01-27-87 agendaU
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA Letter No. 6
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
Settlement of lawsuit for property at 6520, 6530, 6532, 6540,
6544 Lyndale Avenue South and 729 West 65th Street property in
the LHN.
Background:
In the spring of 1984, the HRA acquired title through
condemnation to property owned by Mr. Gordon Strom and located at
6520, 6530, 6532, 6540, 6544 Lyndale Avenue and 729 West 65th
Street, where the existing Market Plaza/Market Towers are sited.
While the HRA received title to the property and sold it for
redevelopment, the value of the property was in dispute. The
dispute was scheduled to go before a jury trial on January 26,
1987 but as a result of discussions with Mr. Strom's attorney,
HRA legal counsel, Mr. Harms the HRA Chairperson, and Mr.
Prosser, HRA Executive Director, a tentative settlement was
reached. Legal counsel will present further details during an
executive session at the HRA meeting on January 27, 1987
Recommendation:
Accept the settlement to be described by legal counsel provided
that Mr. Strom has executed a stipulation.
Basis of Recommendation:
It would be appropriate to terminate this outstanding obligation.
Alternative Recommendation:
Not accept the settlement.
Decision Mode:
It is timely to act now or the opportunity to settle may be lost.
Respectful submitted,
James D. Prosser
Executi e Director
~~!
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA Letter No. 5
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
Resolutions designating official depositories for the HRA of
Richfield for 1987, including the approval of collateral.
Background:
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 475.66 and 118,005,
the HRA of Richfield must annually establish financial
institutions which have pledged the necessary collateral over and
above the amount of Federal Insurance, as Public depositories.
The First Western Bank is pledging collateral in the amount of
$559,962. This collateral pledge means that the HRA's deposits
up to this amount are secured with the depository. In addition
to this collateral pledge, HRA funds are protected by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation in the amount of $100,000, making
the total protection afforded by this depository for HRA funds
equal to $659,962. A resolution naming the First Western Bank as
the 1987 official depository for the Richfield Housing and
Redevelopment Authority is attached to this letter.
A resolution must be provided annually, designating certain
savings and loan associations and banks as official depositories
for investment of certain HRA funds. With approval of these
official depositories, the HRA will be able to invest funds in
these institutions, not exceeding the Federal Insurance of
$100,000.
Finally, a resolution is also attached which designates certain
financial institutions as depositories for the investment of HRA
funds for 1987. These institutions, such as investment brokerage
firms, offer Government Securities in the manner required by law.
These financial institutions include Marquette National Bank,
Merrill Lynch, Dain Bosworth, Prudential Bache, Kidder Peabody,
Miller Schroeder, Norwest Investment Services, Offerman & Company
Services, Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood, State Street Bank & Trust,
and Kansas National Investments.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the HRA adopt the attached resolutions
designating official depositories, with the understanding that
the HRA could not invest in any of the depositories beyond the
level of insurance coverage of the pledged collateral.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The HRA is required by Minnesota Statute 475.66 and
118.005, to designate as a depository of funds, insured
banks or Thrift Institutions as defined in Section
518.01, Sub-Division 3, Minnesota State Statutes. Any
collateral so deposited is accompanied by an assignment
pledged to the HRA in the amount specified in the attached
resolutions.
~ - ~--
2. The HRA has worked with the Institutions recommended in
the past and has found to have a good working relation-
ship with these institutions.
Alternative Recommendations:
The HRA could solicit other financial institutions for official
depositories, but past relationships with the depositories
recommended have proven satisfactory for the HRA.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action of the HRA is desirable at the January 27, 1987, HRA
meeting so that the HRA may invest funds in the approved
financial Institutions for the year 1987 immediately.
Respectful y submitted,
James Prosser
Exec ve Director
JDP/sae
~~
HRA RESOLUTION NO
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE FIRST WESTERN BANK A DEPOSITORY
OF FUNDS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR
RICHFIELD FOR THE YEAR 1987 AND APPROVING COLLATERAL
BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield as
follows:
That, in accordance with law, the First Western Bank be, and hereby is
designated a depository- of the funds of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, and subject to the following terms and conditions:
The said depository shall not be required to give bonds or other
securities for such deposits provided that the total sum thereof shall not at
any time exceed in any depository the sum for which its deposits are insured
under the Acts of Congress of the United States relating to insurance of bank
deposits; but not in case such deposits in any such depository shall at any
time exceed such insured sum, said depository shall immediately furnish bonds
or other security for such excess according to law, approved by the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield.
That said depository shall pay on demand all deposits there; and shall
pay all time deposits, at or after the end of the period for which the same
shall be deposited., on demand.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be maintained a general account
in which shall be deposited all monies. Checks on this account shall be
signed by the following officers or their facsimile signatures.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
James D. Prosser, Executive Director
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be a daily interest savings
account. All withdrawals from said account will be for transfers to the
general checking account.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the collateral in the amount of $559,9b2
deposited for safekeeping at the Marquette National Bank of Minneapolis, is
hereby approved.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this 27th
day of January, 1987.
Thomas E. Harms Chairman
ATTEST:
Joan Helmberger Secretary
~-y
HRA RESOLUTION NO
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN SAVINGS AND
LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND BANKS AS DEPOSITORIES
FOR THE INVESTMENT OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY FUNDS IN 1987
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.66 and 118.17,
municipal funds may be deposited in any Savings and Loan Association which-has
its deposits insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation,
and
WHEREAS, the amount of said deposits may not exceed the Federal Savings
and Loan Insurance Corporation insurance covering such deposits which
insurance amount is presently $100,000, and
WHEREAS, the .deposit of Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds in
Savings and Loan Associations and Banks would provide greater flexibility in
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's investment program and maximize
interest income thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Richfield as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the
best interests of the proper management of Housing and
Redevelopment Authority funds that certain Savings and
Loan Associations and Banks be designated as additional
depositories for Housing and Redevelopment Authority
funds for 1987.
2. The following Savings and Loan Associations and Banks
are hereby designated as additional depositories for
Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds:
First Minnesota Savings
6445 Nicollet Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Midwest Federal Savings & Loan Association
3100 West 66th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55435
Twin City Federal Savings and Loan
3330 West 66th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55435
3. It is further found and determined that the purpose of
such depository designation is to facilitate the proper
and advantageous investment of Housing and Redevelopment
Authority funds and that such designation is not exclu-
sive nor does it preclude the deposit of any Housing and
Redevelopment Authority funds in other officially desig-
nated depositories of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
C.Cj
4. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to deposit
Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds in any or all
of the depositories herein designated up to the amount
of $100,000, or such other amount as may be subsequently
permitted by law, such deposits to be in the form of
demand accounts for Public Unit Savings Certificates
purchased by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield, payable to the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Richfield on the signatures of the Executive
Director.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this
27th day of January, 1987.
Thomas E. Harms Chairman
ATTEST:
Joan Helmberger Secretary
t!j -
HRA RESOLUTION NO
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
AS DEPOSITORIES FOR THE INVESTMENT OF HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF RICHFIELD FUNDS IN 1987
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield has money
which is available for investment, and
WHEREAS, different financial institutions offer different rates of
return on investments, and
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield shall
purchase U. S. Treasury Bills, U. S. Treasury Notes and other such government
securities in the manner required by law from the institution offering the
highest rate to the City providing greater flexibility in the investment
program and maximize interest income thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interests
of the proper management of Housing and Redevelopment Authority
funds that certain financial institutions be designated as add-
tional depositories for Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds
for 1987.
2. The following financial institutions designated as depositories
for Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds:
Marquette National Bank
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
Dain Bosworth, Inc.
Prudential - Bache
Kidder, Peabody & Company
Miller Schroeder
Norwest Investment Services
Offerman & Company, Inc.
Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood
State Street Bank & Trust, Trust for Short-Term U.S.
Government Securities
Kansas National Investment
3. The Treasurer is hereby authorized to deposit Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority funds in any or all of the depositories herein de-
signated. Such deposits may be made and withdrawn from time to time
by the Treasurer as his/her best judgment and the interests of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority dictates.
4. The investment of funds and the reporting thereof pursuant to this
resolution shall be conducted in accordance with established
policies regarding the investment of these funds.
~-~
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this 27th
day of January, 1987.
Thomas E. Harms Chairman
ATTEST:
Joan Helmberger Secretary
- S_ ~
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 4
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
Designation of Official Newspaper for 1987
Background:
The Richfield Sun-Current, published by the Minnesota Suburban
Newspapers, Inc,, has been the city's official newspaper for many
years, with legal rates as set forth by Minnesota Law.
Attached to this HRA letter is a copy of a letter from the
Minnesota Suburban Newspapers, Inc. requesting that they be
designated the official newspaper 'for the City of Richfield for
1987.
Recommendation:
Designate the Richfield-Sun Current as the HRA official newspaper
for the year 1987.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The paper has served well as the official newspa per for the
city for many years.
2. The paper has expressed a desire to continue to provide this
service.
3. The newspaper is in close proximity to city hall offices if
it is necessary to hand deliver legal notices be fore
publication deadlines.
4. The paper is delivered to each residence in the city, thereby
providing city-wide coverage of legal notices to residents.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Not make a designation and request the city clerk's office
to check into using another newspaper, such as the
Minneapolis Star and Tribune.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
As the city typically publishes legal notices each week, this
item has been placed on the January 27, 1987 HRA agenda so that a
designation can be made early in the year.
Respectf lly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
Exec tive Director
JDP/eja
~~
MINNESOTA SllBllRBAN NEWSPAPERS, INC.
December 11, 1986
City Council
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Council Members:
We would appreciate your designation of the Richfield Sun-Current
to be your official newspaper for the year 1987.
Our rate for legal publications as permitted by Minnesota law
will be 38G per line for the first insertion and ~5~-per lane
for each additional insertion.
All items to be published should reach this office by Thursday
a.m. preceding your Wednesday publication.
To assist us in providing the best. possible service, we request
that you direct your publications to the attention of Meridel
Hedblom, Legal Publications, 7401 Bush L ke Road, Edina, MN
55435.
Two notarized affidavits will be provide of each of your publi-
cations. Additional notarized affidavit , on request, will be
furnished at 25~ each:
Thank you for considering us as the offi ial newspaper for the
City of Richfield for the forthcoming year.
Very truly yours,
MINNF~TA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS, INC.
L. Canning ///
P lisher
Publishers of Current Newspapers, Sailor Newspapers, Sun-Current Newspapers and Focus`Newspapers
7401 Bush Lake Road • Edina, Minnesota 55435 • (612) 831-1200
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA Letter No. 3
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
February 16, 1987, HRA meeting to be rescheduled to February 17,
1987.
Background:
February 16th has been designated as a legal holiday to observe
Presidents Day. Thus the HRA meeting date should be rescheduled.
In accordance with Article III, Section 2 of the HRA bylaws, the
meeting shall be held the next succeeding "secular day".
Staff Recommendation:
The HRA meeting should be rescheduled from February 16th to
February 17, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers..
Basis for Recommendation:
Recommendation is based upon HRA Bylaws when regular meeting
date falls on a legal holiday.
Alternative Recommendation:
Cancel HRA February meeting
Decision Mode:
The January meeting is the only time a decision can be made.
Respectfu ly submitted,
James Prosser
Exec ive Director
~,~ /
HOUSING AND 'REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 2
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
Selection of a developer for the Graham Avenue area site.
Background•
The HRA has been presented with three development concepts for
the, Graham Avenue site. Proposals were made by Walker Methodist,
Trestman-Shaller, and Tushie-Derrick.. Near the end of December,
1986, Walker Methodist withdrew their proposal. The Trestman-
Shaller proposal was withdrawn at the public meeting on January
21, 1987. The Tushie-Derrick proposal for a mixed use
development known as Landmark Center remains.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that staff be authorized to initiate
negotiations on behalf of the HRA with the developers of the
proposed Landmark Center and that staff request. the City Council
to concur in the selection of Tushie-Derrick as developer and
authorize negotiations on their behalf.
Basis. for Recommendation:
1. Landmark Center is a development concept which is appropriate
_ for the site. The approximate distribution of floor area
usage is 10.5% residential, 12.5% retail, 14.4% office-
medical, 43.7% garage, 13...3% VFW., and 5.6% miscellaneous
usage. The mixed use proposal would be well suited for the
area..
2. There is a market for additional office and retail space.
3. The below market rent housing would help the community
achieve a long sought goal.
4. All of these uses are contained within a structure which
is sensitively and attractively designed.
5. The tax increment to be generated from this site, while not a
primary consideration, is favorable.
6. Using parking generation data published by the Urban Land
Institute and the Institute of Transportation Engineers, BRW,
the city's planning consultant, has determined the number of
spaces proposed to be adequate.
7. At the January 21 information meeting, Mr. Shaller, owner of
Big Wheel Auto Parts and Mr. Trestman, owner of Trestman
Music, indicated they have reached agreement with Tushie-
. Derrick regarding their future. Mr. Shaller has reaffirmed
his intent to operate a Big Wheel retail store as a tenant
of .Landmark Center. Mr. Trestman will relocate his business
from the site.- Both Mr. Shaller and Mr. Trestman would
become partners in the development.
8. The VFW also indicated their Conti-Hued support for the
concept. Their goal is not only to be a tenant, but also
part .owners of Landmark Center.
9. Mr. Hules, owner of the Cricket Photo facility, is also in
support of the project, assuming he can remain on the site.
~-~
~-~
Tushie-Derrick have worked out a tentative agreement with him
as well as with the Lynch and Davis families for their
property.
10. Preliminary traffic analysis indicates that with a modest
level of improvements, the streets could carry the
additional traffic.
11. Public utilities are adequate to handle the new building.
Attached to this letter is the evaluation form initially
presented to the HRA in October, 1986 and updated at each of the
HRA meetings which followed in November, December, and finally
this month of January. (Exhibit A)
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Reject the Landmark proposal, and solicit for new
redevelopment proposals which would exclude the LSD owned lot
from the redevelopment.
This parcel was originally purchased by the HRA and subse-
quently sold to Knutson Construction Company for inclusion in
the condominium site. At the time of the sale to Knutson,
the HRA included restrictions in the deed which prohibited
the owners from constructing any building on that site.
The Condominium Association has filed a Declaration of Open
Space Covenants and Easement against the property running in
favor of each owner of the Lake Shore Drive Condominiums.
Each owner has a perpetual, non-exclusive easement over the
property. Reaching an agreement on this parcel may be
difficult. Additionally, some residents of the Lake Shore
Drive condominium hold the opinion that the city agreed to
never permit any construction on that site.
Some condominium owners also believe that the HRA has a
contractual obligation to offer for purchase the Davis/Lynch
properties. There was such a provision in an agreement with
Knutson Construction, but it expired on June 1, 1982
Presently, Tushie-Derrick has a purchase option for the two
parcels, and the NRA will not obtain title to the property.
2. Reject the proposal on the basis of concerns of the Lake
Shore Drive condominiums owners that construction of the
Landmark building would have an adverse impact on their
property.
Residents from. Lake Shore Drive have reported that
their property values have decreased because of construction
of Wood Lake Point and Market Towers. They fear that the
Landmark Building would have a similar impact.
A discussion with the city assessor indicated that he was
unaware of any such decreases. Lee Maxfield, the marketing
specialist retained by the HRA, has expressed some concern
about values. Brad Bjorklund, an independent appraiser
i 1 ,
~_~
consulting with the city, has indicated that it would be
difficult to justify a decrease in value for Lake Shore
Drive condominium units on the basis of construction by the
Landmark building.
It should be noted, however, that as a result of the concerns
initially expressed by Lake Shore Drive residents, the length
of the east/west leg of the Landmark Center has already been
shortened to minimize the impact on the condominiums. To
illustrate the portion of the Landmark Building in relation
to LSD, the proposed building site has been staked. Blue
stakes indicate the most westerly portion of the building,
which would be constructed on top of-the parking facility.
The red stakes indicate the westerly portion of the original
plan.
3. Abandon efforts to rehabilitate the Graham Avenue area
because of neighborhood opposition. A copy of a letter
recently received from Mr. Russel Helleckson, President of
Lake Shore Drive Condominium Association is attached.
(Exhibit B) His letter raises a number of concerns regarding
the proposed development of the Graham Avenue site. Staff's
response is also attached. (Exhibit C)
4. Seek modifications to the Landmark proposal. Since the
Landmark proposal is a mixed use, some aspects may be
modified if there are particular problems with the proposed
use. However, it is also likely that some aspects of the
development cannot be modified without endangering the
financial feasibility of the project.
A summary of remarks made at a community meeting held on
January 21, 1987 is attached. (Exhibit D). Only a portion
of the people who were to be invited received an invitation.
Those people who were not invited to the meeting on January
21, 1987 have received an invitation to the HRA meeting on
January 27, 1987, and have been invited to contact the staff
if they wish to review any information prior to the January
27, 1987 meeting.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The Tushie-Derrick proposal was first presented to the HRA on
September 29, 1986, approximately four months ago. At each
meeting since that time, there has been discussion of the
concept. Virtually every issue identified to date has been
examined. A final determination of some issues is appropriate
only if designation of Tushie-Derrick as the developer is
provided by the HRA. Some of the issues which require additional
analysis include environmental assessment, traffic impact, value
and purchase process for the lot owned by Lake Shore Drive, the
amount of subsidy to be provided by the HRA, the amount of money
the HRA is to receive in return for its assistance, the rent
levels for the 48 units, the number of years rent is to be below
market rate, rezoning of the site, and final design plans.
~,
The City Council is requested to attend a
HRA in order that they may indicate their
development proposal. The City Council w
their meeting of 1/26 to 1/27 for this pu
~y
joint meeting of the
opinion regarding this
ill be asked to adjourn
rpose.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
Exe u ive Director
~ ;
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSAL: TUSHIE-DERRICK (LYNDALE PARTNERS)
1. Development team:
-identify members
-experience with similar projects
-financial capability to be determined
Developer: Lyndale partners (Tushie/Derrick/Shaller/Trestman
Architect: Tushie Montgomery and Associates
Contractor:. Bossardt/Christianson
New partnership, members of the partnership have mixed use
development experience in cooperation with local government.
The final membership is still being determined.
2. Brief description of overall project and comments regarding
building height, location, shadows, etc.
Copy of preliminary site plan and revised site plan, is
attached. "Landmark Center" is a stepped 5 story mixed use
development with five distinct uses: Office (31,700 square
feet),. VF'vV (48,600 square feet), residential (38,300 square
feet), retail (45,600 square feet) medical (21,000 square
feet), garage (159,600 square feet) and circulation space all
floors (14,000 square feet). Also included is 6,600 square
feet of mechanical space. Total land area needed fo-r the
project approximates 4.8 acres with the building set back
from Lyndale Avenue and Lake Shore Drive to accommodate
parking to the front.
There are 282 surface parking stalls and 498 parking stalls
within a privately owned ramp. The first level, primarily
retail and VF'R uses, covers 55,100 square feet of floor area
and is reduced to 24,900 square feet in the fifth level. The
length of the east/west "leg" has been reduced to improve
site lines and traffic circulation. With the reduction in
length., none of the Lake Shore Drive units (LSD) would be in
a shadow. Only a small portion of LSD site would be shadowed
but this area is already in a shadow from the existing trees.
All present uses would be relocated: VFW, Cricket Pho-to, Big
Wheel, Trestman, Lynch, and Davis. The vacant lot owned by
the condominium would be needed for the development.
3. Site lines; on site, off site
It has been represented by the developer that the mature tree
line closely approximates the fourth level of the building.
However, it is not clear how many existing trees would
remain. Since the development would be built directly
~'~
adjacent to LSD Condominium development, the screening,.
berming and planting -that occurs to the north side of .the new
building would be on LSD property for LSO to maintain. With
the new design, additional landscaping and plant materials
have been added along the edge of the property line shared
with LSO. The rear delivery driveway and receiving area
would be screened with a canopy. An intended use restriction
would prevent large semi truck trailers from servicing the
development. =ighteen feet of green space is provided along
Lyndale with the new cricket Photo located within a corner
plaza. The entire first floor of the Building is accessible
from the Lyndale Avenue elevation even though the grade
changes significantly along Lake. Shore Orive. Underground
ramp parking will fill in :vhere the grade changes. All
mechanical equipment would be enclosed in a penthouse.
4. Density; lot coverage, massing, number of housing units and
parking spaces, square footage of uses, open space
The building covers 55,100 square feet, approximately 26
percent of the total land area. The number of levels gives
it a "mid-rise" configuration in comparison to high rise
development on adjacent areas. The stepped floor
arrangement 55,100 square feet on first, 47,700 square feet
on second, 41,900 square feet on the third, 36,200 square
feet on the fourth, 24,900 square feet on the fifth, reduces
the cuilding mass to land coverage ratio. Forty eight (48)
units of lower cost rental housing are proposed.: 40-1
bedroom, 2-2 bedroom, 2-1 bedroom and den, 4-efficiencies.
There would be designated parking stalls for the residential
use. Other uses would sham the parking referred to in Item
~~2 above.
The developers have indicated they will be providing 780
parking spaces on the site. Current city parking guidelines
do not address the parking needs for the VFW and a mixed use
project as proposed. The planning consulting firm of BRW
reviewed the proposed parking against Urban Land Institute
and Institute of Transportation Engineers standards and their
experience and determined it to be adequate.
5. Identification of development site Coundary:
-ability to secure sits control
-consensus of opinion by affected owners
-resolution of site restrictions
The Lyndale Partners have secured a purchase agreement from
homeowners Lynch and Davis. Although Shaller, Trestman, and
VFW have alT"made individual plans for there own buildings,
they also appear receptive to being included in the new
development. (Discussions are continuing on this item). In
a land trade with the developer, the owner of Cricket Photo
~~~ould be relocated to a new building designed for the corner.
~` ~,
LSD owns a key parcel in the development area. There are
restrictive covenants on the LSD .parcel and other parcels
which would require condemnation to eliminate. The
condemnation could result in payment of damages.
6. Traffic Analysis:
-offstreet parking, internal and external circulation
(loading, access to various uses)
-capacity of adjacent streets
-conflicts with existing public street improvements
Based on a preliminary analysis by staff, the Tushie/Derrick
proposal may result in a portion of Lyndale Avenue (from
Lakeshore Drive to 67th Street) Being over its design
capacity. If left turn lanes were constructed at the
Lakeshore Drive and Lyndale Avenue intersection, the design
capacity would not be exceeded. The design capacity of
Lakeshore Drive may be exceeded. However, if on-street
parking is prohibited on Lakeshore Drive to maintain two
lanes of traffic in each direction, the likelihood that its
design capacity would be exceeded would be minimized.
If this proposal i
consultants would
volumes, level of
more specifically
other intersection
be necessary.
7. CompatiCility:
s selected, additional traffic analysis by
be needed concerning peak hour traffic
service, and turning movements to determine
.any problems and if additional signals or
improvements such as turning lanes would
-adjacent uses {LSD, Lyndale Hardware,
Shaller-Trestman, Cricket Photo, VFW)
-redevelopment district
-buffering
-The proposed development has accommodated the retail uses
into a strip retail center. Discussions with owners and the
relationship to LSD and Lyndale Hardware have been initiated
and are continuing. The developer has indicated that the
owner of Lyndale Hardware is supportive of their concept.
Developers position•
-Cricket Photo remains a separate wilding for photo studio
and processing work. (Staff is not yet totally comfortable
with this concept).
-VF'A will be concerned if additional restaurants utilize the
retail space.
-~'
-LS~J will have to be satisfied with the buffering and
driveway uses.
-~Vaste disposal to be handled internally
-Cooking odors at the VF,V should Ce considered in developing
final plans.
8. Marketability of use, need, lease up
The developer has indicated that discussions are underway
with users who are interested in approximately 53 percent of
the space.
Primary tanant would Ce VF~N
-48,600 squats feet leased with an ownership position in the
development.
(The VF'N does pay property taxes)
detail S?ace (45,600 square feet)
The amount of retail space has been increased about 11,000
square feet to accommodate demand.
-Shaller & Trestman may locate in a portion of this space
"Medical (21,000 square feet)
Meta Partners of Cleveland with a local office in Edina would
lease this space and than suClease to professional medical
people.
Office (31,700 square feet)
This space was reduced by almost 50~ from the original
concept. The VFw and Tushie-Montgomery would occupy a
portion of .this space.
Housing (38,300 square fe°t)
The rental housing would meet Section 8/Section 202 design
requirements and ~e very affordaCle if the proposed rents
ranging from $319 to $490/month can be achieved. There is a
need for this type of opportunity.
9. Summary of estimated project costs:
-net construction
-architectural
-parking
-site
-financing
-profit
y'
Building Construction $10,613,000
Leasehold Improvements $ 2,008,400
Site Costs ~ 890,000 (utilities, demolition,
grading, soil prep,
surface parking,
landscape)
Land $ 2,000,000
Financing Costs $ 2,589,11.5
marketing $ 389,225
Contingency $ 1,059,462
Total 21,006,203
Requested HRA Assistance ($2,031,886)
Net Development Costs $18,974,317
City/NRA subsidy could take several forms: land writedown,
public improvements, tax increment interest reduction. The
HRA has already incurred costs of approximately $250,000 to
acquire the 3 parcels on Graham Avenue. Utility relocation
would require an additional $50,000 to $75,000. Negotiations
would determine who paid that expense as well as the return
to the HRA for the assistance which would be provided.
10. Timing/phasing of project:
A 15 month construction period is anticipat°d. Construction
would likely begin during the summer of 1987. The VFW,
Shaller, and Cricket ?hoto uses would remain while the ramp
parking and building foundation was initiated.
To permit the phasing, interim parking at other locations
would have to be identified.
11. City and HRA role:
-formation of tax increment district project boundary
-zoning considerations
-financial assistance
-acquisition/clearance
-displacement
-public improvements
An Economic Development TIF district would have to be
established. It would encompass that portion of the site now
within the LHN and the balance of the site. An analysis by
Evensen-Dodge of the impact of deleting five parcels from the
LHN indicates that all the outstanding bonds for the LHN
could still be paid off by 2002 with the possibility of an
early call.
,~' -/~J
A $2.,031,886 subsidy is being requested, which could take the
form of land writedown, installation of public improvements,
and tax increment interest reduction. Thus the HRA would be
involved in site assembly, however not directly in purchase
negotiations. A preliminary cash flow analysis by
~vensen Dodge indicates that the project would be sslf-
supporting during a period of eight years.
In return, 48 units of rental housing for lower income
elderly is planned... Below mar!<et rents may continue for up
to 20 years.
Neither Housing Revenue Bonds nor IDRB's for the commercial
development would be utilized.
The entire development would be privately owned.
12. Consistency with city zoning ordinance requirements
The site would require rezoning to a PJD. It would arobably
exceed the guidelines concerning maximum floor area.
However, a variance would not be required. Also the
Comprehensive Plan may require amendment.
i3. Revenue to Ce realized from development including land
proceeds Tax. increment.
At this point, the developer has not volunteered to pay for
land owned ~y the HRA. However, it is anticipated that this
would be an item of negotiation.
A preliminary cash flow analysis of the proposal does
indicate that it would be self-supporting. The TIF district
would be of 8 years duration from the receipt of the first
increment.
(As indicated in numbsr 9 above, the HRA has already expended
approximately $250,000 in the purchase and management of 3
parcels in Graham Avenue).
14. Environmental review process-EAW required
An EA'~! would be necessary because the development exceeds the
300,000 square feet building area threshold. This document
would be the responsibility of the developer to be reviewed
by staff prior to submittal to the City Council.
15. Demand on existing public services, puClic improvements
The public Sealer and water utilities in the area are adequate
to service this development. However, plans for handling
/~
storm water runoff should be closely studied. If an
extensive amount of public amenities would become necessary
which require intensive public maintenance 3 special
assessment district would be necessary similar to the LHN.
The demand for emergency medical services could increase with
48 units of housing but would not require additional city
personnel be hired. Additional police service should not to
needed.
16. Housing element feasibility:
-management
-target market (low income target?)
-rents
-arrangement of common spaces in mixed use concept
-separation from commercial uses
-amenities, services, support for residents
-unit size and type
Developing the housing portion according to HUD's Section
202/Section requirements, would produce the lowest practical
cost. The units would range in size from 430 s.f. for an
efficiency to 875 s.f. for a two bedroom. The efficiency
units would rent for $319/month beginning in 1988. One
bedroom units would have rents at $380/month. The one
bedroom plus den would rent for $437/month and the two
bedroom units would be at $490/month. A community room of
2,400 square feet would be provided on the Sth floor along
with a laundry. The community room would have space for a
literary, and arts and crafts. Marketing and management
services would be by a nonprofit health related organization.
The emphasis tivould be on marketing to Richfield residents.
The affordable housing option may remain for up to the life
of the tax increment project that is developed to encompass
the development.
17. Employment Opportunities
The developer has indicated jobs on-site during construction
would approximate 78. Joys in the completed office, retail,
medical and VFW facilities would approximate 289.
18. Public reaction
This developer has met on several or_casions with the
residents of Lakeshore Drive Condominium. The residents are
concerned ab"out loss of view from their living units. The
revised design proposal reduces that impact. They have also
met on at least one occasion with the residents of Woodlake
Point. They too are concerned about. views and the impact on
their units.
~~ tii~~/
~-
~ .
i~ ~ ~ . ~Sa
~ ~~ ~ .mot ^ V ~ ~ , ! r~' -\2y~~~~~i~ ~
- -1, ,.,~ ~/' ~ ". i ~~ it l ~ ,
- s -~.:~.~ ~:
-- ~- ~ ~ ~-
_ _~
J ! + ~
\~ y I~
`7
~t ~ ~.~ . ~~~ ~~
-~..~=111 ~ ~ •~a. i a,~
~ ~/..- ~ ~
1
i t
o- ' _ I
-.
~~ ~ - ,_
i ~--~
~ ~ ` .,~
I `
_ ;
~-
...
1 t ~~i z i, f
~ .: ~! ---
.a
iii ! ~ Ilt ~ If~9~
~~ ;
ta:
/ t,
: ~ ::~:::~ ; t ~ ;; t;.
:: ....
.
... '. '::::':.: ......1tt'
(~ r
! tt
.
i .
i
;: t ~., 11
,..
>,,.
i i ~ ~ ! ~i It 1(I
{
LANDMARK CENTi:A
~OFt LYNOALE PARTTFA9
Rlthfbld Min+s~of~
~ •-
~ ~ ~ .~
~~ ~
~_~°
. -_ ~-
.. _ -~
,_
- -- _ ~_ - ,
---- ~ _.
~~
::,.
r,
,~
i'<
--
i~
%~
;"
-~~
~~~-~
~ ~,
-, ~ ~
~--- i
~~, \~~
~\
,\
~ __
,--~
- - - ;a: ,, ~a-;
~ ~ / ~ - ~ = 3 i i 5 / 3 i is i
i ~ ~ f~: _ - - 9 ! ! E
f Safi i !' a 3 as S i "xii S i iSi i Si i t l iSFi i i i3 i
. \,'\ s { r
\ •(s ~ !s ' i'is -- ~_i= - ;3 °~~'stz
~;- s- i 7i_ f! R ii
I S =rt ~ ~p•
~. !r Sz __~ __ ,f
_- ~ ~
~-
i ~ A
EXY.IBIT B ~~-'f ~
BY THE
LAKE SHORE DRIVE MANAGED
Pvi2y~r --- - - - ~ - ___,~ HEALTH
CG:i~Cil t';r""rt1 s;:_;y _ /6615 LAKE SHORE DRIVE• RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 • (612) 861-7595 CENTRAL
- ~ SYSTEM
~iiy, ..._~ ~..... ,..,. v~_f
Ci2rk
_ P~~. S~ter~ ~._..:.
December 30, 1986
Mr. Thomas E. Harms
Chairman of HRA
6400 Morgan Ave.
Richfield, MN 55423
Mr. Harms,
The Board of Directors of Lake Shore Drive at their
December 16th meeting decided not to poll our residents on the
proposed development on the Graham site. We feel it would be
difficult to get a true reaction. We have some residents who
feel they were promised that nothing would be built that would
interfere with our building. This is the real vocal group. We
have a number of residents that favor an acceptable development.
A large number of residents have voiced no strong opinion on
this development, especially the residents on the north side of
Lake Shore Drive.
The Board of Directors still favor the Trestman-Shallar proposal
as we stated in our previous letter to you. If the Trestman-Shallar
is turned down, the choice would be between the Tushie-Derrick
proposal and the Walker-Methodist proposal. In an .informal poll
of the Board of Directors, the majority favor the Tushie-Derrick
proposal over the Walker-Methodist proposal in case the Trestman-
Shallar proposal is turned down. This is not a unanimous decision
of our Board because several members do not favor either the Tushie-
Derrick or Walker-Methodist proposal.
Attached to this letter is a list of concerns about this
development compiled by the Ad Hoc Committee appointed to Study the
Proposed Development Concepts for the Graham Avenue Development Site.
I am leaving Richfield shortly for a 3 month period so I will
not be available for the next HRA meeting. I hope this information
can be of help to your committee.
/ '~ T' ~./
Russel L. Helleckson
President, Board of Directors
Lake Shore Drive Condominium Association
cc: City Manager Jim Prosser
..
,~-/S
CONCERNS
Potential problems arising from the Walker-Methodist and Tushie-Derrick
proposals
1. If developers and/or owners cannot meet payment on the bonds,
the City of Richfield must do so.
2. Hub-Nicollet-Lyndale tax increment district will require a
considerable increase in this bonding to cover the proposed
developments. What is Richfield's limit on this bonding?
Both Moody's and Standard and Poore's weighs total indebtedness
in setting credit ratings.
3. There is already a heavy concentration of seniors in the Lyndale-66th
Street area. Problems this may raise are:
a. Will the increased traffic adversely affect. the pedestrian
traffic by seniors?
b. Will there be an increase in crime, given the fact that
seniors are more vulnerable to crimes against the person
such as assault and rape and robbery than other groups?
c. How will the concentration of seniors affect the businesses
in the area, and what businesses will they attract?
d. 6di11 a large population of seniors (many on fixed incomes)
tend to resist future bond issues for such things as schools?
4. Since the taxes from property developed through tax increment
financing must be used to pay off the bonds,-tax benefits will
not accrue to Richfield for about 20 years. In the meantime will
the rest of the taxpayers of the city be subsidizing the delivery
of services - water, sewers, health, police, and fire - to the area?
5. Will the water and sewer systems in the Lyndale-66th area accomodate
the increased demands upon them?
6. How will the increased noise and pollution levels during construction
and afterwards affect Wood Lake Nature Center?
7. Since the Tushie-Derrick developers say that the subsidized.
housing in their plan would be subsidized by the other (commercial)
occupants of the complex rather than by federal funds, how long
will that subsidy continue? Will the City Qf Richfield have to
contribute to that subsidy?
8. Both the Walker and Tushie-Derrick organizations suggest housing
development bonds to finance the housing components of their
proposals. How will these bonds be retired from the profits
from subsidized housing in either plan, if built?
ih
9. How much of a demand is there for housing for seniors at the
suggested rental rates in the metropolitan area?
10. Will an environmental impact statement be provided even if not
required?
,~
N
^ tl•
v
^~
A
U
M
Cf'
Ln
~i~+
._
^
Q
0
i
C~~[~~~
January 16, 1987
EXHIBIT C
Russel L. Helleckson
President, Board of Directors
Lake Shore Drive Condominium Association
6615 Lake Shore Drive
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. Helleckson,
Thank you for your letter of December 30, 1986
regarding the Graham Avenue site. The questions
attached to that letter, which were prepared by the
ad hoc committee, indicate they have been doing
their job well.
Accompanying this letter are answers to those
questions which I hope you will find helpful. If
you want to discuss any of this information further,
please contact me.
Sincerely,
James D. Prosser
City Manager
cc: rred Moore
Lake Shore Drive Condominium, ~~500
6615 Lake Shore Orive
Richfield, MN 55423
JDP/dh
telephone: 869-7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
-/~
1. "If developers and/or owners cannot meet payment on the bonds,
the City of Richfield must do so".
Assuming that the question is directed at tax increment general
obligation redevelopment Bonds, the statement is correct.
However, there are several techniga~es used to reduce the risk and
assure the city a sufficient tax increment cash flow to payoff
the bonds. 1) A developer's agreement is negotiated. As a part
of this process, the capability of the developer to finance the
development is assessed. The agreement is a legally binding _
contract committing the developer, HRA and city to do certain
things within a stated time frame. 2) There is a document known
as An Assessor's Certification. It establishes the minimum
market value of the property for tax purposes. The minimum
market value reflects an appropriate value for both the
improvements and the amount of tax revenue needed far debt
__
service on the bonds. The minimum market value cannot be legally
challenged. 3) There is a Deficiency Agreement. This agreement, "'
within limitations established by-the IRS, requires the developer
to pay cash to the city in any year that the tax revenue is less
than that which is needed for debt service. Finally, and most
importantly, a lender is usually involved in financing the
private development. They are:concerned about protecting their
investment. If a developer is unable to complete a project, it
is likely the lender would step in to complete it. The Tushie-
Derrick proposal has an opportunity to be very successful because
between 50-60% of the rentable space has identifiable potential
tenants already interested. For this site, the risk would be
further reduced because it is likely the bonds would be paid off
in eight years.
2. "Hub/Nicollet/Lyndale tax increment district will require a
considerable increase in this bonding to cover the proposed
developments. What is Richfield's limit on this bonding?
3oth Moody's.and Standard and Poore's weighs total
indebtedness in setting credit ratings".
It is likely that to provide a site for the Tushie-Derrick.
proposal, a new tax increment project would be created separate
from the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet project (LHN). Five tax parcels
would be deleted from the LHN and combined with parcels south of
Auto Lane (the alley). Evensen-Dodge, a private consulting firm
which advises the city on financial matters including bonds, has
analyzed the impact of deleting these five parcels from the LHN.
The impact is negligible. That is, it has been projected that
all the outstanding LHN bonds-could be paid off by the year 2002.
With the deletion of the parcels, the projected bond payoff
remains 2002. (.It is possible that projected reserves could
result in an earlier payoff).
There is not an absolute dollar limit on the amount of bonds
which may be sold. The ability of Richfield to sell bonds is
based on a combination of factors. Moody's Investment Services
` ~ /
rates a bond
condition of
itself. The
bond issue to
investment.
issue. The rating is based upon the financial
the issuer (city) and the security of the bond issue
buyers in the market place look to the rating of the
establish the desirability of the bonds as an
In 1977 Richfield's. credit rating, by Moody's, was set at Aa.
This :vas at a time when large amounts of bonds were being issued
fir street improvements and the LHN. This is a very good rating
as only 13 of 855 cities in Minnesota hold it. Only two cities
in Minnesota hold a higher rating of Aaa. The most recent review
of Richfield's credit rating was at the time of a bond sale in
March of 1986. Moody's confirmed the Aa rating at that time.
The amount of bonding required for the Tushie-Derrick proposal at
t!~is time appears to be approximately two million dollars.
3. "There is already a heavy concentration of seniors in-the
l.yndale-66th Street Area. Problems this may raise are:
a. Will the increased traffic adversely affect the pedestrian
traffic by seniors?
It is the objective of the city to minimize the conflicts between
pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic. Goals of the LHN are to
encourage pedestrian traffic and, at the same time, assure
pedestrian safety. A part of the redevelopment process has
resulted in the installation of pedestrian crosswalks and signals
and an extensive sidewalk system. A high level of maintenance
provides for good snow removal services as well during the
winter.
However, the Tushie/Derrick proposal will increase traffic in the
area. Staff is aware that some people feel there is a problem
with pedestrian safety already and the Tushie/Derrick proposal
will add to it. An ad hoc committee of staff people is being
formed to review the situation and identify problem areas and
solutions.
b. Will there be an increase in crime, given the fact that
seniors are more vulnerable to crimes against the persons
such as assault and rape and robbery than other groups?
Public Safety personnel have studied this and do not believe
there will be an increase in crime because of the elderly
population. They reviewed crime data for the entire city and are
of the opinion that crime in Richfield has not increased as a
result of the aging of the population. Secondly, crime in the
LHN has decreased because the environment is generally not
friendly to criminals. The new construction and renovation of
privately owned buildings and public improvements has resulted in
"cleaner" more visible building surfaces. All of the residential
buildings in the area have a security system as a deterrent to
unauthorized persons entering.
c. How ~:vill the concentration of seniors affect the
businesses in the area, and what businesses will they
attract?
The Tushie/Derrick proposal ~,vould add only 48 units of senior
housing to the area. This development will be a benefit to other
retail businesses in the area. It is unlikely that many _
retailers catering exclusively to seniors would locate in the
area because of this additional development. The total senior
population would not Ce high enough. Also many of the seniors in
the area are mobile and can leave the area to conduct business at
other nearby locations. Retailers are likely to be attracted to
the area because of the concentration of population and the
accessibility of the 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue intersection
to a much larger market. The Drug Emporium is an .example. It is
dependent upon a large volume of customers and is attractive to
customers both young and old. The Tushie/Derrick proposal may
contain a medical- office facility. Such a facility would be
attracted to the area because of the population concentration and
accessibility of the area to others.
d. ,Vill a large population of seniors (many on fixed
incomes) tend to resist future bond issues for such things
-as schools?
We don't know. The age and income of residents does influence
their perspective on the cost of providing services to the
community.
4. "Since the taxes from property developed through tax
increment financing must be used to pay off the bonds, tax
benefits will-not accrue to Richfield for about 20 years. In
the meantime will the rest of the taxpayers of the city be
subsidizing .the delivery of service - eater, sewers, health,
police, and fire - to the area?"
Yes, but only to a very limited extant. First it is important to
understand that all of the taxing jurisdictions continue to
receive revenue from the project area. The ~evenu_e__is derived
from the base value of the project area. Only _the tax increment
provided by the value above the base value is used to retire the
bonds. Secondly as indicated above, it is likely that the
development would be located within a new tax increment district.
The district would exist for eight years rather than 15 to 20
years. -
Experience in the LHN indicates the need for police and fire
services has decreased as a result of redevelopment. Pedestrian
and motor vehicle accidents are fewer, police calls resulting
from potential criminal acts are down, fire calls are fewer.
Because of the elderly population, the need for emergency first
~ ~/
aid has increased but has not and will. not require the purchase
of additional equipment or hiring of additional personnel.
Shoplifting in retail stores has increased. The sewer and water
costs are paid ~y a user fee.
5. "Will the ~,vater and sewer systems in the Lyndale-66th area
accommodate the increased demands upon them?"
Yes. The tivater line tivas installed in the early 1960's. Its life
expectancy exceeds well Ceyond 50 years. In the early 1980's, as __
part of the development of the Lake Shore Drive condominiums, the
system-was upgraded by installing a "loop". The "loop" removed a
dead end line in the area and means water is always available in
the line from two directions. It also put the water supply
closer to the main trunk line between the water plant and the
water tower. The capacity of the line is more than adequate to
handle the Tushie/Derrick proposal.
The sanitary sewer was installed in the early 1950's. Its life
expectancy exceeds well Ceyond 50 years. A main trunk line is
located beneath 66th Street.
The Graham Avenue site is only .about one block from the main..
The Tushie/Derrick development would use a lateral line shared
possibly pnly by one or two existing commercial developments
before it connects to the main. The lake Shore Drive condominium
connects directly, to the main. The main has more than adequate
capacity to handle the Tushie/Derrick development.
6. "How will the increased noise and pollution levels during
construction and afterwards affect Wood Lake Nature Center?"
We don't think the noise and pollution levels from the
Tushie/Derrick project. will negatively affect Wood lake. Eor
example, during the construction of the Lake Shore Drive
condominiums there were no noticeable effects from noise or other
pollution sources. However, upon completion, some birds were
killed because while flying they hit the building. Now they have
adjusted their flight pattern for the height of the structure.
The contractor for the Tushie/Derrick project would be required
to prevent soil laden runoff water during construction from
running into the lake. Once occupied, the building shouldn't
negatively impact Wood Lake either. However, before the
Tushie/Derrick proposal can be constructed, it would be necessary
to complete an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The process
requires that the impact of the development be studied. Its
relationship to '~~ood Lake would be determined as a part of that
study.
7. "Since the Tushie/Derrick developers say that the subsidized
housing in their plan would be subsidized by the other
(commercial) occupants of the complex rather than by federal
funds, how long will that subsidy continue? Will the City
of Richfield have to contribute to that subsidy?"
~~-
The 48 units of housing would require a subsidy to maintain the
rents at the levels proposed which may fall within the $390 to
$440 range initially. Increases would likely "e tied to a
formula which would assure their affordarility ~y lower income
eld2rly. The length of time the developer would be required to.
provide low rent would be established during negotiations on a
developers agreement.
The HRA vrould ce providing a subsidy to encourage this
development. That subsidy and the rent from the commercial space _
would help make it aossible for the developer to offer lower
rents for the housing units. Neither the HRA nor the city
anticipate providing a direct rent subsidy.
8. "Both the Walker and Tushie/Derrick organizations suggest
housing development Conds to finance the housing components
of their proposals. How will these bonds be retired from
the .profits from subsidized housing in either plan, if
built?"
Initially Tushie/Derrick proposed to utilize housing revenue
bonds. However, at the present time they have determined not to
use them.
9. "How-much of a demand is them for housing for seniors at the
suggested rental rates in the metropolitan area?"
The market demand far exceeds that which will be met by the 48
units in the oroject. The rents proposed. for the 48 units would
make them available and affordable to a single person for example
with an income between $12,000 and $16,D00. For a couple, the
income range would be slightly higher. The intent of the
developer would be to market these units to Richfield residents
first.
10. "Will an environmental impact statement be provided even if
not required?"
The development would require that an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet be completed (EAW). The EAW requires a study of the
impact of development on the surrounding environment and public
facilities such as roads and utilities. The results of an EAW
are evaluataed against state guidelines to determine if an
Environment Impact Statement (EIS) must be undertaken. A
decision on an EIS would be made by the City Council after an EAW
is completed.
-~ 3
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Inter-Office P~lemorandum
DATE: DecemCer 11, 1986
TD: Housing & Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Development Review Advisory Committee
SUBJECT: Summary of Comments, Concerns and Issues expressed at
12/10/86 t4eeting.
Ths Development Review Advisory Committee is a group of staff
from the various administrative departments and divisions of the
~ city. They met to listen and react to a presentation of the
Tushie-Derrick concept which included the use of drawings and a
t'-~ree dimensional model. Following are the thoughts that were
expressed during the meeting.
1) The design from a fire protection point of view appears to be
good on Loth the interior and exterior.
2) °ar~cing and traffic flow should Ce closely studied to avoid
congestion and other safety hazards.
3) pedestrian circulation for the entire southwest quadrant
should ~e studied and for this development the crossing of
Lyndale Avenue in particular.
4) Site drainage should Ce carefully planned.
5) Odor discharge from the VF~~1 kitchen should he carefully
~ thought to avoid adverse impact on the area.
~~y
6) The separation of the uses in the cuilding appears to he well
_~
thought out. With proper construction, noise transmission
from the VFW area :could not he a proClem.
7) The staging of the development to permit existing
organizations to function during construction is good.
However, it could result in serious parking proClems during
construction, especially with the VFW. The developer must
work out an agreement with the VFW. The options to hs
explored include the susp°nsion of special events, which
require consideraCle parking and the use of parking lots at
other locations and a shuttle hus. The activity schedule for
Mood Lake Nature Center and the VF;~I should he coordinated.
Perhaps the VFW should hire traffic police personnel for
i
certain events.
3) Because the site must ~e rezoned and an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan may ~e necessary and an EA;~1 would he
necessary as :vill as the estaClishment of a new TIF district,
the planning phase for this project could he protracted.
9) For a few minutes the discussion centered on the question of
the appropriateness of the concept. Is this concept simply
an attempt to satisfy everyone on every issue?
The collective response ~~as that there seems to he a market
for the uses, the rental apartments are desiraCle if
Richfield r-esidents are given priority in the occupancy of
the units and the development would Ce an appropriate
t
entrance/exit feature for this area of "downtown" Richfield.
~-~
10) A public information meeting should ~e scheduled to permit
people in the area to express their thoughts.
The :yal!~er conespt could not to evaluated as it is reing
reformulated. The Trest^~an-Shaller propasal ,vas discussed
Briefly. There-was agreement that while it would result in the
upgrading of the property, it did not utilize the site to its
Cest advantage.
t~~,
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 1
Agenda January 27, 1987
Issue Statement:
Election of officers for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Background:
The bylaws of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
provide that the HRA hold an annual meeting in January of each
year. The bylaws further provide that the Chairman, Vice-
Chairman-, and. Secretary of the HRA be elected at this meeting.
Officers for the years 1983-1986 are as follows:
1983
Thomas Harms, Chairman
Vern Luettinger, Vice-Chair
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
1984
Thomas Harms, Chairman
Vern Luettinger, Vice-Chair
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
1985
Thomas Harms, Chairman
Vern Luettinger, Vice-Chair
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
1986
Thomas Harms, Chairman
Vern Luettinger, Vice-Chair
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
Recommendation:
Hold the election to elect these officers for 1987.
Basis for Recommendation:
The HRA bylaws require that officers be elected at the annual
meeting in January of each year.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not hold the election. However, this would be in
contradiction to the HRA bylaws.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item~has been placed on the January 27, 1987 HRA agenda in
accordance with the HRA bylaws.
Respect ully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Exe tive Director