Loading...
03-23-2004 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:30 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportun-ty 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 Regular City Council Meeting of March 9, 2004 PRESENTATIONS 1. Consideration of endorsement of "Together We Stand" 2004 ad campaign which urges parents and community leaders to take active role in preventing underage drinking and alcohol use in Richfield Staff Report No. 49 Notes: 2. Discussion of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District proposed Rule M with members of Board of Managers of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Staff Report No. 50 Notes: COUNCIL DISCUSSION 3. Council discussion • Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 4. City Manager's report Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 5. Council approval of agenda - CONSENT CALENDAR 6. 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 request from State of Minnesota to authorize new currency exchange license for Unbank Company, LLP, 6421 Penn Avenue S.R. No. 51 B. Consideration of approval of purchase of new 2004 Ford Explorer as Police Reserve vehicle from Wick Ford in amount of $20,919 S.R. No. 52 Notes: 7. Consideration of item(s), if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. Public hearing regarding new 2004 on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano, 1120 East 66th Street Staff Report No. 53 Notes: 9. Public hearing regarding new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Pu'hket Thai Restaurant, 6345 Penn Avenue Staff Report No. 54 Notes: 10. Disciplinary hearings and consideration of resolutions regarding civil enforcement for alcohol establishments in Richfield that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff and failed by selling alcohol to underage youth Staff Report No. 55 Notes: 11. Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance vacating drainage and utility easement for proposed Aldi grocery store at 6300 Penn Avenue Staff Report No. 56 Notes: 12. Public hearing and second reading of amendments to Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506 and 526 and Richfield City Code Section 920 to create regulations for firearms related uses Staff Report No. 57 Notes: 13. Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from Special Revenue Fund Staff Report No. 58 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 14. 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 bean opportunify to address the Council on items not on the agenda, lndividuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.. Notes: 15.Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 612-861-9702. AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 PUBLIC HEARINGS 13 58 Related to: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. N/A AND/OR RICHFIELD ZO2O GOAL(S~ NO N/A REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund. ~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ~~ Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve second reading of the transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds from the Special Revenue Fund for certain improvements. II. BACKGROUND • At the December 9, 2003 City Council meeting, the City Council authorized $500,000 of Special Revenue Funds for improvements to City recreation capital improvements and City Hall repairs 2004. • Finally, the 2004 Capital Improvement Budget provides for expenditure for all types of funds contained in the budget document including, municipal state aid, user fees, federal grants and state grants, however, authorization by ordinance is not required for expenditures other than Special Revenues. 0323TransitoryOrdinance • Subsequent to the first reading of the transitory ordinance there have been some changes in the use of the Special Revenue funds. The initial reading showed the replacement of Ice Arena ceiling beams at a cost of $55,000. Recreation staff has since determined that there is not a block of time available in 2004 to undertake the project. Consequently, staff is recommending deferring the Ice Arena Ceiling Beam project to 2005, and replacing the project with the following: • Wood Lake Nature Center Improvements • Wood Lake Fence Replacement • Mini Golf Rock Border Replacement • Mini Golf Carpet Replacement • Lincoln Field & Other Ball Field Improvements • The cumulative cost of completing these projects is the same as the initial Ice Arena Ceilina Beam aroiect. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION ~ A. POLICY • City Charter Section 7.12, Subd. 2 requires that Special Revenue Funds for capital improvements must be authorized by ordinance. This process provides for public input through a public hearing. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. The ordinance requirements must be completed early enough in 2004 so that capital projects can be initiated on a timely basis, completed and funds expended. This needs to be completed promptly so payments can be made for projects authorized. C. FINANCIAL • While the total 2004 Capital Improvements Budget (CIB) includes total budgeted expenditures of $9,773,000 the portion of CIB concerning proposed funding from the Special Revenue fund is $500,000 as shown below: Park Maintenance 50,000 Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment 50,000 Wood Lake Improvements 30,500 Wood Lake Fence 6,000 Mini-Golf Rock Border 5,000 Mini-Golf Carpet 6,000 Lincoln Field & Other Ball Field Improvements 7,500 Outdoor Pool Renovation 214,000 City Hall Repair/Maintenance 131,000 A transitory ordinance is necessary to finalize these appropriations pursuant to City Charter. The source of Special Revenue funds are municipal liquor profits. D. LEGAL • First reading of the ordinance was approved at the February 24, 2004 City Council meeting and a notice of public hearing was published on March 11, 2004. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The City Council could postpone the second reading of the transitory ordinance to a future City Council meeting. • The City Council could decide to authorize none or only a portion of the expenditures identified from the special revenue in the CIB. V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance . VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Park Maintenance 50,000 Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment 50,000 Wood Lake Improvements 30,500 Wood Lake Fence 6,000 Mini-Golf Rock Border 5,000 Mini-Golf Carpet 6,000 Lincoln Field & Other Ball Field Improvements 7,500 Outdoor Pool Renovation 214,000 City Hall Repair/Maintenance 131,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 12 REPORT # 5 ] STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 Related to: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. N/A REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL~S~ NO N/A BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing and second reading for consideration of amendments to the Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506 and 526 and the Richfield City Code Section 920 to create regulations for firearms related uses. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the attached ordinance amendments to Richfield Zoning Code Section 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 and to the Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7 and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b) to create regulations for firearms related uses. III. BACKGROUND ~ A Richfield resident requested zoning requirements for locating a firearms safety training center at 6611 Chicago Avenue in June of 2003. After reviewing current land-use rules, staff determined. that no zoning regulations. existed for such a use in 032304-2nd Read-Fi rearms. doc Richfield. Zoning Code Section 511.05 states that uses not listed in the Zoning Code are to be referred to the City Council for consideration. On July 8, 2003 the City Council voted to classify any use involving the discharge of a firearm as a `firearms related use' and to limit such uses to the C-2 or I districts within the City. The Council further directed the Planning Commission and Public Safety department to work together to draft suggested zoning regulations for such uses. The City Council also enacted a moratorium on such uses until after regulations could be drafted and adopted. This land-use moratorium took effect on July 8, 2003 and will expire on July 31, 2004 unless it is extended by the City Council prior to the expiration date. Staff began studying firearms related use regulations from other communities in Minnesota and around the country. In addition to regulating the location of such uses, staff discovered that most communities also regulate a wide variety of aspects related to the management of businesses that involve firearms. Community Development Department staff met with staff from the Public Safety Department and thus City Clerk's Office and both agreed that in addition to zoning and land-use regulations, business management and licensing regulations should also be drafted for the City Council to adopt. The Planning Commission conducted a worksession on September 8, 2003 to review staff research and recommendations for possible zoning regulations for firearms related uses. Richfield Police Sergeant, Mike Koob participated in the discussion. The Richfield resident who originally requested zoning information for a firearms safety training center on Chicago Avenue was invited to the worksession but did not attend. Using staff research, the Planning Commission developed recommended zoning regulations for firearms related-uses. These recommendations are included in the attached ordinance providing amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinances. Community Development staff has also worked with the City Clerk's Office to create licensing requirements for firearms-related land uses. These recommended licensing requirements are also included in the attached ordinance providing amendments to the City's Ordinances. Summary of recommended land-use regulations and licensing requirements. The recommended revisions to the City's Zoning Code and Public Safety and licensing requirements can be summarized as follows: Zoning a) Firearms related uses are defined and then included with the existing zoning regulations for gun and ammunition sales/repair uses. This change requires firearms related uses to obtain a City license; to be located at least 300 feet from schools, churches, daycare centers, public libraries, or governmental buildings; to be located at least 1,000 feet from other gun or ammunition sales/repair businesses orfirearms-related uses; and, to be located at least 100 feet from any residentially zoned property. b) Additional zoning requirements are added specifically for firearms-related uses above and beyond those outlined above for both gun and ammunition sales/repair and firearms related uses. These additional requirements specific to firearms related uses include: hours of operation are limited to between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; firearms related uses must be operated in buildings that meet minimum standards, including a prohibition against operating such uses in trailers or other non-permanent structures; and. exempting firearms related uses that exist on or before January 1, 2004. Public Safety and Licensing a) The licensing section of the City Code is modified so a city license is required for firearms related uses, as is already required for firearms manufacturers and dealers. b) Conditions required to issue a license for firearms related uses are created, including the requirement that the licensee must be at least 21 years of age. c) The section listing the exemptions to the prohibition against discharging a firearm in the city is modified to include the lawful discharge of weapons at licensed firearms-related uses that comply with the City's zoning requirements. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council referred this issue to the Planning Commission for study and a recommendation on July 8, 2003. • The recommended ordinance amendment will create a definition for firearms-related uses and provide zoning regulations and licensing requirements for such uses in the C-2.and I zoning districts. • In addition to requiring changes to the City's Zoning Code, changes to Chapter IX, Public Safety, of the City's Ordinances are also required. These changes are provided here for consideration and adoption as well. • The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments at its January 26, 2004 meeting. and recommended that the amendments be approved by the City Council. • The City Council reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments at a first reading on February 24, 2004. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Regulations for firearms related uses are necessary to provide reasonable controls for such uses to insure public health, safety, and welfare. • The Director of Public Safety has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's code. • The City Attorney has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's code. • The amended ordinances should be adopted and published 30 days before the moratorium expires on July 31, 2004 or the moratorium will need to be extended. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL Zoning: This ordinance amendment creates land-use controls for firearms related uses in the C-2 and I zoning districts. Land Use: Firearms related land-uses. Comprehensive Plan: N/A Notification: Notification for the City Council public hearing on this proposed Zoning Code amendment was published in the Sun Current on March 11, 2004 as required by City Ordinances and State Statutes. Other Actions: ~` The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments at its January 26, 2004 meeting. If the City Council adopts the recommended changes , they will take effect 30 days after the approved City Council resolution is posted in the Sun Current newspaper. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Reject the motion to amend Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 to create zoning regulations for firearms related uses and to amend Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7, and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b) to create public safety and licensing requirements for firearms related uses. ~ V. ATTACHMENTS ~ rences: Draft of proposed amendments to Zoning Code Sections 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 and Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7, and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b). VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Persons interested in zoning and land-use regulations. BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE SECTION 506.07, SUBDIVISION 32; SECTION 526.27, SUBDIVISION 19; SECTION 920.01, SUBDIVISION 4; SECTION 920.03 SUBDIVISIONS 1, 7, and (new) 8; AND SECTION 920.11 SUBDIVISION 4(b) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 506.07, Subdivision 32 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 506.07, Subdivision 32 "Firearms-Related Uses"-uses operated by a private person or entity that involve the discharge of a firearm, including but not limited to shooting galleries firing ranges, and fire-arms safety training centers. 2. Section 506.07 is amended so all subdivisions, starting with "Floor Area, Gross", are renumbered by increasing their subdivision number by one (1). 3. Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 526.27. Subdivision 19. Gun or ammunition sales/repair and firearms-related uses, provided the following conditions are met: a) such uses shall be licensed under Section 920 of the City Code; b) such uses shall be located not less than 300 feet from any school; Church, daycare center, public library, or government building; c) such uses shall be located not less than 1,000 feet from other gun or ammunition sales/repair businesses or firearms related uses; a~ d) such uses shall be located not less than 100 feet from residentially zoned property; e) firearms-related uses shall not operate before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m.. f) firearms-related uses shall only be allowed within an enclosed structure which is soundproofed to prevent the sound to be heard by persons on adjoining propertys g) no firearms-related use shall be allowed in a trailer or other non- permanent buildina: and h) any firing-range existing in the City on or prior to January 1 2004 shall be allowed to continue. 4. Section 920.01, Subdivision 4 is of the code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: 920.01. Subdivision 4. "Firearms-Related Uses"-means uses operated by a - private person or entity that involve the discharge of a firearm, including but not limited to shooting aalleries firing ranges and fire-arms safety training centers. 5. Section 920.03, Subdivision 1 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.03. Subdivision 1. License required. A manufacturer or dealer may not sell at wholesale or retail, or lease, pledge or accept as security for a loan a firearm without first having procured a license as specified below under Subdivision 7. An operator of afirearms-related use mav_not operate any firearms-related use without first having procured a license as specified below under Subdivision 8. 6. Section 920.03, Subdivision 7 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.03, Subdivision 7. Conditions Governing Issuance for firearms manufacturers or dealers. The following conditions govern issuance of a license for firearms manufacturers or dealers pursuant to this subsection: [items a) through t) under 920.03, Subdivision 7 remain unchanged...] 7. Section 920.03, Subdivision 8 of the code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: 920.03. Subdivision 8. Conditions Governing Issuance for operators of firearms- related uses. The followina conditions govern issuance of a license for operators of firearms-related uses. a) All licensees must be at least 21 years of age; b) No person may in applying for a license to operate afirearms-related use, give false identification or offer false evidence of his identity; 8. Section 920.11, Subdivision 4 (b) of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.11, Subdivision 4(b). persons engaged in target shooting at inanimate objects at afirearms-related use that is licensed under this section and complies with the requirements of Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 of this code. ~9-Ny Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: public Hearing AGENDA ITEM # 11 REPORT # 56 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 Related to: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO 3O REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: S/GNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: ', Public hearing and second reading for a transitory ordinance vacating a drainage and utility easement for the ro osed Aldi roce store at 6300 Penn Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the attached transitory ordinance vacating a public drainage and utility easement at 6300 Penn Avenue, in the former right-of-way of the 6300 block of Queen Avenue. II. BACKGROUND • The 60 foot wide right-of--way for the 6300 block of Queen Avenue (located to the east of Fraser School and to the west of Penn Avenue) was vacated in the early 1990's. The land underlying the right-of-way accrued to the adjoining properties, and a private driveway was created to serve these properties, including Fraser School and Lund's. 032304 6300 Penn • When the public right-of-way was vacated, a 60 foot wide drainage and utility easement was created over the area that had been public right-of--way. • Because half of the right-of--way accrued to the adjoining property owners, the property at 6300 Penn Avenue acquired 30 additional feet of land, so that it's western property line moved further west 30 feet. (Instead of the eastern line of the right-of--way being the western edge of the property at 6300 Penn, Avenue the current western edge of the property is 30 feet further to the west, at what used to be the centerline of Queen Avenue... ) • Aldi, Inc. purchased the property at 6300 Penn Avenue and has received City Council approval for the construction of a new building at this site. The proposed building meets all City requirements, including locating the proposed building so that it is set-back 20 feet from the rear (western) property line. • Because the proposed building at 6300 Penn Avenue will be set-back the required 20 feet from the western property line, the existence of a 30 foot drainage and utility easement along the western 30 feet of the property at 6300 Penn Avenue causes the proposed building to overlap the drainage and utility easement by 10 feet. • The applicant has requested that the eastern 10 feet of the drainage and utility easement be vacated, so that 20 feet of the easement remain and so the building will not encroach upon the easement area. • Staff has reviewed both the public and private utilities in the area and determined that only an electrical line exists in the area. The request can be approved while still accommodating the electrical line and any future needs for either public or private utilities. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Richfield City Charter Section 13.05 specifies procedures for the City Council to vacate a street, alley or "part thereof', including a drainage and utility easement. • Richfield City Code Section 820.05 states that the Council "shall by resolution acknowledge receipt of any petition. The Council shall also set the date for a public hearing on any proposed street vacation. No vacation may be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so. Not less than ten days prior to the public hearing, a notice shall be published once in the ofFcial newspaper and sent by mailed notice to the owner and residents." • The City Council passed a resolution finding the petition to vacate the easement to be adequate on February 24, 2004. • Notification for this public hearing was published in the Sun Current on March 11, 2004. Notices were also mailed to residents and property owners within 350 feet of the proposed vacation area. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The proposed redevelopment of this site has already been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. During title research, the applicant discovered the existence of this easement and has requested that it be vacated so that their proposed building, which has been approved by the City, can be constructed without encroaching into an easement area. City staff has reviewed the area of the easement to be vacated and determined that there are no private utilities in the area. The only public utility in the area is an overhead electrical line, which will be relocated as part of the redevelopment of this site. There are no additional utilities planned in the area. The drainage and utility easement currently covers the rear 30 feet of the applicant's property. Only 10 feet will be vacated, while 20 feet along the property line will still remain under the drainage and utility easement. While staff does not anticipate any utilities becoming necessary in the area, 20 feet of the applicant's property will still remain available if any utilities must be provided on or over the property. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • 60-DAY RULE: The '60 day rule' does not apply to requests for vacations. A complete application was received on February 3rd, 2004, and the applicants plan to begin construction on the site sometime this spring. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) V. ATTACHMENTS • Transitory Ordinance • Attachment `A' -certificate of survey showing easement to be vacated VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Mr. Joseph Samuel, representative for the petitioner BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT CREATED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2756159 (Formerly the 6300 block of Queen Avenue South, Richfield) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: The following described lands are subject to a drainage and utility easement as created in Document Number 2756159 ("Drainage and Utility Easement"): The West 30 feet of the East 330 feet of the South '/ of the East 3/8 of the East '/ of the North 'h of the Northeast %4 of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24; EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof AND The West 30 feet of the East 360 feet of the East 3/8 of the East'/ of the North'/ of the Northeast'/ of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24 lying. south of the North 175 feet thereof, EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof. Section 2: The City of Richfield has received a petition for the vacation of the following described portion of the "Drainage and Utility Easement" ("Vacation Area"): The East 10 feet of the West 30 feet of the East 330 feet of the South'/2 of the East 3/8 of the East 'h of the North'h of the Northeast'/ of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24; EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof. - Section 3: The City Council has determined the petition to vacate the "Vacation Area" of the "Drainage and Utility Easement" to be adequate by Resolution No. Section 4: The Vacation Area is not required for drainage and utility purposes. Section 5: There are no City-owned water or sewer facilities located within the Vacation Area. Section 6: The City has notified the service providers for gas, electric, telephone, and cable communications services of the proposed vacation, and the following facilities are reported to be located within the area of the Drainage and Utility Easement: Overhead Xcel electrical facilities.. Section 7: The Council finds that there is no need for a drainage and utility easement in the Vacation Area. Section 8: The drainage and utility easement over the Vacation Area is vacated. Section 9: The vacation of the Easement is effective 30 days following publication of this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to prepare a Certificate of Completion of vacation proceedings and to record the vacation in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles or Hennepin County Recorder, as appropriate. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this March 23, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 032304-Vacate Easement. doc ATTACHMENT 'A` .w.. tw ,.••r••.l•""~"'. H~13~IS NOlld~dll a ~ ~ ~ ~„~' xzx vios~x+iN 'ai3i~+aia _ NI `I lb' ~ r O ' \. 0 ~ V ~ ~ ~~ Z W0 ~ ~ U~ ~ V~ t 86. P~a~e .;„°s 5 •Q= e~ i~ ~6~~ ~a~s ~a~~ • ~_ .o '. tl `o e 5 r ,!f e a ~i~ ct °n $ rxi to a. `o p k:. m n z 3f1N V NN3d Q pp ~ C~ tl tl ~£ °v {'~ V ~ N tlN W '~ ° {•t . R N N - Z ° ~~ n E E~ ~ ' tl o oe ~X~a - a p = ~ ~ ~ S '~ ~N Z ~ c L O i __ - A. 1 w (7 Z a i to ~ (~ ~ . 0 ,cl~i ° t` o s ro F < 3 y0 "V ~QO N tl0~0 Z" ~ ~ I l. VN o a Or {*l ~ ~_ a't) X01 M ~ ~v a Yi #\N ~ ~ v z e~ LL o ~ ~E aw ~ ~ = O N ~ O u~ o V ~a C VUZ a~ . t~w O F v~ .. oN'c$ m ~ of $ r ~t Y~° QQ U vv „~vf~ r o k tlAt l~ z t9i ~ o ° w .c t ,e "y O fi q~ a ~, ~ o ~ V tl ._ E ~~ u~ s.$ o n6 $- o i ` G= - ass ... 10 M N Z W 0 ~ "~ 2 W oe Q Y 0 a~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~J U ~ .n ~....t..m, [a~ -~~•~ Frtnos ~nnr~nt~ nrnr~a 55` wg... ~_ € en en nn on en en .n en en en .n m ~ ~ n--R~ .n 1 ~• s ~~~ 310'if9ls ~...~ N •VI ro •NI'1 ^3-, 9 y7 `A1 _ ---~e~"vezr-~-- -~! -- 'L59 3.81.11.005 M.BI./LOON 1 1. ; I ~ t r I { ~ I ~ I :.w.. em .eL _-` 4 1 , .us m w n.e.~ - . .. _ 1 w w w _ _ - .. .. .N a. '4 `` ,qq``I i •'~' ~~ 3FS a; m a I Z I W i W 5 ~~a ~~ I J O Z ~ lti J " `" a~ ~I W ff ~ ~,~ 8.sr° n ~3a ~I LAN a~ i '~ ¢ ~ ~ ,~ a o~~~ ~ ~~ ~I m ~ V W€~o W ~ '" N O Q d --------- p------- > ens z }- LU LU W -- I ttl ~p `~ ~ lL Z ~' I L1.. '~f' -----------~--~---- O ..; r ~- Q o f.•„ I w ~ ,~ I W ~'~ I --:. I N ~' '~~: \ { ; ~ \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ II 1 = i I 1_ ~ I fl t I 1 { i ~_-3~F -__-_, I I I I ; ~ ' I i 1 I ~ I '~ I I { ,s~ --------- .. -~ i~~ ----------------- °°~ -----•~-- 1 ~ 1 ! -----•-----------------------------~ --- 00 L[l ~ I ---- - - ----t----- I :----~ I i! I i i ~ n + ~ ~3 n n o { to ' I i ! a "' ~ o w i eS'V ; I ~ s G ~ ~ bN ~ I I n Paz o 5a I I ' a~~~~ -~ { ~ I~ ~ ' ~ I I ~s ~ ~ ! I a ! i ~ I# i~ a r __.._ i / .L•....... ~. m +~~ • I I '.~:::.• . . ':.° --------- I ~ .. . ~ .; . , i I ~.~ n ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ i i ~i ~_ •.I i I t; ~ I I I r • s ~~ A''"~. 3 ;~ :7 z °o 'o$a s •~,~~ - ~g@ d ~a o 1 ~t,~ ~ a° „,§~ Z W ~ °s 0 o: m W .~ ~ W \ 7' .,...e,.., I I ... .~-w.tw •+++.nn_R. -.. { !i ~tnaee <N +•e ~I E ippp -~• w 4.1•+ xn iri- + I ' •{--Iwrma I.NI r. w.geV Ac-. °~~ d I on nom. ~ . ~ _-~ e,.ww., w - - - - - l0 i•9L _ ~ `, --- fe.er.w wneu,.tr..n.w~ w . W~ .. .wpl.I• ttt) M ~. eMM•~ ee(( mum/ mmAA. e m mIA .R---_, 1 IICI"[C aN *^n +M aNV-i aniaa '1---------------- ..-Y------ -- -__ --------~-~f~---------------- L. I-- ' - ,t '1 .,. w S - ~ ~ , %'' ;, c;~ ' N~3 1 ry „ W W~~z ~ ~~~~a ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ Z a --era-{o ~ ~~1:~3 ~ ~>:ss~~3~~a d ~ L e . ^ . ^ 1 f . .. . i . ^ e ^ . . ^ °~ i~ o ~- ~ i lI I IJI N O J ewue-w..-twee\e~.~w-~~ ~~Y1 ~y i AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # lO REPORT # 55 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 RELATED TO: CITY COUNCIL GOALS NO. 1 AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO. 1 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:. SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Council consideration of a disciplinary hearing and resolutions regarding civil enforcement for alcohol establishments in Richfield that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks, conducted by Richfield Public Safety staff, and failed by sellin alcohol to underage youth. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolutions suspending the license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days for each of the first time violating establishments; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1,000 for the first violation; requiring a mandatory meeting with the. Public Safety Director to present their individual establishment plans to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind; and providing proof of the attendance of the manager of the establishment in an alcohol sales awareness program. Approve the attached resolutions suspending the license to sell alcohol for seven (7) consecutive days for each of the second tii 0323 Liquor Compliance Violator Resolutions violating establishments; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1,750 for the second violation; proposing that the Public Safety Director select the seven consecutive days their licenses will be suspended; requiring a second meeting with the Public Safety Director; and conducting a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session with all of their employees, provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety officials, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Approve the attached resolutions suspending the license to sell alcohol for twelve (12) consecutive days for each of the third time violating establishments;. levying a fine against each establishment in the amount of $2,000 for the third violation; proposing that the Public Safety Director select the twelve consecutive days that the licenses will be suspended; and conducting a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session with all of their employees, provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety officials, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Approve the attached resolution dismissing a revocation for the fourth time violating establishment's license to sell alcohol as they have changed ownership and are no longer operating under Phillip's 12th Avenue 66 Station; and levying a fine of $2,000 for the fourth violation. II. BACKGROUND On December 3 and 4, 2003, Richfield Public Safety staff conducted alcohol compliance. checks at all of Richfield's alcohol establishments, assisted by three underage youth that were all 20 years of age. These compliance checks were the second set of checks conducted in 2003. Arrangements for the minors to enter the establishments with undercover police officers. In seven instances, the underage youth were served alcohol. The businesses that made sales to underage youth on December 3, 2003 are as follows: • Chi-Chi's. - 7717 Nicollet Avenue South • Davanni's - 2312 West 66th Street • SuperAmerica - 7720 Nicollet Avenue South This is a first offense for Davanni's. Technically it is a second violation but because of time elapsed between now and the previous violation in July of 2001, it is considered a first violation. This is a second offense for SuperAmerica. Technically it is a third violation ,but because of the time elapsed. between now and the previous violation in November 1999, it is considered a second violation. This is a third offense for Chi-Chi's. Technically it is the fourth violation but because of the time elapsed between now and the previous violation in August of 2000, it is considered a third violation. The businesses that made sales to underage youth on December 4, 2003 are as follows: • Frenchman's-1400 East 66th Street • Ketsana's-7545 Lyndale Avenue South • Kwik Way Foods-7701 Portland Avenue South • Phillips 12th Avenue 66 Station-7744 12th Avenue South This is a first offense for Frenchman's. Technically it is their second violation but because of the time elapsed between now and the previous violation in July of 1999, it is considered a first violation. This is a first offense for Kwik Way Foods. Technically it is their third violation, but because of the time elapsed between now and their previous violations in April of 2002 and March of 1999, it is considered a first violation. This is a second offense for Ketsana's. Technically it is their third violation, but because of the time elapsed between now and their previous violation in July of 1999, it is considered a second violation. This is the fourth violation for Phillips 12th Avenue 66 Station. Technically, it is their fifth violation but because of the time elapsed between now and their previous violation in July 2001, it is considered a fourth violation. It is also important to note that the property is no longer owned by Phillips 66 and has been sold to someone new who is now operating out of that site. At no time did any of the minors consume any of the alcohol. The youth presented their ID's and at no time attempted to convince anyone that they were of legal age. Establishments were visited at a variety of times, busy or not busy, in an effort to determine if busy times produced more successful buys. It doesn't appear to have made a difference at either time. After each attempt, successful or unsuccessful, the officers identified themselves to the clerks and issued them a citation if they failed. If the underage youth was unsuccessful in securing alcohol, the clerk was congratulated by officers for doing a good job. The employee that sold alcohol will be charged criminally in court. The action being taken today is for civil enforcement and penalties against the businesses that hold a license to sell alcohol within the City. The fines being recommended at this time are intended to recover 100% of the costs for conducting the compliance checks and to penalize the businesses punitively. Compliance. checks will continue to occur during 2004. It is also recommended that 15% of the punitive fines be designated for future alcohol and tobacco education efforts within the community. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Resolution No. 9204 specifies certain improper conduct of alcohol license holders and delineates the progressive discipline that can be expected when violations occur, such as the sale of alcohol to minors. • Staff recommends that the City Council suspend each of the first time violating establishment's license to sell alcohol for five (5) consecutive days and levy a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1,000 for the first violation. Staff is also proposing that each first time violating establishment attend a mandatory meeting with the Public Safety Director to present their individual establishment's plan to ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind. In addition, one employee, preferably the manager, must attend a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session, provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety. The cost of the training is to be paid for by the establishment. • Staff recommends that the City Council suspend each of the second .time violating establishment's license to sell alcohol for seven (7) consecutive days and levy a fine against each establishment in the amount of $1,750 for the second violation. Staff is also proposing that the Public Safety Director will select the seven consecutive days that the licenses will be suspended. It is further recommended that second time violating establishments be required to meet a second time with the Public Safety Director and to also conduct a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session with all of their employees. This training will be provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety, with all costs of the training to be paid by the establishment. • Staff recommends that the City Council suspend the license to self alcohol for 12 consecutive days for each of the third time violating establishments; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount of $2,000 for the third violation. Staff is also proposing that the Public Safety Director will select the 12 consecutive days that the licenses will be suspended. It is further recommended that third time violating establishments be required to meet with the Public Safety Director and to also conduct a mandatory alcohol and sales awareness training session with all of their employees. This training will be provided by a private firm approved by Public Safety, with all costs of the training to be paid by the establishment. • .Staff recommends that the City Council dismiss the revocation for the fourth time violating establishment's license to sell alcohol as they have changed ownership and are no longer operating under Phillip's 12th Avenue 66 Station; and levying a fine of $2,000 for the fourth violation. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • It is a violation of Minnesota State Statute and City ordinance to sell alcohol to underage youth. • Civil enforcement penalties taken in the past by the City Council against several establishments have been severe. This was done to send a message to the establishments and the community that the Council will not tolerate this type of violation to continue in the community and that Richfield youth and their well-being are highly valued. • Citizen representatives of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health support severe actions against establishments in an effort to protect the youth of the community and to send a message that youth and their well-being are a high priority in this City. C. FINANCIAL • All costs of conducting compliance checks will be reimbursed through the fines that are levied against an establishment for failing an alcohol compliance check. • Furthermore, 15% of the punitive fines are designated for future alcohol and tobacco educational efforts within the. community. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The Council could decide to take no action against the establishments for the sale of alcohol to a minor which would result in no disciplinary actions against the establishments. This would, however, send a message to the community that children and their well-being are not a priority in Richfield. • The Council may consider taking more or less severe action against the establishments that sold alcohol to underage youth; however, that would deviate from the guidelines set for progressive discipline in Resolution No. 9204. ~ V. ATTACHMENTS ~ • Keso~ution for c;ni-curs uiscip~me • Resolution for Davanni's Discipline • Resolution for Frenchman's Discipline • Resolution for Ketsana's Discipline • Resolution for Kwik Way Foods Discipline • Resolution for Phillips 12th Avenue 66 Discipline • Resolution for SuperAmerica Discipline PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Representatives from each of the establishments are expected to be in attendance at the meeting as they were notified in writing of the need for someone to be present. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR DAVANNI'S, 2312 WEST 66TH STREET SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL. PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Davanni's, ("Licensee") holds an On-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor License from. the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 3, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is technically their second failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a first failure. Their original first penalty was imposed by the Council at the September 10, 2001 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004 and admitted the violation and stipulated. to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1,000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by August 23, 2004 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSES FOR FRENCHMAN'S, 1400 EAST 66TH STREET SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Frenchman's, ("Licensee") holds On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor Licenses from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is technically their second failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a first failure. Their original first penalty was imposed by the Council at the October 11, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor licenses are hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1,000. 3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by April 23, 2004 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR KWIK WAY FOODS, 7701 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FIRST TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Kwik Way Foods, ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's. establishment; and, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is technically their third failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failures, it serves as a first failure. Their original first penalty was imposed by the Council at the September 10, 2001 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of five (5) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1,000 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1,000.. 3. Licensee will meet with the Director of Public Safety by April 23, 2004 to present a written action plan to ensure future compliance. 4. One staff member, preferably the manager, must attend an alcohol compliance and sales awareness presentation conducted by a private firm, approved by Public Safety, with all costs to be paid by the establishment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE WINE AND 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR LICENSES FOR KETSANA'S, 7545 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH; AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR SECOND TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Ketsana's ("Licensee") holds On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor Licenses from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment, and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor. WHEREAS, this is technically their third failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a second failure. Their original first penalty was imposed by the Council at the October 11, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004, and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension- and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license has not been renewed in 2004 due to the owner's decision to no longer sell alcohol. 2. A civil penalty of $1,750 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1,750. 3. Due to the fact that the Licensee no longer serves alcohol, alcohol sales awareness training will not be required. However; should the owner decide to sell alcohol in the future, alcohol compliance sales awareness training for all employees who serve alcohol will be required and must be provided by a private firm, approved by the Public Safety Department, and all costs associated with the training will be the responsibility of the Licensee. 4. A meeting with the Director of Public Safety is no longer necessary. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March 2004. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SUPERAMERICA, 7720 NICOLLET AVENUE SOUTH; AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR SECOND TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, SuperAmerica ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 3, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment, and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor. WHEREAS, this is technically their third failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a second failure. Their original first penalty was imposed by the Council at the December 13, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004, and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of seven (7) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $1,750 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $1,750. 3. The Licensee must schedule mandatory alcohol compliance sales awareness training for all employees who are responsible for the service of alcohol to customers and must be scheduled to occur no later than April 23, 2004. This training will be provided by a private firm, to be approved by the Public Safety Department, and all costs associated with the training will be the responsibility of the Licensee. 4. Licensee will meet with the Director of Public Safety by April 23, 2004 to present a written action plan to ensure further compliance. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE ON-SALE INTOXICATINGAND SUNDAY LIQUOR LICENSES FOR CHI-CHI'S RESTAURANT, 7717 NICOLLET AVENUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR THIRD TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Chi-Chi's Restaurant ("Licensee") holds On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor Licenses from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 3, 2003, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is technically their fourth failed alcohol compliance check but because of time that has elapsed since their previous failure, it serves as a third failure. Their previous penalty was imposed by the Council at the September 25, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on-March 23, 2004 and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor license is hereby suspended for a period of twelve (12) consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public Safety Director, but to take place within 30 days of their Council appearance. 2. A civil penalty of $2,000 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $2,000. 3. The Licensee must schedule mandatory alcohol compliance sales awareness training for all employees who are responsible for the service of alcohol to customers. This will include all servers, bartenders and all managers and must be scheduled to occur no later than April 23, 2004. This training will be provided by a private firm, to be approved by the Public Safety Department, and all costs associated with the training will be the responsibility of the Licensee. 4. Meet with the Director of Public Safety by April 23, 2004 to present a written action plan to ensure further compliance. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23 day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor. ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE OFF-SALE 3.2 PERCENT INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR PHILLIPS 12TH AVENUE STATION, 7744 12TH AVENUE SOUTH, AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR FOURTH TIME ALCOHOL COMPLIANCE FAILURE WHEREAS, Phillip's 12th Avenue 66 Station ("Licensee") holds an Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor License from the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2004, the City of Richfield Public Safety Department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold alcohol to a minor and; WHEREAS, this is technically their fifth failed alcohol compliance check but because more than two years has elapsed since the previous failure, it serves as a fourth failure. Their previous penalty was imposed by the Council at the September 10, 2001 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on March 23, 2004, and admitted the violation and stipulated to the suspension and penalty imposed by this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The Licensee's Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Intoxicating Malt Liquor License no longer exists due to the fact that they have changed ownership and are no longer in operation under Phillip's 12th Avenue 66. 2. A civil penalty of $2,000 is hereby imposed. On or before April 23, 2004, the Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the amount of $2,000. 3. No employee training is necessary as the business has changed ownership and no longer in operation as Phillips 12th Avenue 66. 4. A meeting with the Director of Public Safety is no longer necessary as ownership has changed. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 9 REPORT # 54 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 RELATED TO: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(Sl NO. 30.31 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO. N/A BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE S/GNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing for consideration of the request for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt li uor licenses for Pu'hket Thai Restaurant, 6345 Penn Avenue South. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve or deny the issuance of new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for Pu'hket Thai. Restaurant, 6345 Penn Avenue South. II. BACKGROUND On January 23, 2004, the City received the new application and other required documents for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent matt liquor licenses for Pu'hket Thai Restaurant. The Public Safety staff has reviewed the application for compliance with all applicable state and local requirements. The following technical requirements for license issuance have all been satisfied: 0323 Puhket New Liquor Licenses 1. The applicant has paid the required licensing fees; 2. The required proof of liquor liability insurance coverage has been received showing United States Liability Insurance Company affording the coverage. 3. Proof of workers' compensation insurance has also been supplied. 4. All general real estate taxes, state sales and withholding taxes have been paid and are current. The applicant has satisfied all objective criteria for eligibility under state law or local ordinances. In the case of a corporate applicant, the City ordinance requires that both the stockholders of the corporation and the manager satisfy the eligibility criteria in order for the corporation to be eligible. KhamKoun Chanthalakeo and his son, Varouna Chanthalakeo, are the owners of the establishment. The on-premises Assistant Manager is Sisaketh Chanthalakeo. The Public Safety background investigation on KhamKoun and Varouna Chanthalakeo did not reveal any prior convictions for either of these individuals. The background investigation of Sisaketh Chanthalakeo revealed that he was arrested and convicted on two different occasions for fourth degree driving while impaired, in 1997 and 2002. Credit history was also conducted on all three men and all three have an exemplary credit history. There appears to be no items of concern regarding any of the individuals' credit history. The Environmental Health Staff had one contact with this address in the past year regarding long grass that was unfounded. There were two police contacts with Pu'hket Thai restaurant since it opened. The first contact was on May 23, 2002 when three juvenile males walked out without paying for their meal. The second contact was on January 10, 2003, on a burglary alarm call where forced entry had been made and stereo equipment was taken. The owner of the property is Steve Ngo, 3255 South 376th Place in Auburn, WA 98001. The lease between the applicant and the landlord are in effect with all payments current. The notice of the public hearing was published in the Richfield Sun Current on March 17, 2004. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both City Codes and State Statutes pertaining to on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • That the requirements in Resolution 9204 are met. A copy of this resolution has been given to the owner of the establishment. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The City Council has broad discretion to determine whether or not to issue or renew a liquor license, but the Council may not act arbitrarily or unreasonably. • The applicant must be provided an opportunity to address the Council regarding the license and to respond to any concerns that the Council may have. • The City Council must treat license applicants equally and may not deny the license if it has approved a license. for a different applicant under substantially similar circumstances. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Varouna Chanthalakeo AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings AGENDA ITEM # 8 REPORT # 53 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 RELATED TO: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. N/A AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO. 31 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL hRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~•O SIGNATU2E REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Public hearing for consideration of new 2004 on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano, 1120 East 66th Street. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the request for new 2004 on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano, 1120 East 66th Street. II. BACKGROUND On October 23, 2003, the City received the application and other required documents for new 2004 on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano, 1120 East 66th Street. The applicant has paid the required fees. Some of the information needed in order to complete the background investigation was not present at the time the City received the application. It was obtained in December of 2003 and given to a detective at that time to complete a background investigation on it in the middle of December 2003. 0323 LaVilla-New Liquor License The Public Safety background investigation has been completed and reveals the following: The Articles of Incorporation of R&J Brothers, Inc. that were filed with the Minnesota Secretary of State along, with the stock. purchase agreement, shows the sole owner of the corporation as Rodolpho Hernandez.. The corporation, R&J Brothers, is the corporation that owns LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano. Mr. Hernandez has no known criminal record and is listed as the President. He has lived in the United State for approximately 20 years and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1997. Mr. Hernandez owns several other businesses in other communities. They are: Relampago Musical, Inc., 404 East Lake Street (Mpls) Relampago Musical, .1515 East Lake Street, Suite 213 (Mpls) These businesses appeared busy with customers at the varying dates and times the detective was conducting a background investigation. The detective contacted the City of Minneapolis business licensing department and found no licenses are issued for this type of retail business. The Minneapolis Police Department does not have any complaints or calls for service for either location on Lake Street. • Relampago Musical, 232 East 1st Avenue (Shakopee) The City of Shakopee does not license retail businesses such as Relampago Musical and the Shakopee Police Department had two theft reports and two false alarm reports for this Relampago location. • Relampago Musical, 205 Concord (St. Paul) • ByMore, Inc, 857 Payne Avenue (St. Paul) ByMore, Inc. in St. Paul is a grocery store in a predominately Hispanic neighborhood. ByMore has a butcher shop and a wire transfer business, Enviro. On the varying dates and times the detective was in ByMore, it was found to be a very clean, organized and busy grocery store. The St. Paul Police Department calls for service consisted of three thefts, one robbery, two alarm calls, one auto theft, one disturbance and one burglary for ByMore on Payne Avenue. St. Paul does not issue business licenses for retail stores such as Relampago, and there were no calls for service at the Concord Street address. All four Relampago Musical locations are very clean business sites that have Hispanic DVD's, VHS's, CD's, cassettes and small gifts. All general sales and withholding taxes have been paid and are current. The property is owned by Rodolpho Hernandez and the real estate property taxes are paid and current. The $10,000 bond issued by Western Surety Company has been submitted. The required proof of liquor liability insurance coverage has not yet been received. Proof of workers' compensation insurance coverage has not been supplied as of this writing. As a result of this being a new request for on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses, there is no need for an accountant's statement to be submitted regarding the food/alcohol ratio. Police had one contact with LaVilla from March of 2003 through February of 2004. This was a theft report taken in July of 2003. As this is a request for a new license, there are no previous contact records to compare this with. Environmental Health staff received no complaints regarding LaVilla in the past year. On-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses require owners of these establishments to comply with Resolution No. 9204, which outlines discipline they can expect if any ongoing problems occur: A copy of this Resolution has been given to the owner of the establishment. There are no distance requirements to notify neighbors of the. issuance or renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses. The Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Richfield Sun Current on March 10, 2004. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both City Codes and State Statutes pertaining to on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses, with the exception of having provided proof of liquor liability and worker's compensation insurance. • Based on the information supplied. by the applicant and the investigation conducted, there appears to be no reason to deny the issuance of the license requested. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The requirements of Resolution No. 9204 must be met. C. FINANCIAL • N/A _ D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Continue the hearing. This would only be necessary if the Council believes there is a valid reason for delaying the decision on the issuance of the licenses. Public Safety staff has found no reason to deny or delay the issuance of the licenses requested. V. ATTACHMENTS • N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Rodolpho Hernandez AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # ~g REPORT # 52 : "~ STAFF REPORT . ~. ~ `~ ~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~~ ~~ . ~ tF ;~ ~ 2004 MARCH 23 ~:~ . , Related to: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A AND/oR RICIIFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 10,11,14 REPORT PREPARED BY: MARK HALL, GARAGE AND PARK MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: ,~ ~ t DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~~ ~ REVIEW: ,~ ~ ~ ~`'~ ~-c ~,- ~'; ~ .e r L,~ SIGNATUR'L~ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the purchase of a new Police Reserve vehicle. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a new 2004 Ford Explorer from Wick Ford in the sum of $20,919.00 II. BACKGROUND Unit 9781, a 1997 Chevrolet Astro van being used by the Public Safety Department is fully depreciated and is scheduled to be replaced in 2004. Purchase of a replacement has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low bidder for the type of equipment required is then awarded a contract to supply equipment to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the low bid price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Wick Ford has the state contract on the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing. Program for Ford Explorers. • The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Approval at the March 23, 2004, Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new 2004 Ford Explorer. C. FINANCIAL • The approved 2004 budget contains $29,000 for this purchase. • Upon delivery of the vehicle, charges for delivery and for the installation of police equipment such as two-tone paint, radios, lights, cages and decals will be deducted from the remaining funds budgeted for this purchase. • This vehicle will be sales tax exempt as it will be a marked police vehicle. • Funding for this vehicle will be Equipment Certificates issued in 2004. D. LEGAL • When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. • No action by Council on this purchase could eventually compromise safety for police reserves driving old vehicle. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 6A REPORT # 51 ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 RELATED TO: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A AND/OR Richfield 2020 Goal(s) No. 30 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the. request from the State of Minnesota to review the request for a new currenc exchan a license for Unbank Com an LLP, 6421 Penn Avenue South. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Council approve the request for a new currency exchange license for Unbank Compan ,LLP, 6421 Penn Avenue South. II. BACKGROUND On February 17, 2004, the City received notification from the State of Minnesota, Department of Commerce, of a new application for a currency exchange license in the name of Unbank Company LLP, 6421 Penn Avenue South. All of the information required by the State of Minnesota has been provided by Unbank Company LLP. In addition, the background investigation conducted by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension found no information on the applicants, Gary A. Dachis and Stuart D. Tapper. 0323 New Currency Exchange Unbank Company There were no Public Safety contacts for this address for the previous year. The applicant has complied with State Statute 53A.04 for a currency exchange license with the State of Minnesota. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • A license for this type of business is not required in the City. However, effective on April 24, 1992, Minnesota Statute 53A.04 requires that the Department of Commerce submit any application for licensure as a currency exchange license to the governing body of the municipality in which the business proposes to conduct business. • This law also requires the governing municipality to render a decision regarding issuance or denial of the license within 50 days of the receipt of the State's notification. • The State requires that the applicant submit the following information when applying for this type of license: o License fees in the amount of $50; o A current fee schedule used for cashing checks, money orders, or traveler's checks. o A surety bond in the amount of $10,000. o Any owner, partner, director, stockholder (owning 10% or more of the corporate stock) or any employee with the authority to exercise management or policy control over the company must submit to a background investigation by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATIONS} • Deny the request for a currency exchange license for Unbank Company, LLP. However, the Public Safety Department has found no reason to deny the requested license. V. ATTACHMENTS • N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None AGENDA SECTION: presentations AGENDA ITEM # 2 REPORT # Sfl _~ STAFF REPORT ~.... , c. . CITY .COUNCIL MEETING = t v~_~ . ..~,. _~ MARCH 23, 2004 Related to: CITY COUNCIL GoaL(s) No. 27 REPORT PREPARED BY: AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO MIKE EASTLING, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ r ~ ~~ `~~r SIGNATURE' ie+' 10, 11, 14, 15 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Review of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District proposed Rule M with the members of the Board of Mana ers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: B Motion: No formal action at this time. II. BACKGROUND The City Council reviewed Rule M at their March 9, 2004 City Council Meeting and requested that the item be brought to a future City Council meeting when a representative from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) Board could attend. A member of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed is scheduled to be at the meeting. The MCWD has been considering the establishment of Rule M to require that vegetated buffers be established around all wetlands in the district. At the City Council's annual goal setting session the City Council requested that the buffer issue be brought to the Council for consideration. 0323 MCWD rule M The attached January 21, 2004 letter to Jim Hafner of the MCWD outlines the .concerns of City staff. A draft of Rule M was attached to the March 9 City Council letter on this topic and so is not copied as an attachment to this letter. A copy of the draft will be available at the meeting. Under Rule M a buffer of unmowed native vegetation that extends from the edge of the pond to near the houses around Milner (near 65th Street and 4th Avenue) and Norby (near 69th Street and 2nd Avenue) Ponds. could be required if Rule M were enacted. Rule M would be enforced at the time the property was improved, such as an addition to the garage. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION No recommendation is being made at this time. The item is for discussion purposes only. A. POLICY N/A B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • January 21, 2004 letter to Jim Hafner, MCWD • .Photo of the homes along Milner Pond VL PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Member(s) of the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Public Works Department January 21, 2004 Jim Hafner Project Manager/Senior Technician. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District MAYOR 18202 Minnetonka Boulevard MARTIN J. KIRSCH Deephaven, MN 55391 CITY COUNCIL JOHN ENGER Dear Mr. Hafner: SUSAN ROSENBERG SUZANNE M. SANDAHL Thank you again for coming over last -week to help me better understand Rule M. The GERTRUDE ULRICH comments that I got from the staff from the other cities in attendance indicate that the cITY MANAGER meeting was helpful especially due to the. insight that you provided. As I mentioned at sAMANTHA oROUNO the meeting, at their annual goal setting meeting, the Richfield City Council instructed me to respond to the MCWD with their concerns about Rule M. I want to make the following points about Rule M,Buffers: 1. The proposed rule is particularly burdensome to developed communities. 2. The "one size fits all" rule is not supported by good science as a beneficial wetland protection practice (and in some circumstances it is counterproductive). 3. The rule does not allow reasonable flexibility. 4. Milner Pond in Richfield provides a specific example of the unreasonableness of the rule. 5. There are reasonable alternative approaches. 1. Burdensome to developed communities The imposition of Rule M in its current form would impose significant burdens on owners of property in the watershed.. Although land would be lost for development in undeveloped areas, a greater burden would. be imposed in areas that are already subdivided and developed. In some cases, the creation of the required buffer would mean the loss of all or a significant part of a backyard that is currently usable for open space, recreation, entertaining, gardening, .and the like. Not all citizens would have the. knowledge, time, information, financial resources, or physical ability to plant and maintain a buffer that is suitable for the location and compatible with the neighborhood. Faced with the need to lose a backyard to a buffer, some landowners would choose not to improve their properties so that Rule M would also be a disincentive to reinvestment in the community. In many cases, this would affect the redevelopment of older areas that are very much in need of redevelopment or reinvestment. 2. Not supported by good science- not beneficial in some circumstances While the general goals of Rule M are laudable, there. will be many cases in which. the application of the Rule would not significantly advance those goals. The runoff from a mown lawn that is not fertilized with phosphorus, and from which grass The Urban Hometown 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 612.861.9700 FAX: 612.861.9749 www.ci.richfield.mn.us AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Jim Hafner January 21, 2004 Page 2 clippings are removed, may contain lower levels of nutrients than an unmaintained buffer strip containing decomposing leaves and other plant materials.. In some cases, such as with ice ridges around a .lake, surface water does .not even flow from the upland to the water body through a buffer area. The City is not convinced that the available scientific evidence demonstrates consistent or predictable benefits from buffers, particularly benefits that are of sufficient magnitude to justify the substantial social, economic, and even environmental burdens resulting from buffer strips in fully developed areas. Not all buffers would be beneficial and pleasant natural gardens. Some, perhaps most, would be unmaintained weed patches that provide a harborage for mosquitoes and other pests, collect wind blown refuse and leaves, and serve as a fire hazard and source of seeds of undesirable plants for nearby lawns. These buffers would be a blighting influence on the neighborhood and adversely affect property. values. 3. Not reasonably flexible The public will not accept a law that is unreasonable or does not make sense. A significant concern about Rule M, in its current form, is that it is a "one. size fits all" Rule that does not provide any reasonable flexibility for situations where buffers would be of little or no benefit. Or, the Rule would not have .sufficient beneficial effect to offset unreasonable burdens that the Rule would impose. The Comprehensive Site Water Resource Plan (CSWRP) does not provide sufficient flexibility to address these concerns. In some cases, there will be no greater justification to impose the implementation of a CSWRP than there is for the imposition. of the buffer rule. And, depending on the circumstances of any given case, a CSWRP maybe more. expensive to design and implement than a buffer. 4. Milner Pond, Rule M unreasonable In Richfield, there is a pond known as Milner's Pond, 65th and 4th, that has served as a storm water pond since that area of Richfield was developed in the 40's. The pond is approximately 7 acres in size and is surrounded by 31 houses, built over 50 years ago, with relatively small backyards that are mowed nearly to the water line (A photo is attached). The area of Richfield that flows through Milner's Pond has been fully developed for over 50 years, and is approximately 150 acres in size. There are approximately 384 residential properties in the watershed flowing through the pond. Surface water from all of these properties, both front and back yards, flow onto the streets and into the. storm sewers, untreated, through Milner's Pond. Whatever water quality or storm water treatment benefit a buffer serves-would result from a buffer around the edge of every one of these 384 properties to the same extent as a buffer around Milner's Pond. Yet any of these other properties would be able to construct a garage, widen a driveway or expand their houses without having to create and maintain a buffer strip. The only properties that would be subject to the Rule would be a handful of properties around Milner's Pond. Jim Hafner January 21, 2004 Page 3 5. Reasonable alternative approaches There are a number of ways that the City's concerns might be addressed, at least in part.. These include the following: 1. Apply the rules only to new development. 2. Incorporate reasonable exceptions into the Rule. 3. Encourage, rather than mandate, buffers by the use of grants, education, model projects, and model ordinances. 4. Substantially reduce the width of the required buffers. 5. Adopt buffering as a means of attaining a performance standard under the MCWD's surface water management plan rather than. as a rule. This would allow cities the latitude to meet these performance standards in a way that would take local concerns into account in the adoption and implementation of their local municipal plans. - 6. Provide for variances that take into account such factors as: ^ the hardship involved in the imposition of the Rule, ^ the availability - or lack of availability - of reasonable alternative means of meeting the same objectives, ^ the direction of surface water flow, ^ the potential effectiveness of buffers in each individual case, ^ the compatibility of a buffer with adjacent and nearby uses, and ^ the public benefit of the project that triggers the application of the Rule. The City urges the MCWD to continue a dialog with the cities to explore whether the objectives of the Rule can be met in a way that avoids, or at least minimizes, the unreasonable costs and burdens about which the City is concerned. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Michael J. Eastling Director of Public works City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Attachment c .. J T ~ 4 s f ~ . -~~t. '~~ G4 ~ y~ { 7 ~ ~ e . rt~^+^~ §` ~Y~,~ ~. _ - ~-.~ ~: `~~~~ ~;;: .:, _ '~s~. ~ ,~ h ~91I`' ~_.. 4 ~ bP ° I ~Y~ ~ " +` 1 ~~ ~ ~ F~' 4~ 1 =~ !: ,_ ,.~ ~r uis, r ~ ~ ~®cv rmwnmm~. yy i W 9 $$ $ i Y I y~ ,~~,i g , e Ap~ F~v` 4 1 ~. '~ ~~' ~.~ 8 ~~~ ` ~," "~ ... a ~, +~V yip ~ { ^ `' ro ~ t ~ .. y~. L y r ~ ~~ ~, ~ ~: V}i ~ ~ ~,~ ~M ~ '~ ' yj. . ~ - F _~,. ~' 3 ,~ " .~ * .~ AGENDA SECTION: Presentations AGENDA ITEM # 1 REPORT # 49 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 23, 2004 RELATED TO: CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. 1 & 18 AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO. 1 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ,® SLGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration and endorsement of the "Together We Stand" ad campaign for 2004 which urges parents and community leaders to take an active role in preventing underage drinking in the Richfield communit . I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Endorsement of the "Together We Stand" ad campaign which urges parents and community leaders to take an active role in preventing underage drinking and alcohol use in the Richfield commun II. BACKGROUND This campaign began in the spring of 1999 when Councilmember Rosenberg identified the alarming fact that other adults were offering her underage daughters alcohol at graduation events throughout the community. At that time, Councilmember Rosenberg, along with the Chair of the Advisory Board of Health and the principals of the Richfield Senior High School and the Academy of Holy 0323 Together We Stand Ad Angels, sent a letter to all parents educating them to the dangers of underage drinking. The letter was an effort to support parents in making wise decisions and to provide them with a positive environment to help their children in making healthy choices regarding alcohol and drug use. The campaign has grown since then to include a postcard to parents in the spring each year concerning the alcohol problems that occur when kids travel to Mexico unattended during spririg break, and aprom/graduation letter sent to parents on their role in preventing underage drinking and drug use. The "Together We Stand" ad campaign began that same year with an ad in the Richfield local paper signed by 18 Richfield organizations/community leaders and has now been embraced by the cities of Edina and Bloomington. A further partnership with the Richfield municipal liquor stores results in the display of an abbreviated version of this ad throughout the spring and summer months in all of their four stores. In recent years, some people wanting to be a part of this endorsement have had to be denied involvement due to the large number of individuals and organizations wanting to be included in the ad campaign efforts. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Sally Parsons, Chair of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health, has in the past five years approached the Council as a citizen and board member bringing this campaign for approval and endorsement during the open forum for residents. • Council has asked that the request from the Advisory Board of Health be formally brought before the Council. • For the sixth year, Sally Parsons, Chair of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health, is seeking approval and endorsement of the ad campaign from members of the Richfield City Council. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) ~ • The Council could decide not to endorse the "Together We Stand" ad campaign which would mean that they would not be listed in the ad and it would be a change in their position since the ad's inception. ~ V. ATTACHMENTS ~ • "Together We Stand" campaign PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~ • Sally Parsons, Chair of the Richfield Advisory Board of Health. a o~i 0 L ~ ~ -F- -- ~~L~ V U ~,- ~ ~ f ~ c~ ~ • ~ i-+-- ed~~~ .~ 0 A~a~ .~ •~`y~,~ ~ of vi ~ a ~ ~ V N ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ s ° ~ ~ os s --- 0 3 Y -v ~ ~ cs Q o~ ~ } ~ L o L ~ o ° . ~ ~ O ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ al C o ~ s ~ D cs ~ o } ~ a ~ Q U ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~ p o S 0 0 o d vi 3 +- 6 o~ ~ .° d ~ ~ ~ o~i 7 ~ ~ • ~ L -a N s ~ ~ N S U ~ S ~ Q ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N 3 ~ ~ ~ c3 ~ `~- s° N L ~ V O L N ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ a -p •oNi Q 1 • ~- O U ~ v- O O V N L O L ° ~ ~ o ~ ~ to L a N O ~ c } ~ c ~ ~ Vd1 +- L ' '~ ~ d1 • L ~ L o ~ ~ d ~ 'D +- o ~ o -°~ ~ 'N ~ 01 ~ L .--i ~ 4- V O C L d Y ~ ~ Ol ~ ~ N ~ N S O ~ 7 ~ U a ~ L ~ 3 d ~~ p ~ N ~ } rn ~ L ~ L L C3 ~ -a •L •> v a ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~- o~ s .~. o -~ s° ~ ~ ~ ~ o L p) s 3 ~ ~ t ~ N (3 ~ D1 ~ ~ cn cT = -a ~ L ~ ~ N C ~ ~ N Q 'O U ~ ~ ~ N N } a- C L `~ } O ~ D • O N • `'~ N • ~ ~ s o t ~ -'~ ~ Q ~ S Q ~ Q ~ ~ a o C ~ s ~ _ 3 ° 0 ~ s ~ •~ 0 ~ Y ~ C y C y N C ~ ~ p N V •~ V N c1 •~ ~ C V Q ~ O } •~ C ~ ~ c~ cn ~ ~ ~ ;~ 3 ~ c cn ~ a a ~ H H 1-- ~ 'a F- H ~ F" ~ ~ • • • ~ ~ U Cam,. ~ o ~ ~ o ~ •~ o s } o ~ Q ~ s d ~ 3 ° ~ L ~ o ~ ~ s } ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ N =_ N s ~ 3 a ° ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ o N Q ~ ~ ~ L j V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 'Q ~ ~ Y ~ a s ~ •~ O Q ~ ~ s + - ~ t } L -Q ~ L N .~ ~ o ~_ ai ~ p) y 3 O Y G V 0 ~ ~ ~ L •p ° .~ O cs ~ ~' V ~ ~ t N N '~ ,t' L U L ~ ~, ~l a. 01 ~ Q .~ s H L ~ ~ L ~ ~ } S L _ ~ C o } ~ t ~ Q ~ Q C3 -~ 0 3 ~ L ~ Q ~ vi s° U ~ ~ ~ Q p U N ~ O c v ~ o~ s ~ ~ N a ~ ± o O } ,Q O '~ } ~ +- ~ . ~ ,~ S •~ .0 •N ~ .N ~ Q S L '~ N U C3 ~ p o o ~ ~ L s 3 ~ ~ L ~ 0 i- ~ Y C ~ Q ~C "~ N ~ ° L • ~ '~ N O O N N o rm a d o 0 ' ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ d a U ° O ~ N x } gy {' L ~ " } o i L o i ~ ' p • L ~ ~ ~ O .S } 1 l) ~ ~ L } ~ ~ > ~ h Y '~ N Q i U ~ ~ o ~ N t , N ~ d1 v i ~ ~ U ~ V S +" L S N L L N ~ L ~ ~ +- a ~ ~ a a a ~ c .. ~ rn • • • Z O H ~.1 J J 0 W j 0 Q, Z aC ~O Z J } ~ ~. ° y _pp _a, c oai L ~ d° H_ O d p N= N S A U u ~.~ ~ Q2` ~ }Q L~ cv-o ~~ d~ ~ ~ In O ?~ t V J ~ ve s Q ~ Q ~ ~ `2 to °o 'moo o°- ~.-° '~ ~` ~ obi d °" o •~ •°' ° s c ~ a ~ u ~v ~s--Lv~ ~u o°iQ~ ~ y~ ~_°> d mad' Cf V w sd. ~ vdi Q ~ ~ ~ ° • L d ~ ° ~ G V V ~ d 2 aC u~j } ~ •v ~ o_~ _u a_ QaQ~~ Nt .~ d •~ ~ s ~ m o. 'L V ~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ •~ o Q DC d Q p y •v}i V p a ~' ± V L y d O N a p H 'D 4= £ N H Y L a s of to of o a~ Y~~ s ~ ?_~ ~~ s o° a. (L l~ + V V C L O LL' _ ~ C L = C GC •d h ~ In ~ ~ f-• H~ L o N O d£ •p~ ~ U. O Q C C p~ N~ C 0 7~ L ac ~, o ac m a m ma= ticc ~ d~ a a ti H ct~ Y o ~n i=, o U +; ~ a ~ 0 ~ N rn o~i c } .°c '~ o c O ~ S ~ t i ± O. C3 O ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~5a= t oii •> w = d ~ ~,~ o c ~~ ~a t ~ °~ ~ m W ° '~ ~ _~ c oNi s° V > _> S ~ O O L O 7 C>~ N~ U y~ DC .L .~ ~ Q V ~ 7 7 L "O ~ d C d1 of o~ ~ s ~ o ° o a~ S~Qm~~ V ~w~~0a,cc2 'C 'C 'C 'O '~ p 'O 'C 'O 'G "~ 'G 'C 3 +- d d o- d d v d o, d d~ d d Y d N- 4- 4- 4- ~ 'O V- 4- 4- 4•- 4- +H N••• ~ •0 S S S S S~ S .~ S S S t t L L V V V V U S U V U V U V V w accoccc a a a ac cc acoc acc cc L t •°~ ~ ~ -° °- ~ ~ c c s H- c v'~Li t u0 V ~~w•U4- ~ ~ ~s • ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O d U O ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ V o~ ~(~o_~ oaC'> V H ~p 3~ Q = a c d ~~ Z ~ ~ ° y u_ L s °tf oLi ~ a V +V- d 'a } w > o3i ~ V~w.'?v~ o~ °u =tnsa`~~s° c >.d ~ v ~ -° ~~ ~ s ~.a> o cwt-a°`2-i'_~ ~~~W o tnN L o u n.d.~ ~ L d ~ ~~ V ~ d ~ d w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v V o o rn ~ ~ £ s ,~ ° a° o -° ~ s '~ ~' ~G ~ ~ ~ ti a V ~ ~ v o~i t = -o~i ' W W v L z ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ °a o = -'a ~ d - V° ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ s p c a -a w L a a W a O~~ w ~ ~ v w p W '~ L .~ W W I L~ 7~ t ~' L o~ V °' L~ L Y p =_ c > V d s o~ ~ w u~ ~ w +d- a s °~ .V ~j ~~ ~~ d~ ~. ~ ~ d ~ L cn d L~ ~~ eo 7 L L L l7 •$ d c c~ ._ t 'dv ~~ E ~~~ d~ c 6 c Q~ m m c o s o °~ L 2= ~ oai ~ L~~~ ~' v~ d o s° s~ 0 0 0~ o°i ° o odi Q Q _d m V} W W W ~ H ~[ Y J J N~ O ~~ p~ ~ m V V V V V V V J~ DC I- z V ~` ~ L O C C 4- ~ S C ~ .t ~ ~ ~` •~ L -O ~ O s ~ _C ~_ t ~ ~_ C ~_ _C _~ _C ~_ ~_ p t° O C3 O N d N d G 7 0~ 0 y O 4 N S 0 6~ V d 'p 'p 'p ~ 'p 'p 'p 'p 'p 'p 'p 'p wv~v»m~,x~-,I-~cu)c~Ytia v~~~~nhpe~~wwwwwwwwwwww fA y~ C U C L L } ~ L S .OC U ~ ~ ~ •C c rnv a v ~ ~~~ sN,~_~ c d d 7 a C L V t L V= ~ O H~ w° •C ~ S V C1 ~ C1 7 V L A C ~~ ~ U d dad ° da Cj c~w~ ~ E C v~s°~ti o Qs d•~ o ~ •u V L ~ Uj v ds d ~ ~ 01 d ti •i= m ~ ° d o ~ L id• ~' ~ -° ~ d C ~ m V ._~` .F +- ° V o +- ~ o s Y ~ L 7 0 o0i = ~ oii `n ° ~ obi m H ~ Q V V •~ .O r p tJil 4d- •~ N~ C y -~ y p N ~~~ °} ~ o v1 V d ~'f. ~ o d a c Q ~} C o V- ° c} d L d 3 C V U°~ v° t o a ° s -° s O N E .~ Q C O Y ti~ p .h C d 6 7~ ~ ~ dl 0 7 V C~ 0 7 6 ~• N m ~ L V a O ~ O Y V J O V N [' ~~ ° w V ° L ~ m W O• U > L O F- V~ 7 L `~ ~ L d ~ a~ m ~~~~ .a ~~ c ~j Y d p L ~ c o 0 0 0~ o a ~T O> N~ V~v V o w d -~ a c ° L ~ -~ p L ~ ~ ci ° `v } ~ d N o ~ m h -a £ V d ~ ~ ~ s o d ~ a } c i°- ~ s ° c y ~ nL. °o X ~ v}i a ~ oO1i • -° 'd .Y ~ °o .~ '~ '£ d a ~ a, .~ o ~ o ~ oc- o~i d L ovmp° g C mw ~ d oi*"}v~ 1d~°o ovi ~QmVUULL~HO~aC~~• o'o-o .J O t d=_ d L ;F- C d} cn •1- N C ~ ~ C ~ C C ~ C C C ~ ~~ t .F H a m L N~ J p .~? X N '~ a~ aC .t N d~ C N +°- t t -~ +°•• t° +°- -~ •~ t +°- -~ c N to ~ci o~ic~'', ov o a ~~z a o~ V ~Y3_°-3N _~,_~,_~ _~'_~ _c c'~'~'~'~ ~_,~_,:°v~ O O C a~ 0~ d N +d- O 7 L L O N L y •L - d p O O O O O O S 0 0 0 0 0 0 -a N ~ m~~~F=tiw~a~tiv~~~ccoc ~acx~cD~cmmmmmmmmmmmmmwx~ •do a N d 3 +s- c c :o v c ~ ~ •O h ~ •> ~ ~ o c d d ~ > ~ 00 .°a v ~ C M .o d N ~ }"~ d vl ~ C V C 0 L d •N a to > a c ~ ~ s _ } ~ = ooi a c u ~ *' .o _ ~ a' d ~ o ~ oai ~ ~ D •~ 0 v t ° c } m ;~ ~ u } + } L ~ ~ 0 V o ~ a ° a } = L c ~ v°- 'i~ LL C v1 d Q ~ O ~ V ~ O -® L d LL. ~ ~ L V O C ~ t d d d v } a -d ~1 = N .o ° t ._ o ~ d m ~ D S d ~ +- d O c ~ v Q L } V ~ oLi c ti } v d a° s ~} ~ v '° o _d ~ ~ U t '~" y- F- c