The URL can be used to link to this page

05-29-01 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 29, 2001 • RICHFIELD CITY HALL 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. Call to order Roll call 1. Annual meeting with Civil Service Commission 2. Meeting with Richfield Chamber of Commerce 3. Transportation Update Adjournment REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. • AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Pledge of Allegiance Roll call Approval of minutes of (1) Regular City Council Meeting of April 23, 2001; (2) Richfield Board of Equalization Meeting of April 30, 2001; (3) Special City Council Meeting of May 8, 2001; and (4) Regular City Council Meeting of May 14, 2001 PRESENTATIONS 1. ,Presentation to Richfield Explorers 2. .Swear-in two Richfield Police Officers 3. Presentation by I-494 Corridor Commission • 4. Presentation by City Maintenance Facility Task Force . 5. Council discussion items • Notes: 6. Opportunity for citizens to address the Council on items not on the agenda (Limited to 15 minutes) Speakers are asked to keep their comment period to three, minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Individuals who wish to address the Council are requested to print their name and address on the ...Speaker's Register for the_xecord. _ Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 7. Council approval of agenda • CONSENT CALENDAR 8. 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 bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract to Valley Paving, Inc. for 2001 milling and bituminous overlay work in amount of $128,566.91 S.R. No. 109 B. Consideration of approval of bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract to Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. for 2001 annual curb and gutter, sidewalk and miscellaneous concrete repair in amount of $36,345 S.R. No. 110 C. Consideration of approval of award of contract to ARI Mechanical Services, Inc. for furnishing and installation of replacement rooftop condenser for rink one at Richfield Ice Arena in amount of $14,309 S.R. No. 111 D. Consideration of approval of award of contract to Blue Earth Environmental for demolition of nine houses and fourteen foundations on 18th Avenue in amount of • $93,400 S.R. No. 112 E. Consideration of approval of plans and specifications for City parking lot • improvements, ordering City projects for Community Center, Donaldson Park,. Water Plant and Cedar/Jensen; and authorizing advertisement for bids S.R. No. 113 F. Consideration of approval of resolution approving Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 8, Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental, 6405 Cedar Avenue S.R. No. 114 G. Consideration of approval of resolution approving Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 1, Dr. Blaine, 6301 Cedar Avenue S.R. No. 115 H. Consideration of approval of resolution increasing Richfield Tourism Promotion Board from three to five director positions and appointing new directors S.R. No. 116 L.~ Consideration-of approvalwof.authorizing._Tease.agr~err~ep~G~wathr:~west Wireless#or . monopole wireless communications antenna tower-at Madison-Park -S.R. No. 117 J. Consideration of approval of first reading of.ordinance repealing cable television ordinance for WideOpenWest, LLC and setting public hearing and second reading for June 11, 2001 S.R. No. 118 K. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amendment to City Code Section 416 regarding sign regulations in high density residential areas and setting public hearing and second reading for June 25, 2001 S.R. No. 119 L. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amendment to City Code Section 416 regarding sign regulations at outdoor sports arenas and complexes and setting public hearing and second reading for June 25, 2001 S.R. No. 120 n LJ Notes: PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. Cancellation of public hearing and second reading of cable television ordinance for Everest Connections Corporation Staff Report No. 121 Notes: 10. Public hearing regarding capital expense project for 800 megahertz Public Safety radio system which could exceed $500,000 Staff Report No. 122 • Notes: • RESOLUTIONS 11. Consideration of resolution granting drainage easement between Emerson Avenue and Richfield Lake as requested by Minnesota Department of Transportation Staff Report No. 123 Notes: ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND .OTHER BUSINESS 12. Consideration of delay of reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue between 76th Street and 77th Street Staff Report No. 124 Notes: • 13. Consideration of response to Environmental Impact Statement for I-494/1-35W interchange including 76th Street ramp Staff Report No. 125 Notes: 14. Consideration of plans, ordering project and authorizing ad for bids for roadway improvements in vicinity of 76th Street and Penn Avenue Staff Report No. 126 Notes: 15. Update on status of joint fire/police training facility Notes: • 16: Consideration of resolution supporting City Manager's candidacy for League of • Minnesota Cities Board of Directors Staff Report No. 127 Notes: AIRPORT BUSINESS 17. Airport status report Notes: COUNCIL CHOICE 18. Claims and .payrolls 19. 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. • • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 ADMIN. REPORTS 16 127 REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER SAMANTHA. ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution in support of Richfield City Manager's candidacy for the Lea ue of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution of support for the City Manager's candidacy to the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors. II. BACKGROUND The League of Minnesota Cities is a statewide organization comprised of over 800 Minnesota cities. The organization's mission is to be an informational and service delivery resource for the cities it serves. The League is also a strong presence at the Minnesota Legislature working as an advocate of Minnesota cities. The focus of the League's efforts is policy development, advocacy, information-sharing, education. and training, insurance services, municipal code codification services and numerous other value-based services that strengthen all Minnesota cities' client delivery systems. The League is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of representatives from Minnesota cities, both out-state and metro cities. Each year, at the League's annual • conference, new members of the Board are elected to fill the seats of vacating members who have completed their three-year term. Membership on the Board is balanced between metro and out-state representation. At the June 2001 League Conference in Duluth, the League membership will elect several new Board Members. The Richfield City Manager has been asked to once • again be a candidate fora Board position. Samantha Orduno served as a Board Member from 1993 to 1995 and as the League's Second Vice-President in 1995. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It has been a consistent policy of the Richfield City Council to encourage and support both Council Members and staff in their participation in city- affiliated organizations. Former City Manager Jim Prosser served as a member of the League Board and current staff members are currently serving on several municipal service organizations. • It is the League of Minnesota Cities' policy that any candidate for a Board position has the support of the City Council. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Time Commitment • The League Board meets once a month. The League conducts a three-day strategic planning meeting in July that Board Members are expected to attend. In addition to the July meeting, Board Members are expected to attend Conference meetings and at least two non- • metro meetings when the League conducts informational meetings. • The time commitment is minimal as the City Manager has been a member of several policy and strategic planning committees for the past two years. Board Members do not participate in these committees, so the time commitment is less. • Benefits • The benefit to the City of .having the City Manager sit on the League's Board of Directors is one of exposure and responsiveness. Board Members are often called upon to testify at Legislative hearings as well as participate in special collaborative efforts with other cities, counties and the Met Council. Because information sharing is so critical in any city's performance goals to its stakeholders, the more one knows, the better. A city representative to the Board increases our information sharing capabilities and responsiveness to our stakeholders. C. FINANCIAL • Other than the time element, there is no other significant financial expenditure. The City Manager currently attends League conferences as well as the League's legislative updates and regional meetings. D. LEGAL • • None. 05291mc • IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Decline to approve the attached resolution and withhold support for the candidacy of the City Manager. The nomination would then be withdrawn. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • 05291mc RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY MANAGER'S CANDIDACY FOR LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES .BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities is an organization representing the interests of over 800 Minnesota cities; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has been a member of the League of Minnesota Cities for over 30 years; and WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities provides such municipal services as issue research, municipal code codification, legislative monitoring and lobbying efforts on behalf of cities, informational services, insurance through the League Trust and other valuable services that help Minnesota cities serve. the people of this State; and WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of representatives from cities across the State; and WHEREAS, the League's. Board of Directors work in a collaborative effort to establish policies .and procedures that benefit Minnesota cities in their service delivery efforts to residents and community stakeholders; and WHEREAS, the Richfield City Manager, Samantha Orduno, is a candidate for an • open seat on the Board of Directors of the League of Minnesota Cities; and WHEREAS, Samantha Orduno has abroad-based experience history in municipal government and has served on numerous League committees as well as a member of the League Board from 1993 to 1995, serving as the League's Second Vice-President in 1995; and WHEREAS, the City Council fully understands the time commitment necessary to serve on the League's Board of Directors and fully supports its City Manager desire to contribute to this valuable organization. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council in and for the City of Richfield does hereby extend its full support for the candidacy of its City Manager, Samantha Orduno, to the Board of Directors for the League of Minnesota Cities. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 29th day. of May, 2001. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 05291mc Admin. Reports & AGENDA SECTION: Other Business AGENDA ITEM # 14 REPORT # 12 6 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29,.2001 • REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: GEORGE L. ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration to approve plans, order project and authorize ad for bids for roadway improvements in the vicinity of 76th Street and Penn Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve plans for roadway improvements in the vicinity of 76th Street and Penn Avenue, order City Project 401-30-513 and authorize staff to advertise for bids. ~ Ih. BACKGROUND ~ As part of the Best Buy developer's agreement, the City agreed to make certain improvements to public infrastructure around the site. Among the improvements needed are: 1) widen 76th Street between I-35W and Sheridan Avenue, 2) widen Penn Avenue between 75th Street and the new Penn Avenue entrance to Best Buy (approximately 77th Street), 3) reconstruct Knox Avenue south of 76th Street, and 4) add a second right turn lane to the I-35W off ramp at 76th Street. Some utility, signing and traffic signal upgrades are included. A copy of the layout is attached. • All of the above improvements are included in the construction plans for City Project 401-30-513, which is generally referred to as "The 76th Street Widening Plan". 0529-76thStWiden NAME, TITLE Right of Way • The Best Buy development has provided the opportunity to widen 76th Street to the south and minimize the right of way impact on the residential area north of 76th Street. City staff is in the process of acquiring permanent and temporary easements from all the properties adjacent to the project. The design has been refined to reflect concerns raised by property owners affected by the road widening. A majority of the right of way required for the widening of 76th Street will come from the south side of the street. Best Buy will dedicate the required property to the City for the purpose of roadway use. Funding With completion of the final Municipal State Aid (MSA) approved plans, an Engineer's Estimate of construction costs has been determined by the City's engineering consultant preparing the plans. Along with the cost for right of way acquisition, the total estimate of cost to date for this project is $5 million. Funding for this project will come from the City's MSA account, except for utility work done on Knox Avenue that will be funded by Best Buy and the City's utility funds. This project will require using the entire MSA account balance to date along with a request for an advance of funds in the amount of $780,000 (approximately 3/4 of a year's allotment). III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • .The proposed layout for widening 76th Street is consistent with the Developer's Agreement between the Richfield HRA and Best Buy that • commits the City to make necessary improvements to Penn Avenue, 76th Street and Knox Avenue. • The widening of 76th Street to the. south was identified in the Best Buy Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as having the least impact on adjacent residential land uses. . B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Necessary right of way property and easements will be acquired by late June 2001. To maintain the schedule for the redevelopment in the area formerly known as Interchange West, the roadway improvements on 76th Street need to be constructed this year. The complexity of constructing the roadway and utility improvements along 76th Street, it will be necessary to detour traffic during the construction. The detour route will be along Knox. Avenue and the I-494 frontage road from Knox Avenue to Penn Avenue. Information about the detour will be posted on the City's website, and included in publications such as the Your City and a project newsletter sent to the neighborhood. C. FINANCIAL • The adopted 2001 Capital Improvement Budget includes $3.7 million in Municipal State Aid funding for the project. The majority of the work in the project will be paid for out of Richfield's Municipal State Aid Construction Account but the Knox Avenue utility improvements will be paid for with funds from Best Buy and city utilities in the approximate amount of $783,00. The cost split for Best Buy and city utilities will be • available to the Council at the bid award D. LEGAL • The City has agreed to make certain improvements to public infrastructure around the Best Buy campus site. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council could direct staff to not construct these improvements. However, the City is obligated under the Best Buy Development Agreement to make improvements to these areas. • Council could direct staff to redesign these improvements; however, staff believes that the plan as submitted makes the necessary improvements at a minimum cost. V. ATTACHMENTS • Graphic of proposed .76th Street improvements. • A set of drawings showing: • Proposed geometrics • Existing utilities • Proposed utilities •, Staging options (2) • VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None known of at this time. __________ ~~r i Oliver Avenue Newton Avenue Morgan Avenue Logan Avenue • • ~ .p._ ~ , /5 k~; -.:. ~.. ~~ y ~ a 'r r ?'"may 9~y4y~7r r ;~ ~ ~ ~. 1 W o ~~ ~ ~ ~: ¢ I~1 N i. ~~ y, , _ E `~ ~ ~ .: .. b Y ~ ~ 9 '. V F ~ f~~ ~ SM ` `~ ~~,: ~ ' . ~ >*'"~n.. } ..__.~....-. v°. .~~ , ' ++t~ tu..,..W. ,_..~. _~ v ` tde :' ~ A ~h "%~:. ~~ ~ ~' ~ ':~ 3 ~ °s~~~ ~' r~ f~ Al .,... ~' .. o ~/~ V~ ~ ~ O ~ ~' Q G~ N ~ Cn ~7 _~ ~ r+ ~ O ~ CD ~ m ~ ~ ~ n' Q t '=~ r r; {`h '~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~.'~t K f '"~" .* ,'ri'4 '. ~ 3 a ~ ~~ ~~~ N ~~~ ~$ ~`~F. V ~ ~ ~h ~ '~` ~3u~ +.. .. - -- " E e, ,y, ~ ~ ~ ~,~ a ~ -_'t' .~.,........ W ~ - -- z ~ a ~ ~ ~ , ~ v l -Ea .~ ' r ti. 1 ~t~. r ~ ro~ k s ~ ~ .. ~ + ~ w, < w ~; - f k F S k s FF 1 ~ ~ ,y ~ ~ ' * __ ~ 4 w 'S r a' ~ "` ~ ., ~ f a ~~ rr ~~~ r "~~,~;~.. epep.~ ~s~"~' ... ~ ...... LS ~ ., w,.... ~I.-,:c f ...i - a..A~4WQnk.M n ...., a a.. , .. r_ ~ a... `. ` a F'~ 'kk .. .. r ~ i x ~:.. z 4 /...~. t.Y # R'i . a 5 ~ .~...wHM ..~ ~ ~ F are ~~ i F ei a. `gip ... _w+iu+u^e'. _-.'f~. +2 e a F.~ f ~ ~ ` ~ ~yy4 "L~ ~. ~ ~ ~,. ~~ "°~~ n ~ .+ ti ~4~ V ...~y ~,~y ~ I I. ^ a 'Wbn,w~l. 'T'Ti Y~i* ~. ,. ~'a,~x~d .,a~,...r~ ~''~~•a _ ~~ ~~~ I y 1 -w., r..-..... ,.a-- ,. .s~~ ~~ F Ali i ~ } .: d ~ ~~; 4 ~'Xl. "~ ~~r ~ fi . ~ ~~. I> ~, a ~,.~ r=': 'Sar :x r,' ..eE~~#.'~` ..fi~r if~~d ~ n;-i ;M ~~+, M4....+~,_ ,m~ ~, ak. ~ryq MY. ~ '~ 41&~ $ 4. ~~ ^; ~j i>q,,. - 'y n r ,. .. ~~ m ~ ~ P1 ._ ~ ~ F" µ,: ~ ' t ~" ' °~'~ { ~ ~~ .ate ~ ^ • , ~`~ ~~ Li.:: ~ _ _ _ _ __ _ , _ ~_ ~K i~ m ni ~ X fR~ X X X ~ ~~cn'~~C ~« ~ ~ 7 = tQ tQ (Q =~ ~~~~ ~ o ~ ~ 3 ~. v ~ 5 ~' g rn rN-r ~. (~ C CD~ O J ~~ Q ~ ~T N_ ~- ~ C7 ~ CD ~ (~ (~ ~, ~+ ~ T ~~"'-a~ ~ s .. ~ ~ ` ~~ a~ *<~; ~. '199 • t ~ ~ ~ , ~ t , ~~ ~ 4 t` ~ 3 1. .........,,..~....~-`r~....~~~w...w.. ~, ,y~ : x ~ , t r k. .. cy YN ~''l~~ "S. ` 5 f ' ~ j~ ~ ~ f hr. ~ ~~p ' ~ ' ~ ., ~' ~~.` w..n.......~., ~ ~ ~ .d...... _ *.'~ R* ~ i ~ ,~„ ~ ~ A y ~ ,) ., It ,13 Y y1 ,y. Vie, ~ ~ ~ R ... W ~t rr e7~' ahn s. ?~ , ,-..~ s ~ q ~h'.i W w~ ~ ~ R ,.. f k ~' ~ ~ ~ ei ~ f. 3 . i " , { 1 ! P.j~e wM'a,1~... - 1 : 1~=5.~ s~:8'. i~if.~ `y4N~eda t.. N j '~~`;""4.ur>f.~` f '~ 3. ~. a k ;:~ 4 ., ~t~ '~ k,y~ ~. ...~ . a~~ .~t ~r: . f fi~ Y ~'~ ~ e . ^~ ~, r Y ~""~"`~`~ j~~ ~~ ~ 7 . i ': ~ ~` '~y~ ~ ~ R~y~~ ,y y ,~. .+.+..r, ~i4e' 1 /tt • e . : ~~Y^a" €~~ ii '~.xl ..~ SSA' ~~Rtlt Jug ~ ' ~ . '~ xk +F x •` ~6 a h ~ ~ wr ~ ¢ ~ : 1 _ ~, ~ fL ~9 ti ~y6 Q ~R 4 0 t ~ p~.~ ,p. it ~. t ~f u ~ `~a.~w~,y~,yy fw~y, Y ~'~ ~ +1 4 x ) aJ + '~W~ ~ ~ ~ G'~3 h 1 ~ ~ 4a r ~ .~~.,~~,,~. ~,y~ ~.a..a~ . ~ r~. qtr ' n~ .e~ ._:. ~ - 1 n za F ~ ~ ~ h . ;~ ~°. .. ~ rid ~ ~x ~_'; .. _ Y ? ` wipe aw S ~~^ ^ ..&~..~ r. A w ~~ ~ •.' ' .i - .. ~ ~~ ~_, ,a ~ _ Xtriev.,. ~ .,: ,.5a, n.~~kivd ~ "~` •.~~-.~'"Y.!'Nm,~~ii~ ~:F ~, u~`7'~ i':, '~ ~ ~ .., 5,: °, vw ~' ,~ ~.,.-~..,a.... „. ,, ^c ,,~ ,. ~ _ .,N a -' ~- i r~ ~ i ~, ~ ~d' .yam di. y,~.'^'.i`..a-w..w'r n "wsrr..~p.~:w/ r~:YR. _ ..e.... r- :' y~ ~~ r~ _ ~ -~ i w - - ! ~ _ r ^ ~ ~_ ' 7u:. .... ,x l4 ~. ! ~ ,,q'.s ~ e ,q i .a*'^. ~ ' ~t, ~'~ ,., Ate'.-e _.... h :. ~ .~.~ t s +~+ -ter-: V ~/~ O ~ O ~/ ~ ~ ~ IV ~ ~ C O ~ ~ n =± O ~ CD ~ ~ CD ~ '{ CD Q ~e 5" r ~, C '~': -,. ~~ 9 ray .~ ~~ ~~ ~~ a ~r ,~ ~:r s ' W .~ ~~/1 r i. - 3 I + w 4~n~ °. ~4 ~ _.. ~ ~. P b y } D r ~ ~- ~ a r$-s "~ hk ~ ~x ~, j' ,y r,k ''` .I x' ~ ~, k A ! 5- A! I (y3 A ~ ,~l ~. w 1 ! 7~. ~ Irk ~. i * Ry'1t ~ w ~~ LLw 1 ~ r ~~ ~r ~ ~';~' +.. H .. `_..- ~ ~, i , tk d ~ p'. ~ - 1 ~ M~jj{~ ~~. 'T kn. ~I ~~~~f"~ A8 ~x ~~.,~{!f~~~ p ~ K{1•' t.~' ~i'~y ~".,Wo .h, µ' ..5~`~kroMYF,.~ iE: .. ` ~, Q SIY•~t+~in. .+..~.~.y ' 3 .~ „ .:~ 9 .. h.~?»~n y~t~ c~ ~.~.k~.'~Q ~ .~ -~~ •.~+ r r r :~ ~ .~.J F.. '~'~, n-,ten ~K ~:~` q ' .. ~. i ~~' ~,yJ ~~y~ :~~4t i fi.,~. C~~~~~,.~ l~r: ~h'~ F . .1., ~ .`r':., * ~ r pyrt.... >. ~.. . ~•,' .. ,, L: { P" t: ~1~... ~ 5: .n 7 .:. ,sa.;:sR°'~"e,'~i60"~.,Ii}~Cl3s~iF~'. _ _ _ Nn ~7. ~1. ~'R~., ... f r s ~- r~Y ~ ~. -t6 ,:q -, .. tt.~ ; ~~~'~',~,~~."+9i Mu.hu€g1n `Tj;. ~~ it ~ _ ~, _ ~~ ~` ~ ~`'~` «~ ((/f/f }{~~ J J ~'~`~ i 'KS~';p. ~ .{~, s ~ Y a h {~+w+www. ~"`...y.,° ~g'~+Y...,~,.5_ .. ,; y~ ~ a " ~ z $ 4 , . wy Y .fir " ,,, ~__- y rp~+4~ }~{ ±p~ P wr aM'~ ! q N v ..A 1 Ai 'k ~ rI« I'~ N ~,~ ~ ~ f ry ~L. k~~ ~ 'R _i~ ' .. .-.. '' 1.y W. .." .' i. o ' M ~ '.,~ a~ .~ a ~ ~ ::.vm t A . r ~ u ~.., 4 _ ~ Oi ~ qtr -. ~ ~p +.:~ '~ ,;rb „ - # ~ ,n+i '~. y'~ y _. r ~ ti F. .,F d I it 1 I p -' i 6 y 4 _ 'i°~ , s i .f a(w M+.+ Vv11r.Vh ~ i ..~ +~y ! M..'b~C ~'mb"` ~';~ ~ ~ inh Pk': i sMxr~, :'"~ .~.. ~.5 x.~~ ~-+- > -. ..., •Yh4Y 7 -' .. 1M ,~ - ~ .. i ~~ 3 ~„ " ~ :. a ~.r .;'.y ,.., ., w sr~ , „ :~-. i.' • ~. E i ,~ • ~~ ( ~ ~4N~ ~~ ~ yr, F ' r~ 4 ,: w ,* \ ~ ~ -i . • n ,. 1 ~. a .. y 4 ~ $ i ` i -~ .. °, k 4k. r~ qe s ' ~ k 9 _ ~ ti p .. ' ,~ _ "~ ~. r _ , `~ ~ s a ,. ~ • 6 p ~~ f 3, Y ... "'+ r+w.- ~.:+ kw 'n+A~ ~ -- .. r c }^y '„~.r .n. ~{~+, ~t'." ~ hr 9'~,~ -•C .~y ^'Y } ~~.~~5~'L,rpk 1 ""~ ti ~. ,-.. ,w e :. ~ '~ 6A Kn i ::.n ~ ki'k it }~ ~ ~,xe __. ~ ~S y _._.... ~ .. .. ~ ~~,, !~,. ! j~ P3 - 4r'._, p b Y~_~~~ I~ . x r~•4u. •.x.tii. .r,Fy,a.,.y... ~ ~ M 1"~'~ ,.,,,,.~ r ~ 1~,[ 4 i w.'/ ~ A -.« ~ r~ n ~ h t x n ~ p ~,,,~ , p,, •~ ~~k ~ f .eta -,~ ;^ r"'.~sra < ,.w~-, ,. ~. ~.. . nr' ... _r s ° :,. ... _ t ~, .....,. ~~ ... - „ - ... a ,,~.. k` f ~ ~ .~ ~ ',. ~.. r 1 • a', r .~ y ~ ,. .. ~~ - '~ Y-. rr ... ~ --ik k ~ .},~~A ~ ' j s ~ „~' Rw u ~ „~, e..~;~r* .w ? er , ~,p "~~"~R -. "' ~ ~9~w r k ` fir, ~~; ~ ~ ~~„ roMk 5 ' ~ s '~; r-. ~~r ~` ~ +~g r y ~ ~ - ;, r © _ ~ __ ~~ _ ,~ ~~ ~ ` I ~ ~ ~ _~ V/ of O • / /1 ~ ~1 N nv O ~- ~C~ cn . O ~ ~ ~~ ~ c ~p m Q 1 4 : ~~. 1 ~ xr 9. ; ry '~a ~ a~a ._._..__...~""~........~..._._.__ a?~'` F`.^rri?'bD s,..•v~. ~ ~5 ~ ... '' t M '''f'... A rY!aal F,~~ R~~i ~ fi ~5ix t 'gw4r~~: ~~ ¢ ~ ?M F~k 1 lR., ' " ~ .. ..~ i .`:< ~~~ ¢,, s ;tF ''.r...~.~...+.x.a~Y°~rJw+,'u.irlt«~.t R 'tt 1 ? ice' ~ i ~ 7 ~ '! ~ U d b N M 4~"~ '+- EY mss:.. ~ .. `t~ ^ .~ D `;~ ~ a' u k 'P a 7 P> €•' ' t ~y ,~ _ ..~ ~ r a , . ._ _. - +re.~+mw. e C ~°~ t ~ ,. ~ 'i°fe in k z ~rv. z s' r ' .: _ ' . .. ~ ~ ~ SI a _~ ~ .. -:. gal t„ ~. ~ ~~ ~ , .+ ~ w.'p~4 ~ ~ J.~~~ ,~ '~' !~'.~'4Pr`` ~i__°'"0.?r f ~ ~ A'~ ~~°-' e~ . -:.d ~. ri "'~~`~a` ~~ J' a t'S'MMl 3~i~1tS~Y..... .f~ ~ ,. .. t ` ~ t}I' r .. .. ~. «t.. i~ ~~ ~ a'M~ ~ .wy ~ r, ; ~y, «. .~ ~ i ~ q4 ,. F ~ .., a7 r .,.~ x.r~+ :.. ~+r d t ~ a ~ „~,, ^4 C' ~ . ^^ .. , a~ ~' ~ „ r .~ t +~ r ~~ --__ ~ ,. .,~ . b.,r ~rniMO~ ~ ~ p h w„aw. p `'a"' i B~~ ~,~ , 9x ~ w. "+ ~ ~ rM' "~; ~,""'' -. ~ t$ ~ ~ n -'o-'~'"' "t3: to +~. Mgr,.,ya ~ ,~ ., s • ! ~ ~~ ~`~ *"y kl R~; r, .,~' "" $ a S* ,~.c .: ~ ^~~,., Y K ~ f ~ ~~~ ~ ~ k :F.~ iD ~~ ~ < M -'~k ~"* ~-~S r ~~' "tY+ -v~ it ~ ..a. ~ -:.~ ~ ` ;YS ~ w !, it `b ~ S ~ :. by ~ ~" „. A ~.~ i II If - ~ a1 a f t «. 'p~D~} M ~ ~- ,. ~a ~ ~ '~ m>"E..~1' i fyy k"R y'9'k-~ 'Yr. ~ ~~ a -+lY+. Jw'. -.-. .... .. ~. Y ~ ~~ L`y,., ° ..._. Stk. kj.. F yy__ y 'A Nn~ 7 {'yr ~.,.~. '........ ~:. ~ w .., ~ ~ ~ .. r 7 .tom ~ ~ ~ wk ~ y ~~ ~ ~ ~t f , ~~., ~, - - ,._._T k ,rte _ ,e,,:Y .~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~.~ !! ~ t : .~ ~, ;~. ~ n - ~-. .., ~ Y' f a a 3 { .,~~ i 7r. ~ t .. ~ H 1 ! ~e 4q. 1 ~ ~f tt 5 riue ~~ ~ '~2~~Rxtr`~o- ~ ?'~ +. - .m~ f .1 ~. E i :. x is ~as~~# F ~' ~~ y "."" x ~ °- ~ i r y. -. -1 .. '~.` ~ >: t.! ,' a-. ,. ~t , i~ '~1- ~_=..e ~ ~ ~ ~ k_ rl ~3 ~`~ _~ ~ ~:.r :. R e ~ .a. ' - ~.': ~... ~ 1. ~ $- ~f {I f ~ ~ '~„ e - 4?-L '~S,a,~ r~. _._ _. ~r..ti.. .v.4, ~'w't`„" T r~ '~'i '; y 4" 1~,. .y D r . ' Ftllr 4 y i'e'ti ~,..~ ~ ~ ~ i .. ~ dt~ ~~,$,~..~4fii ,~ A yi t ~ _. - s ' t ' ~ ~'Y~y, 5 ~1.+Wi~'-, ~ t ~ l sd~ ~~~ "G'~F ~e t !f ~ XF ., . ,~ - ,~ is ~ f - ~~ :;~~ ~ ~ ~ .. . i r -};~ ] as r,d~i_ ~~~w!'A vw..a,~ .. ,. n ,~ ~ . i'~~ ~ ~"~ .fit ~ .; .. :. , ' :.. ^' p j .. .. ~ ~ , ~ "! .. ~ lV~ -- L ~4Z. ~Nlt pain-~~ ~~ _ e§ ' ~ ~, ,..~"a ~.o ~~ ~-~..:r~ ' Mme., ?2 ' ~'i^` sa -~ ,. ' ` . ; -' ' t , +1r ~A* sF f , w° *~ y't ~ '~~t1W. r - ~, t ' ~ :.,Mf +a'~i.- - ~, .-~~ ajt'J- a'~vw~y~rt ~--.1'rt / - .~ E ""` +dR " ,~,.~ ,t. ro, -. w. .. .x ` , f! ` r E 1 ~s :'~'"E ~ ~ ~,~ x ~ e;` t t e' a d ~t- ~~.. n. ,. ~~ s- ..i' ,a r+ ~ Ya ~ ,q . ~ ~ - ' ";45t1 { ~?i :. ww_t_'15t;~~'_..ree+:_~:~~ ..~ ~` ~:S`_->a _ _ ...mss - _ - r. , ,_. V ~ ~ \ W W W N ms's ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ Q~~ 6 ~ ~ N N N (D r-r ~ ~ cn N Cn O ~~ ~ C7 o ~ ~' ~ CQ ~ ~~ `~ ~ ~ AGENDA SECTION: ~, AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • • MAY 29, 2001 Admin. Reports & Other Business 13 125 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: TOM FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of response to Environmental Impact Statement for I-494/1-35W interchange including 76th Street ramp. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Request the Minnesota Department of Transportation to make modifications to the 494 layout to reduce right of way impact on the homes on Humboldt Avenue and the Shops at Lyndale in Richfield. III. BACKGROUND 1992 -RICHFIELD PREFERRED HOV OPTION. The Richfield City Council commented on the Draft I-35W Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on June 9, 1992. At that time the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) had proposed Light Rail Transit or a High Occupancy Vehicle Lane in the median of I-35W and an additional lane in each direction, and other alternatives. The first two alternatives would have required significant right of way acquisition including all the homes along Humboldt Avenue from 76th Street to the Wood Lake Nature Center. The Council favored the High Occupancy Vehicle alternative and opposed the Light Rail Transit alternative. 0529EIS494-35 NAME, TITLE 1996 - MnDOT ADVANCES SCALED BACK PLAN MnDOT chose not to pursue either alternative. Instead, a scaled back design was proposed in December 1996 that added just the High Occupancy Vehicle Lane without adding any additional lanes for general-purpose traffic. The Addendum to the Final I- 35W Environmental Impact Statement dated December 1996 did not discuss any changes in the right of way impacts along Humboldt Avenue from the original Final I- 35W EIS dated January 1995. 1999 - RICHIFELD INITIATED STUDY OF I-35W/I-494 INTERCHANGE Council commented on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Reconstruction of I-494 in June 1992. The project was stalled due to high costs associated with the preferred alternative and insufficient funds. In 1999 Richfield initiated a study to redesign the I-35W/I-494 interchange to reduce the cost of the project and hasten its construction. FEBRUARY 2001 -COUNCIL EXPRESSES_CONCERN OVER TAKINGS On February 12, 2001 Council discussed the proposed design for the I-494 Reconstruction Project. At that time Council expressed its concern that the proposed 76th Street northbound entrance ramp to I-35W would severely impact homes along Humboldt Avenue from 76th Street to 74th Street and the proposed braided I-494 ramps at Lyndale Avenue would adversely affect the Shops at Lyndale Shopping Center. 2001 -EIS INCLUDES TAKING OF HUMBOLDT AVENUE HOMES AND SHOPS AT LYNDALE PROPERTY In February and March 2001 MnDOT held public information meetings in communities affected by the proposed reconstruction of I-494. These meetings were held to inform the public of MnDOT's preferred layout to be included in the Final I-494 EIS.. The 76th Street entrance ramp to northbound I-35W is a part of the reconstruction of I-494. The design of the ramp is affected by the design of the I-494/1-35W interchange. MnDOT's preferred layout for the ramp will require the acquisition of an estimated total of 23 .homes on Humboldt Avenue. south of 73rd Street to 76th Street and 3 houses on Girard Avenue. This is a reduction in the number of homes originally identified in the Final I- 35W EIS dated January 1995. According to MnDOT the Final I-494 EIS document is scheduled to be published some time in 2001. The Final I-494 EIS is needed before MnDOT can begin to reconstruct the freeway. Richfield has not been asked by MnDOT to comment on the preferred layout being included in the Final I-494 EIS, even though the preferred layout differs substantially from the layouts shown in the draft EIS's for both I-35W and I-494. However, based on comments from Council Members and the public at the public information meeting held in Richfield, MnDOT staff has agreed to explore several design alternatives that may reduce the amount of right of way needed along Humboldt Avenue. This will be done in the summer after MnDOT staff has completed design work needed elsewhere along 1- 494. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The proposed layout is consistent with the City's policies to improve capacity and safety, and to promote transit on I-494. However, residents, Council Members and staff have concerns about the amount of right of way needed for the 76th Street entrance ramp to I-35W and the braided 1- 494 ramps at Lyndale Avenue. • The City proposed a design for the I-494/35W interchange that served as the basis for the proposed MnDOT layout for the interchange, but the City's design did not include braided ramps at I-494 and Lyndale Avenue. By eliminating the braided ramps, the City's design does not require additional right of way from the. Shops at Lyndale property. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The proposed 76th Street northbound entrance ramp to I-35W will severely impact homes along Humboldt Avenue from 76th Street to 73rd Street. • The proposed I-35W/I-494 interchange has a major negative impact on the Shops at Lyndale Shopping Center. • The design of the I-35W/I-494 interchange is based on the design proposed by the Richfield study. • Richfield has not been asked by MnDOT to comment on the preferred layout being included in the Final 1-494 EIS. However, based on comments from Council Members, the public at the public information meeting held in Richfield and neighborhood meetings with affected .residents, staff recommends that the City explore several design alternatives to reduce the amount of right of way needed and the number of homes (if any) that will need to be acquired. C. FINANCIAL • Due to limited MnDOT funding, work on 1-494 through Richfield may not begin unti12011-2016 at the earliest, although City staff is encouraging MnDOT to start the work much sooner than that. • There is no financial impact on the City as a result of this proposed layout. D. LEGAL • The City attorney will be present at the Council meeting and will be available for counsel. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to withhold formal comment until such time as MnDOT provides design alternatives that may reduce the amount of right of way needed along Humboldt Avenue. V. ATTACHMENTS • Graphic of I-35W/76th Street ramp right of way impact on Humboldt Avenue. VI. PRINCIPAL. PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Thomas O'Keefe, Area Manager of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, will attend to answer any questions. • Ken Meter, Humboldt resident, and several other residents of Humboldt and Girard Avenues. The group plans to present a resolution to the City Council in support of the City's position to develop alternatives to a MnDOT design that would remove homes. ~ Q. G Q W W Ili M C. STAFF REPORT Admin. Reports & AGENDA SECTION: -0ther Business AGENDA ITEM # 12 REPORT # 1.24 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 • REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: GEORGE L. ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NaMC, T/TLS MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of delay of the reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue between 76th Street and 77th Street. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation, reject all bids for roadway improvements in the 7600 block of Lyndale Avenue and authorize staff to re-advertise when the developer has control of the necessary aroaerties. IIL BACKGROUND The reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue from 76th Street to 77th Street was originally scheduled for construction as part of the Lyndale bridge project. When the Lyndale Gateway redevelopment project was proposed, the developers asked that the 7600 block of Lyndale be constructed before the bridge. In response to this request the project was rescheduled for summer of 2000. When the developer of the west side of Lyndale could not sign a contract with its primary tenant the project was again delayed. Construction was then scheduled for 2001. • The developer of the west side of Lyndale (CSM Corp.) has still not reached an agreement with its primary tenant, Walgreen Drug, and has therefore not acquired any of the other properties on the block. As a result the City cannot proceed with construction because it would mean closing down access to existing businesses. 0529-76th Lyndale Nanar:, Tirrr: The City is also under a time constraint to award or reject the bids no later that May 31, 2001. Since the City cannot proceed with construction, and cannot award a contract • until ready to proceed, the only available option is rejecting all bids and re-bidding at a later date. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Bids were solicited and opened on March 14, 2001 according to legal requirements. To afford the Lyndale Gateway developer additional time to reach an agreement with a primary tenant and to acquire other properties on the7600 block of Lyndale, the apparent low bidder for the roadway improvements was contacted and agreed to hold the bid of March 14, 2001 until May 31, 2001. • CSM Corporation has not, despite delays in construction and extensions of its developer's agreement, been able to conclude negotiations with Walgreen Drug. As a result Richfield finds itself in the position of having to reject all bids for this work in order to not violate the provisions of the contract bid documents. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The apparent low bid contractor for the roadway improvements in the 7600 block of Lyndale Avenue earlier agreed to an extension of the • award date. The additional time granted by that extension has also lapsed, and Richfield has run out of time. C. FINANCIAL • Much money has already been spent to develop plans and specifications for this work; however, the plans and specifications will be reused when the project is re-bid. D. LEGAL • Because of delays brought about by the developer's inability to complete his obligations under the developers agreement, Richfield is in the legal position that it must either award a contract or reject all bids. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council could choose to award a contract for this project; however, that would place Richfield in the legally untenable position having to default on the provisions of the contract. The contractor would have a contract and be ready to proceed, but Richfield would not have access to the construction site. V. ATTACHMENTS • Bid minutes/tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None known at this time. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Bid Opening March 14, 2001 1:30 p.m. Lyndale Avenue Improvements City Project 401-30-672 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for Lyndale Avenue Improvements, as advertised in the official newspaper on February 21, 2001. Present: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk George Atkinson, Public Works Representative Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Vendor Bid Security Total Bid Amount Thomas & Sons Construction Inc. 10% Bid Bond $ .893,649.48 Rogers, MN Progressive Contractors, Inc. 10% Bid Bond $ 848,573.32 St. Michael, MN Shafer Contracting Inc.. 10% Bid Bond $ 978,082.20 Shafer, MN The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 29, 2001 City Council Meeting. Nancy Gibbs City Clerk L~ • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MAY 29, 2001 RESOLUTION 123 REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE L. ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SI~ATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ s/ ,~ y~ .ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) request for a drainage easement between Emerson Avenue and Richfield Lake over park land, which can be .described as the easterly extension of the south half of 64th Street between Emerson Avenue and Richfield Lake. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution granting the drainage easement between Emerson Avenue and Richfield Lake as requested by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said drainage easement on behalf of the City of Richfield. II. BACKGROUND The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is in the process of extending an HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lane on I-35W from just north of 76th Street to approximately 42nd Avenue in Minneapolis. The completed project will generate more storm water runoff than has previously been generated. In order to use Richfield Lake for rate and water quality control, it is necessary for MnDOT to move the waterfrom I-35W to Richfield Lake through pipes. MnDOT 0529stormesmt therefore needs a place to put those pipes. A storm sewer main will be constructed in 64th Street from I-35W to Emerson Avenue then across parkland to the Lake. A drainage easement is necessary for the park portion. of the proposed new storm main. MnDOT has requested that Richfield grant the necessary easement. City staff has agreed to bring the easement to the City Council for consideration at this time so MnDOT can continue with plans for the I-35W project. The adopted 2001. Capital Improvement Budget includes a Richfield Lake stormwater retention pond. There will be a public hearing when the construction plans for the .pond are brought. to Council for consideration. MnDOT will participate in the cost of constructing the pre-treatment pond around Richfield Lake that will treat all storm water entering Richfield Lake. Richfield Lake .already accepts runoff from I-35W and, with the stormwater retention pond, is capable of accepting the increased amount of runoff from this I-35W improvement. The City plans to use Richfield Lake and the planned perimeter pre-treatment pond as an amenity to the park land surrounding the lake as well as for the planned re-development of the area which includes the Lyndale Garden Center site. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Richfield has been a leader in the metropolitan area in the treatment of storm water and the protection of storm water ponds. This project will decrease the pollutant load that enters the main body of Richfield Lake. It will also provide additional storage volume in the Richfield . Lake area. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • None known at this time. C. FINANCIAL • MnDOT will pay to the City of Richfield the appraised value of $700 for this easement. D. LEGAL • None known at this time. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATTnN(~l • ~ouncn could decline to approve this easement; however, MnDOT would then file for condemnation by Eminent Domain. I V . ATTACHMENTS I • H copy of the proposed resolution granting the easement. • A copy of MnDOT Right of Way Plat No. 27-114 • A copy of the proposed drainage easement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None expected at this time. • • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ACROSS PARKLAND SURROUNDING RICHFIELD LAKE TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD WHEREAS, The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) desires to drain storm water from the widened I-35W to Richfield Lake for runoff rate and water quality control; and WHEREAS, The City of Richfield desires to accommodate the storm water runoff from I-35W in Richfield Lake; and WHEREAS, It is necessary for the City of Richfield to grant to MnDOT a drainage easement for the placement of a storm sewer main across parkland surrounding Richfield Lake to convey storm water from I-35W to Richfield Lake; and WHEREAS, MnDOT will pay to the City of Richfield the appraised value of $700 for said easement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the City of Richfield hereby: • 1) Grants to the Minnesota Department of Transportation a drainage easement across parkland surrounding Richfield Lake as described on the attached document labeled. "Parcel 70"; and 2) Authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk of Richfield to execute said easement document on behalf of the City of Richfield. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 29th day of May, 2001. ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, .City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor • • • • ~~ J ~ ~~~ ~i ~ ~ -. ~ w ~. w w~ v +1 31 O 31 4 8 R A ~8 R ~ z o Z 0 ° zr - - - - m a _ u ~ No = w w N m ti D y _ Z D w _ ~ ~ m ~ rn . $ $S o . M U to ; 0 0 :+ w o o Z ~ - -- _ _ OD r ~o n N O -, ~~ T l O w o ~ ~9~ u N J` ~ u 0 .1 w -Ni i ~ o ~ m u N Riw, ~ ~ i I I u u y I ,. i .- i ... - I :. - ., i ... ,. ~O ~, -- m ~ ~ ~ K - E%IST• T.H. 75^ R/^ INTER ST ATE ~ = o -~. n '^ a I ~ ( ~ ~ ~; i ~ i i =a, ~~ i, i. ~ ~ i._~ .. ,r ~ . _, . i . ~ I r~ n m GIRARD AVENUE m o -, .~ w 7C u ~ .. m // Bio °w I ^ , - D _ ~ _ N y Z - w ess ~ . S ° -m w -_ _.._ N _ ~ °• I ~I u ~. ~ _ - ~~ I I O y -~-- ~ .~ i N a `----'•----L----~'- --- - m wn o~ , °: "~ ~~ ~ ^ y~ s_ '_ $~ ^ u _~ n ~m a oN ~ y In u m .o w n w~ N a p ~ _ I N z ~ >~ -r s I N N C~ a\ > ... A D ~ ~ 2 82 c ~c ~0 z ;c s ~~ ~ D _ '~ N v ~ ~ o o = s,, m m ~ N BJ O C] ~ Z ~ N 9 i s 0 I , ~ _ ~ By "~ Efi ey ToTINc e// ~CCF Sf C~r~4 ~~ m ~ i m~ a ~ -_ F+'S, ~ m ~ i- ~ I I i i I .N ~ I _ o m ~ rH a ~~ti ~ I i I ~.~ I I o= yrc ~- • ~ m ~ =° O ° ^ ~. I _ _ _ m m ~JJ, " Raw I _ Z - ... __ .. __. N 1'n I y y I C I ~ ~~ ~ EMERSON AVENUE ~ 1 ~'` N zn ~) o m - o :~ ~~a ~T io n i O <_ r ~' O ss ~ ' `~F Ut 0 ~ ~ + o0 s = - -- m 2 ~ ~ ~ n .. ~~ ~ ~7 +o r e $ Z ~ - - a C - D ~ z~ Z In > Z ~~ s g _ ^ _ _ s ~ ~ C --- - ----- -- - ~r ~ 7o a+3 1 m ~ ~^ m ~ I ~ o i <O~~O - w w .~ u 7c N - Z n frml ~ u ~ B/6 ~ m u N 111 ~ m N > ~ I - ~ P ° w W N m -, ~ m~ N ~ ~ i i o W~ (n e J c~+~~ o DUPONT AVENUE '~ IH~~~~EASEYENT ~ N ~ -' ~ n I V 1 0 ~o 'mow d ., ~' LN o~a~~aa U D o m - ~--- ----~ ----1- ={ --- 9nN3rtl tiaUSa~ ~ m w o'N > n ~ ~ I '-~-- -- ~ ^, o A R~ a ~ ~'~ - e7 - - O y n m t "- i 2S .'t 09 .~-~ - 7c N N w ' ~ ~ ~ . ~ r -. I i .. i ~., r~ I u - a y N i ~ rG ~ P d -~1 N N = N (~ Z m ~ ~ N .- I 1 . - ~ o - s a m 0 ~ ' -' I ~ -.. I '~ A9 m ~ u __ -r _-.__ _ __..-_ _ _-_ _-__.-_ c ~ m > o D i ~ -~ r0 n i I s s ~ N m m m m m m m - - - - - w $ = ~ ~ m $ w o ~ ~ ~' ~ m lZi ° $ - $ o m r m m m - - - m a m o m " m m 8 m o u nmr Z M w b R ~ R - ~ R E R o ~ ~ a w r - u - ww $ m - " u ~ o u o e u o ~ _° . c mn 0 ? S ~ a p H _ ~ H ~ _ r H » y O y p O r p O ~ p O p O p O p O C ~N y M S ~ y O O ~ In -1 D .~ 2 ~ .Ni w R _ _ u & 8 5 ~ . ~ u ~ » o .~ : o `C » ~ . M w ' ~ , . w _ w m D . _ _ tn a - - ~ N ~ - - _ p _ _ p _ _ S i ~ O ~ N ~ y O ~ N o a - _ _ - _ ti y Z ,.,~ ~~ N= - 0 0 N N .n a ~ Dy ~ - I i Z ~ i ~ ~ m g ! o ~ ' ai z ~ ~ r i o N eTe g--~--- - -~ ~ COLFAX AVENUE $ $ I '•' ~ ~ .-1 __n _-_ _ : „ ~ : e+ ~~ • 837 i T p L~ ~-.y ~ = O V1 1 m i -~ r w I ~ I .., ~ o ~ ~ D ~ ~ H ~ IF- O ~ n 7~ O Z ~ I •'•~ m 1--1 m ~ ~ m ff•11 1 i N ~ w u I z; s s (] gel ~ N w m a __.. .. y _ ~ zz n m ~ ~~~ mz C r ~:" uo ~ ~ N V1 ~ ~ m YNi n + u Z ~ ... > D >E I ~~~ ;~ c _ _ m Z Z p i i - + Z = 1•--1 ~ °~ Z o ~ mmm~ G7z ~ r B : ~ S S ~ ~ $ 8 8 8 8 l 1 4 4 P ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ o E 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 ~ _8 o ~ P3 ~ R4 ~ ,~ 1 I D ; ~ ~ ~ Y: - ~ 3 ~ 91 ~ 81 ~l N N 9t 9l o ~ : p ° ~ ~ ~ ~ : 8 : w m 8 P.° S ° ° 8 ~ ° N ~ ~ RI o w _ ~ ° ,. - 8 .. w o s CD u w O O S M O M- L p S u r S ~ S -. w - rrJJ N ~ S M N S Y ~ i M a S S u S m O = s s s 8 ~ 8 °0- 8". w 8 3 -° 8 ~ f: .". St :, . .$ . .' » 0 » 8 » - N Y C ~ In Y R R » ~S o Y fNi S N ~ o ~ ' . ° w o ~ .N". o + R '~" = 8 8 R p _ i v w N 'S 4 ~ ~ 44 `N^ M : 4 x : 4 Y 4 » ° ~ 4 4 4 ~ 4 '1 4 9 ~ 4 4 4 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ N -- w P ~ y O N N N O y r N N M V O a N O u M P Y ~ S m >= 0 0 m DS^+ 0 0 00 ~N= H m ~ O O ~> m ~ an m ~ o m n m mmmm ~ i z mm z 0 mmz zjm~ ~ m i z<zo •° o m o " ~~m~n ~ o~O~ y mr- 20 to mrZZm < rm-1 C -~ rm-1 O p ooh z z . . ov~-- '+ i ' ~ .. ~ n i a z v+ n 7c..<(~-I '~ ~ Z O I Cn o Z OD I c> _ m ~.. _>~ nl Z N ~1 m C ~ m y ^Z.ZI I r~-. ~~ z ~ I = ,~•N Z~ mi N m > m - - ~ > I m Z Z to ~--~ ~ ° i = o BRYANT AVE NUE ~ c ~ O O = ~ ,~ ' ------ , L N -+>so ~~ <In inz D v s a ~ ~ ~ ~ r Z ~ m ~ i R = Z> iN np .,, O r I ° y z my~-1 "{fTl tn 7C W \ y ~ ~~m ~ mmN N ~ U D a N D o ~.~.~W V D Y N N ~ ~ ~ N T O -_ 111 D l D ~ W , ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~ _ ~ y m u I N _- I y ~ ~ Z o p m Z Z Z Z A• O~ ,~ N N2r ~ > m G=•1 w o ~ NO Z m N ~ A DR ~.y.o ~ ~ T. E. IN STREE T w o B70 ~ ~ ~ s n x L iCH A ~i rsn 811 12 m r VENUE a m ~I IDRI CH AVEN UE ~ "' ~ 702 ~ = z ~ ~ B29 w v lnc~ R>'"- ~~_ m ~~ ~~ ~ s2s r y=y w ~ tiD 7C ~ + ~- CIn N F ~1 ~ O U ~ S w N ~ Z ~ i u - ___ m w o ,~~ D m m n ~ N u Z m, c m ~ ~ D ~ ~ j Oa yi O _ .l ~ T.E. IN STREET =~ ~ J~ IYNDALE AVENUE ~ ~ .D > s 1 ~ r :, N b 621 n r N 3 us ~ a = .+m R - n'o R1 z 70 D a ZN~~z -+N ~ I=~ ~ ~~ T Z ~uo n H~ - m (n ~n N G W O+ -•1 O ZO iC Q1 ~ O «'~ ~ ~~ R c i ~ V D v i y r+ m~ ~ N ti -~ $ a z ~ ~-+ ~~ ~titixr~ " ~ mi •^ O •.. • m N ,s r ••~ = Z Y 7 ~ .7 ~ ~ y ~. ~ ~ a N ~ e 1~.1 NE SEC. te~ ~~ elf o N r~ LYNDALE AVENUE ° ._.. ~ ~.. . ~~ • . s ~ S ~aae O~Z#~;~~ ~~ OWN ~~~~~ ~~ Nr 8~3$€319 ~p~ ~ gqq'~ ~ i ~ 3~ ~ ~ N ~, .- . Y ~ ~~~~~ 4~ s3 9 3 ~ P ~ ~ ° I ~ Iw ;ji ~ ~ i ~ ~ o •. ~ I ~: a' ~ y; N~77 e ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ • ° ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ = 5 ~ '~~ii.~~ xQ 4;0~9 ~3 ~ ~ .~ ° ~s~9 ~.~7 ~~ ~ ~ 3 '~ . R ~ i ~ ..»R ~~ 3~~~ ~g ~ N 1~ •° 33 ~•~r 9 ~ • ~ 9° ~i = ~ ~ O V ~I• ~ `• Q ~$ 9 ~ $$ ~~ =a '~ t ~ ~ `~ 3I ~ 3 a !~ 9 N y m N = "~ 0 O ~ N w , N V r N N ~ _r Y v~3~ 9Q;_ :~~o 9 t VY ~s - _~ '~~ ~~ s py_ ~ • ~ N ~ •I ~~ ~a ~ ~~ ~ a n Y - ~ '~'° Q~ =9 ~~ z 0 ~ s 9 • ~~a~l ~ y ~~# t N $~ 0 0 O f J N L N N N N N ~ W 10 ~ W 1 W 0 O l t W +I N ~ N ~ ~ O A > > s m r K t- ~ s m ~ s c < o ~ ° 1~ 1 ~ ~ 1 m y z -+ ~ s y to ~ to z m i > m s m -< m > 1 r a +Oi > ~p ~ ~ ~ m _ s a ~ n ~ ~ 91 A tI ~ N I' i ° 3 r ~ ~ i A a ° ~ ~ am i', r m m ~ a o ~ N m -- ~ ~ , N N y Z O ~ 9 W r O r 0 O I" O O O W O > > U 7c 1 >z -~ -~ 7t -~ -r -1 to t -i 1 ~ W ~U N N N t0 /b ~ . I r ~ > N to m W m j ~ ~ r ~ m j Q y ~ U ~ O ~ ~ ~1 t0 N a a ~ U Z O ~ O m v ~/ N t!1 W 'M N H 01 p O N m tll U tL Ip O N fJ U ~t U r W ~ t0 O Ot to U 01 . W { ~ tNn a O O N O r P ~ ~ d ~ N U _ N ~ W i 01 ~ w ~ 1 tG N ~ U a 0/ m N t0 ~ w M U UI U 10 • to > ~ ~ ~ Z~. _ ~ _ ~. ~ _Y t I' ~ ; m _ m N U - c Z ~ i N W r N W m U N N ~ a w N i~ t jt V w W a i.1 ~ r s ~ _ '_ r - - m ~ o z E ~ z - N I ! 7 O ~, F _ .__ ~ N __. _ _~ _;a ~ _~ a j < e - A ~ m ~ _ z W W - ~ O m p r N i P uy l V a o - _ _~~ 9 c b i ~~ b a m m m m m+1r >m m r m .1 m .1 m r > n m mmm m m m t m ~ 5 o ._ .~ ~Q 1 a .. N ~~ . #$la ~ ° i s'li ; •3sl~9 t •~ 3~ i;i~ s ~_~; ~~~g 4~~1 ~~~ ,: O~°~ !~'~_ 9i~~ 'u • gl~ ~~ 1 ~~ 3g w: tae §3~ ,a e `R~ €pp~n m2~ n$ 9 2~ :~ ~$ W~ N a_ pDN n C im i~ NIOI a- rzf ~1- 1 ~_ ro ~ti O~ ~~ S = Z O H vmrzna =Z zzoo~ -irZr1 o .~.t ~ ran (/1 -~ > ~ o -1. :~~~= n ZssN nQ o rn to N "TJ sv:utw ~D 0 0 ~ r ~1 •1 u D -~ W mma -~~ ;~ m oom Zz ==a o-r °"~ o r~~p -J T~ N ro ~ m m _r ,rte = 1.a ~ '"' ~' n N N 2 Z a a ~ Z ~ ~ -il " O 0 ~ ~ N n ~{ ~1 O Z DRAINAGE EASEMENT C.S. 2782 (35W-394) 919 Parcel 70 Date: County of Hennepin For and in consideration of the sum of Seven Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($700.00), City of Richfield, a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota, Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to the State of Minnesota, Grantee, a drainage easement in perpetuity for the construction. and maintenance of a drainage system, together with the unrestricted right to improve the same, free and-clear of all encumbrances, on the following described premises in Hennepin County, Minnesota: All of the following: A drainage easement in perpetuity in that part of Government Lot 5 of Section 28, Township 28 North, Range 24 West, shown as Parcel 70 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-114 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Tales in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, and designated as a permanent drainage easement, the title thereto being registered as evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 251117. Grantor is the owner of the above described premises and has the lawful right and authority to convey and grant the easements herein granted. Grantee shall have the right of ingress to and egress from the hereinbefore described property for the purpose of maintaining and repairing said drainage system. The said Grantor does hereby release the State of Minnesota from any claims for damages to the fair market value of the above-described area covered by the drainage easement and for its use, or any claims for damages to the fair market value of the remaining property of Grantor caused by the use of the drainage easement, including grading and removal of materials from said easement area for highway purposes. Notwithstandingtpe foregoing, Grantor does not release any claims it may have as a result of the negligence of the Grantee, its agents or contractors, in conducting any of the above activities. CITY OF RICHFIELD _ sy Its Mayor And tts Clerk ;~ - Page 1 of 2 • AGENDA SECTION: public Iiearin~ AGENDA ITEM # 10 REPORT # 12 2 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 • • REPORT PREPARED BY: SCOTT WILLIAMS, PLANNING AND RESOURCE SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~ n (, C.~(.NL. ~ 'SIG`NATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ ~~~~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing for consideration of a capital expense project, the 800 Megahertz Public Safety radios stem, which could exceed $500,000. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the ublic hearin . II. BACKGROUND Most of Richfield's police and fire radio system is approaching 20 years of age and is in need of replacement. In 1999, a decision was made that joining the Regional 800 MHz Radio System was the most cost-effective option for upgrading Public Safety's communications system. On March 27, 2000, the City Council approved a contract with Motorola and a cooperative agreement with Hennepin County to join the Regional 800 MHz Public Safety Radio System. Originally, the total capital investment for this system was expected to be less that $500,000; however, in conducting the final system design, it was decided that the existing space available for radio equipment was not adequate. Fortunately, staff was able to negotiate a deal with Sprint PCS to construct joint equipment space for both the 800 MHz radio equipment and Sprint's PCS equipment. At the April 9, 2001 meeting, the Council approved a lease with Sprint that requires them to construct this space in return for a $70,000 credit on their tower lease. Although not a direct cost to the City, the $70,000 could be considered part of the capital cost of this project. 0529800MHz • If the Sprint lease credit is considered part of the total system cost, then the total capital investment for 800 MHz will exceed the $500,000 threshold for a required public hearing. A public hearing is recommended to avoid any future confusion or misunderstanding. No other Council action is required. All other approvals are in place for the project to continue as planned. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Under the City Charter, a public hearing is required for capital projects over $500,000. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • When this project was first approved, the total costs were projected to be under $500,000. The credit on the Sprint PCS lease for the construction of equipment space, if considered part of the capital costs of the project, puts the total capital .investment over $500,000. • The required notification of the public hearing was published in the Richfield Sun Current on May 16, 2001. C. FINANCIAL • The total capital costs for this project are as follows: • Motorola Contract: $266,655. • .Cooperative agreement with Hennepin County to provide microwave link into system: $200,000 ($20,000 paid annually over 10 years). • Miscellaneous site preparation (tower modifications, electrical work, grounding system): $15,000. • Sprint PCS lease credit: $70,000. D. LEGAL • To ensure full compliance with the City Charter, this public hearing has been scheduled. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None. V. ATTACHMENTS • None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. r~ LJ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HARING 9 121 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 • REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ Goa ~ " ~ G~ .SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ ~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Cancellation of the public hearing and second reading of a cable television ordinance for Everest Connections Cor oration. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Cancel the public hearing and second reading of the cable television ordinance for Everest Connections Cor oration. II. BACKGROUND In April 2000, Everest Connections Corporation (Everest) and WideOpenWest, LLC (WOW) approached the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) regarding the process to be undertaken to obtain a cable television franchise in the five-city SWSCC franchise area. In compliance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238, the SWSCC assisted its member municipalities in conducting the process for the granting of a cable television franchise in each respective member city. The process consisted of the preparation of a Notice of Intent to Franchise and • Official Application Form. These documents were published by the City and two proposals were received; one form Everest and one from WOW. The SWSCC, through its legal counsel Moss & Barnett, conducted a review of the legal, technical 0529Everest and financial qualifications of both applicants and submitted a report to the City Council regarding these matters. • The City then conducted a public hearing in compliance with Minnesota Statutes to receive input from all interested parties. Following completion of the public hearing, the City adopted resolutions finding both Everest and WOW possessed the requisite qualifications to own and operate a cable television system within the City. The SWSCC was then instructed by the member cities to negotiate with Everest and WOW to prepare a Cable Television Franchise Ordinance that would be consistent with all applicable local, state and federal laws. A franchise ordinance agreement was negotiated with both applicants and, subsequently, the City of Richfield approved the first reading of a Cable Television Franchise Ordinance with Everest. ' Since the first reading of this franchise ordinance with Everest, staff has received a letter from the company indicating that it is not going to pursue the cable franchise in the SWSCC at this time. However, Everest indicated that it still finds the SWSCC to be an attractive market and may pursue a franchise again in the future. The letter does not indicate any certain timeframe for a future franchise. On April 25, 2001 the SWSCC considered the current position of the Everest franchise ordinance and has recommended that each member City take action to either cancel or repeal any further action on this ordinance. • If Everest decides to reenter the SWSCC market area in the future, the. ordinance process will start over at that time. However, the basic terms of a franchise agreement between the. SWSCC and Everest have been agreed upon and would likely require only minor alteration. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Richfield has followed the legal and procedural recommendations of the SWSCC legal counsel in completing the franchising process. • The franchisee is not in the position to accept the franchise at this time. • The SWSCC has recommended that each member city either cancel or repeal the franchise ordinance for Everest at this time. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The required legal notice for the public hearing and second reading was published in the Richfield Sun Current on January 31, 2001. The • second reading has been continued since February. • Everest has informed the City that it is not in a position to accept a franchise at this time. 0514Everest • The SWSCC acted on the Everest franchise matter at its meeting of April 25, 2001 and recommends the City take action now to cancel the • ordinance process. C. FINANCIAL • There is no financial impact of repealing the ordinance at this time, other than the investment of staff time. Other expenses have been reimbursed by Everest for processing their application. D. LEGAL • Mr. Brian Grogan, legal counsel for SWSCC, is recommending that the City follow the action suggested by the SWSCC. IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • None. V. ATTACHMENTS • None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • • 0514Everest • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # gI, REPORT # 120 ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of an amendment to City Code Section 416 regarding sign regulations at outdoor sports arenas and complexes. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct first reading of an attached ordinance amendment to allow scoreboard panels around scoreboards at outdoor sports arenas and complexes and schedule second reading and public hearing for June 25, 2001. U III. BACKGROUND Richfield Baseball, Inc., an association that organizes little league baseball in Richfield, is requesting permission to install outdoor advertising signs around the perimeter of four scoreboards at Roosevelt Park. Richfield Baseball, Inc. states that by selling such space to advertisers, they will be able to generate revenue to cover some of the costs for operating little league baseball. Richfield Baseball, Inc. is not affiliated directly with the City, but does have a partnership with the Recreation Services Department to provide little league services. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 0529-scoreboardsigns NAME, TITLE A. POLICY • All parks in Richfield are zoned `R', single family residential. City code [416.09 (2)(a)] currently states that "Outdoor Advertising Displays" are not permitted in `R' districts in Richfield. To allow advertising signs around the scoreboards at Roosevelt Park, an amendment to City Code section 416 will be necessary. • The proposed ordinance amendment adds a new sign definition- - "Scoreboard Panel" to the sign ordinance section 416.01. • The proposed. ordinance amendment adds a fourth permitted sign- Scoreboard Panel-in the R, R-1, and MR-1 Districts in Section 416.07 (2)(a). Such "Scoreboard Panels" will only be allowed at "outdoor sports arenas or complexes". (Qualifying sites include in addition to Roosevelt Park include Donaldson, Taft and Lincoln Parks owned by the City.) Additional criteria for approval are also outlined in the proposed amendments to this section, including maximum size, height, and area of "Scoreboard Panels". • Permits will still be required for Scoreboard Panels, as the City currently requires for any signs in the City (416.03, Subdivision 1). • Variances will still be prohibited (416.03 Subdivision 7), meaning that no signs will be .allowed that do not conform with ordinance requirements. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Representatives of Richfield Baseball, Inc. have worked with City staff and with neighbors of Roosevelt Park to-write the proposed ordinance amendment. As drafted, the ordinance amendment satisfies both the desires of Richfield .Baseball, Inc. and the concerns of neighbors around Roosevelt Park. The proposed ordinance amendment also would allow other, similar outdoor sports arenas and complexes to place scoreboard panels around .their scoreboards. • The process for implementation of this ordinance would be as follows: first reading May 29; second reading June 25; publication July 3; effective August 4. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has advised staff that an ordinance amendment for signs that only applies to one parcel of land -such as a specific park - cannot be created. Instead, any new ordinance must apply to all properties with the "same characteristics". Therefore, if adopted this ordinance amendment will apply to all "outdoor sports arenas and complexes" in the City. • The public hearing and second reading would be scheduled for June 25, 2001. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Deny the ordinance amendment at first reading. V. ATTACPIMENTS • Draft Ordinance Amendment VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • No parties are expected at this first reading. Representatives of Richfield Baseball, Inc. and park neighbors will be notified and invited to the public hearing on June 25, 2001. • BILL NO. s AMENDMENT TO SECTION 416 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:. Section 416.01, Subdivision 46 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: rd Panel" means anon-illuminated sign which is affixed to Section 416.07, Subdivision 2, Section (a) Number 4 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: regulations: C_J attractive. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day. of 2001. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # $j~ REPORT # 119 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~' REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NAME. TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of an amendment to City Code Section 416 regarding sign regulations in high- density residential areas (MR-2 and MR-3). I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct first reading of an attached ordinance amendment to allow more than one area identification sign per parcel in the MR-2 and MR-3 districts and schedule second reading and ublic hearing for June 25, 2001. M III. BACKGROUND City Code section 416.07, Subdivision 2(b) regulates signs in MR-2 and MR-3 districts in Richfield. Currently, only one area identification sign is allowed per property in this district, regardless of how many buildings, frontages, or entrances a multi-building apartment complex has. The current code is too restrictive in that it does not allow multiple Area Identification Signs for those complexes with multiple frontages or entrances. For example, several of the apartment complexes along 1- 494 have several buildings and entrances on more than one street, but are currently only allowed one sign identifying the area. Allowing more than one sign as the attached draft amendment proposes will allow these residential complexes to better identify themselves at each of their entrances. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION i A. POLICY The current sign ordinance is too strict and does not adequately allow for multiple signs where they would be appropriate in high-density residential areas (MR-2 and MR-3 zoned districts). B. CRITICAL ISSUES The proposed ordinance.includes provisions hat would unit area identification signs to arterial streets. • The proposed amendment would prohibit area identification signs from being located within 300 feet of single-family residential districts. The amendment also prohibits more than one area identification sign per street frontage. • The proposed ordinance does not allow any increase in the size of area identification signs. No increase in sign size is recommended because the current size limits are adequate. C. FINANCIAL • N/A • D. LEGAL • The city attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment and her suggestions have been incorporated. • Second reading and a public hearing would be scheduled for June 25, 2001. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deny the ordinance amendment at first reading. V. ATTACHMENTS • Draft Ordinance Amendment VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING Ron Mehl, Dominium Development • BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 416 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 416.07, Subd. 2(b)(3) of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: Area Identification Signs. One freestanding sign not exceeding 24 square feet in sign area or 4 feet in height is permitted per area with 3 or more multi-unit residential buildings. For through lots or properties with frontages on more than one public street. one area identification sign shall be allowed per frontage. with the following stipulations: (i) Such signs shall only be allowed on principal or minor arterial streets (ii) Such signs shall not be located within 300 feet of the. closest parcel classified as R, R-1, or MR-1. .(iii) Only one area identification sign shall be allowed per street frontage ~v) When more than one sign is permitted due to multiple frontages, each permitted sign shall be oriented toward its respective frontage. It is the intent to prohibit lots with multiple frontages from combining sign rights so as to erect larger signs or additional signs that are oriented to only one frontage. (v) Such signs`shall not be closer than 10 feet from any street right-of- way and not closer than 50 feet from any street intersection. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 2001. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • STAFF REPORT CONSENT 8J 118 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVE DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR • NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: STEVE DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~ ' SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading consideration of the attached ordinance repealing a cable television ordinance for WideO enWest, LLC and set ublic hearin and second readin for June 11, 2001. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the first reading of the attached proposed ordinance repealing a cable television ordinance for WideOpenWest, LLC and set public hearing and second reading for June 11, 2001. II. BACKGROUND In April 2000, WideOpenWest, LLC (WOW) and Everest Connections Corporation (Everest) approached the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSSC) regarding the process to be undertaken to obtain a cable television franchise in the five-city SWSCC franchise area. In compliance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238, the SWSCC assisted its member municipalities in conducting the process for the granting of a cable television franchise in each respective member city. The process consisted of the preparation of a Notice of Intent to Franchise and .Official Application Form. These documents were published by the City and two proposals were received; one from WOW and one from Everest. The SWSCC, through its legal counsel Moss & Barnett, conducted a review of the legal, technical ~• 0529WOW and financial qualifications of both applicants and submitted a report to the City Council regarding these matters. The City then conducted a public hearing in compliance with Minnesota statutes to receive input from all interested parties. Following completion of the public hearing, the City adopted resolutions finding both WOW and Everest possessed the requisite qualifications to -own and operate a cable television system within the City. The SWSCC was then instructed by the member cities to negotiate with WOW and Everest to prepare a Cable Television Franchise Ordinance that would be consistent with all applicable local, state and federal laws. A Franchise Ordinance agreement was negotiated with both applicants and subsequently the City of Richfield approved the first and second reading of a Cable Television Franchise Ordinance with WOW. An approved summary of the ordinance was published and became effective in March 2001. However, since the date of the franchise ordinance approval, the SWSCC has. been notified by WOW that it was not now in a position to accept the franchise ordinance. WOW cited a change in the economic climate and the general availability of venture capital as a major reason for their departure from the SWSCC market at this time. They may return to this market at some time in the future. The SWSCC considered this matter on April 25, 2001 and has recommended that each of the member cities either cancel or repeal any cable franchise ordinance granted for WOW. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Richfield has followed the legal and procedural recommendations of the SWSCC legal counsel in completing the franchising process. • Since the approval of the Franchise Ordinance by the City of Richfield, WOW has indicated in writing to the SWSCC that it is not in a position at the current time to accept the cable TV franchise at this time. • The SWSCC has considered the current situation with WOW and has recommended that each of the member cities either cancel or repeal their cable TV franchise ordinance with WOW at this time. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The public hearing and second reading of the ordinance would be scheduled for June 11, 2001. C. FINANCIAL • There is no financial impact of repealing the ordinance at this time, other than the investment of staff time. Other expenses have been reimbursed by WOW for processing their application. D. LEGAL • Brian Grogan; the attorney for the SWSCC, has recommended that the City repeal the franchise ordinance. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • None. V. ATTACHMENTS • First reading draft of ordinance repealing cable franchise agreement with WOW. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • • BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2001-3 REPEALING THE GRANT OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO WIDEOPENWEST MINNESOTA, LLC THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Cable Television Franchise Agreement Ordinance No. 2001-3, which granted a cable television franchise to 1/VideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC is hereby repealed, due to the franchiee's failure to accept the terms of the franchise. Section 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 2001. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING .MAY 29, 2001 CONSENT 8I 117 REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~~ L SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of authorization of lease for monopole wireless communications antenna at Madison Park to Qwest Wireless. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Authorize the City Manager to execute a lease agreement with Qwest Wireless for a monopole wireless communications antenna tower at Madison Park. IL BACKGROUND The City has previously approved lease agreements with APT, Sprint and Airtouch Cellular at the Penn and Logan Avenue water towers. The City also recently approved a lease with Sprint for location of an antenna on the radio tower at City Hall. The proposed Qwest Wireless tower would be the first freestanding monopole of this type in Richfield. After considerable discussion, Qwest Wireless and the City have come to tentative approval of a lease agreement including plans for the antenna and ground structure required to support the antenna facilities. The major terms of the lease, which follow very closely a model lease developed by the League of Minnesota Cities, are as follows: 0529Qwest 1. The lease is to begin not later than February 1, 2002 pending approval of other agencies such as the FCC and construction of the antenna and run for a term of five years. The term of the lease may be extended for four additional five-year periods. 2. The lease for the tower antenna space shall be $10,200 for the initial year and be increased annually by five percent or the CPI, whichever is greater, over the previous year's annualized rent. However, the first year would be prorated depending upon the construction schedule. 3. The antenna facility that would be constructed by Qwest would be incorporated. into the northern edge of the park, causing minimal intrusion into the park. 4. The Recreation Services Division and Community Services Commission have worked very closely on this project and have signed off on the overall project as well as design details. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The antenna tower will not cause any problems or interference with the communications of the City and will "fit" into the park. • The lease, in its entirety, provides for many favorable provisions and protections for the City of Richfield, and in most respects either equals or exceeds the standards set forth in the League of Minnesota Cities' model lease. • Qwest Wireless has agreed to the terms of the lease agreement. • The Planning Commission and the City Council have previously given approval for a Conditional Use Permit for this antenna installation. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Staff is requesting approval at the May 29 City Council meeting so that Qwest may begin activity in conjunction with scheduling this antenna construction in early 2002. C. FINANCIAL • The $10,200 annual lease payment is a fair amount and is commensurate with what Bloomington is being paid for a similar tower by Qwest. The Richfield annual lease payment is greater than most cities with similar Qwest towers in the metro area. • The antenna will also serve as an additional light tower for the park, saving the cost of constructing such a light standard. • Revenue from this lease will be directed into the Recreation Enterprise Fund. D. LEGAL • The lease document has been drafted rev' sewed. and approved by the City Attorney's Office. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The City Council could seek other terms for the lease agreement. • The City Council could disapprove the lease of the park space. V. ATTACHMENTS • Lease document. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • SITE NAME: SITE NUMBER: COMMUNICATIONS SITE LEASE AGREEMENT (GROUND) This Communications Site Lease Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into this day of , 2001, between Qwest Wireless, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company ("Tenant"), and the City of Richfield ("Landlord"). For good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Premises. .Landlord is the owner of a parcel of land located in the City of Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, commonly known as 6700 Portland Avenue South and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached and made a part of this Agreement (the "Land"). Landlord hereby leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from .Landlord on annon-exclusive basis, approximately L_) square feet of the Land as described. in Exhibit B attached and made a part of this Agreement (the "Premises"). 2. Use. The Premises may be used by Tenant solely for the construction, maintenance and operation of facilities described below and the provision of wireless communications services. Landlord shall process in good faith, at Tenant's expense, any application for licenses, permits and any and all other necessary approvals that may be required for Tenant's intended use of the Premises. 3. Tests and Construction. Tenant shall have the right at any time following the full execution of this Agreement to enter upon the Land for the purpose of making inspections, appropriate engineering and boundary surveys, soil test borings, and other reasonably necessary. tests, and for the purpose of constructing the Tenant Facilities (as defined in Paragraph 7(a) below). Tenant shall not be liable to Landlord or any third party on account of any pre-existing defect or condition on or with respect to the Land and Premises, whether or not- such defect or condition is disclosed by Tenant's inspection. 4. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be five (5) years commencing on _February 1, 2002 ("Commencement Date") and terminating on the fifth (5th) anniversary of the Commencement Date (the "Term") unless otherwise terminated as provided in Paragraph 11. Tenant shall have the right to extend the Term for four (4) successive five (5) year periods (the "Renewal Terms") on the same terms and conditions as set forth herein. This Agreement shall automatically be extended for each successive Renewal Term unless Tenant notifies Landlord of its intention not to renew at least thirty (30) days prior to commencement of the succeeding Renewal Term. 5. Base Rent. Within 15 days of the Commencement Date and thereafter in advance on January lstlof each year during the Term, Tenant shall pay to Landlord as base rent $10,200 and 00/100 DOLLARS ($850.00) per month (Base Rent ). Base Rent for any fractional year at the beginning or at the end of the Term or Renewal Term shall be prorated. Base Rent shall be payable to Landlord at Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423, Attention: City Manager. Base Rent shall be increased annually on the anniversary of the Commencement Date by the greater of: (a) five (5) percent (%) of the previous year's annualized Base Rent, or (b) by an amount equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). The CPI shall mean the Consumer Price Index- for all Urban Consumers, All Cities, All Items (1984=100)" as published by the United States Department of Labor Statistics, or if such index shall be discontinued, the successor index, or if there shall be no successor index, such comparable index as mutually agreed upon by the parties. 6. Additional Rent. The Base Rent is compensation for Tenant's use of the Premises. Tenant shall pay additional rent for each additional carrier that locates equipment within the Premises ("Additional Rent"). Tenant shall make an Additional Rent payment annually for each such additional carrier or installation, for the period during which such additional carrier or installation occupies the Premises. Each Additional Rent payment shall be in an amount equal to forty percent (40%) of the then current Base Rent. 7. Facilities; Utilities: Access. (a) Tenant shall erect, maintain and operate on the Premises a 60 foot monopole antenna tower ("Tower"), along with radio communications facilities including utility lines, transmission lines, air conditioned equipment shelter(s), electronic equipment, radio transmitting and receiving antennas, supporting equipment and structures thereto, as described in Exhibit C ("Tenant Facilities"). In connection thCrewith, Tenant has the right to prepare and maintain the Premises for Tenant's business operations and to install transmission lines connecting the antennas to the transmitters and receivers. All of Tenant's construction and installation work shall be performed at Tenant's sole cost and expense and in a good and workmanlike manner. Title to Tenant Facilities shall be held by Tenant. All of Tenant Facilities shall remain Tenant's personal property and are not fixtures. Subject to Landlord's rights in paragraph _ herein, Tenant shall remove all Tenant Facilities at its sole expense upon the expiration or earlier termination of the Agreement; provided, Tenant shall repair any damage to the Premises caused by such removal. This provision shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreeement and may be specifically enforced by Landlord. (b) Tenant shall pay for the electricity it consumes in its operations at the rate charged by the servicing utility company. Tenant shall have the right to draw electricity and other utilities from the existing utilities on the Land or Obtain separate utility Service from any utility company that will provide service to the Land (including a standby power generator for Tenant's exclusive use). Landlord agrees to sign such documents or easements as may be required by said utility companies to provide such service to the Premises, including the grant to Tenant or to the servicing utility company at no cost to the Tenant, of an easement in, over, across or through the Land as required JMS-192882v2 RC 145-310 by such servicing utility company to provide utility services as provided herein. Any easement necessary for such power or other utilities will be at a location acceptable to Landlord and the servicing utility company. (c) Tenant, Tenant's employees, agents, subcontractors, lenders and invitees shall have access to the Premises to Landlord twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week. Tenant shall give reasonable advance notice to Landlord prior to accessing the Premises. Landlord grants to Tenant, and its agents, employees, contractors, guests and invitees, the non-exclusive right for pedestrian and vehiculaz ingress and egress across that portion of the Land described in Exhibit B. Tenant shall ensure that co-locating entities have rights of access to the Premises equivalent to Tenant's rights herein. (d) Landlord shall maintain all access roadways from the nearest public roadway to the Premises in a manner sufficient to allow pedestrian and vehicular access at all times under normal weather conditions. Landlord shall be responsible for maintaining and repairing such roadway, at its sole expense, except for any damage caused by Tenant's use of such roadways. (e) The Tower shall be designed and constructed to be capable of supporting the equipment of three (3) communications providers. Tenant shall permit co-location by three (3) unaffiliated communications providers and shall negotiate commercially reasonable terms for such co-location. 8. Interference. (a) Tenant shall not operate the Tenant Facilities in a manner that will not cause interference to Landlord, or with the existing use by tenants or licensees of the Landlord, provided, that their installations predate that of the Tenant Facilities. All operations by Tenant shall be in compliance with all Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") requirements. Tenant, Landlord and other sublessees of the Premises shall operate their respective equipment in a manner that does not interfere with each others' operation and use of the Premises. (b) Subsequent to the installation of the Tenant Facilities, Landlord. and Tenant shall not permit themselves, or their Tenants to install new equipment on the Tower or Premises, if such equipment is likely to cause interference with operation of communications equipment on the Premises. Such interference shall be deemed a material breach. In the event interference occurs, the interfering party shall take all reasonable steps necessary to eliminate such interference, in a reasonable time period. 9. Taxes. If personal property taxes aze assessed, Tenant shall pay any portion of such taxes directly attributable to the Tenant Facilities including the Tower. Landlord shall pay all real property taxes, assessments and deferred taxes on the Land. 10. Waiver of Landlord's Lien. (a) Landlord waives any lien rights it may have concerning the Tenant Facilities which aze deemed Tenant's personal property and not fixtures, and Tenant has the right to remove the same at any time without Landlord's consent. (b) Landlord acknowledges that Tenant has entered into a financing arrangement including promissory notes and financial and security agreements for the financing of the Tenant Facilities (the "Collateral") with a third party financing entity (and may in the future enter into additional financing arrangements with other financing entities). 11. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated without further liability on thirty (30) days prior written notice as follows: (i) by either party upon a default of any covenant or term hereof by the other party, which default is not cured within such thirty (30) day period, provided, however, that the cure period for any monetary default is ten (10) days from receipt of notice, and provided that if, by its nature, such default is not capable of being cured within 30 days, this Agreement may not be terminated so long as the defaulting party commences appropriate curative action within such 30 day period, and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure to completion as promptly as possible; or (ii) by Tenant if it does not obtain or maintain any license, .permit or other approval necessary for the construction and operation of Tenant Facilities; (iii) by Tenant if Tenant is unable to occupy and utilize the Premises due to an action of the FCC, including without limitation, a take back of channels or change in frequencies; (iv) by Tenant if Tenant determines that the Premises aze not appropriate for its operation for technological reasons, including without limitation, signal interference; or (v) by Landlord if it determines that the Tower substantially impairs the existing use or is likely to substantially impair Landlord's planned use of the Land. 12. Destruction or Condemnation. If the Premises or Tenant Facilities are damaged, destroyed, condemned or transferred in lieu of condemnation, Tenant may elect to terminate this Agreement as of the date of the damage, destruction, condemnation or transfer in lieu of condemnation by giving notice to Landlord no more than forty-five (45) days following the date of such damage, destruction, condemnation or transfer in lieu of condemnation. If Tenant chooses not to terminate this Agreement, Rent shall be reduced or abated in proportion to the actual reduction or abatement of use of the Premises. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Tenant shall be entitled to any separate awazd paid or payable to Tenant that is attributable to the value of Tenant's facilities, the value of unexpired Term, or to moving expenses incurred as a result of any condemnation. 13. Liability Insurance. Tenant, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall procure and maintain on the Premises and on the Tenant Facilities, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance with a combined single limit of at least One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. If such CGL insurance contains a general aggregate limit, the general aggregate limit shall be not less than Two Million and 00/100 ($2,000,000). Such CGL insurance shall cover all liability arising out of or in connection with Tenant's use of the Premises, including liability arising from operations, independent contractors, product-completed operations, personal injury and adverstising injury, and contractually assumed liability. Landlord shall be listed as an additional insured on Tenant's policy. Tenant shall JMS-192882v2 2 RC145-310 annually provide to Landlord a certificate of insurance evidencing the coverage required by this paragraph.. Landlord shall procure standard League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust coverage for any Landlord's Facilities that aze located on the Tower. 14. Waiver of Subrogation. Landlord and Tenant .release each other and their respective principals, employees, representatives and agents, from any claims for damage to any person, the Premises, or to the Tenant Facilities thereon caused by, or that result from, risks insured against under any insurance policies carried by the parties and in force at the time of any such damage. Landlord and Tenant, from time to time, will cause each insurance policy obtained by them to issue appropriate waiver of subrogation rights endorsements to all property insurance policies carried in connection with the Premises only to the extent that Landlord's insurance policy is not compromised. that the insurance company waives all right of recovery by way of subrogation against the other in connection with any damage covered by any policy. Neither Landlord nor Tenant shall be liable to the other for any damage caused by fire or any of the risks insured against under any insurance policy required by paragraph 13. 15. Indemnification. Tenant shall fully indemnify and hold harmless Landlord from any and all costs (including reasonable attorney's fees) and claims, actions, damages, obligations, liabilities and liens which arise out of: (i) construction and operation of Tenant Facilities; (ii) Tenant's breach of this Agreement or (iii) Tenant's use of the Land and Premises pursuant to this Agreement. This indemnity shall not apply to any claims, actions, damages, obligations, liabilities and liens arising from the willful or intentional misconduct by Landlord. This indemnity shall survive termination. Tenant bears all risk of loss and damage to the Tenant Facilities except in the case of the negligence or willful misconduct of Landlord. 16. Limitation of Landlord's Liability. Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary contained herein, if Landlord terminates this Agreement other than as provided in this Agreement, or Landlord negligently causes interruption of the business of Tenant, or for any other breach of this Agreement which causes damage to Tenant, Landlord's liability for damages to Tenant as a result thereof shall be limited to the actual and direct costs of removal, relocation and repair of Tenant Facilities and any other equipment operated by Tenant, and shall specifically exclude any recovery for value of the Tenant's business as a going concern, future expectation of profits, loss of business or profit, or related damages to Tenant. 17. Assignment and Subletting. Tenant may assign this Agreement, or sublet or license the Premises or any portion thereof, subject to Landlord's written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event of an assignment, the assignee shall assume ail of Tenant's obligations herein and shall be deemed a signatory to this Agreement. Tenant shall have the right to assign this Agreement (including any rights to renew) or to sublet all or a part of the Premises, without Landlord's consent to any of Tenant's Affiliates as defined below, on the same terms and conditions hereof. Any such assignee or sublessee shall have the similar right to assign this Agreement (including any rights to renew) or to sublet all or a part of the Premises, without Landlord's consent to any of Tenant's Affiliates, on the same terms and conditions hereof. As used herein, "Tenant's Affiliates" means any corporation or entity which is under common ownership with Tenant, or any corporation or entity which results from a merger or consolidation with Tenant. No transfer or consolidation with Tenant or assignment of the stock of Tenant or any controlling interest in Tenant, whether by sale, merger; exchange or other means, shall constitute an assignment of this Lease. This Agreement shall run with the property and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties,. their respective successors, personal representatives, heirs and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, Tenant may. assign, mortgage, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise transfer without notice or consent its interest in this Agreement to any financing entity, or agent on behalf of any financing entity to whom Tenant (i) has obligations for borrowed money or in respect of guaranties thereof, (ii) has obligations evidenced by bonds, debentures, notes or similaz instruments, or (iii) has obligations under or with respect to letters of credit, bankers acceptances and similaz facilities or in respect of guazanties thereof. Upon issuance of Landlord's written consent, or upon notification to Landlord of any assignment if written consent is not required as provided above, Tenant shall be relieved of ail performance, liabilities, and obligations under this Agreement. 18. Sale of Tower. In the event Tenant sells or transfers ownership of the Tower, Tenant shall be required to assign this Agreement in accordance with paragraph 17 above; except that Tenant shall not be required to assign this Agreement in the event Landlord acquires the Tower as provided in paragraph 25. 19. Warranty of Title and Quiet Eniovment. Landlord warrants that: (i) Landlord owns the Land in fee simple and has rights of access thereto and the Land is free and cleaz of all liens, encumbrances and restrictions; (ii) Landlord has full right to make and perform this Agreement; and (iii) Landlord covenants and agrees with Tenant that upon Tenant paying the Rent and observing and performing all the terms, covenants and conditions on Tenant's part to be observed and performed, Tenant may peacefully and quietly enjoy the Premises subject to all uses and limitations that pre-exist this Agreement. - 20. Re airs. Tenant shall maintain Tenant Facilities including the Tower in a safe and commercially reasonable condition. Tenant shall not be required to make any repairs to the Premises or Land unless such repairs shall be necessitated by reason of the default or neglect of Tenant. Except as set forth in paragraph 25, upon expiration or termination hereof, Tenant shall restore the Premises to the condition in which it existed upon execution hereof, reasonable wear and tear and loss by casualty or other causes beyond Tenant's control excepted. 21. Hazardous Substances. Tenant agrees that it will not use, generate, store or dispose of any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within the Land in violation of any law or regulation. Landlord represents, warrants and agrees (1) that neither Landlord nor, to Landlord's knowledge, any third party has used, generated, stored or disposed of, or permitted the use, generation, storage or disposal of, any Hazardous Material (defined below) on, under, about or within the Land in violation of any law or regulation, and (2) that Landlord will not, and will not permit any third party to use, generate, store or dispose of any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within the Land in violation of any law or regulation. Landlord and Tenant each agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other and the other's partners, affiliates, agents and employees against any and all losses, liabilities, claims and/or costs (including reasonable attorney's fees and costs) arising from JMS-192882v2 3 RC 145-310 any breach of any representation, warranty or agreement contained in this paragraph. As used in this paragraph, "Hazardous Material" shall mean petroleum or any petroleum product, asbestos, any substance known by the state in which the Land is located to cause cancer and/or reproductive toxicity, and/or any substance, chemical or waste that is identified as hazardous, toxic or dangerous in any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation. This paragraph shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 22. Security Deaosit. The City may accept an escrow fund to secure removal of the tower and other costs that may be incurred by the City pursuant to the Lease in lieu of a security fund. Qwest should propose security fund lanaguge. 23. Miscellaneous. (a) This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the parties, and supersedes all offers, negotiations and other agreements concerning the subject matter contained herein. Any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by both parties. (b) If any provision of this Agreement is invalid or unenforceable with respect to any party, the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such provision to persons other than those as to whom it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected and each provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. (c) This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the successors and permitted assignees of the respective parties. (d) Any notice or demand required to be given herein shall be made by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or reliable overnight courier to the address of the respective parties set forth below: If to Tenant: Qwest Wireless, L.L.C. If to Landlord: City of Richfield c/o US West Communications Group City Hall Real Estate Services 6700 Portland Ave. South 8200 East Belleview, Suite 500 Richfield, MN 55423 Englewood, CO 80111 Attn: Attn: Manager/Wireless Attn: City Manager With a copy to: Qwest Wireless, L.L.C. With a copy to: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered c/o US West Communications Group 470 Pillsbury Center Real Estate Services 200 South Sixth Street 426 North Fairveiw Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 St. Paul, MN 55104 Attn: Regional Real Estate Manager Attn: Richfield City Attorney Staubach Global Services Attn: Qwest Real Estate Admin. -Prop. ID #MIN422 15601 Dallas Parkway, Suite 400 Dallas, TX 75001 With a copy to: Qwest Law Department 1801 California Street, Suite 3800 Denver, CO 80202 Attn: Real Estate Attorney Qwest Wireless, L.L.C. 425 North Fairview Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Attn: Director, Real Estate Landlord or Tenant may from time to time designate any other address for this purpose by written notice to the other party. All notices hereunder shall be deemed received upon actual receipt. (e) This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota (f) Landlord acknowledges that a Memorandum of Agreement in the form annexed hereto as Exhibit D will. be recorded by Tenant in the official records of the County where the Land is located. In the event the Land is encumbered by a mortgage or deed of trust, Landlord agrees to obtain and furnish to Tenant anon-disturbance and attornment instrument for each such mortgage or deed of trust. (g) Tenant may obtain title insurance on its interest in the Land. Landlord shall cooperate by executing documentation required by the title insurance company. JMS-192882v2 4 RC 145-310 (h) In any case where the approval or consent of one. party hereto is required, requested or otherwise to be given under this Agreement, such party shall not unreasonably delay or withhold its approval or consent. (i) All Riders and Exhibits annexed hereto form material parts of this Agreement. (j) This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. (k) Tenant shall reimburse the Landlord for its expenses associated with processing Tenant's request to use the Premises and negotiating this Agreement. (1) In the event that either party shall initiate suit under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover costs and attorney's fees up to a total of $5,000.00. 25. Transfer of Tower Uaon Notification From Landlord. Should Landlord notify Tenant in writing. thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of this Agreement, or within forty-five (45) days after the earlier termination of this Agreement, that the continued presence of the Tower is desired, Landlord shall have the option to purchase the Tower a price equal to the depreciated cost of the Tower. Tenant shall provide documentation reflecting all such initial construction and -installation costs, and .maintenance costs. Landlord may purchase the Tower from Tenant at this price, and upon such additional terms as shall be agreeable to both Landlord and Tenant. 26. Performance Bond. Tenant hereby agrees to supply to Landlord a performance bond in the amount of ($~, ("Performance Bond"), for the sole purpose of assuring Tenant's faithful performance in the removal of the Tenant Facilities as required under Paragraph 8(a) of this Agreement. If Landlord does not exercise the right to purchase the Tower as provided in Section 25 above, and Tenant fails to remove the Tenant Facilities within sixty (60) days of the termination of this Agreement, Landlord may notify Tenant in writing that Landlord will remove the Tenant Facilities at Tenant's expense. Landlord may use the proceeds from the Performance Bond for removal costs. Alternatively, Landlord may notify Tenant that Tenant Facilities are deemed abandoned and that title has reverted to Landlord. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. LANDLORD: City of Richfield, a Minnesota TENANT: Qwesf Wireless, L.L.C., a Delaware municipal corporation limited liability company By: By: Date: Date: Title: Title: JMS-192882v2 RC145-310 EXI3IBIT A DESCRIPTION OF LAND to the Agreement dated , by and between Qwest, L.L.C., a limited liablity corporation, as Tenant. The Land is described and/or depicted as follows: as Landlord, and JMS-192882v2 6 RC145-310 EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES to the Agreement dated , by and between as Landlord, and Qwest, L.L.C., a limited liablity corporation, as Tenant. The Premises are described and/or depicted as follows: SEE ATTACHED Notes: 1. This Exhibit may be replaced by a land survey of the Premises once it is received by Tenant. 2. Setback of the Premises from the Land's boundaries shall be the distance required by the applicable governmental authorities. 3. Width of access road shall be the width required by the applicable governmental authorities, including police and fire departments. 4. The type, number and mounting positions and locations of antennas and transmission lines are illustrative only. Actual types, numbers, mounting positions may vary from what is shown above. JMS-192882v2 7 RC145-310 EXHIBIT C DESCRIPTION OF TENANT FACILITIES INCLUDMG STRUCTURAL SPECIFICATIONS OF TOWER SEE ATTACHED Tenant facilities shall operate in the = _ MHz range. JMS-192882v2 8 RC145-310 EXHIBIT D f MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT CLERK: Please return this document to: Qwest, L.L.C. Attn: This Memorandum of Agreement is entered into on this _ day of , by and between the City of Richfield, (hereinafter referred to as "Landlord") and Qwest, L.L.C., a limited liablity corporation with an office at (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant"). 1. Landlord and Tenant entered into a Communications Site Lease Agreement ("Agreement") on the _ day of ,for the purpose of installing, operating and maintaining a radio communications facility and other improvements. All of the foregoing aze set forth in the Agreement. 2. The term of the Agreement is for five (5) years commencing on or ,whichever first occurs ("Commencement Date"), and terminating on the fifth anniversary of the Commencement Date with ~) successive U yeaz options to renew. 3. The Land which is the subject of the Agreement is described in Exhibit A annexed hereto. The portion of the Land being leased to Tenant (the "Premises") is described in Exhibit B annexed hereto IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum of Agreement as of the day and year first above written. Landlord: Tenant Qwest L.L.C., a limited liablity company By: gy. Date: Date: Title: Title: ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STATE OF COUNTY OF: On before me, Notary Public, personally. appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. {SEAL) Notary Public My commission expires: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE 3 JMS-192882v2 9 RCI45-310 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CONTINUED STATE OF COUNTY OF: On ,before me, ~ Notary Public, personally appeazed personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public My commission expires: (SEAL) JMS-192882v2 10 RC 145-310 • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # $g REPORT # 1 l h ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES DIRECTOR STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution regarding the appointment of two additional individuals to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion; Adopt the attached resolution increasing the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board (RTPB) from three to five director positions and appoint new directors. II. BACKGROUND On May 14, 1990, the City of Richfield approved the ordinance to levy a 3% tax on the gross receipts of lodging from Richfield hotels and motels pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 469.190. Minnesota Statute Section 469.190 authorizes the proceeds from the lodging tax to fund a Tourism Promotion Board for the purposes of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center. Later, on June 25, 1990, the City Council adopted a resolution that established- bylaws and appointed three directors to head the RTPB. The articles and bylaws of the RTPB provide that the Richfield City Council appoints three directors to the Board. The three directors were originally to represent the Richfield Chamber of Commerce, the Hampton Inn and Motel 6. The term of each director is three years. Each. director serves as a director until his or her successor 0529Tourism shall have been appointed and have qualified, or until his or her earlier disqualification, death, resignation or removal. • The three original Board Members included: 1. Larry Zielke, representing the Richfield Chamber of Commerce; 2. Charles Davis, Regional Vice President for Motel 6; and 3. William Brusman, Vice President of Realty Management Services, Inc. representing Hampton Inn. Since the adoption of the original resolution establishing the RTPB, the lodging business and facilities have greatly increased. Currently four lodging facilities contribute to the lodging tax: Hampton Inn, Motel 6, Americinn and Candlewood Suites. The current Board Members are: 1. Erika Olmstead, Manager of Candlewood Suites, to complete athree-year term ending December 31, 2000; 2. Bill .Brusman, Vice President of Realty Managaement Services, Inc. for athree- yearterm ending December 31, 2001; and 3. Cathy Sulla as the Richfield Chamber of Commerce representative fora three- year term expiring on December 31, 2002. Mr. Brusman, the only original member of the RTPB, is no longer involved in the Hampton Inn property. Instead, his position now encompasses the construction and management of commercial properties throughout the Midwest region. Mr. Brusman has been the Clerk-Treasurer of the RTPB since its inception. In that role, he continues to be an extremely valuable asset to the board, especially with the financial/funding activities of the RTPB. The RTPB recently amended its bylaws to increase the board to five directors. The five positions would include an At Large representative, Chamber of Commerce representative and three Director representatives selected from the lodging facilities in Richfield. In addition to the current directors the following changes are proposed: • Appoint Randy Benson, General Manager of the Hampton Inn, for the unexpired portion of a three-year term ending December 31, 2003, replacing Bill Brusman. • Appoint Shelly King, General Manager of Americlnn; for the unexpired portion of a three-year term ending. December 31, 2003. • Appoint Bill Brusman, Vice President of Realty Management Services, Inc., as the At Large representative to the board for the remainder of athree-year term ending December 31, 2001. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Structure and bylaws of the RTPB are governed by action of the RTPB. • The City Council makes appointments to the RTPB. • The growth in Richfield's lodging facilities has created a need to upgrade and enlarge the membership of the RTPB. • The recommended composition of the RTPB provides a good cross- section of representation of individuals that deal with tourism and promotion issues for Richfield. • The RTPB needs to expand its activities in using its financial resources to create a greater marketing awareness of Richfield and its lodging facilities. • Steven Devich serves as the City's Liaison to the RTPB, ensuring that actions of the RTPB are coordinated with appropriate City action and oversight. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • While there is no pressing time issue regarding this change, there is a need to enlarge the board to expand representation and essential board activities regarding marketing. C. FINANCIAL • There are no financial implications in as much as Board Members serve without compensation. • The RTPB generates adequate funding through the 3% lodging tax to fund its activities. There is no property tax levy impact. D. LEGAL • The City Council has the legal authority to make appointments to the RTPB by Council resolution. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Not appoint the additional two members to the RTPB. • Seek other individuals to appoint to the RTPB. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Letter from RTPB VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None. • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD, INC. WHEREAS., the City of Richfield has levied a 3% tax on the gross receipts of lodging from hotels and motels in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 169.190; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute Section 169.190 authorizes the proceeds of the tax to fund a Tourism. Promotion Board for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center; and WHEREAS, the articles and bylaws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. provide the City Council of the City of Richfield appoint directors to the Board; and WHEREAS, the Board has passed a motion making a change to the by-laws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board increasing the number of Board Members from three to five members; and WHEREAS, Bill Brusman, Vice President of Realty Management Services, Inc. the current Board representative for the Hampton Inn, is recommended. by the Board to the new At Large position; and WHEREAS, Randy Benson, Hampton Inn Airport General Manager, has been recommended by the Board for. appointment to complete the unexpired portion of a three- . year term ending December 31, 2003; and WHEREAS, Shelly King, Americlnn & Suites General Manager, has been recommended by the Richfield Tourism Board to complete the unexpired portion of a three-year term ending December 31, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board be modified as follows: 1. The Board membership is increased from three to five members. 2. Appoint Randy Benson as Hampton Inn Airport representative to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for the remainder of a term ending December 31, 2003. 3. Appoint Shelly King as the Americlnn & Suites representative to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for the remainder of a three-year term ending December 31,.2003. 4. Appoint Bill Brusman, Vice President of Realty Management Services, Inc, as the At Large representative to the Board for the remainder of athree-year term ending December 31, 2001. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 29th day of May, 2001. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~ RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD. 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota Apri16, 2001 Mr. Steve Devich City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Steve, ~ ~ f ~~~ ~ Z~~~ 13Y:_ The Richfield Tourism Promotion Boazd has passed a motion to make a change in the By Laws increasing the number of Boazd members from three to five members. The Boazd requests that the following persons be appointed to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board: Randy Benson, Hampton Inn Airport Richfield General Manager & Shelly King, Americinn & Suites General Manager. Thank you for your consideration of these appointments. Sincerely, ., ij ' Cathy. Sull~ President, Richfield Tourism Promotion Board • Phone (612) 854-8800• Fax (61.2) 854-4434 • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8G 1~c.PORT # 115 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 • C7 PERRY THORVIG, REPORT PREPARED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY IDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution approving a Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 1, Dr. Blaine, 6301 Cedar Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 1, Dr. Blaine, 6301 Cedar Avenue. III. BACKGROUND The Dr. Blaine parcel at 6301 Cedar Avenue is one of thirty parcels along Cedar Avenue and 66th Street that are being purchased for the realignment and expansion of the Trunk Highway 77 and East 66th Street Interchange. This parcel was originally appraised at $227,135, including fixtures and real estate. The proposed settlement amount is $285,000 plus reimbursement of $500 for appraisal fees. Robert Lindall, legal counsel at Kennedy & Graven, opines that this proposed settlement is reasonable and if not accepted the condemnation process could result in a higher number. Therefore, he recommends that the City authorize the payment of $285,000 plus reimbursement of $500 for appraisal fees. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 0529 blainestipulation A. POLICY • The subject property has been identified for purchase for the project. • The Memorandum of Understanding between the City, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), and the Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC), approved by the Council on February 28, 2000, outlines the responsibilities for each participating agency. • An agreement between the City and MAC, dated February 28, 2000, allows the use of condemnation proceedings as a means of acquiring property. • In accordance with the agreement, MAC is responsible for approving and recommending to the City just compensation and condemnation settlement payments with property owners. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Approval of the Stipulation of Final Settlement for the Dr. Blaine property would prevent the need for further condemnation proceedings for this property. C. FINANCIAL • MAC is obligated to fund this transaction. • MAC has approved this final settlement amount. • D. LEGAL • The Stipulation of Final Settlement was prepared by Robert Lindall and approved by MAC and Mr. Leland Frankman for Dr. Blaine. E. TIMING • Upon Council approval of the final settlement, payment will be made to the owner within ten days. The property has already been vacated. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not accept the final settlement amount. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing the City to enter into a Stipulation of Final Settlement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A STIPULATION OF FINAL SETTLEMENT FOR 6301 CEDAR AVENUE (66TH STREET/TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 INTERCHANGE PROJECT) WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, .Minnesota desires to purchase certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the 66th Street/Trunk Highway 77 Interchange Project (the "Project") heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (the "City") said real property being described as follows: Lot 3, Block 15, New Ford Town, 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, the City Council has adopted a layout for Project improvements; and WHEREAS, the Project improvements necessitate the purchase of real property; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (the "MAC") is initially funding the Project; and WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals for the subject property to be made by qualified independent professional appraisers to determine fair market value of real estate and immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto; and WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the appraisal reports as being in conformity with appraisal standards; and WHEREAS, a qualified fixture review appraiser has certified the fixture appraisal report as being in conformity with appraisal standards; and WHEREAS, MAC has reviewed all appraisal reports and review appraisal reports prepared for the subject property and has recommended that the just compensation for the real estate be determined by the City Council to be $220,000 and that the just compensation for the immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto be determined by the City Council to be $7,135; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2000, the City Council approved just compensation for the real estate in the amount of $220,000 and for immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto in the amount of $7,135 and did make an offer to the property owner in said amounts; and 0529 blainestipulation WHEREAS, the City Council authorized condemnation of the subject property on August 14, 2000, such proceedings were commenced on behalf of the City by the city attorney; and WHEREAS, the city attorney has reached a settlement with the property owner in the amount of $285,000 plus $500 for appraisal fees and MAC has concurred with the terms of final settlement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the proposed settlement amount of $285,000 plus $500 for appraisal fees is hereby approved. 2. That the City Manager and Mayor are authorized to execute the Stipulation of Final Settlement and take all other actions necessary to complete the obligations of the City pursuant to its .terms. 3. That the city attorney is authorized to take all actions necessary to complete the obligations of the City pursuant to the Stipulation of Final Settlement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 29th day of May, 2001. • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk ~~ • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT Consent 8F 114 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 • REPORT PREPARED BY: PERRY THORVIG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, REPORT PRESENTER: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED. BY CITY MANAGER: ~ ~ - ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution approving a Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 8, Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental, 6405 Cedar Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Stipulation of Final Settlement on Parcel 8, Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental, 6405 Cedar Avenue. • III. BACKGROUND ~ The Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental parcel at 6405 Cedar Avenue is one of thirty parcels along Cedar Avenue and 66th Street that are being purchased for the realignment and expansion of the Trunk Highway 77 and East 66th Street Interchange. This parcel was originally appraised at $230,180, including fixtures and real estate. The proposed settlement amount is $275,000. Robert Lindall, City legal. counsel at Kennedy & Graven, opines this proposed settlement is reasonable and if not accepted the condemnation process could result in a higher number. Therefore, he recommends that the City authorize the $275,000 payment. 0529 toupinstipulation III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The subject property has been identified for purchase for the project. • The Memorandum of Understanding between the City, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), and the Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC), approved by the Council on February 28, 2000, outlines the responsibilities for each participating agency. • An agreement between the City and MAC, dated February 28, 2000, allows the use of condemnation proceedings as a means of acquiring property. • In accordance with the agreement, MAC is responsible for approving and recommending to the City jusf compensation and condemnation settlement payments with property owners. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Approval of the Stipulation of Final Settlement for the Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental property would prevent the need for further condemnation proceedings for this property. C. FINANCIAL • MAC is obligated to fund this transaction. • MAC has approved this final settlement amount. D. LEGAL • The Stipulation of Final Settlement was prepared by Robert Lindall and approved by MAC and Mr. Leland Frankman for Harold Toupin/Affordable Car Rental E. TIMING • Upon Council approval of the final settlement, payment will be made to the owner within ten days. The property has already been vacated. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Do not accept the final settlement amount. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing the City to enter into a Stipulation of Final Settlement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • RESOLUTION NO. s RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A STIPULATION OF FINAL SETTLEMENT FOR 6405 CEDAR AVENUE (66TH STREET/TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 INTERCHANGE PROJECT) WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota desires to purchase certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the 66th Street/Trunk Highway 77 Interchange Project (Project) heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (City) said real property being described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 8, New Ford Town, 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, the City Council has adopted a layout for Project improvements; and WHEREAS, the Project improvements necessitate the purchase of real property; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its corporate boundaries; and • WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is initially funding the Project; and WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals for the subject property to be made by qualified independent professional appraisers to determine fair market value of real estate and immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto; and WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the appraisal reports as being in conformity with appraisal standards; and WHEREAS, a qualified fixture review appraiser has certified the fixture appraisal report as being in conformity with appraisal standards; and WHEREAS, MAC has reviewed all appraisal reports and review appraisal reports prepared for the subject property and has recommended that the just compensation for the real estate be determined by the City Council to be $217,000, and that the just compensation for the immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto be determined by the City Council to be $13,180; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2000, the City Council approved just compensation for the real .estate in the amount of $217,000 and for immovable fixtures and equipment appurtenant thereto in the amount of $13,180 and did make an offer to the property owner in said amounts; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized condemnation of the subject property on August 14, 2000, such proceedings were commenced on behalf of the City by the city attorney; and WHEREAS, the city attorney has reached a settlement with the property owner in the amount of $275,000 and MAC has concurred with the terms of final settlement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the proposed settlement amount of $275,00 is hereby approved. 2. That the City Manager and Mayor are authorized to execute the Stipulation of Final Settlement and take all other actions necessary to complete the obligations of the City pursuant to its terms. 3. That the city attorney is authorized to take all actions necessary to complete the obligations of the City pursuant to the Stipulation of Final Settlement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 29th day of May, 2001. • ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MAY 29, 2001 Consent 8E 113 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: PATRICK DOLAN, ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN NAMI?, T/TI,F. MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration to approve plans, order projects and authorize ad for bids for City parking lot improvements. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the plans and specifications for City parking lot improvements, order City Projects 402-30-555 (Community Center and. Donaldson Park), 501-30-569 (Water Plant) and 917.-25-957 (Cedar/Jensen), and authorize advertisement for bids. IIL BACKGROUND I The parking lots at Donaldson Park (lower level - 7400 Lake Shore Drive) and the Community Center (7000 Nicollet Avenue) were constructed in the early 1960's and are now in need of replacement. These existing lots would be reconstructed under proposed project 402-30=555 which is funded by Special. Revenue (liquor store profits) as identified in the Capital Improvement Budget. City project 501-30-569 is proposed to construct a new 13-space parking lot in front of the Water Plant dewatering building, 6221 Portland Avenue. The existing parking lot in the back of the Water Plant will be resurfaced under the same contract. The Water Utility Fund will pay for these improvements. 0529ParkingLots NAMLs', Trrtc The area of Cedar Avenue and Diagonal Boulevard generally has a lot of vehicles parked on the street. Project 917-25-957 proposes to construct a 75-stall parking lot between Cedar Avenue and Highway 77 at approximately 69th Street. Transmission Shop, Inc. owner, Steve Jensen, has agreed to reimburse the City for all costs associated with construction of the new parking lot. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The adopted 2001 Capital Improvement Budget includes the projects related to parking lots at Donaldson Park, the Community Center and the Water Plant. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The existing parking lots being considered for improvement, Donaldson Park, Community Center and Water Plant, are in need of repair. • There is a need for. additional. parking related to activities at the Water Plant and Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. • Four of the five trees currently in front of the de-watering building will have to be removed for construction. All four are Lindens and are all distressed. These four trees will be cut down and replaced. The new trees will be planted in Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield as close to the current tree locations as is possible. • There is a need to provide an alternative to on-street parking in the vicinity of Cedar Avenue and Diagonal Boulevard. C. FINANCIAL • The estimated total cost for all the parking lot improvements under consideration is $350,000. The adopted 2001 Capital Budget includes $120,000 from Special Revenue and $85,000 from user fees. Transmission Shop, -Inc. has agreed to pay all costs for the Cedar/Jensen parking lot. Funding sources will be revised as necessary after bids are received and the work is complete. D. LEGAL • None known at this time. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council could determine no parking lot improvements are needed at this time. • Council could amend the location, scope, and/or design for parking lot improvements proposed to be provided in 2001. V. ATTACHMENTS • Graphic identifying location of parking lot improvements as proposed. • • Aerial photo with proposed Cedar/Jensen parking lot imposed. • Graphic of proposed new parking lot at Water Treatment Plant. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. C: 0 ~ o a 0 a 0 0 N • +. ' i Lilb~ >. ~~ ~_~._~ ~. ~. ~ t~ _ ~ ~` 1-- i-.-. -^ y, ,. _ _ ~ _~ =,, ~^ ~.:.~ __ ,r ` .~ ;.. .4i« • • • J O Z O C7 z w w z ~ aJ ,~ C7 z w ~ a c o w Q ~ v ~ U J ~ ~v °` o W J _ ~ LL z _ ~ V Q ~~ ~~ Z Q J ~ ~ ~ N ~ O _~ r~ ~ _ r _ _~ L }I W > Q N ~ ~ 3 '~ N m ~ Q Q ~ m ~ -- rn o _ O v 1 N W :: B S • ~- STAFF REPORT Consent 8D 112 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 I~ f. J REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: /~ PERRY THORVIG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAM&, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITL& ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Acceptance of the demolition bid of $93,400 submitted by Blue Earth Environmental for the demolition of nine houses and fourteen foundations on 18th Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the attached bid of $93,400 submitted by Blue Earth Environmental for the demolition of nine houses and fourteen foundations on 18th Avenue. III. BACKGROUND I The State of Minnesota provided $5,000,000 to acquire residential properties in Richfield that will be adversely impacted by low frequency noise when the new north-south runway is opened in 2003.. Twenty-three homes were purchased with the funds. House movers will move fourteen of the twenty-three homes. The foundations of the buildings will have to be demolished along with the homes and foundations of the other nine homes. The former basements will be back filled. • Bid specifications were sent to approximately 70 potential bidders. A dozen proposals were submitted ranging from the $93,400 bid to over $260,000. 0529demolition The recommended bidder is Blue Earth Environmental, which is located in Mankato, Minnesota. This company is doing the demolition and removal of the commercial • buildings on Cedar Avenue under contract with the Metropolitan Airport Commission. Blue Earth is performing responsibly on the Cedar Avenue project and inquires to others who have hired this company are affirmative. They have met all required qualifications (their qualifications have been checked), submitted a bid bond and provided proof of the required insurance. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The policy of the City of Richfield is to accept the lowest bid from a qualified responsible contractor. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The company has demonstrated an ability to perform in a timely manner and is currently the contractor removing the commercial buildings on Cedar Avenue between 63rd Street and 66th Street. C. FINANCIAL • Blue Earth Environmental's bid was $12,000 lower than the next lowest bidder. The cost of this work will be paid by the state grant. • D. LEGAL • The. competitive bidding laws and regulations have been followed. IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Do not accept the bid. V. ATTACHMENTS • Bid minutes Bid submitted by Blue Earth Environmental VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Bid Opening May 14, 2001 10:00 a.m. 2001 Airport Noise Mitigation Demolition Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for 2001 airport noise mitigation demolition, as advertised in the Construction Bulletin on April 27, 200.1. Present: Nancy Gibbs,. City Clerk Perry Thorvig, Community Development Specialist Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative • • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name/City Bid Security Total Bid Amount not includin sales tax Diamond 5 Construction Inc. Hutchinson, MN None Required $105,000.00 BelAir Excavating, Inc. New Brighton, MN None Required $167,159.00 Kellington Construction, Inc. Corcoran, MN None Required $267,490.00 F. M. Frattalone Excavating & Grading, Inc. St. Paul, MN None Required $148,568.88 Wickenhauser Excavating, Inc. Cologne, MN None Required $147,000.00 USD-Minnesota LLC Long Lake, MN None Required $149,000.00 Carl Bolander & Sons Co. St. Paul, MN None Required $144,750.00 Blue Earth Environmental Co. Inc. Mankato, MN None Required $93,400.00 Veit & Company, Inc. Rogers, MN None Required $132,065.00 n Holst Excavating, Inc. Prescott, WI None Required $143,940.00 Doboszenski & Sons, Inc. Loretto, MN None Required $245,525.00 Semple Excavating & Trucking, Inc. St. Paul, MN None Required $164,645.00 Kevitt Excavating, Inc. Crystal, MN None Required $149,735.00 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 29, 2001 City Council Meeting. Nancy Gibbs City Clerk • -.~, x ;::"~f ~:~'. Exhibit B BID PROPOSAL FORM • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA FOR DEMOLITION AND SITE CLEARANCE BID TO: CITY OF RICHFIELD 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 FROM: ~Jt ~4~~~ CONTACT PERSON or C~Oo p~ MINNESOTA LICENSE NO. t ~rl 2 (~ L, City: «G•r~t~ =-k-o State: Zip:_~ (~ ~o Phone: Day ( ) ~ r7~ -3 87-(o Z~6 l Cellular: ~7) ~ ~,~~ f Fax: ( ) S 07- 3~ 7-~ ~ Z ~O WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ,, 1. The undersigned Bidder having familiarized myself with the existing conditions of the properties as shown in Exhibit H and the Contract documents proposes to famish all supervision, technical personnel, labor, materials, permits, machinery, equipment, services, Sales Tax and appropriate licenses, including utility and transportation as ervices~peces ry, to do a d comp) a all work required r~lemol n a d~ite clearance for $ ~'~Y~.:,...7~ ~/,~.e ~~ /_ ~ stn ~{z.._.i~_! fI-,37~~ I Total Before $ Minnesota Sales Tax 6.5% $ TOTAL BID FOR DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL $ 2. The City has scheduled opening and review of the proposals for the week beginning May 14, 2001. City staff will have the responsibility to review each Bid Proposal. They will recommend the Bid(s) that comply with the conditions. of invitation and that they have judged most responsible, competifive and reasonable for the City to accept. 3. The Bidder understands that the City Council of the City of Richfield has to approve the selection of Contractors.. We have scheduled the award of contracts for the regular City Council meeting of May 29, 2001. 4. The City will not accept this Bid Proposal without the required Performance Bond Requirements. Refer to the Instructions to Bidders, Section 7, for an explanation of the deposit requirements. 5. Before the City will award a Bid, the Bidder must famish the City Certificates of Insurance showing coverage in - ~' force throughout the time of the contract. Insurance coverage requirements are set forth in the Instructions to Bidders, Section 10. ~6. We advise bidders that the City may demand additional information evidencing the Bidders capabilities, such as financial statements and resume of relevant experience. ; , 0 ~ _ ,. °7. As from this date, the Bidder agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless, the City from all claims or lawsuits `" f that may arise from the activities of the Bidder and his or her sut>'contracbors, agents, employees or officers during and after the term of this Agreement. Refer to instructions to Bidders, Sections 8 and 9 for specific requirements. • 8. The Principal(s) of the Bidders is (are): Name of Princi al: Street: t~ C' t`ti ~.:ta State: hti Zi Social Secu ' #: x{'70- Cam- a Phone: p-T- 3 -~-:,5~ SIGNATURE OF BIDDER: ~'`' FEDERAL TAX LD. NUMBER: ~ J - / (03 O ~ OQ Subscribed an ~m to before This -~~ ~-f--day of , 2001 (Notary Pudic) ~~ ,/~ ~1 '~~'~~( ~ ~" 7 ~ • ~ MARSHAANN MILLER My Commission Expires: _~/<~i/ / ~ G" ~S Notary Pubic Minnesota My Comm. lEspines aan 31, 2005 • `~ • • STAFF REPORT Consent 111 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29,.2001 • REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: AL PAYNE, FACILITIES MANAGER NaMr•„ Tii/.1 71M TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for furnishing and installation of a replacement rooftop condenser for rink one at the Richfield Ice Arena. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Award the contract per the attached quote to ARI Mechanical Services, Inc. in the amount of $14,309.00 for the furnishing and installation of a replacement rooftop condenser for rink one at the Richfield Ice Arena. III. BACKGROUND I The air conditioning units on rink one at the Richfield Ice Arena are essential during the spring, summer and early fall months to control the humidity in the building. Without the air conditioning, the Arena would not be able to operate from April to September. An inefficient system that allows excessive moisture in the building will also do damage to the wood ceiling, light fixtures, the public-address system and the ice. • The existing. units are thirty years old, in constant need of repair and not operating efficiently. There are two rooftop units. One would be replaced this year and the second next year. 0514 rink condenser III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The project was approved as part of the Revised 2001 Capital Improvement Budget for an amount up to $25,000, and will be funded by Special Revenue. Unused funding .for this project will remain in the Special Revenue Fund or will be applied to a second air conditioning unit, scheduled for replacement in 2002. Only one air conditioning unit was approved in 2001 due to funding availability. • A reference check was performed on ARI Mechanical Services Inc. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The existing air conditioning unit is over 30 years old and has exceeded its expected service life. Parts for this system have become scarce. • Effective and reliable air conditioners will extend the life of the equipment at the Ice Arena and the building structure, and will cost .less to operate: • Maintaining the proper humidity levels reduces the load on the compressors to maintain the ice and also is more comfortable to the facility users. • Action is requested at the May 29 meeting in order to have the unit ready during the warmer and more humid months of July and August. C. FINANCIAL • Staff solicited quotes to remove the old unit and furnish and install one new unit. The lowest bid of the three proposals received was from ARI Mechanical Services, Inc. of Bloomington. The following bids were submitted: ARI Mechanical Services, Inc. $14,309.00 Bloomington, MN Equipment Supply, Inc. $16,694.00 St. Paul, MN Gartner Refrigeration $20,659.00 Minneapolis, MN ALTERNATIVE KECOMMENDATION(S) ~ • Do not award the contract to ARI Mechanical. • Award the contract to a different company. • Accept none of the quotes and direct staff to solicit new bids. V. ATTACHIVIENTS ~ • Submitted quotes. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None MecYl<an#aal Servi~cee. Ina. 9201 EAST @LOOMlNGTON FREEWAY • SUITE HK • BLOaii11WC~TON, MN 55420.952/894.7140 • FAX: 952/884.7143 May 7, 2001 Sent Via Facsimile 612.861-93S3 Richfield Ice Arena 636 - 66N St. Richfield, MN 35423 i Attn: Jerry M;•ssie Re; Replacement Condensing Unit Dear Jury. ARt Meehertical Services, tree. proposes to furnish and install one TSl Model 20AOCS25 air cooled ~~ condenser, along. with the following, for a price of S 14,309.00 (Pourieen Thousand.Threa Hundred.Nine Dollars). Included inthis bid; n. Guaranteed off run timer B. Off run pump dawn switch C. Low ambient lockout D. Control transformer E. Reclaim existing- refrigerant F. Demo existing McQuay condenser G Replace filter driers andevaeuate Fl. Provide crane service 1 Connect condenser to existing AHU J. Provide ball valve isolation of frlter drier K. Start up andcharge condertseR L. Check sequence of operetion and super heat ;N. Provide first year waccanty servieaon new condenses. _ N. Control and Power Wiring 1. Disconnect 2. Circuit Breaker 3. Dchumidistat 11tPNtS[KTINO...gi~ALITV M'f-ATIN-O-• Vq'NTiLrRT1N6'• AIR'CONbIT10NlN0 t'ILTtRINO •Qy1PMtNT ,i ..r~...~v rGr il~VGf\/9{~V f~ P~OPQSA~ =:4~~ c~U~i3iVIE~I~" SURPLY, INC. ,~ "t'3 ;~CRTN r~`-tRViFtrV RVEPIlIE :a'i. Pr~-il~, Mid ~5'f 04 I ,:.t:a.~rr:t~p to: ~ Richfield City Hall l;.r.~eet: 636 East 77th Street C.rC'~. ~r:~re. Zip: 12ichfie/d. MN 55423 ~.v• nn ocrs ~ Svc Phone Job Name: C.'c Jab. Location: rnvn~ ~ OJ"{-040-L~/i FI4X: 651-646.29T! ~ Rev+SE±% Date: ~Epri•' ~C; 3t?flt lce -.:rc~^~ .• ..:.°.Nus ;;; urnisn iabcr and n-,ateriai for the instailation of a replacement 25 ton rooftop .,......,,.,,;. ~n~t Gs toliows: ;••~ icNripve the existing unit from the job site - I:~tai! nre new 25 ton Carrier modeF 38AKS028 semi-hermetic eondensfrt~ tlt~t. (\N±ttt r .,,~ red~~~*ion and hot gas if reGuirt*_d.) (R-22 unit) !~ .~ccr^r+cct'o extstirTgetec:ricat disccrrtne~ct anct~ornrat wiring and existing rF:frigersltion „~ . - . _ ~~;i.°:enal supi:ort stae{ to existing steel support to accommodate the fc:.ot print :: i-.~c.:, test, and ctl,arge unit. ~. ~:: '.e yc~r parts and labor warranty i Fri•~nd~~d four year compressor warranty (parts only)........... Add to Sase'Price..............$590.GG ti~~c! Isc'.°tien vatv~~~ for the liauio tirte~dryer snit unit suction lirte._.Rctd to Base Price.......$ 37~~.!)~r >~ '~ r'a!' nc_~•a- duct hlamid'sst3t to cor±rCt unit A/C in lieu of existing .. ., .. , . ., •1 = •~^~~ `° ~ contr~•t wiri„~ inc!uCEd.........Add to Base Price.....Not to Exceed ....... .....:. $13r ' r .......... ~ivl i$. •. •c.iiril0 i ..: vv c'«_•CtrIC2l OIS:.OMeCt I~~, ~~alr latent aefECts beyond our scope of work ~ _ __ _ _.-,: _~: ••: `_ner•ao~~o furnsn material and laoor -complete !n accordance with above soeci6cations. far the sum of: `__ _.__. 2~e:c Prlce: Fourteen•7"housand Nine-Thousand Fihy artd nol100 DCIlarS; S1495c) t3U 1 r •~ _ _ _ _^_5e macfa as iolioH~S ~ • ~ •~ :e~~ ~c .."e as s:e•e~Bed A++work is 'o Ce completed in a professional manner aeconrrg to sta~:da-d pr aids. '•r~•• • r: 'i .~• . cf ve•~~i-.icn rr~m abo~ne speahcstlons. fnvowmg extra tests wtll De executed Cnly upon written order::. and wdI . -.~ -~r ,: •:n czar~t over ant ~buve the eaamate_ AU agreements cOntint3ent upon strikes, aeciesnes or dolays :oyand nur . .. ... ~ .~ .~•r~ tire, tomauo. nna otner necessary,nsurance. Our workari arf tupy covered by Workers Ccanpensatien Insurance ,~.. -.:~~,~,:.~°e'(maybey~r."1~draylnby • .a':f1>JA'1XEC1 SIC; within 6C days ~~ .~,- .~~~.•. ~.~ r'~upc•s~i: ine acnwe pnces, specificatronst ,•: ~..:::.,«c~ ~~ :~,r arc .:urnonzed to do the riork as specified. . •.~~r-.,ed Signature: f -- - concmons ara sarrsrecrory ana are nen:r~y dent wiA be made as oaUined.above. f.~ato OPPOR7tJN-TY~ ENlPl.Dl'ER TOTAL P.02 k ~ 2 REFRIGERATION & MFG. INC. 13205-16th Avenue North 02/1$2001 Plymouth, MN 55441 QUOtatlon NO. 0201-7355-0 Richfield Arena 636 East 66`" Street • Richfield, MN 55423 Attn: Gerry Massie Subj: Condensing Unit Replacement Dear Mr. Massie, We propose to furrrlsh the necessary labor and material to replace your existing condensing unit located on the roof of the northwest equipment room. Gartner Refrigeration will pump down and reclaim the R-22 refrigerant in this condenser. Once the refrigerant is removed, we will cut the condensing unit piping loose as well as the supports. We will remove the condensing unit and in its place install a new Carrier condensing unit. We will provide for the repiping of the new condenser unit m the existing liquid and suction lines. We will add the necessary }pressure wntrols for Ian cycling. Unce the connections are made to this unit, we will perform a leak check and evacuation of the condenser portion of the system. Gartner Refrigeration will add the refrigerant and perform a start up and check out, cycling and sequencing all operating and safety controls along with the new fan controls to maintain head pressure. We will provide the necessary copper and fittings, permit, crane for hoisting, installation labor and system check out. RICHFIELD ARENAS NET PRICE .........................................................................$20,659.00 Under our proposal we will provide the necessary shop drawings and wiring diagrams, select a proper condenser and delivery it to the job site, furnish the necessary labor, copper and fittings, make all calibrations, adjustments and a final check of the operation of the equipment, instruct your operating personnel and guarantee the equipment for a period of one year, with the compressor having an extended warranty of four additional years. Attached to this proposal is the standard "Scope of Responsibilities". Terms & Conditions Down Payment Purchaser shall pay a down payment of twenty-five percent (25%) of the total Purchase Price when Purchaser accepts this contract. ,~ Office/24-hour phone: 763-559-5880.800-328-5547 • Facsimile: 763-559-5925 www. Gartner-Refrig. com 2. Invoice and Payment Equipment, material, supplies and labor are invoiced on completion and shall become due in full 10 days from the date of invoice. 3. Past Due Chazge All past due invoices will be subject to a service chazge of one percent (1 %) of the past due amount per month. 4. Service Charges and Possible Additional Charges Purchase Price Subject to Increase -The Purchase Price is subject to the price in effect at the time of delivery and any price increase in equipment shall be added to the amount of this Contract. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us. Respectfully submitted, Gart r Refrigeration & Mfg. '~ I~~L Gary R. Bye Service Operations'Manager Gartner Refrigeration & Mfg. Inc. Page 2 1::1Quotes\0201-7355-0 Richfield Arenacompressorreplacement.doc • AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 29, 2001 CONSENT 8B 110 REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR - NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ //y~~ `/ S GQJ G SIGNA REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ /L~C~~` ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for 2001 concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter repair. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for 2001 annual curb and gutter, sidewalk and miscellaneous concrete repair to Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. in the amount of $36,345. • II. BACKGROUND Each year the City awards a contract to replace broken and dangerous sidewalk, curb and gutter and other concrete as necessary. This year's contract includes: removal, replacement and appurtenant work for concrete sidewalks, paths, curb and gutter and boulevards at various locations. According to the plans. and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. Because the specifications were written early in the year, it is possible that not all 2001 concrete needs were identified at that time. Therefore, the contract provides for an increase in quantity should additional concrete work be needed. There were eight plan holders for the April 23, 2001 bid opening. Four bids were received. 0529SideCurbGutter III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Each year the City contracts to replace broken and dangerous sidewalk, curb and gutter and to construct other concrete work as necessary. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • The annual street maintenance budget includes funding for replacement of miscellaneous broken and dangerous boulevard sidewalk, curb and gutter. • Funding for the 2001 concrete at park. sites are included in the Recreation CIB budget. • Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. • This firm has previously done concrete work for the City. • The engineer's estimate for the contract work was $36,670. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available for discussion if there are any questions. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not do the work. However, this contract is an important tool in protecting Richfield residents from injury caused by tripping on damaged sidewalk and slipping on ice built up in gutters. The contract also provides a tool for making minor improvements which benefit Richfield residents. • Award contract to another bidder. However, staff is not aware of any reason to award a contract for other than the lowest responsible bid. • Direct staff to readvertise the project. However, the lowest responsible bid is within the Engineer's estimate and staff does not believe lower bids will be received. V. ATTACHMENTS • .Bid minutes/tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA `~ Bid Opening April 23, 2001 11:00 a.m. 2001 Concrete Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter Repair City Project No. 101-35-603 (Bid No. 01-05) Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Deborah Guiher, Deputy City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for 2001-concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter repair, as advertised in the official newspaper on March 21, 2001. Present: Deborah Guiher, Deputy City Clerk George Atkinson, Public Works Director Representative Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name/City Bid Security Total Bid Amount Standard Sidewalk Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 43,115.00 Lindstrom, MN Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 36,345.00 Elko, MN Midwest Concrete Specialties, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 57,163.30 Montgomery, MN Ti-Zack Concrete Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 36,400.00 LeCenter, MN The Deputy City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 14, 2001 City Council Meeting. Deborah Guiher Deputy City Clerk • ~J AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING L~ MAY 29, 2001 CONSENT 8A 109 REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ %~`~~ C~~ j~ SIGNA REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: - ,r~r~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for the 2001 mill and overlay project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract to Valley Paving, Inc. in the sum of $128,566.91 for milling and bituminous overlay work to be done in 2001. • II. BACKGROUND Last year the City started a mill and overlay program for streets in the worst condition. The present condition of some roadways in the City on the attached map indicate it would not be cost effective to continue routine and preventive maintenance to try to prolong the existing driving surface. Instead, staff has determined that the best course of action would be to remove the top two inches of asphalt by a milling operation after which a new two-inch layer would be placed. Roadways scheduled for milling and overlaying in 2001 include 64th Street from Penn Avenue to Xerxes Avenue, 67th Street from Lyndale Avenue to Harriet Avenue, Bloomington Avenue from .Diagonal Boulevard to 76th Street, and 72nd Street from Nicollet Avenue to Fourth Avenue. 0529Mi11&Overlay A bid opening was held April 23, 2001 for the mill and overlay project and nine bids were received. The contract is based upon estimated quantities. Payments will be made on actual work performed. Council would be authorizing a contract at the stated amount, with the stipulation that the contract documents allow variations. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • In 1995, Council initiated an accelerated street maintenance program. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • Valley Paving, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. • The engineer's estimate for the contract work was $153,256.70. • The 2001 adopted Street Maintenance budget contains $145,000 for the mill and overlay project; i.e., the contract, printing and postage, City labor and so forth. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to reject all bids and direct staff to obtain new bids; however, the prices received for this work are extremely good, and .staff does not believe lower prices can be obtained from a reputable contractor • Council may choose not to begin a milling and overlay program. However, the program appears to be needed to maintain and extend .the usable life of the City's residential streets. V. ATTACHMENTS • A map of sites included in the 2001 mill and overlay project/contract. • A copy of the April 23, 2001 bid minutes/tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None r~ LJ D J W LL 2 U O U N ++ d L ~F+ L 0 L •~ V W z ~: 3 ' 's s o Z 'J J W (vR O ~ W $ d J Z O 0 _Z W W Z_ C'3 Z W IX • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 23, 2001 1:00 p.m. 2001 Bituminous Mill and Overlay for the City. City Project No. 101-35-606 (Bid No. 01-04) Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Deborah Guiher, Deputy City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for bituminous mill and overlay for the City, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 4, 2001. Present: Deborah. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk George Atkinson, Public Works Representative Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR Bid Security Bid Amount Ace Blacktop, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 137,765.95 Inver Grove Hei hts, MN Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 147,412.00* Shako ee, MN DMJ Corporation 5% Bid Bond $ 145,866.09 Hamel, MN Hardrives, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 145,777.81 Ro ers, MN McNamara Contracting, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 175,584.75 Rosemount, MN Midwest Asphalt Corporation 5% Bid Bond $ 149,197.45 Ho kins, MN Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 155,271.58 Shako ee, MN Valley Paving Incorporated 5% Bid Bond $ 128,566.91. Shako ee, MN C. S. McCrossan Construction Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 1fi9,888.10 Ma le Grove, MN * Denotes corrected figure The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 14, 2001 City Council Meeting. Deborah Guiher Deputy City Clerk ,- ,~