Loading...
11/15/2004 CONF MTG - 4579� � CffY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING November i5, Zoo4 — 7:0o p.m. Fridley Municipal Center Conference Room A 1. Rice Creek Watershed District Permitting Information. 2. Springbrook Nature Center Fees. 3. Four-plex Acquisition. 4. Other business. P• � � � � � � � � � � � � � � s � O y V T 3 c � � L C � N O � 'in � � GJ (� L � O � � L � 3 � � O � � O L � v � � L � U O � '.' w � � O � Q V � U o y � N T � � 3 w o v� a� 'u Gl N O Q � T v �� � ��.+ v O v C b V � (°' S � � � � � b � � � �i � � V s � � � s @ � � � � S � � P s � � � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ A ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ bA v � T u bA L M1, � f� � � ^. � � � � � ^� � � i u � > i �TS � u� �� N � Q G� O � � � �s fC � L N i � v`� 3 3 L 3�� ,� c o T � � G1 U— � �� �� a1 ctf U N i C Y �'� � I..I � 41 L 3 L . � � C � v L � O >, � � � � , bA V1 f`1 OJ U p p V� — 3 Q C � OJ c c� � y o v `° �a pA � L u � tC cd �^ GJ � L G� !-' O ''' C L rts L � Y � 'D f� � b �+ y 'y� � 0 � L L _ � � � � vf Q1 �.�, C r.�.+ T N N V N v � cC y � 'p � � v �C � v' � `^ � O c� � «f L f.. Rf v � v `� T � � �` � 'S3 � � �.. bA � N bA bA Q bA'�-+ (� rtf L+ tC i C � bA�` C ��C C v� OJ � ty `� � w O fC (C C� _ CA «( L O G� � — i > i � � � 0 >. � S C ._ � •i i � Q� �0 � � � � � 3 � � � � � � � cG � fC � 'j 'j � 'j � � �> = i � O ��'' 'Q'� V n. V C V� '� V y �� p�p i� � � � � i � C � � � +-+ � bq �' � +� V� u v ��rts �Z v v O C� p O .� �v �v ��n �� in Q �n � in N V �C •— bA V � 3 i^, � i v� � r.. O� O O i' r. OJ bA ciC �� � — y i, N �,T t�C � � O O p O� � � '�� � j� _ � V O � N fl- � fl- � � �� Q � a. O i � � 0 � `n p ._ �' V 'G V v O G� � L O L A u0 '.'�.0 in T> �.0 O AY Tv O �n — i., O� �� N —>O —� —>O� � � V i� v � v � O �'�, 0.�� >� �� >�M � � Q axi QZ3 Q Q V Q� o � � N M �t V1 Vr I� OO G1 � � 1� � s 3 � s � � P � � � � d � � �i � � s � s � s b � @ V i i N � � � � � � .- v � o •o Q oA �. ,� = i a, p v "� v u � � N . L fC 41 � O� � 3 � �' a � 'in "C7 O v O n v O �� � N Q N � i � � c�C v � C � � N N.� X v� 0 3 E c � '= °J � � � 'v •u '� � o � � on o — � � � � a� +� � � � 'L IT � � � y1 t�/1 Qi c N �— �� i a �a N i N � v i a� . � N� i� O �U O iJ p�p V a. s c� o� a, � o v c o o c. u. � Qj -O V � fC �+ O y� � � � >� i T3 O� � Q' y�—_ �E � C � � L .L � � y�•"= O i i,�, N � � C � � N O y � Q'� ,> "C3 J Z'� c Z ��n ��i Q� am n V � n. 7 N Q L fC 3 O � L � � c � O � � v i L Q O � Q � Q L � O N i L (� � 3 � V N � .3 Q N � � . � ro T � = d �� 3 CV � �:; a�`�'�°m � O (p �p � �. � Q � � ^ 1 � � � Q N� SO � � � r+ < � •o o R � �. o�ortD O � �. � � ¢ � � � � 3 p' R- ^ � /p N � � � � � � R S 0. aa � � N 3 � ?, -t �¢rt� 0.0 � �, � �o �o ����' � O n� ¢� w� ay � � � _ D � � w n N T 0 c a � 0 � PY T � � m < Z I � � � � D m� 0.� � n' dQ � � � n r' �D �C � c, o, s w `�° � � � N. ^ rt � n �� (� dQ G �• _� �o a � �a � rt � � o �' w 'O �� D O I � � � o � � — N � � � � ^' N � m -o �• rt � � �. a s� �o ° �' � � O N �� � � rt (� io � �. r'1 (� (� � � Q- 0 0 a � � � �.� a. � �� S s1 � � C ,..� m O � � � � � � � � � � � �' a�i � m �' � m �� � N � p � Q � � � � � � � z p . � � �1 ' � � � � y�j 1�/1 � � � � . V � � � ¢ rt v ^ ¢ � !0 � � rt � ef C. in � rt m p �'O � O U�_C n 3 � v O. � � �• � O � �, � � R^ �p 7 < A� O �C � tn (�D � � it . W /� O � 0. � �D N n 3 UQ � � m � � � � � � � � 0 � � � s�. � S (D � n m � � � � w n �D h S (D � � n f1� rr W O � O.. O � P�i � OQ (D O 3 n S N � S < � C1. 3 M G. � O A�i r1 S � O 3 � ? � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� . r ';s Recreation and Natural Resource Department emo � To: Wiiliam W. Burns, Cifiy Manager � � From: Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources Date: November 9, 2004 Re: Springbrook Nature Center Admission Fees for 2005 Last fall, the City established admission fees for the Springbrook Nature Center as part of an overall revenue package to support the Naturalist Division budget for 2004. As we get close to starting a new year, I thought it would be a good idea to take a look at the admission fee issue and make a decision on whether or not to continue charging an admission. During this past year, the Naturalist Division was working with a reduced budget (from the previous year) and, at the same time, had a very ambitious program revenue target. We did not have any extra dollars to pay for additional staff to collect fees, so the admission fee process was set up to direct visitors to the Interpretive Building to buy a pass from existing staff on hand. For visitors to the park after the building was closed for the day, an "honor system" drop box was available for taking the admission fees. With limited staff available, we also did not have anyone to regularly patrol the trails to check on park visitors displaying a pass. While this was not the ideal way to collect fees from all park users, it seemed to be the most cost effective way for us to operate. I would say that the charging of fees this year was only somewhat successful. I am sure there were visitors to the park who chose to ignore the signs and did not purchase a pass or did not place the fee in the drop box. There were also a lot of negative comments from park users about having to pay just to walk on the trails. While the admission fees (including annual passes) did generate about $20,000 in revenue, it was not well received by many Springbrook park users. You may recall that in the fall of 2000, we did some research and discussed with the City Council the possibility of charging admission fees at Springbrook Nature Center. We looked at facility additions or changes that would be needed, as well as what personnel needs there would be. Our conservative estimate was that it would cost us around $40,000 per year to collect the fees at the entrance to the park. At $2 per person for admissions, it would require 55 paid admissions each and every day of the year in order to just break even. Based on our experience with fees this year, I don't believe we would reach that break- even point if we brought on extra staff to collect admission fees. . .. . It is my recommendation that we discontinue the admission fees to Springbrook Nature Center at the end of this year. With the approval of the levy and other revenue expected through program fees, the funds available to operate Springbrook for next year should be su�cient without continuation of admission fees. The levy amount was established at a level that, when coupled with program revenue, would provide enough financing to cover the operating budget of the Naturalist Division and put away $25,000- $30,000 for future nature center improvements. While we can't predict with certainty the future financial needs for the nature center, it does look like the center should be in good financial shape for the near term. Even if admission fees are not charged for next year, they can always be reinstated in the future if there is a need to do so. I know there has been some concern about the nature center serving people from neighboring cities and only Fridley residents paying for the operation. One way of addressing this issue would be to add a"non-resident" fee to the programs and events offered at Springbrook. Non-residents would then pay a registration fee that was a certain percentage over the rate paid by our local Fridley participants. This non-resident fee could be 10 or 15 or even 20 percent above the rate for Fridley residents. While this would not capture a fee from all non-residents that used the park, it would bring in revenue from those individuals participating in the organized activities. Once again, it is my recommendation that the City of Fridley not charge admission fees to Springbrook Nature Center for 2005. I will be at the City Council Conference meeting next Monday to discuss thiS issue. Please let me know if there is any additional information you need or if you have any questions that should be addressed. � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT � DEPARTMENT HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Memorandum DATE: November 3, 2004 TO: William W. Bums, Executive Director of HRA �� � FROM: Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Assistant Director of HRA SUBJECT: Gateway West Update The purpose of this memo is to provide a summary of the "housing summit" held on November 2"a to discuss the possible ramifications of acquiring the remaining properties desired for Gateway West. The "summit" attendees included Dr. Burns, Jim Casserly, Gay Greiter, Dan Wilson (our relocation expert), Scott Hickok, Angela Obert (Fire Department rental inspector), Chief Don Abbott, Capt. Brian Weierke (Fridley PD), Paul Bolin, Ron Julkowski, and Julie Jones. It was hoped tha.t this group could develop an action plan tha.t will allow the 4- plex property at 5955 3�a Street to be acquired in a timely, legal, and cost effective manner. The concerns with acquiring the property through a quick-take condemnation include relocation benefits, disparate population impact challenges, and condemnation blight. The consensus of the HRA's legal counsel and relocation earpert was that it is very unlikely that the City or HRA would have any negative ramifications from these concerns if the quick-take were to move forwazd. Relocation benefits would not need to be paid. The property in question has not ha.d a rental license since 2001. Although the la.ck of a rental license is not determinative as to City liability for relocation benefits if the building is, in fact, occupied by renters, water bill records indicate that the property is unoccupied. The police department did talk to a nephew of the property owner, in late September, who indicated that his residence was in Worthington but that he did occasionally "crash" at his uncle's property when in the metro area. Relocation benefits would not need to be paid to someone with a principal residence elsewhere. C:�Documents and SettingsUwrnsbU.ocal Settings\Temporary Imernet Files\OLKIB�Nov2004HRA Memo (Gateway West SummitUPdate).doc Any disparate population impact challenges would ha.ve no merit, as the units aze all vacant. City staff, from different departments, have continued to monitor the property for any activity and have found none. A proper determination of condemnation blight has also been a concern. It should be noted that there are two different standards for blight, condemnation blight and TIF district blight. Condemnation blight is a looser standazd than that used for a TIF district. Because the City and HRA have a history with this area and have designated it as an area for redevelopment the HRA has eminent domain powers to acquire this property based on the fact that the HRA has determined tha.t acquisition of the property is needed for the redevelopment project. Legal counsel and the City's relocation e�ert are quite certain that the City will not run into the same set of problems that Richfield encountered in setting up the TIF district for Best Buy. Further, they have recommended that the HRA authorize its legal counsel to send one more proposalletter to the property owner. T'he letter will ensure that the City and HRA have "dotted a11 the i's and crossed all the t's" to further avoid any legal challenges down the road if a quick-take condemnation becomes necessary to acquire the property. Staff Recommendation: Staff concurs with the approach suggested by legal counsel and recommends that the HRA authorize legal counsel to proceed in drafting a final offer letter to the owner of 5955 3`� Street. Legal counsel will report the result of the offer prior to the Authority's December meeting. If an agreement cannot be reached with the property owner, staff and counsel will be asking for authoriza.tion, at the December meeting, to move forward with condemnation. C:�Documents and Settings\bumsbV.ocal SetiingslTemporary Internet Files\OLK1BlNov2004IIRA Memo (Gateway West SummitUPdate).doc