Loading...
12-22-86 agendaiJ � - v� RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1987 MANAGEMENT SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for management Employees from time -to -time, and WHEREAS, the city administration has prepared a 1987 pay plan for position classifications for management employees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council do and hereby does establish for the year 1987 the following pay plan, which is to be effective January 1, 1987, and subject to all applicable provisions of the city code: MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION PLAN PAY GRADE MINIMUM MID -RANGE MAXIMUM A YR 23,097.12 27,172.91 31,249.51 MO 1,924.76 2,264.41 2,604.13 BW 888.35 1,045.11 1,201.90 HR 11.1:0 13.06 15.02 B YR 24,703.92 29,048.00 33,391.27 MO 2,058.66 2,420.67 2,782.61 B;tl 950.15 1,117.23 1,284.28 HR 11.88 13.97 16.05 C YR 26,443.92 31,054.41 35,664.90 MO 2,203.66 2,587.87 2,972.07 BW 1,017.07 1,194.40 1,371.73 HR 12.71 14.93 17.15 D YR 28,179.8.8 33,057.05, 38,070.12 MO 2,348.32 2,754.75 3,172.51 BW 1,083.84 1,271.43 1,464.24 HR 13.55 15.89 18.30 E YR 30,047.7!1 35,326.64 40,605.58 MO 2,503.98 2,943.89 3,383.80 BW 1,155.68 1,358.72 1,561.75 HR 14.45 16.98 19.52 F YR 32,047.39 37,727.01 43,406.10 MO 2,670.62 3,143.92 3,617.17 BW 1,232.59 1,451.04 1,669.47 HR 15.41 18.14 20.87 • r G YR 34,211.22 40,296.38 46,381.27 MO 2,850.94 3,358.03 3,865.11 BW 1,315.82 1,549.86 1,783.89 HR 16.45 19.37 22.30 H YR 36,645.23 43,136.19 49,626.35 MO 3,053.77 3,594.68 4,135.53 BW 1,409.43 1,659.08 1,908.71 HR 17.62 20.74 23.86 I YR 39,214.33 46,110.55 53,007.05 MO 3,267.86 3,842.55 4,417.25 BW 1,508.24 1,773.48 2,038.73 HR 18.85 22.17 25.48 J YR 41,918.78 49,356.17 56,793.29 MO 32493.23 4,113.01 4,732.77 BW 1,612.26 1,898.31 2,184.36 HR 20.15 23.73 27.30 Normal Progression Through Management Compensation Plan Salary Increase Amounts. Individual salary increases will normally be made effective when the salary range structure changes and will vary in size, depending on the individual's performance rating and current position in the salary range in line with the following criteria. PERFORMANCE POSITION IN SALARY RANGE RATING UNDER 95% MIDPOINT 95 -105% OF MIDPOINT OVER 105% OF MDPT. Outstanding Above Satis- factory Satisfactory Needs Improve- ment Unsatisfactory Range Adj. +4.1 -6.0% Range Adj. +2.1 -4.0% Range Adj. +2.1 -4.0% Range Adj. +1.0.2.0% Range Adj. +1.0 -2.0% % of Range Adj. % of Range Adj. Range Adj.- 1.0 -2.0% No increase until performance improves. Range Adj. +1.0 -2.0% % of Range Adj. Range Adj.- 1.0 -2.0% Range Adj.- 2.1 -4.0% Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1986. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk J RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1987 GENERAL SERVICES !� SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for General Services employees from time -to -time, and WHEREAS, the City administration has prepared a 1987 pay plan for position classifications for general services employees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 1987 the following pay plan, which is to be effective January 1, 1987, and subject to all applicable provisions of the city code: GENERAL SERVICES COMPENSATION PLAN Step A B C D MERIT RANGE Range GS1 YR 11,315.12 11,934.59 12,570.47 13,825.55 MO 942.93 994.55 1,047.54 1,152.13 BW 435.20 459.02 483.48 531.75 HR 5.44 5.74 6.04 6.65 YR 12,651.74 13,352.74 14,054.29 15,456.03 �GS2 MO 1,054.31 1,112.73 1,171.19 1,288.00 BW 486.61 513.57 540.55 594.46 HR 6.08 6.42 6.76 7.43 GS3 YR 14,135.82 14,918.10 15,700.64 17,265.99 MO 1,177.99 1,243.17 1,308.39 1,438.83 BW 543.69 573.77 603.87 664.08 HR 6.80. 7.17 7.55 8.30 GS4 YR 14,967.34 15,847.57 16,728.06 17,608.56 19,369.28 MO 1,247.28 1,320.63 1,394.01 1,467.38 1,614.11 BW 575.67 609.52 643.39 677.25 744.97 HR 7.20 7.62 8.04 8.47 9.31 GS5 YR 16,728.06 17,705.97 18,700.84 19,678.74 21,651.52 MO 1,394.01 1,475.50' 1,558.40 1,639.90 1,804.29 BW 643.39 681.00 719.26 756.87 832.75 HR 8.04 8.51 8.99 9.46 10.41 GS6 YR 18,765.69 19,874.11 20,966.66 22,075.62 24,276.59 MO 1,563.81 1,656.18 1,747.22 1,839.63 2,023.05 BW 721.76 764.39': 806.41 849.06 933.71 HR 9.02 9.55 10.08 10.61 11.67 GS7 YR 21,015.90 22,238.96 23,477.63 24,716.57 27,194.98 . MO 1,751.33 1,853.25 1,956.47 2,059.71 2,266.25 BW 808.30 855.34 902.99 950.64 1,045.96 HR 10.10 10`.69 11.29 11.88 13.07 b. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Above Satisfactory or Outstanding. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Needs Improvement or Satisfactory. C. Step D. At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, 1,,2 months for those rated Satisfactory or iAbove Satisfactory, ;and 18 months for those rated Needs Improvement. d. Merit Range. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, and 18 months for those rated Above Satisfactory. Satisfactory and Needs.Improvement performers may not advance to or within the Merit Range. Salary increases in the Merit Range will be determined,by the supervisor and may range between 3% - 8 %. e. Employees whose competency level and /or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their per- formance improves. II. Individual part -time employees will receive increases to the next higher grade step in lino with their length of time in the pay grade and their individual competence and performance rating according to the following criteria: a. Step 8 (Grades 4 through 9) and Step C (Grades 1 through 3). Completion of at least 1,040 hours or 1 year from date of hire, whichever comes first, and competence and performance levels rated at least Needs Improvement. b. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 1,560 hours or 9 months since previous increase for those rated Above Satisfactory or Outstanding. At least 2,080 or 12 months since previous increase for those rated Needs Improvement or Satisfactory. GS8 YR 23,526.61 24,912.74 26,298.07 27,684.20 30 455.93 MO 1,960.55 2,076.06 2,191.51 2,307.02 2 537.99 BW 904.87 958.18 1,011.46 1,064.78 1 171.38 • HR 11.31 11.98 12.64 13.31 14.64 GS9 YR 26,297.26 27,843.24 29,389.22 30,934.93 34,026.89 MO 2,191.44 2,320.27 2,449.10 2,577.91 2,835.57 BW 1,011.43 1,070.89 1,130.35 1,189.80 1,308.73 HR 12.64 13.39 14.13 14.87 16.36 Normal .Progression Through General Services Compensation Plan I. Individual full -time employees will higher step in line receive increases to the next and grade with their their individual competence and length of performance time in the pay grade rating according to the following criteria.' a. Step 9 (also Step Clin Grades 1 through 3). Completion of at least 6 months on one or more jobs in the pay grade, and competence and performance levels rated at least Needs Improvement. b. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Above Satisfactory or Outstanding. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Needs Improvement or Satisfactory. C. Step D. At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, 1,,2 months for those rated Satisfactory or iAbove Satisfactory, ;and 18 months for those rated Needs Improvement. d. Merit Range. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, and 18 months for those rated Above Satisfactory. Satisfactory and Needs.Improvement performers may not advance to or within the Merit Range. Salary increases in the Merit Range will be determined,by the supervisor and may range between 3% - 8 %. e. Employees whose competency level and /or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their per- formance improves. II. Individual part -time employees will receive increases to the next higher grade step in lino with their length of time in the pay grade and their individual competence and performance rating according to the following criteria: a. Step 8 (Grades 4 through 9) and Step C (Grades 1 through 3). Completion of at least 1,040 hours or 1 year from date of hire, whichever comes first, and competence and performance levels rated at least Needs Improvement. b. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 1,560 hours or 9 months since previous increase for those rated Above Satisfactory or Outstanding. At least 2,080 or 12 months since previous increase for those rated Needs Improvement or Satisfactory. C. Step D. At least 1,560 hours or 9 months since previous increase, whichever comes first for those rated Outstanding, 2,080 hours or 12 months, whichever comes first for those rated Satisfactory or Above Satisfactory, and 3,120 hours or 18 months, whichever comes first for those rated Needs Improvement. d. Merit Range. At least 2,080 hours or 12 months, whichever comes first, since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, and 3,120 hours or 18 months, whichever comes first, for those rated Above Satisfactory. Satisfactory and Needs Improvement performers may not advance to or within the Merit Range. Salary increases in the Merit Range will be determined by the supervisor and may range between 3% - 8ro. e. Employees whose competency level and/or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their performance improves. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1986. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk U� • ; RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1987 SPECIALIZED PAY PLAN WHEREAS, Section 2.32 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield provides that the pay grades, the number of steps or range of each pay grade, the compensation rates in each pay grade, and the method of normal progression through the pay grade be established by council resolution; an WHEREAS, the city administration has prepared a 1987 pay plan for the Positions for which there are no essentially similar position classifications in other regular pay plans. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT.RESOLVED that the City does establish Council do and hereby for the year 1987 the following pay effective plan, which is to be on January 1, 1987, and subject to the provisions of the personnel rules and regulations ordinance: SPECIALIZED PAY PLAN INTERMITTENT AND SEASONAL COMD Code A B C D E Step 1 2 3 4 5 SP1 -E HR 3.52 3.69 3.88 4.07 4.27 SP2 -E HR 3.91 4.09 4.31 4.51 4.74 SP3 -E HR 4.21 p 4.42 4.65 4.87 5.12 SP4 -E HR 4.55 4.78 5.03 5.27 5.53 SP5 -E HR 4.91 5.15 5.42 5.68 5.96 SP6 -E HR 5.31 5.58 5.86 6.15 6.46 SP7 -E HR 5.73 6.00 6.31 6.63 6.97 SP8 -E HR 6.20 6.51 6.82 7.17 7.52 SP9 -E HR 6.69 7.02 7.36 7.74 8.12 SP10 -E HR 7.22 7.59 7.97 8.36 8.79 SP11 -E HR 7.80 8.19 8.60 9.03 9.47 SP12 -E HR 8.41 8.84 9.27 9.74 10.23 Instructor's Range: $4.00 - $15.00 R.Y.E.S. Home Service Worker : - $3.35 /0 Normal Progression Through the Specialized Pay Plan •Individual employees will be� eligible to receive increases to the next higher grade step based on individual performance and the following progression: 1 2 3 4 5 Start 1,040 hrs. 2,080 additional 2,080 additional 2,080 additional or hours or one hours or one hours or one one year year since last year since last year since last since increase increase increase anniversary date i Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1986. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Whomas P. Ferber ;City Clerk U SPECIALIZED POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE Grade Position Titles Grade Position Titles 1 Driving Range I 6 Adaptive Program Supervisor Pool Attendant Center Program Supervisor Concession Operator 2 Arena Cashier (Golf Course) Field Attendant I Maintenance Laborer III Ice Guard Naturalist I Pool Cashier Tennis Coordinator Projectionist 7 Adaptive Team Coordinator 3 Basketball Scorer /Timer Construction Specialist Bike Patrol Officer Golf Course Technician Concession Stand I Naturalist II Driving Range II Playground Coordinator Field Attendant II Survey Crew Person Men's Activity Night Attendant Pool Night Watchman 1 8 Assistant Golf Course Manager Tennis Center Attendant Construction Inspector Volleyball Attendant ' Greens Foreman Warming House Attendant Pool Manager Winter Sports Technician 4 Clerk Typist - Int. & Sub. Custodian I 9 Community Development Dance Coordinator Technician Lifeguard Maintenance Laborer I; 10 Engineering Aide Playground Leader Ranger 11 None Skating School Coordinator Starter 12 None Video Production Assistant Instruc- Baton 5 Adaptive Program Leader tors Belly Dancing Assessment Clerk Cross Country Ski Assistant Pool Manager Figure Skating Concession Stand II Golf Professional Custodian II Housing & Redevelopment Tech. Driving Range Supervisor Self Defense Intern Slimnastics Licensing Clerk Sports Official Liquor Clerk Tap and Ballet. Maintenance Laborer II Tennis I Playground Specialist Tennis II Pro Shop Supervisor WSI Senior Playground Leader Special Events Supervisor Building Inspector Substitute Naturalist' Substitute Jan Driver Other Home Service Worker Warming House Supervisor Winter Sports Attendant Zamboni Operator MANAGEMENT POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE GRADE POSITION'TITLES A Turf Supervisor B Community Services Foreman - Park Community Services Foreman - Sewer Community Services Foreman - Street Community Services Foreman - Water Distribution Community Services Foreman - Water Plant Garage Superintendent Liquor Store Manager C Building.Superintendent City Clark Community Center Manager Nature Center Manager Recreation Manager D City Planner Community Services Maintenance Superintendent Data Processing Manager Golf Course Manager Ice Arena Manager Personnel Manager Utility Superintendent E Chief Building Inspector F City Engineer Facilities /Project Coordinator Finance Manager Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator Recreation Prog -ram Coordinator G Assistant Fire Chief Technical Operations Coordinator H Liquor Operations Director \ I Assistant City Manager /Administrative Services Director Community Development Director J Community; Services Director Public Safety Director 6 Accountant Administrative Aide Assistant Liquor Store Manager Assistant Turf Supervisor /Mechanic Central Services Technician Community Development Aide Community Services Aidg Leased Housing Agent Telecommunicator GENERAL SERVICES POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE GRADE POSITION TITLES GRADE POSITION TITLES 1 Liquor Clerk 7 Administrative Assistant 2 Clerk Typist Assistant Turf Supervisor/ • Public Safety Support.Aide Mechanic II Naturalist 3 Accounting Clerk 8 Administrative Assistant Assessment Clerk Assistant Building Superintendent Communications Aide Communications Supervisor Data Entry Operator Recreation Supervisor Licensing Clerk Liquor Account Clerk 9 Housing Specialist Liquor Clerk /Cashier Inspector Receptionist Senior Clerk Typist Recreation Supervisor /Designer Senior Engineering Technician 4 Accounting Technician Accounts Payable Clerk Community Center Programmer Community Service Officer Computer Operator Leased Housing Assistant Licensing Leadworker Police Aide Secretary Senior Liquor Account Clerk Transportation Specialist Utility Billing Clerk 5 Community Development Intern Custodian Data Processing Technician Payroll Accountant Records Technician Recycling Specialist Residential Energy Conservation Technician Social Services Supervisor 6 Accountant Administrative Aide Assistant Liquor Store Manager Assistant Turf Supervisor /Mechanic Central Services Technician Community Development Aide Community Services Aidg Leased Housing Agent Telecommunicator CITY'OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 480 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Adoption of Resolutions making adjustments in compensation of employees covered in the General Services, Management and Specialized Pay Plans. Background: Section 2.33, Subd. I of the Municipal Code requires the City Manager to submit a formal recommendation for pay plan and benefit adjustments for non- unionized City employees to the City Council. The purpose of this letter is to make recommendations for 1987 adjustments injthe General Services, Management and Specialized Pay Plans, which cover City employees who are not represented by organized bargaining groups A Council Letter and Resolution covering benefit adjustments for eligible non - unionized employees was :presented to the City Council at the December 8, 1986, Council meeting. The General Services Pay Plan includes the City's office, clerical and technical personnel. This pay plan consists of approximately 60 predominantly non - supervisory personnel. The second pay plan under consideration is the Management Pay Plan, which includes approximately 33 management and supervisory personnel, ranging from first line supervisors to Department Head positions. The third pay plan under consideration is the Specialized Pay Plan. The Specialized Pay Plan includes all the City's seasonal and non - permanent part -time employees. The total number of employees covered by this pay plan varies from month to month and time of year. However, during the course of the summer months, several hundred part -time employees may be paid from this pay plan. All other City employees not covered by the three pay plans covered in this letter are represented by organized bargaining units. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution providing for a 3.5% pay structure adjustment for the Management, General Services and Specialized Pay Plans. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The recommendation of 3.5% is based on a thorough survey of surrounding communities with respect to non - unionized personnel. Pay increases from city to city varied, but were all in the 3.0 to 4.5 range. Many comparable cities indicated a tendency to grant 3.5% increases. 2. The budget provides for a total of 4% for salary adjustments and any comparable worth adjustments, which may be made during the course of 1987. Thus, there is funding provided for the 3.5% pay increase. 3. In arriving at a 3.5% pay structure recommendation, other factors such as internal employee equity and similar positions in other communities were considered. Alternative Recommendation: 1. City Council could decide not to grant any pay adjustments for non- unionized City employees. 2.- The City Council could delay granting pay structure increases for the City's non - unionized employees. 3. The City Council could decide to grant either a higher or lower percentage adjustment to the City's non - unionized employee groups. Discussion /Decision Modp: In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify payroll records in a timely fashion for January 1, 1987, it is recommended that the City Council act on December 22, 1987, to adopt the attached resolutions providing for pay structure adjustments effective January 1, 1987. Respectfully submitted, Ja s D. Prosser City Manager JDP /eja 9. CITY,OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 479 Agenda December 22,1986 Issue Statement: Approval Of Setting the'Date for a Public Hearing on A Planned Unit Development Plan, Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Street Vacation And Street Dedication Request For The CDR Project At 35W And 494. Background: A public hearing was scheduled for the December 22,1986 City Council meeting to consider a request by CDR Associates, " Minnesota Inc. for approval of a planned unit development plan, rezoning, preliminary plat, street: vacation and street dedication for their planned office /hotel project at 35W and 494. The hearing was suggested by the city attorney as an additional hearing for this particular project and not the normal hearing conducted with second reading of an ordinance for land use change. Notice of this hearing was published in the Richfield Sun Newspapers. However, the developer is reconsidering the phasing of their development and is considering adding the hotel to the first phase of development along with the 18 story office building. Because further analysis of this potential change was necessary to determine its impact on the specific site as well as the ILN improvement project, the Planning Commission continued their public hearing on this matter from December 16th to December 30th, 1986. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council continue the public hearing on this matter from December 22, 1986 to January 12, 1987. Second reading of the rezoning and other ordinances and the related public hearings will be scheduled for January 26, 1987. However, if members of the public are in attendance at the meeting, it would be appropriate to take their testimony before taking action to continue the hearing. Basis of Recommendation: The continuation is necessary to provide the Planning Commission sufficient information to review the proposal and make a recommendation to the City Council. Alternative Recommendation: Not continue the hearing. Decision Mode: Continuation is necessary because public notice has been published for the December 22, 1986 hearing date. Mailed and published notice will be provided for the January 12th and January 26th City Council meetings. Respectfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 478 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Public Hearing of an ordinance amendment establishing and defining a classification of employee entitled Project (Special Funded) Employee Background: In the course of administering a variety of public service programs, the city occasionally has the opportunity to obtain special funding from a number of non - general revenue sources. For example, in 1986 and 1987, the city is a recipient of grant funding from Hennepin County for the city's recycling program. The city also receives grant funding for a variety of other programs, such as energy related projects. Additionally, the city occasionally finds itself in a position of undertaking a large number of capital improvement projects or special assessment projects which are one or two years in duration and which require temporary additional staff. In both cases, special projects and temporary grants, there is often adequate funding provided to the city to carry out these programs ,and_to provide for an employee to work on the program. At the same time, it is neither desirable nor necessary to extend employment beyond the term of the project. City personnel ordinance; limits the eligibility of group insurance and holiday /leave benefits to permanent employees. Thus, project employees who may be employed for a year or two, are full time, but do not receive full time benefits. To address these concerns, an ordinance amendment has been prepared. The amendment establishes and defines a classification of employee entitled Project (Special Funded) Employee. This classification defines project employees as full time employees whose term of employment.is directly related to the operation of a specific program or project, and whose compensation is specifically allocated from designated revenues associated with such a project, such as grants or special assessment proceeds. The employment of a project employee would terminate upon the termination of such funding, or at the end of each year, unless it was to be renewed by the City Manager. However, for the term of such an individual's employment with the city, the employee would be eligible for group health insurance and holiday, vacation, personal leave and disability insurance, as a permanent employee would be. The new classification title attempts to balance the need to provide some sort of a benefit package to full -time employees who serve in year -by -year capacity with the city, while limiting the growth of permanent employees in the city. Recommendation: Hold the public hearing and adopt the attached ordinance amendment establishing and defining a classification of employee entitled Project (Special Funded) Employee. Basis for Recommendation: 1. At the December 8, 1986 city council meeting, the city council gave first reading to this ordinance amendment and scheduled the public hearing for December 22, 1986. 2. With the ongoing pressure to find outside funding for a number of limited duration programs, it is essential to find a means to staff such programs. It is beneficial to both the city and the prospective employee to offer a limited benefit package to such employees. 3. It is important to have flexibility within the Personnel Ordinance and budget process, to be able to make hiring decisions on certain positions which are.directly related to the receipt of special funding which may be discontinued. It is important for'both the city and such employee to have an understanding that once funding has terminated, or once such projects have been completed, that the position also terminates. Thus, both parties may have a complete an accurate expectation of the employment relationship upon hiring. 4.:. The city now faces a situation with administration of recycling grants (Recycling Specialist) and engineering services (Engineering Technician) for assessment projects where full -time help is needed and would be paid for by grant funding and special assessment project funding respectively. While the 1987 Engineering Division budget provides adequate funds for these positions, including benefits, it would be desirable to tie these positions to the respective projects they would be hired to work on. Thus, with the new classification of employee, the positions could receive benefits without adding to the permanent positions of the city. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The city could make.no provision to allow limited benefits for employees who are hired as full -time employees for periods of a year or more, and who are hired for the execution of duties.and responsibilities related to a special program. 2. The city could hire employees to perform such programs and make such employeesregular permanent employees incorporated in the budget. However, this would make it more difficult to associate the position with the particular program responsibilities the individual may have been hired to perform, and would serve to continually pressure the city to increase the number of permanent full -time positions in the city. • Discussion /Decision Mode: • It is recommended that the city council adopt this ordinance amendment at the December 22, 1986 city council meeting. This would allow the city an- adequate timeframe to fill two such positions which are provided for in the 1987 budget in a timely manner. RespectAully submitted, James D. Prosser City anager JDP /eja It t iF AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER II, • PART III OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF .THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter II, Part III of the Ordinance Code of the City entitled: "Personnel- Definitions -- Penalties and Separations, is hereby amended in the following respects: 1. By amending Subdivision 27 of Section 2.29 to read as follows: Subd. 27. "Project (Special Funded) Employee" means a full- time employee whose duties are directly related to the operation of a specific program or project and whose compensation is specifically allocated from designated non - general revenue funds, such as, but not limited to, grants or special assessment. With respect to Group Insurance, Holidays, Vacation Leave acid Personal Leave /Short -Term Disability benefits only, such employees shall be treated as permanent employees. 2. The City Clerk is instructed to renumber Subdivisions 28 through 41 of Section 2.29 to accommodate the above insertion of the above Subdivision. 3. By amending Subdivision 2 of Section 2.34, adding paragraph (4) to read as follows: (4) Termination of Project Employees - The employment of a Project Employee shall terminate upon the termination of such funding or at the end of each year unless extended by the City Manager. Such terminations shall not be construed as layoffs. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22 day of December, 1986. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY'OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 477 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Approval of the Social Services Agency Funding Report and Recommendation. Background:. The increasing number of requests for funding by the City of Richfield for social service agencies has prompted the city establish a Social Service Agency Committee to review the requests of the various agencies and to provide a report and recommendation for which agencies should receive funding and amount that funding should be. to what The committee was provided with a target total grant amount of $55,000. This amount was approved by the City Council in a lump sum as part of the 1987 budget. The committee has completed their review and deliberations. A copy of the report is attached. Recommendation: Approve the Social Services Agency Funding Committee recommendation for funding of social service agencies in the following amounts: Storefront /Youth Action, Inc. $42,850 South Hennepin Human Services 6,000 Senior Outreach Program 2,000 Project Charlie 1,800 Cornerstone Advocacy 1,250 - Home Program'(SHHSC) 1,100 TOTAL $55,000 Basis for Recommendation: 1. The Social Services Committee has carefully considered the individual requests of each agency requesting funding, and has assessed the relative needs and community impact and merit of each request in providing the final recommenda- tions. The committee was specifically selected for their sensitivity to community concerns and awareness of community social service needs and their recommendation should be followed. It should be noted that the committee has identified alternate methods for securing results desired by the social service agencies which do not receive funding. Therefore, it should not be assumed that those agencies not receiving funding were ignored. • Alternative Recommendation: 1. Reject the recommendation of the committee. The city council would then make their own determinations. Discussion /Decision Mode: This matter will be presented at the council meeting of December 22, 1986 as a consent item. If there is a desire for additional discussion of this item, it is recommended that the matter be deferred to the meeting,of January 12, 1987 in order that the committee can be present to further review their recommendations and basis of recommendation. Respectfully submitted, Jam s D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP /eja SOCIAL SERVICES 1987 FUNDING REQUESTS 1986 1987 1987 AGENCY RECEIVED REQUEST RECOMM. ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY -- - - - - -- $ 750 0 CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY -- - - - - -- $ 5,000 $ 1,250 HOME PROGRAM REQUEST (SHHSC) $ $ 5,000 $ 1,100 PROJECT CHARLIE $ 3,160 $ 3,160 $ 1,800 RICHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY -- - - - - -- $ 29500 0 SENIOR OUTREACH PROGRAM -- - - - - -- $ 6,095 $ 2,000 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES $ 5,800 $ 6,032* $ 6,000 STOREFRONT /YOUTH ACTION, INC. $40,800 $42,850 $42,850 UNITED BATTERED FAMILIES NETWORK -- - - - - -- $ 5,000 0 TOTALS $49,760 $76,387 $55 000 REPORT OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUNDING AGENCY COMMITTEE • The Social Services Funding Agency Committee has completed review of the applications for funding for the fiscal year 1987. The committee requested and received, applications from each agency requesting funding. Additionally, each agency provided an oral report and responded to meetings at meetings held on December 3 and 4, 1986. A final meeting was held on December 10. As part of the final deliberations the committee considered the following factors: 1. Given the fact that the total amount of funds available, $55,000 was less than the amount requested, $76,387, there was a need to establish priorities for the community. 2. The committee agreed that primary consideration should be given to those agencies who had been providing direct services to the community, especially to the extent that those traditionally provided services reduced the cost of direct operating budget. Specifically referencing South Hennepin'Human Services Council and the Storefront /Youth Action. 3. To the extent that agencies providing services were duplicative, an attempt was made to determine which organization appeared to be best able to deliver those services, historically and perspectively. 4. The, committee gave particular attention to the ability and willingness of organizations to seek alternate funding sources. 5. The committee reviewed the overall need for the _services and the record of the agency in servicing needs within the City of Richfield. After considerable amount of discussion, the final recommendation approved by the committee was as follows: Storefront /Youth Action, Inc. $42,850 South Hennepin Human Services Council $ 6,000 Senior Outreach Program $ 2,000 Project Charlie $ 12800 Cornerstone Advocacy $ 1,250 Home Program (SHHSC) $ 1 100 55,000 In addition, the committee made the following recommendations: 1. To the extent feasible, the city should attempt to work with agencies which have been funded, partially funded, • or not funded at all, in an attempt to identify other potential funding sources that may be contacted by these agencies. 1� 2. In the case of United Battered Families Network and Cornerstone, the committee suggested that the city council request that South Hennepin Human Services review these agencies to determine if there is any possibility of combining efforts to avoid any potential duplication. 3. The committee suggested that the city assist the Richfield Historical Society in providing additional information to the residents within the community as well as businesses relating to the desperate need for additional funds and volunteers to maintain the Barthelemow House. 4. The importance of Project Charlie was clearly recognized. However, given the obvious support for drug education' programs, the committee suggested that Project Charlie contact civic groups within the community for additional funding. 5. Finally, the committee suggested to the extent possible that all agencies requesting funding be reviewed by the South Hennepin Human Services Council prior to the application review by the Social Service Agency Committee next year in order to assess the agencies role in meeting human service needs within Richfield. • CITY OF RICHFIELD, Council Letter Agenda December MINNESOTA No. 476 22, 1986 2, 1 Issue Statement: Consideration of a request to approve a county -wide legislative goals committee policy statement for legislative action. Background: The county -wide legislative goals committee is one of five public health Goals Committees which have focused on a specific dimension of public health concerns. The committee consists of members of each local community health service board and has worked together to establish a unified approach in prioritizing health care issues for the Legislature. The issues which are of common interest to all five Hennepin County Boards of Health„ Hennepin County as a whole and the Metropolitan Council are summarized as follows: Home health regulation, uninsured medically disadvantaged, maternal and child health fundings, and CHS subsidy. Richfield's representative on this committee, Mary Brekke, has requested consideration of the council to approve the recommendations of the committee. Recommendation: Approve legislative policy recommendations. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The legislative policy recommendation report positively addresses issues of general concern to the City of Richfield. 2. Recommendation by Richfield Advisory Board of Health. Alternative Recommendation: !-.Not approve the recommendations based upon the different views of the council'. Discussion /Decision Mode: This matter will be presented as a consent item for the meeting of December 22, 1986. If any member of the council wishes additional discussion, tMe matter can be deferred for discussion at the January 12, 1987 council meeting. Respect lly submitted, Jam s D. Prosser Cit Manager . JDP /eja • 1 County tide Legislative Goals Committee I N T R 0 D U C T 1 0 N The County Wide Legislative Goals Committee is one of five public health goal committees which has focused on a specific dimension of public health concern. The committee, comprised of members of each local Community Health Services Board, has worked together to establish a' unified approach in prioritizing health care issues for the Legislature. These issues, which are of common interest to all five Hennepin County Boards of Health, Hennepin County as a whole and the metropolitan community, are summarized as follows: -home Health Regulation - Uninsured Medically Disadvantaged - •atern�l and Child Health -Funding -AIDS b -CHS Subsidy' In order to insure a unified approach and,presentation of t:ese 1JJUCJ to the legislature. criteria for their rof the issues] selection was developed by the committee. Also, a formal network of public health and other', non - governmental non - profit agencies working to pass health /public health legislation was established. The primary health related organizations who were contacted include the Minnesota Medical Association, the'Minnesota Public Health Association, the Minnesota Nurses Association, the Children's Defense Fund, the Minnesota Association of Community Health Administrators and Senator Linda Berglin. In July (1986), a Joint Hennepin County Advisory Committee' Meeting was held to discuss the issues in detail. During this meeting 13 legislative issues, previously identified by the health network, were presented. It is from this list that the five (5) key issues were selected. Since that time a detailed narrative description [attached] of the issues has been developed by the Legislative Committee for presentation and approval by the local boards of health. Upon approval by the local boards, the Legislative Committee will present their position to the Hennepin'County Legislative Delegation for further review and discussion. ISSUE = 1: II 0 M E H E A L T H R E G U L A T I O N The emphasis of the delivery of health care during this past decade has shifted from in- patient hospitalization to out - patient and home based care. Large numbers of senior citizens, the handicapped and general medical and surgical patients are being discharged earls from the hospital leaving them dependent upon themselves, their families and community resources for the balance of their recuperative. and maintenance care. Highly specialized procedures that were once limited to the hospital setting are now being performed in the patient's home. State and County supported Public Health Nurses were once the only source of community based care; now, however, to meet the increased demands, a new industry has evolved. Within the seven county region there are approxiamtely 160 operating home neaith care agencies. 11'hese agencies function independently with no provisions for the regulation and standardization of policies, personnel or services. Of additional concern is the lack cf established procedures to handle patient complaints or grievances. Regulation of home health care is a controversial issue and one which has remained unsettled since the 1986 legislative session. The Minnesota Department of Health sponsored a bill mandating licensure, but because of unresolved philosophical differences between, certain Legislators, the Department of Health and'home health providers, the bill was not passed. The primary source of disagreement concerns the issue of regulation by licensure, versus regulation by registration. Regulation by licensure would be statewide and mandatory, whereby regulation by registration would be. county based and voluntary. The Legislative Committee recommends that the Boards of Health take the following actions to support: *statewide licensure rather than registration; *establish personnel requirements and training guidlines to assure quality of staff working with volunteer organizations and agencies [with an allowance in the requirements to ensure continuation of care now being provided by family member's or volunteer organizations and volunteer chore services]; - continued- ,r__�- r-z 0 0 • • w .. Issue r 1: H 0 ", E H E y L T H R E G U L A T I O N appoint the Commissioner of Health responsible for regulation of licensure and services. Regulation of services should include: - standards of care criteria, - routine inspection of provider facilities with investigation by Commissioner of Health and not by individual counties, - routine on -site home visits [with client approval], _Petahl;chment of client erievance procedure, - availability of service and price listing, - establishment of Patients Bill of Rights; *establish licensure fee and allocation of funds for licensure process. I The Minnesota Department of Health is unable to estimate the cost of implementing home health licensure in Minnesota and it is this issue of increased regultory costs that remains a major factor in the opposition to state licensue. 2 0 K• Issue r 2 : U I N I N S U R E D E D I C A L L T . D I S A, D V A N T A G E D In a state where medical resources are in abundance, there is a vastly emerging population. throughout Minnesota who will never be able to avail themselves of care. Insurance is a major determinant of access to health care, but for an estimated 342,000 Minnesotans not covered by insurance, health care is not an option. Because many Minnesotans are without jobs they are also without health insurance. Additionally, the growth of the service industry and the increase in part -time employment has contributed to the working uninsured. Most of the employers do note provide or contribute to employee or dependent healtai coverage. miI& U)I IF- Mn P 1.vy It- V AO1T-1eT O /IW t19G � VU-0- 11ll ltd 111aJt11 rl ClJ r: i_i:G Gi the million Americans each vear who are now refused medical treatment, and two of five million others who don't even seek the help they need. With over 100,000 children and nearly one in five women between the ages of 18 and 24, the r�puiatiC•n gr =tit~ Of the L•___no_s_•� — e'�_il disad ant^ged y -o- in Minnesota is greatly Expanding. The Children's Defense Fund -Right Start Proposal states that Minnesota's most vulnerable citizens - mothers and children are among the least likely to be insured. To date, no specific legislation has been introduced which addresses these concerns. At a minimum, a statewide program is needed to insure the provision, of services to persons not covered by insurance. The initial focus should be on assuring the availability of preventive health services, _ ambulatory-care for children under age five and pregnancy related services for women who do not have insurance or are not eligible for Medicaid. The lack of early prenatal care is closely associated with poor birth outcomes and subsequent high health care costs. Minnesota spends more than S58.1 million on neonatal care each year. The elderly and the chronically ill are also part of this expanding population of the uninsured; their health care needs must also be evaluated. i - continued- • • Issue 2 - U N I N S U R E D M E D I D I S A D V A N T A G Legislation pertaining to health care uninsured medically disadvantaged inv A preliminary discussion must explore concerns: • C A L L T E D coverage for the olves several issues. the following -are the uninsured the responsibility of the state or federal government? - should a program be jointly funded through state and federal resources? - should coverage include all necessary health services or should services be limited% - S"Ouid target groups uS idcntiii�d and selected on the basis of greatest reed? Until these questions can be answered, developing long term strategies will be difficult. Due to the magnitude of the "r r, i imm r III F i. PC; i R i a r. i ve (, rim, i r —r- r P r- lnmim. F i 111 s r in A r.hP S r A r- v establish an Interim Commission comprised�of leaders from the private and public sector, the health care industry including insurance companies, as well as members from the legal and financial communities to develop an equitable way of financing and administrating a statewide program for providing services to the uninsured. 2 4 1 ISSUE u 3: M A T E R N A L A N D C H I L D fi E A L T H F U N D I h G The health care needs of indigent mothers and children have been federally funded for decades. However, the allocation and administration of funds has changed throughout the years; and herein lies the controversy. In 1985, the Minnesota Legislature passed.a number of major amendments to the State Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Act which included provision of one -third of the grant to local boards of health, more restrictive definitions of eligible services, a phased down of funding to the pre -block grant MCH programs and a reduction in the portion of the grant used for Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) administrative services. The current issue is whether any further changes are needed. Community Heath Service (CHS) agencies statewide provide maternal and child health services for those who do not have access to the health service system. Currently, a large portion of preventive heath services provided to low income fii_ ^.Aed h i, t'�e (H _1r,r-K r, r :4 tvr, Dr- rrPac;no the amount of MCH funds to the CHS agencies will sharply curtail the availability of direct services to children in Minnesota. In addition to the funding issue there is the controversy that still exists over the definition of eligible services. After the passage of the 1985 MCH Block Grant bill well child preventive services and dental services for children could no longer be funded. The Legislative Committee recommends that the Boards of Health take the following action to insure that: . *the MCH Block Grant continue to be divided among CHS agencies, pre -block grant programs and MDH, resulting in an increase in direct service program allocation and a decrease in MDH adminisrative service funds; the portion of the MCH Block Grant alloted to the CHS agencies continue toibe on a formula basis; *the eligible services be redefined to include primary health care for low- income children and dental care for children and pregnant women. 0 u • I• 0 ISSUE r 4: A I D S [Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome] AIDS is not just a problem for gay men, nor just a problem for people whose children are gay; this is a problem that all people need to be concerned about. It is now recognized that AIDS is transmitted through heterosexual contact as well as homosexual contact. The control and elimination of this disease continues to challenge the scientific, medical and religious communitie's as well as federal, state and local officials. No disease in the history of man has required so many divergent factions to work together in the prevention of such a decimating condition. The Public Health Service has conservatively estimated that 54,000 people will die from AIDS in 1991 alone, compared to 9,000 deaths accounted for this year. Most of the people who will develop AIDS by 1991 may appear healthy today; however, they have already been infected with the virus. It takes an average of four years foY an infected person to develop the disease. In Minnesota the number of patients afflicted with AIDS has been doubling every six months. State and local officials in Minnesota are faced with the need to - a-11 -oc -ate f..nn.S --nd prevention, research and treatment of AIDS while maintaining a balance among political, economic and public health concerns. Most communicable disease laws.in Minnesota are no longer applicable or have been repealed. Privacy and civil liberty issues and potential discrimination in the workplace and in housing must also be considered. To date there are no specific legislative solutions or policies which have been proposed by concerned groups or current providers of AIDS related services. The federal government is funding clinical (including vaccine development) as well as epidemiolnooical research; therefore, to avoid unnecessary duplication of services, the Legislative Committee recommends that the Boards of Health support state funding for prevention oriented activities which include the following: *monitoring the prevalence and incidence of the AIDS virus in Minnesota to determine the characteristics of the disease outbreak and trends; *development of community based education programs designed to stimulate behavorial changes to reduce the risk of acquiring ATTIC and farther trangmittinb the Aj ccaSe, especially among high risk groups and children. • - continued- . It . _ . Issue # 4: A I D S • *the coordination of community education, public information and awarenes=s initiatatives between local governmental agencies and private organizations; the development of an AIDS educational curriculum for use by local school districts; `the development of standard policies, programs and procedures for dealing with situations that pose particular disease management problems, specifically AIDS infection among the mentally ill, mentally handicapped and non - complient clients. According to Public Health Service the care of an AIDS patient would cost, on an average, at least $46,000 by 1991. Education and disease prevention are two of the major weapons with which to fight this dreaded disease. Although funding sources have not yet been identified it is evident that a coordinated effort by public and private health care providers at the national, state and local leve.ls is required. 0 • 2 I 1 ISSUE ;" 5: C H S S U B S I D Y • Community Health Services; (CHS) subsidy is a broad based issue involving the economics of health care funding and the politics of administrative control. In 1985, when the State Health Department was forced to cut funds to reduce the budget for the biennium, an expected 50 increase for CHS subsidy was disallowed. Because of the increased demands for public health services [for the elderly, the medically uninsured, indigent women and children, and communicable diseases such as AIDS], the loss of this 5% increase has had an effect on the overall delivery of care. Since federal funding has also been decreasing, the financial burden hub been buiiie uv iucui governments. LCt1Nsell i9v'1V GlaLL 1 J,U.T the loC.0 L tail 1C v y f or community health services increased statewide from $19.9 ILL 1 1 1 1 The type and extent of services available from Community Health Service Agencies varies from county to county. The available services are often a direct reflection of the county's political interests, rather than'bein^_ based upon actual need. For example, in most rural counties there are no public health clinics which offer subsidized quality prenatal care to the indigent. These women are forced to either do without care or;move to an outlying community such as Hennepin County where care is more accessible. As a result of the disparity in the services provided, State Legislatures want the local agencies to be more accountable for how the CHS Subsidy monies are spent the local boards resent state inteference and want to maintain their autonomy and direct control of how funds are allocated. The Legislative Committee.recommends that the Boards of Health in Hennepin County support the following action: *allotment of a statewide subsidy increase of at least 10% for Community Health Service Agencies; *establishment of s1pecific program guidlines for the use of CHS funds by the the local boards of health; *allocation of at least 25% of the increased funds for preventive health initiatives. • .n S U R V E Y I S S U E S � I D E N T I F I E D B Y H E A L T H N E T W O R K 1. Seat Belt Penalties 2. Maternal and Child,Health Funding 3. Uninsured /Underinsured State Residents 4. AFDC Reform 5. School -Based Clinics C i C s fCr ::3. ^.`�1CuTTGI mail A,-=n V. 1'1G11LLal. =l1 .ipeciai ucrvil. i' YY 0 -3 i 7. AIDS 8. EMS Funding 9. Recodification of the Community Health Services Act (MN)* 10. Community Health Services Subsidy 11. Medical Liability Insurance 12. Regulation of Home Health Agencies T 13. Pre - Admission Screening Expansion • 0 • iJ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 475 ;December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Adoption of the attached resolution which establishes the date for a public hearing on the ILN Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan (Plans) amendments for January 26, 1987. Background: In November, 1985, the HRA and City Council approved a redevelopment plan and tax increment finance plan for the ILN area. As a result of modifications to the CDR project, it was necessary to modify the;'Plans to reflect less value for their development and less tax increment revenues. The modifications have had extensive exposure to the public and in some instances reflect the suggestions made at public meetings. Basis of Recommendation: On December 15, 1986, the HRA adopted the attached resolution whereby they approved the modifications and requested the City Council to schedule a public hearing and consider approval of the Plans. Alternative Recommendation: 1—Not schedule a hearing at this time 2) Schedule a hearing for another date Decision Mode: Scheduling a hearing at this time would make it possible to meet the publication requirement for a public hearing. Respe�tjtfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP /eja • CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (HRA) adopted a resolution on December 15, 1986, adopting a modified Redevelopment Plan and a modified Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Interstate Lyndale Nicollet redevelopment district; and WHEREAS, such Plans must'be presented to the City Council of the City of Richfield for consideration and adoption prior to undertaking any publicly financed redevelopment work within the area. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield as follows: 1. That a public hearing be held before the City Council at city hall on January 26, 1987, at 7 :00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard: 2. That the city clerk is authorized and directed to cause to be published a notice of said public hearing in the official newspaper of the City at least ten days in advance of the meeting. 3. That the city clerk or city attorney is authorized to transmit a copy of the Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan along with a notice of the public hearing to the county and school district. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of December, 1986. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: • Thomas Ferber, City Clerk 0055RE02.E40 1 F HRA RESOLUTION NO. 295 RESOLUTION APPROVING A MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE INTERSTATE- LYNDALE- NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; REQUESTING THE RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL TO CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARINGS THEREON; RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PLANS BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (HRA) adopted a redevelopment plan (Redevelopment Plan) and a tax increment financing plan (TIF Plan) for the area of the City generally known as the Interstate- Lyndale- Nicollet area (Project Area) on October 21, 1985. 1.02 The city council of the City of Richfield (City) held a public hearing on the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan and approved the Plans on November 12, 1985. 1.03 Changes in the public and private improvements to be constructed within 'the Project Area have occurred and have necessitated modification of the Plans. 1.04 The HRA has caused:to be prepared a modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan which are contained in a document entitled "Interstate Lyndale Nicollet Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan" dated December 15, 1986; and on file with the HRA. 1.05 The modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan were referred for review to the! Richfield planning commission and on November 25, 1986, the planning commission found that the modified Plans were consistent with general plans for development of the City. Section 2. HRA Approval. 2.01 The HRA finds that the objectives of the HRA in encouraging development and redevelopment within the Project Area will be advanced by adoption of the modified Redevelopment. Plan and TIF Plan. 1 ' 2.02 The modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan are hereby approved and adopted by the HRA. Section 3. Further Proceeding. 3.01 The executive director of the HRA is hereby authorized and directed to transmit copies of the modified Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan to the school board of Independent School District No. 280 and the board of commissioners of Hennepin County for review and comment and to notify said public bodies of the public hearing to be held on the Plans by the City. 3.02 The HRA requests the City to hold the public hearing on the modified Plans required by Minn, Stat. Section 462.521 and Minn. Stat. Section 273.74, Subd. 3 as soon hereafter as is practicable and recommends that the modified Plans be approved by the city. Section 4. Financing. 4.01 The HRA intends to request that the City assist from time to time in financing the public redevelopment costs identified in the TIF Plan by issuance of its general obligation bonds payable from the tax increments of the TIF District. 4.02 The HRA also intends to request that the city from time to time consider various other actions necessary to the imple- mentation of the Plans and pledges its cooperation with the City in achieving the objectives of the Plans. Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 15th day of December, 1986. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Joan Helmberger, Secretary 0056REOI.E40 i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 474 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Request for illuminated sign at Market Plaza, 700 West 66th Street. Background City ordinance provides that the city council must approve all permits for illuminated signs. Market Plaza - 700 West 66th Street, has requested an advertising permit for an illuminated ground sign with a size of 9' X 251. It is to include a clock, the "Market Plaza" logo and a sign for the Drug Emporium. At the present time it appears that the exterior aluminum materials do not meet LHN guidelines. Recommendation: It is recommended that the city this illuminated sign, provided LHN guidelines. council approve the permits for that the exterior materials meet Basis for Recommendation: 1. The Inspection Division and Planning Division have approved the signs. 2. The signs conform to all applicable city ordinances. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not approve the permits. However, the city has no alternative design criteria to suggest for substitutes for these signs. Discussion /Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the consent calendar portion of the December 22nd council agenda for consideration. The business is requesting action to complete their sign placement. Respectfully submitted, i s D. Prosser City Manager • Q t ; ' ,7• I i i. tC� .OqO i � tEv Q•LUr•tINUH W/ Pf'+r�r FiNWiK • � 1 1 � -� lU- urrW�v I i MARKET . oGo �r.U► -t . �-c vim- � � • eon Nr rl?4Kp►4 r i alF je7 -- GJ�-7 pec.T'Tu me Ir DRUG 4 _ EMPORIUM '� PC i I' i � I I i Lit r `�� •° �L>!Y -.1 • �L! cl E1r " F � yJt I: 0 o3 -�lQ CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 473 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Consideration of Approval of Purchase Order for Optech III -P Voting Equipment. Background: At the October 1, 1986 Budget Hearing the City Council approved a modification to the Capital. Improvement Budget to provide for the acquisition of the Optech III -P optical scan voting equipment. This voting equipment was recommended by the Hennepin County Voting Equipment Task Force for utilization on a county wide basis. On November 24, 1986, the city council reviewed a presentation and demonstration of the Optech III -P voting equipment by representatives of the vendor, Business Records Corporation, and Marge Christianson of the Hennepin County Election Division. Hennepin County is acting as an agent in pooling all orders of municipalities in Hennepin and Ramsey County for this voting equipment to obtain quantity discounts on the purchase price. Orders by the various municipalities must be received by 12/31/86 in order to qualify for the quantity discount. That discount, which is based on the total number of units purchased by the County, could save the City $625 per unit. However, this final discount will not be known until all interested Cities have submitted their orders to the County. It is proposed that the City of Richfield purchase:ll Optech III - P voting devices ($4800 each) and 11 duplicate prom packs ($225 each) which are required by state law for each unit. This will provide for one unit per precinct (9 precincts) and two back up units. Delivery will be requested so that the devices can be used for the Fall 1987 Elections. Hennepin County will not have the programming equipment in place in time for the May, 1987 school board election. (Hennepin County will be responsible for programming the devices and is purchasing the necessary equipment); therefore, the optical scan equipment will not be available for use at that election. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council authorize a purchase order for the purchase of 11 Optech III -P voting devices and 11 duplicate prom packs for a total estimated purchase price of $55,275. Basis of Recommendation:' 1. The voting equipment currently used by the City of Richfield (Shoup Lever voting machines) is over 30 years old and needs • to be replaced. In addition, the Optech III devices would provide much quicker voting results. �r .r 2. The Hennepin County Voting Equipment Task Force has recommended utilization of the Optech III -P as voting equipment for the entire county. 3. During the budget hearing process, the city council gave approval to modifying the Capital Improvement Budget to provide for acquisition of election equipment. 4. To qualify for a quantity discount, a purchase order must be received by Hennepin County by 12/31/86. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The city council could decide not to purchase new voting equipment. This would require the temporary or permanent acquisition of additional lever machines for the 1988 elections. 2. The city council could delay purchase of new voting equipment until a later date. However, the discount would not be available after the l2 /31/86 group purchase. Discussion /Decision Mode: In order to receive a substantial quantity orders must be received by Hennepin County Therefore, it is recommended that the city authorize the purchase of the Optech III -P 6 i equipment at the December 22, 1986, counci • discount, purchase by 12/31/86. council act to optical scan voting 1 meeting. Respe tfully Submitted, Ja a D. Prosser Ci Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 472 Agenda December 22,-1986 Issue Statement: Supplemental Agreement for Technical Assistance for the ILN Redevelopment Project with the firm of BRW. Background: The HRA and City Council have contracted with the planning consulting firm of BRW since April, 1985. BRW and especially Mr. Arijs Pakalns, have been working in two areas. First was to prepare a plan for the future of the ILN area which in part became the ILN Redevelopment Plan approved by the HRA and City Council in 1985. Since the spring of this year, they have been working with staff, the,ILN Advisory Committee, the ILN Residential Advisory Committee and other people from the community to revise the original redevelopment plan to meet the needs of the community with less revenue. i In July 1986, the HRA and City Council approved a second contract with BRW for $26,000 for two tasks. Task one would provide technical assistance for special studies in the ILN and for the assessment of the impact of development proposals on the redevelopment plan. The second task called for the formulation of guidelines and strategies for the redevelopment area.between 77th Street and I494. This task would be important to help assure that the city is:in a strong position to not only seek development proposals for this area but properly evaluate them. The funds from the July contract have been completely expended on task one. The expenses were incurred because of the extensive public meeting process which began to unfold near late August. The July contract did not anticipate the high level of community activity. From September through October BRW was involved in 6 of the 9 meetings of the Residential Advisory Committee. There were also meetings with staff to review issues which arose during this period. The time commitment was great because the Residential Advisory Committee discussions were very detailed. Discussion at these meetings were preceded by questions from the committee for which written answers were requested for the meeting. The questions and answers for the various topics resulted in four technical memos which generally focused on traffic. The memos are attached to provide an understanding of the many issues and details which demanded attention. The contract attached to:this letter provides funding for four tasks. They are described on pages 4 and 5 of the contract. To clarify, Task la. would provide funding for assistance which may be needed as the HRA and City Council consider action on items related to the amended ILN redevelopment project plan and the CDR proposal. As indicated on page 4, it would also provide assistance to work with the residents and business people in evaluating the needs and requirements for the 77th Street improvements especially the buffer strip and roadway loops. 'Work related to 77th Street and the loops is, of course, subject to the HRA and City Council responding favorably to the requests for action related to the amended redevelopment project plan and CDR proposal. i.. I 2- Z-X Task 2 was included in the previous contract. However, no work was accomplished on this task as indicated above. This task is important for the city to realize the potential of the area south of 77th Street. The limitation on issuance of building permits expires March 22, 1987.; Task 3 would be classified as an implementation activity the undertaking of which would be dependent upon the approval of the redevelopment plan amendments and CDR's amended contract. Task 4 relates to the seeking of funds for improvements to the Lyndale /494 bridge. The I494 corridor study will be released about mid -1987. That report may significantly influence the design of the bridge. However, to put the city in the best possible position to deal with the need for bridge improvements, it would be desirable to apply for FAU funds when the applications are released in late January. Competition for FAU funds will be very keen and we may have to apply more than once, so it is important to start next year. Staff has met with Bloomington staff regarding the bridge. Bloomington has indicated they would support an FAU application. The amount of compensation projected at this time for each task is indicated on page 7 of the agreement. Funds would be provided from the HRA Capital Revolving Fund which is to be reimbursed by the temporary bonds when redevelopment proceeds. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the supplemental contract with BRW to permit planning activity to continue in an amount not to exceed $50,000. Basis of Recommendation. As of the payment of the October statement, the current contract has no funds remaining. (The HRA approved this agreement at their 12/15/86 meeting).' Alternative Recommendation: The City Council could approve less than all four of the tasks contained in the supplemental contract, although the HRA approved the full contract. Decision Mode: Action by the City Council is desirable on December 22nd 'so that work under the contract me continue. Respectfully submitted, LAVj Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager • JDP /eja _ PLANNING i TRANSPORTATION r --~ - ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS. GARDNER. INC. THRESHER SOUARE 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612'370 -0700 DATE: September 18, 1986 ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 4 FROM: Arijs Pakalns, AIA, AICP RE: Responses to Traffic Issues Raised by The Residential Advisory Committee (RAC) Following is a summary of the questions and responses to the issues raised by the ILN RAC. r 1. ISSUE: How will vehicles traveling west or east on W. 76th Street make the turning movement at Emerson Avenue? RESPONSE: t For most of the vehicles itraveling west on W. 76th Street the destination will be the I -35W access iramp or points west of I -35W. These vehicles will make a simple right -turn movement onto the new W. 77th Street exten- sion. Vehicles whose destination is the new commercial district along the freeway or the Lyndale Avenue access ramp to I -494 will have to make a left -turn movement at the new W. 77th Street intersection, or they can use Lyndale Avenue, which would be a lot easier and also a more direct route. The vehicles traveling east on W. 76th Street will use the left turn lane on the new W. 77th Street extension to make the left turn movement into W. 76th Street. 2. ISSUE: How will businesses along;W. 77 -1/2 Street enter the rear of their pro- perty for loading purposes? RESPONSE: The access to the north side of the businesses north of W. 77 -1/2 Street will continue to be, for the time being, as it is now, directly from W. 77th Street. As part of the Phase I, Stage 1 improvements, W. 77th Street, between Colfax Avenue and Lyndale Avenue will be upgraded to a four -lane roadway and the.residential streets north of W. 77th Street will •, DAVID J. SENNETT DONALD W. RINGROSE RICHARD P WOLSFELD PETER E. JARVIS LAWRENCE J. GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A. AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G SWENSON JOHN 8. MCNAMARA DONALD L. CRAIG RICHARD 0. PILGRIM DALE N. BECKMANN DENNIS J. SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER , BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX Technical Memorandum No. 4 September 18, 1986 Page 2 be looped to eliminate commercial through traffic on the residential - streets. The service access for the existing businesses will be from the southerly lane of the four -lane roadway. Although this is not an optimum situation, this condition will remain until the area along W. 77 -1/2 Street is redeveloped and the need for direct service access to be busi- nesses is eliminated, as recommended in the ILN Redevelopment Plan. At the time this area is redeveloped and the service need eliminated, W. 77th Street will be upgraded to a four -lane roadway with a landscaped median and protected left -turn lanes. 3. ISSUE: What are the traffic counts at W. 76th and W. 77th Streets, where the two streets merge? RESPONSE: The existing traffic counts indicate that the Average Daily Traffic Volume (ADT) on W. 76th Street in the vicinity of Emerson Avenue is approximately 11,000 vehicles a day. The projected traffic volumes for the new inter- section are as follows: Average Daily Traffic Volume (ADT) Street Phase I, Stage 1 Phase I (Full Dev.) W. 76th Street 5,600 W. 77th Street Extension 15,800 5,600 18,500 4. ISSUE: What are the current and projected traffic counts for West 76th Street (west of the I -35W overpass)? Should address the entire impact not just a segment. RESPONSE: The current average traffic volume on W. 76th Street west of I -35W is 12,300 vehicles a day. The Phase I developments will generate a total volume of 12,460 vehicles a day. Since it is estimated that only five percent of the study area generated traffic will use W. 76th Street west of I -35W, the increase in traffic volume west of :I -35W will be approxima- tely 600 vehicles a day for a total projected volume of 12,900 vehicles a day. This volume will be well within the capacity of W. 76th Street. L� Technical Memorandum No. 4 September'18, 1986 Page 3 The projections for Penn Avenue at W. 76th Street are between 12,300 and 14,200 ADT. By comparison the volumes on Penn Avenue at W. 66th Street are between 15,900 and 22,000 ADT. Therefore; especially with the pro- posed improvements at Penn Avenue, the intersection at Penn Avenue and W. 76th Street will be adequate to handle the projected traffic volumes. 5. ISSUE: How can we defend against increased traffic in area? We should be con- cerned about the Mega Mall effect and take a defensive position in our community. It's important to take commercial traffic off residential streets. RESPONSE: One of the primary goals of the ILN Redevolpment Project is to eliminate commercial traffic from residential streets. This will be accomplished by channeling all commercially oriented traffic onto the designated business roadways, such as the proposed new W. 77th Street, and by looping the residential streets to eliminate through traffic. The Redevelopment Project will also reduce traffic on W. 76th Street which is located in a residential neighborhood. The key to minimizing traffic problems is proper planning. The community should continue planning efforts, such as the ILN Redevelopment Study, to insure that the proper framework exists to accommodate future changes. 6. ISSUE: What is the possibility of relocating the signal on Lyndale Avenue and W. 76th Street south to W. 77th Street and possibly eliminating the W. 76th Street signal and the Lyndale Avenue & I -494 signal? Traffic signals are so costly. RESPONSE: All three intersections on Lyndale Avenue, at W. 76th Street, at W. 77th Street, and at the I -494 access ramps, have and will continue to have sufficiently large traffic volumes, including turning movements, to warrant signals and, therefore, none of these signals should be elimi- nated. It is physically impossible to combine these intersections. l Technical Memorandum No. 4 September'18, 1986 Page 3 The projections for Penn Avenue at W. 76th Street are between 12,300 and 14,200 ADT. By comparison the volumes on Penn Avenue at W. 66th Street are between 15,900 and 22,000 ADT. Therefore; especially with the pro- posed improvements at Penn Avenue, the intersection at Penn Avenue and W. 76th Street will be adequate to handle the projected traffic volumes. 5. ISSUE: How can we defend against increased traffic in area? We should be con- cerned about the Mega Mall effect and take a defensive position in our community. It's important to take commercial traffic off residential streets. RESPONSE: One of the primary goals of the ILN Redevolpment Project is to eliminate commercial traffic from residential streets. This will be accomplished by channeling all commercially oriented traffic onto the designated business roadways, such as the proposed new W. 77th Street, and by looping the residential streets to eliminate through traffic. The Redevelopment Project will also reduce traffic on W. 76th Street which is located in a residential neighborhood. The key to minimizing traffic problems is proper planning. The community should continue planning efforts, such as the ILN Redevelopment Study, to insure that the proper framework exists to accommodate future changes. 6. ISSUE: What is the possibility of relocating the signal on Lyndale Avenue and W. 76th Street south to W. 77th Street and possibly eliminating the W. 76th Street signal and the Lyndale Avenue & I -494 signal? Traffic signals are so costly. RESPONSE: All three intersections on Lyndale Avenue, at W. 76th Street, at W. 77th Street, and at the I -494 access ramps, have and will continue to have sufficiently large traffic volumes, including turning movements, to warrant signals and, therefore, none of these signals should be elimi- nated. It is physically impossible to combine these intersections. Technical Memorandum #4 September 18, 1986 Page 4 �. 7. ISSUE: - The Lyndale Avenue stacking area will be complicated by the Hampton Inn ingress and egress. RESPONSE: The ILN Phase I plan includes the widening of Lyndale Avenue and the installation of a median barrier. This will result in right -in and right - out traffic movements only at the Hampton Inn entrance and should present no problems for traffic movement or staking. 8. ISSUE: Why not widen the south side of the W. 76th Street bridge? RESPONSE: Most of the pedestrian traffic origin and destination points are located north of the W. 76th Street bridge and therefore the north side of the bridge was selected for widening. The public facilities west of I -35W are located north of W. 16th Street and most of the residential area east of I -35W will also be located north of the W. 76th Street /W. 77th Street - minor arterial making the north side of the bridge the logical choice for widening. Widening both sides of the bridge would double the cost and would be redundant. One more factor which should be considered as part of the bridge widening issue is 'the I -35W corridor study. If the study- recommen- dations-call for widening I -35W and rebuilding the W. 76th Street bridge, which could incorporate a wider pedestrian crossing, widening the bridge now could be wasteful and unwise. 9. ISSUES: What impact will the I -494 and I -35W corridor study recommendations have on our community? What effect will the freeway expansion have on the frontage roads, and exit and entrance ramps onto Lyndale Avenue? RESPONSE: Both, the I -494 and the I -35W corridor studies are currently underway and should be completed sometime in 1987. Since the ILN area is located at the intersection of these two major freeways, there certainly may be some significant impacts on the ILN study area especially in the frontage road area and at the interchanges. r1 U r 4 J Technical Memorandum #4 September 18, 1986 Page 4 �. 7. ISSUE: - The Lyndale Avenue stacking area will be complicated by the Hampton Inn ingress and egress. RESPONSE: The ILN Phase I plan includes the widening of Lyndale Avenue and the installation of a median barrier. This will result in right -in and right - out traffic movements only at the Hampton Inn entrance and should present no problems for traffic movement or staking. 8. ISSUE: Why not widen the south side of the W. 76th Street bridge? RESPONSE: Most of the pedestrian traffic origin and destination points are located north of the W. 76th Street bridge and therefore the north side of the bridge was selected for widening. The public facilities west of I -35W are located north of W. 16th Street and most of the residential area east of I -35W will also be located north of the W. 76th Street /W. 77th Street - minor arterial making the north side of the bridge the logical choice for widening. Widening both sides of the bridge would double the cost and would be redundant. One more factor which should be considered as part of the bridge widening issue is 'the I -35W corridor study. If the study- recommen- dations-call for widening I -35W and rebuilding the W. 76th Street bridge, which could incorporate a wider pedestrian crossing, widening the bridge now could be wasteful and unwise. 9. ISSUES: What impact will the I -494 and I -35W corridor study recommendations have on our community? What effect will the freeway expansion have on the frontage roads, and exit and entrance ramps onto Lyndale Avenue? RESPONSE: Both, the I -494 and the I -35W corridor studies are currently underway and should be completed sometime in 1987. Since the ILN area is located at the intersection of these two major freeways, there certainly may be some significant impacts on the ILN study area especially in the frontage road area and at the interchanges. r1 U i 1• , } Technical Memorandum No. 4 September.18, 1986 Page 5 The ILN Redevelopment Plan does consider the possibility that I -494 and I -35W may have to be widened and the frontage roads may have to be vacated. The circulation system proposed by the ILN Plan does not depend on the frontage roads, and all traffic and area access can be accommodated on other roadways. Until the studies are completed and the recommendations presented, very little can be done. The best course for the City would be to stay ac- tively involved in the study process and to aggressively address the impacts once the recommendations are published and implementation begins. AP /sk F_ -I `i f r PLANNING c�c ` TRANSPORTATION ` ENGINEERING V ARCHITECTURE • BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS. GARDNER. INC. THRESHER SOUARE 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612'370 -0700 DATE: September 25, 1986 ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 5 FROM: Arijs Pakalns, AIA, AICP i RE: Responses to Traffic Issues Raised by The Residential Advisory Committee (RAC) at the September 18, 1986 meeting. At the September 18, 1986 RAC meeting a list of questions was submitted by the RAC chairman regarding a widerange of traffic circulation related issues in the ILN area. Since many of the questions deal with existing traffic conditions and the pro- posed traffic circulation plan, most of the answers are provided in the ILN Redevelopment Study report which was published aspart of the ILN redevelpoment planning process and which has been distributed to all RAC members. Additional answers to traffic circulation questions are provided in Technical Memorandum No.4 which included responses to the first set of traffic issue questions raised by RAC and which was presented and discussed at the September 18, 1986 RAC meeting. Copies of Technical Memorandum No. 4 are attached. Finally, in order to more clearly answer further traffic questions raised at past meetings, additional traffic study material has been prepared and is included as part of this memorandum. The additional material consists of the following: o Table 1, PM Peak Hour Level of Service o Figure 1, 1984 Traffic Counts o Figure 2, Future Traffic' Volumes, Phase I, Stage 1 o Figure 3, Future Traffic i Volumes, Phase I Additional traffic data which was too detailed for inclusion in the ILN Redevelopment Study report or'the attached material is available for review at the BRW offices. Since answers to all the traffic issues raised are contained in either the ILN Redevelopment Study report or;the attached material and in order to minimize duplication, responses to the traffic issues are given by referencing the appropriate.source material. DAVID J. BENNETT DONALD W. RINGROSE RICHARD P WOLSFELD PETER E JARVIS LAWRENCE J. GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G. SWENSON JOHN B. McNAMARA DONALD L CRAIG RICHARD 0. PILGRIM DALE N. BECKMANN DENNIS J. SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER, BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX r• Technical Memorandum No. 5 September 25, 1986 • Page 2 J-e,fl Following is a listing of the questions and responses to the traffic issues raised at the September 18, 1986 RAC meeting: I. What is Existing Situation A. Capacity of existing system 1. 76th Street 2. 76th Street & I35W Interchange 3. Lyndale & I494 Bridge RESPONSE: For items I.A.1., I.A.2., andI.A.3 see Table 1 (Attached). The capacity is given in terms of level of service. 4. 76th Street & Penn 5. Penn & I494 Bridge RESPONSE: For items I.A.4. and I.A.5. a separate study has been conducted by Hennepin County and is available through City staff. B. What level of service exists today . 1. A, B, C, D, E, or F RESPONSE: See Table 1 TAttached) 2. Average Daily Traffic RESPONSE: See "Inventory /Analysis" (page 9) and Figure 10 (page 33) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. 3. Peak hour traffic, occurrence RESPONSE: See Table 2 (page 32) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. C. What are existing turning movements 1. 76th & Lyndale 2. Lyndale & I -494 Both sides i r- --I- Technical Memorandum No. 5 September 25, 1986 Page 3 RESPONSE: For items I.C.1. and I.C.2. see Table 2 (page 32) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. 3. 76th & Penn RESPONSE: i A separate study has been conducted by Hennepin County and is available through City staff. D. Where is Origin & Destination of traffic RESPONSE: See "Existing Traffic Circulation" (page 22) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. II. What are Projected Volumes e- • A. Projections i 1. Each phase I & II of CDR & Corporate Travel project & by uses (office, hotel,'etc.) RESPONSE: For Phase I, Stage 1 and Phase I traffic volumes see Figures 2 and 3 (Attached) and Table 4 (page 63) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. 2. Completed ILN RESPONSE: See Figures 13 and 14 in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. i 3. Completed ILN &'Redevelop in Bloomington RESPONSE: See Figures 13 and 14 in the ILN Redevelopment Study.` Increases in background traffic were used to account for additional developments outside the ILN study area. r ,_�- c/a r, Technical Memorandum No.5 September 25,1986 Page 4 B. What is projection by ADT & Peak Hour for each phase, completed ILN & completed ILN & Bloomington redevelopment RESPONSE: See Table 4 (page 63) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. The ADT projec- tion for Phase I, Stage 1 is 6,100 vehicles a day. C. What is Origin & Destination of projected traffic - How determined RESPONSE: See Traffic Circulation Alternatives" (page 55) and specifically "Trip Generation" (page 62), Table 4 (page 63), and "Trip Distribution" (page 64) in the ILN Redevelopment Study report. III. What is Detail Plan To Handle Projected Traffic A. Major Parts 1. 77th Street 2. 77th & Lyndale 3. 76th & I35W i 4. 76th & Penn - B. Other Parts 1. Fremont & 76th 2 76th & New 77th 'Street 3. Emerson & 76th 4. 76th & Lyndale RESPONSE: See the ILN Redevelopment Study report C. Pedestrian, Safety 1. 76th & 35W RESPONSE: See Issue #8 in Technical Memorandum No.4 (Attached) 2. 77th Street RESPONSE: Pedestrian Crossings will be provided as required. A signalized crossing will • be installed at W. 77th Street and Lyndale Avenue. Technical Memorandum No.5 September 15, 1986 Page 5 TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE 2-e* // Note: This Analysis is Based on Circular 212 Planning Analysis Methods for signalized intersections. Level A represents the highest level of service with Level F representing the lowest. Level D is typically considered to be the lowest desireable level of service. 1/ Assumes widening of Lyndale Avenue to provide northbound left -turn lane from Lyndale Ave to westbound 77th Street, right turn lane on southbound Lyndale Avenue to westbound I -494 on -ramp, and right -turn lane on northbound Lyndale Avenue to eastbound I -494 on -ramp. 0 0 • INTERSECTION EXISTING PHASE I - STAGE 2 PHASE 1 76th St. /I -35W Off -Ramp A A B 76th St. /I -35W On -Ramp * B C 76th St. /Lyndale Ave. C B B 77th St. /Lyndale Ave. D C 1/ 77 -1/2 St. /Lyndale Ave I * Removed Removed I- 494 /Lyndale Ave. (North Ramps) C D C.1/ I- 494 /Lyndale Ave. (South Ramps) B C C.1/ Note: This Analysis is Based on Circular 212 Planning Analysis Methods for signalized intersections. Level A represents the highest level of service with Level F representing the lowest. Level D is typically considered to be the lowest desireable level of service. 1/ Assumes widening of Lyndale Avenue to provide northbound left -turn lane from Lyndale Ave to westbound 77th Street, right turn lane on southbound Lyndale Avenue to westbound I -494 on -ramp, and right -turn lane on northbound Lyndale Avenue to eastbound I -494 on -ramp. 0 0 • 0 0 • S 1At L Z J t wil O O IZ O Y 'il �011 3Sit01 Y too ,e r I0 I 0 0 cn C . ■ :nz G 'N £ 4 L= 'lA U wet "a ~~ V Y '3At Q/ £ Y '3At Y Y S r '3A. ly XOIOXIX0011 N s f s g Y i Y 1At J�� wit N S '3AtN O ryt Y -JAI wIt •S F T w21 M @ " S S T r 0 •Ti !L Q3At • s D n t t £ r • .S v $ '3A. w 107 S" 3At mm, Y QXt1 tt0 S Wd W4 N t DAA1 1 3At wi ^ U N : Y N w -JAW T SAW X117 ",j £ �` r yi Y w 3At.� MO1 1417. w Y M £ S S» Q ■ '3At. ag Y 3At put O Sri) Y N$ 'i 3At W3A 3aS Y r x W S '3At — .n .i �• r Y■ ® Y S 1«tj tjl/ � 3111 f 7 3At s 11 I 3"" Y Y M 3']AI S 131107 l � N : ® M -S • S N N X1W0 1X3■ 1At M N X /Y0■ lAf3A1» M S» 3A• O T 7At a1rO S11id 1 At !Mt Sv3L 3 AIIIYSIIU '3At 3< C3 Cl �' J\ F r ■ £ t Y »7RI 3At j awK t3L 'S �1 •S y T 3At iXKt31r j tM/q .• ; R S 3At 2L QMtY7 de 3A►» C Y -57 a 3t s 3111 71Y1■ S'Jrlt -1 `r b <� Oaf! Y 3At£ «71Iq S 3At f l 3At EIXVIW 3A. 1 • -M y i s i 3At w w Y 1At aXOI 147 » » � YY At1A IyQ1W ■M WN f f £ r r $t.�i '3At 1alOMM i : : 3At slow 'S Y '3At m '1 f : �' 3A, 1Xts N 1At £ 3At a331t _ Q •3A. olIIS : N N I. OA. YtX rrn S • r M 3AI» : s X Df�3 i" 1117 f �.� i ► t OY►YM S S Y S e 21 At 111011 ;W - ■ A.S D3W 3 OF C A. 4 XPw" .S T O 1 S N -JAY.: ON Y£ 1At f FQM © 1 r r S N Y . N N = U. C7m aI ' '3At c 1A► j . Xt1 Tv—ft 1At a .fit XO ■ c 1At 1M Q 7 �' ■ 3At w N ,/' 3Ar 3At X ♦, '3At /a : Y s '3Ate l71S F — XI Ilf)15 Y '3A, : Stt1p11 Y 1At • X01 • j 1«37MIA j y1 111 tR ■ O '1t31 w0a ■ O: M » L 011►3Y 3A. .3YO •S 1 : �� : : 'S 1At '3At 1 N pp i ■ Y C < 9l dii R ta' l O i! O : . �: J �3A.0 MJjfl 37XTVJ L Y /1 -al fez IZ too ,e r I0 I 0 0 cn C O 4 L= U zro ~~ V CO 4--f 00 'c �IEiU ll0 O I!'li ❑!0 10 jo b a O b �I I OI OI OIOI I- + I °lojolol rT:TT:� rT T T ®. I - -� - -- 1P113 1oI131 10I13 113 I0pPp 1� I L D cool] i T � rc5o i l i I l I � I I tty O I i I I o I° In rTTTZ TT i 7 !400 I i i i i Qi °ial °I iolo101010 jo jo i 1 0 ado �' j I I J-1 7i� 'P�u TTT 401 1010101 0;, : - - --� I I► I I I L !I OOOO °,a F., I ❑ 1 iftial �IC�101 r q �al 61 1.1._..1 L..1..�. .1.J r ]' I dT-TnHb7r .i 1 ,-L -P-+ + t -+ �l Ida I oioldOlolOiolO 1 1 1 1 LI - -.L 1 1 1 1 1 1 -L T_.T i oT�T�I -TT�,T �I I I I I . 19131 Idd q3 I 777-1 r1��' TT°T T T T T �PPPI I1°j °j 1 °loi°? °1 °�j'ia�i +t-t-j I-+ t ± +�r �n1n61 Idd°IOfQI °14101301 111 L1.1.J.1.1.1_.1.11._Lj 7 T7 T 'T' T- '77 T. T T T� 1 II!"I I�QI°IQI°i °j °I °i °nlOj I +.i--L i 1--- F444-+4- + - +- 44-4 - j �I I 13I60601 OlOIDIa Ob 1 A i I `�!0�. O10i -Vb Ia I- ..+ T - M1141j1 e .1G1. �L 1_ I bOIQI T-w 7- I T-T. T_ OFF 1 01 101loloi°Ic L.2-L J_.L.1.. r-, ='-r- aI I I oI lI o *4 LJ -. _ IXAI Iil o .!1 Ir, ' jp + T r +- , Ifl101C31 n-L.4.4- 11310 101 !C10bi 010 I TTTo�� P F3F3 .p T -}- I I 7 -L . 10 01 lolo E3 11 rA G 5 111312 ca u5 `U ES cu - LE >0 r �� • .i 0 ®Z �a 0 O 4 rA G 5 C _O 4 m v Pal o m=ica V 111312 ca u5 `U ES cu - LE >0 r �� • .i OM 31D"0 !III GO �° O b 0 'C3 'D i� 1 13 I I I 1, L C10 00 oo�a, M �, • i I j( I I I I I I i �� • � --_ a•� i o1 ;D I 'D13 a .1 �j�0- �+ + -}--i I- -}-+ -f- -{- -f- 1-o ToToT T - ro a l i 1 1 Q jo ( I I I wl p I I I I ( j I I r r -7--F-77 F I I I I °i I °I°i TIC , 101i 010 10 113!O 3 ❑ a�oo j 0 �('I/ U /S /) erg 31 Z pa -0 7' T - n 31pM031 106 I of LZAC3!.. 77 T u, ]�ppml _ °I °1mffMp ++ +1 f- F11�-rttft� -r +� i•, 1 ido..l Bald I I I I I i I i 1�1� Ll_ L .ill 111.11�� - _ o j- °? �'�OTI p M �T T y rr ari 1p bl Iddplgq(la i'� pip 10 "I T 31 I TT TTCpT T°ToTo�jGTp , �G O D O T T 1 j�m01 I IpI I I CPU i I 101 I I I UI I QI �'.4- .4- -4-,-� t� I I CD 1bb.1 Iddo101 °I 11lobloo, 1 QIoIo1c1 pla' �'t-'� �► T►" � T Q T j ° 7-7-77- 7i °.7i °7 i --I T T °°Ipa � 1 I r I ° T! °. T.T ° O �T O eg, j I ]I ► / [3I01010IdDiDIplpW p61 1 010 1016 iD r- 11.1 1.� -J 7.T 7'7 "rT- -- - - - - - -- I r >Iobid Iplp ^O!0 bbl 7-711 i_77 -TTTTo —� j I0 I p A�°I°pp1; i �-- 1. I 01 16. 1 Q y 1� -I, q '''��� .. N: - fl PLANNING TRANSPORTATION � ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS. GARDNER. INC. • THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612 %370-0700 DATE: October 2, 1986 ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 6 FROM: Arijs Pakalns, AIA, AICP RE: Responses to Implementation Issues Raised by The Residential Advisory Committee (RAC) at the September 18, 1986 meeting At the September 18, 1986 RAC meeting a list of questions was submitted by the RAC chairman regarding traffic circulation and implementation related issues in the ILN area. The traffic circulation issues were answered in Technical Memorandum No. 5. This memorandum contains responses to the development related issues which were listed under Category No. IV, "How can we be assured that the plan will be built after CDR is'�given the go ahead." Following is a listing of the questions and responses to the issues raised at the September 18, 1986 RAC meeting: A. Has Mn /DOT approved the West 76th Street and I -35W design; where are the dollars coming from? RESPONSE: The West 76th-Street and I -35W design has not been approved by Mn /DOT. The design proposed for the West 76th Street and I -35W area calls for the following improvements: 1. Widening the sidewalk on the north side by approximately six feet. 2. Adjustments to the on -ramp to I -35W. 3. Installing a signal at West 76th Street and Girard Avenue South. 4. Widening West 76th Street east of the bridge, Since all of these improvements are designed to upgrade traffic circulation and traffic flow, no problems are anticipated in gaining Mn/DOT approval. The approval process can be started immediately and the City intends to begin scheduling meetings with Mn /DOTthis month. DAVID J. BENNETT DONALD W RINGROSE RICHARD P. WOLSFELD PETER E. JARVIS LAWRENCE J. GARDNER THOMAS F. CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G. SWENSON JOHN B. McNAMARA - DONALD L CRAIG RICHARD D. PILGRIM DALE N. BECKMANN DENNIS J. SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX 0 n LJ 151 f Technical Memorandum No. 6 October 2,. 1986 • Page 2 One factor which should be considered in the development of designs for this area is the I -35W corridor study. The corridor study recommendations, which are expected in mid -1987, may impact this area and may require adjustment of the plans. It is recommended that, although the planning and approval process can be.continued, implementation not begin until the I -35W corridor study is completed. Funding for the improvements listed above were included in the ILN Redevelopment Project budget. However, because of the change in scope in the CDR development, some of the improvements, such as the signal and widening of West 76th Street, may not be necessary, at least in the immediate future, and may have to be funded from future stages of the CDR project or through other developments. B. How are we assured that theiI -494 bridge will be built? 1. CDR Letter of Credit 2. City Contract, Mn /DOT Contract 3. Joint Powers Agreement with Bloomington 4. Phasing of the CDR Project RESPONSE: • Although there is no way an absolute guarantee can be given at this time, most of the techniques listed above will be used by the City to implement the widening of the Lyndale Avenue bridge over I -494. The City will, this month, start discussions with Mn /DOT and the City of Bloomington to lay the groundwork for the bridge widening project. Since widening of the bridge is not an essential part of the Phase I /Stage I public improvements, the first stage of the CDR project is not affected by the bridge widening issue. As additional development proposals are received, the City will have to continue monitoring the Lyndale Avenue area to clearly establish at what point widening of the bridge does become essential and no further developments, without impro- vements to the bridge, should occur. It is hoped that that point will not be reached before the bridge is reconstructed. Since a corridor study is also being conducted for I -494 no implementation should be started until the study recommendations become available. • .7 PLANNING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING is ARCHITECTURE BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELO. JARVIS. GARDNER. INC. • THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612370 -0700 DATE: October 22, 1986 ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.7 FROM: Arijs Pakalns, AIA, AICP RE: Responses to Traffic Impact/ Pedestrian Safety Issues Raised by the Residential Advisory-Committee (RAC) at the October 9, 1986 Meeting. At the October 9, 1986 RAC meeting, a list of questions was submitted by the RAC chairman regarding traffic impact and pedestrian safety issues in the ILN area. A number of the questions submitted were discussed in Technical Memorandums No.4 and No. 5 and the ILN Redevelopment Study Report. Where appropriate, responses to some of the questions raised are made by referencing the original source material. In addition, in order to provide more detailed information regarding some of the • issues, additional traffic study material has be included as part of this memorandum. The additional material consists of the following: o Table 1, Definition of Levels of Service o Council Letter No. 288 Following is a listing of the questions and responses to the traffic impact and pedestrian safety issues raised',at the October 9, 1986 RAC meeting: A. First Group of Questions 1. Is the I- 494 /Lyndale Avenue bridge and access designed to accommodate additional projected traffic at reasonable service levels? RESPONSE: See Table 1, "PM Peak Hour Level of Service," in Technical Memorandum No. 5. (Please note the following corrections. The heading of the third column should read "Phase I /Stage 1" instead of "Phase I - Stage 2 "). As the table indicates, the levels of service for the I- 494 /Lyndale Avenue North Ramps and South Ramps will drop from the existing Levels of Service of C and B, respectively, to D and C in Phase I /Stage 1 and will be C and C in Phase I, once additional improvements to Lyndale Avenue are completed. DAVID J. BENNETT DONALD W. RINGROSE RICHARD P WOLSFELD PETER E. JARVIS LAWRENCE J GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G. SWENSON JOHN B MCNAMARA DONALD L. CRAIG RICHARD D PILGRIM DALE N BECKMANN DENNIS J. SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER: BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX Technical Memorandum No. 7 October 22, 1986 Page 2 Since level D is typically considered to be the lowest desireable level of service, the projected levels of service will be within the acceptable range. For a more detailed definition of the levels of service see Table 1, attached. The assumptions for these projections are that no improvements, except for the signal at W. 77th Street, are made to Lyndale Avenue in Phase I /Stage 1 and that Phase I will include the improvements described in Table 1 of Technical Memorandum No. 5. Future improvements for full development of the ILN Redevelopment project area will include widening of Lydale Avenue to include two left turn lanes from northbound Lyndale Avenue to W. 77th Street, widening of the Lyndale Avenue bridge'to incorporate side -by -side left -turn lanes on the bridge, and improvements '!(widening to three lane approaches) of the freeway ramps. See figure 17, Alternative B, on page 77 in the ILN Redevelopment Study Report. These improvements will result in Level of Service C or better traffic operations at the I -494 ramp intersections with Lyndale Avenue. 2. Is the I- 35W /W. 76th Street bridge designed to accommodate additional projected traffic at reasonable service levels? RESPONSE: • See Table 1, "PM Peak Hour Level of Service," in Technical Memorandum No. 5. For Phase I /Stage 1 and Phase I Levels of Service C or better will be main- tained at the W. 76th Street and I -35W ramp intersections. With full development of the'ILN Redevelopment Project area Levels of Service C or better traffic operations are still forecast at the I -35W ramp intersec- tions. 3. Is the Penn Avenue /W. 76th Street intersection and Penn Avenue /I -494 bridge and access capable of accommodating additional traffic at reaso- nable service levels? RESPONSE: Hennepin County, in cooperation with MnDot, the City of Richfield, and the City of Bloomington, has been developing a plan for improvement of the Penn Avenue interchange with I-494,-which includes improveents at the Penn Avenue /76th Street intersection. Hennepin County's year 2000 projection for Penn Avenue at W. 76th Street is 25,000 vehicles per,day. The current traffic volume is 16,000 vehicles per, day on this section. They did not project traf- fic on 76th Street. The proposed design would widen both 76th Street and Penn Avenue to provide protected left -turn lanes on all approaches to the intersection. Technical Memorandum No. 7 October 22, 1986 Page 3 J 4. How will pedestrian safety be accommodated on both sides of W. 76th Street from Emerson Avenue to I -35W? RESPONSE: A pedestrian walkway will be provided between Emerson Avenue and'I -35W. In addition, the intersection of W. 76th Street and Girard Avenue /I -35W Access Ramp will be signalized and the freeway access ramp will be simplified to require only one pedestrian crosswalk instead of two. 5. What are the solutions'to deal with W. 77th Street east of Lyndale Avenue? a. Four lanes west of 4yndale Avenue and taper down to two lanes before turning south at Harriet Avenue. That existing corner cannot accom- modate the turning of large trucks and car transports without rolling over the curb. The shifting up and down at that corner generates more noise and pollution. b. Consider 7644 Garfield as an acquisition. c. Air and noise pollution is anticipated to be high. RESPONSE: • A detailed analysis was prepared for the W. 77th Street area east of Lyndale Avenue and the recommendations were presented in Council Letter No. 288, which is attached to this memorandum. The recommended plan will help to alleviate some of the existing problems by separating the commercial and residential traffic, by providing a larger turning radius at W. 77th Street and Harriet Avenue S., and by creating a buffer strip north of W. 77th Street. Although the acquisition of the 7644 Garfield Avenue property still is part of the overall plan, funding limitations do not permit the acquisition as part of the Phase I /Stage 1 redevelopment program. Because of the relatively low traffic volumes on W. 77th Street east of Lyndale Avenue, no noise or air pollution violations are projected for the residential area east of Lyndale Avenue. B. Second Group of Questions 1. The traffic projections are conflicting. A. Although the projections that indicate almost all of the traffic leaving the new exitat Girard Avenue at W. 76th Street will proceed east, the existing traffic turning movements and the developer's traffic engineer indicate that the traffic will proceed at about 1/3 • west, 1/3 east on 16th Street and 1/3 north on the on -ramp to I -35W. Technical Memorandum No. 7 October 22, 1986 Page 4 RESPONSE: The turning movement forecasts, included in the ILN Redevelopment Study, for the south approach to the W.'76th Street /Girard Avenue intersection are 31% going (north), 61% going right (east), and 8% going left (west). The same percentage forecast was made for the CDR exit on to W. 77th Street. If one makes the assumption that most of the traffic going east will use the W. 77th Street exit and the traffic going west will use the Girard Avenue exit, the distribution at the Girard Avenue intersection will be more even in all three directions. B. Although the projections indicate that the I -494 bridge is capable of accommodating projected traffic, it appears that the total projected traffic was not °considered. A large portion of the proposed redeve- lopment in Richfield and possible development in Bloomington from its traffic projections,have been left out. RESPONSE: All the proposed developments in the ILN area, as well as all known develop- ments within a reasonable distance of the ILN area, were included in the traf- fic projections directly or were included as part of the increase in the background traffic. C. Although the projections indicate that the I -494 bridge is capable of accommodating projected traffic, the turning movement projections presented are in conflict. RESPONSE: The apparent discrepancy in the turning movement projections between the north and south ramps is due to the'fact that the projections are based on existing traffic movement counts which were taken on different but comparable days and therefore may vary across the bridge. 2. Two reports completed by professional traffic engineers indicate that the Lyndale Avenue, Lyndale Avenue /I -494 bridge and W. 76th Street are at capacity at the present time without any additional development. These two reports conflict thus need to be addressed. RESPONSE: The ILN Redevelopment Study projections were made under current conditions and based on the proposed roadway; improvements. This situation is different from the conditions that existed 10 or 20 years ago when the other studies or reports were prepared. 11 Technical Memorandum No. 7 October 22, 1986 Page 5 C. Additional Questions or Issues Raised at RAC Meetings 1. What will the traffic conditions be for making the left -turn movement from the W. 76th Street /W. 77th Street diagonal to W. 76th Street? RESPONSE: The traffic projections for the W. 76th Street /W. 77th Street intersection, listed in Table 5, page 72, of the ILN Redevelopment Study Report, indicate that the turning movement can be made as designed. The report also indicates that, if warranted, a signal may be installed at this intersection. As part of the street improvement program, provisions will be made to include all con- duit and other required components to permit the future installation of a signal at this intersection.; 2. How will this traffic plan work if other streets and intersections do not work? RESPONSE: Every street and intersectionis different and has to be evaluated in terms of -its own specific conditions or merits. Frequently, poor traffic conditions develop because traffic increases were not planned for or traffic is routed on streets which have not been designed to carry large volumes of traffic. In the ILN are the City.of Richfield has an opportunity to plan and design a traffic circulation system which will be able to not only handle the traffic from the new redevelopment area, but also alleviate many of the existing traf- fic problems. AP /sk 0 0 P 11 Technical. Memorandum No. 7 October 22, 1986 TABLE 1: DEFINITION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Specifically, level -of- service criteria are stated in terms of the average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15 -min analysis period. The criteria are given in Table 9 -1. Delay may be measured in the field, or may be estimated using procedures presented later in this chapter. Delay is a complex measure, and is dependent on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group or approach in question. Level -of- service A describes operations with very low delay, i.e., less than 5.0 sec per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. TABLE 9 -1. LEVEL -0F - SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTER- SECTIONS STOPPED DELAY PER VEHICLE LEVEL OF SERVICE (SEC) A 5.0 B 5.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 D 25.1 to 40.0 E 40.1 to 60.0 F > 60.0 Level -of- service B describes operations with delay in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 sec per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and /or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. Level�of- service Cdescribes operations with delay in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and /or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. Level -of- service D describes operations with delay in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the pro- portion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle fail- ures are noticeable. Level -of- service E describes operations with delay in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. In- dividual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Level -of- service F describes operations with delay in excess of 60.0 sec per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, Le., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersec- tion. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. "� - & I - �'� CITY OF RICHFIELD,. MINNESOTA Office of City-manager • Council Letter No. 288 Agenda July 28, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members Of The City Council City of Richfield Subject: ILN Project, Right -of -Way Improvements To 77th and 78th Streets, East of Lyndale Avenue Council Members: This letter requests the City Council to take action to authorize activity which could result in the installation of interim traffic control measures at two areas within the ILN Redevelopment Project. ;One area is along 77th Street at its intersection with Garfield and Harriet Avenues, and the second is at 78th Street and its intersection with Lyndale Avenue. . BACKGROUND In November, 1985, a Phase I plan for right -of -way • improvements for the ILN Redevelopment Project was approved by .the HRA and City_Council. The schedule at that time anticipated the city would begin topurchase property for the right -of -way improvements when CDR began the construction of their office building in June, 1986.. Construction of the right -of -way improvements would begin in the Spring of 1987 when CDR initiated work on the hotel development. CDR, of course, is not proceeding on that original schedule. However, the development east of Lyndale Avenue is proceeding. Richfield - Bloomington Honda is complete and the Hampton Inn should be under construction in August or September. Construction should be completed in about 9 to 12 months. With development east of Lyndale Avenue proceeding, but with the density and tax increment cash flow not yet determined for a revised CDR concept (a revised CDR concept is not yet available), it was appropriate to identify interim traffic control measures. The measures were to be consistent.with the ILN Redevelopment Plan Phase I, cost effective, provide protection to.the residential area -north of 77th Street, help establish the desired permanent traffic patterns, and minimize or eliminate further problems. 0 .On May 12 and May 27, the Council discussed interim traffic control measures which could be provided to give relief to the anticipated intensification of existing problems.at the intersection of 78th and Lyndale Avenue with the construction of the Hampton Inn. Related to this consideration was a request made by some of the residents north of 77th Street to eliminate or significantly reduce commercial related traffic on their residential streets. At the May 27th meeting, three alternatives for 78th Street identified as A, B, and C were discussed-­ of the three offered a different option for 78t,h Street and its intersection with Lyndale Avenue. Each of the three called for a diverter at the intersection of Harriet Avenue with 77th Street and conversion of Garfield Avenue to a one way. Alternative C was selected by the Council as the most desirable solution (a copy is attached). It included the conversion of 78th Street to a one -way east bound, as well as the measures noted above, but further study of the Garfield Avenue solution was requested because of concern thatione -way signs would not be effective. A request was made by the'Council that staff evaluate alternative interim improvements which would reduce or eliminate commercial traffic on Garfield as well as Harriet Avenues. Measures to mitigate the other land use conflicts between the residential and commercial areas related to noise and vision were also to be studied. REVISED PLANS ' Attached to this letter are three different stages prepared by BRW for the Garfield /Harriet Avenue area. The third stage is the full implementation of the-Phase I plan as designed by BRW. Implementation of Stage 1 only at this time would be appropriate. The Stage 1 plan, Figure 19 represents the minimum plan which would accomplish the established goals while preserving the integrity of the ILN Study Plan. Stage 1. would require, in .addition to the construction of the roadway diversion at the Harriet Avenue and West 77th Street intersection, the acquisition and clearing of two residential properties north of West 77th Street. The two properties to be purchased would be 7645 Garfield and 7644 Harriet. It would also provide for the construction of a residential loop road between Garfield Avenue and Harriet Avenue. This option would-totally separate commercial and residential traffic and it would present some opportunities for screening the commercial district from the residential neighborhood. Although a•sound- barrier type wall, as suggested in the ILN Study, could be constructed for a portion of the residential area, it is recommended that the sound - barrier wall not be constructed with this option. It would be appropriate in a-later • stage when a more complete and therefore more effective wall can be installed. Some landscaping improvements, including screening, however, could be implemented as part*of Stage 1. Stage 1 can be implemented independently of any other improvements in the Redevelopment Project area, and it would be a viable option even if no further redevelopment activities or improvements are carried out. The Stage 2 plan,'Figure 2, illustrates further improvements which could be implemented in addition to ttie_Stage 1 improvements discussed above. The Stage 2 plan would require the acquisition of-one more residential property north of West 77th Street and west of Garfield Avenue, as well as the commercial property north of West 77th Street at Lyndale Avenue and a 24 foot strip from the properties east of the Hampton Inn south.of West 77th Street. The additional improvements would include the widening of West 77th Street between Harriet Avenue and Lyndale Avenue, the construction of the sound- barrier wall north of West 77th Street, and the landscaping of the buffer strip area. This option would provide the maximum traffic, visual, and noise separation between the residential and commercial areas. The residential property at the corner of West 77th Street and Lyndale Avenue could be. redeveloped for commercial use. The widening of West 77th Street east of Lyndale Avenue, as shown in Figure 2, should be implemented only in conjunction with .the widening of West 77th Street west of- Lyndale Avenue. These two actions are interdependent and one should not be carried out without the other. The Stage 3 Plan which would be the optimum plan, represents Phase I of.the ILN Redevelopment Plan and includes all the improvements described in Stages 1 and 2, as well as the widening of Lyndale Avenue. This plan accomplishes all the goals established for the Redevelopment Project area, including the goals for the residential neighborhood north of West 77th Street. A further stage, not illustrated as part of this study, would be the extension of West 77th Street to the east through the City garage property;, as was recommended in the ILN Study Long -Range Plan. This stage would require acquisition of additional properties east of Harriet Avenue and the construction - of a new roadway through the City garage area. SUMMARY The three options represent staged improvements of the ILN Redevelopment Project Phase I Plan. They are all viable options with each option accomplishing more of the established goals than the previous option. Correspondingly, each option would be -more • complex and more costly to implement than the foregoing option. Since Stages 2 and 3 depend on many factors which are currently undetermined, no accurate cost estimate can be given at this time for implementing those options. A cul -du -sac Garfield Avenue. street maintenance Additionally, land necessitating the from 77th Street. from at least four COSTS was an alternative to the However, a cul -du -sac is point of view, especially would still be needed for shifting of the cul -du -sac It would also require the residential ,properties. loop street for not desirable from a snow plowing. a landscape buffer to the north away partial acquisition The desired interim right -of -way solutions for the three areas are as follows. Alternative C with the median at 78th Street and LyndaleJAvenue, one -way east bound traffic on 78th Street, and the diverter at Harriet and 77th Street; and, Stage 1 Figure 1 with the loop road and landscaped buffer strip. The approximate total cost for each of the two solutions is estimated as follows: Alternate C Stage 1 Total $60,000 $288,030 $348,030 The costs include design and construction and for Stage 1 • acquisition-of the two properties and relocation benefits as well. The funds for these activities would be provided by the -sale of long term tax increment bonds. Evenson -Dodge has estimated that with the tax increment from only the Hampton Inn, it could be possible to support a bond issue of approximately $1.2 million at slightly over 7% interest. The net proceeds, which would be available'for project related activities, would be approximately $935,000. However, approximately $115,000 of this amount would be paid to the Hampton Inn for easements specified in the developers agreement and $290,000 would be returned to the HRA to reimburse the Capital Fund for the cost of ILN activities since 1983. An approximate balance of $181,970 would remain after the $348,000 was expended. To accomplish the long term bond sale, a portion of the short -term three year bonds sold in December, 1985 would be recalled and reissued. Given.the nature of the improvements, their location and relatively small size, it would be appropriate to combine them into one project.., Cost economies could also be achieved. Assuming the Hampton Inn proceeds, the actual construction of the improvements could be initiated in the spring of 1987 and would require about one month. Prior to construction, final plans and specifications are needed for bidding, the two residential properties at 7645 Garfield and 7644 Harriet must be appraised, • acquired and the occupants relocated. 1 " The Hampton Inn project is significant in terms of generating greater traffic and congestion, as well as a source of funds for a solution. 'Once that projects' footings and foundations are under construction and staff is reasonably assured that it will be completed, it would be appropriate to initiate the following actions: 1) Order OSM and Associates to prepare detail plans and specifications for the traffic control measures identified in Alternative C and Step 1 Figure 1,, 2) Direct BRW to prepare a landscape plan for the area between the loop ,street and 77th Street. The cost of this work would be approximately $10,000. 3) Order appraisals of the two properties at a cost of $500. When this work is completed, (within four to six weeks following the commencement of the Hampton Inn construction) a report could be made to the Council before proceeding further. It is critical to time the expenditure of these funds with the progress in the Hampton Inn project, since it will be providing the source of; revenues to complete the city contracted • work. i RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to proceed with the preparation of plans and specifications, landscape plans, and appraisals of the property once the construction of the footings and foundation for the Hampton Inn Project has been initiated. 7 Res c fully bmitted, i L. is Acti g City Manager SLO /sae 0 KU U — D i, IL SIMS WROW qopLL" c .2.6 o E O KU U — D i, IL SIMS WROW qopLL" c .2.6 o E ,2 Via OZ z1a ,2 Via OZ S 0 1 I • I I 1 i 1 I . 1 M N A 3 R c cs 1 : c e a � E 1 – � 1 I fu- S�3 �I ..'-J Gf1UGh/ all il3 �I -- T- T-TT 7 --�- 1 I 1 cz I I I ( R M 1 i I 1 cn it 1 cu I W 0 oe --$ E 25 -: I _ p W y 4) a z� i 0.4 1 c cs 1 : c e a � E 1 – � 1 I fu- S�3 �I ..'-J Gf1UGh/ all il3 �I -- T- T-TT 7 --�- 1 I 1 cz I I I ( R M 1 i I 1 cn it 1 cu I W 0 j rF - py >� im ALA Y O W j >� im e 0.4�&n cj . .................. oCL 6 I 3 I I a Iwo • Y wlw.w w'w • I �la�s I • a ! ; 4v-s G=xay ""Xzkl cz cu W I i � II II — U •• w. .. w C4 �I CO S 'Gd PUNH S 5 V► Moto r i ® I I• j .� i I I 1 I� •(I iI —_y n.i ' zpo - �r w ^' y - I .� I • w a ala � w a �lali i bit rl 4� I j-,Ilt jj .......... c vS � c o_ oE it 1 yl r 4VOS arwmW SIBMAl 41 = r oT a al .T zI w v w OR U) M 0 '1 PLANNING / TRANSPORTATION /- ENGINEERING / ARCHITECTURE Agreement For Professional Services This AGREEMENT entered into by: the CLIENT: City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 and the CONSULTANT: BENNETT- RINGROSE - WOLSFELD - JARVIS- GARDNER, INC. Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 for the following PROJECTS: Is Supplemental Agreement for Technical Assistance for the ILN Redevelopment Project Implementation WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT did work with the City Council of the City of Richfield, the HRA, and the ILN Task Force in studying the Interstate /Lyndale /Nicollet (ILN) commercial area and did prepare a redevelopment plan which formed the basis for the Redevelopment Project which was ultimately adopted by the City of Richfield, and WHEREAS, the CLIENT desires the provision of certain technical assistance and oflper services in conjunction with the implementation of the ILN Redevelopment IFrojecr as heretofore adopted by 'the City, and WHEREAS, the CLIENT desires that;the CONSULSTANT provide such assistance and services in order to ensure continuity in this major project, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration.of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT agree as follows: The CONSULTANT shall provide professional services for the PROJECT in accordance with the Terms and Conditions asset forth below under Article II entitled "Services" and The CLIENT shall compensate the CONSULTANT.in accordance with the Terms and. • Conditions as set forth below under Article III entitled "Compensation." 1 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT ARTICLE I. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. CHANGE IN SCOPE OF.THE PROJECT Should the CONSULTANT'S scope of services change substantially from that outlined in this AGREEMENT or if work is suspended or delayed by the CLIENT for more than three months,,then this AGREEMENT may be subject to re- negotiation. i B. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party upon ten days written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault of the party initiating the termination. In the event of termination due to the fault of parties other than the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall be paid his compensation for services per - formed to termination date, including Reimbursable Expenses. C. TRANSFER OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is not transferable by either party to a non -named party without the written consentiof the other party., D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST .No member, officer, or employee of the CONSULTANT, or its designees or agents, no member of the governing body of the locality in which the PROJECT is situated, and no other public official of such locality or localities, who exercises any functionsor responsibilities with respect to the PROJECT, during his /her tenure or for one year thereafter,, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or subcontract, or the proceeds thereof for work to be performed in connection with the program assisted under this AGREEMENT. E. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY In connection with the exec�tion of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall take affirmative actions to insure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during their employment, without regard to their race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. 2 Such actions shall include; but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment, or recruitment advertising; layoff, or termination, rates of pay, or other forms of compensation; and selection for training including apprenticeship. F. MATERIALS OWNERSHIP All materials produced under the terms of this AGREEMENT are the property of the CLIENT. The term "Materials" includes all documents, data, reports, studies, and maps. ARTICLE II SERVICES A. SCOPE OF SERVICES The CONSULTANT'S scope of services shall consist of providing Professional Services to the CLIENT for the implementation of the ILN Redevelopment Project. The Services shall include the following work tasks: TASK 1: ON -GOING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SPECIAL STUDIES IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Objective: To provide, technical assistance to the City staff in deve- loping special studies for the redevelopment project area and to assist 'staff in the evaluation and assessment of specific developer :proposals. a. Prepare special detailed studies, at the direction of City staff,;of the redevelopment project area in order to: assess development, traffic circulation, and other impacts; evaluate needs and requirements for the buffer /screen north of West 77th Street; and to respond to public inquiries and questions. b. Review and evaluate developer proposals, at the request of City staff, for the redevelopment project area and make recommendations regarding their impact on the redevelop- ment plan. c. Attend meetings, at the request of City staff, with City staff, City Council, HRA, neighborhood groups, City com- mittees, and developers. TASK 2: PREPARATION OF A FRAMEWORK PLAN FOR, THE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS Objective: To develop guidelines and establish strategies for encouraging the redevelopment of the "future redevelopment areas" south of West 77th Street, which are not part of the Phase I improve- ments, as designated in the ILN Redevelopment Study. a. Develop preliminary prototypical concept framework plans and guidelines for the future redevelopment areas. This task may include the preparation of typical illustrative plans,'as required, to help illustrate the anticipated development densities and locations. b. Review the recommended framework plans and guidelines with City staff, all affected City agencies, the ILN Task Force, and interested developers and select a preferred framework plan and guidelines. 4 go 40 0 • 2Z4__j� c. Assist the City staff in preparing implementation strate- gies for the framework plan for the future redevelopment areas including design guidelines, zoning ordinances, and developer requests- for - proposals, as required. TASK 3: DEVELOPMENT OF A REHABILITATION PROGRAM FOR THE LYNDALE AVENUE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Objective: To identify needs and requirements, evaluate rehabilitation programs, and develop a detailed plan for the upgrading and stabilizing of the neighborhood commercial district along Lyndale Avenue between West 75th Street and West 77th Street. a. Meet with the business community to identify specific problems, issues, needs, and requirements for the commer- cial district. b. Assist ;City staff in the evaluation and establishment of commercial rehabilitation programs and the preparation of a design framework, including design guidelines, to assist businesses in the district to upgrade and rehabilitate their storefronts and business establishments. c. Prepare a detailed plan of the proposed public and private improvements. d. Review. design guidelines and improvement plan with appropriate City personnel and agencies and the business community. TASK 4: PREPARATION OF THE FAU (FEDERAL AID URBAN) APPLICATION FOR THE LYNDALE AVENUE BRIDGE OVER I -494 Objective: To provide technical assistance to City staff in the prepara- tion of the;FAU application for:the Lyndale Avenue bridge over I -494. a. Develop schematic plans for the reconstruction of the Lyndale,Avenue bridge over I -494. b. Prepare traffic circulation data required for the submittal. c. Prepare cost estimates of the proposed bridge improvements. d. Assist City staff in the preparation of the FAU submittal including maps and plans of the bridge, traffic cir- culation data, and other required technical support material. 5 J. e"3 �' B. PRODUCTS Products for each task shall be established at the time the CLIENT gives authorization to proceed. C. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time of performance for all' tasks shall'be established at the time the CLIENT gives authorization to proceed. D. PROJECT PERSONNEL The CONSULTANT shall assign,Arijs Pakalns as Project Manager and Donald Ringrose as Principal -In- Charge. The assigned personnel shall be primarily responsible for the project development and presentations and shall not be replaced unless a change isl approved in writing by the CLIENT. E. MAINTENANCE OF DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS The CONSULTANT shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records and other evidence pertaining to cost incurred in connection with work and.services performed hereunder. The CONSULTANT shall make such material available at its office at all reasonable times during the contract period and for three years from the date of final payment under this agreement for inspection by.the CLIENT and copies thereof shall be furnished upon request. The CLIENT may also request originals of drawings or the text material. j 6 7 ARTICLE III COMPENSATION A. COMPENSATION The cost of providing professional consultant services as set forth under ARTICLE II shall be as described below, unless additional amounts are approved in writing by the CLIENT. It is understood and agreed that the CLIENT must authorize the CONSULTANT to proceed with each task. TASK 1: ON -GOING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SPECIAL STUDIES IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Compensation for services provided under Task 1 shall be on an hourly basis and the total amount shall not exceed $14,000.00 TASK 2: PREPARATION OF ,A FRAMEWORK PLAN FOR THE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS Compensation for services provided under Task 2 shall be on an hourly basis and the total amount shall not exceed $12,000.00. TASK 3: DEVELOPMENT OF A REHABILITATION PROGRAM FOR THE LYNDALE AVENUE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Compensation for services provided under Task 3 shall be on an hourly basis and the total amount shall not exceed $18,000.00. TASK 4: PREPARATION OF.THE FAU (FEDERAL AID URBAN) APPLICATION FOR THE LYNDALE AVENUE BRIDGE OVER I -494 Compensation for services provided under Task 4 shall be on an hourly basis and the total amount shall not exceed $6,000.00. B. TERMS OF COMPENSATION Compensation for services provided on an hourly basis shall be according to the hourly rates by employee classification plus Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses include photographic and printing expenses at cost. The CLIENT will be billed according to the following hourly rates by employee classification. Principal $95.00 Sr. Associate 1 67.50 Associate 62.50 Sr. Professional 55.00 Professional II 47.50 Professional I 37.50 Supervisor /Sr.'Technician 35.00 Technician III ! 32.50 Technician II 27.5U Technician I 19.00 7 These, hourly rates are in effect through March 31, 1987. During the month of March, 1987, the CONSULTANT shall file with the CLIENT revised hourly rates which will become effective starting with April 1, 1987. C. INVOICE CERTIFICATION Each invoice shall contain a certification by an officer of the company stating that the invoice is' correct and that payment has not been received previously. D. TERMS OF PAYMENT The CONSULTANT will bill the CLIENT monthly for work completed the previous month. The CLIENT agrees to pay all invoices in full within 45 days after receiving them. This AGREEMENT executed this day of , CLIENT: By: By: By: CONSULTANT: By: By: By: 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 471 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Rejection of bids for a walk -in cooler and display /service systems at new Cedar Liquor Store. Background: Construction of the new Cedar liquor store is currently in progress. The custom made walk -in cooler and various display and service systems; i*.e., wine and spirit baskets and shelves, and custom made check out counters, were not included as part of the general contract for construction. City staff worked with the Executive Director of the Municipal Liquor Store Association, the Bloomington Public Health officials and others in the writing of the specifications for the walk -in cooler, display /service systems and appurtenant work. On Monday, December 15,'1986 bids were opened in accordance with legal requirements. There were seven plan holders of record, and four bids were received. All four bids received were for the walk -in cooler. No bids were received for the display /service systems. A copy of the bid minutes and tabulation is attached for council review. One vendor submitted a proposal for the walk -in cooler and included shelving which was to be bid separately as a part of the display /service systems. It was the opinion of the city attorney that the specificationsleft sufficient question as to the exact intention of which items were to be included with which bid proposal and that it would be in the best interest of the city to reject the bids received December 15 and to readvertise for bids on the walk -in cooler and appurtenant work. Recommendation: It is recommended the city council reject all bids received on December 15, 1986, order the return of all bid securities and authorize the readvertisement for bid on the walk -in cooler and appurtenant work. Basis of Recommendation: By rewriting the specifications to eliminate any question as to the requirements for the walk -in cooler and appurtenant work, any misunderstandings should be eliminated. Alternative Recommendation: The city council may elect to award a contract to the apparent low bidder, Northwestern Service, Inc. in the amount of $40,853. However, due to the confusion, another bidder claims to be apparent low bidder should the shelving portion of the bid be subtracted. It does not appear that an award of contract at this time would be in the best interest of the city. By using the informal quotation process for the display /service systems rather than the formal bidding process, it would seem more likely that qualified, reliable vendors will be located. Discussion /Decision Mode: Installation of the walk -in cooler will take place during the construction of the new Cedar liquor store. It now appears that delivery time will be less than originally anticipated. Readvertisement in the near future should provide sufficient time to bid, award and order the walk -in cooler and appurtenant work without delaying the overall completion of the building. Therefore, this item has been scheduled for the December 22, 1986 city council meeting on the consent calendar. Respectfully submitted, Jam s D. Prosser City Manager JDP /eja I• r1 U I• I• CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening December 15, 1986 11:00 a.m. Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud,,bids for Walk -In Cooler and Apprutenant Work and Display /Service Systems and Appurtenant Work, as advertised in the official newspaper on December 3, 1986. Present:'Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Eileen Anderson, City Manager Representative William Fillmore, Liquor Operations Director Pat Prok, Community Services The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR Northern Air, Inc. Carbonic Machines, Inc. Palen - Kimball Company St. Paul Northwestern Service Inc. St. Paul BID SECURITY 5% Check 5% Check 5% Bond 5% Bond PROPOSAL A (Cooler) 43,500 55,099.75 49,995 40,853 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the December 22, 1986 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY 'OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 470 Agenda December 22, 1986 Issue Statement: Request for authorization to purchase 1) a new Chevrolet Suburban for the Fire Division and 2) a 3/4 ton cargo van replacing an existing unit in the central garage motor pool. Background: The City Council policy'resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. The City of Richfield and other agencies have a joint purchasing agreement with Hennepin,County for various merchandise, materials and equipment. Vehicles are one of the items cooperatively bid. Two vehicles are included in the December 22, 1986 consent agenda. Fire Division Vehicle. The fire inspector position requires that the inspector travel throughout the city for inspections and related duties and that'he be able to respond to fire and medical emergencies as required-. Funds in the amount of $16,500 for the fire division inspector's vehicle were provided in the 1986 revised Fire Division budget (101- 4120). However, the new vehicle will be used for emergency and routine assignments by the on -duty fire crew, aand'the station wagon which they are now using will be reassigned to the fire inspector. The station wagon is used to transport personnel on emergency responses' to neighboring cities on mutual aid requests; as a backup vehicle to the rescue squad at station one when that unit is out of service for repair; and for daily use by the on -duty crew for inspections. It has proven to be too small to carry the necessary equipment when used as a replacement for the rescue squad. Central Garage Van. The adopted 1987 budgetfor the central garage (602 -4862) provides $11,500 for replacement of a fully depreciated van used by the building superintendent. It is anticipated the existing vehicle will be sold at auction. The lowest bid by a responsible bidder for the replacement vehicle was submitted by Superior Ford in the amount of $10,897 for the basic 3/4 ton cargo van per Hennepin County specifications. Various options are available and those recommended for acceptance are a rear heater for $225, is parts and service manuals at $35 each and painting the vehicle "Richfield blue ", the cost of which was included in the base price. Page 1 t • Recommendation: Approve the purchase of in 3/4 ton cargo van and selected options from Superior Ford in the amount of $11,192 and the purchase of a Chevrolet Suburban from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet in the amount of $16,743. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The fire inspector will have the duties of visiting buildings throughout the city on a daily basis to conduct complex or difficult inspections and to assist and train the on -duty crews in the technical aspects of fire inspection activity. The inspector will also respond to fire and medical emergencies when required to assist the on -duty crew. These duties require that the inspector have available a vehicle equipped with emergency lights, siren and Fire Division radio. 2. The station wagon is not adequate for its present use, but is adequate for the fire inspector. The Chevrolet Suburban is large enough and heavy enough to serve as a replacement for the rescue squad, yet can also be used for the other tasks noted above. 3. The existing central, garage motor pool van is fully depreciated and in dire need of replacement. 4. Proper procedure has been used in securing bids through the joint purchasing agreement with Hennepin County. 5. Superior Ford and Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet are the lowest responsible bidders for the vehicles under consideration. 6. Sufficient funding is available in the revised 1986 and adopted 1987 budgets. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The fire inspector could use the existing station wagon, using it when it is not needed as a replacement for the rescue squad. Since the need is not predictable, this would limit the inspector's ability to schedule inspections. Also, when the inspector would be using the vehicle the Fire Division would not have it available for the needs it is now filling, which would reduce the productivity of the Fire Division and delay the response of the Fire Division to mutual did requests. 2. With regard to the replacement cargo van, and the fire division vehicle, th'e city council may choose to reject the bids received by Hennepin County and request staff to obtain bids from other sources in an attempt to receive a lower purchase price. However, it is not anticipated that lower bids will be received. Page 2 Discussion /Decision Mode: Action is requested at the December 22, 1986 meeting of the Council. The bid submitted by Superior Ford for the replacement cargo van was accepted by Hennepin County early in December, 1986. The purchase prices for the van as stated above are guaranteed for only 30 days. Therefore, to take advantage of the bid price and as the next regular city council meeting is not until January 12, 1987,,by which time the bid price guarantee will have expired, it is recommended the city council act on the purchase of the replacement van at the December 22, 1986 city council meeting. Respectfully Submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager Page 3