11-9-98 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
•
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1998
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
:..INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
OCTOBER 26,1998; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
OF NOVEMBER 2,1998; (3) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OF
NOVEMBER 2,1998; AND (4) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER
5, 1998
Is PRESENTATIONS
1. RECOGNITION OF 12 ART CONTEST WINNERS FOR DESIGN OF HOME PAGE
FOR INFOQUEST
2. PRESENTATION FROM MULTI - PURPOSE RECREATIONAL FACILITY TASK
FORCE
INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO
PRINT THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER FOR THE
RECORD.
3. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
ON THE AGENDA
AGENDA APPROVAL
4. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
• 5. 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 DESIGNATING CITY'S
CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE
PREMIUMS FOR GENERAL. SERVICES .AND...MANAGEMENT..EMPLOYEES
C.L. 278
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REQUEST BY RICHFIELD CHURCH
OF CHRIST, 7314 HUMBOLDT AVENUE, TO ERECT GROUND SIGN THAT
DOES NOT MEET SETBACK REQUIREMENTS C.L. 279
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF ITINERANT PLACE OF AMUSEMENT
AND ITINERANT FOOD LICENSE WITH FEES WAIVED FOR CHURCH OF
ST. RICHARD'S 1998 FALL FESTIVAL ON NOVEMBER 21 AND 22, 1998
C.L. 280
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
CITY CODE SECTION 930 REGARDING NOISE RELATED ISSUES
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 281
7. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 6600 OAKLAND AVENUE TO ALLOW
CONVERSION FROM EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USE TO
RESIDENTIAL ONLY
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 282
8. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION REGARDING
PROPOSED APPROVAL OF MODIFICATION TO RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-
NICOLLET TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 283
9. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION GRANTING
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 7615 NICOLLET AVENUE
. COUNCIL LETTER NO. 284
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
0 AIRPORT BUSINESS
10. CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR BALL FIELD
REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PHASE ONE
• INGRAM EXCAVATING, INC. FOR ROOSEVELT PARK IN AMOUNT OF
$825,561
• INGRAM EXCAVATING, INC. FOR DONALDSON /RICHFIELD JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL SITE IN AMOUNT OF $753,356
__• ..KA WITT CONSTRUCTION_ FOR. INTERMEDIATE.. S.C.HOOL.SITE.- IN :.AMOUNT.
OF $187,839
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 285
11. CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF RICHFIELD AND CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS PARK AND RECREATION
BOARD FOR JOINT DEVELOPMENT OF ATHLETIC FIELDS IN FORT SNELLING
AREA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 286
12. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
0 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 861 -9702.
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 286
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of entering into a joint powers agreement between the City of Richfield
and the City of Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for the joint development of
athletic fields in the Fort Snelling area.
Background:
The City of Richfield and the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board have been
working on a concept to develop athletic fields in the Fort Snelling area. The athletic
fields would consist of a golf course and learning facility to be operated by Richfield;
and ball fields and tennis courts to be operated by Minneapolis Park and Recreation
Board. In order to implement this concept, the City of Richfield and Minneapolis Park
and Recreation Board would be required to cooperate in property acquisition including
leasing of property and a variety of development issues. The joint powers agreement is
a format to permit this cooperative effort.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a joint powers agreement between
the City of Richfield and Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.
Basis of Recommendation:
The agreement would allow the development and operation of recreation facilities to
replace facilities lost due to airport development.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council may decide not to proceed with the joint powers agreement at this
time.
2. The Council may decide to revise the joint powers agreement.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This matter will be presented for consideration at the November 9 Council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
I
Jan. D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
•
//_1
DRAFT
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT entered into this _day of ,
1998 by and between the City of Minneapolis, acting by and through its Park and Recreation
Board, a body corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota ('Park Board ") and the City of
Richfield, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota ('Richfield ") is entered into
pursuant to the Minnesota Join Powers Act Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 (the "Act ") (The
Park Board and Richfield arc jointly referred to as the 'Parties ")
1. Findings.
A. Richfield and the Park Board are empowered under Minnesota Statutes Section
471 to expend funds for the capital costs, operation; and maintenance of facilities
for athletic fields and related facilities both within and without their corporate
limits;
is B. The Park Board is authorized to enter into agreements for the operation,
management and maintenance of park lands for recreation and other purposes
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 412.91, et seq., 448.56 and 471.59;
C. The Parties have determined that the Park Board and Richfield need to provide
recreational facilities for the residents of Minneapolis and Richfield in the area of
the current Fort Snelling State Park and adjacent lands, all of which is
approximately located on attached Exhibit A (the "Site "):
D. The several parcels which comprise the Site are in separate ownership, and are
subject to separate restrictions regarding their use. The separate parcels are shown
on Exhibit A. The parties believe that it is vital to the function and utility of the
envisioned recreational facilities that all of the parcels be under the control of the
parties, either individually of jointly.
E. The Parties have authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471 and their
respective powers as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 412 and 448 to
enter into a joint powers agreement for the purposes set forth herein.
2. Statement of Purpose
• The purpose of this Agreement is to enable the Parties, through joint and cooperative
action. to expand and provide recreational facilities of the highest quality and lowest cost
to the residents of Minneapolis and Richfield, and to provide a means for the construction
JBD- 151991
RC145 -343
I /-;L,
maintenance, and supervision of such facilities. In particular, the Parties foresee the
expansion of the current nine hole golf course into an eighteen hole project, the use of
some of the historic buildings located in the Site as a conference center and expansion of
the current ball fields (collectively herein, the "Project "). This Agreement is entered into
for the purposes of providing a framework for reaching agreement on and providing for
financing and managing the Project and to facilitate the exercise of powers of the Parties
pursuant to the Act. This Agreement is further entered into to create a joint entity, which
shall have the power to operate the Project as well as to negotiate for any leases or other
agreements involving the Site or parcels thereof necessary to create and operate the
Project.
3. Term. The term of the agreement shall be one year commencing on the date set forth
above (which is the date the Parties have received required approval and signature of this
Agreement). The Parties agree that they shall amend this agreement to provide for a term
not less than the term of any lease or agreement entered into with the State for the
operation of the portion of the Project located on the Fort Snelling State Park parcel..
4. Joint Powers Board. The parties agree that in order to administer this Joint Powers
Agreements the Parties, through action of their governing bodies, shall create a "Fort
Snelling Park Joint Powers Board" which shall be composed of two members from the
City Council of the City of Richfield and two members from the Minneapolis Park and
Recreation Board ( "Joint Powers Board ",). The Joint Powers Board shall have the
authority to disburse public funds of the Parties (to the extent that the governing boards of
the Parties in their discretion, make such funds available) to carry out purposes of this
agreement However, the method of disbursement shall, as far as practicable, be consistent
with the method provided by law for the disbursement of funds by the Parties. Pursuant to
Minnesota Statute Section 471.59. Subdivision 11, it is understood that the Joint powers
Board may not pledge the full faith and credit or taxing power of the Park Board or
Richfield, but rather the obligations or other forms of indebtedness shall be obligations of
the Joint Powers Board issued on behalf of Richfield and the Park Board. The Joint
Powers Board shall have the authority to enter into an agreement, acceptable to both
Parties, which sets forth the procedures by which the Joint Powers Board shall operate.
The Joint Powers Board shall comply with all requirements of Minnesota Statute Section
471557.
5. Richfield Duties:
Richfield agrees to do the following (unless the Parties subsequently agree otherwise):
A. Richfield shall at its cost, prepare a plan for the expansion of the current nine hole
golf course into an eighteen hole golf course In addition, at its sole cost, Richfield
shall prepare plans for use one or more of the historic buildings as conference
center(s) In Addition Richfield shall be responsible, at its cost for entering into an
agreement with the appropriate entities for the use of the V.A. parcel and its
incorporation into the plan for the Project. (all such activities are collectively the
"Richfield Project "). The plans shall include all necessary appurtenances,
JBD- 151991 2
RC 145 -343
11-3
including all groundwork and necessary planting of grass, construction of
necessary structures such as lighting and sprinkler system, and the time schedule
for commencement and completion of construction ( "Richfield Project Site
Plan "). The Park Board shall review the Richfield Project Site Plan and indicate
its approval before the Joint Powers Board advertises the Richfield Project Site
Plan for bid.
B. Richfield shall, at its cost, be responsible for overseeing the bidding and
construction of the Richfield Project and to assure that construction of the
Richfield Project in conformance with the Richfield Project Site Plan.
C. Richfield shall, at its cost, be responsible for the ongoing operation and
management of the Richfield Project and shall coordinate and oversee all
programs held at the Richfield Project Site.
D. Richfield shall, at its Cost, maintain the lands of and all improvements located on
the Richfield Project, including. but not limited to fertilization, watering,
maintenance of any irrigation system, and mowing.
E. Richfield shall maintain open communication with the Park Board to make
efficient operation of the Project pursuant to this Joint Powers Agreement.
F. Richfield shall pay for all utilities provided to the Richfield Project.
6. Park Board Duties:
The Park Board agrees to do the following (unless the Parties subsequently agree
otherwise):
A. The Park Board shall, at its cost, prepare a plan for expansion of current and
creation of new athletic fields. Additionally, the Park Board shall be responsible,
at its cost for securing agreements with appropriate entities for the use of the
and parcels and their incorporation into the plan for
the Project ('Park Board Project "). The plans shall include all necessary
appurtenances, including all groundwork and necessary planting of grass,
constriction of necessary structures such as lighting and sprinkler system, and the
dates for commencement and completion of construction ( "Park Board Project
Site Plan "). Richfield shall review the Park Board Site Plan and indicate its
approval before the Joint Powers Board advertises the Park Board Site Plan for
bid.
B. The Park Board shall, at its cost, be responsible for overseeing the bidding and
construction of the Park Board Project and to assure that construction of the Park
40 Board Product is in conformance with the Park Board Project Site Plan.
JBD- 151991 3
RC 145 -343
is
/i -4
C The Park Board shall, at its cost, be responsible for the ongoing operation and
management of the Park Board Project and shall coordinate and oversee all
programs held at the Park Board Project Site.
D. The Park Board shall, at its cost, maintain the lands of and all improvements
located on the Park Board Project' including, but not limited to fertilization,
watering, maintenance of any irrigation system and mowing.
E. The Park Board shall maintain open communication with Richfield to maximize
efficient operation of the Project pursuant to this Joint Powers Agreement.
F. The Park Board shall pay for all utilities provided to the Park Board Project.
7. Duties of Both Parties
Both Parties agree to do the following:
A. Act cooperatively in negotiating for leases and agreements necessary to improve
and operate the Project as well as to cooperate with each other in obtaining the
written consent of any necessary entities to any improvements or alterations ore
the Project.
B. Provide each other and others with reasonable access to the Project for the
purpose of construction, operation and use.
C. Refrain from materially altering the Project in any fashion unless the Parties and
other entitled entities have previously agreed in writing to such alteration.
D. Grant to each other, and cooperate in obtaining from owners of the separate
parcels any easements for utilities reasonably deemed necessary by the Parties to
provide utility service to the Project.
E. If agreed to by both Parties, jointly bid work for the Project as a Joint Power
Entity and to otherwise cooperate with each other in bidding out the necessary
work for the Project. Richfield shall provide the funds (or be responsible for the
repayment of funds necessary for the improvements under the Richfield Project
Site Plan and the Park Board shall provide the funds (or be responsible for the
repayment of funds) necessary for the improvements under the Park Board Project
Site Plan.
F. Cooperate with each other in the design of their respective Project Site Plans
8. Use of the Project
JBD- 151991 4
RC145 -343
1/-5-
The Parties agree that residents of the cities of Minneapolis and Richfield shall have the
right to use the facilities located in the Project, subject to rules and regulations agreed to
by the Parties.
9. Ownership and Tax - Status of the Proiect
Several, if not all of the parcels which comprise the Site are currently tax exempt and is
expected to remain tax exempt. In the event a portion of the Site should become taxable,
each party shall be responsible for the taxes associated with that portion of the Project
designed and maintained by the party under the terms of this agreement.
10. Work Commencement
The parties agree that work on the Project shall not begin until all necessary consent has
been received from the Parties and all other entities from whom consent is required
11. Termination
This agreement shall not terminate sooner than term of any lease or agreement entered
into for any portion of the Site. In the event no such agreement or lease is in place, or in
the event that such lease or agreement has been terminated, this agreement may be
terminated upon 30 days written notice by either party delivered to the other party. Each
• party shall have 30 days, weather permitting, from the termination date to remove any
improvements it paid for under the agreement above so long as the Project site is restored
to the same condition it was in prior to the date of this agreement, unless any lease or
agreement prohibits such removal. The Parties agree that improvements associated with
the Project site not removed within the 30 -day period shall be subject to treatment and
disposition as provided for in the lease or agreement covering the parcel upon which the
improvement is located.
12. Supervision/Insurance/Indemnity
The Parties agree that each shall be responsible for reasonable supervision of persons on,
and shall be responsible for any claims for damages or injuries growing out of any
accident or occurrence during use of its Project (as defined in Sections 5 and 6). The
Parties agree to carry policies of liability insurance in at least the amounts specified as the
extent of such liability under Minnesota Statutes, or shall provide reasonable proof of
self - insurance. In addition, the Parties agree to provide other entities, having the right to
know, with proof of necessary insurance. Nothing herein shall be deemed to waive any
statutory limits of liability granted to the Parties.
13. Memorandum of this Agreement
Either Party shall have the right to require the other Party to this agreement to execute a
memorandum of this agreement which in recordable form and such Party shall have the
JBD- 151991 5
RC 145 -343
right to file such memorandum, at its own expense, in the appropriate Hennepin County
land recorder's office.
14. Amendments
This agreement may be amended in writing at any time by mutual consent of the Parties
and shall be executed by the same parties who executed this agreement of their duly
authorized successors in office.
15. Subletting/Assignment
Both Parties agree not to assign, sublet or otherwise use of the Projects as allowed in this
agreement, without the consent of both Parties and the State.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Richfield and the City of Minneapolis. acting by
and through its Park and Recreation Board have caused their names to be signed by their
respective officers thereunto duly authorized' as at the date and year first written above.
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, ACTING
BY AND THROUGH ITS PARK AND
RECREATION BOARD
By.
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
JBD- 151991 6
RC 145 -343
Its:
LN
Its:
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 285
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Award of contracts for the Ball Field Replacement Project.
Background:
The City of Richfield currently leases recreational property from the Metropolitan
Airports Commission. The lease covers property used for 13 youth ball fields. The ball
fields are essentially sub - leased at no charge to various athletic groups.
The City established a task force, including representatives of the various youth athletic
groups and schools, within the City to explore replacing these fields within the
community. Recommendations were made to reconfigure existing fields: Richfield
Junior High /Donaldson Park, Washington Park, Roosevelt Park and Richfield
Intermediate School.
Bid packages for this project (broken down into the three separate proposals) were
provided to five qualified bidders for each proposal. Bids for the Ball Field Replacement
Project were opened according to legal requirements on October 27, 1998. A copy of
the bid minutes /tabulation is attached for Council review.
goRecommended Motion:
Accept the bid minutes /tabulation and award contracts to Ingram Excavating, Inc. for
Proposal #1 - Roosevelt Park in the base bid amount of $825,561; and Proposal #2 -
Donaldson /Richfield Jr. High School Site, base bid plus alternates #1 and #2 in the
amount of $753,356; and KA Witt Construction for Proposal #3 - Intermediate School
Site, base bid plus alternate #1 in the amount of $187,839. All three proposals and
awards form City Project No. 421 -40 -754, Phase One of the Ball Field Replacement
Project.
This recommendation maintains a 5% construction contingency. Also, $150,000 is
being kept in reserve for the completion of future recreation improvements on Academy
of Holy Angels property.
Sodding of the Roosevelt Park site was not included in this recommendation, although
the Council may choose to do so, in lieu of seeding. The cost of this alternate is
$31,200. The staff recommends that the City reconsider this option in the spring, using
contingency monies if still available.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The bids were opened according to legal requirements on October 27, 1998. The
• consultant has verified bid amounts, checked references, and has recommended
award to the three bidders listed above.
/(D -1
2. The City Council approved the execution of agreement for the $2,000,000 grant
from the State of Minnesota for the Ball Field Replacement Project at the October
12 Council meeting. The City received the grant to develop and improve ball fields
at the aforementioned parks to replace ball fields currently in use on Metropolitan
Airports Commission property. The grant is half of the estimated cost of the total
plan, which was developed by the Ball Field Task Force and recommended for
implementation by the Community Services Commission.
3. The concept plan was reviewed at the March 16 joint meeting of the Richfield Board
of Education and the City Council. Discussion has been held with the appropriate
cooperating jurisdictions.
4. Neighborhood meetings have been held with neighbors of these sites on July 21 -23
to discuss proposed plans, design and funding for the project. Alternate, interim
plans are available to accommodate the user groups as necessary until the
replacement ball fields are ready for use. City staff will maintain and schedule the
new facilities.
5. The City Council approved the plans and specifications and authorized
advertisement for the construction of the Ball Field Replacement Project at the
September 28 Council meeting.
• Alternative Recommendation:
1. Council may reject the bids and direct staff to re- advertise. However, staff does not
believe a better price can be obtained from a reputable vendor.
2. Council may elect to award a contract to another bidder. However, the consultant
has verified bid amounts, checked references, and has recommended award to the
three bidders listed above. ( See attached letter from Brauer and Associates, Ltd.)
3. Council may reject bids and direct staff and the consultant to amend the
specifications prior to re- advertising for bids.
4. Council may reject all bids and delay the Ball Field Replacement Project.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
Staff is requesting action at the November 9, 1998 Council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam 4Macer
rosser
City
• JDP:cak
cv
c
N
N
N
Q.
N
N
O
C
m
U
N
O
t
L
Y
N
U
O
U
N
Y
O
a
O)
C
w
N
cB
t
►=
v7
U
O
O
N
06
a�
Y 7
cu
_C
O
U co
co
O >
ER
L
O
O
N
ca O
0-0
H O
c
a�
co
2
a
O
c�
.0
cu
c
7
O
N
O)
O
0
N
O
C
O
(D
0
E
co
U
L
L
C
co
a�
U)
L
CL
N
O
r
N
CL
0
a
O
O
O
O
O
M
U �
C�
Q
0
d
� U
ui , . L
L
ca
O
O
N C
-0
=
O N
N
U')
O O N
r-
H O
•d+
d'
0 E
Q
ca
N '_a a)
N
U Q co
O
O
O
O
O
C
O O m
O
O
iE
?� O
ca Y
cn
N
O—
cB
Qo
c
>-0 o
I- o
0m
cu
4- c 0) M
cL co co
N
00
M
w
z co
It
=
An
0 0 co
.
zOD
O
E 0 a)
M
Y
O
Q
M
M
O
d
> C O
0
N
0 O
O
W
69
0
-
L= 'O
O
69
N
N
O O O
V
L
U)
VL
U
O C
L
y
O Q
p
0
Ooo
�0�
0) 3: o cc
a
0
0
0
E tm
0
0
co w CO
O N O O
•�
o
'-
-0-+ a)
LO a
E
CL
c
o a� O
•c6
E
>
E
L
O
m
O
O O
Z O'a N
a.
0- C- W
EES
r C
000�
E
E
L+
O
O
N
L
2 � L
-- -0
Y N
U) a.-.
d
O
d'
d
6F}
U U>
>
Efi
3
Q
co > CU
p
Q Q
C 4-. N
o
C2
E
O o
a�
cu 0
o c 0
N
0 0 t
m
0
U)U)U
o•OCLf.- 0
CO) U)
O
O
1 1 1
0
4
0
-Nc+M
0 m a) 0
0 fa
co
C:
L
0 0 0
O >
•
�
0. a CL O O O
N Q a)
Q
U
aaCL
(L c
cv
c
N
N
N
Q.
N
N
O
C
m
U
N
O
t
L
Y
N
U
O
U
N
Y
O
a
O)
C
w
N
cB
t
►=
v7
U
O
O
N
06
a�
Y 7
cu
_C
O
U co
co
O >
ER
L
O
O
N
ca O
0-0
H O
c
a�
co
2
a
O
c�
.0
cu
c
7
O
N
O)
O
0
N
O
C
O
(D
0
E
co
U
L
L
C
co
a�
U)
L
CL
N
O
r
N
CL
0
a
O
O
O
O
O
M
C)
C�
Q
0
d
O
�
=
N
U')
It
r-
cN
•d+
d'
Q
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
O
O—
O
M
O
O
N
00
M
d'
It
M
M
M
M
69
6F}
63
69
69
Q
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
o
6
0
6
6
N
O
O
LO
O
E
rl�
O
N
L
4+
M
d
d'
d'
d
6F}
69
69
Efi
ff}
Q
m
O
�
N
O
O
4
uj
4
00
co
Lo
�
�
M
M
Q
m
N
�
�
co
�
�
�}
6q
6F}
d}
69
m
.a
C
m
x
x
x
x
x
00
U
0
�
O
U
c
0
4-
c5
o
E
>
—
O
U
00
0
ZU
4-
x
N
w
U
o
�
cu
U
V
co
m
U-
Y
L
L
�
q
m
0
J
Y
LL
CL
� ]l
i
N
w
c
m
Y
L
a
c
t
N
.a
C
t
L
0
i
O
U)
V
93
N
N
CL
0
a
/c)-3
°o
i
V
_m
E
d
co
t�
N
a
0
a.
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
O
O
O
O
d
�
LO
IT
�
co
a
O
O
O
O
O
m
=
to
O
O
tf)
0o
0
E
r
r
r
r
°O
Q
6%
6-4-
ff}
Ef}
69
000
M
00
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
d
oo
T-
d'
I`
O
O
N
O
O
O
m
619,
�
6F}
69
69
E
U')
Il-
�
O
Ln
_
f`
00
00
I`
O
Q
x
x
x
6F}
6F}
O
O
O
Cl
O
m
O
O
O
O
O
d
ti
o
m
o
0
U
m
N
co
O
c0
_
E
00
CO
M
O
cu
W
d
O
ti
O
O
00
Q60-
69
69
69
69
°O
°O
0
o
LO
DLO
0
E
000
N
ti
u)
m
LO
U')
T-
00
N
a
f`
N
0)
(D
tV)
N
co
00
(D
I-
r-
m
m
.0
C
m
x
x
x
x
x
V
m
tm
C
;
>
0
U
c
X
d
a
W
>
N
U
C
C
0
z
N
H1
W
v
cu
O
m
E
m
L-
U
m
UL
c
L
ca
m
J
U-
a-
0
°o
i
V
_m
E
d
co
t�
N
a
0
a.
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
=
U-)
N
O
CD
O
O
O
m
O
U')
�
LO
IT
�
co
a
6F}
69
69
69
69
0
E
°O
o
°
O
O°
°O
000
M
00
N
N
m
oo
T-
d'
I`
O
T-
N
r-
r-
N
619,
6F}
6F}
69
69
_
m
x
x
x
x
x
m
U
c
cu
�±
Gs
O
cu
W
E
m
z
W
d
cc
>
co
U
W
E
co
i
Y
m
-
c
C
U
Q
cu
2
U
c
0Y
c
�U
C
O
U
a
U
co
0)
V-
0
O
O
0
z
m
m
N
N
N
0
U
c
(6
ca
N
O
N
U
c6
..0
O
U
C
O
O
c
c
ca
Y
N
U
N
F-
Y
_N
U
U
L-
W
N
U-
�1
ca
0
LAND. USE PLANNING AND DESIGN
-Y
10 -q
51�
Page l of 2
November 2,199S
Jim Prosser, City, Manager
City' of Richfield '
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield;`Minnesota 55423 -2599
Re:. Phase One - Ballfield Replacement'Pr9ject: including Improvements to Roosevelt Park,, Donaldson /
Richfield Junior High School Site, Washington Park, and Richfield Intermediate School Site.
.Mr. Prosser,
The bids opened on October 27, 1998 for this project have, been reviewed and checked for errors: No significant errors
were found in any of the proposals that were submitted. All. bidders acknowledged receipt of the two addenda and
submitted bid bonds as,required. l ;have attached a, copy of the bid tabulation, for your review. - In all there were three
proposals for the work included in the first phase of the ballfield replacement project. All three proposals received five
bids each from responsible contractors.
The low base bid for each of the three proposals is as follows:
Base Bid Amounts and Contractors Recommended for Acceptance
Proposal Company Base Bid Amount
Proposal #1 Roosevelt Park Ingram Excavating,. Inc. $825,561.00
Proposal #2 Donaldson / Jr. High School, Site Ingram Excavating, Inc. $671,589.00
Proposal #3 Intermediate School Site K.A. Witt Construction $141,839.00
Total Base Bids $1;638,989.00
Having worked with both of these contractors in the past 12 months on similar projects,, I am satisfied with the
competency of both to preform the tasks involved in completing these projects: .
The city received a total grant in the amount of two million dollars for this work. If the three low base bids are accepted
for this work, some money will remain for acceptance of alternates.
Monies Available for Construction
State Grant Amount $2,000,000.00
Base Bid # 1 Roosevelt Park ($825;561.00)
Base Bid #2 Donaldson /7r. High School Site ($671,589.00)
Base Bid #3 Intermediate School Site ($141,839.00).
Construction Contingency of 5 % ($81,949.45)
Subtotal $279,06155
Amount of Reserve for AHA Development ($150,000.00)
Total Funds Remaining $129,061.55
7301 Ohms Lane, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55439 Tel (612) 832-9475 -Pax (612) 832'9,542,
CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 284
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Public hearing on a preliminary and final plat for 7615 Nicollet Avenue.
Background:
On February 9, 1998, the City Council approved a conditional use permit to allow
construction of three townhome units at 7615 Nicollet Avenue. A condition of the approval
was that the property be replatted to reflect the three units. The property is currently one lot.
Recommended Motion:
Conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution approving the preliminary and final plat of
Ferch Addition, 7615 Nicollet Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The conditional use permit approved by the City Council on February 9, 1998 requires
that the property be replatted.
2. The three units cannot be conveyed separately unless the land is divided into three lots.
3. The proposed plat satisfies the requirements of the City's subdivision ordinance.
0 4. Because the proposed plat abuts a County it was sent to Hennepin County for review.
5. Approval of the plat will facilitate construction which is planned to start in November.
6. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun - Current.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Approve the preliminary and final plats for Ferch Addition with revisions.
2. Do not approve the preliminary and final plats.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 9, 1998. The hearing will
be held in the Council Chambers, Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City M nager
0 JDP:ds
•
9 -I
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL APPROVAL OF A
SUBDIVISION, FERCH ADDITION
WHEREAS, Mahoney Construction has requested preliminary and final approval
to split a tract of land located at 7615 Nicollet Avenue in the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is to be known as FERCH ADDITION; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed plat of FERCH ADDITION was
held on November 9, 1998 at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to
be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, as follows:
The proposed plat of FERCH ADDITION satisfies the requirements of the
City's subdivision ordinances.
2. Preliminary and final approval is granted to Mahoney Construction for the
plat of FERCH ADDITION, subject to the terms of this resolution.
3. This resolution shall be null and void unless within the time limit required
by Subsection 500.29, subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Code, the
Applicant files the final plat with the Hennepin County Recorder or
Registrar of Titles, as may be appropriate.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 9th day of November,
1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
0 Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
ti
CL
W.
W
(r Ll-
CL
81
xxx
!2 rz T
H4
9
Ul -1
Z9 aN OV08 00 )
'OS '3A'V 1311001N
NcicVl 'I,' A 1 _, , ) -11
I
Iv f yjl
99 �s
go ov
O
arm
J.
n
q3
-64w.
9
Ul -1
Z9 aN OV08 00 )
'OS '3A'V 1311001N
NcicVl 'I,' A 1 _, , ) -11
I
Iv f yjl
99 �s
go ov
O
n
q3
-64w.
9
Ul -1
Z9 aN OV08 00 )
'OS '3A'V 1311001N
NcicVl 'I,' A 1 _, , ) -11
I
Iv f yjl
99 �s
go ov
92
-64w.
C\j
J
TF
9
Ul -1
Z9 aN OV08 00 )
'OS '3A'V 1311001N
NcicVl 'I,' A 1 _, , ) -11
I
Iv f yjl
•
•
CJ
1 i3
0 b
^� P
cr-
s� a
yt yy i£
y u4yq 3 g
s
m I
050
jus
(V
W �
rT �
Fri — I
I
-- 00'OSL 3 4L 00.00 N- .__. S'
I
L: p
e al
H
co
" $
IM
0 o z m
0
3 .,00,00.00 S--' o
a'.4 'O.ti �i` ie {'JiH ai `i,LY.Lti n�4i ?C ) cY aT
F OS 3nN3Ab -- 1311001N
-------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- $ -
eil l�J.i Do L,
N
N
~
N
�
L
r
F,14
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 283
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and consideration of a resolution regarding proposed approval of the
Modification to the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Redevelopment Plan
(Redevelopment Plan) and Interstate - Lyndale - Nicollet Tax Increment Financing Plan
(ILN TIF Plan).
Background:
In accordance with the 1985 ILN Tax Increment Financing Plan, the City of Richfield
issued and sold $18,675,000 in General Obligation Temporary Redevelopment Bonds,
Series 1988, to finance certain redevelopment project costs in the ILN redevelopment
project area. As some of the anticipated projects did not proceed forward, a portion of
the bonds were redeemed and paid in 1988. The City then issued $1,900,000 General
Obligation Redevelopment Bonds, Series 1988A, to permanently fund the then
anticipated costs in the ILN area. At that time, the costs were related to public
improvements, land acquisition and issuance costs.
Currently, approximately $1,000,000 of bond proceeds remain in the fund. This figure
includes estimated interest earnings. Due to the regulations for tax exempt bonds and
the tax increment nature of the bond issue, the proceeds may only be expended on
public improvements which are identified in a tax increment financing plan. Since the
ILN project area and TIF district were established prior to 1990, these proceeds may
also be expended outside of the ILN TIF District.
The proposed modification to the Redevelopment Plan and ILN TIF Plan contemplates
a budget modification to authorize the expenditure of the remaining bond proceeds for
eligible public improvements anywhere within the Richfield Redevelopment project
area. Currently, it is proposed that a portion of the proceeds be used for the City's
portion of the 66th Street and 1 -35W bridge design expenses. The budget is also being
updated for expenditure activity associated with the Shops at Lyndale, Meridian
Crossings, and Candlewood Hotel project (although no expenditure activity is expected
for Candlewood).
Please note that the proposed plan modification neither changes the boundary of the
redevelopment project area nor the tax increment district. The plan only identifies tax
increment budget expenditure activity. The ILN tax increment district will still expire in
the year 2011.
The proposed plans, as modified are attached for review. The modifications are short
and concise and do not include many pages. Immediately following the resolution is a
summary of the modification.
S'J
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which approves a modification to Redevelopment Plan
and ILN Tax Increment Financing Plan
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Both the City Council and HRA (May 11 and June 15, 1998 respectively)
approved Design Alternate A for the bridge with the expectation that the HRA
could provide funding up to $250,000. In its action, the HRA set aside $250,000
from the bonds of 1988 and directed staff to prepare the appropriate modificants
to the ILN Plans to permit the funds to be accessed for the bridge.
2. The balance of the funds, approximately $750,000, could only be used for other
public improvements. Public improvements within the ILN or LHN areas would be
eligible for example.
3. In 1988, the City issued $1,900,000 General Obligation Redevelopment Bonds,
Series 1988A, to permanently fund anticipated project costs in the ILN.
4. Currently, approximately $1,000,000 of the bond proceeds and estimated interest
earnings remain unspent.
5. As the bond proceeds are tax exempt and considered tax increment revenue, they
must be expended on qualified costs related to public improvements.
6. Public improvement uses for the bond proceeds have been identified; sources and
uses of other ILN tax increment from existing redevelopment projects have been
clarified.
7. Legal counsel has provided the HRA with its opinion on the use of the bonds
proceeds and has reviewed the modified plans.
8. The proposed modification to the Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Plan
meet the requirements of state law and established procedures within Richfield.
9. The Hennepin County Board Commissioner representing the affected area of the
project was notified of the proposed plan modification and public hearing by letter,
as required by law.
10. Hennepin County and the Richfield School District were notified of the impacts to
taxing jurisdictions and the public hearing by letter, as required by law.
11. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield
approved the modification to the Redevelopment Plan and ILN TIF Plan.
•
12. The Planning Commission found that the modification to the Redevelopment Plan
and ILN TIF Plan is consistent with the general plans for the development and
redevelopment of the City of Richfield on October 27, 1998.
13. Legal notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun - Current newspaper on
October 28, 1998.
14. The approval of the plan documents will make it possible to access the unspent
bond proceeds for planned public improvements within the boundaries of the
Richfield Redevelopment project area.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and ILN TIF Plan.
2. Delay approval of the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and ILN TIF Plan.
3. Seek alternatives to the proposed use of tax exempt bond proceeds.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
It is anticipated that in February 1999, the tax exempt bonds proceeds be released to
the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the bridge design work at 66th Street
and 1 -35W.
10 Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
0
3-3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA; AND
ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN FOR THE ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT RELATED
THERETO
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota (the "City "), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City has heretofore established the Richfield Redevelopment Project
Area and adopted the Redevelopment Plan related thereto. It has been proposed that
the City adopt the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area and adopt the Modification to the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District (collectively, the
"Modifications "); all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047 and 469.174 through 469.179,
all inclusive, as amended, all as reflected in the Modifications, and presented for the
Council's consideration. Generally, the substantive changes to the current Modification
include the authority to spend tax increments generated from the ILN Tax Increment
Financing District in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area on eligible development
costs.
1.02. The Council has investigated the facts relating to the Modifications.
1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior
to the adoption and approval of the proposed Modifications, including, but not limited to,
notification of Hennepin County and School District No. 280 having taxing jurisdiction
over the property to be included in Modifications, notice of the proposed modification of
an existing redevelopment district to the local county commissioner, a review of and
written comment on the Modifications by the City Planning Commission, and the holding
of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law.
Section 2. Findings for the Approval of the Modifications
2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Modifications are intended and, in the
judgment of this Council, the effect of such actions will be to provide such other facilities
and improvements as shall further the objectives in the Plan and Minnesota Statutes
Sections 469.001 through 469.047.
40 2.02. The Council hereby reaffirms the original findings for the ILN Tax
Increment Financing District as modified herein, namely: that Modifications is in the
�- q
public interest and is a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, subd. 10 (a)(1) and that the proposed development would not occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future, that the increased
market value on the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of
tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated
to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the
projected tax increments for the maximum duration of Modifications permitted by the
Tax Increment Financing Plan; that the Modifications conforms to the general plan for
the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Modifications
will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole,
for the development of Modifications by private enterprise.
Section 2. Findings for the Modifications.
2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Modifications, are intended and, in the
judgment of this Council, the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for
development in the public purpose and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the
Modifications, which are hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Approval of the Modifications; Filing.
3.01. The Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area and the Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District are hereby approved, and shall be placed
on file in the office of the HRA Director. Approval of the Modifications does not
constitute approval of any project or a Development Agreement with any developer.
3.02. The staff of the City are authorized to file the Modifications with the State
Department of Revenue and the Hennepin County Auditor.
3.03. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized
and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and for this
purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all
further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of
November, 1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
fe Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
C�
J
is
85
Ehlers and Associates
Tax Increment Financing District Overview '
CITY OF RICHFIELD - The Modification to the ILN TIF District
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the proposed Modification to the
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District. More detailed information
on each of these topics can be found in the complete Modification to the TIF Plan.
Proposed action:
Approval of the Modification to the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing
District to authorize the HRA to expend tax
increment from the ILN Tax Increment Financing
District for qualified activities identified in the
budget of the Modification to the ILN Tax Increment
Financing Plan.
Redevelopment Plan:
Modification of the Redevelopment Plan for the
Richfield Redevelopment Project Area includes the
authority to spend tax increments generated from the
ILN Tax Increment Financing District in the
Richfield Redevelopment Project Area on eligible
development costs.
Boundaries:
The boundaries of the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area and the ILN Tax Increment Financing
District are not being modified.
Type of TIF District:
Redevelopment District
Proposed uses:
See budget on attached page
Form of financing:
Existing Pay -as- you -go Notes for Shoppes at
Lyndale and Meridian Crossings
Estimate Project Costs
is This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the ILN Tax Increment Financing District
for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts and the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area. The Shops at Lyndale and Meridian Crossing budgets listed below represent an
update to the budget for project activities completed since the original budget was adopted. These budgets also
reflect the maximum qualified costs as certified or to be certified by the developers and which may be paid
through tax increment. Additional information is provided in the Contracts for Private Development by and
between the developers and the HRA. The Candlewood Hotel Project budget reflects an increase in the budget
to authorize additional project expenditures. The Public Improvements budget are dollars that are being
reallocated for public improvements within the ILN Tax Increment Financing District and Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area.
isPage 2
Meridian
Candlewood Hotel
Sources of Funds
Shops at Lyndale
Crossings
Project
Public Improvements
Tax increment revenue
$30,000,000
$52,000,000
$1,300,000
$0
Bond proceeds
$0
$0
$1,000,000
Total Sources of Funds
$30,000,000
$52,000,000
$1,300,000
$1,000,000
Uses of Funds
Land /building acquisition
$15,000,000
$26,000,000
$1,105,000
$0
Site imp. /prep. costs
$0
$65,000
$0
Streets and sidewalks
$0
$0
$900,000
Loan /note int. payments
$12,000,000
$20,800,000
$0
$0
Administrative costs
$3,000,000
$5,200,000
$130,000
$100,000
Bond deposit
$0
$0
$0
Total Uses of Funds
$30,000,000
$52,000,000
$1,300,000
$1,000,000
isPage 2
S�
BOUNDARY MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND
THE ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
El
0 Page 3
uj
Q
a Z
l
W
LL.
V
U
Z
3
oa
NZ 0�
ME
mix
0�� I
Not DOQQ71 �O
Not
RW
Hot
RIC, �
.1
Ruts
KW►�
,am�corim.
awbw
swawu:3
�3
', 3
wasm
Ast .
3wl3TIMN
AWWWM
cow
MM"
agwwo
Nxim_
IWAM
XV.Aw
immm
OAW
Qvm
"P,
kvakm�
PAMLNM�
vvm,
WMEld
N3M�
SM�OiLL J i
JI
PGl,n
MtsMe
1
0
�Z
of
—
•
MODIFICATION TO THE
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR THE
ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield
City of Richfield, Minnesota
Hennepin County, Minnesota
J
Public Hearing: November 9, 1998
Adoption:
Prepared by:
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
40 11 Phone: (651) 697 -8500
Fax: (651) 697 -8555
$ --to
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(provided for references purposes only)
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ......................... Page 1
Introduction ............................... ............................... Pagel
Statement of Public Purpose .................. ............................... Page I
Statutory Authority ......................... ............................... Page 1
Statement of Goals and Objectives ............. ............................... Page 1
Estimated Public Costs ...................... ............................... Page 1
Boundary of the Richfield Project Area, Parcels in Acquisition, and Legal Description .. Page 1
MODIFICATION NO.6 TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTINCT .............................. Page 2
Introduction............................... ............................... Page 2
Estimated Project Costs ..................... ............................... Page 3
BOUNDARY MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND
THE ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTINCT . ............................... A -1
•
•
•
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for ` J Q /
the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area U
November 9, 1998
Introduction
The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment
Project Area. The Modified Redevelopment Plan represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set
forth in the original Plan. Generally, the substantive changes to the current include the authority to spend tax
increments generated from the ILN Tax Increment Financing District in the RichfieldRedevelopment Project
Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project
Area dated June 14, 1993 or the most recent Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area dated June 22, 1998 is recommended.
Statement of Public Purpose
See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993.
Statutory Authority
See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993.
Statement of Goals and Objectives
Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993.
Estimated Public Costs
This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the ILN Tax Increment Financing
District for qualified activities identified in the budget of the Modification to the ILN Tax Increment
Financing Plan.
Boundary of the Richfield Project Area Parcels in Acquisition and Legal Description
The boundary for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area is not being modified.
City of Richfield Modification to the Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District Page 1
Modification No. 6 to Tax Increment Financing Plan
• for ILN Tax Increment Financing District
November 9, 1998
•
Introduction
The following text represents a modificationto the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment
Financing District. The Modifications to the ILN Tax Increment Financing Plan represent a continuation
of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Tax Increment Financing Plan. Generally, the substantive
changes to the current Modification include the authority to spend tax increments generated from the ILN
Tax Increment Financing District in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area on eligible development
costs.
For further information, a review ofthe Redevelopment Plan for RichfieldRedevelopmentProject Area dated
June 14, 1993 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District adopted
October 21, 1985 and modified on November 25, 1985, January 12, 1987, September 18, 1989, May 17,
1993, March 24, 1994 and October 21, 1996 is recommended.
Boundaries of the ILN Tax Increment Financing District
The boundary for ILN Tax Increment Financing District is not being modified.
City of Richfield Modification to the Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District Page 2
0
•
Estimated Project Costs
This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the ILN Tax Increment Financing District
for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts and the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area. The Shops at Lyndale and Meridian Crossing budgets listed below represent an
update to the budget for project activities completed since the original budget was adopted. These budgets also
reflect the maximum qualified costs as certified or to be certified by the developers and which may be paid
through tax increment. Additional information is provided in the Contracts for Private Development by and
between the developers and the HRA. The Candlewood Hotel Project budget reflects an increase in the budget
to authorize additional project expenditures. The Public Improvements budget are dollars that are being
reallocated for public improvements within the ILN Tax Increment Financing District and Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area.
Sources of Funds Shops at Lyndale
Tax increment revenue
$30,000,000
Bond proceeds
Crossings
Total Sources of Funds
$30,000,000
Uses of Funds
$1,300,000
Land /building acquisition
$15,000,000
Site imp. /prep. costs
$1,000,000
Streets and sidewalks
; $1,300,000
Loan /note int. payments
$12,000,000
Administrative costs
$3,000,000
Bond deposit
$65,000
Total Uses of Funds
$30,000,000
Meridian
Candlewood Hotel
Crossings
Project
Public Improvements
$52,000,000
$1,300,000
$0
$0
$0
$1,000,000
$52,000,000
; $1,300,000
$1,000,000
$26,000,000
$1,105,000
$0
$0
$65,000
$0
$0
$0
$900,000
$20,800,000
$0
$0
$5,200,000
$130,000
$100,000
$0
$0
$0
$52,000,000
$1,300,000
$1,000,000
City of Richfield Modification to the Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District
Page 3
0
•
APPENDIX A
BOUNDARY MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND
THE ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
City of Richfield Modification to the Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District A -1
K,9
Rut
NMI
met
� DOD DO
HLJI
M"
car-*o
w ° of
° )w o�
a
V at 00 DI
7 00 OI
0 ° o DDi
o i
w"
AMVWM
❑O
0 �
C) CFNW °nn
Maw
°
z �►
9 - �
w
~ NOMEM o0
warm
savw
Xom
Noulum V��—
NCIMM
Urm
E�ooDad�
j BBE
m3l.n` ��O EBE
„MW, �!—! Ep=;E
i NWWW .4 �F
O
�Z
of
.3www
'' X0000
L 'U":
NMI 2�1
OOo a00�I�J
Rut `
t t
OOOOOOC'i ma
00000 — `u`
�a0OO��1 `u"
KLDI
00000_]0 iorng
OOOOOOOt � �
0000000 Wow= �
0000000
0000000 � MVd a �'
000000 awo, '
000800 ►DLNn $
�00EBO0 O
cm
Ist
OEBBOOOOi
�BBOOOD
�BBCJOO� V � —
BEBBEB a' �
❑DOaoO � a —
B 0*%D ..
MMM
OBBE�
a '°W"
XV '�
°�0°
ao°O
immxw
amm
�oM
�U m
NOINM
vwm
�� DO
r3wwd3d $
0 i HEM
mooksa
NDun
MMM
O
n(�a°
NWMW
CHU
ISLZ 000
mm
KWI
K,9
Rut
NMI
met
� DOD DO
HLJI
M"
car-*o
w ° of
° )w o�
a
V at 00 DI
7 00 OI
0 ° o DDi
o i
w"
AMVWM
❑O
0 �
C) CFNW °nn
Maw
°
z �►
9 - �
w
~ NOMEM o0
warm
savw
Xom
Noulum V��—
NCIMM
Urm
E�ooDad�
j BBE
m3l.n` ��O EBE
„MW, �!—! Ep=;E
i NWWW .4 �F
O
�Z
of
.3www
'' X0000
L 'U":
NMI 2�1
OOo a00�I�J
Rut `
t t
OOOOOOC'i ma
00000 — `u`
�a0OO��1 `u"
KLDI
00000_]0 iorng
OOOOOOOt � �
0000000 Wow= �
0000000
0000000 � MVd a �'
000000 awo, '
000800 ►DLNn $
�00EBO0 O
cm
Ist
OEBBOOOOi
�BBOOOD
�BBCJOO� V � —
BEBBEB a' �
❑DOaoO � a —
B 0*%D ..
MMM
OBBE�
a '°W"
XV '�
°�0°
ao°O
immxw
amm
�oM
�U m
NOINM
vwm
�� DO
r3wwd3d $
0 i HEM
mooksa
NDun
MMM
O
n(�a°
NWMW
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 282
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Public hearing regarding a request for a conditional use permit at 6600 Oakland Avenue to
allow conversion from the existing commercial and residential use to residential only.
Background:
The HRA purchased 6600 Oakland Avenue, the former Hat Trick Hockey location, in order
to remove the existing commercial space and convert the structure back to a residential
use. The property is zoned C -2 (general commercial). Residential uses are conditional
uses in the C -2 district, so a conditional use permit is required to make changes to the use
and structure.
The HRA would sell the property to Cornerstone to use as transitional housing.
Cornerstone provides crisis intervention services to victims of domestic violence in south
Hennepin County, including Richfield. Cornerstone's transitional housing program
provides supportive housing to clients for up to two years. Transitional housing, coupled
with supportive services, allows these families to work towards self - sufficiency, permanent
housing, and stability in order to remain in the community. One family would live in the
three bedroom home at 6600 Oakland Avenue. Cornerstone finds that most clients stay in
transitional housing between 18 and 24 months.
This summer, the HRA and Cornerstone received federal HOME funds from Hennepin
County to purchase a home in Richfield. The State provided additional funds to pay for
rehabilitation costs. Rehabilitation will include removing the retail space and its basement,
painting the siding, roof replacement, landscaping, possibly a family room addition, and a
variety of interior improvements as well as renovation of the garage.
The Executive Director of Cornerstone, Susan Neis, will be in attendance at the Council
meeting.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the conditional use permit to allow use of 6600 Oakland Avenue as single family
residential housing with the following stipulations:
That the commercial space be removed.
2. That the curb cut and the pavement along 66th Street be removed as well as the
curb cut on Oakland Avenue at 66th Street.
3. That a resolution be recorded with the County, pursuant to Minnesota statutes
section 462.36, subdivision 1.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The proposed expansion and remodeling will improve the property. The structure
could continue to be used as a non - conforming residential use if no improvements
were made to the property.
2. The existing commercial space and related parking is obsolete; it is appropriate to
remove the commercial function from the property.
4 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates this parcel as Community Commercial. A
community commercial development on this property would only be appropriate if
coordinated with redevelopment of adjacent commercial parcels. Such
redevelopment is unlikely at this time.
4. In May 1997, the Planning Commission determined that the purchase and sale of the
property by the HRA was consistent with the 1982 Comprehensive Plan.
5. Cornerstone provides a valuable service to Richfield residents.
6. Bloomington homes are being used to meet Richfield needs. In April 1998,
Cornerstone lost one of their single family dwelling units in Bloomington which was
leased as part of their transitional housing program.
7. Homes owned and managed by Cornerstone in Richfield and Bloomington have
been well cared for and are assets in their neighborhoods. Also, ownership by
Cornerstone provides more reliability than leasing. Cornerstone employs a property
manager who maintains all of Cornerstone's properties.
8. On November 2, 1998, Cornerstone hosted an informational meeting for the
neighborhood to give them an opportunity to learn about Cornerstone's programs.
Neighbors who have contacted staff have been supportive of Cornerstone's
10 programs. They have also been curious about how transitional housing operates.
9. Notice of the hearing was published in the Sun - Current and mailed to property
owners and occupants within 350 feet of the subject property.
10. On October 27, 1998, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the conditional use permit.
Alternative Recommendation:
Deny the request with a finding that the proposal would have an adverse impact on
adjacent properties or the City as a whole.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 9, 1998. The hearing
will be held in the City Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue.
Respectfully submitted,
JaVs. Prosser
Citger
JDP:ds
•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION FOR APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
6600 OAKLAND AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which
requests approval of a conditional use permit for a single family residence on land
generally located at 6600 Oakland Avenue South, legally described as:
Lot 18, Block 1, Auditor's Subdivision Number 340
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the
conditional use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. A conditional use permit is issued for a single family residence, as
described in City Council Letter No. , on the Subject Property legally
described above.
2. The conditional use permit is subject to completing the following
conditions for the conditional use permit to be valid:
• That the commercial space be removed.
• That the curb cut and the pavement along 66th Street be removed
including the curb cut at the northeast corner of the property.
• That this resolution be recorded with the County, pursuant to
Minnesota statutes section 462.36, subdivision 1.
3. The conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions
regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if
normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months,
as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 546.05, Subd. 9
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of
November, 1998.
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
66TH STREET
WALK
REMOVE ASPHALT 70.00'
AND CURB CUT
ep I
40.5' 28.7'
I
-------- - --� -m
I � Itl
DEMOLISH
RETAIL SPACE
N
it I I
0
O
N
In
r
IV i ,v i ■a®
CITY OF
RICHFIELD
RENOVATE
GARAGE
NORTH
F_
aes
r
r
SCALE: 1" = 20' DATE: 10 -17 -98
6600 OAKLAND
AVENUE
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
1-3
W
Z
W
ai
Z
a
J
Y
Q
O
SITE PLAN
I
I
W
Z
J
}
H
W
a
O
2
.I
la
NN
i
I
IH
O
IV i ,v i ■a®
CITY OF
RICHFIELD
RENOVATE
GARAGE
NORTH
F_
aes
r
r
SCALE: 1" = 20' DATE: 10 -17 -98
6600 OAKLAND
AVENUE
CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT
1-3
W
Z
W
ai
Z
a
J
Y
Q
O
SITE PLAN
u
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 281
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amendment to City Code Section
930 regarding noise related issues.
Background:
Public Safety and Planning staff have completed a review of the City's current noise
ordinance in an effort to identify where there may be some gaps that may cause staff to
be unsuccessful in enforcing noise related problems that can create a disruption to the
residents of the City.
It has been determined that updates are needed in the following areas of the current
ordinance: unlawful idling of a motor vehicle, motor vehicle audio systems, refuse
hauling, radios, phonographs, stereo and electronic equipment, paging systems, and
participation in noisy gatherings.
Staff from health, inspections, fire, police and planning divisions have reviewed the
ordinance and provided their input to these changes. It is anticipated that these
10 changes will result in staff being better able to deal with noise violations. This should
also result in an improved ability to undertake enforcement action when necessary.
Copies of the amended ordinance have been sent to all licensed refuse haulers for their
review, along with a letter making them aware of staff s intent to recommend to the City
Council that the current ordinance be amended.
First reading of the ordinance amendment occurred on October 12, 1998. At that
meeting, there was a question regarding how police would enforce loud car stereo
violations. The City Council directed staff to schedule a public hearing and second
reading of the ordinance for November 9, 1998.
Recommended Motion:
Conduct a public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amendment to City Code
Section 930 regarding noise related issues.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The proposed changes in the ordinance should provide Public Safety staff with the
ability to better handle and enforce noise violations than in the past.
2. Staff from health, inspection, fire, police and planning divisions are in agreement
that these areas need to be amended to provide the community with a noise
ordinance that is fair to those individuals /businesses generating noises yet
protective of the community's need for peace and quiet.
69 1
3. First reading of the ordinance occurred on October 12, 1998.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide not to adopt the amendments and allow the current
ordinance to remain as it is. This would result in noise issues being unresolved or
unenforceable in the City.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
City Council approval of an ordinance amendment to City Code Section 930 regarding
noise related issues is requested at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam Prosser
City gager
JDP:ds
•
rI
0 BILL NO. (V
AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 930 OF THE UPDATING THE NOISE ORDINANCE
CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD IN ORDER TO CLEARLY DEFINE AND
ENFORCE NOISE VIOLATIONS
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 930 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled "Noise Control"
is hereby amended:
Section 930 - Noise control
930.01. Subdivision 1. Definitions. For purposes of this section the terms defined in
this subdivision have the meanings given them.
Subd. 2. "L 10 Level" means the noise level, expressed in dBA, which is
exceeded by ten percent of the time for a one hour survey as measured by test
procedures formulated by the City's Department of Public Safety.
Subd. 3. "Motor Vehicle" means (i) any self - propelled vehicle not operated
exclusively upon railroad tracks, (ii) any vehicle propelled or drawn by any self -
propelled vehicle,
dQpq
ne steered by skis, rskids or r, Memo.
Subd. 54. "Daytime" means that part of each calendar day between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
Subd—.65. "Nighttime" means that part of each calendar day between the hours
of midnight and 7:00 a.m. and between 10:00 p.m. and midnight.
930.03. Adoption of Regulations by Reference. The following state agency regulations
are adopted by reference: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Noise Pollution Control
Section, 6 MCAR SS4.2004 and NPC 1.
930.05. Receiving Land Use Standards. Subdivision 1. Maximum Noise Levels by
Receiving Land Use District. No person shall operate or cause to be operated or permit
any source of noise in such a manner as to create a noise level exceeding the limits set
in Table I for the receiving land use category specified therein when measured at the
property line of the receiving use which is closest to the source.
Table l
L 10 Noise Limits by Receiving Zoning Districts
Zoning Districts Daytime Nighttime
Industrial (1) 70 dBA 70 dBA
General Commercial (C -2) 65 dBA 65 dBA
Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) 60 dBA 60 dBA
Residential (R, MR) 60 dBA 50 dBA
Subd. 2. Exceptions. The noise limits prescribed in subdivision 1 shall not apply
to the following:
{#} LM construction activities described in subsection 930.09.
{c} U situations in which public health and safety require that immediate
work be done on any property the performance of which exceeds
the sound levels permitted for that time of day or for that day.
{d4 Lcj situations in which the purpose of the sound is to alert persons to
an emergency or for the purpose of testing any alarm system.
930.07. Outdoor Implements. No person may operate any outdoor power implement,
including but not limited to lawn mowers, hedge clippers, chain saws or other
implements designed primarily for outdoor use, at any time other than between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on public
holidays, Saturdays and Sundays, except that snowblowers shall not be operated at
any time other than between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. any day of the
week. All implemeRts shall be efferatively muffled so as te pFevent the emission of loud
ai;d explosive noises eF noise evneedinn the limits spenifed in T•4hle I
930.09. Construction activities. Construction activity involving the use of power
equipment which does not generate a sound level in excess of 85 dBA, measured 69
feet bey at the property line of the source, may be operated in all zones between
the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. daily. All other construction activity may be
carried out only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00
a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on Saturdays.
930.11. Air circulation devices. No person may permanently install or place any sound
emitting air circulation device or other mechanical equipment, except a window air
conditioning unit, in any outdoor location without first obtaining a permit for the
installation. The sound level produced by any window unit and by any existing air
circulating or mechanical device shall be attenuated reduced in the manner required by
(® Y
the director of public safety. Such requirements may include, but are not limited to,
relocation of the device if the noise results or contributes to sound levels in excess of
those specified in Table I.
930.13. Motor Vehicles. Subdivision 1. General restrictions. No person may operate
a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles in such a manner as to exceed the noise
limits contained in Pollution Control Agency Rules, 6 MCAR 4.2004.
Subd. 2. Idling of motor vehicles. No person may operate or permit the
operation of any motor vehicle or any auxiliary equipment attached to such vehicle; fer
-hP-:-hAfP-P-R the IIGUFS Of 10;00 P.M. of one day and 8:00 a.m. of the following d in a
manner that constitutes unlawful idling, in violation of this subdivision. As used in this
subdivision, a vehicle is engaged in unlawful idling if:
a the vehicle is stationary, for reasons other than congested traffic, for a
period of more than 10 minutes in any hour between the hours of 10:00 p.m.
of one day and 8:00 a.m. of the following day; and
the vehicle is located on public or private property within 150 feet of a
residential zone.
Subd. 3. Motor vehicle in disrepair. No person may operate any motor vehicle in
such a condition of disrepair as to create loud or unnecessary grating, grinding, rattling
or other noise.
Subd. 4. Loading of vehicles. No person may create any loud and excessive
noise in connection with the loading, unloading or unpacking of any vehicle.
Subd. 5. Muffler required. No person may permit the discharge into the open air
of emissions from an internal combustion engine except through a muffler or other
device which will effectively prevent loud or explosive noises issuing therefrom.
Subd. 6. Audio Equipment. No person may operate a motor vehicle audio
system in a manner so that the sounds emitted by the system are audible at a distance
of 50 or more feet from the motor vehicle.
930.15. Keeping of Animals. The keeping of a dog, cat or other animal which by
reason of noise caused by it or by its presence, annoys other persons who are in the
neighborhood is a public nuisance and is unlawful. Upon the receipt of a written
complaint of such annoyance by the occupants of two or more neighboring properties,
the city shall notify the owner of the animal that the nuisance must be abated within 48
hours. Failure to obey the notice is a violation of this subsection.
l �5
930.17. Refuse Hauling and Snow Plowing. The operation of vehicles used for the
hauling of refuse on private property shall be limited in- residdamial- distROts, and within
to the period between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weeks
any day of the week. The operation of vehicles for snow plowing on private property
shall be limited in residential districts and within 50 feet of such districts to the period
from 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. any day of the week.
930.19. Horns and Signaling Devices. The following uses of horns or other signaling
devices are unlawful:
(a) the sounding of any horn or signaling device on any automobile,
motorcycle or other vehicle and upon any locomotive, except as a danger
warning;
(b) the creation by means of any signaling device of any unreasonably loud or
harsh sound; and
(c) the sounding of any device for an unnecessary and unreasonable period of
time.
930.21. Radios. Phonoaraohs. Stereo and Electronic eauioment. Paaina Svstems:
Except Advertising. No person may use or operate or permit the use or
operation of any radio receiver, musical instrument, phonograph, stereo and
electronic equipment, paging system, machine or other device for the
production or reproduction of loud sounds so as to unreasonably disturb the
peace, quiet and comfort of any person nearby. The following shall constitute
such a disturbance:
(a) Operation of any set, instFument, phenegFap h, Fnarshfno nr ether such
device at aRy time from within an enclosed structure between the hours of
10:00 p.m. of any day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day in a manner distinctly
audible at the property line of the structure or building in which it is
located; or in the hallway or apartment unit adjacent if located in an
apartment unit,
Operation of any such device outside of an enclosed structure at any time,
in a manner distinctly audible at a distance of 50 feet from the device.
The regulations contained in this subsection are not applicable to licensed sound trucks
and other similar advertising activities.
930.23. Radios, Phonographs Stereo and Electronic equipment, Paging Systems:
Commercial Advertising. No person may use or operate or permit the use or operation
of any radio receiver, musical instrument, phonograph stereo and electronic equipment,
10 paging system or other device for the production or reproduction of sound on any street
or other public place, or audible at any location, for the purpose of commercial
advertising or attracting the attention of the public to any commercial establishment or
vehicle unless a license is first obtained pursuant to chapter XI.
930.25. Noise Near Schools Churches and Health Care Institutions. No person may
willfully create any excessive noise on any street, alley, sidewalk or public grounds
adjacent to any educational, religious or health care institution when the noise
unreasonably interferes with the conduct of the activities of the institution or disturbs or
unduly annoys its occupants or residents.
930.27. HawkORQ aP4 Peddling. No hawkeF, peddler or vendor may make any noise on
a public street, whether by yelling, shouting or otherwise, which disturbs the peace and
quiet of the residents of the neighborhood.
930.29. Participation in Noisy Gatherings.
a. At any time between the hour of 10:00 p.m. of any day and 7:00 a.m.
of the following day no person may congregate because- efr-at, or participate
in, any party or gathering of people from which noise emanates of sufficient
volume to unreasonably disturb the peace, quiet or repose of other persons
b. A police officer may order all persons present at such party or
gathering other than the owners, residents or tenants to immediately
disperse. Any person who refuses to leave after being ordered to do so by a
police officer is guilty of a violation of this subsection.
C., Any owner, tenant, or resident of the building or place who has legal
authority to control the activities at such building or place and who knows or
has reason to know of the disturbance and fails to immediately take
reasonable steps to abate such disturbance is guilty of a violation of this
subsection.
d_ Any owner of a building or place who knows or has been notified of a
pattern of disturbances and fails to immediately take reasonable steps to
abate such disturbances is guilty of a violation of this subsection. For
purposes of this subsection, a disturbance is defined as an incident which
results in oral or written communication with the public safety department;
pattern is defined as more than one (1) disturbance in a 30 -day period or six
(6) or more disturbances in a twelve (12) month period.
930.31. Additional Restrictions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no
person may make, continue or cause to be made or continued, any loud, unnecessary
or unusual noise or mother noise which unreasonably disturbs, injures or endangers
the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of others within the limits of the city.
930.33. Administration and Enforcement. Subdivision 1. Responsible official. The
manager, acting personally or through his designee, shall administer and enforce the
noise control regulations contained in this section.
Subd. 2. Testing Procedures. The manager shall adopt guidelines establishing
the test procedures and instrumentation to be used in enforcing the provisions of this
section.
930.35. Noise Variances. Subdivision 1. Authorily. The council and manager may,
consistent with this subsection, grant variances from the requirements of any provision
of this section.
Subd. 2. Application. A person seeking a variance shall file an application with
the manager on forms prescribed by the manager. The application shall state the dates
during which the variance is proposed, the location of the noise source, the time of
operation of the noise source, the nature of the noise source, the reasons why the
variance is sought, the steps which will be taken to minimize the noise level and such
0 other information as is required by the manager.
Subd. 3. Action on Application: 15 days or less. If the requested variance is to
last for a period of 15 days or less, the manager may either grant or deny the request.
Before granting or denying the request, the manager may require the applicant to notify
property owners within 500 feet of the noise source that the application has been made.
A person claiming to be adversely affected by the granting of the variance may be given
an opportunity to file a statement in opposition to the granting of the variance stating the
reasons for such opposition. The manager may conduct an informal hearing at which
the applicant and persons filing statements in opposition to the variance are given an
opportunity to be heard. The manager shall thereafter either grant or deny the variance
request.
Subd. 4. 15 days or more. If the requested variance would last for a period of
more than 15 days, it shall be granted or denied by the council after hearing. Upon
receipt of an application for such a variance, the manager shall give mailed notice of
the council hearing to property owners within 500 feet of the noise source. At the
hearing applicant and all persons claiming to be affected by the variance request may
be heard.
Subd. 5. Hardship: conditions. A variance may not be granted by either the
council or the manager unless it is found that full compliance with this section would
constitute an unreasonable hardship on the applicant, which hardship outweighs any
(°O
serious adverse impact upon the health, safety or welfare of the public. In granting a
variance, the council or the manager, as the case may be, may attach conditions
including sound levels, duration, hours, design and termination of the variance.
Subd. 6. Temporary variances. The manager may grant temporary variances
pending action by the council on an application for a variance.
930.37. Appeals. A person, whose interests are affected by the granting or denial of a
variance, or any condition imposed thereon, may appeal the manager's decision to the
council. An appeal may be initiated by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk within 20
days of the date of the manager's decision. The appeal shall be heard by the council
as soon thereafter as practicable. In considering the appeal, the council shall hear
evidence bearing upon the granting or denial of the variance or any conditions to be
imposed. The council shall have 30 days following the close of the hearing on a
variance to either grant or deny the variance. The variance may be granted subject to
conditions which the council may in its discretion impose.
930.39. Sound level and bid awards: evaluation of city bids. The city may consider the
sound levels of equipment which bidders propose to supply to the city in evaluating
which equipment represents the lowest responsible bid.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day
of November, 1998.
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
5C,
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 280
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Request by the Church of St. Richard for an itinerant place of amusement and itinerant
food license for the 1998 Fall Festival to be held November 21 and 22, 1998.
Background:
On October 8, 1998, the Church of St. Richard submitted a request for an itinerant
place of amusement and itinerant food license for November 21 and 22, 1998. They
are requesting that the fees be waived.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the license, fee waived, for November 21 and 22 for St. Richard's 1998 Fall
Festival.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to this license.
2. The City has previously issued this license in conjunction with the St. Richard Fall
Festival.
• 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
this license in conjunction with the St. Richard Fall Festival.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
The request by the Church of St. Richard for an itinerant place of amusement and
itinerant food license for the 1998 Fall Festival to be held November 21 and 22, 1998 is
presented for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam . Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
r
W6
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
. Council Letter No. 279
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a request by the Richfield Church of Christ, 7314 Humboldt Avenue, to
erect a ground sign that does not meet setback requirements.
Background:
Richfield Church of Christ is seeking permission to place.a new ground sign in the City
boulevard. The City Code requires institutional signs to be set back ten feet from the
property line. The Public Works Director can give permission to place items in the
boulevard, but in the case of signs that do not meet the City's sign code provisions, the
City Council must also grant permission.
The boulevard in front of the Church of Christ along Humboldt Avenue is approximately
48 feet deep. The normal boulevard size for a City street is 12 -14 feet. There are
utilities located in the boulevard area; however, the Church of Christ has obtained a
permit from the Public Works Department that requires the church to remove the sign in
the event that the City needs to conduct work in the area.
The four by eight foot sign would be seven feet tall and located 20 feet from the street
curb.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the request by the Richfield Church of Christ, 7314 Humboldt Avenue, to place
a sign in the boulevard and not comply with the required ten foot property line setback.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The sign code requires institutional uses to set ground signs ten feet back from the
property line. The City Council can grant approval for a sign of unusual height or
location.
2. The church has an extraordinary amount of right -of -way in front of their property.
This amount of right -of -way provides more than enough room to accommodate the
sign and provide an appropriate setback from the street without affecting the Public
Works Department's ability to provide street and utility services.
3. The church received a boulevard permit from the Public Works Department to allow
them to put the sign in the boulevard. The boulevard permit makes it the church's
responsibility to move the sign if the City ever needs to do work in the boulevard.
4. The sign will be set back 20 feet from the street and should not interfere with traffic
visibility.
6e)'I
. Alternative Recommendation:
Deny the request to place a sign in an unusual location.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for the City Council agenda on November 9, 1998.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja 4e. Prosser
Citger
RIBA' P
is
I-
L-1
73RD ST
N. b,- 5b 01 11 10 :16 * 11 loo ICI lot Iby
bf
j--
G'1
4
0
oi
48'
.3-y
loop tic
PROPERTY LINE
20-
SIGN
TION
nI 74
0
ST l!-k'- 124.0L.-M-Ifn
: y son
m
rn
48'
.3-y
loop tic
PROPERTY LINE
20-
SIGN
TION
C
Richfield Church of Christ 56-�-
Land Use Context
100 0 100200 Feet
9
a)
a)
0
E
3:
LO
M
...........
.. ...... .......
�T -L,
Land Use
= Residential
School
Church
Park
October 30, 1998
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 5/q
Council Letter No. 278
Agenda November 9, 1998
Issue Statement:
Resolution designating City's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance
premiums for General Services and Management employees.
Background:
At the present time, the City contributes to the cost of premiums for four kinds of
insurance coverages available to City employees. Full -time Management and General
Services employee contributions are discussed within this letter as well contributions
toward health insurance for part-time regular General Services employees. Other
employees are covered under terms of labor agreements.
LIFE
A $25,000 term life insurance policy is currently provided for all full -time Management
and General Services employees. The City pays the full premium for this insurance,
which is $4.25 per month per employee. The rate is unchanged for 1999.
DENTAL
The second type of insurance provided to full -time Management and General Services.
employees is a self - funded group dental insurance. In 1998, the City contributed $24
per month per employee for the total cost of employee (not dependent) coverage.
Employees who desire dependent coverage must pay the full cost of such additional
premium, which for 1998 was $31. Inasmuch as dental insurance is self - funded, the
City establishes the dental rates from year to year internally, based upon administrative
and benefit pay -out cost data. No change is recommended for 1999. While the City
does not contribute to dependent coverage for dental insurance, for informational
purposes, the rate the employee will pay will remain at $31 per month.
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR FULL -TIME EMPLOYEES
The third type of insurance coverage available to full -time Management and General
Services employees is group health coverage. Currently, employees may select from
three plans available through the LOGIS Health Insurance Program. Beginning
January 1, 1999 the LOGIS group will be offering the Medica Health Plan only to its
member cities. The Medica plan has a high option plan and a low option plan for
employees to choose from.
The City will continue to pay the full individual employee premium and provide an
additional contribution toward dependent coverage up to a specified maximum
insurance premium. Beginning January 1, 1999, full -time employees will be able to
waive health insurance coverage through the City of Richfield. Employees will,
however, need to prove they have coverage elsewhere. Employees electing to waive
coverage will receive an additional $50 per month on their pay check. This $50 will be
taxed as regular income.
The 1998 and 1999 monthly premium costs of the health plans are:
Medica Hiah Oation
Individual
Family
Medica Low Option
1998 Rate
$202.25
544.00
Individual NA
Family NA
1999 Rate
$195.16
524.92
$178.56
480.31
% Change
-3.5%
-3.5%
�m -
l
In 1999, the City's monthly contribution for Management and General Services
employees will be increased by $20 to $415. The City's contribution for Management
and General Services employees as a percent of premium over the past ten years is
shown in Attachment 1.
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PART -TIME REGULAR EMPLOYEES
The City will contribute 75% of the single health care premium for part -time Regular
employees and $207.50 per month towards dependent coverage (which includes single
coverage.) Part-time employees may opt out of health insurance altogether. The 1999
rates and City contribution are as follows:
1999 Rate City Contribution
Medica High Option
Individual $195.16 $146.38
Family 524.92 207.50
Medica Low Option
Individual $178.56 $133.92
Family 480.31 207.50
LONG -TERM DISABILITY (LTD)
The fourth type of insurance provided to all employee groups, except Firefighters, is
long -term disability insurance (LTD). LTD is provided through a group policy secured
by the City. Currently, the City pays a premium rate of 40 cents per $100 of salaries for
covered employees. No rate increase is anticipated at this time. In Spring 1998, as
required by state law, the City re -bid its long -term disability coverage. That re -bid
resulted in a decrease of the City's LTD rate. Previously the premium rate was 40
cents per $100 of salary for covered employees. The new rate is 24 cents per $100 - a
40% decrease in the premium rate.
• Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the following actions be taken with respect to the City's
insurance contributions for Management and General Services employees:
A. Life Insurance
That the term life insurance remain at $25,000 with the same premium charge of
$4.25 per month per employee.
B. Dental Insurance
That the per employee per month contribution remain at $24. As in the past,
employees who desire dependent coverage would pay the full cost of such
additional premium.
C. Long -Term Disability Insurance
That the long -term disability insurance coordination of the benefit remain the
same.
D. Group Health Insurance
That the City contribution for full -time employees be increased from a maximum of
$395 per month to $415 per month per employee for dependent coverage; and
that the City's rate of contribution for part-time regular employees remain at 75%
of the premium cost for single coverage and 50% of the City's contribution toward
dependent coverage for a full -time employee.
Basis of Recommendation:
40 1. To provide adequate insurance protection for the Management and General
Services employee groups, which are comparable to other City employee groups, as
well as employees performing similar jobs in comparable communities.
'0 I-C;L-
2. Greater benefit equality is achieved between female classes found in General
Services and Management groups and male classes found in the contracted labor
units.
• 3. The 1999 Budget includes the funding necessary to provide for the premium
contributions as recommended.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council may take no action to increase the insurance premiums beyond the
current 1998 funding level.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
The City should implement the premium increases for coverages by December 1, 1998.
Payroll deductions for January insurance payments, the beginning of the new insurance
period, are calculated in December.
Respectf Illy submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City M ager
JDP:cak
•
40
,-A-3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION
TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE
PREMIUM FOR MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the hospital - medical /surgical'group health insurance plan is available
from the LOGIS Health Insurance Program for City employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is
available from the Local Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS) for City
employees; and
WHEREAS, a self - funded group dental insurance plan is available to City
Management and General Services employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a group short-term and long -term disability program is available to City
Management and General Services employees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by resolution the City's
contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum
of $415 per month for family health insurance, and in any event, said contributions shall
not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. The City shall
give to full -time employees not participating in the City's health plan, a sum of $50 per
month which will be taxed as regular income. The City shall also pay the $24.00 monthly
• premium for the employee dental insurance plan, and the $4.25 monthly premium for the
term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan for Management and
General Services employees, for a total possible maximum 1999 insurance premium
contribution of $443.25 per month. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective
January 1, 1999.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall contribute the full cost of long -term
disability insurance for the Management and General Services employees' coverage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall determine the City's
contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the
adoption of the appropriate resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective
organized employee groups.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 9th day of
November, 1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
)
Attachment 1
The City's Contribution Toward Dependent Health
Insurance as a Percent of Total Premium Cost
YEAR
HEALTH
DEPENDENT
CITY CONTRIBUTION
CITY CONTRIBUTION
PLAN
PREMIUM
MGMT. /GEN. SVCS
AVERAGE % OF
COST
PREMIUM
1989
PHP
$266.00
$170.00
MCHP
$291.25
$170.00
63%
GHI
$254.70
$170.00
1990
PHP
$299.50
$210.00
MCHP
$326.20
$210.00
68%
GHI
$290.67
$210.00
1991
PHP
$340.00
$240.00
MCHP
$357.20
$240.00
70%
GHI
$321.46
$240.00
1992
MEDICA
$399.00
$255.00
MCHP
$389.35
$255.00
66%
GHI
$356.76
$255.00
1993
MEDICA
$430.92
$285.00
MCHP
$437.25
$285.00
68%
GHI
$397.48
$285.00
01994
MEDICA
$449.05
$315.00
MCHP
$478.35
$315.00
69.5%
GHI
$431.44
$315.00
1995
MEDICA
$449.05
$335.00
MCHP
$478.35
$335.00
72%
GHI
$465.86
$335.00
1996
MEDICA
$449.03
$345.00
MCHP
$464.63
$345.00
76%
GHI
$443.32
$345.00
1997
MEDICA
$490.85
$365.00
MCHP
$451.86
$365.00
81%
GHI
$417.43
$365.00
1998
MEDICA
$544.00
$395.00
MCHP
$484.67
$395.00
79%
GHI
$466.74
$395.00
1999
MEDICA
High Option
$524.92
$415.00
79%
Low Option
$480.31
$415.00
86%