The URL can be used to link to this page

111516CompleteAgendaSPECIAL CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM NOVEMBER 15, 2016 5:45 PM Call to order Discussion regarding the Comprehensive Plan consultant selection (Council Memo No. 78) 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 November 10, 2016 Council Memorandum No. 78 Planning Commission Memorandum No. 4 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Planning Commission. Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Comprehensive Plan - Consultant Selection (Worksession Agenda Item No. 1) Council Members and Commissioners: City staff has begun to prepare for the decennial update to the City's Comprehensive Plan. In response to a Comprehensive Plan Update solicitation, five proposals from consulting firms/teams were received. Lead consultants submitting a proposal included: Stantec, Future iQ, Kimley-Horn and Associates, WSB and Associates, and SRF Consulting Group. Based on a number of factors, including experience, public engagement strategies and cost, staff is recommending that the City hire SRF Consulting Group to lead the update process. Staff is confident that the team assembled by SRF has the technical knowledge and the interpersonal skills to help guide us through this process. On Tuesday,. November 15, selected lead team members from SRF Consulting Group will present a brief summary of their proposal to the City Council, Planning Commission and Chairs of the Transportation and Community Services Commissions. Following this presentation both staff and members of the SRF team will be available for questions. subm Is 0^7 Dev Manager SLD:mp Attachment: Project Proposal Summary Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors City Planner Community Services Commission Chair Transportation Commission Chair City Richfield 2018 Comprehensive Plan .y. Update iia •��- I �.r -',�� .•. ✓�, Y. !f% r kit r � s 0 • ^ � 4 y�y p 4Faa 4", �nJ Lil , v 1 October 12, 2016 2018 Richfield Comprehensive Plan Update Company Overview SRF Consulting Group: SRF works with cities and counties throughout the seven -county metropolitan area to prepare comprehensive plans that address many aspects of growth, development, infrastructure, community values, and quality of life. Since the last required update in 2008, SRF has assisted six of the seven metropolitan counties and more than 40 local agencies in updating their comprehensive plans. Furthermore, SRF has played an integral role in developing state and regional plans that influence the required comprehensive plan updates. SRF is highly qualified to complete this project based on our similar experience. More importantly, our project team has a thorough knowledge of both Hennepin County issues and the Metropolitan Council Local Planning Handbook and regional plans and policies. This knowledge will be critical in making sure your comprehensive plan meets all Metropolitan Council and State Statute requirements. Our Partner (HI(Gi): For more than thirty years HKGi has helped communities throughout the Upper Midwest create great places for people to live, work, and play. HKGi's approach is built on four core principles: collaborate, listen, explore, and create. These principles emphasize the value of community participation in the planning process, the importance of examining potential strategies to identify the best strategies for moving forward, and the ability of the community to put a plan for the future into action. HKGi will provide expertise related to zoning and land use, urban design, redevelopment planning, market analysis, economic development, and housing. Project Understanding Many communities in the seven -county metropolitan area are approaching their 2018 Comprehensive Plan purely as an update. In some respect, this is true for the City of Richfield. The existing systems (e.g. roads, infrastructure and parks) are well established and redevelopment initiatives will continue to be focused along major corridors (e.g., Cedar Avenue and I-494) and within defined areas (e.g., 66th Street and Nicollet Avenue). The Plan will continue to embrace themes such as connectivity, revitalization and stabilization. However, refining Richfield's Comprehensive Plan will still require a careful lens. This lens will focus on public engagement, connectivity, multimodal components, economic competitiveness, and parks and trails. These elements are recognized and discussed throughout our scope of work. Project Approach/Scope of Work Our project approach/scope of work is highlighted in a series of tasks (see below). These tasks will be carried out by a multidisciplinary team of planners, landscape architects and engineers. • Task 1— Project Management: SRF's project manager Lance Bernard will work closely with City Staff on a day-to-day basis to ensure the project is within budget and on schedule. • Task 2 - Engagement and Transparency: The update will include a meaningful public engagement process and transparency between the public, city staff and elected leaders. More importantly, the public engagement process will target underrepresented populations. • Task 3 -Visioning and Goal Setting: SRF will screen the existing vision and goal statements based on public input. The update will explore opportunities to integrate new themes (e.g., health, resiliency and economic competitiveness) and community priorities. • Task 4 - Economic Competitiveness: The update will focus on ways to foster economic competitiveness, in turn promoting prosperity. This will include strategic planning initiatives, goal setting and project prioritization for redevelopment areas (e.g., 66th Street and Nicollet Avenue) and neighborhoods. • Task 5 - Connectivity: The update will focus on connectivity and how all modes of transportation move through -out the community. Greater emphasis will be put on pedestrian/bicycle networks, complete streets, and transit facilities. • Task 6 - Parks and Open Space: We recognize the update will require a larger effort in analyzing the park and opens space system. Special attention will be given to this plan element and to updating a "Draft Ten Year Parks Master Plan." • Task 7 - Implementation: We believe a successful comprehensive plan links the vision and goals with "realistic" action items. Refinements to the Plan's implementation chapter will focus on project prioritization and strategies to achieve meaningful outcomes. • Task 8— Updates and Modifications: The update will conform to the Metropolitan Council requirements and State Statutes. SRF will utilize findings from Tasks 2 — 7 to modify the existing plan, which includes the land use, housing, transportation, utilities, public facilities, parks and open space, and implementation chapters. Public Engagement Plan As part of this effort, we recognize the importance of public engagement. SRF and City Staff are developing a public engagement plan to ensure a meaningful and transparent planning process. Listed below are examples of public engagement strategies that are being considered. Public Engagement Strategies Pop -Up Events: Pop-up events are interactive/information booths at key locations or community events with large volumes of foot traffic. These events have proven to be very effective in collecting input from community members. • In Person Surveys: SRF has invested in mobile devices to conduct in-person surveys. We can position staff at key locations (e.g., schools, the HUB, or City Hall) or during events to collect responses. One effective measure is to ride local busses and interview riders. This has been effective in targeting youth and underrepresented populations. • Online Public Input Tools: SRF has invested in a variety of online public input tools. Each platform provides us the ability to develop interactive mechanisms (e.g., interactive maps, informational videos, polls or questionnaires) to garner public input. One of our newest tools includes a polling software that allows participants to respond to questions via text message. • Roundtable Forums: Roundtable forums help facilitate discussions around specific topics (e.g., parks, economic development and housing). For example, a roundtable focused on parks could include a field visit. This approach helps create a much more engaging conversation around topics and issues. It also provides "boots on the ground" to clearly see and understand the strengths, opportunities and issues being raised by participants. Public Open Houses: We believe public open houses still provide value as part of the planning process. However, effective public meetings must include a healthy balance between the dissemination of information, listening and collecting feedback. SRF has used a number of techniques to ensure meetings are engaging and fun for the public. These techniques include interactive work stations, visuals, games and videos. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM NOVEMBER 15, 2016 6:30 PM Call to order Discussion regarding the Gypsy Moth Communication and Eradication Plan (Council Memo No. 79) 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 November 10, 2016 Council Memorandum No. 79 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: Gypsy Moth Communication and Eradication Plan (Worksession Agenda Item No. 1) Council Members: At the November 15, 2016 City Council Worksession, Kimberly Thielen Cremers, Pest Mitigation and Regulatory Response Unit Supervisor from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) will share the MDA's plan to eradicate the Gypsy Moth infestation within Richfield. Emergency Quarantine The MDA has enacted an emergency quarantine in Richfield between Washburn and Logan Avenues, from TH62 to 67th Street, effective November 2, 2016 (attached). Quarantine means that no one (e.g. residents, tree care specialists, contractors, yard waste haulers, etc.) will be allowed to move any tree wood, including sticks, outside of this area. It also restricts the movement of outdoor storage items (e.g. outdoor furniture, boats, and recreational vehicles). MDA staff is working with the 66th Street contractor regarding the removal of those homes within the quarantined area. The quarantine is expected to go through mid-June 2017. Public Notification MDA has issued a press release announcing the quarantine and a public meeting is scheduled for November 16, 2016 from 5:00-6:OOPM at the Richfield Public Works building. A Fater meeting focused on their management plan (aerial application) will be targeted for January 2017. Please contact Kristin Asher, Public Works Director, at 612-861-9795 with questions. SLD:kda Attachment Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors sota Department iinne Of Agriculture MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE STATE EMERGENCY QUARANTINE GYPSY MOTH Section 1: Declaration of Emergency Quarantine Whereas, tbeCommias�nerofthe NUn � Depa�mentofAghouKure.hav�gfound that an exotiopest - known as the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar (Linneaus)), has been detected in Minnesota and has o United distribution at this time; and Vha�rea�m'the Commissioner ofth�eMinnesota Department ofAgriculture monitors gypsy moth populations annually along the expanding population front, and has found onestablished isolated population vgypsy moth /Richfield Minnesota aoindicated through elevated survey trap catches and the presence of alternate life stages; and Whereas, the anthropogenic movement ofgypsy moth inlikely via the transport ofyard waste and other outdoor household articles that may be infested with gypsy moth life stages; and Whereas, the gypsy moth has the potential to weaken or kill host trees, in infested counties, cities, and townships; and Whereas, trees of many host species are a valuable resource for the tourism, nursery, landscaping, and timber industries inMinnesota; and VVhareoo. Minnesota's urban and rural forest environments are susceptible to gypsy moth infestation and defoliation; and Nom/therefore, the Comrniaaionero/the [�ihneuotoDepu�mantofAghou|turabythe authority oY Minnesota aotoStatutes Section 18G.06 (2016) declares this emergency quarantine to prevent the further spread of this pest and sets forth: definitions, regulated articles, quarantined oreao, n`- ouiunmofovemen1.violations and penahieu.and special exemptions. This quaraodneshall become effective immediately and will remain ineffect until withdrawn orsuperseded. Section ll: Definitions "Bark"'means the tough outer covering 0fthe woodyetomuoftreeo.ehru o.endothorvvnodyp1ontu aadistinguished from the cambium and inner wood. "Bark products" means products containing pieces of bark including bark chips, bark nuggets, bark mulch, and bark compost. °Commisoioner"means the Commissioner nfthe Minnesota Department ofAgriculture nrhis designee. "Compliance agreement" means a written agreement between a person engaged in growing, hend|ing, moving or receiving regulated artiu|oa, and the Commissioner to achieve compliance with this quarantine. "Gypsy Moth" (°GWY") meansthe insect known asgypsy moth.LymonbiaoYxparL.inany stage of development. 625Rouert Stm ntPau|.Mwso1so'zsao nm1ao1'ooVnn,1-000-no7-2474 www. muu.ntme.mn.us In accordance with ,uonno'm`~~~^an--uanoxxmomomou�ux�.wmm /n,mooun/n,wvam avmo/�,vauforms by calling m* ao,o�oou users m oaunRe/avaem/xoatr,11n' `-8ou'oopuauu.The MDA /uun,wuwopportunity employer and provider. Minnesota Department of Agriculture "Firewood" means wood cut to Lengths Fess than four feet long. This includes firewood cut for personal use. "Inspector" means an employee of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture authorized in accordance with the law to enforce the provisions of this quarantine and regulations in this subpart. A person operating under a compliance agreement is not an inspector. "Log" means tree parts cut into lengths four feet or longer. "Minnesota" means the State of Minnesota. "Move" ("moved", "movement") means shipped, transported, carried; held or offered for shipment, transport or carriage; received for shipment, transport or carriage; or allowed to be shipped, transported or carried. "Outdoor household articles" means articles associated with a household that have been kept outside the home such as awnings, barbecue grills, bicycles, boats, dog houses, firewood, garden tools, hauling trailers, outdoor furniture and toys, recreational vehicles and associated equipment, and tents. "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, company, society, association, firm, governmental entity, legal entity or other organized group. "Quarantined Area" means any portion of Minnesota listed in Section IV of this quarantine. "Regulated Article" means any article listed under Section III of this quarantine Section 'Ill: Regulated Articles A) Regulated articles are as follows: 1) The gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar L., in any stage of development (egg, larva, pupa, adult). 2) Regulated articles: a. Trees and shrubs with roots and persistent woody stems, unless they are greenhouse grown throughout the year. b. Firewood, logs, bark and bark products. c. Any other outdoor household articles, or means of conveyance, of any character whatsoever, when it is determined by an inspector that any life stage of gypsy moth is in proximity to such articles and the articles present a high risk of artificial spread of gypsy moth infestation. Outdoor articles include but are not limited to: outdoor furniture, dog houses, garden tools, tents, awnings, boats, trailers, and recreational vehicles. Section IV: Quarantined Areas A) The northeast portion of the City of Richfield bounded by: North boundary: Minnesota State Highway 62 (the "Crosstown Hwy") East boundary: Logan avenue South South boundary: West 671h Street West boundary: Washburn Avenue South 625RobertSt.N.,St.PauI,MN55155-2538 651-201-6000or1-800-967-2474 www:mda.state. mn..us in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this information is available in alternative forms of communication upon request by calling 659/2o1-6000. TTY users can call the Minnesota Relay Service at 711 or 1-800-627-3529. The MDA is an equal opportunity employer and provider. .F<;= Minnes®ta Department .' of AgriCUItUre Section V: Restrictions on Regulated Articles A) Regulated articles and outdoor household articles from the isolated infested areas shall not be moved from the quarantined area to a non -quarantined area until June 15, 2017 unless the regulated article has been inspected, treated or subject to special handling under a compliance agreement. Section VI: Penalties A) Any person violating these quarantine regulations is subject to the civil penalties up to $7,500.00 per day of violation or misdemeanor penalties set forth in Minnesota Statutes Sections 1 BJ.10 (2015) and may be subject to criminal penalties set forth in Minnesota Statutes Sections 1 BJ. 11 (2015). Section V0: Special Exemptions A) The Commissioner may allow, with written approval, the movement of gypsy moth, in any living stage of development, into or within Minnesota for research purposes. Thi tice anO State Emergency Quarantine are effective November 2, 2016. 1 t David J.'Frederi son Commissioner Minnesota Department of Agriculture 625 Robert St.N.,St.Paul,MN55155-2538 851-201-6000or1-800-967-2474 www.mda.state.mn.us In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this information is available in alternative forms of cornmunication upon request by calling 651/201-6000. TTY users can call the Minnesota Relay Service at 711 or 1-800-627-3529. The MDA is an equal opportunity employer and provider, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 15, 2016 7:00 PM INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order 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. Pledge of Allegiance Approval of the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of October 25, 2016. PRESENTATIONS 1. Annual meeting with the Community Services Commission. 2. Presentation by Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek. COUNCIL DISCUSSION 3. Hats Off to Hometown Hits AGENDAAPPROVAL 4. Approval of the agenda. 5. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action 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 the renewal of the contract with Chiefs Towing, Inc., for Public Safety towing services for December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017. Staff Report No. 191 B. Consideration of the approval of the first reading of an ordinance amendment to the Richfield City Code Appendix D (Fee Schedule) and schedule a Public Hearing and a second reading for December 13, 2016. Staff Report No. 192 C. Consideration of the approval of a second amendment to the Consent Decree in State of Minnesota by City of Minneapolis, et al. v. Metropolitan Airports Commission, et al., Hennepin County Case No. 27-CV- OS -S474 Staff Report No. 193 D. Consideration of the approval of the second reading of an amendment to the Citys Zoning Ordinance that modifies regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas and a resolution authorizing summary publication of said ordinance; and consideration of a resolution granting a conditional use permit amendment and variances to allow an animal kennel business with an accessory outdoor relief area at 6244 Cedar Avenue. Staff Report No. 194 E. Consideration of the approval of a request for a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Health Fitness Corporation, d/b/a Health Fitness, located at 7601 Penn Avenue South, D building of the Best Buy Corporate Campus. Staff Report No. 195 Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor licenses for 2017 for EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, LLC d/b/a EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Inc. d/b/a Fireside Foundry, GM Richfield, LLC d/b/a Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis Airport, Frenchman's Pub, Inc. d/b/a Frenchman's, VPC Richfield Pizza, LLC d/b/a Giordano's of Richfield, Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar, Paisan, Inc. d/b/a Khan's Mongolian Barbeque, Lyn 65, LLC d/b/a Lyn 65 Kitchen & Bar, Pizza Luce VII, Inc. d/b/a Pizza Luce, Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post 435 and Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555 d/b/a Four Nickels Food & Drink. Staff Report No. 196 G. Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor licenses for 2017 for Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill, Davanni's, Inc. d/b/a Davanni's Pizza & Hot Hoagies, Joys Pattaya Thai Restaurant, LLC d/b/a Joys Pattaya Thai Restaurant, Minnesota Junior Hockey Group, LLC d/b/a Minnesota Magicians (located in the Richfield Ice Arena), My Burger Operations, LLC, d/b/a My Burger, The Noodle Shop Co. Colorado, Inc. d/b/a Noodles & Company (two locations), Patrick's French Bakery, Inc. d/b/a Patrick's Bakery& Cafe, Henry Thou d/b/a Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant. Staff Report No. 197 H. Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer licenses for 2017 for University Cash Company, LLC d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry and Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. Staff Report No. 198 I. Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of property owned bythe Cityof Richfield to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Staff Report No. 199 J. Consideration of the approval of the purchase of a Fire Rescue Truck from Custom Fire for $179,894 plus taxes and licensing in 2017. Staff Report No. 200 K. Consideration of the approval of a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous building and a public health and safety nuisance existing at 7144 4th Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. Staff Report No. 201 L. Consideration of the approval of a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous building and a public health and safety nuisance existing at 7301 Garfield Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. Staff Report No. 202 M. Consideration of the approval of the first reading of a transitory ordinance authorizing the conversion of the existing R-22 direct refrigeration system at the Richfield Ice Arena and scheduling of a public hearing and second reading for December 13, 2016. Staff Report No. 205 6. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar RESOLUTIONS 7. Consideration of a resolution approving the contract with the Labor and Trades Local 49 for the period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018 and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Staff Report No. 203 8. Consideration of a resolution determining the results of the City General Election held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Staff Report No. 204 9. Consideration of a resolution authorizing the refunding of the $9,480,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A, dated December 23, 2008 with the $6,130,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C. (Council Memo No. 80) Staff Report No. 206 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 10. City Manager's Report • Discussion regarding implementation of 76th/77th Street renaming (Council Memo No. 81) CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 11. 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. 12. 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 October 25, 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; Tom Fitzhenry; Present: and Pat Elliott. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Karen Barton, Acting Community Development Director; Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director; Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director/Police Chief; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant City Manager/HR Manager; Chris Link, Operations Superintendent; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Coordinator. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. OPEN FORUM None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Fitzhenry, S/Garcia to approve the minutes of the (1) Special City Council Meeting of October 11, 2016 and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of October 11, 2016. Motion carried 5-0. Item #1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SEWER LINING PROJECT UPDATE (COUNCIL MEMO NO. 73) Mike Olerich, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, provided an overall update on the project schedule, construction activities and traffic impacts including traffic detour routes and duration; Metro Transit detour routes and duration; and extended impacts near the HUB. Council Meeting Minutes -2- October 25, 2016 Item #2 ANNUAL MEETING WITH THE FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION Ahmad Ansari, Friendship City Commission Chair, reported on the commission's activities and events. Erin Vrieze Daniels, Planning Commission Chair, reported on the commission's activities and events. Mayor Goettel invited Colleen Carey, Cornerstone Group, to provide an update on the project at the Lyndale Gardens site. Ms. Carey reported on the progress of the shoreline improvements and provided a financing update. She stated there is a resolution on the City Council agenda this evening related to remediation costs for contamination clean-up. Item #3 1 COUNCIL DISCUSSION • Cancel the Tuesday, November 22, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting • Cancel/reschedule the Tuesday, December 27, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting • Hats Off to Hometown Hits M/Fitzhenry, S/Howard to cancel the Tuesday, November 22, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. M/Goettel, S/Fitzhenry to cancel the Tuesday, December 27, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Goettel encouraged everyone to get a flu shot at one of the many clinics offering the service. Council Member Elliott acknowledged the Penn Avenue Streetscape Project. Council Member Garcia announced the Voices Heard: A Conversation Between Youth and Cops presentation on November 2, 2016. Council Member Howard reported on the success of the recent Barnyard Boo event at Wood Lake Nature Center. He also stated that October 25 is the anniversary of the death of Paul and Sheila Wellstone. Council Member Fitzhenry acknowledged the utility box wrapping at 65th Street and Lyndale Avenue. He announced the Veterans' Day Beyond the Yellow Ribbon memorial event at Veterans Park. He also provided a Noise Oversight Committee update. The City Council encouraged residents to vote on November 8, 2016. Item #4 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA M/Elliott, S/Fitzhenry to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -3- October 25, 2016 Item #5 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of the approval of the second reading of an ordinance amending subsection 400.21 of the Richfield Code of Ordinances relating to adoption of the Minnesota State Fire Code. S.R. No. 179 This constitutes the second reading of Ordinance No. 2016-19, amending Subsection 400.21 of the Richfield City Code of Ordinances relating to adoption of the Minnesota State Fire Code, that it be published in the official newspaper and that it be made part of these minutes. B. Consideration of the approval of a resolution amending the 2016-2017 labor agreement with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1215. S.R. No. 180 RESOLUTION NO. 11272 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS HEALTH AND DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS (IAFF), LOCAL 1215 BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE YEAR 2017 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11272. C. Consideration of the approval of the Continuing Agreement for 2017 between the Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department and the City of Richfield Police Department for continuing funds for a Police Cadet and/or Community Service Officer position and Joint Community Police Partnership (JCPP) training. The funds available for 2017 will be $20,000. S.R. No. 181 D. Consideration of the approval of a resolution modifying the Health Care Savings Plan for LELS Local #162 Employees. S.R. No. 182 RESOLUTION NO. 11273 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MODIFICATION OF A POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN FOR LELS LOCAL #162 EMPLOYEES This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11273. E. Consideration of the approval of the first reading of an ordinance that modifies regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas. S.R. No. 183 F. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing acceptance of a grant received by Richfield Recreation Services Department from Hennepin County for youth sports equipment in the amount of $7,465 and to authorize the Recreation Services Director to execute the associated grant agreement. S.R. No. 184 RESOLUTION NO. 11274 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF GRANTS RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD -RECREATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO ADMINISTER THE FUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH GRANT AGREEMENTS AND TERMS PRESCRIBED BY DONORS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11274 Council Meeting Minutes -4- October 25, 2016 M/Goettel, S/Elliott to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #7 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO THE ANNUAL LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT PROCESS S.R. NO. 185 Council Member Garcia presented Staff Report No. 185. M/Howard, S/Fitzhenry to close the public heari Motion carried 5-0. M/Garecia, S/Goettel that the following resolutions be adopted and that they be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11275 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2015 TO DECEMBER 31, 2015 RESOLUTION NO. 11276 RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 2017 TO DECEMBER 31, 2017 Motion carried 5-0. These resolutions appear as Resolution Nos. 11275 and 11276. Item #8 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO THE ANNUAL 77T" STREET MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT PROCESS S.R. NO. 186 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 186. M/Elliott, S/Fitzhenry to close the public heari Motion carried 5-0. M/Goettel, S/Howard that the following resolutions be adopted and that they be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11277 Council Meeting Minutes -5- RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON 77TH STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2015 TO DECEMBER 31, 2015 RESOLUTION NO. 11278 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT WITHIN THE 77TH STREET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2017 TO DECEMBER 31, 2017 October 25, 2016 Motion carried 5-0. These resolutions appear as Resolution Nos. 11277 and 11278. Item #9 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR WORK ORDERED IN 2015 S.R. NO. 187 Council Member Elliott presented Staff Report No. 187. Marilyn Northfelt, 6931 Logan Avenue, contested the assessment due to her financial situation and health issues. Finance Manager Regis explained there is a senior citizen deferral process and that he would work with the resident. City Attorney Tietjen added that if it is determined this assessment qualifies for a deferral, it can be removed from the assessment roll. M/Fitzhenry, S/Howard to close the public heari Motion carried 5-0. M/Elliott, S/Goettel that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11279 RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2015 TO DECEMBER 31, 2015 Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11279. Item #10 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $5,450,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2016B S.R. NO. 188 Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 188. Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. reviewed the Standard and Poors Rating Report and congratulated the City for receiving the AA+ bond rating. Council Meeting Minutes -6- October 25, 2016 Ms. Kurtz stated the recommendation is to award the bond sale to Piper Jaffrey, Minneapolis, in the amount of $5,085,000 with a 1.57% interest rate. M/Fitzhenry, S/Goettel M/Elliott, S/Goettel that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made Dart of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11280 A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2016B, IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $5,450,000; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11280. Item #11 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TAX BASE REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT GRANT PROGRAM FOR CONTAMINATION CLEAN-UP AT THE LYNDALE GARDENS SITE, 6400 LYNDALE AVENUE S.R. NO. 189 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 189. M/Goettel, S/Garcia that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11281 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TAX BASE REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT GRANT PROGRAM FOR CONTAMINATION CLEAN UP ASSOCIATED WITH THE LYNDALE GARDENS PROJECT 6400 LYNDALE AVENUE Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11281. Item #12 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN ADVANCE PAYMENT OF 2018-2021 MUNICIPAL STATE AID (MSA) FUNDS TO COVER COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 66TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT S.R . NO. 190 Council Member Howard presented Staff Report No. 190. M/Howard, S/Fitzhenry that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 11282 Council Meeting Minutes -7- October 25, 2016 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN ADVANCE OF 2018-2021 MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET FUNDS Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11282. Item #13 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Devich reported on a recent meeting with Minnesota Management and Budget representatives regarding the $10 million earmarked for Richfield in the 2015 bonding bill for the 77' Street Underpass Project. Item #16 CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS M/Fitzhenry, S/Garcia that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. Bank 10/25/16 A/P Checks: 253969-254343 1,268,640.35 Payroll: 122891-123208 42533 601,029.11 TOTAL $ 1,869,69.46 Motion carried 5-0. OPEN FORUM None. Item #17 ADJOURNMENT The City Council Meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:23 p.m. Date Approved: November 15, 2016 Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich Executive Coordinator City Manager AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.A. STAFF REPORT NO. 191 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Jay Henthorne, Director/Chief of Police DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 10/19/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the renewal of the contract with Chiefs Towing, Inc., for Public Safety towing services for December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City of Richfield requires the services of a towing contractor to tow impounded vehicles/trailers as well as vehicles parked illegally during snow ordinance enforcement, etc. The contract with Chief's towing expires November 30, 2016. They are not requesting an increase for services provided for the 2017 contract period as fuel prices have stabilized. The rates will stay the same as the 2015-2016 contract period. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the renewal of the contract with Chiefs Towing, Inc., 8610 Harriet Avenue South, Bloomington, MN, for Public Safety towing services for the period of December 1, 2016, through November 30, 2017. 1 T-1MMe]0:7=Fero]iyiIiyi14►107_19C7Z A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The City currently has a contract with Chief's Towing, inc., for Public Safety towing services. Chief's Towing, Inc., was awarded the contract for 2016 and would like to renew the contract for the year 2017, as the contract expires on November 30, 2016. The contract can be automatically renewed if both parties agree to the renewal and if Chief's notifies the City in writing, 30 days in advance of the expiration of the contract, that they wish to renew. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • Chief's notified the City that they wish to renew the contract for 2016-2017. • The Public Safety department wishes to renew the contract with Chief's Towing, Inc. • Contracts for services need not be competitively bid. • The contract has numerous conditions that must be met. Chief's Towing, Inc., is a reputable, established towing business that meets all contract requirements. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • A six month notice must be given by either party in writing to terminate the contact. • On December 1, 2016, Public Safety must have towing services. This is particularly important with the possibility of snow ordinance violations at any time. • Chief's is a large towing company that can handle the needs of Public Safety regarding seizure/impound vehicles and comply with City ordinances that a smaller company could not handle effectively. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • The current contract with Chief's reflects rates from 2015-2016. Rates will not increase for the period of December 1, 2016 -November 30, 2017, per the attached letter from Jeffery Schoenborn, General Manager of Chief's Towing. • There is adequate funding in the Public Safety budget to cover the costs. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the past contract with Chief's Towing, Inc. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI Council could chose to not sign the contract. However, Public Safety must have towing and impounding services beginning December 1, 2016. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Letter and Rate Sheet Backup Material ❑ 2016-2017 Contract Contract/Agreement Chief s Towing, Inc 8610 Harriet Ave. South Bloomington, MN 55420 Ph 952-888-2201 watts 800-888-2201 September 27, 2016 City of Richfield Richfield Public Safety Department Lt. Joe Griffin 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 RE: CONTRACT FOR TOWING OF CITY VEHICLES, IMPOUNDING AND STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES CONTRACT DECEMBER 1, 2016 THRU NOVEMBER 30, 2017. LT. Griffin: Chief s Towing, Inc. would like to take this opportunity to thank you for allowing us to perform the towing, impounding and storage of motor vehicles for the City of Richfield this past year. We would like to extend the contract for an additional (1) year period if such an extension is approved by the Richfield City Council. These services would be performed at the same rate as last year. We would however like to change the releasing hours on Saturdays, currently releasing hrs. on Saturdays are fi-om Sam to 6pm We would like to change those hours to loam to 2pm which is in line with other companies in the metro providing the same services. If special circumstances arise and an officer requests a vehicle to be released back to a party we would of course honor that request. Attached is a list of services showing the rates to be charged. Sincerely, Jeffery R. Schoenborn Chief s Towing, Inc. General Manager City of Richfield, MN Current and proposed rates for TOWING, IMPOUNDING, STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND SERVICES Current Proposed 12/01/2016 12/01/2016 thru thru 11/30/2016 11/30/2017 *no change* Towing of impounded cars, trucks (under 1 '/2 ton capacity), Motorcycles, all -terrain vehicles, snowmobiles and unattended Utility trailers towed within the City of Richfield ................................... $ 88.60 $ 88.60 Towing charge for the same from outside the City of Richfield.................................................................................... $ 88.60 $ 88.60 Mileage charge for same.......................................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.55 Towing of trucks (larger than 1 ton capacity) within the City of Richfield................................................................................ $148.50 $ 148.50 Towing charge for same outside the City of Richfield.................................................................................... $148.50 $ 148.50 Mileage charge for same.......................................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.55 Use of Winch with a tow Car (Per hour)............................................................................ $ 22.10 $ 22.10 Truck (Per hour......................................................................... $ 36.65 $ 36.65 Use of Dolly.................................................................................... $ 22.10 $ 22.10 Use of low -bed trailer or truck (flatbed required) .................................... $ 110.85 $ 110.85 Storage Charges First 24 hours or fraction thereof: Inside Storage.............................................................. $ 39.80 $ 39.80 Outside Storage........................................................... $ 28.40 $ 28.40 Each additional 24 hours of fraction thereof: Inside Storage............................................................................ $ 39.20 $ 39.20 Outside Storage......................................................................... $ 28.80 $ 28.80 Forfeitures Vehicles forfeited to the City of Richfield ................................ $152.00 $ 152.00 City owned vehicles Towing city owned vehicle less than I ton within city of Richfield........ $ 43.15 $ 43.15 Mileage charge for same outside city ...................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.55 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND CHIEF'S TOWING, INC. FOR TOWING, IMPOUNDING AND STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES. THIS AGREEMENT is made this 15th day of November, 2016, between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and Chief's Towing, Inc., located at 8610 Harriet Avenue South (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor") WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City has a need to contract for the towing, impounding and storage of motor vehicles; and WHEREAS, the City requires that the towing operators are located within three (3) miles of the City limits; and WHEREAS, the Contractor is the operator of a towing and storage facility within three (3) miles of the City limits and has the expertise and capabilities to provide the required services; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed herein, the parties agree as follows: TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement shall be from December 1, 2016, to November 30, 2017, subject to termination as provided in Subdivision V. II. DUTIES OF CONTRACTOR A. The Contractor shall tow, impound, and store all motor vehicles, which are ordered removed under the direction of the police chief, or the fire chief, of the City of Richfield or their authorized and legal representatives. The Contractor shall be entitled to a charge for its towing and storage services pursuant to those fees specified in the Contractor's Proposal (Exhibit B). It is agreed that neither the City nor the Richfield Police Department is responsible for any charges as a result of towing and/or storage, with the exception of those vehicles identified by the Police as subject to forfeiture, and that the Contractor assumes liability for any unpaid charges. B. The Contractor agrees to provide the services, as proposed, and perform all other terms and conditions according to the City's Specifications and the Contractor's Proposal, incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit A and Exhibit B. C. The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless, the City of Richfield, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the Contractor's (including its officials, agents or employees), performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Contractor. D. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting the Contractor's staff as the agents, representatives or employees of the City for any purpose in any manner whatsoever. The Contractor and its staff are to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. The Contractor represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the Contractor or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Contractor under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the City and shall not be considered employees of the City, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the Contractor, its officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City; and the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. E. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 363. F. The Contractor agrees to maintain for the full term of this Agreement, the following minimum insurance coverage: a) $1,000,000.00 Comprehensive General Liability insurance, Business Auto Policy with $1,000,000.00 limits and Garage Keeper's Legal Liability. b) Workers' Compensation insurance covering all employees of the Contractor, or his agents, in accordance with the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Law. Certifications of insurance must be filed with the City and shall include a provision that states the insurance company shall give the City at least 25 days written notice prior to cancellation, non -renewal, or any material change in the policy. The Contractor further agrees to name the City of Richfield as additional insured on said comprehensive general liability policy. G. The Contractor agrees to furnish on or before the date this Agreement becomes effective, an acceptable corporate surety bond in the amount of $10,000, payable to the City of Richfield and subject to approval by the Richfield City Attorney, for the faithful performance of all duties and obligations imposed under the terms and conditions of the Agreement. III. DUTIES OF THE CITY The City agrees to pay the Contractor the flat rate charge of $152.00 per vehicle for the towing and storage of vehicles identified by the Police Department as subject to forfeiture and which are subsequently released to the Police Department. IV. MISCELLANEOUS A. This agreement represents the entire Agreement between the Contractor and the City and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. B. The Contractor agrees to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. The Contractor agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought, alleging a violation of ADA and/or Section 504 caused by the Contractor. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs and activities. The City has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. C. The Contractor will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. The Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in the performance of the duties of this contract. D. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of the City. E. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of the Contractor, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the City, and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 168.06, Subdivision 4. F. The City and the Contractor agree to submit all claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be conducted through the Mediation Center, 1821 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota. The parties hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non-binding. If the parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non-binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and commence such action prior to the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. V. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving six (6) months advanced written notice to the other party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: DATED: CITY OF RICHFIELD BY: Its Mayor BY: Its Manager CHIEF'S TOWING, INC. DATED: BY: Its: AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.13. STAFF REPORT NO. 192 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: John Stark, Community Development Director DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director 11/4/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the first reading of an ordinance amendment to the Richfield City Code Appendix D (Fee Schedule) and schedule a Public Hearing and a second reading for December 13, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: City staff conducts an annual review to determine whether its fees for permits and services are appropriate. Among other criteria, the intent of the review is to determine whether the costs of issuance for fees and permits reflect the staff time and costs related to performing the services associated with those fees. At the same time, staff tries to ensure that costs for City services are in line with our peer communities and are not excessive or onerous. Fees related to Building Permits, Zoning, other Land Use permits and Fire Services are established in Appendix D (Fee Schedule) of the City's Ordinance. Staff is recommending the following changes to the Fees and Permits included in this section of the Ordinance: Building Permits: Building permit fees are based on a percentage of the estimated construction cost of a project. This is applied on a sliding scale in which the percentage decreases as the construction value increases. Staff is proposing a 4-5% increase, depending on the value of a project. This will be the first increase the Building Permit Fee Schedule since 2001. Plats: The current fee for filing a combined Preliminary and Final Plat is $500. Staff is recommending that this be modified to be $500 for the Preliminary Plat and an additional $250 for a Final Plat in order to cover associated legal fees. Vacations: The current application fee for seeking a Vacation of a road or other public right-of-way is $350. Staff is recommending increasing this fee to $500, again, to cover legal fees and additional notification requirements. Escrow Administration Fee: Currently, there is a $50 fee for administering escrow agreements and funds as part of Building Inspections/Permitting, but not for items related to Planning and Zoning. Staff is recommending that this $50 fee be applied to the administration of Escrows for Planning and Zoning as well. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: 1) Approve a First Reading of the Ordinance Amendment to Richfield City Code Appendix D (Fee Schedule); and 2) Schedule a Public Hearing and Second Reading for December 13, 2016. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • While Community Development reviews fees and service charges on an annual basis, the last time any Planning and Zoning or Building Permitting/Inspections fees were raised was nearly three years ago (January 2014). B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • State Statutes require municipal fees and permits to be determined in conformance with actual staff time and costs that are incurred in providing the relevant services. • City staff have determined that the fees in question should be modified in order to make them better reflect actual staff time and costs incurred. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • If approved, a Second Reading and Public Hearing related to this Ordinance Amendment would occur on December 13, 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: City staff have determined that the fees in question should be modified in order to make them better reflect actual staff time and costs incurred. Staff also reviews similar fees in our "peer communities" to ensure that Richfield's fees and permits are not onerous or excessive. With the recommended changes, Richfield's fees and permit costs for Planning and Zoning and Building Permits and Inspections remains in the lower 1/3 of our peer communities. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • If approved, a Second Reading and Public Hearing related to this Ordinance Amendment would occur on December 13, 2016. • Notice of the Public Hearing shall be published in the Richfield Sun Current Newspaper in accordance with State and Local requirements. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI • Approve a First Reading of the Ordinance with changes. • Reject the proposed Ordinance. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Transitory Ordinance - P&Z & Building Inspection Fees Ordinance ❑ Updated P&Z & Building Inspection Fees Ordinance BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX D TO THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE; ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR CERTAIN PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background 1.01 Appendix D to the Richfield City Code consists of the schedule of fees adopted by the City Council, including those adopted by resolution and those adopted by Ordinance. 1.02 Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.353 requires that certain fees be adopted by Ordinance. The City Council has previously established certain fees by Transitory Ordinance No. . The City Council has established other fees by resolution, which resolution is also part of Appendix D. 1.03 The City Council has determined the need to update the schedule of fees under Transitory Ordinance No. Section 2. Fee Schedule Adopted 2.01 The fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A are hereby adopted by Ordinance. 2.02 The fees adopted at Section 2.01 of this Ordinance shall be amended only by Ordinance. Any fees established by resolution, other than those adopted at Section 2.01 of this Ordinance, may be amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Section 3. Effective date; codification. 3.01 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the City Charter. 3.02 A copy of this Ordinance shall be included in Appendix D to the Richfield City Code, immediately prior to the resolution establishing fees. 3.03 This Ordinance supersedes Transitory Ordinance No. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of December, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor /WAIIIII11111*15 Elizabeth Van Hoose, City Clerk EXHIBIT A CONSTRUCTION AND RELATED PERMIT FEES AND CHARGES A. Investigation Fees: Work without a Permit: Investigation. Whenever any work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without first obtaining said permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit may be issued for such work. Fee. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this code. The minimum investigation fee shall be the same as the minimum fee set forth in Section 2. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt any person from compliance with all other provisions of this code nor from any penalty prescribed by law. B. Permit fee refunds: The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The building official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written application filed by the original permitted not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. Type of Permit or Section License Requiring Description Fee (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge - two hours) $60.00 per hour hour (b) Reinspection fees (minimum charge$60.00per $35.00) (c) Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) $60.00 per hour (d) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record card $60.00 per hour $35.00 *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employee involved. (1) Building Permits 400.03— �$l to $500 (includes one inspection) 400.09 Each additional inspection $501 to $2,000 $2,001 to $25,000 $25,001 to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $500,000 $500,001 to $1,000,000 $35.00 $25.0 26.25 for the first $500 plus $3-45$_L50 each additional $100, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000 with a minimum fee of $35.00. $73.99 77.25 for the first $2,000 plus $14.75$1S.50 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000. $415. 436.50 for the first $25,000 plus $19.7S$11.25 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000. tc� 716.75 for the first $50,000 plus �9 7.75 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000. $1�9 1 106.25 for the first $100,000 plus $6-.9A 6.25 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000. $3,n� 3 599.25 for the first $500,000 plus (2) Driveway, 515.05 Parking Area Permits 1,000,001 and up (no permit fee for sidewalks) $5-.9A 5.25 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000. $5,a� 6 242.50 for the first $1,000,000 plus $4.-W$_4.25 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof. $35.00 (3) Swimming 420.00 Permanent or portable pools are based on $35.00 building permit fees with a minimum of (4) Plan Review 400.03— 35% of building permit fee for one and two family dwelling aid Fee 400.09 gaFages and basement remodels 65% of building permit fee for all other building permits, except no fee for the following: (a) Existing single family dwelling minor nonstructural alterations. (b) Single and two family dwelling repair and maintenance work. (c) Commercial and industrial repair and maintenance work not exceeding $1,000 or where plans are not required. Plan review fee Maximum 25% of permit fee based on Minnesota State Building Code for similar 1300.0160 buildings (5) Contractors Charged once each time a contractor $5.00 License applies for permit(s) Verification Fee (6) Moving- 1845 1 Moving Permit Fee 1$50.00 Buildings (7) Structure 400.00— (a) Commercial Demolition cost as per $50.00 Demolition 400.09 Building Permit Schedule with a minimum of (b) Dwelling $50.00 One or two story $35.00 Residential - Garage and lesser structure (8) Plumbing 400.03— Residential $35.00 Permit 400.09 Minimum Fee 2% of Total Job cost with a minimum of (includes one inspection) Each additional inspection $35.00 (9) Plumbing 400.03— Commercial/Industrial/Multi-family Based $45.00 Permit 400.09 on Total Job cost 2% of Estimated Job cost with a minimum of(includes one inspection) $35.00 Each additional inspection Residential (10) Electrical 400.03— $35.00 Permit 400.09 (a) Minimum Fee which includes one inspection (b) Each additional Inspection $35.00 (c) Complete Wiring Fee: $150.00 Single Family Dwelling and each dwelling unit of a two family dwelling and includes not more than three inspections. (d) New Service - up to 200 amps $55.00 (e) Temporary Service - (for $45.00 construction) (f) Installation, addition alteration, or $8.00 (11) Electrical Permit Commercial 400.03- 400.09 repair of each circuit or feeder (g) Swimming pool or exterior hot tub J$55.00 Commercial, Industrial and multiple $45.00 dwellings(more than two units) and Technology systems: Minimum Fee which includes one inspection Each additional inspection J$35.00 (a) Based on total job cost $45.00 - 2% of estimated job cost with a minimum of - Over $50,000 - Fee/ $1,000.00 plus 1% of cost over $50,000.00 (b) Traffic Signals: Per Intersection j$185.00 (c) Fire Alarm: Based on % of cost of $45.00 electrical job to customer with a minimum of (d) Carnivals, festivals and similar $110.00 events plus $35.00 for each service on generator (12) Electrical 400.03— Based on 2% of cost of electrical job to $45.00 Permit Signs 400.09 customer with a minimum of (separate electrical permit required for signs) (13) Residential 400.03— Central Systems and Additions, $35.00 Heating, 400.09 Alterations and Repairs Ventilating, Air 1%% estimated cost with a minimum of Conditioning and (Includes one inspection) Refrigeration Each additional inspection $35.00 Commercial Central Systems and Additions, $45.00 Heating, Alterations and RepairslY2 estimated Ventilating, Air Conditioning and cost with a minimum of Refrigeration (14) Sign 415.01— (a) Temporary sign permit Installation 415.11 (b) Permanent sign (any size) Building permit is required for sign support structures Fees based on building permit fee schedule (15) Temporary 400 A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may Certificate of be issued before completion of the entire Occupancy work covered by the permit, provided the Chief Building Official deems that the building is safe to occupy Type of Permit or License (1) Planned Unit Development $35.00 $100.00 $ 200.00 Plus a letter of credit or cash escrow equal to 125% of the remaining City Code requirements ZONING, LAND USE AND RELATED CHARGES Section Requiring 542 Description I Fee (a) $500 plus $5/$1,000 of project value $3,500.00 (construction cost) up to a maximum fee of (b) Major PUD Plan Amendment - $500 plus $3,500 $5/$1,000 of project value (construction cost) up to a maximum fee of (c) Minor PUD Plan Amendment 1$3SO.00 (2) Site Plan Review 547 (a) $500 plus $.50/$1,000 of project value $3,500.00 (construction cost) to a maximum fee of (b) Major amendment - $500 plus $.50/$1,000 $3,500 of project value (construction cost) to a maximum fee of (c) Minor amendment $350.00 (3) Variance 547 Residential $250.00 Non Residential $450.00 Variance Appeal Residential and Non Residential $150.00 (4) Conditional Use (a) $500 + $.50/$1,000 of project value $3,500.00 547 Permit (construction cost) up to a maximum fee of (b) Major amendment - $500 + $.50/$1,000 of $3,500 project value (construction cost) up to a maximum fee of (c) Minor amendment $350.00 (S) Interim Use Permit 547 $500 plus $100/year monitoring fee up to a $1,000 maximum fee of (6) *Zoning District or 547 $690 ries $9.50/$1,000 of project al,,, s3,60g-gg 600 Code Text Change (eenstFu tion eest) up to a Maximum f ,f Zoning Code Text ARA e.nPmon+ $690.90 (7) *Subdivision 500.01— $500.00 Approval 500.05 Subdivision Waiver 500.05- $350.00 Subd. 2 (8) Street/Easement 820/State 500 Vacation Statute (9) Appeal to Board of 547 $350.00 Adj. & Appeals (10) Special Request $350.00 to City Council (11) Zoning $50.00 Compliance Letter (12) Comprehensive Plan Amend. (13) Plats: pF aFY 500 Preliminary Plat $500.00 &a4 r_;-1 Dkt (14) Sketch Plan Review 250 $250.00 (15) Extension Extension of a Land Use Approval (rezoning, site $125.00 plan approval, conditional use permit, variance, etc.) beyond its original approval period (16) Escrow 50 Administration Fee *Any additional expenses -incurred by the City in the course of processing a request will be charged to the applicant. FIRE SERVICES FEES Type of Permit or License Section Requiring Description Fee (6) Fire Extinguishing Based on Building Permit fee schedule with a $50.00 System Permit minimum of: Plan review fee: 65% of building permit fee, except no fee for the following: (a) no charge for valuation of $1,000 or less (7) Fire Alarm Systems Based on Building Permit fee schedule with a $50.00 minimum of: Plan review fee: 65% of building permit fee, except no fee for the following:;eol(a) no (8) Flammable or Combustible Liquid or Gas Storage Tanks and Piping Type of Permit or License (3) Antenna Commercial Wireless Telecommunication Service(CWTS) charge for valuation of $1,000 or less Tanks (installation or modification Installation or alteration of piping Each unit or dispenser Underground Tank Removal MISCELLANEOUS FEES Section Description Requiring 425&544 (a) CWTS antenna permit application fee $150.00 $50.00 $100.00/Tan k Fee $100.00 (b) Antenna permit fee for additional $35.00 antennas added to an existing antenna location or replacement of existing antennas at a location REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.C. STAFF REPORT NO. 193 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant City Manager/HR Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven Devich 11 /7/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: None CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a second amendment to the Consent Decree in State of Minnesota by City of Minneapolis, et al. v. Metropolitan Airports Commission, et al., Hennepin County Case No. 27 - CV -OS -S474. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In 2005, the cities of Minneapolis, Richfield and Eagan, and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority (MPHA) sued the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) for violations of the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act related to alleged inadequacies in the MAC's noise mitigation program. The parties settled the litigation in 2007 by entering into a Consent Decree that required the MAC to provide noise mitigation according to the Consent Decree. In May 2013, the parties to the Consent Decree approved an amendment to the Consent Decree which preserved the noise mitigation standards of the original Consent Decree and created a refined noise mitigation plan extending to the year 2024. A second amendment is now being proposed in response to changes in the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) noise modeling system used to create the noise contours from which mitigation eligibility is determined. The Integrated Noise Modeling (INM) software system referenced in the Consent Decree is being phased out and replaced with the FAA's most recently released version of the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT). The City of Minneapolis has expressed concerns that homes that fall within the noise contours qualifying for sound mitigation may drop out of the contours with the use of this updated system. In order to allay these concerns, the parties have negotiated a proposed Second Amendment. Under the terms of this amendment: • For 2016, the MAC will use both the INM and AEDT systems to prepare the annual noise contour. Thereafter, the MAC will only use the most recently released version of the FAAs noise modeling software. • No homes currently in the noise mitigation program drop out of the program under the 2016 noise contour scenario using AEDT if their eligibility would have been maintained with the use of INM for the 2016 noise contour. • Homes that previously opted out of the original Consent Decree partial mitigation program (62- 60 DNL) will have the option to come back into the program if they become eligible for the full 5 dB package in the 63+DNL. While the City of Richfield does not currently have any additional homes in the current sound mitigation program, the provisions of this proposed amendment secure possible future benefits for Richfield property owners if the noise environment around MSP changes. The attached amendment is being submitted to the governing bodies of all five parties for approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve the proposed Second Amendment to Consent Decree. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT As previously noted in the Executive Summary, the original Consent Decree was approved in 2007 and a First Amendment was subsequently approved by all parties in 2013. Under the terms of the current noise mitigation program specified in the First Amendment, the MAC determines eligibility for the program based upon actual noise contours prepared annually using the FAAs noise modeling software. A home must be in a noise contour for three consecutive years in order to receive mitigation. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes. etcy • The City of Richfield wants to continue to secure the benefits obtained for its residents under the Consent Decree. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Under the terms of the Consent Decree, the MAC must produce an Noise Contour Report annually. The Second Amendment approval allows the MAC to move forward with the report without delay. • The MAC has asked that all the governing bodies to the Consent Decree consider the Second Amendment for approval by the end of November. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • Approval of the Second Amendment will not result in any additional costs to the City. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorney has reviewed the amendment language. • The amendment is contingent on FAA approval and approval by the Hennepin County District Court. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: None PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Second Amendment to Consent Decree Cover Memo STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA BY THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, et al.,, Plaintiffs, vs. METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION, Defendant, and NORTHWEST AIRLINES, Defendant -Intervenor. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: CaseType Court File No. 27 -CV -OS -5474 SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONSENT DECREE WHEREAS, the City of Minneapolis, City of Richfield, City of Eagan, Minneapolis Public Housing Authority (collectively, the "Cities"), and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (the "MAC") are parties to a Consent Decree entered by this Court on October 19, 2007, and amended by this Court on September 25, 2013 (the "Consent Decree"); WHEREAS, the MAC is implementing elements of the proposed Minneapolis St. -Paul International Airport ("MSP") 2020 Improvements Project to accommodate expected demand and ensure the level of service is acceptable throughout MSP's facilities under both existing and 2020 conditions, and that regional roadways provide an acceptable level of service under both existing and 2030 conditions; WHEREAS, the MAC and the Cities requested this Court adopt the First Amendment to Consent Decree, which this Court adopted on September 25, 2013, and which created a refined noise mitigation plan described in the final MSP 2020 Improvements Project Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet: WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has upgraded its Integrated Noise Model (INM) through integration into its new Aviation Environmental Design Tool software (AEDT); WHEREAS, the FAA now requires the use of AEDT for airport planning documents and federal environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); WHEREAS, the MAC and the Cities desire to add clarifying language to the Consent Decree regarding the refined noise mitigation plan; WHEREAS, Section 8.10) and Section 8.7 of the Consent Decree allow the Cities and the MAC to modify the Consent Decree by mutual agreement and in writing; and WHEREAS, this Amendment will be submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration for a determination regarding its consistency with federal requirements regarding the use of airport revenue; NOW THEREFORE, upon (a) receipt of a written determination by the Federal Aviation Administration that use of airport revenue to fund the programs contemplated by this Amendment is permitted and (b) approval of this Amendment by the Court, the Consent Decree shall be amended as follows: 1. The Consent Decree is hereby modified to insert the following language after Section 4.10: Section 4.10.1 "FAA's Integrated Noise Model", for the purposes of Section 8. 1, means the most recently released version of FAA's Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) or the most recently released version of any subsequent FAA modeling software system FAA uses in preparing environmental review documents under FAA Order 1050 or in preparing airport noise compatibility planning studies under 14 CFR Part 150; provided, however, that if, in preparing the 2016 Annual Noise Contour, a Single -Family or Multi -Family home which had been included in the 2015 63 DNL or had been included in the 2015 62 to 60 DNL Contour areas is not included in, respectively, the 2016 DNL 63 Contour or the 2016 DNL 60-62 Contour, MAC will determine whether that Single -Family or Multi -Family home would have been included in the respective contour area using the previous version of FAA's Integrated Noise Model, INM Version 7.Od and, if so, will treat that home as being included in that contour area in the 2016 Annual Noise Contour; but, provided further, in 2017 and subsequent years MAC will only use the most recently released version of FAA's noise modeling software. 2. The Consent Decree is hereby modified to strike existing Section 9.7 and insert the following language in its place: 9.7 Opt -Out Eligibility. Single -Family and Multi -Family homes that previously opted out of mitigation under this Consent Decree are not eligible to participate in the mitigation program provided under this Section. Opting -out, for the purposes of this section, does not include failing to participate in the 2005 DNL 60-64 contour partial reimbursement program provided for in Section 5.3 (e),(f) and (g). Further, notwithstanding any previous opt -out, Single -Family homes that previously opted out of the partial mitigation program provided in Section 9.5(b) or Section 5.2 may participate in the mitigation program provided in Section 9.5(a) if the Single -Family home meets all of the requirements for participation set forth in Section 9.5(a). Entered this day of 12016 District Court Judge FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS By: Susan L. Segal Its: City Attorney Dated: FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Debbie Goettel Its: Mayor Dated: By: Steven L. Devich Its: City Manager Dated: FOR THE CITY OF EAGAN By: Mike Maguire Its: Mayor Dated: By: Christina M. Scipioni Its: Clerk Dated: FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Cora McCorvey Its: Executive Director/CEO Dated: FOR THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION By: Brian D. Ryks Its: Executive Director/CEO Dated: AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.D. STAFF REPORT NO. 194 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Matt Brillhart, Associate Planner DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director 11/4/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the second reading of an amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance that modifies regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas and a resolution authorizing summary publication of said ordinance; and consideration of a resolution granting a conditional use permit amendment and variances to allow an animal kennel business with an accessory outdoor relief area at 6244 Cedar Avenue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In April 2015, the City Council approved a conditional use permit and variances to allow an auto repair business (Maaco) at 6244 Cedar Avenue. Maaco currently occupies the southern half of the property and has made the northern half of the property available to another commercial tenant. Adogo Pet Hotels ("The applicant') is proposing to open an animal kennel business in the northern half of the building, along with an outdoor animal relief and play area on the east side of the building. Animal kennels are a permitted use in the C-2 General Business District. In 2009, the City Council approved an ordinance establishing outdoor animal relief areas as a conditional use when constructed as an accessory to animal kennels. The necessary conditions for permitting an outdoor animal relief area include setback and screening requirements, and regulations related to supervision and maintenance. One of the conditions states that "the outdoor relief area shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, animal run, animal play area or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit." The intent of this regulation is to allow the minimum necessary outdoor relief area for animal kennel businesses to be viable, without allowing the other aforementioned outdoor activities, due to the potential nuisance to nearby residential properties. The applicant has requested an ordinance amendment that would modify those regulations to allow the outdoor relief area to also function as an animal play area. This change is not permissible by variance, as State Law prohibits use of the variance procedure to allow uses that are not permitted in a given zoning district. The applicant is also requesting variances to setback and parking requirements. This site is uniquely situated in the City, located on the dead-end portion of Cedar Avenue, north of Cedar Point Commons. The site is more than a full city block (appro)amately 600 feet) from any eAsting or potential residential development. For that reason, staff finds this use to be reasonable in this location. Staff is recommending approval of an ordinance amendment to allow outdoor relief areas to function as play areas, provided that the area is located at least 600 feet from residential property. This buffer distance will mitigate the adverse effects the ordinance was intended to prevent, while allowing this business to serve the Richfield community and create additional employment opportunities. Staff is also recommending approval of the conditional use permit amendment and variances. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: 1. Approve the second reading of an Ordinance amending regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas. 2. Approve a Resolution authorizing summary publication of an ordinance amending regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas. 3. Approve a Resolution granting a conditional use permit (CUP) amendment and variances to allow an animal kennel business with an accessory outdoor relief area at 6244 Cedar Avenue. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Discussed in Executive Summary. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy Ordinance Amendment and Conditional Use Permit: In the General Business (C-2) Zoning District, animal kennels are a permitted use. Only the outdoor animal relief area component requires a CUP. The following is a discussion of the proposed ordinance amendment to modify those conditions. Proposed changes are underlined and discussion is in italics. 534.07. Conditional Uses. Subdivision 25. Accessory outdoor animal relief area to animal kennel, provided the following conditions are met: b) The outdoor relief area must meet setback requirements; This is a simple housekeeping change to insert a missing word. c) The outdoor relief area shall be screened from view of neighboring properties in a manner consistent with the surrounding area, as approved by the City; Staff recommends this change to better clarify how these areas shall be screened. f) The outdoor relief area shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, animal run, animal play area or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit, if the outdoor area is located less than 600 feet from any residential parcel; As discussed in the Executive Summary, staff believes that this buffer distance will mitigate the adverse effects the ordinance was intended to prevent. Summary Publication: In instances where the full text of an amendment is cumbersome and the expense of publication of the full text is not justified, the City is permitted to publish a summary of the approved text. Variances Requested: The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required setback for the outdoor area from 25 feet to 10 feet along the eastern property line. The code does not specify setbacks for the outdoor area itself, only that the outdoor area must observe the same setback as the principal building, in this case 25 feet on the street/corner side of the property. The intent of the setback regulation is to protect neighbors from possible nuisance created by the outdoor area. This property has no neighbors to the east and is directly adjacent to Cedar Avenue and Trunk Highway 77 right-of-way. The applicant is also requesting a variance to reduce the off-street parking requirement. The Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for animal kennels. In the past, staff has substituted the requirement for day care centers, which is "1 per 5 enrolled persons based on licensed capacity." The requested ma)amum capacity of 200 dogs would require 40 parking stalls. After adding a required dumpster enclosure to the property, the northern parking lot will have 36 stalls, leaving a deficit of 4 stalls. The property is located on the dead-end portion of Cedar Avenue, north of Home Depot. Maaco occupies the southern half of the property and there are no other properties along this portion of Cedar Avenue. On -street parking is allowed on Cedar Avenue in the event there is a parking shortage. If overflow parking does occur, the impacts would be limited to this property alone. Furthermore, the applicant states that the anticipated daily average would be appro)amately 100 dogs. Plans show 128 kennels, plus dog day care and grooming rooms. The ma)amum capacity of 200 dogs would be an absolute peak scenario, such as on Christmas Day. Afull discussion of all of the CUP stipulations, the eight general CUP requirements, and additional information related to the requested variances and required findings can be found as an attachment to this report. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: 60 -DAY RULE: The 60 -day clock 'started' when a complete application was received on October 11, 2016. A decision is required by December 10, 2016 OR the Council must notify the applicant that it is extending the deadline (up to a ma)amum 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 October 24, 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 ordinance amendment, conditional use permit amendment, and variances (6-0). • Afirst reading of the attached ordinance was approved by the Council on October 25, 2016. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: • Approve the proposal with modifications. • Deny the zoning code text amendment, CUP amendment, and/or variances with a finding that requirements are not met. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: John Sturgess, Adogo Pet Hotels ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Ordinance Amendment Ordinance ❑ Resolution - Summary Publication Resolution Letter ❑ CUP & Variance Resolution Resolution Letter ❑ Legal Description Backup Material ❑ Requirements Attachment Backup Material ❑ Plans, Survey, Zoning Maps Backup Material BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE REGULATIONS RELATED TO OUTDOOR ANIMAL RELIEF AREAS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 534.07, Subdivision 25 of the Richfield City Code related to outdoor animal relief areas in the General Business (C-2) Zoning District is amended to read as follows: 534.07. Conditional Uses. Subdivision 25. Accessory outdoor animal relief area to animal kennel, provided the following conditions are met: a) The outdoor relief area shall not be located in the front yard; b) The outdoor relief area must meet setback requirements; c) The outdoor relief area shall be screened from view of neighboring properties in a manner consistent with the surrounding area, as approved by the City; d) The outdoor relief area shall be for the use of dogs only; e) No dogs shall remain unattended in the outdoor relief area; f) The outdoor relief area shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, animal run, animal play area or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit, if the outdoor area is located less than 600 feet from any residential parcel; g) The outdoor relief area shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition at all times; h) Solid waste material shall be removed a minimum of once per day and disposed of in a sanitary manner; and i) If required by the Public Works Department, a filtration bed shall be constructed to ensure that liquid waste will not enter into the ground or the City's stormwater system. Section 2 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor /_laION9 Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING REGULATIONS RELATED TO OUTDOOR ANIMAL RELIEF AREAS WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above referenced amendment of the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense of publication of the complete text is not justified. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication: SUMMARY PUBLICATION BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING REGULATIONS RELATED TO OUTDOOR ANIMAL RELIEF AREAS This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. This ordinance revises regulations related to outdoor animal relief areas as an accessory to animal kennel businesses. Current City regulations prohibit outdoor animal relief areas from functioning as animal runs or play areas. The approved ordinance further specifies that outdoor animal relief areas may be used as animal runs or play areas, when located 600 feet or more from residential properties. The approved ordinance also clarifies screening requirements. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office during normal business hours or upon request by calling the Department of Community Development at (612) 861-9760. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT AND VARIANCES FOR AN ANIMAL KENNEL BUSINESS WITH AN ACCESSORY OUTDOOR RELIEF AREA AT 6244 CEDAR AVENUE WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of a conditional use permit amendment and variances to allow an animal kennel business with an accessory outdoor relief area at property commonly known as 6244 Cedar Avenue and legally described in the attached Exhibit A; and 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 October 24, 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 on October 11, 2016; and WHEREAS, the requested conditional use permit meets the requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield's Zoning Code, Subsection 547.09 and as detailed in City Council Staff Report No. ; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that the outdoor animal relief area must be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the street / corner side property line, Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that off-street parking for day care uses shall be provided at a ratio of 1 per 5 enrolled persons based on licensed capacity, Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6; 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 Zoning Code Subsections 534.11, Subd. 1; and 544.13, Subd. 6; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the conditional use permit; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council makes the following general findings: a. The Property is zoned General Business (C-2). b. The Zoning Code states that the outdoor animal relief area must be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the street / corner side property line. A variance from Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1 is necessary. c. The Zoning Code states that off-street parking for day care uses shall be provided at a ratio of 1 per 5 enrolled persons based on licensed capacity. A variance from Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6 is necessary. 2. With respect to the application for variances from the above -listed requirements, the City Council makes the following findings: a. Strict enforcement of Richfield Zoning Code Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1 would cause a practical difficulty. The existing layout of the northern half of the property limits the areas where an outdoor area can be located on the east or west sides of the building. Locating the outdoor area to the north of the building would require the removal of several parking spaces. Locating the outdoor area on the west side of the building would be undesirable, due to proximity to Taft Park, leaving the east side of the building as the only remaining option. Strict enforcement of Richfield Zoning Code Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6 would cause a practical difficulty. The Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for animal kennels. In the past, staff has substituted the requirement for day care centers, which is "1 per 5 enrolled persons based on licensed capacity." The requested maximum capacity of 200 dogs would require 40 parking stalls. After adding a required dumpster enclosure to the property, the northern parking lot will have 36 stalls, leaving a deficit of 4 stalls. It is reasonable to assume that parking demands for an animal kennel are lower than that of a day care center. b. The intent of the setback regulation is to protect neighbors from possible nuisance created by the outdoor animal area. This property has no neighbors to its east and is directly adjacent to Cedar Avenue (City) and Trunk Highway 77 (MNDOT) right-of- way. With regards to parking, there are no adjacent properties along this portion of Cedar Avenue. On -street parking is allowed on Cedar Avenue, in the event there is a parking shortage. c. Granting the requested variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood. No adverse impacts are anticipated. With regards to the setback requirement, the property has no neighbors to the east. With regards to parking, if overflow parking does occur, the impacts would be limited to this property alone. d. The variances requested are the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulties. e. The proposed variances do not conflict with the purpose or intent of the Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan. 3. Based on the above findings, a variance is hereby approved to permit a 10 -foot setback on the east side of the Subject Property. 4. Based on the above findings, a variance is hereby approved to reduce the off-street parking requirement to 36 stalls for a maximum capacity of 200 dogs. 5. A conditional use permit is issued to allow an accessory outdoor relief area to an animal kennel business, as described in City Council Letter No. , on the Subject Property legally described above. 6. This conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions in addition to those specified in Section 547.09 of the City's Zoning Ordinance: • That the recipient of this conditional use permit record this Resolution with the County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subd. 1 and the City's Zoning Ordinance Section 547.09, Subd. 8. A recorded copy of the approved resolution must be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. • The parking lot must be re -striped in accordance with the approved plan, including two accessible parking spaces and a loading area as close as possible to the accessible entrance. Parking stalls must be available year- round. No snow or other storage is permitted in required parking stalls. • The outdoor animal area shall not include outdoor kennels. The outdoor area must be screened with 8 foot tall cedar fence and kept in a good state of repair. • Existing trees and shrubs must be preserved as indicated on the approved plans. Any trees or shrubs that die must be replaced. • A dumpster enclosure must be constructed in compliance with Subsection 544.05. • Separate sign permits are required. • The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all requirements detailed in the City's Administrative Review Committee Report dated September 23, 2016, and compliance with all other City and State regulations. • Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit the applicant must submit a surety equal to 125% of the value of any improvements and/or requirements not yet complete. This surety shall be provided in the manner specified by the Zoning Code. 7. The conditional use permit and variances shall expire one year after issuance unless 1) the use for which the permit was granted has commenced; or 2) Building permits have been issued and substantial work performed; or 3) Upon written request of the applicant, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period not to exceed one year. Expiration is governed by the City Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subdivision 9. 8. This conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 10. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (Per Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Commitment for Title Insurance, Commitment No. 15824463, effective date, December 11, 2012.) An interest in land, said interest being over a portion of the following described parent parcel: The following tract of land located in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota: That part of Tract B, lying East of a line parallel with and 118 feet East of the West line of said Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 930; AND Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 930. Together with The North 24.0 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, "Iverson's Third Addition" and that part of vacated East 63d Street, vacated by Resolution No. 240 of the Village of Richfield, recorded June 10, 1955, as Document No. 2946652, which accrues to said Lot 7, and that part of Government Lot I in the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 26, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot 7, Block 3, "Iverson's Third Addition"; thence West along the North line of said Lot 7 a distance of 133.62 feet to the Northwest corner of said Lot 7; thence North along the East line of 18th Avenue South produced Northerly a distance of 126.0 feet to a point 295.47 feet West of the East line of said Northeast 1/4; thence East a distance of 133.62 feet to a point 161.85 feet West of the east line of said Northeast 1/4; thence south a distance of 126.00 feet to the place of beginning; AND The North 24.0 feet of Lot 6, Block 3, "Iverson's Third Addition" and that part of vacated East 63d Street, vacated by Resolution No. 240 of the Village of Richfield, recorded June 10, 1955, as Document No. 2946652 which accrues to said Lot 6, and that part of Government Lot 1, Section 26, Township 28, Range 24, described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot 6, Block 3, "Iverson's Third Addition"; thence North parallel to the East line of said Northeast 1/4 a distance of 30.0 feet; thence East on a line drawn parallel to and 30.0 feet North of the North line of said Lot 6, a distance of 17.0 feet; thence North parallel to and 33.0 feet West of the East line of said Northeast 1/4 a distance of 96.0 feet; thence West parallel to and 126.0 feet North of the North line of said Lot 6 a distance of 128.85 feet to its intersection with the West Line of said Lot 6 produced; thence South a distance of 126.0 feet to the Northwest corner of said Lot 6; thence East along the North line of said Lot 6, a distance of 109.38 feet to the place of beginning; All according to the recorded plat thereof and according to the United States Government Survey thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. EXCEPT: That part of the North 24 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Iverson's Third Addition, and that part of vacated 63rd Street adjoining said Lot 7, lying West of a line parallel with and 118 feet East of the Southerly extension of the West line of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 930, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin; AND EXCEPT That part of Government Lot I, Section 26, Township 28, Range 24 lying North of the North line of "Iverson's Third Addition", East of the Northerly extension of the West line of Block 3 in said Addition; South of a line parallel with and 96 feet North of the North line of said Addition, and West of a line parallel with and 118 feet East of the West line of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 930, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. Torrens Property Certificate of Title recorded in Certificate No. 1335982. Code Requirements I Required Findings Part 1 — Outdoor animal relief area, accessory to an animal kennel in the General Business (C-2) District: The findings necessary to approve said business in the C-2 District are as follows (534.07, Subd. 25). Proposed zoning code text amendment changes are underlined. The outdoor relief area shall not be located in the front yard. This requirement is met. The front lot line of a corner lot is defined by the Zoning Code as the shorter of the two lot lines abutting a street. In this case, the front yard is along 63rd Street. 2. The outdoor relief area must meet setback requirements. The applicant has requested a variance to this requirement along the eastern property line. A full discussion of this request can be found in Part 3 below. 3. The outdoor relief area shall be screened from view of neighboring properties in a manner consistent with the surrounding area, as approved by the City. The outdoor relief area will be fully screened with wood privacy fence. 4. The outdoor relief area shall be for the use of dogs only. The applicant will be required to comply with operational regulations. 5. No dogs shall remain unattended in the outdoor relief area. The applicant will be required to comply with operational regulations. 6. The outdoor relief area shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, animal run, animal play area or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit, if the outdoor area is located less than 600 feet from any residential parcel. The proposed location of the outdoor area is more than 700 feet from the nearest residential parcel. 7. The outdoor relief area shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition at all times. The applicant will be required to comply with operational regulations. 8. Solid waste material shall be removed a minimum of once per day and disposed of in a sanitary manner. The applicant will be required to comply with operational regulations. 9. If required by the Public Works Department, a filtration bed shall be constructed to ensure that liquid waste will not enter into the ground or the City's stormwater system. The applicant proposes to install synthetic grass (K9 Grass) over a limestone base. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal and did not raise any concerns. Part 2 — Conditional Use Permit: The findings necessary to issue a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) are as follows (547.09, Subd. 6): 1. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with the "Community Commercial" designation. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a number of goals and policies related to economic development and support for business and employment growth. The proposal is consistent with these goals and policies. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to protect and promote the public health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. The purpose of the General Business (C-2) District is to allow a wide variety of commercial businesses that are attractive and compatible with nearby residential properties. The proposal is consistent with these purposes. 3. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. There are no specific redevelopment plans that apply to the property. 4. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this code. The proposed use will either maintain the status quo or improve compliance with performance standards requirements. 5. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. The City's Public Works and Engineering Departments have reviewed the proposal and do not anticipate any issues that cannot be addressed through the stipulations of approval. 6. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare. Adequate provisions have been made to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 7. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. Investment and improvement of existing properties is encouraged and necessary in order to maintain a thriving community. 8. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement can be met, if the Zoning Code text amendment is approved. Part 3 - Variances: The findings necessary to approve a variance are as follows (Subd. 547.11): 1. There are "practical difficulties" that prevent the property owner from using the property in a reasonable manner. 2. 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. 3. The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality. 4. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. 5. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Reduced setback (Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1) The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required setback from 25 feet to 10 feet along the eastern property line (street / corner side). Criteria 1: The existing layout of the northern half of the property limits the areas where an outdoor area can be located on the east or west sides of the building. Locating the outdoor area to the north of the building would require the removal of several parking spaces. The City's Parks Department objected to the outdoor area being located on the west side of the building, due to proximity to Taft Park, leaving the east side of the building as the only remaining option. Criteria 2: The code does not specify setbacks for the outdoor area itself, only that the outdoor area must observe the same setback as the principal building, in this case 25 feet on the street / corner side of the property. The intent of the setback regulation is to protect neighbors from possible nuisance created by the outdoor area. This property has no neighbors to its east and is directly adjacent to Cedar Avenue (City) and Trunk Highway 77 (MNDOT) right-of-way. Criteria 3: The proposed variance is not expected to have any impact on the character of the neighborhood. Criteria 4: The proposed variance is the minimum necessary. Criteria 5: The proposed reduction does not conflict with the purpose and/or intent of the Comprehensive Plan or the Ordinance. Reduced Parking Requirement (Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6) The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the off-street parking requirement from 40 stalls to 36 stalls. Criteria 1: The Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for animal kennels. In the past, staff has substituted the requirement for day care centers, which is "1 per 5 enrolled persons based on licensed capacity." The requested maximum capacity of 200 dogs would require 40 parking stalls. After adding a required dumpster enclosure to the property, the northern parking lot will have 36 stalls, leaving a deficit of 4 stalls. The lack of a specific requirement for this type of business is a practical difficulty. It is reasonable to assume that parking demands for an animal kennel are lower than that of a day care center. Criteria 2: The property is located on the dead-end Cedar Avenue, north of Home Depot. Maaco Auto Repair occupies the southern half of the building and there are no adjacent properties along this portion of Cedar Avenue. On -street parking is allowed on Cedar Avenue, in the event there is a parking shortage. Criteria 3: The proposed variance is not expected to have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood. If overflow parking does occur, the impacts would be limited to this property alone. Criteria 4: The proposed variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate an animal kennel with a maximum capacity of 200 dogs. Criteria 5: The proposed parking variance does not conflict with the purpose and/or intent of the Comprehensive Plan or the Ordinance. LU F- 0 r LU 5L1 3NIl Uy3dod'd O I V � e CV cy (clods L L ydu}s-a) l� 3 = W H Q QOjz i m LU I I c7 _ c7 U I I � I 0o yuyc xO s z I -ley: S y -a) z� Joy s a �mw z yy - U -- w J' (-i) V) W 3 J j Q LU 7 wl v V z ra WWw O I �I LE I I Q I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I 3 - 3 I I ^I C --t) n `l I I I I I I I I I 0o-� o Z wW V" II I -- ---------- C� �J 133?J1S 4?lE9 '3 ------------ IEYISTI NG I MECHANICAL I TO REMAIN I "TY�LEI�T GR' 66 SF LJ MECHANICAL a � I DAY'CARE #1 F F--] MOP 1 VJOM EN'S O J � MEN'SExlr� CENTRAL I — �� CLE�G DAY CAPE #2 PREPOROOM v.2.1 FLOOR PLAN �N ADOGO PET HOTELS SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 6244 Cedar Ave. S. RICHFIELD, MN 55423 SCALE: 1/ 16" = V-0" r1 IOUTDOOR PLAY AREA A' I OUTDOOR PLAY AREA B' I I ,W4 SF I.684SF I v.2.1 FLOOR PLAN �N ADOGO PET HOTELS SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 6244 Cedar Ave. S. RICHFIELD, MN 55423 SCALE: 1/ 16" = V-0" r1 (/7 J W 0 W n ,O V O 0 Q i 00 0 LU LL x U BTH AVENUE SOUTH IS I� 181H "E =ol �e FEE.IIIEti=.LIL �F."E_"„ �a.�o" � c — �� N �� 111 � L"E of ,R,o, a ��6�., . ,. �aa�,; s° � m0 zi'so'9Io aa� ` OF °f SIIT IN CEDITE�AR Y NE A VENUE o SOUTH � II S ' T �� S/ °03'03"N' 4/4.97 LNI nuo Ens uNE oF�.anc a e' T.za a.za 0 ------------- P, — o O y � _ O y o m � u y z o 3 D u3n3 3 " 3` v - 3U1 - m 0 O Z CONCREII gnF m n 3 - 3 y � ^.3 ` Ui OF °f SIIT IN CEDITE�AR Y NE A VENUE o SOUTH � II S ' T �� S/ °03'03"N' 4/4.97 LNI nuo Ens uNE oF�.anc a e' T.za a.za 0 ------------- P, — o O y � _ O y o m � u y z o 3 D u3n3 3 " 3` v - 3U1 - m 0 O Z CONCREII gnF m n 3 - 3 y � ^.3 ` F. o , o IS IS t OF °f SIIT IN CEDITE�AR Y NE A VENUE o SOUTH � II S ' T �� S/ °03'03"N' 4/4.97 LNI nuo Ens uNE oF�.anc a e' T.za a.za 0 ------------- P, — o O y � _ O y o m � u y z o 3 D u3n3 3 " 3` v - 3U1 - m O Z O Z n 3 - 3 y � ^.3 ` Outdoor Animal Area Ordinance Amendment 6244 Cedar Avenue site and surrounding context � I - M r a .WA F L �. W Adogo Proposed Outdoor r Animal Area Maaco 63RD o J MIR- - V 6244 Cedar Avenue Proposed Outdoor Animal Area 600 ft Buffer of Residential Property Streets and Highways 0 75 150 300 m Feet 450 600 J t" O CL � � d E O 2 300 m Feet 450 600 J m x x E 66TH a -@o � Qo 66TH -@o � Qo IL o ) � � LL AtlMH91H IL o � ) � � L•1-AVMH9IH N � N !p N ` � N U a U a r N a o a` � a` 21tl033 W 21tl03� aI ~ a' •VJ c @ ;oda(] awoH ■ i`v06 c o a 0o Il'[edf aadfali:=4f aadl :sLll .[adf aadfal-i ;calf i$i [fg'[fg' �r�' [rg'drg' gig' drg'Erg' �r$' drg' it A o L � 06 ^, W d li : [edf aadf .dtli 'daif aad! 'sell '[adf aadf sa41i % daif siter+[riy[r$�[ri��ri'ii�1drg,E01Wri[r$�dri, d N ci rn V dsg' 11 to f! $: f$�i ri= Sdq°x> [f rid fyd;°o: [' aii4a�lii{dial JB l (d P M n p aW ii{�iad iiilf+ iii�l�'i{�Sd i�J% liilfad fii�4 iii.V�,{ f �O 11 rVol to $' ri= S1q°x, [ F frim ff;°o,d [' iYyil•i ld ai (°li. Ii . iV01•iir4d affi l .y{,`i'[• f '`�i{'sa ila �4 n O 4slEi'i(ala[!'fiQdii'iri'41sliiiddri'As(aia[IriQ{ii+ri d ��(. aesift ni';4 a�.�I'l- if: i' d•y(ii L•gf61i.!�d ±�.�d iI-Cif. lisa iJa isaf o -(If. I,i( d1EAif f Vrij 0 N [dfaiiE (ra (d�iY iriV (iri?J df i?J Vrij(ra(�iY ilii;4! �$qe� i {i�} ! ii�. iriV[ri?J fi riV[fa �iY iriV dVi?Jsi h"' ,i ,�ddi d'i /. sod��b lSiff: ai 6e•�/-IWC dl�sif;-441NI ❑ T 3 �i iC so �e4d��siy �o iso p •id d ��[ ,�' li{i i A Vi•V dd!�i ddFi d �j' dd{ii O E llg del �l .dell gala .6�l.sadl Lala rd 7,dalf 2ala.°O ri{ ri�i i1Y«i( i •i ii i •i iJ i O o U /�♦ v ^��/. ayiif[i{�diijbl46Lf�i!'1d if �iiji4l fiis4f �i{'�S �$i�bl;ii. co g C a ri{ rid! i1Y «i iJ i •i i! i •iU co E o L }''�� Vl {[I Vs�?if fi �d Y;ori �df tdf �� 11 �gi aos �gf��l jgl s bi gi. ; }$1od $l.g o[�gi. f (f�C �gl sfdf gi- f �1 }r �d i(di(iid i(, i'i �� [i (,�ta(iidi( di ff lid �(i'iiff diff fiij[sdi��f diff i;affil tsfi;��$!ii'Vsf fii �[L�?ii diff �;4fii tdf ii %a d4i' �%� ylfi��f�dye5`fiill�ii46�'fid�C �i%y4d fii�f�y{eS df driV lr'.di ydr 'Qafi'�ddri4a 3dit�y [drib 1f ria dd MaLIHOIN �/J d�i(. ff ild•i( O v*ff'diff lad p(i'd' di( N �li�'d dl tiff%y! fy��f � die5` f ii1 ! �ii46�'fid�C �i%y4d fii�f � i{eS df iiA driVst�'s fly[ri�afi'.�fi'�ddr,ga�'.iifiiy[drit !f {r4 dpi{, iidi(Edi(i�di(i'di(d;(�id•i(f�4('diff �di(i'd' di 1 ` [elf %ala id4 riilfi'liia(]i'¢drig`;i'Jfiiadrit {. I.Laff%ala idol :dalf )all i6adl '[adl %ala id4dl :!! 64il. Lri'`iiYdric !•iii(] r�d'riai'i I'd rid ril!•(i'd'r96'riad'i. f$�C=fV di dr�g>lflr�g,r=f °pd s�d�g;a O d•ii�d'rd rif i'i i'd•rd rii!•(iid`rI96'rifd`i.� r driP., sC if'a`d[ �$: off$?i=f$ di dr�g> eflr�g;r=fgdd[ fg; ■ ,■ ■ iY�id iVi'd iViid i�y� ■■ • ■ E m_ p. /�� / L Rig+s , ■ Vii f{Vi'd iiViid iVy� ■ ■ ■ (G iJC V 1iiViid airAd aiiad`i{qa l =irAd �iiiii� i. ■ 1eif�6Jifigdd11 ■ ■ ■ ■ 2 u i i i i i i dll (•Lal1 (1alf (.[ail �'faif )all 16411 (. [adl %elf id4 f s ,sifi$ i°{$=didsg=diff6�'i°{&dd[dig z E d�rd' d�r'd#r �d•ii d'i d'(•ei(a i'f''ii( i�ai '�'aj ai a! did 'teff a! 'self a i! ''a41_i v EE E d'i iid'ii rd�r p I -eol 61 sy :ao1 s�di -eol e91 �■ ■ Si rl [f}i{Vil fii� �' ■ ■ ,� Ua E Il .a l l d�r�d' d�r'd#r �d•ii d'�r�d�r m U ayjA[d( [{iiJdf;? i ii fF•ylAr/aiiD , 4 �id� � •1 4 'S+ f . ■■ ■ ■ � C N i iid'ii ❑ <ii ftlrg i'r stifg; taig?ifrg stfi�g, s lFg?�figC a ■ ■ ' ■ ■ + o aU ■ ■ ■ `m " 'N �1/ {� ed iyiAe ��ii{�Se iii?e ii�&,I�jiiV ed i Ij'!a` iii• `D � ■ ■ ■ ■ � c � Ni if 1 d[°rg' �ar$'i!r$dd=dig'[Ldr°'iargd � ■ ■ ■ E p a d•f o mea' (]tiff �• ■ , �•r ■ L) Ir a a Z x E 66TH -@o � Qo IL o � ) � � LL AtlMH91H NL•1-AVMHQIH N p N U a o r o a` � 21tl033 U ~ tr aI N■ v U lode(] awoH c @ ■ i`v06 o a 0o Il'[edf aadfali:=4f aadl :sLll .[adf aadfal-i ;calf i$i [fg'[fg' �r�' [rg'drg' gig' drg'Erg' �r$' drg' it A %) c a 1i.1 d! �ii� d s ti ilei' d #i �de #yr46 a •�yi4e v! ji ��g6 ail s ti file q #ir a a' V dsg' 11 to f! $: f$�i ri= Sdq°x> [f rid fyd;°o: [' aii4a�lii{dial JB n p ii{�iad iiilf+ iii�l�'i{�Sd i�J% liilfad fii�4 iii.V�,{ f �O O 4slEi'i(ala[!'fiQdii'iri'41sliiiddri'As(aia[IriQ{ii+ri d ��(. aesift ni';4 a�.�I'l- if: i' d•y(ii L•gf61i.!�d ±�.�d iI-Cif. ai ❑ Vrij [dfaiiE (ra (d�iY iriV (iri?J df i?J h"' ,i ,�ddi d'i /. sod��b lSiff: ai 6e•�/-IWC dl�sif;-441NI 3 p •id d ��[ ,�' li{i i A Vi•V dd!�i ddFi d �j' dd{ii E llg del �l .dell gala .6�l.sadl Lala rd 7,dalf 2ala.°O ri{ ri�i i1Y«i( i •i ii i •i iJ i O o U O d'i(. ifl i(diff lid i4'74; f lid x(101 diff , [i(,�2 I 'gl (d l1i4, lr ?10 !ri dr��l dfi iri d�i=�`d lri 41ri co L {[I Vs�?if fi �d Y;ori �df tdf �� 11 �gi aos �gf��l jgl s bi gi. ; }$1od $l.g o[�gi. f (f�C �gl sfdf gi- f �1 }r Ol31dHOR1 �%� ylfi��f�dye5`fiill�ii46�'fid�C �i%y4d fii�f�y{eS df driV lr'.di ydr 'Qafi'�ddri4a 3dit�y [drib 1f ria �/J d�i(. ff ild•i( O v*ff'diff lad p(i'd' di( N 1 ` [elf %ala id4 riilfi'liia(]i'¢drig`;i'Jfiiadrit !•iii(] r�d'riai'i I'd rid ril!•(i'd'r96'riad'i. f$�C=fV di dr�g>lflr�g,r=f °pd s�d�g;a ,■ ■ iY�id iVi'd iViid i�y� ■■ • ■ E m_ p. I_ airAd �iiiii( aiiad`i{qa =iiA(] �iii+id i. �d•ia l%5i'(4 {•56f �3ii�1�'f!i%Ri'(47 ■� dr ■■ ■■ � � ■ ■ (G iJC V , cirg,[ii8d cid, afi$,aii$, ddrg, sifg,aii&d cdrg i = .L _ m ma i i i i i i dll (•Lal1 (1alf (.[ail �'faif )all 16411 (. [adl %elf id4 f F N N d�rd' d�r'd#r �d•ii d'i E E E d'i iid'ii rd�r p I -eol 61 sy :ao1 s�di -eol e91 �■ ■ Si rl [f}i{Vil fii� �' ■ ■ ,� Ua E ayjA[d( [{iiJdf;? i ii fF•ylAr/aiiD , 4 �id� � •1 4 'S+ f . ■■ ■ ■ � C N f f ! : Sa �3 ! 1 • La 1 )%4f. ddi sirg. tir$•tfr$d ddrg, tlrf'ilrg' • ■ ■ ■ `m " 'N �1/ d •i AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.E. STAFF REPORT NO. 195 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/1/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a request for a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Health Fitness Corporation, d/b/a Health Fitness, located at 7601 Penn Avenue South, D building of the Best Buy Corporate Campus. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On August 25, 2016, the City received an application for a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Health Fitness Corporation, d/b/a Health Fitness, located at 7601 Penn Avenue South, D building of the Best Buy Corporate Campus. All required information and documents have been received. All fees have been received. The Public Safety background investigation has been completed. The Public Safety Director has reviewed the background investigation report. None of the information in the report would cause the Public Safety Director to recommend denial of the requested license. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the request for a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Health Fitness Corporation, d/b/a Health Fitness, located at 7601 Penn Avenue South, D building of the Best Buy Corporate Campus. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The Public Safety background investigation has been completed and reveals the following: • The applicant has paid the required licensing fees. • The required proof of liability insurance has been submitted showing Arch Specialty Insurance Company as affording coverage. • All real estate and personal property taxes due and payable for the premises have been paid. • The parent corporation of Heath Fitness Corporation is The Trust Mark Companies. The corporate officers are Paul Lotharius, Steven Alavi, Philip Goss, Deborah Pazdernik, Michael French, Graham Traynor and Ann Derouin. Criminal background checks were conducted on all of the corporate officers. None of these individuals has any known criminal history. The program manager is Justin Vinchattle. A criminal background check was conducted on Justin Vinchattle. He has no known criminal history. • No application has been submitted for an individual Massage Therapist at this time. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • The applicant has complied with all the provisions of the application process. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • There are no critical timing issues. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • Licensing fees have been received. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • There are no legal considerations. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI Deny the request for the Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Health Fitness, however, Public Safety has not found any basis for denial. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: A representative from Health Fitness will be attending. AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 51. STAFF REPORT NO. 196 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/1/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor licenses for 2017 for EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, LLC d/b/a EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Inc. d/b/a Fireside Foundry, GM Richfield, LLC d/b/a Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis Airport, Frenchman's Pub, Inc. d/b/a Frenchman's, VPC Richfield Pizza, LLC d/b/a Giordano's of Richfield, Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar, Paisan, Inc. d/b/a Khan's Mongolian Barbeque, Lyn 65, LLC d/b/a Lyn 65 Kitchen & Bar, Pizza Luce VII, Inc. d/b/a Pizza Luce, Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post 435 and Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555 d/b/a Four Nickels Food & Drink. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Richfield City Ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider the renewal of all On -Sale Liquor license renewals and a date be set for the public hearing. This request is for the approval of the setting of the public hearing scheduled for December 13, 2016, for the consideration of these license renewals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor licenses for 2017 for EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, LLC d/b/a EI Tejaban Mexican Grill, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Inc. d/b/a Fireside Foundry, GM Richfield, LLC d/b/a Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis Airport, Frenchman's Pub, Inc. d/b/a Frenchman's, VPC Richfield Pizza, LLC d/b/a Giordano's of Richfield, Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar, Paisan, Inc. d/b/a Khan's Mongolian Barbeque, Lyn 65, LLC d/b/a Lyn 65 Kitchen & Bar, Pizza Luce VII, Inc. d/b/a Pizza Luce, Minneapolis -Richfield American Legion Post 435 and Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555 d/b/a Four Nickels Food & Drink. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • The On -Sale Liquor licenses for restaurant establishments will expire on December 31, 2016. • Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. • The renewal process has been initiated. • Holding the public hearing on December 13, 2016, will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2017. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • Richfield City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor license renewals. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Current On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor licenses will expire on December 31, 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • There are no financial considerations. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • There are no legal considerations. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this will delay the licensing process. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: There are no parties expected at the meeting. AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.G. STAFF REPORT NO. 197 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/1/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor licenses for 2017 for Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill, Davanni's, Inc. d/b/a Davanni's Pizza & Hot Hoagies, Joy's Pattaya Thai Restaurant, LLC d/b/a Joy's Pattaya Thai Restaurant, Minnesota Junior Hockey Group, LLC d/b/a Minnesota Magicians (located in the Richfield Ice Arena), My Burger Operations, LLC, d/b/a My Burger, The Noodle Shop Co. Colorado, Inc. d/b/a Noodles & Company (two locations), Patrick's French Bakery, Inc. d/b/a Patrick's Bakery & Cafe, Henry Thou d/b/a Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Richfield City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider the renewal of all On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license renewals and a date be set for the public hearing. This request is for the approval of the setting of the public hearing scheduled for December 13, 2016, for the consideration of these license renewals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor licenses for 2016 for Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill, Davanni's, Inc. d/b/a Davanni's Pizza & Hot Hoagies, Joy's Pattaya Thai Restaurant, LLC d/b/a Joy's Pattaya Thai Restaurant, Minnesota Junior Hockey Group, LLC d/b/a Minnesota Magicians (located in the Richfield Ice Arena), My Burger Operations, LLC, d/b/a My Burger, The Noodle Shop Co. Colorado, Inc. d/b/a Noodles & Company (two locations), Patrick's French Bakery, Inc. d/b/a Patrick's Bakery & Cafe, Henry Thou d/b/a Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • The On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor licenses for restaurant establishments will eXpire on December 31, 2016. • Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. • The renewal process has been initiated. • Holding the public hearing on December 13, 2016, will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2017. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • Richfield City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license renewals. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Current On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor licenses will expire on December 31, 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • There are no financial considerations. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • There are no legal considerations. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this will delay the licensing process. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: There are no parties expected at the meeting. AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.1-1. STAFF REPORT NO. 198 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/1/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer licenses for 2017 for University Cash Company, LLC d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry and Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Richfield City ordinance requires that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license renewals and a date be set for the public hearing. This request is for the approval of the setting of the public hearing scheduled for December 13, 2016, for the consideration of these license renewals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 13, 2016, for the consideration of the renewal of Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer licenses for 2017 for University Cash Company, LLC d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry and Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • The Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer licenses for pawnshops will expire on December 31, 2016. • Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. • The renewal process has been initiated. • Holding the public hearing on December 13, 2016, will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2017. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • Richfield City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license renewals. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Current Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer licenses will expire on December 31, 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • There are no financial considerations. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • There are no legal considerations. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this will delay the licensing process. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: There are no parties expected at the meeting. AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.1. STAFF REPORT NO. 199 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: John Stark, Community Development Director DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director 11/9/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11/9/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of property owned by the City of Richfield to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: One of the primary purposes of a City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority is to purchase and sell properties for redevelopment purposes. State statutes have established a more streamlined process for Housing and Redevelopment Authority's to act in this capacity. For these reasons, and based on the advice of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's legal counsel, the City conveyed 38 properties it owned for redevelopment to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority in December 2015 and February 2016. At that time, however, the properties at 6600 17th Avenue South and 6601 16th Avenue South were inadvertently omitted. Staff is recommending the conveyance of these properties to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The conveyance of the properties would result in a one-time expenditure (in the book value of the properties) to City accounts and commensurate revenue to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority accounts. This transaction would be reflected in the 2016 financial reports for both the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve a first reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of property owned by the City of Richfield to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • Staff provided City Council members with a memo (Council Memorandum No. 28) on April 23, 2015 in which this action was recommended. • At its Worksession on April 28, 2015, City Council members discussed this topic and directed staff to draft an ordinance for formal consideration. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch • State statutes prescribe a process allowing a City's HRA to purchase and sell properties for redevelopment purposes. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • If approved, the second reading of this ordinance will be scheduled for December 13, 2016. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • The conveyance of the properties would result in a one-time expenditure (in the book value of the properties) to City accounts and commensurate revenue to HRA accounts. This transaction would be reflected in the 2016 financial reports for both the City and HRA. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The ordinance was drafted by Julie Eddington, HRA legal counsel. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI • Delay consideration of a first reading in order to obtain further information about the impact or benefit of transferring the properties to the HRA. • Deny approval of a first reading and allow the subject properties to remain under the ownership of the City. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background; findings; authority_. 1.01. The City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City") is governed by a home rule charter adopted pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 410. 1.02 The City is the owner of two parcels of real property located in the City, as described in the attached Exhibit A (the "City Property") and legally described as shown therein. 1.03. It has been proposed that the City convey the City Property to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("HRA") for the purpose of future redevelopment. Pursuant to Section 13.04 of the City's Chatter, no real property of the City shall be disposed of except by ordinance. 1.04. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462.356, it has been determined that the proposed disposal of property has no relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. 1.05. The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City to convey the City Property to the HRA for the purpose of redevelopment. Section. 2 Adoption; effective date; filing 2.01 The conveyance of the City Property to the HRA is approved. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized and directed to convey the City Property to the HRA and take all steps necessary to effect such conveyance. 2.02. This Ordinance shall take effect after the thirtieth (30th) day, exclusive of day of publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of December, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Beth VanHoose, City Clerk 474686v1 JAERC125-1 EXHIBIT A City of Richfield properties to be conveyed to Richfield HRA Lot 001, Block 001, "Cedar -Sunrise Addition", Hennepin County, Minnesota Lot 016, Block 001, "Cedar -Sunrise Addition", Hennepin County, Minnesota A-1 474686v1 JAERC125-1 REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.J. STAFF REPORT NO. 200 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 Chris Link, Operations Superintendent DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director 11/4/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Mike Dobesh, Assistant Fire Chief STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the purchase of a Fire Rescue Truck from Custom Fire for $179,894 plus taxes and licensing in 2017. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Richfield Fire Department is scheduled to replace a Fire Rescue Truck in 2017. This is the primary response vehicle for rescue calls out of Station 1 and in the last year this vehicle has been used to respond to 2,700 calls for service. Public Works and the Fire Department partnered to find a vehicle that meets the operational needs of the Fire Department and manages the future costs to the City's fleet. Together staff was able to budget $100,000 less for the purchase of this vehicle. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a Fire Rescue Truck from Custom Fire for $202,894, minus $23,000 for trade-in, totaling $179,894 plus taxes and licensing in 2017 for use by the Fire Department. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Replacement schedules are set for each piece of equipment once purchased. The following are taken into consideration when deciding on when to replace vehicles: • Year of purchase • Replacment date/depreciation • History of repairs • Technology upgrades B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy The City of Richfield currently purchases vehicles using cooperative sources. The Houston Galveston Area Council (HGAC) Cooperative Purchasing Program is one of these sources. The Fire Rescue Truck will be purchased through the HGAC. When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment, or construction exceeds $100,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • Approval at this meeting will ensure delivery of the vehicle in 2017, the budgeted year of purchase. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • The 2016 Revised/2017 Proposed Budget includes $240,000 for this purchase. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S . • None. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Fire Department staff will be available for any questions regarding this piece of equipment. AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.K. STAFF REPORT NO. 201 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/2/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous building and a public health and safety nuisance existing at 7144 4th Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff has concluded that the conditions at this property are hazardous and constitute a public health nuisance under state statute and City ordinances. Staff has worked with the resident of this property since the City deemed the dwelling unfit for habitation on August 27, 2015. Despite staff's attempt to seek cooperation, the resident has made virtually no progress in bringing the property into compliance for habitation or to abate the public health and safety nuisances that caused the property to be deemed uninhabitable. Allowing the property to remain in this condition causes significant public health and safety risks and concerns. Approval of the Resolution and Order is the first step in a process that would allow the City to obtain a court order and abate the hazardous conditions on the property. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous property and a public health nuisance existing at 7144 4th Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Throughout this process, staff has worked with the resident and provided access to the property in order to encourage the resident to bring the property into compliance. Staff has also attempted to provide the resident with some helpful resources, including offering Public Health Nursing services, which the resident declined. Prior to taking this step to initiate an abatement action, staff asked for the resident's permission to allow the City to abate the nuisances and assess the costs to the property, which the resident has refused. Richfield HRA has also contacted the resident to see if the property was available to purchase which the resident has not responded to. Staff believes it has exhausted its options short of initiating a more formal action. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes. etch • The current condition of the property implicates state statutes defining hazardous conditions and public health nuisances, including Minnesota Statutes sections 463.161, 463.15, 145A.03, 145A.08, and City Code subsections 925.01 and 305.09. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • There are seasonal issues regarding abatement of some of the nuisances on the property. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • If this action is approved and a court order obtained, the City will hire a company that specializes in abatement of nuisances on the property. That company will work with the resident to bring the property into compliance. The costs incurred by the City will be assessed to the property, which is allowed by state statute. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorney drafted the resolution and order for abatement and will be handling the action going forward if the Council approves the requested action. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(B)LI The property could remain placarded as uninhabitable and secured until the owner brings it into compliance. However, allowing the property to remain in the current condition presents significant public health and safety concerns. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ 7144 4th Imminent Hazards Resolution Backup Material RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A HAZARDOUS BUILDING AND A PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY NUISANCE EXISTING AT 7144 4" AVENUE S, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: WHEREAS, the property located at 7144 4h Avenue S, legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto, which contains a single-family dwelling (the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, the City deemed the dwelling unfit for habitation as of August 27, 2015 and denied the owner the ability to access the dwelling without a City escort; and WHEREAS, subsequent physical inspections of the Subject Property by the City Code Compliance Officers on August 27, 2015 and October 5, 2016 found the following conditions: garbage and debris strewn around the interior of the dwelling, narrow walking paths or nonexistent walking paths throughout the dwelling, egress blocked throughout the dwelling (unable to access doors and windows), no access to certain rooms, including the basement and bathroom, feces throughout the dwelling, conditions allowing the breeding of insects and vermin, an insect infestation covering the refrigerator, unsanitary conditions throughout the dwelling, fire hazards, lack of electricity, lack of water, garbage and debris scattered in the yard surrounding the dwelling, and vegetation in yard is not maintained, as shown in further detail in Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, Theresa Steeno is the owner of the Subject Property and has taken no or minimal steps to abate the hazardous conditions and health and safety related risks; and WHEREAS, the City has communicated its intent to the owner of the Subject Property that if she failed to comply with the applicable City and County health, building, and fire codes, the City would institute a hazardous building action; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 authorizes the governing body of any city or town to order the owners of any hazardous building within the municipality to correct or remove the hazardous condition; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15, subdivision 3 defines a "hazardous building" as "any building..., which because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, physical damage, unsanitary condition or abandonment, constitutes a fire hazard or a hazard to public safety or health;" and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 et seq. authorizes a city to correct or remove a hazardous condition of any hazardous building if the owner of record fails to do so after a reasonable time and the district court enters a judgment sustaining the city's order; and WHEREAS, the City has established a health board pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 145A.03 and Richfield City Code Subsection 305.09; and 1 488686v1 LBKRC145-702 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 145A.04, subdivision 8 authorizes a city or health board to correct or remove a threat to public health such as a public health nuisance or source of filth; and WHEREAS, Richfield City Code Subsection 925.01, subdivision 2(l) has declared the following as a nuisance affecting public health: "Overcrowding a room or portion of a dwelling with long-term storage of items, goods, or any material so as to prevent upkeep, maintenance, or regular housekeeping. A room may be considered overcrowded when storage covers an excessive amount of the floor area of a room, constitutes a potential excessive fire load, prevents access to windows or doors, prevents access to or obstructs mechanical systems or air movement, effectively eliminates use and access to required electrical devices, impedes access and movement of emergency personnel, blocks hallways, limits the operation of doors or provides pest harborage." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The dwelling located on the Subject Property is hazardous as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15. 2. The dwelling also constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and a nuisance affecting public health under Subsection 925.01, subd. 2(1) of the Richfield City Code. 3. The dwelling further constitutes a public health nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes 145A.02, subdivision 17. 4. An Abatement Order substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit C shall be served upon all parties with an interest or a purported interest in the Subject Property in order to effectuate this Resolution. 5. The City Attorney is authorized to take all necessary legal steps to secure compliance with the Order and to obtain authority to remove and abate the hazardous conditions on the Subject Property by court order or consent and assess the costs thereof against the Subject Property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk 2 488686v1 L13KRC145-702 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 November, 2016, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk 488686v1 LBKRC145-702 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Lot 8, Block 2, "Ireland Addition", according to the recorded plat thereof, and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Property Being registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1193229. A-1 488686v1 LBKRC145-702 Opp- , `yam •' �� 74 M2. mmww- ,"*At 4 401 - OWNS& O Ti YATi2TT !' Abatement Order STATE OF MINNNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In the Matter of the Hazardous Building Located at 7144 4`h Avenue S., Richfield, Minnesota TO: All owners, occupants, and all lienholders of record. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Other Civil ORDER FOR ABATEMENT OF A HAZARDOUS BUILDING AND PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY NUISANCE The City Council of the City of Richfield orders that within 20 days of service of this Order that you abate the hazardous conditions which exist on the property located at: 7144 4`h Avenue S., in the City of Richfield, which property is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The City of Richfield, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261, finds the building located at the above -referenced property, specifically the substantial amount of garbage throughout the dwelling which prevents ingress and egress and creates unsanitary conditions, constitutes a hazardous building within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 subdivision 3. The City of Richfield finds the property located at the above -referenced address constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and City Code Section 925.01. C-1 488686v1 LBKRC145-702 The City of Richfield finds the property located at the above -referenced address constitutes a public health nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Sections 145A.02. Pursuant to the above -referenced statutes, it is hereby ORDERED that you abate the hazardous property conditions within 20 days of the date of service of this Order by completing the following: 1. Remove all excess junk, garbage, and unnecessary articles from inside and outside the dwelling; 2. Ensure proper ingress and egress exists throughout the dwelling; 3. Reinstate water and electrical service to the dwelling; 4. Clean and sanitize the dwelling; and 5. Ensure safe access to all rooms in the dwelling. You must apply for and obtain any appropriate permit(s), if applicable, for the work you intend to perform from the appropriate City offices before abating the hazardous conditions. This Order is not a permit. Further, all work completed is subject to inspection by the City's building inspector, Fire inspector, and other staff as required to ensure compliance with applicable rules and law. You are further advised that unless such corrective action is taken or an Answer is served on the City and filed with the Hennepin County District Court Administrator within 20 days of the date of service of this Order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this Order will be made to the Hennepin County District Court. You are further advised that if you do not comply with this Order and the City is compelled to take any corrective action, all necessary costs incurred by the City in taking the corrective action will be assessed against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section C-2 488686v1 LBKRC145-702 463.21. In connection thereto, the City intends to recover all its expenses incurred in carrying out this Order, including specifically but not exclusively, filing fees, service fees, publication fees, attorneys' fees, appraisers' fees, witness fees, including expert witness fees and traveling expenses incurred by the City from the time this Order was originally made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.22. Dated November , 2016. KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED Mary D. Tietjen (40279833) Elizabeth Brodeen-Kuo (#0391949) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD C-3 488686v1 L13KRC145-702 EXHBIT A TO ABATEMENT ORDER Legal Description Lot 8, Block 2, "Ireland Addition", according to the recorded plat thereof, and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Property Being registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1193229. C -A-1 488686v1 L13KRC145-702 AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 51. STAFF REPORT NO. 202 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Betsy Osborn, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director 11/2/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous building and a public health and safety nuisance existing at 7301 Garfield Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff has concluded that the conditions at this property are hazardous and constitute a public health nuisance under state statute and City ordinances. Staff has worked with the resident of this property since the City deemed the dwelling unfit for habitation on December 2, 2015. Despite staff's attempt to seek cooperation, the resident has made virtually no progress in bringing the property into compliance for habitation or to abate the public health and safety nuisances that caused the property to be deemed uninhabitable. Allowing the property to remain in this condition causes significant public health and safety risks and concerns. Approval of the Resolution and Order is the first step in a process that would allow the City to obtain a court order and abate the hazardous conditions on the property. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve a resolution ordering the abatement of conditions creating a hazardous property and a public health nuisance existing at 7301 Garfield Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Throughout this process, staff has worked with the resident and provided access to the property in order to encourage the resident to bring the property into compliance. Staff has also attempted to provide the resident with some helpful resources, including offering Public Health Nursing services, which the resident declined. The VA also offered services including financial support for bringing the property into compliance which the resident declined. Prior to taking this step to initiate an abatement action, staff asked for the resident's permission to allow the City to abate the nuisances and assess the costs to the property, which the resident has refused. Richfield HRA has also contacted the resident to see if the property was available to purchase which the resident has not responded to. Staff believes it has exhausted its options short of initiating a more formal action. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch • The current condition of the property implicates state statutes defining hazardous conditions and public health nuisances, including Minnesota Statutes sections 463.161, 463.15, 145A.03, 145A.08, and City Code subsections 925.01 and 305.09. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • There are seasonal issues regarding abatement of some of the nuisances on the property. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • If this action is approved and a court order obtained, the City will hire a company that specializes in abatement of nuisances on the property. That company will work with the resident to bring the property into compliance. The costs incurred by the City will be assessed to the property, which is allowed by state statute. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • The City Attorney drafted the resolution and order for abatement and will be handling the action going forward if the Council approves the requested action. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(51. The property could remain placarded as uninhabitable and secured until the owner brings it into compliance. However, allowing the property to remain in the current condition presents significant public health and safety concerns. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ 7301 Garfield Imminent Hazards Resolution RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A HAZARDOUS BUILDING AND A PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY NUISANCE EXISTING AT 7301 GARFIELD AVENUE S, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: WHEREAS, the property located at 7301 Garfield Avenue S, legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto, which contains a single-family dwelling (the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, the City deemed the dwelling unfit for habitation as of December 2, 2015 and denied the owner the ability to access the building without a City escort; and WHEREAS, subsequent physical inspections of the Subject Property by the City Code Compliance Officers on January 6, 2016 and October 13, 2016 found the following conditions: garbage and debris strewn and accumulated throughout the interior of the dwelling, narrow walking paths or nonexistent walking paths throughout the dwelling, egress blocked throughout the dwelling (unable to access doors and windows), lack of water service, lack of a heat source, debris accumulation near the furnace and hot water heater, lack of garbage service, no access to certain rooms, conditions allowing the breeding of insects and vermin, unsanitary conditions throughout the dwelling, and fire hazards, as shown in further detail in Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, John Curtis Aro is the owner of the Subject Property and has taken no or minimal steps to abate the hazardous conditions and health and safety related risks; and WHEREAS, the City has communicated its intent to the owner of the Subject Property that if he failed to comply with the applicable City and County health, building, and fire codes, the City would institute a hazardous building action; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 authorizes the governing body of any city or town to order the owners of any hazardous building within the municipality to correct or remove the hazardous condition; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15, subdivision 3 defines a "hazardous building" as "any building..., which because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, physical damage, unsanitary condition or abandonment, constitutes a fire hazard or a hazard to public safety or health;" and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 et seq. authorizes a city to correct or remove a hazardous condition of any hazardous building if the owner of record fails to do so after a reasonable time and the district court enters a judgment sustaining the city's order; and WHEREAS, the City has established a health board pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 145A.03 and Richfield City Code Subsection 305.09; and 1 488863v1 LBKRC145-703 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 145A.04, subdivision 8 authorizes a city or health board to correct or remove a threat to public health such as a public health nuisance or source of filth; and WHEREAS, Richfield City Code Subsection 925.01, subdivision 2(l) has declared the following as a nuisance affecting public health: "Overcrowding a room or portion of a dwelling with long-term storage of items, goods, or any material so as to prevent upkeep, maintenance, or regular housekeeping. A room may be considered overcrowded when storage covers an excessive amount of the floor area of a room, constitutes a potential excessive fire load, prevents access to windows or doors, prevents access to or obstructs mechanical systems or air movement, effectively eliminates use and access to required electrical devices, impedes access and movement of emergency personnel, blocks hallways, limits the operation of doors or provides pest harborage." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The dwelling located on the Subject Property is hazardous as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15. 2. The dwelling also constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and a nuisance affecting public health under subsection 925.01, subd. 2(1) of the Richfield City Code. 3. The dwelling further constitutes a public health nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes 145A.02, subdivision 17. 4. An Abatement Order substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit C shall be served upon all parties with an interest or a purported interest in the Subject Property in order to effectuate this Resolution. 5. The City Attorney is authorized to take all necessary legal steps to secure compliance with the Order and to obtain authority to remove and abate the hazardous conditions on the Subject Property by court order or consent and assess the costs thereof against the Subject Property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk 2 488863v1 L13KRC145-703 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 November, 2016, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk 488863v1 LBKRC145-703 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Lot 12, Block 6, "Irwindale", according to the recorded plat thereof, and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Property Being registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 674902. A-1 488863v1 L13KRC145-703 v 1 1�71.-Z�'- Arqq 41 Ads& lkbkr + 1 11 M�. _A* EXHIBIT C Abatement Order STATE OF MINNNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In the Matter of the Hazardous Building Located at 7301 Garfield Avenue S., Richfield, Minnesota TO: All owners, occupants, and all lienholders of record. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Other Civil ORDER FOR ABATEMENT OF A HAZARDOUS BUILDING AND PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY NUISANCE The City Council of the City of Richfield orders that within 20 days of service of this Order that you abate the hazardous conditions which exist on the property located at: 7301 Garfield Avenue S., in the City of Richfield, which property is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The City of Richfield, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261, finds the building located at the above -referenced property, specifically the substantial amount of garbage throughout the dwelling which prevents ingress and egress and creates unsanitary conditions, constitutes a hazardous building within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 subdivision 3. The City of Richfield finds the property located at the above -referenced address constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 609.74 and City Code Section 925.01. The City of Richfield finds the property located at the above -referenced address constitutes a public health nuisance within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Sections 145A.02. C-1 488863v1 LBKRC145-703 Pursuant to the above -referenced statutes, it is hereby ORDERED that you abate the hazardous property conditions within 20 days of the date of service of this Order by completing the following: 1. Remove all excess junk, garbage, and unnecessary articles from inside and outside the dwelling; 2. Ensure proper ingress and egress exists throughout the dwelling; 3. Reinstate water service and garbage service to the dwelling; 4. Remove debris from near furnace and hot water heater; 5. Clean and sanitize the dwelling; and 6. Ensure safe access to all rooms in the dwelling. You must apply for and obtain any appropriate permit(s), if applicable, for the work you intend to perform from the appropriate City offices before abating the hazardous conditions. This Order is not a permit. Further, all work completed is subject to inspection by the City's building inspector, Fire inspector, and other staff as required to ensure compliance with applicable rules and law. You are further advised that unless such corrective action is taken or an Answer is served on the City and filed with the Hennepin County District Court Administrator within 20 days of the date of service of this Order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this Order will be made to the Hennepin County District Court. You are further advised that if you do not comply with this Order and the City is compelled to take any corrective action, all necessary costs incurred by the City in taking the corrective action will be assessed against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.21. In connection thereto, the City intends to recover all its expenses incurred in carrying C-2 488863v1 LBKRC145-703 out this Order, including specifically but not exclusively, filing fees, service fees, publication fees, attorneys' fees, appraisers' fees, witness fees, including expert witness fees and traveling expenses incurred by the City from the time this Order was originally made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 463.22. Dated November , 2016. KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED In 488863v1 L13KRC145-703 Mary D. Tietjen (#0279833) Elizabeth Brodeen-Kuo (#0391949) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD C-3 EXHBIT A TO ABATEMENT ORDER Legal Description Lot 12, Block 6, "Irwindale", according to the recorded plat thereof, and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Property Being registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 674902. C -A-1 488863v1 LBKRC145-703 AGENDA SEC -10N: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 5.M. STAFF REPORT NO. 205 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 REPORT PREPARED BY: Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director 11/13/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11/14/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the approval of the first reading of a transitory ordinance authorizing the conversion of the existing R-22 direct refrigeration system at the Richfield Ice Arena and scheduling of a public hearing and second reading for December 13, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: By the year 2020, R-22 refrigerant will no longer be produced or imported. The City currently has R-22 direct refrigeration systems in both rinks at the Richfield Ice Arena. Staff has met with three separate engineering consultants to determine the best course of action. Staff has found that a single ammonia -based refrigeration system to serve the two existing ice rinks is the most efficient and cost effective solution. Switching to a single ammonia -based refrigeration system will have a significant savings in terms of equipment maintenance throughout the year. The new system is designed using screw compressors which require very little annual maintenance. Ammonia is a natural based refrigerant and is more environmentally friendly. The total cost of the project is estimated at $2,816,000. Staff recommends splitting the project into two phases with the first phase dedicated to replacing the piping in the floor of rink one and constructing the combined refrigeration equipment for both rinks. Rink two would remain a direct R-22 system. Phase Two of the project includes the replacement of piping in rink two and connecting it to the ammonia -based system that was installed in phase one. Phase Two can be delayed a year to aid in the availability of funding. R-22 refrigerant from rink one can be stored and made available in rink two, in case of a leak, until rink two is converted in Phase Two. The City has recently applied for a James Metzen Mighty Ducks Grant and expects to be awarded the maximum grant award in the amount of $400,000. If awarded and accepted, the City would have to complete Phase One by December 31, 2017. Staff will submit another James Metzen Mighty Ducks Grant Application next year for an additional $400,000 to be applied to the conversion of rink 2 (Phase Two) in 2018. Sources of funding for the project come from the James Metzen Mighty Ducks Grant in the amount of $800,000 and the remainder of Special Revenue Funds and other City Funds in the amount of $2,016,000. Funding for Phase One of this project was included in the approved 2017 Capital Improvement Budget and the 2018-2021 Capital Improvement Plan, with the completion date in 2019. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve the first reading of the transitory ordinance authorizing the conversion of the existing R-22 refrigeration system at the Richfield Ice Arena and scheduling of a public hearing and second reading for December 13, 2016. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT As a continued effort to improve the mechanical operations and financial success of the Richfield Ice Arena, over the last three years staff has researched and planned for the elimination of its dependency on R-22 to operate its ice rinks. The City of Richfield has a great history of delivering a great product to its customers. The Richfield Ice Arena is used by the Minnesota Magicians, Adult Hockey Association, Academy of Holy Angels High School, Richfield/Southwest Christian Coop High School, Richfield Youth Hockey Association, Edina Youth Hockey Association, and the Minneapolis Storm Youth Hockey Association. The Richfield Ice Arena was constructed in 1971 using a direct R-22 Holmsten Ice Rink system. This rink is a NHL -sized rink with a sand floor. The City built another ice sheet in 1999 to meet the growing demand of ice time in the metro area. Richfield again went with an R-22 Holmsten Ice Rink system for the second sheet of ice. The second rink is also NHL size, but with a concrete floor instead of sand. The facility has been well maintained throughout its lifetime and gotten a great shelf life from its mechanical equipment. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etch • Pursuant to Section 8.04 of the City Charter, the project will require approval of a transitory ordinance because the estimated design costs may exceed $250,000 and the estimated construction cost may exceed $2,000,000. • With City Council approval, a public hearing and second reading of a transitory ordinance authorizing the conversion of the existing R-22 direct refrigeration system at the Richfield Ice Arena will be scheduled for December 13, 2016. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: To minimize revenue lost, the ideal time period to close down rink one for the Phase One refrigeration conversion is May 28, 2017 to October 1, 2017. This leaves a tight schedule to prepare design and specifications and to bid the project out in time to be able to order equipment and materials before May 28, 2017. Staff is in the process of evaluating proposals from engineering companies to prepare plans and specifications for the project and will bring a contract to City Council for consideration on December 13, 2016. Bidding for the project is expected in January, 2017. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Cost Estimate for Conversion Project Phase 1 1. Removal and install of dasher board system $35,000 2. Demolition of existing refrigeration system $20,000 3. Misc. demolition of perimeter concrete $20,000 4. Common Ammonia refrigeration system. $970,000 5. Computer-based ice rink control system. $60,000 6. New stainless snowmelt coil in Rink 1. $20,000 7. NHL size concrete ice rink floor for Rink 1. $550,000 8. New dasher boards for Rink 1. $175,000 9. New perimeter concrete. $20,000 10. Contingency (10%) $187,000 Total Phase 1 Cost $2,057,000 Cost Estimate for Conversion Project Phase 2 1. Removal and reinstallation of dasher board on Rink 2. $35,000 2. Demolition of existing concrete floor. $70,000 3. NHL size concrete ice rink floor for Rink 2. $550,000 4. Piping connection from new refrigeration room. $35,000 5. Contingency (10%) $69,000 Total Phase 2 Cost $759,000 Total Estimated Project Cost = $2,816,000 Source of Funding James Metzen Mighty Ducks Grant $800,000 Special Recreation Funds and Other City Funds $2,016.000 Total Funding $2,816,000 Operating Cost Savings Going to a single ammonia -based refrigeration system will have a significant savings in terms of equipment maintenance throughout the year. The new system is designed using screw compressors which require very little annual maintenance. Additionally, should there ever be a leak in the system, the cost of ammonia is roughly seven times cheaper per pound than R-22. This new system will save the City an estimated $40,000 per year on maintenance costs. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: Pursuant to Section 8.04 of the City Charter, the project will require approval of a transitory ordinance because the estimated project cost exceeds $2,000,000. Pursuant to Section 8.05 of the City Charter, notice of the public hearing will be published twice in the Sun Current fourteen days prior to the hearing. Publication dates will be December 1, 2016 and December 8, 2016. The City Attorney has reviewed the procedure for this capital improvement and finds that it complies with the City Charter. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(51. • The City could decide to forgo the grants and apply at a future date. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee the State will continue issuing grants beyond 2017. This would be a higher cost alternative as construction costs will increase over time. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: There are no principal parties expected at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Transitory Ordinance Conversion of R-22 Refrigeration Cover Memo System BILL NO. Transitory Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR THE CONVERSION OF THE EXISTING R-22 DIRECT REFRIGERATION SYSTEM AT THE RICHFIELD ICE ARENA PURSUANT TO RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER SECTION 8.04 THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background; findings. 1.01. Section 8.04 of the Richfield City Charter requires that any capital improvement on City - owned property that has an estimated cost exceeding $2,000,000.00 or expenditures for design or engineering costs exceeding $250,000.00 must be approved by ordinance after a public hearing. 1.02. It is proposed that the City Council approve a capital improvement project for the improvement of property located at 636 East 66t" Street, the current site of the Richfield Ice Arena.. 1.03. The capital improvement project consists of the design, engineering and construction of the conversion of the existing R-22 direct refrigeration equipment at the Richfield Ice Arena. 1.04. A cost estimates for the project has not been finalized but the construction cost is expected to exceed $2,000,000. 1.05. A public hearing was held on December, 2016 after due notice as required by Section 8.05 of the Richfield City Charter. 1.06. The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City and its inhabitants that the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project be approved. Sec. 2. Approval; effective date. 2.01. If approved by City Council, the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project may proceed according to the procedures required by law. 2.02. The purpose of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of Section 8.04 of the Richfield City Charter. This Ordinance shall not be construed to require that the City proceed with the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project nor does it vest any rights in the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project to any individual or entity. This Ordinance shall not be construed to pre -approve any contracts for the design or construction of the Ice Arena Equipment Project, and the City Council specifically reserves to itself the authority to approve any such contracts. The City Council reserves the right to abandon the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project or to modify elements of the Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion Project Ice Arena Equipment Project, if the Council deems abandonment or modification to be in the public interest. 2.03. This ordinance is effective 30 days following its publication. Adopted by the City of Richfield this 13th day of December, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk 111516 Ice Arena Refrigeration Conversion REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM # 7. STAFF REPORT NO. 203 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 Jesse Swenson, Asst. HR Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven Devich 11 /7/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: None CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11 /7/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution approving the contract with the Labor and Trades Local 49 for the period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018 and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: City staff has completed labor negotiations with the Labor and Trades Local 49 (Union). The provisions of the 2017-2018 labor agreement cover all of the employees in this Union which consists of 32 positions. The two-year contract provides a wage adjustment of 2.75% in 2017 and a wage adjustment of 3.00% in 2018. It also includes an equity adjustment in both contract years to the top steps of the LT1 and LT2 pay grades in order to bring those wages more in line with other similarly -sized metro area cities. This was done after a thorough analysis of metro wages by staff. The other provisions of the tentative agreement include: • A $0.25 per month increase towards Employee single dental coverage. There is a reopener provision for insurance for 2018. • An increase to the Public Works Certificate pay in 2017 to $0.95/hr and $1.00/hr in 2018. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution approving the provisions of the 2017-2018 labor agreement with the Labor & Trades Local 49 bargaining unit and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT The tentatively approved two year contract settlement includes the following significant changes: • Wages: A 2.75% wage adjustment for 2017 and a 3.00% wage adjustment for 2018. • Equity Adjustment: An equity adjustment was provided to the top step of both the LT1 and LT2 pay grades because metro area wage surveys indicated that this employee group falls below the metro average top public works worker, water plant operator, and mechanic wage. The equity adjustment brings the group closer to the average at the end of 2018. The top pay steps will receive a one time adjustment of $43.25 to their base monthly wage for 2017 and another additional one time adjustment of $43.25 to their base monthly wage in 2018. The Public Works Certificate pay will increase from $0.85/hr to $0.95/hr in 2017 and $1.00/hr in 2018. Health Insurance: No change in 2017. This article will re -open for 2018. Dental Insurance: A$0.25 per month increase to the Employer contribution for Employee single dental insurance coverage at $59.25 per month. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • The City has met and negotiated in good faith with the Union and its representatives and is bound under the Public Employer's Labor Relations Act to meet and bargain over the terms and conditions of employment. • The proposed settlement for the health and dental insurance provisions is identical to those provided to both union and non-union City employees. The City has a long history of providing the same level of insurance benefits to all eligible City employees. • The 2.75% wage increase represents the same 2.75% wage adjustment implemented for non- union City employees and all other contracts settled for 2017. • The 2.75% wage adjustment and health insurance contribution is comparable to other bargaining groups in similar metro cities. A survey of Stanton 5 cities indicates that those cities are providing anywhere from a 1.5 to 3 percent increase. The City has a long history of trying to remain as close to the mid-range as possible for Stanton 5 cities, in terms of wages and benefits. • The 3.00% wage adjustment for 2018 is the City's and Union's best estimation of what will be the average of such settlements in the metro area. The City is aware of at least three other metro area cities that have settled between 2.75% and 3.00% for 2018. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify payroll records in a timely manner for 2017 wages and benefits, it is recommended that the City Council act on November 15, 2016 to adopt the attached resolution providing for contract changes, effective January 1, 2017. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • A 2.75% wage increase for contract year 2017 and 3.00% wage increase for contract year 2018. • An equity adjustment to the top step of the LT1 and LT2 pay grades of a $43.25 increase to the base monthly wage in 2017 and a $43.25 increase to the base monthly wage in 2018. • An increase to the Public Works Certificate pay will result in a potential net financial impact of $1,100. • A$0.25 per month increase in Employer monthly contributions towards dental insurance in 2017. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • If the terms of this agreement are not approved, further negotiation and/or mediation will be necessary. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: • Do not approve the terms of this agreement and prepare for further negotiation and/or mediation. • Defer discussion to another date. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Resolution Resolution Letter RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 49 BARGAINING UNIT FOR YEARS 2017 and 2018 WHEREAS, the City Manager and the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49 have reached an understanding concerning conditions of employment for years 2017 and 2018; and WHEREAS, it would be inappropriate to penalize Local 49 members who have negotiated in good faith; and WHEREAS, the City Ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be completed by Council resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49 Bargaining Unit, for years 2017 and 2018 under the provisions of the Labor Agreement to be implemented effective January 1, 2017 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November 2016. Debbie Goettel Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose City Clerk REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM # 8. STAFF REPORT NO. 204 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven Devich 11/9/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH 11/9/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution determining the results of the City General Election held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City General Election was conducted on Tuesday, November 8, 2016 in conjunction with State General and Presidential Elections. The City of Richfield Council Members in Wards I, II, and, III were on the general election ballot. The Richfield City Charter states that the City Council shall meet and canvass the election returns at the next regular or special City Council meeting immediately following any regular, primary or special election, but in no event later than the time prescribed by state law, and shall make full declaration of the results as soon as possible, and file a statement thereof with the City Clerk. At the time of this staff report, the results of the City General Election have not been finalized and will be provided at the City Council Meeting on November 15, 2016. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Adopt the resolution determining the results of the City General Election held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT • Historical Context is contained in the Executive Summary. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy • The City Charter provides that the City Council declare the results of the election. • Minnesota Statutes Chapter 205 governs the conduct of municipal elections. • Section 205.185, Subd. 3 sets the date for canvassing any city general election as "between the third and tenth days after an election". C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • In accordance with state law and the City Charter, the City Council must take action no later than Friday, November 18, 2016. • Council Members are available to canvass the election on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at the regular City Council Meeting. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • N/A E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • City Charter Section 4.07 provides that the City Council declare the results of the election. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl: N/A PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: None. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Resolution: Canvass of General Election Resolution Letter ❑ Attachment A- Results Backup Material RESOLUTION NO. 11288 RESOLUTION DETERMINING RESULTS OF THE GENERAL ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2016 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the Council, having received and considered the tally of votes by the election judges of the General Election held November 8, 2016, the results are determined to be as follows: Votes cast for Council Member Ward I: Four Year Term Pat Elliot WRITE-IN** 4,864 votes 133 votes Votes cast for Council Member Ward II: Four Year Term Edwina Garcia 3,237 votes Lisa Knack 2,169 votes WRITE-IN** 42 votes Votes cast for Council Member Ward III: Four Year Term Maria Regan Gonzalez 2,619 votes Lisa Rudolph 1,992 votes WRITE-IN** 46 votes Total number of voters in this election: 18,568 Attached Attachment A is complete tabulation of results. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following list of judges were those certifying returns of said election: James Alagna Hannia Amegee Robert Amundson Aaron Anderson Janis Anderson Chase Androff Carol Athey Andrew Atkins James Atkins Stephen Aus Cheryl Avenson Patricia Bailey Patricia Bates Barbara Bauer Terri Behrends-Singer Kiley Bigger Rosalie Bjorkman Kimberly Blomberg Andrew Boeke Mary Boespflug Sara Boothe Jack Bowens Linda Boyd Sandra Bradley Nancy Buck Christie Burke Hazel Burnside Marjorie Cain Doris Christine David Clark Venious Virginia Clark Kirsten Croone Ellen Cutter David Dahl Scott Dahlquist Marie Dallager Julie Danielson Eileen Davenport Sandra Decker Catherine Dinndorf Carley Dowell Cynthia Dubansky Dee Ann Edlund Liz Ekholm Carolyn Engeldinger Patricia Erickson Jeanne Exline John Exline Denise Famodu Ed Fletcher Francie Fletcher Ryan Fluege Sharon Foster Bridget Gaeleigh Claire Gahler Grant Gartland Jennifer Gisslen Lee Judy Goebel James Grant Rebecca Guarino Robert Hall Jim Harding Abdulkadir Hashi Mary Hayden Adrienne Hayes Ruth Hiland Oliver Hoffman Janette Holter Karen Jenkins Kathy Johnson Sita Johnson Janell Joyner Vanessa Kahn Betty Lou Kamps Thomas Keegan Kidist Kika Claire Killian Elisabeth Kingdon Jadyn Knipp Max Krueger Brenda Kupfer Mesa LaRoque Nancy Lindberg Rick Loney Veronica Lundquist Ruby MacDonald Kathryn MacEachern Natalie Madgy Cynthy Mandl Shelby Marrs Lawrence Martin Sharon Mattson Andrew May Megan McCartan Karin McComb Michele McGee Matthew McGlinn William Mejia Sandy Menning-Glavan Eleanor Mihock Davis Miles Hassan Mohamed Raphael Morales-Balbuena Richard Morey Isabelle Moulinier Sarah Musgrave Helen Nachicas Linda Nemitz Marilyn Nienkerk Emma Nollenberger Cindy Norland Peter O'Grady Martha (Betty) Obenchain Kyle Odefey Chris Okey Joan Olson Mary Olson Robert Olson Ruby Olson Mark Pafiolis Paul Peterson Carol Petkoff Monica Petrov Beth Picard Frank Ploog Janet Purdie Constance Reinhardt Nathae Richardson Moses Roberts Jeffrey Rundgren Matthew Ryan Maureen Scaglia Shannon Schmidt Margaret Schow Anne Schuette Evan Scribner Nate Shurtleff Mary Sievers Jordan Skof Margaret Smith Katy Stark Mary Jane Steinhagen Charles Strauch Brett Stursa Roger Swanson Erika Telkamp Myrtle Thom Janet Thompson Mark Tilc Mary Jo Tuttle John Twisk Nick Ulmer Brian Van Eyll Linda Vigen Patrick Voigt David Vrieze Daniels Erin Vrieze Daniels Nancy Walstrom Sandra Walstrom Molly Weber Kevin Wells Robert Wells Elaine Wetsch Lisa Wold Marian Woolery Jeffrey Wright Ben Hodok PASSED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of November, 2016. Debbie Goettel, Mayor /_Na143M Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Attachment A :per City of Richfield General Election November 8, 2016 Unofficial Results for Richfield Precincts CITY OFFICES Council Member Ward 1 Pat Elliott WRITE-IN** Council Member Ward 2 Edwina Garcia Lisa Knack WRITE-IN** Council Member Ward 3 Maria Regan Gonzalez Lisa Rudolph WRITE-IN** VOTER TURNOUT Registered Voters Persons Registered at 7:00 AM New Registrations on Election Day TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS Ballots Cast Number Voting at Polls Number Voting Absentee TOTAL PERSONS VOTING Turnout Percentage Page 1 of-] 11/11/2016 4:22:46 PM Precinct Total % 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4,864 97.3% 133 2.7% 3,237 59.4% 2,169 39.8% 42 0.8% 2,619 56.2% 675 1,992 42.8% 552 46 1.0% 10 Total % 1 1,753 1,410 1,701 57 32 44 1,268 811 11 1,134 835 793 565 21 10 Precinct 2 3 4 5 6 799 1,145 605 835 13 23 7 8 9 20,825 91.2% 1,574 2,918 2,711 2,220 2,500 2,654 1,833 1,750 2,665 2,013 8.8% 129 306 235 263 195 254 147 168 316 22,838 100.0% 1,703 3,224 2,946 2,483 2,695 2,908 1,980 1,918 2,981 12,735 68.6% 1,010 1,593 1,734 1,523 1,421 1,570 1,086 1,188 1,610 5,833 31.4% 384 977 708 436 883 812 565 391 677 18,568 100.0% 1,394 2,570 2,442 1,959 2,304 2,382 1,651 1,579 2,287 81.3% 81.9% 79.7% 82.9% 78.9% 85.5% 81.9% 83.4% 82.3% 76.7% REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM # 9. STAFF REPORT NO. 206 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/15/2016 Chris Regis, Finance Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich 11/15/2016 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: None CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich 11/15/2016 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the refunding of the $9,480,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A, dated December 23, 2008 with the $6,130,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C. (Council Memo No. 80) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the September 13, 2016 City Council meeting, the Council passed a parameters resolution which established a pricing committee of the Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager for the purpose of awarding the sale of the Series 2016C bonds. With City Council approval, the Pricing Committee would be authorized and directed, with the advice of the City's Municipal Advisor, to review proposals for the sale of the Bonds based on the following parameters: (i) the principal amount of the Bonds shall not exceed $6,305,000; (ii) the true interest cost of the Bonds shall not exceed 1.900000%; (iii) the present value of such debt service or interest cost savings (the "Reduction") shall be at least nine percent (9%) of the debt service on the Refunded Bonds. The sale date of the Series 2016C bonds is November 15, 2016. If the proposals received are within the established parameters, the Pricing Committee is authorized and directed to select the best proposal and award the sale to the respective bidder. However, subsequent to the presidential elections, interest rates within the bond market have increased significantly. Consequently, the bids received on the refunding of the Series 2008A have exceeded one of the parameters established by the parameters resolution passed by the City Council on September 13, 2016. Accordingly, since there is now a scheduled City Council meeting on November 15, 2016, the same date as the sale of the Series 2016C bonds, staff is recommending rejecting the parameters resolution and bringing the award of sale of the Series 2016C bonds to the City Council for consideration. The recommended sale will still result in interest savings for the City in the amount of $776,547, a reduced par amount of the bonds of $6,130,000, and the minimum net present value savings required by Minnesota state law will still be exceeded. Accordingly, the Series 2016C bonds are being issued to provide funds sufficient for an advance crossover refunding on February 1, 2019. The par amount of the Series 2008A to be called on the call date is $6,065,000. Bids on the 2016C General Obligation Refunding Bonds are due in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. on Tuesday November 15, 2016. A representative from Ehlers & Associates, Inc. will be at the City Council meeting to recommend the successful bidder and review attached documents, and provide information that is absent from the resolution and available only after the bidding on the bonds has closed. Following Ehlers & Associates, Inc. recommendation it would be appropriate for the City Council to award the bond sale to the qualified buyer and undertake other related actions as necessary as delineated in the approving resolution. The anticipated closing on the 2016C Bonds is scheduled for December 15, 2016. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016C, in the original aggregate principal amount of $6,130,000; fixing their form and specifications; directing their execution and delivery; providing for their payment; providing for the escrowing and investment of the proceeds thereof; providing for the redemption of bonds refunded thereby; and rescinding a prior resolution of the City. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT As part of the construction and financing of the Richfield Municipal Center, the City issued the $9,480,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A. As interest rates continue to be at low levels, the City's Municipal Advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. has recommended a bond refunding of the Series 2008A bonds to take advantage of the low interest rates and realize interest savings. Furthermore, the type of refunding being presented is an Advance Crossover refunding. In an Advance Crossover refunding, bonds are issued in advance of a specified call date. The proceeds of the refunding issue are invested in government securities and held in escrow. The money in the escrow is used to pay interest on the new issue until the call date. At the call date, the remaining funds in the escrow are then used to redeem/call the old bonds. At this time, the City "crosses over" and begins to make the payments on the new, refunding bonds. B. POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etcy None. C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES: • The sale of the refunding bonds at this time will allow the City to take advantage of the low interest rates and realize interest savings. D. FINANCIAL IMPACT: • On the basis of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. review, it appears that the current interest rate climate makes it feasible to refund the Series 2008A bonds. • The current outstanding principal balance of the Series 2008A bonds is $7,395,000. The City will continue to make principal and interest payments up to and on the crossover date. • The $6,130,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C are being issued to provide funds for an advance crossover refunding of the City's G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A on February 1, 2019. The par amount of the Series 2008A bonds at that date will total $6,065,000. • It is estimated that this refunding under current rates would reduce the debt service costs of paying this debt by an estimated $776,547. • The savings expressed in present value terms is approximately 11.176% of the refunded principal or $676,061. The minimum savings required by Minnesota state law for a refunding is a present value savings or at least 3.00%. The bonds are being issued for a 13 -year period; this does not extend the term of the original issue. The maturity date of the new refunding issue will be the same as the two current outstanding issues. E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION: • Legal Counsel has reviewed the attached resolution. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(51. • Disregard the current refunding option, continue to retire the bonded debt as presently scheduled, and forego the projected savings. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING: Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type ❑ Resolution to Award the Sale of the 2016C Bonds Resolution Letter ❑ Crossover Refunding Escrow Agreement Contract/Agreement ❑ Council Memo No. 80 Backup Material Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Tuesday, November 15, 2016, commencing at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City's General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C, to be issued in the original aggregate principal amount of $6,130,000. The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds. The proposals were as set forth in EXHIBIT A attached. After due consideration of the proposals, Member then introduced the following written resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption: 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2016C, IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $6,130,000; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE ESCROWING AND INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY; AND RESCINDING A PRIOR RESOLUTION OF THE CITY BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City") as follows: Section 1. Sale of Bonds. 1.01. Background; Authorization. (a) The City issued its General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A (the "Refunded Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $9,480,000, currently outstanding in the principal amount of $7,395,000, of which $6,065,000 is subject to optional redemption on or after February 1, 2019. The Refunded Bonds were issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended (the "Act"), including Section 475.521, to finance the construction of a new Police/Fire/City Hall facility in the City (the "Project"). (b) The City is authorized by Section 475.67, subdivision 13 of the Act to issue and sell its general obligation bonds to refund outstanding bonds when determined by the City Council to be necessary and desirable. (c) On September 13, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11247 (the "Parameters Resolution"), which provided for the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and appointed a pricing committee to approve the sale of the City's general obligation bonds to refund in advance of maturity and at their redemption date the Refunded Bonds. (d) The City Council hereby rescinds the Parameters Resolution. (e) The City finds it necessary and desirable for the reduction of debt service costs to the City to issue, under the terms of this resolution, its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C (the "Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $6,130,000, to achieve the crossover refunding of the Refunded Bonds by refunding in advance of maturity on February 1, 2019 (the "Redemption Date") the 2020 through 2029 maturities of the Refunded Bonds. (f) The City is authorized by Section 475.60, subdivision 2(9) of the Act to negotiate the sale of the Bonds, it being determined that the City has retained an independent financial advisor in connection with such sale. The actions of the City staff and municipal advisor in negotiating the sale of the Bonds are ratified and confirmed in all aspects. 1.02. Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. The proposal of UMB Bank, N.A., Kansas City, Missouri (the "Purchaser"), to purchase the Bonds is hereby determined to be a reasonable offer and 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 2 is accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $6,282,941.24 (par amount of $6,130,000.00, plus original issue premium of $198,155.90, less underwriter's discount of $45,214.66), plus accrued interest to date of delivery, if any, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: Year Interest Rate Year Interest Rate 2020 2.000% 2025 2.500% 2021 2.000 2026 2.500 2022 2.000 2027 2.500 2023 2.000 2028 2.500 2024 2.500 2029 2.500 True interest cost: 2.0373743% 1.03. Purchase Contract. The sum of $214,241.24, being the amount proposed by the Purchaser in excess of $6,068,700.00, shall be credited to the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or deposited in the Escrow Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the Finance Manager in consultation with the City's municipal advisor. The Finance Manager is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful proposers. The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.04. Terms and Principal Amounts of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to the Act in the total principal amount of $6,130,000, originally dated December 15, 2016, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and which mature serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Year Amount 2020 $545,000 2021 555,000 2022 570,000 2023 585,000 2024 600,000 Year Amount 2025 $620,000 2026 635,000 2027 655,000 2028 675,000 2029 690,000 1.06. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2025, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2026. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 8 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. Section 2. Registration and Payment. 2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2017, to the registered owners of record as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not that day is a business day. 2.03. Registration. The City will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (the "Registrar"). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows: (a) Re ig ster. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 4 (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon thirty (30) days' notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of the City Council, the Finance Manager must transmit to the Registrar monies sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due. 2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction of the Finance Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of a Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Manager will deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B attached hereto with 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled. Section 3. Form of Bond. 3.01. Execution of the Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B. 3.02. Approving Legal Opinion. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota, which is to be complete except as to dating thereof and cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each Bond. Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants. 4.01. Debt Service Fund. For the convenience and proper administration of the moneys to be borrowed and repaid on the Bonds, and to provide adequate and specific security for the Purchaser and holders from time to time of the Bonds, there is hereby created a special fund to be designated the General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C Debt Service Fund (the "Debt Service Fund") to be administered and maintained by the Finance Manager as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The Debt Service Fund will be maintained in the manner herein specified until all of the Refunded Bonds have been paid and until all of the Bonds and the interest thereon have been fully paid. To the Debt Service Fund, there is hereby pledged and irrevocably appropriated and there will be credited: (i) ad valorem taxes hereinafter levied for the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon (the "Taxes"); (ii) any balance remitted to the City upon the termination of the Escrow Agreement (as defined herein); (iii) all investment earnings on funds in the Debt Service Fund; (iv) amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.03 hereof, and (v) all other moneys which are properly available and are appropriated by the City Council to the Debt Service Fund. 4.02. Escrow Fund. Proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $6,281,188.81 will be deposited in a separate fund (the "Escrow Fund") maintained by U.S. Bank National Association, in Saint Paul, Minnesota, acting as escrow agent (the "Escrow Agent"). Such funds will be received by the Escrow Agent and applied to fund the Escrow Fund or to pay costs of issuing the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds not used to pay costs of issuance on the Bonds are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the Escrow Fund, together with all investment earnings thereon. The Escrow Fund will be invested in securities maturing or callable at the option of the holder on such dates and bearing interest at such rates as will be required to provide sufficient funds, together with any cash or other funds retained in the Escrow Fund, to (i) pay when due the interest to accrue on the Bonds to and including the Redemption Date; and (ii) pay on the Redemption Date the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds then outstanding. Other than moneys in the Escrow Fund used to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds, the Escrow Fund will be irrevocably appropriated to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Refunded Bonds until the proceeds of the Bonds therein are applied to prepayment of the Refunded Bonds. The moneys in the Escrow Fund will be used solely for the purposes herein set forth and for no other purpose, except that any surplus in the Escrow Fund may be remitted to the City, all in accordance with the Escrow Agreement by and between the City and the Escrow Agent. Any moneys remitted to the City upon termination of the Escrow Agreement will be deposited to the Debt Service Fund. 4.03. Prior Debt Service Fund. The debt service fund heretofore established for the Refunded Bonds pursuant to the resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of the Refunded Bonds (the "Prior 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 6 Resolution") shall be terminated on the Redemption Date and all monies therein are hereby transferred to the Debt Service Fund herein created. 4.04. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City will be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Escrow Fund or Debt Service Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency will be promptly paid out of monies in the general fund of the City which are available for such purpose, and such general fund may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Escrow Fund or Debt Service Fund when a sufficient balance is available therein. 4.05. Pledge of Tax Levies. (a) To provide moneys for payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds maturing after the Redemption Date, there is hereby levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax upon all of the taxable property in the City which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general taxes of the City. The ad valorem taxes will be credited to the Debt Set -vice Fund above provided and will be in the years and in the amounts set forth in EXHIBIT C attached hereto.. (b) The tax levies are such that if collected in full they, together with estimated collections of investment earnings (and until the Redemption Date, of all amounts in the Escrow Fund), and other revenues herein pledged for the payment of the Bonds, will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds. The tax levies will be irrepealable so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent permitted by Section 475.6 1, subdivision 3 of the Act. 4.06. Cancellation of Prior Levy after Redemption Date. Following the payment in full of all outstanding principal of and interest on the Refunded Bonds on the Redemption Date, the Finance Manager is hereby directed to certify such fact to and request the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Taxpayer Services Division Manager") to cancel any and all tax levies made for the Refunded Bonds pursuant to the Prior Resolution. 4.07. Filing of Resolution. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager and to obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act. Section 5. Refunding; Findings; Redemption of Refunded Bonds. 5.01. Purpose of Refunding. The 2020 through 2029 maturities of the Refunded Bonds will be called for redemption on the Redemption Date in the amount of $6,065,000. It is hereby found and determined that based upon information presently available from the City's municipal advisor, the issuance of the Bonds, a portion of which will be used to redeem and prepay the Refunded Bonds, is consistent with covenants made with the holders of the Refunded Bonds. 5.02. Findings. It is hereby found and determined that based upon information presently available from the City's municipal advisor the issuance of the Bonds will result in a reduction of debt service cost to the City on the Refunded Bonds, such that the Reduction is at least three percent (3%) of the debt service on the Refunded Bonds, as required by the Act. The Reduction, after the inclusion of all authorized expenses of 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 refunding in the computation of the effective interest rate on the Bonds, is adequate to authorize the issuance of the Bonds as provided by Section 475.67, subdivisions 12 and 13 of the Act. 5.03. Proceeds Pledged to the Escrow Fund. As of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds, proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $6,281,188.81 for the purpose of redeeming on the Redemption Date the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds then outstanding. Proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $56,233.00 will also be deposited in the Escrow Fund to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds. 5.04. Securities to Fund Escrow Fund. Securities purchased, if any, from the moneys in the Escrow Fund will be limited to securities specified in Section 475.67, subdivision 8 of the Act. Ehlers & Associates, Inc. and/or U.S. Bank National Association, as agent for the City, is hereby authorized and directed to purchase for and on behalf of the City and in its name, appropriate securities to fund the Escrow Fund. Upon the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the securities so purchased will be deposited with the Escrow Agent and held pursuant to the terms of the Escrow Agreement and this resolution. 5.05. Notice of Call for Redemption. The Refunded Bonds maturing on February 1, 2020 and thereafter will be redeemed and prepaid on the Redemption Date in accordance with their terms and in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the form of Notice of Call for Redemption attached hereto as EXHIBIT D, which terms and conditions are hereby approved and incorporated herein by reference. The registrar for the Refunded Bonds is authorized and directed to send a copy of the Notice of Call for Redemption to each registered holder of the Refunded Bonds. 5.06. Escrow Agreement. On or prior to the delivery of the Bonds, the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the City an escrow agreement (the "Escrow Agreement") with the Escrow Agent in substantially the form now on file with the City Manager. All essential terms and conditions of the Escrow Agreement including payment by the City of reasonable charges for the services of the Escrow Agent, are hereby approved and adopted and made a part of this resolution, and the City covenants that it will promptly enforce all provisions thereof in the event of default thereunder by the Escrow Agent. Section 6. Authentication of Transcript. 6.01. City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 6.02. Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement. 6.03. Other Certificates. The Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager are hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates as are required as a condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds or the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at the closing the Mayor, the City Manager, and 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 8 the Finance Manager shall also execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the Finance Manager shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Bonds. 6.04. Payment of Costs of Issuance. Costs of issuance of the Bonds will be paid by the Escrow Agent pursuant to the Escrow Agreement. Section 7. Tax Covenant. 7.01. Tax -Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Tntemal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. 7.02. Rebate. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States. 7.03. Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 7.04. Qualified Tax -Exempt Obliaations. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the following factual statements and representations: (a) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the Code; (b) the City designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2016 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 2016 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 7.05. Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. Section 8. Book -En System; Limited Obligation of City. 8.01. DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.04 hereof. Upon initial issuance, 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its successors and assigns ("DTC"). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. 8.02. Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions from time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the "Participants") or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Registrar), of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Manager of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words "Cede & Co." will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Manager will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent. 8.03. Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations (the "Representation Letter") which will govern payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds. Any Paying Agent or Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter with respect to the Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times. 8.04. Transfers Outside Book -Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. in such event the City will issue, transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof. 8.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to the contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and all notices with respect to the Bond will 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 10 be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC's Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter. Section 9. Continuing Disclosure. 9.01. Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. "Continuing Disclosure Certificate" means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and City Manager and dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof. 9.02. City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City hereby covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of the City to comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of default with respect to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the City to comply with its obligations under this section. Section 10. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and effect. The City may discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 I I The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 12 Passed and adopted this 15t1i day of November, 2016. Mayor Attest: City Clerk 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 13 EXHIBIT A PROPOSALS 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 A-1 EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE BID TABULATION $6,305,000' General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C City of Richfield. Minnesota SALE: November 15. 2016 AWARD: UMB BANK. N.A. Rating: Standard & Poor's Credit Markets "AA+" BBI: 3.52% Bank Qualified NET TRUE MATL-RITZ' REOFFERING INTEREST INTEREST NAME OF BIDDER (February 1) RATE YIELD PRICE COST RATE UMB BANK, N.A. $6,461,994.50 $1,015,075.92 2.0318% Kansas City, Missouri 2020 2.000% 1.300% 2021 2.000% 1.400% 2022 2.000% 1.500% 2023 2.000% 1.600% 2024 2.500% 1.700% 2025 2.500% 1.850% 2026 2.500% 1.900% 2027 2.500% 2.000% 2028 2.500% 2.100% 2029 2.500% 2.300% PNC CAPITAL MARKETS LLC $6,548,189.95 $1,024,613.38 2.0463% Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 2020 3.000% 2021 3.000% 2022 3.000% 2023 3.000% 2024 3.000% 2025 3.000% 2026 2.250% 2027 2.250% 2028 2.500% 2029 2.125% Subsequent to bid opening the issue size was decreased to $6,130,000. Adjusted Price - $6,282,941.24 Adjusted Net Interest Cost - $997,750.01 Adjusted TIC - 2.0373% M M M M 1-800-552-1171 1 www.ehlers-inc.com 490150v1 JAE RCI 45-700 A-2 NET TRUE MA URITY REOFFERING INTEREST INTEREST NAME OF BIDDER (FebrLLAfV 1) RATE YIELD PRICE COST RATE FTN FINANCIAL CAPITAL MARKETS Memphis, Tennessee PIPER JAFFRAY Minneapolis, Minnesota NORTHLAND SECURITIES. INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota 2020 2.000% 2021 2.000% 2022 2.000% 2023 2.000% 2024 2.000% 2025 2.000% 2026 2.000% 2027 2.250% 2028 2.500% 2029 2.500% 2020 3.000% 2021 3.000% 2022 3.000% 2023 3.000% 2024 3.000% 2025 3.000% 2026 2.500% 2027 2.500% 2028 2.500% 2029 2.750% 2020 2.000% 2021 2.000% 2022 2.000% 2023 2.000% 2024 2.000% 2025 2.000% 2026 2.000% 2027 2.500% 2028 2.500% 2029 2.500% Bid Tabulation City of Richfield, Minnesota $6,305,000* General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C 490150v1 JAERCI 45-700 A_3 $6,369,128.86 $1,013,891.83 2.0471% $6,584.561.80 $1,071,971.95 2.1294% $6.341,723.80 $1.058.007.73 2.1414% November 15, 2016 Page 2 NAME OF BIDDER MATURITY (FebruafV 1) REOFFERING RATE YIELD PRICE NET INTEREST COST TRUE INTEREST RATE STIFEL,NICOLAUS 2022 $6,643,254.80 $1,134,614.37 2.2368% Bimungham, Alabama 2020 3.000% 2.000% 2026 2.500% 2021 3.000% 2028 3.000% 2029 2022 3.000% 2023 3.000% 2024 3.000% 2025 3.000% 2026 3.000% 2027 3.000% 2028 3.000% 2029 3.000% BAIRD $6,404,055.60 $1,137,931.76 2.2832% Milwaukee. Wisconsin 2020 2.000% 2021 2.000% 2022 2.000% 2023 2.000% 2024 2.000% 2025 2.000% 2026 2.500% 2027 3.000% 2028 3.000% 2029 3.000% Bid Tabulation November 15, 2016 City of Richfield, Minnesota $6,305,000* General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C Page 3 490150v1 JAERCI 45-700 A-4 EXHIBIT B FORM OF BOND No. R- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF RICHFIELD GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND SERIES 2016C Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP February 1, 20_ December 15, 2016 Registered Owner: Cede & Co. The City of Richfield, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1, 2017 to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The City may elect on February 1, 2025, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2026. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify The Depository Trust Company ("DTC") of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $6,130,000 all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on November 15, 2016 (the "Resolution"), for the purpose of providing money to refund in advance of maturity and on their redemption date certain outstanding obligations of the City, pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended, including Sections 475.521 and 475.67, subdivision 13. A portion of the interest hereon will be payable from an escrow fund established in the name of the City. The principal hereof and remaining 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 B-1 interest hereon are payable from ad valorem taxes, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency in taxes pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities. The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to snake it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, charter, or statutory limitation of indebtedness. This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: December 15, 2016 acsimile Mayor 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 B-2 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA City Manager acsimile CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. BOND TRUST SERVICES CORPORATION ME Authorized Representative ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants in common TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT Custodian (gust) (Minor) under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors Act, State of Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program ("STAMP"), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program ("SEMP"), the 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 B-3 New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program ("MSP") or other such "signature guarantee program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STEMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Cede & Co. Federal ID #13-2555119 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 B-4 Signature of Officer of Re isg tray EXHIBIT C TAX LEVY SCHEDULE YEAR * TAX LEVY 2019 $721,323.75 2020 720,378.75 2021 724,473.75 2022 728,253.75 2023 731,718.75 2024 736,968.75 2025 736,443.75 2026 740,775.00 2027 744,581.25 2028 742,612.50 * Year tax levy collected. 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 C-1 EXHIBIT D NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION $9,480,000 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS SERIES 2008A NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1, 2019 all outstanding bonds designated as General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A, dated December 23, 2008, issued by the City of Richfield, Minnesota, having stated maturity dates of February 1 in the years 2020 through 2029, both inclusive, totaling $6,065,000 in principal amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers: Year of Maturity Amount CUSIP 2020 $ 485,000 763325 2E6 2021 505,000 763325 2F3 2022 530,000 763325 2G1 2023 555,000 763325 2119 2024 585,000 763325 2J5 2025 615,000 763325 2K2 2027 1,325,000 763325 2M8 2028 715,000 763325 2N6 2029 750,000 763325 2P1 The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2019, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment at the main office of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, at the following address, on or before February 1, 2019: Reg istered/Certi ied Mail. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Corporate Trust Operations P.O. Box 1517 Minneapolis, MN 55480-1517 Air Cnilrior Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Corporate Trust Services 600 South Fourth Street MAC N9300-060 Minneapolis, MN 55479 III Poranvj Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Northstar East Building 608 2nd Ave. So., 12`" Fl. Minneapolis, MN Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2009, the paying agent is required to withhold a specified percentage of the principal amount of the redemption price payable to the holder of any bonds subject to redemption and prepayment on the redemption date, unless the paying agent is provided with the Social Security Number or Federal 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 D-1 Employer Identification Number of the holder, properly certified. Submission of a fully executed Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9 (Rev. December 2011), will satisfy the requirements of this paragraph. Dated: BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA By /s/ Steven L. Devich City Manager City of Richfield, Minnesota 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 D-2 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. CITY OF RICHFIELD ) I, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on November 15, 2016 with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of the City's General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C, in the original aggregate principal amount of $6,130,000. WITNESS My hand officially as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this day of 12016. City Clerk City of Richfield, Minnesota (SEAL) 490150v1 JAE RC145-700 CROSSOVER REFUNDING ESCROW AGREEMENT Relating to: $9,480,000 City of Richfield, Minnesota General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds Series 2008A THIS CROSSOVER REFUNDING ESCROW AGREEMENT, dated , 2016 (the "Agreement"), is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, subdivision 13 (the "Act") and executed by and between the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), and U.S. Bank National Association, Saint Paul, Minnesota, a national banking corporation (the "Escrow Agent"): WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto recite and, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, covenant and agree as follows: 1. The City previously issued its General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A (the "Refunded Bonds"), dated December 23, 2008, in the original aggregate principal amount of $9,480,000, which are currently outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of $7,395,000, of which $6,065,000 in principal amount is subject to redemption on or after February 1, 2019. Pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council of the City on September 13, 2016 (the "Resolution"), the City has provided for the issuance of its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C (the "Refunding Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $ . On the date hereof, a portion of the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds will be deposited with the Escrow Agent to be used to redeem and prepay the 2020 through 2029 maturities of the Refunded Bonds on February 1, 2019 (the "Redemption Date") and pay the interest due on the Refunding Bonds to and including the Redemption Date. 2. The City, in accordance with the Resolution, issued and sold the Refunding Bonds in the principal amount of $ , and has received proceeds of the Refunding Bonds in the amount of $ (par amount of the Refunding Bonds of $ , [plus original issue premium of $ ,] [less original issue discount of $ ,] less underwriter's discount of $). The City has deposited proceeds of the Refunding Bonds in the amount of $ to the Escrow Account (as defined herein), to be allocated as follows: (i) the amount of $ shall be invested in securities which are general obligations of the United States, securities whose principal and interest payments are guaranteed by the United States (the "Federal Securities"), as described in the schedule which is attached hereto, marked EXHIBIT A and made a part hereof; (ii) the amount of $ shall be an initial cash deposit in the Escrow Account and shall remain uninvested; (iii) the amount of $ shall be applied by the Escrow Agent to payment of costs of issuance as specified in paragraph 3 hereof; [and (iv) $ shall be disbursed to the City on the date hereof for deposit to the Debt Service Fund established for the Refunding Bonds]. The purchased securities and initial cash deposit will be irrevocably deposited with the Escrow Agent on the date of this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the dates and amounts of payments of principal and interest due on the securities so deposited are as indicated in EXHIBIT B, and that the principal and interest payments due on such securities together with the initial cash deposit are such as to provide the funds required to pay the interest payable on the Refunding Bonds to the date on which any of the Refunded Bonds have been directed to be prepaid, as stated in the Resolution, and to pay the outstanding principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on such date. 3. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the securities described in paragraph 2 hereof and agrees that it will hold such securities in a special escrow account (the "Escrow Account") created by the 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 Resolution in the name of the City, and will collect and receive on behalf of the City all payments of principal of and interest on such securities and will remit from the Escrow Account (i) to the paying agent for the Refunding Bonds the funds required to pay the interest due on the Refunding Bonds through the Redemption Date; and (ii) to the paying agent for the Refunded Bonds the funds needed for the redemption and prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on the Redemption Date. After provision for payment of the principal of all remaining Refunded Bonds, the Escrow Agent will remit any remaining funds in the Escrow Account to the City. Of the amounts deposited with the Escrow Agent, the sum of $ shall be used by the Escrow Agent for payment and disbursement of the costs of issuance of the Refunding Bonds as set forth in EXHIBIT C attached hereto. [The Escrow Agent shall return the sum of $ to the City in the form of a check for deposit to the Debt Service Fund established for the Refunding Bonds.] 4. In order to ensure continuing compliance with the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively, the "Code"), the Escrow Agent agrees that it will not reinvest any cash received in payment of the principal of and interest on the Federal Securities held in the Escrow Account. This prohibition on reinvestment shall continue unless and until an opinion is received by the Escrow Agent from nationally recognized bond counsel that reinvestments, as specified in said opinion, may be made in a manner consistent with the Code. Reinvestment, if any, of amounts in the Escrow Account made pursuant to this paragraph may be made only in direct obligations of the United States of America which mature prior to the next date on which either principal of or interest on the Refunded Bonds is payable. 5. The Escrow Agent expressly waives any lien upon or claim against the moneys and investments in the Escrow Account. 6. If at any time it shall appear to the Escrow Agent that the money in the Escrow Account allocable for such use hereunder will not be sufficient to make any interest payment due to the holders of any of the Refunding Bonds, or principal payment due to the holders of any of the Refunded Bonds, the Escrow Agent shall immediately notify the City. The City thereupon shall forthwith deposit in the Escrow Account from funds on hand and legally available to it such additional funds as may be required to meet fully the amount to become due and payable. The City acknowledges its obligation to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City to the extent required to produce moneys necessary for this purpose. The City and Escrow Agent acknowledge receipt of a verification report from [Grant Thornton LLP, Minneapolis,] Minnesota, certified public accountants, of even date herewith, to the effect that such cash and securities are sufficient to comply with the requirements of the Act. 7. The City will not repeal or amend the Resolution which calls the Refunded Bonds for redemption on the Redemption Date. The Escrow Agent shall cause the Notice of Call for Redemption attached hereto as EXHIBIT D to be mailed not less than sixty (60) days prior to the Redemption Date of the Refunded Bonds to the paying agent for the Refunded Bonds for the purpose of giving notice not less than thirty (30) days prior to the Redemption Date to the registered owners of the Refunded Bonds to be redeemed, at their addresses appearing in the bond register and also to the bank at which the principal of and interest on the Refunded Bonds are then payable. 8. The Escrow Agent shall cause the Notice of Defeasance attached hereto as EXHIBIT E to be filed with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board within ten (10) business days of the issuance of the Refunding Bonds. 9. Within thirty (30) days of December 31, 2016, and each December 31 thereafter until termination of the Escrow Account, the Escrow Agent shall submit to the City a report covering all money it shall have received and all payments it shall have made or caused to be made hereunder during the preceding 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 2 twelve months. Such report shall also list all obligations held in the Escrow Account and the amount of money on hand in the Escrow Account on the last day of December of each year. 10. It is recognized that title to the Federal Securities and money held in the Escrow Account from time to time shall remain vested in the City but subject always to the prior charge and lien thereon of this Agreement and the use thereof required to be made by the provisions of this Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall hold all such money and obligations in a separate special escrow account wholly segregated from all other funds and securities of the Escrow Agent, and shall never commingle such money or securities with other money or securities. It is understood and agreed that the responsibility of the Escrow Agent under this Agreement is limited to the safekeeping and segregation of the funds and securities deposited with it in said escrow account, the collection of and accounting for the principal and interest payable with respect thereto, the reinvestment of certain funds in United States Treasury Obligations, State and Local Government Series with zero interest which are not being held as uninvested cash and the remittance of the funds to the paying agent as provided in this Agreement. 11. This Agreement is made by the City for the benefit of the holders of the Refunded Bonds, and is not revocable by the City, and the investments and other funds deposited in the Escrow Account and all income therefrom have been irrevocably appropriated for the payment of the callable principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on the Redemption Date and the interest on the Refunding Bonds to and including the Redemption Date in accordance with this Agreement. 12. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the City and the Escrow Agent and their respective successors and assigns. In addition, this Agreement shall constitute a third -party beneficiary contract for the benefit of the holders of the Refunded Bonds and said third -party beneficiaries shall be entitled to enforce performance and observance by the City and the Escrow Agent of the respective agreements and covenants herein contained as fully and completely as if said third -party beneficiaries were parties hereto. Any bank into which the Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be consolidated or any bank resulting from any merger or consolidation to which it shall be a party or any bank to which it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its corporate trust business shall, if the City approves, be the successor agent without the execution of any document or the performance of any further act. 13. The Escrow Agent hereby certifies that it is a financial institution whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and whose capital and surplus is not less than $500,000. 14. The Escrow Agent may at any time resign and be discharged of its obligations hereunder by giving to the City Manager of the City written notice of such resignation not less than sixty (60) days before the date when the same is to take effect, provided that the Escrow Agent shall return to the City the pro rata portion of its fee which is allocable to the period of time commencing on the effective date of such resignation. Such resignation shall take effect upon the date specified in the notice, or upon the appointment and qualification of a successor prior to that date. In the event of such resignation, a successor shall promptly be appointed by the City, and the City Manager of the City shall immediately give written notice thereof to the predecessor escrow agent and publish the notice in the manner described in this paragraph 14. If, in a proper case, no appointment of a successor agent is made within forty-five (45) days after the receipt by the City of notice of such resignation, the Escrow Agent or the holder of any Refunded Bond may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction to appoint a successor escrow agent, which appointment may be made by the Court after such notice, if any, as the Court may prescribe. Any successor escrow agent appointed hereunder shall execute, acknowledge and deliver to its predecessor escrow agent and to the City a written acceptance of such appointment, and shall thereupon without any further act, deed or conveyance become fully vested with all moneys, properties, duties and obligations of its predecessor, but the predecessor shall nevertheless pay over, transfer, assign and deliver all moneys, securities or other property held by it to the successor escrow 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 agent, shall execute, acknowledge and deliver such instruments of conveyance and do such other things as may reasonably be required to vest and confirm more fully and certainly in the successor escrow agent all right, title and interest in and to any property held by it hereunder. Any bank into which the Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be consolidated or any bank resulting from any merger or consolidation to which it shall be a party or any bank to which it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its corporate trust business shall, if the City approves, be the successor escrow agent without the execution of any document or the performance of any further act. 15. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the sum of $ as its full compensation for its services to be performed under this Agreement. 16. The duties and obligations of the Escrow Agent shall be as prescribed by the provisions of this Agreement and the Escrow Agent shall not be liable hereunder except for failure to perform its duties and obligations as specifically set forth herein or to act in good faith in the performance thereof and no implied duties or obligations shall be incurred by the Escrow Agent other than those specified herein. 17. Any notice, authorization, request or demand required or permitted to be given in accordance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and sent by registered or certified mail addressed: If to the City: City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Attention: City Manager If to the Escrow Agent: U.S. Bank National Association 60 Livingston Avenue EP-MN-WS3C St. Paul, MN 55107-2292 Attention: Corporate Trust Services is. The exhibits which are a part of this Agreement are as follows: EXHIBIT A Federal Securities EXHIBIT B Principal and Interest Payments on Federal Securities EXHIBIT C Costs of Issuance EXHIBIT D Notice of Call for Redemption EXHIBIT E Notice of Defeasance 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Crossover Refunding Escrow Agreement to be duly executed by their duly authorized officers, in counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original agreement, as of the date and year first written above. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor By Its City Manager Security Advice Waiver: The City acknowledges that to the extent regulations of the Comptroller of the Currency or any other regulatory entity grant the City the right to receive brokerage confirmations of the security transactions as they occur, the City specifically waives receipt of such confirmations to the extent permitted by law. The Escrow Agent will furnish the City with period cash transaction statements that include the detail for all investment transactions made by the Escrow Agent for all current and future accounts. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT PROCEDURES FOR OPENING A NEW ACCOUNT: To help the government fight the funding of terrorism and money laundering activities, Federal law requires all financial institutions to obtain, verify and record information that identifies each person who opens an account. For a non -individual person such as a business entity, a charity, a Trust or other legal entity we will ask for documentation to verify its formation and existence as a legal entity. We may also ask to see financial statements, licenses, and identification and authorization documents from individuals claiming authority to represent the entity or other relevant documentation. (Signature page of the City to the Crossover Refunding Escrow Agreement related to the City of Richfield's General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A) 485329v1 JAERC145-700 S-1 Execution page of the Escrow Agent to the Crossover Refunding Escrow Agreement, dated as of the date and year first written above. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION By Its Vice President (Signature page of the Escrow Agent to the Crossover Refunding Escrow Agreement related to the City of Richfield's General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A) 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 S-2 EXHIBIT A FEDERAL SECURITIES 485329v1 JAERC145-700 A-1 EXHIBIT B PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL SECURITIES 485329v1 JAERC145-700 B_1 EXHIBIT C COSTS OF ISSUANCE Municipal Advisor Rating Agency Bond Counsel CPANerification Report Escrow Agent Paying Agent TOTAL [In addition to paying the above -referenced costs of issuance, the Escrow Agent shall return the amount of $ to the City for deposit to the Debt Service Fund established for the Refunding Bonds.] 485329v1 JAERC145-700 C-1 EXHIBIT D NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION $9,480,000 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS SERIES 2008A NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1, 2019 all outstanding bonds designated as General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2008A, dated December 23, 2008, issued by the City of Richfield, Minnesota, having stated maturity dates of February 1 in the years 2020 through 2029, both inclusive, totaling $6,065,000 in principal amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers: Year of Maturity Amount CUSIP 2020 $ 485,000 763325 2E6 2021 505,000 763325 2F3 2022 530,000 763325 2G1 2023 555,000 763325 2119 2024 585,000 763325 2J5 2025 615,000 763325 2K2 2027 1,325,000 763325 2M8 2028 715,000 763325 2N6 2029 750,000 763325 2P1 The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2019, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment at the main office of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, at the following address, on or before February 1, 2019: Reg istered/Certi ied Mail. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Corporate Trust Operations P.O. Box 1517 Minneapolis, MN 55480-1517 Air Cnilrior Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Corporate Trust Services 600 South Fourth Street MAC N9300-060 Minneapolis, MN 55479 III Poranvj Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Northstar East Building 608 2nd Ave. So., 12`" Fl. Minneapolis, MN Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2009, the paying agent is required to withhold a specified percentage of the principal amount of the redemption price payable to the holder of any bonds subject to redemption and prepayment on the redemption date, unless the paying agent is provided with the Social Security Number or Federal 485329v1 JAERC145-700 D-1 Employer Identification Number of the holder, properly certified. Submission of a fully executed Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9 (Rev. December 2011), will satisfy the requirements of this paragraph. Dated: BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA By /s/ Steven L. Devich City Manager City of Richfield, Minnesota 485329v1 JAE RC 145-700 D-2 EXHIBIT E NOTICE OF DEFEASANCE $9,480,000 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS SERIES 2008A NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to the holders of the above-described bonds (the "Bonds"), dated December 23, 2008, and maturing on February 1 of the years and amounts shown below, that U.S. Government Securities have been deposited with U.S. Bank National Association, Saint Paul, Minnesota (the "Escrow Agent"), in an amount sufficient to defease the 2020 through 2029 maturities of such Bonds. Interest on the Bonds will continue to be paid by the City of Richfield, Minnesota, from cash on hand. The outstanding Bonds will be redeemed and prepaid in full on February 1, 2019, and are identified below by CUSIP number: Year of Maturity Amount CUSTP 2020 $ 485,000 763325 2E6 2021 505,000 763325 2F3 2022 530,000 763325 2G1 2023 555,000 763325 2H9 2024 585,000 763325 2J5 2025 615,000 763325 2K2 2027 1,325,000 763325 2M8 2028 715,000 763325 2N6 2029 750,000 763325 2P1 Dated: .20 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Escrow Agent 485329v1 JAERC145-700 E-1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager November 10, 2016 Council Memorandum No. 80 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: $6,305,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C (Agenda Item No. 3 ) Council Members: At the September 13, 2016 City Council Meeting, the City Council approved a resolution establishing a Pricing Committee with respect to the refunding of the $9,480,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds, Series 2008A, and the sale of the $6,305,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2016C. The approved resolution authorizes and directs the Pricing Committee, with the advice of the City's Municipal Advisor, Ehlers and Associates, to review proposals for the sale of the bonds based on the following parameters: (i) the principal amount of the Bonds shall not exceed $6,305,000; (ii) the true interest cost of the Bonds shall not exceed 1.900000%, (iii) the present value of such debt service or interest cost savings (the "Reduction") shall be at least nine percent (9%) of the debt service on the Refunded Bonds. The pricing committee will comprise the Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager. The date for the Pricing Committee to award the sale of the Series 2016C bonds is November 15, 2016 at 11:30 a.m. If the proposals received are within the established parameters, the Pricing Committee is authorized and directed to select the best proposal and award the sale to the successful bidder. Finally, based on the prior approved resolution, it will not be necessary for the City Council to take action at the November 15, 2016 City Council Meeting with regard to the sale of the 2016C bonds. However, a presentation will be made to the City Council by staff and the City's Municipal Advisor, Ehlers and Associates, on the results of the sale. rodtry Somitted, I K.#De ich City Manager SLD:cr Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager November 10, 2016 Council Memorandum No. 81 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: International Boulevard Implementation (Agenda Item No. 10 ) Council Members: During the November 15, 2016 City Manager's Report, the future International Boulevard will be discussed. The following information is provided so that the City Council may direct staff on how they would like to proceed with the implementation of the name change., Edina Extension Staff has had a discussion with Edina staff regarding the potential of extending the International Boulevard name into Edina. The Edina City Council has asked their appropriate commissions to review the matter and make a recommendation on the name change. The initial reaction by the City of Edina has been a positive one and they seem open to the possibility of the name change. Depending on the outcome of their analysis, the name could potentially be extended to Highway 100. Affected Proaerties It is estimated that 12 single-family homes, 348 apartment units, 12 businesses, two schools and one church would need to change their mailing address. Transition Period While the U.S. Postal Service has not provided any feedback, it was the recollection of Bloomington officials that properties were able to use either their former 79th/80th Street addresses or the new American Boulevard addresses for an 18 -moth transition period. Timeline Considerations There has been an assumption that the implementation would coincide with the completion of the 77th Street Underpass which could be under construction as soon as early 2018, depending on the outcome of the Regional Solicitation (expected to know in early 2017) and the ability of the City to front the construction costs for the project. I AUDI of Richfield plans on opening in February or March. It would provide them considerable cost savings to inform them soon of a pending name change as it would keep them from ordering letterhead, business cards, forms, etc. with a 77th Street address. Cost Estimate Richfield Edina Local Road Signs 20 $1,800 1 $60 Signal Arm Signs 20 $8,000 17 $7,500 MnDOT Signs 6 $42,000 7 $74,000 TOTALS $50,862 $80,281 If you have any questions, please contact me. ;en lly subm' d, e L. vic City Manager SLD:kda Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors