Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09-09-85 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City. Manager Council Letter No.- 348 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor, and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: 1985 NLC Congress of Cities and Exposition Seattle, Washington - December 7 -11, 1985 Council Members: The 1985 NLC Congress of Cities and Exposition will be held December 7 -11, 1985, in Seattle, Washington. The 1985 council budget provides funds for one council member to attend this conference. However, the city manager projects the FY 1985 budget will be balanced and funds can be provided for additional council members to attend the NLC conference. It would be appropriate at this time for the city council to determine which members shall attend so arrangements can be • initiated for attending the conference. A copy of the conference highlights is provided in the council backup. pectfu 1 s itted, 2John G. Car wrigh City Manage JGC /eja • Polity Development Activities Sunday's main business is the meeting of the standing policy committees. During the year; the 35- member steering committees of NLC's five standing policy committees -- Finance, Administra- tion and Intergovernmental Relations Energy, Environment and Natural Resources; Transporta- tion and Communications; Human Development; and Community and Economic Development — have debated possible changes to the National Municipal Policy. At the Congress of Cities, the full standing committees meet in business ses- sions at which they consider recommendations for policy changes. Only policy committee members may vote at the policy committee business ses- sions although the meetings are open to anyone who has registered for the Congress of Cities. Policy committee recommendations are sent to the resolutions committee, which in turn cre- ates a composite slate of proposed changes for the delegates to act on at Wednesday's annual busi- ness meeting. The voting membership adopts the National .Municipal Policy and elects the League's officers and new members of the Board of Directors at the Wednesday business meeting. While all delegates to the Congress of Cities may attend the business meeting, only the official voting representatives of direct member cities and member state municipal leagues have floor privi- leges, may speak on issues, and may vote at the business meeting. Each member state municipal league is entitled to cast 20 votes, and each direct member city may cast from 1 to 20 votes, based on the city's size. To cast those votes, the city must designate a city official as its voting delegate. If you would like more information on how to introduce policy proposals for consideration at the Congress of Cities, write to William E. Davis, Director, Office of Policy Analysis and Develop- ment. National League of Cities, 1301 Pennsylva- nia Avenue N.W., Washington, D.C. 20004. General Sessions The purpose of the general sessions at the Congress of Cities is to give the city official a na= tional perspective on local issues. At the Monday morning general session. the Tuesday luncheons and the Wednesday morning general session, speakers of national reputation address the dele- gates on current urban issues. Concurrent Plenary Sessions and Tracks The three concurrent plenary sessions and the workshop tracks that follow them are built around the year's theme. Each plenary session sets the theme for the workshops that follow; the workshops explore that aspect of the theme in greater detail. Because the plenary sessions take place at the same time. you can't attend them all, and you'll have to make some choices among workshops. As a local official, you are accustomed to making choices; at the Congress of Cities, how- ever, the choices are all good._ Roundtable Discussions Once again this year, the Congress of Cities workshop schedule includes time for informal small group discussions among delegates. At these Roundtable Discussions — scheduled on Monday and Tuesday —you will have the op- portunity to talk with colleagues and speakers about the issues and ideas generated during the day's workshops. Constituency Group Meetings Some of the special interest groups that will be meeting during the-Congress of Cities include the Small Cities Advisory Council (SCAC), Women in Municipal Government (WIMC). National Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials (NBC /LEO). His- panic Elected Local Officials (HELD), Mayors' Ex- ecutive Staff, University Communities Caucus, and Asian Officials Caucus. Saturday, December 7 8:00 a.m. -9:00 a.m. HELD Nominating Committee Meeting 9.00 am.-10:30 a.m. NBC/LEO Board of Directors Meeting 9:30 a.m.-12:00 noon WIMG Board Meeting 10:30 a.m. -12:00 noon NBC/LEO General Business Meeting 12:00 noon -1:30 p.m. NBC/LEO Luncheon 1:00 p.m. -4:00 p.m. SCAC Steering Committee Meeting 2:00 p.m.-3:30 p.m. NBCILEO Workshops 3:30 p.m: 5:00 p.m. NBC/LEO Workshops 6:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m. NBCILEO Social Function Sunday, December 8 12:00 noon -5:00 p.m. Mayors' Executive Staff Program 4:30 p.m. -6:00 p.m. Asian Officials Caucus Meeting 4:30 p.m. -6:00 p.m.. 'HELD Business Meeting 4:30 p.m.-6-.00 p.m. SCAC Business Meeting 4:30 p.m.-6:00 p.m. WIMG Business Meeting 4:30 p.m.-6-.00 p.m. UCC Workshop and Meeting 7:30 p.m. -9:00 pan. HELO Reception For additional mtonnatm about cowaft ixy group attmties at the Congress of Ules. contact AC4 Oft of Membership Semites. 1301 Aww1mMW Aoenue. N.W.. Wathamgtom D.C. 20004. State Municipal League Meetings Many state municipal leagues hold meetings and receptions for their delegates attending the Congress of Cities. For information on the time and place of any meeting planned for your state delegation, consult your state league executive director. Guaranteed Lowest Air Fares The NLC Conference Travel Center guaran- tees to book you on the lowest available air fare at the time of booking. This air fare may be a re- stricted published discount or an unrestricted un- published negotiated discount, whichever best suits your individual needs. For more information call the NLC Conference Travel Center at (800) 368 -3239 or (703) 471 -0460. N_X Post Congress Tour to Hawaii A Post Congress Escape to Honolulu, Hawaii has been arranged by the NLC Conference Travel Center. Plan to depart Seattle Thursday, Decem- ber 12 for Honolulu and return Sunday, Decem- ber 15 back to the mainland. Prices for three nights/four days at the oceanfront Sheraton Moana on Waikiki Beach start at 8187.00 per per- son based on double occupancy. Air fare is addi- tional. Phone (800) 368 -3239 or (703) 471.0460 for further details and specific air fare quotes. NLC's Orient Study Tour Take off for a study tour to Tokyo and Hong Kong before or after the 1985 Congress of Cities, organized by the NLC Conference Travel Center. BEFORE: November 30- December 2 in To- kyo, Japan December 2-6 in Hong Kong and Shenzhen AFTER: December 13 -15 in Tokyo, Japan December 15 -19 in Hong Kong and Shenzhen The one price of oply $475.00 per person (based on double occupancy) includes hotel ac- commodations, some meals, transfers, special study meetings, and tours. Air fare is extra. Call (800) 368 -3238 or (703) 471 -0460 for complete details and specific air fare quotes. Win Two Tickets to Hawaii The NLC Conference Travel Center will hold a drawing from the names of all Congress of Cit- ies attendees who travel to the Congress of Cities on tickets purchased from them. The winner will receive two free round trip tickets to Honolulu from their point of residence in the United States. The tickets can be used anytime within 12 months following the Congress of Cities. The air- line will be chosen by Conference Travel Center. Call (800) 368 -3239 or (703) 471 -0460. To avoid problems: 1. Register for the conference now so that we can make your hotel reservations. NLC will not make hotel reservations for you unless you have registered for the Con- gress of Cities. 2. Don't change your plans. If you change your arrival date, the hotel may not be able to accommodate you with a room. And arrive when you say you will, otherwise the hotel will release your room and retain your deposit. 3. Make your airline reservation now. Call the NLC Conference Travel Center toll - free at (800) 368.3239; residents of Alaska. Hawaii and Virginia may call collect at (703) 471 -0460. 4. Most important of all: guarantee your hotel room by credit card, or by send- ing the hotel a deposit as soon as you re- ceive your confirmation slip from the hotel. SEATTLE WASHINGTON: Dunning your city: No one ever promised it would [L be easy. Then again, no one ever said it would be so challenging. Meet the challenges well, and your community and the nation will emerge stronger for it. To understand today's challenges and to get ready to take them on, you need information and inspiration. You'll get both at the 1985 Congress of Cities. You'll learn how to find new resources and forge new partnerships, how to become a better leader and take on bigger jobs, and how to enrich lives by enhancing the livability of your city. Be there. Dear Colleagues: planning special events that On behalf of the city of showcase the best Seattle has Seattle, I encourage you to to offer. for I know you will attend the 62nd annual Con- enjoy exploring our city. gress of Cities and Exposi- Please register soon and join tion. The National League of us for a memorable Congress Cities has created an exciting of Cities. program to help us all ad- 2:00 p.m.-3:45 p.m. dress the challenges facing Sincerely, American cities. 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Seattle looks forward to Charles Royer welcoming you. We are busy Mayor Saturday, December 7 8:00 am.-6:00 p.m. Registration Prc- conference Seminars 9:00 am.-5:00 p.m. Policy Leaders Economic Development Telecommunications 1:30 p.m.4:30 p.m. Women in Municipal Government Hispanic Elected Local Officials (These pre- conference seminars require a separate registration fee) Sunday, December 8' 8:00 am.-6:00 p.m. Registration 9:00 am.4:00 p.m. Exposition Open 9:00 a m.-430 p.m. Policy Committee. Seminars and Business Sessions 10:00 a.= -12:00 noon Special Workshops Comparable Worth Debtbusters New Elected Officials Workshops Hazardous Materials Transportation 1 2:00 p.m..4:00 p.m. Special Workshops Cities & the 1990 Census Debtbusters Job Training Partnership Act Fair labor Standards Act Hazardous Materials Transportation U 6•.30 p.m. -8:00 p.m. Welcoming Reception Monday, December 9 8:00 am.-5:00 pm. Registration 9:00 am.-10:15 a:m. Opening General Session 10:30 am.-12:15 p.m. Concurrent Plenary - Sessions 11:00 a.m. -5:00 p.m. Exposition Open 12:30 p.m. -1:45 p.m. Lunch in the Exhibit Hall 1:00 p.m.4:00 p.m. Resolutions Committee 2:00 p.m.-3:45 p.m. Workshops 4:00 pm.5:00 p.m. Nominating Committee 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Roundtable Discussions Tuesday, December 30 8:00 am.-5:00 p.m. Registration 9:00 am.-10:30 am. Workshops 9:00 am.-12:00 noon Exposition Open 10:45 a.m. -12:15 p.m. Workshops 12:30 p.m.-2:00 p.m. Delegates' Luncheons 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. City Innovations Idea Mart Roundtable Discussions Special Workshops Hazardous Wastes 2:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m. International Policy Forum Wednesday, December 11 8:30 am.-12:00 noon Registration 9:00 a.m.-10:30 am. General Session 10:30 a.m: aftemoon Annual Business Meeting 7:00 p.m. Annual Banquet 7985 CONGRESS.OF CITIES AND IXPOSIiION'• • • i i i i • • woeKSHOPTaacKs Track One Finding Resources, Forging Partnerships In today's era of scarce resousces,'it is just as portent for cities to do the right things as to do ings right. Whatever your role, your new part- rs in growths will come from every segment of ur community, and some from outside it, a :nd of the old and the new, the best your corn - .miry has to offer. • In this set of workshops, youll learn how to :ntify new resources and get the most out of rrent resources You'll also explore new tech- juts for dealing with federal m arsdates, new ys to create jobs, and new roles for local vemment. Workshops Smell City Demrfopnwnt S&Stigies: • Questions about economic development strategies are often magnified in small cities. Explore such topics as the difficulties of developing sound strat- egies. the choice of the most effective way to identify resources and set objectives and priorities. the involvement of the private sector and the dif- ferences between success and failure. Intemettowd AlaAxets: Expanding Opyor, dnftiat Export trade and foreign direct invest- ment can be effective economic development tools for cities of all sizes. Lam how to promote inter- national trade as part of your city's economic de- velopment strategies; youll create new markets, and as a result. expand production, boost business profits, create new jots, and increase tax revenues. 77it Ramifies of FederW A/aideErst And - trust, civil rights, environmental, and labor lass impose legal mandates on cities. poverty, home- lessness, hunger and infant mortality impose hu- man mandates. Review the effects and responsibil. ities that these mandates bring to citie& and loam .how you can cope with them. Creada► Tna saarteden Aftemadars: Con- tinuing financial pressures on transit systems and changes in travel patterns force local officials to consider new and more cost - effective ways to keep our mobile society mobile. Discuss transit plan- ning, the contracting out of transit services, pri- vate financing of public transit. and private sector imolvement in promoting public transportation with the panelists and with your colleagues, Shwa Covertuirent as a snae f CUM Resomoet • Find out how state govemments are in- creasing assistance to smaller communities through new programs, team about mechanisms that improve local government's access to state resources, and discover how they an wort for you small city or town. Prisms, Reswnees for Pub!& Purpesest As federal support and assistance for loaf public pro• grams diminish, many cities are looking to busi- ness for the development stimulus that once cane from federal programs. Exptone the new kinds of Private sector alliances that an stimulate and continue economic development and job creation in your city. Pleat Ckshw The Impact on Worisrs end Conammor isles: Foreign competition, declining iw dustries and questionable tax policies cost the American economy 11S million jobs and untold millions in lost tax dollars between 1919 and 1984 alone. listen as a panel of experts tackles the Problem that plant closings pose for cities, and profit from their state -of- the -art advice. Heminy Shrfegies in an Bra of Limits. Rapidly rising housing costs and declining federal assistance have combined to increase the housing problems faced by local officials. Find out how to get more from the housing programs that remain and how your city an meet today's housing responsibilities. Csdtkatiny the Cify- School Potnership: A city's schools are a valuable resource, and a city's educators are powerful partners for growth. Ex- amine various ways to link your city's educational system with city hall to produce better cities as well as better schools: Yaw Ctfy as a Cat is fir Crmoth: With changes in the national economy imposing more constraints upon growth and increasing costs and competition, cities are looking at local business and industry as partners and at local historic, cul- tural, and natural amenities as resources. Learn from case histories of successful programs for commercial and industrial retention. and discuss the current emphasis on cultural planning, open space management, natural resource conservation, and cultural tourism as catalysts to growth. Shw*W Resomnrs Amasp Smell Cities: • It's more important than ever for small cit- ies to explore new relationships that can provide servicerto citizens" generate revenues to sup- port these services. Explore, through examples, ways to set up cooperative programs and service delivery systems with neighboring communities. and with counties, councils of governments, and state governments. Cmady Raewtstr Casters ie CHI Hem Cit- hes today are searching for new, non - property tax methods for financing municipal services and ado ins mus&ioit heoartmdiu'te'funcfi. lax,. u.:.,a.. waunue& ruiu auc now aeamg --prone- can- ters. requiring departments to cover their casts through user fees, having departments bid against outside contractors for the opportunity to provide services can save your city money and contribute to a more productive workforce. Track Two Better Leaders, Bigger Jobs Provide the strong, innovative leadership your city needs. The workshops in this track will sharpen your own leadership skills, show you how to tap new sources of community leadership and encourage those who have not traditionally been involved in running your city to lend their exper- Use, and present ways to make the most of today's new technologies and management techniques workshops City Investments: Prolits. Pitfalls and Poli- tics: Investments are an important source of reve- nue for any city. Loam what works and what doesn't when it comes to investing your city's funds —how to maximize profits, make sound in- vestments, and deal with the political rainifica- dons of imxstmmts.. Crisis :Management: A Challenge to Leader- ship. Handling an emergency is one of the most public tests of a local official's leadership skills. Explore, the common elements of all city crises and ways to respond to them, and discus the preparation of emergency response plans. Putting Your Best Foot Forurard: The Art of Selling Your Ideas: leadership requires salesman - ship: getting People to support an idea or follow a course of action is not always easy. Discuss the key steps -- preparing the groundwork, building constituencies, and others —Hat will generate public support for your ideas. Finding and :Vatirating Citizen Leaders: Volunteers are playing a growing role in local events and loci programs. Find out how to iden- tify the leaders and the workers among the grow. ing number of local volunteers and how to use their knowledge. experience, and energy to bolster your-city's services. Incentives for a Productive Workforce. Take a lesson from modem business management and learn about techniques- -award programs, quality circles, lens buy - backs, training, and others — that provide incentives to increase the productive sty of local government employees. Shaping Your Community's Future: Elected officials can play more positive, visible. and dy- namic roles in shaping the future of their com- munities through strategic planning. Find out who to involve in the process and how to involve them, how to conduct successful strategic plan- ning exercises, and how to get maximum local in- volvement in, and media attention to. a city stra- tegic pi mw* program. .Managing Your City: It'orking Smarter. Aot Harder: Efficient and effective management of city government is more difficult, thanks to the pres- sure- cooker environment in which today's local officials live and work. Find out how to exercise more effective oversight and control over munici- pal operations; tarp the right questions to ask of city administrators and department heads, and ex- plore time management techniques you can use to cope with the demands of a busy schedule. Computer Use in Small City Government: • Deciding to computerize city operations is no small decision, even for a small city. Explore the technical, managerial, and policy questions of computerization with a panel of experts and colleagues. ,Managing Your Bond Issue Campaign: What are the elements of a successful bond issue cam- paign? What does it take to develop broad com- munity support? Which community groups and institutions can be particularly important allies? Learn what you need to know from a panel of city officials who have been successful at selling bond issues under varying local conditions. Track Three Enhancing Communities. Enriching Lives Livability is the bottom line. Do people want to live and work in your city? Can they find jobs? Do they have access to services and programs they need and want? Will the schools educate their children well? Can the elderly, the homeless, the poor, get the help they need? Will people be safe downtown, in their neighborhoods "and in their homes? The answers to these challenging ques- tions are vital to the future of your city, and the workshops in this track will show you ways to make your city a place where people want to live, where they can live comfortably, work produc- lively, and grow in marry ways. Workshops Cam endons and Tourism as Rreenue Sources: Every visitor to your community, whether traveling for business or pleasure, spends money. Meetings are a $30 billion industry; tour- ism accounts for 6,6 million jobs. Explore ways in which you can work together with your local chamber of commerce and convention bureau to • Mebane a seefai era dd bWwt to MW die oMdda IQ$ strengthen your local economy by nuking your city a better host. Mealth Carr in Seattle; A Mobile Ww*dwp. Visit community health cluucs serving Seattle's ethnically - diverse, low- income population. Learn about funding. services delivered, governance, and talk with clinic personnel and clients. Seattle's nationally- acdanned Rduges Screening Program may also be visited. WAo World Went to Lim In Your City ?. Liv- ability requires more than the physical enwon- ment —it also requires opportunities for recrea- tion, employment, education, and culture. Examine the factors that create the environment and the opportunities that make a city livable. See how Seattle's innovative and successful Ki¯ helps make the city a piece where families will want to live, and hear about other successful pro- grams from around the country. M tTmeft of Sister city Reistimsh/pa The Sister City program originally a way to transfer technical expertise and practical experi- ence to third world countries, has become a two- way stmt for exchanging of ideas, technology, and trade. See how cities have used Sister City programs; discuss the benefits of the program's educational. cultural and technical awAm w and explore methods for organising and hviding Sider City programs. - - -- Tharspartation in Seadia A Monk Wwi-; _-.- shw Take a mobile tour of Seattle's public tgttM. portation system. See at first hand how public transportation enhances the quality of life in Seat- de by connecting the city and its suburbs with an extensive park -anti -ride program M aggressively promoting a carpool and vanpool matching pro- grain, and easing downtown traffic. Neighborhood Dirmily a a City Resowca Cultural and ethnic diversity are invaluable city resources. Find out how other cities spotlight community diversity, and discover tow recogni- tion of a city's diversity leads to better under- standing and unity, instills pride and community spirit, and shows residents and visitors that the city is an interesting place o live and work. Mowing /a Seat/la A Mobik Wonbho . See how the city of Seattle provides housing for its residents in a period when federal assistance for low and moderate income housing. has dropped 60 percent and In the face of proposals to eliminate the tax incentives that promote the construction and rehabilitation of multifamily rental housing. Capitalis/mg on Your Cily Assets: 0 Every small city or town has unique features— physical, cultural. social. or economic assets— that offer local leaders an opportunity to improve the quality of community life. Find out how other small cities are using creative programs to snake their communities more satisfying places to work live, and play. t murtwily Alternadoes for flee Homeless: Homelessness, one of the country's most visible tragedies, transcends other social and human services problems and strains city resources. Ex. Plate the fiscal and social problems of meeting the needs of the nation's two million homeless people. and explore ways to provide shelter for them. Commrmily Coopered- for NeighborAoorl Saft: Lam from case histories how cooperation between community volunteers and police depart. ments. careful planning of physical appearance and corporate development. and marketing of a city's identity through public events improve the. overall feeling of safety in a city and make your city a safe, attractive and comfortable community in which to live, work, and play. PRE- CONFERENCE - SEMINARS SAT(JRIMY. DECEMBER Policy Leaders Seminar: Effective Employer - Employee Relations; The Challenge of Political Leadership 9.00 am. -5.00 p.m. Public personnel management has changed considerably in recent years, partly because of fed- eral and state legislation and judicial decisions. How is the current political and economic climate affecting such local government labor relations is- sues as comparable worth and pay equity, public employee motivation and incentive programs? Examine the policy leader's role in assuring effective employer - employee relations at this day- long seminar. Workshops will explore comparable worth and job claisifiation and evaluation schemes; offer tips on handling and preventing Public employee strikes; and review employee mo. tivation and incentive programs that an increase organisational efficiency and improve worker sat- isfaction and morale. A separate registration fee of $75 will be charged for this seminar. Leveraging Available Resources for Local Development 9:00 am. -5 :00 p.nL City economic development programs are benefitting from the evolving relationships be. tween state and local governments, the growth of public and private partnerships, and the use of university and community resources. Take an in -depth look at that new relation- ships between state and local governmenm com- munities aril their universities, and the public and private sectors. Leam how to leverage these resources to further the economic development goals of your city. A separate registration fee of $75 will be charged for this seminar. Moving Forward in the Information Age: Cities as Telecommunication Regulators. Users, and Broken 9:00 am. -5-00 p.nL New technology, new companies and services, and new federal regulations are shaping today's high-tech information age and creating a rapidly - changing environment in which cities are bec im- regulaors, brokers. and users. At this one day seminar yowl examine key kcal government tell issues, hear the latest on First Amendment proceedings that threaten municipal able regulatory authority. and discuss innovative studies of local govemewrt re- sponses to the Cattle Communications Policy Art and relevant FCC proceedings. You will also learn how to transfer private sector tdceommimiations panning experiences to local government and ex. amine basic cable administrative problems in the areas of franchise renegotiation, franchise compli- ance, and consumer protection. A separate regis- tration fee of $75 will be charged for this seminar. X's WIMG Seminar. Conflict Management 1:30 p.m. -4.30 p.m. Learning to work out conflicts an lead to better working relationships with colleagues and constituents. At this seminar for woman elected officials, you will probe the reasons for conflicts and hear practical suggestions and guidance on dealing with conflicts and resolving them. A sepa- rate registration fee of $40 will be charged for this half -day seminar. Hisp ole Officials: Techniques for Successful Lobbying 1:30 p.m. -4.30 p.m. Hone your lobbying skills at this half -day seminar, sponsored by NLC's Hispanic Elected Lo- al Officials (HELO) organization, and become a more effective advocate within your own commu- nity and as a representative of your city. You'll discuss the Ws and don'ts of good lobbying and hear tips on haw to became more persuasive and effective both on the city council and with siaie and federal legislators. A separate registration fee of $40 will be charged for this seminar. sk LINUS Demonstrations LINUS, NLC and IMCA's joint electronic mes- saging service, will be demonstrated throughout the Congress of Cities. Come and see how rapidly this new service an bring you information on the latest happenings in Washington, and other spe- cial services from NLC and ICMA. Among the items demonstrated will be messaging featurei. a wide variety of bulletin boards, and special oppor. tunity for hands-on tryouts of LINUS. LOGIN �J Discover how the Local Government Infor. mation Network (LOGIN) an save your city time and money in the search for successful solutions to local government problems. At the LOGIN dis- play, open during the registration hours, we'll also show you the special NLC services that are available on LOGIN. Special training will be avail- able for LOGIN users who want to learn how to use the service to its fullest. A LOGIN users' meeting is also scheduled during the Congress of Cities. Police Consultation Room If you need specialized assistance on police problems that may be troubling your community, NLC's Police Consultation Service an help. A meeting room has been set aside for confidential individual discussions with Tom Crockett. director of the Police Consultation Service. Mr. Crockett will be available every day throughout the conference. TUESDAY. DECEMBER 10 City Innovations Idea Mart 2:00 p.m. -4 :00 p.m. Declining financial resources and increasing demands for municipal services have forced signif- icant changes on local programs. At the City In- novations Idea Mart-the showcase of innovative municipal programs -.you can see how local gov. ernments are adopting new approaches to local service delivery and implementing creative or in- novative strategies to solve pressing city problems, 1985 Exposition This year's Congress of Cities and Exposition is expected to be one of the largest ever, with the exhibits on display Sunday through Tuesday as an Integral tart of the conferaxce. !'tore than 150 hibitors, sponsoring over 250 booths, are to dupVY products and services for the mainte- nance and mutaganent of municipal government and municipal services. Exhibits will include air- port management services, hospital management systems. fire equipment. computer hardware serv- ice and software. and waste management equip - ment. Dan 't canna them M W_ AF-1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 347 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Retention of an Architect to Provide Design Services for the Replacement of the Cedar Cedar Avenue Liquor Store. Council Members: The City Council and the HRA have discussed the`;development of the Cedar Avenue liquor store site and the construction of a new liquor store during the past 2 "to 3 years. The staff has been negotiating with the Lincoln Companies for site redevelopment and the authorization fon the issuance of Industrial Development - Revenue Bonds during 1985 • With the redevelopment of the liquor store site it will be necessary to construct a new liquor store. (See Council letter #346 on this agenda for more information on this subject.) The initial phase of this process will require the hiring of an architect to prepare building and site designs and preliminary cost estimates. Because of the crucial timing imposed by changes in the IDRB legislation it is essential that an architect be hired soon if the project is to be constructed in the near future. This is the last year that Richfield has a guaranteed IDB allocation. It is the developer's and City's intent to initiate this project before 1986. In 1'984 the Lincoln Companies retained the services of Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson, (KKE) to prepare concept designs for both the proposed office- service center proposal and a proposed new liquor store to be located on the northeast corner of 66th and Cedar. Because of this previous design work, KKE is well aware of the city's design needs for a new liquor store in east Richfield, and should be able to perform additional design work in an efficient manner. KKE will also be used by the Lincoln Companies for the design of the proposed office /service center complex. It is desirable that one architectural firm be used for both projects so that design unity and project compatibility can be maximized. -2- /7- /Y "2 The architectural contract specifies that the architectural • fee shall not exceed $27,500 It is recommended that the City Council authorize its city manager to enter into a design agreement for architectural services with Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson. The developer and city staff have reached informal agreement that the municipal liquor store will be placed at the southwest corner of 66th Street and Cedar Avenue where the former service station building is located. The office- service center building will occupy the liquor store site. The office- service center building will be reduced in size from approximately 45,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet. The building could be expanded if developer negotiations for additional land south of 67th Street are successful. The new liquor store would be approximately 5, -400 square feet. This development plan means the city will not have to purchase a site for the replacement store. The sale of the existing liquor store site can be utilized to const'r..pct the new liquor store or be utilized to provide funding to redevelop properties on the east side of Cedar Avenue, north of 66th Street. Another method to finance the store would be to pledge future liquor store profits. The liquor fund cash balance could be used in part for funding. The projected fund balance as of January 1, 1986, is $6$59667. • Respectfully submitted, ohn G. Ca wri t City Manager 'O JGC /eja CITY Off' RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 17 1 Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 346 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Cedar Avenue Liquor Store Site, Setting Date of Hearing for Use of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds. Council Members: On April 15, 1985, the City Council and the HRA selected Lincoln Companies to be the developer of the Cedar Avenue Liquor) Store site. This was the result of a lengthy process which involved evaluation of several reuse concepts by staff, the neighborhood, the City Council and HRA. The reuse concepts included multi -unit housing, an entertainment center and the office /service center. The neighborhood, staff, HRA and Council found the Lincoln Compoanies concept to be the most desirable. •`- Thus, staff was authorized to initiate negotiations on a developer's agreement. Discussions have been underway for sometime. The development concept was that the existing liquor store would be relocated to another site adjacent to 66th Street in east Richfield, and Lincoln Companies would construct a 45,000 square foot one.story office /service center type facility on the Cedar Avenue Liquor Store site. The row of trees along 18th Avenue would "remain intact and there would be no site access from 18th Avenue. All of these features helped to make the development compatible to the neighborhood. In meetings with the adjoining community, the response to this concept was very favorable. This concept has been difficult to implement because of the problem to-identify an alternative liquor store site and coordinating the timing of the two developments. This difficulty has been resolved by slightly redefining the concept. The liquor store would be relocated to the area of the former service station with the city would retaining ownership of this land. Lincoln Companies would-purchase from the city the existing liquor store facility and construct on this site a 30,000 square foot one story office /service center facility. As with the previous concept, the trees will be retained and there will be no site access from 18th Avenue. -2- 17-,), It is appropriate at this time to initiate the process for issuance of IDRB's. A decision on the city's final IDRB • entitlement must be made by October 31, 1985.- The concept is consistent with the "Guidelines for the Issuance of IDRB's ". A developers agreement is being negotiated. The construction of a new liquor store would be financed substantially by the land sale proceeds received from Lincoln Companies. At the time a developers agreement is presented for your review and formal action, the details regarding the cost and financing of a new liquor facility will also be presented. Because of the IDRB entitlement process and the desire of other communities to use Richfield's allocation, it would be in our best interest to schedule a hearing at this time to establish our intent to utilize up to $2.9 million of the IDRB allocation. At the time of the hearing, Mr. DeFresne from the Lincoln Companies will present graphic representations of the development concept and will be available for questions. On Thursday, September 5, 1985, a commercial real estate broker and a credit union representative met with the Community Development Director and indicated that they would befdesirous of developing the Cedar'Avenue site with a credit union building and other commercial uses. They indicated that they could build a structure of comparable size and value. However, because of the lengthy process which has occurred on this proposal, the acceptance of the Lincoln Companies concept by area residents, • the amount of staff time spent on this proposal, and the need to utilize the IDRB allocation in the very near future or lose it, the City Manager and staff recommend proceeding with Lincoln Companies on their proposal. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution establishing the date of public hearing and consideration of the adoption of the inducement resolution for September 30, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. Because of the timeframe, the notice for the hearing has already been submitted to the Sun Current Newspaper. If the council does not concur in the hearing recommendation, the hearing will be cancelled. JGC /eja • Respectful,Ly submitted, hn G. Car wri t City Manager • • • RESOLUTION N0. 173 RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED PROJECT UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT. WHEREAS, Richfield Office Showroom Developers, a Minnesota general partnership (Company), has proposed that the City undertake and finance a project under the Municipal'Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 (Act); and WHEREAS, the Act and federal regulations require that a public hearing.on the proposed project be conducted by the Council before any action may be taken by it relative to the proposed project: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield: 1. The Council shall meet at 7:00 p.m. on Monday September 30, 1985 to conduct a public hearing on the.proposed project requested by the Company and to take whatever action in relation thereto as it deems appropriate. 2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish notice of the hearing' in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A once in the official newspaper and once in the Minneapolis Star - Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, no less than 15'days prior to September 30, 1985 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk John Hamilton, Mayor • • Exhibit A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IT � NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, will meet in the Council chambers in the City Hall in the City of Richfield at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, Sept. 30 , 1985, to conduct a public hearing on a proposal that the City undertake and finance a project under the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474. The project is proposed by Richfield Office Showroom Developers, a Minnesota general partnership (Company) and consists of the acquisition of land and the construction and equipping thereon of an approximately 30,000 square foot office showroom facility for lease to various tenants. The project will be located at approximately 6604:Cedar Avenue- South in the City. The principal amount of bonds or other'''obligations proposed to be issued by the City to finance the project is estimated to be not in excess of $2,900,000. A draft copy of a proposed application to the Minnesota Department of Energy, Planning and Development, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall, City of Richfield, Minnesota during regular City business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily, except Saturdays, Sundays and holidays). Any person wishing to express a view. with respect to the, proposal to undertake and finance the Project will be held at the public hearing. Dated: September 9, 1985. jW BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL By Thomas P. Ferber 0 • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 3145 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Reconsideration of Stipulation at 817 East 66th Street Council Members: At the July 8, 1985, City Council meeting, the City Council approved the issuance of a special use permit to the owner of the service station at 817 East 66th Street to allow construction of a 27 x 36 foot addition and to,allow the operation of a service station store. The following two stipulations were placed on that approval: 1. That the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be closed prior to occupancy of the addition. 2. That one 90 degree curb out be constructed in conformance with the city ordinance prior to occupancy of the addition. The property owner has subsequently requested that the city reconsider these two stipulations and allow them to use the existing curb cuts. City staff has reviewed the situation and in light of the fact that this is an existing service station, that there has not been a history of accidents or traffic problems at that service station, staff would recommend-that the stipulations be rescinded. Staff is also working on developing a policy concerning the number, width and location of curb cuts in non- commercial property. This new policy would apply to all new construction and help insure safe engress and egress into commercial properties. Once staff has drafted this policy it will be transmitted to the council for your review and consideration. Respectfu 41 submitted, John G. CartwrY.Kht City Manager I 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Letter No. 258 Agenda July 8, 1985 Subject: Special Use Permit at 817 East 66th Street Council Members: PROPOSAL 4 Mr. Robert C. Hoffman (APCO dealer) has made an application for a special use permit to allow a 27 X 36 foot addition to the existing building at 817 East 66th Street for the operation of a service station store. HISTORY On May 8, 1978, the city council approved a variance request to allow a free standing canopy at the existing service station. The city council, at the time of granting the variance also made the following stipulations: 1. That the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be closed. 2. That one 90 degree curb out on Elliot Avenue be constructed in conformance with city ordinance Observation of the site indicates that the south curb out on Elliot Avenue has not been closed, nor has a 90 degree curb cut on Elliot Avenue been constructed as stipulated by the city council. The applicant indicates that the service station has had a grocery license for the past two years and has operated as a service station store without securing the required special use permit. ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS 1. Section 3.33, subdivision 2, requires a special use permit for converting a gasoline service station into a service station store. 2. Section 3.33, subdivision 3, regulates gasoline service stations. r� -2- 1f0 3. Section 3.41 governs the issuance of a special use permits. STAFF REVIEW Staff has reviewed the proposal against the standards for special use permit and has found the following: 1. The site is located in C -2 general commerical district . and abuts multiple - residence districts both to the east' and-west. 2. The proposal indicates a 27' x 36' foot addition_ to the already existing 20' x 34' masonry building "(680 square feet) to accomodate the service station store. The operation involves one full -time employee. There is no significant change in the operation of the station. There are four parking stalls on th-e site which is sufficient for the operation. 3. The existing curb cuts on the site create dangerous traffic movements in the area. The entrance drives are laid out in such a manner that traffic enters and exits the site at a 45 degree angles rather than at a 90- degree angle. Such angle drives reduce the field -of vision. The number of curb cuts into the site.(four) encourages unsafe turning movements and conflicts with the city's adopted comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan indicates that "major streets will have restricted left -turn movements and restricted. access to adjacent properties, in order to reduce accidental potential and avoid congestion caused by slow traffic and turning movements....". The applicant has been made aware of these concerns by the city officials at the time when the variance was granted in 1978. 4. The site conforms to all the city ordinance requirements for the operation of a gasoline service station except that the east curb out on 66th Street is located only 30 feet from the.66th Street - Elliot Avenue intersection. The city ordinances require that no curb'cut at the point it crosses the property line of the site will be within 40 feet of an intersection. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is staff's recomendation that the city council approve the special use permit to allow the construction of a 27 x 36 foot addition to the existing building for the operation of a gasoline service station store at 817 East 66th Street with the following stipulations: • • • -3- ' 164 1. That the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be closed prior to occupancy of the addition. 2. That one 90- degree curb out on Elliot Avenue be constructed in conformance with city ordinance prior to occupancy of the addition. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The planning commission voted (5 -1) (Nay- Hoverson) to recommend city council approval of 'a special use permit to allow the construction of a 27 X 36 foot addition to the existing building for the•operation of a gasoline service station store at 817 East 66th Street without the stipulations recommended by staff. The commission concurred With the applicant that the curb cut changes would cause safety problems because gasoline tank trucks would be forced to back up onto 66th Street after making deliveries.. Staff agrees that trucks backing out onto 66th Street is an unsafe condition, but also believes the existing angled curb cuts and the close proximity of two of the curb cuts to the 66th Street and Elliot-Avenue intersection is unsafe. Staff would like to see curb cuts eliminated where possible and 90 degree curb cuts constructed in place of the existing angled curb cuts. SD /eja Resp/e4tfu ;ly Erc v e n -5*vi Ac ing City bmitted , f'A", h Manager L yes ...... � . I� • �t 1 •h 1 W� i �c �cc src� EAST 66th STREET i /!off i _ w �iw Y � •• t j � •Ln✓1M•� Ir�V.i711 iMMf'r ' •N• . y s � PftCPO$im AGomc" f DpsTMCa sutw a �...-s ' r Vim► s.r•�•.n r 1 1 f t: j 1 H O W i. W 5 1— O ul ll�do Council Meeting Minutes- -2- May 8, 1978 Richard Krier, planning and redevelopment director, reviewed the request of Mr. Clifford Hoffman for a variance to the service station canopy design requirements . to allcv.him to construct a free standing canopy -at his service station located. at 817 East 66th Street, as outlined in Council. Letter No. 127. Mr. Krier presented the staff's recommendation for correction of curb cuts on 66th Street and Elliot. Avenue. Joan Helmberger presented the planning co=ission's recommendation which favored . granting the variance. Dean Lewis, representing. Pump & Meter, 2711 E.. Franklin, who will be building the canopy for Mr. Hoffman, described the proposed construction. Mr. Clifford Hoffman spoke against changing curb cuts to 90 degrees and indicated e: would be-willing to close the Elliot curie cut nearest to 66th Street. Gordon McKinnon, 7308 Upton,. spoke in favor of 90 degree curb cuts. Mr. Edelman, attorney for Mr. Hoffman, spoke in favor of: this variance request indicating this is a. relocation and every consideration should be given to the applicant. Motion by Ludeman, seconded by Luettinger to approve the granting of this variance with the following stipulations: 1. That the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be closed. Z. That one 90 degree curb cut on Elliot Avenue be constructed in conformance with city ordinance.. Poll of votes: Ayes - Jacobsen, Ludeman, Luettinger, Law. Nays - Anderson. Car+ied. 3'. Recuest for Rezoning, 6629 Harriet Avenue Richard Krierr, planning and redevelopment director, reviewed the request of Mr... Carl McBride of Richfield State Agency, 66Z5 Lyndale Avenue, for a zoning district change from Residence (R) to General Commercial.(C -Z) for the property-located at 10629 Harriet, as outlined in Council Letter No. 126. Mr. McBride. proposes to use this property to expand an existing parking lot adjacent to it. /S -1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 34 "4 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject Resolution Supporting Legislation Permitting Exemption From The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Overtime Pay Requirements. Council Members: The League of Minnesota Cities, ICMA, and the National League of Cities recommend the passage of a resolution supporting Senate Bill 1570, introduced by Senator Don Nickles (R- Okla.) and eo- sponsored by Senator David Durenberger. The resolution supports legislation designed to exempt local govern - ments from FLSA concerning overtime pay requirements. The resolution also calls for similar legislation to be introduced • in the House of Representatives. The bill permits an exemption from FLSA overtime pay requirements for stage and local employees, permits the use of compensatory time off in lieu of overtime compensation, grants exempt status (from FLSA) for individuals who volunteer services for state and local government, and, eliminates the retroactive application of the FLSA to state and local government. City staff has recently assessed the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling in Garcia vs San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (FLSA applicability) on its finances and personnel. The impact of FLSA on the City of Richfield includes the following: 1. The City will require approximately $75,000 more in its Public Safety budget in order to meet the overtime provision of the Act. This may require a reduction in services and programs or additional revenues from increased taxes. 2. Under the provisions of the FLSA, the City is required to change its current firefighters schedule. The firefighters are opposed to such a work schedule change. 3. The City has discontinued its flex -time practices. i This was a popular and productive program and was a key part of our employee relations program. -2- 4. The loss of a flexible schedule in the Public Safety Communications Center may require the hiring of an additional employee for the purpose of limiting the City's liability for overtime under the Act. The issue of liability was not addressed in the Supreme Court ruling and, with a two -three year possible liability exposure to employee lawsuits and a three year limit for willful violations, jurisdictions stand to risk harsh and punitive actions resulting from FLSA enforcement. In the future, with the restrictive scheduling under FLSA requirements, the City could be faced with the need to increase its staff, out services and programs, and, raise taxes. Thus it is essential that the City be exempted .from certain aspects of FLSA as proposed in Senate Bill . 1 � P P 570 It is recommended that the City Council adopt th-e attached resolution providing support for federal legislation'to.exempt local units of government from certain provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. Respectfu y submitted, 4ohn G. Cartwr ht City Manager JGC /eja 3. That the council forward a copy of this resolution to the League of Minnesota Cities for their use in supporting the above efforts. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 1570 AND CALLING FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF SIMILAR LEGISLATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that local units of government must now comply with provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and WHEREAS, the application of the provisions of FLSA will be extremely costly to the City of Richfield, requiring the budgeting of over $75,000 for Public Safety overtime costs in 1986 alone, and WHEREAS, the costs of FLSA will require a reduction in services to Richfield residents and /or increased tax revenues, and, WHEREAS,. Senator Nickles and Durenberger have introduced Senate Bill 1570 affecting FLSA applicability to local government units. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the City take the following actions: 1.. That the council support the passing of Senate Bill 1570 which permits an exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act provisions on overtime pay requirements for state and local employees, permits the use of compensatory time off in lieu of overtime compensation, grants exempt status (from FLSA) for individuals who volunteer services for state and local government, and, elimnates the retroactive application of Federal Fair Labor Standards to state and local. governments. 2. That the council support the inroduction of similar legislation by its representative, Congressman Martin Sabo. . 3. That the council forward a copy of this resolution to the League of Minnesota Cities for their use in supporting the above efforts. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk XNA NEWSLETrER /13#Supplem .Peptember e'nt # 1. 2.1985 Vol: 66, No. 18 LSA. Action Needed ,_-.ICMA's Pubiic Pol -icy Committee met Friday, August 23, in Washington, D.C,, .to discuss ways ICMA can be more effective on public policy:issues... The group agreed-that city and, county administrators need to make themselves available to po licymaking groups of such organiza- tions as the Natlopal,League.of• Cities, U.S. Conference of-:Mayors, and the National. Association of Counties. In addit:ion,,_.,they feit:. managers should, be active participants,-in their state municipal leagues. The committee identified the Fair Labor Standards Act as the most pressing public policy issue.. Since immediate Congre.ssiona,l: act,ion,,is needed, they urged ICMA members to contact their representatives quickly.(; Also discussed were tax- exempt.bonds,,: deductibility of state and local taxes,.mandatory '. coverage of Medicare for.all.local government-. employees, -and mandatory coverage of Social Security for „amp l ogees , h i red of ter, January- ,1, 1986. These issues. w i,) ,1, be. oni the, committee s agenda at the next meeting, October 27, at the ICMA Annual Conference. Members of the committee are: G. Stevens Bernard, CM, Grand Rapids, Mich., chairman; Manuel Deese, CM, Richmond, Va.;.Gary;,Gwyn, CM, Tyler,-Tex.;,Alan Harvey, CM,.$t.. Pe.tersburg.,.Fia.; Richard Ives, AA,!: Duluth, Minn.;.Norman-;K.ing, CM, Paim Springs,, Calif.; - ,Bruce :,Liedstrand, CM, Mountain V1ew,- Calif.;; Arthur (Don) Mendonsa, CM, Savannah, Ga.; Thomas Muehienbeck,,CM, irginia,Beach, Va.; J,- A. Ojeda.,oJr.,.Asst to. CnM, Dade County, Fla.; Karen Smith, CM,-: Union City, Calif.; James.Sm.ith,:CM,:Concord, N.H.; .Richard:Townsend, Sr. Staff Assoc., League of : Oregon,. C i t i es, Sa.l ems Ore.; and 0. Wendell Wh i.te,. CM, Charlotte, N.C. There are still do.ubts,among many members..of Congress and: the Reagan Administration that the Supreme Court's February 19,;1985. dec,isioA in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority is causing serious problems for local governments. The executive directors of seven state and local organizations, including ICMA, the National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Association of.Counties,,:senit a letter to President Reagan and to members of Congress In July asking for the following amendments to the FLSA: First, individuals who p.r.ovide service 'to,state•snd local governments on a;yolunteer basis should not be subject to the wage and hour.prov.isions ; of the FLSA.,; The- Department of Labor's (DOL) regulations establish that volunteer firefighters are employees whenever they receive more than $2.50 per call. Second, the overtime provisions of the FLSA should not apply to "state and iocal'employees. Under Section 7 of the FLSA, regular employees are enti-tled to compensation on a time and a -'half basis for hours worked in a'week ,in excess''of'40'0 -Simi'larly, overtime; pay must'be paid 'to firefighters for hours-worked i n excess' °of' 212 -in a 28 -day period' and' to police off i cers for hours worked in excess of 171'ln'a 28 -day period.` These provisions mean that numerous employment practices of state and." ocal governments,, many of which have'been. incorporated. into collective bargaining agreements at the 'request of employees and'are long - standing.' pract ices,' must' be ended. - < hird, a prospective effective date for the application oU the'FLSA to'states and localities should be established. On June 14, DOL announced plans to begin enforcement actions against states and localities and to impose liability on states and localities retroactive to April 15. This retroactive enforcement policy will compound the problems caused by application of the FLSA to states and localities. Legisiation'(S1570) introduced by Senators Don Nickles (R- Okla.) and`Pete•Wil`'son "(R- Calif.) is strongly supported by ICMA, NCL, USCM, and NACo. It would exempt states and localities ' =.from the overtime.provis.ions of the FLSA, exempt individuals who provide services to state and local governments on a volunteer basis from the FLSA, and eliminate the retroactive ..application of 'the -' FLSA. �. —Since Congress assumes FLSA is not a problem in the Midwest or Northeast -It °--•is particularly Important that local governments in_those regions write to•their representatives. . r•. tea,,..:.... . . .. .ri, .. .._. <,.:, r .:. � : , .sM ,, :�... .. ....,..... Members 'of 'the ` Senate -'Labor andjHuman Resources Committee are: . . *Orrin• Hatch (R- Utah),.Chairman; *Robert Stafford (R -Vt.); Dan Quayle (R*•Ind.); *Don Nickles (R- Okla.); Paula Hawkins (R- Fla..); Strom Thurmond (R- S.C.); Lowell,Weicker (R- Conn.); *Malcolm Wallop (R- Wyo.); .Charles Grassley (R- Iowa); *Edward Kennedy (D- Mass.); Claiborne Pell (D= R.I.); *Howard Metzenbaum (D- Ohio); *Spark Matsunaga (D- Hawaii) ;•Christopher Dodd (D- Conn.) ; • Pau 1 S i mom ( D -11 1.) ; and John Kerry ( D -Mass. ) (* = Member of the Subcommittee on Labor.) Although several bills, have been introduced in the House, the Labor-Standards--Subcommittee, chaired•by Rep. Austin Murphy (D- Penn.), has shown little interest_;in.taki.ng up -the issue. H.R. 31739 introduced by Rep. Harris Fawell ('R -Ill.) would exempt states and localities from the FLSA. H.R. 2936, Introduced by Rep. Beverly Byron (D -Md.), would exempt public safety employees from the-overtime provisions.of FLSA. H.R. 31521-introduced'15yt Rep. Norman.~ `Shumway (R.- Calif.) would also exempt public safety employees from the - overtime prov- isions. Members of the House Education and Labor Committee are: *Augustus Hawkins -(D Calif.), Chairman; William Ford (D- Mich.); Joseph Gaydos (D- Penn.); *William Clay (D- Mo.);,Marlo Biaggi (D- N.Y.) ;, *Austin Murphy (D- Penn.); -Dale Kildee (D - -� Mich.); *Pat Williams (D- Mont.);•- *Matthew Martinez (D- Calif.); Major Owens (D- N.Y.); Frederick Boucher-(D -Va.); Charles Hayes (D- I11.)•,,Carl.- Perkins (D-Ky.);.-Terry Bruce (D Ill.); Stephen Solarz (D- N.Y.); Mervyn Dymally =(D- Calif.); Dennis'Eckart (0- Ohio);.Timothy Penny (D- Minn.); Chester•:Atkins (0- Mass.); *James Jeffords (R -Vt.); William- Goodling (R Penn.); E. Thomas Coleman (R -Mo.); *Thomas Petri (R- Wisc.); Marge Roukema (R- N.J.); Steve —Gunderson (R- Wisc.); *Steve Bartlett (R -Tex); Rod Chandler (R- Wash.);,Thomas Tauke (R- Iowa); John McKernan (R -Me.); Richard Armey (R- Tex.); Harris Fawell (R',-111J; and PauV -Henry (R- Mich.). �.,. �* = Members of -the Subcommittee- oa.Labor Standards.) Be sure to send copies of your letters to the Whlte.House, and to any other organizations such as the National League of Cities; state leagues, or the National Association of,.: Counties, that represent your community. Also brief your loca V editors on•the,issue. i _ FLSA ENFORCEMENT ANNOUNCEMENT ZC m DOL recently mailed a brief announcement, of its FLSA enforcement policy to more'�than 80,000 state and local governments. The,notice i.ndi.cates. that DOL is now investigating.pompliance complaints wi•th'FLSA for specified:categorles of nontraditional public employees;, and will begin Investigations for other. categories of, employees on October 1.5. The.mot -ice is.accom- panied by a. checklist that "is intended to assist'[you] in determining whether, your juris- diction is in compliance with certain elements of FLSA." If you'did not receive o'copy o if you want technical assistance from DOL, call its new toll -free FLSA hotline at 800/2330 3572 between 8:15,AM and 4:45 PM EDT. e t1ouse ears Leagues on by Linda R. Woodhouse White House aides told city and f y officials' attending a briefing in ington, D.C. last week that Presi- Reagan is leaning toward backing :gislation to partially exempt cities from he Fair Labor Standards Act, but they topped far short of pledging the admin- :tration's firm and active support. Eighty officials of state municipal ?agues and NLC's Executive Director plan Beals attended the Aug. 19 briefing t the Old Executive Office Building, ailed mainly to discuss the impact of the ebruary 1985 U.S. Supreme Court deci- ion, Garcia vs. San Antonia Metropolitan ransit Authority, which held that the >deral Fair Labor Standards Act applied local government. However, the issues I mandatory Medicare and Social Secu- ity, environmental problems, the bud- et, deficit and tax reform also were re- iewed. League representatives made clear at ie meeting that without relief from LSA provisions, especially in the areas f overtime, the use of compensatory me and the use of volunteers, cities cross the country would be severely urt financially. They stressed that small Aftwould suffer the most. ere 's a very .strong likelihood the ident will support a remedy for the ;arcia decision," presidential assistant titch Daniels told the more than 100 city nd county representatives. "Action from ounty, state and city officials will be the iotivating factor," said Daniels, who is irector of the White House Office of .tergovernmental Affairs. The president's Cabinet Council is ex- ected to recommend support of such -gislation, early next week, but the final ecision will be the president's, Daniels aid. 0 1,600 attend FLSA seminars More than 1,600 city officials gathered at six sites around the nation during the .week of Aug. 19 for briefing sessions on the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) which were jointly sponsored by NLC and the International City Management Association. The meetings were held in Denver, Boston, Dallas, Chicago, San Francisco, and Atlanta. A wide range of city offi- cials, including elected officials, city man - agers, personnel directors, police and fire chiefs, finance directors, and city attor- neys, attended the day -long sessions. "This is a decision that only the presi- dent can make, after the Cabinet Council makes its recommendation early next week," said Daniels after the meeting, the New York Times reported. The council is chaired by Attorney General Edwin Meese, who has privately voiced opposition to the Garcia decison. "The Garcia decision was not wel- comed by the administration," said Debbie Steelman, with the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs. On the topic of mandatory Social Secu- rity, one administration official at the briefing said he was unaware that a pro- vision of the recently passed budget reso- lution, which would impose Social Secu- rity and Medicare taxes on cities and their employees, was a potential problem for cities. Ed Dale, the Office of Management and Budget's assistant director for public affairs, said he had "no indication that this is a problem" but promised to take a look at the issue. He said he had been out of the country in recent weeks and per- See p.7, col.1 .,4L#- rxecunve Utrector A.an Beals (left) met with New Jersey State League of Municipalities representatives after last week's meeting with White House officials. They are (left to right) Executive Director John Trafford, labor relations counsel Gerald Dorf, and Maplewood Mayor Robert Grasmere, president. jW FLSA. meeting from pi baps thatwas why he had not'heard any rumbling. from local officials The issue first came up on Capitol MR in early. summer when Senate. Majority Leader Robert: Dole IR-Kans.) . began pushing his proposal to requite cities to be a part of Medicare and SodaLSecurity as a deficit: reduction measure Sudr a move could cost cities and their employ- ees $9A billion over the next three years. However, Ron Alvarado, with the -White House Office of Intergovernmen- tal Affairs, said he had heard "only in the last 10 days" about the problems it would cause local governments; "That's on a track that looks to me as-if it's going to fly," Dale said. "I don't think there's been an awful - lot of thought in the administration abort this... III cer- tainiy carry back the message that you all take this very seriously." Also speaking - during the Briefing was Lee Thomas.. administrator of the Envi- rornaental Protection Agency, who said he is "anticipating delays" in implement-, ing new EPA rules governing storm wa- ter treatment and permit for stoma sew- ers, pendidg further study'of the issue.' The new regulations could cost cities mil lions of dollars. The first official public pronouncement of the administration's position on FLSA legislation is expected to come Sept. 10 when Labor Secretary Bill Brock is sched- uled to-testify .before the Labor Sub- committea of the Senate Labor and Hu- man Resources Committee The subcommittee is chaired by Set.. Don .Nickles (R -0kla), who along with Sen. Pete Wilson (R -CaRE) and 23 co- sponsors has introduced .S.1370.- The." masure• would exempt state and local . governments from FLSA overtime provi- sions, .would exempt volunteers, and would be retroactive to, April 15, 1985; the date cities felLumder FLSA. The National Lague of Cities supports themasumand urgescity offi ials to ask their US. senaiors and representatives to support it:. Debbie- Steelman, with the White House Office of Intergovernmental Af faun, said diming the White House brief - mg that, while she could not commit the administration's support until after the president's decision, the Nickles.bill was the best- measure- introduced so far to provide relief to "cities. She said one drawback of the measure was that only two of the 25 cosponsors are Democrats, which might make it difficult for the measure to pas the Democrat- controlled House of Representatives, even if the Republican- controlled Senate approved it Charles Cooper, deputy assistant attor- ney genes I for civil rights, also pledged . Department of Justice support. "The Jus- tice Department is prepared to support any reasonable legislation in - Congress that would congressionally overrule Gar- cia," Cooper said. Because the Department of Labor will begin Oct. 15 to monitor local govern- ments for compliance with FLSA, "time is of the essence," legislative Counsel Cynthia Pots, with NLC's Office of Fed- eral Relations, told city officials before the White House briefing "If we don't see real movement by late September, chances of getting legislation become During the White House briefing Sue Meisinga, deputy undersecretary with the Department of Labors Employment Standards Administration, again reit- erated DOL's position that legislation was the proper remedy to cotmter the effects of the Garcia decision . After the Garcia, Wiling dty officials. had asked DOL to use its rule- making powers to resolve a member of problems created by the application of FLSA to cities. "Unfortunately, the Department of Labor felt constrained by the act Itself," said Alan Beals, executive director of NLC "They felt the real solution had to tw legislative because of the Supreme Court decision." -Beals said he. was "encouraged" by Daniels' report that presidential suppport for FLSA legislation may be forthcoming While many city officials would rather be totally exempt from RSA, legislation introduced so far addresses only the FLSA provisions causing.cities the most trouble. They include requiring cities to pay overtime instead, of giving employ- ees compensatory time off for extra hours worked. That provision alone will cost cities more than $Aillion ayen and will result in further redjwbon of government services; Beals said: ' In addition, millfonsof volunteers, es- pecially volunteer firefighters, will be af- fected by =rFLSA provision that dasst fies anyone paid anre than $2.50 per hour as a regular employee. Steelman told those attending the White House b uftg that if cities don't work to stem. the FLSA tide, other laws from which cities are currently exempt might also soon apply to cities. "If the Congtegs does not hear- a fairly Loud blast, there is an open door in other areas," Steelman said. - EPA's Thomas'said his agency is developing 'a short list of acutely toxic air pollutants'and is updating an emergency guidance manueL in order to assist local .governments to better respond to acd- dental releases of toxic into the air. Thomas said more staff has also been added to regional EPA offices to help local go emments plan for emerged— Thomas, also urged_ support for re- authorization of Superfund, the 1ederal hazardous waste cleanup program which expires at the end of September. He also - predicted that reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act "will go through (Congress) fairly quickly." In response to a question about chas- ing hazardous' waste disposal sites Thomas said fording suitable sites was "a major problem," and that EPA "was hes- itant to get involved in trying to pick sites." Thomas said a study group has been looking at the siting issue. In addition, Thomas reminded those in attendance that 1987 is the deadline for meeting air quality standards for ozone. He predicted many cities will have "ma- jor problems meeting ozone standards. It's going to require some tough decisions among state and local govemments." Vacaville, Calif. Mayor Bill Carroll, president of the League of California Cit- ies, said the meeting was "very worth - see p.% cou 15-2 lie • El FLSA meeting, -"�- fromp. 7 while," and said Daniels willingness to speculate on the president's support for ::A legisletion was "a good sign" that - the administration oauuM side with cities : on this issue. Implementing FLSA will east Vacaville (pop 50,000) $100,000 next year, about - fivepercent of. the _dty s.toW budget. , " Calrou .said, regardless of_ the legisla- five outcome on FLSA, cities will once Bill Carroll; Cali . rnia- Daniel's remark. Bill r again be.hurt "Everybody is going to be d si g00 gy " : faced with one -half of a- chicken or none good sign.. "We' came in optimistic ar at all," Carroll said. hopeful and we came out optimistic ar Piece, S,D- Mayor Grace Petersen, hopeful," Lemon said. president of the South Dakota Municipal League, said the small cities will. be - ,: ::.. Ed Griffin, executive director of tr Kentucky Municipal League was also of effected the mtost by FLSA provisions dmistic. "I think the administration wi because theqy have less budget flexibility "Fiftydollass align itself with cities on (FLSA).,' from a very small budget is GriHm said he appreciated the sees a lot of money." tildty of Alvarado and Daniels on ti-. FLSA issue, but found it "frustrating t have exposum to •some speakers withor - F:• - sensitivity to city issues.,, . Williamstown Mayor Herb Caldwel president of the Kentucky league, said hi - city of 3,000 will not be affected by th overtime: provisions. of FISH . becaus ' state law already recluires smaller cities t. pay overtime instead..of giving- coma time : -He said, however, that there ar many cities. across- Kentucky which oper ate with Iargs numbers of volunteers. " F[SA will have a significant effect or the ability Of city officials to continue to Bob Hmyster 10-- Implementing FLSA. provide those services," Caldweltsaid. Reno; Nev. Councilwoman Janict 7 ivflt_tosE milliorikof dollars" _ Pme, president of the Nevada. League o She said' marry small towns in South Ci tim s aidimplementation of FLSA wil "Welover$1' Dakota - hire - full time ployees who costhercity million, maykx ' m er$2 million =' next year becauseof ft w orklonghoiirsfn _thesuatmerrepoiring streets and maintaining parks, and- take s" al labor contacts." The W. .� latge•dumksof comp tiunein thewinter.,` ly - l city currently pays its 200 full time "Instead, you're going to see people laid off In.. the: winter:•• Petersen acrd That will- cause unemployment . insurance claims-to ibe. and -will have an- adverse impact bridw eeonomyof-strall mmmu -. nities; Petersen said - _ -° Aru : there are just some .situations, ' -... whencities will have to pay overtime; no. matte what, Peterson said "'If. you'ire , gota water leak and -lea 404touus, you're - not going. to send them home." Rotiert Harpster,- executive director of the. League. of Iowa Municipalities, agreed the impact will be greatest on- smailercities because of the marry volun- -Grace Pet — ,;South Dakota— "You're tees they- use: Implementing FLSA in . _going to see people laid off in the minter." Iowa will cities "millions of dollars," including $1.2 million for Des Moines_ firefighters more than double. time for : next yea>;. Harpster said. r and Ankeny Councilman overtime:_ "I'd feel more comfortable if they (the Johrr Lem p• vice president of the Iowa administration} would take a position, " lea league, thought the administration's will- Pine Pme said Iwould.like to know that they ingnew to meet with local officials was a would be supportive of the city's con - cam.. _ Don Timmerman, executive director of the Arkansas Municipal League" said he was' encouraged„ by-the possible admin- istration support for .FLSA. Implement- ing RSA will -cost Arkansas does about -,' $10 million to $15 million next yeas` He was concerned about the apparent lack of knowledge among those in the administration about the impact partici- pation in Social Security and Medicare r" will have on cities: '"they all seemed to Don Zimmernum. Arkansas — "FLSA will be rather taken aback" to learn- that bringing cities under those programs cost Arkansas cities $10 -$I5 million." would cost millions of dollars, i 154 10 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1985 Reagan Expected To Back Measure On Overtime Issue just being another attack on labor." The Labor-Department amwunced last June that it wit! begin enforcing the court Wiling Oct 15 by investigating violations alleged to have occurred after April 15. Without corrective legislation, marry mayors and governors have warned, com- pliance with the decision could trigger widespread layoffs reduced services and By JOANN S. Luarnr blow mxes- SW1Reo~*fT= wnu. STaxwriounN" WASHINGTON — President Reagan is expected to agree to support legislation easing the impact of a Supreme Cant Is- bur decision that initially could cost cities and states $3 billion a year. A Wbits Hose cabinet council yester- bfD overturningpatt of a decision that bars dries and states from granting time off as compensation for Overtime work. Attorney General. Edwin Meese will present the recommendagon to the pred- dent. amdadministradon officials predicted that Mr. Reagan would accept it soon.. per . baps today. "We're just trying to do what's rtgK" explained one Reagan aide, "both from a financial and it philosophical ,stand- The- bill, sponsored by GOP Sces., Don Nickles of Oklahoma and Pete' Wilson of California, would allow cities and states to continue: compensatory dmroff policies. Tie high courts February-ruling requires these governments. to pay for overtime in cash,: instead.. as.prlvate empkryera must do: So far, the bil has 23 :atgporsors. -many Of wbarrr aM conservative Republicans. The Reagan administration is expected to take a format position on the bill at Senate heariM next Tuesday. The measure would amend thr federal minimum- wage and overtim"ey laws to. exempt cities and states from certain overtime provis- i os.- Support for the bill would worsen the administration's. standing with public em- pkryee uuions and canM aggravate its of- tat fractions relations with organized Is- bor. Gerald McEntee: ,president of the Ll millft- member American Federation of State. County and MOW* Employees, said-that uniot intends to continue its fight against weakening the decision. A second official of the union suggested that the Nicides- wilton bill faces tough sledding. even with tbe. administration's blessing, because of the crowded congressional cal- endar. In addition. the official said. "they are on the wrong side of the issue and the public agrees with us." City aW state groups exerted pressure in recent weft to win the administration's support for a modification of the decision. They have lobbied more heavily than on soy other issue in recent years, and this House council's c mcil's action yesterdays Rea- gas official said. But even some mnmicipai lobbyists con- cede that. a Reagan endorsement won't carry a lot of weight with Democratic members of Co sus, "For those who in- terpret this as an administration position that's gati labor: it doesn't help," said Frank Shatroth. a National League of Clt- les lobbyist Unless the Senate measure gains more Democratic cosponsors, he . added. the bill "will take on the tinge of 1 ass • • �J 1 • • .Q C N a 0 C c a� 0,= u0 w U 0 73m E 0 W% i 0 E m o8y -_.`� y `ec e o E Ba E o e a u� r°i I go 0o poles g` �ge km a $Eo—�= 6_BY$ ° 3,�g s�ErimSe �eCu -&Rp0 O s a Y Epp Q r �• V V A' ° $oQ 9 V m Y`° E m m r 2 °e =erg `$oamr °eY acem °,fop = IL 3 . V a E - fir 6 legs m«v�' �� 0Y ° 8e - '$ 2p 1 =9112I C, aO= { V QQ �gjCa Y CY:.� >A C°OaC °AYj GeC oa.vEo = Y`Eoyv �e _ Euea°YE og42�� v °e�'�da ao8i 9p� °r`oarj°°oy �u3Y° oym$° ° °rit2 ,. E�Og sae v is- = >mm o�'a >o°i ° BED Q aq e m V € eve $ d O 3 Amw V i . ° 8S XXs�s4a dada o $° U- `s$ s$ m 04 I - �a» eQ m " e }Q $E3 S — ° — 'a a. ads oE$� WO c°r� 03 . °`�i�i c we nit ago 0 C C °a Yr QQm�. qq Q O SQL iiO�e $0� V pYO7 pF°��O ap to aga Ila Nfiet � =moo Des aA USA ° '51412 Meg E � s I's v ZA E E v a, oo° ° Y 98° �; •$da e a $ ..a� I _ s s.. a a Ym ID "pO yCy q= QYOO�y Y�p o�o� CY�� C � =e i'gBCsx Or• sid GC 3 .Y3 Ym J. Al t�aOC °` e° GAO DGIYII��< Y >9 °6 Hit Oslo 2az 8a y ua YE3'i E s' e U. It 8 m .0 AM m e u Y am INS mca 3iao$ aaaz5i��! eE <a °uo °e_$a 1 1) 5�_A mi • //1/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 343 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject:_ Certification of Delinquent Sewer and Water Utility Accounts Council Members: The City Council is asked to consider a resolution on the September 9, 1985, City Council agenda certifying the annual accumulation of unpaid water and sewer utility accounts. Although the Richfield utility ordinances places unpaid water and sewer charges as a lien against the property, some homeowners have traditionally chosen to have the charges certified and included in their annual property tax billing. A $20 certification charge (preparation for certification to taxes of delinquent accounts) shall be charged against each delinquent account as authorized by Ordinance 8.12, subdivision 12. The attached resolution represents those delinquent accounts which have occurred from August 31, 1984 through August 31, 1985• It is recommended that the city council adopt this resolution certifying delinquent water and sewer accounts. JGC /ea cc: Finance Manager tMiPubmitted, Bohn G/ Qartw;1 dht City Mana er RESOLUTION NO. AA2� RESOLUTION CERTIFYING UNPAID SEWER AND WATER SERVICE CHARGES TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO BE COLLECTED WITH OTHER TAXES ON SAID PROPERTIES WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 8..23 establishes rules, rates and charges.for water service in the City of Richfield, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 44.075, subd. 3, provides that all delinquent water service charges not paid may be certified to the County Auditor and shall be collected with other taxes on such property, and WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 8.12 establishes rules, rates and charges for sanitary sewer service in the City of Richfield, and WHEREAS, Subd. 12 thereof provides that all sewer service charges not paid within fifteen (15) days after the quarterly due date may be certified to the County Auditor with taxes against such property, and shall be collected with other taxes on such property, and WHEREAS, an assessment roll has been prepared specifying the amount which shall be certified against each particular property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that: 1. There.is hereby determined to be a total uncollected amount for water and sanitary sewer - service of $67,870; and 2. That a $20.00 Certification charge shall be levied against each delinquent account; such charges totaling $11,680; and 3.' That such amount is hereby certified to the County Auditor for collection with other taxes on said properties; and 4. That a copy of this Resolution shall be sent to the Hennepin County Auditor. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: 0 Thomas P. Ferber; City Clerk John Hamilton Mayor Y ' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 43.1` Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 342 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Assessment Rolls for Diseased Tree; Nuisance Abatement and Weed Destruction Council Members: There are several resolutions on the September 9, 1985 city council agenda certifying special assessments to Hennepin County. These resolutions provide for the following, certification: 1. Resolution certifying special assessments for mowing /cutting weeds. This is a one -year assess- ment at an 8% penalty; • 2. Resolution levying special assessments for nuisance abatement. This is a one -year assessment at no interest or penalty; and, 3. Resolution levying special assessments for abatement of diseased trees. This is the assessment roll for diseased tree removal on private property which has been performed by the a contractor employed by the city at the request of the property owner. The assessment is certified at the city's actual cost of the tree removal. This assessment is spread over three three years with an inerest rate of 8% per annum. The five properties on the nuisance abatement resolution, which totals $94.00 for all five properties, is for garbage pickup or trash removal where the property owner failed to have it removed. To date in 1985, 371 Dutch Elm trees have been removed in the city: 178 from city boulevards and 193 from private property. Of the 193 trees removed from private property, 127 residents requested the city to contract for their removal. In 1984, a total of 656 Dutch Elm trees were removed (262 from city boulevards and 394 from private property). • -2- It is recommended that the city council adopt the resolutions certifying these special assessments. P p et 1 bmitted, a n a wrig y Manag JGC /ea cc -: Finance Manager f P, • • 0. /3 -3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The following described properties are hereby specially assessed in the following amounts for expenses incurred by the city in connection with abatement of a nuisance health hazard pursuant to provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 145.23, to wit: PROPERTY ID DIVISION ADDRESS AMOUNT 25- 028 -24 -22 -0053 45880 6336 21st Ave. S $20.00. 27- 028 -24 -33 -0075 46930 6813 Grand Ave. S 18.50 34- 028 -24 -33 -0080 44834 400 W. 78th St. 18.50 29- 028 -24 -42 -0129 46790 .6720 Upton ,Ave. S 18.50 34- 028 -24 -22 -0018 44925 7013 Garfield Ave;;, 18.50 W.,66 2. The above special assessments are to be spread over one year at no interest. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 9th day of September, 1985• ATTEST: TF16iings'P. FeF64F i Clerk John 990TEon Mayor RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR WEED DESTRUCTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The following described properties are hereby specially assessed in the following amounts for expenses incurred by the city in connection with the abatement for weed destruction pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, 1984, 18.271, Subd. 4 to wit: PROPERTY ID ADDITION ADDRESS AMOUNT. 25- 028 -24 -22 -0053 45880 6336 21st Ave. $ 40.00 26- 028 -24 -12 -0152 45225 6208 13th Ave. 70.00 28- 028 -24 -23 -0010 44828 6500 Oliver Ave. 55.00 34- 028 -24 -41 -0059 44834 7444 4th Avenue 90.00 27- 029 -24 -21 -0095 44827 Pleasant Avenue 107.53 $362.53 2. The above listed assessment be spread over a period of one year at the rate of 8% interest per annum. 3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: omas P. FeFEW ity Clerk • John Hamilton Mayor RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ABATEMENT OF DISEASED TREES / WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 4.11 establishes rules and regulations with reference to the abatement of diseased trees on private property in the City of Richfield by tree removal, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 429.101 provides that all unpaid or special charges for such tree removal may be certified to the County Auditor with the taxes against such property and shall be collected with other taxes on such property, and WHEREAS, an assessment roll has been prepared specifying the amounts which shall be certified against each particular property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: Richfield as follows: 1. That the following described properties are hereby specially assessed in the following amounts for expenses incurred by the City in connection with abatement or removal of diseased trees pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.101: ADDITION _ PROPERTY ID CODE NO. ADDRESS AMOUNT 33- 028 -24 -41 -0049 45605 7444 Bryant Ave $ 184.49 27- 028 -24 -13 -0007 46830 6421 2nd Ave. 353.20 26- 028 -24 -33 -0053 45256 6914 Park Ave. 310.99 27- 028 -24 -33 -0045 46889 6939 Harriet Ave. 843.29 26- 028 -24 -31 -0030 46750 901 E 66th St. 256.13 26- 028 -24 -33 -0072 46020 6838 Columbus Ave 653.54 32- 028 -24 -41 -0042 45990 7509 Thomas Ave. 416.45 34- 028- 2.4 -14 -0092 45040 7345 3rd Avenue 316.25 34- 028 -24 -42 -0062 45890 7413 Nicollet Ave. 179.23 34- 028 -24 -23 -0061 45590 7209 Harriet Ave. 295.21 32- 028 -24 -42 -0116 45991 7520 Upton Ave. 274.04 29- 028 -24 -14 -0035 46775 6401 Russell Ave. 15.78 .34- 028 -24 -24 -0119 45920 7305 Blaisdell Ave 284.69 35- 028 -24 -24 -0029 45382 7321 11th Ave. 342.55 26- 028 -24 -14 -0097 45942 6500 16th Ave. 237.22 34- 028 -24 -11 -0040 45575 7120 4th Ave. 558.71 28- 028 -24 -21 -0108 46065 6324 Knox Ave. 205.56 28- 028 -24 -21 -0115 46065 6321 Logan Ave. 205.56 34- 028 -24 -23 -0137 45590 7309 Harriet Ave. 395.28 27- 028 -24 -42 -0116 46129 6600 2nd Ave. 231.96 27- 028 -24 -32 -0077 45740 6736 Grand Ave. 521.78 34- 028 724 -33 -0064 46710 7601 Garfield Ave. 400.54 29- 028 -24 -44 -0113 46793 6904 Russell Ave. 368.95 34- 028 -24 -34 -0044 46530 7621 Pillsbury Ave 521.78 28- 028 -24 -32 -0078 45355 6717 Penn Ave. 205.56 28- 028 -24 -34 -0011 46792 6810 Irving Ave. 205.56 27- 028 -24 -11 -0104 45381 6315 3rd Ave. 221.38 34- 028 -24 -13 -0038 45900 7339 1st Ave. 258.26 -2 134 29- 028 -24 -41 -0152 46790 6729 Queen Ave. 142.31 35- 028- 24 -23- 0006 44835 7344 Oakland Ave. 679.97 33- 028 -24 -23 -0012 44833 7321 Penn Ave. 453.27 27- 028 -24 -42 -0050 44850 6733 Nicollet Ave. 482.33 27- 028 -24 -42 -0045 44850 6732 1st Ave. 482.33 27- 028 -24 -11 -0063 45381 6238 4th Ave. 679.97 33- 028 -24 -13 -.0083 45605 7432 Dupont Ave. 674.80 25- 028 -24 -21 -0019 45880 6325 22nd Ave 843.42 28- 028 -24 -33 -0049 46792 6805 Penn Ave. 366.50 28- 028 -24 -33 -0048 46792 6809 Penn Ave. 426.50 27- 028 -24 -12 -0064 46830 6326 2nd Ave. 834.95 33- 028 -24 -22 -0070 45414 7132 Logan Ave. 253.00 28- 028 -24 -21 -0109 46065 6326 Knox Ave. 685.22 27- 028 -24 -12 -0022 46830 6343 -45 Nicollet 278.24 34- 028 -24 -13 -0026 45900 7332 2nd Ave. 278.24 27- 028 -24 -34 -0069 45170 6921 Blaisdell Ave.357.04 32- 028 -24 -43 -0013 45830 7626 Thomas Ave. 472.50 33- 028 -24 -42 -0129 45605 7544 Dupont Ave. 378.00 26- 028 -24 -33 -0107 46020 6817 Portland Ave. 446.24 28- 028 -24 -41 -0029 45755 6621 Lynnwood Blvd 183.76 34- 028 -24 -43 -0033 45100 7627 Stevens Ave. 567.00 26- 028 -24 -13 -0069 45940 6421 14th Ave. 509.24 32- 028 -24 -14 -0064 45565 7233 Thomas Ave. 152420 28- 028 -24 -24 -0101 45356 6528 James Ave. 496.78 28- 028 -24 -32 -0097 45355 2009 Forest Dr. 669.37 29- 028 -24 -44 -0008 44829 6825 Queen Ave.; 627.00 33- 028 -24 -21 -0056 45410 7106 Knox Ave. 339.85 . 27- 028 -24 -32 -0048 32- 028 -24 -12 -0114 45740 46870 6720 2800 Garfield Ave. W 71st St. 711.53 577.48 27- 028 -24 -41 -0036 45810 6633 4th Ave. 577.48 27- 028 -24 -21 -0069 45910 6305 Blaisdell Ave 735.04 32- 028 -24 -13 -0038 45990 7300 Thomas Ave. 402.60 29- 028 -24 -12 -0036 45670 6210 Upton Ave. 287.65 29- 028 -24 -14 -0054 46780 2415 W'65 1/2 St. 522.78 27- 028 -24 -12 -0068 46830 6300 2nd Ave. 517.66 29- 028 -24 -11 -0101 45875 6321 Sheridan Ave. 261.44 28- 028 -24 -34 -0051 46792 6817 Logan Ave. 522.88 28- 028 -24 -33 -0035 46792 6815 Oliver Ave. 1041.65 35- 028 -24 -23 -0058 45070 7332 Oakland Ave. 188.25 33- 028 -24 -14 -0062 45606 7332 Colfax Ave. 292.50 33- 028 -24 -22 -0078 45414 7115 Morgan Ave. 350.00 34- 028 -24 -41 -0034 44834 7412 5th Ave. 270.00 32- 028 -24 -43 -0049 45830 7645 Xerxes Ave 202.50 27- 028 -24 -44 -0105 46730 6932 4th Ave. 234.00 34- 028 -24 -41 -0039 44834 7428 5th Ave. 280.00 27- 028 -24 -11 -0097 45381 6338 Clinton Ave. 225.00 28- 028 -24 -32 -0015 45355 6605 Morgan Ave. 260.00 29- 028 -24 -41 -0088 46790 6721 Thomas Ave. 145.00 25- 028 -24 -24 -0054 45880 6512 23rd Ave. 260.00 27- 028 -24 -44 -0081 45240 6815 3rd Ave. 325.00 27- 028 -24 -21 -0025 45910 6234 Nicollet Ave. 350.00 29- 028 -24 -41 -0029 46790 2513 W 66th St. 280.00 27- 028 -24 -34 -0036 46310 6920 Blaisdell Ave 260.00 33- 028 -24 -11 -0040 46970 7074 Oak Grove B1d.240.00 34- 028 -24 -23 -0009 44834 7339 Harriet Ave: 615.00 28- 028 -24 -22 -0035 45340 2016 W64th St. 115.00 25- 028 -24 -24 -0118 45880 6516 23rd Ave. 425.00 134 • 0 U 25- 028 -24 -24 -0117 35- 028 -24 -41 -0103 28- 028 -24 -33 -0050 35- 028 -24 -34 -0041 27- 028 -24 -44 -0119 28- 028 -24 -31 -0045 35- 028 -24 -24 -0025 27- 028 -24 -12 -0033 32- 028 -24 -14 -0056 -3- 45880 6520 23rd Ave. 370.00 4,6995 7438 16th Ave. 65.00 46792 6801 Penn Ave. 260.00 46551 7614 10th Ave. 280.00 46730 6920 Clinton Ave. 240.00 45355 6624 Knox Ave. 300.00 45382 7345 11th Ave. 145.00 46830 6344 Stevens Ave. 240.00 45565 7214 Sheridan Ave. 240.00 $35,539.51 r3 -1 2. That the above listed assessments be spread over a period of three years at the rate of 8% interest per annum. 3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to. certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: TFIMRag P. FgrSer Mg CleF2 John MIME Flgyor CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 3141 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject! $8,250,000 City of Richfield Multi - Family Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 1985 (Market Plaza Housing Project) Council Members: The city council is asked to approve the resolution authorizing the sale of $8,,250,000 in City of Richfield multi- family housing revenue bonds Series 1985, for the Market Plaza project. The developers of the Market Plaza commercial and housing project have previously received city approval for the bond issue for the commercial component. • Approval of this bond resolution clears the way for the Market Plaza project getting underway in the fall of 1985• To date, the developers have been unable to proceed with the commercial component because the financial institutions have required the developer to complete the financing for the housing project so that they could be assured that both the housing and commerical projects would proceed together. Attorney David Kennedy, of the City Attorney's office, has reviewed the resolution and has given it his approval. Please note in Paragraph 7 the words "not to exceed" interest rate language. This language has been used because the developers at the time of dictating this letter had not priced the bonds in the market yet. Attorney Kennedy recommends'that we insert "not to exceed 8 1/2% interest rate" at Monday night's meeting unless the developer can give us the actual agreed upon rate. At this time there is a.blank regarding the purchase price of the bonds. If we do not hear from the developer on the price of the bonds, it is recommended that the city insert 100% in that blank. i -2 The city administration recommends approval of the resolution. The development should be able to get underway by •_ October 1, 1985• The commercial project is estimated to take 12 months, and the-housing component 18 months. Respectfully submitted, 4,7 'FAft/ ohn G. Ca twr ht City Manager JGC /eja • • f MATMTW J: Lsvtrr GOLS oaRLEa Boasts M. BoWaR F HAMMORa .J. P. FW Ruts G. Starr x P. FnEL BURT E. SWA199M X J. GALvrx JR. DAvm Q Foasssao Joux J. 3%ksx= MONUL V. SaTMOUS, Js. JaRRr F. Ra "n TEaaxca N. Dona RIGRARD H. KYLE Jom1 L Davmm R. L SOIREES x PETER H. Saab SAMUEL L 11"SON RON►LD E.OvenARD JOHN ?Rotas STRPHNN WINNICE Avow L Gorman JO" R. KrnsWICa Jomr &FRIEDMAN TROMU A. LASSOS DATW J. SrmroaR DAxtEL J. Colt. Jr. Psrtr W. S1PSU+S Donous L SEos MMCRUL H. Jaaommus B. Som Davits J.P►Tasca MCDAvnT JOH11 8. VAN Da NOR=. JR. RwnAm Q MAC Axnraw Q BacaaR JAMES L NXLWW JaROMa A. Gals Stave A. BRAND Jots H.GOTTESMAN AIAN IL MACLIX JerrSaT R SHAW MATmRw L Lavrrr DAvtD G. Gaasxtxo DAviD B. SAxD CG �.7QCI�v%� 1C' G 9S-10 7-61 LAW OFFICES Joasfa P. Nom= Erm. NttaaoR BRIGGS AND MORGAN C ARi=&Ml�r FR�snammP Annor MARtnr H. FIBS Rosam L Its PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION JORN BMMM ASR 13MMMOM JAM= G. RAT TRUar R. GUTaAEOao Ricuum H. MAmm Eutiarm J Aanaaws TSUDT J. RADA Graooia J. StaRaoa 2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDINGS Mum L irnEL GR.°'° a ROOSaa Rosaar E. Woons PAUL K Gv aS (" L Sraa SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 WILLx WILLIAM J. Jo►xts J. JGAM MArT M. DTassra M&w HsRGARST L SAVAOR Kava A. Base BRras Q BausLa (912) 201-1215 Tots ST owm Er TELEPHONE NASr SOa AYPNER EvixOSr 0 MICRAar.H.STRSATEa TELECOPIER (912) 222 -4071 JOHN & LUWSrROR Rum= A ANDaatox SALLY A. SCOODIR INCLUDINO THE FORMER FIRM of D►Tm G. MaDcmw Bacaa W. Moors T.171TTT VATMFT?_ RAWF.Ti_ RATNFAN Re SHARE V120"FIA A. DWYER or000W5at. September 5, 1985 T0: Attached Distribution List RE: $8,250,000 City of Richfield Multi - Family Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 1985 (Market Plaza Housing Project) Ladies and Gentlemen: S Enclosed is a revised draft, marked to show changes, of the final Resolution for the City to adopt at its meeting on Monday, September 9, 1985. Please note in paragraph 7 the "not to exceed" interest rate language. At this time there is a blank regarding the purchase price of the bonds. If I do not hear otherwise, I will direct the City prior to their Monday meeting to insert 100% in that blank. If you have any questions on the enclosed resolution, or any further revision, please do not hesitate to call. ARK:sks _ Enclosure 2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANE BV=INo SAINT PAQL, MINNESOTA wun (e12) 201-1216 Very truly yours, drew R. Kintzinger 2400 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNE9OTA 86402 (612) 339 -Octet J. Nan. X0ZWX Rzamm E. KY= JORN X. PALMER SAMUEL H. MOUGAN FRLM N. GRAHAM A.IAUam+cs DAVIS GLARES= Q FRAME x ARK: Draft 8/21/85; 9/4/85 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROJECT AND HOUSING PROGRAM UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C (MUNICIPAL HOUSING PROGRAMS) AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE THE PROJECT AND PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF VARIOUS DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of 516X /)- I/ Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Council has received a proposal from Market Plaza Housing Limited Partnership (the "Company ") that the City undertake to finance a certain Project and multifamily rental housing program for such Project as herein described, pursuant to Chapter 462C, Minnesota Statutes (the "Act "), through the issuance by the City of its $8,250,000 Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 1985 (Market Plaza Housing Project) (the "Bonds "), and in accordance with a Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement ") between the City, the Company, E. J. Plesko, so le general partner of the Company and Miller & Schroederkinancial, Inc. (the "Bond Purchaser "). 2. The Company desires to acquire and construct a multifamily housing development consisting of an approximately 176,000 square foot building containing 166 units and related improvements including parking facilities (hereinafter referred • • • V. to as the "Project ") in the City. The Project as described • above will facilitate the development of rental housing within the community; encourage the development of affordable housing opportunities for residents of the City, encourage the develop- ment of housing facilities designed for occupancy by persons of low or moderate income and assist such persons in,obtaining decent, safe and sanitary housing at rentals they can afford, encourage the development of blighted or underutilized land and structures within the boundaries of the City,'and will otherwise further the policies and purposes of the Act; and the findings made in the Preliminary Resolution adopted by,,this Council on December 19, 1983 with respect to the Project are hereby ratified, affirmed and approved. • 3. It is proposed that, pursuant to a Loan Agreement dated as of September 1, 1985, between the City as Lender and • the Company as Borrower (the "Loan Agreement "), the City loan the proceeds of the Bonds to the Company to partially finance the costs of the Project. The loan repayments to be made by the Company under the Loan Agreement are fixed so as to produce revenue sufficient to pay the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds when due. It is further proposed that the City assign its rights to the loan repayments and certain other rights under the Loan Agreement to First Trust Company of Saint Paul, in St. Paul, Minnesota (the "Trustee ") 0-& as security for payment of the Bonds under an Indenture of Trust dated as of September 1, 1985 (the "Indenture ") between • the City and the Trustee. To further secure the payment of the Bonds and the interest thereon and of the purchase price of any Bonds required to be purchased under the provisions of the Indenture, the Company will provide for a Letter of'Credit (the "Letter of Credit ") to be issued by Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis (the "Bank ") and in connection therewith, enter into a Letter of Credit Reimbursement Agreement dated as of September 1, 1985 (the "Reimbursement Agreement ") with the Bank. Payments under the Letter: of Credit and payments on the Bonds will be further secured by collateral pledged pursuant to a Collateral Agreement dated as of September 1, 1985 by and between the Bank and the Trustee. Payment of principal and interest on the Bonds is also secured by a Trustee Mortgage, Assignment of Rents and Leases, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement (the "Trustee Mortgage ") dated as of September 1, 1985 executed by the Company in favor of the Trustee and by a Trustee Guaranty Agreement (the "Trustee Guaranty ") dated as of September 1, 1985.executed by E. J. Plesko and Roger Derrick in favor of the Trustee. The Company will enter into a Remarketing Agreement, dated as of September 1, 1985, with Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc. (the "Remarketing Agreement "). The • • acquisition, construction, operation and occupancy of the Project will conform to the terms and conditions of a Regulatory Agreement (the "Regulatory Agreement ") dated as of September 1, 1985 between the City, the Company, the Bank and the Trustee and a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (the "Declaration ") dated as of September 1, 1985 executed by the Company and recorded as a covenant and restriction running with the land on which the Project is located. 4. This Council by action taken on December 19, 1983 adopted a resolution giving preliminary approval to a proposal to finance a project substantially the same as the Project; and '4 on or about October 25, 1984 the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency gave approval to the proposed financing program for the Project. A subsequent public hearing on the Project was held on September 9, 1985, prior to the adoption hereof, after notice was duly published all as required by Section 103(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and the Regulations promulgated thereunder, at which public hearing all those appearing who so desired to speak were heard. S. Pursuant to the preliminary approval of the Council, forms of the following documents have been submitted to the Council for approval: (a) The Loan Agreement. (b) The Indenture. (c) The Bond Purchase Agreement. (d) The Regulatory Agreement. (e) The Declaration (not executed by the City). 6. It is hereby found, determined and declared that: (a) the Project described in the Loan Agreement and Indenture referred to above constitutes a Project authorized by the Act and the financing program for the Project is authorized by the Act; (b) the purpose of the Project and the program for the Project is, and the effect thereof will be, to promote the public welfare by the acquisition, construction and equipping of rental housing facilities for assisting persons of low and moderate income within the City to obtain decent, safe and sanitary housing at rentals they can afford; (c) the acquisition, construction and installation of the Project, the issuance and sale of the Bonds, the execution and delivery by the City of the-Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Regulatory 1.7 -8 • Agreement (collectively the "Agreements "), and the performance of all covenants and agreements of the City contained in the Agreements, and of all other acts and things required under the constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and City Charter to make the Agreements valid and binding obligations of the City in accordance with their terms, are authorized by the Act; (d) it is desirable that the Company be authorized, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and subject to the terms and conditions- set forth in the Loan Agreement, Regulatory Agree- ment and Declaration, which terms and conditions the City determines to be necessary, desirable and proper, to complete the acquisition and installation of the Project by such means as shall be available to the Company and in the manner determined by the Company, subject to the terms of the aforesaid agreements; (e) it is desirable that the Bonds be issued by the City upon the terms set forth in the Indenture; • /) -/o (f) the loan repayments under the Loan Agreement are fixed to produce revenue sufficient to provide for the prompt payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds issued under the Indenture when due, and the Loan Agreement, Indenture and Regulatory Agreement also provide that the Company is required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance of the Project, including, but without limitation, adequate insurance thereon and insurance against all liability for injury to persons or property F arising from the operation thereof, and all taxes and special assessments levied upon or with; respect to the Project Premises and payable during I the term of the Loan Agreement, Indenture and Regulatory Agreement; (g) as provided in the Loan Agreement and Indenture, the Bonds are not to be payable from or charged upon any funds other than the revenues pledged to the payment thereof; the City is not subject to any liability thereon; no holder of any Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise by'the City of its taxing powers to pay any of the Bonds or the interest or premium, if any, thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City except the interests of the City in the Loan Agreement which have been assigned to the Trustee-under the Indenture; the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City except the interests of the City in the Loan Agreement which have been assigned to the Trustee under the Indenture; the Bonds shall recite that the Bonds are issued without moral obligation on the part of the states f or its political subdivisions, and that the Bonds, including interest thereon, are payable solely . from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof and that the Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; and (h) a public hearing on the Project was duly held by the City Council on December 19, 1983; on September 9, 1985, prior to the adoption of this resolution, a subsequent public hearing was duly held by.the City Council, in order to consider a change in the entity owning and operating the Project. 6. Subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the provisions of Section 9'of this Resolution, the forms of the Agreements and exhibits thereto are approved substantially in the form submitted. The Agreements, in substantially the form submitted, are directed to be executed in the name and on behalf of the City by the Mayor and the City Manager. Any other documents and certificates necessary to the transaction described above shall be executed by the appropriate City officers. Copies of all of the.documents necessary to the transaction herein described shall be delivered, filed and recorded as provided herein and in said Loan Agreement and Indenture. 7. The City shall proceed forthwith to issue its Bonds, in the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture and this Resolution. The Bonds shall initially bear, • interest at a rate that the Mayor, City Manager and the Bond Purchaser shall agree to, which rate shall not exceed eight and one -half percent (8.50$) per annum. The Bond Purchaser shall purchase the Bonds for an amount not less than $ of the principal amount of the Bonds. The offer of the Bond Purchaser to so purchase the Bonds//is hereby accepted. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to prepare and execute the Bonds as prescribed in the Indenture and to deliver them to the Trustee for authentication and delivery to the Bond Purchaser. • • • • B. The Mayor and City Manager and other officers of the City*are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Bond Purchaser certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the bonds, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers' custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. 4 f 9. The approval hereby given to the various documents referred to above includes approval of: such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by the City Attorney and the City officials authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and said City officials are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the City. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence ,W 0-3 r of the Mayor or City Manager, any of the documents authorized by this resolution to be executed may be executed by the acting Mayor or acting City Manager, respectively. Passed: September 9, 1985 Attest City Manager (SEAL) Mayor i /P-/� . • • P-j CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA . Office of City. Manager Council Letter No. 340 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Ordinance Amendment Creating a.Committee of Hearing Examiners to Review Zoning Ordinance Variance Requests. First Reading Council Members: In July, 1985, the city council approved an ordinance amendment which created a committee of hearing exam'i$ers to review zoning ordinance variance requests. The purpose of the committee would be to review all variance requests administratively,'with the provision that appeals of administrative decisions will be made to the city council. The committee of hearing examiners was to be a committee of the Planning Commission, composed of persons nominated by the Planning Commission, and appointed by the city manager with city council confirmation of the appointments. At,the August, 1985, meeting of the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission determined that it would be more appropriate that the Hearing Officer Committee be a committee of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals (the City Council), rather than the. Planning Commission. The commission by a 5 -1 vote recommended that the ordinance .be amended to make the committee of hearing examiners a committee of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and that the Planning Commission not be required to nominate members for appointment.to the committee. A copy of an ordinance amendment reflecting these changes is attached to this council letter. The amended ordinance provides that the Hearing Examiner Committee be a committee of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and that it be administered by the Department of Community Development. Members would be appointed,by the city manager, subject to confirmation by the city council. It is tecommended that the council give first reading consideration to the attached ordinance and. schedule the public hearing and second reading consideration for September 23, 1985. Re ectfu bmitted, ohn G. artwright City Manage JGC /eja 4 i • • • ORDINANCE N0: // 7:R AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER III; PART IV OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter III, Part IV, Section 3:40A, Subdivision 2 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield, Minnesota is hereby amended to read as follows: Subdivision 2. Committee of Hearing Examiners. There is hereby created the committee of Hearing Examiners which shall constitute a special committee of the - P -iann4n& -Gemm+& i-efr Board of Adjustments and Appeals to be administered by the Department of Community Development. - The Committee of Hearing Examiners shall constitute the Board of Adjustments and Appeals in all matters within its jurisdiction. Hearing examiners shall be -aem-i n&te4 -b-y t4-re- - P1ean4tag appointed by the City Manager subject to confirmation by the City Council and shall serve at the pleasure of the City Manager. Hearing examiners may be city employees and shall have experience. in municipal administration and procedures of law. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of ,1985. ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk John Hamilton, Mayor • • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 339 Agenda September 9,1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members-of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Variance and Subdivision Request 6306 Irving Avenue Council Members: PRO...». P�OSALL Ms. Charlotte Anderson has made a request to subdivide the property located at 6306 Irving Avenue and for a variance to the minimum lot area and lot width of the new parcel B. The single family home at 6306 Irving Avenue consists of three platted lots of record (Lots 1, 2 and 3). Lots 2 and 3 are approximately 40 feet wide, and Lot 1 is approximately 23 feet wide. The lots are approximately 127 feet deep. The existing structure is on lot 3 and is only 3.03 feet from the north property line of lot 3. Lot 3 by itself would be nonconforming in its present state. The applicant seeks to create two single family lots so that the existing house would be on lot B and a vacant lot would be known as lot A. The property is in 'R' (Residence) zoning district. The applicant intends to subdivide the three existing lots into two new lots in such a way that the newly created Parcel B with the existing house will have an area (46.82' x 127.95' approximately) of 5,990.62 square feet and will not meet the minimum lot area (6,750 square feet) or the width requirements of 50 feet. The new subdivision would maintain the required building setbacks on parcel B. The variances would pertain to the new lot B with the existing dwelling on it, but would be necessary to allow the vacant lot A to be sold separately and a new house constructed on it. The vacant lot A would exceed minimum lot area and width requirements (see below). Proposed Required by Code Lot A 7140/56 6750/50 Lot B 5991/47 6750/50 _2_ �6 a ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS 1. Section 3.29, subdivision 1, indicates that nonconforming structures cannot be extended without first obtaining a variance. 2. Section 3.30, subdivision 4, requires a minimum lot area of 6,750 square feet and a lot width of 50 feet. 3. Section 3.30, subdivision 5, requires that a single family dwelling in 'R' (Residence) districts have a 5 foot sideyard setback. 4. Section 3.40, subdivision 6, lists the three conditions which must be met for a variance to be granted. STAFF REVIEW Staff has reviewed the proposal against the three conditions which must be met for a variance to be granted and,found the following: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting this hand not _common ,to-other properties,a.r similar districts. It is staff's opinion that there are no special circumstances present on these sites. The existing site is rectangular in shape and is similar to other corner lots in the neighborhood. 2. That the granting f the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantialJorooerty rights. It is staff's opinion that denial of the variance would not preclude any reasonable use of the property. The existing single family residential use could continue on the site if the variances are denied. 3. That the granting of the application will not materially and. adversely affect the health or sa ety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood aril will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to improvements in the neighborhood. It is staff's opinion that granting of the variance would not adversely affect the health or safety and welfare of the public in the area, with the exception of creating a nonconforming lot where none presently exists and increasing the housing density in the area above what is allowed by the zoning ordinance. _3_ h zz STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the variance request on the grounds that the three conditions for variances have not been met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the variance request at 6306 Irving Avenue. However, the commission indicated that if the minimum width requirements of 50 feet would be met on both lots they would recommend approval of a variance to a minimum lot area. A petition from 11 residents opposing the variance request is attached to this council letter. JGC /eja 0 9 ectft,�llroomitted , A v , hn G. r wrigY ity Man ger j -3- STAFF RECOMMENDATION 16-3 • Staff recommends denial of the variance request on the grounds that the three conditions for variances have not been met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the variance request at 6306 Irving Avenue. However, the commission indicated that if the minimum width requirements of 50 feet would be met on both lots they would recommend approval of a variance to a minimum lot area. A petition from 11 residents-opposing the variance request is attached to this council letter. NhnG 1 u mitted,r wr i ghr er JGC /eja • • CALVIN H. H E D L It N D r1as Maroon Av"Oe 'saft Rkk leid I Minao>rote 55423 Laid - Surveyor Chil C"Ineer Phone 866- 23523 t ` 51wTe#Ors eei "te JOB NO. SURVEY FOR: Charlotte Anderson MCRISED AS: Parcel A Lot 1 and that part of Lot 2, lying north of the South 7.00 feet thereof, Block 6, RAYS LYNNFNRST, City of Richfield,.fiennepin County; Minnesota, and reserving easements of record, if any. Parcel B - Lot 3 and the South 7,00 feet of Lot 2, Block 6,,RAYS LYNNHURST, City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and reserving easements of record, if any. 0 1 14 63RD STRFFT I I =fI'143 M I t'• pq S. M 34" VIZ7 t 4C Id 2 ! T— 4 sow* 740 *Pet J LO H 3a.S3 I14' uo &WAKE �_ F 30 l Yz U� t yZ� IRON --IZSJO Meas. M -� 11182 Kit a" OI hereby certify that an 5 /2$ /85 I surtrpd the property described above and that the above plot is a correct representation of sold survey. A Colvin K Hedlund, Minn. Req. Na 5942 OLSEN, SNELLING & CHRISTENSEN, P.A. STANLEY C. OLSEN, JR. ATTORNEYS AT LAW RONALD L SNELLING SUITE 307 JOSEPH J. CHRISTENSEN 6200 WIL SON ROAD THOMAS A. BIUANT MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 66421 TELEPHONE (612) 827.6866 August 27, 1985 Mr. Towhid Kazi Assistant Planner Community Development Department City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423 RE: Variance /Subdivision Request of Charlotte Anderson job Dear Mr. Kazi: S Pursuant to our telephone conversation of last week, I am enclosing herein a copy of a letter I obtained from Hedlund Engineering Services, Inc. certifying that the distance between the garage and side lot line about which you inquired is exactly two feet. In addition, I am enclosing a revised copy of the survey which includes the addition of this dimension in the appropriate place. If there are any additoinal questions-,,,or problems, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you for ur assistance. Very .� ours,. N, & ST SEN, P.A. Jo istensen Att ney t aw JJC /gsr cc: Charlotte Anderson P.S. Would you also be kind enough to supply me with a copy of the staff report on Mrs. Anderson's application for the variance and subdivision? • • • � 0 9'. • sewmeA 471m.; CIVIL ENGINEERS d LAND SURVEYORS 7728 MORGAN AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 66423 PHONE 888 -2623 Mr. Joseph J. Christensen August 14, 1985 Olsen, Snelling & Christensen, P.A. 5200 Willson Road Suite 307 Edina, MN 55424 - Re: Charlotte Anderson Dear Mr. Christensen, This letter is to certify that the garage shown on Parcel B of the enclosed survey is 2.0 feet from the south lot line of said Parcel B. This distance was inadvertently left off the survey, I am sorry if this caused any inconvenience to you. If you have any questions, please call me. Yours Truly, 44-IL4., H. Hedlund, R.L.S. JDL /rfc enclosure (ok .16-7 We, the undersigned, are petitioning against the granting of a variance to mininum lot requirements. The reasons we are against it is that it lowers Richfield lot standards and decreasing existing property values in the area. �. �.� 3 • ' "' � x'66- �� �o' 2L( �G cv J �ev -3 Li fcC_.P 3 P 0 3O-f673 , �& 61 -61 51.12 0' • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Coun c' it etter No. L 338 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: City of Richfield Subject: V ariance Request at 6824 Chica o Avenue South. Council Members: PROPOSAL Mr. d M Rodger or E. Morgan has requested that he et� �' rant a g g q t Y g variance to the frontyard setback re u're ent h' Y q � m to allow him to build a 12' x 24' roofed parch addition on the south side of the house. The property is in the "R" (Residence)Zoning District and has an area of . 144 5 7 68 square feet. The lot is more than 5 q two times the required single family lot size. • The existing frontyard is 24 feet which is below the required 30 foot frontyard setback requirement; hence, the structure is noncon forming. The property does meet the rearyard and sideyard setback requirements. ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS 1. Section 3.29,,Subdivision 1, indicates that nonconforming structures cannot be expanded without first obtaining a variance. 2. Section 3.30' Subdivision 5, requires that a single family dwelling in 'RI (Residence) districts have a 30 foot frontyard setback.. 3.-- Section 3.140, Subdivision 6, lists the three conditions which must be met for a- variance to be granted. STAFF REVIEW Staff has reviewed the proposal against the three conditions which must be met for a variance,,-to be granted and found the following: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions • affecting this land not common to other roperties or similar districts. • I• I• V -2 It is staff's opinion that there are no special circumstances present on the site. This is'a large lot rectangular in shape and quite similar to other lots in the neighborhood. ,F-O� 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and en oyment of substantial property rights. It is staff's opinion that denial of the variance would not be detrimental to reasonable use of the property. The existing single family residential use could continue on the site if the variance request is denied. 3. That the grantin of the application will not materially affect the or sa ety q oand - adver r wor ng in the neighborhoo . It is staff's opinion that the proposed addition will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of':the persons residing in the neighborhood, and would not incr -ease the degree of nonconformity of the existing structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the variance since the three conditions for granting a variance have not been met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted 4 -2 to recommend City Council approval of the variance request at 6824 Chicago Avenue. Six neighbors have signed a petition in support of the variance request. JGC /eja Res eatfL y submitted, John G. Cartwr ht City Manager .P sm CHICAGO AVENUE O c m a D m 4 S J ! r i v 12 1 fit I I 22 .P sm CHICAGO AVENUE O c m a D m 4 S J z Ow iL z 9- z1 0 • • • REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF 682h Ckle-srs jb. s. _ FOR PURPOSE OF A..pail Psreh "Ji tien Legal Description LOT ONE, FLOCK ONES PORTLAND AVE. ACRW Except the N*rth 120 Feet PLAT 46020. PARCEL 430 We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the variance as requested. Signature of Owners* Address * Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. G,t,l L (D CD �9D All * Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. y� AHEM CONDITIONS FOR VARIANCE APPROVAL I. Special circumstances affecting this particular building not common in this neighborhood. A. douse built in 1927 -no setback requirments in effect at this time. B. Small portion of existing house is beyond current setback requirments . C. Original builder owned surrounding property which was later sold in lots platted according to setback regLd ments. II. Granting oY variance neceasary fir enjoyment of sustantial property rights A. Many homeowners in Richfield and local neighborhoods have decks and porches attached to existing homes. B. Decks are used for summertime ehjoyment and relaxation, and entertainment. C_ Property owners of 6824 Chicago should have the same equal rights to build and impreve_their home with a roofed deck at "said property. III. Granting of application will not adverse17 affect the health ar safety ,of , homeowner or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of property. owner. Granting of application will not be detrimental to public welfare or injuries to property or improvements in the neighborhood. A. Addition of a roofed porch will actually enhance this home architecturaly. By adding a structure on the southside of 'the house it will have much better balance from a visual standpoint. 3. This addition should also be a plus for the neighborhood by improving the outside appearance and balance of the existing home in relation to its lot size and surrounding topography. �7 • if • • OP-/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 337 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Variance Request at 7233 Humboldt Avenue Council Members: PROPOSAL f Mr. and Mrs, Andreasen have requested that the city grant a variance to the frontyard setback requirement to allow a 20' x 20' detached garage to be constructed in their frontyard. The site is located in the IR' (Residence) Zoning District and the existing house meets all the setback requirements. The site has an area of approximately 4,425 square feet which is below the minimum lot area requirement (6,750 square feet) for 'RI district, and is a nonconforming lot. The applicant proposes to build the garage 10 feet west of the house and possibly build a deck at a future date. The proposed garage will increase the building area to 27..5% of the lot, which will be more than the maximum allowable lot coverage of 25% for residential use in the 'RI district.. ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS 1. Section 3.29, subdivision 7, indicates that nonconforming structure cannot be expanded without first obtaining a variance. 2. Section 3.30, subdivision 4(c), indicates that for residential uses maximum lot coverage shall be 25%.. 3. Section 3.30, subdivision 4(a), requires that a single family dwelling have a minimum lot area of 6,750 square feet. 4. Section 3.30, subdivision 5, requires that a single family dwelling in an IRT residence district have a 30 foot frontyard setback. • Y__1�12 -2- 5. Section 3.30, subdivision 5(f -2), indicates that no accessory building shall encroach upon the half of the lot abutting the street, nor be situated forward of the front building line. 6. Section 3.40, subdivision 6, lists the three conditions which must be met for a variance to be granted. STAFF REVIEW .Staff has reviewed the proposal against the three conditions which must be met'for a variance to be granted and found the following: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting this land not common to other-properties or similar districts. It is staffs opinion that there are no special".' circumstances present on the site that necessitates a detached garage in the frontyard. The site is similar in shape and size`. to other lots in the neighborhood. The site slopes down eastward thus causing drainage problem which is not unique to the subject property only. • 2. That the granting of the ap lication is necessary for the reservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. It is staffs opinion that denial of the variance would not be detrimental to reasonable use of the property. The single family use of the :property has been the same for several years and could continue if the variance is denied. 3. That the granting of the application will not materially and adversely a ec a health or MM y_ of persons residing or working in the ne i bor oi•and will not be materially detrimental to the _public -welfare _or injurious to improvements in the_neighborhoo It is staff's opinion that granting of this variance would adversely affect the health or safety and welfare of the persons in the neighborhood. Granting of the variance to allow a 20' x 20' detached garage would reduce the frontyard to only 2 feet and set a bad precedent. If the proposed garage is allowed to be built , the cit y, s �in effect would create another nonconforming use, i.e. allow the lot coverage for residential use to exceed the minimum requirement of 25% of the lot area. • • • b3 _3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of this variance on the grounds that none of the three conditions for granting variances have been met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The commission motion to approve the variance request failed on a tie vote (3 -3). A motion to send the matter to the council with no recommendation failed on a 2 to 4 vote. Neighbors immediately adjacent to the property are in support of the variance request. Respectful submitted, John G. Car wri t f City Manager JGC /eja August 1 , 1985 Richfield City Council and Members of the City Staff City of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave. S. Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Council Members and City Staff: The purpose of asking for this variance is to permit the construction of a double garage in a manner that is economical and yet attractive to the neighborhood. In 1978 a variance was granted to 7229 Humboldt Ave. S. for the.same purpose. A variance is requested permitting the placement of this building in front of and to the one side of our present house.. The reasons for this request being (1) the back yards have a definate water problem and a large ponding area occurs in the spring during snow melt; it. is not practical to put a building back there that would displace that amount of ponding area a garage would occupy, (2) `there is no storm sewer drainage for the back yards in this block, (3) the back yards are only 30 feet in depth and most of the usable land area is in the front of the house, and (4) houses have a deep set back from the street Sdue to the highway department condemning approximately 2000 square feet of porperty prior to freeway construction. Originally an entrance and exit ramp to 35W was to have been on 73rd street but plans were changed and that entrance and exit ramp moved to 76th street. A footbridge was instead constructed on 73rd street over 35W. Consequently there is 2000 square feet of land that we maintain and use for our front yard. This is in addition'to the normal setback requirements and makes the buildings sit far back from the street. Even with a variance granted there would still be over 40 feet to the street from.any building. For all of the above reasons we believe this meets the first criteria of the three conditions necessary for the granting of a variance, this being special circumstances not common to other properties. As to the second criteria I can only say that even though not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights, these rights are certainly enhanced by having a garage available for use during our Minnesota winters. Also I believe a garage addition is a sound investment for our property and would also generate a higher property.tax valuation for the city. For the third criteria we can think of no reason that the granting of a variance would adversly affect the health or safety of the persons residing in the neighborhood or be detrimental to the public welfare. We thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Dolores and Ottar Andreasen 723.3 Humboldt Ave S., Richfield, MN 55423 (869 -1060) ti{ v_ J Zfla wG R:s t oeNer VARIAClcE G;2AX --MZ GAVLAcirr. 1478 Ex �srtrc� "O"l000le/ / f I m.z_ 1 e 1 t AX Alma ai ®r,G..� t 4.1A WAS. L2 722' 237 G�.aR.A,Ge 400 L° ► 45010 eAV ROAD 1 as 1i Z _+ I i t • I r3 a try t 1 74,i r3 a . � � � � •cis =�'� � i CG�'� f77 f • • REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF FOR PGRPOSE OF oJC Legal Description: . We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the variance as recuested. Signature of Owners* Address * Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. Na os s * Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. Na z • • � r G / > i �7 w t Y'l / • • • T -/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 336 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Approval of Off - Street Parking Permit, Waiver of Certain LHN Urban Design Element Requirements and Public Hearing and Approval of Preliminary Resolution - Concerning the Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Rehabilitation of the Commercial Structure at 6401 -35 Lyndale Avenue Council Members: • At the August 12, 1985, City Council meeting, the concept plan for the rehabilitation of the property located at 6401 -6435 Lyndale Avenue was presented to the Council. At the meeting, the Council passed a resolution calling for a public hearing on the proposed project under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act. The City Council is being asked to consider these actions: (1),approve an off - street parking permit for the property; (2) waive certain requirements of the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet. Urban Design Elements; and, (3) to give approval- to an IDB resolution. The project involves the substantial interior and exterior renovation of the existing strip shopping center and the ' expansion of a small freestanding building located on the property. There would be new facades constructed, a mansard roof would be constructed along the Lyndale Avenue frontage and the remaining portion of the building would be' stuccoed to clean up its appearance. Several sheds, out - buildings, and a freestanding garage along the north side of the building would be removed to improve the appearance and to allow additional parking to be constructed on the site. A pedestrian arcade would be constructed through the building towards the south end of the large structure on the site. The parking areas would be overlaid and striped to provide additional parking on the site. Landscaping would be installed along 64th Street and adjacent to the expanded freestanding • building on the.north end of the site. The existing rooftop sign on the north end of the building currently utilized by the donut shop would be redesigned and r- etained as an identity sign for the whole center. -_- 702 Staff has reviewed the off - street parking layout against the standards for the issuance of an off - street parking permit and found that the proposal would be in partial compliance with those standards, with the exception of the number of parking places provided on the site. Off- street parking guidelines indicate that a total of 125 parking spaces should be provided on the site. The site plan indicates that 80 parking stalls would be provided. It is difficult to determine the exact number of parking stalls currently provided on this site because of the poor condition of the parking area, the irregular shape of parking area and the interruption of parking area by garages and sheds. It is staff's estimate that the 80 parking stalls being proposed would be 10 to 15 more parking stalls than are currently on the site. There would be more efficient use of space and more clear definition of parking and driving aisles through the use of curbs, striping, and repaving. There wopld be a much improved parking situation on the site with. the new proposal. The developer and city staff met with the four.residential property owners who abut the site to the east concejrning the proposed improvements and the proposed use of the va'c'ated 'alley between the commercial property and the residential property property owners. The developer is proposing to pave and maintain the entire width of the vacated alley, including the 7 feet owned by the residential property owners. •For this to • occur easement agreements would be necessary between the commercial and residential property owners. At the meeting the owners of the property at 6414 and 6420 Harriet Avenue indicated that they.did not wish to have their 7 feet of alley paved and did not wish to enter into any easement agreements with the commercial property owner. The owners of the properties at 515 and 521 64th Avenue indicated that they would be willing to consider entering into an easement agreement with the commercial property owner. The city attorney's office is drafting an easement agreement for consideration by the property owners. In terms of the development the easement agreement with the property at 521 64th Street is the only one which is critical to the project because it.affects access to the commercial parking areas from 64th Street and the connection between the parking areas on the north and south end of the project. The developer is concerned about the appearance and maintenance of the total. vacated alley and for this reason has indicated a desire to pave the whole width and to maintain it in the future. The project is within the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet redevelopment area and is subject to the LHN Urban Design Elements. Two aspects of the project would not'be consistent with the Urban Design Elements. The proposed plan indicates that a mansard roof . would be constructed only along the Lyndale Avenue frontage and a very small portion of the north and south ends of the building. The Urban Design Elements indicate if a mansard • roof is to be used it should be carried along all frontages of • • 40 7 -3 the building. It is staff's feeling that because of the irregular shape of the building and because the other faces of the building would be improved and stuccoed, the requirement of a continous mansard roof can be waived. The second Urban Design Element waiver would be the material used on the mansard roof. The Urban. Design Elements indicate that exterior building materials should be wood, brick, stone or stucco. The developers are proposing to use an imitation wood shake which is constructed out of a PVC material. The color would be a dark brown. The PVC material used would have the same appearance as the fiberglass`` material used on the mansard roof at the Dairy Queen building at 66th Street and First Avenue, but the material should be more fade resistant and should maintain its appearance longer. It is staff's opinion that the material being proposed would be appropriate and would provide the type of appearance intended by the Urban Design elements. Another issue that the City Council should consider is the use of the rooftop sign. It is the goal'of the LHN redevelopment area to work towards the elimination of rooftop signs. The continued use of the rooftop sign would not be consistent with that goal. However, several other rooftop.signs would be removed and the overall appearance of the building would be considerably improved. The fact that,the sign-is right on the edge of the building and integrated into the design of the mansard roof and sign band on the building also improves its appearance. The applicant has requested continued use of this sign to identify the shopping center because of the difficulty of locating a free standing sign on the property to provide the necessary identity for the center. It is staff's opinion that because the sign is integrated into the design of the building that the Council should approve the requested sign. As was previously indicated, a public hearing has been set for the city to consider the issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds to assist the developer in the proposed renovation. The developer is requesting the issuance of $400,000 of IDR bonds to cover the proposed improvements of the site and buildings. The proposed project, in addition to the aesthetic improvements to the building, would also generate 60 new jobs and may result in additional tax revenue of approximately $15,000. The amount of the increase in taxes is unusual, but the assessing division believes the return will be higher than most rehabilitation projects because of the poor condition of the building and the extensive renovation which is required. JGC /eja is 7 -4- It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Adopt a resolution which gives _ reliminar preliminary approval of the project and authorizes city officials to execute the memorandum of agreement, the comprehensive statement, and the filing of the IDB application with the State of Minnesota,. The resolution and other documents are attached for council consideration. 2. Adopt the attached resolution approving the off - street parking layout and authorizing city officials to execute an off - street parking agreement with the developer with the stipulations that easement agreements be executed with the residential property owners concerning the use of the alley and that the design of the site lighting be reviewed and approved by city staff. 3. Approve the Urban Design Elements Waivers,-.discussed previously and allow the proposed rooftop identity sign to be constructed. Respectfu 10i ubmitted, John G. Cartwri t City Manager JGC /eja is • • • �'L ,A1 � I = i.TS� "9sl I �,t3�� 4 1 r=lC1 3 F u Y -- � a� Ih• -fii p— ' I aY �i P '�'''b• itFPO" _ U L / J // kly lo g s �!ggF S S G ill I z s _ ' j�,. I �i� -I 0 0 I 39— I4}q��7,_ , �� i ; � •� Z6 - — — fir` qq _ u PF 1 t rq f-17E FLAN f IEVr+Tt�tiS ®1j► BERNARD HERMAN ARCHITECTS, INC SHOPPING CENTER REMODELING at 64th St and Lyndaie Ave -:;� ;� �... .........�.. ......._— ' "•• "•, o.n G:.r,Cl ...,.., ___ E u r� • %-z f k w.r4 _._.. �. v u.g '•, �cw rc� »l -_.... .y!'.a: -y �R_.._.. r. +_�� � "� ilk -C In ti_ui �3Yy 1E� E., r ,1_ oo €" 'S Pig � i i> I`, a4• <wul � -v_w .w ,eus --._ tf ?'� Vic'.- -� .._.y 1=one I}eF Ff� rte.. r�`o _�C r "♦ f !^r jr ZZ�� Z 1 � �•I I. I F c. =�o E SC o� x�f I ��pf 4m t�x off.; � Ij� iGG�r���Fc' =•ail. Lr �4��� Iii �F. a 3 » S°4 gF Fp Zs OttT 1- < P f.. � H s yN 144 �i �Fd "�} Da pt 3'C I ,�` `\ I• -- t = C$ �c 9 U r t - gi ® O O 00 0000 P. r Z i _ 7 eL Ls7� vi EF€ F= ? a� ,i. rt "�, ''� Q Cy \�• j� � �F �.. •'� fir: � � >•� i � //, %' JU p xu ; BERNARD HERMAN s�cTlca s r_�Tnu a ®, ARCHITECTS, INC SHOPPING CENTER REMODELING ® ® ®w.� :C. ��• ,.I.�.`;�;, at 64th St and Lyndale Ave " a +•o e� • • • _RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT: REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (City),. as follows: I. It is hereby, found, determined and declared as follows: 1.1 The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires active promo- tion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, so far as possible, emergency of blighted lands and areas of chronic unemploy- ment, and the state has encouraged local government units to act to prevent such economic deterioration. I.Z Michael •Oreck and Susan Oreck, individuals residing in Hennepin County (Company), have advised this Council of its desire to rehabilitate certain commercial property in the City located at 6401 - 6435 Lyndale Avenue South in the City for lease to various commercial tenants (Project). 1.3 The existence of the Project within the City would signifi- cantly increase the tax base of the City, County and school district in which the City is located, and would provide. opportunities for employment for residents of the City and surrounding area. 1.4 The City has been advised by the Company that conventional, commercial financing to pay the capital cost of the Project is avail- able only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the. Project would be signifi- cantly reduced, but that with the aid of municipal financing, and its resulting low borrowing cost, the Project is economically more feas- ible. 1.5 This Council has been advised by First Bank East, St. Paul, Minnesota, investment bankers, that on the basis of information submitted to it and the discussions with representatives of the Company that bonds or notes to finance all or part of the cost of the Project can be successfully sold, and that it will undertake to purchase such bonds or notes. 1.6 The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, to issue its revenue bonds, notes or other obligations (Bonds) to finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise, such as that of the Company, and the issuance of such Bonds by the City would be a sub- stantial inducement to the Company to construct the Project within the City. 7,7 2. On the basis of information given the City to date, it presently appears that it would be in the best interest of the City to issue its industrial development revenue Bonds under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 474 (Act) to finance the Project of the Company at a cost presently estimated to be approximately $400,000. 3. The Council declares that it is its present intent to issue the Bonds. The Project above referred to is hereby given preliminary approval by the City and the issuance of Bonds for such purpose and in such amount approved, subject to approval of the Project by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority (Authority) and to the mutual agreement of this body, the Company and the initial pur- chasers of the bonds as to the details of the Bonds and provisions for their payment. In all events, it is understood, however, that the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance legal or equitable upon any property of the City except the Project, and each Bond, when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that the bond, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenues received from the Project and properly pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, charter or statutory limitation thereon. 4. The form of- Memorandum of Agreement relating to the issuance of the Bonds to finance the cost of the Project is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Memorandum of Agreement in behalf of the City. N io, EW, 5. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, Subdivision 7A, the Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the Authority for approval. The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney and other officers, employees, and agents of the City and LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz, a Professional Association, as bond counsel and City Attorney, are hereby authorized to provide the Authority with any preliminary information needed for this purpose, and the City Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the Project, if it is approved by the Authority, -- _- Passed by the City Council of* the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 19$5 ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk e or John Hamilton, Mayor • MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT, dated as of 1985 between the City of Richfield, Minnesota (City) and Michael Oreck and Susan Oreck, individuals' residing in Hennepin County, Minnesota (Company) provides as follows: 1. Preliminary Statement. Among the matters of mutual induce- ment which have resulted in this Agreement are the following: (a) the City is authorized and empowered by the provisions of Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes, as amended (Act), to issue revenue bonds to defray the costs of a project as defined in the Act; (b) the Company has proposed that the City, pursuant to the Act, issue its revenue bonds to defray the costs to be incurred in connection with the rehabilitation of certain commercial property in the City located at 6401 - 6435 Lyndale Avenue South in the City for lease to various commercial tenants (Project), and that the City and the Company enter into a lease, sale or loan agreement or similar agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act (the "Revenue Agreement "); (c) the Company wishes to obtain satisfactory assurance from the City that the proceeds of the sale of the revenue bonds of the City will be made available to finance the costs of the Pro j ect; (d) subject to due compliance with all requirements of law, the City by virtue of such statutory authority as may now or hereafter be conferred by the Act, will issue and sell its reve- nue bonds or other obligations in an amount not exceeding $400,000 (Bonds) to pay the costs of the Project; (e) the Bonds shall be limited obligations of the City and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely out of the revenues derived from amounts payable to the City by the Company pursuant to the provisions of the Revenue Agreement. 2. Undertakings on the Part of the City. Subject to the con- ditions stated in (d) of paragraph 1 hereof, the City agrees as follows: • �_A) (a) that it is its present intent to authorize the issuance and sale of the Bonds, pursuant to the terms of the Act as then in force, and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (b) that, if it issues and sells the Bonds, it will as requested by the Company enter into the Revenue Agreement with the Company. The lease rentals, installment sale payments, loan payments or other amounts payable under the Revenue Agreement will be sufficient to pay the principal and interest and redemp- tion premium, if any, on the Bonds as.and when the same shall become due and payable. 3. Undertakings on the Part of the Company. The Company agrees as follows: (a) that it will use all reasonable efforts to find one or more purchasers for the Bonds. (b) that contemporaneously with the delivery of the Bonds the Company will enter into the Revenue Agreement with the City under the terms of which the Company will provide security to the City for payment of sums sufficient in the aggregate to pay the principal of and interest and redemption premium, if any, on the Bonds as and when the same shall become due and payable. (c) that it will pay all costs of the City in connection with the financing of the Project whether or not the Project is carried to completion or approval by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority. 4. General Provisions. (a) All commitments of the City under paragraph 2 hereof and of the Company under paragraph 3 hereof are subject to the condition that within 12 months from the date hereof (or such other date as shall be mutually satisfactory to the City and the Company, and as set forth in an amendment to this Agreement), the City and the Company shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the Revenue Agreement, the Bonds and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds. (b) If the events set forth in (a) of this paragraph do not take place within the time set forth therein, or any modification thereof, and -the Bonds are not sold and delivered within such time, the Company agrees that it will reimburse the City for all reasonable and necessary direct out -of- pocket expenses which the City may incur arising from the execution of this Agreement and the .performance by the City of its obligations hereunder, and this Agreement shall thereupon terminate. (c) This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of the parties at any time, provided, however, that the City reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to withdraw its ap- proval of the Project if at any time the City Council determines that the public interest and the purpose of the Act will not be served by the Project. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement by their officers thereunto duly authorized as of the date first written above. • i • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor By Its City Clerk Michael Oreck Susan Oreck A 1/1-/9- Exhibits 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10- COMPREHENSIVE STATEMENT CONCERNING A PROPOSED PROJECT UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 474 The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Mayor and City Manager, respectively, of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (City), hereby certify that the City has been provided by Michael Oreck and Susan Oreck (Company), with certain information concerning a proposed project (Project) under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (Act). On the basis of such information, the City Council, by resolution adopted on September 12, 1985, has given preliminary approval to the proposed Project and the financing thereof by the issuance of revenue bonds or other obligations of the City as set out in Council resolu- tion. The following are factors considered by the City Council in determining to give preliminary approval to the Project: 1. Representatives of the Company state that the Project consists generally of the rehabilitation of certain commercial property in the City located at 6401 - 6435 Lyndale Avenue South in the City for lease to various commercial tenants. 2. Bond counsel is of the opinion that the Project consti- tutes a project within the meaning of Section 474.02, Subdivision la of the Act and that the public hearing requirements of state and federal law have been complied. with. 3. Representatives of the Company estimate that the acqui- sition and construction of the Project will result in an annual payroll of approximately $1,036,800 based on wage rates currently in effect for 60 new jobs. The City Council believes that a substantial percentage of that payroll will be spent on housing, food and other goods and services in the City and surrounding area, thus benefiting the local economy. • 4. The Project, when in place, will add to the tax base of the City and assist the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield in achieving their redevelopment goals. 5. The City Council has reviewed the preliminary plans and drawings for the Project and believes that the Project, when com- pleted, will be compatible with present and projected development in the Lyndale- Hub- Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area. The City will provide the Minnesota Energy and Economic Develop- ment Authority with the information required by Section 474.01, Sub- divisions 8 and 11 of the Act, upon entering into a revenue agreement, as defined in the Act, with the Company. 0 The Project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property, for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as' a permanent residence. In addition, the Project does not include: an airplane; a private luxury box; a facility primarily used for gambling; or a store the principal business of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off premises; and no more than 10 percent of the proceeds of revenue bonds will be used to finance movable equipment not con- stituting a fixture, no more than 25 percent of revenue bonds will be used to finance the acquisition of land, and not more than $10,000,000 in revenue bonds which are industrial development bonds subject to the exemption described in section 103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended December 31, 1983, will be issued with respect to any one building which is used for commercial, office or industrial purposes, without regard to ownership of condominium units within the building. The City will undertake to encourage that the employment oppor- tunities made available by the Project will, if feasible, be offered to individuals who are unemployed or who are economically.,disad- vantaged as contemplated in Laws of 1983, Chapter 289, Sectiow 113. The City will comply with the reporting requirements set forth in said Section 113. A public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project was conducted pursuant to Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b of the Act and federal regulations on September 9, 1985, at 7:00 o'clock p.m. in the Richfield City Hall, at which public hearing all interest- ed parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. A copy of the notice of public hearing is attached. Dated: 1985. Mayor City Clerk 7 -/3 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT DIVISION Application for Approval of Industrial Development Bond Project Pursuant to Chapter 474 (Please submit this form in duplicate — all supporting data in single copy only) Date: The governing body of Richfield , County of Hennepin , Minnesota, hereby applies to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development (Department) for approval of a proposed Industrial Development Bond issue as required by Minn. Stat. 474.01, subd. 7a. An allocation of issuance authority under Minn. Laws 1984, ch. 582 § 13 -20 (to be codified as Minn. Stat. 474.16 — 474.24) for this proposed issue has Q, has not ❑, been received from the Department. (If an allocation has been received, please show source: Entitlement ❑, Competitive Pool ❑) We have entered into preliminary discussions with: Firm: Michael_ & S ,_Gan Creck. Suite 103 Address: 4517 Minnetonka Blvd. . 4 Attorney: Leonar T. Juster Address: 1000 IDS Center City: St. Louis Park State: M City: _ Minneapolis State NM1 Name of Project: CXeCk Project 55416 55402 This firm is engaged primarily in (nature of business): ReA1 estate oumgmrshi Ia. Ana eiP�,e1 =,-,,,A_,,, nt The proceeds from the sale of the Industrial Development Bonds will be used to (describe project): Renovation, uuarade, bringing project to code Address of Project: 6401 — Proceeds from the salQ of the bonds of approximately s 4 00, 000 , will be applied toward payment of costs now estimated as follows: Acquisition of land: Facing a new 2, sq. 000 ft. bldg; New construction: g % cv�srlows Demolition and site door sstion qns, Sprinkling system, lighting, Acquisition of Equipment: flooring, sheetrcck, roof, Movable (limited to 10% of proceeCTST orating Other Installation Fees: Architectural, engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal, administration, or printing: Construction Interest: Initial Bond Reserve: Contingencies: Other: & s Previously acquired 211,000 35,000 75,000 • 7-1,5 It is presently estimated that construction will begin on or about Seer 10 , 1985 , and will be completed on or about December 31 , 19_L5_. When completed, there will be approxi- mately 60 new jobs created by the project at an annual payroll of approximately $ 10 0360 ROn based upon currently prevailing wages. (If applicable) There are 15 existing jobs provided by business. (if applicable) There will be 40, jobs created by construction of the project. Number of hours . Aver- age wage level $ 16.00 per hour, The tentative term of the financing is 25 years, commencing January 1 1986 . The following exhibits are furnished with this application and are incorporated herein by reference: 1. An opinion of bond counsel that proposal constitutes a project under Minn. Stat. 474.02 and Minn. Laws 1984, chp. 582 § 12 (to be codified as Minn. Stat. 474.23). 2. A copy of the city council resolution giving preliminary approval for the issuance of its revenue bonds and stating that the project, except for a project under Minn. Stat. 474.02, subd. 1 f, would not be undertaken but for the availability of Industrial Development Bond financing. 3. A comprehensive statement by the municipality indicating how the project satisfies the public or purpose and policies of Minn. Stat. ch. 474. 4. A letter of intent to purchase the bond issue or a letter confirming the feasibility of the project from a financial standpoint. 5. A statement signed by the principal representative of the issuing authority to the effect that upon entering into the revenue agreement, the information required by Minn. Stat. 474.01, Subd. 8 will be submitted to the Department (not applicable to project under Minn. Stat. 474.02, subd. 1 f). 6. A statement signed by the rinci al representative of the issuing P P P g authority that the protect does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as a permanent residence. 7. A statement signed by the principal representatives of the issuing authority stating that the project: (1) does not include: an airplane; a private luxury box; a facility primarily used for gambling; or a store the principal business of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off premises; and (2) that no more than 10 percent of the proceeds of revenue bonds will be used to finance movable equipment not constituting a fixture, no more than 25 percent of revenue bonds will be used to finance the acquisition of land, and not more than $ 10,000,000 in revenue bonds which are industrial development bonds subject to the exemption described in section 103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended December 31, 1983, will be issued with respect to any one building which is used for commercial, office or industrial purposes, with- out regard to ownership of condominium units within the building. 8. A statement signed by a representative of the issuing authority that a public hearing was conducted pursu- ant to Minn. Stat. 474.01, Subd. 7b. The statement shall include the date, time and place of the meeting and certify that a draft copy of this application with all attachments was available for public inspection and that all interested parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. 9. Copies of notice(s) as published which indicate the dates) of publication and the newspaper(s) in which the notice(s) were published. 10. Provide a plan for compliance of employment preference of economically disadvantaged or unemployed indi- viduals. (See Minn. Stat. 474.01, Subd. 11. ) o, 7-11a We, the undersigned, are duly elected representatives of . the Nty c)f R; nhf; Pl rl Minnesota and solicit your approval of this project at your earliest convenience so that we may carry it to a final conclusion. Signed by: (Principal Officers or Representatives of Issuing Authority; type or print official's name on the line to . the left of the signature line. Thank you.) John Hamilton Mayor /chair John G. Cartwright_ Title: City Manager Signature Signature This approval shall not be deemed to be an approval by the Department or the State of the feasibility of the project or the terms of the revenue agreement to be executed or the bonds to be issued therefor. Authorized Signature Minnesota Department of Date of Approval Energy and Economic Development Please return to: Minnesota Dept. of Energy and Economic Development Business financial Management 900 American Center Building 150 fast Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 • • RESOLUTION NO � RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT AND CONTRACT FOR 7 17 OFF- STREET PARKING WITH MICHAEL ORECK NAME: MICHEAL ORECK SUITE 103 4517 MINNETONKA BLVD. ST: LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 LOCATION: 6401 -6435 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH USE: COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the proposed geometric layout of the off - street parking is hereby approved subject to and upon completion of performance of the contract for such off - street parking as hereinafter authorized. 2. That the proposed off - street parking contract for the improvement of said off - street parking, be placed on file and that the city manager be authorized to sign said contract and the city clerk be authorized to seal the name for and ion behalf of this city subject to the following provisions: A. That easement agreements be executed by the commercial and residential property owners as necessary concerning the use and maintenance of the vacated alley. B. That the design and location of the parking lot lighting be submitted to the city staff for approval. 3. That the off - street parking operator provide the City of Richfield with surety in the form of cash, letter of credit, performance bond or other- security in an amount to be determined by the community development director and city manager, to ensure the off- street parking lot is constructed within the terms and regulations of the off- street parking agreement. 4. That responsibility for the property upkeep and maintenance of off - street parking lot shall remain the responsibility of the off - street parking lot operator in accordance with Ordinance Code 4.05• Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 9th day of September, 1985. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk • • • • P—Z i� � _ ra�w;� � a t� �+ _ ( 233 �f9p�: lea 4 Ifil- R 11 1 ri-7 JF all I, I j� 1 4-4 A- Jji Ul ch o as too > F 7-14 lil tit, RR Ali Ila T-1— 115 4 g i r d hlTF- PLAN BERNARD HERMAN ARCH'ITECTS' , INC SHOPPING CENTER REMODELING at 64th St and Lyndalo Ave CITY OF RICHFIELDj MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No.335 Agenda September 9,,1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City, of Richfield Subject: Public Hearing to Consider Specially Assessing Current Maintenance Services for City Alleys for the Period of January 1 through December 31, 1986 City Project No. 820 Council Members: On August 12, 1985, the City Council scheduled ,a public hearing for September 9, 1985, to consider ordering" the 1986 alley maintenance project, and to consider specially assessing for this service. In order to implement the alley maintenance policies previously passed by the city council, it is necessary for the • council.to initiate this specific alley maintenance project. The maintenance functions to be financed through special assessments include such work as rough grading, cleaning and sweeping, cold patching and snowplowing. Community Services Department personnel estimate the cost of this project for the period January 1, 1986, through December 31, 1986, to be $23,600. Alleys which were resurfaced in 1981, 1982, 19.83, 1984 or 1985 or which are scheduled to be resurfaced in 1986 would not be assessed for patching -type maintenance. Further, the amount of the special assessment could vary according to the amount of work necessary on each individual alley. The costs for the repair of an alley will be charged to the property owners abutting the alley. For patching- cleaning- sweeping -type maintenance, this would result in an estimated average assessment of about $16 per lot, assuming a fifty foot lot. Another portion of the total project cost would be for snowplowing of alleys, whether resurfaced or patched. Weather conditions during the proposed assessment period will, of course, have a significant impact on the actual amount assessed. For snowplowing maintenance, this would result in an estimated average assessment of about $7.50 per lot, again assuming a fifty foot lot. • LY r _2_ It is recommended that the City Council hold the public hearing and adopt the attached resolution ordering the 1986 • alley maintenan ce project and special ecial assessment of current services. Xul bmitted, Ca twrigage JGC /eja � -3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1986 CITY PROJECT NO. 820 WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 12th day of August, 1985, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed maintenance of the following alleys: Number Surrounding Avenues Surrounding Streets 1001 Xerxes- Washburn 66th -67th Street 1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th -68th Street 1003 Xerxes- Washburn 68th -69th Street 1004 Xerxes- Washburn 69th -70th Street 1005 Washburn- Vincent 66th -67th Street 1006 Washburn- Vincent 67th -68th Street 1007 Washburn- Vincent 68th -69th Street 1008 Washburn- Vincent 69th -70th Street 1009 Vincent - Upton 66th -67th Street 1010 Vincent -Upton 67th -68th Street 1011 Vincent -Upton 68th -69th Street 1012 Vincent -Upton 69th -70th Street 1013 Upton- Thomas 66th -67th Street 1014 Upton- Thomas 68th -69th Street 1015 1016 Upton- Thomas Thomas- Sheridan 69th -70th 66th -67th Street Street 1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th -68th Street 1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th -69th Street 1019 Thomas- Sheridan 69th -70th Street 1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th -67th Street 1021 Sheridan- Russell 67th -68th Street 1022 Sheridan- Russell 68th -69th Street 1023 Sheridan- Russell 69th -70th Street 1024 Russell -Queen 66th -67th Street 1025 Russell -Queen 67th -68th Street 1026 Russell -Queen 68th -69th Street 1027 Russell -Queen 69th -70th Street 1028 Queen -Penn 66th -67th Street 1029 Queen -Penn 67th -68th Street 1030 Queen -Penn 68th -69th Street 1031 Queen -Penn 69th -70th Street 2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd -64th Street 2002 Oliver- Newton 63rd -64th Street 2004 Morgan -Logan 63rd -64th Street 2005 Logan -Knox 63rd -64th Street 2007 James- Irving 63rd -64th Street 2008 Irving- Humboldt 63rd -64th Street 2009 Humboldt- Girard 63rd -64th Street 2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd -64th Street 2011 Girard- Fremont (35W) 64th -65th Street 2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th -66th Street 2013 Fremont (35W)- Emerson 64th -65th Street 2014 Fremont (35W)- Emerson 65th -66th Street 2015 Dupont- Colfax 63rd- Mildred Dr. 2016 Colfax- Bryant 63rd- Mildred Dr. 2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd- Mildred Dr. 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th -Lk. Shore Dr. 2020 Aldrich- Lyndale 75th -76th Street 2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th -77th Street 3002 Lyndale- Garfield 68th -69th Street 3003 Augsburg- Garfield 70th -71st Street 3004 'Augsburg- Garfield 71st -72nd Street 3005 Lyndale- Garfield 72nd -73rd Street 3006 Lyndale- Garfield 73rd -74th Street 3007 Garfield- Harriet 71st -72nd Street 3008 Garfield- Harriet 72nd -73rd Street 3009 Garfield- Harriet 73rd -74th Street 3011 Harriet -Grand 67th -68th Street 3012 Harriet -Grand 68th -69th Street 3013 Harriet -Grand 72nd -73rd Street 3014 Harriet -Grand 73rd -74th Street 3015 Grand- Pleasant 68th -69th Street 3016 Grand- Pleasant 72nd -73rd Street 3018 Wentworth- Blaisdell 67th =68th Street 3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd -73rd Street 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd -74th Street 3022 Blaisdell- Nicollet 74th -75th Street 3023 Blaisdell- Nicollet 75th -76th Street 3024 Nicollet- Second Avenue 68th -69th Street 3025 Nicollet -First Avenue 70th -71st Street 3026 Nicollet- First Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3027 Nicollet -First Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3028 First- Stevens Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3029 First- Stevens Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3030 Stevens- Second Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3031 Stevens- Second Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3032 Second -Third Avenue 66th -67th Street 3033 Second -Third Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3034 Second -Third Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3035 Third- Clinton Avenue 66th -67th Street 3036 Third- Clinton Avenue 73rd -74th Street 3037 Clinton- Fourth Avenue 66th -67th Street 3038 Clinton- Fourth Avenue 73rd -74th Street 3039 Fourth -Fifth Avenue 66th -67th Street 3040 Fourth -Fifth Avenue 73rd -74th Street 4001 13th -14th Avenue 65th -66th Street 4002 14th -15th Avenue 62nd -63rd Street 4004 15th- Bloomington 62nd -63rd Street 4005 15th- Bloomington 65th -66th Street 4006 Bloomington -16th 65th -66th Street 4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd -64th Street 4008 Cedar- Longfellow 64th -65th Street 4009 Cedar- Longfellow 65th -66th Street -3- 4010 19th -20th Avenue 4012 22nd- Standish Avenue 4013 13th -14th Avenue AND, WHEREAS, the owner of each prpposed to be assessed for the imp resolution was mailed a. copy of the 65th -66th Street 65th -66th Street 66th -67th Street parcel within the area rovement described in said required notice, and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice of the hearing and two weekly publications of the required notice was given as required by law, and the hearing was held thereon on this 9th day of September, 1985, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Such alley maintenance is hereby ordered as proposed by resolution adopted the 12th day of August, 1985• 2. That the city maintenance divisions be designated to perform these maintenance functions. } Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. • ATTEST: Thomas P. Fgrggr, City Clerk is ME Hamilton, ayor CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 334 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Public Hearing on the Assessment Roll for City. Project No. 796, Alley Maintenance for the Period January 1, 1984, through December 31, 1984 Council Members: The city council has scheduled a public hearing to be held September 9, 1985, on the assessment for the cost of,current maintenance services on alleys for the period January >1 through December 31, 1984. The city staff has calculated the proper amounts to be assessed against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land specially benefited. The proposed assessment was properly filed with the city clerk, notice was duly published • and notices were marled to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll. The cast of current maintenance services January 1 through December 31, 1984, totaled $21,195.21 and included labor, material and equipment related to alley patching and snowplowing. Due to the length of the list, the assessment roll is not included in the council packet, but a`copy of the assessment roll for alley maintenance January 1 through December 31, 1984 ", will be available for council reference and review at the September 9, 19852 city council public hearing. The public hearing provides an opportunity for all interested persons to present their objections, if any, to such proposed assessment. The city staff will be available at the hearing to answer questions about the special assessment. City staff will also be. available prior to the city council meeting to answer questions (approximately 6:30 p.m.). The city ordinance provides that special assessments for current services may be certified to the county auditor for collection along with current taxes. This certification may provide that the 10 year special assessment be completely paid in the first year or in up to ten annual installments. • -2- s� 0 It is recommended that the certification adopted by the • city council provide that payments be due and payable within the first year, rather than in installments. The city has the right to change interest on the amount assessed in that the city provided the funds initially for the current services. It is the recommendation of staff that the interest rate be established at eight percent, the maximum permitted by law. A property owner may make payment before November 15, 1985, in order to avoid interest payments. Payments made after that date, up to December 31, 1986, would include the interest charges. Following the hearing, it is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution, adopting the assessment of City Project No. 796, Alley. Maintenance for the period January 1, 1984, through December 31, 1984. The city council may make changes in the assessment roll as a result of the hearing by adding the phrase "and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems just." ectf 1 mitted, G�Zfil�1! 5ohn G. ar wrigh • City Manager JGC /eja 0 '3'0'_S RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON CITY PROJECT NO. 796 ALLEY MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 - DECEMBER 31, 1984 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current services related to maintenance of the following alleys in the City of Richfield: Number Surrounding Avenues Surrounding Streets 1001 Xerxes- Washburn 66th -67th Street 1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th -68th Street 1003 Xerxes- Washburn 68th -69th Street 1004 Xerxes- Washburn 69th -70th Street 1005 Washburn- Vincent 66th -67th Street 1006 Washburn- Vincent 67th -68th Street 1007 Washburn- Vincent 68th -69th Street 1008 Washburn- Vincent 69th -70th Street 1009 Vincent -Upton 66th -67th Street 1010 Vincent -Upton 67th -68th Street 1011 Vincent - Upton 68th -69th Street 1012 Vincent -Upton 69th -70th Street 1013 Upton- Thomas 66th -67th Street 1014 Upton- Thomas 68th -69th Street 1015 Upton- Thomas 69th -70th Street 1016 Thomas- Sheridan 66th -67th Street 1017 Thomas- Sheridan 67th -68th Street 1018 Thomas- Sheridan 68th -69th Street 1019 Thomas - Sheridan 69th -70th Street 1020 Sheridan- Russell 66th -67th Street 1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th -68th Street 1022 Sheridan- Russell 68th- 69th'Street 1023 Sheridan- Russell 69th -70th Street 1024 Russell -Queen 66th -67th Street 1025 Russell - Queen 67th -68th Street 1026 Russell -Queen 68th -69th Street 1027 Russell -Queen 69th -70th Street 1028 Queen -Penn 66th -67th Street 1029 Queen -Penn 67th -68th Street 1030 Queen -Penn 68th -69th Street 1031 Queen -Penn 69th -70th Street 2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd -64th Street 2002 Oliver - Newton 63rd -64th Street 2004 Morgan -Logan 63rd -64th Street 2005 Logan -Knox 63rd -64th Street 2007 James - Irving 63rd -64th Street 2008 Irving- Humboldt 63rd -64th Street 2009 Humboldt- Girard 63rd -64th Street 2010 Girard- Fremont (35W) 63rd -64th Street 2011 Girard - Fremont (35W) 64th -65th Street 2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th -66th Street 2013 _ .Fremont (35W)- Emerson 64th -65th Street -2- 2014 Fremont (35W)- Emerson 65th-.;66th Street 2015 Dupont- Colfax 63rd- Mildred Dr. 2016 Colfax- Bryant 63rd- Mildred Dr. 2017 Bryant- Aldrich 63rd- Mildred Dr.. 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th -Lk. Shore Dr. 2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th -76th Street 2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th -77th Street 3002 Lyndale- Garfield 68th -69th Street 3003 Augsburg- Garfield 70th -71st Street 3004 Augsburg- Garfield 71st -72nd Street 3005 Lyndale- Garfield 72nd -73rd Street 3006 Lyndale- Garfield 73rd -74th Street 3007 Garfield- Harriet 71st -72nd Street 3008 Garfield- Harriet 72nd -73rd Street 3009 Garfield- Harriet 73rd -74th Street 3011 Harriet -Grand 67th -68th Street 3012 Harriet- Grand 68th -69th Street 3013 Harriet -Grand 72nd -73rd Street 3014 Harriet -Grand 73rd -74th Street 3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th -69th Street 3016 Grand- Pleasant 72nd -73rd Street 3018 Wentworth- Blaisdell 67th -68th Street 3020 Blaisdell- Nicollet 72nd -73rd Street 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd -74th Street 3022 Blaisdell- Nicollet 74th -75th Street 3023 Blaisdell- Nicollet 75th -76th Street 3024 Nicollet- Second Avenue 68th -69th Street 3025 Nicollet -First Avenue 70th -71st Street 3026 Nicollet -First Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3027 Nicollet -First Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3028 First- Stevens Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3029 First- Stevens Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3030 Stevens- Second Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3031 Stevens- Second Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3032 Second -Third Avenue 66th -67th Street 3033 Second -Third Avenue 71st -72nd Street 3034 Second -Third Avenue 72nd -73rd Street 3035 Third- Clinton Avenue 66th -67th Street 3036 Third- Clinton Avenue 73rd -74th Street 3037 Clinton- Fourth Avenue 66th -67th Street 3038 Clinton- Fourth Avenue 73rd -74th Street 3039 Fourth -Fifth Avenue 66th -67th Street 3040 Fourth -Fifth Avenue 73rd -74th Street 4001 13th -14th Avenue 65th -66th Street 4002- 14th -15th Avenue 62nd -63rd Street 4004 95th - Bloomington 62nd -63rd Street 4005 15th - Bloomington 65th -66th Street 4006 Bloomington -16th 65th -66th Street 4007 Cedar- Longfellow 63rd -64th Street 4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th -65th Street 4009 Cedar- Longfellow 65th -66th Street 4010 19th -20th Avenue 65th -66th Street 4012 4013 22nd- Standish Avenue 13th -14th Avenue 65th -66th 66th -67th Street Street -3- s -s NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Such proposed assessment roll is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed current services in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 1986 and shall bear interest at the rate of eight percent from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay whole of the assessment on such property to the,city's Assessing Division and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city's Assessing Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The city clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to the county auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: homas P. FeFb4r, City Clerk • io n ami tons MayV v VVt tw _ I ahn G. Ca twri t CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA / 4 Office of City Manager `i' / Council Letter No. 333 b, Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of :Richfield Subject:; Public Hearing to Consider Specially Assessing L /H /N Area for 'Current Maintenance Services for the Period of January 1 through December 31, 1986 - City Project No. 821 Council Members: The City Council has scheduled a public hearing for September 9, 1985, to consider the establishment of a special assessment district for current maintenance service costs in the L /H /N redevelopment area. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to all owners of commercial property in the area and published in the official newspaper as required by law.. The higher level of maintenance proposed to be provided in the area includes the trimming and watering of trees and plants, operation of a special street lighting system, removal of snow • and ice from sidewalks and performagce of other specialized maintenance functions. The estimated maintenance cost for the period January 1 through December 31, 19862 is $52,900. All commercial properties would be assessed on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable property to be assessed equally, for the costs incurred in the maintenance of common areas,such as street islands, the civic plaza, and sidewalks. There is an agreement between the city and many of the businesses that the business shall maintain the property behind the curb. In the event the city is asked to do this maintenance, the particular business is assessed for the cost of the special, individual maintenance of direct benefit to the given property. At the conclusion of the September 9, 1985, public hearing, it is recommended that the City P - Council adopt the attached resolution ordering the L /H /N maintenance work to be done and the costs to b specially e cia 11 P Y assessed . Respectf ubmitted, v VVt tw _ I ahn G. Ca twri t RESOLUTION NO , _2 RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT y L /H /N MAINTENANCE - JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1986 CITY PROJECT NO. 821 WHEREAS, pursuant to ordinance, the City Council of the City 40 of Richfield did establish a special assessment district and did propose that certain current services be undertaken by the city in the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet Redevelopment Area approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue and that the cost of such services be specially assessed against benefited property, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield did also by such resolution set the date of public hearing on the undertaking of such current service project and the levying of special assessment to bear the costs thereof, and WHEREAS, following due notice, such public hearing was held on September 9, 1985 at which time all interested parties desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the following examples of current services of the city shall be undertaken by the city within the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet Redevelopment Project-Area, which area constitutes the special assessment district with the exception of single family, two family and multi - family residential properties, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against benefited property within the district: a. Snow, ice or rubbish removal from sidewalks; b. Weed elimination from streets and private property; c. Removal and elimination of public health and safety hazards from private property, excluding any structure under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 and 463.26; d. Installation of and repair of water service lines; e. Street sprinkling and other dust treatment of streets; f. Tree trimming and care of trees and removal of unsound trees from any street; g. Treatment and removal of insect infested or diseased trees on private property; h. Repair of sidewalks and alleys; i. Operation of street lighting system; j. Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent to street right -of -way; k. Snow removal and other maintenance of streets in the commercial redevelopment area. 2. The work to be performed may be by day labor, by city force, by contract or by any combination thereof. 3. The designated period of the project shall be from January 1 through December 31, 1986. Costs of the project shall be collected in the manner provided in.Richfield Ordinance Code Sections 12.29, 12.30 and 12.31. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, 1-12 Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985• Jo n ami ton, ayor ATTEST: Thomas P. erber, City Clgrk � 5 • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA. Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 332 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Public Hearing on the Adoption of the Assessment Roll for City Project No. 797, L /H /N Maintenance, for the Period January 1, 1984, through December 31t 1984 Council Members: The City Council has scheduled a hearing to beheld on September 9, 1985, on the assessment for the cost of,,current maintenance services in the L /H /N Redevelopment Area for the period January 1 through December 31, 1984. The city staff has calculated the proper amounts to be assessed against every ` assessable lot, piece or parcel of land specially benefitted. The proposed assessment was properly filed with the city clerk, notice was duly published, and notices were mailed to the owner • of each parcel described in the assessment roll. The cost of current maintenance services for this period totaled $41,983.62, and included, but were not necessarily limited to,'one or more of the following, including labor, equipment and materials: 1. Landscaping including tree trimming, sod replacement and turf management; 2. Sidewalk sweeping in ,summer; 3. Snow removal in winter; 4. Sidewalk de- icing;_ 5. Painting and repair of wood furniture; 6. Trash removal; 7. General maintenance, including repairs and replacements; and, 8. Irrigation maintenance.' i The city ordinance provides that special assessments for current services may be certified to the county auditor for collection along with taxes. This certification may provide that the ten -year special assessment be completely paid in the first year or in up to ten annual installments. -2- 34 It is the staff recommendation that such payments be due and payable within the first year, rather than'in installments. The adopted assessment roll for the period January 1 through December 31,, 1984, would be certified with the county auditor by October 10, 1985• The city has the right to charge interest on the amount assessed in that the city provided the funds initially for the current services. It is the recommendation of the city staff that the interest rate be established at eight percent. Payment may be made by the assessed owner before November 15, 1985, in order to avoid interest payments. Payments made after that date would include the interest payment. Following the public hearing, it is recommended that the. city council approve the attached resolution adopting the assessment on City Project No. 797, L /H /N maintenance for the period January 1`through December 31, 1984. The council may make changes in the assessment roll as a result of the hearing by adding the phrase "and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems just." Re ectf 1 mitted, Jo n G. ar wrig • ty Manage / l JGC /e a J • .3;3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON CITY PROJECT NO. 797 L /H /N MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 - DECEMBER 31, 1984 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current services related to maintenance of the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area, which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street .and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Such proposed assessment roll is hereby accepted and. shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed current services in the amount of assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 1986 and shall bear interest at the rate of eight percent,Jrom the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. f 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior-to certification of the assessment to the county auditor pay the whole of the assessment on such property to the city's Assessing Division and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city's Assessing Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid,.with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The city clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to the county auditor to be extended'on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1985. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk jo• Jo n amilton, Mayor D_ l CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 331 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield l Subject: Request for Approval of a Fee Waived Non - Intoxicating Malt Liquor License For St. Richard's Church Council Members: i St. Richard's Church has applied for a fee waived non- intoxicating malt liquor license to permit the church to sell 3.2 beer at two yearly fund raising events. Based upon the background investigation conducted by the public safety department, the applicant qualifies for the issuance of such a license. It is recommended that the city council approve the issuance • of a fee waived non - intoxicating malt liquor license to St. Richards Church. P14 s eat fu mitted, dohn G. Car iFwrigh City Manager \ JGC /eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 330 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Sign, 6540 Penn Avenue Council Members: Sign-crafters has requested an advertising permit to erect a four foot by six foot illuminated wall sign at Pennhurst Cleaners located at 6540 Penn Avenue., City ordinance code 3.49, subdivision 19, Illuminated Signs, provides that city council approval is,requiredor 1 uminated signs, • The city staff has reviewed the sign application and finds that the sign conforms to all pertinent city ordinances. It is recommended that the city council approve the application to erect an illuminated sign at 6540 Penn Avenue. ectfu 1 itted, ohn G. art ight City Manager JGCleja APPROVE! DENY U : APPROVE DENY City Manager inspector 3 �� Date Date I �( APPROVE r7i DENY Q.: _ - 1 APPROVE a DENYY : Planning Department City Council Date 9 Date 10 e to above for special approval pproval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield, Minnesota Date?- Zoning Sign Erected - Yes No t/ Fee 1 Address of Sign y 1 �% PNt, �j'a __-__Proprietor Name LZ"_4,DBA Sign Erector Address 7 7 7y"' Type of Sign Design Weather Cover Lighting Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the.business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by Per-sons des ned for or passing the subject premises? Ap cant's Signature and Ti le with Firm /• U V Date Phone Number 0. 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061 Wall Single Face Clear Lexon Constant Projecting Double Face Frosted Lexon Flashing Ground Multi -Faced Plastic Covered Revolving Roof Aerial /Blimp Shaded Traveling Pedestal Searchlight Neon Zip Lite Changeable Banner /Pennants Other t Other(Explain) Temporary Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer T ❑ A 0. Post Q . RP�Q If Illuminated e. No Watts �D Eorical Contractor Address `� ` Phone 71-7-2 Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost ��L_ Sign Width Height�¢ Total Square Feet Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the.business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by Per-sons des ned for or passing the subject premises? Ap cant's Signature and Ti le with Firm /• U V Date Phone Number 0. 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061 CITY OF RICHFIELD,_ MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 329 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and f Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit To Erect An Illuminated Sign at 6607 18th Avenue • Council Members: Attracta Sign, Inc. has requested an advertising permit to erect a single faced wall sign with constant illumination. The sign will measure four feet by three feet and will be located at Homeowners Concept, 6607 18th Avenue. City.of Richfield-ordinance code 3.49, subdivision 19, Illuminated Signs provides that city council approval is r;iuired for illuminated signs. The city staff has reviewed the sign permit application and finds that the sign conforms to all applicable city ordinances. It is recommended that the city council approve the permit for an illuminated sign at 6607 18th Avenue. peat f� /�Pbmitted , JGC /eja • City Manage ,4 C7 0 v� c= V n 07 0 E `� ^J no o O C� o J rs d J Lam] +-1, 3 J `i as -CZ z n as y Ct w I., =zM, E 0 Z.;' � 0 F w w� z �g� E W< 0 =Z2 �J N -� z ca f C � �y�Q <_ .. V O - � N cc _ �y �O m 1 � 4 c� ?s d J Lam] +-1, 3 J `i as -CZ z n as y Ct w I., =zM, E 0 Z.;' � 0 F w w� z �g� E W< 0 =Z2 �J N -� z ca f C � �y�Q <_ .. V O - � N cc _ �y �O m '0 4 c� ?s _ cc (n a N o DENYu : APPROVE 1\/1 DENYU 3 tJ City Manager • Inspect r�.�~ ` �j r Date Date �tj r''SOA49 APPROVE DENYa : �L: �� APPROVE ❑ DENY : Planning Department City Council Date g ors Date . Route to above for special approval per code Gdneral•Signs 1:'7M (CC- APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield, Minnesota Date 8-27 -85 Zoning Sign Erected - Yes X No Fee 18.00 Address of Sign 6607 18th Ave. Proprietor Name Randy Bolsinger DBAHomeowners Concept Sign Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield, 55423 Tveof Sin Design Weather Cover Lighting X Wall Projecting Ground Roof. Pedestal Changeable Temporary Trailer X Single Face Double Face Multi -Faced Aerial /Blimp Searchlight Banner /Pennants Portable Frame: T Q A n Post Clear Lexon X Constant Frosted Lexon Flashing Plastic Covered Revolving Shaded Traveling Neon Zip Lite Other Other(Explain) Sign Colors Red & Ye ow If Illuminated - Yes X No Watts Electrical Contractor Address Phone ,-mow Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost 500. Sign Width 4' ' Height 3' Total Square Feet 12 Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring.or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Yes Will -the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe ess by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? No C� \ Applicantts Signature and Title with Firm Date 8 -27 -85 Phone Number 866 -3047 Lkt 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061 S • A E _;Al CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No..328 Agenda September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit to Erect an Illuminated Sign at 631`9 Penn Avenue Council Members: Attracta Sign, Inc. has requested an advertising permit to erect a double- faced, pedestal sign with constant illumination at Vale Typewriter, 6319 Penn Avenue. The proposed sign will measure eight feet by four feet. City of Richfield ordinance code 3.49, subdivision 19, Illuminated Signs, provides that city council approval is required for illuminated signs. The staff has reviewed the permit application, and finds that the proposed sign conforms to all pertinent city ordinances. It is recommended that the city council approve the permit for an illuminated sign at 6319 Penn Avenue. Ragpectf ly�itted, / JGC /eja John G./Car righ City.Manage w , u � YAK TYPE�'7C���C SALES • SEA a SUIRPUIFES • XE 71 DENY: Wall Projecting Ground Roof Pedestal Changeable Temporary Trailer Single Face Double Face Multi - Faced. Aerial /Blimp Searchlight Banner /Pennants Portable Frame: T M AM Post APPROVE � DEA'Ya: X J t..�•C- �- c ---�. City Manager Inspecto /!_ 2 oL! /� J17.J Date Date APPROVE 1z BENT' : - U APPROVE U DENYF : Planning De artment City Council Dated -; Q Date R ute to above for special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERIMIT City of Richfield, Minnesota Date 8 -26 -85 Zoning Sign .Erected - Yes X No Fee 18.00 Address of Sign 6319 Penn Ave. So. Proprietor Name Mark Vale DBA Vale Sign TVDe Typewriter Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield 55423 of Sian Design Weather Cover Liehtin^ If Illuminated— YesX No Watts rical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost 1,500.00 Sign Width 8' height 4' Total Square Feet 32 Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on. drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Yes Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? No- Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm Date 8 -26 -85 Phone Number 866 -3047 *c nort, & 0j 0�_d 6,E T 6d C� ,� �'r� 81 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061 Wall Projecting Ground Roof Pedestal Changeable Temporary Trailer Single Face Double Face Multi - Faced. Aerial /Blimp Searchlight Banner /Pennants Portable Frame: T M AM Post Clear Lexon Constant Frosted Lexon Flashing Plastic Covered Revolving Shaded Traveling Neon Zip Lite Other Other(Explain) Sign Colors Yellow & Black X X If Illuminated— YesX No Watts rical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost 1,500.00 Sign Width 8' height 4' Total Square Feet 32 Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on. drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Yes Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? No- Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm Date 8 -26 -85 Phone Number 866 -3047 *c nort, & 0j 0�_d 6,E T 6d C� ,� �'r� 81 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 326 HRA Letter No. 46 Agenda of September 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Amendments to the Market Plaza Corporation Developer's Agreement and Related Agreements. Council Members On May 14, 1984, the City of Richfield (City) and!the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) entered into a contract for the Sale of Land for Private Development with Market Plaza Corporation (Developer), Arkell Development Corporation (Co- developer) and E.J. Plesko Association Inc. (Co- developer). • On August 26, 1985, certain contractural documents were presented to the City. The agreements had not been presented in time for sufficient review and it is, therefore, expected that they will be reviewed, revised and presented again at the September 9th meeting of the City Council. The first of these is an amendment to the Developer's Agreement, Exhibit H which is attached. Some of the revisions were previously approved and others are being presented for the first time. In November, 1984, an increase in the number of condominium units from 136 to 157 was approved along with the mix of number of bedrooms and unit size. On July 22, 1985, a number of revisions were made: -a reconfiguration of the building on the east end; -an increase in the gross floor area from 316,400 square feet to 322,659 square feet; -the building has been pivoted southward slightly; -an addition of a maintenance building on the west side of the structure; -a reconfiguration of commercial spaces and a reduction in the mall width; -a reconfiguration in the apartment guest parking area and in the commercial parking area adjacent to Wendys; and, -2- -a revision in the exterior facade materials. -an increase in the number of aprtments from 162 to 166. • For your consideration on September 9th,are the following modifications in Woodlake Point: 1. The use of a flat roof on the elevator penthouse on the roof instead of a pitched hip roof. - 2. The use of metal siding instead of wood on the sides of the balconies. 3. The reconfiguration of the pedestrian walkway west of the building so that the sidewalk is totally on the subject site. 4. Minor adjustments in the access road to Bridgemans and adjacent landscaping. The documents to be presented Monday evening will amend other portions of the developer's agreement as follows. The amendment consents to the assignment by Market Plata Corporation and E.J. Plesko of their rights under the Developer!f,sf Agreement. The assignment is to two limited partnerships. The agreement releases the limited partners from any obligation with reference to the condominium component. It also provides for revised assessment agreements and deficiency agreement which have the effect of dividing up the obligations among the various • entities which are involved in the Market Plaza Development. The second agreement is a form of Subordination Agreement between the City, the HRA, Midwest Federal and the partnerships than will be developing the two components of the Market Plaza project, i.e., the commercial component and the rental housing component. There will be a suggested Subordination Agreement for each of the two components. The general purpose of the Subordination Agreement is to protect the lender against any prior right of the municipality to recapture the Market Plaza project site. In the event that Market Plaza is unable to complete the project in accordance with the Developer's Agreement, the lender wants to be able to step into the situation and salvage its investments. A third form of agreement is an Assignment and Assumption Agreement. These agreements are for your information only. They provide for the assignment of the Developer's responsibilities under the Developer's Agreement to the limited partnerships. There is an Assignment and Assumption agreement for each of the two components of the Market Plaza project. No council or HRA action is required on these agreements but they do constitute notice to the City that the identity of the developers has changed (even though the principal parties involved are largely unchanged). -3- In addition, attached to this letter is the bond sale resolution providing for the sale of the housing bonds. Our • bond counsel has reviewed the resolution and finds it to be acceptable. However, you will notice on page 9, paragraph 7 that the line for the'purchase price of the bonds is blank. That information will be provided to the Council on Monday evening. The bond sale is scheduled for Monday. It is recommended that the HRA and City Council take the following action: 1) The HRA approve the amendments to the developer's agreement as discussed above. 2) The City Council approve the amendments to the developers agreement as discussed above and the resolution approving the housing revenue bond sale. Respeetf y ubmitted, . t ohn G. Car wr' ht City Manager HRA Executive Dir.ector JGC /eja � 18 • • • Exhibit H Revised 9/85 / e� 4 MARKETING PLAN AND 'TENANT MIX PROJECTIONS: WOODLAKE POINT CONDOMINIUMS HOUSING COMPONENT B MARKET PLAZA APARTMENTS SHOPPING CENTER MARKET PLAZA COMMERCIAL EXHIBIT H n 0 WOODLAKE POINT CONDOMINIUMS • TYPICAL MIX 12 One Bedroom 610 square feet 11 One Bedroom 741 square feet 32 One Bedroom 786 square feet • 11 One Bedroom 843 square feet 21 One Bedroom and Den 915 square feet 10 One Bedroom and Den 944 square feet 13 One Bedroom and Den 976 square feet 11 One Bedroom and Den 985 square feet 10 Two Bedroom 1,060 square feet 22 Two Bedroom 1,106 square feet i 2 Two Bedroom and Den 1,435 square feet 1 Two Bedroom and Den 1,490 square feet 1 Two Bedroom and Den 1,600 square feet 157 Units 0 • • F •-• The older adult market can be subdivided into three groups: 1. Healthy, active empty nesters that are simply Iookng to escape the. responsibility of homeownership; 2. Independent living elderly- that are often retired, have some health concerns, and are looking to escape the burden of homeownership; and 3. The frail elderly that require considerable care for the satisfaction of their basic needs. M1 The elderly building component of the Market Plaza Development is directed towards the first two groups listed above. ' Both the building plans and marketing approach have been designed to meet their special requirements. t The e.;perience that Knutson organization gained by developing Lake Shore Drive, a 178 unit condominium in Richfield, provides insight into the development of market rate elderly housing. This project, marketed in difficult economic times, opened in the Fall of 1082 and was sold out within six months. The key ingredients to the success were: 1. Involving the market into the design development phase, assuring a fit between supply, demand, and cost. , This process lasted nearly one year before ground was broken in the Fall of 1081; 2. Gaining the trust of the market and the community by keeping them informed of progress through regular newsletters' and community meetings. Included within this category way. ' the development of a sponsoring relationship with a- local church, which facilitated of the creation of a working relationship -with other local churches and organizations; and 1-7 3. Understanding the special needs of this market segment, such as providing independent consultants to assist the buyers y in dealing with the seemingly overwhelming task of selling their home. These consultants explained the process of selling real estate in today's market, provided an estimate of expected selling price and review realtor's performance and proposals if necessary. The Lake Shore Drive product that evolved out of this process was first of all a condominium versus a cooperative. With some minor modifications, the operations of these two structures are virtually identical. The preference for the condominium form of ownership was based primarily on financial considerations. Most important among them was that each buyer can finance his or her unit in a manner that best fits their, particular situation; small downpayment, large downpayment or cash, and, this money is not required until closing. The apartments themselves ranged in size from 550 square fee to 1130. . square feet and cost from $46 , 000 to $94,000. Covered parking cost an additional �5 , 000. The most popular units were the deluxe one bedroom at 750 square feet for $64,000 and the 1 bedroom den at 950 square feet for $78,000. The financing that was available included conventional, FIiA, or VA. Most of the owners preferred to transfer the equity they had in their current home to their new home, resulting in little or ' no mortgages. This desire to trade equity made the sale and cash out of their existing home vital to the success of Lake Shore Drive and reinforced the reed for the earlier mentioned Homesale Consultants. The buyers themselves were almost entirely drawn from a two mile distance of the project. Nearly 90% were homeowners, two - thirds of them were married, and their average age was 71. The recommendation for the primary design features and approach to • marketing of the Market Plaza follows those developed at Lake Shore E Vol Drive. That experience provides an excellent foundation on which to 18 build an even better. facility. An important first step in the marketing of an elderly facility is establishing credibility. Central to this is the development of a working relationship with respected community organizations for the purpose of sponsoring the project. This helps to establish credibility and provides early access to a group of the market that has a real interest in working together to improve the project and spread the word. The feeling of trust and confidence that is built with the community and marketplace through the early involvement of the sponsor is vital to the overall success of the development. The recommended apartment plans range in size from 600 tot• 1200 square feet and are priced at approximately $90 per square foot. Features th<rt we have found very important include storage closets within the units, lever handles in place of all knobs, outlets raised to a height of two feet, full size kitchens, including a breadboard, a definable dining area, 36" wide doors throughout the accessibility, balconies, air conditioning, and emergency call buttons. The community space in a building for older adults, many of whom are retired, is particularly important. These areas become an extension of their living space and provide an opportunity to interact with others. Amenities that will be available within the building include a library, workshop, gameroom, diningroom serving a daily meal, guestrooms, 24 hour a day security and emergency response system, underground parking. Upon announcement, it is anticipated that individuals on the waiting list at Lake Shore Drive and others that have heard of its success will express interest. The formal marketing program would begin shortly after the Development Agreement has been signed. At that time, reservations would be taken as the plans are firmed up through market interaction. These would later be converted to Purchase Agreements on specific units. Throughout the marketing period, the sales staff 'would be working with the particular concerns and problems facing the buyer. One of these will likely be the selling of their current home. The development of a ro ram similar p g molar to that utilized at Lake Shore Drive and discussed earlier, would be instituted. Based on our current projections, all units will be sold and closed within 18 months of building completion. • • Revised 9/85 MARKET PLAZA APARTMENTS (A Targeted Adult Community) TYPICAL MIX 32 Standard One Bedroom 629,square feet 39 Deluxe One Bedroom 715 square feet 39 One Bedroom Den /Office 850 square feet 56 Two Bedroom 1,050 square feet 166 • 1-149 II MARKETING MARKET PLAZA APARTMENTS The targeted -adult community can- be_factored. into_ a. diverse group of people who reflect the population mix of the surrounding community.- *Seniors (55 +); single and couples *Empty Nesters (45 -55), middle management, craftsman; sales people and sunshine commuters. *Young to middle age couples (27 -44) with established careers. *Young couples (21 -26) with first professional jobs. *Young to middle age single (27 -28) with established careers. *Young singles (19 -26) with first professional jobs. The apartment. building component is directed to this heterogenous group. Both the building plans and marketing approach have been designed to meet many of their requirements including: 1. Common Areas such as laundry and community /social room 2. Restaurant (Commercial Component) f 3. Covered parking 4. Drug/variety store and other retail and service uses. (Commercial Component) 5. Apartment unit design with 2 bedroom /2 bath, 1 bedroom and 1 bedroom office /den. 6. Location, entrance, view including the path around Richfield Lake, natural areas, and the proximity to bus lines, employment and shopping. 7. Direct and secure connection to the shopping service center. The apartments range in size from the one bedroom 629 square foot unit to the two bedroom 1,050 square foot unit. These units are expected to rent for: 32 Standard One Bedroom 39 Deluxe One Bedroom 39 One Bedroom Den /Office 56 Two Bedroom 629 square feet $453 to $472 715 square feet $515 850 square feet $595 1,050 square feet $714 The garages will probably rent for $35 to $40 per month. Rents should include use of all common areas and other incentives. • I] MARKETING APPROACH Our marketing approach--is -- based -on preliminary market analysis: While a..great deal_is known about the features- that.generally appeal to this diverse housing Ismarket; there are a number of specific questions we are answering at the present time. These questions relate to preferences, desires and profiles of the immediate market.- A detail personal interviews and group meetings are being completed to the finalized unit layout, amenities and mix. We do not expect the unit mix or layout to change. We do expect to make sure the features, bath design, kitchen design and common areas attract future tenants. *Network Strategy - In the early stages of development, a marketing coordinator experienced in leasing housing to a diverse age group will be involved in the project and will implement the network strategy. This strategy uses a "word of mouth approach ". *Presentations to targeted groups and organizations *Working with employees and local businesses *One to one visits with pastors and community leaders This approach could develop community awareness and support for,the housing. +: 4 *Advertising - Direct mail, newspaper and newsletters will be used to appeal to residents in the Richfield Market area. Newspaper and radio advertising may be used to reach the larger market area. Use. of selected, magazines (Twin City, Freeway News, The Guide) may be used to target the market segments. *Rental Office - A rental office will be located near or on the site. The office hours will be opened as deemed by the marketing coordinator to maximize the marketing program. The developers anticipate the office hours will include_ some weekday evenings and weekends. The office will be staffed with a professional marketing coordinator. MARKETING MARKET PLAZA SERVICE CENTER The shopping /service component of this mixed -used project will be diversified to capture trade from various market segments within the market area. The market analysis demonstrates that the retail /service uses in the 66th and Lyndale area are predominately budget to moderate neighborhood convenience and service. Lyndale Garden Center, Lyndale Hardware, K -Mart and Marshalls are the strongest retail draw. Richfield Bank and Trust is the strongest service draw. This combination of retail uses and market orientation provides the opportunity to create a life style service center. This center will have a classier look and feel than any of the existing retail facilities. The focus of the center will be on convenience, restaurants, life style stores and neighborhood service. There are a number of office /service type businesses in the area that are interested in better accomodations at reasonable rents. These uses along with traditional office uses will be accomodated within the new complex. Other 0 - primary uses will be recruited from outside the area. / - -13 The service center concept can. achieve rents in the $8:00.to $14:OO.per.square foot range:_ The amount of space which will be absorbed by the center relates to the market area consisting of primary and secondary areas having the following characteristics: 0 *Populations 156,023 people *Employment 154,800 people *Average household income $23,357 MARKETING APPROACH We are presently refining the market study to discover more detail design considerations and to insure that the proposed market approach will be successful. Our marketing approach will be to: *Regional Store Recruitment - E.J. Plesko and Associates are responsibile for recruitment of national and regional store franchise or owner locations. This approach involves marketing directly to major business headquarters in Chicago, New York, Kansas City and St. Louis.' *Local Store Recruitment - A local broker will be contacting local stores in the Twin City Metropolitan area to interest them in Market Plaza. The professional broker, with assistance from E.J. Plesko and Associates, will also provide onsite assistance and staff the local leasing office. A broker participation program will be available to provide an incentive to other brokers to bring clients to Market Plaza *Advertising -Ads are being place in trade journals and local papers. A marketing booth should be set up at local and regional meetings of trade associations. A site sign will be used to identify the broker and the shopping/service center. • MARKS PLAZA= OMMERCLAL SHOPPING/SERVICE-CENTER'' (a neighborhood service center) 4 tential RYOPICAJENANT MIX Restaurants Delicatessen /Snack Bar Sporting Goods Hair Stylist Health and Sports Club Jewelry Electronics iiomen's clothing Men's clothing Computer Service /Store Professional Offices Doctor Dentist Insurance Legal Financial Printing /Secretarial Instant Photo /Art Gallery Drug Store /Variety Store Pharmacy Travel Service Shoes Optical Ice Cream Card and Specialty Store Other Retail Uses Gross Square Footage: Gross Leasable Area: • ., 74,000 square feet 68,000 square feet TYPICAL SIZE (square f 5,000 to 10,000 300 to 400 2,000 to 3,000 1,000 7,000 to 10,000 1,000 to' 2,000 2,000 to 3,000 5,000 2,000 to 4,000 ,;2,000 to 3,000 i"000 to 10,000 1,000 to 2,000 400 to 1,000 15,000 to 20,000 3,000 to 5,000 2,000 to 3,000 1,500 1,000 1,000 1,000 to 10,000 Im ... o E,' ■ ri oo. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ 0 'CI c o� r_ N d � p n; u ■ r ■■ O `afG e■ ■ -■ - ■w 0 c3i , -rt �a� E a G © O o° v CD c b Q j L � ■ Dom 00 0000pv1- 1. —0 i -I - -...H ' . . 0 . - � p ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 173 173 'r■I rr •r n o ■r it t■ i O • �i�%�i:aw'�:i' Cr- e ■ ■ 0 173 ■ Ed • o ILI E I' a! a Mi; M r=1110 M M M F.-M, Nommooll Ali ion!ImEi:11p mel -��� IF, 1 8 8 R e R x All Y A • 3� / Y • 71 ur- e� f� i 1 k ill r' s Ir s Y t I .,. ... ,:... ....: i..,. -+.. +Attr�4•i4M'7b. ........x..r... ..c..+rv... � '_ -::_ ..was �... - ...,,:�:YS � yip ry ( t ; �/e0�lA6• its„+ 1 / / 1 8 8 R e R x All Y A • 3� / Y • 71 ur- e� f� i 1 k ill r' s Ir s Y t I .,. ... ,:... ....: i..,. -+.. +Attr�4•i4M'7b. ........x..r... ..c..+rv... � '_ -::_ ..was �... - ...,,:�:YS • • • The attached floor plans are typical and are subject to owner change without HRA approval. EXHIBIT H FLOOR PLANS p- 0 a 0 a 0 L O $ ' O G 0 v A �_",*-7 4 11 WIWA "IMAEF-11, p �.�,►. /9 • f • Immim l NMI�+�all w ■■■■■ ..... .......... fa ■ ■I .................... ■■ =■ ■I ■ ■i1■■■ .m•.■■ ■ ■ ■ ■. tQ O O. O A a w a 0 0 O l 0 V y1 C!1 A C� C� Cs7 y Z y 4 V/ CM1 l J N x y a 0 M pw- to t� v g d x t� 47 iC7 C!1 C/1 A C� y o= O� OFE Z �a i:o • O �O O O D y O .�O* ■ s mg A '�y • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 325 Agenda Sept. 9, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Evaluation of 1984 -1985 "Bundle -Up Richfield" Residential Energy Conservation Program and Request for Extension of the Residential Energy Technician Position through 1986 The 1984 -1985 "Bundle Up Richfield" energy conservation program is now history. The planning of the 1985 - 1986 "Bundle, Up Richfield" program is underway. This letter reviews the performance of the 1984 -1985 program and compares it'to the first year program performance (1983- 1984). This letter also requeststhat the Residential Energy Technician position be extended through December, 1986. Currently, the position is set to terminate on December 31, 1985. . 19W1_984 Program The goal of the 1983/1984 "Bundle -Up Richfield" residential energy conservation program was to improve the energy efficiency of homes in Richfield. The emphasis of the first year's program was the promotion of existing programs:' (1) the home energy- audit available through Minnegasco and NSP; (2) low - interest energy loan financing available through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA); and, (3) energy information centers such as ASK NSP, Minnesota Energy Information Centers and Minnegasco's Answer Line. Existing programs for lower- income' households such as the Hennepin County Weatherization Programs, Richfield's CDBG Home Rehabilitation Program and South Hennepin Human Services "H.O.M.E." program were also promoted. is ,c. During the period November 1- December 15, 1983, approximately 366 or 3.4% of all eligible Richfield homeowners requested a utility home energy audit. During this same period, approximately 1000 copies of 25 different brochures were distributed to residents. The Minnesota Energy Information Center received approximately 125 requests for information'..-, from Richfield residents. A total of 84 energy loans repre- senting $274,700 in MHFA Home Energy Loan Program funds were committed to Richfield residents. Specific data relevant to the number of participants referred to the Low Income Weatherizatio'n, Richfield CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Deferred -2 5S �-�- Loan or the H.O.M.E. Programs by the 1983/1984 "BUNDLE -UP RICHFIELD" promotion is not available. Virtually every Richfield household received at least two different deliveries • of "BUNDLE -UP RICHFIELD" promotional literature. The Energy Technician position was responsible for all these efforts. 1984/1985 Program The 1984 -1985 "Bundle -Up Richfield" program matured substantially from the first year. The 1984 -1985 program added four elements which emphasized conservation through home improvements and reduced energy consumption. These elements included the House Doctor Pilot Program, Neighborhood Energy Workshops, Shared Savings Pilot Program, and receipt of a $15,000 grant from the Minnesota Department of Energy & Economic Development. A description of the promotional effort and program results achieved during the 1984 -85 "Bundle -Up Richfield" program, which the Energy Technician position was responsible for,. follows: House Doctor Pilot Program- Within the federally mandate onservation Investment Program (CIP), whi.0h requires utility companies to promote energy conservation in`their service area, Richfield received $40,000 from Minnegasco to provide home weatherization ( "House Doctoring ") to qualifying lower income Richfield homeowners. These energy saving improvements were designed to reduce air infiltration in the home. Of this $40,000, staff utilized $2000 for administrative costs related to the Energy Technician responsibilities for advertising and processing applications for participants. At the conclusion of the program on July 31, 1985, 85 Richfield homes had been weatherized by the "House Doctor" program at a cost of approximately $450 per house, which expended the $38,000. Minnegasco's selected contractor, Energy Outfitters, estimates an average 28% reduction in air infiltration in those homes receiving the service. Since the program was targeted to higher than average fuel consumers, an $$410 per month ($100 to $120 per year) savings is possible with the corresponding drop in consumption. Minnegasco will be - evaluating the energy savings over the next year for these homes. There are approximately 30 households that were unable to receive funding under the current program and are interested in participating in a future House Doctor program effort. Homeowners have been pleased with the improvements, the Minnegasco selected qualified contractor has performed in a helpful and cooperative manner, and Minnegascofs contract requirements have been fully met in a timely manner. Neighborhood Energy Workshops - Three energy workshops were held in each ward of the city from November, 1984 through March, 1985• The workshops consisted of slide presentations on energy improvements, training sessions using window, rim joist, • door and attic demonstration models and distribution of free weatherization kits provided by Minnegasco. Energy information brochures and promotion of the Bundle -Up Richfield programs were included. A total of 278 households attended the workshops. The Energy Technician promoted each effort and made the planning arrangements necessary to have a successful workshop. The Technician also acted as an instructor. Methods of marketing the workshops varied for each workshop. Flyer drops, water billing inserts or Richfield Sun inserts were utilized to promote the workshop to individual households. The Richfield Sun also provided city wide promotion of the workshops when publishing promotional energy conservation related articles. Shared Savings Pilot Program - Funded by private contractors, this loan program provided audits and weatherization improvements to Richfield residents Homeowners repay the loans to the contractor out of the monthly energy savings resulting from the energy improvements. Therefore, no out of pocket expenses were required of the homeowner. Approximately 5,000 households received different types of promotional literature. Final statistics of the program show 559 audits were completed and 111 homeowners chose to have the suggested.work completed. Approximately $200,000 in energy conservation related improvements have been made to Richfield homes through this program. The Hennepin County Office of Planning & Development was responsible for the marketing of the Shared Savings program, as that - office was performing a study on the effectiveness of various marketing techniques. Because of Richfield's interest in energy conservation and the availability of the Energy Technician to work on the program, Richfield ° was invited to participate as a pilot community. The Energy Technician made recommendations to Hennepin County concerning the promotional efforts and provided Richfield data such as water consumption data to the county. Water conservation became one element of the shared savings concept. The Shared Savings Pilot Program results indicate that.the response from Richfield residents to either the audit or improvement work was significantly lower than other Hennepin County communities involved in the program. This could be because availability of Richfield's energy programs provide more program choices to residents than elsewhere in the county. Thoroughness of this particular audit and quality control of the contractors work has been suggested as a perceived weakness of the program. Further evaluation to be undertaken by the Energy Technician, may suggest that this program be deleted for the 1985 -1986 "Bundle Up Richfield" energy conservation programs. Department of Energy & Economic Development Community Energy Council Grant - The $15,000 grant applied for and approved during the 1984 -1985 program is being used primarily • 0 • • -4- for funding the Energy Technician position to develop and administer energy programs, to advertise programs, to cover, postage and printing costs, and to fulfill reporting requirements of the grant. These funds must be expended by December, 1985, and work responsibilities have been scheduled accordingly. ssi V DEED grant funding will not be available to Richfield during the 1985 -1986 program because communities may receive this assistance only once. This grant funded a majority of the administrative costs in 1985 since city contributions previously received have been expended. Promotion Of Existing-Programs As of March 31, 1985, over 10% of all eligible Richfield homeowners requested a utility home energy audit since its beginning in 1981. This figure is above what is estimated to be average for other communities. During the same period, approximately 7000 pieces of literature were distributed to residents through display racks. As of July 31, 1985, 47 Richfield homeowners had received $147,800 in low - interest energy loans from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. The Richfield Sun published approximately five major articles, on "Bundle -Up Richfield "Programs. Although these figures are somewhat lower than the 1983/1984 program stat.isties, reduced emphasis was placed on the promotion of existing prgrams and more was placed on administration of the new home improvement and workshop training programs. Planning for the Upcoming Heating Season A 1985 -1986 "Bundle -Up Richfield" program can continue to maintain and expand on last year's program by providing more funding and services to Richfield residents. Minnegasco would be approached to extend funding of the House Doctor - program, and fund more Neighborhood Energy Workshops (NEW). NSP has acknowledged that assistance is available to fund NEW's in cooperation with Minnegasco and provide auditor training. and subsidy for a local auditor program. The specific program concepts include: 1. House Doctor - funded through Minnegasco, both for improvement and administrative costs, this program would be extended for the 1985/1986 program from its pilot project in 1984/1985, subject to utility negotiation. In addition to increasing funding through Minnegasco to provide more opportunities for residents to participate in the program, the addition of an insulation element and furnace replacement element would be explored. The House Doctor program, being primarily a "house tightening" program, has found that there is a need to provide some insulation in some homes and replace inefficient old furnaces. For example, some residents that participated in this year's • • -5- program effort have "tighter "houses.,. but no attic insulation. Because the House Doctor audit thoroughly checks furnace operation, hazardous furnaces were identified.. Availability of these options would provide a more comprehensive program for low - income recipients. In addition, to expand the awareness of what "'House Doctoring" is, a potential aspect of the program would be to inform the general public and promote the utilization of "House Doctoring" for weatherization of their homes with their own financing. This could be accomplished through Richfield Sun articles or brochures. The Energy Technician is responsible for negotiating allowable improvements and securing funds from Minnegasco, marketing the program, qualifying participants, inspecting completed work, and routinely reporting to Minneg.asco about. the program operation. 2. Neighborhood Education Network - One goal of most workshop programs is to eve op a volunteer.system of neighborhood representatives that would actively promote Neighborhood Energy Workshops (NEW -) in their own f neighborhood. This system has proved to,be very i effective in Minneapolis and results in a much larger participation rate in the NEW's and the completion of more home improvements by residents. Neighborhood Energy .Workshops are presented to encourage residents to learn of n-o -cost, low - cost -forms of weatherization, and allow the residents to install some weatherization materials provided them through the workshop. Installation of these materials could reduce their home's gas consumption. This program requires the Energy Technician position to identify target areas, educate and coordinate volunteers, and ensure proper administration. The Energy Technician, within the evaluation phase of the program, would assemble "success stories" from previous participants that would demonstrate the benefit of participation. The net effect would be more participation in NEW's and more energy improvements made. 3. Multifamily Conservation Program Is a program funded by Minnegasco and currently being offered in the City of Minneapolis.. This program involves the outreach to apartment building owners, audits of an apartments instal - lation of conservation measures and consumption monitoring and evaluation. For hot water heated apartment buildings (a common type in Richfield) the retrofit could include boiler maintenance service, outdoor reset and cutout controls, low flow showerheads, and repair of zone control valves. A $400 investment for a boiler.retrofit can result in an 18% fuel savings. Most retrofits have a payback of under one year. The program would be promoted by the Energy Technician, but improvement costs would be paid by the building owner. This program would allow.the Richfield residents who rent to benefit by the "Bundle -Up Richfield" program: Energy enhance its image as a leader in the promotion and S'r -6- -fp savings would directly affect renters who pay their own utility bill or indirectly for those who do not. Richfield .Is rental housing units consist of 1/3 or approximately 5000 of all housing units in the.city. However, no program efforts have been directed to this housing stock. Since July, all rental property owners are required to improve the energy conservation of their rental property. This could be accomplished by directing owners to the available program. 4. Energy Bank - Is a program that would be financed,by the Minesota Housing Finance Agency (MFHA) with loans originated by Minnegasco or local lenders. The rogram would `provide ' access to low- interest rate loans for all income levels for energy improvements. The program would be promoted by Minnegasco through the monthly utility bill. Monthly loan payments by the homeowner would be included,as part of the monthly utility payment unless a separate payment was being made to a Tender. It is estimated that $500,000 in loan funds would be available to Richfield, Bloomington and Fridley. These three communites would cooperate in securing these funds throug.h�,MHFA. Minnegasco would be requested to cooperate in thefdelivery of these funds to residents through the "Bank ". This program is more important now than in past years as it is doubtful that MHFA will continue to provide their low- interest Energy Loan program which has been offered during the past two years. The Energy Bank program would provide a • method for moderate income households.to fund energy improvements and pay for the improvements (in part from the savings realized by the improvement) on their utility bill at a lower than market interest rate. The Energy Technician would be responsible for preparing agreements with MHFA, Minnegasco, and lenders, and promoting the program. The responsibility for qualifying lower income households to determine eligibility to participle may be another role. 5. NSP Audit Program - Technical training could be provided by SP to interested residents to perform modified Residential Energy Audits. NSP would also pay for a large. percentage of the audit costs, (approximately $60) with the balance (approximately $10) paid by the homeowner. The program would provide the city with its own auditors, allow for more control over the quality and thoroughness of the audit and provide employment for Richfield residents. This program would provide an opportunity for NSP to participate in the Richfield Energy program for the first time.. The Energy Technician would coordinate training, monitor the quality of work performed, promote the program, and identify participants. 6. Commercial and Industrial Auditing - Recently introduced by NSP, this program might give Richfield the opportunity to enhance its image as a leader in the promotion and -7- jS/ utilization of conservation programs. An audit of a commercial or industrial structure points out savings opportunities and equipment replacement rebates that would • keep typical paybacks to under 3 years. An audit would cost between $50 -200 (depending on facility size), but would cost less than a private audit as NSP subsidizes the fee. The Energy Technician could promote this audit program. Conclusion The program opportunities made available in the past and those being contemplated for this year have been made possible by the commitment of the Richfield City Council to employ an Energy_ Technician. The programs initiated in Richfield have been seen.by others as innovative and effective." A "House Doctor" program similar to Richfield"s is being considered in Fridley. A consortium of government agencies and individuals within Hennepin County have formed the "Suburban.Hennepin County Energy Issues Task Force" This group is exploring the potential for providing utility funded programs to.Hennepin County communities. Richfield's energy programs have been designated "role models" for such programs. There are sufficient funds to carry the program through December 31, 1985 Currently none have been approved for 1986 The proposed 1986 budget which will be considered shortly; requests $23,000 in city General Fund monies to continue the program for a full year. To date, three different temporary • stuff persons have been employed on a short term basis to administer the program (one. person for each heating season). Stuff assigned to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority have "filled -in" when there has been an absence a Technician. It is becoming impractical to continue this staffing arrangement and provide increased opportunities for Richfield residents to reduce energy expenditures. The appropriate schedule-for for administering energy programs is to develop programs during ' the summer, initiate and operate programs in the fall and throughout the heating, season, and to undertake evaluation and plan for the future in the spring. Thus, full year funding would provide a continuous, uninterrupted program. The goals of the 1985/1986 season not only expand on the previous year's programs, but may provide energy program access to all segments.of the Richfield building stock; single - family homes, multi- unit'apartments, commercial buildings and industrial facilities. These programs would all be funded through utility contributions and /or private funds. The function of the Energy Technician would be to develop, coordinate and administer the programs in the city. In the 1984/1985 program, it is estimated that $250,000 in funds were generated for the administration and implementation of energy programs in the city. The source of these revenues was the DEED grant, the "House Doctor" and Shared Savings programs. Although final estimates cannot be made until program development is -8- completed, a 1985 /1986.proposed program could generate up to $400,000 in program administration and implementation. These funds would be provided through the Energy Bank, House Doctor, Multi- family 'conservation, and, energy workshop programs. Each program provides the city with additional remedies by which to reduce energy consumption. , It is recommended that the City Council gie preliminary approval to the establishment of a full -time Energy Technician position for fiscal year 1986 by making available $2 °3,000 in the city's General Fund as discussed in the 1986 budget. This preliminary approval would.be subject to a final decision to.be made after a review of the 1986 General Fund budget during the months of September.and early October. Respectfully submitted, John G . Ca g ht City Manager JGC /eja 1