06-28-99 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1999
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
RICHFIELD CITY HALL
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 14,
1999
PRESENTATIONS
1. RECOGNITION OF LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FOURTH OF JULY ESSAY
CONTEST WINNERS
2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING WOMEN OF TODAY
FOUNDER'S DAY, JULY 1, 1999
3. INTRODUCTION OF CITY OF RICHFIELD HUMAN SERVICES
PLANNER/COORDINATOR KATHY FARRIS
4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NATIONAL
THERAPEUTIC RECREATION WEEK, JULY 11-17, 1999
5. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JULY NATIONAL PARK
AND RECREATION MONTH
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 ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS 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 COUN-CIL.DISC.USSION AND
ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF LEASING EXTERIOR PORTION OF
7214 CEDAR AVENUE FROM HRA FOR USE BY CITY OF RICHFIELD
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT AT RENT OF $300 PER MONTH C.L. 144
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH DAVID A.
KIRSCHT ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR GOLF
COURSE AT EXISTING FORT SNELLING GOLF COURSE IN AMOUNT UP
TO $28,525 C.L. 145
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY CELEBRATION EVENT
LICENSE AND TEMPORARY ON-SALE 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR
LICENSE, WITH FEE WAIVER, FOR FOURTH OF JULY COMMITTEE
EVENTS SCHEDULED AT VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK, 6335 PORTLAND
• AVENUE, ON JULY 3 AND 4, 1999 C.L. 146
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY ON-SALE 3.2 PERCENT
MALT LIQUOR LICENSE, WITH FEE WAIVER, FOR JULY 4, 1999 FOR
MINNEAPOLIS-RICHFIELD AMERICAN LEGION POST 435, 6501 PORTLAND
AVENUE C.L. 147
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AFFIRMING
MUNICIPAL TORT LIABILITY LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY MINNESOTA
STATUTES 466.04 C.L. 148
PUBLIC HEARING
9. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF TRANSITORY ORDINANCE
FOR SALE OF PROPERTY AT 6537-14TH AVENUE TO HRA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 149
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
10. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AMENDMENT TO CITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 1, SUBSECTION 310.03 DESCRIBING
PROJECT EMPLOYEE
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 150
•
ADMINISTRATIVE_REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
• 11. CONSIDERATION OF STATUS OF RUNWAY 4-22 LITIGATION IN MINNESOTA
STATE COURT
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 151
12. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
13. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
14. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
15. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
16. 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.
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 15r•
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Status of Runway 4-22 litigation in Minnesota State Court.
Background:
In August 1998 the Eighth Circuit Court dismissed Richfield's lawsuit challenging the
Metropolitan Airports Commission's (MAC) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on
Runway 4-22. At that time, Steve Pflaum, legal counsel from McDermott, Will & Emery,
stated that the City of Richfield might consider reactivating its lawsuit in the Fourth
District Court in Hennepin County if the MAC proceeds with its plan to use Runway 4-22
to redistribute aircraft noise.
During the week of June 21, the judge presiding over this case in Minnesota District
Court contacted Richfield Attorney Chuck Dayton, Leonard Street & Deinard, to inquire
about the status of the litigation. At this time, the litigation is still pending and has been
placed on hold since the City filed it.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize Richfield attorney to dismiss the Runway 4-22 litigation filed in Minnesota
State Court.
Basis of Recommendation:.
1. With the construction of Runway 17/35 moving ahead it will not be feasible for MAC
to implement the Runway 4-22 plans for noise redistribution. The use of the
Runway 4-22 for noise "spreading" is not feasible with the operation of a new
North/South Runway.
2. Since it has been over three years since MAC's original noise environmental
assessment of the noise spreading procedure, MAC would now be required to
complete a new EIS before noise redistribution would proceed forth. To date, MAC
has not shown an interest in using Runway 4-22 noise spreading procedures and
has not initiated any efforts to complete additional environmental work.
3. Although not a part of the December agreement, between the City and the MAC,
Richfield's willingness to dismiss this lawsuit would be a further indication of good
faith efforts to work out differences with MAC.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Allow Runway 4-22 litigation to remain pending.
•
2. Defer discussion to future date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This matter will be discussed at the City Council meeting of June 28, 1999. A response
to the court should be provided as soon as possible.
ng City Manager
SLD:cak
ro
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. '~.so
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
First hearing of amendment to the City Administrative Code Section 1, Subsection
310.03 describing a Project Employee.
Background:
City Code Section 310.03 Defining Terms, specifically describes a Project Employee as
"a full-time or part-time employee whose duties are directly related to the operation of a
specific program or project and whose compensation is specifically allocated from
designated non general revenue funds..." Non-general revenue funds which have been
generally used are grants or allocations of money for specific programs paid for by other
units of government.
With the increase of City activities (new construction, remodeling, redevelopment) there
has been a need within certain departments to hire Project Employees for a temporary
time period. As an example, a Clerk and Inspector needed to be hired to work as
Project Employees on a temporary basis due to the increased demand of permits and
inspections at this time.
To better serve the public during this time of increased activity, the City of Richfield
needs to be able to utilize general revenue funds in paying some of its Project
Employees.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the first hearing of the proposed ordinance amendment to Subsection 310.02,
Subdivision 27 regarding the definition of Project Employee and schedule the public
hearing and second reading for July 26, 1999.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Due to sporadic increase of activity within departments, the need to hire Project
Employees on a temporary basis has increased.
2. Some of the Project Employees that need to be hired cannot be paid through non-
general revenue funds (grants, special assessments).
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not amend the ordinance.
2. Defer Discussion to a future date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
First reading of an ordinance amending Subsection 310.03 describing a Project
Employee js scheduled for consideration at the June 28, 1998 City Council meeting.
Res~ctf~lly su
i ~_~
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
lO-I
BILL NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE CITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; DEFINING TERMS; AMENDING
SUBSECTION 310.03 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Subsection 310.03, Subdivision 27 of the Richfield City Code is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 27. "Project employee" means afull-time
or part-time employee whose duties are directly related to the operation of
a specific program or project and whose compensation is specifically
allocated for such program or project from designated
r°~rcv°"'crtci~funds~~an-av, h~~~ nn~ limit ~n~ ivr~n~c nr cr~oni~) occ~°ccmont~
cv-grurr~ ~ ..~....... .... .........................
The term of initial appointment may be for a period of up to one year and
may be extended annually thereafter. With respect to group insurance,
holidays, vacation leave and personal leave/short-term disability benefits
only, such employees shall be treated as regular employees working a
similar number of hours.
Sec. 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield
City Charter.
Adopted by the City of Richfield this day of
1999.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
r
CAH-162459
RC160-2
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. `149
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of the transitory ordinance for the sale of property at
6537-14th Avenue to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Background:
At the May 24 meeting, the City Council authorized the acquisition of 6537-14th Avenue
and held the first reading of an ordinance authorizing sale of the property to the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). The HRA also approved purchase of the property
from the City at their June 21 meeting.
The City will use federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to acquire
the property. Upon sale to the HRA, the 51 x 133 ft. property would be developed by
Hennepin Technical College (HTC) under the. New Home Program. HUD rules require
that the City purchase the property and subsequently transfer it to the HRA to re-sell at
the appropriate time.
It is anticipated that the City will acquire the property by early July. Following
acquisition, the City and HRA would enter into a purchase agreement for $1. The
purchase agreement would be contingent on publication of the transitory ordinance.
• Sale of the property to the HRA could occur in early August if the transitory ordinance is
approved at the June 28 meeting. The HRA would be responsible for any holding or
maintenance costs incurred at the property after acquisition by the City.
Staff, in cooperation with HTC's architectural drafting faculty, has developed project
plans to meet all setback requirements, complement the design of the neighboring
homes and incorporate interior features desirable in the market. Although neither of the
sites are in the designated mitigative area, they are in an area impacted by airport
noise. However, -recognizing that it is important to remove substandard property and
contribute towards strong neighborhoods, new homes on these sites are being
proposed. Staff obtained information from an airport noise mitigative project in
Baltimore, Maryland and had a discussion with Sandy Fidell, a noise consultant to the
City. The following modifications will be applied to help reduce the potential effects of
low frequency noise:
• Exterior soundboard applied to the exterior walls and ceiling, which is another layer
of gypsum or cement board.
• Maximum insulation values in the ceiling and rim joists.
• Windows with an STC rating that exceed standard requirements.
• Installation of storm doors.
• Gaskets placed between foundation and wood framing, and between top plates and
floor joist system connections.
• • Seal exterior framing elements with sound-deadening mastic.
9-I
• The new house will have approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of finished living area on two levels.
It will feature four bedrooms, two baths and an attached garage.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council hold the public hearing and approve the second
reading of the transitory ordinance authorizing the sale of 6537-14th Avenue to the
HRA.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The HRA has identified this property for a new home project and authorized staff to
acquire the property at the June 21 meeting.
2. The City Council has authorized the acquisition of 6537-14th Avenue.
3. City owned property requires a public hearing and the adoption of a transitory
ordinance to effectuate a sale.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not give second reading of the transitory ordinance. This would negatively impact
the proposed redevelopment of the substandard site.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Timely sale of the property from the City to the HRA requires publication of a transitory
ordinance following. the June 28 meeting.
SLD:cak
•
Hcting city manager
9- a
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA
6537-14TH AVENUE
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1:
The following described real property located in the City of Richfield, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, is hereby authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise
disposed of, and conveyed by the City, described as follows:
Lot 17, Block 4 Nokomis Gardens Rearrangement of Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4; and 5 Girard
Parkview, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and having the street address of 6537-14th
Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota
Section 2:
The Mayor and Acting City Manager are hereby authorized to take all actions as
required to sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of and convey the real property described
in the foregoing Section 1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the
execution of all documents, purchase agreements, deeds of conveyance, and other
instruments connected with such sale, transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of
June, 1999 by the Richfield City Council.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:.
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
gE
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 148
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Resolution affirming municipal tort liability limits established by Minnesota Statutes
466.04
Background:
The State Statute that governs tort liability limits for municipalities was amended in
1998. One major change contained in that amendment was to raise the monetary limits
of exposure for any municipality involved in a liability claim against it. The limits of
$200,000 for a single claimant and $600,000 for any single occurrence, were raised to
$300,000 per single claimant and $750,000 per occurrence. Thus, in 1999 the City was
subject to the new limits.
With the previous limits, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust through which
the City purchases insurance, automatically waived single claimant liability limit in
providing the insurance. Thus, any single claimant could recover up to $600,000
.against the City for a liability claim. With the change of liability limits, this option was no
longer automatically invoked by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust.
Instead, the waiver of liability limits must be acted upon by each individual city and/or
H RA.
The Richfield City Council must annually decide whether the City would voluntarily
waive the statutory limits for both the- single claimant. and each occurrence. If the single
limit is waived it would allow an individual claimant to recover up to the $750,000 single
occurrence limit. If the Council waived its per occurrence liability limits and purchased
excess liability insurance, a single claimant could potentially recover up to the amount
of the limit. of the additional coverage purchased. The total which all claimants would
be able to recover for a single occurrence. to which the statutory limits apply would also
be limited to the amount of coverage purchased regardless of the number of claimants.
Since the new law was implemented,-the majority of cities in Minnesota, including
Richfield for the period July 1, 1998 to June 30, 1999, have elected not to waive the
monetary limits on municipal tort liability that was established by Minnesota Statutes
466.04. In other words, most cities are standing by the statute which would allow an
individual claimant to recover no more than $300,000 on any individual claim and that
all claimants recover no more than $750,000 per single occurrence.
The election to waive limits of liability is an action that may be reviewed by the City
Council on an annual basis. City staff, in examining the actions of other municipal
entities across the state and its own risk management practices, is recommending that
the Council not waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability for its insurance
renewal of July 1, 1999.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Council not to waive the monetary limits on
municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04.
r~
&E~~
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The new limits have been increased to provide greater coverage for claimants
against municipal entities. The increase taking effect in 1998 is the first step in a
series of increases that will eventually bring the limits up to $1,000,000 per
occurrence in 2000.
2. The City has typically not purchased excess liability coverage because of the cost
of such coverage.
3. The majority of municipalities in Minnesota are not waiving the monetary limits on
municipality tort liability as was established by Statutes 466.04.
4. The tort liability limits established by Minnesota Statutes have protected cities
historically and no court has awarded an amount to a claimant in excess of the
statutory limits for municipalities in Minnesota.
5. There is a slight premium savings for entities that affirm the monetary limits on tort
municipal liability in their package coverage with League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust. The savings for the City would be less than $1000 per year.
6. The Council could waive its statutory limits in future years if the Council should
decide to do so.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. If the Council believes that any single claimant should receive more than the
$300,000 limit, the Council could elect to waive the monetary limits on tort liabilities
established by Minnesota statutes.
2. If the Council believes that the $750,000 limit is not adequate, the City could
purchase excess liability coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 in excess of the
limit at a cost of approximately $2,200 and subsequently waive the limits of liability
so individuals suing the City could collect up to the amount of coverage purchased
by the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City's insurance policy with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust will
renew on July 1, 1999. Thus, it is important that the Council take action as soon as
possible to either affirm or waive the monetary limits on tort liabilities established by
Minnesota Statutes 466.04.
ly s
St~~n L. Devich -
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
~~
gE a
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AFFIRMING MUNICIPAL TORT LIABILITY LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY
MINNESOTA STATUTES 466.04
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 466.04 provides for Municipal tort liability limits
for Minnesota cities, and
WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust has asked that
each city review the tort liability limits and determine if the respective city would choose
to waive it's limits, and
WHEREAS, such decision to affirm or waive the tort liability limits must be filed
with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust at the insurance renewal date.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Manager is directed to
report to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust that the Richfield City Council
does not waive the monetary limits on the municipal tort liability established by
Minnesota statutes 466.04.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of
June 1999.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
1_JJ
SD
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 147
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Request for a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license, with fee waiver, for July
4, 1999 for Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435, 6501 Portland Avenue.
Background:
On June 16, 1999, Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 submitted a
request for a temporary license to serve on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor within their
parking lot area during the events to take place on July 4. They are requesting that any
fee be waived.
This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has been
organized by the Fourth of July committee. Their plans are to have an open house and
community dance outside on their property and they would like to serve refreshments,
including beer. Their current liquor license is only valid for the serving of alcohol within
the establishment and doesn't cover exterior serving. They will provide proof of
additional liquor liability insurance to cover the exterior of their property prior to the day
of the event.
Recommended Motion:
Approve a fee waived, temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license for July 4, 1999
with the following stipulations:
• That the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor cease no later than midnight, July 4, 1999.
• That the proof of liquor liability to cover the exterior premise be submitted as soon as
possible.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a temporary on-sale
3.2 percent malt liquor license with the exception of the submittal of the proof of
liquor liability insurance to cover the exterior premise.
2. The City has previously issued temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses
in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has
not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted
temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of
July Celebration.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
__
The request for a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license for Minneapolis-
Richfield American Legion, 6501 Portland Avenue, is presented for Council
consideration at this time.
Re a ully submitted,
a
•
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
gC
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 146
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Request for a community celebration event license and temporary on-sale 3.2 percent
malt liquor license, with a request for a fee waiver, for the Fourth of July Committee
events scheduled to take place at Veterans Memorial Park, 6335 Portland Avenue, on
July 3 and 4, 1999.
Background:
Each year the Fourth of July Committee makes application for a community celebration
event license and requests that the fee be waived for the activities that take place
throughout the City on July 3 and 4, 1999.
This year they have included a request for a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor
license which would allow them to serve beer and wine coolers at Veterans Memorial
Park during the July 3 and 4 activities. They have provided proof of liquor liability
insurance to cover this event.
A detailed activity plan of the days' events is currently on file. A copy of the
committee's bylaws and articles of incorporation are also on file. The food concessions
will be staffed by members of various organizations, most of which have been with the
committee since the celebration began.
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.
In addition, each individual concessionaire has been approved by Duane Hudson of the
Bloomington Health Department.
All fees for each professional concession have been received except for the following:
Gypsy Joe Concessions, Westrums, and Waage Concessions.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends the following actions:
1. Approve a community celebration event license and temporary on-sale 3.2 percent
malt liquor license, with fee waiver, for the Fourth of July Committee for activities
held throughout the day on July 3 and 4, 1999 at Veterans Memorial Park.
2. Approve all vendors to participate in this event with the stipulation that all fees
have been submitted prior to the event.
•
ac-i
Basis of Recommendation:
• 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City application
process and meets the requirements for fee waiver with the exception of the
submittal of all licensing fees.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide not to grant the license. This would result in the
applicant not being able to conduct activities, especially those concerning food
preparation and temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor sales, on July 3 and 4,
1999.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Request for a community celebration event license and temporary on-sale 3.2 percent
malt liquor license, with a request for a fee waiver, submitted by the Fourth of July
Committee for events scheduled at Veterans Memorial Park, 6335 Portland Avenue, on
July 3 and 4, 1999 is presented for Council consideration at this time.
R pe tfully submi d,
~~
vich
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
•
SB
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 145
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Retain architectural services of David A. Kirscht Associates, Inc. to prepare a
preliminary and schematic design for a golf course at the existing Fort Snelling Golf
Course (FSGC) site.
Background:
The Rich Acres Golf Course (RAGC) site will be closing soon to make room for the new
North/South Runway. For the past 18 months, the City has been working with the
Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) on a plan for the joint development of
the upper bluffs area. Under the terms of the joint powers agreement previously
approved by the Richfield City Council, the MPRB would utilize an area for soccer fields
and ballfields. Richfield would develop the FSGC. Redevelopment of the course
appears to be necessary due to the condition play ability and lack of teaching facilities
on the course in its current state.
Minneapolis has a design plan in place while Richfield does not. With a timeline of up to
two years from planning to completion of construction, it is essential that the planning
process begin as soon as possible.
To that end, staff has talked with a golf course design professional regarding a proposal
for golf course design services. David A. Kirscht Associates, Inc. has submitted a
proposal to prepare a preliminary and schematic design package for a cost of $28,525,
and could begin work on the project immediately. The cost of the project would be paid
for from golf course revenues.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the agreement for golf course services with David A. Kirscht Associates, Inc. in
the amount of up to $28,525 and authorize the Mayor and Acting City Manager to
execute such agreement.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The architect is familiar with RAGC/Richfield and services for RAGC in the past
have been satisfactory.
2. The architect has a good reputation for work performed in the area.
3. The architect is available and willing to begin the process at Richfield's
convenience.
4. This matter is extremely time sensitive. If Richfield is to have an opportunity to
acquire or lease FSGC, design plans are necessary as soon as possible.
•
ge-I
+~ Alternative Recommendation:
1. Seek amendments to the proposed agreement.
2. Direct staff to seek an alternative approach.
3. Do not replace the RAGC asset.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A task force of 14 citizens was assembled as an advisory body to the decision making
process. The recommendations of this task force are in the attached memo, reference
item C.
Re ec ully submi ed,
. De
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
Attachment
•
•
k.s ~~
memo ..................................6/6/9 9
The Brauer Group, Inc: 61161?arneli Avenue, .Edina, MN 55424 •Tel (812) 720-4888 FX (612)91514
E-Mail.....brauergroup@electronet.com Home Page...electronet.com/bgroup/ ,Pager (612) 318-1553
T~: .Steve Devich, Jim Prosser, •and Mike Lannigan .
FROM: Don Brauer
RE: Ft. Snelling Golf Course Forum Results & Recommendations
A. THE PROCESS.....AND PARTICIPANTS
1. The Process included an invitation to 18 people active in all aspects of golf
activities in Richfield, presentation of the fact situation regarding the existing Ft.
Snelling Course, the potential for expansion, limitations of the total site area
available and restrictions imposed by conditions of the historic district,
comparative data on less-than-full-length golf facilities in the basic competitive
area, questions and additional information, about 90 minutes of small group
discussion, reports from each small group, and wrap up.
2. Participants included representatives ~ of current leagues, golf coaches,
community services staff and commission, course operation and teaching staff.
Fourteen of the eighteen invited attended and participated, while one who. was
unable to be present submitted a letter with suggestions.
B. FOCUS OF DISCUSSION
1. Facility Priorities........because there will not be' enough site to support
development of a complete golf facility like Rich Acres, participants were asked
to prioritize various elements, i.e., range/teaching area, regulation nine, par-
three nine or eighteen, executive nine, or other element that participants might
suggest.
2. User Priorities:..:.....that is, the relative allocations of available time for leagues,
open range, teaching activities, tee time reservations, and open tee times.
3. .Operations Priorities.......including season (patron) passes or discount cards,
special events times and frequencies, range operations, and teaching
activities. .
C RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........FACILITIES
All agreed tha# the existing Fort Snelling golf facility has a poor reputation and must be
improved or replaced, and an effective information program will be required in order to
change the current image. In addition to the basics (parking, club house, putting
green, starter shack, maintenance facility, equipment and signage, etc., etc., facility
priorities should be:
page 1
88 3
•
memo .................................. 6/6/99
THE BRAUER GROUP, INC. 6116 Parnell Avenue, Edina, MN 55424 (612)720-4888 FAX (612) 915-1484
1. '`Regulation" Nine.......was the clear first priority of all three discussion groups. It
was understood that "regulation" means 3,000 to 3,500 yards for nine holes,
with two par fives, two par threes, and four par fours. It would be desirable to
provide "alternate" tees to provide some variety for playing a second round.
2. 'Teachina-Practice Ranae......was the clear second priority. The consensus was
to provide a "complete" teaching facility including pitch and chip activity, traps,
and virtual golf and instruction in a multi-level, year-round facility.
3." Nine Holes of Par Three.........similar to what is now available at Rich Acres
(1,000 to 1,500 yards).
4. Nine Holes of Pitch-and-Putt........ if there is room. in addition to the elements
described above (800 to 1,000 yards).
RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.........OPERAT[ONS
1. Patrons (or Season Pass)........should have reservation and fee discount
arrangements similar to those available at Rich Acres now.
2. League Times and Fee Structures........should be similar to current policies.
• 3. Special Events......should be scheduled on a basis comparable to the policies in
place at RA today.
4. School-Team-and Adaptive Programs..........should be continued at current
levels and supported as much as the Fort Snelling facilities will permit.
5. Teachina Programs ........should continue to be supported to the same extent
that they are today.
6. Promotion Program to Overcome Current "Poor" Image.......must be a clear and
effective effort.
•
page 2
AGREEMENT
GOLF COURSE DESIGN SERVICES
AGREEMENT
GOLF COURSE DESIGN
CITY OF RICHFlELO
Job PAGE 1 OF 7'
V ~P~
for
City of Richfield, Minnesota
This Agreement, made on the day of , 1999 by and between, the
CITY OF RICHFIELD,- 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MN 55423, hereinafter referred to as
CLIENT, and DAVID A. KIRSCHT ASSOCIATES, INC., 5500.LINCOLN DRIVE, EDINA, MN 55436-1666
hereinafter referred to as GOLF COURSE ARCHITECT (GCA).
WITNESS, whereas the CLIENT requires professional design services in conjunction with the DESIGN for a
new golf course, located at Fort Snelling, Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (hereinafter called
the PROJECT),
AND, whereas SECTION I -GOLF COURSE DESIGN SERVICES. of this Agreement will be completed in
accordance with a CLIENT approved time schedule,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises between the parties hereto, it
is agreed:
SECTION I -GOLF COURSE DESIGN SERVICES
A. The GCA will prepare the Preliminary and Schematic Design for a new golf course and teaching
facility on land area designated and available to support the uses. The type of golf course will be
prepared for CLIENT approval as part of A.1. and A.2. below. The GCA agrees to provide
professional golf course design services in connection with the PROJECT as described below:
1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE
a. TASK I -DATA GATHERING. ETC.
The GCA will complete this Task working with the CLIENT to gain a thorough
understanding of the CLIENT'S goals and objectives. Included will be assembling
appropriate data relating to the PROJECT, conduct site investigations, and assist the
CLIENT in determining the extent of site constraints impacting the PROJECT, i.e., existing
utilities, structures, easements, wetlands, etc.
b. TASK I(-PERMITS
The GCA proposes to assist the CLIENT with the preparation of applicable permits;
however, any permit applications will be the responsibility of the CLIENT.
•
The GCA also proposes to not adversely impact wetlands determined to exist on the site
with the course routing; however, if this is unavoidable the CLIENT will be alerted to the
need for the preparation of required permit applications to be submitted through the
Local Governmental Unit (LGU) for anticipated approvals. The process may be on-going
as the golf course plans are being prepared for review and approval.
AGREEMENT
~} ~ GOLF COURSE DESIGN
yU~ ~ CITY OF RICHFlELD
PAGE 2 OF 7
c. TASK III -GOLF COURSE. ROUTING PLAN
The GCA will prepare a preliminary Routing Concept and teaching facility for the
PROJECT utilizing net land area available and will include schematic location for the
clubhouse, maintenance facility, and associated parking. The Routing Concept is
intended to determine the best type of golf course facility to be accommodated by the site
and may result in more than one Concept for review.
The above Routing Concept(s) will be reviewed with the CLIENT and refined as needed.
Refinements will be incorporated in the Schematic Design Phase.
2. SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
a. TASK I -SCHEMATIC COURSE LAYOUT
Based on the previously CLIENT approved Routing Concept and teaching facility in the
Preliminary Design Phase, the GCA will make necessary refinements and prepare the
Schematic Course Layout. This plan will further explore and illustrate greens, tees, and
fairways together with schematic grading, drainage, and other course components.
Based on the completion of the above work in A.2.a. the GCA will develop an estimate
of probable course development costs for the CLIENT'S approval and budgeting.
The information prepared in this Phase will be thoroughly reviewed with the CLIENT,
anticipating approval to proceed with the FINAL DESIGN PHASE.
. 3. F/NAL DESIGN PHASE (by addendum only)
a. TASK 1-CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE
Upon approval by the CLIENT of the Schematic Course Layout the GCA will incorporate
necessary revisions and prepare for the CLIENT'S approval, detailed Construction
Documents and Specifications required for bidding and construction of the PROJECT.
Construction Documents will be completed according to an approved time schedule and
will include final cost pro%ections. Included in the Construction Documents will be
detailed instructions setting forth the requirements for the construction of the PROJECT
and the duties and responsibilities of the CCA, CLIENT, and the Contractor(s).
Construction Documents will include:
(1) Demolition and Removals Plan.
(2) Layout Plan for the golf course features, i.e., greens, tees, fairways, ponds, cart
paths, etc., including construction limits.
(3) Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan.
(4) Details for green, tee, and cart path construction and other course elements.
(5) Automatic irrigation plan, pump station, and details.
(6) Sod and Seed Plan, together with landscaping and other course amenities.
(7) Specifications including proposal form, special conditions, and general conditions in
conformance with CLIENT requirements.
The GCA will review, for conformance, any plans and information provided by the
CLIENT to be incorporated in the PROJECT.
i In general, the GCA will be responsible for all services included to complete the
PROJECT design, with the exception of those itemized in Section ll.
2
~cm o ~~HFl~n
PAGE S OF 7
4. BIDDING AND NEGOTIATION PHASE (by addendum only)
The GCA, following the CLIENT'S approval of the Construction Documents, will assist the
CLIENT in advertising for bids, determining contractor qualifications, preparing addendum's,
evaluating the bids, and make a recommendation for awarding the contract(s) for the
construction of the PROJECT.
The GCA will provide duplication and distribution of Construction Documents for this
Phase. Two sets will be provided to the Client and the GCA will require anon-refundable
deposit for bidder sets payable to the GCA.
The GCA may require a pre-bid meeting of the qualified bidders to supplement the
documentation for the PROJECT.
4. CONSTRUCT/ON PHASE (by addendum only)
(1) The GCA may conduct apre-construction conference with the CLIENT and the
Contractor(s).
(2) The GCA will make periodic visits to the site of the PROJECT to familiarize himself
with the progress and quality of the work and to determine in general if the PROJECT
is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents.
(3) The scope of services in this phase will include, per A.4.(2), periodic construction
observation of the Contractor's work, interpretation of plans and specifications for accuracy
of workmanship and materials, and appearance of the final product, but without assuming
any responsibility of the Contractor's means and methods. It will also. include assistance
with the processing of necessary and appropriate paperwork, assistance with contract
administration, progress reports, approval of payment requests, and final inspection
for approval, etc., as mutually agreed by the CLIENT and the GCA.
(4) Visits for periodic construction observation, in items A.4.(2-3), will be conducted
during critical construction periods, excluding periods of work stoppage due to
construction scheduling or adverse weather conditions. Visits for periodic construction
observation are anticipated to once a week minimum, and limited to twelve (12).
(5) One (1) visit for final inspection will be conducted for construction approval.
B. Additional services requested of the GCA and mutually determined essential to the satisfactory
completion of the PROJECT including, but not limited to, the following:
1. CLIENT approved outside professional and technical services, etc.
2. Preparation of applications for approval unique to the PROJECT from regulatory
agencies, i.e., U. 5. Army Corps of Engineers, City of Mpls., Hennepin County, DNR, etc.
3. Preparation of presentation materials, attendance/presentation at special meetings, etc.
4. Preparation of plans for clubhouse, parking, maintenance facility, etc.
5. Additional services, not presently contemplated, authorized by the CLIENT and considered
essential to the satisfactory completion of the PROJECT.
3
AGREEMENT
~~ GOLF COURSE DESIGN
~~// CITY OF RICNFlELD
PAGE • OF 7
C. The GCA shall serve as the CLIENT'S professional representative as described herein.
SECTION 11-THE CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The CLIENT will compensate the GCA in accordance with Section III of this Agreement.
B. The CLIENT will provide any and all previously or newly acquired site and related historical
information for the use by the GCA. The GCA may rely upon the accuracy and sufficiency of all
such information in performing the required professional services.
C. The CLIENT will provide the following information or services, if not previously provided, and
considered essential to the satisfactory completion of the PROJECT to the GCA and any costs will
not be part of this Agreement:
Easements, utilities, deed restrictions, etc., affecting the golf course property, and topographic
and boundary survey in digital format.
2. Zoning, platting and historical information as it may affect course layout and relating to
present and future development of adjacent parcels.
D. The CLIENT will guarantee access to and make provisions for entry upon all portions of the
PROJECT and adjoining private properties.
E. The CLIENT will give prompt notice to the GCA whenever the CLIENT observes or otherwise
becomes aware of any defect in the proposed PROJECT.
F. The CLIENT will designate a liaison person to act as the CLIENT'S representative with
respect to services to be rendered under this Agreement. Said representative shall have
the authority to transmit instructions, receive instructions and information, and interpret
and define the CLIENT'S policies with respect to the PROJECT and the GCA's services.
G. The CLIENT, as part of its PROJECT administration, will provide such legal, accounting,
independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for
completion of the GCA services described in this Agreement.
H. The Client will provide necessary off-site professional engineering design and on-site investigative
and testing services essential to the satisfactory completion of the overall PROJECT.
The CLIENT will verify and make available adequate irrigation water supply (well) and required
electrical power to operate the irrigation pump station.
J. The CLIENT will furnish or make available, at the appropriate time and as mutually determined
essential to the satisfactory completion of the overall PROJECT, the following:
1. Delineate wetlands, as may be determined existing on the PROJECT site, tied to same..
ground control points as topographic and course boundary survey in C.1. above, in
.digital format.
Independent testing company to perform laboratory and materials testing, and soils testing
that can be justified for the proper design and construction of the PROJECT.
3. Hydrologic data including existing and proposed storm water detention requirements
as may be necessary, pond water containment requirements, etc.
4
~j ~~ AGREEMENT
vx GOLF COURSE DESIGN
CITY OF RICHFlELD
PAGE S OF 7
K. The CLIENT will furnish the form of Contract for construction of the PROJECT together with form of
Performance and Payment Bonds.
SECTION III -COMPENSATION FOR CCA SERVICES
A. FEES
The fee in SECTION III-A.1.a. through d. is predicated on the design of nine holes of
golf and full practice range (teaching facility).
The CLIENT will compensate the GCA for base services in accordance with the following
schedule for services as listed under Section I-A.1: 2.,-(Golf Course Design Services),
based on the sum of Twenty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Five Dollars ($28,525)
including an initial retainer of Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) with this executed
Agreement.
a. I-A.1: 2. Preliminary and Schematic Design. Phases: ($28,525)
As part of the this Agreement, the GCA will complete the above Preliminary and Schematic
Design Phases for the fee of $28,525, and the CLIENT further agrees that the GCA will be
retained to complete the Final Design Phase, the Bidding and Negotiation Phase, and the
Construction Phase when the CLIENT proceeds beyond the Schematic Design Phase approval
with the design and construction of the PROJECT.
The work listed in A.3: A.S. above maybe added only by addendum to this Agreement A
schedule of fees for the work in A.3 - A:S. will be included as part of the estimate of
probable development costs to be completed in the Schematic Design Phase, I A.2., and
based on what is designed and approved by the CLIENT.
2. Fees for Additional Services under Section I-B. will be mutually determined at the time of
CLIENT request and authorization in writing. Fees for additional services, other than lump
sum agreed to at time of authorization, will be computed on the following basis:
a. Standard hourly rate of $90.00 per hour, including travel time.
b. Attendance/presentation at special meetings at $115.00 per hour, including travel time.
c. Mileage at $0.35 per mile.
d. Materials at cost plus 10%.
