Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09-24-84 agenda
. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 344 Agenda Sept. 24,198 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: A Residential Energy Conservation Program for the 1984-85 Heating Season Council Members: The City of Richfield has an excellent opportunity to incorporate its !'Bundle Up, Richfield" promotional program with a county, state and federal effort which is the first of its kind in the nation. Thus, the Richfield Energy Conservation Program for the 1984-85 heating season should provide a broader, more comprehensive approach to weatherizing Richfield's 10,000 single family residences. • This letter discusses a program that will offer energy information, and education, home energy audits, financial assistance in the farm of grants and low-interest loans, and cost-effective home improvements. The greater emphasis an ir:troducing home improvement opportunities to residents should result ir: a 10 to 20 percent reduction in natural gas consumption and expenditures for gas usage for those who participate. This season's program is also designed to test a number of conservation strategies. It incorporates a variety of marketing approaches and a range of weatherization services that will be assessed by a number of organizations including The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The program delivery objectives are: to determine which combination of strategies deliver the greatest energy savings for the least dollars invested, to assist t'nose lower income persons who need to make improvements but are r,ot eligible for low-income grar:t programs and also cannot afford bank loans for more expensive improvements,and to weatherize as many Richfield homes as passible. Discussion regarding the importance of promoting residential energy conservation, in Richfield through a comprehensive program • began in the summer of 1982. The City Council, The Richfield Energy Awareness Commission and the city staff have reacted to a number of individuals ar.d groups with experience ir, the conservation field. In June, 1983, the Richfield City Council allocated funding to analyze residents' needs and ir:terests and -2- • initiate development of a residential energy conservation program. The following administrative guidelines provide direction to staff in implementing a residential energy conservation program. The program should be: -self supporting; -simple and easy to use; -involve as many citizens as possible; -address the major element of a comprehensive program which includes: 1) education (keeping pace with the changing energy technology) 2) appropriate lifestyle changes (thermostat setback, waterheater setting, etc.) 3) low cost/no cost improvements (caulking, weatherstripping, etc.) major weatherization (attic & sidewall insulation) 5) furnace/appliance efficiency (new furnaces, etc. The 1983 promotional efforts were passible because a temporary staff position, an Energy Program Aide, was created to develop the program and coordinate the education, audit, marketing, and finance services that were made available. In • addition, the city contracted with the firm of Anderson & Berdie Assoc., Inc. to survey residents attitudes and behavior toward energy conservation. The results of the survey indicate that more than 90~ of Richfields single family owner occupied households believe that making energy improvements to homes is justified by savings or, electric and gas bills. Almost half of these households believe something more could be done to increase the energy efficiency of their homes. On October 10, 1983, the city council authorized staff to proceed with the implementation of an energy conservation program, and the "Bundle Up, Richfield" Program ensued. The emphasis of last years' program was promotion and education. Because of last years' success, Richfield is now incorporated into an institutional framework encompassing the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, the utilities ar.d the fir.ar:cial community. Thus, Richfield is perceived as a leader in the residential energy conservation field. Staff is now discovering that the general .fund commitment (approximately $7,860 for 198 and $7,960 for 1985) to a residential energy conservation program is leveraging further financial assistance. Minr.egasco, Northern States Power, ar.d the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development (DEED) are considering financial contributior:s to Richfields' program. Hennepin County is funding a marketing strategy that, over a period of two heatir:g seasons, will reach every Ric'field household. Subcontractors, reporting to Henr.epir, Cour:ty ar.d Minnegasco, are willing to invest their time and labor to improving Richfield homes. -3- The complexity of the 198-85 program effort requires a high level of coordination, open communication, ar:d cooperation among participants. No less than six government agencies, two energy utilities, two local banks, ar,d a medley of private contractors, are involved. The areas of responsibility for program implementation this fall will be determined by the agency's or organization's particular expertise. Richfield will be responsible far overall coordination of program elements and agencies. Hennepin County's Department of Planning and Development is formulating an experimental research model to assess marketing strategies. Energy consumption data will be monitored by the utilities. Cost-effective weatherization measures are being identified by energy auditors and private contractors. The University of Minnesota and Hennepin County are evaluating the best methods for past-program evaluation. All program participants have exhibited flexibility in the planning stage, setting organization self-interest aside and compromising far the further development of the program. Agencies are genuinely excited about the progress we have made, and are contributing considerable time and effort to complete the details of planning before the advent of the heating season. i Although a number of the finer details are still being decided, review of program objectives and details of the program elements by the City Council and Energy Awareness Commission are now appropriate. Many of the program responsibilities and agency activities are scheduled to start in late September or early October (Hate the attached estimated time schedule of activities). The Energy Awareness Commission had an opportunity to review the objectives and program elements or, September 18, 198u. However, while supportive of the energy program efforts, they were unable to came to an agreement in endorsing the program by resolution. Action was r.ot taken because of commission concern that two specific contractors had been targeted by Hennepin County ar,d Minr.egasco to deliver certain services in Richfield. The selection of two particular contractors was made competitively based on the contractors ability to contribute large amounts of capital and use technologies that are not otherwise available. Local contractors may still perform improvements at the request of residents by participating in various program elements. The pilot program, though, would have to be provided by the two selected, since Richfield cannot prever:t their participation. A discussion of the overall program objectives and elements follows: -4- • 1984-85 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES: Provide an opportunity for the utilities to expand their Conservation Investment Program to the suburban service area. Coordinate various government agency and private utility conservation programs to maximize service in Richfield, *Assist the private sector in servicing the interests and needs of Richfield residents to reduce fuel consumption in residences. *Provide a basis to analyze the effectiveness of various marketing, education, and home improvement strategies. Maintain and expand previous Richfield conserv- ation program efforts. PROGRAM ELEMENTS: 1) Marketing & Promotion - Richfield will, as in 1983, promote residential Energy Conservation through direct mail & advertising. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) has developed a promotional package far their law-interest energy loans, which we will utilize. Richfield Bank & Trust and First Federal Savings and Loar will have MHFA Home Energy Loan financing available ar,d will also have MHFA promotional material. DEED is beginning an advertising campaign an Sept. 25th with a kickoff at the State Capitol. Richfield will be recognized by the Governor as one of several commur:ities working in Residential Energy Conservation. The campaign slogan - "Save Energy, Pass It Or:" - and logo, will be prominently displayed on a DEED arranged Richfield area billboard. DEED will also provide press releases and have an "Energy Van" available from time to time in Richfield as part of their promotion. package. Hennepin County has developed a direct mail proposal, designed specifically to test a number of marketing strategies. The mailing will offer audits and various levels of weatherization to the homeowner. This will be followed up by a phone call from a contractor, Sentinel Energy Company, Inc. which has beer, selected by Hennepin County and Minnegasco to perform weatherization improvements. A business reply er:velope will be enclosed ir. the solicitation. Because of the experimental nature of the Hennepin County direct mail campaign, care must be exercised in our promotion: of their project to ensure there will be accurate test marketing results. Richfield is collaborating closely with the county to assure that our promotional efforts coordinate with theirs. Ore other option, currently under consideration is the establishment of a volunteer network to directly contact, face- to-face, some of the harder to reach segments of our community. This one-or,-one contact with Richfield residents is the most -5- effective approach to increasing energy awareness. However, it is also the most labor-intensive and requires significant volunteer interest. 2) Education - Brochures are currently available in the city hall foyer on general energy conservation topics. These will be restocked throughout the heating season. In addition, it is expected that the Sun Newspaper will print articles on home weatherization as the thermometer plummets during the winter. The Minnegasco "Answer Lines" and "Ask NSP" will again be available and both utilities can provide speakers on energy conservation topics for interested community groups. DEED is another technical resource that residents car, call for information. NSP is offering to train volunteers to provide educational workshops to their suburban service areas. Minnegasco has also made an offer to provide workshops. Providing there is citizen interest and time far coordnation, these workshops would be organized along the lines of the Minr:eapolis "Neighborhood Energy Workshops". These types of workshops characteristically organize small groups of neighbors and invite them to a training session that transmits energy facts and teaches residents haw to perform their own low cost/no cost improvements. • NSP will provide $20 in weatherization materials (with adequate neighborhood participation) free to workshop attendees. Another aspect of education is the information, transferred to the residents by the auditor during the energy audit. Although the audit presently performed by the utilities doesn't provide an opportunity for education, Hennepin County and Sentinel Energy Company are developing educational components to be given with Sentinel's audits. 3) Home Energy Audit The Minnesota Energy Conservation Service (MECS) Audits are available through the utilities for all homeowners that call and request one. There is a nominal charge of $10.00 to the homeowner for this service although the audit actually costs about $100 to perform. The MECS audit identifies approximately twenty key areas that residents should evaluate in reducing energy consumption. This heating season., in addition to the MECS audits, some lower to moderate income Richfield residents may be offered an infiltration test. The test is performed using a "blower door" to measure air infiltration that result from the small pressure charges created by the door. This is an alternative to an audit that actually identifies leaks in the building er:velope. The actual audit to be offered to a homeowner will be determined • within the context of Hennepin County's marketing research and services Minnegasco arranges with cor:tractors. -6- 4) Home Improvement Two innovative approaches to home weatherization are proposed to supplement currently available home improvement programs. The "House Doctor" and "Shared Savings" approaches based on initial testing results in Robbinsdale and New Hope suggest great acceptance by homeowners ar.d increased fuel savings far ratepayers. The "House Doctor" weatherization program is targeted toward those people who are not eligible for very law income fuel assistance programs and not able to undertake loan financing. The "House Doctor" approach would utilize the blower door technology to reduce air pressure within the house, draw air in through cracks and holes, identify the holes, and seal the building envelope. Using this method the auditor is able to isolate and stop specific areas of infiltration. After the envelope sealing weatherization measures have been completed, another blower door test will be conducted to quantify the improvements and estimate the level of reduced consumption of energy that results. There would be no cost to the qualified homeowner far the approximate $400 contractor cost to perform the "House Doctor" type of improvements. Minnegasco is providing the $40,000 financial support to "House Doctor" approximately 100 homes this heating season. Minnegasco has chosen Energy Outfitters, a local business capable of delivering this service, as their primary contractor. Also new to this year's residential energy conservation program is Sentinel Energy Company's "Shared Savings" approach. There is no upfront cost to the homeowner - Sentinel will finance and install the home improvement measures, and take payment from the money the homeowner saves ar, their utility bill. In effect, Sentinel guarantees energy savings or the homeowner does not pay far the installed improvements. Sentinel's auditors determine which measures (if any) are cost- effective for a particular home. Generally, Sentinel's investments are in the range of $800- $1500 per home. The weatherization improvements must have a three year simple payback, while the "Savings" are "Shared" for five years. This is actually a contractual relationship between Sentinel ar:d the homeowner, which the homeowner can buy out of at any time. To staffs knowledge this is the first time "Shared Savings" has been offered to residential customers anywhere in the nation. In additior, to the new improvement programs, very law ir:come homeawr.ers can receive free weatherization improvements from Natural Resources Corporation, a non profit agency performing weatherization with federal fuel assistance monies. ~Iaderate to -7- • higher income homeowners can weatherize utilizing private contractors. DEED can provide a list of contractors that can perform a variety of weatherization improvements. 5) Financing As indicated earlier, MHFA financing is available. Richfield Bank & Trust has secured $260,000 and First Federal has approximately $200,000 that can be allocated to the Richfield branch. The loans have a limit of $5000 and 5 year payback term at an 8~ to 9~ interest rate depending on income. All residents, regardless of income, are eligible for these loans. Also available are the fuel assistance grant programs as just discussed and administered through Natural Resources Corporation far those hameowr:ers qualifying as "very low income". And there will be the new program of grants for some lower moderate income households who would not qualify far fuel assistance or MHFA financing. The grants would approximate $400.00 per home (including materials, labor & administrative costs), be financed by Minnegasco, and have improvements installed by Energy Outfitters ar Sentinel Energy Company, Inc. If Richfield is successful in securing a grant from DEED, there may be administrative funding assistance in addition to • the improvement funding assistance. The Energy Aide, Steve Warr., is responsible far preparing a grant application to be submitted to DEED by October 3, 1984. A maximum grant request of up to $15,000 can be utilized to finance pragram planning, promotion, coordination, audits, workshops, education materials, improvements and salaries of personnel responsible far program implementation. Although the grant request will not be completed until the later part of the week of September 24th, when final negotiations with utilities are completed, it is anticipated that some likely uses for the funds include: -matching the general fund contribution for personnel, program advertising, and promotional materials -administrative costs for conducting income verifi- cations to determine those residents that are eligible for the $400 "House Doctor" grant -administrative costs for preparing agreements between: the city and Minnegasca, NSP, ar.d Hennepin County to ensure program delivery to residents Because of the limited time available, it is important that the City Council authorize staff to praceed in submitting the grant proposal. It is alsa important, because of the stiff competition. for grant dollars, to continue actively supporting effective appointmer:ts to the Energy Awareness Commission. The grant funding selection process places considerable weight an the type and quality of representation of the members. The commission members "must include representatives of labor, -8- small business, volunteer organizations, senior citizens, low and moderate income residents; and may include local officials and other interested persons (excerpt from DEED administrative guidelines)". An effective appointment is one that provides positive minded, motivated individuals having an active interest in energy conservation. 6) Administration Richfield's 198/85 Residential Energy Conservation Program will be directly administered by the Energy Aide, Steve Warn, who is a member of the Housing and Redevelopment Division staff within the Department of Community Development. Primary administrative responsibilities include, but are not limited to, planning and developing a comprehensive residential/energy conservation program, securing financial and technical assistance; coordinating participating agencies and companies; managing day-to-day operations; monitoring program progress; and evaluating program success. Specific administrative tasks which require significant expenditures of time and effort initially include development of contractual relationships with Minnegasco, NSP (and subcontractors, Energy Outfitters and Sentinel Energy Company); integration of the Richfield Energy Conservation Program with Hennepin County's Residential Shared Savings Demonstration Project; and applicatior. for a Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development Community Energy Council Grant. These documents will be made available to the City Council for consideration. As the program proceeds into the heating season ar:d toward the end of 198, the monitoring and evaluation responsibilities become more important. Evaluation is more important to this heating seasons efforts since the Minnesota Public Utilities commission will be evaluating program cost effectiveness, benefits to lower income persons, and the cooperative efforts of the utilities with Richfield. Presently, the Energy Aide position is funded through the city's General Fund as a part-time, temporary position until it ends December 31, 198. The position was originally budgeted to start again in July, 1985• The scope of the proposed program ar,d the corresponding increase of responsibilities for the Energy Aide may necessitate considering extending the term of this position through the beginning of 1985. However, the extension would only be considered and presented to the City Council if outside funds were to become available and the program required a longer administration period. At this time, it is r,ot proposed to change the position end date of December 31, 198. -9- CONCLUSION: The City Council, in its October 10, 1983 findings to initiate "Bundle-Up Richfield", addressed t'ne issue of local needs. In part: -there is a continued need to reduce consumption of energy from nonrenewable petroleum based resources; -energy improvements and energy rehabilitation will reduce the consumption of energy from nonrenewable petroleum based resources or from nuclear sources. -there are housing units in the city which are in reed of energy improvements and energy rehabilitation; and -there is a need to reduce energy consumption in Richfield homes. The 1983 promotional effort responded to the initial requests of information, audit, and financing assistance from residents. The 1984-85 program provides a variety of strategies that can assist homeowners in making energy conserving decisions in their home. It is recommended that the City Council adapt the attached resolution which authorizes: i) implementation of the 1984-85 heating seasor. Richfield Energy Conservation Program. 2) the City Manager to apply to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development to secure up to $15,000 in grant dollars to assist in the administration of the 1984-85 program effort; 3) the City Manager to apply to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for additional energy loan funds for local lenders if such a program materializes. Respectf~.ll~ submitted, CC....1 ~ • John G. C rt ght City Manager JGC/eja RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE 1984-$5 HEATING SEASON . WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield and its Energy Awareness Commission. have had an opportunity to evaluate elements of a residential energy conservation program; and WHEREAS, the program elements include marketing and promotion, education., energy audits, financial assistance, methods for installing energy improvements, and program administration; and WHEREAS, in a coordinated effort with Hennepin County, Northern States Power, Minnegasco, subcontractors Energy Outfitters and Sentinel Energy Company, Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, and local citizens, these elements can be delivered as a comprehensive program for improving the energy efficier:cy of residential property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1) The implementation of the 1984-85 heating season Richfield Energy Conservation Program is authorized. 2) The City Manager is authorized to apply to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development to secure up to $15,000 in grant dollars to assist in the administration of the 1984-85 program effort. 3) The City Manager is authorized to apply to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for additional energy loan funds for local lenders if such a program materializes. Passed by the city council of the city of Richfield this 24th day of September, 1984. John Hamilton MAYOR ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk Anticipated Energy Program Events September 4 - 28, 1984 - Finalize discussions with NSP, Minne- gasco, Hennepin County, Energy Outfitter, ' Sentinel Energy Company, etc. concerning program implementation. September 4, 1984 - Energy Education Materials Available at City Hall. September 4, 1984 - MHFA Home Energy Loans Available at Local Lending Institutions. September 7, 1984 - Deadline to respond to the PUC concern- ing progress in developing 1984/85 program and working with the utilities. September 18, 1984 - Energy Awareness Commission reviews program proposal, September 24, 1984 - City Council reviews program proposal. September 25, 1984 - DEED "Save Energy" promotion begins. October 1, 1984 - "Shared Savings" promotion with Hennepin County begins. October 3, 1984 - Deadline to submit Energy Council grant request to DEED. October 8, 1984 - Local promotion of Richfield program begins. October 15, 1984 - "Housing Doctor" promotion with Hennepin County begins. November 1 - 30, 1984 - Program promotion continues. November 1, 1984 - Local workshop/educational component begins. November 30, 1984 - "Shared Savings" promotion ends. December 1, 1984 - Tnitial program monitoring and evaluation begins. December 31, 1984 - Energy Program Aide position ends. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 343 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Er.vironmer:tal Assessment Worksheet for the Market Plaza Development Council Members: Attached for your review is the State required Er.vironmer.tal Assessment Worksheet (EAW) recently completed for the Market Plaza development on the black bounded by 65th Street, 66th Street, Graham Avenue, and Lyndale Avenue. The purpose of the EAW is to determine if the project could potentially cause environmental problems and to establish whether or r.ot a mare detailed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required. • The action which is required on September 24th is to accept the EAW and approve its release for public review and review by the State Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and other governmental agencies. The EQB will publish the availability of the EAW far public review. There will then be a 30 day review period. When the 30 day period is aver the council will then have to determine if the development can proceed or if an EIS is necessary based on public comments and or, the information contained in the EAW. It is recommended that the council accept the EAW and approve its release for public review. At the end of the 30 day review period staff will schedule a public hearing and present any comments received concerning this matter to the council far consideration. Respectfully submitted, . ~ ~bhn G. Cartwrig,~t City Manager JGC/eja E.R. ' ;filled in bS' EQB) 9/5/84 A'[AR~C A~PROPRIA'~'E R(3X: C~ REGULAR EA6W ? SCO~'YNG EALi1 NOTE TO REVIEWERS: For regular EAWs, written comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information, potential impacts that may warrant investigation andjor the need far an E1S. For scoping EAW s, written com- mentsshould address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. Such comments must be submined to the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) during the 30-day period following notice of the EAW''s availability in the EQB:'ifonitor. Contact the EQB (metro: 612j295-8233: non-metro: 1-800-b32-9147, ask for envi- ronmental review program) or the RGU to find out when the 30-day comment period ends. Project Name Market Plaza Proposer Market Plaza Corporation RGU City of Richfield Richard C. Krier Contact Person Rick Jo-~ke Contact Person r Address 1650 Shelard Tower andTitlP City Pla;~ner Minneapolis, M'J 55426 Address 6700 Portland Aveo Soa Phase (612) 546-2276 Richfield, Mx~ 55423 Phony (512) X69-7521 Project Location: IJW&?1E a SW&SE t /a Section 27 & 28 Township 28 Range 24 ' a. Coun Name Hennepin G `Townshi Name F-ichfie'd tY ty ~ p b. Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: 1. a county map showing the general area of the project. 2. a copy(ies) of USGS 7'; z minute, 1:24,000 scale map. 3. a site plan showing the location of significant features such as proposed structures, roads, extent of flood plain, wetlands, wells, etc. 4. an existing land use map and a zoning map of the immediate area, if available. Describe the proposed project completely (attach additional sheets as necessary)- The site is contained entirely within the Lyndale/Nicollet/HUB (LHN) Redevelopment District created by the City of Richfield; for which the City has an overall en vironment~ assessment on file. Market Plaza will contain 70,000 square feet of commercial wthin an enclosed mall. An eight story apartment structure containing 162 units will be located over the mall. A second structure will be a twelve story 147 unit condominium forpersons over age 55 and will be located to the west of the mall. A total of 690 parking spaces will be provided on the surface and under both structureso The zoning is PUD (PC 2) and the project is consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Richfield. ff Voluntary ~A• Reason for EAW preparation: - - - ~ _ - - . List all mandatory category rule °'s which apply: (6 NICAK S 3.038A-DD) Res; dental Development, C A . Estimated construction cost $20-25,000,000 6.05 Acres Total project area (acres) or length (miles) 7 • Number of residential units 309. _ or commercial, industrial, or institutional square footage 70 , 000 1 Number of proposed parking spaces 690 Parking spaces rroposed List all known local, state and federal permits.'approvals,'funding required: Level of Gov _rnment Type of .applicarion Status Federal: Rezoning P7-el iminary approved Special Uses (Permit for PUD) Pending State: Platting Pending Watershed District Pending Water Pending Sewer Pending LocalCity of Richfield Liquor Pending Special use permit for restaurant Pending is the proposeu Nro~ect inconsistent with the local adopted comprehensive rand use plan or any other adopted plans? L~ No ? Yes If yes, explain: • Describe current and recent past land use and development on and near the site. This area is part of the Lyndale, HUB Nicollet (LHN) F.edevelo~~_~~:nt Project area created by the City of Richfield. Land uses within the district are ccmmercia_' and high density residentialo Lyndale Hardware fxirders the site tc the south; K-Mart is located to the east on Lyndale. Richfield Lake, a 3-story apartl7aent and the mur_icipal liquor store is located to the north. Bridgemans is Located to the west on Graham venue. Approximately how many acres of the site are in each of the following categories? (Acreages should add up to total project area before and after construction.} Before After Before After Forest;'Wooded Wetland (types 3-8} Cropland Impervious Surface ~ • jL a , 5 , stS a . e Brush;'grassland Other (specihy) .67 a, (landscaped) 5 • Describe the soils on the site, giving the SCS soil classifzcatiQn types,sf known. The sample of natural soils were predominantly sand and slightly sa,~do rill was sampled at the North and Faest ends of the site to the depths of 15 to 85 feet. 2 V • Dces the site contain peat soils, highly erodible soils, steep slopes, sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, abandoned veils, or any geologic hazards? if yes, show on site map and explain: U No ? Yes - ~ ~ • Whar is the approximate depth (in feet) to: a. groundwater min. 20 avg. b. bedrock `min. avg. Dces any part of the project a .involve: a. shoreland zoning district? ~ No Yes b. delineated ltxl-year flood plain? No Vas c. state or federal}y designated river land use district? No Yes If yes, identify water body and applicable state classification(s), and describe measures ' to protect water and related land resources: 1 Describe any physical alteration (e.g., dikes, excavation, fill, stream diversion) of any drainage system, !aka, stream, and'or wetland. Describe measures to minimize im- pairment of the water-related resources. Estimate quantity of material to be dredged and indicate where spoils wiif be deposited. There are no physical alterations to existing drainage facilities, a.Wi11 the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water? if yes, explain (indicate quartiry and source): ® No ? Yes b.1L'i11 the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on or off the site)? If yes, ex- plain: ~ No ? Yes Z ~ . Describe the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after . construction of the project. During construction silt fer_ce erosion control will be usedo After censtructien, the area will be paved and landscaped, L6ro a. Will the project generate: 1. surface and stormwater runoff? ~ No ~ Yes 2. sanitary wastewater? No x..~ Yes 3. industrial wastewater? ~ No ~ Yes 4. cooling water (contact and noncontact)? ~ No ~ Yes ]f yes, identify sources, volumes, quality (if ocher than normal domestic sewage), and treatment methods. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. The City of Richfield has in place storm sewers to handle a discharge of twenty cubic feet per second from the existing site; the redevelopment project will have the same discharge rated Sanitary wastewater is estimated to be 69,000 gallons per day and t~ri11 be discharged into existing sewers which have adequate capacityo Our eng- b. Identify receiving waters, including groundwater, and evaluate the impacts of the tae=r , WcStwov^d DZanni:,g Inc discharges fisted above. If discharges to groundwater are anticipated, provide per- provided the estimatesa colation /permeability and other hydrogeological test data, if available. it ~ • Will the project generate (either during or aher construction): a. air pollution? No _„J Yes b. dust? No Yes c. noise? ~ ._..i No ~ Yes d. odors? J No ~ Yes if yes, explain, including as appropriate: distances to sensitive land uses: expected lev- els and duration of noise; types and quantities of air pollutants from stacks, mobile sources, and fugitive emissions (dust): odor sources: and mitigative measures for any impacts. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. Construction contracts will provide for dust control, such as watering, during constructiono We will also comply with the construction noise ordinance of the City cf r2ichfieldo 3 Describe the type and amount of solid and/or hazardous waste including sludy_. and 4 ashes that will be generated and the method and location of disposal: Refuse will consist of normal domestic waste and will be handled by private tt~~ handlers, LS. Will the project affect: a. fish or wildlife habitat, or movement of animals? © No ? Yes b. any native species that are officially listed as state endangered, threatened, or of special concern (animals andi"or plants}? ~ No ? Yes if yes, explain (identify species and describe impact): Do any historical, archaeological or architectural resources exist on or near the project nn site? If yes, explain (show resources on a site map and describe impact}: 1~' No ? Yes Lr / . Will the project cause the impairment or destruction of: a. designated park or recreation areas? ~ No ~ Yes b. prime or unique farmlands? ~ No ~ Yes c. ecologically sensitive. areas? ~ No Yes d. scenic views and vistas? No ~ Yes e. other unique resources (specify)? ~ No Yes If yes, explain: For each affected road indicate the current average daily traffic (ADT), increase in ADT contributed by the project and the directional distributions of traffic. The existing transportation facilities (Lyrdale ~$ve., 65th and 66th Streets) are designed to acco.~date the proposed development, current 1983 velt~--~es are: 15,400 ADT on 66th Street, 4,360 .~T on 65th and 24,28a on Lyndale Avea Please see attached s~r(e~port prepared by the traffic engineer, Lr 9. Aze adequate utili~es and public services now available to service the project? If not, what additional utilities and %or services will be required? ? No Yes Su~a~ar~ Iss~..nes For regular EAWs, list the issues as identified by "yes" answers above. Discuss alternatives and mitigative measures for these issues. For scoping EAWs, list known issues, alternatives, and mitigative measures to be addressed in EIS. - See Attached CEBTIFiCA770H BY BESFOKSi~LE GOVER1~iMEM'AL UNIT 1 hereby certif•,~ that the information contained in this document is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and that copies of the completed FAW have been made available to all points on the official EQf3 distribution list. Signature Date ATTAC:;.~:'L'IVT SJMMA.RY Or ISS~'ES 22. d (1) $torS.*! Water runoff W211 be directed to R? chfield Lake via a c. ty storl-~ water system. Richfield Lake is a holdir,c pond for city storm water. ^_'he storm water system is of sufficient capacity to carry additional runoff. a (2) Sanitary wastewater wi11 be directed to City (r,':JWC) System. This is a separated system with capacity to carry additional load. 23, (a) Additional air pollution. from increased tra.f.c will be ;resent. The additional air pollution wi1_' not exceed state standard, Dust during construction wi11 be controlled by construction watering methods. (c) Noise increases during construction_ will i,e Zir.~ited to normal working hours. Noise increased amounts with additior•aI trafr~c wi11 not exceed state standards. i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 342 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Richfield Lake Pathway Alternatives Council Members: The city council requested staff to prepare cast estimates for modifications to the Richfield Lake pathway system. These alternatives and cast estimates were introduced to the city council at the study session held earlier this evening. The attachmer:t to this letter again outlines potential modification alternatives and their cost estimates. The Richfield Lake city project budget, as it now stands, • does not have sufficient funding to afford any of the modifications outlined. Should the city council determine same sort of modification(s) should be made, additional funding of $20,000 - $25,000 may be required. The city staff does not have a recommended source of funding at this time. Respectfu~..].y submitted , John G. Ca twr~t City Manager JGCleja Attachment D RICHFIELD LAKE COST ESTIMATES rresent level 114.6' 3" of blacktop added raised Level to 114.9' Fi11 to the normal ordinary high water mark of 115.8' ESTIMATED COST $4,000 Fill to bring up to 116.5' (approximate high water mark of 1984) ESTIMATED COST $19,000 Add two 18" culverts at washout ESTIMATED COST $700 Extend twenty culverts 3' each side (6' total) ESTIMATED COST $2,000 Rip-rap to be added at outlets and at controlled area for overtopping path near the play features ESTIMATED CCST $1,000 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~f Office of City Manager -Y~' Council Letter No. 341 • Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Consideration of Authorization to Place Charter Amendment Relating to Council Terms on November 6, 1984 Ballot Council Members: The Richfield City Charter presently provides for terms of the Mayor at two years and for Council Members at three years in length. The Richfield Charter Commission has suggested removing the disparity between lengths of mayoral and council terms of office by lengther.ir.g them to four years. Dialogues between the Richfield Charter Commission and the City Council indicated mixed support for specific provisions of the proposed amendment, but the general concensus was to set the question. before the voters. The Richfield Charter Commission met on September 4, 1984 and voted to request council authorization to place the charter amendment on the general election ballot of November b, 1984. The Transmittal Order or petition of their membership, a copy of which is attached, represents their formal request. Suggested language for the charter amendment on the ballot has beer. submitted by the charter commission and a copy is attached to this council letter. The City Attorney will be present at the Monday evening council meeting to discuss the warding of the amendment on the ballot. In order that legal publication and ballot printing requirements are met in a timely manner, it is imperative that the City Council take action on this proposal at the September 24, 1984 city council meeting. Respectfully submitted, ohn G. C~twr' ht~' City Manager lJ • JGC/eja _ _ / ` ~ ' Suzanne M. Sandahl Attorney at Law ~ su1TE z1o 1518 EAST LAKE STREET Minneapolis, Minnesota 55-07 AREA CODE 672 OF CouwSEL: OFFICE: 722-2693 TIMOTHY R. ERLANDER HOME: 661-d 769 September 12, 1984 Sylvia Berg Richfield City Clerk 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Sylvia: Enclosed please find the following documents: Transmittal Order Ordinance amending Section 2.03 of the Richfield City Charter Suggested Language for the Charter Amendment on the Ballot Mill you please see that this matter is scheduled for the next City Council Meeting so that the Council can place it on the next general election ballot. I believe that the ordinance must also be published for two consequtive weeks in the legal nevrspaper. The Charter Commission also suggested the enclosed language be used in ex- plaining the amendment cn the ballot. b!e realize that the Council will have to make the decision and that space limitations may limit what can actually appear on the machine. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Suzanne i~t. Sandah sr~~s/1 d Enclosures TRR.~ti'SMITT~L ORDER To the ~-:o.^.orable I~layor and Mericers of she Ccancil of t'~e City of Richfield, hii-u:esota: we, the undersigned, being duly cualified and acting members of the Charter Coi~~.,issio^ of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, do hereby respectfully su`~i?tiit and deliver to you the attached Drcposed ordinance amending Section ~ ~ % of the City Charter of the City of Rice ~f ieid . Ple hereby respectfully_/_prcposed, rec~en~? end su'r~t for adeptcn, 6y -j-h~ r•~S,ctr_.~T_ Cf.: ( ~Z~ ti~~l' GGG.;~-t'P,-L 3~~~c;-; To 3L ~~T iNF ~.:ri:,~.~~~a ^tQ Ci}y C~o:~.cil---~--a~~~o~ai--~1~ t.` i~,~:Y~~ ~P lam.` L c n., c ~ ~ C-a-ty, the attached proi.^osed ordinance this day of - ~ % j 1 / ! ' ~ `ter. '~~"Z~~ ~o ~ ~ ~ ' ~ _ _ / i i ~ cf] (D (l N tl• c~ t0 I~• E O rh c-t rt IJ =3 n rt -3 rn O rt I-• ~ ty O N r• r,. H I (D .O O O rb, Ur iV `•t In U' rn O N tD ~ (D O (D O O ;.T p• N N O 3 r-t r t r j .1 : D G G t t ~ I `-t tD r• • ri ;7 ry oo :3 ~ (D -1 rt G rt r _1 (D r hJ .1 ID N :7 ~ (D ( t tt N 1~ fl. G ~1 0o b' iJ• ~ (D rL O Y•'t) :J rr r< (n ID rk F-' n n rt II• (U (D 1-~ N N• r+ N N N I-• N N Cl (D ¢ ry ut O r 3 to .V N I~• t~• • w (D .B N to :Y ?i O N ry :7 +.n rt 1-•- rt to cn (D cn N O r-~ O N I I • N N 1-• q) :1 I (7 (n rt (D 4C rn t-• n ro to rt t-• p, N N N (D f]. N n] tD rr !n I !n c rit rt 'cD r1' N rt (D to 1~ J N 7 ly l) r-r, (U ti N (n I11 to rJ. ~1 IM~ rt N 1y rte. rh H r n u, ry to 11. (U rr rr rt O ;R• ~ m II• c~ 1-'- a• rr I :1 Ir• c1 n G o ry N A rD ~ I•• cr v a o o IJ n i-r CL (D ri to N :i ft a (D t~• rt I-• :t G 1~ rJ N to I S ~ N r r, O O 1-• 1 rr rD ;v rt t-• r•• :1 (D It ~ 1-' N ry O H E tD I-' O rt 1'• ~ rt C 7 ry :J O rr .t; '3' b' rt rt 1-• :-7 f1. I I rtl n X ~ r•• t--' to ry n m 1 O N N y ,,1 ` N•'C Ir• rr 1 tr• rt a' O rt rt'< to r+ rt N• rt :=i t-- rt Iv N N r'• ,-t (n (D N• n t7 rt t/ :J cD I G (D N rt N l-• to rt n f7 N N 3 :7 n lTl rt :1 n rt r< E •t I I n ~ ~ I n, N 7 ry O (D rr O I~• ri ry N o v .q 'T (-T Z N (n O (D rt U ~ O ry N C rr ~ ry O to O ~ .t) to `C w w N U N U" O IS rp, 'D' it O N• Y• In N C G .A N O ty ri O t-' rt ry 'C '-l ?er (D i r-h N O t-- p. N rt (D `C ~ ry rt N rr V ;U O (D O R• N I I P• 1 (1 t h t t, O f' • r t, 5• N J E O In N r N rt n It• It• ~ E to o 1-' (D r r, N I.. o n N In tD 'o ry c~ rt CT• ~ rt It• t/ w It• n (D O ~3 r+ ry ~D O ry E rt G o :t r-' ,t N Ut `-C (D N to •1 I 4i I (D ~ rh 7 :T t t ~ J ri to ~ ~J N (D t) O r*) ~ (D tc 11' :)I U ,h.q m r•- N o N ~ r• =1 ~ n o rr rr, c~ z O t]. f] 'll N n N 1 :1 I (D F; N fJ• N p (D r+ F•• N r t, rt rh N Q [D 'O (D r n ~t rr fD rl t'• ti O rr ry rt rr (D O N J' 3 J- J O 1~• ~ rt U r t ~ ~ n C G tD 'O rt D It• If' tl' rt (D'_t• tD rD ry rt ;.y C7" N n r C ;r ;r• t'1 ?-t ;r; :7 [D O N N (D 11' tD (D ~ N ~ O r tD (D r+ (D r , r on (Dryu,rt?t I cortY•c'.o c:o ntnrt :t'?il-r~D~• tN ~ (D r ni~ s~ ~ r t, lD. r t rt n '1" rt t ~ ul n .n t-• G rf ~ rt (D to l:r ~L] O O rt r7 • • H ITl 7 '-3 I I-•• w N 1 ir• Ir• ~ rt O N N~ o I, N •r~< o r-t, I,- N U• O b" w It• a tD '1' rr :7 ri O rt, O O (D to r`, N E C. rh rr rt H ~ n l'1 O `•t :J 1-' n l0 I :t U :.1• ri ri N • 1'~ ~ N rh ri 7 rt ~ I~• I-' ~ U C 1 ,U O r-h I (D 1' 1 rt I 1 (D N to ri r+ 1-• rn N (D N N rt n n N O z z .t, i rl [l. Ut p fD n ~ In N (D O rt N rt rt ~ tJ 1-' In :7' N N (1 O '71 G7 O rt 'D' C I ID :1 (D f]. 1-'• 1-' ty ~ G N I 1-' (D N ti rh l'1 J tD !r ~ tI; :J n. tD N • Q. ~ N r t N r 1 r t p. n N r-' ut - H N I ~C 1'- :1 1 i I V1 (D ~i N ~ C (D N m l7' rt F--• ~D ,3 ITJ ,U 1-r ,1; (=1 •C Orr Ir• (D 1 (D rt t-' O U" < ~ ro ty O I~ 1--• m (D r-' n t'1 cD `U (d ct it 'D' II• ly ~ (D ry, N N N .q f rt O 'tJ CL (D 'tD (D (D N- N ry N < r-t,K N N ~ C)' N C)' H '`1 'l. r+ tD 'b N n. It• (1 (D t1 I~• ~ rt N (n rt O O (D y t~ (D (D N rt r n I-I I~ r.3 `C rt G n to I rt (D tt rt t-• 1'• :J to ri rt N N tD rt IJ rt (D Y• r~• 1,1 t~ lA 1--• rt rt N I (D (D I'• O to ri ~ (D n r-h N to C N t1 'C O I N N rt lD rl Il. rfi p. ~ O N N (o rt (D n O N IJ C) rr, :t; rt N rt S? •1 (D 1 ?Y (n N rt, n, ~ ~ ((D rt N O (D I-•• 7 N It I It t1 U N rt N rh t-' n p, rt [L N i]. O 1'• I-' G :t: ~ •Y O p. to fD t :1 '1 ~ N (D rt t' tJ O (D t'•'C rt. W O t-' :7 r t, t.. (D :J lD 'U 1 n. n p, ty In O rt, r-r f1 ;1 rh IIl ;11 r] B O 1 It :D" F; I'- rt, E N to ~ rt O rt ry ry O 1•. Imo. r fD• N O (D m I r• IL I C .i O :J N m I ~ ht O O CT rt r h t-' t> 1,3 rtr !6 Ul ~ :7 (D U l~ I N•~ tt N• ti :J N O N• U1 ~ (D :Y (D N ;V rX rt U1 :1 rt 1 ri~ O C p a rr, (D [l J' to 1D E to ,y rt N I :J 1--•~ cD I '1 :1' N r+ :Y -f N I' ry J rt N N N ~ to N IJ -u (D J to [t rt (D 1-' `3 r] rr p r~'aJ O r-' O O N b" I-• p. ~I N .n to (D tT I i]' N (D l7 N r r„rl N :J" t-'• n I-~'(J rt: (D rn 3 I-' `D ~ I r t G r+ I i I tD N n N J O r t U O n rh t-• r-. ~ 11• O :J rl (D rr rt O t-• O rt E rt N .1] G to K rr rr In to to .r. ~r>'< r N !v X I O rh I-• N r' O rD ;i N rt :7 r'- O :r tT . ~t, to iD rt 'us Ir rt o rh o (n N r+ r. t, ri c•~ rD o N N ctt rl rt IY• tD ~ h'• r+ :J J < r•• IJ• C O Q In 1 ~ tU (D • rt (D :D• rk rt to O I'• O n N rt IJ N '7 1--• rY Q, r t I (D TrD ar N (D ~ J r t I- tL 7 N N O. IU IU (D. (D N ~ ~n ~-.I~ ~ [L rt rh U• t)- t1. (D Suqqested Lanquaae for the Charter Amendment on the Ballot Proposed by The Charter Commission on September 4, 1984 The Richfield Charter Commission has proposed an amendment to Section 2.03 of the Richfield City Charter. The amendment will gradually extend the future terms of the mayor and the city council to four years. Council District elections will be held during presidential election years and the mayor and at-large council seat elections will be held during gubernatorial election years. It ~~ill eliminate off-year elections. In the 1981 election the mayor will be eiected for a three year term. Beginning with the 1990 election the mayor and at-large council member will be elected for four years. Beginning in the 1988 election the council district members will be elected to four year terms. Shall the proposed charter amendment be adopted? YES NO CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA -d Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 340 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to the Age Liquor May be Consumed. Second Reading. Caur,cil Members: The Minnesota Legislature amended the liquor laws relating to persons under 19 years of age in the 1984 session. The new liquor laws make it illegal for any person under the age of 19 to consume any intoxicating or nor.-intoxicatir:g malt liquor unless in the household of his or her parent or guardian and with the consent of his or her parent or guardian. An ordinance amendment relating to this matter was given first reading consideration at the September 10, 1984 City Council meeting. Second reading ar,d the public hearing were scheduled far September 24, 1984. Respectfully submitted, ~yZ.~, John G. C~rtw ~ght City Manager JGC/eja ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11.01, SUBD. 2 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RELATING TO CONSUMPTION OF LIQUOR CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 11.01, Subd. 2 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield relating to consumption of non-intoxicating malt liquors is amended to read: Subd. 2. Limitation on Application. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or restrict the serving of non-intoxicating malt liquor to guests in a private home, except that it shall be unlawful for a person under the age of 19 years to consume any intoxicating or non-intoxicating malt liquor unless in the household of his or her parent or guardian and with the consent of his or her parent or guardian. The council may also permit any non-profit social organization, lodge, labor organization, political party, church or corporation not included in the definition of a bona fide club to serve non-intoxicating malt liquor without a license, free of charge, for a period not exceeding 12 hours and not more than three times per calendar year. "Political party" as used in this subdivision includes city-wide political party organiza- tion but does not include individual candidates or the campaign committees of individual candidates, Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of 1984, John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~ `x-~' Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 339 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of .the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Source of Funding for CP 791, Alley Maintenance Cauncil Members: On September 10, 198~t, the city council approved a resolution adopting the assessment roll far City Project 791, alley maintenance, for the period April 1, 1983 through March 31, 1984. The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund has sufficient cash balance to provide interim financing far this project. The fund would be able to retain all of the special assessments levied, and the proceeds from collections would then restore the monies necessary to close the project. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, authorizing a temporary financing of this pro,~ect from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund. Respectfu,l.l,y submitted, ; i ~ J/ ohn G . Ca ~wr ' t City Manager JGC/eja s RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND TO CP 7g1 ALLEY MAINTENANCE TO PROVIDE INTERIM FINANCING OF SAID PROJECT WHEREAS, the Ordinance Cade of the City of Richfield provides that a Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to be used for the purpose of financing local improvements, and WHEREAS, the Ordinance states that the proceeds of said fund may be used to pravide interim financing of capital exper:ditures far projects of the city by resolution of the City Council, and WHEREAS, it appears desirable to transfer funds to pravide interim financing for CP 791, alley maintenance, and WHEREAS, the Permanent Improvement Revaluing Fund would assume collections of the levied special assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by resalutiar, of the City Council of the City of Richfield that $18,100.00 from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund of the City be transferred to CP 791, Alley Mainter.ar:ce for the purpose of pravidir,g interim financing. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of September, 1984. Johr. Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 338 Ager_da September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Sign 6642 Penn Avenue Attracta Sign Incorporated has requested an advertising permit for an illuminated wall sign to be located at Tokar Chiropractic Clinic, 6642 Penn Avenue. The sign is to be 16' X 4' (64 sq. ft.) with constant illumination. City of Richfield Ordinance code 3.49, Subdivision 19 - provides that City Council approval is required for illuminated signs. The proposed sign conforms to city ordinances pertaining to illuminated signs of this nature, and it is recommended that the permit be approved. Respectfully submitted, John G. C rtw ght City Manager JGC/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 337 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Sign 6517 Nicallet Avenue Crosstown Sign has requested an advertising permit for a 22' X 2' illuminated wall sign, sir:gle faced with canstar.t illumination. The sign is to be erected at Rent-A-Center, 6517 Nicollet Avenue. City of Richfield Ordinance code 3.49, Subdivision 19 - provides that City Council approval is required for illuminated signs. The proposed sign conforms to Richfield City Ordinances pertaining to signs of this nature, and it is recommended that the permit be approved. Re~pectf~Y~y „submitted , r l / J//ohn G. Cartwright City Manager JGC/eja C~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 336 Agenda Sept. 24, 1884 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Signal System at 66th Street and Pillsbury Avenue Council Members: As part of the negotiations with Kentucky Fried Chicken on the relocation of their Lyndale Avenue restaurant to the old Clark Oil site, the City of Richfield agreed to allow the installation of a traffic signal on 66th Street at vacated Pillsbury Avenue (now a commercial entrance) when the appropriate traffic volumes were met. The agreement states that the full cost of the traffic signal system will be paid for by Kentucky Fried C'nicken. The signal system will belong to Hennepin County ar.d the County will be responsible far the cost of maintair.in.g, repairing, or replacing the traffic signal system after it is installed. At the May 14, 1984 city council meeting, the council passed a resolution requesting that the Hennepin County Department of Transportation install this traffic car.tral system. The Hennepin County Department of Transportation has prepared the traffic signal construction agreement concerning the signal at 66th Street and vacated Pillsbury Avenue. The city attorney has reached agreement with Kentucky Fried Chicken concerning payment far the signal. Construction will occur in the spring of 1985. The city staff recommends that the city council pass the attached resolution authorizing the mayor and city manager to sign Agreement No. PW 24-19-84 for Her_nepir: County Project No. 8421, the traffic control system at C.S.A.H. 53 (66th Street) ar.d vacated Pillsbury Avenue. Respectf~.l,ly submitted , ~ ~ ~,J ~.~n/ ~v'~- fl.. John G. Car~tw 'ght City Manager JGC/eja RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT N0. PW 24-19-84 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT N0. 8421 WHEREAS, Agreement for participation in the construction and operation of traffic control signal system or. County State Aid Highway No. 53 at Pillsbury Avenue within the limits of the City, Hennepin County Project No. 8421, Agreement No. PW 24-19- 84 has been prepared and preser:ted to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said Agreement be in all things approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Manager are authorized to sign Agreement No. PW 24-19-84, Hennepin County Project No. 8421. Passed this 24th day of September, 1984. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 335 Agenda: September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Authorizing Signature an Application far Reimbursement of Funds Council Members: Far the ir,formatian of council members, the State of Minnesota requires that all peace officers obtain 16 hours of continuing education annually far licer,sure. In January of 1982, the state began collecting money from a 10~ surcharge an all moving traffic offenses and from this penalty assessment money, allocated funds to the Minnesota Board of Peace Officer Star:dards ar.d Training Board to be used as reimbursement funds to local units of government far offsetting the cost of providing continuing education to peace officers. • The Richfield Department of Public Safety has prepared the necessary application far reimbursement of these cantinuir:g education funds and this application requires two signatures: 1) the chief law enforcement officer of the ager:cy applying (Thomas Morgan); ar.d, 2) some other official to be designated by resolution of the local governing body. Therefore, I am requesting that members of the city council authorize, by resolution, the signature of the Richfield City Manager, John G. Cartwright, as the designated official signature tc be used in submitting this application far reimbursement of continuing education funds. Respectf~ly submitted , a- ?it/ ~ cy/ John G . Ca tw~ht City Manager JGC/eja RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE FOR THE APPLICATION FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CONTINUING EDUCATION FUNDS WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota requires 16 hours of POST approved continuing education for the annual licensure of Peace Officers, and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota disburses funds to defray the cost to local units of government providing this POST approved continuing education to their Peace Officers, and WHEREAS, the Richfield Department of Public Safety meets all of the requirements and has made application to receive reim- bursement of funds, and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota requires the City Council to designate, by resolution, the authorized official signature to be used on this application for reimbursement of funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, that the signature of Richfield City Manager, John G. Cartwright, be designated as the authorized signature used on this State of Minnesota application for reimbursement for the continuing education of Peace Officers. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RICHFIELD, this 24th day of September, 1984. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 334 Agenda September 2~, 1985 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Purchase in Excess of $5,000 Council Members: The adapted operating budget of the water utility fund .includes purchase of liquid carbon dioxide which is used in the water softening process. Several suburbar_ communities, including Richfield, cooperate with the City of Minneapolis in the bidding process. Bids have beer, received far furnishing of liquid carbon dioxide for the period of November 1, 198 through October 31, 1985• The low bidder was Cardox Corporation with a base bid of $70/tan, F.O.B. destination, with r.a cash discount. It is recommended the city council take the following actions: 1. Accept the bid far liquid carboy, dioxide per City of Minneapolis Official Publication, No. 8891. 2. Authorize master purchase order number 22710 far the estimated purchase of 200 tans liquid carbon dioxide at $70/ton from Cardox Corporation: for an estimated total purchase of $14,000. Re~spectfu-~ly~ submitted , J ' ~ John G. Cartwright City Manager JGC/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 333 Agenda September 24, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Discussion on Storm Water Utility for City Council Study Session Council Members: At the July 25, 1983 city council meeting, the staff was directed to take steps to create a storm water utility. The staff was to prepare rate schedules deper:ding on the level of service options. The September 24, 1984 study session will be used to discuss the options available far the levels of service. Level of Service The storm water control service that is provided by the city consists of three elements. First there is operations. This is the work performed to enhance the performance of the system. The emphasis is on the performance rather than the actual physical facility. Cleaning storm sewer lines, catch basins and outfalls are examples of operation: tasks. Operation costs include the power to run the lift stations and street sweeping. Street sweeping collects the silt and debris before it reaches the catch basir:s and drair:s into the ponds. A second element of the storm water control service is maintenance. Mair,ter:ance is work performed to keep up the existing physical system. An example of this is the dredging of whole ponds so that they do r.ot fill up with the silt cor:tair:ed ir. the storm water. Another costly maintenance item is the repair of the adjustment rings that support the catch basin (street drain) castings which collect the water from the streets. The city has been spendir:g about $20,000 a year to maintain these rings and should spend at least twice that to prevent the erasion of the subgrade under our streets. The third element of storm water control service is the capital expenditures. These capital expenditures are additions to the system or major rehabilitation. The engineering firm of Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. (OSM) has completed a storm water control analysis of the city's entire system. Engineers from OSM will be at the study session to explain. haw the study was done and what new information is now available. This study will be helpful in the determination. of which capital projects would be the most effective. -2- The Rate Schedule The attached storm water utility level of service schedule (Attachment A) identifies three levels of service that could be available. Level of Service A identifies tasks which are currently performed by the city which could be assigned to the storm water utility. Some of these functions are now funded by the sanitary sewer utility and some through the general fund. Level of Service A includes the cleaning of storm sewer lines, catch basins and outfalls, power for lift stations, spring and fall street sweeping, repair of catch basins, and same limited dredging. Level of Service B includes all those services in the Level of Service A plus a summer street sweeping program and additional dredging. For approximately $15,000 to $20,000 a summer, a street sweeper can be kept on duty far constant sweeping. The rate of catch basin repair would be at least doubled and the dredging significantly increased. Also included in Level of Service B is $20,000 for capital expenditures. This $20,000 could be used tc pay off a bond for a $160,000 to $200,000 capital project. The Level of Service C is the same as Level of Service B except that $200,000 would be identified for debt retirement. This money could be used to retire bonds far a capital project for between 1.6 and 2 million dollars. The attached storm water utility rate schedule (Attachment B) indicates the estimated cast impact of these three levels of service on typical properties in the city. Although na formal action can be taken at the study session, the staff is seeking direction from the city council as to the desired level of service to be provided by the utility. A public hearing can be scheduled and information about the utility can be prepared to be distributed to the residents by a brochure similar to the or,e used by Roseville (Attachment C). Richfield Lake cost estimates are also included as Attachment D. The alternatives will be discussed at the study session. Continuing discussion ar,d possible action related to Richfield Lake pathway alternatives will also be scheduled far the regular council agenda. Attachment E is a letter from Orr-Scheler:-Mayeron ar.d Associates, Inc, which outlines certain drainage problems in the city along with recommended priority of solution. implemer:tatior.. Respectfully submitted, ~fA,J ohn G. Car~wri t City Manager Attachment A STORM WATER UTILITY ANNUAL EXPENDITURES Level of Service A B C OPERATIONS $ 94,000 $115,000 $11.5,000 MAINTENANCE $ 30,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 CAPITAL - $ 20,000 $200,000 TOTALS $124,000 $210,000 $390,000 Attachment B STORM WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE * RESIDENTIAL - per lot (average 65' lot) Approximately $1 annual fee per household for each $16,000 spent on utility OR Level of Service A B C (Annually) $8.00 $13.20 $24.40 (Quarterly) $2.00 $ 3.30 $ 6.10 * COMMERCIAL Level of Service A B C 65' Lot: (Annually) $24.00 $39.20 $73.20 (Quarterly) $ 6.00 $ 9.80 $18.30 One Acre: (Annually) $116.80 $196.40 $366.00 (Quarterly) $29.20 $49.10 $91.50 ANNUAL FEE FOR ADDITIONAL CAPITAL EXPENSES $.5 Mil. $1 Mil. $1.5 Mil. $2 Mil. $3 Mil. $4 Mil. Residential $ 3.50 $ 7.00 $ 10.50 $ 14.00 $ 21.00 $ 28.00 65' Lot Commercial $ 10.50 $ 21.00 $ 31.50 $ 42.00 $ 63.00 $ 84.00 One Acre Commercial $ 52.50 $105.00 $157.00 $210.00 $315.00 $420.00 • Attachment C ~1 Roseville plans to use a new technique to pay \ ; Y V for the costs of managing storm water runoff r - a Storm Drainage Ltility. This leall~t is pr`pare~~,~ ~t to introduce you to this new utility and answer your questions. Q~~sti~~s ~ z~ ~ ~~sW~~s ~ ~ i Why do we have a storm drainage system? What is a storm important to control the storm drainage utility? a ~ water. Storm drainage facilities had to be built, maintained and A storm drainage utility is renewed in order to: similar to the Familiar sanitary • PROTECT PEOPLE sewer utility. The fee is based on • PROTECT PROPERTY the amount o~water that is discharged Before people settled in Rose- • REDUCE INSURANCE RISKS into the system. For instance, a vine, the natural state of the land • parking lot creates more runoff was rolling prairie covered with IMPROVE PROPERTY than a grass area the same size, so VAL ll E5 grass and trees. When it rained, the it pays a higher rate. Similarly, water soaked into the ground. or • Ei~IHANCE THE a large parcel creates more runoff flowed naturally to the rivers and ENVIRONiVlEillT than a small parcel, so it too pays a streams. When people came to • PROVIDE FOR SAFE higher amount. In this way, the Roseville, they built homes, stores, TRAFFIC FLOW citizens of Roseville will pay for ~oEfices, churches, and paved the To control storm waters and the management of storm water in land with streets, parking lots, and receive these benefits, there is a proportion to the amount of water driveways. Now, when it rains, the cost. The proposed storm drainage they "contribute", not on the value of ground cannot absorb the water as utility will spread these costs to their property. easily, and more water flows off. those who "create" the storm As the development of the land water runoff. continued, it became increasingly Why is a utility needed? What's my share of the costs? .Recent State legislation now re- The expected quarterly Fees in 1984 to various types of properties are quires Roseville to take greater and shown below: cost(rer actions to protect water PROPERTY TYPE QUARTERLY RATES quality in our community than ever before. These actions will Single Family Homes and Duplexes 84.3511ot include Forming ttivo new water Cemeteries and Golf Courses 83.ZSlacre management organizations and Parks and Parking Lots 89.751acre developing regional and local plans Schools and Community Centers 816.251acre to identify problems. Multiple Family Dwellings and Churches 832.50lacre Today, storm ~?vater costs are Commercial/Industrial 865.00lacre paid for using general tax money Your storm drainage Eee will be -property taxes. These new costs, included on the same water and when combined with the nearly sewer bill you receive each quarter. 8200,000 Roseville must spend for Also, your fee can be reduced if you ongoing storm drainage main- can demonstrate that your pro- ~tenance each year, represents a perty has on site facilities which ~ maior expenditure of tax money. improve water quality or reduce its Roseville must find a way to meet outflow rate. these rising costs in a fair and equitable manner, without adding / additional burden to the property tax rolls. Attachment D RICHFIELD LAKE COST ESTIMATES • Present level 114.6' 3" of blacktop added raised level to 114.9' Fill to the normal ordinary high water mark of 115.8' ESTIMATED COST $4,000 Fill to bring up to 116.5' (approximate high water mark of 1984) ESTIMATED COST $19,000 ^ Add two 18" culverts at washout ESTIMATED COST $700 ^ Extend twenty culverts 3' each side (6' total) ESTIMATED COST $2,000 Rip-rap to be added at outlets and at controlled area for overtopping path near the play features ESTIMATED COST $1,000 i ` ~ F~ttachmer,t E ~ ~ ? ` ; , / ~ , ORR •SCHEIEN • MAYERON ~ ASSDClATES, lNC. r ,S ors:~i~ ~y cnyrree. September 13, 1984 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Re: Storm Water Problem Dear Mayor & Council: Stormwater flooding problems have been an issue in Richfield since the rainstorm event of August 30, 1977 during which over 7 inches of rainfall occurred. Our fire prepared a report dated September 22, 1978 regarding problems that occurred. The report identified 38 areas that flooded, identified various mitigative or solution alternatives to address each problem area and made recommendations on ponding area, conveyance, and other improvements to help the Richfield drainage system handle excess stormwater flow. A summary of those 38 problem areas is attached. A number of communications have been submitted since the 1978 report regard- ing specific areas such as Adams Hill Pond, Norby and Wilson Ponds, Edina- Richfield drainage problems and other specific issues. In February of 1983, a brief document was submitted that categorized the problem areas by type and severity of flood problems with a suggestion on a program to follow to implement system improvements. In recent months, in response to needs for watershed management organization requirements and as a part of the City infrastructural analysis, a comprehen- sive study of the Richfield drainage system has been under way involving computer simulation of drainage flow. Based on all of the assembled data and on the new information provided by the computer modeling, the City has good information on flooding occurrences and the ability to simulate or model any specific rainfall event to predict drainage system performance. The analysis that has and is occurring shows that the Richfield drainage system works well but not without problems. The problems occur when rainfall intensity is greater than design flow capacity or when rainfall volume is more than the holding capacities of ponds and lakes. The work to date has identified and categorized the problem areas with the recommended priority for solution implementation directed first at areas where structures, ie residences or commercial buildings flood, and then at lesser problems related to flooded private property and flooded streets. i ,ct 6-~c.nr.-nir %~ianirc %ta ^?r: PEA=- 'i1 ll~~nn.~: nt,. F~/,"? r'' 7 ??'l _ .~'':F,.!1 Page Two Honorable Mayor & Council, City of Richfield September 13, 1984 The highest priority category where buildings are theatened or flooded, en- compass the areas shown on the attached map. The facilities identified to improve drainage system performance are identified as costing X4,100,000 consisting of: A. From 66th to 70th, Penn Avenue to Wood Lake Relief sewer at $1,700,000 B. 76th & k'ashburn to Adams Hill Pond Relief Sewer at $ 250,000 C. Norby's Pond Area Pond Improvement and Associated Conduits $1,200,000 D. Wilson Pond Area Pond Improvement and Associated Conduits ~ 450,000 E. 77th b Colfax Area Relief Conduits $ 170,000 F. 66th & Xerxes Relief Conduit by Hennepin Co. & City of Richfield ~ 200,000 G. 69th & Xerxes Stormwater Runoff Control and Limited Conduits 3 130,000 The second and third categories of flooding, where property other than struc- tures flood or when streets or alleys flood, can and probably should be fur- ther examined once the first priority concerns are resolved. Such additional problem areas that include city park land, individual front or back yards or street flooding to relatively minor depths and for reasonably short durations are important concerns but not deemed as critical as structure flooding. The recent data base that has been assembled for the conduit simulation and com- puter modeling work can assist in examining these areas. We anticipate meeting with the Council in a workshop setting to discuss drainage problems and the status of the current study. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. hn A. Harwood, P.E. JAH:mIn i I ' 7 ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ .s ~ ~ ~ ~ a s+ s o a : i c r x[RxES lv[ k~=;.__. _ _ ,..,1 RLRYCI lvC MllNeVRN ~ ~i~~, i ~ - ~ M'11M {URM vINC[N1 J ViMCt VT 1~. Ir--_ - URTDM ~ ~ ~ r ~ r U/TON fwCR101N , - - RUf![LL I ;i i ~ l~ _ ;f ~ ~ ~ ~ I 1 I RusILLL ~i 'i :~JL 1. ~ ~ ~I outEM r~ l~ ' N ~ ~ o~ttN ?fNN lvC. - - ~ _ ~ IL ~ OIrvER ~ 1L ,r - Jl _ ~l V I i it LI -?L__ 1 WER NCf TOM ~ 'i - ~i T~ t :f !•I I~~ II If lr J•.-±~~ MC•TON rOMear ~=__1~_ :I ~ -It ' R~~ _J! _.~L_. rDRa/N ) , L001Mt l'~.~ 11 ll' ,l ~ .i xy~: ~~-_j l0•IN r „ : ~ ~r xNOx L___.L _-~i ,I 1. Ii' '1 LM Ii II ~I~ ~ II RNOx IRVINO 1 1 3a` :i ~ I.. ~t IIVINO 1'. L, ill 1 li L.ar ~.i 1 ~ III r 1:999 wU r.OIDT ~ _ _ F - 3S1f _ 0"rr - JL _ I - ~ '1: wUreOI DT Ir 1 J I!:~ I _ ~ ~~J OIRIRD ~ ~ ~ ~ i. _ ,r 7t - i, 0111. RA ~j- nlfrarT I,'- - - = ; ! r ?J ~ ~ . ~ _ M ?•rrarT jj CYERlOM r~ ~ I ~ R O ~1. 1 - ~ CMERSON _~L-_i! _ I I~ \ n O R WPONT i' I( I o \ "'O~ ,r.`. ~ OU?OMT COIr1x - t. ~ r,~-, ~ tit ~ r _ I. > eRT 1NT JL _ 1L.. )l e - ~ eRrINT .1~ _ BLVD ~ L;~ .'I I 1l DRICw li li 1. - ~~~I{ _ C;r_1 III iIDRICN lr NOll[ WE l ~ , if •--1~--~, i~wr, i~' ~ i ~ ~ JC1 lr w0?L[ •v[. T~° r 1 01R?1 LO j..r yL _ JL~ .L I ~-1~ ~ ~ } 1 Ol R?,[l0 wt RNltT - _lf ,1 ~ ~ I( l--i-2~1... !I ~ l~~ d~_;L _If ORiMO Ir~ if I 1 J~_ .1 ~i II I i.~ / -,I III I OR IMO KC>•S1NT I~ ~ ~-_~--•1~---1 1 ~..~-.7~ ~1 ~,1 _ r'-~~_.~.~h.~ 1 _ 1..~~~~:.~+Illk Rt.I. N. a~ ~ ice. i ~i ~ ~ I j I~ L~ ~ ~ Il '1.--~~ _~~r 1111 ?tilssvrr ~fNT *pRTM r ~ ;i ~ _ ~IY_ - _ _ ~ YCNT'ID/TM ~r I ~ ~ I f' f ,~i K115 DELL i ~ ) ~i ~ _ ~ r- ~ - I •l1fSDLlI N KOt.t[T lK. 'II~-• _ ~ ~ - - - - ,--_T NICOIItT lvt STEVEN3 ~ '1 .1l 1L li~_ .L--^•---y`- _I _ J;I JI I~.-JL-• _ STEKN! !rx it 1~ ~ r- ,F---'4- r t I ~ ~j CLIM TON ;I C~ _ :L l - I - I _ CL IN TON ~r r 7~_ I r _ ji L. J JL I I r ~ - I 511 ~ Z ~t I ` I I, J 1i ~ ~'I li a'1 i3RTl/N0 1vL _ it it 1'~ ;r ii ~ ~ ! -II - ~ j y ?ORTl1M0 1v[ 01N11wP I ~'L 'L' 1_ - ~I I I ~ OINL lN0 r Ir ir- Ir I - it I l ;I nRR Il J L if II IL Ji I RuR F,y it 1( ~i Il ~ _ I~ ii _ ~l, COLD rMUS t r i - 1L_ ! r ~ ~ COLD YlvS CrIIC1Gp h ~ Imo. l- I~ ~ ii II T ~ i:~ CM1C 10O 1 'L_ _il_ ~L_ _ 'i IL i~ ii i; 11 EIUOT _ _ . _ a ~ CLUDT 101. l 11 _JL_. rLr - - _ ~1 li y~ i 10n n 1? is JL-_ ~L 1:_ - I~ ~ _ ~'L _ _ _ , n n i[ j. i- it _ I i . J( - ~f- l ---1 1 1t 1. I i _ IL_ J J ~ .l 15 1• a_ _ , ~ r eLmaIMGTON ~ ~ tt „ ,I ~r - elDprINGTOM I; 1T1. r I i ~ ,1 JI Jl I ll_ I( r ctou .rf ,.i~:~"i .J~..L._~. ~ al _ h_. Ali ! I _ ~ CcD?R 1Vt loacrtuDlR - - - - - sx TT _ - - - - ~ . _ l! - - j~-1~~r---~~-- Lo»srtllow {1 ~ J - - I ~ it ~i - 1~ lTINDIlN JL_ _li t, ,f s- Z~ w IR r Z w ~ , i i S 3 i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , i, , l ORR•SCHEIEN•MAYERON ASSOCIATES, INC. Lana Su.~~e, ors February 7, 1983 Mayor and Council: During the past five to six years, data has been collected on areas of the City which experience flooding during heavy rainstorm events. These range from minor street flooding to incidents of property dar~~age. Methods of mitigating the flooding, and particularly the damage, have been described and preliminarily costed. Because the areas scattered throughout the City ex- perience different levels of flooding severity and have a range of costs, it is difficult to define the most cost-effective program to follow. The purpose of this memorandum and accompanying material is to present a sug- gested program to follow. In the 1978 OSM Study, 38 areas known or reported to have flooded were identified. This memorandum groups these areas into five categories as follows: (1) Areas which have reported flooding of structures during rainfalls of high intensity. (2} Areas vMich have reported flooding of structures during rainfalls of high intensity and/or volume. (3) Areas which have reported flooding of streets and lawn areas during rainfalls. (4} Areas which have reported only flooding of streets during rainfalls. (5) Areas which have reported flooding but where projects or methods have been accomplished to mitigate flooding or flooding damage. Following is a tabulation of the areas by the above categories. Please refer to map, Exhibit I, for location. Category 1: 2, 3, b, 9, 11, 13, 16, ]9, 27, and 28 Category 2: 12, 34, 35, and 36 Category 3: 14, 22, 26, and 30 Category 4: 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 15, 17, 18, 20, 24, 25, 29, 31, 32, 37, and 38 Category 5: 21, 23, and 33 1~~a F^-c '~F(7.nRr`l ~ ~.'/F/~l;'R • .Cr;,itF 7~R • fi/,`r'~ ~F^~;°i~C ~i!,'-~Fr(~ cn.A • ';~7 ~~~-~:f'>;i In the 1978 OSM report, several projects were identified. The areas generally influenced by those projects are outlined and labeled alphabetically on Exhibit I. A. Consists of installing additional sewer conduits with an outlet to Wood Lake. Estimated project cost is $1,500,000. B. Installation of an additional conduit Admas Hill Pond. Estimated project cost is $220,000. C. Consists of additional conduits and upgrading of Norby's Pond. Estimated project cost range is $850,000 to $1,900,000, depending on final recom- mended plan . D. Consists of additional conduits and upgrading of~ Wilson's Pond. Esti- mated project cost range is $3b0,000 to $730,000, depending on final recommended p1 an. E. Additional conduits. Estimated project cost is $160,000. E. This project or projects depends on a joint solution with Hennepin County, Edina and the City of Richfield. G. This project would cover the isolated or individual areas not included in the above projects. Estimated costs are not feasible att his time, but would be small relative to the above costs. The recommendation of this memorandum is that projects A through F be placed on a five year plan for detailed study of their cost effectiveness, final recommended plan, detailed cost estimate and possible construction. Project (or projects) G should be placed in a ten year plan of study and possible implementation. Attached are descriptive paragraphs of each area. s • • • $ ~ LOCATION MAP - F iQure I i~ i i r i i i i i i r r i i i~ i f i i i i f i i t i f i i i i i i Y t i i i y i i t i I~It11t~I:El1~~t'~i~l~lrii{t~~ t~r~li~ii~li~itiiiiii iii EElii +jt r I ~ 2: r ! f I ~ i{:¦¦ t t i t s ~ S i t s i t t i r I~ _ I' J ~ ' ' ' , l Imo. ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ .j ~ i ~ - ~ _ - - .y ~ -~I 1 ~~=---Ir_- ~lr ~ i r_Z.~) NKnr~t~:~ r - ~ ^ _ _ - r---~~ _ - ~ ~I 1,~,= ~--r-1 ~ _ _ _ - _ t=' 1 I~Q I _ - ~ r- . - E + IIII I _ ~ _ - 6 0 r i l~ . _ ~ ~ )I; _ I It ~ r- L ~I ~ , _...L . I I^- I - - I ~~1~ ~ J~-.~ _Il ' ~ ~ - .I T ..-I r- r- ~ 1 ~ r- - r ~ i - , 1~~ ~ I ( i o ~ l =r:~ r i ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ' Of 1 I I _ I ~ I _ • ~ ~ _ _ _ I ~ ~ J~~:~.~. ' -1 _ _ ~ _ _ !1 - ~1~ - I~ I~ - , ITY OF RiCHFIE:.., ~ ~1 ~ ~ L' I ,~_i, ! ~ 1 I~ ~ 1~ ~ (-It i , 1~~(~; I ~ ~ ~ ~C~u~Pn car.~r. u~:~~s^-~-. _ ~ t ~ - - _ I 1111 _ , _ _ . - _ Li~T_ u l _ . ~ 1 ~ E •R ~ ~ ~ r I I ~ - - I}l iI ~ ~ i~~l II ~ J~ J l , : jl JI- JI-- II ~I r~/ t I ~ I. - ~I~ I~_=f.-- - =1I ~ L_ t_. l _ ~i._ 1- ~ ~l _ . , _ - _ Ir r- lLl ~ ~ 1 ~r ~ , U4J ~ i ~ ~ C. f ~ i i i T t i i i t f t i i i i i i(? i f i l t i 1 f f f f 1 i i f 1 i i t i t i i i t i ~ i i i i i i i~ i f i i~ i i. i f i i I~~tli~z;Elttf{'l~illii!?i~!'t!f`~::~:: :.i,_ i i i i t t t - 2 - 4 h roc, ~;~4 ~~f'~ John A. Harwood P . E . date: February 7, 1983 no.: 17 5 0 2ez1 EAS7 NENMEPIM AVE. Drainage Problems YtAIMEA?OUf,YIfIMES07A55413 ANf1Ef: Clty Of Richfield (612)331-ibd0 51~C"~: City of Richfield Drainage Problems In 1978 our firm studied reported flood problem areas in the City of Richfield. This memo is descriptive of the type and extent of each problem area with the intent of categorizing them in such a way that solution systems ma_y be more easily identified. The 1978 study examined 38 individual locations. The following comments are applic- able to each. Location 1 - 64th & Xerxes This location experienced street flooding to minor depths. The problem is that when the street floods the water flows overland, westerly into the City of Edina and into a stormwater holding area in Edina. The outlet from the Edina holding area is via pumps. Ex- cess flow is greater than pump capacity resulting in overfilling the storage area. I do not believe property damage was involved. The City of Edina proposed to place an asphalt overlay just west of Xerxes at 64th to contain water in Xerxes and reduce the potential for westward flow. Location 2 - 69th & Xerxes Tr~is location is an alley between Xerxes and Washburn; 69th - 70th. During the heavy rainstorms water was about 3 feet deep in the alley causing damage to garages and flooding the walkout basements and several houses. The problem results from the location being a locally low spot. Local runoff and major amounts of stormwater from highly impervious Edina commercial areas flow to this area. Water gets to the low alley by overflowing the street on Xerxes, mid block 69th - 70th, and by coming out of a catch basin in the alley when the storm sewer system is surcharged. The City of Edina is to do some regrading work near 69th and York to route excess surface water southerly on York rather than easterly along 69th to this area. Locally it was proposed to raise the boulevard area just east of Xerxes at the low problem area and increase catch basin sizing. These two actions would serve to contain more runoff in the street and accept more runoff into the store sewer. In the alley, it was proposed to disconnect the existing catch basin from the storm system so that water would not escape from the system to the alley. Alley drainage would be provided via a new catch basin connected with a backflow preventing gate or via a pump. Location 3 - 66th North, Xerxes Washburn & Vincent The intersection of 66th and Xerxes floods causing damage to the commercial building south of 66th A locally low alley between Washburn and Vincent floods causing damage to an apartment that has a tuck under garage. The existing storm sewer in 66th that flows to Page Two Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 Edina is too small for the large impervious areas. The system is in a county road (66th), with improvement controlled by the County. There are downstream flow and volume problems which have been repor- ted in the Point of France Pond or in Lake Edina. Two alternatives were examined that conveyed stormwater either west into Edina or east into Sheridan Pond and ultimately Richfield Lake. Both are expensive and need joint action by Edina, Richfield and Hennepin County. Locally it was proposed to raise the sidewalk at the alley south of 66th on Washburn and to place a one way flow gate in the manhole at the alley and Washburn. Location 4 - 6700 Block of Washburn There was street flooding without property damage. Relief at 66th and Xerxes will make the system function better and reduce some of the flood potential. Location 5 - 62nd & Russell Between Russell and Penn, 62nd to 63rd, the land is currently unde- ' veloped and is locally low. Runoff from a large parking lot area west of Penn reaches the area as well as local drainage. I do not • believe any property damage occurs, although garages along the back lat line of houses east of Russell are threatened. The solution is either more outlet capacity to the county drainage system in the crosstown highway or development of a controlled ponding area. Location 6 - 66th to 67th, Queen to Penn The major problem is in the alley just north of 67th which is low. One commercial structure has a basement level garage that has been flooded. The intersection of 67th and Oliver has flooded. Flood proofing the basement garage was recom~-nended and a storm drainage system to convey excess flow was identified. Location 7 - 69th & Sheridan/Russell The entire area is very flat with all street at minimum grade. During heavy rainfalls the area had general street flooding, but to relatively shallow depth. No property damage occured. Location 8 - 70th & Thomas/Sheridan/Russell/Upton The entire area is very flat with all street at minimum grade. During heavy rainfalls the area had general street flooding, but to relatively shallow depth. No property damage occured. Location 9 - 70th & Penn There are two houses mid block. 69th to 70th and east of Penn, that have basement garages. The driveway to these basements comes off Penn, goes between houses and down to a very low parking area in backyards. Water flooded the 70th and Penn intersection and flowed overland to fill low area. I believe this overland flow route has been blocked by construction of a new building on the N.E. corner of Page Three Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 70th and Penn. When water gets above curb depth in Penn Avenue it overflows the sidewalk between the houses and gets to the low back- yard area. There is a sump in the backyards and a pump to get rid of water. During heavy rainstorms the pump cannot handle the ,inflow. The best solution, not desired by the two affected residents is to eliminate the basement garages and fill the low backyard. A proposal was made to raise the sidewalk of Penn Avenue near the problem spot, but this would make the already too steep driveway even worse. Flood proofing the basements was recommended. Location 10 - 72nd & Sheridan The intersection of 72nd and Sheridan floods to relatively minor depths. No property damage occured. Location 11 - 76th & Washburn The grades on 76th to this intersection are relatively steep. The intersection floods to over 3 feet in depth. The elevation of the intersection is only 1-1/2 feet above the elevation of the flood level in Adams Hill Pond. The residence on the N.E. corner had flood damage. The work done in Adams Hill Pond will improve the function- ing of the existing drainage system since the hydraulic grade line fro~~: the intersection to the pond has been improved. A relief line would be required to totally eliminate the street flood potential. Location 12 - 66th & Newton There is one house that has a walk out basement. The back lot areas are lower than the street. The apartments and commercial structures south of the area are built on fill. All backyard drainage from the block comes to the low spot of the block which is j ust where the walkout basement is. This basement will flood when runoff is exces- sive. The solution would be to either flood proof the basement, eliminate the walkout, excavate an area that would be lower than the walkout and large enough to hold the runoff or provide a pump for outlet. Location 13 - 68th & Oliver/Newton The residences on Oliver and Newton just south of 68th have access to basement garages via a locally low alley. Local water ponds in the area and water overflows the boulevard of 68th to the area. Basement flooding has occured. A new storm sewer system would provide relief. The rasing of the boulevard on 68th would minimize street overflows. Location 14 - 63rd & Girard An alley east of Girard and just adjacent to the freeway sound barrier is low. The alley floods and reportedly flooded one adjacent garage. A relief line would be under the freeway to Richfield Lake. Page Four Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 Location 15 - 64th & Irvinq This is reported to be general street flooding without property damage. Location 16 - 66th & Irvinq/James/Knox/Logan/Humboldt The area on 66th Avenue from the freeway to Logan Avenue, has water in the street during heavy rains, This a county road. South of 66th near Knox and Logan, an apartment building with basement garages flooded. No other property damage is known. The boulevard areas could be built up to reduce overflow from the street to private property. Between James and Irving flow could be directed overland to Monroe Field in such a way as to minimize problems. Location 17 - 68th & James The intersection floods but no residences are threatened. There is a conduit from the storm system north to Monroe Field. The conduit has a flap gate to stop overflow from going to the park area. The flap gate could be removed and use of Monroe Field as an overflow holding area encouraged. Location 18 - 7333 Humboldt The church south of 73rd has a low parking lot with no outlet. Excess water gets to the parking lot and stays until it infiltrates. No property damage occured. The solution involves provision of some outlet. Location 19 - 77th & Bryant The intersection of 77th and Bryant floods to about a 2 foot depth. The reisdence on the N.W. corner has an attached garage that floods. The water got very close to the basement level but did not flood the house. The only solutions seem to be flood proofing or a relief sewer. Location 20 - 77-1/2 & Colfax West of Colfax is a low area that at the time of the study had a lot of animal and bird cages in it. When excess rainstorm floods Colfax the water flows to this low area from which there is no outlet. No structures were involved in the flooding. Location 21 - 65 - 66 & Pillsbury/Pleasant A relief sewer was under construction in this area in 1978. I presume any problems have been solved. Location 22 - 75th & Pleasant This is a low area just east of the railroad tracks. 76th to 76th. The area is very flat. The higher railroad tracks block flow. The street is low and the houses are not much above street level. The street arx3 frontyard areas flood, but I believe not to the extent that houses were damaged. The solution is a long and expensive Page Five Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 relief line. An alternative would be to examine use of Lincoln Field as an emergency overflow area which would require a conduit under the tracks and development of a ditch type ponding area. Location 23 - 66th & Stevens This area correlates to Location 20. A relief line was under con- struction in the area in 1978. The problem was a locally low street and may have been solved. Location 24 - 312 West 65th Street This is street floodin 'ust west of Milners Pond. An overflow oes 9 J Y 9 directly into the pond. No residences were threatened. Location 25 - 66th & 4th Avenue Street flooding occured in 66th. No residences were threatened. Overflow goes directly to Milners Pond. Overland flow to the pond could be improved via a curb cut to eliminate the flood potential. Location 26 - 68th & Stevens Water from 1st Avenue, Stevens Avenue and 2nd Avenue flows southerly and to the 68th and Stevens area. Street flooding occurs, and when the street water is about 1 foot deep, the flow is south between houses to a large low backyard area. During the major rainstorms examined in the 1978 report, the water surface in Norbys Pond was at the street elevation of 68th and Stevens. All Local water went to the backyard area. No houses were damaged, but water came very close to several. There is no outlet for water from this area. Improve- ments include Norby Pond work, raising the overflow area of the boulevard and installing a pump as an outlet. Location 27 - Norbys Pond Norbys Pond was at a very high elevation such that the water in the pond was as high as the street elevations at 68th and Stevens, 69th and Columbus and 73rd and First. The entire drainage system leading to Norbys Pond was influenced by the high pond levels. The drainage system was not able to work as well as it could due to backwater influences of the pond. The pond needs work to reduce the maximum water surface elevation during regional flood events. Only one residence near the pond, at the N.E. corner was threatened, none flooded. Location 28 - 73rd & First This intersection floods often. During the major events a residence on the S.W. corner flooded. I understand that this house is being purchased by the City. The intersection is significantly influenced by high water in Norbys Pond. Norbys Pond however, does not fully explain the frequent flooding. The conduits leading from the inter- section are very flat. Inspection on several occasions showed from Page Six Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 4" to 8" of sand and silt in the invert. Such deposits are almost impossible to prevent or to keep cleaned. The only ultimate solution seems to be a relief line. Location 29 - 76th & Third The intersection flooded, but no property damage was involved. The flooding was not reported to be severe. Location 30 - Columbus near 69th A local low area between 68th and 69th on Columbus was flooded to depth of 3 + feet. Norbys Pond high water influences this area. I understand residences were closely threatened, but not actually damaged. Location 31 - 66th & Columbus/Chicago Avenue The intersection floods. No property damage occurs. Relief could be provided by outflow created directly north to Legion Lake. A manhole located in Columbus, mid block 66th to 67th has shown surcharge results. The lid has been forced off several times. When the lid was bolted down internal hydraulic forces raised the pavement area, Location 32 - 63rd & Bloomington One residence east of Bloomington has a driveway to a backyard garage which is 7-8 feet lower than the street. The drivewav is located exactly at the low point of the street. When the drainage system in the street cannot handle the stormwater the flow is over the sidewalk, down the driveway and through the garage. The solution was seen as raising the boulevard and sidewalk so such overflow was reduced. On the property, work could be done to route the flow around the garage so it could outlet towards Taft Park near 63rd and 16th. Location 33 - 63rd & 16th One house abutting the Taft Park was subject to flooding. I under- stand the house has been purchased and removed with the land now being park. ' Location 34 - 71st & Cedar This is a very flat area. During the heavy rainfall events, general area wide street flooding occured. The elevation of Wilson Pond was as high as many street elevations. Some houses were flooded not apparently by overland flow, but when street flood water entered the sanitary sewer system and backed up into house basements. The solu- tions involve work to Wilson Pond and sealing of the sanitary sewer system. Location 35 - 73rd/Bloomington This is a very flat area. During the heavy rainfall events, general area wide street flooding occured. The elevation of Wilson Pond was Page Seven Memo Re: Drainage Problems - Richfield February 7, 1983 as high as many street elevations. Some houses were flooded not apparently by overland flow, but when street flood water entered the sanitary sewer system and backed up into house basements. The solu- tions involve work to Wilson Pond and sealing of the sanitary sewer system. Location 36 - 73rd and 16th/17th/18th This is a very flat area. During the heavy rainfall events, general area wide street flooding occured. The elevation of Wilson Pond was as high as many street elevations. Some houses were flooded not apparently by overland flow, but when street flood water entered the sanitary sewer system and backed up into house basements. The solu- tions involve work to Wilson Pond and sealing of the sanitary sewer system. Location 37 - 77th & Bloomington Avenue This is reportedly street flooding with no property damage. To my knowledge it was not severe. Location 38 - 68th & Wentworth A significant amount of water runs off an adjacent school playground and causes street flooding. Wentworth in this area slopes north to a dead end. The flooding has reportedly caused property damage. A conduit solution system was identified. Signed ti~~'~ ~ .Q hn A. Harwood, P.E. JAH:min