03-27-07 Agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2007
REGULAR CITY COUNCil MEETING
COUNCil CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
6:30 P.M.
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
Call to order
Roll call
Open fqruni (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 Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Notes:
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of March 13, 2007
COUNCil DISCUSSION
1. Council discussion
. Richfield Historical Society funding request
. Hats Off To Hometown Hits
Notes:
AGENDA APPROVAL
2. Council approval of agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
3. Conse'nt 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 removed from the
Consent Calendar and placed on the r gular agenda for Council discussion and action.
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval.
A. Consideration of approval of canceling public hearing regarding conditional use permit
to allow installation of 35-foot tall accessory roof-mounted antenna at 6221 Portland
Avenue; City Water Treatment Plant S.R. No. 80
B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing submission of Federal Non-
Motorized Transportation grants S.R. No. 81
C. . Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing storm water management plan for
new Public Works maintenance facility S.R. No. 82
D. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Public Safety Department/Police
Division to accept $50 donation from Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Auxiliary
Unit 435 S.R. No. 83
E. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Public Safety Department/Police
Division to accept $50 donation from Residential Mortgage Group S.R. No. 84
F. Consideration of approval of setting public hearing on April 24, 2007 to consider
issuance of new on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Naviya's
Thai Kitchen, 6345 Penn Avenue S.R. No. 85
G. Consideration of approval of executing lease termination agreement for 1710 East 78th
Street; Normark Building S.R. No. 86
Notes:
4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar
Notes:
PUBLIC HEARING
Notes:
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
6. Consideration of second reading of ordinance amending Transitory Ordinance No. 17.57
correcting legal description of affected land near reconstructed intersection of Emerson
Avenue South and 77th Street West
Staff Report No. 88
Notes:
RESOLUTIONS
7. Consideration of resolution regarding amendment to conditional use permit to allow
installation of additional pump and overall reconfiguration of existing service
station/convenience store at 6744 Penn Avenue (continued from February 13, 2007)
Staff Report No. 89
Notes:
8. Consideration of resolution authorizing procedures for private activity revenue bond
financing
Staff Report No. 90
Notes: .
OTHER BUSINESS
9. Consideration of accepting bid mihutes/tabulationand awarding contract to Eureka
Construction for Richfield Parkway and 66th Street improvement project in amount of
$1,717,457.48 and purchasing engineering services from WSB & Associates to provide
services required to complete project
Staff Report No. 91
Notes:
10. Consideration of consent to withdrawal of Kennedy and Graven, Chartered as legal counsel
with respect to 66th Street and Portland Avenue condemnation matter and authorizing City
Manager to retain interim substitute counsel pending City Council approval of substitute
counsel
Staff Report No. 92
Notes:
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
11. City Manager's report
Notes:
12. 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 agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Notes:
13. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be
made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3A
80
........
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING &
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Cancel the public hearing regarding a request for a conditional use permit to allow the
installation of a 35-foot tall accessory roof-mounted antenna at 6221 Portland Avenue (City
Water Plant).
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Cancel the public hearing of March 27,2007 regarding
consideration of a request for a conditional use permit to allow the
installation of a 35-foot tall accessory roof-mounted antenna at 6221
Portland Avenue (Citv Water Plant).
I II. BACKGROUND I
The City is in the process of updating its SCADA system. This system is the radio
communication equipment that the City uses to monitor the functioning of all utilities.
The proposed antenna is a part of this system. It was thought that plans would be
ready for review by the City Council in time for this meeting,; however, after further
consideration the Utilities Department has decided to continue using the current
antenna while they investigate additional details of the new antenna. A new public
hearing process will be started at the appropriate time.
032707 - Cancel Public Hearing 6221 Portland CUP antenna
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. A public hearing is required to consider conditional use permits.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. Delaying consideration of this item will not have a detrimental effect on
the project.
I C. FINANCIAL
. N/A
I D. LEGAL I
. Legal notice will be published and mailed notice re-sent to the
required parties at the appropriate time.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
. N/A
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. N/A
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. N/A
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3B
81
.......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
bj'
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution approving the submission of Federal Non-Motorized
Transportation Grants.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the resolution authorizing the submission of
rant a lications for Non-Motorized Trans ortation rants.
I II. BACKGROUND I
The Federal Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program was created to evaluate the
ability of good facilities for bikes, walking and transit to get people to shift to one of these
travel modes from the use of automobiles. Minneapolis and its surrounding cities are
eligible as one of four national demonstration areas for 100% federal grants.
Richfield staff has suggested three possible grant applications. Two involve the new
Richfield Parkway, one for design and the other for construction of the segment north of
65th Street that will connect to Bloomington Avenue. The third proposal is for a study to
redesign the four arterials from 77th Street north to Highway 62, i.e., Penn Avenue,
Lyndale Avenue, Nicollet Avenue, and Portland Avenue, to better accommodate bikes and
pedestrians.
0327 Non-Motorized Grants
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. The Richfield Parkway proposals implement the LGK Plan, and the arterials
study implements the 1997 Comp Plan by upgrading arterials in commercial
areas.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. The deadline for applications is April 10, 2007. Council must approve the
submission of all proposals by resolution.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. The grant allows up to 100% federal funding for certain costs such as
sidewalks and bike lanes, and designs studies are limited to $50,000. Grant
funds will be supplemented by Municipal State Aid Street (gas tax revenue)
funds. See attached Budget Summary.
I D. LEGAL I
. There are no legal issues involved in submitting these applications
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Council can choose to reject any or all of the grant proposals for submission.
I V. ATTACHMENTS I
. Resolution approving submission of the grant applications.
. Budget Summary of the three grant proposals;
. Two maps showing the location of the grant proposals.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None anticipated.
38-(
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF SUBMISSION OF APPLICATIONS FOR
FEDERAL NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PILOT PROGRAM FUNDS
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is committed to promote walking and biking as
alternative travel modes to the automobile; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wants to improve its walking and biking facilities
as they connect to similar facilities in Minneapolis; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield supports the creation of the new Richfield
Parkway as a key link in the Cedar Avenue Corridor to replace the Cedar Avenue frontage
road that will be lost as part of the City's Airport Mitigation Plan and to promote walking
and biking.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Richfield approves the submission of applications for Federal Non-Motorized
Transportation Pilot Program funds. The applications include: (1) the design of the Stage 1
of Richfield Parkway improvements from 65th Street to the Bloomington Avenue Bridge
over Highway 62; (2) the construction of Stage 1 of the Richfield Parkway improvements
from 65th Street to the Bloomington Avenue Bridge over Highway 62; and, (3) the design of
arterials north of 7th Street including Penn Avenue, Lyndale Avenue, Nicollet Avenue and
Portland Avenue to improve facilities for walking and biking.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
.38- d-
Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program
Budget Summary of Project Costs and Revenues
Design of Richfield Parkway- Stage 1 (From 65th Street to Bloomington Avenue Bridge
over Highway 62)
Costs
Design(Consultant Services)
Amount
. $86,000
Revenue
Federal Non-Motorized Transportation Grant
Municipal State Aid Street(Gas Tax Revenue)
Total
Amount
$50,000
$36.000
$86,000
Construction of Richfield Parkway- Stage 1 (From 65th Street to Bloomington Avenue
Bridge over Highway 62)
Costs
Construction of Sidewalks & Bike Lanes
Construction of Roadway
Right of Way
Amount
$ 375,000
$ 751,000
$ 900,000
$2,026,000
Total
Revenue
Federal Non-Motorized Transportation Grant
Municipal State Aid Street(Gas Tax Revenue)
Amount
$ 675,000
$1,351,000
$2,026,000
Total
Design of Richfield Arterial Streets- Penn Avenue, Lyndale Avenue, Nicollet Avenue and
Portland Avenue (From 7yth Street to Highway 62)
Costs
Design(Consultant Services)
Amount
$50,000
Revenue
Federal Non-Motorized Transportation Grant
Amount
$50,000
City of
Richfield
w.'
s
......
.
1:\GIS\Public Works\Staff\Derick\Projects\basemap 66th & Cedar close up.mxd
'"
"~:\"~ ............ ,.]
f.. .- c....m I
"..... ! '1
Ii -.
..... f.......
,.
~ ,
~
!
3NrJ 1NV 1.L, Od -, !-\,
,...-.-..
I~ ..,......
f.... . ..'.". .',- f.
L...."... [,~]
..."..~ ... ,,- ""M
i-
., '"
.......
{ '-" ,.... ,/
I 3^' .1311 JOIN ,.."...... . "-'. \
!
....... I I
." ........1
.5Q .. ..,.. "...,...... ...
.......
0 J - ~,~
a. V r',. '..'" .,,- rid
as <.-,..
Q) -
C ~~"~~i
C
~ \
-
0 I.-
>- /Y
:!: (~ 1/\:::- ")".,-.. \ \// /fj
()
+-.- I." .' "J ___:fJi -.,// -"~,
i", f J ::~:~::::l ~-\~
" ,,,,- " '.'"
'\// .... ,,' ,
... m'
f' L.., .,.,
..... I,.. ,,- :,.'" ,
. :.. "
~,: ...j
\V ,..,...... "
_...-,- --T' I
!
i. i
/..a i
'tJ C/) W
W W ~
I"- :s ~ ~ C/)
0 ;:" 0
0 - I- W Z
z~ C\I "C en w w ~ <C
...J ...J
0 C G) <C ...J
CI) m ...J Z Ii:
C\I 0 0
J:: C){!. z Q z
e ~ w 0
CI) 0 Z ll. ll.
as ...I -
:2 Cll I I I I
"i:
~
<(
~
-C
:::J
~
CJ)
C
C>
en
-
a:s
.C
Q)
1:::
<(
-C
-
Q)
'+-
..c
(.)
a:
. AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3C
82
......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
KRISTIN ASHER, ASSISTANT CITY
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~
REVIEW: t::.I
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution approving storm water management plan for the maintenance
facility.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt a resolution approving the storm water
management plan for City of Richfield Public Works Maintenance
Facility.
I II. BACKGROUND. I
The new Public Works Maintenance Facility is located within the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD) requiring the plan to meet certain storm water
requirements set forth by the district. The City of Richfield has a cooperative
agreement in place with MCWD that gives the City permitting authority for projects
within the City as long as the project meets the requirements of the MCWD. The
following elements have been incorporated into the plan that provides rate control
and treatment for the storm water tributary to the area.
. Rain Gardens
. Porous Pavements
. Perforated Pipes for Storm Water Infiltration
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
0327MaintenanceF acility
I A. POLICY I
. Storm water regulations require that best management practices
addressing rate control and treatment be incorporated into site plans.
lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. The adoption of a resolution is required to satisfy the permitting
requirements set forth in the cooperative agreement between the City
and the MCWD, thus allowing the construction of the maintenance
facility.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. There are no additional expenses incurred through the adoption of the
resolution approving the storm water management plan.
I D. LEGAL I
. This resolution/permit is required prior to construction.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. The City could chose to use more traditional storm water techniques like
ponds, however that would impact our Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) certification.
I V. ATTACHMENTS I
. Resolution Approving Storm Water Management Plan for City of Richfield
Public Works Maintenance Facility
. Site plan highlighting
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None Anticipated
.
3C-1
CITY OF RICHFIELD
RESOLUTION NO.
c,
RESOLUTION APPROVING STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CITY OF
RICHFIELD PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE FACILITY
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has a cooperative agreement in place with the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) that gives the City of Richfield permitting
authority for projects within the City as long as the project meets the requirements of the
MCWD; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wishes to construct a Public Works Maintenance
Facility on a vacant 3.7 acre parcel bounded by the TH 77 northbound off ramp to 66th
Street, 66th Street, and Longfellow Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the proposed preliminary construction plans prepared by Short Elliott
Hendrickson, Inc., transmitted January 25,2007, incorporate Best Management Practices
for the site that meet the requirements for commercial or industrial sites less than eight
acres as outlined in MCWD Rule N, Section 2(d); and
WHEREAS, the construction of this facility was anticipated when the new storm
sewer system for the 66th Street ramps east of TH 77 was designed; and
WHEREAS, the new storm sewer system, including the treatment pond north of the
Mn/DOT maintenance facility, constructed as part of the TH 77 ramp construction provides
rate control and treatment for the area tributary to it; and
WHEREAS, the site plan incorporates low impact design (LID) features such as rain
gardens and porous pavement that is anticipated to reduce peak runoff rates and runoff
volume from the site; and
WHEREAS, the site plan incorporates 4800 cubic feet of live-pool storage that will
further reduce peak runoff rates; and
WHEREAS, the construction plans incorporate erosion control measures as
required by MCWD Rule B. .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as
follows:
1. The Storm Water Management Plan for the City of Richfield Public.
Works Maintenance Facility, as presented, meets the City of
Richfield's policies for storm water management.
2. The Storm Water Management Plan for the City of Richfield Public
Works Maintenance Facility, as presented, meets the requirements of
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's Rule B and Rule N.
3. The City hereby permits the City of Richfield Public Works
Maintenance Facility. .
Approved by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 27th of March 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~
.... .r:.::~':.: 4. . s:~_~~~~.~.-:,:::
""':'.::;':'.:.[":'''.:.::.:':'9::::::::::::::::
ii'.'!
<.
.\
..
i
~ '.;.,.~.. ~{"-'~"~,~.} ..i-'::--'~:i"__::;!J.:~'
. {..n ".. ...,..- - f: ...." ~"'~:.~;':'~':~:~~::2~~~-~"'~":::~:~~::::.!i~~:;;
- - .:.:'- .~ - '::'" - -.0.:...... _ ~ -! '- _
~ '"" '- '-"- -
;;;;;;:;:< ~::- , ,- ~ ~.::::-
..........,...." ........ "-
, I ~""''''';~~''.'''' '. "-
"l~ _ ""'~-~\~"....' ,
'l-t"7:\'l--,. .......'1 ~\,~.~, "'.... ". ,
"'~'~ "'<:~" ~"-
"~~ '"<:~ " '\~-~ .
"'':'''' '1'...."0 . . ,~
.. '~, "",-'-,;l"
.. ~ ~0, "*'
,'h", ",,"":. \I..
o '1' '~~~'\\~ <~') / "',
-\-\.:1:.t ')l:~, ';/ r
"l,.~"lt,'.. ~~ ',I.
(r':,~,~\,,' ... "'-""" /
"~'t)~"'~, .... .,,~/
'-....::>,~~, \.
.....'-...~..~;0
"'........ "'~
;;
::
;;;
i!
..
i>
~.
.0
..
i> ~~
[ g:
)>)>Z 19 e
ZjJ OVlVl OOVl
A1J=~ "'-cl::::! fTlQCTl
;10 ~Sl -lZ'"
~j;j -j 0.. -)>J> ~OJ>
;<j~ O~ {;jC);:o {Jj~~
c)> g\2 . "'2 . j;j;!;
~J= ~~ ~iil ;":j;j
Zo "0
;:OfTl ;:0 VI VIe! ~e!
",x ....... )>;:0
OUi f!l)> z;u
c:::l OZ 6f!': ~f!':
;oZ ~~
zC) ;<j" 0"
C)c Z" )>!; ~!;
:::l fTlO Vlz .Z
Oc -j IVI )>VI
~:::l 0", "'." Z"
VlfTl "r;; Zo 00
;<jVl g~ p;o VI;:O
c)> ~g 0 d
OZ VI
-l0 C 0
6 Z ;0 "
f'. VI fTl
;:
~
;;;
:;;
~
..
00
SHEET CONTENTS
SITE lAYOUT PlAN
<>
'"
...
"
:I:
"
s:
z
::~::::::I': "',,:::::
\
~....... ,.
~::::''fi':.:.:::'''::'''''' ';A
..".if"
iij
\ CB"C"
-1~~;)f;~_lt~
........." ''''
....-.....-............ "
..
CEDAR
.i/.
jq
I
if;
......t".
..f../..MO.l....
AVE. /T. H. 77..--..r,:lif
r: j ~
.... .......1]).. ,~.,~."...t'I) . .......j):l.~.. ..,(
......nJ
'" I"-~
........-rf]tJ~~ . (~>J\?~.M)I~
....".x\~.....'..
. /~'
>(
.../
..._ ~ ~ ......h)f. ..
. ...... -- r-Ul / ~
,1".h>~~'ll:~~":-'l)J::,;,_.... ~I ....,r......._,,!s:,".........i.;{r;,...._.......,_ NB OFF
' . .- f.' ,l'l"...._.,,"~ ,-.. , I ,."..0........:..-..:...1.,;-......._........ RAMP
-.. - t' ~ - -p ~ ; --..-~"~Z' .::"l-:-~>';;..:~:::~';^'"".....~,.,'I,;"'''''' ""1',,,,,"~ "~:>' ?$""',..I.,jQ"'- "....-;;j".-;.--
. _ . .. kr'o :ilL ..- ...... I> - . ,.. - . ~". ~....~::;;.;"-'~;!~:~~;;;!.:,,:'~,;;~':'.;::~\;:'~;~''';;:':';~;;:,,"~;:!:~~'
-. -.. -" - - -..~' .:.. '::'"-'''~~ ":''';:~-'-='~'''''''''''''''=
-.'- '-"-
...
~-.n_.,
--~
..
~~
()H
HZ
t'lt-3
.'Ht<:I
t-3Z
K1~
()
t<:I
::
~
$1
H
Z
GJ
~
~
t:I
t<:I
Z
-0 " " -0 " fTl fTl
;:0 ;:0 ;:0 ;:0 .;:0 .X x
0 0 0 0 0 Vi Vi
" -0 -0 " " :::l :::l
0 0 0 0 0 Z Z
VI VI VI VI VI C) C)
gj '" fTl fTl fTl
0 0 0 0 C) I
0 VI ~ VI VI )> a
to d J> d j;j ';:0
j;j Z )>
Ill> ;0 ~ ;0 ~ Z
s: ;u s: -I
s: s: ;:0 VI r
)> " )> -< ;$i
z: 0 Z ~
I ;:0 VI
0 0 '"
'" ~ ;:0
r s:
r>1 )> ;:0
z
;:
~
-~
\
~ '\) "
..~
.
· 1. 1. J. j j l
111111
.
<> '" '" ." " :I:
SEH flU NO, RICHf0701,OO 2007 MAINTENANCE FACILITY --
ISSUE DATE CITY OF --
DESIGNED BY lC1C --
DRAWN BY "" RICHFIELD --
PROJECT MGR "" ---
.. --.--.-- ---
@2ooa Short [Illoll Hendr1ckllon, Inc RICHFIELD~ MN MARK DAlE DESCRIPTION
"
,..
s:
z:
"
PRELIMINARY
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
1200 25th Avenue SOUUl
P.O. Box 1717
SI. Cloud. MN 56302-1717
320.229.4300 main 1320.229.4301 fax
800.572.0617 toll free t www.8ehlnc.com
ITl
~
No.T FOR CONSTRUCTION
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3D
83
~
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
BARRY FRITZ, POLICE CAPTAIN
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
lEI
REVIEWED By CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution authorizing the Public Safety Department/Police Division to
accept donation from American LeQion Auxiliary Unit 435.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the resolution accepting the $50 donation from
the Minneapolis-Richfield American Leaion Auxiliary Unit 435.
I II. BACKGROUND I
Richfield Police has been presented with a check in the amount of $50 from the
Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Auxiliary Unit 435.
Each year, the Auxiliary has presented the department with a check and designated
that it be used towards the purchase of safety vests for the police officers. This is a
continuation of annual giving by the Auxiliary.
0327 Resolution Accepting Funds from American Legion Auxiliary 435
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Businesses, organizations and occasionally residents are proud of the
law enforcement programs and accomplishments in Richfield because
the programs and quality of service add to their sense of safety and
security as they live and work in Richfield. To ensure that programs
continue, they will offer to contribute to specified areas, such as
protective vests for officers or a K-9 unit.
. Public Safety does not accept financial support unless it is designated
for a specific program that will affect the department as a whole.
. Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real or personal property on terms prescribed by the donor
be made by resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City
Council.
. The Administrative Services Department issued a memo on
November 9, 2004 requiring that all grants and restricted donation to
departments be received by resolution and by more than two-thirds
majority of the City Council in accordance with Minnesota Statute
465.03.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES
. N/A
I C. FINANCIAL I
. The $50 donation will be placed in the forfeiture fund to be used
towards the purchase of police officer safety vests.
I D. LEGAL
. N/A
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Council could deny the resolution and the funds would be returned to the
Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Auxiliary Unit 435. However, this
donation has been accepted in past years.
IV. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None.
8D-1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY/POLICE TO
ACCEPT A DONATION OF $50 FROM THE MINNEAPOLlS~RICHFIELD
AMERICAN LEGION AUXILIARY UNIT 435-
WHEREAS, the Public Safety Department/Police Division, through its
Director, has been notified that the Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Auxiliary
Unit 435 has presented a check in the amount of $50 to Richfield Police;
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real or personal property on terms prescribed by the donor be made by
resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City Council;
WHEREAS, the donated funds will be used towards the purchase of safety
vests for Richfield police officers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Public Safety
will accept the donation of $50 from the Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion
Auxiliary Unit 435 to be placed in the forfeiture fund account and directed for the
purchase of police officer safety vests.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day
of March 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3E
84
......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
BARRY FRITZ, POLICE CAPTAIN
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
rn
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Council approval of attached resolution authorizing the Public Safety Department/Police
Division to accept donation from Residential MortQaQe GrouP.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve attached resolution allowing the Public Safety
Department/Police to accept $50 donation from Residential Mortgage
Group, given in the name of two City residents.
I II. BACKGROUND I
Public Safety/Police received a letter from Sunny Nelson, a Principal/Loan Officer
with the Residential Mortgage Group (RMG). She indicated that RMG has started a
charitable donation program called "Refer a friend; Build your community," that
makes a donation to the group designated by their client at the time of loan closing.
Kori and Ed Marshall, Richfield residents, who were clients of RMG asked that a
donation be made to the Richfield Police. A copy of the letter received from RMG is
attached.
0327 Resolution Accepting Funds from Residential Mortgage Group
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Businesses, organizations and occasionally residents are proud of the
law enforcement programs and accomplishments in Richfield because
the programs and quality of service add to their sense of safety and
security as they live and work in Richfield. To ensure that programs
continue, they will offer to contribute to specified areas, such as
protective vests for officers or a K-9 unit.
. Public Safety does not accept financial support unless it is designated
for a specific program that will affect the department as a whole.
. Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real or personal property on terms prescribed by the donor
be made by resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City
Council.
. The Administrative Services Department issued a memo on
November 9, 2004 requiring that all grants and restricted donation to
departments be received by resolution and by more than two-thirds
majority of the City Council in accordance with Minnesota Statute
465.03. -
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES
. N/A
I C. FINANCIAL I
. The $50 donation will be placed in the forfeiture fund to be used
towards the purchase of police officer safety vests.
I D. LEGAL
. N/A
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Council could deny the resolution and the funds would be returned to the
Residential Mortgage Group.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution no.
. Letter from Residential Mortgage Group to Richfield Police.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None.
3~-1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY/POLICE TO
ACCEPT A DONATION OF $50 FROM RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.
IN THE NAME OF RICHFIELD RESIDENTS KORI & ED MARSHALL
WHEREAS, the Public Safety Department/Police Division, through its
Director, has been notified that the company Residential Mortgage Group, Inc.
(RMG), has presented a check in the amount of $50 to Richfield Police; and,
WHEREAS, the Residential Mortgage Group, Inc. has begun a charitable
donation program in which they donate funds to a school, police or fire department
in the community of and in the name of their clients at their loan closing; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real or personal property on terms prescribed by the donor be made by
resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City Council;
WHEREAS, the donated funds will be used towards the purchase of
equipment for Richfield police officers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Public Safety
will accept the donation of $50 from Residential Mortgage Group, Inc. in the name
of Richfield Residents Kori & Ed Marshall to be placed in the forfeiture fund account
and used to purchase equipment for the police officers.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day
of March 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
6[-~
Expert Home Financing. Gua ran teed. ™
February 15,2007
~, CT" ~/T'\
~.1J'O~h~k-k
1;~
Richfield Police Department
Attn: Administration Office
6700 Portland Ave. S
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Richfield Police Department Staff:
RMG has begun a charitable donation program called "Refer a friend. Build your
community."TM We are extremely excited about this exclusive initiative and have
enclosed a letter explaining a bit more about how this program works.
Enclosed you will find a check payable to your organization. Our client or referral source
has selected your group to be a beneficiary in conjunction with their loan closing with us.
Congratulations! We hope there will be more to come. Listed below is the name of the
donor that has selected you:
Kori & Ed Marshall
7526 Stevens Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
As our letter indicates, every loan that RMG closes can result in up to $100 donated to
the school, police or fire department in their local community. Our goal is to donate at
least $200,000 this year. We believe everyone in our communities will benefit. Call us if
you have any additional questions about how this program works.
at:)1~
Sunny Nelson
Principal/Loan Officer
Enclosures
c~: Kori& Ed Marshall
RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP INC.
11100 Wayzara Boulevard, Suire 570
Minneronka, MN 55305
PHONE 952.593.1169 FAX 952.593.1634
WWW.RMGMN.COM
03/12/2007 11:09
9524178451
SUNNY NELSON RMG
~ ~-.?
PAGE 02/02
, ' ,
"R' -M' ',': 'U'.'
. . . . '. . .
, '
, . '
. . ..
. '
"~':
'\!, \::...
t,
Expert Home Financing. Guaranteed:""
At RMG, we're starting the year off fresh! We've updated our look with a new logo,
new colors and kicked off an aciting new program. It is RMG's c1!:dusive initiative:
Refer a friend.
Build your community:'"
When a ~cfe~ral~generated mortgage closes, we'll donate $50 to a schoo), fire or police department
on behalf of hoth the person who referred the client, as well as the client who completed the loan
($100 total per closed loan). In the past, ea.ch Loan Officer has been able to select their own, charities;
however, by directing all donations to local schools, fire or police depa.r1ments, we'll be able: to make
a bigger impa.ct. We also believe in this program because it lets our clients directly improve the
conununities that thry caU home.
Residential Mortga.ge Group is committed to being the foremost resource for innovative, sound
home~Hna.ncing solutions for clients in Minneso~ and beyond. RMG combines unparalleled servi.ce
with unquestioned pl:oduct integrity for customers, industry partners and investors. RMG)s
exceptional, experienced employees arc:: committed to operating with the highest ethical standards
and providing pcac~ of mind with unique products such as closing cost and. approval guarantees.
The powerful combination of service, sound financing aI),d professional ethics is the reason we earn
our customers) wholc:.hearted recommendations to their f.unily, friends and neighbors.
Our goal is to generate in excess of $200,000 in charitable donations with, this program.
We hope that you will partner with us in our efforts to reach our goal. If we do, everyone in ou:r
communities will benefit. Call. us today so w€ can fill you in on all the d.ewl~ of how this exciting
new program works!
RMG is building your community
- one client at a time!
RESIOENTIH M01HGAGE GROUP INC,
lllOO W~)'"1"1.r;1 R"lIlc""lrd. :-illir,: ~7n
Milln,'r"llk~. MN "";lIl"
1'''',''''', ~J'\25'J~.1\f:.') FA~ \)'il."'H,IC,;\1\
WWWP""r.UJlN i.("\M
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3F
85
......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
[II
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Approve a public hearing for consideration of the issuance of new on-sale wine and on-sale
3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Naviva's Thai Kitchen, 6345 Penn Avenue South.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: .
By Motion: Approve a public hearing to consider the following:
· Issuance of new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses
for Naviya's Thai Kitchen, 6345 Penn Avenue South.
. Set public hearina for Aoril 24, 2007.
I II. BACKGROUND I
Applications for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Naviya's
Thai Kitchen were received by the City on January 22,2007.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
· City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing
to consider all on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor license
0327 Set PH Naviya's Thai Kitchen New Liquor Licenses
applications and that a date be set for the public hearing at a Council
meeting 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 24, 2007 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 applications for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor
licenses for Naviya's Thai Kitchen.
. Schedule the hearing for another date; however, this may delay the licensing
process.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. None
I VI PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. N/A
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3G
86
~
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
I
I
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
BRUCE P ALMBORG, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
~
REVIEWED By CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Approval of Lease Termination Agreement for 1710 East 78th Street, known as the Normark
buildinQ.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the execution of the Lease Termination
Agreement for 1710 East 78th Street, known as the Normark building,
by the City Manager and the Mavor.
I II. BACKGROUND I
The City has been leasing the Normark building to Metro Sales, Inc for several
years. Because of the growing intensity of mold within the building and the expense
of remediation, Metro Sales, Inc. has vacated the property at the request of the City.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Renting the property as an interim use was appropriate until the
maintenance costs became prohibitive. .
032707 1710 E 78th St
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. Legal counsel recommended the Lease-Termination Agreement as
the best way to make a "clean break" from the lease.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. Rent revenue in the amount of $2,089 monthly was received by the
77th Street Project Fund. This is the project which purchased the
property. Rent revenue will no longer be received.
. The cost to repair the roof and arrest the mold was estimated to be in
excess of $150,000. There was some concern that even with the
expenditure of significant dollars the mold might persist.
. The building will be demolished. A demolition specification is now
being prepared for purposes of obtaining demolition bids. Funding for
the demolition will be provided by MSA funds because the property
was purchased for the 77th Street project.
I D. LEGAL I
. The proposed action has been recommended by legal counsel. The
property has been vacated as of March 15,2007.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE REcOMMENDATION(S) I
. Do not approve the Lease Termination Agreement.
I V. ATTACHMENTS I
. Copy of the Lease Termination Agreement.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. N/A
3(;---1
TERMINATION AGREEMENT
This Termination Agreement ("Termination Agreement") is made effective as of _
day of , 2007 by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota
municipal corporation (the "Landlord") and Metro Sales, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the
"Tenant") .
RECITALS
A. Landlord and Tenant are parties to that certain Lease Agreement dated
, 2003 (the "Lease") for property located at 1710 East 78th Street, Richfield,
Minnesota 55423, commonly known as the Normark Building (the "Building").
B. Landlord has determined that there is the presence of "Mold Conditions" as
defined in the Lease in its portion of the Building.
C. Landlord has determined that the Mold Conditions constitute a "casualty"
pursuant to paragraph 13 of the Lease, and that Landlord will not undertake any actions to repair
or remediate the Mold Conditions. Landlord has informed Tenant of the existence of the Mold
Conditions and the casualty arising from the Mold Conditions.
D. Landlord and Tenant desire to terminate the Lease Agreement due to the casualty
caused by the Mold Conditions and amicably resolve outstanding issues arising from such Lease
termination.
TERMINATION AGREEMENT
1. Each party agrees that for purposes of complying with the termination notice
requirements of paragraph 3 of the Lease, this Agreement constitutes the "termination notice" to
the other party.
2. Upon execution of this Termination Agreement by each party, and Tenant having
completed its obligations set forth in paragraph 3 of this Termination Agreement, the Lease is
terminated with an effective date of , 2007 (the "Termination Date").
3. Prior to the Termination Date, Tenant shall undertake the following activities:
a) Tenant shall surrender the Building to the Landlord pursuant to the
requirements of paragraph 24 of the Lease, except that Landlord agrees Tenant shall not
be required to restore and repair any damage caused by Tenant's removal of Tenant's
trade fixtures, personal property or permitted alterations of the Building by Tenant.
Tenant shall remove all personal property, equipment, materials and rubbish, broom-
clean the Building and return all keys to Landlord. upon surrendering possession of the
Building.
307510vl MTN RC145-509
1
3 Es-- J-.
b) Tenant shall pay directly to Hennepin County the total annual property
taxes due in 2007 with respect to the Building as required by paragraph 6 of the Lease
and shall provide proof of payment prior to the Termination Date. Such property taxes
due in 2007 may be prorated as of the Tennination Date only if permitted by Hennepin
County.
c) Tenant shall pay all charges for heat and utility services furnished to the
Building and for the benefit of Tenant's occupancy including but not limited to, gas,
electric, snow removal and rubbish removal through the Termination Date, and provide
reasonable proof to Landlord that such payments for these services have been made.
d) Landlord shall pay the monthly Base Rent through the Termination Date,
but shall have no further obligation for payment of Base Rent after that date.
e) Tenant agrees to indemnify and hold Landlord, its agents or
representatives harmless from any claims or damages to Tenant or its business activities
arising out of the early termination of the Lease.
