12-02-96 Worksession
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Study Session
December 2, 1996
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kirsch at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:Martin Kirsch, Mayor; Susan Rosenberg; Michael Sandahl; Russ
Susag; and Don Priebe.
Staff Present :James Prosser, City Manager; Thomas Ferber, City Clerk; Steven
Devich, Administrative Services Director; Gretchen Blank, Leisure
Services Coordinator; Randy Hughes, Operations Coordinator;
Michael Eastling, City Engineer; Bruce Palmborg, Community
Development Director; Vaughn Lambert, Police Captain; and
Corrine Thomson, Assistant City Attorney.
Item # IDISCUSSION OF HENNEPIN COUNTY WATER MANAGEMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT. S. S. LETTER NO. 44
City Engineer Eastling reviewed Study Session Letter No. 44 regarding the
Hennepin County Water Management Advisory Committee Final Report and
recommendations. He discussed and answered questions regarding the following issues:
1.SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
x
Duplication at the local level between WMOs and cities
x
Staff seeking concurrence from the City Council to negotiate with the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for regulatory and financial control
2.HENNEPIN COUNTY
Water Management Advisory Committee Final Report - August 1996
Study Session Minutes-2-December 2, 1996
x
Finding - “...some duplication does exist at the level between a few
watershed districts and cities...”
x
Recommendation - “Encourage WMOs and cities... to identify roles and
responsibilities...”
3.MN STATUTE 103B.201
x
Protect, preserve and use natural surface and ground water retention
systems;
x
Minimize capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality
problems;
x
Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and
groundwater quality;
x
Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface
groundwater management;
x
Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems;
x
Promote groundwater recharge;
x
Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and other recreational
facilities;
x
Secure the other benefits associated with proper management of surface
and groundwater.
4.WHAT’S AT STAKE?
x
Good Government
x
Financial
x
Control of Redevelopment and Park Improvements
5.FINANCIAL EXAMPLE
x
Richfield
x
Special Assessment
x
Stormwater Utility
x
Cash-in-lieu development fee (no longer used)
x
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
x
Administrative and Maintenance Levy (0.5 mil)
x
Capital Improvements Levy (1.8 mil in 1995)
x
Cash-in-lieu ($20,000 per acre foot plus land cost)
6.WHY DOES MCWD NEED TO REGULATE?
x
Flooding (Quantity)
x
Water Quality
x
Legion Lake insulates MCWD from both
7.ALTERNATIVE RESPONSES
x
MCWD designates Richfield as separate subwatershed for funding
x
City assumes control of surface water management not inconsistent with
MCWD plan
x
Request relief from the MN State Board of Innovation
8.INTENDED RESULT
x
Relief from cash-in-lieu payments
x
Relief from capital improvements portion of MCWD levy
x
Relief from administrative and management portion of levy
9.CITY OF RICHFIELD VIEW
x
Surface water management is an important consideration in the life of a
city
Study Session Minutes-3-December 2, 1996
x
Good water management techniques can be used to foster good
development
x
Wood Lake dredging
x
Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield
x
Richfield Lake Redevelopment
x
Meridian Crossings
x
It is irresponsible for governments to duplicate regulatory and financing
mechanisms
It was the consensus of the City Council that City staff proceed as outlined by the
City Engineer.
Item # IIDISCUSSION OF STATUS OF CITY MAINTENANCE FACILITY. S.S.
LETTER NO. 45
City Engineer Eastling reviewed Study Session Letter No. 45 regarding the options
for a City Maintenance Facility indicating two sites are being actively explored: a shared
facility with MnDOT on MAC property and an independent facility adjacent to the Water
Treatment Plant on Portland Avenue. He outlined and answered questions regarding the
following issues:
1.NEW MAINTENANCE FACILITY
ITEMAREACOST
x
Vehicle Storage53 sf$2,915
x
Vehicle Maintenance12 sf 780
x
Office12 sf 840
x
Cold Storage 4 sf 180
x
Site work 58
$4,773
All figures in thousands (000)
2.MnDOT/MAC SHARED SITE SAVINGS
x
Salt
x
Fuel
x
Welding
x
Wash bays
x
Site work
x
Bulk purchases
3.MAINTENANCE FACILITY FUNDING SOURCES
x
Utilities$1,000
x
Federal Demo$ 412
x
Municipal State Aid$ 103
x
Sale of Property$1,500
x
Other Sources$1,758
x
TOTAL$4,773
Study Session Minutes-4-December 2, 1996
4.ADVANTAGES OF BOTH SITES
x
Free up sites on I494 for redevelopment (6-7 acres)
x
No taxable land used
x
Better working environment for Public Works
x
Likely use of Mn/Dot salt/sand, fuel and some storage
5.PORTLAND SITE ADVANTAGES
x
Certainty of long term availability of land
x
Low land cost
x
Allows consolidation of all Public Works functions including Water Plant
x
Meeting room and 2,000 sf space for offices in existing Water Plant
x
Veteran’s Park enhancements
x
Additional parking
x
Flat Field, gym, tennis, or garden on roof
x
Meeting, program, or office space
6.PORTLAND SITE DISADVANTAGES
x
Use of park land
x
DNR review (replace land with vacated lime lagoon)
x
Neighborhood impact
x
Traffic congestion at 64th/Portland
x
Possible higher construction cost ($1 million)
7.MnDOT/MAC SITE ADVANTAGES
x
No taxable land used
x
No park land used
x
No neighborhood impacts
x
Shared space/savings with MnDOT
8.MnDOT/MAC SITE DISADVANTAGES
x
Dependent upon MAC (possible MnDOT purchase)
x
Separates Water Plant/Utility staff from other Public Works staff
x
Possible high land cost ($750,000)
Gretchen Blank, Leisure Services Coordinator, reviewed and discussed issues
related to DNR regulations regarding the conversion of park land.
Council Member Rosenberg stated the increased parking for Veterans Memorial
Park and the opportunity to replace or enhance recreation facilities is attractive.
Randy Hughes, Operations Coordinator, stated that the City would utilize a shared
site for salt storage with either MnDOT, Minneapolis or Bloomington and would also not
build a fuel facility if the Portland Avenue site is built.
City Manager Prosser discussed the variables and timing issues related to the
MAC site. He indicated there was interest in redevelopment of the VFW and American
Legion sites. He indicated the City’s Lambert maintenance facility site was the preferred
potential site for a possible joint VFW/American Legion Club/Banquet Facility.
Lawrence Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth Avenue, asked about the square footage of
the Lampert site.
Study Session Minutes-5-December 2, 1996
Randy Hughes reviewed the site usage and size of the existing City maintenance
facility sites.
Kristal Stokes, 6733-17th Avenue, asked if installation of a traffic signal at 64th
Street and Portland Avenue could be a part of the Portland Avenue proposal.
City Manager Prosser stated that because Portland Avenue is a county road, traffic
warrants for a signal must be met. He stated that the addition of a maintenance facility
and redevelopment of the American Legion site could help in meeting the warrants.
City Manager Prosser stated that staff would provide cost estimates, revenues, and
further information regarding the Portland Avenue site for the City Council in about 30
days to facilitate a City Council decision regarding a site.
Item #IIIDISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL TO USE POSTCARD FOR UTILITY BILLING.
S.S. LETTER NO. 46
City Manager Prosser reviewed Study Session Letter No. 46 regarding the
possibility of replacing the existing utility bill with a postcard utility bill.
It was the consensus of the City Council that the disadvantages of a postcard utility
bill outweighed the potential cost savings; therefore staff should not replace the existing
utility bill with a postcard utility bill.
Item #IVDISCUSSION OF STATUS REPORT OF SIGN ORDINANCE
ENFORCEMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING ASSISTANCE
TO NON-COMPLIANT BUSINESSES. S. S. LETTER NO. 47
City Manager Prosser reviewed Study Session Letter No. 47 regarding a status
report on sign ordinance compliance issues and potential assistance to non-compliant
businesses.
City Attorney Thomson stated she had met with representatives from Universal
Sign regarding interpretation of the sign ordinance and amortization requirements for
billboard signs. She recommended the sign ordinance be amended to clarify that
billboards are required to be removed at the end of the amortization period. She stated
this clarification could extend the amortization period for billboards based on a formula
similar to what is used in San Diego. She stated that the City sign ordinance does comply
with state and local law. She stated that state law does require that signs constructed
prior to 1971 which are visible from a freeway are eligible for compensation if removal is
required as a result of local government action. She indicated that if sign structures are
reconstructed subsequent to 1971, compensation is not required to be paid and that it is
Study Session Minutes-6-December 2, 1996
the City’s position that all the signs within the City have been substantially reconstructed
since 1971.
City Council Member Sandahl stated he supports the intent of the ordinance but
also has concerns about the financial burden on small businesses.
Steve Lindgren, President and Chief Operating Officer of the Richfield Chamber of
Commerce, discussed the desire of the Chamber to survey its membership regarding this
issue, to put together a task force committee to work with the City to examine alternatives,
to have the legal issues be clarified, and to review Richfield’s sign ordinance in
comparison to Bloomington’s and Edina’s to assure there is not a competitive
disadvantage.
It was the consensus of the City Council that City staff work with Chamber
participation to facilitate the implementation of the ordinance.
Council Member Priebe stated that businesses were given 10 years for compliance
and should need very little assistance.
Council Member Susag stated that he would be interested in seeing the sign
regulation for Bloomington and Edina. He asked about the financing assistance proposal.
City Manager Prosser stated it would be a special financing option that would
essentially allow the businesses to establish a special service district to pay for the cost of
a sign.
Steve Lindgren discussed a concept of self policing partnership between business
and government.
Michael Cronin, Universal Sign, stated that they won’t accept amortization as
compensation for billboards and that they disagree with the City Attorney. He indicated
the issue may have to be decided in the courts. He state that in regards to business
signs, he would suggest that the City look at a tiered approach and treat particular areas
differently. He stated that the felt there was little public benefit to enforcing the ordinance
with great cost to marginal businesses.
Council Member Rosenberg stated that it was a good ordinance and that it was a
matter of community standards.
Council Member Priebe stated that Howard Bunce was President of the Chamber
when the ordinance was approved in 1987. He stated Mr. Bunce has said that the
Chamber had generally approved of the ordinance regarding business signs.
City Manager Prosser stated that City staff would meet with impacted businesses to
assist with options to comply with the sign ordinance, prepare an ordinance amendment to
clarify the amortization requirement for billboard signs, and to provide comparative
information to the City Council regarding the Bloomington and Edina sign ordinances.
Study Session Minutes-7-December 2, 1996
Item #VDISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF APPLE BLOSSOM
PARK FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. S.S. LETTER NO. 48
City Manager Prosser reviewed Study Session Letter No. 48 regarding the potential
redevelopment of Apple Blossom Park for residential purposes.
Council Member Rosenberg stated that it is appropriate to look at the potential for
redevelopment but the input of the area residents would be very important.
It was the consensus of the City Council that the Community Services and Planning
Commissions review this issue, including meeting with neighbors and provide a
recommendation regarding the potential conversion of the Apple Blossom Park property to
residential purposes.
Item #VIDISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED ISSUES. S.S. LETTER
NO. 49
City Manager Prosser reviewed Study Session Letter No. 49 regarding the status of
the following airport related issues:
x
Runway 4-22
Mediation was terminated unilaterally by MAC without consultation with Richfield or
the Metropolitan Council. Staff has requested clarification from the Met Council
regarding 4-22 review prior to construction of the C/D taxiing complex. If the
Met Council agrees to further review, then Richfield will continue to stay on the
pending lawsuit. If the Met Council opposes, Richfield will proceed with court
action.
x
Termination of Lease Agreement
MAC ignored the request to delay termination of the youth athletic fields,
community gardens and Rich Acres Golf Course land lease. The City
Attorney’s legal opinion found that MAC’s decision to terminate the lease
agreement was in violation of the lease agreement and environmental laws.
On November 18, 1996, the City, under direction of the City Council,
commenced a lawsuit against MAC in Hennepin’s District Court.
It was the consensus of the City Council that staff include the proposed draft of
a letter to residents regarding this issue in the January Your City Newsletter.
x
Comprehensive Plan
The Met Council has provided recommendations on how the City can
accommodate airport impacts. Don Brauer is working with other consultants to
provide more detail on mitigation efforts. The revised comprehensive plan will
be sent to the Planning Commission in April .
Study Session Minutes-8-December 2, 1996
The City is working to assure that the Comprehensive Plan will be accepted by
the Metropolitan council prior to MAC’s FEIS.
x
MSP Mitigation Committee/MSP Expansion
The committee recommendations have been forwarded to the State Advisory
Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning and will ultimately be sent to the
Legislature.
x
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC)
MASAC will meet on December 3. The Technical Advisor’s Report will be
forwarded to the Council.
x
New Ford Town and Rich Acres Acquisition
Phase I appraisals remain for two properties and condemnation appears likely
in these cases. Phase IV offer meetings are near finalization. Phase V will
probably include multi-family residential housing, two businesses, two parks and
vacant lots located along 66th Street.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 9:31 p.m.
Date Approved:
Martin J. KirschMayor
Thomas P. FerberJames D. Prosser
City ClerkCity Manager