Loading...
072611completeagenda CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2011 RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION BARTHOLOMEW CONFERENCE ROOM 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 5:30 P.M. AGENDA Call to order Roll call 1. Discussion regarding organized garbage collection (continued from June 28, 2011 ) (Council Memo No. 81) Notes: 2. Discussion regarding sidewalk snowplowing (continued from July 12, 2011) Notes: 3. Discussion regarding Honoring All Veterans Memorial (Council Memo No. 82) Notes: Adjournment REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 7:00 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of(1) Special City Council Worksession of July 12, 2011; and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of July 12, 2011 COUNCIL DISCUSSION 1. Council discussion • Hats Off to Hometown Hits Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 2. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing submittal of funding application for Federal Transportation Enhancement funds for 63rd Street Greenway S.R. No. 151 B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing acceptance of grants and donations received by Richfield Recreation Services and Public Works Departments S.R. No. 152 C.Consideration of approval of resolution establishing special revenue funds to conform to Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement #54 S.R. No. 153 D.Consideration of approval of 2011 agreement with City of Bloomington for provision of food inspection services for City of Richfield S.R. No. 154 E. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Richfield Department of Public Safety acceptance of grant funds from U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program S.R. No. 155 F. Consideration of approval of public dance and temporary food licenses for Richfield- Bloomington Credit Union Membership Appreciation Day on July 30, 2011 S.R. No. 156 Notes: 4. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: PROPOSED ORDINANCES 5. Consideration of second reading of ordinance amending Section 547 (Administration) of Zoning Code; specifically application process, requirements and terms of conditional use permits, variances, site plan approval and interim use permits and amending regulations related to requirement for driveway permit and resolution authorizing summary publication of ordinance Staff Report No. 157 Notes: 6. Consideration of second reading of ordinance relating to storage of garbage, refuse and recyclables containers; amending Subsection 601.25 of Richfield City Code to require screening Staff Report No. 158 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 7. City Manager's report Notes: 8. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: 9. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. richfield: July 2011 Page 1 of 2 City of Richfield Calendar Calendars Net Navigate: 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep tact Nov Dec 2012 July 2011 •Ionday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday ?7 I Jun 28 29 3() 1 I Jul 5:30p Human Services 5:30 PM Special Planning Council Concurrent City 7:OOp Planning Counci/HRA Commission Worksession 6 PM Special City Immediately following Council/HRA/Planning Concurrent Worksession Commission -Special City Council Worksession regarding Worksession Lyndale Garden Center site @ Oak Grove 7 PM Regular City Lutheran Church,7045 Council Meeting Lyndale Avenue 4 5 6 7 8 City Administrative 11:30a Richfield Tourism 7:OOp Transportation 7:OOp Arts Commission offices closed--Fourth Promotion Board @ Commission @ 6335 Portland Ave of July holiday 6601 Lyndale Ave,Suite CANCELED 106 CANCELED 7:OOp Human Rights Commission CANCELED 1. 12 13 14 15 6:30 PM Planning 11:30 AM Tourism Commission Study Promotion Board @6601 Session Lyndale Ave (rescheduled) 7 PM Special Council Meeting(Possible 5:30 PM Special City quroum)Open house Council Worksession regarding concept for greenway in northeast 7 PM Regular City Richfield along 63rd St. Council Meeting Corridor©Richfield Public Works Facility, 1901 E.66th St. 18 19 2(1 21 22 6:OOp Special City 7:OOp Community 7:OOp Friendship City Council/HRA/Planning Services Commission @ Commission Commission 7000 Nicollet Ave Worksession regarding Lyndale Garden Center site @ Oak Grove Lutheran Church,7045 Lyndale Avenue 7:OOp Housing and Redevelopment Authority(HRA) 25 26 27 28 29 5:30p Human Services 5:30 PM Special City 7-8 PM Neighborhood SATURDAY,JULY 30 Planning Council Council Worksession Crime Watch Block 9:30 a.m.-10:30 a.m. 5:30p Special HRA Captains Meeting @ Mayor's Hour @ Meeting 7 PM Regular City Richfield Middle School Farmers'Market 7:OOp Planning Council Meeting Auditorium,7461 Oliver Avenue Commission Display: Year Month Week Day Block List Condensed Abs Slide Calendars: Search Add Events: Daily Duration Periodic Administer: This Calendar http://www.my.calendars.net/richfield 7/21/2011 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES RICHFIELD Richfield, Minnesota Special Worksession July 12, 2011 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Council Members Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Fred Wroge; Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott; and Present: Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; John Stark, Community Development Director; Karen Barton, Community Development Manager; and Cheryl Krumholz, Recording Secretary. Item # I DISCUSSION REGARDING UPDATE FROM THE CORNERSTONE GROUP Colleen Carey, President of The Cornerstone Group, discussed the chain of events resulting in the current financial situation related to Kensington Park. Julie Eddington, Kennedy and Graven, discussed the financial analysis as it relates to the bonds, tax increment financing and interfund loan on the subordinate mortgage on the property. Ms. Carey explained an investor is being added, the property is not being sold because she remains a partner. A timeline should be clearer next week. The financial proposal to the investor has not changed but the sheriff sale made the processing go to a different department and now has to become familiar with the situation. Ms. Eddington explained the processing of the costs for time spent by Kennedy and Graven and Ehlers which is billed to the City and passed on the Cornerstone. She also explained the process of the appeal of the property tax by Cornerstone and calculating tax increment impacts. Community Development Director Stark stated the actions taken were to protect the interests of the HRA and City. Ms. Carey said she was optimistic for things to fall into place at Kensington but it's not a done deal. Special Worksession Minutes -2- July 12, 2011 Council Member Elliott expressed concern with explaining to constituents that if Kensington fails, the same developer may be seeking public financing for the proposed Lyndale Garden Center project. Ms. Carey responded that she did not believe Kensington was a failure because it is a vibrant site that has done a lot for the neighborhood and City as a whole. Council Member Wroge expressed concerns regarding the financing. He questioned The Cornerstone Group's stating Kensington's financial problems result from the 1-494 Bridge project when other businesses in the same area stayed operative. Mayor Goettel stated The Cornerstone Group is not walking away from Kensington. Council Member Sandahl stated her concern was that the City not lose any money and she is confident that will not happen and is comfortable with proceeding. Ms. Carey discussed the proposed Lyndale Garden Center concept, timeline, financing and parking options to be resolved. The project is a mixed-use town home center on two parcels, including anchor space, flex space and housing. Economically it makes sense to re-use the current garden center since it has been determined to be sound. Ms. Carey discussed Minnesota Life College as a potential part of the project. Ms. Carey explained the funding stages related to the Lyndale Garden Center purchase agreement, including the sources and uses funds, final project budget and short term acquisition funds. Mayor Goettel expressed support for the proposed Lyndale Garden Center project, including the Minnesota Life College partnership. Ms. Carey said Kensington is successful because the City and developer worked together in helping get priorities completed. She said she was asking for the City Council's feedback on supporting or not supporting the proposed Lyndale Garden Center project before proceeding financially. Council Member Sandahl expressed her support for the project to go forward. Council Member Fitzhenry stated he was concerned financially but supported the improvement to the area. Council Member Elliott stated there are always reservations but he was willing to move forward to see what develops. Council Member Wroge stated he would wait to see what happened and hoped for success. Item # 2 DISCUSSION REGARDING SIDEWALK SNOWPLOWING Due to lack of time, this item was deferred to a future meeting. ADJOURNMENT Special Worksession Minutes -3- July 12, 2011 The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:55 p.m. Date Approved: July 26, 2011 Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich Recording Secretary City Manager 1..AM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES RICHFIELD Richfield, Minnesota Regular Meeting July 12, 2011 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Sue Sandahl; Fred Wroge; Pat Elliott; and Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant City Manager; Melissa Poehlman, City Planner; Karen Barton, Community Development Manager; John Stark, Community Development Director; Corrine Heine, City Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Recording Secretary. OPEN FORUM None. PRESENTATION OF COLORS AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Fitzhenry, S/Sandahl to approve the minutes of(1) Special City Council Meeting of June 27, 2011, (2) Special Concurrent HRA and City Council Worksession of June 28, 2011, (3) Special City Council Worksession of June 28, 2011 and (4) Regular City Council Meeting of June 26, 2011. Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -2- July 12,2011 Item #1 PRESENTATION OF "2011 XCEL ENERGY CASE STUDY FOR MOTOR EFFICIENCY PROGRAM" PARTICIPATION PLAQUE TO ROBERT HINTGEN (VIDEO) The City Council viewed a video of the "2011 XCEL Energy Case Study for Motor Efficiency Program" participation plaque presented to Robert Hintgen. Item #2 PRESENTATION OF HENNEPIN COUNTY 2011 WELLNESS BY DESIGN AWARD (VIDEO) The City Council viewed a video of the Hennepin County 2011 Wellness by Design award presentation to the City of Richfield employee wellness committee. Item #3 COUNCIL DISCUSSION • CANCEL AUGUST 23 COUNCIL MEETING • POTENTIAL DATES FOR BUDGET DISCUSSION -SEPTEMBER 6 OR 7 • HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS M/Wroge, S/Sandahl to cancel the August 23, 2011 Regular City Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. The City Council confirmed the budget discussion will take place on September 7, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. The City Council acknowledged the success of the July 4 events and thanked volunteers and sponsors. Council Member Wroge acknowledged the advance notification to the neighborhood regarding the demolition of the old City Hall building. Council Member Wroge suggested additional meetings not be held on nights of other regularly scheduled meetings. Mayor Goettel requested the recently received Building Performance Commissioning of the new Municipal Center received from Orfield and Associates be scheduled for discussion at a future City Council meeting. Item #4 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA M/Sandahl, S/Wroge to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -3- July 12,2011 Item #5 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of a resolution supporting the efforts of the City of Richfield becoming a Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Community S.R. No. 140 RESOLUTION NO. 10526 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD BECOMING A BEYOND THE YELLOW RIBBON COMMUNITY This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10526. B. Consideration to accept the change order report for the Richfield Municipal Project for an aggregate net effect of$20,578 in items included in the project budget S.R. No. 141 C. Consideration of resolutions pertaining to the annual Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) maintenance assessment process and schedule a public hearing for August 9, 2011 S.R. No. 142 RESOLUTION NO. 10527 RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2010 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10527. RESOLUTION NO. 10528 RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2012 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2012 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10528. D. Consideration of resolutions pertaining to the annual 77th Street maintenance district assessment process and schedule a public hearing for August 9, 2011 S.R. No. 143 RESOLUTION NO. 10529 RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 77TH STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2010 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2010 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10529. RESOLUTION NO. 10530 RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE 77TH STREET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2012 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2012. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10530. Council Meeting Minutes -4- July 12,2011 E. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed for removal of diseased trees from private property for work ordered in 2010 S.R. No. 144 RESOLUTION NO. 10531 RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2010 TO DECEMBER 31, 2010 This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10531. F. Consideration of approval of submission of the Portland Avenue Reconstruction Project for Federal Surface Transportation Program Grant consideration S.R. No. 145 RESOLUTION NO. 10532 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PORTLAND AVENUE FOR FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM FUNDS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10532. G. Consideration of approval of first reading of an ordinance amending Section 547 (Administration) of the Zoning Code; specifically the application process, requirements and terms of Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Site Plan Approval and Interim Use Permits and amending regulations related to the requirement for driveway permits S.R. No. 146 H. Consideration of approval of an Encroachment Agreement with Richfield Hotel Associates Limited Partnership to place and maintain two signs in the City's existing Utility Easement S.R. No. 147 I. Consideration of the continuation of the contract with the City of Bloomington for provision of inspection services for the City of Richfield for the year 2011 S.R. No. 148 M/Goettel, S/Fitzhenry to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #7 PRESENTATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF 66TH STREET CORRIDOR REVITALIZATION PLAN (STAFF REPORT NO. 149) Tom Whitlock, Damon Farbor Associates, presented the 66th Street Corridor Revitalization Plan. Mayor Goettel commended the positive public participation approach and suggested more in-depth housing be considered along the corridor. Council Meeting Minutes -5- July 12,2011 Council Member Wroge expressed concern regarding the roadway changes from east to west Richfield along 66th Street. Mr. Whitlock explained that design discussions with Hennepin County are the next step in exploring alternatives. M/Sandahl, S/Goettel to accept the 66th Street Corridor Revitalization Plan. Motion carried 5-0. Item #8 CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AT 6401 LYNDALE AVENUE, 515 64TH STREET WEST AND 521 64TH STREET WEST (LYNDALE COMMONS) TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 94-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING (STAFF REPORT NO. 150) Council Member Wroge presented Staff Report No. 150. Mayor Goettel stated she was pleased with the revised setback. A Michael Development representative stated they preferred more green space and less parking but space is available if more parking is needed. He explained the improvements made to the interior of the units since the original plan was presented. Council Member Wroge stated the upgrades were excellent. Community Development Director Stark stated the financing changes through a private bank not HUD as originally expected. M/Wroge, S/Sandahl that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 10533 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A 94-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT 6401 LYNDALE AVE, 515 64TH STREET WEST AND 521 64TH STREET WEST Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10533. Item #9 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Devich discussed the time capsule located at the new City Hall. The City Council requested the opening of the old time capsule be included as part of the dedication of the new Municipal Center in the fall. The City Council requested the Historical Society be contacted regarding submitting an item for the new time capsule. Item #10 CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS Council Meeting Minutes -6- July 12,2011 M/Wroge, S/Sandahl that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. Bank 7/12/2011 A/P Checks: 204971-205297 $ 1,316,817.96 Payroll: 76412-76783 $ 584,701.82 TOTAL $ 1,901,519.78 Motion carried 5-0. OPEN FORUM Heidi Gaibor, 6915 Wentworth Avenue, spoke in opposition to a publicly funded amphitheater/bandshell and suggested private funding be considered as a more economical means of financing. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:16 p.m. Date Approved: July 26, 2011 Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich Recording Secretary City Manager AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3A REPORT# 151 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: JEFF PEARSON, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR Er" --- REVIEW: NO .1 _ REVIEWED BY CITY r rweavavARE MANAGER: f AK/ / ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approval of submission of the 63rd Street Greenway Project for Federal Transportation Enhancement Funding consideration. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution approving the submission of a funding application for Federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds for the 63rd Street Greenway. II. BACKGROUND Funding Program The Metropolitan Council and the Transportation Advisory Board have released the 2011 Solicitation Package for federal funds. The regional solicitation process selects projects or programs to be funded by the: • Surface Transportation Program (STP) • Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) • Transportation Enhancement Program (TE) • Bridge Improvement or Replacement Program (BIR) TE Applications may be for construction projects or programs that fall within criteria for Transportation Enhancements. Applications are due one month from the date that State government resumes operation, likely mid-August. Funding will be allocated in 2015-16. 072611 STEGrant Project Description The 63rd Street Greenway Project proposes to narrow 5 blocks of 63rd Street between Bloomington Avenue and 11th Avenue to allow for the addition of a multi-purpose trail and walking path. Current layouts for the Greenway are conceptual. The ultimate design, which will largely be community driven, is expected to include significant landscaping features and may include pedestrian scale lighting. Access to the homes along 63rd Street would be maintained. The construction of the Greenway would connect Veteran's Memorial Park to Taft Park and the future Three Rivers Park Regional Trail in that area. This would provide further opportunity for physical activity as well as provide increased access to the many events, facilities, and programs within the two parks. Public Input As directed by the City Council at the June 14, 2011 Work Session, a neighborhood open house was held on July 11, 2011 to gather input and determine support from those residents on and near the proposed project area. Twelve residents attended the open house meeting. Of those, ten filled out a feedback survey card. A summary of those responses is attached. All of the respondents expressed interest in continuing the design and input process for a greenway. Based on the feedback received to date, staff is recommending submittal for the federal funding. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The proposed project meets multiple goals in the City's Comprehensive Plan (Transportation). B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The application deadline for Federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds is mid-August, 2011. C. FINANCIAL • The construction of the 63rd St. Greenway is estimated to be $610,000. If selected for TE funds, $488,000 (80%) would be funded with Federal dollars and the matching 20% ($122,000) and engineering costs ($92,000) would be funded using other City funds. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council can choose to reject the grant application submission. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution approving the submission of the grant application. • 63rd Street Concept Map and Graphics • Summary of July 11, 2011 Open House comments VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE 63RD STREET GREENWAY PROJECT FOR FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FUNDS WHEREAS, the City of Richfield believes in promoting the increased health of residents through the construction of infrastructure that encourages active living behaviors; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield supports increased access to its parks and exposure to the community events, facilities, and programs within; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is committed to promote walking and biking as alternative travel modes to the automobile; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield values integrating the Three Rivers Park Regional Trail system into the community; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield values the inclusion of landscaping and other scenic beautification into transportation projects; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield approves the submission of application for Federal Transportation Enhancement funds. The application is for conversion of 63rd Street to a greenway to improve facilities for walking, biking, and other recreational use along the corridor. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of July, 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk lit 4\ tt, y �1 A' a iik No.7 O' T`A 4', 1' li 1f -' may= + t - ;- '{Rye' -'(` - . - - • - -- G GI) tl) . ° l t *M>`+ E y r , 1 11 e - , At f f CD 0 ( ) 7- cr,) . . . _. '.. O' y f ' t ' 1a `v _AA • Z ` f4. tyy . y r.,. I C) � " c -7..!..,..‘,0,.,,,,,z41,::•-._ yA�.'31°Sr a f._-t' •'.L.--..-1.4,e A CIL /v Bat t +, C1111 Wilillir ' -*. li- ■-' '1' Y ' �f S 1 t _ k Irr r �,, r ' Ir; ; - ii . e, ,+? ',1-O ii k 2 - 0 CD O C:11 Y. :. + .was f . `•' 6) M mss. 0mi • 1 - EMI. D _ 1► R Y ' �` `' - • OTO.C.- XI (60 . , i rn .. ;,iee A ,,, L .�3_. i_. __.., .40-, -. • , CI) 1 > > j 7' • . - ■'' . , j. • • c\-I `t Z X LLI W �1 ,, w 0. 0 mar L - _ W limm Q s LT W o CO el Oft, , __. • 1_ss u . ct I! - co s ' .,„...... a) ID . ...• . _ , ..._ . . . .,i ..... 13 iiiii,. -....:-H,. ,._ , • la■ -. -I \..._ r nia_. • -401. . . .. • ` • 0 . . , . CI) 1 ,.;-7. ' -v.ir, ..;.L. ..,, - - - 1 .. . ,,:. .;'',-....1'. -...7,,,Y-..:,,<, : .-; -, ,'i''4 V.._ :;,-,..-i..2‘...41. ,, ,v..'-' .,A,I , ..ai , r iniC 'Via; L:i I~a`4 i"i ..: .t ..,_.„.. ,,..,....,.............„. ....„...... , . ._,.... . ,___. ........... .._., _.. ....,.. . „ _ , •.,:$,-.• . '.. •-• . -, , . ._. —,, :,;.,!,.44-....'':-." 7 , ..' . _ A. 0 ,..-i- ,, •. .- .,• -- _.. . r.,• -..". • ., '1 ....'.,.1 . :: -,-,-- , ''.,,,,I.,;;A,.:-.,.. ''''• , ,;... ::.--.-r4,..',:fec , .1 4,11- 11:41 -- '''''vr_•:.:_,J,:-..... ....A7=0;-4•_:-...1044,-•,- . ,,,...,: .. Ay.- - thist_.4.--..1,-,.. :...1=,.., ....:- 4*--.........._.,.- ,.- --- ,,:. ..„ t1,, i .!'2,i' : L•'-'.!... , .,41,1q0:14 . -,-.: •--:.,,. ---:;-,-..--. ..--4- t1 . .. . . . .., ,,....,..,,.. .,,...,!,A...-,,,,,,-.,...._ -.. ..„-.i. r-f•:-:: ',...-.-. - -: ! .:_-. •-, v.. • . .--! :. ' .."..,.L.:,.-. •-kk,;: .._:.!-„,...7!--,,,,,,..-,-,...-.,i4,-- ,., iiii■ .. ..,... ._......,_„.,..-...,, :.,...,- ,.., ...: . ..,, .p..., ,. ...,„,,-..-,-.:- ., ,,,,•1,-,40,:c:IN,,,,.: , ... ' '''', ` ,.4 ..,?—. , ' .:•.4.).. . ilv/4'.11., .1 .,,i"2 ,• :.;',.. LL3 =1.- 'i D * ' . e ,, k,••- __441,'.,.... --'',.',,-?",..t,_ ,-:'''', A:. ' ' -"-:',_ C")) - e % ., •, .--..- :,- t. .,--. ...-z....e,,-,,,,,,,.2.-,.,. .-_,..r1._ •,-,.• it-). . • • —- - - - -- -! -'r *--..tz-:'-'";77,1= CD 0 r.4,A-. „,...........„,,,,e,--„,---.0„- _-,1_,......44„,,,:e. :;•_,,,,T...„...-_,.. ,-;:,,.. ,.,„,,, .,... •-• •_. .,.. , . . ., ti,,,,,,-..,_ ,...2_... .„*„.„--,.•_...„,..,._..,.„. :._. y... e-7. „,, „t.,.. , . . . .1. _ ) .____ _ --.1. •-,,-w ' . " :,..."'„,.,',4-:":-.ti" - ''"--' - "- ' . ---1-":-. ''' I . 1 = t- ':./' -... :. -'7'-r...t • - ;-. C• -,'.%-- Itik..14 , • inurosmusuoulny...; .,-;...,„ . .... ....,r; . ,. •-• ,._ .. * . I - z milm ... .-.,.. .....,-. _ ___ . _..----• -_, . - + 1117,77i7:111111,1:-'' fl) C:LI .. , ., .. . - --..);;,',,;,' - .. t'''-'•' . 1 ........„., r 411■111/IM , 111.1 ," —-. . ,_ ,., , . a) ,- , -ty,- "S . '- ' - I ,.., = 1"-?1-‘,. ..1 ____Tri!',:-;1•41N1 ,., k"-,1••■‘: .,?:-_-,"'„6.-..,:i-74,',..: _.„. F, ,7•'.; ' CL • , .,,,s"1_,..7',.„-;;_,','.:t::-:..--..-.---• .: . . ... ... ....y. ...,. .., - . - , ,....,...-_, ,..----1„,... 0 CD ....", -,• - , . _ ..e_..- -,-.-.5 . , .._,..:..„- . ,- ;-...;-.---, , ..,1 fa, ..'40 ,-.--,--,"'',---- .,-7-' - '---. , . - ,-.:......,- _,..„..4 _..., .4 .-...._,-. .tv,-. , . .. ., . rra , .. ....., ..,_. . . . _-„.- ,t: 4,-. 0 CS) . ,:. _ ,t,-....,; .-- N.2. xi • • '''' .-' ':,.• _ ..,-.._ , . • _ 1-.1h,-- ,, -,1/4-----_,._,-•-'-'-',-.--' . , - -,•'. 7C- Cra m i ..... -. ,---;„...---.,:.'..1';1,--1- -I,, „.. - .-.17.1 ..'.:,I' , •::••. . '--.. !' $i•:'' - . . .____ •-- . ■•j =11111 M 1.,_-...„, ., - ,,..4 -''• 1 -1 ._, ._, . .. 0. _ • . , .- _ -‹ —I . • - , ,, L. . ••=• „:- --_:.. ..- -!.,.,-- ....0. ..„.4,...f... ,—.1., -- * , r— 0 • r, -. . _ mos ., . . .. .. . . , . .: . __ ..„400.- , 4".".0-.63w,, '-',-"--- tric.. -.'„:„,„ -'-"' '• , . __ _. __.--- , , , ... ' 0 . _. . ria . . . _. ,,..,. _ __ , . .. ... . . '',-- •-,0-"--;_` ' ' . ,.... , , -_•.-,.._-.1,---, , . . . xrri Z .:q • ,_...,...- ---,-„,,,4-•:', , . . • _... .. r---- 1 4 T-• ..- -‘.:-8.;,. -=4-- ......1 _ •,. . ._ , . . _. ., . . . , .. • • • - - ' > ' - , - '''''' „a i ill 11111, .. -.. . . _ „ .., 1 "." • . - :',__ - .. r- . ; • r" . . A .V., ..1W',• r— : ..... -, .< I . -!--,- , 1,1--,.;-' __2; •..x.., •-,.-;1 :.'-' 1.--.,-___.• m _ .._,.._ . . , . -,.., ..., .....__ '' --,...,.....,..— .. •,,,...._ ,: ... , • --.„... ... ., - -:. .1 k ,. 1 ,... 4_ Q Z w -.- W F- d O■ 1 J' (J.)W ■ W U 1/4...D �r W fx X11 r :1t . L = —� tip` i !'�' , M � _ W ao _1_1 ;. .. ____i 1 I _ 1 `, uq11ua11 — — , t , l l 1 _- , r, T-: ,.- ,.. .,..lI y 4 ' yq y � fA4 `i 4{ f . 1. u. ' , l `, ( ss n•H� hz.-_. r t .- M1 e t. `t 1 t, a l}. f e c t: • 7 *j ti ,r �[� K 4 _1 ti14 y1'3 l »!a xy J 0 N e r.�.Lr 2�.' i t , allk •Mir �. • 1` .•!J t d 4` x ��` I - , c1 �.r _ N _, lot . uumuuuuuuuuunuruNUni C3 — mom C) o - , ,,, , -• 131) CI z c) -- -. 1r i _ , 1 . m ..: , ; 1 . • zim CDm D CD - - .1 '- ; ova .• ; 1 m rn ., _. NI fi v (I)0 fril) r+ e J dj� s --1 --�. -i )a * • - 1 ,? - 4. '� .ter �. T -41"elli v • ' t 34 -7 63rd Street Greenway Open House Surveys & Comments Received (as of 07/18/2011) "How would you rate your interest level in learning more about the greenway concept for 63rd Street and continuing COMMENT the design process? (Not Interested, Somewhat Interested, Very Interested) I think this is a wonderful idea for connecting the Very Interested two parks. I have biked down this route many many times over the years to get to Veterans Park. Very Interested None Very Interested Please keep the community involved in the design if this goes forward. We will be glad to provide input in the future! We prefer the simplist design possible with minimal additional greenery. We do not strongly support the need of a separate sidewalk. We prefer any Very Interested changes be as environmental as possible. We appreciate and are glad to be included in the future Three Rivers Park Trail expansion. Any extra money would be preferred used to enhance parks rather than street. Very Interested Let's keep Richfield on the "Cutting Edge." Very Interested None Very Interested Excellent drawings and concepts. Would be willing to pay extra taxes to help fund project. Very Interested None Might be a good idea to think of different uses for Somewhat Interested Taft Park in order to bring those already at Veterans Park east. Somewhat Interested Need to know more. AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3B REPORT# 152 IMAM STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 112 Sri ,--� REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: I Atf „ i ligea // ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution authorizing acceptance of grants and donations received by the Richfield Recreation Services and Public Works Departments and authorizing the city to administer the funds in accordance with grant agreements and terms prescribed by donors. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution authorizing acceptance of grants and donations received by the Richfield Recreation Services and Public Works Departments and authorizing the city to administer the funds in accordance with grant agreements and terms prescribed by donors. II. BACKGROUND The Richfield Recreation Services and Public Works Departments received grants from SHIP to promote healthy living in the community through different projects. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or devise of real or personal property of more two-thirds majority of the City Council. 0726 SHIP Grant Acceptance • The Administrative Services Department issued a memo on November 9, 2004 requiring that all grants and restricted donations to departments be received by resolution and by more than two-thirds majority of the City Council in accordance with Minnesota Statute 465.03. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • None C. FINANCIAL • All of the donations listed were given without obligation to provide any additional matching funds. D. LEGAL • Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires every acceptance of a grant or devise of real or personal property of more two-thirds majority of the City Council. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • None V. ATTACHMENTS • Council Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING N/A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF ALL GRANTS AND DONATIONS RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO ADMINISTER THE FUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH GRANT AGREEMENTS AND TERMS PRESCRIBED BY DONORS WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 reads in part as follows: Any city, county, school district or town may accept a grant or devise of real or personal property and maintain such property for the benefit of its citizens in accordance with the terms prescribed by the donor. Nothing herein shall authorize such acceptance or use for religious or sectarian purposes. Every acceptance shall be by resolution of the council adopted by two-thirds majority of its members, expressing such terms in full, and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has received grants and donations as described below: DATE DONOR AMOUNT June 2011 SHIP: Tobacco-Free Ordinance Park Signs $2,119 SHIP: Reimbursement for sign hardware, posts, and staff time related June 2011 to development of comprehensive tobacco policy. $2,576 SHIP: Development of a healthy foods policy for City-owned June 2011 concession facilities. $4,000 SHIP: Farmers Market development, promotion, and EBT payment June 2011 acceptance $9,800 June 2011 SHIP: Development and implementation of master bike plan $9,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: That the City Council of the City of Richfield hereby accepts all grants and donations as listed above for the year 2011 and authorizes the City to administer the funds in accordance with grant agreements and terms prescribed by donors. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of July, 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3C REPORT# 153 ...AI STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS,FINANCE MANAGER NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR lir REVIEW: 0 Akri REVIEWED BY CITY d . MANAGER: AYPS14- Tl'EM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approval by resolution the established special revenue funds to conform to Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Statement#54. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve by resolution the committing of specific revenue sources in special revenue funds so as to conform to Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Statement #54. II. BACKGROUND The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has implemented, effective for governmental financial statements for periods beginning after June 15, 2010 Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Statement 54. The objective of this statement is to enhance the usefulness of fund balance information by providing clearer fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied and by clarifying the existing governmental fund type definitions. The definitions of the general, special revenue, capital projects, debt service, and permanent fund types are clarified by the provisions of this statement. The statement could necessitate changes in fund structure, particularly for existing special revenue funds. 0726GASB 54 Special Revenue The GASB Statement#54 has defined special revenue funds as funds used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditures for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It has been the City's informal policy to conform to all new GASB pronouncements. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • GASB Statement#54 is in effect for fiscal year 2011, and therefore the City needs to conform to the statement this fiscal year. C. FINANCIAL • The City currently maintains thirteen Special Revenue funds. D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) • N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution committing specific revenue sources in special revenue funds to conform to GASB Statement#54. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A 3c - RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMITTEE OF SPECIFIC REVENUE SOURCES IN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS WHEREAS, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board's Statement#54 definition of special revenue funds states that special revenue funds are used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditures for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects; and' WHEREAS, the term "proceeds of specific revenue sources" establishes that one or more specific restricted or committed revenues should be the foundation for a special revenue fund and comprise a substantial portion of the fund's revenues; and, WHEREAS, investment earnings and transfers from other funds do not meet the definition of a specific revenue source; and, WHEREAS, council action is required to formalize the commitment of the specific revenue sources to specified purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that effective July 12, 2011 the specific revenue source of each special revenue fund and the specific purposes for which they are restricted or committed are as follows: Fund Specific Revenue Sources Committed For Liquor Contributions Liquor Operation Profits Certain City capital improvements approved by ordinance. Tourism Administration Administrative Fee on Administration of the tourism Tourism tax fund. Communications Fund Cable TV Franchise Fees Finance public service cable television programming and public information activities Elections Cell carrier antenna To offset the costs of City revenues elections. Drug/Forfeiture Forfeited cash and property Law enforcement purposes. 91 T Fees 911 fees collected Implementation and maintenance of 911 system Public Safety Compliance Fines levied against The costs related to businesses that fail alcohol performing the compliance and tobacco compliance checks and expenditures checks and Public Safety related to the Public Safety JAG and CERT Grants. JAG and CERT Grants. Recreation Contributions Donations received. The donations are used toward purposes that benefit City recreation services. Nature Center Contributions Donations received. The donations are used toward purposes that benefit Wood Lake Nature Center. Community Center Days Out Charges for days out To offset costs to administer programs. the programs. Public Health Grants Federal grant dollars that To assess and enhance the originate from the Centers capacity of the state and for Disease Control and local public health Prevention. departments to respond to bioterrorism, infectious diseases and other threats to public health. SC - e9. Wood Lake Half Marathon Race fees generated and Revenues are used to donations. provide funding for Wood Lake Nature Center's environmental education curriculum. Utility Franchise Fees Gas and Electric franchise Street maintenance and fees. forestry programs. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of June, 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3D REPORT# 154 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR / REVIEW: 4 REVIEWED BY CITY ` MANAGER: At= ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approval of the continuation of the agreement with the City of Bloomington for the provision of food inspection services for Richfield for the year 2011. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the continuation of the agreement with the City of Bloomington for the provision of food inspection services for Richfield for the year 2011. II. BACKGROUND The City of Bloomington has provided inspection and enforcement services in the areas of food, beverage, lodging and public swimming pools and plan check for food services for over 20 years to the City of Richfield. The proposed contract for 2011 for these services will be $90,060, compared to the 2010 contract amount of $90,300. Richfield staff had communicated with Bloomington in June of 2010 regarding Richfield's inability to pay an increase in the 2011 contract amount based on budget related issues. Bloomington's City Council did not approve of the 2011 Richfield food, beverage, lodging and public swimming pools inspection contract until June 6, 2011. Typically it is approved in January of the contract year; however, one or more Bloomington City Council members were apparently reluctant to sign the contract until recently 072611 2011 Contract with Bloomington for Food Inspections as several of them had questions about Richfield's inability to withstand a standard 3% increase in the contract amount over 2010. Council may recall that in order to stay at a 0% contract in 2010, Richfield staff worked with Bloomington staff to decrease activity in a couple areas of the contract to be able to maintain the same contract amount. Decreases in service were made in the areas of discontinuing church inspections and reducing public pool inspection frequency from three to two per year. Church kitchens are generally used for their membership and guests and are typically well maintained, clean and present few, if any, problems. It should also be noted that these decreases did not reduce service levels to less than what is required by the State. Anticipating possible continued concern about this, issue Richfield will undertake a more thorough review of the food inspection contract and service levels for discussion with the City Council at a later period of time. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Bloomington has sufficient resources to provide a professional level of inspection services to Richfield residents. Annual evaluations of their services have shown that they are providing efficient services in a very cost-effective manner. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed the contract and has approved of it and its contents. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) • The Council could decide to have Richfield provide its own food service inspections, beverage, lodging and public swimming pool inspections and • plan check food services. The cost of hiring the staff necessary to provide the same level of services and administrative support would be more than our current expenditures, and would require a budget increase. V. ATTACHMENTS • 2011 City of Bloomington Food, Beverage, Lodging and Public Swimming Pool Inspection Contract. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this day of , 2011, by and between the City of Richfield (hereinafter referred to as "Richfield") and the City of Bloomington (hereinafter referred to as "Bloomington"). WHEREAS, Richfield is authorized and empowered to provide for various types of environmental health inspections and code enforcement to ensure the public health, welfare and safety; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties and the purpose of this agreement that certain of such services be performed by Bloomington on behalf of Richfield; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, the above parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The term of this agreement shall be from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011, subject to termination as provided in paragraph 7. 2. For the term of this agreement, Bloomington shall provide Richfield with the following services, in and on behalf of Richfield: a.. Food establishment inspections and code enforcement as necessary. A minimum of two inspections will be done of all "high risk" food service establishments and schools per year. At least one inspection will be done of all "high risk" retail food establishments. "Low risk" food establishments will be inspected once per 24 months and "medium risk" food establishments once per year. b. Plan check and preopening construction inspections for new and remodeled food and lodging establishments. c. Public swimming pools inspected at least once per year with a goal of two inspections per year. This includes an opening inspection of all outdoor public pools at the beginning of the summer swimming season. d. Lodging establishments inspected at least once per year. Investigation and resolution of complaints associated with food and lodging establishments and public swimming pools. 3p —a- 3. Bloomington shall have control over the manner in which the inspections, plan review and code enforcement activities are conducted and over the determination of what enforcement action is appropriate and consistent with Richfield City Code Section 615 and other policies as established by the City of Richfield. 4. Bloomington shall assume the expense of performing the inspections and code enforcement. 5. In 2011, Richfield shall pay Bloomington the sum of NINETY THOUSAND, SIXTY AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($90,060.00) for services provided pursuant to this agreement. One-half of this amount shall be due on June 30, 2011, and the remainder shall be due on November 30, 2011. 6. This agreement shall terminate as follows: a. Upon the expiration of 30 days after service of written notice upon the other party; or b. At any time, upon agreement of the parties; or c. In any event on December 31, 2011. 7. In the event of a termination prior to December 31, 2011, a prorata reduction of the compensation owed by Richfield to Bloomington shall occur which reflects the period remaining on the agreement at the time of termination. 8. Bloomington agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Richfield, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Bloomington's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Bloomington. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or limitators on liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 9. Richfield agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Bloomington, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Richfield's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Richfield. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or limitators on liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 10.Bloomington shall carry liability insurance in the amount of at least $300,000 per individual and $1,000,000 per occurrence. Bloomington shall carry property damage liability insurance in the amount of $100,000. Richfield shall be named as an additional insured, and a certificate of said insurance shall be provided to Richfield. Bloomington shall carry Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.181, Subd. 2 and further agrees to provide a certificate of said insurance to the Richfield. 11.Any employee assigned by Bloomington to perform its obligations hereunder shall remain the exclusive employee of Bloomington for all purposes including, but not limited to, wages, salary and employee benefits. 12.In addition to the services listed in Paragraph 2 above, Bloomington shall, upon request, also provide for and on behalf of Richfield: a. Lead inspections and lab services; b. Housing and grossly unsanitary dwellings inspections and code enforcement services; and c. Mold inspection and code enforcement services. Such services shall be paid for by Richfield on an hourly basis at the rate of $62.00 per hour, and said hourly rate shall be separate from, and in addition to, the payment provided for by Paragraph 5 of this Agreement. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain applicable with respect to the lead, housing, mold and unsanitary dwelling inspection services being provided. 13.It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the persons employed by Bloomington as the agent, 3D representative or employee of Richfield for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Bloomington is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this contract. Bloomington represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this contract. Any and all personnel of Bloomington or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Bloomington under this contract, and shall not be considered employees of Richfield , and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Bloomington, its officers, agents contracts or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of Richfield; and Bloomington shall defend, indemnify and hold Richfield, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from Richfield, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensations, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. 14.The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of Bloomington relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by Richfield and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subd. 5. 15.This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Bloomington and Richfield and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, any amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. 16.Bloomington and Richfield agree to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and not to discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs, and activities. Bloomington has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. For information contact Human Services Division, City of Bloomington, 1800 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431; telephone: 952/563-8700; TDD: 563-8740. Richfield agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Bloomington from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Richfield. Bloomington agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Richfield from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Bloomington. 17.The City of Bloomington and the City of Richfield agree to submit all claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be conducted through the Mediation Center, 1536 Hewitt Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55104. The parties hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non-binding. If the parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non-binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and may commence such action prior to the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. 18.Both parties agree to comply with all applicable state, federal and local laws, rules and regulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands on the day and year first written above. Upon proper execution, this CITY OF BLOOMINGTON Agreement shall be a legal By: and binding obligation upon Its Mayor the City of Bloomington By: Its City Manager City Attorney CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Its Mayor By: Its City Manager AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3E REPORT# 155 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 JAY HENTHORNE,POLICE REPORT PREPARED BY: LIEUTENANT NAME,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: A -1-4('��"� lir SIGNATU dird REVIEWED BY CITY / MANAGER: -jo W A I L ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Council approval of attached resolution authorizing acceptance of JAG funds. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution allowing monies ro f eld U.S. Department of Public Safety e of Justice Programs, the Justice Department of Justice, Office Grant (JAG) )rogram. II, BACKGROUND The Public Safety Department has been informed B a additional Memorial l Just c will be made available to the department as part of the Edward Y s to Assistance Grant (JAG). The grant allows e prevent states, and control crime based on the rtown support a broad range of activities to p local needs and conditions. Richfield applied for and received grant funds in 2009 along with Cities of Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Minnetonka, New Hope, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Maple Grove, Plymouth, Richfield, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park. Notification was received that the City of Richfield was approved to receive $13,200 from the JAG grant for 2011. 072611 Resolution Approving Grant Monies from JAG III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY support unless it is designated • Public Safety does not accept financial supp for a specific program that will affPubl c Safety foe training and • The grant money will be used by purchasing of equipment. • Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires oeibted by the donor ntor devise of real of personal property n terms presc be made by resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City Council. • The Administrative Services Department issued a memo on November 9, 2004 requiring that all grants and restricted donations to departments be received by resolution and by more than two-thirds majority of the City Council in accordance with Minnesota Statute 465.03. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The grant money will be used by Public Safety for purchasing equipment. • Due to budget restraints for the past several years, the Police Division has not purchased many needed equipment items. C. FINANCIAL • Five percent (5%), or $729 of the total $13,929 has been removed as approved by the administrator of the grant for administrative costs. Richfield Public Safety will receive $13,200. D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) • Council could disapprove of the acceptance of the grant monies and the funds would have to be returned. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution No. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None sa -i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) ACCEPT THE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE FOR $13,200 FROM THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS SPECA BZED TRAINING SELECTED TRAFFIC AND NARCOTIC ENFORCEMENT, FOR POLICE PERSONNEL, AND CRIME PREVENTION AND JCPP (JOINT EN COMMUNITY POLICE PARTNERSHIPS) WHEREAS, Richfield Police has been approved by the U.S. Department of Justice to p articipate in funds made available to several Hennepin County departments through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Grant (JAG); and, WHEREAS, Richfield is scheduled to receive $13,200 to b designated related the grant agreement which mandates that the funds b e used for law programs and or equipment; and, e fiscal WHEREAS, Richfield has agreed that Hennepin yBrooklyn ParkhChamplin, agent on behalf of the Cities of Bloomington, Brooklyn Center Eden Prairie, Edina, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, New Hope, Plymouth, Richfield, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park; and, WHEREAS, Richfield Police has designated $13,200 for department programs, specialized training, and officer overtime for selected enforcement; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the agreement, five per en (5%) ($729)9) JAG total amount ($13,929) has been set aside for costs associated with funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department will accept funds designated for police programs and equipment in accordance to and as listed above. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 26th day of July, 2011. Debbie Goetell, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM# 3F REPORT# 156 immidi STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER NAA4E,TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ® 'tr 7-ii, ' v l IGNA REVIEWED BY CITY • MANAGER: igr 4 0 I V 111111A ta TI'EM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the request by the Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union for public dance and temporary food licenses for their membership appreciation day to be held July 30, 2011. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve public dance and temporary food licenses for the Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union for their membership appreciation day to be held on July 30, 2011. II. BACKGROUND On July 7, 2011, Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union submitted requests for public dance and temporary food licenses for their membership appreciation day to be held July 30, 2011. The required licensing fees have been received. They will be serving such food items as hot dogs, brats, veggie dogs, potato chips, baked beans, pasta salad, popcorn, mini donuts, cookies, bottled water and soda. The Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. The event will take place from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. The Public Safety Department has received no complaints regarding similar events for the Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union for previous years. 072611 RBCU Member Appreciation Day III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to these licenses. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • All required fees have been paid. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS) • Deny the requests. However, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted similar licenses for Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union events. V. ATTACHMENTS • N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Richfield-Bloomington Credit Union staff/representative AGENDA SECTION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE AGENDA ITEM# 5 REPORT# 157 STAFF REPORT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 REPORT PREPARED BY: MELISSA POEHLMAN, CITY PLANNER 'AME, ITLE • ACTING DEPARTMENT f DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CJ 44#411r- 1Als- ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Second reading and summary publication of an ordinance amending Section 547 (Administration) of the Zoning Code; specifically the application process, requirements and terms of Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Site Plan Approval and Interim Use Permits. The ordinance will also amend regulations related to the requirement for driveway permit. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: 1. Approve the attached ordinance amending Subsections 507.07, Subdivision 129; 547.07, Subdivision 3; 547.09, Subdivisions 4, 9 and 11 ; 547.11, Subdivisions 1, 3, 4, 9 and 12; 547.13, Subdivisions 1 through 4 and 11; and 546.15, Subdivisions 2, 3 and 5 related to the administration of zoning permits; and Subsections 514.05, Subdivisions 6; 518.05, Subdivision 6; and 522.05, Subdivision 6 related to driveway permits. 2. Approve the attached resolution authorizing summary publication of an ordinance amending Subsections 507.07, Subdivision 129; 547.07, Subdivision 3; 547.09, Subdivisions 4, 9 and 11; 547.11, Subdivisions 1, 3, 4, 9 and 12; 547.13, Subdivisions 1 through 4 and 11; and 546.15, Subdivisions 2, 3 and 5 related to the administration of zoning permits; and Subsections 514.05, Subdivisions 6; 518.05, Subdivision 6; and 522.05, Subdivision 6 072611 -2nd Reading Ord Amend -Admin & Driveway Permits related to driveway permits. II. BACKGROUND City staff continually monitors and note areas of the Zoning Code that may require review. This review may be the result of changes in State Law or its interpretation, changes in social norms, new technology or direct experience with a particular regulation. The changes proposed in the attached ordinance are related to new State Statute language regarding variances, the general processing of land use applications and a minor correction to clarify when driveway permits are required. Variances Last summer the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a decision related to the interpretation of the statutory language governing the issuance of variances. The Court interpreted the "undue hardship" test of the Statute to mean that no reasonable use of a property is possible in the absence of a variance. This very significantly limited a city's ability to grant variances. On May 5th, the Governor signed into law revised language related to variances. The new law eliminates the term "undue hardship" in favor of"practical difficulties;" however the test to determine "practical difficulties" remains the familiar three- pronged test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness to the property and (3) protection of the essential character of the area. The new law also adds a requirement that any variance granted must be "in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance" and "consistent with the comprehensive plan." Finally, cities are allowed to impose conditions upon the granting of a variance so long as they are directly related to and roughly proportionate to the impact created. In summary, when considering variances based on the new law, policy-makers must make all of the following findings: • The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance; • The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; • The proposal is reasonable; • There are unique circumstances related to the property that were not created by the landowner; • The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty; and • The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Conditional Use Permits The proposed change prevents conditional use permits from expiring if permits have been issued and substantial work performed. Site Plan Approval A number of changes to the site plan approval process are proposed; however none of the proposed changes reflect a significant policy change. The changes clarify existing policy and remove contradictory language. Interim Use Permits The proposed changes remove the unnecessary requirement for a consent agreement, in favor of a signed statement of agreement to the terms of the interim use permit. Even this requirement is not legally necessary; however, given the fact that an interim use is by definition temporary, staff feels that it's important to be especially diligent in ensuring that the applicant understands the limitations of the approval. The change also clarifies that the proposed use be similar to the existing area, as opposed to the zoning district. If the use were similar to the zoning district, it would likely be permitted by right rather than require an interim use permit. Finally, the change alters the conditions for termination related to nonconforming uses. In most cases, the proposed use will be nonconforming to begin with. Driveway Permits The City has required permits for driveway replacement since 1994. This helps the City to ensure that driveways remain in compliance with requirements. The proposed change will explicitly list "replacement in the text, making this clause consistent with others in the Code. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Clear and concise ordinances that describe the process for land use approvals are essential to good customer service and consistent application of the Zoning Code. • Ongoing review and periodic updating of the Code is necessary to ensure that regulations are serving their intended purposes. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • Simple errors and/or contradictory language can lead to misunderstandings and potentially unintended consequences if not corrected. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 27, 2011. • Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current in accordance with State and Local requirements. • The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments (7-0). • A first reading was approved by the Council on July 12, 2011. • If approved, the proposed changes become effective 30 days following publication in the Sun Current Newspaper. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Driveway regulations are in place for a number of reasons include the control of runoff. The permit process allows staff to ensure that maximum impervious surface regulations are not being exceeded. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Approve a second reading of the proposed ordinance with minor additional changes. • Deny a second reading of the proposed ordinance. V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance • Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A S - 1 BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE RELATED TO ZONING AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 507.07, SUBDIVISION 129; 547.07, SUBDIVISION 3; 547.09, SUBDIVISIONS 4, 9 AND 11; 547.11, SUBDIVISIONS 1, 3, 4, 9, AND 12; 547.13, SUBDIVISIONS 1 THROUGH 4 AND 11; AND 547.15, SUBDIVISIONS 2, 3 AND 5 RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF ZONING PERMITS; AND SUBSECTION 514.05, SUBDIVISION 6; SUBSECTION 518.05, SUBDIVISION 6; AND SUBSECTION 522.05, SUBDIVISION 6 RELATED TO DRIVEWAY PERMITS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 507.07, Subdivision 129 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 129. "Variance" —A relaxationPermission to deviate from ccrtain dimensionalthe literal requirements of this Code. Sec. 2 Subsection 547.07, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 3. Public Hearing and Planning Commission review. After receipt of a completed application, a date shall be set for a public hearing. Not less than 10 days prior to the public hearing, notice shall be published once in the official newspaper. If the application involves a change in district boundaries of 5 acres or less, notice must also be sent by mail to all the owners of properties located wholly or partially within 350 feet of the subject property - - -- - -- - ••- • - - - . The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council regarding the application. Sec. 3 Subsection 547.09, Subdivisions 4, 9 and 11 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 4. Public Hearing and Planning Commission review. After receipt of a completed application, a date shall be set for a public hearing. Not less than 10 days prior to the public hearing, notice shall be published once in the official newspaper and sent by mail to all the owners of properties located wholly or partially within 350 feet of the subject property. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council regarding the application. Subd. 9. Expiration of CUP. A conditional use permit shall expire one year after is has been issued unless: a) The use for which the permit was granted has commenced with ;-the d; or b) Building permits have been issued and substantial work performed; or c Upon written request of the person or corporation holding the CUPpermit, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period not to exceed one year. Subd. 11. Amendment to CUP. Holders of a conditional use permit may propose amendments to the permit by following the procedure set in this subsection for issuance of a new permit. Amendments to a conditional use permit shall be administered in the same manner as site plan amendments, as described in Subsection 547.13, Subd. 4410 of this Code. Sec. 4 Subsection 547.11, Subdivisions 1, 3, 4, 9 and 12 of the Richfield City Code are amended to read as follows: Subdivision 1. Limitations. The following limitations apply to variances: a) A variance may be granted from the literal provisions of this Code only when - - - - - . - - - - -- - • - - • -_ gcneral purpose and intent of this Code and all of the following criteria are found to exist: "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a - -- - - - - - e - - - - - - - - -- _ . --- The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems; ii. Unusual or unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and such circumstances were not created by any persons presently having an interest in the property; S- � iii. The variance, if granted, would not alter the character of the neighborhood. The completed project would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, or substantially increase the congestion of public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values, or have a detrimental or injurious impact on surrounding properties; and iv. The variance requested is the minimum variance that would alleviate the unduc hardshippractical difficulty. v. The variance requested will not alter the essential character of the locality. vi. The variance requested is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and consistent with the comprehensive plan. b) Usc variances Variances shall may not be granted for uses that are not allowed in the zoning district where the subject property is located.. c) Conditions may be imposed in the granting of variances. Such conditions must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variances. Subd. 3. Application. Application for a variance shall be made to the Director on forms provided by the City. Applications shall not be considered complete until an Administrative Review Committee (ARC) meeting is held between the applicant and staff. This requirement may - . _.. -_ _ - •_ - - •_ - •_ - = • or the Director determines that such a meeting is not necessary. Application s must be submitted for the ARC meeting at least 28 days before the scheduled hearing to be considered for the agenda. Applications must be complete at least 14 days before the scheduled variance hearing to be placed on the agenda. Subd. 4. Public hearing. Upon receipt of a completed application, the Director shall assign the application to one Hearing Examiner and a date shall be set for a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. If the variance requires some other approval by the City Council in conjunction with another planning and zoning application, the Director shall assign the application to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals for consideration in conjunction with the other requcstsrequest(s) and a date shall be set for a public hearing before the Board. Not less than 10 days prior to the public hearing, notice shall be published once in the official newspaper s -4 and sent by mail to all the owners of property located wholly or partially within 350 feet of the subject property. Subd. 9. Appeals. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Hearing Examiner may appeal such decision if a written notice of appeal and the fee set by Appendix D of the City Code is submitted to the Director within te10 days of the decision. The notice of appeal shall be addressed to the attention of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, care of the Director. A decision of the Board is subject to judicial review as provided by law. Subd. 12. Expiration of variance. Any variance granted shall expire one year after it has been granted unless: a) The project for which the variance was granted is completed within the one year period: or b) Building permits have been issued and substantial work performed; or c) Upon written request of the person or corporation holding the variance, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period. Sec. 5 Subsection 547.13, Subdivisions 1 through 4 and 11 of the Richfield City Code are amended to read as follows: 547.13. Site plan approval. Subdivision 1. All commercial, industrial, multiple-family housing (overfetrthree or more units) or institutional development applications shall be reviewed under the site plan approval process as set forth in this subsection. Site plan review will be coordinated with the review of applications for preliminary plats, rezoning, conditional use permits and variances. Provisions for the review of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) shall be dictated by Section 542 of this Code Subd. 2. Approval required. It shall be unlawful to do any of the following without first obtaining site plan approval: a) Construct a building; b) Move a building to any lot within the City; c) Expand or change the use of a building or lot or modify a building, accessory structure, or site or land feature in-any --- - - - - - - •p-afking(See Subd. 11 for amendments to previously approved plans); and d) Take actions to prepare a lot for development, including grading or removing or adding soils to a site, except in conformance with a permit or an approved plan which complies with the City's comprehensive surface water management plan or has received a variance from the appropriate water management organization as necessary. (Amended, Bill No. 1998- 2) Subd. 3. - - - - -- . ._ . - - - - - - - - building, provided no variances are required and the modifications do not Community Development Department. The City may require according to Subsection 509.25 of this Code.Repealed. Subd. 4. Application. Application for a site plan review shall be made to the Director on forms provided by the City. Applications shall not be considered complete until an Administrative Review Committee (ARC) meeting is held between the applicant and staff, or the Director determines that such a meeting is not necessary. Applications must be submitted for the ARC meeting at least 28 days before the scheduled Planning Commission meeting to be considered for the agenda. An application must be complete at least 14 days before the Planning Commission meeting to be placed on the agenda. Submitted applications and-shall be accompanied by the following: a) Evidence of ownership or an interest in the property; b) Evidence that there are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, penalties, interest and/or municipal utility fees due on the property; c) Accurate and current certificate of survey; d) Accurate legal description; e) Eight full-size legible plans regarding the following aspects of the project (All submitted plans shall be signed by a registered architect, civil engineer, landscape architect or other appropriate design professional): i. Boundary survey with existing; ii. Site plan with proposed improvements; 5 - � iii. Site plan with proposed parking and parking lot improvements, in compliance with Section 544, General Building and Performance Standards, of this Code; iv. Building elevations; v. Landscape plan, in compliance with Section 544, General Building and Performance Standards, of this Code; vi. Tree protection plan; vii. Grading plan; viii. Drainage plan; ix. Storm water management plan; x. Utility plan; xi. Sediment and erosion control plan; xii. Lighting plan; xiii. Screening plans for mechanical equipment and dumpsters; xiv. Signage plan; and xv. Solar access plan. f) The fee specified in Appendix D of the City Code; g) All plans must meet the following requirements: i. A title block stating the name, address telephone number and e- mail address of the applicant; ii. A north arrow and graphic scale; iii. Plans for preliminary review can be 11" x 17" and to-scale; and iv. One set of 8-1/2" x 11" legible reductions is required for City Council and Planning Commission packets. h) All applications must contain the following information: i. Property lines, setbacks and lot dimensions; ii. Building dimensions, height; iii. Building coverage; iv. Impervious surface coverage (buildings + hard surface/lot size); v. Access to parcel, location of medians; vi. Street locations, right-of-way, driveway and drive aisle widths; vii. Existing & proposed topography with spot grades & slopes in excess of 3:1; viii. Parking lot layout including location of curbing and striping; ix. Location of fire lanes and related signage; x. Location of hydrants; xi. Location of underground storage tanks and major utilities; xii. Sidewalk/trail alignment plan; xiii. Easement documents; and xiv. Significant trees lost and preserved. 5- -i j) The type of plans and number of copies required may be adjusted by staff based on the particular project. The City reserves the right to request additional plans or information as necessary. Subd. 11. Amendments to an approved site plan. Amendments to an approved site plan shall be administered as follows. a) Minor Amendments. Minor amendments to a site plan are:include the following, provided that no variances are required and the modifications do not significantly intensify use of the site: - - - - - '- -• - - - • - - - - - -- -- -• - a sign permit.) Landscape changes. iii. Parking lot configuration changes (not change in number__of spaces). iviii. Less than 25 percent change in the floor area in any one structure. viv. Less than 25 percent change in the approved separation of buildings. v+v. Less than 20 percent change in the ground area covered by the project. vi+vi. Less than 20 percent change in the number of residential units. v+i+vii. Less than 20 percent change in the number of parking spaces (provided or required). b) Major Amendments. Major amendments to a site plans are: i. More than 25 percent change in floor area in any one structure,- ii. More than 25 percent change in the approved separation of buildings. iii. Any chvangereduction in the original approved setbacks from property lines if adjacent to single or two-family residential property. iv. More than 20 percent change in the ground area covered by the project. v. More than 20 percent change in the number of residential units. vi. More than 20 percent change in the number of parking spaces (provided or required). c) Review of minor amendments. Proposed minor amendments (as specified in "clause a" above) to a site plan shall be reviewed and decided by the Director. Review criteria remain the same and the City may require nonconforming site improvements to be brought into conformance according to Subsection 509.25 of this Code. Decisions of the Director may be appealed to the City Council. The Director may determine that a proposed minor amendment is in fact a major amendment and may refer such proposed amendments to the Planning Commission and Council according to the procedure established in "clause d," below. Application fees for a minor amendment to a site plan are set forth in Appendix D of this Code. d) Review of major amendments. Any major amcndment to a site plan shall be considered by thc Planning Commisfion at a public h wring. The Council. Major amendments to a site plan shall follow the application procedure set forth in this subsection for issuance of a new permit (beginning at 547.13, Subd. 4). Sec. 6 Subsection 547.15, Subdivision 2, clause "a" of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: a) A signed consent agreement, provided by the City, statement agreeing: i. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user has no entitlement to future reapproval of the interim use permit; ii. That the interim use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to fully or partially take the property in the future; and iii. That the applicant, owner, operator, tenant and/or user will abide by conditions of approval that the City Council attaches to the interim use permit. Sec. 7 Subsection 547.15, Subdivision 3, clause "d" of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: d) The use is similar to existing uses defined in the zoning district in why thc property is located the area; Sec. 8 Subsection 547.15, Subdivision 5 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 5. Termination. An interim use permit shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events; whichever first occurs: a) The date stated in the permit; or b) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued;-er S -9 Sec. 9 Subsection 514.05, Subdivision 6, clause "f" is amended to read as follows: f) Any expansion,,oc installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit; Sec. 10 Subsection 518.05, Subdivision 6, clause "f" is amended to read as follows: f) Any expansion,of installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit; Sec. 11 Subsection 522.05, Subdivision 6, clause "f" is amended to read as follows: f) Any expansion,of installation or replacement of a driveway, parking or turnaround area on a lot shall be subject to a city permit; Sec. 12 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 day of , 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk i° RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 507.07, SUBDIVISION 129; 547.07, SUBDIVISION 3; 547.09, SUBDIVISIONS 4, 9 AND 11; 547.11, SUBDIVISIONS 1, 3, 4, 9, AND 12; 547.13, SUBDIVISIONS 1 THROUGH 4 AND 11; AND 547.15, SUBDIVISIONS 2, 3 AND 5 RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF ZONING PERMITS; AND SUBSECTION 514.05, SUBDIVISION 6; SUBSECTION 518.05, SUBDIVISION 6; AND SUBSECTION 522.05, SUBDIVISION 6 RELATED TO DRIVEWAY PERMITS 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 ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 507.07, SUBDIVISION 129; 547.07, SUBDIVISION 3; 547.09, SUBDIVISIONS 4, 9 AND 11; 547.11, SUBDIVISIONS 1, 3, 4, 9, AND 12; 547.13, SUBDIVISIONS 1 THROUGH 4 AND 11; AND 547.15, SUBDIVISIONS 2, 3 AND 5 RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF ZONING PERMITS; AND SUBSECTION 514.05, SUBDIVISION 6; SUBSECTION 518.05, SUBDIVISION 6; AND SUBSECTION 522.05, SUBDIVISION 6 RELATED TO DRIVEWAY PERMITS This summary of the ordinance is published pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Richfield City Charter. This ordinance makes the following changes to the City Code: revises criteria related to the consideration of variances to match State Statute language; prevents the expiration of conditional use permits and variances when building permits have been issued and substantial work performed; clarifies the administrative process for amending approved site plans and the definitions of major and minor amendments to site plans; revises submittal requirements related to interim use permits to include a signed statement rather than a consent agreement; revises conditions under which an interim use permit can be issued and shall expire; and clarifies that a permit is required for driveway replacement (as has been the case since 1994). 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. S - II Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of July, 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE AGENDA ITEM# 6 REPORT# 158 aria STAFF REPORT, RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 26, 2011 BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES REPORT PREPARED BY: DIVISION MANAGER NAME,TITLE ___.. DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR . ___ i 4 REVIEW: .3L_a. , IGNATURF / REVIEWED BY CITY i7 • MANAGER: ' r---, ` ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Second reading and approval of an ordinance relating to the storage of garbage, refuse and recyclables containers; amending subsection 601.25 of the Richfield City Code to require screening. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Second reading and approval of the attached ordinance relating to the storage of garbage, refuse and recyclables containers; amending subsection 601.25 of the Richfield City Code to require screening. II. BACKGROUND The City Council established a Property Excellence Task Force made up of residents and liaisons from the City Council and School Board. The Council had charged the task force with studying neighborhood conditions and City ordinances and recommending changes to ordinances, policies or procedures in order to improve community livability. One of the task force's recommendations was to amend the City ordinance to require property owners to screen garbage, refuse and recyclables containers from public street view when not at curbside for collection. On June 28, 2011, the City Council approved the first reading of this ordinance amendment with second reading scheduled for July 26, 2011. At their June 28, 2011 Council meeting, it was agreed that now effective to be�ndcompliance Id be January 1, 2012 giving residents from 072611 Ordinance Amendment Requiring Screening of Garbage & Recyclables with the ordinance. Members agreed that it would be useful to place information concerning the amendment on the City's website and to have visuals for the July 26, 2011 Council meeting of acceptable forms or types of screening. It was also agreed that any screening must be behind the front plane(s) of the residential structure and detached garage, if any. Councilmember Elliot also stated that the enforcement of opacity should have some latitude. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Richfield places a high value on preserving property values and the livability of residential neighborhoods. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The ordinance will become effective on January 1, 2012. It should also be noted that information about the proposed amendment was placed on the City website for notification to residents about the proposed ordinance. At the time of this writing, a short video will also be done and run on Cable educating residents about the requirement. C. FINANCIAL • NSA D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Proper storage of garbage, refuse and recycling containers reduces the occurrence of litter and visual clutter. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • None V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance No. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO STORAGE OF GARBAGE, REFUSE AND RECYCLABLES CONTAINERS; AMENDING SUBSECTION 601.25 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 601.25 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Storage of garbage, refuse and recyclables containers. Garbage cans, refuse, and recyclables containers for single- and two-family residential properties must be located _ _ _ _ - - - - -- - -- - - - •- - • _ _ - as provided in this subsection. Except when placed for collection, containers must be stored within an enclosed structure or screened from public view. Screening may consist of a wall, fence, evergreen plantings, or other screening material of at least 50 percent opacity. The screening material must screen the entire container from all street (but not alley) views. Enclosures or screens must comply with all applicable codes as to setback, height, and other requirements. Enclosures or screens that are designed solely for container storage must be erected behind the front plane(s) of the residential structure and detached garage, if any. Sec. 2. This ordinance will be effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the City Charter. Enforcement of the ordinance shall be by warning and education until December 31, 2011, after which the Public Safety Department may enforce the ordinance by citation or any other available enforcement measures. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of July, 2011. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk