Loading...
10-22-90 agenda~3A CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 262 Agenda October 22, 1990 Issue Statement: Council authorization of the purchase of a video cassette editing/recording system. Background• Within the.City's cable television budget for the past two years, there have been funds budgeted for the acquisition of equipment to upgrade the City's overall cable broadcast and cable internal training capabilities. One such item that has been targeted for acquisition since 1989 has been a video cassette editor/recorder. In addition, the Public Safety Department has made a commitment to use internal video for employee training in order to reduce both direct training and training-related overtime costs. This training is currently. being developed through in-house production or is obtained from the LETN (Law Enforcement Television Network) and LESTN (Law Enforcement Satellite Television Network). The video editor is necessary in order to prepare raw video from in-house or satellite broadcasts into concise, professional training programs suitable for employee viewing. The editor will also be used to produce in-house community service programs which will be developed by the Public Safety Department's community resource section. Finally, the editor also allows the interjection of previously taped materials into live broadcasts and completes the City's planned in-house cable television studio/broadcasting capabilities. Two quotations were received for the price of the equipment; one from Alpha Video & Audio for $8,191 and the other from Todd Communications for $8,539. However, Alpha Video & Audio has also been the company from which the City has purchased its other television cameras and control console. Thus, Alpha is very familiar with the City's system and will easily be able to integrate the new JVC equipment into the existing framework. Recommended Motion: Authorize the purchase of JVC SVHS editing system from Alpha Video and Audio in the amount of $8,191. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A editing system is needed for the City to complete its cable television broadcasting recording in-house capabilities. 2. The SVHS editing system would provide a high quality basis from which to create in-house training films as well as films to be rebroadcast over the public access channel. ~3~ ~i 3. The SVHS format which will be used by this editing system is state-of-the-art and will provide the City with a very high quality editing capability. 4. The $8,191 price is an extremely attractive price for purchasing such a system, and Alpha Video has been involved with setting up the city's cable equipment in the past. 5. An editing system has been referenced in the City's cable television budget since 1989. However, this is the first opportunity the City has had to purchase such a system for this type of pricing. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide to withhold approval of the purchase of the editing equipment. 2. The City Council could direct City staff to go out and seek additional quotations. Discussion/Decision Mode: It is suggested that the purchase be authorized at the October 22 meeting in that there may not be a November 12 meeting and action on this item would not then be considered until the end of November. Currently, several training programs have been taped over the satellite network and are ready for and in need of editing to be used within the City's in-house training program. Respectfully submitted, James D. Prosser City Manager JDP:cak ~T' w ~ ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO PROPOSa~ ~ 3~ ' ~ t ACCT # QUOTE # PAGE ~ 7836 - 2nd Ave. South 213471. 003113-S 1 Bloomington, MN 55420 Q (612) 881-2055 FAX: (612) 881-4835 Submitted To: CITY OF RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY Date: 09/18/90 3:45 PM 6700 PORTLAND AVE SO Delivery: RICHFIELD MN 55423 Terms: NET 30 DAYS ATTN : F.O.B.: .ITEM QUAN. MODEL DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE TOTAL* 1 1 VES41 JVC SVHS EDIT SYSTEM 2 1 BRS811U JVC EDITING RECORDER 3 1 BRS611U JVC REC/PLYR 4 1 RMG810U JVC EDIT CONTROLLER JON BARTHOILOMEW ~ BUSINESS! 4258.00 2734.00 1199.00 4258.00 2734.00 1199.00 This proposal as presented by Alpha Video is firm until Proposal' $ $191.0 0 DATE Total JPB BARTHOLOME Submitted By: WE HEREBY ACCEPT this proposal and agree to purchase the items as listed above and on any continuation pages attached hereto in accordance with the terms and provisions set forth on both sides hereof. Company: P.O. No. ~ SHIP TO: Authorized Agent: X Date 'Prices do not include sales tax Prices reflect current manufacturers cost antl are subject to change. ~:. :. ~ : ` - .. ,.tea. -~+, . _, L. .:: )ATE 10/1$/90 ~1.38MITTEC? TG - PTEVE DENIER CITY OF RICHFIELD 6700 PORTLAND AVE. SOUTH RICHFIELD MN SS~423 [TEM QTY SUPPLIER MODEL PURCHASE PRICE ON JVC EDIT SYSTEM 1 1 JVC VES-41 EDITINV SYSTEM PACKAGE PACKAGE INClUDE5: @R-S611U, $R-S811U, RM-G810U VERBAL QUOTE WAS LIST PRICE F~~R BUDGETARY PURPOSES ONLY. APPLIED PURCHASE DISCOUNT: PROI~Of~AL ACCEPTED WITH TERMS ~C CONDITIONS ATTACHED SIGNATURE DATE ~ 3 ~'3 PRC~Pt SAL Nc~ . M~tS i t3 ~ 8900 DELIVERY 3c7-45 GAYv TERMv NET 20 DAY F.0.6. ORIGIN UNIT WRICE TOTAL 10,860.00 10,8Fa0.00 t , f ITEM TOTAL 10.8b0.00 LESS DISCOUNT 2,321.00- PROPOSAL TOTAL 38.539.00 PROPOSAL MJS10189002 IS FIRM UNTIL 11/17/90 PRICES DO NOT INCLUDE STATE, LOCAL OR USE TAXES UNLESS SPECIFICALLY LISTED. SHITTED BY ~j' ~ ~- 65~t5 CECILIA CIRCLE _J_~~~~. ! ~}z-fZ- -- ~~~~NNEAPOL S M G I N SS43., tin RH©NE. 612-941-0556 ~=~ ~3A -~} TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ACGEPTA,NCE OF PROPOSAL Acceptance of this proposal constitutes an agreement by the Buyer to purchase the equipment and/or services therein .from TODD in accordance with the following terms and conditions: PRICES: Prices do not include any sales, use, excise or similar tax which sha1.1 be paid by the Buyer unless TODD is provided a tax exemption certificate. CREDI'T' & PAYMENT: Acceptance is subject to a satisfactory credit review. Payment shall be as follows unless stated in other areas of this proposal: ~ with placement of order ~ prior to shipment of equipment ~ upon receipt of equipment i~z~ ~ net ~ days after invoice date SHIPMENT & DELIVERY: Any quoted delivery and/or completion dates are estimates of times within which TODD anticipates making deliveries andJor ccmpleting services and are not guarantees of meeting such dates. TODD shall use its best efforts to meet such dates, but shall not be liable for damages or otherwise if they cannot be met. All sales are F.0.8. manuf`acturer's shipping point unless specifically stated otherwise. Responsibility for damage to or loss of equipment shall pass to the Buyer upon delivery to the carrier. C,~ICELLAT~ON: Buyer shall. pay a 15v cancellation charge plus all expenses incurred in commitments made by TODD and all unrecoverable costs incurred by TODD. REr1` N O EOUIPM,~NT : Returns sha3.1 be made only with prior return authorization by TODD and in accordance with ToDD's standard policy relevant to restocking charges. WARRANTY: Unless specifically stated otherwise, the warranty shall be the manufacturer's warranty. ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 263 Agenda October 22, 1990 Issue Statement• " First Reading of an Ordinance Amendment. regulating backyard composting of organic materials. Background• Increased yard waste disposal costs, combined with a growing awareness and concern on the part of the public about environmental problems associated with waste disposal, have motivated many Richfield residents to initiate backyard composting. At the current time, Richfield City Code does not directly address backyard composting. Until now, composting has been addressed on a case by case basis under City Code Section 601.03, the last sentence of which specifies that: "No person may accumulate or permit to accumulate any unacceptable waste on any property in the city which might constitute a nuisance by reason of appearance, odor, sanitation, littering of the property on which the unacceptable waste is accumulated or an adjacent property, or a fire hazard." It is anticipated that .increased numbers of residents will turn to composting as an alternative yard waste management technique. Residents need some clear-cut guidelines on how and what to compost. An ordinance amendment specifically addressing composting would give residents the direction they need in initiating and managing compost piles, while making it easier for City staff to regulate composting activities. Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council, among other governmental. entities, currently have promotional campaigns encouraging people to compost yard waste. At the current time, not only does Richfield's solid waste ordinance not address composting., but it could be interpreted as discouraging composting.. In order to be consistent with county and regional government waste campaigns, and in order to encourage composting as an alternative waste management strategy, it is necessary to specify, in Richfield City-Code Section 601, backyard composting restrictions and requirements. A copy of the amendment to City Code Section 601.03 is attached. The amendment addresses, and provides specifications for, the following issues: 1) Location requirements of compost piles on residential property; 2) Size and composition of compost structures; 3) Materials that can, and cannot, be composted. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that Council have the first reading of the ordinance amendment specifically regulating backyard composting. ~~I--i Basis of Recommendation: 1. The current approach to backyard composting has created some confusion on the part of residents and City of Richfield staff about what constitutes a "nuisance." 2. For public health reasons, it is in the City's best interest to regulate what types of materials go into compost piles, and how such piles should be prepared and managed. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council could choose to retain Section 601 as written, however, Richfield has always been a leader in solid waste management strategies, and staff believes amending the ordinance at this time will insure our city remains in step with the county guidelines. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting approval of the first reading at the October 22, 1990 council meeting. Respect~a~l1.~ submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP/reb Attachment $~_~ Bill No. 1990- AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Composting. Private composting is permitted if the following conditions are met: (a) Only organic materials, such as grass clippings, leaves, faded flowers, weeds, sawdust, wood ash and plant trimmings, lake plants, straw, raw vegetable and fruit scraps, coffee grounds, egg shells, and commercially available compost ingredients, may be placed in the compost container; (b) Composting shall be conducted .within an enclosed structure, not to exceed 100 cubic feet (for example, 5'x5'x4') in volume for individual structures, or 300 cubic feet (approximately 15'x5'x4') for "three bin" containers. Compost structures must be of a durable material such as wood, brick, concrete block, or sturdy metal fencing material, and must be neat in appearance and capable of securing composting materials. The three .bin and barrel composter methods may also be utilized. (c) The following materials are not permitted in compost containers: meat, bones, fat, oils, whole eggs, dairy products, whole branches or logs, plastics, synthetic fibers, human or pet wastes, diseased plants, or paper. (d) The compost container shall be located at the rear of the property, and at least 3 feet from the property line. (e) At no time shall composting create a health hazard or a nuisance to adjoining properties 5 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 264 Agenda October 22, 1990 Issue Statement• Amendment of Comprehensive Plan for Rich Acres. Background• A petition•was presented to the City Council from 42 out of 54 homes in Rich Acres requesting that the land use be redesignated and a reuse plan be developed. In response: o A Rich Acres redevelopment feasibility plan was submitted by Tom Martinson; o A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission; o The Planning Commission considered and recommended a redesignation to planned unit development; o Review meetings were held to determine a workable proposal; o Redesignation plan presented to Met Council for planned unit development - commercial; o Met Council approved redesignation of land use from residential to commercial.; o Discussions have been initiated with the Metropolitan Airports Commission concerning cooperative acquisition. Council action is necessary to complete the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Recommended Motion: Adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating the land use in Rich Acres from residential to planned unit development - commercial. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Some 42 out of 54 owners and residents of Rich Acres petitioned the Council to redesignate land use and develop a reuse plan. 2. Tom Martinson, planning consultant, developed and presented alternative redevelopment and reuse proposals for Rich Acres. 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 28, 1990, pursuant to statute, and recommended approval of the redesignation to planned unit development. 4. Meetings were held with staff, developers, consultants and other interested parties to review the proposals and although residential redevelopment was found to be ~~_ ~ unworkable, commercial type redevelopment was suggested to be feasible. 5. The proposed redesignation to planned unit development - commercial was submitted to the Met Council and was considered by them to have metropolitan significance. 6. Met Council staff recommended against the redesignation on the primary ground of possibly increasing the cost to the Metropolitan Airports Commission at some undetermined future time to buy out the area under currently unascertainable circumstances during an expansion of the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. 7. Met Council approved the amendment subject to an agreement, submitted by the city, that"the city will not do any of the following without 90 days prior notice to the Metropolitan Airports Commission and to the Metropolitan Council: a. Acquire any interest in land in Rich Acres other than for streets, utilities, easements, parks or other such purely governmental uses; b. Enter into a contract for development or redevelopment of property in Rich Acres with a private developer; or c. ,Designate any area in Rich Acres as a development district, redevelopment district or tax increment district." 8. That existing residential development is incompatible with MSP operations and appropriate land designation is clearly non-residential. 9. That planned unit development - commercial affords a method of control consistent with the need to redevelop Rich Acres as a unit.. 10. That the MAC comprehensive plan update due January 1, 1991 will not provide a final conclusive resolution of the use of this area. 11. That the buyout and redevelopment of Rich Acres is preferable to holding those residents in limbo for possibly a very extended period of time while still being subject to the noise and other impacts of MSP. Alternative Recommendation: Continue this hearing to November 26, 1990. The notice published by the Sun Current misspelled the title as the "Richfield Compensation Plan" instead of the "Richfield Comprehensive Plan". As this was a courtesy notice rather than the required public hearing notice which was .previously published for the Planning ~ 5-~ Commission meeting, this notice is considered superfluous and without legal consequence. If, however, the Council feels that residents may be in some way misled, then this matter could be continued. Discussion/Decision Mode: Upon adoption of the amendment to the comprehensive plan, staff may begin to implement the redevelopment process. Respe lly submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:dkh [BJW] r~ RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the Rich Acres area represents a special study area of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, study of this Area was prompted by the need to evaluate changing land use needs; and WHEREAS, this study has resulted in the formulation of an amendment to the Land Use Element of the city's Comprehensive Plan that the future land use of Rich Acres be redesignated from residential to planned unit development - commercial; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the study and related amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment on Wednesday, March 28, 1990 and approved such; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has considered and approved this amendment and made recommendations to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that: The Rich Acres Area future land use be redesignated from residential to planned unit development - commercial and the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this 22nd day of October, 1990. Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomes Ferber, City Clerk N C ~ ~ W~p i I Q Y7 b ~p b Ip Ip r -_ ~- ~ y _ I I ~ VJ CZ 1-~:. __ NSION 4IS ~ -II.. ~ ~~ ~7 ~ y ~' U n~zz I, 1~ .lI _ 1~ c~i Ua ~ I. IZ C. li.-~11C171 W ` Z W 0 Z W Wa W 1L _ ~ ~A ` W OW ~, a ~o W a N W U U_~ ii u V 1 02 (( II (r' c o e c W t~~L~ • ~ e . e e e Y161 ~^~~ ~ . 10• f n r ~ w w ~ w ro-~ 1! JI _ MOl l3dONOl ___~.~~ _ _ ~c---~-___- ~ MOII 3nv tlvo3~ r( l - Y111 I J ~- Y191 I N019NIw0018 I'J6rr'J6T l~---- VI GI R I _ ~ JC-_~: YI -1 I, "- VI CI dl -~~--~~ Y111 II~ _~ Y 1 OI lOlll3 ~ OOV OIHO II sne«mo~ ~ ~ xavd - ~ ONVlxVO II~ I nv oNVUaoe - 1 L~~II- ~t -_ wS ~ - II r: __- NO1NIl0 ~_ i1C - -- -- ollz SN3n315 1.1 Inv 1311001N 113051V1B Ili ~ C I L N1tlOM1 N3M 1I ~~ AtlnB$llid III 1Nasv3ld qj aNVao II ~C 131tltlvH I I In ol3uavo II` ~~ nv 3lvONAI HOItlOIV II - I , 1NVAtlB I'',1 - xadlos I'I ~ I ~ 1NOdna ~I :~~ NOStl 3w3 •I \~~ ~ ~- 1NOw3W I aavtllo II ~BI laloewnN II~ oNlnal ~~LJ~I s3wrr )I ~~~~ I -- ~~ zoNx I _ ~~r NVOOI l NVOtlOw C~~~rI NO1M3N ~ ~C~L tl3nll0 ~-~~7I ~~` 3nV NN3d ~A '~J~~lr~ N33n0 'i - _~I 11355ntl I ----- NOOItl3H$ I` ~r~{1 svwOHl • i ~Ir~- NOldn I' _ _r._~` 1 N30NIn ~ I - ~~_ NtlnBH$aM i ~ ~~ Iv 53xtl3x rr~~~-. ~~~ i h N Z ~ o = pb ~ b uri h g Zt xi_.____ -- 3dONOl ~.__-'_.---- ----------- 3nV tlvo3~ _- _ 1 I~ v191 J I ~~ JI _ ~ ~ II NOIONIN0018 ~I ~' YI SI J~ - I YI -I )C~ i~ YI CI '1~f fr.I I' Y / 21 11.._.-..J 1' i 1r-~~ II;I YI 11 II IC~f _ III Y101 ~I lOlll3 r I~ n IL.-~ ~i OOV 91N0 I;I~ snewmoo IC~ ' ~ xtlVd I II'I ONV lxVO ~~ ~~ ~~ '3nv ONYl1tlOd i rl V! S Cam` I VI- NOl N I l0 °'` n - o~Z ~~ SN3n31S r~ Isl u I ~^ ~ '3AY 1311001N \~ 1130SIVlB N1tlOM1N3M ~O' AtlnBSllid I _ i._.l_ ' 1NVSY3ld I ONVtlO ~f II 131atlvN ~j / 'I al3letlvo ~I®/ 'ant 3lvONll I N~ItlOIV ~~ 1NtAtlB xrsloo ~L , 1NOena LL ~ NOStl3w3 ~ 1NOw3erd ' otlatllo _- loioewnH (~~~~ oNlnal s3war \ ~ xONM Nt OOI ~.____._ Nv OtlOw !I NO1M3N ~', a3nno _'N'll '3A- NN3d ji N33n0 11355ntl ~J Nv01tl3NS ~~--- sawONl I NOldn '~~ 1N39NIn rr> ~j NtlnBHSYM ____ '~"SSSS 3nv S3Xtl3X p A N N N N Y) Y1 IA to Y) ~ ~ N ~ N ~~pp op = = Gr _ ~ F ~ ~ ~~o 1nD 1- b 10 b Imo- ! h i- n ~ w n 1- ~5-5 RICH ACRES The 14-acre Rich Acres subdivision is a 3-block, 54-unit neighborhood located east of Highway 77, between E. 68th-69th streets. Like the larger New Ford Town two blocks north, it is physically isolated from other community residential neighborhoods. Also like Ncw Ford Town, Rich Acres is subject to impacts from airport operations. However, the site is located back from both. active runways: 11R-29L and 4-22, and is surrounded on three sides by a municipal golf course. Especially the west side of Rich Acres commands extensive views across and beyond the airport. Under some circumstances, the combination of superb vistas, golf course setting and airport location renders Rich Acres a promising redevelopment site. This study presents three potential redevelopment choices: (I) a "boutique" commercial office campus; (2) a "maximum" apartment development, intended to approach 1:1 replacement of existing residential units lost in the redevelopment of New Ford Town and Rich Acres; and (3) ahigh-amenity housing development designed with particular attention to Site and landscape potential. ~~ !~ COMMERCIAL OFFICE For a commercial office program the 14-acre Rich Acres site is best suited to a "boutique" development. The parcel is large for many single-tenants, and much smaller than the very spacious, pastoral corporate campuses constructed in U.S. suburban locations over the past generation. This planning concept balances environmental amenity with function and development economics --traditionally a test of the amount of parking that can be efficiently introduced without visually degrading a site. Development Concept In this concept, commercial office space is split among three distinct buildings, which spread across the slope in the center of the site. Based upon the amount of parking provided, a total of 125,000-150,000 s.f. of office space can be easily accommodated. With three buildings, construction can be phased if necessary, and individual identity is available for three anchor tenants. Probably the south office building would be l-2 stories, the .center building 3 stories, and the north building 1-2 stories. These could naturally be larger with additional parking, especially if the a I-level parking deck was added to the south surface parking lot. In addition to the south surface lot, with about a 100-car capacity, four 2-level parking "trays" follow the hill slope and provide an additional 400-car capacity. At a ratio of 4 cars per 1000 s.f. of office space, this configuration would allow construction of about ]25,000 s.f. of office space. Site Concept The site is roughly divided, west to east, into thirds: a formal "front yard;" the central development area; and a passive park to the east, adjacent to the golf course. The campus is visually organized around an east-west axis: a formal entrance boulevard lines up with an entrance pavilion, beyond which, in the park, a small gazebo completes the axis. Employees may enter on this boulevard, or may also choose to use more direct driveways on the north and south edges, which lead into the parking decks or surface lot. Visitors may be dropped off at the entrance pavilion, and the car may be driven back to either parking decks or surface lot. A colorful garden parterre of flower beds and small reflecting pools. within the entry boulevard is supported by colored plant materials such as red barberry. The park, at the back (east) of the site can be more regional in character, featuring a small "forest" of White Boleana Poplars. .{..'. v i, ;.1 f'++ r * ~: ~r k. ~~ s '_g'. ~, ry. ~~ .~:'. 00 c (~ Y U `" .. ~ ~ a L O~ ao Qo `~---..r . .. _ _.~.. .. _ ._.._ a y ~,- ~ °o ~ c € ~ .....«..-.~-..~...... ~ N <~ .~ _.w: ~y,~ APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT Housing is another redevelopment choice for Rich Acres, although it must be carefully sited and constructed for maximum noise protection. A national model for housing on this site is the recently completed, 444-unit Park West development located less than a half mile across an open field from Los Angeles International Airport (LA?~). That complex features heavier, sound-deadening construction, pools, tennis, and a nearby golf course, and has experienced excellent rent-up. Development Concept In this concept, 350-400 apartment units are developed within a multi-story apartment complex, which steps up in height from west to east. The actual number of units possible is limited by the ability to provide parking, rather than any architectural restrictions. The accompanying design test provides about I50 enclosed and 2l0 surface parking spaces, so the building would be limited to about 350 apartment units or less. At some additional cost, enclosed parking could be provided for all units. The "U"-shaped structure encloses a central lobby/social/recreation building, from _ which elevators may be reached for accessto each section of the complex. Although the complex is expressed architecturally as a single building, it would probably be constructed as three physically separate structures, to increase security and reduce the length of corridors. Site Concept Major landscape features are organized around a symmetric east-west axis running through the middle of the site. A pond is enclosed by a curved entrance drive, off from which parking is reached. Within the courtyard is a swimming pool; tennis courts are located along the eastern edge of the site. Plant materials are chosen for texture and color. At the west end of the site are clusters of Amur Cork trees, wide-spreading specimens with very light summer foliage which allow sunlight to filter through to the grass. In the winter, the Amur Cork's highly-sculptural trunks offer visual interest. Within the sheltered courtyard are a symbolic orchard of flowering fruit trees, and Blue Beech. Along the golf course and cast edge, the predominant planting would be high-headed Scotch Pines, with their blue-green tops and orange trunks. ~" I •~• ~~ F ~~• W a O •~ a w . w v Q Z • ~ ~ ~ ~~ Cry N tf5-~ o HIGH-AMENITI' HOUSING An alternative approach to residential development on Rich Acres is this site test, which first creates an idealized physical environment, and proposes housing within that context. As might be expected, this approach results in substantially fewer units than more intensive schemes, Iike the previous "Apartment Development" plan. Two constraints restrict the number of units: the need to provide parking, and the open space potential of the site. Based upon site tests, it appears that the idealized number of housing units under this approach is in the range of 100-130; this specific scheme projects 123 residential units. Development Concept Three distinct housing configurations are shown: (1) 15 townhouse units with garage along the north boundary;. (2) 18 tri-plex, 2-level maisonettes with adjacent garages and visitor parking, in the southeast corner of the site; and (3) 90 apartments to the west. All units represent the leading edge in technology, unit features, and market expectations. - These units are marketed expressly to a small. airport-related market --both employees and those who are attracted to the activity of airports. While these are a small percentage of all Twin Cities residents, they do represent a significant absolute number against a metropolitan population exceeding 2 million. Site Concept Imaginative design and site development arc integral to the marketability of this concept. Buildings are sited and configured to deflect noise from operations on runway 4-22, and use of sound-porous materials and small-scale projections on each building will further diffuse aircraft noise. The landscape scheme is central to site development of this scheme. At the entrance (west) side the design is very formal, with symmetric ornamental plantings and pool. The central water feature theme is carried through the apartments to a circular swimming pool, which "flows" into an informal Olmsted landscape and lake to the east, finally ending in a runoff/overflow at the eastern boundary. Plant materials are chosen to create "drifts" of trees and shrubs across the site, both stopping and focusing views, and further diffusing aircraft sound. Across the site, a full range of ornamentals and deciduous and evergreen specimens would be employed for variety and visual interest in each season. -._ ___ .. _~.._....... _...~L ~ e r ~, '~ l ~~ ~' r--- ~r ~ ` / ,~ • ~ • ` ~ ~ r ~~ ~~ 3 i / l~~ ~ ~ ! _ ~ J / , .~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~~ .~ :~~ ~ ~ ~. r ~~ _- r! f ~ ~ •r . ~~ ~~ Y a ~.ir ~rwW~.~w- iii - iiGe~ `......~n.~..~u .. a:. a -~-~-----~``~ ---- ,.,,,~ ,. .~. r ~ ., Y~;> ~~ r ~j o ~I 'r z~ ~~ oa x~ ~. . _ Fo Z " .,- . ~.. w ~a z o Q y ~`; ~" a ~. _ w'. .. .", n......rli.~. pi ~ .. r. M ~Ti N ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 265 Agenda October 22, 1990. Issue Statement: Cancellation of November 5, 1990 Study Session and November 12, 1990 regularly scheduled meeting. Background• As the general election will be held Tuesday, November 6, it is suggested that the Council Study Session regularly scheduled for Monday, November 5, be cancelled. The November 12 regularly scheduled council meeting falls on a holiday (Veteran's Day). The council meeting would normally be held the following day or Tuesday, November 13. Since a council budget study session is scheduled for Wednesday, November 14, it is recommended that the November 13, 1990 meeting be cancelled as well. Recommended Motion: .Cancel the November 5, 1990 Council Study Session and the November 13 regular City Council meeting. Basis for Recommendation: 1. November 5 is the day before the General Election and a quorum. may not be present. 2. The Council will meet on November 14 and can act on any pressing business at that time. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Hold the meetings as scheduled. Discussion/Decision Mode: Action is requested at the October 22, 1990 council meeting so that proper notice can be given. Respectf lly submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP/e~ a ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 266 Agenda October 22, 1990 Issue Statement: Council confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commissioner. Background• The term of HRA Commissioner Vern Luettinger will expire in October, 1990. Commissioner Luettinger was appointed to an unexpired five-year term on the HRA in 1983 and was reappointed in 1985. Under state law, the Mayor appoints HRA Commissioners subject to confirmation of the City Council. Mayor has indicated he will make an appointment to the HRA for a five-year term at the October 22, 1990 council meeting. Recommended Motion: Confirm the Mayor's appointment and Redevelopment Authority for expire October, 1995 of a Commissioner to the Housing a five-year term which will Basis for Recommendation: 1. An appointment needs to be made for a term which expires in October, 1990. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Continue. the appointment to a future council meeting. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been scheduled for the October 22, 1990 council meeting so that the appointment may be made prior to the November 19, 1990 HRA meeting and budget hearing. Making an appointment at this time will ensure a full compliment of members on the Housing and Redevelopment .Authority. Respec fully submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP:eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 267 Agenda October 22, 1990 Issue Statement: Discussion of the status of South Hennepin Human Services Council. Background: Carolyn Forbes, Executive Director for the South Hennepin Human Services Council (SHHSC), submitted her resignation effective November 2. Carolyn has been Executive Director for approximately three months. Observations of Richfield SHHSC Board Members and City staff indicate concerns for the following two areas. • There appears to be a lack of agreement among .the participating SHHSC cities (Bloomington, Richfield, Edina, Eden Prairie) regarding the mission of SHHSC. • There is some concern regarding how some members of SHHSC interact with their staff. Recommended Motion: The City Council and SHHSC should meet to discuss this issue with the following specific purposes: • Update the Council on the concerns regarding SHHSC • Discuss alternatives for resolving these issues • To obtain suggestions from the City Council Basis of Recommendation: 1. SHHSC board members met with City Manager to discuss the Executive Director position and the future of SHHSC. All present agreed that this matter should be reviewed with the City Council. 2. It is important to provide the City Council direction to the SHHSC reps so that they may represent our issues on this critical matter. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented at a workshop session immediately following the Council Meeting on October 22, 1990. lly Submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP:tlm