Memo Downtown LRT Cooridor
. CITY OF HOPKINS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 3, 1991
TO: The Honorable Mayor & City Council
. _/\/11,
FROM: Tom Harmenlng .~.
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Downtown LRT Corridor - Grocery Store Project
---------------------------------
I. Purpose of Discussion
City staff and legal counsel desire to discuss the following
items with the city council:
a. The proposed agreement with the Hennepin County
. Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) regarding the
acquisi tion of the HCRRA I S existing right-of-way
located in the proposed grocery store project area in
downtown Hopkins.
b. Possible steps which the City could take to insure that
the grocery store TIF district is "grandfathered" in
under the old TIF regulations.
II. Backqround Information
o December. 1990 - The HCRRA adopted Resolution No. 83R-
HCRRA-90 which approved in principal the elements of an
agreement which would allow for the release of the
HCRRA right-of-way in downtown Hopkins, thereby
accommodating the proposed grocery store project~
o Januarv. 1991 - The city Council/HRA approved in
concept the principals contained within HCRRA
Resolution No. 83R-HCRRA-90 and directed staff to
prepare an agreement with the HCRRA.
o Januarv. 1991 - During the later part of this month,
city staff sent to the HCRRA a draft of an agreement
which took into consideration the principals contained
in the resolution adopted by the HCRRA.
4It 0 February. 1991 - The city council/HRA approved a draft
of a proposed agreement between the City of Hopkins,
Hopkins HRA and the Hennepin County Regional Railroad
Authority. The draft agreement contained provisions
consistent with the resolution previously adopted by
. the HCRRA. The agreement generally called for the
Hopkins HRA to acquire the existing right-of-way in the
grocery store project area, with the HCRRA retaining an
easement to use the right-of-way for LRT purposes after
20 years. If the HCRRA used this easement, it would be
required to compensate the owner of that property up to
7.5 million dollars. At the same time, the city would
agree to give the HCRRA an easement on city property
located south of County Road 3 and on 9th Avenue for an
alternate LRT route.
o Late March/Earlv April. 1991 - After two months of
review, the HCRRA was finally in a position to meet
with the City1s legal counsel to review the proposed
agreement. Based upon this meeting, the city was made
aware of several changes proposed by the HCRRA. These
changes raise issues which staff feels the City Council
should discuss.
Attached is a memorandum from steve Bubul, Holmes and Graven
(City's legal counsel) who prepared the draft agreement and met
with the County to discuss the agreement. The attached
memorandum summarizes the changes which the HCRRA proposes. Some
of the changes are generally minor, while other changes raise
significant questions.
. staff would like to discuss these issues with the city council
and receive direction such that we may continue negotiations with
the County.
On a related matter, the proposed agreement with the HCRRA
required the City to acquire the LRT corridor in question by May
31, 1991. Staff's intent was to acquire the property prior to
June 1, 1991 in order to "grandfather" in one of the TIF
districts in which the proposed grocery is located. As it now
appears less and less likely that the city will have an agreement
signed and have the LRT property secured by May 31, Staff is
looking into other ways to facilitate the grandfathering of the
applicable grocery store TIF district. Under state statute, a
TIF district can be grandfathered if the city has one or more of
the following items in place by June 1, 1991:
o A development agreement.
o The City has acquired property in the TIF district.
o The City has obligated bonds in the TIF district with
bond debt.
Staff desires to discuss with the City council possible methods
to be used to grandfather the grocery store TIF district under
4It the old TIF laws.
TKH/kmb
cc: Jim Kerrigan