Loading...
07-08-03 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 8, 2003 SPECIAL CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORKSESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 5:45 P.M. Call to order Roll call 1. Discussion of Cornerstone agreement revisions;.Lyndale Gateway West project Adjournment REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:30 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda, Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting, Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of (1) Special City Council Worksession of June 24, 2003 and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of June 24, 2003 .PRESENTATIONS Annual meeting with Community Services Commission 2. Presentation by Tom Tuttle regarding Richfield Historical Society 3. Presentation of proclamation designating July 6-12, 2003 National Therapeutic Recreation Week in Richfield Notes: COUNCIL-DISCUSSION 4. Council discussion • Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT ,~5..-City Manager°s,-Re{~ort Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 6. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 7. 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 resolution appointing Rudy Hanuman to Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for remainder of three year-term ending December 31, 2003 S.R. No. 147 B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing summary publication of Ordinance No. 2003-10, franchise ordinance agreement between Centerpoint Energy/Minnegasco and City of Richfield approved May 27, 2003 S.R. No. 148 C. Consideration of approval of resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing purchase of 6414-18th Avenue S.R. No. 149 D. Consideration of approval of resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing purchase of two apartment buildings at 6412 and 6444 Cedar Avenue; Airport Noise Acquisition Program S.R. No. 150 E. Consideration of approval of renewal of lawful gambling license and resolution allowing bingo and pulltab operations for Church of the Assumption, 305 East 78th Street S.R. No. 151 F. Consideration of approval of on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor, itinerant place of amusement and itinerant. food licenses for Church of the Assumption, 305 East 78th Street, annual Fun Fiesta on August 10, 2003 S.R. No. 152 Notes: 8. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar ,~ Notes: RESOLUTIONS 9. Disciplinary hearings and consideration of resolutions regarding civil enforcement for alcohol establishments in Richfield that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff and failed by selling alcohol to underage youth Staff Report No. 153 Notes: 10. Consideration of: • Richfield Zoning Code classification "firearms related uses" as conditional use in General Commercial (C-2) and Industrial (I) zoning districts; • Resolution calling for moratorium on "firearms .related uses" and directing study undertaken; • First reading of ordinance directing study be conducted and moratorium established for "firearms related uses" in C-2 and I zoning districts and set public hearing and second reading for August 12, 2003; • Resolution denying request to establish firearms safety training center at 6611 Chicago Avenue Staff Report No. 154 Notes: PUBLIC HEARING 11. Public hearing and second reading of amendment to Chapter VIII of Richfield City Code for new right-of-way ordinance and consideration of resolution authorizing summary publication of ordinance amendment Staff Report No. 155 Notes: 12. Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance authorizing sale of parcels at 7645 Aldrich and 7646 Lyndale Avenues to The Cornerstone Group Staff Report No. 156 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 13. Consideration of authorization for Housing and Redevelopment Authority to administer $500,000 Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Grant for Lyndale Gateway West Project Staff Report No. 157 Notes: 14. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) ~achspeaker~is-to:keep their comment period-to #hree~nir~utes-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: 15. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon ;request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 612-861-9702. STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 Other Business 13 157 REPORT PREPARED BY: JOHN STARK, CONINIUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ('' SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of authorization for the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority to administer the $500,000 Livable Communities Grant from the Metropolitan Council for the L ndale Gatewa West ro'ect. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Authorize the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority to administer Metropolitan Council Grant No. SG-02-162, and to take all necessary actions including, where appropriate, taking title to individual parcels with the grant funds. II. BACKGROUND • On February 25, 2003, the City of Richfield received a $500,000 Livable Communities Grant (Grant No. SG-02-162) from the Metropolitan Council. • The stated purpose of this grant was for "land acquisition and assembly." • Activities such as land acquisition and assembly for redevelopment are more i`1 commonly performed by housing and redevelopment authorities than city councils. • A situation has arisen in which grant funds are needed for advanced purchase of a property located at 7639 Aldrich Avenue. 0708LGW • A primary reason for the early acquisition of this site would be to provide the ^` developer with an on-site location for their marketing/sales trailer. - • Under the City Council's administration of the grant funds, a number of time consuming steps (such as two readings, a transitory ordinance and a public hearing) would be required for the advance purchase of the property, which would render early acquisition impractical. • If the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) were to administer the grant funds, however, the acquisition of the property would occur in a more timely fashion because the acquisition has already been contemplated in the Contract for Private Development and all required public approvals have been made. • As with all land acquisition and disposition matters, the HRA would make all efforts to ensure a proper amount of security (such as a primary mortgage), before transferring title of a property that was acquired with grant funds to a developer. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • On February 25, 2003, the City of Richfield received a $500,000 Livable Communities Grant (Grant No. SG-02-162) from the Metropolitan Council. • The intended purpose of the grant funds are for redevelopment site assembly. • Staff has determined that the HRA would be able to administer redevelopment site assembly activities more efficiently than the City Council. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • A primary purpose for the funds at issue is for the early acquisition of the property located at 7639 Aldrich Avenue prior to July 16, 2003. If the City were to administer the grant funds instead of the HRA, it would be impossible to accomplish all the needed activities by that time. • The City of Richfield would continue to be the grantee from the perspective of the Metropolitan Council. • There does not appear to be any "downside" of having the HRA administer the grant funds. C. FINANCIAL • The HRA would make all efforts to ensure a proper amount of security (such as a primary mortgage), before transferring title of a property that was acquired with grant funds to a developer. !~ D. LEGAL • Legal Counsel made the suggestion that staff recommend this course of action to the City Council. • The Metropolitan Council staff agrees that the City can assign the administration of the grant to the HRA. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deny authorization for the Richfield HRA to administer the $500,000 Livable Communities Grant (Grant No. SG-02-162); this action would result in the inability to acquire the property at 7639 Aldrich Avenue prior to July 16, 2003 (as needed in order to acquire this property early). V. ATTACI-IlVIENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Legal Counsel ~, ,-~ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT Public Hearing 12 156 CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: JULIE URBAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading regarding the attached transitory ordinance authorizing the sale of parcels located at 7645 Aldrich Avenue and 7646 Lyndale Avenue to The Cornerstone Group. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the attached transitory ordinance authorizing the sale of parcels located at 7645 Aldrich Avenue and 7646 Lyndale Avenue to The Cornerstone Groua. II. BACKGROUND • On December 11, 2003, the City Council approved a planned unit development and final development plan for a proposed redevelopment of the west side of Lyndale Gateway West by The Cornerstone Group. • The redevelopment project encompasses the area from 76th to 77th Streets, Aldrich to Lyndale Avenues. • In 1993, the .City purchased four parcels at the south end of this block for the 77th Street road project. A portion of the parcels is being used for 77th Street right-of-way. The remainder is not needed for right-of-way but is needed for the redevelopment project. 0708LGWparcels • The Cornerstone Group needs 1,987 sq. ft. of 7645 Aldrich Avenue and 837 sq. _ ft. of 7646 Lyndale Avenue for the redevelopment project. • Staff proposes selling the remnant parcels to The Cornerstone Group for $18,311.70. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The property to be purchased by The Cornerstone Group is not needed for right-of--way purposes. • Sufficient land will remain for the 77th Street right-of--way. • It is appropriate to charge The Cornerstone Group fair market value for the property and reimburse the 77th Street account, which - originally purchased the property. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The redevelopment project needs the land for the development. • On June 10, 2003, the Council continued the public hearing to July 8 to allow staff additional time to address property line issues. Those issues have been addressed and do not impact the amount of property to be sold to The Cornerstone Group. • The Cornerstone Group is seeking to close on all project properties by September 3 in order to begin construction on the project this fall. C. FINANCIAL • In 2000, appraisals were conducted on 77th Street remnant parcels ,~ located to the east of Lyndale Avenue. The residential portion of the land was appraised at $4.15 a sq. ft. The commercial portion was appraised at $10.60 a sq. ft. • In the case of these parcels on the west side of Lyndale Avenue, an inflation factor was applied to the appraised values to arrive at $4.44 a sq. ft. for the residential property and $11.34 for the commercial property. Using these rates, 7645 Aldrich Avenue is valued at $8,820.69 and 7646 Lyndale Avenue is valued at $9,491.01 for a total of $18,311.70. • The 77th Street account would be reimbursed with the sale proceeds. D. LEGAL • The Cornerstone Group will be platting the redevelopment area, which will legally establish the new right-of--way line. • First reading of the transitory ordinance was held on May 13, 2003. • A legal notice was published in the Sun-Current on May 29, 2003. • The public hearing was continued from June 10 to July 8. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION • Decide not to sell the excess =way to The Cornerstone Group. I V . ATTACHMENTS I • ~ ransitory c~rdmance • Description sketch of parcels VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A ~'~, ~ BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA 7645 ALDRICH AVENUE AND 7646 LYNDALE AVENUE The City of .Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1: The following described real property located in the City of Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, is hereby authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of, and conveyed by the City as herein provided: Parcel A That part of Lot 8, Glenn's Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying north of the south 51.35 feet of said Lot 8. Parcel B That part of Lot 7, Glenn's Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying south of the north 28.30 feet of said Lot 7, lying '~ north of the south 45.30feet of said Lot 7, and lying westerly of a .curve concave to the east having a radius of 17.01 feet. Said curve passes through a point on the south line of said north 28.30 feet of Lot 7 distant 108.99 feet easterly of the west line of said Lot 7, and passes through a point on the north line of said south 45.30 feet of Lot 7 distant 105.76 feet easterly of said west line of Lot 7. Section 2: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all actions as required to sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of and convey the real property described in the foregoing Section 1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the execution of all documents, purchase agreements, deeds of conveyance, and other instruments connected with such sale, .transfer or disposition and conveyance. 2003. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk w E d ~ ~ . - °°~ 3- ot~ ~~ a ~- d9o i~ V po_ 1 ~ p, noa jy :3 I _ N y~~~ a ~ I~ 3~p~ ~~. J`T ~ ~laaj 0£ = 4°°I I ~3ltlOS y ~ ~n a I y ~ va U ~ as ~ IJ NX y J c0 T } ~K ~ T~~ i:. . J 0 O W I ! 0 0 ~ O a p a Q: ~ I L ^ N O ._vvy ] I` v m I Y O ~ N '•n rn~ H Z I ~ C c a .. vae: •- ~ ~ I rn 1 ~ o Ic ~ S oa0 rA r °n ~ .°.' w o I -L°~ ~E -- m V, ~ °~ (~ 3 n O N ~ f7/1 m _ ~ _O C N V - - r m O O1 s~~~ ~an~~ Yy ° W O ~ O m N c 4Z '3021 '8Z 'dMl '££ '03S d0 4/I 3S 3H1 I ~ O ~ 1 . 30 4/I 35 3H1 j0 Z/I N 3H1 d0 3NIl 1SV3 m m ~J ~ L lOl d0 3NIl 1Stl3 I •~ ~ Q ~/L ~ i 28 43 0~j1 ~W O /\ ` -~: -~~ 853 I 39 gl~ £'8Z ~' 110522'0£ RgR~ ~ I J ~ c ~ ~ ~~~ o£ sb ^ S~ ; - ~ ~ 0 ^ \ \ b y I O ~ I ~ f ~ ~ ~ W I I` ~ ° rn i0 n Z P a s \ J J \ ~\ ~ \~ J O r ~S c v'o to °~~ ~ ~~ ~ `~ ~~ I d o -' ~ o ~_.-° ra°'' Z ~ m o -' p~~ ~~ W ~, ca p m morn"° V ~ ~~:pOw _ Q ° c...t c.... ~ ~ U U W .. 1~ .n .a N o a o £ 8Z 1 0£ S4 v v n c c v y O it.. C `~ _ v , 0 w u' `o ~ v L lOl ~0 3NIl 1S3 ~'~, ~~ T ~ v n (° a; ^ ,-Z/'S/. 3„F/,90,0 . .. ~ "o I v 0 0 ~ ^+ m = y ~ o n n°='~o o v .. ~ a ~ No" ~ O ~ a ° °1~m` 0 ot- O ~~'~ w S£'IS '- ° mM O ~ O ~ O O~ N W J v vz ~.-a ~. Z w0 .t.. ~ C D N .t.. \~ = W v v-~oH ~ "~ ~ "'1 O= I Oy - OQl Of~ OJw- ~ ~ ~ 0 o v J N v c ~ W Q~ 3 ~ ~ O .y °.°m v l I I ^ W °~ v1 = w n U p`O U ~~~OC ~~ J q UO.° ~~ I ~w h a s a a;,~Nr_ C, ~ 2 Q II h ~ ~~ o O wn O WO~~o ~ ~a i Z Z C ... ~ _ ~ r.~ n Ow N oN N °OC VOZO ~ .. w v rnJ p L ~ .` y O C J o vt JOO N \O W O VI O O T ~ ~a O o. vy y y d y y N N y ~"/Z'S/-" U O al ~ c° a ~ °m 3 ~ n s 3„F/,90,ON co ...... -._ O b - ££ 'J3S j0 4/I 3S 3Hl d0 6/I 3S 3H1 30 Z/I N n° I 3H1 j0 1333 096 1S3M 3H1 d0 3NIl 1Stl3 ~ 0 o - ~.- AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing AGENDA ITEM # 11 REPORT # 155 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, .2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: JIM OLSON, PROJECT ENGINEER TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ® ~• d SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading regarding an amendment to Chapter VIII of the Richfield Cit Code for a new Ri ht-of-Wa Ordinance . I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the attached Right-of-Way Ordinance and adopt the attached resolution approving summary publication of the ordinance amendment. II. BACKGROUND Staff proposes to enact a new updated Right-of-Way (ROW) Ordinance as recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) and our City Attorney. Richfield has had a ROW Ordinance in effect for many years; however, staff now finds it beneficial to enact a new ROW Ordinance. The LMC has developed a model Right-of-Way Ordinance to promote consistency between City Ordinances and to ensure that it is consistent with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission's rules of right-of-way management. The attached ordinance is based on the LMC model and has been drafted with the help of James Strommen, an attorney with Kennedy and Graven. 0708ROWOrdinance2nd Read The ordinance has been reviewed by city staff and representatives of Xcel Energy, Centerpoint Minnegasco, Quest Communication and Time Warner Cable. The _ Community Services Commission has also reviewed the attached ordinance. They have recommended approval of the ordinance with one comment, see Critical Issues. The primary differences between this proposed ordinance and the existing R-O-W Ordinance are: • All persons or companies that own facilities that occupy the right-of-way or excavate within the R-O-W must register with the City and provide certain necessary information such as name, address, a-mail address, telephone and fax numbers, and certification of insurance or self-insurance. • All right-of-way users must, at the beginning of the year provide a plan of construction projects anticipated within the next year. • In addition to the already required permit to excavate within the public right-of- way (street cut permit), a new permit will be created for "Occupation of the Right- of-Way". This permit would allow for obstructions such as dumpsters to be temporarily placed within the street. • The proposed ordinance deals with such issues as: permit extensions; delays; non-performance; restoration; emergencies; and, other conditions. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City is responsible for managing its right-of-way, which includes the placement and maintenance of facilities within the right-way and the. appropriate use of the right-of-way. This ordinance will impose. reasonable regulations to handle these concerns. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • .After review by the Community Services Commission, there was discussion on the obstruction permit which could allow the placement of dumpsters on the street for a temporary period. Staff would like to discourage this practice but the Commission thought there would be circumstances where it would be necessary to place dumpsters on the street. If dumpsters are allowed on the street there was also concern about liability and insurance issues. The ordinance does have insurance requirements. Members of the Commission thought the dumpster issue could be separated out to specifically address homeowners. City attorneys state that this ordinance is not meant to specifically address placement of dumpsters on the street. Staff recommends leaving the ordinance as written. Staff believes the proposed ordinance as written will allow the placement of dumpsters on the street under certain circumstances through the use of the obstruction permit provided within the '~ ordinance. Staff will ensure the necessary insurance requirements _ are met and that the City be indemnified from the placement of dumpsters on the right of way as it does with the existing Boulevard Feature Permit. Staff will then evaluate whether there is enough demand for the obstruction permit to where the City should amend its ordinance to be specific in dealing with the placement of dumpsters on the street. C. FINANCIAL • The City will develop a fee schedule for the Excavation Permit Fee and the Obstruction Permit Fee included in this ordinance. The amount will be similar to existing permit fees and will be sufficient to recover the City management costs and any degradation costs to city streets. D. LEGAL • Attorney James Strommen of Kennedy and Graven has been a part of the staff team that drafted this ordinance. There are no legal issues known at this time that would affect passage and implementation of this ordinance. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ r-~, • Council could decline to approve this ordinance or recommend amendments; however, staff and the. City Attorney believe it is an appropriate ordinance that follows the League of Minnesota Cities' model. V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed Right-of-Way Ordinance • Resolution approving summary publication VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. ORDINANCE NO. , AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE AND REGULATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS; ADDING SECTION 802 TO THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. The Richfield City Code is amended to add a new Section 802 to read as follows: Section 802 -RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT 802.01 Findings, Purpose, and Intent. To provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the- rights-of--way, the city strives to keep its rights-of--way in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances. Accordingly, the city enacts this new Section of this code relating to right-of--way permits and administration. This Section imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within the city's rights-of--way or to be placed therein at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal. agencies. Under this Section, persons excavating and obstructing the rights-of--way will bear financial responsibility for their work through the, recovery of out-of-pocket and projected costs from persons using the public rights-of--way: This Section shall be interpreted consistently with 1997 Session Laws, Chapter 123, substantially codified in Minnesota Statutes Sections 237.16, 237.162, 237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the "Act") and the other laws governing applicable rights of the city and users of the right-of- way. This Section shall also be interpreted consistent with Minnesota Rules 7819.0050 - 7819.9950 where possible. To the extent that any provision of this Section cannot be interpreted consistently with the Minnesota Rules, the interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and case law is intended. 802.03 Election to Manage the Public Rights-of-Way Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and common law, the city elects pursuant Minnesota Statutes, section 237.163 subdivision 2(b), to manage rights-of--way within its jurisdiction. 802.05 Definitions. The following definitions apply in this Section of this code. References to "subdivisions" are unless otherwise specified references to subdivisions in this Section. JMS-222029v5 RC 145-326 Subd. 1. "Abandoned Facility" means a facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of--way user. Subd. 2. "Applicant" means any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct aright-of--way. Subd. 3. "City" means the city of Richfield, Minnesota. For purposes of Section 802.57, city means its elected officials, officers, employees and agents. Subd. 4. "Commission" means the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. Subd. 5. "Congested Right-of--Way" means a crowded condition in the subsurface of the public right-of--way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral facilities in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.04. subdivision 3, over a continuous length in excess of 500 feet. Subd. 6. "Construction Performance Bond" means any of the following forms of security provided at permittee's option: A. Individual project bond, including a "license and permit" bond; B. Cash deposit; C. Security of a form listed or approved under Minnesota Statutes, section. 15.73, subdivision; D. Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the city; E. Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the city; F. A blanket bond for projects within the city, or .other form of construction bond, for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the city. Subd. 7. "Degradation" means a decrease in the useful life of the right-of--way caused by excavation in or disturbance of the right-of--way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of--way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. Subd. 8. "Degradation Cost" subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a level of restoration as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum .restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950. Subd. 9. "Degradation Fee" means the estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right- of-way caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost. Subd. 10. "Department" means the department of public works of the city. JMS-222029v6 RC145-326 2 Subd. 11. "Department Inspector" means any person authorized by the city to carry out inspections related to the provisions of this Section. Subd. 12. "Director" means the Director of the department of public works of the city, or her or his designee. Subd. 13. "Delay Penalty" is the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of--way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration as established by permit. Subd. 14. "Emergency".means a condition that (1) poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a customer. Subd. 15. "Equipment" means any. tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right-of--way. Subd. 16. "Excavate" means to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of aright-of--way. Subd. 17. "Excavation permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may excavate in aright-of--way. An Excavation permit allows the holder to excavate that part of the right-of--way described in such permit. Subd. 18. "Excavation permit fee" means money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in Section 802.23. Subd. 19. "Facility or Facilities" means tangible asset in the public right-of--way required to provide utility service. The term does not include Facilities to the extent the location and relocation of such Facilities are preempted by Minnesota Statutes, section 161.45, governing utility facility placement in state trunk highways. Subd. 20. "Five-year project plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next five years. Subd. 21. "High Density Corridor" means a designated portion of the public right- of-way within which telecommunications right-of--way users having multiple and competing facilities may be required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure. Subd. 22. "Hole" means an excavation in the right-of--way, with the excavation having a length less than the width of the pavement or adjacent pavement. Subd. 23. "Local Representative" means a local person or persons, or designee of such person or persons, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters within the scope of this Section. i 1 JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 3 '~ Subd. 24. "Management Costs" means the actual costs the city incurs in managing - its rights-of--Way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing, processing, and verifying right-of--way permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of--way work; determining the adequacy of right-of--way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of--way permits. Management costs do not include payment by a telecommunications right-of--way User for the use of the right-of--way, the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, chapter 123; Minnesota Statutes, sections 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or the city fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Section 802.61. Subd. 25. "Obstruct" means to place any tangible object in aright-of--way so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the right-of--way. Subd. 26. "Obstruction Permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may obstruct aright-of--way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that right-of--way, for the duration specified therein, including a blanket permit for a period of time and for types of work specified by the Director, if deemed appropriate in his discretion. Subd. 27. "Obstruction Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by a permittee to ~ cover the costs as provided in Section 802.23. Subd. 28. "Patch or Patching" means a method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists of (1) the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, 'and (2) the replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the city's five year project plan. Subd. 29. "Pavement" means any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of--way and that is paved or otherwise constructed with paver blocks, bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel. Subd. 30. "Permit" has the meaning given "right-of--way permit" in Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162. Subd. 31. "Permittee" means any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of--way has been granted by the city under this Section. Subd. 32. "Person" means an individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state, however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate, or political. ~ Subd. 33. "Public right-of--way" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, }( section 237.162, subdivision 3. JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 4 Subd. 34. "Registrant" means any person who (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any right-of--way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of--way or place its facilities or equipment in the right-of--way Subd. 35. "Restore or Restoration" means the process by which an excavated right- of-way and surrounding area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before excavation. Subd. 36. "Right-of--.Way Permit" means either the excavation permit or the obstruction permit, or both, depending on the context, required by this Section. Subd. 37. "Right-of--Way User" means (1) a telecommunications right-of--way user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of--way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of--way. Subd. 38. "Service or Utility Service" means and includes (1) services provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes 216B.02, subdivisions 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right-of--way user, including transporting of voice or data information; (3) services of a cable communications system as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter. 238.02, subdivision 3; (4) natural gas or electric energy or telecommunications services provided by a local government unit; (5) services provided by a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam, cooling or heating services. Subd. 39. "Supplementary Application" means an application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of--way than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that. had already been issued. Subd. 40, "Temporary Surface" means the compaction of subbase and aggregate base and replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the city's two-year plan, in which case it is considered. full restoration: Subd. 41. "Trench" means an excavation in the right-of--way, with the excavation having a length equal to or greater than the width of the pavement or adjacent pavement. Subd. 42. "Telecommunication right-of--way User" means a person owning or controlling. a facility in the right-of--way, or seeking to own or control a Facility in the right-of- way, that is used or is intended to be used for transporting telecommunication or other voice or data information. For purposes of this Section, a cable communication system defined and regulated under Minn. Stat. Chap. 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether provided by a public utility as defined in ~ Minnesota Statutes, section. 216B.02, a municipality, a municipal gas or power .agency organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapters. 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 5 association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A, are not telecommunications right- - of-way users for purposes of this Section. Subd. 43. "Two Year Project Plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next two years. 802.07 Administration. The Director is the principal city official responsible for the administration of the rights-of--way, right-of-way permits, and the ordinances related thereto. The Director may delegate any or all of the duties hereunder. 802.09 Utility Coordination Committee. The city may create an advisory utility coordination committee. Participation on the committee is voluntary. It will be composed of any registrants that wish to assist the city in obtaining information and by making recommendations regarding use of the right-of--way, and to improve the process of performing construction work therein. The city may determine the size of such committee and shall appoint members from a list of registrants that have expressed a desire to assist the city. 802.11 Registration and Right-of--Way Occupancy. --~ Subd. 1. Registration. Each person who occupies, uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of--way or place any equipment or facilities in or on the right-of--way, including persons with installation and maintenance responsibilities by lease, sublease or assignment, must register with the city. Registration will consist of providing application information and paying a registration fee. Subd. 2. Registration Prior to Work.. No person may construct, install, repair, remove, relocate, or perform any other work on, or use any facilities or any part thereof in any right-of--way without first being registered with the city. Subd. 3. Exceptions. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to repeal or amend the provisions of a city ordinance establishing the rights of and limitations placed on persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or gardens in the area of the right-of--way between their property and the street curb. Persons shall not be deemed to use or occupy the right-of--way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other requirements under this Section for the following: A. Planting or maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens (City Code 811.07); B. Other surface landscaping works (City Code 811.07); JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 6 '-` C. Construction and maintenance of driveways, sidewalks, curb and gutter, or parking lots, except repairs or restoration necessitated by utility cuts or other work (City Code 800.11); D. Construction or maintenance of street furnishings, bus stop benches, shelters, or posts and pillars (City Code 805.07); E. Snow removal activities (City Code 930.17); F. Construction and maintenance of irrigation systems provided that the system does not connect directly to water mains in the right-of--way (City Code 811.07). Subd. 4. Gopher One Call Nothing herein relieves a person from complying with the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216D, Gopher One Call Law. 802.13 Registration Information. Subd. 1 Information Required. The information provided to the city at the time of registration shall include, but not be limited to: A. Each registrant's name, Gopher One-Call facility owner code number or other One-Call identifier, address and e-mail address, and telephone and --~ facsimile numbers. B. The name, address and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be accessible for consultation at all times. Current information regarding "how to contact the local representative in an emergency shall be provided at the time of registration. C. A certificate of insurance or self-insurance: 1. Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the registrant by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a form of self insurance acceptable to the city; 2. Verifying that the registrant is insured against claims for personal injury, including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i) use and occupancy of the right-of--way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permittees, and (ii) placement and use of facilities and equipment in the right-of--way by the registrant,. its officers, agents, employees and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground facilities and collapse of property; JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 7 3. Either naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such coverages or otherwise providing evidence satisfactory to the Director that the city is fully covered and will be defended through registrant's insurance for all actions included in Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250; 4. Requiring that the city be notified thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation of the policy or material modification of a coverage term; 5. Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability coverage, workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the city in amounts sufficient to protect the city and the public and to carry out the purposes and policies of this Section. 4. The city may require a copy of the actual insurance .policies if necessary to ensure the Director that the policy provides adequate third party claim coverage and city indemnity and defense coverage for all actions included in the indemnity required by Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250. 5. Such evidence as the Director may require that the person is authorized to do business in Minnesota. Subd. 2. Notice of Changes. The registrant shall keep all of the information listed above current at all times by .providing to the .city information as to changes within fifteen (15) days following the date on which the registrant has knowledge of any change. 802.15 Reporting Obligations. Subd. 1. Operations. Each registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1 of each year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the city. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the city and shall contain the information determined by the city to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in the frequency of excavations and obstructions of rights-of--way. If by December 1 the registrant has not developed its construction and maintenance information for the coming year, the registrant, shall file such information with the city thereafter as soon as it is developed. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: JMS-222029v6 RC145-326 8 A. The locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be commenced during the next calendar year (in this section, a "next- year project"); and B. To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending dates for all projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar year (in this section, a "five-year project"). The term "project" in this section shall include both next-year projects and five- year projects. By January 1 of each year and subject to the Minnesota Data Practices Act the city will have available for inspection in the city's office a composite list of all projects of which the city has been informed of the annual plans. All registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list. Thereafter, by March 1, each registrant may change any project in its list of next- year projects, and must notify the city and all other registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a registrant may at any time join in a Next-year project of another registrant listed by the other registrant. Subd. 2. Additional Next-Year Projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city will not deny an application for aright-of--way permit for failure to include a project in a plan submitted to the city if the registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for the project. 802.17 Permit Requirement. Subd. 1. Permit Required. Except as otherwise provided in this code, no person may obstruct or excavate any right-of--way without first having obtained the appropriate right-of--way permit from the city to do so. A. Excavation Permit. An excavation .permit is required by a registrant to excavate that part of the right-of--way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the right-of--way by placing .facilities described therein, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. B. Obstruction Permit. An obstruction permit is required by a registrant to hinder free .and open passage over. the specified portion of the right-of--way by placing equipment described therein on the right-of--way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An obstruction permit is not required if a person already possesses a valid excavation permit for the same project. C. Permits for installation, repair or otherwise work on above-ground facilities within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 237.163, Subd. 6(b)(4) will ~ be obstruction permits, notwithstanding the need for excavation, provided JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 9 .-~ ~ the excavation is augered or hand dug for the purpose of placing a pole type structure. Subd. 2. Permit Extensions. No person may excavate or obstruct the right-of--way beyond the date or dates specified in the permit unless (i) such person makes a supplementary application for another right-of--way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (ii) a new permit or permit extension is granted. Subd. 3. Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1000 subp. 3, the. city shall .establish and impose a delay penalty for unreasonable delays in right-of--way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The delay penalty shall be established from time to time by city council resolution. A delay penalty will not be imposed for delays due to force majeure, including inclement weather, civil strife, acts of God, or other circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. Subd. 4. Permit Display. Permits issued under this Section shall be conspicuously displayed or otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by the city. Subd. 5. Routine Obstruction and Excavation. The Director may approve a permit plan which, among other conditions, allows for routine excavations and obstructions without separate notice and separate compensation for such projects. '^`` Projects .that do not involve excavation of paved surface and that last less than eight hours in duration maybe included in such a plan. 802.19 Permit Applications. Subd. 1. Content of Permit Application for a permit is made to the city. Right- of-way permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon compliance with the requirements of the following provisions: A. Registration with the city pursuant to this Section; B. Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required attachments, and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the location of all known existing and proposed facilities owned or operated by the applicant. C. Payment of money due the city for: 1. permit fees, estimated restoration costs and other management costs; 2. prior obstructions or excavations; JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 10 3. any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of applicant's prior excavations or obstructions of the rights-of--way or any emergency actions taken by the city; D. Payment of disputed amounts due the city by posting security or depositing in an escrow account an amount equal to at least 100% of the amount owing. Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional facilities when applicant requests. an excavation permit to install additional facilities and the city deems the existing construction performance bond inadequate under applicable standards. 802.21 Issuance of Permit; Conditions. Subd. 1. Permit Issuance. If the Applicant has satisfied the requirements of this .Section, the city shall issue a permit within five (5) business days of receiving a completed application. Subd. 2. Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of--way and its current use. -~ Subd. 3. Screening. The required by the Director. and/or landscape rock or facility. 802.23 Permit Fees. Permittee shall screen all above-ground facilities as Screening methods shall include the use of shrubs, trees installation using stelt or camouflaged forms of the Subd. 1. Fee Schedule and Fee Allocation. The city's permit fee schedule shall be available to the public and established in advance where reasonably possible. The permit fees shall be designed to recover the city's actual costs incurred in managing the right-of--way and shall be based on an allocation among all users of the right-of--.way, including the city. Subd. 2. Excavation Permit Fee. The city shall establish an Excavation permit fee in an amount sufficient to recover the following costs: A. City management costs. B. degradation costs, if applicable. Subd. 3. Obstruction Permit Fee. The city shall establish the obstruction permit !~`~ fee and shall be in an amount sufficient to recover the city management costs. JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 11 Subd. 4. Payment of Permit Fees. No excavation permit or obstruction permit shall be issued without payment of excavation or obstruction permit fees. The city may allow Applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30) days of billing, or on some other payment plan agreed to by the Director at his discretion. Subd. 5. Non Refundable. Permit fees that were paid for a permit that the city has revoked for a breach as stated in Subdivision 22 are not refundable. Subd. 6. Application to Franchises. Unless .otherwise agreed to in a franchise, management costs may be charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed on aright-of--way user in the franchise. 802.25 Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration. Subd. 1. Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching and restoration of the right-of--way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances beyond the control of the permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. Subd. 2. Patch and Restoration. Permittee must patch its own work. The city may choose either to have the permittee restore the surface and subgrading ~~ portions ofright-of--way or to restore the surface portion ofright-of--way itself. A. City Restoration. If the city restores the surface portion of right-of--way, permittee shall pay the costs thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, following such .Restoration, the pavement settles due to permittee's improper work, the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days. of billing, all costs associated with correcting the defective work. B. Permittee Restoration. If the permittee restores the right-of--way itself, it shall at the time of application for an Excavation permit post a construction performance bond in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.3000. C. Degradation fee in Lieu of Restoration. In lieu of right-of--way restoration, aright-of--way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of--way user shall remain responsible for replacing and compacting the subgrade and aggregate based material in the excavation and the degradation fee shall not include the cost to accomplish these responsibilities. Subd. 3. Standards. .The permittee shall perform patching and restoration according to the standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall ~ comply with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100. JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 12 Subd. 4. Duty to Correct Defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching, or restoration performed by permittee or its agents. Upon notification from the city, permittee shall correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city. Unless otherwise agreed to by the Director, said work shall be completed within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of the notice from the city, not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. Subd. 5. Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right-of--way in the manner and to the condition required by the city, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all restoration required by the city, the city shall notify the permittee in writing of the specific alleged failure or failures and shall allow the permittee ten (10) days from receipt of said written notice to cure said failure or failures, unless otherwise extended by the Director. In the event the permittee fails to cure, the city may at its option perform the necessary work and permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, the cost of restoring the right-of--way. If permittee fails to pay as required, the city may exercise its rights under the construction performance bond. 802.27 Joint Applications. Subd. 1. Joint application. Registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or obstruct the right-of--way at the same place and time. Subd. 2. Shared fees. Registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or excavation, which the city does not perform, may share in the payment of the obstruction or excavation permit fee. In order to obtain a joint permit, registrants must agree among themselves as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications. Subd. 3. With city projects. Registrants who join in a scheduled obstruction or excavation performed by the city, whether or not it is a joint application by two or more registrants or a single application, are not required to pay the excavation or obstruction and degradation portions of the permit fee, but a permit would still be required: 802.29 Supplementary Applications. Subd. 1. Limitation on Area. Aright-of--way permit is valid only for the area of the right-of--way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the permit, except as provided herein. Any permittee which determines that an area greater than that specified in the permit must be JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 13 obstructed or excavated must before working in that greater area (i) make - application for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and (ii) be granted a new permit or permit extension. Subd. 2. Limitation on Dates. Aright-of--way permit is valid only for the dates specified in the permit. No permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided herein, continue working after the end date. If a permittee does not finish the work by the permit end date, it must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new permit or an extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit. This supplementary application must be submitted before the permit end date. 802.31 Other Obligations. Subd. 1. Compliance With Other Laws. Obtaining aright-of--way permit does not relieve permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses, and authority and to pay all fees required by the city or other applicable rule, law or regulation. A permittee shall comply .with all requirements of local, state and federal laws, including Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System). A permittee shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations, and is responsible for all work done in the right-of--way pursuant to its permit, regardless of who does the ~ work. Subd. 2. Prohibited Work. Except in an emergency, or with the approval of the city, no right-of--way obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. Subd. 3. Interference with Right-of--Way. A permittee shall not so obstruct a right-of--way that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be interfered with, unless otherwise approved by the Director. Private vehicles of those doing work in the right-of--way may not be parked within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with city parking regulations. The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit. Subd. 4. Traffic Control. A permittee shall implement traffic control measures in the area of the work and shall use traffic control procedures in accordance with the most recent manuals on uniform traffic control, traffic control devices and traffic zone layouts published by the State of Minnesota. 802.33 Denial of Permit. The city may deny a permit for failure to meet the requirements and conditions of this Section or if the city determines that the denial is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of--way and its current use. JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 14 802.35 Installation Requirements. The excavation, backfilling, patching and restoration, and all other work performed in the right- of-way shall be done in conformance with Minnesota Rules 7819.1100, 78.19.5000 and 7819.5100 and other applicable local requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minnesota Statutes sections 237.162 and 237.163. 802.37 Inspection. Subd. 1. Site Inspection. Permittee shall make the work-site available to the city and to all others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon completion of the work. Subd. 2. Authority of Director. A. At the time of inspection the Director may order the immediate cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety or well- being of the public. B. The Director may issue an order to the permittee to correct any work that does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or code. If the work failure is a "substantial breach" within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 237.163 Subd. 4(c), the order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for revocation of the permit after a specified period determined by the Director. The permittee shall present proof to the Director that the violation has been corrected within the time period set forth by the Director in the order. Such proof shall be provided no later than the next business day following the day of completion. If such proof has not been presented within the required time, the Director may revoke the permit pursuant to Section 802.43. 802.39 Work Done Without a Permit. Subd. 1. Emergency Situations. Each registrant shall immediately notify the Director of any event regarding its facilities that the registrant considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed to take whatever actions are necessary to .respond to the emergency. Within two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency, unless the Director allows a longer time, the registrant shall apply for the necessary permits, pay the fees associated therewith and fulfill the rest of the requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this Section for the actions it took in response. to the Emergency. If the Director concludes that a registrant is required to perform work at the facility solely because of an emergency created by another registrant and the work is performed in the immediate area of .the emergency work, the Director may waive the permit JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 15 otherwise required by the registrant(s) called to the emergency created by another party. If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the city will attempt to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the emergency. Subd. 2. Non-Emergency Situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates aright- of-way must subsequently obtain a permit, pay an unauthorized work permit fee in an amount established from time to time by the city council, deposit with the city the fees necessary to correct any damage to the right-of--way and comply with all of the requirements of this Section. 802.41 Supplementary Notification. If the obstruction or excavation of the right-of--way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit, permittee shall notify the city of the accurate information as soon as this information is known. 802.43 Revocation of Permits. Subd. 1. Substantial Breach. The city reserves its right to revoke any right-of- way permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms and conditions of any statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit. A substantial breach by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: A. The violation of any material provision of the right-of--way permit; B. An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right-of--way permit, or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens; C. Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for aright-of- way permit; D. The failure to complete .the work in a timely manner; unless a permit extension is obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the permittee's control; or E. The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition indicated on an order issued pursuant to section 19B-19. ~~ JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 16 Subd. 2. Written Notice of Breach. If the city determines that the permittee has - committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or any condition of the permit the city shall make a written demand upon the permittee to remedy such violation. The demand shall state that continued violations may be cause for revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the breach. Subd. 3. Response to Notice of Breach. Within a time established by the Director following permittee's receipt of notification of the breach, permittee shall provide the city with a plan to cure the breach, acceptable to the city. Permittee's failure to submit a timely and acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to timely implement the approved plan, shall be cause for immediate revocation of the permit. Subd. 4. Reimbursement of city costs. If a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse the city for the city's reasonable costs, including Restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation. 802.45 Mapping Data. Subd. 1. Rule.- Each registrant and permittee shall provide mapping information in a form required by the city in accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 802.47 Undergroundin~. Subd. 1. .Purpose. The purpose of this Section 802.47 is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public and is intended to foster (i) safe travel over the right-of--way, (ii) non-travel related safety around homes and buildings where overhead feeds. are connected and (iii) orderly development in the city. Location and. relocation, installation and reinstallation of Facilities in the right-of- way or in or on other public ground must be made in accordance .with this Subdivision. This Subdivision is intended to be enforced consistently with state and federal law regulating right-of--way users, specifically including but not limited to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 161.45, 237.162, 237.163, 300.03, 222.37, 238.084 and 216B.36 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Title 47, U.S.C. section 253. Subd. 2. Undergrounding of Facilities. Facilities newly installed, constructed or otherwise placed in the public right-of--way or in other public property held in common for public use must. be located and maintained underground pursuant to the terms and conditions of this section and in accordance with applicable construction standards, subject to the exceptions below. Above-ground installation, construction, modification, or .replacement of meters, gauges, transformers, street lighting, pad mount switches, capacitor banks, re-closers and JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 17 `~` service connection pedestals shall be allowed. The requirements of this - Subdivision shall apply equally outside of the corporate limits of the city coincident with city jurisdiction of platting, subdivision regulation or comprehensive planning as may now or in the future be allowed by law. Subd. 3. Undergrounding of Permanent Replacement, Relocated or Reconstructed Facilities. If the city finds that one or more of the purposes. set forth in Section 802.47, Subd. 1. would be promoted, the city may require a permanent replacement, relocation or reconstruction of a Facility of more than 300 feet to be located, and maintained underground, with due regard for seasonal working conditions. For purposes of this section, reconstruction means any substantial repair of or any improvement to existing Facilities. Undergrounding may be required whether a replacement, relocation or reconstruction is initiated by the right-of--way user owning or operating the Facilities, or by the city in connection with (1) the present or future use by the city or other local government unit of the right-of--way or other public ground for a public project, (2) the public health or safety, or (3) the safety and convenience of travel over the right-of--way. Subd. 4. Exceptions to Undergrounding. The following exceptions to the strict application of this Subdivision shall be allowed upon the conditions stated: A. Transmission Lines. Above-ground installation, construction, or placement of .those Facilities commonly referred to as "high voltage transmission lines" shall be allowed unless the council requires - undergrounding of the Facilities after providing the .right-of--way user notice and an opportunity to be heard. This provision shall not be construed as waiving the requirements of any other ordinance or regulation of the city as the same may apply to any such proposed project. B. Technical/Economic Feasibility; Promotion of Policy. Above-ground installation, construction, or placement of Facilities shall be allowed in residential, commercial and industrial areas where the council, following consideration and recommendation by the planning commission, finds that: 1. Underground placement would place an undue financial burden upon. the landowner, ratepayers;. or right-of--way user or would deprive the landowner of the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; or, 2. Underground placement is impractical or not technically feasible due to topographical,. subsoil or other existing conditions which adversely affect underground Facilities placement. 3. Failure to promote the purposes of undergrounding. The right-of- way user clearly and convincingly demonstrates that none of the JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 18 `~ purposes under Section 802.47, Subd. 1 would be advanced by underground placement of Facilities on the project in question, or the city determines on its own review that undergrounding is not warranted based on the circumstances of the proposed undergrounding. C. Temporary Service. Above-ground installation, construction, or placement of temporary service lines shall only be allowed: 1. During new construction of any project for a period not to exceed twenty-four (24) months; 2. During an emergency in order to safeguard lives or property within the city; 3. For a period of not more than seven (7) months when soil conditions make excavation impractical. Subd. 5. Retirement of Overhead Facilities. The city council may determine whether it is in the public interest that all Facilities within the city, or Facilities within certain districts designated by the city, be permanently placed and maintained underground by a date certain or target date, independently of undergrounding required pursuant to Section 802.47, Subd. 2. of this Code (new Facilities) and subdivision 802.47, Subd. 3. (Replacement Facilities). The decision to underground must be preceded by a public hearing, after published notice and written notice to the utilities affected. (Two weeks published: 30 days written.) At the hearing the council must consider items (1) - (4) in Section 802.47, Subd. S.B. of this Section and make findings.. Undergrounding may not take place until city council has, after hearing and notice, adopted a plan containing items (1) - (6) of Section 802.47, Subd. S.C. of this Section. A. Public Hearings. A hearing must be open to the public and may be continued from. time to time. At each hearing any person interested must be given an opportunity to be heard. The subject of the public hearings shall be the issue of whether Facilities in the right-of--way in the city, or located within a certain district, shall all be located underground by a date certain. Hearings are not necessary for the undergrounding required under Subdivisions 24.B. and D. of this Section. B. Public Hearing Issues. The issues to be addressed at the public hearings include but are not limited to: JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 1. The costs and benefits to the public of requiring- the undergrounding of all 19 2. The feasibility and cost of undergrounding all Facilities by a date certain as determined by the city and the affected utilities. 3. The tariff requirements, procedure and rate. design for recovery or intended recovery of incremental costs for undergrounding by the utilities from ratepayers within the city. 4. Alternative financing options available if the city deems it in the public interest to require undergrounding by a date certain and deems it appropriate to participate in the cost otherwise borne by the ratepayers. Upon completion of the hearing or hearings, the city council must make written findings on whether it is in the public interest to establish a plan under which all Facilities will be underground, either citywide or within districts designated by the city. C. Undergrounding Plan. If the council finds that it is in the public interest to underground all or substantially all Facilities in the public right of way or in non- right-of--way public ground, the council must establish a plan for such undergrounding. The plan for undergrounding must include at least the following elements: ~ 1. Timetable for the undergrounding. 2. Designation of districts for the undergrounding unless the undergrounding plan is citywide. 3. Exceptions to the undergrounding requirement and procedure for establishing such exceptions. 4. Procedures for the undergrounding process, including but not limited to coordination with city projects and provisions to ensure compliance with non-discrimination requirements under the law. 5. A financing plan for funding of the incremental costs if the city determines that it will finance some of the undergrounding costs, and a determination and verification of the claimed additional costs to underground incurred by the utility. 6. Penalties or other remedies for failure to comply with the undergrounding. Subd.6. Developer Responsibility. All. owners, platters, or developers are responsible for complying with the requirements of this Subdivision, and ~~ prior to final approval of any plat or development plan, shall submit to the JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 2~ '~ Director written instruments from the appropriate right-of--way users showing that all necessary arrangements with said users for installation of such Facilities have been made. 802.49 Location and Relocation of Facilities. Subd. 1. Rule. Placement, location, and relocation of facilities must comply with the Act, with other applicable law, and with Minnesota Rules 7819.3100, 7819.5000 and 7819.5100, to the extent the rules do not limit authority otherwise -available to cities. A. Relocation Notification Procedure: The Director shall notify the utility owner at least three months in advance of the need to relocate existing facilities so the owner can determine if relocation or replacement is required and plan any required work. The Director shall provide a second notification to the owner one month before the owner needs to begin the relocation. The. utility owner shall begin relocation of the facilities within one month of the second notification. To the extent technically feasible, all utilities shall be relocated within one month or in a time frame determined by the Director. The Director may allow a different schedule if it does not interfere with the city's project. The utility owner shall diligently work to relocate the facilities within the-above schedule. B. Delay to City Project: The Director shall notify the utility owner if the owner's progress will not meet the relocation schedule. If the owner fails to meet the relocation schedule due to circumstances within its control, the city may charge the utility owner for all costs incurred and requested by a contractor working for the city who is delayed because the relocation is not completed in the scheduled timeframe and for all costs incurred by the city due to the delay. C. Joint Trenching: All Facilities shall be placed in appropriate portions of right-of--way so as to cause minimum conflict with other underground Facilities. When technically appropriate and no safety hazards are created, all utilities shall be installed, constructed or placed within the same trench. Notwithstanding the foregoing, gas and electric lines shall be placed in conformance with Minnesota Rules pt. 7819.5100, Subd. 2, governing safety standards. Subd. 2. Corridors. The city may assign a specific area within the right-of--way, or any particular segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of facilities that -are or, pursuant to current technology, the city expects will be located within the right-of--way. All excavation, obstruction, or other permits issued by the city involving the installation or replacement of Facilities shall designate the proper. corridor for the facilities at issue. A typical crossing section of the location for utilities may be on file at the Director's office. This section is not intended to JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 21 establish "high density corridors". Any Registrant who has facilities in the right-of--way in a position at variance with the corridors established by the city may remain at that location until the city requires Facilities relocation to the corridor pursuant to relocation authority granted under Minnesota Rules part 7819.3100 or other applicable law. Subd. 3. Limitation of Space. To protect the public health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of--way and its current use, the city shall have the power to prohibit or limit-the placement of new or additional facilities within the right-of--way. In making such decisions, the city shall strive to the extent possible to accommodate all existing and potential users of the right-of--way, but shall be guided primarily by considerations of the public interest, the public's needs for the particular utility service, the condition of the right-of--way, the time of year with respect to essential utilities, the protection of existing facilities in the right-of--way, and future city plans for public improvements and development projects which have been determined to be in the public interest. 802.51 Pre-excavation Facilities Location. In addition to complying with the requirements of Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 ("One Call Excavation Notice System") before the start date of any right-of--way excavation, each registrant ~ who has facilities or equipment in the area to be excavated shall be responsible to mark the horizontal placement of all said facilities, to the extent .technically feasible. To the extent its records- contain such information, each registrant shall provide information regarding the approximate vertical location of their facilities to excavators upon request. Nothing in this subsection is meant to limit the rights, duties and obligations of the facility owners or excavators as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, .Section 216D.01-.09. 802.53. Interference By Other Facilities. When the city does work in the right-of--way in its governmental right-of--way management function and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move a registrant's facilities to carry out the work without damaging registrant's facilities, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is reasonably possible. The city costs associated therewith will be billed to that registrant and must be paid within thirty (30) days from the date of billing. Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any facilities. in the right-of--way which it or .its facilities damages. 802.55 Right-of-Way Vacation -Reservation of Right. If the city vacates aright-of--way that contains the facilities of a registrant, the registrant's rights in the vacated right-of--way are governed. by Minnesota Rules 7819.3200. JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 22 802.57 Indemnification and Liability. By registering with the city, or by accepting a permit under this Section, a registrant or permittee agrees to defend and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.1250. 802.59 Abandoned Facilities. Subd. 1. Discontinued Operations. A registrant who has decided to discontinue -all or a portion of its operations in the city must provide information satisfactory to the city that the registrant's obligations for its. facilities in the right-of--way under this Section have been lawfully assumed by another registrant. Subd. 2. Removal. Any registrant who has abandoned facilities in any right-of- way shall remove them from that right-of--way pursuant to Minnesota Rule Part 7819.3300, unless the requirement is waived by the Director. 802.61 Appeal. A right-of--way user that: (1) has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has. had permit revoked; or (4) believes that the fees imposed are not in conformity with Minn. Stat. § 237.163, Subd. 6 may have the denial, revocation, or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the city council. The city council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A decision by the city council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision. 802.63 Reservation of Regulatory and Police Powers. A permittee's or registrant's rights are subject to the. regulatory and police powers of the city to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, .safety and welfare of the public. 802.65 Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Section is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate,. distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. If a regulatory body or a court of .competent jurisdiction should determine by a final, non-appealable order that any permit, right or registration issued under this Section or any portions of this Section is illegal or unenforceable, then any such permit, right or registration granted or deemed to exist hereunder shall be considered as a revocable permit with a mutual right in either party to terminate without cause upon giving sixty (60) days written notice to the other. The. requirements and conditions of such a revocable permit shall be the same requirements and conditions as set forth in the permit, right or registration, respectively, except for conditions relating to the term of the permit and the right JMS-222029v6 RC 145-326 23 '~ of termination. Nothing in this Section precludes the city from requiring a franchise agreement - with the applicant, as allowed by law, in addition to requirements set forth herein. Section 2. City of Richfield Code Sections are hereby repealed. Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, held this day of , 2003. Mayor of the City of Richfield Attest: City Clerk JMS-222029v6 RC145-326 24 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VIII OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE WHICH PERTAINS TO RIGHT-OF-WAY 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. 2003 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VIII OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD. This summary of the ordinance amendment is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. The purpose of this ordinance amendment is to manage the City of Richfield's right-of-way, which includes the placement and maintenance of facilities within the right- way and the appropriate use of the right-of-way. The proposed ordinance establishes reasonable regulations to handle these concerns. and deals with such issues as: permit extensions; delays; non-performance; restoration; emergencies; and, other conditions. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the Public Works Department during normal business hours or upon request by calling Engineering Supervisor George Atkinson at 612-861-9191. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~J STAFF REPORT Resolutions 10 154 AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~TULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: .~''` DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ .~`'~~ SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration fora 'Use Not Listed' in the Richfield Zoning Code, attached resolution calling for a study and a moratorium for firearms related uses, first reading of attached transitory ordinance establishing a moratorium for firearms related uses, and the attached resolution denying the request for a Firearms Safety Training Center at 6611 Chicago Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Classify "firearms related uses" as a Conditional Use in the C-2 and I zoning districts; By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution calling for a moratorium on "firearms related uses" in the City and directing a study to be undertaken; By Motion: Conduct a first reading of attached ordinance directing that a study be conducted and a moratorium be established for "firearms related uses" and set a date of August 12 for a second reading and public hearing for an ordinance directing that a study be conducted and a moratorium be established for "firearms related uses"; and By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution denying the request for a Firearms Safety Training Center at 6611 Chicago Avenue. 070803-FiringRanges-Final.doc II. BACKGROUND The Richfield Zoning Code specifies rules and regulations for a variety of uses. Not ~~ all uses, however, are listed in the zoning code. Section 511.05 states that "When a proposed use of any building, structure, or premises is not specifically described in this code, the requirements for the use most similar to the proposed use applies. If in the judgement of the Director [Community Development Director], a proposed use does not come within any existing use classification, the Director shall refer the matter to the Council for a determination as to whether the use shall be classified as permitted, accessory, conditional, or prohibited in the particular zoning district for which the use is proposed". Mr. Steve Knutson has proposed operating a "Firearm Safety Training Center" at 6611 Chicago Avenue. This "Firearm Safety Training Center" would include classroom space and an "indoor qualifying pistol range" for the purposes of training people to use firearms. Mr. Knutson has indicated that students would use low- caliberfirearms for shooting practice in the pistol range. Please see the attached letter dated June 18, 2003 from Mr. Knutson (Attachment A). The property at 6611 Chicago Avenue is zoned C-2, General Commercial. The C-2 zoning district outlines rules and regulations for a variety of uses, but it does not provide any uses that are "similar" to the proposed use of a "Firearm Safety Training Center". Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 does provide conditions required for a "Gun or ammunition sales/repair" use, but City staff and the City Attorney have concluded that a "Firearms Safety Training Center" is substantially different in nature from a "Gun or ammunition sales/repair" use, particularly since the proposed training center would include a firing range. It is the judgement of the Director of Community Development that this request for a "Firearm Safety Training Center" falls under the guidelines of Section 511.05. The Director of Community Development recommends the following:. • That the City Council consider "Firearm Safety Training Centers" under a general heading of "Firearms Related Uses"; • That the City Council classify "Firearms Related Uses" as a Conditional Use in both the C-2 and the 1 Districts; • That the City Council direct the Planning Commission and Community. Development staff to study "Firearms Related Uses" and recommend conditions of approval for such uses in the C-2 and I zoning districts; • That the City Council invoke State Statute 462.355 and establish a moratorium on "Firearms Related Uses" in the City of Richfield until such time as the recommendations of the Planning Commission and Community Development Department can be considered and adopted by the City Council; and • That the City Council deny the request fora "Firearms Safety Training Center" at 6611 Chicago Avenue. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Zoning Code Section 511.05 specifies that the uses not listed in the Zoning Code should be referred to the City Council for a determination. State Statute 462.355 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. The Planning Commission serves to advise the City Council in zoning and land-use regulation matters such as this one. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Recently enacted State legislation may lead to a greater number of requests for firearms related businesses such as the one proposed at 6611 Chicago Avenue. As a result, zoning regulations for such uses should be created. • The Richfield Public Safety Department should be directed to work with the Planning Commission and Community Development staff when formulating a recommendation for the City Council's consideration. • The request from Mr. Knutson is considered a request for a `determination of use' as outlined under Zoning Code Section 511.05. The request triggered the State's "60 Day Rule" for issuing a response for zoning and land-use regulation requests. • If the recommended motions are adopted by the City Council, staff will inform Mr. Knutson that his current request is denied. • Staff will also inform Mr. Knutson that he can apply for a Conditional Use Permit for his proposed "Firearms Safety Training Center" after the City Council has adopted the recommendations of the Planning Commission and Community Development Department staff for regulation of "Firearms Related Uses". C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • State Statute 462.355 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. • The City Attorney has reviewed this matter and recommends that the ~.-~ Planning Commission and Public Safety Department develop recommended regulations for firearms related uses for the City Council's consideration. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ ~ Determine that the proposed use "Firearms Safety Training Center" is a permitted use in the C-2 and I districts. If the Council determines that such a use is permitted, staff will inform the applicant that no permit is required. Also, no moratorium on firearms related uses will be required. • Determine that the proposed use "Firearms Safety Training Center" is a prohibited use in the C-2 and I districts. If the Council determines that such a use is prohibited, staff will inform the applicant that the use is not allowed. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution, Authorizing Study to be Conducted Pertaining to Firearms Related Uses • Resolution, Deny the Request to Establish a Firearms Safety Training Center • Transitory Ordinance • Attachment A, June 18, 2003 letter from Mr. Steve Knutson. • Zoning Code Section 511.05 • State Statute 462.255 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Mr. Steve Knutson, applicant. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A STUDY TO BE CONDUCTED PERTAINING TO FIREARMS-RELATED USES OF LAND IN THE C-2 AND I ZONING DISTRICTS WHEREAS, a request has been made for a Firearms Safety Training Center at 6611 Chicago Avenue South, which is zoned C-2, General Commercial; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield ("City") finds that a Firearms Safety Training Center is part of a broader general use category to be called "Firearms Related Uses"; and WHEREAS, the City finds that regulations for "Firearms Related Uses" are not currently specified in the City's Zoning Code; that the existing regulations under Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 for "Gun or ammunition sales/repair" do not apply to "Firearms Related Uses"; and that such uses fall under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 511.05 "Uses Not Listed"; and WHEREAS, the City finds that "Firearms Related Uses" will be classified as a Conditional Use in the C-2 and I zoning districts at its July 8, 2003 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City is desirous of conducting studies to determine appropriate and reasonable conditions of approval to regulate "Firearms Related Uses" of land in the C-2 and I zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the City deems it desirable to place a moratorium on "Firearms Related Uses" of land until the study has been completed and amendments to the Zoning Code enacted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City staff and Planning Commission are directed to conduct a study to determine the appropriate land use regulations to be placed upon "Firearms Related Uses" within the C-2 and I zoning districts. The scope of the study would include the types of uses to be included in a "Firearms Related Uses" category and the conditions of approval for such uses in the C-2 and I zoning districts. 2. Upon completion of the study, the matter is to be considered by the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council. 3. A moratorium on "Firearms Related Uses" is hereby adopted pending completion of the study and the adoption of any amendments to the City's zoning regulations. Except as provided below, no "Firearms Related Uses" will be allowed during the moratorium period. The moratorium period created under this resolution shall expire July 31, 2004 or at such earlier date as may be further determined by the City Council. The moratorium period may be extended for a reasonable time, as may be necessary to complete the study and adopt the necessary amendments to the City's zoning regulations. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. n ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~--~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A FIREARMS SAFETY TRAINING CENTER AT 6611 CHICAGO AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, a request has been made fora "Firearms Safety Training Center" at 6611 Chicago Avenue South, which is zoned C-2, General Commercial; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City") has determined that a "Firearms Safety Training Center" is a use that should be permitted only conditionally in the C-2 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the City has directed that a study be undertaken to determine the types of firearms-related uses that should be permitted by conditional use permit in the C-2 and I zoning districts and has established a moratorium to protect the planning process while the study is undertaken. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City makes the following findings of fact: a. The property at 6611 Chicago Avenue South (the "Property") is .-~ located in the C-2 General Commercial zoning district. b. Mr. Steven Knutson has made a written request to operate a "Firearms Safety Training Center" at the Property. The training center would include the use of a portable firing range for firearms. c. According to public tax records, Mr. Knutson. is not the owner of the Property, and the owners of the Property have not joined in Mr. Knutson's request or evidenced their consent to his request. A Richfield zoning application requirement states that the applicant must either provide proof of ownership or provide a letter of concurrence from the property owner if the applicant does not own the property. d. The C-2 zoning regulations do not identify any use that is similar to a firearms training center or gun range. The zoning regulations do require a conditional use permit for gun and ammunition sales or repair uses, and also establish a distance requirement for gun and ammunition sales uses from residential properties. A firearms safety training center is different from gun and ammunition sales and repair uses, however, because the former use involves the firing of live ammunition. n e. Pursuant to Subsection 511.05 of the Richfield City Code, the City has determined that firearms-related uses, such as a "Firearms Safety Training Center" and gun range, may be permitted as a conditional use in the C-2 and I zoning districts. However, appropriate standards must be established for such uses, and none currently exist. The City also finds that firearms-related uses should be treated at least as -., stringently as gun and ammunition sales uses. In addition, the City finds that additional conditions specifically addressing safety aspects of a gun range need to be included in any conditional use permit for a "Firearms Safety Training Center". f. The City has no current regulations that adequately address safety and community concerns regarding permanent or portable gun ranges. The City has determined and directed that a study should be undertaken regarding the types of firearms-related uses and the conditions of operating such uses that should be established in the City. g. The City has established a moratorium on the ..establishment of any firearms-related uses in the City in order to protect the planning process, while the study is undertaken. h. The Property is located adjacent to residential property and, if the same criteria were applied to a "Firearms. Safety Training Center" use as are applied to gun and ammunition sales and repair uses, the property would not qualify for the establishment of such a use. 2. Based on the foregoing, the application of Steven Knutson to operate a ~ "Firearms Safety Training Center" at the Property is denied. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk BILL NO.2003- TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN INTERIM ORDINANCE DIRECTING THAT A STUDY BE CONDUCTED PERTAINING TO FIREARMS RELATED USES OF LAND IN THE C-2 AND I ZONING DISTRICTS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background. 1.01. The City of Richfield regulates land use activities throughout its official controls, which include the City's Comprehensive Plan, zoning regulations and subdivision regulations. 1.02. A request has been made fora "Firearms Safety Training Center" on a parcel zoned C-2, General Commercial. 1.03. The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City") currently has regulations for Gun and ammunitions sales/repair in Zoning Code Section 526.27, Subdivision 19. ~. 1.04. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355 Subd. 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. Section 2. Findin s. 2.01. The City finds that a "Firearms Safety Training Center" is part of a broader use category to be called "Firearms Related Uses". 2.02. The City finds that existing regulations under Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 do not apply to "Firearms Related Uses", and that rules and regulations guiding the use of land for Firearms Related purposes need to be developed. 2.03. The City finds that it is necessary to conduct studies to determine the types of uses to be included in a "Firearms Related Uses" category and appropriate and reasonable regulations for such uses and to adopt the appropriate amendments to the City's zoning regulations. 2.04. The City finds that there is a need to adopt an interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens regarding such matters. Section 3. Planning and Zoning Study; Moratorium. n 3.01. A study is authorized to be conducted by City staff to determine whether the _ City's official controls need to be modified as they relate to "Firearms Related Uses" described in Section 2.01. above. BILL NO. 2003- -2- 3.02. Pending completion of the study and adoption of any amendments to the City's official controls, it shall be unlawful, except as provided herein, for any person to establish, expand, or rebuild any "Firearms Related Use" in the City. Section 5. Enforcement. The City may enforce any provisions of this ordinance by mandamus, injunction or other appropriate civil remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction. Section 6. Term. Unless earlier terminated by action of the City this ordinance shall be effective until July 31, 2004, and may be further extended for such additional periods as the City may deem appropriate, not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months. Section 7. Resolution Repealed. Resolution No. is repealed upon the effective date of this ordinance. Passed by the City Council this 12th day of August, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~~ ATTACHMENT A 6-18-2003 To the city of Richfield. My name is Steve Knutson I live in Richfield I am looking at locations in Richfield to possibly open a firearm safety training center. I would like to know what guide lines I must follow in opening this type of business. Such as use regulations zoning ect. The business would have an indoor qualifying pistol range and gun safety. classes wouldbe taught there. Thank you for your time in addressing this matter. Sincerely Steve Knutson ~ r 612-861-6980 6739 Irving ave. so ' Richfield Mn. 55423 ~: ~ ' n --_, Richfield Zoning Code 511.05. Uses not listed. When the proposed use of any building, structure, or premises is not specifically described in this code, the requirements for the use most similar to the proposed use applies. If in the judgment of the Director, a proposed use does not come within any existing use classification, the Director shall refer the matter to the Council for a determination as to whether the use shall be classified as permitted, accessory, conditional, or prohibited in the particular zoning district for which the use is proposed. (~, MN Statute 462.355 Prepare, adopt, and amend comprehensive municipal plan. Subdivision 1. Preparation and review. The planning agency shall prepare the comprehensive municipal plan. In discharging this duty the planning agency shall consult with and coordinate the planning activities of other departments and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in the development of the comprehensive municipal plan. In its planning activities the planning agency shall take due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public agencies. The planning agency shall periodically review the plan and recommend amendments whenever necessary. Subd. 1a. Plan update by metropolitan municipalities. Each municipality in the metropolitan area, as defined in section 473.121, subdivision 2, shall review and update its comprehensive plan and fiscal devices and official controls as provided in section 473.864, subdivision 2. Subd. 2. Procedure for plan adoption and amendment. The planning agency may, unless otherwise provided by charter or ordinance consistent with the municipal charter, recommend to the governing body the adoption and amendment from time to time of a comprehensive municipal plan. The plan may be prepared and adopted in sections, each of which relates to a major subject of the plan or to a major geographical section of the municipality. The governing body may propose the comprehensive municipal plan and amendments to it by resolution submitted to the planning agency. Before adopting the comprehensive municipal plan or any section or amendment of the. plan, the planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing thereon. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published once in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days before the day of the hearing. Subd. 3. Adoption by governing body. A proposed comprehensive plan or an amendment to it may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation of the planning agency or until 60 days have elapsed from the date an amendment proposed by the governing body has been submitted to the planning agency for its recommendation. Unless otherwise provided by charter, the governing body may by resolution by atwo-thirds vote of all of its members adopt and amend the comprehensive plan or portion thereof as the official municipal plan upon such notice and hearing as may be prescribed by ordinance. Subd. 4. Interim ordinance. if a municipality is conducting studies or has authorized a study to be conducted or has held or has scheduled a hearing for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan or official controls as defined in section 462.352, subdivision 15, or if new territory for which plans or controls have not been adopted is annexed to a municipality, the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens.. The interim ordinance may regulate, restrict or prohibit any use, development, or subdivision ~, within the jurisdiction or a portion thereof for a period not to exceed one year from the date it is effective, and may be extended for such additional periods as the municipality may deem appropriate, not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months. No interim ordinance may halt, delay, or impede a subdivision, which has been given preliminary approval prior to the effective date of the interim ordinance. ~~~ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING --~ JULY 8, 2003 Resolutions 9 153 BETSY CxRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY: SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, T/TLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Lo SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Council consideration of a disciplinary hearing and resolutions regarding civil enforcement for alcohol establishments in Richfield that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks, conducted b Richfield Public Safet staff, and failed b sellin alcohol to undera a outh. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolutions suspending the license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days for each of the first time violating establishments; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1000 for the first violation; requiring a mandatory meeting with the Public Safety Director to present their individual establishment plans to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind; and providing proof of the attendance of an employee, preferably the, manager of the establishment, in an alcohol sales awareness program. f~~ 0708 Liquor Compliance Violators On May 22, and 27, 2003, the Richfield Public Safety staff conducted alcohol compliance checks at all of Richfield's alcohol establishments. These checks were the first alcohol compliance checks conducted in 2003. Public Safety staff arranged for three underage youth that were 18-20 years of age to enter the establishments with undercover police officers. In three instances, the underage youth were successful in being served alcohol. The businesses that made sales to underage youth on May 22, 2003 are as follows: • Airport Bowl - 7711 14th Avenue South • Short Stop Superette - 7034 Cedar Avenue South • Taco Morelos - 2 West 66th Street This is the first offense for Airport Bowl, Short Stop Superette and Taco Morelos. Technically, it is a second violation for Airport Bowl, but because of the time elapsed between now and the previous violation, it is considered a first violation. At no time did any of the minors consume any of the alcohol. The youth presented their ID's and at no time attempted to convince anyone that they were of legal age. Establishments were visited at a variety of times, busy or not busy, in an effort to determine if busy times produced more successful buys. It doesn't appear to have made a difference at either time. After each attempt, successful or unsuccessful, the officers identified themselves to -~~ the clerks and issued them a citation if they failed. If the underage youth was unsuccessful in securing alcohol, the clerk was congratulated by officers for doing a good job. The employees that sold alcohol will be charged criminally in court. The action being taken today is for civil enforcement and penalties against the businesses that hold a license to sell alcohol within the City. The fines being recommended at this time are intended to recover 100% of the costs for conducting the compliance checks and to penalize the businesses punitively. Compliance checks will continue to occur during 2003, at least once a year, but perhaps more. It is also recommended that 15% of the punitive fines be designated for future alcohol and tobacco education efforts within the community. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Resolution No. 9204 specifies certain improper conduct of alcohol license holders and delineates the progressive discipline that can be expected when violations occur, such as the sale of alcohol to minors. • Staff recommends that the City Council suspend each of the first time violating establishments' license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days and levy a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1000 for the first violation. Staff is also proposing that each first time violating establishment attend a mandatory meeting with the Public Safety Director to present their individual establishment's plan to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind. One employee, ~ preferably the manager, must attend a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session, provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety, with the cost of the training to be paid for by the establishment. B. CRITICAL ISSUES --~ • It is a violation of Minnesota State Statute and City ordinance to sell alcohol to underage youth. • Civil enforcement penalties taken in the past by the City Council against several establishments have been severe. This was done to send a message to the establishments and the community that the Council will not tolerate this type of violation to continue in the community and that Richfield youth and their well-being are highly valued. • Citizen representatives of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health support severe actions against establishments in an effort to protect the youth of the community and to send a message that youth and their well-being are a high priority in this City. C. FINANCIAL • All costs of conducting compliance checks will be reimbursed through the fines that are levied against an establishment for failing an alcohol compliance check. • Furthermore, 15% of the punitive fines are designated for future alcohol and tobacco educational efforts within the community. D. LEGAL • N/A TERNATIVE RECOIVIMENDATION(S) ~ • The Council. could decide to take no action against the establishments for the sale of alcohol to a minor, which would result in no disciplinary actions against the establishments. This would, however, send a message to the community that children and their well-being are not a priority in Richfield. • The Council may consider taking more or less severe action against the establishments that sold alcohol to underage youth; however, that would deviate from the guidelines set for progressive discipline in Resolution No. 9204. I • ATTACHMENTS I • Resolution for Hirport ttowi aiscipline. • Resolution for Short Stop Superette discipline. • Resolution for Taco Morels discipline. • PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~ • Representatives from each of the establishments are expected to be in attendance at the meeting as they were notified in writing of the need for someone to be present. n RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR AIRPORT BOWL, 7711 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALITY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Airport Bowl, ("Licensee") holds an On-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor; and WHEREAS, this is technically their second failed alcohol compliance check, but because more than one year has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a first failure. Their original first failure date was in November 1999, with the penalty imposed by the Council at the December 13, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 8, 2003 and admitted the violation; and the Licensee has stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield ~, as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 8, 2003, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 8, 2003 to present an action plan to ensure future compliance; and 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: n Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SHORTSTOP SUPERETTE, 7034 CEDAR AVENUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALITY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Shortstop Superette, ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor; and WHEREAS, this is their first failed alcohol compliance check; and WHEREAS, Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 8, 2003 and admitted the violation; and the Licensee has stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 8, 2003, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 8, 2003 to present an action plan to ensure future compliance; and 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. ,~ -- RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSE FOR TACO MORELOS, 2 WEST 66TH STREET, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALITY FOR A FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Taco Morelos, ("Licensee") holds an On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor; and WHEREAS, this is their first failed alcohol compliance check; and WHEREAS, Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on July 8, 2003 and admitted the violation; and the Licensee has stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor license is hereby ,~ suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed. On or before August 8, 2003, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 8, 2003 to present an action plan to ensure future compliance; and 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of July, 2003. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~~ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 Consent 7F 152 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CxIUSTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the request by the Church of the Assumption for on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor, itinerant place of amusement and itinerant food licenses for their annual Fun Fiesta to be held Au ust 10, 2003. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor, itinerant place of amusement and itinerant food licenses for the Church of the Assumption for their annual Fun Fiesta to be held August 10, 2003. II. BACKGROUND On June 6, 2003, the Church of the Assumption submitted a request for a temporary license to serve 3.2 percent malt liquor. They also submitted requests for itinerant place of amusement and itinerant food licenses for their annual Fun Fiesta (formerly Fun Fest) to be held August 10, 2003. The required licensing fees have been received. They will be serving such food items as hamburgers, brats, hot dogs, roast beef, french fries, pizza, tacos, enchiladas, caramel rolls, and other snack type items. The Church of the Assumption has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will 0708 Assumption Fun Fiesta work with Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and ~-~ wholesome food handling. The event will take place from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. The applicant has hired a private security crew to be on duty during this event to address any issues that may arise. Liquor liability insurance coverage has been provided showing The Catholic Mutual Relief Society as affording the coverage. The Public Safety Department received no complaints regarding this event for the previous year. The City has previously issued these licenses in conjunction with the Assumption Fun Fiesta. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to these licenses. B. CRITICAL ISSUES -~ • Necessary fees have been paid and insurance coverage has been obtained. C. FINANCIAL • N/A I~. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deny the request. However, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted these licenses in conjunction with the Assumption Fun Fiesta. V. ATTACHMENTS • N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Church of the Assumption staff. n AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT Consent 7E 151 CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CxRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: G~ SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for the renewal of a lawful gambling license and the adoption of the attached resolution, for the Church of the Assum tion, 305 East 78th Street. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the renewal of a lawful gambling license and the adoption of the attached resolution allowing bingo and pulltab operations, for the Church of the Assumption, 305 East 78th Streets II. BACKGROUND On June 6, 2003, the Church of the Assumption submitted an application for the renewal of their lawful gambling license. The application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations. The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Friday and Saturday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. The pulltabs would be conducted in conjunction with the bingo operation. - The Public Safety Department has conducted the required background investigation and has determined that the applicant has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling manager, Ms. Wendy Uhrich, has no known criminal record. 0708 Assumption Gambling License Renewal III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department to review the request for the gambling license and make its review and recommendation to the City Council. • The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City Code pertaining to lawful gambling. • The applicant submitted the request within 60 days of the renewal of the license. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • None C. FINANCIAL • None D. LEGAL. • None ~ IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deny and pass a resolution specifically disapproving the renewal request of a lawful gambling license for the Church of the Assumption; however, staff has determined that there is no basis for this alternative. In addition, the Council has previously granted this request and passed a resolution allowing this activity at the Church of the Assumption.. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Ms. Wendy Uhrich, Gambling Manager RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR THE CHURCH OF THE ASSUMPTION TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, the Church of the Assumption has submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and WHEREAS, the application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides authority for review of applications by local authorities; and WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City code provides regulation of lawful gambling; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an investigation of the application and finds the application to be in order. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, ~`~ Minnesota, as follows: 1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Church of the Assumption, 305 East 77th Street. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 Consent 7D 150 JULIE URBAN, REPORT PREPARED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~~° REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~r ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of two apartment buildings located at 6412 and 6444 Cedar Avenue (Airport Noise Acquisition Program). I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of 6412 and 6444 Cedar Avenue (Airport Noise Acquisition Program). II. BACKGROUND • On March 26, 2002, the City Council approved an agreement (Agreement) with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to provide $10 million of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airport improvement program funds to the City of Richfield to purchase properties (including all related costs) that are, or will be, negatively impacted by airport operations. • Single family and duplex properties in the 6600 and 6700 blocks of 18th Avenue were identified for first priority purchase with the funds. The remaining funds are to be used to purchase as many of the apartment buildings north of 66th Street as possible, beginning with the northernmost building and moving south. • Two apartment buildings, 6328 and 6344 Cedar Avenue, have been purchased to date. 0708ANAPjustcompAPT • The owner of the third building, 6400 Cedar Avenue, declined the City's purchase offer. • Appraisals for the next two buildings were completed and reviewed last summer. The selected appraisal was recently updated to reflect current market conditions. MAC concurs with the appraisals. • Staff is recommending just compensation for two apartment buildings in the following amounts: Property Address Fair Market Value 6412 Cedar Ave S $988,000 6444 Cedar Ave S $988,000 TOTAL $1,976,000 • The apartment tenants may also be eligible for relocation benefits. The relocation benefits will be calculated separately in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Act once an offer is made to the property owner. • Attached is the resolution for City Council consideration. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City and MAC have identified certain properties for purchase for the Airport Noise Acquisition Program in accordance with the Agreement. • The properties are within the 87dB contour. • Uniform acquisition procedures will be followed. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Conworth, Inc. will make purchase offers to the property owners upon the City Council's approval of just compensation. C. FINANCIAL • MAC is obligated to fund this transaction in accordance with the Agreement. • MAC has reviewed the fair market values of the properties and has recommended that the City Council approve just compensation so that purchase offers can be made to the property owners. • These are likely the last apartment buildings that can be funded with the grant money. D. LEGAL There are no pending legal issues at this time. E. TIMING ~"~ • The City's acquisition agent, Conworth, Inc. and legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven, will coordinate settlement issues with property owners. • If a property owner accepts a purchase offer, a settlement closing could occur within a 90-120 day period. • .Tenants will be provided with a 90-day notice to vacate and a determination of relocation benefits once a purchase offer has been accepted by the property owner. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Delay approval of just compensation. • Do not approve just compensation and property acquisition. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6412 AND 6444 CEDAR AVENUE AIRPORT NOISE ACQUISITION PROGRAM WHEREAS, on September 10, 2001, the City Council approved the acquisition strategy for residential property in the airport mitigative area, using $10 million in federal funds secured by Congressman Sabo; and WHEREAS, on March 26, 2002, the City Council approved an agreement (Agreement) with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to provide $10 million of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airport improvement program funds to the City of Richfield to purchase properties (including all related costs) that are, or will be, negatively impacted by airport operations; and WHEREAS, within the aforementioned airport mitigative area the real property identified for purchase is: Property Address Legal Description 6412 Cedar Ave S Lots 4 and 5 and the north 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 2, Iversons Third Addition Together with all abutting streets and alleys,. vacated or to be vacated, and all easements, gaps, overlaps and gores, appurtenant thereto 6444 Cedar Ave S Lots 1 and 2 and the south 1/2 of Lot 3, Block 2, Iversons Third ~ Addition Together with all abutting streets and alleys, vacated or to be vacated, and all easements, gaps, overlaps and gores, appurtenant thereto; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals for the subject properties to be made by qualified independent professional appraisers to determine fair market value of real estate; and WHEREAS, qualified review appraisers for the real property have certified the appraisal reports as being in conformity with professional appraisal standards, the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation and the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, Appraisal Specifications (5-491.203) set forth in the State of Minnesota's Right of Way Manual, and the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Preparation of Real Estate Appraisals, Appraisal Report Content, Detailed Appraisals and Appraisal Reviews; and WHEREAS, the fair market values, as recommended by the review appraisers and approved by MAC and recently updated to reflect current market conditions,. are listed within Exhibit B. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the just compensation amounts are approved for the purchase of 6412 Cedar Avenue at $998,000 and for 6444 Cedar Avenue at $998,000, Exhibit B are hereby approved. 2. That the City's acquisition/negotiation/relocation consultant, Conworth, Inc., is authorized to present purchase offers of approved amounts to the respective property owners. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: ('.nnePnt AGENDA ITEM # )R REPORT # 1l-R ~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE L. ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution regarding the summary publication of the Franchise Ordinance and A reement between Center oint Ener /Minne asco and the Cit of Richfield. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the summary publication of Ordinance No. 2003-10, the Franchise Ordinance and Agreement between Centerpoint Energy/Minnegasco and the City of Richfield that Council approved on May 27, 2003. ,~ II. BACKGROUND • On May 27,2003, Council held a public hearing and second reading of the agreement between Centerpoint Energy/Minnegasco and the City of Richfield, which pertains to the City's right-of-way. • On July 8, 2003, the Council will consider the second reading and approval of the amendment to Chapter VIII of the Richfield City Code for a new Right-of- Way Ordinance. • The City Clerk assigned Section number 802 to this new amendment. • Section number 802 was then inserted into the agreement where referenced. • The summary publications for the franchise ordinance and the new Right-of-Way Ordinance (if approved) will be published at the same time. 0708Sum Publication Franchise III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY According to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter, if the City Council determines that publication of the complete text of an ordinance is not worth the expense and a summary would clearly inform the public of intent and effect of the ordinance, the Council may approve a summary of the ordinance be published. B. CRITICAL ISSUES City Charter requires every ordinance passed by the Council be published at least once in the official newspaper. C. FINANCIAL • None. D. LEGAL • None. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None Recommended V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution approving summary publication • Copy of Centerpoint Energy/Minnegasco Franchise Ordinance and Agreement VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated n RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF FRANCHISE ORDINANCE AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTERPOINT ENERGY /MINNEGASCO AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD WHICH PERTAINS TO CENTERPOINT'S USE OF RICHFIELD'S RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above referenced franchise ordinance and agreement between Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco and the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the ordinance and agreement 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. 2003 - FRANCHISE ORDINANCE AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN CENTERPOINT/MINNEGASCO AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. The purpose of this franchise ordinance and agreement is to grant Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, a division of Centerpoint Energy Resources Corp., a nonexclusive franchise to construct, operate, repair and maintain facilities and equipment for the transportation, distribution, manufacture and sale of gas energy for public and private use and to use the public ways and grounds of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, for such purpose; and, prescribing certain terms and conditions thereof. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the Public Works Department during normal business hours or upon request by calling Engineering Supervisor George Atkinson at 612-861-9191. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk -~ GAS ORDINANCE CENTERPOINT ENERGYMINNEGASCO ORDINANCE N0.2003-10. CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO, A DIVISION OF CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: City. The City of Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. City Utility System. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, .private lighting, or other forms of energy. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. Company. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco, a division of CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp., a Delaware corporation, its successors and assigns including all successors or assigns that own or operate any part or parts of the Gas Facilities subject to this franchise. Gas Facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes, lines, ducts, fixtures, and all necessary equipment and appurtenances owned or operated by the Company for the purpose- of providing gas energy for public or private use. Gas. Natural gas, manufactured gas, mixture of natural gas and manufactured gas or other forms of gas energy. Non-Betterment Costs. Costs incurred by Company from relocation, removal or rearrangement of Gas Facilities that do not result in an improvement to the Gas Facilities. Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco, V.P., Regulatory & Supply Service, 800 LaSalle Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55402-2006. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Manager/Administrator, City of Richfield, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423. Any party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other parties. Public Way. Public right-of--way within the City as defined in Minn. Stat. § 237.162, subd. 3. Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for park, open space or similar public purpose, which is held for use in common by the public. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to import, manufacture, distribute and sell gas for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. This right includes the provision of Gas that is (i) manufactured by the Company or its affiliates and delivered by the Company, (ii) purchased and '~ delivered by the Company or (iii) purchased from another source by the retail customer and delivered by the Company. For these purposes,. Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Gas Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Ways and Public Grounds, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject however, to such lawful regulations as may be adopted by separate ordinance and as currently exist under City Right of Way (ROW) ~c-e Code, Section 802, or other applicable ordinances or as they may be lawfully amended from time to time during the franchise term. The Company shall be notified 60 days in advance of proposed changes to City Code (ROW) Section 802. By agreeing to the City's right to incorporate amendments to City Code (ROW) Section 802 into this Ordinance during the franchise term, Company does not waive its right to challenge any such amendment, in accordance with Section 2.5 of this Ordinance and based on the limits of City police power authority under Minnesota law. If a provision of City Code (ROW) Section 802 conflicts with a provision on the same subject in this Ordinance, this Ordinance will control. 2.2. .Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after its passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance by Company. If Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 90 Days after the date the City Council adopts this Ordinance, or otherwise places the City on written notice, at any time, that the Company does not accept all terms of this franchise, the City Council by resolution may either repeal this ordinance or seek its enforcement in a court of competent jurisdiction. n 2 2.3. Service and Gas Rates. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for gas service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission 2.4. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance shall be paid by Company. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining parry shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and .attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief permitted by law. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires, this franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow the franchise to expire. SECTION 3. LOCATION. OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1. Location of Facilities. Subject to regulation under City Code (ROW) Section 802, Gas Facilities in the Public Way shall be .located, constructed, and maintained so as not to disrupt normal operation of any City Utility System. Gas Facilities may be located on Public Grounds. as determined by the City. 3.2. Restoration of Public Ways and Public Ground. A. Restoration of the Public Way shall be subject to City Code (ROW) Section 802. B. After completing work requiring the opening of Public Ground, the Company shall restore the Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for one (1) year on unpaved surfaces, two (2) years on paved surfaces thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits. If Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition and after demand to Company to cure, City shall, after passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed ten working days, have the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City or it's assigned. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section. 3 -~ 3.3. Waiver of Performance Security. The City hereby waives any requirement for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, letter of credit or any other form of security or assurance that may be required under City Code (ROW) Section 802 currently or in the future. The City reserves all other rights under City Code (ROW) Section 802 to enforce Company performance requirements for work in the Public Way or Public Ground. 3.4. Avoid Damage to Gas Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Gas Facilities while performing any activity. SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.1. Relocation of Gas Facilities. A. Relocation of Gas Facilities in Public Ways shall be subject to City Code (ROW) Section 802.. B. City may require Company at Company's expense to relocate or remove its Gas Facilities from Public Grounds upon a finding by City that the Gas Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Grounds. Relocation Gas Facilities in Public Ground shall comply with applicable City ordinances consistent with law. ~~ 4.2. Proiects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal, or rearrangement of any Company Gas Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally-aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 161.46, as supplemented or amended. The City is not obligated to pay Company for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has not received federal funding. 4.3. No Waiver. The provisions of Section 4 apply only to Gas Facilities constructed in reliance on a permit or franchise from City and Company does not waive its rights under an. easement or prescriptive right or State or County permit. SECTION 5. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 6. FRANCHISE FEE. 6.1. Reservation of Rights. The City reserves all rights under Minn. Stat. § 216B.36, to require a franchise fee at any time during the term of this franchise. If the City elects to require a franchise fee it shall notify Company and negotiate in good faith to reach a mutually acceptable fee agreement, which shall be set forth in a separate ordinance and not adopted until 4 --~ at least 60 days after Notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon the Company by certified mail. If the City and Company are unable to agree on a franchise fee or on any terms related thereto, each hereby consents to the jurisdiction of State District Court, Hennepin County, to construe their respective rights under the law, subject to all rights of appeal. SECTION 7. LIMITATION ON APPLICABILITY; NO WAIVER. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and its successors and the Company and its successors and permitted assigns, as the only parties. No provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any .third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. This franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 8. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended. This Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company's written consent thereto with the City Clerk within 60 days after the effective date of the amendatory ordinance. SECTION 9. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERSEDED. This franchise supersedes and replaces previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessors. Upon Company acceptance of this franchise under Section 2.2, the previous franchise shall terminate. Passed and approved: May 27, 2003 Mayor of the City of Richfield, Minnesota Attest: City Clerk, Richfield, Minnesota 5 AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 7A REPORT # 147 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~TULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DII~CTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STEVEN L. DEVICH ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an appointment to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution appointing. Rudy Hanuman to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for the remainder of a three-vear term ending December 31, 2003. III. BACKGROUND I On June 25, 1990 the City Council approved an ordinance to levy a 3% tax on gross receipts of lodging from Richfield Hotels and Motels pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. The establishment of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. (RTPB) and the appointment of directors were also a part of the resolution. Currently there are five director positions on the Board. The term of each appointment is for three years and terms are staggered to maintain Board continuity. The current appointments to the Tourism Board and the ending dates of their terms are as follows: 1. Russ Susag, representing the Richfield Chamber of Commerce, term ending December 31, 2005. 070803 Tourism Bd Appt 2. Rebecca Ortega, General Manager of Candlewood Suites, term ending December 31, 2003. 3. Rhonda Osborne General Manager of Americlnn, term ending December 31, 2003. 4. Robyn Goolsbey, Hampton Inn, term ending December 31, 2003. 5. Jerod Endersbe, General Manager of Motel 6, December 31, 2004. Rebecca Ortega, the current Candlewood Suites representative to the RTPB, was appointed to the Board to a three-year term ending December 31, 2003. However, Ms. Ortega is no longer with the Candlewood Suites and has been replaced as the General Manager of the property by Rudy Hanuman. Mr. Hanuman has indicated that he wishes to be appointed to the Board as the Candlewood Suites representative for the remainder of the three-year term. Prior to his appointment as the General Manager of the Candlewood Suites, Mr. Hanuman spent 17 years in the hotel business in Minnesota, beginning with his work with the Holiday Inn Minneapolis. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council has the authority to make appointments to the RTPB. • The RTPB has typically included a Candlewood Suites representative. • Mr. Hanuman is the new General Manager of the Candlewood Suites and is interested in an appointment to the RTPB. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • A vacancy on the RTPB exists as of June 2003 and should be filled as soon as possible. C. FINANCIAL • There is no cost to the City. D. LEGAL • The appointment conforms to City Ordinance and bylaws of the RTPB. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The City Council could decide not to appoint Mr. Hanuman to the RTPB. • The. City Council could choose to review this matter at a future date. V. ATTACHMENTS • .Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. RESOLUTION NO. '~ RESOLUTION APPOINTING A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO THE RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD, INC. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has levied a 3% tax on the gross receipts of lodging from hotels and motels in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 169.190; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute Section 169.190 authorizes the proceeds of the tax to fund a Tourism Promotion Board for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center; and WHEREAS, the articles and bylaws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. provide the City Council of the City of Richfield appoint five (5) directors to the Board representing the Richfield hotel-motel properties and the Richfield Chamber of Commerce; and WHEREAS, each director shall serve as a director until his or her successor has been appointed and has qualified, or until his or her earlier disqualification, death, resignation, or removal; and WHEREAS, Rebecca Ortega, the representative from the Candlewood Suites is no ~ longer with the property; and WHEREAS, Mr. Hanuman has replaced Ms. Ortega as the General Manager of the Candlewood Suites and is interested in an appointment to her unexpired term. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board directors be modified- as follows: Appoint Rudy Hanuman, Candlewood Suites, to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for the remainder of a three-year term ending December 31, 2003. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: ,~ Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 7C REPORT # 149 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 2003 REPORT PREPARED BY: KATIA MEDVETSKI, REDEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, T/TLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~~~ SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of 6414 18th Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of 6414 18th Avenue. ~ II. BACKGROUND ~ In the year 2000, the Legislature appropriated $5 million for the City of Richfield (City) to purchase residential properties (including all related costs) impacted by extreme low frequency noise that will be caused by the new north-south airport runway. The revenue was provided as a grant through the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (DYED). To date, these funds have allowed the City to purchase 26 homes on 18th Avenue, north of East 66th Street, and undertake site clearance activities. 0708JC6414.doc ~ Aself-audit, conducted late last year, realized a fund balance sufficient enough to purchase one additional residential property. Part of the available revenue for this - purchase includes sale proceeds from house moving activities related to the project. The single family home at 6414 18th Avenue was selected because it is the next property in line to be acquired. An appraisal report and review appraisal report were recently completed by the City's appraisers. The fair market value of this property has been appraised at $150,000. The property owners may also be eligible for relocation benefits in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Act. These benefits will be calculated separately once an offer is made to the property owners. Staff recommends acquisition of the property as the property owners are motivated sellers and funds are currently available for acquisition and relocation activities. Site clearance activities may still occur this year. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City identified the subject property for purchase for the project with funds from DTED. • The property lies within the 87dB contour. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • An offer will be made to the homeowners upon the Council's approval of just compensation and acquisition. ~' Conworth, Inc. continues to represent the City in acquisition and relocation activities for this project. C. FINANCIAL • DTED grant money and house moving sale proceeds are available to purchase the subject property. • As in the past, DTED will reimburse the City for all expenses related to the purchase of this property. D. LEGAL • Barring any unforeseen title problems, the City may be in possession of this property by fall of this year. ALTERNATIVE KECOMMENDATION(S) ~ • Delay or do not approve just compensation and acquisition of 6414 18th Avenue. However, the sellers are motivated and funds are available. I V . ATTACHMENTS I ~ VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 641418TH AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, the 2000 Minnesota State Legislature authorized the City of Richfield (City) to acquire residential property within two blocks of Trunk Highway 77 and within the 87d B; WHEREAS, within the aforenoted area the following real property is identified for purchase: Lot 14, Block 5, Iverson's Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Together with all abutting streets and alleys, vacated or to be vacated, and all easements, gaps, overlaps and gores, appurtenant thereto; and WHEREAS, grant funds from with the Department of Trade and Economic Development (DYED) and house moving sale proceeds related to the project are available to the City for the purchase of the real property and related expenses; and WHEREAS, the City has a plan for the purchase of properties along 18th Avenue, north of East 66th Street; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City has caused an appraisal for the subject property to be made by a qualified independent professional appraiser to determine fair market value of real estate; and WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the appraisal report as being in conformity with appraisal standards; and WHEREAS, the fair market value of 6414 18th Avenue is $150,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That just compensation in the amount of $150,000 is approved. 2. That the City's consultant is authorized to present an offer of said amount. to the respective property owners. 3. That the City's consultant is authorized to undertake all other necessary actions to purchase said property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of July, 2003. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk