The URL can be used to link to this page

11-28-2023 City Council Agenda FINALREGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 28, 2023 7:00 PM INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Pledge of Allegiance Open forum Call into the open forum by dialing 1-415-655-0001 Use webinar access code: 2631 142 7966 and password: 1234. Please refer to the Council Agenda & Minutes web page for additional ways to submit comments. Approval of the Minutes of the (1) City Council Work Session of November 14, 2023; (2) City Council Meeting of November 14, 2023; and (3) Special Council Work Session of November 11, 2023. AGENDA APPROVAL 1.Approval of the Agenda PRESENTATIONS 2.Human Rights Commission annual presentation given by Chair Walter Burk. 3.Sustainability Commission annual presentation given by Chair Amanda Kueper. 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.Consider approval for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the Blessed Trinity Catholic School, located at St. Richard's Catholic Church, 7540 Penn Avenue South, for their 2023 Annual Gala taking place December 2, 2023. Staff Report No. 154 B.Consider the approval of setting a public hearing to be held on December 12, 2023, to consider the renewal of the Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license for 2024 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. Staff Report No. 155 C.Consider approval of the first reading of an ordinance amendment to allow micro units as an accessory use to religious institutions, and schedule a second reading for December 12, 2023. S taff Report No. 156 D .C onsider a modification to the Tax Increment F inancing P lan, Tax Increment F inancing D istrict 2018-1, RF 64, withdrawing parcels from the D istrict. S taff Report No. 157 E .C onsider a resolution designating the existing structure at 500 - 78th S treet E ast as structurally substandard within the Richfield Redevelopment P roject A rea. S taff Report No. 158 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 and consider the second reading of a proposed F ranchise Ordinance and A greement with C enterP oint E nergy Minnesota Gas ("C enterP oint E nergy") allowing and setting terms for C enterP oint E nergy's use of the C ity right-of-way. S taff Report No. 159 PR O P O S E D O R D IN AN C E S 7.C onsider a request for a C omprehensive P lan A mendment, a S econd Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning the S ubject P roperty, P reliminary P lat, S ite P lan A pproval and two Variances, for 38 uni ts of affordable housing at 6613-6625 P ortland Avenue S outh. S taff Report No. 160 8.C onsider a second reading and summary publication of an ordinance amendment to S ection 408.01, subdivision 6, clarifying that escrows submitted under the P oint of S ale P rogram can be subject to forfeiture if improvements are not made, and to S ection 408.01, subdivision 4, correcting a code reference relating to the appeals process. S taff Report No. 161 O T H E R B U S IN E S S 9.C onsider the appointments to C ity advisory board and commissions. S taff Report No. 162 10.C onsider a resolution affirming that A ster C ommons received approvals from the C ity and is authorized to apply for an E nvironmental Response F und grant from Hennepin C ounty for environmental assessment. S taff Report No. 163 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 ayroll C O U N C IL D ISC U SSIO N 13.Hats Off to Hometown Hits 14.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 612-861-9739. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Special City Council Work Session November 11, 2023 The retreat was called to order by Mayor Supple at 8:00 a.m. held in the Bartholomew Room. Council Members Mary Supple, Mayor; Mary Supple; Ben Whalen; Sharon Christensen; Present: and Sean Hayford Oleary Council Members Simon Trautmann Absent: Staff Present: Kelly Wynn, Administrative Assistant Item #1 MEETINGS WITH APPLICANTS OF THE CITY’S ADVISORY COMMISSIONS The City Council held meetings with the following applicants for appointment to City Advisory Boards and Commissions: David Gepner Brenan Kennealy Tiffany Bighley Eli Straub Amanda McKnight Walter Burk Jeff Klein Stephanie Hollman Jim Reilly Kris Anderson Madeline Vukson Jaz Warren Kelly Hauer Valerie Hurst-Baker Cheryl Gunness Grace Bronken Adam Knosalla McKenzie Burke Callmie Dennis The work session was adjourned by unanimous consent at 3:15 p.m. Date Approved: November 28, 2023 Mary B. Supple Mayor Kelly Wynn Katie Rodriguez Administrative Assistant City Manager CALL TO ORDER ADJOURNMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota City Council Work Session November 14, 2023 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Supple called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Bartholomew Room. Council Members Present: Mary Supple, Mayor; Sean Hayford Oleary; Ben Whalen; and Sharon Christensen Council Members Absent: Simon Trautmann Staff Present: Guests: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Dustin Leslie, City Clerk; Chris Swanson, Management Analyst; Jennifer Anderson, Health Administrator; Mike Dobesh, Fire Chief; Joe Powers, City Engineer; Matt Hardegger, Transportation Engineer Scott Barshun, Communications Strategist; Dr. Nick Kelley, Bloomington Public Health Administrator ITEM #1 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH CAMPAIGN MATERIALS FOR PROPOSED CHANGES TO MUNICIPAL SPEED LIMITS. City Manager Rodriguez introduced Scott Barshun, Communications Strategist, who gave the presentation covering: the Richfield Drives 25 campaign vision, communication strategies, visual themes, process, and action steps. Mayor Supple asked if the city had permission to use all photographs with residents. Communications Strategist Barshun confirmed that they did but he would double check with certain residents. Council Member Hayford Oleary asked how much was budgeted for printing materials. City Engineer Powers stated there was about $200,000 budgeted for the whole project. Council Member Hayford Oleary stated that while the new images were an improvement, the pixelated colors still made the messages illegible and preferred simplified colors. Communications Strategist Barshun stated solid color signs would not stand out as much as the multi-colored signs. City Council Work Session Minutes -2- November 14, 2023 Council Member Whalen spoke about the design aspects and that some appeared to be too busy and loud. Mayor Supple stated she liked the vision statement and the focus on positive messaging. She also stated she preferred the pixelated colors over the blurred images. Mayor Supple asked if people who were colorblind would be able to read the signs. Communications Strategist Barshun confirmed that they would be able to read the signs. Council Member Hayford Oleary stated he preferred a solid background for the Richfield Drives 25 against the pixelated colors so it was easier to read. He also talked about minimizing the appearance of the Richfield logo. City Manager Rodriguez summarized the discussion and next steps. ITEM #2 UPDATE ON REGIONAL OPIOID RESPONSE WORK FROM BLOOMINGTON PUBLIC HEALTH. Dr. Nick Kelley, Bloomington Public Health Administrator, gave the presentation covering: hospital visits due to opioids in Hennepin County, opioid-related deaths in Hennepin County, settlement funds overview, fund-use guidelines, communication strategies, the opioid workgroup, the opioid workplan, program areas, action steps, and upcoming milestones. Mayor Supple spoke about the pilot project being done in Bloomington and asked if it would eventually be done in Richfield Dr. Kelley stated they would see how things worked out from the pilot and plan next steps afterwards. There was a conversation between the Council and Dr. Kelley about how mental health issues figure into the opioid epidemic and how it is affecting different communities in the area. The Council asked Dr. Kelley to keep them updated with any new developments. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Supple adjourned the work session at 6:32 pm. Date Approved: November 28, 2023 Mary B. Supple Mayor Dustin Leslie Katie Rodriguez City Clerk City Manager CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Supple at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Council Members Present: Mary Supple, Mayor; Sharon Christensen; Sean Hayford Oleary; and Ben Whalen Council Members Absent: Simon Trautmann Staff Present: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager; Mary Tietjen, City Attorney; Melissa Poehlman, Community Development Director; Karl Huemiller, Acting Recreation Services Director; Jennifer Anderson, Support Services Manager; Matt Hardegger, Transportation Engineer; Mike Dobesh, Fire Chief; Joe Powers, City Engineer; Chris Swanson, Management Analyst; and Dustin Leslie, City Clerk Others Present: Civil Service Commission President Jeffrey Bruzek; Transportation Commission Chair Husniyah Bradley; Community Services Commission Chair Tessa Johanson. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Supple led the Pledge of Allegiance. ITEM #1 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mayor Supple recognized the 18th Annual Great Pumpkin Giveaway Coloring Contest Winners including Madeline Guzman Cruz and Audrey Holman. She thanked the whole team who sponsored the event. OPEN FORUM Mayor Supple reviewed the options to participate: Participate live by calling 1-415-655-0001 during the open forum portion Call prior to meeting 612-861-9711 Email prior to meeting kwynn@richfieldmn.gov CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Regular Council Meeting November 14, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes -2-November 14, 2023 Rodney Sather, 63rd and Thomas, expressed concern about the City’s unregulated short-term rentals and people running “unregulated hotels,” which changed the character of the neighborhood. He believed it was time for the City to establish rules and regulations for short-term rentals. Meghan Webster indicated she strongly supported the Aster Commons housing development. She believed the development would greatly benefit the city. She acknowledged some neighbors had concerns about the impact of the development and wanted residents to approach concerns with an open mind and base their judgments on facts rather than misconceptions or fear. Kathleen Balaban, 65th and Stevens, requested Council remove the Whitecaps Agreement from the consensus calendar and decline the offer to buy out the remainder of their five-year term. She asked staff to recalculate whether this was an adequate offer as her calculations came up with the City losing money. She also stated she did not want the Council to be giving away their authority to change City Code to staff members. She indicated staff members could recommend changes, but the Council should be the only ones with the authority to change the City Code. Scott Dahlquist noted over the years he has seen the value of his home greatly increase, which was good for him, but he did not believe the City did a good job of providing housing for low-income individuals. He urged the Council to support Aster Commons development as they provided a much- needed service and were assets to their communities. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Whalen, S/Hayford Oleary to approve the minutes of the: (1) City Council Work Session of October 24, 2023; (2) Regular City Council Meeting of October 24, 2023; and (3) Special City Council Meeting of November 1, 2023. Mayor Supple noted she was absent for the Special City Council Meeting of November 1, 2023 and requested that change be made to the Minutes. Motion carried: 5-0 ITEM #2 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA M/Hayford Oleary, S/Whalen to approve the agenda. Motion carried: 5-0 ITEM #3 PROCLAMATION CELEBRATING NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH Mayor Supple invited Tyler Olson to accept the proclamation and read aloud the proclamation. ITEM #4 PROCLAMATION CELEBRATING SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY Mayor Supple invited Kelsey Nagel to accept the proclamation and read aloud the proclamation. ITEM #5 City Council Meeting Minutes -3- November 14, 2023 CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ANNUAL PRESENTATION GIVEN BY PRESIDENT JEFFREY BRUZEK Civil Service Commissioner President Jeffrey Bruzek gave the annual Civil Service Commission presentation. ITEM #6 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSON ANNUAL PRESENTATION GIVEN BY CHAIR HUSNIYAH BRADLEY Transportation Commission Chair Husniyah Bradley gave the annual Transportation Commission presentation. Council Member Hayford Oleary expressed his gratitude for the Commission as their liaison and for their willingness to meet with the public outside of the normal time. Mayor Supple thanked the Commission for going above and beyond. ITEM #7 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION ANNUAL PRESENTATION GIVEN BY CHAIR TESSA JOHANSON Community Services Commission Chair Tessa Johanson gave the annual Community Services Commission presentation. Council Member Whalen indicated as the Council liaison he appreciated the hard work the Commission has done, and he looked forward to working with them to help spread the word and educate people about the options they have ahead of them. ITEM #8 CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Rodriguez presented the consent calendar. A. Consider approval of the final reading of an ordinance rezoning property at 6613-6625 Portland Avenue South to MU-N “Mixed Use Neighborhood” and schedule a second reading for November 28, 2023 (Staff Report No. 144) B. Consider the approval of first reading of an ordinance amendment to Section 408.01, subdivision 6, clarifying that escrows submitted under the Point-of-Sale program can be subject to forfeiture if improvements are not made, and to Section 408.01, subdivision 4, correcting a code reference relating to the appeals process (Staff Report No. 145) C. Consider a resolution designating buildings formally located at 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South as structurally substandard within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (Staff Report No. 146) RESOLUTION NO. 12140 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING BUILDINGS FORMALLY LOCATED AT 7700 AND 7730 PORTLAND AVENUE City Council Meeting Minutes -4- November 14, 2023 SOUTH AS STRUCTURALLY SUBSTANDARD WITHIN THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA D. Consider the approval of the mutual termination rental agreement between the City of Richfield and the MN Whitecaps Professional Women’s hockey team (Staff Report No. 147) E. Consider the approval of a contract with Grayont (WI), LLC for the purchase of 1,400 tons of quick lime for water treatment in the amount of $302,120.00 (Staff Report No. 148) F. Consider adoption of resolutions of support for Richfield’s applications for federal capital construction funding for five projects through the Metropolitan Council’s Regional Solicitation. (Staff Report No. 149) RESOLUTION NO. 12141 - 12145 RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT FOR RICHFIELD’S APPLICATIONS FOR FEDERAL CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUNDING FOR FIVE PROJECTS THROUGH THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL’S REGIONAL SOLICITATION G. Consider authorizing the City Manager to sell Richfield Fire Ladder Truck Unit #3789 to the City of Grand Marais Fire Department for $65,000 (Staff Report No. 150) H. Consider rescinding acceptance of the Midwest Playscapes proposals for the replacement of play equipment at Donaldson Park and the replacement of play equipment at Fairwood Park, reject all proposals, and authorize the Interim Recreation Services Director to issue new requests for proposals (Staff Report No. 151) M/Whalen, S/Hayford Oleary to approve the consent calendar. Mayor Supple stated she had looked into the questions regarding the Whitecaps agreement (Item D) and after doing due diligence it was her belief that this was a fiscally prudent and fair agreement. She did not believe this would do harm to the City and might benefit the City. She thanked staff for all of their work they put into this and residents who had made comments. She stated she had listened to the comments and did hear what was said. Council Member Hayford Oleary noted he had also received concerns about the Whitecaps agreement. He stated it was his understanding the differences between not approving this and approving this was that they could immediately lease the ice to a new group as opposed to the current agreement where they had exclusive rights under the contract and if nothing was done, there would be an empty ice arena until the contract was over. City Manager Rodriques stated the city wanted to continue to host the Minnesota Whitecaps, but they were no longer a team as they had merged into one league and the hockey arena was too small now and the team would be playing at the Excel Center. She explained why the staff recommended this. She noted ice time was in demand and the city would be able to rent it while still getting 2 years’ worth of lease payments. Council Member Whalen thanked everyone who came to the meeting for the proposal at 66 and Portland. He expressed excitement for that project. He thanked the staff who worked on this. Motion carried: 4-0 City Council Meeting Minutes -5-November 14, 2023 ITEM #9 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR None. ITEM #10 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1305 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE, AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO SET SPEED LIMITS ON MUNICIPAL ROADWAYS (STAFF REPORT NO. 152) Council Member Whalen presented Staff Report 152. M/Whalen, S/Hayford Oleary to approve the First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 1305 of the Richfield City Code, authorizing the City Engineer to set speed limits on municipal roadways and set the second reading for December 12, 2023. Council Member Hayford Oleary requested the City Manager address the comment at the beginning of the Open Forum as to why this defers to the City Engineer. City Manager Rodriques explained the State had changed the Statute that now allowed the City Engineer to set the speed limits on local roads. Council Member Hayford Oleary asked if other cities had similar language around speed limits. City Manager Rodriques responded they did. Council Member Hayford Oleary noted this was not the only tool available to the city and there was another option such as using the urban speed limit designation. He shared his perspective on 76th Street and 77th Street indicating it was a serious equity issue to allow only the west end where there were single-family homes, wealthier neighborhoods, and wider neighborhoods to continue to maintain the 30-mph speed limit but have the lower income part of the City with similar speed characteristics go to 35 mph. He believed this was a fairness issue and it did not represent the City’s equity values. He noted ten percent of the city lived along 77th Street and a lot of people would be affected by this decision. Council Member Hayford Oleary emphasized this was generally an equity issue for them to consider 30 mph on that road would be very consistent with the rest of the corridor and what other cities have done. He indicated no city that he could find had a 35-mph zone in front of apartments like this and he did not want Richfield to be the lead in this. He wanted the speed limit to be 30 mph. Council Member Hayford Oleary supported the action and asked residents to let him know their thoughts on this. Council Member Whalen noted at the work session he did not have a strong opinion on this, but he understood Council Member Hayford Oleary’s points and thanked him for bringing this up. He noted they had discussed working with the County to lower the speed limit on County roads also, and he agreed if the County should reduce their streets to 30 mph and if people wanted to drive faster, they should go on a nearby freeway. He noted the difference between five miles per hour faster was not going to significantly change how people would get places, but it would significantly impact safety. He thanked everyone who had worked on this. Council Member Christensen echoed the other Council Members’ opinions and research. She noted there needed to be consistency on the roads they drive on every day. City Council Meeting Minutes -6- November 14, 2023 Mayor Supple believed this was a good decision because it would make the speed limit consistent throughout the city. She noted slowing down to 25 mph on many of the streets was very helpful and they would need to go through the process with the County with respect to the County roads. She indicated she supported the proposal. She indicated if this was approved, the city was going to have to do a lot of public relations to make sure people knew what the speed limit was going to be. She stated she wanted to make sure they were not setting this up to have a safety hazard with speed differentials. She requested staff investigate what that impact would be. She expressed concern about crashes with one person speeding and one person going slow and the conflict points that sets up. Mayor Supple indicated they also had to educate people about slowing down and she did not want to have enforcement problems. She wanted to ensure enforcement was equitable and fair across the city and that they had not set up an area that was going to essentially be a speed trap. Mayor Supple stated she wanted them to really investigate the unintended consequences of this and if they would be creating an enforcement nightmare. Council Member Whalen requested for the final reading staff have a map on the screen for people who were watching the recording could see it. Council Member Hayford Oleary asked with respect to speed differentials concerns, they have a unique case in the city that has three different speed limits in the same corridor. He asked what crashes were associated with those speed differentials and asked staff for comparisons of the existing 30 mph one to the existing higher speed zones. Motion carried: 4-0 ITEM #11 CONSIDER THE APPOINTMENT OF A YOUTH MEMBER TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. (STAFF REPORT NO. 153) Council Member Christensen presented Staff Report 153. M/Christensen, S/Whalen to approve the appointment of Beatrice Hernandez Guerrera to the Human Rights Commission as a Youth Commissioner. Motion carried: 4-0 ITEM #12 CITY MANAGER’S REPORT City Manager Rodriguez stated she had no report. Council Member Hayford Oleary requested the City Manager report back at the next meeting regarding the comment made at Open Forum regarding short-term rentals. City Manager Rodriguez noted short-term rentals did need a license and staff is currently doing research around this item. She requested the residents if they believe there were short-term rentals in their neighborhood to inform the city of that as staff was keeping an inventory. Mayor Supple noted for Bed and Breakfasts were different situation than short-term rentals and staff should do more education around this matter. ITEM #13 City Council Meeting Minutes -7-November 14, 2023 CLAIMS AND PAYROLL M/Whalen, S/Hayford Oleary that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. BANK 11/10/2023 A/P Checks: 324776 - 325193 $3,049,534.61 Payroll: 182995 – 183299; 43667 - 43676 $1,571,153.85 TOTAL $4,620,688.46 Motion carried: 4-0 ITEM #14 HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS City Clerk Leslie gave hats off to everyone who assisted in making the School Board election a success. Mayor Supple thanked City Clerk Leslie for leading the effort and his work on this. Council Member Hayford Oleary gave hats off to the voters who showed up for the recent election. Council Member Christensen noted that Small Business Saturday was coming up after Thanksgiving. She recommended breakfast at Flynn’s on 66th. She mentioned the annual Richfield Fall Boutique was this Saturday at the Community Center on 78th and Nicollet. Council Member Whalen wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Mayor Supple echoed the thanks given to the voters for turning out to vote. She thanked everyone who worked and participated in the annual Friends of Woodlake dinner and fundraiser. She gave a shout out to the volunteers who have been helping remove buckthorn and create soft landings at Veterans Park. She thanked STEM for honoring family members who were veterans and recommended residents watch STEM’s YouTube channel. She thanked everyone who applied and participated in the Commission interviews. She noted the City was still accepting applications for the HRA and EDA. ITEM #15 ADJOURNMENT M/Hayford Oleary, S/Christensen to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Motion carried: 4-0 Date Approved: November 28, 2023 Mary Supple Mayor Dustin Leslie Katie Rodriguez City Clerk City Manager AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #4.A. STAFF REPORT NO. 154 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/28/2023 REPORT PREPARED BY:Jennifer Anderson, Support Services Manager DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:Jay Henthorne, Director of Public Safety/Chief of Police 10/11/2023 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW:N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager 10/18/2023 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider approval for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the Blessed Trinity Catholic School, located at St. Richard's Catholic Church, 7540 Penn Avenue South, for their 2023 Annual Gala taking place December 2, 2023. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On September 28, 2023, the City received application materials for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the Blessed Trinity Catholic School, located at St. Richard's Catholic Church, 7540 Penn Avenue South, for their 2023 Annual Gala taking place December 2, 2023. They will serve intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, December 2, 2023, only. They will provide a dinner. The Blessed Trinity Catholic School has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure proper food handling practices are followed. The Director of Public Safety has reviewed all required information and documents and has found no basis for denial. The City Council has previously granted this license in conjunction with this event. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve issuance of a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor license for the Blessed Trinity Catholic School, located at St. Richard's Catholic Church, 7540 Penn Avenue South for their 2023 Annual Gala taking place December 2, 2023. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: A.HISTORICAL CONTEXT The applicant has satisfied the following requirements for the issuance of this license: The required licensing fee has been paid. Proof of liquor liability insurance has been provided showing the Catholic Mutual Relief Society of America affording the coverage. B.EQUITABLE OR STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS OR IMPACTS This is standard business. C.POLICIES (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): Richfield City Code Section 1202.05 requires all applicants to comply with all of the provisions of this code, as well as the provisions of Minnesota S tatute C hapter 340A . D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The event takes place on D ecember 2, 2023; therefore, consideration of the license is required at the C ity C ouncil's November 28, 2023 meeting. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The required licensing fees have been received. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: There are no legal considerations. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): The C ouncil could deny the approval of the Temporary On-S ale Intoxicating L iquor license for the B lessed Trinity C atholic S chool. This would mean the applicant would not be able to serve intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 percent malt liquor; however, P ublic S afety has not found any basis for denial. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: B lessed Trinity C atholic staff has been notified of the date of this meeting. AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type Temp liquor - D ec 2 B lessed Trinity C over Memo AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #4.B. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 155 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 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 11/14/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/19/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider the approval of setting a public hearing to be held on December 12, 2023, to consider the renewal of the Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license for 2024 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: Richfield City ordinance requires that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider the Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license renewals and a date be set for the public hearing. This request is for the approval of setting the public hearing for December 12, 2023, to consider this license renewal. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: Approve the setting of a public hearing to be held on December 12, 2023, for the consideration of the renewal of the Pawnbroker and Secondhand Goods Dealer license for 2024 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. 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 P awnbroker and S econdhand Goods D ealer licenses will expire on D ecember 31, 2023. Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. The renewal process has been initiated. Holding the public hearing on D ecember 12, 2023, will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before J anuary 1, 2024. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S This is a required process and normal city operations that need to be conducted. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): Richfield C ity ordinance provides that the C ity C ouncil conduct a public hearing to consider the P awnbroker and S econdhand Goods D ealer license renewals. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: C urrent P awnbroker and S econdhand Goods D ealer licenses will expire on D ecember 31, 2023. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: None ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): S chedule the hearing for another date; however, this will delay the licensing process. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: There are no parties expected at the meeting. AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #4.C. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 156 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:S am C rosby, P lanner D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W:Melissa P oehlman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector 11/17/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/20/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider approval of the first reading of an ordinance amendment to allow micro units as an accessory use to religious institutions, and schedule a second reading for December 12, 2023. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: During their 2023 session, the Legislature passed a bill authorizing religious institutions to construct micro unit dwellings on their property. Development of these micro unit dwellings are being referred to as “Sacred Communities” and they are intended to provide an additional means for faith communities to serve chronically homeless and extremely low-income individuals, living in a community with volunteers. I n summary, the new law sets the following minimum standards for these developments: Micro units are defined as no more than 400 gross square feet in size with exterior materials compatible with standard residential construction. The units are required to have a toilet, electricity, and smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Between one-third and 40% of the units must be occupied by designated volunteers. They must provide the City with a plan that outlines: o water and sewer management, o parking, lighting, and access by emergency vehicles and; o security and severe weather protocols. The law permits cities to designate these settlements as either conditional uses or permitted uses, but defaults to conditional if not otherwise stated. I f allowed to default to a conditional use, the City would have no ability to impose any conditions, creating pointless and futile public hearings. Therefore, staff is proposing an ordinance that would allow Sacred Communities as an accessory use to religious institutions. This would avoid a frustrating and pointless public hearing process. Also, by designating the settlements as an accessory use to the religious institution, the settlement would not continue if the religious institution ceased. The Zoning Code allows religious institutions as a conditional use in the R-Low Density Residential, the MR-2- Multi-Family Residential, and the MR-3- High Density Multi-Family Residential districts. Religious I nstitutions are also listed as a permitted use in the C-2-General Commercial zoning district. The proposed ordinance creates a definition for the term Sacred Community (as defined by the new law) and adds language to each of these districts, to specify that sacred communities are allowed as accessory uses to approved religious institutions. T he Planning Commission just held the public hearing for the proposed ordinance on Monday, November 27th. A summary of the Planning Commission's public hearing will be included in the December 12th staff report. T he first reading of an ordinance amendment does not obligate the Council to approve the ordinance upon second reading. A second reading will be considered by the Council on December 12th. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: Approve a first reading of an ordinance amendment to allow micro units as an accessory use to religious institutions, and set December 12, 2023 as the date for the second reading. 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 law, C hapter 53, A rticle 11, S ection 57, is attached for reference. The effective date is J anuary 1, 2024. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S E quity and S trategic considerations: B y allowing sacred communities as an accessory uses to approved religious institutions we can help ensure everyone in our community, regardless of their current economic situation, has a place to live. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): T he new law states: “Unless the municipality has designated S acred C ommunities meeting the requirements of this section as permitted uses, a sacred community meeting the requirements of this section shall be approved and regulated as a conditional use without the application of additional standards not included in this section. When approved, additional permitting is not required for individual micro units.” Under guidance from the C ity A ttorney, the last sentence means that the C ity cannot require A NY additional permitting, including land use and/or building permits, regardless of whether the C ity passes this proposed ordinance amendment or not. The statute outlines the minimum construction requirements for the micro units and the C ity cannot go beyond that. If a micro unit connects to utilities such as water, sewer, gas or electric, then those C ity permits and inspections apply. The law does require that all units be inspected and certified for compliance with the provisions of the law by a licensed MN professional engineer or qualified third-party inspector. A nd each settlement must also annually certify to the C ity that it continues to comply with the eligibility requirements of the law. If a C ity has setback regulations for mobile homes, those are the only regulations a city can impose. Otherwise, the default setback chosen by the legislature is 10 feet. The C ity of Richfield does not regulate mobile homes, so the 10 foot setback would apply. The C ity’s Zoning C ode does not define the term religious institution. The new law defines it as “a church, synagogue, mosque, or other religious organization organized under S tate S tatute C hapter 315." It is preferable that there is no city definition that could potentially conflict with S tate S tatute. The C ity would apply the statutory definition if questions arose. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The law sets the effective date as January 1, 2024. S ince it is a C ity-initiated amendment, the 60-day clock does not apply. The first reading is scheduled for the day after the P lanning C ommission meeting and the second reading is anticipated for Tuesday, D ecember 12, 2023, so that the effective date of the ordinance amendment can be as close to the effective date of the new law as possible. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: Notice of the public hearing was published in the S un C urrent newspaper on November 16, 2023. The P lanning C ommission held a public hearing on Monday, November 27th. T he result of the Planning Commission's public hearing will be included in the December 12th staff report for the second reading. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): None; it is a first reading. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type D raft S acred C ommunities Ordinance Ordinance C hapter 53, A rticle 11, S ection 57 B ackup Material BILL NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MODIFYING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE IN RELATION TO “SACRED COMMUNITIES” THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 507.07, Subd. 111, of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to add a definition, all subsequent items to remain unchanged, to read as follows: Subd. 111. “Sacred Communities” are micro unit dwellings on religious institutional property, as defined by State Statutes Chapter 53, Article 11, Section 57. Section 2 Subsection 514.05, of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to add a Subdivision 12, for the purpose of listing sacred communities as an accessory use in the R zoning district, to read as follows: Subd. 12. Sacred Communities as an accessory use to an approved Religious Institution (conditional use permit amendment not required). Section 3 Subsection 525.05, of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to add Subd. 9, for the purpose of listing sacred communities as an accessory use in the MR-2 zoning district, to read as follows: Subd. 12. Sacred Communities as an accessory use to an approved Religious Institution (conditional use permit amendment not required). Section 4 Subsection 527.05, of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to add Subd. 10, for the purpose of listing sacred communities as an accessory use in the MR-3 zoning district, to read as follows: Subd. 10. Sacred Communities as an accessory use to an approved Religious Institution (conditional use permit amendment not required). Section 5 Subsection 534.03, Subd. 8, of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to add language, for the purpose of identifying sacred settlements as an accessory use in the C-2 zoning district, to read as follows: Subd. 8. Religious institutions and related convents or parsonages, including sacred communities as an accessory use. Section 6 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of December, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk Chapter 53, Article 11, Section 57. [327.30] SACRED COMMUNITIES AND MICRO-UNIT DWELLINGS. Subdivision 1. Definitions. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given. (b) "Chronically homeless" means an individual who: (1) is homeless and lives or resides in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter; (2) has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last three years; and (3) has an adult head of household, or a minor head-of-household if no adult is present in the household, with a diagnosable substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability, post-traumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairments resulting from a brain injury, or chronic physical illness or disability, including the co-occurrence of two or more of those conditions. (c) "Designated volunteers" means persons who have not experienced homelessness and have been approved by the religious institution to live in a sacred community as their sole form of housing. (d) "Extremely low income" means an income that is equal to or less than 30 percent of the area median income, adjusted for family size, as estimated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. (e) "Micro unit" means a mobile residential dwelling providing permanent housing within a sacred community that meets the requirements of subdivision 4. (f) "Religious institution" means a church, synagogue, mosque, or other religious organization organized under chapter 315. (g) "Sacred community" means a residential settlement established on or contiguous to the grounds of a religious institution's primary worship location primarily for the purpose of providing permanent housing for chronically homeless persons, extremely low-income persons, and designated volunteers that meets the requirements of subdivision 3. Subd. 2. Dwelling in micro units in sacred communities authorized. Religious institutions are authorized to provide permanent housing to people who are chronically homeless, extremely low-income, or designated volunteers, in sacred communities composed of micro units subject to the provisions of this section. Each religious institution that has sited a sacred community must annually certify to the local unit of government that it has complied with the eligibility requirements for residents of a sacred community in this section. Subd. 3. Sacred community requirements. (a) A sacred community must provide residents of micro units access to water and electric utilities either by connecting the micro units to the utilities that are serving the principal building on the lot or by other comparable means, or by providing the residents access to permanent common kitchen facilities and common facilities for toilet, bathing, and laundry with the number and type of fixtures required for an R-2 boarding house under Minnesota Rules, part 1305.2902. Any units that are plumbed shall not be included in determining the minimum number of fixtures required for the common facilities. (b) A sacred community under this section must: (1) be appropriately insured; (2) have between one-third and 40 percent of the micro units occupied by designated volunteers; and (3) provide the municipality with a written plan approved by the religious institution's governing board that outlines: (i) disposal of water and sewage from micro units if not plumbed; (ii) septic tank drainage if plumbed units are not hooked up to the primary worship location's system; (iii) adequate parking, lighting, and access to units by emergency vehicles; (iv) protocols for security and addressing conduct within the settlement; and (v) safety protocols for severe weather. (c) Unless the municipality has designated sacred communities meeting the requirements of this section as permitted uses, a sacred community meeting the requirements of this section shall be approved and regulated as a conditional use without the application of additional standards not included in this section. When approved, additional permitting is not required for individual micro units. (d) Sacred communities are subject to the laws governing landlords and tenants under chapter 504B. Subd. 4. Micro unit requirements. (a) In order to be eligible to be placed within a sacred community, a micro unit must be built to the requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Code 119.5, which includes standards for heating, electrical systems, and fire and life safety. A micro unit must also meet the following technical requirements: (1) be no more than 400 gross square feet; (2) be built on a permanent chassis and anchored to pin foundations with engineered fasteners; (3) have exterior materials that are compatible in composition, appearance, and durability to the exterior materials used in standard residential construction; (4) have a minimum insulation rating of R-20 in walls, R-30 in floors, and R-38 in ceilings, as well as residential grade insulated doors and windows; (5) have a dry, compostable, or plumbed toilet or other system meeting the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Chapters 7035, 7040, 7049, and 7080, or other applicable rules; (7) have minimum wall framing with two inch by four inch wood or metal studs with framing of 16 inches to 24 inches on center, or the equivalent in structural insulated panels, with a floor load of 40 pounds per square foot and a roof live load of 42 pounds per square foot; and (8) have smoke and carbon monoxide detectors installed. (b) All micro units, including their anchoring, must be inspected and certified for compliance with these requirements by a licensed Minnesota professional engineer or qualified third-party inspector for ANSI compliance accredited pursuant to either the American Society for Testing and Materials Appendix E541 or ISO/IEC 17020. (c) Micro units that connect to utilities such as water, sewer, gas, or electric, must obtain any permits or inspections required by the municipality or utility company for that connection. (d) Micro units must comply with municipal setback requirements established by ordinance for manufactured homes. If a municipality does not have such an ordinance, micro units must be set back on all sides by at least ten feet. EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective January 1, 2024. AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #4.D. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 157 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:Julie Urban, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W:Melissa P oehlman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector 11/17/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/20/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan, Tax Increment Financing District 2018-1, R F64, withdrawing parcels from the District. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: I n 2018, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment (Contract) with NHH Properties, now doing business as Cedar Point I nvestments, L L C (Developer), to construct up to 80 townhome units in the Cedar Point I I Housing area (63rd to 65th Streets, 16th Avenue to Richfield Parkway). The number of units was later reduced to 64. To facilitate the redevelopment and encourage housing affordability, the HRA and Council approved the creation of a housing Tax I ncrement Financing (TI F) District and the issuance of two TI F Notes in the amount of $900,000 each. Each Note was to be issued when construction had begun on each set of 32 units, and payment is contingent upon 95% of the units being sold to households earning up to 100% (family of 1-2) or 115% (family of 3 or more) of the Area Median I ncome (A MI ). The first Note was issued in 2021, but as construction and sales neared completion of the first 32 units, cost increases impacted the affordability of the project compelling the Developer to ask the HRA to allow the second 32 units to be sold to non-income-qualified buyers. The HRA approved an amendment to the Contract on October 18, 2021, that allows the Developer to sell units as market-rate with the understanding that the second TI F Note would not be issued and any non-qualified parcels removed from the District. T he amendment includes a provision whereby the Developer could resume selling to income-qualified buyers in blocks of eight units, in the event that market conditions improved. Conditions, however, have not improved and have in fact worsened with rising interest rates. Construction is now completed on all 64 units and while 13 units remain to be sold, there is no block of eight units which would meet the amendment requirement, so all 32 units need to be removed from the T IF District for the District to remain in compliance. As explained in the attached memorandum from Ehler's, the H R A's financial consultant, the proposed modification to the T IF Plan removes 39 parcels from the T IF District, which encompasses the 32 market-rate townhomes and adjacent common areas. T he removal will bring the District into compliance with Minnesota Statute. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: Adopt a resolution approving a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan, Tax Increment Financing District 2018-1, R F64, withdrawing parcels from the District. 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 On August 18, 2018, the City Council authorized the creation of the 2018-1 Tax Increment Financing District, a housing district. On August 20, 2018, the H R A approved the Contract with NHH Companies, L LC for the townhome portion of the development. T he Contract was later assigned to Cedar Point Investments, LL C. T he first eight townhomes had been reserved by buyers and construction was nearing completion when the pandemic began in 2020. On October 18, 2021, the H R A approved an amendment to the Contract allowing the Developer to sell units to non-income-qualified buyers. T he combination of rising construction costs, pandemic-related supply chain delays, and high interest rates caused a significant rise in sale prices that made the units out of reach of income-qualified buyers. Construction has been completed on all 64 units. 31 of the first 32 units have been sold. 19 of the remaining 32 units have been sold. One unit remains to be sold to an income- qualified buyer, and 13 units remain to be sold at market-rate. On November 20, 2023, the H R A approved the Modification. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S Removing parcels from the TIF D istrict will place the entire valuation in the C ity's tax base, meeting the S trategic P lan desired outcome to increase the tax base. W hile the townhomes are no longer being sold affordably, the project still advances equity in the community because funds from the sale of the apartment side of the development were transferred to the A ffordable Housing Trust F und and used to provide affordable homeownership opportunities through the HRA 's F irst-Time Homebuyer P rogram, which provides homeownership opportunities to low-income buyers and has helped buyers who are B lack, Indigenous, and P eople of C olor enter the homeownership market. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): Minnesota S tatute requires that at least 95% of the units in a housing district be initially purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to 100 to 115% of the A M I. The RF 64 development is part of the larger C edar P oint II redevelopment area, which includes the townhomes as well as 237 units of market-rate apartments to the east. The development was negotiated and approved prior to the adoption of the C ity's Inclusionary Housing P olicy. While the primary goal of the project was redevelopment of the C edar C orridor area, affordability standards were applied to the development. S pecifically 95% of the townhomes were expected to be affordable, 100% of the apartments are market-rate but provide a 10% contribution in TIF to the C ity's Housing and Redevelopment F und (HRF ). In addition, a portion of the sales proceeds from the apartment side of the development were directed to the C ity's A ffordable Housing Trust F und. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The C ity's financial consultant recommends that the Modification be approved before the end of the year, so the parcels can be removed from the district before tax increment is collected in 2024. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: In addition to approving TIF funding, the HRA assisted in the acquisition and land assembly costs for the project, loaning the project $630,000 for the acquisition of two properties. 20% of the annual tax increment generated by the project is set aside to repay this loan. The amount to be generated to repay the interfund loan is reduced if the TIF D istrict is reduced, so under the terms of the amendment, the D eveloper makes a payment to the HRA in the amount of $8,506 at the sale of each market-rate unit to cover any shortfall in increment. This money is currently being held in escrow until the HRA 's financial consultant determines the final shortfall amount to be covered by the D eveloper. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: The proposed modification is required to bring the 2018-1 Housing TIF D istrict into compliance with Minnesota S tatute. The HRA is legally authorized to approve a modification that removes parcels from a district, but it has been C ity policy to bring modifications before the C ity C ouncil as well. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): D o not approve the proposed modification. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: N/A AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type Memorandum from E hlers C over Memo Modification to TIF P lan, RF 64 B ackup Material RF 64 TIF P lan Mod Map B ackup Material Resolution Resolution L etter ▪ ▪ PID : Pay 2023/24 Taxable MV - 2023 Taxable MV - 2024 26-028-24-11-0086 6363 16th Ave. S. 93,000 457,300 26-028-24-11-0087 6361 16th Ave. S. 81,000 443,200 26-028-24-11-0088 6359 16th Ave. S. 81,000 458,000 26-028-24-11-0089 6357 16th Ave. S. 93,000 452,500 26-028-24-11-0090 6349 16th Ave. S. 97,000 468,300 26-028-24-11-0091 6351 16th Ave. S. 85,000 448,000 26-028-24-11-0092 6353 16th Ave. S. 85,000 458,000 26-028-24-11-0093 6355 16th Ave. S. 97,000 442,500 26-028-24-11-0094 6347 16th Ave. S. 92,000 313,300 26-028-24-11-0095 6345 16th Ave. S. 80,000 438,000 26-028-24-11-0096 6343 16th Ave. S. 80,000 299,000 26-028-24-11-0097 6341 16th Ave. S. 92,000 313,300 26-028-24-11-0098 6333 16th Ave. S. 92,000 482,300 26-028-24-11-0099 6335 16th Ave. S. 80,000 299,000 26-028-24-11-0100 6337 16th Ave. S. 80,000 299,000 26-028-24-11-0101 6339 16th Ave. S. 92,000 31,300 26-028-24-11-0102 6331 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0103 6329 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0104 6327 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0105 6325 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0106 6317 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0107 6319 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0108 6321 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0109 6323 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0110 6315 16th Ave. S. 92,000 122,300 26-028-24-11-0111 6313 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0112 6311 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0113 6309 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0114 6301 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0115 6303 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0116 6305 16th Ave. S. 80,000 197,000 26-028-24-11-0117 6307 16th Ave. S. 92,000 211,300 26-028-24-11-0119 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0120 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0121 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0122 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0009 6433 16th Ave. S. Individual home owner 26-028-24-14-0002 6509 16th Ave. S. Mt. Clavary 26-028-24-14-0003 6501 16th Ave. S. Mt. Clavary Pay 2023/24 Market Value Total: 2,776,000 9,280,400 Address Parcels to be removed from the RF64 TIF District PID : Base / Pay 2019 Address Taxable MV - Pay 2019 26-028-24-11-0033 6309 - 16th Ave. S 192,000 26-028-24-11-0034 6315 - 16th Ave. S. 0 26-028-24-11-0035 6321 - 16th Ave. S. 192,000 26-028-24-11-0036 6327 - 16th Ave. S. 182,000 26-028-24-11-0037 6333 - 16th Ave. S. 0 26-028-24-11-0038 6339 - 16th Ave. S. 186,000 26-028-24-11-0039 6509 - 16th Ave. S. 0 26-028-24-14-0002 6501 - 16th Ave. S. 235,000 26-028-24-14-0003 Base Market Value Total:987,000 Parcels to be removed from the RF64 TIF District PID : Pay 2023/24 26-028-24-11-0082 6365 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0083 6367 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0084 6369 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0085 6371 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0150 6457 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0151 6459 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0152 6461 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0153 6463 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0154 6449 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0155 6451 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0156 6453 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0157 6455 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0161 6431 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0162 6429 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0163 6427 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0164 6425 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0165 6417 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0166 6419 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0167 6421 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0168 6423 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0169 6415 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0170 6413 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0171 6411 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0172 6409 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0173 6401 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0174 6403 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0175 6405 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0176 6407 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0177 6379 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0178 6377 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0179 6375 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0180 6373 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0158 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0159 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0118 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0183 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0182 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0181 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0184 Common Area Address Parcels to Remain in the RF64TIF District PID : Pay 2023/24 26-028-24-11-0086 6363 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0087 6361 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0088 6359 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0089 6357 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0090 6349 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0091 6351 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0092 6353 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0093 6355 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0094 6347 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0095 6345 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0096 6343 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0097 6341 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0098 6333 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0099 6335 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0100 6337 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0101 6339 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0102 6331 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0103 6329 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0104 6327 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0105 6325 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0106 6317 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0107 6319 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0108 6321 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0109 6323 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0110 6315 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0111 6313 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0112 6311 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0113 6309 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0114 6301 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0115 6303 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0116 6305 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0117 6307 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0119 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0120 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0121 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0122 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0009 6433 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0002 6509 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0003 6501 16th Ave. S. Address Parcels to be removed from the RF64 TIF District PID : Pay 2023/24 26-028-24-11-0082 6365 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0083 6367 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0084 6369 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-11-0085 6371 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0150 6457 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0151 6459 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0152 6461 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0153 6463 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0154 6449 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0155 6451 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0156 6453 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0157 6455 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0161 6431 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0162 6429 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0163 6427 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0164 6425 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0165 6417 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0166 6419 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0167 6421 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0168 6423 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0169 6415 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0170 6413 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0171 6411 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0172 6409 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0173 6401 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0174 6403 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0175 6405 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0176 6407 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0177 6379 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0178 6377 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0179 6375 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0180 6373 16th Ave. S. 26-028-24-14-0158 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0159 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-11-0118 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0183 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0182 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0181 Unassigned - Driveway 26-028-24-14-0184 Common Area Address Parcels to Remain in the RF64TIF District CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF PARCELS FROM THE 2018-1 RF64 TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, on August 20, 2018, the City Council authorized the creation of the RF64 Tax Increment District, a housing district (the “TIF District”); and WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City entered into a Contract for Private Development (the “Contract”) with Cedar Point Investments, LLC (the “Developer”) on September 17, 2018 to build affordable townhomes; and WHEREAS, a TIF Note in the amount of $900,000 was issued in August of 2021; and WHEREAS, the Developer has determined that due to the changing market conditions, they are not able to complete the remaining townhomes in accordance with the Contract; and WHEREAS, in order to remain in compliance with the Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794 (the “TIF Act”), at least 95% of the units must be initially purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to 100% to 115% of the area median income; and WHEREAS, the Developer is requesting that 39 parcels be removed from the TIF District and the 32 qualified townhomes remain in the TIF District; and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. Section 469.175, subd. 4 states that the TIF Plan may be modified without a public hearing as long as the only modification is elimination of parcels from the district and the current net tax capacity of the parcels eliminated from the district equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcels in the district's original net tax capacity; and WHEREAS, Modification #1 for the TIF District has been prepared and made available to the City Council for review; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Modification #1 for the TIF District is hereby approved. 2. This resolution shall be in full force and effect as of the date hereof. 2 Approved by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 20th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RC125-1 (JAE) 637083v1 AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #4.E. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 158 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:Melissa P oehlman, E xecutive D irector D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W:Melissa P oehlman, E xecutive D irector 11/20/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/20/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider a resolution designating the existing structure at 500 - 78th Street East as structurally substandard within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn-D OT) recently purchased the properties at 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South to allow for the reconstruction of the I -494 and Portland Avenue intersection. Following construction of the roadway improvements, remnant land is anticipated to be available for redevelopment. The Richfield Comprehensive Plan calls for Regional Commercial Development at this major transportation intersection. I n order to achieve this, remnant land will need to be combined adjacent property addressed as 7701 - 5th Avenue South (parking lot) and 500 - 78th Street East (vacant former restaurant). Redevelopment of this land is expected to be very costly. I n addition to anticipated high acquisition costs and demolition of building at 500 - 78th Street East, the nature of the previous use of half of the parcels for auto repair makes it likely that environmental clean-up will also be required. To preserve the City's authority to create a Redevelopment Tax I ncrement Finance (TI F) District in the future, an inspection documenting the condition of the buildings was requested by the Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). Under Minnesota law, the City or the HRA is authorized to deem parcels as occupied by structurally substandard buildings before the demolition or removal of the buildings, in order to create a Redevelopment TI F District. The City has three years to create this District, following demolition of the substandard structures. Several timing issues complicate the future creation of a Redevelopment TI F District and the City will need to approach the State for special legislation related to the area. To begin, this phase of the I -494 project is expected to last three years (through fall 2026). Remnant land is not expected to be available for redevelopment until after final completion of the project. Current law gives the City only three years after demolition of the substandard structures to create a Redevelopment TI F District. The City will need to seek special approval from the legislature for an extension of the time limit. A finding of substandardness for the properties at 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South was made by the Council on November 14, 2023. The report for 500 - 78th Street East was not available in time to include it in this previous action. Findings related to 500 - 78th Street and 7701 - 5th Avenue South have been incorporated into a revised version of the previous letter of finding which is attached. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By Motion: Adopt a resolution designating the existing structure at 500 - 78th Street East as structurally substandard within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. 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 P roperty at the intersection of I-494 and P ortland Avenue is guided for Regional C ommercial use by the Richfield C omprehensive P lan. Redevelopment in this area is expected to be exceptionally expensive due to anticipated environmental clean-up. The properties formerly addressed at 7700 and 7730 P ortland Avenue S outh were acquired by Mn-D O T for the expansion of the interchange with I-494. Remnant land is expected to be available for redevelopment following completion of the project in fall 2026. A redevelopment project that serves a regional purpose will require the combination of remnant land with the adjoining parcels at 500 - 78th S treet E ast and 7701 - 5th Avenue S outh. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S Redevelopment of this property will be outside of the dates of the S trategic P lan; however, it will potentially further the goal of increasing the tax base. If and when a redevelopment proposal comes forward, the equity impacts of that proposal will be evaluated. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): In order to establish a Redevelopment TIF D istrict, the property within the proposed D istrict boundaries must be found to be blighted and structurally substandard under the requirements established by Minnesota S tate S tatutes. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The HRA A ttorney recommended that we approve the resolution related to 7700 and 7730 P ortland Avenue S outh as soon as possible given that Mn-D OT had removed the buildings. F ollowing approval of substandard resolutions related to 500 - 78th S treet E ast, the property owner will remove the structure which has become a target for thieves and unsheltered persons. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None at this time. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: The attached resolution was prepared with the assistance of the HRA A ttorney. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): D ecide not adopt the resolution certifying the building as substandard, thereby eliminating the possibility of creating a Redevelopment TIF D istrict in the future. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: N/A AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type Resolution Resolution L etter S ubstandard L etter of F inding E xhibit CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. _________ RESOLUTION DESIGNATING BUILDINGS AS STRUCTURALLY SUBSTANDARD WITHIN THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision 10(d), the City or the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the “Authority”) is authorized to deem parcels as occupied by structurally substandard buildings before the demolition or removal of the buildings, subject to certain terms and conditions as described in this resolution. 1.02. The City or the Authority intends to cause demolition of the buildings located on the property described in EXHIBIT A attached hereto (the “Designated Property”), and may in the future include the Designated Property in a redevelopment tax increment financing district as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174, subdivision 10, within the Richfield Redevelopment Project. Section 2. Approvals. 2.01. The City finds that the buildings on the Designated Property are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, based upon the analysis of such buildings by LHB, Inc., dated November 10, 2023 and on file in City Hall. 2.02. After the date of approval of this resolution, the buildings on the Designated Property may be demolished or removed by the Authority, or such demolition or removal may be financed by the Authority, or may be undertaken by a developer under a development agreement with the Authority. 2.03. The Authority intends to include the Designated Property in a redevelopment tax increment financing district, and to file the request for certification of such district with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota, as the county auditor (the “County Auditor”), within three (3) years after the date of demolition of the buildings on the Designated Property. 2.04. Upon filing the request for certification of the new tax increment financing district, the Authority will notify the County Auditor that the original tax capacity of the Designated Property must be adjusted to reflect the greater of (a) the current net tax capacity of the parcel, or (b) the estimated market value of the parcel for the year in which the buildings were demolished or removed, but applying class rates for the current year, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision 10(d). Error! Unknown document property name. 2 2.05. City staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk Error! Unknown document property name. A-1 EXHIBIT A POTENTIAL PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT 34-028-24-44-0027 34-028-24-44-0023 November 10, 2023 Melissa Poehlman, AICP Community Development Director City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 TIF ANALYSIS FINDINGS FOR 500 78TH STREET EAST, 7700 AND 7730 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH LHB was hired to inspect three buildings on four parcels in Richfield, Minnesota, to determine if they meet the definition of “Substandard” as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision 10. The building parcels may potentially be part of a future Redevelopment TIF District, so will need to be compliant with all the statutes pertaining to a Redevelopment District. The buildings are located at 500 78th Street East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South (Buildings A, B, and C in Diagram 1). Diagram 1 TIF Analysis Findings for 500 78th St East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South Page: 2 City of Richfield CONCLUSION After evaluating the condition of the buildings on October 25 and November 3, 2023, and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the buildings qualify as substandard. The remainder of this letter and attachments describe our process and findings in detail. MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states: INTERIOR INSPECTION “The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property...” EXTERIOR INSPECTION AND OTHER MEANS “An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard.” DOCUMENTATION “Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3, clause (1).” QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires two tests for occupied parcels: 1. Coverage Test “…parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots…” The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures.” The LHB team reviewed the following parcels: Parcel A ID Number 340282440006 • The parcel is approximately 14,545 sf and is 100 percent covered by buildings, parking lots or other improvements. TIF Analysis Findings for 500 78th St East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South Page: 3 City of Richfield Parcel B ID Number 340282440007 • The parcel is approximately 22,980 sf and is 100 percent covered by buildings, parking lots or other improvements. Parcel C ID Number 340282440023 • The parcel is approximately 29,176 sf and is 99 percent covered by buildings, parking lots or other improvements. Parcel D ID Number 340282440027 • The parcel is approximately 12,933 sf and is 100 percent covered by buildings, parking lots or other improvements. Findings The parcels are covered by buildings, parking lots or other improvements, exceeding the 15 percent parcel requirement. 2. Condition of Buildings Test Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a) states: “…and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;” Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, ‘structurally substandard’ shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.” We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b)) defined as “structurally substandard”, due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. Findings Three buildings exceed the criteria required to be determined a substandard building (see the attached Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports). Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: “A building is not structurally substandard if it follows the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence based on reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence.” “Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.” LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: TIF Analysis Findings for 500 78th St East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South Page: 4 City of Richfield • The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. • Chapter 13 of the 2015 Minnesota Building Code states, “Buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the International Energy Conservation Code.” Furthermore, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1305.0021 Subpart 9 states, “References to the International Energy Conservation Code in this code mean the Minnesota Energy Code…” • Chapter 11 of the 2015 Minnesota Residential Code incorporates Minnesota Rules, Chapters, 1322 and 1323 Minnesota Energy Code. • The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. • In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. For an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. Findings The buildings have code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent building code deficiency criteria required to be determined substandard (see the attached Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports). TEAM CREDENTIALS MICHAEL A. FISCHER, AIA, LEED AP - PROJECT PRINCIPAL/TIF ANALYST Michael has 34 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial, and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is an Architectural Principal at LHB and currently leads the Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at MIT and Harvard in 1999, earning master’s degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards, and community task forces, including City Council President in Superior, Wisconsin, Chair of the Duluth/Superior Metropolitan Planning Organization, and Chair of the Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission. Most recently, he served as a member of the Edina city council and Secretary of the Edina HRA. Michael has also managed and designed several award-winning architectural projects and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. PHIL FISHER – INSPECTOR For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota, he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition TIF Analysis Findings for 500 78th St East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Avenue South Page: 5 City of Richfield Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. ATTACHMENTS We have attached a Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report, Replacement Cost Report, Code Deficiency Report, and thumbnail photo sheets for each substandard building. Please contact me at (612) 752-6920 if you have any questions. LHB, INC. MICHAEL A. FISCHER, AIA, LEED AP c: LHB Project No.230805 M:\23Proj\230805\300 Design\Reports\Final Report\230805 Richfield 500 78th St East, 7700 and 7730 Portland Ave South Letter of Finding.docx APPENDIX A Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report Replacement Cost Report Code Deficiency Report Photographs Portland Ave South TIF District Page 1 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel A – 7700 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report Parcel A Automotive Repair Garage Address: 7700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Parcel ID: 053-3402824440006 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): October 25, 2023, 11:25 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $417,424 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $160,040 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 38.3% DEFECTS IN STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS 1. Steel lintels should be protected from rusting per code. 2. Exterior wall concrete block and mortar should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. COMBINATION OF DEFICIENCIES 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. There is no code required accessible parking. b. There is no code required accessible route into the building. c. The restroom is not code compliant for accessibility. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Lighting does not comply with code. b. The electrical wiring system does not comply with code. c. The HVAC system does not comply with code. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Thresholds do not comply with code for maximum height. b. Door hardware does not comply with code. c. There is no code required smoke detector system in the building. d. There is no code required emergency exit signage in the building. e. There is no code required emergency lighting system in the building. f. There is no code required emergency notification system in the building. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 2 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel A – 7700 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 g. There is no code required building sprinkler system. h. There is no code required fire caulking. i. The flooring is damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. The interior walls and ceilings should be repaired/repainted. 5. Exterior Construction a. The roofing material is failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. b. Windows are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. c. Exterior walls should be repaired and repainted. DESCRIPTION OF CODE DEFICIENCIES 1. Steel lintels should be protected from rusting per code. 2. Concrete block should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. 3. Accessible parking should be created per code. 4. A code required accessible route into the building should be created. 5. The restroom does not comply with the accessibility code. 6. The lighting does not comply with code. 7. The electrical wiring system does not comply with code. 8. The HVAC system does not comply with code. 9. The damaged flooring should be repaired to create a code required unimpeded means for emergency egress. 10. Thresholds should be modified to comply with code. 11. Door hardware does not comply with code. 12. Code required fire caulking should be installed. 13. There is no code required smoke detector system. 14. There is no code required emergency exit signage system. 15. There is no code required emergency lighting system. 16. There is no code required emergency notification system. 17. There is no code required building sprinkler system. 18. Failed windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. 19. Failed roofing material should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. OVERVIEW OF DEFICIENCIES This building was most recently used as an automotive repair garage. There is no code required accessible parking or accessible route into the building. The restroom does not comply with code. The electrical wiring and lighting systems do not comply with code. Interior walls and ceiling should be repaired and repainted. A code required accessible route to all levels of the building should be created. The HVAC system does not comply with code. There are no code required life safety systems including smoke detectors, emergency lighting, notification and exiting, and building sprinklers. The exterior and interior block and mortar are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. Exterior walls should be repainted. The roofing material and windows are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 3 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel A – 7700 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 ENERGY CODE DEFICIENCIES In addition to the building code deficiencies listed above, the existing building does not comply with the current energy code. These deficiencies are not included in the estimated costs to correct code deficiencies and are not considered in determining whether the building is substandard. M:\23Proj\230805\300 Design\Reports\Building Reports\A - 7700 Portland Ave So Building Report Redevelopment District.docx Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/25/2023 Estimate Name:7700 Portland Avenue South Building Type:Garage, Repair with Cast in Place Concrete / Steel Joists Location:RICHFIELD, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14.00 Floor Area (S.F.):2200 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2023 Quarter 4 Cost Per Square Foot:$189.74 Building Cost:$417,424.71 Quantity % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost A Substructure 17.42% $28.74 $63,228.42 A1010 Standard Foundations $16.79 $36,937.32 A10101051560 Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick 220 $10.43 $22,949.96 A10101102700 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide 242 $6.36 $13,987.36 A1030 Slab on Grade $11.55 $25,412.64 A10301204520 Slab on grade, 6" thick, light industrial, reinforced 2200 $11.55 $25,412.64 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.40 $878.46 A20101104560 Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage 2200 $0.40 $878.46 B Shell 40.38% $66.62 $146,563.99 B1020 Roof Construction $8.99 $19,787.92 B10201162500 Roof, steel joists, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on bearing walls, 40' bay, 25.5" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 61 PSF total load 2200 $8.99 $19,787.92 B2010 Exterior Walls $32.40 $71,284.01 B20101014000 Concrete wall, reinforced, 8' high, 8" thick, plain finish, 3000 PSI 2464 $32.40 $71,284.01 B2020 Exterior Windows $6.88 $15,131.48 B20201066650 Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3'10.27 $6.88 $15,131.48 B2030 Exterior Doors $6.49 $14,272.88 B20302203450 Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" opening 0.66 $1.02 $2,234.43 B20302204450 Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, manual operation, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening 3.21 $5.47 $12,038.45 B3010 Roof Coverings $11.86 $26,087.70 B30101051400 Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped 2200 $4.04 $8,888.40 B30103203090 Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite 2200 $2.70 $5,934.65 B30104201400 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face 220 $3.96 $8,719.93 B30106305100 Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick 220 $1.16 $2,544.72 C Interiors 9.14% $15.08 $33,185.79 C1010 Partitions $5.32 $11,695.51 C10101022300 Lightweight block 4" thick 462 $1.87 $4,116.73 C10101046000 Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 8" thick, no finish 616 $3.44 $7,578.78 C1020 Interior Doors $0.38 $833.69 C10201022600 Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" 0.73 $0.38 $833.69 C1030 Fittings $1.17 $2,584.28 C10301100460 Toilet partitions, cubicles, ceiling hung, stainless steel 1 $1.17 $2,584.28 C3010 Wall Finishes $5.87 $12,905.16 C30102202000 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler 2464 $4.32 $9,509.07 C30102300320 Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, primer & 2 coats 880 $0.85 $1,871.52 C30102300340 Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, addition for block filler 880 $0.69 $1,524.57 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Ave So, Roichfield, MN 55432 C3020 Floor Finishes $1.68 $3,693.71 C30204100940 Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum 1980 $1.46 $3,211.70 C30204101580 Vinyl, composition tile, minimum 220 $0.22 $482.01 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $0.67 $1,473.44 C30302105800 Acoustic ceilings, 5/8" fiberglass board, 24" x 48" tile, tee grid, suspended support 220 $0.67 $1,473.44 D Services 33.06% $54.55 $119,999.81 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $4.10 $9,027.75 D20101102080 Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung 0.75 $1.39 $3,056.25 D20102102000 Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung 0.37 $0.30 $655.16 D20103102080 Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 19" x 17" 0.75 $0.72 $1,593.79 D20104404340 Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" 0.37 $1.22 $2,686.58 D20108201920 Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH 0.37 $0.47 $1,035.97 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $0.88 $1,933.74 D20202202260 Gas fired water heater, residential, 100< F rise, 30 gal tank, 32 GPH 0.37 $0.88 $1,933.74 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $8.40 $18,490.33 D20402106200 Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 4" diam piping, 10' high 1.12 $2.72 $5,979.98 D20402106240 Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 4" diam piping, for each additional foot add 102 $5.69 $12,510.35 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $11.32 $24,902.37 D30501503120 Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, factories, 10,000 SF, 33.33 ton 2200 $11.32 $24,902.37 D3090 Other HVAC Systems/Equip $3.43 $7,544.05 D30903201040 Garage, single exhaust, 3" outlet, cars & light trucks, 1 bay 1 $3.43 $7,544.05 D4010 Sprinklers $6.35 $13,971.69 D40104101080 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF 2200 $6.35 $13,971.69 D4020 Standpipes $1.58 $3,467.12 D40203101540 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor 0.22 $1.44 $3,168.40 D40203101560 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, additional floors 0.09 $0.14 $298.72 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $2.72 $5,990.22 D50101200280 Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A 1 $1.69 $3,714.80 D50102300280 Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A 30 $0.86 $1,902.12 D50102400200 Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 3 phase, 400 A 0.03 $0.17 $373.30 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $11.61 $25,540.28 D50201100280 Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 4 per 1000 SF, .5 watts per SF 2200 $2.68 $5,904.05 D50201350280 Miscellaneous power, 1 watt 2200 $0.36 $801.26 D50201400240 Central air conditioning power, 3 watts 2200 $0.79 $1,738.33 D50202100520 Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF 2200 $7.77 $17,096.64 D5030 Communications and Security $4.07 $8,962.96 D50309100452 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire 0.22 $2.42 $5,333.22 D50309100462 Fire alarm command center, addressable with voice, excl. wire & conduit 0.22 $1.36 $2,992.83 D50309200104 Internet wiring, 4 data/voice outlets per 1000 S.F. 0.44 $0.29 $636.91 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.08 $169.30 D50902100280 Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 15 kW 0.22 $0.08 $169.30 E Equipment & Furnishings 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Ave So, Roichfield, MN 55432 F Special Construction 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G Building Sitework 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 100% $164.99 $362,978.01 15.0% $24.75 $54,446.70 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 Total Building Cost $189.74 $417,424.71 Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees SubTotal User Fees Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Ave So, Roichfield, MN 55432 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Building Name or Type Parcel ID 053-3402824440006 Automotive Repair Garage Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Accessible Parking Create code required accessible parking 100.00$ EA 1 100.00$ Accessible Routes Create a code required accessible route into the building 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Restroom Modify restroom to comply with code 3.58$ SF 2,200 7,876.00$ Structural Elements Steel Lintels Protect steel lintels from rusting per code 750.00$ Lump 1 750.00$ Concrete Masonry Units Repair or replace damaged/missing concrete masonry units to prevent water intrusion per code 9.95$ SF 2,200 21,890.00$ Exiting Flooring Repair/replace damaged flooring to create an unimpeded means for emergency egress per code 1.68$ SF 2,200 3,696.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with code for maximum height 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Door Hardware Install code compliant door hardware 1,250.00$ Lump 1 1,250.00$ Emergency Exit Signs Install code required emergency exit signs 1,250.00$ SF 3 3,750.00$ Emergency Notification System Install a code required emergency notification systme 1.36$ SF 2,200 2,992.00$ Fire Protection Fire Caulking Install code required fire caulking 0.15$ SF 2,200 330.00$ Smoke Detectors Install code required smoke detectors 2.42$ SF 2,200 5,324.00$ Building Sprinkler Systems Install a code required building sprinkler system 7.93$ SF 2,200 17,446.00$ Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Exterior Construction Windows Replace failed windows to prevent water intrusion per code 6.88$ SF 2,200 15,136.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Materials Remove failed roofing material and replace to prevent water intrusion per code 11.86$ SF 2,200 26,092.00$ Mechanical - Electrical Mechanical Install a code compliant HVAC system 11.32$ SF 2,200 24,904.00$ Electrical Install a code compliant electrical wiring system 6.55$ SF 2,200 14,410.00$ Install a code compliant electrical lighting system 7.77$ SF 2,200 17,094.00$ Total Code Improvements 164,040$ Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7700 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 20231025_111741.jpg 20231025_111758.jpg 20231025_111813.jpg 20231025_111831.jpg 20231025_111752.jpg 20231025_111802.jpg 20231025_111820.jpg 20231025_111837.jpg 20231025_111755.jpg 20231025_111807.jpg 20231025_111824.jpg 20231025_111844.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel A 1 20231025_111858.jpg 20231025_111909.jpg 20231025_111941.jpg 20231025_112023.jpg 20231025_111900.jpg 20231025_111922.jpg 20231025_112001.jpg 20231025_112029.jpg 20231025_111907.jpg 20231025_111940.jpg 20231025_112019.jpg 20231025_112043.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel A 2 20231025_113310.jpg 20231025_113331.jpg 20231025_113355.jpg 20231025_113423.jpg 20231025_113325.jpg 20231025_113340.jpg 20231025_113408.jpg 20231025_113425.jpg 20231025_113328.jpg 20231025_113345.jpg 20231025_113413.jpg 20231025_113435.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel A 3 20231025_113441.jpg 20231025_113505.jpg 20231025_113528.jpg 20231025_113542.jpg 20231025_113451.jpg 20231025_113507.jpg 20231025_113538.jpg 20231025_113546.jpg 20231025_113458.jpg 20231025_113525.jpg 20231025_113540.jpg 20231025_113556.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel A 4 20231025_113559.jpg 20231025_113655.jpg 20231025_113601.jpg 20231025_113724.jpg 20231025_113650.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel A 5 Portland Ave South TIF District Page 1 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel B – 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report Parcel B Automotive Repair Garage Address: 7730 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Parcel ID: 053-3402824440007 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): October 25, 2023, 11:50 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $863,626 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $355,708 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 41.2% DEFECTS IN STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS 1. Steel lintels should be protected from rusting per code. 2. Exterior wall concrete block and mortar should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. COMBINATION OF DEFICIENCIES 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. There is no code required accessible parking. b. There is no code required accessible route into the building. c. The restroom is not code compliant for accessibility. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Lighting does not comply with code. b. The electrical wiring system does not comply with code. c. The HVAC system does not comply with code. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Thresholds do not comply with code for maximum height. b. The flooring is damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. c. Door hardware does not comply with code. d. There is no code required accessible route to all levels of the building e. There is no code required smoke detector system in the building. f. There is no code required emergency exit signage in the building. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 2 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel B – 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 g. There is no code required emergency lighting system in the building. h. There is no code required emergency notification system in the building. i. There is no code required building sprinkler system. j. There is no code required fire caulking at through wall and ceiling penetrations. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. The interior walls and ceilings should be repaired/repainted. 5. Exterior Construction a. The roofing material is failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. b. Windows are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. c. Exterior walls should be repainted. DESCRIPTION OF CODE DEFICIENCIES 1. Code required accessible parking should be created. 2. A code required accessible route into the building should be created. 3. There is no code compliant accessible route to all levels of the building. 4. The restroom does not comply with accessibility code. 5. The lighting does not comply with code. 6. The electrical wiring system does not comply with code. 7. The HVAC system does not comply with code. 8. Thresholds do not comply with code for maximum height. 9. Door hardware does not comply with code. 10. Flooring should be prepared to create an unimpeded means for emergency egress to comply with code. 11. There is no code required smoke detector system. 12. There is no code required emergency exit signage system. 13. There is no code required emergency lighting system. 14. There is no code required emergency notification system. 15. There is no code required building sprinkler system. 16. There is no code required fire caulking. 17. Steel lintels should be protected from rusting per code. 18. Exterior block and mortar should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. 19. Failed windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. 20. Failed roofing material should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 3 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel B – 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 OVERVIEW OF DEFICIENCIES This building was most recently used as an automotive repair garage. There is no code required accessible parking or accessible route into the building. The restroom does not comply with code. The electrical wiring and lighting systems do not comply with code. Interior walls and ceiling should be repaired and repainted. A code required accessible route to all levels of the building should be created. The HVAC system does not comply with code. There are no code required life safety systems including smoke detectors, emergency lighting, notification and exiting, and building sprinklers. The exterior block and mortar are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. The roofing material and windows are failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. Exterior walls should be repainted. ENERGY CODE DEFICIENCIES In addition to the building code deficiencies listed above, the existing building does not comply with the current energy code. These deficiencies are not included in the estimated costs to correct code deficiencies and are not considered in determining whether the building is substandard. M:\23Proj\230805\300 Design\Reports\Building Reports\B - 7730 Portland Ave So Building Report Redevelopment District.docx Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/25/2023 Estimate Name:7730 Portland Avenue South Building Type:Garage, Repair with Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:RICHFIELD, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):21 Floor Area (S.F.):5600 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2023 Quarter 4 Cost Per Square Foot:$154.22 Building Cost:$863,626.41 Quantity % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost A Substructure 17.09% $22.92 $128,373.07 A1010 Standard Foundations $10.97 $61,450.27 A10101051560 Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick 366 $6.82 $38,180.39 A10101102700 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide 402.6 $4.16 $23,269.88 A1030 Slab on Grade $11.55 $64,686.72 A10301204520 Slab on grade, 6" thick, light industrial, reinforced 5600 $11.55 $64,686.72 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.40 $2,236.08 A20101104560 Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage 5600 $0.40 $2,236.08 B Shell 36.54% $49.00 $274,426.50 B1020 Roof Construction $8.99 $50,369.26 B10201162500 Roof, steel joists, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on bearing walls, 40' bay, 25.5" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 61 PSF total load 5600 $8.99 $50,369.26 B2010 Exterior Walls $16.80 $94,096.62 B20101116280 Concrete block (CMU) wall, regular weight, 75% solid, 8 x 8 x 16, 4500 PSI, reinforced, vertical #5@32", grouted 6148.8 $16.80 $94,096.62 B2020 Exterior Windows $6.74 $37,759.91 B20201066650 Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3'25.62 $6.74 $37,759.91 B2030 Exterior Doors $6.38 $35,729.04 B20302203450 Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" opening 1.68 $1.02 $5,687.63 B20302204450 Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, manual operation, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening 8.01 $5.36 $30,041.41 B3010 Roof Coverings $10.08 $56,471.67 B30101051400 Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped 5600 $4.04 $22,625.01 B30103203090 Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite 5600 $2.70 $15,106.39 B30104201400 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face 366 $2.59 $14,506.79 B30106305100 Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick 366 $0.76 $4,233.48 C Interiors 10.65% $14.29 $80,003.58 C1010 Partitions $5.32 $29,770.37 C10101022300 Lightweight block 4" thick 1176 $1.87 $10,478.94 C10101046000 Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 8" thick, no finish 1568 $3.44 $19,291.43 C1020 Interior Doors $0.38 $2,122.13 C10201022600 Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" 1.87 $0.38 $2,122.13 C1030 Fittings $0.46 $2,584.28 C10301100460 Toilet partitions, cubicles, ceiling hung, stainless steel 1 $0.46 $2,584.28 C3010 Wall Finishes $5.78 $32,374.06 C30102202000 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler 6148.8 $4.24 $23,729.45 C30102300320 Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, primer & 2 coats 2240 $0.85 $4,763.88 C30102300340 Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, addition for block filler 2240 $0.69 $3,880.73 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 2 Replacement Cost Report Parcel B - 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 C3020 Floor Finishes $1.68 $9,402.17 C30204100940 Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum 5040 $1.46 $8,175.23 C30204101580 Vinyl, composition tile, minimum 560 $0.22 $1,226.94 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $0.67 $3,750.57 C30302105800 Acoustic ceilings, 5/8" fiberglass board, 24" x 48" tile, tee grid, suspended support 560 $0.67 $3,750.57 D Services 35.71% $47.89 $268,176.34 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $4.10 $22,979.70 D20101102080 Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung 1.9 $1.39 $7,779.54 D20102102000 Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung 0.95 $0.30 $1,667.67 D20103102080 Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 19" x 17" 1.9 $0.72 $4,056.92 D20104404340 Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" 0.95 $1.22 $6,838.57 D20108201920 Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH 0.95 $0.47 $2,637.00 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $0.88 $4,922.25 D20202202260 Gas fired water heater, residential, 100< F rise, 30 gal tank, 32 GPH 0.95 $0.88 $4,922.25 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $4.95 $27,732.12 D20402106200 Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 4" diam piping, 10' high 2.86 $2.72 $15,221.77 D20402106240 Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 4" diam piping, for each additional foot add 102 $2.23 $12,510.35 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $11.32 $63,387.86 D30501503120 Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, factories, 10,000 SF, 33.33 ton 5600 $11.32 $63,387.86 D3090 Other HVAC Systems/Equip $1.96 $10,948.05 D30903201040 Garage, single exhaust, 3" outlet, cars & light trucks, 1 bay 1 $1.35 $7,544.05 D30903201060 Garage, single exhaust, 3" outlet, additional bays up to seven bays 2 $0.61 $3,404.00 D4010 Sprinklers $6.35 $35,564.31 D40104101080 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF 5600 $6.35 $35,564.31 D4020 Standpipes $1.58 $8,825.41 D40203101540 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor 0.56 $1.44 $8,065.02 D40203101560 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, additional floors 0.22 $0.14 $760.39 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $1.07 $5,990.22 D50101200280 Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A 1 $0.66 $3,714.80 D50102300280 Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A 30 $0.34 $1,902.12 D50102400200 Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 3 phase, 400 A 0.03 $0.07 $373.30 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $11.61 $65,011.64 D50201100280 Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 4 per 1000 SF, .5 watts per SF 5600 $2.68 $15,028.50 D50201350280 Miscellaneous power, 1 watt 5600 $0.36 $2,039.58 D50201400240 Central air conditioning power, 3 watts 5600 $0.79 $4,424.84 D50202100520 Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF 5600 $7.77 $43,518.72 D5030 Communications and Security $4.07 $22,814.78 D50309100452 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire 0.56 $2.42 $13,575.46 D50309100462 Fire alarm command center, addressable with voice, excl. wire & conduit 0.56 $1.36 $7,618.10 D50309200104 Internet wiring, 4 data/voice outlets per 1000 S.F. 1.12 $0.29 $1,621.22 E Equipment & Furnishings 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 F Special Construction 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G Building Sitework 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 100% $134.10 $750,979.49 15.0% $20.12 $112,646.92 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 Total Building Cost $154.22 $863,626.41 Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees SubTotal User Fees Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 2 Replacement Cost Report Parcel B - 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel B - 7730 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Building Name or Type Parcel ID 053-3402824440007 Automotive Repair Garage Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Accessible Parking Create code required accessible parking 100.00$ EA 1 100.00$ Accessible Routes Create a code required accessible route into the building 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Create a code required accessible route to all levels of the building 2,500.00$ Lump 1 2,500.00$ Restroom Modify restroom to comply with code 3.58$ SF 5,600 20,048.00$ Structural Elements Steel Lintels Protect steel lintels from rusting per code 1,250.00$ Lump 1 1,250.00$ Concrete Masonry Units Repair or replace damaged/missing concrete masonry units to prevent water intrusion per code 3.25$ SF 5,600 18,200.00$ Exiting Flooring Repair/replace damaged flooring to create an unimpeded means for emergency egress per code 1.68$ SF 5,600 9,408.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with code for maximum height 1,000.00$ Lump 1 1,000.00$ Door Hardware Install code compliant door hardware 1,500.00$ Lump 1 1,500.00$ Emergency Exit Signs Install code required emergency exit signs 1,250.00$ EA 5 6,250.00$ Emergency Notification System Install a code required emergency notification systme 1.36$ SF 5,600 7,616.00$ Fire Protection Fire Caulking Install code required fire caulking 0.15$ SF 5,600 840.00$ Smoke Detectors Install code required smoke detectors 2.42$ SF 5,600 13,552.00$ Building Sprinkler Systems Install a code required building sprinkler system 7.93$ SF 5,600 44,408.00$ Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel B - 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Exterior Construction Windows Replace failed windows to prevent water intrusion per code 6.74$ SF 5,600 37,744.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Materials Remove failed roofing material and replace to prevent water intrusion per code 10.08$ SF 5,600 56,448.00$ Mechanical - Electrical Mechanical Install a code compliant HVAC system 11.32$ SF 5,600 63,392.00$ Electrical Install a code compliant electrical wiring system 4.90$ SF 5,600 27,440.00$ Install a code compliant electrical lighting system 7.77$ SF 5,600 43,512.00$ Total Code Improvements 355,708$ Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel B - 7730 Portland Ave So, Richfield, MN 55423 20231025_112059.jpg 20231025_112135.jpg 20231025_112208.jpg 20231025_112232.jpg 20231025_112122.jpg 20231025_112139.jpg 20231025_112219.jpg 20231025_112243.jpg 20231025_112128.jpg 20231025_112154.jpg 20231025_112230.jpg 20231025_112245.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 1 20231025_112256.jpg 20231025_112312.jpg 20231025_112329.jpg 20231025_112406.jpg 20231025_112305.jpg 20231025_112314.jpg 20231025_112335.jpg 20231025_112420.jpg 20231025_112308.jpg 20231025_112324.jpg 20231025_112338.jpg 20231025_112422.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 2 20231025_114009.jpg 20231025_114020.jpg 20231025_114033.jpg 20231025_114059.jpg 20231025_114013.jpg 20231025_114023.jpg 20231025_114045.jpg 20231025_114107.jpg 20231025_114018.jpg 20231025_114031.jpg 20231025_114048.jpg 20231025_114120.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 3 20231025_114125.jpg 20231025_114138.jpg 20231025_114200.jpg 20231025_114218.jpg 20231025_114134.jpg 20231025_114148.jpg 20231025_114209.jpg 20231025_114219.jpg 20231025_114136.jpg 20231025_114158.jpg 20231025_114217.jpg 20231025_114238.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 4 20231025_114244.jpg 20231025_114323.jpg 20231025_114335.jpg 20231025_114502.jpg 20231025_114250.jpg 20231025_114325.jpg 20231025_114410.jpg 20231025_114540.jpg 20231025_114312.jpg 20231025_114330.jpg 20231025_114458.jpg 20231025_114655.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 5 20231025_114733.jpg 20231025_114736.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel B 6 Portland Ave South TIF District Page 1 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel C – 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report Parcel C Khan’s Mongolian Barbecue Address: 500 78th Street East, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Parcel ID: 3402824440023 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): November 3, 2023, 8:00 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $1,471,188 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $626,320 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 42.6% DEFECTS IN STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS 1. No defects observed. COMBINATION OF DEFICIENCIES 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. There is no code compliant access into the building. b. Transaction counters do not comply with the accessibility code. c. Restrooms do not comply with code. 2. Light and Ventilation a. The lighting system does not comply with code. b. The electrical system does not comply with code. c. The HVAC system does not comply with code. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Thresholds do not comply with code for maximum height. b. Code required fire caulking should be installed in all through wall and ceiling penetrations. c. Door hardware does not comply with code. d. Exit signage does not comply with code. e. Smoke detectors do not comply with code. f. Flooring material is damaged creating and impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 2 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel C – 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 g. Emergency lighting does not comply with code. h. There is no code required emergency notification system. i. There is no code required building sprinkler system. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior walls should be repaired/repainted. b. The carpet should be cleaned. c. There is mold present on the kitchen walls. 5. Exterior Construction a. Wood trim should be repainted. b. The exterior concrete walls are failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. c. Windows are failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. d. Roofing materials are failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. DESCRIPTION OF CODE DEFICIENCIES 1. Code-compliant transaction counters should be installed. 2. Restrooms should be made code compliant. 3. The lighting system should be modified to comply with code. 4. The electrical wiring system should be modified to comply with code. 5. A code compliant HVAC system should be installed. 6. Thresholds do not comply with code. 7. Install code compliant door hardware. 8. Fire caulking should be installed where required by code. 9. Install code compliant smoke detectors. 10. Install code compliant emergency lighting. 11. Install code compliant emergency exit signage. 12. A code required emergency notification system should be installed. 13. A code required building sprinkler system should be installed. 14. Failing exterior concrete block should be repaired to prevent water intrusion per code. 15. Failing windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. 16. Roofing materials are failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. OVERVIEW OF DEFICIENCIES This restaurant is currently not in operation. Exterior windows are failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. Code-compliant transaction counters should be installed. The restrooms are not code compliant. Interior walls should be repaired/repainted. All code required life safety systems should be installed. The interior walls should be repaired and repainted. The carpet should be cleaned. Code compliant lighting should be installed. Code-compliant electrical wiring should be installed. A code-compliant HVAC system should be installed. Exterior concrete block is failing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. The roofing material is failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. Portland Ave South TIF District Page 3 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230805.00 Parcel C – 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 ENERGY CODE DEFICIENCIES In addition to the building code deficiencies listed above, the existing building does not comply with the current energy code. These deficiencies are not included in the estimated costs to correct code deficiencies and are not considered in determining whether the building is substandard. M:\23Proj\230805\300 Design\Reports\Building Reports\C - 500 78th St East Building Report Redevelopment District.docx Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:11/7/2023 Estimate Name:500 78th Street East Building Type:Restaurant with Brick Veneer / Reinforced Concrete Location:RICHFIELD, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14 Floor Area (S.F.):5800 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2023 Quarter 4 Cost Per Square Foot:$253.65 Building Cost:$1,471,188.70 Quantity % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost A Substructure 9.00% $19.86 $115,180.55 A1010 Standard Foundations $11.79 $68,355.53 A10101051560 Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick 320 $5.76 $33,381.76 A10101102700 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide 320 $3.19 $18,495.68 A10102107410 Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 100K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 4' ‐ 6" square x 15" deep 29 $2.84 $16,478.09 A1030 Slab on Grade $7.38 $42,824.76 A10301202240 Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced 5800 $7.38 $42,824.76 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.69 $4,000.26 A20101103380 Excavate and fill, 4000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage 5800 $0.69 $4,000.26 B Shell 32.47% $71.63 $415,436.48 B1010 Floor Construction $2.58 $14,981.35 B10102049913 Cast‐in‐place concrete column, 12", square, tied, minimum reinforcing, 150K load, 10'‐14' story height, 135 lbs/LF, 4000PSI 185.6 $2.58 $14,981.35 B1020 Roof Construction $20.55 $119,182.75 B10207257000 Roof, concrete, beam and slab, 25'x25' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 20" deep beam, 9" slab, 152 PSF total load 5800 $20.55 $119,182.75 B2010 Exterior Walls $19.67 $114,087.68 B20101291420 Brick veneer wall, standard face, 2x6 studs @ 16" back‐up, common bond 3136 $19.67 $114,087.68 B2020 Exterior Windows $6.24 $36,179.36 B20202101100 Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass,1‐3/4"x4", 5'x6' opening, no intermediate horizontals 224 $1.21 $7,023.74 B20202202050 Glazing panel, plate glass, 1/4" thick, tempered 1120 $5.03 $29,155.62 B2030 Exterior Doors $8.89 $51,572.98 B20301106550 Door, aluminum & glass, without transom, full vision, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 7'‐0" opening 3.48 $6.20 $35,961.54 B20301107250 Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, non‐standard, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 10'‐0" opening 1.16 $2.01 $11,684.27 B20302203450 Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" opening 1.16 $0.68 $3,927.17 B3010 Roof Coverings $11.80 $68,455.84 B30101203400 Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, loosely laid, stone ballast 5800 $2.57 $14,918.24 B30103202700 Insulation, rigid, roof deck, extruded polystyrene, 40 PSI compressive strength, 4" thick, R20 5800 $6.69 $38,793.24 B30104201400 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face 320 $2.19 $12,683.54 B30106100050 Gutters, box, aluminum, .027" thick, 5", enameled finish 160 $0.29 $1,662.51 B30106200100 Downspout, aluminum, rectangular, 2" x 3", embossed mill finish, .020" thick 64 $0.07 $398.31 Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 B3020 Roof Openings $1.89 $10,976.52 B30202100300 Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs 2.32 $0.86 $4,964.38 B30202102100 Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator 2.32 $1.04 $6,012.14 C Interiors 13.15% $29.00 $168,211.54 C1010 Partitions $4.27 $24,765.63 C10101045500 Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish 2320 $4.27 $24,765.63 C1020 Interior Doors $0.81 $4,709.00 C10201022510 Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8", birch, hollow core 5.8 $0.81 $4,709.00 C1030 Fittings $1.05 $6,080.78 C10301100420 Toilet partitions, cubicles, ceiling hung, plastic laminate 5.8 $1.05 $6,080.78 C3010 Wall Finishes $5.98 $34,708.14 C30102202000 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler 3136 $2.09 $12,102.45 C30102202000 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler 3712 $2.47 $14,325.35 C30102301940 Ceramic tile, thin set, 4‐1/4" x 4‐1/4" 928 $1.43 $8,280.34 C3020 Floor Finishes $10.28 $59,630.93 C30204100080 Carpet tile, nylon, fusion bonded, 18" x 18" or 24" x 24", 35 oz 4060 $3.84 $22,243.85 C30204101800 Tile, quarry tile, mud set, minimum 870 $3.05 $17,667.09 C30204101820 Tile, quarry tile, mud set, maximum 870 $3.40 $19,719.99 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $6.61 $38,317.06 C30301105300 Gypsum board ceilings, 5/8" fire rated gypsum board, painted and textured finish,1" x 3" wood, 16" OC furring, concrete support 5800 $6.61 $38,317.06 D Services 45.37% $100.08 $580,465.95 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $12.25 $71,028.95 D20101102080 Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung 5.8 $4.09 $23,698.16 D20102102000 Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung 2.32 $0.70 $4,064.07 D20103101560 Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 20" x 18" 5.8 $2.07 $12,008.78 D20104102040 Kitchen sink w/trim, countertop, stainless steel, 44" x 22" triple bowl 5.8 $3.07 $17,829.29 D20104404340 Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" 1.16 $1.44 $8,332.72 D20108201880 Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH 1.16 $0.88 $5,095.93 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $4.55 $26,377.76 D20202502220 Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, 480 GPH 1.16 $4.55 $26,377.76 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $2.47 $14,312.76 D20402104120 Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 3" diam, 10' high 6.96 $2.38 $13,825.21 D20402104160 Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 3" diam, for each additional foot add 13.92 $0.08 $487.55 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $43.02 $249,512.89 D30501554040 Rooftop, multizone, air conditioner, restaurants, 3,000 SF, 15.00 ton 4640 $35.36 $205,100.06 D30501556900 Commercial kitchen exhaust/make‐up air system, rooftop, gas, 2000 CFM 1.16 $7.66 $44,412.83 D4010 Sprinklers $12.87 $74,637.03 D40104100580 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, 1 floor, 2000 SF 5800 $10.72 $62,179.48 D40104101020 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 1000 SF 1160 $2.15 $12,457.55 D4020 Standpipes $3.46 $20,047.34 D40203101540 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor 1.39 $3.46 $20,047.34 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $4.73 $27,458.41 D50101200320 Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 400 A 1 $1.28 $7,406.58 D50102300320 Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 400 A 60 $1.31 $7,608.48 D50102400200 Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 3 phase, 400 A 1 $2.15 $12,443.35 Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $13.24 $76,818.39 D50201100520 Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 10 per 1000 SF, 1.2 watts per SF 5800 $3.71 $21,538.71 D50201350400 Miscellaneous power, 1.8 watts 5800 $0.57 $3,318.06 D50201400320 Central air conditioning power, 6 watts 5800 $1.19 $6,888.66 D50202100520 Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF 5800 $7.77 $45,072.96 D5030 Communications and Security $3.50 $20,272.42 D50309100450 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 12 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire 1.16 $2.78 $16,122.17 D50309100460 Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit 1.16 $0.72 $4,150.25 E Equipment & Furnishings 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 F Special Construction 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G Building Sitework 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 100% $220.57 $1,279,294.52 15.0% $33.09 $191,894.18 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 Total Building Cost $253.65 $1,471,188.70 Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees SubTotal User Fees Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th Street East, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Building Name or Type Parcel ID 3402824440023 Khan's Mongolian Barbecue Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Transaction Counters Modify transaction counters to comply with code 1,500.00$ Lump 1 1,500.00$ Restrooms Modify restrooms to comply with code 7.91$ SF 5,800 45,878.00$ Structural Elements No deficiencies observed -$ Exiting Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with code for maximum height 100.00$ EA 4 400.00$ Door Hardware Install code compliant door hardware 250.00$ EA 6 1,500.00$ Emergency Lighting Install code compliant emergency lighting 2.15$ SF 5,800 12,470.00$ Emergency Notification System Install a code required emergency notification system 0.72$ SF 5,800 4,176.00$ Emergency Exit Signs Install code compliant emergency exit signs 0.75$ SF 5,800 4,350.00$ Fire Protection Fire Caulking Install code required fire caulking 0.07$ SF 5,800 406.00$ Smoke Detectors Install code required smoke detectors 2.78$ SF 5,800 16,124.00$ Building Sprinkler System Install a code required building sprinkler system 16.33$ SF 5,800 94,714.00$ Exterior Construction Concrete Block Repair/replace failed concrete block to prevent water intrusion per code 0.50$ SF 5,800 2,900.00$ Windows Replace failing windows to prevent water intrusion per code 6.24$ SF 5,800 36,192.00$ Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Roof Construction Roofing Materials Replace failed roofing materials to prevent water intrusion per code 13.69$ SF 5,800 79,402.00$ Mechanical - Electrical Mechanical Install a code compliant HVAC system 43.02$ SF 5,800 249,516.00$ Electrical Install a code compliant electrical wiring system 5.47$ SF 5,800 31,726.00$ Install a code compliant lighting system 7.77$ SF 5,800 45,066.00$ Total Code Improvements 626,320$ Portland Ave South TIF District LHB Project No. 230805.00 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C - 500 78th St E, Richfield, MN 55423 20231103_075521.jpg 20231103_075541.jpg 20231103_075617.jpg 20231103_075715.jpg 20231103_075524.jpg 20231103_075603.jpg 20231103_075634.jpg 20231103_075729.jpg 20231103_075532.jpg 20231103_075607.jpg 20231103_075704.jpg 20231103_075752.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel C 1 20231103_075759.jpg 20231103_075840.jpg 20231103_075934.jpg 20231103_075946.jpg 20231103_075813.jpg 20231103_075908.jpg 20231103_075938.jpg 20231103_075957.jpg 20231103_075829.jpg 20231103_075930.jpg 20231103_075943.jpg 20231103_080012.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel C 2 20231103_080016.jpg 20231103_080101.jpg 20231103_080327.jpg 20231103_080515.jpg 20231103_080024.jpg 20231103_080117.jpg 20231103_080425.jpg 20231103_080530.jpg 20231103_080028.jpg 20231103_080256.jpg 20231103_080502.jpg 20231103_080539.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel C 3 20231103_080547.jpg 20231103_080621.jpg 20231103_080646.jpg 20231103_080723.jpg 20231103_080555.jpg 20231103_080623.jpg 20231103_080706.jpg 20231103_080727.jpg 20231103_080608.jpg 20231103_080630.jpg 20231103_080711.jpg 20231103_080734.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel C 4 20231103_080740.jpg 20231103_080745.jpg 20231103_080750.jpg Portland Avenue South Redevelopment TIF District | Parcel C 5 AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA ITEM #6. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 159 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 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 11/16/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/19/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Public Hearing and consider the second reading of a proposed Franchise Ordinance and Agreement with Center Point Energy Minnesota Gas ("Center Point Energy") allowing and setting terms for Center Point Energy's use of the City right-of-way. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The current Franchise Ordinance and Agreement with CenterPoint Energy expired on May 27, 2023 but remains in effect until a new agreement is adopted or the Franchise is formally terminated. The City and Center Point Energy wish to continue the Franchise and have negotiated a revised Franchise Ordinance and Agreement which is attached to this staff report. The revised Franchise Ordinance and Agreement will be effective for 10 years with the option to renew for a second 10 year term. The Franchise Ordinance and Agreement: 1. Grants Center Point Energy the right to use City controlled right-of-way for the installation, maintenance and repair of gas distribution facilities; 2. Spells out the rights and responsibilities of each party to the agreement; and 3. Allows the City to impose franchise fees. The first reading of the proposed Franchise Ordinance and Agreement took place at the October 24, 2023 regular City Council meeting. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: 1. Approve the second reading of a proposed Franchise Ordinance and Agreement with Center Point Energy allowing and setting terms for Center Point Energy's use of the City right-of- way; and 2. Approve a resolution authorizing 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 S ee E xecutive S ummary. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S E quity C onsiderations: The F ranchise A greement covers C enterP oint's use of the public right-of-way throughout the entire C ity. The franchise fee that C enterP oint charges customers via their gas bill is remitted to the C ity and is equal across all customer classifications. These fees could place a higher burden on lower-income customers. S trategic Outcome C onsiderations: The F ranchise A greement allows the city to collect franchise fees which fund various street maintenance, forestry, and sustainability efforts and ensure "C ity infrastructure supports service needs" while making use of "sustainable infrastructure financing". C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): It is necessary that the C ity work with the privately-owned utility companies like C enterP oint E nergy to provide necessary services to Richfield residents. F ederal and S tate law requires the C ity to allow private utility infrastructure to be placed, operated and maintained in C ity right-of-way. City Staff and CenterPoint Energy negotiated the Franchise Ordinance and Agreement and CenterPoint Energy staff have indicated that the company will accept the current language and will execute the agreement as is. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The previous F ranchise Ordinance and A greement expired in late May 2023 and the updated version should be approved as soon as possible. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The proposed F ranchise A greement with C enterP oint E nergy allows the C ity to impose a franchise fee to fund right-of-way improvements. The fee was set earlier this year by C ity C ouncil action and is expected to generate $2,430,000 annually in improvements. The proposed F ranchise A greement does not make any changes to the established franchise fees. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: The C ity A ttorney's office prepared the F ranchise Ordinance and A greement and will be available to answer questions. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): None P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type C enterP oint F ranchise Ordinance and A greement Ordinance S ummary P ublication Resolution Resolution L etter BILL NO. 2023- AN ORDINANCE GRANTING CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP. d/b/a CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS (“CENTERPOINT ENERGY”), ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, MINNESOTA, FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: City. The City of Richfield, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. City Utility System. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer, storm sewer, water service, street lighting and traffic signals, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting, or other forms of energy. Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. Company. CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. d/b/a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas its successors and assigns including all successors or assigns that own or operate any part or parts of the Gas Facilities subject to this Franchise. Gas Energy. Gas Energy includes both retail and wholesale natural, manufactured or mixed gas. Gas Facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes, lines, ducts, fixtures and all necessary equipment and appurtenances owned or operated by the Company for the purpose of providing Gas Energy for retail or wholesale use. Notice. A writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy, Minnesota Division Vice President, 505 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402. Notice to the City shall be mailed to City of Richfield, C/O Finance Director, 6700 Portland Ave S, Richfield, Minnesota, 55423. Any party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written Notice to the other parties. Ordinance. This gas franchise ordinance, also referred to as the Franchise. Public Way. Any highway, street, alley or other public right-of-way within the City. Public Ground. Land owned or otherwise controlled by the City for utility easements, park, trail, walkway, open space or other public property, which is held for use in common by the public or for public benefit. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE 2.1 Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of ten (10) years from the date this Ordinance is passed and approved by the City, the right to import, manufacture, distribute and sell Gas Energy for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future and also the right to transport Gas Energy through the limits of the City for use outside of the City limits, provided that the City may extend this Franchise for an additional ten (10) years upon Notice to the Company prior to expiration hereof. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Gas Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Ways and Public Grounds, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject, however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant with state law. 2.2 Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This Franchise shall be in force and effect from and after the passage of this Ordinance and publication as required by law and its acceptance in writing by Company. 2.3. Service and Gas Rates. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the terms and conditions of service and the rates to be charged by Company for Gas Energy in City are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission. 2.4. Publication Expense. Company shall pay the expense of publication of this Ordinance. 2.5. Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the written Notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this Franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity. 2.6. Continuation of Franchise. If the City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this Franchise expires, this Franchise will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon, or until ninety (90) days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of its intention to allow Franchise to expire. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS 3.1. Location of Facilities. Gas Facilities shall be located, constructed, and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt normal operation of any City Utility System. Gas Facilities may be located on Public Grounds in a location to be mutually agreed in writing by the City and the Company. The location and relocation of Gas Facilities shall be subject to reasonable regulations of the City consistent with authority granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state law, to the extent not inconsistent with a specific term of this Franchise. 3.2. Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee, unless the City is receiving a franchise fee pursuant to this Ordinance, in which case all permit fees will be waived. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other public right-of-way users for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a permit if (i) an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Gas Facilities and (ii) Company gives telephone, email or similar Notice to the City before commencement of the emergency repair, if reasonably possible. Within two (2) business days after commencing the repair, Company shall apply for any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.3. Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Way, the Company shall restore the Public Way in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 7819.1100 and applicable City ordinances consistent with law. The Company shall restore the Public Ground to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain the surface in good condition for six months thereafter. All work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if the Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to the Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration of the Public Ground at the expense of the Company. The Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.3. The Company shall also post a construction performance bond consistent with the provisions of Minnesota Rules, parts 7819.3000 and 7819.0100, subpart 6. 3.4. Avoid Damage to Gas Facilities. The Company must take reasonable measures to prevent the Gas Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the Gas Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Gas Facilities by persons, property or the elements. Per Minnesota Statute § 216D.05, the City must take protective measures when it performs work near the Gas Facilities. 3.5. Notice of Improvements to Streets. The City will give Company reasonable written Notice of plans for improvements to Public Ways and Public Grounds where the City has reason to believe that Gas Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The Notice will contain: (i) the nature, extent and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Ways or Public Grounds upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the time when the City anticipates work will start, and (iv) if more than one Public Way or Public Grounds is involved, the order in which the work is expected to proceed. The Notice will be given to Company a minimum of eight (8) weeks time, considering seasonal working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its Gas Facilities Company deems necessary. 3.6 Mapping Information. If requested by City, Company must promptly provide complete and accurate mapping information for any of its Gas Facilities in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 3.7. Emergency Response. As emergency first responders, when a public safety concern exists both the City and Company shall respond to gas emergencies within the City without additional direct fee or expense to either City or Company. SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS 4.1. Relocation in Public Ways. The Company and City shall comply with the provisions of Minnesota Rules 7819.3100 with respect to requests for the Company to relocate Gas Facilities located in Public Ways. 4.2 Relocation in Public Grounds. City may require Company at Company’s expense to relocate or remove its Gas Facilities from Public Grounds upon a finding by City that the Gas Facilities have become or will become an substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Grounds. Nothing in this Section 4.2 shall be construed so as to invalidate or impair any existing company easements in Public Grounds. 4.3. Projects with Federal Funding. Relocation, removal or rearrangement of any Company Gas Facilities made necessary because of the extension into or through City of a federally aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes §§ 161.45 and 161.46. SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION 5.1. Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits or the operation of the Gas Facilities located in the Public Ways and Public Grounds. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence or otherwise wrongful act or omission except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. 5.2. Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written Notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such Notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City. The Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City, shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. This Franchise agreement shall not be interpreted to constitute a waiver by the City of any of its defenses of immunity or limitations on liability under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. SECTION 6. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PUBLIC GROUNDS The City shall give Company such written Notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Ways or Public Grounds as is required by law. The City and the Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules 7819.3100 and 7819.3200 with respect to any request for vacation. SECTION 7. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 8. FRANCHISE FEE 8.1. Form. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, the City may charge the Company a franchise fee. The franchise fee will be collected on a flat fee basis, or by some other method that is mutually acceptable to both City and Company for each retail customer account within the corporate limits of the City. The amount of the fee collected may differ for each customer class. The City will use a formula that provides a stable and predictable amount of fees, without placing the Company at a competitive disadvantage. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City and be consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011, Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. If the Company claims that the City required fee formula is discriminatory or otherwise places the Company at a competitive disadvantage, the Company will provide a formula that will produce a substantially similar fee amount to the City. If the City and Company are unable to agree, the disagreement shall be subject to the Dispute Resolution provisions of this Ordinance. 8.2. Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council. The effective date of the franchise fee ordinance shall be no less than ninety (90) days after written Notice enclosing a copy of the duly adopted and approved ordinance has been served upon the Company by Certified mail. The Company is not required to collect a franchise fee if the terms of the fee agreement are inconsistent with this franchise or state law, provided the Company notifies the City Council of the same within the ninety (90) day period. 8.3. Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Company unless it lawfully imposes a fee of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of Gas Energy within the City by any other supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the authority or contractual right to require a franchise fee or similar fee through an agreed-upon franchise. 8.4. Collection of Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable not less than quarterly during complete billing months of the period for which payment is to be made. The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time, however, the change shall meet the same Notice and acceptance requirements and the fee may not be changed more often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City and be consistent with Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011, Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles and customer refunds incurred by the Company. The Company shall not be responsible to pay City fees that Company is unable to collect under Commission rules or order. Company agrees to make available for inspection by City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit Company’s determination of the franchise fee payments. 8.5. Continuation of Franchise Fee. If this franchise expires and the City and the Company are unable to agree upon terms of a new franchise, the franchise fee, if any being imposed by the City at the time this franchise expires, will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon. However, the franchise fee will not remain in effect for more than one (1) year after the franchise expires as stated in Section 2.6 of this Franchise. If for any reason the franchise terminates, the franchise fee will terminate at the same time. SECTION 9. ABANDONED FACILITIES The Company shall comply with Minnesota Rules, Part 7819.3300, as it may be amended from time to time with respect to abandoned facilities in Public Ways . The Company shall maintain records describing the location of all abandoned and retired Gas Facilities within the Public Ways and Public Grounds, produce such records at the City’s request and comply with the location requirements of Minnesota Statutes § 216D.04 with respect to all Gas Facilities located in Public Ways and Public Grounds. SECTION 10. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE 10.1. Severability. Every section, provision or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision or part; and if any section, provision or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision or part. Where a provision of any other City ordinance is inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 10.2. Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between City and Company as the only parties. No provisions herein shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public a t large) so as to constitute any such person as a third-party beneficiary of this Ordinance or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 11. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE Either party may propose at any time that this Franchise Ordinance be amended. Franchise Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company’s written consent thereto with the City Clerk within ninety (90) days after the effective date of the amendatory ordinance. SECTION 12. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERCEDED This franchise supersedes and replaces previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessors. Upon Company acceptance of this franchise under Section 2.2, the previous franchise shall terminate. SECTION 13. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance is effective as provided herein. Read by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of October, 2023. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th Day of November, 2023. _____________________________ Mary Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE GRANTING CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP. d/b/a CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS (“CENTERPOINT ENERGY”), ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC WAYS AND GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, MINNESOTA, FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF; AMENDING APPENDIX E: ARTICLE III OF THE CITY CODE WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above-referenced amendment to the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense of publication of the complete text is not justified; and 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. ________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX E: ARTICLE III OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. This ordinance, which amends City Code Appendix E: Article III relating to gas franchise fees, does the following: updates the City Code to include a revised Franchise Agreement between the City of Richfield and CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas (“CenterPoint Energy”) allowing and setting terms for CenterPoint Energy's use of the City right-of-way. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s office during normal business hours or upon request by calling the City Clerk at 612- 861-9739. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION:PROPOSED ORDINANCES AGENDA ITEM #7. STAFF REPORT NO. 160 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/28/2023 REPORT PREPARED BY:Sam Crosby, Planner II DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:Melissa Poehlman, Community Development Director 11/17/2023 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager 11/20/2023 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, a Second Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning the Subject Property, and approving a Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Approval and two Variances, for 38 units of affordable housing at 6613-6625 Portland Avenue South. EXECUTIVE SUM MARY: Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative (Applicant) is a non-profit housing developer that specializes in developing supportive housing at deeply affordable levels. They have applied for land use approvals to construct a 3-story, 38-unit housing development on land owned by the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and located south of T&T Automotive in the southeast quadrant of 66th Street East and Portland Avenue. The targeted clientele of the project is neuro-diverse young adults. A portion of the ground level would provide common areas and supportive services. All 38 units would be studio apartments. Half of the units would be available at 30% of Area Median Income (AMI) and the other half the units would be available at 50% AMI. See applicant’s project narrative, attached. Per the City’s policy for land use requests that involve Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezonings, the Applicant held a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposed plans. Neighbors expressed concerns about building height, privacy, view sheds, crime, and traffic. In response to the neighborhood meeting, the Applicant has reduced the size of the units in order to minimize the building mass, shifted the building farther from the east property line, moved the smoking hut to the north side of the building, and offered to increase the initial size of new trees in the rear. The neighborhood meeting conversation is summarized in greater detail in the “Neighborhood Meeting Summary” attachment. Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is guided as “Medium Density Residential” by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which allows up to 35 units per acre (or 21 units). “High Density Residential” allows for multi-family uses at a density of 35 to 100 units per acre (over 22, and up to 60 units). Because the project is proposing 38 units, the Applicant is pursuing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re- guide the site from Medium to High Density Residential. The proposed project meets many goals of the Comprehensive Plan and is located in an area that is compatible with higher intensity development, therefore staff recommends approval of the request. Zoning: The subject property is currently zoned MR-2, “Multi-Family Residential” and lies within the Veteran’s Park Area (VPA) overlay district. The Applicant is requesting a rezoning to MU-N, “Mixed Use, Neighborhood,” as the dimensional standards therein more closely align with the purpose and intent of the VPA overlay district. The proposed zoning is compatible with the proposed High Density Residential land use designation; therefore staff recommends approval of the request. Plat: In this case, replatting of the property is required in order to combine four parcels into one development site. Of particular note in this process and in consideration of the site plan and variances requested, the size of the properties was reduced when the right-of-way was expanded for the roundabout improvements. The preliminary plat meets all requirements; staff recommends approval of the request. Site Plan: Site Plan Approval is required for all developments in a Mixed Use district, not otherwise approved by a c onditional use permit or planned unit development. I t is worth noting that once re-guided and rezoned the proposed projec t c omplies with all aspec ts of the zoning code exc ept two. Staff finds that the c riteria have been met and recommends approval of the request. Variances: The first varianc e requested is a 32-parking stall varianc e from the 43-parking stall requirement to allow 11 parking stalls. The second varianc e is a 5-foot varianc e from the 15-foot front building setback requirement, to allow a 10-foot building setback along the west property line (Portland Avenue). I n order to grant a variance, the C ity must find that several specific c riteria (detailed in an attachment to this report) are met. Summarizing the requirements and findings, staff finds that reduc ed parking need of the population to be served by the proposed development, its loc ation on a bus rapid transit line, and a previous right-of-way taking by the County justify the requests and recommend approval. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 23rd. The Planning Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend approval of all aspects of the request. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: 1. Approve attached resolution changing the C omprehensive Plan designation for the subject property from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; 2. Approve a second reading of the attached ordinance rezoning the subject pr oper ty from MR-2, “Multi-Family Residential” to MU-N “Mixed Use Neighborhood”; and 3. Approve the attached resolution granting a preliminary plat, site plan approval, and 2 variances for the multi-family residential development of 38 units of affordable housing. 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 property is made up of remnant parcels from the P ortland Avenue roundabout project. The Housing and Redevelopment A uthority (HRA ) has been seeking a viable development proposal for the site since 2009 (about 14 years). The northernmost parcel, 6613, was rezoned to M R-2 in 2010. The rest of the parcels were rezoned in 2021. A ll the parcels have been guided Medium D ensity Residential since at least 2013. The P ortland and 66th S ub A rea S tudy was completed, and the V PA overlay di strict was adopted in June of 2021. On March 8, 2022, at a joi nt work session of the C ity C ouncil, H R A , and P lanning C ommission, B eacon presented conceptual plans for the development of up to 40 units of supportive, affordable rental housing at 6613-25 P ortland Avenue S outh. On March 21, 2022, the HRA approved a resolution of support for the B eacon concept. On A pril 18, 2022, the HRA approved a P relimi nary Redevelopment A greement with B eacon. On January 17, 2023, the HRA extended the P reliminary A greement until J anuary 31, 2024. On the evening of May 4, 2023, the A pplicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Ri chfi eld C ommunity C e nte r. A pproximately 12 neighbors attended. S ee the attached “Neighborhood Meeting S ummary” prepared by C ity staff. On J une 20, 2023, the HRA approved a Redevelopment A greement with B eacon Interfaith Housing C ollaborative for the development of approximately 38 units of supportive housing. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S W hat are the (racial) equity impacts of this decision? The rate of autism and other executive function disorders by race is not known by staff, but affordable housing generally helps those with the least resources, which tend to be a higher proportion of communities of color. W ho will benefit from or be burdened by this decision? Those who are at the lowest to middle-low end of the income bracket will benefit most from the development of housing for people earning between 30% and 50% A M I. Neuro-diverse young adults within that community will particularly benefit as half of the units would be reserved for them. F inally, the general population will also benefit, indirectly, as any increase the amount of housing helps alleviate housing shortages, and sufficient housing within a community generally reduces socio-economic problems and thereby generally increases the quality of life within that community. W hat are potential unintended consequences, and are there strategies to mitigate those consequences? S taff does not foresee any unintended consequences at this time. S trategic considerations: B y allowing this development to proceed we can help reduce barriers to housing for traditionally excluded groups which will help to ensure everyone in our community, regardless of their ability or economic situation, has a safe place to live and thrive. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): C omprehensive P lan A mendment The A pplicant is pursuing an amendment to re-guide the site from Medium D ensity Residential to High D ensity Residential. The subject site has been designated as Medium D ensity Residential since 2013. W hile the existing designation is not inappropriate, the proposed designation is equally or more appropriate. The Hi gh D ensity Residential future land use category is intended to allow for “multi-family uses at a density of 35 to 100 uni ts per acre primarily located in areas convenient to transportation, shopping and social services necessary to support higher concentrations of people." This site’s location, adjacent to the intersection of two C ounty roadways, along the D -L i ne bus rapid transit route, and in close proximity to Veteran’s P ark aligns with the characteristics envisioned for High D ensity Residential. Re-guiding the property to High D ensity Residential supports the purpose and intent of the V PA overlay district, whi ch i s (in brief) to produce structures of appropriate scale that transition from single-family residential to higher density mixed use and commercial while being sensitive to surrounding land uses and adhering to the sub-area study’s guidance and development principles. Those principles include (among other things): D iversify Housing Opti ons: This project utilizes a redevelopment opportunity to expand the mix of housing in the area, both in relation to services provided and population served. B uilding transition: The subject proposal is a housing project that provides an appropriate transition between single-family residential to the east and P ortland Avenue, an “A Minor A ugmenter” under C ounty jurisdiction, to the west, as well as between the single family residential to the south and the commercial use to the north. Quantity of P arking: B ecause of the demographic served, the housing project is able to minimize the parking needed. This is a significant factor in what makes the project viable. F inally, the project is sensitive to surrounding single-family residential through the lush landscaping and 6 foot tall privacy fence that would provide screening on the north, east and south sides. A s well as pushing the building as far westward and northward as possible. In reviewing amendments to the C omprehensive P lan the C ity is acting in a legislative capacity. A s such, a wider degree of discretion i s afforded to the C ity to balance the various policy consi derati ons. In general, the action must be reasonably related to advancing the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. S taff finds that providing affordable housing for those who are less advantaged advances the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Rezoning A rezoning i s also being requested to accommodate the density of the project. The M R-2 zoning district has a maximum of 25 uni ts, regardless of lot size. The A ppli cant has not requested a rezoning to M R-3 because both the M R-2 and M R-3 zoning districts are anti quated in thei r bulk and dimensional requirements. In 1982, the sub districts of MR-2 and MR-3 were created based on what was already existing (projects built in the late 1970’s or earlier). They were updated in 1996, to add cluster homes, but generally have not kept pace with the realities of constructing multi -family housing in today’s market. S taff has hopes of holding workshops with the P lanning C ommission towards updati ng these districts to reflect current development patterns. In 2007, the C ity created three mixed use districts, one of which i s the Mixed Use Nei ghborhood (M U-N) district. In this district, commercial services are not required and residential uses are emphasized at key transportation nodes/corners. The projects are intended to be of smaller scale and oriented to the neighborhood. The main differences between the M R-2 district and the M U-N district are building coverage limits (30% vs. 75%), unit sizes (minimums vs. no minimums), open space requirements (12,350 sq. ft. vs. 2,533 sq. ft.), rear and side setbacks (35 ft. vs. 5 ft.), building height (3 stories vs. 8 stories) and the number of studio units allowed (maximum 20% vs. no limit). The purpose and intent, as well as the bulk and dimensional standards, of the M U-N zoning district are more aligned with the purpose and intent of the V PA overlay district (i.e. discourage auto use and promote increased use of transit). Rezoning to MU-N provides the opportunity for a project that fits within the community fabric, as the building is not too dissimilar in height and bulk to other existing apartments in the immediate area, but does not have the availability of land that previous generations enjoyed. P reliminary P lat The property is already served by publi c utilities and recently i mproved street rights-of-way, therefore, no further land dedication is being requested beyond that which was requi red for the roundabout. The MU-N zoning district does not have a mi ni mum lot size requirement or dimensional requirements such as a lot width requi rement. The required 5-foot uti lity and drainage easements are provided along the perimeters of the lot. The A pplicant has worked with the C ounty to restripe a southbound left-turn lane i nto the site, and a space for emergency vehicles to pull over behind the (northbound) bus bay. The attorney has provided a P reliminary P lat Opinion L etter that will be updated when the final plat is applied for. S ite P lan A pproval The site layout pushes the bui ldi ng as far north and west as possible, to provide as much space between the building and the si ngle-fami ly residential as possible. The A ppli cant has worked with Metro Transit to provide private improvements that complement the public improvements within the right-of-way, and provide a seamless transition between the two. The plan includes a 6-foot tall privacy fence along the north, east and south property lines to provide privacy for both the residents and the nei ghbors, and lush landscaping along the perimeter of the site. P arking adequacy is discussed in the variance section, as is the front yard building setback variance. A ll other aspects of the zoning code, including bui ldi ng height, landscaping, architecture, electric vehicle charging, bike parking, solar access, impervious area and useable open space, are all being met. P arking Variance P arking in the M U-N district requi res 1.25 spaces for every dwelling unit, which is 48 spaces for the 38 units proposed. The code allows a 10% reduction for proximity to a high-frequency transit line, bringing the requirement down to 43 spaces. The A ppli cant i s proposi ng only 11 parking spaces, which is a 32 stall difference, or 0.29 stalls per uni t. The A pplicant has provided a parki ng study (attached) which captures the parking utilization at their three other locations in S t. P aul, Minneapolis and E dina. The locations provide 0.27, 0.21 and 0.33 stalls per unit, respectively and are, on average, only 62% full during peak operations. W hile all three comparative locations are 100% affordable at 30% A M I, the subject si te is proposed to be only 50% affordable at 30% A M I. The i ncrease in resident wages almost negligibly impact parking demand. The high cost of owning even a used car makes it very difficult for low income earners to have their own vehicle. A s of 2021, nationally, only 16% of car owners make $49,999 or less in annual income, 16% of half the units is three. The facility will also have, at most, five employees. The five employees, plus the potential for three resident vehicles, plus one for dial a ride type services, equals nine parking stalls. Two stalls would remain for visitors. This facili ty i s a unique facility that serves a population with a higher rate of mental or physical impairment, that also impedes ownership of an automobile. A goal of the V PA overlay distri ct is to minimize parking demand and this project does that. B ecause of the faci lity’s financial demographic, which is guaranteed over the next 40 years due to fundi ng requirements, staff supports the variance. To i ncrease the comfort level with the vari ance, staff has included a condition of understanding, that - should for some unforeseen reason, the parking demand exceed the parking supply such that i t creates a nuisance or issue - the owner of the property will work with the C ity to resolve the nuisance or issue. S etback Variance The front yard setback in the MU-N district is a mi ni mum of 15 feet and the northwest corner of the building is proposed to be 10 feet from the west property line. There is room to shift the building eastward, to comply with the setback requirement, but the project team chose to maximi ze the space along the rear of the building for two reasons. F i rst, to provide as much setback from the nei ghbori ng single-family residential as possi ble. S econd, to provide as much private green space for the residents of the building as possible. The vast majority of the building complies with the 15-foot setback requirement – it is only the northern 37 feet that encroaches - a total of 118 square feet. The V PA overlay district has a 10-foot setback requirement, so placi ng the bui ldi ng closer to the street is not inappropriate i n this locati on. A s mentioned in the A pplicant’s narrative, the dedication of frontage to the round-a-bout project reduced the depth of the lot, specifically on the north end, in the area of the D -L ine bus station. Thi s is precisely the area of, and directly related to, where the variance is being requested. The requested setback is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practi cal difficulty that was created by a past public acti on; if the right- of-way had not been widened, the proposed building would comply with the 15-foot setback for the entire length. Other C onsiderations Safety. S ome residents have rai sed concerns about crime and safety. Richfield staff contacted the C ity of E dina staff, to inquire about the rate of police calls to their B eacon location, which has been operating since 2014. E dina staff could easily attest that calls for service are not greater i n number or severity than any market rate apartment building of the same size. Generally speaki ng, the project could be expected to reduce crime, as those with a roof over their head are less likely to commit crimes than those that do not. The C ity with the most affordable housing units in the entire county — Irvine, C A — is the safest in the nation, based on F B I Uniform C rime Reporting statistics. S trategic Outcome C onsideration B y approving thi s affordable housing project that serves neuro-divergent youth and young adults, the C ity “maintains Richfield as an affordable place to li ve” and “applies and equity-based framework to decision making." A ffordability The 2040 C omprehensive P lan calls for a full range of housi ng choices that meets residents' needs at every stage of their lives and ensures a healthy balance of housing types that meet the needs of a diverse population with diverse needs. S upporting housing stability for people with the lowest incomes is a way to further the community's commitment to equitable opportunities for all. The Metropolitan C ouncil has identified the C ity's share of housing affordable at 30% of the A MI to be 66 units, and at 50% of A MI to be 29 units by 2030. The proposed project meets several priorities of the A ffordable Housing Trust F und, including: Housing with units affordable at 30% of the A MI Housing with accessible units Housing with supportive services Housing with resident rental subsidies D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: The development is not likely to start construction until funding is received, which may not be until 2025. Therefore, staff has written the approval to default to two years, rather than the standard one year. The A pplicant can still request further extension after that, if needed. L ikewise, the timeframe in which to file the final plat has also been extended to two years. The 60-day clock started when the application was deemed complete on S eptember 8, 2023. B ecause the request involves both a Re-zoning (which requires more than one reading before the C ity C ouncil) and a C omprehensive P lan A mendment (which requires both adjacent and affected jurisdiction review, and Met C ouncil approval), C ity staff already exercised the C ity’s right to a time extension for an additional 60 days. The extended review period will end on – and therefore a decision is required by - F riday, January 5, 2025. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None; the required land use application fees have been paid. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: A public hearing regarding this item was held before the Planning Commission on October 23, 2023. Notice of the hearing was mailed to properties and residents within 500 feet of the proposed development and published in the Sun Current Newspaper on October 12, 2023. Several people participated in the hearing. The P lanning C ommission voted unanimously to recommend approval of all aspects of the land use request (6-0). F irst reading of the rezoning was before the C ity C ouncil on November 14, 2023. If approved, the rezoning will take effect 30 days following publication in the S un C urrent Newspaper. If approved, the C omprehensive P lan A mendment will be sent to adjacent and relevant jurisdictions for comment, and then to the Metropolitan C ouncil for review. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): A pprove the proposed C omprehensi ve P lan A mendment, Rezoning, S ite P lan, Variances, and P reliminary P lat with additional and/or modified conditions. D eny the requests with findings that code requirements and/or the C omprehensive P lan has not been met. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: J im B arnes, S enior Housing P roject Manager for B eacon, and P aul Mellblom, P rincipal A rchitect MS R D esigns. AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type Rezoning Ordinance Ordinance C PA Resolution Resolution L etter P relim P lat Reso Resolution L etter S ite P lan & Variance Reso Resolution L etter L ocation and Zoning Map E xhibit P lanned L and Use Map E xhibit Required F indings B ackup Material Neighborhood Meeting S ummary B ackup Material A pplicant's Narrative B ackup Material P arking S tudy B ackup Material S ite P lans B ackup Material Graphic Renderings B ackup Material C olored E levations B ackup Material P reliminary P lat B ackup Material L andscape P lan S et B ackup Material S olar S hading D iagrams B ackup Material ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING APPENDIX I OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE BY REZONING 6613-6625 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH FROM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (MR-2) TO MIXED USE - NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Section 13, Paragraph 43 of Appendix I of the Richfield Zoning Code (Multi-Family Residential – MR-2) is here amended as follows. M-9 (E side of Portland Ave, S of 66th). Lots 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and the West ½ of Lot 26, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 340. Sec. 2. Section 16, Appendix I of the Richfield Zoning Code (Mixed Use - Neighborhood) is here amended to add a new Paragraph 6 to read as follows: (6) M-9 (E side of Portland Ave, S of 66th). Lots 31, 32, 33 and 34, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 340. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF 6613-6625 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH TO “HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL” WHEREAS, the City’s Comprehensive Plan provides a Planned Land Use Map guiding the future use of parcels within the City; and WHEREAS, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates 6613, 6617, 6621, and 6625 Portland Avenue South (“subject property”) as “Medium Density Residential”; and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the Planned Land Use Map and determined that it would be appropriate to designate the subject property as “High Density Residential” as described in City Council Staff Report No. ____; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended approval of amending the Comprehensive Plan at its October 23, 2023 meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the City’s Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to designate 6613, 6617, 6621 and 6625 Portland Avenue South as “High Density Residential” contingent upon the following: 1. The revision is submitted to and approved by the Metropolitan Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ASTER COMMONS WHEREAS, Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative, LLC. (“Applicant”) has requested approval of a preliminary plat that combines parcels generally located at 6613-6625 Portland Avenue South, legally described as: Lots 31, 32, 33 and 34, Auditor’s Subdivision, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Torrens Property Certificate of Title 14184 72, 71, 70 and 69 and WHEREAS, the proposed plat is to be known as ASTER COMMONS; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held for the proposed preliminary plat on Monday, October 23, 2023, at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, as follows: 1. The proposed preliminary plat of ASTER COMMONS satisfies the requirements of the City’s subdivision ordinances. 2. Approval of the preliminary plat of ASTER COMMONS is granted subject to the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must address to the City Attorney’s satisfaction all items listed in the final plat opinion letter to be prepared by the City Attorney’s office upon the submittal of a final plat document. b. The Applicant must file the final plat within two years of the date of this approval, unless a written request for a time extension is approved by the City Council, or the preliminary plat will expire. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND TWO VARIANCES FOR ASTER COMMONS HOUSING AT 6613-6625 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative, LLC, with the City of Richfield which requests approval of proposed site plan, a 32 stall parking variance, and a 5 foot front yard setback variance, all in order to construct 38 units of affordable apartment homes at 6613, 6617, 6621, and 6625 Portland Avenue South, property legally described as: Lots 31, 32, 33 and 34, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 340, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 544.13, Subdivision 6, establishes a minimum number of required off-street parking spaces, which totals 48 spaces for this property; and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 544.13, Subdivision 8, allows a reduction of 10% for proximity to transit (any parcel which is located within 1/4 mile of a frequently operating transit line), bringing the total required off-street parking spaces down to 43; and WHEREAS, the proposed site plan provides 11 parking stalls; and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided a parking study that illustrates the actual demand anticipated by the project, as demonstrated by their three other locations within the metro area; and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 537.07,Subd.1, requires that the principal building be set back a minimum of 15 feet from the front property line; and WHEREAS, the proposed layout places the northwest corner of the building 10 feet from the front property line in order to maximize the rear yard setback ; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property and published in the Sun Current newspaper on October 12, 2023; and, WHEREAS, the variances meet the requirements of Zoning Code Section 547.11, Subd.1, as detailed in City Council Staff Report No. __; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing at its October 23, 2023 meeting and recommended approval of the requested site plan and variances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has fully considered the request for site plan approval and variances; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS clauses set forth above. 2. The City Council further adopts as its Findings of Fact the findings listed in the Required Findings Statement. 3. The requested site plan and variances are hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. Should the parking demand exceed the parking supply such that it creates a nuisance or issue, the owner of the property will work with the City to resolve the nuisance or issue. b. Separate sign permits are required for signage greater than 6 square feet in size. c. All required parking spaces shall remain available year-round and shall not be used for snow storage. d. The property owner is responsible for the ongoing maintenance of all exterior improvements, including landscaping, in accordance with approved plans. e. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, and compliance with all other City, County and State regulations. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall: f. Provide a SAC determination from the Met Council. g. Provide proof of having recorded a copy of this resolution of approval. h. Enter into a construction and maintenance agreement with the City. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall: i. Enter into an escrow agreement for outstanding items and provide a surety equal to 125% of the value of any improvements not yet complete. j. Provide proof of having recorded the construction and maintenance agreement. k. The final plat shall be recorded and mylar copies provided to the City. Prior to the release of the surety: l. All exterior improvements shall be installed. m. All requirements of the escrow agreement shall be met. 4. This approval is contingent upon the approval of the associated Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning of the property. 5. This approval shall expire two years from issuance unless the use for which the permit was granted has commenced, substantial work has been completed or upon written request by the applicant, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.13, Subd. 9. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" VETS MEMORIAL PORTLAND AVE66TH ST E 66TH ST EPORTLANDAVE OAKLAND AVE67TH ST E 66TH ST E66TH ST E 6 6 T H S T EPORTLANDAVE66TH S T E 5TH AVE SPORTLANDAVE± Location and Zoning Map 0 150 30075ft I:\GIS\Community Development\Case Maps\2023\Aster Commons.mxd 6613-6625 Portland Avenue South Beacon Interfaith Housing - Aster Commons SUBJECTSITE Legend Parks R Low Density Residential """"""""""""Veteran's Park Area Overlay MR-2 Multi-Family C-2 General Commerciall MU-N Mixed Use-Neighborhood Proposed Rezoning from MR-2 to MU-N PROPOSEDl 66TH ST E 6 7 T H S T EPORTLAND AVEOAKLAND AVEPARK AVE66TH ST E 66TH ST EPORTLANDAVE 6 6 T H S T EPORTLANDAVE66TH S T E 5TH AVE SPORTLANDAVE± 2040 Comprehensive Plan Designations I:\GIS\Community Development\Case Maps\2023\Aster Commons - PLU.mxd 6613-6625 Portland Avenue South 0 150 30075ft Subject Site Re-guide from MDR to HDR Beacon Interfaith Housing - Aster Commons lLegend: Community Commercial High Density Residential Medium Density Residential Low Density Residential Park Quasi-Public lPROPOSED(8-34 du/ac) (35-100 du/ac) VETERAN'S MEMORIAL PARK REQUIRED FINDINGS – ASTER COMMONS Part 1: Development proposals in the Mixed Use Districts shall be reviewed for compliance with the following (537.01, Subd.3): 1. Consistency with the elements and objectives of the City’s development guides, including the Comprehensive Plan and any redevelopment plans established for the area.  As outlined in the policies section of the staff report, assuming the rezoning approval, the proposed development complies with all zoning requirements, save the two variances being requested.  The proposal also supports the purpose and intent of the Veteran’s Park Area Overlay district, which, among other things, is to: i. Diversify Housing Options ii. Provide Sustainable Development iii. Create Appropriate Transitions iv. Minimize Parking  The project advances the following objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: i. Includes site design and architectural characteristics that provide appropriate transitions between lower and higher intensity uses. ii. Provides a full range of housing choices that contribute to vital and desirable neighborhoods that welcome diversity of age, race, and physical ability; while maintaining a comfortable small town atmosphere iii. Focuses commercial and higher density residential development along major thoroughfares. iv. Strongly encourages pedestrian-friendly and transit friendly building and site design through measures such as higher density development and growth, which is located along major transportation routes. v. Ensure that redevelopment and infill projects maintain the integrity of existing neighborhoods. vi. Uses quality, durable building and landscaping materials to maintain a high- quality standard. vii. Provides quality amenities and a safe living environment. viii. Supplies part of the City’s allocation of the region’s need for affordable housing. ix. Furthers the development of a balanced housing stock that is available to a range of income levels. 2. Consistency with the regulations of the Mixed Use Districts as described by Section 537 of the Code.  As noted above, the proposed development is consistent with the Mixed Use District regulations. 3. Creation of a design for structures and site features which promotes the following: i. An internal sense of order among the buildings and uses.  The location of the building, parking lot, and walkways provide for orderly and safe accessibility that will adequately serve residents, visitors, deliveries, and emergency vehicles. The project is designed to accommodate those arriving by all transportation modes. Pedestrian connections are provided around the west, south and east sides of the building. The front is activated by large windows and articulated main entrance. ii. The adequacy of vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width or interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking.  See 3.i, above iii. Energy conservation through the design of structures and the use of landscape materials and site grading.  The landscaping plan proposes plantings to both soften the appearance of the site and uptake stormwater. The number, design and placement of windows allows plenty of natural light into the building. The roof has been designed to support the future installation of solar panels. iv. The minimization of adverse environmental effects on persons using the development and adjacent properties.  No adverse environmental effects are anticipated. Part 2 - Site Plan Approval (Subsection 547.13) In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its compliance with the following: 1. Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City’s long range plans including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan.  The proposed use is consistent with the long-range plans and comprehensive plan. See item 1 in Part 1, above. 2. Consistency with the purposes of the Zoning Code.  Except for the two variances requested, the proposed use is consistent with the Zoning Code and is allowed in the zoning district. 3. Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas.  Any natural features were lost with the original development of the land in the 1940’s. Five out of eight existing trees would be saved and no significant changes in grade are proposed. 4. Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the proposed development.  The proposed site layout is harmonious with the nearby existing and future buildings, by placing the building as far north and west on the site as possible, and by placing the parking on the south side of the property. This allows the vehicular access to be as far from the intersection as possible and the building to be as far from the low density residential as possible. 5. Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features including: i. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community;  The site layout is logical and provides a generally desirable environment in the context of the area. ii. Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping to the design and function of the development;  There is good design and function of open space, with various gathering spaces on the north and east sides of the building. The landscaping along the east and south property is robust to help screen the building from the neighboring residences. iii. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and functions;  Details of construction are compatible to the area. iv. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian, cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring properties.  There is adequate bike parking, with 6 outside and 36 inside. The pedestrian areas are also adequate with ADA access to both the back and front of the building. The simple arrangement of parking is safe, convenient and compatible with the surrounding properties. The amount of parking is adequate subject to approval of the requested variance. See Part 3, below. 6. Creation of an energy-conserving design through design location, orientation and elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of landscape materials and site grading.  The development is of standard building and site design and does not contain any unique energy-conserving features outside of traditional architectural and landscape architecture standard practices. 7. Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.  The building does not unreasonably block light or air to adjacent residences. Neighboring properties would be protected by a 6-foot tall privacy fence, robust landscaping along the property lines, the stormwater management features being located on the west side of the building and the smoking canopy being located on the north side of the building. Part 3A – Parking Variance (Subsection 547.11, Subd.1) A variance may be granted from the literal provision of this code only when all of the following criteria are found to exist: a) There are “practical difficulties” that prevent the property owner from using the property in a reasonable manner.  The City’s parking requirements are based on the assumption that apartment dwellers are of an income level and physical or mental ability to own a vehicle. However, the residents of this particular apartment are highly unlikely to meet those criteria. Therefore, the City’s requirement imposes a practical difficulty to provide spaces that are not needed. b) There are unusual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity.  The demographic make-up of the community to be served is the unique circumstance that applies to this property that does not apply to other market-rate apartments in the same zone or vicinity. The funding source’s requirement for restrictive convenants guarantees the demographic make-up for 40 years. c) The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality.  Given that the residents of the building are highly unlikely to own a car, sufficient parking is provided in regards to the demand created (employees and visitors). Consequently, the variance is not anticipated to alter the character of the neighborhood. d) The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty  The Staff agrees that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. e) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.  The variance is in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance as it provides adequate parking relative to the anticipated demand; it supports pedestrian, bicycle and mass transit use; provides a loading and unloading area, meets the drive aisle and parking aisle design standards; meets the ADA and electric vehicle charging requirements, and meets the setbacks. The variance is also consistent with the Comprehensive plan as it supports the type of development where vehicle use is minimized. Also, it supports housing that ensures a healthy balance of housing types that meet the needs of a diverse population with diverse needs. Part 3B – Setback Variance (Subsection 547.11, Subd.1) A variance may be granted from the literal provision of this code only when all of the following criteria are found to exist: a) There are “practical difficulties” that prevent the property owner from using the property in a reasonable manner.  A slice of right-of-way was taken in the northwest corner of the property to accommodate a public improvement (the round-about at Portland Avenue and 66th Street E), This created a practical difficulty. A public action, such as a right-of-way dedication, is a classic practical difficulty, formerly known as a “hardship”. b) There are unusual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity.  The reduction in parcel depth by the round-about project was a public action that was not created by the applicant and does not apply, generally, to other properties in the same zone or vicinity. c) The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality.  The vast majority of the building complies with the required setback, it is only the northernmost corner of the building – specifically in the area where the lot was reduced for public purpose – that the building encroaches. The south side of the front of the proposed building aligns with the front of the neighboring residence to the south. Therefore, staff finds the variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood or locality. d) The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty.  The amount of right-of-way that was dedicated (25 feet) is much wider than the amount of variance being requested (5 feet). Consequently, staff agrees that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. e) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.  The building design could be altered to meet the setback requirement, but deviation is being requested in order to maximize the setback along the east side. Maximizing the rear yard provides as much space as possible for screening, light, air flow and transition between the adjacent single-family to the east and the subject building. A design that is sensitive to the surrounding land uses is in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance and the Comp Plan. Part 4 - Preliminary Plat: (Subsection 500.05,Subd. 7) The Planning Commission, as a basis for their recommendation, and the City Council, as a basis for their approval, must make the following findings prior to approval of a preliminary plat: (a) The subdivision is in conformance with this Section and the applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance.  The proposed preliminary plat is in conformance with Section 500 “Plats and Subdivision Regulations” of the municipal code and, subject to the approval of the two variances, is in conformance with all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. (b) The subdivision does not conflict with any goals or policies of the Comprehensive Plan or other sub-area plan; the Capital Improvements Program; or any other City policy or regulation.  The combination of four parcels into one will facilitate the orderly, economic and safe development of la nd. As such, it does not conflict with any goals or policies of the Comp Plan or the Veteran’s Park Area Overlay District. (c) The subdivision can be economically served with public facilities and services.  The property is already served by public faciliti es and services, and the increase in capacity demand can easily be absorbed. (d) The subdivision design mitigates potential substantial and irreversible negative impacts on the environment, including, but not limited to: topography; steep slopes; trees; vegetation; naturally occurring lakes, ponds, rivers and streams; susceptibility of the site to erosion, sedimentation or flooding; drainage; and storm water storage needs.  The subject site is relatively flat, the only natural features are a few existing trees. Of the seven trees which remain, four will be removed, but 16 will be planted . (e) The subdivision will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.  Staff foresees no way in which the platting of the property would be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Aster Commons – Neighborhood Meeting Summary On the evening of May 4, 2023, Beacon held a neighborhood meeting at the Richfield Community Center. Approximately 12 neighbors attended. Neighbors expressed concerns about: o building height, o privacy, o view sheds, o crime, and o traffic. Neighbors heard the following: o The building will reflect a preference for young adults (18-24), particularly those with neurodiversity, typically with Autism Spectrum Disorder, but also those experiencing housing insecurity, sometimes both. o Behavioral or emotional issues can sometimes be associated with their clients, but not necessarily. o There will not be anyone who is court ordered to live there. The facility is a traditional landlord/tenant arrangement. As such, they are willing to evict as needed. o Volunteers of America (VOA) will be the primary service provider. They have over 50 years of experience providing service-enriched affordable housing as property managers, building owners, and service providers. Additionally, VOA offers a variety of community-based services regarding challenges to behavioral and emotional health and well-being. o Staffing will be during regular business hours, but may vary according to resident needs and schedules. o There will be no services provided to non-residents. o The property will not be tax exempt. o Beacon did consider other sites for this project. Sites within the City of Richfield included: 6501 Penn, 817 E 66th Street, the Post 435 site, and the HUB. They also researched 15 other sites in the west metro area. o There have been other developers who explored other potential projects in the past, including two townhome developers and two multi-family housing developers. Limiting factors, which have hindered previous attempts at redevelopment include:  The County’s restriction to one curb cut as far south as possible.  The shallow depth of the lot, which narrows from 123 feet on the south side to 104 feet on the north side. In response to the neighborhood meeting, the applicant has: o Reduced the size of the units in order to minimize the building mass. o Shifted the building further from the east property line. o Moved the smoking hut to the north side of the building. o Offered to increase the initial size of new trees in the rear. PROJECT SUMMARY Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Aster Commons is a new, 3-story building of wood construction and slab on grade with a flat roof housing solar panels, to be installed provided they are funded. When completed the building will provide 38 studio apartments targeting neurodiverse young adults. The backyard will be extensively landscaped (trees and shrubbery) with a 6’ high fence abutting the neighbor’s properties to provide a safe space for these vulnerable young adults. Parking is provided by 11 onsite parking stalls at the south end of the site. The building will have security cameras located in interior common spaces and around the building perimeter to protect the residents’ safety. The building provides a variety of spaces to support residents’ wellbeing including property management, case management, therapy and counseling services, community rooms, a 3-season porch, meeting rooms, and quiet rooms. Residents must comply with income limits of 30% of AMI for 50% of the apartments and 30%-50% AMI for the other 50% of the apartments. The building is 28,079sf and is predicted to have 3-4 staff onsite throughout the day. MSR Design has discussed this proposal with city staff and believe the following items need to be addressed in this application: o Comp Plan Amendment to Reguide from MDR to HDR o Rezoning from MR-2 to MU-N o Variance for a 11-stall parking lot o Variance for a 10’ setback for building location in the front yard COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The project is requesting a Comprehensive Plan amendment as the current guiding only allows for 34 dwelling units per acre and Aster Commons would exceed that limit by 4 units. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide from MDR to HDR is justifiable because this is a node within the city that has been identified to have a higher land use capacity than the surrounding single-family neighborhood. The current MDR designation does not support the ambitions of the Veterans Park Area Overlay (VPA) zoning district by its own definition in Section 541.25 Subd. 1: “…to produce structures of consistent character and of appropriate scale that transition from single family residential to higher density mixed use…” (italics added for emphasis). This site is located along Portland Avenue, a primary north-south arterial in the city of Richfield that contains many large commercial and institutional buildings along its spine between highway 62 and interstate 494, including churches, schools, and the Richfield Municipal Complex one block south of this site. This is an ideal site for a reguiding to HDR to allow this site to provide higher density housing and to provide affordable housing that helps the City of Richfield meet the community’s Met Council affordable housing goals. The site is in close proximity to commercial offerings as well as located along the BRT and adjacent to the 66th Street bus routes and protected bike path. The area is highly walkable and the nearby Veterans Park is an ideal municipal amenity that should have density nearby as a natural support area for residents. This proposed use is a useful transition/buffer from the lower density single-family neighborhood behind the property to Portland Avenue, continuing the densification along Portland Avenue. Thus we believe the proposed reguiding to HDR is congruent with the intents of the VPA and the reality of this property’s best and highest use along Portland Avenue. REZONING REQUEST Proposed to rezone from MR-2 to MU-N to enable this proposed project to conform with the MU-N zoning designation with two minor variances needed. The current MR-2 zoning does not support the ambitions of the Veterans Park Area Overlay (VPA) district, as written in the municipal zoning code Section 541.25 Subd. 1: “…to produce structures of consistent character and of appropriate scale that transition from single family residential to higher density mixed use…” (italics added for emphasis). By definition, the MR-2 zone is a lower density zone that does not support the VPA’s intentions to create a node of vitality at and adjacent to the Portland Avenue and 66th Street roundabout that seeks to diversify housing options per municipal zoning code Section 541.25 Subd. 1: “…to expand the mix of housing in the area such as row/townhouse, affordable units, courtyard apartments, courtyard cottages, and live-work units.” Additionally, Richfield has committed to supporting the Met Council’s goals of providing 121 units of affordable dwelling units at or below 80% of the area median income by 2030. This project will help the city meet its long-term commitment to build affordable housing for Richfield by adding 38 new affordable units at or below 50% of the area median income. VARIANCE REQUESTS PARKING REDUCTION VARIANCE Under the current zoning, only 20 units would be allowed and that would mean the project would need 25 parking stalls at 1.25 stalls per unit. Proposed parking is 11 total parking stalls = 0.29 parking stalls per dwelling unit. (a). Is there a practical difficulty present which denies a reasonable use of the property? (Explain): Yes, the additional parking would result in a much smaller building to allow the zoning required parking count to fit onsite and much of that parking would always sit empty. A parking study was conducted by Beacon Interfaith Collaborative through the winter of 2022/2023 to measure total parking demand at three similar buildings owned by Beacon. This was done at the suggestion of Richfield city staff when the issue of excessive parking requirements for the target resident population was discussed at the Sketch Plan review session in August 2022. The study found that at any time a maximum of 8, 6, and 7 parking stalls were actually used at the three properties, each of which is larger than the proposed Aster Commons and are targeted to more all-purpose young adult housing rather than Aster Commons’ targeted population of neurodiverse young adults. Thus we are convinced the demand at Aster Commons will not exist for residents and staff to need more than the 10 car parking stalls provided onsite. An additional parking stall is being provided and will be signed for Metro Mobility and ride share vehicles to pick up/discharge residents at the parking lot entry to the building. Four exterior bike parking spots and an interior bike storage room accommodating 38 bicycles are in the proposed design, including indoor space for 2 adaptive bikes with electric plug-ins (See Sheet A193 for layout and dimensions). Residents at Beacon’s three other properties are very frequently users of these modes of transit and we anticipate that to be true for this property. Metro Mobility, ride share, buses and bicycles are predicted to be the primary means of transport for this population since this population has a higher rate of physical impairments than the general population and their incomes restrict the funds required to own/maintain an automobile. Thus having the parking stall count required by the code would create a sea of parking lot on this property since underground parking is cost prohibitive. Additionally, many of the residents will be unable to secure a driver’s license due to their neurodiverse medical conditions. (b). Are there any unusual or unique circumstances relating to the property or building which are beyond your control? (Explain): Yes, the current site conditions of the new BRT station’s proximity to new roundabout reduce the lot size and force the curb cut to be at the south end of the property. Both remove available site square footage for parking and limit building placement. The proposed use of Metro Mobility and the adjacent BRT station aligns with city goals for reducing traffic and congestion. Thus the proposed reduced parking count aligns with overall city goals to reduce automobile traffic. The location along the BRT line, public sidewalks, and bike lanes along Portland Avenue and 66th Street are optimal for this population’s predicted needs for transportation. We believe this parking reduction represents less site burden than other uses that would typically be permitted by zoning that would allow at least 24 parking stalls. Thus granting this variance so this project can go forward as proposed will actually reduce individual automobile traffic since residents will be primarily utilizing public transportation, walking, and bicycle options for the most part. (c). Is the variance consistent with the purpose and intent of the rule from which a variance is being requested? (Explain): Yes, the purpose of this zoning code section is to provide sufficient off-street parking for the sites intended use; in this case that is residents, staff, and guests. Based on the parking study conducted by Beacon Interfaith Collaborative (noted above) at the buildings they own and manage in Edina, Minneapolis, and St Paul the parking demand will be less than or equal to the 10 parking stalls proposed. The results of this study were sent to city staff by Beacon in January 2023. Per current zoning allowed for the site, there could be 24 dwelling units built onsite. Parking could be provided in underground and/or surface parking. If these were 3-bedroom apartments, there could reasonably be 72 to 96 residents onsite (assuming families with 2 children). At the zoning code required mandate this would result in only 30 parking stalls, which would likely mean additional parking on the nearby side streets since parking is not allowed on Portland Avenue. Thus we believe our proposal is a less intensive use of the site than if the building constructed were to be maximized per the current zoning allowances. And that our proposed parking reduction will decrease neighborhood impact by reducing the level of traffic on the site and entering/exiting the property. FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE Required property front setbacks are 15’ min to 25’ max per zoning code section 537.07 Bulk and Dimensional Standards MU-N table 2. Proposed front setbacks are from 10’ minimum to 25’ maximum. Maintaining 15’ minimum front set back is doable except at the BRT station because that station infringes on the efficient use of the site. The original site consists of the following lots 31, 32, 33 and 34 for a total of 28,478 square feet or 0.654 acres. Front building setback responds to revised site conditions with the recent roundabout installation and BRT station installed by Metro transit. The current site has been reduced to 25,266 SF. The building follows the recommended 15’ setback for main front yard setback except at BRT bus shelter where we are requesting a 10’ setback from the BRT station since the station sits within the 5’ area of the setback. Side yard setbacks are 5’ on the north and east yards and a 15’ south setback has been created for the parking lot as required for adjacency to residential property. The east rear yard setback has been increased to 27’-4” to accommodate private resident features including rear patio space, walking paths, private seating areas and landscape.(a). Is there a practical difficulty present which denies a reasonable use of the property? (Explain): Current site conditions with the new BRT station have resulted in the property being narrower at its north end due to the BRT bus stop that steps back into the site by 5’. This step back has necessitated the building being 10’ from the front property line, which sits at the rear edge of the 5’ indent for the bus shelter, sign, and bench. If this step-back in the property line had not been present, the building position would comply with zoning and this variance would not be necessary. The project is also maintaining a min of 27’ for the rear yard area to maintain the min of 10% useable area and to maintain more distance from the neighbors who front on the street to the east. The building placement is aligned to avoid solar shading of neighbors per the zoning code. (b). Are there any unusual or unique circumstances relating to the property or building which are beyond your control? (Explain): After talking with existing neighbors who live behind the property, we believe the best building location is to push it to the west and as far from the rear property line as possible. The current site layout accomplishes this by including a 27’ setback on the rear (east) side of the site to provide as much separation as possible between the building and neighbors. This allows the project to include taller trees to be planted between the new building and rear property line to help screening between the building and the neighbors. If the site were to meet the requirements of the 15’ minimum setback at the north end of the site, it would be a very convoluted building to maintain the 25’ maximum setback at the south end of the site since the site is trapezoidal in shape. We believe this design layout better situates the building on the site than strictly complying with the 15’ minimum setback rule. The remainder of the proposed building adheres to the 15’ setback except at the entry area due to the removal of original site sf for the BRT shelter, signage and bench. (c). Is the variance consistent with the purpose and intent of the rule from which a variance is being requested? (Explain): The newly constructed BRT station sits within the prior, typical 15’ setback requirement for the property. Had the original property line been maintained then the building placement would comply with the 15’ minimum setback dimension. The 15’ minimum setback is maintained south of the bump into the property for the BRT shelter, bench, and sign. Aster Commons – Determination of Parking Need 2023 In developing the preliminary designs for the Aster Commons 38-unit supportive housing development, determining the need for parking has been carefully considered. The site is on the METRO D Line as a part of the growing network of bus rapid transit (BRT) lines that deliver a faster trip and an improved transit experience with service from Bloomington through Minneapolis to Brooklyn Center. We believe the residents who will live at Aster Commons will be youth and young adults, some with neurodiverse conditions, emerging from homelessness without access to vehicles and heavily dependent on the metro transit system and bicycling thus requiring minimal parking. The site has a METRO D Line stop steps from the front door and ample bike storage will be provided. To validate our theory of parking demand needs, we conducted a parking study at three of Beacon’s other youth/young adult buildings located in St. Paul (on the Green Line) and Minneapolis (on the 18 & 23 metro lines) and Edina . These buildings have similar populations, are all studio apartments and similar transit access. Based on our study, tracking parking activity for a month period, we’ve determined that the planned eleven parking spaces proposed for the Aster Commons development will be sufficient and we will seek necessary approvals to proceed in this direction. At no time during this study were the parking spaces full or over extended. The Parking Study: Prior Crossing Nicollet Square 66 West 1949 University Ave W, St Paul MN 3710 Nicollet Ave S, Minneapolis, MN 3330 West 66th Street, Edina, MN Total units = 44 studio units (355-428sq/ft) All @ 30% AMI Total units = 42 studio units (382-519 sq/ft) All @ 30% AMI Total Units = 39 studio units (324-429 sq/ft) All @ 30% AMI Total Parking Spaces = 12 Total Parking Spaces = 9 Total Parking Spaces = 13 Demand exceeded parking spaces days = 0 Demand exceeded parking spaces days = 0 Demand exceeded parking spaces days = 0 Eliminating the underground parking garage will create a potential savings of $800,000 in construction costs. Prepared by: Kirsten Spreck Director of Housing Development Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative kspreck@beaconinterfaith.org 15’ PROPOSED BUILDING 5 MIN DELIVERYNO PARKING30’60’ 6’ PERIMETER FENCE SHADE STRUCTURE TRANSFORMER WITH SCREENING FENCE SEAT WALL PRIMARY ENTRANCE VISITOR BIKE PARKING RESIDENT PATIO SIGN (ON BUILDING) BACK ENTRANCE GATE 6’ PERIMETER FENCE EXISTING METRO TRANSIT STOP SITE PLAN BIKE ROUTE PROPERTY LINE RAIN GARDEN WITH NATIVE PLANTINGS TREE, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER PLANTINGS POLLINATOR LAWN EDGE TREE, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER PLANTINGS EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN PROPOSED TREE STUDIOSTUDIO BIKE STORAGE (QTY 36) ZEN RM ZEN RM TREATMENT RM STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO STUDIO MECHANICAL PUBLIC SIDEWALK SUMP PUMP TOILET STAIR TRANSFORMER W/ SCREENING GARAGE 0102040 FT STUDIO ELEV VB ELEV VEST CONCRETE PATHWAY (ACCESSIBLE) ARTIFICIAL TURF 6'-0" PRIVACY FENCE, FULL LENGTH OF NORTH, EAST, AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES, 4" OFF PROPERTY LINE FENCE WITH GATE, EMERGENCY RELEASE AND FOBBED ENTRY EXISTING BUS STOP ELECTRICAL COVERED PORCH EMERGENCY EXIT DOOR & CANOPY NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE MOP SINK MEETING ROOM VESTIBULE TOILET STAIR COMMUNITY RM ZEN RM ZEN RM ZEN RM STAFF BREAK ROOM EV CHARGING POINT FUTURE EV CHARGING POINT NEW CURB CUT BIKE CURB CUT EXISTING SITE LIGHTING SITE LIGHTING TO BE RELOCATED RAINGARDEN 22" 28" ROOF DRAINAGE DAYLIGHT TO RAIN GARDEN WATER SERVICE LOCATION TRASH & RECYCLING PICKUP 4'-0" FENCE SOLAR SHUT-OFF CONCRETE STOOP CONCRETE STOOP W/ IMPERMABLE PAVERS 6'-0" FENCE TO EDGE OF BUILDING, TRANSITION TO 4'-0" WITH ACCESS GATE TRELLIS CANOPY, W/VINESPERENNIAL RAIN GARDEN PLANTINGS, NO SOD PERENNIAL RAIN GARDEN PLANTINGS, NO SOD FIRE CONNECTIONCONCRETE STOOP NEIGHBOR'S TREES CONCRETE APRON 220' - 0 7/8" ADA PARKING BIKE RACKS BOLLARDSSMOKER'S CANOPY6' TALL PRIVACY FENCE EXISTING TRANSFORMER EXISTING BUS PYLON 5 MINUTE DELIVERY STORAGE DATA5' - 0"4' - 6 3/8"4' - 6"5' - 0"(E) ELECTRICAL POLE 851.1' CIVIL ELEVATION 1' RETAINING WALL 849.86' CIVIL ELEVATION 100.0 ARCH ELEVATION 849.0' CIVIL ELEVATION PRESERVE TREE PRESERVE TREE PRESERVE TREE 6" RIVER ROCK ZERO CURB 6' TALL PRIVACY FENCE 4' TALL PRIVACY FENCE TO STREET PRESERVE TREE PRESERVE TREE DIGITAL SIGNBOARD ELEC. SHUT-OFF MANAGER STAFF 5' - 2" STUDIO SNOW STORAGE COMPRESSED GRANITE ACCESSORY SHADE STRUCTURE R 15' - 0"ADA PARKING8' - 0"TRASH TRASH RECYCLING CONCRETE CONCRETE PERMEABLE PAVER CONCRETE4' - 0"ADA TURNAROUNDADA TURNAROUND PUBLIC SIDEWALK EXISTING CONCRETE BUS STOP PAVING 5' - 0"5' - 0"15' - 0"15' - 0"15' - 0"6' - 3 1/4"123' - 0 5/8"25' - 0"104' - 3 7/8"220' - 0 5/8" R 1 5 ' - 0 " 24' - 0"19' - 0" 15' - 0" 5' - 11 7/8" 59' - 0"8' - 4"TURN LANE 4' - 2 3/8"3' - 0"FIRE HYDRANT 9' - 6"R 23 ' - 0 " R 2 3 ' - 0 "96' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0 1/32"8' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"9' - 0"ADA CURB CUT 24' - 0"19' - 0"14' - 0"14' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"RELOCATED BENCH 5' UTILITY EASEMENT AND BUS SHELTER ACCESS EXISTING BIKE RACKS EXISTING MEDIAN CURB ALIGN EMERGENY VEHICLE FIRE TRUCK MODIFY TAPER MAINTAIN THIS FLAT FOR ACCESS FOR SIDEWALK 5' - 0"9' - 8"2' - 1 3/4" REMOVE LEANING BAR 5' - 5" BENCH SECONDARY SNOW STORAGE ADA PATH DOUBLE ARTICULATED BUS 43' - 0" 23' - 9"8' - 4"7' - 11"11' - 0"53' - 8 7/8" 24' - 0" 25' - 0"20' - 0" 15' - 11 5/8" FIRE DEPARTMENT KEY BOX FIRE DEPARTMENT KEY BOX 3,121.18 SF AREA REMOVED FROM PROPERTY 28,457.49 SF ORIGINAL PROPERTY AREA 25,336.31 SF NEW PROPERTY AREA Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota. Architect Seal Signature Print Name Date License No ISSUE / REVISION DateMark Description 510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336 9/11/2023 4:06:18 PMC:\Projects\2022018_R22_Central_ConnorMcManus.rvtA001 SITE PLAN Design Development Landscape Architecture Confluence BKBM 530 N 3rd St #120, Minneapolis, MN 55401 | 763.843.0420 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION530 N 3rd St #120, Minneapolis, MN 55401 | 612.333.3702 Civil and Structural Engineering Project No: 20220182023.08.10 CITY REVIEW COMMENTSAsterCommons6613 Portland Avenue S.Richfield, MN 55423Architecture and Interiors Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing Emanuelson-Podus, Inc. 7705 Bush Lake Rd, Edina, MN 55439 | 952.930.0050 1" = 10'-0"A001 1PRES SITE PLAN 6' - 3 1/4"123' - 0 5/8"220' - 0 7/8" R 15' - 0" 5' - 0"5' - 0"BUILDING SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK 5' - 0" SETBACK 15' - 0"SETBACK15' - 0"25' - 0"220' - 0 5/8"104' - 3 7/8"NEW PROPERTY LINE AT EDGE OF BUS STOP SLAB 3,121.18 SF AREA REMOVED FROM PROPERTY 28,457.49 SF ORIGINAL PROPERTY AREA 25,336.31 SF NEW PROPERTY AREA 90.42° 89.58° 93.07° 90.42° 89.58° 87.38° 24' - 0"19' - 0" TURN LANE EM VEHICLEARTICULATED BUS BIKE CURB CUT59' - 0" 6' - 0"10' - 0"96' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"NEW FIRE HYDRANT ORIGINAL PROPERTY CORNER PROPOSED NEW PROPERTY CORNER BACK OF CURB14' - 0"EXISTING LIGHT POLE TO BE RELOCATED NEW FIRE Y CONNECTION ORIGINAL PROPERTY CORNER PROPOSED NEW PROPERTY CORNER R 23 ' - 0 "BACK OF CURB14' - 0"BACK OF CURB14' - 0"176.78° 91.93°3' - 9 1/8"1' - 6 3/8"10'20'40'11' - 0"SETBACK5' - 0"5' - 0"EASEMENT5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"3' - 0"4' - 8 3/8" EXISTING MEDIAN CURB FIRE TRUCK EXISTING MEDIAN STRIPING TO BE WIDENED AT THIS POINT FOR TURN LANE 15' - 11 5/8" 53' - 8 7/8"21' - 0 1/8"24' - 0"25' - 0"20' - 0"9' - 8 1/2"MODIFY TAPER SETBACK15' - 0"SETBACK10' - 0"90.00° 90.00° 90' - 9 1/4"15' - 0"15' - 0"56' - 0 1/8" 20' - 3"16' - 9" M gnSRiseD 1" = 20'-0"AP001 1SITE PLAN PROPERTY BOUNDARIES 6' - 3"123' - 0 7/8"24' - 3 3/8"105' - 0 1/2"220' - 2 5/8" BUILDING FOOTPRINT 9,915 SF CURRENT LOT AREA | 25,336.3 SF LOT AREA REMOVED | 3,121.2 SF ORIGINAL LOT AREA | 28,477.5 SF ZONING IMPERVIOUS BUILDING PAVEMENT - NONUSEABLE PAVEMENT - USEABLE 17,048 SF 9,915 SF 4,780 SF 2,353 SF PERVIOUS PLANTING AREAS ARTIFICIAL TURF - USEABLE GRAVEL 8,288 SF 7,567 SF 481 SF 240 SF 32.7% 29.9% 1.9% 0.9% 67.3% 39.1% 18.8% 9.3% TOTAL CURRENT LOT AREA 25,336 SF 100% LOT COVERAGE PERMISSABLE BUILDING AREA PROPOSED BUILDING AREA: 39.2% 3 ARTIFICIAL TURF (USEABLE) BRT STATION ORIGINAL LOT AREA REMOVED PLANTING AREAS USEABLE OPEN AREA - IMPERMEABLE IMPERMEABLE PAVEMENT (NOT USEABLE OPEN AREA) USABLE OPEN SPACE LISTED ABV. BALCONIES (LVL 2+3) TOTAL USEABLE OPEN SPACE 2,744 SF 350 SF 3,094 SF 10.8% 1.4% 12.2% TURF - USEABLE OPEN AREA 10 STALLS 5 MIN DELIVERY Met Met BUILDING STORIES PROPOSED HEIGHT 35' PROPOSED SF PROPOSED % REQUIREMENT 75% MAX 25 MIN / 50% MAX 10% MIN Met Met KEY PLAN 25 MIN / 50% MAX 2 MIN / 8 MAX PROPOSED Met REQUIREMENT BALCONIES ON LEVELS 2 AND 3, USEABLE OUTDOOR AREA AREA ON LVL 1 INCLUDED IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT BALCONIES ON UPPER LEVELS - USEABLE OUTDOOR AREA 10' - 0"10' - 0"20' - 0" TOTAL BUILDING AREA 27,792 SF MSRignDes AP002Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 DATE:10/18/23 1" = 30'-0"AP002 1ZONING CODE SUMMARY SITE PLAN M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD M gnSRiseD ELEVATOR OVERRUN BRICK AT GROUND FLOOR NICHIHA LATURA V GROOVE NICHIHA VINTAGEWOOD SPRUCE VERTICAL PERFORATED METAL SCREENING FOR EQUIPMENT PELLA IMPERVIA FIBERGLASS WINDOWS U VALUE 0.24 INTEGRATED 6" VENTILATION LOUVER INTO SIDING, COLOR MATCHED PERFORATED METAL SCREENING FOR EQUIPMENT ROOF ACCESS HANDRAIL 35' TOP OF PARAPET MSRignDes Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 AP211 DATE:07/04/23 1/16" = 1'-0"AP211 1BUILDING WEST ELEVATION - SHADED MATERIAL BRICK NICHIHA WHITE LATTURA V-GROOVE NICHIHA SPRUCE VINTAGEWOOD WINDOWS+ GLASS DOORS METALS (TRIM, LOUVERS, PANELS, SCREENS) SQUARE FOOTAGE 1321 1879 771 1289 160 5,419 sf % of FACADE 24% 34% 14% 24% 3% BRICK - ENDICOTT MANGANESE IRONSPOT, VELOUR FINISH, NORWEGIAN SIZE SIDING 1: NICHIHA LATTURA V-GROOVE, WHITE SIDING 2: NICHIHA VINTAGEWOOD, SPRUCE MECHANICAL SCREENING: CITYSCAPES ENVISOR PERFORATED PAN PERFORATED METAL SCREEN CROSS SECTION EQEQEQ METAL MESH SCREENING METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY MSRignDes Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 AP212 DATE:07/04/23 MATERIAL BRICK NICHIHA WHITE LATTURA V-GROOVE NICHIHA SPRUCE VINTAGEWOOD WINDOWS+ GLASS DOORS METALS (TRIM, LOUVERS, PANELS, SCREENS) SQUARE FOOTAGE 688 548 672 579 99 2,586 sf % of FACADE 27% 21% 26% 22% 4% BRICK - ENDICOTT MANGANESE IRONSPOT, VELOUR FINISH, NORWEGIAN SIZE SIDING 1: NICHIHA LATTURA V-GROOVE, WHITE SIDING 2: NICHIHA VINTAGEWOOD, SPRUCE 1/8" = 1'-0"AP212 1BUILDING NORTH ELEVATION - SHADED MECHANICAL SCREENING: CITYSCAPES ENVISOR PERFORATED PAN PERFORATED METAL SCREEN CROSS SECTION BALCONY: MIDWEST IRON METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY NOTE: SEE WEST ELEVATION FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND MATERIAL DESIGNATIONS PERFORATED METAL SCREENING METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY MSRignDes Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 AP213 DATE:07/04/23 1/16" = 1'-0"AP213 1BUILDING EAST ELEVATION - SHADED MATERIAL BRICK NICHIHA WHITE LATTURA V-GROOVE NICHIHA SPRUCE VINTAGEWOOD WINDOWS+ GLASS DOORS METALS (TRIM, LOUVERS, PANELS, SCREENS) SQUARE FOOTAGE 370 1488 1921 1253 374 5,406 sf % of FACADE 7% 22% 6% 23% 7% BRICK - ENDICOTT MANGANESE IRONSPOT, VELOUR FINISH, NORWEGIAN SIZE SIDING 1: NICHIHA LATTURA V-GROOVE, WHITE SIDING 2: NICHIHA VINTAGEWOOD, SPRUCE MECHANICAL SCREENING: CITYSCAPES ENVISOR PERFORATED PAN BALCONY: MIDWEST IRON METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY PERFORATED METAL SCREEN CROSS SECTION NOTE: SEE WEST ELEVATION FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND MATERIAL DESIGNATIONS PERFORATED METAL SCREENING METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY MSRignDes Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 AP214 DATE:07/04/23 1/16" = 1'-0"AP214 1BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION - SHADED MATERIAL BRICK NICHIHA WHITE LATTURA V-GROOVE NICHIHA SPRUCE VINTAGEWOOD WINDOWS+ GLASS DOORS METALS (TRIM, LOUVERS, PANELS, SCREENS) SQUARE FOOTAGE 1321 1974 676 187 230 2,425 sf % of FACADE 9% 39% 24% 8% 9% BRICK - ENDICOTT MANGANESE IRONSPOT, VELOUR FINISH, NORWEGIAN SIZE SIDING 1: NICHIHA LATTURA V-GROOVE, WHITE SIDING 2: NICHIHA VINTAGEWOOD, SPRUCE MECHANICAL SCREENING: CITYSCAPES ENVISOR PERFORATED PAN PERFORATED METAL SCREEN CROSS SECTION BALCONY: MIDWEST IRON METAL HANDRAIL BALCONY \\msr.ad\dfs\MSR_Share\Projects\2022018BRS\Progress Set\2023-06-27 Check set\2022018_R22_Central_ConnorMcManus-MSRDesign_BlackRGB-01-952042.jpgDrawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336LA200TREE PROTECTIONPLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and Interiors20'40'10'0'TREE PROTECTION PLAN1L-2001"=20'REMOVALREMOVAL TREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.CRITICAL ROOT RADIUS, TYP.PROPERTY LINE26" CAL.26" CAL.22" CAL.23" CAL.21" CAL.18" CAL.22" CAL.24" CAL.REMOVAL24" CAL. 4'-6"4'-0"2'-0"5'-0" O.C., (TYP.)D5'-0"CRITICAL ROOT RADIUSD" X 1.5'1.5' PER 1" DIAMETEROF TREE TRUNK MEASURED4.5' ABOVE ORIGINAL GRADEPROTECTED ROOT ZONEEXISTING TREE4'-0" HIGH FENCEEXISTING TREEORANGECONSTRUCTIONFENCE2X4 CONTINUOUSTOP AND BOTTOMRAIL. ATTACHCONSTRUCTIONFENCE TO RAILS6' STEEL POST1.ALL EFFORTS MUST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT THE TREESIDENTIFIED ON L400 FOR THE DURATION OF DEMOLITIONAND CONSTRUCTION.2.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY MUUST EXTEND INTO THECRITICAL ROOT RADIUS, A 12-FOOT WIDE BY 12-INCH DEEPLAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH SHALL BE PLACEDOVER THE IMPACTED AREA. THE 12-FOOT WIDTH BY 12-INCHDEPTH SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD OFCONSTRUCTION THAT AFFECTS THE PROTECTED TREE. THEMULCH SHALL BE REM-VED ENTIRELY AT THE END OFCONSTRUCTION.TREE PROTECTION DETAIL, TYP.01L2011/4" = 1'-0"TREE PROTECTION GENERAL NOTESROOT CUTTING AND PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES02L201N.T.S.\\msr.ad\dfs\MSR_Share\Projects\2022018BRS\Progress Set\2023-06-27 Check set\2022018_R22_Central_ConnorMcManus-MSRDesign_BlackRGB-01-952042.jpgDrawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336LA201TREE PROTECTIONDETAILNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and Interiors Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.033620'40'10'0'FENCING PLAN1L-3001"=20'LA300FENCING PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and Interiors 6' TALL BOARD-ON - BOARDCOMPOSITE FENCING 6' TALL BOARD-ON - BOARDCOMPOSITE FENCING WITH GATE TOSCREEN UTILITIES4' TALL ENTRY FENCE WITH GATEFENCING GENERAL NOTESTHERE ARE THREE FENCING UNITS IDENTIFIED IN THE PROPOSED SITE:1.448 LINEAR FEET OF 6' TALL BOARD-ON-BOARD COMPOSITE FENCINGSURROUNDS THE SIDE AND BACK YARDS OF THE SITE. FENCING ISSET-BACK 6" INTO SITE FROM PROPERTY LINE.2.132 LINEAR FEET OF 6' TALL BOARD-ON-BOARD COMPOSITE FENCINGWITH ACCESS GATE SURROUNDS THE TRANSFORMER AREA.3.12 LINEAR FEET OF 4' RALL FENCE WITH ENTRY GATE AT THE ENTRYTO THE RESIDENTIAL BACKYARD.4.FENCING TYPE WAS CHOOSEN FOR ITS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER.SECTION VIEWSECTION VIEWSCALE 3" = 1' 6' TALL BOARD-ON - BOARDCOMPOSITE FENCINGLANDSCAPE PLANTINGS. SEEPLANTING PLAN.PRODUCT FINISH AND DESIGNSITE MATERIAL LEGENDPOLLINATOR LAWN SEED MIXHARDWOOD MULCH WITH PLANTINGS - SEE PLANTING PLANPERMEABLE PAVERSTABILIZED GRANITE WALKWAY (PERMEABLE)CONCRETE34"-1" ROCK MULCHRAINGARDEN : ZONE 1RAINGARDEN : ZONE 2PROPERTY LINESETBACK (1) Ex(1) Aa4 (1) As(1) Bw(1) Ag2 (1) Bw (1) Aa4 (1) Ts (1) Ex(1) Ts (1) Ex (1) Ag2 (1) Br2 (1) Bw (1) Aa4 (1) Ag2 (5) PB (2) Ex (5) Je (1) Uo (1) Uo DECIDUOUS TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMEEx6Existing Tree To Remain /Aa43Autumn Blaze Maple / Acer x freemanii `Jeffsred` TMAg23Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry / Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`Br21River Birch / Betula nigraMulti Trunk, 2 Trunk MinimumPB8Pillar Birch / Betula platyphyllaSingle TrunkBw3Whitespire Birch / Betula populifolia `Whitespire`Cw8Golden Shadows® Dogwood / Cornus alternifolia 'Wstackman'As4Ware's Oak 'Kindred Spirit / Quercus x warei 'Nadler'Ts2American Linden / Tilia americana `Sentry`PLANT SCHEDULEUo2Discovery Elm / Ulmus davidiana var. japonicaEVERGREEN TREESQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMEJe5Eastern Red Cedar / Juniperus virginianaSHRUBSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMEAi288Iroquois Beauty Black Chokeberry / Aronia melanocarpa `Iroquois Beauty` TMCs215Cardinal Red Twig Dogwood / Cornus sericea `Cardinal`SC93Sandcherry / Prunus pumilaPERENNIALSQTYCOMMON / BOTANICAL NAMEAc125Lady's Mantle / Alchemilla mollisAg68Goatsbeard / Aruncus dioicusAf22False Spiraea / Astilbe japonica `Deutchland`Nw5Celastrus Scandens 'Bailumn' / Autumn Revolution BittersweetCb134Bicknell's Sedge / Carex bicknelliiCo34Blue Sedge / Carex glaucaCos117Carex bicknellii / Copper Shouldered Oval SedgeDrawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.033610'20'5'0'PLANNING REQUIREMENTSTHE PROPOSED BUILDING CONTAINS 38 UNITS. PER PLANNINGREQUIREMENTS, .5 TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR EACH UNIT. THIS PROJECTREQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL 19 TREES. THIS PLAN PROPOSES 39 TREES BEADDED TO THE SITE IN A RANGE OF SIZES, SPECIES, AND VARIETIES. 20%OF THE SPECIES ARE TO BE PLANTED WITH A CALIPER OF 4.5", 30% WITH ACALIPER OF 30%, AND 50% WITH A CALIPER OF 2.5".TOTAL SITE AREA: 25336 SQ FEETTOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 6378 SQ FEET (25% OF TOTAL SITE)ALL PLANTINGS WERE SELECTED TO MAXIMIZE ECOLOGICAL STATUS. ALLPLANTINGS EITHER ARE NATIVE OR ARE KNOWN TO HAVE HIGHENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE (POLLUTION CAPTURE OR HEATTOLERANCE).LA500PLANTING PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and InteriorsEX.EX.EX.EX.EX.PROPERTY LINESETBACKSITE MATERIAL LEGENDPOLLINATOR LAWN SEED MIXHARDWOOD MULCH WITH PLANTINGS - SEE PLANTING PLANPERMEABLE PAVERSTABILIZED GRANITE WALKWAY (PERMEABLE)CONCRETE34"-1" ROCK MULCHRAINGARDEN : ZONE 1RAINGARDEN : ZONE 2EX. Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336LA501PLANTING PLAN : MIXDETAILSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and InteriorsZONE 2 MIXZONE 1 MIX 11NOTE:CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLEFOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMBPOSITION THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTYPERIOD. STAKING AND GUYING ISMANDATORY FOR TREES 4" CAL ORGREATER, AND ALL BARE ROOT TREES.WRAP TREE TRUNKS ONLY UPON APPROVALBY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION 32 93 00.3 x AMIN.30"RADIUS MIN.4"AEACH TREE SHALL BE PLANTED SUCHTHAT THE ROOT FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THETOP OF THE ROOT BALL. IF THE ROOTFLARE IS NOT VISIBLE, THE SOIL SHALL BEREMOVED IN A LEVEL MANNER FROM THEROOT BALL TO WHERE THE FIRST MAINORDER ROOT (12" DIA. OR LARGER)EMERGES FROM THE TRUNK. SET MAINORDER ROOT 1" HIGHER THAN ADJACENTGRADE. DO NOT COVER TOP OF ROOTBALL WITH SOIL.SCARIFY SIDES OF TREE PIT WITH SPADEBY HAND TO BIND WITH PREPARED SOIL.PLANTING PIT TO BE TWO TO FIVE TIMESTHE DIAMETER OF ROOT ALL, SLOPEDTAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASEFIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THATROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT.DRAINAGE TRENCH AS REQUIRED PERPERCOLATION TEST IN SPEC. AUGER A 4"DIA. HOLE & FILL W/ 34" GRAVEL.PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED ORCOMPACTED SOIL.DIG PLANTING PIT 4-6" DEEPER THANROOTBALL.UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE.REMOVE BURLAP, WINE, ROPE ANDWIRE FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL.COMPACT PLANTING SOIL TO85% OF MAXIMUM DRY UNITWEIGHT PER ASTM D 698.EDGE CONDITION VARIES, SEEPLAN.4" BUILT-UP EARTH SAUCERBEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL.3" SHREDDED HARDWOODMULCH. DO NOT PLACE MULCHIN CONTACT WITH ROOT FLARE.RODENT TRUNK PROTECTIONFOR DECIDUOUS TREES: 12"HARDWIRE-CLOTH MESHCYLINDER. DIMENSIONS: 8"DIAMETER (OR GREATER) X 36"HEIGHT. STAKE IN PLACE,AVOIDING ROOTS. SEE SPEC.TREE PLANTING DETAIL, TYP.01L5021/2" = 1'-0"SEE PLAN12"MIN.PREPARE SOIL FORTHE ENTIRE BED4"3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. DONOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITHSHRUB STEM.NOTE: SEE SPECIFICATION SECTIONRELATED TO EXTERIOR PLANTING.CONTAINER GROWN MATERIAL SHALLHAVE ROOTS HAND LOOSENED.MIN.4" DEEPER THAN ROOT BALL.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF ENTIREBED WITH SPADE BY HAND TO BIND WITHPLANTING SOIL.UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE.PLANTING DETAIL, TYP.02L5021/2" = 1'-0"5' DIAMETER MULCH RING, TYP.12"12"12"12"12"PLANSECTION AFILTRATION BASIN SUBGRADE, SEE CIVILPLANTING SOIL MIX, SEE CIVIL FOR DEPTH,3" HARDWOOD MULCHPLUG, SEE MIX FOR SPECIESA'A1/2" SCALESTORM FEATURE PLUG LAYOUT03L5021/2" = 1'-0"SEE PLAN SEE PLAN SEEPLANS E E P L A N PLANSECTION A'-AA'ATURF @ PLANT BED04L5021-1/2" - 1'-0"FINISHED GRADE AND EDGECONDITION VARIES - SEE PLANFOR CONDITION.3/16" METAL EDGERW/STAKE, PER SPEC.PLANT BED / GRASS MIXAREA MAY OCCUR, SEE PLAN.\\msr.ad\dfs\MSR_Share\Projects\2022018BRS\Progress Set\2023-06-27 Check set\2022018_R22_Central_ConnorMcManus-MSRDesign_BlackRGB-01-952042.jpgDrawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336LA502PLANTING DETAILSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and Interiors Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.Drawing 2022 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.Architect SealSignaturePrint NameDateLicense NoISSUE / REVISIONDateMarkDescription510 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 200Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.375.0336LA600IRRIGATION PLANNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Project No: 2022018 Aster Commons 6613 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Architecture and Interiors20'40'10'0'IRRIGATION PLAN1L-6001"=20'GENERAL NOTESEXISTING CONDITIONS: CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND NOTIFY THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXISTING WATERPRESSURE.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING A COPY OFUNDERGROUND SPRINKLERS SPECIFICATIONS (328423) PRIOR TO BIDDING.THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS ARE A PART OF THESE PLANS AND, THECONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING WORK AS SPECIFIED INTHE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS AND ON THE PLANS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL PUBLICAND PRIVATE UTILITIES WHICH LIE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREAPRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANYDISCREPANCIES.PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN WARNING SIGNS, BARRICADES ANDCONSTRUCTION FENCING AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES.IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION ANDINSTALLATION OF ALL EQUIPMENT TO PROVIDE A WORKING IRRIGATIONSYSTEM FOR THE OWNER. SEE ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING SHEETS FORWORK BY OTHERS.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PLUMBING EQUIPMENT (BACKFLOW, ETC) USEDWILL MEET DEMANDS OF IRRIGATION AS RECOMMENDED BYMANUFACTURER AND ARE WITHIN TOLERANCES OF SPECIFICATIONS.BACKFLOW DEVICES ARE TO BE INSPECTED BY A CERTIFIED TECHNICIANWHERE REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ALL INSPECTIONS ASREQUIRED BY CODE.ALL IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT AND PIPING TO BE INSTALLED PERMANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL AS ALL FEDERAL, STATEAND LOCAL LAWS AND ORDINANCES THAT MAY APPLY.IRRIGATION SLEEVES SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC AND INSTALLED BY THEIRRIGATION CONTRACTOR. SLEEVES SHALL BE 2X THE PIPE DIAMETER.SEPARATE SLEEVES ARE REQUIRED FOR CONTROL WIRE. COORDINATEINSTALLATION WITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR. WHERE REQUIREDDIRECTIONAL BORING OF PIPE SLEEVES UNDER CONCRETE SHALL BEINCLUDED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST.INSTALL LATERAL LINES WITH A MINIMUM COVER OF 18" AND MAINLINESWITH A MINIMUM COVER OF 24".IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHOULD BE INSTALLED WITH AUTOMATIC RAINSHUT-OFF SENSORS.PROPERTY LINESETBACK SITE MATERIAL LEGENDPOLLINATOR LAWN SEED MIX : SPRAY IRRIGATIONHARDWOOD MULCH WITH PLANTINGS: DRIP IRRIGATIONPERMEABLE PAVERSTABILIZED GRANITE WALKWAY (PERMEABLE)CONCRETE34"-1" ROCK MULCHRAINGARDEN : ZONE 1 DRIP IRRIGATIONRAINGARDEN : ZONE 2 DRIP IRRIGATION 9,089 SF LOT SIZE 4,329 SF SHADING 47.6% SHADED 9,711 SF LOT SIZE 767 SF SHADING 7.9% 28,711 SF LOT AREA 13,695 SF SHADING 47.7% 9,089 SF LOT SIZE 0 SF SHADING 0% 28,711 SF LOT AREA 5,547 SF SHADING 19.3% 9,711 SF LOT SIZE 0 SF SHADING 0% 9,715 SF LOT SIZE 0 SF SHADING 0% 19,468 SF LOT AREA 7,963 SF SHADING 40.8% SHADED 13,434 SF LOT AREA 1,216 SF SHADING 9% SHADED 28,711 SF LOT AREA 3,395 SF SHADING 11.8% SHADED M gnSRiseD 1" = 100'-0"AP401 3 SHADING DEC 23 3PM 1" = 100'-0"AP401 2 SHADING DEC 23 12PM 1" = 100'-0"AP401 1 SHADING DEC 23 9AM 9,089 SF LOT SIZE 1001 SF SHADING 11.1% 28,711 SF LOT AREA 1,682 SF SHADING 5.8% SHADED 9,711 SF LOT SIZE 612 SF SHADING 6.3% 28,711 SF LOT AREA 1,172 SF SHADING 4.1% SHADED 28,711 SF LOT AREA 1,397 SF SHADING 4.9% SHADED M gnSRiseD 1" = 100'-0"AP402 3 SHADING MAR 23 3PM 1" = 100'-0"AP402 1 SHADING MAR 23 9AM 1" = 100'-0"AP402 2 SHADING MAR 23 12PM 28,711 SF LOT AREA 128 SF SHADING 0.4% 9,089 SF LOT SIZE 78 SF SHADING 0.8% SHADED M gnSRiseD 1" = 100'-0"AP403 1 SHADING JUN 23 9AM 1" = 100'-0"AP403 2 SHADING JUN 23 12PM 1" = 100'-0"AP403 3 SHADING JUN 23 3PM AGENDA SECTION:PROPOSED ORDINANCES AGENDA ITEM #8. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 161 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:Julie Urban, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W:Melissa P oehlman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector 11/17/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/20/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider a second reading and summary publication of an ordinance amendment to Section 408.01, subdivision 6, clarifying that escrows submitted under the Point of Sale Program can be subject to forfeiture if improvements are not made, and to Section 408.01, subdivision 4, correcting a code reference relating to the appeals process. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The City's Point of Sale (P OS) Program requires all single-family and two-family structures, condominiums, and townhomes to be inspected and receive a Certificate of Housing Maintenance Compliance before any transfer of ownership. Any items identified for repair in the inspection must be completed prior to transfer. I n the case of non-life safety items, the City may agree to allow the ownership transfer before all items are completed if a cash escrow is submitted for the incomplete items. The Buyer is then responsible for completing the work and receives the escrowed funds upon completion. Occasionally, buyers do not complete the work, and property ownership transfers again without escrow funds being accessed. A review of the escrow account during the audit process identified several of these situations where ownership changed and the escrow was never accessed. The City Attorney advised that the current ordinance language does not specify what the City will do with these abandoned funds and recommends a change to the ordinance and escrow agreement so that the City has the option of identifying these funds as forfeited and capturing the funds for other purposes. The proposed amendment of Section 408.01, subdivision 6 would clarify that failure to make the improvements is in violation of the code and the cash escrow amount can be forfeited to the City. The amendment also makes a technical correction to the reference in Section 408.01, subdivision 4, regarding where to find the appeals process in the City Code. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: 1. Approve a second reading of an amendment to Section 408 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield relating to the Certification of Housing Maintenance Compliance. 2. Approve a resolution authorizing 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 P O S P rogram was created by the C ity in 1989 and requires that prior to the voluntary sale of any owner-occupied housing in the C ity, the S eller must receive a C ertificate of Housing Maintenance C ompliance from the C ity (C ertificate). A C ertificate is issued after an inspection and finding that the property is free from housing code violations. Without the C ertificate, the B uyer may not occupy the property, unless the B uyer provides an executed C ash E scrow A greement and accompanying escrow deposit (E scrow D eposit). The E scrow D eposit is the greater of 25% of the cost to correct the housing code violations or $1,000 with a maximum of $5,000. A review of the C ity's escrow fund earlier this year revealed several escrows from many years ago. The escrows have technically been forfeited, but the current ordinance doesn't make it clear that the C ity can take over the funds. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S A mending the ordinance furthers the S trategic P riority of Operational E xcellence and works toward the desired outcome of having the operational capability to deliver essential services and helps us meet the target of making process improvements. The potential equity impact of capturing forfeited funds could be that B uyers for whom E nglish isn't their primary language are disproportionately impacted if they don't understand that funds are available to make improvements. While the language of the buyers is unknown, it is a goal of the Housing Inspections team to translate documents as capacity allows, which would help to ensure that all buyers understand their rights and responsibilities under the P O S P rogram. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): The current ordinance governing the P OS P rogram isn't clear what happens to escrowed funds when required improvements aren't made. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: S taff would like to amend the Housing Maintenance C ode C ash E scrow A greement and be able to use it moving forward in order to be able to capture any forfeited funds. The ordinance should be amended to provide clear notice that forfeiture is a possible consequence of not complying with the escrow agreement. The P O S P rogram is now operating under C itizenS erve, the new online permitting software system, which will make it easier to identify escrows that haven't been accessed and send reminders to B uyers who haven't completed the necessary repairs. W hile this may reduce the amount of forfeited funds, it's unlikely to eliminate all of it, so an ordinance amendment is recommended. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: W ith the ordinance amendment, forfeited escrow funds could be transferred to the General F und. S taff does not expect this to be a significant amount of money. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: The proposed amendment was prepared by the C ity A ttorney and would apply to future C ash E scrow A greements. Once the review of old escrows is completed, staff will work with the C ity A ttorney to clean up forfeited escrows collected under the current ordinance. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): D ecide not to amend the ordinance or recommend that the ordinance be approved with changes. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: NA AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type P roposed Ordinance A mendment Ordinance Resolution and S ummary P ublication Resolution L etter C ash E scrow A greement Revisions B ackup Material BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 408 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RELATING TO THE CERTIFICATE OF HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Subsection 408 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled “Certificate of Housing Maintenance Compliance for Single- and Two-Family Homes” is hereby amended to correct a reference relating to appeals and to allow for forfeiture of escrow funds in cases of non-compliance: 408.01 … Subd. 4. Appeal. A determination that the structure is not in compliance with the housing maintenance code may be appealed in the manner provided in Section 405.05, subdivision 2(b) 320.11. … Subd. 6. Occupancy. A person may be granted permission to occupy a dwelling prior to issuance of the certificate upon the approval of the director of community development, or his/her designee. The approval may be based upon undue hardship or other extraordinary or exceptional circumstances, provided that no such occupancy constitutes an immediate hazard, as determined by the director or his/her designee. Approval will not be given until the prospective owner or designated agent has filed on forms supplied by the city, a statement of intent to comply with the housing maintenance code and submitted the required escrow. Compliance dates in the statement of intent to comply will be established by the director of community development, or his/her designee. (Amended, Bill No. 2015-12) The director may also approve occupancy prior to issuance of the certificate if a cash escrow agreement is signed and submitted to the Building Official or designee. The cash escrow agreement must be executed on a form provided by the City and accompanied by the fee established in Appendix D of this code. Failure to make the required corrections by the compliance dates in the statement of intent or within the terms of the cash escrow agreement is a violation of this code and will (i) cause the cash escrow amount to be forfeited to the City and (ii) render void any approval given pursuant to this subdivision. If the City conducts any re-inspections beyond the initial inspection and one (1) follow-up inspection, the applicant for a certificate will be required to pay the re-inspection fee as established in Appendix D of this code. (Amended, Bill No. 2005-15) Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this __ day of _______________, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 408 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RELATING TO THE CERTIFICATE OF HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE WHEREAS, the City has adopted the above-referenced amendment of the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, the verbatim text of the amendment is cumbersome, and the expense of publication of the complete text is not justified. 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. ________ AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 408 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RELATING TO THE CERTIFICATE OF HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. This amendment incorporates a provision into the City’s Housing Maintenance Compliance Code clarifying that failure to make improvements required under an escrow agreement is in violation of the Code, and funds held in escrow under the agreement can be deemed forfeit and transferred into the City’s General Fund. It also updates the code reference relating to the appeals process. Copies of the ordinance are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s office during normal business hours or upon request by calling the Department of Community Development at (612) 861-9760. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD Housing Maintenance Code Cash Escrow Agreement (Rev. 12/7/1811/--/23) Policy: A cash escrow will be required in instances where a Certificate of Compliance is sought, the Seller will not complete repairs by the time of closing, and the Buyer intends to comply at a future time in cooperation with the Building OfficialCommunity Development Director or designee. CASH ESCROW REGULATIONS 1. A signed escrow agreement and funds must be provided to the Inspection DivisionCommunity Development Department prior to closing. 2. The cash escrow amount will be determined as follows:  In order to reasonably determine the estimated cost of repairs, a written ITEMIZED bid by a licensed contractor must be submitted to the Inspections DivisionCommunity Development Department for approval.  A cash escrow equal to 25% of the itemized bid or $1,000, whichever is greater, shall be required (except as below).  If any certifications are required, contractor must bid REPLACEMENT COST of the item needing certification.  For non-certification-required work, a $5,000 escrow may be accepted in place of an itemized bid, with the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 3. If electrical or mechanical certifications are required, no one shall occupy premises until certifications are completed and proper paperwork is submitted to and approved by the City of Richfield Inspection DivisionCommunity Development Department. 4. By signing this agreement, Buyers are petitioning the City to allow the purchase and occupancy of the property despite the existence of the violations set forth on the attached list (unless occupancy is prohibited per regulation #3). 5. Correction orders must be made within 60 days of the date of closing, unless an extension is granted by the Community Development Director or designee. 5.6. Unauthorized changes to this escrow form are not acceptable and will void this agreement. 6.7. Cash escrow agreement is not valid unless signed by the Buyer and Building OfficialCommunity Development Director or designee. 7.8. This agreement is non-transferable and remain attached to the property identified in this agreement. . Buyers who fail to complete the Repairs (as defined in the escrow agreement), fail to complete the Reinspection (as also defined in the escrow agreement), or who transfer ownership prior to the correction of itemscompletion of the Repairs identified in the attached list shall forfeit all escrow funds to the City. Cash Escrow Agreement Housing Maintenance Code I/We , (Buyer) the Buyer of property located at in Richfield, Minnesota, do hereby tender a cash escrow to the City of Richfield in the amount of $ (the “Cash Escrow”) for the attached Detailed List of Items Requiring Correction (the “Repairs”“list) and an additional $50.00 non-refundable fee. This The Cash Eescrow amount represents 25% of the amount that the parties (Buyer, City of Richfield) agree is required to complete the improvementsRepairs. The City of Richfield shall deposit the Ccash Eescrow in a non-interest bearing account; and no interest shall be due and payable to the Buyer as a result. In signing this cash escrow agreement the Buyer does hereby agree to consult with the Housing Inspections Division and correct all violations and discrepancies described in the attached listas the Repairs by the scheduled reinspection date noted below. .An inspection of the property must be conducted by the Building OfficialCommunity Development Director’s or designee to verify acceptable completion (the “Reinspection”). Your Rreinspection is scheduled for: . The City of Richfield will release the is cCash Eescrow upon acceptable completion of the items listedRepairs. An inspection of the property will be conducted by the Building Official or designee to verify acceptable completion. Upon verification of completion, the escrowed amount will be released to THE BUYER - NO EXCEPTIONS - within ten (10) business days. The Buyer understands that the failure to comply with the terms of this agreement, including the failure to make the Repairs or participate in the Reinspection, can result in any or all of the following:  Forfeiture of all or a portion of the Cash Escrow to the City;  Approval to occupy the premises may be revoked and occupants required to vacate;  Failure to comply is a violation of the City Code and can be punished as a misdemeanor, including fines and incarceration; and  Compliance may be compelled by order of the Court. Any administrative costs involved with enforcing this agreement or any costs incurred by the City of Richfield in excess of the Ccash Eescrow amount will be paid by the Buyer within 30 days following written notice of such costs. DOB Date: Property Buyer(s) Daytime Phone Number for Buyer Email for Buyer Receipt of the cash escrow is acknowledged as intent to comply with the housing maintenance code. Date: Community Development Director or Designee AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM #9. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 162 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:K elly Wynn, A dministrative A ssistant D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 11/19/2023 I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider the appointments to City advisory board and commissions. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: Terms of several City advisory board and commission members are set to expire on J anuary 31, 2024. I n addition, due to resignations there are mid-term vacancies that should be filled. The terms for advisory board and commissions are three years. Please refer to the attached list of appointments for reference. The City Council directs the City Manager ’s office to conduct an annual recruitment seeking applicants to fill the vacancies. This recruitment includes a press release and information on the City’s website and social media platforms. Applicants were interviewed at a special work session held on November 11, 2023. To ensure a quorum at future advisory board and commission meetings, the City Council should make appointments to fill vacant positions. Recognizing the importance of a functional and responsive Advisory Board of Heath (A B H), especially with the recent global pandemic and civil unrest, the city is reducing the number of commissioners on the A B H to make it more likely the commission will make quorum and will allow them to perform their work. Staff are recommending that the commission membership be reduced to seven (7) members, with two (2) additional youth commissioners. W ith the two (2) appointments recommended to council at this meeting the commission will be at seven (7) members. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: By motion: Appoint members to fill the expiring or vacant terms on City advisory board and commissions referenced in the attached list. 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 E xecutive S ummary. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S A ppointing residents to commissions vacancies will make for more community-representative conversations and decision making. We continue to look for ways to improve the commission application process, and increase the diversity of both applications and appointments. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): C ity advisory board and commissions were established by C ity ordinance or resolution. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: S everal terms of C ity advisory board and commission members will expire on January 31, 2024. To ensure a quorum at future advisory board and commission meetings, the C ity C ouncil should make appointments to fill future vacancies. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: None ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): None P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type C ommission/B oard A ppointments B ackup Material Commission/Board Commissioner Term Expires Advisory Board of Health Joel Schleisman January 31, 2027 Kelly Hauer January 31, 2027 Arts Commission John Blackshear January 31, 2026 Mid-term vacancy Cheryl Gunness January 31, 2027 Ann Bieganek January 31, 2027 Luke Smith January 31, 2027 Civil Service Commission James Frechette January 31, 2027 Community Services Commission Grace Bronken January 31, 2025 Mid-term vacancy Krstine Torgeson Anderson January 31, 2027 Jessica Johnson Kreps January 31, 2027 Jeff Klein January 31, 2027 Jim Reilly January 31, 2027 Human Rights Commission Madeline Vukson January 31, 2026 Mid-term vacancy Tiffany Bighley January 31, 2027 Valerie Hurst-Baker January 31, 2027 Tyler Olson January 31, 2027 Callmie Dennis January 31, 2027 Planning Commission Brendan Kennealy January 31, 2027 Stephanie Hollman January 31, 2027 Sustainability Commission Amanda McKnight January 31, 2026 Mid-term vacancy Transportation Commission Adam Knosalla January 31, 2026 Mid-term vacancy McKenzie Burke January 31, 2026 Mid-term vacancy Jaz Warren January 31, 2027 Eli Straub January 31, 2027 David Gepner January 31, 2027 AGENDA SECTION:OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM #10. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 163 CIT Y COUNCIL MEET ING 11/28/2023 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y:Julie Urban, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W:Melissa P oehlman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector 11/17/2023 O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: I T E M F O R C O UNC IL C O NS ID E RAT I O N: Consider a resolution affirming that Aster Commons received approvals from the City and is authorized to apply for an Environmental Response Fund grant from Hennepin County for environmental assessment. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: On J une 20, 2023, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment (Contract) with Beacon I nterfaith Housing Collaborative (Beacon) to develop 38 affordable, supportive housing units, targeted at neuro-diverse young adults, on HRA-owned property located at 6613-25 Portland Avenue South. As part of the Contract, Beacon conducted due diligence, including environmental testing through Phase I and Phase I I Environmental Site Assessments (E S A). The reports identified arsenic and diesel range organics impacts that will require remediation during redevelopment. Beacon has applied to Hennepin County for funding from its Environmental Remediation Fund (E RF) grant to pay for a Supplemental Phase I I E S A in order to further define the soil impacts for management during redevelopment. The E RF application requires City approval of the project in order to be funded. Land Use approvals are before the City Council for consideration at this meeting. These approvals must be granted before the Council can affirm City approval. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T I O N: If land use approvals are granted to the project by the Council: By motion: Approve a resolution affirming that the Aster Commons project, located at 6613-25 Portland Avenue South, received land use approvals and that Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative is authorized to apply to Hennepin County for an Environmental Response Fund grant. O R If land use approvals are not granted to the project by the Council: By Motion: Deny the resolution affirming that the Aster Commons received land use approvals and do not authorize submittal of the application to Hennepin County for an Environmental Response Fund grant. 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 properties at 6613-25 P ortland Avenue S outh were acquired by the C ity for the construction of the P ortland Avenue and 66th S treet roundabout in 2008. The remnants were turned over to the HRA to facilitate redevelopment. P roperties to the north and northwest of the HRA site are former petroleum leak sites causing the potential for residual petroleum impacts in groundwater and soil vapor to have migrated to the HRA properties. A former printing operation was located at 6613 P ortland Avenue S outh. The activities commonly associated with printing create a potential for contamination. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S The project furthers the C ity's S trategic P riority of C ommunity D evelopment by helping to maintain Richfield as an affordable place to live and increase the tax base of the currently tax-exempt property. The project also advances equity by providing housing designed specifically to meet the currently unmet needs of neuro-diverse young adults for accessible, supportive and affordable housing. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): The C ity and HRA encourage developers to apply for outside funding when possible. A n assessment of environmental conditions and related clean up is required before new development can occur. D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: L and use approvals for the project are also before the C ouncil on November 28. Those approvals need to be granted first before a resolution regarding the E RF application can be considered. The application for funds was due November 1 and a resolution approving the project is required as soon as possible to complete the application. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: Grant funds from Hennepin C ounty would pay the cost of the P hase II S upplemental E S A . There is no cost to the C ity or HRA . F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: The E RF application requires submittal of a C ity C ouncil resolution approving the project and authorizing the application for funds. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C OMME N D AT ION(S): D ecide not to authorize the submittal of the E RF application. P R IN C IPAL PAR T IE S E X P E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: N/A AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type Resolution Resolution L etter RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AFFIRMING APPROVAL OF ASTER COMMONS AND AUTHORIZING BEACON INTERFAITH HOUSING COLLABORATIVE TO APPLY FOR A GRANT FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY’S ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND WHEREAS, Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative (“Beacon”) is proposing to construct Aster Commons (“Project”), a development containing 38 units of affordable, supportive housing targeted to neurodiverse young adults on property owned by the City’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) located at 6613-25 Portland Avenue South; and WHEREAS, Beacon conducted environmental testing on the property that indicates that some environmental contamination is present and needs to be remediated; and WHEREAS, on November 1, 2023, Beacon applied for $21,641 in environmental assessment funds through the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund (ERF); and WHEREAS, the ERF application requires a resolution from the City stating that it grants its approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, Beacon applied to the City for various land use approvals on July 11, 2023, to construct the Project; and WHEREAS, on November 28, 2023, the City Council reviewed and approved the application for land use approvals; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 1. On November 28, 2023, the City of Richfield granted land use approvals for the Aster Commons project, for which an Environmental Response Fund grant application was submitted to the Hennepin County Environment and Energy Department on November 1, 2023, by Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative. 2. The City Council authorizes Beacon to apply for an ERF grant from Hennepin County. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2023. Mary B. Supple, Mayor ATTEST: Dustin Leslie, City Clerk