07-27-98 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, JULY 27, 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) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 13,
1998 AND (2) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 13, 1998
PRESENTATION
INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO PRINT
THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER FOR THE RECORD.
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT ON
THE AGENDA
• AGENDA APPROVAL
2. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
3. 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
A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA TO
RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENT FOR STORM CLEANUP COSTS C.L. 163
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REMOVAL AND REALIGNMENT OF
STOP SIGNS AT 64TH STREET AND PILLSBURY AVENUE C.L. 164
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
SUBDVISION WAIVER AT 7645 NICOLLET AVENUE C.L. 165
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR
REPLACEMENT OF SIX RETAINING WALLS ON COUNTY ROADS TO
LAKELAND NURSERIES, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $39,635.40 C.L. 166
.
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL
LICENSE AT 6800 CEDAR AVENUE; THREE DOGS C.L. 167
F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL
LICENSE; AT 7232-11TH AVENUE; FOUR DOGS C.L. 168
G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF COMMERCIAL KENNEL
LICENSE FOR ELAINE'S GROOMING; 7429 HUMBOLDT AVENUE, FOR
PURPOSE OF ANIMAL GROOMING C.L. 169
H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF COMMERCIAL KENNEL
LICENSE FOR PETCO ANIMAL SUPPLIES, INC., 710 WEST 66TH STREET,
FOR GROOMING OF ANIMALS C.L. 170
1. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF VETERINARY LICENSE
FOR ANIMAL CARE CLINIC, 6521 CEDAR AVENUE C.L. 171
J. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF VETERINARY LICENSE
TO OPERATE VETERINARY CLINIC FOR AIRPORT PET HOSPITAL, 6301
CEDAR AVENUE C.L. 172
-K. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL-OF=VETERINARY LICENSE
TO OPERATE CLINIC AT WOODLAKE VETERINARY HOSPITAL, 6436
LYNDALE AVENUE C.L. 173
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
4. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OF SECOND
ICE SHEET AT RICHFIELD ICE ARENA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 174
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
5. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE
AT 6325 GIRARD AVENUE
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 175
6. CONSIDERATION OF SETTING SPECIAL MEETING FOR 1998 REVISED/1999
PROPOSED BUDGET AND SETTING 1999 PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 176
AIRPORT BUSINESS
7. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
8. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
9. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
10. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
11. 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
40 at 861-9702.
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 176
Agenda July 27, 1999
Issue Statement:
Setting special meeting for 1998 Revised/1999 Proposed budget and setting 1999
preliminary tax levy.
Background:
City staff is now in the process of preparing the draft 1998 Revised/1999 Proposed
budget. Included in that draft document is the proposed preliminary property tax levy
for the City and for the Richfield HRA. The Truth in Taxation statute requires that a
preliminary levy be adopted by the local units of government and certified to the County
Auditor on or before September 15 of each year.
In order to review the draft budget document with the City Council prior to the
September 15 deadline, it is necessary to establish at least one special meeting. For
the current year, staff is proposing that such special meetings be set for the following
dates:
• 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, August 26, 1998
7:00 p.m. Wednesday, September 2, 1998
The above suggested meeting should provide adequate time to review the budget
document and proposed tax levy. The adoption of the preliminary levy and dates for
the Truth in Taxation public hearings could either be adopted at one of the special
meetings listed above or at the September 14, 1998 regular City Council meeting.
Recommended Motion:
Set the date of August 26 and September 2 (if necessary) as a Special City Council
meeting(s) to review and discuss the 1998 Revised/1999 Proposed budget and set the
1999 preliminary tax levy prior to certification to the County on September 15, 1998.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. It is necessary to review and discuss the 1998 Revised/1999 Proposed budget and
1999 preliminary tax levy prior to certification to the County on September 15, 1998.
2. Draft budget documents will be available to City Council Members on or before
August 19. This will allow some time for Council Members to review the draft
budget before the scheduled meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
• 1. The City Council could schedule meetings on a different date(s) than those
suggested.
?A
• 2. The City Council could schedule additional sessions than those suggested.
3. The City Council could decide not to schedule any budget meetings and proceed
with the preliminary levy at a regular City Council meeting before September 15,
1998.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Because of the strict timeframe associated with the Truth in Taxation process, this issue
should be considered at the July 27, 1998 meeting so that a date for special meetings
may be established if the City Council wishes to use that process.
Respectfully submitted,
Prosser
JamYnager
City JDP:ds
n
U
0
5"'?
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 175.
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a new residential kennel license for George
Broadston, 6325 Girard Avenue.
Background:
On March 9, 1998, George Broadston submitted an application for a residential kennel
license. He owns one dog and his daughter, Lisa Duvall, who lives with them, owns 5
dogs. Mr. Broadston's application contains the signatures of two contiguous property
owners. One property owner, Isabella LaRoche, 6331 Girard Avenue, was not willing to
sign the application.
Staff received a letter from Ms. LaRoche dated April 1998, which states some of the
complaints she has with the applicant. Her concerns are odors, feces in the bushes,
barking and the destruction of her garden. .
Both parties were contacted and asked to participate in the mediation process. It is
always strongly suggested that parties participate in mediation if there are any concerns
raised by anyone. Mr. Broadston agreed to participate in the mediation session. Ms.
LaRoche was initially hesitant, but after explanation of the process, she said she would
be willing to give it a try.
The parties were referred to the West Suburban Mediation Center on, April 9, 1998.
• The mediation center sent out written information regarding their services to both
parties. Mr. Broadston responded to the mediation service and said that he would be
willing to mediate. After several attempts to reach Ms. LaRoche, staff was unable to
make contact with her.
On April 30, staff received a letter from West Suburban Mediation Center indicating that
the case would be closed since Ms. LaRoche had not responded and their attempts to
reach her were unsuccessful. Several additional attempts were made to contact Ms.
LaRoche.
On June 3, 1998, Isabelle left a message for staff stating that Isabella would participate
in mediation. Staff contacted West Suburban Mediation to initiate another request for
mediation. Staff notified Mr. Broadston's daughter, Lisa Duvall, who is the Broadston's
representative due to the fact that the Broadstons live at the lake during the summer.
On June 11, 1998, West Suburban Mediation staff called to inform staff that Isabella will
not mediate. After attempting to schedule two mediation sessions, staff made a
decision to forward the license request to the City Council.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer on March
11, 1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time. The Community
Service Officer noted that the dogs are kept in immaculate conditions with insulated dog
houses, heated water dishes, etc., and they recommended approval. A second
inspection was conducted on July 20, 1998. As before, the kennel conditions were
found to be immaculate. Staff was unable to determine the number of dogs kept at the
residence because the dogs were currently out of town for a week at a dog show.
5-1
The City has adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the area of the
residential kennel license. Staff received no calls regarding this application; however,
they did receive the one letter from Ms. LaRoche which is attached.
Although this application is for six dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six
animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Due to the fact
that the animals were at a dog show the week of July 20, staff was unable to confirm
that the number of dogs they own is still six.
Recommended Motion:
Staff is not making a specific recommendation to either approve or deny the request for
a residential kennel license.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Staff is unable to determine if Mr. Broadston has proven that the keeping of more
than two dogs does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood.
2. It is City policy to recommend approval of a residential kennel license only if
adjoining property owners agree with the request.
3. Staff set up two mediation sessions; however, both of them were cancelled due to
the fact that one of the parties was not willing to participate in the mediation
process.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff is not making a specific recommendation to either approve or deny the request for
a residential kennel license for George Broadston, 6325 Girard Avenue.
Staff has been notified that the complainant has requested that this item be considered
no earlier than 7:30 p.m. because she is unable to leave work early to attend the
Council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
JaIsProsser
City er
JDP:cak
0
? IT) P"60
AAAAe,a g
a-,b\ --tAj
a -AV
.mss ? .Gt?erP- ?, ? d uu,,; r?dm?J-tr
i
a.Q N?P D?9Ptil ?ti r 2,-k?t?O ?orJ a
- - CJ
.tI6
a
till 0
1l JAI
X331 ?;??d ?v?
m?
6,3
Richfield City Code 905.01 (Rev. 1996)
Section 905 - Animal control.
(Amended, Bill No. 1996-10)
905.01. Licensing of domestic animals. Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the
purposes of this section the terms defined in this subsection have the meanings
given them.
Subd. 2. "Owner" means any person owning, keeping, harboring or having
custody of an animal.
Subd. 3a. "Commercial kennel" means a place where more than two dogs or
two cats over six months of age are kept, and where the business of selling,
boarding, breeding, showing, or grooming dogs or cats is conducted.
Subd. 3b. "Veterinary kennel" means a kennel facility or clinic operated
and maintained by a licensed veterinarian, where treatment, care, diagnosis, and
veterinary procedures are performed..
Subd. 4. "Residential kennel" means a place where more than two dogs or
two cats over six months of age are kept on premises which are zoned and occupied
for residential purposes, and where the keeping of such dogs or cats is
incidental to the occupancy of the premises for residential purposes.
Subd. 5. A dog is "at large" when it is off the property of its owner and
not under restraint.
Subd. 6. A dog is "under restraint" if it is controlled by a leash not ex-
ceeding six feet in length, or at heel beside a competent person having custody
of it and obedient to that person's commands, or within a vehicle being driven
or parked on a public street or within the property limits of its owner's
premises. An unattended dog on the property of another, without the consent of
such property owner, is "at large" and not under restraint even though it is on
a leash.
Subd. 7. For purposes of subsections 905.03 - 905.33, "animal" shall refer
to domestic dogs and cats. _
905.03. License. Subdivision 1. General rule. No person may own, harbor, keep
or have custody of an animal over six months of age within the city, unless a
current license for the animal has been obtained as provided in this subsection.
Applications for animal licenses must be made when the animal attains six months
of age, (i) and not later than 30 days from the acquisition of an animal, (ii)
and not later than 30 days from the moving of an animal into the city, (iii) this
registration will expire on the date the animal's rabies vaccination expires, and
must be reinstated within 15 days of the expiration of the animal's rabies
vaccination. Owners whose animals have received rabies vaccinations which are
effective for more than one year may apply for a two or three year license,
depending on the type of rabies vaccination. When making application for a
multi-year license, the owner must submit all of the information required for an
annual license as well as documentation indicating that the animal has received
a rabies vaccination which is effective for the multi-year license being applied
for. The multi-year license may not exceed the period of effective rabies
vaccination stated on the vaccination certificate provided by the veterinary
clinic, or veterinarian, which vaccinated the animal. These multi-year licenses
may only be issued for animals which have been spayed or neutered.
4, 1
• Richfield City Code 905.03, Subd. 2
(Rev. 1996)
Subd. 2. License fees. The license fee for each animal license, and the
charge for a duplicate animal license is as provided in appendix D.
Subd. 3. Late penalty. If an animal license is obtained while the animal
is impounded by the city, or if the 15 day period allowed for reregistration of
the animal has expired there shall be added to the regular license fee a late
license penalty as provided in appendix D for each animal; provided that an owner
who newly acquires an animal, or an owner who has an animal at the time of
becoming a resident of the city, shall be allowed 30 days to secure a license,
without incurring the late license penalty provided in this subdivision.
Subd. 4. Contents of application. Application for an animal license shall
be made to the Public Safety Department. The application shall include such
descriptive information as is necessary to provide reasonable identification of
the animal and its owner. Applicants shall provide a certificate issued by a
licensed doctor of veterinary medicine showing that the animal has been
vaccinated against rabies, that such vaccination is effective on the date of the
application, and that the vaccination will be effective for the period of time
for which application for animal license is made.
Subd. 5. Identification of licensed animal. Upon the issuance of an
animal license by the city clerk or the city pound keeper, the licensee shall be
provided with a metallic tag bearing the license number and the word "Richfield."
Except where the animal for which the license is issued is indoors on the
premises of his owner, the animal shall have a collar or harness on which the
license tag, and current rabies tag is affixed. No person may counterfeit any
tag of this city or use a counterfeit tag.
Subd. 6. License nontransferable. A license tag is nontransferable to any
other animal or to a new owner of the animal for which it is issued.
Subd. 7. Replacement of lost tag. If any such tag is lost or stolen, the
owner may obtain a new tag by surrendering the receipt for the first tag and by
paying the charge for a duplicate license as provided in appendix D.
905.05. Dogs not to be at large. An owner may not permit a dog to be at large
in this city, but shall keep dog under restraint at all times.
905.06. Immediate disposal of animal feces. An animal owner, or person having
custody or control of an animal, shall immediately clean up and sanitarily
dispose of any feces of the animal, except that this provision does not apply to
blind persons with respect to their ownership and use of seeing eye dogs.
905.07. Confinement when necessary. A female animal in heat shall be confined
in a building, secure enclosure, veterinary hospital or boarding kennel, or shall
be controlled on a leash while being exercised, provided the animal does not
create a public nuisance.
905.09. Public nuisances. The keeping of an animal which annoys other persons
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 such an animal that the nuisance shall be abated
within 48 hours. Failure to obey a notice is a violation of this subsection.
5-5
. Richfield City Code 905.11 (Rev. 1996)
905.11. City pound. The council may provide for a city animal pound either
within or outside the limits of the city.
905.13. Pound keeper. If a city pound is established, the manager shall
designate the pound keeper who may appoint and deputize special officers to
enforce this section. The special officer shall have police powers to cite
owners of dogs or cats for violations of this section, to impound animals and to
enforce the provisions of this section.
905.15. Enforcement procedures. Such officers as the manager shall designate
to enforce this section may pick up and impound any animal found not to be kept,
confined or restrained, or licensed in the manner required by this section. The
officers may enter upon private property where there is reasonable cause to
believe that an animal is on the premises and is not licensed as required by this
section, or that there is an animal on the premises which is not being kept,
confined or restrained, as herein provided. An owner shall produce for
inspection an animal license receipt when requested to do so by the officer.
905.17. Quarantine. Any animal capable of carrying the rabies virus that has
bitten a person shall immediately be impounded for at least ten days and kept
apart from other living creatures, under the supervision of a veterinarian or the
Department of Public Safety, until it is determined whether the animal had or has
a disease which might have been transmitted by the bite. The impounding may be
done by the owner at owner's residence, or veterinary facility with the approval
of the Department of Public Safety, but if it is not at the city pound or
designated pound, the owner shall notify the pound keeper or director of public
safety immediately and shall furnish proof in writing that the animal is being
impounded, and shall follow all policies and procedures relating to the
quarantine as directed by the Department of Public Safety. Upon the expiration
of ten days, if it is determined that the animal does not have a disease which
might have been transmitted by the bite, the animal may be released and the pound
keeper or director of public safety shall be notified immediately prior to the
release by the owner of the animal. If the animal is impounded at the city
pound, it may be reclaimed as hereinafter provided. Any animal which has been
bitten by a rabid creature shall be euthanated or impounded and kept in the same
manner for a period of six months; provided that if the animal which has been
bitten by a rabid creature has been vaccinated at least three weeks before the
bite and within one year of the bite and if it is again immediately vaccinated,
then such animal shall be confined or impounded for a period of 40 days before
it is released. The owner of an animal which has been bitten by a rabid creature
shall notify the city pound keeper or director of public safety immediately prior
to the release of the animal.
905.19. Dangerous animals. Adoption by reference. Minnesota Statutes 343.40,
346.57, 347.50, 347.51, 347.52, 347.53, 347.54, and 347.55 as they pertain to
domestic animals, are adopted by reference and are as much a part of this code
as if fully set forth herein. Any violation of the statutes herein adopted by
reference is a violation of this code. If an animal is diseased, vicious,
dangerous, rabid or exposed to rabies and the animal cannot be impounded after
a reasonable effort or cannot be impounded without serious risk to the persons
attempting to impound it, or if an animal has made more than one attack on a
person or persons, the animal may be immediately killed by or under the direction
of an officer authorized to enforce the provisions of this section.
5--IP
Richfield City Code 905.21 (Rev. 1996)
905.21. Treatment during impounding. Any animal which is impounded in the city
pound or designated pound shall be kept, with kind treatment and sufficient food
and water, and sanitary conditions, for the animal's comfort. If the animal is
not known or suspected of being diseased and has not bitten a person or been
bitten by a rabid creature, it shall be kept in the pound for at least five days,
unless it is sooner reclaimed by its owner. If the animal is known to be or is
suspected of being diseased with a disease which might be transmitted to persons,
it shall be kept in the pound for at least ten days.
905.23. Redemption of animals. An animal may be redeemed from the pound by the
owner upon paying the following:
(a) the license fee for the animal, if the license has not previously
been obtained;
(b) the late license penalty, where a license has not been obtained
within the time provided in this section;
(c) the amount of the boarding fee which the city is required to pay to
the pound keeper; or
(d) an impounding penalty as fixed in appendix D.
905.25. Disposal of unredeemed animals. The city pound keeper or designated
pound keeper shall make an effort to contact the owner of any animal which has
been impounded and which has identification on it. If at the end of the
impounding period the animal is not reclaimed by the owner, the animal shall be
deemed to have been abandoned and may be disposed of or sold to any person
following the procedures contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 514.93. If the
animal is to be kept in the city, a license shall be obtained before possession
of the animal is given to the purchaser,' if a license is required.
905.27. Limit of dogs on one premise. Not more than two dogs or cats over six
months of age shall be kept on any one premise, except at a licensed commercial
kennel, veterinary kennel, or a licensed residential kennel.
905.29. Abandonment. It is unlawful for any person to abandon any animal in this
city, or at the city pound, or designated city pound.
905.31. Kennel licenses. Subdivision 1. Definitions. The terms "commercial
kennel," "veterinary kennel," and "residential kennel" are defined in section
905.01.
Subd. 2. License required. No person may operate a veterinary, commercial
or residential kennel in this city without first obtaining a kennel license as
provided in this subsection. Application for the license shall be made to the
city clerk and must be accompanied by the license fee set by appendix D. The
clerk shall refer the application to the council, which may grant or deny the
license. Licenses issued for kennels shall be on an annual basis. The council
may impose conditions upon the granting of any residential, veterinary, or
commercial kennel license.
U
Richfield City Code
:5J'?
905.31, Subd. 3
(Rev. 1996)
Subd. 3. Approval of contiguous property owners. The application for a
residential kennel license, or commercial kennel license in a residential area,
shall be accompanied by a petition showing the approval of the occupants of
privately owned real estate abutting the premises on which the kennel is to be
located. Whether or not all of the occupants of abutting property approve the
application, the council may grant or deny the license. The license may not be
granted unless the council finds that the use of the applicant's premises as a
residential kennel will not have, or will not be likely to have, any adverse
effect upon adjacent properties or the occupancy thereof, and will not constitute
a nuisance to the neighborhood.
Subd. 4. Revocation. Kennel licenses may be revoked by the council by
reason of any violation of this subsection or by reason of violation of any other
provisions of this code or any order, law or regulation.
Subd. 5. Notice and hearing. Before revoking a kennel license, the
licensee shall be given notice of the meeting at which such revocation will be
considered, and if the licensee is present at such meeting, the licensee must be
given an opportunity to be heard. Notice of the meeting shall be given to the
licensee in writing. Written notice shall be mailed to the address of the
licensee as set forth in the licensee's application for the kennel license, and
it shall be mailed at least five days before the date of the meeting at which the
revocation is to be considered by the council.
Subd. 6. License fees. The fee for a veterinary or commercial kennel
license and the fee for a residential kennel license are as fixed in appendix D.
The residential kennel license fee is in addition to the usual animal license
fees provided in this section, if applicable.
Subd. 7. Sanitation. Kennels shall be maintained in a clean and healthful
condition at all times, and shall be open to inspection by the director of public
safety, at all reasonable times.
Subd. 8. Reports to city. Each month that a kennel is operated, the owner
of the kennel shall report to the city manager, accurately stating in writing the
greatest number of animals kept on the kennel premises during the preceding
calendar month. Animals kept by a kennel in its capacity as the city pound need
not be so reported.
905.33. Reports by pound keeper. The city pound keeper or designated pound
keeper shall account for and pay over monthly to the city all monies received by
the pound keeper on behalf of the city as license fees or other charges. The
pound keeper shall also give an accurate written report each month to the city,
stating (i) licenses issued, (ii) fees or other charges collected, (iii) sales
made, (iv) dogs, cats and other animals impounded, (v) the duration of any such
impoundment, (vi) all animals destroyed, and (vii) other pertinent data relating
to animal control which may be requested by the city manager.
905.35. Miscellaneous prohibitions. Subdivision 1. General rule. The
existence of any of the conditions enumerated in this subsection are declared to
be nuisances and may be proceeded against in the manner provided in section 925.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 174
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
First reading consideration of an ordinance to authorize construction of a second ice
sheet and set the public hearing and second reading for August 24, 1998.
Background:
At the January 26, 1998 regular City Council meeting, a group of interested citizens (the
ICE Group) asked that the City explore the idea of constructing a second indoor ice
sheet at the ice arena at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. The City Council listened
to the request and asked staff to prepare a feasibility study on the matter of the second
ice sheet.
Staff worked with architect Delano Erickson to prepare concept drawings, rough
estimates of project costs and an estimated time schedule.
In addition, the City also asked Mark Ruff of Ehlers and Associates to prepare
background information regarding the financing alternatives involved, potential debt
service schedules, revenues and operating cost information. Information regarding the
revenues and operating costs was provided to Ehlers and Associated by City staff. In
• addition to that information, Mr. Ruff has worked on a number of financial feasibility
studies for other metropolitan ice arena projects and has a solid knowledge of the
subject matter.
Information from the architect and Ehlers was presented to the City Council in March.
On March 23, 1998 the City Council authorized staff to hire an architect (Delano
Erickson) and to begin work on the plans and specifications.
Another factor in this process is that a new Charter provision mandating an ordinance
to authorize certain City projects over $500,000 took effect on July 21, 1998. Thus, any
future action on a second ice sheet would include ordinance approval with two readings
and appropriate published notice.
At the March 23 City Council meeting the City Council generally concluded that there
was a need in the community for more ice time for a variety of programs. The
consequences of not providing the additional ice time were also discussed by the City
Council at that time (see Council Letter No. 68, March 23, 1998.)
Attached is a refined cost estimate for the project prepared by Delano Erickson
Architects and Krause Anderson. The current estimate is $2.75 million. This includes a
precast concrete exterior building with a flat shingled roof. The addition is proposed to
be constructed on the east side of the arena. The east side was chosen because soil
tests show that the north side location would have a higher soil correction cost. The
east side soil correction cost is estimated to be $350,000 or $100,000 over prior
estimates prepared before soil test. Some cost savings can be achieved through
alternates including purchase of used refrigeration system, deletion of lobby
remodeling, and deletion of bleachers. The City has received notice of a Mighty Ducks
Grant of $250,000. A more refined estimate of capital costs will be available for the
second reading on August 24, 1998.
Recommended Motion:
Approve first reading of an ordinance to authorize construction of a second ice sheet
and set the public hearing and second reading for August 24, 1998.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A second ice sheet will provide capacity to meet community needs for ice
programming.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council may decide to delay first reading in order to provide additional
information. If this option is chosen, the Council should identify the specific
additional information requested.
2. The Council may decide to not approve first reading.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This matter will be presented for consideration at the Council meeting of July 27, 1998.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Cr
onager
JDP:cak
E
•
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE
ICE AREA, PURSUANT TO RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER
SECTION 8.04
0 1.04. The estimated construction cost of the capital improvement, excluding design and
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Background; findings.
4-a
1.01. Section 8.04 of the Richfield City Charter requires that any capital improvement on City-
owned property that has an estimated cost exceeding $500,000.00 or expenditures for design or
engineering costs exceeding $75,000.00 must be approved by ordinance after a public hearing.
1.02. It is proposed that the City Council approve a capital improvement project at Veteran's
Memorial Park, 636 East 6e Street, which is City owned property.
1.03. The capital improvement project consists of the design,. engineering and construction of an
addition to the existing ice arena, and the construction of a second .ice sheet (the "Ice Arena
Project).
engineering costs, is in excess of $500,000. The preliminary estimates for total construction cost is
$2,450,000 to $2,850,000, which includes estimated costs for construction management services in
the amount of $199,000 to 230,000. On March 23, 1998, prior to the effective date of Section 8.04
of the Richfield City Charter, the City Council previously approved a contract for architectural
services, including design and engineering costs, in the amount of 6% to 6.5% of the total
construction costs.
1.05. A public hearing was held on , 1998 after due notice as required by Section
8.05 of the Richfield City Charter.
1.06. The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City and its inhabitants
that the Ice Arena Project be approved.
Sec. 2. Approval; effective date.
•
2.01. The Ice Arena Project is approved, and planning, design and construction of the Ice Arena
Project may proceed according to the procedures required by law.
2.02. The purpose of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of Section 8.04 of the
CAH-146571
RC160-2
y -3
Richfield City Charter. This Ordinance shall not be construed to require that the City proceed with
the Ice Arena Project; nor does it vest any rights in the Ice Arena Project to any individual or entity.
The City Council reserves the right to abandon the Ice Arena Project or to modify elements of the
Ice Arena Project, if the Council deems abandonment or modification to be in the public interest.
2.03. This ordinance is effective on the day following its publication.
Adopted this day of '1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
CAH-146571
RC160-2
I Ix
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
. Council Letter No. 68
Agenda March 23, 1998
Issue Statement:
Public hearing regarding second indoor ice sheet request and selection of architect to
prepare plans and specification for advertisement for bids for construction.
Background:
At the January 26, 1998 regular City Council meeting a group of interested citizens (the
ICE Group) asked that the City explore the idea of constructing a second indoor ice
sheet at the ice arena at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. The City Council listened
to the request and asked staff to prepare a feasibility study on the matter of the second
ice sheet.
Staff has worked with the Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects and Delano Erickson
Architects to prepare concept drawings, project cost estimates and estimated
construction schedules for the construction of a second ice sheet. In addition, the City
also asked Mark Ruff of Ehlers and Associates to prepare background information
regarding the financing alternatives involved, potential debt service schedules,
revenues and operating cost information. Information regarding the revenues and
operating costs was provided to Ehlers and Associates by City staff. In addition to that
• information, Mr. Ruff has worked on a number of financial feasibility studies for other
metropolitan ice arena projects and has a solid knowledge of the subject matter.
The information from the architect and Ehlers and Associates was presented and
discussed with the City Council at the special March 16 Study Session. The information
was also presented to the Community Services Commission on March 12, 1998 at a
Special meeting.
If the City is to proceed with this project on a schedule to attempt to provide an
additional ice sheet which could be usable in January 1999, action should be taken by
the City Council on March 23 to authorize the selection of an architect to begin work on
the plans and specifications.
In arriving at a decision on this matter several issues must be considered. Each issue
identified in this Council Letter is presented in some detail for Council analysis.
Need for More Ice
The arena hosts a Youth Hockey program for boys and girls ages four to fifteen. The
youth program is the largest single consumer of ice time, purchasing about 720 hours
annually. The arena also provides open skating, Adult Hockey League programs and
host various skating clinics
•
`**-? 4, 5
Currently, two high schools, Richfield High School and The Academy of the Holy
Angels, use the Ice Arena for their hockey programs. Both schools have Girls and
Boys Varsity programs, as well as Boys Junior Varsity. In addition, Richfield High
School will add a Junior Varsity Girls program during the next hockey season and Holy
Angels is expected to add a Girls Junior Varsity and a Bantam team the following
season.
The Ice Arena currently cannot provide all of the ice hours needed by the users of the
arena. With the addition of a Girls Junior Varsity team for the upcoming season
beginning in 1998, the shortage of ice hours will become more critical.
During the 1998-99 season, 27 teams will need to use the hockey arena (that includes
the Hockey Association and the high schools). For the following season, 1999-2000,
29 teams will be requesting use of ice time at the Richfield facility. Thus, it's apparent
that there is a need for more ice time at the Richfield facility.
Consequences of Not Providing More Ice
There are several potential consequences or issues to be considered which would be
associated with the decision to not provide an additional sheet of ice. There is a direct
responsibility for the schools to provide gender equity in athletic programs which, of
course, would include girls' and boys' varsity and junior varsity hockey. That also
provides an indirect impact on the current Ice Arena as the City works with all of the
. groups to balance the requests of all of the organizations in light of their legal
responsibility to provide gender equity. Obviously, the more demand on one ice sheet,
the more difficult it will be to satisfy all of the needs presented to the arena for ice.
Another direct effect of not providing a second sheet of ice is that it is almost certain
that either some group or a portion of every group's hours will likely be displaced from
the Richfield Ice Arena. That is because of the demand versus the availability of prime
ice time. To that end, there will be an immediate need if there is no second ice sheet to
adopt a policy which would govern how and what priority order the request for ice time
would be granted or conversely, denied. Whichever group is left out of the Richfield Ice
Arena because of the shortage of ice time may find it very difficult to buy or schedule
ice anywhere in the near vicinity because of demand and the short notice for buying
such ice time.
Project Costs
As the feasibility study concluded, the project that was conceptionalized by the ICE
Group and by the project architect was one that basically met the needs of most users
of the facility but was projected to be a total cost of about $2.7 million. The estimated
cost of the $2.7 million project does not include dedicated locker rooms for the high
schools. Those locker rooms could cost anywhere between $325,000 and $400,000. It
is staff's recommendation that if such locker rooms were to be added to the project that
the high schools provide either the up-front funding or the debt service payment stream
• to pay for the locker rooms.
4 6 '1-?
With the $2.7 million cost and the accompanying financing necessary to fund the
project, another consideration would be to scale the project back. There are a number
of possibilities that could be used. One option would be to locate the building as
designed to the north of the current ice arena rather than to the east. The savings
would be approximately $250,000. The north location provides some advantages to
linking up with the existing mechanical system. However, there is a disadvantage in
terms of the flow of the public through the building and of the ability of staff to monitor
the two ice sheets. Another option is the use of a pre-engineered steel building were
used in place of the concrete structure, the savings would be approximate $650,000.
That, however, would require a variance as the City Ordinance does not allow such
metal buildings.
Another major consideration in downsizing the project might be the use of an air
supported bubble which would reduce the cost by approximately $950,000. It is the
architect's advice that the air supported bubble would have a useful life of 10 to 15
years and utility costs would increase due to inflating the bubble.
Some other smaller reductions might be the use of a pre-engineered metal roof which
would save about $100,000. Reducing the building size by approximately 2,000 square
feet would save approximately $100,000 and the use of a sand rink floor rather than the
better concrete floor would save approximately $80,000.
In considering some of the potential cost reductions, the building appearance and
community standards of what would be expected of a public park recreation facility
should also be considered. It should also be noted that depending upon the down-
grading of the facility, certain down-grades would have an impact on projected
revenues. For example, it is unlikely that tournaments such as Team Minnesota, which
would be a sizable tournament in the spring-summer time of the year, would be
interested in using the facility for such a tournament with a bubble ice sheet. It is
impossible to accurately predict exactly what types of revenue reductions would be
seen by each major downgrade of the building. However, it is likely that while the metal
building would not have the same appearance quality as the masonry building depicted
in the concept drawing, it would still be likely to draw tournament events.
Financial Issues
The public finance firm of Ehlers and Associates identified a number of potential
financing sources for a second ice sheet if it were to be approved (see attached report).
The source of funding would undoubtedly end up being a bond issue under one of the
four scenarios identified by Ehlers. Assuming a twenty-year debt service schedule, it is
likely that the annual debt service payments could be approximately $282,000 a year.
Thus, the important comparison is how close do anticipated revenues and expenditures
associated with the second rink come to meeting the debt service obligations. A
conservative estimation of hours rented for the second sheet was prepared by staff.
• That estimate included rental of approximately 1925 additional hours per year. The
Ehlers report incorporates the data provided by staff and also provides a less optimistic
`3 q-1
estimate of additional hours sold somewhere in the range of 1500 hours per year.
Using those two numbers, Ehlers prepared a comparison of revenues and expenditures
versus debt service. Under the more optimistic assumption of 1925 additional hours
per year, the analysis reveals approximately a $150,000 annual shortfall while under
the less optimistic assumption, the deficit at roughly $196,00 per year.
If those figures were to hold true, the shortfall or annual deficit would have to be made
up with other funds. Those funds would have to be identified at a future date by the
City Council. However, it should be noted that one limiting factor in making up those
deficits is the current restrictions under levy limits which under certain bond scenarios
would preclude any additional tax levies for the deficit over and above the levy limits set
for the City of Richfield.
The ICE Group contends that the estimates of additional hours sold are far too
conservative and that other groups could be brought into the arena to take hours other
than those identified by staff or the Ehlers report. Furthermore, there are other
revenues which were not considered in the Ehlers estimate. For example, there may
be additional revenue to be gained from providing advertisements on the dasherboards
in the main arena. There may also be more revenues provided through a revamped
and more aggressive concessions program, similar to what has been used in other
communities such as Bloomington. Obviously, if there were other revenues to be
gained through such sources and additional hours sold, coupled with a reduced project
cost, the annual deficit projection could be significantly reduced.
Another potential option that will be pursued if the project is approved is a Mighty Ducks
grant. In the past, Might Ducks grants have been available for second ice sheets in an
amount up to $250,000. As of this writing, it is uncertain whether money for the Mighty
Ducks program will be appropriated for another cycle. In any event, applications for any
Mighty Ducks money provided would not be until the end of May 1998. So, at this time
it is difficult to say whether or not the City would be in a position to obtain the $250,000.
Site Locations
One major issue with siting the additional ice sheet is location. The current concept
plan would provide for the new ice sheet to be located to the southeast of the current
Ice Arena. That plan has been submitted to the DNR and has been approved by them.
Moreover, it is the City's intention to restore any pathways that are disturbed in the park
area by placement of the second ice sheet, whether it would ultimately end up to the
east or to the north of the present Ice Arena site.
Community Services Commission
The Community Services Commission has heard a number of presentations concerning
the second ice sheet proposal. At its regular meeting in February, the Commission
indicated that it recognized a need for additional ice time and requested a feasibility
study. A feasibility report was presented to the Community Services Commission on
q, 3 --4?4
i March 12. At its March 17 meeting, the Commission voted not to recommend either for
or against the project, but instead recommended that a series of two or three
community meetings be scheduled throughout the community as soon as possible to
obtain public input concerning the proposed second ice sheet. This is a
recommendation they have forwarded to the City Council.
Selection of Architect
City staff invited proposals and interviews from four architectural firms: Bonestroo,
Rosene, Anderlik & Associates; Ankeny Kell Architects, P.A.; Delano Erickson
Architects and RSP Architects, Ltd. These four architectural firms are well know and
noted for their work on municipal projects, especially ice arenas. The interviews,
including fee proposals, were conducted and analyzed. Based on that analysis, it is
staffs recommendation that if the City Council decides to proceed with the construction
of a second ice sheet, that the design team of Delano Erickson Architects be selected
to provide architectural services in conjunction with the second ice sheet.
Delano Erickson Architects, under the leadership of Del Erickson, has proposed to
provide this service for a fee ranging from 5.8 to 6.5% of project costs, depending upon
the scope of the project. In addition, the proposal also provides a staged fee for service
which would allow the City to proceed with the architectural work one section at a time,
beginning with the schematic design and followed by design development and bid
documents. If the City authorizes staff to engage Del Erickson's firm and proceed with
. the work on the ice arena, Mr. Erickson is very familiar with the project since he
prepared the feasibility report and, in essence, already has a piece of the work
completed.
Recommended Motion:
1. Conduct a public hearing regarding the construction of a second ice sheet.
2. If the City Council decides to proceed with the project at this time, a motion should
be made to select Delano Erickson Architects as the architect for the second ice
sheet and to direct the City Manager and Mayor to execute a contract for services
upon the following conditions:
a) Project fees shall range between 5.8% - 6.5% of total project cost depending
upon the scope of the project (excluding civil engineering services, if needed.)
b) Services and Fees will be phased in accordance with the following:
• Schematic Design - 20% = 1.2%
(credit for study - .20%)
• Design Development - 15% =.9%
• Contract Documents - 35% = 2.1 %
• Bidding - 5% =.3%
• Construction Administration - 25% = 1.5%
c) Final form of contract is approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
1\,? 4 -9
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The feasibility data has been compiled and presented.
2. The DNR has provided a letter indicating that the addition of a second ice sheet in
Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield would be allowable, provided that the portion of
trails that would be disturbed would be rerouted and repaired.
3. In order to proceed in a timely fashion for potential construction in 1998, official City
Council action to amend the 1998 Capital Improvement Budget and hire an
architect to prepare plans, specifications and advertisements for bids would need to
be considered by the City Council on March 23, 1998.
4. A public hearing to amend the 1998 Capital Improvement Budget has been
published and scheduled for March 23, 1998.
5. Although it is not required, a public hearing has been noticed and scheduled for
March 23, 1998 to consider the selection of an architect for the second ice sheet
project.
6. Architectural proposals have been received and firms interviewed.
Alternative Recommendation:
• 1. The City Council could postpone this discussion to a future date.
2. The City Council could request additional information or public input.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
If the City intends to proceed with the construction of this project in 1998 for use during
any portion of the 1998-99 hockey season, official Council.action would likely be
necessary in March to initiate the project in a timely manner.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
•
•
q-1c)
DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS
7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426
612-544-8370
July 22, 1998
Mr. Steve Devich
City of Richfield
636 East 66th Street
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Re: Richfield Ice Arena Addition
Dear Steve:
We are enclosing a reduced plan, elevation and site plan which is the basis for the cost estimate
and design concept for the Ice Arena Addition located on the east side of the arena.
Kraus Anderson has prepared a cost estimate based on the above documents and our M&E
engineers have prepared an outline specification and cost estimate for their systems. Copies of
these are enclosed for your reference.
The cost estimate is similar to our original projection if we incorporate the deduct options. We
are still in the process of further refinement and selection of systems and details which may or
may not reduce the cost.
The building cost estimate as presented, including soil correction and site work,
totals: $2,470,000
Soft Cost Budget:
Includes Contingency $100,000
Zamboni, Ice and Concession Equipment 90,000
A&E Fees and Testing 14Q-00 S 330,000
Total Budget: $2,800.000
Cost Reduction Alternates to consider are:
• Used Refrigeration $ 100,000
(see LKPB memorandum dated June 24, 1998 regarding Princeton Units)
Delete Remodeling of Lobby $ 85,000
• Delete Bleachers $ 16,000
• Delete Utilities, Curbs, Walks and Landscaping (by City) $ 50,000
We have looked at locating the arena to the north assuming soil was better based on original soil
tests. Further soil tests have proven otherwise and in fact poor soils are deeper to the extent that
piling would be required. Piling and increased structural costs offset savings of a lesser quality
building (i.e. metal) and, therefore, the site is not more economical and is functionally less
desirable. (See Kraus Anderson letter of June 29, 1998 enclosed herewith.)
01 4-I
Mr. Steve Devich
July 22,1998
Page 2
We are continuing to investigate other options of cost reductions such as a metal building
(potential reduction of $200 - $250,000) which has a shorter life, greater maintenance and
appearance(ordinance)concerns.
You have asked us to also consider locating the building to the south. This may have better soils,
however, it is still fill and some correction would be required (probably less than east site) and
parking and drives must be relocated which may offset any soil correction savings.
At this point it appears that the budget should be approximately $2.75 million. We recommend
incorporating add and deduct alternates to protect the budget as well as to allow for upgrades
such as a partial brick exterior.
We will be available to discuss the design and cost estimates at the Council meeting on July 27,
1998.
Sincerely,
DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS
0
DE/tlt
Enclosures
cc: Kraus Anderson
Cluts O'Brien Strother Architects
LKPB Engineers
0
Delano Erickson, AIA.
•
•
PROD: RICHFIELD ICE ARENA
LOC.: RICHFIELD MN
C.M.: KRAUS ANDERSON
ARCH: DEA/COSA
DATE: 7/22/98
S.D. ESTIMATE SG. FT. ¦ 29.409 q /
SEC WORK QTY UNIT UNITS COST S/T S / SA- FT.
01 F OUNDATIONS
BLDG. EXCAVATION & BACKFILL INCL 0
FOOTING - EXT. WALL 730 LF 19.00 13,870
FOOTING - INT. WALL 466 LF 10.00 4.560
FOOTING - EXT. COL./PIER 10 EA 500.00 5,000
FOUNDATION WALLS 0 SF 8.50 0
RIGID PERIM. INSULATION 0 SF 150 0
DRAINT?LE 730 LF 7.50 5,475
WATERPROOFING LS 4,000
32.905 1.12
02 SUBSTRUCTURE
SLAB ON GRADE
-RINK 7,000/sf) IN BELOW 0
-BUILDING 12,240 SF 3.00 36,720
M/E PADS LS 3,000
STAIRS LS 61000
44,720 1.52
03 STRUCTURE
ARENA ROOF-COLS/BMS/DECK 29,409 SF 6.00 176.454
UNTELS MISC. LS 20.000
196,454 6.66
04 1MLTERIOR WALL
PRECAST 18,512 SF 12.00 222144
-HEAT AND COVER 0 0
GLASS-4x4 WINDOWS 144 SF 30.00 4,320
GLASS - ENTRIES - DOORS
-DBL 3 EA 2500.00 71500
SGL 0 EA 1,500.00 0
EXITS-DBL 4 EA 1,350.00 5,400
OVERHEAD DOORS 2 EA 2,500.00 5,000
LOWERS ALLOW 1.000
CAULKING ALLOW 7 500
25ZW 8.60
OS ROOFING
EPDM 29,409 SF 2.75 80,875
FLASHING/SHEET METAL LS 20.000
WOOD BLOCIONG/CURBS LS 20.000
120,875 4.11
06 INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
PARTITIONS - CMU 6.01 3 SF 8.0 0 46,10 4
PARTITIONS - STUD/GYP. 8 D. 0 SF 0.0 0 0
Page 1
C
•
PROJ: RICHFIELD ICE ARENA
LOC.: RICHFIELD MN
QM.: KRAUS ANDERSON
ARCH: DEA/COSA
q
3
DATE: 7/22/98
-1
S.D. ESTIMATE SQ. FT. ¦ 29,409
SEC WORK QTY UNIT UNIT $ COST S/P $ / SQ. FT.
DOORS - SINGLE 1 6 EA 850.0 0 13.600
DOORS - DOUBLE 3 PRS 1,300.0 0 3,900
DOORS - SPECIAL (SHUTTERS) LS 1,500
FINISHES - FLOORS
- LOBBY CONCESSIONS NCI)
395
SF
1.80
711
- S.CONC. ECH/STOR 448 SF 0.50 224
- CERAMIC TILE RESTROOM 960 SF 5,00 4,800
- CERAMIC TILE HOWER 0 SF 5.00 0
-TEAM ROOMS 1,950 SF 8.00 15.600
-ZAMBONI ROOM 696 SF 0.50 348
-ICE EQUIPMENT ROOM
- PLAYER BOX AREA 464
450 SF
SF 0.50
8.00 232
3,600
- PUBLIC AREA AROUND RINK 2,500 SF 0.50 1,250
-RUBBER AROUND RINK
FINISHES - WALLS 2,6W SF 8.00 20.000
- PAINT 0 GYP 0 SF 0100 0
- PAINT 0 CMU 26,500 SF 0.45 12,825
- EPOXY PT AT RESTROOMS
FINISHES - CEILINGS 1,960 SF 1.00 1,960
- ACOUSTICAL 400 SF 1.30 520
- GYP/V. PLASTER EST/LOCKS Z910 SF 4.50 13,095
- EXPOSED PAINTED
ARENA 22,000 SF 1.00 22.000
MECH/STORAGE
FINISHES - SOFFITS/MISC. 448 SF
ALLOW 1.00 448
51000
BORROWED LITES/GLAZING 400 SF 20.00 81000
REMODEL 2,800 SF 30.00 84.000
261,717 8.90
08 MECHANICAL
PLUMBING 80,000
FIRE PROTECTION 36,200
HVAC/TEMP. CONTROLS 130.000
246,200 8,37
09 ELECTRICAL
SERVICE/DW./POWER/LIGHTING 150.000
SPECIALICOMMUNICATIONS LS 10,000
RELOCATE POWER FOR PUMPS ALLOW 10,000
170,000 5.78
10 GENERAL CONDITIONS/FEE
CONTRACTOR FEE/REIMB. 8 MONTH LS 157,652
GENERAL CONDITIONS. ALLOW 50,000
207,552 7.06
11 EQUIPMENT
MILLWORK/CASEWORK ALLOW 6,000
Pogo 2
J UL_
0
•
0
PR0.1: RICHFIELD ICE ARENA
LOC.: RICHFIELD MN
C.M.: KRAUS ANDERSON
ARCH: DEA/COSA
DATE: 7/22/98
S.D. ESTIMATE SQ. FT. = 29,409 q-4
SEC WORK QTY UNIT UNITS COST S/T $ / SOL FT.
SPECIALTIES LS 51000
TOILET PARTITIONS 10 EA 6,500
LOCKERS-PUBLIC NCL BENCHES ALLOW 10,000
FOOD SERVICE EQUIPMENT NIC 0
MISC. EQUIPMENT/SHELVING ALLOW 2,000
BLEACHER SEATS ALLO 16.260
PEDIMATS ALLOW 5000
ICE RINK CONST. (BOARDS) 120,0DO
REFRIG. PIPING AND EQUIP 350,000
$20,750 17.71
BUILDING SUBTOTAL W/O SITEWORK: 2,054.037 69.84
12 SITEWORK LS 355,796
SITE CLEARING INCL 0
SITE GRADING C/ INCL 0
SOILS CORRECTIONS INCL 0
FINISH GRADING INCL 0
TOPSOIL SPREAD INCL 0
SEED/SOD/LANDSCAPING ALLOW 10,000
UTILITIES ALLOW 20,000
CURBS ALLOW 51000
WALKS ALLOW 10,000
BITUMINOUS PAVING PATCH 5,000
RELOCATE TRAIL ALLOW 10,000
415,796 14.14
SITEWORK SUBTOTAL: 415.796 14.14
BUILDING/SITE TOTAL: 2,469,633 83.98
Pogo 3
PROD: RICHFIELD ICE ARENA
LOC.: RICHFIELD MN
C.M.: KRAUS ANDERSON 1 r `'
ARCH: DEA/COSA ?-1}
DATE: 7/22/98 S.D. ESTIMATE SA. FT. 0 29.409
E
•
SEC WORK WTY UNIT UNITS COST S/( $ / S6L FT.
CONTINGENCY 100,000
FF&E 90,000
A&EAESTING 140,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST 2,799,833 96.20
POSSIBLE DEDUCTS
DEDUCT SOIL CORRECTIONS SO
DEDUCT FOR USED ICE EQUIP -$100,000
DEDUCT BLEACHER SEATS -$16,250
DEDUCT REMODEL WORK -S85,000
BUILDING COST AFTER DEDUCTS $2,149,673
ADD FOR LOCKERS AT NORTH END $50,000
EXTRA WALL AND PRECAST MEZZ.
Page 4
U'I-'L1-yls 11: ZJAM rxUM Lnrb Diu iflttta 1U 016D40uoJy 1 UUC./ uiL
q-16
DESIGN NARRATIVE - MECHANICAL
RICHFIELD ICE ARENA EXPANSION
PROJECT NO. 98.115.00
July 20, 1998
General Provisions
1. Provide and be responsible for all labor, insurance, taxes, overhead, profit, permits,
engineering, supervision, material, equipment and service necessary for complete
mechanical systems as specified herein and as shown on the plans.
2. Comply with current applicable codes and standards as follows:
UBC
NFPA
OSHA
MEC
MPC
• UMC
ADA
Site Work
- Uniform Building Code -1994
- National Fire Protection Association
- Occupational Safety and Health Act
- Minnesota Energy Code
Minnesota Plumbing Code
- Uniform Mechanical Code -1991
- Americans with Disabilities Act
Extended new 6" fire service from existing main located at north end of existing well
pump house to new ice arena at southwest comer.
a. Rework existing 6" water main that may be disturbed by new ice arena footings.
2. Extend 3" domestic water service approximately 70 feet from existing 3" line buried on
east side of existing ice arena located north of existing entrance. Locate riser at
northwest corner of new ice arena and extend in building to fixtures, etc.
3. Extend new 4" sewer line from southwest comer of new ice arena west to existing lift
station, approximately 120 feet.
4. Rework existing storm sewer and footing drain around existing entrance where new ice
arena is being attached.
5. Extend firm gas pipe from existing boiler room through existing arena to new building
approximately 280 feet.
• Insulation
.
1. Pipe and duct insulation shall meet or exceed Model Energy Code.
tKUM LArb LNlr1AMU 1v u1LU4uU0Jy L UUJ/ U1L
Design Narrative - Mechanical
Richfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20,1998
Page 2
Fire Protection
1. Entire building shall be sprinklered.
2. Ice arena shall have a dry system.
Plumbing
1. Piping
a. Gas water heaters, desiccant unit, black steel schedule 40 with screwed or
welded fittings as required.
b. Water type L copper with wrought copper fittings. No "T" drill. Shut-off valves
40 at each take-off from main. Extend from existing 3" cold water line.
C. Waste and vent pipe above and below ground - cast iron.
d. Connect new 4" waste line to existing lift station.
e. Provide 4" removable standpipe in new ice melt pit and sump pump.
2. Plumbing Fixtures
a. Public Bathrooms - flush valve water closets, wall hung elongated bowls, heavy
duty seat. 1.6 gallon flush.
b. Public Bathrooms - wall hung blow-out, flush valve, urinals, heavy duty carrier.
C. Lavatory - countertop mounting vitreous china, single lever faucet.
d. Service Sinks - Durostone 36" x 36", with wall faucet.
e. Electric Water Coolers - ADA compliant.
f. Showers - enclosure, see architectural drawings, 2" floor drain, and single lever,
temperature pressure balanced, 1 shower each area for ADA.
9
11:LJAIA VXVIl Lhrli MIVI1V1',L'KJ 1V Di4D4000Jy rUU4/VIL
•
Design Narrative - Mechanical
Richfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20, 1998
Page 3
3. Plumbing Equipment
a. Install new 80 gallon gas water heater in new mechanical room near toilets.
b. Provide (12) floor drains in toilets, team rooms, mechanical rooms, refrigeration
room and ice resurfacer room. Provide 4" drain in 10'-0"L trench between arena
and ice resurfacer room.
C. Provide 2 -100 gallon gas fired water heaters in ice resurfacing room for 180°F.
water.
•
4. Ice Resurfacing Machine Fill Water
a. Provide 1-1/2" hot and cold water lines in ice machine room and extend to hose
adapter fill outlet in ice resurfacer area with ball valves and wye fitting.
5. Refrigeration System
a. Extend 2" cold water to now evaporative condenser and 1 " cold water to
refrigeration equipment.
•
Heating
1. Extend 3" heating hot water supply and return pipe with pumps from existing boiler room
to new ice arena - 300 feet.
2. Provide hydronic cabinet unit heater at new entry vestibule.
3. Provide horizontal hydronic unit heater in refrigeration room, concessions and ice
resurfacing room.
Ventilation
1. Locker and Toilet Room. Air handling unit for locker, toilet area. Interlock exhaust fan
serving these areas with A.H.U. on occupied cycle. On unoccupied cycle, close damper
to air handling unit and maintain temperature in space. Provide time clock, 5000 cfm.
A.H.U. to have heat recovery coil from refrigerant compressor hot gas plus a hydronic
heating coil, filters, dampers, etc.
2. Rink Ventilation and Dehumidification. Desiccant cooling with sensible heat recovery
wheel, gas heat reactivation, 7000 cfm process air, 250#/hour moisture removal, 1500
Ui'L1'ytj 11:LSAM rxUM Lhrb tNVIlula A;
•
q-19
Design Narrative'- Mechanical
Richfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project #98.115. 00
July 20, 1998
Page 4
lU 014D4000Jy 1UUJ/Ui6
cfm outdoor air for normal use - 3000 cfm outdoor air for spectator occupancy.
Unoccupied - outdoor air closed return air ductwork - 12" AFF.
3. Exhaust Fans
Team locker and toilet rooms - 5000 CFM PRV interlocked with A.H.U.
Ice Resurfacer - 2000 CFM PRV on reverse act thermostat
Refrigeration - 4000 CFM PRV on reverse act thermostat
Emergency ventilation switch and/or refrigerant sensor shall override reverse
act thermostat and start fan.
•
Refrigeration
1. Direct R-22 system. 85'x 200' ice sheet.
a. Waste heat from compressors to be use for:
.1 Subsoil heating system.
.2 Snow melt pit.
.3 Heat reclaim coil on locker room air handling unit.
b. Exterior roof mounted evaporative condenser with indoor sump and pump.
C. Two - 100 hp, 15°F. suction temperature, compressors, chiller, receiver and
pumpers.
d. If Richfield purchases used equipment an allowance should be in the budget to
refurbish the unit, i.e., descale evaporative condenser, interior of chiller, etc.
recondition compressors, rework control wiring and provide float switches on
pumpers, etc.
0
l,`1-41-H 11:LJR1Y1 rAVIVI LArD LAVIOLLRO iv U14J4000Jy iuuuiuic.
•
u-aC)
DESIGN NARRATIVE - ELECTRICAL
RICHFIELD ICE ARENA EXPANSION
PROJECT NO. 98.115.00
JULY 20, 1998
General Provisions
Provide and be responsible for all labor, insurance, taxes, overhead, profit, permits,
engineering, supervision, material, equipment and service necessary for complete
electrical systems as specified herein and as shown on the plans.
2. Comply with current applicable codes and standards as follows:
NEC - National Electrical Code
NFPA - National Fire Protection Association
OSHA - Occupational Safety and Health Act
MEC - Minnesota Energy Code
ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act
E
3. All materials shall be U.L. listed and meet NEMA performance standards.
4. Secure necessary permits and licenses.
5. Install temporary electric service for lights and power including temporary lighting and
lamps and properly located 120 volt receptacles for use of all trades.
6. At end of project, provide three sets of transparent project record documents and shop
drawings of electrical equipment for Owner.
Site Work
1. Provide 400 watt high pressure sodium shoebox light fixtures on 25' poles for parking
area. Light fixtures shall be controlled by a photocell. Relocate existing light poles
where required for new parking lot conflguratlon.
2. Site Lighting Criteria
a. Maintain average of 1/2 to 1 footcandles throughout the entire paved surface.
b. All fixtures shall direct light away from adjoining property and public right-of-way.
•
C. Lighting shall be behind curbs or within islands and shall not be placed as a
freestanding structure within parking areas.
3. Minimum wiring size shall be #10 AWG. Provide a #10 ground wire in each conduit.
. Provide minimum 3/4" PVC conduit for all exterior wiring.
U (-Ll-yO I 1 : LJA14 VKUIW Lhrb LAVI1VBLAK
i
Design Narrative - Electrical
richfield lee Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20, 1998
Page 2
Basic Materials and -Methods
1. Raceways
lU 016D4000)y rUUI/U16
a. Feeders shall be installed using EMT, IMC or rigid steel galvanized conduit.
b. Branch circuits shall be in electric metallic tubing (EMT) with set screw or
threaded gland fittings.
C. Motor connections shall be made with flexible metallic conduit and ground
conductor. Provide Sealtite conduit in wet and outdoor locations.
d. Boxes shall be galvanized steel.
e. Provide grounding continuity throughout using standard conduit fittings to
connect all conductive surfaces including light fixtures, motors, ducts, wireways,
portable equipment, transformers and fixed equipment.
2. Conductors shall be copper with THWN, THHN or XHHW insulation at 600V. Aluminum
wire shall not be used.
3. Provide heavy duty fused safety switches to disconnect and protect motors, feeders and
equipment.
4. Fuses for safety switches shall be non-renewable dual element time delay current
limiting type.
5. Wiring devices shall be specification grade rated 20 amperes and be of the grounding
type. GFCI receptacles shall be provided as required by the NEC. Switches shall be
rated 120 volt and 20 amperes. Color shall be gray for normal power.
6. C:overplates shall be Type 302 stainless steel.
7. Provide branch circuit wiring for lighting, receptacles, switches and special outlets.
Provide green grounding conductors for all feeder and branch circuits. Provide a
separate neutral for each circuit feeding isolated ground receptacles.
8. Minimum wire size shall be #12 AWG copper. 120 volt branch circuit rungs greater than
120 feet in length shall utilize #10 AWG wire and runs greater than 180 feet in length
shall utilize #8 AWG wire.
l9f-L1-y? 11:ZJAM PKVM l.nrD tvvivttKJ lU 016D4000JJ rUU01U16
q'DD_
Design Narrative - Electrical
richfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20, 1998
Page 3
9. Provide receptacles as follows:
Offices - One on each wall - double duplex by desk.
Corridors - 50 feet on center.
Toilet Rooms - One per room, GFCI type.
Utility Rooms - One per 50 sq. ft.
Store Rooms - One per 100 sq. ft.
Locker Room, Gymnasium or Activity Areas - As required.
•
10. Provide switching of light fixtures as follows:
Corridors - One per corridor.
Toilet Rooms - One per room.
Utility Rooms - One per room.
Store Rooms - One per room.
Locker Room or Activity Areas - As required - multiple level, multi-location.
11. Motors and Starters - Motors are specified under Division 15.
a. Three phase motor starters shall be magnetic, across-the-ling with three
overload elements, reset, HOA selector switch and pilot lights in cover.
b. Fractional horsepower starters shall include snap action on-off switch, neon pilot
and overload protectors.
C. Provide all power and connections for HVAC and mechanical equipment
motors. Control wiring will be provided under Division 15, Temperature Control_
d. For package unit equipment, provide heavy duty fused disconnect and power
feeder for equipment.
•
Electrical Service
1. An incoming primary system shall be provided by the local utility.
2. The pad mount transformer shall be provided by the local utility. A concrete pad and
grounding shall be provided by Division 16.
3. The secondary conductors from the pad mount transformer shall be provided by Division
16 to a CT cabinet feeding a 12 x 12 wireway with a 800 amp switch to feed refrigeration
equipment and a 200 amp 277v panelboard to feed lighting. A 200 amp switch shall
supply a 112-1 /2 KVA transformer which shall supply three 200A panelboards to supply
120 volt loads. The secondary service shall be 480/277V, V, 1200 A, three phase, four
wire.
U'V-ll-H 11:1,iAM MM Lhfb 1rNUllu K 1u 014D400iJs ruuyIUIL
•
•
qla3
Design Narrative - Electrical
richfield lee Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20, 1998
Page 4
4. Power at 480V three phaso shall be provided for heating, refrigeration, and motors
larger than 1/2HP. Power at 120 V shall be provided for lighting, receptacles, and
motors smaller than 1/2HP.
5. Surge protection shall be provided at the main service entrance.
Existing Ice Arena Electrical Services
1. The existing primary service to the existing ice arena will be relocated to allow
installation of new arena which conflicts with the existing incoming primary service.
Emergency Distribution
1. Emergency power utilizing battery packs shall be provided for emergency egress
lighting, and any other required life safety loads.
Electrical Distribution
1. Receptacle panels and lighting panels shall be circuit breaker type.
2. Provide panelboards for branch circuits with dead fronts and lockable doors and copper
or aluminum busing with plated contact surface. Provide equipment ground bus.
3. Circuit breakers shall be bolt on type. Breakers shall be rated minimum 10,000 AIC at
120/208 V. Provide higher ratings if required.
Lighting
1. In corridors and public spaces provide fluorescent lighting with acrylic lenses,
fluorescent PL lamp downlighting and other specialized lighting as required by the
design.
2. In offices provide 2'x 4' lay-in fluorescent lighting with acrylic louvers.
3. In mechanical, electrical, and storeroom areas provide chain hung industrial fluorescent
lighting.
4. In public toilets provide 1' x 4' lay-in fluorescent lighting with acrylic louvers.
5. Ice Arena lighting shall utilize 1000 watt high bay, bi-level ballasts metal halide type light
fixtures (32 fixtures).
6. All ballasts shall be electronic type and shall utilize T-8 lamps.
Ul-L1-y? 11:LJAN1 MM Lhrb ti4vuitpNc 1u 01404000ii ruluiulc
q'aq
Design Narrative - Electrical
riohfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project #98.115.00
July 20, 1998
Page 5
7. On exterior areas of the building, additional lighting shall be utilized to increase security
for the public and staff.
8. In offices, restrooms and other areas where suitable, occupancy sensors shall be
utilized.
Fire Alarm System
1. The fire alarm system shall be a hard wired microprocessor based fire alarm system
including a main fire alarm panel, smoke and heat detectors, smoke duct detectors,
manual pull stations, audio/visual horns and strobes, and an auxiliary battery power
supply.
2. The system shall be non-coded and have electrically supervised Class B circuits.
3. All wiring shall be in conduit.
4. Provide connections to systems that require interface to the fire alarm system including
HVAC systems, sprinkler fire protection systems, and a central station or city tie.
Provide combination hom/strobes to comply with ADA, NFPA, and UBC requirements,
including Code 3 temporal pattern for horns, synchronized strobes, etc.
5. The fire alarm control panel shall be located at the main entrance.
6. The existing fire alarm system panel shall have an input into new fire alarm system.
Voice/Data System
Telephone service shall utilize existing conduits stubbed out to the property line. Provide
2" conduit from new telephone board In new addition to existing main telephone
backboard in existing ice arena.
2. Provide a two gang box with single gang ring and 3/4" conduit up to accessible corridor
ceiling space for voice/data outlets.
3. Cabling from each voice/data outlet back to the telecommunications closet and jacks
and covcrplatcs, shall be provided by owner.
Central Clock System
None
Uf'C1-y? 11:' JAM MM Lhrb 1111VIALLrO lu 01404000Jy IUIUUlc
Design Narrative - Electrical
richfield Ice Arena Expansion
Project ;;98.11b.00
July 20, 1998
Page 6
Public Address S, sy tem (Building Wide)
1. None
Sound System Ice Arena
1. Provided by owner.
Cable TV
1. None
Security Camera TV
1. None
Scoreboard
1. Raceway provisions only.
S:% :U1e-nCh-ice.Jmkwpd
9
lfl-Ll-y? 1I:43Alvl CAV1Y1 LArD L1VVIDDLAJ
Richfield Ice Arena
July 20, 1998
Cost Estimates
LULL/ULL
4-a&
i
Building Cost
Mechanical
Sprinkler
Plumbing
HVAC
lV U1L'J4000Ul?
$ 36,200
80,000
130,000
$246,200
•
Electrical
142,000
142,000
Non-Building Cost ( P" 40-0
$00
Site Lighting 0 v/. 8,000
Sewer, Water, Gas 20,000
Not Included
Central Clock System
Security System
Sound System
Building Paging
Cable TV
Scoreboard (conduit only)
s:?cow?-rknne?a.is?.wpu
28,000
J UI Y G J JO Lu - c-JMI i \? ?n?.J.J r?? ??? ?.?vi -
MUUS-ANDERSON, CONS'T'RUCTION COMPANY
CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUC_ PION MANAGERS
June 29, 1998
Mr. Dell Erickson
Delano Erickson Architects
7415 Wayzata Boulevard
Minneapolis, MN 55426
Re: Richfield Ice Arena
Richfield, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Erickson:
Subsequent to our meeting on Tuesday, June 23, 1998, regarding the above referenced
project, we have reviewed the information made available to us from the soil reports,
Delano Erickson Architects and the consulting engineer retarding the building location,
and soil corrections and we offer the following analysis.
a North Site
Due to poor soil conditions at the north site, it appears that pilings would be required for
foundations/structural support with an estimate of 150 pilings needed at $1,000.00/each
for a total of $150,000.00 and an increased concrete floor system cost of $282,000.00.
The premium cost of this site over a naturally acceptable site would be approximately
$432,000.00. However, as you stated, a metal building could be utilized in this
application with a cost savings of $210,000.00 in lieu of using a block and brick cavity
wall system for a net cost increase of $232,000.00.
East Site
This site also has poor soils conditions, but instead of piling, soil corrections are
recommended. The premium cost of this site over a naturally acceptable site would be
approximately $333,000.00. This cost may also be reduced by several options that need
to be explored further.
We recommend that several test pits be dug on the north and east side of the building to
:further explore the existing conditions, which will help determine the most cost effective
location of the building for the ice arena addition.
Midwest Division
8625 N.E. Rendova Street, P.O. Box 159, Circle Pines, MN 55014 ?`? C`
Phone: (612) 786-7711 FAX: (612) 786-2650
Equal Opportunity Employer `? ;
iyFp\
Mr. Dell Erickson -2- June 29, 1998
Delano Erickson Architects
Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have regarding this
information.
Very truly yours,
KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
MIDWEST DIVIS O
Richard J. J son
Vice President
RJJ:rh
cc: Steven Devieh, City of Richfield
•
0
i
S
O
c
N
m
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
.820
821-
0
c
m m
m o W
A m O
Z y _?
? Z
D r
Z m
0
/ 828
Zl
/ g31 /1 m
832
r_
? z
m
n
a T SITE PLAN D6 AN0 Ula(SON ARCaiTEM ""? ?w b ?r s • r. •• rw.r ASSOCIATE ARCMW
1
A- Y? r ..r q 6e7 ?? .l
"°'?° -~ °?'-' W Sh* '? "a--*
Mien n Q°
?
RICHFIELD ICE ARENA AMMON
1 C06N DAVE fEY. Strother
740 wArz&rA ea%nAno
ARCHMOS 66TH AM FORILAM, SOTA
9804 7/23/98 LIN
s
i DATE fEQ NO
a
4 -ra
n
(GW un rim nxi ME and WK 0 aw
MtMi-40
m
x
z
D
1
D i
? i
fTl i
? i
n
D
z
F-
FTI
0
!
o
z ?
i
DT
N
z
? i
i
i
N
cf)
Z
O
O
Z ?r
m
Z
0
/ r
?z
m
/ O
, Jz
? .n
0 0 0
1?-0-
g
4 NNW 14'-8' Rut 14'-6 1
I I I I I
I I I I ,
I I I
z
--- 4$
' -=---?
-- tY-4- 4'-P !!1-
n 310
n mn
O m
b pa -n
0 c%
Tz n O = z
m' I J n
II ? II 1
I LI
I? ? I IIII
III I IIII
I IIII
T? ? IIII
?? I I IIII
I II n
__s I I
E_???? \4\_____
IIII ?
UPI ?
1j1, II
I I
111
,?\ I I
O`\ I I
m
0
I
8
'r
D
Z
Itl•0?
I I I
I. I
I I I
I I ? I
I I I
I I
I I D j %
§ I t4'-6' ? p'-
{ N
0
85-0'
4'-6'
N
N
-P
Z
0
b
FLOOR PLAN DELANO 6IKYASON ARCH1E= ft 1'°`
`? ywrr.gi.e ywda, 11 wl?w•4W
Ip.e.w 4el+l.e wr w a. ? w sr. w r.wer
+:-.
OOILL DATE ?.
9804 7/23/98 7116 WATUTA lOI{1YAIp
trams w eelxs
DATE iEQ NO.
fM2) 6isiT/0 7?to ,r?¢1 M
[7t-
6'-4' 14'•8'
g 8-0• 1'•0• }
4
m?
?
i!
YI
4
p m
b
5-0• A I 4'-1•
?, ism ?, sr•o•
nY-a'
ASSOCIAT& ARCFBTBtT
Q°t RICHFIELD ICE ARENA ADDITION
O'Brien
Su? 66TH AM P09R ABD, RCHFELD, MMNESOTA
6K Fm IMI[ M SU11 t117J111-?
?--1
w
Q
0 0 1 0
® I •I
I
•I
I
-
-
--
--
-------
-
-
L
I ?I -
r-
I
1
t I ? z
m
-
I
k Z
I o
q..
L ? OX
I
-
m
j Jn O
=Drn
O
om nz _
tTF m
AU
\
fllllI I II
:
.
l 4i'1
.. 1
I
i-
l F I
Il
11,
. LJ;I 1 Li LIN=
L
? u
I IIII. .
I IIII
?t11Y- 1'---
II r ?r n LC
L-.--JL_ J•:
-tea=
1 ICJ
- _
?
IIII
\,i )
r I
.
.. I
.
1
I I - 04
": I I I I \k I I
I I I
I
r r L h ???? n I
1 L--? O? \
1 Ii 1
I ?I
e I •,
I
I I
I I
I
I
I I
m DD
I
z
D
P3
8
I ?'-
I z
t?-0
D
gl ffr ALT. FLOOR PLAN
oA?t
F?V DEL.ANO EPoCKSON ARCFF ECTS ' ^^°t' --* m "+ ? °'-w •• e'"
Aa+.e w. a. w. a u. sw a
e.ga..a
""" """ a'w"?"? M I ASSOMT6 ARCMCf
Chita
?'°
RICHFIELD ICE ARENA ADDITION
RICHFIELD
MINNESOTA
66TH AND PORTLAND
9804 /23/98
rl 746 WAYZATA BOLLEVMC
taacA'aa 54 4= DATE fEd NO. ? ? MAX MW- M FRVM w 5&w (eltjMt +m ,
,
s
o
1:1
•
z
e
o
Z
Au
i !
o' ?4
Z
W
SHEET
ELEVATIONS
DELANO ERICKSON ARCMrB.M
Anw *"* "d "" ASSOC ARCH
uTB M
-4
- ,,'"
rogrw Adaa w. w e.. d e. sa. a r..,s
Cluts O'Brien RICHFIELD ICE ARENA ADDITION
COM
DAIS FAY. R'K;HFIEL
D
MINNESOTA
66TH AND PORTLAND
OR 9804 7/23/98 740 WAYIATA OCU"A10
?rtexaLw
(SW 54+000 DA7F3 FM N0. s??
? ? nKx aK ma w4v, ri A (n9wo-Tm .
,
,
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 173
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a veterinary license to operate a clinic
for Woodlake Veterinary Hospital, 6436 Lyndale Avenue.
Background:
On June 18, 1998, Woodlake Veterinary Hospital submitted an application for the
renewal of their veterinary license. The application was complete and the $150 fee has
been received.
On July 1, 1998, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service
Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a veterinary license be granted to Woodlake
Veterinary Hospital, 6436 Lyndale Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
• 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a veterinary license.
2. The City has previously issued a veterinary license to Woodlake Veterinary
Hospital.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a veterinary license; however,
the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a veterinary license for Woodlake
Veterinary Hospital, 6436 Lyndale Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
James rosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 172
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for renewal of a veterinary license to operate a
veterinary clinic for Airport Pet Hospital located at 6301 Cedar Avenue.
Background:
On June 25, 1998, Airport Pet Hospital submitted an application for the renewal of their
veterinary license. The application is complete and the $150 fee has been received.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer on July 1,
1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The Public Safety Department and the Environmental Health staff have received no
complaints during the past year for Airport Pet Hospital.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a veterinary license be granted for veterinary
service purposes to Airport Pet Hospital, 6301 Cedar Avenue.
• Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a veterinary license.
2. The City has previously issued a veterinary license to Airport Pet Hospital.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a veterinary license; however,
the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a veterinary license for Airport Pet
Hospital, 6301 Cedar Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
James grosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
40
3J
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 171
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a veterinary license for Animal Care
Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue.
Background:
On June 15, 1998, Animal Care Clinic submitted an application for the renewal of their
veterinary license for providing full service veterinary services. The application is
complete and the $150 fee has been received.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer on June
30, 1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The Public Safety Department and the Environmental Health staff have received no
complaints during the past year for Animal Care Clinic.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a veterinary license be granted for veterinary
• service purposes to Animal Care Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a veterinary license.
2. The City has previously issued a veterinary license to Animal Care Clinic.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a veterinary license; however,
the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a veterinary license for Animal Care
Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. Prosser
City Manager
0 JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 30
Council Letter No. 170
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a commercial kennel license for Petco
Animal Supplies, Inc. 710 West 66th Street, for the grooming of animals.
Background:
On June 22, 1998, Petco Animal Supplies, Inc. submitted an application for the renewal
of a commercial kennel license. This license will be for the grooming of animals only.
There will be no kenneling of animals at any time. The application is complete and the
$150 fee has been received.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service officer on July 1,
1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The Public Safety Department and the Environmental Health staff have received no
complaints for the past year for Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a commercial kennel license be approved.
• Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has been made aware of the City codes pertaining to a commercial
kennel license.
2. The City has previously issued a commercial kennel license for the purpose of
grooming to Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a commercial kennel license;
however, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a commercial kennel license for Petco
Animal Supplies, Inc., 710 West 66th Street, for the grooming of animals is presented
for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. P osser
City Man er
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 169
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a commercial kennel license for
Elaine's Grooming, 7429 Humboldt Avenue, for the purpose of animal grooming.
Background:
On June 27, 1998, Elaine Bergquist submitted an application for the renewal of her
commercial kennel license. Ms. Bergquist's application had all contiguous property
owners' signatures on it.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer on July 1,
1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The City has adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the area of the
commercial kennel license when it is located in a residential neighborhood. Staff
received no complaints from any of the other neighbors.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a commercial kennel license be approved.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a commercial kennel
license.
2. The City has previously issued a kennel license to Elaine's Grooming for the
purpose of grooming.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a commercial kennel license;
however, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for denial.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a commercial kennel license for
Elaine's Grooming, 7429 Humboldt Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
I--
James . rosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
3F
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 168
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a residential kennel license for Carolyn
Kretchmer, 7232 11th Avenue.
Background:
On June 29, 1998, Carolyn Kretchmer submitted an application for a residential kennel
license. She owns four dogs. Ms. Kretchmer's application had all contiguous property
owners' signatures on it.
An inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer on June
30, 1998. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The City has adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the area of the
residential kennel license. Staff received no calls or complaints from any of the
neighbors.
Although this application is for four dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of
six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does
not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Kretchmer has been able to
do this.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny Ms. Kretchmer's residential kennel license. This
would mean that she would have to reduce the number of dogs she has from four
to two.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for Carolyn
Kretchmer, 7232 11th Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
40 James . rosser
City Maer
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 167
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a residential kennel license for Ethel
Zobel, 6800 Cedar Avenue.
Background:
On June 13, 1998, Ethel Zobel submitted an application for a residential kennel license.
She owns three dogs. Ms. Zobel's application contains all contiguous property owners'
signatures.
On June 30, 1998, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community
Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time.
The City has adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the area of the
residential kennel license. Staff received no calls or complaints from any of the
neighbors.
Although this application is for three dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of
six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does
not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Zobel has been able to do
this.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny Ms. Zobel's residential kennel license. This
would mean that she would have to reduce the number of animals on her property
from three to two.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve a residential kennel license for Ethel Zobel, 6800 Cedar
Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. rosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 166
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Consider award of contract for replacement of retaining walls on County roads.
Background:
The 1998 project calls for replacement of six retaining walls along 66th Street, Penn
Avenue and Nicollet Avenue at the following addresses: 70-1/2 Street and Penn
Avenue, 1615 West 66th Street, 6602 Irving Avenue, 6605 Clinton Avenue, 6941
Nicollet Avenue, and 6937 Nicollet Avenue. The 1998 project will be a joint effort with
Hennepin County with the cost to be split evenly. The Hennepin County Board will take
formal action on the cost sharing at its August 4, 1998 meeting. The adjacent property
owners have agreed to have the replacement walls moved onto their property and to
accept ownership and future maintenance responsibility for the new walls.
Bids for retaining wall replacement were opened on July 8, 1998. There were six plan
holders. One bid was submitted. A copy of the bid minutes/tabulation is attached for
Council review.
Recommended Motion:
Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract, contingent upon approval of
the cost sharing by the Hennepin County Board, to Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. in the
amount of $39,635.40 for replacement of six retaining walls at 70-1/2 Street and Penn
Avenue, 1615 West 66th Street, 6602 Irving Avenue, 6605 Clinton Avenue, 6941
Nicollet Avenue, and 6937 Nicollet Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A number of retaining walls along County roadways in the City of Richfield are in
need of repair. The adjacent property owners at six sites have agreed to have the
replacement walls moved onto their property in 1998 and to accept ownership and
future maintenance responsibility for the new walls.
2. The County will afford half the cost for the work incurred in the retaining wall
reconstruction.
3. The bid submitted is in keeping with the Engineer's estimate of $41,142. The
bidder is considered to be a reliable and responsible contractor.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not repair or reconstruct the retaining walls. However, the walls to be repaired
or reconstructed are in need of improvement.
0
OJU
• 2. Reject the bid submitted and direct staff to readvertise in an effort to obtain
additional bids for consideration. However, the bid received is considered
reasonable and the bidder is considered responsible.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council is asked to take action at the July 27, 1998 regular City Council meeting. The
specification indicates the work is to begin August 11, 1998 and be completed
September 30, 1998. In the event the Council chooses to reject the bid and direct
readvertising for bids, the beginning and completion dates would need to be altered
and, because of the time required to rebid the project, there would be some question
whether the work could be completed in 1998.
Respectfully submitted,
Prosser
Jam4Mager
City JDP:ds
Attachment
U
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
n
LJ
Bid Opening
July 8, 1998
11:00 a.m.
1998 Retaining Walls on County Roads
City Project No. 427-35-655
3D
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the
meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for 1998 retaining walls on county
roads, as advertised in the official newspaper on June 24, 1998.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
George Atkinson, Public Works Representative
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
0
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Vendor Bid Security Base Bid
Lakeland Nurseries, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 39,635.40
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the July
27, 1998 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
\, J
3C
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 165
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Request for approval of a subdivision waiver at 7645 Nicollet Avenue.
Background:
The City Council approved a conditional use permit to allow construction of a twin home
at 7645 Nicollet Avenue. Because a twin home has two separate owners, the property
needs to be divided into two lots. A replat is not required because of the small size of
the property.
The first lot is 5,002 square feet and the second lot is 5,312 square feet. The Zoning
Ordinance requires that the lots be equal or near equal in size as is reasonably
possible. The second lot is slightly larger because of the additional setback required
adjacent to a public street (77th Street).
There is a slight jog in the lots along Nicollet Avenue due to the position of the shared
driveway. The driveway is designed to bring the curb cut as far from the 77th Street
intersection as possible. An easement will be established to allow shared use of the
• driveway.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt a resolution approving a subdivision waiver for 7645 Nicollet Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Approval of the subdivision waiver would not interfere with the purposes of platting
regulations, Section 500.05
2. Compliance with the regular platting requirements of Section 500.05, Subd. 1 of
the City Code would result in an unnecessary hardship.
3. The proposed lots meet the minimum lot size, width and depth requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance, Section 521.45.
4. The proposed lots are near equal in size, as required by Zoning Ordinance,
Section 521.43.
5. Approval of the conditional use permit requires the builder to establish a driveway
easement.
Alternative Recommendation:
The City Council may deny this subdivision waiver if a finding of fact determines that the
proposal would have an adverse impact on adjacent properties.
U 11
• Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled on the Consent Calendar.
Respectfully submitted,
James irosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
•
0
3&0,
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SUBDIVISION WAIVER
(7645 NICOLLET AVENUE)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which
requests approval of a subdivision waiver for the division of certain parcels of land
located at 7645 Nicollet Avenue, legally described as:
The northerly 8 feet of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10 in Block 4, A.G. Bogen Company's
Nicollet Avenue Addition
WHEREAS, the proposed division of land for which the subdivision waiver is
sought is as legally described as:
Parcel A: That part of Lot 10, Block 4, A.G. BOGEN COMPANY'S NICOLLET
AVENUE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County,
Minnesota which lies northerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 10, Block 4; thence on
an assumed bearing of South, along the west line thereof, a distance of
46.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
North 58 degrees 47 minutes 13 seconds East a distance of 11.69 feet;
• thence North 89 degrees 39 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of
114.23 feet to the east line of said Lot 10 and said line there terminating.
Parcel B: The North 8.00 feet of Lot 9 and that part of Lot 10, Block 4, A.G.
BOGEN COMPANY'S NICOLLET AVENUE ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies southerly of the
following described line:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 10, Block 4; thence on
an assumed bearing of South, along the west line thereof, a distance of
46.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
North 58 degrees 47 minutes 13 seconds East a distance of 11.69 feet;
thence North 89 degrees 39 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of
114.23 feet to the east line of said Lot 10 and said line there terminating.
WHEREAS, the two lots resulting from the subdivision waiver will comply with
Section 521.45 of the City Code relating to lot area and width; and
WHEREAS, the two lots are near equal in size as is reasonably necessary, as
required by Section 521.43, subd. 4 (a) of the City Code relating to division of land for
twin homes; and
• WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval for the
subdivision waiver; and
3 c-3
• WHEREAS, the City Council finds that compliance with the City Code Section
500.05, Subdivision 1 would result in unnecessary hardship and that failure to comply
therewith will not interfere with the purposes of the platting regulations of Section
500.01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. A waiver for the subdivision of the Subject Property legally described
above.
2. Future transfers of any of the Subject Property may be by parcel or parcels
as described above as Parcel A and Parcel B.
3. City staff is authorized and directed to take any action necessary to
effectuate this resolution and to authorize the recording of conveyances
complying with the terms of this resolution.
•
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of July,
1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
40
W m
w
>
w Q
a
z
I"- 3NIl A183dO8d_ _ ,b0'E8
W (/? b0'Ob 0'Eb
J p
O m ' I I
V ( 1
cr)
Z
P- 1 , L
N
+-1 cn
t
e
I
I
M
M
Sri
M
I
1
0
W
N W ON
CL m
0
a r--
r - J
r?
? W
Q
I
I
H
3 w
jW
? N
? W
,0'E8
.99
WI
Z
JI
r
19 L a
0
1 cr
a
0 1
ui
.0'L£
_J
,8 t
G
W
W
N W
N
p0
MM i
L
W
Q I
li I
Q I
t?
3nN3AV 131103IN
Y
J
3
J
W
N_
O
Z
W
cr)
ti
a 3c-q
J
a
w
F-
N
w
T
W
a
O
c
N
di
O J
Z Q
U
N
LL-?
oW
L-
UU
J1, L. -:S •Jb ,?luhi ? •1? Yn?icc z.•,,. \k:th,•\:: ..•, ,?.. t,.. .,__ „-_?
3??5
t
•
•
CONSULTING ENOINEEIM - - -
ROOF.
ENGINEERING PLANNERS and LAND StM%EYORS PROJECB? 27?37.Do
COMPANY, INC. PAGE 68
1000 EAST 146th STREET, SURNSYILLE, MINNESOTA 55337 PH 432-300D
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
Legal Description: LOT SPLIT DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A:
That part of Lot 10, Block 4, A. C. BOGEN COMPANY'S NICOLLET AVENUE ADDITION, according
to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies northerly of the following
described line:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of said Lot 10, Block 4: thence on an assumed bearing
of South, along the west line thereof, a distance of 46.00 feet to the point of beginning of the
line to be described: thence North 58 degrees 47 minutes 13 seconds East a distance of 11.69
feet; thence North 89 degrees 39 minutes 39 asoonds East a distance of 114.23 feet to the
east line of said Lot 10 and said tine there terminating.
PARCELS:
SCALE 1 = 30' The North 8.00 feet pf Lot 9 and that part of Lot 10, Block 4, A. C. BOGEN COMPANY'S NICOLLET
AVENUE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies
southerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of said Lot 10, Block 4; thence an an assumed bearing
of South, along the west ens thereof, a distance of 46.00 feet to the point of beginning of the
[Ina 10 be described: thence North 58 degrees•47 minutes 13 seconds East a distance of 11.69
feet; thence North 89 degrees 39 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of 114.23 feet to the
east line of said Lot 10 and said line there terminating.
DRIVEWAY EASEMENT DESCRIPTION
ondi
0
0
f-
t-
m
--I
Fri
to
O
.;. i
NOISE WALL
fig; 2 , 77TH STREET
I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct representation of a tract as shown and described
hereon. As prepared by me this 137#4 day of u-g 1938.
it,-ddr.V Minn. Reg. No.?--
That part of Lot 10, Block 4, A. C. BOGEN COMPANY'S NICOLLET AVENUE ADDITION, according
to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin bounty, Minnesota described as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest comer of said Lot 10. Block 4; thence on an assumed bearing
of South, along the west line thereof, a distance of 46.00 feet to the point of beginning of that
part of said Lot 10 to be described; thence North 58 degrees 47 minutes 113 seconds East a
distance of 11.69 feet; thence North 89 degrees 39 arkwtse 39 seconds East a distance of
5.00 feet; thence North 34 degrees 23 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 28.55 feet to
said west Inc of Lot 10; thence South a distance of 28.130 feet to the point of beginning.
DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION
(d48 S DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION
+---- INDICATES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
_ FINISHED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION
= HASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION
TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION
36
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 164
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Removal and realignment of stop signs at 64th Street and Pillsbury Avenue.
Background:
Residents along the 6300 and 6400 block of Pillsbury Avenue have expressed concern
about the safety of the intersection of Pillsbury Avenue and 64th Street, particularly
about the safety of school children who use the intersection to board the school bus
and about excessive speeding on Pillsbury Avenue.
The City's Transportation Engineer visited with residents at a neighborhood meeting to
discuss their concerns. The attached petition was submitted as a result of the
neighborhood meeting. Almost all of the residents on the 6300 and 6400 blocks of
Pillsbury Avenue signed the petition in favor of moving the two-way stop signs to control
traffic on Pillsbury Avenue.
There was interest on the part of many residents for four-way stop signs at the
intersection but they are not warranted based on traffic volumes and accident history.
• The requirements for four-way stop signs are much greater than for two-way stop signs.
The existing two-way stop signs control east-west traffic on 64th Street now. Traffic
counts on both streets are similar and either street could be stop controlled. If Council
approves, the two-way stops would be moved to control north-south traffic on Pillsbury
Avenue. According to the City's stop sign policy, removal of stop signs requires a
recommendation from the Community Services Commission and approval by the City
Council before they can be removed.
The Community Services Commission recommended moving the two-way stop signs as
requested by the residents' petition at its July 6, 1998 meeting.
Recommended Motion:
Move the existing two-way stop signs that currently control east-west traffic on 64th
Street at Pillsbury Avenue to control north-south traffic on Pillsbury Avenue at 64th
Street.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A sight obstruction occurs on the northwest corner of the intersection warranting
two-way stop signs.
2. The west leg of the intersection forces traffic to slow down to make a right turn and
does not need the stop sign to slow traffic.
38-I
3. Traffic counts on both streets are similar and either street could be stop controlled.
4. Pillsbury Avenue provides the only outlet to 65th Street from the neighborhood.
The two-way stop signs on 64th Street encourage motorists to speed on Pillsbury
Avenue.
5. According to the City's stop sign policy, removal of stop signs require a
recommendation from the Community Services Commission and approval by the
City Council before they can be removed.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Deny moving the two way stop signs. The signs were originally installed to control
speeding on 64th Street and right angle crashes at the intersection.
2. Approve four-way stop signs for the intersection of Pillsbury Avenue and 64th
Street. This action is not consistent with the City's stop sign policy. The
intersection does not experience five or more right-angle crashes per year nor does
it carry a high traffic volume to warrant four-way stop signs.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council can choose to delay a decision on this issue if it determines additional
information is necessary.
10 Respectfully submitted,
Jam Prosser
City nager
JDP:ds
Attachment
0
0 PETITION
The undersigned residents of the 6300 and 6400 blocks of Pillsbury Avenue South and on
64th Street petition the City of Richfield to:
7
NnmP
•
•
Move the two-way stop signs on our block to provide stop control on Pillsbury
Avenue at 64th Street:
The following individuals are presenting this petition with the support of the undersigned
residents:
G, 0)
G33? ?'
f
/l F E /Z C II /? 0.r7') E 5 Ors/ 7 Ilk 1/00 1JL O? k OF
P1 U554,lr yA v. S . /o PF0PLF SZ61VED TN-TS PE'TTT.701V
M-3 PETITION
The undersigned residents of the, 6300 and 6400 blocks of Pillsbury Avenue South and on
64th Street petition the City of Richfield to:
Move the two-way stop signs on our block to provide stop control on Pillsbury
Avenue at 64th Street:
The following individuals are presenting this petition with the support of the undersigned
residents:
Name
•
Address
y6S /
/ ?- -s
Y _e_S ,
S U1Y) nAP-Y. Tf E CI H v P fCCOLE PU BOX-1> 19F7-,-R T //t/FJW _ yFS
5) T11A5YVV Aiv 'T A y VJA X S Top sz Div /9 44
BOOM F C>WIV5As WERE hCo-REFAI3 L_E .A/Q/) V aA SALl)"* .5,0,C,0 THEY 4 iC S,C / p•'V/ )? S TC??° ,? s cti L ,
/ /M o c v/L1,6_A oiv 71t,E &400k AA/ L Y LA/o Y
Al- Af5!D_9 P.TC4?5-- fit/-95 To R CAc Il _ X 7h IAIKC / A t04,6'Y AN1) APPR&i:?:7.?rtTE 7,11C
c-TTY OF RTC1Y/=1i?_L,D wV-4Z- '.v6 'TO 171E'ET-
140MEoW/vtR5 TO F X PRE5-5 OUIZ COn/e4AI l13_
? A10n P-icLS13UA1) V. 5.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 163
Agenda July 27, 1998
Issue Statement:
Approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a sub-grant
agreement with the State of Minnesota to receive reimbursement for storm cleanup
costs.
Background:
The City suffered significant storm damage during the severe storms of May 15 and
May 30. Many of the costs incurred by the City to clean up debris and repair storm
damaged facilities are eligible for reimbursement from the Federal Emergency
Management Association (FEMA). Costs for overtime, cleanup contracts, and
vehicle/equipment use can be reimbursed up to 75% from FEMA and may also be
matched by a 15% reimbursement from the State (pending enabling legislative action).
Staff is currently working to document these costs for the FEMA inspector. One of the
actions that is required before receiving funds is for the Council to designate an
authorized official to enter into sub-grant agreement with the State Division of
Emergency Management (DEM is administering the distribution of FEMA funds). The
amount of reimbursement won't be determined until the FEMA inspector has reviewed
all of the documented expenses.
• Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution authorizing execution of the sub-grant agreement and
designating the City Manager as the authorized official.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A substantial portion of the City's storm-related cleanup costs are eligible for
FEMA reimbursement.
2. The attached resolution must be approved as part of the application process.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. None
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approving this resolution allows the City Manager to execute the sub-grant agreement
with the State. Funds should be received within 30 days after the agreement is
executed.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja es . Prosser
City ager
JDP:ds
31q-i
0 RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT
WITH THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENT
FOR STORM CLEANUP COSTS
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the
State Division of Emergency Management (DEM), has established funds to reimburse
cities for storm damage; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield suffered significant damage during the storms
of May 15 and 30, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield will incur many storm related expenses
including overtime, cleanup contracts, vehicle/equipment use and repair of storm
damaged facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into a
sub-grant agreement with the State of Minnesota, Division of Emergency Management,
for the program entitled Infrastructure Program for FEMA 1225 DR-MINNESOTA.
James D. Prosser, City Manager, is hereby authorized to execute and sign such sub-
grant agreements and amendments as are necessary to implement the project on
behalf of the City of Richfield.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
July, 1998.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
0
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
UNDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FOR SUB-GRANTEES
Grantor Program: Federal Disaster Assistance
-914 L
DR-1225
EXHIBIT V
UW SOLUTION
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT
Be it resolved that the CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(Name of organization/Local Unit of Government)
enter into a Sub-grant Agreement with the Division of Emergency Management in the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety for the program entitled Infrastructure Program for FEMA 1225
DR-MINNESOTA.
JAMES D. PROSSER, CITY MANAGER,
is hereby authorized
(Name and Title of authorized official)
to execute and sign such Sub-grant Agreements and amendments as are necessary
to implement the project on behalf of the CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(Organization/Local Unit of Government)
I certify that the above resolution was adopted by the
CITY COUNCIL
(Executive Body)
on JULY 27, 1998
(Date)
SIGNED:
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(Organization/Local Unit of Government)
(Signature)
City Manager
(Title)
7/27/98
(Date)
WITNES SETH:
(Signature)
City Clerk
(Title)
7/27/98
(Date)
MPS-DEM
December 4, 1995 19