Loading...
06-13-77 agenda~' /~S' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 189 Agenda June 13, 1y77 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Airport Master Plan In September, 1y76, the city council received copies of the Preliminary Summary Report on the- Master Plan for the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On September 27, 1976, MAC officials presented an oral report on this plan to the city council. The Metropolitan Council is now requesting written comments on the Airport Master Plan. The Metropolitan Council is currently undertaking a revision to the Airports Chapter of the Development Guide and, therefore , it is appropriate. that the MAC Master Plan Study be included in the Metropolitan Council's Revised Airport Guide Chapter. The city council will have opportunity to review the provisions of the Master Plan and prepare comments to the Metropolitan Council at their June 13, 1977 meeting. SUMMARY OF PLAN The Master Plan Study is basically a capacity study incorporating the findings of a team of aviation, transportation and land use experts regarding the future capability of Vllold-Chamberlain Field to remain as the region's major air carrier airport. As such, the plan is a planning document and a guide for the MAC's future development programs. The Master Plan Study has examined numerous aspects of airport planning, from weather and drainage to fueling. The areas of particular concern are the following: Highway Access The following table indicates the recorded 1974 average daily vehicle activity at the airport and the future traffic level to be accommodated, if possible. "Trip Origins" are outbound passengers who start their trip here: Council Letter No. 189 -2- June 13, 1977 Trip origins Air cargo Employees 1974 Daily Activity Future Possible Daily Activity 6,744 passengers 33,800 passengers 710,000 pounds 15,000 3,400,000 pounds Over 15 , 000 The 1974 daily activity resulted in 29,080 cars on the airport. It is projected that the future activity would result in about 101,000 cars on the airport daily. The plan analysis shows that access capacity could accomodate as much as five times the 1975 level of passengers, provided certain access improvements are completed. These include: -Widening of the present access roadway to three lanes in each direction. -Planning the terminal expansion to effectively handle inbound and outbound traffic for loading, unloading, parking and exiting. -Establishing a new West Terminal in the northwest area of the airport.' This West Terminal must be served by separate access roads. -Completion of major off-airport highways, 1494, Hiawatha Avenue (TH 55) and Crosstown. Two of the planned improvements, a new west terminal and related road improvements, could have a significant effect on Richfield, particularly East Richfield. The expansion of airport and related facilities could have large scale environmental impacts associated with it. Passenger Terminal Capability Expansion of the terminal to handle several times the 1975 traffic will require major new construction. The first expansion would be in the present terminal area. However, more future expansion could be possible and necessary. This could mean construction of an entirely new "West Terminal" complex in the northwest quarter between the main runways, a terminal roughly the size of the present 1y75 terminal. This would be connected to the present terminal area via an underground tunnel which would be limited to special purpose vehicles for passenger, baggage, and cargo transfer. This West Terminal would have its own auto access via Cedar Avenue, with supplementary access from the Crosstown Highway, and its own auto parking area Approximately 29, 000 trips were made to the airport daily in 1974. It may be assumed that twice as many vehicles, or 60, 000 daily, would use the new "West" facilities. 'Most trips would use the Cedar Avenue approach. .A "West" Terminal" with twice the activity now associated with the existing terminal, much closer to Richfield residential areas, could pose significant problems. Council Letter No. 189 -3- June 13, 1977 These major terminal expansion programs are estimated to accommodate 34, 000, 000 passengers, or about five. times the 1975 traffic. This estimate is derived as follows: Passengers West terminal 14, 000, 000 East terminal expanded 20, 000, 000 34,000,000 The 1976 traffic level was 6, 776, 000 passengers. Runway & Airspace Capacity To maximize the airport runway capacity either new runways must be added or a higher capacity achieved on existing runways, through technological and pro- cedural improvements. Both possibilities have been studied. One runway improvement program is planned, the extension of Runway 4-22 to the southwest. The extension has been evaluated to provide some environmental benefit, while also providing greater length for°landing and takeoff. The projected capacity of the airspace and runway system is as follows: 1975 1985 1995 Annual Operations Gen. Aviation Total & Military 226,000 81,000 415,000 500,000 Environmental Impact 100,000 100,000 Airline & Commuter 146,000 315,000 400,000 Annual Passengers 6,776,000 22,000,000 36,000,000 The above analysis of capacity indicates the need for more highway access facilities and greater traffic flow and increased capacity for aircraft activity. Noise The effect of noise can be illustrated by the use of an evaluation system (Noise Exposure Fore case (NEF) which defines areas within which the cumulative effect of noisy operations will be found objectionable by people. The area included depends on the kind of aircraft, the number of landings and takeoffs, and aircraft operating procedures. Council Letter No. 189 -4- June 13, 1977 -There is no housing within the most critical area -that area within the 40 NEF contour. However, there are dome institutions and parks. -Within the area of 30 NEF and 40 NEF contains housing in part of New Fordtown and the very southeast corner of Richfield will be affected. -The northwest off-airport section, southeast Minneapolis, has much housing, for this is a natural land use in this location. There is no feasible policy to remove residential use of this area. Whether some plan involving avigation easement, deed restriction, home removal, etc. , can be developed remains to be seen. -The northeast sector, Highland Park area of St. Paul, also includes housing and may be treated in whatever format is developed for other residential areas. -The southeast sector, Mendota Heights, is largely undeveloped. Thus, preventative measures can be pursued such as land use by commerce and industry, open space, multi-family housing v~ith acoustic treatment. -The southwest sector, (includes part of Richfield and Bloomington) has some residential, but is more multi-family. and motel -and so the buildings generally are more soundproof. Commercial and industrial use of un- developed land should be encouraged. Aircraft generate exhaust gas and materials as they land and takeoff. The effect on air quality of the exhaust pollutants has been calculated based on a high growth exhaust level for aircraft operations (to accomodate about six times 1975 passenger traffic). It is found that the extent of added pollution is not critical, -and even an expanded airport operation will be compatible with community air quality. The Master Plan does contain a limited number of future environmental impacts on Richfield of which we should be aware and prepared to respond to. These impacts include: 1. Additional employment 2. Fringe airport business and stimulation 3. Continued reduced trip length for Richfield residents to use air terminal facilities as compared to an alternative, such as a proposed Ham Lake air terminal site 4. Additional terminal oriented vehicle traffic on 62 Crosstown, TH 36, and East 66th Street Council Letter No. 189 -5- June 13, 1977 . ,. 5. Additional employment oriented vehicle traffic an East 66th Street 6. Need for land use separations between residential areas, such as New Ford Town and Rich Acres, and the airport terminal access and repair facilities. Golf course use and open space use can provide this needed separation 7. Reduced noise due to changes in the type of jet engine used, and improved • operating procedures PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The planning cammission reviewed the MAC Master Plan at a special meeting on June 7, 1977 and viewed the MAC slide presentation on this plan. The planning commission expressed concern with the enforcement of existing noise abatement procedures, and addressed the need for keeping the city council informed regarding implementation of the Master Plan elements. The planning commission also recommended that the MAC give careful consideration to the traffic impact of a new west terminal facility. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director ~ e~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No, 188 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Barricades. for Block Party Mrs. Charles Tooley, 7421 Vincent Avenue, has requested permission to barricade the 7400 block of Vincent Avenue between 74th and 75th Street for a block party on June 18 , 1977 between the hours of 3:00 p, m, and 11:00 p, m. Ms. Corrine Briggs, 7240 Dupont Avenue, has requested permission ~:o barricade streets at Oak Grove and Bryant Avenue and 73rd Street and Dupont Avenue for purposes of having a block party on Saturday, June 18, between the hours of 5:00 p, m, and,l 1:00 p, m. The only stipulations attached to the requests ere that the city erect the barricades and that they be erected in such a way so as to permit ingress and egress of emergency vehicles should this be necessary during the time of -the block parties. Respectfully submitted, U~~ ~- Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Works Director Public Safety Director ~v v CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 187 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for Special Use Permit fora Car Wash and Wax Business - 6645 Penn Avenue Mr. Mike Kelley of Sir Waxer, Inc. , Milwaukee, Wisconsin,, has requested a special use permit to allow his company to operate a speciality car wash and waxing business at the above location. e The following items are attached to this letter and will be referred to throughout: Exhibit A - proposed site plan Exhibit B - applicant's description of proposed business Exhibit C - current zoning Exhibit D - current land use Exhibit E - zoning ordinance a.nd requirements of section 3.33 Exhibit F - Off-street parking regulations Exhibit G - Off-street parking site plan ZONING REQUIREMENTS Richfield Ordinance, Section 6.04 requires a special use permit for the operation of a car wash in a C-2 general commercial zone. This request for a special use permit should be judged by the standards established for public garages in Section 3.33, subdivision 3 of the zoning ordinance.. The property at 6645 Penn Avenue is owned by the Conoco Oil Company and presently contains a vacant FasGas Station. Sir Waxer, -Inc. has entered into a purchase agreement with Conoco for the property. As explained in Exhibit B, Sir Waxer, Inc. represents a unique concept in the automotive appearance industry. Their principle business is to wax and palish automobiles and washing the auto- mobiles is secondary. Council Letter No. 187 •-2- June 13, 1977 The applicant describes his• business as having a relatively low volume in terms of daily retail transactions. The majority of the business._is done on an appointment basis, the applicant anticipates an average daily volume between 25 and 30 vehicles. Some of the customers will leave their vehicles for the day and other customers might wait in the facility until the job is com- pleted. The underground gasoline storage tanks at this location have been re- moved and the applicant will not be selling gasoline. The surrounding land use and zoning is as follows: Zoning Land Use North C-2 general commercial Strip shopping center East Single family residential Single family residential West C-2 general commercial Strip commercial South C-2 general. commercial Office building The comprehensive plan indicates that this area is best suited for mixed land use, medium to high density. STAFF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The site plan was reviewed by the staff and found to be in accord with city ordinance as follows: 1. Curb cuts are sufficiently located to provide stacking room and safe turning movements onto Penn Avenue and 67th Street 2. Landscaped areas are provided 3. -Fence and landscaped areas to the rear are provided 4. Seventeen parking spaces are provided 5. A freestanding single pedestal sign is proposed.. Although the new use will abut a residential zoning district, as the gas station has in the past, it is the recommendation of the staff that the city council issue the special use permit for a public garage. OFF-STREET PARKING APPLICATION Mr. Kelly has also requested approval of an off-street parking contract. This oft-street parking contract establishes performance standards for driveway and parking area modifications required for the issuance of a special use permit for a public garage at this location. The parking standards indicate a need for nine parking spaces, three for each bay and one for each employee. The applicant proposes to develop 17 parking Council Letter No. 187 ~ -3- June 13, 1977 spaces. In order to comply with the standards applicable for a pib lic garage, the applicant is proposing to close the west curb cut on 67th Street, construct a six-foot fence as required by ordinance and a 16 foot landscape buffer at the rear of the property as well as provide landscaping adjacent to 67th Street and bumper stops along Penn Avenue. New barrier curbs will be constructed as in- dicated. The staff has reviewed the off-street parking application and recommends council approval of the off-street parking contract subject to approval of the special use permit. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The planning commission reviewed this request and took testimony at their regular meeting on May 24, 1977 and during a special meeting on June 7, 1977. During the discussion, the planning commission expressed reservations regarding the proposed fence at the rear of the property, since there is currently a large lilac hedge on the property line and a tall opaque wood fence on the residential side of the property line. As proposed, the lilac hedge would be located between two tall fences and the commission was concerned with maintenance of the hedge and the potential problem of removing litter from between the two fences. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the special use permit for a public garage, with the request that an alternative to the fence requirement be considered. Respectfully submitted, ~ c.-W ~ ~r~ Wayne S. Burgg~a ff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director Acting Public Works Director .~ ~~ 41 ~~ -{ r- i _~ ~~'z w i . ~~~ o'o .5 W . - ' ;.~ { rn - N ~~ .r ~ ~a ~ i x ~ - . --~- "z P m ~l "r ° ----x- i) ~ a~ t. ~ ,tan `', OU ~ ~ ~° ~ 'p !~ ° !-_ y`-< to ~ ~,. °u~ G- arc ~ ~, ~ % °' - z ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ _ ~.- su:~ ~) ~ L zli ' ~, ~ N ?~ o ~, I ~ ~ _._.____z___~,-~~ ____-- •a I~- , ~,~ 122' ~~f;.~ r~,~p ~~ `~,`~, ~ ~.A~ ~ t~ , ~ { I i'' _ i , U _ - !~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I K' F J~ ~~ ' ~ - ~ j t w G ~~~~.__ ~ / (-> _ _ ' _ ~ ~ ~' iii s ~fl_ ~_ { ~,` ll. ~ ~ ~ 'A z~ Q -t 7 ~ F~>:!~T11.t~ 1t~~ .~ Ex',STIti`: - i. j- _ ,t- ,~ ~ _ •.__-...__.. _ ,t ~y ' ~ ~ a _s ~ Y •.~ t t~ 7~T h l ;,, ~} _~ ~, =~ ~ c. ;: ,ri _; tom. ~- J ~ `o s \~ o~ n Zl-. -~ ~= Z --p66 +r Sa 1 to 7 u e ~ \ (~ .a ~ :~ • . x ~. C•a'-t j ... ,~ ~ ~' • th ! ,~ _:;n'y .},z lt, ;~ :~ In ---~ X -~ ; . v~~t(~ ~!~ ' ! sus ~~ ~ - ~r `. G~ ' 6~ 4~` ~ a ° ~" 9. ~i z~. z yo I ~. Q s J1 •' i lQ ~' ~ m- ~~t`.t °~ ~• X1~1`. ~ i. ~, ~ F fCi ~ ~ a IR t~ v D~:tC .~ Y -i< _. 7J' ~\_ -- -~- ° ~n i i . ~' T ..y ~ •~ ~ ~. ~'~ ~;,~ a I ~•~ ~ f" • . ~1 ~~ I ~ ~ r ~ I V ~~• X45 W. MiCIi1GAN Sl•. • MILWAUf<EE, ~"JI 53203 • 4i4-273-2200 April 18, 1977 Mr. Herbert- Kuehl •Chi of Inspector .City of Richfield 6700 Poxtla~ld Avenue Richfield, DL~I 55323 Dear hSr. Kuehl: 14e have enclosed our application for a conditional use permit for the property at the northeast corner of 67th ~ Penn. The application fee is also enclosed. Copies of the layout and elevation are attached far your . review. 1'~e ~ti~ould appreciate it if h•e could be scheduled to appear before the Planning Commission at their next scheduled meeting on Tuesday, April 26, 1977. 1'ie do not intend to sell gasoline at this Iocation. As the plans in- dicate, ~ti~e intend to remove the tanks. Hle intend to maintain the same ex- terior appearance for the expanded portion of the building as the present portion cf the building. ~. Sir 14axer is a una.que concept in the automotive appearance industry. As the attached list of services indicates, we wax and polish automobiles. Ours is a relatively Io~~r-volume business in the number of daily retail transaction:. 1Ve 1•rould anticipate an ~vexage volume of twenty-five tb thirty vehicles per day at this location. Obviously, this is substantially lower than.the present use of the premises titi~ould anticipate. The vast majority of our business is done on an appointment basis. In most cases the customer stays ill the facility ti~'hile his vehicle is being waxed and polished. F3ecause of the combination of appointments and the fact that the customer remains in our facility, it is highly unlikely that tae will need the nwnber of par}:ing spaces sho~•<n on the plan. F3ecatise it is our policy not to wash cars, you wi.11 find that we do not have a great influx of business on any ga_ven clay. Specifically, you wall not sec lines of cars waitins; to be serviced. In addition, after a /cl~icle has been prepped for. wax~n~; we completely hand dr.y the vehicle and do not use automatic blo~,~exs to dry the customer's vehicle. Ui\li~~,~i~ ~\ }fir. Herbert Y.uc}11 . 1'agc 7'wo Apri 1 7.8, 1977 • 7n reference to the liar};i.n}; spaces, the •clistomer's vehicle is. outside the UuilclinL only a.n the few minutes immediately pxi.or to his appointment and inuaediately after the car claszb~ellrio~r}'totodur sDrvicingllthe vehiclel~and car is inspected for existing ~ p is inspected for the quality of Iti-orl:manship and the satisfaction of the cttsto~ncr folioG•ring col;lplction of the Sir 1~'axer wax and polish. `~ }lave also enclosed a copy of•a letter from the building inspection department of the City of: biilwau};eionein~~hich we acquiredlan abandonedal use permit fox an identical. sztua ~l.icati_on, service. station. •Tn the event you }lave ally questions on our apl •please contact Ire so that ~~~e can provide you full information prior to the next Plalaning meeting. Thank you. . Sincerely, ~,~~~1~ ~'~ ~ '~ M. J. Ke ly hiJK; gn ^losures .~--- t: . l.~ , • . ........... .. ., . .... .. . !i. - Port \~~ • • ~ Ceti ; ; `;; ;•. :' ~• .~ ~': .~ ,t,V ..~. .Iii, fit ~ttct t-,..., t !_: ': '. •- ~• ~, ' ("'opt !.. ~ .... ~;' . ..:r.' t, r`.'~'r . ~. ,...: r.1 ~ • ~ j t...J.J• .. •\ •\ _ ~ ..- / r f\ a F~ v•Lt.+. . tt77 ~L1~~Y i - ~ I }., ,, .i .,- t1^''^''•ir`.t ;1ryC~~ !` r t~et'r r~7r \,';f~-, ``'i~i '''„~l~li'r'..~~` 1"z.. '. ~"`• . c ;.:j '~i1G°.. :.'j i;~' ~;~ "Cl.'r ..~:,- ~ ~ i~ili ~:~:.~ {v`r e: . '.•~ c. ^ ' " .'. . ~ ~. - ~^••.'t ~ ..,: ;; . . ~ ; C f' :~ n~tu~:! ~'rax~~ ~:~ ~.c^;i~c! ~n c~ Cf • b' ry r ~ ~!~~.~~..~ a ~ :-s~~ ., .. . :1 L-• ~ ~n unt7+t~ • PlC/-UP TFsUCit<.S-SU3USF~i~!S = ' ~' -Lii:~GS---fi'J'S----CU STC`.' C/\i-'e-~ u:~ VA~~S- i 1fis,/~ ~Er~ ~ ~t,f,~ ~~,fs ~ ~«~~~a ~ :_~ . i`~1 t ~ - }1'L TOP ~ ~~ ~ V{{~ ~ CLE/TED A1\D SEALED ~~ . _ - ' partial ~ ~~ ~ -. __._ ----------- ---- --- -- ...^_... ## CAt - ~T ~i-I,`~. ~C'GO G PL~ET~ COi: • .~.... _....,.......... .. . _ . : ~ ~u 3.50 ' ~ Cl-ir,Oiv~E POI...ISHIi~'G ~ a ~~ 2 t~J ,, ~{...,1_..... v c1 . a ~.. . , -~-. \^: • `• -` -a ~ /, ~~ // li i~V~I~~/A~ . TAf~ l~L ~~ ..,.,~ Zr 1 t 7 . ~~ ~, - U l 1~1 G 3.50 ~;;+ ~'-•-~ ~ :~, r ~ ~ { . ~ i ~ J.OO • '~ . a ~~~ , : .~ ~, . , ,. ,.., .., r, ~... , ~~~~~..'-_ a ~ Vdinclu~,vs cl.:~.u~c:!_.._d~.:,~t--- f1 ~, ~ ^..... , i..:t ~ {~ancls---uoor j.~n.~i~--_.,~ncu~:mcd 1.~ . ht.II ('l: Y].e.+... \.`tlM-w+~AU..N aIY.w U.Nwliaalva f.(WMrY Y•:+.• IYt^nr)-\/....Y•1 .q •^. 7.1•~wa•.tl•.. ;. ~ C111t CCt (Iri t1 ~:^. .v• ` ;,:ilC (i1.,~•n , <~tl IClc::l .. , . i~t iGl' lli"1}' C` CJ CC~:;in~1. ' 1~ , ........ ,._. ,n w..vaa ui • r+.~...s Ivas~. u v nr.aw wu ......u ~.. •..swo.aw.a..v.m a a a,.a,.s. uN wsxin.t... ~, ~: i - .~~• -r"J~_~1..T-._... :_ .. ~~ ._.. _ ~.~.~-.rte -~_ ~. .• j ~ -~ ~._l. ... I. ~ . T--'~ f ~ J_-y ... j /`lam f..~r~a •_..._ ~ _ _ _. .:... .. .. .. - •t ~ .. - Lam:. • .r ~-° ;---~-' ' ,-~ ----~ •~...._._.--,------* : -- l _ _ ' ~;,.. - •., ... ~ ... °_j ~ ~ ~ > jtP.Y_ R ..~.._~+ ..-~-~.. w.._,..-.t ~_ . - 4:Z.--,....- psz ~.~i.--a, j-~ .-~ ~. , • :.k, o a $( = v t A ` ~^ 1 1 ~,, . f t t . "a:z-='o ~ ~ ~.. M.. : ~ •..-.-,-.-..-~.~~ ~ t~ fi'r' ' NER~L IND T R -'`~ LIMITED SUSI-~IESS ,. 1 .. ~~. ~ ~~ 1 ~4 ~ ~ `~ i I~ ~ \ 1 = il~l_E RESIDENCE ~. :,. ,~; ~' ~,~~ ~ - .~-- - M U LT .. ,, ,, , _-~_ r_ - -- . , ! `~ ' .. ~ ~ [ , , 1 • I ~ ~ Fi ~J. ! ., Z3 r ,... , ~,.1 . _ l C) i j ..,1* 9 _ f ~.,,~ .: c: : Z -~; - + ~... ~ _ F" ~ - -~-. ~ =vr a~J ` ~, -~4 JI ~, ,. ~ f.~ .t •~r^1_ ~ ~ C~"~ J ~lJ ~ ~ _.' _. !. __. ... _ ~ C ~ , <: r._.;~ -- -- ~_._,~ ~.~ I../ psi •~"_~ t. -7 ~ •- l - t"^""~ I __ '~ ~ -- ,~1, I ~ !7 'l l ._ _ _ _ ... _ urs L IV ~ ~~ .J (( .i, I' ~. •i_~ _ _ _ _ l j - ~..+ _1 ~.. ~- I ~ r) ~ .~ r j 1 c.,3~ i ~~? 7 ~~ . e ~„~ ~ g ~ E3 j I --- ~.= ~ - - -- - ~-- s a r .q I, I <' I • r :' i ~ f I~ , 1 3a+i ,.,c +~' i ~r L Cv (~`~~ ~~ . __ _ i .1 , ~ ,---- --~----~ r 2 1 ' • ~ ~~- _ ~/ 2~, ~G ± ~ ~ ~z 1 '1 i '• ~1,, ~ i .~~~~~: ~ , ~-gyp _`.~ ru ,~ blO~ G~~C r ~ 4`UU . ~ r l) e ~~ 22; ~3 .` loe ~2 .~: I y ~ ~ 1 , ti. •y -- - '~ - --; ~- - -- r ~ ------ F ~~- - 1. ., l.ziti .._ f ( ~~` , , ~ ` I ~~ _. ~ ~_ ~ (~^J _..j_._._~.. _:~ . _ - - - ~ ~ :D ~ /""fig - - I -. I ^ I ~ I i r 1 I ~ ~ _ ~_ ... 8 ~_ RAJ -- j' ~ ~ ~ +~+~ ~ r! ~ R ~. x--) ~~ ~ - - - . - ~~- - - ' • . ~-,- ~ i ..ems..-.`~ -~____ ---------- ------ ----- - -i . 11 _ , O rr f7 ~ ~ I 9 lt.~ f ~ ~ I 'n - -~ n ~ --~ . , . ,~ r -} o r, u I --' l~ 5 a I _~ ' I ` _ _~_~~ - I~ ~; r._~ ~.~ ~_ -~ , '~-^`.~ ~?.-~o ?11 "' zoo l~ ~.~.i - - ~ ' ' ~ ./" L J ~ .+ F ~+~ N I ~ 7 ~ ^' __ .. - fi . ... _~ F- 4 1 ~ N ~~.. v ,. •n r-~--..~ L i I, i r --a I 1e ~,J _ ~ .N ....._ ~„~ ~ ~J ~_,. _..r , .i? f' 1 ~' 13 i' ~ ~~ i5 U.! !'- ~ . ~ ~ i r~ II ,. .~ ( Q 1. F: ----; f G~ r ~ --- :. _. k~- lv ~ i r ____-_-•- --- -,r---~ exhibit nor ;;to:a~c, l.o :di.ng,, unlo~:dingy or .>lnll.lar , ctivitic:;. .33. USL ::T:GLIL:/:TTOi,T._;:_ PC "C-?.`^ Gl:i`?1;I:^~L.CO~.~~T:".i,_i_G~,_ I)TC_TI:TCr. ~ ~ --- -~, i . ---I'~roti. rc~ 'J>c~. ?n r. General. ~u~::c:~c:~cictl dist;-i.ct, unle::s othcrc?isc~ provi_dcu i.n this cha;c.cr, tn~ %ollo~.ri.n~; uses ~.ti~e pe~mi_l'.tect: (1.) any use perntittecl i_n an ";:' district or an "i•iI:" district upon compli.tnce c~lit_-h the pr.oceclural rec~ttir.emenis fo-r :such district ,>rovi_decl that no one-fanti.l.y, tT?o--family or multiple--iami 1.y clc?elling shall. be cone:t:ructecl in this di_~tri.et without f.i.rst obtai.ni_ng a special u:;e permit therefor in accordance Taitlt provi_si_ons of Secti_o.~ 3._rsl. • (2) any commercial use permitted in a '`C-1" district, subject to the procedural. xEC_ui-r.2ments contained in this . eci=i.on. (3) P.et-ail stores and sho;~s, including soda fountains. (!,) Fir_aucial institut^i_ons, telephone and tele~-r«ph offices, messenger offices and professional or"_fices. (5} Carpenter, furni_t:ure repairing and upholstet,y shops, book binding shops, u:-ass t~~atcin~ shops, rhos -repairing or dyeing shops, netTSpaper_ and job pri_nti_no ' tinsmithi.n~r lum~ino, decorating shags, self service est-a'~lishments, electrical, ~~ P lt.tlPid;.i_e3 and OULdOOr adVE'_I't?_Sl.n~ Si.gnS, (5) Tree ir>_n:tmrt:g sorvicas provided that such services do not include storaUe accunutlati.on or l:ee~itz~ o-~ cTOOd or tree trin:niings on the premises. but not (7) accessory use:, and structu-r.es incidental to any perrnitt:ed use, including the open s'~oraGe of ec!uipment o'r ntat~~ials. Subd. ?_. Uses by Special Use Permit. The follo~?ink uses shall be permitted only __ n ~lpon the prOCU:.~el:tetlt o{ a special use permit pursuant t-o erection 3. rl (l) UndeLtalci_nn, establishments. (?_) hny drive-in business ~-There people a-re served in automobiles. (:i) automobile camps 4nd courts. (t,) }Iotels, motels, restaurants, cafes, gasoline service stations, service station stores, public ~a-ra~s, car sales lots, and theaters. Ida service station may be converted into a station store t?ithouL- a spacial use pe~-mi~-l~r7(uch use issued in accordance tTi.th Section 3.41 of this code. (1973-21). (5) palter. business LlJeJ e~:hich are determined by the Council to be of the same l;ener•al character as the uses enumerated in this section and c•?hich trill not be obro~cious or detrimental to the area in which they t7ould be located. motions Public Ga-ra;;es and Car Stlbd, 3. Renul.ata_ons P.elati~n~ Co Gasoline Service Stu , Sal.e> Lot:. A special use p~~-mieyfbr a gasoline service station, :public garat e or a car sales lot shall not be granted unJ.ess the council finds that' the proposed use t~iill be in substantial c.ompl.iance t~ith the follotTi.ng standards; (a) The use site s?il.l not abut a lot which is i.n an "P." district. tzar the purposes of thi.^> paragraph, a lot c•?hi.ch merely adjoins the use site at one corner c•ri_1.1 not be deemed to abut the site. (b) The use trill. slot create undue L-raffic hazards or t_-raffic can~esti.on by reason of the turning movements which vehi.cl.cs caould make in entering or leaving tltc mite. (c) Tlo drl.vct•?ay, at the no in L- it cro:tses the proper. ty li_ne of the site will ~e tait-hin ~;~0 feet- of an intersection. t1n "ittter.secti_on" as used in this paragraph n:cans the point of i.ntet-section of, t:he extenclecl curb lines i f the curbs on the near sicla .of: the site:, and measurement,. hall be along such ext..nded curb lines. G7 ~}~ ~11 ~. I ,~ (d) Tl~e station or g.trage will not display any banners, noisy ribbons- Qr si_uti.I_ar attention-d:_stracting or vi.si.bi.lity-obscuring devices in the urea in front. of bui_lcli.ng setback lines. (e) 7'lte mi.niimim fronta~c on any street will be 120 f.ect and Lhc minimum area of ~ the site will be 17_,000 square fcet-• •Lor a station wi_tlt ,:our pumps or Jess ; and s tat ions ~•rith more pumps will. have' su f f iczent adcl i_tionzl. frontage area to provide equivalent and sufficient- space f.or servi.ci.nl; vehicles; f.or off-street parking, for safe vehicular approaches i_nt:o t-he 5tati.on, and for good vi_si.bil.ity for_ pedestrians and drivers. (f) 1\o dri_vetaay tiaill be flared outward on the boulevard in such a way as to encroach upon the boulevard of adjacent pr.opert:y. (g) The st-at:ion or garage will comply with l.he off•-street parking, sign construction and other regulations of the city. (h) Any required buffer or. sr.reening area will be so cotist-ructed as to obstruct head]_igltt beams of automobiles on the station property from beaming onto adjacent residential property. (i) Pump islands wi_lI not be so close to street or adjacent property lines as to create the I_i_kelihood of encroachment by vehicles upon street right--of••way, side~•ralk areas or acljaceYOUP~°display sign, pedestal type may (j) Unly one permanent detached ~ line ad•acent be erected on the street frontage at or near the prcpert} .] to the street, except that if the frontage o~ the ~sb~;ect.; . is in :eXCeas •of 150 feet, taro such signs may be allot~red by the council on such frontage, Subject to any other appJ.i_cable sign regulation, • (1~~. AI_I exterior lighting caill be so designed, placed and operated as not L-o be a nuisance t:o adjacent properties, (1) If the station or garage is to be located in a shopping center or • other integrated development, it- :ai_l_1 be in architectural harmony with the rest of the center or development.. (m) The station or garage will not provide for the ouL-door operation of lubrication equipn.ent, hydraulic lifts or_ service pits, or the outdoor clispl.ay of merchandise; but the outside underground storage of gasoline and other petroleum products bet~•reen pumps, or the_L-emporary display of merchandise G7 i.t111.11 4 feet of the station building is permitted. (n) Zf the station or garage is not to be located on a county road or state ]Zi_ghnay, it- shall not be operated between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a~.m. of t-he foJ_l_otaing day. (o)' ';f f- the site i.s at an intersection, provision will. be made for an unobstructed area on the site, adjacent to and ~•rithin 50 feet- of the inter- secti.on, free of vehicles, signs (other than a pedestal sign), displays or other materials which tend to obst:ruci: intersection visibility. Subd. _ __ Restaurant:s and Cafes. 4 Regulati.on:; Re'at~n~; t:o llotcl_s, t`iotel_s, _ A special use permit: shall not be granted for a hotel, motel, restaurant or cafe unless the council finds Lhat the proposed use will be in substantial compliance with the following standards: (a) The use will not create undue traffic hazards or traffic congestion either on t:he pub l.i_c streets adjacent to the site or on the parking areas on or adjacent to t.}te site or on streets adjacent t:o the site unto which t.-raf:fic to or from the site is channeled. (b) Adequate prova.sion will. be made, through the use of bui_ldi_ng set- backs, buffer areas, scr.eetli.ng, and e>:ter.ior treatment or placement of t_-he building; on the site Lo avoi.cl noise, glare, fumes, dust, and any other saua,ces of uui.sance or anltoyance to adjacent properties. ~~ 3/23/"IO . ~XNt/31T /- cL.` .~ rca ; ~_`)) ~Li1G' ad8t(t13Cy UC tha C11SL'anCc, bE?t:CJYt'll c1rLVf>*.Jays ~ lid l.nt'.'_X';(c'i:tLUR3 aRC; c Oi [l:'i" Cl'.'].VE?W<l~:> i:i:U,['.l t:'l"l f_' St:?I?C;pO ~nt U1. CL?3[:~Ic11.I1~, (;CEli 1:1C:~ (~~) '.Che'su'Efi.cionc_y clrci cl~lrity of the traLf~ic patterns Ind t:r.a`fice con- l:rol 7.{~El`i iii?d dCVLCC?c; On tiic? C:YP_a fUr Vc'1?LClll.~r and pc`3i~23tY1~?['1 S%1Lt?~~'f i (1 } '111 ' ~ Cl:`(~U3Cy Clf tt?c 1.1:i[?t7.I'.~, ~ ild CIr~~Il1`,c'. U11 t:h~' Flt°a ~rCCI th<' S tE?'_C.' pO:LTIt Of Gl.7.i:::LI::3~1I1~~ 112a1t11 aI?d s3rCty hzl~ards i:U 1)E'.r~Oi.S and prOic'Ity. Surd. 7. Oner.at?.on o_f 1'<Irlcir.c; Arias. It is unla[a.f:ul for any p~rsoll holcii_::, a t)C'.TIllit: f~r it pariC].P_o are$ t0 L1;3c_' the ui.2a Or t0 perC,'! t t12C: area t0 be L5:'.'_I 7::1--?;ly .1*.IanLrr'.r.cUn~i:?ry tC)- ti'1` <'1pTiJrOVed plan Ur COntrury t0- thy-prOi~-iSLUn? O" v::'?:.~~:'l'S~.v=:`~' Of~ •t'h18 SC'C tivll, '>O' p 1 i ~~~ tr0 ~l `ill bC iC C'f)t fr°F_'. Oil:-str~ t ar:_L. ~_ as .,?~_ o;: snow so that all of the desiGnated off-street parlcin~ spaces and drive- t•lay5 ~;iVitlg aCCES5 thP_rC.'.t0 are available for Ol:f-°Str"°i?t pBriClnS~ (:1';rOll~ilOL'~ the year. Iio Longer tYlan forty-eight (~~3) hours after each srow.fal.l e:~coed- . i.nu four (4} i.nchos ilx depth all such parking sp~lces and driveways shall be cleared of snow and available for use. Subd. 8. Pazki.n? Ar_4as; ST?ecial Re;;ulations. A11 paYl:irp areas establis'r.ed pursuant to a p2rt:lit .ssuz~d~ under ti?is s2ci=ion shall. co~lply with th;fz fcl-- l.o;•:in~ requirements: ~ • ~~/(l) A parking area adjoi_ni_ng or ~tdjacallt to any reside. tiai or Inultipl~a rr>siciallce sha1.1 he e£ft Ctively screel?ed fro~l such district by a fence, c•:all, or coi;lpact hedge, or a co::binati;:,n pL these. Such screer.in~ sklall ba kept free from advertising matter. Such area shall have a side yard on tha side on which such multiple resid~_nce or residence district is located, at least 15 feet TJ.i.da, which shall be maintained free of parlcirg, sl!a].l be landscaped, and shall be kept in a dust, r:~ud and refuse-frae flonaition ii at all ti_mos. l.i.ghting on any such area shall 1)e so placed as to refic:c:t l^ light a._\Jay ir.~m any adjoining r_eszdellce or multiple residence district as defined in chanter IJ:T of this cods. (?) 1'arlcina areas and all driveways and appr.ocches thereto shall be surf-acad. with a high. type f:le:~cible or•- ri.gid paverlent. Sidewalks shall. be of~concre(-e, Arc>as rot used far drivir.o, parking or padestrlan traf-- 1. .4C`Jhall_ be surfaced or landscaped and kept tree of mud, Bast and refuse. v (3)• ~~ concret4 barrier curb shall be constructed on the pericleL-cr of each such area. (~+) Concrete curb axed gutter, \ait.h curb returns, shall be construc~ed at all intersections and approach c~ntrar.ces. Side;aallcs snail be constructed a:tl;e!)ng 'auildil-lg frontage. • (5} Par):ci.n~; stalls shall be clearly marked and distinguished frocl dri.v- in lrlnes, and shall have eitl?era concrete curb oz a side*.aalk ain tl?e front o~- side. ~ (G) `.l'r31'fiC signs and devichs shall bE: installed, directinn traffic ~ai.tllia thL~ area and traffic entering or leaving t:he arc>a. (7) Such area shall b~ so gtadd and drained as to dispose o:t: all sur- f'.ICC' \,•.?~.~r. tdher~~ n,~cessary, prapvr storm drains sf?all. bo i.rstalld to c.;lrr; ,ilJ;ly stor~:l water C:ro~ti the s.rea surface . (;~) i;;):ll.ev.lrcl;, shall not b~ :%ncluded ill any such area. I3ouli:v~•Irds shall b;.: c:~.tti:;~~cl 1>y driver•I:lyS or appJ oacl?es only at aporov~d points; t;her~ l:~~c.~ - ~':'i''~ ~ ~'i)~~~)"t~VE'1't t:i';lt"1: .LC ~I'O'tl Cr03SJ.11`~ at Utll:'r tha11 SuCI; ~ pprOVed pOi.nf:~' ~ ~ ~),11''.' 1 :`i' ; it 1' 1);ll'1: LC:.1~~~?9 c5.~ il[1 :.lt)piOVE'.d t:j7pC: S(1~111 bC E'.rc'C:i:t'd O11 Ol' I2L?~r C'l;•? ' 1)t~U ~ t`V.1 CSI .1 t'C?;1. 115 ?_/9/70 i -- -1- ~x b . ~ u ~. ".. _.. t. - __-..__..L p';r (j A ~; - - i I' y,: Ih x .~.. llry'~ N ~ ~ ` ~ V 1' r lZ~ai ! •-, ~ ~ U ~ i ~ ~ L `-'__ "~- _ ~t- ~ ~ C ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ' ~ ~~ t~j ~ z rt r -a ` .~_ ~ ~ ~~ 1s o.s., ~ ~ ~ 1~ I. ; N ~ , ~ I s i L o ~ -- 0 Ct a ~6- ~ n_ ~~ to ~ ~ z~ ~ ~ ~ ant j n. ; ~ tj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t . _ ..... _ . _. t . ~. ~. ~a ; ~~_C~._ _ ~ it '~ - .a i ~~ - (Jl 1 i ~ ~ J i u -L s ', ~~~~. ~ ~F { _;G OFF~STREET PARKING N0. 77-2 ~:_ ~OWNER~AND ADDRESS: Sir Waxer, 105 W. Michi~ari,-Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 6 and S. 17' of Lot 7, Block 6, Fairwood Par Plat x+5355 , Parcel x+210 USE: Car Wash/wax and polish maintenance service. DATE OF APPLICATION: , 6/8/77 PLANNING C091M: 5/24 & 6/7/77 COUNCIL: 6/13/77 N0. PARKING SPACES: 17 ~• x.16 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 186 Agenda June 13 , 19 7 7 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen; Subject: Metropolitan Systems Statement The Metropolitan Council has asked the City of Richfield to provide pre- liminary review and input into the .Metropolitan Draft Systems Statement. This review is the first step in a seven step process for finalizing the systems state- ment and updating the city's comprehensive plan in accord with this statement. The systems statement is divided into three .parts: 1. Part I gives the Metropolitan Couna.l' s estimate of future population, employment and housing for Richfield 2. Part II tells how Richfield is affected. by individual metropolitan systems plans such as transportation and airport plans, waste management .plans, . recreation and open space plans . Part ?I also describes existing and planned metropolitan facilities and conveys to Richfield as much inform- ation as possible to help in preparing amendments to the Richfield comprehensive plan 3. Part III lists those sections of the comprehensive plan which legally may be excluded from Richfield's comprehensive plan. Richfield's local comprehensive plan must include all the mandatory elements of the comprehensive plan that are identified in Section IX of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. - The statement is to be reviewed by the city council in its preliminary form now, with the review to focus primarily on factual errors and other differences. Any comments which the city council has will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council staff for review-and discussion. Following this review, the systems statement will be revised as necessary and finalized. This statement will.be provided to the city by July 1, 1977 and will be transmitted as the final systems statement, subject to an appeal process specified by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. Council Letter No. 186 -2- June 13, 1977 DRAFT SYSTEMS STATEMENT Population, Household and Employment Estimates The population forecasts for Richfield. which will be adopted by the Metropolitan Council for inclusion as an amendment to the Development Framework Chapter are as follows: 1970 1976 1980 1990 2000 47,231 43,952 42,500 38,300 37,000 These revised figures are considerably lower than the original forecasts of 47, 300 in 1990, 42, 500 in 2000. The revised forecast appears to be extremely low, and could tend to have a negative affect on Richfield if they are adopted as part of the systems statement and added to the development framework chapter. The revised forecasts of 42, 500, 38, 300 and 37, 000 assume a decline in "people per household" from 2.95 people per household in 1976, to only 2.5 people per household in the year 2000. To accomplish this per household drop in popu- lation (nearly 7, 000 between 1976 and 2000) a greatly increased out-migration rate is assumed, along with a decreased birth rate. Although both of -these factors are occuring, it is unlikely that either will be so extreme as to cause such a decrease in population as that reflected in the revised figures. There has been out-migration from Richfield and other inner-ring suburbs to outlying areas in the past. However, with the increasing cost of transportation in outlying suburbs, it seems that Richfield would continue to be a favorable area for accessability to employment and commercial areas. In a ddition, Richfield housing is more moderately priced than that of some- outlying suburbs. The Metropolitan Council itself has a policy of encouraging filling in the nearly fully developed areas and controlling growth in outer areas. Thus, it seems that the Metropolitan Council may be contradicting its own growth policy by projecting such a low future population of an inner ring suburb like Richfield. Thy second assumption contributing to this estimated population decrease can also be disputed. The birth rate in recent years has been declining. However, between 1977 and 1990, the largest segment of the population will be of child- . bearing ages, age 20-35. This group, even with the declining birth rate, will add to the population. Thus, any births between 1970 and 1980 will continue to be an ad~]ed population and should be reflected in a slightly increased or stabilizing population. In addition to the slight increase in births, there is also a projection of 400 additional multi-family dwelling units in Richfield by the years 1985-1990. These units are not replacing a large number of single family units, but rather represent a net increase of 378 housing units. ?f these units are filled, an addition of between 5'00 and 1, 500 people can be expected. In considering a stabilization Council Letter No. 186 -3- June 13, 1977 of out-migration, and an increase in births and nev~~ dwelling units, it appears improbable that the Richfield population will decline by as much as 7, 000 people by the year 2000. It is recommended that the city council request that the population estimates be reconsidered by the Metropolitan Council before these estimates 'are included in the final system statement. The effects of such low estimates will be seen in resources, community projects and maintenance of the city's quality of services. The original population projection which forecasts stabilization of the poi ulation at 42, 500 people by the year~2000 appears to be more reasonable. The other aspects of Part I; employment and housing, both project a slight increase' and stabilization, and are in accord with city plans and projections. Metropolitan Facilities Part II of the Systems Statement describes existing and planned metropolitan facilities which affect Richfield. Discussions related to these facilities should address their application to Richfield, and not focus on the existance of the facilities, as they are already part of the Metropolitan Council policy, and already in place. Also, each of the facilities covered in the systems statement must be considered in -the amended Richfield compre~iensive plan. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act provides that the local comprehensive plan "shall contain a discussion of the use of public facilities specified in the Metropolitan Systems Statement. "' Transportation The transportation section of the Metropolitan Systems Statement includes I494, TH 36, I35W, CSAH 62 Crosstown, TH 55. I494 should be completed to link .the area between Richfield/Bloomington and Egan across the Minnesota River. The I494-100 corridor area transportation task force should be involved in the interchange modifications and one-way frontage road modifications. These modifications were adopted as policy by the council in 1975. It is the opinion of the staff that there is no conflicts or errors of fact in the Systems Statement regarding the I494 principal arterial. TH 36 will be upgraded from I494 south to the Minnesota River. It is the opinion of the staff that there is no conflict with the Systems Statement in regard to this intermediate arterial. I35W will be upgraded in the common section with CSAH 62 Crosstown. It is the opinion of the staff that additions should be considered with this principle arterial. These additions should include upgrading of the 76th Street interchange , upgrading the 66th Streit interchange, along with the interchanges mentioned in the Systems Statement. Improvements to the length of the freeway is a matter for extensive future study. Council Letter No. 186 -4-~ June 13, 1977 CSAH 62 Crosstown will be upgraded with the common section of I35W. The staff finds no immediate conflict in regard to the Systems Statement for this intermediate arterial. The Systems Statement does not include any pedestrian considerations, pedestrian crossings across the primary and intermediate arterials. The staff suggests that the Systems Statement should address the question. of adequate pedestrian movement and accesses across both principal and intermediate arterials. Transit System There are no plans available on the transit system at the present time, They will be added to the Systems Statement in the future.. The map in the Systems Statement does not show the 76th Street east-west transit service. It is the opinion of the staff that 76th Street east-west transit service should be added to . the Systems Statement. Airports The airports portion of the Systems Statement deals with Wold-Chamberlain Field as it relates to land use, noise and hazardous zones. These issues consist of: 1. Airspace Hazard Zones and Land Use Safety Zones 2. Airport Land Use Zones 3. Noise Zones The airspace hazard zones and land use safety zones are zones established by state statute around airports, which deal with building and structural heights in airport approaches; residential density in airport approaches; specified land uses in airport approaches; and in conical zones around airport approaches. The state legislature has mandated land use zoning around airports. The staff concurs with inclusion of the airspace hazard zones and land use safety zones in the system statement. ' Airport land use zones are zones within the airport's perimeter which provide for existing and future land use within the 3, 000 acre International Airport. The staff generally has no conflict with including the airport land use zones as they exist, or as the Master Plan proposes them to be in the systems statement. However, further study and detailed planning should be a joint venture of MAC and the City of Richfield. The noise zone is a zone established by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for controlling airport noise within a decible/time perimeter. The staff finds two areas of concern regarding use of the L-1D measurement as proposed in the Systems Statement:. Council Letter No . 18 6 -5 - June 13 , 19 77 1. :Is the noise measurement system accurate or are there other noise measurement systems which are more accurate ? It is staff opinion that the measurement system - L10 - is accurate. However, because of the method used to obtain the measurements , the readings should be verified by both the city and the Metropolitan Council. Likewise, other systems such as Noise Exposure Forecast {NEF) are also accurate. The Airport Master Plan and the Department of Housing and Urban De- velopment both used NEF. 2. Is the noise measurement system accurate for making future capital investment decisions and land use on real estate decisions. If the MPCA L-10 system used in the Systems Statement is an adequate measure and an effective noise tool for managing what is happening at the present time. However, it is not accurate nor is it reasonable to be used in making future real estate and future public capital investment decisions. A noise exposure forecast method which is used in the Metropolitan Airports Master Plan .shows 1982 as a future year on which to base decisions.. It must be remembered comprehensive planning not only deals with the present, but also with the future and is going to be an effective guide for future real estate and public capital investment decisions. The. noise measurement tools of planning .decision making must be future oriented and cannot measure only existing noise, but must also predict future noise. The problem with the L-10 which is contained in the Systems Statement is that it only shows existing noise areas and does not project future noise areas. Although the issue can be raised that with an increased number of planes the L-10 would increase, and therefore, the size of the L-10 zone would increase, at the same time it can be argued that the noise. exposure forecast is a composite dealing with the response of human beings. It is also important to realize that noise in the airport is decreasing not only because of aircraft operations, but also because of technology. Thus, it is the recommendation of the staff that we do not accept the L-10 as a noise zone for basing future public capital investment expenditure or future real estate policy decisions. Some future oriented decision making tool should be used. Waste Management There are three metropolitan interceptor sewers running through Richfield; one on 66th Street, one on 76th Street and one in east Richfield. IRF940 is a major interceptor running west to east under 66th Street. The additions of the L/H/N development should be considered by the Metropolitan Council in dealing with this interceptor sewer. IRF9491 is on 76th Street. Future use of the Lyon's property for either commercial or office development should be considered relevant to this interceptor. _ Council Letter No. 186. -6- June 13, ]977 The Systems Statement spends considerable time discussion on-site sewage disposal for Richfield. There is not any on-site disposal site, nor is there likely to be such in Richfield. Thus, the staff feels- that this part of the Systems Statement should be deleted.. Storm Water Our storm water system is complete and does conform to Nine-Mile Creek Water Shed District policies and plans and the Minnehaha Creek Water Shed District plans as well as the Metropolitan Water Quality plans. Thus, the staff~els there is no co nflict in the Systems Statement relative to local plans and facilities. Recreation .The staff feels there is a need to include Legion .Lake in the Systems State- .. ment as a regional recreational area, as-well as Wood Lake Nature Center. Neither of these parks are included in the Systems Statement. Bicycle trail systems should be extended into Richfield, as per the Richfield Bicycle Plan, as part of the Metro- politan Trail Systems Plan. Part III Part .III of the Systems Statement is to specify any parts of the Richfield Comprehensive Plan which maybe excluded from the requirements of the Metropol- itan. Land Planning Act. In general, the Land Planning Act requires that the compre- hensive plan include a land use plan, a public facilities plan and a plan for con- trolling and providing service to planned areas of urbanization. Except for Section 9, subdivision 5, which is "areas of planned urbanization", the staff finds no concept .conflicts with providing an amended comprehensive plan which. conforms to the requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. Subdivision 5 requires that the"comprehensive plans may designate, when appropriate, five year urban- ization areas and shall specify in the capital improvements program the timing and sequence of major local public facilities and an implementation program for official controls which make sure urbanization occurs only in urbanization areas in accord with the plan. " The staff feels that this is not applicable to an already fully developed first ring suburban community such as Richfield. Staff Recommendations 1. The staff finds conflict and error possible in the population projection and recommends that these projections be disputed. 2. Transportation conflicts and additio~xs involving I35 interchange modifications, the need to address pedestrian considerations, and the updating of the transit system map to reflect the 76th Street transit route. The staff recommended modifications of the System Statement to reflect these transportation concerns. Council Letter No. 186 -7- June 13, 1977 3. The staff. finds that using the MPCA noise regulations for future capital investment and real estate decisions is unreasonable, and recommends that either Noise Exposure Forecasts or other appropriate planning tools to be used instead of the- MPCA System. 4. On site sewage disposal is not a problem in Richfield and it should be recommended for deletion from the Systems Statement. 5. •Legion Lake, Wood- Lake Nature Center and the interconnecting parts of the Richfield bikeway plan, should be included in the Systems Statement. 6. The area of planned urbanization should not be included in the compre- hensive plan for Richfield. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission discussed the Systems. Statement at their June 7, 1977 special meeting. The planning commission recommends that the popula tion estimates be reviewed in light of population. estimates being completed by the city and Independent School District 280. The planning commission also recommends that the appropriate parts of the Richfield Bike •Plan be included in the Systems Statement. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director l `P d _Z V, n G f ~® ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ', ,:fit:: ~:-a:'::•:':-::~::: ~'~ :~,~: :i. •.4'. ':'. ~ . .. ~ .' J. a'~•.'.':':': ~' J ....:. ~ ~~ a r, Z. • I,.:•::•::'t~ 1r.~ <'.~~. ~. ~ ,tan'. S[•. _)" fix.. ~.~4 ~1 ••::V~~ '. ~'Yl a. 'ab A- .:11 ..:~Y' '\•]' Intl>.[- •.• ' ~. ~• ~ ~ . } .. r.... • Y 1 J v.' . V ' a a r.cF r.x •r~+.f.Y C; ;lQ'•' ..:.. ,.•. ~[ D~ Rl :...f:...tt.~ ( y~. .::::_:. t ~ ::~:::: ~~• . • '`¢<~, ... l rj. .. ~i~w. Q•}8tao,~.~s Y.3ek;CtX.-tip ~T..p.~;:-;:F~:•:•i. ~_ ~~-~ (~ ~. h ~~" ~~ N~~ ®® ®® i i 1.~ U~ r~ 60/ ~~~~~: ~7 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 185 Agenda. June 13, 1y77 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the amity Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Proposed Revision in Sauna License and Masseuse Certificate Fees. Second Reading. On May 23, 1y77 the city council gave first reading approval to an ordinance amendment revising the sauna license and masseuse certificate fees. This ordinance amendment provides for an increase in the s~=una license fee from the present fee of $600 annually to a fee of $1500 annually. The present sauna ordinance also provides for an initial investigation fee of $700. The proposed revision recommends that the investigation fee be increased to a minimum of $1500. The ordinance amendment also provides for an initial investigation fee for masseuer-masseuse certificate of $75. This $75 fee repre- sents anew fee, as there is currently no investigation fee fora masseuer- masseuse certificate. It is suggested that these fees be stipulated as minimum fees, with the city retaining the right to charge an applicant for any investigation cost incurred that might exceed these minimum fees. A copy of the proposed ordinance amendment is attached. It is recommended that the city council give second reading consideration to the proposed ordinance amendment at the June 13, 1y77 city council meeting. Respectfully submitted, {~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: City Attorney Public Safety Director .,-~'' A1~1END: PENT TO CHAPTER V ` PART II Sl:C'TTON 5.25 - OF 'T`HE ORDIP~ANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN; Chapter V, Part II, Section 5.25 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to the regulation of sauna and massage parlors is hereby amended by amending Subdivision 4, Paragraph 1_and adding Paragraphs 2 and 3 as follows: "Subd. 4. License Fees and License Year (1) The annual license fee is [$600.00] One-Thousand Five-Hundred Dollars ($1,_500): The license fee shall be paid when the application is filed.- In the event that the application is denied or in the event that the license once issued is re- voked, cancelled, suspended or surrendered, no part of the annual fee shall be returned to the applicant unless by council action. [In addition to the annual license fee required by this subdivision, any applicant malting an initial application shall also pay a non-refundable application and investigation fee of $700 at the time of making such application, Aseparate-License shall be obtained for each place of business. The licensee shall display the license on a prominent place in the licensed business at all times. A license, unless revoked or surrendered,. is for the calendar year or part thereof for which it has been issued.] S2) At the time of each original application for a license, the applicant shall also pay a minimum investigating fee. This minimum fee shall be One-Thousand Five Hundred Do11ar~,500) If the expenses of the investigation relating to any application exceed the minimum investigating fee, the city shall notify the applicant of this fact and shill require the applicant to pay an additional i_nvesti- dating fee which the City lvianager deems necessary, to complete its investigation of the applicant The applicant shall pay such an additional i_nvestigati.ng fee within five (5) days of bein, so notified If such additional investi.~;atin~; fee is not e,, . paid.,ty'3~~, zn such five-day period, the city shall discontinue consideration of the application. S3) A_separate license shall be obtained for each place of business 'rhe licensee sha1.I. display the license on a prominent place in the licensed business at all tii~ies. A l.i.cense, unless revoked or surrendered, is for the calendar year or~art thereof, for which i.t has been issued." Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1977. Loren Z. Law riayor ATTEST: Thomas J. rioran City Clerk ' Bill 1977--12 Ah1END1~1EN7 TO .CHAPTER V • PART II SECTION 5.26 .' OF TI4E ORDIP~ANCE CODE • OF T1iE CITY 01= RICHFIELD CITY OF IZICHFIEI..D DOES ORDAIN: Chapter V, Part II~, Section 5.26 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to the regulation. of the practice of massage is hereby amended by amending Subdivision 5 by adding Paragraph 2 as follows: "Subd. 5. Certificate Fee .and Certificate Year ~1}~~.The annual certificate fee is $25.00. A certificate unless revoked, is for the .calendar year, or part thereof for which it has been issued. .~ At th° time of each original application for a certificate, the applicant shall also a a minimum investigating fee. This minimum fee shall be sevent - five dollars (575 00) The minimum investigating fee shall not be subject to refund If the eynenses of the investigation relating to any application ex- ceed the minimum investigating fee, the city shall notify the aoplicant of this fact and shall require the applicant to pay an additional investigating fee which the City 1~lanager deems necessary to complete its investigation of" the applicant The applicant shall pay such an additional inves~ating fee Ytlthin five (5) days of being so notified If such additional investigating fee is not paid within such five-day period, the city shall discontinue consideration of tfie application. Proposed by the City Council of the City of Richi'ield this 23rd day of May, 1.977. A11 persons interested for or against this proposed ordinance amendment' are notified to be present June 13, 1977 and they will be heard. 13X ORDER OF TIIE COUNCIL .° lviay 23, 1977_ , rnorlAS .t, rior.~N clxx cLERx Publish Ji.ine 1, 1977 ~ ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 184 Agenda June l 3 , 19 77 The Honorable Mayor 'and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Ordinance Amendment Concerning Sauna Licenses The municipal code limits the number of saunas and massage parlor licenses to five. At the present time there are only four outstanding licenses and no applications for new licenses on file. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council give consideration to the attached ordinance amendment which reduces the number of saunas and massage parlor licenses which may be in force at any one time from five to four licenses. Respectfully submitted, / ~~ . ~ ~; 4~~ r ~ r~ f•~~~~ J~ iC ~~ tTy V~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Safety Director City. Attorney 'n CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 183 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor ~d Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Purchase of Betty Crocker Pie Shop at 711 W. 66th Street E~ Since January of 1977, the staff has been negotiating for the acquisition of the Betty Crocker Pie Shop located at 711 West 66th Street, just compensation for this property was established by the city council at $316, 000, while the Pie Shop's appraiser arrived at a value of approximately $350, 000. Subsequent to initiation of these negotiations, a relocation estimate completed by a specialist in this field estimated a relocation payment of $14, 000. Red Lobster Inns of America , which owns the Betty Crocker Pie Shops , has accepted an offer of $330, 000 to include acquisition and relocation. The prop- erty owner finds this an acceptable compromise since our relocation estimate includes compensation for searching for a replacement site (which the company has full time employees for), the reprinting of stationery for a change of address, (which the company will simply continue to use until their supply is depleted) and the actual cartage of property by commercial movers (the owner will use their own employees already on the payroll to move): This property is being purchased for the 1978 public improvements in the area. The entire parcel is being acquired since the required right-of-way cuts into a corner of the building. This work is scheduled to begin in the early summer and-, as in the case of Amoco, the tenant willvacate by April 1. Their lease with Red Lobster Inns of America is identical with the one negotiated with Amoco for Jerry's Standard Station. It is recommended that the council adopted the attached resolution approving the purchase agreement with Red Lobster Tnns of America in the amount of $330, 000 for the Betty Crocker Pie Shop, 711 West 66th Street with the provision that this amount shall also include the Pie Shop's relocation payment. No other payment will be owed to either the property owner or the tenant. espectf bmitted, ~~G~ ~/~ ~ Wayne S. Burggraa f City Manager cc: Planning Director N RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND IMMOVABLE FI}~TURES AT 711 WEST 66TH STREET WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council_ proposes to purchase certain real property and immovable fixtures as identified by the fixture ap}~raiser, pursuant to and in furtherance of the LyndalejHubjNicollet Redevelopment Project, heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (the "City") and the Housing and Rede'~Telopment Authority of Richfield, said real property being described as L~~i.s 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Fairwood Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council has caused appraisals of subject property to be made and has carefully considered such appraisals; and. WHEREAS, the City Council has instructed the City Manager and the City Attorney to commence negotiations for the purchase of the real property described above and for immovable fixtures; and WHEREAS, the negotiations for the real property and immovable fixtures described in the above agreement have resulted in the execution of a purchase agreement by the ocvner(s}; - __ NOLd, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council that the City :Manager is authorized to execute the purchase agreement and to purchase the above-described property for $330,000. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 19 Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk .~ y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 182 Agenda June 13 , 19 7 7 The Honorable Mayor ' and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Purchase in Excess of $l, 000 Chapter Six, Section 6.05 of the City Charter stipulates that the city council must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction when the amount exceeds $l , 000. There is one such item on the June 13, 1977 city council agenda. ° The public works department is requesting council authorization to purchase one Drott 4-1 Bucket, equipped with a quick coupler for mounting on a front end loader. The purpose of this bucket is to allow for a safer and more efficient manner of loading trees for disposal, This device will be partic- ularly useful in the increased tree removal activity that city crews have become involved in, due to the spread of Dutch Elm disease. One quotation has been received from Ziegler, Inc. in the amount of $1800, It is the recommendation of the acting public works director, in which I concur, that the council authorize the purchase of this Drott 4-1 Bucket. Funds for this purchase are available in the 1977 central garage budget, Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Works Director Finance Director /`f CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 181 Agenda June 13, ' 977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Purchase of Jerry's Standard Station, 6600 Lyndale Avenue In January of 1977, the city council authorized the staff to enter into negotiations with Amoco for acquisition of Jerry's Standard Station, 6500 Lyndale Avenue. As council members are aware, a strip of this property on the northerly and easterly sides is needed for the public improvements project in the L/H/N area. The land required from this parcel for the public improve- ments is extensive enough to render the remaining property useless for operation of a service station. Therefore, it is necessary for the city to purchase the property in its entirely. Just compensation for this property was established at $136,093. The staff has been negotiating for several months with the real estate representatives of Amoco to arrange for this acquisition. Agreement has been reached, and a purchase agreement signed by the company in the amount of $140, 000. This amount includes not only the acquisition price, but also the relocation payment which would be made to Amoco. The property owner owns the gasoline pumps, oil stand, signs, cabinets, display racks, air compressor, and some other miscellaneous items, and would normally be entitled to moving expenses from this property. (The gasoline pumps alone are estimated to cost $500 apiece for disconnection, moving and reconnection, and there are six pumps for a total of $3, 000). When the other personal property is considered, it is the belief of the staff that $140, 000 is a fair price for acquisition and relocation, both for the city and Amoco. The property owner has also retained the right to salvage the station immed- iately prior to demolition. The staff does not believe this creates any problems, since the property is marketable only to a very small percentage of businesses and a city sale of the items would be a very time consuming endeavor in relation to the proceeds we could expect to gain. The staff has also been in contact v~~ith Jerry Oberaigner, who leases the property from Amoco. The relocation process and benefits have been explained to the lessee, and both the staff and Amoco are searching for a suitable replace- Council Letter No. 181 -2- June 13 , 1977 ment site. Since the reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue has been rescheduled to the spring of 1978, the city will be leasing the property back to Amoco for Mr. Oberaigner's use until another site has been found for him or until the property is needed by the city for the street project. Since this scheduling allows approximately eight months to find a new location, none of the parties involved believe that finding a suitable site will create a problem. The lease with Amoco has been reviewed and approved by the city attorney, with several modifications which Amoco has agreed to. This agreement provides that A2noco will be responsible for all maintenance and repairs., and payment for utilities and taxes. The city will be responsibile for providing liability insurance. Sufficient rental will be collected to cover this expense, which is estimated by our i:~surance agent at $50 per year. Amoco is also required in the lease to carry both liability and property damage insurance. It is recommended that the council adopt the attached resolution approving the purchase agreement with Amoco in the amount of $140, 000 for acquisition of Jerry's Standard Station at 6600 Lyndale Avenue with the provision that this amount includes all relocation payments payable to Amoco. The agreement also provides that the. property owner shall retain salvage rights. In addition, Mr. Oberaigner will be eligible to a relocation payment as the property's lessee. Respectfully submitted, ',p ~ ~, 7~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director Finance Director a RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND IMMOVABLE FIXTURES AT 6600 LYNDALE AVENUE WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council proposes to purchase certain real property and immovable fixtures as identified by the fa.xture appraiser, pursuant to and in fu.rther_ance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nico.llet Redevelopment Project, heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (the "City") and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield, said real property being described as Lots 18 and l9, Block 1, Fairwood Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council has caused appraisals of subject property to be made and has carefully considered such appraisals;- and WHEREAS, the City Cour7cil has instructed the City Manager and the C~.ty Attorney to commence negotiations for the purchase of the real property described above and for immovable fixtures; a.nd VdEiEREAS, the negotiations for the real property and immovable fixtures described in the above agreement have resulted in the execution of a purchase agreement by the owner(s); NOW, THEREFORE, BE I`I' RESOLVED by the City Council that the City Manager is authorized to execute the purchase agreement and to purchase the above-described property for $140,000. Passed by the C1_ty Council_ of the City of Richfield this day of 19 Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: omas J. Moran City Cler -~.~ /3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City, Manager Council Letter No. 180 Agenda June l3, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Release of Bond on Off-Street Parking Contract, Mr. Steak, 1420 East 78th Street On the June 13 , 1977 city council agenda there is a resolution providing for the release of an off-street parking bond for the Mr. Steak Restaurant located at 1420 East 78th Street. The public works department has inspected the property and confirmed that the requirements of the oft-street parking contract have been n~,et. Therefore, it is recommended that the council authorize release of the bond. Respectfully submitted, r , .- Wayne S. Burggraafff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Acting Public Works Director Planning Director RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RELATING TO RELEASE OF BOND ON OFF-STREET PARKING Mr. Steak Restaurant 11+20 East 78th Street Use: Addition to Restaurant and Expansion of Parking Lot WHEREAS, Mr. Steak Restaurant, 11+20 East 78th Street, Richfield, Minnesota, had an off=street parking agreement with the City of Richfield, relating to 11+20 East 78th Street, which contract bears the designation of Contract No. 2218 and which contract was guaranteed by a bond of the Great American Insurance Company, New .York, New York, in the amount of Fifteen Thousand ($15,000) Dollars, and. WHEREAS, Mr. Steak Restaurant has complied with the provisions of said agree- went and the Great American Insurance Company now seeks to be relieved of any further obligation under said bond, and WHEREAS, there appears to be no justification for requiring Mr. Steak Restaurant to continue to provide a bond for security on the pez•formance of said agreement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesotan, as follows: That the city manager is hereby authorized and directed to release tYie Great American Insurance Company, New York, New York, for any and all acts of Mr. Steak Restaurant committed or incurred in violation of Contract No. 2218 on and after the 13th day of June, 1977• Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 1.3th day of June, 1977• ATTEST: Loren L. Law Mayor Thomas J. Moran. City Clerk ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 179 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Proposal for General Commercial Planned Unit Development Promotional Department Store Site - Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area Financial Properties Developers, Inc. , Atlanta, Georgia, and the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority have requested the following actions of the city council: 1 . Zoning district change from general commercial to planned general ,~~ commercial ~~ 2. Approval of the preliminary PUD plan 3. Approval of a special use permit 4 . Approva 1 of a pre liminary plat The following items are attached to this letter and will be referred to through- out: 1. Exhibit A -site plan, grading plan, utility plan, lighting plan, and elevations 2. Exhibit B -development schedule 3. Exhibit C -preliminary plat (to be presented) 4. Exhibit D - L/H/N Redevelopment Plan 5. Exhibit E -traffic projections Proposa 1 ~. ._ Financial Properties Developers, nc. is proposing to design, construct and Council Letter No. 179 -2- June 13, 1977 lease a 68; 334 square foot K-Mart department store on the promotional department store site of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project. The project has been designed and will be implemented within the following guidelines as proposed by the developer and Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The project will be located on 255, 000 square feet of land area and will provide 370 parking spaces at a parking ratio of 5.4 cars per 1, 000 square feet. The parking will include eight handicapped parking spaces, in accordance with state code. Sixty-degree angle parking is provided. Access to the parking lot will be from 65th Street, with atwo-way entrance and atwo-way exit, and from Lyndale Avenue with aright-turn entrance and a right-turn. "out only" exit. The parking lot is designed so that there is a perimeter two-way traffic moving aisle, and an interior one-way traffic moving aisle. The two-way perimeter lanes will be 30 feet wide, and the one-way lanes vuill be 20 feet wide. There will be a 30 foot depth in the parking spaces. The ends of the parking spaces will have concrete aisle markers to identify the parking area in inclement weather and to insure a more orderly parking arrangement. The parking lot will be striped . The parking lot will have trees planted diagonally across the lot, and trees and landscaping will be provided around the outside perimeter of the lot. Since the proposed K-Mart is adjacent to two major roadways which carry substantial traffic, it will be easily accessible by pedestrian movement and adjacent to two major bus turnout areas . The developer will provide a 10 foot concrete pedestrian walk and lease life pedestrian easement across the front of the store. This pedestrian walk will connect with the mid-block pedestrian system, as proposed in the Redevelopment Plan. The walk where it crosses driveways, will be of the L/H/N standard bominite material as per the Urban Design Guidelines. In addition to the mid-block walk, sidewalks will be provided on Lyndale Avenue and on 66th Street. As outlined in the Redevel- opment Plan, no sidewalks will be provided on the south side of 65th Street. . The loading area, compactor pad and utility pole which are located on the 66th Street frontage will be completely enclosed with the same building material as the main building. In addition, the signed one-way entrances and exits on 66th Street will be for service only. The loading areas will be completely screened from public view on 66th Street by landscaping walls, building enclosures and landscaping. The garden area is proposed to have- alternating wall areas with black vinyl- covered fencing and black-covered frame, and a poured concrete floor. In addition, part of the garden area will be m vered. Although the garden shop still does not appear to be part of the main building, it is the opinion of the staff that this is the best architectural and aesthetic treatment which can be obtained. The garden Council Letter No. 179 . - 3- June 13, 1977 area will be screened from Lyndale Avenue by the raised landscaped pedestrian plaza, The building material (split concrete) •will be used on all sides of the building. The building will be a one-story with mezzanine concrete construction. The building's main entrance faces the 65th Street frontage. The garden shop will have a separate entrance. Landscaping and screening will be provided around the perimeter and within the site.' The garden area will be completely screened from 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue by the corner pedestrian plaza, which is raised and includes extensive landscaping. The tire, battery and accessory area will be screened from Lyndale Avenue by a low, landscape wall (3 feet) and vegetation. Landscaping will be prodded on all sides of the project. The interface between the Northwestern Bell Telephone lot and. building will be softened by landscaping and terracing. The building facing material will be extended to the east side of the building. The proposed landscaping conforms with the Redevelopment Plan Urban Design Guidelines. The drainage plan provides for regrading of the property in such a -way that the parking lot will slope from southwest to northeast. The storm sewer plan provides for internal drainage of the rooftop area and catch basins at appropriate locations, to prevent storm water spillage into 65th Street or onto the NWB Telephone property. The underground storm water system will be connected directly to the city's 65th Street storm sewer. The utility plan provides for the water service off of 65th Street to NWB and off of 66th Street to K-Mart. The sanitary sewer service will be from Lyndale Avenue . The storm sewer system will be interconnected with the roof drains, and will be completely underground. Storm sewer drainage is pr posed to the main storm sewer on 65th Street. The lighting system will be the standard design lights for the Lyndale/Hub/ Nicollet area, provided at effective intervals throughout the parking lot. Lighting is also proposed on the building and in the TBA area . The K-Mart sign is to be used on the 65th Street building front canopy, and there will be an additional sign on the 66th Street side. The 66th Street sign will help break up the solid wall on that frontage. A non-illuminated "Auto" and "Garden Shop" sign are proposed within a signing strip on the building west elevation. The site and proposal offer both aesthetic amenities and economic amenities. The proposal conforms to all the L/H/N Urban Design Guidelines. One of the goals of the Redevelopment Plan was to attract a major department store to the area, and the plan provides for such a promotional department store. The reason for attracting a major department store was to revitalize the retail commercial activity of the L/H/N area and to stabilize the area's future. The stabilization of the L/H/N area also will stabilize the future of the surrounding residential area. The Economic Analysis completed early'in the L/H/N planning process indicated that a major department store was a key element to the successful rsjuvination of the L/H/N area. Council Letter No. 179 -4- June 13, 1977 Staff Review The project has been reviewed for compliance with development objectives ' contained in the Planned Unit Development Ordinance, Chapter III, Part IV, Section 3.34, Subd, 4 of the city code, as well as for compliance with the city's subdivision regulations. In addition, the applicant's proposal has been reviewed for compliance with the Redevelopment Plan, and the Urban Design Criteria of the Redevelopment Plan. Relationship to the Zoning Ordinances and Plans The PUD section of the zoning ordinance requires that a proposed PUD plan be compared to the zoning ordinance requirements otherwise applicable to subject project. That is, if this project were not developed under the PUD section, the provisions of use regulations for C-2 general commercial districts, Section 3.33 of the- zoning ordinance, would otherwise be required. Shown below is a comparison of what the city requires for a C-2 commercial activity, and what is actually proposed for the PUD project. Use Regulation from C-2 General Proposed Under Commercial District the PUD Parking 1 sp, for ea. 200 sq. ft. of retail area = 242 sp. 5.4 cars per 1, 000 sq. ft. = 370 spaces Height Requirement Setbacks -Front yard Rear yard Side yard 3 stories or 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet -0- feet 1 story -approximately 19 feet 65th Street - 316 feet Lyndale - 80 Feet. 66th Street - 24 feet Not applicable -0- feet -the proposed K-Mart is located approx. 60 feet from Northwestern Bell Building The comprehensive plan, as amended by the city council in June, 1976, indicates promotional department store land use on this site, which is within the boundaries of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project. The Redevelopment Plan also indicates promotional department store land up to 100, 000 square feet on this site. The proposed project has been coordinated. with the subdivision regulations and is in compliance with the subdivision regulations. It is the opinion of the city staff that the project is in general conformance with the comprehensive plan and the redevelopment plan, that the differences between the proposal and the otherwise applicable provisions of the use regulations for General Commercial districts are minimal. In many cases, the proposed project exceeds- the Council Letter No. 179 -5- June 13, 1977 standards of the general commercial district. The differences from- the general commercial district standards vaould not be detrimental to the public interests and, in fact, would appear to enhance the public interest. The proposed project was designed to provide ingress and egress at two separate locations -Lyndale Avenue and 65th Street. This design will eliminate the sole use of either Lyndale Avenue or 65th Street as entrances. A public entrance to the area will not be provided from 66th Street. Traffic coming from the west on 66th Street would turn at 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue, proceed north and turn into the K-Mart lot. Traffic coming from the south on Lyndale would proceed tnrough the 66th Street intersection and turn into the lot at Lyndale Avenue . Traffic coming from the north on Lyndale would turn at 65th Street and proceed to the 65th Street entrance. Traffic coming from Nicollet would proceed on 65th Street to the 65th Street entrance. The 65th Street entrance provides for two ingress lanes and two egress lanes with atwo-foot wide chatter strip between the ingress and egress lanes. Vehicle stacking room is provided in the 30 foot two-way driving aisle. Service entrances are provided off of 66th Street. The service area will provide for two semi-trailer trucks in an enclosed loading area, as well as stacking and maintenance room. A 22 foot driving lane is proposed along the loading enclosure and a 50 foot wide backing area is provided for trucks to back into the l03 ding enclosure. These service entrances are one-way from east to west, and are not for customer access. The K-Mart store is expected to generate approximately 70 vehicle trips per 1, 000 square feet per day or 4, 780 trips per day. The public street design which is being completed in 1977 and 1978 will adequately handle the trip generations of this project as well as other projects within the redevelopment area (Exhibit E) . It is expected the trip generations to .the K-Mart will be as follows: Lyndale Avenue South (20%) 900 ADT Lyndale Avenue N. and 65th Street (15%) 675 ADT 66th Street (20%) 900 ADT Nicollet South and 66th Street East (30%) l , 350 ADT Nicollet North and 65th Street East (18;;) 675 ADT Bus Transit (maybe double ridership, i.e., 280 ADT get off bus and pick up car) Total 4, 780 ADT The existing traffic generation for the land uses on the site is approximately 750 ADT. (23, 372 square feet and 10 houses). The orientation of the site to 65th Street provides for better traffic flow on 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue, and provides for better utilization of the existing traffic sytstems. This orientation also creates an urban structure space which helps give a sense of place at the the 66th Street/Lyndale Avenue intersection. It is the opinion of the city staff that while there will be a substantial increase i~n traffic generation at this site, the majority of this traffic will use the 65th Street Council Letter No. 179 -6- June 13, 1977 exit. With the implementation of the L/H/N public improvements, improving the intersections•at 65th Street, 66th Street and Nicoll'et Avenue and Lyndale Avenue, -• as well as improving the lengths of street, that there will be adequate capacity for the increased traffic generation. The parking of 5.4 cars per 1, 000 square feet is adequate fora 68, 334 square foot K-Mart store, in light of the heavy use of mass transit in the Lyndale and 66th Street area. Bus turnout lanes are provided at 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue. The area is serviced by 143 MTC bus routes. K-Mart Commercial Site Intensity of Land Use Proposed Allowed by Ordinance Net land area Cross land area Floor area Land use intensity Floor Area ratio 254, 972 sq. ft. Not applicable 286,-768 sq, ft. Not applicable 68, 834 sq. ft. 131, 627 sq. ft. Not Applicable 52 t UI .240 FAR .459 FAR The proposed K-Mart development will have two substantial impacts: 1. Economic impact on the L/H/N redevd.opment project. 2. Impact on the existing property owners. The conoomic impact on the L/H/N redevelopment project is estimated to be as follows (all figures are in millions of dollars): 1 1. Sales: 1980 - $12,685; 1985-$14,318; 1990-$16,241 2. Additional employment - 170 new jobs, net increase of 120 jobs. 3,. Stimulators for 240,000 square feet of additional comparison retail use. The staff has concluded that the project is necessary to accomplish the goals of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet redevelopment project, and will have a substantial impact on the economic characteristic of the L/H/N area. Eleven businesses, ten single family homes , and one landscaped lot owned by the telephone company end a public street, Grand Avenue, are located on this site. The HRA has expressed intent to clear the site by acquisition, relocation of existing businesses and homeowners, and demolishing or moving the structures and improve- ments. 1 • Includes all department stores in L/H/N area - K-Mart 7 million, others 5 million in 1980. ....... Council Letter No. 179 7- June 13, X977 The closest property to the site is the Northwestern Bell Telephone Company. A _ landscape interface is being proposed between the site and NWB Telephone Company. The property north of this site is multi-family residential. Landscaping will be done ~" along 65th Street on both the north and south sides of the street to create a visually pleasing interface between the multi-family residential and the site. Commercial property to the north, south and west of the site is within the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet redevelopment project, and is expected to benefit from location of the major depart- ment store on this corner. Availability of Public Services The site is adequately served by gas, water, electricity, and sanitary sewage facilities. A nine-inch sanitary sewer line is in Lyndale Avenue and a 30-inch main collector sanitary sewer line exists in 66th Street. A 12-inch sanitary sewer line exists in 65th Street and water is available in 66th Street, Lyndale Avenue and 65th Street. A 42-inch storm sewer is located in 65th Street. The internal storm sewer drair~ ge system, which will be in the ground, will drain to 65th Street to the 42-inch collector. An additional storm sewer is planned for 65th Street to handle projected. storm water volumes, east of the site. All surface water on the parking lot and roof will be collected by catch basins and drains and diverted underground to the 42-inch collector storm sewer. Gas is available from both Lyndale Avenue and 66th Street. Electric power is available in 66th Street (the building will be electrically heated and cooled). Staff Recommendation 1. Preliminary PUD Plan and Rezoning This proposal is generally in conformance with the L/H/N redevelopment plan and comprehensive plan and takes maximum advantage of the space available. It is oriented correctly to adjacent streets. The developers have provided sufficient parking and landscaped area. The floor area being proposed is below maximum allowable floor area. Therefore, the proposed K-Mart is in conformance with the PUD ordinance. Traffic generated at this location can be handled adequately with the improvements of Lyndale Avenue, 65th Street and 66th Street, which are planned for 1977 and 1978. It is the recommendation of the staff that the council approve the preliminary plan,- and rezoning to PC-2 from C-2 general commercial. 2. Preliminary Plat It is also recommended that the council approve the preliminary plat in that it conforms to the subdivision regulations for submittal of preliminary plats. • Council Letter No. 179 -8- June 13, 1977 3. Special Use Permit The criteria for issuing a special use permit is provided in Section ' 3.41, sbud. 5 "......issuance will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental, (1) to the health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or (2) to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. It is the opinion of the •city staff that these criteria have been satisfied. In summary, it is recommended that the city council take the following separate actions: 1. Approve the PUD plan 2. Approve a zoning district change from general commercial to planned genera 1 commercia 1 3. Approve the preliminary plat 4. Find that the conditions for granting of a special use permit are satisfied, and approve the special use permit. • Planning Commission Recommendation Following a staff presentation and additional comments from the developer, the planning commission heard testimony from interested persons. The commission then discussed the proposal as it relates to the L/H/N redevelopment plan and the compre- hensive plan for the city. Following this discussion, the planning commission made the following recommendations: 1. Recommended to the city council a zoning district change from general commercial to planned general commercial for this site. 2. Recommended to the city council approval of the preliminary ?PUD plan as .presented for this site . 3. Recommended to the city council approval of the preliminary plat for the K-Mart site 4. Recommended to the city council approval of the special use permit in that the conditions for a special use permit are satisfied. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ ,. pl' , Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager cc: Planning Director Acting Public Works Director I ~' j '~ <~ 'r~4',3°~t ~ ~ ~t ~ ~i~i~~:i~ ~ _...~ ~ ..~,... _ ~ w ~~~. .A ~'`. ::-1 lei '~ ": fl ~ 1~ y°s ~ ~~ s . ~~! ~~~~~ ^ ~~ ~ s ~~e _ * ` ~ ~, ,s 4C~~ ~ 3 i i i ,.~ `~.. (~"^~ 'V'U Ntf3HlflOt3 ONV s', in'/ \ i'y; `~ r' ,+ `~ M •~) ~. Ya 'r. -,~~. ~. ~n :~~~ .,Sa+` .~I ~ i;4 1~~"[ ~t C. ~~~! ~~ ` ri' i { ~} -~ t ~~` ~~ ~~ ~,- ~ , t ~._I: ... \ _. ~ ~. s. >^ !' ,.y ~gi _ ~ ~3 ~ t S3 W. _ ~, J ~ ~~ .. \ ~Y S _ . ~ ~ ,SI 1'. ~, i ` V ; ~.t3~~ , ~ ~ ~ .. ~C:. ~ A q~,t 1 ~. ~' , ~~._- R~ {~ ' t S ~ .1 L• I ~`• ...... _. ~. t i1~~7S9F l(C 1 ,f ; I . r ~I ~ q~ij~J~i t .. ..~il(~ d. ~' ~ ~ ~ 1 1 zI ~l~i~y~~i Y 777( i ~; ' ~[ ~ I,~. ~ . t ~ ~~ °` - ~ A, A ~.:.~ -t~.1' 3 ~ ~!_ g c ~ ;, . ~~•,- \` ; _;., _ 5~r'~q ~ - ~ ~ iii: I ~ III ~ ~ C`(e>. \~ ~ `~ ~~ ~ \ 6 ~,~ ~~ ~s ~'~ Y ~ s~ ` ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~. \~ ~~ `~~ ~ \~ ~\\ ~\\\ 7 -_ '/1 ~ ~ I p r I- I _~_ ~. ~ I ~' ~ i ~ `; ~ ~.~ ", ~~ ~,_._ ., __, _. . ,~ ,_.___ l '1 f I ! : - - ! ~ ; 1. L!--!.! ~ __i i_. . LI ~ . ,~ - -,- z i ~ li'i 'll~..l.l Ili-i~~ III Ii 4 i._ _.__ ______ . _~.___ ___. _ i ,_.._ ............. ~ ~_ i ~Y ~.1, '~v:. .~? r, +~ ,' ~r ~ a= i ;> I 1 n'd ',' t %2 ~ - f~. /G: ~ ~ y.n 1 :~ ~ i ~~~,., '\.~\\\ ::,tip` ~ ~ ' ,,r' " q 1 ':1 ~~ ~ :~` J1 ~ f ,._~.___~.~~N ~'''-~.`;~ ~;/;. ~ ~~~~ _ _ ~ ~;, , _ ---' -,max" ~ ~_ _ - - l ~ ~ t .:.7:-l i '1'.: 'r ~J{ l ..~ • +•~, ..4 _ _ - _`.."_.'/ ~ ~_~-~-~t~~-y~~,... .~,~ I ~ i1I ~ ~ ~/ ul ,~ l ,,:.. ~ww .a,• .~ a ~ ~-. ~~ .1^Yo zOreo -1n7 ~ ~ 3 ~ai~ .•t ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ n ~ 1 _ Ca ~ '. i , i ei'' 'n ~~ i- •uc:r.,;S 1 ~~ ` ~ c _ ~~' (`.I '1.~;' ^~~ ~ ,'. i. vr~p 5^4 J ~ ;`• ~ Yi_/ ` _ ~ Q •• ,11 ~ I '~~ -s 7~> = L It--'- --.L- r -5. q 7~ i r` D dJ=,l.- ` I a- . a t. i ` ~~i-rJ.Z a=n C `~ j ° .I s; ~~~J-JJf~ /~ t :'l ~ 2 1 }.- /. :.:z ' ~i~' 1 t"• ~il.,~' O zT jy~!'. t Y ~', c-:•T 'S ~,.` L~ (~ 1~ '/ ' ``!6^-- 7`i - ,.FnL_•11~SL!- __ ~_,.~~_.~. t !^:.~, \ 1~~, _ ~ --~T' ' - -lam }•.iC =~,-.,,._.,,~_~_ ~ L _ ~ ._., it ' ~ J .K 1 I.~ 1 •o ~ o•ojn TN ~i nc~ a'n 1 'a~ ~ k. ! 1 °:n $i-~ a lI i~ I; l 1 - ' i, 1 ~ 1 T ~I. ! IC I 1 ~~ ~~ i ~ i ~ • i. l ~•~ _~ w - z -- l .f -~, ,Y 1 1 T_ ~~. ~._L____.-.._ ____} _ W r ~ .- _L._. l~ ~ ..~~, ....~w..~..~ ~~.._._._____ rx~rr~z2, z-2 a 1 ~ ,Iie ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1d I i ° ~ `~` ` .~: 6. ~ z) ~li~` - S1 ( ~ -. ~-~- __.__ ~__=_.._._ _1~ _-_~.~_. o__~.-~....__ l___.~__~.~~_______`.___~_______~-_ ,-'. __. _.~ 11 _.___ + _ _ _~ ~1 51~ y ~ \ .. 7 • •1:..,Ir,~ r ~:~ -.-L .fir ~ }~•~ ~ ~ ~ :; :, j~j ~ 't "~ ini ..... ... ... .. I b 5 ~ . ~. l ~ir \\ \ i ~ 3 ti~ y ` -. _~ ~ ~ ~- , . ~ ~~ _ ~ :, !d~~ W a F Q I ~ (~l °a ~~~ ~ --- 111 _ ,, 11 ~ I I I I I _. ~ - i 1 1 f YI ~ -• --.~~_- ___ ==---1 - _~ .- .~ -~__~--~--v ...~, - ~ - . 1 ~ ~ ( ~_t~ I . r1'-----.__ ~ --- ', - _v --#~ - ~ ~ I w w I ~ I \ • ; ~ 1. 1 t /~ i ~~--------fir--- / I f - ~ ~ / / L~ I q p 1 1 t Q ~ 1 n~ c~__ _ i__-__- , ~- t I . I ~ 1 ~ 1 I ~ 1 ~ \ I I 1 - - ---- i ~ I I l.' 11 iil~11 -IIUiT-~~II1{ ~ l l l 1. _ 11 f l.Ll__.___ 11t1.11._______tl1 ~ ~ 1-- l _ ~ -'- _-_._...___~ ~:=a7---- __'=~-==T111:11„C;A::uTiilll; 'i~ ~i °! "' ~i j, ~~( ~, 7i~ t'i+ Z a J ~_ Lil F U1 J Q o U o Q: ~ - C_) t ~1 ~ J ~ ~1 ~~ i/ ~/~ °7- Ilarz~act /'tvernae Soutlz 1'acatc hct~acen 14'est 67th and ltresl. G6th Street. Grand hvenuc South Vacate l~etz•:ceri lt~est 66th cincl ltirest 65t:1z St.xect. Realign betiacen 14'es1: G7th ~,nd 1'c°~t 66th Streca~~, and • const~-~rct landscape buffer.. P1_easalrt hvenue South. Co~struct pcde~frial~ tiaalkway from 1`'est 65t:h Street t:o • 1tc~t 61th Stec Pi7.7.sbury hvenue South Vacate 1'i.llsbury fro,n 1'dest 66th Street t:o 1~'est GSth 5~:rect. • Const~-rzct cut-clc-sac nori.}z at 1'dest 65th Street. 1~entwor'i.h. ht~e. So. ~ Dead.-end. or c.onstn~ct. ctzl.-de-sac nor.t:h of real_in~ed 1';est 137_aisdcl:l. hve. So, GSt:h Street r+i.t=h a dcacl er.d at 65t1z Street. First Avenue South Coll\rert t0 one-ti•;ay street north ~ro;n „rest Ci6tl~ Street tc l~'est 65th Street-. Construct landscape buffer from 14cst 66th Street to 1';•~~st. 65th Street. Rail~~~ay Construct pedestx~ an ~~ra.y fi-o~n 66th to 67th Stxec:t. fi-om Snydcr's to 65th Street. off-st:ceet improvements izzcluding par}:ing lots, pedestrian ~k~al.}:ways, pedestrian plazas, and landscaping, are an integra]_ part of the dove7_opmcnt of the overaJ_1 area. Although very close coordination will be required bct~•:een the Housing and Rede~.~clopment Authority and the developers, the responsibility for those improvements lies with the private sector and will not be a part of the City street project. The pedestrian ways ~•:ithin the street rigizts-of -way and adjacent easements ~-ai~_J_ generally consist of- an eight--f_oot-~•lide side~•ra1-lc. `t'here ~•rill be considerable street tree pJ_antings throughout thc~ area. ~,~eas Associated with the ~•aalrtaay system ~,1ill be a number of rest ~v - with bencl~zes, trash con-l~ainers, screen ~~laJ_7_s, and landsartpeof`~tl~c~~.als Upgrading and uzliformity of street lighting wiJ_1 be a p improvement to all streets 5.n the project. r 1• . ' y'- ..•~.~ ~ ~ E ~ tt°yi ti~~ aE~ ;, ,~ 1 A ~ ~a .. -s ~ o- l~ ~ / }` 1 ,. _ ~ :,~ ,.~ "` „ = ~ ~ p :y 'I m :: ~ r.:~ ~, ~ ~ r~~ I ~ ~'` " rn ~' ( ~, '' ! _ = --- -- ~ A ___. i o / ~ e dry ~,~• ;r~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ _ -', L o r -° 0 I ~~ r ~` ~ ~~~ ~t ;i~ , 11~.~~~I it" `~ ~ I ~. ~II ~' ( a i -_1 >_ ~i ' ~t- -~ ~ ~. ~ `~ "~ "~t'.r r ` ' ~•~ ~ , 1 f~" ~ ,-- ~ M - ~~ ,~~ . ~~ r i1: < , F ~ ;~ ~ - F :~~~ ~ ~? ~~ k~ ;~ 1: ++ '~.. All' I L ~t 1. ~`1. •c.,,~: t_ ,,~ e: h~, ~~, ~•~ _ - -- ~ ~ ~_ .....,. ~ J _ -_..~..;, .~....f.-. -... .. ...- <-. n ..... -err+....- -__...-~s..~. ~. ,..". 4~.i 1~ ~~: I *' ~~~ ~~1'~L~~ ttl :' . ~; : ~ ~ ,~. ~~ 1:l ~`,i a 1 `r' w a Q •' r ~ +3 o ~ :;-~ ~~ ,~`~ ' ~I u ~,~ a V ~~-~ 99 . i4., . i. -- -- ~., E.. _9 -_ _ (~~, r~ ..~c -~~ ` ~ ~ V_ I !_~ I 7 1 r r°~ ~~~.~E;~`t l ~ . F u a s ,~~`~~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~ ~ ~;~i ~i~ ~ ~w K -- M A R T D E V E 7. O P M E i~T T_ S C Ii E D U L L. 1. I-IRA Begins Acquis~_tion - August I_, 1977. 2. July 1, 1978 or March 1, 1979 - C~_osing on Land. 3. Starf: Construction 3rd quarter 1978 or. 2nd quarter 1979. 4. Dependent on closing date - Ylill Open For Business 2nd quarter of 1979 or 4th quarter of 1979 respectively. ~ Q. - t ~ ; J ~--- -- -- ~ S ~ 6~ O w ticX:..te,~recwt~alY.~:es.;J~~ ~~~~ .A M r'_'"} Y I i ~-~ .... - t+ 4 ~~ J L__'•-:.1~ ~.~ .- _ p, ~ - zc c ~ ::tn ay L i i3_ct is .ts. ~c_ _~-J l_. a ~ ~ ' ie~ I 1~ ~ ~:.~~ 'J fl _h --mod'! _ •~ ~~ '~'.,~ ..~!`,.$;~ ti ! I ~. -gig ~Oa ~ r---- i i ~ ,i ,y _ ... _... ° w ~. :.. (:t ° - - .. .- -~ ~---- -~ ~ ~ -------------s ~ l ~ 1 ~ i ~ ! to ,.-, } vo, L .. _ . ~-- --~:- , I I I I I ~• {~ t-'1 1- O G1 ~ p r r-l ~ GO------, t•; J ~----- - 1 ~ ~ ~ , i. _ a ~0: .~ ~ ,~.~ I _ `~ ~ ~jd' \ ~ I LL~U i ~\~iyc ~l.Ry2 'c~ L___.~ l ~ r R ~l ~_ r ~~^~..~. ~- / < ~~ ~__~ ' ! / _-._. _ W ~~l/ r- Z ~ ,'" / - QJ J_~ J1 '. l 2F OQ .~ l~ W +1 7 1=- %oUu7r UQSN I ~lu '7 r~~~ J i L_J ~' t. t ~!' ` ' , ~:.._..,~ ~~... .._ .. ..... .. _. ... ~ .a ,' ~, `•, tea. ,.. .. _ ~ - ur,i _J.',1.. ,r. .. "' ~-, 1 <.» '~ ;d + •I [r.+tJr:er( A7C. ,') ~ r' .~r~- ` ~ l; ,T•.- ^lj '.` , I, (-(i,'m ~~''~~ t1~i1"rn-' ~ ~/-'•. :•.., n;marT Av~-,•-..tt„ 1 . ' ~~ • .. :r T. 'Tll r,~ ~ '~• ~ ,1 .'+ .' ,! Lt~A,E AX A•d(,'.'~•".- y ' %C) ., i L~.CO ANT A4 C. ' ` /~1 `/ \nl ,~ \ cam`>'~ _ D V _ i ~ VALnwCt( A_; t:.:~!raa F - ~.S.~ ~d~ ~• r`~`-' \nSl }ti.t': ~n~ I ;'t V~ .~Q~1 _j+. ,. • r •:- ..,~_a}.~ ~ ,/ -r~.c.<x. .__ ••`t [YtpDALE AbT C.r~-,cLr•~ r i%/,•'' r i ~ -- {_% .~1i~ 'a> ~ ~ \~i;, -C \ j/-`~~, i~~~' 1~• ~ ;7..1 ~/~. ~ :~'~ t. ? _~%` ~."r,,~^ . i ~ 7 :/..:i.~fQ~ p~`x+,yi J:a ~ t ~ ~.L.+`;'_: ~ - .~~1 ~ ,9 \,,l~~~r/ ~~ ~.I J . _ r - p-~ -t ~,,,u ~'' n ~ , r , 74 ~ t ~ ti Ct; ~\~ ~ ~i ~ ~~~~ ~ nt -i J _ \ +..iaFlclo r to .; ,~. ~ z-c ~ ~ II t .~~. . IV.Rn¢T AtT.- mfr'..; {~~~ `__ ~•..`r!„„^ ( !t i- 'l!`,~ .~~C 1 r •` Q:' f ~ ~ _- ~ iJ ~rnt.a:ET A~~r~; i t ' )7lvsn ,~ :.] ~,E--fact r._~r_:•7.~` ~o~r-.v°t~ ~~i,r;c_ ~ -. 1-''Y"'t{- .V}:_t ~ ~~• .;`"~ f~ . Z - n • r~ \. E,, ~.: 1' I ~`V ^1 C) ~ t' ^• T ~ r l -' _ 4. !'J lrirn~ --~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ t.y1 l_ Y~ ~~-, .~1 J-•-- _'1. t.• It ~' t UrnTp „~.~~""" 1 ` ~E t~ C \ 1. r -.c rp.-D ~:. o~ ~~ i _ ~ t: a • ~_ ,n ff~ ~" ((~' ~(~ y•~ '~..:. ~.-. Sr ~_Y~ , i ~~~ r ~ ~~oL~~ "v } `crcRer~lAt'~ ~ ~ t. ^) j ~ > ) C~~RI y.,,. r----fi' t ~.C_~i-~t~ ~Z uj _.1~ I~ •( J ~t _ 1 ~^-~..t :~ it O , I J ~Z" ~< I '•,t-~-1 -=--y~S"._ ( z ~o,~rt . -' ~ f ~.s' ,,~•. ! ', j' ~~ `< j;zl ~'rn kv~ -, ), I L1r 11 J_J_ -1` `"~~ •n vn -ta~2 1t s~ ~F 1._. t G ``a+ ! _ '- - ., --r;. Pt EAS:,h ~. a km r ~ Y- -_~=(--- ?C2J f. ~!_ <_~ 'a,_ _~ F:.. , ~' _ ~.~ .. - _ t -_-_E.. F7El.SAr T ......_.. _-._.-. yy l _ -_.__..__ __ - _ •- } - "______-_ - t At E. r' ~!" ..:::.: ~, ~ .............:...1'.:~ - f-1 _-- i ' `~_ •~~ -_-..~ --_ .~ .. ~ F., f(E; 5,.1:`~.s_'- ,i ~._._.... _ _~~ a ~< ,.I ~`,,• -._- - I :' ('t f")[n 4C~ 6 rN d r.. ... 'r••+~-s•:~ , t rn ~: ~~: .t jl ~ J ,(~'"~ ~ "~ c ~~ ~^`~ GF ~~~Lr ~ :43.--~:n-~a.p - ~ er_r.suu(t~•ve .• _. r~ ~~7 ~~ rn ~ y N ~ j;o: I `~ ~ ~l . ~ •~~ ~~;4`~ ~ r ~nirn _'~; ~ _ ~•'~-d ~ ,'; fir? ~ ~ ~ (, [ L~ ~ > F i2• ~ t r'~ Z P~ 1 r+a~~ ~V ~ C) Li l~ ----p ~ .. .. I' Y.~rtiwcr ~,~ ~~-_.lj ? . (7 ryry~ z ~ ¢ :, „ ~ (~t I t ;~ `r---'u \i E_= -~ f'. - T c I t - + ~ ~ j i (~~ . 3 ~~ ~F "to ~ h,,. Q--'- -u ~:: :-(n ~~.~••.. ~~ ' .. _, !- 'r•.araava t .. 1 ! 1 ~ ~ o o ., f. x :.?sl'``14 ~ __-l ~ j ~~{ t~% .L- i.c .. _ _ t. ~ ( "' `"~ r~; ?: ~j' '< r.~\.^k~F`----0:f ,/`'y_, ~cnim I~}m~v _ `. s.:..:./ ~. ~-:,....~' .. i•4 bi ~' , ;~ '> I; `g i }' i--f'`W~ t -- 'm o- r c ^ttulsoEtl AvC. , ; , r'-i l_J('~ ~ a . ~, we.ot ~ .:, .~ 1 ' r^:i t 4 { a~ ~ iri 2 f~ - . - 1 .. ~ ,. ~^~ t ~ 1: ~.C ~Lr _• ~' ... 7 t}11' L'l~l',J ~• ~ ~i~ ~ f~ Y 11:I~.,.,c..?...):Y irnU ~, .. -~$'9 (' ~ •~ ~.-,'~' Cl ~ ? ~ J ~ fn t k:., I; ~.I~~,•<(t''~~ ~ "{ I(r., t rs ;' '' b `~ .ti::~ 1,~, , +J n~ ~ },_ -J + . ~--'- r ~ . ~r~ ~~ ~ ~ Il/ Z.^.a cr w , ~) v~ E +ta }, ,a ~, `J ' m Y '...v . ~ t .. ,...~; _ •r'' 1"-' i, {~-.s~_.u .}, , ,, ' ~~ 1 J~ N:COIIET AVC1 r !'~~ (,,.. ~ ~J l-l [" ~ l Cs~.( .~' _ 'r~rr; ` • • I~~ I !1f lr -tea .-s"•'a ~,,~ 7 l~tr lf~~ ~l'•5>:,, .,,~. ~a'°0 j~, i~r- ( ! 7.~t.y HS O etCOLLEi \zr.*as {• 'r~ .,, ~~~ - ,~fu?~~~~~~ f(~`~'~('t`'~/~ ~,z~.rL'u`,? _~-.tl~t~'°~~`~.~ .j`i` ifs{~~~,I'/~i),, _. .. r ~.~ .. (`~K,• ~t tY \ \ i ( `f^n~ ~ ^ (n~}t-: L..~:.1 1 4 ~~_~ ~I r.. r..7 ] X•r.j-.1- Z .4,•sl.);y` f ;... - n ` ` ~ \~ R. UI _ ... .. l: / 7n Ors n: .11 (t . 1 ~ ~~~-- r--~ 1 I .._. `Jt:.t-,_, ~. ,~ :~. ,'... ~ e ~ .~ ,; nip( rn_c,'i~~Ta:~1 .t :? _:=sv l (n:- .~' 9 ~ E ~j• - ~T )ry ' - i ~r 1 ~~ _ I_ `t5T RYE 1 ' ~F~1 .. .• ),~j71 cnni nu"- ~'' ~y'i ;)•ow rnL}> UVOfi ~-i= F~ t ' ~~.`• ~U vtoni/ I' J•%-1t "~(_ ~ to•.. ,.1.._t •. ~}.t. a...l.i.l. J!.)r.^. 1 1 + N v,m<j -nrnin ~J QO:o ?T(n -. -+-a .. C .. •' 1 ,.sr • .. ~11~'it (_»' •~: 1 'i , l)Ufi\ I~ `. .•~ 6TC VCN$ AVC. 2:oa t•, •:r:. - I' ~,•__ 1'jll)- .-'{ ! 'Ejrii J' ~4p>rl is .^ ,rte ~`+f i•. r• ti.~ '~r~f^.1 `~,~..l y.l, ..~-l,a-'1 t I 7 i V. . 1 ?~l. ~ lip .. t i [ , )' . °-~, .. 1't' : to p I ~ - k-.. __.._-__•W /~`___` /r ((--j f ~...-s~_ ~„.._.. ;-•- t-.ne `..fV.-.-t i __'., . r'C_. ~ _ ~~~ ~~T ry _(~~'- `n•~~ x.r!,.ny __'-'.~'__-_ z ~d' 1_~.r __:. -~' ll..\Gt' I~\_~!'..rr'~l;•~~.~ RE ;~, /~::;:111~ ~t.~~J/ ~J\ j t I' is l~ l L -J L.r-,i k,:lsi Tea L.«, a +•-Y 1 r-' A '•Rf i r" 1 ~'r I ~ir. +n.... y !i -\ r•T t.r.:a ` j. .rr.~+q ~ ~~ ~ r~ I p ;. .r `~ i(' (/ i ~.r• IU ~'`~.. I---1 ~.1} -:A IT F i{I \ i {pl lp~t` rn••? ~ \\` C ... i, I ` 1 t1 f3 ~ ~ 8 r•n ~ ~ I I l~•.,,31: n,,_J It ~~ ~ l II ~' li +:_-», is " 11 L~e•,aU t! l ""~ ~s:ea U Ii l~4'r it w:•:~ • I, •.a rl \,vn'l `J Le.-,. t1 `,~ ~, lv~rn Ll \i~J 41 1~ •; I .t ~~ r.. 7 L , '• `, , t '1 tt w r'l_ ~__. I-.,.: ;+ i' '... s.R° ~l r!°'-it F'.t:n' ~ ~ - t t % • ...~. V „~ "-' i_----_ 7[_ 7 l G..s..:G:..n~,~~~>•r„~i~"~Sf,- ~~I\%~ ~~G...yra-"e~~r~~ r_,.h~`:9r ~~rfL'~~~ ~_------ L- -- - __-_ _-` ____ ---- b I I ~- ..i ~'1 '. n -. )~ J ~- C, :l ./+. ~ ~ T(or i' ~( ~ ~ ~' r r ry_ pa l -- ~ 1i ~~ .p cp ni O (l~ 2m ~p ~~ (:) ~ ~ S~3 A /b \• ~~ za "l /~° ~~ ~~~~~C a`~ m s rn b b X j' ~ ~. cL.~~ ~z__ .~ ~. , ~ <- n Cl p hi ~ .,~° •i k ~ c> ,l ~;. ;{~~ ~- ~~ ;;~., ~-. O .q `- t ;~ -_ ,, ,) ' ~ ' -.-! 'i:7 :~r' r;n---'--J 7~ ({/'=_:t 1 f __~-~~;~;_ t- J f'. ~--~ `o - 7_ u_i~ f .`i ~ ~ Z T ro .. ::: ,_ . ... - • - :~ '~ r ~~~ -.m G I .r-cam.... •;-:r,...:~ ~ i• ~ j-`~i . ~11 N Y v ~~~ ') ~ I ~ ~ ) 7 '1 ~i 0 2$ ~ ~a .~~ ~-> I ~ =~ - --, _;_ _ _ col L G -~ ~ ` ~` ,o` ~ ' g : i , ..'.w. c%~' . ~ =i r ~,.~. '~;,~ ,, ~ ,; < a ~ ~ ;~,~ n - • ' . O ~~ ~ ). O ~ i (_ ~~ 45 t ______~ ~----- ., .~ : - _- ~ ~j .~i _ vvy, ci_:i= ~~~ ... _ r . _ ~ ._ . \~ tl a p N (n 4 n i -c i ~. ~~ ~r^r ~~ a~~c ,~' <. ...,. , ,tom ~' `'[~ .. l,l ~'~. '°°4t ~~ ~~ t `e~,~ w.. ~~`; ~,~ _r ~' ~n y/ ~+~-' ~~;`, t ` ~t..1 wm e~ ~ ~~rY k `~ ~` . ~~° :., i~`~` ..","`° may.. ~irnnr' --2- ~ . The purpose of this repor. t is to illustrate that the revised ~si`rGci~ ~~ system a..ncludc~d as part of the Lyndale/Ilub/Nicollet Commercial Redcvel.opmcnt: Program is sufficient: to handle traffic volumes in the a.r_ea after_ a-edeve~.opment. A four-step procedure is utilized as follows: 1. The number of nit additional daily-trips which would be generated by.the projected development is estimated. r 2. The direction of approach to the redevelopment area for the net additional Trips a_s then estimated. ' 3. The net additional trips are then allocated to the street system and added to existing traffic counts to determine post-development volumes. 4.. Final~_y, streets are designed to handle the future pr_o-- ' jected traffic. Tri;~s Generated The fo11o~~~ing table summarizes the computations made irl determining the additional traffic to be gene?°ated by~the projected development. The amount of_ land for each use listed is°based on the redevelopment plan dated October, 1975; and the trip generation rates per_ thousand square feet Were derived by Bather--Ringrose-.°;olsf_eld (BR,~]) . Base data for the rates included trip generation surveys conducted by BRW as part of the i~~etro"politan Courlci.l' s Travel_ Behavior Inventory Study and reports by the I-3ighway Research Board. Facilities included in the firm's survey Were three Target stores, t~•ao Gem stores, a F~~ard's development, and five major apartment complexes. As ]_ong as the types of land use do not vary, the added daily trips can con"stantly be updated as development plans are finalized by merely adjusting for the actual square footages. Net Additional Reduction Factor Type of Gross Square For Net Leasable Land Use Feet Square Feet Trip Generation Rata. Additional Day ~~ehicle Trip Endsl Promotional Depar-trnent Store ~ 85,000 _ 0.8 - 70/1000 s.f:~ 4,760 other Colllnlercial2 110,000 0.8 32/1000 s.f. 2,820 Office - 33,000 0.8 14/1000 s.f. _ 370 TOTAL ?_28,000 7,950 Residential 400 dV,Jelling units 5. 5/D. U. 2, 2.0©_ TO`1'AL ]_0, 150 -~-A trip end is c'.7.thC1" all origin or dest9.nat_ion. I'or c~x~~impl.c , When a pC;raOn 111altiC S ci t1")_p t0 the Iiub, I1 C' gC11C1"atC ~ OnC' trap C11d W hC'.ll 11e arI"a_vC'S alld U1"1C tzlp CI1C~ WI1Cn I1C~1CaVCS, for a t=Ota1 Of t~1'C) . -3•- 2`i'he normal trip generation rate for "Other Commercia7_" in {..hi-~; ty}~c of dev~l.oprnc~nt is 40/1000 s. f . Tn this case a reduction facto~_ or 20 per cent has been app]_icd to acrour~~t for multi--purpose tr:i_1~s (e. g. , a shopping trip by a person caho t•~orks in one of the new of{ices) and int:erceptcd trips (e.g., trips that ar_e already orr the strecL system ar.d will stop at one of the neca stores. Trip Des ti_nation and 1lssignment The r_cdevel_opment p1_an also included an delineated the Lyndale/}Iub/Nico1_.let tra Based on the orientation of the project to the existing primary road~~aay system, to be distributed as sho~•m below. 20 0 c extensive market study G•I.i:i.Ch ~e area after redevelopment. area to the trade area and additional traffic is expect-ed 15 `~ .;~.. Ths_s step allocates the additional dai7_y trips to the str_oet system based ors the locations of the proposed developments, the number o-r trips generated, and the direction distribution of traffic as shorn Un thc~ ,~receeding page. • Post--L)cvel.opment Volumes To arrive at post-development volumes, the current traffic. must first be updated for future years' changes and then the additional trir>~~ added.. Z'lie current voJ_umes shown in the P1_an of October, 1975, have not been used foa~ this report. While being the most current avaii~- able, the fi_gur_es are not adjusted for daily and seasonal variations. Therefore, the volumes from the 1974 County f1.ow map, which are adjusted, constitute the brio data. hn effective rzzethod to estimate ]_9B0 volw~nes is to utilize historical trends, .i. e., to adjust current vo]-umes based upon volume changes cxperi_crrced during the past few years. -The follot,~ing sketch shows the da:i_ly vo]_umes on 66th Si.reet grid Nicollet avenue for each of: tlrc fo11.o~~ring years •- J_969,, 1970, 1971, 1973 and J.974. -4- v ;s 00000 ooo~nin e~ Ol I~ 'V' rl CI' ' ~ r{ONNr--I r-~ r-I rl r~ r-I a~ 1 t I I i ri r--I ~r cn r-t o rn O rnrnrna,c~ '•~-t - t-'{ r_{ r-I r~ r~ P 1974 .- 14, 100 66th ,S'tr_eet 1.9.73 - - 14, 100 1971_ - 16,100 • 1970 - 14,150 1969 - ° 13, 800 These statistics show that volumes peaked in 197.1, and that current volumes are at about the same level as experienced in 1969. Based on this trend, it i_s expected that 19°0 vo]_umes, ~•3ithout the pro- posed LIEN redevelopment, would be about the same as exper_ienc~d i.n 1974. The projected 1980 traffic volumes shown an the next chart and on the attached map entit]_ed "Updated Existing and Post-Uevelop- ment Vo1_umes" do include the additional trips to he generated by ne,a development. The entire increase in capacity, then, from 1974 to 1980 is attributed to the~neca construction. As part of the Hennepin. County Transportation System Study which BRj~~ leas conducted for the County, volume projections for the year 2000 were deve]_aped. Three different volume levels were developed to account for potential variation in key factors that influence the amount•of vehicular travel, e.g., price and availability of gaso]_i3ie, daily trips per person, car occupancy, and the usage of transit. Under the medium volume level, which assumes that car occupancy will_ increase by four per_ cent over the 1970 leve]_ and that transit usage wi1]_ increase by 30 per cen-c, year 2000 volumes would remain about -the same ~s piesent]_y experienced. Under the high valu~:le ]_eve.l, which assumes that car occupancy and transit usage will remain a-t thei.r present leve]_s, volumes on streets in the LIiN area would increase by about 3U per cent over 1974 values. ]Cn or_der to achieve the highest. potential va.lumes, the figures included in the next chart for year_ 2000 maximum traffic volumes assumes the full 30 per cent increase i.n traffic after development (tl~~e 1980 figures) . T'xi_stinc~ and Planned Capacity The exi,sti.ng streets i.n the LIiN area ar_e designed or_ used in such a way that they carry a-1i.mited volwne of traff-_ir.. In some cases there presently are more veliicl_cs on the exi.sti.ng streets than tho str.ect: is designed to carry. Tllis is evidenced by the congestion near thc~ 12ichfi.eld )"3ar1}, & Trust and ne~a.r t}1C'. exi.si:i_ng Lyndale Garden Ccaztcr. Onr.e tl~e streets ar-e upgr~.lded as per the plan, t~]~ere tai].]. be suffi.r.i.ent cal~aci.ty to ]land].e Existing and projected increased traffic i.n t)le LIIN ar_ca. -5- ° (Again, the 2000 projected volumes arc the same as those foa- 1900. `i'he chart figures indicate the taorst situations .) The foll.otainc3 i_able described tho existing and upgraded street capacities, alone with existing and projected traffic.volumes. Exi_sti_nq Existing Upgraded 1'rojccted T~~affi_c Volun~c Capacif:y Traffic Capacity 19£30 r~axi.mum ?.000 Volume 1\icollet Avenue 17,000 11,900 24,000 13,600 17,680 Lyndale . Avenue 12,000 14,700 24,000- 16,300 21,190 GGt.h Street (Last of Nicollet) 18,000 13,100 18,000` 14,800 19,240 66th Str_eet_ (U1eSt Of Lyndale) 18,000 22,900 28,000 ?_5,000 32,500 66th Street (Bett~aeen Lynda]_e & Nicollet) 22,000 15,500 28,000 18,000 23,400 Conclusion Streets are desigrLd for 25 years. The above table indicates that the upgraded` system taili not only provide sufficent capaci~i:y for the 1°00 post-development tralfi_c but in most cases for the maximum potential year 2000 loads. The LHN area should, faith upgraded streets, have a conc_,estion-free traffic system capab)_e of providing access to elist:i_ng and planned devel_opmc~nt. The p7_anned tr°af_fic system should solve t~~e congestion on Lyndal.e: Avenue, 66th Street, and the Nicoll.et-66th Street intersection and should provide convenient access to the LHN shopping area. lleta:i.l: of Street improvement Xl.__TI~~TOVCmez~i:s on Cot.~nt,T Streets ~, 1ti'est: 66th Street Lal:cshorr. Drive to Ly~~dale ~lvcntie; increase pavement t•:idt}~ i'rom 50 feet to 66 f:ect and rJ_},'lll-Of-t•,~ay from G6 feet t.o . 83 feet. • Coi~strttct: left turning; lake at. Tyndale, Graham anti Ta}:c- shol~e I~venues and }I~ib-I'eruiy-Snycler coml~leti entrance. • 'Provi.cle fo~~ bus turnout:s at is}7~clalc i.ntcrscction. UI~~;radc si.~;na1, on 1;'cst: G61:h Street anti I.,ynda7 e. Coi~sl:~~ttc1: A3cdians Provi tie for }~cdr. ,t:ri an t;layti front Talc Shore: Px :i.vc t:o 1'1 easant and ~Crom Ni cvl7.ct to l~:i.rst /1vc?nuc. --6- ct l~venue Nicoll l!'i.dcn at GGth y GSt.}1 St:rcct: to crcat:cd protect cd ]eft . tt1rll l~lncs. C,OI1:3t1'l1Ct 1CSa. tUl'nJ.ll~; L<lI1.C;S at: Illzh-\:icvl.lct entrance. (•,OnStrLlCt 111CC1].a11S firolll G )t}) St.rcet. t0 G4 t:h St:1'C'.Ct:. Construct btls LLlrnouts at: GGt:h Strcct intcrscct:in>>. 1\icol.let 1!venue Construct pedestrian flays from G7t.h Street: to G~)t.h St rec;t.. • tlpl;radC Si.~71a1. a11d pro\ric1C ttlT'71i_Ilo lanes O;1 1\:i COL1.C1: and 1!'est. GGth Street. Inst:al.l siglla.l. oil realigllccl GSi:h Street ' and Ni.coll.ct. Constl°tlct bus tu2~I1 outs at P~icollet. Provide turllin~ lanes into Hub and ~?icoll_et strip shopping areas. Ilnprovcrncnts an Ci.t.}T Streets 14est G5t}7 Street Reali_gll street fro.n Pillsbury to I~;icoJ_Let part:ial_1y o~.~cr present alifnl~~calt o~ G~1 ~ Street. L1.i)ninate i.nterse(:-bons faith Pillsbur}=, 1`;ellt.l-forth, ~~nd I3laisclell A~renue. Go)lstrLlct: 1_~CdC'.Strlc'311 1~'~~~.}:5 c~T).C~ lanClSCc`1,.pC bt1~~G1S ir0;11 I,)'Ildalc f.o l~ii_collct. Construct le£t turn lanes at L}aldale. 1!lest G7th Street Construct. Landscape buffer, I..yndale to Grand. it\le:llue• Construct dead.-end at Grand. ' Construct le{-t t.tlrn lanes at. L)~nclal_e. 1!'est GBth Street Close street at railroad tracks. T~al;e S}lore Drive Constz~tlct landscape buffer.. -~. Circle Place Vacat:e frol~) GGth Street to L)~Ildalc ma.intainin~ a. selaer casement. ~,}~Ilclalc A\~cllue 7ncxease pavrnlent laidtJ) from GO :Ccet to 6G 1'cet. Construct pedestrian ldr+ll:way from l,~llcc S}lorc to G1t:h Strcc~~ Cvnstruc.t pled 'ans fi`om l.,al:c Shore D;'i.ve t:o h'csfi. G~1 tl) S t 1•cc . ,Wlt:h t.tiTIl lallcs at G:lyde'll Cnti'anc:c'., h)'I1da1.C 11~11`Cltt'arc, /i~ency, lV. GGt.h St. , GSth St.l~cet. and ,forth Richfi.el.d St~lt.e , .t.:l.quox• st:oz'c. • Construct }lcdcstl"i an way , from La}cc SI)orc Dr. to l5'. G4 t}, St . l)pl;radc ~;i C1)~ll. at: Lync},11 C allcl l!'cst. GSt:ll St:l'C(.~1-.. Insi-~)1.1. nEaa pCCICStJ':1 <111 Sl.j;lltll. Oll h)'11d;IlC hCt.1aCC11 lVcst G.>th <lllcl ~!'(:SL GGt.ll ~~tl`C:CtS. 1n.stall, I1Cla s~J,na1. }.)'lldill.(.'. ill;(l ~)•~t11. .. --- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor aid ' Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: ~7 Council Letter No. 17II Agenda June 13, 1977 Subject: Setting Public Hearing Date for Change in the L/H/N Project Boundaries The Hennepin County property description division has requested the city to amend the L/H/N project area boundaries to include the total parcel of property in Richfield Lake which was purchased by the city from the Rutman's on September 27, 1976. The inclusion of this property, which is partially located within the project boundaries, will not have an effect on the financing of the tax increment district because the property is tax exempt and has an intended park use purpose. This change is simply an administrative change to simplify the recordkeeping of both the HRA and the County. The attached map shows the area now outside the project boundary which is proposed to be included. The city attorney has advised that it is necessary to hold a public hearing on this proposed change in the L/H/N project area boundaries and it is, therefore, recommended that the council set July 11, 1977 as the date for this public hearing. R?spectfully submitted; S. Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director ~ - 35W I I '1 . _ ^•^l~11!/fit p^~ti440ii1®CIilI1II3A F{ EMERSOR ~ AVC_ ~\`\ ~ ~ _ ~ ~IitAltt!/®ii0®111 i Y =t ~ ~~ LYN W000 B[VO. - ~ - ~ __ ._ ~ \ ~ \ -_ ~ J ~ COLEAX AVE _ I ~ U ' ~ ~~ ,_,_,- t I D ~ !~!I BRYART AVE J \ I ~- ~~- I' ~ ~ _ ~ . •- ~ - - ~ ALDRtCR AVE. _ __ I ~ ae~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~, ' ~ - iz f - p ~i •- 11 p _ . = .... - - r, - - __.._... _ . _. - s r \y . - . _ r... . - _ .. __. 1 ~ !~ - ~-- I - - • • l~ _ `' - 1 I ~ _RARRIET. ...AVE ~ __-I ~s ~=~~..~ ~ - ~_- o--~~- ~~-1- - - = ~t.® ; . --_-. - - ~_ = - Ali ~- - ~ ~ - - - _ ~ .._ i - .--_ ---.- - -- -- --~I ~ ~__ AMD , ., AVE ae~ ~ s r ~ .-__ ~ ~ l~ I I ~ ~-. --. _.. _. _J ~_ ___ ~ ~-__.,_ __ ._ _~ __.. _ ILEASART AVE. i ~___• ~-1 it I .~ ~ ._ I_...- ~ '.~ _ `PILLSBURY ~ AVE.1- ~ O _ ~ nm z l-iJ _;_ i--~ -~-~ ___1 _i Y i --l ~Op ! ~~ ~WERTWORTN AVE. n(' < r ~~, 1 4 1 1 I!! -I ~w ' r-_ ~_-~_ I t-' f-' iI ~ ~ -~ 1 , ti I I ~, I I I D 4 BLAISDELL AYE. L ! ~ ! ( , i Y lfsll NE~UNIY^ ' _~ ' ~ I ! I i -L Pu~uteu --- {~.1_ ~ (~ ~ ~ t ~ i _~ l~ ___~ l _~ _-l~ I -t l_1 L_ ~ (-'}~~ Nit OtIET AYE ^ '` l r I IIiU~A1~A0A/ilt®ii1~110im//~iN~! r ' - -~ ' \ f ST[VENS i AYE. I r I 1 I I~ , 1 nE AVC. 6imram i..a,A ~ ~ ~ ~a i~ ~ `~ t~ ~ I ~_ ,`~~ D ~ L`-,~_~ ~ ~a~ ~€~&~~t~L~s t'om' IaJ Q ~: Q : . ® " J 4 NI d • Existing --- . Park property purchased ey City Area to be added W. 66th S~. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 177 Agenda June 1.3, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject; Request for Variance, 6544 5th Avenue Mr. Richard Johnson, 6544 5th Avenue has requested a variance to the ordinance which establishes his sideyard building setback line to permit con- struction of an attached garage. Background Parcel Size: 66.5' x 200' Existing House: 24' x 44' The existing south property line setback is 18.5 feet. The proposed setback from property lines is one (1) foot. The dimensions of the proposed garage are 18' x 2 3' . This property i.s a corner lot located on the northwest corner of 66th Street and 5th Avenue. The variance requested is to the sideyard setback requirements from 66th Street. A garage does not presently exist on the property. The sideyard setback from the street on a corner lot is required to be the same. as that for the front yard. However, when a dwelling has been constructed less than this required distance, the side of the dwelling most near the street becomes the setback line. Thus, any structure which extends beyond the side of the dwelling requires a variance. Zoning Requirement A request for a variance must be judged in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 3.41, subd. 6 of the city code. The city council should grant the variance only if alI conditions necessary for granting a variance are present on the property. Council Letter No. 177 -2- June 13, 1977 eta ff Review Staff has reviewed this proposal using the criteria which must be present for granting a variance. 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the particular land, building or use referred to in the application, not common to other properties in this or similar districts. The lot is 66.5 feet wide. The existing house is 44 feet long, and is situated approximately five feet from its interior side lot line. There is 18.5 feet from the house to the property line on 66th Street. Because of the topography of this property, it is not possible to construct the garage in the rear yard with a driveway from 5th Avenue. The house has a walkout basement. The grade of the property drops rather abruptly along the sides of the house to the rear of the lot. Access off of 66th Street to a garage in the rear is also difficult due to the severe grade change. The rear yard continues to slope downward towards a storm water holding pond. No alley exists. The only other location for a garage would be in front of the house and this would require a substantial variance to the front yard setback. Therefore, it is the opinion of the staff that there are special circumstances which affect this property not common to other properties in the district. 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. • The property was purchased without a garage and is being used as a single family residence and denying the variance will not preclude the applicant from using the property for its intended use. Thus, it is the opinion of. the staff that this criteria is not satisfied. 3. That the granting of the application will not materially and adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood . • The applicant has requested a variance which would allow him to build an attached garage one foot from the property line. ° The senior right-of-way agent for Hennepin County has indicated the county would have no objection to such a variance . Although the county does not intend to utilize the full width of their right-of- way in the near future, it is the opinion of the staff that a minimum five feet setback from the property line should be maintained. If the garage is constructed one foot from the property line, this structure would be closer to the right-of-way of 66th .Street than any other structure on this side of the street. This close proximity to the street right-of-way could make future improvements for a pedestrian way or bikeways and landscape buffers extremely difficult, possibly requiring the Council Letter No. 177 -3- June 13, 1977 purchase of the garage and unneccessary public expenditure. The home just to the west of this property has a n attached garage located five feet from their property line on 66th Street. Other structures along the north' side of 66th Strut in this vicinity are set back even greater distances. If the proposed garage were set back five feet from the south property line, there would be approximately 13.5 feet left to the side of the house, although this would not be wide enough to build even cone-car garage, 15 feet is sufficient room to construct a single car garage. The staff is of the opinion that construction of a garage within one foot of the property line on 66th Street will be materially detrimental to the neighborhood and to the public welfare. It is the opinion of the staff that all three conditions are not present on the property, and. the staff, therefore, recommends denial of the request for variance on that basis. Planning Commission Recommendation At their regular meeting of May 24, 1977, the planning can mission heard this request for a variance. The commissioners expressed concern that if the variance were allowed one foot from the property Line, future possible roadway expansion, bikeways and new mass transit needs could be hindered. The commission did explore with the applicant, the feasibility of constructing a smaller garage, and the applicant observed that it would cost the same to .construct either a one car or two car garage. No residents appeared at the planning commission meeting to testify. The planning commission voted to recommend to the city council the granting of the variance to allow construction of a one car garage three feet from the property line, instead of the required five feet. One commissioner voted against this recommendation in that he felt a larger garage would be needed by the applicant. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director I~.NER - ~0[~!D fC~1~~ /~1'Etl 200 ~~~~ ° 644 Fxisi ing ;~ Mouse ~'j ° `.v, Proposed ~_ Gara o '' ,too 9 _~ t- sidewatk . curb .- r - v v i~I~i' (Q W Q .t~' -~.-. t.~ ~~ __ Scale 1~~~. M O D; I 1 t'UUIfC t'vUrres ~ . -- ~^~ , ~ ' ` . 1 ~~ r r ~ s t none ys: s i VLV YY Ct Jt ntt~dVtt t... vii .. ... ~...... t ~--~~~~r~~c~~~~~ co~;~~~ Y April 22, 1977 1.4r Rl•~'::~~rd C. Johnson 651+4 ~ 5th Avenue South Rlohfleld, t~(innesota 55~+23 Dear I,r . Johnson : RE: Set Back Variance for Addition to 651+1~ ~ 5th Avenue South, Richfield We Dave.revie~•red your request of Apr11 13th and find that the County has no anticipated projects which should affect your property in the near future. . Since set back reclulrements are established by the city, ~•re assume you will maize an application to Richfield for the subject variance. The County ~•rould have no objection to the stated variance if approved i~y Your city. Yours very truly, l~' Dona]d A. awrence Senior Right of 41ay Agent • DAl:lm cc: Herb Kuehl • inspection Department City of i;ichflcld G700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, 1~1N 55423 ..t• h4inoritics, 4Yomen and OU~cr ('rotcctr•d Cr~sscs arc encouraged to a~pry lot fniployrnt>nta(lle:nnrptn Ce~unly ~y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 176 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for Variance, 6944. Portland Avenue Mr. Raymond Abel of 6944 Portland Avenue has requested a variance to the zoning requirement which establishes his sideyard 'wilding setback line. Mr. Abel would like to construct a roofless deck 13 feet into the sideyard setback , Background The applicant's property is on a corner lot. The sideyard setback on the 70th Street .side of a corner lot is required to be the same distance as the front yard setback. When a dwelling has been constructed less than this required distance, the side of the dwelling most near the street becomes the established building set- back line. Thus, any structure which extends beyond the side of the dwelling re- quires avariance. In 1962 the city granted a variance to this property. This variance also provides for a reduction in the sideyard setback on the street side. The 1962 variance was to allow construction of a car port, The setback of the canopy allowed by the previous variance does not establish a new sideyard setback line, The side of the dwelling remains as the building setback line. (See Exhibit A}, Zoning Requirements A request for a variance must be judged in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 3 , 40 , subd . 6 of the city code . The city council should grant the variance only if all conditions necessary for granting a variance are present on the property. Staff Review The staff has reviewed this proposal using the criteria which must be present for granting a variance: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the Council Letter No. 176 -2- June 13, 1977 particular land, building or use referred to in the application, not common t.o other properties in this or similar districts. It is the opinion of the staff that there are no special circumstances affecting this property. Denial of the variance does not preclude the applicant from con- structing the deck in another location away from the street or from constructing a ground level patio in the sideyard. The ground level patio could be fenced to a four feet heigra to provide privacy. 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. It is the opinion of staff that the variance will not materially or adversely affect the public welfare or property in the neighborhood. The proposed deck would be seven feet from the property line. The car canopy is the same distance from the property line. The deck would be far enough back from the intersection so as not to interfere with the intersection visibility. This intersection is signalized. Since all three conditions were not present on the property, the staff recommends that the request for variance be denied. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission heard this request for a variance at their regular meeting of May 24, 1977. The applicant was present at the meeting and presented a petition in favor of the variance. No other residents appeared, although the planning director received one telephone call in favor of the variance. The planning commission unanimously voted to recommend to the city council the granting of the variance to construct a roofless deck 13 feet into the sideyard set- back at 6944 Portland Avenue. Respectfully submitted, ~.~ ~~~~~ Wayne S . Burggraa City Manager W SB/eja cc: Planning Director V Lt.l S Vnrtnnre J ~- C~ C~ Scales i~~=:~ E.K.S. 5/IO/7 C, (V l n J 1. May 19, 1977 Mr. Richard C. Krier Planning & Development Director City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Mr. Krier: s We, the people living behind and across the street from Raymond Abel at 6944 Portland,. have seen the proposed plans for a redwood deck, and tiAre have no objections to it. ~. „n. ~-~ C ~ - ~..~.~~~ ~ boa ~~J ~r,~;.. ~~ , X/•ry~ h. ~ , ~~d Gi.~?.~~~ l Ccc~~" ~ ~ _~9 ~'~ ~~ly ~.'t~ • ~Oo, ~~ ! ;~ r •Y f '~ r~~~~v~~ r CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 175 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and • Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for a Variance for Canopy over Gas Station Pumps at 826 West 66th Street -Super America Station Mr. John Hogenson of Super America Stations, Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota has requested a variance to the zoning regulation Section 3.33, subdivision 6, para. 2, line (d) which requires canopies to be an integral part of the main building. A request for a variance must be judged in accordance with the conditions set forth in Section 3.40, subd. 6 of the city code. Tf the conditions for granting a variance are present on the property, the city council should grant the variance. If all the conditions are not present, the city council should deny the variance. The following exhibits are attached and will be referred to throughout this letter: 1. Exhibit A -site plan 2. Exhibit B -zoning requirements Background Land Parcel Building Proposed Canopy 48' x 90' Zoning Req's. 219' x 187' Staff Review See Exhibit A The variance request is subject to the action taken on the request for rezoning. A variance to the canopy requirements cannot be granted unless the changes to C-2 zone is made . The application has•been reviewed against the de~•elopment requirements for gas station canopies; Council Letter No. 175 =2- June 13, 1977 1. The structure has been designed to serve as protection for customa~s using the self-serve' pumps. 2. The canopy does not extend closer than five feet to the front yard lot line 3. One canopy is proposed. 4. .The canopy will not be constructed to a height exceeding 16 feet. 5. No advertising either permanent or temporary shall be affixed to the structure 6. Lighting will be contained within the canopy structure and will not extend below the bottom edge of the canopy structure The variance request has been reviewed in accordance with the following criteria: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the particular land, building or use referred to in the application, not common to other properties in this or similar districts . It is the opinion of the staff that there are special circumstances or conditions affecting this application not common to other properties in this or similar districts. This is a redevelopment area where rehabilitation and redevelopment in accord with adopted design standards should be promoted. Similar variances have been granted for other gas stations in the same zoning district. 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. For this canopy to comply with the zoning requirements, major structural changes to the existing building would be necessary to integrate a canopy of this size into the overall structure. Because of the changes in right-of-way and the redevelopment of the area, granting the variance is necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights. 3. That the granting of the application will not materially and adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neigh- borhood of the property of the applicant and will not lie materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neichborhood. It is the opinion of the staff that the granting of the application will not materially and adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood as long as the right-of-way is dedicated and the L/H/N Urban Design Guidelines are adhered to. Council Letter No. 175 -3- June 13, 1977 Recommendation Since the request for a variance meets all three criteria which must be present on the property to grant a variance, it is the recommendation of staff that the city council grant the variance. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission unanimously recommended that the city council grant the variance to construct a canopy as all three criteria are satisfied. Respectfully submitte w Wayne ~~rggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director Acting Public Works Director (c) Adequate provision will. be made through the use of building set- backs, screening, landscaping, exterior design and placement of the building on the site to avoid tloise, €;lare, fumes, dust and <~tny other sources of nuisance or annoyance to users, or patrons of the facility, (d} Adequate off-street parking space is available for patrons and employees. ' (e) If liquor is to be. sold on the premises (1) the property abuts upon a main khoroughfare of the city, (2) access to all off-street parking space is from internal driveway 'systems and is not directly from public streets, and (3) provision is made for well-designed vehicular stacking space allowing for an efficient and orderly flow of traffic from the site onto adjacent: main thorough- fares of the city, "Main thoroughfares of the city", as used in this paragraph, means a street designated as a state trunl: highway or a service drive adjacent to the state trunk highway, a state aid highway, a count}* aid highway, a county high- way, or a street which is so located as to serve, primarily, commercial develop- ment. (7.976-IO) !f/2G/76 ~ ' (f) Tf1e proposed facility will provide an aesthetic appearance which will not- detract- from or conflict with the existing or proposed architectural forms of buildings in the same area., _ (g} The use will not create an excessive burden on public parks,- public open-space, streets, or utilities requiring public services which are proposed to serve the facility. (h) T11e proposed development will not conflict with the comprehensive development plan of the city, Subd. 5. Height Regulai.ions, In a "C-2" district no building shall hereafter be erected or structurally altered to exceed three stories or 40 feet in height, subject to the modifications and exceptions provided in Section 3.39 of this chapter. Subd. 6. Lot Areas and Yard Rey_uirements. {Tt1e same requirements shall be observed for the "C-2" district as are provided for a "C-1" district i_n Section 3.32 of this chapter.) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subdivision the same min- imum requirements shall be observed for "C-2" district as are provided for a "C-1" district in Section 3.32. (2) A gasoline service station may construct a canopy extending into the building setback area of the lot on whi~.h it is located provided that such canopy complies with the fo]_lotaing regulations; • (a) It must be designed and constructed to customers and attendants from inclement weather. (b) It may extend into the front yard area measured from the centerline of the gasoline pump lot line but in no instance closer than five feet (c) Only one canopy shall be permitted at- it is locat-eci on a coY`ner 7.ot, serve as protection for distance of 10 feet, as island closest to the street from this lot line. each service station, unless (d) It shall be designed and constructed as main service station building and shall ext:cnd from (e) TI1e canopy shill not be constructed to a fee L-. ORDINl~NC1= CODC G8.1 n integral part of the such builclingo height exceeding sixteen 4i?6i7G CITY OF RICHFIELD, MiNNESn (/~ . . (f) Tire canopy shall riot' b•e designed for use nor shall it be used as a location for any business or advertising sign. of a pernranent~or temporary construction. (g) Lighting located on t}re canopy shall be designed as an integral part of the canopy providing that fixtures shall not extend below the bottom surface of the canopy structure and shall. be beamed downward. {h) The canopy shall not be used as the location for lights or lighting fixtures used to illuminate the service station building, off-street parking areas or other. areas not directly beneath the canopy. Flashing lights and rotating light=s shall not be located on or attached t-o the canoe}~. (i) ho canopy, whether it conforms with the foregoing regulations or not°, .shall. be constructed in a location or manner which will block or obscure the vision of automobile traffic on any street adjacent to the service station or the vision of an automobile entering or Leaving the service station. (I972~6) 3/13/72 .Subd. 7. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.40 the council may grant an exception or an adjustment to any of the requirements of this section where the COUnCl.l finds t}iat the project encourages amore creative and efficient approach t:o the use of land and t-o environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the zoning regulations of the city, provided that the project: is consistent with the purposes of such regulations. (1970-10) 3/23/70 3.3~J. USE REGULATIO\S FOR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT~l~ Subdi_vi_sion l_. Permit:ted L'ses. In the "I" district, unless other;•rise provided in this chapter, no building or land shall be used and no building shall here- after be erected or structurally altered except for one or more of the following uses; (1) Any vse pez-mi.tted in a "C-2" district, subject to any procedural re- quirements applicable in the "C-2" district. (2) tdholesale businesses and warehouses. (3) Automobile assembly or major repair. 68.2 3/13/72 ORDINANCE CODE CITY Of= RICHEtEt_D, MiNNFSn f /~ ~' ~~ 9 ~ ! CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 174 Agenda June 13 , 1 y 77 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen; Subject: Authorization for Sale of Fire Apparatus On May 23, 1977 the city council authorized the city manager to enter into negotiations in an attempt to obtain a satisfactory sale price for disposal of the fire division's 85 foot aerial ladder truck. Minnesota Statute 47.1.64 provides for such a negotiated sale between municipalities within the State of Minnesota and eliminates the need for formal bidding process. Over the past several weeks, the public safety department has made several contacts with other municipalities to determine what interest might e xist for purchasing this piece of equipment. Several communities within the State of Minnesota, including the City of Minneapolis were approached. The only community that has expressed a strong desire to negotiate for the purchase of this truck is the City of Lake City, Minnesota. The manufacturer of this truck, The Peter Pirsch Company, has also been contacted to determine a potential trade-in value. W~Zile the manufacturer does not encourage trade-ins, they indicated they might be willing to give atrade-in allowance toward a new piece of-fire apparatus ordered from their firm. However, beau-tee of the problems they would anticipate in reselling a truck with our specifications, such atrade-in would not be allowed for more than $15,000 to $20,000. Since the last council meeting, the city manager and the public safety director have negotiated a price for the sale of this truck with the City Administrator of Lake City. The City of Lake City has submitted a formal purchase offer in the amount of $67, 500. A copy of the proposed purchase agreement is attached. The City of Lake City has also submitted a $500 down payment with their purchase offer. Should the city council authorize the sale of this piece of equipment, the balance of $67, 000 will be paid upon delivery of the truck to representatives of the City of Lake City. The proposed sale Qf this piece of fire fighting equipment has been discussed on several occasions previously. The City of Richfield currently has only a minimal need for aerial fire fighting equipment. In the past three years, the ladder itself Council Letter No. 174 -2- June 13, 1977 • ` has never been used at a fire within the City of Richfield. The primary use of this truck has been to ~.itilize the electric generator which is mounted on the truck. However, since our new medical rescue vehicle, which also has an electrical gen- erator, was placed into service early this year, the medical-rescue truck has provided the electrical generating capabilities needed by the fire division. There- . fore, the aerial ladder truck is no longer required even for our electrical generating needs at fire scenes. The public safety department has made arrangements with both the Cities of Edina and Bloomington to provide aerial equipment on a first alarm basis to the few locations within our city where this equipment might be needed. Currently, our own ladder truck does not respond to any calls on a first alarm basis and is put into service only after call-back personnel have returned to duty, Therefore, the sale of our aerial ladder truck at this time will not jeopardize our fire fighting capabilities. The most immediate equipment need within the fire division currently is for replacement of our 1y54 pumping engine. If the city council authorizes the sale of the aerial ladder truck, I think it woula be appropriate to add the proceeds from such sale to our fire vehicle reserve fund and proceed with replacement of this pumping engine . Based upon the foregoing information, it is the recommendation of the public safety director, in which I concur, that the council take the following actions: 1. Authorize the city manager to accept the purchase offer from the City of Lake City in the amount of $67, 500 for the sale of the fire division's aerial ladder truck. 2. Authorize the proceeds of the above sale to be added. to the fire vehicle reserve fund . 3. Authorize the city manager to develop specifications and solicit bids for a replacement fire pumping engine. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Safety Director .' i. ' ~~n, FIRE T:IUCR PURCHASE AGREE~IrNT , ~ ~ ,~ ». . t ~ ~~? i TFIIS AGREE34ENT is entered into this day of '~", , - 1977, by and between the City of Richf9.eld, .., f+~ ;~ ~~~ ' ~ Minnesota, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred " . ,• `4 ~. ~~ ', .q to as Seller, and the City of Lake City, Minnesota, a z municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as Buyer. 1 ~~ ~~~ ~YHEREAS, the Seller and Buyer hereto do hereinafter '~. enter into this agreement pursuant to the authority of Minnesota Statutes 471.64 'of the Laws of 1974. ,• ~YITNFSSETH : The Seller agrees to sell and the Buyer agrees to buy a 1969 Pirsch - 85 ft. ladder Fire Truck with certain equip- went which is set forth ran Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, for the full sum of Sixty- ' Seven ~1'housand Five Hundred and no/100 Dollars (S67,500.00). . ~ ~ .Upon the execution of this agreement, the Buyer .agrees to pay to the Seller the sum of Five Hundred and no/100 . Dollars 0500.00) do«~n on said purchase price and the balance of Sixty-Seven Thousand and no/100 Dollars ~ 067,000.00) due upon the billing of the Buyer by the Seller. As a part of this agreement, the Seller agrees and • warrants as follows: • 1. That the truck and its equipment which is a part of this agreement, is in proper operating condition as of the delivery of said truck as is hereinafter provided. 2. That the Seller agrees to train representatives of the Buyer's .F ire Department at the Seller's fire station, .. for t«•o full days, on the operation of the truck and its reJ.ated equipment that is the subject of this agreement. v 3. That after the delivery of the trucl~ and the related equipment that is th,e subject of this agreement by the Seller to the Buyer, the Se11_er agrees to have the representatives of the Seller assist in the training of the Buyer's fire personnel at Lake City, li~innesota for such reasonable period of time as is necessary to .acquaint the Buyer's fire representa- fives with the operation of the truck and its equipment. IN I~YITNESS ~i'HEREOF, this agreement is executed this day of , 1977 by the duly autho- rized representatives of the Seller and Buyer. CITY OF RICIIFIELD by Seller CITY OF LAKE CITY ~~~~ ~~ b y - .,, ~fZ-k%-~ ~; tti~ c ~~~~ ~~ Buyer '~ F~xhi.}pit .' ..: .' ~ ~ ' A ; ; , ~~.: ~ ~ .~ . EQ117PM}:N`1' FUR 85' T.ADDI_ R TKUCK .. .. - ~ 1 40-foot extension ladder • 1 35--foot extension ladder " . ' 1: 28-foot extension ladder _=: .' - I- ' 20--£oot single ladder with foldj.ng ~ roof hooks ~ • ' ` ~1 , lb--foot single 3.adder with folding .roof -hooks -' ` - l 1~--foot extension ladder 1 10-foot collapsible ladder 1 Ladder pipe~.suitabl.e for quickly attaching to ladder with 1~-, 1 3/4°, 1'~-inch tips.... , , , - 100 feet of 3-inch double-jacketed, rubber.-lined fire hose, coupled. " - ;:. 1 2--inlet clapper valve siamese with drain,..3/8-inch minimum diameter (2 female, l male connection).. • 3 .. pick-head axes (6 pounds) 2 flat--head axes. (6 pounds) - ' .: 1: cro~,~bar, 50-inch minimum ~ ' ~ _ .. . ~.:. 1 claw tool .., .:.. _.-.:- 2 approved portable fire extingui-skiers, fire department type.. The variety shah be suitable for .use on~Clriss A,' $, -and: C fires. •. ,~- ,, .. .;. Z 6-foot pike poles .. ~ ~~. ~ . ' .2 8-foot pike po7.es ~ , 4 r 2 12-foot pike poles : 1 ~ scoop shovel. .- .. 1 shovel, plain _ F ~ ( k.~ ~ ` ~ _ 2 pompier ~ a° belts ~ _ ~. - J .. 4 . ~< - hose straps ~ , ~ ~ 1 ; , 12-pound sledge ` - ~ 7. spray nozzl-e, 500 gpm or larger , ~ ~ - 2 ~ hydrant wrenches ~ ` ,' ~~ ~::1 electric generator set of at least: 2,500`.watt; rating • • . 3., portable floodlights (500 watt) ~ ~~; ~; • ~ . 1: mil: ~ at least 8 roll 15-pound .tar paper or plastic sheeting '~., 12 standard sprinkler. heads (assorted temperatures <snd types),'. - ~" ' l first-aid kit (24-unit fire department assor.iment) .2 • combination spanner wrenches for ?.'~-i.ncl~: andl'--~-inch coc~p7.ings. ~ _ . CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: ~/ Council Letter No. 173 Agenda June 13, 1977 Subject: Request for Zoning District Change and Special Use Permit - 826 West 66th Street -Super America Station and Off-Street Parking Contract Mr. John Hogenson of Super America Stations, Tnc. , St. Paul, Minnesota has requested a zoning district change from C-1 neighborhood commercial to C-2 general commercial for the Super America station located at 826 West 66th Street. This application also includes a request for special use permit. The following items are attached to this letter and will be referred to through- out: 1. Exhibit A -current zoning 2. Exhibit B -current land use 3. Exhibit C -site plan 4. Exhibit D -map showing petition of signers S. Exhibit E - L/H/N Redevelopment Plan 6. Exhibit F -Off-.street parking site plan Background The existing gas station is anon-conforming use. When a use is non-conforming, the use cannot be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted or structurally altered. Gas stations are allowed in the C-2 general commercial district with a special use. permit. This non-conforming gas station use is requesting the zone change in order to permit construction of a gas pump island canopy and other improvements. Site Data Zone/Land Use: C-1 Neighborhood Commercial/Gas Station/Service Station Store Location: The site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection Council Letter No. 173 -2- Tune 13, 1977 of 66th Street and Rae Drive, within the L/H/N Redevelopment Project area . Surrounding Zoning: North - C-1 East - C-1 West - R South -Rand C-2 Surrounding Land Use: North - U.S. Post Office East -Restaurant ' West -Single Family Residential South -Single Family Residential and Gas Station Site Improvements: The following modifications related to the construction of a gas pump island canopy are proposed (Exhibit C): 1. Relocate existing gas pump islands and tanks 2. Relocate existing barrier curb on north property line and provide for additional° otf-street parking 3. Close south curb cut on Rae Drive and provide for additional parking areas 4. Construct pump island canopy Staff. Review and Findings Zoning The property occupied by the Super America Station, the post office and the restaurant are zoned for neighborhood commercial use. The remainder of the surrounding. commercial area is zoned C-2 general commercial use. The commercial uses which have developed in this C-1 zone are by reason of service or commodity offered, traffic generation, and business hours, businesses which typically locate in higher intensity commercial zones. The C-1 zone should not be used as a buffer or transition zone between more- intense commercial zones and single family zones. Neighborhood (C-1) commercial zones were developed to provide for a limited amount of convenience goods and services within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods. When a C-~1 zone is located next to a more intense commercial zone, the tendency is for typical general commercial uses to locate in the C-1 zone. This is what happened in this case. i-i~owever, after the -the use located in the C-1 zone, the zoning ordinance was changed to allow gas stations only in C-2 general commercial zones. The C-2 is appropriate zoning for gas stations. Thus, the Super America Station is a non- conforming use and cannot be expanded without a zoning district change. Council Letter No. 174 -3- June 13, 1977 T./H/N Plan Certain goals of the L/H/N Redevelopment project address the need to tie together or unify the commercial area. These goals are as follows: 1. Facilitate the consolidation of commercial uses along Lyndale Avenue. 2. Increase the intensity of use within the L/H/N area 3. Develop a design framework for building renovation so that a unified image begins to emerge. 4. Develop a unified design theme for the L/H/N. Comprehensive Plan L/H/N Redevelopment Plan The city's comprehensive plan considers this property as a part of the Central Business District, and appropriate for mixed land use of a medium to high density. The redevelopment plan indicates that the use should be for a gas station. Relationship to Plans This project is within the L/H/N redevelopment project area and is, in fact, the first business at the major entran:;e to the L/H/N area. The devClopment is subject to the HRA's adopted L/H/N Urban Design Standards. These standards require the structures to be in earth tones and the light standards and illuminaires be a type similar to those being used in the public right-of-way. Landscaping which conforms to the Urban Design Standards will be completed in all areas not used for parking, The sidewalk treatment will be done in conformance with L/H/N standards. Street improvement plans for 66th Street between Graham Avenue and I35W have been developed to alleviate the hazardous traffic situation which exists on this section of road, and to address concerns raised by a number of residents in the area. This section of 66th Street has the second highest number of accidents in Richfield. The preliminary plans which have been developed by Hennepin County, in cooper- ation with city staff and BRW, include reducing the severity of the curves along this stretch of 66th Street to prevent weaving accidents. The plans also call far installation of medians and turning lanes, A traffic signal is planned for Lakesl~~ore Drive and 66th Street, and sidewalks will be provided along 66th Street. Hennepin County is requesting, with city staff concurrence, a 20-foot easement over the property adjacent to 66th Street for these future street improvements. The right-of- way easement which should be dedicated by Super America is similar to the right-of- way being dedicated by the Woodlake School site developer. Recommendation It is the opinion of the staff that the proposed zone change is consistent with the L/H/N redevelopment plan and the comprehensive plan. The rezoning would aid Council Letter No. 174 -4- June 13, 1977 in tying the commercial area together in terms of zoning and land use. The proposed- project will conform to the L/H/N Design Guidelines. Therefore, it is my recommendation, in which the planning director concurs,' that the request to rezone the subject property from C-1 to C-2 be granted, provided Super America Stations, Inc. dedicate the requested right-of-way easement along 66th Street, and conforms to the adopted Urban Design Guidelines for the L/H/N area. The changes being proposed by the applicant improve both internal and adjacent vehicle circulation by changing the curb cut on Rae Drive from 60° to 90° . Closing the south curb cut on Rae Drive, and providing sidewalk and dedicated land for street improvements, while providing structural improvements and landscaping improvements to the site, brings the applicat~n into substantial conformance with the required special use permit criteria for a gas station in a C-2 district. However, the site is adjacent to a residential zoning district (a criteria for not issuing a special use permit). However, given the special circumstances that the station currently exists at this site, that it is the beginning of the L/H/N commercial area, and that the station conforms to both the L/H/N redevelopment plan and the comprehensive plan, it is recommended that the council approve the special use permit subject to the following stipulations: 1. The applicant dedicate appropriate easements for public street purpose along 66th Street. 2. The applicant provide structural and landscape design plans in conformance with. the adopted L/H/N Urban Design Guidelines 3. The applicant construct a 10-foot wide walk along 66th Street. The L/H/N project will pay for five feet width of the walk. 4. The compressers be baffled to reduce the noise to State rioise maximums which are: 7:00 a , m. - 10:00 p. m. L50-60dba - L10-05dba; 10:00 p, m. - 7:00 a, m. - L50-50dba; L10-55dba. 5. Completion of Off-Street Parking Contract Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission heard this request for rezoning and special use permit at its regular meeting of May 24, 1977. Three nearby property owners testified at the meeting; one was in favor because he felt Super America ran a good business; and the other two were in opposition because of noise from the existing compressors, and debris blowing into their yards. The planning commission voted unanimously to recommend to the city council . rezoning of the subject property from C-1 to C-2, provided that Super America Council Letter No. 174 -5- June 13, 1 977 Stations, Inc. dedicate the requested 20-foot right-of-way along 66th Street and comply with the adopted Urban Design Guidelines for the L/H/N area. The .planning commission also unanimously recommended. to the city council issuance of the special use permit with the following stipulations: 1 . The applicant dedicate appropriate right-of-way for public street purpose along 66th Street. 2, The applicant provide structural and landscape design plans in conformance with the adopted L/H/N Urban Design- Guidelines. 3. The applicant construct a 10-foot wide walk along 66th Street. The L/H/N project will pay for five feet width of the walk. Therefore, it is recommended that the council take the following actions: 1 . Approve the zoning district changes from C-1, neighborhood commercial to C-2 general commercial. 2. Approve the special use permit to allow operation of a gas station in a C-2 zone . 3. Approve the off-street parking Contract. Off-Street Parking Contract Mr. :t-iogenson has also requested approval of an off-street parking contract. This off-street parking contract establishes performance standards for driveway and parking area modifications proposed as part of this request for a rezoning and 'special use permit. The parking standards indicate a need for five parking spaces to accomodate employees and customers. This requirement is based on 'the ratio of five spaces per 1, 000 square feet of floor area . The applicant proposes to develop 15 parking spaces, as shown on Exhibit F. Additionally, new concrete barrier curbs will be constructed where indicated and landscaping is in conformance with the require- ments of the L/H/N Urban Design Guidelines. The staff has reviewed the off-street parking application and recommends council approval, subject to approval of the zoning district change and special use permit. Res ectfully su fitted, f ~~ ~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager cc: Public Works Director Planning Director _~ f'" ; - ,-- _ _.,_.1- , •., _~ .y,, ~' , ' - ~1 ~ ! l: i / ~ z '-~ i.' IS rJ ''ter `r !, ~ ~ r.~..-:~._..` ~ ,.. - -. ._.~~_- _. 4 ~ ~ . ~• ~ vt S l• ({ ~1T 1,. _ .. l~~f,h Lam-- ,~_~ ~ j'l,.:y, . S:~r., __ -~.---.~... , ..." .ice '. re ~ .. t s*r x ~ ;..<~ % 4- ~~ I / -i..^~ 1P "' ..~r-"'~'...~ ~,~p-%.5 a . j,~..~+ ±~-,.~::. ~~ ____, w..... t.. ... ,.~^$ r~ N .? 375' ~.. '-tc .`~R, z _~-,-•.. ~-~ r:.--!,~- !L^r_ •-'~`~ ~;-. .._~. ...,., '4 .t ~ Lac . , `{ ., I . )~ ~'* S, - ~--.~r~-% M; ~..; ., sl-'S~ti • F . ' "-.., . v ~ 1 • ~ ~ ~ _ ~* /f ~~;! J ~' F~~ ,y j~ {~ ~v ~yY f ~ i ~ 4 .~'C ~ ~ ~ v„1, r ~ ~ r ' r:` r (~~ t\~1Kp-w. r ,. - ~ °~ •~% ~'~ ~~'4' t Bpi. ' !`'~s 'I~,' nc ~ ~ ~ ~\ `\ s .. ~ •' .-_~.. _ _ ~ r ~ ;L•~ ' ^ •l• ~ ~ ~ 1 {'. ' ' ^~`l ~~•~f ~~R t ~ `. ;a ~~! ATV, .~ -.~~- y>. ~'~ •'c. ~., <,_• 'SID r ' ,-_,.. . , ~ •: , t 'l. -, _ ~ ~ ESN,;, _~-..-.... -:~ r ' ~ .mot , { ` \/~''1(`-1 ~ .. ' ` i` . , tr4 ~^+~ 6a \ ' ~"; ``~, `~_ :t. ~ w{ ~ `,•~> > ~ ~• ~ _~~.^ .rte'; . _ .. ,~ ~ .~ "- _ ~~ ~ G .ate 7._:_ ,~_..~ ~ ~ G~~~1~~~AL I(~~US T~{~L y..:: I _~~~~~~ ~~~S~n~~~~ ~( ~~~ r ~"> '~R -~? t :r~ t •~ • 't ~' f, err, ~'. ~ t ~ ~ . r y-~°: . t ~ ~' K • ~:~- • '~ ~ ~, '\ ~~~ ~~ { ., ~~ ~~ r-~ ~~ LJ~ .- ...; ~~~~w~. ~O~J~E;'J;~ E i y~~ - r~ ~z~':~ ,~, ~~ ~~ -~` r --- ~ tn~~U ~~- ~N ~M~ r``~~, Y { /t~, `~• ",. x.11_ ..-~\~\ ~+y Wi' ~-~ ..;~- ~~ 7 ~~' t ~,~ ~~~ ~ >~ `,, ~. ~~ --~ ~ '~~ .~ ( IT"/ t -~--~ .~S~J •~ m\ `v` N `~ ~ , ,.~ _~d /, ./ N ~/ 4 /` z/`/ N ~/ k~. ~ ~~ iS2 ~•~ N o ~~`•Ji sSC9 „-.. N ` ~. ~, ; -- 1~ \~ r~ ~ f f~10S~1~ V~J ~_ ~Ir'G~'-- -- i ~~-~~/t ~. ~~ '~ (, J\ `, ~ ~ ~. ~ ~. '~-_ ~-~. `:.. _' / ~~~~t.a I ,~V. ......~...~~._. ~~,L - __. i _~ i ~. ./ 1 ff ~U ~~ / ¢~ / L~ Q G ~ ~o ~~t.( Q' G~ ~' l (+ r ~ ' ~, l o ~~}~ f' ~~ I ~-.,. l~r 7` ro b /,- S`aAedd :~ 1 rr // ~ i / I _-~-- ~ ~ ~ ~ 50` U~ ' °~ l bA ' t do ;,-r' CANOPY i .a`~ - ~~ ~ I ~~ ~``\ ,__ 1 I 1~~\ - FPra~ased Easerxsent_ ~~, n.__.. _-- ~ ::__• ~ ..._~.. ~ ~. ~6~ .°' ~,~ ~ ~ 1~l. C 6 fh ~~' i Of Scales I`~= 50~ ----indicates new barrier curb rvc 1 1 1 . ~°~ ~ \ t I \ ~t+~ / /r; 'Y''_ JC ~ fti i ~ ~. ~^_...~.. O \4 Ia ~ n" it ,"L t / _ i~ \ Y SCe ;1d ~ }l ,ono Y '~~- ~ ~ /. ~_. j Y'' \ [ 111 ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' ,I•~ 6 ta' L ~ ~ •~~ !j" j~,`i .' ~. '\ ...:_~i 4t;7 w~~..~;:t -s ~..e .°e~. -~ ~ J` l ~' 1, S y / r ~. _ / -/': ~r - e ~~ ~~ p ~ _ / ..:-::sY~~'.~._~ ~ .:- _ ~.?i { J i. •1-Tom"='¢~ ~ a .N a ~ j r ~~ ~ ~ t r~ T S ` r - _ 'F ';: ~/ ~ Ji ~ y, ~''~ .. 'r.I ~1, >'~'9'y y 4 F ° ~~ ~ r~ e `~ A ( ,~! ~,, J: ~rt---l~+~.!1 J.~ -~r ~~~ "-Z, ~ ~r~~= ... `}l IQ, ;{ ll,~/ tz~~,3 t~~- O 3~` ~ ., ,~ !r ~ ~ l~~F. ~ a _T~~' Z \~t~~t v. !/ ~ ...,F !` \ ..,{SST ! ~. ~ l~-~i< ~ 7 ' `'~'~ GYc 9 ~; ~ ' /' ~ yt. ~\ n `} z/' \,\ "`~ Fr.Y ~y~ ~', _ s ! ~,~j~~ { `' _ 1 "15D r ~i.`~{~ ` ~r S'.- ~y, .. v.~~r ~r 1 ,ll. L,,>, /~ ~ ~~ O ~ ~ E, ~ .ci, ~ r ~~~~' ~~ . ~~~:~ . ~~~....\.~ ~ [ G i~J ~ [~ S NQP~l--~[G~~[[~~ \\/ /jn ~ . _`13 ~L ° U 5 ~~ E ~>` / `('~ `4-~J Yom,. . . ~~ a i ...'' S t. ~,. ~.. __ ~ ., e m • ~ . - 8 i ' ~,1YLT:G7. h'si M9~="D"am::-. '*f '.. ^(t':6? F.rl.e:ra;nezviaz!et_rx:u~ ~ ~ c>, ~--y _ ff ~~ ~""L-~ r U F~ . l ~Ye::,-/_~d F:~: t•t 1 ~ ~ ,.fie.') LL r 1 ~ -41 ~1 ti 7'~ ~) r J .. ------- ~~ --, Et ~ c ~~3 sl -t ft ~..~ ~ f; i Y < s .. . - ___ - _ ~...~. ~..x .n -.. _ ... ..... .......~ t ~ ~ y •~ ~ ._ SS _ (:: ' '. (1 s v -- - ~ ~i 4 U ~p •i (y~l_e ~~~: ~7_G (~"- - a s:- ~~ ~, ~ I LL~ I ~ _ ff•Y •'J / ~' ~---/ // _. `~ V ~ ~~. ~~ ~ ~~. ~: ~,_ w % . ~~ \ 7j • ~ J-1 OZ Z ~ . 4. Ill +1 '+~ r . / 7 F-~?UUi~ aWC~: c.~ ~N~ J l_. -J ~ , ~,: ' N ..~ ~~ l~ ~~ ~~6`yy~ 6~. _J '-__ e Ig , To be ~ 5 ~Qped® (V ~ 1 ~. ~ Q I ~~ 0 q ~ ~ ~ a0i I N m PROPOSED m ~o ,., ~o x I CANOPY ~ / I _ ~, ~ '~ I s / ~' ~ - ~ Ui .""~~ b ~Praposed. Easement __._. ~ a, Une - ._.._.,_..,- o ~~-••- .._._.__.... ~, 9 ... O c ... ~ - 220 W. 66~h ST. .~....~Indicates new barrier curb OFF-STREET PARKING N0. 77-3 OWNER AND ADDRESS: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: USE: DATE OF APPLICATION: PLANNING COMMISSION: COUNCIL ACTION: N0. PARKING SPACES: ~n v IV Scales 1~~= 50~ Super America, P. 0. Box 2~+8, St. Paul Park, Minn. 826 West 66th .Street Plat x+6125 , Parcel x+510 Gasoline Service Station - Service Station Store June 8, 1977 May 2~+ , 1977 June 13, 1977 12 E. S ~ // CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 172 Agenda June 13, 1977 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Approval of Request for Proposal and Authorization to Advertise for Bids for Data Processing System In July, 1976, the City Council authorized execution of a three phase contract for data processing consulting services with the firm of Intech~, Inc. In January, 1977, Phase I, The Analysis of System Requirements, was approved and the council authorized Phase II, Prepreparation of Bid Specifications. These specifi- cations have been prepared, and a request for proposal (RFP) drafted. The purpose of this council letter is to provide council review of the RFP and to request council authorization to enter Phase III of the agreement, the Advertisement for Bids for the proposed data processing system. A copy of the draft RFP is attached. This request for proposal has been pre- pared by the consultant and reviewed by the city staff and the data processing users committee . On May 1 I , 1977 a qualification letter summarizing the request for proposal was mailed to 48 data processing vendors located in the twin city area. This letter invited all interested vendors to a pre bid conference to be held on May 25, 1977. Seventeen firms responded to the qualification letter and requested copies of the bid specifications. Thirteen vendors attended the pre bid conference and discussed in detail the request proposal. Most of the questions raised at this conference. were concerned with the legal aspects of the contract- rather than the technical detail contained in the proposal. The RFP was reviewed and minor modifications made in certain provisions subsequent to this discussion with interested vendors. Mr. Dewey Albers, of Intech, Inc. , will be present at the June 13, 1977 city council meeting to review the RFP and answer any questions which the' council might have. Subsequent to this review, it is recommended that the council approve the RFP and authorize the advertisement for bids based on the following timetable: • . Council Letter No. ~-2- June 13, 1977 June 13, 1977: ~ Council authorization to call for bids June 22, 1977: Public Advertisement for bids July1S.~, 1977: Bid opening August 22, 1977: Council award of bids Res ectfully sub fitted , ~, ~~~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager. WSB/eja cc: Finance Director