Tenant's obligations under this paragraph 3, and paragraphs 6.(b) and 17 of the Lease, shall
survive termination of the Lease.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Termination Agreement
effective as of the day and year first stated above.
TENANT:
. LANDLORD:
METRO SALES, INC.
CITY OF RICHFIELD
By:
By:
Its:
Its Mayor
By:
Its City Manager
307510vl MTN RC145-509
2
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
PUBLIC HEARING
5
87
.....
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING &
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding consideration of a resolution for the installation of a wall sign at 1901
East 66th Street (New City GaraQe) that does not conform to the Siqn Ordinance.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the
attached resolution granting special Council approval of a 132-square
foot wall sign at 1901 East 66th Street.
I II. BACKGROUND I
. A new City Garage is to be constructed at 1901 East 66th Street.
. The sign ordinance classifies this sign as an institutional sign.
. Institutional wall signs may not exceed 24-sq. ft.
. The size of the wall to which the proposed sign is to be attached is 10,890 sq. ft.
A 24 sq. ft. wall sign would barely be visible on a wall this size.
. The property is zoned C-2 (General Commercial).
. The allowable size of a wall sign in the General Commercial District is 15
percent of the wall size, or in this case 1,633-sq.ft.
. The proposed wall sign is appropriate for the building and will allow the public,
visitors and delivery vehicles to easily identify it.
032707 - 1901 E 66th sign variance
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Sign permit applications are generally reviewed and approved
administratively.
. The City Code requires that in the case of sign variance requests the
City Manager shall refer the issue to the Council for approval.
. An "institutional sign" is defined as "a ground, wall, canopy or marquee
sign or bulletin board which identifies the public institution,
governmental building, church or other place of worship, school or
charitable organization including chartered veterans organizations
located on the site" (Section 416.01, Subd. 19).
. "Institutional wall, canopy and marquee signs shall not exceed 24
square feet in total aggregate sign area" (Section 416.07, Subd.3).
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. If the proposed building were to be used as a commercial rather than
a public garage, the allowable size of a wall sign would be 15 percent
of the wall size or 1,633-sq.ft.
. The proposed sign is not excessive or out of character with the
building or setting.
. The proposed sign will allow the public, visitors and delivery vehicles
to identify the building.
I C. FINANCIAL
. N/A
I D. LEGAL I
. Notification of this hearing has been sent to residents and property
owners within 350-feet of the subject property.
I IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Deny the request for a sign with an area of 132-sq. ft.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution
. Sign specifications and building elevations
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I
. Randy Hughes, Operations Superintendent
.
5r(
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION FOR SPECIAL COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
A 132-SQUARE FOOt WALL SIGN AT
1901 EAST 66TH STREET
(NEW CITY GARAGE SITE)
WHEREAS, application has been made to the City of Richfield which requests
special Council approval for a sign of unusual height and location on land generally located
at 1901 East 66th Street, legally described on the attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the requested
sign; and
WHEREAS, the proposed sign is reasonable and appropriate for the proposed
location and purpose; and
WHEREAS, the proposed sign will not have undue adverse impacts on
governmental facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements; and
WHEREAS, the use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health,
safety, or welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Special Council approval is granted for an institutional wall sign not to exceed
132 square feet, as described in City Council Staff Report No. , on the
Subject Property legally described above.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
.
032707 - 1901 E 66th sign variance
5/d-
Exhibit A
All of Tract A described below:
Tract A.
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter lying West of
the East 690 feet thereof except the North 233 feet of the West 233 feet of
said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, all in Section 25, Township
28 North, Range 24 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and lying Easterly
of that part thereof taken under condemnation proceedings by the State of
Minnesota for highway purposes, more particularly described as: that part
thereof which lies within a distance of 60 feet Westerly and 144 feet Easterly
of the following described line: from the Southwest corner of Section 36,
Township 28 North, Range 24 West, running Northerly on the West line of
said Section 36 for 1000 feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 90
degrees 00 minutes for 74.5 feet; thence deflecting to the left at an angle of
90 degrees 00 minutes for 2893 feet; thence deflecting to the right at an
angle of 05 degrees 37 minutes for 1434.45 feet; thence deflecting to the left
at an angle of 05 degrees 36 minutes for 1180.86 feet to the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence continue along the last
described course for 1363.79 feet and there terminating; together with all that
portion of the above described tract lying Westerly of the Westerly boundary
of the above described strip and which lies Northeasterly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on a line running parallel with and
distant 60 feet Westerly of the above described line, distant 1088.79 feet
South of the point of termination of the above described line; thence running
Northwesterly to the intersection of the Easterly line of Cedar Avenue with a
line running Westerly at right angles to the above described line at a point
distant 813.79 feet Southerly of its point of termination (both distances being
measured along said line); also together with all that portion lying Easterly of
the first above described strip and which lies Westerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on a line running parallel with and
distant 144 feet Easterly of the first above described line at. its intersection
with the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 25; thence running Northeasterly to the intersection of a line parallel
with and distant 340 feet Easterly of the first described line with a line running
Easterly at right angles to said first above described line, from a point distant
663.79 feet South of its point of termination (when measured t:llong said first
above described line); thence running Northerly parallel with and distant 340
feet Easterly of said first above described line to the East and West Quarter
line of said Section 25; the title thereto being registered as evidenced by
Certificate of Title No. 351401; which is contained within the following
described line: Commencing at the west quarter corner of said Section 25;
thence southerly on an azimuth of 179 degrees 56 minutes 38 seconds along
the west line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter for 859.87
feet; thence on an azimuth of 89 degrees 56 minutes 38 seconds for 419.87
feet; thence northeasterly for 279.23 feet on a non-tangential curve, concave
to the southeast, having a radius of 378.00 feet, a delta angle of 55 degrees
49 minutes 48 seconds, a chord azimuth of 37 degrees 19 minutes 27
seconds and an arc length of 368.33 feet to the point of beginning of the line
to be described, said point being on the west line of the above described
Tract B.
Tract C.
5/3
tract and distant 629.27 feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence
continue northeasterly along the last described curve for 89.10 feet to a point
of reverse curvature; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve, having a
radius of 280.00 feet and a delta angle of 01 degree 03 minutes 29 seconds,
for 5.17 feet to a point on the east line of the above described tract, distant
581.13 feet south of the northeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of
359 degrees 56 minutes 54 seconds along the east line of said tract for
514.66 feet; thence westerly for 69.21 feet on a non-tangential curve,
concave to the south, having a radius of 284.00 feet, a delta angle of 13
degrees 57 minutes 44 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 290 degrees 04
minutes 09 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 229 degrees 39 minutes 28
seconds for 19.69 feet to a point on the west line of said tract, distant 54.99
feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 180
degrees 00 minutes 51 seconds along the west line thereof for 574.28 feet to
the point of beginning;
That part of the east 690 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of Section 25, Township 28 North, Range 24 West, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying west of a line running through a point in the north
line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, 829.5 feet east of
the northwest corner thereof and at right angles to said north line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, and north of a line parallel to
and 250.06 feet south from said north line of said Northwest Quarter of the
Southwest Quarter measured at right angles to said north line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, except road;
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 25,
Township 28 North, Range 24 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described
as follows: Beginning 250.6 feet south of a point 690 feet west from the
northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence
east to a point 829.5 feet east of the west line of said Southwest Quarter;
thence south for 405.54 feet; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 89
degrees 51 minutes for 330 feet; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 89
degrees 42 minutes for 656.4 feet to a point on the north line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, distant 1164.4 feet east of the
northwest corner; thence east to the northeast corner; thence south to the
southeast corner; thence west for 690 feet; thence north to the point of
beginning, except road;
together with that part of Tracts Band C hereinbefore described which lies westerly of Line
1 described below:
Line 1.
Commencing at the west quarter corner of said Section 25; thence southerly
on an azimuth of 179 degrees 56 minutes 38 seconds along the west line of
said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter for 859.87 feet; thence on
an azimuth of 89 degrees 56 minutes 38 seconds for 419.87 feet to the point
of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence northeasterly for 368.33 feet
on a non-tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of
378.00 feet, a delta angle of 55 degrees 49 minutes 48 seconds, and a chord
azimuth of 37 degrees 19 minutes 27 seconds to a point of reverse
5/Y
curvature; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve, having a radius of
280.00 feet and a delta angle of 84 degrees 46 minutes 13 seconds, for
414.26 feet; thence on an azimuth of 340 degrees 30 minutes 58 seconds for
11.69 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve, having a radius of
284.00 feet and a delta angle of 57 degrees 22 minutes 51 seconds, for
284.42 feet and there terminating;
containing 2.35 acres, more or less, of which 0.20 acre is encumbered by an existing
highway easement;
together with that part of Tract A described below:
Tract A.
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter lying West of
the East 690 feet thereof except the North 233 feet of the West 233 feet of
said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, all in Section 25, Township
28 North, Range 24 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota and except that part
of the above described tract lying Easterly of that part thereof taken under
condemnation proceedings by the State of Minnesota for highway purposes,
more particularly described as: that part thereof which lies within a distance
of 60 feet Westerly and 144 feet Easterly of the following described line:
from the Southwest corner of Section 36, Township 28, Range 24, West
running Northerly on the West line of said Section 36, for 1000 feet; thence
deflecting to the right at an angle 90 degrees for 74.5 feet; thence deflecting
to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes for 2893 feet; thence
deflecting to the right at an angle of 5 degrees 37 minutes. for 1434.45 feet;
thence deflect to the left at an angle of 5 degrees 36 minutes for 1180.86 feet
to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence continue along
the last described course for 1363.79 feet and there terminating, together
with all that portion of the above described tract lying Westerly of the
Westerly boundary of the above described strip and which lies Northeasterly
of the following described line: Beginning at a point on a line running parallel
with and distant 60 feet Westerly of the above described line, distant 1088.79
feet South of the point of termination of the above described line; thence
running Northwesterly to the intersection of the Easterly line of Cedar Avenue
with a line running Westerly at right angles to the above described line at a
point distant 813.79 feet Southerly of its point of termination (both distances
being measured along said line); also together with all that portion lying
Easterly of the first above described strip and which lies Westerly of the
following described line: Beginning at a point on a line running parallel with
and distance 144 feet Easterly of the first above described line at its
intersection with the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of said Section 25; thence running Northeasterly to the intersection
of a line parallel with and distant 340 feet Easterly of the first above
described line with a line running Easterly at right angles to said first above
described line, from a point distance 663.79 feet South of its point of
termination (when measured along said first above described line) thence
running Northerly parallel with and distance 340 feet Easterly of said first
above described line to the East and West quarter line of said Section 25;
the title thereto being registered as evidenced by Certificate of Title No.
733426.
5/t5
which lies within Tract B described below:
Tract B.
Commencing at the West Quarter Corner of said Section 25; thence South
00 degrees 03 minutes 22 seconds East along the west line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter for 859.87 feet; thence North
89 degrees 56 minutes 38 seconds East distant 419.87 feet to the point of
beginning of Tract B to be described: thence northeasterly for 279.23 feet on
a non-tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 378 feet,
a delta angle of 42 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds, a chord bearing of North
30 degrees 34 minutes 17 seconds East and a chord length of 272.92 feet to
the east line of Tract A; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 51 seconds
East, along east line of Tract A, for 574.28 feet; thence South 49 degrees 38
minutes 54 seconds West, for 85.11 feet; thence South 06 degrees 15
minutes 07 seconds West, for 300.80 feet; thence deflect to the left on a
tangential curve having a radius of 5674.58 feet a delta angle of 02 degrees
16 minutes 26 seconds for 225.21 feet; thence South 03 degrees 58 minutes
41 seconds West, for 164.84 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential
curve, having a radius of 6536 feet a delta angle of 00 degrees 35 minutes
19 seconds for 67.13 feet to said point of beginning.
.....
1>
n =E
.
. 0
~ 8
n ..
m , rr1i
n
Z X
s: -1'
rrI
:::0 ;:2'
G) 0 8
::;O!
m
0 ! rr1'
m r
1'] < 10; ~,
m ~;
~ ~ 0,
I;. Z
'" (0
"
'"
!'<.l
8
G
8
G
e
r (J) ~ "U r r r r en
CD co' ::r CD CD CD CD -. 8
co @ ~ "..... ~ ~ (Q
::J - ".....
CD CD CD
C'" () 0 en ., ., ., ., ~
CD CD s: () " (J)
0 3 0 0 0 -. en
" < Q) N @
., CD CD -. "..... - ::J CD -c
0 ., ::J 3 CD 0 "..... . . G) ;;
., . . CD
" 3 Q) en ::!.
co -. CD Q) )> N n
CJ'1 CD 0 :::J - 0 ""'I "J:::..
::J en :':'-0 -. -.
0 en -. Q) ::J .... @
0 N 0 o Q) -.
:::J (') n.
" ~ V> en .,..0 OJ ::r ~
~ 3 ~ fA
CD 0 V> 0 CD
CD (j) CD - en
"..... :r: 0- ~ Q.
-.. co :r:
m "U ::r
::J ::r co' - ;:::::;: @
~ "..... >< ::r Q) CD ~
., en
Q) V> >< ~.
::J V> N (')
(') 0 N 0
CD
@ r r
c:: 0 .~
0
3 ::J :::J
-0 co co @
-..-.. , i
"..... !
0 ~~ I
t .., ;-.. ~'
0 V> 0 ,0
." ,,,
;: (J) N ~... 8 -0 ~!~ <::0 ;:
ex> r' "1 ~~ I.....,..,
0 ...., ~1~ ~ ~~
CO.(J) n G) ~~ ."0
C . -. .s-
"..... 0" '1'
:::r (J)-
C'"
0 " :t>'
;;, c -
:::J
0-
()
CD
;;. 0- '"
Q)
.,
::t>
<
CD
-
~ "
D
2007 PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF
RICHFIELD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SEH FILE NO. AJ.:-IG\-W()701.GO
ISSUE DATE O.J 01.07
D(S1GNfD BY:""
DRAWN BY R81l
PROJECT ~GR JRD
PRELIMINARY
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
1200 2!Mh AvftnlJO SOutO
P.O. Box 1717
51. ClOUd. MN 56302-1711
3?O.t'29.4300 INln! 32:l,n9 4~1'1 fall;
8[}::J.572.OG17 toll free I www.Hh.nc.com
Sign Permit
f<lomELD. MN 55423- 2706
I,(A~K I)Jdr I;.r~;,;::-~.. nON
~
lIffiJ
[ "1 S ]
~
lUO:)':)UILI"'.*NJM'I.1 HJllIOII~90'Zl!i 009
l(a, 1-Utltfi.cl. Ol& l u,.w oocv au O<:l;
Hll.ZOCgg NVoI'POOI:J -lS
llH xOB 'O"d
llilll;>S onUOI.V :.nGZ OOlL
'~UI uos~:>tJpuaH n01ll3 lJo~S
NO,j!!!h~~>C;;l(J
]J'V(!
NOl.LOmUSNOO l:IO:l .LON
"
"
~
~
8
~
e
'"
,. ~r 8
c> t:: U
... I :>
~~~
w
w
. .u>
G
0
e
e
e
8
(0
8
@
@
G
@
ffi
1~
Z
0 @)
e ~ ~;
G:;
...J 'i.ci
W
a::: <;)
o
0::
W
~
W
@
a:,,~
I
1-0;
=> ~
o
(/)
..J
.....
G
~
@
z'
o
~~
Gj",
...J
W
@
B!
wi
" ,
0.1
u.i
01
~l'
o
~
~9
c..;,
f~ ~
c
>:~!'I"
90LZ;-fl:11<:;<:; Nfl 'OT;UH;)I~
Ol31.:JHJI~
.:JO )"llJ
S)<~OM JIlBnd LOOZ
W'
...0
...,
'"
~
-$-
Iii I:"
<5.'
w~
ll:_
(\.,
~l
cd
121
,
~- ...
~ 8~ !
"
i;! H ~
" '"
u. u.bl.1..b ~7 " ~ 0':
o t-...
0 0101 IOVl
(L -0.. "" a.. (0 "-\- wbS?w
R I ~~g:: R~ u..O w
u........... v:
~
"--.<-----
~.- - ._~.-.. .'.
Q~~ UOr4 1:>3rm.ld
/H-1H ).,6 NMV~Q
h1::' ),,8 {E1Nt'>IS3Cl
t..:qo'ro :UVO JnSSi
DO'W!.U,!"!:JIHv 'ON 311.:1 H3S
:':"-',
SNGllVA.i':::I HGI.!.(~~x:~
00
::
'f'
+ -$- ;!
~~ .1: ~" "" t:>!}, 1
of? ..~ c;
.,_"i-<"l lL.i'..o ~e l.1..!~
0" 01:: >--
u>
"- oj ..
2 ~~ f? '"
@
:2
8
I
h-
~l~
>-1 Ii;
~!w
jl.J
>-,U> e
~
e
8
e 1:1
Z
fo
,j:: ~*!
:~ i
:G:;
...J '"
:w
e t~:"
:0::
'0
10::
W
:1-
'x
8 iW t.:
c
c
tn "
~!
W ,
3:
~
z
o
~ '0
G:;
cd<<
0:: n.
o
0::
W
~
W
~
I
~~
o
Z
W
.....
@
Al:J'VN/W/13l:Jd
@)
@
@
@
G
e
::!
<J:
.....
AGENDA SECTION: PROP. ORDINANCE
AGENDA ITEM # 6 .
REpORT # 88
....
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
CHRISTINE COSTELLO, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Second readinq of an amendment to Transitory Ordinance 17.57.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve second reading of an ordinance amending
Transitory Ordinance No. 17.57 to include the correct legal
description of the affected land.
I II. BACKGROUND I
In 1994, as part of the Shops at Lyndale Redevelopment project, the City Council
approved Transitory Ordinance 17.57, which vacaled a street easement over a
portion of West 77th Street between Dupont and Emerson Avenues. The legal
description for the area to be vacated was incorrect and the property owner, CSM
Corporation (CSM), is requesting that an amended Transitory Ordinance be
adopted with the correct legal description of the area.
In addition to the above modification, CSM had requested that the Transitory
Ordinance also be amended to delete a "reservation for public utility easements".
This request was included in the Staff Report for the first reading of this Ordinance.
Upon further review by City Staff, this reservation must be retained because of
032707-2nd Rdg Amed Trans Ord 17.57 _Shops at Lyndale Plat
existing utilities in the area. Therefore, the City is not able to amend the ordinance
with respect to this request at this time. The consideration of approval by the
Council will proceed with only the correction of the legal description of the street
easement area that was vacated by Transitory Ordinance 17.57.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. The City conducted all necessary public notice requirements when it
initially considered this request in 1994.
. CSM will have until December 31,2007 to plat the Shops at Lyndale,
Hennepin County.
lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. The amended Transitory Ordinance will facilitate the replatting of the
Shops at Lyndale.
. The current request is simply to correct the legal description of the
street easement area that was vacated by Transitory Ordinance 17.57.
. The request to eliminate the reservation for public utility easements that
was included in the original Transitory Ordinance 17.57 has been
approved by the City Attorney. The reservation is unnecessary
because public utility easements will be included in the Declarations of
Easements document that will accompany the final plat.
. Council approved a first reading of the attached amended transitory
ordinance on March 13, 2007.
I C. FINANCIAL
. N/A
I D. LEGAL I
. The City Attorney has reviewed this request.
. No public hearing is required on this item.
I IV.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Do not approve the amendment to Transitory Ordinance 17.57.
IV.
ATTACHMENTS
. Amended Transitory Ordinance 17.57.
. Map showing location of vacated area.
I VI.
-
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. Representative from CSM Corporation.
fo-(
AMENDED BILL NO. 1994-11
AMENDED TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. 17.57
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF 77TH STREET WEST, NEAR THE
RECONSTRUCTED INTERSECTION OF EMERSON AVENUE SOUTH AND 77TH
STREET WEST AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER, OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE
OF MINNESOTA (7537 GIRARD AVENUE SOUTH)
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1: The following described lands are subject to an easement for public
street purposes:
That part of 77th Street West lying between the centerline of Dupont Avenue South
and the west line of Emerson Avenue South, located in the Southwest Quarter of
the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 28, Range 24 and 77th Street West,
as dedicated in the plat of NORTHFEL T ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
thereof, all in Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as commencing at the
southeast corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence South 89 degrees 55 minutes 12
seconds West, assumed bearing, along the south line of said Northeast Quarter of
the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter 86.58 feet to the point of beginning
of the parcel to be described; thence northwesterly 187.04 feet along a non-
tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 610.33 feet and a
central angle of 17 degrees 33 minutes 32 seconds, the chord of said curve bears
North 63 degrees 15 minutes 42 seconds West; thence South 38 degrees 20
minutes 06 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, 32.47 feet; thence southerly
64.46 feet, along a tangential curve concave to the east, having a radius of 120.00
feet and a central angle of 30 degrees 46 minutes 42 seconds to said south line of
the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence
South 89 degrees 55 minutes 12 seconds West, along said south line of the
Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of
1.00 foot to the east line of the west 30.00 feet of the East half of the Southeast
Quarter of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Sec. 33; thence
South 0 degrees 07 minutes 35 seconds West, along said east line, to the south line
of the north 30.00 feet of said East half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 55 minutes 12 seconds
East, a distance of 298.95 feet, along said south line, to the east line of said East
half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter;
thence north along said east line to its intersection with the southeasterly
continuation of the above described 610.33 feet radius curve; thence northwesterly
along said 610.33 feet radius curve to the point of beginning.
Sec. 2: Due to the relocation and reconstruction of 7ih Street West in the vicinity of
Emerson Avenue South, there is no longer a public need for a street easement over the
above-described property.
~,-~
Sec. 3: The street easement in favor of the public over the above-described
property is hereby vacated reserving, however, easement for existing public utilities..
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March,2007.
"
/
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Sunde Land Surveying, LLC.
Vacation .Description
Sketch For:
CSM CORPORATION
II
900 I East Bloomington Freeway (35W)
Suite 118
Bloomington, Minnesota 55420-3435
Business: 952-8811 - 2455
FAX: 952-888-9526
SE CORNER OF THE NE 1/4~F
THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 -_ 30
OF SEC. 33 "-
- "
"
\
\
\
&-8
t-
~~ ~
f.~ t."i
'- .
~~ f~
"C' ,
:. '. E. LINE OF THE E 1/2 OF THE
~-""NO.0~'22"E SE 1/4 OF THE sw 1/4 OF
" , -78.67 THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 33
,,,' "
o ~
. .............~..................................:~.~..~ r - - -1~ :
~ ~~ ~ ~
. _Vl: Ol
: . 1'"). 30 !Xl
; '.f.: ~ ~,.,.,; Vl
! ...... u. v 8 !
, .::<" 0 ::::- 1Il :
.:.:';;':' ~ : L~::; n____
..,.;........
: . : \
/J ~C? .~ 1\'
:.: " l\) <'v ,
//:: I l:t J~f I. I
.: '. ~ .!:i::; if? /" j
: ~ 0'" ," , :
j ;; r;:; J! <., " i
.,.;. : ~ ",OJ I""' ,,' ,
'. ~ Q:: v I. \,1- :
...............:.. .....................~..................
~ ~~ (- "
~. J)
I ~~-85-t-
i -~
i )'\
, : \ ~~'\
'",:~: ,
...~~~.. (..t;z/;':'.
/ :', ~.~\~
.:-~ ; "'.... ....~q~~...~
..Ofo ~: .....' ..y;..~
.~ ";)'V i ~.
",'0 :
0' !
i <I '16 0
~ ~JOo -" ../
: <:6' <";'1'" I I
: "1<" _.........'\\"'\ I ~ut:"R.~O'u
: _~~_ 0 ,,,...<In
~---B5-=t---1 II A'm~
( W. LINE OF: E:."~R.""'''
\ EMERSON AVE. ~ :-:-:;.;;:;n" g
.- --L- : 1- ^'~'V ,
I
o
I'")
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, ,
\1. \.'"
,'I "
,'I \
\
200/-/56
6/6/5
T.28 R.24 5.JJ SMT 200//560/4.dwg
PROPOSED V ACA TION DESCRIPTION
w'"
en'"
"'0
Ow
",en
''''
-0
w~
...-
Ow
,.;en
......
00
"'...
.,
;0-
l:;~
That port of 77th Street West lying between the
centerline of Dupont Avenue South ond the west line
of Emerson Avenue South, located in the Southwest
Quarter of the Southeost Quarter of Section 33,
Township 28, Range 24 ond 77th Street West,
as dedicated in the plat of NORTHFEL T
ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, all
in Hennepin County, Minnesota,
described os commencing at the southeast corner of
the Northeast Quorter of the Southwest Quarter of
the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence
South 89 degrees 55 minutes 12 seconds West,
assumed bearing, along the south line of said
Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter 86.58 feet to the paint of
beginning of the parcel tei be described; thence
northwesterly 187.04 feet along a nan-tangential
curve concave to the northeast having a radius of
610.33 feet and 0 central angle of 17 degrees 33
minutes 32 seconds, the chord of said curve bears
North 63 ,degrees 15 minutes 42 seconds West;
thence South 38 degrees 20 minutes 06 seconds
West, not tangent to said curve, 32.47 feet; thence
southerly 64.46 feet, along 0 tangential curve concave
to the east, having 0 radius of 120.00 feet and a
central angle of 30 degrees 46 minutes 42 seconds
to said south line of the Northeast Quarter of the
Southwest Quarter of the Southeast 'Quarter; thence
South 89 degrees 55 minutes 12 seconds West, along
said south line of the Northeast Quarter of the
Southwe,st Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a
distance of 1.00 foot to the east line of the west
30.00 feet of the East half of the Southeast Quarter
of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of Sec. 33; thence South 0 degrees 07 minutes 35
seconds West, along said east line, to the south line
of the north 30.00 feet of said East half of the
Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 55
minutes 12 seconds Eost, a distance of 298.95 feet,
along said south line, to the east line of said East
half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence north along
said east line to its intersection with the
southeasterly continuation of the above described
610.33 feet radius curve; thence northwesterly along
said 610.33 feet radius curve to the paint of
beginning.
~ SCALE: I Inch = 40 Feet
- _ 1iiiiiiiiiiiiii
We hereby certify that this sketch, plan or
report was prepared by me or under my
instruction and that I am a duly Registered
Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
Doted this 9th."doyohsepte.mbep,'~'2003 '
SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, LLC.
BY.~~ J?~,~~_________
Scotf"~~L.t
Minn. Reg. No. 17256
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
RESOLUTIONS
7
89
.......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING &
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
NAME, TiTLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
m'/'
ab
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
[(
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a request for an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow the
installation of an additional pump and the overall reconfiguration of an existing service
station/convenience store located at 6744 Penn Avenue (continued from February 13, 2007).
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Deny an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow
the reconfiguration of an existing service station/convenience store
at 6744 Penn Avenue (continued from February 13, 2007),
I II. BACKGROUND I
Applicant Mark Olson is the owner and operator of the Richfield Mobil Mart located
at 6744 Penn Avenue. Mr. Olson is proposing to reconfigure the existing site in
order to add a third gas pump and a larger canopy.
The Council conducted and closed the public hearing regarding this item on
February 13, 2007. The item was tabled to allow the applicant to apply for a
number of variances necessary to reconfigure the site as proposed. On March 21,
2007 the Hearing Examiner approved all required variances.
032707 - 6744 Penn ACUP (continued from 021307)
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Service station/convenience stores are a conditional use in the C-2
District.
. The standard conditions necessary to issue any CUP (546.05, Subd.
6) have all either been met or variances have been approved.
(Variances were granted for light levels and parking lot setbacks.)
. Service station/convenience stores must also meet 13 specific
requirements for a CUP to be issued (526.27, Subd. 12). Twelve of
the thirteen requirements have either been met or variances have
been approved. (Variances for buffer yards and canopy & pump
island setbacks.)
. The final requirement of the Zoning Code states:
o "Queuing space of at least 20 feet shall be provided in
front of the pump island in each direction in which
access can be gained to the pump :- this required space
shall not interfere with internal circulation patterns..."
o Staff believes that the queuing space has the potential to
interfere with internal circulation.
o As discussed by the City Attorney on February 13, 2007,
this requirement is subjective. On February 13th, the
Council stated that it did not believe the queuing space
would interfere with internal circulation. For this reason,
a variance was not required for this condition. If the
Council is of the belief that interference is not present,
there is nothing from which to grant a variance.
. Staff and the applicant have been unable to find a service station in
the metropolitan area with the proposed dimensions.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. Planning Commission decision: The Planning Commission was
split (3-3 with one Commissioner absent) on this issue.
o The Planning Commission unanimously agreed that the
site improvements including the landscaping, new pump
islands and canopy, etc. would aesthetically improve the
property.
o The Planning Commission was divided over the issue of
drive aisles and the potential internal circulation
problems.
. Hearing Examiner decision: All requested variances were approved.
, .. The property has been used as a service station since 1961 and a
service station/convenience store since 1982.
. There is a need to maintain service stations in the City.
. Staff received one phone call regarding the proposal from a resident
of Queen Avenue. This resident stated that although the service
station has always been a "good neighbor," there are significant
parking and circulation problems in the neighborhood. This includes
delivery vehicles idling on the street.
. The applicant has begun handing out a letter to all delivery drivers
requesting that they refrain from idling on 68th Street and that all
delivery trucks exiting via 68th Street turn east towards Penn Avenue,
rather than traveling through the residential neighborhood.
. The applicant submitted signatures from over 350 customers in
support of the proposed site changes.
. The proposed changes add significantly to the aesthetic appeal of the
site.
. The proposal to close one of the existing curb cuts on 68th Street
improves safety at that intersection.
. The Ordinance requires that queuing space be provided in a manner
such that it does not interfere with internal circulation. It is the belief of
staff that this requirement is not met.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. The required fee for a CUP has been paid.
I D. LEGAL I
. 60-DA Y RULE: 60-day clock 'started' when a complete application
was received on January 16, 2007. As is authorized by State Statute
the City sent a notice of extension to the applicant on February 21,
2007. The deadline has been extended to March 27, 2007.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Approve the attached resolution amending a conditional use permit to allow
the reconfiguration of an existing service station/convenience store at 6744
Penn Avenue.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution to deny amendment
. Resolution to approve amendment
. Proposed site plan
. Proposed landscape plan
. Traffic flow illustrations
. Lighting plan
I VI. PRINCIP AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. Mark Olson, owner/applicant
. John Kosmas, architect
1-(
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW THE RECONFIGURATION OF AN EXISTING SERVICE
STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE AT 6744 PENN AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow the reconfiguration of an existing
service station/convenience store at 6744 Penn Avenue, legally described as:
Lots 11 and 12, Block 16, Tingdale Bros Lincoln Hills.
WHEREAS, the three members of the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield
have recommended denial and three members have recommended approval of this
requested amended conditional use permit at the Subject Property at the January 22, 2007
meeting; and
WHEREAS, this requested amended conditional use permit at 6744 Penn Avenue
meets the requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in
Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 546.05, Subd.6; and
WHEREAS, this requested amended conditional use permit at the Subject Property
does not meet the following requirement necessary for issuing a conditional use permit for
a service station/convenience store as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section
526.27, Subd.12:
1. The proposed use will not provide queuing space of at least 20-feet in front of
the pump island in each direction in which access can be gained to the pump in
a manner that will not interfere with internal circulation patterns; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for denial of the conditional
use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. An amended conditional use permit is denied for a reconfigured service
station/convenience store, as described in City Council Letter No. , on the
Subject Property legally described above.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
. ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
032707 - 6744 Penn ACUP (continued from 021307)
1- :J-
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW THE RECONFIGURA TION OF AN EXISTING SERVICE
STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE 6744 PENN AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow the reconfiguration of an existing
service station/convenience store at 6744 Penn Avenue, legally described as:
Lots 11 and 12, Block 16, Tingdale Bros Lincoln Hills.
WHEREAS, the three members of the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield
have recommended denial and three members have recommended approval of this
requested amended conditional use permit at the Subject Property at the January 22, 2007
meeting; and
WHEREAS, this requested amendment to the conditional use permit at the Subject
Property meets those requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as
specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Sections 526.027, Subdivisions 12, and 546.05,
Subdivision 6; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the amended
conditional use permit;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. An amended conditional use permit is issued to allow the reconfiguration of the
existing service station/convenience store, as described in City Council Letter No.
, on the Subject Property legally described above.
2. This amended conditional use permit at the Subject Property is subject to the
following conditions in addition to those specified in Section 521.07 Subdivision 2 of
the City's Zoning Ordinance:
. That the recipient of this conditional use permit record this Resolution with
the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subdivision 1
and Richfield Zoning Code 546.05, Subdivision 7.
3. The conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating
it are observed, and the Conditional Use Permit shall expire if normal operation of
the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the Zoning
Ordinance, Section 546.05, Subd. 9.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
FILE NO.: 61 030---3:VWI-
I
o
o
-0
Pl fll ITI ^
o s: ~
OJ I
I fTI Pl Pl
)> X X X
Z U1 U1 U1
O::j c-l =,
o Z Z Z
)> G) G) G)
'0
o s:
)> )>
~~ Z
I I
OJ F2
G) [""fl
Z
Ul Ul
-1 c-l Ul
)> )> c-l
:= := )>
Ul Ul :=
"lJ ;0 '0
:::0 rr1 f'l
<;2 g ;0
o ;0 N
rrI rq U1
o 0 0
Ul
--.,
)>IUl
c-l a -I
00
"lJ "lJ .
e. Ul 0 OJ
:~~ ~- g
- ~:=[;; '- )>
)> ;0
Z N",
o (1)>
Ul 0
-1
o
c-l
)>
,
~ 0
VI --.,
II ....~..
U1 ~
VI :!::
,
,-""
I
l1:~~_ 8
CJ -.........J < --->. (/) rr1 Vl (/) (/) U1
)> m::::ooZoe =i-
-1 vi z U1 r 0 I ;0 )> ", --I
jT] ,zeo 20<Z f'I
o vlfjO;:;:ll'1r'l1'10<
.fo..O:::;:Ulg,-< ViO
CY>z)>::JUl'm =iJ>
I~_<z R'-< -I
'-J)>N0 I.. J>
g- )> 1 UlS:
.(Xl ~~;:",~E;
~OJ~~~
r'1 !< ;0 c3 z
~?~~-:...
-, ;;:: z
)> ~10
UI ~-o
VI f:: s;:
v.1 :z:
.f>. UlZ
(N rrl rr)
~;o
::::U)
o
1'1
Ul
~:
)>
-<
lD
lD
.po.
(/)
o
J>.
.- -
rrl
o
z)>;o'0
~~8~;;;
-ce 1'1
2:)>-)>z
Pr-;o;o
c r>lI'1Ul
o O)>-u
~ " )>
C)~ ()
~~ r>l
g~.~
,--~
"J
~N--->'~
o~ w w
)>-OCQO
:::0 UI.......CO
~->.LN'-J
Ul
UlUlUl
_.-_0
Z
--.,--.,--.,
SHEET
11
OF
"lJ
)>
:;0
A
Z
o
I
I
I
I
I 0)
I OJ
I --.+.
, ~T
! Ul
I ---I
I :;0
I rr"l
I rq
I -.1
I ~
I
, fTl
I Vl
! ,c.-l
I
I
I
I
U) I
~-
=I I
r'! I
--0 I
l~~-
:r>
Z
Z
--.,
o
;0
s:
)>
-,
o
z
-I
)>
^
1'1
Z
'1
;:0
o
~
1'1
Z
,
)>
:;0
0V1
1'1(j)
o .
- 1
00
c -
;0 .
CD
1/11/2007
...... ()
00
II )> ;0
Z r'l'
0
0 )>
z
a
0 "'"0
:::E
-< I
=i
r'l
0
p"'J )>
z
r" 0
-u
rq -<
."
< - =:JJ )>
Ul
0
)> )>
._~! ~
- )>
0 0
(')
fTl
Z Z
-I
Ul
-1
;0
-u
1'1
J 12' 6"
. 13'-6" / /
----.-.-----,,-
- -------,---- /.
-_._._------------_.--_._--------------~._-------------.----_.--------_.,----~--
ALLEY ~~
LOW PLANTlNGS EACH SIDE OF FENC~_-=-~WRTH ~IYO.OO' PR()P_~~NE __--:::-:::--.-.--
/----- -~ -= :;.'=::::-:: =-==---=-=-==-:.-~ - - -c;- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- -: I =
(/ >:-I'.-x-----x---x-x--x--x-x---E~iAIN LINI<xFENCEx---x:
"(>.. 6" CONC, CURB WI NEW SLAT INSERTS I 10' SETBACK
1- (B 12 TY E) ._ _ ~HECESSARY '_.1
o r>lo)> I
= ze~:;O I
p~:,,-! \;:"
o-ux I
UlUl~ N I
c-1o 0
;01'1 - U1
1'1 ;0 I 25' SETBACK
-.- - -- -.,
IUl
1 (Xl
'lD
I~
IN
10-1
I~
I
1
IN
,m
ITI
X
Ul
-1r>l
'z
0'
e)>
- :;0 ;0
OJ0
r>l
o
C
-j
s:
)>0
-10
Oz
IO
g; 1'1 .
Xo
I Vie
o -1:;0
-m
Z
Ul 0
=i
1'1
-I
:;0
)>
Z
o
,
1'1
~!TI~
G)'O ~:
, ~E 0
.'JO<
Z'"
~ l"1
~'----
~
Vi
-1 "-
'0
25 "-
:;o-Ul
OJ 1'1
o
e
-I
(J)c/~~l~r
'0 I
1&
PROJ. NO : 0610-30
DESIGNED BY PT IJK
DRAWN BY : SL
2 DATE: 11/20/2006
Z
co
lD
o
VI
I~
VI
v}
~
--'-1
-....JI
~I
,
,
~I
-01
. I
~I
1'1,
1
~~ I
0:;0 :c'
S 2~ r~~~-I
:;00 0-1
CD< ,1'1
" __":1_. 1'10 I
I Ii]
"'1
;6 I ~ . ~~-4" "
~ ~ j' ~IS-LA~io-SET8ACKTI I
aU) '19'-3 1/2'" 28'-0" '"
........... -t ~/_-----~-;lc------------A':'
b ~ ~ _<--___ 50'-0'~_~~TE TRIA~_~~_J C EN T E R
=8;1
)><);
~Viz
<-0
l"l~r:;:;
-I ..
om
"U~
0:::;:
." r'l
1'1
Oz
C
:;0
OJ
F'---
[,
rq
o
OJ
~
_q~ r-,-'
C 0 Pl c)
rq rri X -u
r- :;0 Vi c
-I G) .--.j ;;::
J> :;0 Z -0
~ 3 G) Vi
Ul Z ,-
a ~
o
Ul
\~
)>
/1'0
~o
)>z - ~
o~~
~tW;~
. 0_
o
Z'
r'l
S
_~ (11
_c.j
t;J -
lOZ
0-IG)
UlOJ
.e
TJ-
. ,
\2
Z
G)
VI
o
o
:'"
4 - 9'-O"x19'-O" PARKING STALLS
I - 8'-0"x19'-O" PARKING STALL
W/ 8'-O"x19'-O" ACCESS AISLE
r>lO;o
ZCrrl
0;;:::<::
'-uO
OUl<
Ul-1r>l
c",
;0 :;0
r>l
-r'~-- ----
__.________~!;J &-. I~AMP
E, CONe. SIDEWALI<
~-~-~\~-- --- "
1O
-0
::0
o
-u
r>l
::0
-{
-<
,-
:z
1'1
-'\
I~
"
I~
. -<
OJ J> Pl
COX
r5;:Vi
\20:::J
ZfTlZ
G)zG)
--1
._._._._~,
Vi
28'-0"
OF CANOPY
I
2(),-O"
, .;<.------.----..- ,.
ISLAND SETBACK
I
, 24'-8 1/2"
A~----------...-/
COLUMNS
~
\
()..)
XJ fTl
)>.
;;:-
'is'U
rq
CJ-
f~ E N N
A y__.~ _~ _V..I _ ~__ _ s Q__ U~T_J! ___ _ ____, __ ____,__
F<ICHFIELD CONOeO
6744 PENN AVENUE SO.
RICHFIELD - MINNESOTA
PETI~OLEUIVi EQUIPMEN r
IN STALLA T'I 0 1"-1
BLOOMINGTON, IvllNNESOT A
55437
SALES &
9201 BRIAR LANE
952-831-5797
FILE 1:10.' 610:'iQ-3.VWF
----
~-~-
(j~~ (::) *.1~
o 0 co
N
;0 3;::
r'1 )>
0-0
,
[Tl
VI
'^ -0
r" r'l r-'
-<
J>
)> Z
0 -,-1
.p.. -) -.-
'-l -< Z
C)
IJ.J
N
-I)> 0"U :0 zO U)
r'1;o 00 Ul)> J>O
Oco ,-I -1-< ~ :5:: C)
IO 0[Tl [Tl
Z;o Z " r'l :5::
o -I ~~ =:r
-<< ;or: 0
::::j 0, 0 z 1'1
)> "U}>
,!"'1 O. 0
;0
q C
_3.-__
zrn r-
O-j --,., "U rq
OI 0;:00 I )>0
OC OC-\ [Tl <:-1
-<- '-\[Tl ~
0)> OOZ [Tl r'l J>
[Tl DO=! ;0 Z
Z 0
-\ ;oUl' 0
0)>' 0
)> -0 )> )> ):>.
C r r-
Ul C
Ul
:;0)>
CO
CO[Tl
:;0:;0
C
~
VI' -I ~
0 ~~
I ~ I
0 [Tl 0
0 :
-I '-l-l
0 1"0
0) a~
0 :::01
I :r: I
0 -0
0:
I
NCO <J) CO
.::::R> bR>
~CO :CO
I
OJ. 0
I
OZ-IOUlO
[TlOIOOC
Ul-I[TlzI)>
O~U)<rrlZ
~-<o,;g3
"UO:r:=r[Tl
)>[Tl[Tlr'1fTl(j)
Z(j)OZ
O-CO)>(j)
-GJ'fTl;oI
r'1Zr'1' "10
Ulg)>O-,.,::;:
6 zi:oz
00. :;0_
:;0-,., "U Z
0)>'-\
O)>z;oI-\
~z fTlr'1:C
;o-<;:!oor'1
:;:; r'1CO-o
- )>z'
o "1J Z :"'1 )>
)> '-\;oz
-I )>_)>_1
- 1'1-
o Z(j)Oz
z )>-60
zz;o
o Ul
!"
z
o
z)>;o,0 ~I
o 0 [Tl 0 ;0 ITI
~c!g-I~ (/)
2:)>-)>z
~r::::o;o
c ,rrr'-'1(J)
o O)>"U
~ ..)>
C)~ 0
~~ [Tl
~ '-J U1
co ;;.Q~~
r '--^-'"
r'l
< ~
~N~N
0- ~ ~
}>-acoa
;::oUl-"CO
~ ~ IJ.J.'-l
VlUlUlUl
-,., -,., -,.,
VI .1'- ~
~ClJ)> :;;: :;;: Pl)> OJ
o-<r= 1'1000-1 R>
[Tl:;OoGJ"U
or oUloQr
<". )">. "U CD
~6~ coI,.,.- ~ II
Pl (j) Z ~;:;::cl=! OJ
-!o=! :;oormz
Pl)>z -00 :0 )>
O"U0 1'1 r'1 I r
:;0 0 co. )> ,
:;ofTlUl -,., I~:;o [Tl
~OZd )>~:;;:o';; 0"
~(j) l'D:;OOAUl )>
OZ-lco ~^o<.. Z
O~P1 o Ooz 0
(j) ~ 3;:: co
0-< C
"" :;0 )> :cr- :;0
)"> -
(j)-,.,Z "U ,
00-1 Ul )>
Z:;O~ "U
Z
r'1
0
Ul - -.-.0
()
)> - -
r
1'1
e..--~.i)..
01' -I
o =r~ 'ill
PROJ. NO : 0610-30
DESIGNED BY PT /JK
DRAWN BY : SL
2 DATE: 11/20/2006
SHEET
?
.t;?-==
OF
:z
N
.p..
'it, ,M R''U
~ r
(J1 )> ;;:0 )>
"U , OZ
,
0 O~
-\ "U
0 --jz
-j _IGJ
-( Ul
'U __
r'l N
rei
1'1
r'1
-I
-s:
--
rq
U)
---I
[
., Ul:S::
,~ NJ>
r'l --I
C
;;:0
r'l
r--'
)>
Z
o
U1
C)
)>
LJ
r'-l
I
10")
CO
1_+
I :r-
I
I U)
I-I
:::::tJ
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
~(J
r-~
)>
Z
1/'11/2007
["11
rei
x
(/)
-.-1
<
f:
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
-I
WI ;Q,~~ :
~--- I
I
,
I
,
I ---...--".--.
I
I
,
I
I
~
"
,i
I:
,
II
'i
I: 1"1
, .
"
J=~IST_~U"B_~UT _~ . ~____
)>
;0
r'1:;;:
)>0
NO
_0
~~
~c
r-
YJ ~.
o
c
:;0
CO
o
COJ)>
-I I I
~ <J)
I.OlD
P"l
X
(/)
=!
z
o
CO
C
,
o
Z
o
\\
E. CONC, SIDEWALK I
._ _0 _ _. _ _0 _ _._ _.. _ _0__._ _. _ _. _ _ .._~
co )>
I I
\
OJ )> r....
cox
FLu;
O )> -I
_0-
zr'1Z
C)ZC)
-I
\
\
~Tl
s:
I
o
OJ
~
\
-C-
VI
(,)
Z
F) E: N N
AVENUE
s ~;L_~~_TJ-j_.__.__._.._
f~ICHFII=-LD CONOCO
PET'I=<OLEUM EQUIPMENT
INSTALLATION
BLOOMINGTON, IvIINNESOTA
55437
6744 PENN AVENUE SO.
RICHFIELD - IvIINNESOT A
SALES &
9201 BRIAR LANE
957-831-5797
X:\11600\1l69~ RIO. GAS STATION AUTOTURN\dwg\PESIRICH10-AE.DWG, 1/10/20073:05:10 PM
"0
:u
r--- d_____ ---- 0 .--- .- --.
~x_x_x_X_lC_X_lC_X_lC_X-X-X
. E. ()fAIN UNKFENCE
~
~
~
iB
~
-t
c
~z
f!lc~
ii~
~8G')
cn~
ftga'~ ~
~~t^~g: 0
::Jrl"
<00 (/)
?;5" N
<00 fTl
<0"
=l
3
(1)
;0
Of'l
c;;::
;00
00<
fTl
~ :tI]~
~
:-&gJ
~l5
sn!
:'1G
z
G')
fTlO;o
ZCf'l
0;;::;;::
r-uO
OVl<
VI-l1Tl
CfTl
;0;0
ITl
-h
&J0l(])(J) g
~ootn .....
moDo
o
~
~
:;u
W
~
-t
o
~~
LJ~
,-
)>E
z~
-}
.----.-.-.----.-.----.-.-
(/)
(")
l>.
r
fTl
N.
o
fa
~
z
--I'>-
o
"T]
fTl
fTl
-l
~ffi
E. CONe. S1DEWAu<
. ------- ---=-.. -===-.:.. --===-: ---
EXIST. CURB CUT
f'1
C
~
. -t
~~~
i2~~
l52!G')
-t
~
\
U\
X:\11600\11698 RIclD GAS STATION AUTOTURN\dwg\PESIIUCHlO-AE.DWG, 1/10/20073:04:10 PM
~ba~ ~
~.~~g: 0
::Jrl-
",0
)>r
::J 0
",0
,,"'"
=1
3
11l
'-n
~?'P'P) $l
. 0001
OJooo
o
Ul
o
)>.
I
fT1
z
'1
fT1
fT1
-;
~
u
~ :fIl~
o
UJE
-l~
I'l -l
-o\'f
~.~
N
'0
-"'"
o
~ffi
{'I
"U
.:0
-- - - --'--'.' --..-.-.-.. . 0 ..- . . . . ..' .-'--
-)(-)(-~-)(-)(""'--)(~)(--l CHAfNUNt FENcE-X
~
~
E
aI
8
-t
;;0
01'1
c:;:::
;;00
t1J<
1'1
c:
2:!z~
J!l~~
~~~
~z .
(1)0
(J ~
.x (J ~~
1'10Al ~z
ZCI'1 c,aG)
0:;::::;::: (IJ~
r"l]O
OVl< :'1G
Vl-l1'1
CfTl
AlAl Z
1'1 G)
~
e
iB
g
I"
I::
~.
. -t
sa
~
~ CUT
) ) ,
} I }j
&( /~/
,.......... /
.---'/
~~g
6~~
-gz
~!ZG)
-t
.-
~
~
o
'"
o ~
----J ~
tN p
GJ
U1
N
OJ
CD
!;II' Ir ~~!~~,.
~I it ~ih~il
II !~~ ~~~5~1
~: ~~~ 1Il8:~i
~... ~~Ul H~O(e!!
~~ ~Ii I~II:
I~ !ii ;i~!!
b ~!1 ~ii~1
~~ ~I hili
~ b ul~~
i !;I~ :I~!
in ~c1 ~!l!.~
~ t Ii!!!
I II il;1
~
:;:u
fTl
<
(f)
o
Z
IN
I
fTl
Z
N--l
..p..GJ
~ fTl
X(f)
OJO
0)>
~Z
o
lJ
-<
0 0 '"
0 0> 0> ~
...... (,.l (,.l ~
(,.l ~ ~
(,.l
(]I (ll .j>. ~
0 (,.l 0>
(]I
0
'"
>
;E
z
"
z
c:
;r::
III
!:I
en
..
Iii il~
1l;;t J ~
I J
.
~ ~~
o ~^Zll~
----J ~ z1j t:l.
eN ~
GJ
U1
N
OJ
CD
00
~>
.!.;;l
0>
I
o
-..j
!'1
\J
'0
...-..-. ..-..-..-.....-..-..-..-..---...-..-..-..-..---..-.-.-..-.-.-..---'..-..-.-.-..-.-.1:5 .. -..-..-....-.-..-..-..-..-..0-..-..-..---..-0..-..-..-.-..-.0..---..-.----0--..-..-..-. -0-..-.-. -. ....-0
_'5?_9_9_l?_x_~_x_x-x-x-x-x
E. CHAIN LINK FENCE
rrJ
X
Vi
;-i
o
C
;0
lD
o
C
-I
o
o
~
~
~
o
:".
rrJ
X
Vi
;-i
o
C
::0
(D
o
C
-I
~
o
Co
......
Co
:...
o
Co
o
o
o
0,
~
~
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
."C
cZrrJ
rrJox
rgVi
E~~~
zOG)
"'C
(//Z
~ 0
o :".
o
o
rrJ
X
~Vi
. :::l
(,.lz
~G)
(/)lD
.c
.,,-
. r
o
Z
G)
~
~
o
o
o
o
o
:".
o
0,
o
U
~
o
o
o
o
Co
N
:".
o
0,
o
i-.>
~
~
-I'-
Co
w
U
(,.l
o
......
Co
o
~
o
U
~
!Xl
N
!-"
.j>.
(,.l
:".
.j>.
-I'-
c"
0>
00
u
(]I
0>
U
N
00
u
~
(,.l
w
U
CO>;J> rrJ
~~
0)>:::1
~6
Ol-I
o
0,
o
i-.>
(]I
(]I
!Xl
.j>.
w
Co
0>
(,.l
~
-I'-
(]I
o
!'l
P
0>
o
i-.>
0>
!-"
:...
N
(]I
:".
N
~
p
w
o
0>
o
i-.>
--..---------....-----------------------'-----------------.---------
:t
~
Co
~
0,
gl8l~
io Co
:g 181 ~
io :".
(]I
!'l
!'1
o
r :".
o
:c
-I
o
o
o
U
p
......
(]I
c" 181 io
o
00
Co
p
p
o
i-.>
o
o
o
o
o
o
p
o
o
~
;!l 1t~. ~ ~ ~ ~,ffi 181 ~ ~ 181 ~ ~
.00 S ~ ~ 0> S ~ S 0
-1'-""00 ...... N 00 W W W~l\lII
\~ l!loI !J' !Xl 0 !'l .j>. !Xl -!" ;-- -,- ~
. ~ \._.__-=:._--~._.- :".._._~._--~--~-~_._~-~~_._-_.~_.-
(]I -I'- ...... (]I ...... 0> 0> (]I (,.l
N W -I'- N ~ 0> (]I
Co :". U 0, U :". :... c" U
(ll
0,
N
o
0,
!-"
W
:".
p
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
N
o
Co
N
~.
o(/)
00
Z
o
i-.>
o
i-.>
o
i:.l
o
i:.l
o
i:.l
o
i:.l
o
i-.>
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
i:.l
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
181
O$:)>$:$:)>IUlIJ COS::)>S::S::)>:CNG) ~~~c~g~g
o o~ S'o ~ 00J(3 ::] 0 o~ :;'0 Iii O(]l;o o 3<0 ::] 0
(I) x .. -. x ...,:::0 -0 ~~~ 3::3'~'a :!!w~ co ~oo.:::;;1
-~~3 ~3'.g N-g (I) .., <~-'c 3<0 I::::I-c ~=g- 3!t l7i
00::]::]3CCDOO CD _'" {JO 0 (/)-1'-
< :J':J C C (I) 0 -. ;+ 0..., 3 ~::;. ::] 0 -en(;i' ....s::o
o 33 z:J,< )>r+- 000 CIl'-"-':C I
rCll CDOO 1D
..., -lUl .,,~ !'! g: ~.,,~ . ~
)> r ::] _.0.., r I
r :J' 0 CIlOO (]I ~
~ ON II ~ <reO
(I) Z;--ZZoooO;-I1I
N ., ~:g~~o~~~~ 11"'30 I
G) 0 0 G) ~ Z 0; :--J 1\ -. 0 ."
..., ~zzo,J:>.,J:>.~ ..., 0(1) (,.l0;~9.0 g
0 0: r-O 0 .. . ~ (bO
-0 co....................... ~. 0 Gl~ r+- g. en.
::r (X))>)>o,J:>.co)> r+- 3 ::]0
o' Z c. .j>.
0 0 ~ 0 3 0
c
(J) r ::] g-~g
0 fT1 00 r+-
:;' .., r+-O
0 (J) ;:l! <0 _r+-
C (1)_.
(I) 0 ;;r 3-0 ~ ~
<ll g'~ 9:
.0' ,
;;r ::;"--
r+- CDec
(1)33 '-.)
II -'CD
-I'- ::]::]
~Q.cn
;:ll 0>'" .
CD-o
N 11 ~
0 .j>.Q
(]I 3
00-0
-J>..
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
RESOLUTIONS
8
90
....
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the attached resolution approving procedures for private activity revenue
bond financina.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approval of the attached resolution approving Procedures
For Private Activitv Revenue Bond FinancinQ.
I II. BACKGROUND I
Under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, the City of Richfield has
authority to issue revenue bonds or notes to attract or promote economically sound
industry and commerce to the City, including the development of facilities by
qualified organizations.
As part of this authority, the City of Richfield has adopted certain guidelines to aid
the City in the issuance of revenue bonds or notes. The City Council had originally
adopted "Guidelines for the Issuance of Industrial Revenue Bonds for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota," in October 1980, modified in November 1983, November
2002, and updated most recently as July 2004.
.
As the City has been approached again to assist in this type of financing it is
appropriate to forthe City Council to review its guidelines for the issuance of private
activity bonds.
03272007 Private Activity Guidelines
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
. Under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651, the City of Richfield has
authority to issue revenue bonds.
. In addition, under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, the City is
authorized to issue housing revenue bonds to finance multi-family
residential housing projects for low and moderate income persons and
elderly persons.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. It is important to review and revise procedures and guidelines for the
issuance of private activity revenue bond financing in order to keep
them current.
. The City is being approached by @ Home Apartments (the Borrower),
concerning the issuance of this type of financing. The Borrower is
requesting that the City issue tax-exempt private activity revenue
bonds and then the borrower will loan the proceeds from the sale of
the bonds to an entity to be formed by the borrower. The proceeds will
be applied to the acquisition and rehabilitation of Gateway Pointe
apartments in Richfield.
. A public hearing on the issuance of private activity revenue bonds is
preliminarily scheduled for the April 24, 2007 City Council meeting.
. Staff will be discussing with the applicant prior to the public hearing,
best management policies and gathering more detailed information on
the planned rehabilitation work.
I C. FINANCIAL
The proposed guidelines provide that:
. The City will receive a non-refundable application fee in the amount of
$2,500, which must be submitted with the application.
. The applicant will be charged an annual administrative fee in the
amount of 1/Sth of1% (.125%) of the outstanding principal balance of
the bonds.
. The City is to be reimbursed and held harmless for and from any out-
of-pocket expenses related to the tax exempt financing, including, but
not limited to, legal fees, financial analyst fees, bond counsel fees,
staff costs, and any deposits or application fees required under state
law in order to secure allocation of bonding authority.
. This type of bonds would be issued in the City's name, but not be a
charge against the City's general credit or taxing powers. The City
would act as a conduit for the financing of a project. However, it does
not create any financial liability to the City.
. The issuance of these bonds do not affect the City's $10,000,000
Bank Qualified Debt limit.
I D. LEGAL I
. Kennedy & Graven has prepared and reviewed the proposed
guidelines and application.
I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I
. Forgo approving the attached resolution and not proceed with the review and
revision of the procedures for private activity financing.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution
. Procedure for Application.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None.
~-I
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROCEDURES FOR
PRIVATE ACITIVTY REVENUE BOND FINANCING
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is authorized under various provIsions of
Minnesota Statutes to issue bonds the proceeds of which are loaned to private entities,
referred to as "private activity bonds;" and
WHEREAS, the Council has adopted certain "Guidelines for the Issuance of
Industrial Revenue Bonds for the City of Richfield, Minnesota," originally approved in
October, 1980, modified in November 1983; modified in November 2002, and modified
most recently in July 2004, and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined to revise it's guidelines for the issuance of
private activity bonds (which term includes industrial revenue bonds), and to that end has
reviewed a document titled "Procedure for Application to the City of Richfield, Minnesota
for Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing," referred to as the "Private Activity Bond
Proced ures."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
as follows:
1. The Council approves the Private Activity Procedures in the form on file in City
Hall.
2. The Private Activity Procedures supersede in all respects the prior Guidelines
for the Issuance of Industrial Revenue Bonds, and are effective for any private
activity bonds issued after the date of approval of this resolution.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
<6--~
PROCEDURE
FOR
APPLICATION TO
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
FOR
PRIVATE ACTIVITY REVENUE BOND FINANCING
Effective as of March 27,2007
Finance Director
. City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
SJB-221408vl
RC145-501
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
Part VII
SJB-221408vl
RC145-501
~,3
PROCEDURE FOR APPLICATION
TO THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR
PRIV ATE ACTIVITY REVENUE BOND FINANCING
Table of Contents
Page
General.................................................................................................................... .1
Guidelines............................................................................................................... .2
Miscellaneous Matters.............................................................................................4
Application for Tax-Exempt Financing
(Commercial, Industrial or Health Care) .............. .... ........ .............. ..... .............. ......6
Application for Tax-Exempt Financing
(Multi - Fanlily Housing)...........................................................................................9
Addendum to Application........................... ................ ........ .... .......... ....... .... ..........12
Indemnification Letter of Agreement ..... ................ ............. ........ ................... .......13
~-~
PART I
GENERAL
Under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.152 to 469.1651 (the "Industrial Development Act"), the City of Richfield has
authority to issue revenue bonds or notes to attract or promote economically sound industry and
commerce to the City, including the development of facilities by qualified 501 (c)(3)
organizations.
Under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Housing Act") the City is authorized to issue
housing revenue bonds to finance multi-family residential housing projects for low and moderate
income persons and elderly persons. Projects must be consistent with the City's Housing Plan
and must be embodied in a Housing Program as these terms are defined in the Housing Act.
The Council is aware that such financing for certain private activities may be of benefit to the
City and will consider requests for tax exempt financing subject to these Guidelines. The
Council considers tax exempt financing to be a privilege, not a right.
It is the judgment of the Council that tax exempt financing is to be used on a selective basis to
encourage certain development that offers a benefit to the City as a whole, including significant
employment and housing opportunities. It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the
benefit to the City, both in writing and at the required public hearing. The applicant should
understand that although approval may have been granted by the City for the issuance of
financing for a similar project or a similar debt structure, that is not a basis upon which approval
will be granted. Each application will be judged on the merits of the project as it relates to the
public purposes of the Housing Act or the Industrial Development Act and the benefit to the City
at the time the request for financing is being considered.
1
~-5
PART II
GUIDELINES
1. The Council will consider tax exempt financing for manufacturing and health care
facilities, and other facilities operated by qualified 501(c)(3) organizations, under the
Industrial Development Act; and housing projects under the Housing Act. An applicant
for tax exempt financing pursuant to the Industrial Development Act must submit to the
City the application contained in Part IV of these Guidelines. An applicant for tax
exempt financing, pursuant to the Housing Act, must submit to the City the application
contained in Part V ofthese Guidelines.
2. Projects must be compatible with the overall development plans and objectives of the
City and comply with the zoning and land use regulations of the City.
3. An application will not be considered by the Council until tentative City Code findings
and requirements have been made with respect to zoning, building plans, platting, streets,
and utility services. The application must be accompanied by the addendum contained in
Part VI of these Guidelines and must provide information as to the project's need for
municipal services including, but not limited to, street improvements, water and sewer
services, and police and fire protection.
4. The project must be a positive benefit to the City. The project must be of a nature that
the City wishes to attract, or an existing business which the City wishes to retain or
expand within the City, considering employment opportunities, incentive for further
development, impact on City services, and support for the industrial, commercial or
health care operations currently located in the City. A housing project must provide
significant housing opportunities for low and moderate income persons or the elderly.
5. The Council will, if requested, grant an applicant a pre-application review. The purpose
of the pre-application review is to inform applicants of the possibility of rejection or the
possible bases for such rejection. The fact that the project is not rejected at the pre-
application stage is not to be construed as approval of the project or as an indication that
the project will be approved upon formal request to the Council. Requests for tax exempt
financing may be rejected by the City whether or not the project was submitted to a
pre-application review and regardless of the outcome or recommendation of that pre-
application review.
A request for pre-application review must be in writing, addressed to the City Finance
Director, and set forth the name of the project, the type of project intended and the name,
address and telephone number of the person who will be representing the applicant at the
pre-application review, together with such additional information as the applicant desires
to submit.
2
3/~
6. The applicant must select a qualified financial adviser or underwriter to assist the
applicant in preparing all necessary application documents and materials. The financial
adviser will submit a letter that establishes the financial feasibility of the project.
Applications may, in the alternative, include a signed letter from a responsible financial
institution indicating that the project is economically feasible and viable and stating that
bonds can be successfully sold for the project or that an individual or institution intends
to purchase all of the bonds.
The applicant must receive approval from the appropriate state agencies, secure financing
and commence construction within one year of the date of the resolution giving
preliminary approval to the project or the housing program. Upon application, the
Council may approve an extension of the preliminary approval.
The City will appoint bond counsel for the bond issue, which will normally be the City's
regularly retained bond counsel.
7. Pursuant to the Industrial Development Act and the Housing Act, consideration of an
application for tax exempt financing must be done at a public hearing held by the
Council. Modifications to the project after the public hearing and preliminary approval
must be consistent with the scope of the project as proposed at the time of preliminary
approval.
8. The City is to be reimbursed and held harmless for and from any out-of-pocket expenses
related to the tax exempt financing including, but not limited to, legal fees, financial
analyst fees, bond counsel fees, the City staffs expenses in connection with the
application, and any deposits or application fees required under state law in order to
secure allocation of bonding authority. The applicant must execute a letter to the City
undertaking to pay all such expenses. A form of the required letter is set forth as Part VII
of these Guidelines. A non-refundable application fee in the amount of $2,500 must be
included with the submission of the application.
9. Prior to closing and delivery of the bonds for the project, the applicant must pay, or
commit to pay an annual administrative fee in the amount of 1/8th of 1% (.125%) of the
outstanding principal balance of the bonds. At the City's discretion, the bond documents
may provide that the administrative fee will be paid in a lump sum at closing on the
bonds, or annually or semiannually at the times specified in the bond documents. The
administrative fees required by this paragraph will be adjusted at or paid prior to delivery
of the bonds if necessary to ensure compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and
regulations.
10. Applications for financing must be made on the forms attached to these Guidelines. In
addition, the applicant must furnish a description of the project, a plot plan, elevation of
proposed buildings, landscape, lighting, and site preparation, together with a brief
description of applicant and the proposed financing in such form as required at the time
of application.
3
Cl/1
11. The Council may, in its sole discretion, impose conditions exceeding those required
under the City building code in respect to exterior building materials, landscaping,
signage lighting, and such other aspects as the Council may consider appropriate on a
case-by-case basis.
12. The Council may, in its sole discretion, withdraw its preliminary approval of a project
any time if in its judgment the purposes of the Act will not be served by going forward
with the project and its financing.
4
~-~
PART III
MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
1. Ratings. The City will give its most favorable consideration to proposed tax exempt
bond issues that have the same rating as the City's obligations by Moody's Investment
Service or Standard & Poor's Corporation. Issues carrying lower ratings or non-rated
issues may be sold only to institutional or other investors on a private placement basis
and must be in denominations of at least $100,000. The Council may depart from this
guideline when in its judgment the project is of a level of merit and public purpose to
justify the departure; and in case of such a departure the Council must state its reasons
therefor in the resolution awarding the sale of the bonds.
2. Refundings. The Council will normally approve the refunding of a tax-exempt issue but
only upon a showing by the applicant of (i) substantial debt service savings, (ii) the
removal of bond covenants significantly impairing the financial feasibility of the project,
or (iii) both (i) and (ii). In the case of refundings of bonds for which the administrative
fee listed in paragraph 9 of Part II have been paid in full, no new administrative fees are
required; but the non-refundable application fee must be paid together with all City
expenses in excess of that fee. If the administrative fees for the refunded bonds are not
paid in full upon closing on the refunding. bonds, such fees must continue to be paid for
the refunding bonds.
In the case of refundings of bonds where no administrative fee has been paid, the
administrative fees listed in paragraph 9 of Part II must be paid. The application form is
to be appropriately modified.
3. Subsequent Proceedings. Where changes to the underlying documents or credit facilities
of outstanding bond issues are to be made and require Council action (including changes
that are a "deemed reissuance" under Internal Revenue Service regulations), no
administrative fee is charged but a non-refundable fee of $2,500 must be deposited with
the City to cover administrative costs. No formal application form is required.
4. Issue by Another Political Subdivision. The City will consider requests for tax exempt
financing of projects in the City by other political subdivisions. In these cases the non-
refundable application fee must be paid and all procedures through the approval of the
preliminary resolution followed. No administrative fee is charged.
In the situation where another political subdivision is issuing tax exempt financing for a
project in a city other that the City of Richfield for a qualified 501(c)(3) organization, and
that organization has a facility in the City of Richfield, the City is considered a host city
and under federal and state law must undertake certain steps and the following will apply:
State Law
. The execution of a joint powers agreement between the City and the organization.
5
~,-9
.
Federal Law
. A public hearing must be held in each jurisdiction where a facility is located.
. Notice of public hearing must be published in the official newspaper.
. The City Council of Richfield must adopt a resolution approving the project and
financing.
In addition, the City will charge the organization a fee of $500 to cover miscellaneous
staff time and administrative time.
The organization will be responsible for all publication and legal costs and any
miscellaneous out of pocket costs.
There will be no annual administrative fee charged.
5. City Contact. Initial contacts about tax-exempt financing are made by contacting:
Finance Director
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
6. Deadlines. The Council conducts all tax exempt financing matters at regularly scheduled
Council meetings held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. Documents for
Council consideration must be at the City office on the Tuesday preceding the next
regular Council meeting at which the matter is to be considered. In the case of a publicly
offered bond, issue the documents, when submitted, may specify a maximum price and
maximum effective interest rate if prices and rates have not yet been established.
6
3/JD
PART IV
APPLICATION FOR
TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING
(Manufacturing, Health Care or Qualified Other Nonprofit)
1. APPLICANT
a. Business Name:
b. Business Address:
c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc.):
d. Authorized Representative:
e. Principal contact person and telephone number:
2. PURPOSE OF REQUESTED FINANCING:
a. New Facility (describe):
b. Expansion (describe):
c. Refunding (attach explanatory letter)
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL PRODUCTS,
ETC.:
4. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS: (Not required for refunding)
Land
Building
Equipment
Architectural, Engineering
Costs ofIssuance
Capitalized mterest,
including discount
Other
$
Total Financing Requested
$
7
~/ \ )
5.
6.
AMOUNT OF FINANCING REQUESTED: $
TYPE OF FINANCING PROPOSED:
Bonds Tax Exempt Mortgage
Expected Term of Financing Years
Security:
Mortgage
Letter of Credit
Guaranty (third party)
Guaranty (personal)
Unsecured
Other (specify)
7. BUSINESS PROFILE: (Not required for refunding)
a. Is the business located in the City of Richfield now?
b. Number of employees in City:
1) Before this project:
2) After this project:
c. Approximate annual sales:
d. Length of time in business:
Length oftime in business in City:
e. Do you have facilities in other locations? If so, where?
8
L % of proj ect costs)
8' 11-
8. NAMES OF:
a. Underwriter (name and contact person):
b. Corporate Counsel:
c. Underwriter's Counsel:
9. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
a. Construction start:
b. Construction completion:
10. Attachments:
a. Project description':
b. Draft application to Department of Trade and Economic Development - together
with necessary attachments
c. Initial application fee
d. Indemnification Letter of Agreement
I certify that the information provided above contains no misrepresentations, omISSIons or
concealments of material facts and that the information given is true and complete to the best of
my knowledge. I have been furnished a copy of the Procedure for Application to the City of
Richfield for Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing and is aware of its content and agree to
be bound by its terms and the terms of the indemnification letter.
Signature
Date
Title
9
~>l)
PART V
APPLICATION FOR TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING
(Multi-Family Housing)
DATE OF APPLICATION:
APPLICANT:
CONTACT PERSON:
TITLE:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE (~
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT INFORMATION
RENT
Efficiency
One Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Three Bedroom
Parking (included in rent!
not included in rent)
$
$
$
$
$
$
Laundry
10
UNITS
3-1+
Utilities included in monthly rent:
OPERATING EXPENSES
% of Gross (Annual)
TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ DEVELOPER EQUITY: $
DEBT SERVICE: $ *HARD COSTS: $
LAND VALUE: $ SOFT COSTS: $
*(Hard Costs are all project costs the IRS has determined to be eligible items for depreciation.)
ANTICIPATED INTEREST RATES:
. AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE:
%
-Year Amortization Schedule
If the project were conventionally financed, what interest rate would you expect to pay?
%
SALES ASSUMPTION:
DEPRECIATION METHOD:
How many years do you plan to
hold the property before you
sell?
years. At what percent do you
feel the value ofthe project
will appreciate?
Years:
Type:
Amount of Total Basis: $
EQUIPMENT:
$
ofproject cost is for equipment (e.g., washers/dryers)
ANTICIPATED INCREASES:
ANTICIPATED VACANCY RATE:
Revenue: _ % per year
First Year:
%
Expenses:
% per year
After First Year:
%
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Anticipated construction commencement date:
11
~ ,- (5'
Anticipated construction completion date:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
I certify that the information provided above contains no misrepresentations, omISSIOns or
concealments of material facts and that the information given is true and complete to the best of
my knowledge. I have been furnished a copy of the Procedure for Application to the City of
Richfield for Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing and is aware of its content and agree to
be bound by its terms and the terms of the indemnification letter.
Signature
Date
Title
12
~-llP
PART VI
ADDENDUM TO APPLICATIONS
The following items must be attached to each application:
APPENDIX A
A brief description of the organizational structure of Applicant, including parent subsidiary and
affiliate organizations (if applicant is other than an individual).
APPENDIX B
Statement of Applicant's business history, including any multi-family rental projects.
APPENDIX C
The name, address, and telephone number of:
1. The Applicant's legal counsel
2. The Applicant's accountant
3. The architect ofthe proposed Project
4. The engineer ofthe proposed Project
5. The general contractor ofthe proposed Project
APPENDIX D
1. Present ownership of the proposed Project site and Applicant's interest therein.
2. Present zoning of the Project site and a description of what city land use approvals are
needed for this project.
3. The projected number of new employees to be added to the Applicant's permanent work
force because ofthe Project (for Commercial, Industrial or Health Care only).
4. Other financing attempted or available to the Project including any interim financing.
5. Statement regarding whether or not this project has all required city approvals. If the
project does not have all of the required approvals, list the approvals still needed and a
tentative time schedule.
APPENDIX E
Indemnification Letter of Agreement.
APPENDIX F
Proforma Analysis of the Project
13
~-r1
PART VII
INDEMNIFICATION LETTER OF AGREEMENT
The Mayor ofthe City of Richfield
and Members ofthe City Council
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
RE: Application of
of Richfield
for Tax Exempt Revenue Bond Financing by the City
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
This letter of agreement is given by , a under the
laws of Minnesota ("Applicant") as required by the City of Richfield, Minnesota in connection
with its consideration of an application for tax exempt revenue bond financing for the project
described in the application.
Applicant agrees as follows:
1. Applicant agrees to payor reimburse the City for any and all costs and expenses which the
City may incur in connection with its consideration of the project and the granting of tax
exempt revenue bond financing therefor, whether or not the project is preliminarily
approved by the City, whether or not the project is approved by the State of Minnesota,
whether or not revenue bond financing is finally approved by the City, whether or not the
bonds are issued and sold, and whether or not the project is carried to completion.
2. Applicant agrees to indemnify and hold the City, its officers, employees and agents
harmless against any and all losses, claims, damages, expenses or liabilities, including
attorneys fees incurred in their defense, to which the City, its officers, employees and
agents may become subject in connection with the City's consideration, issuance or sale of
the bonds for Applicant's project and the carrying out of the transactions contemplated by
this agreement and any resolutions adopted, or agreements executed by the City in
connection with the issuance of its bonds for this project.
3. Applicant hereby releases the City, its officers, agents and employees from any claims,
causes of action, losses, damages, or liabilities which it may have against the City, its
officers, agents, and employees or which it may incur in connection with: the City's
consideration of the application for industrial development revenue bond financing for
Applicant's project; the failure of the City, in its discretion, to issue tax-exempt revenue
bonds for Applicant's project; the issuance and sale of the bonds; the construction of the
project; or any other matter or thing of any type or nature whatsoever which may arise in
connection with the foregoing.
14
~--\2>
4. Applicant is aware of the City's application and administrative fee structure for tax exempt
financing and agrees and covenants that all such fees will be paid in the amount and at the
times required.
(Applicant)
Dated:
By
Its
15
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
OTHER BUSINESS
9
91
......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
DERICK ANDERSON, CIVIL
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
13"
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of award of contract for the Richfield Parkway and 66th Street Roadway .
Improvement Project and authorization to hire WSB & Associates to provide construction
inspection services reQuired to complete the project.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion:
. Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award contract to Eureka
Construction in the amount of $ 1,717,457.48 for the Richfield
Parkway and 66th Stree~ Improvement Project, and
. Approve the purchase of engineering serVices from WSB &
Associates to provide services required to complete the project.
I II. BACKGROUND I
As part of the developer's agreement for the Cedar Point Commons Project, the
City agreed to build a new intersection on 66th Street that will serve as the main
entrance to the new shopping center.
The improvement consists of a two-lane roundabout to serve as the main entrance
to the Cedar Point Commons development. The new intersection also will serve as
the first stage in development of a new north-south arterial to replace the Cedar
0327 Richfield Parkway Roundabout
Avenue frontage road. As such, the proposed improvements include
accommodations for pedestrians and bicycles en route to Taft Park, as well as east-
and westbound bus pullouts.
Bids for work to be performed under City direction were opened on March 19, 2007.
Eureka Construction was the lowest, responsible bidder (bid tabulations are
attached).
The City requested proposals from three engineering firms for the construction
services needed for the project. Construction services include inspection, surveying,
preparation of change orders and pay estimates, and preparation of as-builts upon
the completion of the work. WSB & Associates was selected based on their
experience with roundabouts for the construction services portion of the project.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. Council approval is required for expenditures over $25,000.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. According to the City's agreement with Ryan, the roundabout needs to
be open for traffic on August 1,2007.
. WSB was selected as the design engineer for the roundabout project
and has developed a relationship with Ryan personnel active on the
redevelopment project. WSB staff has completed the design and
inspection of a two-lane roundabout recently built in the Twin Cities
area.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. Seven bids were received for construction; the low bid was
$1,717,457.48. The project is still within budget estimates.
. The total estimated cost for the construction administration is
$133,864.
. Project funding will come from special assessment bonds, the City's
Municipal State Aid Street funds (gas tax revenues), and the
Metropolitan Airports Commission.
I D. LEGAL I
. The City has made commitments to Ryan Companies to provide a
new street with an upgraded intersection.
. WSB & Associates is included in the engineering consultant pool and
this work would be completed as a work order.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. Council could direct staff not to construct these improvements. However, the
City is obligated under its agreement with the Ryan Companies to build a
new intersection as the main entrance to the Cedar Point Commons Project.
IV.
.
ATTACHMENTS
. Bid minutes and tabulation.
. Project layout.
. WSB Work Plan for construction inspection services.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. None anticipated.
CJ-I
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
March 19, 2007
10:00 a.m.
66th Street and Richfield
Parkway Roundabout
City Bid No. 07-05
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Deborah Guiher, Deputy City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of
the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for 66th Street and Richfield
Parkway Roundabout, as advertised in the official newspaper on February 22 and
March 1,2007, and the Construction Bulletin on February 26 and March 5, 2007.
Present:
Deborah Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
Tom Foley, Transportation Engineer
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Bidder's Name Bid Bond Addendums Total
5% Base Bid
Arcon Construction Company, Inc Provided Acknowledged $1,802,885.07
C. S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. Provided Acknowledged $2,240,193.53
Eureka Construction, Inc. Provided Acknowledged $1,717,457.48
Max Steininger, Inc. Provided Acknowledged $1,872,229.84
Pember Companies, Inc. Provided Acknowledged $1,839,787.90
Progressive Contractors, Inc. (PC I) Provided Acknowledged $1,791,675.07
Veit & Company, Inc. Provided Acknowledged $1,920,641.44*
.
*denotes corrected figure
The Deputy City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at
the March 27 City Council Meeting.
Deborah Guiher
Deputy City Clerk
g/~
PROJECT:
66th Stre t and Richfield Parkway Roundabout
S.A.P. No. 157-020-024
City Project No. 41410
LOCATION:
City of Richfield, MN
WSB PROJECT NO.:
1301-04
BIDS OPENED:
Monday, March 19,2007 at 10:00 a.m.
Contractor
Bid Security
(5%)
Addendums
Received
(Nos. 1 and 2)
Grand Total Bid
Eureka Construction, Inc. X
2 Progressive Contractors, Inc. X
3 Arcon Construction Company, Inc. X
4 Pember Companies, Inc. X
5 Max Steininger, Inc. X
6 Veit & Company, Inc. X
7 C. S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
$1,717,457.48
$1,791,675.07
$1,802,885.07
$1,839,787.90
$1,872,229.84
$2,240,193.53
Engineer's Opinion of Cost
1,670,070.85*
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on March 19,2007.
Jupe G. Hale, PE, Project Manager
_ Denotes corrected figure.
* 0 notes revised engineer's estimate with updated lighting costs.
K:\01301-04lAdmlnlConstruction Admln11301-04 Bid Tab Summary NEW.xls
Q,-3
Date Printed, 2/6/2007
~ ~:;;;3(6;0~;:*)a;~PRi~h;';i;;;;;;;atlveS\F1nal_LaYaut.dQn
. Intersection Improvements (Roundabout)
City of Richfield, Minnesota
FINAL LAYOUT
:::I
>>
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
::zI
=-
=II
=II
:II
:II.
.
=-
:II
=II
=II
=II
:11
::II
:a
:II
::&I
=-
a
I
:a
=-
..
..
Understanding through
our Experience
.
WSB
& ..h.wJ(:iuks. {nc
Of ::-~_
Construction of a roundabout is, in many ways, similar to typical municipal
intersection construction. However, construction of the 66th Street and
Richfield Parkway intersection has factors and a history that makes it unique
from other municipal construction, unique even from other roundabouts. By
selecting WSB and Associates to perform construction services on 66th Street
and Richfield Parkway, the City will benefit from not only our experience in
municipal construction and roundabout construction, but more importantly,
from our in-depth knowledge and understanding of the decisions that shaped
the ultimate design of this particular roundabout.
The roundabout, in conjunction with Cedar Point Commons, is the cornerstone for
the redevelopment of the Cedar Avenue Corridor. WSB's transportation planners
and design staff have been involved with this area of Richfield since the first
drafts of redevelopment concepts were introduced as Metropolitan Airports
Commission funding became available. We understand the significance of this
area for the City and its residents, and how its success impacts the City in the
future.
The first major step in the process is the Cedar Point Commons development
and the construction of the roundabout. Our understanding of how the
roundabout was designed in conjunction with Cedar Point Commons will allow
us to make good decisions that fit the plan should unexpected problems arise.
With the eyes of residents and City leadership focused on the project, its ability
to meet the construction schedule and minimize impact to area businesses and
homeowners will be critical. WSB's informed decision-making, from contract
management to observation and staking, will be drive success in these key
areas.
The City is under contractuali,obligation with the developer for the project. The
City has entered into a development agreement with Ryan Companies as the
developer of Cedar Point Commons to meet specific project requirements and
milestone dates. The consequences of failing to meet those requirements will
result in monetary impact to the City. WSB's involvement in the drafting of the
agreement, including meeting with Ryan and review of draft language, allows
us to not only uniquely understand the City's obligations, but also Ryan
Companies' contractual obligations and responsibilities. An example of this
understanding has recently presented itself in dealing with private utilities, an
instance in which Ryan Companies have not met their obligation to have
conflicts resolved prior to 2007 construction.
Our presence during agreement development gives WSB a position of strength
from which to defend the City's rights and insist on Ryan Companies'
compliance with their duties. That position cannot be gained by simply reading
the contract once it has been signed.
Roundabout safety and capacity is tied to it3 intricate geometry, it3 signing, and
the pavement markings. In an ideal world, any set of construction plans would
be constructed exactly the way they are drawn on paper. But in the real world,
unexpected and unforeseen field conditions alter the final product. WSB not
only has roundabout design and construction experience, we have planned and
engineered this project from its earliest stages. We know the geometry inside
and out, know where the critical geometric points are, are well-versed in
roundabout signing and marking standards, and understand the line between
helpful additional driver information and driver sensory overload. Simply put,
- 1 -
..
..
~
~
o
c....
t:r:l
(J
-l
C
Z
o
t:r:l
~
C/)
-l
~
o
l--<
Z
Cl
..
..
r
~
=:II
=-
.
=II
=II
=II
=-
=II
:II
=II
=II
=II
=II
=II
:31
t
:II
::II
..
..
.
WSB
&,'fno(jut(...../lfc
Cl--(P
our knowledge of when a proposed field change will or will not affect the
roundabout's operation will be a crucial factor in managing its successful
construction.
In municipal construction, the right combination of traffk safety, traffic capacity,
and business/resident access defines project success. Upon completion of a
municipal project, the answer to the question "Was it a successful project?"
rarely includes quality pavement, good pipe installation, or proper sign
placement. More often, short-term project success is judged on fewer resident
complaints, fewer traffic delays, and minimized impacts to adjacent businesses
and residents. As the prime contractor is not guaranteed to be attuned to these
factors, the construction management team must be. WSB has extensive
experience in the municipal construction realm, which translates to appropriate
priority given to not only proper construction materials and techniques, which
will ensure long-term success, but to daily impacts of the project on businesses
and residents, which will define the project upon its completion. We already
know many of the affected parties from our public involvement during design,
and have established a positive image as someone they can work with. We are
also sensitive to and understand the neighborhood's concern with traffic
increases and circulation in their neighborhood.
The 66th Street and Richfield Parkway project will be built with materials and
methods everyone is famili3;r with - bituminous roads, concrete curb and gutter,
poly-preform pavement markings. But understanding how to install these
components in light of the project's past history, its present design parameters,
and neighborhood issues, along with its future implications for the community,
will be the determining factor for project success.
"
- 2-
..
..
'"'0
;Ai
o
'-
tTJ
(J
-j
C
z
U
tTJ
;:0
(j)
>-3
>-
Z
U
>-<
Z
CJ
..
..
q-]
=-
t
..
..
Overall Approach
The approach to the construction of the 66t11 Street and Richfield Parkway
project must begin and end with the concept of successful project delivery.
WSB's proposed team brings many strengths to the construction phase that will
ensure timely delivery of a quality project in a manner that minimizes impacts
to the surrounding area.
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
=-
=II
=-
=-
=II
=II
=II
Project Ownership
WSB is proud of the work we do and proud to be associated with our many
successful projects. Because of this, we take personal and professional
ownership in "our" projects. This will be even more evident on the 66th Street
and Richfield Parkway project, as we have been involved in the project in both
the planning and final design phases. It is this vested interest that focuses or
efforts oil delivery of the constructed project.
Project Knowledge
Because of our background with the project, we know the critical issues, both
those stated in the development agreement and those that are not. Because of
the schedule implications, for example, WSB's construction manager and
observer will be focused on contractual items such as schedule submittals,
regular updates, and interim completion dates. Another example is the
presence of the concurrent construction of the Cedar Point Commons site. WSB
has discussed the delivery and access needs with Ryan Companies and has
already devised the project schedule so that both projects can proceed smoothly.
~~{w6are;pmpmiti~:.:11<:~!~~~.~eSi~ mafi~~f;;fti~.ft~\~~.~~i";S~~l~}
1'lh~"J;jf)i~~'1i\~_'~erttns ttE!Sfgn .. ..... ...... constructIOn
: manager from a previouslyccompleted two-lane rotin Monticello, will
jf~,~.~ilClble to consult and a~sist as necessary for the project.
=-
=II
=-
31
=-
=-
=-
:II
:II
=-
=-
=-
.
a
31
=-
Team Experience
WSB has extensive experience in municipal construction. Our proposed team,
including construction manager, observer and staking crew have all completed
several municipal projects. Additionally, our team has experience with
roundabout construction, having recently completed a two-lane roundabout in
the 2006 construction season. Utilizing the same observer and staking crew
from that project will allow WSB to anticipate upcoming issues and staking
needs so that they can be addressed without negatively impacting the
construction.
Existing Relationships with Residents and Businesses
Through the public information process, WSB project staff is identified with the
project. In many cases, our staff has established relationships with affected
parties. We know them and understand their issues, especially as it relates to
their properties, their access, and the amount of traffic in their neighborhood.
These relationships will give the City the greatest opportunity to deliver the
project in a positive manner and with minimum adverse impact.
.
WSB
-7-
&4uodull':\',ln(
..
..
'"d
~
o
c.....
m
n
-3
>
""Cl
""Cl
;X'.1
o
>-
n
::c
..
..
Cj-~
CI
It
=-
=-
:II
=-
fII
..
..
2007 Fee Schedule
Principal
Associate
Sr. Project Manager
Project Manager II
Project Manager/Engineering Specialist III
Registered Engineer/Registered Land Surveyor/Engineering Specialist II
Project Engineer/Engineering Specialist I/Sr. Construction Observer
Engineering Technician V /Construction Observer/Grad Engineer
Engineering Technician IV/Scientist III
Engineering Technician III/Scientist II
Engineering Technician II/Scientist I
Engineering Technician I
Office Technician II
Office Technician I
Survey (Two-Person Crew/GPS Crew)
Survey (Three-Person Crew/Expanded GPS Crew)
Costs associated with word processing, vehicle mileage, cell phones, reproduction of common
correspondence and mailing are included in the above hourly rates.
Reimbursable expenses include costs associated with plan, specification and report reproduction,
permit fee, delivery cost, etc.
Rate Schedule is adjusted annually.
...
WSB
- 10-
..
..
&_'hH:>C;~l/l.s.lr/('
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
OTHER BUSINESS
10
92
......
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER
NAME, TInE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
^--
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consent to the withdrawal of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered as legal counsel with respect to
the 66th Street and Portland Avenue condemnation matter and authorize the City Manager to
retain substitute counsel.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Consent to the withdrawal of Kennedy & Graven,
Chartered as the City's legal counsel with respect to Hennepin
County District Court File No. 07-789 and authorize and direct the City
Manager to retain interim substitute counsel pending City Council
approval of the substitute counsel.
I II. BACKGROUND I
. On December 12, 2006, the City Council authorized the City Attorney to initiate
condemnation proceedings for the acquisition of right of way from four property
owners for the 66th Street and Portland Avenue intersection project. The action
has been commenced as Hennepin County District Court, File No. 07-789.
. The City Attorney has informed the City that the law firm has a conflict of interest
with respect to the pending condemnation matter.
. After consultation with City staff, both the law firm and staff agree that in the
interests of efficiently handling the case, it is in the City's best interest that
Kennedy & Graven withdraw from handling the case and that substitute counsel
be retained.
03271egalcounsel
. The City Manager will retain substitute counsel on an interim basis, and the City
Council will be asked to approve the substitute counsel's contract at the April 10,
2007 City Council meeting or to provide direction to City staff regarding the
selection of different legal counsel. The interim substitute counsel will remain in
place until the City Council has approved the selection of substitute counsel.
. The potential conflict of interest exists only with respect to the parcels that are
under condemnation in Case No. 07-789. Kennedy & Graven will continue to
represent the City on acquisitions for other parcels.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. It is in the City's interest to have the pending condemnation action
handled efficiently, without duplication of efforts and free of any
potential conflict of interest with its legal counsel.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. Kennedy & Graven has informed the City staff that it wishes to
withdraw as legal counsel on the pending condemnation case,
effective upon the City's retention of substitute counsel.
. Because the condemnation case is pending, it is important to retain
substitute counsel at the earliest possible date.
I C. FINANCIAL I
. Kennedy & Graven will coordinate the transfer of the file to the
selected substitute counsel at no charge to the City.
I D. LEGAL I
. The substitution of counsel will allow the pending condemnation
matter to proceed without delay.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
. None.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Letter from the City Attorney.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. Legal counsel.
10-1
CORRINE H. THOMSON
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9217
Email: cthomson@kennedy-graven.com
MSBA Board Certified Real Property Specialist
March 21, 2007
Steven L. Devich
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
RE: Condemnation Action for 6rJh and Portland Avenue Project
Dear Mr. Devich:
For the reasons given below, I am writing to inform you that our firm wishes to withdraw as legal
counsel to the City with respect to Hennepin County District Court File No. 07-789.
As I have previously informed you, our law firm has a conflict of interest in this matter. Our firm
has been independent advised the firm may ethically continue in its representation, under conditions
that included the retention of independent. counsel in certain circumstances. I have discussed this
matter with City staff, however, and we have concluded that the use of independent counsel in this
fashion could be inefficient. It is both my opinion and the opinion of City staff that the City would
be better served if our firm would withdraw from this condemnation matter entirely and allow the
City to retain substitute counsel. Our firm will continue to represent the City until substitute counsel
is retained, and we will coordinate with substitute counsel to bring that law firm "up to speed." The
firm will not charge any fees for work related to the transition of the file to substitute counsel.
I regret the need to write this letter. I want to assure you that the firm will work with the City staff
and the selected substitute counsel to efficiently handle the transfer of this file.
Sincerely,
Corrine H. Thomson
CHT:jms
cc: James Strommen, President, Kennedy & Graven
308280vl CAR KG400-65
Rdd;~ lfnot tlnSJln1 l+lm
<a
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
CONSENT
3H
93
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 27, 2007
REpORT PREPARED By:
STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution regarding appointment to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ,
By Motion: Adopt a resolution appointing Raj Bhakta to the Richfield
Tourism Promotion Board for the remainder of a three-year term
ending December 31, 2009.
I II. BACKGROUND I
On June 25, 1990, the City Council approved an ordinance to levy a 3% tax on
gross receipts of lodging from Richfield Hotels and Motels pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes. The establishment of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. (RTPB)
and the appointment of directors were also a part of the resolution. Currently there
are five director positions on the Board. The term of each appointment is for three
years and terms are staggered to maintain Board continuity.
The current appointments to the RTPB and the ending dates of their terms are as
follows:
1. Russ Susag, representing the Richfield Chamber of Commerce, term ending
December 31,2008.
2. Rudy Hanuman, General Manager of Candlewood Suites, term ending
December 31,2009.
3. Patrick Riley, General Manager of Americlnn, term ended December 31, 2009.
4. Robyn Goolsbey, Hampton Inn, term ending December 31, 2009.
5. Vacant, General Manager of Motel 6
.
Patrick Riley has been the General Manager of the Americlnn for the past few
months and has served on the RTPB for two months. The Americlnn property has
recently been acquired by Raj Bhakta, who is the owner and new General Manager
of the property. Mr. Riley is no longer with the Americlnn property in Richfield, thus
the Board position for the Americlnn is now vacant and should be filled.
Raj Bhakta is the new Owner/General Manager of the Americlnn. The Americlnn
has requested that Mr. Bhakta replace Mr. Riley on the RTPB. Mr. Bhakta has over
15 years of diverse management experience in the hospitality industry and, most
recently, has overseen the management of the Microtel in Bloomington and the
Super 8 Motel in Crystal.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
. The City Council has the authority to make appointments to the RTPB.
. The RTPB has typically included a representative from each property.
. Mr. Bhakta is the new owner and General Manager of the Americlnn
and is interested in appointment to the RTPB.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
. The Americlnn has historically had a seat on the RTPB and as such,
the appointment should be made as soon as possible.
. The next meeting of the RTPB is April 3, 2007 and it would be
desirable to have the appointment before then.
I C. FINANCIAL
. There is no cost to the City.
I D. LEGAL I
. The appointment conforms to City ordinance and bylaws of the RTPB.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
. The City Council could decide not to appoint Mr. Bhakta to the RTPB.
. The City Council could choose to review this matter at a future date.
I V. ATTACHMENTS
. Resolution.
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
. Russ Susag, RTPB Chair
"
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVE
TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD, INC.
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has levied a 3% tax on the gross receipts of
lodging from hotels and motels in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 169.190;
and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute Section 169.190 authorizes the proceeds of the tax
to fund a Tourism Promotion Board for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as
a tourist or convention center; and
WHEREAS, the articles and bylaws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc.
provide the City Council of the City of Richfield appoint five (5) directors to the Board
representing the Richfield hotel-motel properties and the Richfield Chamber of Commerce;
and
WHEREAS, each director shall serve as a director until his or her successor has
been appointed and has qualified, or until his or her earlier disqualification, death,
resignation, or removal; and
WHEREAS, Patrick Riley, the representative from the Americlnn is no longer his
position with the Americlnn, and
WHEREAS, Raj Bhakta has been appointed as the new General Manager of the
Americlnn and seeks appointment to the RTPB.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, that the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board directors be modified as follows:
Appoint Raj Bhakta, Americlnn, to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board
for the remainder of a three-year term ending December 31,2009.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
March, 2007.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
-
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk