Loading...
04-08-08 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 5:30 P.M. AGENDA • Call to order 5:30 - 6:30 p.m. l 1. Discussion regarding Key Financial Strategies (Council Memo No. 55) Notes: 6:30 - 6:50 p.m. 2. Discussion regarding Review of Franchise Fees (Council Memo No. 56) Notes: Adjournment REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 7:00 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: • • Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of Special City. Council Meeting of March 25, 2008; Special City Council Worksession of March 25,2008; and Regular City Council Meeting of March 25, 2008 PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of Proclamation recognizing the 40th Anniversary of the Establishment of the Richfield Human Rights Commission (Council Memo No. 52) . 2.. Restaurant Awards from Richfield Advisory Board of Health .(Council Memo No. 54) 3. Annual meeting with the Richfield Advisory Board of Health COUNCIL DISCUSSION 4. Council discussion • .Confirm date of Joint City Council and Richfield School Board meeting for May 5, 2008 • Discussion regarding location of proposed new City Hall/Police/Fire Facility • Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: • AGENDA APPROVAL 5: Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 6. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once-the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amending City Administrative Code Chapter III, Subsection 310.13, describing appointment and placement of relatives and set second reading for April 22, 2008 S.R. No. 85 B. Consideration of approval of resolutions modifying 2008 General Services and Management Compensation Plans to reflect adjustments to Liquor Operations pay .rates S.R. No. 86 C. Consideration of approval of renewal of contract for 2008/2009 with- Auction Broadcasting Company of Minneapolis for auctioning forfeited vehicles from Public Safety/Police S.R. No. 87 D. Consideration of award of contract for the construction of a fiber optic network to Castrejon, Inc. in the amount of $195,020.62 S.R. No. 88 E. Consideration of approval of purchase of Cisco network switches and fiber . connection equipment in the amount of $29,888.66 S.R. No. 89 F. Consideration of approval of resolution acknowledging receipt of petition for vacation of utility easement at 800-66th Street West, first reading of a transitory ordinance and set second reading public hearing for May 13, 2008 S.R. No. 90 G. Consideration of approval of hiring WSB & Associates to provide construction. inspection services for 66th Street and Portland Avenue Project S.R. No. 91 C7 • H. Consideration of approval of two change orders, PCO#029 for a credit of • ($25,000.00) and PCO#031 at a cost of $33,874.50, to Master Mechanical Inc. for the new Maintenance Facility S.R. No. 92 I. Consideration of bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract for Mill- and Overlay Project to Hardrives, Inc. in total amount of $486,199.64 S.R. No. 93 J. Consideration of bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract for 2008 Curb and Gutter and Miscellaneous Repair to Create Construction:,. Inc. in total amount of $75,897.50 S.R. No. 94 K. Consideration of continuation of public hearing to April 22, 2008 regarding request for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, with optional 2 a.m. closing for Aribel's, 1120 East 66th Street S.R. No. 95 Notes: 7. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: PUBLIC HEARING 8. Public hearing and second reading of ordinance amending Zoning Code Subsections • 522.05, 534.03, 537.05, 537.11, 544.03, 547.13 and 547.15 of the Richfield City Code Staff Report No. 96 Notes: PROPOSED ORDINANCE 9. Consideration of approval of first reading of an ordinance relating to sale of intoxicating liquor by hotels, on-sale wine licenses and combination licenses, and amending subsections 1202.01, 1202.05, 1202.07 and 1202.21 of the Richfield City Code and schedule a second reading for April 22, 2008 Staff Report No. 97 Notes: RESOLUTIONS 10. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing acceptance of agreement between Mn/DOT and the City of Richfield to-receive federal funds to perform a study to redesign Richfield Arterials • Staff Report No. 98 Notes: .] • 11. Consideration of resolution establishing a policy concerning ex parte contacts regarding zoning matters. Staff Report No. 99 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 12. Consideration of private utility undergrounding within the project limits of the 6300 Block of Lyndale Reconstruction Project. Staff Report No. 100 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT • 13. City Manager's report Notes: 14. 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 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: 16. 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. • • r 1 LJ 1r~ u STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8,.2008 AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # GA REPORT # 85 REPORT PREPARED BY: PAM DMYTRENKO, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE lJ DEPARTMENT'DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading consideration of amendment to the City Administrative Code Chapter III, Subsection 310.13, describing appointment and placement of relatives. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the first reading of the proposed ordinance amendment to the City Administrative Code Chapter 3, .Subsection, 310.13, describing appointment and placement of relatives and schedule the second reading for April 22, 2008. u II. BACKGROUND After. review of the City's current ordinance provision Section 310.13, which ` addresses the appointment and placement of relatives, staff is recommending the addition of brother-in-law and sister-in-law to the definition of "relative" for the purposes of the ordinance. The new language would prohibit brother-in-laws and sister-in-laws, as well as other listed relatives, from being appointed or placed by the City into a position where: A. One employee would supervise a relative; r ~ LJ • B. One employee would be responsible for auditing the work of a relative; C. The confidentiality of the City may be compromised. " D. A conflict of interest would arise from such employment. The proposed ordinance change to Section 310.13, Appointment and Placement of Relatives, is indicated below in underline: 310.13. Appointment and placement of relatives. The city will not employ relatives under any of the following circumstances (for purposes of this subsection, a "relative" shall be defined as an employee's mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, sister, brother, son, daughter, spouse, mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister.-in-law, brother-in-law, stepmother, stepfather, stepchild, aunt, uncle, niece or nephew): III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The new language would prevent employees related by marriage from working in the same work unit if one employee would be responsible for supervising and overseeing the work of a relative. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • In order to meet the. publishing requirements for the second reading of the ordinance amendment,:it is recommended that the second reading be scheduled for April 22, 2008. C. FINANCIAL • None. D. LEGAL • -The proposed modification to the City Ordinance regarding the placement of relatives complies with applicable State Statutes. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Do not approve the ordinance amendment and take no further action. • Defer first reading consideration to another date. V. ATTACHMENTS • City Administrative Code change. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • • • ~A-/ BILL NO. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 310.13 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OFRICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 310.13 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled "Appointment and placement of relatives" is hereby amended: 310.13.- Appointment .and placement of relatives. The city will not employ relatives under any of the following circumstances (for purposes of this .subsection, a "relative" shall be defined as an employee's mother, father, grandmother, .grandfather, sister, brother, son, daughter, spouse, mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law, stepmother, stepfather, stepchild, aunt, uncle, niece, or nephew): 1. Where one employee will supervise a relative. 2. Where one employee will be responsible for auditing the work of a relative 3. Where confidentiality of the city would be compromised. 4. Where a conflict of interest would arise from such employment. Where. a possible violation of these provisions relating to the employment of relative exists, • the city manager must consult the city attorney to determine whether the implementation of this policy is consistent with applicable federal and state laws and regulations. Passed by the City. Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of April, 2008 Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs., City Clerk r: • • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDAITEM# C)B REPORT # $( J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 • • REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: PAM DMYTRENKO ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER NAME, TITGL ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration and approval of modified 2008 General Services and Management Com ensation Plans to reflect ad~ustments to Li uor O erations a rates. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolutions approving the revised 2008 Management Compensation Plan and 2008 General Services Compensation Plan to reflect the addition of new pay grades for Liauor Oaerations staff. II. BACKGROUND Periodically, the City reviews and evaluates its pay plans based upon comparable positions within other municipalities. Such a review and comparison was conducted in February 2008 for the Liquor Operations Department. As part of this analysis, the municipal operations of Apple Valley, Lakeville, Eden Prairie and Edina were reviewed, which are similar in sales and scope of operations. The analysis indicated that Richfield's pay rates for the positions of Liquor Operations Director, Store Manager, Assistant Store Manager and Liquor Sales Associate were considerably higher and needed to be adjusted to bring them more in line with these similar operations. • • ~~ In order to meet the City's long-held goal to keep its wages and benefits in the middle of the pay ranges of similar metro cities and operations, the following compensation . adjustments are being recommended and/or implemented: 1. Effective January 1, 2008, the position of Liquor Operations Director was reclassified .from an M-5 to an M-4 in the Management Compensation Plan. The current Director will not receive a salary increase until his wages fall within the M-4 pay range. 2. The position of Liquor Sales Associate has been reclassifed from an SP7-NE in the Specialized Pay Plan to an SP6-NE. Effective March 15, 2008, all new hires in this position will be paid at the SP6-NE pay rate. Liquor Sales Associates hired prior to March -15, 2008 will remain at the SP7-NE pay rate for 2008, but will experience modifications to their step increases for 2008. In 2009, all Liquor Sales Associates will be reclassifed to a separate, new pay grade in the Specialized Pay Plan, an SP6.1 L-NE, which will be adjusted at half of what the rest of the Specialized Pay Plan receives in order to keep in line with other comparable municipal liquor operations. 3. With Council approval, the position of Assistant Liquor Store Manager will be reclassified from a GS5-E within the General Services Compensation Plan to a new pay grade, GS3-E, effective April 13, 2008. 4. With Council approval, the position of Liquor Store Manager will be reclassified from an M-1 within the Management Compensation Plan to a new pay grade, M-L, effective April 13, 2008. Liquor Store Managers and Assistant Managers who are currently paid at higher hourly rates than the new M-L maximum and GS3-E maximum rates will not experience a reduction in pay, but will also not receive increases until their wages fall within the M-L and GS3-E pay ranges. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY. • The City periodically conducts an analysis of its pay rates in order to ensure it meets it goal of staying in the middle of the pay ranges for similar metro communities and operations. Based upon these evaluations and the data collected, the City makes upwards or downwards adjustments to its pay rates. The recent analysis of Liquor Operations pay rates indicates the need for a downward adjustment in order to be more in line with other similar operations. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • In order to make these pay plan adjustments, Council action on April8, 2008 is necessary. • Employees of the Liquor Operations Department have been told of the - reclassification and reasons for these actions. • • C. FINANCIAL The recommended pay rate changes are expected to bring the Richfield Liquor Operations into an appropriate pay comparison with the other leading municipal liquor operations and will enhance Richfield's gross margin and profit. • Greater gross margins and profit will lead to larger transfers to the Special Revenue Fund for capital projects in the future. D. LEGAL None IV. ALTERNATIVE REC014RVIENDATION(S~ Do not approve the compensation plan changes. However, current pay rates are considerably higher than those of similar municipal operations. V . ATTACHMENTS ~J Resolutions VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None expected • • • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 2008 MANAGEMENT • SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for Management employees from time-to-time; and WHEREAS, the City administration has prepared a 2008 pay plan for position classifications for Management employees. The City Manager is authorized to add or reclassify positions as necessary. Examples of positions in each pay grade are attached. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 2008 the following pay plan, which is to be effective April 13, 2008 and subject to all applicable provisions of the City. 2008 MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION PLAN -APRIL 13, 2008 PAY GRADE MINIMUM MID-RANGE MAXLMUM M-L YR 51,480.00 58,760.00 66,040.00 MO 4,290.00 4,896.67 5,503.33 BW 1,980.00 2,260.00 2,540.00 H R 24.75 28.25 31.75 M-1 YR 56,264.00 64,355.20 72,384.00 . MO 4,688.67 5,362.93 6,032.00 BW 2,164.00 2,475.20 2,784.00 • H R 27.05 30.94 34.80 M-2 YR 66,996.80 76,544.00 86,153.60 MO 5,583.07 6,378.67 7,179.47 BW 2,576.80 2,944.00 3,313.60 H R 32.21 36.80 41.42 M-3 YR 73,049.60 83,449.60 93,870.40 MO 6,087.47 6,954.13 7,822.53 BW 2,809.60 3,209.60 3,610.40 H R 35.12 40.12 45.13 M-4 YR 75,587.20 86,361.60 97,177.60 MO 6,298.93 7,196.80 8,098.13 BW 2,907.20 3,321.60 3,737.60 HR 36.34 41.52 46.72 M-5 YR 89,939.20 102,772.80 115,627.20 MO 7,494.93 8,564.40 9,635.60 BW 3,459.20 3,952.80 4,447.20 H R 43.24 49.41 55.59 r~ C • • G~~-J o ~~ ~ L _ >~~~ o ~ ~ ~ U ~ C ~ L ~_ ~ ' a.- Q~ ~ ~ O `~ '~ ~ U ~ C (0 ~ ~ ~ ~ LL ~ O `~ O 0~~ U ~ fQ `C ~ o (j /^~ O ~ ~ LL L Q.. C U~ O ~ 0 L a ~ (p G_ (0 ~ ~ CV r- N O p~ v W C ~~ ~ ~,,,,, p ~ ~ O ~ .~ p ~ O c~ ~ .~ > O r- ~ Z cn :v ~ ~ ~ C ~ U >~ W c(A~ o ~ O ~,,,, N Q ~ ~ O Q ~ ~ O t""' ~ ~ ~ L Q V ~~N ~ ~ ~ o ~ U N~ o a Q p-~~' > o ~ (6 ~ JQ t ~ ~ ~ ~ N LL U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ca-v O Q-~ ?O ocCp~> c o ~ - ~ N v~ C N ~ N O N ~ ~ ~ - N ~ U ~ ~ O O p~~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~ N ~ ~~n ~ i~' o°'a Z Zc~Ec Ov~ L- c ~ ~•~ E"~ Z Q'~ U N 'y ~ U N ~ V ~ ~ ~~ L d ~ ~ N ~ N ~ .-+ a N ~ ~ N (n _U ~ L ~ t~ N ~ O ~ (6 ~ ~ O O L ~ C ~ ~ ~ O G 4 p ~ U. ~ ~ '~.' ~ - R O (~ - ~~~~0 3 ~ V ~ ~ ~c~ ~'~~o ~ a~ ~ U ~ fns.>~ . ~~M~' ~ N ~ a~ "J O Z 'Q~I- ~~' > 3 W O O X 0 0 ~~~ Q O ' cv Q ~ ~ c Z~ c0 '''' 0 0 ~M~~?ZZ ~ -' N .~ -W O ~ U ~ O ~~~~~ ~OC ~> 6 W U L , a~ E c~~~ ~' _ Z c ~ N `~ 0 ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • Q a0~~ ~~ ~cn ~,~ ~ cn W c~~~ a c6,Jca~~ cn ~ ca - ~~`--°~~' > v, ~~°~aic ~ v ~ E $ O¢cnz~ L )O+ (0 N N O N .n a~ 0 L U U ~ ~ FW- c z • RANGE M-L M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 (Rev. 4-08) MANAGEMENT POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE ~ ~ POSITION TITLES "' CLASS Liquor Store Manager Exempt City Clerk Exempt Facility/Program Manager Exempt Supervisor Exempt Health Administrator Exempt Assistant City Engineer Exempt Assistant to the City Manager Exempt Assistant Utility Superintendent Exempt Chief Bui{ding Official Exempt Community Development Manager Exempt Information Technologies Manager Exempt Transportation Engineer Exempt Asst. Fire Chief/Fire Marshal Exempt Finance Manager Exempt Housing & Redevelopment Manager/ Exempt Assistant Community Development Director Operations Superintendent. Exempt Utilities Superintendent Exempt Liquor Operations Director Department Director Exempt Exempt • • • • RESOLUTION NO. jj~~ RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 200.8 GEN~ AL SERVICES WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for General Services employees from time-to-time, and WHEREAS, the City administration has prepared a 2008 pay plan for position classifications for General Services employees. The City Manager is authorized to add or reclassify positions as necessary. Examples of positions in each pay grade are attached. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 2008 the following pa plan, which is to be effective April 13, 2008 and. subject to all applicable provisions of the City Code: 2008 GENERAL SERVICES COMPENSATION PLAN -APRIL 13, 2008 STEP 1 2 3 4 5 6 RANGE GS1 YR 29,681.60 .31,428.80 33,176.00 34,964.80 37,044.80 38,168.00 MO 2,473.47 2,619.07 2,764.67 2,913.73 3,087.07. 3,180.67 BW 1,141.60 1,208.80 1,276.00 1,344.80 1,424.80 1,46$.00 H R 14.27 15.11 15.95 16.81 17.81 18.35 GS2 YR 32,656.00 34,340.80 36,004.80 37,835.20 39,769.60 41,745.60 MO 2,721.33 2,861.73 3,000.40 3,152.93 3,314.13 3,478.80 BW 1,256.00 1,320.80 1,384.80 1,455.20 1,529.60 1,605.60 H R 15.70 16.51 17.31 18.19 19.12 20.07 ~S3 YR 36,004.80 37,835.20 39,832.00 41,745.60 43,825.60 :46,259:20 MO 3.,000.40 3,152.93 3,319.33 3,478.80 3,652.13 3,854.93 BW 1,384.80 1,455.20 1,532.00 1,605.60 .1,685.60 1,779.20 HR 17.31 18.19 19.15 20.07 21.07 22.24 GS3E YR 38,708.80 40,664.00 42,827.20 44,886.40 47,112.00 49,732.80. MO 3,225.73 3,388.67 3,568.93 3,740.53 3,926.00 4,144.40 BW 1,488.80 1,564.00. 1,647.20 1,726.40 1,812.00 1,912.80 HR 18.61 19.55 20.59 21.58 22.65 23.91 GS4 YR 39,832.00 41,745.60 43,888.00 46,113.60 48,380.80 50,939.20 MO 3,319.33 3,478.80 3,657.33 3,842.80 4,031.73 4,244.93 BW 1,532.00 1,605.60 1,688.00 1,773.60 1,860.80 1,959.20 HR 19.15 20.07 21.10 22.17 23.26 24.49 GS4SN YR 42,785.60 44,865.60 47,195.20 49,587.20 52,041.60. 54,683.20 MO 3,565.47 3,738.80 3,932.93 4,132.27 4,336.80 4,556.93 BW 1,645.60 1,725.60 1,815.20 1,907.20 2,001.60 2,103.20 HR 20.57 21.57 22.69 23.84 25.02 26.29 GS4E YR 42,785.60 44,865.60 47,195.20 49,587.20 52,041.60 54,683.20 r MO 3,565.47 3,738.80 3,932.93 4,132.27 4,336.80 4,556.93 BW 1,645.60 1,725.60 1,815.20 1,907.20 2,001.60 2,103.20 HR 20.57 21.57 22.69 23.84 25.02 26.29 • • ~~~ ~ GS5 YR 43,888.00 46,113.60 48,380.80 50,939.20 53,476.80 56,160.00 MO 3,657.33 3,842.80 4,031.73 4,244.93 4,456.40 4,680.00 BW 1,688.00 .1,773.60 1,860.80 1,959.20 2,056.80 2,160.00 HR 21.10 22.17 23.26 24.49 25.71 27_.00. GSSE YR 47,195.20 49,587.20 52,000.00 54,683.20 57,428.80 60,611.20 MO 3,932.93 4,132.27 4,333.33 4,556.93 4,785.73 5,050.93 BW 1,815.20 1,907.20 2,000.00 2,103.20 2,208.80 2,331.20 H R 22.69 23.84 25.00 26.29 27.61.. 29.14 GS6 YR 48,380.80 50,939.20 53,476.80 .56,160.00 59,030.40 65,104.00 MO 4,031.73 4,244.93 4,456.40 4,680.00 4,919.20 5,425.33 BW 1,860.80 1,959.20 2,056.80 2,160.00 2,270.40 2,504.00 HR 23.26 24.49 25.71. 27.00 28.38 31.30 GS6E YR 52,000.00 54,683.20 57,449.60 60,320.00 63,356.80 69,950.40 MO 4,333.33 4,556.93 4,787.47 5,026.67 5,279.73 5,829.20 BW 2,000.00 2,103.20 2,209.60 2,320.00 2,436.80 2,690.40 HR 25.00 26.29 27.62 29.00 30.46 33.63 a. Step 1 -Start b. Step 2 -One year from anniversary date. c. Step 3 -One year since last increase. If an employee is rated Needs Improvement, the employee may not advance to Step 3 until performance is rated Satisfactory or higher. d. Step 4 -One year since last increase. If an employee is rated Needs Improvement, the employee may not advance to Step 4 until performance is rated Satisfactory or higher. e. Step 5 -One year since last increase.. An employee must.achieve a Satisfactory rating or better in all areas of responsibility before advancing to Step 5. f. Step 6 -One year since last increase. An employee must achieve a Satisfactory rating or better in all areas of responsibility before advancing to Step 6. Employees whose competency level and/or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their performance improves. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of April 2008. Debbie Goettel Mayor. ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs City Clerk (Revised 4-08) • • ~V~~ GENERAL SERVICES POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE GRADE POSITION TITLES CLASS 1 Office Aide Non-Exempt Data Entry Operator ist ti d R it hb S Non-Exempt Non-Exem t on oar - ecep w c p 2 Community Development Technician Non-Exempt Community Service Officer Non-Exempt Custodian Non-Exempt Investigative Clerk Non-Exempt Lead Liquor Clerk Non-Exempt Licensing Clerk Non-Exempt Police Cadet Non-Exempt Senior Office Aide Non-Exempt Accounting Clerk Non-Exempt Community Development Assistant Non-Exempt Facilityy Operations Assistant Non-Exempt Forestry Inspector/Operations Assistant Non-Exempt Environmental Health Assistant Non-Exempt Lead Licensing Clerk Non-Exempt Leased Housing Assistant Non-Exempt Secreta Non-Exempt .Utility Bil ing Clerk Non-Exempt 3E Assistant Liquor Store Manager Exempt 4 Assessment Clerk ~ Non-Exempt Information Technologies Help Desk Non-Exempt Technician 4SN Administrative Aide Non-Exempt Payroll Accountant Non-Exempt 5 Engineering Technician Non-Exempt Facility Maintenance Supervisor Non-Exempt Part-time Recreation Supervisor Non-Exempt , information Technologies Technician Non-Exempt 5E Code Compliance Specialist Exempt Communications Coordinator Exempt Crime Prevention Program Coordinator Exempt Community Development Accountant Exempt Community Development Coordinator Exempt Executive Coordinator Exempt Housing Specialist Exempt Human Resources Coordinator , Exempt Human Services Planner/Coordinator Exempt Leased Housing Specialist Exempt Naturalist Exempt Records Supervisor Exempt Recreation Supervisor Exempt Redevelopment Specialist Exempt Zoning Administrator Exempt 6 Civil Engineer Non-Exempt Network Administrator Non-Exempt Trade/Building Inspector Non-Exempt Trade/Electrical Inspector Non-Exempt 6E Accountant Exempt PayPlans 4-08 • • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6C REPORT # - g] ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: JAY HENTHORNE, POLICE LIEUTENANT NAME; Trrzc COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~: ~ , _ REVIEWED BY CITY / ~ ~~~_ ~- MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the renewal of the contract with ABC for 2008 for auctioning forfeited vehicles from Public Safet /Police. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: • Approve the renewal for 2008/2009 of the attached auction service contract between the City of Richfield and Auction Broadcasting Company of Minneapolis for auctioning. forfeited vehicles from Public Safety/Police. • Three noted changes in fees (indicated under Policy), two of which were due to increased fuel arices. II. BACKGROUND The City currently has a contract with the Auction Broadcasting Company (hereinafter referred to as "ABC" was awarded the contract for the past year and would like to renew the contract for the year 2008/2009 as the contract expires on Aprii 9, 2008. 0408 ABC Forfeiture Vehicles Auction Contract Renewal for 2008 • • ABC's performance during the contract period was satisfactory, as in the pasta They auction forfeiture vehicles for many cities, including the City of Bloomington. There were three changes in fees for this next year: (1) Operable Vehicle Transportation rate is changed from $45 to $50; (2) Inoperable Vehicle Towing charge is changed from $85 to "Not to exceed $100," and (3) Basic Cleaning Is changed from $35 to $37. The first two charges are solely due to increased fuel prices. ABC indicates that they have three different towing services that can handle Richfield and they will use the least expensive when they can. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • "ABC" notified the City that they wish to renew the contract. • The Public Safety Department wishes to renew the contract with "ABC." • The contract has numerous conditions that must be met. "ABC" is a reputable, established auction company that meets all contract requirements. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • A 30-day written notice must be given either party to terminate the contract. • Public Safety must have a company to store and auction forfeited vehicles on April 9, 2008. • Adequate space is not available in the City to store forfeited vehicles. C. FINANCIAL • Fees were increased on three items: Transportation of operable forfeiture vehicles increased from $45 to $50; towing of an inoperable vehicle changed from $85 to "Not to exceed $100" and, basic cleaning of forfeiture vehicle changed from $35 to $37. • Public Safety receives monies from the sale of forfeited vehicles after .appropriate fees are taken out. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the past contract with "ABC." IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not sign the contract; however, Public Safety would-need to find other means to auction forfeited vehicles. V. ATTACHMENTS • ABC Contract for 2008/2009. VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • C] ~~ ~~~~ AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND AUCTION BROADCASTING COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 8th day of April, 2008 by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 6700 Portland Ave. S., Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and Auction Broadcasting Company Minneapolis, a limited, liability corporation with its principle business offices located at 18270 Territorial Road, Dayton, Minnesota 55369 (hereinafter referred to as "ABC"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City comes into possession of and is authorized to retain various motor vehicles which are identified as potentially being. subject to forfeiture or other civil processes under the laws of the State of Minnesota as a result of their having been used in the connection with a criminal act (hereinafter referred to as "Forfeiture Vehicles") and upon successful completion of the forfeiture or civil process the City is authorized to dispose of said vehicles in accordance with Section 315 of the Richfield City Code; and • WHEREAS., ABC represents that it has the professional expertise and knowledge to perform its duties as an automobile dealer, and is licensed by the State of Minnesota in that capacity; and WHEREAS, the City desires to hire ABC to transport, store, repair, maintain and sell its Forfeiture Vehicles; NOW, THEREFORE, inconsideration of the terms and conditions expressed herein, the parties agree as follows: I. TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement shall begin April 9, 2008 and shall continue until April 9, 2009, subject to termination as provided in Article IV. II. DUTIES OF ABC A. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to drive or transport • those vehicles identified by the City as one of its Forfeiture Vehicles to a secure location to be determined and managed by ABC. • .] ~' B. Upon receipt of a City Forfeiture Vehicle, ABC accepts full responsibility for it and agrees to exercise due: diligence in its care, maintenance and storage of said vehicle until the time that it is sold or released; so as to avoid waste and obtain a reasonable sale price at auction. C. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to perform such minor repair work on the City's Forfeiture Vehicles so as to prepare them for auction and maximize the City's return at auction, but in no event shall such repair work exceed the cost of TWO HUNDRED AND N01100 DOLLARS ($200.00) without prior, written authorization by the Richfield City Manager or his/her designee. D. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to release the City's Forfeiture Vehicles prior to auction on such terms and conditions as the City may direct. E. ABC agrees to box and store personal property that is not affixed to, but located within, the City's Forfeiture vehicles and upon specific authorization from the City to release such property on such terms and conditions as the City may direct. F. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to promptly sell the • City's Forfeiture Vehicles in a commercially reasonable manner by an open and competitive automobile dealer or salvage auction. G. ABC agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officials, employees and agents from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from ABC's (including its officials, agents or employees) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of ABC. H. During the term of this Agreement ABC agrees to maintain general comprehensive liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 for any damage to property, theft, loss or other claims as a result of ABC's negligence or malfeasance in performing this Agreement. In addition, ABC agrees to maintain such motor vehicle liability insurance as required by state and federal laws. • C] r~ ~J W ~~~ ABC shall be licensed and bonded in the State of Minnesota to perform its duties under this Agreement and shall provide a certificate of licensure, bonding and insurance to the City. J. ABC agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federa{ laws, rules and regulations in the performance of the duties of this Agreement. K. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting ABC's staff as the agents, representatives or employees of the City for any purpose in any manner whatsoever. ABC and its staff are to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement.. ABC represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnek of ABC or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by ABC under this Agreement, shah have no contractual relationship with the City and shall not be considered employees of the City, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the • ~ Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged., and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against ABC, its officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City; and ABC shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. L. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of the Contractor, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the City; and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subdivision 5. • • • ~ c-a M. ABC agrees to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. ABC agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from, costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA and/or Section 504 caused by the ABC. Upon request, accommodation will,be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs and activities. The City has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations N. The Contractor will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. 0. Any Forfeiture Vehicles which ABC has been authorized and directed to sell • but was unable to under the terms of this Agreement shall be returned to the City at a site designated by it as soon as reasonably practicable but in no event more than sixty (60) days from the occurrence of the event making sale under this Agreement impossible... III. DUTIES OF THE CITY A. The City shall consign specifically identified Forfeiture Vehicles to ABC to sell to the highest bidder at public dealer or salvage auctions. B. The City shall certify that it has good title and right to sell those of its Forfeiture Vehicles which it directs and specificaNy authorizes ABC to sell at public dealer or salvage auctions and shall provide and deliver merchantable title to the purchaser upon notification .from ABC. C. The .City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the ABC, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of City. • r: W ~/~ ~'r' D. The City shall pay to ABC the following amounts as and for its services • property authorized. and provided pursuant to this Agreement: 1. Transportation of an operable Forfeiture Vehicle to or from the City of Richfield to ABC's designated storage site: $50.00. 2. Tow of an inoperable Forfeiture Vehicle (tow or trailer) to or from the City of Richfield to ABC's designated storage site: Not to Exceed $100.00. 3. Basic cleaning of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $37.00. 4. Complete detail of a Forfeiture Vehicle (vacuum and shampoo carpets, detail interior, etc.): $85.00. 5. Repair of a Forfeiture Vehicle prior to auction: Shop Rates. 6. Sale by auction of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $110.00. 7. Release of a Forfeiture Vehicle prior to auction: $50.00 redemption, fee plus any • charges (i.e., transportation). 8. Storage fee if car is not sold within 90 days: $3.00/day. 9. Inventory fee for release of personal property: $25.00. IV. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other party. The City reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in event of default or violation by ABC of any provision of this Agreement. The City may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear. necessary or desirable to collect damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement. V. MISCELLANEOUS A. Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of • this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement and signed by both parties. • • U ~P~ l0 B. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of the • City. C. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between ABC and the City and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. D. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 363. E. .The parties hereto agree to comply with Section 504 of the. Rehabilitation Act of 1973/31 CFR Part 51. This Act states in part that, "...all recipients of federal funds, whether in the form of a grant or a contract, review, and if necessary modify, their programs and activities so that discrimination based on handicap is eliminated." F. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on ABC's successors and assigns and to the extent any assignee of ABC. • {N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: DATED: CITY OF RICHFIELD BY: Its Mayor BY: lts Manager AUCTION BROADCASTING COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS • DATED: BY: Its • • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6D REPORT # $$ -STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: SALLY MORTON, I.T. MANAGER NAME, TITLE • r1 COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~ "C ~~ REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~( wwPi ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for the construction of a fiber optic network to connect several Cit facilities. I. .RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for the construction of a fiber optic network to Ca~trejon, Inc. in the amount of $195,020.62. II. BACKGROUND - The City's computer network interconnects equipment installed in 12 city facilities, 2 schools, and at LOGIS. These connections currently utilize dedicated copper data circuits and DSL service obtained from Qwest. An increase in network traffic due to new technologies and increased use are pushing these connections to and beyond their useful capacity. This has resulted in slow response times and occasionally unreliable service. Construction of a fiber optic network to connect City buildings will solve the current performance issues and provide capacity for the future. Construction of a-fiber network will also facilitate the installation of a Voice over IP (VoIP) phone system offering advanced productivity features and cost savings. 0408-FiberBid.doc • • • • The City, with the assistance of LOGIS, prepared specifications and published a request for bids for construction of a fiber optic network in late February. The specifications include a core project consisting of connecting City Hall, the Community Center, and Fire Station #2 to the fiber network owned by the Richfield School District. The core project also includes installing a fiber run from City Hall to the new Public Works building. Contractors were asked to bid on optional add-ons to install fiber runs to 3 facilities that are near the fiber path between City Hall and Public Works. These add-on options. include the Water Plant, Ice Arena, and the Cedar Liquor Store. All fiber runs will be installed underground. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY _ • A request for bids for this project was published. in-the Richfield Sun- Current on February 28 and in the Construction Bulletin on March 3. Fourteen companies requested. specifications: • The bid opening was held on March 25, 2008. Six companies submitted bids. A copy of the tabulation for the Fiber Optic Network Bid is attached. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The capacity of the City's current computer network connections between City facilities, with other. agencies, and to the Internet is often inadequate to meet current needs. • Because it is new construction, no computer network connection currently exists to the new Public Works facility. A connection will be required by the time the building opens in June of this year. • Again because it is a new facility, no phone system is installed at the new Public Works building and will be need to be in place by the time the building opens in June. • Construction of the fiber network will allow us to install a Voice over IP (VoIP) phone system hosted at LOGIS and supported by-them at the new Public Works facility. This will serve as a pilot project for the eventual implementation of VoIP City-wide. • The fiber network bid specifications require that construction of the fiber runs required to provide computer network service and VoIP to the new facility be completed by May 15. • Castrejon, the recommended contractor, submitted the lowest bid. • LOGIS had a positive experience working with Castrejon and recommends that their bid be accepted. • Castrejon has done projects for the cities of Edina, Minnetonka and. St. Louis Park. C. FINANCIAL • All of the bids came in over budget and over estimates. This is mostly due to including more sites to the bid than originally planned last year when the budget was prepared, some routing changes made after the • • • estimates were calculated, and a higher than anticipated cost to run • fiber under Trunk Highway 77. • The core project and the Water Plant and Cedar Liquor Store options are included in the proposed contract. • Due to cost considerations, the Ice Arena is not included in the project at this time. The fiber network has been designed such that it will facilitate the future construction of a link to this building. • The project is proposed to be funded by $102,800.00 budgeted for this project in the I.T. Fund in 2007 & 2008; $40,324.44 from the Utility Fund; $18,744.50 from the Liquor Operations Fund, and that a change order be issued to use $33,151.68 from the contingency fund for the new Public Works facility. • -The contingency fund contribution to this fiber project is less than the cost to run fiber to the new Public Works building, so it is not subsidizing the installation of fiber to any other City facilities. • An equipment purchase will also be required to complete this project and approval of that purchase is requested in a later item on the City Council's agenda. • ,Six splices to the school district's fiber network will be required. Per. our agreement with the School District, they will pass this cost on to the City. The amount is estimated to be $1,800. Also per our agreement, the school district will bill LOGIS $500 per month for the use of their fiber network and LOGIS will pass half of that cost on to • the City. The State of Minnesota will pay the other half. • Implementation of this phase of the fiber network will result in $16,300. per year savings. The savings are due to the elimination of costs for leasing. data circuits for the 6 buildings included in this project and because the fiber connection to LOGIS will allow us to reconfigure the remaining sites on our network to reduce costs. • Implementation of the fiber network will allow us to install a VoIP phone system at the new Public Works facility. This will serve as a pilot project for the eventual implementation of VoIP City-wide. • Cost savings related to replacing the current telephone system with a VoIP system have not yet been fully calculated. D. LEGAL - • When a purchase of this nature is estimated to exceed $50,000 sealed bids must.be solicited by public notice in the manner and subject to the laws governing contracts and purchases by the City of Richfield. This process was followed. • Castrejon, Inc. submitted the lowest total bid and the lowest bid for the work recommended by staff (required facilities plus the water plant and Cedar store). • Connecting to and use of the School District's fiber network is governed by a "Fiber Optic Connection Agreement" between the City, the Richfield School District, and LOGIS. This agreement was approved by the City Council on October 9, 2007, and has been formally agreed to by the other parties. • • The agreement obligates the City to install fiber o~tic cable from City Hall to a School District connection point near 70t & Portland. The cost of this construction is included in this bid: IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The Council can reject all bids and direct staff to reduce the number of facilities included in the project and obtain new bids. This would lower the cost of the project, but would also mean that another alternative to provide network and phone service would need to be installed at the new Public Works building as there would not be adequate time to re-bid the project and for the construction to take place before the facility opens in early June. • The Council can chose to reject all bids and not do this project at this time. There are several considerations related to this option. First, the agreement with the School District which requires the City to install a portion of the project would need to be terminated. Second, as with the option above, another alternative to provide network and phone service to the new Public Works building will need to be installed. Lastly, the network performance and capacity inadequacies which triggered this project would remain unresolved. V. ATTACHMENTS • Bid minutes/tabulation. • VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • • L_J W ~I '~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening March 25, 2008 2:00 p.m. Fiber Optic Network Bid No. 08-03 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution'No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called. by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for the Fiber Optic Network, as advertised in the official newspaper on February 28, 2008. Present: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Doris Swanson, City Manager Representative Salty Morton, IT Manager The following bids were submitted and read aloud: • Contractor Bid Required Water Plant Ice Arena Liquor Store Security Solution Add-On Add-On Add-On Michels Corporation X 732.00 $191 $49,295.00 $29,366.50 $11,009.50 Brownsville, WI , Underground Piercing X $149 945.00 $37,190.00 $23,100.00 $14,175..00 Rogers, MN , MP NexLevel Mapte Lake, MN X $243,146.07 $47,401.83 $27,319.22 $11,555.02 Telcom Construction X $240 406.71 $56,292.87 $35,533.76 $48,880:87 Clearwater, MN , Castrejon Inc. Blaine, MN X $135,951.68 $40,324.44 $23,259.19 $18,744.50 Access Communications X 414.41 $169 $45,925.17 $21,546.61 $16,865.83 Minneapolis, MN , The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the April 8, 2008 City Council Meeting. Nancy Gibbs City Clerk • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6E REPORT # $9 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: SALLY MORTON, I.T. MANAGER NAME, • • COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of purchase of equipment needed to implement the City's fiber network. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of Cisco network switches and. fiber connection equipment in the amount of $29,888.66. II. BACKGROUND This item under consideration is related to the fiber network construction project which also appears on the Council's agenda for this meeting. Equipment needs to be purchased to connect the fiber cable at each building. to the computer network. In some buildings we will be able to upgrade existing equipment and in other buildings we will need to replace existing equipment. The cost of the proposed equipment purchase for City Hall, Fire Station #2 and the Community Center is $13,647.77. The cost of the proposed equipment for the new Public Works building is $12,024.55, for the Cedar Liquor Store- is $3,398.42, and for the Water Plant'is $817.92. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION .0408-FiberEquip.doc • A. POLICY • LOGIS will be purchasing the equipment and will pass the costs through to the City. • .Cisco brand equipment will be purchased as it is supported by LOGIS and meets the City's standards for networking infrastructure equipment. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • This equipment is necessary to complete the implementation of the fiber network for use with the Voice over IP (VoIP) phone system at the new Public Works facility and the City's computer network. C. FINANCIAL • Staff proposes that the equipment for City Hall, the Community Center and Fire Station #2 be purchased from the I.,T. fund, the equipment for the Water Plant be purchased by the Utility Fund, the equipment for the Cedar Liquor Store be purchased by the Liquor fund; and that a change order be issued to purchase the equipment for the new Public Works facility from the contingency fund for that construction project. D. LEGAL • LOGIS will .purchase the equipment from Berbee, the vendor who holds the State of Minnesota contract for Cisco hardware. The City of Richfield is a part of the State's purchasing cooperative and is therefore eligible to use State contracts. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • If the City Council does not award a contract for the fiber network construction, this equipment. purchase should not be approved. V. ATTACHMENTS • None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • ~J • • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6F REPORT # 9Q ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAAfE, TITLE • COUNCIL PRESENTER: INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution acknowledging receipt of a petition for vacation of a utility easement, conduct a first reading of a Transitory Ordinance and schedule a second readin and ublic hearinj I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: • .Adopt the attached resolution acknowledging receipt of a petition for vacation of utility easement at 800 66th Street West; • Conduct a first reading.of a Transitory Ordinance to vacate the utility easement; and • Call fora public hearing and second reading to be held May 13, 2008. II. BACKGROUND • On August 27, 1984 the City Council approved the vacation of Graham Avenue between 65th and 66th Streets. This vacation reserved a utility easement across the entire vacated right-of-way. 040808 - 1st reading easement vacation 800 66th St W • The owners of 800 66th Street West (formerly Bridgman's restaurant) have petitioned the City to vacate a portion of the reserved utility easement. The owners intend to cap and remove the water main within the easement area that is no longer required. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved this proposal. A reduced utility easement will increase the options for building placement in the event of redevelopment of the site. A utility easement will remain in place for land surrounding sanitary sewer facilities. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Code Section 820.05 states that the Council shall by resolution acknowledge receipt of any petition for vacation. The Council shall also set the date for a public hearing on any proposed vacation. No .vacation may be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so. Not less than ten days prior to the public hearing, a notice shall be published once in the official newspaper and sent by mailed notice to the affected owner and residents. • The Hennepin County Registrar of Deeds and Titles and public utilities have received notice of the proposed vacation and have been asked to identify any electric or telephone poles or lines; gas or sewer lines; water pipes, mains, or hydrants; and any other cables or utilities within • the area to be vacated. Easements for identified utilities will be maintained. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The Public Works Department has determined that the -City has no need for such an extensive utility easement. A utility easement for sanitary sewer purposes shall be maintained over the area indicated in the attached exhibits. • The sanitary sewer within this easement area shall be lined in accordance with Public Works requirements. • The water main within the proposed vacation area. is no longer necessary and shall be capped and removed by the applicant at their expense. C. FINANCIAL • All work shall be undertaken at the owner's expense. D. LEGAL • In order to be determined adequate, the petition must be signed by the owners of half of the land abutting the area to be vacated (Section • 820.03). This requirement has been met. • IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deny a first reading of the Transitory Ordinance with a finding that there is a public need for the utility easement to be maintained at its current extent. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Draft Transitory Ordinance • Survey • Zoning and land use maps VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • -Owner representative • • • (~~-1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION FOR VACATION' OF A UTLITY EASEMENT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REQUEST TO VACATE A UTILITY EASEMENT WHEREAS, the City has received a petition for the vacation of a portion of the utility easement at 800 66t" Street West; and WHEREAS, Richfield City Code Subsection 820.03 requires that a petition for vacation be signed by the owners of at least half of the land abutting the area to be vacated; and WHEREAS, there is one property that abuts the easement-area in question. The owner of the parcel has signed the petition for vacation of the easement area; BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. A certain petition requesting the vacation of a utility easement at 800 66th Street West in the City of Richfield, filed with the City on March 24, 2008, is declared to be signed by the owners of the required percentage of property. affected thereby. This declaration is made in conformity with Richfield City • Code Subsection 820.03. 2. A public hearing on the proposed right-of-way vacation is scheduled for May 13, 2008. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of the public hearing in the City's official newspaper once, not less than ten days prior to the public hearing. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • • • ~~-a BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 800 66th Street West, Richfield THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: The following described land is subject to an easement for public utility purposes: All that part of Graham Avenue as recorded in Book 2052 of Deeds, Page 639, embraced within Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 642, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ,Sec. 2: The City Council has determined the petition for vacation to be adequate by Resolution No. Sec. 3: There is no public need for a utility easement over a portion of the land, as described in section 1. Sec. 4: The water main located within the land described in section 1 is no longer necessary and shall be capped and removed by the owner of said land. Sec. 5: There are additional existing utility lines within a portion of the land described in .section 1, and there is a continuing need for an easement over this area. Sec. 6: A utility easement shall be maintained over the following described land: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 642, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Tract A; thence South 59 degrees 44 minutes 30 seconds West on an assumed bearing along the south line of said Tract A, a distance of 13.50 feet to the. point of beginning of said line; then North 15 degrees 30 minutes 31 seconds. West 292.88 feet to the north line of said Tract A and there said line terminates. Sec. 7: Upon the effective date as provided in section 8 below, the public utility. easement described in section 1 above is vacated, except for that portion which lies within the area described in section 6 above. The City expressly retains a public utility easement over the lands described in section 6 above, including the right to enter to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend to public • utility lines; provided that the utility shall promptly repair any damage resulting from such maintenance, repair, replacement, or removal. Sec. 8: The vacation of the utility easement is effective 30 days following publication of the ordinance. • ~J c~ ~~3 Sec. 9: The City Clerk is directed to prepare a certificate of completion of vacation proceedings and to record the vacation in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles or Hennepin County Recorder, as appropriate. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,, Minnesota this May 13, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • • • • _., .. _. .. .....w w. ~ a ~~' ~~ ~ ~ ~, - ...:,~,,,:._. ~... ~...~.~,,.._..~.~,w~y__,.~.. ~ -.. ~ ,. - .... . .,. :: . , ,, :_,_~ ~,1 ,::,, m. _;.. .:. "'~ .~....x.. _ ~ s,..~. - _ _ s _ __. ~--NE'L:Y COR. ~ ~ ' . __ _ _ . TRACT A ~' ~~ ;.. i ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ _ - _ Y ~.w.. ~~ ~o t __ q _ _. r ~a ,.. .. ._ u ~ .... - _._. ~, t x -- ~ ' __... _ ._.._. r.. ~ ~ . ~...~.... -~ ~ f 1 Rw ( _' _ ~~ ~: ~' r^ ~ :. p -~ a. - _. , ' CTa ~ ~ ' .N , ~ `. ~ ,.. Q ~ `~ . ...... ...: ~ ~ ~ ..- -. __~x.-. ..... may. -xw~~u ~ . ~ r `4 F \ d ~ ~ziA< A ~ • ~, `mo .mot ~ n t . LEGEND 0 2s 50 goo EASEMENT RESERVATION AREA. SCALE IN FEET File: Checked By. GRAHAM AVENUE D7DDBB DBD ALLIAlVT Dwg Name: Drown By. VACATION/SANITARY SEWER ENGINEERING. INC. 70088resv-eas.dwg ~T EASEMENT RESERVATION Z33 PA&K AVE. sovTx, su-Te aoo Date: Scale: - HOO 66TH ST. W, r~¢rrreArotss.MN ssais s/~2/os ,•=so' RICHFIELD, MN FAX 6E2)7a8?8099 80. • • • Y.M1 `, .y Alliant Engineering, Inc. ~ ~~~ Street Vacation and Reservation of Sanitary Sewer Easement For 800 66~' Street West, Richfield,lVlinnesota r~ U • Street Vacation All that part of Graham Avenue as recorded in Book 2052 of Deeds, Page 639, embraced within Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 642, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Reservation of Sanitarv Sewer Easement Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 642, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying easterly of the following described-line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Tract A; thence South 59 degrees 44 minutes 30 seconds West on an assumed bearing along the south line of said Tract A, a distance of 13.50 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 15 degrees 30 minutes 31 seconds West 292.88 feet to the north line of said Tract A and there said line terminates. 233 Park Avenue South, Suite 300, Minneapolis Minnesota 55415-1108 Phone 612.758.3080, Fas 612.758.3099 • • • - asernent acation eques Surrounding Zoning f~~-~ MR-3 R ~' MR-2 c,~~~ ,.• MR-2 \ ~: ` / 65th St W C-1 PMR R ~~ i PMR Q 1 ~~' C-2 __... PMR-1 1 R . ; _.. MR- C-2 _ __ _ _. 66th St W R 1 R-1 PMR R PC-2 R PMR R PC-2 ~ LEGEND C-1 -Community Commercial C-2 -General Commercial PC-2 -Planned General Commercial ' R -Single-Family Residential R-1 -Low Density Single-Family Residential MR-2 -Multi-Family Residential PMR -Planned Multi-Family Residential PMR-1 -Planned Two-Family Residential I j 0 62.5 125 250 375 500 Feet N W r E s • • t - asement acation eques Surrounding Land Use ~~"~ APT PRK O~ nj~ APT `~ APT 65th St W ~~ COM MXLND RE5 Oi APT P ~ P ~~' COM ~ DPLX P _.... _ P COM _... 66th St W RE APT APT T MXLND PRK APT PRK APT LEGEND COM -Commercial RES -Single-Family Residential DPLX -Duplex APT -Multi-Family Residential MXLAND -Mixed Use N PRK -Park W r E ~ 0 62.5 125 250 375 50Feet S • • r~ AGENDA SECTION:. Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6G REPORT # 9 j J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: KRISTIN ASxER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER NAME, TITLE r~ L J COUNCIL PRESENTER:. DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a work proposal presented by WSB & Associates for the construction ins ection of the 66t" Street and Portland Avenue Intersection Pro'ect. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the hiring of WSB & Associates to provide construction inspection services for the S6t" Street and Portland Avenue Project. II. BACKGROUND On January 22, 2008, the~Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of the intersection at 66t" Street and Portland Avenue. WSB & Associates has submitted a proposal to provide construction inspection services. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The reconstruction of 66~" Street and Portland Avenue has been identified as a priority in the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Council approval is required for expenditures over $25,000. 0226WSB • • • B. CRITICAL ISSUES • .This intersection has been identified as one of the most dangerous intersections in Hennepin County based on crash rate, severity, and cost. C. FINANCIAL • :The estimated cost for construction. inspection services is $232,136 to be paid for using Municipal State Aid Funds (Gas Tax). D. LEGAL, • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The Council .may choose to take no action at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS • WSB & Associates Construction Services Cost Proposal VL PRINCII'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. • • • • r~ ~J r, ^ ~^ • 3 ~ »~ ~`~&s Materials Testing Task 1 - Project/Contract Management • Task 2 -Construction Observation • ~ , ;~~. ~i- ~.,~: ~~-~ ^ The following tasks describe the scope of work WSB anticipates for the successful delivery of the 66th Street and Portland Avenue Roundabout. While ~ the task descriptions are similar to many municipal projects, the manner in x which they are performed. will be enhanced by our understanding and ~ approach. Each task description includes the estimated number of hours required for the work, and utilizes WSB's 2008 Fee Schedule to determine hourly rates. \ n x As decided by WSB and City staff during project design completion, the C materials testing will' be accomplished via a combination of Mn/DOT Materials [ (quality assurance) and an independent laboratory (quality control). Fees for ~ the quality control testing have been requested bythe City through WSB, ~ independently of this request for proposals. As such, no fees for the materials ,~ testing have been included in this proposal ~ Our Project Managers for construction will be Jupe Hale and Andrew.Plowman (resumes attached). Jupe will conduct the preconstruction meeting and all weekly field meetings. His role will be to supervise the observer and surveyors and troubleshoot any questions regarding design and constructability. He will also monitor the contractor's progress relative to the project schedule and, if appropriate, issue a notice should the contractor fall behind. Jupe will be available for questions from the owners; public; staff, contractors, and utility companies.. He will review and sign the monthly pay vouchers and perform all other general contract administration required. Jupe will dedicate eight hours per week to the project, ensuring both proactive contract management and ability to complete and. administer all documentation for the project. Estimated hours and fees for this task: 30 weeks x 8 hrs/wk x $126/hour = $30,240 30 weeks x 12 hrs/wk x $96/hour = $34,560 WSB will provide full time construction observation on the project. Our observer, Ross Engelking (resume attached), will provide project oversight and roundabout construction experience to the project. Ross will also provide the City with daily and weekly reports and track quantities for payment purposes. Ross will make sure the project is built to the project and City specifications. Any deviations or potential change orders will be brought to the attention of the City. Ross will. also serve as the liaison with the residents and owners located within the project area to answer questions and keep them informed of the progress. He will schedule necessary materials testing with Mn/DOT and the independent materials lab. A final walk through inspection for punch list items and final close out procedures will be completed. The erosion, control inspections will be performed in compliance with the SWPPP. Estimated hours and fees for this task: 24 weeks x 44 hrs/wk x $86/hour = $90,81.6 ~i • • • • Task 3 -Construction WSB will provide construction staking for the project, utilizing Pete Bade Staking (resume attached) as our staking crew leader. Components of the staking are: ~ • Line and grade stakes for all utility improvements x 'T~ • Cut sheets for all utility improvements • Line and grade stakes for all street improvements, including curb stakes, ~ sidewalks, etc. ~ • Cut sheets for all street improvements ~ • Collect the survey data needed for the record drawings, including top nut a of hydrants, top of casting and invert elevations of all storm and sanitary ~ sewer structures. ~ • Replace all property corners lost due to construction ~ Estimated hours and fees for. this task: t~ Cn ct~ 440 hours x $167%hour (2 person crew) _ $73,480 Task 4 -Record Drawing WSB will prepare the record drawings based on the as-built survey information. Preparation The record drawings will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City of Richfield. WSB's field employees are trained in CARD software, and are readily available at the completion of the construction season to provide timely preparation of the record drawings. Digital files can be provided if requested. • Estimated hours and fees for this task: 40 hours x $76/hour = $3,040. ;~~ The schedule for the construction administration will follow the construction -_.-_______------~----~--------~ - schedule created by WSB and the City. The estimated hours for project - management and construction observation are based solely on anticipated weekly hours and the construction duration, as described in the project specifications. The completion date in the specifications is September 30, 2008. It is important to note that actual hours for contract management and .construction observation will be dictated by the actual construction schedule. _-____~_`___~__ - Construction staking and- record drawing preparation indicate total project hours based on the previously-completed 66th Street and Richfield Parkway project. All estimated hours are multiplied by the appropriate hourly rates per WSB's 2008 Fee Schedule .(attached). The total. estimated cost for the construction administration is $232,136, which represents approximately 9.3% of the engineer's opinion of probable cost of construction. .~- ~~ ^ ~. ~3 • AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT Consent 92 APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: RANDY HUGHES, OPERATIONS SUPERINTENDENT NAME, TITLE • COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CITY COUNCIL MEETING SIGNATURE ~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approve two change orders to Master Mechanical Inc. for changes in air handling units for the new Maintenance Facilit L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve two change orders to Master Mechanical Inc. as follows: • PCO#029 -Change indirect fired makeup air units in the vehicie storage area for direct fired units for a credit of ($25,000.00). • PCO#031. - Change a roof top energy recovery unit to an indoor unit for a cost of $33,874.50. II. BACKGROUND As construction of the -new Maintenance Facility has progressed, the construction manager, engineers, architect, contractors and City staff have been in constant • communication reviewing plans and making changes when necessary to improve the building. The change from indirect fired to :direct fired make up air units(PCO # 029) will result in a cheaper installation cost and cheaper operating costs.. 0408 GarageChange Order • • • The change from a roof top energy recovery unit to an indoor unit (PCO #031). although no more efficient has several other advantages such as: • more aesthetically pleasing building with no unsightly exposed fixtures on the roof. • a longer life of the equipment by not being exposed to the elements • easier. to maintain. • eliminates traffic on the roof, which is destructive to roofing materials. Staff has maintained both roof top and indoor units and believes the indoor units are the best way to go when you consider the benefits for the life of the equipment. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Change orders of $25,000.00 or more need Council approval. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • These-decisions were made as construction progressed and final costs were not available until installations were almost complete. • Delays in making these decisions were not possible due to the tight construction schedule. C. FINANCIAL The total project- budget approved by the Council for the building is $12,908,000.00. • The total construction budget approved is $11,580,000.00 of which $616,230.00 is the remaining contingency. • These costs will be credited and charged to the contingency. D. LEGAL • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None V. ATTACHMENTS • Change Orders VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • • ~~ ~ ~ Re uest for informs ' g tton 005 Ater ~~#+acenC` Michigan -Wisconsin -Minnesota Detailed, RFIs Grouped by RFl Number www.acfirstcom 1`/ -Richfield->lifiairtenancx Facility-ConstrucEion Project ~ Gq Job ;~07-015 GundlacN Cf~ampion, tnc. East 66th Street & Longfellow Avenue South Tel: Fa:c F~ichfiefd, MN -~ ~ ~ ate created: stzzrzao7 Answer Company Answered $Y Author Company Authored By Short mioit Hendrickson, Inc. 'Stanley Owens . Gundlach Champion, Inc. 'Adam Hill Butter Sq Bldg, Suite 790C; !D0 N 6th. St. 600 East Lakeshore Dr Minneapolis, MN 554~U3-9505 Houghton, Mf 49931 ' Co-Respondent ~ Author RFl Number ~~ Master Mechanical RFl'# 001 ~j~ Discipline Category lndirecrt Fired Make-up air Equipment ~ Mechanical Clarification Co: Company Name Contest Illame Copies Notes Gundlach Champion, inc. Bryan Pischel 1 • Gundlac,h Champion, !na Scott McdVlyler 1 ' Gundlach Champion, Inc. Adam Hilt 1 This was originally sent to SEH directly from Master Mechanical on 6-1-07. ton Date Required: 617 The indirerct fired make-up air equipmerrt could be changed to a direct fired unit and save Appro:drrtately $25,000.00. Please advise contractor if this is an acceptable value engineering proposal. We intend to submit on TITAN make-up air equipmerrt. Our focal. rep is John J. Morgan Company. Sugg~ion Answer Date Answered: 7/9Qt2007 Substitutlon of indirect MtJA unit to a Direct fired unit is acceptable. Verify credit prior to submittal Note: Provide a Stainless steel burner wifh the direct fired unit submittal • ~9 ~9er Printed on: 7/10120Q7 GCi Master Database - p~ 1 • C] ~~.~ ° REQUEST FOR lNFORMATlON lltAST~ MECH~-NICAL! INC HVAC-001 DESIGN - BUILD, MECHAN{CAL CONTRACTOR 7027 GEMtN! RD. EAGAN, MN 55121 651.9051600 FAX 651.905.7801 • • ° i 1 • • LJ CoN'"~ • ~: ADVANTAGES OF: DIRECT FIRED ~. Higher efficiency (f00% thermal for life of the burner}. Lower operating cost. 2. Can heat air over a wide temperature range with fast temperature response. 3. No heat exchanger to corrode or leak. Burners are very durable. 4. Better turn down ratio; approximately 30:1 =better control. 5. No flue or chimney needed. Units can be located almost anywhere within ffie confines of the building, or outdoors. 6. irasily adapted to take alai combustion air from. outdoors. important if corrosive or contaminated work room air is present.. :Direct Fired Air Make-t . lND/RECT FIRED 1. E- fficiency is lower (80% max. which decreases after use}. Higher operating cost. 2. Can heat air over a limited temperature range- with a slow ; .temperature response. 3. Heat exchanger subject to severe corrosion conditions =toxic fumes. 4. Turn down ratio Limited; 3a usual, maximum 5:1. 5. Flue or chimney required, and unit must be located where one is available, unless outdoor mounted. 6. Difficu"rt to adapi to take ail combustion air from outdoors, unless roof mounted or outdoor mounted. Jp heaters. from the industry innovator; LJ ~ ~ qL' W ~ ~ T ! Z ~ O a~-- -- ~ m ~ c _ .o ~ c ~ o N U ++ -~ LL m a ~~ ~- .. 4 v *„<., ~"' 0 ~ ~ U o _ ` ~~ tlS a~ ~ Y U i aI ~ '~ ~'a ~ C d ~ O ~n m O O C - Q a ~ .a. ; _ ~ a ~' ; ~ - ~, fh ~ CO ~ ~ :~ ~ .Q ~ ~ Q -~ ~ Z m ~ 0i o p o. ~: ~ ~ a ° 9 ~ ~. Q o .. ... ~...... G .o... c _o .. . o ........... 'C .:.::. c C a ~ o o d. a L ~~ i ~ z v $ ~ ~ a M N N +~ lp H T T ~ ~ ~ N ~.' -: yy d V O ~ 1 C ~ O O ~ ~ ~ £. G O ~ N O ~ _ ,a, ~ V ~ ~ O m ~ ~ V a~ a m Q c us ~ ~ m v ~ ~ o a m .~ w ++ 3 ', m Q' ~ ~ o m d = W Q F~ Q ~ / C w O a ~ ~ 1'"' a .. V . ry n ~ 7 ~ O T m c - m v Q L O O C O1 = . G7 C .G C ~ _ p ~ ~ m~ a z ~ ~ 'a N 'p ~ Q ~. ~ ~ w m ~ m ~ ~ ~ W ~ 7 i N m r w ~ a . .v ~ ~a . ~, m ~ a t~ m 'a m ~~ °o a O _ C T I gt °o t ~ m W m a M 0 v r :9- D.. r.. 0 c T C s D u D a G L r m m 0 m U n O N r' M ~, 0 m e a ro ~. 0 i 4 • • • • i'ro- E7ichfield Maintenance.FaciliEj- Scopei Venmar Energy Recovery Unitirtlieu of Aaon Rooftop unit {per adder+dum #4) ~ • Materlat ERU-1 $26,960.00... Sales Tax 6.5% . $1,7SL40 Materials Sub-Total • ° $28,71240 Fee ~4 `;,~i ' $2,87124 . . 531,583.64 Project ManageM#ours. _ .:.. . ' ~ -$60:00 " ~ ~ ~ c. fi, ~~~t ~~ ~1~~~++ ... _ . _......... _.~.. -:......_ . ~. .... .~._ ..... ... ......_.~___.. .... $0.00 Estlmabr [tours $35.00 . . ~~ <~9'~ ~G~a~l~ ° -- - . - . ~ $o.oo Sheer Metal Hours _ _ _. MATERIAL HANDLING 10% 2° SUPERVISION 125% 25 DRAYAGE 5% 1 . t3QND ' 2% 0:4 PERMIT 2% 0.4 . WARRANTY 2°10 0.4 TOTAL HOURS. 26.7 HOURLY RATE . SUBTOTAL LABOR COST $2,08260 TOTAL LABOR COST $2,082.60 Fee ~ '' ~ $208.26 Labor Total j~„gg Oilier Rate Unlts . PARKING • $0.00 Hour $0.00. UFTS f TRUCK ~ ~ $0.00. Hour $0.00 Stab-T~ta! Other Costs $0.00 Fee $0.00 Tatal Other Cosh 5©.00 Total labor ~ Materials --- - 533,874.50 ~~ _ C7 • • ' ~~~ ' - . •. .. ~~L -SCHINA.B • VOLLHABER . LUBRATT,-INC. 4600 CHlJItCHILA. STREEF . ST. PAUL, lIBNNESOTA 55!26 . PHONE (661)461-8000 . FAX: (651)48!•862'1 • To ~ Master Mechanical • • PROPOSAL NUMSER• 56848 REV01 . . • - REBID DATE 5/24/07 ....... ............................... .................. ~ ...Terms-of :Payrriei~t....:.... .....1VET-30...DAYS' ............... . Project ~ Richfield Maintenance . .Richfield, MN DeUvery Terms FOB FACTORY Engineer K71N1N Engineering Consultants FREIGHT ALLOUVED • ' Notes- ~ ~ Date ~ S9 2008 ENERGY RECOVERY UNIT~~ . (1} Venmar Indoor energy recovery ulait.(Tag: QtU-i)wlth: 460J60J3 electrical service, Double wall ' - consiruction, Energy recovery wheel with VFD, Water source heat pump, Electric preheat and reheat, Supply and exhaust fan, 5 year compressor part warranty, sv!_ Service check, best, start aria first year's service. Total net price, freight allawed ....................,.................................................... $52,460.00 Original BuyNetmber.-------_~.~._.__--~ ~ -~.:_ ..- ~ ~-.. $~25;500.00~ . _ .... - ~ -- ~~ A~~a ----~.~~._______.~~._M~ ~ x6.36®.00 - Sincerety, ~ .. . man McCar~ - Dan .McCarty . Schwab Voilhaber Lubrai~ Inc.. Smnderd schweb-vouheter-Lubratt Inc recurs ma conadons e~ty to ibis paopemvsele sa[as ~ use raxesngt~~a 1/1 . Goods will conform to subminals. r~ • C] • J STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT ~# CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 Consent 93 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NAME, TI7ZE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration ofiaward of contracts for the..2008 Mill and Overlay Project. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the -bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract forthe Mill and Overlay Project to Hardrives, Inc. in the-sum of $486,119:64. II. BACKGROUND The pavement management program was implemented in 1988. That policy direction was set to'improve the quality of the roads within the City and maintain an acceptable roadway system for residents. Committing: to and continuing the preventive. maintenance program is essential to delay the high costs associated with the deterioration of the streets to the point of major repair.- The franchise fee implemented in 2004 provides the bulk of the funding for the City's pavement management program. In 2000, the City started. a mi11 and overlay program for streets in the worst condition. These roadways have deteriorated past the point where sealcoating remains effective in maintaining the surfiace integrity of the road and significant 0408Mi11&Overlay DERICK ANDERSON, CIVIL ENGINEER ~J • • patching is needed- every year. The base of these roads has typically been found in good_condition allowing the mill and overlay program to offer a preventive maintenance strategy that delays a costly reconstruct of the roads and also decreases immediate costs by reducing patching needs. In conjunction with regular sealcoating, the life of that roadway can be extended far beyond the,intended -life. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • In 1995, Council initiated an accelerated street maintenance program. The program includes sealcoating for all City streets in five-year cycles, asphalt crack repair, and asphalt milling and overlaying. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Regular preventive maintenance techniques such as sealcoating and overlaying delays costly street°reconstruct projects. • Construction costs have stabilized somewhat since last year, especially asphalt pavement costs. • Since all streets have been sea{coated in the last four years, no Sealcoating is planned for this year. • Asphalt pavement costs have increased over 29% since 2005. • This .year's project is much larger resulting in very competitive bid • prices. C. FINANCIAL • The City Council :identified 2008 franchise fee revenue for the following targets for expenditures: 2608 - B Street. Maintenance ~ $ 700,000 Forestry 20,000 ..Council Approved Annual Franchise Fee $ 720,000 • .Additional work may be added or subtracted from the mill and overlay contract depending on actual cost of construction. D. LEGAL • When the«amount of purchase is estimated to exceed $50,000, sealed bids shall be solicited by public notice in the manner and subject to the law governing contracts or purchases by the City of Richfield. • The advertisement for bid for the contract was published in the Richfield Sun-Currenton.March 13, 2008 and in the Construction Bulletin on March 10, 2008. • Bid opening was held. on March 27, 2008. A copy of the bid tabulation • - for the contract is attached. • The City has followed the competitive bid process and should award contract to the lowest responsible bidder. • • • Hardrives, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid within the mill and overlay budget amounts. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may chose to reject all bids and direct staff to obtain new bids; however, the prices received for the contract was very competitive, and staff does not believe lower prices can be obtained from a reputable contractor. • Council may chose not to continue with the Pavement Management Program as planned. However, the program is essential to maintaining and extending the usable life of the City's streets. V. ATTACHMENTS • A copy of the March 27, 2008 Mill and Overlay Bid Tabulation • A map depicting the 2008 Mill and Overlay project areas. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT 1VIEETING • None • • • t~.~- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Bid Opening March 27, 2008 2:15 p.m. 2008 Mill and Overlay Bid No. 08-02 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Theresa Schyma, Deputy City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for 2008 Mill and Overlay, as advertised in the official newspaper on March 13, 2008 and the Construction Bulletin on March 10, 2008. Present: Theresa. Schyma, Deputy City Clerk Derick Anderson, Civil Engineer Doris Swanson, City Manager Representative • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name Bond Non- Collusion Intent To Comply Receive Add. #1 & 2 Total Base Bid Ace Blacktop Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $582,355.74 Bituminous Roadways Inc.. Provided Provided Provided Provided $532,753.40 C. S. McCrossan fnc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $625,983.40 Hardrives, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $486,119.64* McNamara Contracting, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $578,241.54 Midwest Asphalt, Corp. Provided Provided Provided Provided $636,517.78 Northwest Asphalt, Inc. Provided. provided Provided. Provided $533,762.52 Valley Paving, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $524,976.64* * Denotes corrected figure The Deputy City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the April 8, 2008 City Council Meeting. Theresa Schyma Deputy City Clerk • • 10~~ ~ ~S ~ J g g ~ ~ a ~ ~ $ ~ ~ s ~ ~ s a ~ ~ ~ XERXES . XERXES .atop WASHBURN 3aao r ••t WASHBURN VINCENT z30o l~ VINCENT UPTON 2300 O O UPTON O O THOMAS 2700 C.~ THOMAS ~ W O ~ SHERIDAN ziwo SHERIDAN O ~ V RUSSELL 2500 ". - ~ RUSSELL ~ y OUEEN 7AOO - '° ~ a OUEEN PENN z2o0 - p PENN ~ - ~ OLIVER 2200 OLIVER fie NEWTON zto0 ~ NEWTON ~ MORGAN zao0 MORGAN ~ m s°' LOGAN tgoo LOGAN '~ $ KNOX 7800 KNOX JAMES noo JAMES IRVING 1511(1 ~,. - - IRVING HUMBOLDT t5~ - GIRARD tnoo. t ~~_ ~~ HUMBOLDT GIRARD N FREMONT 1300 - - ~ t ~ ~ ~ t ~ t ` 1 t .t ~ ~~~ ~••~ FREMONT O EMERSON 1200 • '. ~ '. „ O EMERSON DUPOM ttoo t i~` i t ~ : •: DUPONT /~~ ,- COLFAX 1000. r` r• ~ i• i• COLFAX W BRYANT tl0o ••i -.i•ri i !! ' '•t r ~ BRYANT ALDRICH 800 : ~. I AIDRICH ~~ LYNDALE 7W " - LYNDALE I~ GARFIELD e0o ~ GARFIELD HARRIET 500 ~ ~ - HARRIET GRAND ao0 GRAND PLEASANT s0o- -~ PLEASANT PILLSBURY zoo ~ - PILLSBURY O WENTWORTH 100 ~ '`0 ~>~' WENTWORTH BLAISDELL 000 : BLAISDELL NICOLLET NICOLLEf 1st 100 - „~ ist STEVENS 124 STEVENS 2nd zoo ~! :.. ~ - ...r {~ 2nd 3rd aoo 3rd CLINTON 4th 400 ~ 4m 5th 500 ~ !. ~ Sm PORTLAND ~ - - ~ " PORTLAND OAKLAND 520 PARK 700 OAKLAND COLUMBUS 720 ~ PARK ~ _ • COLUMBUS CHICAGO eoo - ~ - i ~ ~ CHICAGO ELLIOT 300 •• 'I Q ELLIOT 10th 7000 - - y~,,~~ t4-" 10th 11m 1100 11th 12th 1200 , ' 12th 13th 1300 ' - 13th ~ tam taoo tam. O 15th 1500 - 15th'. 9 BLOOMINGTON 7524 - ^..-7 p BLOOMINGTON 16th 1800 - 16th G m 17th 1700 - - ~ 17th m 18th 1800 a ~ ~ 18th CEDAR tti00 - - CEDAR. 3 V ~ T V V J V ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W s ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ii' 0 g m - to Z I®~ rn • r-~ LJ AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6J REPORT # 94 .~ J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DERICK ANDERSON, CIVIL ENGINEER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: .7 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:. REVIEWED BY CITY 1 MANAGER: -ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for the 2008 Concrete Curb and Gutter Repair. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for 2008 Curb and Gutter and Miscellaneous Concrete Repair to Create-Construction, Inc. in the sum of $75,897.50: II. BACKGROUND. Each year the City awards a contract to replace broken and dangerous curb and gutter, and other concrete as necessary. This year's concrete contract includes removal; replacement and appurtenant work for concrete curb and gutter at various locations: Because the specifications were written early in the year; not all 2008 concrete needs have been identified. Therefore, the contract provides for an increase/decrease. in quantity to meet the budgeted amount:. There were ten plan holders for the March 27, 2008 bid opening. Six bids were received.. III. BASIS 4F RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY 0408SideCurbGutter • • • As part of the City's street maintenance program, each year the City contracts to replace broken and dangerous curb and gutter and other concrete work as necessary. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Create Construction, Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder to submit a bid and is an established contractor that meets all requirements. C. FINANCIAL The annual street maintenance budget includes funding for replacement of miscellaneous broken curb. The estimated amount of .necessary curb and gutter repair over the mill & overlay area was $100,000. D. LEGAL When the amount of purchase is estimated to exceed $50,000, sealed bids shall be solicited by public notice in the manner and subject to the. law governing contracts or purchases by the City of Richfield. The advertisement for bid for this contract was published in the Richfield Sun-Current on March 13, 2008 and in the Construction Bulletin on March 10, 2008. • A bid opening was held on March 27, 2008. A copy of the bid- tabu~ations for the Concrete Curb and .Gutter contract is attached. • The City follows a competitive bid process and should award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to reject the bid and direct staff to obtain new bids; however, the. prices received for this- work are fair, and staff does not believe lower prices can be obtained from a reputable contractor. • Do not do the work. V. ATTACHMENTS • Bid minutes/tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • • • • ~~ i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA. Bid Opening March 27, 2008 2:00 p.m. 2008 Concrete Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Bid No. 08-01 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Theresa Schyma, Deputy City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for 2008 concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter repair, as advertised in the official newspaper on March 13, 2008 and the Construction Bulletin on March 10, 2008. Present: Theresa Schyma; Deputy City Clerk Derick Anderson, Civil Engineer Doris Swanson, City Manager Representative • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name Bond Non- Collusion Intent To. Comply Total Base Bid Concrete Idea. Provided Provided Provided. $134,475.00 Create Construction, LLC Provided Provided Provided $75,897.50 Curb Masters Provided Provided- Provided $81,721.25 Rnn Kassa C:nnstnirti~n Inc. Provided Provided Provided $78.637.50 u • • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # E)R REPORT #. 9S STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: BARRY FRITZ, ACTING PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE • COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Continue the public hearing to April 22, 2008 regarding consideration of request for new on- sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, with optional 2 AM closing for Aribel's, 1120 East 66th Street, Richfield. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Continue the public hearing to April 22, 200 regarding consideration of a request for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, with optional 2 AM closing for Aribel's , 1120 East 66tH Street. Richfield. II. BACKGROUND In December 2007, the City Council approved the renewal of Aribel's Restaurant's on-sale wine and 3.Z percent malt liquor licenses with some conditions. One condition was that the applicant would have all taxes in arrears to the Department of Revenue paid in full by December 31, 2007. Noncompliance with this stipulation would result in the applicant having to apply fora 2008 wine/beer license as if she were a "new, first time" applicant. The applicant did not comply with this stipulation. Therefore, the renewal license was not issued. 040808 PH Aribel's New Liquor License Request • • On January 10, 2008, the City received the application and other required documents for anew on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Aribel's. • The applicant has paid the required fees. The corporate structure of the organization remains unchanged. However, the applicant originally applied as a natural person, not a corporation. This was later corrected to a corporate application. The applicant and sole owner/manager of Aribel's is Chetranee Jwalapersad Seepersaud. Her husband Leon serves as the cook. A public hearing was initially scheduled for the April 8, 2008 Council Meeting. At the time of the initial application, no other party was indicated as having a financial interest in the property. It was later revealed that the mortgage for the business is in the name of a friend of the applicant: Jaiprakash Munna. Richfield Ordinance requires that a complete background be conducted on the owner of the premises if different from the owner of the business applying for the license. Criminal history checks on Jaiprakash Munna show no convictions. In addition, he has no driver's record in Minnesota or Connecticut, which is his primary residence, but Public Safety Detectives need additional time to complete a thorough background. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • . A public hearing is necessary before issuance of a on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor license. • City Code requires a background check on the premises owner in addition to the license applicant. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Public Safety staff needs additional time to complete a thorough background on the owner of the premises. C. FINANCIAL N/A D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Staff is not recommending approval or denial of the. licenses. requested. If the Council should decide to deny the license request, this would mean that the applicant would not be able to obtain on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses. V. ATTACHMENTS ` None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Chetranee Jwalapersad Seepersaud has been notified of the proposed continuation. • • 1...._~ • AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing AGENDA ITEM # $ REPORT # 96 ~~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE C. • COUNCIL PRESENTER: INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an ordinance amending various sections of the Zoning Code to correct obsolete references and one incorrect reference related to the procedural requirements for rocessin interim use ermit a lications. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Approve a second reading of the attached Ordinance amending Subsections 522.05, .534.03, 537.05, 537.11, 544.03, 547.13 and 547.15 of the Richfield Citv Code, II. BACKGROUND On November 13, 2007 the City Council approved a second reading of new ordinances related to zoning.throughout the City. As staff has begun to use the new code, incorrect references have been noted. These incorrect references are the result of countless revisions during the preparation of the new code. The only proposed amendment of consequence is within the Administration Section and is in regard to interim use permits. Currently the procedural requirements for interim use permits are to follow the same requirements in place for zoning code or map amendments. These requirements detail a process that requires a first and 040808 - 2nd Reading Update Zoning References •. second reading a delayed effective date based on publication. These requirements are onerous and unnecessary in cases of interim use permits. The section • regarding interim use permit procedures was intended to reference the procedural requirements of conditional use permits. Conditional use permits require a public hearing, published notice and direct mailed notice to property owners within 350 feet of the site, but do not require a second reading or involve a delay in the effective date of the permit. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Incorrect references within the code should be corrected to ensure clarity. The current inconsistencies could cause the code to be misinterpreted. • The procedural requirements now in place for interim use permits are the same as those required for zoning ordinance amendments. • The proposed interim use permit procedure includes a public hearing, published notice and notice to residents within 350 feet of the project site. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Discussions with the Planning Commission and City Council prior to • the adoption of the new zoning ordinances detailed a procedure for interim use permits that would be the same. as that of conditional use permits. • A typographical error resulted in the current requirements which include a second reading and additional publication, leading to a delayed effective date.. • The proposed change to the interim use permit section will not reduce or remove- requirements related to public notice or participation through a public hearing. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The Planning Commission voted unanimously (8-0) to recommend approval of the attached Ordinance. • If adopted by the Council, the proposed changes will take effect 30 days following publication in the Sun Current newspaper. IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~ . • Approve the attached Ordinance with revisions. • r~ U U V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance VI. PRINCII'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A r 1 ~J r~ L.J L~ r 1 L~ ~~~ BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE 522.05, SUBDIVISION 7; 534.03, SUBIDIVISION 3; 537.05, SUBDIVISIONS 2 AND 3; 537.11, SUBDIVISION 3A; 544.03, SUBDIVISION 8B; 547.13, SUBDIVISION 9D; AND 547.15, SUBDIVISION 2 THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 522.05, Subdivision 7 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 7. Home occupations that are operated in accordance with Subsection 51.509.21 of this code. Section 2 Subsection 534.03, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 3. Retail, service and office uses with 50,000 square feet or less of gross floor area (excluding those uses listed in S~es#+et~s-Subsections 512..07 and 534.807 of this code). Permitted uses may exceed the 50,000 square foot size limitation if located within a shopping center or other multi-tenant . building. Section 3 Subsection 537.05, Subdivisions 2 and 3 of the Richfield City Code are amended to read as follows: Subd. 2. Regional retail services in MU-C. Regional retail services in the MU-C district provided that retail uses with over 50,000 square feet of gross floor area, are located within amulti-tenant or multi-use shopping area of other multi-tenant development and meet the mixed use requirements of subsection 537.8407, Subd. 2. Subd. 3. General retail services in MU-N. General retail services in the MU-N district provided that the following conditions are met: The retail uses front on an arterial street and meet the area requirements of subsection 537.8407, Subd. 2. Section 4 Subsection 537.11, Subdivision 3a of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: a) All buildings shall have at least one primary patron entrance facing an abutting public street, rather than the parking area. Buildings abutting a major pedestrian circulation area as defined in Subsection 537.8611, Subdivision a-88 shall have at least one primary entrance facing and • accessing the major pedestrian circulation way. Primary entrance is defined as the principal entry through which people enter the building. A building may have more than one .primary entrance. Primary entrances shall be open to the public during all business hours. 040808 - 2nd Reading Update Zoning References • ~~ ~~ `~ Section 5 Subsection 544.03, Subdivision 8b of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: b) Boulevard plantings: In instances of constrained sites (544:1-Su~~- 509.25, Subd. 6), landscape standards may be met through boulevard plantings under a permit from the Richfield Public Works Department. Section 6 Subsection 547.13, Subdivision 9d of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: d) If the project is not in compliance with the approved plans, the project shall be subject to review as specified in Subdivision 11. Section 7 Subsection 547.15, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 2. Application, public hearing, notice and procedure. The application, public hearing, .public notice and procedure requirements for interim use permits shall be the same as those for ~^^~^^ °~°"`~"''°^~ conditional use ep rmits as provided in Subsection 547.909. In addition to the general planning and zoning application requirements, applications for interim use permits shall include: a) A signed consent agreement, provided by the City, agreeing: i. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future reapproval of the interim use permit. ii. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and iii. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user will abide by conditions of approval thaf the City Council attaches to the interim use permit. b) A statement addressing the relationship of the proposed project to the neighboring uses. Section 8 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of April; 2008. ATTEST: Debbie Goettel, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk .7 • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT Prop. Ordinance 9 97 APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: CORRINE HEEVE, CITY ATTORNEY NAME, COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CITY COUNCIL MEETING C ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of an ordinance amending various sections of the City Code related to liquor licenses for hotels and combination licenses for wine and 3.2 malt li uor. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a first reading of an .ordinance relating to sale of intoxicating liquor by hotels, on-sale wine licenses and combination licenses, and amending subsections 1202.01, 1202.05, 1202.07 and 1202.21 of the Richfield City Code and schedule a second reading for ril 22. 2008. II. BACKGROUND The City Code allows the issuance of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license to hotels, _ restaurants and clubs. The City Code also imposes a requirement on licenses issued to hotels and restaurants that the gross revenues from sale of food be greater than 50 percent of the total revenues attributab{e to food and alcohol sales. State law allows hotel licenses to be issued to hotels that have at least 25 rooms and seating for at least 30 guests. A local hotel establishment has asked the City to consider amending the City Code to permit a tower ratio of food sales as compared to food and alcohol sales. At a worksession on March 25, 2008, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would permit hotels to obtain intoxicating liquor licenses under requirements that 040808 hotel liquor license C7 • are more realistic for hotel operations yet consistent with the public safety need for • responsible sale of alcohol. City staff is proposing that the food ratio be reduced so that hotels must have greater than 20 percent of their total food and alcohol sales come from the sale of food. The current 50 percent requirement would remain in place for restaurants. A lower requirement. is appropriate for hotels, where most of the sales would. be expected to come from guests who will have accommodations at the hotel. Because the food ratio is reduced for hotels, the staff is recommending that the City Council impose a higher room requirement of at least 100 rooms and a minimum room size of 150 square feet. Those requirements are intended to restrict licenses to business-class. hotels that typically have high quality, trained and responsible management. In preparing the ordinance, the City staff determined that the City Code does not re- state certain State law requirements regarding food consumption for wine licenses and combination wine and malt Liquor licenses. Although the State law requirements apply regardless, the staff determined that it would be preferable to have the State requirements restated in the ordinance, for the benefit of applicants and licensees. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City desires to attract and retain hotel chains and operators that will provide dining and beverage service that appeal to business travelers. • The public safety demands that adequate controls be placed on the sale of liquor to promote responsible use and dispensation of alcoholic beverages: B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The current .requirement for the ratio of food sales as compared to 'food and alcohol sales presents amarket-competitive disadvantage for the City's hoteliers. • Applicable State food requirements should be identified in the city ordinance. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • City ordfinances may be more restrictive but may not be less. restrictive than state law. • There is no State law that imposes a food requirement on intoxicating • liquor licenses. • State law does impose food requirements on wine licenses and combination wine/malt liquor licenses • r~ IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ . • Approve a first reading of the ordinance with additional. revisions. V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance ~ , VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Representatives of Richfield Inn r~ LJ • • • A-I BILL NO. •J:. - ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR BY HOTELS, ON-SALE WINE LICENSES AND COMBINATION LICENSES; AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 1202.01, 1202.05, 1202.07 AND 1202.21 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 1202.01, subdivision 7 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: ~ Subd. 7. "Hotel" means an establishment where food and lodging are regularly furnished to transients and which has: (i) a dining room serving the general .public at tables and having facilities for seating at least 30 guests at one time; and (ii) not fewer that 25 100 guest rooms, each • room having an area of no less than 150 square feet. , Sec. 2. Subsection 1202.05, subdivision 3(d) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (d) Wine. (1) On-sale wine licenses may be issued to restaurants clubs. (2) No more than seven wine licenses may be issued. Sec. 3. Subsection 1202.07, subdivision 2 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 2. Ineligible places. No license shall be granted to or held by: (a) any premises upon which taxes or assessments or other financial claims of the city or of the state are due, delinquent and unpaid. The city council may, upon request by the applicant or licensee, waive strict compliance with this provision if the applicant or Licensee has contested their tax liabilities or other financial claims through a process permitted by federal or state regulations or by 4 . city ordinance; or is working out debt problems under the supervision of a bankruptcy court or pursuant to some other formal agreement. No waiver may be granted, however, if taxes or any portion thereof, remain unpaid for a period exceeding one year after become due; or (b) any premises owned by a person who is ineligible under this chapter. Premises are not disqualified if the sole basis for disqualification is that the owner is a minor; or (c) with respect to an on-sale intoxicating liquor license, any premises that has a common entrance or exit between the area in which intoxicating liquor will be sold and any other business or establishment. A public concourse or lobby shall not be construed as a common entrance or exit for purposes of this subsection. Sec. 4. Subsection 1202.21, subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 6. No combination sales. (a) On-sale licensees may not sell alcoholic beverages off-sale. (b) No 3.2 .percent malt liquor licensee may permit the consumption of intoxicating liquor on the licensed premises, unless licensed to do so. The holder of an on-sale wine license issued pursuant to state law and this Code who is also licensed to sell on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor pursuant to state law and this Code, and whose gross receipts are at least sixty (60) percent attributable to the sale of food and non-alcoholic beverages is authorized to sell intoxicating malt liquor at on-sale without an additional license, provided that valid sales figures are submitted to the public safety director at the time the on-sale wine license is renewed Sec. 5. Subsection 1202.21, subdivision 18 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 18. Food requirements. ~ Restaurants GIs licensed under this chapter must be conducted such that of the total alcohol and food sales, more than fifty (50) percent of that total is derived from business activities related to the serving of food. (b) Hotels licensed under this chapter must be conducted such that of the total alcohol and food sales, more than twenty (20) 5 • • 1 '~ percent of that total is derived from business activities related to the serving of food. A hotel licensee must make food available for purchase or consumption at any time that alcoholic. beverages are sold or served by the licensee. (c) A licensee holding a wine license under this section shall not allow any person to consume wine unless the wine_is consumed with a meal Sec. 6. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Adopted the 22"d day of April, 2008 by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. - Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk .7 • • • AGENDA SECTION: Resolutions AGENDA ITEM # IQ REPORT # 9$ APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE • • COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: .STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER ~` d ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of Agency Agreement No. 92194 with the Minnesota. Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) to receive federal funds to perform a study to redesign Richfield Arterials. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion:: Adopt the. attached resolution to approve Agency Agreement No. 92194 between Mn/DOT and the City of Richfield to receive federal funds, to perform a study to redesign Richfield Arterials. IL BACKGROUND The City of Richfield applied for and received a 100% federal grant under the Non- Motorized Transportation PilotProgram in the amount of $50,000 to conduct a study of the design of Richfield's four north-south arterials: Lyndale Avenue, Penn Avenue, Portland Avenue and Nicollet Avenue. On February 26, 2008, ,Council approved Resolution 10065 accepting this grant. The planning study will evaluate. alternative cross-sections, similar to what has been discussed for 75th Street and 76th Street as part of the proposed Metro Sanitary Sewer Interceptor Project., 0408Arterials Agreement • • An agency agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation is needed in order to allow Mn/DOT to .pass through federal funds to the City of Richfield so that the City can finance the study. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION : A. POLICY • The updated Comprehensive Plan promotes the design of streets that accommodate all modes of transportation including motorized .vehicles, pedestrians, transit and .bicyclists. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City's arterial streets are wearing out and will need to be reconstructed in the coming years. it is important to .design. the streets to meet current and future travel patterns of all users. C. FINANCIAL • The City has been awarded a 100% federal grant in the amount of $50,000 to conduct the arterials study. Costs in excess of $50,000 will be covered by the City's Engineering operating .budget. • D. LEGAL • The City is authorized to enter into agreements with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to receive federal funds. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to not approve the Agency Agreement. Doing so would mean the design study ofi Richfield's arterials would. not be done. V. ATTACHMENTS • .Resolution authorizing acceptance of Agency Agreement no. 92194 between .the Mn/DOT and the City of Richfield for federal participation in the Richfield arterials design study. • Map of Arterials to be studied. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. • • • ~ ~- ~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGENCY AGREEMENT. N0.92194 BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN THE RICHFIELD ARTERIALS DESIGN STUDY WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is proposing to use federal funds to perform a planning study of alternative designs of its arterial streets to accommodate motor vehicles, transit, pedestrians and bikes as part of a Complete Streets design; and WHEREAS, the project is eligible for the expenditure of federal#unds and is identified by the City of Richfield as City Project 41001, and is identified by the Minnesota Department of Transportation records as State Project SP 157-091-001, and is identified in Federal records as Minnesota Project NMTP 2708 (154); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Minnesota Stat. Sec. 161.36, the Commissioner of Transportation be appointed as Agent of the City of Richfield to accept as its agent, federal aid funds which may be made available for eligible transportation related projects. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the -Mayor and the City. Manager of the City of Richfield are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the City to execute .and • enter into. an agreement with the Commissioner of Transportation prescribing the terms and conditions of said .federal aid participation as set forth and- contained in "Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement No. 92194," a copy of which said. agreement was before the City Council and which is made a part hereof by reference. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of April 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs,-City Clerk • • • t o-- .,. ~ ~ ~ ~` ~ E _ ~ E 3 I S ~ ~~ ~~F ~ ~ _ ~ E 3 - - ~ ~ ~ t aI 1 F ~.-.. - , - E 7 S E .~ ~ _ Jf,,... I €,. ~ i t ~.,. ~ ,~ ~ .,r,. ~. ~- ~ ~ j ' ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~._ s j _p - _ ~ - S g ,a ~ ._.~ ff ~ ..e r °~ 3 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a s , ~~ i g ~ 4 PAY Yt~ ~ ~. ~ s i ~ - - 6 ~ .fin 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ _ _ ~ ~~ ~~~~;~._.~.e._ ~.~~® ~ z T g ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~a --- i § ~. g m ~w ,.__.._ 7i 7 b t _. 'e ~ ~ e I ~~ _~a ~~ ~ ~e.~;° .....E ~~~~ _ ~ ~ _ E 1 ~ _ .. E ~ e g e ' ' ~s D I I i I ~: ~ z r' u- ~ ~ z o v ° ~ D Z ~ m -~ m N fl. D m ~ G, < ~ ,.. fl. m m cmn a v N O N 0 0 r 1 J Q. ~1 ~~ '~ VI v ~. ~/~ tC Z • ~J • ~~~ ~ Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194 STATE OF MINNESOTA AGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING . FOR S.P. 157-091-OOi; M:P. NMTP 2708 (1.54) This agreement is entered into by and between City of Richfield ("City") and the State of Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("Mn/DOT"), Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.36, the City desires Mn/DOT to act as the City's agent in accepting federal funds on the City's behalf for the construction, improvement; or enhancement of transportation. financed either in whole or in part by federal funds, hereinafter referred to as the "Project"; and • The .City is proposing a federal aid project to develop alternative cross-section designs , improve sidewalks and providing possible bicycle lanes for Penn Avenue, Portland Avenue, Nicollet Avenue and Lyndale Avenue in the City of Richfield ,hereinafter referred to as the "Preliminary Engineering;" and. The Preliminary Engineering is eligible for the expenditure of federal- aid funds, and is identified in Mn/DOT records as State Project 157-091-001, and in Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") records as Minnesota Project NMTP 2708_(154); and- Mn/DOT requires that the terms and conditions of .this agency- be set .forth in an agreement. THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. DUTIES OF THE CITY. A. DESIGNATION. The City designates Mn/DOT to act as its agent in accepting federal funds~in its behalf made available for the Project. B. ELIGIBILITY /COSTS.. The estimated cost of the Preliminary Engineering is $50,000.00. 1. It is anticipated that 100% (up to $50,000.00 of the cost of the Preliminary Engineering is to be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA. The (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page 1 • • • IO-~{ City will pay any part of the cost or expense of the work that the FHWA does not • pay. 2. Any costs incurred by the City prior to authorization of the. Federal Funds, will not be eligible for federal participation. 3. Eligible cost-and expense, if approved, may consist of the following: a) The cost of conducting study for street cross-sections, sidewalks and bicycle lane -for Penn Avenue, Portland Avenue, Nicollet Avenue and Lyndale Avenue in the City of Richfield. b) The direct labor charges for City employees for the time that said employees are performing work pursuant to this agreement must be documented in a Public Interest Finding and approved by the FHWA, Said labor charges may include the prorata share of "labor additives" applicable to said labor charges. Costs to the City of "labor additives" consisting of holiday pay, vacation, sick leave, retirement, pension, unemployment taxes, compensation and liability insurance, lost time charges. and similar costs incidental to labor employment will be reimbursed only when supported by adequate records. c) The applicable equipment rental charges for City owned equipment used by the City and mileage charges for employee owned vehicles used by the City • .~ on work performed pursuant to this.agreement, at rates reflective of the City, actual cost. d) Expenditures for materials, supplies, mechanical data processing and equipment rental, limited to the actual expenditures for the purposes of this agreement. e) The cost incurred by the City to employ outside forces to perform any or all of the work pursuant to this agreement, subject to the provisions of section I:D. SUBLETTING. 4. Expenditures for general administration, supervision,. maintenance and other overhead or incidental expenses of the City are not eligible for federal participation. 5. Acceptability of costs under this agreement will be determined in accordance with the cost principles and .procedures set forth in -the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulations, Contract Cost Principals and Procedures, 48 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 31 which is hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this agreement. 6. For costs expected to exceed. $50,000, the City must request the preparation and • execution of a supplement to this agreement, prior to incurring such costs. C. STAFFING... (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page 2 • • • 1©,5 1. The City will designate a publicly employed registered engineer, ("Project Engineer"), to be in responsible charge of the Project and to supervise and direct the work performed under any contract let for. the Project. If City .elects to use a private consultant for engineering services, the City will provide a qualified, full- time public employee of the City, to be in responsible charge of the .Project. The services of -the City to be performed pursuant to this agreement may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the. City is notified in writing by Mn/DOT that such action is permitted under 23 CFR 1.33 and 23 CFR b35.i05 and state law. This written consent will in no way relieve the City from -its primary responsibility for performance of the work. 2. During the progress of the work on the Project, the City authorizes its Project Engineer to request in writing specific engineering and/or technical services from Mn/DOT, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.39. Such services -may be covered by other. technical service agreements_ If Mn/DOT furnishes the services requested, and if Mn/DOT requests reimbursement, then the City will promptly pay Mn/DOT to reimburse the state trunk highway fund for the full cost and expense of furnishing such services... The -costs and expenses will include the current Mn/DOT labor. additives and overhead rates, subject to adjustment based on actual direct costs that have been verified by audit. Provision of such services. will not be deemed to make Mn/DOT a principal or co-principal -with respect to . the Project. • .3. The City will furnish the personnel, services, supplies, and equipment necessary to properly supervise, inspect, and document the work for the Project. D. SUBLETTING.. The City will .prepare. request for proposals in accordance with Minnesota law and applicable Federal laws and regulations. 1. The City will solicit proposals for Preliminary Engineering after obtaining written notification. from Mn/DOT that the FHWA has authorized the Project. Any Project advertised prior to authorization will not. be eligible for federal reimbursement. 2. The City will prepare .the request for proposal; which will include all of the federal-aid provisions supplied by Mn/DOT. 3. The. City will prepare and publish the proposals solicitation for the Project as required by state and federal laws. The City will include in the solicitation the required language for federal-aid contracts as .supplied by Mn/DOT. The solicitation will state where the City will receive the sealed proposals. 4. The City may not include other work in the. contract for the authorized Project without obtaining prior notification from Mn/DOT that such work is allowed by FHWA. Failure to obtain such notification may result in the loss of some or all of the federal funds for the Project. 5. The City will prepare proposal packages and prepare and distribute any addendums, if needed. (Mn/DOT Agreement NO.. 92194) Page 3 • • !O- ~ 6. The City will receive open, and evaluate proposals. 7. After the proposals are opened, the City will consider the proposals begin negotiations on the price of the Preliminary Engineering in accordance with the practice commonly-known as Quality Based Selection. If the proposal contains a goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, the City will not award the bid until it has received .certification of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation from the Mn/DOT EquaLEmployment Opportunity Office. 8. This written consent; will in no way relieve the City from its primary responsibility for .performance of the wark. Subcontractor agreements must contain all appropriate terms and conditions. of this agreement. E. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. l . The City will request approval from Mn/DOT for all costs in .excess of the amount of federal funds previously .approved for the Project prior to incurring such costs. Failure to obtain such approval may result in such costs being. disallowed .for reimbursement. 2. The City will prepare reports, keep records, and perform work so as to enable Mn/DOT to collect the federal. aid sought by the City. The- City will retain alI records and reports'in accordance. with MnIDOT's record retention schedule for federal aid projects. 3. Upon completion of the Project, the Project Engineer will determine whether the work will be accepted. F. PAYMENTS.. 1. The entire cost of the Project is to be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA and by other funds provided by the City. The City will .pay any part of the cost or expense of the Project that is not paid by federal funds. 2. The- City may request partial payments not more than once each thirty (30) days. The Project Engineer will certify each partial. payment. 3. The invoice and supplements thereto, will contain all details that may be necessary for a proper audit. Such details will consist of at .least the following: (a) A b"reakdown of labor by individual, classification, dates and hours worked times the applicable rate to arrive at a total dollar amount for each individual. (b) The ,labor additive shall be applied to total labor dollars. (c) The equipment charges shall be broken down by type of equipment times the applicable rate and dates used to arrive. at total equipment (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page 4 c: ~i l p-7 charges. (d) A detailed breakdown of outside services used. and supporting - invoices and documentation that costs of outside services have been paid. (e) Detail for. materials, supplies, and other items with the description, units, and unit prices included in the invoice. If materials or supplies are purchased from an outside source, a copy of that invoice should be included. (f) The invoices will include 100% of eligible charges applicable. to the Preliminary Engineering so that the prorata share of federal and City participation can be applied to the total costs. 4. Following certification of the final estimate, the City may request reimbursement for costs eligible for federal funds. The .City's .request -will be made to Mn/DOT and will include a copy of .the certified final estimate along with the required records. 5. Reimbursement of costs under this agreement will be based on actual costs. G. LIMITATIONS. 1. The City .will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations. 2. Nondiscrimination. It is the policy of the FHWA and the State of Minnesota that no person in the United States will, on the grounds of race, color, or national ...origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of; or be subjected to discrimination ..under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance (42 U.S.C. 2000d). Through expansion of the mandate for nondiscrimination in .Title VI and through parallel legislation,. the prescribed bases of discrimination include race, color, sex, national origin, -age, and disability. In addition, the Title VI program has been extended to cover all ..programs, activities and services. of an entity receiving Federal financial assistance, whether such programs and activities are Federally assisted or not. Even in the absence of prior discriminatory practice or usage, a recipient in administering a program or activity to which this part. applies, is expected to take- a~rmative action to assure that no person is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, the program or activity on the grounds of race, color, national .origin, .sex, age, or disability. It is the responsibility of the City to carry out the above requirements. 3. Workers' Compensation. Any and all employees of the City or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required or permitted by the City under this agreement will not be considered employees of Mn/DOT, and any and all claims that may arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of Minnesota on behalf of said employees, or other persons while so engaged, will in (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page S • r~ LJ • l~ 0 A no way be the obligation or responsibility of Mn/DOT. The City will require proof of Workers' Compensation Insurance from any contractor and sub- contractor. H. AUDIT. 1: The City will comply with the Single Audit Act of 1984- and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circular A-133 including amendments and successors thereto,.which are incorporated herein by reference. 2. As provided under. Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05; subdivision 5, all books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the City are subject to examination by the United States Government, MnIDOT, and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate, for a minimum of six years. The City will be responsible for any costs associated with the performance of the audit. I: MAINTENANCE. The City .assumes full responsibility for the operation and maintenance of any facility constructed or improved under this Agreement. J. CLAIMS. The City acknowledges that MnIDOT is acting only as the City's agent for acceptance and disbursement of federal funds, and not as a principal or co- principal with respect to the Project. The City will pay any and ail lawful claims arising out of or incidental to the Project including, without limitation, claims related to contractor .selection (including the solicitation, evaluation, and acceptance or rejection of bids or proposals), acts or omissions in performing the Project work; and any ultra vires acts. The City will indemnify, defend. (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney General), and hold Mn/DOT harmless from any claims or costs arising. out of or incidental to the Project, ..including reasonable attorney fees incurred by Mn/DOT. The City's indemnification obligation extends to any actions related to the certification of DBE participation, even if such actions are recommended by Mn/DOT. II. DUTIES OF 1VIn/DOT. A. ACCEPTANCE. Mn/DOT accepts designation as Agent of .the City for the receipt and disbursement of federal funds and will act in accordance herewith. B. PROJECT ACTIVITIES. 1. Mn/DOT will make the necessary requests to the FHWA for authorization to use federal funds for the Project, and for reimbursement of eligible costs pursuant to the terms of this agreement. 2. Mn/DOT will provide to the City copies of the required Federal-aid clauses to be included in the proposal solicitation and will provide the required Federal-aid provisions to be included in the Proposal. 3. Mn/DOT will review and certify the DBE participation and notify the-City when (Mn/DOT P,greement No. 92194) Page 6 ' - /o-~ ' certification is complete. If certification of DBE participation cannot be obtained, then the City must decide whether to proceed with awarding the contract. Failure to obtain such certification will result in the project becoming ineligible for federal assistance, and the City must make up any shortfall. C. PAYMENTS. 1. Mn/DOT will receive the federal funds paid by :the FHWA for the .Project, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 161.3.6, Subdivision 2. 2. Mn/DOT will review and certify each partial pay request. Following certification of the partial estimate, Mn/DOT will reimburse .the City; from said- federal funds made available to the Project, for each partial payment request, subject to the availability and limits of those funds. 3. Upon completion of the Project,. the City will prepare a final payment request in accordance with the terms of this agreement. Mn/DOT will review and certify the final payment request with a final audit. 4. No more than 90% of the reimbursement due under this agreement will be paid until completion. of the final audit and approval by Mn/DOT's authorized representative. 5. If Mn/DOT does not obtain funding from the FHWA or other funding source, or funding cannot be continued at a sufficient level to allow far the processing of the federal aid reimbursement requests, the City may continue. the work with local funds only, until -such. time as Mn/DOT is able to process the federal-.aid reimbursement requests.. D. AUTHORITY. Mn/DOT may withhold federal. funds; if Mn/DOT or the FHWA determines that the Project was not completed in compliance with federal. requirements. E. INSPECTION.. Mn/DOT, the FHWA, or duly authorized representatives of the. state and federal government will have the right to audit, evaluate.and monitor the work performed under this agreement. The City will make available all books, records, and documents pertaining. to the work hereunder, for a minimum of seven years following the closing of the construction contract. III. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. Each authorized representative will have " responsibility to administer this agreement and to ensure that all payments due to the other party are paid pursuant to the terms of this agreement. A. The City authorized representatives are Thomas Foley, Transportation Engineer, City of Richfield, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, MN 55423-2599, phone 6i2- 861-9791, or his successor. B. Mn/DOT's authorized representative is Lynnette Roshell, Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Aid for Local Transportation, 395 John Ireland (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page 7 ~, • t , J~~~ Boulevard, Mail Stop 500, St Paul, MN 55155, phone 651-366-3822, or her successor. IV. TORT LIABII.TTY. Each party is responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the -acts and omissions of any others and the results thereof. The Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736, governs Mn/DOT liability. V. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party will assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this agreement without prior written approval of the other party. VI. AMENDMENTS. Any amendmentslsupplements to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the same parties who executed the original agreement, or their successors in office. VII. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This agreement will be effective upon execution by -the City and by appropriate State officials, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, and will remain in effect for two, (2) .years. from the effective date or until all obligations set - forth in this agreement have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. VIII. TERMINATION.- This agreement may be terminated by the City or Mn/DOT at any time,. with or without cause, upon ninety (90) days written notice to the other party. Such • termination will not remove any unfulfilled financial obligations of the City as set forth in this Agreement. In the. event of such a termination the City will be entitled to reimbursement for Mn/DOT-approved federally eligible expenses .incurred for work satisfactorily performed on the Project to the date. of termination subject to the terms of this agreement. • (Mn/DOT Agreement No. 92194) Page 8 ', c: • • k ~. IN WITNESS- WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION City certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the contract on its behalf as required by By: applicable resolutions, ordinances, or charter provisions Title: Director, State Aid for Local Transportation By: Date: e ie oe e Date:April 8, 2008 COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION Mayor Title: By: , Date: By: Steven L. Devich Date: April, 8 , 2 00 8 i Title: City Manager tMn/DOT-Agreement No. 92194) .Page 9 • • • c: AGENDA SECTION: Resolutions AGENDA ITEM # 11 REPORT # 99 ~~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 8, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: CORRINE HEnvE, CITY ATTORNEY NAME, Tr7zE .7 COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution establishing a policy concerning ex pane contacts on zoning matters. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution establishing a policy concerning ex ante contacts re ardin zonin matters. IL BACKGROUND The City Council makesdecisions regarding zoning matters, including applications for rezoning, variances and conditional use permits. It is not unusual for applicants to contact Council members regarding pending applications. Although the Council recognizes the right of citizens to contact their elected officials, contacts by applicants with Council members outside of public meetings may create an unfavorable impression upon the public about the transparency of its government. The Council has requested a policy to provide guidance regarding ex pane contacts by applicants. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Council .recognizes the importance of citizens having access to their elected officials to express opinions on pending matters. • It is important for public business to be conducted in a transparent fashion that avoids appearances of undue influence or secrecy. 0408exparte • • • There needs to be a clear and consistent policy for dealing with such requests. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The Council has requested guidelines to assist members of the Council in dealing with requests by applicants for individual meetings with Council members. C. FnvANCIaL • None.. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney prepared the proposed policy. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Council may choose to take no action at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. ~i • I~ U • fr l RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR EX PARTE CONTACTS ON ZONING MATTERS WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council has authority over and decides various issues related to zoning, including applications for rezoning, comprehensive plan amendments, conditional use permits and appeals from variance determinations; and WHEREAS, members of the public should be encouraged to petition their government and to contact Council Members on matters of public concern; and WHEREAS, the Council also recognizes the importance of transparency in public decisionmaking; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to establish guidelines for its members, for applicants and for the public regarding contacts outside of Council meetings with Council Members on matters pending before the Council NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: • 1. An ex parte contact is an .oral or written communication that: (a) occurs outside a public meeting; (b) relates to a matter pending before the City Council; and (c) occurs between individuals seeking to influence the decision of the City Council on the matter and individual members of the City Council 2. On zoning matters pending before the Council, including text amendments to the zoning code, rezoning applications, applications for comprehensive plan amendments, conditional use permits, appeals from variances, or any other matter brought to the Council -under the zoning code, Council Members are encouraged to provide all ex parte written communications that they receive regarding the application to the City Manager for distribution to other members of the Council. Council Members are also encouraged to relate the substance bf oral communications that they receive at Council meetings, particularly any, contacts that they receive from individuals whom the Council Member knows to have a financial interest in the Council decision. 3. Council Members are not prohibited from making site visits to properties that are the subject of pending applications, but Council Members should disclose the substance of any communications that occur during such site visits at the time the matter is considered by the Council, as provided in this resolution. 4. Council Members shall not participate in any serial meetings or communications with the intention or purpose of arriving at a,decision outside the public view or preventing public discussion of a matter pending before the council ,Council Members .are not prohibited from meeting individually with applicants or interested parties on zoning matters that may come before the Council, but Council Members are encouraged to make the disclosures recommended under paragraph 2 of this resolution. If the applicant or interested party indicates that he or she has communicated with other Council Members on the same subject, the Council • • r~ L d ~-a.- Member should inform the person not to repeat or in any way share with the Council Member what other Council Members have said about the matter. Adopted by the City of Richfield this 8th day of April, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • • • • • AGENDA SECTION: ether Rnsi ness AGENDA ITEM # ~ 7 .REPORT # 100 ~J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL g~ 2U~8 REPORT PREPARED BY: KRISTIN ASxER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER ]NAME, TITLE • • COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of private utility undergrounding within the project limits of the 6300 Block of Lyndale Reconstruction Pro'ect. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Direct staff on how to proceed with the Lyndale Avenue ..utility crossing at 63rd Street located within the project Fimits of the 6300 L ndale Reconstruction Pro'ect. IL BACKGROUND The City Council has identified undergrounding of private utilities within .the City's ..right-of--way as a goal for the major roadways within .Richfield. Only one overhead facility exists within the 6300 Block of Lyndale, which is a crossing line at 63ra .Street.' Because both Xcel Energy and Comcast are utilizing the crossing, the design to bury. the crossing entails much more than a typical parallel crossing would. Xcel Energy has provided the City with. a cost estimate., of $90,000 to bury the overhead crossing. If the Council chooses to have the utility crossing line put underground, payment options will be presented for consideration at the April 22nd Council Meeting. If Xcel .Energy's was directed to utilize their tariff to recover costs through the City's 0408XcelLyndale • • ~~ LJ ratepayers, the $90,000 cost can be recovered in 6 months time ($1/month/residential meter). III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council has identified undergrounding. of public utilities in the right of way as a goal in the City's Comprehensive Plan (Goal 16 - 1997 Comprehensive Plan). B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Xcel Energy and Comcast both. have facilities on the crossing line that will trigger extensive design and time to relocate. The timing of the .roadway project. is coordinated with the Crosstownproject. C. FINANCIAL • The estimated cost difference between relocating the poles and placing Xcel's facilities underground is $90,000. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has been working with staff on the utility • undergrounding process. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council may direct staff to have the utility placed. underground. • The Council may direct staff to leave the crossing above ground as it exists today. V. ATTACHMENTS. • Photo of overhead facility crossing Lyndale Avenue at 63~d Street: VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • • • • ~~l Overhead utility crossing Lyndale Avenue at 63rd street (facing north). • • •