The URL can be used to link to this page

071216CompleteAgendaSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM JULY 12, 2016 6:30 PM Call to order Discussion regarding Hennepin Countys application for Penn Avenue reconstruction (Council Memo 52) Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager July 7, 2016 Council Memorandum No. 52 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: July 12, 2016 Worksession to Discuss Hennepin County's Application for Penn Avenue Reconstruction (Agenda Item No. 1) Council Members: At the request of Council Member Elliott there will be a brief worksession on Tuesday, July 12, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. for purposes of more thoroughly explaining and further discussing Hennepin County's Application for the reconstruction of Penn Avenue. Applications are due on July 15, 2016 so a consensus decision as to whether or not the City would like to continue support for the project will need to be made at the Worksession. Please contact Kristin Asher, Director of Public Works, at 612-861-9795 with questions. City N SLD:kda Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 12, 2016 7:00 PM INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Open forum (15 minutes ma)imum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Pledge of Allegiance Approval of the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 28, 2016. COUNCIL DISCUSSION • Hats Off to Hometown Hits AGENDAAPPROVAL 2. Approval of the agenda. 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 on these items is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of the approval of a resolution granting site plan approval and variances to allow a conversion of the former Lariat Lanes bowling alley at 6320 Penn Avenue to office space. Staff Report No. 105 B. Consideration of the approval of the request for two separate Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor licenses for the Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South for their Bike Night Out events scheduled to take place on July 20, 2016 and August 17, 2016. Staff Report No. 106 C. Consideration of the approval of a resolution appointing election judges for the August 9, 2016 Primary Election and the November 8, 2016 General Election. Staff Report No. 107 D. Consideration of the approval of the award of a contract for the 2016 Sealcoat project to Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of $112,646.30 and authorization of the City Manager to approve changes in the construction contract up to $100,000. Staff Report No. 108 E. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing and directing the condemnation of certain real estate, easements and other rights and interests for the purpose of the expansion of the parking lot serving the Richfield Municipal Liquor Store located at 6600 Cedar Avenue. Staff Report No. 109 4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. Public hearing and consideration of a resolution regarding the removal of an easement related to sight lines at 76th Street and the adjacent railroad tracks. Staff Report No. 110 RESOLUTIONS 6. Consideration of a resolution for Site Plan Approval for a community bandshell at Veterans Memorial Park. Staff Report No. 111 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 7. City Manager's Report CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 8. Claims and payrolls Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. 9. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. CALL TO ORDER CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Regular Meeting June 28, 2016 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Council Members Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Michael Howard; Edwina Garcia; and Tom Present: Fitzhenry. Council Member Pat Elliott Absent: Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director; Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant City Manager/HR Manager; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Karen Barton, Assistant Community Development Director; Chris Link, Operations Superintendent; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Director. OPEN FORUM Robert Hall, 7309 Oliver Avenue, expressed his concerns regarding the Sewer Line Warranty letter sent to Richfield residents. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Howard, S/Fitzhenry to approve the minutes of the Special City Council Worksession of June 14, 2016 and the Regular City Council Meeting of June 14, 2016. Motion carried 4-0. Item #1 PRESENTATION OF 2016 FOOD SAFETY AWARD (COUNCIL MEMO NO. 47) Erin Rykken, Advisory Board of Health Chair, presented the awards. Council Meeting Minutes -2- June 28, 2016 Item #2 PRESENTATION OF THE GENE AND MARY JACOBSEN CITIZEN OF THE YEAR FOR 2016 AWARD TO ANDY GRAY (COUNCIL MEMO NO. 46) Council Member Howard presented a Certificate of Recognition to Mr. Gray. Mark Westergaard, Human Rights Commission Chair, presented the award to Mr. Gray. Item #3 ANNUAL MEETING WITH THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Mark Westergaard, Human Rights Commission Chair, presented a summary report of the commission activities. Item #4 REPORT FROM STAFF WHO ATTENDED THE 2016 TRANSFORMING LOCAL GOVERNMENT — LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONFERENCE Assistant City Manager/HR Manager Dmytrenko, Assistant Community Development Director Barton and Operations Superintendent Link provided a report. Item #5 COUNCIL DISCUSSION Hats Off to Hometown Hits Council Member Fitzhenry provided a Beyond the Yellow Ribbon update. Mayor Goettel and Council Member Garcia discussed the recent mailing to Richfield residents regarding the Sewer Line Warranty program. Item #6 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA M/Fitzhenry, S/Garcia to approve the agenda. Motion carried 4-0. Item #7 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of the approval of a request for a Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the activities scheduled to take place July 3 - 4, 2016 for the Minneapolis - Richfield American Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South. S.R. No. 93 B. Consideration of the approval of an annual request for a Community Celebration Event license, with a fee waiver and a Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor license, from the Fourth of July Committee for the events scheduled to take place at Veterans Memorial Park, July 3 - 4, 2016. S.R. No. 94 C. Consideration of the approval of the Sponsorship Agreement between the City of Richfield and Best Buy Purchasing, LLC for the financial sponsorship of the 2016 Urban Wildland Half Marathon in the amount of $2,250.00. S.R. No. 95 D. Consideration of the approval of a resolution amending Appendix D of the Richfield City Code to provide for a registration fee for Beekeeping in the City. S.R. No. 96 Council Meeting Minutes -3- June 28, 2016 RESOLUTION NO. 11214 RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX D OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR A REGISTRATION FEE FOR BEEKEEPING IN THE CITY This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11214. E. Consideration of the approval and acceptance of a five year agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Lead Unit to perform the initial environmental lead risk assessment for diagnosed cases of elevated blood lead levels in children under six years of age and pregnant women in the City of Richfield. S.R. No. 97 F. Consideration of the approval of a resolution supporting the submittal of a grant application to the Metropolitan Council for the Richfield Parkway/Cedar Point South development project. S.R. No. 98 RESOLUTION NO. 11215 RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR ASSOCIATED WITH THE CEDAR POINT SOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11215. G. Consideration of approval of the implementation of Bicycle Master Plan identified bike routes in the 2015 mill and overlay area as recommended by the Transportation Commission. S.R. No. 99 H. Consideration of the approval of the renewal of the agreement with Hennepin County for the purchase of assessment services for the period commencing August 1, 2016 and ending July 31, 2020. S.R. No. 100 I. Consideration of the approval of a resolution updating procedures for deferment of special assessments against owner -occupied homestead properties in hardship cases for qualifying homeowners. S.R. No. 101 RESOLUTION NO. 11216 RESOLUTION UPDATING PROCEDURES FOR DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST OWNER -OCCUPIED HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES IN HARDSHIP CASES FOR QUALIFYING OWNERS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11216. M/Goettel, S/Fitzhenry to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0. Item #8 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #9 1 CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE Council Meeting Minutes -4- June 28, 2016 ALLOWING UP TO TWO LICENSED GAMBLING ORGANIZATIONS TO CONDUCT GAMBLING AT ON SALE LIQUOR OR CLUB ESTABLISHMENTS S.R. NO. 102 Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 102. M/Fitzhenry, S/Goettel that this constitutes the second reading or Bill No. 2016-12 allowing up to two licensed gambling organizations to conduct gambling at on sale liquor or club establishments, that it be published in the official newspaper, and that it be made part of these minutes. Motion carried 4-0. Item #10 CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 910 OF RICHFIELD CITY CODE PERTAINING TO SHADE TREE PEST CONTROL AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW SECTION 910 AND A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION S.R. NO. 103 Council Member Garcia presented Staff Report No. 103. M/Garcia, S/Goettel that this constitutes the second reading or Bill No. 2016-13 repealin( Section 910 of Richfield City Code pertaining to Shade Tree Pest Control and replacing it with a new Section 910. Motion carried 4-0. M/Garcia, S/Howard that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11217 RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 910 OF RICHFIELD CITY CODE PERTAINING TO SHADE TREE PEST CONTROL AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW SECTION 910 Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11217. Item #11 CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 910 OF RICHFIELD CITY CODE PERTAINING TO SHAD TREE PEST CONTROL AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW SECTION 910 AND A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION S.R. NO. 103 Council Member Garcia presented Staff Report No. 103. Council Member Garcia requested an update on the proposed project. Assistant Community Development Director Barton provided an update, including proposed amenities, funding and timeline. M/Garcia, S/Goettel that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: Council Meeting Minutes -5- RESOLUTION NO. 11218 RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AT APPROXIMATELY 6400 LYNDALE AVENUE Motion carried 4-0. Item #9 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT June 28, 2016 City Manager Devich reported that he and Assistant City Manager Dmytrenko met with the City of Edina to discuss the renaming of the Edina portion of 76th Street. Mr. Devich stated he will prepare a letter on behalf of the City Council to the Edina City Manager requesting the renaming to International Boulevard continue past France Avenue where 76th Street ends to Highway 100. Item #13 CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS M/Garcia, S/Fitzhenry that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. Bank 06/28/16 A/P Checks: 250783-251207 1,602,083.89 Payroll: 119686-120050, 42454-42455 667,601.59 TOTAL $ 2,269,685.48 Motion carried 4-0. OPEN FORUM None. Item #14 ADJOURNMENT M/Garcia, S/Goettel to adjourn the City Council Meeting. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 p.m. Date Approved: July 12, 2016 Cheryl Krumholz Executive Coordinator Debbie Goettel Mayor Steven L. Devich City Manager AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 3.A. STAFF REPORT NO. 105 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Matt Brillhart, Planning Technician DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Karen Barton, Acting Community Development Director 7/6/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: NA CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/6/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a resolution granting site plan approval and variances to allow a conversion of the former Lariat Lanes bowling alley at 6320 Penn Avenue to office space. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Originally constructed in 1958 Lariat Lanes bowling alley operated at 6320 Penn Avenue (herein, "the Property") for 57 years, until closing in May 2015. The applicant, Fraser, has purchased the Property and would like to remodel the building for use as office space. With the addition of this property, Fraser's holdings would constitute a four building "campus" at the northwest corner of Penn Avenue and 64th Street. Fraser plans to relocate administrative departments from the main building at 2400 West 64th Street into the proposed office space at 6320 Penn Avenue. This shift would allow for the expansion of clinical services offered at the main building. Fraser's long-term plan for the campus is to remove the buildings at 6320, 6328, and 6344 Penn Avenue and develop a single administrative office building, allowing 2400 West 64th Street to be used exclusively as a clinic and school. Because the building has now been vacant for over one year, all legally nonconforming status has expired; any new user must meet current Code requirements or apply for variances. The applicant has requested variances to parking lot and building setbacks, impervious surface maximums, and landscaping regulations. The proposed use is found to be reasonable and offers many aesthetic improvements to the site and building. Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan and variances. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve the resolution granting site plan approval and variances to allow a conversion of the former Lariat Lanes bowling alley at 6320 Penn Avenue to office space. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Discussed in Executive Summary. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes. etch The Property is zoned Mixed Use — Community (MU -C) and is within the Penn Avenue Corridor (PAC) Overlay District. The Penn Avenue Corridor District allows for a balanced mix of commercial, office and residential uses that together create a cohesive and pedestrian -friendly area. Site plan approval is required prior to the change in use of a building. The proposed site plan will improve upon existing conditions, while allowing for reuse and aesthetic improvements. General Requirements - Parking Office uses require 3.3 parking stalls per 1,000 feet of gross floor area. The minimum parking requirement for a 10,570 square foot office building is 35 stalls; the maximum allowed parking for this use is 45 stalls. The applicant is proposing 58 parking stalls on site, exceeding the maximum number allowed by 13 stalls. An applicant may request a modification of the maximum allowed number of parking spaces by submitting a study of anticipated parking demand, prepared by a professional engineer with expertise in traffic and parking analysis. Staff also requested a narrative of the overall parking needs at the Fraser campus. As stated above 6320 Penn Avenue would become the fourth building in a campus of office, clinic, and school space. While the four properties do not have direct interconnected parking access, the various parking areas serve the needs of the entire campus. Engineering firm Wenck Associates conducted a parking study, which is attached to this report. The study found the existing peak parking demand to be 160 spaces. Before adding the Property to the campus, the study found a 17 space deficit. The Property will provide 58 additional parking spaces, for a total supply of 201 spaces throughout the campus. Following the relocation of administrative services and subsequent clinical space expansion at the main building, total peak parking demand for the campus is projected at 207 spaces, including a 5% "design safety factor" surplus. The future parking supply would be 6 spaces less than anticipated peak demand. On -street parking is allowed on 64th Street, which could help accommodate peak demand. With regards to the parking lot layout, Fraser is proposing several changes to improve vehicle circulation, pedestrian safety, and add landscaping to an area that currently has none. Six parking spaces facing Penn Avenue would be removed, while six compact stalls would be added behind the building. The applicant is proposing to close one of the two curb cuts from Penn Avenue, and to add a direct pedestrian connection from the sidewalk to the front door, via the access aisle between accessible parking spaces. A bike rack will be provided near the front entrance. Architectural standards The proposed building fagade along Penn Avenue is complimentary to the adjacent Fraser property to the south. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a revised drawing of the north building elevation. The north facade of the building shall be finished with materials of consistent quality as those of the front wall, in accordance with City Code Subsection 544.07, Subd. 6. At a minimum, staff is recommending that the north fagade shall include a small awning over the door and a secondary paint color, to match the east fagade and provide visual interest. Variances The applicant is requesting variances from building and parking lot setbacks, impervious surface regulations, and landscaping requirements. Variances Requested - Required (R), Proposed (P: Minimum parking lot setback (R: 5 ft.; P: 0 ft.) • The existing parking lot directly borders the north and south property lines. No changes are proposed. Maximum building setbacks (R: all sides- 15 ft.; P: front - 65 ft., north side - 58 ft., rear - 84 ft.) • No changes are proposed to the building dimensions Maximum impervious surface coverage (R: 80%; P: 81.8°/x) • The applicant is reducing impervious surface coverage on the site from 83.7% to 81.8°/x. An additional 765 square feet of pervious/landscape area will be added to the boulevard area in public right-of-way along Penn Avenue that is currently impervious. Landscaping requirements • The applicant is proposing new landscaping areas to screen the parking lot facing Penn Avenue. These plantings must be maintained to meet the intent of the Penn Avenue Design Guidelines. The applicant must submit a revised landscaping plan to be approved by staff, providing further detail of the proposed landscaping areas along the east and west property lines. Along the north and south property lines, no major changes to e)asting conditions are proposed and screening requirements will not be met. Additional information related to the requested variances and required findings can be found in the attached document. General Criteria for Site Plan Evaluation In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and City Council shall consider its compliance with the following criteria which are discussed more fully in the attached code requirements / findings document: • Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Consistency with the purposes of the City Code. • Consistency and harmony with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and open spaces. • An internal sense of order and provision of a desirable environment. • Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping, the building materials, textures and colors. • Adequacy of circulation and parking for all modes of transport. • Use of energy -conserving design. • Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties from negative environmental impacts. Criteria listed are all met or improved by the proposed site plan. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: 60 -DAY RULE: The 60 -day clock 'started' when a complete application was received on June 13, 2016. A decision is required by August 12, 2016 OR the Council must notify the applicant that it is extending the deadline (up to a maximum or 60 additional days or 120 days total) for issuing a decision. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 27, 2016. • Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current newspaper and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the site. No members of the public spoke at the public hearing. • The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed site plan and variances (6-0). ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS . • Approve the resolution with modifications. • Deny the request with a finding that the proposal does not meet City requirements. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Dale Raasch, Fraser Property and Facilities Director ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Resolution Resolution Letter ❑ Requirements Attachment Backup Material ❑ Site plans Backup Material ❑ Fraser Campus Narrative & Parking Study Backup Material ❑ Zoning Maps Backup Material RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN AND VARIANCES AT 6320 PENN AVENUE WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of a site plan and variances for an office building on the parcel of land located at 6320 Penn Avenue (the "Property"), legally described as: The East 330 feet of the South 132 feet of the North 396 feet of the South 1/2 of the East 3/8 of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing and recommended approval of the requested conditional use permit and variances at its June 27, 2016 meeting; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun -Current and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code requires a minimum parking lot setback of 5 feet from adjacent commercial and mixed-use property, while the proposed site plan allows for parking lot setbacks of 0 feet along the north and south property lines; and WHEREAS, the existing building at 6320 Penn Avenue does not meet various building setback requirements specified in the Mixed Use Community (MU -C) District; and WHEREAS, impervious surfaces are proposed to cover 81.8 percent of the site, exceeding the maximum coverage of 80 percent; and WHEREAS, the site does not meet general landscaping and screening requirements, as described in Zoning Code Subsection 544.03; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their enforcement would cause "practical difficulty" to the owners of the Property under consideration; and WHEREAS, based on the findings below, the Richfield City Council approves the requested variances from Richfield City Code Subsection 537.07, Subdivision 1; Subsection 544.03; and Subsection 544.13, Subd. 5; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval for the site plan with variances; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: The City Council makes the following general findings: a. The Property is zoned Mixed Use Community (MU -C) and is located in the Penn Avenue Corridor overlay. b. Office uses are permitted in the MU -C District. The Penn Avenue Corridor District provides for a balanced mix of commercial, office and residential uses that together create a cohesive and pedestrian -friendly area. C. The site and building are existing, and were previously used as a bowling alley from 1958 to 2015. d. Reuse of this building on this site in any fashion will require variances. e. Code states that the minimum parking lot setback from adjacent mixed-use property is 5 feet. A variance from Subsection 544.13, Subd. 5 is required. f. Code states that the maximum front, side, and rear setbacks for a principal building shall not exceed 15 feet. The proposed setbacks are 65 feet, 60 feet, and 84 feet, respectively. Code states that the maximum impervious surface area shall not exceed 80%. The proposed impervious surface area is 81.8°/x. Variances from Subsection 537.07, Subd. 1 are required. g. Proposed landscaping and screening plans do not meet several requirements. A variance from Subsection 544.03 is required. 2. With respect to the application for variances from the above -listed requirements, the City Council makes the following findings: a. Strict enforcement of the Richfield Zoning Code Subsections listed above would cause a practical difficulty. The existing property cannot be used in any fashion without variances. It is reasonable to allow the reuse of an existing building on an existing lot. b. Unique circumstances affect the Property that were not created by the land owner. The existing building was constructed in 1958, prior to the adoption of current Codes. These circumstances were not created by the land owner. C. Granting the requested variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The requested variances will allow for the reuse and improvement of a vacant building. The improvements proposed will benefit the surrounding neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the site, particularly along Penn Avenue. No negative impacts are expected. d. The variances requested are the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. The proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this property. e. The variances are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plans are consistent with the general purposes and intents of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. 3. With respect to the proposed site plan, the City Council finds that it will adequately serve the purpose for which it is proposed and will not have adverse effect upon the public safety or general welfare. 4. Based upon the above findings, variances to the above-specified requirements are hereby approved. 5. Based upon the above findings and variances, the proposed site plan is hereby approved according to the terms of Richfield City Code Subsection 547.13 with the following additional stipulations: a) The parking lot must be re -striped in accordance with the approved plan. Compact stalls and accessible stalls must be identified by appropriate signage. The accessible pedestrian route to the Penn Avenue sidewalk shall be cleared of snow as to be usable year-round. b) The building entrance facing Penn Avenue shall be covered by an awning, as shown on the proposed plans. The applicant shall submit a revised drawing of the north building elevation, to be approved by the Community Development Department. The north fagade of the building shall be finished with materials of consistent quality as those of the front wall, in accordance with City Code Subsection 544.07, Subd. 6. At a minimum, the fagade shall include a small awning over the door and a second paint color, to match the east fagade and provide visual interest. c) The applicant shall submit a final landscaping plan to be approved by the Community Development Department, including further detail of the proposed landscaping areas along the east and west property lines. Required plantings must be maintained to meet the intent of the Penn Avenue Design Guidelines. d) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall submit a surety equal to 125% of the value of any improvements (based on two bids including labor cost) not yet complete. e) All trash must be stored inside the building. f) The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all requirements detailed in the City's Administrative Review Committee Report dated June 2, 2016, and compliance with all other City and State regulations. Permits are required prior to commencement of any work; g) That the recipient of this approval record this Resolution with the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subd. 1 and the City's Zoning Ordinance Section 547.11, Subd. 7. Proof of recording is required prior to the issuance of a building permit; h) This approval shall expire one year from the date of approval unless the use has commenced or a building permit has been obtained and construction begun. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of July 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Code Requirements / Required Findings Part 1 - Site Plan Approval (Subsection 547.13) In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its compliance with the following: a) Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's long range plans including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. In the Penn Avenue Corridor, the Mixed Use District is intended to be a vibrant, pedestrian -oriented neighborhood center. The District can accommodate a variety of uses. The proposed use of the property as an office building is in keeping with these intentions. b) Consistency with the purposes of the Zoning Code. The purposes of the Zoning Code include: assisting in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan; creating harmonious and workable relationships among land uses; enhancing and protecting the physical appearance of the City and more. The proposal is consistent with these purposes of the Zoning Code. c) Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas. The site is already fully developed and is over 80 percent impervious. The proposed site plan has been designed so as to compliment and improve the surrounding area, by reducing impervious surfaces and adding landscaping where possible. d) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the proposed development. The proposed building fagade is complimentary to the adjacent Fraser property to the south. The proposed improvements to the site, particularly the removal of a curb cut along Penn Avenue, will reduce auto and pedestrian safety issues. e) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features including: i. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community; ii. Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping to the design and function of the development; iii. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and functions; and iv. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian, cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring properties. In order to justify exceeding parking maximums, the applicant has provided a professionally conducted parking study and a narrative of parking demands at the overall Fraser campus. The study found the existing peak parking demand to be 160 spaces. Before adding 6320 Penn to the campus, the study found a 17 space deficit. 6320 Penn will provide 58 additional parking spaces, for a total supply of 201 spaces throughout the campus. Following the relocation of administrative services and subsequent clinical space expansion at the main building, total peak peaking demand for the campus is projected at 207 spaces, including a 5% "design safety factor" surplus. The future parking supply would be 6 spaces less than anticipated peak demand. On -street parking is allowed on 64th Street, which could help accommodate peak demand. The striping of accessible parking spaces and a sidewalk connection near the front building entrance will bring the building into compliance with ADA requirements. A bike rack will be provided near the front entrance. Landscaping areas facing Penn Avenue will be added to screen the parking lot and the improve curb appeal of the building. Along the north and south property lines, there is limited opportunity to improve the site further given the placement and size of the building. f) Creation of an energy -conserving design through design location, orientation and elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of landscape materials and site grading. The proposal will not worsen conditions. g) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. No changes to surface water drainage, sound and/or sight impacts, views, etc. are anticipated. Part 2 - Variances: The proposed site plan will improve upon existing conditions, including functional and aesthetic improvements to the site. The applicant is requesting variances from parking lot setbacks, building setbacks, impervious surface regulations, and landscaping requirements. Subsection 544.13, Subd. 5: o Parking lot setback — 5 feet from adjacent mixed-use (proposed — 0 feet) Subsection 537.07, Subd. 1: o Front, side (north), and rear building setbacks — 15 feet maximum (proposed — 65 feet, 60 feet, and 84 feet, respectively) o Impervious surface regulations — 80% maximum (proposed — 81.8%) The applicant is reducing impervious surface coverage on the site from 83.7% to 81.8°/x. An additional 765 square feet of pervious / landscape area will be added to the boulevard area in public right of way along Penn Avenue that is currently impervious. Subsection 544.03: o Landscaping requirements — New landscaping areas are proposed to screen the parking lot facing Penn Avenue. The applicant must submit a revised landscaping plan to be approved by staff, including further detail of proposed landscaping areas along the east and west property lines. Along the north and south property lines, no major changes to existing conditions are proposed and screening requirements will not be met. The findings necessary to approve variances are as follows (Subsection. 547.11): a) There are "practical difficulties" that prevent the property owner from using the property in a reasonable manner. The existing property cannot be used in any fashion without variances. It is reasonable to allow the reuse of an existing building on an existing lot. b) There are usual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity. The building was constructed in 1958, prior to the adoption of current Codes. These circumstances were not created by the land owner. c) The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality. The requested variances will allow for the reuse and improvement of a vacant building. The improvements proposed will benefit the surrounding neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the site, particularly along Penn Avenue. No negative impacts are expected. d) The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. The proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this property. e) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plans are consistent with the general purposes and intents of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan as discussed further in Part 1 of this document. SSM �I� LU ZZ Z -- L.0 LU U 0J J __ _ _ • ate- Q^ K LL Z z O W W - o co W f7 U) ! - • �.. _ L1..� u Y SSM LU U) 7 7 LIJ LU < < V .Jr 0C� oc L N7 < F-- 0 z 0 m 0 co r LU zi 0 0 LL TF w V .Jr 0C� oc N7 0 0 LL TF w W U) oe U) z LIJ O % S 3nN3AV NN3d ¢ a� J U. o �XAa__ S 3nN3AV NN3d FRASER / Special needs * Bright futures® Date June 13, 2016 Project Statement — 6320 Penn Avenue South Rezoning Request Fraser owns four properties in Richfield. They are grouped around the corner of Penn Ave., South and W. 64th St. Fraser is requesting that the property at 6320 Penn Ave. S. be rezoned for office use. This is a change in use from a bowling alley into office space for use by our administrative support services. Administrative departments located in the 2400 W. 64th St. building, which currently houses Fraser HQ, Richfield Clinic and Fraser School will relocate to 6320 Penn Ave. to consolidate with other administrative departments. This shift is to allow for the expansion of clinical services offered at the 2400 W. 64th Street. Fraser's combined parking spaces will be shared by the four properties. The long-term plan for the "campus" is to remove the buildings, 6320, 6328, 6344, on Penn Avenue and develop a single Administrative Office building on the corner of Penn and West 64th Street and for the 2400 W. 64th building to be used exclusively as a clinic and school. r Dale Raasch Director, Property and Facilities Fraser School • Fraser Behavioral and Mental Health • Fraser Housing and Community Supports Fraser Pediatric Therapy • The Fraser Institute 2400 West 64th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55423 • Tel: 612.861.1688 • Fax: 612.861.6050 • www.fraser.org VOV WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. To: Dale Raasch, Fraser From: Ed Terhaar, P.E. Date: June 13, 2016 Subject: Parking Study for the Fraser Campus in Richfield, MN Wenck project number 6078-01 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND This memorandum presents the results of our parking study for the Fraser campus in Richfield, MN. Changes are proposed for the campus that include additional building space. A parking study was completed to examine the existing conditions and determine the overall impact of the proposed changes. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS The proposed development consists of renovating a former bowling alley building into 10,570 square feet of office space. As a result of the project, approximately 7,000 square feet of existing office space will be converted to clinic space. A total of 3,570 square feet of new office space will be added to the campus. PARKING STUDY Existing Parking Supply and Demand We performed a parking usage survey for the existing Fraser campus on Tuesday, June 7 and Wednesday, June 8, 2016. Parking usage data was collected for the entire campus, which was divided into the sub -areas shown in Figure 1. Parking usage data was collected from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for each sub -area. The results of the parking survey by sub- area are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Wenck Associates, Inc. 1 1800 Pioneer Creek Center I P.O. Box 249 1 Maple Plain, MN 55359-0249 Toll Free 800-472-2232 763-479-4200 Email wenckmp@wenck.com wenck.com w z 2400 64th Street N V^� A WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. R lA I• ALDI l r 64th Streel 6344 Penn, PARKING STUDY FOR THE FRASER CAMPUS IN RICHFIELD, MN FIGURE 1 PARKING SUB -AREAS Dale Raasch Fraser June 13, 2016 Table 1 Parking Survey Results for Existing Fraser Campus On Tuesdav June 7, 2016 V^V WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Total Time of Day Spaces Used By Sub -area Vehicles Parked A B C D E F G 8:00 10 10 12 19 5 3 0 59 8:30 11 12 20 26 8 19 2 98 9:00 22 13 26 34 10 24 1 130 9:30 20 14 21 39 10 23 1 128 10:00 14 13 19 41 11 26 1 125 10:30 16 14 19 40 11 27 1 128 11:00 16 14 19 39 11 27 1 127 11:30 19 14 22 38 10 27 1 128 12:00 17 14 29 42 13 28 1 135 12:30 16 14 17 50 10 30 1 138 1:00 16 14 17 50 10 30 2 139 1:30 17 14 17 52 10 31 4 145 2:00 17 14 17 52 11 33 5 148 2:30 18 14 17 53 11 34 6 151 3:00 17 14 17 53 11 34 6 152 3:30 15 12 20 52 9 33 6 147 4:00 18 9 17 46 7 30 6 133 4:30 16 8 15 44 5 27 5 120 5:00 15 6 15 40 3 25 4 108 Dale Raasch Fraser June 13, 2016 Table 2 Parking Survey Results for Existing Fraser Campus On Wednesday June 8, 2016 V*V WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Total Time of Day Spaces Used By Sub -area Vehicles Parked A B C D E F G 8:00 16 15 10 21 6 6 1 75 8:30 19 16 18 39 6 18 2 118 9:00 23 18 26 47 10 21 2 147 9:30 19 18 25 48 11 25 4 ISO 10:00 16 19 21 46 10 28 4 144 10:30 16 19 21 47 10 29 4 146 11:00 15 18 22 47 10 29 4 145 11:30 16 17 23 48 11 28 4 147 12:00 16 18 24 49 11 27 4 149 12:30 15 17 20 46 10 28 4 140 1:00 16 18 19 44 8 29 4 138 1:30 16 19 18 41 8 29 4 135 2:00 14 17 17 37 7 31 4 127 2:30 13 17 18 39 8 32 4 131 3:00 14 16 20 36 8 28 4 126 3:30 15 14 17 35 8 29 4 122 4:00 12 11 15 33 8 28 4 111 4:30 12 9 15 30 6 26 3 101 5:00 11 7 13 28 5 23 2 89 As shown in the tables, the observed peak parking demand occurred on Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. with 152 vehicles parked. The observed peak parking demand on Wednesday occurred at 9:00 a.m. with 150 vehicles parked. The variation between the two days is due to an off campus meeting that occurred Tuesday morning. During that time period, 40-50 staff people were off campus. These staff members returned to the campus in the afternoon, resulting in higher demand in the afternoon. Standard parking analysis calculations include a design safety factor that is applied to the parking demand to account for parking space turnover, vehicles using two spaces, peak surges, etc. A design safety factor of 5 percent is used for this purpose. Therefore, the peak parking demand would be 5 percent greater than the observed peak. Under existing conditions, the required number of parking spaces is 160 spaces, or 152 * 1.05. The parking supply without the bowling alley property was 143 spaces, or 17 spaces less than the peak demand. Therefore, under conditions without the bowling alley parking, there was a deficit of 17 parking spaces. Since the addition of the bowling alley, employees have been using the parking spaces on the property. This added 58 parking spaces to the supply, bring the total to 201 spaces. Under this scenario, the supply is 41 spaces greater than the peak demand. V*V Dale Raasch WENCK Fraser June 13, 2016 Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Future Parking Demand The future parking demand was calculated using industry standard parking generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for the proposed uses. Based on information presented in the ITE Parking Generation, 4th Edition, the 7,000 square feet of clinic space will generate a peak parking demand of 35 spaces and the 3,570 square feet of office space will generate a peak parking demand of 10 spaces, for a total of 45 spaces. Applying the design safety factor of 5 percent results in a peak parking demand of 47 additional spaces. Future Parking Supply As described earlier, the bowling alley property includes 58 parking stalls over previous conditions. Therefore, the future parking supply for the entire campus will be 201 stalls. Parking Supply and Demand Analysis The total peak parking demand using the ITE data is 207 spaces. The future parking supply of 201 spaces is 6 spaces less than the peak demand. On -street parking is allowed on 64th Street, which will be able to accommodate this amount of excess parking demand. The addition of the 58 parking stalls as part of the bowling alley renovation are critical to accommodating the expected parking demand on the campus. PARKING LOT DIMENSIONS The proposed site plan for the bowling alley renovation project includes a layout for the parking areas surrounding the building. The area north of the building includes two parking rows separated by a two-way drive aisle with a total width of 57'-9". The area on the west side of the building includes one parking row against the building and a two-way drive aisle with a total width of 38'-6". Since both of these areas are smaller than required by City code, additional information on parking lot dimensions was obtained and reviewed. Information from the City of Minneapolis indicates the minimum parking space and aisle dimensions in Minneapolis are 18 feet for standard stalls and 22 feet for two-way drive aisles, resulting in 58 feet of space for two parking rows and a two-way drive aisle. Minneapolis also allows compact parking spaces, which have dimensions of 15 feet for stalls and 22 feet for two-way drive aisles, resulting in 52 feet of space for two parking rows and a two-way drive aisle. Therefore, the size range for two parking rows and a two-way drive aisle is 52 to 58 feet and 37 to 40 feet for one parking row and a two-way drive aisle. Both of the proposed parking areas are within these size ranges. In addition, the low turnover nature of parking stalls used office employees lends itself to smaller parking dimensions. Fewer parking maneuvers are made each day compared to high turnover uses such as retail or restaurants. V*V Dale Raasch WENCK Fraser June 13, 2016 Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information presented in this memorandum, we have made the following conclusions and recommendations: • The observed peak parking demand occurred on Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. with 152 vehicles parked. The observed peak parking demand on Wednesday occurred at 9:00 a.m. with 150 vehicles parked. • Under existing conditions, the required number of parking spaces is 160 spaces, which includes a five percent design safety factor. The parking supply without the bowling alley property was 143 spaces, or 17 spaces less than the peak demand. Therefore, under conditions without the bowling alley parking, there was a deficit of 17 parking spaces. • The acquisition of the bowling alley property added 58 parking spaces to the supply, bringing the total to 201 spaces. Under this scenario, the supply is 41 spaces greater than the existing peak demand. • Based on information presented in the ITE Parking Generation, 4th Edition, the proposed development will generate a peak parking demand of 45 spaces. Applying the design safety factor of five percent results in a peak parking demand of 47 additional spaces. • The total peak parking demand using the ITE data is 207 spaces. The future parking supply of 201 spaces is 6 spaces less than the peak demand. On -street parking is allowed on 64th Street, which will be able to accommodate this amount of excess parking demand. • The proposed parking areas on the bowling alley property are within the City of Minneapolis size ranges for standard and compact parking areas. I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. �vwl Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 DATE: June 13, 2016 5.1 a H w z� x a n c c N a to w wo U o m w w � n c c a to w cl V 3AVH :13AI�Q o m p U O lM0 U K K K CL CL d' d' N C) CD M W W ❑ ❑7pw U X U d N N❑Ww Q L U U xX X� H � � TT1 U U X_ X_ X_ X_ X W X X 'j- c C a C 3AVNN3d 3AV NN3d p o u, O F M N �w W U U U U W W U on y / Q a a a a LU W o D N w w w w w Of 0 F w ' X x X x X X �n E - E 2 n 3 E > U m o S2 a L � � U a}� �/J M o a �_ ❑ ❑ a r_ -0 X_ X_ �a✓ X_ () C cn N a CL o E�@ o � 0 000000000❑ . . . . . . o N T o. N 6 c N M CIO 3nV ��3SSf12i X o M 3nv��3ssnb ,a Q J w X J i� � M a x Z E LL o N H w n c c N a to w 3AVH :13AI�Q o m � N cl V p U O lM0 U K K K CL CL d' d' p @ P U U U d N Q L U U U H TT1 U U U U U U U C 3AVNN3d p u, p �wN O F M N E c U U U U U W W U on y / a a a a a Ofa o D �n E (D E O ao m o S2 L � � U M _U v J cn y O T a E�@ . . . . . . . . . o. N y C O T >>� M 3nv��3ssnb i� � M AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 3.13. STAFF REPORT NO. 106 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 7/6/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/6/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the request for two separate Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor licenses for the Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South for their Bike Night Out events scheduled to take place on July 20, 2016 and August 17, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On June 8, 2016, the City received application materials for two Temporary On Sale Into)acating Liquor licenses for the Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South. The American Legion plans to have two separate Bike Night Out events take place in their parking lot and serve alcohol from 3:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on July 20, 2016 and August 17, 2016. They will serve food indoors. The applicant will serve alcohol in a taped off area in their parking lot and will have three security persons monitoring the area and checking ID's prior to allowing entrance into the area. The applicant was approved for a Temporary On Sale Into)acating Liquor license for the same event that took place on June 15, 2016. The Director of Public Safety has reviewed and approved these license applications and sees no reason they should be denied. All required information has been provided. All licensing fees have been received RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the issuance of Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor licenses for the Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South for their Bike Night Out events scheduled to take place on July 20, 2016 and August 17, 2016. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The applicant has satisfied the following requirements for the issuance of these licenses: • The required licensing fees have been paid. • Proof of liquor liability insurance has been submitted showing Integrity Mutual Insurance Company affording the coverage for both events, including the parking lot where the events are taking place. • Private security has been hired by the American Legion to patrol the area for these events. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy Richfield City Code Section 1202.05 requires all applicants to comply with all of the provisions of this code, as well as the provisions of Minnesota Statue Chapter 340A. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: There are no critical timing issues. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The required licensing fees have been received. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: There are no legal considerations. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: The Council could decide to deny the requested licenses, which would mean the applicant would not be able to serve alcohol outside to the public for these events. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Jeff Husaby - Legion Manager AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 3.C. STAFF REPORT NO. 107 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/6/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a resolution appointing election judges for the August 9, 2016 Primary Election and the November 8, 2016 General Election. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The State Primary Election is on Tuesday, August 9, 2016 and the State General Election is on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Election Judges The City Clerk's office is updating and verifying the City's election judge availability list. All individuals who have previously served as an election judge, were on the list submitted to the County Auditor by the major political parties, or have expressed an interest in serving as an election judge were asked to complete an online election judge application. Election judges will be assigned to the precincts based on availability, party balance, and the number required for each election. The General Election will require assignment of the greatest number of available judges. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution appointing election judges for the August 09, 2016 Primary Election and the November 8, 2016 General Election. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Minnesota Statute 204B.21 Subd. 2 provides that election judges for precincts in a municipality shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality and that the appointments be made at least 25 days before the election at which the election judges will serve. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch The City Council is required by State Statute to make election judge appointments at least 25 days prior to the election. The proposed resolution contains names of those qualified individuals who have indicated a willingness and ability to serve as an election judge for the August 9, 2016 Primary Election and the November 8, 2016 General Election. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: If the City Council does not appoint election judges, the conduct of the election would not be valid. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Due to a highly contested Presidential Election, voter turnout is expected to greatly increase. This will result in having to schedule additional election judges for appropriate coverage which will increase election costs. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: The City Council must appoint election judges to serve at these elections to comply with Minnesota Statute 2046.21, Subd. 2. The names come from a list of people who have indicated their interest in serving as an election judge to the County Auditor pursuant to the provisions of M.S. 2046.21 Subd. 1 and those who have previously served or indicated interest in serving. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI The City Council could choose to appoint other individuals as election judges who are not named in the resolution. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Resolution - 2016 Election Judges Resolution Letter RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE STATE PRIMARY ELECTION OF AUGUST 9, 2016 AND THE GENERAL ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 8, 2016 WHEREAS, a State Primary Election will be held on Tuesday, August 9, 2016 and a General Election will be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, that the following are hereby appointed as judges for said elections: Yvonne Atkins Kirsten Croone Janette Holter Donna Englert Ellen Cutter Jenee Honnigford Angie Faison David Dahl Kathy Johnson Sharon Flick Kathy Dahlen Janell Joyner Nancy Gibbs Scott Dahlquist Betty Lou Kamps John Holter Marie Dallager Thomas Keegan Veronica Martinez- Julie Danielson Claire Killian Hernandez Eileen Davenport Elisabeth Kingdon Kari Sinning Sandra Decker Cynthia Kuntz Julie Smith Cindy Dubansky Bonnie Leslie Marlys Solt Liz Ekholm Daniel Leslie Katherine Stehly Betty Elenbaas Joseph Limoli II Nancy Stroth Carolyn Engeldinger Nancy Lindberg Judy Wood Patricia Erickson Richard Loney James Alagna Jeanne Exline Cynthia Mandl Rob Amundson Denise Famodu Lawrence Martin Janis Anderson Francie Fletcher Sharon Mattson Carol Athey Sharon Foster Paul Matuschek Andrew Atkins Bridget Gaeleigh Andrew May James Atkins Mary Gagne Karin McComb Kristin Atkins Claire Gahler Michele McGee Stephen Aus Grant Gartland Sandy Menning-Glavan Patricia Bailey Jennifer Gisslen Lee Richard Morey Patricia Bates Judy Goebel Isabelle Moulinier Barbara Bauer James Grant Sarah Musgrave Rosalie Bjorkman Rebecca Guarino Helen Nachicas Kimberly Blomberg Roger Guarino Linda Nemitz Andrew Boeke Caitlin Hackbarth Marilyn Nienkerk Mary Boespflug Robert Hall Cindy Norland Linda Boyd James Harding David Nyholm Sandra Bradley Mary Hayden Janet Nyholm Crystal Brakke Adrienne Hayes Martha (Betty) Nancy Buck Iryche Hickenbotham Obenchain Marjorie Cain Ruth Hiland Chris Okey Doris Christine Cheryl Hjortaas Mary Olson David Clark Oliver Hoffman Robert Olson Venious Virginia Clark Ilene Holen Ruby Olson Rachel Orzoff Mark Pafiolis Marlene Kay Peterson Carol Petkoff Monica Petrov Nathae Richardson Jeffrey Rundgren Matthew Ryan Margaret Schow Anne Schuette Mary Sievers 2016. Margaret Smith Mary Jane Steinhagen Brett Stursa Catherine Sullivan Roger Swanson Myrtle Thom Jan Thompson Mark Tilc Mary Jo Tuttle John Twisk David Vrieze Daniels Erin Vrieze Daniels Nancy Walstrom Sandra Walstrom Molly Weber Robert Wells Elaine Wetsch Marian Woolery Yemesrach Yohannes PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of July Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 3.D. STAFF REPORT NO. 108 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Finnegan, Civil Engineer DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director 7/1/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/6/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the award of a contract for the 2016 Sealcoat project to Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of $112,646.30 and authorization of the City Manager to approve changes in the construction contract up to $100,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Sealcoating has been the leading cost-effective technique for slowing the deterioration of our residential streets. The sealcoating process involves applying a thin coat of emulsified oil, then covering it with rock. Recently reconstructed streets (since 2010) are due for sealcoating. The 2016 sealcoating project includes portions of 62nd Street, 72nd Street, 75th Street, 76th Street, Humboldt Avenue, 11th Avenue, and Diagonal Boulevard (as shown on the attached map). RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: 1. Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract to Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of $112,646.30. 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve contract changes up to $100,000 without further City Council approval. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • The residential roads were originally constructed between 1972 and 1977. • A pavement management program began in 1980. That policy direction was set to protect the City's capital investment and maintain an acceptable roadway system. The City's ongoing preventive maintenance program is essential in delaying the costs associated with reconstruction. • The franchise fee implemented in 2004 provides the funding for the City's Pavement Management Program. • Streets reconstructed after 2010 are now due for a sealcoat. These roads will be sealcoated as part of this project. • Advertisement for Bids was published on June 16, 2016. • Pearson Brothers, Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch • The City has adopted a Pavement Management Program to maintain the quality of the road and prolong the life of the capital investment (Comprehensive Plan — Road Pavement Conditions). • Council approval is required for expenditures over $100,000. • All contracts over $100,000 require sealed bides to be solicited by public notice. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Regular preventive maintenance techniques, such as sealcoating, are effective in delaying costly street reconstruction projects. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • The cost of oil used for sealcoating is similar and the installed price of rock is down from the 2013 prices. • A recent history of bid prices for sealcoating: Year Bid Price Rock Bid Price Oil Contractor 2011 $0.34 $2.19 Pearson Brothers 2012 $0.51 $2.39 Pearson Brothers 2013 $0.56 $2.63 Pearson Brothers 2016 $0.57 $2.49 Pearson Brothers E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: • None PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None /t1aV-11m:Iiyi14Ll11i+5 Description Type D Bid Tab Exhibit D Contract Contract/Agreement D 2016 Sealcoat Map Exhibit CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening June 28, 2016 10:00 a.m. 2016 Sealcoat Project Bid No. 16-06 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for the 2016 Sealcoat Project, as advertised in the official newspaper on June 16, 2016. Present: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Jeff Pearson, City Engineer Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name Bond Non- Intent to Responsible Total Base Bid Collusion Comply Contractor Allied Blacktop, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $ 126,292.35 Maple Grove, MN Pearson Brothers, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $ 112,646.30 Hanover, MN The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 28, 2016 City Council Meeting. Elizabeth VanHoose City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA CONTRACT FOR MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION City Project No. 41013 Contract No. 2820 Bid No. 16-06 Class of Work: 2016 Sealcoat THIS AGREEMENT is made this 12th day of July, 2016, between the City of Richfield, Minnesota, acting by and through its Mayor and City Manager ("City") and Pearson Brothers, Inc. ("Contractor"). 1. Contract Price. The Contractor, in consideration of the payment of the contract price — One Hundred Twelve Thousand Six Hundred Forty Six Dollars and Thirty Cents ($112,646.30) — will furnish all materials (except such as are specified to be furnished by the City, if any), all necessary tools and equipment, and do and perform all the necessary work and labor for the full completion of the City Project: 2016 Sealcoat ("Project"). 2. Compliance with Plans. Contractor shall complete the Project as shown in the approved plans, specifications and special provisions (collectively, "Plans") that are on file in the office of the City's Public Works Department. The Plans are attached and are made a part of this Agreement. Contractor agrees that all work shall be done and performed in the best and most proficient manner and that all materials and labor shall be in strict conformity with the Plans for the Project. All work is subject to inspection and approval by the City Engineer, or her authorized designee. If the City rejects any material or labor as defective or unsuitable, then the Contractor must remove the rejected materials and replace it with material approved by the City Engineer, at the cost of the Contractor. The Contractor must also perform anew any rejected labor to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, or her designee, at the cost and expense of the Contractor. 3. Commencement and Completion of Work. The Contractor further agrees that it will commence work as soon after the Pre -Construction Meeting and as appropriate permits have been obtained, and will have all work done and the improvement fully completed to the satisfaction and approval of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, on or before August 26, 2016. 4. Delays and Liquidated Damages. Time is of the essence for completion of the Project. If the Contractor fails to complete the Project within the time herein specified, the City shall have the right to deduct from the unpaid part of the contract price, liquidated damages (it being 1 impossible to determine the actual damages occasioned by the delay) of $500 for each calendar day of delay, until the work is completed. Upon receipt of written notice from the Contractor that there will be delay in completion of the Project, the City may in its discretion extend the date for completion. In such case, the Contractor shall become liable for liquidated damages only for failure to perform within the time so extended. If delays are caused by the weather, labor strikes or other factors not caused by Contractor and Contractor cannot provide written notice as described above, then the City may also in its discretion excuse such delays and extend the date for completion. 5. Claims for Extra Work or Materials. Contractor shall not do any work or furnish any materials not covered by the Plans and this Agreement, unless such work or materials is first ordered in writing and approved in writing by the City. If Contractor performs such extra work or provides additional materials without the required written order and approval, the additional costs shall be borne by Contractor. 6. CitV Not Liable. The City, including its Council, employees and agents, shall not be liable or responsible in any manner to the Contractor, its subcontractors, materialmen, laborers or any other person for any claim, demand, damages, actions, or causes of action of any kind arising out of this Agreement or the performance and completion of the Project described herein. Dated at Richfield, Minnesota, this 12th day of July, 2016. Signatures for: Pearson Brothers, Inc. (Contractor) EVA Its Signatures for: CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA (City) By Its Citv Manager. Steven L. Devich By Its M 2 pxw,leooleaS 9602\y}noSuollonilsuoopuelliod t0 960Z\sdeW\5uuaaul5u3MJoM ollQnd\SIE)\:I 7 0- J a) 0rim V •rim 4- 0 I - *rim V M s r OWL MV30 OOLZ NOIA49N OWL 418L 0ozz N3 Ilo OOLL 41LL }J 009L 449L OObZ N33nO 4Z9L NOIDNIWOOlB OWZ 113Ssnd OO9L 419L 009Z NVOIM3HS N OO L 41bL II OWZ NOl n 00£L 41£L 006Z 1N3ONIA OOZL 41ZL OOL£ S3XM3X OOLL 41LL OIL 410L 006 IOM3 008 OOVOIHo OZL Snannioo OOL M d OZg ONV wo 009 ONVl1MOd 009 415 00b 410 0 4Z£ NO1 110 („) 00£ Pi£ 003 NZ VL SN3A S C9 w 00L "Ir r C) A 000 13110OIN CD V v OS 1130SIVlB 3 OOL H1MOM W OW AMnBSllld 00£ 1NVSV3ld 00b ONVMo 009 131MMVH 009 Ol31dMVO OOL 3NONAl '.L008 HOIHON 006 1NVAH8 -POOL XVdlOO _OOLL 1NOdnO OOZL NOSM3N3 00£L 1NON3Md o" 0MVM1O =OO9L 1O1O8WnH o 009L ONIAMI CDOLL S3W 008E XONN OWL NVOOI 0003 WOMON OOLZ NOIA49N 0ozz N3 Ilo 00£Z NN3d }J LN OObZ N33nO OWZ 113Ssnd N 009Z NVOIM3HS N OOLZ SVWOHL II OWZ NOl n 006Z 1N3ONIA 000£ NMnBHSVM OOL£ S3XM3X AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 3.E. STAFF REPORT NO. 109 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Mary Tietjen, City Attorney DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing and directing the condemnation of certain real estate, easements and other rights and interests for the purpose of the expansion of the parking lot serving the Richfield Municipal Liquor Store located at 6600 Cedar Avenue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At its meeting on June 14, 2016, the City Council approved the award of a contract for improvements to the Municipal Liquor Store located at 6600 Cedar Avenue. Improvements to the store are expected to be underway this fall, with completion expected in November 2016. As part of the upgrade to this store, the parking area is in need of improvement and expansion to accommodate customer needs. Sufficient land exists to the east of the store for an expansion of the parking area, but the City first needs to acquire ownership of the property before it can undertake the expansion. Authorizing the City Attorney to initiate eminent domain will allow the City to obtain ownership of the necessary area, which is approximately 33' of additional land east of the City parcel. This additional land should be more than sufficient to make the parking lot improvements needed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: (1) Approve the resolution and (2) authorize City staff and the City Attorney to initiate eminent domain to acquire said interests. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The City Attorney's office has obtained title work to determine the underlying ownership and interests in the area that is needed for the expansion. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has an easement interest in the land, but has indicated that it will not contest the City's condemnation to obtain fee title. The City Attorney's office is currently researching the available records on the named fee owners. Because the land is not currently being used for any purpose, any compensation that may be necessary to the fee owners (if they can be identified and if they contest the action) should be minimal. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes. etcy • Right-of-way acquisition procedures set forth by Minnesota State law are being followed. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • The eminent domain process must begin now so that the City can obtain title to the land and begin the parking lot improvements in conjunction with the upcoming renovation of the store in the fall of 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • There is no payment to MnDOT for their interest in this property. However, if there is an underlying fee owner associated with this property, they may be entitled to a nominal payment. This will be determined during the condemnation process. • It is estimated that the legal costs of this property acquisition will be approximately $10,000. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorneys are overseeing the acquisition process and will be available to answer any questions. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI The Council may choose to delay or deny the approval of the use of eminent domain to acquire the necessary property. This would result in the City not having the ability to expand the parking lot serving the liquor store. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Resolution Resolution Letter CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL ESTATE, EASEMENTS, AND OTHER RIGHTS AND INTERESTS FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF EXPANDING THE PARKING LOT SERVING THE RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE LOCATED AT 6600 CEDAR AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield ("City Council") is the official governing body of the City of Richfield ("City"); and WHEREAS, the City, a Minnesota municipal corporation acting by and through its City Council, is authorized by law to acquire land and other interests in real estate which are needed for public use or purpose; and WHEREAS, the City owns and operates a liquor store at 6600 Cedar Avenue in the City of Richfield, and wishes to expand the parking lot which serves that store over adjacent and unused real estate, which is also located within the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation owns an easement encumbering said real estate, which the Commissioner has indicated that the City may acquire, subject to conditions acceptable to the Commissioner; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest, and reasonably necessary, proper and convenient for the City to acquire the real estate which is described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") in fee simple, to eliminate unused and abandoned real estate, and to provide parking to be owned and used by the City for City purposes ("Project"); and WHEREAS, despite the good faith efforts of employees and agents of the City, it has not been reasonably possible to voluntarily obtain marketable title to the Property. 1 482488v1 RC145-699 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is reasonably necessary, proper, and convenient, and in the interest of the public safety, public health, and general welfare of the citizens of the City that title to and possession of the Property be acquired through use of the power of eminent domain for said purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the funding and construction schedule for the Project make it necessary to acquire title to and possession of the Property prior to the filing of the final report of the condemnation commissioners to be appointed by the district court; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD IN REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, that it is the considered judgment of the City Council that it is necessary to obtain the real estate described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof as though fully set forth at this point, for the stated public purposes, through the exercise of the power of eminent domain. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Attorney is authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to acquire said real estate through use of eminent domain proceedings, including use of the quick -take procedure. Adopted this day of July, 2016 by the Richfield City Council. Debbie Goettel, Mayor Pat Elliott Tom Fitzhenry ATTEST 482488v1 RC145-699 2 Edwina Garcia Michael Howard Steven L. Devich, City Manager/Acting City Clerk Debbie Goettel, Mayor CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of July, 2016, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Steven L. Devich, City Manager/Acting City Clerk 482488v1 RC145-699 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED Parcel l The West 33.00 feet of the North 233 feet of the West 233 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter in Section 25, Township 28, Range 24, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 123118. A-1 482488v1 RC145-699 AGENDA SEC -10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA ITEM # 5. STAFF REPORT NO. 110 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Karen Barton, Acting Community Development Director 7/6/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/6/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and consideration of a resolution regarding the removal of an easement related to sight lines at 76th Street and the adjacent railroad tracks. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On December 5, 1947 the Village of Richfield and owners of property immediately east of the railroad tracks at 76th Street, entered into an agreement to reserve a "sight easement" overly the westerly 30 feet of the property. This easement required the owners to keep this area free from "shrubbery, buildings or other obstructions which may interfere with the view of traffic approaching the railroad crossing on 76th Street." The railroad was not a party to this easement. It is unclear why the City entered into this agreement with the private owner of the property. Staff has not found any similar easements along the railroad tracks, nor have we come across easements between the railroad and private owners. In approximately 2011, automatic warning devices and crossing gates were added to this crossing. The stated purpose of the sight easement is "to daylight the grade crossing of 76th Street..." The installation of the crossing gates makes this easement unnecessary. Notice of this hearing and the City's intent to vacate the easement was sent to the railroad. No comments have been received. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Approve a resolution vacating a sight easement at 76th Street and the adjacent railroad tracks. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT See Executive Summary. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch • As part of platting process for the adjacent multi -family senior development, the City Attorney's Office prepares a plat opinion letter. • The plat opinion letter recommends review of all easements and the vacation of easements that are no longer necessary. • The City may vacate an easement by resolution when it appears in the interest of the public to do so. • City staff sees no reason to maintain the existing easement. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: None D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • Notice of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the easement area. • No comments related to the easement have been received. • The City Council may vacate public easements in accordance with MN Statute 412.851. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI None. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Resolution Resolution Letter ❑ Easement area Exhibit ❑ Planning & Zoning Maps Exhibit RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PUBLIC EASEMENT AT APPROXIMATELY 76TH STREET AND PLEASANT AVENUE WHEREAS, the following described lands are subject to a sight easement in favor of the City of Richfield: The westerly 30 feet of Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, R.C. Soens Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the property is subject to an easement for sight/visibility purposes, as described in Document No. 254953 (dated December 5, 1947), in the files of the Hennepin County Recorder; and WHEREAS, there now exist automatic warning devices and crossing gates at this railroad crossing; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the easement created by Document No. 254953 is no longer needed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The easement for sight purposes, which was reserved over the above- described property in Document No. 254953, is vacated, effective immediately. 2. The City Clerk is directed to prepare a certificate of completion of vacation proceedings and to record the vacation in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of July, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk PRELIMINARY PLAT - of - RICHFIELD ASSISTED LIVING I I I I I 1 1 ImAt? CL I I I I I I rvP — ,, — ,l 1,9 —-�.T.------- --- --- — — — — — —-----------� n ,. .- — 21 Ti--11Y ao� Atleioo«'. xx e arms, I..I.,n Leel aeee I a x u .,� ,. J" , , n1,11 1- PMA1111k.FI11c1 1-11 I rr n I _ �n To.....: o1w,ry-r:r I I _ �e oT. 'tel oecon. A--1, •Ra. Eoe,llmem,,. are6m�of Ta1�1 mann OWNERS: Mesaha Capital Devel,pment � `Minneapolis Bloomington, MN 55437 3d.go — + m St RBUI O ---- n--Plll e •� 1 �ess�'10�w �, ' j�(r j Ed a SUITE 100 AA II - 7666 Pillsbury Av Sto en'Pralrie (7 T3458-2997 ♦ Bloo ngton CIVIL S111 Cr:OUP :, p T. LOUIS PARK, M 1 55416 R�rnsvile , MATT PAVER; 763-213-31�� or PAT SARVER. 952-250-2003 15 .vw.�.,�Nk Pla<E rr 1 ory nPt v. lI r 8 w� i � R p -LA }Y ry°o"r iiaeu= aLs63ai,ry luo a, s,w�o,o1 — NS I II� I w I+ LOT 1, BLOCK 1 TOTAL AREA = 142,861 sq. ft. (3.28 acres) � F 1 II„ W I „ � I f W I � Q r Ell I � I m ' W �p J J a III I� o II ——.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.—.— — —.— 77TH STREET s,,,, �w soM,� UNE or NOA,R a' 0T LOT a� MONeMEN,so-_ -------------�---------------�----- �—�,i � lea PIPE 11 GT:NFRAT_ NOTES: 11 t .d s—NIVITI NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE I I I I I VICINITY NIAP: I I I DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION 4 .- — 21 Ti--11Y ao� Atleioo«'. xx e arms, I..I.,n Leel aeee I a x u .,� ,. J" , , n1,11 1- PMA1111k.FI11c1 1-11 I rr n I _ �n To.....: o1w,ry-r:r I I _ �e oT. 'tel oecon. A--1, •Ra. Eoe,llmem,,. are6m�of Ta1�1 mann OWNERS: Mesaha Capital Devel,pment � `Minneapolis Bloomington, MN 55437 m St RBUI O ngal0 k6 •� wo0d6u �, ' j�(r 9140 BALTIMORE STREET NE Ed a SUITE 100 - 7666 Pillsbury Av Sto en'Pralrie (7 T3458-2997 ♦ Bloo ngton CIVIL S111 Cr:OUP :, p T. LOUIS PARK, M 1 55416 R�rnsvile , MATT PAVER; 763-213-31�� or 77TH STREET s,,,, �w soM,� UNE or NOA,R a' 0T LOT a� MONeMEN,so-_ -------------�---------------�----- �—�,i � lea PIPE 11 GT:NFRAT_ NOTES: 11 t .d s—NIVITI NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE I I I I I � Easement Area t, P.— R, I1—T I I I DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION rex sTr; i'IT C1 a R1 c1cTLcrrc exoov. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I� elle 'R.0-5oaos 21 Ti--11Y ao� Atleioo«'. xx e arms, I..I.,n Leel aeee I a x u .,� ,. J" , , n1,11 1- PMA1111k.FI11c1 1-11 I rr n I _ �n To.....: o1w,ry-r:r I I _ �e oT. 'tel oecon. A--1, •Ra. Eoe,llmem,,. are6m�of Ta1�1 mann OWNERS: Mesaha Capital Devel,pment #10700 N—, ,,ddl BIVd_ Ste. #202 _ Bloomington, MN 55437 meas) 840-9801 1 _ Gecapltnl.cem SURVEYOR ACRE LAND SURJEYINC, INC_ 9140 BALTIMORE STREET NE SUITE 100 BLAINE, MN 5544D (7 T3458-2997 ERIC R. 4ICKARYOUS, PLS CIVIL ENGINEER CIVIL S111 Cr:OUP 4931 \`, 5TH „T_, SUITE �(2UU T. LOUIS PARK, M 1 55416 ------ MATT PAVER; 763-213-31�� or PAT SARVER. 952-250-2003 REV. 02/08/16. FLAT BOUNDARY. TITLE COMMITMENT EASEMENTS tluly Rt .Fredv Land Sudth.rveprt ulnder the laxs of the S.ote of Minnesota. ACRE LAND SURVEYING ERIC R. 6 V 9 0 4 4�-e entl k»yontl mall. II f � �,LL� ervnp �In CGiee rr RARv JOB #15499 2997 ac Ne Y� ete:den. —d 2016 Re . N a 12s L£b99 NW'NOlONIW0019'ZOZ 31ins'mm3inos 31VONVWNON OOLOI Z Y �6 1N3WdOl3A3U TdlldVO VSVS3W V+JJNW'G131dHOIN '3AV 1NVSV31d 8133NiS H19L p� �; q k a U =xl J g� Loo=^.', _- m ®� ;"'� ►� '�`�€ � m =gip ° = w Z = 00 JNIAI'l 431SISS`d a131�HOIN m11 1 g 4 4 OZ o m = \ 133&ll .11 1S3M r 0 8= M $� o m "IA \ 4�m n=n xua �� i \ z • w I Y %/ Ir _ g \I o_ i I I / I ' I a jjI Aq i t I IIIA II II/ o a w "mom sm5 1 �o fgb m Irl I i I - B�o as �gh 2� TI 1 p� N Wpm 8i�s�m �oswo: m <p mq sole a� 92 I N uJ 1�. I z aa5w i'zi -68 8?w2 aS I I i r I\ 828 88 33 Ic Iz I a � I II II I ti I I z I I II Is I II I I:_I I Doll a I I I I r I E P y e. Y � ax mga" _ y 133 A M19. •N •E O O = N L C O L � U cn Q� Q ++ +, cu cl) U -a M L a) ch ■� cu L CD O N L � O N U- I � � � � � � LLI 3nV Hl2iOM1N3M os z z z z z z £ 3nVJ.JnaSllld LU �. r w LU - w af Lo z z ct! a a OVOJIIVJ / 3nb 1NVSV3Id a � 3nV ONVJO 3nV H1JOM1N3AA z z z z z z os £ 3nV).Jnasllld CL K K K LU ~ LU LU - i w af Lo ~ z z OVOJIIVJ / 3nV 1NVSV3Id N N N N N N a � 3nV ONVJO 0 0 N O a o m N N N N N N a � 3nV ONVJO 3nV H1JOM1N3AA z z z z z z os £ 3nV).Jnasllld CL K K K LU ~ LU LU - i w af Lo ~ z z OVOJIIVJ / 3nV 1NVSV3Id N N N N N N a � 3nV ONVJO 0 0 N O a o m % CD ■N � O a = U L � O ■i O C/) O L 1 � o L Q y� V T ■ L � J Tco— L O N N I I �- �- Ll ❑ o LLI 0 3nV Hl2iOM1N3AA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p ❑ ❑ x x sF 3AvJ.Jf18S-nld w • o o �, ❑ = o x ❑ � p r OVOHIIV'd / 3, 1NVSV3�d K K � O � ❑ K K K ❑ ❑ 3nV ONVJO ❑ o 0 0 w • o o �, ❑ = o x ❑ � p r OVOHIIV'd / 3, 1NVSV3�d K K � O � ❑ K K K ❑ ❑ 3nV ONVJO 0 K U y N ro M. y @ 'Z7] CN T.- a� U w oC)or 000xp a ai o z E O � w T Q 3nV Hl2iOM1N3AA d i o 0 � o � o x x U N D ■� d Cl) V ) U sin o 1 3AVJ.:jnas- ld c 1 m a w❑ ❑ ❑� w z z i w O U) ❑ ❑ E �i 2 � � � ❑x o ocu. ❑ N D W U � _ o ■Q OVOHIIV2J / 31NVSV3�d N L E R! (U o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ o ❑ o t n U V � O U y ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �_ @ d' <6 ■� � (6 i M6 C = C L a y N 3nVONVJ0 moa cu a� CO C C = N @ 3 N E C Ir - O 0O U x q 2� LJL N 000ro� N - -1 � / U U U= x p d ❑ o 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ p p p 0 K U y N ro M. y @ 'Z7] CN T.- a� U w oC)or 000xp a ai o z E O � w T Q 3nV Hl2iOM1N3AA d i o 0 � o � o x x U N D ■� d Cl) V ) U sin o 1 3AVJ.:jnas- ld c 1 m a w❑ ❑ ❑� w z z i w O U) ❑ ❑ E �i 2 � � � ❑x o ocu. ❑ N D W U � _ o ■Q OVOHIIV2J / 31NVSV3�d N L E R! (U o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ o ❑ o t n U V � O U y ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �_ @ d' <6 ■� � (6 i M6 C = C L a y N 3nVONVJ0 moa cu a� CO C C = N @ 3 N E C Ir - O 0O U x q 2� LJL N 000ro� N - -1 � / U U U= x p d ❑ o 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ p p AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM # 6. STAFF REPORT NO. 111 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7/12/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Karen Barton, Acting Community Development Director 7/7/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 7/7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution for Site Plan Approval for a community bandshell at Veterans Memorial Park. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City of Richfield has long -planned for an outdoor performance facility. The 1985 Veterans Memorial Park Master Plan identified a desire for a 1,500 seat amphitheater; the Richfield 2020 Visioning Project Report (2001) identified a desire for an amphitheater to support an expanded summer concert schedule; and most recently, an outdoor performance stage is identified as a potential park improvement for Augsburg Park in the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan. On June 23, 2015 the City Council approved plans for the construction of a bandshell at Veterans Memorial Park. Since that time, the City has continued to study site soils and has determined that construction of the bandshell at a location nearer to the ice arena would be less expensive. This location is also farther from the adjacent pond. The attached revised plans show the new location and revised orientation of the proposed bandshell. Staff has also continued to review the possible environmental impacts of the proposed building as additional public comment has been received. A letter from the Audubon Chapter of Minneapolis and a response from Recreation Services Director Topitzhofer have both been attached to this report for review and consideration. A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 27, 2016. A number of people spoke both for and against the proposed bandshell. The Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of the resolution (5-1) with a stipulation requiring that a professional noise study be undertaken prior to the issuance of a building permit. At the time of this report, staff is working to address this stipulation and an update on progress will be provided at the Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve the resolution for Site Plan Approval for a bandshell at Veterans Memorial Park. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The community and Council have identified construction of a bandshell/amphitheater/performance stage in a community park as a goal in a variety of long-range plans, as discussed in the Executive Summary. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy Parks and related recreational facilities are permitted in all zoning districts. Site plan approval is required prior to the construction of any building in the City. The revised location of the bandshell has not changed its level of compliance with Zoning requirements. General Requirements The proposed bandshell meets all dimensional (setback, height, bulk, lot coverage, impervious surface) requirements for nonresidential buildings as stated in Section 514 of the Code. Performance standards related to screening, architectural design, stormwater management, and lighting are all met. Afinal landscaping plan shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Landscaping along the southern edge of the parking lot will be considered as part of the reconstruction of 66th Street. Parking The Code requires 90 parking stalls for a public place of assembly of this size that is located within one- quarter mile of a frequently operating transit line. The lot immediately adjacent to the proposed bandshell can accommodate 175 vehicles. The northern pavilion parking lot can hold an additional 110 vehicles and an agreement with the American Legion would allow shared parking for exceptionally large crowds. Additionally, the Richfield Recreation Department operates both the Ice Arena and Pool, and will program the bandshell facility such that events are not scheduled simultaneously. The available parking, in addition to the fact that many users will potentially use alternate modes of transportation (bike, walk), exceeds Code requirements. Noise To comply with Code Section 930 related to noise, the following Noise Control Plan will be established: All bandshell performances shall be conducted by permit through the Recreation Services Department. A staff member of the Recreation Services Department will be present at all performances and will monitor the use of sound equipment and noise levels to ensure compliance with City Codes. A noise monitoring devise will be required to be stored at the site at all times and noise measurements will be taken by City staff at intervals throughout each performance. No performances will be permitted beyond 10:00 p.m. or earlier than 7:00 a.m. unless approved by the City Council through a Community Event License. General Criteria for Site Plan Evaluation In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its compliance with the seven criteria outlined in Subsection 547.13 of the City Code. Afull discussion of these requirements is provided as an attachment to this report. In general, the Council must consider the following: • Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and other long- range plans; • Site and building designs that offer integrated and thoughtful transitions from adjacent land and buildings; • Functional connections for drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists; • Energy -conservation through site or building design; and • Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties from substantial negative effects. Staff finds the identified criteria to be met. Expiration Land use approvals expire one year following the date of approval unless the use has commenced or a building permit has been obtained and construction begun. The previous approvals for the bandshell expired on June 23, 2016. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: If approved tonight, construction is anticipated to begin this year. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total budget for the bandshell project is $530,000. • Sources: • $250,000 - Capital Improvement Budget • $75,000 - Additional City funds approved by Council (July 8, 2014) • $205,000 - Donations E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 27, 2016. • Notice of the required public hearing was published in the Sun Current newspaper and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the site. • Draft minutes from the Planning Commission meeting are attached for reference. • The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request (5-1, Standfuss dissenting). ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI • Approve the resolution with modifications. • Deny the request with findings that the proposed use does not meet requirements. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director. ATTACHMENTS: Description ❑ Resolution ❑ Requirements Type Resolution Letter Exhibit ❑ Proposed Plans Exhibit ❑ Minneapolis Audubon Letter Exhibit ❑ Recreation Services Director Topitzhofer Response Memo Exhibit ❑ NHIS Report Exhibit ❑ Report Supplemental Materials Exhibit ❑ Planning & Zoning Maps Exhibit ❑ Draft Planning Commission Minutes Exhibit RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN TO ALLOW A COMMUNITY BANDSHELL AT VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of site plan to allow a community bandshell Veterans Memorial Park; WHEREAS, the requested site plan has been reviewed by the City Council and meets City requirements; and WHEREAS, the proposed site plan will adequately serve the purpose for which it is proposed and will not have an adverse effect upon the public safety or general welfare; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the site plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS clauses set forth above. 2. A site plan for a community bandshell as described in City Council Report No. , on the Subject Property legally described above is approved. 3. The approved site plan is subject to the following conditions: • Final building material selections must be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a building permit; • A final landscape plan including shade trees along the eastern parking lot edge is required. The final landscape plan, must be approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments; • Installation of required landscaping along 66th Street may be delayed in order to coordinate with 66th Street reconstruction; • A professional noise study must be conducted prior to the issuance of a building permit; • A Noise Control Plan similar to, or more robust than, that described City Council Report No. must be continuously in place; • The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all requirements detailed in the City's Administrative Review Committee Report and compliance with all other City and State regulations. Permits are required prior to the commencement of any work; • This approval shall expire one year following the date of approval unless the use has commenced or a building permit has been obtained and construction begun. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of July 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Site Plan Approval (Subsection 547.13) In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its compliance with the following: a) Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's long range plans including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. A community band shell and/or amphitheater has been identified in numerous long-range policy documents over the past many years. These documents include the 1985 Veterans Memorial Park Master Plan, the 2001 Richfield 2020 Visioning Report, and the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Veterans Memorial Park Master Plan approved August 26, 1985. Richfield 2020: o Pg. 11 — "Construct a natural amphitheater in a suitable community park to accommodate an expanded summer concert program. Construct a permanent stage area which includes state -of -the art sound and light equipment. 2008 Comprehensive Plan o Pg. 7-9 — "Most community facilities and festivals are located in Veterans Memorial Park. Improvements to this park should be a high priority." o Pg. 7-13 — "performance stage" identified as potential improvement within Augsburg Park. b) Consistency with the purposes of the Zoning Code. The purposes of the Zoning Code include: assisting in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan; creating harmonious and workable relationships among land uses; and more. The proposal is not inconsistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code. c) Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas. The proposed building has been designed so as to compliment the surrounding area. d) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the proposed development. Building materials, building location and building orientation have all been designed to coordinate with the surrounding natural and man-made amenities, in addition to the nearby residential neighborhoods. e) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features including: i. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community, ii. Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping to the design and function of the development; iii. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and functions; and iv. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian, cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring properties. The proposed plans address internal circulation through the provision of adequate parking on site; additional accessible parking spaces and an accessible walkway; convenient additional bicycle parking; and integration with existing park paths/walkways. The building and location are sensitive to the surrounding buildings and park. f) Creation of an energy -conserving design through design location, orientation and elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of landscape materials and site grading. As a protective measure for area birds, no glass will be used in the structure. g) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Adequate provisions are in place to protect neighboring land uses from substantial effects, including a noise control plan. -Nm NO-- IN011tlatld3ad 3115 el s}�a}iy��y 13S 419 1a „1 3 JODUI I pineal ll3HSUNtlB . 'l -u— w Rro 31 Z z w w w r > n u '� x W�x v i - - O - v C r J O kr Nt _ u zF - - U.` GZ r N4 T t v w J s CI z7 z _ z O - J - C J O O o + H w u y Z c s n u r v J � .. u n - z u U 0 0 � a J ,..�CGz �. z w d _ O .. C Z O < Jz� _ - - Zy J v� Z a .� __ a z 57 F< 01_ "t 17 s�� f��1 �/ /��/ \ I// //•'� e o in A o� / O 4.1 0 a / � It It It �4r a � i 1��aB" 3 �� r ' l Vii. i� a �i V a � "3 � i � � a I� 1� • 3k� = �,�_e •vv off' . a I a i a Nv ]Al �i 4 e w z � � .\ � tea. a.� ` y�� • / a• �+—� ae / � u z r � U Z z w w w r > n u '� x W�x v i - - O - v C r J O kr Nt _ u zF - - U.` GZ r N4 T t v w J s CI z7 z _ z O - J - C J O O o + H w u y Z c s n u r v J � .. u n - z u U 0 0 � a J ,..�CGz �. z w d _ O .. C Z O < Jz� _ - - Zy J v� Z a .� __ a z 57 F< 01_ "t 17 s�� f��1 �/ /��/ \ I// //•'� e o in A o� / O 4.1 0 a / � It It It �4r a � i 1��aB" 3 �� r ' l Vii. i� a �i V a � "3 � i � � a I� 1� • 3k� = �,�_e •vv off' . a I a i a Nv ]Al �i 4 e w z � � .\ � tea. a.� ` y�� • / a• �+—� ae / � u z 611b134 I NHId 1 Atll s}�a}lij°gay; JAS O19 .aauui-1 pineal ll3HS ONVS c ` C C '11111 tE ll � � _ 'llllllll III _ � �:III�IIIIIIIII = II—I z ii iia i ' �o ll= �-IIIIIIIIII c- o IIII -- 11= _ � � IIhIIIIII I III- - •'' �� , � �� =� � ,�.;='gym � o 1 o_/ w c�c 9 c \ ° \4Ln/ off= / / mLLz U NVId 3-0— S104NS ay' 13S (119 ii3vHs aNva aauuil pined FIeJ4� a is Aga J �� r SNOIlY�3�38 NMld?JOOl3 ANdNIWll3&J I- N. aauui-j pinedpla!1432!)aAllo LL J a 00 oa as 4-4/_ J 0 0 K _ J w t , �r - W LL r �v 2 w= M — �r a v LL Q LL LL — LL 2 U - N - — — O < III � N w> F I .� a o — a `.k — om J a = 4, S4 n 7 a v £ N v O U OF R � w Ow p w�wp OZ ¢ O p.oLL u Ow O m�pp �Fzo¢ o; 0o �F 3o�g wz>�� wp�� 03030 �N �p mFpoF? po<�oz GwwQwu so z zz0 Z��wW zz<- �¢uo>u wm o�ipOp zi��mF FD zu mwpm «NGS wSY ZHU o o zo m��zo2>519< m - >z0 p d¢ u 2 0 O J u Q N w F F> p¢ p N¢ Y¢ 0 U W V m �wQz `Oo°opz a O J d oo�a oommwo owo Y O 3g ��z�zw owwadzz LL owo - uYY¢zo �LL w d ii a Sa s¢�LLNu ww wZm v Eli - i o i tj, ()'I »i.jw.us&—IA—aav—v—:m nv-LL s�ozi.usu.cwwie 3c� o iU / II LU > O 1 W F Mi IIT of ,M 2 III' o o � h � e / v Eli - i o i tj, ()'I »i.jw.us&—IA—aav—v—:m nv-LL s�ozi.usu.cwwie 3c� o iU / II LU > O IIT of ,M 2 III' o o � v Eli - i o i tj, ()'I »i.jw.us&—IA—aav—v—:m nv-LL s�ozi.usu.cwwie 4T , 8 / / 1 LU > O o � h � e / v Eli - i o i tj, ()'I »i.jw.us&—IA—aav—v—:m nv-LL s�ozi.usu.cwwie Audubon Chapter of Minneapolis PO Box 3801 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 May 9, 2016 Jim Top.itzhofer Director of Parks and Recreation' Richfield Community Center 7000Nicollet Ave. S. Richfreld;:MN 55423 Re: Veterans Park Bandshell Dear Director Topitzhofer, Audubon Chapter of Mirineapolis (ACM) is affiliated with the National Audubon Society in Minneapolis and greater Hennepin County including Richfield. Among the multiple uses of Veterans Memorial (Vets) Park in Richfield, ACM recognizes the importance of the woods and wetlands to many birds, with dozens of bird species observed rusting there, including black -crowned night heron, and nearly 200 species observed', including numerous types of owls, herons, warblers, waterbirds, and raptors. The natural areas at Vets Park support threatened and near -threatened birds (such as the Golden -winged warbler), as well as rare birds such as the Kentucky warbler and Worm -eating warbler. This area is a priceless asset for Richfield residents, and many ACM members and other wildlife enthusiasts from around the region join Richfield residents in visiting Vets Park and watching:birds there. Given the small area of woods on the east: and southeast -sides of the park, the large number of migrants seen there every year is remarkable, with possibly more rare species than at Wood Lake Nature Center. Veterans Memorial Park and Wood Lake as well as Richfield Lake form a habitat corridor that is essential in modern conservation planning. We also, understand that Vets Park plays an important role in protecting the city's water supply, with -a recent capital investment of over $3 million by the City of Richfield and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to improve water quality, if public support and funding exist for an additional bandshell=in Richfield, as efforts proceed to find a suitable site in Vets Park, ACM urges the city to restrict .the search to parts°of the park that are already developed, and avoid impact to the natural areas oh. the east: and southeast sides, Though urban birds such as house sparrows, starlings, and mallards are acclimated to noise, migrant species and wetland residents would be disturbed by sound and traffic from a bandshell;. Water quality would also be adversely affected by increasing impervious surfaces with a bandsheii and additional paving for access roads or bandshell amenities. ACM supports the Richfield Comprehensive Plan's. callsfornatural resource preservation and for existing natural areas in Vets Park to be better preserved.. As serious and growing .challenges to birds --such as habitat loss and extreme weather events --continue to cause declines in bird populations, ACM strongly supports the preservation and (Continued on back of this tetter) incerely, r J , Bahls, President u ubon Chapter of Minneapolis 763-572-2333 Representing the National Audubon Society in Greater Minneapolis Printed with soy ink on paper 30% recycled, 20% postconsumer waste. enhancement of existing bird habitat. We respectfully ask the City of Richfield to eliminate sites from consideration that are within 200 feet of the wooded or wetland areas of Veterans Memorial Park, in order to avoid any disruption to nesting, reduction of habitat, or other cumulative negative impact to birds that rely on this important natural areaACM recommends a minimum 200 -foot buffer, in keeping with guidance provided by state environmental resources such as the Sustainable Building Guidelines. These guidelines recommend a buffer zone of up to 300 feet in areas that provide habitat for any animal or plant species on the Federal or State threatened or endangered list. Any additional construction needed to support use of the bandshell (such as roads, paths, or parking) should follow the same buffer guidelines as the bandshell structure. References 1. Reports from Cornell University's eBird database and records maintained by and available from the Audubon Chapter of Minneapolis. 2. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Capital Improvement Project to improve water quality Taft Lake and Legion Lake, httv://www.minnehahacreek.orroiect/taf-le ion -volume -and -load -reduction roice . Feasibility Study at: htto�//www minnehahacreek.org/sites/minnehahacreek.org/files/FFNAL%20TAFT%2oFEASIBILITY_pdf Project Costs $3.3 million (page 22). 3. Francis, Clinton D. and Jesse R. Barber. 2013. A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11: 305-313. "Chronic andfrequent noise interferes with animals' abilities to detect important sounds, whereas intermittent and unpredictable noise is often perceived as a threat. Importantly, these effects can lead tofitness costs, either directly or indirectly. " 4. Richfield Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6, The Parks System http://vvww.citvofrichfiicid.org/home/showdocument?id=22. "Community input suggests a growing desire far natural resource preservation and environmental sustainability in part due to concerns, about climate change, invasive species, awareness raised through the Nature Center and other factors. Richfield parks are highly developed and all but a few lack natural character. There is a desire for passive areas of parks to be restored to a more natural character, and for existing natural areas to be better preserved. There is also a growing desire for more environmentally sustainable maintenance; management practices ,including best practices for stormwater management; and the incorporation of environmental sustainability into new facility programs. "-pp. 6- ATTACHMENT TO AMENDED SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR RICHFIELD BANDSHELL RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS FROM AUDUBON CHAPTER OF MINNEAPOLIS REGARDING SITE SELECTION FOR THE RICHFIELD BAND SHELL June 7, 2016 The attached letter was delivered to the City on May 9, 2016 from Jerry Bahls, president of the Audubon Chapter of Minneapolis asking the City to eliminate sites from consideration for the proposed band shell that are within 200 feet of the wooded or wetland areas of Veterans Memorial Park (also known as Legion Lake). The proposed location for the band shell is 154 feet from the delineated wetland. This compares to a distance of 80' in the prior site plan review submittal. The current band shell location is 72' from the nearest tree canopy to the building. This compares to a distance of 63' in the prior site plan review submittal. Although the proposed site is farther away from both the wetland and wooded areas compared to the site originally approved, the proposed site selection would not be eligible should policy makers accept Mr. Bahls' recommendation. Mr. Bahls urges the City to restrict the selection of the band shell site to parts of the park that are already developed and to avoid impact to the natural areas on the east and southeast sides. To the contrary, the proposed band shell site is on the southwest side of the wetland in an area that is already developed and that has been mowed for years. The proposed site is adjacent to the frequently used ice arena and outdoor pool and is nearly the exact location that the Fourth of July Committee sets up a portable stage for their Fourth of July Celebration, which accommodates thousands of people every year. The proposed band shell location is 74 feet further away from the delineated wetland than the location originally approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Bahls indicated that a minimum 200 -foot buffer from wooded or wetland areas was needed to avoid any disruption to nesting, reduction of habitat, or other cumulative negative impacts to birds, in keeping with State Sustainable Building Guidelines. He was referring to Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines (133 Guidelines), Site and Water Guidelines, S.1 Identification and Avoidance of Critical Sites, subparagraph D. The guideline recommends to avoid selecting sites that contain land which provides habitat for any animal or plant species on the Federal or State threatened or endangered list. If rare, threatened, or endangered species occur on maps of subject site, the guideline suggests contacting the County Biological Survey (CBS) for exact coordinates of the said species. If these species are present and/or if the site provides habitat for any rare animal or plant species using County Biological Survey (CBS), the land which is within 300 feet of these areas which should function as a buffer zone. This guideline is a requirement for all construction projects that are funded by State bonding funds. This guideline is not a requirement for the band shell project and is not associated with the State Building Code; however it does serve as a general guide for sustainable building design. A query was requested from the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System to determine if any rare, protected or endangered species have been documented within a one mile radius of Veterans Park (see attached report). The report indicates that three such species are included on State and/or Federally listed species, Blanding's turtles, Forster's terns, and the Northern Long -Eared Bat. Blanding's turtles have been reported from the lakes and wetlands in the surrounding area, although there are no records directly from Legion Lake or within the project site. Legion Lake appears to have suitable but not ideal habitat and it is possible that turtles may be encountered on site, but the report's author indicated that it is unlikely. The report offers the following summary of recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to blanding's turtle populations: • Avoid Type 2 & 3 wetlands (Legion Lake is a type 3 wetland), • To avoid any incidental takings, avoid filling or dewatering wetlands during the winter, • Implement stringent sediment and erosion control methods, • Use wildlife -friendly erosion control methods (see enclosed fact sheet), • Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR, • Please refer to the first list of recommendations in the enclosed Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet. If greater protection for turtles is desired, the second list of recommendations can be implemented as well. If the City proceeds with the proposed band shell site, the attached flyer can be given to each contractor with instructions to remove any and all turtles, including western painted and snapping turtles from the construction site. Contractors can also be required to set up silt fencing to keep turtles out of the construction area and to promptly remove the fencing upon completion of the project. Other applicable recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to blanding's turtles as indicated above can be followed. The report indicates that Forster's terns, a state -listed bird of special concern, were documented nesting on Legion Lake in 1999. The nesting area was inactive from 2000-2003 and no further observations of this species have been reported from the lake. Legion Lake does appear to have suitable habitat for Forster's terns, but the author of the report said she believes they are not present. The Northern Long -Eared Bat federally listed as threatened and state listed as special concern can be found throughout Minnesota and it is possible that they may be found in Veterans Park, however no sightings have been reported. Legion Lake does appear to have suitable habitat for Northern Long - Eared Bats. The report includes the attached US Fish and Wildlife Service's Key to the Northern Long - Eared Bat 4(d) Rule for Non -Federal Activities to determine if a project may cause prohibited take of the species. The USFWS was contacted and their specialist determined that the band shell project would not cause prohibited take. Mr. Bahls asserts that migrant species and wetland residents would be disturbed by sound and traffic from a band shell. He references the attached study, 'A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority', which states that chronic and frequent noise interferes with animals' abilities to detect important sounds, whereas intermittent and unpredictable noise is often perceived as a threat. The study concludes that these effects can lead to fitness costs directly or indirectly (fitness cost refers to an animal's ability to survive to reproductive age, find a mate, and produce offspring). The study indicates that although animal species differ in their sensitivities to noise exposure, noise is problematic to wildlife and disrupts their activities which interfere with the daily needs of survival. The study also points out that more research is needed to have a basic framework for determining what situations can be harmful for wildlife so that rules and regulations can be developed to help curtail noise where is has the potential for causing harm. Only more research will tell us if or what the long term harm is on birds from repeated episodes of noise. However, the existing wildlife in Veterans Park has endured noise exposure for decades from airplanes, traffic noise, and the day to day activities that have been conducted in this highly used community park. It is difficult to know and measure the impact that the proposed band shell will have on wildlife. However, in the case of Lake Harriet Band Shell, Minneapolis Park Board staff has said the facility has been found compatible with the adjacent bird sanctuary and both facilities are flourishing. In conclusion, the concerns outlined by Mr. Bahls are understandable and well presented. To know if the proposed band shell site and project will have an effect on avoiding any disruption to birds is difficult to discern given the fact that the proposed location is in an already developed area and that has been subject to noise exposure for years. This is ultimately a judgement call for policy makers. However, it is comforting to know that whether a band shell is built on the proposed site or not, suitable habitat for migratory birds is present in the undeveloped areas of the park that are located on the east side of this community park. Submitted by Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director, June 7, 2016 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Box 25 500 Lafayette Road It St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4025 MNDNR Phone: 651-259-5109 E-mail:Iisa.joyaI@state.mn.us May 24, 2016 Correspondence # ERDB 20160419 Mr. Jim Topitzhofer City of Richfield, Parks and Recreation Department 7000 Nicollet Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed Richfield Band Shell, T28N R24W Section 26, Hennepin County Dear Mr. Topitzhofer, As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) has been queried to determine if any rare species or other significant natural features are known to occurwithin an approximate one -mile radius of the proposed project. Based on this query, rare features have been documented within the search area (for details, see the enclosed database reports; please visit the Rare Species Guide at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/index.html for more information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation measures of these rare species). Please note that the following rare features may be adversely affected by the proposed project: State -listed Species Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state -listed threatened species, have been reported from the lakes and wetlands in the surrounding area. Although we have no records directly from Legion Lake or within the project site, the area appears to have suitable habitat and it is possible that turtles maybe encountered on site. Blanding's turtles use upland areas up to and over a mile distant from wetlands, as well as wetlands. Uplands are used for nesting, basking, periods of dormancy, and traveling between wetlands. Actions to avoid or minimize potential disturbance to this state -protected turtle may include, but are not limited to, the following recommendations: ➢ Avoid Type 2 & 3 wetlands, ➢ To avoid any incidental takings, avoid filling or dewatering wetlands during the winter, ➢ Implement stringent sediment and erosion control methods, ➢ Use wildlife -friendly erosion control methods (see enclosed fact sheet), ➢ Monitor for turtles during construction and report any sightings to the DNR, ➢ Please refer to the first list of recommendations in the enclosed Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet. If greater protection for turtles is desired, the second list of recommendations can be implemented as well. The attached flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. If Blanding's turtles are encountered on site, please remember that state law and rules prohibit the destruction of threatened or endangered species, except under certain prescribed conditions. If turtles are in imminent danger they should be moved by hand out of harm's way, otherwise they should be left undisturbed. www.mndnr.gov AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Richfield Band Shell Natural Heritage Review May 24, 2016 Forster's terns (Sterna forsteri), a state -listed bird of special concern, were documented nesting on Legion Lake in 1999. The nesting area was inactive from 2000-2003 and no further observations of this species have been reported from the lake. Federally Listed Species The northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), federally listed as threatened and state - listed as special concern, can be found throughout Minnesota. During the winter this species hibernates in caves and mines, and during the active season (approximately April -October) it roosts underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Pup rearing is during June and July. Activities that may impact this species include, but are not limited to, wind farm operation, any disturbance to hibernacula, and destruction/degradation of habitat (including tree removal). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has published a final 4(d) rule that identifies prohibited take. To determine whether you need to contact the USFWS, please refer to the USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule (see links below). Please note that the NHIS does not contain any known occurrences of northern long-eared bat roosts or hibernacula within an approximate one -mile radius of the proposed project. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about Minnesota's rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Department of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and thus does not represent all of the occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area. If additional information becomes available regarding rare features in the vicinity of the project, further review may be necessary. The enclosed results include an Index Report of records in the Rare Features Database, the main database of the NHIS. To control the release of specific location data, the report is copyrighted and only provides rare features locations to the nearest section. The Index Report may be reprinted, unaltered, in any environmental review document (e.g., EAW or EIS), municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the Index Report for any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. For environmental review purposes, the results of this Natural Heritage Review are valid for one year; the results are only valid for the project location (noted above) and the project description provided on the NHIS Data Request Form. Please contact me if project details change or for an updated review if construction has not occurred within one year. The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential effects to these rare features. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover. Sincerely, Lisa Joyal Endangered Species Review Coordinator Page 2 of 3 Richfield Band Shell Natural Heritage Review May 24, 2016 enc. Rare Features Database: Index Report Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet and Flyer Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control Links: USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule for Non -Federal Activities http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/Ke\/Final4dNLEB.html USFWS Key to the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule for Federal Actions http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nIeb/KeyFina14dNLEBFedProlects.htmI USFWS Northern Long-eared Bat Website http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/index.html USFWS Northern Long-eared Bat Fact Sheet http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nlebFactSheet.html cc: Becky Horton Page 3 of 3 M M M�--' IJ 01r-- M M N N N O � a M N 0` 00 I-- h Vr 0) N 00 M T In kn M r -- Vr M M M N N N N N Dc N o 11 rA O O1 m M cIn 01 00 C? O O o o0 0, a, a, \O 01 l� z of 00 M C� O O 0) 01 O O '--' --• N N v u z u z V N N N z v CG � � rn V1 ry� ry� ry� y z a z Ln z W T a y � o 0 0 u v u u ry� ry� ry� y z a z z z F N F F F z T F M N N N p M M N a �$ GG r �z N rq rq r N •� F u � 0 � x � l� � N � � N F N F N F O y o� _y MN cn bQ con M b-0 M b-0 W O N *k U] M N 4k cr V'1 N 4$ con N Dn Nrfr NCG N iC `--� . i3. F x F r4 F� CG Fri C7 Sx N m N n n *n :)c.. '. Oz0 ., z �" �" U y � 71 Y :)c Y :)c -4 y CC r4 F F N � .�". F r �CQ Tr Ur �c M "o S7 N N 70 3= cn 5= N O N M N N N -O it �+ N N N N N O N Z t". zoc,L" z , z p p N N E N E N Do N Iz N N N •T"+ O ccDo N F f3a F W F wl F x F 7,n F Ln F Un W N o O 7:;y U bq v F Y� y v.� p y> O v W o O a.7 m SC v m O N 8 N •� "a m *n .� N Q II .� v v bA a" 0 o v Z ami U an Itacin i :7 -o � � v II U � Co y' U S U U ON y CL y y ✓ n by "O m y O O C an cct . a ': ice- cC It y^ .�`�', y ca y bf7,0 fyl a'�'- cC U U y Z ocn cr y v a uy O y Ll y u' y y y OblU m y '8 <e v -77 oa� .•��. L) U Q 6i rOn W :.) y m �-' v . -� y ice• U � S CC'S 6J � �. d y �" y � '+�-� 3 y 55y c y cmn o " p y� V� � � O y y � r y U Z •-�. u Y y W Y T Q S R! . ' cnU o II a� p. 3 S N Enz bll E CA R. "� O W R C u.� 41-1 p y W Gd 'y -"r Ri O O y •'O Z y O y "U O y sy. �" "" y O c7 R 6 u blU R. v, vOi c��cII' "�' o v +L".0 x v -O o v cye ++ -a_ a o 3 a 8 y y y v UCt v Li y O y W -fi r"O C q m ` :J 40. y u v C O 3 m o y 7CbU L) m jy m �. m m <� z• O y U y C -m C "O II Y b0 �a y Z v U a y U O y vbb [xa v y v A on ,� rC O O v o uj -8. S s U o �' o n. �' z7 v 5 o L a v _ v v v y. U 11v bb a O m 3 p v 'Cis ami 'i. v y Cn Ov y O y¢ vy x y y a n y O O 3. > m C a o° n u c v o a s 2 as m oLn m a o � o cmn y o a x" " N) y o' u m � a m v ct O W o v u r4 . �' ai O r y y y U O C iC y O O 'U y y .�"• +�' y O y. u .� W O v m y 9 O ;� b!] '�J n cOC v xi Y r O y y ;n C 4 Oyrq .`1 y y O 4i O i `•� jy�" uL'i o v SO m II e inn-. -o � m v v xt S m O y c�l n % v O .� �" '- v byA� v v � U 7 m FQ v Ry U` y x u� v S S y 0i u �� 0. '¢ y .� u� u bOA . F y A y � o� �, a o r W F Z u p. o o A, y X v �Abl)% II i o C m v O O y ✓, 0 u y v y 7cj Q oo z� 5-2 5u:� �z a A3 V� U_,m 0 Cc) cc - a w w Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series Endanbered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species of Vliiniesota Slandino s Turtle tn (Kin!1do dere blU cdlytdit) Minnesota Status: Threatened State Rank : S2 Federal Status: none Global Rank': G4 HABITAT USE Blanding's turtles need both wetland and upland habitats to complete their life cycle. The types of wetlands used include ponds, marshes, shrub swamps, bogs, and ditches and streams with slow-moving water. In Minnesota, Blanding's turtles are primarily marsh and pond inhabitants. Calm, shallow water bodies (Type 1-3 wetlands) with mud bottoms and abundant aquatic vegetation (e.g., cattails, water lilies) are preferred, and extensive marshes bordering rivers provide excellent habitat. Small temporary wetlands (those that dry up in the late summer or fall) are frequently used in spring and summer -- these fishless pools are amphibian and invertebrate breeding habitat, which provides an important food source for Blanding's turtles. Also, the warmer water of these shallower areas probably aids in the development of eggs within the female turtle. Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy uplands, often some distance from water bodies. Frequently, nesting occurs in traditional nesting grounds on undeveloped land. Blanding's turtles have also been known to nest successfully on residential property (especially in low density housing situations), and to utilize disturbed areas such as farm fields, gardens, under power lines, and road shoulders (especially of dirt roads). Although Blanding's turtles may travel through woodlots during their seasonal movements, shady areas (including forests and lawns with shade trees) are not used for nesting. Wetlands with deeper water are needed in times of drought, and during the winter. Blanding's turtles overwinter in the muddy bottoms of deeper marshes and ponds, or other water bodies where they are protected from freezing. LIFE HISTORY Individuals emerge from overwintering and begin basking in late March or early April on warm, sunny days. The increase in body temperature which occurs during basking is necessary for egg development within the female turtle. Nesting in Minnesota typically occurs during June, and females are most active in late afternoon and at dusk. Nesting can occur as much as a mile from wetlands. The nest is dug by the female in an open sandy area and 6-15 eggs are laid. The female turtle returns to the marsh within 24 hours of laying eggs. After a development period of approximately two months, hatchlings leave the nest from mid-August through early -October. Nesting females and hatchlings are often at risk of being killed while crossing roads between wetlands and nesting areas. In addition to movements associated with nesting, all ages and both sexes move between wetlands from April through November. These movements peak in June and July and again in September and October as turtles move to and from overwintering sites. In late autumn (typically November), Blanding' s turtles bury themselves in the substrate (the mud at the bottom) of deeper wetlands to overwinter. IMPACTS / THREATS / CAUSES OF DECLINE • loss of wetland habitat through drainage or flooding (converting wetlands into ponds or lakes) • loss of upland habitat through development or conversion to agriculture • human disturbance, including collection for the pet trade* and road kills during seasonal movements • increase in predator populations (skunks, raccoons, etc.) which prey on nests and young *It is illegal to possess this threatened species. Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. 2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS These recommendations apply to typical construction projects and general land use within Blanding's turtle habitat, and are provided to help local governments, developers, contractors, and homeowners minimize or avoid detrimental impacts to Blanding's turtle populations. List 1 describes minimum measures which we recommend to prevent harm to Blanding's turtles during construction or other work within Blanding's turtle habitat. List 2 contains recommendations which offer even greater protection for Blanding's turtles populations; this list should be used in addition to the first list in areas which are known to be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles (contact the DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program if you wish to determine if your prej ect or home is in one of these areas), or in any other area where greater protection for Blanding's turtles is desired. List 1. Recommendations for all areas inhabited by List 2. Additional recommendations for areas known to Blanding's turtles. be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles. GENERAL A flyer with an illustration of a Blanding's turtle should be Turtle crossing signs can be installed adjacent to road - given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners crossing areas used by Blanding's turtles to increase public should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's awareness and reduce road kills. turtles in the area. Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, harms Workers in the area should be aware that Blanding' s out of way. Turtles which are not in turtles nest in June, generally after 4pm, and should be imminent danger should be left undisturbed. advised to minimize disturbance if turtles are seen. If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the If you would like to provide more protection for a nest. Blanding's turtle nest on your property, see "Protecting Blanding's Turtle Nests" on page 3 of this fact sheet. Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of Construction in potential nesting areas should be limited to construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be the period between September 15 and June I (this is the removed after the area has been revegetated. time when activity of adults and hatchlings in upland areas is at a minimum). WETLANDS Small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) should Shallow portions of wetlands should not be disturbed not be dredged, deepened, filled, or converted to storm during prime basking time (mid morning to mid- afternoon water retention basins (these wetlands provide important in May and June). A wide buffer should be left along the habitat during spring and summer). shore to minimize human activity near wetlands (basking Blanding's turtles are more easily disturbed than other turtle species). Wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of Wetlands should be protected from road, lawn, and other fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and run-off chemical run-off by a vegetated buffer strip at least 50' from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion wide. This area should be left unmowed and in a natural should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching condition. wetlands and lakes. ROADS Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and Tunnels should be considered in areas with concentrations lanes (this reduces road kills by slowing traffic and of turtle crossings (more than 10 turtles per year per 100 reducing the distance turtles need to cross). meters of road), and in areas of lower density if the level of road use would make a safe crossing impossible for turtles. Contact your DNR Regional Nongame Specialist for further information on wildlife tunnels. Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. curbs must be used, 4 inch high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred (Blanding's turtles have b eat difficulty climbing traditional curbs; curbs and below grade roads trap turtles on the road and can cause road kills). Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. 3 ROADS cont. Culverts between wetland areas, or between wetland areas and nesting areas, should be 36 inches or greater in diameter, and elliptical or flat-bottomed. Wetland crossings should be bridged, or include raised roadways with culverts which are 36 in or greater in diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical (raised roadways discourage turtles from leaving the wetland to bask on roads). Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. Road placement should avoid separating wetlands from adjacent upland nesting sites, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details). Road placement should avoid bisecting wetlands, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details). This is especially important for roads with more than 2 lanes. Roads crossing streams should be bridged. UTILITIES Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum (this reduces road -kill potential). Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be checked for turtles prior to being backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade. LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible. Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and (orbs (some non -natives form dense patches through which it is difficult for turtles to travel). Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October- 1't and before June 1 st ) As much natural landscape as possible should be preserved (installation of sod or wood chips, paving, and planting of trees within nesting habitat can make that habitat unusable to nesting Blanding's turtles). Open space should include some areas at higher elevations for nesting. These areas should be retained in native vegetation, and should be connected to wetlands by a wide corridor of native vegetation. Ditches and utility access roads should not be mowed or managed through use of chemicals. If vegetation management is required, it should be done mechanically, as infrequently as possible, and fall through spring (mowing can kill turtles present during mowing, and makes it easier for predators to locate turtles crossing roads). Protecting Blanding's Turtle Nests: Most predation on turtle nests occurs within 48 hours after the eggs are laid. After this time, the scent is gone from the nest and it is more difficult for predators to locate the nest. Nests more than a week old probably do not need additional protection, unless they are in a particularly vulnerable spot, such as a yard where pets may disturb the nest. Turtle nests can be protected from predators and other disturbance by covering them with a piece of wire fencing (such as chicken wire), secured to the ground with stakes or rocks. The piece of fencing should measure at least 2 ft. x 2 ft., and should be of medium sized mesh (openings should be about 2 in. x 2 in.). It is very important that the fencing be removed before August 1St so the young turtles can escape from the nest when they hatch! REFERENCES 'Association for Biodiversity Information. "Heritage Status: Global, National, and Subnational Conservation Status Ranks." NatureServe. Version 1.3 (9 April 2001). http://www.naturcserve.org/ranking.htm (15 April 2001). Coffin, B., and L. Pfanrunuller. 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 473 pp. Minnesota DNR Division of Ecological Resources Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle. 4 REFERENCES (cont.) Moriarty, J. J., and M. Linck. 1994. Suggested guidelines for projects occurring in Blanding's turtle habitat. Unpublished report to the Minnesota DNR. 8 pp. Oldfield, B., and J. J. Moriarty. 1994. Amphibians and Reptiles Native to Minnesota. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 237 pp. Sajwaj, T. D., and J. W. Lang. 2000. Thermal ecology of Blanding' s turtle in central Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4):626-636. Compiled Uv the Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources Division of Ecological Resources, Updated March 2008 Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109 CAUTION BLANDING'S TURTLES MAY BE ENCOUNTERED IN THIS AREA The unique and rare Blanding's turtle has been found in this area. Blanding's turtles are state -listed as Threatened and are protected under Minnesota Statute 84.095, Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species. Please be careful of turtles on roads and in construction sites. For additional information on turtles, or to report a Blanding's turtle sighting, contact the DNR Nongame Specialist nearest you: Bemidji (218-308-2641); Grand Rapids (218-327-4518); New Ulm (507-359-6033); Rochester (507-206-2820); or St. Paul (651-259-5772). DESCRIPTION: The Blanding's turtle is a medium to large turtle (5 to 10 inches) with a black or dark blue, dome-shaped shell with muted yellow spots and bars. The bottom of the shell is hinged across the front third, enabling the turtle to pull the front edge of the lower shell firmly against the top shell to provide additional protection when threatened. The head, legs, and tail are dark brown or blue -gray with small dots of light brown or yellow. A distinctive field mark is the bright yellow chin and neck. BLANDING'S TURTLES DO NOT MAKE GOOD PETS IT IS ILLEGAL TO KEEP THIS THREATENED SPECIES IN CAPTIVITY SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS TO BLANDING' S TURTLE POPULATIONS (see Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet for full recommendations) • This flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's turtles in the area. • Turtles that are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harm's way. Turtles that are not in imminent danger should be left undisturbed to continue their travel among wetlands and/or nest sites. • If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest and do not allow pets near the nest. • Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be removed after the area has been revegetated. • Small, vegetated temporary wetlands should not be dredged, deepened, or filled. • All wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and run-off from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching wetlands and lakes. • Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and lanes. • Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4" high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred. • Culverts under roads crossing wetland areas, between wetland areas, or between wetland and nesting areas should be at least 36 in. diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical. • Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. • Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum. • Because trenches can trap turtles, trenches should be checked for turtles prior to being backfilled and the sites should be returned to original grade. • Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible. • Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and forbs. • Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October 1St and before June 1St) Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Updated August 2012 Endangered Species Review Coordinator, 500 Lafqvette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109 Veterans Park B Site P 6/2016 Surrounding Zoning NI NEI NNI NEIRME, G21®® Feet C-2 - General Commercial O 25 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 R -SingleF mil Residential MR2MaGFamil Residential N Path: IAGIS\Community De elopmenrS*mRammngTc«Pr]ed«V R Park B ndsh&I± mx � HIGHWAY 62 o R 2°,»}/a 0,a\/00,x,,00, R R R R ` , `a ^ \`a\ R R R ` R R , & 4p & { . ` / /&, , & { / &, , & 4pg 4p � `- , R ".5\ & Rcp R R RJ , a a a R R R „ °&©,,\°&©, „ „ R R R r 4pa a , ° a �3= a,�ag e ° a, 4p,;, Q o=4pa, §=4p4» ¥ R ` ° R® a s 0° 0, a° , ° a, 0° a rR 0 °a`0a R R , &aa 0 R R a a a_- >, R , . R R R,a,aQa,_.-/\ R R R § , /°7 ,° R ,/ R ,00, R RR R Q2 R R SR - R Q/ 3 �°3} R =3}3of3° R R MR -21 a Q Q J Q a Q a 4p _ Qa2,a,�a2,a, � _ , 7 aJ) , 7 �a2 J,Qa � _ ,) NI NEI NNI NEIRME, G21®® Feet C-2 - General Commercial O 25 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 R -SingleF mil Residential MR2MaGFamil Residential N Path: IAGIS\Community De elopmenrS*mRammngTc«Pr]ed«V R Park B ndsh&I± mx Veterans Park Bandshell Site Plan 6/2016 Surrounding Comprehensive Plan LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR MHD ,so 7 HIGHWAY 62 Do LDF 'D ° ° LDF LDF D o o ,� o o 'D - •? LDF LDF o •} �Ro o o o ' K P7f�a PR LDF '' ' ° ° '? `'D ° 'D °' ° °' LDF ` LDF v 'D o] v' a a' v' 'D o] v LDF LDF ? LDF LDF :2TJK 'd }' . LDF LDF PRK•] 'd? 'D ' o LDF HDR ° o } o } o } 'd ° o CC 77, -Q ,) v° '? o CC o '� '? ° o ' ' ' ° o P o o o a;111-0 MDR PRK - Parkland 0 250 500 LDR - Low Density Residential MDR - Medium Density Residential MHD - Medium -High Density Residential HDR - High Density Residential CC - Community Commercial NC - Neighborhood Commercial NC I NC I I IMDRIMDRI I IMDRIMDR Feet 1,000 1,500 2,000 M, Planning Commission Minutes June 27, 2016 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Erin Vrieze Daniels and Commissioners Sean Hayford Oleary, Rick Jabs, Dan Kitzberger, Susan Rosenberg, and Charles Standfuss MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Gordon Vizecky STAFF PRESENT: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner Matt Brillhart, Planning Technician Chris Regis, Finance Manager James Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director OTHERS PRESENT: Meeting sign -in sheet attached to minutes Chairperson Vrieze Daniels called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES X% 'I M/Rosenberg, S/Standfuss to approve the minutes of the May 23, 2016 regular meeting. No members of the public spoke PC Letter #1 — Consideration of the 2018-2021 Capital Improvement Program and a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the Capital Improvement Program and the 2017 Capital Improvement Budget. Finance Manager Chris Regis gave a presentation of the 2018-2021 CIP and 2017 CIB. M/Rosenberg, S/Kitzberger to recommend approval of the 2018-2021 Capital Improvement Program and approve a resolution finding that the 2017 Capital Improvement Budget and 2018-2021 Capital Improvement Program are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried: 6-0 PUBLIC HEARING(S) ITEM #2 16 -SP -01 — Consider a request for site plan approval for a community band shell at Veterans Memorial Park. June 27, 2016 City Planner Melissa Poehlman presented the staff report and Recreation Services Director James Topitzhofer detailed the changes from the previous band shell proposal. Chair Vrieze Daniels gave a statement describing the Planning Commission's role in the review process and set guidelines for the public hearing, giving each speaker 3 minutes. Martha Allen, 6640 Lyndale Avenue, stated appreciation for moving the band shell further away from wetlands, but that it wasn't far enough to ensure no effect on migratory birds. Molly Murray, 7445 Lyndale Avenue, stated support for the band shell with concerns about sound levels. Dorothy Hoffman, 6438 11th Avenue, requested details about the noise study and for further study to be done. Renee Anderson, 701 East 66th Street, stated concerns with noise. Kathleen Murphy, 6601 5th Avenue, stated concerns with noise and spillover parking. Steve LaVictoire, 4308 15th Avenue (Minneapolis), stated concerns with the need for the band shell and with loss of open space. Constance Pepin, 4031 Zenith Avenue (Minneapolis), stated concerns with open space and wildlife habitat. Steven Greenfield, 3429 Grand Avenue (Minneapolis), stated concerns with affecting wildlife habitat and requested that the bandshell be moved to another park. Sue Sandahl, 7601 Bryant Avenue, stated support for the band shell. Terry Straub, 7430 Portland Avenue, stated financial concerns with the proposal. Maureen Scaglia, 6410 Washburn Avenue, stated support for the band shell. David Gepner, 6845 Penn Avenue, stated support for the band shell as a community asset. Birgit Johnson, 6332 13th Avenue, stated numerous concerns with the financing and public process of the band shell proposal. Linae Larson, 6331 Blaisdell Avenue, stated concerns with the duplicate bandshell, referencing the Lyndale Gardens site, as well as concerns with effects on wildlife. Tom Fitzhenry, 6737 Park Avenue, spoke on behalf of the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC), stating concerns with airport noise. M/Rosenberg, S/Hayford Oleary to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 6-0 In response to questions from Chair Vrieze Daniels, Poehlman stated that the Comprehensive Plan identified Augsburg Park as a site for a performance stage, though further study identified Veterans Park as the preferred location. Poehlman stated that the stage at the Lyndale Gardens site would be smaller in scale and could not host community -wide events. In response to a question from Commissioner Rosenberg, Topitzhofer stated that all events would be scheduled through the Recreation Services Department. In response to a question from Commissioner Jabs, Topitzhofer described how the noise test was performed, using standards from the Pollution Control Agency. Chair Vrieze Daniels stated desire for a professional sound quality test to be conducted. In response to a question from Commissioner Standfuss, Poehlman described how the zoning code regulated properties in the areas affected by airport noise. June 27, 2016 Commissioner Kitzberger stated that the band shell was a great opportunity for residents to get out and meet one another, and stated support for the location. Chair Vrieze Daniels read the site plan approval criteria in the Zoning Code. M/Rosenberg, S/Hayford Oleary to recommend approval of the site plan. Commissioners Rosenberg and Hayford Oleary stated support for the bandshell. Chair Vrieze Daniels proposed a friendly amendment to the motion, adding a stipulation to require a professional noise study prior to issuance of a building permit. Commissioner Rosenberg accepted the amendment. Motion carried, as amended: 5-1 (Standfuss dissenting) ITEM #3 16 -SP -02, 16 -VAR -04 — Consider a request for site plan approval and variances to allow a conversion of the former Lariat Lanes bowling alley at 6320 Penn Avenue to office space. Planning Technician Matt Brillhart presented the staff report. Commissioner Hayford Oleary praised the improvements along Penn Avenue and noted that snow clearance of pedestrian routes had been an issue at other properties. M/Standfuss, S/Rosenberg to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 6-0 M/Hayford Oleary, S/Standfuss to recommend approval of the site plan and variances, with an additional stipulation that the pedestrian connection to Penn Avenue be cleared of snow. Motion carried: 6-0 ITEM #4 16 -VAR -03 — Consider a request for a variance to allow a fence to exceed 4 feet in height in the front yard area at 7600 Clinton Avenue. Brillhart presented the staff report. M/Jabs, S/Rosenberg to close the public hearing. Motion carried: 6-0 M/Jabs, S/Rosenberg to approve the variance. Motion carried: 6-0 ITEM #5 16 -APUD -04 — Continue the public hearing to consider land use applications for the Cedar Point Commons development to July 25, 2016. M/Standfuss, S/Kitzberger to continue the public hearing to July 25, 2016. Motion carried: 6-0 June 27, 2016 OLD BUSINESS None. LIAISON REPORTS Community Services Advisory Commission: Commissioner Jabs City Council: No report HRA: No report Richfield School Board: No report Transportation Commission: Commissioner Hayford Oleary Chamber of Commerce: No report CITY PLANNER'S REPORT No report. ADJOURNMENT M/Rosenberg, S/Jabs to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried: 6-0 The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:44 p.m. Charles Standfuss Acting Secretary