09-08-09 agenda packet__
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
6:00 P.M.
AGENDA
Call to order
Roll call
1. Discussion. regarding Water Conservation Rates (Council Memo No. 147)
Notes:
Adjournment
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
Call to order
Roll call
Open forum (15 minutes maximum)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Notes:
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of minutes of (1) Regular City Council Meeting of August 11, 2009; and (2)
Special City Council Worksession of August 17, 2009.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
1. Council discussion
• Police/Fire/City Hall Project
• Hats Off to Hometown Hits
Notes:
AGENDA APPROVAL
2. Council approval of agenda
.CONSENT CALENDAR
3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City
Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual
items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is
necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from
the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and
action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval.
A. Consideration of approval of a Case 440 skidsteer for the Parks Maintenance
Division from St. Joseph Equipment in the amount of $28,457.87 S.R. No. 175
B. Consideration of a resolution regarding an agreement between the MN Department
of Public Safety and the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department, pertaining to
the Safe and Sober Enforcement Program S.R. No. 176
C. Consideration of approval of resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering
preparation of the proposed assessment roll for weed elimination from private
property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private
property and setting public hearing for October 27, 2009 S.R. No. 177
D. Consideration of approval of itinerant amusement and itinerant food licenses for
Richfield visions, Inc., for Richfield Cattail Days events, September 19, 2009, at
Veterans Memorial Park, 6400 Portland Avenue S.R. No. 178
E. Consideration of resolution authorizing the City of Richfield Public Safety
Department to enter into a Co-operative Agreement to become a member of the
Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force S.R. No. 179
Notes:
4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar
Notes:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5. Public Hearing and consideration of resolutions approving:
• Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project
Area; and
• Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet
Tax Increment Financing District; and
• Proposed establishment of the 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) and 2009-2 (Former
Garage South Portion) Tax Increment Financing District; all relating to the
Accessible Space Inc., and Twin City Christian Homes Project as continued from
August 11, 2009
Staff Report No. 180
Notes:
6. Public hearing regarding the implementation and collection of a Street Light User Fee
Staff Report No. 181
Notes:
PROPOSED ORDINANCES
7. Second reading and consideration of approval of transitory ordinance authorizing the
sale of real property at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue (south portion only)
Staff Report No. 182
Notes:
8. Second reading and consideration of approval of ordinance amending Appendix 1 of the
City Code by rezoning 301-77th Street West from Mixed Use -Regional to Mixed Use -
Community
Staff Report No. 183
Notes:
RESOLUTION
9. Consideration of 2009 Revised/2010 Proposed Budget resolutions adopting 2010
preliminary property tax levy, setting truth in taxation hearing date, authorizing budget
revisions, authorizing revision of 2009 budget of various departments, and authorizing
use of Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund refund interest.
earnings for police and fire expenditures
Staff Report No. 184
Notes:
OTHER BUSINESS
1 O. Consideration of City Council approval of an agreement for consulting services with
Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for Council Chambers lighting/daylighting, acoustical and
audio visual design
Staff Report No. 185
Notes:
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
11. City Manager's report
Notes:
12. Claims and payrolls
Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by
majority vote of the City Council)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the- Council must have registered prior to the meeting,
Notes:
13. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be
made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
September 3, 2009
Council Memorandum No.147
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
Subject: Water Conservation Rates
(Worksession Agenda Item #1)
Council Members:
At the April 28, 2009 City Council Worksession, the City Council selected astaff-led
(rather than consultant-led) study of possible options for a Water Conservation Rate.
City staff now has information for City Council consideration. City staff will present
information for City Council consideration at the September 8, 2009 City Council
Worksession.
.,~~y ~~~a~ ~Qy~~
SLD:ds
Email: Department Directors
Assistant to the City Manager
J
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Regular Meeting
August 11, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl at 7:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor (arrived at 8:10 p.m.); Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott;
Fred Wroge; and Tom Fitzhenry.
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director;
John Stark., Community Development Director; Brad Sveum, Fire Services
Director; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Karen Barton, Assistant
Community Development Director; Corrine Heine, City Attorney; and
Cheryl Krumholz, Recording Secretary.
OPEN FORUM
None.
PRESENTATION OF COLORS AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Wroge, S/Elliott to approve the minutes of (1) Special City Council Worksession of July
28 2009 and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of July 28, 2009.
Motion carried 4-0.
Council Meeting Minutes -2-
August 11, 2009
Item #1 ANNUAL MEETING WITH CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Jerry Plagge, Civil Service Commission Chair, provided a report on the Commission's
activities and goals.
Item #2 I COUNCIL DISCUSSION
• HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS
• DESIGNATION OF COUNCIL MEMBER(S) TO ATTEND NATIONAL
LEAGUE OF CITIES OF CONGRESS OF CITIES AND EXPOSITION
(COUNCIL MEMO NO. 133)
• UPDATE REGARDING POTENTIAL CLOSURE OF RICHFIELD POST
OFFICE (COUNCIL MEMO NO. 134)
The City Council discussed the recent successful Night to Unite.
Council Member Elliott acknowledged the successful Penn Fest.
Council Member Elliott discussed fundraising efforts by the Richfield High School football
program.
Council Member Wroge discussed the progress of the new Lincoln Athletic Complex.
Council Member Fitzhenry acknowledged the success of the Urban Wildland Half Marathon
and 5K.
Council Member Fitzhenry discussed the crosswalk signs on 66th Street at Park Avenue for
increased pedestrian safiety.
Council Member Fitzhenry acknowledged the efforts of Best Buy doing home maintenance
in the area of 68th Street and Cedar Avenue.
Council Member Fitzhenry reported on the recent announcement of the K-Mart closure at
65th Street and Lyndale Avenue.
The City Council tabled, to the September 22, 2009 meeting, discussion of attendance at
the League of Cities Congress of Cities and Exposition.
City Manager Devich discussed the potential closure of the Richfield Post Office.
Council Member Wroge suggested the Richfield Post Office site could be added to a
potential opportunity for a development site (Bridgeman's) if the post office was in a storefront
(vacant Snyder's) for the retail services, and the bulk delivery was discontinued.
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl suggested the City Council understand the postal delivery
process before making recommendations.
Council Meeting Minutes -3-
August 11, 2009
Item #3 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl stated that Item #16 is removed from the agenda because the
financial terms of the project have changed.
M/Elliott, S/Fitzhenry to approve the agenda as amended.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #4 CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Consideration of approval of continuing. public hearing to September 8, 2009 regarding
modification to Redevelopment Plan for Richfield redevelopment project area; modification
to tax increment financing plan for Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet tax increment financing
district; and proposed establishment of 2009-1 (Section 202) and 2009-2 (Section 811) tax
increment financing district; all relating to Accessible Space Inc. and Twin City Christian
Homes project S.R. No.154
B. Consideration of approval of resolution appointing Abisola Omiwade to Richfield Tourism
Promotion Board, Inc. for remainder of three-year term ending December 31, 2009 S.R.
No. 155
RESOLUTION NO. 10268
RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVE
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD, INC.
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10268.
C. Consideration of approval of purchase and installation of 1,922 feet of sanitary sewer lining
from Insituform Technologies USA, Inc. in amount of $55,636.80 S.R. No. 156
D. Consideration of approval. of purchase of new control panel from Total Control Systems,
Inc. for sanitary lift station at Richfield Ice Arena in amount of $25,257 S.R. No. 157
E. Consideration of approval of amendment to Public Health Emergency Preparedness
contract for 2009-2010 with Minnesota Department of Health S.R. No. 158
F. Consideration of approval of authorizing City Manager to spend up to $40,000 for repairs
and improvements to Fire Station 2 due to water damage occurring on August 4, 2009
S.R. No. 159
M/Elliott, S/Fitzhenry to approve the Consent Calendar.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #5 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT
CALENDAR
Council Meeting Minutes -4-
None.
August 11, 2009
Item #6 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING RESOLUTION ADOPTING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR 2008 REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM
PRIVATE PROPERTY S.R. NO. 160
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl presented Staff Report No. 160.
M/Wroge, S/Elliott to close public hearing.
Motion carried 4-0.
M/Sandahl, S/Wroge that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of
these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10269
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY
FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2008 TO DECEMBER 31, 2008
Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10269.
Item #7 PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR 2008 MAINTENANCE SERVICES AND
RESOLUTIONS ORDERING CURRENT 2010 MAINTENANCE SERVICES
A. 77TH STREET MAINTENANCE S.R. NO. 161
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl presented Staff Report No. 161.
M/Wroge, S/Elliott to close public hearing.
Motion carried 4-0.
Public Works Director Eastling explained how the cost estimates are determined.
M/Sandahl, S/Wroge that the following resolutions be adopted and that they be made part of
these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10270
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON
77TH STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD
JANUARY 1 -DECEMBER 31, 2008
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10270.
Council Meeting Minutes -5- August 11, 2009
RESOLUTION NO. 10271
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE
PROJECT 77TH STREET PROJECT AREA JANUARY 1 THROUGH
DECEMBER 31, 2010
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10271.
Motion carried 4-0.
B. LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET MAINTENANCE S.R. NO. 162
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl presented Staff Report No. 162.
M/Wroge, S/Fitzhenry to close public hearing.
Motion carried 4-0.
M/Sandahl, S/Wroge that the following resolutions be adopted and that they be made part of
these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10272
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE
PERIOD JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10272.
RESOLUTION NO. 10273
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE
PROJECT LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE
JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2010
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10273.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #8 PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE MODIFYING
ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER DBA XCEL
ENERGY FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN CITY OF RICHFIELD
AND RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE
S.R. NO. 163
Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 163.
Larry Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth Avenue, spoke in opposition to the franchise fees and
encouraged the City Council to place the revenue source for these projects on property taxes.
M/Wroge, S/Fitzhenry to close public hearing.
Council Meeting Minutes -6-
Motion carried 4-0.
August 11, 2009
Council Member Wroge questioned if foreclosed properties paid franchise fees.
Finance Manager Regis explained the fee is based on the number of meters.
City Manager Devich added that staff will confirm the use of utilities by foreclosed
properties.
Council Member Elliott stated he recognized the benefit of franchise fees being on property
taxes.
Finance Manager Regis explained all properties pay the fee including those that do not pay
property taxes.
Council Member Wroge requested staff provide a list of properties that pay the franchise
fee.
M/Fitzhenry, S/Sandahl that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2009-13
modifying electric franchise fee on Northern States Power dba Xcel Energy for providing electric
service within the City of Richfield that it be published in the official newspaper and that it be made
part of these minutes and that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of
these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10274
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX E OF THE RICHFIELD
CITY CODE WHICH PERTAINS TO THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE
Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10274.
Item #9 PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE MODIFYING GAS
FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY FOR PROVIDING GAS SERVICE
WITHIN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY
PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE S.R. NO. 164
Council Member Elliott presented Staff Report No. 164.
M/Wroge, S/Sandahl to close public hearing.
Motion carried 4-0.
M/Elliott, S/Sandahl that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2009-14 modifying
gas franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy for providing gas service within the City of Richfield, that it
be published in the official newspaper and that it be made part of these minutes, and that the
following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes:
Council Meeting Minutes -7- August 11, 2009
RESOLUTION NO. 10275
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX E OF THE RICHFIELD
CITY CODE WHICH PERTAINS TO THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE
Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10275.
Item #10 CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 1, SUBSECTION 100.07 ADOPTING
REFERENCE TO MINNESOTA STATUTES AND RULES S.R. NO. 165
Council Member Wroge presented Staff Report No. 165.
M/Wroge, S/Sandahl that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2009-15 approving
amendment to City Administrative Code Chapter 1, Subsection 100.07 adopting reference to
Minnesota Statutes and Rules that it be published in the official newspaper and that it be made
part of these minutes.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #11 CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
PAWNBROKER CODE, SUBSECTION 1187.43, RELATING TO CHANGING AGE
LIMIT FROM 21 TO 18 YEARS FOR PAWN TRANSACTIONS S.R. NO. 166
Mayor Pro Tempore Sandahl presented Staff Report No. 166.
M/Sandahl, S/Wroge that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2009-16 approving
amendment to Pawnbroker Code Subsection 1187.43 relating to changing age limit from 21 to 18
years for pawn transactions that it be published in the official newspaper and that it be made part
of these minutes.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #12 CONSIDERATION OF:
• RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT 301 77TH
STREET WEST FROM REGIONAL COMMERCIAL/OFFICE TO HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND SOUTH PORTION OF 7700 PILLSBURY
AVENUE SOUTH FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; AND
• FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX 1 OF CITY
CODE BY REZONING 301 WEST 77TH STREET FROM MIXED USE-
REGIONAL TO MIXED USE-COMMUNITY S.R. NO. 167
Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 167.
Council Meeting Minutes -8- August 11, 2009
Council Member Wroge expressed concern that the land was being changed without an
offer on the land yet.
Community Development Director Stark stated this is a typical process. He also explained.
the acquisition intention of Accessible Space Inc., (ASi) and Twin City Christian Homes (TCCH).
Dan Billmark, ASi, stated HUD requires a letter of permissive zoning for site control prior to
making application for HUD funding.
Council Member Wroge questioned these changes being "spot zoning."
City Attorney Heine explained that, in her opinion, the proposed property zoning is
acceptable. At a future date, if the City Council chooses to change zoning, the City Council makes
that determination at that time. She added the zoning code was changed previously because it
was determined onerous to development.
City Attorney Heine stated the Comprehensive Plan amendment requires a super majority
vote of the City Council, zoning does not.
Mayor Goettel arrived at this time.
Council Member Elliott expressed his concern that there is not adequate time to review this
proposed project. He stated he shared the concerns of the three Planning Commission members
who did not support the project.
Council Member Sandahl stated this is first reading so this item will be before the City
Council again and to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. She expressed support for the
project because it provides housing to unique citizens and is an asset to the community.
M/Fitzhenry, S/Sandahl to approve first reading of ordinance amending Appendix 1 of City
Code by rezoning 301 West 77th Street from Mixed Use-Regional to Mixed Use-Community and
that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10276
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AT 301 77TH STREET WEST FROM REGIONAL
COMMERCIAL/ OFFICE TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND
FOR THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF 7700 PILLSBURY AVENUE
SOUTH FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
Motion carried 4-1. (Wroge oppose) This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10276.
Item #13 CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF TRANSITORY ORDINANCE
AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL PROPERTY AT 7700 PILLSBURY AVENUE
(SOUTH PORTION ONLY) AND SCHEDULING SECOND READING FOR
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 S.R. NO. 168
Council Member Elliott presented Staff Report No. 168.
Council Meeting Minutes -9- August 11, 2009
Council Member Wroge questioned the number of years for the TIF payoff.
Community Development Director Stark explained there was a law changing TIF housing
districts to 25 years.
Community Development Director Stark explained the property valuation process including
an appraisal and shadow value and the impact on the property since 2005. He also discussed the
option agreement related to the value, TIF, and upfront proceeds.
M/Elliot, S/Fitzhenry to approve first reading of transitory ordinance authorizing sale of real
property at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue (south portion only) and scheduling second reading for
September 8, 2009.
Motion carried 4-1. (Wroge oppose)
Item #14 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBDIVISION FOR
FORMER CITY MAINTENANCE FACILITY AT 7700 PILLSBURY AVENUE INTO
TWO SEPARATE TAX PARCELS; PARCEL NORTH OF 77TH STREET AND
PARCEL SOUTH OF 77TH STREET S.R. NO. 169
Council Member Sandahl presented Staff Report No. 169.
Community Development Director Stark stated there is a construction proposal from Ron
Clarke for the north portion, including the mortuary and some homes, but there are site assembly
issues..
M/Sandahl, S/Wroge that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of
these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 10277
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SUBDIVISION WAIVER
FOR 7700 PILLSBURY AVENUE
Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10277.
Item #15 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT, FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW CONVERSION OF RETAIL SPACE TO 12 ADDITIONAL
RESIDENTIAL UNITS AT 700 66TH STREET WEST AND 6501 WOODLAKE
DRIVE; MARKET PLAZA/VILLAGE SHORES S.R. NO. 170
Council Member Elliott presented Staff Report No. 170.
M/Elliott, S/Sandahl that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of
these minutes:
Council Meeting Minutes -10-
RESOLUTION NO. 10278
August 11, 2009
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT
TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF RETAIL SPACE
TO 12 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
AT 700 66TH STREET WEST AND 6501 WOODLAKE DRIVE
Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10278.
Item #16 CONSIDERATION OF REVISED CEDAR POINT II SENIOR HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL BY LANG NELSON S.R. NO. 171
This item was removed from the agenda.
Item #17 CONSIDERATION OF ENTERING LEASE NEGOTIATIONS FOR USE OF
IDENTIFIED FUTURE REMNANT PARCEL AT 1710 EAST 78TH STREET;
NORMARK SITE S.R. NO. 172
Council Member Wroge presented Staff Report No. 172.
Public Works Director Eastling stated the significant parking lot repair will be part of
negotiations.
M/Wroge, S/Goettel to approve entering lease negotiations for use of identified future
remnant parcel at 1710 East 78th Street; Normark site.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #18 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Devich reported on the process of the Lyndale Avenue bridge project.
Item #19 CLAIMS AND PAYROLL
M/Wroge, S/Sandahl that the following claims and payrolls be approved:
Council Meeting Minutes -11- August 11, 2009
U.S. BANK 08-11-09
A/P Checks: 187643 - 188039
PAYROLL 59927 - 60305,41454 - 41455
$ 3,273,374.18
$ 531,345.01
TOTAL
Motion carried 5-0.
OPEN FORUM
None.
$ 3,804,719.19
The City Council meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:37 p.m.
Date Approved:
Cheryl Krumholz
Recording Secretary
Debbie Goettel
Mayor
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
J
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special Worksession
August 17, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 5:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; and Tom
Fitzhenry.
Staff Present: Steven Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; John
Stark, Community Development Director; Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation
Services Director; Brad Sveum, Fire Services Director; Bill Fillmore, Municipal
Liquor Operations Director; Barry Fritz, Public Safety Director; Chris Regis,
Finance Manager; Dave Conrads, Building Maintenance Supervisor; Rick
Regnier, Chief Building Official, Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant to the City
Manager; and Cheryl Krumholz, Recording Secretary.
Item # I DISCUSSION REGARDING UNRESOLVED ISSUES RELATED TO DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT PHASE OF NEW POLICE/FIRE/CITY HALL FACILITY (MEMO
NO. 132)
Mike Cox, WOLD, requested the City Council discuss and provide direction on a few
unresolved issues related to the new facility so they can proceed with developing contract documents.
Mr. Cox discussed the proposed exterior materials and colors to be used.
The City Council consensus was to proceed with the materials and colors presented.
Mike Klass, WOLD, discussed the proposed exterior vertical fins and horizontal sun shelf
louvers, including spacing and depth.
Mr. Klass also discussed the proposed interior light shelves.
Steve Orfield, Orfield Laboratories, discussed the purpose of the fins/louvers/shelves is to
control glare and brightness, not energy. He also discussed automated shades for the common work
areas and their associated high cost.
Mr. Orfield was provided a copy of a summary from the Weidt Group findings on their energy
audit of the new facility. He stated he would be surprised if the report found energy savings to be
cost neutral.
Council Member Elliott questioned the effectiveness of the fins; including the additional costs
and Mr. Orfield's comments regarding energy savings.
Special Worksession Minutes -2- August 17, 2009
City Manager Devich discussed the concerns expressed by staff related to the fins and light
shelves.
Council Member Sandahl expressed support for the design of the fins, light shelves/louvers to
control light and that staff would get used to them.
Mr. Cox stated his opinion that performance standards manifest as an image and shows on
the outside so there needs to be a comfortableness to portray that image in a way that works.
Council Member Wroge questioned the cost of the fins and the analysis of sun positions.
Mr. Klass estimated the cost to be $200,000 installed. They are most prominent on the east
and south sides of the building.
Mr. Orfield stated there is an analysis of the sun and it will be provided to the City Council.
Mayor Goettel acknowledged the importance of staff feedback and that being progressive can
sometimes be difficult the first time.
City Manager Devich questioned the need for interior light shelves, difficulty of dust control,
and the cost of maintenance.
Mr. Cox replied the shelves or blinds would be needed.
The City Council discussion included the size of the fins being minimal and the interior shelves
being acceptable with pivotal positioning for easier maintenance.
Mr. Cox stated the shelf cost is undetermined at this time.
City Manager Devich requested the City Council discuss the retaining of Orfield Laboratories
or doing a request for proposals for consulting services on the acoustical, lighting, and audio visual
design of the Council Chambers. He added the original Orfield Laboratories agreement was for a
proposal of a minimum of $100,000 and is not included in the project budget.
Mr. Orfield encouraged the City Council to utilize a professional design with superb lighting
and acoustics for the Council Chambers and meeting rooms.
City Manager Devich discussed the current equipment upgrades were made with the intention
of moving them into the new building.
Council Member Sandahl asked Mr. Orfield if his agreement included the Council Chambers
and all other meeting spaces.
Mr. Orfield said yes.
Council Member Fitzhenry expressed support for using one vendor to do all the work.
Council Member Elliott asked WOLD about the Farmington Council Chambers.
Mr. Cox stated WOLD did the lighting, acoustical and format design of the City of Farmington
Chambers. An outside group performed the technological audio visual equipment.
Council Member Elliott stated Farmington was pleased with the result and he believed VVOLD
could do the work for Richfield.
Council Member Sandahl stated Orfield Laboratories should be hired and held accountable for
the work.
Council Member Elliott stated the City Council may not have the adequate knowledge on
these issues to hold Orfield Laboratories accountable.
Mr. Orfield stated he could work within the budget.
Special Worksession Minutes -3- August 17, 2009
City Manager Devich requested the City Council discuss the type of flooring for the lobby.
Building Maintenance Supervisor Conrads explained ceramic the lasts 25 years and terrazzo
flooring last 50 years at an additional cost of $42,000 which is outside the budget.
City Manager Devich suggested the flooring options could be an alternate in the bid process.
Building Maintenance Supervisor Conrads asked Mr. Orfield how long the fins have been
made, where they are in use, and their maintenance life.
Mr. Orfield stated the fins have been used in Europe and the modern fins have been made of
aluminum for 30 years.
Council Member Wroge requested a budget amount. for Council Chamber audio costs.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:09 p.m.
Date Approved:
Cheryl Krumholz
Recording Secretary
Debbie Goettel
Mayor
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
r
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 3A
REPORT # 175
~~ STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY:
MARK HALL, OPERATIONS
MANAGER -FLEET AND PARK
TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER.
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the purchase of a skidsteer for the Public Works department.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a purchase order to St. Joseph Equipment in the
amount of $28,457.87 for a Case 440 skidsteer.
II. BACKGROUND
Unit 409, a 1999 Gehl skidsteer, is due for replacement and is included in the 2009
Central Garage Budget. This unit has a motor and hydraulics that are extremely
worn and in need of replacement. The skidsteer is used by all Public Works
Divisions on a year round basis, i.e., tree planting, stump removal, snow removal,
and park landscaping. It is also used by other City Divisions such as Wood Lake
Nature Center & the Ice Arena.
Purchase of the new skidsteer has been coordinated through the State of
Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• St. Joseph Equipment has the state contract on Case skidsteers.
090809Skidsteer
y
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Approval at the September 08, 2009 Council meeting will facilitate
delivery of the new skidsteer.
C. FINANCIAL
• The 1999 Gehl is' being traded in for $6275.00 to St. Joseph
Equipment.
• $34,000 for the purchase of this skidsteer is in the Central Garage
2009 Budget (61000-7500).
D. LEGAL
• When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment, or
construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be
submitted to the City Council for consideration.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• None
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however,
will result in delayed delivery.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 3B
REPORT # 7 7 F,
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY: MICHAEL FLAHERTY, POLICE
LIEUTENANT
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
SIGNAT
REVIEWED BY CITY •
MANAGER: ~
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution regarding an agreement between the Minnesota Department of
Public Safety and the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department, pertaining to the Safe and
Sober Enforcement Program
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution for an agreement between
the Richfield Public Safety Department and the Minnesota Department of
Public Safety authorizing the acceptance of grant funds to be used for the
payment of overtime for police officers involved in the Safe and Sober
Program.
II. BACKGROUND
Edina, Airport and the Richfield Police Department submitted a joint grant
application to the State of Minnesota for funds that are to be utilized for enhanced
traffic enforcement during the upcoming year. These departments have been jointly
awarded $48,000 and plan on scheduling joint traffic enforcement campaigns.
0908 Resolution Accepting Safe & Sober Grant Funds
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The State of Minnesota requires that the City approve a resolution
accepting the funds prior to their issuance.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The Resolution needs to be signed by all three agencies' City
Councils before the release of funds to the police departments.
• Traffic law enforcement is a critical function of the police division.
Approval of the resolution makes available funds to cover the costs
associated with focusing on this area of law enforcement.
C. FINANCIAL
• The overtime paid to officers will come from the Grant Fund.
D. LEGAL
• N/A
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The City Council could disapprove the resolution, which would void the
agreement.
V. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution Number
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None
~~-i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD/POLICE AND THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY TO
APPROVE GRANT FUNDS TO BE SHARED BY RICHFIELD POLICE, EDINA POLICE
AND THE AIRPORT POLICE DEPARTMENTS AS PART OF THE SAFE & SOBER
COMMUNITITES PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Governor has designated the State of Minnesota, Office of Traffic
Safety in the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (hereinafter called the STATE) as the
agency responsible for administration of a project entitled Safe a& Sober communities; and
WHEREAS, the STATE is authorized to make contracts from state funds to
qualified applicants; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Public Safety/Police (herein after called the
GRANTEE) is authorized to accept state funds for overtime for traffic enforcement
programs; and
WHEREAS, GRANTEE represents that it is duly qualified and will carry out the
tasks described above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into a
cooperative agreement with the Office of Traffic Safety in the State of Minnesota
Department of Public Safety for the project entitled Safe & Sober Communities. Steven
Devich, City Manager, and Barry Fritz, Public Safety Director, are hereby authorized to
execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City
of Richfield, Department of Public Safety.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBERS, 2009
CONSENT
3C
177
REPORT PREPARED BY:
REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER
NA.tfE,
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the attached resolution declaring costs to be assessed for current services
performed for weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public
health or safety hazards from private property.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring costs to be
assessed and. ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment
roll for weed elimination from private property and removal or
elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property
and setting the public hearing date for October 27, 2009.
II. BACKGROUND
• The special assessment for elimination of public health or safety hazards from
private properties is for costs incurred by the City in connection with abatement
of these hazards on certain properties in the City, which are not properly
maintained.
• The owners of the subject properties are notified by the City to correct the public
health or safety hazards and have failed to do so within a timely limit.
• The property owners were notified that if the public health or safety hazards
were not abated within the proper time limit, the City would take the corrective
action necessary and bill the property owner.
. • Finally, each year the City utilizes City Public Works staff to cut weeds on certain
properties in the City not maintained by the owners. If the owner fails to cut the
weeds in a timely manner after notification by the City, the City undertakes the
weed destruction and bills the property owner for the service.
• In all cases, property owners will be notified that any unpaid charges of fees may
be assessed against the property...
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The nuisance properties were not maintained by the owners and the
City incurred costs to abate the nuisance.
• Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one-
. year assessment for these costs.
• .Notice of the certification will be published in the Sun Current October
8, 2009.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
• The proposed special assessment for the elimination of public health
or safety hazards from private property is $2,811.00 with an additional
6% interest penalty.
• The proposed special assessment for weed elimination from private
property is $4,103.00 with an additional 6% interest penalty.
• Costs incurred for city staff time in the clean up of the properties or to
remove the weeds are included in the special assessment amount.
• A $25.00 administrative fee is charged to all properties.
• The affected property owner may prepay the original principal amount
without interest within 30 days from the date the Council adopts the
assessment, scheduled for October 27, 2009. If the original principal
amount is not paid, the assessment will be charged 6% interest.
D. LEGAL
• No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in
attendance at the Council meeting should a legal question arise.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Do not approve the attached resolutions and have the costs absorbed by the
city.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of
proposed assessment for weed elimination from private property, and
removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private
property.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
3C-(
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
WEED ELIMINATION FROM PROVATE PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OR ELIMINATION
OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PROVATE PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for weed elimination and removal or
elimination of public health or safety hazards from private properties in the City of Richfield
and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such work ordered amount to $6,914.00.
Public
Health or
Weed Safety
Property Address Property ID Number Elimination Hazards
1421 - 62ND STREET EAST 26-028-24-12-0035. 140.00 104.00
315 - 74TH STREET WEST 34-028-24-32-0003 110.00
6220 LOGAN AVE SO 28-028-24-22-0042 125.00
6234 NEWTON AVE SO 28-028-24-22-0026 140.00
6320 MORGAN AVE SO 28-028-24-22-0086 160.00 455.00
6321 NICOLLET AVE SO 27-028-24-12-0018 103.00
6401 GIRARD AVE SO 28-028-24-13-0003 308.00
6525 BLOOMINGTON AVE SO 26-028-24-14-0112 140.00
6700 - 17TH AVE SO 26-028-24-41-0021 140.00
6701 - 4TH AVE SO 27-028-24-41-0090 193.00
6711 - 14TH AVE SO 26-028-24-42-0110 140.00
6732 CHICAGO AVE SO 26-028-24-32-0098 280.00
6826 PILLSBURY AVE SO 27-028-24-34-0081 140.00
6845 UPTON AVE SO 29-028-24-43-0013 108.00
6905 SHERIDAN AVE SO 29-028-24-44-0134 160.00 115.00
6944 17TH AVE SO 26-028-24-44-0104 320.00
7001 - 5TH AVE SO 34-028-24-11-0087 125.00
7009 XERXES AVE SO 32-028-24-12-0025 140.00 114.00
7027 - 5TH AVE SO 34-028-24-11-0082 140.00
7101 - 17TH AVE SO 35-028-24-11-0043 129.00
7134 CEDAR AVE SO 35-028-24-11-0123 140.00
7144 - 4TH AVE SO 34-028-24-11-0044 140.00
7200 - 10TH AVE SO 35-028-24-24-0065 236.00
7200 NICOLLET AVE SO 34-028-24-24-0001 160.00
7204 HARRIET AVE SO 34-028-24-23-0065 140.00
7208 CHICAGO AVE SO 35-028-24-23-0114 125.00
7220 RUSSELL AVE SO ~ 32-028-24-14-0041 125.00
7233 PORTLAND AVE SO 35-028-24-23-0111 150.00
7244 - 2ND AVE SO 34-028-24-13-0124 140.00
7244 STEVENS AVE SO 34-028-24-13-0054 125.00
7314 - 11TH AVE SO 35-028-24-24-0035 160.00 475.00
7415 DUPONT AVE SO 33-028-24-41-0079 140.00
7415 DUPONT AVE SO 33-028-24-41-0079 140.00
7531 WENTWORTH AVE SO 34-028-24-31-0106 107.00
7645 THOMAS AVE SO 32-028-24-44-0013 278.00 104.00
Total $4,103.00 $2,811.00
3 C-Z
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota:
1. The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be
$6,914.00.
2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such work against each benefited property, and shall file a copy of such proposed
assessment in her office for public. inspection.
3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City
Council thereof.
4. A hearing shall be held on the 27th day of October, 2009 in the City Hall Council
Chambers at 7:00 p.m., or as soon as hereafter as it may be reached on the agenda, to
pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning
property affected by the weed elimination and/or removal of public health or safety
hazards assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such
assessment.
5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed
assessment at least two weeks prior to the hearing and shall state in the notice the total
cost of the weed elimination and the removal or elimination of public health or safety
hazards. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each
parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of September, 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: CONSEN'P
AGENDA ITEM # 3D
REPORT # j]$
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBERS, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY:
BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES
MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a request by Richfield Visions, Inc. for itinerant amusement and itinerant food
licenses for Richfield Cattail Days events, September 19, 2009, at Veterans Memorial Park,
6400 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the itinerant amusement and itinerant food
licenses for Richfield Visions, Inc., for Richfield Cattail Days events,
September 19, 2009, at Veterans Memorial Park, 6400 Portland
Avenue South, Richfield, MN
II. BACKGROUND
On July 23, 2009, Richfield Visions, Inc. applied for an itinerant amusement and
itinerant food licenses for the activities scheduled to take place at Veterans
Memorial Park on September 19, 2009. The license fees-for the event have been
paid.
The City has previously granted this license to Richfield Visions, Inc. for the
Richfield Cattail Days celebration. - -
The committee has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to
ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with
Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome
food handling.
0908 Cattail Days Amusement and Food Licenses
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The application has complied with
application process and meets the
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
• All licensing fees have been paid.
D. LEGAL
• N/A
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• N/A
all of the provisions of the City
requirements.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Deny the request for an itinerant amusement and food licenses. This would
result in the applicant not being able to conduct activities, especially those
concerning food preparation, on September 19, 2009.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• N/A
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Bob Houlton, President Richfield Visions, Inc.
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # ~j;
REPORT # ~ 79
~- STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY:
TODD SANDELL, DEPUTY
DIRECTOR/DEPUTY CHIEF
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY r
MANAGER: , l-
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution regarding a Co-operative Agreement to become a member of the
Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the City of
Richfield Public Safety Department to enter into a Co-operative
Agreement to become a member of the Hennepin County Violent
Offender Task Force.
II. BACKGROUND
In 2007, the Hennepin County Sheriffs Department created the Hennepin County
Violent Offender Task Force (VOTE). The VOTE focuses their enforcement on
repeat violent offenders, gangs and narcotic activity. VOTE also serves as a
criminal intelligence gathering resource for law enforcement. Current VOTE
agencies include Hennepin County Sheriff's Department, Brooklyn Park Police
Department, Golden Valley Police Department and Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA). VOTE is currently working to include additional southern
Hennepin County agencies.
The VOTE operates under a Co-operative Agreement and is under the direction of a
commander who reports to an Advisory Board comprised of the chief law
enforcement officers (or their designees) of the participating agencies. All
participating members will remain employees of the contributing agency.
0908 Resolution Approving Henn. Co. Violent Offender Task Force Agreement
Co-operative Agreements have been created for the task force, and they address
common issues including, but not limited to: purpose, scope of work, work location,
command structure, terms of participation, designation and duties of a fiscal agent
and use of forfeited assets.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Law Enforcement realizes that to effectively combat repeat offenders,
gangs and narcotic activity, the resources of a single agency are
inadequate. They are limited by resources and jurisdictional
boundaries. Multi-jurisdictional task forces combine resources and
eliminate jurisdictional boundaries. With the placement of an officer
on .the task force, Richfield would benefit from the resources of eight
officers and four law enforcement agencies.
• A resolution must be signed allowing the City of Richfield Public
Safety Department to enter into a Co-operative Agreement to place an
officer on the VOTF.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Richfield must select a police officer to be on the Task Force. The
VOFT Advisory Board must officially accept our nominated officer; this
will be completed by September 8, 2009.
C. FINANCIAL
• Richfield Public Safety is responsible for all funding of this position on
VOFT.
D. LEGAL
• The Co-operative Agreement was reviewed and approved by the
Richfield City Attorney.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Council could disapprove of the resolution; however, this would mean that
Richfield Public Safety would not be able to participate in the multi-
jurisdictional agreement and the benefits it provides.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution number
Copy of Co-operative Agreement
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• -None
~~~~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT'S
PARTICIPATION IN THE HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE
WHEREAS, Hennepin County Sheriff s Department is the agency responsible for
the administration of the Violent Offender Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the focus of the Violent Offender Task Force is combating repeat
offenders, gangs and illegal narcotics, and the sharing of criminal intelligence, and
WHEREAS, criminal activity is cross jurisdictional and involves repeat offenders,
gangs and illegal narcotics; and
WHEREAS, modern police tactics involve the use of multi-jurisdictional task forces
to combat crime and share criminal intelligence; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force has a proven track
record in combating this type of criminal behavior; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department, is responsible for the
prevention of crime and the enforcement of laws; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Sheriffs Department has requested the Richfield
Public Safety Department to place an officer on the Violent Offender Task Force.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into a Co-
operative Agreement with the Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force for placement
of one Richfield Police Officer on said task force. Steven L. Devich, City Manager, is
hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project
on behalf of the City of Richfield, Department of Public Safety.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
3 ~ ~2-
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE
CO-OPERATIVE AGREEMENT
The parties to this Co-operative Agreement are units of government responsible for the
enforcement of laws in their respective jurisdictions. The parties desire to work cooperatively in the
enforcement of violent offender laws including but not limited to the enhancements and crimes set
forth in Minnesota Statutes § 609.1095, and, for that purpose, are hereby forming the Hennepin
County Violent Offender Task Force.
The undersigned governmental units, in the co-operative and mutual exercise of their
powers, agree as follows: ',
L ' Name. The name of the co-operative powers entity shall be the Hennepin County Violent
Offender Task Force. (HCVOTF).
2. Defmitions:
a. Officer - means a peace officer, employed by a Member, who is assigned to the
Task Force and has been approved by the Task Force Commander(s).
b. Board -means the governing board of the Task Force.
c. Fiscal Agent -Hennepin County agrees to perform this function during the initial
term of this Agreement.
d. Member - means a governmental unit that is .a signatory to this Agreement or a
', counterpart. ',
e. Task Force -means the Hennepin County Violent Offender Task Force.
f. Task Force Commanders -means one (1) supervisor from the Hennepin County
': Sheriffs Office. The original Task Force Commander will be assigned by HCSO
', without Board'; action, but subsequent replacements shall be nominated and voted on
by the Board.
g: Non-Voting Member -means the Hennepin County Attorney's Office or the United
', States Attorney's Office.
~ ~-3
3. Members. The initial''1Vlembers of the Task Force are the following governmental units:
Hennepin County Sheriff s Office
Brooklyn Park Police Department
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Golden Valley Police Department
3.1 The Members shall cooperate and use their best efforts to ensure that the various provisions
of the Agreement are fulfilled. The Members agree to act in good faith to undertake
resolution of disputes,'.. if any, in an equitable and timely manner and in accordance with the
provisions of this Agreement.
4. Term.
4.1 The term of this Agreement shall be for seven years, commencing December 1, 2008 and
terminating March 31, 2015, unless terminated earlier pursuant to section 11.4 of this
Agreement. This Agreement may be extended by mutual written agreement of the parties
for one successive seven year term upon the same terms, conditions, and covenants, unless
the Task Force is dissolved prior to expiration of the initial or successive term.
4.2 Upon dissolution of the Task Force, the Board shall provide for the distribution of all Task
Force funds and assets in the following manner: (1) The Board may determine to sell and
liquidate non-monetary assets prior to distribution; (2) Only governmental units that have
been Members of the Task Force continuously for the 24 months immediately preceding
dissolution shall be entitled to share in the distribution; and (3) Assets and funds shall be
distributed in proportion to the full-time staffing contributions and other financial
contributions of each Member to the Task Force ,during the 24 months immediately
preceding dissolution, determined by the full time equivalent contributions of each Member
for each of the 24 months immediately preceding dissolution. Property owned by Members
shall be returned to the Members upon dissolution. A Member whose membership
terminates prior to dissolution of the Task Force is entitled to the return of its own property,
but is not entitled to any share or portion of Task Force funds or assets.
2
3E~4
5. Executive Board.
5.1 The Task Force shall be governed by an Executive Board (Board). Members of the Board
will be known as "Directors." The Chief Law Enforcement Officer from each Member, or
his or her designee, shall serve as a Director. Each Director and, accordingly, each Member
agency is allowed no more than one (1) vote, regardless of the number of employees
assigned to the Task Force or in attendance at any meeting from the respective Agency.
5.2 Directors shall not be deemed employees of, nor compensated by the Task Force.
5.3 The Hennepin County Sheriff shall be the chair of the Board. The Chair's responsibilities
include but are not limited to the following: giving notice of meetings when scheduled or
otherwise called; calling meetings to order and providing for their orderly and efficient
conduct; and providing for the preparation of minutes.
5.4 The Board will delegate operational control over activities to a Task Force Commander(s).
5.5 The Board shall meet on a quarterly basis or more frequently as needed.
5.6 The Board may take action based on the vote of a simple majority. A quorum shall exist,
and votes maybe taken, if a majority of the Directors or their designees are present.
5.7 The Board may recommend changes in this Agreement to its Members. Such changes shall
not become effective until the governing body of each Member has, by resolution, approved
such changes.
5.8 Non-Voting Members may attend Board meetings.
6. Powers and Duties of the Task Force.
6.1 To accomplish the objectives herein, all Task Force Members shall assign at least one peace
officer licensed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 626.84, subd.l, or similar licensing statute
or regulation, to the Task Force. The assigned peace officer must comply with Minnesota
Statutes § 471.59, subd. 12.
6.2 Atypical assignment to the Task Force should be for a minimum period of one year.
However, assignments shall be at the pleasure of both the Task Force Board and the
Officer's employing agency and maybe terminated at any time.
6.3 The Task Force Commander(s) will direct investigative and enforcement activities based on
intelligence provided by the Task Force Members with priority given to case investigations
that directly impact the Members' Minnesota communities.
3
~~
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
While assigned to the Task Force, all personnel shall be under the direct supervision and
control of the Task Force Commander(s) or his designee(s). The Task Force Commander's
duties shall include, but not be limited to:
(a) Guiding and directing the activities of personnel assigned to the Task Force;
(b) Establishing goals, priorities, and work. assignments;
(c) Reviewing and approving reports;
(d) Scheduling assigned personnel;
(e) Providing input on employee evaluations, if requested;
(f j Allocating overtime work, if necessary; and
(g) Approving officers to serve on the Task Force.
The Task Force Commander(s) shall cooperate with other federal, state, and local law
enforcement agencies to accomplish the purpose for which the Task Force is organized.
The governmental unit serving as the Fiscal Agent shall cause to be made an annual audit of
the books and accounts of the Task Force and shall make and file a report to its Members
which includes the following information:
(a) The financial condition of the Task Force;
(b) The status of all Task Force projects;
(c) The business transacted by the Task Force;
(d) Quarterly financial report;
(e) Other matters which affect the interests of the Task Force.
The Task Force's books, reports, and records shall be open to inspection by its Members at
all reasonable times.
Nothing herein is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing
the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting one of the
Members as the agent, representative or employee of another Member for any purpose or in
any manner whatsoever. Personnel assigned to the Task Force by one of the Members shall
not be considered temporary or permanent employees of any other Member for any purpose
whatsoever or be entitled to tenure rights or any rights or benefits by way of workers'
compensation, re-employment insurance, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave,
severance pay, PERA or any other right or benefit of another Member.
4
~~
6.9 The Members acknowledge and agree that it is their sole responsibility to provide all salary
compensation and fringe benefits to their separate employees. Benefits may include, but are
not limited to: health care, disability insurance, life insurance, re-employment insurance,
FICA, Medicare, and PEI2A.
6.10 The Members acknowledge and agree that it is their responsibility to provide the equipment
necessary to enable their assigned employee to complete their duties.
6.11 The Members acknowledge and agree that Hennepin County will provide initial start-up
funds, to include headquarter space.
6.12 The parties acknowledge and agree that entering into and carrying out the terms and
conditions of this Agreement will not violate or constitute a breach of any obligation binding
the party and shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws including but not
limited to Minnesota Statutes § 471.59.
7. Liability.
7.1 Each Governmental Unit agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and the acts of
its officers and employees and any liability resulting therefrom to the extent authorized
by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other Governmental Units or any
liability resulting therefrom. Each Governmental Unit acknowledges and agrees that it is
insured or self-insured consistent with the limits established in Minnesota state statute.
Each .Governmental Unit agrees to promptly notify all Members if it becomes aware of
any potential Task Force related claims, or facts giving rise to such claims.
7.2 Each Member shall be responsible for injuries to or death of its own personnel. Each
Member will maintain workers' compensation insurance or self-insurance coverage,
covering its own personnel while they are assigned to the Task Force or are otherwise
participating in or assisting with Task Force operations or activities. Each Member waives
the right to, and agrees that it will not, bring any claim or suit against the Task Force or any
other Member for any workers' compensation benefits paid to its own employee or
dependents, that arise out of participation in or assistance with Task Force operations or
activities, even if the injuries were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other
Member or its officers, employees, or volunteers.
~~~
7.3 Each Member shall be responsible for damages to or loss of its own equipment. Each
Member waives the right to, and agrees that it will not, bring any claim or suit against the
Task Force or any other Member for damages to or loss of its equipment arising out. of
participation in or assistance with Task Force operations or activities, even if the damages or
losses were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other Members or its
officers, employees, or volunteers.
7.4 As applicable, under no circumstances shall a party be required to pay any amounts in
excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 applicable
to any one party: The statutory limits of liability for some or all of the parties may not be
added together or stacked to increase the maximum amount of liability for any party.
8. Finances.
8.1 Task Force operations will be fmanced from funds and resources contributed by Members.
Members shall provide Officers to be assigned to the Task Force.
8.2 The Fiscal Agent shall serve as sole administrator of all funds contributed by Task Force
Members or otherwise received by the Task Force, and in such capacity is authorized to
receive all funds for deposit .and make disbursements therefrom in accordance with
Hennepin County policy and generally accepted accounting principles. In conjunction
therewith, the Fiscal Agent shall maintain current and accurate records of all obligations and
expenditures of Task Force funds in accordance with Hennepin County policy and generally
accepted accounting principles. It shall also produce quarterly financial and statistical
reports which shall be disseminated to all Directors and the Task Force Commander(s). The
Task Force shall maintain all such reports and related records for a period of six (6) years
after dissolution of the Task Force.
9. Officers.
9.1 The Task Force Commander(s), or his designee(s), shall refer disciplinary matters or other
instances of misconduct involving an Officer to the Officer's Chief Law Enforcement
Officer for investigation, referral, or disposition. However, nothing herein shall be
construed to prevent the Task Force Commander(s) from reporting suspected criminal
conduct directly to an outside agency for investigation.
6
~~-
9.2 Officers will be responsible for focused investigation on targeted violent offenders,
including intelligence management, case development, and case charging. Officers may
also assist other Officers in surveillance and undercover operations. Task Force Officers
will work cooperatively with assisting agencies. Officers acting under this Agreement in the
jurisdiction of another Member are acting in the line of -duty and in the course of
employment and are authorized to exercise the powers of a peace officer therein.
10. Forfeiture, Seizures and Fines. All proceeds generated by Task Force operations shall be
returned to the Task Force. When the Task Force seizes property or funds in cooperation
with other law enforcement agencies, the Task Force Commander(s) and Task Force Board
will negotiate the distribution of the forfeited funds with those agencies.
11. Additional Members and Change in Membership.
11.1 A governmental unit may join the Task Force and become a Member upon approval by the
Board of Directors and execution of a copy of this Agreement by its governing body.
11.2 The Board of Directors may involuntarily terminate a Member if that Member has failed to
provide a minimum of one Officer to staff the Task Force for more than 12 consecutive
months.
11.3 In any case in which a parry identified in paragraph 3 joins the Task Force after the effective
date of this Agreement or any other governmental unit joins the Task Force pursuant to
paragraph 11.1, contributions by and reimbursement to such Members shall be equitably
determined and adjusted by the Board to reflect the participation by that Member for less
than one full year. The decision of the Board shall be final.
11.4 A Member may, upon ninety (90) days' written notice to all other Members, withdraw and
cancel its participation in this Agreement with or without cause.
12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which
shall. be an original, all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies,
caused this Agreement to be executed.
(signatures continued on the following page)
7
~~~
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT
CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK
The Brooklyn Park City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of
2009.
City of Brooklyn Park
Approved as to form
and legality:
By:
Brooklyn Park City Attorney Its Mayor
And:
Its City Administrator
(signatures continued on the following page)
8
~ ~-t c~
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
The Golden Valley City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of
2009.
City of Golden Valley
Approved as to form
and legality:
By:
Golden Valley City Attorney Its Mayor
And:
Its City Administrator
(signatures continued on the following page)
9
~~~~
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT
CITY OF RICHFIELD
The Richfield City Council duly approved this Agreement on .the day of
, 2009.
Approved as to form
and legality: ,
Richfield City Attorney
City of Richfield
sy:
Its Mayor
And:
Its City Administrator
(signatures continued on the following page)
10
~ ~=l 2_
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, DRUG ENFORCEMENT
ADMINISTRATION
The Drug Enforcement Administration duly approved this Agreement on the day of
2009.
Drug Enforcement Administration
Approved as to form
and legality:
By:
DOJ Attorney Its Director
(signatures continued on the following page)
11
~E-i3
HENNEPIN COUNTY VIOLENT OFFENDER TASK FORCE AGREEMENT
Hennepin County Board Approval
Task Force Members, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on the day of , 2009 and
pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this Agreement, the parties
hereto agree to be bound by the provision herein set forth.
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
Reviewed by County
Attorney's Office:
Chair of its County Board
Assistant County Attorney
And:
Assistant/Deputy/County Commissioner
And:
Hennepin County Sheriff
Attest:
Deputy/Clerk of County Board
12
AGENDA SECTION: pDBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM # 5
REPORT # j$Q
~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
CHRISTINE COSTELLO, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and consider the following:
1. Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area; and
2. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet
Tax Increment Financing District; and
3. Proposed establishment of the 2009-'I (Candlewood Outlot) and 2009-2 (Former Garage
South Portion) Tax Increment Financing District; all relating to the Accessible Space Inc.,
and Twin City Christian Homes Project as continued from Au ust 11, 2009.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion:
Adopt the attached resolutions approving:
1. Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area; and
2. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Interstate-
Lyndale-Nicollet Tax Increment Financing District; and
3. Proposed establishment of the 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) and
2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) Tax Increment Financing
District; all relating to the Accessible Space Inc., and Twin City
Christian Homes Project as continued from August 11, 2009.
090809 -Call for PH for Housing Districts 2009-1_2009-2.doc
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Richfield (City) and the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
are proposing modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area for the establishment of the 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) and 2009-2 (Former
Garage South Portion) Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts related to the proposals
from Accessible Space Inc., (ASi) and Twin City Christian Homes (TCCH). The creation of
the Districts will facilitate the development of the 51-unit senior housing project at 301
West 77th Street, also known as the vacant Candlewood parcel, for seniors age 62 or
older who are at or below 50% of the area median income (AMI). The second District is for
the 15-unit housing project located at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue, the south half of the former
City Public Works Maintenance Facility, for persons with physical disabilities with incomes
at or below 50% of the AMI.
In January 2008, Mary Bujold, President of Maxfield Research spoke before the Council,
HRA, and Planning Commission and stated that there was a need for affordable senior
housing in the City. The proposed affordable senior project, as well as the accessible
housing for those with physical disabilities that is proposed by ASi, will provide a niche in
the Richfield housing stock that is currently underserved in the community. The existing
senior housing in Richfield will find itself not competing with ASi for residents, since the ASi
market for residents is more specialized in terms of meeting certain housing needs (rental)
and income levels (50% at or below the area median income). According the Consolidated
Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium a high priority was set to provide
housing for those with physical disabilities as well as housing for the very low-income
seniors. The proposed ASi projects help in meeting the goals for both the community and
the County.
The type of TIF District that is being proposed for these areas are Housing TIF Districts.
According to Minnesota Statutes, the primary purpose of Housing Districts is to provide
housing for low and moderate-income families. To qualify as a housing district, 80 percent
or more of the value of the assisted development must be used for low and moderate-
income housing. The area encompassing a housing district need not meet the blight
criteria" required for redevelopment districts and is permitted to be vacant land area.
To facilitate the creation of these two housing TIF Districts, the following has been done to
date:
• On July 27, 2009 the Planning Commission made a finding that the Modified
Plans conform with the general plans for the development and redevelopment
of the City as a whole.
• On June 9, 2009 the City Council called a public hearing on the Modified
Plans for August 11, 2009.
• On June 30, 2009 the County Commission was notified of the proposed
Modified Plans and a public hearing date was scheduled.
• On July 9, 2009 the School Board and County were notified of potential
fiscal/economic implications contained within the Modified Plans.
• On August 17, 2009 the HRA considered the modification to the
Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) and 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion).
• The City Council was scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Modified Plans
on August 11, 2009, but the public hearing was continued to September 8,
2009.
• A legal notice of the public hearing and map of the project area and TIF
districts was published in the Sun Current newspaper on July 30, 2009.
• A short summary of the Modified Plans is provided below.
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area and the Establishment of the 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) Tax
Increment Financing District:
o Establishes the 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) Tax Increment Financing
District and provides for the TIF revenue to be used to reimburse the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for land acquisition costs.
a Authorizes the expenditure of one tax increment district's increment revenue
in another tax increment district within the defined boundaries of the project
area. Specifically, authorizes the HRA to pool tax increment from the 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) TIF District to the 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) TIF District.
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area and the Establishment of the 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) Tax Increment Financing District
o Establishes the 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) Tax Increment
Financing District and provides for the TIF revenue to be used to reimburse
the City for land acquisition costs.
o Authorizes the expenditure of one tax increment district's increment revenue
in another tax increment district within the defined boundaries of the project
area. Specifically, authorizes the HRA to pool tax increment from the 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) TIF District to the 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) TIF District..
Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Interstate-Lyndale-
Nicollet Tax Increment Financing District
o Indicates that the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet (ILN) TIF district budget is not
being changed.
o Removes one parcel from the ILN TIF District to be placed in the 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) Tax Increment Financing District.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City Council is the body that must hold a public hearing to
consider approval of the proposed modifications to a redevelopment
plan and modifications to the TIF plans.
• Modifications to the redevelopment project area plan and tax
increment financing plans require certain notifications and public
hearings as prescribed in Minnesota Statutes.
• The HRA considered the modifications and TIF Plans at their August
17, 2009 meeting. They voted 3 to 1 for approval.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Approval of the establishment of the tax increment financing plans for
2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) and 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) are not contingent upon one another.
• The County Commission and School Board did not have any
comments regarding the proposed modifications and TIF plans.
C. FINANCIAL
• Creation of the Housing TIF Districts for each of the sites would
guarantee that the City/HRA would recover the value of the land.
• Ehlers and Associates, Inc. prepared the Modified Plans, resolutions,
notices, and other documentation required for this process.
D. LEGAL
• Legal counsel has reviewed the materials prepared by Ehlers and
Associates, Inc.
• Legal counsel recommended one public hearing but separate action of
each item.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Do not approve the Modified Plans or delay approval of the Modified Plans
and provide further direction to staff.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution adopting a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area and Establishing the Housing Tax Increment
Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot).
• Resolution adopting a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area and Establishing the Housing Tax Increment
Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion).
• Resolution approving the Elimination of Parcels from the Interstate-Lyndale-
Nicollet (ILN) Tax Increment Financing District.
• Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) Overview.
• The Modified Plan for Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood
Outlot).
• Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion)
Overview.
The Modified Plan for Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former
Garage South Portion).
But For Analysis for Proposed TIF Districts Memo.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Sid Inman, Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
• Dan Billmark, Accessible Space, Inc.
~i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND
ESTABLISHING THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-1 (CANDLEWOOD OUTLOT) THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(the "HRA") has heretofore established the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and adopted a
Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the HRA and the City that the City adopt a
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment
Plan Modification") and establish the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood
Outlot) (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the
Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"); all
pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to
469.047 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the
Plans, and presented for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The HRA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused the
Plans. to be prepared.
1.03. The HRA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior. to
the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not
limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280 having taxing
jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Plans
by the City Planning Commission, approval of the Plans by the HRA on August 17, 2009, and the holding
of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law.
1.04. .Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities
contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the Council
and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports include data, information
and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in
this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby
incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein.
1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, but
is however, modifying the Redevelopment Plan therefor.
Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Plans.
2.0.1. The Council hereby finds that the Plans are intended and, in the judgment of this Council,
the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for development in the public interest and
accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Plans, which are hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1
5-a
(Candlewood Outlot).
3.01. The Council hereby finds that the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) is in the public interest and is a "housing district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subd. 11 of the Act.
3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed development would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future that the Plans conform to the general plan for
the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Plans will afford maximum
opportunity 'consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment
of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing,
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 4. Public Purpose.
4.01. The adoption of the Plans conform in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will.
help fulfill a need for affordable housing in the City, to provide housing opportunities for senior which
may not otherwise be provided, and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit
A, the City believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the
TIF Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development
financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not
outweigh the primary public benefits.
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans.
5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the
findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and
adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Community Development Director.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Plans- and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council
for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
5.03 The Auditor of Hennepin County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of
the District, as described in the Plans, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount b}% which the
original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment
Authority is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form
and content as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which
building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this
resolution.
~3
5.04. The Community Development Director is further authorized and directed to file a copy of
the Plans with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State
Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subd. 4a.
Approved by the Richfield City Council this the 8th day of September, 2009.
ATTEST:
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
Steven L. Devich, City Manager
(Seal)
~~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND
ESTABLISHING THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-2 (FORMER GARAGE SOUTH PORTION) THEREIN AND ADOPTING A
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(the "HRA") has heretofore established the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and adopted a
Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the HRA and the City that the City adopt a
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment
Plan Modification") and establish the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage
South Portion) (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor
(the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively. herein as the "Plans");
all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to
469.047 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the
Plans, and presented for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The HRA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused the
Plans to be prepared.
1.03. The HRA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to
the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not
limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280 having taxing
jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Plans
by the City Planning Commission, approval of the Plans by the HRA on August 17, 2009, and the holding
of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law.
1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities
contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the Council
and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports include data, information
and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in
this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby
incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein.
1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, but
is however, modifying the Redevelopment Plan therefor.
Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Plans.
2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Plans are intended and, in the judgment of this Council,
the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for development in the public interest and
accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Plans, which are hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2
~r~
(Former Game South Portion).
3.01. The Council hereby finds that the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2
(Former Garage South Portion) is ~in the public interest and is a "housing district" under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 11 of the Act.
3.02. The Council further, finds that the proposed development would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future that the Plans conform to the general plan for
the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Plans will afford maximum
opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment
of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing,
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 4. Public Purpose.
4.01. The adoption of the Plans conform in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will
help fulfill a need for affordable housing in the City and, to provide housing opportunities for the disabled
which may not otherwise be provided, and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in
Exhibit A, the City believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided
under the TIF Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development
financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not
outweigh the primary public benefits.
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans.
5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the
findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and
adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Community Development Director.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council
for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
5.03 The Auditor of Hennepin County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of
the District, as described in the Plans, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the
original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment
Authority is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form
and content as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which
building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this
resolution.
~r
5.04. The Community Development Director is further authorized and directed to file a copy of
the Plans with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State
Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 4$9.175, Subd. 4a.
Approved by the Richfield City Council this the 8th day of September, 2009.
ATTEST:
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
Steven L. Devich, City Manager
(Seal)
5 ~~
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) as required pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that theHousing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) is a
housing district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11.
The Housing TIF. District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) consists of one parcel. The development
will consist of rental housing for adults with disabilities. All or a portion of the units which will receive tax
increment assistance will meet income restrictions described in M.S. 469.1761 for the duration of the
District. At least 40 percent of the units receiving assistance will have incomes at or below 60 percent of
statewide median income. Appendix E of the TIF Plan contains background for the above finding.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future.• This finding is supported by the fact
that the development proposed in this plan is a housing district that meets the City's objectives for
development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes this housing development infeasible
without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building affordable new housing in the City this project is
feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and
provided a letter as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment
assistance.
Historically, site development costs in this area have made development infeasible without tax increment
assistance. The City reasonably determines that no other development of similar scope is anticipated in the
next years on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. The City
has relied upon budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the developer for the development of the
proposed housing development. These analyses show that in order to promote the development of
additional affordable housing in the City, financial assistance is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the
land for the development. The construction of the proposed housing development to serve the City is cost
prohibitive without the use of Tax Increment, due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in obtaining
sufficient low cost financing in the current economic market; (ii) the additional costs of building the
proposed housing development in an area which is already established as a residential area, including the
increased costs for land acquisition, and (iii) affordable housing does not generate sufficient revenues to
offset these increased start up costs. In order to make the proposed housing development economically
feasible, the developer has obtained aloes-interest loan from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. The tax increment derived from the TIF District will be used to reimburse the City for land
acquisition, so the land can be provided to the developer at a significantly reduced cost and therefore will
help the developer bridge the gap in financing for the housing project.
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission met on July 27, 2009, and reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan
S~g
conforms to the general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion) will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the
development or redevelopment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise.
Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the HRA and City will provide an impetus for affordable
residential development, which is desirable or necessary for increased population and an increased need for
life-cycle housing within the City.
5-9
CITY OF RICHFIELD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ELIMINATION OF
PARCELS FROM THE INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN)
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT WITHIN THE RICHFIELD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD.
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1985, the City of Richfield (the "City") created the Interstate-
Lyndale-Nicollet Tax Increment Financing District(the "Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet District") within the
Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-I (Candlewood Outlot)
included parcel number 34-028-24-33-0087 which was previously certified in the Interstate-Lyndale-
Nicollet District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield held a public hearing on September 8, 2009
in regards to the elimination of parcel number 34-028-24-33-0087; and
WHEREAS, the City desires by this resolution to cause the elimination of parcel number 34-028-
24-33-0087 (the "parcel") within the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet District thereby reducing the size of the
Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet District.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the
Interstate Lyndale-Nicollet District is hereby modified to eliminate the parcel and the City's staff shall
take such action as is necessary to notify the County Auditor of the reduction in the geographic area of the
Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet District caused by the elimination of such parcel.
Approved by the Richfield City Council this the 8th day of September, 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Steven L. Devich, City Manager
~'
Tax Increment Financing District Overview
City of Richfield
Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot)
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
the Housing TIF District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot). More detailed information on each of these topics
can be found in the complete TIF Plan.
Proposed action: Establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1
(Candlewood Outlot) (the "District") and the adoption of a Tax
Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan").
Adoption of a Redevelopment Plan Modification for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area.
Type of TIF District: A housing district
Parcel Numbers: 34-028-24-33-0087
Proposed Development: The District is being created to facilitate the development of a 51 unit
senior rental housing development for persons with low to moderate
income in the City. Please see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for further
District information. '
Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first
increment by the HRA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment).
The HRA elects to receive the first tax increment in 2012, which is no
later than four years following the year of approval of the District.
Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the
TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after
2037, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA reserves the right to
decertify the District prior to the legally required date.
Estimated annual TIF: Up to $69,076
~'-I ~
Proposed uses: The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount
that may be expended:
Land/Building Acquisition ............................................$1,200,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ....................................$240,000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ....................................... $1,440,000
Interest .............................................................................. 960 000
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL ........$2,400,000
See Subsection 2-10, pages 2-6 and 2-7 of the TIF Plan for the full
budget authorization. Additional uses of funds are authorized which
include inter-fund loans and transfers and bonded indebtedness.
Form of financing: Interfund loan.
Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified.
4 Year Activity Rule After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the
(~ 469.176 Subd 6) following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the
District:
• Demolition
• Rehabilitation
• Renovation
• Other site preparation (not including utility services such as
sewer and water)
5 Year Rule Generally, within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax
(~ 469.1763 Subd. 3) increments must be expended or obligated to be expended. However,
expenditures of tax increment for housing purposes within the
Redevelopment Project Area are considered to be an activity within the
district, and are therefore not subject to the five year rule.
Any obligations in the District made for non-housing purposes and after
approximately September 2014, will not be eligible for repayment from
tax increments.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City Council Adopting
Resolution.
Page 2
5--a
MAPS OF THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
AND THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 2009-1 (CANDLEWOOU OUTLOT)
x=13
As o f August 28, 2009
Draft for Public Hearing
and the
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
for the establishment of
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-1 (CANDLEWOOD OUTLOT)
(a housing district)
within
RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Public Hearing: August 11, 2009
Adopted:
EHL_ERS
Prepared by: FREERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
~'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(for reference purposes only)
SECTION 1-MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Foreword ............................................................. 1-1
SECTION /l -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-1(CANDLEWOOD OUTLOT)
Subsection 2-1. Foreword ............................................... 2-1
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority ........................................ 2-1
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1
Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired 2-2
Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District ................................. 2-2
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ........... 2-3
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax
Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ...... 2-3
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-6
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6
Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election .................................. 2-7
Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies ..........:............................ 2-7
Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8
Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-9
Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-11
Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-11
Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District ................................ 2-11
Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-12
Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-13
Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-13
Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-14
Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-15
Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-15
Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ...........................:... 2-15
Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-15
Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-16
Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment ................. 2-16
Subsection 2-28. Summary .............................................. 2-16
APPENDIX A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................ A-1
APPENDIX B
MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICT .... B-1
APPENDIX C
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT ............. C-1
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT .............................. D-1
~-~~
APPENDIX E
HOUSING QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE DISTRICT ............................ E-1
APPENDIX F
FINDINGS INCLUDING BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS .......................... F-1
5-/ ~
SECTION 1-MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the
Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Generally, the substantive changes
include the establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot).
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area
is recommended. It is available from the Community Development Director at the City of Richfield. Other
relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing
Districts located within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area 1-1
~'~~
SECTION 11-TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-7 (Candlewood Outlot)
Subsection 2-1. Foreword
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Richfield (the "City"), staff
and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Housing Tax
Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) (the "District"), a housing tax increment financing
district, located in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area.
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority
Within -the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes ("M.S.'), Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to
469.1799, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF" Act"), to assist in financing
public costs related to this project.
This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant
information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area.
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives
The District currently consists of one parcel of land and adjacent and internal rights-of--way. The District is
being created to facilitate the development of a 51 unit senior rental housing development for persons with
low to moderate income in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The HRA has
not entered into an agreement but they are working with Accessible Space, Inc. and Twin Cities Christian
Homes to develop the property and development is likely to occur in 2010. This TIF Plan is expected to
achieve many ofthe objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project
Area.
The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude
the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated
to occur over the life of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District.
Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview
1. Property to be Acquired -The HRA currently owns the property within the District.
Property located within the District may be acquired by the City as further described in this
TIF Plan.
2. Relocation -Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary
legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it owns
or may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-1
~~'
4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction,
relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District.
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of--way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcel listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information
on the location of the District.
The HRA currently owns the property to be included in the District.
Subsection 2-6. Classificatipn of the District
The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with
M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a
housing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 and M.S., Section 469.1761 as defined below:
M.S., Section 469.174, Subd.ll:
"Housing district" means a type of tax increment financing district which consists of a project, or a
portion of a project, intended for occupancy, in part, by persons or families of low and moderate
income, as defined in chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National
HousingAct of 1959, the United States HousingAct of 1937, as amended, Title V of the HousingAct
of 1949, as amended, any other similar present or future federal, state, or municipal legislation, or
the regulations promulgated under any of those acts, and that satisfies the requirements of M.S.,
Section 469.1761. Housing project means a project, or portion of a project, that meets all the
qualifications of a housing district under this subdivision, whether or not actually established as a
housing district.
M.S., Section 469.1761:
Subd. 1. Requirement imposed.
(a) In order for a tax increment financing district to qualify as a housing district:
(1) the income limitations provided in this section must be satisfied,• and
(2) no more than 20 percent of the square footage of buildings that receive assistance from tax
increments may consist of commercial, retail, or other nonresidential uses.
(b) The requirements imposed by this section apply to property receiving assistance financed with
tax increments, including interest reduction, land transfers at less than the Authority's cost of
acquisition, utility service or connections, roads, parking facilities, or other subsidies. The
provisions of this section do not apply to districts located within a targeted area as defined in
Section 46X.02 Subd 9, clause (e).
(c) For purposes of the requirements ofparagraph (a), the authority may elect to treat an addition
to an existing structure as a separate building if.•
(1) construction of the addition begins more than three years after construction of the
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-2
5- l~
existing structure was completed,• and
(2) for an addition that does not meet the requirements ofparagraph (a), clause (2),if it is
treated as a separate building, the addition was not contemplated by the tax increment
financing plan which includes the existing structure.
Subd. 2. Owner occupied housing.
For owner occupied residential property, 95 percent of the housing units must be initially
purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to the
income requirements for qualified mortgage bond projects under section 143(f) of the
Internal Revenue Code.
Subd. 3. Rental property.
For residential rental property, the property must satisfy the income requirements for a
qualified residential rental project as defined in section 142(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code. The requirements of this subdivision apply for the duration of the tax increment
financing district.
In meeting the statutory criteria the HRA and City rely on the following facts and findings:
The District consists of one parcel.
The development will consist of 51 units of senior multi-family rental housing.
40% of the units will be occupied by person with incomes less than 60% of median income.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that
qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111 or 273.112 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in
any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District.
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax
increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd.
1(b), the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the H1ZA(a total of 26
years oftax increment). The HRA elects to receive the first tax increment in 2012, which is no later than four
years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any
modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2037, or when
the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required
date.
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
Pursuant to M S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M. S., Section 469.177, Subd. l ,the Original Net Tax Capacity
(ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor
in 2009 for taxes payable 2010.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-3
~' oL~
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 2012) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of:
1. Change in tax exempt status of property;
2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. Change in the use of the property and classification;
5. Change in state law governing class rates; or
6. Change in previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no
value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City.
The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2010, assuming the
request for certification is made before June 30, 2010. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the
District appear in the table below.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, upon
completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown
in the table below. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for
repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2012. The Project
Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed.
Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $68,325
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $8,250
Fiscal Disparities Reduction
$0
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $60,075
Original Local Tax Rate
1.14983 Pay 2009
Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $69,076
Percent Retained by the HRA 100%
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its
request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S.,
Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which
building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the
TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase
the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building
permit was issued.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-4
~~i
The City-.has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found no parcels for which building
permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the
City.
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued
The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax
increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF
Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by an interfund loan.
Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount
of notes to be issued, or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing, will not exceed
$1,440,000 without a modification to the TIF Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. It is
estimated that $1,440,000 in bonded debt will be financed with tax increment revenues. Any refunding
amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification.
This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur
other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The HRA or City
may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the TIF Plan through loans from funds of the
HRA or City or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible costs paid for by a
developer.
The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are expected to be approximately $2,400,000, as
shown in the table below:
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Tax Increment ~ $2,400,000
The HI2A or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments
from the District in a maximum principal amount of $1,440,000. Such bonds may be in the from of pay-as-
you go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total ,
bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the development of a 51 unit senior
rental housing development for persons with low to moderate income. The HRA and City have determined
that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain District costs, as described. The HRA
has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To
facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the
use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs
and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following tables.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-5
sl~a
USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition $1,200,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) 240 000
PROJECT COST TOTAL $1,440,000
Interest 960 000
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $2,400,000
For purposes of OSA reporting forms, uses of funds include interfund loans, bond principal, TIF Note
principal, and transfers, all in the principal amount of $1,440,000. These amounts are not cumulative, but
represent the various forms of "bonds" included within the concept of bonded indebtedness under the TIF
Act.
As permitted under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763, subdivision 2(b) and subdivision 3(a)(5), any
expenditures of increment from the TIF District to pay the cost of a "housing project" as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 11 will be treated as an expenditure within the district for the purposes of
the "pooling rules" and the "five year rule." The City does not currently anticipate that tax increments will
be spent outside the TIF District (except allowable administrative expenses), but such expenditures are
expressly authorized.
The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total
projected tax increments for the District as shown in Appendix D.
Estimated capital and administrative costs listed above are subject to change among categories by
modification of the TIF Plan without hearings and notices as required for approval of the initial TIF Plan, so
long as the total capital and administrative costs combined do not exceed the total listed above. Further, the
EDA may spend up to 20 percent of the tax increments from the District for activities (described in the table
above) located outside the boundaries of the District but within the boundaries of the Project (including
administrative costs, which are considered to be spend outside the District), subject to all other terms and
conditions of this TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election
It is not anticipated that the District will contain commercial/industrial property. Therefore, the fiscal
disparities provision does not apply to the District. If commercial property is developed, the City will elect
to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b (from within the District), pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd.
3.
Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies
Pursuant to M.S, Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered
a business subsidy:
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-I (Candlewood Outlot) 2-6
~~-a3
(1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000;
(2) .Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses,
such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria;
(3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a
public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at
the time the improvements are made;
(4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3;
(5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing
it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that
the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost;
(6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to
provide those services;
(7) Assistance for housing;
(8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance fora tax increment financing
hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23;
(9) Assistance for energy conservation;
(10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
(12) Benefits derived from regulation;
(13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions;
(14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and
bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business;
(16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 19;
(17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation
is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally
technical nature.
(19) .Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency;
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
(21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; and
(22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration.
The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance
under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions.
Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1 a, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or
part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment
will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-7
5^~a ~f
road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five
years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan.
If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty-
five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the HRA and City and consultants, the proposed
development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan
was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The HRA and City are aware that the
county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing.
Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF
Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such
development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the
fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as
follows if the "but for" test was not met:
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
2008/Pay 2009 Estimated Captured
Total Net Tag Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC
Tag Capacity Uuon Completion to Entity Total
Hennepin County 1,463,839,411 60,075 0.0041%
City of Richfield 29,206,516 60,075 0.2057%
Richfield ISD No. 280 34,748,305 60,075 0.1729%
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
Pay 2009 Percent Potential
Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes
Hennepin County 0.404130 35.15% 60,075 24,278
City of Richfield 0.443330 38.56% 60,075 26,633
Richfield ISD No. 280 0.230830 20.08% 60,075 13,867
Other 0.071540 6.22% 60,075 4,298
Total 1.149830 100.00% 69,076
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the actual Pay 2009 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based
on actual Pay 2009 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2010 rates, which were
unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-8
-as
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b):
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $2,400,000;
(2) Probable impact of the District on citesprovided services and ability to issue debt. The probable
impact of the District on police protection is not expected to be significant. With any addition of new
residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. The City does not expect that the
proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment in vehicles or
facilities.
The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The City may have a slight
increase in medical related calls; however, the development is not expected to require an increase in
capital investment in vehicles or facilities.
The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is
not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from
the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated
with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District
will contribute sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees.
The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue
debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any
general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the
City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit.
(3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the
amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district
levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions
remained the same is $360,542;
(4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of
tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the
county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same is $631,228;
(5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any
standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and
impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional
information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax
increment financing plan.
No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed
development for the District have been received.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-9
~-a~
Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and
description of studies and analyses used to make the findings required in the resolution approving the District.
Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the HRA and City's findings:
• Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium
• .2005-2007 American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau
Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing
district include all of the following potential revenue sources:
1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M. S.,
Section 469.177;
2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was
purchased by the Authority with tax increments;
3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the Authority with tax increments;
4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments;
5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for
which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and
6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384.
Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any:
1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the
requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e);
2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred;
3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF
Plan;
4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City;
5. Increase in the estimate ofthe cost ofthe District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment from the District; or
6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City,
shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval
of the original TIF Plan.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(~, the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not
be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county
auditor. If a housing district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the
addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 must be documented. The
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-10
s-a~
requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is .elimination of parcel(s) from the
District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds
the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that,
notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. l ;the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than
the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District.
The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic
area of the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the
boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the
HRA or City, other than:
1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; o
2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and
engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the
District;
3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the
District; or
4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or
5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance
costs described in clauses (1) to (3).
For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982,
and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond
counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section
469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative
expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures
authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause
(1), from the District, whichever is less.
For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay
any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment
expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd.
25, clause-(1), from the District, whichever is less.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits
ofM.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment ofthose expenses by February 15 ofthe
year following the year the expenses were incurred.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-11
~~~
percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount
deducted to the State Treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor
for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and
auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the
Commissioner of Revenue.
Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District
may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow
account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or
redemption date.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6:
if, .after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax
incrementfinancingdistrictpursuanttoM.S., Section469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation
or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a
street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water
systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district
by.the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax incrementfinancing
plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original net tax
capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax
increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently
commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on thatparcel
including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the
tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity
has commenced and the county auditor shall cert~ the net tax capacity thereof as most
recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity
ofthe tax incrementfinancing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions ofthis
subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required
activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be
submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified
as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a
street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street,
and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street.
The HRA or City or a properly owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately August
2013 and report such actions to the County Auditor.
Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment
The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable
property located in the District for the following purposes:
1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project;
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-12
r~
2. To finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield Redevelopment Project
Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047;
3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan;
4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4;
5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the
HRA or City or for the benefit of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by a developer;
6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing
the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and
7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on
the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152
through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178.
Revenues derived from tax increment from a housing district must be used solely to finance the cost
of housing projects as defined in M.S., Sections 469.174, Subd 11 and 469.1761. The cost of public
improvements directly related to the housing projects and the allocated administrative expenses of the
HRA or City may be included in the cost of a housing project.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other
purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4.
Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment
Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an
amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public
improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds
will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and the costs of public improvement activities
outside the District.
Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments
Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the
following:
1. Prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds;
3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their local tax rates.
The HRA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after
the end of the year. In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to
modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Richfield Redevelopment Project Area or
the District.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-13
5 - 3 c~
Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer
The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this. effort, the
following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any
other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the
development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other
issues related to the development.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 10 percent, by acreage, of the property to be
acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result
of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments
from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, the HRA
or City concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides recourse
for the HRA or City should the development not be completed.
Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement
in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market
value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement
shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements
to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are
to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears,
in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the
minimum market value agreement.
Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District
Administration of the District will be handled by the Community Development Director.
Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. S, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting
for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor
on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement
shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section
469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax
increment from the District.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-14
5-3
Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations
As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated
development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written
representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA and City staff awareness ofthe feasibility
of developing the project site(s) within the District.
Subsection 2-27.Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment
General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF
Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the
Richfield Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047. Tax increments
may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition,
construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for
conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government
or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax
increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure.
Housing District Exceptions to Restriction on Pooling; Five Year Limit. Pursuant to M.S., Section
469.1763, (1) At least 80% of the tax increment derived from the District must be expended on Public
Costs incurred within said district, and up to 20% of said tax increments may be spent on Public Costs
incurred outside of the District but within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area; provided that in the
case of a housing district, a housing project, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11, is deemed to
be an activity in the District, even if the expenditure occurred after five years.
Subsection 2-28. Summary
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to provide an impetus for
residential development and provide safe and decent life cycle housing in the City. The TIF Plan for the
District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-
1105, telephone (651) 697-8500.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) 2-15
~~ r
APPENDIX A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1(Candlewood Outlot) is being established to facilitate
the development of an accessible, affordable, 51-unit housing project for very low income (30% AMI) seniors
age 62 or older. The project is being constructed with the assistance of the HUD 202 program.
The development will occur on the 1.13 acre site at 301 77`i' Street West, also known as the vacant
Candlewood Outlot. The site was purchased by the HRA in 1998 and since that time has been vacant.
Tax increment revenues are proposed to be used to provide a land write-down to the project, and reimburse
the HRA for the land write-down.
APPENDIX A-1
5-~3
APPENDIX B
MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICT
_ . ~
.,
I
~.~~
l r..
+AYTM.
~ I iT~~.~
;a ~
c
purr.
L. ~ M
'J
~ J Al
•-. ~_ .frnll~
.. ~
C = ~•~rr
~ ...v...
J ~1Nn
J ~ ~iwm
^~ ~ n~r~~
F ~. Mria•
J y n•Y--:
.rK.~s
~ J .[rw[
'~ riw~•
N a..w
t
,.,.,
¢ ~..~
'" ~.,.:
J WM
s ~~
R/iw
~ -,..
~ -? .,
H® ~_ .,
~® -, .,
~~1 _ ...
~~B ~,a ~
cs
~~ ~YN 41
a N' ~': p
~® yF W.i G
I1~ ~. ... ~.~ ~ P
~ ai
~, ~' d
T r' _L _y
t
~~3 6 ,.
LL ~~
~ ~ ~~ ~.
S/ C 33 ~f11 js.MU~w
~~77 .. 3 ..~r'~.
il~ wa N
p ~~~ n~- l1
•JrM•
yJ ~ u~w.
~ Y
'J
,: ~~ •.wwtf J
i
5~ ,~" z-
r 1 :,~ ~ J~ ~.'
1 ~ U~ 1~vY :J ~
na ..,e.. ~ 'J _
~~ l 5 r
G +
• ~
APPENDIX l3-~
0 [ ~ I ~ _ ~ r 9 [ •
r
5~3 ~
APPENDIX C
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of--way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcel listed below.
Parcel Numbers Address Owner
34-028-24-33-0087 301 77`'' Street W. Richfield HRA
APPENDIX C-1
x-35
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT
APPENDIX D-1
5~3~
0
0
a
d
>
y
0]
O
0
r
_0
N t
W < a, d
J ,~ c r
T V
i ~ ~ ~
Wn = T
'y U
~a
2
U
LU
r
~~~~
~
oaoo
T T T T ~
Q
m m m m C
p
o_LLaa ~
oa ~o0 000
G O O N
(h C'J lp r O 0 0 0~ J ~! ~ t1
O S O O N I~ N O~ O O
O N O
O~ 00 M N
Q7 m~~
O ~ N N ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~
y
N ~
d O U Q
- U
C A A
~ 'C ~
~ Ot
~ '- U
~ U O x
~~ m
r
~ m
0 o w a m
c o H - C
~ U d ~ T
v x w
r,
~a d ~ aA is
~
U~ m N ~ _ a~ E
0
' U
d
O ~`~
c -
=
J y d
U
m
N°~ =~.
-~
U m
D U d "v K i d
d
m °-' ~ ~
~ d~ ~ Q d °o °o ~ °' m Z ~ °o °o
~~ oo y~U= tioo.o ~ m m
> c>
m~ E~ tp E d ~~ A m ~' ~c `-° °° m X~
l0 N U d
U N v (n X d U3 F9 U d' ~y 'd0 U ~ ~ ~
N ~.
y
Q W
:9 F ~ A
~
(0
~~~~ y
N
o E
U d y_ N m= mo d o
`
c~~ ~ X m o y a
~ ~ U m a w ~' > d
O~ W~ H y~ LL 0 C m~ d~ LL U Z ?
F
E~ a m _
~ U t00 O O~ d~ ~
E d
O~>
~ _
c
E ~ a~
m --
a~ E E m~ 2 m
O q
_
~
~~~~ awc~ c~~¢z°x° a
a
d d ..
y U
~ A ~ ~
~ d y
d ~
~~
`
d >
p
a~
0 o
00 d
m >
N ~
~ ~ H Y
u .~
OI O \° c O O O N N M m A~ \
~ d
~
~y N
O C C
O O
O O L E N O O W N O
N N d- 9 O ,N'
Eo
Q ~• -
~=
C A
>
o
2 .,
~
~
~~a c do~r•;
U M W ~ ar
J Y
~ ~ m
Q
Z 3
a '~
>
o
U_
C c
A
J Y
_
d .G ~
y- CG
~ R A
~
U
'm E -
d
c ~ LL
~
. 0
c ~
^ 3
c m d Q :' m
o d E m ~ p z
.- o °i E ~ .a .~ ~ '
i ~,
n
C 2 a. v= ~^
~ O Q -
> ~ C ~ ~
0 ,r _
~
~ p U L
d
C
...
d d
~ U N T LL d O d
J 5
_ O
E E d m 3 d `m w~ U~
c iF .. > is c a~ d o ~
d
c -
a A B U D N N f0 a Q Q C J d t0 a G ~
T d O1c d m o `o d 4 d C C ~
lV/~ N_ O % C .d. ~ N N N d N U ~n
O O U LL W G C LL LL H U) Q LL C L ~ l i Q M
a v
0
r ~
0 j
a d
~~
l ~
d d
Y C
Ol
A L
E „
c
d ~
y c
y ~ d
O y ~
E ~ R
a
d a;
H 7 O
O d y
T .p. C
,~ Y m
a U
U d
o n~
d U A
~ X C
r
~ A C
q C Y
y O) y
'A .
apm
a « o
m ~ o
.t. a M
ma
~ O N
A c ao
ayi m o
E <
~ M
C U
• y 7 ~
c m"c~a
2 ~ ~i n
0
E
w
a"
m
a
a`
5--3~
N
m
t0
a
c
0
a
E
N
Q
d
J
t0
1
d
m
v / V
W<
Ja
2 ~
Wb
J
d
O
a
N
W O
N
Q
d ~
O
O a_ 3
d
'O
= rA
U ()
~ ~ O
0 0~
_ ~ E
.N V o
Q j
C
.N
2 O
U =
U '°
H d
0
'c
m
m
a
0
d
v
a
d
L_
E
O
Y
C
O
N U
C `
C ~
d C
E v
c
v 0
c ~
a
d
a ~
1 A
U d
~ A
O '~
d
v ~
u 10
d ~
d y
r Y
~ U m
O ~
Z ~ N
C
0
V
w
d
O
'O
C
N
.q
N
a
C
A
m
N
N
r
A
A
0
m
a
c
m
m
a
A
d
T
O
A
d
T
E
T
C
A
U
C
N
i
.a
3 u
m d
E a
~ d
U L
C r0
X C
.~. C
'O U
c L
i0 u
N L
A
H
N
O O N
m
N X d
X ~ H ~
A Q d H LL
H
m a_' mF
'O `n R = N
3 ~ d > o
~; ~ x m
y a ~ ~ ~
N ~
f n LL ~ m
Q
ro
w
a`
J "'
M
3
0
U
E
N
U
F
Y
~..~
~_
.O
Q
N
O
N
0
S
~ ~
d O
a o
to = c o
~ .W. ~ 3
~, ~ d
W<o~~
J ~~ R
Z` __ v U
LLJ . ~ ~ o
o w
_ ° c
m
fA
Q U
p
C ~
A ~
= d
U 0
r
N
7
O
2
to
N~
LL
L
_~
.C
d
N N M C C U i! J m m r r m m O~ O~ 0 0~ M M N C N N m (O n m N N O O ~ M M M M\ ~ f L O r r
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O 0 0
aD ~ ~ N ap o m ~ ~ ~ \ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N o N ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~ N W N ~ N ~ ~ W ~ \ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NMM NOOnrmmQ~O~O C CNNmmnr Nm m mOO ~- MCC ~1') ~(' M M r
N C C U O ~ ~ N N N N N N N N ~ M M M M M Cr. M M M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N ~ N N~ M~ C~ f]~ M m~ n n u~ m N rn NON ~~ N O M~ C~ N f p N N m N O~~ O M ~- N ~ N N O
O ~ N M C M m r aD 070 ~ ~N ~M~C~N ~ t0~r ~ m~ W NNNNNNN N N N N N
O m m C~ M ~ N O M O M O m ~ m ~ ~ N m (D ~ N O m M O C 0 m n 0 m mfg C C m Q~
~ W M M r r N Y l M O C O m m O r rn m n C M U~ m N M f 0 ~ O~ O O f 0 N W O
o r r m m N m v o cN+~ m rn m N C O> M M E in m (D M f p m (O M~ r C ~ C c O C !'_ C r (O C W N m C[ C m C
r C 0 (D ~~ Mm r N (D O M f 0 O r m m r O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 m N M ~- O~ t 0 O M W ~ ~ c D N N l0 ~ O> M n
N~lJ m0 NO NNN~MMMMC C V a~~N~fM]~c00mm (D (nD (ODrrrNmrnm mromm ro°mm m rn L`'~ m Omi 0
NNr rN Nmm(D (D~~(O (0000 O>N ~(] ~Il ~fl ~-~NN Oc0 mmCC ~~ C C nN C m ifl ~ m
r r n ~ O~ ~- ~ ~ C C m m C~ N N ~ N ~ f J N O O r r N N (p (O O m M M 0 0 0 O O M
' Q7 Q7MO M~~m mm(0C C N O W mmcoN CCM M X00000000 ~ N N CJ C V ~0
00 ~ ~-N N C N MM On rm m m OOH ~ NN~~CC ~~0 f0m m mO>m00 ~ N M
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M C C C C V C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C~ ~1J ~(J ~l N N N
~0~~~~CC ~~~NMM M MNNO16>CC ~ ~~~NNN NOOmmmmQ~OMMOOmm 0) Q) M M W
C C N~ N N m m (O (O ~ Q m M ~ O O N N W W W O m D 7 m D 7 0 0> O O O O ~ ~ N N C C f 0 (0 r r O O N N C
~ ' C C ~Dm m 000 MMC C~(]NOMrrm W OO ~ ~NNMM C CEO m t0 m m 0)
. _~. .
v M v M v M v v M M M M M M C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C~ C v~~ V~~~
NNrNOOMM~~O~ ~~~~OO ~~~NNNNNm~DOOM nn: ~ "v>O~mMMrrNN t0 <D 0 0 ~
MMM M M C C C C C C~ (O m f0 f0 r r m m m m m m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~~ ~- N N N N N N N
m mC CO~ONN(O m~Dm~COm~~~ ~'OOmm~+"+~~-~ Nry~~0000 NNn n CCNN O~ ~ m
M M NC C NN O rryNOOCCO)D7 r mnm mmNOMO mmNNTTm O) NI O
~~~~ NNMM~ ~ mOn n tO ~DCCMM N N'-~00000000~ N M C CcO tD O O ~ ~ C C r
M cC"J MMM M MM M C N N M M Q C C C V V V V C V C C R ROC C C C V ~~ V> N N~ N ~MIJ ~ N N~~~ h N N
m r o N M m ~ N m o ~n o o M m m co
r m N m m o N m ~n v r R m N ~ N m rn o
O (O N m N W n N C ~ •- ~ N ~+'] r O N OI M m C
O O N M r m O N C m m O N C m m O N C r O) C m T
m r r n m m m m m m rn m rn o 0 0 0 0
u1 u7 N ~ N N N N N ~ N ~ ~ ~ N N ~
to N n m ~ C C N m C m M l0 tp ~ r m W N m C
r C M O m O) O O M O O M O O ~ N m O n O~ C
O C m N _ m N m C O r Q m r C N M M C m m
O ~ C ~ m O ~ m m O ~ ~ ~ M N r T M
m m m (D m m m r r n n r r m m m OD OD m O~ 47 Q7 T T O
0 0 0 0 0 o O O O O o o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0
N N N N N N N N ~ N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
N ~fJ n m ~ C N m C M t0 M m m ~ r m W N m C
A m O V C N N N ~ ~ ~ O m N ~ N ^ m
m O ~ m W C O m W tD W m N m O
~ ~ r r n n N ~ ~ m m 0 m m T O) W D7 W ~ O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~~
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O
E
Q
M
O
5 3~
APPENDIX E
HOUSING QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE DISTRICT
The two options for income limits on a standard housing district are 20% of the units at 50% of median
income or 40% of the units at 60% of median income. At the time a district is established, the project needs
to choose one of the options and meet those requirements for the life of the district. The City elects that 40%
of the units will be at 60% of the median income. There are no rent restrictions for a standard housing
district.
***PLEASE NOTE: THESE NUMBERS ARE ADJUSTED ANNUALLY. ALL INCOME FIGURES
REPORTED ON THIS PAGE ARE FOR 2009.
APPENDIX E-1
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency
~~yo
APPENDIX F
FINDINGS INCLUDING BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) as required pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: .
Finding that the Housing TaxlncrementFinancingDistrict2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot)isahousing
district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11.
The Housing TIF District 2009-1 (Candlewood Outlot) consists of one parcel. The development will
consist of senior rental housing. All or a portion of the units which will receive tax increment
assistance will meet income restrictions described in M.S. 469.1761 for the duration of the District.
At least 40 percent of the units receiving assistance will have incomes at or below 60 percent of
statewide median income. Appendix E of the TIF Plan contains background for the above finding.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur
solely through private investment within the reasonablyforeseeable future: This finding is supported
by the fact that the development proposed in this plan is a housing district that meets the City's
objectives for development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes this housing
development infeasible without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building affordable new
housing in the City, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment
financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter as justification that the developer
would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance.
This site has been marketed for at least 15 years without success. The City reasonably determines
that no other development of similar scope is anticipated in the next years on this site without
substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. The City has relied upon
budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the developer for the development ofthe proposed
housing development. These analyses show that in order to promote the development of additional
affordable housing in the City, financial assistance is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the land
for the development. The construction of the proposed housing development to serve the City is cost
prohibitive without the use of Tax Increment, due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in
obtaining sufficient low cost financing in the current economic market; (ii) the additional costs of
building the proposed housing development in an area which is already established as a residential
area, including the increased costs for land acquisition, and (iii) affordable housing does not generate
sufficient revenues to offset these increased start up costs. In order to make the proposed housing
development economically feasible, the developer has obtained aloes-interest loan from the
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The tax increment derived from the TIF District
will be used to reimburse the City for land acquisition, so the land can be provided to the developer
at a significantly reduced cost and therefore will help the developer bridge the gap in financing for
the housing project.
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood
Outlot) conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as
a whole.
APPENDIX F-1
~~y/
The Planning Commission met on July 27, 2009, and reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF
Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-1 (Candlewood
Outlot) will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for
the development or redevelopment ofthe Richfield RedevelopmentProjectArea byprivate enterprise.
Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the HRA and City will provide an impetus for
affordable residential development, which is desirable or necessary for increased population and an
increased need for life-cycle housing within the City.
APPENDIX F-2
~~
Memo
To: Richfield City Council
From: Rebecca Kurtz and Jon North, Ehlers
Date: August 28, 2009
Subject: But For Analysis for Proposed TIF Districts
The City .and HRA received a request from Assessable Space, Inc. and Twin Cities Christian Homes
(collectively, the "Developer") for tax increment assistance for two housing developments. It is proposed
that the City and the HRA create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-1 (Candlwood outlot) on a
1.13 acre site at 301 77`'' Street West (also known as the Candlewood parcel), upon which ASI proposes
to build a 51-unit housing project for very low-income seniors age 62 or older. It is further proposed that
the City and the HRA create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-2 (former garage south portion) on
a .94 acre site of the former south half of the City public works maintenance facility, upon which TCCH
proposes to build an affordable 15-unit housing project for persons with physical disabilities. The
Candlewood parcel is currently owned by the HRA and has been vacant since the HRA purchased it in
1998. The public works site is owned by the City. The Developer has requested that the HRA donate the
Candlewood site to the Developer and that the City convey the public works site to the Developer at
substantially less than fair market value. It is proposed that tax increment from the two tax increment
districts would be used to reimburse the City and HRA for land write-down costs.
The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the Developer's feasibility analysis for both projects to
determine if the level of financial assistance requested is needed to make the projects financially feasible.
Ehlers prepared a But For Analysis, and determined that the level of assistance was reasonable based on
the current market conditions and the financial assumptions.
In addition to the financial analysis, there are several additional factors that provide support to the But For
.Analysis and the need for public assistance. Under current market conditions, the proposed developments
may not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably near
future. The proposed development described in the tax increment plans are housing developments that
meet the City's objectives for development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes an
affordable housing development infeasible without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building
affordable. new housing in the City, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax
increment financing.
The City has relied upon budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the Developer of the proposed
housing developments. These analyses show that in order to promote the development of additional
affordable. housing in the City, financial assistance is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the land for
the developments. The construction of the proposed housing developments is cost prohibitive without the
use of Tax Increment, due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in obtaining sufficient low cost
financing in the current economic market; (ii) the additional costs of building the proposed housing
-~ FREERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
www.ehlers-inc.com
Minnesota phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Poinie Drive
Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fEUC 651-697-8555 Roseville, MN 55113-1122
toll free 800-552-1171
5-43
development in an area which is already established as a residential area, including the increased costs for
land acquisition; and (iii) affordable housing does not generate sufficient revenues to offset these
increased start up costs.
In order to make the proposed housing developments economically feasible, the Developer is in the
process of obtaining low-interest loans from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
("HUD"). The Developer is in the process of obtaining a HUD 202 loan for the senior housing and HUD
811 loan for the 15-unit building. These types of loans are limited and eligibility is determined by a point
or rating system. Obtaining land through donation or at a significant write-down will significantly
improve the Developer's chances of obtaining the HUD financing. The tax increment derived from the
TIF Districts will be used to repay the City and HRA for the cost of the proposed land write-downs and
will help bridge the gap in financing for the housing projects.
Historically, site development costs in this location have made development infeasible without tax
increment assistance. The Candlewood site has been marketed for at least 15 years without success.
Under current market conditions, it is anticipated that no other development of similar scope would occur
in the foreseeable future on these sites without some type of similar financial assistance being provided to
the developments.
There is considerable statistical and anecdotal evidence that there is a significant need for affordable
housing for seniors and the disabled in the City of Richfield. Accessible Space, Inc. (ASI) has determined
that there is a serious need for accessible, affordable housing in Hennepin County and in the City of
Richfield. According to their research, the number of adults with disabilities found in the 2005-2007
American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau indicates the potential need .for
housing in the area. The 2005-2007 American Community Survey estimates that 16.1% (4,335) of the
adult population of Richfield has a disability. It is estimated that 59.8% (2,592) of the adults with
disabilities population is physically disabled.
According to the Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium a High Priority
Goal was set to provide housing for the special needs subpopulation of physically disabled. The
Hennepin County Consortium also set a High Priority for housing for very low-income elderly.
According to the 2000 Census, the population of the City of Richfield was 34,439. Of that population,
5,633 or approximately 16% were age 65 and over. According to the web site www.city-data.com, the
population of the City of Richfield as of July 2007 was 33,387, a decrease of 2.8% since 2000. Of that
population, approximately 5,342 or 16% were age 65 and over.
According to the 2005-2007 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, 33.5% of the residents in
the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minnesota Metropolitan Area have a disability. Using the July
2007 figures referenced in the paragraph above, it is estimated that approximately 1,790 residents of the
City of Richfield are age 65 and over and have a disability.
In January 2008, Mary Bujold, President of Maxfield Research, Inc., stated during a Special Meeting of
the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Planning Commission that there
is now a need for affordable senior housing in the City of Richfield.
ASI and the National Handicap Housing Institute, Inc. (NHHI) co-sponsored a similar HUD Section 202
senior housing development in the neighboring community of Bloomington that opened in the summer of
2007. The Meadows at Oxboro, located at 401 95~' Street, is a 50 unit accessible, affordable apartment
building for very low-income elderly that remains fully occupied with an active waiting list of over 20
applicants.
~"- `~T
The following are excerpts from a letter sent from Assessable Space to Mayor Goettell and to the
members of the Richfield City Council on May 29, 2009:
• Our proposed, 51 unit Richfield Senior Housing Development will allow seniors age 62 and older
with incomes at or below 50% of the area median income, the opportunity to live and age longer
in Richfield with dignity in an accessible, secure and affordable environment.
Our proposed, 15 unit Richfield Supportive Housing Development will allow adults age 18 and
older with qualifying physical disabilities and incomes at or below 50% of the area median, the
opportunity to live, work and interact in Richfield with independence and dignity in an
affordable, secure and 100% wheelchair accessible as well as supportive, environment.
Both of these proposed developments will help fill a small portion of the critical and unmet need
for this type of housing in the City of Richfield. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Section 811 and 202 Programs are the principal federal housing programs
set up specifically to provide the development and operation financing that can enable qualifying
nonprofit organizations and communities to provide these specific types of housing; however, no
HUD Section 811 or HUD Section 202 housing developments have ever been approved in the
City of Richfield.
Statistics published in the 2005-2007 American Community Survey completed by the U.S.
Census Bureau indicate that approximately 2,592 adults living in the City of Richfield have a
physical disability. In 2007 there were approximately 2,671 or 8% of the residents of the City
that were below the poverty level which is approximately the same percent in the State of
Minnesota. When comparing seniors age 55 and older in Richfield with the State of Minnesota,
statistics indicate that the percentage dramatically decreases in Richfield as seniors age indicating
that as seniors retire, there is a lack of affordable housing options that could allow them to
continue to live in the City (www.city-data.com). Given the current economy and status of many
retirement investment accounts, that condition is not likely to improve.
With the hopeful contingent donation of the proposed sites for these developments, the
applications would capture critical HUD rating points for evidence of municipal financial
support. It has become very important for these highly competitive applications, to try and
capture all of the "leveraging municipal support" rating points for approval since HUD
incorporated afive-point rating system for this application category in 2006. In ASI's opinion,
the locations will also rank very high for demonstration of need given current census tract
information, the limited accessible affordable housing for seniors in Richfield and the fact that no
HUD Section 202 or 811 developments have previously been funded in the City of Richfield.
In essence, the City of Richfield would be trying to leverage the site donations to capture over
$8,900,000 in federal funding for the development of both apartment buildings as well as the
annual Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC) funding that provides the rental subsidy for
the apartment building's residents who will pay no more than 30% of their adjusted gross income
for rent. The PRAC funds will also pay for the ongoing maintenance of the buildings over their
40-year minimum life cycle. The 40 year minimum use for the intended purpose is guaranteed by
HUD Section 202 mortgage and by a HUD formatted regulatory, use and capital advance
agreement that will be recorded in Hennepin County.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions.
5~~ 5
Tax Increment Financing District Overview-
City of Richfield
Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2
(Former Garage South Portion)
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
the Housing TIF District 2009-2 (811 series). More detailed information on each of these topics can be
found in the complete TIF Plan.
Proposed action: Establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2
(811 Series) (the "District") and the adoption of a Tax Increment
Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan").
Adoption of a Redevelopment Plan Modification for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area.
Type of TIF District: A housing district
Parcel Numbers: 34-028-24-34-0052
Proposed Development: The District is being created to facilitate the development of a 15 unit
rental housing development for persons with disabilities with low or
moderate incomes in the City. Please see Appendix A of the TIF
Planfor further District information.
Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first
increment by the HRA (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date
of receipt by the City of the first tax increment is expected to be 2012.
Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the
TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after
2037, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA does not wish to
delay the receipt of first tax increment. The HRA reserves the right to
decertify the District prior to the legally required date.
Estimated annual TIF: Up to $27,395
~~~~
Proposed uses: The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount
that may be expended:
Land/Building Acquisition ...............................................$475,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) .................................... 100 000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL .......................................... $575,000
Interest .............................................................................. 425 000
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL ........ $1,000,000
See Subsection 2-10, pages 2-6 and 2-7 of the TIF Plan for the. full
budget authorization. Additional uses of funds are authorized which
include inter-fund loans and transfers and bonded indebtedness.
Form of financing: Interfund loan
Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified.
4 Year Activity Rule After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the
(,~ 469.176 Subd 6) following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the
District:
• Demolition
• Rehabilitation
• Renovation
• Other site preparation (not including utility services such as
sewer and water)
5 Year Rule Generally, within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax
(~ 469.1763 Subd. 3) increments must be expended or obligated to be expended. However,
expenditures of tax increment for housing purposes within the.
Redevelopment Project Area are considered to be an activity within the
district, and are therefore not subject to the five year rule.
Any obligations in the District made for non-housing purposes and after
approximately September 2014, will not be eligible for repayment from
tax increments.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City Council Adopting
Resolution.
Page 2
~-4~
MAPS OF THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
AND THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 2009-2 (81 1 SERIES)
:~ s r s b ~ y' .' ! ~ ! r i
wi
r.
+a~. ~
s. y
.r.~ r
:..r..- w
.-ter,-: a
nw
en•vr• ~ Q
an rr C '~
d
a m
~ _ a
y ~.~~ ~.
~I ..
,. .~,.....w
...w,.,
y ~w..m.
r~
~I `
~a~
wa.. C
~_'~ J
:!
•~1r ~ J
1 r.rr. J '~
j .Y'r. L
+rr.-t ~_
nw.:w - _7
+.unw
rnrr. ~ _ _
.fir _ ~J
YYL ~ :,I -
~YtRN •J
5
I] (.T N~
.w trN
aa.tm
~"--~18'
As of August 28, 2009
Draft for Public Hearing
and the
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
for the establishment of
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-2 (FORMER GARAGE SOUTH PORTION)
(a housing district)
within
RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Public Hearing: August 11, 2009
Adopted:
FREERS
Prepared by: FREERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 vwvw.ehlers-inc.com
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
~T~ 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(for reference purposes only)
SECTION 1-MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Foreword ............................................................. 1-1
SECTION ll -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-2 (FORMER GARAGE SOUTH PORTION)
Subsection 2-1. Foreword ............................................... 2-1
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority ........................................ 2-1
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1
Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired 2-2
Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District ................................. 2-2
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ........... 2-3
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax
Capacity Va lue/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ...... 2-4
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-6
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6
Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election .................................. 2-7
Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies ....................................... 2-7
Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8
Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-9
Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-11
Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-11
Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District ................................ 2-11
Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-12
Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ...............:................... 2-13
Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-14
Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments .................... . ................. 2-15
Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-16
Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-16
Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-16
Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-16
Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-18
Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment ................. 2-18
Subsection 2-28. Summary .............................................. 2-18
APPENDIX A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .....................:.......................... A-1
APPENDIX B
MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICT .... B-1
APPENDIX C
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT ........:.... C-1
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT .............................. D-1
Ursa
APPENDIX E
HOUSING QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE DISTRICT ............................ E-1
APPENDIX F
FINDINGS INCLUDING BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS .......................... F-1
5 ~s ~
SECTION 1-MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the
Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project. Area. Generally, the substantive changes
include the establishment of the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South
Portion).
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area
is recommended. It is available from the Community Development Director at the City of Richfield. Other
relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing
Districts located within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Modificatiori to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area
~- 5 2
SECTION ll -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR THE HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2009-2 (FORMER GARAGE SOUTH PORTION)
Subsection 2-1. Foreword
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Richfield (the "City"), staff
and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Housing Tax
Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion)(the "District"), a housing tax increment
financing district, located in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area.
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes ("M.S.'), Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to
469.1799, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing
public costs related to this project.
This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan. (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant
information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area.
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives
The District currently consists of one parcel of land and adjacent and internal rights-of--way. The District is
being created to facilitate the development of a 15 unit rental housing development for persons with
disabilities in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The HRA has not entered
into an agreement but they are working with Accessible Space, Inc. and Twin Cities Christian Homes to
develop the property and development is likely to occur in 2010. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many
of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area.
The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude
the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated
to occur over the life of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District.
Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview
1. Property to be Acquired -The City currently owns the property within the District. Property
located within the District may be acquired by the City as further described in this TIF Plan.
2. Relocation -Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
3. -Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary
legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it owns
or may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-]
553
4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction,
relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District.
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of--way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcel listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information
on the location of the District.
The City currently owns the property to be included in the District.
Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District
The HRA ;and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with
M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a
housing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. I1 and M.S., Section 469.1761 as defined below:
M.S., Section 469.174, Subd.ll:
"Housing district" means a type of tax increment financing district which consists of a project, or a
portion of a project, intended for occupancy, in part, by persons or families of low and moderate
income, as defined in chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National
HousingAct of 1959, the United States HousingAct of 1937, as amended, Title V of the HousingAct
of 1949, as amended, any other similar present or future federal, state, or municipal legislation, or
the regulations promulgated under any of those acts, and that satisfies the requirements of M.S.,
Section 469.1761. Housing project means a project, or portion of a project, that meets all the
qualifications of a housing district under this subdivision, whether or not actually established as a
housing district.
M.S., Section 469.1761:
Subd. 1. Requirement imposed.
(a) In order for a tax increment financing district to qualify as a housing district:
(1) the income limitations provided in this section must be satisfied, and
(2) no more than 20 percent of the square footage of buildings that receive assistance from tax
increments may consist of commercial, retail, or other nonresidential uses.
(b) The requirements imposed by this section apply to property receiving assistance financed with
tax increments, including interest reduction, land transfers at less than the Authority's cost of
acquisition, utility service or connections, roads, parking facilities, or other subsidies. The
provisions of this section do not apply to districts located within a targeted area as defined in
Section 46X.02 Subd 9, clause (e).
(c) For purposes of the requirements of paragraph (a), the authority may elect to treat an addition
to an existing structure as a separate building if
(1) construction of the addition begins more than three years after construction of the
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-2
5-- ~y
existing structure was completed,• and
(2) for an addition that does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a), clause (2),if it is
treated as a separate building, the addition was not contemplated by the tax increment
financing plan which includes the existing structure.
Subd. 2. Owner occupied housing.
For owner occupied residential property, 95 percent of the housing units must be initially
purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to the
income requirements for qualified mortgage bond projects under section 1430 of the
Internal Revenue Code.
Subd. 3. Rental property.
For residential rental property, the property must satisfy the income requirements for a
qualified residential rental project as defined in section 142(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code. The requirements of this subdivision apply for the duration of the tax increment
financing district.
In meeting the statutory criteria the HRA and City rely on the following facts and findings:
The District consists of one parcel.
The development will consist of 15 units ofmulti-family rental housing.
40% of the units will be occupied by person with incomes less than 60% of median income.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that
qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111 or 273.112 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in
any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District.
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax
increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd.
1(b), the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a
total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City of the first tax increment is expected to
be 2012. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent
phases or other changes, would terminate after 2037, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA or City does
not wish to delay the receipt of first tax increment. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the
District prior to the legally required date.
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 andM.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity
(ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor
in 2009 for taxes payable 2010.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-3
J~~~
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 2012) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of:
1. Change in tax exempt status of property;
2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. Change- due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. Change in the use of the property and classification;
5. Change in state law governing class rates; or
6. Change in previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no
value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City.
The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2010, assuming the
request for certification is made before June 30, 2010. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the
District appear in the table below.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, upon
completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown
in the table below. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for
repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2012. The Project
Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed.
Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $30,263
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $6,438
Fiscal Disparities Reduction
$0
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $23,825
Original Local Tax Rate
1.14983 Pay 2009
Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $27,395
Percent Retained by the HRA 100%
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its
request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S.,
Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which
building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the
TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase
the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building
permit was issued.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-4
~~~w
The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found no parcels for which building
permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the
City.
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued
The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax
increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF
Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by an interfund loan.
Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount
of notes to be issued, or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing, will not exceed
$575,000 without a modification to the TIF Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. It is estimated
that $575,000 in bonded debt will be financed with tax increment revenues. Any refunding amounts will be
deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification.
This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur
other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The HRA or City
may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the TIF Plan through loans from funds of the
HRA or City or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible costs paid for by a
developer.
The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are expected to be approximately $1,000,000, as
shown in the table below:
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Tax Increment $1,000,000
The HRA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments
from the District in a maximum principal amount of $575,000. Such bonds may be in the from of pay-as-you
go notes, revenue bonds. or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded
indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the development of a 15 unit rental
housing development for persons with disabilities. The HRA and City have determined that it will be
necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain District costs, as described. The HRA has studied
the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the
establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax
increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of
funds associated with the District is outlined in the following tables.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-5
~~~~
USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition $475,000
Administrative Costs (into 10%) 100 000
PROJECT COST TOTAL $575,000
Interest 425 000
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $1,000,000
For purposes of OSA reporting forms, uses of funds include interfund loans, bond principal, -TIF Note
principal, and transfers, all in the principal amount of $575,000. These amounts are not cumulative, but
represent the various forms of"bonds" included within the concept of bonded indebtedness under the TIF Act.
As permitted under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763, subdivision 2(b) and subdivision 3(a)(5), any
expenditures of increment from the TIF District to pay the cost of a "housing project" as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 11 will be treated as an expenditure within the district for the purposes of the
"pooling rules" and the "five year rule." The City does not currently anticipate that tax increments will be spent
outside the TIF District (except allowable administrative expenses), but such expenditures are expressly
authorized.
The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total
projected tax increments for the District as shown in Appendix D.
Estimated capital and administrative costs listed above are subj ect to change among categories by modification
ofthe TIF Plan without hearings and notices as required for approval ofthe initial TIF Plan, so long as the total
capital and administrative costs combined do not exceed the total listed above. Further, the EDA may spend
up to 20 percent of the tax increments from the District for activities (described in the table above) located
outside the boundaries of the District but within the boundaries of the Project (including administrative costs,
which are considered to be spend outside the District), subject to all other terms and conditions of this TIF
Plan.
Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election
It is not anticipated that the District will contain commercial/industrial property. Therefore, the fiscal
disparities provision does not apply to the District. If commercial property is developed, the City will elect
to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b (from within the District), pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd.
3.
Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies
Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a
business subsidy:
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-6
~~
(1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000;
(2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses,
such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria;
(3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a
public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the
time the improvements are made;
(4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3;
(5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing
it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the
assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost;,
(6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to
provide those services;
(7) Assistance for housing;
(8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing
hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23;
(9) Assistance for energy conservation;
(10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
(12) Benefits derived from regulation;
(13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions;
(14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and
.bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business;
(16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 19;
(17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation
is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally
technical nature.
(19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency;
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
(21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; and
(22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration.
The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance
under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions.
Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. la, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or
part of the cost of county road improvements ifthe proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will,
in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road
improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-7
~~' ~ 1
under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan.
If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty-five
days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the HRA and City and consultants, the proposed
development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan
was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The HRA and City are aware that the
county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing.
Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF
Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such
development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal
impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if
the "but for" test was not met:
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
2008/Pay 2009 Estimated Captured
Total Net Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC
Tax Capacity Upon Completion* to Enti , Total
Hennepin County 1,463,839,411 43,211 0.0030%
City of Richfield 29,206,516 43,211 0.1480%
Richfield ISD No. 280 34,748,305 43,211 0.1244%
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
Pay 2009 Percent Potential
Extension Rates of Total CTC* Taxes
Hennepin County 0.404130 35.15% 43,211 17,463
City of Richfield 0.443330 38.56% 43,211 19,157
Richfield ISD No. 280 0.230830 20.08% 43,211 9,974
Other 0.071540 6.22% 43.211 3.091
Total 1.149830 100.00% 49,685
* The captured tax capacity at the time of establishment of the District is estimated to be $23,825 as referenced in
Subsection 2-8. The captured tax capacity listed above assumes the tax capacity in the final year ofthe District, assuming
a 2% annual inflation rate.
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the actual Pay 2009 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based
on actual Pay 2009 figures: The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2010 rates, which were
unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-8
~~~
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b):
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $1,000,000;
(2) Probable impact of the District on cit,Yprovided services and ability to issue debt. The probable
impact of the District on police protection is not expected to be significant. With any addition of new
residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. The City does not expect that the
proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment in vehicles or facilities.
The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The City may have a slight
increase in medical related calls; however, the development is not expected to require an increase in
capital investment in vehicles or facilities.
The impact ofthe District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not
expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the
proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with
street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District will
contribute to the sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees.
The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue debt
for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any general
obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability
to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit.
(3) Estimated amount oftax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount
of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies,
assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the
same is $143,000 based on increment generated in year one;
(4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to coun levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax
increments over the life of the District that would be amibutable to county levies, assuming the
county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same is $250,328
based on increment generated in year one;
(5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any
standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and
impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional
information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax
increment financing plan.
No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed
development for the District have been received.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-9
5 --~
Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and
description of studies and analyses used to make the findings required in the resolution approving the District.
Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the HRA and City's findings:
Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium
2005-2007 American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau
Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing
district include all of the following potential revenue sources:
1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S,
Section 469.177;
2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was
purchased by the Authority with tax increments;
3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the Authority with tax increments;
4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments;
5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which
the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and
6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384.
Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any:
1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the
requirements ofM.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e);
2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred;
3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF
Plan;
4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City;
5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment from the District; or
6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City,
shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval
of the original TIF Plan.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(~, the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not
be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county
auditor. If a housing district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the
addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. I1 must be documented. The
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2- ] 0
~~~2
requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the
District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds
the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that,
notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than
the current net tax capacity. of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District.
The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic
area of the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the
boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the
HRA or City, other than:
1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land;
2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and
engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the
District;
3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the
District; or
4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or
5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance
costs described in clauses (1) to (3).
For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982,
and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond
counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section
469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses
for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized
by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from
the District, whichever is less.
For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay
any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment
expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd.
25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits
of M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the
year following the year the expenses were incurred.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36
Richfield Housing and RedevelopmenbAuthority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-11
~-~3
percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount
deducted to the State Treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for
the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing
authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of
Revenue.
Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District
may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow
account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or
redemption date.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6:
if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax
incrementfinancingdistrictpursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation
or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a
street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water
systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district
by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing
plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original net tax
capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax
increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently
commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on thatparcel
including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the
tax incrementfinancingplan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity
has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most
recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity
of the tax incrementfinancingdfstrict. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this
subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required
activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be
submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified
as included in the district. For purposes ofthis subdivision, qualified improvements ofa street
are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3)
substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street.
The HRA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately August 2013
and report such actions to the County Auditor.
Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment
The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable
property located in the District for the following purposes:
1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project;
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-]2
~'` ~ /
2. To finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs ofthe Richfield Redevelopment Project Area
pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047;
3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan;
4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4;
5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the
HRA or City or for the benefit of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by a developer;
6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance. or other security guaranteeing
the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and
7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on
the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152
through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178.
Revenues derived from tax increment from a housing district must be used solely to finance the cost of
housing projects as defined in M.S., Sections 469.174, Suba~ 11 and 469.1761. The cost of.public
improvements directly related to the housing projects and the allocated administrative expenses of the
HRA or City may be included in the cost of a housing project.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other
purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4.
Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment
Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an
amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public
improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation; and administration. Remaining increment funds
will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and the costs of public improvement activities
outside the District.
Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments
Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the
following:
1. Prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds;
3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their local tax rates.
The HRA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the
end ofthe year. In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify
the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Richfield Redevelopment Project Area or the
District.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (FormerGarage South Portion) 2-13
l~~
Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer
The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the
following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any
other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the
development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other
issues related to the development.
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. S, no more than 10 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired
in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result of
acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from
property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, the HRA or
City concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired. and which provides recourse for
the HRA or City should the development not be completed.
Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement
in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market
value ofthe land and completed improvements forthe duration ofthe District. The assessment agreement shall
be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to
be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to
be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in
the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum
market value agreement.
Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District
Administration of the District will be handled by the Community Development Director.
Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements
Pursuant to M.S, Section 469.175, Subds. S, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting for
all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on
or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. S also provides that an annual statement shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section
469.175 Subd. S and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax
increment from the District.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Gazage South Portion) 2-14
~~lr/~
Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations
As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated
development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written
representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA and City staff awareness of the feasibility
of developing the project site(s) within the District.
Subsection 2-27.Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment
General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF
Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047: Tax increments may not be
used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition,
construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for
conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government
or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax
increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure.
2. Housing District Exceptions to Restriction on Pooling;; Five Year Limit. Pursuant to M.S., Section
469.1763, (1) At least 80% of the tax increment derived from the District must be expended on Public
Costs incurred within said district, and up to 20% of said tax increments may be spent on Public Costs
incurred outside of the District but within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area; provided that in the
case of a housing district, a housing project, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11, is deemed to
be an activity in the District, even if the expenditure occurred after five years.
Subsection 2-28. Summary
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to provide an impetus for
residential. development and provide safe and decent life cycle housing in the City. The TIF Plan for the
District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-
1105, telephone (651) 697-8500.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) 2-15
lr I~~
APPENDIX A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) is being established
to facilitate the development of a 15-unit project for persons with physical disabilities to live independently
in the community. The project is being constructed wit the assistance of the HUD 811 program.
The development will occur on the 0.94 acre site ofthe former south half ofthe City public works maintenance
facility.
Tax increment revenues are proposed to be used to provide a land write-down to the project, and reimburse
the City for the land write-down.
APPENDIX A-1
r~ 0
APPENDIX B
MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE D[STRIC I'
a ~ r , ~
"`:;
..
~;r
w~
~,~~
~., ~
.aw., ,
.,~ i
.,.~.,, j
H.a,,.
d,;, i
..-~.
.~
,..... ,
n.~.
a .
APPENDIX -3-~
~^ K~ 1
APPENDIX C
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of--way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcel listed below.
Parcel Numbers Address Owner
34-028-24-34-0052 7700 Pillsbury Ave. S. City of Richfield
*This parcel is in the process of being subdivided and re-platted. The south portion of the parcel will be
included in the TIF District.
APPENDIX C-1
~~7c~
APPENDIX D
ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT
APPENDIX D-1
m
a
c
O
n
E
J
a
d
m
1
d
m
07
y/z
W<
TJ o
+ ^
W~
0
a~
o
Qf d
= L
~N V
~ ~
0 0
x ,,
q1 U
Q
C
t6
2
U
LU
r
~O
~~~ I
rn rn rn m
O o o O
O O O O
N N N N
T >. T T
m m m m
aaaa
oosa o ~oa°ooe ooa
O O O N O O O O~ N~ O H O
c h M LL' i~- O ~ O O N I~ N O N O
O~ OJ (h N O ~ N N ~ O ~ .-
O O ~ ~ ~
V a i(1
V O
N
X m
m "
m ~
0 o w a m
~ - c
~ o ~ U d ~
d ~ ~ ~ d 2
U ~ m ~ ~ Q ~ ~
_ Q E
o ~ m U ~ U.-.m=2
y o° p U 4? m a c
`° - ~ ~ Q m °o °o ~ d ~ Z ~ °O °o
~ d ~ ~ oo ,~~U- Noon
F?E~ twAE~u°~u°~m~~'~f0ooami
m aiU d N xaF»inU~~m dUe»<» y
U N `~ !O J W t0 m N 0~ ~ E
~~ m~ U ~.: ~- m 2~ d o
C~~ N x m j` N~ U ~p ~ vi `d 2
~~ m~ Q~ C LL O C C d d~ LL~ Z
m ~ > > ~ "
J i m ~ U U U O~ E N m
~~ °~ Y O B E E c `o c E ~
~~p ~ m t0 d' X O O d d 0 0 ~Of
~UCn~ awU U~¢z= ¢
rn o
o °o
N N
as
O1 ~ a o~ 0 0 N N M CD m
C ~
•= N N b ~~ N O O '`d0 ~ 00 0
o LL¢ T m Ewa?
~ ~ a L~ M
- u
c
z
~ `o
L - 0]
d .C ._.
o m p ~
A E N
d C
C ~ LL
O ~ C - d
c A d Q ~' m
o} E yd°'4~
O U d~ a K m
C Z ~ C U j _N ~~
U N O H N C m-
m C a> U~ ~~ a LL a
a '~u>~, ~~dod 5~
~ i£ ~ > ~ °c' 3 m ~ y w o U ~
z=~`w p~~N=r~~a~d
d. o ~ ~wti __o_
~ 2 ~ `m p~ m j o ~ Q~ ~ n~ n~n
__ T Y .C O~ C a d~ O~ p a p p
N Ul ~ ~ y m d d N X y m y N U /Ui U
o X c .. m m d
O~Uiiw-=aiiHUr¢i~ iii ii
ai
Y
E
3
O
L
N
m
m
0
a
w
~ m
~ o
A ~
~LL
d us
a ~'
d ~
O~ N
L p
m
c 1O
~o
m d
t "
o`
~ a
~ d
d H
N d
~ ~
A
d m
C
r _a
U
'u d
n$
d O
A ~ r
N
.~ N
C O
d .~ N
m .
~ o ~
A O
£~3
~ D M
` m v
~ O N
A C pp
d ip O
q E M
T_
c ~
omc°~a
Z r N M
N
N
(0
a
N
C
O
d
J
Q
N
J
N
m
O
N
r
v / Z
W<
Jo
x ~
Wtl
D
V
d
O
`o.
,..,
C ~
d o
~ _
C. m
O N
d d
q
0 a~
~ ~' ~
c
.N ~ io
O
_ °d
~E
.y U °-
Q o
1
0
C
N
U =
U
H y
0
C
d
~- 7 2_
d
Z
o
v
m
`m
t
0
c
N
d
a
N
w
d
:°.
N
N
r
>"
a
rn
c
a
C
d
a
m
a
`m
m
T
O
A
d
a
E
O
C
A
u
w
c
rn
N
A
1
V
3 °'
U_
C ~
d d
E a
m
v d
c
K °c
;? c
~ U
C L
~ U
N L
% 3
F
m
m
o O
ri
d y
d
x a F m
Fad ~
da~v
'o w > >
3 ~ ~ ~
~ U ~ ~
A N A A
(~ LL ~2 m
-- ~ 3
v
a
3
0
U
r
U
d
O
Q
r
0
2
'Y
N
''AA Q ~
vI~ ~ ~
~~ ~
w ~ ~ ~
W<o~~
J~
~ t `o
2 `~ v ~
W~ ~ ~ c
o w c
= o ~
N ~ d
~aU~
c ~
2 y
U ~
U ~
r
N
7
O
2
R
c
N~
I.L
L
0
._
d
` \ \ \ \ M V e ~n \ m m \ \ \ \ m rn o o \ N N \ C \ v v u~u~co cO \ \ m m m N o o ` \ \ N M \ a ~ \ ~ ~ co \
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0
NmN~ N~N00N~NODN~N W N W N~NaDN~N00N~N ~ N~N~N~NmNaDN~NapN~N ~ N ~ N ~m
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O 0 0
M V V N N m m r r m N m m O O ~ M M Q Q N m m r r m m 0) M O O S N M M V V u7 ~f m m
N N M ~ NNN A N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M N M M M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M M O 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N ~ ~O N ~tJ ~ Q N ~O ~O m N r m N O N ~ N N M N R ~O N M N r N m N N O N ~ m N ~fl M M O N~~
O ~ N M M V ~ m rmm W ~ O~ •-N•-cM~O~N~(O~ r ~ W mO>N Q N_ N N N (~ A N N
N N N N N N
(O M C r V M(0~ NONmOrN UJ Mmm mmr~ M m V' M M V rrOm r m~ ~mMl0mMMOm Q) ~I; ~ N m
~ m N f D (O r (O M ~ O N O ~ O N m~ O M O O ~- ~- ~ m m ~ M N^ M O ~ N
m ~OQJ N~ V (D mONm N~fJm (p V IAN mm NmmMO) OnO ~ ~0 m O ~O mm~(OP ~ m O
OO ~-~-OOOmmr mNM NON(O V NOI~ V ~ W NNm~NmN ~-rMm OO~O~m~-m~m~tp •- ~(: 0 0 47
~-N M C~flmrrmQ)O~N M O V NmrrmQ)OO ~ NNNN NNNN mOmOO~'- N M M V O N N
~ ~ N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M
N N Q Q m m O O r r N N ~ ~ r 0 00 O O m m O O m m O O m m m O O ill N N O Q m m m
mmNO~ ~ MmmOONNOO(OmN O mmQmmmmmmO)mN~mm ~-~mm ~~00 c0 m
~Om NNNO>mNNtO m 0)TMM rOOQ NN NmmOO mm R V mm mm N
NNNNM MMPQ R V V V ~~t1NNmlpmm(O (Orr rrao ao ao aoo»rnmmm 0000 ~- ~- N
~ f- '- .- .- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ .- ~ .- .- ~ ~ ~ ~ .- .- ~ N N N N N N N N N
m m T T M MQ r Q O O~ N ro NNN c0 (0 0 0 V^ m m M M r r .-.- m m ~ ~ o 0 0 0~ N O O N N ~ m m N N r
~ ~ ~ ~ M MMM Q N~ _ m cD m m r r _ r M M m m 6~ O~ O> __ M_ M M M O V O
N N N
O~O~.~-f VN~h..~NmOO~.,~`-.,~~.~~~~.~~A ~~MM~r,m t0mmOONNmVm~.,~.~
~ ~ ~ V V NNNM _. _. M~ ~~m(O t0 co co c~io co ~o c~~o ~D CD ~Dn r,rr vrrr r rmm m v _. :.m m m m ro
N 0 0 m m O C 'P P N N N m m m m ~n N ~ ~ m m M N N m m V V M M
m m v v mm MMOOO~O~mm mmQ)O) OOCN'lM m mOONN ~ ~-mm m mvo V oNNmmO~m n n m~ V
~ ~ ~ ~ (Om OOC V ~ ~ iflmNNN (O (OO Oip~OO) M Mmm r r ~~ cp m ~~(O (O ~ ~mm~ m
ri rivvovvv~n vi ~n vi vi vi~~inmr rmmao <n ai ai aimoooo.-.=~.-NNNN ri N v
~ .-.- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N NNN N N N N N N N N N
o M m m ~n M m ~ N o m N m o v m rn m m
~ O O N m m m M m ~ m N ~ M M N N O M OI m N m
O m N N O r ~ ~ O m r tp ~ Q M M M M O (O
N N N N ~ M M cN'l M M M f~') M ~ M M O Q V P Q Q R Q Q V
N ~ ~O M N N N
N O m O N M O W O M O N m r O O) ~ O m M m '-
N V r N r C N N r ~ O ~ O) O) O m Q M M m M ~-
m R O m M O~ m M O Q O r C N Of m N V (`~ N N N
N N N ~ ~ m r m m N o - ~i v f. ~ r a(o cm, o ~ M
N N N M M M M M M M M M R O Q Q
m m m m m m m M ~ m m m m M M ~ m m m m m m m ~
M M M M M M M M
V V C O Q Q V Q O V V Q P Q < O O Q O Q Q Q P
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m cO m co m m m
M N N r N O N m O m O m ~ m V N N m m ~ N O
N m m m m N m D7 N ~ Q M ^ r N m m m m N V
m Q r ? O Q m m Q7 N M O O) m r r m tp
O O N N M O m m m m O M N O r m m
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Q Q Q P Q Q P Q V V C
O
H
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~'
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O u
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r Z
Q1
O
O
r
5-~`~
APPENDIX E
HOUSING QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE DISTRICT
No. of Persons 50% of Median Income 60% of Median
Income
1-person $29,350 $35,200
2-person $33,550 $40,260
3-person $37,750 $45,300
4- erson $41,950 $50,340
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency
The two options for income limits on a standard housing district are 20% of the units at 50% of median income
or 40% of the units at 60% of median income. At the time a district is established, the project needs to choose
one of the options and meet those requirements for the life of the district. The City elects that 40% of the units
will be at 60% of the median income. There are no rent restrictions for a standard housing district.
***PLEASE NOTE: THESE NUMBERS. ARE ADJUSTED ANNUALLY. ALL INCOME FIGURES
REPORTED ON THIS PAGE ARE FOR 2009.
APPENDIX E-1
r~~
APPENDIX F
FINDINGS INCLUDING BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) as required pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
Finding that the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion)
is a housing district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11.
The Housing TIF District 2009-2 (Former Garage South Portion) consists of one parcel. The
development will consist of rental housing for adults with disabilities. All or a portion of the units
which will receive tax increment assistance will meet income restrictions described in M.S. 469.1761
for the duration of the District. At least 40 percent of the units receiving assistance will have incomes
at or below 60 percent of statewide median income. Appendix E of the TIF Plan contains background
for the above finding.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur
solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported
by the fact that the development proposed in this plan is a housing district that meets the City's
objectives for development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes this housing
development infeasible without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building affordable new
housing in the City this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment
financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter as justification that the developer would
not have gone forward without tax increment assistance.
Historically, site development costs in this area have made development infeasible without tax
increment assistance. The City reasonably determines that no other development of similar scope is
anticipated in the next years on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the
development. The City has relied upon budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the
developer for the development of the proposed housing development. These analyses show that in
order to promote the development of additional affordable housing in the City, financial assistance
is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the land for the development. The construction of the
proposed housing development to serve the City is cost prohibitive without the use of Tax Increment,
due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in obtaining sufficient low cost financing in the
current economic market; (ii) the additional costs of building the proposed housing development in
an area which is already established as a residential area, including the increased costs for land
acquisition, and (iii) affordable housing does not generate sufficient revenues to offset these increased
start up costs. In order to make the proposed housing development economically feasible, the
developer has obtained aloes-interest loan from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The tax increment derived from the TIF District will be used to reimburse the City for land
acquisition, so the land can be provided to the developer at a significantly reduced cost and therefore
will help the developer bridge the gap in financing for the housing project.
APPENDIX F-1
~~-~~
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 (Former Garage
South Portion) conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment ofthe municipality
as a whole.
The Planning Commission met on July 27, 2009, and reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF
Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the Housing Tax Increment Financing District 2009-2 Former Garage
South Portion) will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a
whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Richfield Redevelopment ProjectArea by private
enterprise.
Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the HRA and City will provide an impetus for affordable
residential development, which is desirable or necessary for increased population and an increased
need for life-cycle housing within the City.
APPENDIX F-2
~~~ ~
Memo
To: Richfield City Council
From: Rebecca Kurtz and Jon North, Ehlers
Date: August 28, 2009
Subject: But For Analysis for Proposed TIF Districts
The City and HRA received a request from Assessable Space, Inc. and Twin Cities Christian Homes
(collectively, the "Developer") for tax increment assistance for two housing developments. It is proposed
that the City and the HRA create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-1 (Candlwood outlot) on a
1.13 acre .site at 301 77"' Street West (also known as the Candlewood parcel), upon which ASI proposes
to build a 51-unit housing project for very low-income seniors age 62 or older. It is further proposed that
the City and the HRA create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-2 (former garage south portion) on
a .94 acre site of the former south half of the City public works maintenance facility, upon which TCCH
proposes to build an affordable 15-unit housing project for persons with physical disabilities. The
Candlewood parcel is currently owned by the HRA and has been vacant since the HRA purchased it in
1998. The public works site is owned by the City. The Developer has requested that the HRA donate the
Candlewood site to the Developer and that the City convey the public works site to the Developer at
substantially less than fair market value. It is proposed that tax increment from the two tax increment
districts would be used to reimburse the City and HRA for land write-down costs.
The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the Developer's feasibility analysis for both projects to
determine if the level of financial assistance requested is needed to make the projects financially feasible.
Ehlers prepared a But For Analysis and determined that the level of assistance was reasonable based on
the current market conditions and the financial assumptions.
In addition to the financial analysis, there are several additional factors that provide support to the But For
Analysis and the need for public assistance. Under current market conditions, the proposed developments
may not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably near
future. The proposed development described in the tax increment plans are housing developments that
meet the City's objectives for development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes an
affordable housing development infeasible without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building
affordable new housing in the City, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax
increment financing.
The City has relied upon budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the Developer of the proposed
housing developments. These analyses show that in. order to promote the development of additional
affordable housing in the City, financial assistance is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the land for
the developments. The construction of the proposed housing developments is cost prohibitive without the
use of Tax Increment, due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in obtaining sufficient low cost
financing in the current economic market; (ii) the additional costs of building the proposed housing
FREERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
www,ohlors-inc.oom
Minnesot8 phone 651-697-8500 3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555 Roseville, MN 551 1 3-1 1 22
toll free 800-552-1171
~~~ ~
development in an area which is already established as a residential area, including the increased costs for
land acquisition; and (iii) affordable housing does not generate sufficient revenues to offset these
increased start up costs.
In order to make the proposed housing developments economically feasible, the Developer is in the
process of obtaining low-interest loans from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
("HUD"). The Developer is in the process of obtaining a HUD 2021oan for the senior housing and HUD
811 loan for the 15-unit building. These types of loans are limited and eligibility is determined by a point
or rating system. Obtaining land through donation or at a significant write-down will. significantly
improve the Developer's chances of obtaining the HUD financing. The tax increment derived from the
TIF Districts will be used to repay the City and HRA for the cost of the proposed land write-downs and
will help bridge the gap in financing for the housing projects.
Historically, site development costs in this location have made development infeasible without tax
increment assistance. The Candlewood site has been marketed for at least 15 years without success.
Under current market conditions, it is anticipated that no other development of similar scope would occur
in the foreseeable future on these sites without some type of similar financial assistance being provided to
the developments.
There is considerable statistical and anecdotal evidence that there is a significant need for affordable
housing for seniors and the disabled in the City of Richfield. Accessible Space, Inc. (ASI) has determined
that there is a serious need for accessible, affordable housing in Hennepin County and in the City of
Richfield. According to their research, the number of adults with disabilities found in the 2005-2007
American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census Bureau indicates the potential need for
housing in the area. The 2005-2007 American Community Survey estimates that 16.1% (4,335) of the
adult population of Richfield has a disability. It is estimated that 59.8% (2,592) of the adults with
disabilities population is physically disabled.
According to the Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium a High Priority
Goal was set to provide housing for the special needs subpopulation of physically disabled. The
Hennepin County Consortium also set a High Priority for housing for very low-income elderly.
According to the 2000 Census, the population of the City of Richfield was 34,439. Of that population,
5,633 or approximately 16% were age 65 and over. According to the web site www.city-data.com, the
population of the City of Richfield as of July 2007 was 33,387, a decrease of 2.8% since 2000. Of that
population, approximately 5,342 or 16% were age 65 and over.
According to the 2005-2007 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, 33.5% of the residents in
the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minnesota Metropolitan Area have a disability. Using the July
2007 figures referenced in the paragraph above, it is estimated that approximately 1,790 residents of the
City of Richfield are age 65 and over and have a disability.
In January 2008, Mary Bujold, President of Maxfield Research, Inc., stated during a Special Meeting of
the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Planning Commission that there
is now a need for affordable senior housing in the City of Richfield.
ASI and the National Handicap Housing Institute, Inc. (NHHI) co-sponsored a similar HUD Section 202
senior housing development in the neighboring community of Bloomington that opened in the summer of
2007. The Meadows at Oxboro, located at 401 95`'' Street, is a 50 unit accessible, affordable apartment
building for very low-income elderly that remains fully occupied with an active waiting list of over 20
applicants.
~-~~
The following are excerpts from a letter sent from Assessable Space to Mayor Goettell and to the
members of the Richfield City Council on May 29, 2009:
• Our proposed, 51 unit Richfield Senior Housing Development will allow seniors age 62 and older
with incomes at or below 50% of the area median income, the opportunity to live and age longer
in Richfield with dignity in an accessible, secure and affordable environment..
• Our proposed, 15 unit Richfield Supportive Housing Development will allow adults age 18 and
older with qualifying physical disabilities and incomes at or below 50% of the area median, the
opportunity to live; work and interact in Richfield with independence and dignity in an
affordable, secure and 100% wheelchair accessible as well as supportive, environment.
Both of these proposed developments will help fill a small portion of the critical and unmet need
for this type of housing in the City of Richfield. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Section 811 and 202 Programs are the principal federal housing programs
set up specifically to provide the development and operation financing that can enable qualifying
nonprofit organizations and communities to provide these specific types of housing; however, no
HUD Section 811 or HUD Section 202 housing developments have ever been approved in the
City of Richfield.
Statistics published in the 2005-2007 American Community Survey completed by the U.S.
Census Bureau indicate that approximately 2,592 adults living in the City of Richfield have a
physical disability. In 2007 there were approximately 2,671 or 8% of the residents of the City
that were below the poverty level which is approximately the same percent in the State of
Minnesota. When comparing seniors age 55 and older in Richfield with the State of Minnesota,
statistics indicate that the percentage dramatically decreases in Richfield as seniors age indicating
that as seniors retire, there is a lack of affordable housing options that could allow them to
continue to live in the City (www.city-data.com). Given the current economy and status of many
retirement investment accounts, that condition is not likely to improve.
With the hopeful contingent donation of the proposed sites for these developments, the
applications would capture critical HUD rating points for evidence of municipal financial
support. It has become very important for these highly competitive applications, to try and
capture -all of the "leveraging municipal support" rating points for approval since HUD
incorporated afive-point rating system for this application category in 2006. In ASI's opinion,
the locations will also rank very high for demonstration of need given current census tract
information, the limited accessible affordable housing for seniors in Richfield and the fact that no
HUD Section 202 or 811 developments have previously been funded in the City of Richfield.
In essence, the City of Richfield would be trying to leverage the site donations to capture over
$8,900,000 in federal funding for the development of both apartment buildings as well as the
annual Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC) funding that provides the rental subsidy for
the apartment building's residents who will pay no more than 30% of their adjusted gross income
for rent. The PRAC funds will also pay for the ongoing maintenance of the buildings over their
40-year minimum life cycle. The 40 year minimum use for the intended purpose is guaranteed by
HUD Section 202 mortgage and by a HUD formatted regulatory, use and capital advance
agreement that will be recorded in Hennepin County.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions.
~~
Memo
To: Richfield City Council
From: Rebecca .Kurtz and Jon North, Ehlers
Date: August 28, 2009
Subject: But For Analysis for Proposed TIF Districts
The City and HRA received a request from Assessable Space, Inc. and Twin Cities Christian Homes
(collectively, the "Developer") for tax increment assistance for two housing developments. It is proposed that
the City and the HRA create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-1 (Candlwood outlot) on a 1.13 acre site
at 301 77th Street West (also known as the Candlewood parcel), upon which ASI proposes to build a 51-unit
housing project for very low-income seniors age 62 or older. It is further proposed that the City and the HRA
create the Housing Tax Increment District 2009-2 (former garage south portion) on a .94 acre site of the former
south half of the City public works maintenance facility, upon which TCCH proposes to build an affordable 15-
unit housing project for persons with physical disabilities. The Candlewood parcel is currently owned by the
HRA and has been vacant since the HRA purchased it in 1998. The public works site is owned by the City.
The Developer has requested that the HRA donate the Candlewood site to the Developer and that the City
convey the public works site to the Developer at substantially less than fair market value. It is proposed that tax
increment from the two tax increment districts would be used to reimburse the City and HRA for land write-
down costs.
The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the Developer's feasibility analysis for both projects to
determine if the level of financial assistance requested is needed to make the projects financially feasible.
Ehlers prepared a But For Analysis and determined that the level of assistance was reasonable based on the
current market conditions and the financial assumptions.
In addition to the financial analysis, there are several additional factors that provide support to the But For
Analysis and the need for public assistance. Under current market conditions, the proposed developments may
not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably near future. The
proposed development described in the tax increment plans are housing developments that meet the City's
objectives for development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition makes an affordable housing
development infeasible without City assistance. Due to the high cost of building affordable new housing in the
City, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing.
FREERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
Minnesota phone 651-697-8500
Offices also in Wisconsin and Illinois fax 651-697-8555
toll tree 800-552-1171
www.ehlers-inc.com
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113-1122
~'"~I
The City has relied upon budgetary figures and cost estimates submitted by the Developer of the proposed
housing developments. These analyses show that in order to promote the development of additional affordable
housing in the City, financial assistance is needed to reduce the costs of acquiring the land for the developments.
The construction of the proposed housing developments is cost prohibitive without the use of Tax Increment,
due to several factors, including (i) the difficulty in obtaining sufficient low cost financing in the current
economic market; (ii) the additional costs of building the proposed housing development in an area which is
already established as a residential area, including the increased costs for land acquisition; and (iii) affordable
housing does not generate sufficient revenues to offset these increased start up costs.
In order to make the proposed housing developments economically feasible, the Developer is in the process of
obtaining low-interest loans from the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"). The
Developer is in the process of obtaining a HUD 202 loan for the senior housing and HUD 811 loan for the 15-
unit building. These types of loans are limited and eligibility is determined by a point or rating system.
Obtaining land through donation or at a significant write-down will significantly improve the Developer's
chances of obtaining the HUD financing. The tax increment derived from the TIF Districts will be used to repay
the City and HRA for the cost of the proposed land write-downs and will help bridge the gap in financing for the
housing projects.
Historically, site development costs in this location have made development infeasible without tax increment
assistance. The Candlewood site has been marketed for at least 15 years without success. Under current market
conditions, it is anticipated that no other development of similar scope would occur in the foreseeable future on
these sites without some type of similar financial assistance being provided to the developments.
There is considerable statistical and anecdotal evidence that there is a significant need for affordable housing for
seniors and the disabled in the City of Richfield. Accessible Space, Inc. (ASI) has determined that there is a
serious need for accessible, affordable housing in Hennepin County and in the City of Richfield. According to
their research, the number of adults with disabilities found in the 2005-2007 American Community Survey
completed by the U.S. Census Bureau indicates the potential need for housing in the area. The 2005-2007
American Community Survey estimates that 16.1% (4,335) of the adult population of Richfield has a disability.
It is estimated that 59.8% (2,592) of the adults with disabilities population is physically disabled.
According to the Consolidated Plan FY 2005-2009 for the Hennepin County Consortium a High Priority Goal
was set to provide housing for the special needs subpopulation of physically disabled. The Hennepin County
Consortium also set a High Priority for housing for very low-income elderly.
According to the 2000 Census, the population of the City of Richfield was 34,439. Of that population, 5,633 or
approximately 16% were age 65 and over. According to the web site www.city-data.com, the population of the
City of Richfield as of July 2007 was 33,387, a decrease of 2.8% since 2000. Of that population, approximately
5,342 or 16% were age 65 and over.
According to the 2005-2007 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, 33.5% of the residents in the
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minnesota Metropolitan Area have a disability. Using the July 2007 figures
referenced in the paragraph above, it is estimated that approximately 1,790 residents of the City of Richfield are
age 65 and over and have a disability.
In January 2008, Mary Bujold, President of Maxfield Research, Inc., stated during a Special Meeting of the
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Planning Commission that there is now a
need for affordable senior housing in the City of Richfield.
ASI and the National Handicap Housing Institute, Inc. (NHHI) co-sponsored a similar HUD Section 202 senior
housing development in the neighboring community of Bloomington that opened in the summer of 2007. The
5~- ~ z.
Meadows at Oxboro, located at 401 95th Street, is a 50 unit accessible, affordable apartment .building for very
low-income elderly that remains fully occupied with an active waiting list of over 20 applicants.
The following are excerpts from a letter sent from Assessable Space to Mayor Goettell and to the members of
the Richfield City Council on May 29, 2009:
• Our proposed, 51 unit Richfield Senior. Housing Development will allow seniors age 62 and older with
incomes at or below 50% of the area median income, the opportunity to live and age longer in Richfield
with dignity in an accessible, secure and affordable environment.
• Our proposed, 15 unit Richfield Supportive Housing Development will allow adults age 18 and older
with qualifying physical disabilities and incomes at or below 50% of the area median, the opportunity to
live, work and interact in Richfield with independence and dignity in an affordable, secure and 100%
wheelchair accessible as well as supportive, environment.
Both of these proposed developments will help fill a small portion of the critical and unmet need for this
type of housing in the City of Richfield. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) Section 811 and 202 Programs are the principal federal housing programs set up specifically to
provide the development and operation financing that can enable qualifying nonprofit organizations and
communities to provide these specific types of housing; however, no HUD Section 811 or HUD Section
202 housing developments have ever been approved in the City of Richfield.
Statistics published in the 2005-2007 American Community Survey completed by the U.S. Census
Bureau indicate that approximately 2,592 adults living in the City of Richfield have a physical
disability. In 2007 there were approximately 2,671 or 8% of the residents of the City that were below
the poverty level which is approximately the same percent in the State of Minnesota. When comparing
seniors age 55 and older in Richfield with the State of Minnesota, statistics indicate that the percentage
dramatically decreases in Richfield as seniors age indicating that as seniors retire, there is a lack of
affordable housing options that could allow them to continue to live in the City (www.city-data.com).
Given the current economy and status of many retirement investment accounts, that condition is not
likely to improve.
With the hopeful contingent donation of the proposed sites for these developments, the applications
would capture critical HUD rating points for evidence of municipal financial support. It has become
very important for these highly competitive applications, to try and capture all of the "leveraging
municipal support" rating points for approval since HUD incorporated afive-point rating system for this
application category in 2006. In ASI's opinion, the locations will also rank very high for demonstration
of need given current census tract information, the limited accessible affordable housing for seniors in
Richfield and the fact that no HUD Section 202 or 811 developments have previously been funded in
the City of Richfield.
In essence, the City of Richfield would be trying to leverage the site donations to capture over
$8,900,000 in federal funding for the development of both aparhnent buildings as well as the annual
Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC) funding that provides the rental subsidy for the apartment
building's residents who will pay no more than 30% of their adjusted gross income for rent. The PRAC
funds will also pay for the ongoing maintenance of the buildings over their 40-year minimum life cycle.
The 40 year minimum use for the intended purpose is guaranteed by HUD Section 202 mortgage and by
a HUD formatted regulatory, use and capital advance agreement that will be recorded in Hennepin
County.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions.
AGENDA SECTION: PiIBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM # 6
REPORT # 181
J
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
CHRIS LINK, OPERATIONS MANAGER
STREETS/FORESTRY
NAME, TITLE
. °no Ge _ ~ . o n I
•
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding the implementation and collection of a Street Light User Fee.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Conduct and close a public hearing regarding the
implementation and collection of a Street Light User Fee.
IL BACKGROUND
At the February 24, 2009 Council ,Study Session, Council reviewed service fee
options and directed the staff to move forward with the implementation of a street
light utility fee. The proposed fee could be used to generate up to $338,780 per
year, or approximately the City's annual electric bill for street lights.
In 1995 the City initiated a street light fee which lasted for five years. The fee at that
time was used for replacement of lighting heads. A Street Light User Fee was also
considered in 2003 but Council chose to initiate franchise fees rather than
implement a street light fee.
At the August 11, 2009 Council Meeting, Council approved a Street Light
Implementation Schedule (attached) and scheduled a public hearing for September
8, 2009. The City Council also directed staff to prepare a draft fee to recover all of
the electrical costs used for street lights.
090809StreetLig htFee
City staff is proposing to use the same rate structure as was used in 1995. All
residential properties pay the same rate. Residential and commercial properties
pay the same rate per acre assuming 5 residential lots per acre. Using a base fee
for residential homes of $6.48 per quarter, commercial property is then charged
$32.40 per acre. Schools and churches are charged 25% of the commercial rate
due to the large land parcels that do not have streets and streets lights on the
interior of the property. This rate generates sufficient funds to cover the
approximate estimated annual electrical costs for street lighting or $338,780 per
year. To establish the user fee, Council must adopt the attached resolution, which
is scheduled for consideration at the September 22"d Council Meeting.
.The attached Response to Street Light Utility Survey prepared by the City of St.
Cloud shows that many Minnesota cities have Street Light User Fees. It also shows
that the proposed $6.48 quarterly fee is similar to the fee charged in other cities.
City staff is prepared to provide a brief presentation to explain the proposed Street
Light User Fee.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Minnesota State Statues, Section 429.101 the governing body of a
municipality may charge for certain current services provided by the
municipality including the operation of a street lighting system.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Cuts in State Aid have forced cities to pursue alternative funding sources
to maintain current services.
C. ,FINANCIAL
• The City's proposed 2010 budget and moderate tax levy increase depend
upon revenue from the street light utility.
• The table below shows the City's anticipated budgeted electrical costs for
2009 and 2010.
2009 2009 2010
BUDGET. Line Item Proposed Revised Proposed
10610-6207 (Xcel/Electrical $316,620- $338;780 $362,500
Costs)
• The estimated revenue(s) generated from a proposed user fee of
$6.48/quarter (electric only) is $338,780.
• The fee will be collected on the Utility bill as a separate line item.
D. LEGAL
• The City Attorney will be available to answer questions.
__
__ _
E. ENVIlZONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• None
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• The Council may choose not to continue consideration of a street light utility fee.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Street Light Implementation Schedule
• Street Light User Fee Rate Factors Sheet
• Map of typical Residential and Commercial blocks.
• Draft Resolution to charge a user fee for purposes of the operation of a street
lighting system.
• Street Light Utility Survey
VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None Expected
_ ___ _ - ~~
Street Light User Fee Implementation Schedule
August 11, 2009 Approval of Implementation Schedule and scheduled a public
hearing for September 8, 2009..-
August 27, 2009 Published Public. Hearing in the Richfield Sun and on the
website.
September 8, 2009 Conduct Public Hearing and accept comments
September 22, 2009 Approval of resolution establishing the Street Light User Fee.
October, 2009 First Street Light User Fees are included in the utility bill
090809StreetLig htFee
-_
~-
Street Light User Fee
RATE FACTORS SHEET
Fees are based on Land Use
Land Use Titles:
COM All commercial properties, to include multifamily residents (apartments) and
industrial parcels.
RES All residentially coded parcels.
PUB Public buildings, i.e. City Hall, City Garage, and Fire Stations.
CHURCH All churches also to include cemeteries and activity buildings associated with a
church.
SCH- All schools, to include private and public schools.
PRK All parks owned by the City of Richfield, also to include Nature Centers and all
"properties" located within city park parcels.
DPLX Addresses that split a residential lot, to include townhomes, 3-plexs, and 4-
plexs.
LAND USE CODE MULTIPLIER To Bill FACTOR
COM (acres>0.2) 5* (5 x ACREAGE)
if acres<_0.2 ---- 1
RES ---- 1
PUB (acres>0.2) 5 (5 x ACREAGE)
if acres _<0.2 ---- 1
CHURCH (acres>0.2) 1.25** (1.25 x ACREAGE)
if acres <_0.8 ---- 1
if acres <_0.2 ---- 1
SCH (acres>0.2) 1.25 (1.25 x ACREAGE)
if acres <_0.8 ---- 1
if acres <_0.2 ---- 1
PRK 1.25 1.25 x ACREAGE
DPLX ---- 0.5
* The multiplier of "5" is based on the definition that a residential lot is 1 /5 of an acre;
hence multiplying acreage by 5 produces the equivalent number of residential lots.
** The multiplier of "1.25" " is based on the definition that a residential lot is 1/5 of an acre
and multiplying acreage by 5 produces the equivalent number of residential lots. However,
the total area of each parcel is not proportional to the number of street lights in an
equivalent residential area so the factor of 5 is reduced by 75%, producing 1.25.
i _, ~,
RESIDENTIAL
ONE TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CITY BLOCK
1 2 3 4 5
1 ACRE
5 REST®ENTIAL L®TS
5 STREETLIGHT USER FEES
C®IVI I!/I E RC I AL
ONE TYPICAL COIVIIVIERCIAL CITY BLOCK
, ,-
__
J,
5 STREE ~ L~GH`~ ~~~
f -
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A STREET LIGHT FEE TO BE CHARGED TO
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR THE
OPERATION OF A STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield community values the operation of a street lighting
system; and
WHEREAS, every property in the City, residential and commercial, benefits from
good streets which are well lighted and maintained through a city street light system; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota State Statues, Section 429.101 and Richfield
City Code, Section 825, the governing body of a municipality may charge for certain
current services provided by the municipality including the operation of a street lighting
system.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
.rte
1. Every property in the City of Richfield, residential and commercial, benefits
from streets which are well lighted and maintained.
2. The initial Street Light User Fee for residential single family property is $6.48
per quarter for residential property. Rates for other land uses will be
determined by the attached street Light User Fee Rate Factors Sheet.
3. The rates for the Street light User Fee will be reviewed and established
annually as part of the City's budget preparation process.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of
September, 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~-- 5
~oo
U~
4r
0 oa
w
'~ U
m
W
.Q
a
m
E
0
U
;::.
:-:~:~~: ..
°
~ a~ m m a~ ~
_ _ _ _ _
~,•:::.Yi' L V L V V O ~ L .~ L L V U Q Ia N IQ
U
'::::~:~. O O t6 O N •- Ca O C N __
lC{ fti U n n n n ~
':::.'
~ Q. n n n n L C1 n~ n n n C6 L L L L C ~ C
,
~
::':::51GI.
'::: '~ L
Q L
Q L L
(V Q L N
Q n L L L
Q U (V L
Q L L L N N N N ~ ~ ~ L
Q Q n n n n L L L Q
~
n n na no nnn n nn
. vooN ~ °~ °~ °-
0 Q'O'Q"O
:~:~:~:;~',.
•::: OD
CD O
CO OO
00 COO
MN 000
000 O
O OOCO CD W 0
000 ~ttje-O ONCOCC)
d;~C'+)
S~
•
:~:~:
::. 0
r ~
•- MCO
Nr OM
M.- CO CON
er'r' N
s1' OCOM
C
COCOA d
~-~M ~-N.-N tiMd'N
:::
.....................
tf}
EA
tf} 6/3
4A tf3
E!} ER C!>
Ef3
E!} EA Ef? 6F} EA fH d9 Ef3 EA d'3 d~}
:~~`:~:;
..............
...............
~ ~
:':~
:
a~ ~
c ~ ~ ~
;~
_
C n ~ M m N
~ ~
ca m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N
~ ~,
~
~
~ ~ a 2=2= ~
'
U >_.~
C6 ~o~ ~~
S'S~ o
L L
O O ( ~ V 1 .C~ 0000 N Z
C6 CCf ~ ~ ~ ~ t0 CT 3 y:. ~ aM- N N ~ ~ M e1' L
~~~
U
~ O y U C ~~ H
H 0 m N N t~ ~
U U ~ m
~ Q' 00 C 'C a.
J O O ~ w t6 ca co c6 -C ~ '
L EA 1 ~ L L L ~ L V V
.: C ~ O C C ~'C'OC ~ O'C'C ~J~~~~ ~,,
~~~
~
U
-: O N Ca
:r E O O ftf t8 t6 O ,.
~
i R O W~~ p) p) 01 ~
~ 3~ C C C U
;:.: ~ 7
C' m,~ E E
r ~~~
aav' ~ ~ a'a'Q'~C~OO ich ~~~~ ~
:~::-:
•.•: d'
CO M
CO ;a C
(p 3 M
tAr^ 000
000 O
tp ~00~ ~sr~Nf~ tAtlDOM
,~OOf~ tA
tA1~ ~C10~0~
-:=~ ~- M O O NO ~' M
~ M r
m~~ti0 ~MtC)~'O Ors-~1~
:~::: Ef) ~ Q' H E+9 fFY ~?
b9 EA z EA C!} fA ~ EA d4 Ei} 6i3 V d3 EA V3 E!3
.-.:-.-.;'.~T. -a N ~ O r0+ ~ to
~+ O C C ~
:i::~~
--: ~
M
r
~ N ~ N 0
E
D C O t~ E 0
""~
:'.':':..::: .-.
... C
m ~ t m ~ to ~ C V
N 0 C6 3 L ~, 0
~ .
U ~ ~
~ ~ U
.'.•..• U ~
~ v
C U ~
.'~•..':.':.':':.':.:'.~::'::.'. L
~~:.~•::•:::
- a~ o o c ~ ~
_
'::. Q W W W D W
VJ~ .~'
++ ~+ •+
O _O _O
Y~ 4~ 4.~
~ N ~
~
~ m m
::;:~:/
q
~~y
bK'
:':: : m
L m m
L L m o 0 o
` O O O m m
V L m
L L . ~ . :C .~ ~ L
.
::--:-:+rc C3 N Ri ~ O O O ~ tC ~ ~ C c U C C C U Q3
-::•_-'wy
:c•::.':~ L
m L L
mm L L L L
mmmm L L
mm L
m L
~ m m m
a m m m m
aaaa m
a
:;:::::;.;-
~~
• a
0 as
00 aaaa
0000 as
00 a
o w aa
CooaO 0000 0
.
.
•: : O O O ~; E N O O m O C O 1 0 0 0 O O O O O
;:
::• CO
~ MO
MN NCOI~C
NMe-e- CON
~~ C
~ ~
M 0000
NNCO NmOsF
Nr-~-CO N
M
-~•~=• EA tf? fA EA Ef} tf} ~} Efl~ tH 69 ER (f! ~} tfl~ EA tf? EF} 6f3 EA
::.
cU
O
~, 7 ~
.r
m
m~~~
m
p m m
m U ~
:-: ,
O
'~ ~ r .~ U M W
O
tq
S N~
' ~
'
-~: M
C t6 ~
~ C
~
m
m ~ O ~ ~ >. m
O
~ .: m C
'
rr m .r ~ .O 'p
. L ~ L
L Q ~
: O
•
N ~ >
t6
~ m
...................`i•. ~L
~
°
.1.• ~ ~ ~ O O
3
~ O
°
~
c
3 a
:~ '
W
~ ~ t N=~
= m '
~
m
o 0
L
- ~ > 3~
c
s ~cca o a
~ m ~~a
i a
i
m
c c c
i
a ~.
:.::
~ ~ m
~ ?_~ m 3~ L o >
a c ~ m ~!+ 7,o•N
m ,,,,,
~ ~ ~ ~
L ~ ~
~-
.'.
•~ co
o a ~
m ~ ~
w omONro~
U' ~ +N+ 'm 'iT o 1_O
1-- m~ m~v,
~ m c ~n
c
1
l ... EL.«.cc~ •- m
:.__.:.:t~ w~ m ;
~ c
N ~.~oL~o
O
~ o p~c0,r ~cc
m -- E Oc
:-:: ~~ v O t O
O c
U U U O ~
W J~ N
.r ~
" O O p, -
L c
-~-~- O O tQ N L t3
w O ~ m m
. >'
U ~' .
~ U
:~ O
~ Q.
~ _ N ~
Q' ~
+. ~ ~ H _._. ~
N .-
.L.. 7 O
° C3
•E U- N
0 L
m
E S' ~ ~ m
~
:~:. tLL yO,EN ~, :Lmn...:3v,
a O
C o ~~o
C w
~ •~
°3~~
'
A~
.+ 7 ±.
c -a -_
•E ~~
N
~~ `o ~ m ~}
v, ~
N_
.c N O E
rn
o C E O
N _~
rn
- 0
m
.'-
-: U
0 .
~ m 3 N m U" N m~ rn U
C U
U m m c
c o U p,
L
c U~ U m t
N
-- .:- m
CS ~ ~ ~ ~ m
r' .
m a ~
~ ~ c ~
o
rn ~ :C fn U
_ fn ~ ~ L 6
::.
:' ~ ~ ~ ;
~ ~ n ca
0
U a
~ ~ 3
~ ~~ ~ Q ,
m+
L L L L L -~ m
_
. ~
W ~
C3 m m m
O m . a
'
m
N o -
-
~ C3 m
!A ~ i
'
' m
'
'
' c
:':: W
~ m
~ C3 t3 C3
•~~-••. ;,_, ~
mm N
L m +,
p
a~urm-a~
c ....
~ ~
mE=m a C
C ~
wca C
~
C ~
c~c~cu o N
m
o
:. ~ .c
~ L c
m ~ ~ ~ O Q 4O _
'U ~ ~ c ~ c ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~N
/
I.L
-
' c "~~ L > 'a a~ ~
~ a ~~ V V L L Q L L L Q Q N
.
.
- m m m 00 p O O
~'ooo m 0
~Z m
-~ _
~
M o ,...
o ~, c
N m m ~
m m m L
m fd
--
- N o ~~-r-.- m N m m of
V
~ ~ c
m
c
~ • ~ aam aaam
p ~m
-
:.:
': o
mm
L L L L
m
m L V L L
m m
m
m 1 1
~
c ~
O' m c L
O ~' m t0 m~ >
m N
~
m C~
L ~+ U
C C l6 .~'~ U
c c c Qf ~ ~ 1
~
:'.'. ~
/
IL _a .1
..r
L •L y
+
y
+
L ~ 'C L .
~ ~ L ~ ~•~ ~ Zf ~
~ -C m
O U ~ ~ ~F+ ~ .~ L '~ ~ ~ L O
m
:.
:. L ~ ~
m :
:. ~
. ~ ~
3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ O O m
a
m ~
c L O ""~
~ ~- ~ ~
O ~ (a ~ (a
Y O L L m
m m Q. L L L
r
m m m C. EA L `
m
'-
=
= /
.
a c c
m m a' ~
o ~~ ~' Q
M~n
o ~~
our O
o c
a C3 p) O •~ C .C
~ c~ w'
~ 3~~~
m•~ 3 ~
rn a a N
r~oo a a a O m
0000 a
0
:
-:: o
a:~:a no
NO co
mo~v
cy ~o ~,,
o c m
a~
m
'° N ~
~' ~ m rn moo ~o~n~ ~ o ~
~- ~ ~ CO~ ,
tn000 e-a- c
r O o m
u
i
apt0 ~ a.; N .1.: O.aO N m~N lp~i'Nrt CO O
:.'. EA L L Ef? EA EA ER 69 Ef? fA 6R fA N- Q = ~ a- ~ N m V! ~ N ~ EA to EA Ei} EA Et? H3 EA U EA U
'~ ~'~ O
..
~
~ O O O p O O O
N ~ p N N N N
O
~:~~ r
:nlE-:::-'::::::~:~:~:
Yilll.~~~;~: ~ A ~
-
~-::
:~~ ~ a
:
~:
;~, ~ o m 3
~:-:: - ~ N m m = ~ O o C3 ~ m ~ CS
~
~
~
~
~
~
~~"~ ° 7 ~ z O O a m a ° i
~;
`
`:
:
:
: ~ C in c
n c
n c
n n
~~
-
~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
m a
a a ~
m a
a
::' ~
~ ~
~
V LUG. L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N _
L L V L
ca t~ m a a a a a a a m ca ca m c c c c
- a a a L L L L L L L
m m m a a a ~. ~ ~ C
L
~
--------------
'
---.-.~
'
~ L L L m m m m
m m m a a a a a a a
O'Q'fl' L
L L L L L L
m m m m m m L m m
aaaaaaa~aa
::':-:.}:-
.~ N~D COCONCflO
O O N I~~ O N~ I~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
_ ODCpO~~ .-aiMOM
0 0 1~
O ~00N'd;N000~ ~
M O M sf ~ Cp M s}' 00
~ C
E N O O C4
MCOO~N NN~OO tptpstNMNCO~r-
6F} lA (!3 ER E{} E+9 EA fA d~ EA EA (f~ ~} Ef} d9 EA EA d~? EH
N
= t6
H ~
~ W ~
- o2S
J
= N
~
~j ~ J
U~
~ ~
~ m
~ ~
~otf c
~
3u~=~ o
i1 Q
~ N m L
~
~U~
o ~
~
::=:~~ ~
~
o m
~m~mo
~
-
o
m
.
.
~
ca ~-
o.~
~UC~Q
~~:~:~ ~U aa~
~j L ~ t
c LLL.c.c
,
.~ .. ~ C9 ~.+ C1 O O O
v
.c .c Q .r ~ m m m m
rnv,•.,.cNmmmm
~, mmm.~m
~ ~ ~ ~
_ ~ v,wm~ ~
.: .: ~maca~ocac~
N ~ ~ V V
m t0
~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~
m
O
~ ~ V ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ T
~
~
oooo° E
E
~ mm
m
m
m
m
~ C
c
c c
c C
C C
G G G C C
_
~ _mm0~v~~ooo°
+-••F.+r
aaa mu~m`-°ooooo
c O
r
X
~ m m~=~•-~~~o O Op~N C C C C C
c c c rn3 3 3 3 3
c ~~~~ mO~
oi~° ini~i~ c o 0 0 0 0
c
v~ot ~ inF-~~F---
~:
:; - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
' , t
,c ,c ~ .c .c .C ~
L.ct+'+.'.;+.'+r~'.~'r-' L L L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
m m m L L L L L L
'CS'C m m m m m m
-
: , ........... c c ca c c c c c
' co ca c6 ~ ~ 'C 'C 'C 'C
:•::•: ~ 0 0 0 0 0
,Rf C c c 0 0 0~ 3 l0 O O W (~ (Q
:•: c E~~ E~ m~ E E E E
O a-~a-~a~av-a
-:
.~ m~~~(pM ~MVCO
OO
:t3
- ooo~~~~~~
ooooo0
r~a
:-:
': oo~u~ao aov,cornr
v
tOM
~ g
~
~OOI~NCOC4
j
~000
CONMOCO
m
O CMNO
.
'
NM
fl
•:
:':•: ~NM~t[)
(V tnl~r-~-
~ EA EA EA Ei? EA V tf} tf} EA t!3 EA st
r-~r-C
f•
~O
Ef3 ff} EH EA EA Ef} ff9 lfl EA
~::~:
::-
.. ~.
~:~~~:.:
-~--~
:~:.>~x:
~:_,~a;;., ..
-:~-::~ ~
--.o::: -::: -
vt::;~,.~::::::
--- c
o .Q
-a
J
m J
~ m
L
y
O =
'
~
3 m
a
.~
a
o
~ N
~
.
_
`
R L
oa w~
~
~ m
=
o ~L
~ ~~ ~ -_,~ ~ ~T~m~~o
m o
C J ~ ~ ~ c~ co
~ 7 C~ . t m
~~ ~~~ V V
w
V~(A ~
t~ mUWIi LiLL~~~~fA
AGENDA SECTION: PROP. ORDINANCE
AGENDA ITEM # 7
REPORT # 182
~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPAREI? BY:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER: /
CHRISTINE COSTELLO, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
~ NAME, TITLE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a second reading of a Transitory Ordinance authorizing the sale of real
propert at 7700 Pillsbu Avenue (south portion only).
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached Transitory Ordinance authorizing
the sale of real property at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue (south portion
onlvl.
II. BACKGROUND
Accessible :Space Inc. (ASi) and Twin City Christian Homes (TCCH) have proposed
a 15-unit project for persons with physical disabilities with incomes at or below 50%
of the area median income (AMI) for the former south half of the City of Richfield
Garage site located at 7700 Pillsbury Avenue. The project will allow adult residents
age 18 and older the opportunity to live independently in the community.
On July 28, 2009 the City Council (Council) considered and approved an Option
Agreement with ASi for the purchase of 7700 Pillsbury Avenue (south portion only)
at a reduced price. The Option Agreement calls for ASi to pay the-City $225,000
upfront. With the establishment of a Housing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District
the City will receive an estimated $350,000 (NPR over the next 25 years funds from
TIF that will allow the City to obtain additional revenue for the property. The Council
approved the Option Agreement with a 4 to 1 vote.
090809 - 2"d Rdg Trans Ord for sale of 7700 Pillsbury_south only.doc
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• On August 8, 2009 the first reading of a Transitory Ordinance was
considered and approved by the Council with a 4 to 1 vote.
• ~ In accordance with the City Charter, the conveyance of City-owned
land requires two readings of a Transitory Ordinance for the sale of
the land.
• The Planning Commission, in a vote of 7-2, approved that the sale of
the property is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan at
their July 27, 2009 meeting.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The undertaking of the Transitory Ordinance will allow the Transitory
Ordinance process to be completed by the end of September 2009
and allow the developer, ASi to maintain its desired project schedule.
C. FINANCIAL
• The value of the south portion of the former City Garage site was
estimated by staff as $575,000 in today's market; this estimate was
considered appropriate in recent discussions with a real estate
appraiser.
• With the creation of a Housing TIF District, the City will be able to sell
the south portion of the parcel to ASi for $225,000 and recoup the
remaining $350,000 through tax increment over the next 25 years.
• In addition to the TIF, the new development would also pay new
"base" taxes to the City, County, and School District, all of which the
site has not been generating due to its exempt status as a City-owned
property.
D. LEGAL
• The City's legal counsel has reviewed the proposed Transitory
Ordinance.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• The developer would be responsible for any environmental
remediation (with the aid of grants whenever possible).
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Delay the second reading of the Transitory Ordinance.
• Do not proceed with the Transitory Ordinance process at this time.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Transitory Ordinance
• Map
VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES- EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Dan Billmark, ASi
~-i
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1.
The real property described in Exhibit A (attached) in the City of Richfield, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, is hereby authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise
disposed of and conveyed by the City to Accessible Space Inc., (ASi) or such other entity
or person as may be designated by ASi and approved by the City Manager.
Section 2.
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all action as is required to sell,
transfer, or otherwise dispose of and convey the real property described in the foregoing
Section 1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the execution of all
documents, purchase agreements, deeds of conveyance, and other instruments
connected with such sale, transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Section 3.
The City Clerk is authorized to make corrections to the legal description in the attached
Exhibit A as required by the Office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles in order to
permit recording of the deed of conveyance.
Passed this 8th day of September 2009 by the Richfield City Council.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~~
EXHIBIT A
Lot 6, Block 4, R.C. Soens Addition, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in
the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
~~~
Sale of 301 West 77th Street
(south portion only)
0 45 90 180 270 360
Feet
AGENDA SECTION: PROP. ORDINANCES
AGENDA ITEM # $
REPORT # 183
~~' STAFF REPORT
CITY CQiJNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY: MELISSA POExLMAN, CITY
PLANNER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIIZECTOR
REVIEW:
SIGNATU
REVIEWED BY CITY ~ ~ ^
MANAGER: GI /`..
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Second reading of an ordinance rezoning 301 77th Street West from Mixed Use -Regional to
Mixed Use - Communi
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve an ordinance amending Appendix 1 of the City
Code by rezoning 301 77th Street West from Mixed Use -Regional to
Mixed Use -Community.
II. BACKGROUND
Accessible Space Inc. (ASi) and Twin City Christian Homes (TCCH) are proposing
-the development of an accessible, affordable 51-unit housing project for low-income
seniors age 62 and older. The project would be located on the 1.13 acre site at 301
77th Street West ("Candlewood Outlot").
On August 11, 2009 the City Council approved an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan changing the designation of 301 77th Street West
(Candlewood Outlot) from Regional Commercial/Office to High Density Residential.
To maintain consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the City's Zoning
Ordinance (as required by State law), a first reading of an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance changing the zoning designation of the Candlewood Outlot parcel from
Mixed Use -Regional (MU-R) to Mixed Use -Community (MU-C) was also
approved. The primary difference between the MU-R and MU-C District is that the
MU-R District does not allow residential uses to exceed 25 percent of the total
090809 - 2nd Reading Rzn 301 77th
building square footage. This District is intended to primarily support destination-
oriented commercial and office uses. The MU-C District allows single-use
residential development of small sites and requires additional greenspace to
support this type of development.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The State requires that Zoning Codes and Comprehensive Plans be
consistent. The proposed amendment will ensure that this is the case.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on July
27, 2009. No one spoke at the hearing.
• The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment
(6-3; Dissenting: Jabs, Peloquin, Rublein).
• The City Council approved a first reading of the proposed ordinance
amendment on August 11, 2009 (4-1; Dissenting: Wroge).
• If the City Council does not approve a second reading of the
Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan will have to be amended again in
order to maintain consistency.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on July
27, 2009.
• Mailed notice was sent to all property owners and residents within 350
feet of the properties.
• If approved, the zoning change will take effect 30 days following
publication in the Sun Current Newspaper.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• If the project moves forward, the applicants will be required to submit
site plans for review by staff, the Planning Commission and the City
Council. Environmental considerations will be addressed at that time.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• N/A
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Ordinance
• Map -land use
• Map -zoning
• Map -Comprehensive Plan
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Dan Billmark, ASi
~-I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING APPENDIX 1 TO
THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE BY REZONING 301 77TH STREET WEST.
FROM MIXED-USE REGIONAL TO MIXED-USE COMMUNITY
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Paragraph (2) of Section 17 of Appendix 1 of the Richfield City Code is
amended to read as follows:
(2) M-16 (SW of 77th and Soo Line Railway)
~,r r'r~n'a'-riwrT~¢re--e ~"~c +~--p,~ ~~ fco+ ~~i + r+~+~~rlir~c of +ho
^~ vcc--vie. z~ rni rc--vrmc
.Lot 2, Block 1, Candlewood
Hotel Addition.
Sec. 2. Section 17 of Appendix 1 of the Richfield City Code is amended by
adding a new Paragraph (15) to read as follows:
(15) M-16 (SW of 77th and Soo Line Railway) Lot 1, Block 1,
Candlewood Hotel Addition.
Sec. 3. This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield
City Charter.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
301 77th St W
Land Use Designations
RES RES APT RES- RES
COM
RES RES APT RES RES
RES RES APT RES
RES RES APT RR RES
PUB
RES RES APT RES
RES RES APT RES
77TH STREET WEST
301 77th St W MHD COM
COM
COM
w
z COM
w
Q
} COM
COM ~
m
RR ~
COM a
COM
COM
CO
N
RES -Residential
0 45 90 180 270 360 APT -Apartment
Feet COM -Commercial
PUB -Public
RR -Railroad
I:\GIS\Community Development\StafflMelissa\Projects\Zoning Cases\301 77th - LU.mxd
~S-3
301 77th St W
Zoning Designations
R R M R-2 I R
I
R R M R-2 I R
R R MR-2 R
R R MR-2 R R
M U-N
R R M R-2 R
R R M R-2 R
77TH STREET WEST
301 77th St W MHD MU-N
Existing: MU-R
Proposed: MU-C
MU-N
w
Z MU-N
w
a
MU-N
MU-R ~
m
R ~_
MU-N d
M U-R
MU-N
MU-
N
R -Single Family Residential
0 45 90 180 270 360 MR-2 -Multi Family Residential
Feet MU-R -Mixed Use Regional
MU-C -Mixed Use Community
MU-N -Mixed Use Neighborhood
I -Industrial
I:\GIS\Community Development\StafflMelissa\Projects\Zoning Cases\301 77th - Z.mxd
301 77th St W
Comprehensive Plan Designations
N
LDR LDR MHD MHD LDR
MHD
LDR LDR MHD MHD LDR
LDR LDR MHD LDR
LDR LDR MHD PRK LDR
HDR
LDR LDR MHD LDR
LDR LDR MHD LDR
77TH STREET WEST
301 77th St W MHD HDR
HDR
HDR
w
z HDR
w
Q
HDR
}
RCO ~
m
PRK ~_
HDR a
RCO
HDR
HD
LDR -Low Density Residential
0 45 90 180 270 360 MHD -Medium High Density Residential
Feet HDR -High Density Residential
RCO -Regional Commercial Office
PRK -Park
I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff\Melissa\Projects\Zoning Cases\301 77th - CP.mxd
AGENDA SECTION: RESOLIITION
AGENDA ITEM # 9
REPORT # 184
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
REPORT PREPARED BY: C GIS, FINANCE MANAGER
NAME, TITLE.
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of 2009 Revised/2010 Proposed Budget resolutions adopting 2010 preliminary
property tax levy, setting truth in taxation hearing date, authorizing budget revisions,
authorizing revision of 2009 budget of various departments, and authorizing use of Public
Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund refund interest earnings for police
and fire expenditures.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion: Adopt the attached resolutions establishing the 2010
preliminary property tax levy and proposed date for the Truth in
Taxation hearing, authorizing budget revisions, authorizing revision
of 2009 budget of various departments, and authorizing the use of
Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund
refund interest earnings for Police and Fire expenditures.
II. BACKGROUND
On September 3, 2009, a special City Council meeting was held for the purpose of
presenting and discussing the 2009 Revised/2010 Proposed Budget and 2010
preliminary property tax levy.
Consequently, as a result of this meeting the City of Richfield's preliminary gross
tax levy is currently set at $15,299,188, which includes a levy for general fund
operations of $12,876,566, a debt service levy of $2,185,332, a tax abatement levy
of $237,290, and a levy for a portion of unallotted 2008 Local Government Aid of
$33,101. The 2010 preliminary gross levy represents a 6.95% increase from the
2009 gross levy.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City Charter establishes that at a special budget meeting of the
Council on or before September 15, the City Manager must submit to
the Council a proposed budget and a budget message in the form and
containing the information specified in Section 7.06. This follows the
Truth in Taxation Statute, which in the past overrode the Charter
process for budget adoption.
• Consequently, as required by the Truth in Taxation legislation (MS
275.065) each "taxing authority" must certify its proposed property tax
levy for payable year 2010 to the County Auditor on or before
September 15, .2009. "Taxing authority" includes all counties, all
school districts, all cities regardless of population, all towns and all
special taxing districts. No local units ofigovernment are exempted
from this requirement.
• In addition, each "taxing authority" with a population of 500 or more,
must certify to their County Auditor the date that has been selected for
the Truth in Taxation hearing by September 15, 2009. This Truth in
Taxation public hearing must be held between November 25 and
December 26, 2009 and must occur at or after 6:00 p.m.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Along with the 2009 Revised/2010 Proposed budget and preliminary
property tax levy, City staff is also recommending. a date for this year's
Truth in Taxation public hearing. It is recommended that this year's
hearing be set for 7:00 p.m. Monday, November 30, 2009. As Council
Members are aware, at these public hearings, the tax levy may be
reduced from the preliminary tax levy, but not increased.
• All official action concerning the preliminary tax levy and setting dates
for the Truth in Taxation hearings must be concluded before
September 15, 2009.
C. FINANCIAL
• The preliminary gross levy for taxes payable 2010 is $15,299,188.
• The City's tax capacity rate will increase from 42.525% in 2009 to
47.992% in 2010.
• The 2008 and 2009 Local Government Aid (LGA) unallotments qualify
as a special levy for taxes levied in 2009 for taxes payable in 2010.
For the City the LGA unallotments were $619,183 in 2008 and
$561,357 for 2009.
• This gave the City the potential to levy an additional $1,180,540 for
taxes payable 2010. However, to levy that additional amount, would
have resulted in an approximate 15% percent increase. This levy only
utilized a $33,101 unallotment levy.
• A final resolution for consideration authorizes the revision of the 2009
budget to conform to the most recent 2009 revenue and expenditure
projections.
D. LEGAL,
• N/A
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The City Council could adopt a lesser 2010 preliminary property tax levy, or
2009 Revised/2010 Proposed budget or select other allowable Truth in
Taxation hearing dates.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution Adopting a Proposed Budget and Tax Levy for the Year 2010
Resolution Authorizing Budget Revisions
• Resolution Authorizing Revision of 2009 Budget of Various Departments
• Resolution Authorizing Use of Public Employees Retirement Association
Police and Fire Fund Refund Interest Earnings for Police and Fire
Expenditures for 2009 Revised and 2010 Proposed Budget
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
q-i
" RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED BUDGET AND TAX LEVY
FOR THE YEAR 2010
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Truth in Taxation law provides for a proposed tax levy to
be certified to the County Auditor by September 15, 2009 and then recertified before
December 31, 2009.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The budget for the City of Richfield for the year 2010 is hereby approved and
adopted with appropriations for each of the departments to be as follows:
General Fund
Leg islative/Executive
Administrative Services
Public Safety
Fire Services
Community Development
Public Works
Recreation Services
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
$ 744,300
1,097,370
7,356,390
3,249,320
1,093,870
4,126,090
1, 563,140
19,230,480
2. The estimated gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources, including
general ad valorem tax levies as hereinafter set forth for the year 2010 which are
more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the 2010 budget, are
hereby found and determined to be as follows:
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $19,230,480
3. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct
ad valorem tax in the year 2009, payable in 2010 for the following purposes and
in the following amounts:
PURPOSE AMOUNT
General Fund $12,843,4652
Debt Service 2,185,332
Cedar Point Tax Abatement ~ 237,290
2008 LGA Unallotment Levy 33,101
Provision has been made in the General .Fund for the payment of the City's
contributory share to Public Employees' Retirement Association.
2 General Fund Levy includes all fiscal disparities distribution amounts.
~~
4. The budget for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield for the
year 2010 is hereby ratified and approved. There is hereby levied upon all
taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax in the year 2009,
payable in 2010 for the following purposes:
PURPOSE AMOUNT
Housing and Redevelopment Authority $594,292
5. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the County Auditor.
6. The Truth in Taxation public hearing shall be .set for 7:00 p.m. November 30,
2009.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~~~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET REVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City Charter and Minnesota Statutes provide for a process for
adopting an annual budget and tax levy; and
WHEREAS, the City Charter provides certain authority for the City Manager and/or
City Council to revise the annual budget; and
WHEREAS, it would be beneficial to restate such authority with the adoption of the
budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The City Manager may increase the budget by City Council action provided that
unbudgeted receipts will be available to equal or exceed the increased expenditures.
2. The City Manager may authorize transfers between divisions within a department
providing the transfers do not increase or decrease the department or total budget.
3. The City Manager may transfer budgeted amounts between departments only with the
approval of the City Council.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
_I~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION OF 2009 BUDGET OF VARIOUS
DEPARTMENTS
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 10174 appropriated funds for personal services, other
expenses and capital outlays for each department of the City for the year of 2009; and
WHEREAS, The City Charter, Chapter 7, Section 7.09, gives the Council authority
to transfer unencumbered appropriation balances from one department to another within
the same fund at the request of the City Manager; and
WHEREAS, The City Manager has requested a revision of the 2009 budget
appropriations in accordance with Charter provisions and as detailed in the Proposed 2010
budget document.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1: That the 2009 appropriations for each department of the General Fund be
amended to establish the following totals:
General Fund
Legislative/Executive $ 740,460
Administrative Services 1,093,560
Public Safety 8,082,940
Fire Services 3,194,220
Community Development 257,660
Public Works 4,047,890
Recreation Services 1,573,090
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 18,989,820
DECREASE $ 815,660
2. Estimated 2009 gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources, as the
same are- more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the proposed
2010 budget, are hereby revised as follows:
DECREASE
$815,660
3. That the City Manager and the Finance Manager bring into effect the provisions
of this resolution.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
./t
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
ASSOCIATION POLICE AND FIRE FUND REFUND INTEREST EARNINGS FOR
CERTAIN POLICE AND FIRE EXPENDITURES
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield received a refund of overfunded residual assets
from the closed Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Police and Fire Fund;
and
WHEREAS, the City adopted a plan where only interest earnings on the principal of
the residual assets are to be used for eligible expenditures; and
WHEREAS, all eligible expenditures be restricted to Police and Fire expenditures;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. Revised 2009/Proposed 2010 Police and Fire Expenditures using PERA funds
2009R 2010
General Fund Operating Expenditures
Police and Fire 149,580 96,210
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September 2009.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BIISINESS
AGENDA ITEM # LO
REPORT # 1HS
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
STEVEN L. DEVICH
REPORT PREPARED BY: r._.s_ „ .~ . _i. ~r~
- NaNtE s
REVIEWED BY CITY '~ •
i'
MANAGER: I~
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of City Council approval of an agreement for. consulting services with Orfield
Laboratories, Inc. for Council Chambers lighting/daylighting, acoustical and audio visual
design.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Authorize the City Manager to execute the attached
agreement with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for consulting services for
lighting/daylighting, acoustical and audio visual design for the new
City Council Chambers.
II. BACKGROUND
On August 17, 2009 the City Council held a work session to further discuss the
design elements of the new City Hall facility. There were several options
considered during that work session, including a discussion regarding contracting
with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for a more in-depth analysis and design of the
lighting/daylighting, acoustical and audio-visual aspects of the proposed Council
Chambers.
Wold Architects have indicated that their services included these elements of
design, and that they have provided these design services for other City Council
Chambers such as Farmington City Hall. However, their services in this area are
not as in-depth as is being proposed by Orfield Laboratories. At the conclusion of
the discussion on the matter of the Council Chambers design elements, the majority
of the City Council indicated that the City Manager should work with Orfield Labs to
prepare an agreement for some level of such services for City Council
consideration.
~:-.
The agreement now before the City Council is the result of the subsequent
discussions between the City Manager and Steve Orfield. The agreement only
contemplates Phase I of such analysis and design. Moreover, it only includes the
Council Chambers and not any other conference rooms adjacent to the Chambers.
An additional agreement would be necessary to provide for additional and more
extensively detailed work related to these issues for the Council Chambers or other
conference rooms if directed by the City Council.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The agreement for the architectural design of the new City Hall
complex contains provisions for designing various aspects of a new
City Council Chambers. However, those specific~lesign aspects
related to daylighting, acoustics and audio visual design are not as in-
depth as the type of testing and design that would be done by Orfield
Laboratories, Inc.
• Orfield Laboratories has proposed doing a more in-depth analysis of
these aspects of the new Council Chambers under a separate
agreement and the consensus of the majority of the City Council was
to proceed in this direction.
• If the City Council wants to formally proceed with using the services of
Orfield Laboratories for daylighting, acoustics and audio-visual design
of the City Council Chambers an agreement should be authorized and
executed pursuant to formal City Council approval.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The timing of making a decision on this matter is critical. If there is to
be additional design pertaining to any aspect of the new City Council
Chambers, it must be done as soon as possible in order to prevent
further delays in the project.
While this analysis will look at the configuration of the Chambers, it
.should be noted that it is very late in the process to make -any
significant changes in the size or shape of the Chambers.
C. FINANCIAL
• The Phase I cost for these services shall be in a lump sum amount of
$25,500.
• The cost of these services will be included in the New City Hall Project
budget. However, this additional cost was not anticipated in the
budget and some other adjustments/reductions in other areas of the
budget will be necessary to pay for these costs.
D. .LEGAL
• The attached agreement has been prepared by the City Attorney.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• None
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• The City Council could decide to postpone the approval of this agreement to
a future meeting. However, that decision would further delay the project.
• The City Council could decide not to approve this agreement and seek other
terms to the agreement.
• The City Council could decide to forego the use of OrField Laboratories for
consulting services pertaining to the new City Council Chambers and "
continue with Wold's plans and design for the Council Chambers.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Agreement for consulting services with Orfield Laboratories
• _ Proposal for services' by Orfield Laboratories.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Steve Orfield, Orfield Laboratories
i ~ ---~
CITY CHAMBERS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of September, 2009, by
and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation- ("City") and Orfield
Laboratories, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Orfield").
RECITALS
A. The parties acknowledge that without the: requirement of specific building
performance standards, building projects may have failures related to Daylighting, Lighting,
Acoustics, Thermal Comfort and Indoor Air Quality (collectively "Standards") and that the
failure of building design and construction_ to meet Standards is the source of occupant
complaints about buildings.
B. Orfield has extensive experience in providing custom programs to develop
and define Standards. Orfield and the City have previously entered into a City Hall
Building Performance Standards Consulting Agreement dated 2008 (the
"Agreement"). Under the Agreement, Orfield agreed to develop a program to provide
Standards for the City's planned design and construction of a City Hall, excluding the city
council chambers.
C. The City wishes to have Orfield provide recommendations regarding the
design of the city council chambers ("Council Chambers"), with respect to the Standards,
particularly Acoustics, Audio-Visual and Daylighting.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
the parties acknowledge, the parties agree as follows:
The Recitals are made part of this Agreement.
2. Orfield shall analyze the room shape and layout of the Council Chambers
and develop Standards for the Council Chambers, and the components comprising
Acoustics, Daylighting, Lighting, and Audio Visual Design will be further defined in Orfield
report, required under subparagraph 4A. Orfield shall construct an acoustic computer
model of ahe Council Chambers and a daylighting computer model of the council
Chambers, and each will be tested and analyzed for conception performance. Ofield shall
provide specific design approaches that are useful in achieving the Standards and will
include specific test and measurement criteria that Orfield will use to confirm that the
Standards are met and maintained.
3. Orfield will provide consulting support to the architect to assist it in designing
the Council Chambers to incorporate and implement the Standards. This includes design
consultation to the architect in matters of Acoustics, Daylighting, and Lighting.
__lo-~
4. For a flat fee of $25,500 payable upon satisfactory completion, Orfield shall
prepare a written report within three weeks of the date of this Agreement. The report will
detail the Standards, provide recommendations for overall room shape and daylighting of
the Council Chambers. The report shall also include a budget for the implementation of
the design recommendations, identifying items that are already in the current budget for
the City Hall project and also identifying items that are recommended to be included later.
5. -The City shall have the right to cancel this Agreement and terminate the
services of Orfield for convenience upon seven (7) days written notice to Orfield. Upon
receipt of such notice, Orfield shall submit to the -City the total of its hours worked on
Task(s) through the date of the notice and the City shall compensate Orfield for its work
based on reasonable invoices and expenses submitted toward the Task(s) to the time. of
notice of termination.
6. The City shall have the right to terminate Orfield for cause upon seven (7)
days written notice. For cause shall include any material failure of Orfield to timely and
satisfactorily carry out the services to be performed under this Agreement. In the event of
a termination for cause, the parties agree to promptly retain amutually-acceptable
mediator if they are unable to resolve the appropriate compensation for services rendered
to the date of termination. The parties retain all rights in law or in equity if they are unable
to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement.
7. All expenses reasonable and necessary in the timely performance of
Orfield's duties under this Agreement will be billed to the City and paid at cost. Orfield may
charge no more than five (5) cents per copy for standard 8 '/2" by 11" copies or for
reproductions of special size. Orfield shall notify the City for pre-approval of anticipated
expenses not ordinarily incurred in the course of the duties described in the Agreement,
including but not limited to, use of special equipment, travel, overnight accommodations or
meals. No Orfield travel within the Twin Cities' metropolitan area shall be reimbursed as
an expense.
8. The City shall pay Orfield on invoices received in accordance with the
Minnesota Municipal Prompt Payment Act.
9. Orfield does not provide architectural or professional engineering services
and no such services are contemplated by this Agreement. The specific areas comprising
the Standards; Acoustics, Daylighting, Lighting, Thermal Comfort and Indoor Air Quality,
are not recognized under any professional registration practice.
10. Orfield agrees that in the performance of its duties under the Agreement,
Orfield shall work through the City Manager as the City's primary representative and shall
also work with the City's architect and engineer, Wold Architects and Engineers, a
Minnesota corporation ("Wold"). Orfield is providing no direction, control or supervision of
a) Wold or engineering professionals that.may be retained by Wold or the City, or b) the
contractor(s) or its subcontractors constructing the City Hall.
11. Orfield shall work cooperatively with Wold in the process of incorporating and
implementing the Council Chamber Standards into the design. In the event Orfield and
Wold cannot agree on any aspect of the incorporation or implementation of a Standard, for
any reason, Orfield shall promptly notify the City Manager and describe disagreement in
J0-3
writing. The City Manager shall attempt to promptly resolve the disagreement. If the City
Manager's decision does not result in a resolution of the disagreement in a manner
satisfactory to Orfield, Orfield shall promptly give notice to the City Manager that the matter
should be finally decided by the City Council at the earliest opportunity. The City Council
shall make the final determination regarding the presented issue. Orfield shall not stop
performance of any of its duties under the Agreement during the period of disagreement or
after a City Council decision with which Orfield does not agree.
12. The process carried out by Orfield contemplated in this Agreement employs
analysis methods that Orfield has developed previously and uses on an ongoing basis for
evaluation and task performance analysis. OrField will use these methods to prepare a
specific analysis plan for the City Hall. The City acknowledges that 'it has no right to use
any methods that are proprietary to Orfield other than for the City Hall Project and that
such methods, if property rights to them exist, remain the sole property of Orfield. Orfield
hereby grants to the City the right to use such analysis methods for purposes of
development and implementation of Standards for the City Hall. In the event the City
terminates services of Orfield, the City shall have the right to use these analysis methods
for the sole purpose of completing the City Hall Project.
13. Orfield acknowledges that he has received the following documents from the
City:
A. Architectural floor plan;
B. Interior furnishings/design plan;
C. Reflected ceiling plan;
D. HVAC plan;
E. Interior wall elevations;
F. Architectural specification set;
G. Lighting specifications.
Orfield shall be entitled to rely on their accuracy, unless otherwise provided in
writing by the City. Orfield shall make further requests for information to the City in writing
as may be necessary and City shall respond within a reasonable time.
14. Orfield shall indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from any and all
actions arising out of Orfield's negligence or alleged negligence in the performance of the
duties set forth in this Agreement. Upon receipt of .any third party claim against the City
due to Orfield's alleged negligence, the City shall timely tender the defense to Orfield
which shall defend the City to the fullest extent permitted by law and shall be responsible
for all attorneys' fees and costs of the action. If Orfield declines to defend the City, Orfield
shall be responsible for City's reasonable costs and attorneys' fees incurred in defense of
Orfield actions that are adjudged to be negligent and shall allocate such fees and costs
proportionally. Orfield's liability to the City shall not exceed the claim limits of Orfield's
general liability policy; or other applicable policy, which Orfield agrees to keep in force
during the claims period.
15. Orfield shall provide to the City evidence of insurance, and coverage limits,
~s follows and shall list the City as an additional insured on OrFeld's general liability
insurance policy:
i o-~{
Workers' comp;
General liability;
Umbrella liability;
Automobile liability;
Professional liability.
Orfield shall maintain such coverages as necessary during the claims period and
shall provide City with athirty-day (30) written notice prior to any cancellation of insurance
during the claims period.
18. This Agreement is subject to all applicable laws and ordinances and shall be
governed by Minnesota law.
ORFIELD LABORATORIES, INC.
By
Steven J. Orfield
Its President
CITY OF RICHFIELD
By
Debbie Goettel
Its Mayor
CITY OF RICHFEILD
By
Steven L. Devich
Its City Manager
August 21, 2009
~'iirtYd Lebiarr~'lae lir1~
CLIENT
City of Richfield
CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE
Mr. Steve Devich
City Manager
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Ave.
Richfield, MN 55423
Phone: (612) 861-9702
Email: sdevich@ci.richfield.mn.us
ARCHITECT
Mr. Mike Klass
Wold Architects
305 St. Peter Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Phone: (651) 227-7773
E-mail: mklass@woldae.com
PREPARED ~Y
Steven J. Orfield
Michael R. Role
Orfield Laboratories, Inc.
2709 East 25"' Street
Minneapolis MN 55406
Voice: (612) 721-2455
Fax: (612) 721-2457
E-mail:
Steve @orfieldlabs.com
mike@orfieldlabs.com
PROJECT
Memo 10 -Council Chamber
This memo provides an update on the consulting for the City Council Chamber
and the two adjacent meeting rooms. This consuRing was discussed in
October, and its contract was postponed until the project got to the stage where
it was necessary. We are now considering the Council Chamber, so this
becomes important.
~r~~~ Council Chamber
Clirr C City of Richfield
From October Memo to Steve Devich
,The project for the City Hall was not contracted with involvement on the City
',Council Chambers. This was held in abeyance until the project was underway.
The Council Chambers and two meeting rooms are now under design, and it is
time to put this consulting work in place.
This consulting includes creating 2 computer models of the Council Chamber
and verifying the acoustic room shape and performance, checking the walls for
sound transmission, controlling the HVAC noise, working on the room shaping
and glazing related to daylighting, working through testing of color selections,
working on the lighting design for different uses, developing audio-visual
Systems, consulting on AV and lighting control strategies, etc.
FEE RANGES FOR RICHFIELD PROJECT -TYPICAL RANGE
Thls was the estimate in that memo for the City Council Chambers
~It did not include the meeting rooms)
1. Council Chambers - AV Design ($500k) Typical Minimum $50,000
2. Council Chamber Acoustics Typical Minimum $25,000
3. Council Chamber Lighting/Daylighting Typical Minimum $25,000
This type of work was undertaken for the City of Maple Grove and the City of
Lakeville Council Chambers. The City of Maple Grove had a budget, in current
dollars, of about $1,000,000, and out contract for the above items was
approximately $300,000 in current dollars. Our contract with them was
principally on the Council Chambers and adjacent conference room. So the
systems specified were more extensive and far more expensive than what we
are planning for at the City of Richfield.
The discussion today is regarding proceeding to define the scope and
involvement on this effort. This effort, unlike the critique work we are doing on
building performance for the City, will include final design of the Audio Visual
System in a bid package.
t}rsiisld l.~ao;~lsx ie¢: irc
~,V~
~>~~: Gouncil Chamber
t'!~t City of Richfield
Council Chambers -Acoustic and Audio-Visual Consulting
1. The current design of the Gity Council Chambers will be reviewed for its shape
and capabilities via looks at acoustics comfort and audio-visual uses of the
Chamber. This review will be based on Occupancy Qualify, on one hand, and
on room performance on the other. The result will be a space that is relaxed to
meet in for long periods and is relaxing for the public when they attend or
present to the City Council. Most Council Chambers have harsh lighting, little or
no daylighting, poor acoustics and poorly thought out meeting layout and audio
visual capabilities
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
may result in changes to the Council Chambers.
3. A computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed, and this will be
tested and analyzed for acoustics and audiovisual performance.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for changes and acoustics
treatments in this space.
5. Orfield Labs will consult with the City and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
Council Chambers -Lighting & Daylighting Consulting
1. The current design of the City Council Chambers will be reviewed for its shape
and capabilities via looks at daylighting and Lighting uses of the Chamber. This
review will be based on Occupancy Quality, on one hand, and on room
performance on the other. The result will be a space that is relaxed to meet in
for long periods and is relaxing for the public when they attend or present to the
Ciiy Council. Most Council Chambers have harsh lighting, little or no
daylighting, poor acoustics and poorly thought out meeting layout and audio
visual capabilities
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
may result in changes to the Council Chambers.
3. A computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed, and they will
be tested and analyzed for lighting and daylighting performance.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for changes and lighting systems
in this space. This will include an actual lighting design with reflected ceiling
plans, fixture recommendations and control recommendations
5. Orfield Labs will consult with the City and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
;,~;, ti
t7triidd l•~as:~t,~ ~ Ire
® 8
fir~r+~: Council Chamber '
~i~i City of Richfield
Council Chambers -Lighting, Dayiighting & Audio Visual Controls
1. The City Council Chambers will be reviewed its function and uses with regard
to control of lighting, daylighting, audio and video systems
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
will include strategies for impendent control of lighting and daylighting, as well
as media system control of daylighting, lighting, acoustics and AV systems.
3. Two computer models of the Council Chambers are available for these efforts,
and they will be used to complete this project.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for daylighting, lighting, and AV
control in this space. This will include recommendations for systems and for
control placement.
5. Ofield Labs will consult with the City and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
Council Chambers - CBPS Building Pertormance Standards
1. Orfield Labs will provide assistance to The City and Wold on the application of
these standards to the Council Chamber. This is under the existing contract
with the City.
(}rtidd L~~a:rtsz ~: Ir-~
~v-
Ft~ea: Council Chamber
t~a~t Cfty of Richfield
OPTIONAL ANALYSIS -NOT IN ORIGINAL ESTIMATE
Meeting and Conference Room -Acoustic and Audio-Visual Consulting
1. The current design of the Meeting and Conference Rooms will be reviewed for
its shape and capabilities via looks at acoustics comfort and audio-visual uses
of the Chamber. This review will be based on Occupancy Quality, on one hand,
and on room perforrnance on the other. The result will be a space that is
relaxed to meet in for long periods and is relaxing for the public when they
attend or present to the City Council. Most Council Chambers have harsh
lighting, little or no daylighting, poor acoustics and poorly thought out meeting
layout and audio visual capabilities
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
may result in changes to the Council Chambers.
3. A computer model of the Meeting and Conference Rooms will be constructed
as necessary, and they will be tested and analyzed for acoustics and
audiovisual performance.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for changes and acoustics
treatments in this space.
5. Orfield Labs will consult with the City and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
Meeting and Conference Rooms -Lighting & Daylighting Consulting
1. The current design of the Meeting and Conference Rooms will be reviewed for
its shape and capabilities via looks at daylighting and Lighting uses of the
Chamber. This review will be based on Occupancy Quality, on one hand, and
on room perforrnance on the other. The result will be a space that is relaxed to
meet in for long periods and is relaxing for the public when they attend or
present to the City Council. Most Council Chambers have harsh lighting, little or
no daylighting, poor acoustics and poorly thought out meeting layout and audio
visual capabilities
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
may result in changes to the Meeting and Conference Rooms.
3. A computer model of the Meeting and Conference Rooms, as necessary, and
they will be tested and analyzed for lighting and daylighting performance.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for changes and lighting systems
in this space. This will include an actual lighting design wish reflected ceiling
plans, fixture recommendations and control recommendations
5. Orfield Labs will consult with the City and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
i7r4i~id L:sxie~~:~ltt i~ irc
La ~ ~
~=1~~i City of Richfield
Meeting and Conference Rooms, -Lighting, Daylighting & Audio Visual Controls
1. The Meeting and Conference Rooms will be reviewed their function and
uses with regard to control of lighting, daylighting, audio and video systems
2. Consulting advice will be provided on issues that are in need of resolution. This
wilt include strategies for independent control of lighting and daylighting, as well
as media system control of daylighting, lighting, acoustics and AV systems.
3. Computer models of the Meeting and Conference Rooms are available for
these efforts, and they will be used to complete this project.
4. A memo will be issued with recommendations for daylighting, lighting, and AV
control in this space. This will include recommendations for systems and for
control placement.
5. Orfietd Labs will consult with the Gity and Wold on the execution of these
concepts and designs.
~ Council Chambers - CBPS Building Pertormance Standards
1. Orfield Labs will provide assistance to The City and Wold on the application of
these standards to the Council Chamber. This is under the existing contract
with the Ciiy.
~?rSisld L:~rras:~lsx ~ irc
1
Ftrst~d. Council Chamber
Gicr.C City of Richfield
COST APPROACHES
As I discussed at the City Council meeting, our budget placeholder for the October
discussions was typical of a moderate budget city half project. We have many options
regarding your project, from this typical level to more modest levels. And we can remove
'the two additional rooms and leave out control design, saving about $20k on those two
',moves. Many additional strategies are possible, including reducing the budget on AV,
'~, which also reduces fees. {Keep in mind that there is design time in incorporating old
i equipment in new systems, as these existing components need to be analyzed in the
same way as new systems. And the AV systems now exposed should be designed as
i concealed systems in the new Council Chamber.
This project can be approached in a more limited way, and it is important to keep in mind',
that the early issues are the room acoustics and shape, AV approach, and daylighting
approach. These can all impact the building right now, and there is little time to spare. A
way to stage this project might be: ~,
~ Phase 1 - $25,500
1. Analyze the City Council room shape and layout, in terms of how well they work
with modem approaches to acoustics and audio-visual design. This will insure a
state of the art program and room approach. (Currently, there is no place for a
rear screen roam, dark finishes are contemplated, daylighting is not in the
design, and there are no performance criteria for the room or systems.)
2. Analyze the room as it relates to daylighting, as this will be one of the single
most effective occupancy quality objectives in this space.
3. An acoustic computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed, and
this will be tested and analyzed for conceptual acoustics and audiovisual
performance.
4. A daylighting computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed,
and this will be tested and analyzed for conceptual daylighting performance.
5. Recommendations will be issued for overall room shape and daylighting
concept approach
6. Develop a budget for this project, with regard to issues that are already in the
current budget and issues that must be included later.
Phase II -Budget to be determined
Phase II will be a continuation of this project at the scope and budget that is determined
in Phase I, following on the concepts noted earlier in this memo.
~ Summary
As you discussed at the City Council meeting, we can reuse some of your AV systems,
and we have done this in the past. But it is important to identity a real budget range for
all the new systems that you are going to need. Then we can at least get conduit in
place and pick up some expense in future expansion. tt would be far less than desirable
to move into a new facility with mainly second hand systems.
Or~ield L;~+c;:slzc ie¢; his
~.~ Council Chamber
1~ City of Richfield
Phase I Consulting on the Council Chambers -Summary
Orfield Labs has discussed with the City of Richfield the design of the City Council
Chamber in terms of our disciplines. Some design firms attempt to deal with acoustics,
lighting and AV in these rooms via the use of vendor advice and vendor design. Most
architects would automatically call for specialized consulting on this type of project.
Orfield Labs has run a national workplace research group, the Open. Plan Working
Group, for 10 years. Our Design Advisory Council includes 13 of the most prominent
design firms in the United States. We would be pleased to refer Richfield to any of
these firms, or to local design firms, who would clearly support the notion that architects
should not independently practice in these fields, as they have no training, tools or
experience. So what we are proposing is the standard approach with most architects.
On the Lakeville City Hall and the Maple Grove City Hall, on the St. Cloud Civic Center
and on Frank Lloyd Wright's Monona Terrace Civic Center in Madison, our consulting
was full design based consulting, preparing all final documents for the technical
consulting.
This phase I effort is intended to insure that the council chamber is designed in such as
way as to optimize the perceptual environment and relates to the overall building
design.
This will include items such as:
1. Analyze the City Council room shape and layout, in terms of how well they work
with modern approaches to acoustics and audio-visual design. This will insure a
state of the art program and room approach. (Currently, there is no place for a
rear screen room, dark finishes are contemplated, daylighting is not in the
design, and there are no performance criteria for the room or systems.)
2. Analyze the room as it relates to daylighting, as this will be one of the single
most effective occupancy quality objectives in this space.
3. An acoustic computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed, and
this will be tested and analyzed for conceptual acoustics and audiovisual
performance.
4. A daylighting computer model of the Council Chambers will be constructed, and
this will be tested and analyzed for conceptual daylighting performance..
5. Recommendations will be issued for overall room shape and daylighting
concept approach
6. Develop a budget for this project, with regard to issues that are already in the
current budget and issues that must be included later.
Phase II will be the execution of these concepts within the budget that the City of
Richfield determines, with our assistance.
"~.
~~K
Q~~~I L~as~r`~ ~ is