10-10-2017 Complete AgendaSPE C IAL JO IN T C IT Y C O U N C IL AN D P L AN N IN G C O MMIS S IO N W O R K S E S S IO N
R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, B AR T H O L O ME W R O O M
O C TO B E R 10, 2017
6:00 P M
C all to order
1.494 C orridor P lan
A djournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at
least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
October 5, 2017
Council Memorandum No. 93 Planning Commission Memorandum No. 10
The Honorable Mayor Members of the Planning Commission
And City of Richfield
Members of the City Council
Subject: 494 Corridor Plan
Council Members and Planning Commissioners:
On July 25, 2017, the City Council, HRA, and Planning Commission heard a proposal
for a new Jaguar / Land Rover dealership in the 494 Corridor. At that meeting, staff
indicated that the proposal would not be in keeping with the mixed -use vision that the
Comprehensive Plan describes for this area, given that there are already a number of
vehicle dealerships in the corridor (Honda, Mitsubishi, BMW Motorcycle, and Audi).
Staff heard from a number of policy makers that they were not certain of the vision for
this area and wanted to think carefully about the future of the corridor before weighing-in
on specific proposals.
This work session will provide staff and policy makers with time to discuss the existing
plan for the 494 Corridor, the potential impact of individual developments on the
Corridor as a whole, and whether or not additional study of this area is desired. Staff
has met with the city’s Comprehensive Plan consultant (SRF Consulting) to discuss the
possibility of adding further study of the 494 Corridor to the current work plan and will
have an update at the work session. The following excerpts from the I-494 Corridor
Land Use Plan are provided for your review, along with the attached copy of the Plan in
its entirety.
I-494 Corridor Land Use Plan excerpts:
- The vision is aimed at helping the community shape future development in the
corridor to be more unique and identifiable, urban in character, pedes trian-
friendly, economically sustainable and ultimately, more livable (pg. 1).
- The corridor is envisioned as an exciting and complete community that is self -
sufficient, with a diversity and range of affordability of housing types, shops,
services, and amenities typical of many traditional “urban villages.” The Richfield
I-494 Corridor offers a tremendous opportunity to create a vibrant and unique
urban village, complete with diverse and affordable housing choices, shops,
services, offices, restaurants, hotels, and park spaces for its residents. (pg. 1-2)
- One of the hallmark strategies of the plan calls for the creation of a unique district
identity that will positively distinguish the Richfield I -494 corridor from its
neighboring areas…It should not look like a collection of standalone, single-use
buildings that take advantage of its strategic location, but a place filled with
variety, vitality and greenery. (pg. 2)
- The mixed use designation supports the idea that these nodes continue to
develop in a manner that integrates several uses in a vertical and horizontal
pattern, integrating ground level retail with upper story residential and/or office
uses. (pg. 2)
- Promoting future mixed-use development in the corridor is critical to creating a
vibrant, urban village because it produces the density, variety and ground level
activity needed to encourage a pedestrian-friendly environment. Moreover,
mixing residential and commercial uses adds vitality to neighborhoods by
extending street activity beyond the typical nine-to-five work day. It’s this activity
that will create a sense of place within the corridor and provide the interest that
will encourage pedestrian use. (pg.4)
Respectfully submitted,
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
SLD:mnp
Email: Assistant City Manager
Department Directors
Asst. Community Development Director
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 1
I-494 /Corridor Land Use Plan
Purpose
The I-494 Corridor Land Use Plan is founded in
the patterns of Richfield’s past, an
understanding of its current conditions and
opportunities, and a look into possible futures.
This plan is more a prescription for desired
change, than an explicit solution; it recognizes
existing assets, qualities and character, and
strives to add new features that can fulfill the
community’s vision for a unique and
economically viable place where people live,
work, play and shop.
This kind of change will not happen overnight
and it will not likely happen on its own. The plan
envisions a pace of incremental change over a
period of twenty years or more. The existing
land use pattern did not appear in the corridor
overnight; rather, it has taken years or even
decades, for those patterns to become evident,
and it will likely take years or decades to
achieve the vision the community has
articulated. To move forward, it is important that
the community commit itself to a sense of
planned evolution. It will also take a
commitment of continued partnerships, without
which the vision may not be realized.
The vision is aimed at helping the community
shape future development in the corridor to be
more unique and identifiable, urban in
character, pedestrian-friendly, economically
sustainable and ultimately, more livable.
Central components of this vision plan include
the definition of a land use plan and
recommendations for future development in the
corridor. Elements in the plan should be used
to frame regulatory tools, such as zoning
overlays or ordinances, to convey what is
desired for public improvements, and to convey
the community’s goals for a desired
development pattern to prospective developers,
investors, property owners, architects and
planners.
Vision
The Richfield/I-494 Corridor is envisioned as an
exciting and complete community that is self-
sufficient, with a diversity and range of
affordability of housing types, shops, services,
and amenities typical of many traditional “urban
villages”. Traditional urban villages have long
enjoyed the benefits of having compact,
walkable centers that offered resident’s places
to live, work, shop, and dine. Often, the identity
of these neighborhoods was established by the
scale, character and set of uses in these
centers. Urban villages typically include
multiple story buildings that are more densely
developed than the surrounding neighborhoods
achieving a greater mix of land uses and
drawing more pedestrian activity.
One of the benefits of mixed-use urban villages
is that they offer new choices in a supportive
environment. This appeals to a sizable
segment of the population that seeks
convenient transportation to work, a pedestrian
friendly environment, and proximity to
entertainment, restaurants and other amenities
provided in these mixed-use villages. Similar
forces attracting young professionals to these
living environments are motivating the empty
nester generation of baby boomers. Studies
indicate that many will pay a premium to live in
a vibrant, attractive mixed-use center.
More densely developed villages also benefit
the region as the compact development patterns
typical of them consolidates growth and
diminishes the effects of sprawl on the metro
area. Walkable neighborhoods and urban
centers are emerging as socially desirable,
environmentally sound, and economically
affordable and profitable. Once segregated
land uses are being connected by strategic
mixed-use projects on infill and redevelopment
sites. Richfield is adjacent to millions of square
feet of regional shopping, jobs, an international
airport, major transportation systems and
nearby natural amenities. The Richfield/I-494
Corridor offers a tremendous opportunity to
create a vibrant and unique urban village,
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 2
complete with diverse and affordable housing
choices, shops, services, offices, restaurants,
hotels, and park spaces for its residents.
Plan Components
Several key strategies are promoted to achieve
the plan’s vision of creating a vibrant urban
village environment, including the following:
District Identity
One of the hallmark strategies of the plan calls
for the creation of a unique district identity that
will positively distinguish the Richfield I-494
corridor from its neighboring areas. Where that
occurs is primarily along the edges of the
corridor and at key nodes, or gateways. The
overall goal of the plan is to create a place that
is identified by its garden theme and mix of
building types, sizes and uses. It should not
look like a collection of stand alone, single-use
buildings that take advantage of its strategic
location, but a place filled with variety, vitality
and greenery. Few places like this exist in the
metro area today.
The Interstate-494 edge should read like a rich
and green landscaped border with a handsome
mix of building types peering above. These
buildings should include upper story residences
and offices, designed to create a sophisticated
skyline with surrounding views for its
inhabitants. The plan proposes a landscaped
buffer along the south border of the corridor to
create the garden edge.
The plan anticipates future reconstruction and
improvements along I-494 as proposed by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MnDOT), suggesting mixed-use nodes as
gateways into and through the district at key
intersections located along the corridor.
Lyndale and Portland Avenues will be the
primary full intersections under the future
MnDOT plans. These intersections are seen as
critical sites and gateway opportunities to
create a sense of place by encouraging a
greater mix of land use and building density that
may attract users from the larger metro region
for shopping, working and/or living needs.
Nicollet and 12th Avenue nodes are also seen
as significant places to create district identity on
more of a community level. Here, mixed-use
buildings with ground level retail serving the
local community, with residences and office
above are envisioned.
Public art can help establish district identity.
Compact Mixed-Use Development Patterns
Mixed-use development refers to the integration
of residential, commercial, retail, employment,
civic, recreational, and educational uses; the
integration is accomplished in such a way as to
reduce traffic congestion and contain urban
sprawl. The mix of land uses in a compact area
not only supports and enhances each element
in the development but also provides residents
a rich and diverse environment in which to live,
work, shop, play and learn.
The recommended land use plan (Exhibits D-7a
– D-7d) for the Richfield/I-494 Corridor identifies
mixed use areas at the primary nodes located at
Lyndale, Nicollet, Portland and 12th Avenues.
The mixed use designation supports the idea
that these nodes continue to develop in a
manner that integrates several uses in a vertical
and horizontal pattern, integrating ground level
retail with upper story residential and/or office
uses.
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 3
Mixed Use – residential over retail service uses.
Mixed Use – office and health club over retail uses.
Mixed Use – residential over retail and entertainment.
Housing Diversity
Housing is the cornerstone of developing new
residential and supporting existing residential
neighborhoods in the corridor. The Richfield
community has expressed a desire for a range
of affordable housing options to meet the
demands of a diverse population and life cycle
changes. There are many benefits to including
a mix of housing types in any future
development scheme in the Richfield/I-494
corridor:
• One, it provides living options for those
of diverse economic and social
backgrounds seeking an urban lifestyle
with easy access to surrounding
amenities such as premier shopping and
working environments and major
transportation systems such as the
adjacent interstate and the Mpls/St. Paul
International Airport;
• Two, a neighborhood that offers a
balanced mix of housing types and
prices mirrors the community. A variety
of building types, plans, and prices
enhances value by broadening the
market for development, increasing
absorption while creating an attractive,
aesthetically diverse neighborhood.
Studies have indicated that the addition
of new housing choices increases the
value of all homes. Many buyers will
pay a premium for urban living options
set in a diverse community. Richfield
meets its housing goals and objectives
when the choices also address lower
income and workforce housing needs;
• Three, multiple generations are
choosing to live near each other.
Instead of being isolated in retirement
communities, many older people prefer
to live in the same area as their children
and grandchildren, creating more
demand for multi-family housing, and;
• Four, offering a diverse mix of housing
types and densities can help achieve
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 4
the regional goal of containing urban
sprawl and providing growth
opportunities within the City of Richfield.
The future land use plan suggests primarily
housing uses located between the mixed use
nodes with some housing mixed into those
nodes located at Nicollet and 12th Avenues.
Many of these sites already contain a mix of
multi-family housing. Future development on
these sites should continue this trend and
incorporate new building technologies and
development patterns that utilize courtyards,
open space connections and structured parking
in order to provide greater densities.
Pedestrian-Friendly Environment
Promoting future mixed-use development in the
corridor is critical to creating a vibrant, urban
village because it produces the density, variety
and ground level activity needed to encourage
a pedestrian-friendly environment. Moreover,
mixing residential and commercial uses adds
vitality to neighborhoods by extending street
activity beyond the typical nine-to-five work day.
It’s this activity that will create a sense of place
within the corridor and provide the interest that
will encourage pedestrian use.
The plan strives to create a pedestrian friendly
environment.
The presence of people should be the litmus
test to determine if the Richfield/I-494 Corridor
has been successfully planned and designed.
This should be a hallmark of the district’s
identity. Shop windows should invite passers
by and restaurants and cafes should spill out
onto the sidewalks with activity. People of all
ages and types should feel comfortable
walking, shopping, living, working and playing in
the district.
To achieve the goal of creating a pedestrian-
friendly environment, the plan promotes the
following strategies:
• Promote the design of buildings that
vertically mix uses and front streets with
entries and interesting shop windows
incorporated into the buildings ground
level to lure pedestrian activity,
particularly at key gateways.
• Avoid blank spaces along sidewalks that
interrupt the level of pedestrian interest
such as surface or structured parking
facilities or service areas. Instead,
promote the continuity of a strong and
interesting building edge along key
sidewalks.
• 77th Street should be seen as a district
edge and a great street to be addressed
with active building uses and a well
designed streetscape.
• Design a streetscape system that
incorporates elements designed to
encourage pedestrian use such as
street trees, wide sidewalks, seating,
pedestrian-scaled light fixtures, bike
parking, signage, trash receptacles, and
transit shelters.
• Provide pedestrian connections within
the corridor, as in the form of a
pedestrian-scaled trail or sidewalk
system internal to development sites or
to destinations off-site by improving the
safety and visibility of crosswalks at key
intersections, particularly at Lyndale,
Nicollet, Portland and 12th Avenues.
Public Spaces
One of the key features of successful
communities is the variety of attractive public
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 5
and pedestrian spaces they contain. Public
spaces consist of parks and open spaces,
plazas, trails and streets. These places provide
the public realm for everyday social life. Future
development activity in the Richfield/I-494
Corridor will create a need to integrate more
open, green space, trails and pedestrian-friendly
streets to enhance the livability for workers,
residents and visitors. Securing the land for
open space and constructing new parks in the
corridor may be difficult due to the relatively
high cost of land values.
The City will need to monitor growth in the
corridor and balance increased density with
open space needs. As growth in the corridor
evolves, sites should be identified for potential
open space acquisition or incentives should be
considered to ensure open space is developed
as a component of increased housing
development.
Alternative Modes of Transportation
“Location, location, location” is still the mantra of
real estate, but as traffic and congestion erode
people’s quality of life, the marketplace is
reevaluating the definition of what is a premium
location. While people still value convenient
access to freeways, airports, and regional trail
systems, more and more, people are looking to
live in places where job opportunities, shops
and services are within easy walking distance.
Walkability is enhanced by wide sidewalks,
convenient and safe pedestrian crossings, and
pedestrian connections between
neighborhoods. When such an environment is
layered with transit options, livability is further
enhanced because people are presented with
additional choices for mobility. The most
successful communities of the future will be
those that understand the importance of mobility
choices and the choices that resident’s are
willing to make to recapture their commuting
time.
77th Street should be seen as a primary transit
route, providing east/west access through the
corridor. The west anchor is Edina’s
Southdale/Centennial Lakes area. The east
anchor is Bloomington’s Mall of America.
Transit lines along the cross avenues should
also be addressed where they intersect with 77th
Street. Easy access, visibility, transit identity,
signage, shelter and seating should be
promoted at each bus stop. Specific transit stop
locations should be coordinated with Metro
Transit in order to incorporate transit
improvements with future development projects.
In addition, bike routes that intersect with transit
routes should be provided with safe and
accessible bicycle parking facilities and
informational signage.
Parking
While parking is critical to the success of any
future development in the corridor, it should not
be a dominant land use seen from the public
environment. Parking should be configured and
located to insure that buildings and pedestrian
areas are the focus of the corridor. The
following recommendations are made with
regards to parking in the corridor:
• Parking should be located behind or
beneath buildings. Minimal parking
should be located alongside buildings.
• Underground or structured parking
within each block should be encouraged
to achieve greater density and reduce
the amount of surface parking seen
within the corridor.
• Parking lots at street corners should be
prohibited. An exception to this rule
would allow for a parking structure to be
located at the intersection with ground
level uses within the structure that
support pedestrian activity.
• Parking maximum ratios, rather than
minimum ratios, should be applied
within the district to encourage more use
of transit services and to reduce excess
parking.
• Encourage the development of uses that
creatively share parking by time of day
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 6
amongst a variety of uses in order to
reduce the total amount of land
dedicated to parking.
• Surface parking areas should be
screened from the sidewalk and/or
adjacent residential uses.
• On-street parking is encouraged
whenever feasible. Alongside 77th
Street, it may be necessary to create
on-street parking by acquiring additional
right of way and building on-street
parallel parking lanes along the south
side of the roadway.
Parking needs to be convenient and visually attractive.
Applying Green Community Concepts
Utilizing green community concepts in the I-494
corridor will lead to healthy, sustainable, and
affordable environments for living, working, and
recreating. Paying particular attention to where
and how buildings are sited, designed, and
operated can minimize negative impacts on the
natural environment and human health. Using
quality products and superior technology while
paying attention to natural systems can create
durable, efficient, and sustainable buildings that
will remain healthy and vibrant for generations
to come. The following green community
principles should be encouraged in new
development within the I-494 corridor:
• Optimize site potential – Use sites to their
fullest potential by increasing density,
creating opportunities for alternative
transportation (public transit, walking,
cycling), considering microclimate effects on
buildings, and using native species in
landscape plantings.
• Protect and conserve water and soil –
Stormwater runoff should be minimized and
managed through a stormwater runoff plan.
To reduce water consumption, consider the
use of water-conserving appliances,
fixtures, and landscaping. Steps should be
taken to minimize the loss of soil and
sediment during construction and
occupancy to reduce storm-water sediment
and air pollution.
• Minimize energy consumption – Reduce
energy consumption by taking advantage of
natural heating, cooling and day lighting,
and by using energy efficient appliances
(Energy Star), equipment and lighting.
• Enhance indoor environmental quality –
Given the amount of time spent indoors,
indoor environmental quality proves
especially important to human health. To
create a healthy indoor environment for
occupants, consider the use of non-toxic
materials, ventilation and exhaust systems,
and moisture control products and systems.
• Use environmentally preferable materials &
resources – Consider the use of materials
healthy for both occupants and the
environment such as locally produced,
salvaged and/or remanufactured materials,
products with recycled content or from
renewable sources, materials that can be
recycled or reused, and low VOC-emitting
materials.
• Reduce waste – Reduce and manage
wastes generated during the construction
process and operation of buildings. When
demolition occurs, consider the sorting and
recycling of leftover materials and debris.
• Optimize operations and maintenance –
Inform and educate building occupants as to
what they can and need to do to maintain
and improve their green community.
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 7
Consider ongoing support and shared
services.
Land Use Types
The Proposed Land Use Plan recommends
land uses and locations that will promote
strategies established in the future vision for the
corridor. While many of the land use types may
include a mix of uses, whether horizontally or
vertically mixed, the following land use types
promote a primary use type located within
specific areas. The following land use types
are proposed:
Regional Commercial (RC)
The Regional Commercial land use designation
implies that the primary land uses located within
this area be commercial uses attracting users
from the larger metropolitan region. Examples
of uses located in this category might be large-
scale anchor retail tenants, mid-sized retailers
or a collection of specialty retail tenants
fashioned in a lifestyle center. These land use
types are located at Lyndale Avenue and where
I-494 and Cedar Avenue intersect.
Regional Commercial example.
Regional Commercial example.
Regional Commercial/Office (RC/O)
The Regional Commercial/Office designation
would suggest more of the types of tenants
mentioned above for RC plus the presence of
office uses, perhaps located above retail uses
or situated in stand-alone building
developments. These land use types are
located at the Lyndale and Portland Avenue
nodes. Residential uses are also expected to
be part of the RC/O district.
Community Commercial/Office (CC/O)
The Community Commercial/Office land use
category would include retail uses, shops,
services and office uses that cater primarily to
the local community. Multi-family residential
uses may also be located within this zone as
part of a mixed-use development. These land
use types are located at the Nicollet and 12th
Avenue nodes.
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 8
Community Commercial example,
Office (O)
The primary land use envisioned for the Office
category would be office uses. An example of
this would be an office campus type of land use
development. The land use is located at the
intersection of I-35W and I-494.
Office example.
Multi-Family Residential (MFR)
The Multi-Family Residential land use areas are
located between the gateway nodes and
include primarily residential uses offering a
range of residential densities and types, from
townhomes to multi-story condominium flats.
The MFR zones may also contain small
amounts of ground level retail uses at strategic
sites where feasible for retail to survive. This
retail would most likely serve local residents.
Multi-Family Residential/Office (MFR/O)
The Multi-Family Residential/Office land use
areas provide transitions between
commercial/mixed-use areas and residential
areas. The primary use is intended to be multi-
family residential use but would incorporate
commercial uses such as office and/or ground
level retail uses.
Public (P)
Linear Public land uses are located along the
south adjacent to I-494 to provide a landscaped
edge along the freeway. A linear landscaped
interior core is also envisioned to connect
various land uses east and west throughout the
corridor. This greenway is likely to assume a
number of forms as it meanders through the
area. In some locations, it might be a
pedestrian only greenway. In others, it might
be a local street while in others; it might actually
pass thorough buildings as part of a courtyard
area or true galleria.
Richfield has excellent examples of multi-family housing.
Additionally, two small park areas are
envisioned to be incorporated into future
development in the corridor to serve the
residents in the area. Locations for the parks
suggested between Lyndale and Nicollet and
near 12th Avenue, however, final locations are
to be determined by city officials.
Richfield Comprehensive Plan
Volume Three: Plan Elements
Draft 3 – December 6, 2005 9
Church (CH)
Two church sites and a cemetery are located in
the corridor and identified for future integration
within the land use designations.
Church of the Assumption is one of two churches in the
corridor area.
Land Use Tabulations
The following tabulation includes the uses
shown on the I-494 Corridor Land Use Plan.
I-494 Corridor Land Use Plan Acres
Community Commercial/Office 74.2
Church 36.1
Multi-Family Residential 65.7
Multi-Family Residential/Office 74.4
Office 14.6
Park 5.7
Regional Commercial 42.2
Regional Commercial/Office 51.8
Total Acres (not including ROW) 364.8
S P E C IAL C IT Y C O U N C IL W O R K SESSIO N
R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, B AR T H O L O ME W R O O M
O C TO B E R 10, 2017
6:30 P M
C all to order
1.Update to the B lue C ross B lue S hi eld D emonstration project and discussion of the crosswalk policy.
A djournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at
least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
October 5, 2017
Council Memorandum No. 94
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
Subject: October 10, 2017 City Council Work Session
Council Members:
The following items will be presented and discussed at the upcoming work session:
1. Blue Cross Blue Shield Demonstration Project Update
a. Statistical results
b. Public input review
2. Crosswalk Policy Update and Pedestrian Master Plan
a. Current crosswalk policy review
b. City-wide evaluation
c. Additional policy reviews
Please contact Kristin Asher, Public Works Director, at 612 -861-9795 with questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
SLD:tab
Email: Assistant City Manager
Department Directors
R EG U LAR C IT Y C O U N C IL ME E TIN G
R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, C O U N C IL C H AMB E R S
O C TO B E R 10, 2017
7:00 P M
IN TR O D U C TO RY P R O C E E D IN G S
C all to order
Open forum (15 mi nutes maximum)
E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments
are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who w ish to address
the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting.
P ledge of A llegiance
A pproval of the mi nutes of the: (1) S pecial joint C i ty C ouncil and P lanning C ommi ssi on work session of S eptember 20,
2017; (2) S pecial C i ty C ouncil work session of S eptember 26, 2017; and (3) Regular C i ty C ouncil meeting of
S eptember 26, 2017.
P R E S E N TATIO N S
1.P roclamation for the Richfield Historical S oci ety
C O U N C IL D IS C U S S IO N
2.Hats Off to Hometown Hits
AG E N D A AP P R O VAL
3.A pproval of the A genda
4.Consent C alendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City C ouncil in one
motion. Once the C onsent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended
actions have also been approved. No further Council action on these items is necessary. However, any
Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the
regular agenda for C ouncil discussion and action. All items listed on the C onsent C alendar are
recommended for approval.
A .C onsi deration of the approval of a resoluti on authorizing submission to the L ocal Road Improvement
P rogram for the Lyndale Avenue Reconstruction project.
S taff Report No. 160
B .C onsi deration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On S ale Intoxicating L iquor license for
the C hurch of S t. Richard, located at 7540 P enn Avenue S outh, for their 2017 F all F estival
taking place November 11-12, 2017.
S taff Report No. 161
C .C onsi deration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On S ale Intoxicating L iquor license for
S t. Ni cholas E piscopal C hurch, located at 7227 P enn Avenue S outh, for thei r A hoy Mateys event taki ng
place November 4, 2017.
S taff Report No. 162
D .C onsi deration of the approval of a C ooperative A greement regarding public safety related to the 2018
National F ootball L eague S uper B owl security.
S taff Report No. 163
E .C onsi deration of the approval of the renewal of the contract with C hief's Towi ng, Inc., for P ublic S afety
towi ng services for D ecember 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018.
S taff Report No. 164
F.C onsi deration of the approval of a resoluti on calling for a public hearing by the C ity C ouncil on the
proposed adoption of a modification to the redevelopment plan for the Ri chfi eld redevelopment project
area, the modification to the Tax Increment F inancing P lan for the C edar Avenue Tax Increment F inancing
D istri ct, and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment F inance D istri ct No. 2017-1 Housing.
S taff Report No. 165
G.C onsi deration of the approval of a fi rst reading of an ordinance amendi ng residential driveway regulati ons.
S taff Report No. 166
5.C onsideration of items, if any, removed from C onsent C alendar
P U B LIC H EAR IN G S
6.P ublic heari ng regarding the annual Lyndale/HUB /Nicollet (L H N) Maintenance D istrict assessment.
S taff Report No. 167
7.P ublic heari ng regarding the annual 77th S treet/IL N P roject A rea assessment.
S taff Report No. 168
8.P ublic heari ng regarding the assessment for removal of diseased trees from pri vate property for work ordered in
2016.
S taff Report No. 169
9.P ublic heari ng regarding 2017 alley paving assessments.
S taff Report No. 170
C IT Y MAN AG E R ’S R E P O R T
10.C ity Manager's Report
C L AIMS AN D PAYR O LL S
11.C laims and P ayrolls
Open forum (15 mi nutes maximum)
E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments
are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who w ish to address
the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting.
12.A djournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. R equests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the C ity Clerk at 612-861-9738.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special joint City Council and Planning
Commission Work Session
September 20, 2017
CALL TO ORDER
The work session was called to order by Chair Vrieze Daniels at 5:45 p.m..
Council Members Pat Elliott, Mayor; Michael Howard; Maria Regan Gonzalez; and Simon
Present: Trautmann.
Council Members Edwina Garcia.
Absent:
PC Members Erin Vrieze Daniels; and Sean Hayford Oleary.
Present:
PC Members Gordon Vizecky; Susan Rosenberg; Allysen Hoberg; and Bryan Pynn; and
Absent: Dan Kitzberger.
Staff Present: Matt Brillhart, Associate Planner.
Item #1
BUS TOUR OF DEVELOPMENT SITES ALONG 66TH STREET
Chairperson Vrieze Daniels and Associate Planner Matt Brillhart led the group on a bus and
walking tour of several properties along 66th Street, including Cedar Point Commons / Richfield
Parkway, 66th and Nicollet Avenue, and 66th and Penn Avenue.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:20 p.m.
Date Approved: October 10, 2017
_____________________________
Pat Elliott
Mayor
_____________________________ ____________________________
Jared Voto Steven L. Devich
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special City Council Work Session
September 26, 2017
CALL TO ORDER
The work session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 5:15 p.m. in the Municipal Center.
Council Members Pat Elliott, Mayor; Michael Howard; Maria Regan Gonzalez;
Present: and Simon Trautmann
Council Members Edwina Garcia.
Absent:
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; Kristen Asher,
Public Works Director; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Taylor Burandt, Public
Works Administrative Aide/Analyst; and, Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
UTILITY RATES AND CONSERVATION RATE STRUCTURE
Kristen Asher, Director of Public Works, introduced the topic as a continuation of a work
session from June and introduced Rebecca Kurtz of Ehlers.
Ms. Kurtz presented the proposed rate increases and discussed target for cash balances of
each enterprise fund.
Item #2
DISCUSSION REGARDING SERVICE LINE WARRANTY PROGRAM AND CITY-
ADMINISTERED UTILITY LINE INSURANCE
Ms. Asher introduced Taylor Burandt, Public Works Administrative Aide/Analyst. Ms. Burandt
presented background on Service Line Warranty of America (SLWA) and their use in Richfield, as well
as information on the ability for the City to provide insurance to water/sewer lines. Ms. Burandt
presented examples of Lake City and Mounds View who insure private water lines.
Council members discussed the current use of the City’s logo on letters sent out by SLWA and
residents’ confusion over receiving a letter from a private insurance company using the City’s logo.
Ms. Burandt provided staff recommendation to continue working with SLWA and the City can
decide to cancel or renew when the contract nears expiration. Council members generally agreed with
this proposal, but asked to continue to work with SLWA to include additional information, or a letter,
providing more information.
Bob Hall, a Richfield resident, discussed an additional endorsement to his homeowner’s
insurance policy for the coverage of water and sewer lines. He happened to learn about it by chance
from his insurer and that it is a relatively new program.
Special Council Work Session Minutes -2- September 26, 2017
Council Member Howard stated the importance of communicating to residents that they own
their lines and they may want to contact their insurer to see if they have the ability to add this
coverage.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:31 p.m.
Date Approved: October 10, 2017
_____________________________
Pat Elliott
Mayor
_____________________________ ____________________________
Jared Voto Steven L. Devich
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Council Members Pat Elliott, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Michael Howard; Maria Regan Gonzalez;
Present: and Simon Trautmann.
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; Pam Dmytrenko,
Assistant City Manager/HR Manager; John Stark, Community Development
Director; Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director; Melissa Poehlman,
Assistant Community Development Director; and Jared Voto, Executive
Aide/Analyst.
OPEN FORUM
Ben Sunderlin, 7049 17th Avenue S, spoke regarding affordable housing.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Elliott led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Elliott, S/Trautmann to approve the minutes of the: (1) Special joint City Council, Housing
and Redevelopment Authority, and Planning Commission work session of August 21, 2017; (2)
Special joint City Council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and Economic Development
Authority work session of August 21, 2017; (3) Special City Council meeting of September 6, 2017; (4)
Special City Council work session of September 12, 2017; and (5) Regular City Council meeting of
September 12, 2017.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #1
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE
RICHFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2017 LEVY REFERENDUMS. (S.R. NO. 145)
Council Members spoke in favor of the Richfield Public Schools referendums.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Regular Meeting
September 26, 2017
Council Meeting Minutes -2- September 26, 2017
Mayor Elliott read the resolution.
M/Elliott, S/Howard to approve a resolution supporting the Richfield Public Schools 2017 levy
referendums..
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #2
ANNUAL MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
Reed Bornholdt, Chair of the Community Services Commission, presented updates of the last
year of activities of the commission, and provided an overview of upcoming activities.
Council Members thanked the commission for their work.
Item #3
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Hats Off to Hometown Hits
Council Member Garcia spoke regarding the League of Women Voters’ candidate forum for
the Richfield Public Schools election on September 30; a prevention of falls forum at The Pines; the
band shell groundbreaking on September 30; and the great pumpkin giveaway on October 14.
Council Member Trautmann spoke regarding a meeting he attended at Gramercy Apartments
about roundabouts; the success of Penn Fest; and the Richfield Foundation’s wine tasting event and
fundraiser on October 12.
Council Member Regan Gonzalez spoke regarding the closing on Seasons Park Apartments
by Aeon and the kick-off to the citizen’s police academy.
Council Member Howard spoke regarding the city staff’s attendance at Penn Fest; the
remodeled home tour on October 7; the pumpkin patch in Veterans Park; open applications for youth
commissioner positions; and early voting for school board election.
Mayor Elliott spoke regarding Penn Fest; the remodeled home tour; and the Police
Department’s annual tobacco compliance checks.
Item #4
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
M/Garcia, S/Howard to approve the agenda.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #5
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager Devich presented the Consent Calendar.
Council Meeting Minutes -3- September 26, 2017
A. Consideration of the approval of a resolution designating the City's contribution towards health,
dental, term life, and disability insurance premiums for General Services and Management
employees for 2018. (S.R. No.146)
B. B. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing the refunding of the $4,550,000
G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2009A, dated January 14, 2009 with the
$3,205,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Refunding Bonds, Series 2017B. (S.R. No.147)
C. Consideration of the approval of a resolution approving deferral of special assessments
against an owner occupied property. (S.R. No.148)
D. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing the issuance of special permits for
extended liquor sales hours during Super Bowl 2018. (S.R. No.149)
E. Consideration of the approval of a Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the
Richfield Foundation's Wine Tasting event to take place on Thursday, October 12, 2017, in the
atrium area of Woodlake Center, located at 6601 Lyndale Ave South. (S.R. No.150)
F. Consideration of the approval of the 2017-2018 contract with the City of Bloomington, using
public health emergency preparedness grant funds distributed by a federal grant from the
Centers for Disease Control, to provide services in the area of public health emergency
preparedness/bioterrorism and the development of a response system. (S.R. No.151)
G. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing acceptance of a grant received by
Richfield Recreation Services Department from Hennepin County for youth sports equipment
in the amount of $3,158 and to authorize the Recreation Services Director to execute the
associated grant agreement. (S.R. No.152)
H. Consideration of the approval of a resolution certifying delinquent water, sanitary sewer, and
storm water charges to the Hennepin County Auditor. (S.R. No.153)
I. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed for unpaid false alarm user fees
against private property. (S.R. No.154)
J. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed for current services performed for
weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public health or safety
hazards from private property. (S.R. No.155)
K. Consideration of the approval of a work proposal from Barr Engineering for stormwater
infrastructure assessment services. (S.R. No.156)
M/Elliott, S/Trautmann to approve the consent calendar.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #6
CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
None.
Item #7
CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION GRANTING
APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF THE CEDAR POINT COMMONS
SECOND ADDITION TO OCTOBER 24, 2017. (S.R. NO. 157)
Council Member Howard presented Staff Report No. 157.
M/Howard, S/Elliott to continue a public hearing to consider approval of a final plat for the
Cedar Point Commons Second Addition to October 24, 2017.
Motion carried 5-0.
Council Meeting Minutes -4- September 26, 2017
Item #8
CONSIDERATION OF A NUMBER OF LAND USE REQUESTS TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE
284 NEW HOUSING UNITS, 33 REHABILITATED HOUSING UNITS, AND A
TWO-BLOCK EXTENSION OF RICHFIELD PARKWAY BETWEEN
66TH AND 68TH STREETS ALONG 18TH AVENUE. (S.R. NO. 158)
Council Member Regan Gonzalez presented Staff Report No. 158.
Council Member Regan Gonzalez read a letter, dated September 25, 2017, submitted by the
developers related to a neighborhood meeting held on Thursday, September 21, acknowledging
areas of specific commitment for ongoing discussions with both the City of Richfield and their
neighbors.
Mayor Elliott read a letter, dated September 25, 2017, submitted by resident Marty Kirsch
expressing his support for the development.
Council Member Regan Gonzalez invited members of the public to give brief remarks.
Jeanne Biever, 6701 17th Ave S, spoke regarding the lack of a buffer from the apartment
building and increased traffic.
Rosalie Hinrichs, 6638 16th Ave S, stated she would not be directly affected, but spoke
regarding a lack of privacy for neighbors that will be near the apartments.
Christine Wiehle, 6638 17th Ave S, spoke regarding the impacts of the development on their
home.
Bob Cunningham, a partner on the development, spoke regarding their commitment to
providing a quality project to the east side of Richfield and noted the entrances to the development will
all be from Richfield Parkway.
Community Development Director Stark spoke about the neighborhood meetings that have
taken place. He also responded to earlier questions, noting the developer is seeking two variances,
which he stated was less than a typical project of this side, briefly went over a traffic study of this area
as it relates to the roundabout, and talked about an airport noise study that was completed by the
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC).
Mayor and Council Members thanked residents, the development team, and city staff for their
work on this project, shared their enthusiasm for development on the east side, and continues working
the balance the needs of the area.
M/Howard, S/Elliott to approve an amendment to the city's Comprehensive Plan designating
Lots 1-8, Block 3 Wexler's Addition as Mixed Use.
Motion carried 5-0.
M/Regan Gonzalez, S/Elliott to approve an ordinance amending Appendix 1 of the Richfield
City Code to change the zoning designation of Lots 4-13, Block 2 and Lots 1-8, Block 3 and Lots 1-16,
Block 4 all in Wexler's Addition from Mixed Use - Community (MU-C) and Multi-Family Residential
(MR-2) together with the Cedar Avenue Corridor Overlay (CAC) District to Planned Multi-Family
Residential (PMR).
Council Meeting Minutes -5- September 26, 2017
Motion carried 5-0.
M/Regan Gonzalez, S/Elliott to cancel a public hearing to consider approval of a preliminary
plat.
Council Member Howard asked why a public hearing was being cancelled.
Community Development Director Stark responded that the public hearing will be held at a
later date, they are working with Hennepin County on some platting issues.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #9
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD
MAKE SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES A CONDITIONAL USE IN
SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AND CONSIDERATION OF A
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF SAID
ORDINANCE. (S.R. NO. 159)
Council Member Trautmann presented Staff Report No. 159.
M/Trautmann, S/Howard to approve an ordinance making "small wireless facilities" a
conditional use in the Single-Family (R and R-1) Districts and approve a resolution authorizing
summary publication of an ordinance making "small wireless facilities" a conditional use in the Single-
Family (R and R-1) Districts.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #10
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
None.
Item #11
CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
M/Garcia, S/Elliott that the following claims and payrolls be approved:
U.S. Bank 09/26/17
A/P Checks: 262139 - 262579 $ 2,127,198.88
Payroll: 130845 – 131169 ; 42781 623,532.54
TOTAL $ 2,750,731.42
Motion carried 5-0.
OPEN FORUM
None.