The payment of fees to the GCA will be made by the CLIENT upon billing at intervals, not to
exceed monthly, based on the percentage of work completed for each Phase under III-A.1.
and for Additional Services under III-A.2.
SECTION IV -GENERAL
A. CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE.
In the event the CLIENT changes or is required to change the scope of the PROJECT from that
described in Section I, and such changes require Additional Services by the GCA, the GCA will
be entitled to additional compensation. The GCA shall give notice to the CLIENT of the need for
any Additional Services, prior to furnishing such Additional Services. The CLIENT may request
an estimate of additional costs from the GCA, and the GCA shall furnish such prior to the
CLIENT authorizing additional services.
5
•
~~
B. INSURANCE
AGREEMENT
GOLF COURSE DESIGN
CITY OF RICHFIELD
PAGE 6 OF 7
The GCA agrees to maintain such general liability insurance for claims arising from bodily
injury, death or property damage which may arise from the negligent performance of the GCA
or its employees of its day-today general business activities.
The GCA agrees to maintain owned and non-owned auto insurance.
The GCA agrees to maintain Worker's Compensation insurance.
The GCA also agrees to maintain Professional Liability insurance.
C. PAYMENT OF FEES
If the CLIENT fails to make any payment due the GCA for services and expenses within thirty
(30) days after date of the GCA's invoice, a service charge of one and one-half percent (1.5%)
per month or the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less, will be charged on any
unpaid balance.
D. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon ten (10) days written notice.
In the event of termination, there shall be no further obligation by the CLIENT to the GCA
under this Agreement, except for payment of amounts due and' owing for work performed or
materials obtained by the date and time of termination, based on Section III above.
•
E. ABANDONMENT OF'PROJECT'
If the CLIENT shall deem it expedient or it shall become necessary for the CLIENT to abandon or
involuntarily defer the work under this Agreement or any part thereof before completion of the
services to be rendered thereunder, the GCA shall be entitled to receive compensation for all work
performed up to the date which the GCA received notice to discontinue the work. Such
compensation shall be on the basis of Section III above.
SUCCESSOR. AND ASSIGNMENTS
Neither the CLIENT nor the GCA shall assign, sublet, or transfer its interest in this Agreement
without the written consent of the other.
G. CLIENT OWNERSHIP OF PLAN
All drawing, designs, and specifications prepared by the GCA, pursuant to this Agreement, shall
be and. become the property of the CLIENT, except that the GCA may retain all originals thereof
for his files, and provide reproducible duplicates of plans and photocopies of specifications to the
CLIENT.
H. .AGREEMENT TIMING
•
It shall be the intent of the GCA to complete services outlined in this Agreement, expedited
efficiently in a timely manner, in the best interests of the CLIENT. A final time schedule may be
prepared to the mutual agreement of the parties herein at such time as all approvals and
authorizations have been received. The time schedule may be added to this Agreement by
addendum.
6
AGREEMENT
l~ GOLF COURSE DESIGN
~vs CITY OF RICHFlELD
PAGE 70F1
I. NON-DISCRIMINATION
The provisions of any applicable law or ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall
be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein.
J. INDEMNIFICATION
SECTION V -SIGNATURES
THIS INSTRUMENT embodies the whole Agreement of the parties, there being no promises, terms,
conditions or obligations referring to the subject matter other than contained herein, or as may be
modified by mutually approved Amendment(s).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in their behalf on
the day and month of the year written on page 1 of this Agreement.
DAVID A. KIRSCHT ASSOCIATES, INC.
..
.David A. Kirscht
President
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Printed Name•
Title:
Date:
•
The CLIENT agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the GCA for any personal injury and physical
damage that may occur on or to the PROJECT during and after construction is completed.
Printed Name:
Title:
Date:
7
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA g
Council Letter No. 144 Q~
Agenda June 28, 1999
Issue Statement:
Authorization to lease 7214 Cedar Avenue from the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority for use to the City of Richfield Public Safety Department:.
Background:
In 1997, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) purchased this property with
the intent to hold it until. a redevelopment strategy indicated an appropriate reuse.
Currently, the building is leased to Richfield Transmission Center which utilizes only the
inside of the building for storage.
Public Safety would like to reduce its operating costs by leasing from the HRA the
exterior portion of the property which is enclosed with the chain link fence for $300 per
month. They would store motor vehicles which come into their possession until they are
able to dispose of them. Neither sales nor repair work would be conducted from the
site.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the leasing of the exterior portion of 7214 Cedar Avenue from the HRA for
use by the City of Richfield Public Safety Department at a rent of $300 per month.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The lease would help Public Safety reduce their operating costs.
2. Cancellation provisions make it possible for the lease to be terminated when the
property is needed for redevelopment.
3. The HRA authorized a lease with the City at their June 21 meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay consideration.
2. Refuse to approve the lease.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
With approval from the City Council, Public Safety can commence use of the site
following execution of the lease.
Re ctf Ily submitted
ve evich
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak