Loading...
82-11-09MOUND CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Tuesday, November 9, 1982 7:30 P.M. - City Hall CITY OF MOUND A G E N D A Mound, Minnesota 1. Minutes of October 26, 1982, Regular Meeting 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed Vacation of the South 5' of Sulgrove Road which. lies between the Southerly extension across it of the West line of Lot 11, Block 28 and the East line of Lot 15~ Block 28., Whipple Addition. 3. L.M.C.D. Code Amendment - Re: Boat Storage 4. Comments & Suggestions from. Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) 5. Any Ideas for the Public Hearing on Lost Lake, November 16, 1982 - Discussion Item 6. Payment of Bitls 7. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. B. C. E. F. G. Pg. 2511-2521 Pg. 2522-2534 Pg. 2535-2538 Pg. 2539 Minutes of the October 14, 1982, Park Commission Meeting Pg. 2540-2542 Letter from Curt Pearson- Re: Zoning Matters Letter from Metromolitan Waste Control Board - Re: Comprehensive City Sewer Plan REVIEW - Metro Council Bulletin Emergency Preparedness Material (3 articles) Dis't. 277 School Board Minutes (October 13, 1982 Meeting)Pg. 2558-2559 Ratio of Sales to Price Real Estate for 1981-82 for Property Values H. Letter from John Cameron I. Springsted Newsletter J. Letter from Tonka corporation K. Report on Street Light Costs for 1983 L. American Legion Post 398 Gambling Report M. Park Development & Improvement Plan (previously handed out, please bring with you) ~. Tax Increment Financing Materials ~. Calendar for November 1982 Pg. 2543-2545 Pg. 2546-2547 Pg. 2548-2549 Pg. 2550-2557 Pg 2560 Pg 2561 Pg 2562-2563 Pg 2564 Pg 2565 Pg 2566 Pg. 2567-2626 Pg. 2627 Page 2510 215 October 26, 1982 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341Maywood Road i-n said City on October 26, 1.982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers Pinky Charon, Robert Polston,'Gordon Swenson, Donald Ulrick. Also present were: City Manager Jori Elam, City Attorney, Curt Pearson, Water Superintendent Greg Skinner, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens: Buzz Sycks, Bud Stannard, Kaye Westerlund, Bill Koenlg, Peter Ward, Dale Pixler, Patzy D'Avia, Ron Pelarski, Daryl Heikes, Joel Hillyer, Jim Robin, Russ Peterson, Mr. & Mrs. John Wagman, David Hozza, Saul Smiley, Dr. Ken Romness. Councilmember Ulrlck arrived at 7:55 P.M. The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people attending. MINUTES The Minutes of the October 12, 1982, Regular Meeting were presented for consideration. Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the October 12, 1982, Regular Meeting as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Ulrick was absent. WATER BILL - 4700 TUXEDO The City Manager explained that the owner of 4700 Tuxedo (a rental property) is asking that the Council reduce his water bill because he says he didn't use 300,000 gallons of water and his water meter 'indicates he did. The Manager then submitted a letter he had written to the owner outlining his options, which are to have the meter pulled out and tested to see if it is reading accurately and if it is pay the bill or if it is not the City Will adjust the bill. Mr. Joel Hillyer was present representing the owner Mr. Ed McCabe and stated that they felt the meter was wrong and there was no way the house could have used 300,000 gallons of water because it was vacant. The City Manager then explained that in his letter to Mr. McCabe he listed the meter readings from November 1979 to February 19~2 and that around November of 1981 the outside meter reader became stuck and has remained stuck at 207,000. Then when the inside meter was read On Ma¥'20,~ 1982 it read 510,000, an increase of nearly 300,000 gallons. Greg Skinner of the Water Dept. explained to Mr. Hillyer the difference between the meter and the reader outside. Councilmember Polston asked if the owner would be willing to have the meter tested. Mr. Hillyer said yes he thought so. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to have the meter pulled from 4700 Tuxedo Blvd. and have it t~sted for its accuracy. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Ulrick was absent. October 26, 1982 PUBLIC HEARINGS A. FINAL ADOPTION OF THE 1983 REVENUE SHARING BUDGET The City Manager explained that by law we are required to hold a Public Hearing concerning the final adoption of the 1983 Revenue Sharing Budget and that notice has been published of this hearing. The Mayor opened the public hearing and asked for comments or suggestions from citizens present on the following budgeted items. 1. Police Car $ .7,500 2. Spring & Fall Clean-Up 10,O00 3. Dump Truck (1/2 Cost) 30,000. 4. Civil Defense Siren 2,000 5. Codification of Ordinances 15,O00 6. Radio for police car 500 7. Commons Maintenance 10~OOO $ 75,ooo The City Manager stated that there is still approxlmately $45,000 in uncommitted. Revenue Sharing funds after the 1983 Budget is adopted. There were no other comments or suggestions from citizens present. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-279 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1983 REVENUE SHARING BUDGET AS SUBMITTED The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Ulrick was absent. Bo DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER BILLS The Mayor opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone present would like to be heard in regard to any of the delinquent water and sewer bills proposed to be shut-off. There were none. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. The City Manager stated that the llst is down to $2,958.1Oo Polston moved and Charon seconded the followlng resolution. RESOLUTION #82-280 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,958,10 AND AUTHORIZING THE STAFF TO SHUT-OFF WATER SERVICE FOR THESE DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS. The vote was unanimously in favor with Ulrick absent. Motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS A. FINAL SUBDIVISION - WAYNE BYRD PART OF LOTS 3 & 4, BLOCK 3, SHADYWOOD POINT The City Manager explained that this is the same lot that was split in half in Resolution #81-304 in September of 1981, to sell one half to the neighbor on the North and now that neighbor wants to buy the second half 217 October 26, 1~82 of the lot as well. The request is to go back to the orlginel parcel before the split and combination with Lot 2. Councilmember Ulrick arrived at 7:55 P.M. There was discussion on whether Lot 3 would ever need a varlance in the front yard setback if it were ever built upon. The City Attorney stated no it would not. The Planning Commission has approved this item. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-281 RESOLUTION WAIVING REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 22 OF THE CITY CODE REGARDING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION OF PART OF LOTS. 3 AND 4, BLOCK.3, SHADYWOOD POINT (PID #13-)17-24 11 0123 & PID #13-117-24 11 O001) The vote was. unanimously in favor. Motion carried. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - RON GEHRING (NEWHOUSE BUILDERS ADDITION) - LOTS 54 AND THE WEST 25 FEET OF LOT '46I, AUD. SUBD. )68 - PID #23-117-24 0031 The City Manager explained that the applicant was given preliminary approval in Resolution 81-82 and that the 9 stipulated items in that resoluti6n have been complied with. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of this final plat with one escrow fund for Items 4 ($1800), 5 ($200 per lot or $1,000) and 8 ($1,000) as required in Resolution 81-82. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-282 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT OF NEWHOUSE BUILDERS ADDITION SUBDIVISION Ron Gehrlng asked that he not be charged a $625.00 park dedication fee for Lot 4 as there is already a house on it. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to amend the original resolution #82-282 waiving the $625.00 park dedication fee on Lot 4 because there is a house on it already. The vote on. the amendment was unanimously in favor Moji.on carried. The vote on the orginal resolution with the amendment included was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SETBACK VARIANCE FOR.ATTACHED GARAGE - NICHOL & LUCILLE BRYCE - 3142 DEVON LANE - LOTS.II., 12 & 13, BLOCK 4, ARDEN - PID #24Jli7-24' 44 0040 The City Manager explained that the request if to build an 18' x 22' attached garage 11.3 feet to 14.5 feet from the front lot line. This is a corner lot with 30 foot setback required from both right-of-ways. The present house is 10 feet from Devon Lane and 35 ~ feet from Canterbury Road. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the setback variance for the garage with the stipulation that the car entrance to the garage doors be on the Devon side. 218 October 26, 1982 Charon moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-283 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE FRONT YARD VARIANCE AS REQUESTED FOR LOTS 11, 12, & 13, BLOCK 4, ARDEN : The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. D. FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - RONALD L. PELARSKI - LOTS 2-4 & 21-23- BLOCK 7~ WOO.DLAND POINT The City Manager explained that the stipulation in Resolution #82-235 granting preliminary subdivision, have been complied with and now the applicant is seeking final approval. The City Attorney stated that the permanent easement for utility purposes had the wrong description in it and Pelarski's attorney has.been notified to correct the description. He asked the Clerk not to release the resolution approving the final subdivision until the new easement with the correct description is received. The Council agreed and the Clerk noted. Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-284 RESOLUTION TO'CONCUR, WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION FOR LOTS 2, 23, 4, 21,. 3 AND 22, BLOCK 7, WOODLAND POINT.. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. E. CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW - STREETCAR BOAT SHOPPING CENTER - LOTS 35 & 37, AUDITOR'S SUBD. 170.& BLOCK 4'~ SHIRLEY HILLS UNIT F The City. Manager stated that the principals for the Streetcar Boat Shopping Center are looking for two things tonight: l. Approval of the concept. 2. That the City let. the land by Lost Lake revert back to the Catholic Church. Principals present: Bill Koenig, Bud Stannard and Buzz S¥cks. Bill Koenig presented the ideas for the Streetcar Boat Shopping Center. 1. They would like 2 key tenants and 20 shops. 2. They are planning a bank Or other ancillary building. 3. There is the possibility of the relocation of Super America. 4. They want to capture the history of Mound. 5. They are dealing with property that needs a cure. 6. The town does not have a good shopping area at this time. 7. This center is needed to promote development around it. 8. The center will not disrupt anything. 9. They are sticking with private financing versus Tax Increment Financing because the financing is available and the interest rate is lower. 10. They have been studying this for three years in order to get the cost factor tied down to get financing and lease information. Now they would like concept approval from the Council and the release of the land from the City back to the Catholic Church. October 2~, 1~82 Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-285 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE CONCEPT OF THE STREETCAR BOAT SHOPPING CENTER Councilmember Ulrick questiOned releasing the Lost Lake land back to the Catholic Church before the public was given a change to voice their opln'i'on pn what the land should be used for and also getting public input on the subject of Tax Increment Financing which is what the following item on the agenda wants. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion to table this. A roll call vote was 3 in favor with Polston and Swenson voting nay. Motion carried. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded a motion directing the City Manager to prepare all the facts at hand in a factual, objective manner and advertise a public hearing, for the purpose of presenting both developments to the public asking for input from the public on the vacating of the Lost Lake site and the concept of Tax Increment Financing. This Public Hearing to be held approximately 30 days from now. The vote was 3 in favor with Polston and Swenson voting nay, Motion carried. Councilmember Polston voiced objection to the cutting off of discussion and tabling any items on the Agenda. Councilmember Swenson also voiced objection to this item being tabled. The following people present voiced objection to the tabling: Bill Koenig, Jim Robin, Buzz Sycks, Frank Wieland, Bud Stannard, Patzy D'Avia and Pete Ward. The City Attorney advised the Council that the City Manager had given him the deeds to the Lost Lake site about 4 weeks ago and that there are some questions on what the City can do about the site. We are waiting for the Abstract from Title Insurance. TOWN SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Councilmember Swenson asked if this item had gone to the Planning Commission yet. The City Manager replied no. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to have this item go to the Planning Commission before coming to the Council. There was debate on whether to go ahead and have a discussion on Tax Increment Financing tonight or have the Planning Commission review this first, as they have in the past, and then advise the Council. A roll call vote on the motion was 4 in favor with Ulrick voting nay. Motion carried. The City Manager explained that the reason this is on the Agenda was to get the Council's authorization to spend money to research the feasibility of Tax Increment Financing. Another reason for it being on the Agenda was there has never been a project like this in Mound before so he was looking for direction from the Council. 220 October 26, 1982 The Council then asked David Hozza, the City's consultant, for a breif explanation on Tax Increment Financing. David Hozza stated that Tax Increment Financing is a method of redevelopment that can be used to finance either public improvements or acquisition that is in the public interest. It accomodates redevelopment on a local level without the Federal Government and has local control. The additional tax revenues generated by a T.I.F. development that are over current tax revenues would be'used to amortize the principle and interest on bonds for the improvement made on that particular Tax Increment District, be they public improvements or for acquisition or relocation of existing businessed. It is basically a wa.y'to accomplish redevelopment without the Federal Government. Some government agency approvals are necessary, such as the County has to review the project and the State has to have some type of sign off. The City Attorney explained that there are several kinds of Tax Increment Districts and gave some examples of T'.I.F. Districts. It is something the HRA and the Council work together on. Polston moved and Ulrick seconded a motion.to, set November 16, 1982 as the date for a Public Hearing to get put input on the issue of vacating land held in the public interest and the concept of Tax Increment Financing. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BINGO PERMIT - MOUND FIRE DEPT. AUXILIARY Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-286 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE BINGO PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE MOUND FIRE DEPT. AUXILIARY The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. REPORT ON THE )982 SEAL COATING PROGRAM. The City Manager submitted the breakdown of the cost for the 198~ Seal Coating Program which cost $78,926.21. Now a transfer of funds from the Liquor Fund, that was approved earlier, is needed. Polston moved and Uirick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-287 RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER $78,926.21 FROM THE LIQUOR FUND TO THE 1982 SEAL COATING PROGRAM The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. BIDS & QUOTATIONS A. DREDGING OF COMMON'S DOCK SITES - RIDGEWOOD ACCESS & EMERALD CHANNEL The City Manager explained that both of these areas have silted in because of storm sewers emptying into the lake at these points. 221 October 26, 1982 Emerald Channel area will be.dredged to a depth of 4 feet, 40 feet from shore and sloped to the shoreline. 60 feet of shoreline with and estimated 150 cubic yards to be removed. Ridgewood Access area is to be dredged to a depth of 4 feet, 60 feet from shore and sloped to the shoreline. 100 feet of shoreline with and estimated 300 cubic yards to be removed. There is only one Company who have the equipment to undertake thls job, 'Minnetonka Portable Dredging and they have submitted a quote of $1,500.OO estimated for the Emerald Channel and $3,000.00 estimated for the Ridgewood Access. Charon moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-288 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE QUOTE OF MINNETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING IN THE.AMOUNT OF AN ESTIMATED $4,500.00 FOR DREDGING THE EMERALD CHANNEL AND THE RIDGEWOOD ACCESS The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOUND BAY PARK - LAUNCHING RAMP Chris Bollis Park Director, was present and explained that the sand on the launching ramp at .Mound Bay .Park needs to be cleaned off. He has an estimate from Widmer Bros. of $~128.OO and if the ramp cleaning does not take long, the drainage ditch and spillway near the parking lot need to be cleaned and would be done. Charon moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-289 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE QUOTE OF WIDMER BROS. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,128.00 FOR THE CLEANING OFF OF THE LAUNCHING RAMP AT MOUND BAY PARK The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Swenson was absent. B. COMMONS DOCK STEPS ON AVOCET AND BLUEBIRD The Park Commission has recommended that the Council approve the construction and maintenance of stairways at the South end of Avocet and Bluebird Lanes on Wiota Commons. The Park Director advised the Council that he has examined the~two sites and determined that it would be possible to construct timber stairs, like the one built on Canary Lane for an approximate cost for both stairs of $1,7OO.OO. Funding for the stairs would come from the $10,O00 of the Revenue Sharing that the Council earmarked for Commons Improvement. The work would be done in the Spring of 1983. Charon moved and Polston seconded a motion to approve the construction and maintenance of stairways, at the South end of Avocet and Bluebird Lanes on Wiota Commons. The cost to come from the Revenue Sharing Budget. The vote was unanimously in Favor. Motion carried. Swenson was absent. qZ/7 222 October 26, 1982 C. FALL PICK-UP QUOTATIONS The City Manager explained that bids have been received for the Fail Clean-Up. They are as follows: 1. Westonka Sanitation Truck and Driver $30.O0 per hour Each Helper 10.O0 per hour Dumping'Charges Approx. 15.O0 per load OR $5,100.O0 flat fe~ including dumping charges. 2. Illies& Sons Tandem Dump (Driver |nc.)$36.O0 per hour Each Helper 12.OO per hour Dump Charges 20.00 per load 3. Dependable Services Truck and 3.men $60.00 per hour The C'ity pays the dumping expense Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-290 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE. LOW BID OF WESTONKA SANITATION FOR THE FALL CLEAN-UP The vote was unanimously in faVOr: Motion carried. Swenson was absent. D. CBD - SNOW REMOVAL BIDS The City Manager explained that there were two bids received for the CBD snow removal. The are as follows: 1. Illies & Sons A. Front End Loaders B. Trucks Single Axle~ 6 yd. box Tandem Axle: 12 yd. box C. Snow Plow Trucks Road Grader Bob Cats $42.O0 per hour 29.00 per hour 36.00 per hour 32.00 per hour 38.00 per hour 35.00 per hour 2. Widmer Bros. A. Front end Loaders 3 yd. loader B. Trucks Single Axle: 5 yd. box Tandem Axle: 10 yd. box C. Plows Truck & Sander 14' Blade' 1845 Case Skidsteer Salt & Sand $42.00 per hour 48.00 per hour 30.00 per hour 40.00 per hour 35.00 per hour 35.00 per hour 45.00 per hour 35.00 per hour 30.00 per yard Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-291 RESOLUTIONAPPROVING THE LOW BID OF ILLIES & SONS FOR THE CBD SNOW REMOVAL FOR 1982 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Swenson was absent. 1983 LELS CONTRACT 223 October 26, 1982 The City Manager explained there were no changes in the contract languag~ and the salary terms for 1983 are exactly the same that exist in the third year of the contract of the police patrolmen. He and the Police Chief are recommending approval. The CoUncil briefly discussed percentage increases in salary. CharOn moved and Polston seconded a mot'ion to approve the 1983 LELS Contract as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried, BID SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE NEW DUMP'TRUCK The City Manager explained that the Street Department has put together the specifications for.the :1983 snow. plow/dump truck and the Council now needs to approve, them and set a date for the. bid opening. Charon moved.and' SWenson.seconded the. following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-292 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 1983 SNOW PLOW/DUMP TRUCK AND SETTING THE DATE FOR THE BID OPENING FOR NOVEMBER 23, 1982, AT 10:OO A.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. The City Manager also explained that Public Works would like to keep their Summer hours which are 7:00 A.M. to 3:30 P.M. during the Winter months. This will save the City and hour overtime in the morning for snow plowing. He has given his. O.K. to keep the Summer hours year round. PAYMENT OF BILLS Swenson moved and Ulrlck seconded a motion to approve the payment of bills as presented on the pre-list, in the amount of $144,962.64, when funds are available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Polston was absent from the vote. SET DATE TO CANVASS THE VOTES IN THE CITY ELECT]ON Charon moved and Swenson seconded a motion to set the date for the Canvass of Votes from the City Election for Wednesday, November 3, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. There will also be a short Council Meeting at that time. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MISCELLANEOUS/INFORMATION A. Nine Month Liquor Store Balance Sheet - $303,688 is the nine month balance. B. Agenda Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - October 21, 1982 Meeting C. Twin Cities Labor Market Information Report - October, 1982 Packet on Recently Approve Senior Citizen Housin9 Project - The City Manager suggested that the Council keep this packet of information on file for future developments in the project. Sj9 224 October 26, 1982 Eo Bud. get Analysis - Mound Bay Park Pro~ect - breakdown of where the Lawcon money has been spent and will be spent. Fe Budget Analysis - Downtown Advisory Committee - breakdown of where the money has been spent 'and what money is left to spend. American Legion Post #398 Gambling Report - for the month ending September 30, 198'2. ~ ' H. 1982 Summer Recreation Program Report I. State Re~ort o.n L~islative Mandates for Cities - prepared by the Minnesota Department of Energy, Planning and Development J. Sp.eed Limit Chang.es on County Road 110 -. 30 MPH between CSAH'15 <North. Junction) and Grandvlew Blvd. 35 MPH between Grandview Blvd.'and a point approximately 350 feet north of Three Points Blvd. 45 MPH between a point approximately 350 feet north.of Three Points Blvd. and CSAH 151 K.. Lake 'Minnetonka M.a. yor's Forum -.Minutes of a meeting held October 7, 198'2. : ' L. Article on "Tonka Employee Used Farm as Chemical Dump" - from the Minneapolis Tribune. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to adjourn at 11:O0 P.M. The vote'was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. City Manager Attest: City Clerk BILLS .... OCTOBER 26~ 1982 Earl F Andersen & Assoc 180.72 Air Comm 96.00 Holly Bostrom 198.44 Butler Paper 263.64 F.H. Bathke 20.70 Jori Elam 19.65 ELMarketing 36.00 First Bank Mpls 12.OO Fire Control Extinguisher 87.95 Finley Bros. Enterprises 110.00 Dennis Grdnberg 620.00 Nick Gronberg 1,432.36 Robert E. Johnson 25.52 Eugene Hickok & Assoc 857.50 Henn Co. Director Prop Tax 32,374.65 Illies & Sons 2,920.00 J.B. Distributing 55.20 Lyman Lumber 17.O4 Glen Litfin Transfer 75.00 L.O.G.I.S. 1,219.12 Long Lake Ford Tractor 9.98 Lakeland Ford Truck Sales 17.26 Mound Postmaster 600.00 Metro Waste Control 1,683.00 Jackie Meyer 107.87 McCombs Knutson 9,142.00 M.F.O.A. 2.50 City of Minnetrlsta 48.00 Mtka Painting & Decorating 1,746.OO MN UC Fund 177.O0 Minn Comm 28.50 Metro Fone Communication 11.80 Metro Waste Control 19,277.27 Minnegasco 82.95 Meyer Bros. Dairy 22.50 Neitge Construction 200.00 N.W. Bell Telephone 72.80 N.S.P. 4,144.65 Poucher Printing 477.00 Pitney Bowes Credit 26.00 Reo Raj Kennels 85.00 Real One Acquisition 1,342.52 Don Streicher Guns 400.30 Securi:ty Alarms 386.19 Swenson Nursery 50.00 S & M Sales State Treas-Surplus Seton Service Tuff-Kote Rustproof Thurk Bros Chev Unitog Rental Waterous Co. Wurst Pearson Hamilton Westonka Community Srv Widmer Bros. Xerox Corp R.L. Youngdahl & Assoc Griggs, Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Sons Davies Water Equip Lathrop Paint Supply Mound Super VaJu Mound Fire Relief Assn TOTAL BILLS 40.00 25.OO 1.90 300.00 2~3.35 267.32 352.61 11,450.37 129.03 432.00 82.72 5,270.00 1,952.19 2,646.08 1,793.22 1,554.10 1,688.65 15.05 44o. 52 41.36 35,494.59 $144,962.64 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED VACATION OF THE SOUTH 5 FEET OF SULGROVE ROAD WHICH LIES BETWEEN THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION ACROSS IT OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 11, BLOCK 28 AND THE EAST LINE OF LOT 15, BLOCK 28, WHIPPLE ADDITION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Mound will meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minne- sota, at 7:30 P.M. on the 9th day of November, 1982, to consider the vacation of the South 5.00 feet of Sulgrove Road which lies between the Southerly extensions across it of the West line of Lot 11, Block 28 and the East tine of Lot 15, Block 28, all in "Whipple", Hennepin County, Minnesota. The City is to acquire a permanent easement across the Easterly 30 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Douglas Addition, which would connect to the platted East Shore Drive. Such' persons as desire to be heard with reference to the above will be heard at this meeting. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk 12' II A R( ROAD 'OAD WATERBURY ROAO PHELP: 59 IRY ROAD McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS October 8, 1982 Reply To: , 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Sulgrove Road Street Vacation Bialon Property File 92113 - General Dear Jon: The enclosed sketch shows our proposal for the subject street vacation. You will note that we have also shown an easement over a corner of the Bialon property. This should be a perpetual easement for street and utility purposes and I assume it will have to be granted to the City of Minnetrista. The street vacation should only be approved on the condition that the Bialons grant the easement. I have discussed everything with Mr. Bialon and he is satisfied with our proposal. He understands that once the vacation is finalized, he will have to acquire the five foot strip of vacated Sulgrove from the Henrys and the City of Mound. Enclosed is a description for both the street vacation and the easement. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact meo Very truly yours~ McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. meron~-~'~'~f~~ JC:sj Enclosure cc: Curtis A. Pearson, City Attorney Richard Bialon, 3495 East Shore Dr., Mound Street Vacation The south 5.00 feet of Sulgrove Road which lies between the southerly extensions across it of the west line of Lot 11, Block 28 and the east line of Lot 15, Block 28, all in "WHIPPLE" according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. #2113 Street and Utility Easement A permanent easement for street and utility purposes over, under and across Lot 1, Block 1, "DOUGLAS" according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying easterly of a line described as beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 1, distant 30.00 feet west of the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence southerly to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant 50.00 feet southwesterly of said northeast corner of Lot 1. $2113 0 {, C C A. THOMAS WURST. P.A. CURTIS A, PEARSON. · ,IOSEPH E. HAMILTON. P.A. THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD. P.A. JAMES D. I.ARSON. P.A. ..IOHN .,J. BOWDEN LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON A IIaARTNERSHII1~ INCLUDING PROFII~SSlONAL Ae:SOCIATION I 1~ FIR$T BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS. ~INNESOTA November 4, 1982 TELEPHONE i612) 338.-4200 Ms. Jan Bertrand City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Bialon - Street Vacation Dear Jan: Pursuant to our telephone conversation of November 3, 1982, I have prepared a proposed resolution of vacation for a portion of Sulgrove Road. I am sending a copy to Jon Elam and to you and giving a copy to James Larson in case it comes up at the council meeting of November 9. Mro Larson will be in attendance at that meeting. If you have any questions or comments concerning the vacation, the resolution or any of the procedures, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, CAP:ms Enclosure cc: Mr. Jon Elam Mr. James Larson Curtis A. Pearson City Attorney RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION VACATING A PORTION OF A PUBLIC EASEMENT OVER SULGROVE ROAD WHEREAS, Sulgrove Road is a publicly dedicated street lying within the City of Mound, and WHEREAS, the owners of Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, Whipple in the City of Mound and the owners of Lot 1, Block 1, Douglas in the City of Minnetrista have petitioned to have a portion of said Sulgrove Road vacated, and WHEREAS, the City of Minnetrista vacated a portion of East Shore Drive in Minnetrista on April 13, 1967 and this landlocks parcels in Mound which has caused property owners to cross Lot 1, Block 1, Douglas to get to properties in Mound, and kZHEREAS, the owners of Lot 1, Block 1, Douglas have a portion of their home located on the southerly part of Sulgrove Road and they have agreed that if Mound will vacate a portion of said street, they will dedicate an easement to Mound and Minnetrista which will allow Mound residents to get to their properties over a public street, and k~EREAS, it is in the public interest to obtain a public easement in Minnetrista to serve Mound properties and to connect East Shore Drive and Sulgrove Road, and k~EREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 authorizes the City~ to vacate a public easement, after a public hearing if it is determinedO be in the public interest, and ~rHEREAS, a public hearing has been held pursuant to ~ection 412.851 and two weeks published and posted notice has been given prior to said hearing which was held on , 1982. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mound City Council as follows: 1. It is in the public interest to vacate the following legally described portion of Sulgrove Road: Street Vacation The south 5.00 feet of Sulgrove Road which lies between the southerly extensions across it of the west line of Lot ll,.Block 28 and the east line of Lot 15, Block 28, all in "k~IPPLE" according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. Said vacation shall become effective when the owne~of Lot 1, Block 1, Douglas dedicate the following easement to the City of Mound and to the public: Street and Utility Easement to be Dedicated A permanent easement for street and utility purposes over, under and across Lot 1, Block 1, "DOUGLAS" according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying easterly of a line described as beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 1, distant 30.00 feet west of the northeast corner of Lot 1; thence southerly to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant 50.00 feet southwesterly of said northeast corner of Lot 1. 3o The City Clerk shall prepare a "Notice of Completion" of the proceedings which shall contain the name of the City of Mound, an identification of land being vacated as set forth in paragraph 1, a statement of the time of completion thereof and a description of the real estate and land affected thereby. 4. Upon receipt of a recorded easement as described in Paragraph 2, the Clerk shall cause a copy of this resolution of vacation and her "Notice of Completion" to be recorded with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. This resolution may act as the Notice of Completion as it contains all the data required by M.S.A Section 412.851 and the filing of this resolution shall vacate the public's rights over the lands described in Paragraph 1o Attest: Mayor City Clerk Published Notice of Hearing Posted Notice of Hearing_ Public Hearing Held Council Approval of Vacation-- Case No. 82-140 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Planning Commission Agenda of August 30, 1982: Board of Appeals Case No. 82-'140 Location: Sulgrove Road east of Tuxedo Boulevard Legal Desc. as per plat - 30 foot right- of-way Request: Street Vacation Zoning District: R-2 Applicant: Richard Bialon 3495 E. Shore Drive Mound, MN. Phone: 472-3381/446-1660 The homeowners abutting Sulgrove Road and East Shore Drive, Minnetrista, are requesting that the City of Mound vacate the road designated to be Sulgrove from the plat. The corporate limits of Mound is to the south of the proposed street and the street, if vacated, would revert back to Mr. Paul Henry of Lots 14, 15 and part of Lot 6, Block 28, Whipple, and to Roger Bergquist of Lots 4, 16 and 17, Block 28, Whipple. The survey of Richard Bialon's property shows a vacated portion of East Shore Drive indicating that Sulgrove Road does not connect to another right-of-way. Thereby, the property owners in Mound drive across his property to get access to their homes. Also, Mr. Richard Bialon's home is 2.1 feet onto the designated Sulgrove Road right-of-way. RECOMMEND: I have our City Attorney reviewing the situation. Our City Engineer, John Cameron and myself have reviewed the request. He stated the City of Mound has no utilities in the area and I checked with Minne- trista and all three 'homes are not connected to any sewer and water from their mains at the end of East Shore Drive and Tuxedo Boulevard. Also, the City of Mound owns the property to the west which runs through a swamp to Tuxedo Boulevard. Possibly the vacation should include the right-of-way from East Shore Drive to Tuxedo Boulevard and an easement be dedicated to the Mound residents or the City of Mound for the homeowners in Mound to get access from East Shore Drive. Jan Bertrand Building Official JB/ms Plat of Survey for Paul A. Henry of Lots 14 and 15, Block 28, ~ippl~ Henn--pin County, .Minnesota Sul9ro~ . Pood Certi£icat~ of Survey: .. ~ . I herehS' ce.r.ti_*y that t.kis is a'~'true and correct representation of a survey of th% bo~udaries of Lots 14 and 15, Block 28, Whipple, the loca- tion of all existing buildings thereon. It does no% purport to shou other improvements or encr. osdume~ts. Sca!e: 1. = 30' Dute : 10-12-77 o : Iron marker Land Su--veyor and Pl~r~r Long Lake, Hinnesota Certificate of Survey for Richard F. Bialon of Lot l, Block l, Douglas Hennepin County, Minnesota / / / I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of t.~e boundaries of Lot ~, Block l, Douglas, and the location of all existing buildings, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments. Scale: 1" = 40' Gordon R. Coffin Re~. ~. 606~ Date : 12-16-81 Land Surveyor and Planner o : Iron marker Long Lake, Minnesota REGLrL.~ R .H EEII h~ -Regular meetin£ of the Einnetrist~ Council was held at the meetin£ room ~., at ~he MinnetrJst~ Garag~ at ~ P.M. ~embers present Ed kbert, Mayor: Robert Fillmore, RObert Hubbard, Paul ~lader a nd Germaifi Boll, Councilmen: Art Jaekel, [ · Ireasurer. Present also was Richard Diercks, chairm~n of Planning Conm.: Herman Ouaas, ¥ill~e assesor: Elizabeth Bonham, ¥il]a§e Attorney: Lamont Wei]and~ ro~ superintendent and Thomas Lindner, Policeman. Minutes of the March 6, 1967 meetin~ was read a nd approved. A Public he~rin~ held April '3, 1967 at Minnetrista ¥illa~e Garage to consider vocPting of ~ portion of the rozd ad~oinin~ the Edgar V.'Schullen property. There bein~ no ob~ctJ on and, this rord served no other property., the Council ~c~ted this 'i ~aJd road. Applicant brought in this copy l , of minutes which vacated East The Council ~lso ~iscussed ~:ith ln~uranc Shore Drive (portion of) Po]ice reserve under ~ork-m, ns Comperesation, these men will be classified as civil defense reserves. Albert Ht~zst~om of Rollinz Hills maintained the roads in Roll~n~ Hills? addfition as~ ed ~-hy the Village has not Although these roads have been excepted ~%en the Village signed the plot, ~t these roads will have to be brought to the srecific~.tions of the Vill~gemd a possible compromise for the cost of improving these roads or street. Robert Ffillmore gave a good report on the newly Minnehaha I~:atershed Dist. The followin~ bills were ~ udited and allowed: ROAD FUND: ~aconia Co. ~,2791 $~.10 J. Heitz #2792 ~212.85 P.E.R.A. ~2793 $109.24 Am Heitz #2794 $166.5: ~'. Th~rk #2795 $94.84 .Tax Dept. ~/2796 $225.90 E. Berg #2797 $20..68 ].R.S. #2798 $864.80 S~ Boni Auto ~2799 $23.15 A. Heitz #2800 $]5.00 Cor%,er Gravel #2~01 $134.50 Careen paper ~,2802 $476.40 St BonJ 0il ~2803 $196~20 camenson Paper #2804 05.00 L Weiland #2S29 $446.00 A. Be~tz #2830 $264.7~ o All homeowners are working together to try and solve the land problems in this area. Homeowners have retained an attorney to help solve these problems and handle all legal matters. All3 Homeowners have started an assoc|'atlon and are in the process oF getting title to the vacated part of East Shore Drive. If the Council O..K.s vacation of the part of Sulgrove Road in question, these conditions will be met for the Council's approval: A. Association will grant an easement to gain access to Lots 1,2,3, 18, 19, 20 which are owned by.Mr. Henry and Mr. Berquist. B. Mr. Bialon will give an easement to the City for access to other homeowners. Mr. Berquist will give an easement to Mr. Henry to gain access to Lots 1,2,3,18,19 & 20. All easements, quit claim deeds, etc. will be ap'proved by the City. As there are no other building sites in this area and we are the only homeowners and landowners, we hope the Council will take this proposal under consideration. _ Thank you. (signed) Paul Henry Homeowners: Paul Henry - 472-5306 Harvey. Berquist - 472-2223 Di~ck Bialon - 472-3381 ,..\- ,, CITY of MOUND November 5, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROH: CITY HANAGER At my first meeting of the L.M.C.D. I suggested that when they propose changes to their code that these be run by each City's Council prior to approval. This was agreed to. The first of these relates to trying to control what they see as a problem of limiting the number of boats tied up at a dock to two or less without a permit. I guess what is happening is that some people are leasing out part of their docks after extending the length so that as many as 4-5 boats can be tied up at a single dock. What they seem to be trying to control is the commercialization of dockage in residential neighborhoods. I would like your comments so I can feed them into the L.M.C.Do Committee system. Thanks. JE:fc LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: FROM: DATE: MEMBER MUNICIPAL COUNCILS L.M.C .D. November 2, 1982 SUBJ:. LMCD Code Amendment re Boat Storage The LMCD is considering the enclosed 'amendment to the LMCD Code, intending to provide for the storage of 2 watercraft at noncommercial docks and moorings on the Lake. The amendment also establishes an administrative permit system for those wishing to ke~p 3 or 4 watercraft'if they certify resident use and ownership. It is hoped that this will simplify an extremely, complicated and expensive existing process,.continue to recognize the need for controlling the commercialization of residential areas of the Lake and shoreline, and still provide for a variety of legitimate boat storage needs of lake- shore residents. Watercraft by LMCD definition does not include boats 16 feet and under, or 10 hp or under° Average residential boat storage density on the Lake is currently under 1 boat per lot. The present section of the Code developed from a cooperative effort on the part of the LMCD to recognize:municipal zoning regulations However, with the continuing pressure to store, boats on the Lake, a simpler and less costly process is indicated. We would appreciate your comments and recommendations in time for our Water Structures Committee review on Saturday,.December 4° Thank you for your interest and cooperation. ~~r a~nk Mixa Executive Director FM:jm Enc. November. 8, 1982 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER PROPOSED MEETING SCHEDUEL FOR NOVEMBER & DECEMBER - 1982 NOV EMBER NOVEMBER 9th - -NOVEMBER 16th - NOVEMBER 23rd - NOVEMBER 3Oth - First Meeting Second Meeting Third Meeting No Meeting DECEMBER (Regular Schedule) DECEMBER 7th DECEMBER 14th DECEMBER 21st DECEMBER 28th JANUARY 4th 1983 First Meeting Second Meeting No Meeting Third Meeting Fi'rst Meeting of New Year and Organization Meeting for 1983 JE: fc DRAFT ~3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE NUMBER OF WATERCRAFT WHICH MAY BE KEPT AT ANY DOCK OR MOORING FACILITY: AMENDING LMCD CODE SECTION 3.02, SUBD. 9 AND 10. The Board of Directors of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District ordains: Section t. LMCD Code Section 3.02, Subdivision 9 is amended to read as follows: Subd. 9. Shoreline Requirements. a) No new docks or mooring areas other than commercial docks shall be constructed or established which provide space for or are used for mooring or docking a greater number of watercraft than one for each 50 feet of continuous shoreline in existence on May 3, 1978. ~en measurements determining the number of watercraft allowed result in the provision of a fractional watercraft, any fraction up to and including one half (1/2) shall be disregarded, and fractions over one half (1/2) shall allow one additional watercraft° b) Fear Two or fewer watercraft may be kept at any dock or mooring~acility which is otherwise in compliance with this code and with the requirements of the local land use control authority and which is located on a site which is in existence on August 30, 1978. c) Fe~ Two or fewer watercraft may be kept at any dock or mooring area which, is otherwise in compliance with this code and with the requirements of the local land use authority and which is located on a site established after August 30, 1978, provided there is a residence on the site and the dock is owned solely by the residents of that site. d) Three or four watercraft may be kept at docks or moorings under Subdivision 9(b) and (c) above, provided a permit is obtained under Subdivision 10 below. Section 2. LMCD Code Section'3.02 Subdivision 10 is amended by deleting the following: ~he-s~e~age-e~-bea~s-e~-wa~e~e~af~-any-spaee-w~m-~eek- use-a~eas-e~her-Ehan-a~-eemme~e~a½-~eeksv-prev~e~v-he~- eye~7-~haE-seeh-spaee-may-~e-rea~e~-er-~ease~-a~-~eeks-e~- apa~Emen~s-se~e~y-~e~-~he-s~e~ase-e~-~eaEs-e~-~a~e~e~a~- ewae~-~y-~es~de~s-e~-~he-apa~men~sv- and by adding the following: Subd. 10. Boat Storage Permits. a) No person shall keep more than two watercraft at any dock or. mooring area on'the Lake without first securing a permit from the Executive Director, provided that no such p'ermit shall be ~eqUired of docks re¥~irin§ a license under Section 3.08 of the code. b) Application. Application for a permit shall be made on forms provide"d by the Executive Director The ap- plication shall include a certified statement that all boats stored under the permit are for the sole use of th~ residents of the property, a record that all the boats are registered and the boats' registrations are in the names of residents, and all other information deemed necessary by the Executive Director to determine whether or not the proposed dock is in compliance with this code. c) Fee. by a fee of The permit application shall be accompanied d) Granting of Permit. The Executive Director shall grant the permit if information provided shows.that the dock will be in compliance with the code. If the Executive Director refuses to issue a permit, he shall state the reasons therefor to the applicant in writing. e) season. Renewal. A new permit is required each boating This enactment is in effect from and after its passage and publication in accordance with the enabling act of the District. It is enacted by a majority vote of all the members of the Board and has the effect of an ordinance. Adopted by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Baord of Directors this day of , 19' ATTEST: Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman Frank Mixa, Executive Director Date of publication: BILLS NOVEMBER 9, 1982 Applebaums Acro-M [ nnesota Blackowlak & Son Burlington Northern Buds Radiator & Body Bryan Rock Prod. Bowman Barnes Greg Bergquist Comm~ss of Revenue Fran Clark- Cargill Salt Cromer Management Robert Cheney Dependable Services John Ewal d ElMarketing Election Judges (48) Feed Rite Controls Farmers Steel Co. Gopher Oil Good i n Co. W.W. Grainger Inc. G 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood Henn Co. Finance Henn Co. Treas The Hozza Asso¢ Henn Co. Finance Gerald Henke Henn Co. Treas Robert Johnson Island Park Skelly Sharon Legg Doris Lepsch Lindstroms Metro Waste Control MN Rec &' Park MacQueen Equip Marina Auto Supply Miller Davis Mound Fire Dept Mound Locksmith Minnesota UC Fund N.S.P. North Star Waterworks Neitge Construction Planning & Devel Serv Popham Haik Kaufman Phleger Law Office Poucher Printing Reynolds & Reynolds Shepherds Laundry Spring Park Car Wash 54.95 318.11 8O. OO 533.33 28.5o 23.98 126.39 15.O0 3,202.93 17.50 8o6.98 61.25 334. O0 33.00 25.OO 235.OO 2,512.13 204. OO 14.80 286.85 155.5o 171.71 40.40 21.39 87o. oo 714.60 52,319.71 15.oo 3.0o 12.76 4O. OO 9O. 67 15.00 1,448.46 1,683. OO 84.OO 218.20 529.28 12.70 4,411.25 148.OO 2,299.02 3,O40.73 15O. OO 360. O0 1, O24.5O 1,326.77 180.O0 125..OO 118.32 53.oo 78 ..50 Don Streicher Guns Sterne Electric Suburban Tire Specialty Screening State Treas T & T Maintenance Thrifty SnYder Drug Title Ins. Village Chevrolet U of M Registrar Water Products Widmer Bros. Westonka Sanitation Winner Industries R.L. Youngdahl TOTAL BILLS LIQUOR BILLS Holly Bostrom Butch"s Bar Supply Border Glass City Club Distrib Coca Cola Day DiStrib East Side Beverage Gold Medal 'Bev. Home Juice Kool Kube Ice Midwest Wine A.J. Ogle Pepsi Cola Pogreba Distrib Regal Window Clean Real One Acquisition Thorpe Distrib Griggs Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Ed Phillips Total Liquor Bills GRAND TOTAL-ALL BILLS 73.25 591.12 299.40 ,110.50 197.83 53.40 47.25 252.50 239.85 50.00 214.26 378.00 150.00 11.54 297.00 83,640.O7 257.00 80.8o 97.10 2,520.65 138.6o 3,737.85 3,312.65 96.48 '11.O4 126.50 1,212.60 1,327.42 253.OO 2,880.20 10.75 675.OO 5,217.45 2,753.51 2,983.48 '1,413.59 2,165.47 31,271.14 114,911.21 MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 14, 1982 MOUND. ADVISORY PARK COMMISSION MEETING Present: Co-Chair Cathy Bailey; Commissioners Delores Maas, Lowell Swanson, Andy Gearhart, Pete Ward, Phyllis Jessen and Toni Case who arrived at 8 P.M.; CounCil Representative Pinky Charon; City Manager Jori Elam; Park Director Chris Bollis; Summer Recreation Director Jackie Meyer and Secretary Marge Stutsman. Co-Chai. r Cheryl Burns was absent and excused. Also present were: Dr. Harold pellett, Diana Clemas, John Hirt, Merlin Woytcke, Allen Dolejsi, Paul Willette, Christine Terlinden, Duwayne Terlinden, Gill Nedder- meyer, Gerry Neddermeyer, Gordon Woytcke, Geoff Michael, Robin Michael, Jeannine Dolejsi and John Tombers. ~-- Chair Cathy Bailey opened the meeting and welcomed those persons present stating that since most persons present were interested in.Item 5, this would be changed to 2 on the Agenda and 'Item 6 would be 3. Steps on Commons - Request for Steps at Avocet and Bluebird Lanes.(South) The Park Director explained that at the last Park Commission meeting, he had been requested to look at'scope of problem to determine need for stairways on various commons where terrain situation is similar to this and that he has toured all the Commons and this is-the only area except for Finch Lane that has the type of shore- line Where you can walk-both.'on top of bank and on the shoreline tha~ is a major use area having'docks. John Hirt stated present stairway in front of his property is poor qUality and hazardous. When he moved into house,-he fixed two treads that were rotted; there is a handrail, but it is inadequate and stairway is not up to code. Bailey moved and Swenson seconded a motion to recommend to City Council that stairways on Commons'at end.of Bluebird Lane and Avocet Lane be built by .the City and marked "public" as'City owned stairs and' furthermore, that the present' sets of stairs be removed or fixed up by property owners. The vote was unani- mously in favor. City Manager stated'-ipersons present would be notified of the date of the Council meeting---either October 26th or November 3rd. ~ The Park Director explained that the present owner would have to chose to.claim the stairway and make application for a maintenance permit if they wish to leave the stairway. Comm'issioner Case arrived. Someone Commented that flushing of the hydrant at Bluebird had created a gully and that.the bank is'being eroded away and also complained of the number of dead trees on the Commons. City Manager responded that he would direct the Water Department accordingly and that to take down all the dead trees on Commons would be economically unfeasible and only trees taken dow~ey[v~ere health and safety is · involved. Persons present stated they'd take down the dead trees for the wood. The Chairman stated she would like to have landmarks showing where the Commons begin for'neighborhood use. Slide Show Presentation Dr. Harold Pellett, horticulturist at the Minnesota Arboretum, presented a slide show and talked about donating surplus plants for the downtown area and parks. Park Commission Minutes October 14, 1~82 - Page 2 Dr. Pellett explalned that he went to the presentation on the down~own plan, for the developing and improving of that area. Being he was on the School Board and the School owns one of the biggest Pieces of property that )s not taken up with concrete and so forth and that the School Board doesn't have much money in its budget for i'mprovlng t~e downtown area nor is ita high priority item, it occurred to him that in hls research program at the Arboretum, occasionally at the end of projects, they have materials that become surplus and that perhaps some of these plants could be used for School Property and some of the public areas of downtown. In the nex~ few years, one'material that. he will have a-su.Eplus of is azaleas and perhaps, Mound.'could become "Azalea 'Capitol of Minnesota". There would be a few stipulations on.the.plants: 1. A good planting plan.be available before plants are given. 2. There be a good plan for maintenance of the plants. 3. There be'a minimum, of publicity on where p~ants came from; otherwise demand' for plants woulj .be tremendous. ; Dr. Pellett showed the sl.ides, on.a double container.study for trees and also of various'types.of azaleas, some of which are hardy to 45° below weather. Some trees would be available and also a few:other kinds of plants may be. available, Reports Council Representative Pinky Charon.repot. ted that the Council.had allocated for Commons. The City Manager reported that 16 loads of .field stone have been brought in to riprap around storm sewers.on the Commons The. Manager discussed the report done.by Lynn Nichols and. Shelley Nett and that.the report should be used as guidelines and set some pri. orities.for the park;-upgrade park system. Cost about $160,000 to do all that's'left for' the park plan. A lot of things could make the parks more usabie, Perhaps go.to a special bohd issue for the park improvements and not do all at once.. He suggested first step.would be to go.through entire re- port and develop plan--~identify something in every park. City Manager stated, that City woul'd be very glad to come up with a plan for every plant available. Discussed briefly placing of plants, and their maintenance. Also discussed the downtown beautification.program. Dr. Pellett su.ggested that the Park Commission zero in.on one or two area~ and do only what you can do'verY well. The. maintenance most critical and it is best to put in a more simplified plan.. 'Azaleas'need: l) Good planting preparation, 2) Fertilization 2 or 3 times, a. year.and 3) ~atering when there is a drought. Also, it was suggested that different service groups take on the plantings and mainte- nance. Maintenance'Pe~mit'~'16Og.'Blbebi~d.'Lane The Park Director explained that he had a request for a permit to remove de~d trees and stumps and grade lot. before a new house is built at this address. Jessep moved and Maas seconded.a motion to recommend to the City Council that appli- cant be granted a permit to remove stumps and dead trees and grade be brought ie~ comparable to neighbors. The vote was unanimously in favor. Recreation DireCtorms'Report. . Recreation Director Jackie.Meyer distributed copies of her report on I:he lgS~ Summer Recreation Pr.ogram and answered questions about the program from the P~rk Commission. ~'~' ~'~ / Park Commission Minutes October ih, 1~82 - Page 3 Change of November'park.'commissiOn'Meetihg'Date The Park Commission meeting will be held November hth inasmuch as November llth is Veteran's Day and a holiday. Adjournment Ward moved and Gearhart seconded a motion to'adjourn at ~:$$ P.M. Al! were in favor of adjourni.ng, so meeting was adjourned~to November 4th Park Commission meeting... A. THOMAS WURST. P.A., CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A. JOSEPH E. HAMILTON, P,A. THOMAS F, UNDERWOOD; P.A. JAMES O. LARSON, P.A. JOHN J, BOWDSN Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON ~: UNDERWOOD A PARTNERSHIP INC. LUOING PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS 1 1OO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5S402 October 20, 1982 TELEPHONE {612) 338-4200 Re: Zoning Cases Dear Jon: I am enclosing herewith two cases which I thought you might find of interest and might want to share with your staff. The first case relates to the City of Birmingham, Michigan, wherein the Court has found the City guilty of a "discriminatory intent" regarding the construction of a senior citizen housing project which was to include low income family housing. The thing I find so interesting about this case is that the Judge based his decision at least in part on statements made by citizens at public hearings, campaign literature of candidates, protest letters, and other statements which refer to "those people", "outsiders", and "harmful elements". It certainly emphasizes the care with which councilmen must approach controversial decisions so they never give the impression that these kinds of discriminatory comments are influencing their decision. The second case comes from the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers and is on appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. It in effect relates to municipal ordinances restricting mobile homes to mobile home parks to be an unfair restriction on property. This was tried three times in Texas. The trial court found for the City, the appeal court reversed, and the Texas Supreme Court reversed the appeal court, and the matter is now on appeal to the United States Supreme Court. I think you should discuss with your staff our current regulations relating to mobile homes or manufactured housing and we should be sensitive to the fact that these regulations may be contested in the future. As the times become more difficult, undoubtedly there will be a need for housing, and the cheaper type of housing will certainly be coming to the front. I will be cooperating with the NIMLO organization and will send them the information they request. CAP:ih Enclosures Very truly yours, ~ur~i§ ~. Pearson, City Attorney Birmingham, Michigan Violaled Fair Housing Act; Remed.v Ordered The City of Birmingham, Michigan violated the federal Fair Housing Act by blocking a senior citizen hou.~ing project, proposed by a church-sponsored citizen group, once it learned that conditions attached to stale and federal funding necessary for the project required that one unit of iow-income family housing al,a be provided for every two units of senior citizen h~,using. ]n the suit, originally brought by the Justice Dc'partment under the Carter administration and p,~.sued by the Reagan administration, the Michigan di.qrict court held that the city's actions violated the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a), which makes it unlawful' refuse to se]] or rent.., or other,'ise make unavail- ~blt' or deny, a dwelling to an)' person because of race. color, religion, sex or national origin," (court's emphasis), and § 3617, which makes it un]awful to inlcrfere with the exercise or enjoyment of rights granted or protected by the Act. U.S.v. City Birmingham, 538 F. Supp. 819 (E.D. Mich. 1982). Originally, it was the city itself which solicited proposals for a senior citizen housing project on the city-owned site of a former school. A private citizen group's proposal was viewed favorably, leading to an agreement for the sale of the property and receipt of preliminary approval and seed money from the state and federal agencies which would eventually provide the bulk of the funding. Only when the low-income ratio requirement, then being pressed for by the state agency under new policy guidelines, became known and publicized, did opposition develop. A series of events followed, in which an organized citizen opposi- -- tion v. ociferously protested at public hearings, com- plaining about bringing "those people" into Birming- ham and expressing concern about neighborhood harm and lessened property values; in which three City Commissioners who had supported the project were defeated by candidates who opposed it; and in which an advisory referendum against the project was passed by voters. All of this led to a lapse of the agreement for sale of the property and a refusal to further negotiate s¥ith project sponsors. The greatest interes~ of the case lies in the facl that the plaintiff won under the more difficult "dis- criminatory intent" test, and in the way the judge marshalled the facts to show such intent. Under ti' Fair Housing Act, as well as other civil rights legisla. tion, much debate has occurred over whether mere "discriminatory el~ect" shows a violation, or whether the more difficult to prove "discriminatory intent" must be shown. Although at least six of the federal circuit courts have approved a "discriminatory effect" standard under the Fair Housing Act, the case here was tried under the tougher "discriminatory intenl" standard favored by the Reagan administration. In holding the "discriminatory intent" standard satisfied, the judge reviewed public hearing statements, cam- paign literature, protest letters, testimony and so forth, and specifically found that facially-neutral references to "those people, .... outsiders," "harmful elements," and the like, were, in context, racially directed. The court also held that the possible pres- ence of other motivations for the citizens' and city's conduct, such as concern for property values, did not preclude a finding of racially discriminatory intent, so long as racial discrimination was "a motivating factor." Id. at 827 (court's emphasis). While conceding that the finding of a city' intent can not be "based solely upon the bigot~ statements of a few citizens," the court, on the other hand, advised that neither was it necessary 1o show that the government leaders themselves intend~ to discriminate on the basis of race. "In order to'dem- onstrate a city's racially discriminatory intent, it is sut~cient to show that the decision-making body acted for the sole purpose of effectuating the desires of private citizens, that racial considerations were a motivating factor behind those desires, and that mem- bers of the decision-making body were aware of the motivations of the private citizen .... Any other rule of law would permit a legislative body to place its official stamp of approval on private racial dis- eriminafion." Id. at 828. In remedy, the court ordered the City of Birmlng- ham to reinstate its agreement with the project spon- r, ors for the sale of the school site, to not interfere with such provision of iow-income housing by project "sponsors as may be required to obtain ~overnment financing, and to cooperate fully on applications for financing and in processing permits. To supervise ir order, the court retained continuing jurisdiction, in- structing the project sponsors to submit progress re- ports every 120 days. -2- ~ity of Brookside v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982). Facts: Petitioners are owners of a four acre lot in the "bedroom" community of Brookside Village, Texas. Petitioners applied to the city council for permission to place a mobile home on the premises for use as a residence. Pursuant to municipal ordinanc~restr~ctlng'mob~le homes to mobile home parks, the city council denied the application and suit followed. History: The trial court, without a jury, held the ordinances valid and entered judgment for the municipality. The appeals court reversed, 616 S.W.2d 333, holding the ordinances restricting the location of mobile homes to mobile home parks to be an unfair restriction on property use which served no legitimate state interest. Appeal followed to the Texas Supreme Court. Holding: The Texas Supreme Court reversed the court of civil appeals and affirmed the trial court's judgment upholding the ordinances. Absent a showing of a "clear abuse of municipal discretion" showing "no conclusive or even controversial or issuable fact or condition" which would authorize the municipality's action, the ordinances are valid. Here, the municipality's desire to protect pro- perty values and to guard against sewage, drainage, and water problems associated with the random location of mobile homes clearly supported the municipality's ordinances. The ordinances bear a substantial relation to the public health and safety and are not arbitrary° Status: The Plaintiffs who lost in the Supreme Court of Texas are filing a Petition for Certiorari, and it is this Petition that the N}{LDF brief will answer. mETROPOLITAn WASTE (ONTROL (OMMISSION Twin Cites Area Ockober 20 ~ ].982 350 METRO SOUFIRE BLDG, 7TX & ROBERT STREETS SAINT PAUL mn SSlOl 61r~ ~r2,2,84~2~ Mr. Jonathon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Ccmprehensive S~er Plan City of Mound Dear Mr. Elam: The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has approved the Comprehensive Sewer Plan for the City of Mound° The attached Resolution (~OC Resolution No. 82-252) transmits the action taken by the Commission at its October 19, 1982 meetir~. In accordance with the provisions of the M~aropolitan Waste Control Ccmmission Act, the City may undertake the sanitary sewer improvements as programmed in the C~mprehensi~ S~er Plan. The City should operate its ~stewater treatment system in accordance with the "Sewage and Waste Control Rules and Regulations for the Metropolitan Disposal System". The Cc~x~ission wishes to thank the City of Mound for the submission of its plan and the assistance provided the C~ssion d~ring the review process. If you require any additional information, please feel free to contact the CuL,,.~ssion. Sincerely, George W. Lusher Chief Administrator cc: Lowell Thcmpson, Metropolitan Council Ccmmission Svenn E. Borgersen, ~ Business Item "F- ~ METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION 350 Metro Sc~3are Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 222-8423 RESOLUTION ND. 82- 252 RESOLUTION APPROVING COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN FOR THE CITY C~ MDUND WHEREAS, The City of Mound had its previous C~rehensive Se~er Plan approved by the Cum.~ssion in August, 1972; and WHEREAS, The current plan is bein~ submitted in response tm the requirements of the Metropolitan Reorganization Act and the Metropolitan Land Planning WHEREAS, The City of Mound has adopted the plan and submitted it to the C~uu.~ssion for approval; and WHEREAS, The subject Comprehensive S~er Plan conforms to the Metropolitan Disposal Syst~n Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission hereby approves the Comprehensive Sewer Plan for the City of Mound, provided the City operate its ~stewater treatment plant in accordance with the "S~age and Waste Control Rules and Regulations for the Metrogolitan Disposal SysCe~'. Adopted this 19th day of October, METROPOLITAN WASTE salisbury ~nn~, Chairman 1982 CONTROL COMMISSION George W. Lusher, Chief Administrator 300 Metro Square Bldg.. St. Paul. MN 55101 General Office Telephone 1612) 291,' .... _. _. ~" "~' '.- ~ ~ ~ ,,~/ A Metropolitan Council Bulletin for Community Leaders ~~~ - ~ ~ ' For more intbrmation on items mentioned in this publication ~ .t ' formation Office at _91-6464. October 22, 1982 RECENT COUNCIL ACTIONS (Oct. 11-22) METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Stadium Tax-The Metropolitan Council decided to keep the Minneapolis lodgif)g-Hquor tax that pays for s[adium bonded debt retirement at three.percent in 1983. The Metro- politan Sports Facilities Commission and Council staff, plus a financial consultant had earlier concluded that stadium funds were adequate to allow reduction of the tax to two percent beginning Jan. 1, 1983. The reduction of stadium revenues from the football players' strike, however, caused the Council to opt for the three percent tax. The Council said it would reconsider the matter as conditions change. Bingo Parlor Review-The Council terminated the "metro- politan significance" review of a bingo parlor near Prior Lake. The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community and the city of Prior Lake formally requested the termination. The request followed agreement between the tribe and Prior Lake on responsibilities for fire, rescue and police protection, and sewage disposal. Comprehensive Plans-The Council said the New Scandia Township comprehensive plan conforms with plans for regional growth and development. COMMITTEES OF THE COUNCIL The Physical Development Committee recommended that the comprehensive plans of Elko and New Market be found in conformity with regional plans for growth and development. The committee also recommended that Medina adopt density control measures of one housing unit per 10 acres in its comprehensive plan. The committee recommended that Medina be required to modify its plan so that its projected 1990 sewage flow is divided among the three separate metro- politan sewer systems serving the city. PUBLIC HEARINGS Metropolitan Council, Council Chambers. Nov. 18, 4:30 p.m.-The Council will hear comments on a proposed capital improvement program amendment to the Recreation Open Space Deve/opment Gu/de/Po/icy Plan. For a free copy of the proposed amendment, call the Council's Public Information Office at 291-6464. NEW APPOINTMENTS The Council made the following appointments: Criminal Justice Advisory Committee: Erling O. Johnson, Anoka; Richard Mulcrone, Shakopee; Paul Tschida, St. Louis Park; and Peter Vanderpoel, St. Paul. Metropolitan Health Planning Board: Annette Dickie, Prior Lake. COUNCIL ANNOUNCES REVIEW SCHEDULE FOR CHANGES TO WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT The Metropolitan Council will begin review of proposed amendments to its policy plan on regional water resources management. The proposed changes involve: -- Authorizing required engineering and environmental studies and a dechlorination project for the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant in St. Paul; - Revising a schedule for expanding the Hastings Waste- water Treatment Plant in Hastings; - Phasing out the Medina Wastewater Treatment Plant in Medina; - Removing conditions on the approval of: the Ramsey interceptor sewer, serving the Rum River watershed; the Blaine interceptor, serving eastern Blaine; and the Lino Lakes inter- ceptor, serving Lino Lakes; and - Acquiring and extending trunk sewer lines for inter- ceptors in New Brighton and Mendota Heights. A tentative schedule for reviewing the proposed amend- ments is as follows: - Nov. 4, 1982: The Council's Physical Development Com- mittee and the Council adopt the proposed amendments for public hearing. - Jan. 6, 1983: The physical development committee holds a public hearing on the proposed amendments. - Jan. 20, 1983: The hearing record closes; - Feb. 3, 1983: The physical development committee reviews hearing report and adopts final amendments. - Feb. 10, 1983:' The Metropolitan Council adopts final amendments. If you have questions about the schedule or the plan, call John Harrington, water pollution program manager. For a free copy of the plan, Amendments to Wa*,er Resources Manage- ment Development Guide, Part I, Sewage Treatment and Han- dling, call the Council's Public Information Office at 291-6464. FORUM ON NEEDY SET FOR DECEMBER The Metropolitan Council and seven other organizations in the Region are inviting individuals and organizations to partici- pate in a day-long forum assessing the needs of lower-income people in the Twin Cities Area. The forum, "Safety Net or SOS7", will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Dec. 8 at the Hennepin Avenue United Methodist Church, Groveland and Lyndale Avs. S., Minneapolis. A regis- tration fee of $4.50 includes lunch. In addition to the Council, sponsors are: the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities; University of Minnesota Cent~.r for Urban and Regional Affairs; Citizens League; Area cor~ mercial radio and television stations; Council of Metropolita,, Area Leagues of Women Voters; and Minneapolis and St. Paul Foundations. People wishing to register should call the Metropolitan Council at 291-6464. Those interested in preparing two- to three-page papers or 10-minute presentations for the forum should call Shirlee Smith at 291-6421. COUNCIL SETS FOLLOW-UP TO PUBLIC HEARING FOR TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN The Metropolitan Council conducted a public hearing on its Transportation Policy Plan Oct. 12, 1982. The post-hearing process and schedule is as follows: -- Nov. 15, 1982: Public hearing record closes, after which the Council prepares and distributes a-hearing report. - Dec. 27, 1982: lO-clay response period ends, after which Council prepares final statement. -- Jan. 27, 1983: Council adopts transportation policy plan. Copies of the proposed Transportation Development Guide/ Policy Plan for 2000'and Transportation Policy Plan 8ack- ground Papers are available from the Council's Public Informa- tion Office at 291-6464. Written comments should be sent to Steve Alderson, transportation planning program manager, or Charles Weaver, chairman, Metropolitan Council. COUNCIL CHANGES NOVEMBER MEETINGS Council meeting dates in November will be changed because of the Thanksgiving holiday. The Council will meet on Nov. 4 and 18, the first and third Thursdays, rather than the usual second and fourth Thursdays of the month. BREAKFAST MEETINGS WITH COUNCIL CHAIRMAN CONTINUE Metropolitan Council Chairman Charles Weaver continues to meet with local officials in a series of informal breakfast meetings to discuss-issues that concern local communities and the Council, Regional'Commission representatives are also attending the sessions. \ The meetings, all beginning at 7:30 a.m., are being held in each county and in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Remaining meetings are as follows: -- Oct. 26, St. Paul, Minnesota Museum of Art, St. Peter at Kellogg, St. Paul; -- Oct. 28, Hennepin County, Copper Kettle Restaurant, 225 Central Ay., Osseo; -- Nov. 4, Anoka County, Dolphin Cafe, 17628 Hwy. 65, Ham Lake; and - Nov. 10, Scott County, Golden Fox Restaurant, 20251 Johnson Memorial Dr., Jordan (changed from Oct. 26). PUBLIC MEETINGS SET ON AiRCRAFT-NOISE GUIDELINES The Metropolitan Council will hold three public meetings in November to discuss proposed guidelines affecting 23 commu- nities near airports in the Twin Cities Area. Communities would use the guidelines to discourage incompatible land uses such as single-family homes in noisy areas close to the airports. Public meetings on guidelines are set for 7 p.m. as follows: - Nov. 15, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and St. Paul Downtown Airport; Highland Park High School, 1015 S. Shelling Ay., St. Paul. - Nov. 16, South St. Paul, Lake Elmo and Air Lake Air- ports; Council offices, 7th and Robert Sts., S.t. Paul. - Nov. 17, Flying Cloud, Crystal and Anoka Airports; Cooper High School, 8230 47th Ay. N., New Hope. The meetings are preliminary to a public hearing to.be held Dec. 16. Copies of a draft of the guidelines will be available from the Council's Public Information Office after Nov. 10. A background report containing the proposed guidelines is now available: telephone 291-6464. COMING MEETINGS (Oct. 25-Nov. 5) Human Resources Committee-Monday, Oct. 25, 3~0 p.m., Council Chambers. The committee is expected to act on art sponsorship grant applications, staff recommendations on the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rental rehabilitation loan program, and a certificate of need for Lakeview Memorial Hospital, Stillwater. Transportation Subcommittee--Tuesday, Oct. 26, 3 p.m., Conference Room E. The committee is expected to act on a public hearing draft of an amendment to the Aviation chap- ter of the Metropolitan Development Guide on land use guidelines for aircraft noise. The committee is also expected to act on the preferred alternative routes proposed in the final environmental impact statement for Hwy. 610, Anoka County, and Hwy. 252, Hennepin County. Executive Committee-Tuesday, Oct. 26, 5 p.m., Confer- enca Room A. The committee is expected to act on staff recommendations on waste management legislation, a bond sale to finance Metropolitan Waste Control Commission con- struction projects in 1983, an Eden Prairie landfill environ- mental impact statement, and an interagency agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey to develop a groundwater model for the Metropolitan Area. Task Force on Barge Fleeting and Parks and Open Space- Wednesday, Oct. 27, 9 a.m., Conference Room E. The task force plans to discuss the impacts of barge fleeting (storage) on parks and open space recreation and how to mitigate effects of barge fleeting. Task Force on Regional Revenues--Wednesday, Oct. 27, 10 a.m., Council Chambers· The task force is expected to discuss a Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce state-local finance proposal, and discuss and act on four .regional funding alternatives proposed by the task force. Physical Development Committee--Thursday, Oct. 28, 2 p.m., Council Chambers· The committee is expected to act on the preferred alternative routes proposed in the final environmental impact statement for Hwy. 610, Anoka County, and Hwy. 252, Hennepin County; and decide the next steps required in the sludge ash landfill siting process. The committee also will discuss a sludge ash abatement study and the Metro- politan Waste Control Commission sludge disposal program. Metropolitan Council-Thursday, Oct. 28, 4 p.m., Coun- cil Chambers. The Council will act on recommendations from its Human Resources, Physical Development and Executive Committees. Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Committee~ Monday, Nov. 1, 3 p.m., Conference Room E. Human Resources Committee-Monday, Nov. 1, 3:30 p.m., Council Chambers. Transportation Subcommittee-Tuesday, Nov. 2, 3 p.m., Conference Room E. Executive Committee-Tuesday, Nov. 2, 5 p.m., Conference Room A. Technical Advisory Committee (transportation)- Wednesday, Nov. 3, 9 a.m., Council Chambers. Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee-- Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2 p.m., Council Chambers. Chairman's Advisory Committee-Wednesday, Nov. 3, 7:30 p.m., Council Chambers. Resource Recovery Task Force-Thursday, Nov. 4, 8 a.m., Conference Room A. Physical Development Committee-Thursday, Nov. 4, 2 p.m., Cuuncil Chambers. Metropolitan Council-Thursday, Nov. 4, 4 p.m., Council Chambers. Criminal Justice Advisory Committee-Friday, Nov. 5, noon, Council Chambers. BUREAU OF PUBLIC SERVICE DIVISION OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 3524'Hennepin Av. South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408 827-5687 INFORMATION BULLETIN Number 8 October 4, 1982 ON THE LINE Attached is article extracted from the Natural Hazards Observer publication dated September 1982. The article deals with a subject matter not generally known to public officials. Please post or circulate the article among those that bear a responsibility in emergency management. Max D. Seeker, Director Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Attachment HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer ON THE LINE THE ROLE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN AMERICA'S LOCAL GOVERNMENTS During an emergency or disaster, citizens must be able to rely on their local government for a timely, coor- dinated, and comprehensive response. If local govern- ments are not prepared to act quickly, or do not have up-to-date emergency management plans, both lives and property may be lost unnecessarily. Officials are not always aware that they also may be held legally liable if they are not prepared to respond properly to emergencies or disasters. Furthermore, they may be liable if recognized potential hazards are not in- cluded in their local emergency response plans. Court cases have already established legal precedents in both of these areas. It behooves public officials at all levels to know their emergency management responsibilities and to have current plans for managing crises in order to avoid expensive and time-consuming litigation. Public officials should scrutinize their emergency management plans to ensure that they reflect the latest disaster response practices. A local government's plan should be tested periodically to work out any "bugs". The emergency plan's usefulness can be enhanced in several ways: · Public officials should be reminded that they are liable if they are not thoroughly competent in their respective emergency management responsibilities. · Known hazards should be accounted for in the emergency management plan. · Most of the emergency responsibility should be placed on those employees who live near the center of the particular unit of government. · Only current job titles should be used in the plan to avoid ambiguity and confusion. · Current telephone numbers for emergency response team members should be listed in the plan. Backup personnel should be identified. · Most plans list functional responsibilities rather than the actual tasks to be performed. Many plans use such phrases as "conduct a reconnaissance" and "evacuate the area" without actually setting forth what steps should be taken. Detailed tasks should be listed for each function. · Emergency management responsibilities are frequent- ly not centralized, making it difficult to determine precise roles and responsibilities. Responsibilities should be centralized and clearly specified. · All plans should list community resources that could be used in a disaster. The names and locations of hospitals, social service agencies, doctors, nurses, and equipment should be known in advance. · Most local governments have mutual aid agreements for police and fire services only. These pacts should be expanded to ensure the availability of a wide varie- ty of services. · The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is the pulse of any government's response to a disaster. Its func- tions and the delegation of authority and responsibili- ty for them should be clearly specified in the plan. · Most emergency management plans are formulated and implemented from the top down. Plans should be formulated or revised by an "emergency management committee" to elicit the cooperation of those people involved in the plan's implementation. · A provision to waive building codes and zoning laws temporarily should be included in the plan. This will allow for the use of temporary housing or mobile homes on residential sites once they have been cleared. Public officials should not forget that one of govern- ment's basic duties is to protect the lives and property of its citizens. Public officials who remain unskilled in emergency management or ignorant of the hazards their communities face are abdicating their leadership responsibilities to the people they serve. Careful emergency planning, and education and training of citizens as well as Public officials, will help build a local government response capability on which citizens can rely in times of crisis. Roger L. Kemp City Manager Seaside, California 7 A Resource Campaign Survive Winter FEMA-16 October 1982 Through Self Help and Helping Others Federal Emergency Management Agency / National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - U.S. Department of Commerce GOAL: To Save Lives and Reduce Hardship Through Increased Public Awareness of Winter Hazards Each yeer, winter leaves behind a wake of death and destruction in much of our nation. Lives and property must be protected from w;.nter~s cruel and eostZy consequences. Past weather patterns tell us that winter storms will. continue to be killers.' Winter deaths can strike without warning, and often,. when people are feeling the economic pinch. There were more deaths from excessive cold over the last three decades than from hurricanes, tornadoes and floods .combined. The death rate from excessive cold has increased 50% between 1968 and 1978 (National Center for Health Statistics, Department of Health and Human ServiCes). Solid fuel fires from wood and coal have increased 1397. between 1977 and 1981, and deaths increased 84% in one year alone (Federal Emergency Management Agency). Fatalities resulting from poisoning by gases and vapors during winter months are double that for the rest of the year-- improperly installed or defective gas and coal heaters are responsible for many of these fatalitics (Metropolitan-Life Insurance Company). Over 700 deaths between 1980 and 1981 are directly attributable to suffocation and 68% of those during cold weather (National Safety Council). Studies demonstrate that there is a significant increase in deaths the week following a major blizzard. Problems of transportation, communication, and isolation have made the elderly, infirm, handicapped and poor particularly susceptible to the failures of home heating, inadequate provisions of food and medicine, and emergency transportation (The Center for Disease Control). Scientists around the country are looking for temperatures to drop as a result of the April explosion of Mexico's E1 Chieho' volcano, which pumped 20-60 million tons of gas and dust int. the stratosphere (Environmental Data and Information Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE WEATHER--BUT YOU CAN AFFECT ITS OUTCOME. WINTER KILLS. Unpredictable weather is often the rule rather than the exception, particularly during the winter. At least 20 people were killed and 300 injured when a snow and ice storm struck the Southeast in February '82. The storm caused more' 'than 5 million dollars in damage (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration);- More than 35 people were Idlled and 1,077 were .injured during the course of a January '82 storm in the Pacific Southwest. Damage from snow and flooding cost at least 50 million dollars (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). Community officials, weather forecasters and professionals from the Center for Disease Control believe that the winter of '82-83 may go on record as one of the worst of the century. Data indicate that unprepared areas of the country suffered tremendously last winter. Particularly hard hit were the elderly, infirm and economically disadvantaged. This prompted the development Sf a Winter Mortality Surveil- Program. Among those participating are major metropolitan areas and government agencies. The medical community is gravely con- eerned about this winter, and supports Winter Awareness Campaigns. They are worried about the prevalence of winter related illnesses and deaths from heart attacks, fires, drowning, asphyxia, car accidents and hypothermia/expo- sure° High risk groups must be educated on winter weather issues concerning clothing, transportation, fire safety, exposure, exercise, and provisions. FIGHTING BACK The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in conjunction with the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other organizations, is intensifying its program to alert the public to the problems d dangers of the severe winter weather cad. "Survive Winter" is( a national effort to save lives and reduce unnecessary suffering and property loss. The thrust of this campaign is to improve the distribution and sharing of public informa- tion/education materials on winter safety. Target groups include those most vulnerable to severe weather--the elderly, handicapped, and economically disadvantaged. New educational tools have been designed to further emphasize ...... home preparedness, the special needs of the elderly and the role of children. Since those most often victimized by severe weather are least able to help them- selves, community prevention programs are needed to relay information and a helping hand to high-risk households. "Survive Winter" is a cost-effective, self-help approach" to public safety problem solving. Th~ level of community knowledge, involvement and preparedness can make the life-or-death difference in coping with winter disasters. PLANNED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES "Survive Winter" identifies and provides program materials. A major objective is to stimulate private-sector involvement in these public service programs. Program components will include: 1. A SURVIVE WINTER WORKBOOK for those who have already participated in the program. The workbook is divided into five sections: o Planners Packet o Home and School Information o Camera-Ready Materials o Media Packet o Resources This self-help book contains all the tools a community needs to implement a winter survival campaign. Designed for community leaders., campaign coordinators, and public educators, this useful reference ~ includes a ~uide to eonduetin~ a campaign and examples of success stories. The section for parents/teachers and families (home and school information) features an array of items: o Can Your Home Pass the Winter Survival Test? o Winter Watch for Kids o Survive Winter Coloring Book o Christmas Tree Hanger on Tree Safety and Smoke Detectors o Survive Winter Wisely o Survive Winter Poster In addition, the workbook also provides a section with camera-ready public service announcements, posters, and brochures on: o Winter--Keeping the Heat in and the Fire Out. o Your Burning Questions Answered. o Wood--Nature's Housewarming Gift. o Chimney Fires. o The Complete Guide to How to Go on lee and Snow. o A Winter Hazsrd for the Old--Accidental Hypothermia. Teehniques for Cold Water SurvivaL How to Save Money by Insulating Home. o Making Sense Out of Insulation. o Hypothermia~ the Winter Killer. A SUEVIVE WINTER RESOURCE KIT includes the WORKBOOK described above plus samples of materials available from other organizations. Community groups can request bulk materials to support their campaigns. Bulk materials will be provided to community groups and organizations to support their campaigns. A FEMA order blank is included in the workbook. _ Federal Emergency Management Agency P. O. Box 8181 Washington, D. C. 20024 MOUND EMERGENCY PREP LEONARD KOPP 5Zq! MAYW00D RD HOUND MN 5536q HAT CAN MY ORGANIZATION DO TOHELP ? FOR MORE INFORMATION .... Use the Survive Winter materials to put together a Winter Awareness Program aimed at your organization's membership. Offer support to state or local government winter awareness programs, especially through printing or distribution of materials. Help coordinate the activities of organiza- tions involved in educating the public about the problems of surviving winter: civil defense, fire departments, emergency services office, volunteer organizations, churches, business organizations, community service agencies, welfare agencies, utility companies, news media, and others. Help obtain participation of the governor, mayor, or coUnty commissioner by securing the official's signature on a Winter Survival Day Proclamation. Share your organization's, experiences with winter survival preparedness with your local news media. Contact: Federal Emergency Management Office of Public Afrairs Survive Winter Washington, D.C. 20472 National Oeeanie and AtmOSpheric' ': Administration Office of Public Affairs Gramax Building 8060 13th Street Silver Spring, MD 20910 NOTE: IF YOU CONTACTED FEMA LAST YEAR... Communities or organizations which received a winter survival kit or materials last.year will automatically receive a workbook this year, unless they request otherwise. Workbooks will be mailed to last year's campaign participants by early November. Step-by-step guide to disaster preparedness Here's an expert look at how to best design a plan that can make your community's response to a disaster routine rather than a catastrophe. By Roger E. Herman Mr. Herman has sewed as city manager of Rittman, Ohio, director of public service in Hil- liard, Ohio, and coordinator of disaster ser- vices in Summit County, Ohio. Currently, he is an administrator with Dalton-Dalton-New- port, a Cleveland architectural, engineering and planning firm. oping an emergency operations plan and strengthening overall readiness. This task force should be comprised of key members of the local government organization -- department head level or dose to it. The lower on the organiza- tional ladder you go to select task force members, the less effective members will be in getting the job done. The reason is simple. Comprehensive emergency planning requires the input of experience, knowledge and understand- ing that is inherent in top positions. For example, a fire chief, or deputy chief, will have much more expertise to contribute than would a firefighter without com- mand experience. All city and county departments should be represented. Each department will have a role to play in response to a major disaster, so you might as well involve the appropriate leadership from the start. The task force should have a leader. This person can be elected by fellow task force members or appointed by the chief executive. However selected, the chair- person will be responsible for calling meetings, coordinating production of the planning document, soliciting input from all departments, and keeping the chief executive informed about progress. · The leader must assure that each task force member devotes enough time to emergency planning, and that all con- cerned share a feeling of importance and "It can't happen here" isn't a logical rea- son for leaving your community unpre- pared for a disaster. Earthquakes, floods, fires or even nuclear attacks can strike anywhere. Therefore, wise public offi- cials recognize their vulnerability. They respond to the threat with increased plan- ning and preparedness. For officials not familiar with emer- gency preparedness, the challenge can seem overwhelming. There appear to be so many things to do -- so many aspects to be considered. In many communities, .the responsible leaders look at the need to improve their readiness, but don't know where to begin. As a result, they never really get started. However, if you're motivated to get the job done, im- proved emergency preparedness can be achieved by following these steps: m Step one must be taken by the highest elected officials in the com- munity. Government employees and the public must know that their lead- ers are serious about disaster planning. They must understand that you aren't just paying lip service to the need to prepare. This committment cari be demon- strated by formal letter, executive order, or memorandum. State plainly in writing that disaster planning and preparedness is a desired goal which will be pursued. While the task of developing the pro- gram may be delegated to subordinates, the chief executive can't abdicate the ul- timate responsibility. Follow through and visible concern will encourage the staff to work diligently on the project. ~.. Step two involves the use of a team ..: approach to produce a much better ~ product. A special task force, ap- pointed by the chief executive, should be charged with the responsibility of devel- Each department -- not Just the fire department -- will have a role to play In any disaster response situation. Get them all in on the planning early. AMERICAN CITY& COUNTY: October 1982 55 When disaster strikes is not the time to find out the plan doesn't work. Tests and drills are an important ingredient in emergency preparedness, urgency about the work. If team members begin to lower their perception of the disaster planning mission, interest and activity will fall off quickly. The leader and chief executive should seek ways to ~rk together to reinforce the serious- and significance of the job. Step three requires a pause to get organized, Sit down and ask these · important questions: How will the plan be put together? How will it be ar- ranged? What will be in it? Why? What information needs to be gathered? What other agencies need to be involved? How will the pieces of the project be distrib- uted among the task force members? What should be done first? Chapter 4 of my recently published book, Disaster Planning for Local Gov- ernment*, suggests an effective three-sec- tion organizational approach which includes policies, procedures and re- sources. However, whatever approach you use, be sure to keep it simple. This will make it easy to develop.., and easy to implement. Use a loose-leaf notebook to contain the plan. This implies that the plan will never be completely finished. It's true! By its very nature, the plan is a dynamic, ever-changing document. jrnStep four consists of gathering the information you need and writing · the various sections page by ira- ant page. Take enough time to be e the job is done right. 'Available from Universe Books, 381 Park Av- enue South, New York, NY 10016 ($16.50 postpaid). While your preparation effort can sometimes be done on a group basis, you'll probably find it more expedient to have specific task force members assigned to research and write various parts of.the plan. The entire group can work together to edit and critique it to ensure cohesive- ness, consistency and completeness. If your earlier steps, particularly step three, have been effective, the process of gathering and preparing information will go relatively smoothly. It's a time-con- suming process, so don't expect overnight miracles. As each portion of the plan is com- pleted, make it "official." This will ena- ble all concerned to gradually become better prepared for the next emergency. Even a partially' completed plan can prove helpful. Step five concentrates on spread- ing the word. An emergency op- · erations plan is useless if no one knows about it. Tell your employees about the plan. Stress its availability and value. Tell the public about it. Your citizens will be glad to learn that progress is being made toward more effective disaster re- sponse. Don't be surprised if people seem rather apathetic about disaster planning. Remember, most members of your com- munity will feel more comfortable and secure knowing that you are more ready to respond and serve them in times of emergency. Communicate closely with local groups that should be a part of your community- wide planning and'response. Involve leaders of the Red Cross, boy scouts, clergy, doctors, schools and industries. A careful examination of your community will indicate which nongovernmental ent- ities should be included. Don't overlook these important assets and contacts. Step six centers on training and preparedness. As you develop your · plan, you may realize there are some disaster threats you aren't ready to · meet. Additional training may be in or- der. Don't wait until your plan is complete. If you discover a training deficiency, take steps to correct it. Develop a list of new and refresher training programs designed to improve your level of readiness. Consider how well prepared you are in terms of facilities, equipment and sup- plies. Prepare a list of-needed items and include them in your budget t° gradually achieve a state of near-complete readi- ness. Remember that this is a gradual process. It won't b~, accomplished over- night.., or even in a year. Tests, or drills, are an important ingre- dient in emergency preparedness. Once you have planned, trained and equipped, don't take for granted that everything will work just right when disaster strikes. It won't. Murphy's Law notwithstanding, many potential problems can be avoided by working out the bugs with tests of various phases of your response plan. There are two ways this can be done m everyday use of the plan and simulated disasters. Both approaches are recommended. Routine use of your plan will increase familiarity with its contents. Also, it will show where the plan is deficient. 71Step seven centers on plan moni- toring and updating. Don't let I your completed plan sit on the shelf. Encourage use of the manual for better management of routine emergen- cies. Hold periodic meetings of users. (every six months is suggested) to review any needs for its updating or expansion. Continual training will assure that all appropriate personnel can implement various aspects of the plan. Include new personnel and nongovernmental organi- zations in your training and testing ex- ercises. Conduct refresher sessions with all gov- ernment leadership and nongovernmen- tal response groups. Seek ways to improve what you've already done. Ask "what if" questions to test your ability to respond if conditions are different from what your plan "expects" when disaster strikes. Encourage neighboring communities to prepare as you have. Their improved readiness will strengthen your position and theirs. No doubt you will find many opportunities to work together with neighboring governments to provide needed services. You will discover this is a more efficient way to go than if you try to do the job alone. ACC REAL ESTATE MARKET 10/12/82 GROWTH 150 Value Gro~h ,4J"; o 140 130 120 110 9-L-81 Mean Ratio Median Ra[!o 91.1 91.0 Coeffician: of Dispersion Number of Sales 100 10.3 b~-I-82 McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS October 28, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park BouleVard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 ' (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1981 M.S.A. Street Improvements Tuxedo and Three Points Files ~5387 and #5388 Dear Jon: This letter is to bring you up to date on the above projects. After a number of letter written and meetings held with Hardrives, a few of the items in dispute have been settled. They have accepted all the pay items on the last pay request as final quantities except for the Class 2 gravel and the Class 4 and 5 gravel base. We are con- tinuing to negotiate on these last three items. Hardrives has also agreed to bring Tuxedo Boulevard up to an acceptable condition as soon as weather permits in the spring by patching some of the bad areas andi~then seal coating from Brighton Boulevard to Hanover Road° We will keep you informed of any developments. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~amero~ JC:sj Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria- Eagan printed on recycled paper INCORPORATED PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS 27 October I ~2 SPECIAL ISSUE SPRINGSTED hEWSLETTER The recently enacted U.S. 'q'ax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1~2" (TEFRA) included a number of modifications affecting .the__issuance of InduStrial ~evelopment Bonds. Included in the sweeping modifications was a requirement th~at ALL tax-exempt bond issues be subject to registration after January I, I ~3, except those of less than 12 months in length. Initially, while we knew registration meant the end of bearer bonds and interest coupons, we hoped the new requirement might be reasonally met with only minor modifications in current procedures. A further analysis has led us to believe that registration will have a profound effect on the cost of issuing traditional, truly public purpose tax-exempt bonds. Some of the adverse effects include: e A dramatic increase in the net interest cost required to market the securities. Several major 'regional underwriters and investment .bankers have indicated to us th. ey think net interest rates will increase by at least .50%. On a $1,000,000 issue sold for 20 years that translates to $65,000 in added interest costs. The fees to be charged by registrars, and accompanying paying agents, will increase issue costs significantly. One major paying agent in our region has indicated its charges for pay. rnent per interest coupon may go from .15¢ per coupon to $1.50 per registered interest payment. For a recent $3,200,000 issue with an 18-year term issued by an S-I client the paying agency .charges would be increased from a current estimated $2,zt% to $2~,%0 . with registration. Initially, only a handful of major banks and trust companies will have computerized systems in place to accommodate registration. As a result, initial high costs may remain in effect indefinitely, and you as an issuer may be faced to deal with a registrar with whom you have had no experience. A number of states, including Wisconsin, may need to pass legis- lation permitting full implementation of registration (Wisconsin law does not permit authentication for bond signing which is imperative for registered bonds). That cannot be done by January I, 1~3. Registration will require significant changes in current procedures including but not limited to: Delays in settlement pending receipt of final instruction on how many purchasers will be involved in each issue. 800 Osborn Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 222-4241 250 North Sunnyslope Road, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005 (414) 782-8222 Confusion os to how many bonds need to be printed, since sufficient bond forms must be available for future regis- tration changes as bonds ore sold and repurchased in the secondary market. Ce Potential future added costs if issuers are required to pay for the costs of future registration charges, with no opportunity to budget intelligently for those costs. We believe the negative impact of registration, the current confusion on required procedural charges, and the near term monopoly of a limited number of registrars warrants a reexamination of the registration requirements and much more time to develop 'workable, cost-effeCtive procedures. The Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) has requested a .two year-.delay in imple- mentation of the registration .requirement. The U.S. Treasury Department apparently has rejected that .request. Congress will meet in lame duck session following' the general election. We suggest this issue is of sufficient'importance to your :community to warrant adoption of a formal resolution requesting .a two year..delay of the reaistration re___quirem~ent for traditional~ non-industrial d~ve!onrnent, ~ax-exempt be;ntis. We suggest that resolution be forwarded to your U;S.'Representative and Senator at an early date. it may' also be well to contact y. our professional associations to urge them to do whatever they Can. The matter is Urgent because it is doubtful that bonds sold after December i, !'f~82 can be printed and delivered prior to January I. it is an especially Critical matter for small issuers because of the substantial added cost. If you have any questions about this matter pi.ease feel free to.'call us at (612) 222--42/4 I. Tonka Corporation 4144 Shoreline Boulevard P.O. Box 445 Spring Park, Minnesota 55384 Telephone: 612/475-9500 November 1, 1982 City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Gentlemen: As you may be aware, we announced last week our decision to relocate our domestic toy production to a newly acquired facility in E1 Paso, Texas, and to phase down manufacturing at our Mound, Minnesota plant. The Mound plant will continue production for most of 1983. The high cost of transporting manufactured goods from Minnesota to the Company's primary distribution points, together with the high cost of producing in Minnesota, make it impossible for Tonka to remain competitive by manufacturing at our present location. This decision was reached following a complete cost study of all areas of manufacturing, distribution and pricing. We have valued our association with you over the years and anticipate continuing our relationship at least into 1983. With respect to future operations in E1 Paso, cost and transportation factors will influence our purchasing decisions. All existing suppliers will be given an opportunity to continue to compete for our business. We appreciate your continued cooperation during this transition period. Sincerely Stephen G. Shank President and Chief Executive Officer SGS:ls CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472o1155 November 3, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jom Elam Public Works Estimated Electricity costs for 1983. For the year of 1983 the Street Dept. budgeted $55,000 for electricity. In September NSP's rate increase went into effect, here is an estimated out line of the costs for electricity for 1983. STREETLIGHTS 350 - 175W Mercury $9.15 each per month = $3,202.50 23 - 250W Mercury $10.15 each per month = $233.45 12 - 175W Mercury (Parking Lots) $12.55 each per month = $150.60 7 - F72EHO Fluorescent (Shoreline)S23.10 each per month = $161.70 72 - 250 W Mercury (Downtown) $5.75 each per month = $414.00 The streetlights come to a total of $4,162.25 per month or $49,927.00 per year. Also coming out of the electricity budget is $~2.00 per month for the signal light and about $300.00 per year for a portion of the electricity for the shop. The total estimated costs for 1983 electricty is about $50,991.00 Res~ect fully, Joyce N~I son Public Works American Legion Post 398 DATE OCT OBER 23, 198 CURRENT MONTH GAMBLING REPORT GROSS: ~207~. O0 YEAR TO DATE ~17,99~.0( EXPENSES: SALES ~AX ~.98.80 SUPPLIES 302. O0 PAYOUTAS PRIZES: ~ ~.a. oo. 8o ~1200.00 g. 2~ 55.56 ~.lo,, 5o. co PROFIT: ~a7a. 20 55090.12 DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: VET'S HOSPITAL PHEASANT FUND FT. SNELLING RIFLE' STUAD M.S. ~'UND MINN. HANDICAP FUND ALANO' EMERGENCY LIGHTS ~5~' .00 150,00 10. O0 10. O0 25. O0 99.12 AC C OU,; ~ CHECKING ~'6667.99 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472~1i55 November 3, 1982 TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROM: City Manager I have spent a good deal of time lately attempting to put together materials that can explain Tax Increment Financing. Attached are four separate documents which should help: ^) (I) District Qualification Explains the various categories of Tax Increment Financing and some of the data requirements that must be organized in a Tax Increment Plan. c) D) An abbreviated breakdown of the 1982 Tax Increment Act Amend- ments: These probably won't make complete sense without the complete Act, but at least they give you some ideas of what the basic requirements are. A brief explanation of how an Economic Feasibility Study is con? ducted on a Tax Increment Proposal. Although somewhat simpler than the Mound Proposal, shows the important role Economic Feasi- bility plays in the whole process. An Actual Redevelopment Plan & Tax Increment Finance Plan for the City of Olivia. A City is required to prepare such a plan. This one I thought was quite good because it did point out the full range of City policies that must be met in any implementation plan. There is a lot of financing jargon in all of this, which hopefully I can explain. Taking this and other related materials, hopefully a perspective can be gained if this is an idea that can or should be used by and in the City of Mound. Jon Elam JE/ms COVER STORY · .. /. . , ' , '~. ~' ~,.;*'",!,5 "(g.~ ...... ; l.'";- ".~.:',, ';'~..".*,' ~. ,: ;'..'","- '., -f .... "' "l~' l"'t",.'-~-,','"/i/(?'"~ ¢' 'i}2¥,~','I','t ~ ','i,'~"~ '. ~mdO~"~[' -- ' ~ :'.9::? .-,.,- · ' . -, ". .' - "~/,, me"- :"tax":" '"-: brea " i .: ,;; ;.. . .... . :t ,.:.'., .t'. ,. , ': · ',~'i~ ' / ? .'.-"~: "; ,. ' ' ,,- /...'% ,.'4 ¢onttn'ued froTM lA " . ".. · "for 18 months when local development C~V[:-I~'i'-~Tl'"~l~v~',ih:,.'.:,?.,i'.':>)',,: .¢-:.>;-';:,2",~. ' ... ' '.' "'.:: · .' :- (.- people showed It to visiting officials from. '""--""'" ' ""'"'"'" "": :'fit"?t'" .,i:.f,.' '2 'i;:."~l~i i'1¢~"; and an access road graciously'will be re-' '~i Precisionalre, InC. Windows were broken,. : - ,': "'!: ..': ::...-'t;.;',:i named Natior ^venue. cornpany.;i::!.,mda had ripp o,utthe cop rwirir · ,;' 'm m....t, m:!, .~: .: i': ";' t':,'. ' ,m ,.:.;/ :Q. !. ~.~ A~:.~.:.:~i i; :!.¥.':1 . -- which Is moving soon -- Is expected to', ;: i[stx inches of water covered the floor,' the l!r-~ ~lt..~il [] 'r.,~r,,~l~r m~. ,,~m ,:;:~,~¢-,, :.'~.?J cai economy;, 10 to 15 percent through;-~.:.-'inghad dropped.-" · ,; '.. ~ .... -. '::.'::'...'~.-.:.:,' ',,: ~ .;.'...,,:.'.: ,,'..:;~;',".~,.,'Pi~il,.;~?;~ corporate taxes and most ol the rest :_-.;,:: · "rhey said, 'What else' do'you have?, ~-; ~" ' ~:t~;: !~ '": .,: ';'.'. ?','.""", :'. -;% ;'~:; ;'.ii:!.:; '~': :' ,/.i,::,h. ,;~:~r;~;f~t,¢:~N through workers' purchasing power. "We j v'., jUnlortunately,' We' didn't", have anything -1!~'~.: ~;. B ~ 'B [~!!l~ ~ ~ '::: [pl~',~, 1~ ~.~, worked hard on them," Calvert sa~ The' :':~. 'else, so we concentrated on having them- · . ..:.a,-',;:::'."...: .:.;, :,'~..;:'~ :"-,,.t.-...'~,, 5.; !?,...',,v. ,.,.'.';~t)..,~';;';i'?i North Carolina." , . '. · :" "-:;"::' 'Frank,7.ulms;' industrial comfnlssloner ............. "' ""' :"f,'"' ::: ..... '~.;~.~ '. .... .,:~,.,t,.,~'.~ ..~.mard Berkowita president of the W~th a low interest financing package put · ' ;--..i ~ :~,, .,, - : '~..~ . . m .~IL~, ,'~s~ ~ ~.. ~..~P';~..~.~sP'~I~ :'::~r?-;l~'l D~s fall .took the v~ting owner and local Li;:.,!, local' development group,.'.'the company.: :: .'.: .;i.':; :. !: :' ~ 4; ':':,'.f '-?:~'.,.~¢" '":' t;'?;:~.::; '..:,'.~!..;.C,.?.~.~:r;:i.'.?~;~t plant rnanager,,o.f a Japanese firm to ,' :f'-:;;:.u.! f.'?.:?':%::!;'"..";.:,?"'.'?~.'"'.t'2'" '.'".';, j:.':':~':~:' ,:'. :::?~:,::".hlkt~.;~t Orioles..8~. e. We arranged'fo.r an On-::,',};: square'Ioot (compared to Sa0 a foot/or; ' .T~9;' '~r'~ l/b,'?',..:.: ~:.?~' ~ l:~rvara Zlgll j,~ ::..:~ ;'..b-',y:-?;[,;~;l oles official to come and see them during' ;:t:~ new .construction),' and Pottsville will, get .:., ,.,,,¥.,...~,~ .~,.~ ~o.~ ~.':~?'J!,i::;','/.IJ,~A T,O. DA¥.;;:ir..:'L.L,~:~:i..::,.~:,.¢ a break and give them a baseball signed. '.:':., 150 jobs over the nextthree )'ears..~, ..- :,~. · .... , ,: .... ...,; ~;.,-,,~,,- . .' . Paulu~..came e prirnm7 1 re' clfies dangle ts mort- .:: ';':" edng .three.,Colorado. cities lor;~a new' 1~ nq'".:~()~n"'::~ ~';".L to. Wellston,-,.Ohlo, .last year, ey. It comes In many forms:, tax abate- , . ,_ ...: . ;. ...... ~ carry ng: Welcome. merits, low-interest loans, tax-exempl., ,-,. ,.. Fort Collins was.selected as.t?,~,., orew. 1'3,-qr3rl' ~r3r'l~rt '.'.-."".signs lined the streets, tie.was bonds and outright grants. ," ;'.: ,::'/:.~ .,: ::l:r~',". eryslte;not bemuse of the ~',~.r,j~cial hack. _,- ....,......-:..;,. :?. escorted by the.local pollce, ac<. Theres been a. dramaticincrense ln.,..~,~, nge.ltoffered--tl~two:r:lvalsofferedlar thrown 'lB.t~,-. :5...: ?.m?anl. ed:by Gov. James A.'; the an}.ount o[, competition over the last .:tr." more, Fort Collins wo,.,n because.or i~s goo- · ' . ' .... "., .,'il~,noaes. aha serenaded, by the several years, says Tom Lawton, o! Chi-. :,:.f 'graphic location an~j the avalla} 0! a ' ....: . . . . ;We_.tLs't,o,n_ '.m~..Sshool Band: :.::' cago's Fantus Co., which advises business-z.m/~oo~ site,:,~theuser~,Busch ol'nct~_ .,ay. :' · ',. - : .'..' ~ . ~.-.~...,' zaats wna~ happens when es on where to locate...'..'.' - ..I....: :;f.;.::~, ,That's' the ldnd,*of example I-Iardso~ you bring jobs to an area, and a plant for Jeno's Italian Foods was bringing more than 1,000 to the town o! 6,000 in SOuth:! .. Thoi~h i'nost cltYofficlals wouldn't'trot out the htgh's~h~l' band, tl!.ey would understand the enthusiasm behind the fes- tivities. Qfies and states across the nation are spending rail. lions of dollam to Promote themselves tn a.growing comPeti: The lures? Sewer lines and luncheon~,'baseball g{mie~ and. high ~tech.. Southeast Michigan government, for example[ have a .computer that can spew, out a four-color, map that! shows businesses potential plant locations and their pmximi. It s reall~, that special attention, that persohal't0ucl~: s~ Ruth Calvert, whose Spartanburg,. S.C., Chamber of com- merce:helped snare National Lock Hardware ..--~.' and 45(1 jobs'~ for her area. A sewer line was in.qalled for .the firm But battles for jobs have their costs.'.;'5,i::cltes when he say, is that his .study of 230 Economists like Bennett Harrison of the.,i',~:'companles shows/tliat plnnt.lOCation deci-' Ma.~sachusetts Institute of Technology are.:!~i, i: slons are based oI~ factors like labor cost c,.nvinced that tax tncenUves lead to ex-ihi?and climate,' pro:~ximib' to markels and ~iv,e bid. d.i.n.g .wa?s..be.twin..cities,. p..r~.'.i:Qiaw~l_ ab.ffity .of s~.'..~ices, not tax'breaks. :.:, viaingwino!alls lo lnoustry out navingjit-.~?.2,~i} .' .50 why oo citrics and' states '-~-. even tte eIf,ect on the decision to relocate. In ':',::'.."those in the mog, e ~avored Sun Belt.. more and more cases, It's kind of black-'~!.!.:'i;over each otherAto offer them?: :i" mail,", he says. "ClUes are being told, 'If.:i~';?: ,."'rhey got inqo fids terrible compefiUon you don't give it to uS, we'll §o SOmewhere i!~:, i:.with each othe~i-. Governmenis got fright. else.' .... . .....' '. /: ' .: ~"- <: d,:',.:ened' that lI'th~,, other states are doing . With a 12.5 pei'cent 'unemploymint',?,- '.they bettei~ do ~tt. too," Harrison say~ The rote, Ohio has decid,~ it can,t allord, to ',..~i,'result .is desttructive because the tax lose any industry to SOmewhere else. 'It ~.'. breaks cut into) a db"s tax base,' hurting oflers an array of financial lures costing.'!} :. :services and ~mldng the' cit7 less. attrac- the sta~e about $35 million a year, which it i.:'"."five to Indust~.f, he said.' -,-' . ';~ '. hopes to win back in tax revenues.'- ~ ........ ~-",~, ...... 'lax breaks.', are .nearly universal,, but :The Paulucci plant, for example/TM ~:ri;.some cities ar~?beginning to regret having reduced by a $3.75 million low-interest' i. i'-exempted, so~ much properb' from ..tax l°an'accessr°ads'expansi°n°~thec°un":'":'r°lls"":"v l" "' ' ; ' '"~' ly airport, a water plant, a vacant build-' ' .' "We're not; sure 'that to prey uponihe in~'~ "It was total accommodation," Pau-"." lucci recalled. ~ . . .'" Other cities are even more creative.. ~nd aggressive in their battles lor jobs. St. Louis has a roving corps of three am- ~" ~:,,-~'~dors who call on 500 corporate lead;~ em a .year to talk about the db' and dis-' tribute pamphlet. O~e of Baltimore's ambassadors Is a 5ailing ship, .the cib'-o~med and privately ~-un Pr/de o[ Baltimore, which routinely travels to hemtsphere ports, h. osts rece.,p-_ ~, .. row money through a government ,ger,, fions for busin~smen, spreaas the city s ,, -- has s~'/rocketed l~m $1A bi" ' name· The ship left Sunday on a year-long :: 1976 to. gn estimated $11.9 bi! voyage of 17,000 miles, year. CTS,. to taxpayem this ye~ Sometimes it takes quite a selling job. A billion, tl-e Treasury Depar' nlnnl nufcid~ Pntt~villp Pn wnq v-nr-nnt mnt~ extsting tax ~e to attract new industry is a good idea ti, the long run for cities," says Randy Amdl, spokesman for lhe National League of Ci~fies. ' ' · Cincinnati schools lose $3 million a year because of tax breaks to develope~, board presiOent Herbert Brown The' cost:of local and state '.. .~ce~- rives is also'borne by the federal u easury. The use of :~ax-exempt industrial revenue bonds -- which enable companies to bor- I. District Qualification The 1979 Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act categorized the public purposes that could be satisfied throu§h tax increment financing. ~ax increment districts must fit into one of three categories: {1) redevelop- ~ment district.; (2) housing district; (3) e~_conomic development d~strict. - The most complicated type of district to qualify is the redevelopment district. The following map will be used for the exercise in district qualification. Also included is a data sheet containing the infqmation that will probably be needed to qualify a tax increment'district and analyze project proposals. 7 6100 PROJECT MA,,qAG[R DATA SItEET Page size map or larger if necessary of individual project, lhe map should be part of an atlas plate 50 or 100 feet to the inch. The map should identify: - Lot dimension -'Lot numbers - probably legal but prefer PIN (Property Identification l'lumbers) - Additions Information to be indicated on the above map include: - Lots to be acquired - Lots with buildings - Lots that are vacant Information to be acquired at the'Auditor/Assessors office include: - Property identification number for each parcel in the individual p¥.oject - Legal description - (~.~nership - Assessors market 'value - AsseSsors asSessed value - Taxes - Homestead infor~ation by project manager List of p=.rcels not to be acquired by PIN but will be in the project - number of square feet in each parcel with buildings - number of square feet in eadh parcel without buildings - number of square feet in each parcel with blighted buildings - number of square feet in each parcel with blighted land, i.e. poor sub soil List of parcels to be acquired by PIN number and should include: - number of square feet in each parcel with buildings - number of square feet in each parcel without buildings - number of square feet in each parcel with blighted buildings - number of square feet in each parcel with blighted land ,ge 2 Parcels to be acquired (cont'd) - identify each parcel that is homesteaded - identify number of families or businesses on each parcel - use reverse directory or site count - approximate size of buildings to b6 demolished - wood frame or masonry Determining blight - Building condition - Obsolete buildings.: Functionally - poor arrangement of rooms or .commercial space , Economically - unused upstairs, expensive to convert - Health - Safety hazards - Planning reasons: parcel assembly, street.realignment, fragmented parcels and ownerships - Nonconforming uses: zoning conflicts - Land problems: soil.condition, topography - high water tab~es - mck outcrops Prepare preliminary budget - Acquisition - use two times assessors, market value and judgemeht - Relocation'- use $4,~0 per tenant and $15~00 per owner-occupied t,,~ ~,,~.-.. - Demolition - use $1,500 to $2,000 per wood frame, I0¢ a cubic foot for commercial - Public improvements- any streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, sewer, water or other utilities required for the site improvement Site preparation including: - soil replacement - soil compaction - site drainage - grading topographic stabilization Project timing - Project managers best guess when site would be acquired, 'cleared and built on.' Land sales - amount of land .sales if available to project budget Other income - amount of grant money available to the project grant timing coordination Estimated value of new development - Number of housing units - Square. footage of commercial or industrial, buildings Environmental - any worksheets or full EIS required Confl i.cts - possible neighborhood conflicts .: - possible land use conflicts - possible zoning conflicts - possible political conflicts - / kgJ Page 27 (2) (3) (4) (.5) Page 42 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING GUIDE A~tENDMENTS 1982 Legislative Session Section 273.73, subdivision 10 amendment: 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not ineludiag outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or ele.~ance; or 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements and 20 percent of the buildings are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as: inade?m:te street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overe, o~vding of bm'ldings on the land, excessive d'.,velling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for hnprovement' or conversion, or other identified hazards to the health, safety and general wellbeing of the c~mmunity; or Less ti'mn ?0 percent of the parcels in the district are oceutSi..ed by' building's, streets, utilities or other improvements, but due to udu~ual subs~antta~ fil2i.a~, grading or terrain or soil deficiencies requiring " ' ' other physical preparation for use at least 80 percent of the total acreage of such land has a fair market value upon inclusion in the redevelop:nent district wi~ieh, when added to the es~i:'na~ed preparing t,~at land for dev~.lop,nent, excluding costs Cireetly related to roa~s as defined in se,~-tion 16Q.01 and local improvements as described in section 429.021, subdivision 1, clauses i ;, 7, 11 and 12, and section 430.01, if any, exceeds its anticipated fair market value after completion of said preparation; provided that no parcel shall be included within a redevelopment district pursuant to this paragraph (3) unless the authority has concluded an agreement or agreements for the ~evelopment of at least 50 percent of the ac:e.~ge having the unusual soil o? terrain deficiencies, which agreement .provides recou~e for the authority should the development nor. be completed; or The property eonsists of underutilized air rights existing over a publi;~ street, '-~ ,.' , ht~h.,a~ or right-of-way; or The property co,mists of vacant, unused, ,mderused, ineppropriately used or inf:'equently used r.qilyarc[s, rail storage faeii~tles or excessive or vaea~e.~ ruilroud rights-o[-way. S_-etion 273.73, .qubdivision !3 a:nendment "Adminlstr~'~iv¢ expenses" includes amounts ;~:.A~_~ .*or servic.z.~ p.'ovided b'; oond counsc!, fiscal consutt.:mt~ and p!,?n~::~ or economic · ~ev~lopm ent e..:,nsultants. (c) Page 45 Page 31 Page 67 Section 273.75, subdivision 3 amendment Administrative expenses are limited to ten percent of the total tax inerement expenditures. Section 273.74, subdivision 1 amendment The Tax Increment Financing Plan shall also include a description of any expenditures o? development to occur within the project as opposed to the documentation of expenditures and developments within the boundaries of the tax increment financing district. Development Program -- a list of any development activities,which the plan proposes to take place within the project, for :v~hieh contracts have been entered into .at the time of the preparation of the plan, including the names of the parties to the contract, the activity governed by the contract, the cost stated in the contract, and the expected date of eompletio.n of that activity; and the identification or description of the type of any other s~ecifie development reasonably expected to take place within the project, and the date when the development is likely to occur. Section 273.74, subdivision 2 amendment: The county auditor shall not, certify the original assessed value of a district pursuant to section 273.76, subdivision one, until the co.uatY board of commissioners has presented its written comment on the proposal to the authority, or 30 days has passed from the date of the transmittal by the authority to the board of the information regarding the fiscal and economic implications, mvhiehever occurs first. .-- Section 273.75, subdivision 4 amendment: No revenues derived from tax increment shall be used for the construction or renovation of a municipally owned building used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of the municipality; this provision shall not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a commons area used as a public park or a facility used for social, recreational or conference purposes ~_nd not pri. marily for conducting the business of the municipality. Section 273.75, subdivision 6 amendment: Limitation On Increment If after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment financino~ district pursuant to section 273.76, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including improvement oF a street adjacent to a p:~eel but not installation of utility service ineludin~ Page 54 Page 50 water or sewer systems, }ms been commenced on a p~{reel located within a tax increment financing dish'iet by the autho.~ity or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the ta~ increment financing plan, no additional tax increraent may be taken from that parcel, and the original assessed value of that parcel shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. · Section 273.75 amendment: SUbdivision 7 Subsequent Districts is added except as provided in section 273.75, subdivision 6, fo? subsequent recertification of parcels elhninated from a district because of lack of development activity, no parcel that has been so eliminated subsequent to two years from the date of the original certification may be included, in a tax increment district if, at any time during the twenty years prior to the date when certification of the district is requested pursuant to section 273.76, subdivision 1, that parcel has been included in an economic development district. Section 273.76, subdivision 1, amendment: 'K Each year the auditor shall also add to the original assessed value_ of each economic development district an amount equaI to the. original assessed value for the preceding year multiplied by the~ average percentage increased in the assessed valuation of all property included in the economic development district during the five years prior to certification of the district (an annual adjustment to the original assessed valuation for inflationary appreciation)° Section 273..76, subdivision 4 amendment: The county auditor shall increase the original assessed value of the district by the assessed value of the improvement for whleh the building permit was issued, excluding the assessed valuation, of improvements for which a building permit was issued during the three month period immediately preceeding said approval of the tax increment financing plan, as certified by tile assessor. , II. Determining the Economic Feasibility of Tax Increment Financing Proposals General Comments Prior to the completion of any documents to establish tax increment districts or entering into any agreements with prospective developers, the project manager should review the proposal to determine it the proposal will generate enough assessed valuation and tax increments to cover project costs, the timing of expenditures and the timing of construction and revenues. The feasibility study may be prepared by the city or authority at its expense or by the developer or proponent of the project proposal. If the developer is to assume responsibility for the feasibility study, the city will want to review the figures and data submitted for accuracy in timing and amount. If citY'or authority staff does not have the time or there is not sufficient revenue in the budget to complete, such a study, the city may ~onsider having the developer deposit a sum of money in escrow and using this money to pay for staff time devoted to the study. Similarly, the escrow account proceeds may be used to retain outside technical con- sultants. B. Case Study: Economic Feasibility 1. Obsolete agricultural processing facility in downtown area. 2. Possibility of moving facility out of downtown area to another suitable part of the city. 3. Owners of facility need public assistance to finance costs associated with move to new facility not incurred by remaining on present site. Acquisition Site Grading and Rail Spur Public Improvements Well and Septic Tank Roads $ 60,000 45,000 45,000 Sl50,O00 Planning and Administration Legal Capitalized Interest $ 5,000 1,500 28,800 S185,300 4. Determine Income Original Assessed Valuation - $31,528 New Construction Assessed Valuation - $129,000 Captured Assessed Valuation - $97,472 Mill Rate = 140 Tax Increment - $23,646 5. Findings: Use of Annuity or Amortization Schedules PV: PMT 1,11 -- (11 +m i)-N i PV = present value {budget or bond principal amount} PMT = payment {tax increment) i = interest rate ~ N: term of bond issue Solving for PV: PMT: S13,646 i: 9% or .09 N: 22 PV = S128,851 However, Budget: $156,500, so project is not feasible. -IH.LO.L ,y ~]HO:.~ i'L iq 19,3 ': ,'"~, ' ru:u.~ ?.-]g '] Et%I3.:I Q;~,-J ='! i 'l".i , I XI-jL :.';F:Ft , :.=,;.-.' T, :-" ', '~ ..... ;.% (J.'L '.~;~ [, :"' C&;i", ::o:,'.(t 9S.-:.' ~ :il]U.'l '.~.,.:, f, ' """ .... I. I, I.J., ,.'-, '",L,I.," ' ~.R~ ~ 666 T. !.'.,. (; l:~ ~ ' -' . ,n.= [. :.:; G 6 [. :'° :': "" ~ '-: 1'. .Z. 6 ,'-'. L :]U.'u.'l, t6,:3 ',. ~G,S T, :iCU3, ~(S~ [. ~FiFi T. r.~rict '~,f,;£ I, O, CC L ::tf:tf:t %1~ L .8:::6 t 0, O,& (,S.-: l, :-":361; a T, a61; .[ .... ::l .Jrt .., :,.L.HSGIdO 93/';3f]3;~1 S£:S03 ~3H.I,O SLSO:] .~?,iL].]H I, 9WZEi£ 31,;O:Z.I T, J,l..131,~3;~i:.'d.i ~ 3[.JO:3F.I 1: :'1'[133:30;~.=t Z[]:SS I. 3-1FI(]3HOS 3A3~' ~' [- CHART I-2. EXPENDITURE SCI-I£GUI. E f '- 1t--: ' ' EF:.'PE!'C.,)'I ~ U.<E:'<- ' ...... C'Ft::"~ T'FIL DTH.~'';' 'i [.)1 ~IL E,..:,7" ' ?~)2: ~... ?~.2 :"' WE'F4 7E:~. C,.2, .. TBT~L -of I. ~51..ll-J .d 9id.LL'].L ,.'~.C:. :6 ~r_:. >j£,t.i L .LD.L -'i~-i.-.i 1.31--1L;~J.::I "i]-JIDJ. '9W.LO.L :~.FI~ I.I, I.L I.,, :firS,SI, ..-1-.66 T. ::_;:=:,~ ~ 39AO3H3S lN3H3H II3B 1It3(1 11:1¥H3 -TT- O. O, O, i.':, (t l'l. 6 I:t .'366 f. t't Ct '366 f. O, O, :-7;66 f. O. O. ;£,::. & f. 6 6 :3S6 f. O. Ct ::~ :36 T, ,-. ,%, I~ J:t ::,-, -. f. 39fla3H3S 3HfllIaN3dX3 '8-I! l~¥H3 -EI- 0.00.~ 6661, · t~66 l, ~66I :.";66 I. ~66T. ']66 I 886 I ':]861~ ~861. ~861 !!:3H31tI13~t l~13a 'E-II I~VH3 OLIVIA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN~ OLIVIA, MINNESOTA APRIL20,.1981 Prepared by the Technical Assistance and Research Service of the League of Minnesota Cities ~alt Hartman, Director Gary Winter, Assistant Director NV'la IN3HdO13^303~ ¥IAI90 I I I I iiI TABLE OF CONTENTS _Page No. I. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Redevelopment Purpose ...................... 1 Bo Findings ............................ I Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing and Redevelopment Project Area Description Redevelopment Plan Objectives ..................· 2 E. Redevelopment Activities .................... 4 F. Land Use ............................ 5 1. Permitted Use ........................ 5 Additional Regulations and Controls or Restrictions to be Imposed on the Sale of Acquired Land ...................... G. Design Standards ......................... 6 1. Site Design ......................... 6 2 Required Documents .... 10 3. Applicability of Regulations and Controls .......... 11 )4 Redeveloper's Obligations I. Land Acquisition ........................ 12 J. Rehabilitation ............... . .......... 12 K. RelocatiOn of Displaced Persons and Businesses ......... 12 L. Procedure for Changes in Approved Redevelopment Plan .. ..... 12 II. TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT FINANCE PLAN A. Statutory Authority ...................... 13 B. Statement of Objectives ..................... 13 C. Development Program (M.S. §273.74) Redevelopment District Project Proposals ................... 14 D. Description of Property in Olivia Tax Increment Redevelopment District Modification Pursuant to M.S. §273.71-78 ......................... 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Ee Page No. Classification of Tax Increment District ............ 16' Fo Property in Acquisition ..................... 17 G. Estimate of Costs ......................... 17 H. Identification of the Use of Tax Increments ........... 18 I. Limitation on Administrative Expenses .............. 18 J. Sources of Revenue ....................... lg Assessed Value 19' K Original L. Estimated Captured Assessed·Value ................ 20 M DUration of the District . 20 Jurisdictions 20 N. Impact on Other Taxing .............. O. Geographic Modifications .................... 22 P. Limitation on Duration of Tax Increment Financing Districts ....................... 22 Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax "~-" Increment District Not Subject to Improvements ........ '. 22 R. Annual~Disclosure Requirements ................. 23 S. ReqUirementS for Agreements with the Developer ......... 23 T. As6essment Agreements ...................... 24 U. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ........... 24 V. Administ.ratign of the Tax Increment Redevelopment District '; 24 W. Tax Increment Account for this Redevelopment District Modification .............. 24 X. Excess Tax Increments ...................... 25 Y Cash Flow Analysis and Assumptions' 25 Z. Summary ............................. 29 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Redevelopment Purpose Within the City of Olivia certain areas exist that require public involvement to promote the construction of adequate, safe, and sanitary dwelling accommodations and in certain other areas there exist substandard conditions, unsafe and unsanitary housing and- buildings and structures used or intended to be used for living, con~nercial, industrial or other purposes or any combination of such uses which, by reason of sociological and technological changes, dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, and faulty arrangement or design of building and improvements, lack of public facilities, ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, or deleterious land use, or obsolete layout, or any combination of these and other factors,'are injurious to the health, safety, morale' and welfare of the citizens of Olivia, Cause an increase and spread of crime, juvenile delinquency and disease, inflict blight upon the economic value of large areas, and, by impairing the value of private investments, threaten the source of. public revenues while decentralizing the city to areas improperly planned and not related to public facilities, and require many'persons of low income to occupy unsafe, unsanitary, and Overcrowded dwellings. Findiggs The City of Olivia has determinej in accordance 'with M.S. 462.415, Subd. 4,~ 5, and 462.421, Subd. 12 and 13, that (1) certain slumor deteriorated areas or portions thereof, require acquisition and clearance as provided in M.S. Sections 462.411 to 462.711, since the prevailing condition of decay may make impracticable reclaimation o? the area.by conservation or rehabilitation, but other areas or p~rtions thereof are, through means provided in sections 462.411 to 462.711 susceptible of conservation or rehabilitation in such a manner that the conditions and evils herein'before enumerated may be eliminated, remedied or prevented; (2} there is a shortage of decent,'safe and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate' income and'their families; (3} there exists vacant unoccupied, d(lapidated, blighted and/or economically unproductive 'real property which has resulted in a stagnant and unproductive condition of the land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to the public health, safety, and welfare and that private development of such real property is economically unfeasible. In recognition of these conditions in certain areas of the City of Olivia, the City Council of the City of Olivia designates the area described in Section. Cas a housing and redevelopment project and authorizes the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to proceed with the requisite steps toward the formal participation by the City of Olivia and the Olivia HRA in a scattered site redevelop- ment and tax increment financing program. Ce Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing and Redevelopment Project Area The map on the following page designates the corporate limits of the~ City of Olivia and the boundaries of the Olivia Housing and Redevelop- ment Authority housing and redevelopment project area. The boundaries of the empowering area defined as a redevelopment project in accordance with M.S. 462.415, Subdivisions 4 and 5 and M.S.'462.421, Subdivision 12 and 13 are described as follows: Commencing at a point formed by the intersection of the northerly right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 212 and the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence north from said point along said westerly line of said SW quarter section to its intersection with the center line of RenvilIe County Ditch No? 63; Thence west along said center line a d~stance of 208 feet to its intersection with the northerly extension of the easterly lot ljne of lot two block two, Rainbow Park Addition; ' Thence south along said northerly extension of said easterly lot line and continuing along the easterly lot line of lot two, block two, Rainbow Park Addition extended across U.S. Highway 212 to its southerly right-of-way line at a point 208.70 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence southerly from said.point to a point on the southerly boundary of the city limits of Olivia a distance of 208 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence east from said point208 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35 on the southerly municipal boundary to its intersection with the westerly right-of-way line of Minnesota Trunk Highway 71; Thence south along said westerly right-of-way line of Minnesota Trunk Highway 71 to its intersection with the southerly right-of-way line of Park Avenue extended; Thence east along said southerly right-of-way line of Park Avenue to its intersection with the easterly wight-of-way line of Sixth Street; Thence nOrth along said easterly right-of-way line to its intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of Elm Street; Thence west along said northerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the westerly right-of-way line of Twelfth Street; Thence south along said westerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the northerly right-of'way line of U.S. Highway 212; Thence west along said northerly right-of-way line to the point of beginning. ~ t '&S 14,L~ 'LS D. Redevelopment Plan Objectives The City of Olivia and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Olivia seek to achieve the following objectives through this Redevelopment Plan: 1. Remove structurally substandard buildings for which rehabilitation is not feasible. 2. Acquire and remove economically or functionally obsolete or under- utilized buildings. 5 Acquire property of irregular form and shape or inadequate size · which has prevented normal development. 4. Eliminate blighting influences which impede potential development.' 5. Encourage the retention and expansion oflexisting intensive businesses. 6. 'Preserve and encourage the rehabilitation and/or expansion of structures which will remain. 7. Provide land for expansion of existing businesses. 8. Provide redevelopment sites of such size and character to assure the redevelopment of the area. 9. Eliminate or correct physical deterrents to the development~of land. 10. Provide adequate streets, utilities, and other public improvements and facilities to enhance the area for both new and existi.ng development. 11.~Achieve a high level of design and landscaping quality to enhance :'the physical environment. ' 12. Create effective buffers, screens, and/or transitions between residential and non-residential uses to minimize the potential ~bl.ightin~ effects of divergent land uses. 13. Improve the financial base of the City. 14. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise. .15. Provide increased employment opportunities and as much as possible seek businesses which would employ the unemployed and under-employed. Redevelopment Activities The objectives of this Redevelopment Plan will be accomplished through the following actions: 1. Clearance and redevelopment. 2. Rehabilitation of buildings to remain. 3. Construction of buildings and other improvements. 4. Vacation of rights-of-ways. 5. Dedication of new rights-of-ways. 6. New installation and/or improvement of streets and alleys. 7. New installation or replacement of public and private utilities and facilities. 8. Preparation and grading of sites to correct soil and flood Plain deficiencies. 9. Other project improvements. Land Use :- All new development on land acquired by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will be subject to the following uses and requirements: 1. Permitted Use a. Industrial-Commercial - any use permitted in the commercial districts or industrial districts of the Olivia Zoning Ordinance will be permitted on land acquired by the Olivia HRA provided the use does not have an adverse effect on the surrounding uses in terms of noise, vibration, smoke, toxic, noxious, odorous, and particulate matter, fire and explosive hazard, glare, heat, traffic generation, congestions, and appearance. b. Residential - any use permitted in the single family and multiple family districts of the Olivia Zoning Ordiance. 2. 'AdditionalRegulations'and'Controls or Restrictions to be Imppsed on t'h'e Sale' ]of' ~qui'red "L~'h~ All new development on land acquired by the Housing and Redevelop- ment Authority shall conform to the applicable state and local codes and ordinances. The selection of a developer will be based on how well a proposal meets the Redevelopment Plan Objectives previously noted, the Design Standards which follow, and the minimum "intensity levels" of development in order to satisfy the financial requirements of' the project. The Design Standards to be met by new development on land acquired by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority are present in the next section. -5- G. Design Standards 1. Site Design a. Circulation The pedestrian and vehicular systems shall be well defined and separated as much as possible. ~ All parking areas shall be set back a minimum of five feet from the property line and/or any screening material. / Off-street loading facilities shall be easily~'accessible from public roadways. Interference with other vehicular and pedestrian traffic should be minimized. Truck traffic/should be routed around and not through automobile parking .~'reas. No loading or unloading facility shall be located on/any street frontage nor within the limits of areas establishe~d as setback or yard areas. All off-street loading facilities, including maneuvering space, must be located within' the parcel boundary. / ~Build.ing and Facilities Placement / ! Building setback minimums shall beAs follows: --. Commercial~ / C1 District - 15 feet front; ~ building height for rear and interior side yards,'~-20 feet side corner. '"' C2 District - 50 feet front, ~ building height for rear and interior side yards, 20 feet side yard. C3 -.Downtown District - no front setback, 20 foot rear, no requirement in the case of common or abutting walls, other- wise ~ buildi.ng he. ight. Industrial // "· ,'I - from rights~Yof-way of freeways or limited access · expressway's: 7~', from other perimeter public streets: 50 feet, from,/interior public streets: 25 feet, from residential areas: 100 feet. / -- Residential~ R1 - front and rear: 30 feet, interior side yard: 10 feet, side corner: 15 feet. ? R2 - front yard: 15 feet, see zoning ordinance for other setbacks. R3 - front yard: 15 feet, rear and interior side: ½ building height, side corner: 20 feet. PRD- front yard: 25 feet, -6- -- All setback requirements shall relate only to structures and improvements above the approximate level of adjacent public street or streets; buildings, out-buildings, underground parking, and other such structures and improvements may be constructed within the said respective setback areas provided they are constructed below the approximate level of the adjacent public street(s), are landscaped at grade level, and are not visible from without the building site on which said structures and improvements are located. ~A minimum of 10 percent of the lot area shall be landscaped (although a larger percentage is desireable, if possible) with the majority of the landscaping being visible from public rights-of-ways. Bulk..~nd Height - Commercial and Industrial Zoned Land The building should have a continuity,~f massing; that is, it should appear as a single entity and not a c~nglomeration of unrelated shapes, sizes, and colors. / The 'form of the buildi.ng Should be Compatible with adjacent buildings and the landscape. ./ / When the redevelopment includes the expansion of existing buildings, additions should be coordinated With the style, mass, scale, and color of the existi.ng primary building. Ancillary buildi.ngs should beC°ordinated with the primary bulk'ding and treated in a manner similar to-the exterior of the primary buildi.ng, particularly in terms of massi.ng and placement, as well as material, color, and texture. d."'Exterior'Materials /" Exterior walls harmoniously designed, used quality maintenance-free materials such as face brick, prefinished metal panels,, glass and/or curtain wall construction are preferred. Concrete blocks when surfaced with stucco,, granite and masonry paints are permissible and are preferred to those requiring excessive maintenance. All buildi.ng facades visible from any public roadway shall be treated equally and as an architectural surface which is to be compatible with adjacent buildings. All metal-clad or one-hundred percent painted concrete block buildings shall, have other compensatory features justifying their acceptabilityv~ Materials used for smaller elements such as light standards and landscaping screens shall be the same as, or compatible with, materials used in the building itself. Any covered parking, whether separate or part of the primary struc- ture, shall be visually integrated, in terms of location, materials, and design, with the primary structure. e. Open Storage and Screening No storage or salvage, used materials, waste paper, scrap paper, rags, scrap metal, used bottles, trash, or junk (including inoperable vehicles) shall be allowed on a building site outside of a building or structure unless said material covers less tham 400 square feet in land area, is screened completely from view, and is contained in a fireproof container suitable for the temporary storage thereof and designed for the permanent removal thereof. All building sites are to be used primarily for the construction of structures or buildings and their appurtenances; however, after a'building is constructed, the outside, storage of personal property other than discussed above shall be allowed.only when the following minimum requirements are-met: -- Such storage areas shall be provided ' th a firm, dust-free and week-free surface. / -- Such areas shall conform with the setback requirements for buildi.ngs or other structures as established. / -- Such storage areas shall be completely screened from view from any public street or other building site within the project. The screen may be provided by structure, architectural feature, ':,. wall, fence, landscape planting, landscaped earthern berm, or any combination thereof,__. -% Said screening shall be high:enough to preclude visual contact With the enClosed area from points beyond the screening, one- hundred percent opaque, and shall be treated as an architectural surface and be compatible with adjacent buildings or structures. \ -- All exterior equipment (including roof-top equipment shall be / masked from view with maintenance-free screeni.ng, of.' paKking Parki.ng spaces shall be a minimum of nine feet by 20 feet. Aisle and driveway dimehsions, shall allow for adequate circulation. All open-air parking ~hall include adequate space for snow storage. All open-air parking areas shall be landscaped and/or screened, preferably through the use of natural materials and/or earthern berms, Adequate spacing and wheel stops shall be provided where required to prevent damage to screening materials or landscaping. g. Landscaping Design The landscaping plan should include a variety of design elements including, but not limited to, the following: -- Trees {excluding elms) of a variety and height capable of providing shade, screening, and ornamentation; -- A variety oF shrubs and groundcovers capable of providing screening and ornamentation; -- The use of existing and additional grade changes for the purpose of site definition and screening; -- Although variation is important, the varieties of trees, shrubs, and otiler design elements should have similar characteristics to avoid confusion and"visual overload. All exposed ground areas surroundi~)g 'or v,/ithin a principal o) accessory use including street boulevard,~ which are Flot devoted to drives, sidewalks, patios, or other ~uch uses shall be land- scaped with' grass, shrubs, trees,, or other ornamental land-~cape mater.ialsJ All landscaped areas' shall/be kept neat, clean, and uncluttered. Ho landscaped area shal/1 be used for the parking of vehicles or the storage or displa~ of materials, supplies, or merchandise. ' / . Special attention should be giveny~o the screening of any unde- sireable eleme~qts from residential units which border the project. / Screening, through the use of grade changes, plantings, or well- designed fencing (inclusion' 0'f}natural materials with fencing is desi.reable) shall be provided ~around parking and loading areas and 61sewhere as deemed neces,~ary on those parcels located adjacent to or abutti.ng streets· with residences. Large open areas such as pa~kipg lots preferably should be broken up with earthen berms and~or landscaping. · / · "Landscaping materials that are easily maintained should be selected, ana the developer must )7~ve a workable program for landscape, main- ' tenance. This system should make optimum use of innovative land- scaping ;'techniques and/preferably shall include an underground ;, sprinkling system. ! / / _Lighti n9 'System P1 an/ / All lighti.ng (funci:ional, security, and ornamental) shall be coordinated and i?~Cegrated with the total development. Lighting fixture.~ should cor~form to the architectural design. The same quality standards for materials and finishes should apply. Downward directed lighting fixtures as opposed to non-directed fixtures shall be used when the site is adjacent to any residential property or across the street from residences. -9- i. ~ignage. Sys~em Plan General Sign Requirements All signs, including info~,ational, directional, and adver- tising shall be designed as part of an overall sign system which is to be architecturally c~npatible with the overall design and quality of the'proposed structure. Signs must be readable, consistent, and have a pleasing figure and ground relationship. Only those signs advertising or identifying the name and/or building, business, and/or products of businesses, corpora- tions, or other entities lawfully occupying the site shall be allowed.- Hight illumination 'of signs shall be permitted when the method used is direct and the overall visual effect is positive. ~eon and flashing signs shall not be allowed. One identification'sign shall be permitted for each place of business. '~ Each sign that is attached to a building'shall be mounted to and flush with the wall and shall not extend above the top of the wall. Each. sign shall not exceed 50 feet in area or-an area equa~ to two percent of the building wall surface area, whichever is smaller. An additional temporary sign may be erected, containing'no more than 32 square feet of advertising space, for the pur- pose of offering the building or a portion thereof for sale, lease, or sublease. ?arki.ng ~igqage .One Mgnper parking area shall be allowed for the purpose ': of de~ignati.ng allowed useage (e.g., guests, employees, con~nercial parki.ng, etc.). Each sign shall not exceed six square feet in area. Traffic Control signs shall be designed so as to be part of the overall s. ign system. 2. Required Documents Housing and Redevelopment Authority staff will review developers' proposals to determine conformance with these design standards. To facilitate this effort, the following documents shall be sub- mitted for approval: site plan; construction, mechanical, and -10- electrical syStem drawings; landscaping plan; grading and storm drainage plans; utility network and site connection plans; lighting system plan; signage system plan; and any other drawin§s or narrative deemed necessary by the developer and/or Authority staff to demonstrate the conformance of the development with the design standards. ~pplicabilit~ of Regulations and Controls The requirements and p~ovisions of sections G. 1 and G. 2 of this Redevelopment Plan shall apply to all acquired property except where strict compliance thereto would, in the judgment of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, either cause a hardship for an existing owner, or not be in the best interest of the project and the City, or would not contribute to the achievement of the objectives Of the Redevelopment Plan, and shall remain in effect for 20 years from the date of the con- veyance of the property title. These requirements and provisions shall also apply to property /not acquired when the owners acquire other'project land from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Redeveloper's Obl.ig~tion$ The general requirements to~ 'imposed upon the redeveloper.by the Contract for Sale are: !. .I. To redevelop the land purchased in accordance with this Redevelop- ment Plan. -. 2. To conmence and complet~ the building of improvements on the ~' land within a reasonable period of time as determined by the ., Housing and Redevelopment Authority. 3. Not to resell 'the land before improvements are made without the prior consent of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Not to discriminate on. the basis of race, color, sex, creed, or national origin on the sale, lease, transfer~ or occupancy of the land purchased from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. All public and private utility services such as water, sewer, gas, electric and telephone, serving parcels of land to be disposed of under this Redevelopment Plan shall be placed underground except where physical conditions such as relatively small parcels adjacent to existing uses not to be acquired and parcels sold to existing uses for expansion purposes would prohibit placement of utilities. I. Land Acquisition Properties identified for acquisition are included in the tax increment financing plan(s). The Housing and Redevelopment Authority will acquire property by direct purchase from willing sellers to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Such acquisition will only be under- taken when there exists sufficient funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. J. Rehabilitation Owners of properties which are not to be acquired will be encouraged to rehabilitate their properties to conform with the applicable state and local codes and ordinances. Owners of properties.not to be acquired who buy project land from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority may be required to rehabilitate their properties as a condition of the sale of land. The Housing and Rehabilitation Authority will attempt to provide such rehabilitation assistance . that may be available from federal, state, or local resources. Relocation of Displaced Persons and Businesses The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Olivia accepts as binding its obligations under local provisions of state law (Minnesota Statutes §117.50-56) for relocation and will administer payment of relocation benefits to families, individuals, and busi- nesses to be displaced by public action. L. Procedure for Change in Approved Redevelopment Plan This Redevelopment Plan may be modified provided the modification shall be adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Olivia and the Olivia City Council under provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act of the State of Minnesota, Section 462.525, Subdivision 6, as follows: "Subd. 6, Modification of Plan. A redevelopment plan may be modified at any time before or after the lease or sale of the project area or parts thereof, provided the modification shall be adopted by the Authority and the governing body of the political subdivision in which the project is located, upon such notice and after such public hearing as is required for the original adoption of the redevelop- ment plan...provided, however, that where the authority determines the necessity of changes in an approved redevelopment plan or approved modification thereof, which changes do not alter or affect the general land uses established in such plan, such changes shall not constitute a modification to the redevelopment plan nor require approval by the governing body of the political subdivision in which the project is located. ,/ooo -12- II. FINANCE PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINA;~CING DISTRICT Ao Statutory Authority The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority is authorized to establish a tax increment redevelopment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 273.71-78. Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority General Goal and Statement of Objectives The Board of Commissioners of the Olivia Housing and Redevelopmei~t Authority has adopted as a general policy o~' goal that all properties to be included in the non-contiguous downto~m com~.~rcial'tax incre- ment financing district are those properties o~viously in need of redevelopment-within the city and those, specific tracts of property on.which at least one individual has expressed an interest, in developing. With this general policyor goal in mind, the Olivia ~RAoffers the- following statement of objectives: 1. Remove structurally substandard buildings for which ~ehabi!itation 'is not feasible. 2. Acquire and r'emove economically or functionally obsolete or under- utilized structures. 3...~. Acquire land and/or building~which are vacant, unused, underused, or ih~ppropriately used; 4. Acquire property of irregular form and shape or inadequate size which has prevented normal'development. · ~, Acquire property having unique topographical, hydrological or ~ geological characteristics which have impeded or prevented normal development. 6. Eliminate blightedand deteriorated structures and eliminate ~ blighting influences which impede the potential devel°pment of , properties. 7. Eliminate incompatible uses or land use relationships. 8. Encourage the rehabilitation and/or expansion of remaining inten-. sire businesses. 9. Encourage the development of new businesses in or near the downtown central business district. 10. Achieve a high level of design and landscaping quality to enhance the physical environment. 11. Improve the financial base of the City. 12. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise. 13. Provide increased employment opportunities. Ce Development Program (M.S. §273.74, Subd. 1) and Description of Redevelopment Project Proposals i. Acquisition of four (4} properties in Nester's 2nd Addition, Block 28, demolition or removal of structures and relocation of residents in order to provide a site for the construction of a medical clinic and parking at the Sixth Street site. This project is part of Phase I of the redevelopment program.. 2. Acquisition of one (1) residential property in Original'Plat, Block 4, and demolition or removal of structure and relocation of resident in order to provide a site for the construction of a small commercial center and parking adjacent to an existing grocery store. This project is part of Phase II of the redevelopment program. 'k 3. Acquisition of property for site improvements in Original Plat, Block 10, and resale to developer for construction of a new grocery store and parking and rehabilitation of an existing building for commercial floor space. This project ,is also included in Phase II of the redevelopment program° 4. Acquisition of property in Windhorst's Subdivision of Block 1, lot C, to remove bl.ighted structure and hold land as site for future commercial development as part of Phase IV of the rede- vel opment program. 5. Potential acquisition of property in Original Plat, Block 15, to assist possible expansion of an existing business and remove blighted structures and other blighting influences as. a possible Phase IV of the redevelopment program. e Possible acquisition of lots 11 and 15, block 7, Original Plat to accommodate expansion of existing businesses or development of new businesses in the downtown area. This would also be an element of Phase III of the redevelopment program° Possible acquisition of part of lots J and K Morgan's Subdivi- sion of lots 2, 3, 6, 7, and 10, block 7, Village of Olivia for expansion of existi.ng businesses or development of new businesses in the downtown area. This would be another element of Phase III of the redevelopment program. Possible site preparation in the form of cutting and filling of city owned site to be purchased by the HRA and resale to American Legion and VFW for club banquet and meeting rooms at the east 208 feet of the southwest quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35, lying north of the right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 212 -14- and south of the center line of Renville County Ditch #63. This is also included in Phase I of the redevelopment prograln. ~ Possible acquisition of property in Block 15 Hein's Park ~r Additions lots 1, 4~ 5~ 8~ 9~ 12, and lots 13~ 16m and 17 to remove blighted structures and blighted storage areas for "~" possible expansion for an existing business. This would be an element of Phase IV of the redevelopment program. Description of Property in Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Redevelopment District Plat and Parcel Number · Legal Description_ 075-0~40 080-0545 080-0550 080-0540 080-0905. 080-0910 080-0915 080-0920 080-0895 230-2515 230-2525 230-2533 230-2537 165-1430 165-1435 165-1440 i65-1445 .110-735 080-740 f~o: Availab]e 080-755 Not Available Original Plat, Windhorst's Subd. of Block 1, lot C Original Plat,.Block 4, lots Original Plat, Boock 4, lots 6, 7, 10, 11 Original Plat, Block 4, lots 1, 4, 5, 8, .9, 12 .Original Plat, Blo6k 10, lots 5, 8, W. 100' of vacant alley and W.-lOO'Of N 416' of lot 6 and lots A through D Hein's Subd. of lots 2, 3, Block 10 Original Plat, Block 10, lots 9, 12 Ori§inal Plat, Block 10, E 75' lot 11 Original Plat, Block 10, 54' of lot 6 and all of lots 7, 10 and W 75'~.of lot 11 E 50' of N 46' of Lot 6, lots E,.F'Hein's Subd. of lots 2, 3, Block 10 Hein's Park Add'n, Block 15, lots 1~ 4, 5, 8 Hein's Park Add'n, Block 15, lots 9, 12 Hein's Park Add'n, Block 15, lot 13 Hein's Park Add'n, Block 17, lots 1'6, 17 Nester's 2nd Add'n E 89' of S 110' of Block 28 Nester's 2nd Add'n E 89' of N 100' and S 50' of N 150' of E 89' of Block 28 Nester's 2nd Add'n S 100' of W 80' of Block 28 Nester's 2nd Add'n N 150, of W 80' of Block 28 South 20 feet of lots J, K Morgan's Subd. of lots 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, Block 7,'~rigina) Plat ~.. 37' of lot i!, Block 7, Original PI.,t E. 113' of lot 11, Block 7, Original Pla~ Lot 15, Block 7, Original Plat E. 208' of the SW~ of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35, lying North of the right-of-way line of U.S. 212 and South of the center line of Renville County Ditch No. 63 Refer to Map 1, page 3 for location of properties and parcels. Classification of Tax Increment District The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S~ 273.71-78 inclusive, finds that the district to be established is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S. §273.73, Subd. 10. The land in the redevelopment district is predominantly occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and an additional 30 percent of the buildings are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as inadequate street layout, incompatible .uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land,- excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to health, safety and general well-being of the comnunit~y. There are presently 22 parcels of land in the 9.78 acre (423,~78'square feet) scattered site redevelopment district. Fourteen properties or 63.6 percent of the redevelopment parcel acreage is occupiedby struc-' tures and 100.0 percent of the redevelopment parcel acreage is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities and other improvements. This satisfies the requi'rement that at. least fifty percent of the acreage contains buildings., streets, utilities, and other improvements. It has been determined' in the redevelopment district that more than 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and an additional 30 percent of the buildings are found to require substantial renovation ~r clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as inadequate street layout, incompatible land uses or land use relationships~j.over- crowdigg of buildiggs on the land, excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to health, safety and general well-being of the co~nunity. The 14 structures on the 22 parcels of land encompassing .the redevelopment district have been investigated by the Executive. Director of the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority and surveyed bY a representative of the Technical Assistance and Research Service of.the League of Minnesota Cities. Eight of the fourteen buildings are deberiorated and structurally substandard to a degree requiring clearance and four structures are found to require substantial renovation, removal or demolition in order to remove existing conditions including incom- patible land use or land use relationships, inadequate alley and other public Fight-of-way layout and obsolesence of buildi.ngs in need of improvement or conversion. The investigation and survey revealed that 57.1 percent of the structures are structurally substandard and anotheK 28.6 percent of the structures require removal, clearance or substantial renovation in order to remove incompatible land uses or land use rela, tionships, inadequate alley and otherpublic right-of-way layout and obsolesence of buildings in need of improvement or conversion. The buildi.ngs in the areas identified (refer to Map 1) appear to satisfy the requirement that at least 50 percent of the buildings be blighted or demonstrate blighting influences. Thus, the tax increment district appears to meet the statutory requirements of a redevelopment district and will henceforth be referred to as a tax increment redevelopment district. F. Property.in Acquisition Property identified for acquisition will be acquired by the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority in order to accomplish one of the following: (a) remove, prevent or reduce blight, blighting factors, causes of blight or the spread of blight and deterioration;. {b) eliminate unhealthful, unsafe and unsanitary structures and conditions; {c} remove incompatible land uses or land use relation- ships; {d} provide the impetus for rehabilitation, renovation, conversion and other improvement of property; and {e) provide the impetus for new construction and con~nercial development. Properties so identified include the properties described as follows: SUbdivision · Block Lot_~ 'Nester's 2nd Addition Nester's 2nd Addition 28 28 Ne~ter' s 2nd Addition' 28 .ilester's 2nd Addition 28 Hein's Park Addition 15 Original Plat: Windhorst's Subd. of Block 1. 1 Original Plat 4 Original Plat 10 Original Plat 7 Original Plat 7 Original Plat "~' 7 Morjgan's Subd. of Lots 2, 3, · 6,~7, 1D Or. iginal Plat. E 89' of S 100" E 89' of N 100' and S 50' of N 150' of E 89' S 100' of W 80' N 150' of W 80' 9, 12 C 5, 8, 9, 12 15 £,113' lot 11 W 37' lot 11 '~ S 20' of lots J, K Estimate of Costs A p~eliminary budget for the tax incrementredevelopment district 'is listed below. This budget outlines the cost of the first two phases of the four phase redevelopment program for the tax increment redevelop- ment district. BUDGET: Phases ! and II Tax Increment Redevelopment District 1. Acquisition $123,000 2. Relocation 17,000 3. Demolition 4,500 4. Site Preparation 2,000 5. Legal 9,250 6. Administration 5% 13,500 7. Planning 10,000 B. Capitalized Interest 96,750 9. Bonding Costs 9,000 $285,000 -17- The development program costs to be financed through this budget include$ {1) the acquisition, write-down and resale of property in Block 10, Original Plat to Richard Schmitz to facilitate the construction of a new grocery store and rehabilitation of an existing building in the block; (2} the acquisition of a single family house in Block 4, Original Plat, relocation of residents, clearance of the site and resale to James Tersteeg to facilitate the construction of a linear shopping center adjacent to an existing grocery store; {3) acquisition of property in Block 28 Nester's Addition, relocation of residents, removal of structures and resale of land to developers of a medical clinic across the street from the hospital. Two residences will be purchased by the Olivia HRA and the cleared property will be resold to the proponents at a "written down" cost to be negotiated bythe proponents and the HRA. The current bonding capacity for the initial two phases utilizing tax increments from the American Legion VFW proposal, Tersteeg proposal, Schmitz proposal and the medical clinic proposal is $285,000 over 19 ~ears (16 years of amortization and 3 years of capitalized interest). See.Cash Flow Analysis in Section Y for more details on tax increment assumptions, as well as Section J, Sources of Revenue and Section L, Estimated Captured Assessed Valuation for additional information. Identification of the Use of Tax Increments Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.75, Subdivision 4, all tax revenues derived from tax increments shall-.be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan. The Olivia HRA shall use such revenues to finance or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs pursuant"to Minn. Stat. §462.5B5, Subd. 3 and defined in Minn. Stat. §462.545, Subd; 1 as the cost of a project and debt charges. Project costs may encompass HRA activities including the acquisition of various types of bl3ghted or vacant land, the clearing of any such areas, the preparation of~!mites including construction of streets, utilities, and site improve- ment, the sale or lease of land acquired by an authority, the accomplish- ment of a combination of the foregoing to carry out a redevelopment plan, preparation of said plan and a finance plan, the preparation of technical and financial plans and arrangements for buildings, structures and improve6ents, as well as other initiation, planning, surveying and additional administrative costs or relocation expenses and may also include rehabilitation or conservation work on property owned by a housing authority. I. Limitation on Administrative Expenses Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.75, Subdivision 3, adminis-. trative expenses (generally defined as "inhouse"costs of planning, implementing and managing a tax increment financing district) are limited t6 five (5%) percent of the total tax increment expenditures. Each time the Olivia HRA increases the budget of the tax increment financing district, the amount of tax increment money allocated to administrative costs may be increased as long as the total administra- tive expenditures do not exceed 5% of the total budget for tax increment expenditures. J. Sources of Revenue Property acquisition, relocation, demolition or site clearance, site preparation and other costs outlined in the budget for phases one and two {see Section G. Estimate of Costs) may be financed through the collection of annual tax increments. Annual tax increments derived' from redevelopment phases one and two are estimated to be $33,244. Of this total, $3,905 in tax increments would be derived from the new American Legion/VFW Club proposal, $19,528 would originate from the Tersteeg commercial facility proposal, $6,904 would come from the Schmitz grocery store proposal, and $2,907 may be derived from the medical clinic proposal. Land sale proceeds of $10,000 from the Schmitz and Tersteeg proposals are expected, but no other revenue sources have been identified. K. Original Assessed Valuation Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §273.74, Sudvision I and §273.76, Subdivision 1, the OKiginal Assessed Valuation (OAV) of the tax increment financing district is estimated to be $188,46~. This estimate inaludes 6stimates of'assessed valuation for parcels not havingplat and p6~cel number.. These two parcels are publicly owned and therefore tax exempt for real estate taxation purposes. However in accordance 'with M.S. §273.76, Subdivision 1, "the amount to.be added to the oKiginal assessed valueof the district as a result ofpreviously tax exempt real property within the district becoming taxable shall be equal to the assessed value of. the real property as most recently assessed pursuant-to section 273.18 or, if that assessment was made more than one year prior to the date of the title transfer, rendering the property taxable, the value shall be assessed by the County Auditor and assessor: This figure-is based upon the last equalized values {January 2, 1980} for the property in the proposed tax incre- ment redevelopment district. EaCh year the Office of the Renville County Auditor will measure the amount'-of increase or decrease in the total assessed valuation of the tax increment redevelopment district to calculate the tax increment payable ~o ,the tax increment financing district redevelopment fund. In'any year'in which there is an increase in total assessed valuation in'the tax increment redevelopment district, a tax increment will be payable. In any year in which the total assessed valuation in the tax increment district declines below $182,227, no assessed value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable. The County Auditor shall certify in each year after the date the Original Assessed Value was certified, the amount'by which the OAV has increased or decreased as a result of: (a) cha.nge in tax exempt status of property; (b) reduction or enlargement of the. geographic boundaries of the district; change due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements. L. Estimated Captured Assessed Value The Estimated Captured Assessed Valuation {CAV} of the tax increment redevelopment district for Phases I and II will annually approximate $442,348 from 1983 through 1999 and the CAV in 1983 will approximate $51,600. Over the 20-yearldUration of the district and 17-year tax increment collection period, the total captured assessed value of the district is estimated to be $7,129,168. If the district was to exist for the legal limit of 25 years, the total captured assessed value. resulting from Phases I and II would approximate $10,667,952. Duration of the District The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority expects to terminate the tax increment redevelopment district on December 31, 1999. The 20-year duration of the district is based upon the availability of .tax increments over a 17-year period. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §273.73, Subdivision 1, the maximum duration of a tax increment re- development district is 25 years commencing with the date of receipt of the first increment.by theauthority. Legally, the Olivia HRA could collect tax increments through the year 20D8. However, the anticipated duration of the tax increment redevelopment district is 20 years and if the Olivia HRA intends to amend the finance plan and said amendment results in an increase in the duration of the tax lincrement redevelopment district beyond December 31, 1999, the Office of the County Auditorwill receive notice of said amendment approved by t. he City Council of the City of Olivia and certified by the city clerk. -'~-.- Impact on Other Taxi.rig Jurisdictions Itxis anticipated that $33,244 will be captured annually over a 17~Year period. This tax increment is based on the completion of a 6,000 square foot medical clinic, a 125,000 square foot commercial facility adjacent to Tersteeg's Super Valu, a 12,900 square foot Red Owl. grocery store, and an American Legion/VFW club facility. 'The medical clinic is estimated to generate $2,907 in tax increments, and~the commercial facility will generate approximately $19,528. The new grocery store is expected to generate $6,904 in tax increments and the American Legion/VFW Club and meeting room will provide at least $3,905 in tax increments. The actual taxes generated by each of these facilities will be slightly higher, but the original assessed valuation and taxes for each site'have been deducted to determine the estimated tax increment. The City of Olivia comprised 34.2% of the 1981 mill levy while School District #653 comprised 47.2% of the 1981 mill levy and Renville County comprised 18.5%. Region 6E comprised an additional .02% of the total mill levy. -20~ A mill rate of 75.66 mills has been utilized throughout the cash flow analysis employed in this tax increment financing plan. Applying the percentage of the total mill rate in 1981 levied by each taxing jurisS diction to the projected annual mill rate and the estimated tax incre- ment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction. This amount of tax dollars foregone by each taxing jurisdiction is listed in table one. Table I: Percent of Tax Increment Attributable to Taxin9 Jurisdictions T__axing Jurisdiction 1981-1999 Mills Percent Annual Tax Increment City of Olivia SchOol District ~653 Renville County Region 6E 25.82 34.2% $11,369.45 35,69 47.2 15,691.17 14.0 18.5 6,150.14 · 15 ..02. 33.24 75.66 99.92% $33,244.00 The following table represents the additional mills thatwould have to be levied to compensate.for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the projects alluded to in the tax increment redevelopment district l would not be available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for the public intervention by the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Although the increases in assessed value due to redevelop- ment will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value will eventually permit a decrease in the mill levy. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxigg jurisdiction, the non-receipt of tax dollars represented as tax dollars may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimated how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax incre- men~ financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the Olivia HRS. t Table 2: '.Impagto~ Talin9 Jurisdictions if Development Occurred Without "Public'Assistance 'Taxi6g 1980 Jurisdiction Assessed Value R__equi red Mills Annual Tax Increment City of Olivia School District #653' Renville County Region 6E $ 9,234,104 .00123 $11,369.34 26,110,240 .00060 15,691.14 181,460,166 .00034 6,150.14 9,234,104 --- 33.24 -21- O. Geographic Modifications In accordance with Minnesota Statutes §273.74, Subdivision 4, the geographic area of a tax increment financing district "may be re- duced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original assessed value by the county auditor or five years from the effective date of the act (August 1, 1979) for tax increment financing districts authorized prior to the effective date of the act..." The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority may not legally modify the boundaries of the scattered site tax increment redevelopment district after June 1, 1985. P. Limitation on Duration of Tax Increment Financing Districts Pursuant to M.S..§273.75, Subd. 1, "no tax increment shall be paid to an authority three years from the date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the three-year period {a) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 7 or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 474, prior to the effective date of the Act; or (b) the authority has acquired property within the district; or (c) the authority has con- structed or caused to be constructed public improvements within the district..." The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority must therefore issue bonds, or acquire property, or construct or cause public improvements to be constructed by 1984 or the Office of the. County Auditor may dissolve the tax increment redevelopment district. Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax Increment District Not Subject to Improvement 'Pursuant to M.S. §273.75, Subdivision 6, "if, after five years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the modification o{%the tax increment financing district ..., no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation including improvement of a street adjacent to a property but not installation of utility service, has been con~nenced on a property located within a tax increment financing district'byothe authority or by the owner of the property in accordance wi~h the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that property and the original assessed value of that property shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the~tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the property subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that property including improvement of a street adjacent to that property, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor.{in the annual disclosure report, see Section O) that the activity has commenced and the property may be added into the tax increment financing district. The county auditor shall certify the most recently assessed value of that property and add it to the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district." The Olivia HRA should thus take an inventory of the parcels included, in the modification of the existing tax increment financing district in order to determine which parcels may still be qualified after five years and which parcels are to be disqualified due to non-activity. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S. 273.74, Subd. 5, an authority must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with the school board, county board and the Minnesota State Planning Agency. The report to be filed by the Olivia HRA as district administrator shall include the following information: The amount and source of revenue in the account; The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; 3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness; 4. The original assessed value of the district; 5. The Captured assessed value retained by the authority; 6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts; 7. The tax increment received. The annual disclosure report is designed to be a two-way medium of infora~tion dissemination for both the Office of the County Auditor and the Authority. Should the auditor want additional information from the authority regarding its tax increment financing activities, such information should be requested prior to submission of the annual di.~closure report by the authority. Similarly, the authority may ut~qize the annual disclosure report as a means for requesting infor- mationl.from the Office of the County Auditor. AdditionallY, the authority must annually publish a statement in a newspape6 o~:general circulation in the municipality showing the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original assessed value, the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness and any additional information the authority deems necessary. S. Requirement for Agreements with the Developer Pursuant to M.S. §273.75, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent by acreage of the property to be acquired by the Olivia HRA in the redevelopment district modification shall be owned by the authority as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77. without the authority having prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the authority should the develop- ment not be completed. T. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S. §273.76, Subd. 8, the Olivia HRA may, upon entering into a development agreement pursuant to M.S. §273.75, Subd. 5, enter into an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the tax increment financing district which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the tax increment redevelopment district modification. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the county assessor of Renville County who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agre~nent appears in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. U. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S. §273.76, Subd. 4, the Olivia HRA has 'reviewed and searched the properties to be included in the tax increment redevelop- ment district modification and found no properties fort which building permits have been issued during the 18 months in~nediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the county, If a building permithad been issued within th~ 18 month period preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the city, the county auditor is authorized, but not required, for twelve months after completion of the improvements for~.which the building permit was issued, to increase the original assessed value of the district'by the assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was issued, as certified by the assessor. Administration of the Tax Increment RedeveloPment District Administration of the tax increment redevelopment district will be handled.by the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority through the Conmunity Development Director in and for the City of Olivia. .y Tax',Increment Financing Account for the Redevelopment District godification The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment redevelopment district parcels' Will be maintained in the existing tax increment account by the Olivia HRA as the designated administrator and manager of the tax increment district. The tax increment account will be separate from all other housing and redevelopment authority accounts and grant accounts and expended only upon sanctioned redevelopment activities identified in the finance plan as amended. -24- X. Excess Tax Increments Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §273.75, Subd. 2, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in M.S. §475.61, Subdivision 3, the authority shall use the excess amount to: {a} prepay any outstanding bonds; {b} discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore; (c) pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bond; (d) repay any loans including interest on these loans; or (e) maintain the amount in the special redevelopment account described in Section W for current and future expenditures as a result of amendments to the finance plan. Y. Cash Flow Analysis and Assumptions A general obligation bond of $270,000 issued over a term of 19 years (16 years of principal amortization and three years of capitalized interest) will finance the public costs associated with the American Legion/VFW club proposal, the acquisition of one property and land "write down" associated with the Tersteeg commercial facility proposal, a land ':write down" associated with the Schmitz grocery store proposal, and the acquisition of two of four residential properties for resale to an ownership entity for the development of a medical clinic and office. The revenues derived from these four proposals are expected to approach '$33,244 annually (see Chart I - Revenue~Schedule on following page). Thi's amount of revenue will finance the $189,000 in capital costs in 198~, 1982 and 1983 (see Chart II - Expenditure Schedule on page 27). The annual principal and interest payment amount to $34,510 {see column five, "P & I" of Chart III on page 27} after the initial three year capitalized interest period. The land sale ~roceeds and investment income enabl'~ the expenditures to exceed the tax Increment revenues. However, should the Olivia HRA and the financial advisor for the City of Olivia desire to restructure the bond issue so annual debt service does not exceed the projected annual tax increments of $33,244, this change could be accommodated. The financial advisor for the City of Olivia should be contacted regarding any general obligation sales to insure accuracy in determining interest rates, bond issue terms and the structuring of bond issues. L't I.% ~'.t Ct I.% .'-J]BB.]O.Wd i.% i.',. (t ~HIO B' ~'.t .{: Cu~u.'t :g :,S,'3-1~:~ HD:LSLndW03 ;~WBX ~F.J :HHBgd 3:3 L,'~,;~3':~ ~3S £~3E ~0 33N~qB~ S£S03 ~3HIO 3HOOH ]~ 9~101 3NO:3N 1~ .LH3NB;'~3HL 3HO:3H L ~3HLO 3WO:3U T- 39WS HI'riO LHI,'iOl~ 3l A~14NNS MOqJ HSV3 Z~ T, ~] T. 6 g61:. · 966 ;.% ;::,.~ 0 S~l:: 66f. 3]NO3H3S. IN3~3~1113~! :III .121VH3 ~ l,~ ~. l,~ 8'4 I; ~.:3 ~.~.'3 '%]:-] Ct t:..:.],.~ 66:-3 O6a ?.--: ~t:.a ,as 6g,& ;Sa 66?] ;9 6 T,:S :a:-= O :-]lZS &~= Z. 6'=] ~.:3 (,.l'IP, %3 T.--: 660 .L33AH To :'-2 L,~ i% l.'t i_% O. N (t -i~ LI9 L bBHLO 5111. =========:"]B::H] L L'.St-IBdX'4.', ......... 666 ~ 866 T. Z66~ .'-']66 f. .b,66'r. ~":-66 f. 866 f. T. 66 f. (~66 f. 6,'-]6 T. 886~ Z:36 I. ~86 ~ S86 ~ ~86 ~ 3]flO3H3S.3BNIION3dX3. :II I~NH3 ASSUMPTIONS Acquisition budget of $123,000 enabling the Olivia HRA to purchase four properties with properties based at 1.5 times the estimated market value of the properties with acquisition costs delineated as follows: Acquisition of property required for Tersteeg proposal for a price not in excess of $40,000 with sale of property by HRA to Tersteeg for $5,000. b. Acquisition of Schmitz proPerty for $15,000 and resale to Schmitz for $5,000.. Acquisition of two of four properties in Block 28, Nester's Addition and sale to ownership entity of proposed medical clinic for one dollar, Ownership entity will be responsible for acquiring other two properties with their own funds. General obligation bond sale of .$270,000 over a term of 19 years with 16 years of amortization and three years of capitalized interest with bonds issued in ~une 1981. Interest rate of 10.0 percent or less. Investment income derived from bond proCeeds and other revenue of 10.26 percent. 5. Income in the form of tax incremen~ from the assessment of: (1) the American £egion/VFW proposal (taxes of .58 per square foot);{2) the medical clinic proposal (taxes of .67 per square foot); {3) construction of a new grocery store by R. Schmitz (taxes of .58 per square foot); (4) cons'truction of 30,000 square feet of commercial space by J. Tersteeg (tax~s of .81 per square foot). .! 6. Construction of the American [egion/VFW club - meeting rooms in July 1981, completed and fully assessed on January 2, 1982 with taxes payable in 1983. 10. 11. Construction of medical clinic, grocery store and 30,000 square foot {25,~00 squat6 foot net leaseable} commercial facility in 1981 and 1982, completed and fully assessed on January 2, 1983 with taxes payable in 1984. An average mill rate of 75.666 over the duration of the tax increment district {through 1999). No inflation of assessed value has been included in the analysis as inflation is an unstable variable and has not been used as a basis for determining feasibility. Acquisition and clearance of the Tersteeg site (lots 2 and 3, Block 4, Original Plat) by the Olivia HRA before January 1982. Acquisition and clearance of the four residences in Block 28, Nester's Addi- tion by the Olivia HRA and the proponents of the medical clinic before January 1982. -28- OTHER ASSUMPTIONS AND CAVEATS No charges in the Minnesota Real Estate Tax Classification system that would result in reductions in assessment ratios for commercial (class 4 property). SUMI.~RY The Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority may safely embark upon Phases I and II of the proposed tax increment financing redevelopment program pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462.411 et. se.q..and Minnesota Statutes §273.71-78 inclusive. Phase I redevelopment proposals include site preparation in order to facilitate the construction of an American Legion/VFW meeting - club room and the acquisition and clearance of four residences to accommodate the construction of a medical clinic and parking..Phase II redevelopment proposals include the construction of a 12,900 square foot grocery store.and a 30,000 square foot (25,000 square foot not leaseable) linear commercial facility to include six stores adjacent to an existing grocery store. Tax increments derived from the four projects will leverage a sale of $270,000 in general obligation bonds in order to finance some of the public costs associated with Phases I and II. Phases III and IV will be financed as new redevelopment proposals are received or as surplus revenues are available from the current redevelopment proposals in Phases I and II. proposed tax increment financing district has been classified as a non- contiguous redevelopment district 'pursuantto Minnesota Statutes §273.73, Subdivision 10, The tax increment district will consist of 22 scattered sites in the contiguous'empowering area established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462.421, Subdivision !4.. -29- APPENDIX I: RESOLUTIONS 1. Housing and Redevelopment Authority Resolution Adopting Redevelopment Plan Modification 2. City Council Resolution Adopting Redevelopment Plan Modification. 3. City Council Resolution Adopting A Tax Increment District. 4.. City Council Resolution Requesting Certification of Original Assessed Value. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AND DESIGNATING THE OLIVIA HOUSING AND REDEYEEOPMENT PROJECT AND INCLUDED PROJECT AREAS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.411 et. seq. · WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.521, the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority has applied to the Common Council in and forthe City of Olivia, Minnesota, for approval of a redevelop- ment plan and certain housing and redevelopment project~ within the housing and redevelopment authority project area; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Olivia establishes a housing and redevelopment project area pursuant to M.S. 462.411 having boundaries described as follows: Commencing at a point formed by the intersection of the northerly right-Of-way line of U.S. Highway 212 and the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence north from said point along said westerly line of said SW quarter section to its intersection with the center line of Renville County Ditch No. q3; Thence west along said center line a distance of 208 feet to its intersection with the northerly extension of the easterly lot line of lot two, block two, Rainbow Park Addition; Thence south along said northerly extension of said easterly lot li~e and continui.ng along the easterly lot line of lot two, block two, Rainbow Park Addition extended across U.S. Highway 212-~to its southerly right-of-way line at a point 208.70 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence southerly from said point to a point on the southerly boundary of the city limits of Olivia a distance of'208 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35; Thence east from said point 208 feet west of the westerly line of the SW quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 35 on the southerly municipal boundary to its. intersection with the westerly might-of-way line of Minnesota Trunk Highway 71; Thence south along said westerly might-of-way line of Minnesota Trunk Highway 71 to its intersection with the southerly right-of-way line of Park Avenue extended; Thence east along said southerly right-of-way line of Park Avenue to its intersection with the easterly right-of-way line of Sixth Street; Thence north along said easterly right-of-way line to its intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of Elm Street; Thence west along said northerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the westerly right-of-way line of Twelfth Street; Thence south along said westerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 212; Thence ~est along said northerly right-of-way line to the point of beginning. Re~Oiutlon - con~lnueu Page two WHEREAS, the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority has designated certain projects to be redeveloped within the housing and redevelopment project area; and WHEREAS, in connection with the undertaking of certain projects by the Authority pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes 462.411, et. s_~_~. (Laws of Minnesota, 1947, Chapter 487, as amended), the approval by the"~oard of Commissioners of the Authority of the Redevelopment Plan for the project area involved in such undertaking is required by the City Council before it will consider for approval said Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing body of the Authority for its consideration and approval, a copy of a redevelopment plan for said project area dated which plan is entitled Olivia Redevelopment Pla~; and WHEREAS, the said Olivia Redevelopment Plan dated -has been duly transmitted by this Authority to the planning agency of the municipality in which the areas to be redeveloped are situated, namely, the City Planning Con~nission of the City of Olivia for its study, and request was made by said Authority to said Planni.ng Commission for its written opinion of the said Plan, and said Planning Commission at a regular meeting prior to the public hearing has given the Authority its written opinion of said Plan and its findings as to compliance with the General Plan of the City of-Olivia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the Housing and Redevelop- ment Authority in and for the City of Olivia: ). That the housing and redevelopment project area described in said Olivia Redevelopment plan dated contains bl.ighted areas as defined in th~ Minnesota Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes 462.411 et. ~. (Laws of Minnesota, 1947, Chapter 487, as amended). M.S,A. Section 46~421, and constitutes blighted, deteriorating and deteriorated areas in the locality involved, and a housing and redevelopment area within the meaning of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended: '\ 2. The said Plan and Project will carry out the purpose and policy of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act of the State of Minnesota M.S.A. Sec..462.415 to 462.711 {Laws 1947, Chapter 487, as amended} as set forth in Section i thereof (M.S.A. Sec. 462.415) and in the Congressional Declaration of ~ational Housi.ng Policy contained in the Act of 1949 as amended. ' The said Redevelopment Plan hereby in all respects approved and the Secretary is hereby directed to file said Redevelopment Plan with the Minutes of this meeting. Application is hereby made to the City Council of the City of Olivia, the governing body of the municipality in which said project is located, for the approval of said Plan and Project area, and the staff of this Authority to transmit said Plan to said City Council, together with a copy of this Resolution, a statement of the Method for Financing the projects and to take such other action as he, the said staff may deem necessary and advisable in order to secure from said City Council its approval of said Plan and Projects. Said City Council is hereby requested to hold a public hearing on said Olivia Redevelopment Plan after giving published notice of the date, time, place and purpose of such hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Olivia, .such notice to be published at least ten days and no more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. Said City Council is hereby requested to approve said Plan and Projects and to find by Resolution that: (1) the land in the project area would not be made available for redevelopment'without the financial aid to be sought; (2) the redevelopment plan for the redevelopment areas in the locality will afford' maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the locality as a whole, for the redevelopment of such areas by private enterprise; and (3) the redevelopment plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the locality as a whole, and further to find by resolution that (i) the said Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with sound needs of the locality as a whole, for redevelopment by private enterprise; (ii) the Redevelopment Plan conforms to a general Plan for the locality as a whole; and (iii) that the plan for relocation of the individuals and families displaced in carrying out the Project in decent, safe and sanitary dwellings in conformity with acceptable standards is feasible ~nd can be reasonably and timely effected to permit the proper execution and completion of the project. Said staff is hereby authorized and directed to transmit to the State Planning Office of the State of Minnesota certified'copies of this Resolution, of said Plan, and other papers and documents described or referred to in Section 8 of said Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act {M.S.A. Sec. 462.445, Subd. 8). )ted this day of , 1981. ATTEST: ~hJ'irman A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OLIVA'HOUSING'AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.411 et. seq. AND APPROVAL OF THE OLIVIA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia has held a public hearing to receive input regarding the Olivia Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Olivia by Resolution has requested approval of the Olivia Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received recommendation from the City of Olivia Planning Con~nission recommending approval of the Olivia Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia finds that the housing and redevelopment project described in said Olivia Redevelopment Plan dated contains blighted areas as defined in the Minnesota Municipal Housing and Re- developmen~ Act, M.S.Ao 462.411 et..se~q..(Laws of Minnesota, 1947, Chapter 487, as amended}, and constitutes bli~-~ted, deteriorating, deteriorated areas in the locality involved; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia finds said plan and project will carry out the purpose and policy of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act of the State of Minnesota M.S.A. Sec. 462.415 to 462.711 {Laws of Minnesota, 1947, Chapter 487, as amended) as set'forth in Section 1 thereof {M.S.A. §462.415} and in the Congressional Declaration of National Housing Policy contained in the Housing Act of 1949 as amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Oliiia finds thai the land in the project areas would not be made available for redevelopment without the financial aid sought; and ~ WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia finds that the designated redevelopment project areas in the locality will afford maximum opportunitY, consistent with the sound needs.of the locality as a whole, for the redevelopment of such areas'by private enterprise; and WHEREAS, the CityCouncil of the City°f Olivia finds that the redevelopment plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the locality as a whole, and said plan: {i).wil) afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the locality az a whole, for ~edevelopment by private enterprise; (ii) conforms to a general plan for the locality as a whole; and (iii) that the plan for relocation of individuals and families displaced in carrying out the Project in decent, safe and sanitary dwellings in conformity and acceptable standards is feasible and can be reasonably and timely effected to permit the property execution and completion of the projects intended for the project areas, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Olivia does hereby approve, the Olivia Redevelopment Plan, dated R~$ol ution - continued Page two. dopted this day of , 1981, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SCATTERED SITE TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 273.71 TO 273.78 INCLUSIVE OF THE MINNESOTA STATUTES (CHAPTER 322, LAWS OF MINNESOTA 1979) AND ADOPTING A FINANCE PLAN FOR SAID TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia, Minnesota, has determined the. need to create a scattered site tax increment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.71 to 273.78 inclusive, within the housing and redevelopment project area created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462.411 et. seq.; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia, Minnesota, finds that the tax increment district to be established is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S. §273.73, Subd. 10 and that a~ inspection of the 22 parcels identified in the finance plan reveals that 100 percent of the acreage of the parcels contain buildings and improvements and that of the 14 buildings located on the 22 parcels, 5/.1 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and another 28.6 percent are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existi.ng conditions as inadequate street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land, excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to the health, safety and general well-being of the community; and WHEREAS, the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority has fully informed 'the members of the School Board of.Independent School District #653 andthe Board of Commissioners of the county of Renville of the fiscal and economic implications of Phases I and II of the proposed tax increment redevelopment district; ~OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OLIVIA, does hereby designate and establish a tax increment redevelopment district, adopts a finance plan for said tax increment redevelopment district and finds: .{1) that the ~ax increment district to be established is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.SJ §273.73, Subd. 10 and that an inspection of the 22 parcel~ identified in the finance plan reveals that 63.6 percent of the acreage contains buildings and structures and 100 percent of the acreage contains buildings and improvements and that of the 14 buildings located oQ the 22 parcels. 57.1 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and another 28.6 percent are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as adequate street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land, excessive dwelli.ng unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to the health, safety and general well-being of the come,unity; and (2) that the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonable foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary; and (3) that the tax increment financing plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the develop- ment of the tax increment redevelopment district by private enterprise; and Page two (4) that the tax increment financing plan conforms to the general plan for the development of the city as a whole. Adopted by the City Council this day of , 1981. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO CERTIFY THE ORIGINAL ASSESSED · VALUE OF THE REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE OLIVIA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Olivia has determined that is is necessary and desirable and in the public interest to establish, designate, develop, and administer a tax increment financing redevelopment district pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 273.71 to 273.78 inclusive; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITYCOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OLIVIA, MINNESOTA, THAT the Renville County Auditor is hereby requested to certify the assessed value of all real property within the boundaries of the scattered site tax increment redevelopment district as described herein as of the date of the last equalized assessment, and each year hereafter to certify the amount by which the assessed value has increased or decreased from the original assessed value (January 2, 1980), and also to certify the proportion which any increase or decrease bears to the total assessed value for the real property in said tax increment financing district for that year, and also to remit to the Olivia Housing and Redevelopment Authority each year hereafter, that p~oportion of all taxes paid that year on real property in the district which the captured assessed value bears to the total current assessed value, all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.76, Subd. 1 and 2 (Chapter 322, Laws of Minnesota, 1979). Adopted this day of .~..~ , 1981. Al-TEST: Mayor city 'C'16rk r'.'-- :..-'. rrm~y, October 29,~1982 ~ '-'O~ it ~11 move i~' U.S. toy p~ucflon ~ El ~P~,.T~, ~m ~o~d,'~., gtephen G. ~,~to~'s c~ef ~ve' offi~r,!~d .~e comply'ex: t~ay for ~.8 ~ion,dHe 2~ ~ eider ~ mid or~ ~ for o~er ~e my maer ~.Bon .cha~ ~ ~e fou~ 'quit ~ ~fl~t ,co~ '~at~ ~ ~e ~1~. A~ut ~ empl~e~ ~ ~ lad off ~ p~uc~on .at M~d:~ph~ out du~ 1~, Tonka ~d. '-'" ~;(' ~d~,~;::,.?~ ".' ." "- ~es, ~ke~g, ~d ~amh ~d develop- ment'~tles '}1~ ~ 3ua~z, Me,co, ~d ~ Toronto, ~o. . '.' , ' · .' -~ re~, To~a's n~mon~-e~-, ~ skldd~ 95% '~, ~m year-earBer profit of ~.5 mil- lion, or.~.~ ~ ~re. S~es fe~ 24% to S63.4 ~lon, lmm ~ million. Inc. i~d It ~m~gt~ ~e'~e'ob~o~ld. P~o for I7.8 ~llon 'to Toga ~.~ ~'~ ma~actu~r: .F~,,: a ~ maer., oL 'men's clo~g,.~d ~ ~11~ ~ to ~ sl! ,~o~ asn ,~aa e pmj ol s~adolaaap ? Ie!asnpu!. ptre slepgjo ie:ooI- !; pue 'sqo.f ,~au pmj sa~,ioldtua dlaq ,,'~u!o..ual pue uo.qnq.uls!.p 'l~t~. nl ol s,'a,ioIdma ea.,e.-,aq~o ql.~ ,,~I -oetnuem jo sea.m fie paz,ileUe -a~op~i~o,~,p[no~. 1!. p!es e'4up,I, -- . qo!q,~ ,ipnls ~.lsoo qllnoJoql,.~:.~. . ....._. :~alleuI leUOS~ad ~aqlo puc e ~u~. o11o~ 'p!es aueqs 'ape,,, · ouel{ts/q dnoJZ 'uog. e~e~, pan.l~e iuo!s!.o~p uoBeoo?~ -,o~tu aq,I, ~._~ ::~ a. -r' ~ -- 4,) ~ "" --- ~ = o ~ ,r,= ,~ >1~ c z 0 ~ ~r- ._ ~ <: '~'- ,~ ~,' ,-- ~ >.,",..: -z,', = = i,~,I..- z I-- o ~ --- "'~ t.~ ~ t,,- ~ o uJ ..... 0 ~ Z ~- ~ 0 ~,. --JO"' ....