The URL can be used to link to this page

02-28-06 Regular CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006 ******************************************************************************************************* SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION RICHFIELD CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 5:00 P.M. Call to order Roll call 5:00 - 6:20 p.m. 1. Discussion regarding Crosstown reconstruction agreements (Council Memo No. 34) Notes: Adjournment ******************************************************************************************************* REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:30 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of (1) Special Concurrent City Council/Richfield School Board Worksession of February 6, 2006; (2) Special City Council Meeting of February 6, 2006; (3) Special Concurrent City Council/Transportation Commission Worksession of February 14,2006; and (4) Special City Council Closed Executive Session of February 14, 2006 COUNCIL DISCUSSION 1. Council discussion . Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 2. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of first reading of amendments to Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sign criteria for new mixed-use districts, 1-494 Corridor, and schedule public hearing and second reading for March 28, 2006 S.R. No. 41 B. Consideration of approval of first reading of amendment to Richfield City Code Appendix D to establish fee for site plan review in districts where required by ordinance and schedule second reading for March 14, 2006 S.R. No. 42 C. Consideration of approval of resolution amending 2005 General Fund Budget by transferring appropriations from Legislative/Executive Department to Public Safety and Fire Departments S.R. No. 43 D. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Agreement No. 89247 among City of Richfield, Soo Line Railroad Company, Progressive Rail, Inc., and Minnesota Department of Transportation for Richfield to provide power for and maintenance of tunnel lighting for overhead bridge carrying 1-35W over Soo Line Railroad tracks in Richfield S.R. No. 44 E. Consideration of approval of resolution establishing authority for Health Care Savings Plan for International Association of Firefighters, Local 1215 bargaining unit employees S.R. No. 45 F. Consideration of approval of purchase of new Chevrolet Silverado 1500 4x4 (1/2 ton) pickup truck from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for use by Recreation Department at Wood Lake Nature Center in amount of $18,196 plus tax and license S.R. No. 46 G. Consideration of approval of purchase of new Chevrolet Silverado 2500 HD 4x4 (3/4 ton) pickup truck from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for use by Park Maintenance Division in amount of $18,888.75 plus tax and license S.R. No. 47 H. Consideration of approval of new taxi license for Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service L TD, 207 North Main Street, Blue Earth, MN S.R. No. 48 Notes: 4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: RESOLUTIONS 5. Consideration of resolution authorizing transfer of $100,000 from General Fund to Central Garage Relocation Capital Project Fund for purchase of land for new City maintenance facility Staff Report No. 49 Notes: 6. Consideration of resolution approving amendment to 2005-06 labor agreement between City of Richfield and International Association of Firefighters, Local 1215 Staff Report No. 50 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 7. City Manager's report Notes: 8. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. :;i 66~6 N g ::Q 0 0 CJ1 0 ......J "U"U~"U"U"U"U S:S::JS::5::5:S: "U s: g' (') }> en ;:u ,.iii' tll (')g ~ -g (') 0-'0 I o l: en -, Cf) 3""~Q!."U f ()::I:? ~ toQ(') tOO <- 0 0 ! 3 ~(5=(')~ ~ 3 ...,ga.a. Cii" ~:J 0 ::I: r!!1. CD Q, - ;:u t g ~,~if}> t 0 ;:u Q!. :5: f .:J ~ :Tc8" t ,. <6 N l ,r'# Cf 0 00 ~ ..... "'0 ~ @S: s: VJ (1) en (1) 0 ~"'O (1) -0 -. (1) ~:::::>,O(') ::l :::.. ::l -. COo Ql ;:;: 0 "< .z Q 0 c: 0 ::l c: Q, ::l Q. a::: ....., ~;;=~r.n ~tONv.V1 o ;:;: '< I "'0 Q!...... -(1) ~~- CD (1) a.::l -- CJl o Ql "< -...J-...j 0'> (')80000 o 0000 3~-o3C:-o ~. (') s: ~. ~. s: eno::r:CJl::::::::O ci" 3 ;;0 ~. ::r: 0 :J 3 ::t> 0 ;;o::l IR\ l: ::l b (') ~?~~=O~ 3'< (1) 0-(1) _Cf)_.....Ql::l '< CD -. ;;>\::l - . ,::lCJl::l (') S.CO (1) -. Q ~ ~ ~~-< r-+- en -~ CD 0 ..., ::l N o -...j CJ1 <CJlo<o < -' 0 < 0 ~g-oQ-o ~enS:@S: -oc-omen Ql a. Ql CJl-c ::l "< ::l -' (1) - en::l g Q. (1) -. Ql CJl::l - CJl CO 0 -0'0 ::l0 .z @~ Q Cir 5 I Q, N ~ 0'> CJ1 (J1 <:":>0<:":>::1:<0 0_0__<0 -og-o~Q-o S:~S:~@S: o en {l (1) en -' m-c 0 CJl -c -< x (1) ;:+~. (1) (1) (')!It 0 (') o (') -. -'::l -. os.Qlg Ql 5 <' 0 () 0 (') (1) ;::;: 0 ;::;: = en "< 3 "< :::::>'(1)03 0 :::.. CJl 0 -. 0 (1) CJl en (1) _. C:!!1. r::: -0::l0 ::l :i" ::l Q. :J Q. CO - - N N N W ~@~ ~~-o ~ ~s: Qg ()II -< 0 O~ ~ o r 3J;1 OJ 3 (ii' 0 -. ::l Ql ~a. a. -.CJl O::T ::l . -c N ~ ~ W -...j CJ100 }>:::::>'o(')oo :J:::"oooo :J ~ -0 l: "U}> lii~:::::>,~:5::5: -::l :::.. :::: en (') :5: co en en u <' CD -CO~= CD (1) ':J -. en g Q. g Q!. CD <C Ql-(')< ::1: - too n' r Qg~CD ~ -<a..~~ (ii' 0 :5: CD 3 [ 0c8"a3 o c: (') (ii' ..., ::l -. en en Q. -< c'- - :J """'" ~ e~ ~ (")0 00 3-0 3S: (ii' ::r: ~.r::: 03 ::l Ql ::l ;;0 c.C' ::T - CJl """'" tTl """'" 0'\ ~ ~ 0'\ ~~;;\QN ~ ~~::iOl.H I-j ~_...... V100_.+:., ::Ei;> ::: .....,= "" "Ijq t->-- O\\ONUl t->t->- -....lOWO\ ~~:;-...J r:.n. 00 . -...j "0 . . c.5l00 ~ ~o 0 Ci Dl 3 -0 DlUl3S: "0 en -. * 5l16~-1 6= ~. cr Q3 CD o::l ::l .0 -. CJl c.::t "'0 o () 0 20 ::4- 35 ~ 2: o' s: ::l <D !!t S" ee \C ~ ....., (")0 00 3-0 3S: (ii' ::t> ~.::4- OCJl ::l ~ o o ." (I) 0- .., c: D) ~ I\) o o Q) -- .... '< o ..... :;c -- n :T ..... -- (I) - c. AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3A 41 ~ STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MELISSA POEHLMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of first reading of amendments to the Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sian criteria for new Mixed-Use Districts, 1-494 Corridor. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct a first reading of the attached ordinance amendments to Richfield City Code Section 416 to define sign criteria for new Mixed-Use Districts and schedule a public hearing and second reading for March 28, 2006. I II. BACKGROUND , On January 10, 2006 the City Council approved an Ordinance creating three new zoning districts, Mixed-use Neighborhood, Mixed-use Community and Mixed-use Regional, and regulations to guide development within each district. The City also needs to have specific sign regulations in place for these newly-created districts. Sign regulations are currently regulated under Section 416 of the City Code. The attached amendment applies the regulations currently used for the C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and SO-1 (Service Office) Districts to the new Mixed- use Neighborhood area, and the current C-2 (General Commercial) and I 022806 Sign Ordinance (Industrial) District regulations to both the Mixed-use Community and Mixed-use Regional areas. The attached amendment is intended as a temporary measure. Following the advice of the City Attorney, Hoisington Koegler Group did not address sign regulations during the 1-494 Corridor review process. This was in response to pending litigation in other metro suburbs regarding the legality of sign regulations similar to Richfield's. Revisions to the Sign Code were seen as a potential invitation for litigation against the City. The aforementioned cases have now been settled and judgments were in favor of the cities. Staff will now begin the process of revising the Sign Code as a whole, as a number of additional issues regarding the City's sign regulations have been brought up over the past few months. In the meantime, it is important to enact temporary sign regulations for the new districts through the proposed amendment. Without this additional language, virtually no signage could be added or changed within these districts, potentially hurting both current owners and new developments. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The recommended ordinance amendment will regulate the size and placements of signs in the three new mixed-use districts. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The City Code currently regulates signs in all other zoning districts. . Without this additional language, virtually no new signs and no replacement of signs will be allowed in the new mixed-use districts. . A more thorough review of sign regulations for all zoning districts will begin now. . The City Attorney has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's Code. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL I . Zoning: This ordinance amendment will add sign regulations for the MU- N, MU-C and MU-R Districts to the City Code. . Land Use: N/A . Comprehensive Plan: N/A . Notification: Notification of the City Council public hearing on this proposed City Code amendment will be provided as required by State Statute and City requirements. In addition to these requirements, property owners within the 1-494 Corridor were mailed a separate notification letter. . Other Actions: . The Planning Commission reviewed this item at its February 27,2006 meeting. If approved by the Council at this first reading, a second reading and public hearing will be scheduled for March 28, 2006. If the City Council adopts the recommended changes, they will take effect 30 days after the approved Council resolution is posted in the Sun Current newspaper. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the motion to amend City Code Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2 to add sign regulations for the newly created mixed-use districts, thereby virtually eliminating the possibility for businesses within these districts to add or change current signage. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Code References: Draft of proposed amendments to City Code Subsection 416.07 Subd. 2 to add sign regulations for the newly created mixed-use districts. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . N/A ~fl--I BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE SUBSECTION 416.07, SUBDIVISION 2 THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(c) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (c) Neighborhood business~ aAG-service-office. and mixed-use neiqhborhood districts (C-1~ aRd-SQ-1. and MU-N): Sec. 2 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(d) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (d) General commercial~ aRd-industrial. mixed-use community. and mixed-use reqional districts (C-2~ aRd-1. MU-C, and MU-R): Sec. 3 Subsection 416.07 Subdivision 2(d)(S)(i) of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: (i) The offsite directional sign shall be located on property that is zoned C-2 general commercially-ef~ I general industrially zoned property. MU-C mixed-use community. or MU-R mixed-use reqional. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 2Sth day of March, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 022806 Sign Ordinance AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent: lR 42 ~ STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MELISSA POEHLMAN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ lll' DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of first reading of an amendment to Richfield City Code Appendix D to establish a fee for site plan review in districts where it is required bvordinance. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct a first reading of the attached ordinance amendment to Richfield City Code Appendix D to establish a fee for site plan review in districts where it is required by ordinance and schedule second reading for March 14, 2006. I II. BACKGROUND I . The City's current fee schedule for land use permits and approvals is set forth in Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30, which is a part of Appendix D to the City Code. Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30 adopts by reference certain fees in Resolution No. 9556, which was the City's fee schedule resolution for 2005. In December 2005, the City Council approved a new fee schedule resolution for 2006, Resolution No. 9694. As a result, Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30 now contains an obsolete cross-reference. . The proposed ordinance lists the specific fees in the ordinance rather than referring to the current fee resolution. This is a technical amendment. No 022806 Appendix D changes were made to any of the fee amounts. Other technical changes included updating references to certain subsections of the city code. . The proposed amendment also changes the designation of "C-3 zoning district site plan review" to "site plan review." That change was necessary because of the recent addition of the Mixed-Use Zoning Districts to the zoning code, which include a requirement for site plan review. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The recommended ordinance amendment will eliminate an obsolete cross-reference in Appendix D and make other technical changes. . The recommended ordinance amendment will establish a fee for the site plan review process in all districts that require it. The current fee schedule only dictates a fee for site plan review in the C-3 District. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Minnesota State Statute 462.353 requires that certain fees be adopted by ordinance. . The amendment clarifies that the fee for site plan review is applicable to all zoning districts, not only the C-3 District. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL I . Zoning: This ordinance amendment will establish a fee for site plan review in all zoning districts, rather than just the C-3 District. . Land Use: N/A . Comprehensive Plan: N/A . Notification: Notification of the second reading of this proposed City Code amendment will be provided as required by State Statute and City requirements. . Other Actions: . Council: The Planning Commission reviewed this item at its February 27,2006 meeting. If approved by the Council at this first reading, a second reading will be scheduled for March 14, 2006. If the City Council adopts the recommended changes, they will take effect 30 days after the approved Council resolution is posted in the Sun Current newspaper. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the motion to amend City Code Appendix D. The existing Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30 would remain in effect, but the obsolete references in that ordinance could create some confusion about the applicable fees for certain permits. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Code References: Draft of proposed amendment to City Code Appendix D I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . N/A 38-/ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX 0 TO THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE; ESTABLISHING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR FOR CERTAIN PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background 1.01 Appendix 0 to the Richfield City Code consists of the schedule of fees adopted by the City Council, including those adopted by resolution and those adopted by ordinance. 1.02 Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.353 requires that certain fees be adopted by ordinance. The City Council has previously established certain fees by Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30. The City Council has established other fees by Resolution No. 9694, which is also part of Appendix D. 1.03 The City Council has determined the need to update the schedule of fees under Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30. Section 2. Fee Schedule Adopted 2.01 The fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A are hereby adopted by ordinance. 2.02 The fees adopted at Section 2.01 of this Ordinance shall be amended only by ordinance. Any fees established by Resolution No. 9694, other than those adopted at Section 2.01 of this Ordinance, may be amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Section 3. Effective date; codification. 3.01 This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. 3.02 A copy of this ordinance shall be included in Appendix 0 to the Richfield City Code, immediately prior to Resolution No. 9694. 3.03 This ordinance supersedes Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30 to the extent that Transitory Ordinance No. 18.30 is inconsistent with this ordinance. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this _ day of ,2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk A-I j fj,;).. EXHIBIT A CONSTRUCTION AND RELATED PERMIT FEES AND CHARGES A. Investigation Fees: Work without a Permit: Investigation. Whenever any work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without first obtaining said permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit may be issued for such work. Fee. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this code. The minimum investigation fee shall be the same as the minimum fee set forth in Section 2. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt any person from compliance with all other provisions of this code nor from any penalty prescribed by law. B. Permit fee refunds: The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The building official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours $55.00 per hour (minimum charge - two hours) (b) Reinspection fees $55.00 per hour (minimum charge $25.00) (e) Inspections for which no fee is specifically $55.00 per hour indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) (d) Additional plan review required by changes, $55.00 per hour additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record $35.00 card *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, eauioment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of he emolovee involved. Building Permits 400.03-400.09 $1 to $500 $35.00 (includes one inspection) Each additional insDection $25.00 $501 to $2,000 $23.50 for the first $500 plus $3.05 each additional $100, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000 with a minimum fee of $35.00. $2,001 to $25,000 $69.25 for the first $2,000 plus $14.00 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000. $25,001 to $50,000 $391.25 for the first $25,000 plus A-2 TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours $55.00 per hour (minimum charge - two hours) (b) Reinspection fees $55.00 per hour (minimum charge $25.00) (el Inspections for which no fee is specifically $55.00 per hour indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) (d) Additional plan review required by changes, $55.00 per hour additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record $35.00 card *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, eauioment, hourly wages and frinae benefits of he emolovee involved. $10.10 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000. $50,001 to $100,000 $643.75 for the first $50,000 plus $7.00 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and includina $100,000. $100,001 to $500,000 $993.75 for the first $100,000 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and includina $500,000. $100,001 to $500,000 $993.75 for the first $100,000 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and includina $500,000. $500,001 to $1,000,000 $3,233.75 for the first $500,000 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and includina $1 ,000,000. 1,000,001 and up $5,608.75 for the first $1,000,000 plus $3.65 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof. Driveway, Parking Area 515.05 (no permit fee for sidewalks) $ 25.00 Permits Swimming 420.00 Permanent above or below ground pools are based Building Permit. Portable Pools $ 35.00 (No fee shall be charged for construction or erection of any pool 24 inches or less in depth at its deepest part and not exceeding 177 sq ft in water surface) s8~3 A-3 TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours $55.00 per hour (minimum charge - two hours) (b) Reinspection fees $55.00 per hour (minimum charge $25.00) (el Inspections for which no fee is specifically $55.00 per hour indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) (d) Additional plan review required by changes, $55.00 per hour additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record $35.00 card *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, eauicment, hourly waqes and frinqe benefits of he employee involved. Plan Review Fee 400.03-400.09 35% of building permit fee for one and two family dwelling detached garages and basement remodels 65% of building permit fee for all other building permits, except no fee for the following: (a) Existing single family dwelling minor nonstructural alterations. (b) Single and two family dwelling repair and maintenance work. (c) Commercial and industrial repair and maintenance work not exceeding $1,000 or where plans are not required. Plan review fee for Maximum 25% of permit fee based on Minnesota State Building similar buildings Code 1300.0160 (5) Contractors License Charged once each time a contractor applies for $ 5.00 Verification Fee permit(s) (6) Moving Dwellings 845 Pre-inspection Fee: IN Richfield $ 35.00 and Buildings other than Dwellings OUTSIDE Richfield $ 70.00 Moving Permit Fee: WITHIN Richfield $ 35.00 INTO Richfield $ 70.00 Movinq Out of City $ 35.00 (7) Garage Moving 845 Pre-inspection Fee: (if relocated in City) $ 35.00 Garaqe Movinq Permit Fee $ 35.00 (8) Structure 400.00-400.09 (a) Commercial Demolition Demolition cost as per Building Permit Schedule with a minimum of $ 35.00 (b) Dwelling 1. One or two story $ 35.00 Residential - Garaqe and lesser structure $ 35.00 (9) Plumbing Permit 400.03-400.09 Residential Minimum Fee 2% of Total Job cost with a minimum of $ 35.00 (includes one inspectionl 58-4 A-4 TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours $55.00 per hour (minimum charge - two hours) (b) Reinspection fees $55.00 per hour (minimum charge $25.00) (el Inspections for which no fee is specifically $55.00 per hour indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) (d) Additional plan review required by changes, $55.00 per hour additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record $35.00 card *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, eauioment, hourly waQes and frinQe benefits of he emolovee involved. Each additional inspection $ 25.00 (10) Plumbing Permit 400.03-400.09 Commercial- Based on Total Job cost 2% of Estimated Job cost with a minimum of $ 45.00 (includes one inspection) Each additional insoection $ $25.00 (11) Electrical Permit 400.03-.400.09 Residential (a) Minimum Fee which includes one inspection $ 35.00 (b) Each additional Inspection $ 25.00 (c) Complete Wiring Fee: Single Family Dwelling and each dwelling unit of a $ 125.00 two family dwelling and includes not more than three inspection. (d) New Service - up to 200 amps $ 35.00 (e) Temporary Service - (for construction) $ 35.00 (f) Installation, addition alteration, or repair of $ 8.00 each circuit or feeder (g) Swimming pool or exterior hot tub $ 55.00 (12) Electrical Permit 400.03-400.09 Commercial, Industrial and multiple dwellings Commercial (more than two units) and Technology systems: Minimum Fee which includes one inspection $ 45.00 Each additional inspection $ 25.00 (a) Based on total job cost $ 45.00 - 2% of estimated job cost with a minimum of - Over $50,000 - Feel $1 ,000.00 plus 1 1/2% of cost over $50,000.00 $ 185.00 (b) Traffic Signals: Per Intersection (c) Fire Alarm: Based on 3/4% of cost of electrical job $ 45.00 to customer with a minimum of (d) Carnivals, festivals and similar events $ 110.00 plus $35.00 for each service on generator (13) Electrical Permit 400.03-400.09 Based on 2% of cost of electrical job to customer Signs with a minimum of $ 45.00 (separate electrical permit reauired for sians) (14) Heating, 400.03-400.09 Central Systems and Additions, Alterations and Ventilating, Air Repairs $ 35.00 Conditionina and 1 1/2% estimated cost with a minimum of Je-5' A-5 TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (a) Inspections outside of normal business hours $55.00 per hour (minimum charge - two hours) (b) Reinspection fees $55.00 per hour (minimum charge $25.00) (el Inspections for which no fee is specifically $55.00 per hour indicated (minimum charge - one-half hour) (d) Additional plan review required by changes, $55.00 per hour additions or revision to plans (minimum charge - two hours) (e) Fee to reissue building inspection record $35.00 card *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, eauic ment, hourly waQes and frinQe benefits of he emolovee involved. Refrigeration (Includes one inspection) $ 25.00 Residential Each additional inspection Heating, Central Systems and Additions, Alterations and $ 45.00 Ventilating, Air Repairs Conditioning and 1 1/2% estimated cost with a minimum of Refrigeration Commercial (15) Heating, Fuel 400.03-400.09 Tanks (Installation modification, removal, Ventilation, Air abandonment) Conditioning, Each above ground tank $ 100.00 Refrigeration Each below ground tank $ 100.00 Storage Tanks For installation or alteration of piping $ 35.00 (16) Sign Installation 415.01-415.11 (a) Temporary sign permit $ 30.00 (b) Permanent sign (any size) $ 75.00 (c) Building permit is required for sign support structures Fees based on building permit fee schedule 38---(P ZONING, LAND USE AND RELATED CHARGES TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (1) *Planned Unit 536 (a) $500 plus $5/ $1 ,000 of project value up Development to a maximum fee of $ 3,500.00 (b) PUD Plan Amendment fee - major $ 550.00 (c) PUD Plan Amendment fee - minor $ 250.00 (2) Site Plan 526.39 (a) $500 plus $5 / $1 ,000 of project value to a Review 530 maximum fee of $ 3,500.00 (b) Plan Amendment Fee $ 550.00 Transitional Activity 526.38 $300 plus $5/ $1,000 of project value up to a maximum fee permit 526.63 of $ 3,000.00 A-6 (3) *Variance 546.09 Residential $ 250.00 Non Residential $ 450.00 Extension $ 75.00 Variance Appeal Residential and Non Residential $ 100.00 (4) *Conditional 546.05 (a) change in use $ 350.00 Use Permit (b) new construction or building addition up to 20,000 sq. Ft. $ 600.00 (c) new construction or building addition over 20,000 sq. Ft. $600 + $.50/$1,000 of construction value up to a maximum fee of $ 3,500.00 (5) *Zoning District 546.07 $ 500.00 Change (6) *Subdivision 500.01-500.05 $ 500.00 Approval Subdivision Waiver 500.05-Subd. 2 $ 350.00 * Any additional expense of notification necessitated by applicants request for continuance will be charged to the applicant. . (7) Off-street 541.07 (a) As part of conditional use permit process No Fee Parking Permit' 800.15-800.23 (b) In conjunction with permitted use $ 300.00 (8) Street Vacation 820 $ 350.00 (9) Conditional 521.103 $ 300.00 Activity Permit (10) Nonconforming 521.105 $ 400.00 Use Permit (11 ) Appeal to Board of $ 350.00 Adj. & Appeals (12) Special Request to $ 350.00 City Council (13) Zoning Compliance $ 50.00 Letter (14) Comprehensive $ 350.00 Plan Amend. (15) Home Occupation $ 25.00 Permit (16) Plat: preliminary & $ 500.00 final 8fJ-1 PUBLIC WORKS FEES A-7 38-~ TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (7) Utility Services Sanitary Sewer 700.05 All land uses New Service $ 100.00 Repair $ 100.00 Disconnect $ 100.00 Replacement $ 100.00 Water Service 715.01 All land uses New Service $ 100.00 Repair $ 100.00 Disconnect $ 100.00 Replacement $ 100.00 Turn on/off $ 35.00 Meter Installation $ 35.00 Private Hydrant $ 50.00 Storm Sewer 720 All land uses New Service $ 100.00 Repair $ 100.00 Disconnect $ 100.00 Replacement $ 100.00 FIRE SERVICES FEES TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (6) Fire Extinguishing Based on Building Permit fee schedule with a System Permit minimum of: $ 50.00 Plan review fee: 65% of building permit fee, except no fee for the following: (a 1 no charae for valuation of $1 ,000 or less (7) Fire Alarm Systems Based on Building Permit fee schedule with a minimum of: $ 50.00 Plan review fee: 65% of building permit fee, except no fee for the following: (a 1 no charae for valuation of $1 ,000 or less (8) Flammable or Based on Building Permit fee schedule with a Combustible minimum of: $ 50.00 Underground Storage Tanks Plan Review fee: 65% of building permit fee, except no fee for the following: (a) no charge for valuation of $1 ,000 or less Underaround Tank Removal $ 1 OO.OO/Tan~ MISCELLANEOUS FEES A-8 3(j-q TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING DESCRIPTION FEE (3) Antenna 426 (a) CWTS antenna permit application fee $ 75.00 Commercial (b) Antenna permit fee for additional $ 25.00 Wireless antennas added to an existing antenna Telecommunication location ServicelCWTS) A-9 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3C 43 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution amending the allocation of the 2005 General Fund Budget. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution amending the 2005 General Fund Budget by authorization of a transfer of appropriations from the Legislative/Executive Department to the Public Safety and Fire Departments. I II. BACKGROUND I . The Public Safety Department's budget for 2005 exceeds the adopted appropriation by approximately $46,000 or only .66%. There are several causes for the department to exceed budget. Within the Police Operations division, the division realized the following increased costs: . Benefit accrual costs increased by $18,500 in 2005. . Part-time personnel costs exceeded budget in 2005. . Increased software support costs of approximately $25,000 . Increased Hennepin County detention costs of $6,200. . The Fire Department's budget exceeded 2005 adopted appropriation by approximately $13,000 or only .46%. The cause of the department exceeding it's 2005 budget appropriation is due to the following: . Increased benefit accrual costs in 2005. 0228BudgetAllocAmend . An increase in overtime costs to maintain minimum six man staffing levels due to injury absences of firefighters. . The department also incurred unexpected costs of approximately $9,500 with regards to completing the conversion to the 800 MHz radio system. . Therefore, after the compilation of the 2005 Revised Budget, the expenditures of the Public Safety Department and the Fire Department have exceeded the appropriation contained in the 2005 Revised Budget, resulting in the department's total 2005 expenditures to exceed appropriations by approximately $46,000 and $13,000 respectively. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City Charter provides that the City Council must appropriate monies for operations of the City on a departmental level basis. . During the course of the year, the City Council amends the operating budget and it is referred to as the Revised Budget. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES . N/A I C. FINANCIAL I . The amount exceeding budget for the Public Safety Department is approximately $46,000. . The amount exceeding budget for the Fire Department is approximately $13,000. . City staff is recommending that the 2005 Revised Budget be allocated between the following departments and divisions in order to balance all City departments: , INCREASED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES Public Safety Police Operations Division Fire Fire Division Total $50,000 $15,000 $65,000 DECREASE BUDGETED EXPENDITURES Legislative/Executive Legal Division Total Net Change to General Fund Budget $65,000 $65,000 $ 0 I D. LEGAL I . City Charter provides that the City Council must appropriate funds at the department level of spending. I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I . The transfer does not affect the annual General Fund Budget; instead it provides that no department end the fiscal year overspent. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None ~e-I RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION OF 2005 BUDGETS OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WHEREAS, Resolution No. 9545 appropriated funds for personal services, other services and charges, supplies and capital outlays for each department of the City for the year 2005; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 9692 authorized revision of the 2005 budget various departments; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has requested a revision of the 2005 budget appropriations in accordance with charter provisions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, MN as follows: SUMMARY I NCREASEBUDGETEDEXPENDITURES Public Safety Police Operations Division Fire: Fire Division Total $50,000 $15,000 $65,000 DECREASE BUDGETED EXPENDITURES Legislative/Executive: Legal Division Total $65,000 $65,000 Net Change to General Fund Budget -0- Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, MN. this 28th day of February, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk . AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3D 44 ~ STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: KRISTIN ASHER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER NAME, TInE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of approval of the attached resolution in which Richfield assumes responsibility to provide power for, and maintenance of, tunnel lighting for the overhead bridge carrying 1- 35W over the Soo Line Railroad tracks in Richfield. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution approving Agreement No. 89247 among the City of Richfield, 500 Line Railroad Company, Progressive Rail, Inc., and Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). I II. BACKGROUND I On April 28, 2005, Mn/DOT and SRF Consulting Group held a Coordination Meeting with the City of Richfield staff to go over details of the Crosstown Reconstruction plans. At that meeting staff requested lighting be installed under the bridge that goes over the railroad to improve safety and deter graffiti. The City indicated that they were willing to pay the additional costs to add the lighting. Also at staffs request, the surface of the tunnel walls will be textured to help prevent graffiti and the proposed lights will be vandal resistant. The attached agreement is necessary to have the lighting installed in the tunnel. It is a four party agreement involving the City of Richfield, who will provide electrical 022806SooLineLighting power and maintenance, the Soo Line Railroad Company, who owns the tracks and property, Progressive Rail, Inc., who leases the tracks and operates the trains through the area, and the State of Minnesota who will install the light fixtures and electrical box for the tunnel lighting. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The proposed lighting agreement is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan to "improve the quality of life in Richfield by addressing human environmental and visual resources." . The additional lighting will be necessary for safe/comfortable passage through the tunnel if a bicycle trail is ever realized in the railroad's right-of-way. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . The agreement is necessary to obtain lighting in the railroad tunnel under TH 35. I C. FINANCIAL I . $450 per year to operate (electrical costs) . Any light bulbs or fixture replacements (minimal cost) . Associated costs will be paid for through the Streets budget. I D. LEGAL I . The agreement assigns responsibility for providing electrical power and maintenance to the City of Richfield. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Reject the proposed lighting agreement. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Resolution approving the proposed lighting agreement. . Bridge No. 27V74 Tunnel Lighting Agreement No. 89247 (Graphics included). I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None anticipated. 30-( RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF BRIDGE NO. 27V74 TUNNEL LIGHTING AGREEMENT NO. 89247 AMONG THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MN/DOT), SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, PROGRESSIVE RAIL, INC., AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR INSTALLATION, ELECTRICAL SOURCE, AND LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE OF THE TUNNEL LIGHTING. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wishes to assure that graffiti and undesired activities are deterred from the railroad tunnel; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wishes to improve the quality of life in Richfield by addressing human environmental and visual resources; and WHEREAS, Mn/DOT has delegated the responsibility to proVide electrical power and long-term maintenance of the tunnel lighting to the City of Richfield. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into Mn/DOT Agreement No. 89247 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: to provide power, and maintenance of, underpass lighting for Bridge No. 27V74 in connection with the State Project No. 2782-281, carrying TH35 and TH 62 over the railroad. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota on this 28th day of February, 2006. Martin J, Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk , ' 3 Drd... AGREEMENT NO 89247 DATED STATE PROJECT 2782-281 BRIDGE NO 27V74 . FUNDS 100% state Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for Underpass Lighting of Bridge No. 27V74 TH 35/62 Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota Soo Line Railroad Company (DIB/ A Canadian Pacific Railway) & Progressive Rail Inc., City of Richfield, Minnesota Standard Bridge Agreement; Dated December 1, 2000 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY (D/B/A CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY), (Company), PROGRESSIVE RAIL INC. (POR,), the CITY OF RICHFIELD, (City) and the STATE OF MINNESOTA through its COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION, (State). RECITALS: 1. The State has prepared plans, specifications and special provisions for the construction of Bridge No. 27V74, S.P.2782-281, (TH35 & 62), Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (the "Project"); and 2. The bridge plans, specifications and special provisions together with "Standard Specifications for Construction", dated September 5,2000 on file with the State, constitute the specifications for the project; and 3. Pursuant to Federal Aid Guide Policy, issued by the Federal Highway Administration,it has been determined that the railway-highway project shall be classified as "Existing Railroad Crossed by New Highway", and that, under said law, rules and regulations there are no ascertainable benefits to the Company or to PGR; and 3D,.3 AGREEMENT NO. 89247. 4. The Project will require that underpass lighting be installed, and the State will provide lighting to meet state standards; and 5. The City will provide electrical energy and maintenance to the underpass lighting; and 6. The Company, as owner of the property, agrees to grant right of access to the City for the purpose of maintaining the underpass lighting. 7. The State, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 161.20, is authorized to enter into an agreement with the Company and POR and the City for the work. 8. The construction and maintenance of Bridge No. 27V74 will be covered under separate agreement (Agreement No. 89246). The parties to that agreement will be the Company, PGR and the State. Payment for flagging services provided by POR during the construction period, including flagging for the installation of tunnel lighting, will be covered in that agreement. CONTRACT: 1. EXHIBITS 1.1 The State's "Standard Clauses for Railroad-Highway Agreements" (Standard Clauses), is attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A". Except as expressly modified, all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Standard Clauses are incorporated into this Agreement. 1.2 Exhibit "B", the location print is attached and incorporated into this Agreement. . 1.3 Exhibit "C", the prints showing the underpass lighting is attached and incorporated into this Agreement. 2. WORK PERFORMANCE 2.1 The State, with its own resources or by contract, will install a new lighting system under Bridge No. 27V74, at the location shown on Exhibit "B", and in accordance with lighting detail as shown on Exhibit "C" . 2.2 Upon completion of this project, the City will, at its own cost and expense, maintain and keep in repair the Underpass Lighting System. In addition, the City will be responsible for the cost and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole. 2.3 Upon request by the City, the Company, as property owner and POR, as operator, agree to allow periodic access to the City in order to perform the maintenance work. Arrangements for flagging services will be made between the.City and PGR at that time. Page 2 of 5 3 [}-~ AGREEMENT NO. 89247 3. WORK CHANGES 3.1 In the event it is determined that a change in the work to be performed by the City pursuant to paragraph 2, above, it shall be authorized only by a written change or extra work order issued by the State prior to the performance of the work involved in the change 4 LIABILITY 4.1 Each party will be solely responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results threreof, to the extent authorized by law. The State's liability is governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736. The City's liability is governed by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. Each party will be solely responsible for its own employees for any Workers Compensation claims. Page 3 of 5 3D-f) AGREEMENT NO. 89247 SOO LINE RAILROAD COlVIP ANY: By: Tit1€: Date: PROGRESSIVE RAIL INC. By: Title: Date: CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Title: Mayor Date: 2/28/06 By: Title: City Manager Date: .2/28/06 **********************************-*************************************************** STATE OF MINNESOTA: rended for Approval: By: Director, Railroad Administration COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION By: Director, Freight, Railroads and Waterways Date: Date: STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. ss l6A.15 and 16C.05 Signed: Date: MAPS: APPROVED: COlVlMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION By: Authorized Signature Date: Page 4 of 5 3[)-(P AGREEMENT NO. 89247 CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into Mn/DOT Agreement No. _ with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To provide power for, and maintenance of, underpass lighting for Bridge No. 27V74 in connection with the State Project No. 2782-281, carrying TH 35 and TH 62 over the railroad. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the (Title) authorized to execute the Agreementand any amendments to the Agreement. are CERTIFICATION I~ify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the co, unci I of the City of __ an authorized meeting held on the day of ',2003, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 2003 Notary Public My Commission Expires ~. ~'t' * .;;,fJ f~;t '> .;,,;'" (Signature) (Type or Print Name) (Title) Page '5 of 5 3D-1 EXHIBIT "A" STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD CLAUSES FOR RAll..,ROAD-HIGHWA Y AGREEMENTS May 15,2000 1. EFFECTIVE DA TE This Agreement will become effective upon the date State obtains all signatures required by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05 (Subd. 2). . 2. GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE ~esota law, without regard to its choice-of-law provisions, governs this Agreement. Venue for all legal p.edings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, will be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 3. COMMISSIONER'S OFFICIAL CAPACITY The Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota is acting in an official capacity only and is not personally responsible or liable to the Company or to any person or persons whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this Agreement or the performance or completion of the project. 4. NONDISCRIMINATION If the City enters into a contract with a contractor, to perform all or any portion of the City's work set forth in this Agreement, the City for itself, its assigns and successors in interest, agrees that it will not discriminate in its choice of contractors and will include all of the nondiscrimination provisions in this agreement and as set forth in "Appendix A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 5. AMENDMENTS, WAIVER, MERGER, AND COUNTERPARTS Any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by the same parties who executed the o~l Agreement, or their successors in office. Failure ora. party.to enforce any provision of this Agreement w~t constitute or be construed as, a waiver of such provision or of the right to enforce such provision. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the Company and the State. No other understandings, whether written or oral, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement will be deemed to exist or to bind eith~r or both of the parties. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. EXHIBIT "A" - Page 1 of 3 5D-~ 6. CONTRACT LETTING The State agrees to let a contract pursuant to law for the construction of the highway project referred to in this Agreement, in accordance with said plans and specifications referred to in this Agreement. EXHIBIT "A" - Page 2 of 3 3 [)- Cf APPENDIX A Non-Discrimination Provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor"), agrees as follows: (1) Compliance with Regulations: The Contractor will comply with Regulations of the Department of Transportation relative to nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Federal Highway Administration (Title 49, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 21, hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract. (2) Nondiscrimination: The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it after award and prior to completion of the contract work, will not discriminate on the ground of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of suOOcintractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor will not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices w~en the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix "A", "B" and "C". (3) Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the contractor for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of the contractor's obligation under this contract and the Regulations relative to discrimination on the ground of race, color or national origin. . (4) Information and Reports: The contractor will provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or orders and instructions issued pursuant thereto, and will permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the contractor shall so certify the Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. (5) Sanctions for noncompliance: In the event of contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the Department of Transportation shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to, (a) withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies, and/or (b) cancellation, termination or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part. (6) Incorporation of Provisions: The contractor will include the provisions of paragraph (1) through (6) in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations, order, or instructions issued pursuant thereto. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that, in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the s.o enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the State, and in addition, the contractor may request the United S to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. EXIDBIT "A" - Page 3 of 3 . MUNICIPALITY OF ~ I ~ICHFIELD II ~~Q~i~ 4>J; ~ ~c::;::] 6 s. D\~Jl I =:=J[j ~ I s. r IDD~ I D~[~ s. I~ 11 II IU ~lft^' QIJOrs:J l ~,,~,~ ~Is. II II I ~ :' =mJ ~'QDDOJ I ~VE. JilL HUM\llBOLDT II AVE. II ][1] ---------T~0--------r--j66.1:\GIRARDI GJ QI~ .~} . I &I I 3 D--IO <~ ~ Z Z tIJ > F-Q. o r f=l Cf) ~~ p 0 I tJ- 0 (I:) p... ~ : en z t;j . Bridge No. 27V74 Nicollet Ave. Spur lVIN&S Spur Trackage Paynesville Subdivision :MP 8.76 @ r.....'~......_..:I..~..-.....;,. .'~:~-- ..' .~. ,..~ ~ .'EXHf,tfT B'.. ,,~~~ .~, '.. . ..~." '. ." "<~":"~1'.,..:.............."",,;" . . " . c z o fTl :xl -0 D (f) (f) '" ~ '" '" ~ '" ~ ~ '" '" g ~ co ~ r- r- n c ~&~~ ~ g~~g U ;;;mz~2 If) % g ~ z ~ ~ ~ "T] .- X -I C :xl fTl -I -< -0 fTl r co D ::0 ::0 .- fTl ::0 - z ~ . c i ~~i~ ~ I ~~~~I o ~0~a ! ~~:~ 9 l>,.ip~ "\l ;:~o~ ~ m~ ~~~~ ~!!~ ~;~~ 3D-[ -,,'" -"0 IDS:: orn 0" ;:oz "0 ;:0, rn '0 0 N;:O 'n N<J A" J>J> A+ 0' C/lC/l OJ> -<-< Z <rn -"c <rn 0' ~s:: ,rn Oz -;n ;:00 -<0 C/l-; rn C/l0 ;:0 N;:o C ~n A" n, OJ> J>fTl C/l :-'00 -;< <C/l 'rn 0 ZO Z;:o '-" 00 O(fJ -<- " X ~::E <"TI n-; N, J>C ::E::j "TIo -<;:0 N", ::EO ' fTl Ul NO z::E On Ul r "'0 C/l_ >-< 0_ "z 0- '-< S::(fJ "::E 'GJ ~'" -;-; -" :r: 'n N" ", -I +~ -"z ::E, --; "- >-< CDO OC/l ::E '''' Z VI-< " '-; GJ ,,, rn NZ -; ;:0 "'-< -; , " J> N=e 0 C "tJ> fTl -; ID -; CD 0 N-< J> ;:0 "J> , rn ,c) , 0 'iifTl J> CD C/l C -; J> , , J> (fJ -; v fTlO 0;:0 ~; '" ;:0 o < fTl o -~-1 I u:o;l. :'--P;..,3 ; ~:3 ~ ~ : --~.--- n , g ~g ~;o ~, ~DJ .1 ~-- ;~. ~ ~ ~! ~ i x; r l~ -1 - ~ '0 > ~i ;; m ;; m~ !; -""':';';:'~~'""''''"'''(''' , ~ ~~.~ ~ [fr. '1.~~. l ~'l: ~.~ ei ~ ...,.c......, i ....."",""'." J~' m~ ~~ ~i .~ -cv;t;i ~~ ~~~ ;='::Oz .!:!1~1:l ~~ ~m Z~ ., .f .. 9144.54,u1 12120/2005 HI \Pro) lIot.\410z-f'\tll-tll1\P I cn\C2l6";:2I1.L TM. don e ~ ~: ~ ~F ~ "'n "'0 Z U1e 0 ~= S. ~: ~i: :m= ZID 0'" ~: . ~ ~.... . : is ~ ~~ ~;:: g /0 r f I~ " XC")loCU!Xl(1II ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ::m ~ a ~ ~ p E ~ I: ~I,. i~.~ 8 -lCD Ill: ~ ~ -c -c ~ CJ() l<J 0 o z c:: tI> ... c:: , r< - ..; z Z r Cl !<: H Z Z '" 1Il o -i > o '" " '" " ........ > ~~ ~ ~ 1-1 I x: !:: r-N-I rrl c:CDZ Z z..... C) ~ o ",_"'tJ 0 ~:-t ~ -n <fl :I: -i <fl. '" > Z 1Il " o '" -i > -i H o Z Vl ." t.I <.n ~ II ..1Il ~~~ffi x 3:~ ,..n S~ =Iii "'1; ~... :g "'''' ~i: ZF ." c '" ~ ~ o l!!i hi! !"O-1{ :g;~ CD :l\=~l ~ ill- ~ ~~ii ? ~~lIJ p f!;i -I !~i~ Pgi~ i~~ S'b {l! Bi ... F c Z Ii: ~ '" __n c,o Z_Z ,..,... c:n~ ",.n ..... o 0 ~~;D "'0'" ",co '"'z _0'" '" c "'...'" oz '" - ~~~ '" ~ _ Z . co i5_ "'z "'''' ...... ~~ ,..~ sol ." ;::n li& !f~ ao ,.., ~~ ~~ ~~ as il ;!!~ ~; Z ~ ~ ~ E n n o i5 c ::; ID '" ." C '" ~ a ~~~ ;:!'r- "'"'- (")1'11~ M"'" ...~- -<_Z ZO 0-< "T\~~ ~ifi~ QC5 ::~-1 "'00 ,.. Z :'5il-l ~= ,.'" ;::'" z'" ol:: ... 3D-/?- '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ... Z ? i r: @~ ;i\ 1J /I \\ \:' (3) ____ -----.---;;~~/ :~:\ ,~:::::.~~===-==:: =====- --- - -_-:..-..:.~~;_-:-:=.:~--_:- ';\~ ,', '~"" II '\-.":'." ~:: Ef) '" ::tJ .... c ",.C) -..IITI <z -..10 .... I I I I I -~.- :~ .;I%l:.'~.~l(,':.';>.::r:'.~':~' ,.~ m r;:r.""\",,,,", C' 11~ ~~i ut~~ U ~ ~~. \ . . '~;:?~- .-,.~~ . .. ~ ~~ ~ ~p ~~ ~ ~~ ~ iH AGENDA SECTION: r.nn~pn~ AGENDA ITEM # 3E REpORT # 45 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE REpORT PRESENTER: J REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution establishing authority for a Health Care Savings Plan for the International Association of FirefiQhters, Local 1215 BarQaininQ Unit Emplovees. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Letter of Agreement establishing a Health Care Savings Plan for International Association of Firefighters (IAF), Local 1215 bargaining unit employees. I II. BACKGROUND I In 2001 the Minnesota legislature granted authority to the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) to offer a post retirement health care savings plan to eligible employees of the State of Minnesota and other governmental subdivisions. MSRS was authorized to administer these plans after they were adopted by governmental subdivisions throughout the state. A post retirement health care savings plan is an employer-sponsored program that allows employees to save money to pay medical expenses and/or health insurance premiums after termination of public service. Employees are able to choose among different investment options provided by the State Board of Investment. Assets contributed into the program are tax-free, accumulate tax free, and if used for medical expenses, remain tax-free. 0228 Fire HCSP Legal authority to establish such plans is provided through Minn. Stat. 352.98 and Internal Revenue Service rulings. The establishment of each plan, including the contribution formula must be negotiated when dealing with a collective bargaining unit or personnel policy where non-union employees are involved. Once established, the plan must be filed with MSRS to initiate the program. Participation for each individual employee within a bargaining or employee group is mandatory once the plan is established for that respective group. Moreover, the amounts contributed for or by each employee in a particular group must be the same for every employee of the group. Contributed amounts between employee groups may vary, however. To date, General Services, Management, Patrol Officers and Detectives, Police Supervisory and Labor and Trades employee groups have established a City- approved Health Care Savings Plan. The IAF, Local 1215 bargaining unit, which is comprised of 24 members, has approved the attached plan based upon a majority vote of the eligible employees voting on the matter. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The State Statutes have been amended to provide the opportunity for a very valuable benefit to City employees. The City of Richfield is pursuing this benefit with employee groups that are interested in such a mandatory plan. . Approval by the City Council of the resolution will provide the City authority to proceed with this program for employees who are represented by a collective bargaining agreement through the IAF, Local 1215. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . There is no time-critical issue pertaining to the implementation of this plan. However, the IAF, Local 1215 bargaining unit has expressed a desire to implement the program effective March 6, 2006. . After City approval, this plan must be submitted to MSRS for their approval and filing. I C. FINANCIAL I . There is no cost to the City in this version of the plan since the City makes no contribution. In fact, there is a cost savings to the City in that wages and severance pay that the employee contributes to the Health Care Savings Plan are not subject to Social Security or Medicare contributions. . The plan provides a great tax savings to the participating employees and provides a tax mechanism to .fund post retirement medical costs. . I D. LEGAL I . There is legal authority for this plan in the Minnesota Statutes and IRS Code. . A Letter of Agreement between the City of Richfield and IAF, Local 1215 will provide the full local authorization for this plan. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . The City Council could decide not to approve this plan or to pursue a change to the employee contribution limits proposed. However, if the City Council chooses to do so, this program must be renegotiated with the employee group, if there is still an interest to proceed. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution. . Letter of Agreement . IAF, Local 1215, Health Care Savings Plan I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None ,~ ~-I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL 1215 ESTABLISHING A POST RETIREMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN WHEREAS, Laws of Minnesota 2001, chapter 352.98, authorizes the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) to offer a Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan (Plan) program to state employees, as well as, other governmental subdivisions; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service Code provides for such Plans; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is interested in offering the Plan to eligible City employees as a tax free method for employees to set aside money to coverthe ever increasing costs of health insurance and medical costs after termination of public employment; and WHEREAS, such plans must be established by the employee group, either through a collective bargaining agreement for union employees or a personnel policy for employees not covered by a collective bargaining agreement; and WHEREAS, the provisions of the Plan have been agreed upon by Firefighter employees, represented by IAF, Local 1215. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield hereby approves a Letter of Agreement establishing a Health Care Savings Plan for Firefighter employees represented by IAF, Local 1215 in the City of Richfield. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of February 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 3 E-J- LETTER OF AGREEMENT Between The City of Richfield And International Association of Firefighters Local #1215 The City of Richfield (City) and International Association of Firefighters, Local 1215 (Union) hereby mutually agree upon the following: I) A (Post Retirement) Health Care Savings Plan (HCSP) as described in Attachment A shall be implemented on the first payroll period as is reasonably feasible following the approval and notification to the City of Richfield of said HCSP by the Minnesota State Retirement System. II) The provisions of the HCSP as described in attachment A shall be made part of the next agreed upon collective bargaining agreement between the City and the Union. Said HCSP provisions may subsequently be amended upon the mutual agreement of the City and Union. The undersigned representatives for the Union and the City hereby agree this 28th day of February 2006. For the Union: For the City: 3~3 Policy: International Association of Firefighters, Local 1215 Retirement Health Care Savings Plan Approved by: Richfield City Council on February 28, 2006. Effective Date: March 6, 2006 Page: 1 of 2 Plan Purpose Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan Eligibility to Participate Contribution Formula The City of Richfield and the Firefiahters (IAF Local 1215) bargaining unit are interested in establishing a means for eligible employees to participate in a mandatory program to help defray some of the costs of post employment health related expenses, including health insurance premiums using pre-tax dollars. Participation in the Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan, administered by the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS), is intended to provide an opportunity to accomplish that goal. A Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan (HCSP) is an Employer-sponsored program that allows eligible employees to: 1) defer payment of a portion of unused vacation and personal leave as a severance payment at the time of termination to pay for eligible health insurance premiums and/or health expenses after separation from City service, and 2) defer a portion of an Employees' biweekly salary for deposit into their HCSP for the payment of qualified healthcare related expenses after separation from City service. Employees will be able to choose among several different investment options provided by the Minnesota State Board of Investment. Under the Plan, amounts contributed into the HCSP are tax-free and not subject to FICA contributions. Assets in the HCSP will accumulate tax-free and since payouts are used for qualifying medical expenses, they will also remain tax-free. Participation in the Firefighters HCSP is mandatory for all employees that meet the following requirements: 1. The Employee must be a member of the Richfield Firefighter Bargaining Unit at the time of termination of employment. Mandatory participation in the Firefighter HCSP shall be in accordance with, and limited to the following formulas for contributions: HCSP Administration 3E-4 I. Biweekly Contribution 1. An eligible Employee must contribute $25 per pay period to the Employee's account in the Firefighter HCSP. Such contributions shall not exceed $25 per pay period. II. Severance Contribution 1. Severance based on all accumulated but unused Vacation Leave, and Holiday Leave hours shall be paid as a credit to the Employee's account in the Firefighter HCSP. 2. Severance based on all accumulated but unused Compensatory Time hours shall be paid as a credit to the Employee's account in the Firefighter HCSP. 3. Severance based on all eligible Sick Leave as determined by Article 9, SICK LEAVE of the Firefighter collective bargaining agreement shall be paid as a credit to the Employee's account in the Firefighter HCSP. 4. All severance payments contained in this section shall be calculated by multiplying the number of hours by the applicable rate of pay upon termination. Contributions authorized under this Plan shall continue until such time as this memorandum is amended or repealed by the City of Richfield and IAF, Local 1215. The HCSP is authorized under the Internal Revenue Code and is administered by the Minnesota State Retirement System. . . AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3F 46 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MARK HALL, FLEET AND PARKS SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: . REVIEWED By CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of purchase of a new Chevrolet Silverado1500 4X4 pickup truck for use by the Recreation Deoartment at Wood Lake Nature Center. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a purchase in the sum of $18,196.00 plus tax and license to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for a new pickup truck for use by the Recreation Department at Wood lake Nature Center. I II. BACKGROUND I . Unit 372,1995 Ford F150 pickup truck, currently used by the Recreation Department at Wood Lake Nature Center, is fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2006. It has already been extended five years beyond its original depreciated life. . The purchase of replacement vehicles has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 022806halfton pickup I A. POLICY I . The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low bid vendor for each manufacturer is then awarded a contract to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program. lB. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Prices for the three brands of equally equipped vehicles are: => Chevrolet - $18,196.00 => Dodge - $18,766.00 => Ford - $17,930.00 . The Chevrolet truck was chosen over the Ford truck because our records indicate our Chevrolet trucks are getting better mileage than our Ford trucks. . Trucks are now kept in service ten years as opposed to six years in the past. . This truck is an E - 85 Flex Fuel model in accordance with the Governor's request to purchase this type of vehicle when possible. . Approval at the February 28, 2005 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new pickup truck. I C. FINANCIAL I . The approved 2006 budget contains $25,000 for this purchase. . Upon delivery of the vehicles, charges for rustproofing and strobe lights will be deducted from the remaining funds budgeted for this purchase. . Funding for these vehicles will be from the tax levy and the Central Garage Fund. I D. LEGAL I . When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. I IV. ALTERNATIVEREcOMMENDATION(S) I . Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. . Council could direct staff to further investigate other options of trucks or purchase the Ford truck. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRlNCIP AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None ~h. / .-' ;i' AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3G 47 ..... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: MARK HALL, FLEET AND PARKS SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: III REVIEWED By CITY MANAGER: I:i ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of purchase of a new Chevrolet Silverado 2500 HD 4X4 pickup truck for use by the Park Maintenance Division. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a purchase in the sum of $18,888. 75 plus tax and license to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for a new pickup truck for use by the Park Maintenance Division. I II. BACKGROUND I Unit 388, a 1996 Ford F250 4X4 pickup truck, currently used by the Park Maintenance Division is fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2006. This unit has a worn-out front end and substantially rusted body. It has already been extended four years beyond its original depreciated life. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota 022806threeqtrtonpickup solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low bid vendor for each manufacturer is then awarded a contract to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program. Chevrolet did not bid on the State contract this year in this category, but a quote was obtained from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet, which was lower than comparable trucks on the State bid. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Prices for the three brands of equally equipped vehicles are: => Chevrolet - $18,888.75 - Quote => Dodge - $20,443.00 - State Bid => Ford - $19,605.30 - State Bid . Approval at the February 28, 2006 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the pickup truck. I C. FINANCIAL I . The approved 2006 budget contains $29,000 for this purchase. . Upon delivery of the vehicles, charges for a new plow, rustproofing and strobe lights will be deducted from the remaining funds budgeted for this purchase. . Funding for these vehicles will be from the tax levy and the Central Garage Fund. I D. LEGAL I . When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. . No action by Council on this purchase will eventually cost thousands of dollars in repairs and loss of efficiency in plowing and other Public Works operations. . Council could direct staff to further investigate other options of trucks. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Consent 3H 48 ..... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME. TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ REVIEWED By CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a request for a new taxi license for Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service L TD, 207 North Main Street, Blue Earth, Minnesota. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve or deny the request for a new taxi license for Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service L TO, 207 North Main Street, Blue Earth, Minnesota. I II. BACKGROUND I In January of 2006, the City received an application for a new taxi license for Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service LTD. The applicant has paid the required fees. The Public Safety background investigation has been completed and reveals the following: The applicant, Paul Kramer and his wife, Patricia, are the sole owners of the business. At the present time, only two vehicles (vans) will be licensed. Neither applicant has any known criminal record. 0228 Ambassador Limousine and Taxi New License The certificate of liability insurance has been submitted showing National Casualty Company affording the coverage. The applicants have supplied the information regarding the make, body style and year of the vehicles to be operated by the applicant. Applicants agree to supply this information for any additional vehicles in the future as well as to pay fees for any additional operating vehicles making pick-ups within the City of Richfield. The applicants have been cautioned by City staff about the use and cost of limousine services in Richfield. Staff became aware of a situation in the City of Bloomington where Mr. Kramer allegedly used a limousine as if it were a taxicab. In the State of Minnesota, a limousine can't act as a taxi and must charge more than taxis. The allegation was that Mr. Kramer would sit outside a location and negotiate a price for the limo that was closer in cost to the price of a taxi. The allegation was discussed with him, and Mr. Kramer felt that a Bloomington police officer was "laying" for him. Nonetheless, Mr. Kramer has been cautioned about maintaining the limousine requirements as set by Minnesota law and the fact that Richfield officials are aware of this allegation. He indicated that he understood. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . It appears that the applicant meets the standards set forth in the ordinance. . Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and the investigation conducted, there appears to be no reason to deny the license requested. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . Only two vehicles (vans) are currently listed on the application to be licensed as a taxicab. Therefore, no additional vehicles will be allowed to pick up patrons in the City without first obtaining the appropriate license. Future vehicles could be added to the license providing that the proper paperwork has been completed, fees paid, and proof of current liability insurance submitted and it has been approved by the City Council. I C. FINANCIAL . N/A I D. LEGAL . N/A I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Deny the request for a new taxi license for Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service LTD. This would result in the applicant not being able to pick up patrons within the City of Richfield. I V. ATTACHMENTS . None I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . Paul Kramer, Owner AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Resolutions 5 49 ...... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: o REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution to transfer $100,000 of 2005 fund balance from the General Fund to fund the purchase of land for the new City Maintenance Facilitv. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt a resolution providing authorization to transfer $100,000 from the General Fund to the Central Garage Relocation Capital Project Fund to fund the purchase of land for the new City Maintenance Facility. I II. BACKGROUND I . The City for several years has been working to locate a site and construct a new City Maintenance Facility. . As an outcome of the reconstruction of the intersection at 66th Street and T.H. 77, remnant parcels of right-of-way remain that would be suitable for a City Maintenance Facility. . Through a cooperative agreement between the City and the Minnesota Department of Transportation approved by the City Council on February 14, 2006, the City will receive these remnant parcels of right-of-way remaining from the reconstruction of the intersection to be used as site for the maintenance facility. . However, while performing a title search on the land prior to the planned transfer, it was determined that one of the remnant parcels to be transferred was owned by a private party. 0228PurchaseGarageLand . The privateparty was willing to sell the parcel for $100,000. . The City Council met in Special Closed Executive Sessions on November 22, 2005 and December 13, 2005 to consider the offer and agreement to purchase this real estate. . On December 13, 2005, the City Council approved the purchase of remnant parcel. . The City is currently in the process of doing a 120-day due diligence study on the property to ensure that the land will be appropriate in serving the City's needs. I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The construction of a new City Maintenance Facility is included in the 2006 Capital Improvement Budget. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . If the City does not acquire the parcel in question, the current site will not work for the new City Maintenance Facility and an alternate site will need to be determined. I C. FINANCIAL I . The cost of the parcel has been determined to be $100,000. . The financing structure for the new maintenance facility is limited and this was an unexpected cost of the project. . To mitigate this unexpected cost, city staff is recommending 2005 General Fund fund balance be used as the funding source for the purchase, upon satisfactory completion of the due diligence study. I D. LEGAL I . This is not a transfer that is included in the 2005 adopted budget and therefore requires approval by the City Council. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . The City Council could decide to not use the surplus fund balance of the General Fund and seek other City funding sources to pay for the purchase of the maintenance facility land. I V. ATTACHMENTS I . Resolution authorizing transfer of fund balance from the General Fund to the Central Garage Relocation Capital Project Fund. I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None. 5-1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE CENTRAL GARAGE RELOCATIONCAPITAL PROJECT FUND WHEREAS, the City has determined the need to construct a new City Maintenance Facility; and WHEREAS, for the project to move forward the purchase of a parcel of land is necessary and additional funding is needed to fund the purchase; and WHEREAS, the General Fund has been identified as having sufficient funds for a transfer to cover the additional cost to purchase the land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council authorize the Finance Manager to transfer from the General Fund effective as of December 31,2005, $100,000 to the Central Garage Relocation Capital Project Fund. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of February, 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REpORT # Resolutions 6 50 ....... STAFF REpORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2006 REpORT PREPARED By: PAM DMYTRENKO, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY --/ MANAGER: lJlI ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution approving an amendment to the 2005-2006 labor agreement with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1215. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution designating an increase in the City's contribution toward health insurance premiums for the International Association of Firefiahters Local 1215. I II. BACKGROUND I City staff has completed labor negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1215 (Union) for the contract re-opener (Article 20 Health Insurance) of its 2005-2006 contract, subject to Council approval. There are 24 employees represented in this unit. The tentatively approved settlement includes the following change: Health Insurance A $50 increase to the Employer health insurance contribution which provides full coverage to single Employee, $655 per month for Employee plus spouse or Employee plus child(ren) coverage, and $700 per month for Employee plus family. According to the terms of the 2005-06 contract, the Employer contribution for employee single dental coverage increased in 2006 from $27 per month to $30 per month. 0110Fire amendment I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I I A. POLICY I . The City has met and negotiated in good faith with the Union and its representatives and is bound under the Public Employer's Labor Relations Act to meet and bargain over the terms and conditions of employment. . The proposed settlement for the health insurance re-opener provision is identical to the health insurance contribution provided to the other union contracts settled for 2006, as well as for non-union employees. The City has a long history of providing the same level of health insurance contribution to all eligible City employees and strives to maintain that equity. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I . In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify payroll records in a timely manner for 2006 benefits, it is recommended that the City Council act on February 28, 2006 to adopt the attached resolution providing for contract changes, effective January 1,2006. I C. FINANCIAL I . Up to a maximum $50 per employee increase in the City's contribution towards health insurance coverage. I D. LEGAL I . If the terms of this agreement are not approved, further negotiation and/or mediation will be necessary. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I . Do not approve the terms of this agreement and prepare for further negotiation and/or mediation. . Defer discussion to another date. I V. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution I VI. PRlNCIP AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . None. 0-} RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 1215 WHEREAS, "the City of Richfield and International Association of Firefighters Local 1215 signed a bargaining agreement covering a two year period from January 1,2005 through December 31, 2006; and WHEREAS, the labor agreement covers all terms and conditions of employment including the City contribution for health insurance benefits; and WHEREAS, Article 34 of the labor agreement provides for either party to amend the provisions in Article 20, Section 1 - Health Insurance; and WHEREAS, the City has historically provided the same level of health insurance contribution to all eligible City employees, both union and non-union; and WHEREAS, the City desires to maintain such a position of equity; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by resolution the City's contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of $655 per month for employee plus spouse or employee plus child(ren) health insurance coverage, and $700 per month for family health insurance, and in any event, said contributions shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1,2006. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of February 2006. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk