02-26-2019 Regular AgendaR EG U LAR C IT Y C O U N C IL MEET IN G
R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C E N TE R, C O U N C IL C H AMB E R S
F E B R U ARY 26, 2019
7:00 P M
IN TR O D U C TO RY P R O C E E D IN G S
C all to order
Oath of office of Richfield C ity C ouncil Member, B en W halen
Open forum (15 minutes maximum)
E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments
are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who wish to address
the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting.
P ledge of A llegiance
A pproval of the minutes of the: (1) special C ity C ouncil work session of F ebruary 11, 2019; (2) special concurrent C ity
C ouncil, HRA , and P lanning C ommission work session of F ebruary 11, 2019; (3) regular C ity C ouncil meeting of
F ebruary 11, 2019; (4) special C ity C ouncil meeting of F ebruary 15, 2019; and (5) special C ity C ouncil work session of
F ebruary 15, 2019.
P R E S E N TATIO N S
1.National Weather S ervice S tormReady C ity C ertification
C O U N C IL D ISC U SSIO N
2.Hats Off to Hometown Hits
AG E N D A APPR O VAL
3.A pproval of the A genda
4.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 on these items 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 .C onsideration of the approval of the citywide water meter replacement project and directing staff to solicit
bids.
S taff Report No. 32
B .C onsideration of the adoption of a resolution authorizing a land exchange with the Minnesota D epartment of
Transportation as part of the completed I-35W/TH62 "C rosstown C ommons" reconstruction project.
S taff Report No. 33
C .C onsideration of the adoption of a resolution supporting the submittal of a grant application to Hennepin
C ounty for 2019 C ommunity Works C orridor P lanning funds. The grant application will request funds to
study improvements to P enn Avenue, north of 66th S treet. A n award requires a 25 percent match by the
local authority (maximum $12,500).
S taff Report No. 34
D .C onsideration of the approval of permanent easement agreements with the Metropolitan C ouncil to allow
the necessary relocation of utilities as part of the Orange L ine B us Rapid Transit P roject.
S taff Report No. 35
5.C onsideration of items, if any, removed from C onsent C alendar
P U B LIC H E AR IN G S
6.P ublic hearing regarding the C ity of Richfield's Wellhead and S ource Water P rotection – P art 2: Wellhead
P rotection P lan A mendment.
S taff Report No. 36
7.P ublic hearing and consideration of the adoption of a resolution specifying the use of funds from the Urban
Hennepin C ounty C ommunity D evelopment B lock Grant allocation for 2019 and authorizing execution of a
S ubrecipient A greement with Hennepin C ounty and any required third party agreements.
S taff Report No. 37
PR O P O S E D O R D IN AN C E S
8.C onsideration of the approval of a second reading of an ordinance amending S ection 617 of the Richfield C ity
C ode regulating food establishments for consistency with recently updated S tate regulations and adoption of a
resolution approving summary publication of said ordinance.
S taff Report No. 38
O T H E R B U S IN E S S
9.C onsideration of the approval of the preliminary design layout for the P ortland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian link
project from 66th S treet to Trunk Highway 62 (C rosstown) as recommended by the Transportation C ommission.
S taff Report No. 39
10.C onsideration of designating representatives to serve as the 2019 liaisons to various metropolitan agencies and
C ity commissions.
S taff Report No. 40
C IT Y MAN AG E R’S R E P O R T
11.C ity Manager's Report
C LAIMS AN D PAYR O L LS
12.C laims and P ayrolls
Open forum (15 minutes maximum)
E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments
are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who wish to address
the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting.
13.A djournment
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.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special City Council Work Session
February 11, 2019
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Regan Gonzalez at 6:00 p.m. in the Bartholomew
Room.
Council Members Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Mary Supple; and Simon
Present: Trautmann (arrived at 6:02 p.m.).
Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; Russ
Lupkes, Utilities Superintendent; Jack Broz, Transporta tion Engineer; and
Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
DISCUSS PORTLAND AVE BIKE GAP PROJECT
Transportation Engineer Broz provided a presentation on the Portland Ave Bikeway at
Crosstown (Hwy 62). He discussed the bicycle lane gap between 66th Street in Richfield and 60th
Street in Minneapolis. He highlighted the project goals, engagement strategies, the proposed bike
lane and layout through re-striping, and project timeline.
Mayor and Council Members asked questions about the project location, the cost of the
project, the Transportation Commission’s recommendation, pedestrian signals, and passive detectors
for pedestrians.
Transportation Engineer Broz responded to questions explaining the work is north of the
roundabout, which was not reconstructed as part of the recently completed Portland Avenue project.
He also responded that the project is a mill and overlay, with no curbs being removed, so there are no
additional costs for the project based on reconfiguration of the roundabout or lanes. He added that a
traffic study of the roundabout would be completed once traffic counts have been done and then
options for roundabout will be discussed based on the outcomes of the study. Lastly, he also
discussed adding pedestrian activated crossing signals or rapid flashing beacons (RFBs) to the
roundabout and could look into passive detectors during final design.
Item #2
DISCUSS CITYWIDE WAT ER METER REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Public Works Director Asher presented on the problem of a high failure rate with the current
water meters and the solution of completing a citywide meter replacement. She proposed a 3-year
replacement plan for the entire city, starting with a pilot program in 2019, and project completion in in
2021. She also discussed the outreach campaign to contact resident s about the replacement
program. Lastly, she discussedthe timeline for the project, with seeking Council approval to move
forwad with the project at the February 26 City Council meeting.
Special City Council Work Session -2- February 11, 2019
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:29 p.m.
Date Approved: February 26, 2019
Maria Regan Gonzalez
Mayor
Jared Voto Katie Rodriguez
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special Concurrent City Council, Housing
and Redevelopment Authority and
Planning Commission Work Session
February 11, 2019
CALL TO ORDER
The work session was called to order by Mayor Regan Gonzalez at 6:31 p.m. in the
Bartholomew Room.
Council Members Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Mary Supple; and Simon
Present: Trautmann.
HRA Members Mary Supple, Chair; Erin Vrieze Daniels; Pat Elliott; and Maria Regan
Present: Gonzalez.
HRA Members Sue Sandahl.
Absent:
Planning Commission Sean Hayford Oleary, Chair; James Rudolph; Kathryn Quam; Allysen Hoberg;
Members Present: and Peter Lavin.
Planning Commission Bryan Pynn; and Susan Rosenberg.
Absent:
Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; John Stark, Community Development
Director; Julie Urban, Housing Manager; and Jared Voto, Executive
Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
DISCUSS PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY GARAGE
SOUTH SITE
Julie Urban, Housing Manager, introduced representatives from MWF Properties.
Chris Stokka, MWF Properties, presented the development team that includes the developer,
builder and property manager. He provided a development summary of the proposed project, with a
four story building with underground parking, a mix of 1, 2, and 3-bedroom units. Lastly, he discussed
the proposed development schedule.
Council Member Supple asked for a definition of a “land write down”.
Community Development Director Stark stated the developer would be asking for the HRA to
sell the property for a lesser amount than it appraised for, possibly zero . This is in an established TIF
District and the City could pay itself back the difference using tax increment funds.
Special concurrent Council, HRA and Planning
Commission Work Session -2- February 11, 2019
Planning Commissioner Rudolph asked why there is a TIF District if the developer want not
looking for TIF.
Community Development Director Stark stated it is a faster pay back than the City/HRA would
receive from the city allotment of the tax revenues.
Council Member Garcia asked about staff’s review of the proposed project and if the
neighborhood has heard about this project.
Community Development Director Stark responded it has generally been reviewed by staff for
its fit in planning and zoning but specifics, like setbacks, have not been reviewed. He also stated a
notice has not been sent out for this work session; if policymakers were interested in the proposal
then the next step would be to engage the neighbors.
Planning Commissioner Hoberg asked if there are any environmental concerns since this was
a previous industrial site.
Mr. Stokka responded it would be something they would look into, but they have developed
sites previously used as dry cleaners.
Community Development Director Stark responded that environmental reports have been
done on the entire site and there shouldn’t be many issues on this site, other than possible soil
removal and clean fill brought in .
Commissioner Elliott commented that it is nice to see workforce housing brought back as he
thinks it is needed in Richfield. He discussed the figures shown and the City Council and HRA’s
decision to know what the buy down would be. He also asked about the size of the units and
discussed the need for affordable housing for f amilies.
Mr. Stokka responded that about 25% are 1-bedrooms and the rest are 2- or 3-bedrooms.
Planning Commission Chair Hayford Oleary asked about the public storage site to the south
and the possibility of redevelopment of that site.
Department Director Stark responded he did not know if there was possibility of redeveloping
that site.
Commissioner Quam commented that she was impressed that they had nev er sold a property
and headquartered in Richfield.
Commissioner Lavin asked about the financing and if there was a difference between standard
affordable housing and workforce housing.
Mr. Stokka responded there are a lot of different terms for housing that are financed with tax
credits and affordability levels can go from 20 -80%. Their housing is more toward the 50-70%, which
they classify as workforce housing .
Council Member Trautmann commented about his concerns on family housing in this
particular location due to the railroad and I-494.
Community Development Director Stark responded that this is use is what is indicated in the
comprehensive plan, currently and the previous plan, so that is the direction they have taken. This
proposal is similar to what was proposed in 2011-2012. He stated it received policymaker support
Special concurrent Council, HRA and Planning
Commission Work Session -3- February 11, 2019
initially, but had neighborhood opposition. He commented staff is committed to bring the
neighborhood and policymakers together at the same time, if there is interest in the proposal.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:01 p.m.
Date Approved: February 26, 2019
Maria Regan Gonzalez
Mayor
Jared Voto Katie Rodriguez
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor-for-a-Day Hazel Bieganek and Mayor Regan
Gonzalez at 7:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Council Members Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Mary Supple; and Simon
Present: Trautmann.
Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Brian Lehinger, City Attorney; Pam Dmytrenko,
Administrative Services Director/Assistant City Manager; Chris Regis, Finance
Director; John Stark, Community Development Director; Kristin Asher, Public
Works Director; Jennifer Anderson, Support Service Supervisor; and Jared
Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
OPEN FORUM
None.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Regan Gonzalez led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Item #1
MAYOR OF THE DAY ESSAY BY HAZEL BIEGANEK
Mayor Regan Gonzalez welcomed Hazel Bieganek who received an honorable mention from
the League of Minnesota Cities for her Mayor for a Day essay. Ms. Bieganek read her essay.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Garcia, S/Supple to approve the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of January 22,
2019.
Motion carried 4-0.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Regular Meeting
February 11, 2019
Council Meeting Minutes -2- February 11, 2019
Item #2
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Hats Off to Hometown Hits
Council Member Trautmann spoke regarding beginning of registration for spring youth sports
with soccer, softball, and baseball, and invited everyone to sign-up their children using the City of
Richfield’s website.
Council Member Supple spoke regarding the Richfield Arts Commission’s display at the
community center and invited people to submit their art for display; and thanked the Public Works
Department and Public Safety Department for their work during the recent weather events .
Council Member Garcia mentioned the passing of Lorraine Nilsen, whose family runs the
Nilsen funeral home, and offered her condolences to the family; and spoke regarding the City Council
meeting with legislators on Friday, February 15 at 7:45 a.m.; on Tuesday, February 19 at 10 a.m. at
Holy Angels Academy is a naturalization ceremony; on Wed nesday, February 20 at 12:30 p at the
Richfield Community Center a fraud and scam event for seniors hosted by the Richfield Police
Department; and thanked the Public Works Department for their work handling all the snow.
Mayor Regan Gonzalez thanked Mayor Hazel Bieganek for her wonderful essay and asked for
her autograph on the essay; commended and thanked all the City staff members, including the Public
Works, Public Safety, and Fire Departments, for their work during the polar vortex and snow events ;
on Wednesday, February 20, at 5:30 p.m. will be the State of the Community at the Richfield Middle
School; and reminded residents of Ward 3 that tomorrow (February 12) is special election.
Item #3
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
M/Trautmann, S/Supple to approve the agenda.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #4
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager Rodriguez presented the consent calendar.
A. Consideration of the approval of a Small Wireless Facility Collocation Agreement with New
Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, d/b/a AT&T Mobility, that sets forth the terms and conditions of
collocation on wireless support structures within City right -of -way. (S.R. No. 22)
B. Consideration of the adoption of a resolution to adopt the Richfield Surface Water
Management Plan. (S.R. No. 23)
RESOLUTION NO. 11605
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD SURFACE
WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
C. Consideration of the adoption of a resolution authorizing the City of Richfield to accept grant
funds of $10,000 and enter into Source Water Protection Competitive Grant Agreement No.
152466 with Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) to permanently seal unique well no.
206330 (Wood Lake). (S.R. No. 24)
Council Meeting Minutes -3- February 11, 2019
RESOLUTION NO. 11606
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO ACCEPT
GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 AND ENTER INTO
SOURCE WATER PROTECTION COMPETITIVE GRANT AGREEMENT
NO. 152466 WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO
PERMANENTLY SEAL UNIQUE WELL NO. 206330
D. Consideration of the approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Section 617 of the
Richfield City Code regulating food establishments for consistency with recently updated State
regulations. (S.R. No. 25)
M/Trautmann, S/Supple to approve the consent calendar.
Council Member Supple share d information related to Item 4.A.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #5
CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
None.
Item #6
CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING SECTION 300 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE TO FORMALLY
ESTABLISH THE OFFICES OF CITY TREASURER AND CITY CLERK. (S.R. NO.
26)
Council Member Supple presented Staff Report No. 26.
M/Supple, S/Trautmann to approve the second reading of an ordinance amending Section 300
of the Richfield City Code to formally establish the offices of City Treasurer and City Clerk.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #7
CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
CONTRACT WITH THE LABOR AND TRADES LOCAL 49 FOR THE PERIOD
JANUARY 1, 2019 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2020 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT. (S.R. NO. 27)
Council Member Trautmann presented Staff Report No. 27 and thanked staff for their work,
highlighting the great work of all levels of City staff.
M/Trautmann, S/Garcia to adopt a resolution approving the provisions of the 2019 -2020 labor
agreement with the Labor & Trades Local 49 bargaining unit and authorize the City Manager to
execute the agreement.
Council Meeting Minutes -4- February 11, 2019
RESOLUTION NO. 11607
RESOLUTION APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS, LOCAL 49 BARGAINING UNIT FOR YEARS 2019 AND
2020
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #8
CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A
POLICY FOR ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENT
PREFERENCE. (S.R. NO. 28)
Council Member Supple presented Staff Report No. 28.
M/Supple, S/Trautmann to adopt a resolution establishing a policy for advisory boards and
commissions appointment preference.
RESOLUTION NO. 11608
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR ADVISORY BOARD
AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENT PREFERENCE
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #9
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS WITH NON-PROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS TO PROVIDE SOCIAL SERVICES TO THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD AND AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENTS WITH THOSE AGENCIES. (S.R. NO. 29)
Council Member Garcia presented Staff Report No. 28 and thanked those recipients who were
in attendance.
Council Member Trautmann discussed the value of these non -profits in the services they
provide to members of the community.
M/Garcia, S/Supple to approve the agreements between the recommended non-profit
organizations and the City of Richfield and authorize the City Manager to execute agreements for
services with those agencies.
Mayor Regan Gonzalez thanked those that volunteered to review and recommend the
organizations to receive funding and thanked those organizations that offer services to the
community.
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #10
CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 13D.05,
SUBD. 3(B) FOR AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED DISCUSSION OF
HENNEPIN COUNTY DIST RICT COURT FILE NO. 27-CV-18-16502 INVOLVING
THE CITY’S ACQUISITION OF THE MOTEL 6 PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7636
CEDAR AVENUE SOUTH, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA.
Council Meeting Minutes -5- February 11, 2019
Mayor Regan Gonzalez moved the meeting into closed session at 7:52 p.m.
The City Council reconvened the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Item #11
CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A
STIPULATED AWARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE
MOTEL 6 PROPERTY AS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 77TH
STREET/RICHFIELD PARKWAY PROJECT. (S.R. NO. 30)
Mayor Regan Gonzalez presented Staff Report No. 28.
M/Supple, S/Trautmann to adopt a resolution authorizing a stipulated award of commissioners
for the acquisition of the Motel 6 Property as required for the construction of the 77th Street/Richfield
Parkway project.
RESOLUTION NO. 11609
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A STIPULATED AWARD OF
COMMISSIONERS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE MOTEL 6
PROPERTY AS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 77TH
STREET/RICHFIELD PARKWAY PROJECT
Motion carried 4-0.
Item #12
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Rodriguez spoke regarding attending the Minnesota Independence College &
Community family weekend and stated that the results of the special election will be posted on the
City’s website tomorrow evening.
Item #13
CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
M/Garcia, S/Trautmann that the following claims and payrolls be approved :
U.S. Bank 02/11/19
A/P Checks: 274766 - 275229 $ 1,694,964.66
Payroll: 142574 - 142911 ; 143246 - 143579 1,353,843.00
TOTAL $ 3,048,807.66
Motion carried 4-0.
OPEN FORUM
None.
Council Meeting Minutes -6- February 11, 2019
Item #14
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:15 p.m.
Date Approved: February 26, 2019
Maria Regan Gonzalez
Mayor
Jared Voto Katie Rodriguez
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special City Council Meeting
February 15, 2019
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Regan Gonzalez at 7:32 a.m. in the Council
Chambers.
Council Members Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Mary Supple; and Simon
Present: Trautmann.
Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Elizabeth Van Hoose, City Clerk; and Jared
Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
ITEM #1
SPECIAL MEETING ITEMS
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION DETERMING
THE RESULTS OF THE CITY SPECIAL ELECTION HELD ON TUESDAY,
FEBRUARY 12, 2019. (S.R. NO. 31)
Mayor Regan Gonzalez presented Staff Report No. 31 and read the election results.
M/Trautmann, S/Supple to adopt a resolution determining the results of the City Special
Election held on Tuesday, February 12, 2019.
RESOLUTION NO. 11610
RESOLUTION DETERMINING RESULTS OF THE CITY SPECIAL
ELECTION HELD ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2019
The Mayor and Council Members congratulated Ben Whalen for his election, welcomed him to
the City Council, and thanked the other candidates .
Motion carried 4-0.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:36 a.m.
Special City Council Meeting Minutes -2- February 15, 2019
Date Approved: February 26, 2019
Maria Regan Gonzalez
Mayor
Jared Voto Katie Rodriguez
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special City Council Work Session
February 15, 2019
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Regan Gonzalez at 7:45 a.m. in the Bartholomew
Room.
Council Members Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Mary Supple; and Simon
Present: Trautmann.
Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Pam Dmytrenko, Administrative Services
Director/Assistant City Manager; John Stark, Community Development
Director; Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; Wayne Kewitsch, Fire Chief;
Kris Weiby, Acting Recreation Services Director; Chris Regis, Finance
Director; Joe Griffin, Police Lieutenant; Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk; and
Jared Voto, Executive Aide/Analyst.
Item #1
DISCUSSION WITH LEGISLATORS
The City Council and City staff met with the local Legislators to discuss items of mutual
interest to the City of Richfield.
ADJOURNMENT
The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:47 a.m.
Date Approved: February 26, 2019
Maria Regan Gonzalez
Mayor
Jared Voto Katie Rodriguez
Executive Aide/Analyst City Manager
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.A.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 32
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Russ "B utch" L upkes, Utilities S uperintendent
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/19/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the approval of the citywide water meter replacement project and directing staff to
solicit bids.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Problem
The City of Richfield Public W orks Department Water Utility division has been working towards the
implementation of a citywide water meter replacement project. W ater meters serve a critical role in the City's
water utility infrastructure since they serve as the "cash registers" for the utility division. The project is
necessary due to the increasing failure rate of our existing water meters as they reach the end of their usable
lifespan. Over 10% percent of meters read per week are reading faulty, resulting in:
Billing based on estimates of past water use resulting in over or under charging our customers;
Staff time lost in order to notify residents, explain the problem, and schedule an appointment for
replacement; and
Two utilities employees responding to meter replacement service appointments.
The City of Richfield has 10,534 residential water meters and 236 commercial water meters.
Solution
Staff surveyed other municipalities with similar meter troubles and worked with engineering firm S E H, I nc., to
identify a solution to this problem and it was determined that a citywide meter replacement project was the
best option, since the margin of failing meters is expected to increase as time goes on. A citywide project
rather than piecemeal replacement ensures that the meter and reading technology will be uniform throughout
the City and will return stability to our water utility department and our customers' utility service.
Meter Selection Process
I n pursuit of the best water meter for Richfield, staff surveyed other cities and met with multiple meter
suppliers to select the best product. Richfield staff prioritized:
Overall metering accuracy;
Low-flow reading ability to allow for accurate leak detection to aid in water conservation;
Low maintenance & ease of repair;
Battery longevity & warranty; and
An ability to upgrade to advanced metering infrastructure (A MI ).
W ith these considerations in mind, staff selected Sensus brand water meters for this project, which have a
15-year warranty, including battery.
Timeline & Resident Outreach
The project will be a three (3) year program. The schedule is subject to change based on certain factors, but
tentatively follows this timeline:
Year 1 (2019): Pilot program, all commercial properties, failed meters, and 30% of residential meters
Year 2 (2020): 30-40% of residential meters
Year 3 (2021): Remaining residential meters & project completion.
General resident outreach will consist of:
Social media postings;
Utility billing inserts; and
Sun Current advertisements.
I ndividual resident outreach by contractor will consist of:
Mailing an initial appointment notice;
Door knocking & door hanger notice;
Mailing a second notice;
Certified letter to the property owner; and
Turning account over to Public Works for replacement by P W staff.
Contractor's Staff
As part of the project bid specifications, the contractor will be required to have all project staff undergo B C A
background checks and wear the required I D badges that include the Richfield logo. The contractor is also
required to have staff available to conduct all scheduling related to the replacement, a licensed plumber on
staff and available, and supervisors in place to respond to customer concerns or complaints. At no point will
the contractor's staff be allowed to enter a home if a competent adult over the age of 18 is not present at the
property.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Approve the citywide water meter replacement project and direct staff to solicit bids.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The City's current water meters were installed as part of a similar project that was completed from
2007-2009.
The meters have reached the end of their expected lifespan and the batteries are prone to failure.
Significant staff time and resources are being dedicated to replace these failed meters on a case-
by-case basis.
The city has 10,534 residential water meters and 236 commercial meters in total.
Public Works staff held a work session to brief Council on the project on February 11, 2019.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Minnesota Statutes 471.345: For City contracts or purchases estimated to exceed
$175,000, sealed bids shall be solicited by public notice in the manner and subject to the law
governing contracts or purchases by the City of Richfield.
The scope of the project - 10,858 meters - means the contract cost will exceed the statutory
threshold requiring sealed bids.
The project has been identified in the 2019-2023 Capital I mprovement Budget/Capital
I mprovement Plan.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
W ith Council approval, staff expects to advertise for bids March 7, open sealed bids on March 26,
and award the contract at the April 9 regular City Council meeting.
Council approval will allow staff to stick to the above timeline and ensure the project is ready to
commence for the 2019 replacement schedule.
I mplementing the project as soon as possible will ensure accurate billings for customers and
accurate revenue for the City.
The rate of meter failure is accelerating and will continue to do so until the project is complete.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The project is estimated to cost in the range of $4,100,000 and has been accounted for in the
current year's W ater Utility budget and in the coming years' budgets.
The project is identified in the 2019-2023 Capital I mprovement Budget/Capital I mprovement Plan.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
None
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
None
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.B.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 33
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: S cott K ulzer, A dministrative A ide/A nalyst
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the adoption of a resolution authorizing a land exchange with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation as part of the completed I-35W /TH62 "Crosstown Commons"
reconstruction project.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
I n 2006, as part of the I -35W /TH62 "Crosstown Commons" reconstruction project, the City of Richfield and
MnD OT entered into an agreement, memorialized in MnD OT Contract No. 89064, to exchange certain
parcels of land. The project has been completed and the 2006 agreement has since expired, without the land
exchange being officially executed. The Agreement calls for an exchange of deeds to transfer title to the
parcels of land to be exchanged, with the City conveying to the State a strip of land along Highway 62 on the
north side of Madison Park, in return for a deed from the State conveying two parcels of land adjacent to
Madison Park, and a third parcel of land adjacent to Highway 62 on Lyndale Avenue.
The City has determined that granting a deed conveying the City-owned land covered in the Agreement, and
accepting delivery of a deed from MnD OT conveying the State-owned land covered in the Agreement, is in
the interest of the public.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Adopt a resolution authorizing a land exchange with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation as part of the completed I-35W /TH 62 "Crosstown Commons" reconstruction project.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
I n 2006, as part of the I -35W /TH62 "Crosstown Commons" reconstruction project, the City of
Richfield and MnD OT entered into an agreement, memorialized in MnD OT Contract No. 89064, to
exchange certain parcels of land.
The original agreement with MnD OT expired on its own terms in 2013.
The Project has been completed and title to the properties involved in the exchange was never
conveyed.
The City of Richfield and MnD OT both desire to complete the land exchange as originally
contemplated in the the attached MnD OT Contract No. 89064.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Authorizing this land exchange will serve to carry out the original intent of the Richfield City
Council in its adoption of the original agreement and resolution on April 11, 2006.
The original authorizing resolution and MnD OT Contract No. 89064 from April 11, 2006, are
attached for reference.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
Completion of the land exchange is a "housekeeping" measure related to the completed I -
35W /TH62 "Crosstown Commons" reconstruction project and is in the best interest of the City
and the State.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
This agreement represents a land exchange only. No funds are exchanged as part of the
agreement.
For MnD OT's own internal reasons, and because the original agreement expired in 2013, MnD OT
needs to process this exchange as a “direct purchase.” Therefore, this staff report also includes
an offer to sell and a donation letter. Ultimately, it’s the same land exchange as agreed to in 2006,
but in a slightly different form.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and will be available to answer any questions.
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
Resolution Resolution L etter
Old MnD OT A gmnt #89064 B ackup Material
Resolution - 04-11-2006 L and E xchange B ackup Material
MnD O T Quitclaim D eed C ontract/A greement
MnD O T D onation L etter C ontract/A greement
MnD O T Memorandum of C onditions C ontract/A greement
MnD O T F ee A cquisition B ackup Material
RESOLUTION NO.
AUTHORIZING A LAND EXCHANGE WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AS PART OF THE COMPLETED CROSSTOWN
RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (City) and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) entered into an agreement in 2006, memorialized in MnDOT
Contract No. 89064 (Agreement), to exchange certain parcels of land as part of the
Crosstown Reconstruction Project (Project); and
WHEREAS, the Agreement calls for an exchange of deeds to transfer title to the
parcels of land to be exchanged thereunder, with the City conveying to the State a strip
of land along Highway 62 and lying on the north side of Madison Park, in return for a
deed from the State conveying two parcels of land adjacent to Madison Park, and a
third parcel of land adjacent to Highway 62 on Lyndale Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement, by its own terms, expired in 2013; and
WHEREAS, the Project has been completed and title to the properties involved
in the exchange was never conveyed; and
WHEREAS, the City and MnDOT both desire to complete the land exchange and
grant deeds conveying title to each party’s respective properties, as originally
contemplated in the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that granting a deed conveying the City-
owned land covered in the Agreement, and accepting delivery of a deed from MnDOT
conveying the State-owned land covered in the Agreement, is in the interest of the
public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the City shall deed to MnDOT, on behalf of the State, the City-owned
land described in MnDOT Contract No. 89064, and shall accept delivery from
MnDOT, on behalf of the State, a deed conveying the State-owned land
contemplated in MnDOT Contract No. 89064.
2. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
execute all appropriate documents to effectuate the transaction contemplated
by this Resolution.
3. That the Mayor, City Manager, staff and consultants are hereby authorized
and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or
convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this Resolution.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of
February, 2019.
Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REpORT #
ResolutiolJ.S
10
78
STAFF REpORT
RICHFIELD
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 11,2006
REpORT PREPARED By:
KRISTIN ASHER, ASSISTANT CITY
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
rJ.REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of approval of the attached resolution in which Richfield agrees to exchange
land at Madison Park for adjacent land parcels and an additional' remnant parcel on
Lyndale Avenue with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) for land
necessary to complete the Crosstown Reconstruction project.
Consideration of approval for the Mayor and City Manager to grant necessary access to
Mn/DOT's contractors in Madison Park and Legion Lake.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution approving Agreement No. 89064
between the City of Richfield and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT).
Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to approve permits granting
necessary access to Mn/DOT's contractors to complete the
Crosstown Reconstruction Project.
I II. BACKGROUND I
Mn/DOT had determined that it is necessary to acquire a portion of the City
Property in order to complete the Crosstown Reconstruction project. Approximately
0411 LandExchange
12,640 square feet of the north edge of Madison Park will be conveyed to Mn/DOT
for the reconstruction project in exchange for approximately 13,000 square feet of
land, split among three parcels (see attachments). Approximately 7,800 square feet
of the replacement land will be located adjacent to the park; the remaining 5,200
square feet will be conveyed with Parcel 341 located in the western corner of
Lyndale Avenue and the TH 62 ramp.
In addition to the land exchange, Mn/DOT will need access to portions of both
Madison Park and Legion Lake in order to complete the reconstruction project. The
permits allow Mn/DOT's contractors access to the portion of Madison Park indicated
as a temporary easement and permission to construct on the area of Legion Lake
where indicated to build a pedestrian bridge and dredge a drainage channel into
Legion Lake.
I III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
I A. POLICY I
Improvements to the 35W/Highway 62 Crosstown have been
identified as needed in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I
The agreement is necessary in order for Mn/DOT to move forward
with the Crosstown Reconstruction.
The permits allowing Mn/DOT's contractor to do work on City property
Legion Lake & Madison Park) is necessary for Mn/DOT to move
forward with the Crosstown Reconstruction.
I C. FINANCIAL I
Land exchange only. No funds are exchanged as part of the
agreement.
I D. LEGAL I
The City Attorney will be available at the Council meeting to answer
any questions about the agreement.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I
Reject the proposed land exchange agreement.
Deny Mn/DOT's contractors access to Madison Park and Legion Lake.
I V. ATTACHMENTS I
Resolution approving the proposed land exchange agreement.
Mn/DOT Contract No. 89064
Graphics defining land exchange parcels
Permits granting immediate access to Madison Park and Legion Lake
Graphics defining temporary easement area
I VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None anticipated.
ID-I
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 89064 AMONG THE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MN/DOT) AND THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD FOR LAND EXCHANGED AS PART OF THE CROSSTOWN
RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
WHEREAS, Mn/DOT wishes to acquire certain property, a portion of Madison Park,
from the City for highway purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to acquire certain property in the vicinity of Madison
Park from Mn/DOT for use for park and trail purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City and Mn/DOT deem it mutually advantageous to exchange the
property referenced in the attached agreement and maps.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Richfield City Council:
1) That the "State of Minnesota and City of Richfield Land Exchange Agreement"
identified as Mn/DOT Agreement Number 89064, a copy of which was before the
Council, is hereby approved.
2) That the proper City officers are authorized to execute the Agreement, and any
amendments thereto.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota on this 11 th day of
April 2006.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
MnlDOT Contract No: 89064.
lo~~
STATE OF MINNESOTA AND CITY OF RICHFIELD
LAND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT
This agreement is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation
hereinafter "State") and the City of Richfield, acting through its City Council ("City").
Recitals
The parties are authorized to enter into this Agreement by Minnesota Statutes ~~471.59, subd. 10; and 161.202;
and;
The State is planning to reconstruct Trunk Highway number 62 and Interstate 35W, within the Richfield city
limits, under State Project Number 2782-281 (the "Project"); and
The City is the fee owner of property currently maintained and operated as Madison Park (the "City Property");
and
The State has determined that is necessary to acquire a portion of the City Property for purposes of constructing
the Project and operating and maintaining the reconstructed roadway; and
The City will convey the City Property to the State, provided that such property is replaced in a suitable
manner; and
The State has acquired certain property and will acquire certain additional property (collectively the "State
Property") and convey it to the City; and
iI!:e Parties are entering into this Agreement to define the terms and conditions of the above-referenced land
change.
Agreement
1. Term of Agreement; Exhibits Incorporated
1.1 Effective date: This Agreement will be effective on the date signed by all necessary City and State
officials as required by Minnesota Statutes ~ 16C.05, subdivision 2, and other applicable law.
1.2 Expiration date: This Agreement will expire seven years after its Effective Date, or when all
obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first.
1.3 Exhibits: Exhibits A, and B are attached and incorporated into this Agreement.
2. Agreement between the Parties
2.1 Description of City Property. The City Property that is the subject of this Agreement is identified as
Parcel 58 and is depicted on Exhibit A.
2.2 Description of State Property. The State Property that is the subject of this Agreement is identified as
the remnants of parcels 56, 59, and 431, and is depicted on Exhibits A and B.
2.3 Project Schedule. The State has scheduled the construction contract letting for the Project for May 19th,
2006. The State anticipates that construction will commence on July 10, 2006.
2.4 Conveyance of the City Property. The City will convey the City Property to the State by quitclaim
Joint Powers Contract (Rev: 4/3/2006)1 -
Mn/DOT Contract No: 89064
fb-3
deed, in such estates as are designated on Exhibit A. Approximately 12,642 square feet will be
conveyed in fee simple, approximately 4,934 square feet will be conveyed as wall maintenance
easement, and a temporary easement will be granted for approximately 36,469 square feet. The
temporary easement will expire on December 1,2010.
2.5 Conveyance of the State Property. The State will convey the State Property, as shown on Exhibits A
and B, to the City in fee simple estate by quitclaim deed. Approximately 13,007 square feet will be
conveyed in fee simple, of which approximately 4,035 square feet (on certain portions of parcels 56 and
59 as shown on Exhibit A) will be conveyed subject to a wall maintenance easement in favor of the
State.
2.6 Conveyance Documents. The State will be responsible for providing legal descriptions and for
preparing conveyance documents. All conveyance documents must be approved, prior to their
execution, by the State's Metro District Right-of-Way Engineer or her designee.
2.7 Timing of Conveyance. Following the effective date of this Agreement, the State will seek approval of
the land exchange by the Minnesota Land Exchange Board. Upon approval, the City will convey the
City Property to the State pursuant to Article 2.4 of this Agreement. The State will convey the State
Property to the City within 90 days after filing the final certificate of the parcels in Eminent Domain.
The parties will use their best efforts to complete the property conveyances prior to the State's planned
contract-letting date.
2.8 Recording. Each party will be responsible for recording the conveyance instruments which it receives
as part of the exchange.
2.9 Rights of Entry.
2.9.1 Effective upon the execution of this Agreement, the City grants to the State a right of entry on
the City Property for purposes of constructing the Project, and operating and maintaining the
reconstructed roadway. This right of entry will remain in effect until the conveyance of the City
Property is completed.
2.9.2 The State reserves for itself a right of entry onto that portion of the State Property identified as
Parcels 56, 59, and 341 for purposes of constructing the Project. This right of entry will remain
in effect until construction of the Project is completed.
2.1 OEnvironmental Liability. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to alter any responsibility imposed by
applicable federal or state environmental protection laws, specifically including but not limited to, laws
governing responsibility for cleanup of polluted properties.
2.11 Approvals
2.11.1 Approval by Land Exchange Board. The State will be responsible for obtaining approval of this
transaction from the Minnesota Land Exchange Board. If the Minnesota Land Exchange Board
Joint Powers Contract (Rev: 4/3/2006)2-
Mn/DOT Contract No: 89064
lo~t
does not approve this land exchange, this agreement will terminate and neither party will have
any further responsibility to the other.
2.11.2 Approval by City Council. The agreement is contingent upon City Council approval and will be
void if such approval is not obtained. The City will be responsible for obtaining such approval.
3. Payment
The parties agree that the interests in real property to be exchanged pursuant to this Agreement are of
equivalent value and that neither party will be obligated to pay cash compensation to the other.
4. Authorized Representatives. Each party's Authorized Representative has the responsibility to administer
this agreement, to give 'and receive notices, and to niake any other decision authorized or permitted under
this Agreement.
4.1 The State's Authorized Representative is Deb Anderson Sleeper, Metro District Right-of-Way Engineer,
or her successor; 1500 W. County Road B2, Roseville, MN 55113; (651) 582-1658.
4.2 The City's Authorized Representatives are Martin Kirsch (Mayor) and Steven Devich (City Manager) or
their successors; 6700 Portland Ave. S., Richfield, MN 55423; 612-861-9700 (Mayor), 612-861-9702 (City
Manager).
5. Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Contract Complete
5.1 Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this agreement
without the prior consent of the other party and a fully executed Assignment Agreement, executed
and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this agreement, or their successors in
office.
Amendments. Any amendment to this agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it
has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original
agreement, or their successors in office.
Waiver. If a party Jails to enforce any provision of this agreement, that failure does not waive the
provision or its right to subsequently enforce it.
Contract Complete. This agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between the State and
the City. No other understanding regarding this agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to
bind either party.
6. Liability
In connection with the performance of this Agreement, each party will be solely responsible for its own acts
and omissions and the results thereofto the extent authorized by law. The State's liability is governed by
Minnesota Statutes S3.736 and other applicable law. The City's liability is governed by Minnesota Statutes
chapter 466 and other applicable law.
7. State Audits
Under Minnesota Statutes S 16C.05, subd. 5, the City's books, records, documents, and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State
Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this agreement.
Government Data Practices
5.2
5.3
5.4
The City and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 13, as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by
Joint Powers Contract (Rev: 4/3/2006)3 -
0-7
1 l/v~MD P 6fhJ~;:!S1AMO
I I I I '-..... ^ ~tll 3 2
1:._ _ 't' J / I I
BL 0 K 11
T" S-.,- ,
d ~_
V>
W
J
Z
W
z
0
I.t.
Itv s IRtl.- r
I
I
t;..... .
4265
r----
r:
r-~
5 I
1. . ........' '=> _
I
0 CDI
I~ -J
Z
1-
W
w
we::
1-
I-Vl
NtWFWVJ
AlLONG: ·
4pT l~NE
tO'hE;,
PAR 51
t~CEFtT:
aUIlQINQ
I I
I I
L '
WALL MAINTENANCE
EASEMENT L
r-----,...
Pr
LE.
TE AT PAR 58 .
LOT CORNER BY PERMIT
TE AT-
LOT CORNER
i
AL QNG
MADISON
PARK
Z
1-
W
w
we::
1-
I-Vl
V>
W
J
Z
W
V>
W
J
N -
MNDOT TO CITY OF RICHFIELD
PARCEL 56
2620 SF
OF WHICH 2011 SF IS ~M
MNDOT TO CITY OF RICHFIELD
PARCEL 59
FEE 5181 SF
OF WHICH 2024 SF IS ~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD TO UNDOT
PARCEL 58
FEE
WALL MAINT. EASE.
T.E.
12642 SF
4934 SF
36649 SF
100'
SCALE
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.C.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 34
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: John S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D irector
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: Jack B roz, Transportation E ngineer
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/19/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the adoption of a resolution supporting the submittal of a grant application to
Hennepin County for 2019 Community Works Corridor Planning funds. The grant application will
request funds to study improvements to Penn Avenue, north of 66th Street. An award requires a 25
percent match by the local authority (maximum $12,500).
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The Hennepin County Community Works Corridor Planning grant offers financial and technical resources for
plans and studies that advance Community Works' program goals. The primary goals are as follows:
Enhance the tax base;
Stimulate economic development and job growth;
Strengthen and connect places and people;
I nnovate and advance sustainability; and
Lead collaborative planning and implementation.
Awards of up to $50,000 are available and applications must be submitted by February 28, 2019.
City staff is proposing to submit an application for funds that will allow an expansion of work done in the 2008
Penn Avenue Revitalization Plan by looking specifically at right-of-way challenges and opportunities. As
development interest in the Penn Avenue Corridor increases, roadway configuration (including pedestrian and
bicycle facilities) will be an important piece to integrating these new uses into the area. W e believe that this
project will meet a number of the goals of the program; County Commissioner Goettel has encouraged the
City to apply for these funds.
I f awarded the full $50,000, the City must provide a 25 percent match ($12,500). The Community
Development and Public Works budgets have sufficient funds to provide this match.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Adopt a resolution supporting the submittal of a grant application to Hennepin County for
2019 Community Works Corridor Planning funds to be used for a study of Penn Avenue, north of 66th
Street.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The revitalization of the Penn Avenue commercial corridor has been a priority for the city for more
than a decade.
I n 2008, the city approved the Penn Avenue Revitalization Plan to guide private redevelopment;
focusing on design elements that would encourage pedestrian activity and aesthetically improve
the corridor.
The Penn Central business group puts on one of the community's most successful annual events -
Open Streets on Penn.
The City has invested in its properties within the area (Fire Station and Liquor Store), as well as
providing two different grant programs to encourage existing businesses to improve facades and
curb appeal.
A major hurdle to investment in this area is the condition and configuration of the roadway and
sidewalks. W hile Penn Avenue reconstruction in this area has remained a priority for the City,
Hennepin County has removed this road from its Capital I mprovement Plan.
I n 2013, the City approved Guiding Principles for development of transportation projects that
considers the future of the city through improving the following:
Multimodal Design
Connectivity and Public Realm
Local Economy
Design for People
Community Character and I dentity
Sustainable Solutions
Healthy and Active Lifestyles
Unique Location
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Letters or resolutions of support are recommended as part of the application.
I t is the city's policy to seek grant funding when available and appropriate.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
Grant applications are due by February 28, 2019.
Funds will be awarded in April 2019.
Projects must begin no later than J uly 1, 2019 and be completed within 15 months.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The city would be requesting $50,000 in grant funds. This requires a $12,500 match by the city.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
The city will be required to enter into a grant agreement with Hennepin County if funds are
awarded.
The city attorney will review the grant agreement prior to execution.
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
N/A
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
Resolution Resolution L etter
Map E xhibit
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO
HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CORRIDOR PLANNING PROGRAM FUNDS
FOR PENN AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (the “City”) is a city located within Hennepin
county and is therefore eligible to access the Community Works Corridor Planning Grant
funds; and
WHEREAS, the City has identified certain property for redevelopment and
revitalization within the Penn Avenue Corridor, north of 66th Street; and
WHEREAS, current roadway and pedestrian infrastructure in this area is an
impediment to economic development, private investment, job growth, and also to public
safety; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need for, and benefit of, additional study of
this area to support investment, improved connections, and an enhanced tax base in the
Penn Avenue Corridor.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council supports and
otherwise affirms and ratifies the submittal of application for the Corridor Planning Grant
administered by Hennepin County Community Works and authorizes the Mayor and City
Manager to execute any agreements as are necessary to implement the project on
behalf of the applicant.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of
February, 2019.
__________________________
Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
PENN AVE SOLIVER AVE SNEWTON AVE S65TH ST W
66TH ST WRUSSELL AVE SHIGHWAY 62
64TH ST W
63RD ST W
QUEEN AVE S62ND ST W
P E N N A V E S T O E B H W Y 6 2
EB HWY62 TO PENN AVE S
65 1/2 ST W QUEEN AVE S64TH ST W
QUEEN AVE SRUSSELL AVE S62ND ST W
º
Penn Avenue - Crosstown to 66th Street
0 150 300 450 60075FeetPENN AVE S66TH ST W
I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff\Planning Tech\Projects\Penn Ave Crosstown-66th.mxd
AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM #4.D.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 35
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Jeff P earson, C ity E ngineer
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
2/21/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/22/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the approval of permanent easement agreements with the Metropolitan Council to
allow the necessary relocation of utilities as part of the Orange Line Bus Rapid Transit Project.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Orange Line Bus Rapid Transit
The ME TRO Orange Line is a 17-mile planned highway Bus Rapid Transit (B RT) line that will connect
Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington, and Burnsville along I -35W that will operate with the service, quality, and
reliability of rail transit while benefiting from the cost savings and flexibility of bus transit. The Orange Line will
provide frequent, all-day service in both directions, seven days a week.
Easement Need
Construction of the Orange Line’s Knox Avenue Transitway requires the project to relocate an existing
MnD OT storm sewer that runs parallel to I -494, and to relocate a Bloomington water main that runs
perpendicular to I -494. The storm sewer is being rerouted to the north through the parking lot of Dick’s
Sporting Goods, across Knox Avenue, and then south on a city-owned parcel (identified as Orange Line
Parcel 8) to tie back into existing infrastructure. The water main will be relocated to the west of the existing
location at I -494. The Orange Line project seeks to obtain these as no-cost permanent easements from the
City.
Land Parcel
The City-owned parcel, in which the easements are needed, will eventually be sold to MnD OT to be used for
I -494 expansion. The parcel was purchased through the Met Council's Right-of-way Acquisition Loan Fund
(RA L F) that provides loan funding to cities to purchase right-of-way for future highway projects. MnD OT is
unable to purchase highway right-of-way until projects are programmed for construction. W hen MnD OT
needs the land for highway construction, it buys the property from the City at the price paid for the
property. The City then uses that money to repay the loan to the RA L F account.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Approve the Permanent Storm Sewer Easement Agreement with the Metropolitan Council
on "Parcel 8" as described in the easement documents and approve the Permanent Water Main
Easement Agreement with the Metropolitan Council on "Parcel 8" as described in the easement
documents.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The ME TRO Orange Line is a 17-mile planned highway Bus Rapid Transit (B RT) line that will
connect Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington, and Burnsville along I -35W that will operate with the
service, quality, and reliability of rail transit while benefiting from the cost savings and flexibility of
bus transit. The Orange Line will provide frequent, all-day service in both directions, seven days a
week.
The Orange Line will use roadway improvements, upgraded transit stations, Park & Ride facilities,
and improved bus routes to provide fast, frequent, and reliable all-day service along I -35W.
Richfield will have Orange Line stations at 66th Street & I -35W and at 76th Street & Knox Avenue.
Final plans have been completed for these stations as well as for the Knox Avenue Transitway
underneath I -494.
Both the station plans and Transitway layout were presented to the City Council at the February
27, 2018, council work session.
Council approved a resolution of support for the ME TRO Orange Line at the March 27, 2018
council meeting.
Construction on the Knox Avenue Transitway is expected to begin in 2019.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The ME TRO Orange Line is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
City Council passed a resolution of support for the Orange Line on March 27, 2018.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
Metropolitan Council hopes to have final plans approved in March and all right-of-way and
easement acquisition must be complete by that time for 2019 construction.
Metropolitan Council is asking for the easements as soon as possible to keep the project on track.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
There are no financial impacts in providing the easement for the project.
The future use of highway right-of-way for this parcel will not be impacted by the easements.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
The City Attorney has reviewed the easements and will be available to answer questions.
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
Orange L ine P ermanent S torm S ewer E asement C ontract/A greement
Orange L ine P ermanent Water Main E asement C ontract/A greement
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
PERMANENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT is made this ______ day of _________________,
20____, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Grantor”)
and the Metropolitan Council, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of
Minnesota (“Grantee”) hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties”.
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Grant of Easement. Grantor, the owner of the property described on the attached
Exhibit A, (the “Property”) in consideration of One Dollar and other good and valuable
consideration to it in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant,
bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its permittees, successors and assigns, the following
described easement:
Permanent Storm Water Utility Easement
A Permanent Storm Water Utility Easement legally described on the attached Exhibit B
(the “Easement”) over, under and across the Property for, without limitation, the location,
installation, construction, repair, replacement, maintenance, use, and operation of a storm
water sewer and other related improvements. The Easement includes the rights of ingress
and egress over and across the Property by Grantee and its agents, employees, permittees
and contractors, for the use of the Easement area as may be necessary in the exercise of
the rights and privileges herein granted.
The above-described Easement further includes the right to cut, trim, or remove from the
Easement area any trees, shrubs, undergrowth or other vegetation as in the Grantee’s
judgment unreasonably interferes with the use of the Easement area by Grantee, its
permittees, successors and assigns, provided that Grantee shall take all reasonable
precautions to prevent any damage to the Grantor’s property.
Subsequent to the date of the Easement Agreement, Grantor, its heirs, successors and
assigns, will not erect, construct, or create any building, improvement, obstruction,
perpendicular utility crossing, or structure of any kind, either above or below the surface
of the Easement area or plant any trees, or stockpile construction debris or construction
equipment, or change the grade thereof of the Easement area without the express written
consent of the Grantee.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
2
2. Restoration. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by Grantor, Grantee will make
reasonable efforts to restore the Easement area to its original condition, as near as possible,
matching the original surface grade as far as practicable, and restoration of the surface to like
condition, either grass seeding or sodding, either paved or gravel surface restoration.
3. Covenant of Ownership. Grantor covenants that it is the lawful owner and is in
lawful possession of the Property and has lawful right and authority to convey and grant the
Easement described herein.
4. Notices and Demands. All notices, requests, demands, consents, and other
communications required or permitted under this Easement Agreement shall be in writing and
shall be deemed to have been duly and properly given three (3) business days after the date of
mailing if deposited in a receptacle of the United States mail, first class postage prepaid,
addressed to the intended recipient as follows:
Grantor: City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 5423
Attn:
Grantee: Metropolitan Council
390 Robert Street North
St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
Attn: Real Estate Office
5. The provisions and conditions of this Easement Agreement shall be binding upon
and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their successors and assigns and shall constitute
a covenant running with the land.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
3
GRANTOR:
CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota
municipal corporation
By:________________________________
Its:______________________________
Date:_______________________________
By:________________________________
Its:_______________________________
Date:_______________________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF _____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of
___________________, 20____, by__________________________________, its
_________________________ of the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on
its behalf.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
4
GRANTEE:
Metropolitan Council, a public corporation
and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota
By: ________________________________
Meredith Vadis
Its: Regional Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day
of________________, 2019, by Meredith Vadis, Regional Administrator of the Metropolitan
Council, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on its behalf.
________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
Real Estate Office
Metropolitan Council
390 Robert Street North
St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
5
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of the Property
That part of the following described property:
Outlot C, BEST BUY CAMPUS, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the
recorded plat thereof.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
6
EXHIBIT B
Legal Description and Graphic Depiction of the
Permanent Storm Utility Easement Area
STORM UTILITY EASEMENT
That part of Outlot C, BEST BUY CAMPUS, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to
the recorded plat thereof, described as commencing at the northwest corner of said Outlot
C; thence North 89 degrees 15 minutes 19 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the north
line of said Outlot C a distance of 350.54 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence
South 00 degrees 23 minutes 23 seconds East a distance of 6.66 feet; thence South 81
degrees 42 minutes 01 seconds East a distance of 19.09 feet; thence South 05 degrees 51
minutes 47 seconds East a distance of 5.07 feet; thence South a distance of 32.19 feet;
thence East a distance of 117.15 feet; thence South 37 degrees 32 minutes 06 seconds
West a distance of 94.59 feet to the southerly line of said Outlot C; thence easterly,
northerly and easterly along the southerly, easterly and southerly lines of said Outlot C to
a point on the southerly line of said Outlot C distant 92.28 feet westerly of the most
easterly southeast corner of said Outlot C; thence North 37 degrees 31 minutes 57
seconds East a distance of 84.67 feet to the north line of said Outlot C; thence westerly
along said north line a distance of 243.11 feet to the point of beginning.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
7
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
8
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
PERMANENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT is made this ______ day of _________________,
20____, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Grantor”)
and the Metropolitan Council, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of
Minnesota (“Grantee”) hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties”.
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Grant of Easement. Grantor, the owner of the property described on the attached
Exhibit A, (the “Property”) in consideration of One Dollar and other good and valuable
consideration to it in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant,
bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its permittees, successors and assigns, the following
described easement:
Permanent Watermain Utility Easement
A Permanent Watermain Utility Easement legally described on the attached Exhibit B
(the “Easement”) over, under and across the Property for, without limitation, the location,
installation, construction, repair, replacement, maintenance, use, and operation of a
watermain and other related improvements. The Easement includes the rights of ingress
and egress over and across the Property by Grantee and its agents, employees, permittees
and contractors, for the use of the Easement area as may be necessary in the exercise of
the rights and privileges herein granted.
The above-described Easement further includes the right to cut, trim, or remove from the
Easement area any trees, shrubs, undergrowth or other vegetation as in the Grantee’s
judgment unreasonably interferes with the use of the Easement area by Grantee, its
permittees, successors and assigns, provided that Grantee shall take all reasonable
precautions to prevent any damage to the Grantor’s property.
Subsequent to the date of the Easement Agreement, Grantor, its heirs, successors and
assigns, will not erect, construct, or create any building, improvement, obstruction,
perpendicular utility crossing, or structure of any kind, either above or below the surface
of the Easement area or plant any trees, or stockpile construction debris or construction
equipment, or change the grade thereof of the Easement area without the express written
consent of the Grantee.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
2
2. Restoration. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by Grantor, Grantee will make
reasonable efforts to restore the Easement area to its original condition, as near as possible,
matching the original surface grade as far as practicable, and restoration of the surface to like
condition, either grass seeding or sodding, either paved or gravel surface restoration.
3. Covenant of Ownership. Grantor covenants that it is the lawful owner and is in
lawful possession of the Property and has lawful right and authority to convey and grant the
Easement described herein.
4. Notices and Demands. All notices, requests, demands, consents, and other
communications required or permitted under this Easement Agreement shall be in writing and
shall be deemed to have been duly and properly given three (3) business days after the date of
mailing if deposited in a receptacle of the United States mail, first class postage prepaid,
addressed to the intended recipient as follows:
Grantor: City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 5423
Attn:
Grantee: Metropolitan Council
390 Robert Street North
St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
Attn: Real Estate Office
5. The provisions and conditions of this Easement Agreement shall be binding upon
and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their successors and assigns and shall constitute
a covenant running with the land.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
3
GRANTOR:
CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota
municipal corporation
By:________________________________
Its:________________________________
Date:_______________________________
By:________________________________
Its:________________________________
Date:_______________________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF _____________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of
___________________, 20____, by__________________________________, its
_________________________ of the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on
its behalf.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
4
GRANTEE:
Metropolitan Council, a public corporation
and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota
By: ________________________________
Meredith Vadis
Its: Regional Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day
of________________, 2019, by Meredith Vadis, Regional Administrator of the Metropolitan
Council, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on its behalf.
________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
Real Estate Office
Metropolitan Council
390 Robert Street North
St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
5
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of the Property
That part of the following described property:
Outlot C, BEST BUY CAMPUS, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the
recorded plat thereof.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
6
EXHIBIT B
Legal Description and Graphic Depiction of the
Permanent Watermain Utility Easement Area
WATERMAIN UTILITY EASEMENT
The most Easterly 45.09 feet of Outlot C, BEST BUY CAMPUS, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof.
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
7
Project #62405 Orange Line BRT Parcel # 8 3.2018
8
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #6.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 36
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Russ "B utch" L upkes, Utilities S uperintendent
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Public hearing regarding the City of Richfield's Wellhead and Source W ater Protection – Part 2:
Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The City of Richfield Public W orks Water Utility operates under the rules and regulations established by the
Minnesota Department of Health (MD H).
The W ellhead Protection Plan (W HP P) for the City of Richfield addresses the seven municipal water supply
wells operated by the City. T he previous City of Richfield WH PP Parts 1 and 2 were prepared in
2005-2007. T he MD H issued final approval of the previous Part 2 WHP P in 2007. In accordance
with the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rules (Minnesota Rules 4720.5100 through 4720.5590),
amendment of the City’s WH PP was initiated based on the age of the Plan. T he Part 1 WHP P
amendment was approved by the MDH in April 2018. A public information meeting on the Part 1
WH PP amendment was held on May 17, 2018.
The City’s source water aquifers are currently not adversely impacted by contaminants (i.e., the water
supplied to customers meets or exceeds the water quality requirements of the Federal Safe Drinking W ater
Act).
T he attached document comprises Part 2 of the Plan amendment and includes the following
information:
A review of data elements identified by the MDH as applicable to the drinking water supply
management area (DWS MA).
Results of an inventory of potential contaminant sources within the DWS MA.
A review of changes, issues, problems, and opportunities related to the public water supply
and the identified potential contaminant sources.
A discussion of potential contaminant source management strategies and the goals,
objectives, and action plans associated with these management strategies.
A review of the Wellhead and Source Water Protection evaluation program.
Richfield’s alternative water supply contingency strategy specified in the City’s Water Supply
Plan (incorporated by reference).
T he engineering firm Barr Engineering prepared the Part 2 WH PP amendment. John Greer with the
firm Barr Engineering will be giving a brief presentation on the Part 2 WHP P amendment.
Due to the size of the Part 2 W HP P, only the Executive Summary and I ntroduction are included in this
report. To review the plan in its entirety, please visit: http://www.richfieldmn.gov/departments/public-
works/draft-part-2-wellhead-protection-plan
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
Conduct and close a public hearing regarding the City of Richfield's W ellhead and Source Water
Protection – Part 2: W ellhead Protection Plan Amendment.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The City of Richfield Public Works W ater Utility division operates under the rules and regulations
established by MD H.
The previous City of Richfield W HP P Parts 1 and 2 were prepared in 2005-2007.
The Part 1 W HP P amendment was approved by the MD H in April 2018.
A public information meeting on the Part 1 W HP P amendment was held on May 17, 2018.
The Draft Part 2 W HP P was reviewed by the Metropolitan Council and approved in December
2018.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MA C) reviewed and commented on the Draft Part 2
W HP P in February 2019.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
Required under the Federal Safe Drinking W ater Act.
Minnesota Rules 4720.5100 through 4720.5590 require the development and implementation of a
W HP P and its update via amendment every ten years following approval of the plan by MD H.
City Council will be asked to formally adopt the Part 2 W HP P by resolution once MD H gives their
final approval.
A copy of the required public hearing notice published in the Sun Current on February 14, 2019
is attached to this report.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
I n conducting the Part 2 W HP P amendment public hearing, the City of Richfield is fulfilling its
final obligation before submission of the W HP P to MD H for their approval.
The City applied for and was granted an extension of the deadline for completion of the Part 2
W HP P and approval by Council ensures adherence to that deadline.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
I n early 2018, the City of Richfield entered into an agreement with Barr Engineering for
$24,496.00 for assistance in developing its Part 2 W HP P and the funding was accounted for in
the Water Utility budget.
The projects identified in the Part 2 W HP P are not schduled nor funded at this time.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
None
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
P art 2 W HP P P ublic Hearing P resentation P resentation
P art 2 W HP P E xec. S ummary & Intro E xecutive S ummary
P art 2 W HP P Met. C ouncil Review Memo B ackup Material
P art 2 W HP P P ublic Hearing Notice B ackup Material
John Greer, PG Barr Engineering Co.
City of Richfield
Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment
Public Hearing
February 26, 2019
Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP)
Required under Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and
Minnesota Rules (4720.5100-4720.5590)
WHPPs have 2 parts
▪Part 1: delineations of Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA),
Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA), well
and aquifer vulnerability
▪Part 2: potential contaminant source inventory (PCSI),
associated issues/opportunities, and management plan
Minnesota Rules require that WHPPs be amended at least
every 10 years
Richfield’ previous plan approved by MDH in 2007
Part 1 –WHPA/DWSMA Extent & Vulnerability
Assessments
7 wells (primary) in 4 aquifers
▪Wells 1-6 vulnerable
▪Well 7 not vulnerable
WHPA = GWCA + SWCA
DWSMA encompasses WHPA
▪Delineated using property parcel
boundaries and roads
▪DWSMA extends outside Richfield
▪GWCA vulnerability: High (40%),
Moderate (52.5%), Low (7.5%)
▪SWCA vulnerability: High
Part 1 amendment approved by MDH
4/10/2018
WHPP –Part 2 Amendment
Data elements MDH identified as applicable to DWSMA
Inventory of potential contaminant sources in the
DWSMA
Discussion of changes, issues, problems, and
opportunities related to the municipal water supply and
the identified potential contaminant sources
Potential contaminant source management strategies
Wellhead protection evaluation program
Alternative water supply contingency strategy
316 wells (+6,868 sealed wells)
39 potential Class V well properties
129 storage tank properties (includes 76 LUST
properties)
37 chemical storage properties (1 is Richfield
water treatment plant)
2 properties with wastewater permits
4 old dump sites
1 other contaminant spill property
44 potential contaminant location properties
(49 brownfield sites + 4 State Superfund sites)
155 hazardous waste generator properties
3 natural gas pipelines
PCSI
Wellhead Protection Program Goals
Maintain or improve the quality of the City’s water
supply
Work with Minneapolis to protect source water
aquifers
Provide information & promote activities that
protect the aquifers used by the City
Compile data to support future wellhead and source
water protection work
Wellhead Protection Management Actions
Categories of actions for protecting the source water aquifers
within the DWSMAs include:
▪Well management
▪Information for owners of potential contaminant source
properties
▪Maintain up to date PCSI database
▪Provide information on DWSMA to emergency responders
▪Land use planning
▪Public education
▪Data collection
4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200
Minneapolis, MN 55435
Phone: 952.832.2600
Wellhead and Source Water Protection –
Part 2: Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment
Prepared for
December 2018
Wellhead and Source Water Protection –
Part 2: Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment
Prepared for
December 2018
P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271631 Richfield Part 2 WHPP Amendmnt\WorkFiles\DRAFT Richfield Part 2 WHPP.docx
i
Wellhead and Source Water Protection –
Part 2: Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment
December 2018
Contents
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Description of the Public Water Supply System ................................................................................................. 4
1.3 DWSMA .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.0 Identification and Assessment of Data Elements ............................................................................................... 6
3.0 Inventory of Potential Contaminant Sources ....................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Inventory Process ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
3.2 Inventory Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 8
4.0 Impact of Changes to the Public Water Supply Wells ..................................................................................... 9
4.1 Potential Changes Identified ...................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 Physical Environment ............................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 Land Use ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.3 Surface Water ............................................................................................................................................................10
4.1.4 Groundwater .............................................................................................................................................................10
4.2 Impact of Changes .......................................................................................................................................................11
4.2.1 Water Use ...................................................................................................................................................................11
4.2.2 Influence of Existing Water and Land Government Programs and Regulations ............................12
4.2.3 Administrative, Technical, and Financial Considerations .........................................................................13
5.0 Issues, Problems, and Opportunities ....................................................................................................................14
5.1 Land Use Issues, Problems, and Opportunities ..................................... ................................................14
5.1.1 Source Water Aquifers............................................................................................................................................14
5.1.2 Groundwater Quality ...............................................................................................................................................15
5.1.3 DWSMA ........................................................................................................................................................................15
5.2 Issues, Problems, and Opportunities Disclosed at Public Meetings and in Written Comments ...16
5.3 Issues, Problems, and Opportunities Related to the Data Elements ........................................................17
5.4 Issues, Problems, and Opportunities Related to Local, State, and Federal Programs and
Regulations......................................................................................................................................................................17
6.0 Wellhead Protection Goals .......................................................................................................................................18
7.0 Objectives and Plans of Action ................................................................................................................................19
7.1 Establishing Priorities ..................................................................................................................................................19
7.2 Well Management ........................................................................................................................................................20
7.2.1 Distribution of Well Operation and Maintenance Information .............................................................20
ii
7.2.1.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................20
7.2.1.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................20
7.2.1.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................20
7.2.1.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................20
7.2.1.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2 Promote the Proper Sealing of Unused, Unmaintained, Damaged, or Abandoned Wells within
the DWSMA ...............................................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................21
7.2.2.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................21
7.2.3 Identify New High-Capacity Wells Within or Near the DWSMA ..........................................................22
7.2.3.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................22
7.2.3.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................22
7.2.3.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................22
7.2.3.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................22
7.2.3.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................22
7.3 Potential Contaminant Source Properties...........................................................................................................23
7.3.1 Potential Class V Well Properties ......................................................................................................................23
7.3.1.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................23
7.3.1.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................23
7.3.1.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................23
7.3.1.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................23
7.3.1.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................23
7.3.2 Information for Registered Storage Tank Owners .....................................................................................24
7.3.2.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................24
7.3.2.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................24
7.3.2.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................24
7.3.2.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................24
7.3.2.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................24
7.3.3 Tracking of Registered Storage Tanks ............................................................................................................25
7.3.3.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................25
7.3.3.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................25
7.3.3.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................25
7.3.3.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................25
7.3.3.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................25
7.3.4 Information for Chemical Storage and Hazardous Waste Generator Properties ..........................26
7.3.4.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................26
7.3.4.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................26
7.3.4.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................26
iii
7.3.4.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................26
7.3.4.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................26
7.3.5 Sites Where Contaminant Releases May Have Occurred ........................................................................26
7.3.5.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................27
7.3.5.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................27
7.3.5.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................27
7.3.5.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................27
7.3.5.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................27
7.3.6 Inner Wellhead Management Zone Management .....................................................................................28
7.3.6.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................28
7.3.6.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................28
7.3.6.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................28
7.3.6.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................28
7.3.6.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................28
7.3.7 Transportation Corridors, Pipelines, and Emergency Response ...........................................................28
7.3.7.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................28
7.3.7.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................29
7.3.7.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................29
7.3.7.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................29
7.3.7.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................29
7.4 General Public Education ...........................................................................................................................................29
7.4.1 Wellhead Protection Information .....................................................................................................................29
7.4.1.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................29
7.4.1.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.1.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.1.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.1.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................30
7.4.2 Drinking Water Quality Report ..........................................................................................................................30
7.4.2.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................30
7.4.2.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.2.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.2.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................30
7.4.2.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3 City of Richfield Website ......................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................31
7.4.3.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................31
7.4.4 Inclusion of Wellhead and Source Water Protection in the Planning Process within the
DWSMA .......................................................................................................................................................................31
iv
7.4.4.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................32
7.4.4.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................32
7.4.4.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................32
7.4.4.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................32
7.4.4.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................32
7.5 Data Collection ..............................................................................................................................................................32
7.5.1 Monitoring Static and Pumping Levels in Municipal Wells ....................................................................32
7.5.1.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................32
7.5.1.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................32
7.5.1.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................32
7.5.1.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................33
7.5.1.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................33
7.5.2 Other Geologic and Hydrogeologic Data Collection ................................................................................33
7.5.2.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................33
7.5.2.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................33
7.5.2.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................33
7.5.2.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................33
7.5.2.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................33
7.5.3 Updating of the Groundwater Model Used in the WHPA Delineations ............................................33
7.5.3.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................34
7.5.3.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................34
7.5.3.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................34
7.5.3.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................34
7.5.3.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................34
7.5.4 Potential Contaminant Source Database .......................................................................................................34
7.5.4.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................34
7.5.4.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................34
7.5.4.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................35
7.5.4.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................35
7.5.4.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................35
7.5.5 Potential Contaminant Source Verification ...................................................................................................35
7.5.5.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................35
7.5.5.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................35
7.5.5.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................35
7.5.5.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................35
7.5.5.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................35
7.5.6 Tritium and Stable Isotope Sampling ..............................................................................................................36
7.5.6.1 Source of Action ............................................................................................................................................36
7.5.6.2 Cooperators .....................................................................................................................................................37
7.5.6.3 Time Frame ......................................................................................................................................................37
7.5.6.4 Estimated Cost ................................................................................................................................................37
v
7.5.6.5 Goals Achieved ...............................................................................................................................................37
8.0 Evaluation Program ......................................................................................................................................................38
9.0 Alternative Water Supply Contingency Strategy ..............................................................................................39
10.0 References .......................................................................................................................................................................40
List of Tables
Table 1 Municipal Well Construction Summary
Table 2 Annual Volume of Water Pumped
Table 3 Summary of Potential Sources of Contaminants and Assigned Management Priority
Table 4 High Capacity Wells within One Mile of the DWSMA
List of Figures
Figure 1 Municipal Wells and Aquifer Vulnerability
Figure 2 Current Land Use
Figure 3 Planned Future Land Use
Figure 4 High Capacity Wells within One Mile of the DWSMA
List of Appendices
Appendix A MDH Well Records
Appendix B Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan Amendment
Appendix C Data Elements Assessment
Appendix D Water Quality Information
Appendix E Written Comments from Local Units of Government
Appendix F Wellhead Protection Program Evaluation Template
Appendix G Water Supply Plan Documentation
vi
Public Water Supply Profile
The following persons are the contacts for the Richfield Wellhead Protection Plan:
Public Water Supply Contact
Fawn Kinsman
Utilities Supervisor
City of Richfield
1901 East 66th Street
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Telephone: 612-861-9165
email: FKinsman@richfieldmn.gov
Wellhead Protection Manager
Russ Lupkes
Utility Superintendent
City of Richfield
1901 East 66th Street
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Telephone: 612-861-9175
email: RLupkes@richfieldmn.gov
Wellhead Protection Consultant
John Greer, PG
Barr Engineering Company
4300 MarketPointe Drive
Suite 200
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
Telephone: 952-832-2600
Fax: 952-832-2601
email: jgreer@barr.com
General Information
UNIQUE WELL NUMBER(S) 206353, 206354, 206361, 206276, 206280, 206279, 133362
SIZE OF POPULATION SERVED 36,544 (2017 Metropolitan Council preliminary estimate)
COUNTY Hennepin
vii
Documentation List
Step Date Performed
Scoping Meeting 2 Held (4720.5340, subp. 1) May 21, 2018
Scoping 2 Decision Notice Received (4720.5340, subp. 2) June 11, 2018
Remaining Portion of Plan Submitted to Local Units of Government (LUGs)
(4720.5350)
December 11, 2018
Review Received From Local Units of Government (4720.5350, subp. 2) December 12, 2018 to
February 10, 2019
Review Comments Considered (4720.5350, subp. 3) December 12, 2018 to
February 11, 2019
Public Hearing Conducted (4720.5350, subp.4) February 12, 2019
Remaining Portion WHP Plan Submitted (4720.5360, subp. 1) February __, 2019
Final WHP Plan Review Received (4720.5360, subp. 4)
viii
Certification
I hereby certify that this plan, document, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Geologist under the laws of the state of Minnesota.
John C. Greer
PG #:
Date
ix
Acronyms
Acronym Description
DWSMA Drinking Water Supply Management Area
GWCA Groundwater Catchment Area
MGD Million Gallons per Day
MGY Million Gallons per Year
MDH Minnesota Department of Health
MDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
MGS Minnesota Geological Survey
MnOPS Minnesota Office of Pipeline Safety
MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
PCSI Potential Contaminant Source Inventory
SWCA Surface Water Catchment Area
WHPA Wellhead Protection Area
WHPP Wellhead Protection Plan
1
1
Executive Summary
The Wellhead and Source Water Protection Plan (the Plan) for the City of Richfield (the City) addresses the
seven municipal water supply wells operated by the City. The City’s previous Wellhead Protection Plan was
approved by the Minnesota Department of Health in 2008. This Plan amendment was prepared in
accordance with the applicable portions of the State of Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rules (Minnesota
Rules 4720.5100 through 4720.5590) due to the age of the Plan.
The City’s municipal water supply system includes seven primary water supply wells (Wells 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
and 7) and no seasonal or emergency water supply wells. In total, these wells pump from four different
aquifers: the Mt. Simon Sandstone aquifer, the Wonewoc Sandstone aquifer, the Jordan Sandstone
aquifer, and the Prairie du Chien Group aquifer. In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4720.5550, Well 7 is
classified as not vulnerable to contamination from the surface and Wells 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are classified as
vulnerable to contamination.
This Plan amendment consists of two parts. In Part 1 of the Plan amendment, wellhead protection areas
(WHPAs) for the City’s water supply wells were delineated as were the associated drinking water supply
management area (DWSMA). The DWSMA encompasses the WHPAs (also referred to as the groundwater
contribution area or GWCA) and a surface water contribution area (SWCA), which is the area from which
surface water runoff can flow into portions of the WHPAs where aquifer vulnerability is classified as High.
The DWSMA extends north into Minneapolis (see Figure 1).
In Part 1 of this Plan amendment, assessment of geologic conditions in and around the City’s DWSMA and
available water quality data for the City’s wells was done to determine the vulnerability to contamination
of the uppermost source water aquifer. The aquifer vulnerability was classified as High in approximately
40 percent of the area encompassed by the GWCA portion of the DWSMA. The aquifer vulnerability is
classified as Moderate in approximately 52.5 percent of the area in the GWCA. The aquifer vulnerability is
classified as Low in approximately 7.5 percent of the area in the GWCA. The vulnerability of 100 percent of
the area within the SWCA portion of the DWSMA is classified as High.
This document comprises Part 2 of the Plan amendment and includes the following information:
A review of data elements identified by the Minnesota Department of Health as applicable to the
DWSMA.
Results of an inventory of potential contaminant sources within the DWSMA.
A review of changes, issues, problems, and opportunities related to the public water supply and
the identified potential contaminant sources.
A discussion of potential contaminant source management strategies and the goals, objectives,
and action plans associated with these management strategies.
A review of the Wellhead and Source Water Protection evaluation program
Richfield’s alternative water supply contingency strategy specified in the City’s Water Supply Plan
(incorporated by reference).
2
2
The types of potential contaminant sources that must be inventoried depends on the vulnerability
classification within the DWSMA. Potential contaminant sources identified in the DWSMA include non-
municipal wells, potential Class V well locations, properties with storage tanks, chemical storage sites,
wastewater treatment and disposal sites, old dump sites, properties where contaminants were or may
have been released, and hazardous waste generators.
The goals and objectives of this WHPP will focus on reducing the potential contaminant pathways to the
source water aquifers that may be provided by private wells and educating property owners and water
supply users to ensure proper management of the portions of the DWSMA.
The following goals have been identified for implementation of this WHPP:
The City will work to maintain or improve the current level of water quality so that the municipal
water supply will continue to meet or exceed all applicable state and federal water quality
standards.
Work with the city of Minneapolis to protect the source water aquifers
The City will provide information and promote activities that protect the source water aquifers
that provide water to the municipal system. This will include increasing public awareness of the
Wellhead and Source Water Protection Program and groundwater-related issues, and
management of the identified potential contaminant sources within the DWSMA.
The City will continue to collect data to support future wellhead and source water protection
efforts.
Actions identified to accomplish these goals include the following:
Wells
o Promoting proper management of existing active wells in the DWSMA
o Encouraging the proper sealing of all unused wells within the DWSMA
o Identification of new high capacity wells in or near the DWSMA
o Maintaining current IWMZ potential contaminant source inventories for the City’s water
supply wells
Potential contaminant source properties
o Notifying owners of potential Class V well properties of requirements related to Class V
wells
o Encouraging proper handling of chemicals/wastes
o Encouraging proper operation and maintenance of storage tanks
o Tracking the status of identified brownfields sites and other properties where
contaminant releases may have occurred in the DWSMA
o Periodically obtaining updated information on potential contaminant sources in the
DWSMA from the regulating agencies to maintain an up-to-date potential contaminant
source database for the DWSMA and allow timely recognition of potential issues that
could affect the Richfield municipal water supply or DWSMA.
3
3
Public education
o Distribution of the Richfield Annual Water Quality Report for the water supply system,
o Posting Wellhead Protection Program information on the City of Richfield website
http://www.richfieldmn.gov/departments/public-works/utilities/water-quality
o Using the City’s social media outlets and other means of distribution to distribute
information related to wellhead protection
o Inclusion of wellhead and source water protection in the City’s planning process,
Continued data collection
o Recording static and pumping water levels in the Richfield municipal wells,
o Collection of additional local geologic and hydrogeologic data as it becomes available
from public sources or from City-sponsored projects.
Sampling the City’s municipal wells for tritium and the stable isotopes along with sampling of
surface water bodies in Richfield for stable isotopes.
4
4
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
The City of Richfield (City) currently has seven municipal water supply wells. All the wells are classified as
primary water supply wells. In total, these wells pump from four different aquifers: the Mt. Simon
Sandstone aquifer, the Wonewoc Sandstone aquifer, the Jordan Sandstone aquifer, and the Prairie du
Chien Group aquifer. Minnesota unique well number along with well construction, well status, aquifer(s),
and well vulnerability classification for each of Richfield’s municipal water supply wells is presented in
Table 1. Well locations, the Richfield Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA), along with
the portions of the Bloomington and Edina DWSMAs that overlap the Richfield DWSMA are shown on
Figure 1. Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) well records for all the Richfield municipal wells are
presented in Appendix A.
The previous Richfield Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP) Parts 1 and 2 were prepared in 2005-2007. The
MDH issued final approval of the previous Part 2 WHPP in 2007. In accordance with the Minnesota
Wellhead Protection Rules (Minnesota Rules 4720.5100 through 4720.5590), amendment of the City’s
WHPP was initiated based on the age of the Plan. The Part 1 WHPP amendment (Stantec, 2018) was
approved by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) in April 2018 (MDH, 2018a). A public
information meeting on the Part 1 WHPP amendment was held on May 17, 2018.
In the Part 1 WHPP amendment, one DWSMA was delineated for Richfield that encompasses the
groundwater catchment area (GWCA) and surface water contribution area (SWCA) delineated for the
Richfield water supply wells. In addition to the delineation of the GWCA, SWCA, and DWSMA, Part 1 of the
WHPP amendment includes an assessment of the vulnerability to contamination of the Richfield municipal
wells and the vulnerability of the source water aquifers in the GWCA and the vulnerability to
contamination in the SWCA. In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4720.5550, Wells 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are
classified as vulnerable to contamination from the surface and Well 7 is classified as not vulnerable to
contamination (see Table 1 and Appendix B). In the Part 1 amendment report, the vulnerability to
contamination of the uppermost source water aquifer within the DWSMA was identified as ranging from
Low to High (Stantec, 2018). Vulnerability of the SWCA is classified as High (Stantec, 2018). Figure 1 shows
the aquifer and SWCA vulnerability zones in the Richfield DWSMA. The Richfield Part 1 WHPP amendment
is presented in Appendix B.
1.2 Description of the Public Water Supply System
Richfield is located in Hennepin County. The City currently has seven primary water supply wells in the
municipal water supply and distribution system for Public Water Supply #1270045. Locations of the wells
are shown on Figure 1 and general construction details for the Richfield municipal wells are summarized
in Table 1. Copies of the MDH well records for the Richfield municipal wells are presented in Appendix A.
5
5
The 2010 census counted 35,228 people in Richfield. The Metropolitan Council estimated the 2017
population of Richfield to be 36,544 (Metropolitan Council, 2018a). As of January 2018, the Metropolitan
Council has projected Richfield’s population to reach 37,100 in 2020 and 37,300 in 2030 (Metropolitan
Council, 2018b).
Current daily water demand (based on the period 2012-2016) averages approximately 3.0 MGD (SEH,
2018). Maximum day demand (the largest daily water use in a given year) ranged from approximately 4.8 0
MGD to 6.81 MGD in the period 2012-2016 (SEH, 2018). Richfield’s permitted annual appropriation
volume is 1.9 billion gallons per year (BGY). The City’s draft Comprehensive Water System Plan (SEH, 2018)
projects the daily average water demand in 2030 will be 3.3 MGD (approximately 2,300 gpm). The draft
Water System Plan also projects the 2030 maximum day water demand will be 7.0 MGD (approximately
4,900). The City currently has no plans to construct any additional water supply wells to meet projected
future water demand.
The City has one water treatment plant that treats water from the City’s wells. Lime softening is done in
the treatment plant. The softened water is fluoridated and disinfected with chlorine before it enters the
distribution system.
Richfield currently has three water storage facilities consisting of two elevated towers and a clearwell at
the water treatment plant. These facilities have a combined storage capacity of 5 million gallons.
As discussed by Stantec (2018), pumping information from the City for the period 2012 through 2016 and
City water use projections were used to develop pumping rate projections for use in delineating the
WHPA. Annual volume of water pumped by each of the City’s municipal water supply wells during the
period 2012 through 2016 is shown in Table 2
1.3 DWSMA
The DWSMA delineated in the Part 1 WHPP amendment encompasses the 10-year groundwater time of
travel WHPA around the City’s wells and the SWCA. The DWSMA includes all or parts of Township 28N,
Range 24W, Sections 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22,23, 24, 25, 26,27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36. As shown on
Figure 1, the DWSMA extends into Minneapolis and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The
DWSMA overlaps the Bloomington and Edina DWSMAs (Figure 1).
In the Part 1 amendment report, the aquifer vulnerability in approximately 40 percent of the area
encompassed by the GWCA portion of the DWSMA was classified as High. Aquifer vulnerability in
approximately 52.5 percent of the area in the GWCA was classified as Moderate. The aquifer vulnerability
in approximately 7.5 percent of the area in the GWCA was classified as Low. The vulnerability of 100
percent of the area within the SWCA portion of the DWSMA was classified as High.
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Public Hearing Notice
REGARDING:
The City of Richfield is providing notice that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday,
February 26, 2019 to review the draft Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan. This public
hearing will be held at 7:00pm at the Richfield Municipal Center (6700 Portland Avenue)
as part of the regular City Council meeting.
The Wellhead Protection Plan is designed to continue the City’s efforts to prevent
human-caused contamination from entering the municipal water supply wells. The plan
identifies of the area of the groundwater aquifer that supplies water to the City’s wells
over a 10-year period. Based on the level of vulnerability of the aquifer within this area,
potential sources of contamination were identified and a management plan was created
for this area.
WHEN:
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
7:00 p.m.
WHERE:
Richfield Municipal Center – City Council Chambers
6700 Portland Avenue S
SUBJECT ADDRESS:
City-wide
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
N/A
QUESTIONS:
For more information call Utilities Superintendent Butch Lupkes at 612-861-9175.
HOW TO COMMENT:
Attend the hearing and you will be heard or submit written comments.
ELIZABETH VANHOOSE
City Clerk
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.
PUBLISH IN RICHFIELD SUN CURRENT: FEBRUARY 14, 2019
AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM #7.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 37
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: K ate A itchison/C eleste McD ermott, Housing S pecialists
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: John S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D irector
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Public hearing and consideration of the adoption of a resolution specifying the use of funds from the
Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant allocation for 2019 and authorizing
execution of a Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any required third party
agreements.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Hennepin County (County) is annually awarded federal Community Development Block Grant (C D B G)
funding on a formula basis from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The County, in
turn, allocates a portion of these funds to the City of Richfield to address local needs relating to affordable
housing, community development, and public services.
Staff is proposing to use the City's 2019 direct allocation of $192,100 (estimated) as follows:
$47,100 - Deferred Loan Rehabilitation Program
$95,000 - Single Family Scattered Site Acquisition & Rehabilitation or New Construction
$50,000 - First Time Homebuyer Down Payment Assistance
Each city in the Hennepin County C D B G Program will set aside 15 percent of their allocation to fund public
services that will be distributed through a single combined process covering all the cities in the County C D B G
Program. For Richfield, the amount set aside for public services will be $33,900 (estimated) and is separate
from the City's direct allocation.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Adopt a resolution authorizing the use of funds
for the 2019 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizing
execution of a Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any required third party
agreements.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
$47,100 is proposed to be allocated to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for the
Deferred Loan Program (Program), which provides no interest, 30-year loans up to $30,000 to
low-income homeowners to address health, safety, and property maintenance needs. This
Program has been in existence since 1984 and is administered for the City by Hennepin County.
I n the past year, one loan was completed and eight loans were started, 20 households are
currently on the waiting list for the Program. Additional funding for loans is available through loan
repayments (i.e., when a property is sold).
$95,000 is proposed to be allocated to the HRA to either purc hase and demolish a substandard
property and work with a non-profit developer to construct a new, affordable home or to purchase
and rehabilitate an existing home. The newly constructed or rehabilitated property would be sold to
a household earning 80 percent of the area median income or less ($71,900 for a family of four).
$50,000 is proposed to be alloc ated to the HRA for a First Time Homebuyer D own Payment
Assistance Program administered by city staff. This is a pilot program aimed at low and moderate
income Richfield renters who are looking to buy homes in Ric hfield. I t will provide no interest,
deferred loans of up to $10,000 to use towards down payment and closing costs.
Previously, each c ity was required to individually alloc ate the public servic e funds. B eginning in
the 2018 funding cycle, 15 perc ent of eac h c ity’s allocation was set aside and distributed through
a single combined proc ess c overing all the cities in the C ounty C D B G Program. For Richfield,
the amount set aside for public services will be $33,900 (estimated) and is separate from the City's
direct alloc ation. Public service agencies that have rec eived funds from the City in the past
(HOME, Homeline, C AP-HC, and Bridging) have been notified of the new proc ess. City staff will
participate in the County review of public service requests.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
All funded activities must meet one of three national objectives: benefiting low and moderate
income persons, preventing or eliminating slums and/or blight, or meet an urgent need. I n
addition, activities must be consistent with priorities identified in the County's Consolidated Plan.
Those priorities include a variety of housing activities such as housing rehabilitation, preserving
and creating homeownership opportunities, public services to maintain or increase self-
sufficiency, and neighborhood revitalization activities.
Under the C D B G funding guidelines, no more than 15 percent ($33,900) of the allocation can be
spent on Public Services. This amount will be set aside for allocation through a single, combined
competitive process covering all the cities in the Hennepin County C D B G Program.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
The application for 2019 funds is due to Hennepin County by February 28, 2019.
Public Service agencies must submit applications to the County by February 28, 2019.
Applications will be reviewed in March, and the County Board will act on recommendations in May
or J une.
The 2019 Federal Fiscal Year will begin on J uly 1, 2019. Funds must be spent by J une 30, 2020.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The City's estimated direct allocation for 2019 is $192,100.
I n the event of a change in the final allocation, the amount of funds allocated to the Deferred Loan
Program will be increased or decreased, accordingly.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
A local public hearing must be held prior to submission of the 2019 application.
Notice of the public hearing was published in the Richfield Sun Current on February 14, 2019.
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
Council may modify the amount of funds allocated to each project in a way that still meets funding
guidelines.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
N/A
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
Resolution Resolution L etter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED USE OF 2019 URBAN HENNEPIN
COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS AND
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN
COUNTY AND ANY REQUIRED THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota, through execution of a Joint
Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is participating in the Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has developed a proposal for the use of 2019
CDBG funds made available to it; and
WHEREAS, the City held a public hearing on February 26, 2019 to obtain the
views of citizens on local and Urban Hennepin County housing and community
development needs and priorities for the City’s proposed use of $192,100 from the 2019
Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. Approves the following projects for funding from the 2019 Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizes submittal
of the proposal to Hennepin County.
Activity Budget
1. Deferred Loan Rehabilitation Program $47,100
2. Single Family Acquisition & Rehabilitation $95,000
3. First Time Homebuyer Down Payment Assistance $50,000
TOTAL CDBG ALLOCATION $192,100
2. That the Mayor and City Council hereby authorize and direct the execution of
the Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any required Third
Party Agreements on behalf of the City to implement the 2019 CDBG
Program.
3. That should the final amount of FY 2019 CDBG available to the City be
different from the preliminary amount provided to the City, the City Council
hereby authorizes the City Manager to adjust the project budget of the
Deferred Loan Rehabilitation Program to reflect an increase or decrease in
funding.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of
February, 2019.
____________________________
Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:PROPOSED
ORDINANCES
AGENDA ITEM #8.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 38
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Jennifer A nderson, S upport S ervices Manager
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: Jay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hief of P olice
2/19/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the approval of a second reading of an ordinance amending Section 617 of the
Richfield City Code regulating food establishments for consistency with recently updated State
regulations and adoption of a resolution approving summary publication of said ordinance.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
The State of Minnesota Food Code was recently updated after twenty years, with implementation taking place
J anuary 1, 2019. Local jurisdictions are required to adopt changes by March 2019. A sampling of changes
include updates to definitions and terminology, food handling practices, health and hygiene standards, and
equipment certification. Adoption of the amendments to the Food Code will ensure the City of Richfield can
continue to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the public pursuant to the powers granted under
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 145A. Bloomington Environmental Health staff - who are experts in this area -
worked closely with Richfield staff in preparing the proposed ordinance amendments.
The first reading of this ordinance amendment was approved by the City Council on February 11, 2019.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By Motion: Approve the second reading of an ordinance amending Section 617 of the Richfield City
code regulating food establishments and adopt a resolution approving summary publication of said
ordinance.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The Minnesota Food Code (Minnesota Rules Chapter 4626) has not been updated since 1999
and over that period, the industry has undergone immense change; improved food handling
techniques, the introduction of food trucks, pop-up restaurants and increased interest in where
food comes from. Much of the food code update addresses food sanitation and safety measures
necessary to prevent food-borne illness outbreaks.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The principal objectives of the Food Establishment Code are to prevent illness, to correct and
prevent conditions that may adversely affect persons utilizing licensed establishments, to provide
consistent standards for design, construction, operation and maintenance of licensed
establishments, and to meet the consumer expectations of health and safety of licensed
establishments.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
The State of Minnesota has required all Community Health Boards to adopt updated ordinance
language by March 2019.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
The City Attorney has reviewed the ordinance and approves of its contents.
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
There are no alternatives. The City is required to update its Code for consistency with State law.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
Lynn Moore, Environmental Health Manager, City of Bloomington
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
Ordinance Ordinance
Resolution Resolution L etter
1
BILL NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 617 OF THE CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE
REGULATION OF FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. That the following Subsections of Section 617 of the Richfield City
Code are hereby amended by deleting those words stricken through and adding those
words that are underlined, to read as follows:
Section 2. Subsection 617.01 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
This section is enacted to establish standards for the regulation of food
establishments in Richfield in order to protect the health, safety and general welfare of
the public pursuant to the powers granted under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 145A.
The principal objectives of this section of the City Code are to prevent illness, to correct
and prevent conditions that may adversely affect persons utilizing licensed
establishments, to provide consistent standards for design, construction, operation and
maintenance of licensed establishments, and to meet the consumer expectations of
health and safety of licensed establishments.
For the purpose of prescribing regulations governing food establishments, the City of
Richfield hereby adopts the following rules and statutes as may be amended or
recodified from time to time:
(a) Minnesota Statutes, chapters 157 except for 157.16; and
(b) Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626, except for 4626.0033, subparts G through O,
4626.1715, subpart B, 4626.1720, subparts B and F, and 4626.1755 through60 and
4626.178070.
Section 3. Subsection 617.03 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
Subdivision 1. “Certified food protection manager” (CFPM) is defined in
Minnesota Rules Chapter 4626 as an individual who has a valid Minnesota food
protection manager’s certification under Minnesota Rules part 4626.0033 or an
individual who is certified under Minnesota Rules 2015, parts 4626.2005 to 4626.2020.
Subd. 12. "Food catering vehicle" is a commercial vehicle used only to transport or store
food, tableware, utensils or food equipment with temperature control and is used as part
of a food catering or food retail operation. This does not include personal vehicles used
only to deliver foods intended for immediate consumption like pizza, boxed lunches, etc.
Subd. 23. "Food establishment" is defined in Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626, as
amended. Food establishments include, but are not limited to, restaurants, cafeterias,
2
bars, clubs, cafes, coffee shops, grocery stores, delicatessens, convenience stores,
lodges, resorts, retail bakeries, retail meat markets, produce stands, group childcare
centers, group adult care centers, institutions, public and private schools, satellite or
catered serving locations, catering food vehicles, carts, packaged retail food sales,
vending machines, mobile food units, special event food stands or other short-term food
operations, and similar businesses established for the service or retail distribution of
food and beverages where consumption is on or off the premises and regardless of
whether there is a charge for the food or beverages.
Subd. 34. "Health Authority" means the City of Richfield Public Safety Department and
its qualified designated employees or agents as the Richfield City Council may
designate. The term "regulatory authority" in the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4626 shall mean the Health Authority.
Subd. 45. "Issuing Authority" means the City of Richfield Public Safety Department and
its qualified designated agents as the Richfield City Council may designate.
Subd. 56. "Potentially hazardousTime/temperature control for safety food" (TCS) is
defined in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626. It also means food that requires time or
temperature control for safety to limit pathogenic microorganism growth or toxin
formation.
Section 4. Subsection 617.07 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
617.07. - License required and posted.
No person shall operate a food establishment within the City of Richfield or
engage in any enterprises described in this Code, without first obtaining and having a
valid license as provided herein. The application for such license shall be made on
forms furnished by the City of Richfield and shall describe the general nature of the
business, its location, and any other information deemed necessary by the City. The
application must be in the name of the owner of the real property on which the licensed
premises are situated and bear the signature of the owner or that of the owner's
authorized agent. The license must be posted in a location conspicuous to customers.
Section 5. Subsection 617.15 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
Subdivision 1. Type I means those food establishments serving on average 500
or more meals per day; having 175 or more seats; or having 500 or more customers per
day. Type I establishments include those:
(a) Preparing for retail sale potentially hazardoustime/temperature control for safety
(TCS) foods that require extensive processing and handling on premises;
(b) Cooking or cooling potentially hazardousTCS foods;
3
(c) Offering as a menu item, or an ingredient of a menu item, raw or undercooked
[potentially hazardous ]meats, poultry products, eggs, fish, shellfish or similar foods[
with raw potentially hazardous items as ingredients];
(d) Transporting potentially hazardousTCS foods as a catering service; or
(e) Conducting food processing that involves smoking, curing, or reduced oxygen
packaging.
Type I food establishments require a certified food protection manager as specified in
Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. They include, but are not limited to, full-service
restaurants; counter-service restaurants; food retail delis; institutional kitchens; food
manufacturing, packaging, and processing plants; bakeries preparing potentially
hazardous foods or detailed decorating; and meat markets with complex processing. A
supplemental license shall be required for each additional separate and distinct food
facility such as a bakery, kitchen, meat market, grocery store, bar, or serving area
facility on the same premises.
Subd. 2. Type II means a Type I food establishment serving on average fewer than 500
meals per day; having fewer than 175 seats; or having fewer than 500 customers per
day. Type II establishments require a certified food protection manager as specified in
Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626.
Subd. 3. Type III means those food establishments serving or preparing:
(a) Mainly non- potentially hazardousTCS foods and a limited amount of TCS foods that
require minimal processing and handling;
(b) Potentially hazardousTCS foods prepared elsewhere and only heated or held cold
onsite; and
(c) Serving or retailing limited potentially hazardousTCS foods, such as pizza, requiring
handling followed by heat treatment.
Type III establishments require a certified food protection manager as specified in
Minnesota Rules, chapter part 4626.0033 unless specifically exempted. They include,
but are not limited to, such operations as pizza carry-out and delivery; ice cream
dipping; heating for hot holding pizzas, precooked bagged soups and wrapped
sandwiches made elsewhere intended for customer self-service; bake-off only bakeries;
produce departments; meat markets that only cut or grind meat; buffet-style breakfasts
with hot held foods or waffle stations; coffee shops with frothed milk, juice bars with
blended drinks and assembling yogurt parfaits; and serving kitchens receiving meals
prepared elsewhere.
Subd. 4. Type IV means those food establishments having minimal food handling. [Type
IV establishments are not required to have a certified food manager as specified in
Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626.] They include, but are not limited to such operations as,
retail sales of cold or frozen packaged potentially hazardous foods; packaged foods
4
where customers may heat the food onsite; hotdogs; preparing or packaging non-TCS
food that are made from ingredients that are not TCS; heating or serving precooked hot
dog or sausage products, popcorn, nachos, pretzels, or frozen pizza; childcare with
snacks and milk; ready-to-eat pizzas and sandwiches made elsewhere delivered for
immediate resale according to federal regulations; coffee shops with frothed milk;
unpackaged baked goods made elsewhere; continental breakfasts with rolls, juice,
coffee, cold cereal, and milk; juice bars with blended drinks; and on-sale bars with
mixed drinks.
Subd. 5. Type V means those food establishments where non- potentially
hazardousTCS food or food products are sold at retail or served in the original container
including snack bars, bottled beverages and packaged food products. Type V food
establishments are not required to have a certified food protection manager as specified
in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.
Subd. 6. Supplemental facility means any additional distinct or separate food retail or
food service facility on the same premises as a Type I, II, III, IV, or V[II] establishment,
including catering food vehicles. Supplemental facilities are categorized as:
(a) High Supplemental Facility having similar food handling operations specified under
Type I establishment;
(b) Medium Supplemental Facility having similar food handling operations specified
under Type III or IV establishment; or
(c) Low Supplemental Facility having similar food handling operations specified under
Type V establishment.
Subd. 7. Temporary food establishment is defined in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626
and includes special event food stands as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 157.
Temporary Food Establishments are categorized as:
(a) Complex Temporary Food Establishment having similar food handling operations
specified under Type I and Type III establishments; or
(b) Simple Temporary Food Establishment having similar food handling operations
specified under Type IV and V establishments.
Subd. 8. Farmers' market stands meaning those food establishments operating at
farmers' markets and not exempt from licensing under Minnesota Statutes, Section 28A.
Subd. 9. Vending machines means devices dispensing unit servings of food that are
either a food or beverage machine or a nut, gum ball, or unwrapped candy machine.
Section 6. Subsection 617.17 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
617.17. – Reserved. Exemptions or Exclusions.
5
This section shall not include food service operations conducted in and for a house of
worship when the food service is limited to preparation, service, or consumption by the
members of the house of worship and not advertised to the public.
Section 7. Subsection 617.19 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
This section specifically adopts the following additional standards for health and
safety to Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626:
Subdivision 1. Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626.0225 Preventing Contamination From
Hands, D is amended to read as follows: Food employees not serving a highly
susceptible population may contact exposed, ready-to-eat food with their bare hands if:
(a) Written procedures are maintained in the food establishment and made available to
the Health Authority upon request that include for each bare hand contact procedure, a
listing of the specific ready-to-eat foods that are touched by bare hands.
(b) A written employee health policy that details:
(i) Documentation that food employees and conditional employees acknowledge
that they are informed to report information about their health and activities as they
relate to gastrointestinal symptoms and diseases that are transmittable through food;
(ii) Documentation that food employees and conditional employees acknowledge
their responsibilities; and
(iii) Documentation that the person in charge acknowledges his/her
responsibilities.
(c) Documentation that food employees acknowledge that they have received training
according to Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626 in:
(i) The risks of contacting the specific ready-to-eat foods with bare hands;
(ii) Proper handwashing including when and where to wash their hands;
(iii) Proper fingernail maintenance;
(iv) Prohibition of jewelry; and
(v) Good hygienic practices.
(d) Documentation that hands are washed before food preparation and as necessary to
prevent cross contamination by food employees during all hours of operation when the
specific ready-to-eat foods are prepared.
(e) Documentation that food employees contacting ready-to-eat food with bare hands
use two (2) or more of the following control measures to provide additional safeguards
to hazards associated with bare hand contact:
6
(i) Double handwashing, such as after using the bathroom and returning to work,
handling raw meat products, or other high risk activities;
(ii) A hand antiseptic after washing;
(iii) Programs to encourage food employees not to work when they are ill; or
(iv) Other control measures approved by the Health Authority.
Subd. 2. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.0410 TIME AS PUBLIC HEALTH CONTROL,
subpart 2. Notification. The food establishment licensee must submit written notification
to the Health Authority of his/her intention to use the procedures provided under this
part and receive approval from the Health Authority prior to implementation of the
provisions of this part.
Subd. 3.Subdivision 1. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.1050, A is amended to read as
follows: A hand washing lavatory shallsink must be equipped to provide water to the
user through a mixing valve or combination faucet, at a temperature of at least 43
degrees C (110 degrees F), but not more than 54 degrees C (130 degrees F) in a food
establishment and not more than 48 degrees C (120 degrees F), in a sink that is used
by children such as at a school, day care, or preschool, to allow handwashing for at
least 20 seconds through a mixing valve or combination faucet.
Subd. 42. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.1325, A is amended to read: Except as
specified in item 2B, materials for indoor floor, wall, and ceiling surfaces under
conditions of normal use shall be:
(a) Smooth, durable and easily cleanable for areas where food establishment
operations are conducted;
(b) Closely woven and easily cleanable carpet where carpeting is permitted; and
(c) Non-absorbent for areas subject to moisture and resistant to the wear and abuse to
which they are subjected. Materials such as, but not limited to, quarry tile, or ceramic tile
are approved for floors in food preparation areas, toilet rooms, hand washing areas,
wait stations, kitchens, bars, walk-in refrigeration, ware washing areas, janitorial areas,
laundry rooms, areas subject to flushing or spray cleaning methods, and other areas
subject to moisture. Materials such as, but not limited to, ceramic tile are approved for
walls subject to splash or moisture in food preparation areas, ware washing areas, toilet
rooms, etc.
Subd. 53. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.1465 TOILET TISSUE, AVAILABILITY. A
supply of toilet tissue in a mounted dispenser shall be available at each toilet.
Subd. 64. A food establishment shall have in place and use a system of risk-based self-
inspection. The self-inspection program shall include written policies, appropriate forms
for logging self-inspections, and evidence that routine self-inspection of all aspects of
the food establishment takes place.
7
Subd. 5. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4626.0123 Clean-up of vomiting and diarrheal
events. A food establishment must have written procedures for employees to follow
when responding to vomiting or diarrheal events that involve the discharge of vomitus or
fecal matter onto surfaces in the food establishment. The procedures must address the
specific actions employees must take to minimize the spread of contamination and the
exposure of employees, consumers, food, and surfaces to vomitus or fecal matter.
Section 8. Subsection 617.21 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
Subdivision 1. Administrative variance request. Relief from the strict compliance
with the requirements of section 617.19 and those parts of Minnesota Rules, Chapter
4626 hereof may be granted in the form of a variance. Variance requests shall not be
considered from those specifically listed in Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626.1690,
subpart A.(1) through ([7]4). The variance application must be from the party to whom
the requirement applies and must be in writing and submitted to the Health Authority,
including, at a minimum, the following information:
(a) The full name, address, daytime and evening telephone numbers of the party
requesting a variance;
(b) The address of the licensed premises;
(c) The relationship of the party requesting a variance to the licensed premises;
(d) The specific reasons why the requirements of City Code or State Rule cannot be
met;
(e) A description of alternative measures that will be taken to ensure a comparable
degree of protection to the health or the environment if a variance is granted;
(f) The length of time for which the variance is requested;
(g) A statement that the person applying for the variance will comply with the terms of
the variance and maintain a copy, if granted;
(h) A HACCP plan, if required under part 4626.1730, that includes the information in
part 4626.1735 that is relevant to the variance requested; and
(i) Other relevant information the City determines necessary to properly evaluate the
request for a variance.
Subd. 2. Criteria for variance. The Health Authority may grant a variance request upon
making all of the following findings of fact in writing:
(a) The variance was requested in the manner prescribed by this section of City Code;
(b) Science-based evidence that tThe variance will have no potential adverse effect or
impact on public health, safety or the environment;
8
Section 9. Subsection 617.25 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
Construction shall not commence on any new or remodeled food establishment
or any existing structure converted to a food establishment until the Health Authority has
reviewed and approved the plans and specifications. Those construction projects being
expedited under the fast track building permit process, shall not have any equipment or
floor, wall or ceiling finish materials installed until the Health Authority has reviewed and
approved the plans and specifications.
Subdivision 1. Submission of plans.
(a) Two complete sets of printed or one set of digital of plans and specifications shall be
submitted to the Health Authority for review.
Section 10. Subsection 617.27 in the Richfield City Code is amended as follows:
Subdivision 1. The Health Authority shall inspect each food establishment prior to
issuing a license and as deemed necessary by the Health Authority. The Health
Authority shall not issue a license until the food establishment complies with the
standards of this section as demonstrated by a satisfactory inspection.
Subd. 2. The Health Authority, after proper identification, shall have the right to enter
and have access to the food establishment at any time during the conduct of business.
Subd. 3. The Health Authority shall inspect each food establishment as frequently as
necessary during construction, and prior to opening for service to the public, to ensure
that construction and operations are in conformance with this section.
Subd. 4. The Health Authority shall inspect each food establishment at a frequency no
less often than State law requires.
Subd. 5. The licensee, owner, or operator of a food establishment upon receipt of a
health inspection report giving notice of violations of this section shall correct or remove
each violation in the length of time determined by the Health Authority. [Critical]Priority 1
and priority 2 food code violations shall be complied with immediately or within 24 hours
if not otherwise specified by the Health Authority. Failure to remove or correct each
violation within the specified time period shall constitute a separate violation of this
section. The Health Authority may issue orders to halt construction or remodeling, or to
take corrective measures to ensure compliance with this section.
Section 11. This Ordinance will be effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of
the City Charter.
9
Adopted this ____ of ________________, 2019.
By: ___________________________
Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________
Catherine Rodriguez, Manager
RESOLUTION NO. ____
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF
AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO PUBLIC HEALTH
AND THE REGULATION OF FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above-referenced ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the ordinance is cumbersome, and the expense
of publication of the complete text is not justified; and
WHEREAS, the following summary clearly informs the public of the intent and
effect of the ordinance.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication:
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
BILL NO. 2019- ______
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 617 OF THE
CITY CODE PERTAINING TO PUBLIC HEALTH
AND THE REGULATION OF FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
On February ___, 2019, the Richfield City Council adopted an ordinance
designated as Bill No. _________, the title of which is stated above. This summary of
the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. The
purpose of the Ordinance is to: update definitions and terminology, as well as the
body of the Ordinance, to reflect recent changes in State law governing food handling
practices, health and hygiene standards, and equipment certification in food
establishments.
Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s office
during normal business hours or upon request by calling 612-861-9738.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this ____ day of
February, 2019.
Maria Regan Gonzalez, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM #9.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 39
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Jack B roz, Transportation E ngineer
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector
2/14/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/19/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of the approval of the preliminary design layout for the Portland Avenue bicycle and
pedestrian link project from 66th Street to Trunk Highway 62 (Crosstown) as recommended by the
Transportation Commission.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Overview
Hennepin County is the lead agency on the Portland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian link project. The
proposed improvements will be accomplished in conjunction with a mill and overlay of Portland Avenue (north
of 66th Street) and new street striping. Minor curb construction will occur at the eastbound Trunk Highway 62
(Crosstown) & Portland ramp intersection.
Process
The recommended preliminary layout of Portland Avenue was developed by Hennepin County and presented
at two Transportation Commission meetings and one public open house. Concerns were identified for
bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists along the corridor. Through the process, the preliminary design was
developed to address the identified corridor issues. The preliminary layout is intended to improve the
conditions for each of the modes as described below. At the February 6, 2019 Transportation Commission
meeting, the preliminary layout for the Portland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian link project was recommended
for City Council approval.
Design Features
Bicyclists - Concerns were identified due to the lack of facilities for bicyclists. The preliminary layout
includes:
On-street buffered bicycle lanes from 66th Street to Trunk Highway 62 (Crosstown).
I mproved crossings at 66th Street and the Trunk Highway 62 (Crosstown) ramp intersection.
Pedestrians - Concerns were identified related to discomfort, vehicle speeds, and safety when crossing and
walking along the corridor. The preliminary layout includes:
Median at the freeway ramp intersection to provide refuge and one-way crossing of traffic to improve
crossing safety.
Pedestrian activated flashing crosswalk lights at the roundabout at 66th Street and Portland Avenue.
Parking - The existing condition allows for on-street parking on Sundays only. A visual survey of Sunday
parking did not identify any use by residents and no comments were received that expressed concerns about
the potential loss of Sunday parking on Portland Avenue. The preliminary layout proposes the prohibition of all
on-street parking on the east and west sides of Portland Avenue.
Motorists - Concerns were identified with safety and mobility along the corridor. Safety concerns included
above average crash and injury rates. I n addition, the existing speeds make it uncomfortable and potentially
dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists. The preliminary design features include:
Three lane roadway via a 4-to-3 lane conversion similar to Portland Avenue South of 66th Street, with
left turn lanes at intersections.
Traffic signal at 64th Street (same as existing).
I mpacts - The preliminary design generally fits within the existing right-of-way, however, as proposed, it will
require a sidewalk easement at the City of Richfield Water Plant.
Additional Considerations - The commission has also recommended that the following items be considered in
the detail design of the project:
Add pedestrian flashing lights to the median at pedestrian crossings at the roundabout at 66th Street
and Portland (Commission).
Further study of the proposed lane configuration of the roundabout at 66th Street and Portland to
consider single lane exits and potential single lane circulation (Commission).
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Approve the the preliminary design layout for the Portland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian
link project from 66th Street to Trunk Highway 62 (Crosstown) as recommended by the Transportation
Commission.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
The Portland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian link project will connect existing bicycle lanes south
of 66th Street and existing bicycle lanes north of 60th Street in the City of Minneapolis, eliminating
the existing "bike gap".
This gap in the Hennepin County bicycle network was ranked by the County as the highest
priority to connect.
The project received Federal funding and was the top ranked bicycle project as determined by the
Metropolitan Council.
The Richfield Bicycle Master plan identifies Portland Avenue as a future bicycle route.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The preliminary layout for Portland Avenue is consistent with the following approved plans:
Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 6 - Transportation)
Bicycle Master Plan
Complete Streets Policy
Arterial Roads Study
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
The preliminary design needs to be approved in order to complete final design for a 2020
construction timeline.
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
The estimated cost to the City for the project is $42,000 and is to be financed by Municipal State
Aid.
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
None
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
None
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
None
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
P ublic C omments - emailed B ackup Material
P roject Map B ackup Material
P ortland Avenue P roject Info S heet B ackup Material
P roject L ayout B ackup Material
Comments Received on Portland Ave Bike Gap
Email August 11, 2018:
Jason,
I live at 6308 Portland and wasn't able to make it to the Farmers Market to talk to design staff
regarding the Portland Avenue project. I did take a look at the project map online and have a few
questions.
1. Will the right turn lane at Portland coming off 62 from the west now have to wait for the light?
I hope so because the cars come through there really fast right now without a light and it's really
dangerous crossing the street without walking down to 64th and crossing at the light.
2. I was concerned about how steep my driveway would be if the road was widened. Looking at
the project map it looks like my property (the west side of Portland) won't be impacted very
much. Am I interpreting that correctly?
3. Will there be times during the project that we will not be able to access our homes from
Portland? If so, do you know yet how long?
I think it will look really nice and be much safer all around.
Thank you,
Lori Brown
Email August 14, 2018:
Dave,
I got a call from a concerned resident who was wondering if there could be anything done to the
free right at TH 62 EB Ramp to Portland Ave in the short term. It is a blind spot. As you know
we are planning on removing the free right in 2020.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8903449,-
93.2686302,3a,75y,90.2h,69.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA6oWT3f4lqje2_eaPrycSA!2e0!7i1331
2!8i6656?hl=en
Would it make sense for MnDOT to add some sort of Pedestrian crossing ahead on the signs on
the ramp. I know a sign does not stop bad decisions.
Let me know if you want to discuss.
Thanks
Jason Staebell, P.E.
Senior Project Manager - Design
Hennepin County
Transportation Project Delivery
1600 Prairie Drive · Medina, MN 55340
Ph: 612.596.0371
jason.staebell@hennepin.us
Email January 18, 2019:
Hi Jason,
Is there a way we can move the cross walk at 64th and Portland. If you cross/bike there, you run
right in into the traffic light. That is also where the bike path starts – right at the traffic
light. There is a dirt path right at that space. If you have any questions, please email me at
clairekillian22@gmail.com or call me at 612/554-8254.
Claire Killian
Resident of Richfield
Email January 30, 2019:
Jason and Jordan,
First of all, I am excited for this project and the better connections it will provide between South
Minneapolis where I live and Richfield where I often go to shop, visit friends, etc. This will
make bicycling a safer choice for me, especially for family trips.
I do have one concern, which is the newest plan I saw for the 66th/Portland roundabout with
double lanes in all directions. Traffic volumes on all legs of this intersection are relatively low,
and three legs of the intersection now have a three lane profile. Portland north to 62 could easily
have a three lane profile in the future as well. So it's particularly confounding to see the newer
roundabout plans have double lanes in all directions.
I support returning to a single-lane roundabout, first and foremost for the safety of bicyclists and
pedstrians crossing this intersection. There's no reason to have a "double threat" configuration on
any leg of this roundabout, and the newer plans add more of these and reduce safety.
I also support returning to a single-lane roundabout since it would further improve the likelihood
of redevelopment on this corner. The Portland/66th intersection has major development
opportunities on all four corners, and it would be great to see low-setback urban development
fronting this corner in a form that encourages neighbors and visitors to park once even if making
stops at multiple corners of the intersection. This is similar to what Richfield has pursued for
Lyndale or eventually at Nicollet. Having double-lane roundabouts unnecessarily reinforces the
current status of this corner as a "place to get through" rather than a "place to go to." Richfield
deserves better than that!
I hope you can return to the single-lane roundabout configuration at 66th and Portland.
Thanks
Matt Steele
Email February 7, 2019:
I commute often through that intersection [Portland and 66th]. The only safe way to cross that
intersection is to walk across. One or two lane, won't make of a difference. There are always
drivers who want to "sneak" through any delay..if that makes sense...if one does not anticipate
those kinds of drivers, one is in trouble.
Two lanes would be the worst because Americans are not used to traffic circles, and there will be
drivers who will try to move from the inside to outside and then exit. Traffic circles are nerve
wracking and a driver could be so distracting by the outer lane, while trying to exit that they may
not notice a cyclist.
My vote is for a sign that tells cyclists to dismount....and walk through the intersection.
It's great to see that there will be a bike lane from the crosstown to 66th....it is one of the most
nerve wracking part of my commute when I return from downtown.
David Petersen
LEGION LAKE
NicolletPark VetsMemorialPark1st Ave S6 2 n d S tE
65th St E
64th St W 64th St E
60th St E
65th St E
61st St E
63 r d St E
64th St E
61st St EPillsbury AveBlaisdell AveWentworth AveChester St
60th St E
Oakland Ave SPark Ave SOakland AveColumbus AveElliot AvePillsbury Ave SWentworth Ave SColumbus Ave SChicago AveChicago Ave SBlaisdell Ave SElliot Ave S10th Ave SPleasant Ave S10th Ave S11th Ave S1st Ave S12th Ave S5th Ave S13th Ave S12th Ave S14th Ave SClinton Ave15th Ave SBloomington Ave SLorenDr
P a r k A v e
App leLn3rd Ave SClinton Ave S2nd Ave SStevens Ave S4th Ave S66th St W
6 5 t h StW
5th Ave S11th Ave SRamp
$+COUNTY52
$+COUNTY52
$+COUNTY53 $+COUNTY53
$+COUNTY35
$+COUNTY35
66th St E66th St ENicollet AvePortland AveNicollet Ave SPortland Ave SÉÉMINNESOTA62
ÉÉMINNESOTA62
MINNEAPOLIS
RICHFIELD
%&'(35W
Por tland Ave (CR 35)
B i c y c l e a n d Pe d e strian Link
Disclaimer:This map (i) is furnished "AS IS" with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnishedwith no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is not suitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin Countyshall not be liable for any damage, injur y or loss resulting from this map.
Publication date: 5/15/2018
Hennepin
¯0 2,0001,000 Feet
Projec t Limits
Portland Avenue bicycle and pedestrian link
County Road 35 in Richfield and Minneapolis
2020
Project overview
Portland Avenue is among the county’s most biked corridors. It connects downtown Minneapolis with the Interstate 494 employment corridor and the southeast metro.
The project, which is scheduled to begin in 2020, will complete a critical bicycle transportation link on Portland Avenue. It will improve protected bikeways and facilities for pedestrians and convert a portion of the road from four to three lanes.
Hennepin County
Jason Staebell
Project manager
jason.staebell@hennepin.us
612-596-0371
Project website
www.hennepin.us/portlandave-
crosstown
August 2018
Hennepin County is preparing to reconfigure a segment of Portland Avenue (County Road 35) between 60th Street and 66th Street (County Road 53). This is the segment of Portland Avenue near the I-35W/Crosstown (Highway 62) Exchange.
Project features
For people walking and needing accessibility features:
• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant ramps and sidewalk
• accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS)
• durable crosswalk markings
• countdown timers
For people on bikes
• new dedicated trail
For people using transit
• enhanced bus shelters
• enhanced wayfinding signage
Safety improvements and updates for all users
• additional dedicated turn lanes
• new traffic signal mast arms
AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM #10.
STAFF RE P ORT NO. 40
CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING
2/26/2019
RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Jared Voto, E xecutive A ide/A nalyst
D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A
C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager
2/20/2019
I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N:
Consideration of designating representatives to serve as the 2019 liaisons to various metropolitan
agencies and City commissions.
E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY:
Members of the City Council serve as the City’s representatives on various metropolitan agencies and City
commissions. Each year, the City Council appoints these representatives. W ith the election of Ben W halen
as City Council Member for Ward 3, the Council should consider his appointment to these agencies and
commissions.
RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N:
By motion: Designate City Council liaison appointments to various metropolitan agencies and City
commissions for 2019.
B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N:
A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T
This information is contained in the Executive Summary.
B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc):
The City Council designated liaisons at the first meeting in J anuary, with the intent to make
adjustments after the special election for City Council - W ard 3.
C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S:
None
D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None
E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION:
None
ALTE R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D ATIO N(S):
The City Council may defer the designations to a future City Council meeting.
P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G:
N/A
AT TAC H ME N T S:
D escription Type
2019 L iaison A ppointment L ist B ackup Material
01/22/19
AGENCY 2018 LIAISON 2019 LIAISON
METRO CITIES PAT ELLIOTT, REP. SIMON TRAUTMANN, REP.
MICHAEL HOWARD; EDWINA
GARCIA; MARIA REGAN
GONZALEZ, ALTS.
MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT.
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES PAT ELLIOTT, REP. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT.
NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE PAM DMYTRENKO, REP. PAM DMYTRENKO, REP.
MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT.
I-35W SOLUTIONS ALLIANCE MICHAEL HOWARD, LIA. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, LIA.
PAT ELLIOTT, ALT. EDWINA GARCIA, ALT.
JEFF PEARSON, STAFF LIA. JEFF PEARSON, STAFF LIA.
494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION MICHAEL HOWARD, LIA. SIMON TRAUTMANN, LIA.
SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT.
JACK BROZ, STAFF LIA. JACK BROZ, STAFF LIA.
RICHFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. MARY SUPPLE, ALT.
FOWL BOARD SIMON TRAUTMANN, REP. SIMON TRAUTMANN, REP.
MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT.
SOUTHWEST CABLE COMMISSION PAT ELLIOTT, REP. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP.
STEVE DEVICH, REP. KATIE RODRIGUEZ, REP.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. EDWINA GARCIA, ALT.
RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN EDWINA GARCIA, REP. EDWINA GARCIA, REP.
SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT. MARY SUPPLE, ALT.
ADVISORY BOARD OF HEALTH MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, LIA. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, LIA.
EDWINA GARCIA, ALT. EDWINA GARCIA, ALT.
ARTS COMMISSION PAT ELLIOTT, LIA. MARY SUPPLE, LIA.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT.
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP.
COMM. SERVICES COMMISSION EDWINA GARCIA, LIA. EDWINA GARCIA, LIA.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. MARY SUPPLE, ALT.
FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION MICHAEL HOWARD, LIA. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, LIA.
PAT ELLIOTT, ALT. EDWINA GARCIA, ALT.
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MICHAEL HOWARD, LIA. SIMON TRAUTMANN, LIA.
MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, ALT.
PLANNING COMMISSION EDWINA GARCIA, LIA. EDWINA GARCIA, LIA.
PAT ELLIOTT, ALT. SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT.
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SIMON TRAUTMANN, LIA. MARY SUPPLE, LIA.
MICHAEL HOWARD, ALT. SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT.
01/22/19
AGENCY 2018 LIAISON 2019 LIAISON
RICHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY EDWINA GARCIA, REP. EDWINA GARCIA, REP.
PAT ELLIOTT, ALT. MARY SUPPLE, ALT.
BEYOND THE YELLOW RIBBON MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP. MARIA REGAN GONZALEZ, REP.
SIMON TRAUTMANN, ALT.