06-01-83 agendaM CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 187
Agenda June 1, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: 1983 Jobs Bill Appropriation to the Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block
Grant Program
At the May 23, 1983 city council meeting, a special council
meeting was scheduled for June 1, 1983 to finalize proposals to
be submitted for the 1983 Jobs Bill appropriation. -Subsequent
to the last council meeting the staff has received the draft re-
view criteria that were prepared by the ad hoc citizen's advisory
committee which will guide their review of all requests for the
Jobs Bill-CDBG appropriations. Some of the questions raised at
the council meeting have been answered as of this time and others
are still awaiting response from Hennepin County.
Attached please find a proposed application in the amount of
$200,000 for the establishment of an economic development revolv-
ing loan fund. If funded, this project would establish a citywide
revolving loan fund which could be used to assist both new con-
struction and rehabilitation for commercial and industrial proper-
ties. This program would result in additional local employment
opportunities and the retention of jobs within the community.
The staff will make a presentation on this application as
well as responding to council questions on the training of a day
care worker, the home repair program, and the summer bicycle
safety program at the special meeting scheduled for June 1. This
meeting will be initiated after the activities of the Board of
Review have been completed.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/ej a
- REVIEW CRITERIA/PRIORITIES
1983 JOBS BILL ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM
0 ? ?1L
The following criteria and priority considerations have been established by the
ad hoc Citizens Advisory Committee to guide their review of requests from Urban
Hennepin County program participants for the use of the additional CDBG
appropriations from the 1983 Jobs Bill.
In order for Project Proposals to be accepted for funding consideration they
must:
1, be complete and include a detailed budget and explanation of the
proposed activity
2, be carefully and realistically scheduled relative to activity initiation and
completion with major milestones identified
3, be eligible and fundable under the Urban Hennepin County Statement of
Objectives for the Jobs Bill and the regular CDBG regulations
4. be endorsed and submitted.by an Urban Hennepin County participant subgrantee
• S. utilize any existing CDBG funds (exempting Year IX) in contingency
accounts and balances in completed or dead projects in conjunction with the
,Jobs Bill appropriation
6. demonstrate that the activity benefits the citizens of Urban Hennepin
County as constituted for the CDBG program
7. demonstrate that activities will benefit to low and moderate income
persons
To the extent possible and practicable, Project Proposals should:
1. provide for the completion of existing activities which are waiting
implementation because of lack of funding
2. address a need for funding which is not already fully budgeted for
from other local resources including CDBG monies
3. represent a rather substantial effort both in terms of funding and
benefit
4. utilize other sources of public and/or private funding in combination
with Jobs Bill money
• S. enjoy a high degree of local support and commitment from the sponsor
and others who may be integral to implementation 6. create employment opportunities accessible to low and moderate income
persons
1 ?r
PROJECT PROPOSAL ' FORM
1983 JOBS BILL ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM '•=?r. °'
THIS SECTION WILL BE COMPLETED BY HENNEPIN COUNT'(=
r
.R Status:
/ . _ :.. .
status Environmentai Review Specia ist 4rat
Project Number: /
number r nand a i Manager r gate
Project -Eligibility. / ,.
citat1an representative dare
Please complete
the form as carefully as possible and use additional'th elits as'you wish
for clarification and expansion.
A. GENERAL INFORMATION,
1. Community- Richfield, Minnesota
2. Project Name: Economic Development Fund
• 3. Contact Person: Rick Jopke
B. PROJECT DATA
I. Location: Census Tract/s
City Wide X
Street Address
(Attach map, if app icab e
2. Description
Describe the project and all necessary component activities. Be as detailed
as possible.
Funds requested
$200,000
These monies would be utilized to establish a city-wide
revolving loan fund. Non-residential projects of new con-
struction or rehabilitation would be assisted. The developer
would have to demonstrate that the project would result in
additional employment opportunities or the retention of jobs
within the community.
The funds would be utilized in tandem with financing,pr?ovided:
by private sector lenders. The financial analysis o the
developer undertaken by the lender would be used as a basis for
determining credit worthiness. The city would assume a mortgage
position subordinate to that of the private lenders.
_ ?. a411 these funds complete funding/iTOlementation of a prevdusly funded
activity:
es X
__ y
na.. ` yes,lease indicate.
CDBG Year %nded
Proj ec t Numner
4. Identify the local objective that the project is irttanded to meet and explain
how the project will make substantial i
mprovement;,
The objective to be achieved is that of maintaining and improving
the economic vitality of th
e community by providing affordable
financing for physical im
ro
p
vements which also results in main-
taining and expanding the employment base.
At the present time, the city has at least two vacant and/or
underutilized commerci
l
a
structures. There also are three
identifiable commercial developers who are interested i
n con-
structing commercial buildings, but have been unable to proceed
because of difficult
in f
y
ormulating feasible financing. Each
of these properties and proposals would be evaluated to determin
e
the impact a low interest loan would have on the improvement of
the
property and the jobs to be added or retained
.
5. State the accomplishments the project is meant to achieve in a quantifiable
manner. (For exam
le
p
: twenty jobs will be created through the rehabilitation
of a factarf to perm t XYZ Compan
to i
• y
ncrease production. )
The objective would be to provide increased employment oppor-
tunities, retain jobs already within th
i
e c
ty and reduce blight.
This would be accomplished by providing assistance for the c
-
on
struction of new buildings or the renovation and/or expansion
or retrofitting of existing buildings.
The objective to be strived for would be one job for every
500
square feet of gross land area. A probable range of jobs
which could be creat
d
e
would be 14 to 42.
In a report compiled by the Metropolitan Council, the.City of
Richfield received nine points out of a possible fourteen points
in determination of need for commercial-industrial investment/ (next
5- Implementation Schedule. (:his must be carefully t r p a9E
project. Jobs 3111 timelines and processes call for '_ined far the proposed
?. c.,ma i e*_i on or
orocranmed activities by 7/1/8-9.)
a. Specify projected star-Inc gate.
b . Sceci fy proj ec tad Completion date.
C. '-Itarnedi ate .mil estones .
The loan program would be actively initiated in August, 1983
• such that by September 1, 1984 the monies would be committed.
Projects would be completed by July 1, 1985.
?undabili+v
. - i ni s ?ro3ect wi i i : i C„eck ore and provide re,.uest_e? ir:- -
.3r'?3tion
Principally benefit low and moderata income p?rsar5
State any special cansiderations you have give:h -o `benefit low -and
moderate-income persons, the number of persons directly
benefiting, and how they will benefit.
X _ Prevention or elimination of slums and blight
Describe the blight and indicate whether the municipal government
has officially designated the area as blighted or when it plans to
do so.
The funds would be utilized on a city-wide scattered site basis.
The city has an established redevelopment project and there may
be development opportunities within this area and within and
without the project area. Outside, the City Council would be
• requested to make a finding that a property was blighted before
the loan funds were made available.
Meet a Particular Urgent Need
Describe the nature of the need and the time . at. which f,,.-
originated.
3• plain how the crocosed activity will supoor- the Statement of Ob j ec t7 ves for the Jobs 1?e Ur-)an Hennep! n County
"Statement
a the Jobs 3i11 cbja ';1 aDOropria?;on, particslariy as
_c _i ves to provide productive emp 10 4
jobless Americans; hasten or i ni ti ata f` r 1 Ymen ` or
lion; and provide ? humanitarian assi stance to tte undege.r7t. is and construc-
This proposal for use of Jobs Sill funds will support the
objectives. Richfield is a community which ranks high within tam
metropolitan area in need for commercial-industrial reinvestment.
• This need is evidenced by the existence of blighted structures in
the community. It is proposed that these funds be utilized on a
6 _ °. Budget
Using the following budget ?roes; Please list the amount.budgeted for each
component of the project.
a. Acquisition of Real Property a. S
b. Senior Centers b S
c- Parks and Playgrounds Development .
c; S,..
d- Street improvements/Sidewalks d. S
e. Water and Sewer e•
e S-
f. Clearance Activities S
g. Relocation Assistance
h. Removal of Architectural Barriers h S-
i.
j. Rehabilitation of Private Property
Rehabilitation of Public Residential .
1. S See m. below
Structures
k.
Administration (project costs only) j.
k S
S
1, Public Service .
1 $
M. Other - please explain .
M. S 200 j 000
TOTAL BUDGET S 200 , 000
The cost of administering a funded project is to be shown in the project
• budget on line 'T'.
Explanation of m. above
The monies would be utilized to provide a low cost loan for
economic development. It could be used for new construction or
rehabilitation (i. above).
All of the monies made available from the Jobs Bill allocation
would be utilized for loans.. The city has a budget to support
staff who are involved in economic development activities.
Credit eligibility and servicing of the loan would be adminis-
tered by the private lender,as loans would be provided from
this fund only in tandem with private financing.
UHC 5-®-a3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION
FOR FUNDS AVAILABLE FROM THE 1983
JOBS BILL ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPROPRIATION
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota has executed a Joint
Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County establishing participation
in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant
Program; and
WHEREAS, Urban Hennepin County is entitled to receive $1,051,000
from the 1983 Jobs Bill Additional Community Development Block Grant
Appropriation; and
WHEREAS, the city has developed a proposal for the use of 1983
Jobs Bill funds; and
WHEREAS, the proposal for use of 1983 Jobs Bill funds has been
developed consistent with the 1983 Jobs Bill Statement of Objectives
and the Housing Community Development Act of 1974, as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
• City of Richfield, Minnesota authorizes submittal of a request for
funding for the following project/s: Economic Development Fund -
$200,000; Fix and Paint Program - $27,000 to the Urban Hennepin
County Ad Hoc Citizen Advisory Committee for consideration for
inclusion in their funding recommendations to the Hennepin County
Board of Commissioners:
Passed by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota this
day of , 1983
John Hamilton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk
9
- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 186
Agenda June 1, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: June 1, 1983 Board of Review Meeting
The 1983 Richfield Board of Review is scheduled for Wednes-
day evening, June 1, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers at
city hall. As provided by city charter, the Board consists of
city council members, and two residents appointed by the city man-
ager with confirmation by the city council. Mr. Lawrence Emond
and Mr. John Janski were appointed recently to serve on the 1983
Board of Review.
. The duties and responsibilities of the Board of Review are
established by state law as outlined in the attached section of
Minnesota Statutes. In general, it is the Board's responsibility
to hear appeals by property owners of the Estimated Market.Value
established by the city assessor, and to decide if and by what
amount, the estimated market value should be adjusted.
•
All property in the City of Richfield has had an estimated
market value established as of January 1, 1983. Overall, resi-
dential property values increased by approximately 1% over 1982
values. Properties which were physically reappraised received re-
ductions and increases, with no overall trend. Properties which
were not physically reappraised received a statistical adjustment
based on sales information. On average, this adjustment resulted
in market value increases in the range of $800 - $1100per parcel.
The Richfield property assessment has, for the second year,
been conducted through a contract with Hennepin County which is
supervised by the Administrative Services Department. City staff
closely monitors the conduct of the local assessment, as it remains
a direct responsibility of the City of Richfield. For 1983, statis-
tical measures show an excellent level of assessment, in terms of
the assessments of comparable cities, as well as statutory require-
ments. Particularly with regard to the equality of assessment
among similar properties, Richfield has performed better than many
other cities.
In late April, property valuation notices were mailed to
each property owner, indicating the 1983 estimated market value.
The notices requested property owners to contact the city assessor's
0-
Council Letter No. 186
-2-
June 1, 1983
regarding any questions, or to schedule an appearance before the
Board of Review. About 50 inquiries have been received to date
(substantially less than last year) and several resulted in ad-
justments by the city assessor. Attached is a list of four prop-
erty owners who have requested appearances with the Board.
Also attached for informational purposes are:
1. A list of average selling prices for various types
of residential property;
2. A list of repeat sales which have occurred within
the last 1-2 years and which provide an idea of
the increase in property values demonstrated in
the housing market.
0
Any adjustments made by the Richfield Board of Reciew will
be recorded on the property assessment rolls. After appearing at
the Local Board, property owners may subsequently appeal to the
Hennepin County Board of Review, then the State Board of Review
and/or the State Tax Court.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
cc: Administrative Services Director
City Assessor
0
0-
0
Name
Richard Ziemer
Edward Calvin
Dr. Wm. Renneke
Garfield Hoversten
CITY OF RICHFIELD
BOARD OF REVIEW
June 1, 1983
Address
6400 Vincent Avenue
7038 James Avenue
7533 Sheridan Avenue
7000 Cedar Avenue
(25 unit apt. bldg.)
Property ID Number
29-13-0065
33-21-0038
32-41-0050
35-11-0009
•
AVERAGE SELLING PRICE
_ 1982 for 1983
1 Story with Bsmt.
Ground Average Ground Average
Floor Average Price Floor Average Price
Area Price per Sq. Ft. Area Price per Sq. Ft.
1100 (40) $ 75,500 $69
550 (3) $49,900 $91 1200 (24) 78,400 65
700 (10) 60,000 86 1300 ( 7) 81,000 62
800 (30) 65,000 81 1400 ( 2) 85,700 61
900 (38) 69,600 77 1800 ( 3) 102,000 57
1000 (28) 73,100 73
600 (4)
700 (9)
800 (4)
goo (4)
700 (3)
800 (4)
1100 (1)
1'i Story with Bsmt.
1000 (12) $77,500 $77
55,400 92 1100 ( 6) 84,500 77
61,300 88 1200 ( 3) 80,000 67
67,000 84 1300 ( 1)
71,500 79 93,000 70
11 Story with Bsmt.
900 (3) 70,000 78
62,000 90 1000 (3) 77,000 80
68,300 85 1100 (2) 90,200 8o
Split Level - Split Entry
1350 (1) 97,600 72
84,900 76
V
Story - No Bsmt.
600 (2)
800 (4)
900 (2)
49,000 87 1100 (1) 68,900 61
56,800 71
62,400 69 '
1400 (2) 70,700 50
40
REPEAT SALES
One Year
1st F1. Sale Sale Amount % per
Address Type Area Date Amount Date Amount Increase %/## Mo. Month
030 N
A 1 6
9 v
ewton
SB 111 3/80 $60,000 11/81 $68,000 $ 8,000 13/20 .65
6517 Logan Av 1z,?SB 895 7/80 64,500 9/81 76,900 12,400 19/14 1.36
7226 Chicago 1SB 1180 11/80 82,900 9/81 87,000 4,100 5/10 .5
7644 Nicollet 17;SB 816 11/80 57,112 4/82 63,000 5,888 10/17 .58
7409 Vincent 1SB 816 1/81 59,000 9/81 67,500 8,500 14/9 1.55
6836 Upton 1SB 816 3/81 64,000 6/82 70,000 6,000 9/15 .6
6529 Logan 14SB 1243 4/81 86,500 4/82 99,900 13,400 15/12 1.25
6633 10th Av 1?SB 852 5/81 69,500 4/82 71,000 1,100 1.5/11 .14
7627 Vincent 1SB 1132 7/81 73,000 7/82 78,500 5,500 7/12 .58
2513 W. 66th 14SB 982 8/81 63,000 8/82 71,900 8,900 14/12 1.17
1115 Woodlake LnCondo 8/81 72,653 8/82 79,500 6,847 9/12 .75
1812 W. 66th 1-SB 1020 10/81 78,000 9/82 80,000 2,000 2.5/11 .23
REPEAT SALES
Two Years
1st F1. Sale Sale Amount % per
Address Type Area Date Amount Date Amount increase %/## Mo. Month
7145 Clinton Av 1-kSB 1037 7/79 $64,000 11/81 $78,500 14,500 23/28 .82
6812 Upton 1SB 816 1/80 55,200 7/82 62,000 6,800 12/31 .39
9 W. 10th 1SB 874 2/80 64,500 2/82 77,500 13,000 20/24 .83
3 Upton 1SB 816 2/80 54,500 6/82 65,000 10,500 19/28 .68
7438 Stevens 1-f1SB 936 3/80 53,675 6/82 70,000 16',325 30/27 1.1
6431 Logan 1zSB 832 4/80 69,500 11/81 79,000 9,500 14/19 .74
7129 1st Av. 1SB 672 5/80 50,500 2/82 56,000 5,500 11/21 .52
7400 Thomas Av 1SB 884 6/80 55,600 1/82 65,900 10,300 19/19 1.
6330 Irving 1SB 780 6/80 58,000 4/82 69,800 11,800 20/22 .9
6920 Pleasant 1SB 940 6/80 66,000 4/82 80,000 14,000 21/22 .95
7520 Bryant 1SN6 548 7/80 47,000 9/82 51,900 4,900 10/26 .38
6945 12th Av 1SB 1173 7/80 67,200 7/82 72,250 5,050 7/24 .29
7532 Park 1TSB 816 8/80 71,500 4/82 76,125 4,625 6/8 .75
6321 Vincent 1SB 1122 9/80 64,000 1/82 72,000 8,000 13/16 .8
2915 W. 76th 1SB 1176 9/80 67,000 8/82 75,000 8,000 12/11 1.09
6444 Washburn 1SB 1056 11/80 70,000 8/82 74,000 4,000 6/22 .27
7245 Oliver Av 11SB 912 11/80 75,900 5/82 79,500 3,600 5/18 .3
7639 Emerson 1SB 912 12/80 69,900 9/82 71,700 1,800 2.5/21 .12
7044 Elliot 1SB 940 1/81 69,900 8/82 76,000 6,100 9/20 .45
6333 Standish 1SB 998 1/81 49,331 8/82 52,976 3,645 7/20 .35