Council Meeting Minutes -6- September 26, 2017
Item #12
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council Meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:28 p.m.
Date Approved: October 10, 2017
Pat Elliott
Mayor
Jared Voto Steven L. Devich
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.A.
STAFF REPORT NO. 160
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J eff P earson, C ity E ngineer
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
10/2/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/3/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of a resolution authoriz ing submission to the Local R oad Improvement
Program for the Lyndale Avenue Reconstr uction project.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation is currently acc epting applications as part of the Loc al Road
I mprovement P rogram. The Lyndale Avenue Rec onstruc tion projec t qualifies for submittal due to its
classification of a route of regional significance, which will provide c apacity or c ongestion relief to the 35W
trunk highway sy stem. W ith Council approval, staff is preparing to submit an applic ation for the requested
amount of $1,000,000 to be contributed to the project. If successful, funding would be available in 2018,
2019, or 2020, decided upon the construction schedule. Applications are due November 3, 2017.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution authorizing the C ity to apply for the Local Road Improvement
Program and accept funds if chosen.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
The Local Road I mprovement Program (L RI P) provides competitive bond funds to assist c ities,
counties, and townships in paying costs assoc iated with eliminating a transportation system
defic iency. I n turn, this program promotes local, regional or state ec onomic development efforts
and improves safety.
The L RI P program was authorized by the Minnesota State Legislature in State Statute 174.52.
The Minnesota D epartment of Transportation administers the program.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The proposed project meets multiple goals in the City 's Comprehensive P lan (Transportation).
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
The deadline for applications is November 3, 2017.
Construction of the Ly ndale Avenue Reconstruction is tentatively scheduled to start in 2019.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
There is no financial impac t to apply for the funds.
I f suc cessful, the funds would assist the estimated c onstruc tion cost for the projec t of $10M.
W ithout consideration of the LRI P funds, the projec t c osts are currently presented in the
proposed C apital I mprovement Program as follows:
UF - Utility Bond $2,000,000
Bonds (Street)$7,500,000
Munic ipal State Aid $450,000
Xc el Rate Pay ers $50,000
Total $10,000,000
For succ essful implementation and reimbursement of the awarded funds, applicants are required
to follow the state aid project development process for bond projects. These steps inc lude plan
approval and exec ution of a grant agreement with the State.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney reviewed the resolution and will be available to answer questions.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
Resolution Resolution L etter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO APPLY FOR THE
LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND ACCEPT FUNDS IF CHOSEN
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield acts as the applicant for the Lyndale Avenue
Reconstruction Project contained in the Local Road Improvement Program Application
to be submitted by November 3, 2017;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has the legal authority to apply for financial
assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure matching
funds and adequate construction of the proposed project;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has not violated any Federal, State or local laws
pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other
unlawful or corrupt practice;
WHEREAS, upon approval of its application by the state, the City of Richfield
may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced
project(s), and that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in all
contract agreements;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has estimated the total project cost to be
approximately $10,000,000;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield confirms if the project cost exceeds the amount
listed in the Application, the City of Richfield will provide or secure all additional funds
necessary to complete the project.;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield certifies that it will comply with all applicable
laws, regulations, and rules of the Application; and
WHEREAS, that the sources and uses and other financing commitment
represented are accurate.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to apply to the Minnesota Department
of Transportation for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Richfield;
and
2. If the City is selected for the financial assistance, the Mayor and City Manager
or their successors in office, are hereby authorized to execute such
agreements, and amendments thereto, as are necessary to implement the
project(s) on behalf of the applicant.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of
October, 2017.
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.B.
STAFF REPORT NO. 161
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J enni fer A nderson, S upport S ervices Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice
9/20/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
9/21/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor
license for the C hurch of St. R ichard, located at 7540 Penn Avenue South, for their 2017 Fall Festival
taking place November 11-12, 2017.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
On September 13, 2017, the City received applic ation materials for a Temporary On Sale I ntoxic ating Liquor
lic ense for the C hurch of St. Richard, located at 7540 Penn Avenue South, for their 2017 Fall Festival
taking place November 11-12, 2017. They will serve wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00
p.m. on Saturday, November 11, 2017, only. No other intoxicating liquor beverages will be permitted.
They will serve lunch and a spaghetti dinner on S aturday, November 11, 2017. They will only be serving
breakfast on S unday, November 12, 2017. The C hurch of St. Richard has contac ted food sanitarians from
the City of Bloomington to ensure proper food handling prac tices are followed.
The Director of P ublic Safety has reviewed all required information and documents and has found no basis
for denial.
The City Counc il has previously granted this lic ense in conjunction with this event.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the issuance of a Tempor ar y O n Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the Church of
St. Richard, located at 7540 Penn Avenue South for their 2017 Fall Festival taking place November 11-
12, 2017.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
The applic ant has satisfied the following requirements for the issuance of this lic ense:
The required licensing fee has been paid.
P roof of liquor liability insuranc e has been provided showing the C atholic Mutual Relief
S oc iety of Americ a affording the coverage.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Richfield C ity Code Section 1202.05 requires all applicants to comply with all of the provisions of
this code, as well as the provisions of Minnesota Statute Chapter 340A .
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
There are no critic al timing issues.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The required licensing fees have been received.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
There are no legal considerations.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ounc il could decide to deny the approval of the Temporary On S ale I ntoxic ating Liquor license
for the Churc h of St. Ric hard. This would mean the applicant would not be able to serve wine or 3.2
percent malt liquor; however, Public Safety has not found any basis for denial.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Church of St. Ric hard staff has been notified of the date of this meeting.
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.C.
STAFF REPORT NO. 162
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J enni fer A nderson, S upport S ervices Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice
10/29/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/3/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On Sale Intoxicating Liquor
license for St. N icholas Episcopal Church, located at 7227 Penn Avenue S outh, for their Ahoy Mateys
event taking place November 4, 2017.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
On September 15, 2017, the City received applic ation materials for a Temporary On Sale I ntoxic ating Liquor
lic ense for St. Nicholas Episc opal Church for their Ahoy Matey s event taking place November 4, 2017. They
will serve wine and 3.2 perc ent malt liquor from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. No other intoxic ating liquor beverages
will be permitted. T hey will have both live and silent auctions and serve pre-packaged foods during
the event.
The Director of P ublic Safety has reviewed all required information and documents and has found no basis
for denial.
The City Counc il has previously granted this lic ense in conjunction with this event.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the issuance of a Tempor ar y O n Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the St.
Nicholas Episcopal Church, located at 7227 Penn Avenue South, for their event Ahoy Mateys
taking place November 4, 2017.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
The applic ant has satisfied the following requirements for the issuance of this lic ense:
The required licensing fee has been paid.
P roof of liquor liability insuranc e has been provided showing The C hurch I nsuranc e
Company of Vermont affording the c overage.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Richfield C ity Code Section 1202.05 requires all applicants to comply with all of the provisions of
this code, as well as the provisions of Minnesota Statute Chapter 340A .
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
There are no critic al timing issues.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The required licensing fees have been received.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
There are no legal considerations.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ounc il could decide to deny the approval of the Temporary On S ale I ntoxic ating Liquor license
for St. Nic holas Episcopal Church. This would mean the applicant would not be able to serve wine or
3.2 percent malt liquor; however, Public Safety has not found any basis for denial.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
St. Nic holas E pisc opal C hurch staff has been notified of the date of this meeting.
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.D.
STAFF REPORT NO. 163
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ay Henthorne, P ublic S afety D irector/C hief of P olice
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice
10/3/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: Mary Ti etjen, C ity A ttorney
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of a Cooper ative Agreement regarding public safety related to the 2018
National Football League Super Bowl secur ity.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
This Cooperative Agreement is for cities to provide law enforcement officers to the City of Minneapolis to
assist with the Super Bowl and related events occ urring between J anuary 26 and February 5, 2018. The
Minneapolis Polic e Department is c oordinating the law enforcement aspects of the Agreement. Some of the
events will occur in St. Paul and Bloomington, but the offic ers providing services in those venues will still be
operating under the Unified C ommand principle and the provider will still be reimbursed though the
Minneapolis Polic e Department. The designated officers are expected to be dedic ated to the event and the
provider (City of Ric hfield) should not expect the officers to also perform their regular duties in their home
community.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the Cooperative Agreement regarding public safety related to 2018 National
Football League Super Bowl security.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
The Public Safety /Polic e Department wishes to c ontrac t with they C ity of Minneapolis for the
Cooperative Agreement regarding public safety related to 2018 National Football League Super
Bowl sec urity.
This event is a high sec urity event for the C ountry, State, and metro area. The City of
Minneapolis needs assistance with the sec urity of various venues.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Under the Mutual Aide Agreement the City of Minneapolis has requested officers from Hennepin
County to participate in the Super Bowl 52 sec urity detail.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
There are no critic al timing issues.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Cities providing offic ers will remain responsible for pay ing the officers and will only be reimbursed
for the hours worked by the officers at the event at the flat rate of $55 per hour straight time and
$82 per hour overtime.
Minneapolis will not reimburse expenses or any additional c osts the city may incur, providing any
equipment, pay for damaged equipment, and the only liability protection provided for the officers
is a $3 million law enforcement liability policy obtained by the Host C ommittee to address all law
enforcement related claims. However additional liability insurance can be purc hased for each
individual offic er through the League of Minnesota C ities. The Police D epartment has money in
their budget to purc hase the additional liability insurance.
The sending c ity remains responsible for all other insuranc es for its officers, inc luding workers
compensation and any liability claims not c overed by the Host Committee's policy.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
Mary Tietjen, City Attorney, and the League of Minnesota Cities has reviewed the J oint Powers
Agreement.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ounc il could decide to deny the approval of the J oint Powers A greement, therefore the Police
Department would not partic ipate in the sec urity detail for the Super Bowl.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
S uper B owl C ooperative A greement with Mi nneapolis C ontract/A greement
PublicSafetyJPA (8/2/2017/gpw) Page 1
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY RELATED
TO 2018 NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE SUPER BOWL SECURITY
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT REGARDING
PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY RELATED TO THE 2018 NATIONAL FOOTBALL
LEAGUE SUPER BOWL (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”), is made effective,
except as otherwise made operationally effective as set forth in Section 5 herein, on this 10th day
of October, 2017, by and between the CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA, a municipal
corporation, (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), acting through its Police Department
(hereinafter referred to as the “MPD”) and City of Richfield, a Police Department. City, MPD,
and each Provider may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties” to
this Agreement.
WHEREAS, the City is the host city for the 2018 National Football League Super Bowl to be
held on Sunday, February 4, 2018, and for related events authorized by the National Football
League, most of which will take place in the City, City of St. Paul, and City of Bloomington
from Friday, January 26, 2018, through Monday, February 5, 2018 (hereinafter referred to
collectively as the “Event”); and
WHEREAS, a Unified Command structure (as that term is defined in Section 2.4 ) is needed to
ensure the level of security coordination required for the Event; and
WHEREAS, the MPD will be the lead law enforcement agency for those portions of the Event
that occur within the City of Minneapolis (Minneapolis Events) and the St. Paul Police
Department (SPPD) and the Bloomington Police Department (BPD) will be the lead law
enforcement agencies for those portions of the Event that occur within their cities, respectively
(St. Paul Events and Bloomington Events) When either BPD or SPPD is the lead law
enforcement agency, its duties will not include making staff assignments that will continue to be
administered and managed by the MPD as part of the Unified Command; and
WHEREAS, the City has agreed to serve as the fiscal agent for law enforcement costs for the
Event by entering into an agreement with the “Host Committee” (as that entity and agreement
are referenced in Section 3.1 herein) for the Event; and
WHEREAS, the City is in need of procuring additional law enforcement personnel to provide
the public safety and security measures required for such a large and unique Event; and
WHEREAS, at the request of the City, the Provider is willing to provide the services of the law
enforcement personnel identified in this Agreement to the City to assist the MPD with Event
security; and
NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59
(“Joint Exercise of Powers”) and/or Minnesota Statutes Sections 626.76 and 626.77, and in
2
consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and the benefits that each party hereto
shall derive hereby, the Parties agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT
1.1 The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and conditions whereby
the Provider will provide the City with Licensed Peace Officers to be assigned to
one or more of the Event locations identified on Exhibit A attached hereto to
assist the MPD through the use of a unified command center (as further explained
in Section 2.4 of this Agreement) to provide law enforcement and security
services (“Services”) during the term of the Event.
1.2 Provider will exercise its best efforts to assist with Event security. The Parties
acknowledge and agree that resource availability requires Provider to exercise its
best judgment in prioritizing and responding to the public safety needs of its
jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Event. That prioritization decision
belongs solely to Provider. The Provider may, at any time, recall the Provider’s
resources when, it is considered to be in Provider’s best interest to do so.
1.3 Provider’s resources shall be full-time, Licensed Peace Officers and each such
Licensed Peace Officer must meet the following criteria as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Sections 626.84, Subdivision 1(c) and 471.59, Subdivision 12, which
reads:
“(1) the peace officer has successfully completed professionally recognized peace
officer pre-employment education which the Minnesota Board of Peace Officer
Standards and Training has found comparable to Minnesota peace officer pre-
employment education; and
(2) the officer is duly licensed or certified by the peace officer licensing or
certification authority of the state in which the officer's appointing authority is
located.”
1.4 The MPD will coordinate and inform the SPPD and the BPD of staffing
assignments for the St. Paul Events and the Bloomington Events based, when
possible, on the recommendations of the SPPD and the BPD, respectively.
2. ADDITIONAL CRITERIA OF LICENSED PEACE OFFICERS; PROVIDER
SCOPE OF SERVICE
2.1 In addition to meeting the criteria set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement, the
Provider agrees that each of the Licensed Peace Officers shall also meet the
following criteria:
2.1.1. That each Licensed Peace Officer shall by reason of experience, training,
3
and physical fitness be deemed by the Provider of being capable of
performing public safety and law enforcement duties for the Event; and
2.1.2 That each Licensed Peace Officer is in good standing with the Provider.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, the Provider shall promptly notify
the MPD in the event that any licensed peace officer is no longer an
officer in good standing with the Provider or shall recall any peace officer
that is no longer in good standing; and
2.1.3 That unless otherwise provided or requested by the MPD, each Licensed
Peace Officer shall be equipped and/or supplied by Provider at Provider’s
own expense, with a seasonally appropriate patrol uniform of the day and
equipment, including but not limited to service belts with Provider radio
equipment, service weapon and personal soft ballistic body armor, and
traffic vest. Additionally, in Provider’s discretion, personnel may be
equipped with a cell phone that may be used to download a public safety
application to aid in the tracking of law enforcement personnel during
operational periods if allowed pursuant to Provider’s policy.
2.2 Provider acknowledges and agrees that at any time during the term of this
Agreement the City has the sole discretion to decline to accept and/or use any of
Provider’s Licensed Peace Officers or other law enforcement resources without
cause or explanation.
2.3 The Provider agrees as follows:
2.3.1 As requested by MPD, Provider shall list information on each of
Provider’s Licensed Peace Officers no later than ninety (90) days before
the Event that includes, but is not limited to, name, rank, agency, badge
number, photo, cell phone number, and emergency contact information.
Said information shall be used strictly for law enforcement purposes
related to the Event and each Party will hold the data in the same
classification as the other does under the Minnesota Government Data
Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (“MGDPA”); and
2.3.2. That upon reasonable advance written notification from the MPD, each of
Provider’s Licensed Peace Officers or other law enforcement resources so
designated by the MPD shall participate in training activities related to
Event security, that are coordinated or conducted by the MPD or its
designee; and
2.3.3. That each Licensed Peace Officer shall be assigned by the MPD, as
determined and required by the MPD, to any Event-related assignment
based on the Licensed Peace Officer’s skill-set and known duty
assignment as well as the needs of the operation; including, but not limited
4
to, foot patrol, motorized patrol, static posts at outdoor perimeters, general
security inside or outside venues, and traffic control; and
2.3.4. That Licensed Peace Officers participating in the Event may, if so
determined by the MPD, be placed in an “On Assignment” status by MPD
in which the Licensed Peace Officer should be physically proximate to the
Event location, so as to be able to physically report in a timely manner to
such duty post assigned by the MPD and prepared to undertake the
specific job task or responsibility assigned by the MPD; and
2.3.5. That at the request of the MPD, Provider will designate personnel that
participated in or provided Event security to further participate in and/or
provide information to and otherwise cooperate with the MPD in any
“after action activities” following the conclusion of a Training Session or
actual Event security. “After action activities” may include, but not be
limited to post Training Session meetings and revisions of Training
protocols and post Event security meetings, evaluations, mediation or
court proceedings.
2.4 Provider acknowledges and agrees that at all times during any required training
session or during the Event each of Provider’s Licensed Peace Officers or other
law enforcement resources and employees, regardless of rank or job title held as
an employee of the Provider, shall be subject to a structure of supervision,
command and control coordinated through a unified law enforcement command
and following unified command principles and practices established throughout
the law enforcement community (herein referred to as “Unified Command”).
2.5 The Provider agrees to exercise reasonable efforts to cooperate and provide the
City, with any other information reasonably requested by the City that the City
deems necessary to facilitate and enable compliance with the terms and conditions
contained in this Agreement.
2.6 Event staffing levels will be determined by the MPD as the lead law enforcement
agency and fiscal agent, in consultation with the Unified Command and the SPPD
for St. Paul Events and the BPD for Bloomington Events, regardless of the
location of the Event. Provider may increase the staffing levels at Events located
within the Provider’s jurisdiction: (a) at the sole cost of the Provider that hosts an
Event; and (b) with the knowledge that the additional Licensed Police Officers
and other staff members above the staffing level approved by the MPD and
Unified Command are not covered by the Policy as described in Section 9 of this
Agreement. The number of Licensed Peace Officers and other law enforcement
resources to be deployed within the Provider’s jurisdiction will be communicated
to the City as part of the Unified Command. Notwithstanding Section 2.4, the
Provider retains the sole discretion for determining what Provider Licensed Peace
Officer and other law enforcement resources will be deployed in its own
5
jurisdiction for events not included under this Agreement and remain under the
Provider’s own authority. The Provider’s Licensed Peace Officer and other law
enforcement resources deployed in the Provider’s jurisdiction and which are
either included above the number of Licensed Peace Officers as determined by the
Unified Command or remain under Provider’s authority for events not included
under this Agreement, will not be eligible for reimbursement of costs as provided
in Section 4.2 of this Agreement.
2.7 The Provider will comply with the statutes and rules requiring the preservation of
evidence including, but not limited to, Minnesota Statutes, Section 590.10 and
Section 626.04. Each Provider must preserve all handwritten notes, photographs,
incident reports, video recordings, statements, audio recordings, personal notes,
interview audio, text messages, cell phone videos, removable electronic media,
squad car videos, any other video recordings, emails, voice mails, computer files
and all Work Product, Supporting Documentation and Business Records as those
terms are defined in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
2.8 The MPD, as the lead law enforcement agency, will maintain a list of Licensed
Peace Officers (LPOs) assigned to the Events. Each Provider, including the
SPPD and BPD, will be responsible for providing accurate lists of its LPOs that
will be assignable to the Events as a result of signing this Agreement.
3 CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1 The City will be solely responsible for all communications with the Minnesota Host
Committee (the “Host Committee”). The Host Committee shall be responsible for
coordinating each of the events authorized by the National Football League
(including St. Paul Events and Bloomington Events) and activities that occur
within the term of the Event.
3.2 The City and the Host Committee will prepare and enter into an “Event Support and
Funding Agreement for Super Bowl LII” (the “Support Agreement”). The
Support Agreement will be the source of funding for the Event including the
source of payment for the Services to be provided pursuant to this Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement (“Agreement”) and for the policy of insurance that will pay
for the defense and indemnification of claims filed against the City and each
Provider during the term of the Event.
3.3 City agrees that it will provide or facilitate any necessary training to prepare for
providing Event security. The substance of the training, if necessary; including
the locations, dates, and times, shall be detailed in a separate writing provided
from the MPD to the Provider.
3.4 The person responsible on behalf of the MPD for the daily operation, coordination
and implementation of this Agreement, which responsibilities shall include, but
6
not limited to, determining the assignments of the Provider’s law enforcement
resources, shall be Minneapolis Police Department Commander Scott Gerlicher
(hereinafter referred to as the “Coordinator”). Except as otherwise provided in
this Agreement, all contacts or inquiries made by the Provider with regard to this
Agreement shall be made directly to the Coordinator or the Coordinator’s
designee.
3.6 The City will develop and provide to each Provider an adequate supply of the
standard incident report form to be used by the City and Providers that provide
Services at the Event under the direction of the Unified Command.
3.7 The City will obtain from the Host Committee and provide to each Provider, the
“claims procedure” as indicated in Exhibit C hereto that will be used by third
party claimants who file claims against the City or against any Provider
4. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT PROCESS
4.1 The sole source of funds to reimburse each Provider performing under this
Agreement shall be funds provided by the Host Committee pursuant to the
Support Agreement.
4.2 For and in consideration of the Provider performing under this Agreement, the
Provider will be reimbursed for said Services at the rates and in the manner as
indicated in attached Exhibit B. All of a Provider’s Licensed Peace Officers and
other law enforcement resources that (a) perform law enforcement services within
the Provider’s jurisdiction; and (b) are subject only to the Provider’s authority and
are therefore not under the Unified Command, are not eligible to have Provider’s
costs reimbursed pursuant to this Agreement.
4.3 The MPD will prepare and include in Exhibit B eligibility guidelines for cost
reimbursement and a check list for the preparation and submission of the
reimbursement request. Exhibit B will include a “Reimbursement Payment Form
[To be developed by MPD at a later date] to be completed by the Provider along
with the required support documents to be attached by the Provider.
The MPD shall furnish the Provider with a statement which describes all
applicable hours performed by the Provider during the term of the Agreement.
The Provider shall submit the Reimbursement Payment Form to the MPD for all
undisputed amounts within thirty-five (35) days after receipt of the statement of
hours.
4.4 Provider may submit any questions regarding the cost reimbursement process to
Robin McPherson or her designee at: robin.mcpherson@minneapolismn.gov.
7
4.5 For any disputed amounts, the Provider shall provide the MPD with written notice
of the dispute, including the date, amount, and reasons for dispute within fifteen
(15) days after receipt of the statement of hours. The MPD and Provider shall
memorialize the resolution of the dispute in writing and follow the dispute
resolution procedure in Section 13 of this Agreement.
5. TERM OF AGREEMENT
5.1 This Agreement shall be effective as of the date indicated on the first page so that
the Parties can undertake planning for all Event-related activity and shall expire
on March 1, 2018, or the date to which law enforcement resources or Services are
extended, whichever is later, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the
provisions in Section 6. Except for the provision of Training as discussed and to
be scheduled pursuant to Section 3.3 of this Agreement, Services furnished by the
Provider for the Event shall begin on January 26, 2018, and shall terminate on
February 5, 2018, unless terminated sooner or extended in whole or in part as
provided herein.
6. TERMINATION
6.1 Termination by the City-The City may terminate this Agreement upon providing
to the Provider not less than forty-five (45) days advance written notice for any of
the reasons stated below:
6.1.1 Cancellation of Super Bowl LII;
6.1.2 City and Host Committee fail to enter into the Support
Agreement;
6.1.3 Host Committee fails to purchase and provide insurance coverage as
described in Section 9.1 of this Agreement; or
6.1.4 Failure by the Provider to perform any material term under this Agreement
and failure to cure the default within the time requested by the City.
8
6.2 Termination by the Provider-The Provider may terminate this Agreement upon
providing to the City not less than forty-five (45) days advance written notice for
any of the reasons stated below:
6.2.1 Cancellation of Super Bowl LII;
6.2.2 Without cause prior to the initial training session;
6.2.3 City and Host Committee fail to enter into the Support Agreement; or
6.2.4 Host Committee fails to purchase and provide insurance coverage as
described in Section 9.1 of this Agreement.
6.3 In the event of a termination, each Party shall fully discharge all obligations owed
to the other Party accruing prior to the date of such termination, and, except as
otherwise provided herein, each Party shall be released from all obligations,
which would otherwise accrue subsequent to the date of termination.
7. AGREEMENT MANAGEMENT
7.1 The Provider has identified the following person[s] as persons to contact only
with regard to the following matters regarding the Agreement:
(List names) (List responsibilities)
8. WORK PRODUCTS, RECORDS, DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
8.1 For purposes of this Agreement, the following words and phrases shall have the
meanings set forth in this section, except where the context clearly indicates that a
different meaning is intended.
“Work Product” shall mean any report, including incident reports,
recommendation, paper, presentation, drawing, demonstration, or other materials,
whether in written, electronic, or other format that are used or belong to MPD or
results from Provider's Services under this Agreement.
“Supporting Documentation” shall mean any surveys, questionnaires, notes,
research, papers, analyses, whether in written, electronic, or in other format and
other evidences used to generate any and all work performed and Work Products
generated under this Agreement.
“Business Records” shall mean any books, documents, papers, account records
and other evidences, whether written, electronic, or in other format, belonging to
9
MPD or Provider and pertain to work performed under this Agreement.
8.2 Subject to applicable law, including but not limited to the Minnesota Official
Records Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 15.17, and the MGDPA, all deliverable
Work Product, Supporting Documentation and Business Records or copies
thereof, that are needed from or result from the Provider's Services under this
Agreement shall be delivered to the City either pursuant to this Agreement or
upon reasonable request of the City and shall become the property of the City
after delivery.
8.3 The City and the Provider each agrees not to release, transmit, disclose or
otherwise disseminate information associated with or generated as a result of the
work performed (i.e. Work Product, Supporting Documentation and Business
Records) under this Agreement without notice to the other. Except as otherwise
required by and subject to federal and/or state law, neither the City nor the
Provider shall release, transmit, disclose or disseminate any Work Product,
Supporting Documentation and Business Records which shall be classified as
“security information”, “security service” or “security service data”, defined
under Minnesota Statutes Sections 13.37 and 13.861 or any like data, as defined
and/or required in all federal, state, and local laws or ordinances, and all
applicable rules, regulations, and standards.
8.4 In the event of termination, all Work Product, Supporting
Documentation and Business Records prepared by the Provider under this
Agreement shall be delivered to the City by the Provider by the termination date.
8.5 Both the City and the Provider agree to maintain all Business Records in such a
manner as will readily conform to the terms of this Agreement and to make such
materials available at its office at all reasonable times during this Agreement
period and for six (6) years from the date of the final payment under the contract
for audit or inspection by the City, the Provider, the Auditor of the State of
Minnesota, or other duly authorized representative.
8.6 Both the City and the Provider agree to abide strictly by the MGDPA and, in
particular, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 13.05, Subd. 6 and 11; 13.37, Subd. 1(b),
138.17, and 15.17. All of the data created, collected, received, stored, used,
maintained, or disseminated by the Provider or the City in performing functions
under this Agreement is subject to the requirements of the MGDPA and both the
City and the Provider must comply with those requirements. If any provision of
this Agreement is in conflict with the MGDPA or other Minnesota state laws,
state law shall control.
9. INSURANCE; LIABILITY; MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY; NO WAIVER OF
IMMUNITIES
10
9.1 Insurance Coverage for Event-The Host Committee has purchased a law
enforcement liability insurance policy (the “Policy”). The insurance carrier is
International Insurance Company of Hannover SE (the “Insurer”). The Policy
will provide coverage for claims that each Provider becomes legally obligated to
pay as damages due to “bodily injury”, “property damage”, or “personal injury”
suffered by third parties. The Policy will require the insurer to have the right
and duty to defend and indemnify each Provider against any claim or lawsuit due
to Provider acts that occur within the territory of the Events and during the period
in which the Policy is in effect. Each Provider’s Law Enforcement Officers and
supervisors under the Unified Command will be covered under the Policy by
virtue of the Provider being named an “insured” under the Policy.
9.1.1 The limits of liability for all occurrences (claims) during the coverage
period is $3,000,000.00 ($3 million). The limit of liability for any third
party claim for damage to or loss of personal property is $25,000.
9.1.2 The cost to hire and pay for legal representation to defend the City and any
Provider (“defense costs”) are not subject to the $3 million limit of the
Policy.
9.1.3 The Policy is not subject to the payment of a deductible by the Host
Committee, the City or by any other Provider.
9.1.3. Each Provider agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions contained in
the Policy.
9.1.4 Each Provider agrees that it will cooperate with the insurer and with the
City by reasonably and timely responding to the insurer’s request for
information or to appear at meetings or judicially mandated hearings.
9.2 Insurance as Sole Source for Liability and Indemnity-Each Provider hereto agrees
that it will only seek recovery for any liability incurred in carrying out the terms
of this Agreement from the insurance to be procured by the Host Committee as
set out in Section 9.1 of this Agreement.
9.2.1 If a Party’s liability is not subject to recovery through the Policy, then
each Party agrees that it will otherwise be responsible for its own acts
and/or omissions and those of its officials, employees, representatives and
agents in carrying out the terms of this Agreement, whether those acts or
omissions occur within or outside of the jurisdiction or geographic limits
of the City of Minneapolis, and the results thereof to the extent authorized
by law and shall not be responsible for the acts and/or omissions of the
other Party and the results thereof.
11
9.2.2 In the unlikely event that the aggregate amount of any one or all claims
exceeds $3 million, then each Party agrees that it will otherwise be
responsible for its own acts and/or omissions and those of its officials,
employees, representatives and agents in carrying out the terms of this
Agreement, whether those acts or omissions occur within or outside the of
the jurisdiction or geographic limits of the City of Minneapolis, and the
results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible
for the acts and/or omissions of the other Parties and the results thereof.
9.3 Further Limitation On Provider Liability-It is understood and agreed that the
liability of each Provider that is a municipality, county or similar political
subdivision shall be limited by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466
(Tort Liability, Political Subdivisions) and the liability of the State of Minnesota
as a Provider shall be limited by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section
3.736 and by other applicable law. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall
waive or amend, nor shall be construed to waive or amend any defense or
immunity that either Party, its respective officials and employees, may have under
said Chapter 466, Section 471.59 subd. 1a, and any common-law immunity or
limitation of liability, all of which are hereby reserved by the Parties that have
entered into this Agreement.
9.4 Provider Workers’ Compensation Insurance Required-Except as expressly
provided herein, each Party shall be responsible for injuries or death of its own
personnel. Each Party will maintain workers’ compensation insurance or self-
insurance coverage, covering its own personnel while they are providing
assistance pursuant to this Agreement. Except as expressly provided herein, each
Party waives the right to sue any other Party for any workers’ compensation
benefits paid to its own employee or volunteer or their dependents.
9.5 Provider Responsible for Own Equipment-Except as expressly provided herein,
each Party shall be responsible for damages to or loss of its own equipment.
Except as expressly provided herein, each Party waives the right to sue any other
Party for any damages to, or loss of its equipment.
9.6 Provider Rendering First Aid-Except for immediate first aid rendered by a Provider
at the scene of an accident or occurrence, no other medical assistance, expenses or
aid is covered under the Policy.
10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
Each Provider in its relationship with the City under this Agreement is an
independent contractor. No Provider, its Licensed Peace Officers or other law
enforcement resources shall be considered an employee of the City. The City, its
Licensed Peace Officers or other law enforcement resources shall not be
considered employees of the Provider.
12
11. SUBCONTRACTING
The City and Provider agree that no Services will be subcontracted and agree not
to enter into any subcontracts to provide any Services under this Agreement.
12. ASSIGNMENT
Neither the City nor the Provider will assign or transfer any interest in this
Agreement without the consent of the other Party.
13. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The City and the Provider each agree to cooperate and negotiate in good faith to
resolve any disputes that arise regarding the terms of this Agreement and the
performance of the Services. If good faith negotiations fail to resolve a dispute,
then the Parties will use mediation services to attempt to resolve the dispute.
The City and Provider will equally share the expense of the mediator.
The Parties will select a mediator by each submitting three names in rank order of
preference to the other Party. If there is no common name on each Party’s list,
then a neutral, third party, law enforcement representative that is not a party to
this Agreement will select a mediator for the Parties. If mediation fails to resolve
a dispute between Parties, then the Parties will resolve the dispute through
litigation.
14. AUDIT OF AGREEMENT RECORDS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, both the City’s and the
Provider’s books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices
with respect to any matter covered by this Agreement shall be made available to
the State of Minnesota Office of the State Auditor upon written notice, at any time
during normal business hours, for the purpose of auditing, examining or making
excerpts or transcripts of relevant data.
15. AMENDMENT OR CHANGES TO AGREEMENT
15.1 Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this
Agreement shall be valid only when reduced to writing and duly signed by the
Parties hereto; after all appropriate and necessary authority has been acquired by
each such Party.
15.2 Modifications or additional schedules shall not be construed to adversely affect
vested rights or causes of action which have accrued prior to the effective date of
such amendment, modification, or supplement. The term “Agreement” as used
13
herein shall be deemed to include any future amendments, modifications, and
additional schedules made in accordance herewith.
16. NOTICES
Except as otherwise stated in this Agreement, all notice or demand to be given under this
Agreement shall be delivered in person or deposited in United States Certified Mail,
Return Receipt Requested. Any notices or other communications shall be addressed as
follows:
To City: To Provider:
Scott Gerlicher
Commander-Minneapolis Police Department
511 11th Avenue South
Suite 401
Minneapolis, MN 55415
17. INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
It is understood and agreed that this entire Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and
negotiations between the parties hereto relating to the subject matters herein. All items
that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and made a part of this
Agreement. If there is any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and referenced
or attached items, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
The matters set forth in the “WHEREAS” clauses at the beginning of this Agreement are
by this reference incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement.
19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
19.1 The Parties intend that, with respect to the defense and indemnification provisions
in Section 9 hereof, this Agreement may benefit or create rights or causes of
action in or on behalf of any other agency providing services for the Event under
a similar but separate agreement. Except for the foregoing, the Parties intend that
14
this Agreement will not benefit or create any right or cause of action in or on
behalf of any person or entity other than the Parties.
19.2 The Parties shall cooperate in achieving the objectives of this Agreement pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 15.51 through 15.57.
19.3 The Parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes,
regulations, rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted including but
not limited to the MGDPA, Minnesota Statutes Section 471.425, subd. 4a, and as
applicable, non-discrimination and affirmative action laws and policies.
19.4 If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, such
invalidity or unenforceability will not affect any other provision, and this
Agreement will be construed and enforced as if such invalid or unenforceable
provision had not been included.
19.5 Failure of a Party to enforce any provision of this Agreement does not affect the
rights of the Parties to enforce such provision in another circumstance. Failure to
enforce a provision does not affect the rights of the Parties to enforce any other
provision of the Agreement at any time
REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS BLANK
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto are authorized signatories and have
executed this Agreement, the day and year first above written.
CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS STATE/CITY/COUNTY OF
By: ___________________________ By: __________________________
15
Its: Police Chief Its:
Date: _________________________ Date: _________________________
Approval Recommended: Approval Recommended:
By: ______________________________ By:______________________________
Its: Assistant City Attorney Its:
By:______________________________ By:______________________________
Its: Purchasing Department Its:
EXHIBIT A - Super Bowl Events
Event Description
Super Bowl Experience
Media Center/Radio Row
Mall of America Game Day Event
NFL Honors
NFL Friday Night Party
Tailgate Party
16
Opening Night
NFL on Location
Super Bowl Live
Stadium Interior
Stadium Perimeter
Pre-game Party
AFC Team Hotel
NFC Team Hotel
NFL Headquarters Hotel
AFC Practice Site
NFC Practice Site
Police Escorts
Tactical Squad
Bomb Technical Squad
Bomb K-9s
VACIS
Street Patrol Downtown
Extra Metro Transit Security
Mobile Field Force Square
Fit Team
VPSO
Command Post Security
Staging
Logistics
Credentialing
Dignitary Liaison
Counterfeiting
Human Trafficking
Investigators
The MPD will maintain a list of Licensed Police Officers covered by this Agreement
EXHIBIT B
Super Bowl Special Event Period Reimbursement Guidelines
Reimbursement Period: Friday January 26th, 2018 through Monday February 5th, 2018
1. General Reimbursement Guidelines:
a. The lead law enforcement agency, Minneapolis Police Department, will serve as
fiscal agent for purposes of this agreement.
17
b. Reimbursement will be for official Super Bowl events sanctioned by the MN Host
Committee and/or the NFL only, or for hours worked in direct support of the lead
law enforcement agency, Minneapolis Police Department.
c. All hours worked will be considered “on duty” time.
d. Sending agencies are expected to place provided law enforcement officers “on
assignment” for the event period and this assignment will be their normal
assignment for that period. Personnel should not be expected to work the event
week in addition to their normal job at their respective agency.
e. Reimbursement will occur for personnel wage costs only at established straight
time or overtime rates pursuant to Section 2, Established Hourly Reimbursement
Rates, in this Exhibit B. These rates are all inclusive and will not be adjusted.
f. Reimbursement will occur only for hours worked consistent with official
operational plans approved by the core planning team and the lead law
enforcement agency, MPD.
g. There will be no reimbursement for non-personnel costs, backfill, pre-event
training, equipment, and other expenses including but not limited to travel costs,
fuel, mileage, per diem, etc.
h. Reimbursement will occur only for state, county, and local law enforcement
personnel participating in official Super Bowl Event security details.
i. There will be no reimbursement for participation of law enforcement command
level staff including but not limited to those in the ranks of Chief, Sheriff,
Assistant Chief, Deputy Chief, Colonel, Major, Sr. Commander, Captain or other
law enforcement officers working in a command position and/or in an exempt
payroll status.
j. Generally, participating law enforcement personnel will be expected to work a ten
hour shift daily during the event period (This may vary based on specific
assignments).
k. For reimbursement purposes, a law enforcement officer’s shift begins and ends
when he/she checks in/out on site with the lead law enforcement agency. This will
be tracked using an automated system provided by the lead law enforcement
agency.
Law enforcement personnel will be notified of their daily and hourly schedule 30-60 days prior
to the special event period subject to any changes that may occur. There will be no
reimbursement for any changes to the schedule or for any scheduled off days during this period
or for off hours where personnel are not actively assigned to an official special event detail.
a. Sending agencies and personnel assigned to the special event week must adhere to
all lead law enforcement agency requirements in order to be eligible for
reimbursement.
b. Any variation from the above guidelines must be approved by the lead law
enforcement agency, Minneapolis Police Department.
2. Established Hourly Reimbursement Rates:
18
a. All hours reimbursed under the terms of Sections 3 and 4 of this Exhibit B, below
will be paid at one of the following established hourly rates. These are set rates
and will not be adjusted based on specific agency hourly rates. The rates are
inclusive of all costs including both payroll and fringe.
i. $82 per hour overtime rate.
ii. $55 per hour straight time rate.
3. Specific Agency Reimbursement Guidelines:
a. For law enforcement personnel working in areas where they have jurisdictional
authority:
i. Reimbursement will occur only for overtime hours worked as a result of
established/approved operational plans and hours above and beyond that
of their scheduled shifts for that day with approval of incident commander.
ii. Sending agencies will be reimbursed for overtime hours worked under the
Joint Powers Agreement, not to exceed 60% of the total hours worked by
that agency at the established overtime rate as specified in Section 2 of
this Exhibit B, above.
iii. Sending agencies are expected to place provided law enforcement officers
“on assignment” for the event period and this assignment will be their
normal assignment for that period. Personnel should not be expected to
work the event week in addition to their normal job at their respective
agency.
b. For law enforcement personnel working in areas where they do not have
jurisdictional authority:
i. Reimbursement will occur for all hours worked to include straight time
and overtime at the established rates as specified in Section 2 of this
Exhibit B, above however reimbursement for overtime hours worked
under this Joint Powers Agreement which will not exceed 60% of the total
hours worked by that agency.
ii. Sending agencies are expected to place provided law enforcement officers
“on assignment” for the event period and this assignment will be their
normal assignment for that period. Personnel should not be expected to
work the event week in addition to their normal job at their respective
agency.
4. Reimbursement Process:
Within 30 days after the special event period, the lead law enforcement agency, MPD
will provide the sending agency with a report outlining hours worked for all personnel for
that agency.
19
a. Sending agency will review the personnel report for accuracy and outline which
hours constituted straight time versus overtime and submit an invoice with support
documentation to the lead law enforcement agency.
b. The lead law enforcement agency will review the invoice and support
documentation, and work with the sending agency on addressing any
discrepancies.
c. The lead law enforcement agency will issue reimbursement to the sending agency
consistent with the guidelines established in this agreement within 45 days of
receiving an invoice and the requested support documentation.
Invoices should be sent to:
MPD Chief Financial Officer
C/O Robin McPherson
350 South 5th Street, Room 130
Minneapolis, MN. 55415
EXHIBIT C
CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR CLAIMS BROUGHT AS A RESULT OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY SERVICES
1. The Host Committee and Insurer will develop a “uniform claim form (the “Form”). The
Form will be approved by the insurance broker retained by the Host Committee and by
the Insurer.
2. The Host Committee will establish a committee to review each Form submitted by third
parties alleging injuries or property damage due to law enforcement activities that
occurred during the Event (each completed Form a “Claim”).
20
3. The committee established to conduct the preliminary review of the Claim Forms
(“Claims Committee”) will consist of at least the following members:
(a) A Host Committee representative;
(b) A Representative of the insurance broker retained by the Host Committee; and
(c) The City of Minneapolis Risk Manager.
The Claims Committee may also include other Provider representatives as determined by
the three (3) required Claims Committee members.
4. After making a preliminary determination as to the validity of a Claim, the Claims
Committee will forward each Form to the Insurer. The Insurer will determine whether
Claims are covered by the Law Enforcement Liability Policy and determine when the
Policy limits have been reached and exceeded.
5. Once the aggregate amount of Claims exceeds $3 million, then the Insurer will notify the
Host Committee, the City and each Provider. Any further Claims brought against each
Provider after the date of notification that the $3 million coverage limitation has been
exhausted will be the sole responsibility of the Provider or Providers named in the Claim
to defend and pay the amount of damages determined by a court of law.
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.E.
STAFF REPORT NO. 164
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ay Henthorne, D irector/C hief of P olice
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice
10/29/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/3/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of the renewal of the contract with Chief's Towing, Inc., for Public Safety
towing services for December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The City of Richfield requires the services of a towing c ontrac tor to tow impounded vehicles/trailers as well as
vehic les parked illegally during snow ordinanc e enforcement, etc. The contrac t with Chief's towing expires
November 30, 2017. They are requesting an inc rease of 3% for servic es provided for the 2018.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the renewal of the contract with Chief's Towing, Inc., 8610 Harriet Avenue South,
Bloomington, MN, for Public Safety towing services for the period of D ecember 1, 2017, through
November 30, 2018.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
The C ity currently has a contract with Chief's Towing, inc ., for Public S afety towing services.
Chief's Towing, I nc ., was awarded the c ontrac t for 2017 and would like to renew the c ontract for
the y ear 2018, as the contract expires on November 30, 2017.
The c ontrac t c an be automatically renewed if both parties agree to the renewal and if Chief's
notifies the City in writing, 30 days in advanc e of the expiration of the contract, that they wish to
renew.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Chief's notified the C ity that they wish to renew the c ontrac t for 2017-2018.
The Public Safety D epartment wishes to renew the contract with Chief's Towing, I nc .
Contracts for servic es need not be competitively bid.
The c ontrac t has numerous conditions that must be met. Chief's Towing, I nc., is a reputable,
established towing business that meets all contract requirements.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
A six month notic e must be given by either party in writing to terminate the c ontac t.
On D ec ember 1, 2017, Public Safety must have towing services. This is particularly important
with the possibility of snow ordinanc e violations at any time.
Chief's is a large towing c ompany that c an handle the needs of Public Safety regarding
seizure/impound vehicles and comply with C ity ordinanc es that a smaller company could not
handle effec tively.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Rates will increase by 3% for the period of December 1, 2017-November 30, 2018, per the
attached letter from J effery Schoenborn, General Manager of Chief's Towing.
The last rate increase was in 2014.
There is adequate funding in the P ublic Safety budget to cover the c osts.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney has reviewed and approved the past c ontract with C hief's Towing, I nc.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Council c ould c hose to not sign the contract; however, Public Safety must have towing and impounding
services beginning D ec ember 1, 2017.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
L etter and Rate S heet C over Memo
2017-2018 C ontract C ontract/A greement
Chief’s Towing, Inc
8610 Harriet Ave. South
Bloomington, MN 55420
Ph 952-888-2201 watts 800-888-2201
September 11, 2017
City of Richfield
Richfield Public Safety Department
Lt. Joe Griffin
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
RE: CONTRACT FOR TOWING OF CITY VEHICLES, IMPOUNDING AND STORAGE OF MOTOR
VEHICLES CONTRACT DECEMBER 1, 2017 THRU NOVEMBER 30, 2018.
LT. Griffin:
Chief’s Towing, Inc. would like to take this opportunity to thank you for allowing us to
perform the towing, impounding and storage of motor vehicles for the City of Richfield
this past year. We would like to extend the contract for an additional (1) year period if
such an extension is approved by the Richfield City Council.
This year we will be asking for a 3% increase, the CPI shows a 5% since our last
increase in 2014 however we are willing to accept only the 3%.
Attached is a list of services showing the current and proposed rates that will be charged.
Sincerely,
Jeffery R. Schoenborn
Chief’s Towing, Inc.
General Manager
City of Richfield, MNCity of Richfield, MNCity of Richfield, MNCity of Richfield, MN
Current and proposed rates for
TOWING, IMPOUNDING, STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND SERVICES
Current Proposed
12/01/2016 12/01/2017
thru thru
11/30/2017 11/30/2018
Towing of impounded cars, trucks (under 1 ½ ton capacity),
Motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, snowmobiles and unattended
Utility trailers towed within the City of Richfield ................................... $ 88.60 $ 91.25
Towing charge for the same from outside the
City of Richfield .................................................................................... $ 88.60 $ 91.25
Mileage charge for same .......................................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.65
Towing of trucks (larger than 1 ton capacity) within
the City of Richfield ................................................................................ $148.50 $ 152.95
Towing charge for same outside the
City of Richfield .................................................................................... $148.50 $ 152.95
Mileage charge for same .......................................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.65
Use of Winch with a tow
Car (Per hour) ............................................................................ $ 22.10 $ 22.75
Truck (Per hour ......................................................................... $ 36.65 $ 37.75
Use of Dolly .................................................................................... $ 22.10 $ 22.75
Use of low-bed trailer or truck (flatbed required) .................................... $ 110.85 $ 114.20
Storage Charges
First 24 hours or fraction thereof:
Inside Storage .............................................................. $ 39.80 $ 41.00
Outside Storage ........................................................... $ 29.30 $ 30.20
Each additional 24 hours of fraction thereof:
Inside Storage ............................................................................ $ 39.20 $ 40.40
Outside Storage ......................................................................... $ 29.30 $ 30.20
Forfeitures
Vehicles forfeited to the City of Richfield ................................ $152.00 $ 156.55
City owned vehicles
Towing city owned vehicle less than 1 ton within city of Richfield ........ $ 43.15 $ 44.45
Mileage charge for same outside city ...................................................... $ 3.55 $ 3.65
*cents are rounded to the nearest nickel*
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND
CHIEF’S TOWING, INC. FOR TOWING,
IMPOUNDING AND STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES.
THIS AGREEMENT is made this 10th day of October, 2017, between the City of
Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 6700 Portland Avenue South,
Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and Chief’s Towing,
Inc., located at 8610 Harriet Avenue South (hereinafter referred to as the “Contractor”).
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City has a need to contract for the towing, impounding and
storage of motor vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City requires that the towing operators are located within three
(3) miles of the City limits; and
WHEREAS, the Contractor is the operator of a towing and storage facility within
three (3) miles of the City limits and has the expertise and capabilities to provide the
required services;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed
herein, the parties agree as follows:
I. TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term of this Agreement shall be from December 1, 2017, to November 30,
2018, subject to termination as provided in Subdivision V.
II. DUTIES OF CONTRACTOR
A. The Contractor shall tow, impound, and store all motor vehicles, which are
ordered removed under the direction of the police chief, or the fire chief, of
the City of Richfield or their authorized and legal representatives. The
Contractor shall be entitled to a charge for its towing and storage services
pursuant to those fees specified in the Contractor’s Proposal (Exhibit B).
It is agreed that neither the City nor the Richfield Police Department is
responsible for any charges as a result of towing and/or storage, with the
exception of those vehicles identified by the Police as subject to forfeiture,
and that the Contractor assumes liability for any unpaid charges.
B. The Contractor agrees to provide the services, as proposed, and perform
all other terms and conditions according to the City’s Specifications and
the Contractor’s Proposal, incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit A
and Exhibit B.
C. The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless, the City of
Richfield, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all claims,
causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including
attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the Contractor’s (including its
officials, agents or employees), performance of the duties required under
this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense
is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or
destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is
caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful
misconduct of Contractor.
D. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be
construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of
copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting the Contractor’s
staff as the agents, representatives or employees of the City for any
purpose in any manner whatsoever. The Contractor and its staff are to be
and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services
performed under this Agreement. The Contractor represents that it has, or
will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing
services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the Contractor or
other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services
required by the Contractor under this Agreement, shall have no
contractual relationship with the City and shall not be considered
employees of the City, and any and all claims that may or might arise
under the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf
of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all
claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out
of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims
of discrimination against the Contractor, its officers, agents, contractors or
employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City; and the
Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, agents
and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any
determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or
court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to
any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City,
including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick
and vacation leave, Workers’ Compensation, Unemployment
Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA.
E. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act,
Minnesota Statutes, Section 363.
F. The Contractor agrees to maintain for the full term of this Agreement, the
following minimum insurance coverage:
a) $1,000,000.00 Comprehensive General Liability insurance,
Business Auto Policy with $1,000,000.00 limits and Garage
Keeper’s Legal Liability.
b) Workers’ Compensation insurance covering all employees of the
Contractor, or his agents, in accordance with the Minnesota
Workers’ Compensation Law.
Certifications of insurance must be filed with the City and shall include a
provision that states the insurance company shall give the City at least 25
days written notice prior to cancellation, non-renewal, or any material
change in the policy. The Contractor further agrees to name the City of
Richfield as additional insured on said comprehensive general liability
policy.
G. The Contractor agrees to furnish on or before the date this Agreement
becomes effective, an acceptable corporate surety bond in the amount of
$10,000, payable to the City of Richfield and subject to approval by the
Richfield City Attorney, for the faithful performance of all duties and
obligations imposed under the terms and conditions of the Agreement.
III. DUTIES OF THE CITY
The City agrees to pay the Contractor the flat rate charge of $156.55 per vehicle
for the towing and storage of vehicles identified by the Police Department as subject to
forfeiture and which are subsequently released to the Police Department.
IV. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This agreement represents the entire Agreement between the Contractor and
the City and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or
proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter
hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms
and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both
parties.
B. The Contractor agrees to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act
(ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and not discriminate on
the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of
employment in its services, programs, or activities. The Contractor agrees to
hold harmless and indemnify the City from costs, including but not limited to
damages, attorney’s fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought,
alleging a violation of ADA and/or Section 504 caused by the Contractor.
Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with
disabilities to participate in all services, programs and activities. The City has
designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S.
Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations.
C. The Contractor will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. The
Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws,
rules and regulations in the performance of the duties of this contract.
D. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of the
City.
E. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of the
Contractor, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the
City, and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 168.06, Subdivision 4.
F. The City and the Contractor agree to submit all claims, disputes and other
matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this
Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be conducted through the
Mediation Center, 1821 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota. The parties
hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non-binding. If the
parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non-binding. In the event
mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable
remedies and commence such action prior to the expiration of the applicable
statute of limitations.
V. TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving six (6)
months advanced written notice to the other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF RICHFIELD
DATED: __________________________ BY: ___________________________
Its Mayor
DATED: __________________________ BY: ___________________________
Its Manager
CHIEF’S TOWING, INC.
DATED: __________________________ BY: ___________________________
Its: ____________________________
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.F.
STAFF REPORT NO. 165
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector
10/4/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of a resolution calling for a public hearing by the City C ouncil on the
proposed adoption of a modification to the r edevelopment plan for the Richfield redevelopment project
area, the modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment
Financing Distr ict, and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Finance District N o. 2017-1
Housing.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
I n Oc tober 2015, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority entered into a preliminary development
agreement with I nland Development Partners to develop a multi-family housing project in the C edar Point
South area (bounded by 66th Street to the north; 17th Avenue to the west, Cedar Avenue to the east, and
68th Street to the south). After two years of work and succ essful solic itation of grant funds from the
Metropolitan C ounc il for the construction of an extension of Ric hfield Parkway through this area, the Council
approved final development plans to construct three new apartment buildings (284 new units total) and
renovate three existing apartment buildings (33 units) on September 26.
The financial feasibility revealed a substantial gap in the project. I n order for the project to move forward and
inc lude affordable units, the D eveloper will need public assistanc e to bridge the gap.
The development area c urrently sits within an existing Redevelopment Tax I nc rement Financ ing (TI F) Distric t
that was established in 2005. Housing TI F Districts have requirements and benefits that are more suited to
the development being proposed. As such, staff is proposing to remove the development from the
existing Redevelopment T IF District and establish a new Housing T IF District for the project.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution calling for a public hearing by the City C ouncil on the proposed
adoption of a modification to the redevelopment plan for the Richfield redevelopment project area, the
modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing
District, and the pr oposed establishment of Tax Increment Finance District N o. 2017-1 Housing ther ein
and the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
A 1999/2000 study, commissioned by the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports
Commission (MA C ), conc luded that many of the structures in this area, inc luding all single-family
homes, were not c apable of withstanding the negative impacts of low frequency noise.
As a result of the study, this area was identified as a Redevelopment A rea in 2000.
I n 2002, federal funding was secured to ac quire the homes in this area - at which time, 28 single-
family homes and 1 business in the area were purchased and eventually deeded to the HRA.
I n 2004, the Minnesota Legislature approved the creation of a special Redeveloment TI F District
to provide a funding mec hanism for redevelopment of the area.
During the "Great Rec ession" of 2007-2011, there was very little interest in developing this area
due to weak market conditions.
Upon the c onclusion of the recession, HRA staff conc entrated their development efforts on the
Cedar Point I I area (north of 66th Street) for whic h there have been several proposals.
I n 2015, Anderson C ompanies (the princ ipals of whic h later formed I nland D evelopment Partners)
expressed interest in this area and submitted a proposal for development that has remained fairly
consistent sinc e.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The projec t has always anticipated including a minimum of 20% affordable units. The
establishment of a Housing TI F Distric t will ensure that the affordable units will be included in the
project.
2008 C ity of Ric hfield Comprehensive P lan polic ies:
Maintain an appropriate mix of housing types in each neighborhood based
on available amenities, transportation resources and adjacent land uses;
Promote the development of a balanced housing stock that is available to a range of
income levels.
Promote the development, management, and maintenance of affordable housing in the
City through assistance programs; alternative funding sources; and the creation of
partnerships whose mission is to promote low to moderate income housing.
Richfield A ffordable Housing Polic y
Contain a mix of market-rate and affordable units, with a higher proportion of market-rate
units.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
State Statute requires that the County, Sc hool D istricts, and other taxing jurisdictions rec eive
notice of the proposed Tax I ncrement Plan and other information on fiscal impac ts related to the
modification/establishment of a Redevelopment Projec t Area and/or TI F Distric t at least 30 days
prior to the hearing.
The HRA must also consider the modifications and plan; this is tentatively sc heduled for
November 20, 2017.
The Planning Commission must determine whether the establishment of suc h a distric t would be
consistent with Ric hfield's Comprehensive Plan; this is tentatively scheduled for the November 27,
2017 Planning Commission meeting.
A public hearing before the Council is tentatively scheduled for November 28, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The estimated tax inc rement available through the creation of a new Housing TI F D istrict is
approximately $8.5 million over the life of the Distric t.
The approved C ontrac t provides the D eveloper with 90% of the available TI F over the life of the
Distric t.
W ithout the TI F, this project would be unable to proc eed.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity's financ ial advisor and HRA attorney have reviewed the required doc uments.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not adopt the resolution.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Representatives of I nland Development Partners
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
Resolution Resolution L etter
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL
ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA, THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CEDAR AVENUE TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT, AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 2017-1 (THE CHAMBERLAIN) AND THE
ADOPTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"),
as follows:
Section 1. Public Hearing. This Council shall meet on November 28, 2017, at approximately 7:00
P.M., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for
the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, the proposed modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District, and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment
Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain), (a housing district), and the proposed adoption of a Tax
Increment Financing Plan therefor (together, the “Plans”), all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended, in an
effort to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and
Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing, Filing of Plans. City staff is authorized and directed to work
with Ehlers to prepare the Plans and to forward documents to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions including
Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280. The Community Development Director is
authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with an appropriate map as required by law,
to be published at least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days
prior to November 28, 2017, and to place a copy of the Plans on file in the Community Development
Director's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public.
Dated: October 10, 2017
Adopted:
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.G.
STAFF REPORT NO. 166
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Matt B ri llhart, A ssociate P lanner
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S atrk, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector
10/3/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/3/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance amending residential driveway
regulations.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
At the direction of the C ity Council, planning staff began researching potential modific ations to driveway
regulations. Current regulations prohibit properties with narrow, single-car garages from having a driveway
wider than the garage itself. C ity staff and Counc ilmembers annually receive a small number of c omplaints
regarding this polic y. I n conjunction with relaxing that particular regulation, staff is also proposing
modifications to other driveway regulations, whic h were last amended in 2005.
Under current regulations, driveway width is determined in two way s:
Definition of "driveway": D riveways must lead to a garage or other authorized parking area. Parking in
the front yard area is only permitted on driveway s.
Lot width: no more than 35% of the front yard area, up to 22 feet maximum. This results in potential
driveway widths of 17.5 feet (50 foot lot), 21 feet (60 foot lot), and 22 feet (75 foot lots and larger).
For those properties with narrow single-car garages, driveway width is potentially limited to as little as 10
to 14 feet, regardless of the size of the lot. T his has been found to be an overly restrictive policy,
making it difficult or impossible to park two cars side-by-side or bypass a parked car at any point.
Properties that fall into this category make up a fair percentage of the housing stock in Richfield.
Furthermore, current regulations do not specify how and where a driveway should taper from its
maximum width at the garage to an existing curb cut that is narrower. T his lack of specificity has
resulted in driveways being widened out to the curb without replacing the curb cut.
To remedy those related issues, staff recommends amending the clause regarding lot widths and
adding a new clause to the ordinance, as follows:
1. Width shall not exceed 35% of the front yard area, up to 20 feet maximum, whichever is less;
2. Driveway width shall not exceed the width of the curb cut within the boulevard and abutting
ten feet of property. Beyond that point, width may increase to the number established by Item
(1). T he widened portion of the driveway shall be screened with plantings.
Effe cts of propose d change s to drive w ay width in front yard and boulev ard area:
All lot widths: A driveway with a narrower curb cut would retain the existing width through the
boulevard and first 10 feet of private property, then be allowed to expand up to 17.5 feet to 20
feet (depending on lot width), regardless of current garage width.
50 foot lot with existing wider curb cut or wider garage – no change.
60 foot lot with existing wider curb cut or wider garage – reduction in maximum driveway width
from 21 feet to 20 feet.
75 foot lot with existing wider curb cut or wider garage – reduction in maximum driveway width
from 22 feet to 20 feet.
Driveways on the street/corner side of corner lots (not in front yard area) – no change.
O ther proposed changes to driveway regulations:
In addition to relaxing the regulation for narrow garages, staff is proposing to modify the following:
Lots with alley access will not be permitted to install a curb cut in the front yard. T his is the
current policy for new homes constructed through the Richfield Rediscovered program and
staff recommends making this policy effective citywide. If unique conditions exist, necessitating
a front driveway when alley access is provided, a property owner may apply for a variance.
Corner lots will only be permitted one curb cut. Currently, corner properties are eligible for a
curb cut to each street. Most corner properties have garages accessed from the street/corner
side rather than the front. A minority of corner properties do have front driveways, and under
current policy are allowed to retain a front driveway when adding a new garage and driveway
on the street/corner side. Many of those existing front driveways on corner properties are
closer to the intersection than allowed by ordinance. T his change would require removal if a
new garage and driveway are added on the street/corner side of the property.
Turnaround areas will only be permitted on arterial streets. Currently, the ordinance allows
turnarounds on arterials and collectors. In practice, turnarounds exist only on arterials - very
few have been constructed on collector streets. With the exception of Bloomington Avenue
north of 66th Street and 12th Avenue south of 66th Street, the remainder of collector streets
run east-west and do not abut the front yard area of residential properties. Wider driveways
(and/or turnarounds) are permitted in corner/street side yards. See the "Policies" section
below for a complete list of arterial and collector streets.
Benefits of limiting driveway widths in the front y ard and boulevard area include: minimizing impervious
surfac es, retaining space for boulevard trees, retaining on-street parking capac ity, and maintaining existing
neighborhood aesthetics.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a first reading of the attached ordinance amending r esidential driveway
regulations.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
Driveway regulations were last amended in 2005. See attached Council Memo No. 66 for a
summary of past ac tions and Council direc tion to study the issue.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Zoning C ode Sec tion 507.07, Subdivision 36 defines "driveway" as: "An area designed to provide
ingress and egress for motor vehic les from the street to a garage or other authorized off-street
parking area; the term does not inc lude:
A nonc ontiguous area exclusively set aside or used for the parking and storage of
rec reational vehicles and equipment; or
P arking lots.
No changes are proposed to the above definition of "driveway" as part of this c ode amendment.
Changes are proposed to the following subsec tions regulating driveway s in the front yard and
boulevard area:
S ingle-Family Residential (R) - 514.05 Subd. 6
Low-Density Single-Family Residential (R-1) - 518.05 Subd. 6
Two-Family Residential (MR-1) - 522.05 Subd. 6
Arterial and collec tor streets are designated as follows:
AR T E R IAL C O L LE C TO R
66th Street 12th Avenue (66th to 78th Streets)
Ly ndale Avenue B loomington Avenue (62nd to 66th Streets)
Nicollet Avenue Diagonal Boulevard
Penn Avenue 65th S treet (Nic ollet Ave to Rae Dr)
Cedar Avenue 70th S treet (D iagonal Blvd to Ly ndale Ave)
Xerxes Avenue (62nd to 66th Streets) 73rd S treet (D iagonal Blvd to Ly ndale Ave)
76th Street (Girard to Xerxes Avenues) 76th S treet (C edar to Girard Avenues)
77th Street (Cedar Avenue to 35W )
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
None
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
A public hearing to consider this ordinance was held before the Planning Commission on
September 25, 2017. Notice of this public hearing was published in the S un C urrent newspaper in
accordanc e with state and local requirements. No members of the public spoke.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the attached ordinance (5-0).
The C ounc il will consider final adoption of the ordinance on October 24, 2017.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Approve the first reading of the ordinanc e with modific ations.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
Ordinance Ordinance
C ity C ounci l Memo No. 66 - D riveway S i ze Regulations B ackup Materi al
A ttached garage diagram B ackup Materi al
D etached garage diagram B ackup Materi al
E xamples from Google S treet View B ackup Materi al
BILL NO. _____
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE
TO UPDATE RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1 Subsection 514.05, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Code relating to allowable
accessory buildings and uses in the Single-Family Residential (R) District is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Private driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks for
residential uses, provided the following conditions are met:
a) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be set back no less than one foot from any lot line abutting another parcel,
except that upon written request from the landowner, the Director may
reduce or rescind this setback requirement for shared access agreements
or with a finding of necessity and public convenience;
b) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be constructed with concrete, asphalt, concrete pavers, brick set in
compacted sand, or other material approved by the Director;
c) No parking area shall be permitted in the front yard area except as
allowed by paragraph d);
d) Within the front yard area, vehicles shall only be parked on the driveway
area;
e) Driveways, where located within the boulevard or the front yard area, are
subject to the following requirements:
(i) They shall not exceed 22 feet in width up to a maximum of 35% of
the front yard area Width shall not exceed 35% of the front yard area, up
to 2022 feet maximum, whichever is less (curb cut radii excluded);
(ii) Driveway width shall not exceed the width of the curb cut within the
boulevard and abutting ten feet of property. Beyond that point, width may
increase to the number established by item (i). The expanded portion of
the driveway shall be screened with plantings;
(iii) Curb cut radii (five (5) feet minimum) shall not encroach upon the
boulevard of abutting properties;
(iiiv) On corner lots, driveways shall be set back at least 30 feet from an
intersection, as measured from the point where the extended curblines of
the streets intersect;
(iv) Only one (1) curb cut shall be permitted from a public street to an
interior lot. A corner lot may have one (1) curb cut from each public street,
provided the driveway setback requirement in item (iii) above is met and
Lots with alley access shall not be permitted to install a curb cut;
(vi) Upon written request from the landowner, items (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv)
and (v) above may be varied by the Director with a finding of necessity
and public convenience;
f) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or
turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit;
g) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a curb cut from a public
street to a lot shall be subject to a city permit and any curb cut abandoned
with the installation of a new cut shall be extinguished and replaced with
curb and gutter according to specifications determined by the Director of
Public Works;, except as provided in (e) (iv), provided the curb cut meets
all requirements of (e) and is in service for driveway or parking purposes;
and
h) A turnaround area may be located within a front yard subject to the
requirements of this paragraph. The turnaround area is limited to the front
yard of arterial and collector streets only. The turnaround area cannot
exceed 150 square feet. The turnaround area must be contiguous to the
driveway. The turnaround area shall be set back no less than 3 feet from
any public sidewalk.
Section 2 Subsection 518.05, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Code relating to allowable
accessory buildings and uses in the Low-Density Single-Family Residential (R-1)
District is amended to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Private driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks for
residential uses, provided the following conditions are met:
a) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be set back no less than one foot from any lot line abutting another parcel,
except that upon written request from the landowner, the Director may
reduce or rescind this setback requirement for shared access agreements
or with a finding of necessity and public convenience;
b) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be constructed with concrete, asphalt, concrete pavers, brick set in
compacted sand, or other material approved by the Director;
c) No parking area shall be permitted in the front yard area except as
allowed by paragraph d);
d) Within the front yard area, vehicles shall only be parked on the driveway
area;
e) Driveways, where located within the boulevard or the front yard area, are
subject to the following requirements:
(i) They shall not exceed 22 feet in width up to a maximum of 35% of
the front yard area Width shall not exceed 35% of the front yard area, up
to 2022 feet maximum, whichever is less (curb cut radii excluded);
(ii) Driveway width within the boulevard area and abutting ten feet of
property shall not exceed the width of the curb cut. Beyond that point,
width may increase to the number established by item (i). The tapered
portion of the driveway should be screened with plantings;
(iii) Curb cut radii (five (5) feet minimum) shall not encroach upon the
boulevard of abutting properties;
(iiiv) On corner lots, driveways shall be set back at least 30 feet from an
intersection, as measured from the point where the extended curblines of
the streets intersect;
(iv) Only one (1) curb cut shall be permitted from a public street to an
interior lot. A corner lot may have one (1) curb cut from each public street,
provided the driveway setback requirement in item (iii) above is met and
Lots with alley access shall not be permitted to install a curb cut;
(vi) Upon written request from the landowner, items (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv)
and (v) above may be varied by the Director with a finding of necessity
and public convenience;
f) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or
turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit;
g) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a curb cut from a public
street to a lot shall be subject to a city permit and any curb cut abandoned
with the installation of a new cut shall be extinguished and replaced with
curb and gutter according to specifications determined by the Director of
Public Works;, except as provided in (e) (iv), provided the curb cut meets
all requirements of (e) and is in service for driveway or parking purposes;
and
h) A turnaround area may be located within a front yard subject to the
requirements of this paragraph. The turnaround area is limited to the front
yard of arterial and collector streets only. The turnaround area cannot
exceed 150 square feet. The turnaround area must be contiguous to the
driveway. The turnaround area shall be set back no less than 3 feet from
any public sidewalk.
Section 3 Subsection 522.05, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Code relating to allowable
accessory buildings and uses in the Two-Family Residential (MR-1) District is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Private driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks for
residential uses, provided the following conditions are met:
a) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be set back no less than one foot from any lot line abutting another parcel,
except that upon written request from the landowner, the Director may
reduce or rescind this setback requirement for shared access agreements
or with a finding of necessity and public convenience;
b) All such driveways, parking areas, turnaround areas, and sidewalks shall
be constructed with concrete, asphalt, concrete pavers, brick set in
compacted sand, or other material approved by the Director;
c) No parking area shall be permitted in the front yard area except as
allowed by paragraph d);
d) Within the front yard area, vehicles shall only be parked on the driveway
area;
e) Driveways, where located within the boulevard or the front yard area, are
subject to the following requirements:
(i) They shall not exceed 22 feet in width up to a maximum of 35% of
the front yard area Width shall not exceed 35% of the front yard area, up
to 2022 feet maximum, whichever is less (curb cut radii excluded);
(ii) Driveway width within the boulevard area and abutting ten feet of
property shall not exceed the width of the curb cut. Beyond that point,
width may increase to the number established by item (i). The tapered
portion of the driveway should be screened with plantings;
(iii) Curb cut radii (five (5) feet minimum) shall not encroach upon the
boulevard of abutting properties;
(iiiv) On corner lots, driveways shall be set back at least 30 feet from an
intersection, as measured from the point where the extended curblines of
the streets intersect;
(iv) Only one (1) curb cut shall be permitted from a public street to an
interior lot. A corner lot may have one (1) curb cut from each public street,
provided the driveway setback requirement in item (iiiv) above is met. Lots
with alley access shall not be permitted to install a curb cut; and
(vi) Upon written request from the landowner, items (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv)
and (v) above may be varied by the Director with a finding of necessity
and public convenience;
f) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or
turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit;
g) Any expansion, installation or replacement of a curb cut from a public
street to a lot shall be subject to a city permit and any curb cut abandoned
with the installation of a new cut shall be extinguished and replaced with
curb and gutter according to specifications determined by the Director of
Public Works, except as provided in (e) (iv), provided the curb cut meets
all requirements of (e) and is in service for driveway or parking purposes;
and
h) A turnaround area may be located within a front yard subject to the
requirements of this paragraph. The turnaround area is limited to the front
yard of arterial and collector streets only. The turnaround area cannot
exceed 150 square feet. The turnaround area must be contiguous to the
driveway. The turnaround area shall be set back no less than 3 feet from
any public sidewalk.
Section 4 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City
Charter.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of October,
2017.
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
July 6 2017
Council Memorandum No 66
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
Subject Driveway Size Regulations
Council Members
In 2004 the Council asked staff to review the City s front yard parking regulations Both
Council Members and citizens had expressed concerns about what was seen as
excessive amounts of paving and vehicles in the front yards of residential properties
The issue was particularly a problem along major streets where on street parking was
and remains prohibited
A moratorium was put in place in 2004 so the city could study the issue City regulations
at that time allowed up 50 of front yards to be paved in many instances Residents
were using this paved area for parking sometimes resulting in up to a dozen vehicles
parked in the front yard of some homes After the study was completed the City Council
passed a new ordinance that severely limited excessive driveway areas
New regulations were adopted by the Council in 2005 These regulations
Prohibited front yard parking parking would be allowed on driveways only
Driveways continued to be defined as areas that led to a garage or other
approved parking areas in side or back yards
In all cases driveways were limited to 22 feet or up to a maximum of 35 of the
front yard area
On arterial and collector streets a provision for a turnaround area was created
The turnaround area was is defined as an area used for vehicle maneuvers
Turnaround areas are allowed to be up to 150 square feet and must be
contiguous to the driveway Parking is not allowed in turnaround areas
Since the adoption of these rules once or twice each summer Inspections and or
Planning gets complaints from property owners with a single car garage about these
rules The rules prohibit a property with a single car garage from having a driveway that
is wider than the garage itself While street parking is available in most locations with
the exception of snow emergencies property owners would generally prefer to park on
a driveway A recent such request has been received by staff and some Council
Members
Unless Council Members object staff will look at some potential options to relax the
existing rules for properties with a single car garage to submit to the Council for your
consideration However this will be done with careful attention to the underlying
restrictions that were put in place in 2005 to correct a long standing problem identified
by the City Council at that time
Respectfully submitted
Steven L Devich
City Manager
SLD ttf
Email Assistant City Manager
Department Directors
City Planner
Examples of existing non-conforming or illegal driveway expansions in the boulevard
The ordinance amendment will clarify maximum width allowed in the boulevard area
to avoid situations such as these:
Existing narrow curb cut expands to a driveway wider than single-car garage:
This is currently not permitted, but will be permitted under the amended ordinance.
Example of corner lot with two curb cuts and driveways (one on each street):
Under the proposed ordinance amendment, the existing front driveway would have been required to
be removed before installing the new curb cut and detached garage. Additionally, this front driveway is
non-conforming as it is too close to the intersection.
Example of a front driveway on a block where all other properties use alley access:
Under the proposed amendment, front yard driveways are prohibited where alley access is available.
This is currently the city’s policy for new homes constructed through the Richfield Rediscovered
program and would be applied citywide.
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #6.
STAFF REPORT NO. 167
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris L i nk, Operations S uperintendent
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
10/3/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Public hearing r egarding the annual Lyndale/H U B/Nicollet (L H N) Maintenance D istrict assessment.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The Lyndale/HUB /Nic ollet (L HN) maintenance assessment was established to recover spec ial maintenance
expenses in the L HN area in 1981. The current servic es inc lude:
Maintenanc e and operation of irrigation
W eed control
Mowing
Trash and litter removal
Maintenanc e of street lihgting system
The LHN Redevelopment Area is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street, and
Emerson Avenue (map attached).
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion:
1. Approv e a resolution adopting the asse ssme nt on the Ly ndale/HUB/Nicolle t (LHN)
district for costs incurred to maintain the area for 2016.
2. Approve a resolution ordering the undertaking of the current service project within the
Lyndale/H U B /N icollet (L H N) district for 2018.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
City staff has determined ac tual costs of c urrent services to be assessed for the 2016
maintenanc e of this area to be $26,025.24, and the estimated cost for 2018 maintenanc e to be
$50,000.
Fluc tuations in expenditures for maintenanc e of L HN are c aused by a number of factors:
Changes in water use and irrigation costs;
Conc rete repair variations; and
Demand of aging infrastructure updates.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Sec tion 825 of the C ity Code indicates “current servic es” mean one or more of the following:
(a) snow, ice, or rubbish removal from sidewalks;
(b) weed elimination from streets or private property;
(c) removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding
any struc ture included under the provisions of Minnesota S tatutes, sections 463.15 to
463.26;
(d) installation or repair of water service lines;
(e) street sprinkling, sweeping, or other dust treatment of streets;
(f) the trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees from any street;
(g) the treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private property;
(h) the repair of sidewalks and alley s;
(i) the operation of a street lighting system;
(j) the maintenance of landsc aped areas, decorative parks and other public amenities on or
adjacent to street right-of-way; and,
(k) snow removal and other maintenance of streets in commerc ial redevelopment areas.
Council ordered the work and the work was done for 2016.
Commerc ial property owners will be assessed on a per-square-foot basis.
The proposed assessment was properly filed with the City Clerk.
Notic e of assessment and the public hearing was mailed to all property owners on the assessment
roll on September 13, 2017.
Notic e of the public hearing was published in the official newspaper on S eptember 21, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Eac h year the C ity shall list the total unpaid c harges for current services against each separate lot
or parcel to which they are attributable under Sec tion 825 of the City C ode. This list is available at
the offices of the C ity Clerk, Assessing, and Public W orks.
The list is submitted to the County Auditor and due to Hennepin C ounty by November 30, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
All c osts to the C ity will be recovered through this assessment.
Estimated and actual c osts for the L HN maintenanc e services from 2003-2016 are:
Year Estimated Actual
2003 $50,000 $37,785.67
2004 $50,000 $44,031.39
2005 $50,000 $45,385.31
2006 $50,000 $45,648.56
2007 $50,000 $51,605.29
2008 $50,000 $49,999.99
2009 $50,000 $49,747.02
2010 $50,000 $32,459.40
2011 $50,000 $39,090.87
2012 $50,000 $32,244.51
2013 $50,000 $25,522.16
2014 $50,000 $29,415.52
2015 $50,000 $27,321.07
2016 $50,000 $26,025.24
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney has reviewed the resolutions and will be available to answer questions.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Council may make any c hanges to the assessment roll, as deemed nec essary, after the public hearing.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
2016 Resolution Resolution L etter
2018 Resolution Resolution L etter
L HN A ssessment Roll B ackup Materi al
L HN D istri ct Map B ackup Materi al
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR
THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2016 TO DECEMBER 31, 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment
Area, which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street, and
Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the total amount of $26,025.24 is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by
the proposed current services in the amount of assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 2018 and shall bear interest at
the rate of five percent (5%) from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City’s Finance Division,
except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid before
November 13, 2017. A property owner may, at any time prior to November 15 pay to
the City’s Finance Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid,
with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal
taxes.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 10th day of
October, 2017.
________________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT
SERVICE PROJECT LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN)
MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2018 TO
DECEMBER 31, 2018
WHEREAS, pursuant to ordinance, the City Council of the City of Richfield did
establish a special assessment district and did propose that certain services be
undertaken by the City in the Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet Redevelopment Area approximately
bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue and that the
cost of such services be specially assessed against benefited property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield did also by such resolution
set the date of public hearing on the undertaking of such current service project and the
levying of special assessment to bear the cost thereof; and
WHEREAS, following due notice, such public hearing was held on October 10,
2017, at which time all interested parties desiring to be heard were given an opportunity
to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the following examples of current services of the City shall be undertaken by
the City within the LHN Redevelopment Project Area, which area constitutes the
special assessment district with the exception of single family, two family and
multifamily residential properties, with the cost of such services to be specially
assessed against the benefited property within the district:
a. Snow, ice or rubbish removal;
b. Weed elimination;
c. Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private
property, excluding any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26;
d. Installation and repair of water service lines;
e. Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets;
f. The treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private
property;
g. Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees;
h. Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian walkways;
i. Operation of the street lighting system;
j. Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent
to street right-of-way; and
k. Snow removal and other maintenance of streets.
2. The work to be performed may be by day labor, by City force, by contract, or by any
combination thereof.
3. The designated period of the project shall be from January 1, 2018, through
December 31, 2018. Costs of the project shall be collected in the manner provided in
the Richfield Ordinance Code.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 10th day of
October, 2017.
________________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
2017 LHN Assessment
PID Address Column1 Assessment
2702824130115 16 66TH ST E $32.54
2702824230115 42 ADDRESS PENDING $178.95
2802824110090 42 ADDRESS PENDING $622.26
2802824110089 42 ADDRESS PENDING $984.23
2802824140371 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $77.27
2802824140370 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $256.23
2702824320133 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $239.96
2702824320132 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $89.48
2702824320134 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $174.88
2702824240064 100 66TH ST W $1,342.14
2702824240061 199 65TH ST W $5,356.34
2702824240063 220 66TH ST W $239.96
2702824230082 300 66TH ST W $1,146.92
2702824320138 407 66TH ST W $170.82
2702824230106 700 66TH ST W $20.34
2702824230107 704 66TH ST W $1,695.96
2802824140010 800 66TH ST W $483.98
2802824410039 826 66TH ST W $268.43
2702824130052 6401 NICOLLET AVE S $126.08
2702824240040 6410 NICOLLET AVE S $97.61
2702824240065 6412 NICOLLET AVE S $252.16
2702824230114 6420 LYNDALE AVE S $797.15
2702824130053 6425 NICOLLET AVE S $276.56
2702824230084 6436 LYNDALE AVE S $77.27
2702824230085 6438 LYNDALE AVE S $56.94
2702824230074 6439 LYNDALE AVE S $471.78
2702824240057 6440 NICOLLET AVE S $138.28
2702824230086 6440 LYNDALE AVE S $113.88
2702824230087 6444 LYNDALE AVE S $203.35
2702824230088 6444 LYNDALE AVE S $215.56
2702824130001 6445 NICOLLET AVE S $374.17
2702824230010 6467 LYNDALE AVE S $284.70
2702824240060 6500 NICOLLET AVE S $728.01
2702824230090 6500 LYNDALE AVE S $256.23
2702824230111 6501 LYNDALE AVE S $1,309.60
2702824230105 6501 WOODLAKE DR $81.34
2702824130116 6501 NICOLLET AVE S $1,317.73
2702824230112 6525 LYNDALE AVE S $618.20
2702824230113 6545 LYNDALE AVE S $496.18
2702824420078 6601 NICOLLET AVE S $683.27
2702824320137 6601 LYNDALE AVE S $1,395.01
2702824320452 6640 LYNDALE AVE S $1,663.44
2702824320127 6645 LYNDALE AVE S $471.78
2702824320126 6701 LYNDALE AVE S $138.27
26,025.24$
WEST PLEASANT AVE SWoodl
ake Dr
Lake Shore Dr
63RD ST W
RAE DR
EMERSON AVE SLYNDALE AVE SALDRICH AVE SBRYANT AVE SCOLFAX AVE SDUPONT AVE SBOB PL
67TH ST W
E M E R S O N
L A N E
Wood LakeLn
66TH
ST W
6 5 TH S T WHARRIET AVE SGARFIELD AVE64TH ST W
65TH ST W
NICOLLET AVE SGARFIELDAVES6 6 TH S T WLYNDALEAVESGRAND AVE SEAST PLEASANT AVE SPILLSBURY AVE SWENTWORTH AVE SBLAISDELL AVE SNICOLLET AVE S1ST AVE SLYNWOOD BLVDM ILDRED DR
(CO RD NO 52)Ri chfield Lake
ACADEMY OFHOLY ANGELS
BLESSED TRINITYCATHOLICSCHOOL
WOOD LAKENATURE CENTER
THE HUB
LITTLEBOB'SPARK
NICOLLETPARKGARFIELDPARK
APPLEBLOSSOMPARK
6348
6242
8 10 12
652765256521
65096507650565036501
7
1
0
7
0
4
7
1
6
6321
6463646764596716
670410121016101810081014905
6812
6738
6732
6726
6720
6714
6708
6700
6644
6638
6632
6626
6620
6614
6608
6636
6632
6628
6624
6620
6616
6612
6608
1107-09
67356725
6733
6729
6715
6709
6705
6707
6701
6645
6639
6633
6621
6625
6609
6601
6800
905912926
911
901
6615
6615
826
6604
6721
6657
6633
6629
6625
6621
6617
6615
6611
6607
6605
927925923 917
6701
6525
9019036500
920
924
1106
920 910
900
825
800
91592110016445
6540
6536
6327
6532
6528
6524
6520
6516
6512
6508
65046500
6533
6529
6539
1124
6525
6436
643064266424
6420
6416
6412
6408
6404
6400
6531
6535
4
812
6444
6300
6304
6315
102010166420
63016305
100810006304
6300 6301
6305
9201050
9149109069006320
6308
6300 63016305
141663096311
6321
63256327
6308
63046300 63016305
6313 6300
6239
6245 6244
6238
6244
6238 6239
1820226245 6244
6238
6232
6239
6245
6234
6233 6232
906
6328
6324
6320
6314 6317
6321
6325
6330
6320
6641
66246629
6625
66386635
6633 6632
10-12 6644 6641
6633
6627
6601
6621
6617
6613
6605
6601
6721
6727
6733
6739 6738
6732
6726 6729
6733
6737
6701
6705
6711
6715
6718
6714
6708
6704
6700 6701
6705
6709
6713
6719
6547
65496551
407
6601
6711
6600
400
6338633663346332
6555
6645
6701
6717
6600
6734
6732670067016705
6709
6713
6717
6721
6725
6729
6733
6737 6738
6724
6720
67126708
67006701
6709
6713
6717
6721
6725
6729
6733
6737
6741 6744
6736
6732
6728
6724
6720
6716
6712
6708
67046700
67406743672567306709
6725
6733
6737
6741
6745 6740
6736
6732
6724
6720
6716
6710
6700
6640
67306729
6737 6738
6732
6726 6725
6729 161/26735
6739 6738
6734
6728
6724
6737
6741 6740
6736
6600
100
220
199 66th St W
6500
6440
3236
6401
6409
6415
6421
6429
64146420
6410
64006401
6409
6415
6421
6429 6428
6420
6414
6408
64006401
6409
6415
6421
6429 6428
6420
6414
6408
6400
6401
6413
6421
6429 6428
6420
6414
6408
6400
6437
212 200
6430
7
1
8
7
2
26501 6401
6500
6444644064386436
300
6501
65216439800
840
6430 5215156400
6408
6229
6231
1/2
80
6414
6420
4154094016401
6409
6415
6421 6420
6414
6408
6400 6401
6411
6417
6423
6431
6439 6438
6426
6420
6414
6408
301
400 312 300
6345 6086106006025205225145085004184204104124004023163183083006233
6237 6236
6226 6229
6237 6236
6228 6229
6237 6236
6228 6229
6237 6236
6228
6301
6305
6311
6317
6323
6329
6335 6334
6328
6322
6316
6310
6304
63006301
6305
6311
6317
6323
6329
6335 6334
6328
6322
6316
6310
6304
6300
6334
6328
6322
6316
6310
6304
6300
6244
6240 62416245 6244
6240 6241
6245 300 6
6240
6301
6301
6245
6241
6244
62406245
6337
6345 6342
6338
6332 6331
6337
6345 6344
6336
6332 6331
26283057
6337
6343 6342
6336
6330 6331
6337
6343 63426344
63366338
63306332
6301
6305
6309
6319
6325 6324
6318
6312
6306
6301
6305
6309
6319
6325 6324
6312
6308
6304
63006301
6305
6313
6319
6325 6324
6312
6308
6304
63006301
6313
6321
6329 6324
6318
6312
6306
6300
6234 6235 6244 6235 6234 6235 6234
6228
6237
6224
62206227
34 336225
6229 6228
6224
6220 6225
6227
6231 6228
6224
6220
6225
6229 6228
6224
3638
204
6625 164
1006533
6527
6521
6515
6509
6501
65356533
6519
6515
6400
6408
6414
6420
6426
6425
6401
6445
6439
6433
6427
6421
6415
6409
6401
6444
64326445
6345
6339
6333
6327
63216320
6326
6332
6338
63446343
6337
6331
6325
6319
6300
4462
66
64
76
96 94
201
140
6315
6325
6335
644164436402
6445644764516457646164654086545
6312
6300
6308
6333
6339
6354
4064046511
6517
820
7
2
07
2
4
780
790
924928
1025
1112
1115
11186515 11256505
1120
110010301020
1005110510351015
1020
62366238 1&2
62446246
6307
6221 Nicollet Ave S
6308
921
6710 L.S. DR
6715L.S. DR
Lyndale-Hub-Nicollet (LHN)Assessment DistrictRichfield, Minnesota
The City of Richfield makes no representation or warranties, expressor implied, with respect to the reuse of the data provided herewith,regardless of its format or the means of its transmission. There is noguarantee or representation to the user as to the accuracy, currency,suitability, or reliability of this data for any purpose. The user acceptsthe data “as is”, and assumes all risks associated with its use.
Assessment Districts
2017 Assessed Parcels
#I:\GIS\Public Works\Streets\AssessmentDistricts\Data\2017\2017LHNAssessment.mxd1 inch = 500 Feet
0 500 1,000250 Feet
B l o o m i n g t o nEdinaMinne a p o l i s
M S PGVWX35GVWX31
GVWX53
GVWX32
GVWX53 GVWX53 GVWX53
GVWX32 GVWX52
GVWX52 GVWX35
GVWX35
§¨¦35W §¨¦35W
§¨¦494
§¨¦35W
§¨¦494
?A@62
?A@77
?A@62 ?A@62
?A@77
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #7.
STAFF REPORT NO. 168
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris L i nk, Operations S uperintendent
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
10/3/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Public hearing r egarding the annual 77th Str eet/IL N Project Area assessment.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The 77th Street/I L N P rojec t Area assessment was established to recover special maintenanc e expenses in
the 77th Street/I L N area in 1988. The current servic es inc lude:
Maintenanc e and operation of irrigation systems
W eed control
Mowing
Fertilization
Trash and litter removal
These current services are provided on both sides of the 77th Street wall. The maintenance functions are
funded through a maintenanc e assessment on 77th S treet c ommercial properties.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion:
1. Approve a r esolution adopting the assessment on the 77th Street/IL N Project Area for costs
incurred to maintain the area for 2016.
2. Approve a r esolution ordering the under taking of the current ser vice project within the 77th
Street/IL N Project Area for 2018.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
City staff has determined the actual assessment costs of current services for 2016 for this area to
be $71,489.33.
The estimate for 2018 maintenance is $80,000.
Fluc tuations in expenditures for maintenanc e of the 77th Street Redevelopment area are c aused
by a number of factors:
Changes in water use and irrigation costs;
Concrete repair variations;
Demand for aging infrastructure updates; and
Need for re-plantings.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Sec tion 825 of the C ity Code indicates “current servic es” mean one or more of the following:
(a) snow, ice, or rubbish removal from sidewalks;
(b) weed elimination from streets or private property;
(c) removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding
any struc ture included under the provisions of Minnesota S tatutes, sections 463.15 to
463.26;
(d) installation or repair of water service lines;
(e) street sprinkling, sweeping, or other dust treatment of streets;
(f) the trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees from any street;
(g) the treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private property;
(h) the repair of sidewalks and alley s;
(i) the operation of a street lighting system;
(j) the maintenance of landsc aped areas, decorative parks and other public amenities on or
adjacent to street right-of-way; and,
(k) snow removal and other maintenance of streets in commerc ial redevelopment areas.
Council ordered the work and the work was c ompleted for 2016.
Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a polic y for assessing the costs.
Commerc ial property owners will be assessed on a per-square-foot basis; however, all single
family and multi-family residential properties, plus the two churches in the area, would be exempt
from the spec ial assessment levy.
The proposed assessment was properly filed with the City Clerk.
Notice of the public hearing was mailed to all owners described on the assessment roll on
September 13, 2017.
The public hearing notic e was published in the official newspaper on S eptember 21, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Eac h year the C ity shall list the total unpaid c harges for current services against each separate lot
or parcel to which they are attributable under Sec tion 825 of the City C ode. This list is available at
the offices of the C ity Clerk, Assessing, and Public W orks.
The assessment roll is submitted to the County Auditor and is due to Hennepin County by
November 30, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
All c osts to the C ity will be recovered through this assessment.
Estimated and actual c osts for the 77th Street maintenanc e servic es from 2003-2016 are:
Year Estimate Actual
2003 $80,000 $59,831.07
2004 $80,000 $63,842.79
2005 $80,000 $64,841.54
2006 $80,000 $69,606.52
2007 $80,000 $77,441.46
2008 $80,000 $77,000.01
2009 $80,000 $62,894.55
2010 $80,000 $64,124.81
2011 $80,000 $72,427.48
2012 $80,000 $78,286.46
2013 $80,000 $59,779.82
2014 $80,000 $71,499.01
2015 $80,000 $59,557.56
2016 $80,000 $71,489.33
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney has reviewed the resolutions and will be available to answer questions.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Council may make any c hanges to the assessment roll, as deemed nec essary, after the public hearing.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
2016 Resolution Resolution L etter
2018 Resolution Resolution L etter
A ssessment Roll B ackup Materi al
D istrict A rea Map B ackup Materi al
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON
77TH STREET/INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN) PROJECT AREA
MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2016 TO DECEMBER 31, 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to maintenance of the 77th Street/ILN Project Area, which is
approximately bounded east of I-35W and west of Cedar Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Such proposed assessment roll in the total amount of $71,489.33 is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by
the proposed current services in the amount of assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 2018 and shall bear interest at
the rate of five percent (5%) from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City’s Finance Division,
except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid by
November 13, 2017. A property owner may, at any time prior to November 15, pay
to the City’s Finance Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining
unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner in other municipal
taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of October,
2017.
_______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UNDERTAKING OF
CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT WITHIN THE 77TH
STREET/INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN)
PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2018
TO DECEMBER 31, 2018
WHEREAS, pursuant to ordinance, the City Council of the City of Richfield did
establish a special assessment district and did propose that certain current services be
undertaken by the City in the 77th Street Project Area, approximately bounded by I-
35W, 77th Street, I-494 and Cedar Avenue and that the cost of such services be
specially assessed against benefited property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield did also by such resolution
set the date of the public hearing on the undertaking of such current service project and
the levying of special assessment to bear the cost thereof; and
WHEREAS, following due notice, such public hearing was held on October 10,
2017, at which time all interested parties desiring to be heard were given an opportunity
to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. That the following examples of current services of the City shall be undertaken by
the City within the 77th Street/ILN Project Area, which area constitutes the special
assessment district with the exception of residential properties, plus the two
churches in the area, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against
the benefited property within the district:
a. Snow, ice or rubbish removal;
b. Weed elimination;
c. Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private
property, excluding any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26;
d. Installation and repair of water service lines;
e. Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets;
f. The treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private
property;
g. Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees;
h. Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian walkways;
i. Operation of the street lighting system;
j. Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent
to street right-of-way; and
k. Snow removal and other maintenance of streets.
2. The work to be performed may be by day labor, by City force, by contract, or by any
combination thereof.
3. The designated period of the project shall be from January 1, 2018, through
December 31, 2018. Costs of the project shall be in the manner provided in the
Richfield Ordinance Code.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of October,
2017.
____________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
PID Address STREETNAME Assessment
3302824430050 1 MERIDIAN CROSSINGS 4,062.26$
3302824430049 2 MERIDIAN CROSSINGS 3,703.35$
3502824440032 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 32.63$
3302824440236 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 440.49$
3302824440114 42 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 16.31$
3402824340001 84 78TH ST W 269.19$
3402824340056 100 78TH ST W 432.33$
3402824340053 200 78TH ST W 1,745.63$
3402824330087 301 77TH ST W 913.60$
3402824440037 308 78TH ST E 603.63$
3402824440032 345 77TH ST E 685.20$
3402824330088 351 77TH ST W 1,957.72$
3402824330156 401 77TH ST W 5,603.97$
3402824440028 415 77TH ST E 195.77$
3402824440023 500 78TH ST E 546.53$
3502824330009 616 78TH ST E 473.12$
3302824440234 700 78TH ST W 318.13$
3302824440232 710 78TH ST W 6,150.50$
3302824440235 980 78TH ST W 220.24$
3302824440231 1000 78TH ST W 7,023.31$
3502824430008 1200 78TH ST E 872.82$
3502824430073 1400 78TH ST E 269.19$
3302824430019 1401 76TH ST W 2,145.33$
3502824430074 1420 78TH ST E 905.44$
3502824430076 1500 78TH ST E 1,117.53$
3502824440010 1550 78TH ST E 2,618.45$
3502824440031 1600 78TH ST E 628.10$
3502824440008 1620 78TH ST E 1,011.49$
3502824440007 1640 78TH ST E 742.30$
3502824440006 1710 78TH ST E 611.79$
3302824440110 7610 LYNDALE AVE S 1,737.47$
3302824440113 7630 LYNDALE AVE S 228.40$
3502824440004 7636 CEDAR AVE S 1,019.64$
3302824440115 7644 LYNDALE AVE S 179.46$
3402824330152 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824330153 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824330154 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824330155 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824330150 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824330151 7645 LYNDALE AVE S 473.12$
3402824340065 7700 NICOLLET AVE S 350.76$
3302824440233 7700 LYNDALE AVE S 440.49$
3402824440006 7700 PORTLAND AVE S 269.19$
3402824340073 7700 PILLSBURY AVE S 766.77$
3402824340054 7700 WENTWORTH AVE S 375.23$
3402824440027 7701 5TH AVE S 252.87$
3502824330006 7701 PORTLAND AVE S 416.02$
3402824330082 7701 LYNDALE AVE S 122.36$
3402824340061 7701 PILLSBURY AVE S 187.61$
3402824430078 7701 NICOLLET AVE S 7,651.41$
3402824440024 7708 5TH AVE S 187.61$
3402824340060 7709 PILLSBURY AVE S 187.61$
3502824430006 7711 14TH AVE S 774.93$
3402824440025 7714 5TH AVE S 187.61$
3402824340058 7715 PILLSBURY AVE S 97.89$
3402824340059 7717 PILLSBURY AVE S 89.73$
3402824340055 7720 WENTWORTH AVE S 375.23$
3402824340066 7720 NICOLLET AVE S 326.29$
3402824340057 7721 PILLSBURY AVE S 628.10$
3502824330007 7727 PORTLAND AVE S 554.69$
3402824440007 7730 PORTLAND AVE S 432.33$
3402824440029 7731 4TH AVE S 391.54$
3502824330008 7733 PORTLAND AVE S 513.90$
3402824430005 7740 2ND AVE S 758.61$
3502824340002 7744 12TH AVE S 464.95$
3402824440031 7744 5TH AVE S 571.00$
3402824330081 7745 LYNDALE AVE S 1,362.24$
3402824430077 7745 2ND AVE S 432.32$
71,489.33$
2017 77th St./ILN Project Area Assessment
211
7614
7608
7727
7701
7709
77177715
7721 100
7720
7700
200
7644
7600 7601
7609
7615
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600 7601
7609
7615
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600
84
7645 7645
7625
7615
7601
7601
351
301
7701
7745
401
7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600 7601
7609
7615
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600
7639 7638
7633 7632
7627 7626
7621 7620
7615 7614
7609 7608
7601 7600
501
7533
7545 7544
7538
7532 7533
7539
7545 7544
7538
7532 7533
7539
7545 7544
7538
7532 7533
7539
7545 300 7
7538
7532 7531
7537
7545 7544
7538
75307533
7539
7545 7544
7538
75327527
7537
7545 7544
7538
7530
7645
7700
7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600
7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600 7601
7621
7627
7633
7639
7644
7630
7600
7639
7633
7627
7621
7615
76011017
7609
7615
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
1001
7639
7633
7627
700
704
7621
7615
7609
7601
7612
7608
7604
100
200
7601 Girard Ave S
42 AD
42 AD
7625
7632
7626
7620
7614
7608
7600
1401
7621
7617
7609
7601
7529 7529
753375377541
7545 7544
754075367532
7528
7537
7541
7545
7538
7529
7533
7537 7536
7532752875327528 7529
7533
753775417545 7544
753275287529
7533
75377541
7545 7544
75407536
7532
75287529
7533
7541
7545 7544
754075367532
7528
7533
75377541
7545 7544
754075367532
7619
76237625
76297631
76357637
76417643
7610
8090
97 93 89 85 81 77
99 95 91 87 83 79
1000 78th St W
980
710 78th St W
M eridianCrossingsEAST PLEASANT AVE SPILLSBURY AVE SWENTWORTH AVE S78TH ST W
76TH ST W 76TH ST
77TH ST WGRAND AVE SHARRIET AVE SGARFIELD AVE S7 8 T H S T W
77TH ST W
SHOPS AT LYNDALE
US BANCORP
Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet (ILN)Assessment DistrictRichfield, Minnesota
The City of Richfield makes no representation or warranties, expressor implied, with respect to the reuse of the data provided herewith,regardless of its format or the means of its transmission. There is noguarantee or representation to the user as to the accuracy, currency,suitability, or reliability of this data for any purpose. The user acceptsthe data “as is”, and assumes all risks associated with its use.
Assessment Districts
2017 Assessed Parcels
#I:\GIS\Public Works\Streets\AssessmentDistricts\Data\2017\2017ILNAssessment.mxd1 inch = 500 Feet
0 500 1,000250 Feet
7621
7627
7633
7639
7717
7625
7632
7626
7620
7614 7615
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
76147615
7621
7625 7632
7628
7620 7621
7625
7629
7635 7634
7628
7624
7620
7635
7629
7625
7621
6167733
7727
7701 631
620
710
701
315 345
7744
7715
7731
415 7701
7714
7708
500
7639
7633
7627
7621
7720
7701
7730
7700
7644 4th Ave S
7745
7623
7619
76437645
7627
7633
7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7620
7701
7740
7636
7626
7720
7700
7727 30
45
100
7720
7700
7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7627
7633
7639 7638
7626
7620
84
7735
308
305
7730
7740
40508090
70
60
97 93 89 85 81 77 4953576165
99 95 91 87 83 79 67 63 59 55 51 47
7627
607
626 632 638
711 717 729 735
716 728 734
77TH ST E
7 8 TH ST E
78TH ST E 4TH AVE S77TH ST W
INTERSTATE HWY NO 494
I N T E R S T AT E H W Y N O 4 9 4
PARTNERSHIPACADEMYSCHOOL
MENARDS
ROOSEVELTPARK
152477th St E
160077th St E 152477th St E
76337629
7621
7615 7614 7620 7615
1550
1600
1620 1640
760017th Ave S
7636
7625
15001420
1400
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
76207621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
1200
1300
7711
7700 - 14
7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620 7621
7627
7633
7639 7638
7632
7626
7620
901 1001
7700
77449001000
1306
1312
1318
1324 7764 - 787740 - 627716 - 387635
7627
77TH ST E
78TH ST E
INTERSTATE HWY NO 494
WASHINGTONPARK
B l o o m i n g t o nEdinaMinne a p o l i s
M S PGVWX35GVWX31
GVWX53
GVWX32
GVWX53 GVWX53 GVWX53
GVWX32 GVWX52
GVWX52 GVWX35
GVWX35
§¨¦35W §¨¦35W
§¨¦494
§¨¦35W
§¨¦494
?A@62
?A@77
?A@62 ?A@62
?A@77
§¨¦35W
§¨¦494
§¨¦494
§¨¦494LYNDALE AVENICOLLET AVEPORTLAND AVE12th AVE
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #8.
STAFF REPORT NO. 169
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris L i nk, Operations S uperintendent
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
10/3/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Public hearing r egarding the assessment for removal of diseased trees from private property for wor k
ordered in 2016.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The health of trees within munic ipal limits is threatened by shade tree diseases and it is the C ity’s
responsibility to c ontrol and prevent the spread of these diseases.
I f the City deems it nec essary to remove a diseased tree on private property, the property owners have three
options available:
1. Remove the tree themselves;
2. Hire and pay for their own c ontractor; or
3. Hire their own contractor and request the cost of the tree removal be assessed against their property
tax.
I n the period from J anuary 1, 2016, through D ec ember 31, 2016, seven (7) property owners chose the third
option. The total amount to be assessed is $10,336.69.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve a resolution adopting the assessment
for removal of diseased trees from private pr operty for work ordered from January 1, 2016, through
December 31, 2016.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
I n the early 1970’s, the C ity of Ric hfield began a shade tree disease program to assist homeowners in
the removal of diseased trees on private property. The following process is how the C ity ensures
property owners are aware of their diseased tree(s).
Notification to P roperty Owners
At time of marking for removal, paperwork is left at the property which includes:
Removal deadline;
Reason the tree was marked for removal;
Assessment information;
I nformation regarding private contrac tors;
A card postmarked to the City informing the City of owner's removal plans; and
City staff c ontac ts for more information.
I f the tree becomes hazardous or is past the removal deadline the City sends an additional deadline
letter to the property owner. T he letter is sent to the last known owner as obtained from Hennepin
County Property Records and verified by our utility billing records.
Occupied P roperties
On confirmed occ upied properties, property owners with diseased private trees have three options
available for tree removal:
1. Remove the tree themselves;
2. Hire and pay their own contractor; or
3. Hire their own contractor and request the cost of the tree removal be assessed against
their property tax.
Vacant Pr oper ties
I n cases where the property is vac ant and no owner can be found, removals must be ordered when trees
have passed the removal deadline or bec ome hazardous. A c ontractor then performs the removal and the
c ost is assessed to the property.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The work has been completed with prior approval from the affected residents; except in cases of
vacant properties.
Minnesota State Statute requires the County be notified of all spec ial assessments.
The proposed assessment was properly filed with the City Clerk.
Notic es of the assessment hearing were mailed to the owner of eac h parcel described in the
assessment roll on September 13, 2017.
The public hearing notic e was published in the official newspaper on S eptember 21, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
The unpaid c harges for the removal of the diseased trees must be spec ial assessed for
certific ation to the C ounty Auditor along with current taxes as stated in City C ode 910.23.
The assessment role is submitted to the County Auditor and must be reported to Hennepin County
by November 30, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The c osts to be assessed for the removal of diseased trees on private property for work ordered
during the period J anuary 1, 2016, through D ec ember 31, 2016, have been determined to be
$10,336.69.
The property owner may pay the original principal amount without interest within 30 days from the
date the C ounc il adopts the assessment. The unpaid balance will be spread over one (1) year with
a five percent (5%) interest rate.
The original sourc e of funding to have the work done is through the City ’s Permanent
I mprovement Revolving Fund.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney has reviewed the resolution and will be available to answer any questions.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Council may revise the special assessment roll, as deemed necessary, following the public hearing.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
Tree A ssessment Resolution Resolution L etter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED
TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR WORK ORDERED DURING JANUARY 1,
2016 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2016
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the removal of diseased trees from
private properties in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for
such work ordered during the period of January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016
amount to $10,336.69.
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to the removal of diseased trees from private properties in the City of
Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such work ordered during the
period of January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016. The costs to the properties are
as follows:
Address
Address PID Amount
320 Apple Lane 27-028-24-14-0062 $910.56
6616 Morgan Ave 28-028-24-32-0021 $1,605.00
7324 17th Ave 35-028-24-14-0093 $922.85
7325 Humboldt 33-028-24-13-0042 $2,145.50
7339 Blaisdell 34-028-24-24-0114 $1,823.68
7445 Clinton 34-028-24-41-0060 $2,500.00
6520 15th Ave 26-028-24-13-0080 $429.10
TOTAL $10,336.69
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of $10,336.69, is hereby accepted
and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and
each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
current services in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in no more than one annual installment and shall
bear interest at the rate of five (5%) percent from the date of adoption of this
assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City’s Assessing
Division, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid by
November 13, 2017. A property owner may, at any time prior to November 15, pay
to the City’s Assessing Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining
unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is
made.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other
municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of October,
2017.
______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #9.
STAFF REPORT NO. 170
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/10/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J eff P earson, C ity E ngineer
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
10/2/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/5/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Public hearing r egarding 2017 alley paving assessments.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Paving of the three partial alley s identified for improvements in 2017 has been c ompleted. C ity polic y is to
assess the adjac ent property owners for the c ost of the alley paving.
At the April 11, 2017 C ity council meeting, Counc il approved a contract with Ron Kassa Construction, I nc.
for the 2017 alley paving project. The final project cost totaled $39,246.31. This amount, whic h is less than the
engineer's estimate, is used for the ac tual assessments.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve a resolution adopting the 2017 alley
paving assessments.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
I n 1981, the C ity Council established a polic y providing for the improvement of the C ity’s alleys
by c oncrete paving upon the receipt of petitions.
On A pril 28, 1986, the City Council held a special study session to review alternative alley paving
polic ies. I t was the consensus of the Council to support the alternative that recommended paving
all remaining alley s without submission of petitions.
I n 2016, staff identified four (4) partial alley s in Ric hfield that had yet to be paved. Staff
rec ommended C ounc il to move forward to have the remaining alleys paved.
On October 11, 2016, City Council ordered the reparation of a preliminary report for the 2017
alley paving project. A resolution rec eiving the preliminary report, which identified four partial
alleys, was approved on December 13, 2016.
A public meeting for affec ted residents was held on W ednesday, J anuary 11, 2017 from 4:30 -
6:30 P M at the W ood Lake Nature Center. Notices of the informational meeting and notices of of
the public hearing were mailed out separately to impacted residents. A public comment form was
also mailed to impac ted properties to allow those not able to attend the public hearing an
opportunity to provide input.
Any c omment forms rec eived by staff before the J anuary 24, 2017 City C ounc il meeting were
provided to c ounc il members as part of the public hearing.
Based on public input, it was decided to pave three of the four alleys under original c onsideration.
Paving of the alley s was completed in August 2017.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
City policy is to assess the adjacent property owner for the cost of the alley paving.
Established prac tice is to use conc rete for all alley paving projects.
Notic e of the public hearing and notification of assessment was mailed to all affected property
owners on September 13, 2017.
Notic e of public hearing was published in the offic ial newspaper on September 21, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
T he assessment list must be submitted to the County Auditor and are due to Hennepin
County no later than November 30, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The c ost of the improvements totaled $39,246.31.
All costs to the City will be recovered through this assessment to adjacent property
owners over a 7-year period at a 3% interest rate.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney reviewed the resolution and will be available to answer questions.
Staff is following Minnesota Statute 429 (local improvements) process for the
assessment.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Council may make any c hanges to the assessment roll, as deemed nec essary, after the public hearing.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
A lley A ssessment Resolution Resolution L etter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE
2017 ALLEY PAVING PROJECT
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the 2017 alley paving project and
the expenses incurred amount to $39,246.31; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current costs
related to the 2017 alley paving project. The costs to the properties are as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of $39,246.31, is hereby accepted
and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and
PID Address Street Footage Cost per foot
40.87$
Lump Sum
2702824310007 6744 Blasidell 47.38 1,936.57$ 276.65$ Plus Interest
2702824310006 6740 Blasidell 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
2702824310005 6736 Blasidell 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
2702824310030 6745 Wentworth 47.38 1,936.57$ 276.65$ Plus Interest
2702824310009 6741 Wentworth 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
2702824310010 6737 Wentworth 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
2602824140110 1524 66th St E 51.2 2,092.70$ 298.96$ Plus Interest
2602824140109 1528 66th St E 43.2 1,765.72$ 252.25$ Plus Interest
2602824140108 1532 66th St E 43.2 1,765.72$ 252.25$ Plus Interest
2602824140111 6533 Bloomington 133.6 5,460.64$ 780.09$ Plus Interest
3402824140027 7345 5th Ave 47.12 1,925.94$ 275.13$ Plus Interest
3402824140028 7341 5th Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
3402824140029 7337 5th Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
3402824140030 7333 5th Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
3402824140026 7344 Portland Ave 47.12 1,925.94$ 275.13$ Plus Interest
3402824140025 7340 Portland Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
3402824140024 7336 Portland Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
3402824140023 7332 Portland Ave 50 2,043.65$ 291.95$ Plus Interest
TOTAL 960.2 39,246.31$
2017 Alley Paving Assessment
7 Year Assessment
each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
current services in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in no more than seven (7) annual installments
and shall bear interest at the rate of three (3%) percent from the date of adoption of
this assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City’s Assessing
Division, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid by
November 13, 2017. A property owner may, at any time prior to November 15 pay to
the City’s Assessing Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid,
with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other
municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of October,
2017.
______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk