The URL can be used to link to this page

03-28-06 Regular CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2006 . ******************************************************************************************************* SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION RICHFIELD CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 5:00 P.M. Call to order Roll call 5:00 - 5:50 p.m. 1. Discussion regarding proposed Portland Avenue and 66th Street intersection reconstruction (Council Memo No. 51) Notes: 5:50 - 6:00 p.m. 2. Discussion regarding status report on due diligence investigation of Longfellow Loop properties (Council Memo No. 55) Notes: Adjournment ******************************************************************************************************* SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD CITY HALL HEREDIA ROOM 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:00 P.M. Call to order Roll call 1. Interview of persons interested in serving on City advisory commissions (CoUncil Memo No. 52) Notes: Adjournment ******************************************************************************************************* REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:30 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Councilmust have registQred prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of (1) Special Concurrent City Council/HRAlPlanning Commission Worksession of February 27, 2006; (2) Special City Council Meeting of March 13, 2006; (3) Special City Council Worksession of March 14, 2006; and (4) Regular City Council Meeting of March 14,2006 COUNCIL DISCUSSION 1. Council discussion . Hats Off To Hometown Hits . Discussion with architect regarding site plans and elevations for proposed new City Hall (Council Memo No. 56) Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 2. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be r:emoved from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amendment to rezone southern tip of 1401 76th Street West from high-density commercial to general commercial and set public hearing and second reading for April 25, 2006 S.R. No. 56 B. Consideration of approval of purchase of 13,500 square feet of wetland mitigation credits for Cedar Point storm water pond in amount of $27,000 S.R. No. 57 C. Consideration of approval of setting public hearing on April 25, 2006 to consider new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue S.R. No. 58 D. Consideration of approval.of purchase of tandem dump truck (chassis from Astleford International Trucks in amount of $65,480.46; box, chipper cover and snow fighting equipment from J-Craft in amount of $59,298.14) for use by Street Maintenance Division in total amount of $124,778.60 S.R. No. 59 E. Consideration of approval of purchase of single axle dump truck (chassis from Astleford International Trucks in amount of $57,533.43; box and snow fighting equipment from J-Craft in amount of $57,373.68) for use by Street Maintenance Division in total amount of $114,907.11 S.R. No. 60 Notes: 4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: ,PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. Consideration of canceling March 28, 2006 public hearing regarding second reading of ordinance to rezone 15 properties within 1-494 Corridor to mixed use neighborhood Staff Report No. 61 Notes: 6. Public hearing and second reading of Qrdinance amendments to Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sign criteria for new mixed-use districts; 1-494 Corridor Staff Report No. 62 Notes: 7. Public hearing regarding resolution amending Comprehensive Plan to encourage green community development principles for land use designation in 1-494 Corridor for future developments Staff Report No. 63 Notes: RESOLUTIONS 8, Consideration of resolution providing for sale of $6,080,000 General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A 14. Consideration of agreement with Tim Duoos for exchange of land and easements needed to make improvements to Richfield Lake, while providing sufficient stormwater capacity to accommodate any future redevelopment of site on 64th Street and Lyndale Avenue Staff Report No. 70 Notes: 15. Consideration of 3D-month lease between City of Richfield and Hat Trick Hockey, Inc., consisting of 1,900 square feet of space located in Richfield Ice Arena, 636 East 66th Street Staff Report No. 71 Notes: 16. Consideration of appointments to City advisory commissions Staff Report No. 72 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 17. City Manager's report . National Incident Management Training Notes: 18. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for oth rs. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the ag nda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests musf be , Illade at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. Staff Report No. 64 Notes: 9. Consideration of resolution approving Concept Plans for Cedar Point Staff Report No. 65 Notes: 10. Consideration of resolution regarding environmental assessment worksheet for Cedar Point Commons project Staff Report No. 66 Notes: 11. Consideration of resolution authorizing Cooperative Construction Agreement between MnDOT and City of Richfield to provide payment by City to State of City's share of costs for traffic control signal work on Lyndale Avenue just south of 1-35W and storm sewer under 1-35W Staff Report No. 67 Notes: 12. Consideration of resolution establishing authority for Health Care Savings Plan for Mayor and City Council Members - Staff Report No. 68 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 13. Consideration of final layout for reconstruction of 66th Street and Portland Avenue with acquisition of four single-family homes on south end of east side of 6601 block of Portland Avenue for redevelopment Staff Report No. 69 Notes: AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3A 56 .... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MELISSA POEHLMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of an ordinance to rezone the southern tip of 1401 76th Street West from High- Density Commercial (C-3) to General Commercial (C-2). 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve first reading of an ordinance to amend Richfi Id City Code Appendix 1 to rezone the area bounded by 1-494 on the south, the original center line of 77th Street and its westerly extension to the easterly right-of-way of 1-35W on the north, 1-35W on the west, and Girard Avenue on the east, to the C-2 (General Commercial) District, and schedule a public hearing and second reading for April 25, 2006. I II. BACKGROUND I Over the past few months, the City Council has approved a Comprehensive Plan amendment and new zoning regulations for the 1-494 Corridor. The rezonings that have taken place along the Corridor have all but eliminated the C-3 (High-Density Commercial) District in favor of mixed-use districts that favor the integration of a variety of uses. In the course of updating the text relating to the approved changes, it has come to staff's attention that a small corner of the property located at 1401 032806 -1st Reading Rezone portion of 1401 W 76th W 76th Street West (currently owned by the Minnesota School of Business) has retained the C-3 designation. The proposed ordinance rezones this portion of the property as C-2 (General Commercial), which is in keeping with the zoning designation of the remainder of the parcel. The C-3 was created in 1987 with the goals of broadening the tax base, providing for economic growth and employment opportunities, fostering a favorable environment for appropriate businesses, eliminating conflicts between the residential and commercial areas and working toward the "high density freeway strip" called for by the then-current Comprehensive Plan. At that time, it was decided that the area generally bounded by 77th Street, Pleasant Avenue, 1-494 and 35W should be rezoned to C-3 (see attached ILN Study Area Map). As is shown on this map, 77th Street does not continue through to 35W, and this boundary line effectively split the parcels west of Emerson Avenue into two different districts. Since the time of this rezoning the parcels between Girard and Emerson Avenues have been rezoned to PC-2 as part of a planned unit development. The Minnesota School of Business parcel is the only remaining site that is split between two zoning districts. The majority of the parcel is zoned C-2, with only the very southern point falling within the C.,.3 District. At this time, staff sees no reason for this small area to remain C-3 and proposes that it be rezoned as C-2 to keep it consistent with the remainder of the Minnesota School of Business parcel. IIII. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The proposed ordinance amendment designates the entire parcel located at 1401 76th Street West as C-2, rather than splitting the individual parcel into two separate zoning districts. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The small area of land that is designated as C-3 is too small to be developed as a separate parcel. The area is less than one-quarter of an acre, roughly 10,000 sq. ft. . Two zoning designations for one parcel could cause confusion in the future. . Staff spoke with the Director of the School and also sent a letter detailing this proposal. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL I . If a first reading is approved, a public hearing and second reading will be scheduled for April 25, 2006. . Notification of the City Council public hearing will be provided as required by State Statute and City requirements. . If approved at a second reading the rezoning will take effect 30 days following publication in the Sun Current. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the proposed ordinance to amend Richfield City Code Appendix 1 to rezone the area bounded by 1-494 on the south, the original center line of 77th Street and its westerly extension to the easterly right-of-way of 1-35W on the north, 1-35W on the west, and Girard Avenue on the east, to the C-2 District. o In the future the two zoning designations for a single parcel of land could be confusing and difficult to administer. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Proposed ordinance . Map: (Historical) ILN Study Area, dated 6/22/1987 . Map: C-3 Zoned Area I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . N/A 2>P-{ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING APPENDIX 1 TO THE RICHFIELD ZONING CODE BY REZONING A PORTION OF 1401 76TH STREET WEST TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Paragraph (59) of Section 3 of Appendix 1 of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to read as follows: (59) M-14 (SE corner, 1-35W and 76th) That part of Lot 1. Block 1, Bourbon and Basin First Addition which lie,> '1orth of the ',,'esterly evtenc:ion of the center line of 77th Street; and that area bounded by said Block 1 , the northerly extension of the east line of said Block 1, the south right- of-way line of 76th Street and the east right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 35W. Sec. 2. Appendix 1 of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended by repealing Section 4, paragraph (1). Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this ,2006. day of Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 032806 -1st Reading Rezone portion of 1401 W 76th W <( LU 'CC ~ Q :::> 'f- en ,/ lZc.t~-z..,JoIICltWnl.L ca'llI ..LOS~"'. 'G'JWM:MW ..~ "JAW GlI'f'1I.111CW GOd a13I.::1HJJ~ .::10 A1IJ . ~ C\I cr a;j C\I .....: ..; ;;; C') 5 d a w i 'CJ) il ;; s I 8 C\l i C') .. ! . .. . i ~ ~ ~ : " ; I · t · I I I - i - ! - ' l! i ~ I ~ I I ! ~ ~ C\I a:: as C\I .....: ri C') d w CJ) ". 51~:~;~ i~:~:~:~~s:~ ~~~I~i5. ~:: ~ .~: ~~ :.::~ ::: E 5 ! ~ l~:!: ':! 15 .~ ':l1~:~::lill 11!!! il!:~.'~I! ". ..., ~:~I~I~;n!jl ~ i i Iii I ~ H\ml~!~i~!i : ~ ~ i ~ i 2 i' ~ I ~~ i I _ '. '. ,:c; . I') ! . I.....'~i~. .'.'~ili i.II~_I~.I~__ ~.!~;~~'..~.I~I~,"~I:;; ,,1:;1;;','~I;;I~i~ ~~':I.a~o. :~I:::!'Q.... -lO " _ . __ _ _, t- , . . I "01: 1 ~'f '. _:r~~:). . $~ ~ i~:;:i::1~ii,:I!j~1 iti.; ~;ii~ ~ il~iii ~:~ : ! t! Iii! ~ I~ i i i ~ i 11) ;' I N I ~:ii~!E1S, ~ I i! l~.i!~i$;=!!l ~ ~ a I; i :$.5 i~i ' ~ /' ij::: '~I i:! i i! : i~ ~ ......."'........ ...........-.-::,......--...... ...,_.......-... -:....1,::: .......I_~.:::. ..,. ..., I.. . __. '._ ' " ", .____ _ . ! :::~S~:!!!I~; ~ I::'~!'!!~! !~l~!~ ~ ~I;; ~ il~,~,~;~ ..:; ~. " ls'~ fiil~ i:s! i :~:~ I !~~~. ~ ~:~ ~ f;i~.~J~ '01 ..., C\l ~ l:;~'~;,~ '~~'S; ~ <~' (~ ~;~.~ ! n:; ::i:z : : ; /' ",... \ \... . ~ -.: i ~ ] ~~"~.:'::~ "Os "3A. ~ C') ~ .::i ~ ~ ~ i i I ,~.; ; ; 'le~ ~ ~:~! ' .i ~ ;:~l ~.!. ~ ! f ~ ; ~;~l ~ " { ~ ! ~, i ! ~ j .! ~ ~ ..i ~ ; ~ ~~ ~. J.~ ~~ ti~ ~ll:j i li.: . I~ j .~ ~ 'OS "3A'I ~.__ · ;i,;~U"~/- - .:. :, - :- : '. ~ ~~ 1 ~ ;.,:- ~.. ;;:; l' ~ ~ y .~ ~......_::;..-" I '- ;: ~ : ; : ; Ii;.}; ; .O~ "S"l1;;:-- . ..;* =- ~ ~: ~0: o z w (!J W ...I CI) ! I (.) 0 d- O w Z 0 N >- W a: a: <( w 0 CO Z 0 ::l.' a f- m <( z J.iJ -oJ a: <( { I ~ #=~- / r-- ~ ~ - ~ ~ <s;: ~ ~ it;: :+-y .$f ~~ ~, !+7 ~ ~ f C-3 ZONE SOUTH OF SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ... 7524 7525 7524 7528 7529 7528 7529 7533 7532 75: 7537 7537 7536 BE . . 1'1 I J I I'll 1.1 I 7541 UT~ CHl 7545 ~. ~v ....~., ..,. . ~. ~. . '10.. ""'lo.. ""-. ~ "'- . . I I . . . . . I . . . . . ("l~ ;;00 o en 3: enm -,;0 z..... (;)52 en> z IpC-2~ RAMP= 200 MERIDIAN CROSSINGS PROPOSED TO BE ~~~, RezONED p+ -,...., RAMP= ,<c,:c>.. . .............100 MERIDI . '.. ~4t~A... CROSSIN< . ,. \..~. ''7<$j ...... . Q~n ~/^ .~" 'Cc.. uu~ Vi ~ ~~ . 'c'", . ~G&,~tV ~'''. ~,.., ..>.... .,~ '. :>'/<,~'. <:.'., #' . :t. '.. "\c."~, . ~, . ~ ........,:. 'lIIl'". ..."ll- 200 I o 200 400 Feet I t\ N 3-16-06 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3B 57 ....... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: KRISTIN ASHER, ASS'T CITY ENGINEER NAME, TInE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 12r' REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: rn" ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider the purchase of 13,500 square feet of wetland banking credits for Cedar Point Pond. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of 13,500 square feet of wetland mitigation credits for the Cedar Point Storm Water Pond in the amount of $27,000. I II. BACKGROUND I The additional storm water run off caused by Ryan's Cedar Point Redevelopment Project requires storm water ponding. Staff has been working with Ryan's engineers and Mn/DOTto develop a regional storm water pond that will accommodate existing storm water needs in the area, in addition to the Ryan Development. The pond is also designed to handle additional capacity for future redevelopment in the area. Currently, storm water in this neighborhood receives no pre-treatment prior to entering the surrounding wetlands and water bodies; Mn/DOT has agreed to allow for the pond to be built on their right of way, Ryan has agreed to pay for the'constructionof the pond, and the City will maintain the pond. 0328WetlandCredits The Wetland Conservation Act requires anyone proposing to drain, fill, or excavate a wetland first to try to avoid disturbing the wetland; second, to try to minimize any impact on the wetland; and, finally, to replace any lost wetland acres, functions, and values. Wetland banks, such as the one used here (Mr. Selstad in Western Hennepin County), serve as a broker for wetland mitigation. The pond design impacts existing wetlands requiring 13,500 square feet of wetland mitigation credits to be purchased. Ultimately the City will own this pond and there is a desire to maintain control of the design and construction process. Therefore, the City of Richfield has entered into a purchase agreement with Mr. Robert Selstad to purchase the needed wetland mitigation credits, rather than Ryan. Earnest money in the amount of $2,700 was put down for these credits in 2005. Ryan has reimbursed the City for the earnest money and at closing $24,300 will be due from Ryan. In order to maintain control of the construction, staff intends to design and inspect the project. Upon purchase of these credits, construction of the pond can commence. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . Regional ponding of storm water runoff is consistent with Richfield's Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan. lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The storm water pond can not be constructed at this location without wetland impact and mitigation. I C. FINANCIAL I . Ryan is constructing the pond and purchasing the credits. I D. LEGAL I . State agency regulations on how to handle storm water are identified and followed in Richfield's Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan. . The Wetland Conservation Act requires replacement land for disturbed wetlands. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Decide not to purchase credits and require Ryan to develop a different Storm Water Management Plan for the site. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Purchase Agreement for Wetland Banking Credits . Graphic indicating location of pond in relation to Ryan site. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None anticipated. {f . Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Purchase Agreement for Wetland Banking Credit~ THIS AGREEMENT is made this 21 dayof September, 20 05 between Mr. Bob Selstad(Seller) and The City of Richfield, MN (Buyer). 36- , 1. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to purchase from Seller, the wetland banking credits (Credits) listed below: . . . ... ..... . .::..i ." . ..... ....... : CREDITS TO BE SOLD . ..' '.. '.' . '. ..' , A. NWC Acres or Sq. Ft. 13,500 Sq. Ft. PVC Wetland Type2 Topo. Setting Acres 011 Sq. Ft. Type 4 Isolated Cost per Acre or Sq. Foot $2.00/ Sq. Ft Credit Sub-Group I B. e. D. E. I I Check here if additional credit sub-2rOUDS are Dartoftbis account and are listed on an attachment to this document. ,IA. se.p...al:ate .credit sub-group shall be established for each w. etland or wetl. and area that has di. '..ff! eren t wetland characteristics. CIrcUlar 39 types: I,lL, 2, 3,4,5,6, 7, 8, B, U. 3Topographic setting types: shoreland, reverine, floodplain, flow-through, tributary, isolated, upland . 2. Seller represents and warrants as follows: a) The Credits are deposited in an account in the Minnesota Wetland Bank administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) pursuant to Minn. Rules Chapter 8420.0700-.0760. b) Seller owns the Credits and has the right to sell the Credits to Buyer. 3. Buyer will pay Seller a total of $27,000 for the Credits, as follows: a) $2,700 as earnest money, to be paid when this Agreement is signed; and b) The balance of $24,300 to be paid on the Closing Date listed below. 4. The closing of the purchase and sale shall occur on January 1, 2006 (Closing Date) at 5:00PM. The .IOSing Date and location may be changed by written consent of both parties. Upon payment of the earnest Page 1 of2 BWSR Form: wca-bank-12 (purchase agreement).doc . m6hey, Seller will execute and deliver to Buyer an Application for Withdrawal of the. Credits in the form specified BWSR and such other documents as are necessary to transfer the Credits to Buyer. ~13-&. t 5. Buyer has applied or will apply to Minnesota Department of Transportation (Local Government Unit ,',< (LGU)) for approval of a replacement plan utilizing the Credits as the means of replacing impacted wetlands. If the LGU has not approved the Buyer's application for a replacement plan utilizing the Credits by the Closing Date, and no postponement of the Closing Date has been agreed to by Buyer and Seller in writing, then either Buyer or Seller may cancel this Agreement by giving written notice to the other. In this case, Seller shall return Buyer's earnest money, and neither Buyer nor Seller shall have any further obligations under this Agreement. If the LGU has approved the replacement plan and the Seller is ready to proceed with . the sale on the Closing Date, but Buyer fails to proceed, then the Seller may retain the earnest money as liquidated damages. " (Date) . (SignatUre of Seller) &r. Robert Selstad (Date) (Signature of Buyer) Mr. Mike.Eastling for the City of Richfield Page 2 of2 BWSR Form: wca-bank-12 (purchase agreement).doc _..~.. . W:\01000-84\CaO\09-21 .dwg J:l" ">:5, ~,~~" (..;~~_.:.., ,C<.<l,':J--.'1---,.;; cc."-"".d':l<: .. .. .. !(I~) ~ i " .. [ !~f ~ ~~ ~- I:C ~ g~ E~Bt::l i ~!~ [~~~ Ql ;; J) IIIntllS:- Ul ;, _0 . ~ - . * 3g~ ~~~~ n o ~ n (t) ~ ri- r/J. ...... . ri- (t) ""0 ~ ~ n CD 0.- e; ~ o I--l · a n o ~ o ~ 00 ES ~ ~ "<: " " .. I I , I I I I I I ! ! I I I , I I I i I I I , I I I I I I , I @ ~ ~ tj ~ (t) . . \0 V> 0 , N (') ~ ,., ~ ~ " ............ z 0 "-,/ 0 r Ul ..., '" ,., ~ 0 0 ,/ .. ~~------ - .- . '" siii 000 ~F' ---.-. ~~ ~~ ~ --~.~~u_...... ~ , (j) m Z m ;;0 l> _r- ~:: 81m ~~ :r l> z o (;j m S>>::o ~~ 0> fa;:: ---_ ,'<i~_.,..___,...__..,.~___... _~_. o S;; m :;~ ~~ :~O ~< m s: m z ..... ~---._~,- G1 ~~ ig!!; "'(') ;.:a~ ~ .. .. - - "'" 8"' 0>' Ol- -~ .... " ~ :0. tij :;;,: ~ - 66TH STREET ~TAll 5,400 SF I 'r-=-l~. , Ii 1!5 . .. , o. :L~ ~1fi1-.~ ~:~ -~ .~ gm ~~ ---"-- 65TH STREET .... " ~ :0. ~ ~ 64TH STREET ---------_____J , ~---------------------- -- --_.....~----- --- -. .. ---: /----------..:.-......-, .U>;tJ ___~~ ~m g~ ; ~~ (J) ~ ~___....~........~_,~_~_c _-=:..~,.: ... .... O'l ..., >-;; ......~ ~ tij :<: ~ .. ..- AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3C 58 ....... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: BETSY OSBORN SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approve a public hearing to consider the issuance of new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun 80 Chinese Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue So., Richfield, MN 55423. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a public hearing to consider the following: . Issuance of new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue So. . Set public hearing for April 25, 2006. I II. BACKGROUND I Application for new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun 80 Chinese Restaurant was received by the City on November 30, 2005. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDA nON I IA. POllCY I . City Ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern license 0328 Jun 80 Chinese Restaurant New Liquor Licenses applications and that a date be set for the public hearing prior to the hearing. . The hearing must be scheduled and held before a new license may be considered. . The new process has been initiated. . Holding the public hearing on April 25, 2006 will provide ample time to complete the licensing process. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES . N/A I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL . N/A I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the application for new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun 80 Chinese Restaurant. . Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing process. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . No one. .-... '....' AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3D 59 ..... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MARK L. HALL, FLEET & PARK SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: if REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: I1r ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the purchase of a new tandem dump truck for use by the Street Maintenance Division. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a tandem dump truck in the amount of $124,778.60 consisting of the following items: . Chassis in the amount of $65,480.46 to Astleford International Trucks . Box, chipper cover and snow fighting equipment to J-Craft in the amount of $59,298.14. I'll. BACKGROUND I Unit 353, a 1990 Ford LBOOO dump truck, currently used by the Street Maintenance Division is fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2006. Purchase of a replacement has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low 032806T andemDump ",. ," .. iV" bidder for the type of equipment required is then awarded a contract to supply equipment to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the low bid price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. I III. . BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program I B. CRlTICAL ISSUES .1 . Approval at the March 28, 2006 Council Meeting will facilitate timely delivery of the tandem dump truck. . Snow fighting equipment includes the front reversible plow and wing plow. . This tandem dump truck will replace a single axle truck. As the demand for higher volume hauling capacity continues to grow, the . removable chipper cover will make the truck highly versatile for hauling a wide variety of loads. I C. FINANCIAL I . The approved 2006 budget contains $135,000.00 for this purchase. . Funding for these vehicles will be from tax levy and the Central Garage Fund. I D. LEGAL I . When the purchase price of materials, merchandise, equipment, or construction exceeds $25,000.00, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S). I . Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. . No action by Council on this purchase will eventually result in more breakdowns, dollars wasted on repairs and lost efficiency in plowing, and other PLiblic Works operations. Iv. ATTACHMENTS . None I I VI. PRlNCIP AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3C 58 ....... STAFF REPORT RICHfiELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: BETSY OSBORN SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEw: ~ REVIEWED By CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approve a public hearing to consider the issuance of new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue So., Richfield, MN 55423. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a public hearing to consider the following: . Issuance of new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue So. . Set public hearing for April 25, 2006. I II. BACKGROUND I Application for new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant was received by the City on November 30,2005. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDA nON I I A. POLICY I . City Ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern license 0328 Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant New Liquor Licenses applications and that a date be set for the public hearing prior to the hearing. . The hearing must be scheduled and held before a new license may be considered. . The new process has been initiated. . Holding the public hearing on April 25, 2006 will provide ample time to complete the licensing process. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES . N/A I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL . N/A I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the application for new on-sale intoxicating Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses for Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant. . Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing process. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . No one. .. .. AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3E 60 ....... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MARK L. HALL, FLEET & PARK SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ui ,;;{. REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the purchase of a new single axle dump truck for use by the Street Maintenance Division. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a single axle dump truck in the amount of $114,907.11 consisting of the following items: . Chassis in the amount of $57,533.43 to Astleford International Trucks . Box and snow fighting equipment to J-Craft in the amount of $57,373.68. I II; BACKGROUND I Unit 369, a 1994 Ford L8000 dump truck, currently used by the Street Maintenance Division is fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2006. The box and chassis of this vehicle are badly rusted and threatening the integrity of the truck. . Purchase of a replacement has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota . 032806SingleAxleDump '- solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low bidder for the type of equipment required is then awarded a contract to supply equipment to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the low bid price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Approval at the March 28, 2006 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the single axle dump truck. . Snow fighting equipment includes a front reversible plow, wing plow, and sander with controls. . New dump trucks use stainless steel in critical areas of the boxes and are undercoated for a life expectancy of 15 years. I C. FINANCIAL I . The approved 2006 budget contains $129,000.00 for this purchase. . Funding for these vehicles will be from tax levy and the Central Garage Fund. I D. LEGAL I . When the purchase price of materials, merchandise, equipment, or construction exceeds $25,000.00, authority to purchase shall be. submitted to the City Council for consideration. I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I . Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. . No action by Council on this purchase will eventually result in more breakdowns, dollars wasted on repairs and lost efficiency in plowing, and other Public Works operations. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # PUBLIC HEARING 5 61 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: PATRICK SMITH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT~NAGER NAME, TinE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY ~NAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Cancel the public hearing and second reading of an ordinance to rezone 15 properties within the 1-494 Corridor to the Mixed-Use NeiQhborhood (MU-N). I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Cancel the public hearing on March 28, 2006 regarding second reading of an ordinance to rezone 15 properties within the 1- 494 Corridor to the Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N). I II. BACKGROUND I The City Council approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the 1- 494 Corridor on December 13, 2005. The Metropolitan Council is required to review and approve Comprehensive Plan amendments before amendments. The Metropolitan Council is still considering Richfield's Comprehensive Plan amendment. 032806 - Table-494 Rezoning (15 properties) Because State law prohibits the City from adopting zoning controls that are not in compliance with its Plan, the City Council on January 10, 2006 rezoned certain properties within the 1-494 Corridor that comply with the current Plan and continued the public hearing for 15 properties that do not comply with the current Plan. The second reading to rezone those 15 properties was continued to March 28, 2006, pending Metropolitan Council approval. A new public hearing process will be started at the appropriate time. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . Section 506.03 of the Richfield Zoning Code states as its foremost purpose, "to assist in the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan". . The Council approved an amendment to the Plan for the Corridor on December 13, 2005. . On January 10, 2006 the City Council approved the rezoning of certain properties in the 1-494 Corridor to mixed use districts, except for 15 properties. . The current zoning designations of these 15 properties do not comply with the approved Plan amendment. lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The City cannot rezone these 15 properties until the Metropolitan Council reviews and approves Richfield's Comprehensive Plan amendment. . The Metropolitan Council has 60 days to review and approve Comprehensive Plan amendments, unless they request a 60-day extension. The first 60-day review period expires April 10th. Metropolitan Council staff will be requesting a 60-day extension. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A In. LEGAL I . Minnesota State Statute 473.865 Subdivision 2 states that "[a] local governmental unit shall not adopt any official control or fiscal device which is in conflict with its comprehensive plan..." . A legal notice for a public hearing will be published at the appropriate time. . Property owners who were notified of the public hearing received a notice saying the hearing was being cancelled. . . I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I · Continue the public hearing to a date certain. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Map of 15 properties proposed for rezoning. . Maps of existing and proposed zoning for 1-494 Corridor. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING · N/A .. c.., o c c.CD ::JE Z-C I' C ::JCD :sE 0< ..,c -co!!! CDD.. C (1) o > N.- CD tIJ -~ o I- ...,c. -cE CD 0 cnu &.(1) .0 .c I-~ . ~ 0.0 cn- Q) C'CS .- > ~o Q) '- c.c. 00. a:<C . ~ 009~ ~ 9~ VZS~ NOLE>NIWOO OOS\. LIlS\. Oov\. LIlv\. OOE\. 4lt\. OOZ\. LIlZ\. OO\.\. LIl \.\. 4~O\. 1.01113 OE>V:JIH:J SnSlNnlo::> )ll:!Vd ONV1)1VO E8 ~ OOv U vlE OCE G! OOl vl. . 00. ,000 ~ o. ~ OO\. OOl aOE LNVSV31d Cl) ::J C CJ) ~ .. CJ) = 0000 o enenCf)enCf)enQ)Q) (.) Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)>> Z S S ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <( <( .......... .c.c 'Po en en ~ ~ ~ C:' C:' C:' t t O.c..c::J::J::J::J:J::J~~ ..............o..o..o..o..a..o+:;+:; UJ ~ ~ en en en en en en C 'C ~OOO::O::O:O:O:O:~~ :::>~~0..-(j)L()r-..- . 000..-..-('\.\00 tIJ ,,",,",,",,"r-r-ON CJ) ,,"r-r-r-r-r-r-r- ._ . I""'- l""'- t:: (1) c. o l- n. L, - (1) (1) :r... - f1) .c - l"- I"- z< Ii:' ~ co o o t:! .... C (D E 0. o (ii > cD o .2:' '2 ::I E E o u CJ) ::J t: CJ) ~ .c: en .. Q) ~ wwwen~ 'Po +-' +-'.... Q) C oenCf.)Cf.)~.8 ..c ..c .c C> +" ................c c tIJ co co co ...... .- m r- "" 1""'-. ~ E W 000 0 0('\.\0"-0 UJvVL()~iD (1)"-"-"-r-o .- 0 t:: "" (1) r- C. o l- n. ... Q) 'Q) '- ... UJ .c ... ,.... ,.... -ml"'m~ 6:' 008~ 4UH e HffHHffi ~ fRitffiffi ffif!Hffi ~ It) 0 OOL~ 4W ~ . ffiHfffiEL:dffiHffiffiBffiNB 009~ 4j9~ ~ ffiHffiIE ffiffiffiB ffiEEHE , ..... vZ!H NO.1E>NIl^J0018 C -----I Ql 009~ 41S~ E Co ~~-- 0 OOv~ 41v~ ~ _'WllIffi __ ~ Ql 0 ooe~ 4lf;~ ~ ffi1ffiffi 8ffiffiB m m ffifH8 c OOU 411~ ::l E -____1 E DOH 4H~ 0 mm mffiHffil fflffiB u OOO~ 4l0~ tn ffiffiffiHHffiB mBHHfE_ .101113 s:: eiffiBHffiffil fffiffiEm CJ 006 0 008 OE>VOIHO .- -----1 .... OZL Snal^JnlOO ca ffiHHEffilffiE Bffilf88HffiEHImiffi s:: ffilffiEH __ffiHffil OOL )I~Vd C) 0<:9 ONVl>lVO ~ .- ~mHiffijJffifffiHffi ~ I/) tn c: -E 009 ONVl.1~Od (]) G) 1l'ffi!IIlII fiEIlI!I9 8E!8lJ 0 · C g or: (,) C 009 4lS Cl IHHHIHIBffiNHlBffifEHB .. :E c: 41v . (]) C) -__1JIffiHJ I 001' u) G &. "0 s:: vze NO.1NI10 (]) ffiiffilffi fH@ffftrl fffiffiE3 m c: .- .... c: s:: PJf; 'S (Il _HfffitB ffiBHEtHHtffi ffiIffij ODe ::E ii: 0 00<: pU(: <? N -----, C}l SN3A3.1S rx: (,) '- vz~ ::E 0.. 0 IllHIffi!B ffHIffiB m m ffiHffi Oo~ IS~ 10 "tJ eBHH:1ffi ~ m ffiHilll ffiHBiI 000 .131100lN o- Il. --__ffiffil. "ffi ~ ~ '- 09 1130SIVl8 .., Iii oiii c: 0 HffiHEffiEHfBffifffiBmHHHB (]) (I) .., c: "0 c: c: (l) 0 OO~ H.1~OM.LN3M ~ (l) (]) c m ffiEHfBffiffilBH!HHE ffiffiB .. C "0 ~ ()j -c ~ 00<: A~n8S111d ~ &. (]) ==mm_1 ::E (7) Doe .1NVSV31d oe , ~ I (Il ~ oe I/) ~ u. &. 001> ONWE> (]) oe .f . Ci> (Il - - u. 0 'S c: ~ .... 009 .l31~~VH en en ::E s:: fiMffi Iffiffi ffiffirtjl' ,A:#Jl 009 a13I:1~VE> .... C}l f ~!ffiIEil ~~"E" , ..... rx: rx: t:,t9@ OOL 31VONAl rx: D: :: :: '- n__ff1ii!l1 OODI ::s 008 HOI~OlV 0 ffi3 MHiHHB PlHPHHB fMffilHH e:mm . 006 .1NVA~a I~ aBlHlIHHmmfllHffiffij OOO~ XV:ll00 BIilHIIlJJffi!!!1IllIIlMIJllH-m I/) .1NOdnO I/) OOH (]) Iii ~ ffiH]iW} 1IffIffillffi ~ c: -E oiii oe OOZ~ NOS~3W3 :::l g -~8JIlIllIitl,iS7 !Xl (]) "0 E (,) ooe~ .1NOl^J3~:1 0 E ~, ffiHtB ~ ffiIffi 0 0 oiii O~WIE) Iii -E (,) c: OOv~ 0 e (l) EHBB~ 8iEi!iEffiWl ..". E ~ c OOg~ .10108WnH I/) .r: (l) ::s 01 c: .r:. "0 04) (l) Ol II 009~ E>NIA~I ..= z G :E I 001.~ S3l^JVr .... ~ 3 I XON>l - (,) 008~ IIID ffi93!E 006~ NVE>Ol m M 000<: NVE>~Ol^J ==-~ 1Ir:dIl=W ~HEffiBmffiffiB ~~== HHffiID mmHB mm8ffiffi ffiHHBffiHHE_mB1lHB tn HffHffi ffiHHE ffiBffiI HHffiB ffiffiE s::: ffiIffiBm 8IDHB m ffiHfB .2 Qi1ffiffiffiHlmmCJ 10 ffiIfHEffifffffi mmmmm s::: ffi8HB fffiffiE ffiBffiI m tfffiNB .2' m 8ffiHB HffiHE83ffifBffilffiB =~mmnmB8Hffm~ C ffiPffiHl flEm9 HEBm 83, C) HffffiE ~ s::: .- s::: ~ ffiffiHffi!j ffiffiffi 8ffiHB 83ffifB 8:HHfj ....;~., ...--__HlHHJ~ .2 fJffiffiEB rHffiHB m m 8:HHfj',;YI .i: ~~mmffirrB3ilY"H(1 8=====~ ~ 8HEffil ffiHHB HEffiE 8!lffiE t8ffiB @liB \ ~ EEl EElEEIEEImm fct .l. HtiffiHlIH ffiEffiEE " j "'C rmt!nlm @iflE!B HffifB} ~== =tj effi3==_=1 Do ~===. rID ~~lHHnltffiW ill .R.a,~ Ern!B~ 8IEli@3_ L I. - II m m 0:- 009~ 418~ e 10 0 oo./.~ 4W 0 . ~ 009~ 419~ ~ ..... vZ9~ NO.LE>NI~0018 - c: (l) 41S~ ~ ~ E 009~ Q. ~ 'm "m 0 C c c Ql OOv~ 41~~ (I) (I) > (I) 0 0 Q) "0 0 OOl':~ 41E~ 'Ci) -c .r= ~ Cl CD (I) :i: c: a:: ~ ::l ooz~ 41~~ : I I E 's If) ui iii ~ (I) ~ oo~~ 4lH 8!. ex: ii u 0 = = ::3 ooo~ 4l0~ ~ ::3 ::3 "0 ~ ~ E: 006 101113 ..... "l' ~ ~ a:: 008 OE)'v'OIHO ::E ~ ~ - oz./. Sn8~n100 III oo./. >I~'v'd ON'v'1>1'v'O iii ~ OZ9 += -E c '1ij (I) ON'v'11~Od "0 c 009 E CD 0 .~ 0 009 4lS (.) a:: ~ c: J!:o CD 's ..J oat> 41~ C) I "0 III J!:o u. 's NO.LNI10 CD (I) t>ZI': c III c: 15> u. PJE III c 001': a: (j) en ooz pu~ '" 0 .... vZ~ SN3^31S a.. 0: ct. oo~ IS~ DDD 000 .L311001N 1130SI'v'18 If) 09 If) CD iii H1elOMlN3M c -E om "1ij "e ::3 E al (I) 8 ooz A~n8S111d "0 E 0 E ~ 1N'v'S'v'31d 0 8 '1ij 001': .r= 5 c ~ CD oat> ON~E) .0 0 .r= CD Cl c: .r= .L31~e1'v'H "(j) <Il Cl OOS Z CD :i: 009 0131='~'v'E) ..... ~ ~ oo./. 31'v'ONA1 0 (.) 009 HOlelO1'v' liD 006 1N'v'A~8 "0 ooo~ X'v'::l100 Z. g 1: ro "2 0 Oo~~ 1NOdnO c ::3 ..c .2 E .r= E Cl ooz~ NOS~3~3 Cl 'CD ~ 0 (.) Z .LNO~3~=' I I I oos~ C):::l :::l :::l C ~ ~ ::E OOv~ O~~IE) .4"j '2 I 009~ .La108~nH 0' : I N J 009~ E)NI^~I oo./.~ S31'Wr 008~ XON>l 006~ N'v'E)Ol oooz N'v'E>~O~ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Public 'Hp-arings 6 61 ....... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MELISSA POEHLMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: tJ.. REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading regarding amendments to the Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sign criteria for new Mixed-Use Districts, 1-494 Corridor. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the attached ordinance amendments to Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sign criteria for new Mixed-Use Districts. I II. BACKGROUND I On January 10, 2006 the City Council approved an Ordinance creating three new zoning districts, Mixed-Use Neighborhood, Mixed-Use Community and Mixed-Use Regional, and regulations to guide development within each district. The City also needs to have specific sign regulations in place for these newly-created districts. Sign regulations are currently regulated under Section 416 of the City Code. The attached amendment applies the regulations currently used for the C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and SO-1 (Service Office) Districts to the new Mixed-Use Neighborhood area, and the current C-2 (General Commercial) and 1 (Industrial) District regulations to both the Mixed-Use Community and Mixed-Use Regional areas. 032806 2nd Reading Sign Ord (MU Districts) The attached amendment is intended as a temporary measure. Following the advice of the City Attorney, Hoisington Koegler Group did not address sign regulations during the 1-494 Corridor review process. This was.in response to pending litigation in other metro suburbs regarding the legality of sign regulations similar to Richfield's. Revisions to the Sign Code were seen as a potential invitation for litigation against the City. The aforementioned cases have now been settled and judgments were in favor of the cities. Staff will now begin the process of revising the Sign Code as a whole, as a number of additional issues regarding the City's sign regulations have been brought up over the past few months. In the meantime, it is important to enact temporary sign regulations for the new districts through the proposed amendment. Without this additional language, virtually no signage could be added or changed within these districts, potentially hurting both current owners and new developments. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The recommended ordinance amendment will regulate the size and placements of signs in the three new mixed-use districts. . Examples of approved C-1/S0-1 and C-2 District signs follow: . C-1/S0-1 Districts (J 6941, 6945 Nicollet Avenue - Cornerstone Realty (J 7301 Penn Avenue - The Drapery Place . C-2 District (J 7717 Nicollet Avenue - Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant (J 1120 66th Street E- Aribel's (J 2934 66th Street W (Southdale Square) - Heartbreakers I B. CRITICAL ISSUES , . The City Code currently regulates signs in all other zoning districts. . Without this additional language, virtually no new signs and no replacement of signs will be allowed in the new mixed-use districts. . A more thorough review of sign regulations for all zoning districts will begin now. . The City Attorney has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's Code. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL I . Zoning: These amendments will add sign regulations for the MU-N, MU-C and MU-R Districts to the City Code. . Land Use: N/A . Comprehensive Plan: N/A . Notification: Notification of the City Council public hearing on this proposed City Code amendment has been provided as required by State Statute and City requirements. In addition to these requirements, property owners within the 1-494 Corridor were mailed a separate notification letter. . Other Actions: . The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of this item at its February 27, 2006 meeting. If the City Council adopts the recommended changes, they will take effect 30 days after the approved Council resolution is posted in the Sun Current newspaper. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the motion to amend City Code Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2 to add sign regulations for the newly created mixed-use districts, thereby virtually eliminating the possibility for businesses within these districts to add or change current signage. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Code References: Draft of proposed amendments to City Code Subsection 416.07 Subd. 2 to add sign regulations for the newly created mixed-use districts. . Pictures of referenced signs I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . N/A It, .- \ BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODe SUBSECTION 416.07, SUBDIVISION 2 THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(c) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (c) Neighborhood business.l. aOO-service-office. and mixed-use neiohborhood districts (C-1.l. aflG.-SQ-1. and MU-N): Sec. 2 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(d) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (d) General commerciat aflG.-industrial. mixed-use community, and mixed-use regional districts (C-2.l. aflG.-1. MU-C. and MU-R): Sec. 3 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(d)(8)(i) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (i) The offsite directional sign shall be located on property that is zoned C-2 general commercial~.l. I general industrially zoned property, MU-C mixed-use community. or MU-R mixed-use reoional. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 032806 2nd Reading Sign Ord (MU Districts) . . AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Public Hearings 7 63 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: CHRISTINE COSTELLO, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR r"7I' REVIEW: L:.J REVIEWED BY CITY J MANAGER: ~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing regarding a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan that would encourage green community development principles for land use designation in the 1-494 Corridor for future develooments. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public heC!ring and by motion: Approve a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan that would encourage green community development principles for land use in the 1-494 Corridor for future developments. I II. BACKGROUND I . The 1-494 Corridor needed new land use concepts to guide Richfield into the future. . Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi), along with help from the City,completed an eight month planning process that resulted in a new land use plan for the 1- 494 Corridor. . On November 28, 2005, the Planning Commission approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the 032806-1494 Comp Plan Green Concepts 1-494 Corridor to meet the new land use plan vision. The amendment was approved with a vote of 7-0. . On December 13, 2005, the City Council approved the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the 1- 494 Corridor. The amendment was approved with a vote of 4-0. . Central elements of the plan include making the corridor more unique and identifiable, urban in character, pedestrian friendly, economically sustainable and ultimately more livable. . The Plan is conceptual in nature and is meant to be a "fluid" document that can be further developed and refined as the community moves forward with implementation. . In order to make the 1-494 Corridor Land Use Plan more livable, it is important to incorporate green community concepts. . The purpose of incorporating green community concepts is to optimize site potential, protect and conserve water and soil, minimize energy consumption, use environmentally friendly materials and resources, reduce waste, and optimize operations and maintenance. . Green community concepts initiate redevelopment that will lead to healthy, sustainable, and affordable environments for living, working, and recreating. . This amendment will allow for the green community concepts to be added to the Comprehensive Plan section on the 1-494 Corridor Land Use Plan. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . In February 2005, the City Council took action to support a planning visioning process for the area recognizing that a new vision was needed. . On November 28, 2005, the Planning Commission approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the 1-494 Corridor. The amendment was approved with a vote of 7-0. . On December 13, 2005, the City Council approved the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the 1-494 Corridor. The amendment was approved with a vote of 4-0. . The green community concepts that would be encouraged for new development in the 1-494 Corridor are: . Optimize site potential . Protect and conserve water and soil . Minimize energy consumption . Enhance indoor environmental quality . Use environmentally preferable materials and resources . Reduce waste . Optimize operations and maintenance . In the current Comprehensive Plan's goals and objectives there is a focus on values that would support the proposed green community concepts, such as: . Promoting infrastructure that is environmentally responsible. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I The green community concepts are recommendations and not requirements of development within the 1-494 Corridor. I C. FINANCIAL I . Maintaining a current vision of the Corridor is critical to the viability of Richfield. I D. LEGAL I . The City Council is not required by state statute to conduct a public hearing on a Comprehensive Plan amendment; however, it has been City practice for both the Planning Commission and City Council to hold public hearings. . Notice of the City Council public hearing was published in the Sun- Current on March 16, 2006. . The City Council must amend the Comprehensive Plan by resolution by two-thirds vote of the full Council. (Four of the five members must vote in favor of the amendment.) . The "green community" amendment would be contingent upon Metropolitan Council approval. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Continue the consideration of this matter to a future meeting. . Reject the proposal. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution . Excerpt of 1-494 Corridor Land Use Plan I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . N/A '. 1-\ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE 1-494 CORRIDOR WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan provides a Guide Plan establishing classifications for individual property; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 9687, adopted December 13,2005, the City Council amended the Comprehensive Plan Guide Plan with respect to the area known as the 1-494 Corridor, which corridor is located between Knox Avenue- and Trunk Highway 77 and between 7ih Street and 1-494; and WHEREAS, the City staff and Planning Commission have recommended that the narrative to the Guide Plan for the 1-494 area be further amended to include language that encourages "green community" development within the 1-494 corridor; and WHEREAS, the "green community" development principles are intended to minimize negative impacts on the natural environment and human health through careful attention to building siting, design, and operation and the use of quality products and technology; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Guide Plan classifications and determined that it would be in the public interest to encourage the use of "green community" development concepts within the 1-494 corridor; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 27, 2006 regarding the proposed modification of the Guide Plan and approved the modification; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the amendment on March 28, 2006. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the City's Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended by including language in the Guide Plan narrative that will encourage "green community" development principles within the 1-494 Corridor, contingent upon the following: 1. The revision is submitted to and approved by the Metropolitan Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 1-J-. Excerpt from Comprehen ive Plan 1-494 Corridor Land Use Plan S ction Parking needs to be convenient and visually attractive. Applying Green Community Concepts Utilizing green community concepts in the 1- 494 corridor will lead to healthy, sustainable, and affordable environments for living, working, and recreating. Paying particular attention to where and how buildings are sited, designed, and operated can minimize negative impacts on the natural environment and human health. Using quality products and superior technology while paying attention to natural systems can create durable, efficient, and sustainable buildings that will remain healthy and vibrant for generations to come. The following green community principles should be encouraged in new development within the 1-494 corridor: Optimize site potential- Use sites to their fullest potential by increasing density, creating opportunities for alternative transportation (public transit, walking, cycling), considering microclimate effects on buildings, and using native species in landscape plantings. Protect and conserve water and soil - Stormwater runoff should be minimized and managed through a stormwater runoff plan. To reduce water consumption, consider the use of water- conserving appliances, fixtures, and landscaping. Steps should be taken to minimize the loss of soil and sediment during construction and occupancy to . . . reduce storm-water sediment and air pollution. Minimize enerQY consumption - Reduce energy consumption by taking advantage of natural heating, cooling and day lighting, and by using energy efficient appliances (Energy Star), equipment and lighting. Enhance indoor environmental Quality - Given the amount of time spent indoors, indoor environmental quality proves especially important to human health. To create a healthy indoor environment for occupants, consider the use of non-toxic materials, ventilation and exhaust systems, and moisture control products and systems. Use environmentally preferable materials & resources - Consider the use of materials healthy for both occupants and the environment such as locally produced, salvaged and/or remanufactured materials, products with recycled content or from renewable sources, materials that can be recycled or reused, and low VOC-emitting materials. Reduce waste - Reduce and manage wastes generated during the construction process and operation of buildings. When demolition occurs, consider the sorting and recycling of leftover materials and debris. Optimize operations and maintenance - Inform and educate building occupants as to what they can and need to do to maintain and improve their green community. Consider ongoing support and shared services. . . . . AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # ReHolutions 8 64 .... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: CHRlS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TInE COUNCIL PRESENTER: o REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution providing for the sale of $6,080,000 General Obligation Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution providing for the sale of . $6,080,000 General Obligation Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A. I II. BACKGROUND I During 2005, the City's Water Plant began a renovation of its water filters and improvements to its HVAC system. In addition, to these two projects, the Water Plant is in need of further capital improvements. As a consequence of the two projects that are currently underway, both of which are being funded by existing cash in the Water Fund, the cash balance has been spent down. To finance the remaining improvements to the Water Plant the issuance of General Obligation (G.O.) Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds is being proposed. At the February 14, 2006 City Council meeting, the Council approved a resolution that allowed staff to incur costs for proposed capital improvements at the Water Plant prior to issuance of revenue bonds. The resolution allowed costs incurred up to 60 days prior to Council approval to be reimbursed using the proceeds of the revenue bonds proposed to be issued. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The Water Plant is an important infrastructure asset of the City and needs to be maintained at up to date operating standards. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . If the improvements are not completed, the Water Plant could possibly face equipment failures and interruptions in operations. I C. FINANCIAL I . The total of the G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds to be issued is $6,080,000. . The total improvements before capitalized interest and issuance costs is $5,800,000 and include the following: o Installation of Backwash Tanks $ 1,100,000 o Replace Sludge Presses 1,300,000 o Expand Recarbonation Basin 500,000 o Replace Lime Feed System 400,000 o Replacement of Water Meter System 2,500,000 . The debt service of the bonds will be paid from water and sewer revenues. . The City is currently working with Ehlers & Associates to complete a utility analysis, which includes reviewing future water and sewer needs and current and ~uture rates. An outcome of the analysis may be the need in the future.to raise utility rates to help cover the debt service payments. . All improvements proposed with the exception of the expansion of the recarbonation basin are included in the 2006 Capital Improvement Budget and the 2007-2010 Capital Improvement Plan included in the 2006 Adopted Budget. . I D. LEGAL I . Legal counsel has reviewed the pre-sale report and the attached resolution. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Decide not to proceed with the sale of bonds and postpone or reduce the planned improvements. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution. . Bond Pre-Sale Report. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. . Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ~-I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $6,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER AND SEWER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2006A WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $6,080,000 General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2006A (the "Bonds") to finance the water and sewer improvements in the City; and WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc. in Minneapolis, Minnesota (Ehlers), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 6:30 p.m. on April 25, 2006, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk fJ-J- City of Richfield, Minnesota Pre-Sale Report March 28, 2006 Proposed Issue: . $6,080,000 General Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds, Series 2006 Purpose: The $6,080,000 G.O. Water and Sewer Bonds, Series 2006, are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475. The bonds are being issued to fmance improvements to the City's water and sewer system. Debt service will be paid from water and sewer revenues. Term/Call Feature: The Bonds have a 20-year term, with the first principal payment in February 2008 and maturing in February 2027. The bonds will have a 15.year call date, and the bonds maturing February 1, 2022, will be callable February 1,2021, and any date thereafter. Funding Sources: The $6,080,000 G.O. Water and Sewer Bonds will be paid from water and sewer revenues. Discussion Issues: Following is a summary of key factors in the finance plan: . Ehlers & Associates is currently working with the City to complete a Utility Analysis, which includes reviewing future utility needs and current and future rates. The Council may need to consider raising rates sometime in the future to make the debt service payments. . The City (in combination with any subordinate taxing jurisdictions or debt issued in the City's name by 501(c)3 corporations) is not expected to issue more than a total of$lO,OOO,OOO in tax-exempt debt during this calendar year. This will allow the Bonds to be designated as bank qualified. Having bank-qualified status may decrease the interest rates. · Because the City is issuing more than $5,000,000 in tax-exempt obligations during calendar year 2006, the debt will be subject to arbitrage regulations. . The bonds will be rated by Moody's Investor Service. The City currently has an Aa3 rating . Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. <6-3 on its General Obligation Debt. . The Bonds will be global book entry with a bank designated as the paying agent. As "paperless" bonds, you will avoid the costs of bond printing and annual registrar charges. The Paying Agent will invoice you for the interest semi-annually and on an annual basis for the principal coming due. You will be charged only for paying agent/transfer agent services provided by the banle . Bidders on this issue may submit a bid, which contains a maturity schedule providing for any combination of serial bonds and term bonds, subject to mandatory redemption. If the purchaser of the Bonds designates certain of the maturities as Term Bonds, subject to a mandatory call, the City will be responsible for providing a Notice of Call to holders of the Bonds at least 45 days prior to the call date. Allowing potential purchasers the term bond option results in increased bidder interest in this issue and possible lower interest rates. . Because the aggregate amount of this issue is over $1,000,000 and the City will be obligated to comply with Continuing Disclosure requirements as required by paragraph (b)( 5) of Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Schedule: Pre-Sale Review: March 28, 2006 Distribute Official Statement: April 13, 2006 Bond Sale: April 25, 2006 Estimated Closing Date: Mid-May 2006 Attachments: Sources and Uses of Funds Proposed Debt Service Schedules Resolution authorizing Ehlers to proceed with bond sale Ehlers Contacts: Financial Advisors: Rebecca Kurtz (651) 697-8516 Sid Inman (651) 697-8507 . Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ~,-i Bond Analysts: Diana Lockard (651) 697-8534 Debbie Holmes (651) 697-8536 Bond Sale Coordinator: Connie Kuck (651) 697-8527 The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the Council Members at their home address for review prior to the sale date. . Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Resolutions 9 6'i ..... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: PATRICK SMITH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT~NAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED By CITY ~NAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution approving the Concept Plans for Cedar Point. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Concept Plans for Cedar Point. I II. BACKGROUND I In July 2005 the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment (Contract) with Ryan Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) for the redevelopment of the Cedar Point area. A stipulation of the Contract is that Concept Plans for the development be approved by the HRA and the City Council. Concept Plans include building elevations, public improvement plans, and landscaping plans. The HRA approved the Concept Plans by resolution on March 20, 2006. . Building Elevations · The project architects used the adjacent airport for inspiration in designing the commercial buildings. The buildings have been designed with elements which mimic the airport: modern styling, a strong horizontal emphasis with a select 032806 Cedar Point Concept few vertical elements representing control towers, for example, and with creative use of metal and glass building materials. · The SuperTarget has two main entrances. One for the general merchandise and one for the grocery section of the stores. Both entrances are designed with two stories of glass, which effectively highlights the entrances of the large building. The SuperTarget store is 570 feet in length. · The front fayade of the SuperTarget has extensive building articulation, both vertically and horizontally. Much of the building steps back, reducing the massing along the sidewalk. The building steps back and forth along the front fayade to a depth of 25 feet. · The primary building material on the front and south elevations is "quick-brick" material a concrete block that is four inches high and looks like brick. The primary materials on the north and east elevation are rock faced block with brick pilasters. . · Trellises not only provide interest for pedestrians but also break up the blank walls in the front fayade. · Because of the high visibility of the rear of SuperTarget to TH 77, the rear of the building includes elements from the front fayade. The southeast corner of the building has a strong element with the same metal paneling, same horizontal canopy, and same red bulls eye as the main entrance. In addition, the rear facade has a playful element with the "bouncing" half bulls eye running along the fayade. · The outlot buildings will consist of seven general retail buildings, one full service restaurant, and one bank. The outlot buildings will resemble but not be identical to the SuperTarget building. The bank and restaurant will deviate the most from the SuperTarget architecture. · The Concept Plan submittal includes elevations of two of the nine outlot buildings. (As part of the formal city zoning review process to be initiated in several weeks, elevations of all the outlot buildings will need to be submitted for review.) · The building materials will be the same as the SuperTarget: "quick brick," rock faced block, metal panels and glass. All of the architecture for the outlot buildings will be four-sided architecture. · The Home Depot elevations continue the use of brick and metal paneling as the primary materials. · The Home Depot is proposing a new prototype in which the sidewalks in front of the stores are wider, more defined and allows for landscaping, but the vestibules of the two entrances are pulled back, which creates a flatter front fayade than previously built Home Depot stores. · Like SuperTarget, Home Depot is proposing trellises to provide interest for pedestrians and break up the blank walls in the front fayade. · The Nursery on the north side of the building has an open roof, fencing with brick columns on the west and north elevations, and a solid wall facing the airport (east). The new Home Depot prototype has a green house in the nursery. · The rear of the Home Depot will be tip-up concrete panels that will have a rock faced block texture to mimic the SuperTarget rear fayade. In addition, Home Depot also has the metal panel columns and vertical fins along the rear fayade to bring some of the front fayade elements to the rear of the building. · Building materials will be on display at the City Council meeting. Public Improvement Plan . The City plans to construct a roundabout at the 17th Avenue and 66th Street intersection. . Extensive median and boulevard plantings on 66th Street will create the grand boulevard entry from TH 77 through to the roundabout. . Plantings in 66th Street median will use Lannon stone, day lilies, perennials and other plant varieties to repeat the plant palette along 66th Street east of TH 77. (Ryan will be providing substantial funding to landscape the roundabout and median.) . Median pJantings on 17th Avenue will unify the retail on both sides of 17th Avenue between 65th and 66th Streets. . Ryan will be constructing a regional pond in the MnDOT right-of-way that will accommodate the 3D-acre site runoff as well as the runoff from the existing adjoining residential area west of 17th Avenue. . The stormwater design takes advantage of the soil conditions that will allow infiltration of stormwater. The majority of the storm sewer will be perforated pipe to allow water to be dispersed throughout the site as the water flows to the pond. Site and Landscaping Plans . To create gathering nodes and promote interaction between pedestrians and shops, Ryan is proposing providing sidewalks 20-feet wide throughout the development, overhead trellises, over-story trees, outdoor eating areas, and zero lot line architecture. . Ryan and Target have created a tree-lined streetscape with planting islands and trees in front of SuperTarget. Locating streetlights and trees close to the "street", separating pedestrians from vehicular traffic, making the walking experience more enjoyable. . Striving to achieve the Cedar Avenue Corridor Redevelopment Concept Master Plan's goal of creating an urban experience, Ryan is proposing smaller, individual buildings close to the street rather than a long strip center with parking next to the street. In addition, the number of uses with drive-up windows is limited; the one use proposed with a drive-up window locates the drive-up internally within the retail center. . Ryan is working with Mount Cavalry Church to replace the 11 parking stalls, which will be lost to the bus turn out, which is part of the expansion of 66th Street. . The Site Plan incorporates a screen wall (ranging from 5 feet-10 feet in height and approximately 800 feet in length) at the property line with TH 77 designed to match the buildings so there will be no "backside" to the development. All of the architecture will be a four-sided view. . Complementary planting along TH 77 right-of-way with a variety of trees and shrubs will blend with the screen wall and architectural facades. . Respecting the urban grid, Ryan is providing a direct sidewalk connection along 17th Avenue to Taft Park and sidewalks through the parking lot connecting the retail/service with housing and transportation. . The east side of 17th Avenue has a 27-foot wide berm and will be planted with multiple layers of over-story trees and hedges to separate the parking from the street and minimize the intrusion of headlights into the neighborhood. . A heavily landscaped edge adjacent to Taft Park will provide for year-round screening. . Over-story canopy and/or ornamental trees at all retail shops within the sidewalk area will provide shade and create a quality urban space between shops and the parking fields. . Irrigation will be extensively used to maintain the landscaping. . Existing trees will be saved whenever possible. A tree survey will help identify those possibilities. The greatest opportunity for saving existing trees will be adjacent to 17th Avenue and along the edge of Taft Park. . Ryan will construct and own the nine outlot buildings. The SuperTarget Store and land will be owned by Target. The Home Depot store will be owned by Home Depot, and they will lease the land from Ryan. All stores are anticipated to be open the fall of 2007. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City has identified a Low Frequency Noise Impacted area in the northeast corner of Richfield where the negative impacts of low frequency noise will exceed the tolerances of exiting housing. . In 2004, the Comprehensive Plan designation for this area was amended to "Regional Retail/Office" to reflect the recommendations contained in the Cedar Corridor Redevelopment Concept Master Plan. . In July 2005 the HRA approved a Contract for Private Development with Ryan Companies to build a SuperTarget and Home Depot store at this location. . The Community Services Commission has reviewed and approved the proposed connection and access to Taft Park's south parking lot. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Staff is concerned with the amount of rock faced block used on the outlot buildings. Because of their visibility and pedestrian scale of the outlot buildings, staff is recommending that rock face block only be used as a secondary material. . A concern was raised at the concurrent work session that the outlot buildings may look identical with each other. It is the intention of Ryan that these buildings resemble, but not copy, each other. The elevations of all of the outlot buildings will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council when Ryan applies for a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). . The details of the activity in front of Home Depot have yet to be worked out. Staff hopes that the "streetscape" that has been created in front of SuperTarget will be extended past the front of the Home Depot store. . Staff is suggesting more building articulation of the front fa<;ade of the Home Depot store and more depth to the main entrance so it does not look like a false parapet. . Signage on the building elevations is shown as an example for the Concept Plans. Actually signage plans will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the formal review process. . . Buildings and their interior spaces will be mitigated from low frequency noise through quality design and construction of the buildings. I C. FINANCIAL I . Ryan is in the midst of costing out construction of the project. All parties are concerned about maintaining the integrity of the concepts as it relates to materials. I D. LEGAL I . Legal counsel prepared the attached resolution. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Approve the Concept Plans with conditions. . Deny the Concept Plans with a finding that the development would have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution . Site and Landscaping Plan . SuperTarget Perspective . SuperTarget Elevations . Home Depot Perspective . Home Depot Elevations . Outlot buildings Perspective . Outlot Buildings Elevations I VI. PRINCIPALPARTIESEXPECTEDATMEETING I . Gerald Klitz, Director of Retail Architecture, Ryan . Richard Koppy, Director of Engineering, Ryan . John Dietrich, Principal Landscape Architect, RLK . q-l RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CONCEPT PLANS CEDAR POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, on or about July 27,2005, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the "Authority") and Ryan Companies US, Inc. ("Ryan") entered into a Contract for Private Development (the "Contract") calling for the redevelopment of certain tracts of land all as fully described in the Contract; and WHEREAS, one of the preconditions to the Authority's obligations to transfer parcels of land to Ryan was the approval, by the City Council of a Concept Plan as that term was defined in the Contract, and subject to the process provided for therein for approval; and WHEREAS, Ryan has worked closely with HRA and City staff in the development of a Concept Plan for the Cedar Point Area; and . WHEREAS, a draft of the Concept Plan was reviewed at a concurrent meeting of the Richfield City Council, the Authority and the Richfield Planning Commission on February 27,2006; and WHEREAS, following the concurrent meeting the Concept Plan was further refined, and has now been presented to the City Council along with a report of staff and a recommendation that the Concept Plan be approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council has now reviewed the proposed Concept Plan, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Community Development Department of the City of Richfield, the report and recommendation of staff, and is fully informed as to such matters. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Concept Plan meets the requirements of the Contract, and is therefore approved. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 032806 Cedar Point Concept . . M<lr 13, 2000 J;49pm G;\R)'\ln Compollhu\2005-744-M\d....\lmg<;J~'\f!lII'\dorill..\R'nd"'\"'i1 Ell'-.~E:.dfll'il I(~~) ~ 8 . J l!ll i' ~ ~~~ Id ~ i$~ ~~~~ ~n g.CD =nO- s:ei ~ ~~, a n o ~ o ~ 00 I ~ ~ ~ = 00 ~ ~ ~. -< CD r/l ~. ~ CD ~ ~ ~ tj ~ ~ . . ~~ol. 23H~ ~ B ~ r -of ~ III ., 10 CD - ... Ul n ... 0 ., CD :I: "0 III :J " :J :J 10 - Qo m 0 CD (/I r 10 :J )> ~ ., Cl 'i ::r ... CD Cl i: ... i: ., CD Qo Z m :J 10 :J CD CD ., :J 10 '" o s: )> ;U (') J: '" o o OJ o . -I Ql ., (Q co ... :a - n :t -n - m r ~ ~ (f) ... o ., CO "0 Ql :J :J :J (Q Qo o CO l/l (Q :J ) ., Cl ::r ... co Cl ... ; I ~ z :J co CO ., I\) o s: ) ::u o J: I\) o o Ol o 't ::0 - n :c -n - m r- C ::0 m ~ - r- I - Z I r- - Z m m r- m ~ ~ - o z V) s - - w '0 0- = C r- o Z G') r- )> VI ::! z G') ;:0 m r- ~ o z VI :I: ." VI :Ii ~ "1::~ a:t ~~8: iI &lg~ - i8i!'~ ~ 8<g.~ CD "...... -""'I ~ == ~ a:::a :j~:~ iir ~~~ a 8l~g II! ..... :c m :i! :c "., ::0 Cl :I: c=s == ~*rn NrnmC g c:d.::; m w rn.. ." ~~~~ >0 ~ C) ~m ~F;; ~;; II ..... ~C5 q:z: -en 09 ~:;! n m'" ~ ~I;!!~;!! :E~~~23 I , 1 . I ~oooc ~~~~~ ~g~~i :a C5 :c ..... m r- ~ == 6 :z: r- m :!I m r- ~ == 6 :z: :a ~ :a m r- m ;; ..... 6 :z: B1 ~cncn3:""":::a N N -.~ en ~~~~s:i ~ ~~~~~ ~O;-3i~& o)C !:!.Z~ 3 :Ii VI CD :,::S? ~~ ~ a> n 1ll~m ~~ C '=> 1[ ..... <:> c.. ".". '3 's: ::a s: ::;" "tJ ~ ~ 0 ~=r en _ l:5S Z :$ '" -I c = c Z " ~ z " ,. ~ ~ ~ a :z ~ ~ 5i @J B1 i~~~~i: t;~~!:~;: ~~~~~~ ~i~i~i 3 S'~~ '.::~ C;;:ii ~ ~:JJn ?' n" m ~:=!C o CO" :I> 3~ :a ~ ::;" ." ri 15 - ~'::T (I) ..., ",0 - g or 2 a> ..... 1m I:! 1= ~~ @ ~ ~ , '" = c 5 '0 .." )>~ g " 1:1 :;-Q.,.c.... .~ trl n !l: ~ :::a :::a ;lI z .. ~~ ~ i'i' ::r'" :r t"' 0 .. ~ " '" g ei ~ m (; ~ '" ~ trlzS " .....i " ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ i< ~ a. ~ ::l ',"" <) .. .. " >- 1S ~ R 3 < n- '" :I: ili i i!: .. .., .. ~ ::; trl ~ -i .. Os '" g. a,~ E.; B~ '" i5 a -n z 1\)!lJ z a" ~.~.~ 5~ r- " :IIi a z - ~ ~ ~ 8 '" ~ p ~~~~ m > :10 .., Z r- z 1 g ~ m 8 ==.. ." S ~ g-.9'"'; en 0 f~ ~w~ ;;.:.:ig- i< ~ S !i! ~a~~ : ~ ~ m is . ;;I ~ ;; z ~ ~ 1:; l ~ L(i \II !2 :t: g,,~~:=-i ~ ~.~ ~ i. 8 l!l; - .< i' i< ?!!. I:l~~ I!l B1 ~!!l!!l1!;0ii:l i~~:::Ie;:." ~ ~~! ~ ~ ~ i88~~;" ~ii:'ii!~~& ~ )( S";; -z <em ~ '" :0 C"') ~ -. m ~ g. C ~ ::tl ..... b ~ rIIJP ~ .0- ::a w:s;: :S:::;' ~ ~ ~ 0 ?" en _ ~s 2 al '" -I 1m i= i:z: ~ @ i ~ \ ~ { -I- I I I I I I l--- J.._ .....,. _ I I I I I I I I I I L i ~ \ ~ { I- I I I I I I I .1.--- i ~ \ ~ ~ -I ~ -I ~ . . ., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ) 1\ ~ ~ ~ ~ !^ '" III :{ ~ ~ ~ ~ j I I I ! '" III :{ ~ ~ ~ ~ j i i. F i ~ \ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ I \ ~ ~ ~ .. .. ~ i ~ I ~ { i ~ ~ ~ 1 * -I i .J ! , t / I i; I' I: Ii I it , I' f I I :i ~ ;i J! ; j ! - - - - I - = = =: - = = = : 1- = = = \11 ~ ~ i I I ! I AGENDA SECTION: Resolut:i ODS AGENDA ITEM # 10 REpORT # 66 ~ STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: CHRISTINE COSTELLO, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: "A DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Cedar Point Commons ro'ect. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt a resolution approving Negative Declaration and Record of Decision and make the findings of fact and conclusions contained in Exhibit A in regard to the Cedar Point Commons Environmental Assessment Worksheet. I II. BACKGROUND I The floor area size of the proposed Cedar Point required the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) according to State regulations. Based on review of the EAW, the City Council must determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for the project. Staff prepared the EAWwith the assistance of Ryan Companies US, Inc., the project developer, and RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd, engineering and planning consultants to Ryan Companies US, Inc. WSB and Associates provided the City with an independent review of the information submitted by Ryan Companies US, Inc. and RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. The EAW assesses the impact of the project in regard to the 032806_Cedar Point EAW Decision following factors: wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources, wastewater, ground water, hazardous wastes, traffic, air and noise pollution, infrastructure and public service and land use plans. The EAW was made available to the public from January 16, 2006 to February 15, 2006. Comments were received and are responded to in the Record of Decision. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The purpose of an EAW is to identify and assess environmental impacts. . The information disclosed in the EAW process has two functions: to determine whether an EIS is needed, and to indicate how the project can be modified to lessen environmental impacts. The modifications come in the form of permit conditions by regulatory agencies, such as the Department of Natural Resources and Minnesota Department of Transportation. . The EAW, comments, and comment responses is to provide a record on which the City can base a decision about whether an EIS needs to be prepared for the project. . The attached Record of Decision document is the document on which the City Council bases its decision on an EIS. . The project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects that would warrant preparation of an EIS based on the comments received. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The approximate 30-acre single-family housing and commercial/industrial site will be redeveloped into a destination retail/restaurant development. The redevelopment is the result of the Metropolitan Airport Commissions (MAC) adding a new north/south runway at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. . The decibel levels of noise from the new north/south runway are not compatible with existing single-family land uses. . The project will increase the amount of traffic; however, the roadway network is being upgraded for the increased traffic. All intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service with the increased traffic. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL I . Staff has reviewed the proposed Record of Decision and found it to be consistent with the evidence submitted to the City and the applicable statutes and regulations. . Legal counsel prepared the attached resolution. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I. . Deny the request for a Negative Declaration and determine that an Environmental Impact Statement is required for the proposed project. 1 V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution . Record of Decision (Exhibit A) 1 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . A representative from RLK-Kuusisto . Tony Hepplemann, WSB and Associates .; I () ~I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND RECORD OF DECISION CEDAR POINT COMMONS WHEREAS, Ryan Companies US, Inc. is the Proposer of a commercial development located in the northwest quadrant of 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77) in the City of Richfield ("Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is proposed to include 350,000 square feet of retail, general merchandise, restaurant, and home improvement tenant and 1,584 parking spaces; and WHEREAS, the Project falls within the mandatory environmental assessment worksheet ("EAW") category of Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, subp. 14 because the Project involves the construction of a commercial development with 350,000 square feet of retail and general merchandise ("EAW"); and WHEREAS, the City is the Responsible Governmental Unit ("RGU") pursuant to Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, subp. 14; and WHEREAS an EAW was prepared by the City with the assistance from the Proposer, who submitted completed data portions of the EAW to the City consistent with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1400; and WHEREAS, the EAW was prepared using the form approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board ("MEQB") for EAWs in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1300; and WHEREAS, the City issued the EAW on January 16, 2006 and provided a copy to the MEQB on the same day; and WHEREAS, the City issued a press release on January 12, 2006 to the Sun- Current newspaper regarding the availability of the document; and WHEREAS, the comment period closed on February 17, 2006 and comments were received from four state agencies and two individuals during the comment period; and WHEREAS, the City with assistance from the Proposer has prepared a proposed Record of Decision on the EAW for the Project for consideration by the City Council ("Record of Decision"), which includes Findings of Fact and Responses to Comments received, is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the City staff has reviewed the proposed Record of Decision and has found the Record of Decision to be consistent with the evidence submitted to the City and the applicable statutes and regulations, to the best of their knowledge, and has recommended that the City Council approve the Record of Decision and determine that no environmental impact statement ("EIS") is necessary, reasonable or warranted with respect to the Project under the circumstances; and Jo'-~ WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make the Findings of Fact which are contained within the Record of Decision and to conclude that no EIS is required with respect to the Project ("Negative Declaration"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby: 1. Adopt and approve the Record of Decision on the Cedar Point Commons Environmental Assessment Worksheet in the form which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby makes the Findings of Fact and Conclusions which are contained therein; and 2. Find and determine that, based upon the Record of Decision, no environmental impact statement is required for the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act or Minnesota Rules Parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk /0---3 Exhibit A RECORD OF DECISION ON THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W) FOR CEDAR POINT COMMONS PROJECT FINDINGS OF FACT I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Proposed Project The Cedar Point Commons project is a 30:t acre redevelopment project at the northwest quadrant of Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77) and 66th Street in Richfield, Minnesota. The project will include 350,000:t square feet of retail, general merchandise, restaurant and home improvements tenants. The project, to be known as Cedar Point Commons, will have its main access at 17th A venue and 66th Street, which is proposed to be a roundabout. Cedar Point Commons will create a transit and pedestrian friendly design that will promote a community connected urban redevelopment site as well as promoting a high level of architectural design. It is proposed that the entire site will be rezoned as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) as the project progresses through the site development review process at the City of Richfield. B. Existing Conditions The 30-acre site is a redevelopment of vacant and primarily residential properties occupying approximately 6-1/2 blocks, located along the eastern border of Richfield, Minnesota. The redevelopment area has been years in the making and is a result of the Metropolitan Airport Commission's (MAC) decision in 1999 to add a new north/south runway to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. The new north/south runway opened Oct9ber 27,2005. The new runway and the resulting low frequency noise levels have made it essential for the City to revise their Comprehensive Land Use Plan and consider a commercial land use adjacent to the airport versus a residential land use. The anticipated decibel levels to be generated by the new runway have been mapped and the eastern most properties in Richfield will experience decibel readings of 87db or greater. These decibel readings are not compatible with the existing single family residential land use. The entire Cedar Point Commons redevelopment area is within the 87db zone. The 30-acre site is in the process of being assembled. It is estimated that approximately 110 separate legal parcels will be assembled by the developer and the City of Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). C. Administrative Process The City of Richfield issued the EA Won January 16,2006, and provided copies ofthe EA W to all required agencies, the EQB and area libraries. The 30-day comment period closed on February 17, 2006, and comments were received from four agencies and two individuals during the comment period. Written responses to comments are attached as Appendix A and written comments received are included as Appendix B. II. CRITERIA Minnesota Rule 4410.1700 Subp. 7. sets forth criteria for deciding if a project has potential for significant environmental effects. Following is a listing of those criteria and the City's findings with respect to each of the following criteria. IO-Y A. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan The land use plan has been modified and approved by the Metropolitan Council. The property has been guided for commercial development in anticipation of the 2005 completion of the north/south runway noise impact and the transportation improvements of the TH 77/66th Street interchange. The proposed plan is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the proposed PUD zoning provides the City with the authority to review and approve a plan, which meets the criteria of the City Staff, Planning Commission and City Council. Redevelopment of the site to a commercial designation puts the land to a more productive use. III. FINDINGS A. Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources The Cedar Point Commons project does not contain areas offish, unique wildlife and/or ecologically sensitive resources. The project will protect the majority of the mature trees along 17th A venue and within Taft Park. B. Physical Impact on Water Resource Minor wetland impacts are required for the construction of the stormwater pond which is not located within the 30-acre site. Approximately 0.3 acres of wetland, located off the subject site, will be disturbed for the proposed pond construction. The City has coordinated with MnDOT the required sequencing and approvals to be obtained for the O.3-acre wetland. The O.3-acre of wetland will be mitigated as required. This wetland is not listed on the DNR Protected Waters Inventory. It should be noted that this pond will benefit the proposed site, portions of the existing residential property to the west of the proposed site and future expansion of Trunk Highway 77. This is a good use of property, which will be available once the 63rd Street off-ramp paving is removed. This pond will also benefit future development of areas south and west of the proposed site. Due to the limited area on-site and the existing site grade differentials, there were no other areas on-site that would allow for a pond with the ability to provide water quality and rate control for such a large area. The proposed pond will function as a regional pond in an otherwise undevelopable piece of land. Current discussions are underway between MnDOT and the City of Richfield on required sequencing and mitigation under the rules of the Wetland Conservation Act. The City will be purchasing credits from an approved wetland bank located in Hennepin County. C. Erosion and Sedimentation The proposed construction will result in approximately 30 acres of land to be graded and converted from a residential to a commercial land use, in addition to the improvements to 66th Street. The 30 acres ofland to be graded will result in approximately 125,000 cubic yards of excavated soil to be moved within the site. The proposed grading and erosion control plan will incorporate typical Best Management Practice devices to control erosion and sedimentation. These devices include, but are not limited to silt fence, rock construction entrances, storm sewer structure inlet control and temporary sedimentation basins. As part of the construction documents, to be prepared prior to site construction, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared in accordance with the current MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The stormwater will be directed towards the joint stormwater pond at the north end of the site. This pond will outlet the treated runoff to Mother Lake, consistent with current flows. Mother Lake flows Record of Decision - City of Richfield EA W Cedar Point Commons Project March 20, 2006 Page 2 of5 ...- IO-,j through a series of piping and ponds/lake prior to discharge into Minnehaha Creek and eventually into the Mississippi River. With the addition of a stormwater pond, it is anticipated that the runoff to Mother Lake will have improved water quality and an overall reduction in peak flows, thus improving the overall quality of downstream waters. . D. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff The City has also worked closely with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) on creating a stormwater pond to be located northeast of the site on MnDOT right of way. The new pond will address water quality and rate control andbe placed where the former 63rd Street slip ramp was located. The proposed system will route stormwater runoff through new and existing storm sewer. The site storm sewer will be routed to the proposed stormwater pond, while the TH 77 drainage will continue to flow to Mother Lake through the median storm sewer. Portions of the proposed storm sewer will be perforated to promote infiltration into the underlying granular soils, reducing the rate and volume of storm water runoff prior to discharge to the stormwater pond. This joint stormwater pond will provide a permanent pool volume that meets the current MPCA requirements for the overall tributary area. In addition, the pond will provide rate control for the proposed tributary area. This joint pond is proposed to provide water quality and rate control on a permanent basis. E. Water and Sewer The project will be connected to the City of Richfield municipal water system for fire and domestic services. Wastewater from the project will be collected by the City's sanitary sewer collection system. The calculated flows from the existing single family residential, multi-family residential and commercial businesses have been calculated at approximately 70,550 gallons per day. The anticipated flows for the proposed commercial development are approximately 38,200 gallons per day. This results in a significant reduction in sanitary sewer discharge from the subject site. F. Water-Related Land Use Management Districts The project is not within a floodplain, but is within 1,000 feet of Taft Lake. The City does not have a shore land management district. The proposed stormwater pond properly addresses the water quality and rate control for the site and the entire sub drainage area. G. Solid Wastes During construction, limited amounts of hazardous materials typically used on this type of construction project are anticipated to be used. The Developer will require that the contractor ensure that all applicable environmental regulations and requirements for the use, storage, handling and disposal of any such materials are met, to prevent leaks from contaminating groundwater. Due to the age of the residential structures, it is anticipated there will be the need to conduct asbestos abatement of homes and/or businesses on an individual basis. It is anticipated the homes and/or businesses will contain asbestos in roofing materials, flooring products, thermal system insulation, surfacing materials, ducts and insulation. In addition, the buildings may contain lead paint and/or pipes, polychlorinated bi- phenyls (PCB) containing items, mercury containing switches, ozone depleting chemicals, hazardous waste and/or special wastes which must be inventoried and disposed of according to current regulatory guidelines prior to demolition. Additionally, heating fuel oil tanks may be present in the buildings or on the site. The fuel oil tanks may be in the basements or adjacent to the buildings or be underground storage tanks (USTs) located adjacent to the buildings. Demolition contractors will work with the developer and environmental consultant to identify the hazardous materials in the structures to be removed in order to properly dispose, mitigate and/or recycle the products. During redevelopment ofthe Cedar Point Commons Project area, petroleum impacted soils may be encountered as well as other impacted soils. It is anticipated that in those possible areas where impacts may be expected (i.e. former gasoline service Record of Decision - City of Richfield EA W Cedar Point Commons Project March 20, 2006 Page 3 of5 10-& stations and businesses}, an environmental field technician will be on site to screen soils in accordance with MPCA guidelines. A limited amount of hazardous waste is anticipated during operation of the retail/restaurant facilities such as used florescent light bulbs and cleaning supplies. The County's hazardous waste facility is available and has the capacity to serve this development. H. A detailed traffic impact study conducted by WSB and Associates, Inc. for the proposed Cedar Avenue Corridor is titled Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar A venue Corridor Transit Oriented Development. The Cedar A venue study considered the potential impacts associated with the proposed development of the 30-acre Cedar Point Commons commercial/retail site. The study addresses the existing operational conditions, the 2006 and 2025 no-build conditions, and the 2006 and 2025 build conditions, and suggests improvements to the roadway infrastructure to address current and future problems. A complete copy of the above mentioned study is included in the EA W. The traffic impacts at the accesses were studied, and additionally, the study discusses the traffic operations at the following intersections with the inclusion of the development traffic: · TH 77 Northbound Ramps and 66th Street · TH 77 Southbound Ramps and 66th Street · 1 ih A venue and 66th Street Two potential designs for the 66th Street and 17th A venue intersection were considered in the traffic analysis. The first design considered the installation of a roundabout; the second a traffic signal with right and left turn lanes. Both designs will provide acceptable operations of LOS C or better, with the roundabout design operating at LOS A with only 3 seconds of delay per vehicle, while the signalized intersection will operate at LOS C with 30 seconds of delay per vehicle. Additionally, the roundabout option is predicted to experience fewer vehicular crashes, will provide safer pedestrian movements, and is predicted to have fewer bicycle incidents. For these reasons the roundabout is the preferred option. It is noted that the City Council approved the preliminary for this on October 25,2005. The classification of the proposed Cedar Point Commons development is as a local generator, not a regional generator. However, the proximity to the TH 77 interchange at 66th Street may cause additional local traffic to travel on TH 77 to gain access to the study area. Analyses of the traffic operations of the ramp intersections indicate that sufficient capacity is present with or without the proposed development through the twenty year design horizon. Further, the completion of Cedar Point Commons will include provisions for transit usage and pedestrianlbicycle access, which will result in reduced vehicular impacts to the regional system. In conclusion, the 66th Street study intersections are predicted to have sufficient capacity in the 2025 design year to accommodate the proposed Cedar Point Commons development. I. Air Quality The proposed level of service and use of a roundabout will not result in a diminished level of air quality to property owners outside the project area or negatively affect uses of Taft Park. J. Noise The new north/south runway will generate additional low frequency sound waves and overhead airplane noise. The placement of the structures adjacent to TH 77 will reduce the noise ofTH 77 and the airport to the greatest extent possible. K. Cultural Resources No cultural resources were identified within the project area. Record of Decision - City of Richfield EA W Cedar Point Commons Project March 20, 2006 Page 4 of5 /0-; III. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS No related or anticipated future projects are being considered other than the 30-acre Cedar Point Commons retail/commercial area. IV. EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ARE SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING REGULATORY AUTHORITY Following are a list of approvals that are required from regulatory authorities, which will serve to further mitigate environmental effects: Unit of Government Type of Application Co s of En ineers Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (MnDOT) (MnDOT) Minnesota De artment of Health Minnesota De artment of Health Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Wetland Re lacement Building Height Minnesota Pollution Control A Metropolitan Council of Environmental Services Hennepin County Encroachment Permit for Gradin Prelimina and Final Plat A roval Watermain Extension Well Closure Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination S stem (NPDES) Permit(s) Sanit Sewer Extension Permit for Connection to Interceptor Sewer Plat Approval A roval of Road 1m rovements Tax Abatement Coun Fundin Environmental Assessment Worksheet RezoningIPlanned Unit Development Plan Final Planned Unit Develo ment Plans Mass Gradin Permit Prelimin and Final Plat Develo ment A reement Construction Permits Buildin Permits of Richfield of Richfield of Richfield of Richfield of Richfield of Richfield Status Pendin A lication Approved lication lication lication Pendin A lication Pending Application Pendin A lication Pending Application Pending Application Pendin A lication Under review Pending Application lication lication lication lication lication lication The project is similar to many projects completed throughout the City and the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Although each site is unique, the anticipated environmental effects are common for this type of project. They are considered relatively predictable and do not pose significant concerns in terms of regulating long term effects of the project. v. CONCLUSION The environmental review requirements of the Minnesota Statues and the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) Environmental Review Program have been met by the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) review prepared for this project. Attachments: Appendix A - Written Responses to Comments Appendix B - Written Comments Received Record of Decision - City of Richfield EA W Cedar Point Commons Project March 20, 2006 Page 5 of5 10-<6 APPENDIX A WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS /D-Cf SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EA W) FOR CEDAR POINT COMMONS PROJECT As of the end of the 30-day comment period for the City of Richfield Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for Cedar Point Commons at the northwest quadrant of TH 77 and 66th Street in Richfield, six formal comments have been received on the EA W. Comments were received through 5:00 p.m. February 15,2006. Comments were received from the following agencies/individuals: · Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Letter with Checklist from James E. Sullivan dated February 13,2006 · Minnesota Department of Transportation Letter from Tod Sherman dated February 13,2006 · Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Letter from Joe Kurcinka dated February 14,2006 · Metropolitan Council Letter from Phyllis Hanson dated February 15,2006 · James Norlander, Ironton, Minnesota, letter dated January 31, 2006 · Larry Wozniczka, Richfield, Minnesota, letter dated February 15,2006 Copies of the above-described documents are attached to this letter. Following is an identification of comments in italicized text, with responses intended to answer the questions raised, as well as provide the City Staff with a final report of the comments generated. Minnesota Pollution Control A2enCY Letter with Checklist from James E. Sullivan, Project Manager, dated February 13, 2006 Comment: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has received copies of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) preparedfor the above project, prepared by the City of Richfield, Responsible Government Unit (RGU). The MPCA has not reviewed the EAW for this project. Therefore, the MPCA has no specific comments to provide the RGU. This decision not to review the EAW does not constitute waiver by the MPCA, of any pending permits required by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. The enclosed checklist identifies permits that the project may require, together with the most recent contacts at the MPCA. We remind the RGU that, pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 5 (Environmental Quality Board Rules), a copy of the RGU's decision on this EAWneeds to be sent to the MPCA. Response: Comment noted. The RGU will require the Contractor to have the appropriate permits for the site demolition and reconstruction. Comment: Checklist: Areas checked that may need additional follow-up and lor a permit from the MPCA are: Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) Cedar Point Commons Project Page 1 of 8 fo -10 SDS Permit - Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit A State Disposal System (SDS) Permit is requiredfor any extension of a sanitary sewer. Jj a sanitary sewer is proposed as a part of this project, an application for the SDS Permit should be made to the MPCA by contacting David Sahli, Municipal Division (MUN), Metro Region at 651-296-8722. NPDES Permit- Construction Stormwater A General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permitfrom the MPCAfor construction activities will be requiredfor all projects that disturb one (1) or more acres of land. The NPDES Permit specifically requires Best Management Practices which are detailed in the permit (additional information can be found in the MPCA document (Protecting Water Quality in Urban Area) to prevent erosion and control sedimentation during construction and a stormwater pollution prevention plan to manage pollutants in storm-water runofffrom the site that will occur after construction is complete. As a requirement of the NPDES Permit, storm-water wet-detention ponds must be installed to treat the storm-water runoff whenever a project replaces surface vegetation with one or more cumulative acres of impervious surface. Jjyou have need of technical assistance regarding this, please contact Michael Findorff (MUN/Metro Region) at 651-296-6798 or Todd Smith (MUN) at 651-215-6008. For more general information, please contact the appropriate MPCA Regional Office staff: Metro, Brian Gove (REM/Metro Region) at 651-296-7597. Response: The RGU appreciates the checklist, especially the contact names for the specific permits listed for the SDS and NPDES permit identified. The RGU anticipates the Contractor will require a permit for demolition debris; asbestos and well closures may also be required due to the age of the structures to be demolished. Comment: A copy of the RGU's decision on this EAW needs to be sent to the MPCA. Response: Comment noted. The MPCA will be copied on the Record of Decision. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Letter from Tod Sherman, Planning Supervisor, dated February 13,2006 Comment: Please note that MnDOT's review of this EA W does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with the City and Hennepin County to review the updated information. MnDOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Response: Comment noted. Traffic Comments: · For your information, MnDOT wishes to call to the City's attention the fact that a proposed development south of 66th Street, on the west side of TH 77, and parallel to TH 77 (Cedar Avenue) is completed. This proposed development is depicted in Attachment D of the EA W, Figure 3. The 7th Street underpass project is not currently scheduled. For questions on these points, please call Wayne Norris, MnDOT Metro District West Area Engineer, at 651-582-1295. When plats, re-plats, or detailed site plans are developed, the traffic analysis should reflect the proposed development. We request the opportunity to review traffic issues at the time those plans are completed. MnDOT is currently conducting a traffic study, which includes TH 77 and 1-494 to identify options for future development of these roads. Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 2 of8 - . . 10--11 Attachment D of the EA W, Figure 3, indicates future development south of 66th Street. This future development may impact traffic volumes in the vicinity and should be included in the Cedar Point Commons traffic analysis. The access to 66th Street for the liquor store on the south side should be eliminated when that area is redeveloped The access is located less than 200 feet from the 66th Street/TH 77 intersection, while reasonable alternative access is available. Response: Comment noted. - The City will continue to inform MnDOT of the development, which extends south of 66th Street, as the plans move from concept stage towards development stage. The City acknowledges Diagonal Boulevard access to TH 77 will be closed upon the completion of the 77th Street underpass. - Copies of the traffic analysis of the area south of 66th will be provided to MnDOT as they are completed. - Development projection for the potential redevelopment south of 66th Street was included in the traffic analysis. - Upon completion of 66th Street, it is anticipated the parcel, which has the municipal liquor store will have a right turn in and right turn out access. Water Resources Engineering Comments: A MnDOT drainage permit will be required to ensure that current drainage rates to MnDOTright-of- way will not be increased Please include with the drainage permit application a grading plan showing existing and proposed contours. Also provide drainage area maps for the proposed project, showing existing and proposed drainage areas with flow directions indicated by arrows. The maps should be accompanied by drainage computations for pre and post- construction conditions during 10, 50 and 100-year events. Please include an electronic copy of any computer modeling used for the drainage computations. It appears that the high water level of the regional stormwater pond may well be within the clear zone of southbound TH 77. Please provide a larger plan/contour drawing, and/or existing and proposed cross sections, so that we can evaluate this potential hazard Please consider amending Section 6.c. of the EAW to include the benefits the proposed stormwater pond will provide for MnDOT. These include: ~ Stormwater flow from outside MnDOT right of way will be redirected to the new stormwater pond This will eliminate stormwater capacity issues associated with the TH 77 storm drainage system; ~ The proposed stormwater pond is designed to treat the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff from the future expansion of TH 77. Response: Comment noted on the need for permits and the need for grading plans. The formal permit will include all required plans and pre and post computations for the 10, 50 and 100-year events. -A plan identifYing the clear zone will also be presented. -The benefits of the pond include reduction of the stormwater flows into the TH 77 right of way. The pond will provide rate control and water quality for the project and areas outside of the project area, which currently drains directly to TH 77 right of way. This will mitigate the stormwater capacity issues associated with the TH 77 storm drainage systems. Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 3 of8 . 10--/2- -The RGU and its consultants will continue to work with Mr. Nereng on the final permits and design for the proposed pond, normal and high water elevation of the pond, new stormwater pipes in MnDOT right of way, and the outlets to Taft and Mother Lake. Permits Comment: Any work impacting MnDOT right of way will also require a permit. Permitforms are available from MnDOT's utility website at www.dot.state.mn.us/tecsup/utility. Response: Comment noted on permits and MnDOT's review of plats, which abut state property. The RGU will continue to work with MnDOT's right of way agents on the Cedar Point Commons plat and the defmition of the property line ofTH 77 between 63rd and 66th Street. This letter represents only the transportation concerns of MnDOT Metro Division. Other environmental issues raised by the wider MnDOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Letter from Joe Kurcinka, Regional Director, dated February 14,2006 Comment: Permits and approvals (Item No.8) Dewateringfor construction may be necessary. In that case, the DNR may require that the applicant obtain a dewatering permit. For information about these permits, please contact the area hydrologist, Julie Elman, at 651-772-7919. Response: Comment noted. Comment: Water-related land use management district (Item No. 14) The site lies within 1,000 feet of Mother Lake (Natural Environment, #27-23P) and Legion Lake (Recreational Development #27-24P) and the proposed development will result in a substantial increase in impervious suiface. Although the City of Richfield does not have shoreland controls in its ordinance, we encourage the City to consider implementing stormwater management methods that will lessen the impact to these lakes. Response: Comment noted. The proposed stormwater pond being constructed in conjunction with Cedar Point Commons will be providing water quality and rate control. Metropolitan Council Letter from Phyllis Hanson, Manager - Local Planning Assistance, dated February 15, 2006 Comment: Council staff has completed its review of the Cedar Point Commons Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). The project, Cedar Point Commons, is an approximately 30 acre redevelopment project at the northwest quadrant of Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77) and 66th Street in Richfield The project will include 350,000 square feet of retail, general merchandise, restaurant and home improvement tenants. The Metropolitan Council finds that the EA W is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, staff offers the following comments for your consideration: . Response: Comment noted. Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 4 of8 10-/3 EAW Worksheet Items Item 6 - Project Description The document states that no future stages of this redevelopment are planned or likely to happen. However, Appendix Attachment B states that, "Future redevelopment of the area south of 66th Street (subwatershed 1) is anticipated in the future." Attachment D/Vehicle Safety states, "The improvements proposed for the 66th and 17th Avenue intersection will need to accommodate a significant increase in traffic at this location because of the proposed Cedar Point development at well as future redevelopment south of 66th Street." Council staff requests that the city clarify if and when further redevelopment in the vicinity of this proposed project area is planned. (Review File No. 16243-9, Cedar Point Area, CPA, re- guided the land use for this proposed development site but did not involve any land use change south of 66th Street.) Response: To date, very conceptual plans have been discussed as to the redevelopment area south of 66th Street. The City will keep the Metropolitan Council apprised of any future development, which is south of 66th Street. Item 13 - Water Use The Council suggests incorporation of Low Impact Development (LID) bio-infiltration techniques like rainwater gardens and depressed vegetated islands in lieu of raised curb islands, to accommodate runoff from the extensive proposed parking areas within the development. Information on these an other LID runoffreduction methods can befound in the Council's Urban Small Sites Best management Practices Manual at the following address on our website: http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/Watershed/BMP/manual.htm. Response: The project will be utilizing perforated pipe throughout the development for the storm sewer design, in addition to the proposed pond. The proposed development has balanced the use of landscape berms/planting for screening and visual identity with the infiltration requests. Attachments and Aooendices We appreciated the very thorough coverage given to transit in this EA W. Our earlier suggestions and insights as to how Cedar Point Commons could be designed to be a more transit-oriented development were represented in complete and accurate detail. There remain only a few corrections or clarifications required to make the EA W clear and accurate: Page Number 2 ATTACHMENT D Traffic Report by WSB & Associates. Under Pedestrian Safety, second sentence, replace "A bus stop is proposed" with "Two bus stops are planned, one in each direction on 66th Street. " Response: Comment noted. Page Number 5 ATTACHMENT D Traffic Report. Regarding Route 515, the 6th sentence on the page should read, "Busses on this route run every 15 minutes during the rush hours, midday and on Saturday; Sunday and holiday buses run every 30 minutes. " Route 111 - replace "MOA" with "the terminal on 66th St. at Cedar Ave. " Response: Comment noted. . Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 5 of8 10 --It/- Page Number 14 Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Avenue Corridor... City of Richfield Under Route 515, the second paragraph should end with this sentence added: "Lines Band E serve the project site directly while line C stops three blocks or about 900 feet west of the site. " Response: Comment noted. Page Number 16 Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Ave Corridor... City of Richfield. Table 3/Under columns "Line C" and "Line D ", row "Weekday mid-day", should read "Every 30-60 minutes". In the text below about Route 111, replace "MOA with "66th St. and Cedar Ave. " Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Ave Corridor... City of Richfield. In general, the concerns raised about traffic congestion and safety at the future intersection of E. 66th St. and Cedar Ave. (old 18th Ave) stem from the assumption that it will be a conventional signalized intersection. Infact, these issues are positively addressed by the new plan to build a traffic circle at this intersection. Please note that the Council will take noformal action on this EAW document. If you have questions or need further iriformation, please contact Denise Pedersen Engen, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1513. Response: Comment noted. . James Norlander. Ironton. MN. letter dated January 31. 2006 Comment: I have only one comment about this project... DON'T DO IT AT ALL!!! Richfield has been torn up enough already. Starting with K-Mart when I was a teenager. 65th and Lyndale location lost some goodfamilies and kids (white) who moved away and never returned. Should have all stopped there. Another big loss was that speak easy lounge and pool hall at 66th Lyndale. The locals 'there could really grow up and know how to handle situations better in that fun / tough also type of environment. Craswell Studios was pushed out also. The local pigs (10 yr old protected boys and toys club, I call them) were really down on that lounge. They got their way of course. Now look what's there, a crappy shopping center, a dildo sports bar etc. What a waste. Why do you want Richfield to look likefloppyflunky California does? Coming back to the Midwest its good to see the older buildings and type of construction. Can you agree to this? Or do you want them to build more disposable buildings? To line their pockets with every 20 years? So I ask you, just leave well enough alone. I have 2 kids in your school district. This is how I saw the article. They sent up the Sun paper (I delivered 71-76) to my g-parents farm. 7 rt Harriet I grew up. I refuse to come to your town. The pigs illegally arrested me and picked me up twice at 7120 Harriet, August 5, '92 and June 24, '97. That detective, Iforget his name, should be put away for life, been there 24 years in 1997 I think he said or shot between the eyes would be better. Allfigure ups to the msk. Development is the worst thing that can happen to this nation since 1975. It's all for the world. All these German Communist immigrants 1922 to date who irifiltrated ourgovmt in the 1920's and ruled ever since Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 6 of8 {O--IS (poisoning, murder of President Harding in 1923 they've been unstoppable.) All they can do is squander Americas riches and vastness to the world and its other people. A little history lesson might wake you up! Response: Mr. Norlander was opposed to the development project, but did not identify any substantive environmental comments. His objection to the project is duly noted. Larry Wozniczka. Richfield. MN.letter dated February 15.2006 Comments regarding the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Cedar Point project area follow. Comment: Noise Mitigation The EA W does not address the change in noise from Airport and roadway operations as a result of the project. Noise reductions over the existing conditions are requiredfor remaining Richfield properties to thrive. The multi-million dollar contributions to the project area are in vain without noise mitigation. The City of Richfield has authorized studies of noise absorbing structures and has commissioned noise monitoring in this area. Results of these efforts are not found in the EA W It is possible that the expansive parking area proposed will reduce the level of noise absorption now provided by trees and vegetation. Increased traffic on 1 ih Avenue brings vehicle noise closer to established neighborhoods. Relocating entrances to Cedar Avenue would provide greater noise separation. Noise walls along Highway 77 also deserve consideration. . Response: The commentor is correct in stating the City has commissioned noise studies to be completed on the low frequency noise and vibration impact to the eastern area of Richfield. The anticipated decibel reading is above residential standards and is the primary reason this area of Richfield (east of 17th Avenue) has a commercial versus a residential designation. The placement of the general merchandise, inline retail and home improvement structures will provide a solid wall of concrete masonry construction to assist in the blocking of the sound waves. Placement of walls is the most effective measure to block the low frequency noise. The plan also proposes the planting of a number of deciduous and conifer trees as well as berms to block the direct sound waves from penetrating the site. The home improvement store has also added a solid wall on the east side of the garden center to mitigate the low frequency sound waves. This added wall will also reduce the noise level from TH 77 and the ground level noise from the airport to the residents west of 17th Avenue. The increase of traffic on 66th to access the development anticipates the majority of the traffic will utilize the right in and the roundabout to access the site. The second viable access is 63rd Street to Cedar to Bloomington. 17th Avenue is a tertiary option. The developer will work with the City to mitigate traffic speed and volume on 1 7th Avenue to the greatest extent possible with bump outs and signage. The roundabout will allow traffic to flow continuously in an efficient manner, and will be the easiest route for customers to access and exit the development. Comment: Intersection Improvements at 66th Street The EA W does not consider possible location of the traffic circle or roundabout near Highway 77 to also serve bridge and ramp movements. This has the potential to sustain the Cedar Avenue frontage road as a business route. Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 7 of8 la-1ft:> Pedestrian movement at the roundabout lacks analysis in the EAW. This is critical to afuture greenway . development at 17'h Avenue. Response: The placement of the structures next to TH 77 to allow the retail development to embrace east Richfield eliminates Cedar Avenue as an option as a frontage road south of 63rd Street. Roundabouts for the TH 77 exit/entry ramps and 66th Street were not studied prior to the construction of these intersections. Pedestrians crossing roundabouts have designated locations to cross. The pedestrian will have a signed crossing with both pavement markings and vertical signage. The pedestrian has the safety of the median on all four corners of the roundabout, which will provide a "safe" zone between the lanes of travel. The central median reduces the width of the street crossing and enables the pedestrian to cross traffic traveling in one direction at a time. Based on studies performed, a roundabout intersection is as safe for a pedestrian crossing as a ''typical'' intersection with four 90-degree legs. Comment: Environmental Impact Study Impact of a project this size located near residential developments, a park and a lake requires more thorough analysis of alternatives and environmental impacts than have been presented in the EA W. Beyond statutory requirements, an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is needed to optimize intersection- entry locations, structural composition and noise-absorbing landscape design. The EIS must evaluate alternative configurations and land uses. Environmental enhancement for remaining properties is imperative to offtet airport and highway impacts. Public hearings to date on the proposed development have been limited to legal and fiscal minimums. The developer has yet to make a public presentation of the project. The EIS should include a public hearing. Response: The EA W has addressed the traffic impacts of the anticipated traffic and directional flow of the existing and new trips to be generated as a result of the proposed development. All intersections will continue to perform at an acceptable level of service. The project has incorporated masonry walls on all of the commercial structures, berming and extensive landscape material to absorb/mitigate the low frequency waves and traffic noise from TH 77. The project is anticipated to reduce the airport and TH 77 noise impact to the residential properties. Access to Taft Park for both vehicular and pedestrians has been a consideration and is included in the project. Safety of pedestrian crossing all streets is of a high priority and is shown with the number of crosswalks located throughout the development. The installation of a stormwater pond for rate control and water quality and the use of perforated pipe for infiltration is being incorporated into the project. The EA W requires an analysis of the project and the "potential" environmental impacts versus the need to study alternative design scenarios. Public hearings have been held in the form of neighborhood open house sessions. Formal submission of the project is anticipated in April 2006 to initiate the review process. The comments received on the EA W will be incorporated into the design of the project. Formal public hearing on the project will be a part of the City review in April-June 2006. Summary of Comments and Response to Comments for EA W Cedar Point Commons Project - Richfield, MN March 20, 2006 Page 8 of8 10-/1 APPENDIX B WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED I D-{<j Minnesota Pollution Control Agency February 13, 2006 Ms. Christine Costello City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 RE: Cedar Point Commons, Richfield, Minnesota Environmental Assessment Worksheet Dear Ms. Costello: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has received copies of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared for the above project, prepared by the city of Richfield, Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). The MPCA has not reviewed the EA W for this project. Therefore, the MPCA has no specific comments to provide the RGU. This decision not to review the EA W does not constitute waiver by the MPCA of any pending permits required by the MPCA. Ultimately; it is the responsibility of the project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. The enclosed checklist identifies pemlits that the project may require, together with the most recent contacts at the MPCA. We remind the RGU that, pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 5 (Environmental Quality Board Rules), a copy of the RGU's decision on this EA W needs to be sent to the MPCA. Sincerely, ames E. Sullivan Project Manager Environmental Review and Operations Section Regional Division JES:mbo Enclosure cc: Richard Koppy, Ryan Companies US, Inc., Minneapolis 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194; (651) 296-6300 (Voice); (651) 282-5332 (TTY); www.pca.state.mn.us St. Paul · Brainerd. Detroit Lakes. Duluth. Mankato . Marshall · Rochester. Willmar Equal Opportunity Employer' Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20 percent fibers from paper recycled by consumers. /o-Jq CHECKLIST After a cursory review of the proposed project, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff noted areas that may need additional follow-up and/or a permit from the MPCA. Those specific areas are checked below: ~ SDS Permit - Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit A State Disposal System (SDS) Permit is required for any extension of a sanitary sewer. If a sanitary sewer is proposed as a part of this project, an application for the SDS Pemlit should be made to the MPCA by contacting David Sahli, Municipal Division (MUN), Metro Region, at 651/296-8722. o NPDES/SDS Permit for dredged material disposal. If disposal of dredged material is anticipated, then Brett Ballavance (Duluth office) at 218/723-4837 or Jaramie Logelin (Duluth office) at 218/529-6257 (northern), or Elise Doucette (MUN/Metro Region) at 651/296-7290 or Jeff Smith (Rochester office) at 507/285-7302 (southern) should be contacted. ~ NPDES Permit .. Construction Stomlwater: A General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the MPCA for construction activities will be required for all projects that disturb one (1) or more acres of1and. The NPDES Permit specifically requires Best Management Practices which are detailed in the permit (additional information can be found in the MPCA document Protecting Water Quality in Urban Area) to prevent erosion and control sedimentation during construction and a stormwater pollution prevention plan to manage pollutants in storm-water runoff from the site that will occur after construction is complete. As a requirement of the NPDES Permit, storm-water wet-detention ponds must be installed to treat the storm-water runoff whenever a project replaces surface vegetation with one or more cumulative acres of impervious surface. If you have need of technical assistance regarding this, please contact Michael Findorff (MUN/Metro Region) at 651/296-6798 or Todd Smith (MUN) at 651/215-6008. For more general infomlation, please contact the appropriate MPCA Regional Office staff below: o o o o o ~ Brainerd, Lisa Woog at 218/855-5017 Duluth, Jim Dexter at 218/529-6253 Detroit Lakes, Joyce Cieluch at 218/846-7387 Willmar/Marshall, Judy Mader (S1. Paul office) at 651/296-7315 or Mark Hanson (Marshall Office) at 507/537-6000 Rochester, Roberta Getman at 507/280-2996 Metro, Brian Gove (REM/Metro Region) at 651/296-7597 o Industrial Stormwater o Brainerd, Robin Novotny at 218/828-6114 o Duluth, John Thomas at 218/723-4928 o Detroit Lakes, Jack Frederick at 218/846-0734 o Marshall, Brad Gillingham at 507/537-6381 o Mankato, Teri Roth at 507/389-5235 o Rochester, Dennis Hayes at 507/280-2991 o Rochester, Jeff Smith at 507/285-7302 o Major Facilities, Elice Doucette (MUN/Metro Region) at 651/296-7290 o WiIlmar, Ben Koplin at 320/231-5321 6/21/05 OVER I 0 -~ 0 o Water Quality Certification Waiver ofthe Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required. When wetlands are altered or impacted by either filling, drainage, excavation, or inundation as part of the federal Clean Water Act Section 404 permit process, a statement waiving the 401 Certification from our agency must be obtained. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact Jennifer Olson, of the Regional Division, Business Systems Unit 1, at 651/297-8611. The MPCA requires the project be evaluated for mitigation in accordance With the following hierarchy of preference: a. A void the impact. b. Minimize the impact. c. Mitigate the impact through wetland replacement. D ~~~_ Tank System Individual septic tank systems design and construction must comply with Minn. R. 7080. For additional infonnation, contact Mark Wespetal (MUN, Water Policy and Coordination) at 651/296-9322. o Demolition Debris Demolition debris must be disposed of at a properly permitted disposal facility. For information on the location of one nearest you, please contact the appropriate MPCA Regional Office staff below: o Brainerd, Curt Hoffman at 218/828-6198 o Detroit Lakes, Roger Rolf at 218/846-0774 o Duluth, Heidi Kroening at 218/723-4795 or Tim Musick at 218/723-4708 o Marshall, Brad Gillingham at 507/537-6381 o Rochester, Mark Hugeback at 507/280-5585 o Metro, Kevin Ballman (MUN) at 651/297-8504 o Asbestos Asbestos may be present in the building(s) that will be demolished, which requires special handling. Please contact Kevin Ballman (MUN) at 651/297-8504 for additional information. D Wells Abandonment and/or installation of wells must be done by a licensed well driller. Please contact the Minnesota Department of Health 651/215-0823 for additional infomlation. D Above and Below Ground Tanks The installation and/or removal of ALL above and below ground tanks must be reported to the MPCA before any work begins. Please contact the MPCA Customer Assistance Center at 651/297-2274 or 800/646-6247 for additional information. D Other Issues Identified by Staff . 6/21/05 2 OVER f[~\,u;EISO,", -J.~ J> tt '" ... ... cc \; ~O OF Ttll>'" fO-d.-1 Minn sota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville MN 55113-3174 February 13,2006 Ms. Christine Costello Community Development Specialist City of Richfield 6700 Portland A venue Richfield, MN 55423 Subject: Cedar Point Commons EA W Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) Review # EA W 06-001 Northwest quadrant ofTH 77 and 66(h Street City of Rich fieldl Hennepin County MnlDOT Control Section # 2758 Dear Ms. Costello: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Cedar Point Commons EA W. Please note that Mn/DOT's review of this EA W does not constitute approval of a regional traffic analysis and is not a specific approval for access or new roadway improvements. As plans are refined, we would like the opportunity to meet with the City and Hennepin County to review the updated infonnation. MulDOrs staff has reviewed the document and has the following comments: Traffic comments: · For your information, Mn/DOT wishes to call to the City's attention the fact that a proposed development south of 66th Street, on the west side of TH 77, and parallel to TH 77, will not have access to Diagonal Boulevard after the 77lh Street underpass for TH 77 (Cedar Avenue) is completed. This proposed development is depicted in Attachment D of the EA W, Figure 3. The 77'11 Street underpass project is not currently scheduled. For questions on these points, please call Wayne Norris, Mu/DOT Metro District West Area Engineer, at (651) 582-1295. When plats, re-plats, or detailed site plans are deveioped, the traffic analysis should reflect the proposed development. We request the opportunity to review traffic issues at the time those plans are completed. Mn/DOT is currently conducting a traffic study, which inCludes TH 77 and 1-494, to identify options for future development of these roads. Attachment D of the EA W. Figure 3, indicates future development south of 66'h Street. This future development may impact traffic volumes in the vicinity and should be included in the Cedar Point Commons traffic analysis. The access to 66tl1 Street for the liquor store on the south side should be eliminated when that area is redeveloped. The access is located less than 200 feet from the 66tl1 Street/TH 77 intersection, while reasonable alternative access is available. An equal opportunity employer I 0 .- ';;} g.. For questions on these points, please call Diane Colton, MnlDOT Metro District Traffic Engineering, Crash Analysis Unit, at (651) 582-1637. Water Resources Engineering comments: · A Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required to ensure that current drainage rates to Mn/DOT right-of-way will not be increased. Please include with the drainage permit application a grading plan showing existing and proposed contours. Also provide drainage area maps for the proposed project, showing existing and proposed drainage areas with flow directions indicated by arrows. The maps should be accompanied by drainage computations for pre and post-construction conditions during 10,50 and 100 year events. Please include an electronic copy of any computer modeling used for the drainage computations. It appears that the high water level of the regional stormwater pond may well be within the clear zone of southbound TH 77. Please provide a larger plan/contour drawing, and/or existing and proposed cross sections, so that we can evaluate this potential hazard. Please consider amending Section 6.c. of the EA W to include the benefits the proposed stormwater pond will provide for Mn/DOT. These include: . };> Stormwater flow from outside Mn/DOT right-of-way will be redirected to the new stormwater pond. This will eliminate stormwater capacity issues associated with the TH 77 storm drainage system; };> The proposed stormwater pond is designed to treat the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff from the future expansion of TH 77. For questions on these points, please call Rusty Nereng, Mn/DOT Metro District Water Resources Engineering, at (651) 634-2111, or rusty .nereng@dot.state.ron.us. Please send the information requested to: Rusty Nereng Mn/DOT Metro District Water Resources Engineering Waters Edge Building 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113. Permits: · Any work impacting MnlDOT right of way will also require a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at wWW.d.QL.~~llt~!~us/teG.~yp/utility. . . /o-;}?J . Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig (651-582- 1447) of MnDOT's Metro Permits Section. This letter represents only the transportation concerns of Mn/DOT Metro Division. Other environmental issues raised by a wider Mn/DOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Review Coordinator Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's 30-day review and response process to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. . If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 651-582-1548. Sincerely, ~,- 1,.< ''17 od Sherman ... Planning Supervisor !vd S/11?v h1~t"t I be. I .1/1 /I ~ V ;t1c Ai f f'f cc: Rob Wied, Hennepin County Survey Section, Minneapolis, MN Bob Byers, Hennepin COWlty Transportation Planning Section, Medina, MN Aaron Hemquist, RLK Kuusisto, Ltd., Minnetonka, MN . . lo-~Y- Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 651.772.7900 February 14,2006 Christine Costello City of Richfield 6700 Portland A venue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 RE: Cedar Point Commons Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) Dear Ms. Costello: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EA W for the proposed Cedar Point Commons commercial and residential redevelopment project in the City of Richfield. In general, the EA W appears to be complete and accurate. We otTer the following comments for your consideration. Permits and approvals required (Item No.8) Dewatering for construction may be necessary. In that case, the DNR may require that the applicant obtain a dewatering permit. For information about these permits, please contact the area hydrologist, Julie Ekman, at 651-772-79 19. - Water-related land use management district (Item No. 14) The site lies within 1,000 feet of Mother Lake (Natural Environment,#27-23P) and Legion Lake (Recreational Development, #27-24P) and the proposed development will result in a substantial increase in impervious surface. Although the City of Richfield does not have shoreland controls in its ordinance, we encourage the City to consider implementing stormwater management methods that will lessen the impact to these lakes. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and the EA W. We look forward to receiving your record of decision and responses to comments at the conclusion of environmental review. If you have any questions about these comments, please call Wayne Barstad, the Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, at 651-772-7940. Sincerely, Steve Colvin, Wayne Barstad, Sarah Hoffmann, Bryan Lueth, Julie Ekman, Daryl Ellison, Bernice Cramblit (DNR) Jon Larsen (EQB) Nick Rowse (USFWS) #20060276 RF06CedarPointCommons.doc . An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 1-800-657-3929 ~ Metropolitan Council ~ Building communities that work to -- as I~ February 15,2006 Patrick Smith, Community Development Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 SUBJECT: City of Richfield, Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for Cedar Point Commons Metropolitan Council District 5, Review File No. 16243-10 Dear Mr. Smith: Council staff has completed its review of the Cedar Point Commons Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W). The project, Cedar Point Commons, is an approximately 30 acre redevelopment project at the northwest quadrant of Trunk Highway 77 (TH77) and 66th Street in Richfield. The project will include 350,000 square feet of retail, general merchandise, restaurant and home improvement tenants. The Metropolitan Council finds that the EA W is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no majorissues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, staff offers the following comments for your consideration. EAW Worksheet Items Item 6 -Rroject Description . . The document states that no future stages of this redevelopment are planned or likely to happen. However, Appendix Attachment B st1;ltes that "[FJuture redevelopment of the area south of 66th Street (subwatershed 1) is anticipated in the future.' Attachment D/Yehicle Safety states, "The improvements proposed for the 66th and 17th Avenue intersection will need to accommodate a significant increase in traffic atthis location because of the proposed Cedar Point development as well as future redevelopment south of 66th Street." Council staff requests that the City clarify if and when further redevelopment in the vicinity of this proposed project area is planned. (Review File No. 16243-9, Cedar Point Area CPA, reguided the land use for this proposed development site but did not involve any land use change south of 66th street.) Item 13 - Water Use The Council suggests incorporation of Low Impact Development (LID) bio-infiltration techniques like rainwater gardens and depressed vegetated islands in lieu of raised curb islands, to accommodate runoff from the extensive proposed parking areas within the devdopment. Information on these and other LID runoff reduction methods can be found in the Council's Urban Small Sites Best Management Practices Manual at the following address on our website: http://www.metrocouncil.orglenvironmentJWatershed/BMP/manual.htm. Attachments and 'Appendices I:. ~ ! :'-'..J ' '. We appreciated the very thorough coverage given to transit in this EA W. Our earlier suggestions ' and irisightsas to how 'Cedar Point Commons could be designed to be a more transit-oriented development were represented in complete and accurate detail. There remain only a few corrections or clarifications required to make the EA W clear and accurate: . www:metrocouncil.org Metro Info Line 602-1888 230 East Fifth Street . St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626 . (651) 602-1000 . Fax 602-1550 . TTY 291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer February 15, 2006 Mr. Patrick Smith Page 2 1 0 .,-d..~ Page Number D cument ICorrecti n or Clarification 5 ATTACHMENT 0 Traffic Report by WSB & Associates. Under Pedestrian Safety, second sentence, replace "A bus stop is proposed" with "Two bus stops are planned. one in each direction on 66th St."... ATTACHMENT 0 Traffic Report. Regarding Route 515, the 6th sentence on the page should read "Buses on this route run every 15 minutes durinQ the rush hours. midday and on Saturday: Sunday and holiday buses run every 30 minutes." Route 111 -- replace "MOA" with "the terminal on 66th St. at Cedar Ave." Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Ave Corridor...City of Richfield. Under Route 515, the second paragraph should end with this sentence added: "Lines Band E serve the proiect site directly while line C stops three blocks or about 900 feet west of the site." Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Ave Corridor...City of Richfield. Table 3 / Under columns "Line C" and "Line 0", row "Weekday mid-day", should read "Every 30-60 minutes". In the text beloW about Route .111, replace "MOA" with "66th st. and Cedar Ave." 2 14 16 Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Ave Corridor...City of Richfield. In general, the concerns raised about traffic congestion and safety at the future intersection of E. 66th St. and Cedar Ave (old 18th Ave.) stem from the assumption that it will be a conventional signalized intersection. In fact, these issues are positively addressed by the new plan to build a traffic circle at this intersection. Please note that the Council will take no formal action on this EA W document. If you have questions or need further information, please contact Denise Pedersen Engen, Principal Reviewer, at (651) 602-1513. Sincerely, ~~ Local Planning Assistance cc: Jack Jackson, MultiFamily Market Analyst, MHF A Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division Russ Susag, Metropolitan Council District 5 Keith Buttleman, Environmental Services Denise Pedersen Engen, Sector RepresentativelPrincipal Reviewer Cheryl Olsen, Reviews Coordinator V :\REV 1 EWS\Comrmmitics\Richtield\Lettcls\Richfield 2006 EA W Ct'dar Point Commons !9679- J .doc . IO--d.-l 1-51-0~ ~\ I / /' / u en. rr 3f//'lL Lc.J:5Atlo 5t16sar (e.d/it fO(r1t Projecf 1 ),~{C:R on'iD/J{ cdRYJm(lCl,Cr;;,3.~vffl6/J j2/C)jecf~~ J/oAir DctI//J-T/fi-L. <II 1(( ctfhe::fIr<f.5 ~ecp") Pcr; L{):lcfPldf...{ph9(-:- rec,ly5f4-c&dy w/~~l?1qC'Tfv/1it~~ w1J ~ lcel"lycr:c;S/4 *LY#:l~!e ." ../at:..<t:kc:/? Lei.)r .5~/1t.e ~c7J ff I'JrI/(c.$f-:K/Yx {06t/J W Ao /rYIoJr:cf ,9QY f /1eV(~ ....r;t!. ~ r'nJ , S~t7uif h<t~ q/lsiz-ffedll:4:~e~ ll/lUfb(~ /JfJ' ~ 55 4JrJ f l:;r 5rf<iJ: ec;s,Y hr7f~ r f2c7c/ I A~/I yf~ t.??, l-~'117(~< (/'C~L<-/5tie/'t CaL-iIJ (fJi (Iy l/27w lApr 1rJ1<7whc?v 1, h'r",I/z :5'/fc{<ilr/d:6e If" /" I-hsfhu:1!iql/!;{cr 6JiyJt ofe. n <.Jlrc;l/h€,oT Cff5w~l (5'-h./rc;~ u/1512(.J.J>.hrjl. OCifc, 6<.>, "fA ~ foG-~('pr;;5 C !()rrald p/oi(cM !/P,!!;f:+oys;C(lJ,b t L~~ If {4el/h) turf( ceqdy JCW~1 0 It -fit <; f !~iLt1~L_. fhtf 7Df .fhC{fWCJ.Y o{<4'irs,e, !lJOtV iebf cuh91J- I(~r< 0Ctf~9jlpJy56r;rP!f CkJkr Ci dildo ?Icr-b 6y/ C~.()h9f Y4-'f"Jr2: t..Jhy du you. u44 t If(~h frtlcP fu Ioolc If /::C f/vll</ 1/4/J((f Cc,!r!bv-J'ltq do ~'>? Gvt\I/]~ 1;4 tic 10 /.. -h e 1'h,J 4/U r tis. .? Co oj Iv 51' lit. vIde / h f dJ 5 {- ly pc C/-' Con sr/ uvlr c-~ r /o-a ~ . ~J(\ y?0. '1j<'''ft, 16 (~c O~ J;'Y/)f.t(,if;!afjlr~ ,/-ufl., if~ ff'kf'Ld (5);29 Se~ ML 0 f1r? D /('1(' ~,{ ft/~t. c}s[vIficVCl'lV,yrtS., ... .. ..'" ........ j5.6Ic;:;)<YUA'jCiJt (ejC!(.. 4JC{ L f.i/l(/'{5h 70lJfl, i1..hq...v<...2.}(rJ.?.Lh...yCJY[ 2<::-h4Q(...dLs.f?:.(~h.. [),Ij (1 h c-w,L-51L.1fh,Crl.fLdG /0 cyS(>::'{..f4P? "IigS?t~ ,~y.p:-{CId~({u;rd.....2i= z~h. .. ..Ih.Y."f'l~LC.~.t.s i.hr '"t!l1,. Z{ ?!}jq [/(~t.k'1r:L~ c.{fl~.. . . ..... . .'. ; -- r . I .J . i.o.. .,1.:0..... ..({1:'15.l".k>~::r}e. ..1:0..... 'yCt5:r/.-l. ~rl..~ .......Jh.Cf.lfS... ... i I ({(.~ql/y c:.r.lx:jfstJlJ1".rL2(c.teJ.YJJ~Ctf214!{c.L ... \ 41 .. 7(~Q 1('i/c{~f~?~f~-c.Jll'::" Z.f{'i'.Z . I f'h q I de {red-r;'c". .i ....;;/;r~t .;Jt' J.i1~en {' .2.~C:1d/II.~ i p"",f ~'-V'{V&I(k.'...!2{(.'\....#:c,( Z'fy~5/dizF7F 1// n i fh('"1 fLhl...irrJ; .... (2Y5.4&<I~<;ft{/ ~'*'1 t:J;,.fy.r:',S?&J..4til ibr;ftIlu-Llll[f[~7~{11.f2) ...fq.. tb( . ... i...lJrl.V tl~p:7l(df/jf}eV!C!Lstl!L('9'.12..4tC7Rl. o//'h I klirJ' .llSz2?n'.5!'./lC<; /f2~, .Xts..7:LL~/&~c1d 11}1{/6t 5.L.G~[m.4n{ul1l1ttJ?{/l u.'t-IPJ1&-lfL'tatJf.z22 k , K JJ ~j (1 d,k U!.tI 1i16.lmfcilL( ~<d~jJIJ/}thtfj 2()$.'1lttd ; / JJ . (,/ J 17 - /J/l /d./cd"'He~2{4~e .../Cd.h107.1l1ULckr .....d:..g(J6J.~t.i&!tf{, .172-3 !+t 'L . f\ c1z,tJ .JJ.Jc.) If If I>",. /".. /1 'r J1 y j'YU( .. -;; tLu.'l .4.. ... 2~rfJf::r.U. .... ........ .x: ...~...k"ti.Alij) .tL.-if ~tjll<1.dLC LH/110/fLJ1'-> [rdi~J +-fJ<J >Mrft?.>.+c;f4tLiC/rfJ I {TS dkv ItC/jJ (a. . /).I Iff~.. ..b(jfi~y leffcJl4 .1i}/fil-ltJzl~. Y9'M. CfR / ~ ~~ . <<,~.,_. fC0-a9 Larry W ozniczka 6744 Wentworth Avenue Richfield MN 55423 612-869-1236 February 15, 2006 Ms. Christine Costello Community Development Specialist 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Ms. Costello, Comments regarding the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) for the Cedar Point project area follow. Noise Mitigation The EA W does not address the change in noise from Airport and roadway operations as a result of the project. Noise reductions over the existing conditions are required for remaining Richfield properties to thrive. The multi-million dollar contributions to the project area are in vain without noise mitigation. The City of Richfield has authorized studies of noise absorbing structures and has commissioned noise monitoring in this area. Results of these efforts are not found in the EA W. It is possible that the expansive parking area proposed will reduce the level of noise absorption now provided by trees and vegetation. Increased traffic on 17th A venue brings vehicle noise closer to established neighborhoods. Relocating entrances to Cedar Avenue would provide greater noise separation. Noise walls along Highway 77 also deserve consideration. Intersection Improvements at 66th Street The EA W does not consider possible location of the traffic circle or round about near Highway 77 to also serve bridge and ramp movements. This has the potential to sustain the Cedar Avenue frontage road as a business route. Pedestrian movement at the round about lacks analysis in the EA W. This is critical to a future greenway development at 17th Avenue. Environmental Impact Study Impact of a project this size located near residential developments, a park and a lake requires more thorough analysis of alternatives and environmental impacts than have been presented in the EAW. Beyond statutory requirements, an Environmental Impact Study (ElS) is needed to optimize intersection-entry locations, structural composition and noise-absorbing landscape design. The EIS must evaluate alternative configurations and land uses. Environmental enhancement for remaining properties is imperative to offset airport and highway impacts. Public hearings to date on the proposed development have been limited to legal and fiscal minimums. The developer has yet to make a public presentation of the project. The EIS should include a public hearing. Respectfully submitted, Larry W ozniczka, Concerned Citizen AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Resolutions 11 67 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME. TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~. REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of Cooperative Construction Agreement between Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Richfield. for City costs for storm sewer under 35W and traffic sional work on Lvndale Avenue iust south of Interstate 35W. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution authorizing acceptance of the State of Minnesota Cooperative Agreement No. 89359-R between the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Richfield to provide for payment by the City to the State of the City's share of the costs for traffic control signal work on Lyndale Avenue just south of Interstate 35W and storm sewer under 35W. I II. BACKGROUND I The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is going to bid on the reconstruction of the 35W/Highway 62 Crosstown Commons Project on May 19, 2006. As part of the work, the City is responsible for paying 100% of the cost for adding a 60" diameter storm sewer under 35W at 64th Street to connect to Richfield Lake and to pay 50% for a new traffic signal on Lyndale Avenue just south of 35W. Council has already approved the design of the Crosstown Project. 0328 Agreement 35W-62 I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . Improvements to the 35W/Highway 62 Crosstown have been identified as needed in the City's Comprehensive Plan. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The addition of the 60" storm water sewer will allow for the city to improve drainage problems that currently exist west of 35W. I C. FINANCIAL I . Total City cost is estimated at $251,252.28. The cost for the pipe will come from the City's Storm Water Utility fund and the cost for the signal will come from the City's Municipal State Aid Street (gas tax revenue) fund. The cost of the pipe work and the signal work are about equal. The City will save considerable money by doing the storm sewer work at the time 35W is reconstructed. I D. LEGAL I . The City Attorney will be available at the Council meeting to answer any questions about the agreement. I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I . None. The proposed agreement is consistent with discussions City staff has had with Mn/DOT officials on the proposed construction project. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Resolution approving the proposed Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 89359-R with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation. . Proposed Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 89359-R between MN/DOT and the City of Richfield for storm sewer and traffic signal construction by the State on TH 35W/62. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None anticipated. 1/-/ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO ENTER INTO COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT NO. 89359-R WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is supportive of proposed improvements to 1-35W and Highway 62 as part of the reconstruction of the 35W/Highway 62 Crosstown Commons Project; and, WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wants to install an additional storm ~ewer under 35W at 64th Street to connect to Richfield Lake at the time 35W is reconstructed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into Mn/DOT Agreement No. 89359-R with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To provide for payment by the City to the State of the City's share of the costs for the storm sewer and traffic control signal system construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 35W from 66th Street to 42nd Street and upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No 62 from Penn Avenue to Portland Avenue under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394). BE ITFURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March,2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ., II--d..- PRE-LETTING SERVICES SECTION STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT MnjDOT AGREEMENT NO. 89359-R S.P. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) S.P. 2782-276 (T.H. 35W=394) S.A.P. 27-030-013 S.A.P. 141-010-78 S.A.P. 157-363-024 Fed. Proj. IM-NH-BR 0353(287) The State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, and The City of Richfield Re: City bid-based lump sum paYment for storm sewer and traffic signal construction by the State on T.H. 35Wj62 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED (None) ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE $251,252.28 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Richfield, Minnesota, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as the "City". 1 ~ 89359 WHEREAS, the State is about to perform grading concrete and bituminous surfacing, noise and retaining wall, storm sewer, traffic signal, signing, lighting, traffic management system (TMS), and bridge construction and other associated construction upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 35W from 66th Street to 42nd Street and upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 62 from Penn Avenue to Portland Avenue within the corporate City limits of Minneapolis and Richfield in accordance with State plans, specifications and special provisions designated as State Aid Projects No. 27-030-013, No. 141-010-78 and No. 157-363-024, State ~rojects No. 2782-281 and No. 2782-276 (T.H. 35W=394), No. 2782-27405 thru No. 2782-27407, No. 2782-27V65 thru No. 2782-27V76, No. 2782-27V78 thru No. 2782-27V81, No. 2782-27V84 thru No. 2782-27V89, No. 2782-9614, No. 2782-9622, No. 2782-99194, No. 2782-99195 and in the records of the Federal Highway Administration as Minnesota Project IM-NH-BR 0353(287); and WHEREAS, City cost participation is required on State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) for City requested storm sewer and project required traffic control signal construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highways No. 35W/62; and WHEREAS, the City has expressed its willingness to participate in the costs of the storm sewer and traffic control signal construction and associated construction engineering in a lump sum amount as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, it is considered in the public'S best interest for the State to provide a master controller and a new cabinet and control equipment (State furnished materials) to operate the new Traffic Control Signal; and 2 " 11-4- 89359 WHEREAS, in connection with the State contract, certain watermain construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highways No. 35W and No. 62 under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) will be covered under Agreement No. 89326 between the State and the City of Bloomington; and WHEREAS, in connection with the State contract, certain frontage road, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, surge chamber, water main, signal, and signal interconnect construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highways No. 35W and No. 62 under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) will be covered under Agreement No. 89244 between the State and the City of Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, in connection with the State contract, certain traffic signal construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highways No. 35W and No. 62 under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) will be covered under Agreement No. 89360 between the State and the County of Hennepin; and WHEREAS, the traffic control signal system maintenance to be performed during and after completion of State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) will continue to be covered by existing Signal Maintenance Agreements No. 55758M, No. 57148M, No. 57915M, No. 63501M, and Hennepin County Agreements PW-09-20-71, PW-10-19-71, and PW-39-20-77; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 161.20, subdivision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purpose of constructing, maintaining and improving the trunk highway system. 3 89359 IT IS, THEREFORE, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: . ARTICLE I - CONSTRUCTION BY THE STATE Section A. Contract Award The State shall advertise for bids and award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder for State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394) in accordance with State plans, specifications and special provisions which are on file in the office of the Commissioner of Transportation at St. Paul, Minnesota, and are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Section B. Direction and Supervision of Construction The State shall direct and supervise all construction activities performed under the construction contract, and perform all construction engineering and inspection functions in connection with the contract construction. All contract construction shall be performed in compliance with the approved plans, specifications and special provisions. Section C. Plan Changes., Additional Construction, Etc. The State shall make changes in the plans and contract construction, which may include the City cost participation construction covered under this Agreement, and shall enter into any necessary addenda, change orders and supplemental agreements with the State's contractor that are necessary to cause the contract construction to be performed and completed in a satisfactory manner. However, the State District Engineer's authorized representative will inform the appropriate City official of any proposed addenda, change orders and supplemental agreements to the construction contract that will affect the City cost participation construction covered under this Agreement. Section D. Satisfactory Completion of Contract The State shall perform all other acts and functions necessary to cause the construction contract to be completed in a satisfactory 4 II-~ 89359 manner. Acceptance by the State of the completed contract construction shall be final, binding and conclusive upon the City as to the satisfactory completion of the contract construction. ARTICLE II - INSPECTION BY THE CITY The City cost participation construction covered under this Agreement shall be open to inspection by the City. If the City believes the City cost participation construction covered under this Agreement has not been properly performed or that the construction is defective, the City shall inform the State District Engineeris authorized representative in writing of those defects. Any recommendations made by the City are not binding on the State. The State shall have the exclusive right to determine whether the State's contractor has satisfactorily performed the City cost participation construction covered under this Agreement. ARTICLE XII - BASIS OF PAYMENT BY THE CITY Section A. SCHEDULE "I" A Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" is attached and incorporated into this Agreement. The Preliminary SCHEDULE "I" includes all anticipated City cost participation construction items and the construction engineering cost share covered under this Agreement, and is based on engineer's estimated unit prices. Section B. City Cost Participation Construction The City shall, at the percentage indicated, participate in the following construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 35W from 66th Street to 42nd S.treet and upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 62 from Penn Avenue to Portland Avenue under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394). The construction includes the City's proportionate share of item costs for mobilization, field office, field laboratory and traffic control. 5 89359 1. 100 Percent shall be the City's rate of cost participation in all of the storm sewer construction as tabulated on Sheet No. 2 of the attached Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". 2. 50 Percent shall be the City's rate of cost participation in all of the Traffic Control Signal System "D" construction, including State furnished materials located on Trunk Highway No. 35W/62 at the Lyndale Avenue south ramps, as tabulated on Sheet No. 2 of the attached Preliminary SCHEDULE "Ill, 3. 25 Percent shall be the City's rate of cost participation in all of the Traffic Control Interconnection "B" construction, including State furnished materials located on Trunk Highway No. 35W/62 at the Lyndale Avenue south ramps, as tabulated on Sheet No.2 of the attached Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". Section C. Construction Engineering Costs The City shall pay a construction engineering charge in an amount equal to 8 percent of the total cost of the City participation construction covered under this Agreement. ARTICLE IV - PAYMENT BY THE CITY It is estimated that the City's share of the costs of the contract const~uction plus the 8 percent construction engineering cost share plus State furnished materials is the sum of $251,252.28 as shown in the attached Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". Upon award of the construction contract the State shall prepare a Revised SCHEDULE III" based on construction contract unit prices. After the following conditions have been met, the City shall advance to the Commissioner of Transportation the City's full and complete lump sum cost share as shown in the Revised SCHEDULE "I": 6 I' - s 89359 A. Execution and approval of this Agreement and the State's transmittal of it to the City along with a copy of the Revised SCHEDULE 11111. B. Receipt by the City of a written request from the State for the advancement of funds. ARTICLE V - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section A. Plan Changes The City may request changes in the plans. If the State determines that the requested plan changes are necessary or desirable, the State will cause those plan changes to be made. Section B. Maintenance by the City Upon satisfactory completion of all of the loop road construction to be performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper maintenance of the roadways and all of the facilities a part thereof, without cost or expense to the State. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, snow, ice and debris removal, resurfacing and seal coating and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the roadways in a safe and usable condition. Upon satisfactory completion of the City requested 60 inch storm sewer facility construction to be performed near 64th Street within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper routine maintenance of those faci'lities, without cost or expense to the State. Routine maintenance includes, but is not limited to, removal of sediment, debris, vegetation and ice from structures, grates and pipes, repair of minor erasion problems, and minor structure and pipe repair, and any other maintenance activities necessary to preserve the facilities and to 7 89359 prevent conditions such as flooding, erosion, sedimentation or accelerated deterioration of the facilities. Upon satisfactory completion of the pedestrian bridge construction to be performed in Legion Lake Park within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall own and provide for the proper maintenance of the pedestrian bridge necessary to perpetuate the pedestrian bridge in a safe and usable condition, without cost or expense to the State. Upon satisfactory completion of the trail connection construction (Logan - James thru Madison Park, Nicollet Avenue - Stevens Avenue, Clinton Avenue - 4th Avenue South, Irving Avenue - Humbolt Avenue, 2nd Avenue South - 3rd Avenue South, and 5th Avenue South - Portland Avenue) to be performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper routine maintenance of the trail connections, without cost or expense to the State. Routine maintenance includes, but is not limited to, snow, ice and debris removal, patching, crack repair, mowing, trimming, signing, pavement marking, and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the trail connections in a safe and usable condition. Upon satisfactory completion of the retaining and noise wall and bridge construction to be performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract; the City shall provide for the proper minor maintenance of and keep in repair the sides of the walls and bridges that face neighborhood dwellings and City streets, without cost or expense to the State. Maintenance and repair includes, but is not limited to, graffiti removal and surface repair, and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the walls and bridges in a safe, usable and aesthetically acceptable condition. 8 ( (~I 0 89359 Upon completion of the lighting facility construction under the Trunk Highway No. 35W/62 bridges over Nicollet Avenue and Lyndale Avenue to be performed under the construction contract, the City will provide for the proper maintenance of those facilities. Maintenance includes but is not, limited to; replacing faulty luminaires; repairing or replacing underground facilities and wiring; repairing service cabinets, photocells, and all other miscellaneous hardware to keep the lighting facilities in working order; cleaning and relamping the luminaires; and painting the lighting facilities. The City will pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to operate the lighting facility. The City will be responsible for the hook-up cost. and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole. Upon satisfactory completion of Traffic Control Signal System liB" construction to be performed under the construction contract on Trunk Highway No. 62 at the Penn Avenue south ramps, the City shall continue to perform the maintenance responsibilities as outlined in Hennepin County Agreements PW-09-20-71 and PW-I0-19-71. Upon satisfactory completion.of Traffic Control Signal System "D" construction to be performed under the construction contract on Trunk Highway No. 35W/62 at the Lyndale Avenue south ramps, the City shall continue to perform the maintenance responsibilities as outlined in Agreement No. 57148M. Upon satisfactory completion of Traffic Control Signal System "F" construction to be performed under the construction contract on Trunk Highway No. 62 at the Portland Avenue south ramps, the City shall continue to perform the maintenance responsibilities as outlined in Hennepin County Agreement PW-39-20-77. 9 89359 Section C. Additional Drainage Neither party to this Agreement shall drain any additional drainage into the storm sewer facilities to be constructed under the construction contract that was not included in the drainage for which the storm sewer facilities were designed, without first obtaining permission to do so from the other party. The drainage areas served by the storm sewer facilities constructed under the construction contract are shown in a drainage area map, EXHIBIT "Drainage Area", which is on file in the office of the State's District Hydraulics Engineer at Roseville and is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Section D. Future Responsibilities Upon satisfactory completion of the loop road construction (Newton Avenue - Logan Avenue, Humbolt Avenue - Girard Avenue, Grand Avenue - Pleasant Avenue, Stevens Avenue - 2nd Avenue South, 4th Avenue South - 5th Avenue South, James Avenue - Irving Avenue, Garfield Avenue - Harriet Avenue, Pillsbury Avenue - Wentworth Avenue, 3rd Avenue South - Clinton Avenue) to be performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall thereafter accept full and total responsibility and all obligations and liabilities arising out of or by reason of the use, operation, maintenance, repair and reconstruction of the loop roads and all of the facilities a part thereof constructed hereunder, without cost or expense to the State. Upon satisfactory completion of the trail connection construction (Logan - James thru Madison Park, Nicollet Avenue -Stevens Avenue, Clinton Avenue - 4th Avenue South, Irving Avenue -Humbolt Avenue, 2nd Avenue South - 3rd Avenue South, and 5th Avenue South - Portland Avenue) to be performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall thereafter accept full and 10 If ,-- /2- 89359 total responsibility and all obligations and liabilities arising out of or by reason of the use, operation, maintenance, repair and reconstruction of the trail connections and all of the facilities a part thereof constructed hereunder, without cost or expense to the State. S ction EO. Release and Conveyance of Roadways rhe State shall, upon satisfactory completion of the loop road construction (Newton Avenue - Logan Avenue, Humbolt Avenue - Girard Avenue, Grand Avenue - Pleasant Avenue, Stevens Avenue - 2nd Avenue South, 4th Avenue South - 5th Avenue South, James Avenue - Irving Avenue, Garfield Avenue - Harriet Avenue, Pillsbury Avenue - Wentworth Avenue, 3rd Avenue South - Clinton Avenue) construction and all of the facilities a part thereof constructed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, serve upon the City a "Notice of Release" placing those roadway portions under the jurisdiction of the City; and subsequent thereto, after all necessary and required documents have been prepared and processed, the State shall convey to the City all right, title and interest of the State in those roadway portions. Upon receipt of that "Notice of Release", the City shall become the road authority responsible for the roadway portions so released. The State shall, upon satisfactory completion of the trail connection construction (Logan - James thru Madison Park, Nicollet Avenue - Stevens Avenue, Clinton Avenue - 4th Avenue South, Irving Avenue - Humbolt Avenue, 2nd Avenue South - 3rd Avenue South, and 5th Avenue South - Portland Avenue) construction and all of the facilities a part thereof constructed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, serve upon the City a "Notice of Release" placing those trail connection portions under the jurisdiction of the City; and subsequent thereto, after all necessary and required 11 89359 documents have been prepared and processed, the State shall convey to the City all right, title and interest of the State in those trail connection portions. Upon receipt of that "Notice of Release", the City shall become the authority responsible for the trail connection portions so released. Section F. Examination of Books, Records, Etc. As provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, subdivision 5, the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of each party relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by each party, and either the legislative auditor or the state auditor as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from final payment. Section G. Claims Each party is responsible for its own employees for any claims arising under the Workers Compensation Act. Each party is responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability of the State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable law govern liability of the City. Section H. Agreement Approval Before this Agreement becomes binding and effective, it shall be approved by a City Council resolution and executed by such State and City officers as the law may provide in addition to the Commissioner of Transportation or their authorized representative. ARTICLE VI - AUTHORIZED AGENTS The State's Authorized Agent for the purpose of the administration of this Agreement is Maryanne Kelly-Sonnek, Municipal Agreements 12 . " (I-I'-l- 89359 Engineer, or her successor. Her current address and phone number are 395 John Ireland Boulevard, Mailstop 682, St. Paul, MN 55155, (651) 296-0969. The City's Authorized Agent for the purpose of the ad~inistration of this Agreement is Michael Eastling, Public Works Director, City Administrator, or his successor. His current address and phone number are 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, MN 55423, (612) 861-9792. 13 /- 8935 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement by their authorized officers. CITY OF RICHFIELD DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Recommended for approval: By Mayor By District Engineer Date Approved: By State Design Engineer By Title Date Approved as to form and execution: Date By Contract Management . Date COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION As delegated to Materials Management Division By Date 14 ~h " . ~ il-I(P CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into MnlDOT Agreement No, 89359 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To provide for payment by the City to the State of the City's share ofthe costs ofthe storm sewer and traffic control signal system construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 35W from 66th Street to 42nd Street and upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 62 from Penn Avenue to Portland Avenue under State Project No. 2782-281 (T.H. 35W=394). IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the are (Title) authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Richfield at an authorized meeting held on the day of , 2006, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. (Signature) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 2006 (Type or Print Name) (Title) Notary Public My Commission Expires ~ ~ ~<S<S- ~C;A,--? ~ ,..;-. N C! ell ]: (I). ~. ~. s::. ] ~ ~ '::t N 0 , t"l \0 t"l I r- li"l - p.; < r/5 00 r- , 0 - ,.-.. ,.-....,.-...0 r- '::t'::t , 00 0101- N t"l t"l '::t '-' II II - t"l ~ ~ li"l p.; t"l li"l li"l ~ 0 t"l t"l p:: :Ii:Ii CIl !Xl . I ~~ t"l::C: '-' '-' -;'Z - \0 0' 00 r- 8::E N N '" , , ,......-0 N N r- ...;.. s:: 00 00 N e ;:3 r- r- N N p.;~~ p.; p.; . . (I) ~-grs r/5 czi CIl~CIl ... .g ;:3 \0 0 0 N r-: ..0 ~ ..0 (I) 't;j 0 S ~ .~ 0 -0 ... s:: 0.. ell ~ 'B 'g 0 ~ - 0 '" - .s 0 s:: > 0 -< .- - s:: (,) s:: S (I) '" ~ s:: S 0 (,) e - ~ (,) N (I) S \0 0 :Ii (,) ~ ... 2 s:: oS 0 <a o(l s:: .... 0.0 '(ii CIl -0 -0 s:: m N '::t <a .s s:: 0.0 I~ O{ii e ..s::\O E .t:: \0 0 ~ S (,) (,) I; t.;::: <+-< ell ... - 0 li"l -0 Z t"l s:: :Ii ell - ... e ~ (I) ~ - s:: s:: '" 0 0 E u "0 Q) (I) 't;j 0 't;j (,) - - ..9 CIl CIl ,.-.. ~: '" 00 :ti: ~,O! s::;U 05'08 g,q N "6hl(; ~ ~i.g a ~ ".,;:.:_6h (,) 0 SZ CI) -', s:: g 8g ,.-.. - s:: ;:3 o ~ -0 (I) o~ - '" ~ '-' E Q) S Q) Q) ... 0.0 ell Q) oS "-' o < s:: .S! t) Q) CIl >" Q) '0 O€ -< .S -0 Q) ~ ... (,) en .g en ell E 8 ~ 0.. Q) (,) t: <<l > -g "-' o E ;:3 ~ -< "0 ~ CIl S e ~ ,.-.. .... '-' ,.-.. - '-' o \0 . CI} .~. z c ... CI} u .. ... .. J;;t;. J;;t;. ......~ "!I'H SQ ~z ~-< ~rJ IIlZ .....joiIIIf ~H == <~ 00;:3 ~ ~~ ~~ ~.~ QO~ f'ooCl} ~~ 000 E-t CI} o::l a E=: Q U ~ ~ ~ ~ Cf) U ~ c.::: ~ 2 ~ U ~ Qc.::: c.::: ~ 0 ~5o::l0 ~ "1 ~~z~ o ~ ~09c5 ~ Z Cf) :><c.:::E-<c.::: 0.... 0 ......>~ Cf)E-<UE-< ~ ~===:~ ~ ~oz~z < ~ddd~ <u~o c.::: ~\O\O\O:::> ZE::;oU o o..goOE-< 8~uc.::: o::l ;;;;;l ggu > Cf)~c.:::~ j ~~Cf)Cf)~ ~ ~o::l~Cf) QQ ~~~~E-<:><< ~2S~~ r:etiJzc.:::~~~~~d~~Q~Q :><~00~~~c.:>~p...90~9~ a~a~~~~~g~~~~~~~ E-<~~~< ~~~~28t>c.:::8c.::: ~~gs:5~S:S:Q~8~<~~~ ~Qo::lu::r:uuuE-<~ ~E-<~~~ ~~8c.:::~c.:::c.:::c.:::~~~~:3~~~ ~~U~E-<~~~82S~E-<~~E-<~ j:( ~~ ~.~ ..Z ................Nt.r)N...........................\O................... oOO-O.q-.q-.q-O-oo- "1"1'C!"1'C!"1on"1onon"1'C!"1 ..............................MMM\O\ci......Mtrl NMMOOOOOOO-\O\O oooonononononononononon NNNNNNNNNNNNN - o 'C! on \0 on N :>< E-< o '$. o o - ,-... - '-' N AGENDA SECTION: RPRO 111.-1 onR AGENDA ITEM # 1 , REpORT # flR ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: J, REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: . ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution establishing authority for a Health Care Savings Plan for the Mayor and Council Members. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the establishment of a Health Care Savings Plan for the Mayor and Council Members. I II. BACKGROUND I At the March 14 Special City Council Worksession, the City Council discussed establishing a Health Care Savings Plan (HCSP). The City Council consensus was to have staff prepare the necessary documents for their consideration at a future meeting to create a HCSP with $25 of their base biweekly wage placed into each Council Member's account. However, since Mayor Kirsch was absent form the Worksession discussion, the City Council agreed that, if the Mayor chose to make a larger contribution based upon his salary, a percentage contribution would be considered. . In 2001, the Minnesota legislature granted authority to the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) to offer a post retirement health care savings plan to eligible employees of the State of Minnesota and other governmental subdivisions. MSRS was authorized to administer these plans after they were adopted by governmental subdivisions throughout the state. 3/28 Council HCSP A post retirement health care savings plan is an employer-sponsored program that allows employees to save money to pay medical expenses and/or health insurance premiums after termination of public service. . Employees are able to choose among different investment options provided by the State Board of Investment. Assets contributed into the program are tax-free, accumulate tax free, and if used for medical expenses, remain tax-free. Legal authority to establish such plans is provided through Minn. Stat. 352.98 and Internal Revenue Service rulings. The establishment of each plan, including the contribution formula must be negotiated when dealing with a collective bargaining unit, or adopted as a personnel policy where non-union employees are involved. Once established, the plan must be filed with MSRS to initiate the program. Participation for each individual employee within a bargaining or employee group is mandatory once the plan is established for that respective group. Moreover, the amounts contributed for or by each employee in a particular group must be the same for every employee of the group. Contributed amounts between employee groups may vary, however. To date, General Services, Management, Patrol Officers and Detectives, Police Supervisory Unit and Labor and Trades employee groups have established a City- approved Health Care Savings Plan. The City Council, which is comprised of the Mayor and four Council Members, must approve the attached plan with a majority vote. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . State Statutes have been amended to provide the opportunity for a very valuable benefit to City employees. The City of Richfield is pursuing this benefit with employee groups that are interested in such a mandatory plan. . Approval by the City Council of the resolution will provide the City authority to proceed with this program for the Mayor and Council Members. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . There is no time-critical issue pertaining to the implementation of this plan. However, the City Council has expressed a desire to implement the program at the earliest opportunity. . After City approval, this plan must be submitted to MSRS for its approval and filing. I C. FINANCIAL I . There is no cost to the City in this version of the plan since the City makes no contribution. In fact, there are cost-savings to the City in thatwages and severance pay that the employee contributes to the Health Care Savings Plan are not subject to Social Security or Medicare contributions. . The plan provides a great tax savings to the participating employees and provides a tax mechanism to fund post retirement medical costs. I D. LEGAL I . There is legal authority for this plan in the Minnesota Statutes and IRS Code. . A Personnel Policy for the City Council will provide the full local authorization for this plan. I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I . The City Council could decide not to approve this plan or pursue a change to the employee contribution formula proposed. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution . City Council Health Care Savings Plan Personnel Policy I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None 11--1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PERSONNEL POLICY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A POST RETIREMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN WHEREAS, Laws of Minnesota 2001, chapter 352.98, authorizes the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) to offer a Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan (Plan) program to state employees, as well as, other governmental subdivisions; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service Code provides for such Plans; and L WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is interested in offering the Plan to eligible City employees as a tax free method for employees to set aside money to cover the ever increasing costs of health insurance and medical costs after termination of public employment; and WHEREAS, such plans must be established by the employee group, either through a collective bargaining agreement for union employees or a personnel policy for employees not covered by a collective bargaining agreement; and WHEREAS, the provisions of a Plan have been agreed upon by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield hereby approves a Personnel Policy establishing a Health Care Savings Plan for the City Council employees. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 1:;l-d.. Policy: Richfield City Council Retirement Health Care Savings Plan Approved by: Richfield City Council on March 28, 2006 Effective Date: April 3, 2006 Page: 1 of 1 Plan Purpose Post Retirement Haith Care Savings Plan Eligibility to Participate Contribution Formula HCSP Administration The Richfield City Council is interested in establishing a means for eligible Council Members to participate in a mandatory program to help defray some of the costs of post employment health related expenses, including health insurance premiums, using pre-tax dollars. Participation in the Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan, administered by the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS), is intended to provide an opportunity to accomplish that goal. The Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan (HCSP) is an Employer sponsored program that allows eligible employees and elected officials to defer a portion of their biweekly salary for deposit into their HCSP for the payment of qualified healthcare-related expenses after separation from City service. Council Members will be able to choose among several different investment options provided by the Minnesota State Board of Investment. Under the Plan, amounts contributed into the HCSP are tax-free and not subject to FICA contributions. Assets in the HCSP accumulate tax-free and since payouts are used for qualifying medical expenses, they remain tax-free. Participation in the Richfield City Council Members' HCSP is mandatory for all elected officials of the Richfield City Council until the time of termination public service. Mandatory participation in the HCSP shall be in accordance with, and limited to the following formula for contribution: I. Biweeklv Contribution 1. An eligible Council Member will contribute $25 of their base biweekly wage to the Council Member's account in the HCSP. The HCSP is authorized under the Internal Revenue Code and is administered by the Minnesota State Retirement System. ....... AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # STAFF REpORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 Other Business 13 69 RICHFIELD REpORT PREPARED By: THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~ REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of guidance on final layout for reconstruction of 66th Street and Portland Avenue intersection. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I By Motion: Approve final layout for the reconstruction of 66th Street and Portland Avenue with the acquisition of four single-family homes on the south end of the east side of the 6601 block of PortlanCl Avenue for redeveloDment. I II. BACKGROUND I The Council approved the 66th Street and Portland Avenue design of a roundabout and an alignment shift to the north and east at its October 25, 2006 meeting. Since then, the design has been refined with the assistance of Mark Johnson, a designer experienced in roundabouts. The roundabout has been reduced indiameter from the original 180 feet to only 155 feet forthe final layout. As proposed, the layout fits well with the businesses remaining near the intersection of Portland Avenue and 66th Street. . However, by reducing the size of the roundabout, the need for all the single-family housing on the east side of the 6601 block of Portland Avenuewas correspondingly reduced. City staff met with Hennepin County Community Works staff about securing additional funds for the project. They stated that additional County funds might be secured to help fill the gap on the construction budget, including funds to purchase four additional single-family housing units. The residual property not needed for right of way plus the four houses at the south end of the block could be 0328 Portland-66th combined to provide a site for new housing. There is preliminary interest from the development community. A housing development project would be possible if the Council agreed that access control and site design for development would be improved greatly with the acquisition of an additional four single-family homes. Benefits of this action would be: . Increases size of development site by four single-family parcels. . A larger site improves the economic feasibility for redevelopment. . Improves safety by reducing drivewcW access for new redevelopment on Portland Avenue. . Improves site design by allowing for a private alley behind the building(s) to gain access to resident and guest parking. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . Improvement of the Portland Avenue and 66th Street intersection is identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program. . The housing development would be undertaken under the auspices of the HRA. lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Owners of four single-family homes need guidance on the future of their property. . The four properties would only be purchased on a voluntary basis. I C. FINANCIAL I . The additional land to be purchased will be financed by additional County funds. Therefore, there is no effect of this proposal on City funds. . Final confirmation of the availability of County funds is needed along with an agreement to provide the funds. . Tax Increment Financing (TIF) would not be utilized. I D. LEGAL I . The City Attorney will be available to answer legal questions. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Do not support the acquisition of four additional single-family homes. This will mean the 6601 block of Portland Avenue will produce a smaller scale and less desirable development. . Acquire a 3.5-foot strip of land from each of the four parcels on the south end of the 6601 block of Portland Avenue to provide a wider sidewalk. . Use condemnation to obtain four single-family homes to improve the redevelopment potential. I V. ATTACHMENTS ~ I . Proposed layout for reconstruction of Portland Avenue and 66th Street. . Map showing four single-family houses to be purchased for redevelopment. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I . Residents in the project area of 66th Street and Portland Avenue have been invited to attend the council meeting. . II~ ("') .::<" o --h :::0 o :::T =r! CD c::L. en en .... ::T en .... ca CD .... QO -a o ;:a. - D) :::s a.. )> < CD :::s c CD - :::s (if (jJ CD (") ~ o :::s s:: ~ ~ CD en o ,.... Q) :::0 -- ca ::T .... . o ... ae "< - 3 -c D) (") ur ~ i il ~~ 1J . h;: f!l ~ '41 ~ ....1 ~. ~ II" f.: ; ;:i' s; S' ~ U h ':'k ~~g> oS ~ iir c: o ' ~ - !T ;~ 15~g, g~ ~~ii 2ii ~ ~g I@ 1110 ~ Q - d' ~ Q" - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a l a a Sa~9B' ~ :;:, Q ~ ~ ~ ~ .g ~ CD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (rj ~ 0- :;:, ~ ~ ~ (rj ~ g , ~ ~ ~ II~ 1I1@ 1110 C> 0') ~ ::0." ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0') is" ~~ '"i ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... - :::> :::!; :r ~ ~::::!; a ~ a ~ a ~ a 0 en '@ -t ~ --h Cil~ S VI C") ::0 ~ ..... ~ ~~ - 0 g (iJ 2 ~ t;l.: ::J 0 g ~ ~ ~ CD (;) (') Q ~ ~ =::r .... ::;: I ~ .g ~ Cb --!: 0- ~ C/) QO ::;: ~ (1) ::J c- o: I ~ ::J -a ~ ~ - 0 .g s: ;::I.. ~ ~ :J - ~ ;;a. S>> :J :::::s (1) a.. en 0 ~ ....... Q) CD :::::s c: CD - :::::s (if U1 CD (") .... -- 0 :::::s . ::0 -- ca :r ~ 0 ~ ~ "< - 3 -a S>> (") &t ~ i jl~~ ~ ~ "" ~ ""'I 2 ~ ~: (D' ,,' " ~ ~r ~~ m 5i ~i ~l~ ~~ I~g, i1!~ <6 if ~h il~!<! ~a :=i ~o AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Other Business 14 70 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: KRISTIN ASHER, ASS'T CITY ENGINEER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR fi2( REVIEW: REVIEWED By CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider approval of the agreementwith Tim Duoos to provide improvements to his property and fullfill future stormwater ponding requirements in exchange for the land and easements needed to make improvements to Richfield Lake. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with Tim Duoos for the exchange of land and easements needed to make improvements to Richfield Lake, while providing sufficient stormwater capacity to accommodate any future redevelopment of his site on 64th Street and Lvndale Avenue. I II. BACKGROUND I. The City has been working with Mn/DOT for many years determining how to handle the additional stormwater runoff created with the Crosstown Reconstruction project. Rather than purchasing additional homes and/or apartment buildings, both agencies worked together to accommodate the additional stormwater needs at Richfield Lake. . 0328RichfieldLake The Richfield Lake Improvement project consists of reconstructing more than half of the Richfield Lake perimeter, including a new perimeter pond which will not only accommodate the additional stormwater runoff from the Crosstown Reconstruction project and any future redevelopment of the Lyndale Garden Genter (LGC)- Tim Duoos site, but will improve the water quality of Richfield Lake as well. The walking path will be reconstructed and will separate the perimeter pond from the lake. The intention is to run the new stormwater pipe down Lyndale Avenue and across the LGC-Tim Duoos property, along side the existing stormwater pipe (according to attached graphics). This alignment offers the City and adjacent property owners a newly reconstructed Lyndale Avenue from the Crosstown to 64th Street in addition to the improvements to Richfield Lake. The agreement is outlined as follows: The City agrees to: . Reconstruct Lyndale Avenue while replacing the existing stormwater pipe . Construct a new stormwater pipe across the Tim Duoss property . Abandon the existing stormwater pipe and terminate the existing easement . Construct a new entrance to the property coincidentally with the construction of the stormwater pipes . Construct an initial phase stormwater pond adjacent to Richfield Lake and partially upon the property In exchange for: . Temporary and permanent easements to construct and maintain stormwater pipe across the property . Donation of land needed to construct perimeter pond If the City and property owners do not chose to agree on the above criteria, a Plan B option exists that runs the stormwater pipe down 63rd Street and to Richfield Lake via Bryant Avenue. This alternative has the potential to be just as expensive without offering the benefits to both the City and property owner. Detailed construction plans will be prepared after an agreement is reached. The plans may include the construction of a retaining wall along the Lyndale Garden Center edge at the expense of the Lyndale Garden Center property owner. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . Regional ponding of storm water runoff is consistent with Richfield's Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . This agreement is needed in order to avoid the Plan B alternative. I C. FINANCIAL I . There are no costs associated with this agreement. Federal funds will be used to construct Lyndale Avenue, the new stormwater pipe, and the stormwater pond. The LGC property owner may request that the project include the construction of a retaining wall along the pond at the owner's expense. In addition, the City stormwater utility funds may . be used to expand the project to reconstruct and raise the paths and the perimeter of the pond along the south side of Richfield Lake. I D. LEGAL I . The acquisition of right of way needs to comply with the Federal regulations due to funding of the improvement project. . State agency regulations on how to handle storm water are identified and followed in Richfield's Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan. . Wetland mitigation will likely be needed. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) . Plan B I V. ATTACHMENTS I . The draft agreement between the City of Richfield and Tim Duoos. A copy of the final agreement may be available at the meeting. . Plans of Richfield Lake (Improvement Project, Existing Easement, Proposed Easements) . Plan B I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None anticipated. ~1Y<o/J DRAFT 3/28/06 SITE ALTERATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the 28th day of March 2006, by and between Rancho Richfield, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, and its successors and/or assigns (hereinafter "Rancho") and the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"). I. BACKGROUND 1. Rancho is the owner of certain real estate located within the City of Richfield and situated on land legally described in the attached Exhibit A (the "Property"). 2. The City has been participating with the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("MnDOT"). to seek ways to address stormwater management impacts that will result from the MnDOT Crosstown ReconStruction Project; and from the discharge of stormwater from the ProJect into Richfield Lake. 3. In order to properly collect, treat and discharge the stormwater, new facilities will be required in and approaching Richfield Lake. 4. Rancho and the City have reviewed and considered the mutual desirability of locating certain of those facilities upon the Property, and constructing certain other improvements on and adjacent to the Property; and wish to reach agreement as to such matters. This Agreement is intended to serve that objective. ll. RECITALS NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and promises of the parties, the nature and extent of which is deemed adequate, the parties hereto hereby stipulate and agree as .follows: Section 1. The Stormwater Proiect. The City agrees that it will undertake and continue to completion the construction of the StoImwater Project which will include the following elements: (a) New stormwater pipe constructed under Lyndale Avenue from West 63rd Street to the Property. (b) Reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue adjacent to the new stormwater pipe. ( c) New stormwater pipe to be constructed from the L yndale pipe across the Property at substantially the location shown on the attached Exhibit B. JBD-274403v3 106019;v.6 (d) The abandonment of the existing stormwater pipe and termination of the existing easement as generally shown on the attached Exhibit C upon completion of construction of the pipe described in sub-paragraph (c) above. (e) New entrance to the Property to be constructed coincidentally with the construction of the stormwater pipes. (f) Construction of an initial phase stormwater pond adjacent to Richfield Lake and partially upon the Property, as generally shown on the attached Exhibit D. (g) Modification of perimeter of Richfield Lake to accommodate inflow from stormwater pipes and elevation of walkways as needed. The above is referred to hereinafter as the "Stormwater Project." Section 2. Design. and Regulatory Approvals. The City will be responsible, at its cost and expense, for all design, engineering work, regulatory approvals, contracting and construction of the Stormwater Project. The regulatory approvals will also include a determination from the proper authorities that the Rancho is permitted, without the need for further regulatory approvals, to expand on the Property, at Rancho's expense, the initial phase stormwater pond mentioned in paragraph 6 above to satisfy the stormwater ponding requirements for future development of the Property. Rancho agrees that it will join in any applications for permits and regulatory approvals which may be required due to Rancho's ownership of the Property. Not later than 30 days prior to the date on which the City will seek bids on construction of the elements of the Proj ect that will be constructed on the Property, the City will provide Rancho with designs for such elements. Rancho will have not less than 20 days from the date of receipt of such designs to review and comment. Section 3. Easements. In furtherance of the Project, Rancho agrees to execute and deliver to the City temporary and permanent easements in substantially the form of the Stormwater Easement Agreement shown in the attached Exhibit E. The general location of the easement is as depicted on the attached Exhibit . Each easement will be executed and delivered to the City not later than 15 days following the date that the City notifies Rancho that final designs for the improvement covered by that easement has been approved by the City, and all regulatory permits and approvals have been obtained, time being of the essence. Consideration for each such easement will be the City's obligation to construct the improvements as described above, and to obtain the regulatory approvals described above, and to carry out its other obligations under this Agreement, including, without limitation, those obligations contained in Section 4. Rancho acknowledges that it has been informed of its right to have an appraisal of the property performed by the City, and to receive compensation based on that appraisal. Rancho concludes that the forms of consideration described above and in Section 9 hereof are sufficient consideration for the granting of the easement, and hereby waives any right to further compensation, to have the property appraised, and to the payment of just compensation as indicated by such appraisal. Not later than 15 days after the date of this agreement, Rancho will execute and deliver to the City a Waiver of Compensation in substantially the form of the attached Exhibit F. Section 4. Right of Entry. In consideration for such easements, the City agrees to: JBD-274403v4 1060 1 9;v.6 2 (a) Permit Rancho or consultants retained by Rancho to be present during the time any work is being done by City under this Agreement; (b) Provide Rancho with a copy of all test results, surveys and reports prepared by the City, or consultants or contractors evaluating the conditions present on the Property as soon as reasonably possible following final completion thereof. ( c) Dispose of all excess material, not wanted by the Rancho, generated during the course of the City's activities on the Property. (d) Do the work in the shortest period time reasonably necessary to complete such activities authorized under this Agreement; (e) Use the Property.only for the pUrposes described herein and not park or store any equipment on the Property, except during the limited periods of time when the work under this Agreement is actually in progress; (f) Do no unnecessary damage to the Property. (g) Hold Rancho, its agents, contractors, consultants, or representatives harmless from and indemnify it from any and all claims, damages, judgments or obligations, including the cost of defense of suit, arising out of damage to Property or arising out of injury to anyone incurred or alleged to have been incurred in connection with the City's activities pursuant to this Agreement. (h) Fully pay and satisfy any claims for payment for work done on the Property and indemnify and hold harmless Rancho from any claims based on failure to fully pay such claims. (i) Rancho's contractors which enter the Property pursuant to this Agreement shall carry insurance during the time any work is done on the Property in amounts and in coverages ordinarily required by the City for such activities; G) Entrance and exit from the proposed. construction areas will be via established driveways and the City will restore these areas to pre-existing conditions as required. Section 5. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party, if the City is unable to obtain the necessary regulatory permits and approvals or if Mn/DOT is unable to perform on the City - MnlDOT agreement by not later than October 1, 2006, unless such date is extended by mutual agreement of the parties. Section 6. Governing Law. This. Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the state of Minnesota. JBD-274403v4 106019;v.6 3 Section 7. Notices and Demands. All notices, demands or other communications under this Agreement shall be effective only if made in writing and shall be sufficiently given and deemed given when delivered personally or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, properly addressed as follows: 1. If to Rancho: Mr. Tim Duoos Rancho Richfield LLC P. O. Box 2181 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 With Copy to: Bruce D. Malkerson, Esq. Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP 220 South Sixth Street, Suite 1900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 2. If to City: Steven L. Devich City Manager 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 With Copy to: Corrine H. Thomson, Esq. Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 . Or to such other persons as the. parties may from time to time designate in writing and forward to the other persons entitled to receive notice as provided in this section. Section 8. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended by the parties hereto only by written instrument executed with the same procedures and formality as were followed in the execution of this Agreement. Section 9. agree as follows: Notwithstanding any language to the contrary herein, the City and Rancho (a) Permits for and Construction Of A Retaining Wall. As part of the design and regulatory approvals set forth above in Section 2, the City will simultaneously obtain approval of the permits and regulatory approvals needed so Rancho can build the retaining wall as shown generally on attached Exhibit G and place and compact fill to the east side of the wall. Rancho agrees that it will join in any applications for permits or regulatory approvals, which may be required due to Rancho's ownership of the Property. Rancho may build the retaining wall (and foundation), at its expense, in conjunction with the construction by the City of the Stormwater Project as described in the Agreement. Rancho may also delay construction of the wall to a future date. . JBD-274403v4 1060 19;v.6 4 Mar.28. 2.006 4:04PM American Student Financial Group No.5573 p. 6 . , (e) (b) No Need For Future Stormwater Quality or Quantity Ponding or Treatment By The City. The City agrees that the construction of the Stonnwater Project by the City and granting of easements as outlined above shall fulfill all present and future requiredstormwater retention pond requirements or other stormwater volume, rate control~ or water quality requirements and controls. and shall constitute full payment of special assessments or other fees related to same~ for any existing or future development on the Property) regardless of the type and percentage of hardcover, etc. The City further agrees that the Property will not be Special Assessed or in any way taxed for any of the cost of the oonstruction of the Stormwater Project) except to the extent, if any) that all or a portion of the cost of the Stormwater Project is paid for by the City from revenue collected as general real estate taxes levied against all property in the City or paid for by the City from monthly stormwater facility availability fees, or similar fees, which are collected generally from all properties.in the City. , , , , " , , " , (c) . R~lacenient of Parking Areas In the TenworaIy Construction Easement Area. The ,City will minimize as reasonably possible the damage to or removal of the paved 'parking area now existing in the proposed Construction Easement Area and the City will repair any damage to those areas and replace any lost parking spaces in those areas by constructing and pa.ving replacement parking spaces on the Property in areas acceptable to Rancho. . , Cd) Final Grades of Construction Easement Area. The final grades of the Construction Easement Areas, after the City is completed with the construction of the . StormwaterProject. shall be as shown on Exhibit H attached hereto. (f) Access. During the constnlction of the Stormwater Project~ the City shall~ to the extent reasonably possible~ construct the improvements in such a way to avoid any adverse impact on the day-to-say business activities on the Property, including but not limited to maintaining access from the public road to the parking lot on the Property and from the parking lot on the Property to the . entrances into the buildings located on the Property. \ ~ Ranohoneed not deed ~ easements to be granted herein to the City un~ A .. a time mutually agreeable to both parties. ~ K ," : ;. " . Section 10. Counter:parts. This instrument may be executed in any number of counterpart copies, each of which counterpart copies shall be deemed an original for all purposes. JSO-274403v4 I060J9;v.6 . I: [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] [Signatures Follow] 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed in their names and on their behalves on or as of the above date. Rancho Richfield LLC: City of Richfield By: JBD-274403v4 L06019;v.6 By: Tim Duoos, its President 6 . Steven L. Devich City Manager '~ . EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ["Rancho" will insert legal at this location within thirty days of execution of agreement] JBD-274403vl A-I EXHJBIT B NEW STORMW A TER PIPE AND EASEMENTS (See image on next page) JBD-274403v1 B-1 - -...-......--.---....---..-.-..-.--, .---.~-------'--_. _."'-_..__.._-~_._._._-_._-_._----_.- -----.-------- --.--.--. . ,', ~_._ -..J--9,,":; \(oe: \E '.{r.H:!~~, ,;n()09,3~~>: ..(;:: .PIPE -EASE, uQn I il~~ i ~I IR: i i I ir: - li:> ~ 3.~ ~I lIllii Q- ~"8C/) _,t., ~ =~ ellS . cn~ ii I iin ~I ~ i! i ~~ ~~8 II~ ~ g.. t:tc ('I) ~ P. '# ~ ~. ('l) 00 sa. ~ ~ ~ = ;" ~ ~ = = ~ rJ:J. pt. = a ~ ~ ~ .. ~ e "'C .. ~ ~ e ~ a. fIJ 0 " It <c' ! c: c ca !l jjO N ~ ~ l:D I if ! )>)>z (/lZO 0-1 (/l fTl Ie.. 0-1 ::E--i Z,I - fTl )>-1 :::0-<' [Tl a fTl() )>l>)> ""{JVl-1 1J[Tl- :::OS::O DfTlZ XZ --10 S::Vl"Tl l> -1 CJ JT1 :::0 . J> ~- '~. a rJ:1 ~ o tTj > rJ:1 tr1 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rJ:1 ~ o ~ rJ:1 tTj ~ rJ:1 ~ rJ:1 ;9 ~ m x -=r 0- ;:::;: OJ Exhibit C Abstract EASEMENTS THIS INSTRUMENT is made by X, Grantor, in favor ofthe City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Grantee. Recitals A. Grantor is the fee owner of the following described property ill Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Property"): [Insert Legal Description of Property] B. Grantor desires to grant to the Grantee easements, according to the terms and conditions contained herein. Terms of Easements 1. Grant of Easements. For good and valuable consideration, receipt of which IS acknowledged by Grantor, Grantor grants and conveys to the Grantee the following easements: [Temporary easement for storm sewer construction] [Permanent easement for storm sewer] [Temporary easement for storm water pond] [Permanent easement for storm water pond] 2. Scope of Easements. The perpetual utility easements granted herein include the right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents, and employees to enter the premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of locating, constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining, inspecting, altering and repairing storm sewer and storm water ponding facilities in the described easement area. The temporary easements include the right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents, and employees to enter upon said premises at all reasonable times for the purposes of construction, grading, sloping, and restoration purposes, and all purposes ancillary thereto, together with the right to remove trees, shrubs or other vegetation in the easement area, as well as the right to deposit earthen materials within the easement area and to move, store, and remove equipment and supplies, and to perform any other work necessary and incident to the proj ect. 274686vC JBD RC125-256 JBD-274686vl Exhibit C (continued) The easements granted herein also include the right to cut, trim, or remove from the easement areas trees, shrubs, or other vegetation as in the Grantee's judgment unreasonably interfere with the easement or facilities of the Grantee, its successors or assigns. 3. Warranty of Title. The Grantor warrants it is the owner ofthe Property and has the right, title and capacity to convey to the Grantee the easements herein. 4. Environmental Matters. The Grantor shall not be responsible for, and the Grantee hereby indemnifies Grantor from, any costs, expenses, damages, demands, obligations, including penalties and reasonable attorney's fees, or losses resulting from any claims, actions, suits or proceedings based upon a release or threat of release of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants which were caused by the activities of Grantee under this Agreement. 5. Binding Effect. The terms and conditions of this instrument shall run with the land and be binding on the Grantor, its successors and assigns. STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: NONE Dated this _ day of , 2006. x STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of ,2006 by [add appropriate language based on form of X], Grantor. N6taryPublic NOTARY STAMP OR SEAL THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 274686vC lBD RC125-256 JBD-274686vl .-..-.-- .-.-.--..-.----------------------..--.----------... _._-----_._--_.__._.._---------_._.._-----~--- " ,-, -'", .-, .,- ',- "..... "'-,,.........."'...... - " '., - -'J.J"._JC'\:.:'r1!O'C:' '!JClO"-J-:.-'-,,_-PIPE10l; ,jq~ -- i I~. II: rl u ~f S;; 5:::l " i ~ ~ i ii'~ lir ili3:;" c:~ i;:[f. <l~ ~ ",Ii ~~ ~ ~ 8 I.~ i c. = ;r ~ ~ ~ ~ =' =r = ~ ~ (D rI.l I--" - J=l-o Q a ~ rI.l ~. ~ ~ (D .. t"'-l S S. "CS ~ ~ ~ a ~ =' - ~ I .." t ~ ~ Co> ~ (J'J ~ Z ~ rJJ. ~ i ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (J'J ~ o ~ rJJ. tTj ~ ~ (J'J ~ C/.) ~ ~ m >< i ::J'" " c- cO' ... !!l ;::+: c: c: m ... () .:c - .0> I N ....10. ~ .. '0 ' 0'"0",100,"" ,<.'~C.._-,~:-9~:\~.,'Jo\[/.PI\):r~'.1GD\J....r"::;-:' ,..... ~ I !I~~ ~ gl I: g ~I ~r J;;: 5 ::I !~ j ~o ~i il~ o . 11 .~. zi!' izcn ~~ e ",t ~~ ~~8 I.~ ~ g.. ~ (p ~ p.. '- s= ~. (p 00 S ~ 'TJ i c- US' !!l t: Iii m .:c i>> ~ --- e So =- 2- Q. t""4 . ; 1-4 e "CS ... ~ ~ e ~ = .... ~ a ...... ~ f') .... j i ~ i s r;~ C? ~ to > en. ~ Z ~ r.n. ~ i t:1 ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t:1 r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tIj (j ~ m x ::r 0- ;::;.: o I ~ WAIVER OF COMPENSATION (DONATION) S.P. NO. XXXXX PARCEL NO. XX-XX OWNER CDJ OF RICHFIELD INC. ET. AL. ADDRESS 6400 L YNDALE AVENUE SOUTH, RICHFIELD MN 55423 Michael Eastling, Public Works Director City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mr. Eastling: Exhibit D ~ I am fully aware of the City/State's need to acquire right of way (XX acre) from the property at 6400 Lyndale Avenue South for the improvements needed to accommodate additional storm water runoff from the TH 62/1-35W Reconstruction Project. I am also aware of my right to have the City/State appraise the property and of my right to receive just compensation. I have decidedJ",~ish to donate the right of way needed from my property for the temporary construction easements totaling XX acres and permanent easements totaling XX acres required to complete the construction of the project (as indicated on the graphics XXXX). I hereby waive my right to have my property appraised and waive my right to receive just compensation. Sincerely, Tim Duoos Property Owner 6400 Lyndale Avenue South Richfield MN 55423 ------_._-.--- . ------- " " -.. ----.. K:\01000-93\Cod\Exhibits\ 100093-GP1.dgn I ! , I .........-, izg1 IP~I i "1 1 ~l ; Co. i m I 0 ! -l l ~ " ! . I I ~ I , i I~ r :m "m ~-I , f I f ~O !" 1 ! i~ 1m l-l jCl> o o o ~~ '" o o . WSB 7o'i'X:ii;Avenue South, SuI1B 300 MinneapoIs, MN 55416 www.WlIbeIIg.CIlIII Richfield Lake Improvement Project City Project No. Richfield, Minnesota IHEftEIY aRTFY THAT TItS PL'-". SP(CInCATKlN, OR ItEPOlU wAS PREPMEO BY OR l.NlER flY DIRECT ~SlON IIfJ THAT I/JN. It. DlI. Y LICENSED PROFESSlClNM. ENGINEER UNXR TtE LAWS Of'1tt: STATE OF'Wf60TA REVISION NO. DATE EXPLAHATJON ScALEl AS NCJTEO PUN IVl DESIGN IYI TAW TAW/PRW _or. PRW PETER R. WILLENBRING. P.E. DAlia 3/15/05 Lie. NOI 15998 REeoRD copy ay~ DATE &~1nc. .A_ 1II-54f.G.FI1183~~!lOO INFRASTRUC1IJRE EMCll_ PlANNING llONSTRUCTlON ~ n ~ ~ tj ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ Z o ~ ~ EXHIBIT E STORMW ATER EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS INSTRUMENT is made by X, Grantor, in favor of the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Grantee. RECITALS A. Grantor is the fee owner of the following described property in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Property"): [Insert Legal Description of Property] B. Grantor desires to grant to the Grantee easements, according to theteml~~@d conditions contained herein. TERMS OF EASEMENTS 1. Grant of Easements. For good and valuable consideration, receipt ofwmch is acknowledged by Grantor, Grantor grants and conveys to the Grantee the following easements: [Temporary easement for storm sewer construction] [Permanent easement for storm sewer] [Temporary easement for storm water pond] [Permanent easement for storm water pond] 2. Scope of Easements. The perpetual utility easements granted herein include the right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents, and employees to enter the premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of locating, constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining, inspecting, altering and repairing storm sewer and storm water ponding facilities in the described easement area. The temporary easements include the right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents, and employees to enter upon said premises at all reasonable times for the purposes of construction, grading, sloping, and restoration purposes, and all purposes ancillary thereto, together with the right to remove trees, shrubs or other vegetation in the easement area, as well as the right to deposit earthen materials within the easement area and to move, store, and remove equipment and supplies, and to perform any other work necessary and incident to the proj ect. JBD-274403vl 1060 19.doc The easements granted herein also include the right to cut, trim, or remove from the easement areas trees, shrubs, or other vegetation as in the Grantee's judgment unreasonably interfere with the easement or facilities of the Grantee, its successors or assigns. 3. Warrantv of Title. The Grantor warrants it is the owner of the Property and has the right, title and capacity to convey to the Grantee the easements herein. 4. Environmental Matters. The Grantor shall not be responsible for, and the Grantee hereby indemnifies Grantor from, any costs, expenses, damages, demands, obligations, including penalties and reasonable attorney's fees, or losses resulting from any claims, actions, suits or proceedings based upon a release or threat of release of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants which were caused by the activities of Grantee under this Agreement. 5. Binding E.ffect. The terms and conditions of this instrument shall run with the land and be binding on the Grantor, its successors and assigns. STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: NONE Dated this day of , 2006. x STATEOFMINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of ,2006 by [add appropriate language based on form of X}, Grantor. Notary Public NOTARY STAMP OR SEAL THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612)337-9300 JBD-274403vl 1060 1 9.doc AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Other Business 15 71 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DlRECTORREVIEw: 8'/ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approval of the 30-month lease between the City of Richfield and Hat Trick Hockey Inc., consisting of 1,900 square feet of space located in the Richfield Ice Arena, 636 East 66th Street. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the 30-month lease between the City of Richfield and Hat Trick Hockey Inc., consisting of 1,900 square feet of space located in the Richfield Ice Arena, 636 East 66th Street. I II. BACKGROUND I Mr. Tom Sachs of Hat Trick Hockey, Inc. has leased a 1,900 square foot addition of the Richfield Ice Arena, to conduct retail sales of hockey equipment since November 1997. Through November 2005, Hat Trick Hockey has contributed $242,940 to the revenue stream of the Ice Arena. The initial cost of the addition was $261,500. His current lease expires November 30,2006. In recent years, Hat Trick Hockey has suffered declining profits largely due to a major hockey retailer, Hockey Giant, which moved in close by in December, 2003. As a result, Mr. Sachs is faced with the situation of moving or closing his business due to the market conditions. He is now considering an offer to move his business to another area and must make a final decision by April 15, 2006. He is requesting the City to consider lowering his lease payments, effective June 1,2006, or he will not seek to renew his lease upon expiration on November 30, 2006. 1014 Hat Trick Lease Staff has negotiated the attached 30-month lease with Mr. Sachs with a lease payment that has decreased from $26,400 to $17,700. When negotiating the lease payment, staff determined that the net rate for similar retail space is approximately $12.00 per square foot per year, not including taxes. Because Hat Trick Hockey is required to pay property taxes and other retail renters are not, the annual taxes for Hat Trick Hockey in the amount of $8,700 was subtracted from his current rate. Factoring in that Mr. Sachs pays $8,700 a year in taxes, Hat Trick Hockey's new net rate is $13.89 per square foot. Changes in the lease include: 1) The term changes from three years to 30 months. 2) The lease payment was reduced from $2,200 per month to $1,475 per month. IIII. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The current lease expires on November 30, 2006; however, Mr. Sachs is requesting a new lease effective June 1, 2006 to November 30, 2008. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Mr. Sachs has indicated he is considering an offer to move his business to another location. He must make a final decision by April 15, 2006. I C. FINANCIAL I . According to the City's Community Development Department, the net rate for retail space in Richfield is approximately $12.00 per square foot per year, not including taxes. Because Hat Trick Hockey is required to pay property taxes and other retail renters are not, annual taxes for Hat Trick Hockey in the amount of $8,700 was subtracted from his current rate. Factoring in that Mr. Sachs pays $8,700 a year in taxes, Hat Trick Hockey's new net rate is $13.89 per square foot. . The Ice Arena will receive rent revenue in the amount of $1 ,475 each month from June 1,2006 to November 30,2008. It would not be feasible to generate this amount of revenue from a different use of the leased space. . Hat Trick Hockey will have contributed $257,540 to the revenue stream of the Ice arena through May 1, 2006. The new lease will generate another $44,250 for a total of $301 ,790, surpassing the initial cost of the addition. I D. LEGAL . None I ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) . None I IV. ATTACHMENTS I . Lease Agreement between the City of Richfield and Hat Trick Hockey, Inc. IV. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None. Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 16 -I LEASE AGREEMENT This lease is made this 28th day of March, 2006, by and between THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ("Landlord") and HAT TRICK HOCKEY, INC. ("Tenant"). Landlord and Tenant, intending to be legally bound, hereby covenant and agree as follow: ARTICLE I. Leased Premises 1.1 Landlord does hereby lease, demise, and let unto Tenant, and Tenant does hereby hire and take from Landlord, upon the terms and conditions set forth herein (the Lease), the premises shown cross- hatched on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, consisting of 1,900 square feet of space (Leased Premises), located on the level of the Richfield Ice Arena Building located at 636 East 66th Street situated in the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Building"). ARTICLE II. Term 2.1. The term ofthe Lease shall commence on June 1,2006 (the Commencement Date); and the Lease shall terminate on November 30, 2008. 2.2. If, at the termination of this lease agreement for reasons other than default or breach by Tenant, Landlord decides to lease the Leased Premises to a third party, Tenant shall have the right, for a period of one year after the termination date, to match or exceed any proposed and/or actual lease for the .Leased Premises which is acceptable to the Landlord, and if the Tenant elects in writing within 15 days of the date of receipt of the proposed and/or actual Lease, then the parties hereto shall execute such a lease. ARTICLE III. Rent Tenant shall pay to Landlord as the "Base Rent" monthly rent in the amount of$I,475.00 per month. Said Base Rent shall be payable in advance, on or before the first (1st) day of each and every month, commencing on the Commencement Date, and continuing during the Term. ARTICLE IV. Nonpayment 4.1 Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, Tenant covenants and agrees that if at any time it fails to pay any amount required by the Lease, or to obtain, pay for, maintain, or deliver any of the insurance policies herein provided for, or fails to make any other payment or perform any other act required to be made or performed by the Lease, then Landlord, without notice to or demand upon Tenant, without waiving or releasing Tenant from any obligation of Tenant contained in the Lease, and without any obligation to do so, may effect any such insurance coverage and pay premiums therefor and may make any other payment or perform any other act on the part of Tenant to be made and performed as provided in the Lease, in such manner and to such extent as Landlord may deem reasonably desirable, and in exercising such right to pay necessary and incidental costs and expenses. All sums so paid by Landlord and all necessary and any such act by Landlord, together with interest thereon at the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less, from the date of making of such expenditure by Landlord, shall be payable to Landlord as Additional Rent, and except as otherwise provided for in the Lease, shall be payable on demand or at the option of Landlord may be added to any monthly rental then due or thereafter becoming due under the Lease. Tenant covenants to pay any such sum or sums with interest as aforesaid and Landlord shall have (in IS--d. addition to any right or remedy of Landlord) the same rights and remedies in the event of nonpayment by Tenant as in the case of default by Tenant in payment of rent. ARTICLE V. Taxes 5.1 Tenant shall pay all real estate taxes and installments of special assessments which shall during the term be laid, assessed, levied or imposed upon or shall become payable and a lien upon, the Leased Premises or any part thereof (the Taxes). Such taxes and special assessments shall be prorated in the first and last years of the Lease based upon the period of occupancy. Tenant shall make such real estate tax payments directly to the appropriate governmental authorities, which have lawfully levied and are authorized to collect such tax. ARTICLE VI. Utilities and Maintenance Expense 6.1. Tenant shall pay its pro rata share of all charges for electricity, light, air conditioning and power with the Leased premises. The charges thereof shall be deemed Additional Rent and payable in accordance with Article V hereof. To the extent that utilities are separately metered or separately charged to Tenant's Premises, they shall not be subject to prorated allocation, but shall remain the obligation of Tenant. ARTICLE VII. Repairs, Maintenance and Alterations 7.1 Tenant shall, during the Term and at Tenant's expense, keep the Leased Premises and appurtenances and every part thereof in good order, condition, and repair, including, without limitation, the maintenance, repair, and replacement, if necessary, of all interior walls, partitions, doors, and windows, including the regular painting thereof. Tenant shall promptly notify Landlord of any necessary maintenance, repairs, or replacements. When used in this provision, the term repairs' shall include replacements or renewals when necessary, and all such repairs made by the Tenant shall be equal in quality and class to the original work. If Tenant does not keep and maintain the Leased Premises as herein provided, Landlord may, but need not, make such repairs and replacements, and Tenant shall pay Landlord, as Additional Rent, the cost thereof forthwith, plus interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of making such expenditure by Landlord, upon being billed for the same. All damage or injury to the Leased Premises and to its fixtures, appurtenances, and equipment caused by Tenant moving property in or out of the Leased Premises or by installation, removal of furniture, fixtures, equipment, or other property by Tenant, its agents, contractors, servants, or employees, or resulting from any other cause of any other kind or nature whatsoever due to carelessness, omission, neglect, improper conduct, or other causes of Tenant, its servants, employees, agents, visitors, or licensees, shall be repaired, restored, or replaced promptly by Tenant at its sole cost and expense to the satisfaction of Landlord. If Tenant fails to make such repairs, restorations, or replacements, the same may be made by Landlord and the same shall be at the expense of Tenant and collectible as Additional Rent or otherwise, and shall be paid by Tenant to Landlord within five (5) days after rendition of a bill or statement therefor. 7.2 Except as otherwise provided herein, no improvements, alterations, or replacements shall be made to the Leased Premises or any portion thereof without the prior written consent of Landlord. 7.3 Notwithstanding any other provision contained herein to the contrary, Landlord shall repair, at its expense, the structural portions of the Building; provided, however, where structural repairs are required to be made by reason ofthe acts of Tenant, the costs thereof shall be borne by Tenant and payable by Tenant to Landlord upon demand. 7.4 Landlord covenants to Tenant that it will continue to reasonably provide for the removal of 15-3 snow from the parking lot and sidewalks and for the maintenance and repair work on the building exterior all for the benefit of users of the building, including Tenant. ARTICLE VIII. Insurance 8.1 Landlord shall at all times during the Term keep the Building insured against loss or damage by fire and against those perils included from time to time in the standard form of extended coverage insurance endorsement, including but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, wind storm, hail, explosion, vandalism, riot and civil commotion, damage from vehicles, and smoke damage, and such other coverage as may be deemed necessary by Landlord. 8.2 Tenant shall insure the contents of the Leased Premises owned by Tenant, for the benefit of Tenant, against lose or damage by fire, windstorm, or other casualty for such amount as Tenant may desire. 8.3 Mutual Waiver of Subrogation. Landlord and Lessee hereby waive any and all rights of recovery against each other for any loss or damage to the Leased Premises and/or the Building or the contents contained therein on account of fire or other casualty or for injuries sustained on the Leased Premises and/or the Building, provided such loss or damage is insured under a policy carried by Lessor or Lessee at the time of such loss or damage. The aforesaid policies of insurance shall contain appropriate provisions recognizing this mutual release and waiving all rights of subrogation on behalf of the respective insurance carriers. 8.4. Tenant shall also, as Additional Rent hereunder and at Tenant's sole cost and expense, but for the mutual benefit of Landlord and Tenant, as named insureds, maintain during the Term (a) general public .iability insurance against claims for personal injury, death, or property damage occurring upon, in, or about the Leased Premises, and on, in, or about the adjoining lands, such insurance to afford protection to the limit of not less than Five Hundred Thousand and nollOO Dollars ($500,000.00) in respect to injury or death to a single person, and to the limit of not less than one Million and nollOO Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in respect to anyone (1) accident and to the limit of not less than Three Hundred Thousand and noll 00 Dollars ($300,000.00) in respect to any property damage; and (b) steam boiler insurance on all steam boilers, pressure boilers, or other such apparatus as Landlord may deem necessary to be covered by such insurance and in such amount or amounts as Landlord may from time to time reasonably require. 8.5 All policies of insurance required to be maintained by Tenant shall be written in companies satisfactory to Landlord, and shall be written in such form and shall be distributed in such companies as shall be reasonably acceptable to Landlord. Such policies shall be delivered to Landlord endorsed "premium paid" by the company or agency issuing the same or accompanied by another evidence satisfactory to Landlord that the premiums thereon have been paid, not less than (10) days prior to the expiration of any then current policy. IS--Lj ARTICLE IX. Quiet Enjoyment 9.1 Landlord represents and warrants that it is the lawful owner of the Leased Premises; that it has the full right and power to make the Lease; that if and so long as Tenant shall not be in default hereunder, Tenant shall quietly hold, occupy, and enjoy the Leased Premises during all ofthe Term. ARTICLE X. Destruction By Fire 10.1 If the Building or any portion thereof is damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, however or by whomever caused, Landlord shall repair, rebuild, and restore the same with due diligence and dispatch (subject to the approval of the holders of any mortgages on the Building) so that the Building will be restored to at least the same good order and condition as existed prior to damage or destruction. If more than twenty five percent (25%) of the Leased Premises is damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, Landlord shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to decline to rebuild. If Landlord so declines, this Lease shall terminate as of the of the date of such damage or destruction. If Landlord elects to repair the Building, and if such damage in the reasonable opinion of the Landlord renders the entire Leased Premises unfit for Tenant's normal business purposes, and Tenant by reason thereof discontinues business in the Leased Premises, Base Rent and Additional Rent shall be abated for a period during which no part of the Leased Premises is fit for such business purposes and during which time Tenant discontinues business. If such damage renders only part of the Leased Premises unfit for Tenant's normal business purposes, Base Rent shall be apportioned on a square foot of Leased Premises area basis and the proportion thereof applicable to each part of the Leased Premises upon which Tenant discontinues its business operations shall be abated for the period during which such part is not fit for Tenant's normal business purposes and during which Tenant discontinues such business operations. 10.2 Tenant will repair and replace all improvements and betterments placed upon the Leased Premises by it, and such repair and replacement shall be made at its own expense and not at the expense of Landlord. ARTICLE XI. Assignment and Subletting 11.1 Tenant shall not assign or sublease any of its rights under the Lease of any part of the Leased Premises without prior written consent from Landlord, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld by Landlord. No such assignment or subleasing shall in any event relieve Tenant from any of its obligations contained in the Lease, nor shall any assignment or transfer of the Lease be effective unless the assignee or transferee shall, at the time of such assignment or transfer, assume in writing all the terms, covenants, and conditions ofthe Lease to be performed thereafter by Tenant and shall agree in writing to be bound thereby. Tenant agrees to pay on behalf of Landlord any and all costs of Landlord, including reasonable attorneys' fees occasioned by such assignment or transfer. ARTICLE XII. Defaults of Tenant 12.1 If during the Term Tenant shall default in fulfilling any of the covenants of the Lease (other than the covenants for the payment of Base Rent or Additional Rent), Landlord shall give Tenant notice of any default or of the happening of any contingency referred to in this paragraph, and if at the expiration of twenty (20) days after the service of such notice the default or contingency upon which said notice was based shall continue to exist, or in the case of a default or contingency which cannot with due diligence be cured within a period of twenty (20) days, if Tenant fails to proceed promptly after the service of such notice and with all due diligence to cure the same and thereafter to prosecute the curing of such default with all due /s-s diligence, Landlord, at its option, may terminate the Lease, and upon such termination, Tenant will quit and surrender the Leased Premises to Landlord, but Tenant shall remain liable as hereinafter provided. 12.2 If Tenant shall default in the payment of the Base Rent or Additional Rent expressly reserved hereunder, or any part of the same, and such default shall continue for ten (10) days after notice thereof by Landlord, or if the Lease shall expire as provided in Paragraph 12.1 of this Article, Landlord or Landlord's agents and servants may immed.iately or at any time thereafter re-enter the Leased Premises and remove all persons and any or all property therefrom, either by summary dispossession proceedings or by any suitable action or proceedings at law or by force or otherwise and repossess and enjoy said Leased Premises, together with all additions, alterations and improvements, without reentry and repossession working forfeiture or waiver ofthe rents to be paid and the covenants to be performed by Tenant during the Term hereof. Upon the expiration of the Term of the Lease by reason of any of the events described in Paragraph 12.1, or in the event of termination of the Lease by summary dispossession proceedings or under any provision of law now or hereafter in force by reason of or based upon or arising out of a default under or a breach of the Lease on the part of Tenant (except where such breach or default is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be justified because of Landlord's acts or omissions), or upon Landlord recovering possession of the Leased Premises in the manner or in any of the circumstances whatsoever, whether with or without legal proceedings, by reason of or based upon or arising out of a default under or a breach of the Lease on the part of Ten ant, Landlord may, at its option, at any time and from time to time, relet the Leased Premises, or any part thereof, for the account of Tenant or otherwise, and receive and collect the rents therefor, applying the same first to the payment of such expenses as Landlord may have incurred in recovering possession of the Leased Premises, including legal expenses and attorneys, fees, and for putting the same into good order or condition or preparing or altering the same for re-rental and all other expenses, commissions, and charges paid, assumed, or incurred by Landlord in reletting the Leased Premises and then to the fulfillment of the Acovenants of Tenant hereunder. Any such reletting herein provided for may be for the remainder of the Term .ofthe Lease as originally granted or for a longer or shorter period. In any such case or whether or not the Leased Premises, or any part thereof, is relet, Tenant shall pay to Landlord the Base Rent and the Additional Rent required to be paid by Tenant up to the time of such termination of the Lease, as the case may be, and thereafter, Tenant covenants and agrees, if required by Landlord, to pay to Landlord until the end of the Term of the Lease the equivalent of the amount of all the Base Rent and Additional Rent reserved herein less the net proceeds of reletting, if any. Landlord shall have the election, in place and stead of holding Tenant so liable, forthwith to recover against Tenant, as damages for loss of the bargain and not as penalty, an aggregate sum which at the time of such termination of the Lease for such recovery of possession of the Leased Premises by Landlord, as the case may be, represents the then present worth of the excess, if any, of the aggregate of the Base Rent and Additional Rent payable by Tenant hereunder that would have accrued for the balance of the Term, over the aggregate rental value of the Leased Premises for the balance of such Term. 12.3 The specified remedies to which Landlord may resort under the terms of the Lease are cumulative and are not intended to be exclusive of any other remedies or means of redress to which Landlord may be lawfully entitled in case of any breach or threatened breach by Tenant of any provision of the Lease. The failure of Landlord to insist in anyone or more cases upon the strict performance of any of the covenants of the Lease or to exercise any option herein contained shall not be construed as a waiver or a relinquishment for the future of such covenant or option. A receipt by Landlord of Base Rent or Additional Rent, with knowledge of breach of any covenant hereof (other than the payment of Base Rent or Additional Rent) shall not be deemed a waiver of such breach, and no waiver by Landlord of any provision of this Lease shall be deemed to have been made unless expressed in writing and signed by Landlord. In addition to other remedies provided in this Lease, Landlord shall be entitled to the restraint by injunction for the violation or attempted or threatened violation of the covenants, conditions, or provisions of the Lease. IS-&.> ARTICLE XIII. Attorneys' Fees 13.1 If it is necessary for Landlord to retain the services of an attorney at law to enforce any of the terms, covenants, or provisions hereof, or to collect any sums due hereunder, Tenant shall pay to Landlord upon demand, as Additional Rent hereunder, the reasonable cost of such services. ARTICLE XIV. Removal of Improvements and Fixtures 14.1 Any improvements or fixtures installed by Tenant in the Leased Premises or in the Building, whether used solely in Tenant's business or whether usable in the Leased Premises without regard to such business or otherwise, shall become the property of Landlord upon the termination of the Lease. ARTICLE XV. Condition of Leased Premises at Termination 15.1 At the termination of the Lease by lapse of time or otherwise, Tenant shall return the Leased Premises in as good a condition as when Tenant took possession, excepting only ordinary wear and tear, damage, or destruction as described in Article 10 herein. ARTICLE XVI. Holding Over 16.1 In the absence of any written agreement to the contrary, if Tenant should continue to occupy the Leased Premises following the expiration of the Term of the Lease, Tenant shall so remain as a tenant from month to month and all provisions of the Lease applicable to such tenancy shall remain in full force and effect. During such tenancy, the same Base Rent and the same terms and conditions as prevailed during the .ast month of the Term demised shall prevail. In any such event, Tenant shall be liable to Landlord for damages which Landlord may incur as a result of such holding over, including but not limited to damages incurred because of loss of a prospective successor tenant. If Tenant is a holdover tenant and if Tenant continues to ' occupy the Leased Premises following the termination of such holdover (by a proper notice as to such month month tenancy), then the foregoing provisions ofthis Article shall apply in the same manner as when Tenant continued in occupancy following the expiration of the Term of the Lease. ARTICLE XVII. Use of Leased Premises 17.1 The Leased Premises shall be used only for the sale and/or rental of hockey and skating equipment and apparel, skate sharpening and related services and such other activities as the Landlord may authorize from time to time. Tenant shall not use or occupy the Leased Premises or knowingly permit the Leased Premises to used or occupied contrary to any statute, rule, order, ordinance, requirement, or regulation applicable thereto or in any manner which would violate any certificate of occupancy affecting the same, or which would cause structural injury to the Leased Premises or cause the value or usefulness of the Leased Premises or any part thereof to substantially diminish (reasonable wear and tear excepted) or which would constitute a public or private nuisance or waste. Tenant shall promptly upon discovery of any such use, take all necessary steps to compel the discontinuance of such use. Landlord shall not, during the term of this Lease, permit or allow anyone other than Tenant to use the Building as a location to sharpen skates, use a skate sharpening machine, sell hockey equipment or supplies including, but not limited to tape and laces, during the business hours of Tenant. This limitation shall not prohibit the occasioned sale of hockey related merchandise by local hockey associations during organized events. /5-1 ARTICLE XVIII. Permits 18.1 Tenant shall maintain in force and effect all permits, licenses, and similar authorizations to use the Leased Premises for the aforesaid purposes required by any governmental authority having . jurisdiction over the use thereof. Tenant's failure to maintain such permits, licenses, and similar authorizations shall not relieve Tenant from the performance of its obligations and covenants hereunder (except obligations and covenants as may be prohibited by law), nor from the obligations to pay Base Rent or Additional Rent, as set forth herein. Tenant shall, at Landlord's request, in its capacity as Tenant, and not in its capacity as owner of the land underlying the Building, join with Landlord in executing, acknowledging, and delivering any and all petitions, consents, subordinations, plats, or easement deeds that may be required for the installation of any utilities, public improvements, roads, water lines, sewer lines, storm drainage facilities, subdivision, rezoning, special use, platting, or other similar development of the Leased Premises, which do not affect Tenant's use ofthe Leased Premises during the Term of the Lease. ARTICLE XIX. Compliance with Law 19.1 Tenant, at its sole expense, shall promptly comply with all laws, ordinances, and requirements offederal, state, county, and municipal authorities relating to Tenant's use and occupation of the Leased Premises, and with any lawful order or direction of any public officer relating to Tenant's use and occupation ofthe Leased Premises during the Term ofthe Lease. Nothing herein contained, however, shall prohibit Tenant from appealing from or contesting the validity or legality of such laws, ordinances, requirements, orders, or directions and, notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Article, Tenant shall not be deemed to be in default hereunder so long as Tenant diligently prosecutes such appeal or contest. ARTICLE XX. Lessor's Access to Premises 20.1 Tenant shall permit Landlord and the authorized representatives of Landlord to enter the Leased Premises at all times during usual business hours for the purpose of inspecting the same and making any necessary repairs to comply with any laws, ordinances rules, regulations, or requirements of any public authority or of the Board of Fire Underwriters or any similar board. Nothing herein shall imply any duty upon the part of Landlord to do any such work which, under any provision of the Lease, Tenant may be required to perform, and the performance thereof by Landlord shall not constitute a waiver of Tenant's default in failing to perform the same. Landlord may, during the progress of any work in the Leased Premises, reasonably keep and store upon the Leased Premises all necessary materials, tools, and equipment. Landlord shall not in any event be liable for inconvenience, annoyance, disturbance, loss of business,. or other damage to Tenant by reason of making repairs or the performance of any work in the Leased Premises, or on account of bringing materials, supplies, and equipment onto or through the Leased Premises during the course thereof, and the obligations of Tenant under the Lease shall not hereby be affected in any manner whatsoever. Landlord shall, however, in connection with the doing of any such work cause as little inconvenience, annoyance, disturbance, loss of business, or other damage to Tenant as may reasonably be possible in the circumstances. ARTICLE XXI. Indemnity 21.1 Tenant shall indemnify and save harmless Landlord against and from any and all claims by or on behalf of any person or persons, firm or firms, corporation or corporations, arising from the conduct or management of or from any work or thing whatsoever done by Tenant, or any of its agents, contractors, employees, or licensees in, on or about the Leased Premises, and will further indemnify and save Landlord - harmless against and from any and all claims arising during the Term of the Lease from any condition of the Leased Premises arising from any breach or default on the part of Tenant in the performance of any covenant IS-fJ or agreement on the part of Tenant to be performed, pursuant to the terms of the Lease, or arising from any act of negligence of Tenant, or any of its agents, contractors, employees, or licensees, or arising from any accident, injury, or damage whatsoever caused to any person, firm, or corporation occurring during the Term of the Lease, in the Leased Premises, and from and against all costs, reasonable attorneys, fees, expenses, and liabilities incurred in or about any such claim or action or proceeding brought thereon; and in case any action or proceeding is brought against Landlord by reason of any such claim, Tenant, upon notice from Landlord, shall resist or defend such action or proceeding by counsel reasonably satisfactory to Landlord. However, nothing in this Lease shall require the Tenant to indemnify and save harmless Landlord from any claim caused by or occasioned by actions of the Landlord, its agents, contractors, employees or licensees. ARTICLE XXII. Estoppel Certificate 22.1 Tenant shall, at any time and from time to time, upon not less than twenty (20) days' prior notice by Landlord, execute, acknowledge, and deliver to Landlord a statement in writing certifying that the Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or if there shall have been modifications that the Lease is in full force and effect as modified and stating the modifications) and the dates to which the Base Rent and Additional Rent have been paid in advance, if any, and stating whether or not (to the best knowledge of Tenant) Landlord is in default in the performance of any covenant, agreement, or condition contained in the Lease and, if so, specifying each such default of which Tenant may have knowledge, it being intended that any such statement delivered pursuant to this Article shall be in a form approved by and may be relied upon by any prospective assignee of Landlord's interest in the Lease or any mortgagee of the Leased Premises or any assignee of any mortgage upon the Leased Premises. ARTICLE XXIII. Subordination 23.1 The Lease shall, at landlord's election, be subject and subordinate to the terms and conditions of all mortgages which may now or hereafter encumber the Leased Premises and to all renewals, modifications, consolidations, replacements, and extensions of such mortgages. In confirmation of such subordination, Tenant shall promptly execute any certificate of subordination or other such documents which Landlord or its mortgagees may request. ARTICLE XXIV. Signs 24.1 Upon prior written approval by Landlord of design and construction, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, Tenant may erect such signs upon the Leased Premises as it may deem desirable, as long as said signs do not exceed in weight the safe carrying capacity of any bearing structure, or violate the laws of the state or ordinances of the municipality in which the Leased Premises is situated. ARTICLE XXV. Entire agreement 25.1 The Lease contains the entire agreement between the parties, and there are no other terms, obligations, covenants, representations, statements, or conditions, oral or otherwise, of any kind whatsoever. Any agreement hereafter made shall be ineffective to change, modify, discharge, or effect an abandonment of the Lease in whole or in part unless such agreement is in writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of the change, modification, discharge, or abandonment in sought. ARTICLE XXVI. Release of Lessor 26.1 If Landlord sells or otherwise transfers all of its interest in the Leased Premises, Landlord /5-9 shall, without further action by any party, be released and discharged from any further obligation or duty under the Lease, and no claim or demand upon Landlord shall thereafter be made by Tenant arising out of .y such prospective obligation or duty of Landlord hereunder. Upon request by Landlord, Tenant shall execute an attornment agreement with Landlord's transferee in form satisfactory to such transferee. ARTICLE XXVII. Severability 27.1 If any term, condition, or provision of the Lease or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder thereof and the application of such terms, provisions, and conditions to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom it shall be held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby, and the Lease and all the terms, provisions, and conditions hereof shall, in all other respects, continue to be effective and to be complied with to the full extent permitted by law. ARTICLE XXVIII. Short Form Lease 28.1 At the request of either party hereto, a short form lease shall be prepared in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to each of the parties and shall be executed by each of the parties in duplicate, such lease to be filed for record in Hennepin County, Minnesota. ARTICLE XXIX. Notices 29.1 Any notice or election herein requested or permitted to be given or served by either party hereto upon the other, shall be deemed given or served in accordance with the provisions of the Lease if e:elivered to either party hereto and receipt is obtained therefor, or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United states registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, properly addressed to such other party at the address hereinafter specified. Unless and until changed by notice as herein provided, notices and communications shall be addressed as follows: If to Landlord: If to Tenant: City of Richfield, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, MN 55423 Hat Trick Hockey, 640 East 66th Street, Richfield, MN 55423 Each such mailed notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given to, or served upon the party to which addressed, on the date the same is deposited in the United states registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, properly addressed in the manner above provided. Each such delivered notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given to, or served upon, the party to whom delivered, upon delivery thereof in the manner above provided. Either party may change the address to which mailed notice is to be sent to it by giving to the other party hereto not less than thirty (30) days, advance written notice thereof. All payments of Base Rent or Additional Rent hereunder shall be made to Landlord at the address above designated, or as may be hereafter designated. ARTICLE XXX. Headings 30.1 The headings incorporated in the Lease are for convenience in reference only and are not a part of the Lease and do not in any way limit or add to the terms and provisions hereof. ARTICLE XXXI. Binding Effect 31.1 All of the covenants, conditions, and agreements herein contained shall extend to, be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors, and assigns. 15 ~I 0 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease the day and year first above written. LESSOR: CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota municipal corporation By: Its Mayor, Martin Kirsch And By: Its City Manager, Steven Devich LESSEE: HAT TRICK HOCKEY, INC., a Minnesota corporation By: Its Owner, Tom Sachs This instrument was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (JBD) 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 612-337-9219 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # OTHER BUSINESS 16 72 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING . JUNE 28, 2005 REpORT PREPARED By: CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COOR. NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ ( ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of appointments to City advisory commissions. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Appoint persons to fill the vacant terms on the City advisory commissions I II. BACKGROUND I Due to remaining unfilled vacancies on the City's advisory commissions following the 2006 annual recruitment, the City Council directed staff to conduct another recruitment. Vacancies were advertised in the Richfield Sun-Current, on cable television channel 16, the outside message board at City Hall and Water Plant, and the City's Website. Applicants were interviewed at a Special City Council meeting on March 28, 2006. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City advisory commissions were established by City ordinance or resolution. Terms are for three-years and are staggered. Several terms expired on January 31 annually and occasionally there are mid-term vacancies due to resignations. . The Council directs the City Manager's office to conduct a recruitment seeking applicants to fill the vacancies. Interviews of the applicants are 0328Commission conducted at Special City Council meetings. These Council meetings are posted in accordance with the open meeting law requirements. lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Applicants were interviewed at a Special City Council Meeting on March 28, 2006. . There are full-term and mid-term vacancies on several advisory commissions needing to be filled. . In order to ensure quorums for future meetings, appointments should be made on March 28, 2006. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Defer appointments to a later Council meeting. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Commission vacancy list I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None. en w 0 Z en <( CD >- "0 (.) 0 c ~ c co co (.) (.) co Z co > > 0 E E >- s.... (.) en s.... >- CD ~ CD (.) ...... c ...... C I CO I >- :2 :2: :2 CO (.) (.) E CO :2: E (.) c > CO CO 0 C\I > (.) ....... >- E 0 ~ E co ~ (.) s.... s.... > (.) c CD (.) CO ...... CD ....... C I C ...... CO (.) :2 CO I I CO (.) :2 (.) > E CO E Z CO > 0 > E ....... ....... ....... s.... I ....... en CD I I ...... Z en ~ I ::I: CD Z :2 0 l- TS Z :2: 0 E en ~ c 0 :2: co en ....... en <( (.) en 0 en I :2: w co en 0 ::I: > :2: Z :2: (\') - :2: en :2:- 0- 0 u.. __ IE :2: w -E OEE s.... 0 OE ens.... 0 s.... s.... ZCD 0 ~ Os.... en CD Z CCDCD 00+;' 0 ~~ -...... ~............ :2:-6 0 I I -"'0 <(:2:2 en"- en w :2: "- j:: OEE ~S Z en O"E oS ~ m"-"'''-''' :2: 0 ~ "-'" 0 D.. ~ :2: j:: ::I: C) ~ ~ 0 0 Z en Z 0.. 0 0 :J C - en m :2: Z Z en () en w Z Z en :> I- ~ :2: w <( ~ :.:::i C 0:: w 0 C2 ~ C,,) ro <( <( 0 0 u.. D.. I- >