Loading...
04-24-00 agenda• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 24, 2000 RICHFIELD CITY HALL 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM - 6:30 P.M. ..--AGENDA 0 CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. CITY MANAGER SIX-MONTH PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 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) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OF APRIL 10, 2000 AND (2) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 10, 2000 PRESENTATIONS 1. PRESENTATION OF POLICE OFFICER OF YEAR AWARD FOR 1999 TO RICHFIELD POLICE OFFICER JOSEPH GRIFFIN 2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING RICHFIELD'S OBSERVANCE OF CINCO DE MAYO CELEBRATION ON MAY 6 AND 7, 2000 • 3. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAYAS ARBOR MONTH IN RICHFIELD 4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NATIONAL DRINKING WATER WEEK, MAY 7-13, 2000 5. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK, MAY 21-27, 2000 INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO PRINT THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER FOR THE RECORD. 6. OPPORTUNITY-FOR CITIZENS=TO`ADBR $ THErt 0UNC1t'ON11TEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 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 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT 1710 EAST 78TH STREET FOR 77TH STREET PHASE III, UNDERPASS PROJECT S.R. NO. 107 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REVIEW APPRAISER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RUPPERT AND RUPPERT ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR 66TH STREET AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 INTERCHANGE PROJECT S.R. NO. 108 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR 66TH STREET AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 INTERCHANGE PROJECT S.R. NO. 109 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF MODEL 270 JD SKID STEER LOADER FOR USE BY UTILITY DIVISIONS FROM JOHN DEERE COMMERCIAL WORKSITE PRODUCTS, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $25,540.77 S.R. NO. 110 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF BID MINUTES/TABULATION AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO ACE BLACKTOP, INC. FOR MILLING AND BITUMINOUS OVERLAY WORK IN 2000 IN AMOUNT OF $104,766.35 S.R. NO. 111 • F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF BID MINUTES/TABULATION AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION FOR INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT 67TH STREET AND NICOLLET AVENUE IN AMOUNT OF $256,040.63 S.R. NO. 112 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF ITINERANT PLACE OF AMUSEMENT, ITINERANT FOOD AND TEMPORARY INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES FOR DON PABLOS, 980 WEST 78TH STREET, FOR CINCO DE MAYO CELEBRATION ON MAY 5, 2000 S.R. NO. 113 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY EVENT CELEBRATION LICENSE WITH FEE W- AIVER-FOR^-RICHFIELD:;RECREATI,O.N,SERVICES- DEPARTMENT FOR EVENTS TO CELEBRATE CINCO DE MAYO AT TAFT PARK, 6200 18TH AVENUE ON MAY 6 AND 7, 2000 S.R. NO. 114 1. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE AT 7201 LOGAN AVENUE; THREE DOGS S.R. NO. 115 PUBLIC HEARINGS • 9. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF KBL CABLE SYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC., CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISEE, RESULTING FROM MERGER OF TIME WARNER, INC. AND AMERICAN ONLINE, INC. INTO AOL TIME WARNER, INC. (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 27, 2000) STAFF REPORT NO. 116 10. DISCIPLINARY HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF CIVIL ENFORCEMENT FOR GODFATHER'S PIZZA, 2 WEST 66TH STREET, WHO RECENTLY UNDERWENT ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE CHECK, CONDUCTED BY RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY, AND FAILED BY SELLING ALCOHOL TO UNDERAGE YOUTH STAFF REPORT NO. 117 11. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW USE OF PORTION OF BUILDING AT 7145 HARRIET AVENUE AS DAY CARE FACILITY FOR UP TO 50 CHILDREN STAFF REPORT NO. 118 • 12. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES IN INTERCHANGE WEST AREA FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AND AUTHORIZE SUBMITTAL TO METROPOLITAN COUNCIL STAFF REPORT NO. 119 0 RESOLUTION ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS 14. SUMMARY OF CONCttJSIONS"REGARflfiNG'CITYMANAI R?SIX.MONTH PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 15. CONSIDERATION OF DRAFTING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ADVERTISING FOR BIDS TO MOVE SIDEWALKS AWAY FROM COUNTY ROADS NEAR VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD STAFF REPORT NO. 121 13. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING HENNEPIN PARKS FIRST- TIER TRAILS, GREENWAYS AND PARKS PLAN . STAFF REPORT NO. 120 AIRPORT BUSINESS 0 16. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT HRA BUSINESS 17. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPORT 18. LEGISLATIVE REPORT CORRESPONDENCE COUNCIL CHOICE 19. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 20. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 21. 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. 0 AGENDA SECTION: Admin. Revorts AGENDA ITEM # 15 REPORT # 121 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE L. ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. NAME, TIT E DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: -J SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: Q ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of Community Services Commission recommendations that: 1) sidewalks near Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield (VMPR) be moved away from the street (proposed for Council action at this time), 2) Northern States Power Company (NSP) be directed to underground existing overhead utilities near VMPR and at 1-35W and 66th Street (proposed for Council discussion at this time), and 3) unfunded costs related to undergrounding be paid by NSP rate payers (proposed for Council discussion at this time). I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Direct staff to draft plans and specifications and advertise for bids to move sidewalks away from County roads near Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. II. BACKGROUND In February the Hennepin County Department of Public Works announced a program to financially assist inner ring suburbs with enhancements to County Roads. Enhancements that improve safety will receive 50% funding from the County while aesthetic improvements will receive 33% funding assistance. 0424CtyRdEnhancement .J /5-/ Staff is recommending two types of projects. Firstly, staff recommends that sidewalks adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield be moved away from the street by nine or ten feet in order to provide improved safety for pedestrians and bikers. Hennepin County will provide 50% funding for these improvements. The remainder will be funded through Richfield's Municipal State Aid (gas tax) construction account Secondly, staff recommends that existing overhead utilities in the same area and on 66th Street near 1-35W be placed underground. Power poles that support those lines are very close to travelling vehicles. Getting rid of power poles will improve safety and aesthetics. Hennepin County will provide 50% funding for 66th Street near 1-35W and for the Portland Avenue side of Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield and 33% funding for the 66th Street side of Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. The unfunded portion of undergrounding costs could be paid directly to Northern States Power Company (NSP) by Richfield or NSP will reimburse itself by assessing a monthly charge at, say, one dollar per month to each residential electric account in Richfield (more for commercial). Staff and the Community Services Commission recommend that NSP be allowed to collect the unfunded portion of undergrounding costs by assessing Richfield ratepayers. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • In the past Council has been very supportive of attempts to underground overhead utilities and has authorized payment to NSP for the cost of undergrounding along 77th Street. • Council has also supported efforts to provide safe and aesthetically pleasing facilities for the travelling public. • The Community Services Commission took action on April 11, 2000 recommending the proposed sidewalk improvements and undergrounding of utilities. With regard to undergrounding of utilities and the unfunded portion of costs, it is suggested there be an article in a summer publication of Your City and that the Council hold a public hearing. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • If unfunded portions of the cost of undergrounding are collected from rate payers as recommended, NSP will label those charges as "City, requested special facilities" or something similar (the exact wording has yet to be worked out and approved by the Public Utilities Commission). 0 ?S- ;L C. FINANCIAL Because the Hennepin County program was not announced until February of 2000, the County Roadway Enhancement project is not included in the adopted 2000 Capital Budget. It will be included in the Revised 2000 Capital Budget. The cost of undergrounding is estimated as follows: STREET COST CITY SHARE Portland Avenue at VMPR $97,325 $ 48,662.50 66th Street at VMPR $73,963 $ 36,981.50 66th Street near 1-35W $96,227 $ 48.113.50 City Share $133.757.50 The cost estimate is $115,000 to move the sidewalk on Portland Avenue east side and on 66th Street north side and provide a drainage swale in Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. • If the unfunded portion of the cost of undergrounding is collected directly by NSP using an assessment on electric bills, it is estimated that the entire cost would be paid off in six months to one year. • Owners of other overhead utilities, such as U.S. West and Paragon Cable Television, are not eligible for reimbursement. D. LEGAL I • The City Attorney will be available for discussion at the meeting. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council could direct staff to not pursue Hennepin County funding assistance and to not continue with this project.. However, the work described above would not be completed and the opportunity to get financial help from the County would be lost. Council could direct staff to move the sidewalks and not order the undergrounding of utilities or could order the undergrounding but not move the sidewalk. V. ATTACHMENTS • Map of Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield (VMPR) showing sidewalks that are proposed to be moved. • Rendering of a photograph depicting what the Portland Avenue side of VMPR will look like with sidewalks moved and power poles removed. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. 0 j i • • VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD Proposed Sidewalk Relocation N W E S 0 200 400 600 800 Feet 1 ENGINEERING DIVISION 4/512000 s • VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD Proposed Sidewalk Relocation PROPOSED VIEW OF PORTLAND AVENUE ENGINEERING DIVISION CURRENT VIEW OF PORTLAND a • AGENDA SECTION: Resolution AGENDA ITEM # 13 REPORT # 120 J REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE SIG4TURE 1 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution expressing support for the Hennepin Parks First-Tier Trails, Greenways and Parks Plan. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution expressing support for the Hennepin Parks First-Tier Trails, Greenways and Parks Plan. II. BACKGROUND Hennepin Parks has initiated a study of possible pedestrian trail corridors throughout the first-tier suburbs and beyond. The plan identifies a potential regional trail corridor through Richfield on 76th Street. The proposed trail would originate at the Minnesota River bluffs and extend west to Lake Minnetonka. Representatives from Hennepin Parks and SRF Consulting presented the plan to the Community Services Commission at their regular March meeting. Several bike and pedestrian enthusiasts were invited to attend that meeting; approximately 20 attended. ,A i 0424 hennepin trails /3-/ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • At their regular April meeting, the Community Services Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this resolution of support of the plan. • If this resolution is approved, the City of Richfield will contact Hennepin Parks to express a readiness to proceed. • The desire to develop trail connections was identified by the City Council in their 2000 goal-setting session. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Hennepin Parks has asked communities involved with the plan to approve a resolution expressing support for the plan. • Adoption of this resolution does not authorize Hennepin Parks to begin construction. Instead, it allows the trail plan to proceed to Hennepin Park Board for review. C. FINANCIAL • Hennepin Parks is funding the cost of the preliminary planning phase of the First-Tier Trails, Parks and Greenways Plan. D. LEGAL I • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Do not approve the resolution expressing support of the Hennepin Parks First-Tier Trails, Parks and Greenways Plan. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Copy of the Edina/Richfield Corridor First-Tier Trails, Parks and Greenways Plan. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Del Miller, Hennepin arks • Adam Arvidson, SRF Consulting, Inc. • Any number of residents (possibly about a dozen) who have expressed interest in the development of bicycle/walking trails in Richfield. 0 /3-Q- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE HENNEPIN PARKS FIRST-TIER TRAILS, GREENWAYS AND PARKS PLAN WHEREAS, Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District (SHRPD) has studied the potential for trails, greenways and parks in the First Tier Communities of Suburban Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District has authorized its consultant, SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) to draft a plan summarizing the First Tier study information; and WHEREAS, the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District will work with First Tier Communities to review and comment on said plan; and WHEREAS, the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District desires that Communities initiate and support the implementation of said plan; and WHEREAS, the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District will require in a cooperative agreement with each city where a trail, greenway or park would be implemented; and WHEREAS, the implementation of this First Tier Plan will be an ongoing process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield supports the efforts of the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District to implement a first tier system of trails, greenways and parks and endorses the plan for said system. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April, 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 t 13 3 Chapter 3: Preferred Scheme Edina/Richfield Corridor (see Figure 8) This proposed trail corridor could begin where the Southwest LRT Regional Trail t crosses 11 th Avenue in Hopkins. Trails exist along a portion of this roadway leading south to Westbrook Way. At Westbrook Way, the trail could progress eastward, following existing city trails, into a City of Hopkins park. Existing trails lead through ' this park, cross 2nd Avenue, and lead toward US 169. The trail could then pass underneath US 169, which is elevated in this area, and enter ' Edina roughly following Nine Mile Creek. The trail could then proceed southward along the Nine Mile Creek floodway, within a city-owned parcel, until it reaches a town home development near Londonderry Road. This town home development has steep slopes and is heavily wooded. Trail implementation would be difficult in this area, but could generally follow the creek to Walnut Ridge Park. Multiple creek crossings in this area may be necessary. ' From Walnut Creek Park, the trail could cross Vernon Avenue at Gleason Road and follow Gleason Road all the way across TH 62, using existing trails associated with ' Bredesen Park on the east side of the roadway. The crossing of TH 62 on Gleason Road is not ideal, consisting of narrow sidewalks on the bridge. A supplemental non- motorized crossing of TH 62 would be preferred. Another option would be to construct a new pedestrian bridge over TH 62 further east in the vicinity of the creek. The trail could then depart from Gleason Avenue, pass through Bredesen Park, cross the highway, and touch down in Creek Valley Park. This could serve not only as a regional connector, but as a local connection between the schools on the south side of the expressway and the nature area on the north. South of TH 62, the trail could enter Creek Valley Park and progress eastward past Creek Valley School and Edina High School all the way to Tracy Avenue. This segment is comprised entirely of city-owned land. From here, the trail could cross Tracy Avenue at Valley View Road, cross an upgraded bridge over Nine Mile Creek at Valley View Road, and then follow Valley Lane ' eastward. Valley Lane has a very wide right-of-way and an existing narrow sidewalk. A regional trail facility would be easily implemented in this area. Farther along on Valley Lane, an existing trail easement provides access to Heights Park. The trail easement is narrow, but it leads to a high quality existing bridge over Nine Mile Creek. The trail could then follow the creek in Heights Park southward to Brook Drive. At Brook Drive, a small parcel of privately owned land exists between Heights Park and another city-owned parcel along the creek to the south. Trail implementation could be difficult in this segment and support by adjacent landowners would be important. The trail could then enter the aforementioned city-owned parcel and follow the creek south and east to 70th Street. A crossing of the CP/Soo Line Mainline would be required in this segment. 28 Parks Draft for Review: FIRST TIER TRAILS, GREENWAYS PARKS PLAN 3-4 Chapter 3: Preferred Scheme The trail could then follow 70th Street eastward to the Centennial Lakes development just east of France Avenue. 70th Street has the width of a four-lane roadway but is striped as a two-lane roadway. Sidewalks exist on both sides. It is possible that this roadway corridor could be reconstructed to accommodate a regional trail. In Centennial Lakes, there are existing trails leading south and east which offer two possible corridors. • 73rd Street Corridor: The trail could be moved south from 70th Street into Centennial Lakes, and then turn eastward to the York Avenue underpass. This would allow access to Yorktown Park. Yorktown Park backs directly up to Adams Hill Park in Richfield. i t I i Adams Hill Park has existing trails that access 73rd Street. The trail could then follow 73rd Street eastward, dipping south into Richfield Junior High School and Donaldson Park at Newton Avenue. 73rd Street is a residential street with narrow right-of-way and numerous trees. Trail implementation could be difficult in this segment. The trail could progress through Donaldson Park and then follow Humboldt Avenue southward to 76th Street. • 76th Street Corridor: This corridor would follow existing Centennial Lakes trails southward from 73rd Street all the way to 76th Street. It could then follow 76th Street eastward into Richfield. 76th Street is likely to be reconstructed in Richfield, but not in Edina, so the western portion of this route may be difficult due to narrow right-of-way. The Edina Richfield Corridor could then follow 76th Street eastward the entire length of Richfield. As a result of intentional shifting of traffic to 77th Street, this roadway now has excess capacity and is likely to be narrowed from four lanes to three lanes. Such a reconstruction would provide adequate right-of-way for trail implementation. The trail could then cross Cedar Avenue on a proposed new bridge, and access existing on-road facilities leading to the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. These on- road facilities follow the north frontage roads of I-494, cross the expressway at 34th Avenue, and then follow 80th Street into the refuge. Both the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and the wildlife refuge are interested in improving bicycle access to and through their facilities. The airport commissioned a study of possible bikeway improvements and relocations associated with airport expansion (BRW, Inc., 1999). It is possible that these on-road facilities could be upgraded with cooperation from the City of Bloomington, the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and the national wildlife refuge. Alternate Route: The trail could begin in Minnetonka just west of Shady Oak Lake. Existing city trails lead from the Southwest LRT Regional Trail eastward into the Opus H Office Park. Within this office development, existing sidewalks could be upgraded and the trail could proceed across US 169 on Bren Road. This would allow access into the forested town home development and Walnut Ridge Park in Edina. 29 Hennepin Parks Draft for Review FIRST TIER TRAILS9 GREENWAYS PARKS PLAN MAJOR REGIONAL ISSUES/CONSTRAINTS: MAJOR BENEFIT/VALUE: ` DETAILED Figure 8 j Reconstruction of loth and 76th Streets CORRIDOR AS A REGIONAL TRAIL- ,I impacts on Nine Mile Creek floodway ST. LOUIS PARK Potential ANALYSIS Connects the cities of Edina and Richfield to the Southwest LRT Trail on the west, and to the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge on the east J EDINA/RICHFIELD CORRIDOR Establishes Nine Mile Creek as an ecological and recreational corridor HOPKINS I AS A LOCAL TRAIL REGIONAL CONNECTION FIRST TIER TRAIL$, GREENWAVS, AND PARK$ PLAN LLI < Southwest LRT Regional Trail ttitsda Connections across Edina and Richfield go?e'OPPORTUNITY Crossings of US 169, TH 62, TH loo, 1-3SW, and Cedar Avenue City.of'Hopkinstrails/park L _ OPPORTUNITY - ?? - + US169 elevated,. v - . $ _ * / underpass possible' 0A 3 ?e r ' ,ya p (,a. OPPORTUNITY/CONSTRAINT Interlo<hen elud LL - AM a Undeveloped and basin OPPORiINITV Both St V'alnutRld9etPark OPPORTUNITY Gleason Rd: wide ROW, City trails a arw d'• MINNEAPOLIS 9 OPPORTUNITY ~ - lit le nsi It /1, ;.. OPPORTUNITY+a, )"" z - sash St- 6:. _• - EDINA :. Bredesen Park/ M NETONKA Creek Valley Park F a ` J ... 