Loading...
2003-06-17�,- RICHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION ® AGENDA Commission Members Robert Dietl Rodney Schmidt Gloma Hamernick Chad Sharkey Rick Jabs Linda Slocum Barb Kritzman Gordon Vizecky Gary Ness 1. Call to Order Tuesday, June 17, 2003 7:00 p.m. Richfield City Hall (Council Chambers) 6700 Portland Ave Regular Staff Jim Topitzhofer (Staff Liaison) John Evans (Secretary) George Atkinson (PW/Engineering) Tom Foley (PW/Engineering) Frank White (Rae Programs) 2. Approval of Minutes ❑ Regular Meeting: May 20, 2003 3. Public Comment ❑ Opportunity to discuss items not printed on the agenda 4. Program Spotlight ❑ Adult Athletics (Frank White) 5. Staff Reports ❑ Recreation Services • Community Center Remodeling • Outdoor Pool Renovation • Tri-CityNMCA Skate Park 6. Discussion Items ❑ 76th Street Bicycle Lanes (Atkinson/Foley) ❑ Ordinance Amendment: Single -Sort Recycling (Topitzhofer) 7. Action Items ❑ FOWL Board Member Appointments (Topitzhofer) Liaisons John Enger (Council) Mark Tolvstad (Planning Com) Immediately preceding the CSC meeting, the Public Works Department will be hosting an open house regarding the 76th Street Bicycle Lane project. That meeting will be held from 6:30 to 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. CSC members are encouraged to attend. 8. Committee Reports ❑ Transportation Committee (Kritzman) ❑ Ballfield Improvement Task Force (Jabs and Kritzman) ❑ FOWL (Dietl) ❑ Planning Commission (Kritzman) ❑ Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council [RCHSPC] (Slocum) 9. Other 10. Next Meeting Special Joint Meeting with City Council Tuesday, July 8, 2003 6:00 p.m. Richfield City Hall - Council Chambers 11. Adjournment y Y V a Dc„a oll Ileftibe-rr.1l aft:, a ,fq a�'f .gr rte,m MW OS p.A80 d 11"V ,ft�111k ;t+Cl tg"i2.O,A'C sit' enil-v vn-rirclri .nt.q 00-.T nt GC:� nodmsrto JL-mlua. tAAI- �.. w.� DRAK V:INU`IES UYELL APPROVED AT' JUNE �1G M May 20, 2003 RICHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ® Tuesday, May 20, 2003 Wood Lake Nature Center Present: Commissioners Chad Sharkey, Bob Dietl, Barb Kritzman, Linda Slocum, Gordon Vizecky, Rodney Schmidt Staff Jim Topitzhofer, John Evans, Ray Wroblewski, Jim Olson, George Atkinson, Frank White, MaryKaye Champa Council Liaison John Enger Planning Commission Liaison Mark Tolvstad Absent: Commissioners Rick Jabs, Gary Ness, Gloma Hamernick Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Acting CSC Chair Dietl at 7:04 p.m. Approval of Minutes Kritzman moved, seconded by Sharkey, to approve the minutes of the April 15 regular meeting. Approved, ayes all. Other Topitzhofer requested that the Public Works items be moved up in the agenda. Approved by consensus. Program Spotlight 'J Summer Youth Programs Recreation Programs & Athletics Manager White and Recreation Supervisor Champa presented a report on summer recreation programs, services, events and drop -in locations being offered for youth. Staff Reports Public Works For estry Report Wroblewski provided the Forestry report. Action Items'`1 76t" Street Micro -Planing and Striping of Bicycle Lane Engineering Supervisor Atkinson summarized. Microplaning is milling down edges that have risen due to movement of road segments. Outer road lanes will be designated as bike lanes with striping (three entities, including Three Rivers Park District, identify the road as a potential bike corridor). Kritzman asked what other corridors it ties into. Recreation Services Director Topitzhofer said that it would be part of a connection between Minnetonka (along the Nine Mile Creek) and the Fort Snelling/Minnesota River area. Atkinson said that public opinion has been varied and the Transportation Committee hasn't recommended a plan. Atkinson asked for ideas regarding the citizen involvement process. He said that one option mentioned was reconstruction. Sharkey recommended the minimum cost and construction activity at this time. Slocum recommended meetings at places like Erik's Bike Shop, Penn Cycle and other places where cyclists might be found Schmidt recommended sending notice of a meeting two blocks away from 761" St. Enger said that 350' is common for notice (1/2 block). Vizecky suggested that it be discussed in the context of the larger bicycle trail project so it isn't perceived as a five -block trail to nowhere. Topitzhofer said that the striping, if it is well -received, could be continued all the way to 18'" Ave. Enger suggested painting a bicycle icon on the lane itself. Schmidt asked if Sunday parking would be discontinued. Atkinson confirmed. Enger said that many residents in the third ward are very supportive of bike lanes on 761" St. Vizecky moved, seconded by Kritzman, to approve the public information & citizen involvement process. Approved, ayes all. Topitzhofer said that interested residents could be invited to the June or July CSC meeting. Discussion Items Right -of -Way Ordinance In response to Sharkey's request for a definition of right-of-way, Engineering Technician Olson pointed out a legal definition of right-of-way in the ordinance (a reference to the State's RoW definition). In response to Vizecky's question regarding exemptions for residents, Olson pointed out to a reference to certain exemptions for homeowner usage (plantings, etc). Enger asked about storage of a garbage receptacle in a street for a steeply -sloped yard. Olson said that, with some exceptions, storage would hot be allowed for a homeowner. Vizecky asked about insurance requirements for a homeowner May 20, 2003 in such a situation (same liability as a business?). Olson asked if the CSC thought that the ordinance should be more lenient towards homeowners. Vizecky said that the exception would almost always refer to dumpsters. Topitzhofer said that construction dumpsters usually are placed close to the house anyway. Vizecky suggested specific terms be added in reference to dumpsters used by homeowners and stored in the street (permit process). Slocum moved, seconded by Sharkey, to recommend approval of the Right -of -Way ordinance with the addition of language specifically addressing the storage of dumpsters used by homeowners in the RoW. Approved, ayes all. MEMMMUSIMOVU Recycling Ordinance Change' Single -Sort Recycling Topitzhofer explained that the proposed ordinance change would allow garbage haulers to collect recycling that is not sorted by material type and collected in large tubs on wheels. It would also permit haulers to make pickups every other week instead of every week. This method typically results in a greater volume of recycled materials, less landfill trash, less traffic, and less wear on the streets. Presently, no trash haulers officially practice this and the ordinance doesn't permit it. Waste Management has requested that it be permitted. Slocum moved, seconded by Vizecky, to recommend approval of the ordinance change. Topitzhofer said that the ordinance change would require a public hearing. Sharkey wanted to see the present language of the ordinance. Approved, five ayes, one nay. Enger requested copy in the next CSC materials indicating the change being made to the ordinance. Staff Reports (continued) Recreation Services Topitzhofer reported on the following: COMMUNITY CENTER REMODELING Bid opening was May 14. Award of contract will be considered by Council on May 27. Topitzhofer said that some alternates could still be subtracted from the contract, if the contract amount is determined to be too high. He said that the low bid is being protested by another bidder because of the time the low bid was received (stamped 2:00 and 2:01 pm when the bid opening was scheduled for 2:00 pm). He said that the City Attorney advised that the bid be accepted. OUTDOOR POOL RENOVATION Substantial completion date is Friday, May 23. Pool will be filled next week. Work is on schedule. Slocum recommended a grand opening celebration. Sharkey suggested tie-in to the Council's City Beautiful events. Enger and Slocum suggested a free night, with special invitation to previous season passholders. TRI-CITYIYMCA SKATE PARK Ground has been broken. Gravel will be hauled in tomorrow. Completion expected in August. Committee Reports Transportation Committee Kritzman said that she was appointed to the committee. 66' and Portland is an immediate priority. Vizecky moved, seconded by Slocum, to appoint Ness as the alternate. Approved, ayes all. Ballffeld improvement Task Force No report was given. FOWL Diet[ said that the FOWL Dinner, held on Friday, May 2, was a big success. He mentioned the Urban Wildland Half Marathon. Planning Commission PC meeting cancelled. No PC report given. Tolvstad mentioned the July 14 bike tour RCHSPC Slocum provided the report. Next Meeting Tuesday, June 17, Wood Lake Nature Center Adjournment Slocum moved, seconded by Kritzman, to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 9:11 p.m. RICHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION ...,_ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Agenda Item Ordinance Amendment: Proposed ordinance amendment Meeting Date: June 17, 2003 Agenda Section Discussion Items Jim Topitzhofer In May, the CSC voted to recommend approval of an ordinance change that would allow single -sort recycling in Richfield. The executive summary for that item did not indicate which language was being added or removed from the ordinance. Attached is the proposed ordinance amendment. Text that is proposed to be removed is striken with a line; new text is indicated with underline. The City Council will consider the ordinance change on June 24 and July 22 (two readings are required). No further action is required from the CSC. Recommended Action None requested. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING; AMENDING SUBSECTION 601.15, SUBDIVISION 10 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 601-15, subdivision 10 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 10. Obligation of licensed collectors. A licensed garbage and refuse collector must pick up garbage, refuse, and yard waste in the manner provided by this section. A licensed residential garbage and refuse collector must also pick up designated recyclables as follows: ^^ a weekly ba 'S begiRRing on er before the e#eGtive date of this e e -arid On the-manne pFevided in this seGtien (a) Recvclino pick up must be provided on a weeklv basis if the. capacity of the provided container is 32 gallons or less. or. (b) Recvclino Dick uD must be Drovided on a weekhr or bi-weekly basis if the capacity of the Drovided container is 32 oallons or -greater. Sec. 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Adopted this _ day of 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk CAH-232956v1 RC160-7 Item RICHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Meeting Date: June 17, 2003 Agenda Section Attachments Staff Contact Letter to neighborhood regarding open house Tom Foley Immediately preceding the June CSC meeting, an open house will be held by the Public Works Department to discuss the 76'" Street Microplaning and Bicycle Lane Striping project. In May, the CSC were presented with details about the project and voted to approve the public information and resident involvement process for the project Attached is the letter, sent by Public Works to homeowners near 76" Street, inviting residents to the open house. The project will be discussed again at this meeting. Recommended Action Discuss the project and provide staff with feedback. Public Works Department June 11, 2003 Subject: 76th Street Bike Trail Project MAYOR MARTIN J. KIRSCH The City of Richfield proposes to convert the segment of 76th Street between Emerson Avenue to Lyndale Avenue from four traffic lanes to two traffic lanes and CITY COUNCIL JOHN ENGER bike lanes on the shoulders. The proposal is designed to demonstrate the use of 76th SUSAN ROSENBERG Street as a bicycle route across Richfield. The proposal is a low-cost solution to SUZANNE M SANDAHL safe bicycle routes and ascertain community opinion on providing on -street GERTRUDE ULRICH provide bicycle lanes in Richfield. CITY MANAGER SAMANTHA ORDUNO The Richfield Community Services Commission is offering residents two opportunities to learn about the proposal and provide comments before the Commission prepares its recommendation to the City Council on whether or not the project should proceed. A City Answer Van will be in the neighborhood within one block of the proposed 76th Street bike trail on June 11, 2003 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. to answer resident questions and receive comments. The van will visit each block from Aldrich Avenue to Emerson Avenue adjacent to 76th Street. Residents are encouraged to speak with city staff about the proposed on -street bikeway. The Community Services Commission will host a public open house on June 17, 2003 from 6:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield. The public is invited to attend the open house to talk with Commission members and staff about the proposed bike trail. Immediately following the open house, a regular meeting of the Community Services Commission will be held at 7:00 p.m. At the meeting the Commission will make its recommendation to submit to the City Council on the proposed bike trail. For additional information please call me at (612) 861-9191 Sincerely, George Atkinson, Engineering Supervisor Public Works Department GLA:tff The Urban Hometown 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 612 861 9700 FAX 612 861 9749 wrwGrkhfleM.mn.us AN EO OPPORNNItt EMPLOYER RICHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Meeting Date: June 17, 2003 Agenda Item Agenda Section FOWL Board Member Appointments Action Items Attachments Staff Contact FOWL Board Applications Jim Topitzhofer The Community Services Commission is the body responsible for appointing members to the Friends of Wood Lake (FOWL) Board of Directors. They serve a three-year term. Terms have expired for five members of the Friends of Wood Lake (FOWL) Board of Directors. All five members are re -applying and one new person is applying: • Jan Chorzempa • Dave Thielman • John Devlin • Gordon Hanson • Bob Dietl • Robert Sime (new applicant) The CSC may re -appoint the five existing members or choose to appoint the new applicant to one of the vacancies and re -appoint four members. Recommended Action Re -appoint (or appoint) applicants to the FOWL Board of Directors. UU, ice, U� UI : Zb HU. Ub / Idol Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MN 55423 Name ja). CYRn0 �/tor�eirr�Qa� Telephone Number - 9,3/ FJ0 YS- I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My interests in Wood Lake have been n r�he <.�, r�)Z14-7 'x--wS / di 6L®-- nn`pi Yn�n v cs. A c�nuri. Or-ty av P d /I /S O ...P/pdq � ' �wLY__ _/. O_— J� /d/e.�c�/L.Ai✓%T�iQ/ /J �% /J _ G Fax to: 612-861-9367 or mail to: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 55423. Ub,, 12,-Us U1:2' N0. 06^ UO2 Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MNJ55423 lMN Name Y � \[ j Telephone Number 19(c,1 —103 01 x I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My interests in Wood Lake have been Fax to: 612-861-9367 or mail to: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 55423. 06/12/03 01:27 NO. 067 P03 Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MN 55423 Name 6 h ✓l. t )-e,1 i`-7 Telephone Number 6()\ c�o v I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My interests in Wood Lake have been r e (, -e c --Q G�1-r' � `�f Td�S � eat%- �e RcQ ✓�P �� c��` Fax to: 612-861-9367 or mail to: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 55423. un 1�, U� ul : � r NU. UED f' U04 Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MN 55423 Name l 70E-00n/ / I/VSUP✓ Telephone Number / �a- ��- 9.9 7 J� I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My interests in Wood Lake have been �~ /mc Sefilezl 7� D Jc �`7A FDUL /L-e lie, � ` c /v/A�//, it 1% ( A/ S sr 7/� ' �f ://{� �!�e l�s /.'cos l4` > /C/i 6 /Ar 1,:'s G v /i y ) YZ_ 4)00 Z4 A sj4i-ves 6 S I7r y�i Crc P . U IAA ( AA I a. / 9tu4v;Yv, Fax to: 612-861-9367 or mail to: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 55423. ✓Jbl1G.'Y]J ✓J1�Gr 6120692505 06/01/2003 00:24 6129692505 MAiz?YONND1ETL NO.867 D05 i a3el:71 Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MN 55423 Name 1Z 04e, 1 '0 Telephone Number & 14 Yr 6 `/ — ,,2 �;' 6 '� H C./ I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. _ I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My Interests In Wood Lake have been A e-4 or -tea W !}Cla-ss i c_ Fax to: 612-861-9367 or mail to: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 55423. Ub% 1 �` U1 ul ; ed 1'IU. OU I UUU Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center Board of Directors 6710 Lake Shore Drive Richfield, MN 55423 Name 71 '1 S'. ire Telephone Number 61,2 ` &9 6// 6/a- 30k- 3.)-a6 I am interested in serving on the Board of Directors for the Friends of Wood Lake Nature Center. i am interested in serving on the Board of Directors but cannot do so at this time. Please consider me at a later date. I am interested in serving on a Sub -Committee. My interests in Wood Lake have been /11any. --4 4aoe /, -ed .%, ecrAC-e/al >r'.e rep now GcnG� cL.sGiie�e�Cz/ rl��/�.. cep `�/P� a 6� ,';L Ve44 ytn/dq .)c /o moo. Giu� /"e �✓>Jh// -�,� JhiF <j cc /7vro�G� L7/ mg4 QbJr/t G Ve, dk/B T+/ �P GL\�,TGO�RGSTLa. Lor"� O�GCGG/'P �n//���jPsd)�.. U"CvCaa+/✓ /l.Stvt•aA��, (/'���iCf� o��/ Gc,�c� SP/vP a-oy G Co-c/�+R p✓n 7� board a?' /•J%�Q �?,n�IP. WP L.:-//P•��l> lr�R•�' �.,..� /Q sn e.�+6e/S /` fy, bA'- ��iJJOF��PS/` hve 4L�i/i-i7p m%//aw/i YPn /v//�// A�✓p/�i%C/ J otVf A kk- 16�'y74 � &JUU� dufP�.s-a iJ CG/TG� IrJOS� //�YF�/ L✓JCef"8�f��//i O/Ln.'I/' lti J i ti(OL.s inox. �r J " � f�P Are ! /.a f�0�/cC R� %rOl./C �..vJ ✓�Gl c ICI An n FPi(ct�f' •n p Fax to: 612-861-9367 or ✓mail ta: 6710 Lake Shore Drive, Richfield, MN 554�233,. CITY OF RICHFIELD Memorandum DATE: June 16, 2003 TO: Community Services Commission FROM: Thomas Foley, Transportation Engineer SUBJECT: Proposed 76th Street Bike Lanes Comments Received on June 11, 2003 by Answer Van George Atkinson and Tom Foley of the City's Engineering Division used the Division's van as a mobile field office, called the "Answer Van," to visit the five north -south streets intersecting the proposed five -block long bike lanes on 76th Street between Lyndale Avenue and Emerson Avenue. Here is a brief summary of comments received from about 20-25 people. Issue: Two couples residing south of 76th Street were concerned that only two lanes for vehicular traffic would make it difficult to access 76th Streeet for them. One couple reminded us that the 77th Street noisewall made 76th Street the only access out of their neighborhood. Access is only a problem during rush hour. Tom Foley explained that city staff could observe traffic during rush hour to see if gaps are sufficient to provide access. He also said allowing the test to proceed would be the best way to see if access became a problem. Only residents who use the road frequently would be able to evaluate its operations under the two-lane design. Issue: Reduction of traffic lanes on 76th Street may reduce through traffic on 76th Street. This was considered a good thing. Issue: Several people expressed concern that 76th Street would carry increased traffic because of the new developement in the 7600 block of Lyndale Avenue. City staff explained that the new development would have no access to Aldrich Avenue. It would have access to 77th Street, 76th Street and Lyndale Avenue. Issue: Several people were concerned that 76th Street would be needed to carry additional traffic when 1-494 is rebuilt. City staff explained that 77th Street was designed to carry that traffic. The City of Bloomington is about to build a new bridge across 1-35W creating a parallel arterial to 1-494 that would relieve it of traffic. Also, project staging for 1-494 will provide for traffic to be maintained on 494 during construction. June 11, 2003 Page 2 Issue: One resident living north of 76th Street on Emerson Avenue said lots of residents turn onto 76th Street from 77th Street. These people then turn left at Emerson Avenue. She believed motorists following these cars are surprised by the left -turn move so close to 77th Street. She fears that cars will be involved in rear -end crashes at 76th Street and Emerson Avenue. Tom Foley explained that the proposed design would not change the traffic operations at Emerson Avenue. Cars could still use the right lane to get around left -turning vehicles. She became very angry and frustrated, and left without talking further with city staff. Follow Up: City staff will check crash history at this location to see if rear -end crashes have been a problem. Issue: Several people questioned having a bike lane for such a short distance. City staff mentioned that 76th Street was part of a trail identified in the Three Rivers First Tier Suburb Park and Trail study. Some of them wanted the trail extended as far as Cedar Avenue. Issue: Some people thought that no one bikes on 76th Street and so there was no need for bike lanes. Others asked why wasn't another street, like 74th Street or 75th Street, viewed as a possible bike trail. City staff explained that other east -west streets may not have the continuity of 76th Street although 73rd Street did have the pedestrian bridge over 1-35W but it was not well suited to handle bikes. Bikers need to carry their bike up -&vI4 twenty feet of stairs. Issue: Some people thought that 76th Street was not a good route for a bike lane because the 76th Street bridge over 1-35W did not provide for bikes. City staff explained that plans for rebuilding the 35W/494 interchange would require replacing the 76th Street bridge. The City would insist that the new bridge provide for pedestrians and bicyclists. Best Buy officials have indicated that a number of their employees bike to work. Issue: One resident, who worked in concrete construction, wanted to discuss with someone about the effectiveness of micro -planing the concrete panels. He was convinced that frost heave is the cause of panels being warped. He was not convinced that microplaning would cure the problem, even in the short-term. City staff will arrange to have someone call him to discuss microplaning. Summary: George Atkinson tallied resident comments as 11 in favor and 4 opposed to the proposed bike lane. The low-cost of painting the bike lanes and the ease of reversing the trial made some people less opposed to the idea. It would be good to specify the length of time for the demonstration project if it is approved. TFF:ttf CITY OF RICHFIELD Memorandum DATE: April 15, 2003 TO: Community Services Commission Members FROM: Bruce Sylvester, Community Development Department SUBJECT: Park Dedication Ordinance Planning Commission Member Bill Kilian wanted members of the CSC to have a copy of an e- mail he sent to me (text below). I told him I'd need time to do some research and we'd visit this issue/topic at a pc study session later in the year. I'll try to remember to inform you of the date so CSC folks can be invited During our meeting with the Community Services Commission I had mentioned that Woodbury has a charge of over $2,000 for each new home. That has contributed to their parks and recreation capital budget. In fact they just open a new indoor play area. I suggested that Richfield could get some additional funding for parks and recreation using the same concept. The immediate response was that we already have problems with redevelopment being viable and adding an additional cost would be a hardship. A member of the Community Services Commission, I don't remember who, brought up the idea that we might also be able to charge when people sell their homes or something like that. The need, or want, of additional funds for the park system brings a couple of things to mind. There are two groups of people that benefit directly from the park system. 1. People who use the parks on either a regular or irregular basis. Some park uses are free while others have some type of charge for use. Generally speaking, I believe that most of charges are meant to cover all or portion of the maintenance cost and not necessarily the capital cost. 2. Property owners benefit from the park system, whether they are users or non users, when they sell their property. I think you can make a case that a good park system enhances the value of real estate, therefore, would be a benefit at time of sale. When you look at the capital budget one thing becomes very apparent. In the recreation and open space section all the money for the next several years is basically used to take care the existing park infrastructure and the pool renovation. The pool renovation is an infrastructure maintenance issue rather than actually adding additional services. The reality is that we are not going to spend any general fund monies for recreation infrastructure when we already have a difficult time paying for necessary community and human services. What we need is an ongoing funding source to not only maintain but also improve our recreation and open space areas. In today's environment the only logical way to get additional funding is through user fees or real-estate surcharge. Park maintenance is funded out of property taxes April 15, 2003 Page 2 and user fees. Increasing taxes is not an option. Also, taxes would effect business owners who do not use the parks. I think the idea of increasing user fees beyond the cost of maintenance would not be fair to the users. Therefore, the only other group that actually benefits from the park system are those that are selling their real estate holdings. From the information you sent me it looks like we sell about 500 homes in Richfield each year. In -addition, a number of apartment buildings and condos sold each year are not part of that count. It would seem that a surcharge on real estate transactions would be able to generate money for capital improvements that increase the value of the real estate. Given the fact that in Woodbury the assessment for new homes is in excess of $2,000, a $1,000 fee for each home, condo or apartment sold in Richfield would be the same amount of money on a value basis, about 0.5% of the average sale price. Because park usage is based on housing units rather than real estate value it would seem that this should be a fixed charge rather than a percentage charge against the value of the sale. There could be a circuit breaker where the fee could not exceed one-half of 1 % of the selling price. A quick calculation shows that the moneys available for capital improvement would be in excess of one half million dollars per year. With the additional funds we should be able to not only maintain recreation and current open space areas but actually improve on them. We might even be able to afford a community center that meets today's suburban standards. I don't know if we can pull this off without legislative support, or if we can use the law that allows Woodbury to charge. After you review this for inaccuracies, would you please send this e-mail to the rest of the people on the Planning Commission, Community Service Commission and city staff that had an interest in this concept.