10-24-2017 Complete AgendaS P E C IAL J O IN T C ITY C O U N C IL, H O U S IN G AN D R ED E V E L O P ME N T AU T H O R IT Y, 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 24, 2017
5:30 P M
C all to order
1.C omprehensive P lan update.
2.A ffordable housing strategies.
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 19, 2017
Council Memorandum No. 98 HRA Memorandum No. 29
The Honorable Mayor Housing and Redevelopment
and Authority Commissioners
Members of the City Council City of Richfield
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update
Council Members and Commissioners:
On Tuesday, October 24 at 5:30 p.m., staff and Lance Bernard of SRF Consulting
Group will present work thus far on the Comprehensive Plan update. The update will
cover:
Revised vision and goals (enclosed);
66th & Nicollet concepts;
Parks Master Plan;
Public Engagement Findings; and
Next steps.
Two documents are attached for your review prior to the work session:
Community Brief #2 related to the city-wide open house held on August 17 from
3:00 – 7:00 p.m. at City Hall; and
Revised goals and policies.
Respectfully submitted,
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
Attachments
SLD:mnp
Email: Assistant City Manager
Department Directors
Assistant Community Development Director
Planning Commission
Richfield 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Community Brief #2 Phase II Public
Engagement Summary
The City of Richfield hosted an open house on August 17th, 2017 from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at City Hall. The
open house served as the second phase of public engagement activities for the Comprehensive Plan
Update. The open house provided residents an opportunity to review and comment on draft elements
of the plan. Specific items for comment included draft goals, concept ideas for the land uses near 66th
Street and Nicollet Avenue, and draft park recommendations. The open house boards are provided in
Attachment A.
The open house was marketed through a community‐wide mailing, social media posts via Facebook, and
through the help of the Comprehensive Planning Advisory Committee. Marketing materials also
indicated (in Spanish) that a translator would be available during the open house. The Spanish translator
engaged and assisted Spanish speaking residents at the meeting.
Overall, the open house was well attended. Over a hundred residents signed‐in; however, general
observations indicated much more in attendance. Many of those in attendance stated that they learned
about the event through the community‐wide mailing or through the City of Richfield's Facebook page.
A summary of the open house findings is highlighted throughout this Community Brief.
Key Themes
Most of the open house boards were interactive, allowing participants to vote on questions or provide
written comments. Each comment was documented and reviewed by the study team to determine key
themes. This qualitative assessment will help inform changes to the Comprehensive Plan. A summary of
these findings is listed below.
Richfield, the Urban Hometown
Residents were asked to help define what an "urban hometown" means to the community. A draft
statement was provided for comment. In general, the public felt the definition captured the community.
Draft Goals
The draft goals for land use, housing, transportation and parks were on display for comment. In most
cases, residents were split on whether they agreed or disagreed on the goal statements. As this pattern
emerged during the open house, study team members engaged residents on their reasons for voting
one way or another. Staff learned residents were reacting to the goal statements differently. For
example, those who agreed with the goal statements felt the statements captured Richfield positively.
Those who responded negatively felt the goal statements were not being achieved today, and therefore,
disagreed with the statement. However, those who disagreed with the goal statements felt the
statements represented a positive future for Richfield. This finding suggests most participants were in
favor of the goal statements, regardless of how they voted.
66th Street and Nicollet Avenue Concepts
Many residents gravitated towards the concept boards developed for the 66th Street and Nicollet
Avenue area. These concepts were supported by findings from the market analysis. More importantly,
the concepts were presented as "ideas" to consider if the area redevelops over time. Key themes from
the discussions and comments included:
Residents were largely in favor of redevelopment patterns that supported mixed‐use
developments with a strong focus on commercial uses.
Both concepts include the redevelopment of a small portion (south‐west quadrant) of the
Academy of Holy Angels property. Residents expressed a strong desire to keep this area
undeveloped.
There is a strong desire to see more local/small businesses in the area.
Residents would like to see more restaurants, coffee shops and neighborhood services (e.g.,
grocery and hardware stores).
In general, housing is supported if it is integrated with commercial development and is not the
primary use. These comments were primarily focused on the Hub property.
Residents indicated a strong desire to provide the area with a "facelift" through façade
improvements, landscaping and pedestrian amenities.
Residents expressed concerns about future building heights and their potential impact to
adjacent neighborhoods.
Parks
The draft park recommendations generated a lot of discussion amongst residents. A key item on display
included potential sites for a future dog park. Potential locations include Christian Park, Donaldson Park,
Lincoln Field, Taft Park, Veterans Memorial Park and Garfield Park. Residents were asked to vote on
their preferred location. Many participants selected Donaldson Park and Veterans Memorial Park as a
preferred location. Regardless of the location, participants agreed a dog park would be beneficial to the
community.
Other items on display for comment included potential locations for a new soccer field. However, little
input was received to determine a preferred location.
Overall, residents are pleased with Richfield's parks and amenities. Most of the conversations and
comments focused on specific park improvements (e.g., programming, operations and maintenance).
Land Use and Housing
The majority of the discussion on land use focused on housing. In general, there was consensus among
existing residents that the housing stock is meeting today's needs and plays a large part in why people
chose to live in Richfield. However, the term "housing affordability" has a different meaning to many.
Residents defined "affordable housing" as single‐family homes for first time homebuyers to apartment
buildings in disrepair. In some cases, residents felt Richfield has too much affordable housing.
Transportation
The transportation boards described Richfield's Bicycle Master Plan (2017) and multimodal goals.
Discussions and comments indicated a strong support for multimodal options and expanding the transit
system. For example, residents generally supported improvements for safe pedestrian connections and
transit amenities (e.g., shelters and garbage cans). However, responses on the bicycle network varied
widely. Most of these comments regarded recent bike lane improvements. In that respect, staff fielded
questions on the benefits in expanding the bicycle network.
Comments were also received on the roadway system. Most of these comments pertained to spot
improvements, such as signal timing, infrastructure improvements and crosswalks. Discussion also
focused on current improvements along 66th Street and programmed improvements (e.g.,77th Street
underpass) throughout the community.
Attachment A ‐ Open House Boards
Richfield 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Vision Statement
Richfield, “the urban hometown,” is a community that embodies the warmth of a small, close-knit
community while surrounded by the resources of a larger metropolitan area. Our urban hometown
community is diverse and rooted in the personal relationships in our neighborhoods, schools, parks, and
businesses—each integral to our long-term success. The goal of Richfield’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan is
to both embrace and thoughtfully expand upon the unique foundation that makes us the urban
hometown.
Land Use Goals and Policies
A. Goal: Maintain and enhance the “urban hometown” character of Richfield.
Policies:
● Establish a land use pattern and supporting infrastructure that preserves and enhances the
ability of residents to make personal connections in their neighborhoods.
● Provide a full range of housing choices that contribute to vital and desirable neighborhoods
that welcome diversity, while maintaining a comfortable small town atmosphere.
● Require site design and architectural characteristics that provide appropriate transitions
between lower and higher intensity uses.
● Preserve historical, natural and cultural resources.
● Develop residential standards (scale, density, etc.) for redevelopment areas that creates
neighborhood character.
● Support and encourage commercial land uses that are diverse and responsive to their
context.
● Maintain and provide quality amenities and a safe living environment.
● Establish land use policies that create a healthy, vibrant community of opportunity where
low income people, peoples of color, new immigrants, and people with disabilities
participate in and benefit from decisions that impact them.
B. Goal: Develop identifiable nodes, corridors and gateways throughout Richfield.
Policies:
● Facilitate an intense mixed pattern of regional and community-oriented land uses along
regional corridor routes, such as I-494 and Cedar Avenue.
● Focus commercial and higher density residential development along major thoroughfares.
● Encourage a mix of uses that serve a market in and around the City in community
commercial nodes.
● Encourage a mix of uses that serve surrounding local neighborhoods in neighborhood
commercial nodes.
● Create meeting places in multiunit complexes to allow for interaction between its residents,
and between its residents and surrounding neighbors.
● Improve gateways to create a visual means of welcoming people to the City.
● Integrate public art into public spaces when feasible.
C. Goal: Provide an economic climate within Richfield that will encourage the availability of quality
goods, services and employment opportunities for residents.
Policies:
● Accommodate business growth.
● Encourage and support the development of strong commercial districts that respect the
values and standards of the residents.
● Encourage the development of viable and responsive neighborhood commercial services.
● Promote development that broadens the tax base.
● Create commercial districts that sustain specific types of development and stabilize the
economic base.
D. Goal: Encourage development of areas where vehicle use is minimized.
Policies:
Encourage shared parking between different developments when appropriate.
Strongly encourage pedestrian-friendly and transit-friendly building and site design through
measures such as higher density development and growth, which is located along major
transportation routes.
Require pedestrian connections between complementary land uses.
Advocate the location of commercial activity at focused points in the City (“downtown”
areas).
Require new developments of a certain size to prepare Travel Demand Management Plans.
Housing Goals and Policies
E. Goal: Maintain and enhance Richfield’s commitment to housing maintenance, rehabilitation and
redevelopment, resulting in an attractive, desirable and prosperous community.
Policies:
● Support the rehabilitation and upgrading of the existing housing stock.
● Support ongoing maintenance and upkeep of residential properties.
● Develop policies for naturally occurring affordable multi-family housing that encourage the
maintenance and upgrading of aging apartment buildings, while maintaining affordability
and preventing displacement of residents.
● Limit redevelopment of single-family neighborhoods into other uses except where such
neighborhoods are directly adjacent to commercial areas or areas adversely affected by
major roadways, the airport, or other major developments.
● Ensure that redevelopment and infill projects maintain the integrity of existing
neighborhoods.
● Encourage the use of quality, durable building and landscaping materials to maintain a high-
quality standard in residential development.
● Implement housing codes and support programs which lead to a housing stock that reflects
the City’s commitment to sustainability and healthy living.
● Support initiatives which help connect residents with their neighborhood and foster a sense
of community, such as block groups, neighborhood clean-up days, and cultural activities.
F. Goal: Provide a full range of housing choices that meet residents’ needs at every stage of their lives,
and ensure a healthy balance of housing types that meet the needs of a diverse population.
Policies:
● Acknowledge and support the City’s allocation of the region’s need for affordable housing.
● Promote the development of a balanced housing stock that is available to a range of income
levels.
● Encourage improvements to the housing stock to better serve families with children and
seniors.
● Encourage the creation of “move-up” housing through new construction and home
remodeling.
● Maintain an appropriate mix of housing types in each neighborhood based on available
amenities, transportation resources and adjacent land uses.
● Promote additional housing diversity to serve families at all stages of their life-cycle through
assistance, incentive programs, and the exploration of possible partnerships.
● Give priority to projects that meet the following criteria when considering proposals for
market-rate, multi-family housing:
o Located in transitional areas between single-family neighborhoods and
commercial areas.
o Offers a complementary size and style to the community.
o Includes a mix of unit sizes and amenities.
o Includes amenities to build community and encourage active lifestyles.
o Offers a mix of residential and complementary commercial uses, embody and
preserve the feel of the “Urban Hometown” in their design.
o Offers flexibility in their design to accommodate market changes.
● Give priority to projects that meeting the following criteria when considering proposals for
housing that include an affordable component:
o Located in proximity to public transportation, job centers, schools and other
amenities.
o Dispersed evenly throughout the City.
o Provides two and three-bedroom units (or larger).
o Contains a mix of market-rate and affordable units, with a higher proportion of
market-rate units.
o Maintains affordability through the rehabilitation of existing, aging multi-family
housing.
o Includes attributes such as single-level living, low-rise developments, townhome
style housing, shared community spaces, accessibility, and energy-efficient
building systems.
● Give priority to projects that meet the following criteria when considering proposals for
senior housing:
o Includes lower-density senior housing.
o Offers a continuum of care.
o Offers geographic balance throughout the City.
o Easily converts to serve other populations.
o Identified as feasible based on a market survey.
o Incorporates feedback from residents located near the proposed development.
o Results in updates and upgrades to existing senior developments.
● Regularly review land use and zoning ordinances to ensure maximum opportunities for
strengthening housing choices.
● 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.
Transportation Goals and Policies
G. Goal: Improve pedestrian and bicycle travel in the City.
Policies:
● Embrace the City’s Complete Streets Policy.
● Implement projects to improve connections as identified in the pedestrian and bicycle
master plans, along with the Safe Routes to School Plan.
● Construct roadways to reduce vehicle speeding.
● Construct new sidewalks set back farther from the street for increased safety and
accommodate winter maintenance operations.
● Utilize the existing ROW to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists.
● Create safe road crossings in high traffic areas.
● Bury parallel utility lines to provide safer corridors and accommodate space for pedestrians
and bicyclists.
H. Goal: Explore opportunities to enhance mass transit systems.
Policies:
Construct additional bus shelters attractive to users and safely located around intersections.
Continue to work with Metro Transit to construct enhanced bus services.
Work with existing groups and organizations to adequately meet the specialized
transportation needs of seniors, youth, handicapped, and underprivileged citizens in the
City.
Promote mass transit options, such as bus rapid transit, to reduce dependence on
automobiles and provide a diverse, balanced set of public transportation alternatives.
Promote telecommuting and flex scheduling to reduce traffic.
Identify or develop additional park-and-ride lots throughout the City to encourage transit
ridership.
I. Goal: Improve regional and local mobility and safe access to the City.
Policies:
Continue to work with MnDOT and the State Legislature to improve the operations of I-
35W, I-494 and TH 62.
Construct the extension of International Boulevard under TH 77.
Consider roundabouts at major intersections.
Preserve pavement condition on local streets.
Sustainability and Resiliency Goals and Policies
J. Goal: Encourage the use of alternative energy sources and sustainable building practices.
Policies:
● Establish long-range energy/greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and commit to
conducting an energy Action Plan or Climate Action Plan.
● Continue participating in the GreenStep Cities Programs to develop sustainable best
practices.
● Become an innovator in the use of alternative fuels, wind power, and other sustainably
energy sources.
● Install solar panels or similar energy sources on public buildings and encourage owners of
businesses and private property owners to do the same.
● Encourage sustainable building practices.
K. Goal: Encourage protection of the environment in the day-to-day conduct of City business.
Policies:
● Reduce pollutants through public transit, car-pooling, traffic control, use of berms and trees,
and stronger enforcement of pollution policies.
● Create more ways to monitor pollution and put plans in place to resolve problems.
● Use state-of-the-art methods to protect the environment in public projects and encourage
the same in private development.
● Encourage innovative solutions to land use and transportation problems.
● Incorporate landscaping and aesthetics in all transportation improvements.
L. Goal: Encourage the use of alternative power sources for public vehicles.
Policies:
● Make fuel efficiency and alternative fuels a high priority when purchasing vehicles for use by
the City.
Park System Goals and Policies
M. Goal: Maintain and enhance Richfield’s park system for today and tomorrow’s residents.
Policies:
● Make facility improvements and lifecycle replacement based on demonstrated need. The
City will evaluate recreation facility use prior to improvements or and at the end of a
facility’s lifecycle, and will determine at that time whether participation or use warrants
replacement, conversion to an alternate uses, or removal.
● Preserve crucial public places like parks, recreation areas, open spaces, wetlands, and Wood
Lake Nature Center.
● Provide all residents with access to parkland and trails within a walkable distance.
● Include criterion for all new park and facility improvements that improves sustainability of
materials, energy use, operating cost and lifecycle replacement, and natural environmental
impact.
● Incorporate best practices for stormwater retention in new park development and in the
renovation of existing parks.
● Acquire park land from a willing seller basis. Where possible, the City will work to obtain a
first right of refusal to purchase lands identified in this document.
● Prohibit tobacco use at all recreational facilities.
● Encourage parks to be naturalized with prairie grasses and pollinator-friendly plants, where
suitable, to minimize maintenance costs and to beautify parks.
N. Goal: Provide recreational opportunities for all members of the community.
Policies:
● Provide all residents with access and the opportunity to be involved in recreation programs,
regardless of age, culture and mobility level throughout the City.
● Provide adequate seating, shade, trail lighting and a trail loops of varying lengths in parks to
encourage active living for an aging population.
● Provide public safety improvements as needed to ensure park and trail user’s well-being.
The City will utilize Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) strategies.
● Provide parks and recreation facilities that are handicap accessible consistent with the
Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Building and Facilities and
universal design principles.
Note: The Waste Water, Surface Water Management, and Sanitary
Sewer Goals and Policies are still being evaluated and revised.
Waste Water Goals and Policies
O. Goal: Provide residents and businesses with affordable potable water that is safe and of high
quality.
P. Goal: Provide a low-maintenance, efficient water system that supplies the long-term needs of
residents and businesses.
Q. Goal Provide adequate water supply and pressure for residents and businesses.
R. Goal: Work with surrounding communities to provide an assured source of water in case of
emergencies.
S. Goal: Provide adequate water services for areas designated for redevelopment.
T. Goal: Promote water conservation and sustainability by reducing water demand, reducing the waste
of water, improving the efficiency of the existing system, and educating the public on water
conservation.
U. Goal: Protect the groundwater supply from contamination.
Policies:
● Design and construct improvements to the water system that meet demands of
redevelopment and for sufficient fire protection for the entire community.
● Provide a minimal hydrostatic pressure of 50 psi.
● Selectively increase the size of pipes in the distribution system for areas within the City
where low water pressures exist.
● Conduct a water rate study to adopt a conservation rate structure that promotes water
conservation.
● Support an appropriate level of state funding for interconnections and other physical water
system improvements to ensure water supply reliability, natural resource protection, and/or
safety and security, including economic security, of the region and state.
● Investigate interconnection options with neighboring cities.
Surface Water Management Goals and Policies
V. Goal: Protect surface water quality by reducing the use of pesticides and chemical turf treatments
that contribute to water pollution.
W. Goal: Provide a public education program to alert the public on the importance of protecting storm
ponds from harmful pollutants and ensure the proper disposal of solid and liquid wastes.
X. Goal: Perform a regular maintenance program of existing storm drainage facilities, including sump,
catch basin and retention basin cleaning, to protect private property from flood damage and
maintain high water quality.
Y. Goal: Explore innovative ways to improve the quality of surface water and evaluate the
effectiveness of existing treatment methods at reasonable cost.
Policies:
● Design conveyance structures to accommodate a ten-year storm event and storage facilities
to accommodate a one hundred year event.
● Demonstrate chemical treatment of surface waters as an innovative way to improve their
quality and minimize their harm to the environment.
● Research a variety of treatment methods to assess their effectiveness to improve water
quality at a reasonable cost
● Continue regular maintenance of storm ponds and drainage facilities to reduce damage to
property and protect water quality.
● Educate residents in responsible water quality management and ensure proper disposal of
solid and liquid wastes.
● Eliminate illegal connections to the storm water system.
Sanitary Sewer Goals and Policies
Z. Goal: Provide high quality sanitary sewer service to the residents and businesses of Richfield in the
most economical manner possible.
AA. Goal: Provide sanitary sewer service that meets the requirements of the 2030 population and
employment forecasts of the City.
BB. Goal: Take all necessary measures to maintain the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
Design Peak Hour to Average Daily Flow (P/A) Ratio of 2.5 to avoid paying an MCES surcharge.
Policies:
● Take all measures necessary to protect the capacity of the interceptor sewers that service
the residents and businesses of Richfield in the most economical manner possible.
● Work with MCES staff to monitor the metered flows from the Richfield system.
● Continually monitor the sanitary sewer system to identify points of Inflow/Infiltration.
● Continue to eliminate points of Inflow/Infiltration to the sanitary sewer system on public
property, and require the elimination of Inflow/Infiltration on private property.
● Design trunk sewer expansions in relation to the proposed land use intensities outlined in
the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
● Make provisions to ensure sufficient sewer system capacity will serve the intensity of new
development and redevelopment before final development approvals are granted by the
City.
● Periodically review and evaluate the sewer collection system, MCES treatment plant
capacity, and the accuracy of metered flow data provided by MCES in relation to the
confirmed community growth and development.
● Determine who is responsible for the payment of reconstruction of sewer facilities will be
made if insufficient capacity is available to serve the intensity of new development or
redevelopment.
● Place funding priorities on maintaining the existing municipal sanitary sewer system.
● Consider replacing old sanitary sewer pipe at the time of road reconstruction or
redevelopment.
● Prepare a financial analysis prior to the reconstruction of any portion of the sanitary sewer
system.
● Fund future sewer facility improvements identified in the Capital Improvements Plan.
● Maintain operating efficiency, minimize sewage blockage, and reduce the potential for ill.
● Continue to improve the City’s maintenance and inspection program.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
October 19, 2017
Council Memorandum No. 99 HRA Memorandum No. 30
The Honorable Mayor Housing and Redevelopment
and Authority Commissioners
Members of the City Council City of Richfield
Subject: Update on NOAH Preservation Strategies
Council Members and Commissioners:
On July 25, 2017, the City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Authority held a
work session to review tools and strategies for preserving the city’s naturally -occurring
affordable housing (NOAH). Staff was asked to conduct additional research on the
strategies and prepare a work plan for policymakers to review at a future date.
Staff will present the attached draft work plan at the work session on October 24. As
part of the work plan, staff is seeking clarification on policymaker goals regarding
affordable housing. Staff asks that you rank these goals so as to better prioritize the
items identified in the work plan.
The work session on October 24 begins at 5:30 p .m. This item is second on the agenda
and is estimated to begin around 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Steven L. Devich
City Manager
SLD:ju
Email: Assistant City Manager
Department Directors
Planning Commission
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) Preservation
Work Plan
POTENTIAL GOALS
Number in the order of importance (1 being most important):
____ Provide quality rental housing (appearance and management)
____ Prevent displacement of existing tenants
____ Prevent loss of affordable rental housing
____ Maintain/expand access to affordable rental housing by Section 8 tenants
____ Promote mix of incomes in new units*
____ Promote mix of incomes in rehabbed buildings
____ Maintain affordability in rehabbed buildings*
____ Reduce number of cost-burdened renters
____ Promote supportive rental housing
____ Minimize negative impacts on existing Richfield renters
____ Replace lost affordable housing
____ Achieve Met Council Livable Communities Act Affordable Housing Goals by 2030 (66 new units at < 30%
AMI; 29 new units 31-50% AMI; 26 new units 51-80% AMI)
____ Increase supply of two- and three-bedroom units*/**
____ Provide subsidized family housing**
____ Provide affordable/subsidized senior housing**
____ Other _______________________________________________________________________________
*Identified in 2015 HRA Affordable Housing Policy Statement
**Identified in 2012 Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment
Items for Immediate Action:
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) Preservation
Work Plan
1. Define Goals
2. Develop a NOAH Preservation policy
3. Incorporate policies into Comp Plan (OR include language that a policy will be developed)
4. Apply NOAH Preservation strategies to any project receiving HRA/City assistance that includes
affordable units
5. Meet with landlords to solicit feedback
6. Identify NOAH housing and those buildings at risk
7. Increase funding for Kids @ Home Program though the EDA budget
8. Create Pilot Rehab Financing Program
Items for Potential Action in 2018 (Prioritize based on Goals):
1. Advanced Notice period for the sale of rental housing/Help preservati on buyers buy at-risk
buildings
Monitor St. Louis Park Ordinance
Seek landlord feedback
Work with/Encourage ULI/Family Housing Fund to develop system to disseminate information to
preservation buyers – and offer a mechanism for sellers to find buyers
2. Prohibit Section 8 Discrimination
Seek landlord feedback
Educate about the program
Consider incentives to encourage participation
Assess the problem (i.e., is it discrimination or unaffordability or low vacancy rate?)
Monitor Minneapolis court case
3. 60-day Notice to Tenants Requirement
Assess the problem
Seek landlord input
Assess legal issues with a local ordinance
State law change
Consider applying to City/HRA-funded projects
4. Just Cause Eviction
Seek landlord input
Rebranding – Just Cause Non-Renewal
5. Building Permit Fee Reduction
6. Inclusionary housing ordinance
No Action at This Time
1. Right of First Refusal
2. Increasing local government leverage through zoning
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 24, 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 October 10,
2017; (2) S pecial C i ty C ouncil work session of October 10, 2017; and (3) Regular C i ty C ouncil meeting of October 10,
2017.
P R E S E N TATIO N S
1.A nnual meeti ng with the P lanning C ommission.
2.C onferri ng of Ri chfield P olice D epartment awards.
C O U N C IL D IS C U S S IO N
3.Hats Off to Hometown Hits
AG E N D A AP P R O VAL
4.A pproval of the A genda
5.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 resolutions for a P etition and Waiver A greement and for the assessment
of costs for the abatement of a hazardous property.
S taff Report No. 171
B .C onsi deration of the approval of a resoluti on amending the 2017-2018 labor agreement with the
International Union of Operating E ngi neers L ocal 49.
S taff Report No. 172
C .C onsi deration of the award of contract to S hank C onstructors, Inc. for the replacement of lime slakers in the
water plant in the amount of $383,800 and authorizing the C ity Manager to approve any contract changes
under $100,000 without further C ity C ounci l authorization.
S taff Report No. 173
D .C onsi deration of the approval of the purchase of a backhoe loader from Zi egler Inc. for $135,745 (less
$31,375 trade-in allowance, totaling $104,370) for use by the P ublic Works D epartment.
S taff Report No. 174
E .C onsi deration of the approval of a new Therapeutic Massage E nterpri se li cense for P rofessional
Integrati ve B odywork, L L C , located at 2934 66th S treet West, S uite 25.
S taff Report No. 175
F.C onsi deration of the approval of the renewal of the contract with A desa Minneapolis for 2017-2018 for
auctioni ng forfeited vehicles from P ubli c S afety/P olice.
S taff Report No. 176
G.C onsi deration of the approval of a facili ty dedication request to dedicate the sledding hill in Monroe P ark to
the memory of Nicole S tavros.
S taff Report No. 177
H.C onsi deration of the approval to transfer projects to the Richfield E conomic D evelopment A uthority.
S taff Report No. 178
6.C onsideration of items, if any, removed from C onsent C alendar
P U B LIC H EAR IN G S
7.P ublic Heari ng regarding the special assessment roll for unpaid false alarm user fees against private property.
S taff Report No. 179
8.P ublic heari ng regarding the special assessment roll for weed elimination from private property and removal or
elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property.
S taff Report No. 180
9.C ancel a public hearing to consider a resoluti on granting approval of the final plat of the C edar P oint C ommons
S econd A ddition.
S taff Report No. 181
PR O P O S E D O R D IN AN C ES
10.C onsideration of the approval of an ordinance amending residential driveway regulations and consideration of a
resolution authorizing summary publication of sai d ordinance.
S taff Report No. 182
R E S O L U T IO N S
11.C onsideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing the C ity of Richfield to enter into a L ocal Road
Improvement P rogram Grant A greement with the Minnesota D epartment of Transportation for $4,310,000 to be
used in ri ght-of-way acquisition for the 77th S treet E xtension and C rossing of Trunk Highway 77.
S taff Report No. 183
12.C onsideration of the approval of resolutions to either approve or deny a conditional use permit and variances for
a restaurant wi th a drive-thru at 6529 P enn Avenue, 6545 P enn Avenue and 2210 66th S treet West.
S taff Report No. 184
O T H E R B U SIN E S S
13.C onsideration of youth appointments to C i ty advi sory board/commissions.
S taff Report No. 185
14.C onsideration of the C ity C ouncil's approval of the Mayor's appointment of a Housi ng and Redevelopment
A uthority (HRA ) C ommissioner.
S taff Report No. 186
C IT Y MAN AG E R ’S R E P O R T
15.C ity Manager's Report
C L AIMS AN D PAYR O LL S
16.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.
17.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
October 10, 2017
CALL TO ORDER
The work session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 6:00 p.m. in the Bartholomew Room.
Council Members Pat Elliott, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Michael Howard; Maria Regan Gonzalez;
Present: and Simon Trautmann.
PC Members Sean Hayford Oleary and Allysen Hoberg.
Present:
PC Members Erin Vrieze Daniels, Chair; Dan Kitzberger; Bryan Pynn; Susan Rosenberg;
Absent: and Gordon Vizecky.
Staff Present: Steve Devich, City Manager; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; John Stark,
Community Development Director; Melissa Poehlman, Assistant Community
Development Director; Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; and Jared Voto,
Executive Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
494 CORRIDOR PLAN
City Manager Devich briefly introduced the topic.
Assistant Community Development Director Poehlman presented on the I-494 Corridor Land
Use Plan, including giving background on the relationship between the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Code. She discussed the history of the I-494 Plan, developed in 2005, with a vision for the
plan of mixed use in the area. Lastly, she provided four options the Council could consider related to
the current application: (1) deny based on current plan language (default); (2) interpret current plan
differently and find no conflict; (3) amend comprehensive plan to remove language that conflicts; or
(4) deny based on a desire to study further (moratorium).
Community Development Director Stark provided another alternative that the applicant chose
to withdraw or put their plan on hold to give time to the city to study the area.
City Attorney Tietjen discussed the option of a moratorium, not to exceed 12 months, if there
was a desire to study the area further.
City Manager Devich discussed the current uses in the area and potential likelihood of uses to
change, or not change, in the future.
Special joint Council & PC Work Session Minutes -2- October 10, 2017
Council Member Garcia discussed the mentality of past city councils toward development and
keeping Richfield a bedroom community. She sees potential for this corridor with its vision and the
potential for a large hotel with a ballroom. She stated diversification brings in more economic
opportunity.
Council Member Regan Gonzalez shared her thoughts on the vision of the plan and agrees
the area is poised for opportunities. She asked staff what were the city’s options if the application was
denied.
Community Development Director Stark discussed studying the area when the 77th Street
Underpass project was secured. Public Works Director Asher responded with the status of the 77th
Street Underpass and finalizing an agreement with MnDOT. Community Development Director Stark
mentioned to know what to expect in terms of traffic generation after the underpass is open is
important for retailers and other businesses; they base decisions on traffic counts.
Council Members and Commissioners discussed the vision of the corridor, the Comprehensive
Plan, and the current reality of the area and what has developed in the area in the ten-plus years
since the corridor plan was created.
Council Member Trautmann commented on the ability to build larger in this area without
disrupting residential neighbors, and that there are not many places in Richfield like this area.
City staff discussed if they were to study this area to bring additional information to the Council
and Commission it would likely be two components: a transportation study to understand the area
after the 77th Street Underpass and discussions with retail and hotel consultants about what they look
for an if these sites are, or are not, ideal locations.
Council Member Garcia invited Dan Haugen from the Adler Graduate School to speak. Mr.
Haugen read a letter to the Council about the merits of the proposed sale of their building.
Community Development Director Stark concluded by asking if the general consensus was
opposed to a moratorium. The Council generally agreed they were opposed to a moratorium.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:55 p.m.
Date Approved: October 24, 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
October 10, 2017
CALL TO ORDER
The work session was called to order by Mayor Elliott at 6:55 p.m. in the Bartholomew Room.
Council Members Pat Elliott, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Michael Howard; Maria Regan Gonzalez;
Present: and Simon Trautmann
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Kristen Asher, Public Works Director; Jack
Broz, Transportation Engineer; and, Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
UPDATE TO THE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
AND DISCUSSION OF THE CROSSWALK POLICY.
City Manager Devich requested the meeting be rescheduled to a later date, due to lack of time
before the regular City Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:56 p.m.
Date Approved: October 24, 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 7:06 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; Kristin Asher,
Public Works Director; and Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
OPEN FORUM
None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Elliott led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Regan Gonzalez, S/Garcia to approve the minutes of the: 1) Special joint City Council and
Planning Commission work session of September 20, 2017; (2) Special City Council work session of
September 26, 2017; and (3) Regular City Council meeting of September 26, 2017.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #1
PROCLAMATION OF THE RICHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Mayor Elliott read the proclamation declaring October Richfield Historical Society Month in the
city of Richfield.
Item #2
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Hats Off to Hometown Hits
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Regular Meeting
October 10, 2017
Council Meeting Minutes -2- October 10, 2017
Council Member Trautmann spoke regarding the passing of Michele Le, owner of Penn Nails
and Spa, and the Richfield Foundation wine tasting event.
Council Member Garcia spoke regarding Commissioner Goettel’s open house on October 19;
the Richfield Community Center’s “Dear Santa” box; the Honoring All Veterans Memorial; the Richfield
Sun Current’s community magazine and Mayor Elliott’s welcome message; and, the Richfield School
Board election and referendums.
Council Member Howard spoke regarding the great pumpkin giveaway on October 14.
Council Member Regan Gonzalez spoke regarding the Richfield School Board election, the
referendums, and shared voting information and hours.
Mayor Elliott stated he voted for the School Board election and referendums; spoke regarding
an interaction between the Richfield Police Department and a resident that has been resolved; and
shared an experience he had on an Honor Flight to Washington D.C. with his father-in-law.
Item #3
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
M/Howard, S/Trautmann to approve the agenda.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #4
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager Devich presented the Consent Calendar.
A. Consideration of the approval of a resolution authorizing submission to the Local Road
Improvement Program for the Lyndale Avenue Reconstruction project. (S.R. No. 160)
RESOLUTION NO. 11416
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO APPLY
FOR THE LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND ACCEPT
FUNDS IF CHOSEN
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11416.
B. Consideration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On 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. (S.R. No. 161)
C. Consideration of the approval of an annual request for a Temporary On Sale Intoxicating
Liquor license for St. Nicholas Episcopal Church, located at 7227 Penn Avenue South, for their
Ahoy Mateys event taking place November 4, 2017. (S.R. No. 162)
D. Consideration of the approval of a Cooperative Agreement regarding public safety related to
the 2018 National Football League Super Bowl security. (S.R. No. 163)
E. 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. (S.R. No.
164)
F. Consideration of the approval of a resolution calling for a public hearing by the City Council on
the proposed adoption of a modification to the redevelopment plan for the Richfield
Council Meeting Minutes -3- October 10, 2017
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 Finance District No. 2017-1 Housing. (S.R. No. 165)
RESOLUTION NO. 11417
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.
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11417.
G. Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance amending residential driveway
regulations. (S.R. No. 166)
M/Elliott, S/Gracia to approve the consent calendar.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #5
CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
None.
Item #6
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNUAL LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET
(LHN) MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ASSESSMENT. (S.R. NO. 167)
Council Member Garcia presented Staff Report No. 167 and opened the public hearing.
M/Howard, S/Elliott to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0.
M/Garcia, S/Elliott to approve a resolution adopting the assessment on the
Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) district for costs incurred to maintain the area for 2016 and approve a
resolution ordering the undertaking of the current service project within the Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet
(LHN) district for 2018.
RESOLUTION NO. 11418
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD
JANUARY 1, 2016 TO DECEMBER 31, 2016
RESOLUTION NO. 11419
Council Meeting Minutes -4- October 10, 2017
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT SERVICE
PROJECT LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE
PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2018 TO DECEMBER 31, 2018
Motion carried 5-0. These resolutions appears as Resolution No. 11418 and 11419.
Item #7
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ANNUAL 77TH STREET/ILN PROJECT
AREA ASSESSMENT. (S.R. NO. 168)
Council Member Howard presented Staff Report No. 168 and opened the public hearing.
M/Garcia, S/Elliott to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0.
M/Howard, S/Regan Gonzalez to approve a resolution adopting the assessment on the 77th
Street/ILN Project Area for costs incurred to maintain the area for 2016 and approve a resolution
ordering the undertaking of the current service project within the 77 th Street/ILN Project Area for
2018.
RESOLUTION NO. 11420
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON
77TH STREET/INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN) PROJECT
AREA MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2016 TO
DECEMBER 31, 2016
RESOLUTION NO. 11421
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
Motion carried 5-0. These resolutions appear as Resolution No. 11420 and 11421.
Item #8
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF
DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR WORK ORDERED IN
2016. (S.R. NO. 169)
Council Member Trautmann presented Staff Report No. 169 and opened the public hearing.
M/Howard, S/Trautmann to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0.
M/Trautmann, S/Elliott to approve a resolution adopting the assessment for removal of
diseased trees from private property for work ordered from January 1, 2016, through December 31,
2016.
RESOLUTION NO. 11422
Council Meeting Minutes -5- October 10, 2017
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF
DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR WORK
ORDERED DURING JANUARY 1, 2016 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,
2016
Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11422.
Item #9
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING 2017 ALLEY PAVING ASSESSMENTS. (S.R.
NO. 170)
Council Member Regan Gonzalez presented Staff Report No. 170 and opened the public
hearing.
Katherin Iber, 6736 Blaisdell, asked about the cost per square foot.
Public Works Director Asher responded the amount is $40.87.
M/Regan Gonzalez, S/Trautmann to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Elliott read a letter from the homeowner of 7345 5th Ave S objecting to the assessment.
Public Works Director Asher discussed the policy in place related to assessing adjoining
properties.
Council Member Howard discussed the assessment process and indicated he was open to
looking at the policy in the future for potentially reducing the assessment amount to properties that do
not use an adjoining alley.
City Manager Devich commented on the assessment policy and its use over time.
M/Regan Gonzalez, S/Garcia to approve a resolution adopting the 2017 alley paving
assessments.
RESOLUTION NO. 11423
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR THE
2017 ALLEY PAVING PROJECT
Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11423.
Item #10
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
None.
Item #11
CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
M/Garcia, S/Elliott that the following claims and payrolls be approved:
Council Meeting Minutes -6- October 10, 2017
U.S. Bank 10/10/17
A/P Checks: 262580 - 262903 $ 858,004.00
Payroll: 131170 – 131489 ; 42782 600,367.60
TOTAL $ 1,458,371.60
Motion carried 5-0.
OPEN FORUM
None.
Item #12
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council Meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:45 p.m.
Date Approved: October 24, 2017
Pat Elliott
Mayor
Jared Voto Steven L. Devich
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.A.
STAFF REPORT NO. 171
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris Regi s, F inance Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
9/19/2017
O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: None
C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
9/19/2017
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 resolutions for a Petition and W aiver Agr eement and for the
assessment of costs for the abatement of a haz ardous property.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Minnesota State S tatutes provide that the City may levy spec ial assessments for the elimination of public
health or safety hazards from private properties.
The special assessments are based on costs incurred by the C ity in connection with the abatement of
hazardous properties in the C ity that are not properly maintained.
One such property, 7144 4th Avenue South, was determined to contain a hazardous building. The City issued
a hazardous building order on December 5, 2016, requiring the property owner to abate the c onditions on the
property. The owner did not abate the hazardous c ondition and, subsequently, the C ity obtained a default
judgement from the c ourt to enforc e the abatement order on February 6, 2017.
The City hired a c ontrac tor to abate the hazardous conditions on the property at a cost of $8,846.17. I n
addition, the C ity obtained a judgement from the court to assess attorney fees and costs of $8,777.50 against
the property which were incurred bringing the hazardous building action. The total amount of costs incurred
to abate the property is $17,623.67.
The property owner has requested that the total costs against the property be assessed over a period of ten
(10) y ears. The City is willing to assess the property over a period of ten (10) years.
Consequently, the property owner has agreed to sign a Petition and W aiver agreement that will allow the City
to assess the total c ost of $17,623.67 to abate the property and the owner agrees to waive notice of hearing
and hearing on the spec ial assessment to be levied.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution approving a Petition and W aiver Agreement with respect to the
special assessment of abatement costs and attorney fee judgement relating to 7144 4th Avenue South
and a resolution assessing the costs.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
None
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The property was not maintained by the owner and the City incurred costs to abate the hazardous
condition.
Minnesota State Statutes and Richfield C ity Code provide that the City may levy special
assessments for these c osts.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
None
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The total spec ial assessment, to be spread over a ten (10) year period, at an annual interest rate
of eight perc ent is $17,623.67.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity has entered into a Petition and W aiver Agreement with the property owner effective
Oc tober 24, 2017.
The C ity Attorney drafted the Petition and W aiver Agreement 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):
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 to A pprove P etition and Waiver A greement Resolution L etter
Resolution to A pprove a S pecial A ssessment for
A batement of a Hazardous P roperty Resolution L etter
1
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
RESOLUTION NO. _________
RESOLUTION APPROVING PETITION AND WAIVER AGREEMENT WITH
RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF ABATEMENT COSTS AND
ATTORNEY FEE JUDGMENT RELATING TO 7144 4th AVENUE S, RICHFIELD,
MINNESOTA 55423
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council determined the property located at 7144 4th Avenue S (the
“Property”) contained a hazardous building on November 15, 2016 (Resolution No. 11285); and
WHEREAS, the City issued a hazardous building order on December 5, 2016 requiring
the Owner to abate the conditions on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Owner did not abate the conditions on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the City obtained a default judgment from the court to enforce the
abatement order on February 6, 2017 (Case No. 27-CV-16-18618; Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, the City hired a contractor to abate the hazardous conditions on the
Property; and
WHEREAS, the City incurred $8,846.17 (“Abatement Costs”) in abating the hazardous
conditions; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2017, the City obtained a judgment from the court to assess
$8,777.50 (“Attorney Fee Judgment”) in attorney’s fees and costs against the Property, which
were incurred in bringing the hazardous building action (Exhibit B); and
WHEREAS, the Owner has requested that the assessment of the total costs against the
Property occur over a period of ten (10) years; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to specially assess the Property over a period of ten (10)
years; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to forgo notices and hearings, provided the assurances
and covenants hereinafter stated are made by the Owner to ensure that the City will have a valid
and collectable special assessment as it relates to the Abatement Costs and Attorney Fee
Judgment; and
WHEREAS, the Owner has agreed to sign the Petition and Waiver Agreement, attached
hereto as Exhibit C (excepting the referenced exhibits), that will allow the City to assess the total
Abatement Costs and Attorney Fee Judgment to the Property over a period of ten (10) years; and
2
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Petition and Waiver Agreement is approved. The City Attorney and City staff
are authorized to take all necessary steps to secure compliance with the Agreement.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of October, 2017.
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to
and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield at a duly authorized meeting thereof held
on the 24th day of October, 2017, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession.
__________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
A-1
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
EXHIBIT A
A-2
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
A-3
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
A-4
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
B-1
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
EXHIBIT B
C-1
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
EXHIBIT C
C-2
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
C-3
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
C-4
506007v1 LBK RC145-702
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ASESSING COSTS INCURRED FOR THE ABATEMENT OF A
HAZARDOUS PROPERTY RELATING TO 7144 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, RICHFIELD,
MINNESOTA 55423
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (“City”) has incurred costs in the amount of
$17,623.67 related to the abatement of public health and safety hazards on private
property located at 7144 - 4th Avenue South, which legal description is Lot 8, Block 2,
“Ireland Addition”, PIN 34-028-24-11-0044 (“Property”);
WHEREAS, the City has authority, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 463.21 – 463.22 and
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, to collect its costs by levying a special assessment
against the Property;
WHEREAS, the Property Owner and City have entered into a Petition and Waiver
Agreement whereby Owner consents to the City levying a special assessment against the
Property in accordance with Minn. Stat. Section 429.061, in the amount of $17,623.67 and
requests that such assessment be paid over a period of ten (10) years;
WHEREAS, in the Agreement, Owner waives all of her rights under Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 429 to notice, a hearing and an appeal relating to the assessment;
WHEREAS, the increase in fair market value of the Property resulting from abating
the hazardous conditions on the Property is at least equal to the amount of the special
assessment levied against the Property and that such increase in fair market value is a
special benefit to the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota:
1. The total cost to be assessed against the Property is $17,623.67 and shall be
payable over 10 years and shall bear an interest rate of eight percent per annum.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of October, 2017.
______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.B.
STAFF REPORT NO. 172
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J esse S wenson, A sst. HR Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 amending the 2017-2018 labor agreement with the
International U nion of Operating Engineers Local 49.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
City staff has succ essfully c ompleted labor negotiations with the I nternational Union of Operating Engineers
Loc al 49, which c urrently has a 2-year agreement (2017-2018). Under the terms and conditions of the
contract, insurance was to be reopened for 2018.
Subject to Counc il approval, the tentatively approved settlement with the Union provides health insurance
benefits identical to those being provided to non-represented City employees resulting in an Employer
inc rease of up to $75 per month for medical coverage. Spec ific ally, the provisions provide a maximum up to
$839 per month for Employ ee only coverage, $1,195 per month for Employee plus spouse or Employee plus
child(ren) coverage, and $1,290 per month for E mployee plus family coverage.
Additionally, the proposal inc reases the Employer c ontribution towards dental insuranc e by 25 cents to a
maximum of $59.50 per month for Employee single dental c overage.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution designating an increase in the City's contr ibution toward health and
dental insurance premiums, effective January 1, 2018, for the International Union of O perating
Engineers Local 49.
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 I nternational Union of Operating Engineers Local 49 bargaining unit has a two-year contract
with the City for contract years 2017-2018. There is an insurance re-opener for 2018.
The Employ er insurance c ontributions negotiated with the Union are identic al to those being
provided to the City 's non-represented employ ees for 2018. Those rates were approved by the
City C ounc il at its regular September 26, 2017 meeting.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The C ity has met and negotiated in good faith with the union and its representative and is bound
under the terms of the Public Employ er's Labor Relations Act to meet and bargain over the terms
and conditions of employ ment.
The proposed settlement for the re-opener provision is identical in health and dental insurance
provisions provided to non-union City employees. The City has a long history of providing the
same level of health and dental insurance benefits to all eligible City employ ees.
The health insuranc e inc rease is well within the range for other comparable bargaining groups in
similar metro cities. The City has a long history of trying to remain as close to the middle as
possible of the Stanton 5 c ities in terms of wages and benefits.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
I n order to allow the City's accounting personnel the ability to modify payroll records in a timely
manner for 2018 benefits, it is recommended that the City Council ac t on Oc tober 24, 2017 to
adopt the attached resolution providing for c ontrac t c hanges. The health and dental insurance
benefits are effec tive J anuary 1, 2018.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Up to a maximum $75 per month inc rease in the C ity's c ontribution towards the employ ee's health
insurance c overage.
Up to a maximum $0.25 per month inc rease in the C ity's c ontribution towards single dental
insurance c overage.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
I f the terms of this agreement are not approved, further negotiation and/or mediation will be
necessary.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not approve the terms of this agreement and prepare for further negotiation and/or mediation.
Defer discussion to another date.
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 DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS HEALTH AND
DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 49
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield and International Union of Operating Engineers Local
49 signed a bargaining agreement covering a two year period from January 1, 2017 through
December 31, 2018; and
WHEREAS, the labor agreement covers all terms and conditions of employment
including the City contribution for insurance benefits; and
WHEREAS, Article 36 of the labor agreement provides for either party to amend the
provisions in Article 26, Insurance; and
WHEREAS, the City has historically provided the same level of health insurance
contribution to all eligible City employees, both union and non-union; and
WHEREAS, the City Ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the
exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be
completed by Council resolution.
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine, by resolution, the City's
contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of
$839.00 per month for employee only health insurance coverage, $1,195 per month for
employee plus spouse or employee plus child(ren) health insurance coverage, and $1,290
per month for family health insurance. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective
January 1, 2018; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of $59.50 per
month for employee single dental insurance. Such contribution shall be for coverage
effective January 1, 2018.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of
October 2017.
_______________________________
Pat Elliott Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.C.
STAFF REPORT NO. 173
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Russ L upkes, Utilities 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
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the award of contract to Shank Constructors, Inc. for the replacement of lime slakers
in the water plant in the amount of $383,800 and authorizing the City Manager to approve any contract
changes under $100,000 without further City C ouncil authorization.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The Lime Slaker Replac ement includes the replacement of two lime slakers in the water plant. The purpose of
the lime slakers is to soften the C ity's municipal water. T he lime slakers are past their life expectancy and
are becoming unreliable and time consuming with on-going mechanical issues. T he replacement is
scheduled to begin in the spring of 2018.
Bids for the construc tion of the Lime Slaker Replac ement were opened on Oc tober 12, 2017. Shank
Constructors, Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By Motion:
1. Accept the bid minute s/tabulation and award the contract to Shank Constructors, Inc.
in the amount of $383,800.00
2. Authorize the City Manage r to approv e contract change s unde r $100,000 without
furthe r City Council authorization.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
Current lime slakers are 13 years old.
Lime slakers are critic al equipment in the water softening process.
The c urrent lime slakers are becoming unreliable, causing more mec hanic al issues.
Softened water provides many benefits to its users and to the water distributions sy stem. Benefits
inc lude c onvenient, soft water to the users and extended life to the piping system.
Short, E lliott, Hendrickson, I nc. (S E H) provided an engineering estimate for the project, which
amounted to $536,300.00.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Council approval is required for expenditures over $100,000.
Lime Slaker Replac ement was originally identified in the City's Capital I mprovement Program in
2014.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
The acc eptance of the bid tabulation and the award of contract will allow the contractor to order
the parts needed to begin construc tion in the spring of 2018.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Five bids were received for construction; the low bid was $383,800.
The lowest bid is within the Engineer's (S EH) Opinion of Cost for c onstruc tion whic h was
$430,500.
Construction services for the project will be funded by a City Water Utility funds and is budgeted
at $375,000.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The bid opening held on October 12, 2017, was in acc ordance with legal requirements.
The C ity Attorney will be available for 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
B id Tabulation C over Memo
S E H P roposal/E stimate B ackup Materi al
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
October 12, 2017
2:00 p.m.
Lime Slaker Replacement
Bid No. 17-05
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of a the Administrative Staff was
called by Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was
to receive, open, and read aloud, bids for the Lime Slaker Replacement, as advertised in the
official newspaper on September 21, 2017.
Present: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
Russ Lupkes, Utilities Superintendent
Elizabeth Finnegan, Civil Engineer
Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Bidder Addendum
Acknowledged 1
Addendum
Acknowledged 2
5% Bid
Bond
Bid Amount
Gridor Construction, Inc.
Buffalo, MN
Magney Construction, Inc.
Chanhassen, MN
X X X $438,700.00
MN Mechanical Solutions
Waite Park, MN
X X X $398,750.00
Rice Lake Construction Group
Deerwood, MN
X X X $394,640.00
Shank Constructors, Inc.
Brooklyn Park, MN
X X X $383,800.00
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the October 24,
2017 City Council Meeting.
Elizabeth VanHoose City Clerk
April 25, 2017 RE: City of Richfield, Minnesota
Water Treatment Plant - Lime Feed System
Project
SEH No. P-RICHF 122316
City of Richfield
6221 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Russ:
We are submitting this letter proposal for engineering services for the replacement of two existing lime
feed systems located in the lower level of the Water Treatment Facility. The work includes providing bid
documents (specifications and drawings), submittal to the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) for
review and approval, cost estimates, bidding and construction administration and observation.
Project Description
Lime Feed System
Lime is fed from the eastern silo in the lime/soda ash feed room by two lime feed systems that operate in
parallel. Each feed system currently includes a rotary feeder that drops lime into a lime slaker. The lime is
mixed with water in the slaker creating a paste. This paste is then conveyed to the rapid mix basin via an
ejector and hose. The grit is collected from the slaker and conveyed to a grit shoot that drops the grit into a
wheel burrow or container for manual removal of the grit from the room to a dumpster. This equipment will
be removed and replaced with new.
Figure 1. Lime Feed System
Russ Lupkes
April 25, 2017
Page 2
The two new proposed lime feed systems each include an 8 inch electric slide gate to isolate each lime feed
system from the lime silo, a volumetric screw feeder, lime slaker and a screw grit conveyor as shown in Figure
1. The estimated construction cost for this project is identified in the following table at approximately
$536,300.
Table 1. Estimated Project Costs
Work/Equipment Costs
Mobilization $35,000
Demolition
Remove rotary valves (2) (Isolate silo/equipment) $5,000
Remove slaker (2) $3,700
Remove water supply/connections (2) $1,600
Remove Concrete pedestals (4) & dispose $3,400
Remove piping/pipe supports $1,800
Equipment: Knife gates (2), screw conveyors (2), slakers (2), screw
grit conveyor. $290,000
Install of equipment (supports, piping, water, etc.) (25% * Equip
Cost) $72,500
Piping/Valves - Water Supply $7,500
Coatings (piping/equipment) $10,000
Sub-Total $430,500
10% contingencies $43,050
Sub-Total $473,550
Engineering, Legal, Admin, 10% $47,750
Total $521,300
Electrical/Control Work (equipment & labor) $15,000
Total $536,300
Work Plan
The work plan is broken down into the following tasks:
Task 1: Bid Documents
• Kick-Off Meeting at WTP
• Prepare specifications, includes: General project specifications including demolition/removal,
phasing of project, lime feed equipment, piping and valves and coatings
• Prepare drawings, include:
o Plan and section view of demolition/removal
o Plan and section view of new equipment installed within lime/soda ash room
o Water supply schematic
• Coordination with electrical/control work (by others)
• Submit 80% drawings to City of Richfield for review
Russ Lupkes
April 25, 2017
Page 3
• Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) submittal and response letter to review comments
• Project Cost Estimate
Task 2: Bidding
• Prepare bid proposal and contact forms
• Issue bid advertisement
• Reproduce project bid documents and distribute to interested contractors
• Prepare addendums
• Attend pre-bid meeting
• Response to contractor questions
• Evaluation of bids, prepare bid tabulation and prepare bid summary letter
Task 3: Construction Administration and Observation (see Exhibit B for detailed breakdown)
• Construction Administration:
o Progress schedule
o Shop drawings
o Schedule of values
o Construction Meetings
o Payment Requests
o Change Orders
o Reply to Requests for Information (RFIs) from Contractor
• Project Observation
o Part-time construction observation
o Interpretation of documents
o Maintain job site files
o Progress reports
o Punch List
Deliverables
• Submittal to MDH and response letter to review comments.
• Bidding documents: plans and specifications
Provided by Others
• All work related to electrical and controls
Compensation
Engineering Services
The proposed schedule for the project is to have the final construction plans and specifications completed by
June 26, 2017. This will allow the City time to bid and award the project by the first of August, providing the
Russ Lupkes
April 25, 2017
Page 4
contractor sufficient time to submit shop drawings of equipment for approval and to order equipment by mid-
October. Equipment would arrive in January, 2018 for installation.
Planning, Design and Construction Documents
We propose to complete the outlined Tasks 1 and 2 for a Not- to-Exceed lump sum amount of $29,190, as
outline in A-2 which includes reimbursable expenses.
Construction Administration and Observation
We propose to complete efforts outlined in Task 3 and Exhibit B on an hourly basis that is in accordance with
our standard billing rate schedule. Assuming shop drawing review in September and October and a
construction window of approximately 2 months, January through mid-March, we propose a Not-to-Exceed
amount of $18,560 for contract administration, construction engineering, and part-time construction
observation. Reimbursable expenses are included in the not-to-exceed amount. We understand that the not-to-
exceed amount cannot increase without further authorization from you.
Schedule
Recognizing that Richfield’s water plant must remain in operation during the construction process, it is
proposed that the rehabilitation work occur late fall through early spring, when water demand is the lowest.
Based on water demands, the following schedule is proposed for the project:
Schedule Date
Start Design: (2 months) 1-May-17
Submit Bidding Documents to MN Dept. of Health: 26-Jun-17
Bid Project: (4 weeks) 24-Jul-17
Award Contract: 7-Aug-17
Contracts Signed: (4 weeks) 4-Sep-17
Shop Drawings: (6 weeks) 16-Oct-17
Order Equipment (Ave. 12 week delivery): 8-Jan-18
Start Construction: (2 month span) 5-Mar-18
End Construction (Plant on-line): 19-Mar-18
GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This letter and the existing 2016 Professional Services Agreement between the City of Richfield, MN and SEH
shall form the full agreement for this proposed project. This agreement may only be modified in writing and if
signed by both parties.
Closure
We want to thank you for the opportunity to provide the City of Richfield with this proposal. As always, it is
very important to us our services continue to meet and surpass your needs and expectations. After you have
had an opportunity to review this proposal, we would like to hear any comments, concerns or questions you
may have. If this proposal is acceptable, please sign and return a copy of this proposal letter, authorizing us to
proceed with the project.
Russ Lupkes
April 25, 2017
Page 5
Sincerely,
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC.
Karen A. Cavett, PE
Regional Practice Center Leader
Attachments:
Exhibit A-2
Exhibit B
General Conditions of the Agreement for Professional Services
Agreement
General Services Agreement
The terms and conditions of this proposal wholly include the contents of the February 22, 2011, General
Services Agreement between the City of Richfield and Short Elliot Hendrickson Inc.
Short Elliot Hendrickson Inc. City of Richfield, Minnesota
By: By:
Title:
Karen A. Cavett, PE
Regional Practice Center Leader
Title:
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Exhibit A-2 - 1 City of Richfield
(Rev. 10.21.10)
Exhibit A-2
to Supplemental Letter Agreement
Between City of Richfield (Client)
and
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (Consultant)
Dated April ___, 2017
Payments to Consultant for Services and Expenses
Using the Lump Sum Basis Option
The Agreement for Professional Services is amended and supplemented to include the following agreement of
the parties:
A. Lump Sum Basis Option
The Client and Consultant select the Lump Sum Basis for Payment for services provided by Consultant.
During the course of providing its services, Consultant shall be paid monthly based on Consultant’s estimate
of the percentage of the work completed. Necessary expenses and equipment are provided as a part of
Consultant’s services and are included in the initial Lump Sum amount for the agreed upon Scope of Work.
Total payments to Consultant for work covered by the Lump Sum Agreement shall not exceed the Lump Sum
amount without written authorization from the Client.
The Lump Sum amount includes compensation for Consultant’s services and the services of Consultant’s
Consultants, if any for the agreed upon Scope of Work. Appropriate amounts have been incorporated in the
initial Lump Sum to account for labor, overhead, profit, expenses and equipment charges. The Client agrees
to pay for other additional services, equipment, and expenses that may become necessary by amendment to
complete Consultant’s services at their normal charge out rates as published by Consultant or as available
commercially.
B. Expenses Not Included in the Lump Sum
The following items involve expenditures made by Consultant employees or professional consultants on
behalf of the Client and shall be paid for as described in this Agreement.
1. Expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized in advance by the Client.
2. Other special expenses required in connection with the Project.
3. The cost of special consultants or technical services as required. The cost of subconsultant services
shall include actual expenditure plus 10% markup for the cost of administration and insurance.
The Client shall pay Consultant monthly for expenses not included in the Lump Sum amount.
document656
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Exhibit B - 1 City of Richfield
(Rev. 10.21.10)
Exhibit B
to Supplemental Letter Agreement
Between City of Richfield (Client)
and
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (Consultant)
Dated April ___, 2017
A Listing of the Duties, Responsibilities and
Limitations of Authority of the Resident Project Representative
Through more extensive on site observations of the construction work in progress and field checks of materials
and equipment by the Resident Project Representative (RPR), Consultant shall endeavor to provide further
protection for Client against defects and deficiencies in the work of Contractor (Work); but, the furnishing of such
services will not make Consultant responsible for or give Consultant control over construction means, methods,
techniques, sequences or procedures or for safety precautions or programs, or responsibility for Contractor’s
failure to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Contract Documents are the documents
that govern or are pertinent to Contractor’s W ork including but not limited to the agreement between Client and
Contractor, the Contractor’s bid, the bonds, specs, Drawings*, Field Orders*, Addenda*, clarifications,
interpretations, approved Shop Drawings* and reports collectively called the Contract Documents. The duties and
responsibilities of the RPR are further defined as follows:
A. General
RPR is an agent of Consultant at the site, will act as directed by and under the supervision of Consultant, and
will confer with Consultant regarding RPR’s actions. RPR’s dealings in matters pertaining to the on site work
shall in general be with Consultant and Contractor keeping the Client advised as necessary. RPR’s dealings
with subcontractors shall only be through or with the full knowledge and approval of Contractor. RPR shall
generally communicate with Client with the knowledge of and under the direction of Consultant.
B. Duties and Responsibilities of RPR
1. Schedules: Review the progress schedule, schedule of Shop Drawing submittals and schedule of values
prepared by Contractor and consult with Consultant concerning acceptability.
2. Conferences and Meetings: Attend meetings with Contractor, such as preconstruction conferences,
progress meetings, job conferences and other project-related meetings, and prepare and circulate copies
of minutes thereof.
3. Liaison:
(a) Serve as Consultant’s liaison with Contractor, working principally through Contractor’s
superintendent and assist in understanding the intent of the Contract Documents; and assist
Consultant in serving as Client’s liaison with Contractor when Contractor’s operations affect Client’s
on-site operations.
(b) Assist in obtaining from Client additional information, when required for proper execution of the
Work.
4. Shop Drawings and Samples*:
(a) Record date of receipt of Shop Drawings and Samples.
(b) Receive Samples furnished at the site by Contractor, and notify Consultant of availability of
Samples.
(c) Advise Consultant and Contractor of the commencement of any Work requiring a Shop Drawing or
sample if the submittal has not been approved by Consultant.
5. Review of Work, Observations and Tests:
(a) Conduct on-site observations of the Work in progress to assist Consultant in determining if the Work
is in general proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents.
(b) Report to Consultant whenever RPR believes that any Work is unsatisfactory, faulty or defective or
does not conform to the Contract Documents, or has been damaged, or does not meet the
requirements of any inspection, test or approval required to be made; and advise Consultant of
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Exhibit B - 2 City of Richfield
(Rev. 10.21.10)
Work that RPR believes should be corrected or rejected or should be uncovered for observation, or
requires special testing, inspection or approval.
(c) Determine if tests, equipment and systems start-ups and operating and maintenance training are
conducted in the presence of appropriate personnel, and that Contractor maintains adequate
records thereof; and observe, record and report to Consultant appropriate details relative to the test
procedures and start-ups.
(d) Accompany visiting inspectors representing public or other agencies having jurisdiction over the
Project, record the results of these inspections and report to Consultant.
6. Interpretation of Contract Documents: Report to Consultant when clarification and interpretations of the
Contract Documents are requested by Contractor and transmit to Contractor clarifications and
interpretations as issued by Consultant.
7. Modifications: Consider and evaluate Contractor’s suggestions for modifications in Drawings or
Specifications* and report with RPR’s recommendations to Consultant. Transmit to Contractor decisions
as issued by Consultant.
8. Records:
(a) Maintain at the job site orderly files for correspondence, reports of job conferences, shop drawings
and samples, reproductions of original Contract Documents including all Work Change Directive*,
Addenda, Change Orders*, Field Orders, additional Drawings* issued subsequent to the execution
of the Contract, Consultant’s clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents, progress
reports, and other related documents.
(b) Keep a diary or log book, recording Contractor hours on the job site, weather conditions, data
relative to questions of Work Change Directive Change Orders or changed conditions, list of job site
visitors, daily activities, decisions, observations in general, and specific observations in more detail
as in the case of observing test procedures; and send copies to Consultant.
(c) Record names, addresses and telephone numbers of all Contractors, subcontractors and major
suppliers of materials and equipment.
9. Reports:
(a) Furnish Consultant periodic reports as required of progress of the Work and of Contractor’s
compliance with the progress schedule and schedule of Shop Drawing and sample submittals.
(b) Consult with Consultant in advance of scheduled major tests, inspections or start of important
phases of the Work.
(c) Draft proposed Change Orders and Work Change Directive, obtaining backup material from
Contractor and recommend to Consultant Change Orders, Work Change Directive, and Field
Orders.
(d) Report immediately to Consultant and Client upon the occurrence of any accident.
10. Payment Requests: Review applications for payment with Contractor for compliance with the established
procedure for their submission and forward with recommendations to Consultant, noting particularly the
relationship of the payment requested to the schedule of values, Work completed and materials and
equipment delivered at the site but not incorporated in the Work.
11. Certificates, Maintenance and Operation Manuals: During the course of the Work, verify that certificates,
maintenance and operation manuals and other data required to be assembled and furnished by
Contractor are applicable to the items actually installed and in accordance with the Contract Documents,
and have this material delivered to Consultant for review and forwarding to Client prior to final payment
for the Work.
12. Completion:
(a) Before Consultant issues a Certificate of Substantial Completion, submit to Contractor a list of
observed items requiring completion or correction.
(b) Conduct final inspection in the company of Consultant, Client, and Contractor and prepare a final list
of items to be completed or corrected.
(c) Observe that all items on final list have been completed or corrected and make recommendations to
Consultant concerning acceptance.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Exhibit B - 3 City of Richfield
(Rev. 10.21.10)
C. Limitations of Authority
Resident Project Representative:
1. Shall not authorize any deviation from the Contract Documents or substitution of materials or equipment,
unless authorized by Client.
2. Shall not exceed limitations of Consultant’s authority as set forth in the Agreement for Professional
Services.
3. Shall not undertake any of the responsibilities of Contractor, subcontractors or Contractor’s
superintendent.
4. Shall not advise on, issue directions regarding or assume control over safety precautions and programs
in connection with the Work.
5. Shall not accept Shop Drawing or sample submittals from anyone other than Contractor.
6. Shall not authorize Client to occupy the Project in whole or in part.
7. Shall not participate in specialized field or laboratory tests or inspections conducted by others except as
specifically authorized by Consultant.
*All instances in this Exhibit of this capitalized term are as defined in the EJCDC form C-700, copyrighted in
2013.
c:\9. proposals\richfield wtp\lime slaker rplc\3. exhibit b.docx
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.D.
STAFF REPORT NO. 174
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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
10/16/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 purchase of a backhoe loader from Ziegler Inc. for $135,745 (less
$31,375 trade-in allowance, totaling $104,370) for use by the Public Works Department.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
T he equipment needs for the Public Works Department has changed and the department is looking
to replace its large, single-use excavator with a smaller backhoe loader. T he backhoe loader will be
utilized by all divisions for the following functions:
W ater main break repairs;
Street repairs;
I rrigation repairs; and
loading truc ks for hauling.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the purchase of a backhoe loader from Ziegler Inc. for $135,754.00 (less
$31,375.00 trade-in allowance, totaling $104,370.00).
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
Replacement schedules are set for eac h vehic le and piec e of equipment purchased. The following
are taken into consideration when dec iding on when to replace vehic les/equipment:
Year of purchase (1998)
Replacement date/depreciation (2013)
History of repairs
Tec hnology upgrades
Fuel efficienc y
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The C ity of Ric hfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative P urc hasing Program. This
program will be used for this purchase.
W hen the purc hase of materials, merc handise, equipment, or construc tion exc eeds $100,000,
authority to purchase shall be submitted to City C ounc il for consideration.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Approval at this meeting will ensure delivery of the vehic le in the y ear it is budgeted for purchase
(2018).
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The total c ost for the equipment after trade-in allowanc e is $104,370.
The 2018 Proposed Budget includes $130,000 for this purc hase.
The 2018 Revised Budget will be adjusted to show the ac tual purc hase amount.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney 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
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.E.
STAFF REPORT NO. 175
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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
10/11/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for Professional
Integrative Bodywork, LL C , located at 2934 66th Street W est, Suite 25.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
On September 19, 2017, the City received an application for a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license
for Professional I ntegrative Body work, L L C, located at 2934 66th Street W est, S uite 25.
Professional I ntegrative Bodywork, LLC is owned by Dana Mic helle Collins. Ms. Collins is the sole massage
therapist for Professional I ntegrative Bodywork, LLC and has met all the requirements needed to obtain a
Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license.
All required documents and fees have been received.
The Public Safety background investigation has been completed. T he Public Safety Director has
reviewed the background investigation report. None of the information in the report would cause the
Public Safety Director to recommend denial of the requested license.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a new Therapeutic Massage Enterprise license for P rofessional Integrative
Bodywork, L LC, located at 2934 66th Street W est, Suite 25.
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 bac kground investigation has been c ompleted and reveals the following:
The applic ant has paid the required lic ensing fees.
The required proof of liability insurance has been submitted showing Associated Bodywork
& Massage Professionals as affording coverage.
A ll real estate, personal property taxes due and payable for the premises have been paid.
The business is owned by D ana Michelle C ollins.
A criminal background chec k was conduc ted on Ms. Collins. There is no known c riminal
history.
A n application for a massage therapist was also submitted by Ms. C ollins. She is a member
in good standing with the Associated Body work and Massage Professionals.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The applic ant has complied with all the provisions of the application proc ess.
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:
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):
Deny the request for the Therapeutic Massage Enterprise lic ense for P rofessional I ntegrative
Bodywork, L L C ; 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:
Dana Michelle Collins, Owner
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.F.
STAFF REPORT NO. 176
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ay Henthorne, D irector Of P ublicS afety/C hi ef 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
10/16/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 Adesa Minneapolis for 2017-2018 for
auctioning for feited vehicles from Public S afety/Police.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Adesa is a company used by the Public Safety D epartment to store and auc tion off seized vehicles. The City
currently has a c ontrac t with Adesa and would like to renew the c ontract for the year 2017-2018.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve the renewal of the 2017-2018 auction service contract between the City of
Richfield and Adesa Minneapolis, for the auctioning of forfeited vehicles fr om Public Safety/Police.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
Adesa's performance during the past y ear of the c ontrac t period was satisfac tory. They auction
forfeiture vehicles for many cities, including the City of Bloomington.
Adesa Minneapolis has submitted the new c ontrac t for 2017-2018. No c hanges were made to the
services they provide.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Adesa Minneapolis notified the City that they wish to renew their contract with the City.
The Public Safety D epartment wishes to renew the contract with Adesa Minneapolis. The contract
has numerous conditions that must be met.
Adesa Minneapolis is a reputable, established auc tion c ompany that meets all c ontrac t
requirements.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
A 30-day written notice must be given by either party to terminate the contract.
Public Safety must have a company to store and auction forfeited vehic les.
Adequate spac e is not available in the C ity to store forfeited vehicles.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
There is no financial impac t.
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 A desa Minneapolis and there
are no contract changes under the new contract.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not sign the contract; however, Public S afety would need to find other means to auction the
forfeited vehicles.
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
2017/2018 A desa C ontract C ontract/A greement
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
AND ADESA MINNEAPOLIS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 30th day of October, 2017 by and
between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 6700 Portland Ave.,
S., Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and ADESA Minnesota,
LLC dba ADESA Minneapolis, a Minnesota limited, liability company with its principle business
offices located at 18270 Territorial Road, Dayton, Minnesota 55369 (hereinafter referred to as
“ADESA”).
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City comes into possession of and is authorized to retain various motor
vehicles which are identified as potentially being subject to forfeiture of other civil processes
under the laws of the State of Minnesota as a result of their having been used in the connection
with a criminal act (hereinafter referred to as “Forfeiture Vehicles”) and upon successful
completion of the forfeiture or civil process the City is authorized to dispose of said vehicles in
accordance with Section 315 of the Richfield City Code; and
WHEREAS, ADESA represents that it has the professional expertise and knowledge to
perform its duties as an automobile dealer, and is licensed by the State of Minnesota in that
capacity; and
WHEREAS, THE City desires to hire ADESA to transport, store, repair, maintain and
sell its Forfeiture Vehicles;
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 begin October 30, 2017 and shall continue until
December 31, 2018, subject to termination as provided in Article IV.
II. DUTIES OF ADESA
A. Upon specific authorization from the City, ADESA agrees to drive or transport
those vehicles identified by the City as one of its Forfeiture Vehicles to a secure location to be
determined and managed by ADESA.
B. Upon receipt of a City Forfeiture Vehicle and except for fire, storm, flood, war,
civil disturbance, riot, act of God, lightning, earthquake, or other similar casualty, which is not
within the control of ADESA or any act/omission of City or its officers, employees or agents,
ADESA accepts full responsibility for it and agrees to exercise due diligence in its care,
maintenance and storage of said vehicle until the time that it is sold or released; so as to avoid
waste and obtain a reasonable sale price at auction.
C. Upon specific authorization from the City, ADESA agrees to perform such minor
repair work on the City’s Forfeiture Vehicles so as to prepare them for auction and maximize the
City’s return at auction, but in no event shall such repair work exceed the cost of TWO
HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($200.00) without prior, written authorization by the
Richfield City Manager or his/her designee.
D. Upon specific authorization from the City, ADESA agrees to release the City’s
Forfeiture Vehicles prior to auction on such terms and conditions as the City may direct.
E. ADESA agrees to box and store personal property that is not affixed to, but
located within, the City’s Forfeiture Vehicles and upon specific authorization from the City to
release such property on such terms and conditions as the City may direct.
F. Upon specific authorization from the City, ADESA agrees to promptly sell the
City’s Forfeiture Vehicles in a commercially reasonable manner by an open and competitive
automobile dealer or salvage auction.
G. ADESA agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, 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 ADESA’s (including its
officials, agents or employees) performance of the duties required under this Agreement,
provided that any such claim, damage, 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 ADESA.
H. During the term of this Agreement ADESA agrees to maintain general
comprehensive liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 for any damage to property, theft,
loss or other claims as a result of ADESA’s negligence or malfeasance in performing this
Agreement. In addition, ADESA agrees to maintain such motor vehicle liability insurance as
required by state and federal laws.
I. ADESA shall be licensed and bonded in the State of Minnesota to perform its duties
under this Agreement and shall provide a certificate of licensure, bonding and insurance to the
City.
J. ADESA agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules
and regulations in the performance of the duties of this Agreement.
K. 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 ADESA’s staff as the agents, representatives or employees of the City for any
purpose in any manner whatsoever. ADESA and its staff are to be and shall remain an
independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. ADESA
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 ADESA or other persons, while
engaged in the performance of any work or services required by ADESA 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 person or personnel arising out
of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, clams of discrimination
against ADESA, its officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the
responsibility of the City; and ADESA 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.
L. 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 16C.05, Subdivision 5.
M. ADESA 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 employm ent in its services, programs or activities.
ADESA agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from, costs, including by 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 ADESA. 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.
N. The Contractor will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act., Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes.
O. Any Forfeiture Vehicles which ADESA has been authorized and directed to sell
but was unable to under the terms of this Agreement shall be returned to the City at a site
designated by it as soon as reasonably practicable but in no event more than sixty (60) days
from the occurrence of the event making sale under this Agreement impossible.
III. DUTIES OF THE CITY
A. The City shall consign specifically identified Forfeiture Vehicles to ADESA to
sell to the highest bidder at public dealer or salvage auctions.
B. The City shall certify that it has good title and right to sell those of its Forfeiture
Vehicles which it directs and specifically authorizes ADESA to sell at public dealer or salvage
auctions and shall provide and deliver merchantable title to the purchaser upon notification from
ADESA.
C. The City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the ADESA, 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 City’s 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 City.
Notwithstanding the above, City shall also fully defend, indemnify and hold ADESA
harmless for and against any and all claims, expenses (including reasonable attorney’s fees),
suits and demands arising out of, based upon and resulting from alleged or actual damage
caused by the forfeiture process or from inaccuracy of the odometer reading on any Forfeiture
Vehicle prepared in connection with the sale at auction, unless such inaccuracy is caused by an
employee, agent or officer of ADESA.
D. The City shall pay to ADESA and ADESA shall deduct from the sale proceeds
of the Forfeiture Vehicle, the following amounts as and for its services properly authorized and
provided pursuant to this Agreement:
1. Transportation of an operable Forfeiture Vehicle to or from the City of Richfield to
ADESA’s designated storage site: $50.00.
2. Tow of an inoperable Forfeiture Vehicle (tow or trailer) to or from the City of Richfield to
ADESA’s designated storage site: Not to Exceed $100.00.
3. Basic cleaning of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $37.00.
4. Complete detail of a Forfeiture Vehicle (vacuum and shampoo carpets, detail interior,
etc.): $85.00.
5. Repair of a Forfeiture Vehicle: Shop Rates.
6. Sale by auction of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $125.00.
7. Release of a Forfeiture Vehicle prior to auction: $50.00 redemption, fee plus any
charges (i.e., transportation).
8. Storage fee if car is not sold within 90 days: $3.00/day.
9. Inventory fee for lease of personal property: $25.00.
IV. TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon thirty (30) days advance
written notice to either party. The City reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in
the event of default or violation by ADESA of any provision of this Agreement. The City may
take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or desirable to collect
damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement.
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of
this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to
this Agreement and signed by both parties.
B. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of the
City.
C. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between ADESA 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.
D. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act,
Minnesota Statutes, Section 363.
E. The parties hereto agree to comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973/31 CFR Part 51. This Act states in part that, “Gall recipients of federal funds, whether in
the form of a grant or a contract, review, and if necessary modify, their programs and activities
so that discrimination based on handicap is eliminated.”
F. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on ADESA’s
successors and assigns and to the extent any assignee of ADESA.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF RICHFIELD
DATED: BY:
Director of Public Safety
DATED: BY:
ADESA MINNEAPOLIS
DATED: BY:
Its
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.G.
STAFF REPORT NO. 177
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J im Topi tzhofer, Recreation S ervices D i rector
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J im Topi tzhofer, Recreation S ervices D i rector
10/17/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 facility dedication request to dedicate the sledding hill in Monroe
Park to the memor y of Nicole Stavros.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The Community S ervices C ommission recommended approval of the attached facility dedic ation proposal to
install two benches along the berm loc ated in the southeast corner of Monroe P ark with signage attac hed to
the benches that indicate the sledding hill is dedic ated to the memory of Nicole S tavros. Nic ole Stavros grew
up in Richfield on Lakeview Avenue, on the west side of Monroe Park directly across from the existing
moderate sledding hill. She has sinc e then passed away at the age of 39. Richfield native Todd Dexter, a
childhood friend of Nicole Stavros, is the applic ant and will be responsible for the c osts of the benc hes,
memorial plaques, conc rete bases and all other costs assoc iated with the fac ility dedication request. Mr.
Dexter has raised enough funds so far to order the benc hes and plaques.
The attached initial proposal indicates three benches made of composite materials. The proposal has been
modified to inc lude only two metal benc hes that are similar to the newer style memorial benc hes loc ated in
City parks.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a facility dedication request to install two benches along the berm located in the
southeast cor ner of Monroe Park with signage attached to the benches that indicate the sledding hill is
dedicated to the memory of N icole Stavros.
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 C ounc il has received only one other facility dedic ation request in the past and approved a
request in 2008 to dedic ate the Upper D onaldson Park Baseball Field in memory of Gordy
Larson.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The C ity’s Facility Dedic ation Polic y is attac hed. This policy was adopted by C ity Council in
2008 to establish guidelines for dedicating recreational facilities and amenities including athletic
fields, park buildings, and other rec reational structures located in the C ity of Ric hfield in honor of
an individual or organization. As the polic y indicates, the City does not acc ept requests to
permanently rename a park, recreational facility or amenity in honor of an individual or
organization, but as an alternative offers the attached guidelines to dedic ate such fac ilities to the
memory of an individual or organization by granting the installation of a dedication plaque on-site
of such fac ilities.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
The are no pressing timing issues as the benches and plaques will be arriving during the winter
and installed next spring.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
There is no financial impac t to the C ity for the proposed facility dedic ation request other than
installing the benc hes.
The applic ant, Todd Dexter, will be responsible for the c osts of the benches, memorial plaques,
conc rete bases and all other costs assoc iated with the facility dedication request.
The approximate cost of the project is $4,000.
The benches and plaques will become property of the City of Richfield.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
There are no legal issues associated with the proposed facility dedication request.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
City C ounc il has the option of denying or modifying the proposed fac ility dedication request.
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
Monroe P ark S ledding Hill F acility D edicati on P roposal C over Memo
F acility D edicati on P olicy C over Memo
Todd Dexter952-807-8665952-368-7224todd.dexter@gmail.comNicole StavrosMonroe ParkSlidding Hill on South/East side of Monroe ParkSEE OFFICIAL PLAQUESEE ATTACHED01/06/172520 Clover Field Dr.Chaska, MN 55318
PROPOSED NICOLE STAVROS MEMORIAL SLEDDING HILL
My name is Todd Dexter and I am and will always be a Richfield Boy. While growing up in Richfield I spent
all of my time with my best friend Nicole Stavros. A blond, piercing blue eyed bundle of energy. I grew up on
Lakeview Avenue, across the street from Nicole, where her parent still live today. She and I played every day.
Best friends really. Many, many days and nights in the winter were spent slidding down the hill at Monroe Park
and skating (when there was a warming house at Fairwood and Monroe). Needless to say, growing up in
Richfield was amazing.
Nicole died a number of years ago out of the blue at the age of 39. Way too soon. There is no he and she,
Todd and Nicole, without a Richfield and all the experiences, journeys and fun we had together. But it is Richfield
as the setting for all of that that makes this so important. Nicole should be remembered purely for just being a
Richfield girl. She embodied everything that a girl should be. Kind, generous, strong, fierce, athletic and fun.
Nicole is and will always be a rolemodel for good for ALL Richfield girls. Richfield park leader. Captain of the girls
varsity soccer team. Athena Award winner. Homecoming queen candidate. Candy Striper at Fairview. Graduate of
Gustavus Adolpus College. Emergency room nurse. Mother. Wife. Friend.
This Memorial would be in honor of all those things that are good about Richfield. The kind of girl that it
did and will continue to produce with Richfield as the setting for life lessons, adventures and play. It would be nice
to have a place where families and kids can come, have fun, talk, laugh, learn and slide for hours on end...all of
these things Nicole Stavros brought to Richfield. Nicole is Richfield.
-Thank you for your consideration
NICOLE STAVROS
PROPOSED NICOLE STAVROS MEMORIAL SLEDDING HILL
MONROE PARK
LOCATION
CURRENT
STAVROS
RESIDENCE
NICOLE STAVROSTHIS SLIDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
PROPOSED NICOLE STAVROS MEMORIAL SLEDDING HILL
NICOLE STAVROS
NICOLE STAVROS
THIS SLEDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
PLAY, LOVE, GIGGLE & SLIDE IN MEMORY OF
CAST IRON OR STEEL
SUPPORT
(RELATIVE SIZE)
ALTERNATIVE WORDING
PROPOSED NICOLE STAVROS MEMORIAL SLEDDING HILL
NICOLE STAVROSTHIS SLEDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
PROPOSED NICOLE STAVROS MEMORIAL SLEDDING
THREE (3) SIMPLE COMPOSITE AND METAL BENCHES/NO BACK
ON CONCRETE PADS
FOR PARENTS WATCHING KIDS SLIDDING OR WATCHING BASEBALL
OR JUST TAKING A BREAK WALKING THE PATH AROUND THE PARK
(PRACTICAL)
1
2 3
NICOLE STAVROSTHIS SLIDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
NICOLE STAVROSTHIS SLIDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
NICOLE STAVROSTHIS SLIDDING HILL IS DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
Final Draft 03/11/08
City of Richfield
Recreation Facility and Amenity Dedication Policy
Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for dedicating recreational
facilities and amenities including athletic fields, park buildings, and other recreational
structures located in the City of Richfield in honor of an individual or organization. The
City of Richfield does not accept requests to permanently rename a park, recreational
facility or amenity in honor of an individual or organization, but as an alternative offers
the following guidelines to dedicate such facilities to the memory of an individual or
organization by granting the installation of a dedication plaque onsite of such facilities.
Nomination Criteria: Nominations for dedicating City of Richfield facilities or
amenities in the memory of an individual or organization shall be based on one or more
of the following criteria:
1. In honor of organizations or individuals (living or deceased) who have made a
significant contribution, financial or otherwise, to the City of Richfield or who
have played a leading role in advancing the City of Richfield as a good place to
live, work or recreate..
2. In honor of a person, place or event that played a significant role in the history of
the City of Richfield.
The individual or organization for which the dedication is sought shall be deemed to be
of good general character and should not be associated with unlawful or unseemly
activities.
Dedication Guidelines: The dedication of City recreational facilities via this policy shall
be limited to significant facilities or amenities, including but not limited to buildings,
rooms in buildings, athletic fields, ponds, bridges, playgrounds, and trails. The dedication
of minor amenities such as water fountains and benches are not part of this policy and
will be addressed by the Recreational Services Department. Fundraising projects
conducted by the Friends of Wood Lake that benefit the Wood Lake Nature Center are
exempt from this policy.
The dedication of City facilities or amenities shall normally be limited to no more than
two per year to maintain the stature of the facility dedication honor. Any undedicated
City recreational facility may be nominated for dedication using the criteria of this policy.
The nominating person(s) shall be entirely responsible for all costs associated with the
dedication including application and background check fees, recognition, and memorial
plaques. The size, style, text and location of the memorial plaque shall be subject to
review and approval of the Recreation Services Director and the Nominating Committee.
Application Process: The process for dedicating a recreational facility or amenity to the
memory of an individual shall be:
1. The nominating person(s) shall request a City of Richfield Recreational Facility
Dedication Nomination form from the Recreation Services Department office.
Nominations for deceased individuals will not be accepted until after a six-month
time period from the date the individual passed away.
2. A fully completed City of Richfield Recreational Facility Dedication Nomination
form shall be submitted to the Recreation Services Director and the Nominating
Committee along with the specified application fee.
3. The completed application will be reviewed by Nominating Committee
(consisting of assigned members of the Community Services Commission) for
completeness, accuracy and adherence to policy guidelines.
4. All individuals nominated shall be subject to a criminal background check.
5. If the nomination is rejected based on the above review, the nominating person
designated on the application will be notified in writing.
6. Nominations that pass the above review will be forwarded to the Community
Services Commission for review at their next regularly scheduled meeting.
7. Within 60 days of the Community Services Commission meeting at which the
application is received, a recommendation will be made. If rejected by the
Community Services Commission, the nominating person designated on the
application will be notified by City staff in writing.
8. If approved, the recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for final
review and approval or denial.
9. Nominating parties will be notified in writing of the City Council’s actions within
two weeks of the meeting at which action is taken.
10. The City Council shall have the authority to override this policy when they deem
doing so to be in the best interest of the City.
Revocation:
Recreational facility dedications may be revoked by the Community Services
Commission should information later come to light that runs counter to the substance and
spirit of this policy.
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #5.H.
STAFF REPORT NO. 178
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector
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
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 to transfer pr ojects to the R ichfield Economic Development Authority.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The City Counc il adopted a resolution on May 9, 2017, establishing the Richfield Ec onomic Development
Authority (E D A). Since that time, the E D A has approved a 2018 budget that includes funding and
administering c ertain ac tivities that had been funded in the past by either the City of Richfield or the Richfield
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). The specific programs meeting this desc ription are the Kids
@ Home and the Transformation Home Loans programs.
State statute governing the formation and administration of ED A's requires that the C ity Council formally
takes an action to transfer such programs to the E D A prior to the E D A commencing that role.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution relating to the Richfield Economic Development Authority and
transferring cer tain projects to such Author ity.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
By resolution, the Ric hfield City Council c reated the Richfield E D A on May 9, 2017.
The E D A is intending to fund and administer the Kids @ Home and Transformation Home Loans
programs that had formerly been funded and administered by either the City of Richfield or the
Richfield HRA.
The E D A plan on beginning this funding/administrative role on J anuary 1, 2018.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The E D A was established by the City C ounc il in ac cordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.090 through 469.1082.
Per S ec tion 469.094, subdivision 2, the City C ounc il transfers control, authority and operation of
certain projec ts of the Ric hfield HRA to the ED A.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Projec ts must be transferred to the E D A prior to J anuary 1, 2018.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
All funds transferred from the HRA to the ED A shall be held in a separate acc ount and ac counted
for separately.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
Legal C ounsel drafted the resolution.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not approve the transfer of projects to the ED A.
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
496930v1 JAE RC260-1
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE RICHFIELD ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; TRANSFERRING CERTAIN
PROJECTS TO SUCH AUTHORITY; AND APPROVING
MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
(the “City”) as follows:
1. Pursuant to resolution adopted by the City Council on May 9, 2017 (the “Enabling
Resolution”), the City Council established the Richfield Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”) in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1082, as amended (the “Act”).
2. Pursuant to the Act, the EDA is authorized to exercise all of the powers of a housing and
redevelopment authority.
3. There now exists in the City the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City
of Richfield, Minnesota (the “HRA”) created pursuant to the Act. The Act authorizes the City Council to
transfer projects, programs and property of the HRA to the EDA.
4. Pursuant to Section 469.094, subdivision 2 of the Act, the City Council hereby transfers the
control, authority and operation of certain “projects,” as defined in the Act, and certain other programs and
projects of the HRA to the EDA, including but not limited to those set forth in EXHIBIT A attached hereto
(collectively, the “Projects”).
5. All funds transferred from the HRA to the EDA shall be held in a separate account and
accounted for separately.
6. The transfer described herein is conditioned upon acceptance by the EDA of such transfer
and a covenant and pledge by the EDA that the EDA is obligated to perform all agreements, pledges,
covenants, and undertakings heretofore entered into by the HRA with respect to the Projects.
7. The City Manager is authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to
the Executive Director of the EDA, to the Executive Director of the HRA, and to other governmental officers
as appropriate.
8. The Mayor, City Manager, and all other officers and employees of the City are authorized
and directed to take whatever action and to execute and deliver such documents that are necessary to give
effect to this resolution.
2
496930v1 JAE RC260-1
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 24th day of October, 2017.
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
A-1
496930v1 JAE RC260-1
EXHIBIT A
TRANSFERRED PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
Kids @ Home
Transformation Loan Program
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #7.
STAFF REPORT NO. 179
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris Regi s, F inance Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Public Hearing regarding the special assessment roll for unpaid false alarm user fees against private
property.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Richfield City C ode and City C harter allow the City to spec ially assess delinquent false alarm user fees
against the respective properties. State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one year
assessment for these costs.
Unpaid alarm user fees must be paid to the City within 30 days from the date of written notic e by the City to
the alarm user. Fees not paid within the time specified will be subject to a 10% penalty charge.
The special assessment for unpaid false alarm user fees assessed to private properties provides a means for
the City to recover c osts inc urred with the response by public safety to an alarm call on certain properties in
the City that turns out to be false.
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 unpaid false alarm user fees against pr ivate property.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
N/A
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Richfield C ity Code section 915.07 S ubd. 3 and c hapter 8.02 of the C ity Charter allows the City
to specially assess delinquent false alarm user fees against the respective properties.
Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one-year assessment for these
costs.
Notic e of the certific ation was published in the Sun Current on Oc tober 5, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
N/A
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
A 10% penalty c harge is applied to all properties which have not paid within the time specified.
The proposed special assessment for unpaid false alarm user fees from private property is
$1,210.00 with an additional 5% interest charge on the assessment.
The affec ted property owner may prepay the original principal amount without interest within 30
days from the date the Council adopts the assessment. I f the original princ ipal amount is not paid,
the assessment will be charged 5% interest.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The C ity Attorney will be in attendance at the Council
meeting should a legal question arise.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not approve the attached resolutions and have the c osts absorbed by the City.
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
Unpaid F alse A larm A ssessment Resoluti on Resolution L etter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
UNPAID FALSE ALARM FEES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City
Council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for unpaid
false alarm fees from private property in the City of Richfield:
Unpaid
False
Property Address Property ID Number Alarm Fee
1708 66th Street E 26-028-24-14-0130 110.00
1732 66th Street E, 26-028-24-14-0130 110.00
6625 Lyndale Ave S 27-028-24-32-0137 220.00
7200 17th Ave S 35-028-24-14-0018 330.00
7700 Wentworth Ave 34-028-24-34-0054 110.00
7740 S 2nd Ave 34-028-24-43-0005 330.00
Total
$1,210.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of $1,210.00, 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 and within 30 days of the date the City Council
adopts the assessment, pay the whole assessment on such property to the City’s
Assessing Division without interest. Payments received after the expiration of the 30
day prepayment period, but received prior to November 28, 2017 will be charged
interest through the date of payment. Payments will not be accepted between
November 28, 2017 and January 1, 2018.
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 this 24th day of October, 2017.
______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #8.
STAFF REPORT NO. 180
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: C hris Regi s, F inance Manager
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 special assessment roll for weed elimination from private property and
removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Minnesota State S tatutes provide that the City may levy a spec ial one year assessment for the elimination of
public health or safety hazards or the elimination of weeds from private properties. T he special
assessments are based on costs incurred by the City in connection with the abatement of weeds or
public health or safety hazards on certain properties in the City that are not properly maintained.
The owners of the subjec t properties are notified by the C ity to take c orrective action with regard to the issue
with the property. I f the specific property issues were not abated within the proper time limit the City would
take the corrective ac tion nec essary and bill the property owner.
I n all cases, property owners will be notified that any unpaid charges or fees may be assessed against the
property.
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 weed elimination from private property and r emoval or elimination of public health or safety hazar ds
from private pr operty.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
N/A
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The nuisanc e properties were not maintained by the owners and the C ity inc urred costs to abate
the nuisanc e.
Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one-year assessment for these
costs.
Notic e of the certific ation was published in the Sun Current on Oc tober 5, 2017.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
N/A
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The proposed special assessment for the elimination of public health or safety hazards from
private property is $2,017.50 with an additional 5% interest penalty.
The proposed special assessment for weed elimination from private property is $3,385.00 with an
additional 5% interest penalty.
Costs incurred for city staff time in the cleanup of the properties or to remove the weeds are
inc luded in the spec ial assessment amount.
A $25.00 administrative fee is charged to all properties.
The affec ted property owner may prepay the original principal amount without interest within 30
days from the date the Council adopts the assessment. I f the original princ ipal amount is not paid,
the assessment will be charged 5% interest.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The C ity Attorney will be in attendance at the Council
meeting should a legal question arise.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Do not approve the attached resolution and have the c osts absorbed by the City.
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 ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
WEED ELIMINATION FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OR
ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PRIVATE
PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City
Council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of
public health or safety hazards from private property in the City of Richfield:
Public
Health or
Weed Safety
Property Address Property ID Number Elimination Hazards
1545 Fern Drive 35-028-24-11-0068 125.00 -
1820 66th Street W 28-028-24-24-0089 145.00 -
6236 Bloomington Ave S 26-028-24-12-0049 290.00 -
6340 15th Ave S 26-028-24-12-0085 125.00 -
6345 15th Ave S 26-028-24-12-0109 125.00 -
6410 Knox Ave S 28-028-24-24-0062 145.00 -
6600 4th Ave S 27-028-24-41-0044 270.00 100.00
6612 Girard Ave S 28-028-24-42-0033 125.00 -
6616 Sheridan Ave S 29-028-24-41-0055 125.00 -
6618 Park Ave 26-028-24-32-0020 125.00 -
6639 Bloomington Ave S 26-028-24-41-0059 145.00 -
6800 13th Ave S 26-028-24-43-0017 - 300.00
6800 Thomas Ave S 29-028-24-43-0001 - 100.00
6821 10th Ave S 26-028-24-34-0063 - 100.00
6829 Elliot Ave S 26-028-24-34-0088 - 100.00
6845 Upton Ave S 29-028-24-43-0013 145.00 -
6937 Nicollet Ave S 27-028-24-43-0018 145.00 -
7028 15th Ave S 35-028-24-12-0115 145.00 -
7028 Oakland Ave S 35-028-24-22-0092 270.00 -
7100 Portland Ave 34-028-24-11-0105 125.00 -
7144 4th Ave S 34-028-24-11-0044 415.00 130.00
7316 Pleasant Ave 34-028-24-23-0144 125.00 -
7500 11th Ave S 35-028-24-31-0033 - 115.00
7539 Washburn Ave S 32-028-24-42-0106 - 130.00
7632 Chicago Ave S 35-028-24-33-0056 125.00 -
7645 Nicollet Ave S 34-028-24-43-0070 145.00 -
7700 Bloomington Ave S 35-028-24-43-0001 - 442.50
6845 Washburn Ave S 29-028-24-43-0061 - 250.00
6944 Pleasant Ave S 27-028-24-33-0027 - 250.00
Total $3,385.00 $2,017.50
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of $5,402.50, 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 and within 30 days of the date the City Council
adopts the assessment, pay the whole assessment on such property to the City’s
Assessing Division without interest. Payments received after the expiration of the 30
day prepayment period, but received prior to November 28, 2017 will be charged
interest through the date of payment. Payments will not be accepted between
November 28, 2017 and January 1, 2018.
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 this 24th day of October, 2017.
______________________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #9.
STAFF REPORT NO. 181
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Cancel a public hearing to consider a resolution granting approval of the final plat of the Cedar Point
Commons Second Addition.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The City Counc il approved final development plans and a preliminary plat for the C edar Point C ommons
Sec ond Addition on August 23, 2016. Since that time, the retail building has been constructed and opened
and plans for a day care user for the northern half of the site have continued to move forward. A final plat
application has been rec eived and reviewed; the property owner (Hempel Companies) is working to address
final plat comments from the city, Hennepin C ounty, and the Three Rivers Park Distric t. Revised plans have
not been received. A new public hearing will be scheduled upon rec eipt of plans.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: C ancel a public hearing to consider approval of a final plat for the C edar Point Commons
Second Addition.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
See executive summary
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
All plats or subdivisions of land in the City must be approved by C ounc il resolution pursuant to the
provisions of Minnesota State Statutes 462.357.
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 :
Notic e of this public hearing was published in the Sun Current.
New notic e will be published when revised application materials are received.
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
AGENDA SECTION:PROPOSED
ORDINANCES
AGENDA ITEM #10.
STAFF REPORT NO. 182
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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 tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector
10/15/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 ordinance amending residential driveway regulations and
consideration of a resolution authorizing summary publication of said ordinance.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
At the direction of the C ity Council, planning staff researched potential modific ations to driveway regulations.
Current regulations prohibit properties with narrow, single-car garages from having a driveway that is wider
than the garage itself. C ity staff and Council Members annually rec eive 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": A driveway must lead to a garage or other authorized parking area. Parking in
the front yard area is only permitted on driveway s.
Based on 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 properties with narrow single-car garages, driveway width is limited to as little as 10 to 14 feet, regardless
of lot width. This has been found to be an overly restrictive polic y, making it difficult or impossible to park two
cars side-by-side or bypass a parked c ar at any point. Properties that fall into this c ategory make up a fair
percentage of the housing stoc k in Ric hfield. Furthermore, c urrent regulations do not spec ify how and where
a driveway should taper from its maximum width at the garage down to an existing curb cut that is narrower.
This lack of specificity has resulted in driveways being widened out to the curb without replacing the c urb cut.
To remedy those related issues, staff recommends amending the clause regarding lot widths and adding a
new clause to the ordinanc e, as follows:
1. W idth 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 c urb c ut within 20 feet of the curbline. Bey ond that
point, width may inc rease to the number established by I tem (1). The widened portion of the driveway
shall be sc reened with plantings.
Sinc e the first reading of the ordinanc e on Oc tober 10, 2017, the method of measurement was c hanged from
"within 10 feet of the property line" to "within 20 feet of the curbline." The reason for the c hange is that it
would be an administrative hardship to locate property lines for every driveway expansion. The proposed
change is slightly less restric tive than the first reading language. A diagram is attached to this report to clarify
the difference in measurements.
O ther proposed changes to driveway regulations:
I n addition to relaxing the regulation for narrow garages, staff is proposing to modify the following:
Lots with alley ac cess will not be permitted to install a c urb c ut in the front yard. This is the c urrent
policy for new homes c onstruc ted through the Ric hfield Rediscovered program and staff rec ommends
making this polic y effective city wide. I f unique conditions exist, necessitating a front driveway when
alley acc ess is provided, a property owner may apply for a variance.
Corner lots will only be permitted one curb cut. Currently, c orner properties are eligible for a curb cut
to each street. Most corner properties have garages acc essed from the street/c orner side rather than
the front. A small number 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/c orner side.
Many of those existing front driveways on corner properties are closer to the intersection than allowed
by ordinanc e. This c hange would require removal of an existing front driveway 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 ordinanc e allows turnarounds
on arterials and c ollectors. I n practice, turnarounds exist only on arterials - very few have been
construc ted on collec tor streets. W ith the exception of Bloomington Avenue north of 66th Street and
12th Avenue south of 66th Street, the remainder of collec tor streets run east-west and do not abut the
front yard area of residential properties. W ider driveway s (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:
1. Approve an ordinance amending residential driveway regulations.
2. Approve a r esolution authoriz ing summary publication of an ordinance amending residential
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):
"Driveway " is defined as follows (Zoning Code Section 507.07, Subdivision 36):
An area designed to provide ingress and egress for motor vehicles from the street to a garage or other
authorized off-street parking area; the term does not include:
A noncontiguous area exclusively set aside or used for the parking and storage of recreational
vehicles and equipment; or
Parking lots.
Changes are proposed to the following subsec tions regulating driveways in the front yard and boulevard
area:
Single-Family Residential (R) - 514.05 S ubd. 6
Low-Density Single-Family Residential (R-1) - 518.05 Subd. 6
Two-Family Residential (MR-1) - 522.05 Subd. 6
Effects of proposed changes to driveway width in front yard and boulevard area:
All lot widths: A driveway with a narrower curb cut would retain the existing width within 20 feet of the
c urb, 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 c hange.
60 foot lot with existing wider curb cut or wider garage – reduc tion in maximum driveway width from 21
feet to 20 feet.
75 foot lot with existing wider curb cut or wider garage – reduc tion in maximum driveway width from 22
feet to 20 feet.
Driveway s on the street/corner side of corner lots (not in front y ard area) – no c hange.
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 )
I n instanc es where the full text of an amendment is c umbersome and the expense of publication of the
full text is not justified, the city is permitted to publish a summary of the approved text.
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 approved a first reading of the ordinance on October 10, 2017.
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
Ordinance Ordinance
Resolution - S ummary P ublication Resolution L etter
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
Measurement change exhibit E xhibit
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 20
feet of the curbline. 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 shall not exceed the width of the curb cut within 20
feet of the curbline. Beyond that point, width may increase to the number
established by item (i). The expanded 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 shall not exceed the width of the curb cut within 20
feet of the curbline. Beyond that point, width may increase to the number
established by item (i). The expanded 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
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION
OF AN ORDINANCE TO UPDATE
RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above-referenced amendment of the Richfield
City Code; and
WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense
of publication of the complete text is not justified.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield
that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication:
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
BILL NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE
TO UPDATE RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS
This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the
Richfield City Charter.
This ordinance revised regulations related to driveway widths in the boulevard and
front yard area in the Single-Family Residential (R and R-1) and Two-Family Residential
(MR-1) Districts. The ordinance relaxed restrictions on driveway width for properties with
narrow garages, while clarifying how wider driveways shall be tapered to meet existing
narrower curb cuts. The ordinance restricts properties with alley access from adding front
driveways, and limits the addition of turnaround areas to arterial streets. The ordinance
also restricts corner properties from having two driveways (R and R-1 Districts only).
Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s office
during normal business hours or upon request by calling the Department of Community
Development at (612) 861-9760.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 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:RESOLUTIONS
AGENDA ITEM #11.
STAFF REPORT NO. 183
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 the City of Richfield to enter into a Local
Road Improvement Program G rant Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for
$4,310,000 to be used in right-of-way acquisition for the 77th Street Extension and C rossing of Trunk
Highway 77.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The City was awarded $10,000,000 in the 2015 Loc al Road I mprovement Program (LRI P) to be used
towards right-of-way ac quisition and c onstruction of the 77th Street Extension and Trunk Highway (TH) 77
Crossing. The program is administered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnD OT) and
requires a grant agreement as part of the process to release funds. Once the agreement is in place, a portion
of the L RI P funds will be available immediately for right-of-way acquisition in the amount of $4,310,000.
The remainder of the $10,000,000, as well as any funds remaining from this agreement after right-of-way
ac quisition, will be available for construction.
The City shall not sell, transfer, or lease any part of its ownership in real property ac quired using these funds
without the written c onsent of both MnD OT and the C ommissioner.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve a resolution authorizing the C ity of Richfield to enter into a Local Road
Improvement Pr ogram Grant Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnD O T
Agreement No. 1029344) for $4,310,000 to be used in right-of-way acquisition for the 77th Street
Extension and C rossing of Trunk Highway 77.
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 ost estimate to c omplete the 77th Street Underpass, including design, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction is $24.2 million.
The 77th Street Underpass was earmarked in 2015 legislation to be funded through the L RI P.
The L RI P funds can only be used for right-of-way ac quisition and construction. C ity staff time will
be c overed using city funds.
MnD OT administers the L RI P funding and requires a grant agreement with the City.
Acc ording to MnD OT and the agreement, any remaining portion of the $4.31M after right-of-way
acquisition is complete will go back into the total LRI P project funding for c onstruc tion.
An additional $2.1 Million for the 77th Street project was included in the 2014 bonding bill to be
used for projec t design.
Funding has also been secured from Hennepin C ounty ($1.5M) and Federal ($7M) sourc es.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
I nc reasing c apac ity of the I -494 c orridor and the 77th Street crossing of TH 77 are identified in
the C ity's C omprehensive Plan (C hapter 6 - Transportation).
On D ec ember 10, 2013, the City Council approved an Official Map for 77th Street including the
extension and underpass of TH 77.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Right-of-way ac quisition must be complete prior to c onstruc tion.
The remaining funding gap on the project is approximately $4 Million; but this dollar amount will not
be exact until after right-of-way acquisition is c omplete.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The grant funds will be used toward the ac quisition c osts.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The C ity Attorney has reviewed the grant agreement and will be available at the meeting for
questions.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ounc il may choose to reject the L RI P Grant Agreement and direct staff on how to proc eed;
however, this would delay the right-of-way acquisition process.
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
A greement C ontract/A greement
A pplicati on B ackup Materi al
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO
ENTER INTO A LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
(LRIP) GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR $4,310,000 FOR
PURCHASE OF RIGHT OF WAY ASSOCIATED WITH THE
77TH STREET EXTENSION AND CROSSING OF TRUNK
HIGHWAY 77.
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has applied to the Commissioner of Transportation
for a grant from the Minnesota State Transportation fund for the 77th Street Extension and
Trunk Highway 77 Crossing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has received a Local Road Improvement Program
General Fund Grant for $4,310,000; and
WHEREAS, The City intends to use these funds to pay for costs associated with the
right of way required for the 77th Street Extension and Trunk Highway 77 Crossing; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real personal property on terms prescribed by the donor be made by resolution of
a two-thirds majority of the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The City Council of the City of Richfield hereby authorizes the Mayor and City
Manager to enter into a Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement
with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for $4,310,000.
2. Appropriate City personnel are authorized to administer the funds in
accordance with the grant agreement and the terms described by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
3. The City Council of the City of Richfield does hereby agree to the terms and
conditions of the grant consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 174.50,
subdivision 5, clause (2), and will use all funds exclusively for the project,
pay any additional amount by which the cost exceeds the estimate, and will
return to the Minnesota State Transportation Fund any amount appropriated
for the project but not required.
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
MnDOT Agreement No.1029344
LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (LRIP)
GRANT AGREEMENT
This Agreement between the Minnesota Department of Transportation (“MnDOT”) and
the Grantee named below is made pursuant to M innesota Statutes Section 174.52 and pursuant to
Minn. Laws 2015 Chapter 5-H.F.2.Subd. 7.The provisions in that section and the Exhibits
attached hereto and incorporated by reference constitute this Agreement and the persons signing
below agree to fully comply with all of the requirements of this Agreement.This Agreement
will be effective on the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes §
16 C.05, subdivision 2.
1.Public Entity (Grantee) name, address and contact person:
____CITY OF RICHFIELD______________
____6700 PORTLAND AVENUE S_______
____RICHFIELD, MN 55423_____________
_____________________________________
Contact: ___JEFF PEARSON ____________
2.Project(s):
Name of Project &
Project Number
(See Exhibit C for
location)
Amount of
LRIP Funds
Amount of Required
Matching Funds
Completion Date
77TH St -TH77
Underpass
157-597-001
$4,310,000 $1,500,000 2020
3.Total Amount of LRIP Grant for all projects under this Agreement:$__$4,310,000______
4.The following Exhibits for each project are attached and incorporated by reference as part
of this Agreement:
Exhibit A Completed Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule
Exhibit B Project Completion Schedule
Exhibit C Bond Financed Property Certification
Exhibit D Grant Application
Exhibit E Grantee Resolution Approving Grant Agreement
Exhibit F General Terms and Conditions
Exhibit G Jobs Reporting
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
2
5.Additional requirements, if any:
6.Any modification of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties.
(The remaining portion of this page was intentionally left blank.)
MnDOT Agreement No.1029344
PUBLIC ENTITY (GRANTEE)
By:
Title:Mayor, City of Richfield
Date:______________________________
By:
Title: Richfield City Manager
Date:______________________________
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Approval and Certifying Encumbrance
By:
Title: State Aid Programs Engineer
Date:
Office of Financial Management, Grant Unit
By:___________________________________
Agency Grant Supervisor
Date:_________________________________
OFFICE OF CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
By: _________________________________
Contract Administrator
Date:_________________________________
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
3
EXHIBIT A
SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS SCHEDULE
SOURCES OF FUNDS USES OF FUNDS
Entity Supplying Funds Amount Expenses Amount
State Funds:Items Paid for with LRIP
LRIP Grant $4,310,000 Grant Funds:
Right-Of-Way $4,310,000
Other:________________$___________
________________$___________________________$___________
________________$___________________________$___________
________________$___________________________$___________
Subtotal $4,310,000 Subtotal $4,310,000
Public Entity Funds:Items paid for with Non-
Matching Funds $1,500,000 LRIP Grant Funds:
Right-Of-Way $1,500,000
Other:________________$___________
________________$___________________________$___________
________________$___________________________$___________
________________$___________
Subtotal $1,500,000
Subtotal $1,500,000
TOTAL FUNDS $5,810,000 =TOTAL PROJECT
COSTS
$5,810,000
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
4
EXHIBIT B
PROJECT COMPLETION SCHEDULE
(Provide for enough time to final the project through the MnDOT state aid pay request process.)
Complete Appraisal and Relocation Benefits
for Full Purchase Parcel November/December 2017
Make Purchase Offer of Full Purchase Parcel December 2017
Complete Purchase/Condemnation Process of
Full Purchase Parcel 2018
Complete Temporary Easement Process 2018
Project Construction 2019-2020
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
5
EXHIBIT C
BOND FINANCED PROPERTY CERTIFICATION
State of Minnesota
General Obligation Bond Financed Property
The undersigned states that it has a fee simple, leasehold and/or easement interest in the
real property located in the County(ies) of Hennepin, State of Minnesota that is generally
described or illustrated graphically in Attachment 1 attached hereto and all improvements
thereon (the “Restricted Property”) and acknowledges that the Restricted Property is or may
become State bond-financed property. To the extent that the Restricted Property is or becomes
State bond-financed property, the undersigned acknowledges that:
A.The Restricted Property is State bond-financed property under Minn. Stat.
Sec. 16A.695, is subject to the requirements imposed by that statute, and
cannot be sold, mortgaged, encumbered or otherwise disposed of without the
approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget; and
B.The Restricted Property is subject to the provisions of the Local Road
Improvement Program Grant Agreement between the Minnesota Department
of Transportation and the undersigned dated ________________, 20___; and
C.The Restricted Property shall continue to be deemed State bond-financed
property for 37.5 years or until the Restricted Property is sold with the written
approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget.
Date: __________________, 20____
_____________________________________
[name of Public Entity grantee], a political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota
By: ________________________________
Name: _______________________________
Title: _______________________________
By: ________________________________
Name: _______________________________
Title: _______________________________
MnDOT Agreement No.1029344
Attachment 1 to Exhibit C
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF RESTRICTED PROPERTY
(Insert a narrative or graphic description of the Restricted Property for the project. It need not be
a legal description if a legal description is unavailable.)
THAT PART OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 LYING E OF THE SLY EXTENSION OF THE E LINE OF
18TH AVE S AS LAID OUT IN THE PLAT OF LARSONS SOUTH VIEW
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
3
EXHIBIT D
GRANT APPLICATION
Attach the grant application for the project
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 1 | P a g e
A. Applicant Information
1. Title: Mr. 2. First Name: Jeff 3. Last Name: Pearson
4. Phone Number: 612-861-9791 5. E-mail: jpearson@richfieldmn.gov
6. Agency: Richfield 7. Agency Position: City Engineer
8. Street Address: 6700 Portland Ave S
9. Additional Address Line:
10. City: Richfield 11. State: MN 12. Zip Code: 55423
13. Is the applicant a sponsor on this project? Please Select
B. Project Location
1. MnDOT District: 05 - Metro 2. County: Hennepin
3. City: Richfield 4. Township:
5. Name of Road: 77th Street 6. Type of Road: Municipal State Aid Street
7. Road Authority*: State Aid City 8. Road Authority Name*: Richfield
9. Project Termini: From 16th Ave S 10. To: Longfellow Ave
*Complete if road authority is not the applicant.
C. Project Description
1. Select type of project. Reconstruction
2. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project (2,000 character limit).
Right-of-way for construction of a 77th Street extension via underpass of TH 77 including traffic lanes,
sidewalk, and regional multi-use trail.
D. Eligibility
1. Select the LRIP Account your project is eligible under.
Routes of Regional Significance
2. Does your project meet one or more of the Routes of Regional Significance Criteria (select all that apply)?
Farm to Market route
Part of an economic development plan
Provides capacity or congestion relief to a parallel
trunk highway system or county road
Part of a 10-ton route network
Connect to regional tourist destination
Is a connection to the IRC system, trunk highway
or a county road
3. Describe the project contribution to the local, regional or state economic development or redevelopment
efforts (1,500 character limit).
The 77th Street Underpass Project will directly connect the developed I-494 commercial strip to the following
destinations: - MSP International Airport - Commercial shipping centers - Metro Transit South Garage - Mall of
America/Bloomington South Loop area. The project will connect to identified redevelopment areas along both
I-494 and TH 77.
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 2 | P a g e
E. Project Readiness
1. Construction Year: 2019
2. Does the project have any historical/archeological impacts?
No. There are no historical/archeological impacts
3. Are there railroad impacts (railroad crossings or railroad tracks within 600’ of the project)?
No RR crossings or RR tracks within 600'
4. What is the status of the engineering and design work on the project?
Design in progress
5. What is the Right-of-Way (R/W) status of the project?
Additional R/W is needed and is not yet acquired
F. Safety
1. Is this project or components of this project identified in a County Safety Plan? No
2. If applicable, select the appropriate focus area your project/safety strategy align with in the Minnesota
Strategic Highway Safety Plan.
Not applicable
3. Identify the transportation deficiency, type of crash, or safety hazard this project is trying to address (1,000
character limit). Respond even if project is in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety
Plan.
The extension of 77th Street under TH 77 will facilitate the ability to consolidate freeway access at Portland
Ave and Lyndale Ave and remove access points at 12th Ave and Nicollet Ave along I-494. This access
consolidation will improve safety and traffic flow on I-494. The connection to 24th Ave that the 77th Street
underpass provides is identified by the 2010 Metro Highway System Investment Study as a necessary
component in this access control implementation.
4. Describe how this project improves safety, reduce traffic crashes, fatalities, injuries, and property damages
(1,000 character limit). Respond even if project is in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway
Safety Plan.
Click here to enter text
G. Multimodal/Complete Street
Identify infrastructure improvements for non-motorized users on this project (1,500 character limit).
The project includes pedestrian sidewalks and a Three Rivers Park Regional Trail. Both will provide a direct
connection to employment and recreation centers that doesn not exist today.
H. Estimated Project Cost
Source of Funding
1. LRIP Request: 4,310,000
2. Federal Funds: 0
3. State Aid Funds: 0
4. Local/Other Funds: 1,500,000
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 3 | P a g e
H. Estimated Project Cost
5. Total Project Cost: 5,810,000
I. Attachments
At least one project location map with routes labeled
Engineer’s Estimate with an itemized breakdown
Project schedule
Local agency resolution
Sponsor agency resolution (if applicable)
Letters of concurrence or support
When you are ready to submit the application, save the application form with LRIP, agency and road in the name
of the document; e.g. LRIP_RamseyCounty_CSAH30.docx.
The application and attachments are due November 3, 2017 for county and state aid city applicants and
December 1, 2017 for township and non-state aid city applicants. Applications and attachments should be
submitted electronically to saltirhelp.dot@state.mn.us.
More information on the program is available on the Local Road Improvement Program website,
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html. If you have questions regarding this solicitation, contact Patti
Loken at 651-366-3803 or Patti.Loken@state.mn.us.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
4
EXHIBIT E
GRANTEE RESOLUTION APPROVING GRANT AGREEMENT
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO
ENTER INTO A LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
(LRIP) GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR $4,310,000 FOR
PURCHASE OF RIGHT OF WAY ASSOCIATED WITH THE
77TH STREET EXTENSION AND CROSSING OF TRUNK
HIGHWAY 77.
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has applied to the Commissioner of Transportation
for a grant from the Minnesota State Transportation fund for the 77th Street Extension and
Trunk Highway 77 Crossing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has received a Local Road Improvement Program
General Fund Grant for $4,310,000; and
WHEREAS, The City intends to use these funds to pay for costs associated with the
right of way required for the 77th Street Extension and Trunk Highway 77 Crossing; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or
devise of real personal property on terms prescribed by the donor be made by resolution of
a two-thirds majority of the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The City Council of the City of Richfield hereby authorizes the Mayor and City
Manager to enter into a Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement
with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for $4,310,000.
2. Appropriate City personnel are authorized to administer the funds in
accordance with the grant agreement and the terms described by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
3. The City Council of the City of Richfield does hereby agree to the terms and
conditions of the grant consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 174.50,
subdivision 5, clause (2), and will use all funds exclusively for the project,
pay any additional amount by which the cost exceeds the estimate, and will
return to the Minnesota State Transportation Fund any amount appropriated
for the project but not required.
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
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
5
EXHIBIT F
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR
LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (LRIP) GRANTS
Article I
DEFINITIONS
Section 1.01 Defined Terms.The following terms shall have the meanings set out respectively
after each such term (the meanings to be equally applicable to both the singular and plural forms of the
terms defined) unless the context specifically indicates otherwise:
“Advance(s)”-means an advance made or to be made by MnDOT to the Public Entity and
disbursed in accordance with the provisions contained in Article VI hereof.
“Agreement”-means the Local Road Improvement Program Grant Agreement between the Public
Entity and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to which this Exhibit is attached.
“Certification”-means the certification, in the form attached as Exhibit C, in which the Public
Entity acknowledges that its interest in the Real Property is bond financed property within the meaning of
Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and is subject to certain restrictions imposed thereby.
“Code”-means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and all treasury regulations,
revenue procedures and revenue rulings issued pursuant thereto.
“Commissioner”-means the Commissioner of Minnesota Management & Budget.
“Commissioner’s Order”-means the “Fourth Order Amending Order of the Commissioner of
Minnesota Management &Budget Relating to Use and Sale of State Bond Financed Property” dated July
30, 2012, as it may be amended or supplemented.
“Completion Date”-means the projected date for completion of the Project as indicated in the
Agreement.
“Construction Contract Documents”-means the document or documents, in form and substance
acceptable to MnDOT, including but not limited to any construction plans and specifications and any
exhibits, amendments, change orders, modifications thereof or supplements thereto, which collectively
form the contract between the Public Entity and the Contractor(s)for the completion of the Construction
Items on or before the Completion Date for either a fixed price or a guaranteed maximum price.
“Construction Items”-means the work to be performed under the Construction Contract
Documents.
“Contractor”-means any person engaged to work on or to furnish materials and supplies for the
Construction Items including, if applicable, a general contractor.
“Draw Requisition”-means a draw requisition that the Public Entity, or its designee, submits to
MnDOT when an Advance is requested, as referred to in Section 4.02.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
6
“G.O. Bonds”-means the state general obligation bonds issued under the authority granted in
Article XI, Sec. 5(a) of the Minnesota Constitution, the proceeds of which are used to fund the LRIP
Grant, and any bonds issued to refund or replace such bonds.
“Grant Application”-means the grant application that the Public Entity submitted to MnDOT
which is attached as Exhibit D.
“LRIP Grant”-means a grant from MnDOT to the Public Entity under the LRIP in the amount
specified in the Agreement, as such amount may be modified under the provisions hereof.
“LRIP”-means the Local Road Improvement Program pursuant to Minn. Stat.Sec. 174.52 and
rules relating thereto.
“MnDOT”-means the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
“Outstanding Balance of the LRIP Grant”-means the portion of the LRIP Grant that has been
disbursed to the Public Entity minus any amounts returned to the Commissioner.
“Project”-means the Public Entity’s acquisition, if applicable,of the ownership interests in the
Real Property and the performance of activities denoted in Section 2.03 to be totally or partially funded
with a LRIP grant.
“Public Entity”-means the grantee of the LRIP Grant and identified as the Public Entity in the
Agreement.
“Real Property”-means the real property identified in the Agreement on which the Project is
located.
Article II
GRANT
Section 2.01 Grant of Monies.MnDOT shall make the LRIP Grant to the Public Entity, and
disburse the proceeds in accordance with the terms and conditions herein.
Section 2.02 Public Ownership,The Public Entity acknowledges and agrees that the LRIP Grant is
being funded with the proceeds of G.O. Bonds, and as a result all of the Real Property must be owned by
one or more public entities. The Public Entity represents and warrants to MnDOT that it has, or will
acquire,one or more of the following ownership interests in the Real Property: (i) fee simple ownership,
(ii) an easement that is for a term that extends beyond the date that is 37.5 years from the Agreement
effective date, or such shorter term as authorized by statute, and which cannot be modified or terminated
early without the prior written consent of MnDOT and the Commissioner; and/or (iii) a prescriptive
easement for a term that extends beyond the date that is 37.5 years from the Agreement effective date.In
addition,the Public Entity represents and warrants that it possess, or will possess, all easements necessary
for the operation, maintenance and management of the Real Property in the manner specified in Section
2.04
Section 2.03 Use of Grant Proceeds.The Public Entity shall use the LRIP Grant solely to
reimburse itself for expenditures it has already made, or will make, to pay the costs of one of the
following applicable activities:(i) acquiring any of the ownership interests detailed in Section 2.02 (ii)
constructing or reconstructing city streets, county highways,or town roads with statewide or regional
significance that have not been fully funded through other state, federal, or local funding sources; or (iii)
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
7
capital improvement projects on county state-aid highways that are intended primarily to reduce traffic
crashes, deaths, injuries, and property damage.The Public Entity shall not use the LRIP Grant for any
other purpose, including but not limited to, any work to be done on a state trunk highway or within a
trunk highway easement.
Section 2.04 Operation of the Real Property.The Real Property must be used by the Public
Entity in conjunction with or for the operation of a county highway, county state-aid highway, town road,
or city street and for other uses customarily associated therewith, such as trails and utility corridors, and
for no other purposes or uses.The Public Entity shall have no intention on the effective date of the
Agreement to use the Real Property as a trunk highway or any part of a trunk highway.The Public Entity
must annually determine that the Real Property is being used for the purposes specified in this Section
and, upon written request by either MnDOT or the Commissioner, shall supply a notarized statement to
that effect.
Section 2.05 Sale or Lease of Real Property.The Public Entity shall not (i) sell or transfer any
part of its ownership interest in the Real Property, or (ii) lease out or enter into any contract that would
allow another entity to use or operate the Real Property without the written consent of both MnDOT and
the Commissioner. The sale or transfer of any part of the Public Entity’s ownership interest in the Real
Property, or any lease or contract that would allow another entity to use or operate the Real Property,
must comply with the requirements imposed by Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order
regarding such sale or lease.
Section 2.06 Public Entity’s Representations and Warranties.The Public Entity represents and
warrants to MnDOT that:
A.It has legal authority to execute, deliver and perform the Agreement and all documents
referred to therein, and it has taken all actions necessary to its execution and delivery of such
documents.
B.It has the ability and a plan to fund the operation of the Real Property for the purposes
specified in Section 2.04, and will include in its annual budget all funds necessary for the
operation of the Real Property for such purposes.
C.The Agreement and all other documents referred to therein are the legal, valid and binding
obligations of the Public Entity enforceable against the Public Entity in accordance with their
respective terms.
D.It will comply with all of the provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s
Order and the LRIP.It has legal authority to use the G.O. Grant for the purpose or purposes
described in this Agreement.
E.All of the information it has submitted or will submit to MnDOT or the Commissioner
relating to the LRIP Grant or the disbursement of the LRIP Grant is and will be true and
correct.
F.It is not in violation of any provisions of its charter or of the laws of the State of Minnesota,
and there are no actions or proceedings pending, or to its knowledge threatened, before any
judicial body or governmental authority against or affecting it relating to the Real Property, or
its ownership interest therein, and it is not in default with respect to any order, writ,
injunction, decree, or demand of any court or any governmental authority which would
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
8
impair its ability to enter into the Agreement or any document referred to herein, or to
perform any of the acts required of it in such documents.
G.Neither the execution and delivery of the Agreement or any document referred to herein nor
compliance with any of the provisions or requirements of any of such documents is prevented
by, is a breach of, or will result in a breach of, any provision of any agreement or document
to which it is now a party or by which it is bound.
H.The contemplated use of the Real Property will not violate any applicable zoning or use
statute, ordinance, building code, rule or regulation, or any covenant or agreement of record
relating thereto.
I.The Project will be completed and the Real Property will be operated in full compliance with
all applicable laws, rules, ordinances, and regulations of any federal, state, or local political
subdivision having jurisdiction over the Project and the Real Property.
J.All applicable licenses, permits and bonds required for the performance and completion of
the Project and for the operation of the Real Property as specified in Section 2.04 have been,
or will be, obtained.
K.It reasonably expects to possess its ownership interest in the Real Property described in
Section 2.02 for at least 37.5 years, and it does not expect to sell such ownership interest.
L.It does not expect to lease out or enter into any contract that would allow another entity to use
or operate the Real Property.
M.It will supply whatever funds are needed in addition to the LRIP Grant to complete and fully
pay for the Project.
N.The Construction Items will be completed substantially in accordance with the Construction
Contract Documents by the Completion Date and all such items will be situated entirely on
the Real Property.
O.It will require the Contractor or Contractors to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances,
and laws bearing on its performance under the Construction Contract Documents.
P.It shall furnish such satisfactory evidence regarding the representations and warranties
described herein as may be required and requested by either MnDOT or the Commissioner.
Q. It has made no material false statement or misstatement of fact in connection with its receipt
of the G.O. Grant, and all the information it has submitted or will submit to the State Entity or
Commissioner of MMB relating to the G.O. Grant or the disbursement of any of the G.O.
Grant is and will be true and correct.
Section 2.07 Event(s) of Default.The following events shall, unless waived in writing by MnDOT
and the Commissioner, constitute an Event of Default under the Agreement upon either MnDOT or the
Commissioner giving the Public Entity 30 days’ written notice of such event and the Public Ent ity’s
failure to cure such event during such 30-day time period for those Events of Default that can be cured
within 30 days or within whatever time period is needed to cure those Events of Default that cannot be
cured within 30 days as long as the Public Entity is using its best efforts to cure and is making reasonable
progress in curing such Events of Default; however, in no event shall the time period to cure any Event of
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
9
Default exceed six (6) months unless otherwise consented to, in writing, by MnDOT and the
Commissioner.
A.If any representation, covenant, or warranty made by the Public Entity herein or in any other
document furnished pursuant to the Agreement, or to induce MnDOT to disburse the LRIP
Grant, shall prove to have been untrue or incorrect in any material respect or materially
misleading as of the time such representation, covenant, or warranty was made.
B.If the Public Entity fails to fully comply with any provision, covenant, or warranty contained
herein.
C.If the Public Entity fails to fully comply with any provision, covenant or warranty contained
in Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s Order, or Minn. Stat. Sec. 174.5 2 and all
rules related thereto.
D.If the Public Entity fails to use the proceeds of the LRIP Grant for the purposes set forth in
Section 2.03, the Grant Application, and in accordance with the LRIP.
E.If the Public Entity fails to operate the Real Property for the purposes specified in Section
2.04.
F.If the Public Entity fails to complete the Project by the Completion Date.
G.If the Public Entity sells or transfers any portion of its ownership interest in the Real Property
without first obtaining the written consent of both MnDOT and the Commissioner.
H.If the Public Entity fails to provide any additional funds needed to fully pay for the Project.
I.If the Public Entity fails to supply the funds needed to operate the Real Property in the
manner specified in Section 2.04.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, any of the above events that cannot be cured shall, unless waived in
writing by MnDOT and the Commissioner, constitute an Event of Default under the Agreement
immediately upon either MnDOT or the Commissioner giving the Public Entity written notice of such
event.
Section 2.08 Remedies.Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and at any time thereafter
until such Event of Default is cured to the satisfaction of MnDOT, MnDOT or the Commissioner may
enforce any or all of the following remedies.
A.MnDOT may refrain from disbursing the LRIP Grant; provided, however, MnDOT may
make such disbursements after the occurrence of an Event of Default without waiving its
rights and remedies hereunder.
B.If the Event of Default involves a sale of the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property in
violation of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 or the Commissioner’s Order, the Commissioner, as a
third party beneficiary of the Agreement, may require that the Public Entity pay the amounts
that would have been paid if there had been compliance with such provisions. For other
Events of Default, the Commissioner may require that the Outstanding Balance of the LRIP
Grant be returned to it.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
10
C.Either MnDOT or the Commissioner, as a third party beneficiary of the Agreement, may
enforce any additional remedies it may have in law or equity.
The rights and remedies specified herein are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights or remedies that
MnDOT or the Commissioner would otherwise possess.
If the Public Entity does not repay the amounts required to be paid under this Section or under any other
provision contained herein within 30 days of demand by the Commissioner, or any amount ordered by a
court of competent jurisdiction within 30 days of entry of judgment against the Public Entity and in favor
of MnDOT and/or the Commissioner, then such amount may, unless precluded by law, be offset against
any aids or other monies that the Public Entity is entitled to receive from the State of Minnesota.
Section 2.09 Notification of Event of Default.The Public Entity shall furnish to MnDOT and the
Commissioner, as soon as possible and in any event within seven (7) days after it has obtained knowledge
of the occurrence of each Event of Default, a statement setting forth details of each Event of Default and
the action which the Public Entity proposes to take with respect thereto.
Section 2.10 Effect of Event of Default.The Agreement shall survive Events of Default and
remain in full force and effect, even upon full disbursement of the LRIP Grant, and shall only be
terminated under the circumstances set forth in Section 2.11.
Section 2.11 Termination of Agreement and Modification of LRIP Grant.
A.If the Project is not started within five (5) years after the effective date of the Agreement or
the LRIP Grant has not been disbursed within four (4) years after the date the Project was started,
MnDOT’ s obligation to fund the LRIP Grant shall terminate. In such event, (i) if none of the LRIP Grant
has been disbursed by such date, MnDOT shall have no obligation to fund the LRIP Grant and the
Agreement will terminate, and (ii) if some but not all of the LRIP Grant has been disbursed by such date,
MnDOT shall have no further obligation to provide any additional funding for the LRIP Grant and the
Agreement shall remain in force but shall be modified to reflect the amount of the LR IP Grant that was
actually disbursed and the Public Entity is still obligated to complete the Project by the Completion Date.
B.The Agreement shall terminate upon the Public Entity’s sale of its interest in the Real
Property and transmittal of the required portion of the proceeds of the sale to the Commissioner in
compliance with Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order, or upon the termination of the
Public Entity’s ownership interest in the Real Property if such ownership interest is an easement.
Section 2.12 Excess Funds.If the full amount of the G.O. Grant and any matching funds referred
to in Section 5.14 are not needed to complete the Project, then, unless language in the G.O. Bonding
Legislation indicates otherwise, the G.O. Grant shall be reduced by the amount not needed.
Article III
COMPLIANCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTE,SEC. 16A.695
AND THE COMMISSIONER’S ORDER
Section 3.01 State Bond Financed Property.The Public Entity acknowledges that its interest in
the Real Property is, or when acquired by it will be, “state bond financed property”, as such term is used
in Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order and, therefore, the provisions contained in
such statute and order apply, or will apply, to its interest in the Real Property, even if the LRIP Grant will
only pay for a portion of the Project.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
11
Section 3.02 Preservation of Tax Exempt Status.In order to preserve the tax-exempt status of the
G.O. Bonds, the Public Entity agrees as follows:
A.It will not use the Real Property or use or invest the LRIP Grant or any other sums treated as
“bond proceeds” under Section 148 of the Code (including “investment proceeds,” “invested
sinking funds” and “replacement proceeds”) in such a manner as to cause the G.O. Bonds to
be classified as “arbitrage bonds” under Code Section 148.
B.It will deposit and hold the LRIP Grant in a segregated non-interest-bearing account until
such funds are used for payments for the Project.
C.It will, upon written request, provide the Commissioner all information required to satisfy the
informational requirements set forth in the Code, including Sections 103 and 148, with
respect to the G.O. Bonds.
D.It will, upon the occurrence of any act or omission by the Public Entity that could cause the
interest on the G.O. Bonds to no longer be tax exempt and upon direction from the
Commissioner, take such actions and furnish such documents as the Commissioner
determines to be necessary to ensure that the interest to be paid on the G.O. Bonds is exempt
from federal taxation, which such action may include: (i) compliance with proceedings
intended to classify the G.O. Bonds as a “qualified bond” within the meaning of Code Section
141(e), or (ii) changing the nature of the use of the Real Property so that none of the net
proceeds of the G.O. Bonds will be deemed to be used, directly or indirectly, in an “unrelated
trade or business” or for any “private business use” within the meaning o f Code Sections
141(b) and 145(a).
E.It will not otherwise use any of the LRIP Grant or take, permit or cause to be taken, or omit to
take, any action that would adversely affect the exemption from federal income taxation of
the interest on the G.O. Bonds, and if it should take, permit or cause to be taken, or omit to
take, as appropriate, any such action, it shall take all lawful actions necessary to correct such
actions or omissions promptly upon obtaining knowledge thereof.
Section 3.03 Changes to G.O. Compliance Legislation or the Commissioner’s Order.If Minn.
Stat. Sec. 16A.695 or the Commissioner’s Order is amended in a manner that reduces any requirement
imposed against the Public Entity, or if the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property be comes
exempted from Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order, then upon written request by the
Public Entity, MnDOT shall execute an amendment to the Agreement to implement such amendment or
exempt the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property from Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the
Commissioner’s Order.
Article IV
DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT PROCEEDS
Section 4.01 The Advances.MnDOT agrees, on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth
herein, to make Advances of the LRIP Grant to the Public Entity from time to time in an aggregate total
amount not to exceed the amount of the LRIP Grant. If the amount of LRIP Grant that MnDOT
cumulatively disburses hereunder to the Public Entity is less than the amount of the LRIP Grant
delineated in Section 1.01, then MnDOT and the Public Entity shall enter into and execute whatever
documents MnDOT may request in order to amend or modify this Agreement to reduce the amount of the
LRIP Grant to the amount actually disbursed. Provided, however, in accordance with the provisions
contained in Section 2.11, MnDOT’s obligation to make Advances shall terminate as of the dates
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
12
specified in Section 2.11 even if the entire LRIP Grant has not been disbursed by such dates.
Advances shall only be for expenses that (i) are for those items of a capital nature delineated in
Source and Use of Funds that is attached as Exhibit A, (ii) accrued no earlier than the effective date of
the legislation that appropriated the funds that are used to fund the LRIP Grant, or (iii)have otherwise
been consented to, in writing, by the Commissioner.
It is the intent of the parties hereto that the rate of disbursement of the Advances shall not exceed the rate
of completion of the Project or the rate of disbursement of the matching funds required, if any, under
Section 5.14. Therefore, the cumulative amount of all Advances disbursed by the State Entity at any
point in time shall not exceed the portion of the Project that has been completed and the percentage of the
matching funds required, if any, under Section 5.14 that have been disbursed as of such point in time.
This requirement is expressed by way of the following two formulas:
Formula #1:
Cumulative Advances <(Program Grant)× (percentage of matching funds, if any, required under
Section 5.14 that have been disbursed)
Formula #2:
Cumulative Advances <(Program Grant)× (percentage of Project completed)
Section 4.02 Draw Requisitions.Whenever the Public Entity desires a disbursement of a portion
of the LRIP Grant the Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT a Draw Requisition duly executed on behalf
of the Public Entity or its designee. Each Draw Requisition with respect to construction items shall be
limited to amounts equal to: (i) the total value of the classes of the work by percentage of completion as
approved by the Public Entity and MnDOT, plus (ii) the value of materials and equipment not
incorporated in the Project but delivered and suitably stored on or off the Real Property in a manner
acceptable to MnDOT, less (iii) any applicable retainage, and less (iv) all prior Advances.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, no Advances for materials stored on or off the
Real Property will be made by MnDOT unless the Public Entity shall advise MnDOT, in writing, of its
intention to so store materials prior to their delivery and MnDOT has not objected thereto.
At the time of submission of each Draw Requisition, other than the final Draw Requisition, the
Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT such supporting evidence as may be requested by MnDOT to
substantiate all payments which are to be made out of the relevant Draw Requisition or to substantiate all
payments then made with respect to the Project.
The final Draw Requisition shall not be submitted before completion of the Project, including any
correction of material defects in workmanship or materials (other than the completion of punch list
items). At the time of submission of the final Draw Requisition the Public Entity shall submit to MnDOT:
(I) such supporting evidence as may be requested by MnDOT to substantiate all payments which are to be
made out of the final Draw Requisition or to substantiate all payments then made with respect to the
Project, and (ii) satisfactory evidence that all work requiring inspection by municipal or other
governmental authorities having jurisdiction has been duly inspected and approved by such authorities
and that all requisite certificates and other approvals have been issued.
If on the date an Advance is desired the Public Entity has complied with all requirements of this
Agreement and MnDOT approves the relevant Draw Requisition, then MnDOT shall disburse the amount
of the requested Advance to the Public Entity.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
13
Section 4.03 Additional Funds.If MnDOT shall at any time in good faith determine that the sum
of the undisbursed amount of the LRIP Grant plus the amount of all other funds committed to the Project
is less than the amount required to pay all costs and expenses of any kind which reasonably may be
anticipated in connection with the Project, then MnDOT may send written notice thereof to the Public
Entity specifying the amount which must be supplied in order to provide sufficient funds to complete the
Project. The Public Entity agrees that it will, within 10 calendar days of receipt of any such notice,
supply or have some other entity supply the amount of funds specified in MnDOT's notice.
Section 4.04 Condition Precedent to Any Advance.The obligation of MnDOT to make any
Advance hereunder (including the initial Advance) shall be subject to the following conditions precedent:
A.MnDOT shall have received a Draw Requisition for such Advance specifying the amount of
funds being requested, which such amount when added to all prior requests for an Advance
shall not exceed the amount of the LRIP Grant set forth in Section 1.01.
B.No Event of Default under this Agreement or event which would constitute an Event of
Default but for the requirement that notice be given or that a period of grace or time elapse
shall have occurred and be continuing.
C.No determination shall have been made by MnDOT that the amount of funds committed to
the Project is less than the amount required to pay all costs and expenses of any kind that
may reasonably be anticipated in connection with the Project, or if such a determination has
been made and notice thereof sent to the Public Entity under Section 4.03, then the Public
Entity has supplied, or has caused some other entity to supply, the necessary funds in
accordance with such section or has provided evidence acceptable to MnDOT that sufficient
funds are available.
D.The State Entity shall have received evidence, in form and substance acceptable to the State
Entity, that the Public Entity has sufficient funds to fully and completely pay for the Project
and all other expenses that may occur in conjunction therewith.
E.The Public Entity has supplied to the State Entity all other items that the State Entity may
reasonably require
Section 4.05 Processing and Disbursement of Advances.The Public Entity acknowledges and
agrees as follows:
A.Advances are not made prior to completion of work performed on the Project.
B.All Advances are processed on a reimbursement basis.
C.The Public Entity must first document expenditures to obtain an Advance.
D.Reimbursement requests are made on a partial payment basis or when the Project is
completed.
E. All payments are made following the “Delegated Contract Process or State Aid Payment
Request” as requested and approved by the appropriate district state aid engineer.
Section 4.06 Construction Inspections.The Public Entity shall be responsible for making its own
inspections and observations regarding the completion of the Project, and shall determine to its own
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
14
satisfaction that all work done or materials supplied have been properly done or supplied in accordance
with all contracts that the Public Entity has entered into regarding the completion of the Project.
Article V
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 5.01 Insurance.If the Public Entity elects to maintain general comprehensive liability
insurance regarding the Real Property, then the Public Entity shall have MnDOT named as an additional
named insured therein.
Section 5.02 Condemnation.If, after the Public Entity has acquired the ownership interest set
forth in Section 2.02, all or any portion of the Real Property is condemned to an extent that the Public
Entity can no longer comply with Section 2.04, then the Public Entity shall, at its sole option, either: (i)
use the condemnation proceeds to acquire an interest in additional real property needed for the Public
Entity to continue to comply with Section 2.04 and to provide whatever additional funds that may be
needed for such purposes, or (ii) submit a request to MnDOT and the Commissioner to allow it to sell the
remaining portion of its interest in the Real Property. Any condemnation proceeds which are not used to
acquire an interest in additional real property shall be applied in accordance with Minn. Stat. Sec.
16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order as if the Public Entity’s interest in the Real Property had been
sold. If the Public Entity elects to sell its interest in the portion of the Real Property that remains after the
condemnation, such sale must occur within a reasonable time period after the date the condemnation
occurred and the cumulative sum of the condemnation and sale proceeds applied in accordance with
Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695 and the Commissioner’s Order.
If MnDOT receives any condemnation proceeds referred to herein, MnDOT agrees to or pay over to the
Public Entity all of such condemnation proceeds so that the Public Entity can comply with the
requirements of this Section.
Section 5.03 Use, Maintenance, Repair and Alterations.The Public Entity shall not, without the
written consent of MnDOT and the Commissioner, (i) permit or allow the use of any of the Real Property
for any purpose other than the purposes specified in Section 2.04, (ii) substantially alter any of the Real
Property except such alterations as may be required by laws, ordinances or regulations, or such other
alterations as may improve the Real Property by increasing its value or which improve its ability to be
used for the purposes set forth in Section 2.04, (iii) take any action which would unduly impair or
depreciate the value of the Real Property, (iv) abandon the Real Property, or (v) commit or permit any act
to be done in or on the Real Property in violation of any law, ordinance or regulation.
If the Public Entity fails to maintain the Real Property in accordance with this Section, MnDOT may
perform whatever acts and expend whatever funds necessary to so maintain the Real Property, and the
Public Entity irrevocably authorizes MnDOT to enter upon the Real Property to perform such acts as may
be necessary to so maintain the Real Property. Any actions taken or funds expended by MnDOT shall be
at its sole discretion, and nothing contained herein shall require MnDOT to take any action or incur any
expense and MnDOT shall not be responsible, or liable to the Public Entity or any other entity, for any
such acts that are performed in good faith and not in a negligent manner. Any funds expended by
MnDOT pursuant to this Section shall be due and payable on demand by MnDOT and will bear i nterest
from the date of payment by MnDOT at a rate equal to the lesser of the maximum interest rate allowed by
law or 18% per year based upon a 365-day year.
Section 5.04 Recordkeeping and Reporting.The Public Entity shall maintain books and records
pertaining to Project costs and expenses needed to comply with the requirements contained herein, Minn.
Stat. Sec. 16A.695, the Commissioner’s Order, and Minn. Stat. Sec. 174.52 and all rules related thereto,
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
15
and upon request shall allow MnDOT, its auditors,the Legislative Auditor for the State of Minnesota, or
the State Auditor for the State of Minnesota, to inspect, audit, copy, or abstract all of such items. The
Public Entity shall use generally accepted accounting principles in the maintenance of such items, and
shall retain all of such books and records for a period of six years after the date that the Project is fully
completed and placed into operation.
Section 5.05 Inspections by MnDOT.The Public Entity shall allow MnDOT to inspect the Real
Property upon reasonable request by MnDOT and without interfering with the normal use of the Real
Property.
Section 5.06 Liability.The Public Entity and MnDOT agree that each will be responsible for its
own acts and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law, and neither shall be responsible for the
acts of the other party and the results thereof. The liability of MnDOT and the Commissioner is governed
by the provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 3.736. If the Public Entity is a “municipality” as that term is used in
Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, then the liability of the Public Entity is governed by the provisions of Chapter
466. The Public Entity’s liability hereunder shall not be limited to the extent of insurance carried by or
provided by the Public Entity, or subject to any exclusion from coverage in any insurance policy.
Section 5.07 Indemnification by the Public Entity.The Public Entity shall bear all loss, expense
(including attorneys’ fees), and damage in connection with the Project and operation of the Real Property
and, if applicable, Facility, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the State Entity, the Commissioner
of MMB, and the State of Minnesota, their agents, servants and employees from all claims, demands and
judgments made or recovered against the State Entity, the Commissioner of MMB, and the State of
Minnesota, their agents, servants and employees, because of bodily injuries, including death at any time
resulting therefrom, or because of damages to property of the State Entity, the Commissioner of MMB, or
the State of Minnesota, or others (including loss of use) from any cause whatsoever, arising out of,
incidental to, or in connection with the Project or operation of the Real Property and, if applicable,
Facility, whether or not due to any act of omission or commission, including negligence of the Public
Entity or any contractor or his or their employees, servants or agents, and whether or not due to any act of
omission or commission (excluding, however, negligence or breach of statutory duty) of the State Entity,
the Commissioner of MMB, or the State of Minnesota, their employees, servants or agents.
The Public Entity further agrees to indemnify, save, and hold the State Entity, the Commissioner of
MMB, and the State of Minnesota, their agents and employees, harmless from all claims arising out of,
resulting from, or in any manner attributable to any violation by the Public Entity, its officers, employees,
or agents, or by any Counterparty, its officers, employees, or agents, of any provision of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, including legal fees and disbursements paid or incurred to enforce the
provisions contained in Section 5.19.
The Public Entity’s liability hereunder shall not be limited to the extent of insurance carried by or
provided by the Public Entity, or subject to any exclusions from coverage in any insurance policy.
Section 5.08 Relationship of the Parties.Nothing contained in the Agreement is to be construed
as establishing a relationship of co-partners or joint venture among the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the
Commissioner, nor shall the Public Entity be considered to be an agent, representative, or employee of
MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota in the performance of the Agreement or the
Project.
No employee of the Public Entity or other person engaging in the performance of the Agreement or the
Project shall be deemed have any contractual relationship with MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State
of Minnesota and shall not be considered an employee of any of those entities. Any claims that may arise
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
16
on behalf of said employees or other persons out of employment or alleged employment, including claims
under the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota, claims of discrimination against the
Public Entity or its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of
MnDOT, the Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota. Such employees or other persons shall not
require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from MnDOT, the
Commissioner, or the State of Minnesota, including tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and
vacation leave, disability benefits, severance pay and retirement benefits.
Section 5.09 Notices.In addition to any notice required under applicable law to be given in another
manner, any notices required hereunder must be in writing and personally served or sent by prepaid,
registered, or certified mail (return receipt requested), to the address of the party specified below or to
such different address as may in the future be specified by a party by written notice to the others:
To the Public Entity: At the address indicated on the first page of the Agreement.
To MnDOT at:Minnesota Department of Transportation
Office of State Aid
395 John Ireland Blvd., MS 500
Saint Paul, MN 55155
Attention: Patti Loken, State Aid Programs Engineer
To the Commissioner at:Minnesota Management & Budget
400 Centennial Office Bldg.
658 Cedar St.
St. Paul, MN 55155
Attention: Commissioner
Section 5.10 Assignment or Modification.Neither the Public Entity nor MnDOT may assign any
of its rights or obligations under the Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party.
Section 5.11 Waiver.Neither the failure by the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner, as a
third party beneficiary of the Agreement, in one or more instances to insist upon the complete observance
or performance of any provision hereof, nor the failure of the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the
Commissioner to exercise any right or remedy conferred hereunder or afforded by law shall be construed
as waiving any breach of such provision or the right to exercise such right or remedy thereafter. In
addition, no delay by any of the Public Entity, MnDOT, or the Commissioner in exercising any right or
remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right or
remedy preclude other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right or remedy.
Section 5.12 Choice of Law and Venue.All matters relating to the validity, interpretation,
performance, or enforcement of the Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the
State of Minnesota. All legal actions arising from any provision of the Agreement shall be initiated and
venued in the State of Minnesota District Court located in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Section 5.13 Severability.If any provision of the Agreement is finally judged by any court to be
invalid, then the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect and they shall be interpreted,
performed, and enforced as if the invalid provision did not appear herein.
Section 5.14 Matching Funds.Any matching funds as shown on Page 1 of the Grant Agreement
that are required to be obtained and supplied by the Public Entity must either be in the form of (i) cash
monies, (ii) legally binding commitments for money, or (iii) equivalent funds or contributions, including
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
17
equity, which have been or will be used to pay for the Project. The Public Entity shall supply to MnDOT
whatever documentation MnDOT may request to substantiate the availability and source of any matching
funds.
Section 5.15 Sources and Uses of Funds.The Public Entity represents to MnDOT and the
Commissioner that the Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule attached as Exhibit A accurately shows the
total cost of the Project and all of the funds that are available for the completion of the Project.The
Public Entity will supply any other information and documentation that MnDOT or the Commissioner
may request to support or explain any of the information contained in the Sources and Uses of Funds
Schedule. If any of the funds shown in the Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule have conditions
precedent to the release of such funds, the Public Entity must provide to MnDOT a detailed description of
such conditions and what is being done to satisfy such conditions.
Section 5.16 Project Completion Schedule.The Public Entity represents to MnDOT and the
Commissioner that the Project Completion Schedule attached as Exhibit B correctly and accurately sets
forth the projected schedule for the completion of the Project.
Section 5.17 Third-Party Beneficiary.The Governmental Program will benefit the State of
Minnesota and the provisions and requirements contained herein are for the benefit of both the State
Entity and the State of Minnesota. Therefore, the State of Minnesota, by and through its Commissioner
of MMB, is and shall be a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement.
Section 5.18 Public Entity Tasks. Any tasks that the Agreement imposes upon the Public Entity
may be performed by such other entity as the Public Entity may select or designate, provided that the
failure of such other entity to perform said tasks shall be deemed to be a failure to perform by the Public
Entity.
Section 5.19 Data Practices.The Public Entity agrees with respect to any data that it possesses
regarding the G.O. Grant or the Project to comply with all of the provisions and restrictions contained in
the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13,as such may
subsequently be amended or replaced from time to time.
Section 5.20 Non-Discrimination.The Public Entity agrees to not engage in discriminatory
employment practices regarding the Project and it shall fully comply with all of the provisions contained
in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 363A and 181, as such may subsequently be amended or replaced from
time to time.
Section 5.21 Worker’s Compensation.The Public Entity agrees to comply with all of the
provisions relating to worker’s compensation contained in Minn. Stat.Secs.176.181 sub. 2 and 176.182,
as they may be amended or replaced from time to time with respect to the Project.
Section 5.22 Antitrust Claims.The Public Entity hereby assigns to MnDOT and the Commissioner
of MMB all claims it may have for over charges as to goods or services provided with respect to the
Project that arise under the antitrust laws of the State of Minnesota or of the United States of America.
Section 5.23 Prevailing Wages.The Public Entity agrees to comply with all of the applicable
provisions contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 177, and specifically those provisions contained in
Minn. Stat.§.177.41 through 177.435 as they may be amended or replaced from time to time with respect
to the Project.By agreeing to this provision, the Public Entity is not acknowledging or agreeing that the
cited provisions apply to the Project.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
18
Section 5.24 Entire Agreement.The Agreement and all of the exhibits attached thereto embody the
entire agreement between the Public Entity and MnDOT, and there are no other agreements, either oral or
written, between the Public Entity and MnDOT on the subject matter hereof.
Section 5.25 E-Verification.The Public Entity agrees and acknowledges that it is aware of
Minn.Stat. § 16C.075 regarding e-verification of employment of all newly hired employees to confirm
that such employees are legally entitled to work in the United States, and that it will, if and when
applicable, fully comply with such order.
Section 5.26 Jobs Reporting.If the project is valued at over $5,000,000, pursuant to Minn. Stat.
§16A.633, Subd.4, the Public Entity shall collect, maintain and, upon completion of the Project, provide
the information indicated in Exhibit G of this Agreement, to the Commissioner of MMB. The
information must include, but is not limited to, the following: the number and types of jobs created by the
Project, whether the jobs are new or retained, where the jobs are located and the pay ranges of the jobs.
Section 5.27 Additional Requirements.The Public Entity and the State Entity agree to comply
with the following additional requirements.In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the
following additional requirements and any other provisions or requirement contained in this Agreement,
the following additional requirements contained in this Section shall control.
Section 2.03 Use of Proceeds is modified as follows: The Public Entity shall use the LRIP Grant solely to
reimburse itself for expenditures it has already made, or will make, to pay the costs of one of the
following applicable activities: (i) acquiring any of the ownership interests detailed in Section 2.02 (ii)
constructing or reconstructing city streets, county highways, or town roads with statewide or regional
significance that have not been fully funded through other state, federal, or local funding sources; or (iii)
capital improvement projects on county state-aid highways that are intended primarily to reduce traffic
crashes, deaths, injuries, and property damage. The Public Entity shall not use the LRIP Grant for any
other purpose, including but not limited to, any work to be done on a state trunk highway for the sole
purpose of improving the trunk highway.or within a trunk highway easement.
Section 2.09 Notification of Event of Default is modified as follows: The Public Entity shall furnish to
MnDOT and the Commissioner, as soon as possible and in any event within seven fifteen (715) days after
it has obtained knowledge of the occurrence of each Event of Default, a statement setting forth details of
each Event of Default and the action which the Public Entity proposes to take with respect thereto.
Section 5.07 Indemnification by the Public Entity is modified as follows: The Public Entity shall bear
all loss, expense (including attorneys’ fees), and damage in connection with the Project and operation of
the Real Property and, if applicable, Facility, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the State Entity,
the Commissioner of MMB, and the State of Minnesota, their agents, servants and employees from all
claims, demands and judgments made or recovered against the State Entity, the Commissioner of MMB,
and the State of Minnesota, their agents, servants and employees, because of bodily injuries, including
death at any time resulting therefrom, or because of damages to property of the State Entity, the
Commissioner of MMB, or the State of Minnesota, or others (including loss of use) from any cause
whatsoever, arising out of, incidental to, or in connection with the Project or operation of the Real
Property and, if applicable, Facility, whether or not due to any act of omission or commission, including
negligence of the Public Entity or any contractor or his or their employees, servants or agents, and
whether or not due to any act of omission or commission (excluding, however, negligence or breach of
statutory duty) of the State Entity, the Commissioner of MMB, or the State of Minnesota, their
employees,servants or agents.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
19
The Public Entity further agrees to indemnify, save, and hold the State Entity, the Commissioner of
MMB, and the State of Minnesota, their agents and employees, harmless from all claims arising out of,
resulting from, or in any manner attributable to any violation by the Public Entity, its officers, employees,
or agents, or by any Counterparty, its officers, employees, or agents,of any provision of the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, including legal fees and disbursements paid or incurred to enforce the
provisions contained in Section 5.19.
The Public Entity’s liability hereunder shall not be limited to the extent of insurance carried by or
provided by the Public Entity, or subject to any exclusions from coverage in any insurance policy.
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
20
Exhibit G
JOBS REPORTING
(a)Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.633, subd. 4, State Entity is required to report
the number of jobs created or retained by the Project. To enable State Entity to comply with
Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.633, subd. 4, the Public Entity is required to report the number of jobs
created or retained by the Project to State Entity as set forth below.
(b)The Public Entity shall require all of its contractors to report the information
below to the Public Entity. The Public Entity shall then report to State Entity. Information can
be recorded by State Entity in an Excel document that can be downloaded into the report by
Minnesota Management and Budget. Each report must contain the following:
(1)The name of the Project.
(2)The State Entity’s contract number, if applicable.
(3)Reporting period. The appropriate biennium is to be selected.
(4)The Agency Number. This will complete the next column with Agency
Name.
(5)Legal Citation for the Authorization.
(6)Department ID responsible for the Project.
(7)The Appropriation for the Project.
(8)The Appropriation Amount.
(9)Project Start Date.
(10)Project Completion Date.
(11)The County where the Project is located or, if it is located in more than
one county, where it is primarily located.
(12)Funding Source for Project. The selection will be Trunk Highway Bonds,
General Obligation Bonds or General Fund.
(13)Job Type. Jobs should be classified as either (i) engineering/professional,
(ii) construction, or (iii) other. Manager and supervisor jobs shall be
classified as category (i), (ii) or (iii) based on the nature of the work those
individuals spent the majority of their time overseeing.
(14)Hourly Wages. Jobs should be classified according to the hourly pay
ranges below. Overhead or indirect costs or the value of pensions or other
benefits should not be included in wages.
(i)less than $10.00,
(ii)$10.01 to $15.00,
(iii)$15.01 to $20.00,
(iv)$20.01 to $25.00,
(v)$25.01 to $30.00,
(vi)$30.01 to $35.00,
(vii)$35.01 to $40.00, or
(viii)more than $40.00.
MnDOT Contract No.1029344
21
(15)Jobs.
a.Jobs should be classified as either (i) jobs created or (ii) jobs retained; they
will not be counted as both. A “job created” is a new position created and
filled, or an existing unfilled position that is filled, because of the Project.
A “job retained” means a job at a specific wage level that existed prior to
beginning the Project that would have been lost but for the Project. Only
jobs in Minnesota should be counted.
b.Jobs should be expressed in “full-time equivalents” (FTE). In calculating
an FTE, the number of hours worked during the Reporting Period should
be divided by 2,080 (the number of hours representing a full work
schedule in a Reporting Period). Jobs should be reported regardless of
when the Project or an individual’s employment began or ended. Jobs are
to be calculated based on hours worked in the current Reporting Period
only, so that reporting is not cumulative.
c.Jobs should not be separated into full-time, part-time, temporary, seasonal,
etc. Instead, all hours should be totaled and converted into FTEs as
indicated above.
(c)Each contractor will report its workforce and the workforce of its subcontractors
active during the Reporting Period. This includes employees actively engaged in the Project
who work on the jobsite, in the Project office, in the home office or telecommute from home or
other alternative office location. This includes, but is not limited to, any engineering personnel,
inspectors, sampling and testing technicians, and lab technicians performing work directly in
support of the Project. This does not include material suppliers such as steel, culverts, guardrail
and tool suppliers. Only hours that relate to time spent on the Project should be reported.
(d)The Public Entity must incorporate these reporting requirements into its contracts
with its contractors (in part so that contractors can add the requirements to their contracts with
subcontractors and impose deadlines on reporting by subcontractors).
(e)To distinguish the jobs reported by contractors that were funded by the Grant, the
Public Entity must multiply the job numbers reported by each contractor in each category above
by the percentage of total Project costs funded by the Grant (e.g., if the Grant was 40% of total
Project costs, the Public Entity should multiply the jobs numbers given in each category by 40%
to arrive at the number of jobs funded by the Grant) and it is those numbers that should be
reported to State Entity.
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 1 | P a g e
A. Applicant Information
1. Title: Mr. 2. First Name: Jeff 3. Last Name: Pearson
4. Phone Number: 612-861-9791 5. E-mail: jpearson@richfieldmn.gov
6. Agency: Richfield 7. Agency Position: City Engineer
8. Street Address: 6700 Portland Ave S
9. Additional Address Line:
10. City: Richfield 11. State: MN 12. Zip Code: 55423
13. Is the applicant a sponsor on this project? Please Select
B. Project Location
1. MnDOT District: 05 - Metro 2. County: Hennepin
3. City: Richfield 4. Township:
5. Name of Road: 77th Street 6. Type of Road: Municipal State Aid Street
7. Road Authority*: State Aid City 8. Road Authority Name*: Richfield
9. Project Termini: From 16th Ave S 10. To: Longfellow Ave
*Complete if road authority is not the applicant.
C. Project Description
1. Select type of project. Reconstruction
2. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project (2,000 character limit).
Right-of-way for construction of a 77th Street extension via underpass of TH 77 including traffic lanes,
sidewalk, and regional multi-use trail.
D. Eligibility
1. Select the LRIP Account your project is eligible under.
Routes of Regional Significance
2. Does your project meet one or more of the Routes of Regional Significance Criteria (select all that apply)?
Farm to Market route
Part of an economic development plan
Provides capacity or congestion relief to a parallel
trunk highway system or county road
Part of a 10-ton route network
Connect to regional tourist destination
Is a connection to the IRC system, trunk highway
or a county road
3. Describe the project contribution to the local, regional or state economic development or redevelopment
efforts (1,500 character limit).
The 77th Street Underpass Project will directly connect the developed I-494 commercial strip to the following
destinations: - MSP International Airport - Commercial shipping centers - Metro Transit South Garage - Mall of
America/Bloomington South Loop area. The project will connect to identified redevelopment areas along both
I-494 and TH 77.
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 2 | P a g e
E. Project Readiness
1. Construction Year: 2019
2. Does the project have any historical/archeological impacts?
No. There are no historical/archeological impacts
3. Are there railroad impacts (railroad crossings or railroad tracks within 600’ of the project)?
No RR crossings or RR tracks within 600'
4. What is the status of the engineering and design work on the project?
Design in progress
5. What is the Right-of-Way (R/W) status of the project?
Additional R/W is needed and is not yet acquired
F. Safety
1. Is this project or components of this project identified in a County Safety Plan? No
2. If applicable, select the appropriate focus area your project/safety strategy align with in the Minnesota
Strategic Highway Safety Plan.
Not applicable
3. Identify the transportation deficiency, type of crash, or safety hazard this project is trying to address (1,000
character limit). Respond even if project is in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway Safety
Plan.
The extension of 77th Street under TH 77 will facilitate the ability to consolidate freeway access at Portland
Ave and Lyndale Ave and remove access points at 12th Ave and Nicollet Ave along I-494. This access
consolidation will improve safety and traffic flow on I-494. The connection to 24th Ave that the 77th Street
underpass provides is identified by the 2010 Metro Highway System Investment Study as a necessary
component in this access control implementation.
4. Describe how this project improves safety, reduce traffic crashes, fatalities, injuries, and property damages
(1,000 character limit). Respond even if project is in a county safety plan or the Minnesota Strategic Highway
Safety Plan.
Click here to enter text
G. Multimodal/Complete Street
Identify infrastructure improvements for non-motorized users on this project (1,500 character limit).
The project includes pedestrian sidewalks and a Three Rivers Park Regional Trail. Both will provide a direct
connection to employment and recreation centers that doesn not exist today.
H. Estimated Project Cost
Source of Funding
1. LRIP Request: 4,310,000
2. Federal Funds: 0
3. State Aid Funds: 0
4. Local/Other Funds: 1,500,000
Local Road Improvement Program
2017 Application Form
State Aid For Local Transportation
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html 3 | P a g e
H. Estimated Project Cost
5. Total Project Cost: 5,810,000
I. Attachments
At least one project location map with routes labeled
Engineer’s Estimate with an itemized breakdown
Project schedule
Local agency resolution
Sponsor agency resolution (if applicable)
Letters of concurrence or support
When you are ready to submit the application, save the application form with LRIP, agency and road in the name
of the document; e.g. LRIP_RamseyCounty_CSAH30.docx.
The application and attachments are due November 3, 2017 for county and state aid city applicants and
December 1, 2017 for township and non-state aid city applicants. Applications and attachments should be
submitted electronically to saltirhelp.dot@state.mn.us.
More information on the program is available on the Local Road Improvement Program website,
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/stateaid/lrip.html. If you have questions regarding this solicitation, contact Patti
Loken at 651-366-3803 or Patti.Loken@state.mn.us.
AGENDA SECTION:RESOLUTIONS
AGENDA ITEM #12.
STAFF REPORT NO. 184
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
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: Melissa P oehlman, A cting C ommunity D evelopment D irector
10/17/2017
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
10/18/2017
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 resolutions to either approve or deny a conditional use permit and
variances for a restaurant with a drive-thru at 6529 Penn Avenue, 6545 Penn Avenue and 2210 66th
Street W est.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Penn Avenue Partners I I LLC ("applicant") has submitted an applic ation requesting approval of a Dunkin'
Donuts restaurant with drive-thru at 6529 Penn Avenue (c urrently Car Hop) and related site improvements to
the adjacent parcels at 6545 Penn Avenue (formerly Flowerama), and 2210 66th Street W est (unimproved
alley). The properties are zoned Mixed Use - C ommunity (MU-C), and are located within the Penn Avenue
Corridor Overlay D istrict. Fast food or convenience restaurants are a conditional use in the MU-C
Distric t. The applicant has not indicated a specific tenant for the property at 6545 Penn Avenue, but permitted
uses would inc lude general retail, service, and offic e uses.
W hile this proposal advanc es many goals of the C omprehensive Plan, Mixed Use Zoning D istrict, and Penn
Avenue Design Guidelines, it falls short of several C ode requirements. Along with the conditional use permit
(C UP), the applic ant is requesting approval of the following varianc es:
1. Proximity of drive-thru speaker to residential property: 150 feet required (85.64 feet proposed
to east property line);
2. Building coverage: 25% coverage required (9.64% proposed);
3. Rear building setback: 15-feet maximum setback (85 feet proposed to east property line);
4. Buffer distance adjacent to residential property: 15 feet required (11.5 feet proposed along
east property line);
5. Off-premise signs: the Zoning Code prohibits the use of signs that advertise a business or
service that does not take place on the same premises as the sign. T he applicant intends to
retain the property as two separate parcels and proposes to install signs on each parcel that
include advertising space for the business located on the other parcel.
The Planning C ommission held a public hearing to consider the requests on S eptember 25, 2017. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the c onditional use permit to allow a restaurant, as well as
variances to the rear building setback and reduced buffer yard adjacent to residential property. The Planning
Commission also rec ommended approval of a varianc e to allow off-premise signs, with the c ondition that all
signs c omply with the Penn Avenue Corridor D esign Guidelines. Citing potential impacts to residents in the
adjacent apartment building at 6532 Oliver Avenue, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the
variance to reduc e the drive-thru speaker distance requirement from 150 feet to 85 feet. The owner of the
apartment building spoke at the public hearing and submitted a letter stating their objec tion to the variance
request, citing similar c oncerns. The Planning Commission also recommended denial of a variance to the
minimum building coverage requirement.
Notwithstanding the Planning Commission rec ommendation to approve the conditional use permit, denial of
the building coverage varianc e necessitates denial of the entire application. I f a varianc e is not approved to
allow a building of this size and lot coverage, then a conditional use permit and site plan allowing said building
must also be denied. Based on this rationale, staff has drafted a resolution denying the c onditional use permit
and all varianc es listed above.
Sinc e the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has submitted additional information about
the drive-thru speaker and the proposed use of automatic volume control technology. A tec hnical memo
attached to this report describes how the speaker takes into acc ount ambient noise levels and adjusts output
volume accordingly. Although it is staff policy to advance the rec ommendation of the Planning Commission,
staff believes that the submitted information offers a compelling argument for a reduced drive-thru speaker
setbac k. As such, staff has also prepared a resolution granting approval of the c onditional use permit and all
requested variances, subject to the c onditions listed therein, should the Counc il wish to c onsider approval.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By motion: Approve either a resolution to appr ove or a resolution to deny a conditional use permit and
variances for a restaurant with a drive-thru at 6529 Penn Avenue, 6545 Penn Avenue and 2210 66th
Street W est.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
Various used auto sales businesses have operated at 6529 Penn Avenue since 1990. That type of
use has long been considered incompatible with redevelopment goals in the Penn Avenue
Corridor, and is not permitted in the Mixed Use Zoning District. C ar Hop has c ontinued operating
on the issuanc e of interim use permits for many y ears, typically renewed in one- to three-y ear
inc rements. Flowerama c losed the business at 6545 Penn Avenue in 2016 and the property has
remained vac ant since.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Comprehensive Plan:
I n 2008, the c ity adopted the Penn Avenue C orridor Master Plan to help guide redevelopment of the
area, and subsequently rezoned the properties to Mixed Use - Community (MU-C ) with the Penn
Avenue C orridor Overlay D istrict. Select pages of the Penn Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines are
attached to this report.
Zoning:
The MU-C Zoning Distric t is intended to inc lude shops and servic es that support the surrounding
c ommunity. I deally, a balanced mix of commercial, office and higher density residential uses would be
included in this distric t. Class I I I (fast food/convenience) restaurants are a c onditional use in the MU-C
District, subject to the c onditions listed in Subsection 537.05 Subdivision 5, further articulated in the
attached doc ument.
Variances:
Along with the C onditional Use Permit application, the applic ant is requesting five variances, listed in the
"Executive Summary " above. Variances may be granted from the literal provisions of this Code only
when all of the following criteria are found to exist:
1. The applic ant establishes that there are prac tical diffic ulties in complying with the offic ial c ontrol.
"Prac tical diffic ulties," as used in connec tion with the granting of a varianc e, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official
control. Ec onomic considerations alone do not constitute practical diffic ulties;
2. Unusual or unique circ umstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other
properties in the same zone or vicinity, and such c ircumstances were not created by any persons
presently having an interest in the property;
3. The varianc e, if granted, would not alter the c harac ter of the neighborhood. The completed project
would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, or substantially
inc rease the c ongestion of public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish property values, or have a detrimental or injurious impact on
surrounding properties;
4. The varianc e requested is the minimum variance that would alleviate the practic al difficulty ;
5. The varianc e requested is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinanc e and
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
A full discussion of these criteria and findings c an be found in the attached doc ument.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
60-D AY RUL E: The 60-day clock 'started' when a c omplete application was rec eived on August
14, 2017. A dec ision or extension was required by October 13, 2017. At the applic ant's request,
the deadline was extended 60 additional days (120 days total). The C ity must issue a decision on
this matter no later than Dec ember 12, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
A public hearing was held before the P lanning C ommission on September 25, 2017.
Notic e of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current newspaper on J uly 13 and
September 14, 2017 and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the site on August 15, 2017.
The owner of the adjacent apartment building at 6532 Oliver Avenue spoke in opposition to the
proposal.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the c onditional use permit and variances to
the rear building setback, reduced buffer y ard adjac ent to residential property, and off-premise
signs (4-1). The Planning Commission recommended denial of the varianc es to the drive-thru
speaker distance requirement and the minimum building coverage requirement (4-1).
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
Approve the alternate resolution granting a conditional use permit and all requested variances, with a
finding that the new information presented regarding drive-thru speaker technology is a unique
circumstance worthy of issuing a variance.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
Karla Carlson, C apital Real Estate
AT TAC H ME N TS :
D escripti on Type
Resolution (denial)Resolution L etter
Resolution (approval)Resolution L etter
Requirements attachment B ackup Materi al
PA C D esign Guidelines - select pages B ackup Materi al
S ite plans and elevations B ackup Materi al
Zoning maps B ackup Materi al
A pplicant project narrative B ackup Materi al
A pplicant memo to C ouncil - drive-thru noise levels B ackup Materi al
L etter from P remier P roperties (6532 Oliver Ave)B ackup Materi al
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DENYING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES
FOR A RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU AT
6529 PENN AVENUE, 6545 PENN AVENUE AND 2210 66TH STREET W
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
approval of a conditional use permit and variances to allow a Class III (fast food / convenience)
restaurant at property commonly known as 6529 Penn Avenue and site plan approval at the
property commonly known as 6545 Penn Avenue and 2210 66th Street West, legally described
as parcels 1, 2 and 3 on the attached certificate of survey; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing for
the requested conditional use permit and variances at its September 25, 2017 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a conditional use
permit for a restaurant and variances for building setbacks, buffer yard requirements, and off-
premise signage, and recommended denial of variances for drive-thru speaker setback and
minimum building coverage requirements, as described below; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current on July 13
and September 14, 2017 and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property on
August 15, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that any drive-up service window, teller or order
station, or exterior loudspeaker shall be located at least 150 feet from any parcel with
residential uses on the first floor, Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that minimum building coverage of 25% is required
for sites of 2 acres or less, and the maximum rear setback shall be 15 feet, Subsection 537.07;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that a buffer yard of at least 15 feet shall be
provided adjacent to residential property to protecting the values, quietude and privacy of the
housing, Subsection 544.03, Subd. 6; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code prohibits the use of signs that advertise a product,
business, service, event, or any other matter that is not available, or does not take place, on
the same premises as the sign (off-premise signs), Subsection 549.21;
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the
granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their
enforcement would cause “practical difficulty” to the owners of the property under
consideration; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS clauses set forth above,
as well as the following:
a. With respect to the application for a variance from Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5, the City
Council makes the following findings for denial:
The only practical difficulty in meeting this requirement is the inclusion of the drive-thru,
and the lack thereof does not prevent the property owner from using the property in a
reasonable manner. Unique circumstances do not apply, as many properties along
Penn Avenue are of similar lot depth and proximity to residential property. Allowing a
drive-thru speaker within 85.64 feet of residential property would alter the character of
the neighborhood and would not be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of
the ordinance.
b. With respect to the application for variances from Subsection 537.07, the City Council
makes the following findings for denial:
Requiring a building to cover 25% of a site of this size is not a practical difficulty. Unique
circumstances do not apply to the property that do not also apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity. The requested variance is not the minimum necessary, as a
larger building could feasibly be constructed, covering closer to 25% of the site. The
requested variance conflicts with the intent of the ordinance.
c. Notwithstanding the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the conditional
use permit, denial of the building coverage variance necessitates denial of all requests.
If a variance is not approved to allow the proposed building size (1,995 square feet) and
lot coverage (9.64%), a conditional use permit and site plan allowing said building must
also be denied; and
2. On the basis of the foregoing findings, the application for a conditional use permit and
variances are denied.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of October
2017.
_______________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES
FOR A RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU AT 6529 PENN AVENUE
AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL AT 6545 PENN AVENUE AND 2210 66TH STREET W
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
approval of a conditional use permit and variances to allow a Class III (fast food / convenience)
restaurant at property commonly known as 6529 Penn Avenue and site plan approval and sign
variances at the property commonly known as 6545 Penn Avenue and 2210 66th Street West,
legally described as parcels 1, 2 and 3 on the attached certificate of survey; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing for
the requested conditional use permit and variances at its September 25, 2017 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use
permit for a restaurant and variances for building setbacks, buffer yard requirements, and off-
premise signage, and recommended denial of variances for drive-thru speaker setback and
minimum building coverage requirements, as described below; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current on July 13
and September 14, 2017 and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property on
August 15, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the requested conditional use permit meets the requirements necessary for
issuing a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield’s Zoning Code, Subsection 547.09
and as detailed in City Council Staff Report No.____; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that any drive-up service window, teller or order
station, or exterior loudspeaker shall be located at least 150 feet from any parcel with
residential uses on the first floor, Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that minimum building coverage of 25% is required
for sites of 2 acres or less, and the maximum rear setback shall be 15 feet, Subsection 537.07;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code states that a buffer yard of at least 15 feet shall be
provided adjacent to residential property to protecting the values, quietude and privacy of the
housing, Subsection 544.03, Subd. 6;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code prohibits the use of signs that advertise a product,
business, service, event, or any other matter that is not available, or does not take place, on
the same premises as the sign (off-premise signs), Subsection 549.21;
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the
granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their
enforcement would cause “practical difficulty” to the owners of the property under
consideration; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS clauses set forth above.
2. With respect to the application for a variance from Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5, the City
Council makes the following findings:
The narrow depth of this parcel creates a practical difficulty for any property owner
wishing to include a drive-thru along this section of Penn Avenue. The narrow depth of
this parcel is a unique circumstance not created by this applicant. Granting the
requested variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood, as drive-thru
equipment specifications including information about noise levels and volume controls
must be approved by the Community Development Director prior to installation.
Equipment must include Automatic Volume Control (AVC) and city noise ordinances
shall apply at all times. The variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate
the practical difficulty, as the speaker is placed as far from the adjacent residential
property as possible. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of
the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. With respect to the application for variances from Subsection 537.07, the City Council
makes the following findings:
Strict enforcement of this requirement would cause a practical difficulty. The applicant is
proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner. The applicant would be
permitted by right to replace the existing building as is under Minnesota State
nonconformity laws. Instead, the applicant has proposed a new building that will
significantly improve the site and bring it closer to compliance with other dimensional
regulations. The Code exempts sites under two acres from the mixed use requirement.
Given these facts, it is reasonable to allow a new, architecturally and functionally
improved stand-alone building with drive-up service on this particular site. Granting the
requested variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood or locality. It is
anticipated that this will be an improvement to the area. The variance requested is the
minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty and does not conflict with the
purpose or intent of the Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan.
4. With respect to the application for a variance from Subsection 544.03, Subd. 6, the City
Council makes the following findings:
Strict enforcement of this requirement would cause a practical difficulty in restricting
proper drive aisle width, vehicle circulation, and landscaping on other areas of the site.
Unique circumstances apply in that the existing parcel dimensions are narrow and
cannot feasibly be enlarged. Granting the requested variance will not alter the character
of the neighborhood or locality. The improvements proposed will benefit the surrounding
neighborhood by improving the aesthetics of the site, particularly along Penn Avenue.
No negative impacts are expected. The variance requested is the minimum necessary
to alleviate the practical difficulty. Space is not available to create additional parking.
The proposed variance does not conflict with the purpose or intent of the Ordinance or
Comprehensive Plan.
5. With respect to the application for a variance from Subsection 549.21, the City Council
makes the following findings:
The combined acreage of the properties is below one acre and therefore not eligible to
be considered as a Planned Unit Development, under which the off-premise signage
could be permitted. The right-in/right-out access on both Penn Avenue and 66th Street
are unique circumstances not created by this applicant. Granting the requested variance
will not alter the character of the neighborhood or locality, as the total sign quantity
and/or sign area is similar to existing. The variance requested is the minimum
necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. The variance is in harmony with the
general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan, as all signs shall comply with the Penn Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines.
6. Based on the above findings, a variance is hereby approved to reduce the drive-thru
speaker setback requirement to not less than 85 feet, subject to the conditions below.
7. Based on the above findings, variances are hereby approved to reduce the required
minimum building coverage to 9.64% to allow a building of 1,995 square feet, and to
exceed the maximum rear building setback requirement.
8. Based on the above findings, a variance is hereby approved to reduce the required
buffer yard adjacent to residential property to not less than 11.5 feet.
9. Based on the above findings, a variance is hereby approved to permit the use of off-
premise signs, subject to the conditions below.
10. A conditional use permit is issued to allow a Class III (fast food/convenience) restaurant,
as described in City Council Letter No. _____, on the Subject Property legally described
above.
11. This conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions in addition to those
specified in Section 547.09 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance:
• A recorded copy of the approved resolution must be submitted to the City prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
• Approval of a preliminary plat shall be required prior to the issuance of a building
permit and approval of a final plat, including proof of recording, shall be required
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The parcels at 6645 Penn Avenue
and 2210 West 66th Street shall be combined. A cross access agreement between
the various parcels is required and must be recorded prior to occupancy. Proof of
recording must be provided to the City. The plat shall accommodate a 10-foot
drainage and utility easement requested by Hennepin County.
• Drive-thru equipment specifications including information about noise levels and
volume controls must be approved by the Community Development Director prior to
installation. Equipment must include Automatic Volume Control (AVC). City noise
ordinances shall apply.
• A revised landscape plan shall be submitted, including taller tree species with the
capability to mature to similar height as the existing trees in this area. Additional
landscaping shall also be provided behind the menu board.
• The property owner is responsible for the ongoing maintenance and tending of all
landscaping in accordance with approved plans.
• The applicant shall consider removal of the parking space facing 66th Street in the
southwest corner of the property at 6645 Penn Avenue, to reduce impervious
surface area and provide additional landscaping at the intersection.
• The existing pylon sign at 6545 Penn Avenue must not encroach upon public right-
of-way and must be reduced in size and/or rotated as necessary. Internally lit box
signs are not permitted. Aside from channel letters, all signs shall be externally lit in
accordance with the Penn Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines. Separate sign
permits are required.
• Curb radii on the Penn Avenue driveway access shall be reduced from R15’ shown
on plans to R10’, pending Fire Department approval of truck maneuverability. The
sidewalk (minimum 6’ width) shall continue through the driveway, per Richfield
Public Works requirements.
• A striped pedestrian connection to the property at 6545 Penn Avenue shall be
included, in accordance with Zoning Code Section 544.15.
• Bicycle parking on each parcel must be provided in accordance with Zoning Code
Section 544.17.
• All new utility service must be underground.
• All utilities must be located away from public right-of-way and screened from public
view in accordance with Ordinance requirements. A screening plan is required prior
to the issuance of a Building Permit.
• Odor control systems are required to mitigate cooking odors in accordance with City
Code Subsection 544.27.
• All rooftop or ground mechanical equipment must be screened, per Zoning Code
Section 544.05.
• The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all
requirements detailed in the City’s Administrative Review Committee Report dated
June 5, 2017, and compliance with all other City and State regulations.
• Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant must submit a surety
equal to 125% of the value of any improvements and/or requirements not yet
complete. This surety shall be provided in the manner specified by the Zoning
Code.
12. The conditional use permit and variances shall expire one year after issuance unless 1)
the use for which the permit was granted has commenced; or 2) Building permits have
been issued and substantial work performed; or 3) Upon written request of the
applicant, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period not to exceed
one year. The Council hereby extends the expiration date for completion of the building
improvements at 6545 Penn Avenue by an additional six months. All other site
improvements shall be completed within one year. Expiration is governed by the City
Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subdivision 9.
13. This conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it
are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use
has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 10.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of October
2017.
_______________________
Pat Elliott, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
Code Requirements / Required Findings
Part 1 – Conditional Use Permit: The findings necessary to issue a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) are as follows (547.09, Subd. 6):
1. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the
guiding “Mixed Use” designation, when considered within the broader context of this
intersection and the Penn Avenue Corridor. The Comprehensive Plan identifies
several goals and policies related to economic development and support for
business and employment growth. The proposal is consistent with these goals and
policies.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the
purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed
use. The purpose of the Zoning Code is to protect and promote the public health,
safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. In the
Penn Avenue Corridor, the Mixed Use District (Section 537) is intended to be a
vibrant, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood center. However, a mix of uses is not
required, nor does the minimum 2-story building requirement apply in the Penn
Avenue Corridor. Several aspects of the proposal do not comply with Zoning Code
requirements and require variances, including building setbacks and lot coverage,
distance between the drive-thru speaker and residential property, buffer distance to
residential property, and sign ordinances; see Part 2 below for details.
3. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or
urban design guidelines. The proposed building is consistent with several aspects of
the Penn Avenue Design Guidelines, including a main entrance accessible directly
from the sidewalk, entrance(s) covered by canopy or awning, and landscaping along
the Penn Avenue sidewalk.
4. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards
specified in Section 544 of this code. The applicant is requesting a variance to
reduce minimum buffer area distance to residential property, in addition to the
variances noted above; see Part 2 below for details.
5. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities,
utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. The City’s Public Works
and Engineering Departments have reviewed the proposal and do not anticipate any
issues.
6. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare.
Adequate provisions have been made to protect the public health, safety and welfare
from undue adverse impacts.
7. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. Investment and
improvement in underutilized and vacant sites is necessary to maintain a thriving
community.
8. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code for
the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is not met; the
applicant is requesting a variance to reduce drive-thru speaker distance. See Parts 2
and 3 below.
Part 2 – The following conditions apply to fast food / convenience (Class III) restaurants
in the Mixed Use Districts (Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5):
1. A minimum distance of 500 feet must be maintained between substantially similar
uses with drive-up window or teller service (as measured from property line to
property line). This requirement is met.
2. Uses with drive-up window or teller service may not be located adjacent to a
property with an existing drive-up window or teller service unless an applicant can
demonstrate that the use will not be detrimental to pedestrian, bicycle or vehicle
movements. This requirement is met.
3. No drive-up window or lane shall be adjacent to a public street. This requirement is
met.
4. Drive-up uses shall be limited to one service window which is part of a primary
structure and a single queuing lane. The content portion of the order board shall be
limited to 40 square feet and 8 feet in height. The applicant is aware of this
requirement.
5. Drive-up facilities must be designed to minimize impacts to the pedestrian
environment and adequately address circulation issues and potential noise or light
pollution. This requirement is met.
6. There shall be no curb cuts on public streets exclusively for the use of drive-up
queuing or exit lanes. Drive-up traffic shall enter and exit from internal circulation
drives. This requirement is met.
7. Queuing space for at least 4 cars (70 feet) shall be provided per drive-up service
land as measured from but not including the first drive-up service window or teller
station. Such queuing space shall not interfere with parking spaces or traffic
circulation. This requirement is met.
8. Any drive-up service window, teller or order station, or exterior loudspeaker shall be
located at least 150 feet from any parcel with residential uses on the first floor. This
requirement is not met; the applicant is requesting a variance to reduce drive-thru
speaker distance. See Part 3 below.
9. The applicant shall demonstrate that such use will not significantly lower the existing
level of service on streets and intersections. The Public Works Department has
reviewed the proposed plans and has found this requirement to be met.
10. The City shall encourage operators to permit bicyclist use of sales and service
windows. The applicant is aware of this requirement.
11. Alcoholic beverages shall not be served. This requirement is met.
12. Exterior speakers shall comply with the noise control limits set by Subsection 930 of
the City Code. The applicant is aware of this requirement.
Part 3 – Variances
The findings necessary to approve a variance are as follows (Subd. 547.11):
1. There are “practical difficulties” that prevent the property owner from using the
property in a reasonable manner.
2. There are unusual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were
not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the
same zone or vicinity.
3. The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality.
4. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty.
5. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Drive-thru Speaker Distance Requirement (Subsection 537.05, Subd. 5)
Any drive-up service window, teller or order station, or exterior loudspeaker shall be
located at least 150 feet from any parcel with residential uses on the first floor. The
applicant is requesting a variance to reduce this requirement to 85.64 feet.
Possible findings to approve: The narrow depth of this parcel creates a practical
difficulty for any property owner wishing to include a drive-thru along this section of
Penn Avenue. The narrow depth of this parcel is a unique circumstance not created by
this applicant. Granting the requested variance will not alter the character of the
neighborhood, as drive-thru equipment specifications including information about noise
levels and volume controls must be approved by the Community Development Director
prior to installation. Equipment must include Automatic Volume Control (AVC) and city
noise ordinances shall apply at all times. The variance requested is the minimum
necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty, as the speaker is placed as far from the
adjacent residential property as possible. The variance is in harmony with the general
purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Possible findings to deny: The only practical difficulty in meeting this requirement is the
inclusion of the drive-thru, and the lack thereof does not prevent the property owner
from using the property in a reasonable manner. Unique circumstances do not apply, as
many properties along Penn Avenue are of similar lot depth and proximity to residential
property. Allowing a drive-thru speaker within 85.64 feet of residential property would
alter the character of the neighborhood and would not be in harmony with the general
purpose and intent of the ordinance.
Building Coverage and Setbacks (Subsection 537.07)
The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum building coverage from
25% to 9.64% and to exceed maximum building setbacks on the rear and sides.
Possible findings to approve: Strict enforcement of this requirement would cause a
practical difficulty. The applicant is proposing to use the property in a reasonable
manner. The applicant would be permitted by right to replace the existing building as is
under Minnesota State nonconformity laws. Instead, the applicant has proposed a new
building that will significantly improve the site and bring it closer to compliance with
other dimensional regulations. The Code exempts sites under two acres from the mixed
use requirement. Given these facts, it is reasonable to allow a new, architecturally and
functionally improved stand-alone building with drive-up service on this particular site.
Granting the requested variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood or
locality. It is anticipated that this will be an improvement to the area. The variance
requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty and does not
conflict with the purpose or intent of the Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan.
Possible findings to deny: Requiring a building to cover 25% of a site of this size is not a
practical difficulty. Unique circumstances do not apply to the property that do not also
apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity. The requested variance is not the
minimum necessary, as a larger building could feasibly be constructed, covering closer
to 25% of the site. The requested variance conflicts with the intent of the ordinance.
Buffer Yard Adjacent to Residential Property (Subsection 544.03, Subd. 6)
The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required buffer area from 15 feet to
11.5 feet. The intent of this provision is to provide adequate area to separate uses and
attractively screen the parking lot.
Criteria 1: Strict enforcement of this requirement would cause a practical difficulty in
restricting proper aisle width and circulation, and landscaping elsewhere on the site.
Criteria 2: Unique circumstances apply in that the existing parcel dimensions are
narrow and cannot feasibly be enlarged.
Criteria 3: The requested variances will allow for the reuse and improvement of a
vacant building. The improvements proposed will benefit the surrounding neighborhood
by improving the aesthetics of the site, particularly along Penn Avenue. No negative
impacts are expected.
Criteria 4: The variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical
difficulty. Space is not available to create additional parking.
Criteria 5: The proposed variance does not conflict with the purpose or intent of the
Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan.
Off-premise Outdoor Advertising Sign (Subsection 549.21)
The Zoning Code prohibits the use of signs “that advertise a product, business, service,
event, or any other matter that is not available, or does not take place, on the same
premises as the sign (off-premise sign).” The applicant is proposing two signs on the
property at 6545 Penn Avenue intended to advertise the Dunkin Donuts business
located at 6529 Penn Avenue, and one sign at 6529 Penn Avenue intended to advertise
both properties. The property owner does not intend to combine those two properties,
and thus the proposed signage requires a variance.
Criteria 1: The combined acreage of the properties is below one acre and therefore not
eligible to be considered as a Planned Unit Development, under which the off-premise
signage could be permitted.
Criteria 2: The right-in/right-out access on both Penn Avenue and 66th Street are
unique circumstances not created by this applicant.
Criteria 3: Granting the requested variance will not alter the character of the
neighborhood or locality, as the total sign quantity and/or sign area is similar to existing.
Criteria 4: The variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical
difficulty.
Criteria 5: The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as all signs shall comply with
the Penn Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines.
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master Plan Design Guidelines
Page 1 IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage TypesUsing the Guidelines
Good design cannot be explicitly legislated, but it should not be left to chance
either. The design guidelines for Richfield’s Penn Avenue Corridor are a tool
to communicate the design vision and desired character for the area. They are
intended to guide the design character of redevelopment and revitalization in
ways that are sensitive to the intent of the Corridor Master Plan. The guidelines
provide direction while leaving room for the kind of individual expression
needed for a varied and dynamic built environment.
Developed as part of the “Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master
Plan”, these design guidelines offer a framework for creating or enhancing
the character of Penn Avenue and the 1/2 to 1-block corridor surrounding it.
They are intended to capture the local character and offer flexibility for the
ever-evolving development marketplace.
Design Guidelines - What do they do?
Define the relationship and transition between public street zone and private •
development
Define both design and environmental performance•
Build upon zoning requirements•
Could be used as a basis for development and revitalization proposal review•
Could be one of the determining factors in public financial participation in private •
development
Design Guidelines – Where do they apply?
The design guidelines address both the public realm (streets & public spaces)
and the private realm (yards and buildings). This is done because successful
urban spaces have a certain synergy where the public and private realms
interface and complement each other. Therefore, they should be considered
together, as two parts of the same whole.
Critical Definitions:
Street Type:
There are numerous styles or types of streets suggested
for Richfield’s Penn Avenue (see the Street Type
Diagram, Figure 3). Each street type has it’s own set of
design guidelines. Guidelines can be used by agencies
and developers in guiding street design.
Frontage Type:
Land uses suggested for Penn Avenue can be organized
into several styles of buildings. Descriptions of how
various building styles & parking scenarios should
address the public street are called frontage types.
Guideline Matrix:
The Guideline Matrix suggests what range of frontage
types are appropriate given the street type along which
a property is located.
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master PlanDesign Guidelines
Page 2IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage TypesDesign Guidelines - How are they Addressed?
This design guideline is organized around the inter-relationship between streets
and private property (frontage) that touch the streets. The guideline describes
several “street types” with varying character and design elements and several
“frontage types” with varying design features. The design guideline identifies
which frontage types are appropriate with which street types.
Street Types
Because streets occupy the most space within the public realm, they have a
large impact on how people experience an urban environment. Different street
types outlined in this guideline provide functions for different types of uses and
users. Since streets are shared by drivers, parked cars, pedestrians, and cyclists
the design guideline concentrates on the spatial and experiential aspects of a
street and the non-driving area of the street known as the streetscape.
To establish a vocabulary for the basic components of streetscapes, the design
guideline uses several terms common to all street types. The common terms are
the pedestrian zone, the amenity zone, the parking zone, and sustainable
design components. You will see these terms used throught the description
of street types.
Pedestrian Zone
The pedestrian zone is the portion of a sidewalk corridor that accommodates
walking. Important design aspects of the pedestrian zone include elements like
pavement, protection from sun and rain and creating a comfortable width.
Amenity Zone
The amenity zone is the portion of the streetscape where amenites are located
to enhance the pedestrian experience. The amenities could be as simple as
street trees with a grass strip or more elaborate to include street lights, benches,
enhanced landscaping, etc. Lighting makes perhaps the strongest design
statement of all public realm components and is certainly among the most
visible. Other elements, such as banners and hanging plant baskets can be
introduced to the light poles where it is desired to create additional effect. In
certain places throughout Penn Avenue, it will be desirable to create an additional
level of comfort that invites pedestrians to linger and enjoy the space of the
public realm. Where this is the case, site furnishings such as benches and trash
receptacles provide comfort for pedestrians at the same time they add unity to
a broader area. While the boulevard will be the primary location for plantings
in the public realm, there will be other opportunities to introduce green space
that arise along Penn Avenue.
Figure 1:
Frontage Key Diagram
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master Plan Design Guidelines
Page 3 IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage TypesParking Zone
The parking zone is the on-street parking bay along a street. Parking is addressed
in the design guideline because it is often the “touch-down” point for visitors
and because it has a significant impact on the character and experience of
the Penn Avenue corridor. Considerations of pavement, bike parking, and
intersection bump-outs are addressed.
Sustainability
Sustainability elements refer to integrated design features that address
environmental issues such as stormwater, energy, light pollution and urban heat
island effect. Even though we don’t often think of sustainability as something
to be addressed in design guidelines, it is actually an integral and critical aspect
of streetscape design.
Frontage Type
Frontage is the transition between the public and private. These guidelines
address a variety of frontage types appropriate for the land use and street types
outlined in this plan. Issues addressed in frontage type are:
Building Placement and Mass
Building placement through the use of build-to and setback limits
establishes the “pulse” of a neighborhood or district. The design guidelines
use buildings closer to or further from the street to enhance or diminish
urban intensity. Just as the zero front and side setbacks required in
downtown aren’t appropriate in residential neighborhoods, a 30’ setback
with a landscaped front yard would not be appropriate in downtown.
Although building facades are private property, they perform a public
function by contributing to the enclosure of the public space of the
street. As such, there is a public interest in ensuring that building facades
display compatible approaches to scale and character that contribute to
neighborhood cohesion. Important elements of building placement and
mass addressed by these design guidelines are location, height, and bay
width.
Building Wall
Acting as an interface between public and private realms, the building wall
signalizes an edge of private property with varying degrees of “invitation”
to enter.
Yard Wall
The yard wall does not necessarily have to be a wall in the literal sense, but rather
the transitional threshold between the street (public) and the yard (private). A
yard wall might be as subtle as a pavement change at the doorway of a zero-
setback retail storefront or something more solid like a stone wall or ornamental
fence in a residential neighborhood. Parking buffers and courtyards are two
essential elements that define the yard wall along Penn Avenue.
Signage
Signage should be tasteful, artistic and appropriate to its placement. Whether
signs are attached to a building or placed in a yard, they should share design
considerations with the building they address. Since Penn Avenue will be an
intimate streetscape environment, this design guideline takes the approach that
signage success is much more dependent on design nuance than sign size.
Sustainability
Energy generation, rainwater re-use, reduced heat gain, and certification are
the core elements of sustainability addressed along Penn Avenue. Address-
ing environmental heat gain is probably unique for design guidelines but as
the negative effects of global warming become apparent, designing an urban
environment to minimize heat gain from buildings and paved surfaces is an
important community function. The design guidelines address this issue with
criteria for tree canopy and green space. These guidelines focus on strategies
to integrate stormwater management into every aspect of development to
overall reduce the amount of stormwater created. Strategies focus on restor-
ing a more natural hydrology and include: reducing impervious surfaces; use
of green roofs; pervious pavement; bioretention basins; NURP ponds and
other storage devices.
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master PlanDesign Guidelines
Page 6IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage TypesPermeable Pavers
Bicycle Amenities
Bollards
Site Furnishings to provide pedestrian scale character
On-Street Parking
Planters and trees to provide separation from traffic
Roof Patios
Green Roofs
Unique Building Entries
Solar Panels for Energy Conservation/Generation
Penn AvenuePermeable Pavers
Bicycle Amenities
Planted Areas/ separation from traffic
4-Season Patio/In-pavement heating
Unique Site Furnishings
Pedestrian Scale Lighting
Iconic Banners and Signage
Roof Patios
Contemporary LED Light, high efficiency, dark sky friendly
Airy Trees. Protection from weather and sun
Penn Avenue
Window Shopping
Mixed-Use Corridor
As the heaviest traveled street in the study area, the Penn Avenue mixed-use corridor
includes a more automobile-oriented streetscape pattern that also accommodates the
pedestrian. Ornamental streetlights, benches, and other street furniture will mark places
for people to linger. Banners appeal to those driving by, announcing local events as
people enter the community. Setbacks will remain relatively small, with zero front and
side encouraged. Wherever possible, specifically in the amenity zone and bump outs, rain
gardens should be built to treat stormwater. Roof patios and green roofs should also
be built wherever possible, and roof drainages should tie into the rain garden system.
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master Plan Design Guidelines
Page 11 IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage Types Penn Avenue Street Type Design Guidelines
Pedestrian Zone Amenity Zone Parking Zone Sustainability
Pavement Street Crossings Pavement Street Trees Landscaping Signage Furnishings Pavement Bike Parking Bump-outs Green Roofs In-pavement Heating Rainwater Energy Use Lighting
S1:
Mixed-Use
Corridor
S2:
Residential
Street
S3:
Side Street
S4:
Commuter
Bike Street
S5:
Alley Street
Mix of concrete
and brick pavers
preferably with
structural soil base
but standard base
okay.
Reflective, thermo-
plastic tape or similar.
Mix of concrete and
brick pavers with
structural soil base.
Salt-tolerant shade and ornamental trees with varied color and lacey foliage. Ornamental trees only in locations not conflicting with business signage. Trees in tree guards and grates.
Mix of salt-tolerant
perennial and
annual plants in
pots, hanging
baskets, and raised
planters. Use shrubs sparingly.
Public, way-finding
signage. Small
sandwich-board
business sign
during business
hours only.
Contemporary character
and pedestrian-scale
street lights plus benches,
trash/recycling bins,
bollards, banners. Café
seating by conditional use.
Contemporary character
and pedestrian-scale
street lights plus benches,
trash/recycling bins,
bollards, banners. Café
seating by conditional use.
Permeable
pavement preferable
or match street
pavement.
Bike racks to match
character of street
furnishings.
Pavement and
furnishings to match
amenity zone. Bus
shelters. Signature
landscaping.
On bus shelters. On
doorway canopies if
preferred by property
owner as conditional
use.
Preferred in
pedestrian zone only
if solar powered.
Infiltration trenches
under amenity
zone. Permeable
pavement in parking
zone.
PV solar or wind
generators on public
facilities (park & ride)
along corridor.
Dark-sky friendly,
cut-off light fixtures.
LED lamps.
Concrete with band
of structural soil
base at street tree
locations.
Painted.None.Mix of salt-tolerant
shade trees with fall
color.
Turf or salt-tolerant
perennial plants.
None.Contemporary,
pedestrian-scale
street lights. Bollards
and banners on
Penn Avenue.
Permeable
pavement.
None.Signature
landscaping and
pavement pattern.
On bus shelters
along Penn Avenue.
None.Rainwater gardens
in amenity zone.
Permeable
pavement in parking
zone.
Use of low-energy
lighting.
Dark-sky friendly,
cut-off light fixtures.
LED lamps.
Mix of concrete
and brick pavers
preferably with
structural soil base
but standard base
okay.
Reflective, thermo-
plastic tape or similar
along Penn Avenue.
Painted other
locations.
Mix of concrete and
brick pavers with
structural soil base.
Salt-tolerant shade
and ornamental
trees with varied
color. Lacey foliage
at commercial
locations.
Ornamental trees
only in locations
not conflicting with
business signage.
Mix of salt-tolerant
perennial and annual
plants. Turf as accent
only
Public, way-finding
signage. Small
sandwich-board
business sign during
business hours only.
Contemporary
character and
pedestrian-scale
street lights plus
benches, trash/
recycling bins,
bollards, banners.
Café seating by
conditional use.
Permeable
pavement.
Bike racks matching
character of street
furnishings located
at commercial
frontages only.
Pavement and
furnishings to match
amenity zone. Bus
shelters. Signature
landscaping.
On bus shelters. On
doorway canopies if
preferred by property
owner by conditional
use.
Preferred in
pedestrian zone
- only if solar
powered.
Rainwater gardens
in amenity zone.
Permeable
pavement in parking
zone.
PV solar or wind
generators on public
facilities (park & ride)
along corridor.
Dark-sky friendly,
cut-off light fixtures.
LED lamps.
Concrete with band
of structural soil
base at street tree
locations.
Painted.None.Mix of salt-tolerant
shade trees with fall
color.
Turf or salt-tolerant
perennial plants.
Way-finding.Contemporary,
pedestrian-scale
street lights.
Permeable
pavement.
None.Signature
landscaping and
pavement pattern.
N/A None.Rainwater gardens
in amenity zone.
Permeable
pavement in parking
zone.
Use of low-energy
lighting.
Dark-sky friendly,
cut-off light fixtures.
LED lamps.
N/A Match sidewalk pavement.None.Ornamental trees or small shade trees in
random pattern.
Landscaped buffers at edge of right of
way
None.Security lighting.N/A Bike racks and bike lockers.N/A N/A None.Permeable pavement. Rainwater
gardens.
Use of low-energy lighting.Dark-sky friendly, cut-off light fixtures.
LED lamps.
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master PlanDesign Guidelines
Page 12IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage TypesStorefront
The storefront is typical in late 19th and early 20th century downtown
commercial buildings that have no setback from the street and side
property lines. These buildings usually range from one to four stories
with retail spaces on the ground floor with high ceilings and storefronts
to bring the maximum amount of light into the space. Retractable
awnings protect the merchandise from the sun and provide shelter for
pedestrians. The upper floors can be live, work, or retail use accessed
by a separate entry at street level.
Par
a
p
e
t
Aw
n
i
n
g
Sig
n
P
a
n
e
l
Cov
e
r
e
d
Ent
r
y
Bul
k
H
e
a
d
Tra
n
s
o
m
Store Front12 Ft - 14 FtPr
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
Sig
n
P
a
n
e
l
Ro
o
f
t
o
p
D
e
c
k
/
G
a
r
d
e
n
15 FT Min. HeightCovere
d or
Recesse
d
Entry
Re
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e
R
o
o
f
Me
m
b
r
a
n
e
o
r
Gr
e
e
n
R
o
o
f
Solar Panels and
Win Generators
on Rooftops
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master Plan Design Guidelines
Page 19 IntroductionFrontage Types Penn Avenue Frontage Type Design Guidelines
Awnings Shelter Signage Roof
Placement Materials Technique Type and Size Materials Technique Type and Size Materials Technique Style and Pitch Materials Technique
F1:
Storefront
F2:
Door Yard
F3:
Porch Yard
F4:
Garage
F5:
Alley
F6:
Garage Entry
F7:
Parking Yard
Roof
Yard
Upper Wall
Lower Wall
Street Wall
Fit to width -
& shape of
masonry window
of storefront
opening.
Top of awning -
at top of transom
or storefront
opening.
Fabric awning -
material in colors
compatible with
historic building
style.
Fixed or -
retractable
awnings in
traditional style.
Cantilevered -
roof shelter over
entry.
Relate to entry -
opening.
Wood or iron -
framed shelter
structure.
Wood, metal -
or composition
shingle consistent
with building style.
Detailing -
consistent with
building style.
bldg panel/ltrs, -
cant. sign board,
banner, flag, neon,
lettering, awning
sign, sandwich
board, monument.
Refer to sign -
ordinance for size
requirements.
metal, glass, -
wood, plastic,
stone, brick,
concrete
external ltg -
pref., back-lit
letters okay, (no
back-lit boards),
sand-blasted
wood, lettering
on window,
raised letters on
panel.
Low pitched -
roof behind
masonry parapet.
Membrane or -
metal roof.
Brick, stone, -
cast stone, metal
or wood cornice.
Cap parapelt -
with integral or
projecting cornice.
Consistent with -
contemporary
building style.
Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Low slope with -
parapet.
Steep pitch (8” -
to 12” min.) gable
roof.
Low slope -
membrane roof.
Steep pitch -
metal, or
wood, slate or
compositiion
shingle.
Detailing -
consistent with
contemporary
building style.
Refer to -
frontage sketch.
Same as F1 -Covered porch -
at entry.
8 ft minimum -depth.
Porch floor -
12” to 48” above grade.
Wood railings -
and trim, painted,
masonry piers.Roof covering -
to match main
roof.
Roof similar to -
main roof.
Detailing -consistent with
building style.
Same as F1 -Consistent with -
house style.
Consistent with -
house style.
Consistent with -
house style.
N/A -2nd floor -
cantilevered
balcony.
4 ft to 8 ft depth -
depending on
building setback.
Wood, iron or -
concrete framed
balcony structure.
Wood, iron or -
glass railings.
Detailing -
consistent with
building style.
N/A -Consistent with -
house style.
Consistent with -
house style.
Consistent with -
house style.
Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Gutter at roof -when roof drains
to rear.
Roof pitch can -show.
Consistent with -
building style.
N/A -Same as F1 -Fit within -
architectural features.
Refer to -
residential sign ordinance for size
requirements.
Same as F1 -Same as primary frontage. -
N/A -N/A -On wall or fence. -
Ground mounted -
in landscape area.Refer to sign -
ordinance for size
requirements.
Painted wood -
or metal.
Raised Letters. -
Extremely -
lighted.
No back-lit -sign boards.
N/A -
City Of Richfield • Penn Avenue Corridor Revitalization Master PlanDesign Guidelines
Page 20IntroductionStreet TypesFrontage Types Penn Avenue Frontage Type Design Guidelines
Yard and Street Wall Building Wall Entry Level Wall Upper Level Wall
Yard Use Street Wall Materials Technique Setback Bay Width Openings Materials Technique Openings Materials Technique
F1:
Storefront
F2:
Door Yard
F3:
Porch Yard
F4:
Garage
F5:
Alley
F6:
Garage Entry
F7:
Parking Yard
Roof
Yard
Upper Wall
Lower Wall
Street Wall
No yard -N/A -Concrete or -
brick paving.
Exterior paving -
of recessed entry
of storefront.Entry at grade. -
Zero front yard -
setback.
Zero side yard -setback.
Rear setback -
by zoning code.
12 Ft to 20 Ft. -11 Ft to 14 Ft -high storefront opening.50% to 75% -transparent window/door openings.
Brick or stone -
masonry or
cast masonry products.
Contemporary -
window & door
detailing.Main entry door -
part of storefront.
Storefront may -be recessed.
Reflect building -
cadence.
Vertical window -proportions.
25% to -
50% window openings.
Continue entry -
level materials full
height of wall.
Reflect bay -
widths in wall
detailing.Cap wall with -
comics.
Recessed -balcony optional.
Pedestrian only. -
No vehicle -
parking or drives
in front yard.
Maximum 3 ft -
high fence, wall
or hedge.
Masonry or -
concrete edging
if no wall.
Concrete, brick -
or stone paving.
Brick or stone -
wall.
Wrought iron -
or painted wood
fence.
Landscaped. -
Wall or fence -
to match style of
building.
Ground floor at -
grade or raised
above grade.
Front yard -
setback varies
from 6 ft to 12 ft.
Side yard -
setback varies
from 0% to 15%
of lot width.
Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -Same as F1 -
Pedestrian only. -
No vehicle -
parking or drives
in front yard.
N/A -Landscaping -
predominant.
Concrete, brick -
or stone paths.
Wall or fence -
to match style of
building.
Ground floor -
raised above
grade 24” to 48”.
Front yard -
setback 12 ft to
25 ft.
Side yard -
setback varies
10% to 15% lot
width.
N/A -25% to 50% -
transparent
window & door
openings.
Doors & -
windows are
openings in wall.
Brick or stone -
masonry in
historic size &
pattern.
Cement stucco. -
Wood or Hardy -
lap or drop siding.
Main entry from -
roofed porch.
Min. depth 8 Ft. -
Same as F1 -Use same -
materials, or
other wood
or masonry
materials
consistent with
building style.
Detailing to be -
consistent with
building style.
Cap wall -
with cornice or
projecting eave.
Vehicle parking. -
Pedestrian path -
to rear entry.
N/A -Concrete or -
brick paving.
Landscaped -
buffer.
Bick or painted -
wood screen
walls.
Trash -
screening.
Wall or fence -
match building
style.
Paved access -
to garage.
Rear yard -
setback minimum
3 ft.
Side yard -
setback varies.
N/A -Doors & -
windows are
openings in wall.
Size & shape of -
window openings
similar to main
building.
Same materials -
as on main
building.
Window & door -
detailing should
match main
building.
Reflect entry -
level.
Continue entry -
level materials full
height of wall.
Detailing to be -
consistent with
entry level.
Cap wall -
with cornice or
projecting eave.
Vehicle parking. -
Service vehicle -
access.
Pedestrian path -
to rear entry.
N/A -Concrete or -
brick paving.
Brick, rock-faced -
concrete block
or painted wood
screen walls.
Trash & -
storage opaque
screening.
Consolidate & -
screen utilities.
Rear yard -
setback varies
from zero up.
Side yard -
setback same as
building front.
Should be same -
as street side of
building.
Not as open as -
the street side.
25% to 50% -
transparent
window & door
openings.
Same materials -
as on street side
of building.
Window & door -
detailing should
match street side.
Reflect street -
side bay pattern.
Similar to street -
side window
openings.
Window & door -
detailing should
match street side.
May be capped -
with a cornice or
a gutter at roof.
None. -
Vehicle access -
to garage.
Pedestrian path -
to rear entry.
N/A -Conrete or brick -
paving.
Paved yard for -
access to garage
& entry.
Landscaped -
areas encouraged
adjacent to entry.
Rear yard -
setback car
length for garage.
Side yard -
setback same as
building front.
Same as F1 -
or street side of
building.
Not as open as -
the street side.
25% to 50% -
transparent
window & door
openings.
Same materials -
as on street side
of building.
Window & door -
detailing should
match street side.
Reflect street -
side bay pattern.
Similar to street -
side window
openings.
Same materials -
as on street side
of building.
Window & door -
detailing should
match street
sides.
May be capped -
with a cornice or
a gutter at roof.
Parking area -behind buffer in
side yard or F1
or F2.
30” to 36” -high fence,
wall or hedge
in a minimum 8 ft deep
landscaped
buffer.
Masonry wall -similar to adjacent
buildings.
Wrought iron -or painted wood
fence.
Solid hedge. -
Parking area -paved.
Wall and fence -
style consistent with historic
building style.
N/A -N/A -N/A -N/A -
EngineeringAssociates, Inc.RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT PLANS2025 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 210Mendota Heights, MN 55120(651)452-8960(651)452-114930115-CS30115PENN AVENUE PARTNERS, 6529 PENN AVENUE SRICHFIELD, MNC0REV-3Arkansas * California * Minnesota * Pennsylvania * TexasGENERAL NOTES:PLAN INDEX:APPROVED DATERESOURCE LIST:A.TOPOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY SURVEY, INCLUDING PROPERTY LINES, LEGAL DESCRIPTION,EXISTING UTILITIES, SITE TOPOGRAPHY WITH SPOT ELEVATIONS, OUTSTANDING PHYSICALFEATURES AND EXISTING STRUCTURE LOCATIONS WAS PROVIDED BY THE FOLLOWINGCOMPANY, AS A CONTRACTOR TO THE SELLER/OWNER:TOPOGRAPHY: CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC. 6750 STILLWATER BLVD N., MINNESOTA55082. 651-275-8969CEI ENGINEERING AND ITS ASSOCIATES WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACYOF THE SURVEY OR FOR DESIGN ERRORS OR OMISSIONS RESULTING FROM SURVEYINACCURACIES.B.ALL PHASES OF SITE WORK FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE OWNER /DEVELOPER SITE WORK SPECIFICATIONS.C.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING STRUCTURES, RELATEDUTILITIES, PAVING, UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND ANY OTHER EXISTINGIMPROVEMENTS AS NOTED. SEE SITE WORK SPECIFICATIONS.D.CONTRACTOR IS TO REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND OTHER MATERIALSRESULTING FROM PREVIOUS AND CURRENT DEMOLITION OPERATIONS. DISPOSAL WILL BE INACCORDANCE WITH ALL LOCAL, STATE AND/OR FEDERAL REGULATIONS GOVERNING SUCHOPERATIONS.E.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL TAKE ALLPRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURINGTHE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.F.WARRANTY/DISCLAIMER: THE DESIGNS REPRESENTED IN THESE PLANS ARE IN ACCORDANCEWITH ESTABLISHED PRACTICES OF CIVIL ENGINEERING FOR THE DESIGN FUNCTIONS AND USESINTENDED BY THE OWNER AT THIS TIME. HOWEVER, NEITHER THE ENGINEER NOR ITSPERSONNEL CAN OR DO WARRANT THESE DESIGNS OR PLANS AS CONSTRUCTED EXCEPT INTHE SPECIFIC CASES WHERE THE ENGINEER INSPECTS AND CONTROLS THE PHYSICALCONSTRUCTION ON A CONTEMPORANEOUS BASIS AT THE SITE.G.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTEDCONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELYRESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS OF THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS ANDPROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLYCONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. ANY CONSTRUCTIONOBSERVATION BY THE ENGINEER OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TOINCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES, IN, ON ORNEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.H.ALL CONSTRUCTION IN STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BECOORDINATED WITH THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RESIDENT ENGINEER.C0.COVER SHEETC1.DEMOLITION PLANC2.SITE PLANC3.GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANC4.EROSION CONTROL PLANC5.UTILITY PLANC6.LANDSCAPE PLANC7.DETAIL SHEET lC8.CITY DETAILS SHEET lVicinity MapNot to ScaleVicinity MapNot to ScaleGENERAL NOTES:APPROVED DATECITY OF RICHFIELDRESOURCE LIST:CITY OF RICHFIELDCITY PLANNERMELISSA POEHLMAN612-861-9766CITY ENGINEERJEFF PEARSON612-861-9791PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORKRISTIN ASHER612-861-9795Vicinity MapNot to ScaleVicinity MapNot to ScaleSITEFIRE DEPARTMENTWAYNE KEWITSCHFIRE CHIEF - CITY OF RICHFIELD6700 PORTLAND AVE,RICHFIELD, MN 55423PHONE: 612-243-4501FAX: 612-243-4516OWNER:KARLA CARLSONPENN AVENUE PARTNERS II, LLC50 SOUTH SIXTH ST, SUITE 1480MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402ARCHITECT:ELLIOT STENDELARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM901 NORTH THIRD ST, SUITE 220MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CIVIL ENGINEER:ALAN CATCHPOOL, PE, CPESCCEI ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.2025 CENTRE POINTE BLVD, SUITE 210MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55120PHONE: (651) 452-8960EX. ASITE PLAN (NO UNDERLAY)EX. BFIRE TRUCK MANEUVERABILITY PLANC2 ALT.ALTERNATE SITE PLANRELATED PLANS:
66TH STREET WESTPENN AVENUEVANNO PARKINGDRIVETHRUVAN PROPOSEDDUNKINDONUTS1,995 SFFFE=860.00STARTAMERICA RUNS ON DUNKIN'R10'R10'R8'R8'R4'R5'R20'R5'R8'R8'R15'R15'R5'R5'R5'18 LF18 LF18 LF144 SF144 SFTYPTYPTYPTYPTYPTYP366728585.64'DRIVE-THRU DISTANCE TO RESIDENTIAL P.L.CLOSE CURB CUT ENTRANCE,REPLACE SIDEWALKSIDEWALK REPLACEMENT BY COUNTYSECTION: 2.67' CONCRETE PAVER BLVD FROM CURB FACE8' SHARED USE PATH (5" CONC. WALK SPEC. 1)2' BUFFER WALK (5" CONC. WALK)14'24'12'9' TYP18'24'9'8'8'9'4.5'12.5'27.92'8.05'5.7'5.3'24'5'10'18'3'24'18'3'9'
9'
9' TYP
8'13.67'29.4'73'21B21B9.84'4.78'11.5'8' S.B.12A12A12A12D70A70B70C70D70E70D70F09U09S12D70G21B21B01A01A01A01A01A01A01A70A70A03D03D03D03M03D03D04B04B03C03D05A05A08B08C08C70H70H08B08B08B08B08B01A51B51B08B08A08A08A08A08A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A11A12G12G8.35'56.27'9.47'47.11'02B11A01A70I09U09S12G12G51B70JTYP10A30' MIN. SIGHTTRIANGLEPROVIDEDPROPOSED BOUNDARY TO BE ADJUSTED WITH PLATFOR PROPOSED AREA TO BE DEEDED TO COUNTY24'18'24'10'5.75'5.5'70B70' MIN. STACKING5'Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.020'30'40'SCALE IN FEETINITIAL DATEDPORPMDESDRW Engineering Associates, Inc.CEI PROJECT NO.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONSITE BENCHMARKTEMPORARY SITE BENCHMARKSANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SOUTHWEST OF NORTHWEST PROPERTY CORNERRIM ELEVATION 864.67 (NAVD 88)CONTRACTOR TO SET TEMPORARY BENCHMARK PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONEX. AREV-39/15/17SITE PLAN (NO UNDERLAY)(651)452-1149(651)452-8960Mendota Heights, MN 551202025 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 210AJRAJRALCALC9/15/17301156529 PENN AVENUE SMNRICHFIELDPENN AVENUE PARTNERS, LLCPROPOSED LEGENDPROPERTY LINE/RIGHT OF WAY LINECURB INLETBUILDING CONTROL POINT#PROPOSED PARKING SPACESGENERAL SITE NOTESA. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.B. ALL CURB RETURN RADII SHALL BE 2' OR 10', AS SHOWN TYPICAL ON THIS PLAN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.C. UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, CALLED OUT OR SPECIFIED HEREON OR WITHIN THE SPECIFICATIONS: ALL CURB ANDGUTTER ADJACENT TO ASPHALT PAVING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER DETAIL 01A. ALL CURBING ADJACENT TO CONCRETEPAVING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER DETAIL 01B.D. ALL PARKING LOT STRIPING INCLUDING ACCESSIBLE AND VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES SHALL BE PAINTED WHITE PER SITEPLAN.E. ALL PARKING LOT SIGN BASE SUPPORTS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER DETAIL 12F.F. ALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS SHALL HAVE SIGNAGE INSTALLED PER DETAIL 09S.G.CITY OF RICHFIELD ENGINEERING MUST BE PRESENT TO INSPECT ALL CONCRETE FORMS WITHIN ROW PRIOR TOCONCRETE POUR. MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED.H.PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FROM RICHFIELD ENGINEERING FOR ANY EXCAVATION IN THE ROW, OBSTRUCTION OFPUBLIC ROADWAYS, PARKING LANES, OR PUBLIC SIDEWALK, AND PERMANENT STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED IN CITYROW. CONTACT 612-861-9790 FOR PERMITS.I.THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A SNOW REMOVAL PLAN.LIMITS OF SIDEWALKS AND CONCRETE APRONS (PER ARCH. PLANS)CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. SEE DETAIL 01A/01B.EXISTING LEGENDLIGHT POLEUTILITY POLESIGNOUFENCECONCRETEWATER VALVEGAS VALVEOVERHEAD WIRESCULVERTGAS METERTELE/ELEC BOXCATCH BASINHYDRANTMANHOLEDENOTES FOUNDDENOTES SET 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 257181/2" IRON PIPEWELLLTGASGMSITE NOTES02BTRANSFORMER PAD (PER ELEC. CO. AND/OR ARCH. PLANS)04BEXIT STOOP (PER ARCH PLANS)12A4 INCH TRAFFIC WHITE LANE STRIPE (SEE LENGTH INDICATED AT SYMBOL)12D4 INCH WIDE PAINTED WHITE STRIPES. 2.0 FOOT O.C. @ 45 DEGREES (SEE SIZE INDICATED AT SYMBOL)21BTAPER CURB FROM 6" TO 0" IN 2'51BLIMITS OF SAWCUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL70AORDER CANOPY AND SPEAKER (PER ARCH PLANS)70BMENU BOARD (PER ARCH PLANS)70CDRIVE-THRU WINDOW (PER ARCH PLANS)70DDUNKIN DONUTS DIRECTIONAL SIGN (PER ARCH PLANS)70EPYLON SIGN (PER ARCH PLANS)70FSHARED MONUMENT DIRECTIONAL SIGN (PER ARCH PLANS)70GINTEGRAL TRASH AREA (PER ARCH PLANS)70HLOOP DETECTOR WITHIN CONCRETE PAVING70ISWERVE BIKE RACK (PARKS 2 BIKES), SURFACE MOUNT AND POWDER COATED BLACK.(BY WWW.DERO.COM OR APPROVED EQUAL)70JB624 CURB (PER CITY & COUNTY STANDARDS)SITE DETAILS01ATYPE A CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER03CWHEELCHAIR RAMP IN SIDEWALK03DCONCRETE SIDEWALK03MWHEELCHAIR RAMP IN SIDEWALK05AGUARD POST08ASTANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVING08BHEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVING08CHEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVING09SACCESSIBLE / VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN09UACCESSIBLE PARKING SYMBOL10ATRAFFIC FLOW ARROW11ADO NOT ENTER SIGN12GSTOP SIGN70ACOMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY APRON (PER CITY OF RICHFIELD STR-01)1,9958241,295513PROVIDEDREQUIREDPROVIDEDREQUIRED1111NOTE:UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS AND PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS.PORCHES, RAMPS, VESTIBULE, SLOPED PAVING, TRUCK DOCKS, BUILDINGSEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF333
PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUS66TH STREET WESTFOUND DRILLHOLE INCONCRETETACOBELLSIGNEXISTING BUILDINGBOLLARDOLIVER AVENUE SOUTHLTLTLTLTLTEXISTING BUILDING 6.513.26.5
5.128.947.4
10.6XXXXX X
X X
2
0
"
T
R
E
E
T
R
E
E
1
2
"
CHAIN LINK FENCELANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPING
PLANTERWOODEXISTING BUILDINGCUTCURBWATER47.4PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS
PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS(COMMERCIAL)SANITARY SEWERSSSANITARY SEWERSSSSSANITARY SEWER
SSOU OU OU OU OU
OHEOU OUOUOU
OUOU
OUCHAINLINKFENCEBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGOUOHEOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOHE
FLAGPOLEWOODPLANTERTRASHENCLOSUREFOUND 1/2"IRON PIPELIGHTPOLEPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTLANDSCAPINGBITUMINOUSSTREETPUBLIC
(TYP.)CONC
.
CUR
BCONC
.
CU
R
BAT
BU
I
LD
ING
1.5CONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURB
CONC. CURB
LIGHTSCONC. PADWITH ELEC.STUBSW CORNER OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24, FOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY CAST IRONMONUMENT.WEST OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24
UTILITYPOLEPOLEUTILITYELEC. TRANS.GUYWIREWIRE
GUY
CONC. CURBRETAININGWOODWALLUT
UT
UTUTUT
METERGASCLEANOUTLIDSSOUTH LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24EAST LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF
THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,
R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 1089259NOMONUMENTSETSIGNALBOX2020P
A
R
C
E
L
2
P
A
R
C
E
L
4WSO WSOLTEXISTING BUILDINGSIGNCONC. CURBEXISTING BUILDINGBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGCONC.RETAININGWALLFENCEWOOD FENCE
ENCLOSURETRASHTRASHENCLOSURELOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGEXISTING BUILDINGTRAFFIC POLEPENN AVENUE
OU OU OHEOUPOLELIGHT
18' CMPFOUND SPIKEIN CONCRETEFOUND REBAR28.545.4
45.428.6MONITORY WELLSUTILITYPOLEFIRST FLOOR
ELEVATION=853.62EX. CBRIM=854.67EX. CBRIM=854.54EX. CBRIM=854.32INV=850.52EX. CBRIM=854.10INV=850.30EX. CBRIM=854.84INV=852.34EX. CBRIM=854.56INV=851.85EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUSCONC. CURB AND GUTTER CONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTER18" 12"18"15"12"EX. MHRIM=849.99EX. SANRIM=853.97INV=842.87EX. SANRIM=854.04INV=844.04INV=843.54EX. SANRIM=864.67INV=852.67SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSEX. SANRIM=851.61EX. SANRIM=852.91FIRST FLOORELEVATION=856.98
EX. SAN
RIM=850.29
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
METERGASWATER WATERWATER WATERWATERWATERWATER
105.4420.00133.0141.59124.4220.00EXTERIOR=1,295 SQFT.
EXTERIOR=1,457 SQFT.133158 166170.8175.04 NOMONUMENTSETNORTH OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638 HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523100.00 42.00159.5046.95S44°52'41"ESITE BENCHMARKEX. SAN. MH RIM = 864.67(NAVD 88)2''W12" CIP(BY RECORD)9" (BY RECORD)L.B.R.L.B.R.WATERWATERWATERWATERWATERWATEREX. CBEX. CB4''SS2''W4''SSL.B.R.L.B.R.NO PARKING 2''WEUGEUGEUGEUGEUGEPROPOSEDDUNKINDONUTS1,995 SFFFE=860.00Electrical Panels4''SSGASGAS50ANS-650AAB-650APF-450BKF-250BKF-450BKF-450BKF-4KF-1250BKF-1250BBE-650APF-450BAC-1750BIH-1150BTD-1050B50APF-550BDL-1850APF-250BKF-250BDL-6KF-450BBE-250BKnow what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.020'30'40'SCALE IN FEETINITIAL DATEDPORPMDESDRW Engineering Associates, Inc.CEI PROJECT NO.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONSITE BENCHMARKTEMPORARY SITE BENCHMARKSANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SOUTHWEST OF NORTHWEST PROPERTY CORNERRIM ELEVATION 864.67 (NAVD 88)CONTRACTOR TO SET TEMPORARY BENCHMARK PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONC6REV-39/15/17LANDSCAPE PLAN(651)452-1149(651)452-8960Mendota Heights, MN 551202025 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 210AJRAJRALCALC9/15/17301156529 PENN AVENUE SMNRICHFIELDPENN AVENUE PARTNERS, LLCPROPOSED LEGENDEXISTING LEGENDLIGHT POLEUTILITY POLESIGNOUFENCECONCRETEWATER VALVEGAS VALVEOVERHEAD WIRESCULVERTGAS METERTELE/ELEC BOXCATCH BASINHYDRANTMANHOLEDENOTES FOUNDDENOTES SET 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 257181/2" IRON PIPEWELLLTGASGMSHRUB PLANTINGTREE PLANTINGLANDSCAPE DETAILSC.ALL LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GRADESAND STANDARDS FOR NURSERY PLANTS, AND SHALL CONFORM TO Mn/DOT SPECIFICATIONSE.ANY AREAS DISTURBED FOR ANY REASON PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OFTHE PROJECT SHALL BE CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.F.MAINTAIN 5' MIN. HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN TREE PLANTINGS ANDALL UTILITIES.G.A FULLY DESIGNED IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED ANDINSTALLED BY IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR. IRRIGATION DESIGNER SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR SIZING AND SPECIFYING BACKFLOW PREVENTER INACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL CODES.H.CONFIRM HEALTH OF TREES IN THE EXISTING PARKING LOT ISLANDS, REPLACEAS NEEDED.GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTESA. LOCATE ALL UTILITIES AND SITE LIGHTING CONDUITS BEFORE LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.B.NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE OFANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO ANY PLANTING.3" RIVER ROCK OVER LANDSCAPE FABRICPLANTREE WRAPBACKFILL MIXPAINTED FLUORESCENT ORANGECOVERED W/2-PLY RUBBER HOSEWHITE FLAGGING (TYP.)DOUBLE STRAND 12 GAUGE WIRE8" 2-PLY RUBBER HOSE8' STEEL TEE POST- 3 REQUIRED AT 120°4 INCHES MULCHFROM TOP 1/3 OF THE BALLREMOVE BURLAP & ROPEUNDISTURBED SUBSOIL4 INCH DEEP SAUCERNOTE: SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH MATERIAL TO USE.6"
2'(MIN.)TREE PLANTINGN.T.S.12"6"50A2'(MIN.)12"( SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES UNDISTURBED SUBSOILBACKFILL MIX4 INCHES MULCHFOR TYPE OF MULCH )6"& ROPE FROM TOP 1/3 OF BALL. REMOVERUNGS FROM TOP AND HALF-WAY DOWN SIDESIF SHRUB IS B & B, THEN REMOVE BURLAP50BSHRUB PLANTINGN.T.S.WEED MAT (ONLY IFSHRUB IS WITHIN APLANTING BED)NOTE: THE ACCEPTED PLANTING DETAIL MUST BE ADHERED TO BY THE LANDSCAPE INSTALLER.OF WIRE BASKET ON ANY B&B MATERIAL BEFORE BACKFILLING.TREE LISTBOTANICAL NAMEKEYQTYCOMMON NAME/ROOTSIZEREMARKSNSDWARF NORWAY SPRUCEPinus MonticolaMIN 6' TALLPLANT AS SHOWN6CONT.25Malus "Praire Fire"PRAIRIE FIRE CRABAPPLEPF151.5" CAL.PLANT AS SHOWNCONT.SYBBOTANICAL NAMEKEYQTYCOMMON NAME/ROOTSIZEREMARKSSYBKF441 GALCONT.KARL FOERSTER - REED GRASSCalamagrostis x AcutifloraSHRUB LISTPLANT AS SHOWN85DL241 GALCONT.DAYLILIES PLANT AS SHOWNHermerocallisAUTUMN BLAZE MAPLEABACER X FREEMANII' AUTUMN BLAZE'MIN 6" TALLPLANT AS SHOWN6CONT.BE8#2 POTCONT.GOLDSTRUM BLACK EYED SUSANRudbeckia fulgida 'goldstrum'PLANT AS SHOWNSOD OVER 4" OF TOPSOILAC175 GAL.CONT.ALPINE CURRANTRIBES ALPINUM 'GREEN MOUND'PLANT AS SHOWNIH115 GAL.CONT.COMPACT INKBERRY HOLLYILEX GLABRA 'COMPACTA'PLANT AS SHOWNTD105 GAL.CONT.RED TWIG DOGWOODCORNUS SERICEA 'ALLEMANS'PLANT AS SHOWN3
45 LF 8" PVC@ 1.00%PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUS66TH STREET WESTFOUND DRILLHOLE INCONCRETETACOBELLSIGNEXISTING BUILDINGBOLLARDOLIVER AVENUE SOUTHLTCOLTLTLTLTEXISTING BUILDING 6.513.26.5
5.128.947.4
10.6XXXXX X
X X
2
0
"
T
R
E
E
T
R
E
E
1
2
"
CHAIN LINK FENCELANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPING
PLANTERWOODEXISTING BUILDINGCUTCURBWATER47.4PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS
PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS(COMMERCIAL)SANITARY SEWERSSSANITARY SEWERSSSSSANITARY SEWER
SSOU OU OU OU OU
OHEOU OUOUOU
OUOU
OUCHAINLINKFENCEBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGOUOHEOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOHE
FLAGPOLEWOODPLANTERTRASHENCLOSUREFOUND 1/2"IRON PIPELIGHTPOLEPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTLANDSCAPINGBITUMINOUSSTREETPUBLIC
(TYP.)CONC
.
CUR
BCONC
.
CU
R
BAT
BU
I
LD
ING
1.5CONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURB
CONC. CURB
LIGHTSCONC. PADWITH ELEC.STUBSW CORNER OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24, FOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY CAST IRONMONUMENT.WEST OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24
UTILITYPOLEPOLEUTILITYELEC. TRANS.GUYWIREWIRE
GUY
CONC. CURBRETAININGWOODWALLUT
UT
UTUTUT
GMMETERGASCLEANOUTLIDSSOUTH LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24EAST LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF
THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,
R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 1089259NOMONUMENTSETSIGNALBOX2020P
A
R
C
E
L
2
P
A
R
C
E
L
4GASWSO WSOLTGMEXISTING BUILDINGSIGNCONC. CURBEXISTING BUILDINGBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGCONC.RETAININGWALLFENCEWOOD FENCE
ENCLOSURETRASHTRASHENCLOSURELOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGEXISTING BUILDINGTRAFFIC POLEPENN AVENUE
OU OU OHEOUPOLELIGHT
18' CMPFOUND SPIKEIN CONCRETEFOUND REBAR28.545.4
45.428.6MONITORY WELLSUTILITYPOLEFIRST FLOOR
ELEVATION=853.62EX. CBRIM=854.67EX. CBRIM=854.54EX. CBRIM=854.32INV=850.52EX. CBRIM=854.10INV=850.30EX. CBRIM=854.84INV=852.34EX. CBRIM=854.56INV=851.85EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUSCONC. CURB AND GUTTER CONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTER18" 12"18"15"12"EX. MHRIM=849.99EX. SANRIM=853.97INV=842.87EX. SANRIM=854.04INV=844.04INV=843.54EX. SANRIM=864.67INV=852.67SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSEX. SANRIM=851.61EX. SANRIM=852.91FIRST FLOORELEVATION=856.98
EX. SAN
RIM=850.29854853852851 855854 856857855856857858859860861862863865863864 865858 859860 861862856 8578588598608618628638648
5
5
8
5
685485385285385
4858PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
METERGASWATER WATERWATER WATERWATERWATERWATER
105.4420.00133.0141.59124.4220.00EXTERIOR=1,295 SQFT.
EXTERIOR=1,457 SQFT.GM133158 166170.8175.04 NOMONUMENTSETNORTH OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638 HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523100.00 42.00159.5046.95S44°52'41"ESITE BENCHMARKEX. SAN. MH RIM = 864.67(NAVD 88)8642''W12" CIP(BY RECORD)9" (BY RECORD)L.B.R.L.B.R.866867868WATERWATERWATERWATER
WATERWATEREX. CBEX. CB4''SS2''W4''SSL.B.R.L.B.R.PROPOSEDDUNKINDONUTS1,995 SFFFE=860.001.9%9.0%8.4%2.0%5.0%FFE=860.00FG 860.74FFE=860.00FFE=860.00FFE=860.00FG 863.10FG 864.20TC 865.30G 864.80TC 863.00G 862.50TC 861.72G 861.22TC 859.50G 859.00TC 859.40G 858.90FG 857.704.8%1.8%2.1%1.5
%1.5%3.
0
%2.5%3.5%TC 863.78G 863.28TC 860.40G 859.90TC 858.90G 858.40TC 859.53G 859.03TC 859.50G 859.00TC 858.96G 858.46TC 858.32G 857.82TC 858.78G 858.28TC 858.98G 858.48TC 859.22G 858.72TC 859.36G 858.86TC 859.37G 858.87TC 859.84G 859.34TC 859.16G 858.66TC 859.70G 859.20TC 860.33G 859.83TC 860.47G 859.97TC 860.54G 860.04TC 859.65G 859.15TC 859.70G 859.20FG 856.90FG 857.05TC 857.20G 856.708
6
0 8615.4%FFE=856.98FFE=856.98TC 854.70G 854.20TC 856.88G 854.328558528
5
3 8548565.6%8.5%TC 856.80G 856.301.7%FG 858.75TC 859.40G 858.90TC 859.57G 859.071.8%4.0:1864863TC 859.95G 859.45FFE=860.001.7%0.8%FG 859.95FG 861.60FG 861.88FG 861.75FG 861.47FG 863.00FG 864.0913.0%862861FG 859.42FG 859.82FG 859.85FG 859.90TC 859.50G 859.00FG 860.42FG 860.00TC 860.71G 860.21FG 860.30FG 859.74TC 859.80G 859.30FG 859.92FG 861.501.9%2.0%2.8%FG 859.47FG 858.97TC 859.32G 858.82FG 861.53FG 861.03TC 859.74G 859.24862
862863864865FG 862.50TC 862.38G 861.8885985
5
856
85
4
859858
85
7 85885818D18D
18D18D18D18D18D18D73AINV=855.00100 LF 12" HDPE @ 5.40%CB-1RIM=856.40INV=853.40SUMP=850.4073BCO-1RIM=858.93INV=854.5527E105 LF 8" PVC@ 1.10%1.9%2.0%FFE=860.00TC 852.65G 852.15TC 851.90G 851.4009HFG 859.533.
5
%5.0%EX. CBADJUST RIMCORE DRILL AND PROVIDEWATERTIGHT NORTH CONNECTIONINV=848.0009H18CFG 860.42FG 860.12FG 859.54859 6'4'18DKnow what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.020'30'40'SCALE IN FEETINITIAL DATEDPORPMDESDRW Engineering Associates, Inc.CEI PROJECT NO.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONSITE BENCHMARKTEMPORARY SITE BENCHMARKSANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SOUTHWEST OF NORTHWEST PROPERTY CORNERRIM ELEVATION 864.67 (NAVD 88)CONTRACTOR TO SET TEMPORARY BENCHMARK PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONC3REV-39/15/17GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN(651)452-1149(651)452-8960Mendota Heights, MN 551202025 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 210AJRAJRALCALC9/15/17301156529 PENN AVENUE SMNRICHFIELDPENN AVENUE PARTNERS, LLCPROPOSEDPROPERTY LINE/RIGHT OF WAY LINEGRADE BREAKCONTOUR ELEVATIONSSTORM DRAINXX.XXxSPOT ELEVATIONS: TC = TOP OF CURB G = GUTTERGENERAL GRADING NOTESA.PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STORM OR SANITARY SEWER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE, VERIFY, ANDCALCULATE ALL CROSSINGS AND INFORM THE OWNER AND THE ENGINEER OF ANY CONFLICTS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. THE ENGINEER WILL BE HELD HARMLESS IN THE EVENT THE ENGINEER IS NOT NOTIFIED OFDESIGN CONFLICTS.B.ALL SLOPES AND AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE GRADED SMOOTH AND 4" OF TOPSOILAPPLIED. IF ADEQUATE TOPSOIL IS NOT AVAILABLE ON SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TOPSOIL,APPROVED BY THE OWNER, AS NEEDED. THE AREA SHALL THEN BE SEEDED, FERTILIZED, MULCHED, WATEREDAND MAINTAINED UNTIL HARDY GRASS GROWTH IS ESTABLISHED IN ALL AREAS (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FORSEED MIX AND PROPER APPLICATION RATE). ANY AREAS DISTURBED FOR ANY REASON PRIOR TO FINALACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THEOWNER.C.THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIESAS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES, AND WHEREPOSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACTOR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY AT LEAST 48 HOURSBEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES.D.UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, CALLED OUT OR SPECIFIED HEREON OR WITHIN THE SPECIFICATIONS: ALL STORMDRAIN PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF RICHFIELD STANDARD DETAIL STM-14. ALL STORMDRAIN PIPES ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF STRUCTURES AND ENDS OF FLARED END SECTIONS.E.ALL SLOPES IN THE HANDICAP STALLS AND WALK WAYS SHALL BE ADA COMPLAINT OR WILL BE REMOVED ANDREPLACED AT NO EXPENSE.XXX FFE = FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FG = FINISHED GRADEGRADING NOTES09HREMOVE TOP OF EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURE AND ADJUST RIM ELEVATION TO MATCH FINISH GRADE.18CCONNECT TO EXISTING STORM DRAIN MANHOLE OR INLET.18DMATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS.73ACONNECT TO INTERNAL ROOF DRAIN SYSTEM (PER ARCH. PLANS)73BCATCH BASIN/MANHOLE WITH RECTANGULAR LID (CITY OF RICHFIELD DETAIL STM-02A AND STM-11)GRADING DETAILS27ESTORM DRAIN CLEAN-OUTEXISTING LEGENDLIGHT POLEUTILITY POLESIGNOUFENCECONCRETEWATER VALVEGAS VALVEOVERHEAD WIRESCULVERTGAS METERTELE/ELEC BOXCATCH BASINHYDRANTMANHOLEDENOTES FOUNDDENOTES SET 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 257181/2" IRON PIPEWELLLTGASGMSTORMWATER SUMMARYPARCEL 1 = ±0.48 AC.PARCEL 2 = ±0.05 AC.PARCEL 3 = ±0.20 AC.PARCELS 1-3 TOTAL = 0.73 AC.TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = ±0.62 ACRES < 1 THEREFORE A NOI PERMIT WILL NOT BE REQUIRED.PRE-DEVELOPMENTPERVIOUS AREA: 0.09 AC.IMPERVIOUS AREA: 0.53 AC.1-YR STORM = 1.68 CFS10-YR STORM = 3.03 CFS100-YR STORM = 5.55 CFSPOST-DEVELOPMENTPERVIOUS AREA: 0.12 AC.IMPERVIOUS AREA: 0.50 AC.1-YR STORM = 1.60 CFS10-YR STORM = 2.93 CFS100-YR STORM = 5.44 CFS270 LF - SILT FENCE41 LF - BIG RED6 EA - INLET PROTECTION CEI DETAIL IPBMP QUANTITIES: 3
PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUS66TH STREET WESTFOUND DRILLHOLE INCONCRETETACOBELLSIGNEXISTING BUILDINGBOLLARDOLIVER AVENUE SOUTHLTLTLTLTLTEXISTING BUILDING 6.513.26.5
5.128.947.4
10.6XXXXX X
X X
2
0
"
T
R
E
E
T
R
E
E
1
2
"
CHAIN LINK FENCELANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPING
PLANTERWOODEXISTING BUILDINGCUTCURBWATER47.4PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS
PARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUS(COMMERCIAL)SANITARY SEWERSSSANITARY SEWERSSSSSANITARY SEWER
SSOU OU OU OU OU
OHEOU OUOUOU
OUOU
OUCHAINLINKFENCEBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGOUOHEOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOHE
FLAGPOLEWOODPLANTERTRASHENCLOSUREFOUND 1/2"IRON PIPELIGHTPOLEPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTPOLELIGHTLANDSCAPINGBITUMINOUSSTREETPUBLIC
(TYP.)CONC
.
CUR
BCONC
.
CU
R
BAT
BU
I
LD
ING
1.5CONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURB
CONC. CURB
LIGHTSCONC. PADWITH ELEC.STUBSW CORNER OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24, FOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY CAST IRONMONUMENT.WEST OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24
UTILITYPOLEPOLEUTILITYELEC. TRANS.GUYWIREWIRE
GUY
CONC. CURB
CONC. CURBRETAININGWOODWALLUT
UT
UTUTUT
METERGASCLEANOUTLIDSBITUMINOUSSOUTH LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OFTHE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,R24EAST LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF
THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28,
R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 1089259NOMONUMENTSETSIGNALBOX2020P
A
R
C
E
L
2
P
A
R
C
E
L
4WSO WSOLTLTEXISTING BUILDINGSIGNSIGNGUARD RAILCONC. CURBCONC. CURBCONC. CURBEXISTING BUILDINGBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGPARKINGLOTBITUMINOUSBITUMINOUSLOTPARKINGCONC.RETAININGWALLFENCEWOOD FENCE
ENCLOSURETRASHTRASHENCLOSURELOTBITUMINOUSPARKINGENCLOSURETRASHEXISTING BUILDINGEXISTING BUILDINGTRAFFIC POLEPENN AVENUE
OU OU OHEOUOUOUBENCHCONC.POLELIGHTPOLELIGHT18' CMPFOUND SPIKEIN CONCRETEFOUND REBAR28.545.4
45.428.659.459.323.3
MONITORY WELLSUTILITYPOLEPINE 8'PINE 12'PINE 10'PINE 12'PINE 15'FIRST FLOOR
ELEVATION=853.62EX. CBRIM=854.67EX. CBRIM=854.54EX. CBRIM=854.32INV=850.52EX. CBRIM=854.10INV=850.30EX. CBRIM=854.84INV=852.34EX. CBRIM=854.56INV=851.85EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53EX. MHRIM=854.33INV=849.53PUBLICSTREETBITUMINOUSCONC. CURB AND GUTTER CONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTERCONC. CURB AND GUTTER18" 12"18"15"12"EX. MHRIM=849.99EX. SANRIM=853.97INV=842.87EX. SANRIM=854.04INV=844.04INV=843.54EX. SANRIM=864.67INV=852.67SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSEX. SANRIM=851.61EX. SANRIM=852.91FIRST FLOORELEVATION=856.98 FIRST FLOORELEVATION=860.48EX. SAN
RIM=850.29
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
METERGASWATER WATERWATER WATERWATERWATERWATER
105.4420.00133.0141.59124.4220.00EXTERIOR=1,295 SQFT.
EXTERIOR=1,457 SQFT.EXTERIOR=1,512 SQFT.133158 166170.8175.04 NOMONUMENTSETNORTH OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THESW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 28, T28, R24HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638 HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 2281638HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523HIGHWAY EASEMENT PERDOC. NO. 851523100.00 42.00159.5046.95S44°52'41"E2''W12" CIP(BY RECORD)9" (BY RECORD)L.B.R.L.B.R.WATERWATERWATERWATERWATERWATEREX. CBEX. CB4''SS2''W4''SSL.B.R.L.B.R.CONC. CURB18ACONC. CURB& SIDEWALK18ACONC.SIDEWALK18ACONC. CURB18ABUILDING18ALIGHT POLE18ACONC.RETAINING WALL19ABITUMINOUSPAVEMENT18ABITUMINOUSPAVEMENT18ATREE18ATREE18ATREE18ATREE18ATREE18ACONC. CURB18AWOODFENCE19AOVERHEADPOWER18AOVERHEADPOWER19AOVERHEADPOWERLINES, POLE,& GUY WIRES19A51B51BRETAINING WALL,LANDSCAPE ROCK,& PYLON SIGN18ALIGHT POLE19ACONC. CURB& SIDEWALK18ASIDEWALK18ASIDEWALK18ASIDEWALK18AWOODFENCE18AOVERHEADPOWER19A51DCONC. CURB& SIDEWALK18ACURBINLETS19A51DWATERSHUTOFF VALVE19ACURB INLETS19AWATERSHUTOFF VALVE19ACONC. CURB18ACONC. CURB18A51B51D51D51D51D51DCONC. CURB18ASTRIPING51ACONC. CURB18ACONC. CURB& GUTTER19ACONC. CURB& GUTTER19A51B51BSIDEWALK DEMOCOMPLETE BYCOUNTY18ASIDEWALKDEMOCOMPLETEBY COUNTY18APYLONSIGN19ABITUMINOUSPAVEMENT18ACONC. CURB& GUTTER19ACONC. CURB& GUTTER19ACONC. CURB18AKnow what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.020'30'40'SCALE IN FEETINITIAL DATEDPORPMDESDRW Engineering Associates, Inc.CEI PROJECT NO.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONSITE BENCHMARKTEMPORARY SITE BENCHMARKSANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SOUTHWEST OF NORTHWEST PROPERTY CORNERRIM ELEVATION 864.67 (NAVD 88)CONTRACTOR TO SET TEMPORARY BENCHMARK PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONC1REV-39/15/17DEMOLITION PLAN(651)452-1149(651)452-8960Mendota Heights, MN 551202025 Centre Pointe Blvd., Suite 210AJRAJRALCALC9/15/17301156529 PENN AVENUE SMNRICHFIELDPENN AVENUE PARTNERS, LLCEXISTING LEGENDLIGHT POLEUTILITY POLESIGNOUFENCECONCRETEWATER VALVEGAS VALVEOVERHEAD WIRESCULVERTGAS METERTELE/ELEC BOXCATCH BASINHYDRANTMANHOLEDENOTES FOUNDDENOTES SET 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 257181/2" IRON PIPEWELLLTGASGMGENERAL DEMOLITION NOTESA.THE SITE WORK FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE "OWNER STANDARD SITE WORKSPECIFICATIONS".B.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, RELATED UTILITIES,PAVING, UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND ANY OTHER EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AS NOTED. SEE SITEWORK SPECIFICATIONS.C.CONTRACTOR IS TO REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND OTHER MATERIALS RESULTING FROMPREVIOUS AND CURRENT DEMOLITION OPERATIONS. DISPOSAL WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL LOCAL,STATE AND/OR FEDERAL REGULATIONS GOVERNING SUCH OPERATIONS.D.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TOADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BEHELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THECONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.E.ENGINEER'S NOTICE TO CONTRACTORTHE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTINGUTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES, ANDWHERE POSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEINGEXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY AT LEAST 48HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES. IT SHALL BE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THEPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.DEMOLITION NOTES18AEXISTING TO BE REMOVED.19AEXISTING TO REMAIN.51ABLACKOUT STRIPING51BLIMITS OF SAWCUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL.51DPROTECT EXISTING STRUCTURES AND/OR PIPES DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION PHASES.33
50 South Sixth Street Suite 1480 Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 313-2500 Fax (612) 313-0136
Project Narrative
DATE: September 25, 2017
TO: Members of Planning Commission, City of Richfield Staff, and meeting attendees
FROM: Karla Carlson & Rick Hauser (Owner/ Developer) and
Chris Leu & Damon Dranchak (Dunkin Donuts Franchisee/ Operators)
RE: Proposed Dunkin Donuts – 66th & Penn Ave, Richfield, MN
Penn Avenue Partners II LLC has owned the four parcels that make up the NEC of the 66th & Penn Avenue
intersection for 11 years. It was acquired with the intent of redevelopment from Day 1. The planned
redevelopment pieces didn’t fall into place prior to the 2008 housing burst which halted new development
across the country. We are lucky to have maintained tenants during the great recession and only recently lost
Flowerama due to their inability to weather the road construction projects along 66th Street.
As you know, the City of Richfield adopted Ordinance No. 2007-19 which required an Interim Use Permit
for the Carhop operations to continue at 6529 Penn Avenue South. As part of the 2013 renewal of the IUP,
the City required Penn Avenue Partners II LLC to provide to staff evidence that it was pursuing
redevelopment opportunities in order for the City to continue to issue the IUP in future years.
Since 2013, we have met with staff, commissioned site plans, advertised the space for lease and spent
thousands of dollars and significant time analyzing the feasibility and demand for all different types of
developments on the Carhop parcel alone as well as different combinations of the Flowerama, alley and
Aida parcel. Suffice to say, there are physical challenges with the site that make redevelopment within the
City’s guidelines difficult at best. Each plan we drew required some form of variance as well as its own set
of deficiencies that eventually made the project unworkable.
After years of work on this site, we are thrilled to be here today presenting to Planning Commission a site
plan for a new Dunkin Donuts restaurant. Though the focal point of this site plan is of course, the new
Dunkin restaurant, we have also proposed additional site and building improvements on the corner parcel
which brings the two parcels together into one cohesive development along Penn Avenue.
The site plan design was finalized based on feedback from our city work session, multiple meetings with
staff and the operations team at Dunkin. Though the plan requires variances to be granted, we believe the
benefits of this redevelopment far exceed any other site plan we attempted to design, and absolutely exceeds
the conditions of the corner today:
The use no longer requires an interim use permit;
There is demand for another coffee oriented use in the neighborhood (evidenced by the long wait
times at the Caribou down the street on 66th);
The site plan provides significantly more landscaping and trees/ shrubs than existing today;
50 South Sixth Street Suite 1480 Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 313-2500 Fax (612) 313-0136
The site plan provides the 10’ sidewalk that has been noted as extremely important to the city; and
The proposed improvements will add vibrancy to an otherwise tired corner at a well-traveled
intersection in the heart of the PAC.
In addition to the physical improvements this project provides, the operator of this proposed Dunkin’
Donuts is a locally owned and operated franchise with a strong interest in the community. They will actively
participate in local fundraisers and community involvement. Dunkin’ Donuts annually hosts a “Cop on a
Rooftop” fundraiser to bring together the local police department and community in raising money for
Special Olympics programs across the country.
Dunkin' Brands also has a corporate foundation -- The Joy in Childhood Foundation. This
foundation provides the simple joys of childhood to sick and hungry kids. Since 2006, the Joy in Childhood
Foundation (formerly The Dunkin’ Donuts & Baskin-Robbins Community Foundation) has been deeply
embedded in communities across the country and has donated over $11 million to hundreds of national and
local charities.
We fully intend to bring these programs to our restaurant. This is a great opportunity to be among the first
Dunkin’ Donuts in the Twin Cities and will draw attention from a large area to the Penn Avenue Corridor.
Richfield is a vibrant city that would be a great fit for Dunkin’ Donuts and we look forward to the
opportunity to serve the community.
We are excited about the opportunity to write a new story for this corner after a decade of ownership.
Thank you,
Rick, Karla, Chris and Damon
EXHIBIT ASPEAKER BOX TECHNOLOGY
Drive Thru Volume Levels
• Automatic Volume Control (AVC) only raises the speaker volume 15 dBA above the ambient
noise level, but it never increases the level above what would be heard with AVC turned off.
• AVC adjusts the volume every time the speaker is activated.
• This considerably reduces the sound pressure level (SPL) during quiet periods.
• If ambient sound levels are 45 dBA, AVC will adjust the speaker to 60 dBA. Within 8 feet, the
speaker sound level would be below the ambient sound level, see Figure 2 below.
• With this technology, along with additional shielding provided, we are confident we will be a
minimal, if any, disturbance to the adjacent residential.
AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM #13.
STAFF REPORT NO. 185
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ared Voto, E xecutive A ide/A nalyst
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of youth appointments to C ity advisory board/commissions.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Terms of City advisory commission y outh members expired on August 31, 2017. Advisory commission terms
for y outh members are for one y ear.
The City Counc il direct the C ity Manager ’s offic e to conduc t a recruitment seeking applicants to fill the youth
vacanc ies. This rec ruitment includes information on the C ity’s website, Facebook page, and distributed to
local high schools. Applicants were interviewed at a special City Council work session held on
October 17, 2017.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By Motion: Appoint persons to fill vacant youth terms on City advisory boar d/commissions.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT
This information is c ontained in the Exec utive Summary.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
City advisory c ommissions were established by City ordinance or resolution.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
Terms of City advisory c ommission y outh members expired on August 31, 2017.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
The October 17, 2017, spec ial City C ounc il work session was posted in ac cordanc e with the
open meeting law requirements.
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ity Council may c hoose to defer the appointments to a future C ity Council meeting.
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
Vacancy L ist B ackup Materi al
YOUTH COMMISSION VACANCIES
Term Expires
ADVISORY BOARD OF HEALTH
August 31, 2018
ARTS COMMISSION
August 31, 2018
August 31, 2018
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
August 31, 2018
August 31, 2018
FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION
August 31, 2018
August 31, 2018
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
August 31, 2018
August 31, 2018
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
August 31, 2018
AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM #14.
STAFF REPORT NO. 186
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
10/24/2017
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ared Voto, E xecutive A ide/A nalyst
D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager
10/18/2017
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
10/18/2017
I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N:
Consideration of the C ity Council's approval of the Mayor's appointment of a H ousing and
Redevelopment Authority (H R A) Commissioner.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
On Dec ember 13, 2011, the City Council established by resolution that the public’s interest is best served by
having a composition of two appointed Council Members and three Mayor-appointed citizens serve on the
HRA.
Doris Rubenstein was appointed to a five-year HRA term on November 19, 2007, reappointed on Oc tober 23,
2012, and her current term expired Oc tober 23, 2017.
Applic ations for the appointment were sought from residents between September 15 and October 15, 2017,
and the City C ounc il held interviews with applic ants on Oc tober 17.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N:
By Motion: Approve the Mayor ’s appointment of an HRA Commissione r for a fiv e ye ar term
comme ncing Nov embe r 20, 2017 and e x piring Nov embe r 20, 2022.
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 C ounc il Resolution No. 10586 was approved December 13, 2011, regarding appointments to
the Housing and Redevelopment A uthority board of c ommissioners; establishing c omposition of
the board and term limits on non-elected members.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Under S tate law, the May or appointments HRA Commissioners, subject to approval of the City
Council.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S:
To ensure a quorum at future meetings, the C ity Council should appoint an HRA C ommissioner at
tonight's meeting.
I f the C ity Council does not confirm the May or ’s appointment, a quorum may not be present at
future HRA meetings.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
This designation is at no additional c ost to the C ity.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION :
None
ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S):
The C ounc il may decide not to approve the May or ’s appointment or defer the appointment to a future
City C ounc il meeting.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G:
None