'VolIOLane: ! de ROW . c. -.. _ Volley PORUNITY OPPORTWNf1Y? " .. - YorkAve underpass.;? 5dstin9 City ofOPPORTUMTY 7H 62 _. PPORTUNITY O 5 - . development: " Minnetonka trails OPUS 2 ,.. ... - - Heiaka,ParFN-existing bodge isting trails -I some existing trails ! - ! easertient anr!"tmils OPPORTUNITY A 3' d ms Park IR shffel ------ r Cros TH 62 T? T CONSTRAINT - CONST'RA1 - r% -- on Gleason Road } RICHFIELD .; Gossingof Us 169 : Pnvate`tsT? CONSTRAINT! R CONS 1ItA1NT' ?y?. Crossing 62 OPPORf(JNI 73rd Street rgsidential, ' - 'CONSTRAINT of Nine Miles k, - Gly Park - - narrowROW?trees OPPORTUNITY - - d5? ' Residential development. everpassrequlred - OPPO TL7 ITV no Humboldt Ave: wide ROW;, ,. steep slopes, forested CONSTRAINT _ naf?Yark/ n u[an9 structures ..1 Difficult creele/roadway ?- .?. n t crossings at Valley View ?ccess from Newton: and Tracy Ave OPPORTUNITY/CONSTRAINT REGIONAL CONNECTION ,?. •• , 7oth'Street: narrow ROW, 73rd St r - Possible Richfield Railroad ?pur u ?.1 existing sidewalk, alk, possible REGIONAL CONNECTION narrowing 1 EDEN r Possible CP1,oo L ng Trail Corridor road r , PRAIRIE .° oBpo NI ?-- -----•-- -- - f CONSTRAINT i 'Centennial Lakes: - 76th St - ' Railroad, sing • existing trails _ OPPOR11 JIM .. c.:' •-....,..? - : - - ...76[n Ave to be recanstrua:ea I-aga - • - NORTH CONSTRAINT/ REGIONAL CONNECTION > (4 lanes to 3 lanes), trail BLOOMINGTON 761h Ave: high traffic accommodations planned National Wildlife Refuge, - volume, narrow sidewalk Minnesota River valley trails Existing Hennepin Parin Trail Edina/Richfield Trail Corridor.. Immediate Feasibility Primary Route - may Route DRAFT FOR REVIEW Existing City Trail Edino/Richfleld Trail Corridor. Contingent Feasibility Other i?ossible Trail Corridor. Primary Planned City Trail Edina/Richfield Trail Corridor- Difficult Implementation - - - - - - - Secondary Route ou M M QX 0 Other Possible Trail Corridor: Secondary Route FEBRUARY T/, 2000 PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF FACILITIES jFigure3j FIRST TIER TRAILS, GREENWAYS, AND PAW PLAN TP ?5 BROOKLYN ?y, s t ?y, tZ ' ?. u5af- - MAPLE GROVE PARK I. ?.- .? ^: - BROOKLYN ' CENTER pa scnnc. „% oEagle Lake Park n r-? Q, •?? r a rr a.,. - I' !Y?, ., y 3 rr, NEW , •t , ?1¢ ?? s:? HOPE Ys!?0 BROOKLYN CENTER/ ROBBINSDALE s tSA;a7- CORRIDOR - al s CRYSTAL - COLUMBIA PLYMOUTH S I Itd *? ^ ! 7 HEIGHTS NEW HOPE/CRVSTAU GOLDEN VALLEY - CORRIDOR =-- 'S c? fW se. nmMM. Pqu.\ ;T. ANTHONI I OBBINSDALE French Park, "'CRVSTAL/ROBBINfDALE s sM"w"E J CORRIDOR ' ,,.M' ? '. ST. ANTHONY . ' ""'" RAILROAD SPUR 2? t GOLDEN f( Luu tt,. LLEY d VA y MINNEAPOLIS lu:1: GoldenV IkY7 i1_- Iii. ?','.:: •. 3 r r rr ? _ SOO LINE RAILROAD MAINLINE _ vqp t'O's MINNETONKA ? S,aO r3 "BURLINGTON NORTHERN J r RAILROAD MAINLINE "115 -a - ,';• -i' po..____.. _.. Mtltown GZenwoY :_ - ----------------- ST. LOUIE /?. PARK - 2 MINNEAPOLIS HOPKINS ' ^"'.?,,?VERNONAVENUETh - DDR \ - 44TH LSTREET `O CORRIDOR , - - _ M s ` MINNEHAHA CREEK . i REGIONAL WATER TRAIL V pw fw j s VK, .. . .'. } 5t § _ : CEDAR AVENUE %(?. w Troll EDINA }, RICHFIELD CORRIDOR r. RAILROAD SPUR T. dili EDEN 1T PRAIRIE 1} Rat' a s•' 4??, AIRPORT 1 t Ali ,. ED RICHFIELD ' ?' COR RICHFIELD RIDOR i rest, st nev NORTH , m= ® -'BLOOMINGTON j Route DRAFT RAFT FOR R REVIEW Existing Hennepin Parts - Tr-ill -- - Existing -- City - Trail PossiMe T Trail Corridkl urrrane or. Ak Primary eraase Roo e. V - --- ED a : - Planned Hennepin Parks Trail - - - - - - Planned City Trail _____ Pmsl ®co•su.r >,c .uor jI • AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM # 12 REPORT # 119 law r STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: JULIE URBAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Interchange West area. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Adopt a resolution granting preliminary approval to an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the Interchange West area from neighborhood commercial (C-N) and high density single family residential (R-SFH) to regional commercial/office (R-C/O). • II. BACKGROUND The Interchange West area, from 76th to 78th Streets and Knox to Penn Avenues, has been identified as a redevelopment area since 1997. CSM Corporation had proposed a concept for the area that included an office and hotel development adjacent to the freeway and townhomes, apartments, and some neighborhood commercial between the commercial development and 76th Street. The layout and mix of land uses of the proposed development were consistent with the classifications in the Comprehensive Plan Guide Plan. 0424CPamend In 1999, CSM determined that it would not be able to develop the proposed plan. Best Buy Co., Inc. began studying the area as a potential site for its corporate headquarters. On March 20, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Development with Best Buy. The proposed concept plan for the Best Buy development includes 1.5 million square feet of office space. The office development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Regional Commercial/Office classification for the majority of the property. The northern portion of the development is, however, guided for housing and neighborhood commercial, which the Best Buy concept does not include. A Plan amendment to designate this northern area as Regional Commercial/Office is necessary to proceed with the proposed office development. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives and the text for the West 1-494 subarea are supportive of the proposed amendment. (See Attachment A, highlighted portions) • The Comprehensive Plan calls for a net gain of 1,125 housing units throughout the City. The net gain with the amendment would be 1,038 housing units, a reduction of 87 housing units. • While housing is no longer a part of the proposed concept plan, approximately $7 million of the tax increment generated by the development will be placed in a housing fund to finance construction and rehabilitation of affordable and market rate housing throughout the community. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Staff met with Metropolitan Council staff last fall to review the potential amendment. Metropolitan Council staff were supportive of the City's efforts to create jobs and increase the density of development within the 1-494 beltway. • The Comprehensive Plan amendment is one step in the review process for the Best Buy development. Additional zoning, financial, and environmental approvals will also be needed before the development can move forward. At this time, staff anticipates consideration of these items in late fall, 2000. • The impact of traffic from the proposed office development was a significant issue raised at the Planning Commission public hearing. The Comprehensive Plan guide plan considers the impact of proposed land uses on the transportation system from a broad perspective. A detailed study of traffic impacts caused by the specific development proposed by Best Buy and the various alternatives to mitigate those • impacts will be conducted over the next several months as part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. There will be two public meetings scheduled during the EIS process for residents to review detailed traffic information and provide feedback. At this time, staff anticipates these meetings to occur in June and September. • The Comprehensive Plan provides a broad framework for the City to use when reviewing specific development proposals. The Plan will provide that framework when the City reviews the EIS, the planned unit development plan, and the final development plan. I C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The City Council must adopt and amend the Comprehensive Plan by resolution by two-thirds vote of the full Council • Following Metropolitan Council review, this matter shall come back to the City Council for final consideration. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would not be effective until the property is held in common ownership or control by one owner. • On March 28, 2000, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the amendment and voted unanimously to approve the amendment. They voted in support of the amendment with the understanding that the amendment would not take effect if the Best Buy proposal did not proceed. • The City Council is not required by state statute to conduct a public hearing on a Comprehensive Plan amendment; however, it has been City policy for both the Planning Commission and City Council to hold a public hearing. • . • Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on April 12, 2000 and mailed to property owners and occupants within the following area: 78th to 75th Streets, 35W to Sheridan Avenue, properties abutting 76th Street from Sheridan to Xerxes Avenue. Notice was also mailed to persons who have requested notice of hearings related to the project. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Delay the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this time; however, this decision would delay many other aspects of the development process. • Deny the amendment. ' V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution amending the City's Comprehensive Plan concerning the Interchange West area • Attachment A, excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan • Attachment B, map of existing and proposed Comprehensive Plan . classifications VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • A significant number of residents within, and adjacent to, the development area may be present. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO AN AMENDMENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONCERNING THE INTERCHANGE WEST AREA WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan provides a Guide Plan establishing classifications for individual property; and WHEREAS, the property located in the Interchange West area, specifically between Knox and Penn Avenues and 76th Street and midway between 77th and 76t Street is designated R-SFH (high density single family residential) and C-N (neighborhood commercial) [the "subject area"]; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the Guide Plan classifications and determined that it would be appropriate to classify this area as C-R/O (regional commercial/office); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing concerning modifying the. Guide Plan classifications of property in the subject area; and WHEREAS, the appropriate jurisdictions have been notified of the amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved the modification on March 28, 2000 following a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the amendment on April 24, 2000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The amendment of the City's Comprehensive Plan, to change the classifications of property in the subject area from R-SFH and C-N to C-R/O, is hereby preliminarily approved, subject to review and approval by the Metropolitan Council. Following Metropolitan Council review, this matter shall come back to the City Council for final consideration. 2. The preliminary approval granted herein is subject to the following conditions: a. A determination that the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the Best Buy project is adequate. b. All of the property in the subject area must be under common ownership or control, consistent with development of a regional commercial/office complex. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April, 2000. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk • Attachment A RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Volume One: Executive Summary COMMUNITY WIDE GOAL 1 Preserve those elements that contribute to and enhance the small town character and communityt identity. Objectives ¦ redevelop the housing supply to meet diverse needs while maintaining the integrity of existing neighborhoods ¦ encourage community participation in order to reinforce a sense of community ownership and belonging ¦ continue municipal investment that enhances community pride ¦ preserve historical, natural and cultural resources GOAL 2 Maintain and enhance Richfield's imaoe as a distinct and livable communitv. Objectives ¦ maintain and provide quality amenities and a safe living environment for all residents ¦ advocate and support with municipal investment a high quality visual environment throughout the City and particularly along major transportation corridors ¦ encourage and support a diversity of compatible non-residential land uses that are accessible and responsive to the needs of Richfield and adjacent communities GOAL 3 Provide an economic climate within Richfield that will encourage the availability of aualitv aoods. services and emolovment opportunities for residents. Objectives ¦ encourage business growth ¦ encourage and support the development of strong commercial districts that respect the values and standards of the citizens of Richfield ¦ encourage the development of viable and responsive neighborhood commercial services GOAL 4 Encourage and facilitate the preservation and development of a transportation infrastructure that provides a high decree of accessibility for destinations in and around Richfield. Objectives ¦ encourage the development and preservation of transportation connections with neighboring communities ¦ encourage the development and use of alternative methods of transporation ¦ promote Richfield's locational advantage within the greater metropolitan area ¦ develop pedestrian and bike facilities that are functional, attractive, safe and accessible ¦ promote transit-sensitive development ECONOMIC GOAL 5 Promote diverse development that will broaden the tax base while reinforcinc the residential character of Richfield. Objectives ¦ promote development that can support itself and broaden the tax base ¦ manage development in a manner that will not harm the residential character of Richfield ¦ create commercial districts that sustain specific types of development and stabilize the economic base ¦ encourage diverse, high-quality development that meets the needs of all residents and neighbors TRANSPORTATION GOAL6 Expand the existina transportation svstem so as to improve accessibilitv and the aualitv of life for all Richfield residents. Objectives ¦ neutralize impact on the residential areas by focusing on accessibility ¦ strengthen coordinated transportation efforts with other communities in the metropolitan area that enhance and reinforce the location advantages of Richfield ¦ pursue improved system services to increase flexibility and access ¦ address parking and highway use through travel demand management (TDM) and other means to reduce congestion ¦ continue to support the long-term operation of the existing airport in the metropolitan area, working with the federal agencies to provide a quality living environment for those residing near the airport ¦ minimize the traffic impacts of parking areas GOAL7 Emphasize and encouraae alternate forms of transoortation. Objective ¦ develop a city-wide system of bike trails is COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT GOAL 8 Achieve a standard of land use that is reflective of the "home town" character of Richfield., Objectives ¦ consider Richfield's role in the metropolitan area as a basis for land use policies ¦ develop residential standards for land use that will support neighborhood character ¦ promote the development of housing stock that is available to all income levels ¦ support commercial land use that is diverse and responsive to its context and the socio- economic needs of Richfield ¦ maximize the use of existing structures for community needs ¦ minimize the impacts of parking GOAL9 Continue to provide hiah aualitv parks and open spaces that are available on a neighborhood and communitv-wide basis. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT GOAL 10 Improve the aualitv of life in Richfield by addressina human environmental and visual resources. Objectives ¦ promote the improvement of environmental elements (water quality) that can enhance the image of Richfield ¦ reduce residual noise and air pollution that can harm the health and safety of Richfield residents ¦ address the means to improve the visual quality throughout the City, concentrating on design districts and transportation corridors, beginning with land use coordination ¦ provide environmental standards that will be consistent with the needs of the next decade and reinforce the City's image as a sustainable and environmentally sensitive city ¦ minimize the environmental impacts of parking 0 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT GOAL 11 Recoanize the value of the urban forest to the communitf by develooina policies that will preserve the existina urban forest and encourage its continued arowth and expansion. Objectives ¦ develop policies that will encourage an urban forestry approach to energy conservation ¦ continue to encourage a diversity of tree species that will prevent the depletion of urban trees from disease ¦ develop policies and construction specifications that will minimize damage to the existing urban forest canopy GOAL 12 Ensure the preservation of a hiah level of water duality by reducina the use of pesticides and chemical turf treatments that contribute to water pollution. INFRASTRUCTURE GOAL 13 Create an infrastrucure that responds to the needs of the next decade Objectives ¦ promote infrastructure improvements that are responsive to and appropriate for existing and future needs ¦ promote an infrastructure that is efficient and of high quality GOAL 14 Assure the Iona term maintenance and eventual reolacement of infrastructure. Objectives ¦ provide adequate annual funding for maintenance ¦ select, train and retain capable maintenance staff GOAL 15 Promote infrastructure that is environmentally responsible. GOAL 16 Reduce visual and ohvsical clutter by burvina all new and replacement infrastructure utilities. RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Volume Three: Plan Elements J.1-494 CORRIDOR (WEST) The area between 1-35W and Penn Avenue offers the same future commercial development potential as its counterpart to the east of 1--35W. What it lacks is an upgraded street between the two freeway interchanges. The Plan proposal suggests a concept to approach that situation by improving Knox Avenue and West 77th Street as the commercial connection to support proposed Regional Commercial (C-R) sites on both sides of that upgraded street. The existing development can support or justify this and should be a strong candidate for complete or partial redevelopment with the support of this plan proposal. A mixed use project including High-Density Residential and Office would be most likely and is so designated. West 76th Street carries very high traffic volumes today and the increased density and character of the development in the proposed Plan will add even more traffic, particularly between Penn Avenue and 1-35W. For that reason, the Plan proposal would close (or limit movements to right-in and right-out only) all of the intersections east of Penn Avenue except Logan and Newton Avenues and relocate the service road by combining it with the freeway ramp in order to improve the safety and movement of local and through traffic. 0 • AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 12 REPORT# 119 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 • REPORT PREPARED BY: JULIE URBAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR. REVIEW: ` SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Interchange West area. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the designation of properties in the Interchange West area from neighborhood commercial (C-N) and high density single family residential (R-SFH) to regional commercial/office (R-C/O) and authorize submittal to the Metropolitan Council. • II. BACKGROUND The Interchange West area, from 76th to 78th Streets and Knox to Penn Avenues, has been identified as a redevelopment area since 1997. CSM Corporation had proposed a concept for the area that included an office and hotel development adjacent to the freeway and townhomes, apartments, and some neighborhood commercial between the commercial development and 76th Street. The layout and mix of land uses of the proposed development were consistent with the classifications in the Comprehensive Plan Guide Plan. 0424CPamend ' ?a In 1999, CSM determined that it would not be able to develop the proposed plan. Best Buy Co., Inc. began studying the area as a potential site for its corporate headquarters. On March 20, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Development with Best Buy. The proposed concept plan for the Best Buy development includes 1.5 million square feet of office space. The office development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Regional Commercial/Office classification for the majority of the property. The northern portion of the development is, however, guided for housing and neighborhood commercial, which the Best Buy concept does not include. A Plan amendment to designate this northern area as Regional Commercial/Office is necessary to proceed with the proposed office development. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives and the text for the West 1-494 subarea are supportive of the proposed amendment. (See Attachment A, highlighted portions) • The Comprehensive Plan calls for a net gain of 1,125 housing units throughout the City. The net gain with the amendment would be 1,038 housing units, a reduction of 87 housing units. • While housing is no longer a part of the proposed concept plan, approximately $7 million of the tax increment generated by the development will be placed in a housing fund to finance construction and rehabilitation of affordable and market rate housing throughout the community. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • Staff met with Metropolitan Council staff last fall to review the potential amendment. Metropolitan Council staff were supportive of the City's efforts to create jobs and increase the density of development within the 1-494 beltway. • The Comprehensive Plan amendment is one step in the review process for the Best Buy development. Additional zoning, financial, and environmental approvals will also be needed before the development can move forward. At this time, staff anticipates consideration of these items in late fall, 2000. • The impact of traffic from the proposed office development was a significant issue raised at the Planning Commission public hearing. The Comprehensive Plan guide plan considers the impact of proposed land uses on the transportation system from a broad perspective. A detailed study of traffic impacts caused by the specific development proposed by Best Buy and the various alternatives to mitigate those impacts will be conducted over the next several months as part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. There will be two public meetings scheduled during the EIS process for residents to review detailed traffic information and provide feedback. At this time, staff anticipates these meetings to occur in June and September. The Comprehensive Plan provides a broad framework for the City to use when reviewing specific development proposals. The Plan will provide that framework when the City reviews the EIS, the planned unit development plan, and the final development plan. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL The City Council must adopt and amend the Comprehensive Plan by resolution by two-thirds vote of the full Council. • The amendment would be contingent upon Metropolitan Council approval and a determination that the final EIS prepared for the Best Buy project is adequate. It would also not be effective until the property is held in common ownership by one owner. • On March 28, 2000, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the amendment and voted unanimously to approve the amendment. They voted in support of the amendment with the understanding that the amendment would not take effect if the Best Buy proposal did not proceed. • The City Council is not required by state statute to conduct a public hearing on a Comprehensive Plan amendment; however, it has been w City policy for both the Planning Commission and City Council to hold a public hearing. • Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on April 12, 2000 and mailed to property owners and occupants within the following area: 78th to 75th Streets, 35W to Sheridan Avenue, properties abutting 76th Street from Sheridan to Xerxes Avenue. Notice was also mailed to persons who have requested notice of hearings related to the project. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) Delay the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this time; however, this decision would delay many other aspects of the development process. Deny the amendment. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution amending the City's Comprehensive Plan concerning the Interchange West area • Attachment A, excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan • Attachment B, map of existing and proposed Comprehensive Plan classifications VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I • A significant number of residents within, and adjacent to, the development area may be present. is-3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONCERNING THE INTERCHANGE WEST AREA WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan provides a Guide Plan establishing classifications for individual property; and WHEREAS, the property located in the Interchange West area, specifically between Knox and Penn Avenues and 76th Street and midway between 77th and 76th Street is designated R-SFH (high density single family residential) and C-N (neighborhood commercial) [the "subject area"]; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the Guide Plan classifications and determined that it would be appropriate to classify this area as C-R/O (regional commercial/office); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing concerning modifying the Guide Plan classifications of property in the subject area; and WHEREAS, the appropriate jurisdictions have been notified of the amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved the modification on March 28, 2000 following a public hearing; and 4 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the amendment on April 24, 2000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the City's Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to change the classifications of property in the subject area from R-SFH and C-N to C-R/O contingent upon the following: 1. The revision is submitted to and approved by the Metropolitan Council. 2. A determination that the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the Best Buy project is adequate. 3. All property is held in common ownership by one owner. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April, 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: • Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk a- q Attachment A • RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Volume One: Executive Summary COMMUNITY WIDE GOAL 1 Preserve those elements that contribute to and enhance the small town character and communitv identity. Objectives ¦ redevelop the housing supply to meet diverse needs while maintaining the integrity of existing neighborhoods ¦ encourage community participation in order to reinforce a sense of community ownership and belonging ¦ continue municipal investment that enhances community pride ¦ preserve historical, natural and cultural resources GOAL 2 Maintain and enhance Richfield's imaae as a distinct and livable communitv. Objectives ¦ maintain and provide quality amenities and a safe living environment for all residents ¦ advocate and support with municipal investment a high quality visual environment throughout the City and particularly along major transportation corridors ¦ encourage and support a diversity of compatible non-residential land uses that are accessible and responsive to the needs of Richfield and adjacent communities GOAL 3 Provide an economic climate within Richfield that will encouraae the availability of quality Goods, services and emalovment opportunities for residents. Objectives ¦ encourage business growth ¦ encourage and support the development of strong commercial districts that respect the values and standards of the citizens of Richfield ¦ encourage the development of viable and responsive neighborhood commercial services GOAL 4 Encouraae and facilitate the preservation and development of a transportation infrastructure that provides a high dearee of accessibility for destinations in and around Richfield. Objectives ¦ encourage the development and preservation of transportation connections with neighboring communities ¦ encourage the development and use of alternative methods of transporation ¦ promote Richfield's locational advantage within the greater metropolitan area ¦ develop pedestrian and bike facilities that are functional, attractive, safe and accessible ¦ promote transit-sensitive development ECONOMIC GOAL 5 Promote diverse development that will broaden the tax base while reinforcing the residential character of Richfield. Objectives ¦ promote development that can support itself and broaden the tax base ¦ manage development in a manner that will not harm the residential character of Richfield 41 ¦ create commercial districts that sustain specific types of development and stabilize the economic base ¦ encourage diverse, high-quality development that meets the needs of all residents and neighbors TRANSPORTATION GOAL6 Expand the existina transportation svstem so as to improve accessibilitv and the aualitv of life for all Richfield residents. Objectives ¦ neutralize impact on the residential areas by focusing on accessibility ¦ strengthen coordinated transportation efforts with other communities in the metropolitan area that enhance and reinforce the location advantages of Richfield ¦ pursue improved system services to increase flexibility and access ¦ address parking and highway use through travel demand management (TDM) and other means to reduce congestion ¦ continue to support the long-term operation of the existing airport in the metropolitan area, working with the federal agencies to provide a quality living environment for those residing near the airport ¦ minimize the traffic impacts of parking areas GOAL 7 Emphasize and encourage alternate forms of transportation. Objective ¦ develop a city-wide system of bike trails 0 COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT GOAL8 Achieve a standard of land use that is reflective of the "home town" character of Richfield.. Objectives ¦ consider Richfield's role in the metropolitan area as a basis for land use policies ¦ develop residential standards for land use that will support neighborhood character ¦ promote the development of housing stock that is available to all income levels ¦ support commercial land use that is diverse and responsive to its context and the socio- economic needs of Richfield ¦ maximize the use of existing structures for community needs ¦ minimize the impacts of parking GOAL 9 Continue to provide hiah aualitv parks and oven spaces that are available on a neiahborhood and communitv-wide basis. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT GOAL 10 Improve the aualitv of life in Richfield by addressina human environmental and visual resources. Objectives ¦ promote the improvement of environmental elements (water quality) that can enhance the image of Richfield ¦ reduce residual noise and air pollution that can harm the health and safety of Richfield residents ¦ address the means to improve the visual quality throughout the City, concentrating on design districts and transportation corridors, beginning with land use coordination ¦ provide environmental standards that will be consistent with the needs of the next decade and reinforce the City's image as a sustainable and environmentally sensitive city ¦ minimize the environmental impacts of parking 0 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT GOAL 11 Recognize the value of the urban forest to the communitv by developinq policies that will preserve the existina urban forest and encouraae its continued arowth and expansion. Objectives ¦ develop policies that will encourage an urban forestry approach to energy conservation ¦ continue to encourage a diversity of tree species that will prevent the depletion of urban trees from disease ¦ develop policies and construction specifications that will minimize damage to the existing urban forest canopy GOAL 12 Ensure the preservation of a hiah level of water aualitv by reducina the use of Desticides and chemical turf treatments that contribute to water pollution. INFRASTRUCTURE GOAL 13 Create an infrastrucure that responds to the needs of the next decade Objectives ¦ promote infrastructure improvements that are responsive to and appropriate for existing and future needs ¦ promote an infrastructure that is efficient and of high quality GOAL 14 Assure the Iona term maintenance and eventual replacement of infrastructure. Objectives ¦ provide adequate annual funding for maintenance ¦ select, train and retain capable maintenance staff GOAL 15 Promote infrastructure that is environmentaliv responsible. GOAL 16 Reduce visual and ohvsical clutter by burvina all new and replacement infrastructure utilities. RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Volume Three: Plan Elements J. 1-494 CORRIDOR (WEST) The area between 1-35W and Penn Avenue offers the same future commercial development potential as its counterpart to the east of 1-35W. What it lacks is an upgraded street between the two freeway interchanges. The Plan proposal suggests a concept to approach that situation by improving Knox Avenue and West 77th Street as the commercial connection to support proposed Regional Commercial (C-R) sites on both sides of that upgraded street. The existing development can support or justify this and should be a strong candidate for complete or partial redevelopment with the support of this plan proposal. A mixed use project including High-Density Residential and Office would be most likely and is so designated. La-? West 76th Street carries very high traffic volumes today and the increased density and character of the development in the proposed Plan will add even more traffic, particularly between Penn Avenue and 1-35W. For that reason, the Plan proposal would close (or limit movements to right-in and right-out only) all of the intersections east of Penn Avenue except Logan and Newton Avenues and relocate the service road by combining it with the freeway ramp in order to improve the safety and movement of local and through traffic. 0 la-,p Attachment B Exis M?rrlt ?. Ming Comp Plan Classifications \\? ', \\\?\ < 11111111111111111114 200 0 200 Feet (70TH sT w) INTERSTATE HWY NO 494 samtroMna cre Properties with Proposed Classification Change ° z 0 (?M sr " INTERSTATE HWY NO 494 . SOU7HMWN DR Comp Plan Classifications 0 Neighborhood Commercial Regional Commercial/Office Single Family Residential ® S. F. Res.- High Density ® Multi Residential- Medium Density Multi Res.- H.D./Office ® Church J W Q 200 0 200 Feet March, 2000 • AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 11 REPORT # 118 J REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 JULIE URBAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE • • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ©' d IRE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing on a conditional use permit resolution for a day care facility for up to 50 children at 7145 Harriet Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit to allow use of a portion of the building at 7145 Harriet Avenue as a day care facility for up to 50 children. III. BACKGROUND The applicants currently operate a child care facility out of their home. In anticipation of potential airport redevelopment, they are planning to relocate.and expand their child care business at the former Central Elementary school building located at 7145 Harriet Avenue. They would operate Sheranees Montessori, a Montessori learning center and childcare center, for up to 50 children, age 16 to 60 months. Two rooms in the school building will be remodeled and used for the child care center (rooms 305 and 306). A play area would be created to the north of the wing where the center would be located. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 0424daycare A. POLICY • Parking is located to the east of the building, immediately adjacent to the door closest to the child care facility. Parking from the high school is not permitted in this area. A separate drop-off area would not be created given the parking available adjacent to the door. • A latch key program currently operates within the building along with other school-related programs. • The applicants are currently negotiating a lease for the space with the School District. • -City Code requires the day care facility to hold the appropriate state licenses. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • On March 28, 2000, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the conditional use permit. • Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on April 12, 2000 and mailed to property owners and occupants within 350 feet of the subject property. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Deny the conditional use permit with a finding that the proposed use would have a negative impact on surrounding properties. V. ATTACHMENTS I • Resolution • Attachment A, Site Plan VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Lasantha and Miriam Fernando, owners of Sheranees Montessori 0 0-01 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7145 Harriet Avenue South WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of a conditional use permit for a day care facility for up to 50 children on land generally located at 7145 Harriet Avenue South, legally described as: Blocks 2, 3, 10 and 11, Augsburg Park Addition, including adjacent parts of vacated streets and alleys WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the conditional use permit; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: A conditional use permit is issued for a day care facility for up to 50 children, as described in City Council Report No. , on the Subject Property legally described above. 2. The conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 546.05, Subd. 9 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April, 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 • • Al IHl:nwrcrv I N 7145 HARRIET AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ' RICHFIELD HIGH SCHOOL 1 -? lllillll?lll)IIIIi ? ? 0 W METRO WORK W Z ?- *----• -?? Q W PLAYGROUND Iz > : ?• • i,y •DOOR Q L.. RM RM N LL1 1305 306 m GYM C FUN CLUB W O 72ND STREET NORTH SCALE: 1"= 108' DATE: 3-21-00 • V u SITE PLAN • Agenda Section: Public Hearinizs AGENDA ITEM # 10 REPORT # 117 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • APRIL 24, 2000 BETSY CHRISTENSEN, SUPPORT SERVICES REPORT PREPARED BY: DIVISION MANAGER NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY i NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ff, 1'r _ ?? ??-- SIGNATUR REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ' ?it??C%c-?ytp ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Conduct disciplinary hearing and civil enforcement for Godfather's Pizza, 2 West 66th Street, who recently underwent an alcohol compliance check, conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff, and who failed the check by selling alcohol to underage youth. , I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct the disciplinary hearing and by motion: Approve civil enforcement for Godfather's Pizza, 2 West 66th Street, who recently underwent an alcohol compliance check, conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff, and who failed the check by selling alcohol to underage youth. II. BACKGROUND On February 24, 2000, Richfield Public Safety staff conducted alcohol compliance checks at all of Richfield's alcohol establishments, assisted by five underage youths . between 15-17 years of age. These compliance checks were the fourth in a series of four compliance checks that were conducted by Police in 1999 and early 2000. 0424Godf I a-J On February 24, 2000, the police division made arrangements for the minors to enter the establishments with undercover police officers. In one instance, the youths were successful in being served alcohol. The only business that made a sale of alcohol to an underage youth on February 24, 2000 was: • Godfather's Pizza - 2 West 66th Street This is a second offense violation for Godfather's Pizza. They were previously fined $500 and received a two-day suspension of their license as a result of selling alcohol to a minor. At no time did any of the minors consume any of the alcohol. The youth presented their personal valid ID's and at no time attempted to convince anyone that they were of legal age. Establishments were visited at a variety of times,, busy or not busy, in an effort to determine if busy times produced more successful buys. It doesn't appear that the time of day made any difference. After each attempt, successful or unsuccessful, the officers identified themselves to the clerk and issued a citation if they failed. If the underage youth were unsuccessful in securing alcohol, the clerk was congratulated by officers for doing a good job. The employee that sold alcohol will be charged criminally in court. The action being taken today is for civil enforcement and penalties against the business that holds a license to sell alcohol within the City. At an April 5, 1999 study session with the City Council, staff was directed to update Resolution 8714, which specifies certain improper conduct of alcohol license holders and delineates the progressive discipline to be expected when violations occur. In the past, this resolution has not included progressive discipline regarding the sale of alcohol to minors. This is the resolution that is referenced each year at the time that alcohol licenses are renewed. This resolution was updated a second time at a December 13, 1999 Council meeting and included some minor changes in language and fine structures. It is now identified as Resolution 8808. The fine that is being recommended at this time is intended to recover 100% of the costs for conducting the compliance checks and to penalize the businesses punitively. Compliance checks will continue to occur during 2000 at the rate of at least two a year, possibly three. Any establishments found to be guilty of selling again on a second, third or fourth check would receive progressive discipline in the way of license suspension and fines as outlined in a revised version of Resolution 8808. Public Safety staff is also recommending that 15% of the punitive fines be designated for future alcohol and tobacco education efforts within the community. • 'III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Consistent with past actions taken against liquor establishments, staff recommends that the City Council suspend Godfather's Pizza license l©_v_ to sell alcohol for five consecutive days and to levy a fine against the establishment in the amount of $1500 for the second violation. Staff is also proposing that the Public Safety Director will select the five consecutive days their license will be suspended. It is further recommended that as a second time violating establishment, Godfather's Pizza will be required to meet a second time with the Public Safety Director and to also conduct a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session with all of their employees. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • It is a violation of Minnesota State Statute and City ordinance to sell alcohol to underage youth. • Civil enforcement penalties taken in the past by the City Council against several establishments have been severe. This was done to send a message to the establishments and the community that the City Council will not tolerate this type of violation continuing in the community and that Richfield youth and their well-being are highly valued. • Citizen representatives of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health support severe actions against establishments in an effort to protect the youth of the community and to send a message that youth and their well-being are a high priority in this City. • C. FINANCIAL • All costs of conducting compliance checks will be reimbursed through the fines that are levied against an establishment for failing an alcohol compliance check. • Furthermore, 15% of the punitive fines are designated for future alcohol and tobacco educational efforts within the community. D. LEGAL I • City Attorney Corrine Thomson will be present at the Council meeting. I. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council could decide to take no action against Godfather's Pizza for the sale of alcohol to a minor that would result in no disciplinary actions against the establishment. This would result, however, in sending a message to the community that children and their well being are not a priority in Richfield. • The Council may consider taking more or less severe action against Godfather's Pizza for the sale of alcohol to an underage youth. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution 8808, which delineates the progressive discipline that a business can expect, will be taken when any of the noted prohibited conduct takes place. This is attached for reference purposes only and has been supplied to each business establishment each time a compliance check is conducted. ?- 3 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I Representatives from Godfather's Pizza, 2 West 66th Street. 0 0 l0-4 CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. 8808 RESOLUTION SPECIFYING CERTAIN IMPROPER CONDUCT OF ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR, WINE AND 3.2 MALT LIQUOR LICENSEES AND STATING RECOMMENDED DISCIPLINE REPLACING RESOLUTION NO. 8714 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: The City of Richfield annually issues a number of licenses permitting the sale of on- sale intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor within the City. The conduct of the licensed activity is governed by the provisions of Section 1200 of the City Code. Although, the provisions of that Section describe in a general way what is expected of licensees in the proper conduct of the licensed activity, the City Council is concerned that licensees should have a more specific understanding of the types of conduct, generally described in the Code, which may subject their licenses to discipline; and further that they have a clear understanding of the scope and nature of the discipline which may be imposed for certain specific conduct. The levels of discipline described in this resolution will be imposed only in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. The list of activities and conduct contained in this resolution is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather concentrates on the types of conduct most frequently observed at licensed establishments. Other activity or conduct which is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals and welfare and which constitutes a violation of the provisions of Section 1200 of the City Code may also subject liquor licenses to discipline. The actions, which the City may take in accordance with this resolution, are not intended to preclude such further actions such as actions in law or in equity or criminal prosecution available to the City for the conduct described in this resolution. SPECIFIC PROHIBITED CONDUCT AND PROPOSED SANCTIONS. A. Noise and Other Disturbing Conduct Within or Near the Licensed Premises. Licensees are responsible for the conduct of their patrons while within the licensed establishment; and of individuals within the immediate vicinity of the establishment whom are either coming to or leaving the establishment. The City is unwilling to permit the continued operation of a licensed alcohol establishment in circumstances where it is evident that the licensed activity is having a detrimental impact upon the health, welfare, safety and morals of the community and patrons of the establishment. The following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor licenses for verified reports of criminal misconduct occurring on or near the licensed premises and attributable to patrons of the establishment (including persons entering or leaving): 1) For five (5) such incidents occurring within less than a 31-day period (beginning with the date of the first of such five incidents) - suspension of the license for up to 10 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident. 0424Godf C)-S 2) For ten (10) such incidents occurring within less than a 61-day period (beginning with the date of the first of such incidents) - suspension of the license for up to 30 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident. 3) For fifteen (15) such incidents occurring within any 91-day period (beginning with the date of the first of such incidents) - suspension of the license for up to 60 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident. The discipline outlined above is intended to be cumulative in nature, and incidents which give rise to discipline (or the right to discipline) during a shorter period may be counted in determining whether discipline is appropriate during a longer period. The term "verified reports of criminal misconduct" means a report made to the Director of Public Safety by the licensee or a complaint made by others concerning an incident constituting a crime under the City Code of the laws of the State of Minnesota, which, in the opinion of the Director, is directly attributable to the licensed activity. Verified reports of criminal misconduct do not of necessity mean requests for service, and licensees shall not be required to make requests for services in situations where the licensee is capable of resolving the incident without police assistance. However, it is necessary for the City to have an accurate measure of the level of criminal misconduct. The Department of Public Safety shall establish standards and criteria for the making of such reports by the licensee. If the licensee fails to make the required reports of criminal misconduct in accordance with such standards and criteria, the following additional discipline may be imposed upon its on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor license: 1) For the first incident of failure to report criminal misconduct within any license year - suspension of license for up to five days and a civil fine of $2,000. 2) For the second such incident in any license year - suspension of license for up to 10 days and a civil fine of $2,000. 3) For the third such incident in any license year - suspension of license for up to 15 days and a civil fine of $2,000. B. Serving Alcoholic Beverages Beyond the Interior of the Licensed Premises or Permitting Patrons to Leave such Licensed Premises with Alcoholic Beverages. Licensees must assure that the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages will be confined only to those areas permitted by the license. Failure to do so may have an evident and adverse impact upon other activities lawfully occurring within the area and creates a substantial risk of criminal behavior such as violation of the Open Bottle Law. The following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor licenses: 1) The first incident during the license year- up to a 10-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine. 2) The second incident during the license year -- up to a 30-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine. 3) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine. /0-(10 4) The fourth incident during the license year - revocation of license. C. Permitting Occupancy to Exceed the Limits Permitted Under the Uniform Fire Code 25.114 (overcrowding) Licensees are absolutely bound to prevent situations in which the licensed premises become overcrowded. The City finds that the opportunity to serve alcoholic beverages contributes to an environment wherein overcrowding, if not strictly controlled by the licensee, may occur. Each liquor license issued shall state the maximum occupancy limit for the licensed premises. The following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses for incidents of overcrowding verified by the City's Public Safety Director or their designee: 1) The first incident during the license year- up to a 10-day license suspension and $2,000 civil fine. 2) The second incident during the license year - up to a 30-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine. 3) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine. 4) The fourth or subsequent incident during the license year - revocation of the license. D. Facilitating Gambling. Licensees must not permit or allow any condition to occur on the licensed premises, which would facilitate gambling activity. Licensees may not permit any device on the licensed premises, which could be used, for gambling. Such devices include blackjack tables, video games of chance, roulette wheels and any other amusement or gambling device as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 349 and 609, and Richfield City code Subsections 1100.13 and 1100.01. For any incident of facilitation of gambling, the on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor license may be suspended for up to a period of days equal in number to the period of days that such incident continued. E. Effect of Suspension or Revocation of Food License. On-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses which are issued to establishments because they qualify as restaurants shall cease to be valid for any period of time during which the establishment's food license is under suspension or revocation as the result of actions taken by the City Manager, enforcement officer or both pursuant to Subsection 615.05, subdivision 6 of the City Code. The on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor during such period shall constitute an unlicensed sale. F. The Sale, Consumption or Service to a Minor of Intoxicating Liquor, Wine or 3.2 Malt Liquor. (,"?) Licensees must assure that the sale, consumption or service to a minor of any alcoholic beverage is prohibited under any condition. Failure to do so will result in swift and severe progressive civil penalties. The following discipline will be imposed upon on- sale intoxicating, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses for verified reports or compliance checks of misconduct occurring at the establishment: 1) For a first offense, the establishment's license will be suspended for 2 days and a civil fine of $500 will be due and payable to the City. 2) For a second offense, (if within 2 years of the 1st offense), the establishment's license will be suspended for 5 days and a civil fine of $1500 will be due and payable to the City. If the offense occurs outside of 2 years of a 1st offense, it will be considered a first offense. 3) For a third offense, (if within 3 years of the 2nd offense), the establishment's license will be suspended for 10 days and a civil fine of $1750 will be due and payable to the City. If the offense occurs outside of three years of a second offense, it will be considered a 2nd offense. 4) For a fourth offense, (if within 4 years of the 3rd offense), the establishment's license will be revoked and a civil fine of $2000 will be due and payable to the City. If the offense occurs outside of four years of a third offense, it will be considered a 3rd offense. G. General provisions regarding sanctions. In addition to the sanctions listed for specific offenses listed in paragraphs A through F above, the City Council may impose other mandatory requirements upon the establishment such as: meetings with the Public Safety Director to present a plan of action to assure that the problem will not continue; mandatory educational sessions with Crime Prevention staff; or other actions that the City Council deems appropriate. The City Council retains the right to modify the provisions of this resolution from time to time and to impose penalties greater than or less than those contained herein when in the judgment of the Council it is appropriate to do so. The City Council may suspend all or a portion of any penalty or license suspension upon compliance with such conditions as the Council deems appropriate. Prior to imposing any monetary penalty or license suspension or revocation, the City Council will set an initial appearance at which the licensed establishment must appear before the City Council to admit or deny the violation. If the violation is admitted, the licensed establishment will be allowed to explain any mitigating circumstances at the time of the initial appearance. If the violation is denied, the licensed establishment may request a hearing at or prior to the initial appearance. Licensed establishments may explain mitigating circumstances or request a hearing in writing prior to the initial appearance or may do so orally by appearing at the initial appearance. The City Council. strongly encourages licensed establishments to make a personal appearance at the initial appearance. A licensed establishment that does not request a hearing at or prior to the initial appearance will be deemed to have waived its right to a hearing, and the City Council may deem the violation admitted and impose sanctions as provided in this resolution. ID-q Where a hearing is requested, the City Council may conduct the hearing or refer the hearing to an independent hearing examiner. All hearings involving possible suspension or revocation of a license will be conducted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 14. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December 1999. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk 0 • 0 AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 9 REPORT # 116 mada REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 249 2000 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAn? TITLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Continuation of public hearing and resolution to consider approval of the proposed transfer of control of KBL Cable Systems of the Southwest, Inc. by virtue of a proposed merger with America Online to determine if there may be adverse affects on cable subscribers. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by Motion: Approve a resolution approving the transfer of control of KBL Cable Systems of the Southwest, Inc., the cable television franchisee, resulting from the merger of Time Warner, Inc. and America Online, Inc. into AOL Time Warner, Inc. • III. BACKGROUND On January 10, 2000, America Online, Inc. ("AOL") and Time Warner Inc. ("TW') announced a merger in which both TW and AOL will become wholly-owned subsidiaries of a new holding company called AOL Time Warner Inc. Because Richfield is served by KBL Cable Systems of the Southwest, Inc., a subsidiary of TW, the proposed merger and resulting transfer of control requires approval under 1) Minnesota Statutes Section 238 083, and 2) the current cable television franchise with TW. 0424Cable G_ As part of the regulatory approvals necessary for this merger, on or about February 9, 2000, Richfield received, Federal Communications Commission Form 394 - Application for Franchise Authority Consent to Assignment or Transfer of Control of Cable Television Franchise ("Form 394") from TW.. Form 394 is TW's application seeking consent to the proposed transfer of control of the City's cable television franchise. A number of procedural requirements control cable television franchise transfer requests. Under federal law, the City has 120 days from the date of receiving Form 394 to act upon the transfer request. Thus, the deadline for City action is approximately Monday, June 8, 2000. The City's failure to act within that time serves as an implied approval of TW's transfer request. Minnesota Statutes 238 083 and the franchise with TW impose further procedural requirements on the City. Minnesota law requires that the City either approve the transfer request within 30 days of receiving Form 394 or determine the need fora public hearing. The franchise provides that a public hearing may be held at the time of a proposed transfer of control in order to assess whether the transaction may have an adverse effect on the City's cable television subscribers. On February 28, 2000 the City Council set a public hearing to take public input on this matter. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council may adopt a resolution to :approve the provisions of this proposed transfer of the controlling interest of the KBL Cable systems of the Southwest, Inc., Richfield's cable television franchisee. On March 27, 2000 the City Council opened the public hearing and listened to a report from SWSCC attorney Brian Grogan. Mr. Grogan recommended that the public hearing be continued while the matter of payment of the transfer of ownership costs be further negotiated with the cable company. Those negotiations are now concluded. Time Warner is willing to reimburse the SWSCC up to $2,000 per community for a total of $10,000 for transfer-related costs. Total fees and costs to date for work on the transfer are $11,334. Thus, the cost to each City up to now would be $267. Time Warner has reserved the right to deduct this reimbursement from future franchise fee payments. However, Mr. Grogan has talked to two representatives of Time Warner and neither anticipates that an offset against franchise fees will be taken. Mr. Grogan recommends accepting Time Warner's offer. 1111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The public hearing gives the public, including cable subscribers, the 10 opportunity to comment on this proposed transfer and its potential adverse impacts. The transfer of controlling interest should have no impact on the provisions of the City's franchise with KBL. 9-1 • If there are no adverse effects on subscribers and the Council finds that the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the new controlling interest are appropriate, the Council could immediately proceed to approve the merger resolution. • A report to the City Council from Moss & Barnett, legal counsel for the SWSCC, assessed the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the proposed franchisee and find them to be acceptable. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • The public hearing was conducted on March 27, 2000 and continued to April 24, 2000. • Notice of the public hearing was published 14 days in advance of the public hearing. • A final decision by the City regarding TW s transfer request must be issued within 30 days of the closing of the public hearing. C. FINANCIAL • The transfer of control should have no impact on the financial arrangements between KBL Cable Systems and the five cities of the SWSCC as contained within the current franchise agreement. • The cost of processing the transfer will likely cost SWSCC member cities up to $2,400. However, Time Warner has agreed to reimburse the SWSCC $2,000 per City for the transfer. D. LEGAL • Under state and federal law as well as the City's franchise, the City may review the qualifications of the prospective controlling party. These qualifications fall into three categories, legal, technical and financial. Moss & Barnett, legal counsel for the SWSCC, will be preparing a report regarding the legal, technical and financial qualifications of TW based on the proposed transfer of control. They will review the voluminous information provided by TW as part of Form 394 and may seek additional information to clarify unanswered questions. • Mr. Michael Nixi, an attorney from Moss & Barnett and former CPA with Coopers and Lybrand, performed a review of the financial qualifications of TW under the proposed transfer of control. • Moss & Barnett issued their report to a number of franchising authorities, which outlined their recommendations regarding the legal, technical and financial qualifications of TW under the proposed transfer. • In order to withhold approval, the decision must be based on the Council's belief that the technical, legal or financial qualifications are not sufficient. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Close the public hearing and withhold approval of the transfer. 9-3 • Close the public hearing and withhold a discussion on approval to a future City Council meeting occurring within 30 days. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution approving transfer of control • Letter from Brian Grogan on the reimbursement of costs issue. • Report from Southwest Suburban Cable Commission attorney Brian Grogan I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • • RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF KBL CABLE SYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC., THE CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISEE, RESULTING FROM THE MERGER OF TIME WARNER, INC. AND AMERICA ONLINE, INC. INTO AOL TIME WARNER, INC. WHEREAS, on or about November 25, 1996., the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City") passed and adopted Ordinance No. 1996-27, granting a Cable Television Franchise ("Franchise") currently held by KBL Cable Systems of the Southwest, Inc. ("Franchisee"), a subsidiary of Time Warner, Inc., doing business as Time Warner Cable (collectively, "TW'); and WHEREAS, on January 10, 2000, a certain Agreement and Plan of Merger ("Merger Agreement") was made and entered into by and among TW and America Online, Inc. ("AOL"); and WHEREAS, the Merger Agreement contemplates the merging of a to-be-formed TW subsidiary and a to-be-formed AOL subsidiary with a parent holding company known as AOL Time Warner, Inc. ("AOL Time Warner"); and WHEREAS, TW and AOL have requested consent by the City to these mergers and the resulting transfer of control of the Franchisee to AOL Time Warner; and WHEREAS, under the Franchise and applicable state and federal law, the proposed mergers and resulting transfer of control of the Franchisee require consent from the City; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the proposed mergers, transfer of control, and the legal, technical, and financial qualifications of AOL Time Warner; and WHEREAS, based on information obtained and on the reports and information received by the City from TW and AOL, the City has found no reason to disapprove of the proposed transfer of control of the Franchisee to AOL Time Warner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Franchise is in full force and effect, and the Franchisee is the lawful holder of the Franchise. 2. The Franchisee will remain the lawful holder of the Franchise after consummation of the mergers contemplated under the Merger Agreement. 3. The City hereby consents to and approves of the proposed transfer of control of the Franchisee subject to: a. Closing of the transaction contemplated within the Merger Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions described in information provided to the City by TW and AOL. • • _I b. AOL Time Warner or the Franchisee notifying the City in writing of the completion of the mergers and the transfer of control within thirty (30) days of the date of closing. C. The Franchisee, within thirty (30) days of the date of closing, providing the City with a signed acceptance of this Resolution in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. d. AOL Time Warner, TW, or the Franchisee, within thirty (30) days of the date of adoption of this Resolution, reimbursing the City for substantially all reasonable costs, expenses, and professional fees related to the City's review and action on the proposed mergers and the transfer of control. 4. The City hereby waives any right of first refusal which the City may have to purchase the Franchise, or the cable television system serving the City, but only as such right of first refusal applies to the request for approval of the mergers and the transfer of control now before the City. 5. In the event the mergers of the TW and AOL subsidiaries into AOL Time Warner contemplated by the foregoing resolutions is not completed, for any reason, the City's consent shall not be effective. 6. The City's approval of the transfer of control does not waive or diminish any lawful authority of the City to require the provision of non-discriminatory access to the cable system for providers of Internet access service, subject to applicable law. The City and the Franchisee have not waived any rights, obligations, claims, defenses, or remedies regarding the authority of the City to impose such conditions. Prior to the enactment of any such requirement, the Franchisee shall be provided with reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard, including the right to present evidence on any findings to be made by the City with respect to the need for such a requirement. 7. To the maximum extent permitted by all applicable local, state, and federal laws, this Resolution shall not be construed to in any way relieve the Franchisee nor limit the Franchisee from any liability under the Franchise. Approved by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor • ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 9-6 • ACCEPTANCE OF THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL KBL Cable Systems of the Southwest, Inc. hereby agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of this Resolution No and the Franchise referenced therein. KBL CABLE SYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. • Subscribed and sworn to me this day of 2000 Notary Public By Its 0 Q-? 0 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION c/o Moss & Barnett, A Professional Association 4800 Norwest Center, 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (612) 347-0349 Fax: (612) 339-6686 April 10, 2000 r VIA U.S. MAIL Gordon Hughes City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 k teve Devich Assistant City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Chris Enger City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Jim Genellie Assistant City Manager City of Hopkins 1010 South First Street Hopkins, MN 55343 Re: Time Warner Reimbursement of Costs 0 Dear Gentlemen: David Childs RECEIVED APR 112000 BY. City Manager City of Minnetonka 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55345 I have received the enclosed letter from Mr. Gary Matz of Time Warner Cable with respect to the reimbursement issue. The letter explains that Time Warner is willing to reimburse the Commission up to $2,000.00 per community for a total of $10,000.00 for the transfer related expenses incurred by the. Commission. The Commission's total fees and costs to date for work on the transfer matter are $11,334.11. Assuming the Commission accepts this proposal from Time Warner a balance will remain of $1,334.11 which would be the responsibility of the Commission and, therefore, each of the member municipalities. One issue to pay particular attention to in the attached letter is the second condition imposed by Time Warner which relates to Time Warner's reservation of rights to deduct any reimbursement from future franchise fee payments due to the City. I have had discussions with both Gary Matz and Kim Roden regarding this matter and neither anticipates that an offset against franchise fees will be undertaken although neither Ms. Roden or Mr. Matz can guarantee that such an offset may not occur in the future. 0 ct,9 April 10, 2000 Page 2 In an attempt not to belabor this issue and unnecessarily add to the costs incurred by the Commission, I suggest that the Commission accept Time Warner's offer of reimbursement of $2,000 per community. To the extent Time Warner subsequently attempts to offset this amount from a future franchise fee payment the City and/or Commission can challenge such action at that time. In other words, we need not undertake a battle with Time Warner over this issue until we discover whether Time Warner in fact offsets these payments against future franchise fees. If no such offset ever occurs, the issue is moot and no additional time or expense need be incurred. Because the amount of reimbursement does not fully cover all of the costs and expenses associated with the transfer review, I have slightly amended the transfer resolution to reference the fact that "substantially" all of the costs and expenses incurred by the City will be reimbursed by Time Warner. In this way your City Council will be on notice that the reimbursement did not cover every expense but rather the vast majority of the expenses incurred by the City. From what I have been able to uncover from the last transfer five (5) years ago, this appears consistent with the agreement which Time Warner and the Commission entered into at that time. Assuming this recommendation is acceptable, I have enclosed herewith a revised resolution for each City to take action on. Among the five (5) cities only the City of Minnetonka took action to approve the resolution as originally drafted. Each of the other cities determined to delay action on the resolution until an upcoming meeting. Those cities that closed the public hearing have thirty (30) days from the date the hearing was closed within which to take action on the resolution. I recommend that the revised resolution be placed on your upcoming City Council agenda for consideration and action. If you should have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact my office and speak with Mr. Tim Gustin, my associate. As 1 mentioned at our last meeting I arranged my vacation schedule so that I would be available for each City's public hearing then back in town for the Full Commission meeting on Wednesday, April 26, 2000. In my absence Tim is appraised of these issues and can follow-up to take appropriate action as necessary and appropriate. Very truly yours, &C*C?T. Grogan BTG/tlh Enclosures cc: Kim Roden w/enclosures via U. S. Mail 10 Timothy L. Gustin, Esq. w/o enclosures 327079/1 322714/1 Report to the City of Richfield, Minnesota Regarding the Proposed Transfer of Control of the City's Cable Television Franchisee to AOL Time Warner, Inc. March 22, 2000 Prepared by: Brian T. Grogan, Esq. Timothy L. Gustin, Esq. Michael R. Nixt, Esq. MOSS & BARNETT A Professional Association 4800 Norwest Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-4129 (612) 347-0340 phone (612) 339-6686 facsimile GroganB@moss-bameft.com 9-/0 -- Report to the City of Richfield, Minnesota Regarding the Proposed Transfer of Control of the City's Cable Television Franchisee to AOL Time Warner, Inc. March 22, 2000 Table of Contents Introduction ............:.......................................................................................................1 Applicable Law .............................................................................................................. 2 Description of Transfer of Control ...............................................................................7 Chart Demonstrating Proposed Merger .......................................................................8 Legal Qualifications ......................................................................................................9 Technical Qualifications .............................................................................................10 Financial Qualifications 12 Open Access Considerations .....................................................................................15 Recommendations ......................................................................................................18 Exhibit A. Resolution - Approving Transfer • 322714/1 1'-l Introduction The City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City") has before it a request from its cable television franchisee, KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. ("Franchisee"), to approve a proposed transfer of control of the Franchisee resulting from the merger of to- be-formed subsidiaries of the existing parent corporation of Franchisee, Time Warner Inc. ("TWI"), and America Online, Inc. ("AOL") into a new company and ultimate parent of Franchisee called AOL Time Warner, Inc. ("AOL Time Warner"). The merger does not involve the sale or transfer of the cable system operated by Franchisee or of the Franchisee itself. Therefore, the request before the City does not involve a transfer or assignment of the franchise operated by Franchisee ("Franchise"), but instead a transfer of control of the Franchisee. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 238.083 and the Franchise at Section 25, the proposed transfer of control is prohibited without the written consent. of the City. In light of the request by the Franchisee and the procedural requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 238.083 and Section 25 of the Franchise, Moss & Barnett, A Professional Association, has been retained by the City and was asked to provide this Report. This Report will provide the City with an analysis. of the transfer of control and will provide recommendations to the City. In preparing this Report, Moss & Barnett has relied upon information submitted by TWI and AOL_ including: .1 1 1. FCC Form 394 - Application for Franchise Authority Consent to Assignment or Transfer of Control of Cable Television Franchise dated February 11, 2000, received by the City on or about February 18, 2000, including all attachments thereto. 2. The financial information referenced in the Financial Qualifications section of this Report. 3. Agreement and Plan of Merger between AOL and TWI dated as of January 10, 2000, with certain exhibits and schedules redacted for reasons of confidentiality. The Report has been prepared with Brian T. Grogan serving as project manager, Timothy L. Gustin assisting with due diligence and document preparation, and Michael R. Nixt, who is a former CPA with Coopers & Lybrand, performing the financial review of AOL, TWI, and AOL Time Warner. 322714/1 q--I 01 Applicable Law The following provisions of federal law, state law, and the Franchise govern the actions of the City in acting on the request of TWI and AOL for approval of the transfer of control FEDERAL LAW The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended by the Cable Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("Cable Act"), provides at Section 617 (47 U.S.C. § 537): Sales of Cable Svstems . A franchising authority shall, if the franchise requires franchising authority approval of a sale or transfer, have 120 days to act upon any request for approval of such sale or transfer that contains or is accompanied by such information as is required in accordance with Commission regulations and by the franchising authority. If the franchising authority fails to render a final decision on the request within 120 days, such request shall be deemed granted unless the requesting party and the franchising authority agree to an extension of time. The Cable Act also provides at Section 613d (47 U.S.C. § 533d) as follows: (d) Reaulation of ownership by States or franchising authorities Any State or franchising authority may not prohibit the ownership or control of a cable system by any person because of such person's ownership or control of any other media of mass communications or other media interests. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any State or franchising authority from prohibiting the ownership or control of a cable system in a jurisdiction by any person (1) because of such person's ownership or control of any other cable system in such jurisdiction, or (2) in circumstances in which the State or franchising authority determines that the acquisition of such a cable system may eliminate or reduce competition in the delivery of cable service in such jurisdiction. Further, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") has promulgated regulations governing the sale of cable systems. Section 76.502 of the FCC's regulations.(47 C., F. § 76.502) provides: 322714/1 2 943 r 47 C.F.R. § 76.602 Time Limits AaDlicable to Franchise Authority Consideration of Transfer Aaplications (a) A franchise authority shall have 120 days from the date of submission of a completed FCC Form 394, together with all exhibits, and any additional information required by the terms of the franchise agreement or applicable state or local law to act upon an application to sell, assign, or otherwise transfer controlling ownership of a cable system. (b) A franchise authority that questions the accuracy of the information provided under paragraph (a) must notify the cable operator within 30 days of the filing of such information, or such information shall be deemed accepted, unless the cable operator has failed to provide any additional information reasonably requested by the franchise authority within 10 days of such request. (c) If the franchise authority fails to act upon such transfer request within 120 days, such request shall be deemed granted unless the franchise authority and the requesting party otherwise agree to an extension of time. STATE LAW Minnesota Statutes Section 238.083 Sale or Transfer of Franchise provides: Subd. 1. Fundamental corporate change defined. For purposes of this section, "fundamental corporate change" means the sale or transfer of a majority of a corporation's assets, merger, including a parent and its subsidiary corporation, consolidation or creation of a subsidiary corporation. Subd. 2. Written approval of franchising authority. A sale or transfer of a franchise, including a sale or transfer by means of a fundamental corporate change, requires the written approval of the franchising authority. The parties to the sale or transfer of a franchise shall make a written request to the franchising authority for its approval of the sale or transfer. The franchising authority shall reply, in writing, within 30 days of the request and shall indicate its approval of the request or its determination that a public hearing is necessary if it determines that a sale or transfer of a franchise may adversely affect the company's subscribers. "The franchising authority shall conduct a public hearing on the request within 30 days of that determination. Subd. 3. Notice of hearing. Unless otherwise already provided for by local law, notice of the hearing must be given 14 days before the hearing by publishing notice of it once in a newspaper of general circulation in the area being served by the 32271411 3 q-W franchise. The notice must contain the date, time, and place of the hearing and must briefly state the substance of the action to be considered by the franchising authority. Subd. 4. Approval or denial of sale or transfer request. Within 30 days after the public hearing, the franchising authority shall approve or deny, in writing, the sale or transfer request. The approval must not be unreasonably withheld. Subd. 5. Sale or transfer of franchise without system. The parties to the sale or transfer of a franchise only, without the inclusion of a cable communications system in which at least substantial construction has commenced, shall establish that the sale or transfer of only the franchise will be in the public interest. Subd. 6. Sale or transfer of stock. Sale or transfer of stock in a corporation so as to create a new controlling interest in a cable communications system is subject to the requirements of this section. The term "controlling interest, "as used herein, is not limited to majority stock ownership, but includes actual working control in whatever manner exercised. LOCAL LAW 10 The Franchise at Section 26. Transfer of Ownership provides: A. A Franchise shall not be assigned or transferred, either in whole or in part, or leased, sublet or mortgaged in any manner, nor shall title thereto, either legal or equitable or any right, interest or property therein, pass to or vest in any person other than an Affiliate of Grantee without the prior written consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Further, Grantee shall not sell or transfer any stock or ownership interest so as to create a new controlling interest except with the consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 8. Any sale or transfer of Franchise, including a sale or transfer by means of a fundamental corporate change, requires the written approval of City. The parties to the sale or transfer of Franchise shall make a written request to City for its consent. City shall reply in writing within 30 days of actual receipt of the request and shall indicate its approval of the request or its determination that a public hearing is necessary. City shall conduct a public hearing on the request within 30 days of such determination if it determines that a sale or transfer of Franchise may adversely affect the Grantee's subscribers. C. Unless otherwise already provided for by local law, notice of any such hearing shall be given 94 days prior to the hearing by publishing notice thereof once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. The notice 322714/1 4 9-l5 shall contain the date, time and place of the hearing and shall briefly state the substance of the action to be considered by City. Within 30 days after the public hearing, City shall approve or deny in writing the sale or transfer request. D. In a sale or transfer of only a Franchise, without the inclusion of the System in which at least substantial initial construction has commenced, a Grantee shall be required to establish to a sole satisfaction of City that the sale or transfer of a Franchise is in the public interest. E. For purposes of this section, fundamental corporate change means the sale or transfer of a controlling interest in the stock of a corporation or the sale or transfer of all or a majority of a corporation's assets, merger (including a parent and its subsidiary corporation), consolidation or creation of a subsidiary corporation. For the purposes of this Section, fundamental partnership change means the sale or transfer of all or a majority of a partnership's assets, change of a general partner in a limited partnership, change from a limited to a general partnership, incorporation of a partnership, or change in the control of partnership. F. The word "contror, as used herein, shall apply to the sale. or transfer of all or a majority of Grantee's assets or shares of stock, merger (including any parent and its subsidiary corporation), consolidation, creation of a. subsidiary corporation of the parent company, or sale or transfer of stock . in Grantee so as to create a new controlling interest. The term "controlling interest" as used herein is not limited to majority stock ownership, but includes actual working control in whatever manner exercised, including the creation or transfer of decision-making authority to a new or different board of directors. Every change, transfer or acquisition of control of a Grantee shall make the Franchise subject to cancellation unless and until City shall have consented in writing thereto, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. For the purpose of determining whether it shall consent to such change, transfer or acquisition of control, City may inquire into the qualifications of the prospective controlling party. The City reserves the right to seek reimbursement of its costs for conducting an inquiry to the extent permitted by applicable state and federal law. The preceding statement does not constitute an agreement by any party to reimburse the City. G. In no event shall a transfer or assignment of ownership or control be approved without transferee becoming a signatory to a Franchise. H. Any transferee of a Franchise shall be subordinate to any right, title or interest of City. 322714/1 5 • • L For information on the right of the City to purchase the cable system during a transfer of ownership, see Section 26. J. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, no such consent or approval shall be required for a transfer or assignment to any Person controlling, controlled by or under the same common control as the Grantee. } 322714/1 6 0/-1`? Description of Transfer of Control On January 10, 2000, an Agreement of Plan and Merger ("Merger Agreement") was entered into between America Online, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("AOL"), and Time Warner Inc., a Delaware corporation ("TWI"). The Merger Agreement contemplates the two existing parent corporations, AOL and TWI to merge and become wholly-owned subsidiaries of a to-be-formed and ultimate parent called AOL Time Warner, Inc. ("AOL Time Warner"). To that end, AOL Time Warner will first form two new subsidiaries, referred to in the Merger Agreement as "AOL Merger Sub" and "Time Warner Merger Sub". The . Merger Subs are to be formed solely for the purpose of effectuating the merger. AOL will merge into the AOL Merger Sub, with the AOL Merger Sub ceasing to exist as an operation of law. TWI will merge into the Time Warner Merger Sub, with the Time Warner Merger Sub ceasing to exist as an operation of law. AOL and TWI, as merged with the Merger Subs, will become wholly-owned subsidiaries of the new parent and holding company, AOL Time Warner. The Merger Subs will be corporations organized under the laws of Delaware and will presumably be renamed upon incorporation. . Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of AOL and TWI will be exchanged and converted into shares of capital stock of AOL Time Warner with virtually identical rights and preferences. This includes all series and classes of both AOL and. TWI. The Merger Agreement establishes the conversion ratio for each of the series and specific classes of capital stock. The Franchisee is the operating subsidiary currently holding the Franchise and operating the cable television system within the City. Upon consummation of the merger, the Franchisee will remain unchanged. It will continue to hold the Franchise and operate the cable system. There will be no sale or assignment of the Franchisee or the system it operates. There will, however, be a change in the parent corporation that controls the Franchisee. As such, the request of TWI is to authorize the change of control of the Franchisee, not a change of ownership of the cable television system. To better understand the proposed merger, a corporate chart has been provided on the following page. 322714/1 7 0---18 Chart Demonstrating Proposed Merger Before the merger, Time Warner Inc. and America Online Inc. are separate and unrelated corporate utilities. Time Warner inc. America Online, Inc. Time Warner Inc. merges into Time Warner Merger Sub with Time Warner Inc. surviving the merger (to be renamed at a later date) and Time Warner Merger Sub ceasing to exist. Time Warner Time Warner Time Warner Inc. Merger Sub > Inc. America Online, Inc. merges into AOL Merger Sub with America Online, Inc. surviving the merger (to be renamed at a later date) and AOL Merger Sub ceasing to exist. America Online, AOL Merger Sub America Online, Inc. + ? Inc. A new holding company, AOL Time Warner, Inc., serves as parent of the two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Time Warner Inc. and America Online, Inc. AOL Time Warner, Inc. Time America Warner Inc. Online, Inc. Time Warner cable remains the cable management arm for the new parent, AOL Time Warner, Inc., and the City's Franchisee, will remain unchanged. AOL Time Warner, Inc. Time America Warner, Inc. Online, Inc. Time Warner Cable Franchisee lip 322714/1 8 q-/q Legal Qualifications The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to an analysis of whether the Franchisee, as controlled by AOL Time Warner, will remain duly organized and authorized to operate the cable television system under the terms of the Franchise. The applicable standard of review is that the City's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.' The proposed transferee, AOL Time Warner, is a corporation that was . incorporated under the laws of Delaware on February 7, 2000. It will not commence business operations until consummation of the proposed transaction. As such, it has not had an application for a cable television franchise transfer or renewal dismissed or denied by any franchise authority. As the parent of the Franchisee, AOL Time Warner need not be qualified to do business in the state where the City and the system used by the Franchisee are located. TWI has stipulated that it is aware of no instance in which Time Warner Cable, the management arm of TWI, or any of its affiliates has been denied renewal of a cable television franchise. In only two instances were applications for a consent to transfer a franchise denied, both involving a transfer from Time Warner Entertainment Company, L. P. ("TWE") to an affiliated entity, Time Warner Entertainment - Advance/Newhouse Partnership. Certain issues of.dispute remain unresolved. In both situations, TWE continues to hold the franchise and operate the system pending authorization of the proposed transfers. Under the Merger Agreement, the Franchisee will remain the holder of the Franchise and will continue to operate the cable television system in the City. We therefore focus our analysis on the Franchisee and its pertinent legal qualifications. The Franchisee is currently registered and authorized to conduct business in the State of Minnesota. TWI has stipulated that the Franchisee, as the legal entity that operates the City's cable system, will not change and that the Franchisee will continue to be duly qualified to transact business in said State. To confirm this is the case, a certificate of good standing was obtained from the Secretary of State, and according to the certificate, the Franchisee currently is in good standing to conduct business and operate the system in the City. Based on the foregoing, we conclude it would be unreasonable for the City to find that upon closing of the transaction contemplated under the Merger Agreement, the Franchisee, as controlled by AOL Time Warner, will not be legally qualified. See Minn. Stat. Section 238.083. 322714/1 9 ?-ao Technical Qualifications The technical qualifications standard relates to the technical expertise and experience of the Franchisee, as controlled by'TWI America Online, to operate and .maintain a cable television system under the Franchise. In such a review, the standard is once again that the City's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 2 As stated, the Franchisee will remain unchanged, and with that, TWI has stipulated that the local management and staff will remain the same. The local management and staff will continue to report to the same executives of Time Warner Cable, which is the cable management arm of the existing and ultimate parent of the Franchisee, TWI. Assuming this is true, the City should be unaffected by the merger and resulting transfer of control. For example, customer service issues will be directed to the same personnel as before the transfer, and the same level of service at the local. level should be provided. What begs the question, however, is the reason why AOL and TWI would merge and create a new parent if subscribers would experience no change. True, decisions may happen at the upper management level, making it appear that the City and its subscribers will go unaffected, but such decisions will have to be implemented at the local level. With such a monumental merger of media and information companies, there. is reason to believe that the City may see some changes at the local level, whether AOL and TWI anticipate them at this point or not. Currently, Time Warner Cable or its affiliates manage cable systems serving a total of approximately 12.6 million cable subscribers, geographically concentrated in 35 groupings of more than 100,000 subscribers each. It boasts being "one of the largest and most experienced multiple system cable operators in the United States." Now, with the proposed merger with AOL, Time Warner Cable will undoubtedly manage many more subscribers with new issues, many of which may relate to Internet service over the cable system. This is likely, considering the incredible presence AOL has over the Internet and the future offering of its Internet service over existing TWI cable systems. Although the possible benefits of the merger abound, so do the possible strains on management, namely Time Warner Cable. TWI states that it is committed to giving its customers not only an array of entertainment and information choices, but also high quality service. In its efforts to provide the former, the latter may suffer. Local personnel may have every good intention to continue to provide quality service to the City and its subscribers, but strain on upper level management may filter down to the local level, creating confusion and inefficiency. We remain optimistic, however, that the merger, by combining the strengths of the cable and Internet industry, will provide subscribers with countless benefits. 2 See Minn. Stat. Section 238.083. 32271411 10 Particularly, Internet service over cable systems which is many times faster than , traditional service over telephone lines, even telephones lines with digital subscriber line (°DSL") service. Despite such optimism and as previously stated, we remain concerned that management will be strained as a result of this mega-merger, such strain particularly felt by Time Warner Cable. Based on the foregoing, we conclude it would be unreasonable for the City to find that upon closing of the transaction contemplated under the Merger Agreement, the Franchisee, as controlled by AOL Time Wamer, will not be technically qualified. 1?1 322714/1 11 Financial. Qualifications OVERVIEW AND SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The following is a summary of our analysis of selected financial information provided by Time Warner, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Time Warner") in conjunction with Time Warner's request for consent to the change in control of a television cable system ("System") serving the City which will occur as the result of the merger of Time Warner and America Online, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("AOL") (the "Merger„). The selected financial information to which our review has been limited, consists solely of the following (collective, the "Financial Statements°): Time Warner Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998; 2. Time Warner Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 1999; 3. AOL Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998; and 4. AOL Form 10Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 1999 Our procedure is limited to providing a summary of our analysis of the Financial Statements and other relevant information to facilitate the City's assessment of the financial capabilities of AOL Time Warner, Inc., a Delaware corporation to be formed to consummate the Merger, to become the ultimate parent and successor operator of the System serving the City. SUMMARY OF TRANSACTION Time Warner and AOL entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated January 10, 2000 (the "Merger Agreement") pursuant to which AOL and Time Warner established the terms and conditions whereby both AOL and Time Warner would become wholly-owned subsidiaries of AOL Time Warner, Inc., a Delaware corporation to be formed ("AOL Time Warner'). The Merger is to be accomplished by AOL and Time Warner causing AOL Time Warner to form two wholly-owned subsidiaries, "AOL Merger Sub" and "Time Warner Merger.Sub." AOL would merge AOL Merger Sub into itself and Time Warner would merge Time Warner Merger Sub into itself. Immediately following the mergers of the foregoing described Constituent Corporations, AOL and Time Warner would become wholly-owned subsidiaries of AOL Time Warner. In accordance with the provisions of the Merger Agreement, all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of all series and classes of each of AOL and Time Warner would be exchanged and converted into shares of capital stock of AOL Time Warner with virtually identical rights and preferences. The Merger Agreement establishes the conversion ratio for each of the specific classes and series of capital stock. 322714/1 12 As a result of the Merger, the Time Warner operating subsidiary that currently holds the franchise to operate the System in the City will continue to hold the cable franchise notwithstanding the Merger. As such, the request of Time Warner is to authorize the change of control, not change of ownership of the System. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PRO FORMA FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Neither federal law nor FCC regulations provide franchising authorities with any guidance concerning evaluation of the financial qualifications of an applicant for a cable franchise. In certain circumstances, it is appropriate to consider the performance of an applicant based on the applicant's historical performance in relation to recognized industry standards. Given the fact that Time Warner, through its operating entities, has a history of cable system operations, such statistical analysis is relevant with respect to the Time Warner's historical operations. We have based our analysis, in part, on industry standards which are generally recognized in making such a determination. These industry standards are more precisely described below.s Based on the selected pro forma financial information which we analyzed, the following is a summary of the various financial factors, as compared to the applicable Industry Standards, for the 9-month period ended September 30, 1999 and the 12- month periods ended December 31, 1998 and 1997. ..,;...v v.;.yj.y. •; v•.}:•. •'•i' '. ti';:•;L•:':/4:"• : '{ i., - :i:4... .,L ::..:.:•:.::ti;}kfi+i:{;vt4.,'{.xr4;:.'' .\ 4v ''•itivi?-' n• ? ? .: S .t Operating Ratio 60% or less 59.0% 56.3% (op-expense/revenue) Operating Margin 40% or more 41.0% 43.7% (op-profit/revenue) Pretax profit Margin +10% or more 3.0% 4.2% (pretax income/revenue) Debt/Equity Ratio 2.2:1 2.03:1 1.23:1 (long-term debt/total equity) Current Ratio 1.0:1 1.00:1 1.18:1 (current assets/current liabilities) Operating Cash Flow N/A $4.9 Billion $2.2 Billion EBITDA EBITDA Margin 24.0% 25.2% 15.3% (operating cash flow/revenue) AOL FINANCIAL OVERVIEW Based on information contained in the AOL 1999 annual report, for the 12 months ending June 30, 1999, AOL had total revenues of $4.8 billion, operating income 3 Industry data based on information compiled by Paul Kagan and Associates. 322714/1 13 a-a'+ of $578.0 million and net income of $396.0 million, resulting in earnings per share of $.34. During fiscal 1999, AOL's membership grew from 12.5 million to 17.6 million or approximately 41 %. As of September 30, 1999, AOL had total current assets of $2.4 billion, total assets of $6.5 billion, total current liabilities of $2.0 billion, total liabilities of $2.7 billion and total stockholders equity of $3.8 billion. For the three months ended September 30, 1999, AOL EBITDA increased from $153 million to $386 million or 152% over the three months ended September 30, 1998..EBITDA margin increased from 15.3% for the three month ending September 30, 1998 to 26.3°x6 for the three months ended September 30, 1999, with an incremental EBITDA margin of approximately 50.0%. AOL's net worth and historical results from operations, although not necessarily indicative of future performance, do support the position that AOL, as a subsidiary of. AOL Time Warner, will not have a materially adverse impact on the overall operating results from a financial standpoint due to the shifting of resources from Time Warner to AOL for the sole' purpose of funding AOL's ongoing operations and working capital needs. In addition, based on AOL's historical results, it is also not unreasonable to conclude that the historical financial results of operations of AOL may, under certain circumstances, be available to fund the ongoing operations of Time Warner, including providing working capital SUMMARY Based on the foregoing and limited strictly the Financial Statements, we do not believe that.Time Warner's request for transfer of control of the franchise to operate the System can reasonably be denied based solely on lack of financial capabilities. This statement should not be construed in any way to constitute an opinion as to the financial capability of Time Warner, AOL or AOL Time Warner either individually or jointly to operate the existing System serving the City or to successfully consummate the transaction contemplated by the Merger and to successfully incorporate the operation of the existing System and Time Warner's existing business operations with the business operations of AOL, upon which we express no opinion. The sufficiency of the procedures used in making an assessment of AOL Time Warner's financial capability is solely the responsibility of the City. Consequently, we make no representation regard. sufficiency of the procedures used either for the purpose for which this analysis of financial capabilities was requested or for any other purpose. 1? 322714/1 - 14 Open Access Considerations Cable television operators nationwide are beginning to provide access to the Internet over their cable wires. Subscribers lease or buy "cable modems" that connect to the computer and allow access to the Internet via cable, as opposed to local phone lines. Cable modem service is often much faster than connections via phone lines and is a very attractive service offering. Typically, the cable operator has an affiliation with an Internet service provider ("ISP"), such as Road Runner or @Home, which subscribers use to obtain access to the Internet. With the merger of TWI and AOL, AOL Time Warner would gain its own ISP affiliate in which to provide TWI subscribers high- speed Internet access, that being AOL. This benefit is likely a primary reason for the proposed merger. There has been considerable debate over whether cable television operators must allow unaffiliated ISPs "open access" to their cable modem platforms. The proposed transfer of control poses the question of whether AOL Time Warner will allow open access to its cable modems for use of its system. Intending to provide more competition and choice for subscribers, some local franchising authorities have taken an aggressive approach by conditioning franchise renewals or transfers on open access requirements. All who have done so have thus far found themselves in court. One case that has gained national attention on this issue is AT&T Corp. v. Citv of Portland, 43 F. Supp. 2d 1146 (D. Org. 1999). In this case the City of Portland and Multnomah County, Oregon, in reviewing the proposed transfer of control of TCI to AT&T, passed a resolution requiring AT&T to allow unaffiliated ISPs to connect their equipment directly to AT&T's cable modem platform, bypassing @Home, its proprietary cable ISP. AT&T refused the open access requirement, which essentially led to a denial of the proposed transfer. AT&T and TCI sued the City and County in federal district court, where the City and County received a favorable decision. AT&T has since appealed, and a decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is expected sometime in 2000. Faced with ongoing criticism, AT&T not long ago announced its commitment to provide open access to its cable and fixed wireless systems and afford subscribers a choice of ISPs. The decision becomes effective this year for subscribers served by AT&T's fixed wireless systems and in mid-2002 for subscribers of AT&T's broadband cable systems, after AT&T's exclusivity. contract with cable ISP, @Home, expires. Many cable operators argue that it is bad policy to mandate access to new technologies and infrastructures that are privately owned and financed. The Federal Communications Commission has so far maintained a hands-off approach, intending to have competition control. Some public utilities commissions, such as Minnesota's for example, have also avoided the issue, letting market forces drive the issue. Local governments continue to point out that without regulation, cable providers may be able to monopolize the Internet, and subscribers will not be able to select their ISP of choice. 322714/1 15 10 With the level of scrutiny the open access issue has undergone on the federal, state, and local level, TWI and AOL have responded by entering into Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Open Access Business Practices dated February 29, 2000 ("Memorandum"). According to TWI and AOL, they intend to enter into as quickly as possible an agreement to provided broadband AOL Internet service on TWI's cable systems. The agreement is to be used as a model for the commercial agreements that will be available to other ISPs. Specifically, the Memorandum commits to offer: 1. Consumer Choice: AOL and TWI stipulate that AOL Time Warner is committed to offer consumers a choice among ISPs. Consumers will not be required to purchase service from an ISP that is affiliated with AOL Time Warner in order to. enjoy broadband Internet service over AOL Time Warner cable systems. 2. Diversity of ISPs: AOL and TWI stipulate that AOL Time Warner will not place any fixed limit on the number of ISPs with which it will enter into commercial arrangements, and it will offer these ISPs the choice to partner on a national (on all AOL Time Warner cable systems), regional, or local basis, in order to facilitate the ability of consumers to choose among ISPs of difference size and scope. 3. Direct Relationship with the Customer for ISPs: AOL and TWI stipulate that AOL Time Warner is also committed to allow both the cable operator and the ISP to have the opportunity to have a direct relationship with the consumer. Accordingly, both the cable operator and the ISP will be allowed to market and sell broadband service directly to customers. When an ISP sells broadband Internet service directly to a customer, it may, if it so chooses, bill and collect from the customer directly. 4. Video Streaming: AOL and TWI stipulate that AOL Time Warner will allow ISPs to provide video streaming, which is essentially video conferencing over the Internet. AOL Time Warner states that it recognizes that some consumers desire video streaming, and AOL Time Warner will not block or limit it. 5. Fast Action: The Memorandum is subject to existing TWI obligations, such as its contracts with other cable modem ISPs like Road Runner. TWI stipulates that it is committed to provide consumer choice as quickly as possible, and to that and, will. work to achieve that goal before its current obligations expire. Despite such statements, TWI may struggle to achieve its goals of providing consumer choice among ISPs in light of existing contract obligations with Road Runner and other ISPs. AT&T, for example, has been forced to wait until mid-2002 to offer its broadband subscribers such choice, when its contract with @Home expires. 322714/1 16 q-a-7 The Memorandum states that AOL Time Warner will offer ISPs the choice to partner with it to offer broadband Internet service on a national, regional, or local basis to facilitate choice among ISPs of different size and scope. However, it seems that only those ISPs with the financial resources to provide Internet service on a large scale will be given such opportunity. The Memorandum states that AOL is committed to bring the benefits of the Internet to all Americans, but it "will not allow ISPs to offer'redlined' service to only a portion of an AOL Time Warner cable system...' The Memorandum seems to encourage open access, which is a positive step from the City's perspective. However, there are many terms, conditions, and parameters that still need to be articulated and likely will be in the forthcoming agreement between AOL and TWI. There is no doubt that the Memorandum is timely as the City and many others like it are now considering the proposed transfer of control. The Memorandum commits to open access, but under undisclosed terms and conditions. In light of the pending Portland decision, the City should be wary to condition approval on open access issues. As stated before, those cities who have are in court. We will keep the City abreast of any developments in the case and with the open access issue in general. In the meantime, if the City chooses to approve the transfer, the proposed resolution, found at Exhibit A to this Report, reserves the City's right to impose open access conditions at a later date. • 322714/1 17 • Q-0q? Recommendations Based strictly on the information made available to us at the time of this review, we believe that the Franchisee, as controlled by AOL Time Warner, will possess the necessary legal, technical, and financial qualifications based on the standards of review identified in applicable law, and the Franchise as described within this Report. Based on these findings, we recommend that, 1. The City Council review this Report, listen to public comment, as necessary or appropriate, and undertake all necessary action to pass and adopt a resolution similar in form and content to the document following these recommendations. 2. The City follow-up to ensure that the Franchisee submit the Acceptance of the Resolution Approving the Transfer of Control, which must be delivered following closing of the transaction. 9 • AGENDASECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8 T REPORT # 11.5 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY NAM TITLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a new residential kennel license for Brian and Jody Mesko, 7201 Logan Avenue South. ,a 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I By Motion: approve a new residential kennel license for Brian and Jody Mesko, 7201 Logan Avenue South. 1 II. BACKGROUND The application for the request of a new residential kennel license was received by the City on February 22, 2000. The applicants own three dogs. The application contains the signatures of contiguous property owners. A Community Service Officer conducted an inspection of the property on March 6, 2000. There were no apparent problems found at that time. • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I A. POLICY • The City has adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the area of the residential kennel license. Staff received no complaints regarding / this application. 0424MeskoKennel g?_ • Although this application is for three dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL i • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Deny the request for a new residential kennel license for Brian and Jody Mesko. This would mean they would have to reduce the number of dogs they have from three to two. V. ATTACHMENTS None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Brian and Jody Mesko 0 • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8H REPORT # 114 J APRIL 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE 0 REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for a Community Event Celebration license with fee waived for the Richfield Recreation Services Department's Cinco de Mayo events at Taft Park, 6200 18th Avenue, on May 6 and May 7, 2000. -J I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: approve a Community Event Celebration license with fee waived for the Richfield Recreation Services Department for events scheduled to celebrate Cinco de Mayo on Saturday, May 6 and Sunday, May 7, 2000 at Taft Park, 6200 18th Avenue. II. BACKGROUND ! The planning committee for the third annual Ch co de Mayo Celebration is making application for a community celebration event license and requests that the fee be waived for the activities that will take place at Taft Park, 6200 18th Avenue, Richfield. A detailed activity plan of the two-day event is currently on file. The food concessions will operate through the Celebration committee. Only vendors that have applied and been approved by the committee and Bloomington Health Department will be allowed to sell concessions. DAN SyCO , DIRECTOR OF?UBLIC SAFETY f NAME, TIT 0424Cinco • ?M-l The committee has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome food handling. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City application process and meets the requirements for fee waived. This has become an annual event and has been approved for the past two celebrations. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL I N/A 0 D. LEGAL N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Deny the request for a Community Event Celebration license for the Richfield Recreation Services Department. This would mean they would not be able to conduct activities, especially those concerning food preparation, on Saturday, May 6th and Sunday, May 7, 2000. V. ATTACHMENTS N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None 0 • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8G REPORT # 113 J APRIL 24, 2000 • 0 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT, CITY COUNCIL MEETING DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY i NAME, TLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for Itinerant Place of Amusement, Itinerant Food, and Temporary Intoxicating Liquor licenses for Don Pablos, 980 West 78th Street, for their Cinco De Mayo r Celebration to be held on Friday, May 5, 2000. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: approve an Itinerant Place of Amusement, Itinerant Food, and Temporary Intoxicating Liquor licenses for Don Pablos, 980 W. 78th Street, for a Cinco de Mayo Celebration to take place on Friday, May 5, 2000. IL BACKGROUND On Friday, April 14, 2000, Don Pablos submitted applications for an Itinerant Place of Amusement, Itinerant Food, and Temporary Intoxicating liquor licenses for their Cinco De Mayo event. The event will take place from 11 a.m. until 12 midnight. All fees have been received. A detailed activity plan is currently on file. They are proposing to erect a 20'X50' tent in which to service additional patrons. They will be serving a selection of appetizers as well as alcoholic beverages outdoors. There will also be a disc jockey playing music throughout the event. 0424Don Pablos Cinco U v ?? Public Health, Fire and Police staff met to discuss all areas of regulation and concern. A detailed list of event stipulations was submitted to Don Pablos. They have assured us that they will comply with all recommendations. A certificate of Liquor Liability to cover the exterior of the establishment has been received showing American MFRS Mutual Insurance Company affording the coverage. Don Pablos has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome food handling. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION , A. POLICY The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City application process. B. CRITICAL ISSUES N/A C. FINANCIAL N/A D. LEGAL N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) Deny the request for Itinerant Place of Amusement, Itinerant Food, and Temporary Intoxicating Liquor licenses. This would mean that they would not be able to conduct activities on Friday, May 5, 2000. V. ATTACHMENTS N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING Alan Porter, General Manager of Don Pablos • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8F REPORT # 112 STAFF REPORT ¦ CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: PATRICK DOLAN ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGN RE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for installation of traffic signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue. 1. . RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes and tabulation and award a contract to Midwest Asphalt Corporation in the amount of $256,040.63 for the installation of a traffic signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue. III. BACKGROUND The 2000 capital improvement budget has identified the installation of a traffic signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue. This project would also eliminate St. Peter's Church driveway onto Nicollet Avenue and widen and realign Holy Angel's driveway onto Nicollet Avenue. The reconstructed driveway would serve both St. Peter's and Holy Angels and would be aligned with 67th Street. Specifications for this work were sent to eleven contractors. A formal bid opening was held on April 18, 2000 and a set of bid minutes/tabulation is attached for the Council's review. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY Council approved the monies in the 2000 capital improvement fund B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Congestion will be reduced in this area by St. Peter and the Academy of the Holy Angels combining their driveways. C. FINANCIAL • The estimated construction cost of the project is $256,040.63 which will be financed by Municipal State Aid (80%) and the remaining 20% from Hennepin County and St. Peter's. D. LEGAL A resolution authorizing approval of agreement with Hennepin County for the relocation of the signal was approved by Council on February 14, 2000. ' IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may reject the bids and instruct staff to obtain new bids; however, staff does not believe a more reasonable bid can be obtained from a reputable contractor. Delay in the award could affect the time schedule for the construction season. V. ATTACHMENTS Bid minutes and tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING N/A • SF- ?- • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 18, 2000 10:00 a.m. 2000 Signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue City Project No. 401-30-524 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Debbie Guiher, Acting City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for 2000 Signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue, as advertised in the official newspaper on March 22, 2000. Present: Debbie Guiher, Acting 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 Hardrives, Inc. Rogers, MN Midwest Asphalt Corporation Hopkins, MN Ace Blacktop, Inc. Inver Grove Heights, MN 5% Bid Bond $ 258,332.15 5% Bid Bond $ 256,040.63* 5% Bid Bond $ 262,189.50 *Denotes corrected figure 0 The Acting City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the April 24, 2000 City Council Meeting. Debbie Guiher Acting City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 8E REPORT # 111 STAFF REPORT md? CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 249 2000 • REPORT PREPARED BY: GEORGE ATKINSON, ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: 13 1 - 1?? SIGNf IlRE ?l ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of award of contract for the 2000 mill and overlay project. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract to. Ace Blacktop, Inc. in the sum of $104,766.35 for milling and bituminous overlay work to be done in, 2000. II. BACKGROUND The present condition of some roadways in the City indicate it would not be cost effective to continue routine and preventive maintenance to try to prolong the existing driving surface. Instead, it 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 2000 include 64th Street from Nicollet Avenue to Fourth Avenue, 62nd Street from 13th Avenue to Bloomington Avenue, Humboldt Avenue from 70th Street to 69th Street, and 68th Street from Nicollet Avenue to Fourth Avenue. Park reconstruction includes paths at Adams Hill Park and Roosevelt Park, and the Donaldson Park basketball court. 0424MM&Overlay A bid opening was held April 12, 2000 for the mill and overlay project. 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 • Ace Blacktop, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. • The engineer's estimate for the contract work was $142,000. • The 2000 adopted Street Maintenance budget contains $128,000 for the mill and overlay project; i.e., the contract, printing and postage, City labor, and so forth. There is a remaining Special Revenue balance of $24,550 in the project opened in 1999 for park path improvements. Of the $100,000 Special Revenue for major park maintenance in the 2000 adopted Capital Budget, $20,000 has been designated for reconstruction of the Donaldson Park basketball court. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • 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. • 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. V. ATTACHMENTS I • A map of sites included in the 2000 mill and overlay project/contract. • A copy of the April 12, 2000 bid minutes/tabulation. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING 0 None. ? y • S N 0 a 9 1 it §I ENN--=_ -_--??? § §I i L II ? ? li ?f rr 1[ 7§ ?C AIL iC g 09 11 i ..?. ! it 1! mi i § r I ice' §ER li I if 1# §§ i 4I i` 1 II i zEd # - PENN it 11 ii it O { ii §i 1 ? II §I ii it HUMBOLDT p ? Ik ii li I? ?.? ? m m ? 1 i LE I li II I{ ![ ?? :? LYNDALE IDAL E3j (I IF IF 1 §i f § !I II y 3 ?i § I 1 ? Ei i{ l It i IF ?OLLE7 NICOLLETjtc? I i I§ i§ i ?§ §I 1 _ ?- 1.§ RTLA l §i § i it I? 1 li 41 li I ???? 12th - = --- - 13th ?, 11 i§ 1 1. tl it §I §§ §i i§ II iI §§ § 3 ff II I L °? I§ (i I§ li I? li IL 11 IR § - ?+ ( 14 I( liL I§ # I §i li ?? I BL II i?\ II e i !§ 1? j7 §I ??I it 4? §i !i II 11 4,# { 11 !CEDAR li 1 i4 i1 ii ii §§ I§ l CEDAR b a 14I1 " a -? C TY OF R CH F ELD M _L 8c OVERLAY 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 my z= O ^F--I l 1 l1J r d SOME: me '? 061.fm= CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA SE-3 Bid Opening . April 12, 2000 11:00 a.m. 2000 Bituminous Mill and Overlay for the City City Project No. 101-35-606 (Bid No. 00-04) Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, 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 March 22, 2000. Present: Thomas Ferber, 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 $ 104,766.35 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 110,315.00 DMJ Corporation 5% Bid Bond $ 121,859.05 Hardrives, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 144,803.30 McNamara Contracting, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 128,835.18 Midwest Asphalt Corporation 5% Bid Bond $ 143,195.70 Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 111,581.43 Valley Paving Incorporated 5% Bid Bond $ 110,927.30 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the April 24, 2000 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk • • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # $D REPORT # 110 J REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE • • REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: JOHN THOM, UTILITIES COORDINATOR MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of purchase from John Deere Commercial Worksite Products, Inc for Model 270, Skid Steer Loader in the amount of $25,540.77. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a Model 270 JD Skid Steer Loader, for use by the utility divisions, from John Deere Commercial Worksite Products, Inc. in the amount of $25,540.77.. II. BACKGROUND The Water Plant handles grit from the water softening process. This requires the material to be loaded into semi-trailers on a routine basis. The small loader that has been used for this process has been fully depreciated for a period of four years. The new skid steer would take the place of the present loader. 0424SkidSteer 4D-I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION. A. POLICY • Purchases in excess of $25,000 require approval of the City Council. • Purchase of a replacement vehicle has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool vehicles. The low bidder for the type of vehicle required is then awarded a contract to supply vehicles to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. • John Deere Commercial Worksite Products, Inc. submitted the low bid for the type of vehicle requested. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • The Water Division budget contains $25,000 for the purchase of the equipment. The present piece of equipment will be sold for an . estimated $2,500 to cover the difference in cost from the budgeted number to the actual cost. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may delay approval for one Council meeting with no major adverse effect. • Council may direct staff to obtain sealed bids, but staff believes that a better price will not be obtained. • Council may chose to take no action thereby retaining the present equipment. However, the present machine needs repair and the age of the machine possibly does not warrant this cost. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING 0 None. AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8C REPORT # 109 J REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2000 PERRY THORVIG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE 0 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the execution of an Environmental Site Assessment Professional Services Agreement for 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 Interchange Project. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the execution of Environmental Site Assessment Professional Services Agreement with Liesch Associates, Inc. for 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 Interchange Project. III. BACKGROUND The City of Richfield is in the process of acquiring right-of-way in the 66th and Cedar area for the realignment of the access ramps to TH 77. Part of the acquisition process involves environmental site assessments to document any signs of environmental contamination. Liesch is already working with MAC on other project areas. Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) has indicated that Liesch is their choice to do the environmental site assessments on this project. Liesch Associates, Inc. has submitted a proposal to do the site assessments within five weeks of the notice to proceed. They would do the work for $45,900. K- • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION ' A. POLICY • Entering into Professional Services Agreements with project consultants is a standard procedure. The City is bound by the MAC agreement to contract with the vendor of their choice. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • Timing of the availability of this service is important to the schedule. f C. FINANCIAL • The site assessment costs are reasonable based on experience in other projects. D. LEGAL • Legal counsel has reviewed the proposed agreement. 10 E. TIMING • Work will be initiated immediately. • The goal is to have title and possession of all property by December 31, 2000. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Reject the proposal and direct staff to seek new proposals. V. ATTACHMENTS I • Proposed agreement (Attachment A) VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A 0 • S?- a- Attachment A ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City of Richfield, STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as the City, and the Liesch Associates, Inc. hereinafter referred to as Liesch. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City wishes to purchase. the services of Liesch; and WHEREAS, there are funds available for the purchase of these services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the City and Liesch agree as follows: 1. TERMS AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT Liesch agrees to furnish services to the City as indicated on the attached Exhibit A dated March 29, 2000. The total cost of this Agreement shall not exceed $45,900. All reports, memos, and other data produced by Liesch become the property of the City. 2. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES Invoices may be submitted monthly. Payment for services shall be made directly to Liesch by check. Invoices shall be of sufficient detail for the City to determine the activity and personnel for which payment is being made. Payment shall be made within 30 days of receipt of an invoice by the City. 3. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Liesch shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the services herein in consultation with the City. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between Liesch and the City or as constituting Liesch as the agent, representative, or employee of the City for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever Liesch is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Liesch represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of Liesch or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by this Agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the City, and shall not be considered employees of the City. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Unemployment Compensation Act or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Liesch, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City. Liesch shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any and all such claims irrespective of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, disability, severance pay, and PERA. 4. NONDISCRIMINATION No person shall be excluded from or denied the benefits of any service performance or contemplated under the terms of this Agreement on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, public assistance status, ex- offender status, or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable Federal or State laws against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination. Liesch shall (1) furnish all information and reports which may be required by the City's Affirmative Action Policy, and (2) it shall comply with the City's Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policies with regard to employment and contracting (See Exhibit B). 5. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE Liesch agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any liability claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorney, fees, resulting directly or indirectly from a negligent act or omission (including without limitation professional errors or omissions) of Liesch, its agents, employees, or assignees in performance of the services provided by this contract, and against all loss by reason of the failure of Liesch to fully perform in any respect, all obligations under this contract. 6. DATA PRIVACY Appraiser agrees to abide by all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations concerning the handling and disclosure of private and confidential information concerning individuals and/or data including but not limited to information made non-public by such laws or regulations. Appraiser shall maintain all appraisal reports submitted to him on behalf of City as confidential until released by counsel for the City. 7. RECORDS - AVAILABILITY 40 Liesch agrees that the City, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of Liesch and involve 2 D&T transactions relating to this Agreement. Records shall be retained for three years from date of final payment with respect to the project. 8. NON-ASSIGNMENT Liesch shall not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this contract and/or the services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the City. 9. MERGER AND MODIFICATION a. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. b. Any material alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. 10. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION a. If Liesch fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of the Agreement, this shall constitute a default. Unless the default is excused, the City, may upon written notice, immediately cancel the Agreement in its entirety. b. The City's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement. C. This Agreement may be canceled without cause by either party upon twenty (20) days written notice. 11. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION In order to coordinate the services of Liesch with the activities of the City so as to accomplish the purposes of this contract, Katia Medvetski shall manage this contract on behalf of the City. • 3 12. NOTICES Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party hereto under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing. Notices shall be sent as follows: City of Richfield Katia Medvetski Community Development Department City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Liesch having signed this contract, and the City having duly approved this contract on April 24, 2000 and pursuant to such approval and the proper City officials having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to. be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Approved as to legality, form and execution. KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED City Attorney Date: CITY OF RICHFIELD STATE OF MINNESOTA Liesch Associates, Inc. City Manager 4 8 01-4D STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2000, by Samantha Orduno, the City Manager, of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the city. Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment Notarial Stamp Or Seal (Or Other Title Or Rank) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this day of 2000, by , the of Liesch Associates, Inc. a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment Notarial Stamp Or Seal (Or Other Title Or Rank) 0 5 3c-? Exhibit A Work to be p rovided by Liesch a. Visual on-site walk-over assessment at each site, identifying existing surface conditions and any obvious signs of contamination. A visual assessment of potential asbestos-containing material will also be conducted. b. Visual survey of adjacent properties for current land use and any obvious signs of contamination. C. Contacts with state, county and city regulatory agencies to determine if any environmental problems or spills have been reported on are adjacent to the site under investigation. d. Review of U.S.G.S. quadrangle maps for location of pipelines and other features which may potentially impact the property. e. Review available plans and specifications, drawings, site plans, surveys and similar materials pertaining to the referenced site. Review available historic aerial photographs and Sanborn Maps (if available). g. Review of historic property records made available to us by the city of Richfield or the property owners. Liesch will also prepare and submit a written report summarizing the factual findings of the assessment. The scope of the assessment will conform to ASTM Practice El 527-97. One draft and two final copies of the report will be submitted. • AGENDA SECTION: Consent APRIL 24, 2000 KATIA MEDVETSKI, REPORT PREPARED BY: REDEVELOPMENT 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 Professional Services Agreements for 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 Interchange Project. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve execution of Review Appraiser Professional Services Agreement with Ruppert and Ruppert Associates, Inc. for 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 Interchange project. IIL BACKGROUND On February 14, 2000, the City Council approved a number of Professional Services Agreements for 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 Interchange for real estate appraisers, a review appraiser, and an acquisition/relocation consultant. On February 28, 2000, the City Council approved an agreement between the City and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) for funding the project. In accordance with this agreement, MAC recently selected a review appraiser, Scott Ruppert of Ruppert & Ruppert Associates, Inc. for the project. Since the City will be Mr. Ruppert's client, a Professional Services Agreement is required. Mr. Ruppert's fee Is is based on an hourly rate of $185.00. The Professional Services Agreement is attached for additional information. 042466psa 8)3--1 Also, due to the complexity of valuing the three billboards in the project, additional appraisers and a review appraiser will be needed. The City Council will be 0 presented with a request to approve additional appraisers at a later date. 1111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY I • Entering into Professional Services Agreement with project consultants is a standard operating procedure. • MAC selected the review appraiser in accordance with the project's funding agreement. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • Time is of the essence to contract with a review appraiser in order to make offers to property owners on schedule. C. FINANCIAL I • MAC is providing the funding for this contract. D. LEGAL • The City's legal counsel reviewed and approved the Review Appraiser Professional Service Agreement for Mr. Ruppert. E. TIMING • The newly selected review appraiser will begin work immediately upon approval of the Review Appraiser Professional Services Agreement. • It is still a goal to have title and possession of all project properties by December 31, 2000. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • Delay approval of the Review Appraiser Professional Services Agreement. • Do not approve the Professional Service Agreements for the MAC selected review appraiser. V. ATTACHMENTS • Review Appraiser Professional Services Agreement (Attachment A). VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING 0 0 N/A 96-OZ Attachment A REVIEW APPRAISAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City of Richfield, State of Minnesota (whose address is 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423, ATTN: Katia Medvetski), hereinafter referred to as the "City" and Ruppert & Ruppert- Associates, Inc., (whose address is 4930 West 77th Street, Suite 333, Edina, MN 55435-4809, ATTN: Scott Ruppert), hereinafter referred to as "Appraiser". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City wishes to purchase the services of the Appraiser for the 66th Street/T.H. 77 Interchange Project; and WHEREAS, there are funds available for the purchase of these services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the City and the Appraiser agree as follows: 0 1. TERMS AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT The Appraiser agrees to furnish services to the City in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Appraiser shall complete review appraisal reports for the properties listed on Exhibit A attached hereto no later than 120 days after the Appraiser is authorized to proceed. The fee for the review appraisal reports shall be at the rate of $185.00 per hour for the properties listed on Exhibit A. The fee for subsequent services, including attending meetings for coordination, strategy and pre-trial and hearings, if any, where Appraiser is required to attend or for preparation of further reports addressing the impact of environmental contaminants on the value of the property shall be at the rate of $185.00 per hour. The fee for and attendance at Commission hearings or District Court by the Appraiser shall be at the rate of $185.00 per hour. The fee for testimony as an expert witness in Commission hearings or District Court by the Appraiser shall be at the rate of $200.00 per hour. 2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED Appraisal reports prepared pursuant to this Agreement shall conform to recognized professional appraisal standards, the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation and the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. In addition, these appraisals shall conform to the Appraisal Specifications (5-491.203) set forth 49 in the State of Minnesota's Right of Way Manual. Appropriate maps and plans for the Project will be furnished by the City. 883 0 3. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES Payment for services shall be made directly to the Appraiser after completion of the services upon the presentation of a claim in the manner provided by law governing the City's payment of claims and/or invoices. Payment shall be made within 45 days from receipt of the invoice and following certification by the Appraiser. -4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The Appraiser shall select- the means, method, and manner of performing the services herein. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating. or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting the Appraiser as the agent, representative, or employee of the City for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The Appraiser is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. The Appraiser represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the Appraiser or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Appraiser under this Agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the City, and shall not be considered employees of the City. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Unemployment Compensation Act or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the Appraiser, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City. The Appraiser shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any and all such claims irrespective of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or others persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Insurance, disability, severance pay and PERA. 5. NONDISCRIMINATION In accordance with the City's policies against discrimination, no person shall be excluded from or denied the benefits of any service performed or contemplated under the terms of this Agreement on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, public assistance status, ex-offender status, or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable Federal or State laws against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to discrimination. If the Appraiser is not an individual or sole proprietorship: (1) it shall furnish all information and reports which may be required by the City's Affirmative Action Policy; and (2) it shall adopt and comply with the City's Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policies with regard to employment and contracting. 2 P& 7 0 6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE The Appraiser agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any liability claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission (including without limitation professional errors or omissions) of the Appraiser his agents, employees, or assignees in performance of the services provided by this contract, and against all loss by reason of the failure of said Appraiser to fully perform in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement. 7. DATA PRIVACY Appraiser agrees to abide by all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations concerning the handling and disclosure of private and confidential information concerning individuals and/or data including but not limited to information made non- public by such laws or regulations. Appraiser shall maintain all appraisal reports submitted to him on behalf of City as confidential until released by counsel for the City. 8. RECORDS -AVAILABILITY The Appraiser agrees that the City, the State Auditor, Federal personnel or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the Appraiser and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. Records shall be retained for three years from date of final payment of Federal funds to the State with respect to the Project. 9. NON-ASSIGNMENT The Appraiser shall not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this contract and/or the services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the City. 10. MERGER AND MODIFICATION a. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. 0 b. Any material alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. 3 M5 0 11. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION a. If the Appraiser fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of the Agreement, this shall constitute a default. Unless the Appraiser's default is excused, upon written notice to the Appraiser the City may immediately cancel the Agreement in its entirety. b. The City's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Any such consent shall apply only to the specific circumstances described in the writing granting the consent and in no event shall constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement unless specifically so stated. c. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause by either party upon ten (10) days written notice to the other party. 12. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION In order to coordinate the services of the Appraiser with the activities of the City so as to accomplish the purposes of this contract, Katia Medvetski, Redevelopment Specialist, shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the City and serve as liaison between the City and the Appraiser. 13. RECYCLING PROGRAM The City encourages the Appraiser to develop and implement an office paper and newsprint recycling program. 14. NOTICES Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party hereto under the terms of this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party at the address stated in the opening paragraph of this Agreement. • 4 0 4--) • Approved as to legality, form and execution. KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED City Attorney Date: CITY OF RICHFIELD STATE OF MINNESOTA APPRAISER City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2000, by Samantha Orduno, the City Manager, of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the City. Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment Notarial Stamp Or Seal (Or Other Title Or Rank) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this day of 2000, by , the of Ruppert & Ruppert Associates, Inc. a corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. 0 Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment Notarial Stamp Or Seal (Or Other Title Or Rank) 5 • • • City Parcel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and 10 11 12 13 14 15 and 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 042466psa EXHIBIT A Description Of Properties For Review Appraisal Type of Taking Property Address Full Fee 6301 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6311 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6315 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6325 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6333 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6341 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6345 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6405 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6409 Cedar Avenue South 6417 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6421 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6425 Cedar Avenue South 6429 Cedar Avenue South 6437 Cedar Avenue South 6441 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6445 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6501 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6509 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6511 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6525 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6529 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 6533 Cedar Avenue South 21-6=7 PID Number 25-028-24-22-0001 25-028-24-22-0002 25-028-24-22-0003 25-028-24-22-0004 25-028-24-22-0060 25-028-24-22-0007 25-028-24-22-0008 25-028-24-23-0064 25-028-24-23-0065 25-028-24-23-0066 25-028-24-23-0067 25-028-24-23-0142 25-028-24-23-0143 25-028-24-23-0069 25-028-24-23-0070 25-028-24-23-0071 25-028-24-23-0001 25-028-24-23-0002 25-028-24-23-0003 25-028-24-23-0005 25-028-24-23-0006 25-028-24-23-0007 • • • X38- 8 City Parcel 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Exhibit A Description of Properties for Review Appraisal Continued Type of Taking Property Address Full Fee 6537-39 Cedar Avenue South Full Fee 1820 East 66th Street Full Fee 1800 East 66th Street Full Fee 1720 East 66th Street Full Fee 1714 East 66th Street Full Fee 1708 East 66th Street Full Fee 1700 East 66th Street PID Number 25-028-24-23-0008 26-028-24-14-0054 26-028-24-14-0064 26-028-24-14-0118 26-028-24-14-0119 26-028-24-14-0120 26-028-24-14-0121 7 AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 8A REPORT # 107 0 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: KATIA MEDVETSKI, REDEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution authorizing condemnation of a commercial property at 1710 East 78th Street for the 77th Street, Phase III, Underpass Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a resolution authorizing condemnation of a commercial property at 1710 East 78th Street for the 77th Street, Phase III, Underpass Project. II. BACKGROUND On November 22, 1999, the City Council approved a resolution establishing just compensation for the commercial property (commonly known as the Normark property) at 1710 East 78th Street for the 77th Street, Phase III, Underpass Project. On or about March 8, 2000, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) provided verbal authorization to the City to acquire the subject property. On March 9, 2000, Conworth, Inc., acting on behalf of the City, made an offer in the amount of $617,000 to the property owners. The property owners have since retained legal counsel to act on their behalf. A counter-offer was made to the City's offer. To date, no documentation has been provided by the property owners or their legal counsel to substantiate their counter offer. At this writing, their legal counsel has requested that the City move to condemnation of the property. 0424condemn Attached hereto is a resolution authorizing condemnation on the subject property. • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY .I • The City has the legal authority to acquire private property by eminent domain for a public purpose. • The approval by MNDOT to acquire the subject property does not preclude acquisition by condemnation. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • At this time, MNDOT's approval of property acquisition for the project is only for the subject property due to its hardship status. C. FINANCIAL • Acquisition by condemnation could necessitate a payment other than the original amount offered, in addition to legal and court fees. D. LEGAL I • The City's legal counsel has been in contact with the property owners' legal counsel. He has indicated that we would propose condemnation to the City Council. If condemnation is authorized negotiations to voluntarily achieve a settlement can continue. E: TIMING I • The City could potentially have title and possession to the subject property 90 days after the condemnation resolution is filed with the District Court. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Delay approval of the condemnation resolution. V. ATTACHMENTS I • A resolution authorizing and directing the condemnation of certain property for street purposes. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING 0 N/A RESOLUTION NO. RP-C,2- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR STREET PURPOSES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield is the official governing body of the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, acting by and through its City Council, is authorized by law to acquire land needed for public use or purpose; and WHEREAS, the transportation and improvement strategy for the City of Richfield includes the construction of an underpass to permit 77th Street to pass under T.H. 77 as well as the improvement and alignment of 77th and 78th Streets to enhance and facilitate the safe and efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians in that area of the City ("Project"); and WHEREAS, the plans and designs for the Project require that the real estate described herein be acquired to implement the plans and designs; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is reasonably necessary, proper, and convenient, for a public purpose, and in the interest of the public health, convenience, and general welfare of the citizens of the City that title to and possession of the real estate hereinafter described be acquired for the furtherance of the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the funding and construction schedule for the Project makes it necessary to acquire title and possession of the real estate hereinafter described prior to the filing of the final report of the condemnation commissioners to be • appointed by the district court. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that it is the considered judgment of the Council that the property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, be acquired in fee simple absolute for the stated public purposes, and that it be acquired, if necessary, through the exercise of the power of eminent domain. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to acquire said real estate by filing an action in eminent domain, negotiation of early entry authorizations, and the use of the quick take procedure as provided by Minn. Stat. § 117.042, pursuant to the City's approved appraisal of value for said real estate as determined by the City Attorney. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of April, 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: lp Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 8A-3 • EXHIBIT A Description of Property: Street Address: 1710 East 78th Street (PID No. 35-028-24-44-0006) Legal Description of Property: That part of the North 180.26 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 28, Range 24, lying East of the West 722 feet thereof, except that portion thereof contained in the following described tract, to-wit: Beginning at a point in the East line of Section 35, 383 feet North of the Southeast corner of said Section 35; thence West parallel with the South line of said Section 35, 158 feet; thence North parallel with the East line of said Section 35, 150 feet; thence East parallel with the South line of said Section 35, 158 feet; thence South along the East line of said Section 35,150 feet to the point of beginning. • 0