The URL can be used to link to this page

09-11-08 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 • 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 bean 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 (1) Regular City Council Meeting of August 12, 2008; (2) Special City Council Meeting of August 20, 2008; and (3) Special City Council Meeting of August 20, 2008 PRESENTATION 1. Annual meeting with Friendship City Commission COUNCIL DISCUSSION • 2. Council discussion • Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 3. Council approval of agenda • CONSENT CALENDAR 4. 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 proposed ordinance to City Administrative Code Chapter III, Subsection 310.07, Subd. 3 describing vacancies and scheduling second reading for October 14, 2008 S.R. No. 208 B. Consideration of approval of resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of assessment roll for weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property and scheduling public hearing for October 14, 2008 S.R. No. 209 C. Consideration of approval of resolution determining results of City's Primary Election on Tuesday, September 9, 2008 S.R. No. 210 D. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing amendment to conditional use permit. to allow day care services for additional 60 children (up to 205 children) at 7001 Harriet Avenue, Richfield High School S.R. No. 211 E. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing transfer of funds from PIR Fund to Central Maintenance Facility Project Fund S.R. No. 212 F. Consideration of approval of resolution granting subdivision waiver for property • located at 6600 Oakland Avenue into two parcels; one to be accrued to adjacent property at 6601 Portland Avenue (T&T Auto) and other to be used for right-of-way purposes; 66th Street/Portland Avenue intersection reconstruction project S.R. No. 213 G. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing City of Richfield to enter into agreement #91869 with Progressive Rail, Inc: and Commission of Transportation for installation and maintenance of railroad crossing signals at intersection of West 76th Street with railroad tracks of Progressive Rail, Inc. in Richfield S.R. No. 214 H. Consideration of approval of recreational facility and amenity dedication proposal request at Richfield Ice Arena from Richfield Hockey Association S.R. No. 215 Notes: 5. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: PUBLIC HEARING • 6. Public hearing regarding: • Second reading of ordinance establishing one-year moratorium on development of certain properties in Penn Avenue Corridor guided for mixed-use; and • Resolution authorizing summary publication of ordinance; and • Amended resolution establishing one-year moratorium on development of certain properties in Penn Avenue Corridor between Highway 62 and 68th Street Staff Report No. 216 Notes: RESOLUTION 7. Consideration of approval of 2008 Revised/2009_ Proposed Budget resolutions adopting 2009 preliminary property tax levy, setting truth in taxation hearing dates, authorizing budget revisions, authorizing revision of 2008 budget of various departments, and authorizing use of Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund refund interest earnings for police and fire expenditures Staff Report No. 217 Notes: • OTHER BUSINESS 8. Consideration of denial of request for subdivision waiver to allow division of 7300 Upton Avenue with finding that minimum lot standards are not met Staff Report No. 218 Notes: 9. Consideration of confirmation of City Manager's appointment of Barry Fritz as Public Safety Director for City of Richfield Staff Report No. 219 Notes: 10. Consideration of confirmation of City Manager's appointment of John Stark as Community Development Director for City of Richfield Staff Report No. 220 Notes: • CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 11. City Manager's report Notes: 12. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if -more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for 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: 13. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. • 0 N .~ L `~ s v y- ~ o ~~ ~ v n ~~ • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~- STAFF REPORT CONSENT 4A 208 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2U~8 • REPORT PREPARED BY: 'DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: PAM DMYTRENKO ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading consideration of amendment to the City Administrative Code Chapter III, Subsection 310.07, Subdivision 3, describin vacancies. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the first reading of the proposed ordinance amendment to the City Administrative Code Chapter III, Subsection 310.07, Subdivision 3, describing vacancies and schedule the second reading for October 14, 2008. III. BACKGROUND City Administrative Code, Chapter III, Subsection 310.07, describes the selection policies used to fill job vacancies in the City. ,Subdivision. 3, Vacancies, gives the City Manager the ability to prescribe the competitive application process and requires job vacancies for regular positions to be posted for at least five working days. Under current City Code, no .hiring lists can be established, except for the positions of Police Officer and Firefighter, which are vetted through the Civil Service Commission process. However, the ability for the City Manager to allow for the establishment of hiring lists • for the positions of Community Service Officer (CSO) and Dispatcher is being recommended. Just as for police officers and firefighters, both of these positions require that extensive background checks be conducted. These checks are time- consuming and costly. In addition, the turnover rate for the position of CSO, in particular, is high partly because it is routinely used as a stepping stone to a career 0911 Vacancy ordinance chg ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER as a police officer. The opportunity to utilize a hiring list would minimize the time • necessary to fill these critical positions when vacancies arise. The proposed ordinance change to Section 310.07, Subdivision 3, Vacancies, is as follows: Subd. 3, Vacancies. Application to compete for a position vacancy must be filed in the manner prescribed by the City Manager. Vacancies for regular positions will be posted for at least five working days. For the positions of Community Service Officer (CSOI and Dispatcher, the City Manager may prescribe a process process. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • .The new ordinance language would allow job vacancies for the positions of CSO and Dispatcher to be filled using an established hiring list, effective for no longer than twelve months from the date of the recruitment, in order to minimize significant time and costs associated with those specific job recruitments. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • In order to meet the publishing requirements for the second reading of an ordinance amendment, it is recommended that the second reading be scheduled for October 14, 2008. C. FINANCIAL • The establishment of a hiring list for the positions of Community Service Officer and Dispatcher would minimize significant time and costs associated with these specific recruitments. D. LEGAL • The proposed modification to the City Ordinance regarding vacancies complies with applicable State Statutes. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Do not approve the ordinance amendment and take no further action. • Defer first reading consideration to another date. ATTACHMENTS • City administrative code. ~VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • ~{R-~ BILL NO. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 310.07 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OFRICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 310.07, Subdivision 3 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled "Vacancies" is hereby amended: Subd. 3. Vacancies. Application to compete for a position vacancy must be filed in the manner prescribed by the City Manager. Vacancies for regular positions will be posted for at least five working days. For the positions of Community Service Officer (CSO) and Dispatcher, the City Manager may prescribe a process which provides for the establishment of a hiring list that would extend for a period of no longer than twelve (12) months from the date of the recruitment process. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of October, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # tF$ REPORT # 209 • ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE SIGNATURE • REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: .ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the resolution declaring costs to be assessed for current services performed for weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public, health or safety hazards from rivate ro ert . I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll for weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property and setting the public hearing date for October 14, 2008. II. BACKGROUND • The special assessment for elimination of public health or safety hazards from private properties is for costs incurred by the City in connection with abatement of these hazards on certain properties in the City, which are not properly maintained. • .The owners of the subject properties are notified by the City to correct the public health or safety hazards and have failed to do so within a timely limit. • The property owners were notified that if the public health or safety hazards were not abated within the proper time limit, the City would take the corrective action necessary and bill the property owner. • Finally, each year the City utilizes City Public Works staff to cut weeds on certain properties in the City not maintained by the owners. If the owner fails to cut the weeds in a timely manner after notification by the City, the City undertakes the weed destruction and bills the property owner for the service. 0911 nuisance sp asmt declar costs • In all cases, property owners will be notified that any unpaid charges of fees may be assessed against the property. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The nuisance properties were not maintained by the owners and the City incurred costs to abate the nuisance. • Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one- yearassessment for these costs. • Notice of the certification will be published in the Sun Current September 25, 2008. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • The proposed special assessment for the elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property is $4,832.35 with an additional 6% interest penalty. • The proposed special assessment for weed elimination from private property is $7,246.45 with an additional 6% interest penalty. • Costs incurred for city staff time in the clean up of the properties or to remove the weeds are included in the special assessment amount. • • A $25.00 administrative fee is charged to all properties. • The affected property owner may prepay the original principal amount without interest within 30 days from the date the Council adopts the assessment, scheduled for October 14, 2008. If the original principal. amount is not paid, the assessment will be charged 6% interest. D. LEGAL No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting should a legal question arise. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not approve the attached resolutions and have the costs absorbed by the City. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • ~6-f RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR WEED ELIMINATION FROM PROVATE PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OR ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PROVATE PROPERTY. WHEREAS, costs have been determined for weed elimination and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private properties in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such work ordered amount to $12,078.80. ' Public Health or, - Weed Safety Property Address Property iD Number Elimination Hazards 7608 SHEIDAN AVE SO 32-028-24-44-0006 125.00 7127 - 10TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-21-0024 507.00 6315 - 15TH AVENUE SO 26-028-24-12-0116 125.00. 691.56 7201 THOMAS AVE SO 32-028-24-14-0069 125.00 - 6220 LOGAN AVE SO 28-028-24-22-0042 237.00 - 7045 PORTLAND AVE SO 35-028-24-22-0096 167.00 - 7645 THOMAS AVE SO 32-028-24-44-0013 167.00 - 7311 - 7315 NICOLLET AVE SO 34-028-24-13-0014 - 250.00 553.00 6324 - 16TH AVENUE SO 26-028-24-11-0018 160.00 - 6445 - 1ST AVENUE SO 27-028-24-13-0043 125.00 - 7438 WASHBURN-AVE SO 32-028-24-42-0071 200.00 - 7345 NICOLLET AVE SO 34-028-24-13-0045 317.00 - 6839 CEDAR AVE SO 7338 OAKLAND AVE SO 25-028-24-33-0055 35-028=24-23-0005 _ 164.00 172.00 6616 SHERIDAN AVE SO 29-028-24-41-0055 - 186.00 6915 - 13TH AVENUE SO 26-028-24-43-0064 125.00 - 7137 - 18TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-11-0125 125.00 - 6245 DUPONT AVE SO 28-028-24-11-0034 125.00 - 6845 - 12TH AVENUE SO 26-028-24-43-0084 - 115.00 7539 - 13TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-42-0020 200.00 - 7101 - 13TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-12-0064 125.00 - 7124 - 16TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-11-0115 - 109.00 7138 - 18TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-11-0098 125.00 144.00 7632 - 12TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-34-0012 200.00 - 6433 GIRARD AVENUE SO 28-028-24-13-0009 125.00 212.00 7437 NICOLLET AVE SO 34-028-24-42-0058 147.00 - 6821 CEDAR AVE SO 25-028-24-33-0059 - 183.00 6321 - 15TH AVENUE SO 26-028-24-12-0115 147.00 - 7018 - 1ST AVENUE SO 34-028-24-12-0012 - 284.00 7414 UPTON AVE SO 32-028-24-42-0035 - 164.00 6809 RUSSELL AVE SO 29-028-24-44-0039 250.00 - 7233 PORTLAND AVE SO 35-028-24-23-0111 - 178.00 7044 ELLIOT AVE SO 35-028-24-21-0045 - 137.79 6640 - 5TH AVENUE SO 27-028-24-41-0032 125.00 - 6321 LOGAN AVE SO 28-028-24-21-0115 235.00 - 7221 PORTLAND AVE SO 35-028-24-23-0004 125.00 - 6745 NICOLLET AVE SO 6900 - 5TH AVENUE SO 27-028-24-42-0048 27-028-24-44-0042 134.00 125.00 7600 - 11TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-34-0023 - 240.00 10 & 12 - 67TH STREET EAST 27-028-24-42-0104 153.00 - 7204 GRAND AVE SO' 34-028-24-23-0044 - 133.00 1403 - 66TH STREET EAST 26-028-24-42-0070 - 198.00 • • ~~ 8 7420 COLFAX AVE SO -24-41-0065 33-02 160.00 - 7211 - 16TH AVENUE SO 35-028-24-14-0040 219.00 - 7244 STEVENS AVE SO 34-028-24-13-0054 491.00 201.00 709 - 68TH STREET EAST 26-028-24-33-0118 125.00 107.00 200 - 73RD STREET WEST 34-028-24-24-0060 - 158.00 6812 IRVING AVENUE SO 28-028-24-34-0012 - 183.00 6821 UPTON AVE SO 29-028-24-43-0019 125.00 - 7309 HARRIET AVE SO 34-028-24-23-0137 554.45 - 7044 ELLIOT AVE SO 35-028-24-21-0045 - 93.00 6816 NICOLLET AVE SO 27-028-24-34-0051 132.00 109.00 6624 COLUMBUS AVE SO 26-028-24-32-0007 85.00 - 7208 CHICAGO AVE SO 35-028-24-23-0114 259.00 117.00 Total $7,246.45 $4,832.35 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $12,078.80. 2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such work against each benefited property, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in her office for public inspection. 3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. 4. A hearing shall be held on the 14th day of October, 2008 in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m., or as soon as hereafter as it may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by the weed elimination and/or removal of public health or safety hazards assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment at least two weeks prior to the hearing and shall state in the notice the total cost of the weed elimination and the removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 CONSENT 4C 210 REPORT PREPARED BY: NANCY GIBBS, CITY CLERK • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution determining results of City Primary Election on Tuesday, Se tember 9, 2008. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution determining the results of the City Prima Election on Tuesda ,September 9, 2008. II. BACKGROUND The City Primary Election was conducted on Tuesday, September 9, 2008 in conjunction with the State Primary Election. The City Primary Election included contests for the offices of Council Members of Wards 1 and 3. The Richfield City Charter states that the Council shall meet and canvass the election returns at the next regular or Special Council meeting immediately following any regular, primary or special election, but in no event later than the time prescribed by State law, and must make full declaration of the results as soon as possible, and file a statement thereof with the City Clerk. • Minnesota Statutes Chapter 205 also governs the conduct of municipal election. Section 205.02 Subd. 2 states that all City elections are governed by Chapter 205 as far as practicable. Section 205.065 Subd. 5 sets the date for canvassing any city primary election as "within two days after an election." Moreover, the provisions of Chapter 205 preempt the City Charter; therefore the canvassing of election results is scheduled for the September 11, 2008 Regular City Council Meeting. 