The URL can be used to link to this page

01-27-1998ti J PIANNING COMMISSION AGENDA January 27, 1998 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Approval of Minutes Regular Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1997. Special Planning Commission meeting of December 22, 1997. Planning Commission study session of January 13, 1998. Public Hearing ITEM #1 98 -CUP -1 7615 Nicollet Avenue Southridge Construction /Richfield HRA Conditional use permit to allow construction of three, attached townhome units New Business ITEM #2 PC Letter #5 Presentation on the Recreation Asset Replacement Study from Gretchen Blank, Recreation Services Director ITEM #3 PC Letter #6 Finding of Consistency with Richfield Comprehensive Plan Richfield Rediscovered Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plans Old Business Liaison Reports School Board Community Services Advisory Commission HRA City Council Adjournment Planning Commission Minutes Study Session January 13, 19916F MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Terry Ahlstrom, Brenda Bjorklund, Pamela Dmytrenko, David Gepner, Roger Gordon, Mitchell Hadley, and Bill Kilian. MEMBERS ABSENT: None COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: John Melin, Community Development Manager Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator Brian S. Mehl, Community Development Technician The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:04 p.m. NEW BUSINESS Information Letter #1 ITEM #1 Update on Airport Mitigation Plan Don Brauer, consultant to the City of Richfield, provided an update on the status of the airport mitigation plan. Mr. Brauer stated that during a presentation to the Metropolitan Council on January 12, 1998, the City asked for the Met Council's help in the areas of. comprehensive plan review, assistance in the development of a mitigation plan for the City, assistance in the research and development of standards for mitigation of low frequency noise, and aid to the City in monitoring health impacts. Mr. Brauer presented a map showing the mitigation area and outlined the proposed redevelopment along Cedar Avenue according to the Comprehensive Plan. He further stated that the mitigation plan should echo the redevelopment proposed for Cedar Avenue, which includes regional commercial, office, and multifamily dwellings. Mr. Brauer further stated that 375 single family housing units would be lost in the mitigation plan. Several commissioners indicated that they would like staff to provide information on the demographics of the affected area. January 13, 1998 Page 2 Discussion followed regarding communicating the plan to the public. Commissioner Hadley stated that the public should consistently be told that this is necessary due to influences beyond the control of the City. Information Letter #2' ITEM #2 Discussion of Variance Process Zoning Administrator Urban reviewed the staff report, stating that several requests had been made over a two year period in which residents who were constructing additions wanted to build in -line with the existing structure. Ms. Urban described the current variance process, stating that all variance requests go before a hearing examiner and that the process takes up to six weeks to complete. She further stated that the City may wish to consider making changes to the Zoning Ordinance relating to the expansion of nonconforming structures. Ms. Urban stated that one option would be to amend the current ordinance to make it legal to expand a non - conforming structure. A second option would be to consider administrative variances to allow staff to make determinations in cases where the variance requested is minimal. A third option would be to continue to require a presentation before the hearing examiner, but eliminating the public hearing in cases where the variance request is less than a specific amount (e.g. 30 percent of the required standard). Discussion ensued regarding the benefits of the three proposals. Commissioner Bjorklund requested more specific language for the first option. OLD BUSINESS Information Letter #3 ITEM #3 Discussion of Zoning Regulations for Accessory Buildings Zoning Administrator Urban reviewed the staff report, stating that a resident had expressed concern at the November Planning Commission meeting regarding the allowable size for sheds. At that meeting, the Commission had requested that staff research the definitions of sheds and garages, whether or not Building Code requirements were different for the two structures, whether or not it is common in Richfield to have only a single car garage and no option for expanding it, and if the City received a lot of requests to building larger sheds. Ms. Urban gave the definitions as requested, stated that the current allowable height for sheds is 14 feet, and that current ordinances state that lots over 7,000 square feet are allowed 35 percent lot coverage while lots over 7,000 square feet are allowed only 25 percent coverage. January 13, 1998 Page 3 Discussion ensued regarding the zoning regulations for accessory buildings and whether or not changes to the ordinance were necessary. The Commission expressed support for making changes to the definition of a garage and how height is measured, but felt that the essential parts of the ordinance should remain the same. Information Letter #4 ITEM #2 Discussion of Industrial Zoning along I -494 Zoning Administrator Urban reviewed the staff report, stating that several properties located along I -494 from Pleasant Avenue to Cedar Avenue are zoned for industrial uses. She further stated that the Comprehensive Plan calls for higher density, regional commercial and office uses along the City's freeways. The result is that some properties could be developed in a manner that is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Urban presented several maps which showed the Comprehensive Plan's proposed zoning of the properties, the current zoning, the properties that would be impacted by the rezoning, and the properties that would subsequently be made nonconforming if the zoning were changed. The Commission expressed support for rezoning properties to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Discussion followed regarding the need for an open house to discuss the rezonings. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:10 p.m. Mitchell Hadley Planning Commission Secretary f Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting December 22, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Terry Ahlstrom, Brenda Bjorklund, Pamela Dmytrenko, David Gepner, Roger Gordon, Mitchell Hadley, and Bill Kilian. . MEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCIL LIAISON None Martin Kirsch, Mayor COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Elayne Gilhousen; Commissioners: Carolyn Krohn, Timothy Erlander, Robert Died, Denise Schaefer HRA MEMBERS PRESENT: Joan Helmberger STAFF PRESENT: Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator p.m. The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:00 NEW BUSINESS Steve Pflaum, special airport counsel to the City, described the City's response to the proposed north/south runway and the role of the Planning Commission in developing a mitigation plan in the event the runway is built. Mr. Pflaum explained that Richfield's situation is unusual because the debate is about low frequency noise and not over -flight noise. He stated that there is no recognized means of measuring low frequency noise impacts, which makes the problem more difficult to deal with. In addition, when cities are fighting airports, they typically approach it from a parochial point of view. It is difficult to defeat the plans of an airport that serves the broader population on the basis of a "not- in -my- backyard" (NIMBY) argument. A city should question whether or not the airport's plans make sense from an airport planner's point of view. If the answer is no, a city may have a reasonable chance of defeating a proposal. December 22, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Pflaum stated that it is through NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and MEPA Minnesota Environmental Protection Act) that information about the runway's impacts can be obtained. The north/south runway might be stopped through these processes if the runway were going to destroy an endangered species or significant wetland. These processes don't help in the City's case, beyond providing information, because the acts do not address the kinds of impacts the City is concerned about. Mr. Pflaum pointed out that the north/south runway is not the usual solution to increase an airport's capacity. Capacity is best increased by building a parallel runway. In the case of this airport, the City of Minneapolis has the power to veto the third parallel runway option so the north/south runway is clearly a product of the political process. Discussion followed regarding the safety and capacity of the north/south runway. Mr. Pflaum described the environmental review process and explained that the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) had used a different process for the north/south runway. MAC did the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) under MEPA only and did not discuss the different alternatives, as is required under NEPA. He explained that it is important for the City to fully respond at the opportunities given through the EIS process because if the City later decides to go to court, the court will rely on the administrative record. Mr. Pflaum pointed out that the runway needs to be approved by both MAC and the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Pflaum explained that the City is following a two - pronged approach with the runway. The first is to evaluate the legality of the process. The second is to prepare a mitigation plan with a strategy for minimizing the effects on the community if the runway is built. In response to a question from Commissioner Bjorklund, Mr. Pflaum explained that this would be a case of first impression for the courts because there isn't any precedent to follow. He stated that other communities dealing with low frequency noise issues are dealing with existing runways. Commissioner Ahlstrom asked if there are there things the City could do after the runway is built to address the issues. Mr. Pflaum explained that the City has the most leverage before the runway is built. He also stated that the City doesn't have to commit to land use changes if it finds out later that the changes are not necessary. Commissioner Dmytrenko questioned how the City could quantify some of the impacts in dollar figures and gave the loss of children as a potential impact that would have enormous impacts. Chairperson Linnihan stated the plan should include certain principals that are adhered to, including that there be no net loss of housing units. Commissioner Gordon asked for an explanation of the kinds of impacts low frequency noise has. Mr. Pflaum explained that it does not cause structural damage and it hasn't been proven to cause any health problems. He stated that it's an annoyance issue. He explained that Sandy Fidell, BBN Technologies, had developed a measurement for low frequency noise by taking surveys of people for annoyance levels. December 22, 1997 Page 3 In response to a question from Commissioner Bjorklund, Mr. Pflaum explained the City's strategy, where the City could hope to influence the process, and when decisions might be made. He stated that the Planning Commission's role was to address the mitigation plan and that, at this point, it should be an aggressive plan, based on the City's perspective, not what it thinks might be acceptable to the Met Council or MAC. Mr. Pflaum explained that the FAA could approve the runway in May and that MAC anticipates beginning operation of the runway in 2003. Commissioner Gordon pointed out that the decisions that need to be made about a mitigation plan go against his beliefs and values about the community and that it would be a difficult thing to do. Commissioner Gepner questioned whether a compromise on the runway was possible as was worked out with the 4 -22 runway. Mr. Pflaum said a compromise was not clearly evident in this case. He stated that it might be possible to restrict the worst low frequency noise offenders from using the runway but this would only slightly reduce the negative impacts. Dawn Weitzel, City Communications Specialist, explained that the City would be taking a draft mitigation plan to the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Committee on January 12. The Planning Commission would be asked for further feedback at its January 13 Study Session. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:50 p.m. Mitchell Hadley Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting November 25, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Daniel Linnihan; Commissioners: Brenda Bjorklund, Pamela Dmytrenko, David Gepner, Roger Gordon, Mitchell Hadley, and Bill Kilian. MEMBERS ABSENT: Terry Ahlstrom and Kevin Hansen COUNCIL LIAISON: Martin Kirsch, Mayor STAFF PRESENT: John Melin, Community Development Manager Julie Urban, Zoning Administrator Brian S. Mehl, Community Development Technician The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Linnihan at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Hadley, S/Dmytrenko to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1997. Motion carried: 7 -0 M/Dmytrenko, S /Gordon to approve the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of October 28, 1997. Motion carried: 7 -0 NEW BUSINESS Mr. Carl Cornell, 6615 Lakeshore Drive, #807, requested to speak to the Commission regarding the proposed development involving senior housing and a new VFW building. Mr. Cornell stated that he has concerns that there was not enough information being presented to residents of nearby housing developments. He also requested that the Commissioners speak with November 25, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Lou Stocco, a representative of Gramercy Corp. to ask for preliminary plans of the development. Chairperson Linnihan stated that there was a process by which the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Planning Commission and City Council would each hold public hearings before a building could be constructed. Mr. Lou Stocco introduced himself to Mr. Cornell, stating that plans for the development would be available within approximately two weeks of the meeting and that they would be presented to neighbors of the proposed development. Cynthia Mandell, 6529 Logan Avenue South requested to speak to the Commission regarding the allowable size of sheds in the City. Ms. Mandell stated that older homes with small garages suffer the disadvantage of not being able to expand sheds to obtain additional storage space. Ms. Mandell stated that she felt that the ordinance should be amended in order that older homes would be able to build sheds with an area larger than the current ordinance allows. Zoning Administrator Urban responded to a question from Commissioner Kilian, stating that the applicant could apply for a variance to expand a shed beyond the allowable 175 square feet. Discussion ensued regarding the need for an ordinance amendment. Commissioner Kilian suggested that if sheds were allowed to be larger, they should be held to a higher design and construction standard. Chairperson Linnihan suggested that ordinance changes generally come about when a problem applies to many properties, not just one. Zoning Administrator Urban suggested that staff do some research on the issue and bring it back to the Commission in January. OLD BUSINESS PC Letter #19 ITEM #1 Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - Licensed and Community Based Residential Care Facilities Zoning Administrator Urban reviewed the staff report stating that staff discovered that the City's Zoning Ordinance is in conflict with state law as it relates to licensed residential care facilities for disabled persons. Ms. Urban stated that the City currently requires programs to be located 1/4 mile apart, but that state statute does not place a distance requirement on small programs. The City's rules can't be stricter than the state's rules. Ms. Urban explained that there November 25, 1997 Page 3 are state and federal laws governing this issue and that they sometimes conflict with each other. In cases where that occurs, staff recommends compliance with state law. Changes were being proposed to all ordinances relating to group homes in light of the information collected on these laws. Commissioner Bjorklund asked how a unit is defined. She stated that the language may be ambiguous and that it could be interpreted in a manner other than it was intended. Discussion ensued regarding the definition of a unit and how the number of units relates to the number of people allowed to occupy it. Further discussion involved the reasoning behind the proposed ordinance change and how the City's code compares to those of the county and the state. Commissioner Linnihan stated that the county's licensing department should handle the problem of the number of individuals allowed per unit. M/Kilian, S /Gepner to recommend approval of the amendment to Section 521 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to residential care facilities to make it consistent with state law. Motion carried: 7 -0 PC Letter #20 ITEM #2 Review Section 521 of Zoning Ordinance Item #2 was continued to a later date. PC Letter #21 ITEM #3 Consider Report by Don Brauer on City's Mitigation Strategy Community Development Manager Melin reviewed the staff report stating that several consultants have studied the potential noise impacts of the proposed north/south runway at the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The study was undertaken to determine the level of annoyance associated with low frequency noise at an existing airport. Don Brauer, planning consultant, stated that other cities are beginning to deal with the impact of low frequency noise, however no city in the nation will be as affected as the City of Richfield. He continued by stating that the soundproofing that is occurring in Richfield homes will have no effect on low frequency noise. November 25, 1997 Page 4 Discussion followed regarding the decibel range that is considered low frequency, the need for the study, and whether or not the introduction of Stage III aircraft will provide relief from the problem. Mr. Brauer presented a map of Richfield that showed the extent of the low frequency noise problem. He further stated that redevelopment may have to occur as far west as the east property line of properties located on the east side of Bloomington Avenue. In addition, a new collector street may need to be paved to handle traffic for any new development in this area. He discussed the need for a mitigative response before an Environmental Impact Study is submitted by the airport. In light of this new information, several commissioners expressed concern at the extent of redevelopment that would have to occur if the new runway was to be built. Commissioner Linnihan stated that it was "unacceptable" and that the negative effects of the runway wouldn't be limited to the mitigative area. He pointed out that residents living within several blocks of the area would be affected, as well, although there probably wouldn't be any relief for them. Commissioner Bjorklund felt that it was too extensive to be possible. She further stated that it was her belief that the City should wait to develop a mitigative plan because it might give the Metropolitan Airports Commission the idea that Richfield was willing to compromise. Commissioner Hadley recommended bringing it to the neighborhood once the Environmental Impact Survey is published so that the public can see that the mitigation plan is a response to the airport's actions. Commissioner Kilian stated that he felt that a mitigative plan should be considered and developed so that if it the runway was built, the City would already have a response in place to deal with the issue. Commissioner Gordon stated that the City had already lost too much when the airport purchased the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods. He stated that losing the tax base of another 1/3 of Richfield would be a loss too terrible to allow. Mr. Brauer stated that he would develop the plan and bring it to the Planning Commission for feedback. The Commission agreed to revisit the issue during the January study LIAISON REPORTS School Board: Commissioner Dmytrenko stated that $76,000 in budget cuts had been rescinded. She further stated that staff and busing had been restored and an audit revealed that the general budget had $900,000 more than expected. Community Services Advisory Commission: No report. HRA: No report. November 25, 1997 Page 5 City Council: Mayor Kirsch stated that the Lampert Lumber site was approved for rezoning and the second reading for the sale of the site had occurred. He further stated that the council approved the amendment to allow buildings along I -494 to be constructed to a height of 100 feet. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:45 p.m. Mitchell Hadley Planning Commission Secretary eir •tiS / v v FA i Planning Letter CIT1' Ul- RICHFIELD January 27, 1998 Agenda Section: Public Hearing Item #: 1 Case #: 98 -CUP -1 GENERAL INFORMATION Type of Request: Conditional use permit Applicant /Owner: Housing and Redevelopment Authority /Southridge Construction Location: 7615 Nicollet Avenue Zoning: R (single family residential) Existing Land Use: single family residential Proposed Land Use: Townhomes Comp. Plan: High Density Single Family Residential References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts) Zoning Code: Section 521.07, subd. 7; Section 521.09, subd. 2; Section 521.11, subd. 7 Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 350 feet of the subject property. City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of February 9, 1998. ANALYSIS Proposal: Southridge Construction proposes to construct three townhome units on the triple lot at 7615 Nicollet Avenue. The property is zoned R (single family residential), but the proposed townhome projects meets the definition of a cluster housing development. Cluster housing developments are conditional uses in the R district. History: The Housing Redevelopment Authority purchased the property and is prepared to sell it to Southridge Construction for development as three townhome units. Issues: Design: Cluster housing is permitted in the R district if the project design is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The following design features are present and make the units compatible with the single family neighborhood: One - and -half story units Gable roofs Building materials of brick and siding Varied front setback for units and garages Different window treatments for each unit The project is being developed through the Richfield Rediscovered program which applies design guidelines to all units developed through the program (see attachment). The proximity of the site next to an arterial street also makes it an appropriate location for attached housing, typically a transitional land use. Setbacks: The same setbacks applied to single family housing in the R district are applied to cluster housing developments. Although cluster housing developments are permitted some flexibility in setback requirements to allow for creativity in the layout of the developments, there will be no deviation from the standard single family setbacks for this development. The side (9 feet) and rear (46 feet) setbacks exceed the minimum requirements (5 feet and 25 feet). Landscaping: The Zoning Ordinance requires landscaping for cluster housing developments. The following landscaping will be provided: The design guidelines of the Richfield Rediscovered program (under which the townhomes are being developed) require that a certain amount of shrubs and plantings be installed. There are several existing mature trees on the site that will be preserved, as required by the HRA. The developer will plant evergreens in the northwest corner of the site to shield the development from some of the impact of 76th/77th Street traffic. Neighborhood Meeting: A meeting was held in May to show the townhome concept to the neighborhood. The neighbors were supportive of the concept. ACTION TO BE TAKEN Recommendation: Recommend that the City Council approve the request for a conditional use permit at 7615 Nicollet Avenue for construction of three townhome units with the following stipulations: 1. That the project comply with Richfield Rediscovered design guidelines. 2. That a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions be executed and recorded as approved by the City Attorney. 3. That the property be replatted to reflect the townhome configuration. 4. That a grading plan be approved by the Public Works Director. 5. That the conditional use permit resolution be recorded with the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subdivision 1. Basis: 1. The proposed attached housing is an appropriate land use along an arterial street. 2. The units are designed with a single family character which is compatible with the existing neighborhood. 3. The proposed housing fills a need the City has identified in its Comprehensive Plan and Livable Communities Goals for the development of more diverse housing types. Alternative: Recommend that the City Council deny the request for a conditional use permit at 7615 Nicollet Avenue with a finding of fact that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. ZONING CODE: CITATIONS SECTION 521 - ZONING: RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS 521.07. Conditional uses. Subdivision 1. The uses listed in this subsection are conditional uses in the R District, and are subject to the conditional use permit provisions outlined in Section 546.05 of this code. Subd. 7. Cluster home developments with three to ten units, provided the following conditions are met: a) the design of the development shall be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of building materials, architectural design, scale and mass of the structure, or other similar urban design characteristics; b) landscaping shall be provided in accordance with the Richfield Landscape Requirements, on file with the Office of Community Development; c) two off - street parking spaces, one of which must be enclosed in a garage, shall be provided for each dwelling unit. d) there shall be a minimum of 500 square feet of outdoor open space provided on the lot per dwelling unit; e) the number and location of drive%vays and curbcuts shall minimize conflict with vehicular traffic and should not adversely impact adjacent land uses; f) the density of the development shall not exceed the density recommended in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 521.09. Lot area, width, depth, and coverage. Subdivision 1. Standards. The standards set out in this subsection apply in the R District. Subd. 2. Minimum lot area. width, and depth: aL4E : I_OT AREA 1 OT. WIDTH. L(J T DEPT>xl ....: SINCLE:FAMILY 6.700 S . Ft. 50 Ft. 100 Ft. TWOFAMILY."(CUP) 9.000 S . Ft. 60 Ft. 100 Ft. CLUSTER? :< <;;:HOME DEVELOPMENTS (CUP) 4.000 Sq. Ft. Per Unit 60 Ft. 100 Ft. NON= RESIDENTIAL 40.000 S . Ft. 150 Ft. 100 Ft. 521.11. Required building setback and maximum height. Subdivision 1. Standards. The standards set out in this subsection apply in the R District. Subd. 2. Required setback and maximum height: SIDE SIDE MAX M.0 FRONT R,EA R INTERI0R SIitGLT FAMITX.. 30 Ft. 25 Ft. 5 Ft. 12 Ft. 25 Ft. T1?vO.AMILY. ; 30 Ft. 25 Ft. 10 Ft. 12 Ft. 25 Ft. C,SR HONE. 30 Ft. 25 Ft. 5 Ft. 12 Ft, 25 Ft. 30 Ft. 3 Ft. 5 Ft. 12 Ft. 14 Ft. iOk i. RESIDI TTCAL..:: -:_ 40 Ft. 30 Ft. 30 Ft. 30 Ft. 42 Ft. AeGESSURY ;: 40 Ft. 10 FL 10 Ft. 30 Ft. 15 Ft. V Ln I 0 , SZ f N UN nt X7 I N N I N I N W Q r J J 4 Q Z y ........... ta:.. I A i 14 1 Ifll j y LLI 0 z III LLI 0 z w i 0 i a I I m J C O V O i l I i O J C_ F3 DESIGN GUIDELINES for Owner- Occupied Multi -unit Development Quality Considerations: The property design should blend in with adjoining properties to the extent possible. The house building lines, roof lines, door and window placement use to minimize blank: wall mass, and building orientation to the street, must present a balanced and pleasing view from all sides. All sites must be fully landscaped, which includes complete sod installation and appropriately placed plants and shrubs. In addition, the final grade of the property must improve, or not have a detrimental impact on, storm water drainage patterns in the neighborhood. Reworking the existing site grade to improve neighborhood drainage may be requested of the developer. Mature trees existing on site must be retained to the extent possible. Design Considerations: Each dwelling has a separate entrance. Provide separate areas for private leisure /outdoor living space. Garage offset for individuality as well as minimizing mass. Garages must be provided for each living unit, attached or detached. The garage presence must be minimized in the overall property appearance. Allow for future basement finishing for additional bedroom or living space. Main level laundry. Covered entry to dwelling and garage space. Separate service doors to garage, if possible. Appearance to blend with existing developments on block, whether single family, lower - pitched roofs or other. Exterior materials should be low maintenance. Decorative brick is encouraged for character and longevity. Hardboard siding materials are not acceptable. p:rr \7600emer] Planning Gbinmission Letter CITY OF RICHFIELD January 27, 1998 Agenda Section: New Business Item #: 2 Letter #: 5 GENERAL INFORMATION Type of Request: Gretchen Blank, Recreation Services Director, will present the results of the Recreation Asset Replacement Study. The Study was prepared as a response to the future loss of Richfield athletic recreational facilities that exist on land leased from the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Thirteen baseball and softball fields will be lost to the proposed expansion of the airport. ACTION TO BE TAKEN Recommendation: The presentation is being provided to the Commission for information purposes. No formal action is being requested on this item. Recreation Asset Replacement Study City of Richfield Community Services Department Prepared for City of Richfield, Minnesota by Brauer and Associates, Ltd. November 28, 1997 I Executive Summary Planning Framework This study has been prepared as a response to the future loss of Richfield athletic recreational facilities, currently existing on land leased from the Metropolitan Airports Commission at the Minneapolis - St. Paul Airport. Thirteen baseball and softball fields will be lost to the expansion of the airport. The present airport construction schedule indicates that these fields will not be available to the city after the 1998 summer season. In reply to this loss of athletic field space, the City of Richfield organized a task force of the following representatives of youth and adult athletic organizations within the City of Richfield. This group was charged with the responsibility for devising a plan for replacement of the lost athletic facilities. Task Force Member Association Mr. Gordy Larson Richfield Senior Babe Ruth and Richfield Mickey Mantle Mr. Rick Jabs West Richfield Little League and Richfield Babe Ruth Mr. Jerry Millene East Little League Ms. Jan Williams Richfield Girls Fast Pitch Softball Mr. Scott Freeman Richfield Girls Softball Association Mr. Rodney Fors Richfield Football League Mr. Paul Woodnick Richfield Soccer Association Mr. Mike Johnson Richfield Adult Softball Association Mr. Jim Sloss Richfield School District Aiding the Task Force were city staff members Gretchen Blank, Director of Recreation Services and Frank White, Recreation Manager. Planning Objectives The vision statement of the Task Force was: To develop a plan for providing sufficient outdoor athletic field for the citizens of Richfield including youth, high school, and adult teams and 2. Recreation Asset Replacement Study City of Richfield, Minnesota organizations. to provide equivalent service to all youth sports based upon numbers of users. The objectives of the Task Force were: 1. To provide replacement athletic recreatlonal facilities for use by Richfield residents. 2. To provide these facilities within the City of Richfield 3. To fu yll the need for youth athletic recreational facilities first I. To provide capacity for future growth in recreation participation. Planning Process The study process has included an Assessment of Current Facility Capacity and Current Demand, Comparison of Demand and Capacity and Determination of Facility Needs, Alternative Approaches to Meeting Facility Needs, Preferred Approach, Development Priorities, and Development Costs. The Task Force first met on December 18, 1996 and has met almost monthly since that time to prepare this study. Four alternative approaches to meeting the facility needs were developed and evaluated. The Task Fora prepared a preliminary final approach and recommendation. This preliminary approach and recommendation was then presented to the public for comment. Two public information meetings were held, (September 24, 1997 and October 9, 1997), at which all Richfield residents were invited to review and comment on the plans. . The comments of the citizens were evaluated by the Task Force and, as deemed appropriate, incorporated into the final approach and recommendation. The final approach and recommendation has been presented to the Master Park Plan Subcommittee and Community Services Advisory Commission, both voted to accept the approach and recommendation as made by the Task Force and included in this report. Study Findings The Task Force made the following findings during the course of the study: 1. That the loss of the 13 fields currently located on the Metropolitan Airport property represents a significant loss of athletic facilities for the City of Richfield. 2. That city owned park land alone can not absorb all of the lost recreational facilities. 3. That both Richfield School District and quasi - public land will be needed to accommodate current athletic field demand. 4. That reconfiguring Richfield's existing park land to accommodate the lost athletic fields will require adjustments 3. Recitation Asset Replacsment Study City of Richfield, Minnesota to existing athletic facilities. S. That reconfiguring Richfield's existing park land to accommodate the lost athletic fields will require the loss of some existing neighborhood park improvements. 6. That the reduced number of athletic fields will increase the maintenance required on each field to maintain the quality and safety expected by citizens. 7. That individual athletic associations will no longer be able to have a specific park dedicated to each associations practices and games. This will require a centralization of the scheduling of field use. S. That although accommodations can be made to meet today's demand for athletic fields, little flexibility remains in the system to accept future growth. Study Recommendations The following improvements have been recommended for each facility type. Little League Fields Lincoln Park This facility should be redeveloped to include four little league fields meeting the standards set in this study. 2. Roosevelt Park This facility should be redeveloped to include four little league fields meeting the standards set in this study. See attached graphic number I for standards and proposed facility layout.) Girls Fast Pitch Fields Holy Angels This facility shall be reconfigured to include a single field meeting the standards set in this study. See attached graphic number 2 for standards and proposed facility layout.) 4. Recreation Asset Replacement Study City of Richfield. Minnesota Babe Ruth / Mickey Mantle Fields 1. Holy Angels This facility shall be reconfigured to include a single field meeting the standards set in this study. 2. Richfield High School This existing field facility should have lighting added to increase play time. See attached graphic number 3 forstandards and proposedjacility layout.) Youth Slow Pitch Fields Soccer Fields Richfield Jr. High School 2. Richfield Intermediate School This facility should be redeveloped to include four fields meeting the standards set in this study. This facility should be redeveloped to include two fields meeting the standards set in this study. See attached graphic number 4 for standards and proposed facility layout.) Richfield Jr. High School 2. Donaldson Park This facility shall be reconfigured to include a single field meeting the standards set in this study. This facility shall be developed to include an additional field meeting the standards set in this study. 3. Richfield Intermediate School This facility should be redeveloped to include two fields meeting the standards set in this study. See attached graphic number 3 for standards and proposedfacility layout.) S. Recreation Asset Replacement Study City of Richfield, Minnesota Football Fields 1. Richfield Jr. High School This facility shall be reconfigured to include a single field meeting the standards set in this study. 2. Donaldson Park This facility shall be developed to include an additional field meeting the standards set in this study. Note: These are overlays of proposed soccer fields. See attached graphic number 6 for standards and proposed facility layout) T -Ball Fields & Training Facility 1. Taft Park This facility shall be developed to include an additional four fields meeting the standards set in this study and additional batting cages and practice pitching mounds. See attached graphic number 7 for standards and proposed facility layout.) Development Priorities and Schedule The Task Force considers all improvements to be of equal importance. Due to the fact that each facility improvement, with the exception of Holy Angels and Taft Park, involves the disruption of existing athletic fields, all improvements will need to be completed within a reasonable time of each other. Timing of the individual improvements will need to be coordinated with the schedules for school district sports and athletic association schedules. If all improvements are begun in June 1998 and the city elects to seed the turf, the new fields will not be playable until June 2000. If the turf areas are sodded, a more costly option, the fields could be used as early as July 1999. The following estimate of construction cost anticipates seeding the fields. 6_ Recreation Asset Replacement Study City of Richfield, Minnesota Estimated Cost of Improvements The following is a summary of the development costs for the improvements recommended by the Task Force. 7. Recreation Asset Replaconent Study City of Richfield, Minnesota of Estimated Costs to Construct the Imnrovemenls Item #! Park Total Cost 1. Donaldson Park & West Junior High School 1,637,200.00 2. Richfield Community Education / Intermediate School 146,900.00 3. Roosevelt Park 554,200.00 4. St. Peters / Holy Angels Fields 5197,100.00 5. Taft Park 149,900.00 6. Richfield High School 110,000.00 7. Lincoln Fields 931,600.00 Subtotal 3,626,900.00 10% Construction Contingency 362,690.00 Design, Engineering, Testing Etc. 5478,750.80 Total Estimated Development Cost 4,468,340.80 7. Recreation Asset Replaconent Study City of Richfield, Minnesota Little League Fields ON of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Studv This Study rftr••.1011 11. w/rwr.r. Y..gr A..rrO.ww• 70• o.wrw.• 0rrrImage wr--ago hu"s I&"PONM rc Tamar- .ri..w•s.r.•....r.ww ••.•wwnww rr• A Task Forcarrw ro farm. rr- rrr rn.wrw wlr• wr 000ft.• wr.r w 0...•rr Na The Vlslon aft are• wag .w.r.+wr ^++.r.rr.•ww..wr.rr M.• r.-r w -sass r ••. Study Process aw come, a. *am r.r4owmr-am Ig. o owrrrwdon d .•rrrtw.a.nwwrwrw.wr.+.rw.rrr, am rw.r w. rr-.w arse w.osr.... ww Tr rs. •+--r r...ww...r, r... ---nr wr Taft Pan. rr rrm rams agree r7w r.." w cams It am r M.w•.r s.r.amr -.sWL rNW.wM ram erye• r.rW r..4 rl•.Wr. M..Ir.. -. Aw..y •-.1.w.OV ywr r iwr. Little League Field Standards g.-.rr II . 3w.,,..... Tr NW.MO.•r.wMW Mom "mwr.rqa. KMWr•Wws Little Leaoue Field Demand Ammos.•.r do •wM r. MMt A, --W r- W-. Per .. -ram w W— We r. ye rya rs.we r.iw r cow Ire Bo..Q~ OWN; 1 r..... roe.. r...r. -y 9-0 r.r, Little League Field Improvements I.Mw M..... Dies -y - -S Ie. i.. r eW r wl r..• w_M b seas r el- ..)sweet w.el r.— ft- e., 1..... M.new ar m....rf ..e.a rM 1.. U..a..M. e•w real me• wr..-rr n sew r. .... A- w sa..rr.,et ls.ww w...e....b.rr ..-rr ft-Owe ..ma Total Uttle Leaoue Fields e.... - ft-..r ,.... Pesos n M. it lam. l..•. rs.- Q, N XW C m CDN g 1 ttt sees...__, tllii ir • Illllllplll1l111Ul1lllll -=MWlt tltl.11111 Illltlll i 1 1 11!!S 111111111 I`I;Itt'111111 I I11111111111151tt C llllltlllll ,// +1.111 1 Ittt11:11 tltt iriiiiiiiiiiiill llll ll X11! ,` <''!II i11AlIIIIIIIfI11111111i111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL ' IL' Jv : ,, III ,IIII111M1111111111NIIII1 uiliilililinuinunlr rc!uuun - !lullnlnnnl nnl nt lilililililinnnunu /rnllun'a itnuuunntilut Iltlltl BIIIIII lltll II Vl' i;innul uu cuuinul••nnitttnlial uunt nr. r;. ^.iwuu.nlllllluull_!'tlunntu Hill J111111 Itt11111Y: 1,1.111111111111111111111111111 1!EII 11111" 1 11 l 1111' L" "Illlllllllllllllllllll tcllll 11111'1 /11 tI111111,....111111111111Y .1111111'1'11111111 rttt nlul Ilun'I:utnllnnl__ IInnlnlllrml All v i Ix Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue . Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown is titre Girls Fast Pitch Fields City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study This Study r•rrr rr••w a...• rw.. r rww. ft" MA,Lna••W..m•wvvftw rwww.•.WMa,... WOW --M. A Talk Fong,— .r— rw.iarrr.r,r...,.mo woo cwwft-.maw r-- r.aa. ww rwrrr n.T.rr. r• w..1.v w rr w Derr Tra The Vision Statement:•T• w.. ..rwo%,m. ..rw.•rbsMti.wnow"wr•.w.r.w.r aw.r.a.... .d Study Process rrw co mado..+rasa..r... ad,. wow o~w .roa..a.r...•rww.wrrri,rw.arr. a•rYeoww..,....r.n. 0— r. ww.aa ft. w....t..wr.r.... rw. w.w.. w w. T.. POW Tr TO* PWw% MW~ Wr r••.•• M w.. r r•, rMw.•r 1.rf .• /rwb ^YO,wY. W"O..wl 1,..b, bw,rbwew...a•L Pw rw...1'.•r.r.a DO. S"rw..rrrw a,r F- -Im0M.ay ra NO as a.w. r.r. M0.0#b1 _ Girls Fast Pitch Field Standards o D SL P*W*A 10y AFV@k nrna Lngir aO0"°r'° Illilll lill .Ililll lllllillll .I.,I..1.11,,,,,,, ,11....1. Gov -m rl... •1 0 b..e rr rwm bwom ir.+n•.. o.a.+vw,s pcwMn bws• r.•w rT,...1. — w.yr Girls Fast Pitch Fled Demand o.,.. a •r.r — T. u•y.. w1r 1 0—W 01W am rn.w 9••0 r..1 — i• aw.. ,. •... w. wry i Z'."'„ Girls Fast Pitch Field ImprovementsH it Anse. r ms..rr 7D ..saw m T O 2 l Total Girls Fast Pitch Fields r -.r ar. r.r r.. 1.0 r ft MO— ..•w.. O c+.-. w.. ti r... wrr N I e u.x ,•. v1.ae. m I t C Q 0 — d U> PRACT= fOOTULL" n 1 Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown 2N Babe Ruth /Mickey Mantle Fields City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study im This Study I I ,I I•r.rr+a.rrrmat..w.u... . w .rosr.,.fl•r.r..r.r•+rwr.+r.erar a r. rSi t.w r. F•rr ar.+.•rt T•. Wart wrrr... ww.rr.r +r... w w.. w w.r .-rra. A Task Force rp. rrr .. wee meow mom n..r.r. sow eyes awammm an Sm anwom ..t..r+r.rftm • mrrrmmwu ww.gra•+r Trr•rrwrn+ r.a re.ryYe w r • d..rrr taal The Vision Statement: T. ft up. a..tre. re. r. r.. r. Waft Siftrw. rS. rw. r. .we.ret.ww.r..a.r..rrw a .W •man Sao 1.. U.r r. r...•r.w Study Process r•r..r.w.rr.....ro..•rado. .s.ro....+yta..r..r..•a...r.. Two... n. ro..rs.r...w w.rw•rft..r.r.rSir+. r•u.• r+.r•r am ft.. Was* . 000 SWISS F."WML no Pubm" d—NO." Sho— rr.... aft....• or Oft T.. Pw Tr Too Pr rNw... a•...r r..r,•Si...rr Wwr•r 01".. Mare t..•rWr r •+..•.. rw r.trre..ft. w A.+ Saw tarb.. r a. rawer Au+e.. w..re...y.r r rr rSi aft rw.wr. wr..r.r..r. w•.r •Ara .. t>d taro r..r Babe RuthNickev Mantle Field Standards avaoaora.e. p r....e m•aavr......e. aev.amsa.n..r.- e....errrra+tS.......r arrt..r.....Faats orr.a•e•.r.. o....ft. r.ari PUNS W. qr,.. Babe Rud MM Field Demand Yar++S a..a.r.d t +a ... r..el r. •..•.tr.areT nrftN. rCwa-- asT.gq. FAST ... aa. WSi+..... r neYOr b a.r.. —a . P...• s Babe Ruth/MM Field /marovements a a tr a.w.a.e .e.. r.a r,..rti•e sva..r aD.e•a of..+lM bmrr l }.... prft a. r.Ob/ b w+•. Total Babe Ruth/MM Fields r - r.. w r.•..r Sir 1 e Irtr M.1.. - rfta.e 7 lr.a rw •.....ru•r wrr W... ..r. a T.. arse.... ft e— n..r u!a lull L'lllllll Illlllllllllllil '. Illlllllll.11llilllllll II,IIIIIIIIII IIII111111 11111 111111 1l1111t1111; J 111111 " "' HIM InIIIIIIU11]I rlll 111111 J Illl a rOL rti.t.+tay Siva 11tI1111111111111/. I..1..1.'111.1...11 ... I Its ..1. 4#- Cm 4 m ' 2 O K NQ 0 T O o. m asc Q O OS m m a t) "K tam. r111D W t+e•CTICIE iW&ALL Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown r LLI r" L :w 3. Youth Slow Pitch Fields City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study _.am This Study I.w.r•r•NIONS M•w ft" ft..SONS M h1W1Nr0Wl MwN,dam. TMM lwM..S w w+/ soft w SON •ti X1.•.1 M r.r- / ••t pep Ap..L Tr Ow r w. —.. wwwrw brow 0.40 t% A T"k Force me"mm r,amaw. mud wow cmrd w aww --mm r.owa wes g -wr+r TbT.rPrr The WIon Statement. w ove&w.•.1 wr..eft q.1!•w/. •..ft• IY•1/w sw w man=. arse Study Process e ft- ASS wsrrwAS.-wron.. F.M, C.s .0 OwnSe ftdRy D—Ind. W .0 So, a ylwrrw .o...lw.rw•rm e.rw.r rwralr Meow fir -0 ow trt-"a Iw..—dam nSS 8 wA..r.l F— ww.—V w.Ow— n r ft.N=rw.1.TONS Pew Tim T.6 /waft NI.IM•}w. b...•• h. A.ftr..m /AIw11 Nt.1m AWOow Y...Imd. b'•s—am wirlw miaow b..r--SI—WW6Oow.. /tiow/T.•r -Oft 0ti L10111\fft./.Mw ft--"- Awft.T ft.a, w Ltd mw1 b— 0. w.c..prs Youth Slow Pitch Field Standards tl row•. 20- 2ff w60 Slow- 4Wj a.r- M na.ow•r. 1..T.01 s•1•o PT..o am — Youth Slow Pitch Field Demand M •e4 r n 0.r.. Flowft lo..... rC Q ft- 00-W tow.. 7 W. pr Not.w OW, b-V aMw Fft" mme. de two w —.a YSP Field Improvements Tr... eft r.. w.w. i. nan.n..A eAt r wormed, w =Ad r W CO pry b r.. 17.x•4 f)n..Ilt .. 1!f•n.l. Mon b.n..o0 r — eor.r.m. w 40 now r.Wd b, -.0 lD. T.m loft t. 01011- 0— .e.0 ra W.'W . C....m.w w— .wrwwi.w.r •sT+.r r1I w.pi.w b•e w wf.d rm.Tl si! r —.m b ..owaor am Total YSP Fields Ilr..r r 11.. VW Prft O tm•Ir i Mr sws . Ip-. T... ry weft 008,444 •.1709 Illlllll rrrlr 1111111111111111111 .II .I..I III IIId.11T111 .11 nnunnnnie .fn r IIIIIIIIIIIII(II,11111111 / II II II I I II II II1111111111 CO S T N 1 Li CON C L ITS CD z n IrA S I S CO McNiew r. wan 1 Iwo_ -i . 11111111 1 11 illlllllll 111511f IIIIiii111111 IIIIIIN11111,1 III11111 11111 11! 1111111 1111 1 ll IM - IrI-llll,:li) 111111111' 11111 1 11111 ! E II 111111111111 11111111 fjF m FL Q _— I..... I j._ a _.. NOW 0 13 \ ZLb li•i •/ LjMot _ Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown 4. Soccer Fields City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study This Study -n Aw"r1. Yr rw/ w. r rrUrr+ Awrr ol.rlw\ Them -rrr w +r r MAIN r Ytr w-rn rw. r1.. -rr r 11rd1 w M-CTr.\ry r....\.ww a a...•r r..-r OrY. r rr-.\r—.iL A Tail( Force a+fto+.rwww.wamMeN wisms, ftea The Too nwu.wl 1•V rr r'rM• •Y V r oo.w.r 11111. The Vision St doment: T.r+s. a.- No AmM \ w.rr...r -rwrw r rwr..m- w+-.rr r StlrCIY Process .owww,rw.or. awdCt .r.ub.r'wYr.Y w.....rw.r. +wrs b.rr.r1 -drr lr.ar. /"-rLN..f rw.w..eww rw.w.wY.Tr.w TrTr .-V.tirr•Ywr.+- r.r r Trw.lb r- A11.rI0*AMMON YU. I.. w/ rwrp111.... r- wmwtr.-'!.. bM. rb. MONrANNAM• L. MA-•. r- aft r11y.• r... r son Over 1Y1111• RM- r Ft-mom AMlryCb-- MAN C.dOrn11wwMAM, Soccer Field Standards i$lIIamm eaQbou-, Q1Y tTF TLTfSTr•TPt T we.we+11v 11v rw111113r.M . A.1.locwml&W Ir..11M11mr6 1111111111111. 11111111111111111 11 .1..1..11.111... .I...1.,1 r Soccer Fled Demand 111maJ a - rtiw Cr.- Solon* AMft=Arr. MPr1- 4l =Nown Zr0\ -.Y-W r. Pr- r.. .- - r. T- 11. - rwmwf=r rwto.r.1•brwr.11.w - 0.1110-1 - w-rlrw Munk R11b ra.r. r C—Ce— - Tl...uo\11.d -s Tw V rr \y.w 1rM L ] Y w.. -yr. "ft Ow11Y 1r-0 -A... 1 PAN fi a ..rarw.rup ro.r.mrww,..wrrwwt - sr r m.=r-r - -y L . wrw. t r r.1Y, rwtty ^.r w.n -r. -mr sMAMMY. tit 1Y.rA r Cw •.a TwYe\y.w \.IOC fbb r,.r. rd.. -•wu. Yltrrv.Y1 -. aa.a Ttw Y rtr C.- ..r - PA. ..r+1rb1'• AM-0 f•.rr m.. Soccer Field Improvements t Tw rp. r.r r w. lr.11.0 i no womo mo-Fee, q t r dodo d...• mwlm. G -./.m. wt W wsrw -. x t t 1 0W .. x11 INmr.sa..pr+r.•wbn...11-tr -w.mdw C Vrewrdway Total Soccer Fields W w . r. OOload. -y A w. &WMW p.") • UNIT 22 = O 1bw>e. M l..p.l - UYHT e..- ....- 9a,eol lndlrl ,.MYwe Q1. - -• f- t 11ar....aw y%r.. d • i+ M (API • L.-0 i I a Ch— M A.pl -\irl 1 A lrne.r 11..0 Ill x..11 \ [1.l ry • d/'d110 T.-11.r d., 0—.1rr Fi0rC'rU m I1. - r CC) d- 1 CD s L O j`Illl"r11111111111111 IIIt 11,1111 IIIIIIIIII "Illlirnlllla 11 i llllllll :llll,llllllll1111111fill 11. 11111 1111I:Y: I :1111,1111 II II II II I1111111111 W I! (I 1 l1111' IIIIIIIIIIIII1111G1111 1111 I111111Ii1111111111Y1111111111111111 1111111111 IIICIIIII.IIItIIItllll! 1? a g O W m c Vm g a o _ o o Co i —'1 -i k7 t` Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown 5. EM Football Fields City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study ,fm This StUdy.rl/w-.. MY ASrY++rrr.. rwr Yti.. MwwrlarY wY >..tnr.rw.nYYrarY.tYw. rw. r.. f •r11M M•-t TT• Yr r..I. Y.- w-•1• r.. -401Y Agol Y.1- -. -w swooll. A Task Force pas or so MOSIONWO w• . rwY .., — I.Irro.r.i.ti..csr•.+ra n.Twr.ti. w•-r+ow The Vlslon Stetementua a ws om- wsalrrrwm.- rw.rw.+mbfwlww Wheago - 4 .W++maW -06 .. to 40 rp+' own Y- -1- -•w.r SWdy YrY1+Y YS- YwA w.r Oww. /-4w4 -+/ Oww.. o IL. r. d aw roil0w,+/-+ .4.b.w.- wYw- -1.- Yw,--- nr• -Y. Y11- .1/ -•Y-r -+rlw 0'"w a - r-.wrl- w..•r. r-1 1.-- ft./.•- irP -i-Tom P- %/-r1Y r -. -ft, M,- r..M r!- Roam 1w.W A-- .- r-w.eI rwimii, ww.ainmmm -ww.r p 1..- alete- rw.dwy.-ro— Y -. oyr IhIrrr N" Nod Obwm- M-wr bmR w oe IL.rrIww 1111111up00000UUII1 /== "WIIII111; /rlllll 11111111 i 1 11 11!!am1111111111 I.111.1:11111jf 111111111111511? 1111111101 F111If! I,r I{1 r11AlIIIIIIIfI11111111i111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL 'Il' 1v / IIII, I111111wi111111111R11111, IIIIIIIIIIII,II1111111111I IIII(1111' =' !!lilllllllllllll 1111111! IIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111111 III IIIIai 111111111111111 1111 1111111 'ilil„n111111111111 lllll•'- 11111111 IIIII IIIIIIIIII "11111 111111.:1 IN11111111 1';•:1{IIIIHI: 11111111111111 !'lllllllll'j111N J111111 " "" IIi11111Y:11 : 1111111111111111111111111111 !EII 11111"' 1 11 ! 1111' 1111111111111111111111':1111 11111 111171 111111111. 11111111111111.1111111111111111 111 111111 111111 {1111 I l 111 1 1 1 lii,l l l l l l l l l l l l owl Football Field Improvements 'u5 T'.. rA I ft"W 1. NWOO -A.1 M —0 O C- •- -left MO. r,w b r/,- --q m ,•1.+ --+ , c pn '•. O of Total Football Fields rn 0 a H HH o o-La -1 M • NO+tT tw-w r 0 umn - 7 tr Iw s.rr Ttir _ - -.. . • . 1 O 4rllw M - Ynwl+ - 31, r•- .r- ..rr.l -r CV) - -- 0 Jo I- „ o 0 In 0 7 0 L 1 Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown 6B T -Ball Fields & Training Facility City of Richfield - Recreation Asset Replacement Study J Thle Study r+ r—rrr—. r.w rro +wnwrrdwr.trrm,rrrww.~%W..•rrrw aar.ir.rerr wa.01a" Pas ft"Tr rrTr.. ar—w wsm a. 2.—"as awa. r.r.. r..aiiw.a A Task Force efoaa w..r Orrwr.a nrT.rr...ti., a..a wnri•a.blr. bOwa.rr tUL The Vision $ tatemerrt: t. rrwarr sar. rA.r+.•.wewrerrsa<+..rwTwwa+sr. awn.. r w..r...w.wr.rb.r.r.w.•..rrr praawbm"-wr..erer.. Study F"ceSa rrra .r.rr.NA.—.wrOwr•reryor.uvwChOWEA WCONOa-.ra•aw.WW r•.O..wadQWWW Pan O. .rw•a.....w w.r+. wawarr•r•aa- rr.or.a...n..M pa-ft rY.argr Tr T.rrq.rarwr•rwrr.ra erwarte tar Rf.al Mrrw. err.• rwrar- rr. rw... ww. abagaago Pea wI wumm,"a""MwapOa.arma. T -Ball Reid Standards Toao.wa.r.aa oa.ra 1W lad a. aawarr tabraerwwerwwrw T -Ball Field Demand O.wreaw•...ar rar.wrr ar •s r. wan rw u. Lay. w.am er. r+rw b air4d ]e tea. r.—a antis--. e: far Tar ear: ! ^. r. wy. ur•aa aa..erwrt rmw ae.e r e— r---.a .a ea.ar. wear. ro.wb+r...r. a ea: aae . y •. Tar aaia r aa. e1. ea—.r ee. w li le.pa wTVI+ b teen eeaueal T -Ball Field Improvements Trl r.. a. r a.." —,W ar wre. Ift, Tar err a.n r Sa 0-0a.".6. r.i.r.rbe wre• rrO n. aelr —0 wo ruWft a.••• warn r.a w.w.. ra aa..a neaa ••••— w .tar e•w+. eR Tnr.arr w r r— ma sa. Total T -Ball Fields a..a..a -e.a Tar ar.. e Tr r.r. - ..er.r a Trr e.a tar parr U990 IIIIIII It1111u ....... .-- ,I1111111'rllii Im.VNIliillllll I 1:lIt11t11U1 • O.Ril I l i l t e—'lllllll I #/ N 8 0a L O z O a Recreation Services Department 6700 Portland Avenue . Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 The Urban Hometown 1 J; III,"AII arM1 ---- ll I: Cam. 71ff aat Commission • • CITI' OF RICHFIELD January 27, 1998 Agenda Section: New Business Item #: 3 Letter #: 6 GENERAL INFORMATION Type of Request: The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) requests that the Planning Commission consider a modification to the Richfield Rediscovered Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plans and make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. References: Chapter 462 of Minnesota State Statutes requires that whenever any public agency acquires or sells property in the City, the Planning Commission must review the proposed acquisition or sale for consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan. State Statute also requires Planning Commission review of Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plans for consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Public Notice: Not required. City Council: A public hearing is scheduled for February 23, 1998 HRA: HRA approved the plan amendment on January 20, 1998 ANALYSIS Background: Richfield Rediscovered. acquires substandard and obsolete housing and replaces the housing with larger, market rate single family and townhome housing units. The program began in 1990. Periodically, modifications need to be made to the program Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plans. L-1 Proposal: The HRA is recommending that the following changes be made to the Richfield Rediscovered TIF Plans: establish two new TIF districts (where increment is created), A -5 and B -5; expand the boundaries of Project Areas (where increment can be spent) A and B (see map); identify a new list of eligible parcels; and make financial "housekeeping" changes to the Plans to comply with the reporting requirements of the State Auditor. The Planning Commission is being asked to determine whether the Richfield Rediscovered Tax Increment Financing Plans and the acquisition and disposition of the parcels identified in the Plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Issues: All sites identified in the Plans (see attached map and Plans for a listing of properties) are presently zoned R (single family residential). The R district allows single family housing as a permitted use and also allows townhomes, or cluster housing, as a conditional use. The following goals and policies related to the HRA's request are contained in the Comprehensive Plan: excerpts from page ONE -] 0): integrate low- density single- family, attached housing on scattered sites in single- family neighborhoods encourage new high- density single- family, attached housing in transition areas upgrade all substandard single and multi- family housing excerpts from page ONE -17): increase the number of single- family, attached dwellings by at least 500 units. increase the density of housing along arterials and collector streets ... provide for a more diverse housing stock by promoting the development of single- family, attached housing, .. . upgrade the existing housing stock by continuing the Richfield Rediscovered program, scattered site clearance, new construction and remodeling programs to encourage and support rehabilitation and upgrading of the existing housing stock of all types and values. ACTION TO BE TAKEN Recommendation: Adopt the attached resolutions which make the findings that: 1. The acquisition and disposition of property for Richfield Rediscovered is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Richfield Rediscovered Redevelopment and Tax .Increment Financing Plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Basis: 1. Richfield Rediscovered is a proven redevelopment program. Qualifying redevelopment sites have been identified within the specified areas. 2. The Planning Commission is required to review the Plan Modifications to determine consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates all the identified sites as either single family or high density single family. Both of these designations permit single family attached and detached residential use. 4. A source of funding is available to implement the Program. 5. The HRH's development consultant has prepared, and legal counsel has reviewed, the program and related documents and found them to be in compliance with existing laws. Alternative: Find that the Program and Plans are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. EXPLANATION OF ALPHA - NUMERIC ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEM RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED The Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program is organized alpha - numerically because of its cyclical nature. The original program established two redevelopment project areas, Project Area A and Project Area B. The properties which are purchased during any given cycle become the tax increment district for that cycle. Cycle I began when the program was initiated. Properties purchased from the approved plan lists became the tax increment district for that cycle, thus the designation A -1 and B -1. If the current proposed modification is approved, the properties purchased from the two lists of potential candidates in the documents would be designated as Tax Increment District A -5 and B -5. The next two pages are copies of maps which appear in the plan documents. The first map shows the A and B project areas (And also the two proposed areas of enlargement). The second map identifies by dots the potential list of 82 candidates (46 in A and 36 B). All of the properties purchased as part of Cycle V will be designated A- 5 or B -5. an r uoI.9ulw0018 and in I I W Y 3AV PI1UIPad E O x A andlallo3!N aAV lueseald O M•1 aAV 3111paC-1 1r• A 1 M aAV jploywn}I I aAV uu3d 3AV 53 x la X j7nnulmnn•. 1111" sauu o O. ar U o a d y aa m I 11 I n19m 11 11"11111 1111111111 11111111 Ulnitl mow /1/11111 loom aloofphtu'Ilnt11111/111 IIt1111tI1 Itllltnll 1/1111/11 11111/1. 11111,11 1 /Ilan /1111111 Iltlttll mluu 11uum umn11 uuum lout" .nom uwa uuuu mow 11111111 11111111 " lmnu' mmm anon 11111111 111111111 wnm mm/c uuuu anon 11111111 nmm Islam m1111t1 111111 III 1"111 IIt111I1 11.Itnl Illlnl /' 1111111/ 11.11•. 1..11191 wow man mull unman nnnu mom 111111 11..11.. 1nun1 "IIIII uuuu uuuu u.wt nuunn noun 1111.. unuu uuu uuuu uuuu uuuu noun 11111111 lam 1t11111tt1 11 Ilt 1011911 /,IIIII/ ..00 U111t.1 Im1f11 11111111 111111/1 11111111 11/1111 uuuu t1.I "11 mluU .•111113 atoll 1 Illll /It I.uMI ln/ Una r Iii swum it 11rnuu 1111131.111111. wnm uuuu ....... 1111 1 r uuu. O rn 1111111/ II1 plllln { .gall": uuu title n U IRWIN I II11111011111 un t .13 III /1111 .r rODUII n .' Utlljl 1111 IIIIIUIit 1111 tn191m II 11 its /11t11 . nmm uiuu ° rIgll 11111111 tm 1r.In uu r 111111111111 1111111111 umw 1t111w - "1{t /nine maul 11111111 Itll. , In IIIII IIIII IIIIOImII Illtttlll estimate r. i:::ia1 411 /: r1 0111911113i aiolet$ Hitliii iiiis i ..ii iiiiiiil iiiiiiiiii IIIIIIIIIIII iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiii i 111//111 n r/1 111wW111 IIIU IUIt1t11lnht. It.0 /111111// Illlllll 111 1111 111111 /1111111111 1 tltltfll a • t 1 11/1111/ 11111.1.It1 'M IeT: Ilt 11111111 IIIIIIIIII IIIIIII1l11 11 Ilnf III /I 11 1111111 111111119 Iltttlll 111. IIIUtl Itr1,1I, Inn /11 111 .`..1 IIIn111 11111111111 IIIIIIIIIIII /11111111 111/1111 1/1 /1111 11111/1 • 11111111 mom um1. IIIm111 11/19/// 1111 u I,..w 11111111 111111113111 unurl mow gaMttlu Imtu - uut u 11111111 nnnp gam mow 111111 I u..atiluuun 1111uulln uuuu uaun mow unm 111111/. uuuu 191911. 1311E Ittlftll and IA 111 IIwInIIIII 111111111111-11111151 Memo. I11lt tl 111111/ II 11m1111 = t11e1 n 11 1111n11tt11 nlllllllltl IIIIII,11 111111111 1t111tt1 1,111 /1 1111 umw aloe. Itl twti '-1111 IIImm1Il 11111111 I 111111/1/ unuu 111111/ luml 1111 / IInP• .1111= Q11U1 r U I On.IO loom 11 111111uu11 tl /tml 11111111111tt1t nom 11 1 .11f111 flit gal 1 1 Ill 1tm 1111111111 11/./111 galn...88101111 11 ltl 1 non..13ui 1. ° 11111111 mum 11111111 11111111 turn u tmm alum ` m i noon nmm noon mole unu , nano n13f` I _ uuuu 111111// gannu noon mnn momi nmllAA mom 11111111 mom muu nom - mow um norm 11111111 uuuu uuuu 1111" u 11111111 gam I t mom 11111111 noon anon now uuu t1 /tt1U 11118131 m nmm uln.ga - non /1/111/1 in n. 1 _ +. was. .... __ .__ _19..19./ 191911NI11 IfI1P 111//1 n 1 Itlltt r t - IIIt1111n non 1111 11 {1111 n1m.S //1113 .ntpe Ilnulll m 11 nmm m IO1'll` W. III I umu - n t nu a mew w "un 111.11 -nu umu - gaiit. au - thin l nmm.m non a ...ml alum In1 = u . ; - 1 1 11 .nnntu IImL1.1 W.111111 Run 11 UII 1111111 =it y 11 It1IIntI nitnm11l mnuu - ml uwa r rr11II "1111 muwu 11 nmu" Segall .+ nml noun torn n 1 1 0111111" 111111111 11.111 V' Iq /j1 11111 Innill mnTnITFFffffFFFM mutt At ll IIIII111111111111 IIIIII11111111111/ s n 1/ v 1111111111 /111111" uuuum um m 1111 illllal IIt111O 1 "IIt1Iln "Is", _w mom IIt1Itt1I,1 111111111111 1I /1111 rM III1111III1 "Ilill HNIII PE all,11 . 1 II ( IR1mn 131 11 /1111 III 11I /Ili ask _ 111/111 II.I tIlia t.YI uuu 111111111 unmet 111111111111 noun n 11u . rr .r ul e 11.111111 nano L lltlttltl I11t I r /.Illy 111 .Ulna toot 11111 Iltitflm 11111/11. 1111111 •-•O1• •u'I _. t"nnuu m 111111 unnnz nlmnt utittt n 1 11111= . i1 ` _ uwuu n mnn um - ,u 11.1tnn umlun nmf um 1111111 1111 1 gat 1111111111 nmr_ Set 11111= ,i"iii 1111 m/ al l wet r nett= n nn 1 inm 1111 InulII11 nuunn 11111 9IS Illm n 1 Snuuw loom 1111 1 nun gat 1111111111 mn1= nml tt unm u un 1111 11u r i' 11tlW II Ilgall 1111111 : 1 ga Unntl Ittt1111 1111 11111111• 1111111 11 tlllm 11 in mtnl= utm i mnu 11"111 nn m "n: IIIII "m WIIII1111 n1111ru uu= - unu uaun nn uun mmn Elmmmmnntrlt11umoon111 am inn.. 11unm 1111 nnr moon I rnta111 /nIn111 ittr , 1 111111 lrttll /1 1111 11111191,. 1111111t1111t1 1111 IInw1 _- tllltly Ilnitet IInUI 1111111111 " Qr 1Pr19 1111111111 1 t h13 "Mil t IIIII 11 . III ,IIItIII r. 11 r.r . _ Igalutlmn u 1 1. y y •aAV ti3%I3X s O F O ' O r LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 Denotes double lot M Property Address PID Number 6239 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0020 6245 Aldrich 28-028-24-11-0019 6300 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0041 6305 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0027 6320 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0033 6331 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0022 6421 Girard 28- 028 -24 -13 -0008 6440 Humboldt 28- 028 -24 -24 -0009 6306 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0126 6310 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0075 6805 Irving 28- 028 -24 -34 -0008 6645 Knox 28- 028 -24 -31 -0032 6539 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -23 -0092 6700 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -32 -0067 6855 Penn 28- 028 -24 -33 -0146 6817 Queen ** 29- 028 -24-44 -0013 6913 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0175 6924 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0141 6933 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0170 7227 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0017 7332 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0083 6813 Russell 29- 028 -24-44 -0038 6817 Russell 29- 028 -24-44 -0037 6820 Russell 29- 028 -24-44 -0046 6824 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0047 6917 Russell 29- 028 -24-44 -0154 6736 Upton 29- 028 -24 -42 -0132 7332 Upton 32- 028 -24 -13 -0059 6900 Vincent 29- 028 -24 -43 -0121 M? Denotes double lot A -2 Property Address PID Number 6228 Third Avenue 27- 028 -24 -12 -0005 6641 Fourth Avenue 27- 028 -24 -41 -0132 6620 Fifth Avenue 27- 028 -24 -41 -0028 6921 Twelfth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -43 -0098 6515 Thirteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -13 -0145 6915 Thirteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -43 -0064 6237 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0069 6326 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0140 6329 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0091 6349 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0087 6408 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -13 -0117 6537 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -13 -0087 6928 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -43 -0069 6945 Fourteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -43 -0013 6217 Fifteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0058 6245 Fifteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0052 6324 Fifteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -12 -0081 6408 Fifteenth Avenue 26- 028 -24 -13 -0053 A -2 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 Property Address PID Number 7432 Aldrich 33- 028 -24 -41 -0026 7525 Aldrich 33- 028 -24 -41 -0164 6744 Blaisdell 27- 028 -24 -31 -0007 6345 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -11 -0025 6437 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0088 6507 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0116 6508 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -13 -0097 7436 Bryant 33- 028 -24 -41 -0048 6220 Clinton 27- 028 -24 -11 -0001 6915 Clinton 27- 028 -24 -44 -0113 7316 Clinton ** 34- 028 -24 -14 -0086 7500 Colfax 33- 028 -24-41 -0083 7520 Colfax 33 -028 -24 -41 -0088 7027 Columbus 35- 028 -24 -22 -0001 7333 Emerson 33- 028 -24 -13 -0090 7537 Emerson 33- 028 -2442 -0132 7240 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0096 7301 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0129 6833 Grand 27- 028 -24 -33 -0070 7532 Girard 33- 028 -24 -42 -0074 7133 Lyndale ** 34- 028 -24 -22 -0055 7201 Nicollet 34- 028 -24 -13 -0100 6609 Oakland 26- 028 -24 -32 -0031 6833 Park 26- 028 -24 -33 -0086 6800 Pillsbury 27- 028 -24 -34 -0016 6816 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0061 6820 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0062 6833 Portland 26- 028 -24 -33 -0111 7300 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0015 7304 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0016 7415 Portland 35- 028 -24 -32 -0009 6608 Stevens 27- 028 -2442 -0073 6609 Second Avenue 27- 028 -24-42 -0056 6616 Second Avenue 27- 028 -24-42 -0064 7241 Second Avenue 34- 028 -24 -13 -0150 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION OF PROPERTIES RELATED TO THE RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED NEW CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the acquisition of properties associated with the Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program, Cycle V, which are located within Redevelopment Project Areas A and B, as modified, described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and hereby made a part thereof; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the acquisition and disposition of the properties would serve a public purpose; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the acquisition and disposition of the properties for single family residential and townhome purposes would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission finds the acquisition and disposition of the properties described in Exhibit A for single family residential and townhome use to be in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Passed this 27th day of January, 1998 by the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson Mitchell Hadley, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS A -1, A -2, A -3, A-4, A -5, B -1, B -2, B -3, AND B-4, ALL RELATED TO THE RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED NEW CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM, CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City ") has proposed to adopt a Modification to Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts, A -1, A -2, A -3, A-4, A -5, B -1, B -2, B -3, and B-4, all relating to the Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program, (collectively, the "Modification ") and has submitted the Modification to the Richfield Planning Commission, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Modification to determine their consistency with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission that the Modification is consistent with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City. Passed this 27th day of January, 1998 by the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson Mitchell Hadley, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B AND THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5, ALL RELATED TO THE RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED NEW CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM, CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City ") has proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5, all relating to the Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program, collectively, the "Modification to the Program and Plan ") and has submitted the Modification to the Program and Plan to the Richfield Planning Commission, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Modification to the Program and Plan to determine their consistency with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission that the Modification to the Program and Plan are consistent with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City. Passed this 27th day of January, 1998 by the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson Mitchell Hadley, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A AND THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5, ALL RELATED TO THE RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED NEW CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM, CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City ") has proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5, all relating to the Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program, collectively, the "Modification to the Program and Plan ") and has submitted the Modification to the Program and Plan to the Richfield Planning Commission, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Modification to the Program and Plan to determine their consistency with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission that the Modification to the Program and Plan are consistent with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City. Passed this 27th day of January, 1998 by the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson Mitchell Hadley, Secretary 5 , Io ,nCAD nuun nnnwunlnw u ntnw. uuum 811111111111 Marine_ noHill ununtu nutmo iiri " Y Draft as of January 21, 1998 a TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for the establishment of TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 a redevelopment district) within REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Public Hearing: February 23, 1998 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 Phone: (612) 697 -8500 Fax: (612) 697 -8555 E -mail: info @ehiers- inc.com Web Site: www.ehlers- inc.com TABLE OF CONTENTS for reference purposes only) SECTION I - MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A ...... ............................... 1 -1 Foreword 1 -1 Subsection C. Description of Redevelopment Project Area .......................... 1 -1 Subsection G. Acquisition and Relocation Activities .............................. 1 -2 SECTIONK -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 A2 -1 Subsection 2 -1. Foreword ................... ............................... A2 -1 Subsection 2 -2. Statutory Authority ............ ............................... A2 -1 Subsection 2 -3. Statement of Objectives ........ ............................... A2 -1 Subsection 2 -4. Redevelopment Plan Overview ... ............................... A2 -1 Subsection 2 -5. Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District A -5 .. A2 -2 Subsection 2 -6. Classification of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 ............... A2 -3 Subsection 2 -7. Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate ............................. A2-4 Subsection 2 -8. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment .............. A2 -5 Subsection 2 -9. Property To Be Acquired ....... ............................... A2 -5 Subsection 2 -10. Uses of Funds ................ ............................... A2 -5 Subsection 2 -11. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness ......................... A2 -6 Subsection 2 -12. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ............................ A2 -7 Subsection 2 -13. Duration of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 ................... A2 -7 Subsection 2 -14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................... A2 -7 Subsection 2 -15. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ........................ A2 -8 Subsection 2 -16. Administration of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 .............. A2 -8 Subsection 2 -17. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose .......................... A2 -8 Subsection 2 -18. Fiscal Disparities Election ...... ............................... A2 -9 Subsection 2 -19. State Tax Increment Financing Aid .............................. A2 -9 Subsection 2 -20. County Road Costs ........... ............................... A2 -10 Subsection 2 -21. Summary ................... ............................... A2 -10 APPENDIX A - BOUNDARY MAPS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 ... ............................... A -1 APPENDIX B - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 ... ............................... B -1 APPENDIX C - ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTA -5 ............................... ............................... C -1 APPENDIX D - REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTA -5 ............................... ............................... D -1 SECTION I MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A. Generally, the substantive changes include modifying the boundaries of Redevelopment Project Area A as specified below. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A, adopted July 16, 1990, is recommended. It is available from the City Clerk- Treasurer at the City of Richfield. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Redevelopment Project Area A. Subsection C. Description of Redevelopment Proiect Area The modified boundary lines for Redevelopment Project Area A are as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southerly right -of -way line of East 62nd Street and the easterly right -of- way line of 1 Ith Avenue South, thence, in a line easterly more or less, along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the westerly right -of -way line of Bloomington Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said westerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 63rd Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of 16th Avenue. Thence, southerly along said easterly right -of -way to its intersection with the northerly property line of Lot 2, Block 1, Iverson's Second Addition. Thence, easterly along said northerly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the westerly right -of -way line of 18th Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said westerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of Diagonal Boulevard. Thence, southwesterly more or less, along with said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 73rd Street. Thence, westerly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly property line of Lot 5, Block 4, Henry Thernell Addition. Thence, southerly along said easterly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of East 76th Street. Thence, westerly along said northerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the westerly property line of Lot 4, Block 8, Sunset Terrace. Thence, northerly along said westerly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the northerly property line of Lot 8, Block 8, Sunset Terrace. Thence, westerly along said northerly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of Lyndale Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of West 74th Street. Thence, westerly along said southerly right -of -way to its intersection with the easterly property line of Lot 26, Block 25, Irwin Shores. Thence, southerly along said easterly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of West 76th Street. Thence, westerly along said northerly right -of -way line to the intersection with the westerly right -of -way line of Fremont Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said westerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of Humboldt Avenue South. Thence, northwesterly and northerly more or less, along said northerly right -of- way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of West 73rd Street. Thence, easterly more or less, along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of Lyndale Avenue South. Thence, northerly more or less, along with said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection Richfield HRA Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A 1 -1 with the southerly right -of -way line of West 68th Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of Pleasant Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the northerly property line of Lot 7, Block 2, Ralph Hollenbach's First Addition: Thence, easterly, along said northerly property line, as extended, to the easterly right -of -way line of Wentworth Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the northerly property line of Lot 6, Block 2, Oaklane Addition. Thence easterly along said northerly property line, as extended, to its intersection with the westerly right -of -way line of Blaisdell Avenue South. Thence;;, southerly along said westerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of- way line of West 68th Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly.4ht =of -way line of Nicollet Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said, easterly right -of -way line to:its.iritersection with the northerly right -of -way line of East 67th Street. Thence, easterly along said northerly'right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of First Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 66th Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of Stevens Avenue. Thence, northerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 62nd Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the westerly right -of -way line of Clinton Avenue. Thence, southerly, more or less, along said westerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 65th Street. Thence, westerly along said southerly right -of -way line to.its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of 3rd Avenue. Thence, southerly along said easterly right -of -way line to its intersection with the southerly right -of -way line of East 66th Street. Thence, easterly along said southerly right -of -way line to its intersection with the easterly right -of -way line of 11th Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said easterly right -of -way line to the point of beginning. Subsection G. Acquisition and Relocation Activities Acquisition In furtherance of the Richfield Rediscovered Housing Program, HRA staff maintained standards set forth in previous years to identify property for acquisition. In its sequential numbering system, this is Cycle V in the housing program. As in the past, residential property owners were contacted and surveyed to determine (a.) whether or not they continued to express an interest in selling their property on a voluntary basis and (b.) if interested, within which time frame. Additional means of obtaining candidate properties were made by (a.) property owners contacting the HRA requesting that their property be considered for the program and (b.) referrals by the City's health and inspections department. Candidate properties were further evaluated for program eligibility and inspected. The properties identified for acquisition under Cycle V of the program are listed in Appendix A of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5. Relocation The HRA accepts as binding its obligations under provisions of federal and state law (M.S., Chapter 117) for relocation. Richfield HRA Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A 1 -2 SECTION II TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 Subsection 2 -1. Foreword The City of Richfield ( "City "), the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA "), staff and consultants have prepared'the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 (. "District A -5 "), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in 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 City and HRA have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ( "M.S. "), Sections 469.001 through 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 through 469.179, 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 "Plan ") for District A -5. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A. Subsection 2 -3. Statement of Obiectives District A -5 currently consists of 53 parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights -of -way. District A -5 is created to facilitate the demolition of substandard houses and enable families to construct new houses on the lots through a program known as Richfield Rediscovered, which is administered by the HRA. Currently District A -5 consists of 53 lots with the potential for a total of 55 new homes to be constructed, including double lots. Due to the voluntary nature and timing of the sale of the homes included in District A -5, it is likely that some of the parcels will not be redeveloped or will be included in subsequent tax increment financing districts. The budget for District A -5 found in Subsection 2 -10 does assume that 55 new homes are'. built. This plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A. The activities contemplated in the present Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment Financing Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of District A -5 and Redevelopment Project Area A. Subsection 2 -4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1 _ Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within District A -5 may be acquired by the City or HRA and is further described in this Plan. 2. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the City or HRA may sell to a developer selected properties that they may acquire within District A -5 or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 3. The City or HRA may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public streets work within District A -5. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -1 Subsection 2 -5. Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District A -5 District A -5 encompasses all property and adjacent rights -of -way identified by the parcels listed below. Please see the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of District A -5. A2 -2 Property Address PID Number r `: -. 7432 Aldrich 33- 028 -24-41 -0026 7525 Aldrich 33- 028 -24 -41 -0164 6744 Blaisdell 27- 028 -24 -31 -0007 6345 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -11 -0025 6437 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0088 6507 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0116 6508 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -13 -0097 7436 Bryant 33- 028 -24 -41 -0048 6220 Clinton 27- 028 -24 -11 -0001 6915 Clinton 27-028-24-44-0113 7316 Clinton ** 34- 028 -24 -14 -0086 7500 Colfax 33- 028 -24-41 -0083 7520 Colfax 33- 028 -24 -41 -0088 7027 Columbus 35- 028 -24 -22 -0001 7333 Emerson 33- 028 -24 -13 -0090 7537 Emerson 33- 028 -24 -42 -0132 7240 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0096 7301 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0129 6833 Grand 27- 028 -24 -33 -0070 7532 Girard 33- 028 -24 -42 -0074 7133 Lyndale ** 34- 028 -24 -22 -0055 7201 Nicollet 34- 028 -24 -13 -0100 6609 Oakland 26- 028 -24 -32 -0031 6833 Park 26- 028 -24 -33 -0086 6800 Pillsbury 27- 028 -24 -34 -0016 6816 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0061 6820 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0062 6833 Portland 26- 028 -24 -33 -0111 7300 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0015 7304 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0016 7415 Portland 35- 028 -24 -32 -0009 6608 Stevens 27- 028 -24 -42 -0073 6609 Second Avenue 27- 028 -24-42 -0056 6616 Second Avenue 27- 028 -2442 -0064 7241 Second Avenue 34- 028 -24 -13 -0150 Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -2 6228 Third Avenue 6641 Fourth Avenue 6620 Fifth Avenue 6921 Twelfth Avenue 6515 Thirteenth Avenue 6915 Thirteenth Avenue 6237 Fourteenth Avenue 6326 Fourteenth Avenue I_- 6329 Fourteenth Avenue 6349 Fourteenth Avenue 6408 Fourteenth Avenue 6537 Fourteenth Avenue 6928 Fourteenth Avenue 6945 Fourteenth Avenue 6217 Fifteenth Avenue 6245 Fifteenth Avenue 6324 Fifteenth Avenue 6408 Fifteenth Avenue Denotes double lot 27- 028 -24 -12 -0005 27- 028 -24 -41 -0132 27- 028 -24 -41 -0028 26- 028 -24 -43 -0098 26- 028 -24 -13 -0145 26- 028 -24-43 -0064 26- 028 -24 -12 -0069 26- 028 -24 -12 -0140 26- 028 -24 -12 -0091 26- 028 -24 -12 -0087 26- 028 -24 -13 -0117 26- 028 -24 -13 -0087 26- 028 -24 -43 -0069 26- 028 -24-43 -0013 26- 028 -24 -12 -0058 26- 028 -24 -12 -0052 26- 028 -24 -12 -0081 26- 028 -24 -13 -0053 Subsection 2 -6. Classification of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 The City and HRA, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inclusive, finds that District A -5, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: 1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; or 2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used railyards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights -of -way. b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. c) A building is not structuralh substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -3 to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard... e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements until 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains improvements. In meeting the statutory criteria described above, the City and HRA rely on the following facts and findings: District A -5 is a redevelopment district consisting of 53 parcels. An inventory of the parcels shows that at least 70 percent of the area of District A -5 consists of parcels in District A -5 are occupied as defined in the TIF Act. An inspection of the buildings located within District A -5 finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix D) Subsection 2 -7. Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity ONTC) as certified for District A -5 is based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 1998 for taxes payable 1999. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. I and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 1999) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: I . 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 connection with previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity value of District A -5 declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City or HRA. It is expected that the original local tax rate for District A -5 will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 1999. The estimate below is proposed payable 1998. The Original Tax Capacity and the Original Local Tax Rate for District A -5 appear in the table below. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A24 Original Tax Capacity Value $31,111 Percent Retained by City 100% Original Local Tax Rate 1.37491 Subsection 2 -8. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment Pursuant to,M.S., Section 469.174 Sttbd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of District A -5, within Redevelopment Project Area A, upon completion of the.pro- ect,.will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The City and HRA request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2000. The project tax capacity listed is an estimate of values when the project is completed. Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion of Project RC) $102,300 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) 31,111 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) 71,189 Estimated Annual Tax Increment CTC x Local Tax Rate) $97,878 Subsection 2 -9. Property To Be Acquired The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within District A -5 including interior and adjacent street rights of way. The parcels are listed in Subsection 2 -5. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City or HRA only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The following are conditions under which properties not designated to be acquired may be acquired: The City or HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this tax increment financing plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2 -10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for District A -5 is a proposal to facilitate the demolition of substandard houses and enable families to construct new houses on the lots. The City and HRA have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The City has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around District A -5. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of District A -5, this 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 District A -5 over the life of the district is outlined in the following table. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -5 Uses of Funds Per House Total Land Acquisition 65,000 3,575,000 Site Preparation 122,348 Demolition /Grading) 10,000 550,000 Interest 23,539 1,294,620 Administrative Costs (up to 10 %) 5,000 275,000 TOTAL 103,539 5,694,620 Estimated. costs.associated with District A -5 are subject to change. The cost of all activities to be considered for tai.'increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the..tax;-increment paid by property within District A -5 will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of District A -5 but within the boundaries of Redevelopment Project Area A, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of District A -5) subject to the limitations as described in this Plan. Subsection 2 -11. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness Acquisition and site preparation costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City or HRA reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs. The City or HRA reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the Plan. As presently proposed, the project may be financed by a bond issue or loans. Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed without a modification to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. This provision does not obligate the City or HRA to incur debt. The City or HRA may issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The City or HRA may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan through loans from funds of the City or HRA. The estimated sources of funds for District A -5 over the life of the district are contained in the table below. Sources of Funds Per House Total Tax Increment Land Sales Other Tax Increment/Grants Local Contribution 44,490 2,446,962 30,000 1,650,000 26,824 1,475,320 2,225 122,348 TOTAL $1031539 $5,694,630 Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2-6 Subsection 2 -12. 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 paidty 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, purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. repayments of loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; and Ahterest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments. Subsection 2 -13. Duration of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration of District A -5 must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1(b), the duration of District A -5 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the City or HRA. The date of receipt by the City of Richfield of the first tax increment will be approximately 2000. Thus, it is estimated that District A -5, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2024, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City or HRA does reserve the right to decertify District A -5 prior to the legally required date. Subsection 2 -14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes construction which would have occurred without the creation of District A -5. If the construction is a result of tax increment financing, the impact is $0 to other entities. Notwithstanding, the fact that the fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to the fact that the construction would not have occurred without the assistance of the City or HRA, the following estimated impact of District A -5 would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE 1997/1998 Estimated Captured Total Net Tax Capacity (CTC) Tax Capacity Upon Project Completion Hennepin County 936,486,071 71,189 I.S.D. No. 280 26,436,495 71,189 City of Richfield 17,976,447 71,189 Percent of CTC to Entity Total 0.0076% 0.2693% 0.3960% Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2.7 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated 1997/Pay 1998 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 1998 figures. District A -5 will be certified under the actual 1997/1998 rates, which were unavailable at the time this Plan was prepared. Subsection 2 -15. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements The City or HRA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of District A -5 enlargement with a listing of all properties within District A -5 or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original value of District A -5 by the value of improvements for which a building permit was issued. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4. the Cite is in the process of reviewing the area to be included in District A -5 to determine if any building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the City and HRA. Subsection 2 -16. Administration of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 Administration of District A -5 will be handled by the Executive Director of the HRA of the City of Richfield. Subsection 2 -17. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District A -5 as required pursuant to M.S.. Section 409.175. Subd. 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that District A -5 is a redevehipntent district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(x)(1). District A -5 consists of 53 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for residential purposes. At least 70 percent of the District consists of parcels which are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings in District A -5, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance (See Appendix D). Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -8 IMPACT ON TAX RATES 1997/1998 Percent Potential Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes Hennepin County 0.384710 27.98% 71,189 27,387 I.S.D. No_ 280 0.632310 45.99% 71,189 45,014 City of Richfield 0.276640 20.12% 71,189 19,694 Metro Area 0.056330 4.10% 71,189 4,010 Watershed 0.006590 0.48% 71,189 469 Other 0.018330 1.33% 71,189 1,305 Total 1.374910 100.00% 97,878 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated 1997/Pay 1998 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 1998 figures. District A -5 will be certified under the actual 1997/1998 rates, which were unavailable at the time this Plan was prepared. Subsection 2 -15. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements The City or HRA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of District A -5 enlargement with a listing of all properties within District A -5 or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original value of District A -5 by the value of improvements for which a building permit was issued. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4. the Cite is in the process of reviewing the area to be included in District A -5 to determine if any building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the City and HRA. Subsection 2 -16. Administration of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 Administration of District A -5 will be handled by the Executive Director of the HRA of the City of Richfield. Subsection 2 -17. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District A -5 as required pursuant to M.S.. Section 409.175. Subd. 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that District A -5 is a redevehipntent district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(x)(1). District A -5 consists of 53 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for residential purposes. At least 70 percent of the District consists of parcels which are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings in District A -5, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance (See Appendix D). Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -8 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 and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tar increment financing- would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result froth the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of District A -5 permitted by the Plan. Due to the high cost of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings and the cost of financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. A 'comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of Tax Increment Financing District A -5 and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. If all development which is proposed to be assisted with tax increment were to occur in District A -5, the total increased market value would be up to $4,313,900 It is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $3,161,558 would occur without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. This finding is based upon evidence from general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and site improvements in the general area of District A -5 see Cashflow in Appendix Q. 3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District A -5 conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 27, 1998 in order to find that the Plan is in conformance with the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District A -5 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project Area A by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by District A -5 will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Additional findings are set forth in the Authorizing Resolution of the City. Subsection 2 -18. Fiscal Disparities Election No commercial/industrial property is expected to be constructed in District A -5. Subsection 2 -19. State Tax Increment Financing Aid Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, for tax increment financing districts for which certification was requested after April 30, 1990, a municipality incurs a reduction in state tax increment financing aid (RISTIFA) applied to the municipality's Local Government Aids (LGA) first and, Homestead and Agricultural Aid (HACA) second, in an amount equal to a formula based upon the equalized qualifying captured tax capacity (QCTC) of the tax increment financing district. Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, Subd. 6, the City or HRA may choose an option to the LGA -HACA penalty. District A -5 is exempt from the LGA -HACA reduction if the City or HRA elects to make a qualifying Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5. A2 -9 local contribution at the time of approving the tax increment financing plan. To qualify for the exemption in each year, the City or HRA must make a qualifying local contribution to the project of a certain percentage. The local contribution fora redevelopment district is 5 percent. The maximum local contribution for all districts in the City in any year is limited to two percent of the City's net tax capacity, after which point the City or HRA must make an additional contribution equal to the lesser of (a) 0.25 percent of the City's net tax capacity or (b) 3 percent of tax increment revenues for that year. The amount of the local contribution must be made out of unrestricted money of the City or HRA, such as the general fund, 'a property tax levy, or a federal or state grant -in -aid which may be spent for general government purposes. The local contribution may not be made, directly or indirectly, with tax increments or developer payments: ,The local contribution must be used to pay project costs and cannot be used for general government purposes. The City elects to make the annual local contribution to the project to exempt itself from the LGA- HACA penalty. The City or HRA will pay for costs of the project described in this Plan, in an amount equal to 5 percent of annual tax increment for District A -5, subject to the limitations described above, in any year in which such amount exceeds 2 percent of the City's net tax capacity. Such contribution may be in form of either lump sum or annual payments (in addition to tax increment payments) towards costs identified in this Plan or other costs related to that development or redevelopment. The contribution may also be made in the form of public improvements financed by the City or HRA or other unit of government with unrestricted funds. Subsection 2 -20. Countv Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. la, the county board may require the City or HRA 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 judgement 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 under a capital improvement plan or other county plan. In the opinion of the City and HRA and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the City or HRA within thirty days of receipt of this Plan. Subsection 2 -21. Summary The City of Richfield is establishing District A -5 to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The Tax Increment Financing Plan for District A -5 was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc.. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55402 -4100, telephone (612) 697 -8500. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -5 A2 -10 APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAPS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 APPENDIX A_1 V O rah V z 0 x A 0 CA wA AG x WIWOY Wilinl_ 111 nawtwl Iwlw— ' Iumm wWlm nwtw- a mlanm wuml_ wmwl tn wmnl. www IWlwl a m1I mm il Iilllllt IIIIn11Wt alllw i Wnt I unmet tmtuml nnm tmwal alwnm nmI IIi t 11 1111 IOIU — AV nnw a+V 4ni I aAV PUVPiod aAd7apoalH ,, ;,, = aAV 7ueseald aAV aiePUA, aAV 7PIo9urnN Jy 00to r- . JV1 J 6 L V7 1ep33 triaAy C —= a"V ouad = i a^V sa'uaX - — JrA t IO any PaePJod T_, ul aAV aRoaiH 9u r3 n w Q a 0 c a m d tl I 0 0 L U tl Q 0 a 5 l 0 g ter og I d J •aAV sax"x rA tp a] 0 g O w a z O x A VJ WA a I 1 x U to h s s V-Pap::- aAd anitrPQeNud u 4 C A E C9 a 6. u any Im 1 aAd PCMIllod any lapoa!N — ---- - C —= = F= =Fr= •aAy lapoalN aAy JUVWald aAd alepUA -I L- aAdlP1Q9UMH C= _ - -- aAy Quad any saXt3x v any alepaC -] T- aAy Quad 91. 3AV saxJag s J h so n R. d d u_ 0 L CL 4 c 9E ` a 0 d c as i Q= d ds O 0 S o o QqO N i O ' g O I O 00 On CA APPENDIX B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 Property Address PID Number 7432 Aldrich 33- 028 -24 -41 -0026 7525 Aldrich 33- 028 -24 -41 -0164 6744 Blaisdell 27- 028 -24 -31 -0007 6345 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -11 -0025 6437 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0088 6507 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -14 -0116 6508 Bloomington 26- 028 -24 -13 -0097 7436 Bryant 33- 028 -24 -41 -0048 6220 Clinton 27- 028 -24 -11 -0001 6915 Clinton 27- 028 -24 -44 -0113 7316 Clinton ** 34- 028 -24 -14 -0086 7500 Colfax 33- 028 -24-41 -0083 7520 Colfax 33- 028 -24 -41 -0088 7027 Columbus 35- 028 -24 -22 -0001 7333 Emerson 33- 028 -24 -13 -0090 7537 Emerson 33- 028 -24 -42 -0132 7240 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0096 7301 Garfield 34- 028 -24 -23 -0129 6833 Grand 27- 028 -24 -33 -0070 7532 Girard 33- 028 -24 -42 -0074 7133 Lyndale ** 34- 028 -24 -22 -0055 7201 Nicollet 34- 028 -24 -13 -0100 6609 Oakland 26- 028 -24 -32 -0031 6833 Park 26- 028 -24 -33 -0086 6800 Pillsbury 27- 028 -24 -34 -0016 6816 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0061 6820 Pleasant 27- 028 -24 -33 -0062 6833 Portland 26- 028 -24 -33 -0111 7300 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0015 7304 Portland 34- 028 -24 -14 -0016 7415 Portland 35- 028 -24 -32 -0009 6608 Stevens 27- 028 -24 -42 -0073 6609 Second Avenue 27- 028 -24 -42 -0056 6616 Second Avenue 27- 028 -24 -42 -0064 7241 Second Avenue 34- 028 -24 -13 -0150 APPENDIX B -1 Property Address 6228 Third Avenue 6641 Fourth Avenue 6620 Fifth Avenue 6921 Twelfth Avenue 6515 Thirteenth Avenue 6915 Thirteenth Avenue 6237 Fourteenth Avenue 6326 Fourteenth Avenue 6329 Fourteenth Avenue 6349 Fourteenth Avenue 6408 Fourteenth Avenue 6537 Fourteenth Avenue 6928 Fourteenth Avenue 6945 Fourteenth Avenue 6217 Fifteenth Avenue 6245 Fifteenth Avenue 6324 Fifteenth Avenue 6408 Fifteenth Avenue Denotes double lot PID Number 27- 028 -24 -12 -0005 27- 028 -24 -41 -0132 27- 028 -24 -41 -0028 26- 028 -24 -43 -0098 26- 028 -24 -13 -0145 26- 028 -24 -43 -0064 26- 028 -24 -12 -0069 26- 028 -24 -12 -0140 26- 028 -24 -12 -0091 26- 028 -24 -12 -0087 26-028-24-13-0117 26- 028 -24 -13 -0087 26- 028 -24 -43 -0069 26- 028 -24 -43 -0013 26- 028 -24 -12 -0058 26- 028 -24 -12 -0052 26- 028 -24 -12 -0081 26- 028 -24 -13 -0053 APPENDIX B "2 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #A -5 T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS Interest Rate: 6.000% Tax Extension Rate: 1.37491 Pay 98 Estimate Inflation Rate: 0.0000% BASE VALUE INFORMATION Tax MV Per Unit # Units Market Value Capacity Various Parcels 58.700 53 3,111.100 31.111 Total 31,111 PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Type of Tax Increment District: Housing Number of Units: 55 Class Rates: Single Family <$75k 1.0000% Single Family >$75k 1.8500% Estimated Market Value On all Projects: 7,425,000 Pay 00 Estimated Total Market Value per Unit 135.000 Estimated Additonal Market Value Per Unit: 76,300 Estimated Tax Capacity: 102,300 Pay 00 Estimated Taxes: 140,653 Estimated Taxes Per Unit: 2,557 Estimated Tax Increment: 97.878 Estimated Tax Increment Per Unit: 1,780 Estimated Land Sales 1,650,000 Estimated Land Sales Per Unit 30,000 I BUT / FOR ANALYSIS Current Market Value • Est. 3,111,100 New Market Value - Est. 7,425,000 Difference 4,313,900 Present Value of Tax Increment 1,152,342 i Difference 3,161,558 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 3,161,558 Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 01/21/98 Page t CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #A -5 TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Ehlers and Associates. Inc. 0121/98 Page 2 Base Project Captured Semi - Annual Admin. Semi - Annual Local Match Years PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Tax Gross Tax at Net Tax at Of PERIOD END' Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Capacity Increment 10.10% Increment 5.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. 0.0 08 -01 1998 31,111 31,111 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 02 -01 19aa 0.5 02-01 1999 31,111 31,111 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 08 -01 1999 1.0 08 -01 1999 31,111 31,111 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 02 -01 2000 1.5 02 -01 2000 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,9961 2,447 0.5 2.0 08 -01 2000 2.0 08 -01 2000 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 1.0 2.5 02 -01 2001 2.5 02 -01 2001 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,9961 2,447 1.5 3.0 08 -01 2001 3.0 08 -01 2001 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 2.0 3.5 02 -01 2002 3.5 02 -01 2002 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 2.5 4.0 08.01 2002 4.0 08.01 2002 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 3.0 4.5 02 -01 2003 4.5 02 -01 2003 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 3.5 5.0 08 -01 2003 5.0 08 -01 2003 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 4.0 5.5 02 -01 2004 5.5 02 -01 2004 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 4.5 6.0 08 -01 2004 6.0 08 -01 2004 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 5.0 6.5 02 -01 2005 6.5 02 -01 2005 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 5.5 7.0 08 -01 2005 7.0 08 -01 2005 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 6.0 7.5 02 -01 2006 7.5 02 -01 2006 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 6.5 8.0 08 -01 2006 8.0 08 -01 2006 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 7.0 8.5 02 -01 2007 8.5 02 -01 2007 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 7.5 9.0 08 -01 2007 9.0 08 -01 2007 31,111 102.300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 8.0 9.5 02 -01 2008 9.5 02 -01 2008 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 8.5 10.0 08 -01 2008 10.0 08 -01 2008 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 9.0 10.5 02 -01 2009 10.5 02 -01 2009 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 9.5 11.0 08 -01 2009 11.0 08 -01 2009 31.111 102,300 71.189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 10.0 11.5 02 -01 2010 11.5 02 -01 2010 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 10.5 12.0 08 -01 2010 12.0 08 -01 2010 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 11.0 12.5 02 -01 2011 12.5 02 -01 2011 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 11.5 13.0 08 -01 2011 13.0 08 -01 2011 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 12.0 13.5 02 -01 2012 13.5 02 -01 2012 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 12.5 14.0 08 -01 2012 14.0 08 -01 2012 31.111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 13.0 14.5 02 -01 2013 14.5 02 -01 2013 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 13.5 15.0 08 -01 2013 15.0 08 -01 2013 31,111 102,300 71.189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 14.0 15.5 02 -01 2014 15.5 02 -01 2014 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 14.5 16.0 08 -01 2014 16.0 08 -01 2014 31.111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 15.0 16.5 02 -01 16.5 02 -01 2015 31,111 102,300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 15.5 17.0 08 -01 17.0 08 -01 2015 31,111 102.300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 16.0 17.5 02 -01 2016 17.5 02 -01 2016 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 16.5 18.0 08 -01 2016 18.0 08 -01 2016 31,111 102,300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 17.0 18.5 02 -01 2017 18.5 02 -01 2017 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 17.5 19.0 08 -01 2017 19.0 08 -01 2017 31,111 102.300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 18.0 19.5 02 -01 2018 19.5 02 -01 2018 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 18.5 20.0 08 -01 2018 20.0 08 -01 2018 31,111 102.300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 19.0 20.5 02 -01 2019 20.5 02 -01 2019 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 19.5 21.0 08 -01 2019 21.0 08 -01 2019 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 20.0 21.5 02 -01 2020 21.5 02 -01 2020 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 20.5 22.0 08 -01 2020 22.0 08 -01 2020 31,111 102.300 71,189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 21.0 22.5 02 -01 2021 22.5 02 -01 2021 31,111 102.300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 21.5 23.0 08 -01 2021 23.0 08 -01 2021 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 22.0 23.5 02 -01 2022 23.5 02 -01 2022 31,111 102.300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 22.5 24.0 08 -01 2022 24.0 08 -01 2022 31,111 102.300 71.189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 23.0 24.5 02 -01 2023 24.5 02 -01 2023 31,111 102,300 71.189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 23.5 25.0 08 -01 2023 25.0 08 -01 2023 31,111 102,300 71.189 48,939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 24.0 25.5 02 -01 2024 25.5 02 -01 2024 31,111 102.300 71.189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 24.5 26.0 08 -01 2024 26.0 08 -01 2024 31,111 102.300 71,189 48.939 4,943) 43,996 2,447 25.0 26.5 02 -01 2025 Totals 2.446.962 247,143) 2,199,819 122,348 Present Values 1,152,342 116,387 ) 1,035,955 Ehlers and Associates. Inc. 0121/98 Page 2 APPENDIX D REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT A -5 Redevelopment qualifications are on file with the City of Richfield. APPENDIX D_1 t Draft as of January 21, 1998 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for the establishment of TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 a redevelopment district) within REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Public Hearing: February 23, 1998 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, Minnesota 55113 -1105 Phone: (612) 697 -8500 Fax: (612) 697 -8555 E -mail: info @ehlers- inc.com Web Site: www.ehlers- inc.com TABLE OF CONTENTS for reference purposes only) SECTION I - MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B .......... ............................... 1 -1 Foreword' x:: . ......................... .... ............................ 1 -1 Description of Redevelopment Project Area .......................... 1 -1Subsectiori'C.',: '.;. Subsection G. Acquisition and Relocation Activities .............................. 1-2 SECTION• r. II - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Subsection 2 -I. Subsection 2 -2. Subsection 2 -3. Subsection 2-4. Subsection 2 -5. Subsection 2 -6. Subsection 2 -7. Subsection 2 -8. Subsection 2 -9. Subsection 2 -10 Subsection. 2-11 Subsection 2 -12 Subsection 2 -13 Subsection 2 -14 Subsection 2 -15 Subsection 2 -16 Subsection 2 -17 Subsection 2 -18 Subsection 2 -19 Subsection 2 -20 Subsection 2 -21. 132 -1 Foreword ................... ............................... 132 -1 Statutory Authority ............ ............................... 132 -1 Statement of Objectives ........ ............................... B2 -1 Redevelopment Plan Overview ... ............................... 132 -1 Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District B -5 .. 132 -2 Classification of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 ............... 132 -2 Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate ............................. 132 -3 Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment .............. 132 -4 Property To Be Acquired ....... ............................... 132 -4 Uses of Funds ....... ........ ............................... B2 -5 Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness .......................... B2 -5 Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ............................ 132 -6 Duration of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 ................... 132 -6 Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................... 132 -6 Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ... . . . .. . .......... . ... 132 -7 Administration of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 .............. 132 -7 Municipal Approval and Public Purpose .......................... 132 -7 Fiscal Disparities Election ...... ............................... 132 -8 State Tax Increment Financing Aid .............................. 132 -8 County Road Costs ............ ............................... 132 -9 Summary.................... ............................... 132 -9 APPENDIX A . BOUNDARY MAPS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 ... ............................... A -] APPENDIX B - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 ... ............................... B -1 APPENDIX C - ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 ............................... ............................... C -2 APPENDIX D - REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 ............................... ............................... D -1 SECTION I MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B. Generally, the substantive changes include modifying the boundaries of Redev'e* l6pment Project Area B as specified below. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B, adopted July 16;'1990, is recommended. It is available from the City Clerk- Treasurer at the City of Richfield. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Redevelopment Project Area B. Subsection C. Description of Redevelopment Project Area The modified boundary lines for Redevelopment Project Area B are as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the south right -of -way line of State Highway, No. 62 and the east right -of -way line of Oliver Avenue South, thence in a line easterly more of less, along said south right -of -way line to its intersection with the west right -of- way -line of Pleasant Avenue South. Thence southerly along said west right - of -way line to its intersection with the south right -of -way line of West 63rd Street. Thence westerly along said south right -of -way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Aldrich Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the south property line of Lot 4, Block 2, Ray's Lynnhurst Second Addition. Thence, westerly along said south property line, as extended, to its intersection with the east property line of Lot 9, Block 2. Ray's Lynnhurst Second Addition. Thence, southerly along said east property line, as extended, to its intersection with the south property line of Lot 5, Block 2, Ray's Lynnhurst Section Addition. Thence, westerly along said south property line, as extended, to its intersection with the south right -of -way line of Mildred Drive. Thence, westerly more or less, along said south right -of -way line to its intersection with the east right -of -way of Emerson Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said east right -of -way line to its intersection with the north property line of Lot A, Silverwood Second Addition. Thence, easterly along said north property line, as extended, to its intersection with the east property line of Lot A, Silverwood Second Addition. Thence, southerly along said east property line, as extended, to its intersection with the south right -of -way line of West 66th street. Thence, westerly along said south right -of- way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Humboldt Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the north right -of -way line of West 69th Street. Thence, westerly along said north right -of -way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Irving Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the south right -of- way line of West 72nd Street. Thence, easterly along said south right -of -way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Humboldt Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the north right -of -way line of West 73rd Street. Thence, westerly along said north right -of- way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Penn Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the north right -of -way line of West 74th Street. Thence, westerly along said north right -of -way line to its intersection with the west right -of -way line of Sheridan Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said west right -of -way line to its intersection with the north right -of- way line of West 76th street. Thence, westerly along said north right -of -way line to its intersection with the east right -of -way line of Xerxes Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said east right -of -way line to its Richfield HRA Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B 1 -I intersection with the south right -of -way line of West 66th Street. Thence, easterly along said south right -of- way line to its intersection with the east right -of -way line of Russell Avenue South. Thence, southerly along said east right -of -way line to its intersection with the north property line of Lot 23, Block 2, Tingdale Brothers Lincoln Hills. Thence, easterly along said north property line, as extended, to its intersection with the east property line of Lot 23,.Block 2, Tingdale Brothers Lincoln Hills. Thence, southerly along said east property line, as extended, to its intersection with the south right -of -way line of West 67th Street. Thence, easterly along said south,right-of- -way line to its intersection with the east property line of Lot 24, Block 16, Tingdale Brothers Lincoln Hills.--Thence, southerly along said east property line, as extended, to its intersection with the north right -of -way line of West 69th Street. Thence, easterly along said north right -of -way line to its intersection with`the east right -of -way line of Penn Avenue South. Thence, northerly along said east right -of- way line'to ifs intersection with the south right -of -way line of West 67th Street. Thence, easterly along said south right -of -way line to its intersection with the east right -of -way line of Oliver Avenue South. Thence, northerly,along said east right -of -way line to its intersection with the south property line of Lot 13, Block 11, Ray's Lynnhurst Addition. Thence westerly along said south property line, as extended, to the center line of the alley of Block 12, Ray's Lynnhurst Addition. Thence northerly along said centerline to the south right -of- way line of West 63rd Street. Thence easterly along said south right -of -way line to the east right -of -way line of Oliver Avenue South. Thence northerly along said east right -of -way line to the point of beginning. Subsection G. Acquisition and Relocation Activities Acquisition In furtherance of the Richfield Rediscovered Housing Program, HRA staff maintained standards set forth in previous years to identify property for acquisition. In its sequential numbering system, this is Cycle V in the housing program. As in the past, residential property owners were contacted and surveyed to determine (a.) whether or not they continued to express an interest in selling their property on a voluntary basis and (b.) if interested, within which time frame. Additional means of obtaining candidate properties were made by (a.) property owners contacting the HRA requesting that their property be considered for the program and (b.) referrals by the City's health and inspections department. Candidate properties were further evaluated for program eligibility and inspected. The properties identified for acquisition under Cycle V of the program are listed in Appendix A of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5. Relocation The HRA accepts as binding its obligations under provisions of federal and state law (M.S., Chapter 117) for relocation. Richfield HRA Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B 1 -2 SECTION II TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 Subsection 2 -1. Foreword The City of Richfield ( "City "), the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA "), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 ( "District-B -5 "), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Redevelopment Project Area B. 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 City and HRA have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ( "M.S. "), Sections 469.001 through 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 through 469.179, 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 "Plan ") for District B -5. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B. Subsection 2 -3. Statement of Objectives District B -5 currently consists of 29 parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights -of -way. District B -5 is created to facilitate the demolition of substandard houses and enable families to construct new houses on the lots through a program known as Richfield Rediscovered, which is administered by the HRA. Currently District B -5 consists of 29 lots with the potential for a total of 30 new homes to be constructed, including double lots. Due to the voluntary nature and timing of the sale of the homes included in District B -5, it is likely that some of the parcels will not be redeveloped or will be included in subsequent tax increment financing districts. The budget for District B -5 found in Subsection 2 -10 does assume that 30 new homes are built. This plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B. The activities contemplated in the present Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment Financing Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of District B -5 and Redevelopment Project Area B. Subsection 2 -4. Redevelopment Plan Overvie« Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within District B -5 may be acquired by the City or HRA and is further described in this Plan. 2. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the City or HRA inay sell to a developer selected properties that they may acquire within District B -5 or may lease land or facilities to a developer. The City or HRA may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public streets work within District B -5. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B2 -1 Subsection 2 -5. Legal Description of Property in Tax Increment Financing District B -5 District B -5 encompasses all property and adjacent rights -of -way identified by the parcels listed below. Please see the map in Appendix ,A for further information on the location of District B -5. y: Property Address PID Number r 6239 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0020 6245 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0019 6300 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0041 6305 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0027 V 6320 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0033 6331 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0022 6421 Girard 28- 028 -24 -13 -0008 6440 Humboldt 28- 028 -24 -24 -0009 6306 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0126 63 10 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0075 6805 Irving 28- 028 -24 -34 -0008 6645 Knox 28- 028 -24 -31 -0032 6539 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -23 -0092 6700 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -32 -0067 6855 Penn 28- 028 -24 -33 -0146 6817 Queen ** 29- 028 -24-44 -0013 6913 Queen 29- 028 -24-44 -0175 6924 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0141 6933 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0170 7227 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0017 7332 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0083 6813 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0038 6817 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0037 6820 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0046 6824 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0047 6917 Russell 29- 028 -24-44 -0154 6736 Upton 29- 028 -24 -42 -0132 7332 Upton 32- 028 -24 -13 -0059 6900 Vincent 29- 028 -24-43 -0121 Denotes double lot Subsection 2 -6. Classification of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 The City and HRA, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inclusive, finds that District B -5, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 132 -2 1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; or 2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used railyards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights -of -way. b) . •For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. c) A building is not str ucturall_v substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on rite basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building. the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to tire property• after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the parry that otvns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurallt substandard... e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements until 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains improvements. In meeting the statutory criteria described above, the City and HRA rely on the following facts and findings: District B -5 is a redevelopment district consisting of 29 parcels. An inventory of the parcels shows that at least 70 percent of the area of District B -5 consists of parcels in District B -5 are occupied as defined in the TIF Act. An inspection of the buildings located within District B -5 finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix D) Subsection 2 -7. Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate Pursuant to M.S.. Section 469.174. Subd. 7 and M.S.. Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity ONTC) as certified for District B -5 is based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 1998 for taxes payable 1999. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. / and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 1999) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. change in tax exempt status of property; Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B2 -3 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 connection with previously issued building permits. In any year in which the cuirent Net Tax Capacity value of District B -5 declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City or HRA. It is'expected that the original local tax rate for District B -5 will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 1999. The estinate`below is proposed payable 1998. The Original Tax Capacity and the Original Local Tax Rate for District B -5 appear in the table below. Original Tax Capacity Value $18,618 Percent Retained by City 100% Original Local Tax Rate 1.37491 Subsection 2 -8. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment 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 District B -5, within Redevelopment Project Area B, upon completion of the project, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The City and HRA request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2000. The project tax capacity listed is an estimate of values when the project is completed. Project Estimated Tax CapacityY upon Completion of Project (PTC) $55,800 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) 18,618 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) 37,182 Estimated Annual Tax Increment CTC x Local Tax Rate) $51,122 Subsection 2 -9. Propertv To Be Acquired The City or HRA may acquire any parcel within District B -5 including interior and adjacent street rights of way. The parcels are listed in Subsection 2 -5. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City or HRA only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. 2. The following are conditions under which properties not designated to be acquired may be acquired: The City or HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this tax increment financing plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B24 Subsection 2 -10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for District B -5 is a proposal to facilitate the demolition of substandard houses and enable families to construct new houses on the lots. The City and HRA have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The City has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around District B -5. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of District B -5, this 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 District B -5 over the life of the district is outlined in the following table. Uses of Funds Per House Total Land Acquisition $65,000 $1,950,000 Site Preparation Demolition /Grading) 10,000 300,000 Interest 22,539 676,180 Administrative Costs (up to 10 %) 5,000 150,000 TOTAL $102,539 $3,076,180 Estimated costs associated with District B -5 are subject to change. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within District B -5 will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of District B -5 but within the boundaries of Redevelopment Project Area B, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of District B -5) subject to the limitations as described in this Plan. Subsection 2 -11. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness Acquisition and site preparation costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City or HRA reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs. The City or HRA reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the Plan. As presently proposed, the project may be financed by a bond issue or loans. Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed without a modification to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. This provision does not obligate the City or HRA to incur debt. The City or HRA may issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The City or HRA may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan through loans from funds of the City or HRA. The estimated sources of funds for District B -5 over the life of the district are contained in the table below. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 132 -5 Sources of Funds Per House Total Tax Increment Land Sales 42,602 $1,278,048 30,000 900,000 Other Tax Increment/Grants 27,807 834,210 Loc9-Contribution 2,130 63,902 TOTAL $102,539 $3,076,160 Subsection 2-12. 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: I . 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, purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. repayments of loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; and 4. interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments. Subsection 2 -13. Duration of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration of District B -5 must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant to M.S.. Section 469.176, Subd. 1(b), the duration of District B -5 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the City or HRA. The date of receipt by the City of Richfield of the first tax increment will be approximately 2000. Thus, it is estimated that District B -5, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2024, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City or HRA does reserve the right to decertify District B -5 prior to the legally required date. Subsection 2 -14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes construction which would have occurred without the creation of District B -5. If the construction is a result of tax increment financing, the impact is $0 to other entities. Notwithstanding, the fact that the fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to the fact that the construction would not have occurred without the assistance of the City or HRA, the following estimated impact of District B -5 would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 62 -6 is IMPACT ON TAX BASE 1997/1998 Estimated Captured Total Net Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC Tax Capacity Upon Project Completion to Entity Total Hennepin County 936,486.071 37,182 0.0040% I.S.D. No. 280 26,436,495 37,182 0.1406% City of Richfield 17,976,447 37,182 0.2068% Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 62 -6 is Watershed IMPACT ON TAX RATES 0.48% 37,182 245 Other 0.018330 1.33% 37,182 1997/1998 Percent 1.374910 Potential 51,122 Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes Hennepin County 0.384710 27.98% 37,182 14,304 LS.D. No. 280 0.632310 45.99% 37,182 23,511 City of Richfield 0.276640 20.12% 37,182 10,286 Metro Area 0.056330 4.10% 37,182 2,094 Watershed 0.006590 0.48% 37,182 245 Other 0.018330 1.33% 37,182 682 Total 1.374910 100.00% 51,122 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated 1997/Pay 1998 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 1998 figures. District B -5 will be certified under the actual 1997/1998 rates, which were unavailable at the time this Plan was prepared. Subsection 2 -15. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements The City or HRA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of District B -5 enlargement with a listing of all properties within District B -5 or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original value of District B -5 by the value of improvements for which a building permit was issued. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the City is in the process of reviewing the area to be included in District B -5 to determine if any building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the City and HRA. Subsection 2 -16. Administration of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 Administration of District B -5 will be handled by the Executive Director of the HRA of the City of Richfield. Subsection 2 -17. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District B -5 as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that District B -5 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1). District B -5 consists of 29 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for residential purposes. At least 70 percent of the District consists of parcels which are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings in District B -5, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance (See Appendix D). Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B2 -7 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 and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of District B -5 permitted by the Plan. v, Due to the high;cost of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings and the cost of financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. A `comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of Tax Increment Financing District B -5 and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. all development which is proposed to be assisted with tax increment were to occur in District B -5, the total increased market value would be up to $2,188,200 It is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $1,586,332 would occur without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. This finding is based upon evidence from general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and site improvements in the general area of District B -5 see Cashflow in Appendix Q. 3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District B -5 conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 27, 1998 in order to find the Plan in conformance with the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District B -5 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the Cin, as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project Area B by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by District B -5 will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Additional findings are set forth in the Authorizing Resolution of the City. Subsection 2 -18. Fiscal Disparities Election No commercial /industrial property is expected to be constructed in District B -5 Subsection 2 -19. State Tax Increment Financing Aid Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, for tax increment financing districts for which certification was requested after April 30, 1990, a municipality incurs a reduction in state tax increment financing aid (RISTIFA) applied to the municipality's Local Government Aids (LGA) first and, Homestead and Agricultural Aid (HACA) second, in an amount equal to a formula based upon the equalized qualifying captured tax capacity (QCTC) of the tax increment financing district. Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, Subd. 6, the City or HRA. may choose an option to the LGA -HACA penalty. District B -5 is exempt from the LGA -HACA reduction if the City or HRA elects to make a qualifying Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B2 -8 local contribution at the time of approving the tax increment financing plan. To qualify for the exemption in each year, the City or HRA must make a qualifying local contribution to the project of a certain percentage. The local contribution for a redevelopment district is 5 percent. The maximum local contribution for all districts in the City in any year is limited to two percent of the City's net tax capacity, after which point the City or HRA must make an additional contribution equal to the lesser of (a) 0.25 percent of the City's net tax capacity or (b) 3 percent of tax increment revenues for that year. The amount of the local contribution must be made out of unrestricted money of the City or HRA, such as the general fund, a property tax levy, or a federal or state grant -in -aid which may be spent for general government purposes. The local contribution may not be made, directly or indirectly, with tax increments or developer payments. The local contribution must be used to pay project costs and cannot be used for general government purposes. The,City elects to make the annual local contribution to the project to exempt itself from the LGA- HACA penalty. The City or HRA will pay for costs of the project described in this Plan, in an amount equal to 5 percent of annual tax increment for District B -5, subject to the limitations described above, in any year in which such amount exceeds 2 percent of the City's net tax capacity. Such contribution may be in form of either lump sum or annual payments (in addition to tax increment payments) towards costs identified in this Plan or other costs related to that development or redevelopment. The contribution may also be made in the form of public improvements financed by the City or HRA or other unit of government with unrestricted funds. Subsection 2 -20. Countv Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175. Subd, la, the county board may require the City or HRA 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 judgement 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 under a capital improvement plan or other county plan. In the opinion of the City and HRA and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads. if the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the City or HRA within thirty days of receipt of this Plan. Subsection 2 -21. Summary The City of Richfield is establishing District B -5 to preserve and enhance the tax base and redevelop substandard areas.. The Tax Increment Financine Plan for District B -5 was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive. Roseville, A1lnnesota 55402 -4100, telephone (612) 697 -8500. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -5 B2 -9 APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAPS OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 APPENDIX A -1 V O rrk+ vI z 0 x A A A ICI U r M 3 .5 EB != awV JuPa and PUSR+od awd )anoa!H' a'`d 7 ald awd 1plo9uin" I awd UrUad — — H t.7p tO J h y JH y awd 1epa awd q7 i i 7 awd P°aly+od T —, awd )ano3IH wd alepad-j L tp t d o 00 w j D a 9 m n a MCIA e 4 j aAd uuad 8 J p awl+ saxuax n 00 ant+ anti uoa --ig J rtrtii;;11 rtrt tr^^rrnn y s ant, road = a+V gjtl i a anV saXJ;)X J anti paelyod . 4 r t pt0 x A•anV JaRo3!H ant+ wwwald U A•anV alepa(-j A w x anV 1PI°gWnH U J rtrtii;;11 rtrt tr^^rrnn y s ant, road = anV saXJ;)X JV: 4 r t pt0 Jy f/1 LHL h n n d u e+ L 6. e A E z v o W 5 ' a' C v :9 u n I a^V q1b I antr P —I1Jod i aeV JapoalM via J .anV alepmCZ H J yH n MV 'I'llmd aAV SaNjaX P_ Gi 0 8 0 8 O 8 09 oQO C o i o I APPENDIX B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 Denotes double lot APPENDIX B-1 Property Address PID Number 6239 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0020 6245 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0019 6300 Aldrich 28- 028 -24 -11 -0041 6305 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0027 6320 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0033 6331 Girard 28- 028 -24 -12 -0022 6421 Girard 28- 028 -24 -13 -0008 6440 Humboldt 28- 028 -24 -24 -0009 6306 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0126 6310 Irving 28- 028 -24 -21 -0075 6805 Irving 28- 028 -24 -34 -0008 6645 Knox 28- 028 -24 -31 -0032 6539 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -23 -0092 6700 Oliver 28- 028 -24 -32 -0067 6855 Penn 28- 028 -24 -33 -0146 6817 Queen ** 29- 028 -2444 -0013 6913 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0175 6924 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0141 6933 Queen 29- 028 -24 -44 -0170 7227 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0017 7332 Queen 32- 028 -24 -14 -0083 6813 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0038 6817 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0037 6820 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0046 6824 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0047 6917 Russell 29- 028 -24 -44 -0154 6736 Upton 29- 028 -24 -42 -0132 7332 Upton 32- 028 -24 -13 -0059 6900 Vincent 29- 028 -24 -43 -0121 Denotes double lot APPENDIX B-1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #B -5 T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS Interest Rate: 6.000% Tax Extension Rate: 1.37491 Pay 98 Estimate Inflation Rate: 0.0000% BASE VALUE INFORMATION Tax MV Per Unit ft Units Market Value Capacity Various Parcels 64,200 29 1,861,800 18,618 Total 18.618 PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Type of Tax Increment District: Housing Number of Units: 30 Class Rates: Single Family <$75k 1.0000% Single Family >$75k 1.8500% Estimated Market Value On all Projects: 4.050,000 Pay 00 Estimated Total Market Value per Unit 135,000 Estimated Additonal Market Value Per Unit: 70,800 Estimated Tax Capacity: 55,800 Pay 00 Estimated Taxes: 76,720 Estimated Taxes Per Unit: 2,557 Estimated Tax Increment: 51,122 Estimated Tax Increment Per Unit: 1,704 Estimated Land Sales 900,000 Estimated Land Sales Per Unit 30,000 BUT / FOR ANALYSIS Current Market Value - Est. 1.861,800 New Market Value - Est. 4,050.000 Difference 2,188,200 Present Value of Tax Increment 601,868 Dfference 1,586,332 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 1.586,332 Ehlers and Associates. Inc. omi/98 Page 1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #13-5 PERIOD ENDIP Yrs. Mth. 0.5 02 -01 19Sy 1.0 08.01 1999 1.5 02 -01 2000 2.0 08 -01 2000 2.5 02 -01 2001 3.0 08 -01 2001 3.5 02 -01 2002 4.0 08 -01 2002 4.5 02 -01 2003 5.0 08 -01 2003 5.5 02 -01 2004 6.0 08 -01 2004 6.5 02 -01 2005 7.0 08 -01 2005 7.5 02 -01 2006 8.0 08 -01 2006 8.5 02 -01 2007 9.0 08 -01 2007 9.5 02 -01 2008 10.0 08 -01 2008 10.5 02 -01 2009 11.0 08 -01 2009 11.5 02 -01 2010 12.0 08 -01 2010 12.5 02 -01 2011 13.0 08 -01 2011 13.5 02 -01 2012 14.0 08 -01 2012 14.5 02 -01 2013 15.0 08 -01 2013 15.5 02 -01 2014 16.0 08 -01 2014 16.5 02 -01 217 17.0 08 -01 2(. 17.5 02 -01 201b 18.0 08 -01 2016 18.5 02 -01 2017 19.0 08 -01 2017 19.5 02 -01 2018 20.0 08 -01 2018 20.5 02 -01 2019 21.0 08 -01 2019 21.5 02 -01 2020 22.0 08 -01 2020 22.5 02 -01 2021 23.0 08 -01 2021 23.5 02 -01 2022 24.0 08 -01 2022 24.5 02 -01 2023 25.0 08 -01 2023 25.5 02 -01 2024 26.0 08 -01 2024 26.5 02 -01 2025 Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 01/21/98 Page 2 TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Base Project Captured Semi - Annual Admin. Semi - Annual Local Match Years PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Tax Gross Tax at Net Tax at Of Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Capacity Increment 10.10% Increment 5.00% Increment 0.0 08 -01 1998 18,618 18,618 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 02 -01 1999 18,618 18,618 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 08 -01 1999 18,618 18,618 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 02 -01 2000 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 0.5 2.0 08 -01 2000 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1.278 1.0 2.5 02 -01 2001 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 1.5 3.0 08 -01 2001 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 2.0 3.5 02 -01 2002 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,2781 2.5 4.0 08 -01 2002 18,618 55,800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 3.0 4.5 02 -01 2003 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2.582) 22,979 1,278 3.5 5.0 08 -01 2003 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 4.0 5.5 02 -01 2004 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1.278 4.5 6.0 08 -01 2004 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 5.0 6.5 02 -01 2005 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 5.5 7.0 08 -01 2005 18,618 55,800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 6.0 7.5 02 -01 2006 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 6.5 8.0 08 -01 2006 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 7.0 8.5 02 -01 2007 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 7.5 9.0 08 -01 2007 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 8.0 9.5 02 -01 2008 18,618 55,800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 8.5 10.0 08 -01 2008 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979, 1,278 9.0 10.5 02.01 2009 18,618 55,800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979) 1,278 9.5 11.0 08 -01 2009 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 10.0 11.5 02 -01 2010 18,618 55.800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 10.5 12.0 08 -01 2010 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 11.0 12.5 02 -01 2011 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 11.5 13.0 08 -01 2011 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 12.0 13.5 02 -01 2012 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 12.5 14.0 08 -01 2012 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 13.0 14.5 02 -01 2013 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 13.5 15.0 08 -01 2013 18,618 55.800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 14.0 15.5 02 -01 2014 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 14.5 16.0 08 -01 2014 18,618 55.800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 15.0 16.5 02 -01 2015 18,618 55.800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1.278 15.5 17.0 08 -01 2015 18,618 55,800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 16.0 17.5 02 -01 2016 18.618 55.800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 16.5 18.0 08 -01 2016 18,618 55.800 37.182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 17.0 18.5 02 -01 2017 18,618 55,800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 17.5 19.0 08 -01 2017 18,618 55.800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22.979 1,278 18.0 19.5 02 -01 2018 18,618 55.800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 18.5 20.0 08 -01 2018 18,618 55,800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 19.0 20.5 02 -01 2019 18,618 55,800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 19.5 21.0 08 -01 2019 18.618 55.800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 20.0 21.5 02 -01 2020 18,618 55.800 37,182 25,561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 20.5 22.0 08 -01 2020 18,618 55.800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 21.0 22.5 02 -01 2021 18,618 55.800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 21.5 1 23.0 08 -01 2021 18,618 55,800 37.182 25.561 2.582) 22,979 1,278 22.0 1 23.5 02 -01 2022 18,618 55.800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 22.5 24.0 08 -01 2022 18,618 55,800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 23.0 24.5 02 -01 2023 18.618 55.800 37,182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 23.5 25.0 08 -01 2023 18,618 55.800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 24.0 25.5 02 -01 2024 18,618 55.800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 24.5 26.0 08 -01 2024 18.618 55,800 37.182 25.561 2,582) 22,979 1,278 25.0 Totals 1.278.048 129,083 ) 1,148,965 63,902 i Present Values 601.868 160.7891 541.079 PERIOD ENDIP Yrs. Mth. 0.5 02 -01 19Sy 1.0 08.01 1999 1.5 02 -01 2000 2.0 08 -01 2000 2.5 02 -01 2001 3.0 08 -01 2001 3.5 02 -01 2002 4.0 08 -01 2002 4.5 02 -01 2003 5.0 08 -01 2003 5.5 02 -01 2004 6.0 08 -01 2004 6.5 02 -01 2005 7.0 08 -01 2005 7.5 02 -01 2006 8.0 08 -01 2006 8.5 02 -01 2007 9.0 08 -01 2007 9.5 02 -01 2008 10.0 08 -01 2008 10.5 02 -01 2009 11.0 08 -01 2009 11.5 02 -01 2010 12.0 08 -01 2010 12.5 02 -01 2011 13.0 08 -01 2011 13.5 02 -01 2012 14.0 08 -01 2012 14.5 02 -01 2013 15.0 08 -01 2013 15.5 02 -01 2014 16.0 08 -01 2014 16.5 02 -01 217 17.0 08 -01 2(. 17.5 02 -01 201b 18.0 08 -01 2016 18.5 02 -01 2017 19.0 08 -01 2017 19.5 02 -01 2018 20.0 08 -01 2018 20.5 02 -01 2019 21.0 08 -01 2019 21.5 02 -01 2020 22.0 08 -01 2020 22.5 02 -01 2021 23.0 08 -01 2021 23.5 02 -01 2022 24.0 08 -01 2022 24.5 02 -01 2023 25.0 08 -01 2023 25.5 02 -01 2024 26.0 08 -01 2024 26.5 02 -01 2025 Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 01/21/98 Page 2 APPENDIX D REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT B -5 Redevelopment qualifications are on file with the City of Richfield. APPENDIX D -1 Draft as of January 14, 1998 MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS A -1, A -2, A -3, A -4, B -1, B -2, B -3 AND B4 redevelopment districts) Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority City of Richfield County of Hennepin State of Minnesota Modifications Adopted by HRA: Public Hearing on Modifications: February 23, 1998 Modifications Adopted by City Council: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1 ( "District A -1 ") as originally adopted by the City Council on July 23, 1990 and modified from time to time since that date. District A -I is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District A -1 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District AA, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District A -1 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District A -1, increasing the total amount of the budget for District A -1, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District A -1. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District A -1 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District A -1. All of the parcels included in District A -1 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District A -1. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin Countv to be included in District A Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1 Page 1 Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 7320 51h Ave. 34- 028 -24 -14 -0041 A -1 1254 12/06/90 05/10/91 6425 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0046 A -1 1254 12/06/90 05/10/91 6518 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0079 A -1 1254 12106/90 05/10/91 6401 Bloomington Ave. 26- 028 -24 -14 -0096 A -1 1256 12/05/91 07/07192 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 6538 Bloomington Ave. 26- 028.24 -13 -0102 A -1 1256 06/25/92 07/07/92 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 7129 1st Ave. 34- 028 -24 -12 -0085 A -1 1256 10/23/91 07/07/92 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 6612 2nd Ave. 27- 028 -24- 42.0068 A -1 1256 03/24/92 07/07/92 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 6407 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0049 A -1 1256 06/08/92 0.0108695652 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 6415 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0047 A -1 1256 06/25/92 07/07/92 1256 =1254 expansion Amend 3119193 6501 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0115 A -1 1256 4/14/92 & 07/07/92 1256 =1254 expansion 06/11/92 Amend 3119193 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -1 Page 1 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District A -1 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Total including the July 23, 1990 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition $1,009,393 $770,669 Demolition/Site Clearance 114,950 110,000 Administration 16,326 60,000 Interest 200,000 Total Cost $1,140,669 $1,140,669 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. In the original tax increment financing plan and resolution approved by the City Council on July 23, 1990, 1,000,000 of inter -fund loan proceeds from the City's sanitary sewer fund, water fund, and the HRA's LHN tax increment fund ($333,333 per fund) were authorized to finance the activities of District A -I and Tax Increment Financing District B -1. Given the relative size of the original budgets for each of the tax increment districts and the actual number of parcels certified, it is estimated that the authority for loans to be incurred by District A -1 was 60% of the total authority or 5600,000. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the July 23, 1990 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments S820,175 $720,000 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 400,000 Other 0 10,669 Total 5820,175 $1,140,669 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -I Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -1 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -1. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -1 ( "District B -1 ") as originally adopted by the City Council on July 23, 1990 and modified from time to time since that date. District B -1 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District B -1 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District B -1, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District B -1 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District B -1, increasing the total amount of the budget for District B -1, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District B -1. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -1 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District B -1 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District B -l. All of the parcels included in District B -1 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District B -1. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District B -l: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan For Tax Increment Financing District B -1 Page I Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 6315 Dupont Ave.subd: 28- 028 -24 -11 -0067 13-1 1255 12/06/90 5/10/91 & 7/12/91 1016 Mildred Drive 28- 028.24 -11 -0081 1020 Mildred Drive 28- 028 -24 -11 -0082 6424 James Ave. 28- 028.24.24 -0046 6-1 1255 05/14/91 07/12/91 7145 James Ave. 33- 028.24.21 -0078 13-1 1255 12/06/90 5/10/91 & 7/12/91 7210 James Ave. chgn: 33- 028 -24 -24 -0071 B -1 1255 12/06/90 5/10/91 & 7/12/91 7223 James Ave. 33- 028.24 -24 -0071 6813 Logan Ave.; chgn 28- 028.24 -34 -0052 B -1 1255 05/14/91 07/12/91 6809 Logan Ave. 6313 Morgan Ave. 28- 028 -24 -22 -0079 B -1 1255 05/14/91 07/12/91 6321 Humboldt Ave. 28- 028 -24 -12 -0046 B -1 1257 03/30/92 07/07/92 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan For Tax Increment Financing District B -1 Page I Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -1 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Total including the Cost Category July 23, 1990 Original Budget February 23, 1998 Modification Property Acquisition 425,007 350,881 Demolition /Site Clearance 48,400 48,400 Administration 6,874 31,000 Interest 50,000 Total Cost 480,281 480,281 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. In the original tax increment financing plan and resolution approved by the City Council on July 23, 1990, 1,000,000 of inter -fund loan proceeds from the City's sanitary sewer fund, water fund, and the HRA's LHN tax increment fund ($333,333 per fund) were authorized to finance the activities of District B -1 and Tax Increment Financing District A -1 . Given the relative size of the original budgets for each of the tax increment districts and the actual number of parcels certified, it is estimated that the authority for loans to be incurred by District B -1 was 40% of the total authority or $400,000. Section I, Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the July 23, 1990 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments 5452.775 $278,281 Interest Earnings 0 1,000 Land Sale 0 200,000 Other 0 1,000 Total $452,775 $480,281 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan For Tax Increment Financing District B -1 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 ("District A -2 ") as originally adopted by the City Council on July 20, 1992, and modified from time to time since that date. District A -2 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District A -2 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District A -2, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District A -2 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District A -2, increasing the total amount of the budget for District A -2, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District A -2. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District A -2 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, He County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District A -2. All of the parcels included in District A -2 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District A -2. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District A -2: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 Page Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 7500 Bryant Ave. 33. 028.24 -41 -0106 A -2 1258 11/06/92 07/08/93 7520 Bryant Ave. 33. 028.24 - 41.0110 A -2 1258 06/15/93 07/08/93 6634 4th Ave. 27- 028.24 - 41.0052 A -2 1258 02/09/93 07/08/93 6926 Chicago Ave. 26- 028.24 - 33.0028 A -2 1267 07/25/95 317/96 and 6844 14th Ave. 26- 028 -24- 43.0056 A -2 1267 03/18/96 07/12/96 7245 12th Ave. 35- 028.24.13 -0001 A -2 1260 -1258e 05/25/94 07/12/94 7528 Bryant Ave. 33- 028.24 -41 -0112 A -2 1260 -1258e 07/15/93 07/12/94 7112 1st Ave. 34- 028.24.12.0096 A -2 1260 -1258e 10/07/93 07/12/94 6225 14th Ave. 26. 028.24 - 12.0071 A -2 1260 -1258e 07/15/93 07/12/94 6310 15th Ave. 26- 028.24.12 -0077 A -2 1260 -1258e 08/23/93 07/12/94 7021 Nicollet Ave. 34- 028.24.12 -0023 A -2 1260 -1258e 06/16/94 07/12/94 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 Page Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District A -2 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Total including the July 20, 1992 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition $1,074,225 $800,000 Demolition /Site Clearance 105,000 105,000 Administration 5,000 40,000 Interest 239,225 Total Cost $1,184,225 $1,184,225 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $500,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund/development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $500,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the July. 20, 1992 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments S493,850 $493,850 Interest Earnings 0 50,000 Land Sale 0 590,375 Other 0 50,000 Total S493.850 $1,184,225 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -2 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2 ( "District B -2 ") as originally adopted by the City Council on July 20, 1992, and modified from time to time since that date. District B -2 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District B -2 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District B -2, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District B -2 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District B -2, increasing the total amount of the budget for District B -2, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District B -2. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District B -2 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District B -2. All of the parcels included in District B -2 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District B -2. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District B -2: Property PID HRA TIF County Date of TIF Date of Address Number District No. Project Number Cert. Request County Certification 6641 Oliver Ave. 28- 028 -24- 32.0045 B -2 1259 12/30/92 07/08/93 7124 Washburn Ave. 32- 028 - 24.12.0073 B -2 1261- 1259exp 10/05/93 07/12/94 6912 Oliver Ave. 28- 028 -24.33 -0053 B -2 1261- 1259exp 10/05/93 07/12/94 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -2 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2 Page I Total including the July 20, 1992 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition $532,575 $412,575 Demolition /Site Clearance 55,000 55,000 Administration 5,000 25,000 Interest 100,000 Total Cost $592,575 $592,575 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $500,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund /development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $500,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the July 20, 1992 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments S'_79,500 $279,500 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 293,075 Other 0 10,000 Total S279,500 $592,575 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -2 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 ( "District A -3") as originally adopted by the City Council on June 20, 1994, and modified from time to time since that date. District A -3 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District A -3 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District A -3, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District A -3 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District A -3, increasing the total amount of the budget for District A -3, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District A -3. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District A -3 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification/expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District A -3. All of the parcels included in District A -3 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District A -3. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District A -3: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 Page 1 Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 6625 Stevens Ave. 27- 028 -24.42 -0095 A -3 1262 01/10/95 07/19/95 6500 14th Ave. 26- 028 -24.13 -0132 A -3 1262 12/20/94 07/19/95 6828 Elliot Ave. 26- 028.24 -34 -0135 A -3 1262 11/02/94 07/19/95 7525 Girard Ave. 33- 028.24.42 -0094 A -3 1262 11/21/94 07/19/95 7537 Girard Ave. 33- 028 -24 -42 -0091 A -3 1262 08/31/94 07/19/95 7416 4th Ave.subd: 34- 028 -24 -41 -0053 A -3 1262 09/30/94 07/19/95 7412 -4th Ave. (Lot A) 34- 028 -24 -41 -0137 not certified 7416 -4th Ave. (Lot B) 34- 028.24 -41 -0138 09/30/94 6404 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24 -13 -0052 A -3 1262 11/21/94 07/19/95 6432 15th Ave. 26- 028 -24- 13.0059 A -3 1268 04/12/96 07/12/96 7344 Bryant Ave. 33- 028 -24 -14 -0047 A -3 1270 08/27/96 06/30/97 Amends 1262 & 1268 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 Page 1 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District A -3 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Total including the June 20, 1994 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition $1,204,050 $1,000,000 Demolition /Site Clearance 138,000 138,000 Administration 23,000 100,000 Interest 127,050 Total Cost $1.365,050 $1,365,050 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $700,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund/development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $700,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the Revenue June 20, 1994 Original Budget February 23, 1998 Modification Tax Increments 1,379,400 1,045,350 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 300,000 Other 0 10,000 Total S 1.379.400 1,365,350 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -3 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 ( "District B -3") as originally adopted by the City Council on June 20, 1994, and modified from time to time since that date. District B -3 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District B -3 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District B -3, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District B -3 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District B -3, increasing the total amount of the budget for District B -3, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District B -3. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District B -3 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District B -3. All of the parcels included in District B -3 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District B -3. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District B -3: Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -3 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 Page I Property PID HRA TIF County Date of TIF Date of Address Number District No. Project Number Cert. Request County Certification 6404 Humboldt Ave. 28.028.24.24 -0002 B -3 1263 12/14/94 07/19/95 6821 Logan Ave. 28. 028.27.34 -0050 B -3 1263 11/15/94 07/19/95 6236 Pleasant Ave. 27. 028.24.22 -0056 B -3 1263 09/30/94 07/19/95 6645 Upton Ave. 29- 028. 24.42 -0015 B-3 1266- 1263ex 07/19/95 03/07/96 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -3 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 Page I Total including the June 20, 1994 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition $827,600 $693,600 Demolition /Site Clearance 84,000 84,000 Administration 16,000 50,000 Interest 100,000 Total Cost $927.600 $927,600 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $700,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund/development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $700,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the June 20, 1994 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments S979,875 $787,600 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 120,000 Other 0 10,000 Total 5979,875 $927,600 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -3 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -4 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-4. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A4 ( "District A -4 ") as originally adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1995, and modified from time to time since that date. District A -4 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District A -4 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District A -4, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District A -4 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District A -4, increasing the total amount of the budget for District A -4, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District A -4. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -4 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District A -4 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District A -4. All of the parcels included in District A4 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District A4. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District A -4: Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA*and City are not increasing the budget for District A -4 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Modificaiion to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -4 Page I Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 7216 1st Ave. 34. 028 -24 -13 -0094 A -4 1264 07/25/95 07112/96 7415 3rd Ave. 34- 028 -24 -41 -0008 A -4 08/18197 IN PROCESS 6812 13th Ave. 26. 028 -24 -43 -0022 A -4 1264 07/25/95 07/12/96 6820 Portland 27. 028 -24 -44 -0006 A -4 11/18/97 IN PROCESS 7429 Dupont Ave. 33. 028 -24 -41 -0076 A -4 1264 07/25/95 07/12/96 7025 Nicollet Ave. 34. 028 -24 -12 -0022 A -4 11/07/97 IN PROCESS 7037 Oakland Ave. subd: 35- 028 -24.22 -0042 A -4 1264 08/23/95 07/12/96 7033 Oakland 35- 028 -24 -22 -0125 7037 Oakland 35. 028.24 -22 -0126 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA*and City are not increasing the budget for District A -4 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and include all potential categories of costs. Modificaiion to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A -4 Page I Total including the May 15, 1995 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition Demolition /Site Clearance Administration 2,408,100 276,000 46,000 2,054,100 276,000 1/ 111 Interest 300,000 Total Cost $2,730,100 $2,730,100 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $750,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund/development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $750,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the Revenue Nlay 15, 1995 Original Budget February 23, 1998 Modification Tax Increments S2.740,373 2,460,100 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 250,000 Other 0 10,000 Total S2.740.373 2,730,100 Modification to the Tax Increment Financtm: Plan (or Tax Increment Financing District A -4 Page 2 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B4 February 23, 1998 The following text represents a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-4. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area "A" ( "Project Area A ") and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -4 ( "District 134") as originally adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1995, and modified from time to time since that date. District B -4 is a redevelopment tax increment financing district which provides funding sources for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") to acquire structurally substandard single family homes, demolish the homes, and resell the lots for construction of a new homestead property. District B-4 is allowed to collect tax increments from the new homes for up to 25 years. Generally, the substantive changes in the current modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan include the clarification of budgets to meet new formats for financial reporting for tax increment, clarification of the indebtedness for District B-4, and identification of the parcels which have been certified in District B4 by address, parcel identification numbers, and Hennepin County project number. This modification is not increasing the size of District B4, increasing the total amount of the budget for District B -4, nor increasing the total amount of indebtedness for District B -4. For further information, a review of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -4 is recommended. They are available from the Richfield HRA. Section D. Description of Property in the Tax Increment Financing District Due to the nature of the Richfield Rediscovered program, the parcels which were included in the original tax increment financing plan was a potential list of properties to be included in District B-4 rather than a definitive list of properties to be certified. Certification of properties was requested only when the HRA acquired the parcel. Because the acquisition of parcels occurred over a multi -year period, Hennepin County certified the individual parcels with separate county project numbers or as a modification /expansion to the original tax increment plan. Below is a chart which includes the tax increment financing parcels included in District B -4. All of the parcels included in District B-4 were listed in the original tax increment plan and are not modifications to District B -4. It is not expected that additional parcels will be certified to Hennepin County to be included in District B -4: Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -4 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -4 Page 1 Property Address PID Number HRA TIF District No. County Project Number Date of TIF Cert. Request Date of County Certification 6320 Oliver Ave. 28- 028.24.22 -0122 B -4 1265 06/30/96 07/12/96 2819 W. 70 -1/2 St. 32- 028.24 -12 -0068 B -4 1265 07/12/96 6601 Logan Ave. 28- 028.24 -31 -0061 B -4 1265 07/25/95 07/12/96 6845 Newton Ave. 28- 028.24 -33 -0018 B -4 1265 through 07/12/96 2916 W. 71 -1/2 St. 32- 028.24 -12 -0072 B -4 1269 8/2/1996 and 06/30/97 6824 Queen Ave. 29- 028.24 -44 -0024 B -4 01/06/98 IN PROCESS 6318 Knox Ave. 28- 028.24 -21 -0107 6-4 1272 06/26/97 07/08/97 Amends 1265 & 1269 Section G. Estimate of Costs The following is a clarification of the budget for public costs as originally adopted. The HRA and City are not increasing the budget for District B -4 but are being changed to meet new reporting requirements and Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -4 Page 1 include all potential categories of costs. Total including the May 15, 1995 February 23, 1998 Cost Category Original Budget Modification Property Acquisition Demolition /Site Clearance Administration 1,308,750 150,000 25,000 1,033,750 150,000 Interest 200,000 Total Cost $1,483,750 $1,483,750 Section H. Estimated Amount of Obligated Funds. It was anticipated that $750,000 of funds from the HRA's general fund /development account would be available on a long -term basis for financing the net public costs. The $750,000 amount was the anticipated net costs after land sale proceeds had been received by the HRA. Section I. Sources of Revenue. Due to new reporting requirements of sources of revenue, the original tax increment plan is being modified to include all sources of funds, not only tax increments which are funding the majority of the public costs. Total including the May 15, 1995 February 23, 1998 Revenue Original Budget Modification Tax Increments $2.052.994 $1,263,775 Interest Earnings 0 10,000 Land Sale 0 200,000 Other 0 10,000 Total 52.052.994 $1,483,775 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B -4 Page 2