3-28-94 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, MARCH 28, 1994
**??t?***?c?r*?t???t?*???????t**??c?t??t?t*??r?c***?t?t?t*?*??*?*?r*?**?*??**?t?t*
CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL AND
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION FROM RICHFIELD HIGH SCHOOL BAND MEMBERS AND
SMALL GROUP FROM AMERICAN LEGION-RICHFIELD POST #435
2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION HONORING U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
MARTIN OLAV SABO FOR ASSISTANCE ON THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
77TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED CONCURRENTLY BY CITY COUNCIL AND HRA:
1. CONSIDERATION OF CONCEPTUAL ACCEPTANCE OF SHOPS AT LYNDALE
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL; ILN
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 90
HRA LETTER NO. 24
ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY HRA:
1. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION TO
RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN, CONSISTING OF
MODIFICATION NO. 4 TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN FOR INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT; REQUESTING RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A
PUBLIC HEARING RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PLANS
HRA LETTER NO. 25
2. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE
REDEVELOPMENT WITH CSM CORPORATION; ILN REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
HRA LETTER NO. 26
3. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION AND
QUICK TAKE OF PHASE I, THE SHOPS AT LYNDALE; ILN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
HRA LETTER NO. 27
4. CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND EVENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED CSM
PROJECT; PHASE I
HRA LETTER NO. 28
ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY CITY COUNCIL:
1. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION DIRECTING PLANNING COMMISSION TO
REVIEW AND CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN MAP WITH RESPECT TO CSM PROPOSAL AND RELOCATION OF
EMERSON AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 91
2. CONSIDERATION OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCE REZONING LAND FROM HIGH DENSITY
COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR CSM PROPOSAL
• COUNCIL LETTER NO. 92
3. CONSIDERATION OF SCHEDULING SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR
7 P.M. ON MONDAY, APRIL 18, 1994 FOR PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING:
? PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SECOND READING TO
REZONE PHASE I AND PHASE II OF CSM PROPOSAL;
? CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE I
OF CSM PROPOSAL;
? AMENDMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP WITH RESPECT TO CSM
PROPOSAL
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 93
4. CONSIDERATION OF TIME AND EVENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED CSM
PROJECT; PHASE I
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 94
ADJOURNMENT
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING CONCURRENT MEETING
is COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) SPECIAL JOINT CITYCOUNCIL/HOUSING
AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1994 AND (2)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1994
PRESENTATION
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
LISTED ON THE AGENDA
AGENDA APPROVAL
2. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE
ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT
• CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND RECOMMENDED
ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION IS
NECESSARY. HOWEVER, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST THAT AN ITEM
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
3A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE WITH DONATED FUNDS OF
CITY SIGN AND MESSAGE BOARD FOR CITY HALL IN AMOUNT OF
$10,065 C.L. 95
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR OFF-STREET PARKING
PERMIT TO ACCOMMODATE BUILDING EXPANSION AND PARKING LOT
EXPANSION AT ST. NICHOLAS CHURCH, 7227 PENN AVENUE C.L. 96
C.. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST
COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PARTIAL FEE TAKING
AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS AT 7701 PORTLAND AVENUE; 77TH STREET
PROJECT C.L. 97
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF GRANT APPLICATION TO MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SEND
LETTER OF SUPPORT TO BLOOMINGTON FOR 79TH STREET BIKEWAY
C.L. 98
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
INSTALLATION OF NEW 911 EQUIPMENT AND TWO 20-KEY TELEPHONES
LEASED FROM US WEST COMMUNICATIONS IN PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMUNICATIONS CENTER IN AMOUNT OF $5,540.00 C.L. 99
F. CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR AERIAL
PHOTOGRAPHS OF RICHFIELD WITH ONE FOOT ELEVATION CONTOURS
FROM HORIZONS IN AMOUNT OF $52,940 C.L. 100
G. CONSIDERATION OF
OF 1994 CONTRACT
PROPERTY IN BOTH
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
H. CONSIDERATION OF
SERVICE CORPORAT
VEHICLES
APPROVAL OF BID MINUTES/TABULATION AND AWARD
FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES ON PRIVATE
DISTRICTS TO CERES TREE COMPANY IN TOTAL
OF $108,764 C.L. 101
APPROVAL OF TAXICAB LICENSE: YELLOW TAXI
ION d/b/a SUBURBAN YELLOW CAB COMPANY; 8
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR
PURPOSE OF PROTECTING PLANNING PROCESS AND HEALTH, SAFETY,
AND WELFARE OF CITY RESIDENTS; AND REGULATING AND
RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT OF GUNSHOP USES WITHIN CITY
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 102
•
5. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
REGULATE DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS AND SIDEWALKS IN SINGLE
FAMILY AND LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS; AND
CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX D OF ORDINANCE
CODE OF CITY OF RICHFIELD SETTING PERMIT FEE FOR EXPANSION
OR INSTALLATION OF DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS AND SIDEWALKS
'COUNCIL LETTER NO. 103
PROPOSED ORDINANCES
6. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
REZONE THE FOLLOWING MULTIPLE RESIDENCE PROPERTIES: 1) 6409,
6415, 6421 AND 6429 BLAISDELL AVENUE TO SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE; 2) 6227-29 AND 6237 PLEASANT AVENUE TO HIGH
DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE ; 3) 840 WEST 65TH STREET TO
HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE; AND 4) 920-24-28 RAE
DRIVE TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 104
7. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR ACQUISITION AND
PUBLIC HEARING ON SALE OF 7537 GIRARD AVENUE; AND FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY TO HRA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 105
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS
8. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR NEW 1994 NON-INTOXICATING MALT
LIQUOR LICENSE FOR KIANG'S RED PEPPER, INC. d/b/a RED PEPPER
• CHINESE RESTAURANT, 2902 WEST 66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 106
9. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR 60 DAY TEMPORARY ON-SALE AND
SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CHAMPPS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
d/b/a CHAMPPS SPORTS CAFE, 790 WEST 66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 107
10. CONSIDERATION OF SETTING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR
CONSIDERATION OF NEW ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR CHAMPPS
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION d/b/a CHAMPPS SPORTS CAFE, 790 WEST
66TH STREET
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 108
11. CONSIDERATION OF EXPENDITURE OF $93,030 FOR INSTALLATION OF
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND ALONG 77TH STREET BETWEEN CHICAGO
AVENUE AND BLOOMINGTON AVENUE AS PART OF 77TH STREET
RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 109
AIRPORT BUSINESS
12. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
• 77TH STREET PROJECT BUSINESS
13. 77TH STREET PROJECT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
14. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
15. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
16. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available
upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance
to the Administrative Services Director at 861-9702.
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 107
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of request for a 60 day temporary on-sale and
Sunday liquor license for Champps Development Corporation d/b/a
Champps Sports Cafe, 790 West 66th Street.
Background:
Due to a change in major stockholders, Champps Sports Cafe is
requesting a 60 day temporary on-sale liquor license.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the request for a 60 day temporary on-sale and Sunday
liquor license for Champps Development Corporation d/b/a Champps
Sports Cafe, 790 West 66th Street, with the stipulation that the
requirements are met in Resolution No. 7380.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A 60 day temporary license will allow Public Safety staff
enough time to complete their investigation for the public
hearing on April 25, 1994.
Alternative Recommendation:
• 1. Deny the 60 day temporary license. This would mean Champps
Sports Cafe would not be able to serve on-sale liquor until
the public hearing held on April 25, 1994.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The request for a 60 day temporary on-sale and Sunday liquor
license for Champps Development Corporation d/b/a Champps Sports
Cafe, is being presented to Council at this time.
RespectfiAlly submitted,
James)D. Prosser
City anaaer
JDP:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
M Council Letter No.109
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of approval of expenditure of $93,030 for the
installation of utilities underground along 77th Street between
Chicago Avenue and Bloomington Avenue as part of the 77th Street
reconstruction project.
Background:
In November 1992, the City Council reviewed a report from BRW, a
consultant planning and engineering firm, which recommended that
the overhead utility lines within the 77th Street corridor be
buried wherever practical. Specifically, the City Council
directed that the overhead lines which parallel 77th Street
between Nicollet and Chicago be buried at a cost of $123,848.
In other sections of 77th Street, significant cooperation with
businesses and apartment owners is needed because those owners
must pay to have their own private services buried in order to
receive the full benefit of the effort. In the summer of 1993,
the 77th Street businesses between Lyndale and Colfax Avenues
volunteered to bury their electrical and telephone services if
the City paid to bury the main lines. On August 23, 1993, the
City Council approved a $39,128 expenditure to bury the telephone
and electrical main lines in the area.
• The BRW report indicated a reluctance to bury the utility lines
east of Chicago because of the many service lines to adjacent
businesses. A closer analysis of each service line shows that
these services can remain underground within the project area.
The service lines will return above ground on poles outside the
project area. So most of the advantages of burying the utility
lines can be realized.
Recently, City staff pursued the burying of the utility lines
between Chicago and Bloomington Avenues. Businesses and
apartment owners are receptive to burying their service lines.
These few services are widely spaced. In addition, these
services can be buried within the 77th Street project area and
strung up power poles outside the project area. So, the above
ground utility lines will be eliminated within the project area
whether the services are buried or not.
Burying utility lines provides obvious visual benefits. Not only
are the wires and poles unsightly but trees must be kept trimmed
away from the lines giving them an unnatural appearance. The
businesses benefit by improving access for truck deliveries to
their buildings.
Burying utility lines is not an eligible expense in the Federal
• Demonstration Grant or Municipal State Aid funds. There are
sufficient funds in the Capital Project Funds to cover this cost
using either the Public Investment Revolving Fund or the General
Cash Balance as the funding source.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the installation of underground utility lines along the
south side of 77th Street between Chicago Avenue and Bloomington
Avenue, including relocating the high voltage line near 12th
Avenue above ground to cross 77th Street instead of paralleling
77th Street, as part of the 77th Street reconstruction project at
a cost of $93,030.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City is responding to a request by affected businesses
that favor this proposal.
2. The relocation of,the overhead lines will provide an improved
visual environment along 77th Street.
3. Maintain consistency with the buried utility lines west of
Lyndale Avenue.
4. There are no existing trees affected by this proposal and the
addition of new trees will not need special trimming.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Require the utility lines be maintained above ground.
• 2. Approve expenditure of $120,000 to bury ALL utilities
including the high voltage line at Chicago Avenue.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff is requesting approval at this time in order to facilitate
timely burial of utility lines so as to not delay Phase II of the
reconstruction of 77th Street.
Re's c lly submitted,
Ja a D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP:cak
jO
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 108
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Setting date of public hearing for consideration of a new on-sale
liquor license for Champps Development Corporation d/b/a Champps
Sports Cafe, 790 West 66th Street.
Background:
Due to a significant percent of stock exchanged, an application
for a new on-sale liquor license for Champps Sports Cafe has been
received by the City. City ordinance provides that the City
Council conduct a public hearing to consider all liquor license
applications.
Recommended Motion:
Schedule a public hearing for April 25, 1994 to consider a new
on-sale liquor license for Champps Development Corporation d/b/a
Champps Sports Cafe, 790 West 66th Street.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A public hearing must be scheduled and conducted before a new
license may be considered.
• 2. The application process has been initiated. -
3. Holding the public hearing on April 25, 1994 will provide
ample time to complete the licensing process.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may
delay the licensing process.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action to schedule the public hearing on April 25, 1994 will
provide sufficient time for legal publication of the hearing.
Resp t ully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 7380
RESOLUTION SPECIFYING CERTAIN IMPROPER
CONDUCT OF ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR
LICENSEES AND STATING RECOMMENDED
DISCIPLINE THEREFOR -
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield
as follows:
I. BACKGROUND STATEMENT
The City of Richfield annually issues a number of licenses
permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor within the
City. The conduct of the licensed activity is governed by the
provisions of Section 1200 of the City Code. Although, the
• provisions of that Section describe ina general way what is
expected of licensees in the proper conduct of the licensed
activity, the City Council is concerned that licensees should
have a more specific understanding of the types of conduct,
generally described in the Code, which may subject their licenses
to discipline; and further that they have a clear understanding
of the scope and nature of the discipline which may be imposed
for certain specific conduct. The levels of discipline described
in this resolution will be imposed only in accordance with the
applicable provisions of law. The list of activities and conduct
contained in this resolution is not intended to be exhaustive,
but rather concentrates on the types of conduct most frequently
observed at licensed establishments. Other activity or conduct
which is detrimental to the public safety, health, morals and
welfare and which constitutes a violation of the provisions of
Section 1200 of the City Code may also subject liquor licenses to
discipline. The actions which the City may take in accordance
with this resolution are not intended to preclude such further
actions such as actions in law or in equity or criminal
prosecution available to the City-for the conduct described in
this resolution.
II, sPFCTFTC PRnHTETTF.D roNnur-T AND PRnPns .D sANc TnNC
A. Nni se and Other Di gt irhi ng Conduct W; t-h; n nr NQar t lp_
Licensees are responsible for the conduct of their patrons while
within the licensed establishment; and of individuals within the
immediate vicinity of the establishment who are either coming to •
or leaving the establishment. The City is unwilling to permit
the continued operation of a licensed liquor establishment in
circumstances where it is evident that the licensed activity is
having a detrimental impact upon the health, welfare, safety and
morals of the community and patrons of the establishment. The
following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating
liquor licenses for verified reports of criminal misconduct
occurring on or near the licensed premises and attributable to
patrons of the establishment (including persons entering or
leaving):
a) For five (5) such incidents occurring within less than a
31-day period (beginning with the date of the first of
such five incidents) - suspension of the license for
9-3
up to 10 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each
incident.
b) For ten (10) such incidents occurring within less than a
61-day period (beginning with the date of the first of
such incidents) - suspension of the license for up to 30
days and a civil fine-of $2,000 for each incident.
c) For fifteen (15) such incidents occurring within any 91-
day period (beginning with the date of the first of such
incidents) - suspension of the license for up to 60 days
and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident.
The discipline outline above is intended to be cumulative in
nature, and incidents which give rise to discipline (or the right
to discipline) during a shorter period may be counted in
determining whether discipline is appropriate during a longer
period.
The term "verified reports of criminal misconduct" means a
report made to the director of public safety by the licensee or
a complaint made by others concerning an incident constituting a
crime under the City Code or the laws of the State of Minnesota,
which, in the opinion of the director, is directly attributable
to the licensed activity.
Verified reports of criminal misconduct do not of necessity
mean requests for service, and licensees shall not be required to
make requests for service in situations where the licensee is
capable of resolving the incident without police assistance.
However, it is necessary for the City to have an accurate measure
of the level of criminal misconduct. The department of public
safety shall establish standards and criteria for the making of
such reports by the licensee. If the licensee fails to make the
required reports of criminal misconduct in accordance with such
standards and criteria, the following additional discipline may
be imposed upon its on-sale intoxicating liquor license:
a) For the first incident of failure to report criminal
misconduct within any license year - suspension of
license for up to five days and a civil fine of $2,000.
b) For the second such incident in any license year -
suspension of license for up to 10 days and a civil fine
of $2,000.
c) For the third such incident in any license year -
suspension of license for up to 15 days and a civil fine
of $2,000.
B.
PrM isag with Alnnhnl;r BPVPras;P_ Licensees must assure that
the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages will be
confined only to those areas permitted by the license. Failure
to do so may have an evident and adverse impact upon other
activities lawfully occurring within the area and creates a
substantial risk of criminal behavior such as violation of the
Open Bottle Law. The following discipline may be imposed upon
on-sale intoxicating beverage licenses:
a) The first incident during the license year - up to a 10-
day suspension and $2,000 civil fine.
b) The second incident during the license year - up to a
30-day suspension and.$2,000 civil fine.
c) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-
day suspension and $2,000 civil fine.
d) The fourth incident during the license year - revocation
of license.
C. PPrmi ti-i n Qnnm ann3Z-_._tn FxnPP!a the T i mi i-a PPrmi ttAd Unc9Pr the
Uni form Fi rP COAP 25-114 ( nvornrowdi ng )
Licensees are absolutely bound to prevent situations in which
the licensed premises become overcrowded. The City finds that
the opportunity to serve alcoholic beverages contributes to an
environmental wherein overcrowding, if not strictly controlled by
the licensee, may occur. Each liquor license issued shall state
the maximum occupancy limit for the licensed premises. The
following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating
liquor licenses for incident of overcrowding verified by the
City's public safety director:
a) The first incident during the license year - up to a 10-
day license suspension and $2,000 civil fine.
b) The second incident during the license year - up to a
30-day suspension and $2,000 civil fine.
Q) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-
day suspension and $2,000 civil fine.
d) The fourth or subsequent incident during the license
year revocation of the license.
D. Fan; 1 i tat; nc; Cgam1?1 ; n - _ Licensees must not permit or
allow any condition to occur on the licensed premises which would
facilitate gambling activity. Licensees may not permit any
device on the licensed premises which could be used for
gambling. Such devices include blackjack tables, video games of
chance, roulette wheels and any other amusement or gambling
device as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 349 and 609,
and Richfield City Code Subsections 1100.13 and 1100.01
For any incident of facilitation of gambling the on-sale
intoxicating liquor may be suspended for up to a period of days
equal in number to the period of days that such incident
continued.
E. FffPnt of SngnPnSion or RPynnatinn of Fnnd T;nPnse On-
sale intoxicating liquor licenses which are issued to
establishments because they qualify as restaurants shall cease to
be valid for any period of time during which the establishment's
food license is under suspension or revocation as the result of
actions taken by the city manager, enforcement officer, or both
pursuant to Subsection 615.05, subdivision 6 of the City Code. 0
9.7
The on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor during such period shall
N constitute an unlicensed sale.
The City Council retains the right to modify the provisions
of this resolution from time and to impose penalties in excess of
those contained herein when, in the judgment of the council it is
appropriate to do so.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
14th day of December 1987.
John N. Hamilton, Mayor
ATTEST:
0
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
11
S
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.106
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a request for a new 1994 non-intoxicating
malt liquor license for Kiang's Red Pepper, Inc., d/b/a Red
Pepper Chinese Restaurant, 2902 West 66th Street.
Background:
On October •29, 1993, the City received the new application
and other required documents for the non-intoxicating malt
liquor license for Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant. The
applicant has paid the required license fee.
The Public Safety background investigation has been completed
and reveals the following:
? Mr. Ricky Kiang has made application for a non-intoxicating
malt liquor license under the name Kiang's Red Pepper,
d/b/a Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant. The corporate
structure shows that Mr. Kiang is serving as President,
Vice-President, Secretary and Treasurer. Mr. Kiang is also
serving as the General Manager of the restaurant and is the
• sole owner of the restaurant. Mr. Kiang has no known
criminal record.
On February 14, 1994, the City Council approved an increase
in the number of non-intoxicating liquor licenses that could
be licensed from 9 to 12. The increase makes it possible for
Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant to apply for this license.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the issuance of a new 1994 non-intoxicating malt
liquor license for Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of
both City Codes and State Statutes pertaining to a non-
intoxicating malt liquor license.
2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and
the investigation conducted, there appears to be no
reason to deny the license requested.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a non-
intoxicating malt liquor license. This would mean that
the restaurant would be unable to serve non-intoxicating
malt liquor but would still continue to serve wine.
9, i
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The hearing to consider the request for the issuance of a new
non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Kiang's Red Pepper,
Inc., d/b/a Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant has been scheduled
for March 28, 1994 and is being presented to Council at this
time.
Resp lly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
-`7
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 105
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Authorization to acquire 7537 Girard Avenue and to allow the HRA
to proceed with new single family construction; and first reading
of the ordinance authorizing sale of the property to the HRA.
Background:
Since 1980, the HRA has utilized the Voluntary Acquisition
Program and CDBG funds to acquire substandard or under utilized
residential properties for redevelopment. The Vo-Tech builds
new housing units for moderate income families.
The structure at 7537 Girard Avenue is substandard and a
neighborhood eyesore. The lot width of 46 ft. is also
substandard. However, the City hearing examiner has granted a
lot width variance, the lot is in a neighborhood zoned for
residential use and the lot is suitable for the development of a
new single family home. The site is being marketed for $25,900
by a realtor on behalf of the foreclosing lender, National
Mortgage Corporation. Year XIX CDBG funds are available for this
purchase.
• The Hennepin County Assessor valued the property at $45,000 prior
to foreclosure and the subsequent decline in condition. Staff
has negotiated a price of $24,000 which reflects the lot value
after demolition, pending authorization of this value as fair
market value by the HRA and City Council.
HUD rules require that the City purchase the property for the
fair market value of $24,000. The subsequent transfer of the
property to the HRA would require a $1.00 payment. The sale from
the City to the HRA requires a public hearing and passage of a
transitory ordinance. Transfer of the property to the HRA could
occur in June 1994 after the transitory ordinance becomes
effective. The drafted purchase agreement with the seller
indicates the City will purchase by June 1994.
The HRA would be responsible for property maintenance following
acquisition and site clearance following transfer of the property
from the City. The 1994 HRA budget provides $4,500 to clear the
site (source: CDBG XIX), $600 for legal work to acquire (source:
CDBG XIX) and $300 for property maintenance and insurance
(source: proceeds of sale of 1994 Vo-Tech project). It is
anticipated that Vo-Tech could build a new house on site starting
in the summer of 1994. Staff is presently developing a plan,
budget, and contracts for consideration by the HRA.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council:
'1-I
1. Adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the City
Manager and Mayor to:
a. Enter into a purchase agreement and take other actions
necessary to acquire the property at 7537 Girard Avenue
for $24,000.
b. Enter into a sale agreement with the HRA and take other
actions necessary to transfer the property to the HRA
for $1.00.
C. Schedule a public hearing and a second reading of the
transitory ordinance to accomplish the sale to the HRA.
2. Give first reading to the attached transitory ordinance.
Schedule a public hearing and a second reading for April 11,
1994 to accomplish the sale to the HRA.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The owner is interested in selling to the City through the
Voluntary Acquisition Program.
2. The property qualifies for acquisition in accordance with the
Voluntary Acquisition Program Guidelines.
3. Funds have been budgeted for acquisition, clearance, and
maintenance. CDBG funds may be committed once the
environmental clearance process is completed with Hennepin
County in April 1994. The purchase is contingent on this
administrative process.
4. The subject property is available at this time and can be
purchased with available funds.
5. HUD rules require a process in which the City acquires the
property and transfers the title to the HRA.
Alternative Recommendation:
The City Council can choose not to acquire the property.
However, the HRA has no better alternative for timely commitment
of CDBG funds and the development of a first-time home buyer (Vo-
Tech) project.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Pending City Council authorization, the property could be
acquired in May or June 1994.
Re p ully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP:ds
RESOLUTION NO.
THE CITY 00 RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
CALLING FOR ACQUISITION AND A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE SALE OF CERTAIN LAND
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City")
proposes to sell the real property to the HRA for $1.00 in
furtherance of HRA housing programs; and
WHEREAS, the City has considered the purchase of 7537 Girard
Avenue with CDBG funds on behalf of the Richfield HRA for
$24,000. The property is further described as:
Address: 7537 Girard Avenue
PID #: 33-028-24-42-0091
Legal Description:
Lot 15, Block 19, Irwin Shores Addition, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Charter, Section 13.04, the
City if authorized to sell its property following a public
hearing for which notice was published not less than ten day
before such hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The City Manager and Mayor are authorized to take those
actions necessary to purchase 7537 Girard Avenue for $24,000.
2. The City shall hold a public hearing and second reading
of the ordinance regarding the sale of the land to the HRA on
Monday, April 11, 1994.
3. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of such
hearing in the official newspaper of the City and post notice of
said hearing.
Adopted by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota this
28th day of March 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
,rnomas V. Yeroer, city uierx
7-3
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA (7537 GIRARD AVENUE SOUTH)
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1.
The following described real property located in the City of
Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, is hereby
authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of, and
conveyed by the City as herein provided:
Lot 15, Block 19, "Irwin Shores Addition", Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and having the street address of 7537 Girard
Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota.
Section 2.
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all
action as is required to sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of
and convey the real property described in the foregoing Section
1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the
execution of all documents, purchase agreements, deeds of
conveyance, and 'other instruments connected with such sale,
transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Passed this day of
Richfield City Council.
1994 by the
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P.'Ferber, City Clerk
u
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 104
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
First reading consideration of an ordinance amendment to rezone
the following MR (multiple residence) properties: 1) rezone
6409, 6415, 6421, and 6429 Blaisdell Avenue to R (single family
residence); 2) rezone 6227-29 and 6237 Pleasant Avenue to MR-3
(high density multi-family); 3) rezone 840 West 65th Street to
MR-3; and 4) rezone 920-24-28 Rae Drive to MR-3.
Background:
Staff is reviewing the zoning ordinance for revision and update.
Initial analysis indicates that the MR district is not effective
because its provision are incomplete, outdated and ambiguous.
The MR district has no density limitation and incorporates the
single family uses of the R district as well as the two family,
multi-family and group housing developments.
The MR district was the original and only multi-family district
when Richfield's growth occurred. Later, the MR-1 (two family),
MR-2 (multi-family), and MR-3 (high density multi-family)
districts were created to provide more precise controls for the
expanding variety of multi-family housing. When the MR-1, MR-2,
and MR-3 districts were added, most MR zoned land was rezoned to
fit into that classification system. The intention was for all
MR zoned land to be rezoned but approximately 30 parcels of land
are still zoned MR. These parcels are being evaluated and
presented for reclassification to the most appropriate land use
zone.
The proposed zoning designation for the subject parcels are
consistent with the existing land use.
Recommended Motion:
Approve first reading of an amendment rezoning 6409, 6415, 6421,
and 6429 Blaisdell Avenue from MR to R, and rezoning 6227-29 and
6237 Pleasant Avenue, 840 West 65th Street, and 920-24-28 Rae
Drive from MR to MR-3; and set a second reading and public
hearing for April 25, 1994.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. This rezoning will help to bring the zoning map up to date
with current land use practices and the Comprehensive Plan.
2. An MR zone is no longer an appropriate zoning district in
the City and an update to a more appropriate district is
called for whether or not the text of the zoning ordinance
is changed.
3. If the text of the zoning ordinance is updated to eliminate
the MR district, then it would be apropos to have rezoned
such designated areas before the text change.
6-1
•
4. The proposed R zoning is most appropriate for the existing
single family uses at 6409, 6415, 6421, and 6429 Blaisdell
Avenue, while offering proper regulatory control for present
and future land uses.
5. The proposed MR-3 zoning is most appropriate for the
existing 18 unit apartment buildings at 6227-29 and 6237
Pleasant Avenue. The MR-3 classification allows 18 or more
units. This designation would be consistent with the
existing multiple family use.
6. The proposed MR-3 zoning is most appropriate for the
existing 22 unit apartment building at 840 West 65th Street.
The MR-3 classification allows 18 or more units. This
designation would be consistent with the existing multiple
family use.
7. The proposed MR-3 zoning is most appropriate for the
existing 28 unit apartment building at 920-24-28 Rae Drive.
The MR-3 classification allows 18 or more units. This
designation would be consistent with the existing multiple
family use.
8. on March 22, 1994, the Planning Commission voted unanimously
to recommend approval of the rezoning.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could deny this rezoning at first reading.
2. The City Council could rezone the subject parcels to a
classification which is inconsistent with the existing land
use, however, that would result in the creation of
nonconforming uses.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
First reading is set for March 28, 1994. If approved, a public
hearing and second reading will be held on April 25, 1994.
y submitted,
Jam s D. Prosser
City anaaer
JDP:ds
0
?a
Bill No. 1994-
AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX I
OF THE CITY CODE OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Appendix I which describes the boundaries of the various
zoning districts of the City is hereby amended in the following
respect:
Section 5, Paragraph (12) is amended to read as follows:
(12) That 'area the ee ?- lying - between ?-- t-h??e line - of Blaisdell
Avenue and the east line of Lots 6 through 9 inclusive, Block 9,
Addition,
rearrangement of Nicollet Homes Seeend south line of said addition and the north line of Lot 9, Bleek. 9
of said ••bd v .1Bepealedl.
Section 5, Paragraph (17) is amended to read as follows:
(17) Lots 1 through 8, exeept the east 135 feet thereo"'
Rlee-1 4, -??=eteer1s Additie^/ and T e t 7 Hleek 4, ',.Tiee3le+ V.....e?---?
Addition and that portion -e of 63-d Street north of and
adjaeent to said Lot .fRepealedl.
Section 5, Paragraph (27) is amended to read as follows:
(27) Tracts T n E, Registered T °nei Survey No. 793.
fRepealedl.
Section 5, Paragraph (28) is amended to read as follows:
(28) TraetG, Registered Land Survey Nom: [Repealed].
Section 13, Paragraph (4) is amended to read as follows:
(4) The west 55 feet of Tract B and all of Tract C of
Registered Land Survey No. 675, and all of Tract B of Registered
Land Survey No. 1131.
Section 13, Paragraph (13) is added to read as follows:
(13) Lots 1 through 8, except the east 135 feet thereof,
Block 4, Betcher's Addition, and Lot 2, Block 4, Nicollet Homes
Addition and that portion of vacated 63rd Street north of and
adjacent to said Lot 2.
Section 13, Paragraph (14) is added to read as follows:
0 (14) Tracts D and E, Registered Land Survey No. 793.
(0-3
This amendment constitutes a rezoning of the following
properties: 1) rezone 6409, 6415, 6421, and 6429 Blaisdell
Avenue from MR to R; 2) rezone 6227-29 and 6237 Pleasant Avenue
from MR to MR-3; 3) rezone 840 West 65th Street from MR to MR-3;
and 4) rezone 920-24-28 Rae Drive from MR to MR-3.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this day of , 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
i
0
REZONING PLAN
ui
a
J
J
O
N
J
m
EXISTING LAND USE
64TH ST.
DUPLEX
Os
O
co
SINGLE
FAMILY COMM-L.
N
d'
m
0
N
m
ui
a
ui
Q W
F- p
W N
O J
U CO
Z
EXISTING ZONING
64TH ST.
PROPOSED ZONING
. 64TH ST.
ui
a
W J
Q J
W
W N
J
J J
U co
r.
ui
4
W
J
J
U
Z
65TH ST.
6409, 64159 6421 6429 BLAISDELL AVENUE
® MR
MR-2
PLANNING
C-2 1 r
J,JJJ ZONING
R cwnnuMry ovrapm rd Mp1fblNllt
65TH ST.
65TH ST.
REZONING PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
CROSSTOWN HWY
ui N 18-UNIT W
Q
a APT.
DG Q.
a
Z .
BL ?- z
a
a
Q SIN GLE co to
ui 18-UNIT FAM ILY W
in. M APT. -? a
BLDG.
63RD ST.
62279 29 PLEASANT AVENUE
6237 PLEASANT AVENUE
MR
MR-3 NJ)
R
0
ui
a
00
J
J
a
EXISTING ZONING
CROSSTOWN HWY.
u.i
Q
m
N
J
J
CL
PROPOSED ZONING
CROSSTOWN HWY.
ui
Q
z
a
N
Q
w
J
a
63RD ST.
63RD ST.
REZONING PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
22-UNIT
APT.
?q BLDG
3=
?m I#TWnO
PA
RK
q
COWL. `29-UNIT '
APT. BLDGS.
65
EXISTING ZONING
..... 0q
_. J J J
¦• •J JJJ?JJJJJ
J J J J J J
O ¦ JJJJJJJJJ J JJ
¦• J J J J J
3 J J J J J J J
¦••• J J J J J J
¦¦¦¦ J J J J J J J
0 ••¦•¦ J J J J J J
f • ¦ ¦ ¦¦ ¦ • ¦ JJJJJJJJJJJ
/ ¦ . ¦ • ¦ ¦ ¦ J J J J J
•.•¦•¦ ¦ ¦ / ¦ ¦ JJJJJ
• .•. ¦•¦ ::::no J S
....¦`
women . 6
840 WEST 65TH STREET
J J J 11 J
J J J J J
MR JJJJJJ C-2
J J J J J
ru-N-0-8-01 : MR-3 10 .•.•.• PC-2
N
?R
PROPOSED ZONING
........ It
......... ,
...
. . . . . . . ,9
..
'jjj IPA.
In ¦¦sss¦•¦ •¦ _ JJJJJJJJJJ J %
?. ¦ ? ?• ¦ JJJJJJJ J JJJJJ.
• • • • ¦ • ? • JJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
•¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ • X-66.
someone a R . ....
REZONING PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
TOWN
HOUSES
PARK
6g Ty ST
EXISTING ZONING
R
__= nr
--- uu
=v urr
L-14-
9209
9249 928 RAE DRIVE
® MR PMR
` MR-2 PMR-1
N
:•ati• MR-3 ? R . . lll'?
T
PROPOSED ZONING
R
9?0
-- rurrw
= nmuuumun
-- urrruuuuun
unuu
111141.
rrrrrrrr
se Ty S
s
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 103
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amendment to
regulate driveways, parking areas, and sidewalks in the R (single
family) and R-1 (low density single family) districts; and
adoption of a resolution to amend Appendix D of the Richfield
City Code.
Background:
The zoning ordinance does not adequately address or regulate
parking in the single family districts. Last summer, the Council
adopted a temporary moratorium on the construction of new front
yard parking areas. The moratorium was imposed to protect the
planning process, and to allow adequate time to study residential
parking issues and develop appropriate regulations.
Over the past few years, the City Council and staff have received
complaints about certain residential parking situations. In
extreme cases, entire front yards have been paved or graveled and
used as parking for up to eight cars. The City cannot regulate
these situations if the cars are licensed, operable, and parked
on an established driveway. Many residents have requested that
an ordinance be adopted to regulate residential parking,
especially within the front yard areas.
The attached ordinance would regulate parking setback, surface
treatment, amount of impervious surface, number of parking
spaces, and would also set standards for driveways within the
City boulevard. In addition, the ordinance would require a City
permit for expansion or installation of driveways, parking areas,
and sidewalks.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached ordinance approving an amendment which
regulates driveways, parking areas, and sidewalks in the R
(single family) and R-1 (low density single family) districts;
and adopt the attached resolution which amends Appendix D,
setting the permit fee for expansion or installation of
driveways, parking areas, and sidewalks.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The ordinance limits the amount of impervious surface in
front yard areas, which will help to control the quality and
quantity of storm water run-off into the City storm sewer
system.
2. The ordinance would protect aesthetics and property values of
the City and its neighborhoods.
5 1
3. The Planning and Zoning Division has received inquiries from
individuals who want to pave over their entire front yards
this spring. The ordinance would stop the proliferation of
front yard parking lots.
4. A permit requirement would provide an effective means of
regulating code compliance.
5. If the Council requires a City permit for expansion or
installation of driveways, parking areas and sidewalks, it is
appropriate to set the fee to be charged for the permit and
to include the fee in Appendix D of the City Code. The fee
is the same as for a building permit which has a minimum fee
of $15.00.
6. On January 25, 1994, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance amendment.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Refer the amendment back to the Planning Commission for
further study.
2. The City Council could modify the amendment.
3. The City Council could decide not to adopt the amendment.
4. The City Council could modify the resolution which sets the
permit fee, and raise or lower the fee as it deems
appropriate.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A public hearing and second reading is scheduled at 7 p.m. on
Monday, March 28, 1994. The hearing will be held in the Council
Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of
the hearing was published in the Sun-Current.
Res fully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP:ds
•
5-0q-
• Bill No. 1994-
AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX B
OF THE CITY CODE OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 515 of Appendix B to the Richfield City Code entitled
"Zoning: residence districts" is hereby amended by amending
Section 515.05, Subds. 10, 11, and 12 to read as follows:
515.05. Accessory uses. Subdivision 1. The uses listed in this
subsection are accessory uses in the R district.
Subd. 10. Private driveways, parking areas and sidewalks
provided the following conditions are met:
a) for the purposes of this subdivision, the term "front
yard area" shall mean the area which extends across the entire.
width of the lot, between the front lot line and the principal
buildina;
b) all such driveways, parking
. set back no less than one foot from
parcel, except that upon written rep
Director may reduce or rescind this
shared access agreements or with a
public convenience;
areas, and sidewalks shall be
any lot line abutting another
3uest from the land owner, the
setback requirement for
Einding of necessity and
c) all such driveways, parkina areas, and sidewalks shall be
constructed with concrete, asphalt, concrete pavers, brick set in
compacted sand, or other material approved by the Director;
d) unless the Director authorizes a greater amount for
landscape purposes, the maximum driveway, parking area, and
sidewalk coverage within the front yard area shall comply with
the following table:
Lot Width
50 feet or less:
51-60 feet:
61-70 feet:
71-80 feet:
over 80 feet:
Maximum Coveraae Within
the Front Yard Area
50$
481%
46%
44$
42%
e) within the front yard area, no more than three parking
spaces shall be permitted -- the area between each garage stall
and the street shall count as one parking space;
f) driveways, where located within the boulevard, are
subject to the following requirements:
5-3
(i) they shall not exceed 22 feet in width (curb cut radii
excluded);
(ii) curb cut radii (five feet minimum) shall not encroach
upon the boulevard of abutting properties;
(iii) on corner lots, driveways shall be set back at least
30 feet from an intersection, as measured from the point
where the extended curb lines of the streets intersect;
(iv) only one curb cut shall be permitted from a public
street to an interior lot. A corner lot may have one curb
cut from each public street, provided the driveway setback
requirement in item (iii) above is met; and
(v) upon written request from the land owner, items (i).
(ii), (iii), and (iv) above may be varied by the Director
with a finding of necessity and public convenience.
g) driveways, parking areas, and sidewalks legally existing
on or before December 31, 1993, may continue to exist and to be
repaired and maintained, except that upon full replacement, such
drivewav. Darkina area. or sidewalk shall comply with this
subdivision; and
• h) any expansion or installation of a driveway, parking
area, or sidewalk on a lot shall be subject to a City permit upon
adoption of this subdivision.
Subd. 1211. AnteneaAntennas and towers conforming to section
425 of thisthe city code.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfeild,
Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
C7
,5-4
•
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION 8088
ENTITLED "RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 1994 LICENSE, PERMIT AND
MISCELLANEOUS FEES PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF APPENDIX D OF
THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NO. 7950"
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
Section 2 be amended by adding new paragraph (la) to read as
follows:
TYPE OF PERMIT
OR LICENSE
SECTION
REQUIRING FEE SCHEDULE
(1A) Driveway, Parking Area,
or sidewalk permits
515.05 Based on
Building Permit
fee as listed
above
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994.
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
•
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 102
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and approval of second reading of an
ordinance establishing a one year moratorium on gunshops.
Background:
At a previous Council meeting, staff was instructed to
review ways in which gunshops could either be more regulated
and/or limited within the City. Since that time, a number
of issues related to gunshops have surfaced that require
study.
In addition, it is quite likely that the State Legislature
will be dealing with issues relating to the sale of
firearms. One such issue will be the ability of cities to
recover their costs in processing transfers.
Recommended Motion:
Conduct the public hearing and approve second reading of an
ordinance declaring a one year moratorium on "Gunshop Uses."
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A one year moratorium on new gunshops will allow the
Council and staff time to study the issues.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do nothing. Wait and see if the Legislature provides
any direction. In the meantime, however, additional
gunshops could locate within the City.
2. Reduce the moratorium to something less than one year.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The public hearing and second reading are scheduled for
March 28, 1994.
lly submitted,
Jam s D. Prosser
Cit anaaer
JDP:ds
1]
ORDINANCE NO.
INTERIM ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECT-
ING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THE HEALTH, SAFE-
TY, AND WELFARE OF CITY RESIDENTS; AND REGULAT-
ING AND RESTRICTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF GUNSHOP
USES WITHIN THE CITY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ORDAINS:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. As used in this ordinance, the terra "gunshop uses" means commercial uses
involving the retail sale of firearms.
1..02. Gunshop uses are currently treated as "retail stores and shops," which are
permitted uses in a C-2 general commercial zoning district.
1.03. Gunshop uses present different public health, safety, and welfare concerns
than do other uses also included in the "retail stores and shops" classifica-
tion, such as card shops and grocery stores, and it is unclear whether a new
classification should be adopted for gunshop uses.
1.04. In addition to the proper zoning classification of gunshop uses, there are a
number of significant planning and land use issues pertaining to the
regulation of such uses, including the following:
1. The particular zoning districts in which such uses should be
allowed as either permitted or conditional uses.
2. The concentration and density of such uses in the City and its
neighborhoods.
3. The effect of such uses on other uses in the surrounding area.
1.05. There is a need for a study to be conducted so that the City can adopt a set
of comprehensive plans and land use zoning regulations pertaining to gunshop
uses. Such a study will address the land use and zoning issues, including
those referenced above.
1.06. There is a need for an interim ordinance to be adopted for the purpose of
protecting the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the City and to ensure that the City and its citizens retain the
benefits of the City's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance until such a
study has been completed. There is a need to restrict such uses until such
a study has been completed and any modifications to the City's zoning and
land use regulations are accomplished.
1.07. The City Council has directed that such a study be undertaken
1.08. Minnesota Statutes, section 462.355, subd. 4 (Act) permits the adoption of
interim zoning ordinances during the planning process.
--- -- --- ----- ------ - ------
CJ/(y r . v
Section 2. Planning and Zonin& Study; Moratorium.
2.01. A study is authorized to be conducted by City staff to determine how gunshop
uses should be regulated within the City. The scope of the study should
include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. the particular zoning districts in which such uses should be allowed as
either permitted uses or conditional uses;
b. the density and concentration of such uses;
c. the effect of such uses on other uses in the surrounding area;
2.02. Upon completion of the study, the matter is to be considered by the Planning
Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council.
2.03. A moratorium on the development of gunshops is adopted pending completion
of the study and the adoption of any amendments to the City's zoning
ordinance. No building permit may be issued for such uses or for the
expansion of any existing use during the moratorium period nor may any
rezonings, plattings or replattings, or land divisions or consolidations be
granted by the City for such uses during the moratorium period. The
moratorium period shall expire one year from the effective date of this
ordinance or on such earlier date as may be further adopted by ordinance.
The moratorium period may be extended for a reasonable time by ordinance,
as may be necessary to complete the study and adopt any necessary amend-
ments to the City's zoning ordinance.
Sec. 3. Effective Date.
This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield. City
Charter.
Martin Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
10
3&
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 101
Agenda: March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Award of contract for 1994 removal of diseased trees on private
property.
Background:
In the early 1970's, the City began a shade tree disease program
to assist homeowners in the removal of diseased elm and oak trees
on private property. When the City's Tree Inspector marks a
diseased tree on private property for removal, the homeowner has
three options:
? Removal of the tree by the homeowner.
? Homeowner hires a contractor to perform the work.
? Homeowner authorizes the City's contractor to perform the
work.
If the City's contractor performs the tree removal, the homeowner
has the option to pay the removal costs immediately, or have the
cost assessed to the property taxes over a three year period.
The City's bidding process for removal of diseased trees on
. private property was revised and streamlined in 1985. This year,
in an effort to attract more bidders, staff divided the City into
two districts. Bidders were encouraged to bid on one or both
districts.
This year, specifications for this work were sent to six tree
removal companies in the metropolitan area. The companies were
asked to bid a per-inch cost, based on the actual number and
sizes of trees removed in 1993. Two bids were received and
opened on March 3, 1994 with the following results:
East District West District Total
Ceres Tree Company $49,332 $59,432 $108,764
Precision Landscape & Tree, Inc. $56,613 $69,215 $125,828
The 1993 bid for tree removal was $123,553.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the bid minutes/tabulation and award the 1994 contract
for removal of diseased trees on private property in both
districts to Ceres Tree Company in the total estimated amount of
$108,764.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Ceres Tree Company was the lowest responsible bidder for this
work.
2. Ceres Tree Company was the City's contractor in 1993 and has
proven to be reliable.
3G-/
• Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose to reject
readvertise in an attempt to
believes the per-tree prices
homeowners with a reasonable
have the City coordinate the
all bids and direct staff to
receive a lower bid. However, staff
are low enough to provide Richfield
removable cost should they decide to
removal of their diseased tree(s).
Discussion/Decision Mode:
To assure sufficient time to process the necessary paperwork
before the first trees are marked for removal, this item is
scheduled for the City Council agenda of March 28, 1994.
Respec y submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
Attachment
•
40
3&-z
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
March 3, 1994
1:00 A.M.
Diseased Tree Removal on Private Property
Bid No. 94-3
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the
Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk,
who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive,
open and read aloud, bids for diseased tree removal on private
property, bid no. 94-3, as advertised in the official newspaper
on February 16, 1994.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
Byron Wallace, Community Development Director
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
Ray Wroblewski, Central Garage Clerk Typist
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
VENDOR ; BID ; TOTAL
SECURITY ,
Ceres St. Paul ; 5% Bid Bond ;East $49,332.00 ;
432.00 ;
;West $59
,
Precision Tree Company ; 5% Bid Bond ;East $56,613.00 ;
Little Canada ; ;West $69,215.00 ;
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and
considered at the March 28, 1994 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
,?F
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.100
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of purchase of aerial photographs of Richfield with
one foot contours.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. A
contract for services does not require a formal bidding process.
Contour maps are needed for storm drainage planning and more
accurate analysis and design of drainage improvements. After
discussing the options with several consultants, the overall
least expensive product that meets our needs is conventional
aerial photographs produced at a scale of 1" = 100' (same scale
as County produced tax maps) with one foot elevation contours.
The one foot contour option is particularly helpful in
Richfield's 509 Surface Water Management Plan and on proposed
developments. Greater use of aerial photographs with one foot
i contours will save money by providing information without field
survey costs.
This option will cost $52,940 and includes $9,200 in survey
ground control. This specialized survey work requires expertise
and instrumentation not available on City staff. The storm sewer
budget will be revised to include an increase in $12,940 in storm
sewer capital funds for this line item.
The budget originally included $40,000 for two tool contour maps.
Staff recommends that the increased accuracy of one foot contour
maps is well worth the increase of $12,940.
Option two would be aerial photographs with two feet contours.
Two foot contours are initially less expensive; however, survey
costs for future storm sewer and grading projects within
Richfield would increase.
Three aerial survey vendors provided quotations for one and two
foot elevation aerial photographs as follows:
One Foot Two Foot
Contours Total Contours Total
Horizons $ 52,940 $40,910
Mark Hurd 62,100 34,900
Martinez 103,730 42,429
Yi
Recommended Motion:
Approve a 1994 purchase order to Horizons in the amount of
$52,940 for aerial photographs with one foot elevation contours.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Current aerial photographs are needed by several City
divisions.
2. Purchase of one foot elevation contours provide greater use
of aerial photography than two foot contours.
3. The storm sewer budget will be revised to provide funding.
Alternative Recommendation:
Direct staff to order the two foot elevation contours at a cost
of $34,900 or to postpone the aerial photographs at this time;
however, the cost to produce Richfield's 509 plan would increase
significantly.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A decision at the March 28, 1994 Council meeting will allow the
aerial photos to be taken during the prime flying time in April.
Resn fumy submitted,
Jam4s P. Prosser
Cit anaaer
JDP:ds
I-]
3r--
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 99
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Replacement of 911 equipment and two 20 key telephones for the
Public Safety Communications Center.
Background:
In 1980, the Public Safety Department installed enhanced
emergency 911 equipment. The equipment is leased from US West
Communications at a rate of $979 per month. The equipment is now
14 years old and new replacement parts are no longer available.
US West has used replacement parts warehoused from similar units
that have been removed from other customers, but when these parts
are gone, no others will be available.
The two main phone sets used in the dispatch center are old,
manual sets that are owned by the City. US West maintains the
phone lines but will not carry a service agreement on these
phones; they are maintained by a third party maintenance service.
There are frequent problems with these phones, and the problem
may be with the phone itself or the phone lines. Having two
maintenance services on one system often leads to confusion and
delays in repairs.
Due to new tariff rates from US West, it
obtain new state of the art 911 equipment
for $31.50 less than the current monthly
a one time installation cost of $5,540.
is now possible to
and two new phone sets
rate. However, there is
Recommended Motion:
Approve the payment of $5,540 for the installation of the new 911
equipment and telephones leased from US West Communications.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The current 911 equipment is 14 years old and replacement
parts available but are used and in limited supply.
2. The lease costs of the new 911 equipment plus the new phone
sets is less than the current rate for the 911 equipment
alone.
3. The funds are available in Public Safety Communications Fund.
4. The 911 phone system is our citizens' link to emergency
services provided by Public Safety. It is important that
this system remains reliable.
Alternative Recommendation:
Keep the current system and hope that when repairs are needed,
parts will be available.
3E?--)
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Installation of the new system has tentatively been scheduled for
mid-April. Approval of the installation charges must be
completed by then.
Respectfully submitted,
City
JDP:cak
•
. Prosser
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 98
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Approval of a grant application to the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) for pedestrian and bicycle enhancement
project and authorization for the Mayor to send letter of support
to Bloomington for a 79th Street bikeway.
Background:
The Metropolitan Council is requesting proposals for Federal
Surface Transportation Funds under Title l of the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. The
federal funds provide grant assistance for a variety of
activities including the provision of facilities for pedestrians
and bicycles. The funding for selected projects is a maximum of
80% by federal funds and a minimum of 20% local match (non-
federal funds).
Richfield was not successful in the initial funding cycle last
year. This is a resubmission of the previous proposal.
Richfield's proposal is for a bicycle trail along 76th Street to
be built in 1996 after 77th Street is widened from I-35W to Cedar
. Avenue. A bicycle trail will occupy the space left when 76th
Street is reduced in width. The bike trail will begin at Girard
Avenue and continue to 12th Avenue where it will turn south to
the 12th Avenue bridge. Seventy-Sixth Street will be narrowed to
two lanes. There are plans to extend the 76th Street bikeway from
12th Avenue to Cedar Avenue when the tunnel under Trunk Highway
77 is completed so bicyclists will have an alternate route to
reach the Mall of America. Most of the long-range trips on 76th
Street will have been shifted to the new 77th Street. The 76th
Street bikeway is part of the Master Park Plan and would be most
complementary to the 77th Street Project.
The City of Bloomington is proposing a similar bikeway using the
same funding source for a bikeway along 79th Street from Penn
Avenue to 34th Avenue. Richfield's bikeway will tie into this
one to permit cyclists to reach the Mall of America. Bloomington
has asked for a letter of support from Richfield and we have
asked Bloomington for one in support of our proposal. Evidence
of cooperation between communities bolsters an application's
chances to receive funds.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the grant application to the MnDOT for pedestrian/bicycle
trails along 76th Street and authorize the Mayor to send a letter
in support of the City of Bloomington's proposal for a 79th
Street bikeway.
•
3D-1
Basis for Recommendation:
The grant assistance would provide a desirable amenity for the
community as outlined in the Master Park Plan.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not apply for a grant at this time.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The application is due to the Metro Council on April 1, 1994.
Staff is asking for approval at the March 28, 1994 Council
meeting in order to meet this deadline.
Respectfu y submitted,
rosser
James Waager
City JDP:cak
•
El
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 97
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution establishing just compensation and
authorizing purchase of a partial fee taking and temporary
easements at 7701 Portland Avenue; 77th Street Project.
Background:
The property at 7701 Portland Avenue (Parcel #53A) will not be
purchased for the 77th Street Project. However, it will be
necessary to purchase a portion of the property at the corner to
properly install a new sidewalk resulting from the new right-of-
way. The portion to be taken for the new sidewalk will
approximate a 20 x 20 foot triangular section. The business sign
located within this area will be relocated. Two temporary
easements will also be required at two different locations on the
property to accommodate construction. One of the easements will
accommodate traffic detoured from Portland Avenue.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which establishes just compensation
for the partial fee taking (including the sign) and temporary
easements as follows:
• Parcel Partial Temporary
Number Fee Taking Easement Total
53A $3,760 $3,700 $7,460
and authorizes purchase of the partial fee taking sign and
temporary easements.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. MnDOT and FHWA procedures were followed including
notification to the owner.
2. Project funds are available.
Alternative Recommendation:
Delay action.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval will make it possible for this process to continue in a
timely manner and help meet project deadlines.
Resp t ully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
3c-/
0 RESOLUTION NO.
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION
AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PARTIAL FEE TAKING AND
TEMPORARY EASEMENTS AT 7701 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH;
77TH STREET PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota desires to
purchase certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance
of the 77th Street project (Project) heretofore adopted by
the City of Richfield (City) said real property being
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted an official map for
improvements to 77th Street; and
WHEREAS, the improvements to 77th Street necessitate the
purchase of real property; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to
acquire real property within its jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) are funding this
project; and
WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals of the subject
property to be made by qualified independent professional
real estate appraisers to determine fair market value; and
WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the
appraisal report as to conformity with appraisal standards
and has certified same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. That just compensation is determined to be $1,000 for
the partial fee taking, $2,760 for the sign and $3,700
for the temporary easements, for a total of $7,460.
2. That the City Manager is authorized and directed to
commence negotiations for the purchase of said real
property.
3. That the City Manager and Mayor are authorized to
execute appropriate agreements.
4. That the City Manager is hereby directed to notify, in
writing, the owners of subject property as soon as
?C-)-
possible that the City intends to acquire a partial fee
taking and temporary easements in his property and establish
eligibility for relocation benefits if any.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
11
0
EXHIBIT A
Orr
schelen 300 Park Place Center. 612-595-5775
Mayeron: 5775 Wayzata Boulevard 1-800-753-5775
Associates, Inc. Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228 FAX 595-5774
PARCEL NO.: 53A
PID NO.: 35-028-24-33-0006
OWNER: PDQ Food Stores, Inc.
3C-3
Description of Parcel:
That part of the north 132.50 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, which lies west of the east 405.00 feet thereof. Subject to the rights of the
public for 77th Street East and for County State Aid Highway No. 35, also known as
Portland Avenue South.
Description of Taking:
Fee Taking for Right of Way
That part of the above described parcel which lies southerly of the north 30.00 feet,
easterly of the west 33.00 feet and northwesterly of the following described "Line A":
Beginning at a point 30.00 feet south of the north line of said parcel and
• 48.00 feet east of the west line thereof; thence southwesterly to a point that
is 45.00 feet south of the north line of said parcel and 33.00 feet east of the
west line thereof and said "Line A" there terminating.
A temporary easement for roadway and utility construction purposes over, under and
across the above described parcel which lies southerly of the north 30.00 feet, easterly of
the west 33.00-feet, southeasterly of the above described "Line A" and northwesterly of
the following described "Line B".
Beginning at a point 30.00 feet south of the north line of said parcel and
103.00 feet east of the west line thereof; thence southwesterly -to a point
that is 100.00 feet south of the north line of said parcel and 33.00 feet east
of the west line thereof and said "Line B" there terminating.
E
Together with a temporary easement for roadway and utility construction purposes over,
under and across the south 30.00 feet of the north 60.00 feet of the east 50.00 feet of the
above described parcel.
Said temporary easements expire December 31, 1994.
EASEDEA2.XLS
H:\493400\SURV\MISC\53A
NOTE: No boundary survey work was performed as to the precise
location of this tract
I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed
d surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
D. Edward Mmes, LS. l ic. No. 11394 Date
Engineers • Architects • Planners • Surveyors
H
w ?-
W
LL W
J
a
+1 +I +I
F- F- t-
tL Iz LL
C3 O O
N N N
t0 n n
Q' - M
N N
N N
..... .......4
0
z
U
cr- F zz
w z_
G
o
00
w oA
a
102
a a .
w,
? w
a
?a
? c
W °
JJ N
1J - _-- - - ----
'm
n ' -
3 W
Z
L N ?
O
Q m
N
I
+I . I
II II II ? a '
? \
d Lj- 3 W
'
w N z /
d to W J
d z_
w C? 1` J i
1 Z M m
d 3 ao .
'
\ Z M ;....... Z p ......... _.....
d d II ,' i
I-
3 0
O w w w
Z ry ...._.
:::::........?
02 02 ;
b
,
i
LO
z
N
J W
2 1
w O
H
N J H
z
y
cc a
¢ Vyi N m N J Z
m I
~
\ J
I
3 i
? a
3 W
w Z
z J
O u z - W LL
i Zm<>>Cw oo=u¢ Wo b?l MS
W J i F 0 °O l7 w W M<
W W f• F- < O N N a• K O< Z
W arc z¢<= o o s?z E< o
J z : y a
a d N. • 1 a Z V H 0
w m
N •. w
E z I l a
,0L
M I
M I
I
- bl MS - bl MS 3NI-1 •M--l
' 3AV GNIV lidOd
S
0
0?'V Z?e
ov?7fe °•t?
5 a
19
O
o
z
E ?
r•1
o c
v
Q
o
Y
'36
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.96
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Request for an off-street parking permit to accommodate
building expansion and parking lot expansion at St. Nicholas
Church, 7227 Penn Avenue.
Background:
St. Nicholas Church, 7227 Penn Avenue, is proposing to
construct a 2,200 s.f. one-story addition with basement, and
expand their parking lot to add 23 parking stalls. The plans
meet all City requirements.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the request for an off-street parking permit with the
following stipulations:
1. That Council approval be contingent on the marking of
handicapped stalls with signage and include the
provision of "up to $200 fine for violation."
2. That City and County permits be obtained for driveway,
curb and gutter construction on Penn Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The existing building has 6,570 s.f. and 36 parking
stalls. The added parking stalls are adequate to handle
the additional building space. The use of the building
will not change.
2. Site changes include removal of an existing curb cut on
Penn Avenue at the north end of the property and
construction of two new driveways on Penn Avenue. This
will provide better access and circulation to the
existing parking south of the building and the proposed
new parking on the north.
3. The City Planner has reviewed and approved landscaping
plans which will visually enhance the site and maintain
the character of the neighboring residential area.
4. The City Engineer has approved the on-site storm
drainage and the soil erosion protection during
construction.
5. The proposal meets City Code requirements and provides
for adequate parking and traffic circulation.
0
3.8-/
Alternative Recommendation:
Deny the off-street parking permit on the basis it does not
meet the required parking standards.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Consideration of this item is scheduled on the consent calendar
of the March 28, 1994 City Council meeting.
Respe t lly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
0
5Q_1
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 95
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase with donated funds of City sign and message board for
City Hall in the amount of $10,065.
Background:
The City has been seeking an outdoor sign and message board to be
placed in front of City Hall on Portland Avenue for a number of
years. The sign would be of twofold benefit to the City and
residents. In addition to providing an easily seen reference for
City Hall, short messages of importance to residents could also
be displayed. The messages could be changed as needed.
The City began seeking donations to defray the cost of the sign
in 1992 and has now received adequate funding to pay for the cost
of the sign and its installation. The donations for the sign
were provided by the Richfield Tourism Board ($7500) and the VFW
($5000). Without their assistance, the construction of the sign
would not be possible.
Originally, the city was planning to erect an illuminated
monument type of sign with an electronic message board contained
within. However, after seeking quotations for the construction
of such a.sign, the cost was prohibitive at this time. Instead,
staff is recommending an illuminated double-faced monument sign
with a Plexiglas cabinet containing a reader board.
The sign will be mounted on a brick base 30 inches tall, 13 feet
wide and 20 inches deep and will be constructed of aluminum. It
will resemble the Richfield logo. The reader board will feature
three rows of six inch changeable copy letters. This sign could
readily be converted to an electronic message board in the future
if additional funds became available.
A front elevation of the proposed sign is attached to this
Council Letter.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the purchase of the City sign and message board for a
total cost of $10,065 plus the cost of permits and primary
electrical connection.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A City identification sign and message board at City Hall
would be helpful to residents and others who have dealings
with the City of Richfield.
2. Donated funds are available to pay for the cost of the sign
and its installation.
3. No City funds are being used for this purchase.
3 A- cq;' --
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could fail to approve the purchase.
However, the funds donated for the sign are to be used for
that purpose only.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
It is requested that this purchase over $5,000 be approved at the
March 28, 1994 City Council meeting so that the work on the sign
may begin as soon as possible.
y submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP:cak
RECEIVED FEB 1 5 1994
,??q-3 .
February 14, 1994
TO: City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423-2599
Lawrence
s r e s s ss a s s s s w as w r s s s s m: s s m s ®a a m s s s s a m m s s m s a s s m m s s a m s mm seta a a s s as as ss s-
Lawrence Sign, Inc. hereinafter referred to as Company, proposes to furnish for the
above named customer, hereinafter referred to as CUSTOMER; the items described
below, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein.
Furnish and install one 30 tall x 13' wide x 20" deep brick base for
sign. Brick is similar to brick on building. Ton of base will have a
stone cap.
Furnish and install one double faced, illuminated monument sign per
Lawrence Drawing #94R24TQ.PLT. Faces and cabinet are aluminum, copy
is routed and backed with Plexiglas. Cabinet and faces are primed and
painted with acrylic enamels. The reader board section has three rows
of track for 6" changeable copy letters. Reader beard has hinged,
locking, clear Lexan covers. Lighting is horizontally positioned high
output fluorescent lamps. Included is one 300 font of 6° letters and
storage cabinet.
TOTAL PRICE: $10,065.00 + Permit
TERMS: $5,032.50 Down payment, balance due upon completion.
THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCLUDE: The cost of permits or primary
electrical connection.
Ted K k
Salesman
The contract, with all conditions as noted, is herewith accepted by
both parties.
CUSTOMER
By
La
By
Ti
Date Date February 14. 1994
- 945 PIERCE BUTLER ROUTE A ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55104 A 612.488.6711 A FAX 612.488.6715
Return original and one cop}.
3A-q
m
r
O
r
1
0
LL
0
a
a
0
,v
LLg
0l
10
W
a
w
0
m
W
Q
m
r
14
0.
'
F
H
m m'
0
W
0 ;
0 z
F 0
W
Z
0 LL
IX -,
LL 13
Nr
m
r
3
W
S
a
0
V
LL
0
a
a
0
.v
oI
a
H
° H
W
a
W
m
m
0
W
z?
0?
a0
W
0 a
11 -%
LL 0
IaI
?1
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 94
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Approval of time and events schedule for the proposed CSM
project, Phase I.
Background:
Attached are two schedules. One schedule is organized on a
calendar basis, the other schedule is organized according to
major activities. The events in both schedules are the same.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the schedules with staff being authorized to make
adjustments as necessary.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is necessary to follow the schedules to comply with the
Contract for Private Development.
2. If the schedule is maintained, it appears possible that the
needs of CSM for a July Phase I start followed by a November
opening of Phase I will be met.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay discussion of the schedule.
2. Suggest modifications to the schedule.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The schedules have a significant impact on the processing of the
CSM proposal and Phase I construction start and opening.
submitted,
Jam s Prosser
Cit anaaer
JDP:ds
Preliminary
Time and Events
CSM Proposal
ILN
By Date
CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and
Final Development Plan Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16
Development Agreement to HRA for review. 3/21
Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for review 3/21
Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take HRA for review. 3/21
Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of impacts, process
etc. to HRA for review. 3/21
Review request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in
is conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA resolution
approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21
Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing on
Redevelopment Plan Modification scheduled for 4/25 (30 days
between notice and hearing required). 3/22
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/22
Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 regarding
Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 3/22
ARC meeting with presentation of concept proposal statement PC-2
Plan and Final Development Plan by CSM and review by technical staff. 3/23
By Date
Page 2
Development Agreement to HRA for action. 3/28
Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for approval subject
to Planning Commission findings 3/28
Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take for HRA for action. 3/28
Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of
impacts, process etc. to HRA for action. (Incorporated into HRA
resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/28
Request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in
conformance with Comprehensive Plan 3/28
City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/28
Fiscal disparities contribution shift report/analysis of impacts, process
for City Council action. 3/28
City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas
and give first reading to ordinance. 3/28
City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1 and
Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing on Redevelopment
Plan Modification. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing on sale of property; portion
of Cloverleaf site for Church and Phase 1. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing on
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/29
By Date
2
Page 3
. Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan for Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading. 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning. 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan 3/29
Notice of Planning Commission hearing on Comprehensive Plan
Amendment published. 3/30
Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1. 4/1
is Notice regarding City Council hearing on Redevelopment Plan
modification published. 4/6
Publication of hearing notice on HRA sale of property; portion of
Cloverleaf site and Phase 1. 4/6
Notice of City Council hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment
published. 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on Conditional Use Permit/
Final Development Plan. 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on Rezoning. 4/6
Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional
Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 4/6
By Date
3
Page 4
• Planning Commission findings the Redevelopment Plan Modification
conforms with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission finding that sale of property by HRA is
in conformance with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. 4/12
Public hearing by Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan
Amendment; special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2;
special meeting. 4/12
Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit/Final
Development Plan, Phase 1. 4/12
HRA hearing on sale of property; portion of Cloverleaf site and Phase 1. 4/18
Public hearing by City Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment;
special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing and second reading regarding rezoning;
special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing Conditional Use Permit/Final Development
Plan special meeting. 4/18
City Council public hearing Redevelopment Plan Modification. 4/25
Rezoning published. 4/27
Rezoning effective. 5/27
Title and possession through condemnation quick take, Phase 1. 7/1
By Date
4
Preliminary
Time and Events
CSM Proposal
ILN
By Activities
Development Agreement
Defines roles/responsibilities of BRA/CSM. A significant item is the provision for tax increment
"pay as you go" assistance.
To HRA for review 3/21
To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28
Condemnation
Title to property obtained by court order if negotiations are not successful. Quick take provides
title in about 90 days.
Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 Quick take to BRA for review 3/21
To BRA for action; special meeting 3/28
Shops at Lyndale Phase 2 Condemnation without quick take No Date
to HRA for action
Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1 4/1
Title and possession through quick take, Phase 1 7/1
Title and possession without quick take, Phase 2 No Date
• By Activities
1
Page 2
0
•
Fiscal disparities contribution shift
Special legislation makes it possible for the City to elect to pay the fiscal
disparities contribution from outside the district even though the initial
choice was to pay from within the district.
Report/analysis of impacts, process etc. to HRA for review 3/21
To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28
Report same to City Council for action 3/28
Redevelopment Plan Modification
The text needs to reflect CSM proposal. Currently it reflects the Larson proposal from 1989.
Property to be acquired is properly identified however.
To HRA for review
3/21
To HRA for approval subject to Planning Commission findings;
special meeting 3/28
Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing
scheduled for 4/25 (30 days between notice and hearing required). 3/22
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing 3/29
Notice regarding City Council hearing published
4/6
Planning Commission findings the modification conforms with
Comprehensive Plan; special meeting 4/12
By Activities
2
Page 3
City Council public hearing 4/25
Sale in Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
The HRA must sell property only after a public hearing on the sale. Prior to the hearing
the Planning Commission is asked to find that the sale/proposed use is in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan. The existing Emerson. Church site is designated by the Comprehensive Plan
"Institutional" and must be amended to "Freeway Strip".
HRA review request that Planning Commission find sale in
conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA
resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21
To HRA for approval; special meeting 3/28
Planning Commission finding that sale is in conformance;
special meeting 4/12
0 HRA Public hearing on Sale of Property
Public hearing would address sale of a portion of Cloverleaf site
for Church and Phase 1.
Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing 3/29
Publication of hearing notice 4/6
Hearing 4/18
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Amend plan to change existing church site designation from "Institutional" to "Freeway Strip".
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing 3/22
By Activities
3
Page 4
City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing 3/28
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing 3/29
Notice of Planning Commission hearing published 3/30
Public hearing by Planning Commission; special meeting 4/12
Notice of City Council hearing published 4/6
Public hearing by City Council; special meeting 4/18
Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit (CUP)/Final Development Plan (FDP)
Site is currently zoned C3. FAR not sufficient thus rezone to PC-2.
CUP is also required as is approval of FDP.
CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and FDP
Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16
Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 3/22
ARC meeting with presentation of above by CSM and review
by technical staff 3/23
City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas
and give first reading to ordinance 3/28
0
By Activities
4
Page 5
City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1
and Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28
0
Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 3/29
Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning 3/29
Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP 3/29
Notice published City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6
Notice published City Council hearing on rezoning 4/6
Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6
Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2;
special meeting 4/12
Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP Phase 1; special meeting 4/12
City Council public hearing and second reading regarding of rezoning;
special meeting 4/18
City Council public hearing CUP/FDP; special meeting 4/18
Rezoning published 4/27
Rezoning effective 5/27
By Activities
5
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 93
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of scheduling Special City Council meeting for 7:00
p.m., Monday, April 18, 1994 for the purpose of considering the
following:
1.' Planned Unit Development plan and second reading to rezone
Phase I and Phase II of the CSM proposal;
2. Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan for Phase I of
the CSM proposal; and
3. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map with respect to the
CSM proposal.
Background:
The CSM proposal for Shops at Lyndale is in process. In order to
keep the development schedule on track, it is necessary to hold
this special meeting.
Recommended Motion:
Schedule a Special City Council meeting for 7 p.m., Monday April
18, 1994, in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Because timing of the process is critical, Council is being
asked to hold a special meeting.
2. Consideration and approval of the project on April 18, 1994
would allow publication of the rezoning ordinance on April
27, 1994.
Alternative Recommendation:
Schedule the Special Council meeting for a date other than
Monday, April 18, 1994. However, an earlier meeting date may not
provide sufficient time for the Planning Commission to review
relevant issues, and a later meeting date may detrimentally delay
the process.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council is asked to determine the date and time of a Special
Council meeting so sufficient notice of the meeting may be given.
y submitted,
Jam s . Prosser
• Cit anager
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 92
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan and first
reading of an ordinance rezoning land from C-3 (high density
commercial) to PC-2 (planned general commercial) for the CSM
proposal.
Background:
CSM is requesting City approval of a redevelopment project called
Shops at Lyndale. This proposal consists of razing all the
existing buildings in the site area and constructing 231,000
square feet of retail space in the following two phases:
? Phase I - Phase I would include a three anchor building with
114,484 square feet. Anchor A would be a 47,000 square foot
Best Buy, Anchor B would be a 42,000 square foot Sport- Mart,
and Anchor C would be a 25,000 square foot Comp-USA. Phase I
would provide 501 parking spaces, which is above the City
requirement of 460 spaces for a development of this size. If
the project is approved, demolition and construction would
begin this summer, with completion anticipated in time to open
by the end of November.
? Phase II - Phase II would be divided into two stages to
• accommodate relocation of existing businesses into the in-line
shops. Stage one would include 20,475 square feet of in-line
retail space. Stage one would also provide a 6,000 square foot
detached restaurant. Stage two would include a three anchor
building with 85,000 square feet to be attached to the in-line
shops. Stage two would also include a 5,000 square foot retail
pad site on the east side of the site. Phase I and II combined
would provide 1,155 parking spaces, which is above the City
requirement of 924 spaces for a development of this size.
Phase II development is tentatively anticipated to start in the
spring of 1995, with completion in the fall of 1995.
CSM selected a retail use of this site because of its exposure to
I-494 and its access. Several tenants have already been secured
for the proposed development. The proposal would offer
complimentary and supportive land use to the future office use
proposed for the Cloverleaf site.
The building would be generally situated along the north side of
the site, with the major parking areas to the south. Most tenant
signage would be directed to I-494. The building exterior would
use a combination of brick, concrete decorative block, Dryvit (a
stucco-like finish) and a standing seam metal roof.
The main entrance to the project would be from 77th Street. This
entrance drive has been designed to provide a wide visual break
between the two main buildings. Front facades and signage would
face this entrance drive to define the entrance. A monument sign
would also be located at this entrance.
The rear of the building would be situated along 77th Street.
Landscaping and berming would be provided to buffer the rear
building walls from 77th Street, and to maintain the parkway
character intended for 77th Street. The rear wall of the
buildings would be staggered to provide variations and reduce the
mass, and to minimize the view of the loading docks.
•
The City Council would initiate the rezoning of land to a planned
unit development.
The PUD plan and rezoning would apply to both phases of the
proposal. Final development plans for Phase I would be
considered separately next month if the PUD plan and rezoning are
approved.
Recommended Motion:
Approve first reading of the attached ordinance; refer the matter
to the Planning Commission for their recommendation; and set a
second reading and public hearing for April 18, 1994.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The proposed PUD plan would be consistent with the ILN
Redevelopment Plan and Comprehensive Plan if modified as
proposed.
2. The PC-2 classification is appropriate for the proposed
retail development.
3. The proposed PUD plan provides a workable project for the
ILN, given the site area constraints.
4. Several developers have stated that it would be difficult to
redevelop the Cloverleaf site until this site is
redeveloped. Approval of this project may lead to other new
development along I-494.
Alternative Recommendation:
Deny this PUD plan and rezoning at first reading.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
First reading is set for March
hearing and second reading will
28, 1994. If approved, a public
be scheduled on April 18, 1994.
Res lly submitted,
Jame. Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
r?
U
Bill No. 1994-
AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX I
OF THE CITY CODE OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Appendix I which describes the boundaries of the various
zoning districts of the City is hereby amended in the following
respect:
Section 4, Paragraph (1) is amended to read as follows:
(1) That area lying between I-494 and the original center
line of 77th Street and its westerly extension to the easterly
right-of-way line of I-35W, and between I-35W and the
Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railroad, except the
following: That area lying between the original center line of
77th street and I-494, and between the center lines of Lyndale
and Emerson Avenues, except Lots 1 through 5 of Block 1. Strand's
Second Addition.
Section 7, Paragraph (6) is added to read as follows:
(6) That area lying between the original center line of 77th
Street and I-494, and between the center lines of Lyndale and
Emerson Avenues, except Lots 1 through 5 of Block 1, Strand's
Second Addition.
This amendment constitutes a rezoning from C-3 to PC-2, of
the following described land: That land bounded by Emerson
Avenue on the west, 77th Street on the north, Lyndale Avenue on
the east, and the I-494 frontage road (Market Drive) on the
south, except for the parcel located at 7700 Lyndale Avenue
(Conoco).
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this day of , 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
. _..l
i L............
CD
HJMS'3AV 3WOAfn
O
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
C;
i
J ?
9
? W
Q Z
? U
IL
O
S
W
S
m
2
I;E
z
W
i
o ? g
VI
Z
w
a
0
w
O
!2 a gQo N
ZN 4? _ N.
a sr8
3o k$ p.
wa Av
a yq
o •«
a <mu
x rcrc
M
5.6; V;0 0 0.:]
a.a.g
z
6
e?
C
CL
0
IL
I
z
d
W
F-
FD
4
0
U
1
0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.91
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a resolution directing the Planning Commission
to review and consider an amendment to the Comprehensive
Development Plan Map, with respect to the CSM proposal and
relocation of the Emerson Avenue Congregational Church.
Background:
The Comprehensive Development Plan Map currently designates the
church site at 7701 Emerson Avenue as "institutional," which
allows for governmental, school and church uses. CSM is
proposing to acquire the church site for redevelopment of Shops
at Lyndale, a retail power center. If the CSM project is
approved, the Comprehensive Plan Map should be amended to reflect
the proposed change in land use and designate such area as
"freeway strip."
In addition, the CSM project proposes to relocate the Emerson
Avenue Church to the northerly portion of the Cloverleaf site.
The entire Cloverleaf site is currently designated as "freeway
strip," which allows for hotel, dining, retail, wholesale,
office, and multi-family uses. If the church is relocated, the
• Comprehensive Plan Map should also be amended to allow church use
in the area of the Cloverleaf site where the church would be
located.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution directing the Planning Commission
to review and consider an amendment to the Comprehensive
Development Plan Map.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The amendment would facilitate the CSM redevelopment
proposal for the ILN redevelopment district.
2. The proposed land use designations are most appropriate for
the proposed land uses.
3. The proposed land use designations would not conflict with
the overall guide plan for the City, the revised
Comprehensive Plan which is currently being developed by the
Steering Committee, or zoning regulations.
4. It is appropriate for the Planning Commission to review and
make recommendations on amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could decide not to adopt the resolution.
2. The City Council could defer consideration of this item until
a later meeting.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Consideration of this item is scheduled for the March 28, 1994
City Council meeting. Notice of this consideration is not
required.
ly submitted,
Jamegf. Prosser
City(( pager
JDP:ds
0
0
• RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT
TO THE RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND
REFERRING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, a redevelopment proposal has been submitted by CSM
Corporation for land within the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet (ILN)
Redevelopment District; and
WHEREAS, such redevelopment proposal consists of mixed
retail use of land; and
WHEREAS, such redevelopment proposal would require the
relocation of the Emerson Avenue Congregational Church from its
existing site at 7701 Emerson Avenue to the northern portion of
the Cloverleaf site; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Map currently designates the
entire Cloverleaf site as "freeway strip", which allows for
hotel, dining, retail, wholesale, office, and multi-family uses;
and
• WHEREAS, if the CSM redevelopment proposal is approved, and
the church is relocated to the northern portion of the Cloverleaf
site, it is appropriate to redesignate the land at 7701 Emerson
Avenue to "freeway strip", and to redesignate the new church
location (northern portion of the Cloverleaf site) to
"institutional," thereby maintaining conformance with the
Comprehensive Development Plan Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Planning Commission is directed to review and consider an
amendment to the Richfield Comprehensive Plan that would achieve
the following:
a. Redesignate the parcel at 7701 Emerson Avenue from
"institutional" to "freeway strip" on the Comprehensive
Development Plan Map.
b. Redesignate a portion of the Cloverleaf site from
"freeway strip" to "institutional" on the Comprehensive
Development Plan Map.
2. The Planning Commission is requested to conduct a public
hearing upon the proposed amendment to the Richfield
Comprehensive Plan, upon such notice as required by law, and
report its recommendation to the City Council by April 18, 1994.
0 -
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.90
HRA Letter No. 24
Agenda March 28, 1994
Issue Statement:
Conceptual acceptance of Shops at Lyndale redevelopment proposal;
ILN.
Background:
At recent HRA meetings to which the City Council was invited,
representatives of CSM Corporation presented their proposal for
redeveloping that portion of the ILN south of 77th Street and
east of Lyndale Avenue (excepting the Conoco facility). The
project envisions 131,000 square feet of retail space constructed
in two phases. Phase I construction would be initiated in July
with completion in November. Construction of Phase II would
follow in 1995.
Should the HRA and City Council respond favorably to the proposed
concept at the March 28, 1994 meeting, many people will be
impacted and many dollars will be spent in anticipation of
construction. It'is therefore important to ascertain if there
is support to continue on with a lengthy, complicated and costly
process.
Recommended Motion:
To support on a conceptual basis Shops at Lyndale.
• Basis of Recommendation:
1. The redevelopment process is time consuming and expensive.
2. The lives of many people would be impacted including those
businesses which would be located or relocated into the new
facility or elsewhere as well as the developer.
3. People need to plan their future. Uncertainty may well lead
to frustration and anger at the process as would changing
course after a significant period to time.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Reject the development concept.
2. Delay action.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on this item at the March 28, 1994 meeting will facilitate
the planning by all those impacted.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
• City pager/Executive
Director
JDP:Ca,k