0911 ELECTIONS ~ NAME, TITZB III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Gity Charter provides that the City Council declare the results of the election. • The Regular City Council Meeting of September 11 provides a timely opportunity to canvass the election results in accordance with State Statutes Chapter 205. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City Council must take action by September 11, 2008. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • City Charter Section 4.07 provides that the City Council declare the results of the Election. State Statute Chapter 205 sets the date for canvassing the election and controls over the charter provision. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • N/A . V. ATTACHMENTS • Completed resolution will be provided on September 11, 2008. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • SAMPLE ~C ~ ` RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DETERMINING RESULTS OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD HELD ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of-the City of Richfield that the Council, having received and considered the tally of votes by the election judges of the Primary Election held September 9, 2008, the results are determined to be as follows: Votes cast for Council Member Ward 1: Candidate 1 0,000 Four Year Term Candidate 2 0,000 Candidate 3 0,000 Candidate 4 0,000 Votes cast for Council Member Ward 3: Candidate 1 0,000 Four Year Term Candidate 2 0,000 Candidate 3 0,000 Candidate 4 ,, 0,000 Candidate 5 0,000. Candidate 6 0,000 Total number of voters in this election:. 00,000 Attachment A is the complete tabulation of results. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED th at the following list of jud ges were those certifying returns of said election: PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield., Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # LFD REPORT # 211 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 • REPORT PREPARED BY: INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING & ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request to amend a conditional use permit to allow an increase in the number of children to be served by day care facilities at 7001 Harriet Avenue, Richfield High School I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve an amendment to a conditional use permit to allow day care services for an additional 60 children at 7001 Harriet Avenue, Richfield High School, bringing the total allowable children served to 205. II. BACKGROUND The Parents in Community Action South Branch Early Childhood Family Development Center (PICA) is currently located within Elliot Elementary School. PICA serves children between the ages of three and five, and provides care from 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Programming changes at the Elementary School require that the PICA program be relocated. The property at 7001 Harriet Avenue contains both the Richfield High School and Richfield Central buildings. The property currently provides-day care for up to 145 students. PICA serves up to 60 children, bringing the proposed total to 205 children. PICA will temporarily be located within the High School building while renovations are completed on the Central Building. It is anticipated that they will move into the Central Building at some time in the future. 091108 - 7001 Harriet ACUP ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Children are bused to the PICA program and six staff members will be on site. There is adequate parking to accommodate the increased number of children served. No changes are proposed for the design of the property. The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their August 25th meeting and unanimously voted to recommend City Council approval. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY Day care facilities that serve more than 12 persons and are located within non- residential buildings are conditionally permitted in the Single-Family Residential (R) District. There are eight conditions that must be met to approve a conditional use permit (547.09, Subd. 6). All requirements are met as described below: a) The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This requirement is met. The property is designated as "Quasi-Public" which is consistent with a school facility. b) The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. This requirement is met. c) .The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. This requirement does not apply, as there are no official redevelopment plans for this site. d) The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this Code. This requirement is met. The site already conforms to the performance standards section of the Code. No exterior changes will be made. e) .The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. This requirement is met. f) The proposed use will not have undue impacts on the public health, safety or welfare. This requirement is met. g) There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. This requirement is met. The child care center currently operates within the City; the proposed change allows them to remain in the area. h) The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this Code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is met, as explained below. There are two specific conditions of the Single-Family Residential (R) District that must be met to approve the conditional use permit (514.07, Subd. 9). Both • conditions are met as described below: a) Designated pick-up and drop-off areas shall be located on the site. This requirement is met. A bus drop-off. area is depicted on the attached site .plan and is immediately adjacent to the school entrance. b) Outdoor play areas shall be set back at least 75 feet from any lot line that abuts a residential parcel. This requirement is met. IVo new play areas are proposed. ° B. CRITICAL ISStrEs • The PICA program would like to continue to operate in Richfield. • The High School property provides adequate space and parking for-this use. There have been no complaints regarding parking in the area.. No neighbors spoke either for or against the proposal at the public hearing held August 25th before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of the amendment to the conditional use permit. C. FINANCIAL • -The required application fee has been paid. D. LEGAL • 60-DAY RULE: 60 day clock `started' when complete application was received on August 7, 2008. A decision must be given to the applicant by • October 6, 2008, OR the Council must notify the applicant that it is extending the deadline (up to a maximum of 60 additional days or 120 days total) for issuing a decision. • NOTIFICATION: Notification of this fiearing was provided in accordance with City and State requirements. E. ENVIIZONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Deny the requested amendment with a finding that the requirements necessary to obtain a conditional use permit are not met. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • .Site plans • Interior plan • Area zoning & land use maps • VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Representatives of Parents in Community Action (PICA) `~ r-' RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DAY CARE SERVICES FOR UP TO 205 CHILDREN AT 7001 HARRIET AVENUE WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests an amendment to a conditional use permit for day care facilities serving up to 205 children on land generally located at 7001 Harriet Avenue, legally described as: Blocks 2, 3, 10 and 11, Augsburg Park Addition, .including adjacent parts of vacated streets. and alleys. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield has recommended approval of this requested amendment at 7001 Harriet Avenue at its August 25, 2008 meeting, and WHEREAS, this requested amendment at 7001 Harriet Avenue meets those requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Section 547.09, Subd.6; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the amended conditional use permit;. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. An amended conditional use permit is issued to allow day care facilities serving up to 205 children, as described in City Council Staff Report No. , on the Subject Property legally described above. 2. This amended conditional use permit at 7001 Harriet Avenue is subject to the following conditions in addition to those specified in Section 514.07 Subdivision 9 of the City's Zoning Ordinance: • That the recipient of this conditional use permit record this resolution with the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subdivision 1 and Richfield Zoning Code 547.09, Subdivision 8. 3. The conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months,, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subdivision 8. Adopted by.the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 091108 - 7001 Harriet ACUP `iYJ -- ~- 7001- Harriet Ave S -CUP Amendment 2008 Aerial N A 0 80 160 320 480 640 Feet Community Development (MP) 8.18.08 - ----- - 127 a (28 Freez , 689 jsl ~ ( t i 4i~ ° 1~7 ~~~ 354 (s II~II' 126 ' Slage <nza (a 2~ ° ~127A t 1128 ° En l ° • • J I I 199 7 I 106 W. u ~ nr uu Hal~1 135 ,...... _: .~ ..; .. ~ ~~ Lunch Raom 1069 3103 0910 isff ~ Sernng : 1^S31511~ J107 t00A ~ 558 j51) ~. nH Ilway N Ia'n'~1 H31 '~ 4 I II 1 ~ - - Y~~"9 I _ T 11. uh I P ;i41 I I 5L: (.I ~ I 1~9 ~-_-~ 191 eau J eze no!xr7 ..-,,, .._... .__ _ ~ I- tecervln 121 11-~ 112 ~~ 102 ~ ~ u .. 152 16zA 142 9 110 n02 (sry- Hali': 'Han Hall SBT (nlj 606 (sfl ri7~ G11 r ~^-i"^S-'~" `I Q 159 i3 C 7701aP ~ 755 is/) 1i I Hall Hall y.,p a 152E ,~-1 17 11 P I~ F I W hen 113 '.. Hyl 101 199 ~ 524 Q Hall: 143 I. ~2~ 1412 !s•~ har rt ! ,p ^~1gg8~~~ - C722 ~- .~7 (sL 1J6 1^4 133' 13oL 125p 125ga~„_ J I I ~ '!H6 11 ~a Ball id I 7:A :st) 1 L -1. (• eOu^.a~l 1I~ 1211 311 j ~w • _ u 12?A 122 '-"'117E- .136 t3] 13~ 25 126 117 ] .~T-1 I I Olbcea : H 197 ~ ~53 144 _--...-----""---~ ~rFf¢$r)` 1i46 (ai 11se ~- -ms- 1 1 1 1 _ I13B 13t a :.~ Olfice [ 78:3 t) 1.37 iaf{ 7G51sf1 'j 1f(~ 1 l .. .T... PISA Ic,11P 135;sO 1...1,1 ~ ~Hall~ 14B 1 ~~~~e ~ ~ 123 Hdll - h ~j, 1ws .L Hall 1 19: 781 !sl) ~ Y5'"`)"~~I 70 (xlj I'ta6 Y) ~ Ito lasu(si, ?+! I~°., so-l ~~ .'{ ,. ~., ~ ~- ~U~It II~ICO 1rJe- ,j 1oT --- , ~-J"~~ - I ? 0 ya -~ ~ T ~ t>i ~ a -: ~ 116 106 awl 79rr (s!1 ~,~1 1B -- l~ 4 -- ~ - 116 116 11 106 1 101 109 _- _ ~~~ Gtass~o~: Hau laeo e3 . 6 as on ~ :- I ~E ffic om~e 1LoaJ I ¢^~i I- `I Offcel_ 138 134 132 1311 __ i I10$ I 111 ~~~ Hell ' `r Y 1st 1 1 u (, 67 (r~ I'. 700 +, sfl 112 12 4~~~a ~-P'I ° 143 ~ I~ ~t^ '-~ 1618 tsa tsa~ ~ 121 1' Jf29. I tB ..- '01 tisfl ' 113 ~ I~ ~ ~_ I II ~~ ~G ` TSY 66 n4 ~~ ~~~„uv~ ~I c11o 73s _, ,I,I ~,-r. ~~ ~ °'~, I 1158 ° Hall T07{sQ Jm 14 114 i 531x1: ° ° ° ° ° X121 1 4 ~ ~''^.-.4~ftltl-b __.,-_ 14B 09 ~) '. H II a. c -)pr ~ ~ - ~'~ : O1a2; N 686 rsf) 770 (sf) + I74 (x1p77 (al II ncfi 1 IT. , ..._..~ / ~ q ull ,I 149A ~ 149 ~ ~ ~~ `~ ~ I X11 i s. ~ , s ~, ~7 Z' rr1 t , Ise .Hau 1001 ;:n e:i5 tsO -. t52 ~• 101 -- - 1 f A"A _.._ __._..__. .. ..._ _ T - - _. Ym I ~ G.. 5 I 118 i. ;~.. __,. f - .... i 193 ix1) :FI?0. '122 ~_... .I___`, ! G~31.~ ~ .r-.(_ j E113 _ _ ~ lu - - _ pUJ-'-.' _. . _.. _ Hell ~ qdg alsll ` I I f H II ,k91.:r 123 ._ a ,.__.. ..; ....._ .. . ,zo _.~ I. a ,tie 1st Floor -_ __ --- I 780 (sl{ Para _...,.~~- ~ °.~......,a._ _.: _ .z..d Gym 6 II t~ ~ X13.] ,.._._a.' yjg~!I511 \1. _. ..' ,~ ._ __ _: boo X44 Entry 11J 112 lox„ 106 107 ~, IPM -1118 n' 1 °L efiy _ 10~P f/__1 ,. ;•91x, ~ cr 7 ~ ~ I I~i~ I ~~ '_'rJ~ L,'~( ~~~t._`J~'; i L' L^- t (~.~ ~,~ yLf` ;/"! t ~Y/'J/lG~~h kE'~~~~~A~'~^~`TR>S ~T _.._.........---..__...-------...--"-----"- ~' " ~~ y d ~I L~~.z _ ~I mm~naasrnool aama...--.-. ar7 ~ Richfield HS e,•°.~... A•~,~ d.~... ~~ d ~ Floor Plan (Typical) rrp° su°s n°~° '1CY 8fd - . -____._....._.__~.....___c.........__......._ o Ia _V Ja' aa' W IW ' hpo _ g 1st Floor D- 7001 Harriet Ave S -CUP Amendment 2008 Surrounding Land Use RES RES RES RES R QUASPBLC RES RES RES RES RES ES RES RES RES RES RES RES RE RES RES RES RES RES ~O RES RES RE RES RE R S RES RES. RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES t RES RES RES RES . SCH RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RR RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES 9 RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES R ES RES RES RES R RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES RES S R RES N RES =Residential SCH =School QUASPBLC =Quasi-public RR =Railroad 0 125 250 500 750 1,000 Feet Community Development (MP) 8.10.06 It N p -- ~" 7001 Harriet Ave S -CUP Amendment 2008 Surrounding Zoning R R R R R R R R R R R R R `~ R O R R R R R M R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R =Residential 0 120 240 480 720 960 Feet Community Development (MP) 8.10.06 fI AGENDA SECTION: CpNCFNT AGENDA ITEM # /~y REPORT # 9 ~ 9 ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11 ~ 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR r'j REVIEW: 1.~ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approve by resolution the transfer of funds from the Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund to fund a onion of the Central Maintenance Facilit . I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the transfer of funds from the PIR Fund to the Central Maintenance Capital Project Fund. II. BACKGROUND The City Council approved the planning, design and construction of a new Central Maintenance Facility on July 11, 2006. Construction of the new facility began in 2007 and the facility was completed and opened for use in June of 2008. Richfield City Code Section 315.07 Subd.3, allows the use of funds from the PIR Fund to be used for the betterment of public safety facilities in the City. The Public Safety Department is one the primary users of the Central Maintenance Facility. C, III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • N/A • B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The new Central Maintenance facility is complete and the use of $300,000 of PLR Fund monies is an essential part of the funding for the project. C. FINANCIAL • Total cost of the new Central Maintenance Facility was budgeted at $12,908,500. • Funding for the project included a combination of bond proceeds and internal funding sources. , • The use of $300,000 from the PIR Fund was a planned internal funding source for the construction of the Central Maintenance Facility. ; D. LEGAL • Richfield City Code Section 315.07 Subd. 3, allows.funds from the PIR Fund, not to exceed $300,000, to be transferred by resolution of the City Council to provide funding for the betterment of public safety facilities in the city. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • None. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • ~tE~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE'PIR FUND TO THE CENTRAL MAINTENANCE CAPITAL PROJECT FUND WHEREAS, The City of Richfield City Council approved the planning, design, and construction of a new Central Maintenance Facility on July 11, 2006; and WHEREAS, a .portion of the new Central Maintenance Facility will be utilized. for public safety purposes; and WHEREAS, The budgeted cost of the project was $12,908,500 and an essential part of the funding for the project was a transfer of $300,000.00 from the PIR Fund; and WHEREAS, Richfield City Code Section 315.07 Subd. 3, allows the proceeds of the PIR Fund, in a total amount not to exceed $300,000.00, to be transferred by resolution to provide funds for the acquisition and betterment of public safety facilities in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AS FOLLOWS: ' 1. The City Council authorizes the Finance Manager to transfer $300,000.00 from the. PIR Fund to the Central Maintenance Facility Capital Project Fund. . Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • REPORT PREPARED BY: • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 4g REPORT # 213 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2U~8 MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ~ ~ NAME, TITLE INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: , ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a subdivision waiver that will divide the property located at 6600 Oakland Avenue into two parcels; one to be accrued to the adjacent property at 6601 Portland Avenue (T&T Auto) and the other to be used for ri ht-of-way purposes. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution granting a subdivision waiver for roe located at 6600 Oakland Avenue. II. BACKGROUND The property located at 6600 Oakland Avenue was acquired by the City as part of the 66th Street/Portland Avenue roundabout project. The northern 28 feet of the lot are needed for right-of-way associated with the project. Additional land is also required from the property located at 6601 Portland Avenue, the location of T&T Automotive. In an agreement approved by the City Council on October 23, 2007, the City will exchange the excess right-of-way at 6600 Oakland Avenue for the necessary right-of-way from the T&T Automotive parcel. In order to complete this transaction, the City must approve the subdivision of 6600 Oakland Avenue. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 091108 - 6600 Oakland Subd. Waiver A. POLICY • All plats or subdivisions of land in the City must be approved by Council resolution (500.03, Subd. 2). • In any case in which compliance with platting requirements will result in an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of the platting regulations, the Council may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect (500.05, Subd. 2). B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The Council approved a Land Exchange Agreement between the City and Timothy & Luanne Teachout (T&T Automotive) on October23, 2007. • The Council approved a Transitory Ordinance authorizing the sale of the excess right-of-way at 6600 Oakland Avenue on November 27, 2007. • The owners of T&T Automotive are required to combine the properties under their ownership into a single tax parcel. The parcel at 6600 Oakland Avenue may not be developed separately. C. FINANCIAL • The application fee for the subdivision waiver has been covered by the City as the action is due to the City-initiated roundabout project. D. LEGAL • Legal publication is not required; however, notice was sent to residents and property owners within 350 feet of the property. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Draft alta survey dated 7/24/08 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • Y~~~' RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SUBDIVISION WAIVER FOR 6600 OAKLAND AVENUE WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of a subdivision waiver for the division of certain parcels of land located at 6600 Oakland Avenue, legally described as: Parcel A: Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 340, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to divide the above-described Parcel A into two parcels, legally described as: Parcel One: That part of Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 340, according to said plat on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of the northerly 28.00 feet thereof. Parcel Two: The northerly 28.00 feet of Lot 18, Auditor's Subdivision No. 340, according to said plat on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval for the subdivision waiver; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that compliance with the City Code Section 500.05, Subdivision 1 would result in unnecessary hardship and that failure to comply therewith will not interfere with the purposes of the platting regulations of Section 500.01. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: A waiver for the subdivision of the Subject Property legally described above is hereby granted subject to the following condition; That the owner of Parcel One, as legally described above, take steps to combine said property with the adjacent land under the same ownership currently in use as a service station. 2. City staff is authorized and directed to take any action necessary to effectuate this Resolution and to authorize the recording of conveyances complying with the terms of this Resolution; Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor . ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 091108 - 6600 Oakland Subd. Waiver • • I .... : ,.: o I ,.. ~. ° ~, : :, ~~' :::~:. "S ~ f1 N~~'d aNd~~id0~ ~' . _ _. .. ~: . _ ._. _. _ _.. __ _ m, .__ .~ . .._ . ,, o r; o 0 .._ J ::..: ., ,, .r ZZ'OL d ' \ 00'6ZL ; + ~~~.. ~ ~ CC W ,~ ... c ~. I ~.. ;~.. H. - o ... N o ~ C~ ~ ~, a c ~ ._.. ~ I ,. b ~I C Y O o ~ ~~ ' ~ O J ~ ~ v~! _.. _.. ~ .. u O I I ~ \ :u;... .,. I i~ . ' Ca I I ~.... ~%~• i ~ ~ _.__._ ................ _..... ........ ..... .........._~.b_.._............_. .. .... .. ~ ~ ~ ~., I yy 'j'' ~ I ~ ,_. -.. a :.. i, _~ .r;,u....,... • 5' . ~ F ~, : _' ~ ~.. ... q , o. ~,~ .. •': , , ~ i I Q .~,.. o .a .:. ; ~... .• m . ._ ..._ _. ... ~ j, . ; ;-; .: .. ` co O. Q ., .. . ,, !c N ' i . _ • ~ ~ ~ - :...... ..~__... ... .. .. . ..._ ~ .. O ' I 1' ~ i ~ ~ R ~ %~ ~ f ~ ~ i'! ~! , ~ : .. o L ~ '•:~ C w .., ,.. I I C ~ C o ..__; _._ .., ... .. F r ~. .yQ r R 'I ~ . ~...I `o g j , N + W N O ~ _ 6 ~ .2fh~ I r I g ~ i __. _..._ ....... ~'q m O m OD i ~ IzT P 3 .£S~ P ~S s N 00 it y,t v~`-* ~ ~~ 1VM30t5 313tlON00 ii`~ - _,- ~S M ggg ,,,ggg ,¢ R ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~. $ ~s ~_~ ~~~ g ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~8~ ~ ~~ s • AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • SEPTEMBER 11, ZOOS CONSENT 4G 214 THOMAS FOLEY, REPORT PREPARED BY: TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~~ REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: D ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution authorizing the City of Richfield to enter into agreement #91869 for the installation and maintenance of railroad crossing signals at the intersection of W. 76th Street with the railroad tracks of the Pro ressive Rail, Inc. in Richfield. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the City of Richfield to enter into agreement #91869 with Progressive Rail, Inc. and the Commissioner of Transportation for the installation and maintenance of railroad crossing signals at the intersection of W. 76tH Street and the tracks of the Progressive Rail, Inc. in Richfield. IL BACKGROUND The City of Richfield has been awarded a federal grant to install railroad crossing signals at the intersection of 76th Street and the railroad tracks of Progressive Rail, Inc. The attached agreement needs to be approved bythe Minnesota Department of Transportation, Progressive Rail, Inc. and the City of Richfield. Approval of the agreement means that Mn/DOT will provide 90% federal funds to cover the cost of design and construction of the railroad crossing signals at 76tH Street where it crosses the railroad tracks in Richfield. Progressive Rail also will agree to install, operate and maintain the railroad crossing signals. The City will agree to furnish the 10% local funds to cover project costs and supervise the installation of the signals. 091176thStRRCrossingSignal Timing of construction of the railroad crossing signals will be coordinated with the Metro Sewer Project set to begin in 2009 on 76t" Street. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The State of Minnesota, is authorized by Section 130 of Title 23 of the United States Code to make Federal Aid available for the purpose of . eliminating hazards at railroad grade crossings within the State of Minnesota. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Work must be coordinated with construction of the Metro Interceptor Sewer to be installed on 76t" Street beginning in 2009. C. FINANCIAL • ~ The actual costs of the project, including preliminary engineering costs are to be financed as follows: ~ 90% Federal Funds: $181,332.90 ~ 10% Municipal State Aid Funds: $20,148.10 ~ Total estimated cost of the project: $201,481.00 D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Any environmental requirements for this project will be included as part of the environmental documentation needed for the 76t" Street Metro Interceptor Sewer Project. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The Council may choose not to enter into the agreement at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution Agreement No. 91869 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~~-i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT #91869 FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF RAILROAD CROSSING SIGNALS AT THE INTERSECTION OF W. 76T" STREET WITH THE TRACKS OF THE PROGRESSIVE RAIL, INC. WHEREAS, The City wishes to install railroad crossing signals for the purpose of eliminating hazards at the intersection. of W 76th Street with the tracks of the Progressive Rail, Inc. in Richfield. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City of Richfield is authorized to enter into agreement #91869, S.P. 27-00269, with the Progressive Rail, Inc. and the Commissioner of Transportation for the installation and maintenance of railroad crossing signals at the intersection of W. 76th St. (MBAs 0361) with the tracks of the Progressive Rail, Inc. in Richfield, Minnesota, and appointing the Commissioner of Transportation agent for the City to supervise said project and administer available Federal Funds in accordance with Minnesota Statute, Section 161.36. 2. The City's share of the cost shall be 10% of the total signal cost. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • 4U-a • ,.. ,: ,THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the .CITY OF RICHFIELD, hereinafter called the "Local Agency"; the PROGRESSIVE RAIL, INC.; hereinafter called the "Company";-and the COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter called the "State", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration, when acting iri cooperation with the State of Minnesota, is authorized by Section 130 of Title 23 of the United States Code to make Federal Aid available for the purpose of eliminating hazards at railroad grade crossings within the State of Minnesota; .and WHEREAS, the State, pursuant to. Minnesota Statute Section 161.36, is authorized to cooperate with the United States Government in contracting for the construction, improvement and maintenance of roads and bridges not included in the trunk highway system which are financed in whole or in part by federal monies; and WHEREAS, W 76~' St.; as now established, crosses the track of the Company at grade in Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the location of said crossing and railway track being shown on the print.hereto attached, marked Exhibit "B"; and _ ,.::..:. ._ _ _ .:- AGREEMENT 91869 USDOTNO 854425X (F1875) DATED S.P. 27-00269 MINN. PROJ. RRS 2709(042) FUNDS Federal and City Railroad Crossing Signals W 76~' St., Richfield; Minnesota Hennepin County Progressive Rail, Inc Standard Agreement "A" -Dated September. 1, 1998 ~G -3 AGREEMENT N0.91869 WHEREAS, the Local Agency and the Company desire that said grade crossing be provided with railroad flashing light signals and circuitry, and the Company is willing to install, maintain and operate such signals upon the terms and conditions hereinafter stated; and WHEREAS, the State, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 219.26, 'has reviewed the proposed selection of warning devices for the railroad grade crossing and'has determined that the proposed selection is appropriate for said crossing. NOW, THEN, IT IS AGREED: • • 1. EXHIBITS The State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, "Standard Clauses for Railroad- Highway Agreements' ; is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", :and hereinafter referred to as "Standard Clauses". Except as hereinafter expressly modified, all of the terms and conditions set forth in-the "Standard Clauses" are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this agreement with the _ ; ,. ,_ same force and effect as though fully set forth therein. Exhibit "B", the location print; Exhibit."C", the detailed cost estimate; are attached hereto and made a part of this agreement. 2. WORK PERFORMANCE AND TIME SCHEDULE The Company shall furnish all material for. and with its regularly employed forces install a complete railroad crossing signal system on W 76~' St., at the location indicated on Exhibit "B". The placement of he signals shall be in accordance with Part VIII of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD).. Detailed plans, specifications and the work to be done shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. If the Company determines that it is unable to perform all or a portion of the work with its own forces or equipment, it may contract the work only after notifying and receiving approval to proceed from the State. The selection of a contractor shall be subject to approval by the. State prior to the awarding of the contract. T_ ~_ n 4l~ ~ AGREEMENT N0.91869 Work by the Company shall be prosecuted to be completed within 12 months after the date the Company is authorized to begin work.. If the Company determines it is not possible to complete the work within the period herein specified, it shall make a written request to the State for an extension of time for completion, setting forth therein the reason for such extension. The Daily Utility Report provided for in Article 7a of the Standard Clauses, Exhibit "A", shall not be required if the duration: of the construction work is expected to last 10 working days or less. 3.. COST ESTIMATE The actual costs of the project herein contemplated, including preliminary engineering costs, are to be financed with Federal. Funds and Local Agency Funds. The State and Local Agency will reimburse the. Company as provided herein for only such items of work and expense as are proper and eligible for payment with Federal Funds. Only materials actually incorporated into the project will be eligible for Federal reimbursement. The State's portion (reimbursable with Federal Funds) and the Local Agency's portion will be .~. _. paid to -the Company in accordance with Article 8 of the Standard Clauses, Exhibit "A". It is understood that the following estimate is for informational purposes only. The estimated cost of the work to be done by the Company hereunder with its own equipment and regularly employed forces and in accordance with the Company's agreements with such regularly employed forces is as follows and in farther accordance with the. detailed estimate, Exhibit "C". Estimated Cost of Signals 90% State Funds (reimbursable with federal funds) $181,332.90. YO% Local A¢ency Funds $20,148.10 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT $20.1,481.00 • y~-5 AGREEMENT N0.91869 The State's total financial obligation shall not increase without its approval and. the encumbrance of additional funds.. The total obligation under this Agreement is limited to the total amount listed above as "Total Estimated Cost of Project." However, this obligation maybe increased to 120 percent of the "Total Estimated Cost of Project"-listed above if the Company performs work that is previously accepted in writing by the State and additional money was encumbered. The State reserves the right to not participate in project costs incurred without its prior consent. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, the State's and Local Agency's total financial obligation under this Agreement~shall not exceed the "Total Estimated Cost of Project" plus 20 percent, of which the State shall pay 90 percent and the Local Agency shall pay I 0 percent. 4. WORK CHANGES In the event it is determined that a change from the statement of work to be performed by the Company, as outlined in the detailed estimate; Exhibit. "C", is required, it shall be authorized only by an amendment to this agreement executed prior to the performance of the work involved in the change. ., ,. In the event it is found that the work has not changed from the said statement of work to be : performed by the Company, but the estimated amount in this agreement is less than the actual cost of performing the work, then an increase in eligible reirribursement will be allowed to the extent of such actual cost without an amendment in accordance with Section 3 of this Agreement and Article 12 of the Standard Clauses, .Exhibit "A". 5. MAINTENANCE The grade crossing signal system provided for in this agreement shall be maintained and operated by the Company upon completion of its installation. The obligation to maintain said signal system shall continue in accordance with the law of the State as it shall be from time,to time in the future. y C~ - ~O AGREEMENT N0.91869 6. FUTURE REMOVAL The signal system provided for in -this agreement shall not be removed unless there has been a determination by the State that said signal system is no longer required at this location. If the. signal system is to be removed, the Company shall notify the State of their pending removal. Upon request of the State, the Company shall reinstall said signal system at some other crossing within the State on the Company's tracks. The location and division of cost of such relocation shall be agreed upon between the Company and the State prior to such removal. In the event that either railway or highway improvements will necessitate a rearrangement of the signal system at said crossing, the parry whose improvement causes said changes will bear the entire cost of the same without obligation to the other. 7. DETOURS AND WORK ZONE TRAFFIC CONTROL If there is a need for a road detour in connection with the installation of said signal system, it shall be the Local Agency's responsibility to set up the road detour and detour signing. It is understood ,.. that th_ , ~. e Company shall coordinate any necessary road detour with the Local Agency prior to the starting date. The Local Agency. shall bear all costs involved in setting up the road detour. Tf a road detour is not feasible, the Local Agency shall furnish, erect and maintain. all necessary traffic control devices required to provide safe movement of vehicular traffic through the project area during the entire period from the beginning of construction to the final completion thereof. Traffic control devices include, but are not Limited to, barricades, warning signs, trailers, flashers, cones, drums, pavement markings and flagmen as required, and sufficient barricade weights to maintain barricade stability. The Local Agency shall be responsible for.the immediate repair or replacement of all traffic control devicesthat become damaged, moved or destroyed, of all lights that cease to function properly, and of all barricade weights that are damaged, destroyed or otherwise fail to stabilize the barricades. • ~ ~-7 AGREEMENT N0.91869 8. SIGNING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS Subsequent to the installation of said signal system, the Local Agency agrees to install or have installed, as maybe needed, appropriate advance warning signs, other supplemental. signs and pavement markings in accordance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD). The Local Agency agrees to install said signs using retroreflective sheeting types and qualified products used for permanent signs, markers and delineators, Type IX or better found at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/gpUSigning:pdf. The Local Agency also agrees to remove signs that are no longer needed as a result of said signal installation. 9. ASSIGNMENT OF RECEIVABLES Any parry to this agreement may assign any receivables due them under this agreement, provided; however, such assignments shall not relieve the assignor of any of its rights or obligations under this,agreement. - The remainder of this page intentionally left blank ~~~g • IN WITNESS WHEREOF; the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be duly executed. CITY OF RICHFIELD PROGRESSIVE RAIL, INC. By: BY~ Debbie Goettel Title: Mayor Title: Dated: September 11, 2008 Dated: By: BY~ Steven L. Devich Title:. City Manager Title: September 11, 2008 Dated: Dated: STATE OF MINNESOTA . Recommended for Approval: Commissioner of Transportation By: ,. BY= .. Manager, Railroad Administration Section Director Freight, Railroads & Waterways Dated: Dated: .STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. § § 16A.15 and 16C.05 Signed: Dated: 1VIAPS: APPROVED: Department of Administration By: Authorized Signature Dated: ~(~-°1 • EXHIBIT "A" STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD CLAUSES FOR RAILROAD-HIGHWAY AGREEMENTS April 11, 2008 1. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement will become effective upon the date State obtains all signatures required by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05 (Subd. 2). 2. CANCELLATION The State may immediately terminate this Agreement if it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here.. Termination must be by written or fax notice to the Company. The State is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, the Company will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis for services satisfactorily ~erformed to the extent that funds are available. The State will not be assessed any penalty if the Agreement is erminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source,' not to appropriate funds. The State must provide the Company notice of the lack of funding within a reasonable tune of the State's receiving that notice. 3. GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION, AND. VENUE Minnesota law, without regard to its choice-of--law provisions, governs this Agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings .arising aut of this Agreement, or its breach, will be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 4. COMMISSIONER'S OFFICIAL CAPACITY The Commissioner of Transportation of the.State of Minnesota is acting in an official capacity only and is not personally responsible or liable to the Company or to any person or persons whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or-causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this Agreement or the performance or completion of the project. 5. DATA DISCLOSURE Under Minnesota Statutes Section 270C.65, and other applicable law, the Company consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, lready provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of ~tate obligations. These identification numbers maybe used in the enforcement of federal and state tax laws which could result in action requiring the Company to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any. EXHIBIT "A" =Page 1 of 5 ~{ls-f0 •6. ELIGIBILITY OF COSTS The provisions contained in Federal-Aid Policy Guide,. Chapter 1, Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B .and Chapterl; Subchapter B, Part 140; Subpart I, apply to railway-highway project, regardless of the method of financing the project. 7. WORK REPORTS The Company-will furnish the State's Engineer, in charge of the project: a.. "Form 21191, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Daily Utility Report", or equivalent approved by the State's engineer showing the number of people on payroll, classification, and total hours worked, and equipment used, at a time mutually agreed upon by the Company and the State. b. Full detailed information as to progress of work and amount of labor and material used as of the time of request. The Company will, make other reports, keep other records and perform other work in such manner a time as may be necessary to enable State to collect and obtain available federal aid. 8. REIMBURSEMENT The State will reimburse the Company for actual expenses incurred performing the work set forth in this Agreement. Payments will be made in accordance with the following: '~ a: State' will' make payments in accordance with Minnesota' Statutes § 16A.124. b. Invoices for labor and materials ("partial invoices") maybe submitted on a periodic basis during the term of the project, but not more frequently than once per month. These valid partial invoices will be paid 30 days from the date they are received by the Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations, Railroad Administration Section. c. Partial invoices that are not approved due to disputed items will be returned to the Company with a request for an explanation for. any disputed items. If the dispute is resolved, the State shall pay the Company;within 30 days of receiving a corrected invoice. The State may pay the non- disputedportion of any disputed invoice. d. Final invoices must be submitted within 120 days of the completion of the reimbursable railroad work. Invoices submitted after this date, and less than one (1) year after the last activity on the project will not be paid, unless good cause is shown for the delay in the submission of the invoice. In accordance with federal regulations, 23 CFR 140.922, any final invoice received more than one (1) year after the last reimbursable railroad work will not be paid. e. Partial invoices must be based on actual (not estimated) costs incurred. Partial invoices need not be itemized, but State must be able to substantiate costs by checking the Company's records. The final invoice will be a detailed, itemized statement of all items of work performed by the Company, as shown in the appropriate exhibit or exhibits attached to this Agreement, .and shall be marked "Final Invoice". • f. Payment of the final invoice will be made after .State inspects and approves the. work. All work will be inspected within 12~ days from receip± of the final invoice. Subsequently, the final invoice will be forwarded for audit by the State, in accordance with the .requirements of state and federal laws and regulation. The Company will keep account of its work in such a way that accounts maybe readily audited, In the event that any amount previously paid to the company is EXHIBIT "A" -Page 2 of 5 ~f~-ii in excess of the actual cost determined by audit, the Company, upon notice from the State, will within 30 days pay to the State the difference. Conversely, in the event that any amount previously paid to the Company is less than the actual costs determined by audit, the State shall pay the actual costs due within 30 days of the determination of the actual costs of the work. g. All invoices shall be addressed as follows: Mn/DOT Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations M.S. 470, Rail Administration Section 395 John Ireland Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55155-1899 9. WORKERS' COMPENSATION The Company certifies that it is in compliance with workers' compensation insurance coverage required by Minnesota Law, or Federal .Law if the Company is subject: to Federal Law which preempts the Minnesota Law. The Company will require its contractors to present proof of coverage under the Minnesota Workers Compensation Act. The Company's employees and agents will not be considered State employees. Any claims arising under workers compensation laws and any claims made by a third party as a consequence of the acts or omissions of the Company, its agents, .employees or contractors are in no way the responsibility of the State. 10. COST-SHARING .If the costof a project is being shared by the State and other parties, each party should receive a bill setting forth its proportional_ share of the costs whenever a project billing is submitted. 11. INSPECTION, STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE.. The Company and/or Local Agency will permit the State to inspect and approve the work performed under this Agreement during the regular working hours of the Company without prior notice. The State may refuse to approve any and aII work performed under this Agreement for failure to comply with. applicable standards for work of that type. If the State fails to approve the work performed under this Agreement, the State may refuse to .make any further payments under this Agreement until the work at issue is performed iri accordance with acceptable standards for work of this typeand said work is approved by the State. The Company and/or Local Agency warrants that it will perform all work under this Agreement in a workmanlike and timely manner in accordance with all applicable standards for work of the type at issue. Should .the work fail to be performed in a timely manner or in accordance with applicable standards, the State. may immediately suspend further payments under this Agreement and the Company must repay all funds expended on unsatisfactory work. 12. OVERRUN. OF ESTIMATED COSTS WITH NO WORK CHANGES If it appears to the Company; at any time subsequent to the date of fnis Agreement and prior to the final completion of such work, that the actual cost of the project will exceed the estimated cost, the Company must: send written request for approval to the State. The request will explain the reasons for the additional costs and the amount of the costs. If State approves such request, State will encumber additional funds and then issue a notice to proceed. Any additional expenses iricu*red by the Company prior to receiving notice to proceed-may not be reimbursed by State... State's maximum obligation under this Agreement will not exceed 120% of the estimated- cost, except by afully-executed amendment to this Agreement. EXHIBIT "A" -Page 3 of 5 ~-~-lti n 13. STATE AUDITS Under Minnesota Statutes Section 16.C.05, subd. 5, the Company's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years after an appropriate State official certifies the Company's completion of the construction required under this Agreement. 14. NONDISCRIMINATION If the Company enters into a contract with a contractor, to perform all or any portion of the Company's work set forth in this Agreement, the Company for itself, its assigns and successors in interest, agrees that it will not discriminate in its choice of contractors and will include all of the nondiscrimination provisions in this Agreement and as set forth in "Appendix A" attached hereto and made a part hereof 15. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE The disadvantaged business enterprise requirements of 49 CFR 26, apply to this Agreement. The Company will insure that disadvantaged business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR 26, have the maximum opportunity to participate in the_performance of contracts, financed in whole or in part with federal funds.' In this regard, the. Company will take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR 26, to insure that disadvantaged business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for and perform any contracts awarded under this Agreement. The Company shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in-the award and performance of contracts under this Agreement. Failure to carry out the above requirements constitutes breach of this Agreement, and may result in Termination of the Agreement by the State, and possible debarment from performing other contractual services with the Federal Department of Transportation. 16. AMENDMENTS, WAIVER, MERGER, AND COUNTERPARTS Any amendments to this,Agreeinent must be in writing and executed by the. same parties who executed the original Agreement, or. their successors in office. Failure of a party to enforce any provision of this Agreement will. not constitute or be construed as, a waiver of such provision or of the right to enforce such provision.. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the Company and the State. No other understandings, whether written or oral, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement will be deemed to exist or to bind either or both of the parties. This Agreement maybe executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one; and the same Agreement. EXHIBIT "A" -Page 4 of 5 ~-~-~~ ' APPENDIX A Non-Discrimination Provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of l 964. During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor"), agrees as follows: (1) Compliance with Regulations: The Contractor will comply with Regulations of the Department of Transportation relative to nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Federal Highway Administration (Title 49, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 21, hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part ofthis contract. (2) Nondiscrimination: The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it after award and prior to completion of the contract work, will not discriminate on the ground of race;'color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor will. riot participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the. contract covers .a program set forth in Appendix "A", "B" and "C". (3) Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: ]n all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the contractor-for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or equipment; each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of . the contractor's obligation under this contract and the Regulations relative to discrimination on the ground of race, color or national origin.. - • (4) Information and Reports: The contractor will provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or orders and instructions issued pursuant thereto, and will permit access to its books, records; accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the contractor shall so certify the Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. (5) .Sanctions for noncompliance: In the .event of contractor's. noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the Department of .Transportation shall impose. such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to, (a) withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies, and/or (b) cancellation, termination or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part. (6) Incorporation of Provisions: The contractor will include the provisions of paragraph (1) through (6) in every subcontract, includingprocuremerits of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations, order, or instructions issued pursuant thereto. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that, in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation.with asubcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the tate to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the State, and in addition, the contractor may request the United ~tates to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United :States. EXIiIBIT "A" -Page 5 of 5 ~U-i~ • • [7 G7 ~ ~ .~_~ ~ ~ c Qs~ -1,--r • ,,,r~ ~ *~ ~44191J i ~ ~~,rs3tn st'J 1~ ~~a2an~ 9 ^- . ~ r ~~ ~n~s P{ E ~. L 4 I~ Ur ,r~ ~~ z 1 w v, ~n! P~tn s{t : r {{{[[[tt Q' ~ r,~ i ~ . J _ ~ _ ~ f3 _ U) ~ d ~ ~. ~, = 4 I 1 i bV nth St m . d v~~~-w` m ~ ~ E C ~ ~ Y 3~~ 1^1.72~nd St 4V•73rd 5t- 1 t t Haeg Pr' ~y~~~~.i /~~f V'! 84th St ~~'~'! 85th. Z~~S z~ _ .~ ~ ~''r~rt ;~ ,r..~ , Ih ~ I .~~ -:- 1~~-. _r- m ~ 4 m ?' E $9th St J ~jl~'l93th5t-~ _m-~-mom 1r ~ @ a ~ ~ I G) ~ i ~ ;ice `V-7Uth St ~ E 7flth St E Ptah St E ,7th St -F= E 68th St ` E P2th a^ ca Q t I. ~' E [!~ _ U Uj ~ -~-a d '~ 4 C ~ m { ~ trJ i t ~ ~ ~Eb4~2~J +~~ ~ ~ it~ '..~.-~_ ...} E 71st Iat o=Q I ~~t~.',Ccit .;C ~. ' :. ( I ~.);~~ f~ 7 111111 Jf ~ r~ ' 4L' ?end 5t ~ ~ E 7~nd St °~ ~ v, I '~ ~ ~ 'i IW7:~rdlc.t -~=`~il• ~ '~~ ~-~ E73rdS~ ~ I ~-m ~--~-t+'1.74tht ~ .~_=_d=~ r-,~-~a E74thSt. - r ~ ~ l ~ ~ a m Q ~ d ~ w ~-~ a~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ;. hV'i5th St d c-•m ~ E 75th St ~ d :: W- S } ~ ,i LL W w~~ .m I d ~ a tt t i '-- I I UU 7Pth Stf'--' {-~='`,I4~2:;}t -E 7th St `° ,~.,~ ~ ,;=- „x,:76.1 r~'th ~-}N' ntn •~t ~"? c ~ _ E ~~th st ..L ~'• 7 -~.,~"^'i'~._ etai~ H'~.) ~ :'"Wa '' E 78111 St.: ,ir r ~- i r'{ ~ t C1 '- ~~ ~ ~-y8tli Si-~ '~•~ ~4427L !~'r~- I ~ ~~ ~. I ~ _ I _ _ 1_ c --'e'1 75th St--~- I ~4428T Vd•7~kt'i SkE 79th 5t~- ~ Ir ~ U ro --~ I a Q .~ X52 ~ ~. ~ ..*~-r-_~ ~ a ~ , a ~ ~ ~ E 81st St a ~ > 7~ m ~ _ `~ W 81st St'-~ E $1stSt ; ~ ~ ~ ~ # _Q ~ ~ Q `~ I i a o o_~_c ~_ :..:~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ f. ~ E8~IdS~ y-~ ~ ~ ~ @-~ ~-~- ~ W~'~ndSt-$~}=E$2nd5t ~ -'-.LV &3 ni St •- m ^-, ~ - m - ~ -r' ~ ~ ': 1 ~ ~ Q' E $3rd St -... ~ '~ c ~p ~p CFj Q ffj G) , u) I r ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ Q ~ d ~ '~ _Q :. -d ~~ ~ - m ~ w ~ ... E $4th 5t Q- ~ ~i~~3oU w ~ •~ 'N~ r ~ r~~` a a va ~- L 1+'1$5th~St ' ri' a m ~ E $5th St o ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ a ~c Q m . . I m o n ~ ( ,~ ~ ~ ~ i p m ~ d ~44.,_H ~ ~ w ~ ~ o ~ -1~V ~Sth 5t -~~.., .. r~ E I Oth St ~ - d-~ Q ~ r _ w `~ a U o ~ m I .~ - vv $~tn St ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d E ....I ~~I~ _ Its _ i ~ ~ ~°~''' EXHIBIT B ~~-i~ • PROGRESSIVE .RAIL INCORPORATED Detailed Crossing Signal Project Cost Estimate Install Automatic Crossing Gate Signals w! 2W 12" LED Mast and Side Lights, HXP3R and AC/DC Island, PMD3R (77th St), Cellualr RTU Alarm System, Instrument House & AC Service Central Signal, LLC Revised ROAD NAME: West 76th Street 07/29/08 NEAREST CITY: Richfield RAILROAD: Progressive Rail Incorporated COUNTY: Hennepin, RR MILEPOST: SPS Hyline 007.05 STATE: Minnesota OOT/AAR NO.: 854425X MATERIAL ESTIMATE See Attached Total Material $127,905 ENGINEERING 5,000 LABOR ESTIMATE Shop Wiring 1 Wiremen @ 60 ST hours & 0 OT hours 1,560 Field Installation 4 Signalmen @100 ST hours & 0 OT hours 8,900 Total Labor $10,460 ADDITIVES Employee benefits 30.00% of Labor 3,138 Personnel expenses $90.00 per day & 3804 travel miles @ $ 0.48 per mile 6,786 Contractor's Overhead .164.00% of Labor 17,154 • .Contractor's Profit 12.00% Fixed Fee 21,587 ,. Total.Additives. _ $48,666. EQUIPMENT RENTAL Backhoe 1 @ $,1250 per week 1 week 1,250 Total Equipment Rental $1,250. SUBCONTRACTORS Install. Meter. Service 1 @ $2,600 each 2,200 Directional Boring 200 feet @ $30 per foot 6,000 Total Subcontracts $8,200 TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE BY COMPANY Summary Material $127,905 Engineering $5,000 _ Labor $10,460- Additives $48,666 Equipment Rental $1,250 Subcontracts $8,200 TOTAL PROJECT $201,481 AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # J STAFF REPORT CONSENT 4H 215 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2~U8 REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~. REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR c- ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for a facility dedication at Richfield Ice Arena. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached Recreational Facilify and Amenity Dedication Pro osal Re uest from Richfield Hocke Association. II. BACKGROUND In response to recent requests to rename recreational facilities to honor the contributions of two individuals, the Community Services Commission developed the attached policy to handle such requests. The, new policy was adopted by City Council on March 11, 2008. A formal request was received from Richfield Hockey Association to dedicate the Richfield Ice Arena in honor of the memory of AI Payne. AI served the City of Richfield as the Ice Arena manager for 28 years. The dedication request is for authorization to install a dedication plaque to an interior at the Ice Arena so that it is viewable from the lobby. The request conforms to the dedication guidelines set forth in the attached policy. • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 0911 Richfield Ice Arena Dedication Proposal A. POLICY • The Community Services Commission reviewed the attached request and recommends City Council approval. The request conforms to the dedication guidelines set forth in the attached policy. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • If approved, the Richfield Hockey Association would like to conduct a dedication ceremony on October 3,.2008. C. FINANCIAL • The attached policy indicates that the nominating person(s) of such dedication requests shall be entirely responsible for all costs associated with the dedication including application, background check fees, recognition, and memorial plaque. D. LEGAL • None E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None • ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • None IV. ATTACHMENTS • Recreational Facility and Amenity Dedication Policy • Richfield Facility Dedication Proposal Form V. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~~1-I . Final Draft 03/11/08 City of Richfield Recreation Facility and Amenity Dedication Policy Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for dedicating recreational facilities and amenities including athletic fields, park buildings, and other recreational structures located in the City of Richfield in honor of an individual or organization. The City of Richfield does not accept requests to permanently rename a park., recreational facility or amenity in honor of an individual or organization, but as an alternative offers the following guidelines to dedicate such facilities to the memory of an individual or organization by granting the installation of a dedication plaque onsife of such facilities. Nomination Criteria: Nominations for dedicating City of Richfield facilities or amenities in-the memory of an individual or organization shall be based on one or more of the following criteria: 1. In honor of organizations or individuals (living or deceased) who have made a significant contribution, financial or otherwise, to the City of • Richfield or who. have played a leading role in advancing the City of Richfield as a good place to live, .work or recreate.. 2. In honor of a person, place or event that played a significant role in the history of the City of Richfield. The individual or organization for which the dedication is sought shall be deemed to be of good general character and should not be associated with unlawful or unseemly activities. Dedication Guidelines: The dedication of City recreational facilities via this policy shall be limited to significant facilities or amenities, including but not limited to buildings, rooms in buildings, athletic fields, ponds, bridges, playgrounds, and trails. The dedication of minor amenities such as water fountains and benches are not part of this policy and will be addressed by the Recreational Services Department. Fundraising projects conducted by the Friends of Wood Lake that benefit the Wood Lake Nature Center are exempt from this policy. The dedication of City facilities or amenities shall normally be limited to no more than two per year to maintain the stature of the facility dedication honor. Any undedicated City recreational facility may be nominated for dedication using the criteria of this policy. The nominating person(s) shall be entirely responsible for all costs associated with the dedication including application and background check fees, recognition, ~N'3- • and memorial plaques. The size,-style, text and location of the memorial plaque shall be subject to review and approval of the Recreation Services Director and the Nominating Committee. Application Process: The process for dedicating a recreational facility or amenity to the memory of an individual shall be: 1. The nominating person(s) shall request a City of Richfield Recreational Facility Dedication Nomination form from the Recreation Services Department office. Nominations for deceased individuals will not be accepted until after asix-month time period from the date the individual passed away. 2. A fully completed City of Richfield Recreational Facility Dedication Nomination form shall be submitted to the Recreation Services Director and the Nominating Committee along with the specified application fee. 3. The completed application will be reviewed by Nominating Committee. (consisting of assigned members of the Community Services Commission) for completeness, accuracy and adherence to policy guidelines. 4. All individuals nominated shall be subject to a criminal background check. 5. If the nomination is rejected based on the above review, the nominating person designated on the application will be notified in writing. 6. Nominations that pass the above review will be forwarded to the Community Services Commission for review at their next regularly scheduled meeting. 7. Within 60 days of the Community Services Commission meeting at which the application is received, a recommendation will be made. If rejected. by the Community Services Commission, the nominating person designated on the application will be notified by City-staff in writing. 8. If approved, the recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for final review and approval or denial 9. Nominating parties will be notified in writing of the City Council's actions within two weeks of the meeting at which action is taken. 10 . The City Council shall have the authority to override this policy when they deem doing so to be in the best interest of the City. Revocation: Recreational facility dedications may be revoked by the Community Services Commission should information later come to light that runs counter to the .substance and spirit of this policy. r~ LJ 4N~3 rte- ..~. r,~ • i F~h~~~ ~~il~ Edition -The installation of any plaque as ~dedlcatPt~'n to ari ln~ividual nrgr-~iu~ at a Gity facility must be a~pravedby the Richfeld Giiy Caunail. Pease fill putthe form belawR You will he notified of their decision. NAME OF DONOR _ - INDIVIDUAL OR REPRESENTATIVE OF GROUP} . .. NAME. OF DONOR GROUP' (iF APPLICABLE ~~ 4t='~'~Gt~:'~ ~~ ~ ~4'tp`i ~~'~ '{`l~a~°~~~~~,-:""~-~' ~:~ 1~,~ ~~''~' ~ {~ ~~.._ ADLJRESS ~~'~~ ~P.~ ~,~ ~~,~ t~ ~-~ ~,,~. ~ ~ _ t?I1Y PHUNE Lrll 1..~_t ~~{ ~~``~~{ EYEiV1NCi PHONE 'I ~ ,~;(,`~.~?t~~~~~ ~~ ~~"~.i~ f ~ ~. ~~ ~ _ ~'V'b~j~~ ~~''~ ~ ~~ E-MAIL ,`~ '' ~t'Alt"r C:'.'~ '~ S''.-~ ~ ~.^~~~;~•( '#~'s~~~.s~~t...~°~ r7 NAME OF PERSt]NIC~RGANIZATIONtEVENT BEINC~i hlgNgRFD FACILITY AT WHICH DEDICATEOtV WaULD l~E LOCATEfo ~ ~~-~~~"'~"~,i`~~-`'" ~ C~? _{_~t~{ ;. ~~~.~ j~..~ ~~ ~°. BPECtFIG LOCATIC3N OF PLAQUE AT FACILITY ~.:'~r~ ) <„t ~~~t"a ~~~t°~i ,t.tl.f..-ice ~.~t ~'~ .' LIESCRIBR THE 51GNIFICAN7 CONTRIBUTI!DNS MADE BY THE HQNCR~E TQ THE COMN1UNlTY {ATTA'KFL AN EXTRA 5H~ET, IF NECESSARY) ~ _ ,~,.i ,~ ~~.~~~ cF ~; ~- 'i ,i ~ F : ~f.-~.°~;~ +~~~E.. f ~~>a.- ~ ..,~~Y~~~'~ t,r,~r~ ~t t ~' I_Lt~ ~.. i~ "~$~'~L`•.- ~~~~a' ~,~„~~~.-~ r"1 1. Q'~~~t.~li'~~'f ~~ _`` ~..,{~(~~~tT .~~ E,f~r~'~{ z,'`x ,~- ey signing belaW... ~~~'+ ( ~ `~ ~,~' ~ ;mil ~,~:~`t ~r ~ R~ ~`,,d~ `t~~~ ~ ;~, ~~';. ~~~,''t„ ~~ 7 (t r t ~. i ~~°~ ~`,.~`~_ 1 ', t" s~~a f t'~-{,;1t.1`~~t t:'~~ '~~ i;, try, i~:. ~'.-t~ ~"~ I understand that' I, ar the group I re}~reset~t~ will #al~e full responsibility far the cost. flf purchase and'instali'atian of thin plactue anti any other costs associated with the dedication. 1 und~rs#a~nd #ha# this. piaqud will be donated to, and become properYY af, tt1~ -City ofi Riclrfiieltf `"`°~ °- 1 understand that the approval of,thri~cledication ay be subJeet to a criminal background check of the honoree and that a facility dedication pe re,X6~ke by the City at later lake should inforrnatiorr later carne to light that runs. ~QUnter to the subetanc~ r1.,~~r,~ ?~f tl}~ d~~ation pal{cy. ~ TLJRE~~~'~'1~ ~~`:r~~~~'~~1'' "~~"~~~ 17ATE r ~ { r~ ~'~~~ - PLEASE FORWARD THIS FORM TO.tC}hihi EVANS AT`TF1E Ft1GHFIFLC7 GOMMUNfrY CENTER` BYMAIL CJR IN F~ERSflN L3Y EA}C ~Y E-MAIL.. _.___ ~Y laMfJN1 Richfield Camrnunity Center R~12-66.1-9388 jevansi~cltyafrichfield.org 612-861-~~`I5 IQ©O Nicolle~ Aae Richfield MN 55423 Ftich€i~l~f C~amrrtu~i~y~~~r~ter 7~0~ Ni~viletA~ertL~e, Richf~id, M[V 5~~ phawtet ~~~-86'E-995 Fax: 6~2-86~=•388 ~-h~~il j~r~ans~sitycrfri~hfieltl.>~f~° • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~' STAFF REPORT PDBLIC HEARING 6 216 CITY CQUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: KAREN BARYON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER NAME, r~ INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading regarding an ordinance calling for the establishment of a one year moratorium on the development of certain properties in the Penn Avenue Corridor between Highwa 62 and 68th Street. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: • Approve second reading of an ordinance, and take public testimony regarding establishing a one year moratorium on the development of certain properties in the Penn Avenue Corridor that are guided for mixed-use. • Approve a resolution for the summary publication of the ordinance. • Adopt the amended resolution establishing aone-year moratorium on the development of certain properties in the Penn Avenue Corridor between Highway 62 and 68th Street. II. BACKGROUND Since late 2007, staff has been working with Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi) and the Penn Crossings Advisory Group to develop a Master Revitalization Plan and Design Standards for Penn Avenue between Highway 62 and 68th Street. 091108 Penn Avenue Moratorium PH 2nd Reading The purpose of the Master Revitalization Plan and Design Standards are to ensure a cohesive development of the Corridor as reinvestment, revitalization, and . redevelopment occur. In an effort to ensure the vision is fully incorporated, the Penn Crossings Advisory Group has recommended and requested that the City implement a development moratorium for the Corridor to allow for the completion and adoption of the Master . Plan and Design Standards. Additionally, the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Richfield is currently in the process of being updated, as is required decennially. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan designates the properties along Penn Avenue between Highway 62 and 68th Street as Mixed-Use. In order to ensure that future development is consistent with the guidance provided by the Master Revitalization Plan, Design Standards, and the Comprehensive Plan, staff is recommending a moratorium on new construction or major additions to certain properties zoned Commercial, Industrial, or Multi-Residential along the Penn Avenue Corridor between Highway 62 and 68th Street for a period of one-year. This proposed moratorium would prohibit the issuance of building permits for new construction, significant facade improvements, signs, and for additions exceeding 500 square feet in size. • Permits for interior remodeling, exterior maintenance, minor improvements, and wall signs related to change in tenancy would not be prohibited under this moratorium. The attached ordinance has been revised from that considered in the first reading to allow the surface area of any sign to be modified (as allowed by City Code) so long as the dimensions of the sign structure are not enlarged and there are no added electrical components. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Comprehensive Plan is meant as a guide for directing growth and development in Richfield. • Section 506.03 of Richfield's Zoning Ordinance states as its foremost purpose, "to assist in the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan." • Development could occur in this area that satisfies the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, but does not meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, or the forthcoming Penn Corridor Master Plan. • In order to prevent future development that does not meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and may ultimately become legally non-conforming uses upon a potential change in zoning classification, amoratorium on new construction and major additions are proposed while this planning study is • conducted. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • There is a potential for the submittal of zoning or building permit applications which do not meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and may ultimately become legally non-conforming uses upon a potential change in zoning classification. • The moratorium can be ended prior to the one-year expiration by motion of the City Council C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • Richfield Legal Counsel has reviewed the attached resolution and ordinance. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The Penn Corridor Design Guidelines will call for use of "green" and/or sustainable building practices where practicable. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not approve the proposed ordinance. • Approve the proposed ordinance with modifications. V. ATTACHMENTS • A proposed Ordinance establishing cone-year moratorium on the development of certain properties along the Penn Avenue Corridor. • Resolution approving summary publication of the ordinance. • An amended resolution (reflecting a minor change in the wording related to signs) establishing aone-year moratorium on the development of certain properties along the Penn Avenue Corridor. • Map depicting Moratorium Area. • Map depicting current zoning along the Penn Avenue Corridor. VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Legal Counsel b'- i CITY OF RICHFIELD STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE PENN AVENUE CORRIDOR BETWEEN HIGHWAY 62 AND 68TH STREET THAT ARE GUIDED MIXED-USE, AND DIRECTING THAT A PLANNING STUDY BE CONDUCTED THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background. 1.01. The Richfield Comprehensive Plan (2008-2018) (the "Comprehensive Plan") designates certain areas along the Penn Avenue Corridor between Highway 62 and 68th Street ("Penn Avenue Corridor") as Mixed-Use. 1.02. The Comprehensive Plan provides that the intent of the mixed use category is to create a traditional town center that is a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented district. The district would accommodate residential, shopping, recreational and businesses uses in a flexible arrangement that captures the spirit and intent of the Penn Avenue Revitalization Master Plan. 1.03. The Comprehensive Plan states that the Penn Corridor is a target area for redevelopment. • 1.04. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the Penn Avenue Revitalization as an influencing planning effort. 1.05. The Comprehensive Plan contemplates that in 2008 the City of Richfield completed a revitalization Master Plan for the Penn Avenue Corridor between 68th Street and Highway 62. This area is one of the few remaining commercial nodes in the community without a clear vision. The purpose of the Penn Avenue Revitalization Master Plan is to establish a 20 year vision for change in the corridor including 1) establish tools to guide future public and private investments, 2) establish a distinctive identity, and 3) maintain respect for the physical and social environment. 1.06. Section 4.1 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan identifies as guiding goals and policies the need to develop identifiable nodes, corridors and gateways throughout the community by encouraging a mix of uses that serve a market in and around Richfield in community commercial nodes, encouraging a mix of uses that serve surrounding local neighborhoods in neighborhood commercial nodes, establishing a land use pattern and supporting infrastructure that creates a "walkable" environment, and develop residential standards (scale, density, etc.) for redevelopment areas that creates neighborhood character. 1.07. The City has not adopted any plans or land use studies specific to the Penn Avenue Corridor area within the last five years. 1.08. The land within the Penn Avenue Corridor that is guided for Mixed-use use is presently zoned as either General Commercial C-2, Industrial I, or MR-2 Multi-Residential -Medium Density. 091108 Penn Avenue Moratorium PH 2nd Reading ~~ 1.09. The current zoning classifications restrict redevelopment in the area to the specific requirements of each land use and lack fully developed standards to guide future redevelopment. 1.10. The current Industrial (I) zoning classification is inconsistent and incompatible with the guided Mixed-Use zoning. 1.11. At the present time there is no zoning classification that appropriately corresponds to the types of uses contemplated for the Penn Avenue Corridor area and, accordingly the City Zoning Code does not adequately guide development within the Penn Avenue Corridor area with respect to the desired traditional town center model. 1.12: Minnesota Statutes Section 472.865, Subdivision 3 requires that official controls, such as zoning codes, that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan be amended within nine months of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan so as not to conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 1.13. Section 3.9 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan expresses the community's intention to pursue major redevelopment opportunities in the City. 1.14. The City has received at least one inquiry about potential redevelopment of property within the Penn Avenue Corridor that further evidences the need for the City to bring its official controls into conformance with its Comprehensive Plan. 1.15. The lack of an adequate and available zoning classification that corresponds to the Mixed-Use land use plan designation is a barrier to staged and orderly th t • e o implementation of the Comprehensive Plan and is contrary fundamental precepts of orderly municipal planning. 1.16. The public interest will be harmed if piecemeal development is permitted to continue according to zoning standards that conflict with the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan. 1.17. The City Council has determined a need to undertake a study to determine the appropriate land uses for the land in the Penn Avenue Corridor that is guided for Mixed-Use. 1.18. Upon completion of the study, the City Council, together with such city commissions as the City Council deems appropriate or as may be required by law, will consider the advisability of amending certain official controls, which may include the City's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Capital Improvement Program, or other official controls. 1.19. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivision 4 allows the City to adopt an interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. Sec. 2. Findings. 2.01 The City Council finds that it is necessary to conduct planning studies to determine the appropriate land use controls that should apply to properties that meet all of the following characteristics: a. The lands have a Comprehensive Plan land use guide plan designation of Mixed-Use; and (~- 3 b. The lands are located within the Penn Avenue Corridor, which is defined as that area lying along Penn Avenue between Highway 62 to • the North and 68th Street to the South, and Queen Avenue to the West and Oliver Avenue to the East; c. The lands have a current zoning classification of General Commercial C-2, Industrial I, or Multi-Residential MR-2. 2:02 The purpose of the studies to be conducted includes, but is not limited to determining the appropriate land use and development standards that should apply to such property and determining the appropriate changes, if any that should be made to the City's official land use controls, including but not limited to the City's Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program. 2.03 The City Council finds that there is a need to adopt. a Moratorium Ordinance for a portion of the City to prevent development within the Moratorium Area as shown m Exhibit A, while the studies referenced in Section 2.01 are conducted. 2.04 The City Council finds that this Moratorium should apply to the following types of land use applications, as more specifically described at Section 3.02 below: requests for rezoning, subdivisions, conditional use permits, site plan review, and building permits for construction in excess of 500 square feet, all signs, or exterior remodeling. Sec. 3. Planning Study: Moratorium. • 3.01. A study is authorized to be conducted by City staff, to be followed by consideration of potential changes to the city's official land use controls by the City Council and such other commissions of the City as required by law or as directed by the City Council. 3.02. Pending completion of the study and adoption of any amendments to the City's official controls, a moratorium is established on the issuance of City approvals for the properties in the Moratorium Area, as provided in this section: a. Except as provided at paragraph c of this Section 3.02, no building permit may be issued (I) for the expansion of any existing use in the Moratorium Area, where the expansion is greater than 500 square feet, or (ii) for the establishment of a new use; or (iii) for exterior remodeling or fagade improvements; or (iv) for the construction of a new building. b. Except as provided at paragraph c of this Section 3.02, no applications for any of the following approvals may be granted or processed during the period of the moratorium: rezoning, comprehensive land use plan amendment, subdivision or consolidation approval, variances, conditional use permits, site plan approval, free-standing or monument signs, or changes in curb cut location. c. The Moratorium will not apply to building permits issued for routine maintenance or routine repairs of an existing use that do not constitute an • expansion or a change in use. The Moratorium will not apply to interior remodeling or improvements. The Moratorium will not apply to wall signs related to change m tenancy or to the surface (readable) area of sign so long as the sign structure is not enlarged nor electrical components added.. ~~ 3.03 During the period of the Moratorium, applications for any such approvals • related to property in the Moratorium Area shall not be accepted by the City nor shall the Planning Commission or City Council consider or grant approval of any such application, except after approval of the City Council as provided in Section 3.05 of this Ordinance. 3.04 The Moratorium established by this Ordinance shall apply to any application pending as of the date of this Ordinance, but it shall not apply to a subdivision or consolidation that has received preliminary plat approval prior to the adoption of Resolution No.10136, nor shall the Moratorium extend the timeline for acting upon an application as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99. Any application submitted to which the Moratorium applies shall be denied unless the application includes a specific request that it be excepted from the Moratorium, in which case the City staff shall submit the application to the City Council for consideration of granting an.exception. 3.05 The City Council may approve exceptions to this Moratorium for arr application if the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines that the approval being sought will not interfere with the purposes for which this moratorium was adopted. Sec. 4. Enforcement. The City may enforce this Ordinance by mandamus, injunction or other appropriate civil remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction. Sec. 5. Term. Unless earlier repealed by the City Council, the Moratorium established under this Ordinance shall remain in effect until September 1, 2009. • The Moratorium may be extended for a reasonable time, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355. Sec. 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance is effective as provided by Section. 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Deborah Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • ~~~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF BILL NO. WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above referenced amendment to the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense of publication of the complete text is not justified. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication: SUMMARY PUBLICATION BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE. PENN AVE.~IUE CORRIDOR BETWEEN HIGHWAY 62 AND 68 STREET AND DIRECTING THAT A PLANNING STUDY BE CONDUCTED On September 11, 2008, the Richfield City Council adopted an ordinance designated as Bill No. ,the title of which is stated above. This summary of the ordinance is pu lished pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. The ordinance establishes a one year moratorium on the development of properties that are: (1) located between highway 62 and 68 Street; (2) guided for mixed-use; and (3) are currently zoned for General Commercial) C-2, Industrial I, or Multi-Residential - Medium Density MR-2. The ordinance also directs that a planning study'be conducted to determine the appropriate land uses and development standards for pproperties in the Penn Avenue Corridor and that appropriate • amendments be made to the City's official controls upon completion of the study. During the moratorium, applications for rezoning, reguidin~, subdivision or consolidation, variances, conditional use permits, site plan approval, signs, and curb cut changes, will not be accepted, and building .permits will not be issued for new construction or expansions exceeding 500 square feet, substantial facade improvements, or changes m use. Building permits will be issued for routine maintenance or routine repairs of an existing use, expansions of less than 500 square.feet, as well as for internal remodeling. Sign permits will be issued for wall signs relating to a change in tenant. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk during normal business hours or upon request by calling 612-861-9760 of the Community Development Division. ancy i s, ity er BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is directed to keep a copy of the ordinance in her office at City Hall for public inspection and to post a full copy of the ordinance in a public place in the City for a period of two weeks. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. e ora oette , ayor • ATTEST: ancy i s, ity er ~7° CITY OF RICHFIELD • STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE PENN AVENUE CORRIDOR BETWEEN HIGHWAY 62 AND 68TH STREET THAT ARE GUIDED MIXED-USE, AND DIRECTING THAT A PLANNING STUDY BE CONDUCTED WHEREAS, The Richfield Comprehensive Plan (2008-2018) (the "Comprehensive Plan") designates certain areas along the Penn Avenue corridor between Highway 62 and 68th Street ("Penn Avenue Corridor") as Mixed-Use; and WHEREAS the Comprehensive Plan provides that the intent of the mixed use category is to create a traditional town center that is a vibrant, pedestrian- oriented district. The district would accommodate residential, shopping, recreational and businesses uses in a flexible arrangement that captures the spirit and intent of the Penn Avenue Revitalization Master Plan; and WHEREAS the Comprehensive Plan states that the Penn Corridor is a target area for redevelopment; and WHEREAS the Comprehensive Plan recognizes the Penn Avenue Revitalization as an influencing planning effort; and • WHEREAS the Comprehensive Plan contemplates that in 2008 the City of Richfield completed a revitalization master plan for the Penn Avenue corridor between 68th Street and Highway 62. This area is one of the few remaining commercial nodes in the community without a clear vision. The purpose of the Penn Avenue Revitalization Master Plan is to establish a 20 year vision for change in the corridor including 1) establish tools to guide future public and private investments, 2) establish a distinctive identity, and 3) maintain respect for the physical and social environment; and WHEREAS Section 4.1 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan identifies as a guiding goals and policies the need to develop identifiable nodes, corridors and gateways throughout the community by encouraging a mix of uses that serve a market in and around Richfield in community commercial nodes, encouraging a mix of uses that serve surrounding local neighborhoods in neighborhood commercial nodes, establishing a land use pattern and supporting infrastructure that creates a "walkable" environment, and develop residential standards (scale, density, etc.) for redevelopment areas that creates neighborhood character; and WHEREAS the City has not adopted any plans or land use studies specific to the Penn Avenue Corridor area within the last five years; and WHEREAS the land within the Penn Avenue Corridor that is guided for Mixed-use use is presently zoned as either General Commercial C-2, Industrial I, or MR-2 Multi-Residential -Medium Density; and . WHEREAS the current zoning classifications restrict redevelopment in the area to the specific requirements of each land use and lack fully developed standards to guide future redevelopment; and WHEREAS the current Industrial I zoning classification is inconsistent and incompatible with the guided Mixed-Use zoning; and ~~~ • WHEREAS at the present time there is no zoning classification that appropriately corresponds to the types of uses contemplated for the Penn Avenue Corridor area and, accordingly the City Zoning Code does not adequately guide development within the Penn Avenue Corridor area with respect to the desired traditional town center model; and WHEREAS Minnesota Statutes Section 473.865, subdivision 3 requires that official controls, such as zoning codes, that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan be amended within nine months of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan so as not to conflict with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS Section 3.9 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan expresses the community's intention to pursue major redevelopment opportunities in the City; and WHEREAS the City has received at least one inquiry about potential redevelopment of property within the Penn Avenue Corridor that further evidences the need for the City. to bring its official controls into .conformance with its Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS the lack of an adequate and available zoning classification that corresponds to the Mixed-Use land use plan designation is a barrier to staged and orderly implementation of the Comprehensive Plan and is contrary to the fundamental precepts of orderly municipal planning; and WHEREAS the public interest will be harmed if piecemeal development is permitted to continue according to zoning standards that conflict with the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS the City Council has determined a need to undertake a study to determine the appropriate land uses for the land in the Penn Avenue Corridor that is guided for Mixed-Use; and WHEREAS upon completion of the study, the City Council, together with such city commissions as the City Council deems appropriate or as may be required by law, will consider the advisability of amending certain official controls, which may include the City's Comprehensive Plan, zoning ordinance, and capital improvement program, or other official controls. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The City Council finds that it is necessary to conduct planning studies to determine the appropriate land use controls that should apply to properties that meet all of the following characteristics: a. The lands have a Comprehensive. Plan land use guide plan designation of Mixed-Use; and b. The lands are located within the Penn Avenue Corridor, which is defined as that area lying along Penn Avenue between Highway 62 to the North and • 68th Street to the South, and Queen Avenue to the West and Oliver Avenue to the East; and c. The lands have a current zoning classification of General Commercial C-2, Industrial I, orMulti-Residential MR-2. ~~8 2. The purpose of the studies to be conducted includes, but is not limited to determining the appropriate land use and development standards that should apply to such property and determining the appropriate changes, if any that should be made to the City's official land use controls, including but not limited to the City's Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program. 3. The City Council finds that there is a need to adopt a moratorium ordinance for a portion of the City ("Moratorium Area"), while the studies referenced in paragraph 1 of this resolution are being conducted. The Moratorium Area includes those properties generally described in the preceding paragraph 1 and shown in the attached Exhibit A. 4. The City Council finds that this moratorium should apply to the following types of land use applications, as more specifically described at section 3.02 below: requests for rezoning, subdivisions, conditional use permits, site plan review, and building permits for construction in excess of 500 square feet, all signs, or exterior remodeling. 5. A study is authorized to be conducted by City staff, to be followed by consideration of potential changes to the city's official land use controls by the City Council and such other commissions of the City as required by law or as directed by the City Council. 6. Pending completion. of the study and adoption of any amendments to the City's official controls, a moratorium is established on the issuance of City approvals for the properties in the Moratorium Area, as provided in this section: a. .Except as provided at subparagraph c of this paragraph, no building permit may be issued (i) for the expansion of any existing use m the Moratorium Area, where the expansion is greater than 500 square feet, or (ii) for the establishment of a new use; or (iii) for exterior remodeling or fagade improvements; or (iv) for the construction of a new building. b. Except as provided at subparagraph c of this paragraph, no applications for any of the following approvals may be granted or processed during the period of the moratorium: rezoning, comprehensive land use plan amendment, subdivision or consolidation approval, variances, conditional use permits, site plan` approval, free-standing or monument signs, or changes in curb cut location. c. The moratorium will not apply to building permits issued for routine maintenance or routine repairs of an existing use that do not constitute an expansion or a change in use. The moratorium will not apply to interior remodeling or improvements. The Moratorium will not apply to wall signs related to change in tenancy or to the surface (readable) area of sign so long as the sign structure is not enlarged nor electrical components added. 7. During the period of the moratorium, applications for any such approvals related to property in the Moratorium Area shall not be accepted by the City nor shall the Planning Commission or City Council consider or grant approval of any such application, except after approval of the City Council as provided in paragraph 9 of • this resolution. 8. The Moratorium established by this resolution shall apply to any application pending as of the date of this resolution, but it shall not apply to a subdivision or consolidation that has received preliminary plat approval prior to the adoption of this resolution, nor shall the moratorium extend the timeline for acting upon an ~~~ application as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99. Any application . submitted to which the moratorium applies shall be denied unless the application includes a specific request that it be excepted from the moratorium, in which case the City staff shall submit the application to the City Council for consideration of granting an exception. 9. The City Council may approve exceptions to this moratorium for an application if the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines that the approval being sought will not interfere with the purposes for which this moratorium was adopted. 10. Unless earlier repealed by the City Council, the moratorium established under this resolution shall remain in effect for a period of one year after its effective date. 11. This resolution is effective upon adoption. Deborah Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk n LJ ~ -~a Penn Avenue Moratorium Area Current Zoning 64TH z~~ .a a ~ O ~ 2 H ~~ 1--a ~- _ --- --1 --~ ---~~1 W 66TH ST W (CO RD NO T~~~I~ I C-1 C-2 R Industrial Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Single Family Residential ~-~, ~ i ~i R-1 S. Family -Low Density MR Multi Res. (discontinued) i ' MR-1 Two Family Residential MR 2 M lti R M D it d - MR-3 PMR u es - ens e . y Multi Res -High Density Planned Multi Res. ~ L ,--. ~~ z n ~o! .\ ~ ~n ~ ~~'~~ J z~ Penn Avenue Moratorium Area 64TH z N O ~ d O ~ F m66T~H 67TH ~,. ~~ -'~- ~~ r~ ~: ~~ :, (CO RDRD NnO L~ ka ~~ W 6 3RD S T ~ ~ ~ ~ w w w > > > a ¢ Q 64TH Z zQ zC X ~ O Y O z ~ ~~ Q Z ~ O N ~ W • • AGENDA SECTION: RESOLIITION AGENDA ITEM # ] REPORT # 217 D STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER Ti7zE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of 2008 Revised/2009 Proposed Budget resolutions adopting 2009 preliminary property tax levy, setting truth in taxation hearing dates, authorizing budget revisions, authorizing revision of 2008 budget of various departments, and authorizing use of Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund refund interest earnings for police and fire expenditures. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Adopt the attached resolutions establishing the 2009 preliminary property-tax levy and proposed dates for Truth in Taxation hearings, authorizing budget revisions, authorizing revision of 2008. budget of various departments, and authorizing the use of Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund refund interest earnings for Police and Fire expenditures. IL .BACKGROUND On August 20, 2008, a Special City Council meeting was held for the purpose of presenting and discussing the 2008 Revised/2009 Proposed Budget and 2009 preliminary property tax levy. • Consequently, as a result of this meeting the City of Richfield's preliminary gross tax levy is currently set at $14,360,125, which includes a levy for general fund operations of $12,384,020, an equipment levy of $136,502, a debt service levy of $1,607,265, and a tax abatement levy of $232,338. This levy amount represents a 0911 budgetresolutions .10.46% increase from the 2008 gross levy. The general fund, equipment levy, and the existing debt service levies started in 2007 represent a 1.20% increase from the 2008 levy, while the three new debt service special levies and the. Cedar Point tax abatement special levy represent a 9.26% increase over the prior years levy. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • _ The City Charter establishes that at a special budget meeting of the Council on or before September 15, the City Manager must submit to the Council a proposed budget and a budget message in the form and containing the information specified in Section 7.06. This closely follows the Truth in Taxation Statute, which in the past overrode the Charter process for budget adoption. • Consequently, as required by the Truth in Taxation legislation (MS .275.065) each "taxing authority" must certify its proposed property tax levy for payable year 2009 to the County Auditor on or before September 15, 2008. "Taxing authority" includes all counties, all school districts, all cities regardless of population, all towns and all special taxing districts. No local units of government are exempted from this requirement. • In addition, each "taxing authority" with a population of 500 or more, must certify to their County Auditor the dates that have been selected • for the Truth in Taxation hearings by September 15, 2008. The date for this hearing must not conflict with the hearing dates of the county or of the school district in which the "taxing authority" is located. This Truth in Taxation public hearing must be held between November 29 and December 20, 2008. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Along with the 2008 Revised/2009 Proposed budget and preliminary property tax levy, City staff is also recommending dates. for this year's Truth in Taxation public hearings. It is recommended that this year's hearings be set for 7:00 p.m. Monday, December 1, 2008 with a continuation date of 7:00 p.m. Monday, December 8, 2008. As Council Members are aware, at these public hearings, the tax levy may be reduced from the preliminary tax levy, but not increased. • All official action concerning the preliminary tax levy and setting dates for the Truth in Taxation hearings must be concluded before September 15, 2008. C. FINANCIAL • The preliminary gross levy for taxes payable 2008 is $14,360,125. • The City's tax capacity rate will increase from 37.852% in 2008 to • 42.892% in 2009. • A final resolution for consideration authorizes the revision of the 2008 budget to conform to the most recent 2008 revenue and expenditure projections. • The 2008 Revised Public Safety Budget was increased by $200,000 due to increased overtime costs as a result of the City providing Police • ~ Officers to the City of St. Paul for the Republic National Convention. • These additional Public Safety costs will be reimbursed to the City of Richfield in their entirety: D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The City Council could adopt a lesser 2009 preliminary property tax levy, or 2008 Revised/2009 Proposed budget or select other allowable Truth in Taxation hearing dates. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution Adopting a Proposed Budget and Tax Levy for the Year 2009 • Resolution Authorizing Budget. Revisions • Resolution Authorizing Revision of 2008 Budget of Various Departments • Resolution Authorizing Use of Public Employees Retirement Association • Police and Fire Fund .Refund Interest Earnings for Police and Fire Expenditures for 2008 Revised and 2009 Proposed Budget VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A r~ U ~' 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED BUDGET AND TAX LEVY • FOR THE YEAR 2009 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Truth in Taxation law provides for a proposed tax levy to be certified to the County Auditor by September 15, 2008 and then recertified before December 31, 2008. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The budget for the City of Richfield for the year 2009 is hereby approved and adopted with appropriations for each of the departments to be as follows: General Fund • Leg islative/Executive Administrative. Services Public Safety Fire Services Community Development Public Works Recreation Services TOTAL GENERAL FUND $ 866,880 1,189,130 8,355,240 3,248,080 282,120 4,175,320 1.688.710 19,805,480 2. The estimated gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources, including general ad valorem tax levies as hereinafter set forth for the year 2009 which are more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the 2009 budget, are hereby found and determined to be as follows: TOTAL GENERAL FUND $19,805,480 3. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax in the year 2008, payable in 2009 for the following purposes and in the following amounts: .PURPOSE AMOUNT General Fund' $12,384,0202 Equipment 136,502 G.O. Improvement. Bonds, Series 2007A ~ 371,800 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 20076 263,700 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2008A 419,265 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 20086 252,200 G.O. Capital Notes, Series 2008C 300,300 Cedar Point Tax Abatement 232,338 • Provision has been made in the General Fund for the payment of the City's contributory share to Public Employees' Retirement Association. 2 General Fund Levy includes all fiscal disparities distribution amounts. ~~ 4. The budget for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield for the • year 2009 is hereby ratified and approved. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax in the year2008, payable in 2009 for the following purposes: PURPOSE AMOUNT Housing and Redevelopment Authority $596,361 5. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the County Auditor. 6. The Truth in Taxation public hearings shall be set fior 7:00 p.m. December 1, 2008 with a continuation hearing at 7:00 p.m. December 8, 2008 if necessary. Debbie Goettel, Mayor • Adopted by the City Co_ uncil of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September 2008. ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • ~-3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING BUDGET REVISIONS WHEREAS the Cit Charter and Minnesota Statutes rovide fora rocess for Y p p adopting an annual budget and tax levy; and WHEREAS, the City Charter provides. certain authority for the City Manager and/or City Council to revise the annual budget; and WHEREAS, it would be beneficial to restate such authority with the adoption of the budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City Manager may increase the budget by City Council action provided that unbudgeted receipts will be available to equal or exceed the increased expenditures. 2. The City Manager may authorize transfers between divisions within a department providing the transfers do not increase or decrease the department or total budget. 3. The City Manager may transfer budgeted amounts between departments only with the approval of the City Council. • Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • 7-'{ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION OF 2008 BUDGET OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WHEREAS, Resolution No. 10029 appropriated funds for personal services, other expenses and capital outlays for each department of the City for the year of 2008; and WHEREAS, The City Charter, Chapter 7, Section 7.09, gives the Council authority to transfer unencumbered appropriation balances from one department to another within the same fund at the request of the City Manager; and WHEREAS, The City Manager has requested a revision of. the 2008 budget appropriations in accordance with Charter provisions and as detailed in the Proposed 2009 - budget document. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the 2008 appropriations for each department of the General Fund be amended to establish the #ollowing totals: General Fund Leg islative/Executive Administrative Services Public Safety Fire Services Community Development Public Works Recreation Services TOTAL GENERAL FUND INCREASE $ 836,830 + 1,158,100 8,134,270 3,126,020 277,480 4,023,110 1, 647, 990 19,203,800 $ 183, 320 2. Estimated 2008 gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources, as the same are more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the proposed 2009 budget, are hereby revised as follows: INCREASE $183,320 3. That the City Manager and the Finance Manager bring into -effect the provisions of this resolution. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk I~ RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION POLICE AND FIRE FUND REFUND INTEREST EARNINGS FOR CERTAIN POLICE AND FIRE EXPENDITURES WHEREAS, the City of Richfield received a refund of overfunded residual assets from the closed Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Police and Fire Fund; and WHEREAS, the City adopted a plan where only interest earnings on the principal of the residual assets are to be used for eligible expenditures; and and WHEREAS, all. eligible expenditures be restricted to Police and Fire expenditures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Revised 2008/Proposed 2009 Police and Fire Expenditures using PERA funds 2008R 2009 • General FundGeneral Fund OperatingExpenditures Police and Fire 325,130 245,820 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 11th day of September 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • r ~ U AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2UU8 OTHER BIISINESS 8 218 REPORT PREPARED BY: INTERIM DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: MELISSA POEHLMAN, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for a subdivision waiver to allow the lot at 7300 Upton Avenue to be split into two sin le-famil residential lots. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Deny a request for a subdivision waiver to allow the division of 7300 Upton Avenue with a finding that the minimum lot standards are not met. III. BACKGROUND ~ Mr. & Mrs. Rooney, the owners of 7300 Upton Avenue, are requesting permission to split their lot into two single-family residential lots. The Rooneys wish to build a new home in what is currently the back yard of the existing home. Staff and the Rooneys have been in discussion for over a year regarding the proposal to split this lot. From the beginning, it has been position of Community Development staff that the proposed split is not in keeping with the existing neighborhood (see attached surrounding neighborhood map) and that minimum lot size requirements and setbacks cannot be met. • The Rooneys have submitted a number of variations of their proposal; however, none of the proposals meet setback or lot depth requirements. In order to meet these requirements, the Rooneys have proposed to purchase a 20-foot strip of land to the north of their property. This land is currently part of Adam's Hill Park and a 091108 - 7300 Upton Subd. Waiver storm water line runs beneath it. The Rooneys have offered to trade 860-square • feet at the western boundary of their land in exchange for the land" to the north. The Public Works Department does not support the sale of land in which a storm water line is buried.. The Recreation Services Department does not believe that the proposal is advantageous to the City and has also recommended denial. On August 19, 2008, the Community Services Commission unanimously recommended denial of a proposal that would include this trade. The Rooneys have also proposed a scenario in which they would be granted an easement only over these 20-feet of land. In such a scenario, setback and minimum lot depth requirements would not be met. Setbacks are measured from the property line, as opposed to any the curb line. Including these 20-feet in the computation of setbacks or minimum lot depth would be the equivalent of counting the boulevard on a typical lot. In order to approve the requested subdivision, the Council would need to grant a number of variances. It is the opinion of staff that.the criteria necessary to grant a variance are not met. Feedback received from the neighborhood has not been positive. Neighbors have expressed concern about maintaining the existing character of the neighborhood. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION • A. POLICY • Minimum lot requirements in the Single-Family Residential (R) District are as follows: " o Minimum lot area - 6,700 sq.ft. o Minimum lot width - 50 ft. o Minimum lot depth - 100 ft. • The proposed lot split does not meet the minimum lot depth requirement. The proposed lot would have a width of 110.83-feet and a minimum depth of 8- feet. o Note: The front lot line, as determined by the Building Official, would be the northern property line, as ingress/egress are only possible via the Vincent Avenue and 73rd Street intersection. Neither home orientation presented meets both front and rear setback requirements. o Required front setback- 30 feet o Required rear setback - 25 feet ^ The original. proposal (labeled "Original") contemplates a 13.5-foot front setback and a 22.5-foot rear setback. • "Option A" presents a 23-foot front setback and a 20-foot rear setback. ^ In order to comply with setbacks, the depth of the house could be no more than 30-feet. • In order to approve the subdivision of the existing property at 7300 Upton Avenue, the Council must grant variances from the above requirements. In order to do so, the Council must find that all of the following criteria are met: o The enforcement of zoning regulations causes an undue hardship that denies the applicants a reasonable use of the property. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship; and o There are unusual or unique circumstances that apply to this property which do not apply to other properties in the vicinity; and o The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood; and o The variance is the minimum required to alleviate the undue hardship. • If the Council decides to approve the subdivision waiver, it must be contingent upon approval of the necessary variances for lot depth, front setback and rear setback. A public hearing must be scheduled for official consideration of these variances. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Minimum lot requirements are not met. • It is the opinion of staff that the criteria necessary to grant variances • are not met; most specifically the proposal would alter the character of the neighborhood. • Feedback received by staff is in opposition to the project. Neighbors do not believe the project is in character with the surrounding neighborhood and will be detrimental to the park/pond. • The Community Services Commission unanimously recommended denial of any proposal that would include the sale or swap of park land. The Public Works Department opposes the sale of land that houses public infrastructure. • If the Council approves the application, a public hearing will be scheduled for official consideration of the required variances. C. FINANCIAL • The required subdivision waiver application fee has been paid. D. LEGAL • 60-DAY RULE: 60 day clock `started' when complete application was received on June 27, 2008. A letter of extension was sent on July 8, 2008. A decision must be given to the applicant by September 25, 2008, OR the Council must notify the applicant that it is extending the • deadline (up to a maximum of 120 days total) for issuing a decision. • NOTIFICATION: Although not required, notice of the Council's consideration of this item was sent to residents and property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. • A public hearing is required for consideration of variances. If the • Council approves the subdivision request, a public hearing for official consideration of the necessary variances will be published and noticed in accordance with State and Local requirements. Further extension of the deadline for a decision will also be necessary. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • No net increase of run-off is allowed. If approved, the applicant will need to work with the Public Works Department to design a holding area or other system to ensure no increase in storm water run-off. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Approve subdivision of the lot contingent upon approval of all necessary variances. V. ATTACHMENTS • Original proposal • Option A • Option B • Surrounding neighborhood map • Topographical map • Lot photographs • VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Russ & Mary Rooney, owners 1 i ~~ O [ I I I W O ai V] i ~+ ~ I I 11 LL i\ = o ~ 11 ,, H ~~a ~ ~ E~ ` Wii ~ ~ ~ I ~ U 1 ~--- - 1 / `~ ono --- ___ --r-- ~' ~' .oz -i. ~ - -- SS I ~ ~\ ~ I ~i ~ ~ ~ '- m /~QO J _ ~ m z `° / ': fl pp m .. 4v, 7 -.,~ w M o I i ~I \ 3 I I ~ , y ~ I, 3 ~~ ~ °: :: ~ °: r ~~ it ~'~~~ C C C G yt I -~ ,'~ -__ ~ K S CW7 A Q, Q A --9.b- 59.h al ''flr I I ~ ~~~~ a',~c~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ O a I ~ _ Z~.~ ~ r ~ ~ F4 4 O o j ~ 00£L ?SiJnH ~~ d -- - r < ~ < z Q ~~ J Q _z ~_ O x~-i •3nd ivoldn ------ ~oa~oos .3 ~ ~ ~~~~ .1 o z~8s y ~I'' IF -- z, -' R '~i, r ~~e o 4 1 , I '~ s Y M" I r ~ ~ C V N ~~~ N A i I a I ~ i ~ ~ j j a w ~'r - - ~ ~ .~ ~ °' , ~ -----SZ- '=a ~,~ i i ;; a " ,~ ~ ~~ - ~ v I o I 1 ~ ~ ° C i N I ~ ti I I 7 I 1[ r I i ~ ~ I +,-' ~ ` I 3 ~- I ~ M 'm ~ c r ~ LL r °' ~+ . / 1 I ~ N ~ ;, I I I ~ ' - ~~ ~ 3` i / I r -; - ~ ~--- ~' i ~ I w- I i Y I~ Z ~y 1- .L~ ~'ZZ I 5 ___._y 1 \I I I *, I O r I i ~~ ` f O H ~a N ~ W L U N .~ o Z = [t] za a "' a sz ~w w x °" o „~ ^x '~ U .-.~ Q~ w ...~ i1 'and nioldn ----- 9„ 00, OOe OS ' ~, C I , ~ , ' 11 i ~p 'o w y /I n I \ m '~ Y `m m 'a c c ~ I / / ^^ a~~ j I ~ ~ e ~^ ~ , ~ h ~ i E o N I „' u \ is i o n ~ c o ° I ~ I ~ '~ '~ 2T N (~ ~ d ~ ~, I I I ~ ~~ I ~~~~ C as z W aci v a°i m ~ - - - ' ~ - I ~ ~ • • _ _ I ,\ ' ~ S t~i z x (7 A a Q, A Q ,9'b 5 3.h r ~ ...~ 7'EI /~ ~~ ~ ~i ~ o s ~§~ j ~ ~ a c ~ N ~- 1'LI ~a~N 3 i I ~ ~ M ~ ~> a W F ~ ~ ~r'° : ---r:' 2.AS - Z''' ~ ? ~ ~ , t I IF 4 '.i I j~~ O Q ~ ~ f'S/ ~ r. I I ~; W y~ < j ~1 Z I ~ ++ P I I -Z -~ , h-1 ° I I --I- --SZ-- ~ iiW r i I / I I P• ~ ~L - - _ ~ I ~ I ~ I S o - - - .c ~ ~ I I a 7 i ` I ~~ - L I C I 3 - ~ I ~ ~ ~ 3 I L, I+1 'm a ~ I M / I~ ~ ~ J1 I •~ 1 h I H ' _ ~'I _ ~ M ~ ~ I ~ i p G G ~ 1 I Q 'J ~~ , ~ I 1 -- ~ Q Z ~I ~ ---- ,1 - i ~ I i i O ~ ~ ~ I I I OZ i I ~ N ~ I W ~ ~ ~ o ~ .I , ' ~ £Z / ~, ~ ~ ~- ? M '~ ~~ ~ ,_ ~I o I , ® [ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, ~ , s ro~Z I ~ o~ 1 O U ~ 1` ? x~a ~ 11 ~ o ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ °^,od v 1~ OZ o ~ N r ~ O aF"„ „ a ~ ~ ~ ~ W k A y ,~ '~ V \ I ra ,~ 0 r I I ~I __ _~ •3ny No1dn _ _ _ ~„oo,oaevs ^ C I ~ i i i ~1 i ~ y ~ ~ ~ _~ ` ~ 1 ~ m z ~ N a ~ U C W ~ / ? ~ ~~l\~) V \v~. M \ ~ ~ ~ y t~ ~" O m b I I ~ l4 `? ~/ 4Kl~CCZ W ~^ :: :: :: :: I I ~ ~ I' ;~~~ tO W a°i aCi a°i a°i I 4~ ' ~-~ ~ -- - - ~ z S ~ ~ "~' '(J' A A~ A A _ , _ 9•h S'i.h - '" J ~ 1~~~' ~ i ~ c z ~ I I E1 ~ ~ ~~~~ H ~• {: I -- - _ z as ~- - ~i r I 4~ E'6i r r W~~~ 1 y ~ 4 J I .~l Z Y I ~~ N P ~ ~ I = W < ~ N i~. - g 1 I • 3 7/ F'1 -I r l ~ -- - --SZ---'' ~ ~~ / ~ ~i ~ i i a ~' ~, X ~`' ~° -- ~ I I ° ~f O / ~, ~ `~ r~ ) C ~ ,..,) ~ N ~ ~ J I `I ~ I ,y (~ l,~ ~ V C ~ ..--- / - rt~ : 1 I 1/ I ; M ~ 3 L M ~m ~ a 1 ~ vy ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~ j 'F I y H M M ~ I A ~ i Q. \~ ~ N N ~ x a ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ w ~ k c N~ / ~ ~ ~ r O O ~ cf N ~ L. z/ ~ i ~ ~ U ~ o - ~ ,, W k a. \ Ca ~ i ~ ~ ~] --" x ¢ aw '~ o I p 0 1 ap ~ ~ O I as I O WF ~ ~ ~ ~ am I ` r 1 - ~ q I ~ O °~ a. ~ ~ 1 ~ r a~ ~ e`" - az- - ~ +~ I c ~ W ~ V ~' t , ~ ~ ~ ; ~ 7300 Upton Ave S -Subdivision Waiver 7/08 Neighborhood Context • "N A .Adam's Hill Park .~ ~~ ,,. -F... -__ _ _ _ _ _ ~~''y2.f ti.h ~ ~, j ~ r.. ,~k~~ i e~ \ ~... ry f ~~ ~ . ~s w t J( i ~ ~'' r '~.xs ~ { ' / ~ Q ~ ~~ ' ~. ^'.~ _.._. .... __ _ , _. r ~^ ^ Legend - Building Footprints Parcel boundaries 0 62.5 125 250 375 500 Feet -5 7300 Upton Ave S -Subdivision Waiver 7/08 Topography ~j~ii~4t E j}t; rt 1' #<P ~~, ~ ,~ Jf ~ T= ~~ f °K w~<' .. Pik i ~e ..-..`X3~' '~ '~ ~., k { +j r t ~4 ~ ~ ~ } ~a ~1 ~ y ~ ~ , I ., ~ •+ ~~5 .~}~''~ ~ r1~C t4 A, ` .... ~- _u..~. ~~...-*. ~ 1 ~ ~; ire ~~'~ 1} ,fits.;. ~ ti ~r ref, Adam's Hill Park ' ~~ ~ -,~~w.,R ~73rc~St VIF ,. ,.tl/,1221 tfj L9 S 3 f:7 }• ?~~~ i r t! i •~ SS tv F f t 4 fT 'I ~~y~ ! i yy yy 4~ { { Y S p { V~~ ~.; ~~ iii ~ ~~ r~. i ., t l t~a~'„ } ~t., }, 1' i t 1i' ~ ~ ~ v. -~,r-.~ t ~. ~; 4 ~r _ ~ 1~j ~ x l --~ (i71 1 I.. i~a ~ 4 s ~ `t~~ < /r/ y. ~ i I~~~{jjf~/((%JIJJ~JJyyy t ~; r Q j III t ~ ~•~~~. ..,_„ -,-_. ~... _.-. . __ ~' l/ T ~~ ,. i _ _ _~ ,. _._ .... ,' ,_ ~ t ...~ _ .. ~ -. ~ , -,.... ~L.. L_. `~;. _. \ . , t r~ ~ , ~ ~ ~~ _.. ~- ~ -~~ ~ ~~ f ~, ~- J ~ ~ - ~ ~ _ ____ ,._ ti .. [~ f ~~.__r- `. ria f .~..~ , ; ~' ~ f ~ ~ :~ N ------~--- 1-foot contour lines Countour lines join points of equal elevation (height) and thus allow illustration of hills, valleys and the steepness of slopes. More tightly grouped lines illustrate a more rapid change in elevation (steeper slope) as opposed to a more gradual change that is indicated by lines that are spread out from one another. 0 50 100 200 300. 400 Feet ~-~ • f- A N 0 a o^ ~ ~ a ~ •w ~ .1.r .w ~ ~ 4: O ~ .~ as 0 a 0 ~. a a~ ~~ e~ ~ a. o 3 ~' as ~ z .~ ~x ~ o 0 o a a x ao O 3 v ,~ a ~~ ~ o a~ 3 ~, as ~ ~~ '~ o a~ 0 ',~ __ ,:. • ~ o ,- ~ .... .~ .~.. _o a o f, ~ ,a Rr i o 3 ~ ~, ~ ~' ° ~ x m • • N .° ev o o ~ .~ ~. a o ~ ~ 3 ~w in Q • AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # 9 REPORT # 219 ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: STEj~N L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE • REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for the City Council to confirm the appointment of Barry Fritz as Public Safet Director for.the Cit of Richfield. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Confirm the appointment of Barry Fritz as Public Safety Director for the City of Richfield. II. BACKGROUND Since former Public Safety Director Dan Scott left on full-time military leave in January 2008 and subsequently retired effective July 31, 2008, Police Captain Barry Fritz has been serving as Acting Public Safety Director. During that time, Mr. Fritz has been performing the duties of Public Safety Director very competently. In August, the City Manager requested that the position of Public Safety Director be posted as an internal recruitment. Mr. Fritz was the only applicant for the position. As a result of this recruitment, and based on Mr. Fritz's exemplary performance in his role as Acting Public Safety Director, he has been selected by the City Manager for appointment to the position of Public Safety Director. • Mr. Fritz has spent over 32 years in police service. Since starting in the Richfield Police Department in January 1976, Mr. Fritz began as a Police Officer and held that position until May 1981 when he was promoted to the position of Police Sergeant. In October 1984, he was promoted to Police Lieutenant and in April 1990, he was promoted to Police Captain, a rank he has held since then. In those positions, he has supervised every aspect of the Police Division of the Public Safety Department. 0911 Fritzappointment Mr. Fritz is a graduate of Fridley Senior High School and received a Bachelor of Arts . degree from the University of Minnesota in 1971. He studied Principles of Police Management at the University of North Florida and Supervision of Police Personnel from Northwestern University. He has also received Professional. Continuing Education Credits in every aspect of Police Management and Supervision for over 27 years. He has been an Associate Member of the International Assoc. of Chiefs of Police, Minnesota Chiefs of Police and Hennepin County Chiefs of Police. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • According to Richfield City Charter Section 6.02 Powers and Duties of the City Manager, subsection 3, and under Richfield City Code Section 310.01 Subd. 3, Charter authority, appointment or removal of department heads shall be made final only upon a majority vote of the Council. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The Public Safety Department has been without a permanent Public Safety Director since the military leave and subsequent retirement of Dan Scott. Mr. Fritz has been searing as Acting Public Safety Director since that time. • C. FINANCIAL • The 2008 Budget includes the funding necessary to provide for the salary and benefit contributions as negotiated. D. LEGAL • According to Richfield's City Code, the City Council must approve the selection of Mr. Fritz before he is appointed Public Safety Director. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The Council may reject the candidate and direct the City Manager to undertake a new selection process. V. ATTACHMENTS • ~ None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~~' STAFF REPORT OTHER BUSINESS 10 220 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 • REPORT PREPARED BY: ST~EN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NAME, Trr REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~/ _ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for the City Council to confirm the appointment of John Stark as Communit Develo ment Director for the Cit of Richfield. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Confirm the appointment of John Stark as Community Development Director for the Cit of Richfield. III. BACKGROUND Since former Community Development Director, Bruce Palmborg, retired in January 2008, John Stark has been serving as Acting Community Services Director. During that time, Acting Director Stark has performed the duties of the Community Development Director very competently. In August, the City Manager requested that the position of Community Development Director be posted as an internal recruitment. Mr. Stark was the only applicant for the position. As a result of this recruitment process, and based on Mr. Stark's exemplary performance in his role as Acting Community Development Director, he has been selected by the City Manager for appointment to the position of Community Development Director. • Mr. Stark has spent over 15 years in municipal service in the area of community development. He has been with the Richfield Community Development Department as its Community Development Manager from October 1998 to September 2003 and then as its Assistant Director from September 2003 to June 2005 and again from July 2007 to the present. In between his two periods of employment with the City of Richfield, Mr. Stark served as the City of Roseville's Community Development Director for over a year. Prior to working in Richfield, Mr. Stark was a Redevelopment Project Manager for the City of South Bend, Indiana for almost 5 years. 0911 StarkAppointment Mr. Stark received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Geography and Urban Planning from Western Kentucky University and earned a Master of Public Affairs degree from the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs with a concentration in Public Leadership and Management. Mr. Stark has been a certified urban planner through the American Institute of Certified Planners since 1998 and a member of the American Planning. Association since 1992. He has been a featured speaker at the state conferences of the Minnesota chapters of both the American Planning Association and the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • According to Richfield City Charter Section 6.02 Powers and Duties of the City Manager, subsection 3, and under Richfield City Code Section 310.01 Subd. 3, Charter authority, appointment or removal of department heads shall be made final only-upon a majority vote of the Council. ;AL ISSUES ~ The Community Development Department has been without a permanent Director. since the retirement of Bruce Palmborg in January 2008 and Mr. Stark has been serving as Acting Director since that time. • C. FINANCIAL • The 2008 Budget includes the funding necessary to provide for the salary and benefit contributions as negotiated. D. LEGAL • According to Richfield's City Code, the Council must approve the selection of Mr. Stark before he is appointed Community Development Director. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council may reject the candidate and direct the City Manager to undertake a new selection process. V. ATTACHMENTS • None ~ VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~ • None. •