06-22-2004 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 2004
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
5:30 P.M.
Call to order
Roll call
1. Discussion regarding Advisory Board of Health proposed ordinance revisions related to
tobacco non-compliance discipline process
2. Discussion regarding multi-pet licenses
Adjournment
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
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 fo keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others, Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Notes:
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of June 8, 2004
PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation of certificates of appreciation to Miss Richfield Ambassadors and Little
Miss Richfield Ambassadors
2. Presentation of proclamation designating July 1, 2004 Women of Today Founders Day
in Richfield
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
3. Council discussion
• Hats Off To Hometown Hits
• Council plans for Fourth of July Parade
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 resolution authorizing donation of used City computer
equipment to Richfield School District #280 S.R. No. 106
B. Consideration of approval of resolution supporting legislation to provide improved
funding for I-35W Corridor improvements S.R. No. 107
C. Consideration of approval of community celebration event license and temporary on-
sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license, with fee waiver, for Fourth of July Committee for
annual events at Veterans Memorial Park on July 1 through 5, 2004 S.R. No. 108
D. Consideration of approval of temporary 3.2 on-sale percent malt liquor and itinerant
food licenses for Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435, 6501 Portland
Avenue, for activities on July 4, 2004 S.R. No. 109
E. Consideration of approval of new taxi license for ANew-Star Limousine & Taxi
Service, Inc.; 3501-23'rd Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN S.R. No. 110
Notes:
7. Consideration of item(s), if any, removed from Consent Calendar
Notes:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8. Public hearing regarding resolution requesting conditional use permit at 7141 Portland
Avenue to allow two-family dwelling in "R" zoning district
Notes:
Staff Report No. 111
9. Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance authorizing sale of properties
at 6805-12th Avenue and 6239-14th Avenue to HRA for affordable home development
Staff Report No. 112
Notes:
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
10. Consideration of second reading of transitory ordinance authorizing full-time Public
Works employees to issue violation notices, amending Richfield City Code Subsection
115.11, Subdivision 5
Staff Report No. 113
Notes:
OTHER BUSINESS
11. Re-consideration of four-month temporary multi-pet license for 6436 Portland Avenue
(continued from February 10, 2004)
Staff Report No: 114
Notes:
12. 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 minufes to allow sufficient time for
others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the
agenda. Individuals who wish fo address the Council must have registered prior to the
meeting.
Notes:
13. 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: Other Business
AGENDA ITEM # 11
REPORT # 114
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
RELATED TO: AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ N/A
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~ ~~
~ SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Re-consideration of the request for a new multi-pet license for Stephen M. Lewis, 6436
Portland Avenue South.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve or deny a request for a new multi-pet license for
Stephen M. Lewis, 6436. Portland Avenue South. Council previously
issued afour-month temporary license to resident, to allow for
conditions. to be met and inspections of property.
IL BACKGROUND
April 2003
• Environmental Health staff received two complaints regarding the number of
animals and barking dogs at this location.
• A Community Service Officer left a note informing the owner that if he had more
then two dogs, he needed to apply for amulti-pet license. At that time, staff
was not aware of the number of animals that the resident had.
0622 Lewis Multi-Pet License
• The owner stated that he only had two dogs and that occasionally he brings in
other dogs for breeding purposes. The owner was advised that breeding is not
allowed in a residential area. He agreed to take his dogs out for breeding
purposes. The Environmental Health staff informed the owner that he couldn't
have a total of more then six animals over the age of six months on his
property.
• He stated that occasionally he will have puppies on his property, but will not
keep them over six-months.
September 16, 2003
• Stephen Lewis submitted an application for a new multi-pet license.
• A Community Service Officer conducted an inspection of the property and noted
that there were no apparent problems with the residence.
• The Community Service Officer noted that Mr. Lewis only had two dogs at that
time. Mr. Lewis was informed that in order to apply for amulti-pet license he
has to have three dogs. He stated that he would be taking in his son's dog. Mr.
Lewis was advised that when he takes in his son's dog he could then apply for
the multi-pet license.
November 2003
• Mr. Lewis obtained animal licenses for two additional dogs and staff proceeded
with the processing of the multi-pet license.
• Staff notified the neighbors of the request for amulti-pet license. Staff received
three letters from residents that were opposed to this multi-pet license. The
residents were opposed due to the dogs barking (letters attached).
February 10. 2004
• Mr. Lewis' request for a new multi-pet license appeared before the City Council.
• The City Council issued Mr. Lewis afour-month conditional license, with the
provision that breeding ceases immediately.
• City Council requested that staff conduct four inspections of this property. Staff
inspected the property on April 12, 2004, April 18, 2004, April 28, 2004, and
June 1, 2004, and there were no apparent problems.
In May of 2004, staff notified neighbors again regarding the request for amulti-pet
license. At that time staff received one phone call opposed to the multi-pet license.
The resident stated that the dogs are rarely left outside now and that the barking
has gotten better. The resident wanted it noted that she had concerns about the
City approving a license where four or more large dogs are allowed at one
residential location.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City adopted a policy that staff notifies neighbors surrounding the
area of the multi-pet license application. In November 2003, staff notified
the neighbors of the request for amulti-pet license. Staff received three
letters from residents that were opposed to this multi-pet license (letters
attached).
• In May of 2004, staff notified neighbors again regarding the request for a
multi-pet license. Staff received one phone call opposed to the multi-pet
license.
• Per City policy staff checked on police contacts at this location. Richfield
Police received one call on April 27, 2003 for a disturbance. Police
assisted and advised.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Mr. Lewis' application does not contain the signatures of three contiguous
property owners. He received signatures from two contiguous property
owners. The third contiguous property owner is in a nursing home and
Mr. Lewis was not able to get her signature.
• One of the contiguous property owners signed the petition; however, the
property owner also sent a letter stating his concerns regarding barking,
odors, and animals at large (see attached).
C. FINANCIAL
• Pending the City Council's approval of this license, the applicant will be
required to fill out a new application and pay the fee for the upcoming
2004-2005 year.
D. LEGAL
N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Staff is not making a specific recommendation to either approve or deny the
request for amulti-pet license..
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Three letters from neighbors opposing the license.
• Two letters sent to Mr. Lewis from City staff.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Stephen Lewis
Kathy Mueller
prom: .~"
,ent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 2:50 PM
To: kmueller@ci.richfield.mn.us
Subject: dog license request for 6436 Portland Ave
As I said to you in our phone conversation this past week, we have some
serious concerns about amulti-animal residential license for this
neighbor. In the past they have bred dogs and have had multiple dogs in
their yard. We have had problems with the increase in dog barking at all
hours--the dogs are frequently kenneled outdoors. It is especially annoying
in the early hours of the morning--every morning!! We have not called in
complaints because we have tried to be "good neighbors", but to make this
an official situation is not acceptable. We are hesitant to make this
complaint known to the neighbor because we have 1 dog and are afraid that
if we complained about their dogs, they would look for a way to report our
dog if she barked at all! It is because of this concern that we are
requesting that our name/address not be entered into the public record.
thank you,
~ ~~ ~L~. c_ -~ rte, ~= ~ '~-~ ~--
~~ ~ ~J ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~2-T~-fin ~~ ~-~+'~U~-tea ~" ~ 4
~ ~ ~ ~ (.~~
~ ~~ _
~ ~ ~ (~Q. ~-~ `T~ 1/~ ~ Igl~c/1 s ~ U'-/l~}-o Z.a /~5 GV'~~~c T~ Da 0 t2
~ ~
~ ~~ 70 Iv~t~ ,'vta~~+~2~ A~v~ ~.~; {~b12Lt~. /~~~2~~c.~E~~-~ ~-
~ ~~
J ~ ~ ~ v N ~ ~`T ~1t~`3'~G~ 1 ~ ~Z..t~o ~ {~.! ~TL~ ~- ~Z~ C,~ ~ t~~~' t~or2.
~ ~ ~~ - .
q ~ ~ ~ ~z ~o S t c~-rv N~ r~~w~- o ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ rz ~b ~ ~f f r~t/~ C..
. ~ '' ~ b~ lJ, t s 0~"i"r ~ ~ ~ - rv ~ -~ IG-~avnr ~ 1_i c.r ivcf~ t~'o ~2. l~ ~ s ~~cs ~
~a ~ ~~.
~ ~ ~ ~-~~~. ~P~ ~~~ wc-t-~ Nt~z..~ Lam. w mss. ~ ~.
~ ~.
,~ ~ _ ~Plf ~2~ ! y~.r~Tt~. ~~r'vi r~v~S ~ ~ o~T ~~ ~ rv ck=/!~J»'+~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~fl~ .~ aN62d~e~ -~ ! G2/
I'~ U ~'/y4dZ~.a~. ~U t2 ~ 42-c3ZlrL~ ~ D~ ,o- ~,v~/~V~G ~lc~rZG~
~ ~~ ~ l
~ ~ O ~~~ ~/~-I~YV ~~lGa s ~?~t/lS h~s~~'~g1~li~ !~ iZ1 L'~L//ti~~ ~c~~pS G!1/
J ~~ ~i'~/ 1~1G~1f~L-® P
v~ o[..`
1!- ~ .~ dZ~'.~
~~iza-cf~- c}r1~' ~~~z k~~9- is o~ ~v ~ ~i~2.rc:i~~ /1/0 ~ s.~,.
~ C .-------. ~------~
~ ~ a l~~s~~z-~/c~ ~Y~.a~~/ ~oY~.. /1/a off, ~c~~u~ , ~, ,---
~Ja E~ss
Est ~~~`'~v`c.~-.~-57"t GtJ ~' ~S" ~>
b ~~ ~ ~~~f
~w ~ Q~~~,d I '7~_ ~='-~/~GI7~.~' dry /.'%~1/c~ ~ ~~~'~ ~i~ ~/~~~i~ ~>~_.vz~' Q F~ c~~
---•_=>
OI/U' ~~h-Tf~ /Z5 S~.~iy~ ~~i~G~' 7`"i~i?~ o ri ~-~ ~c>7?~
~v 6, /
~a~n~~~ ~~2 ~~~v~ s ~~~ 6z~ ~ ~Q~?T~ -s ,off
aL-r~,z, ~G~ I;2r L-R~vrs s~~o ~i~ ~.-.~ tl 7T ~- ,~r..~,q
r--
~~'~
~ G7 ~ ~ ~r~-T~~~~r c~ vim" a ~ ~7~1~ ~~.vc~ ,CZ~~t.. l
Cc~li~d~i24n~' /~~ ~s~~r= o rz /~~ /'d~~~Z-~~~5~ ~rz,~A r-' .
(~V 1--~ YI S lT ~> •riU~~l n~~' a~7'" 6 c,s ~. ~O ~2ri1'~ - is
~~
~~,~~ ~~
~ ~~'~
v
l~ ~~~ OzTT ,4 ~u~ ~~12/ , ~~ ~~c~ ~~ ~ ~ a U ~r.'~
6 Cc,l~~jc'3~? G1 , 6//
~4 tf,~,tic~ ,.
~p -
~1
l~l 1~ \~
/J J` q
~ ~.
~1 r~
U' \
~~ C
~ ~ ~
~ `~~
r ~ Y'
~~~
~~ ~ .
~ ~ p~ o
~~o~
,~ Q
~ ~
~ :~
a \ `~
~ r'
o
YJ
~~.~~
~ ~ ~~
~ ~~
~~
~~~~
~~~~
~o
~~~~~
~'~~~~
~ ~
~~
~ ~ ~ 1
~~~~
~ .a
~~ ~~
~ ~~
~~
~l~~Z~~ 2~~~`x'~
~ ~~ W ~ ~~S ~ 7~~2~/ ~f ~'~ ~~~~~2~
-~~ ~'~~~ /~ ~ ,moo t i/~~t~P ~ ~~,~~- ~` ~~:~,~
//~~ ,, •_J
Ce~av v /
~-
~S~ ~~c~~rls /.fir 1/u~ ,~`?rG'~D ;o
.~ ,~~,D roc-~j~~_ /~'~'~~ ~~~~ ~-v=r=~2.~ro~
~~ ,
~~ ~~ iv~o~~ ~~' ~~ c~ 7~~f ~a ~~~5
~~ls ~~~~ ~ ~ n~"T~~
~~~~ ~it/r~v~~0 ~- ~~~
~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ -~~rr/rs~~~a~ ~jj~
L~~~~ ~
~ ~ ~~~
~U15l~ / o ~2~ ~1~Grz~~ ~~'`/i~G~jv ~%,...~r ~~'c~~' '~r.~
U ` ~ /~~
l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U~O~ ,~ ~r ~ ~
/~ ~ CT`s' C~~2~ ~,3 ~~brr~s/~~L-ij~~..~_ /~ .~ ~ ~ ~'~ ,Q.~d~c~~
Off- ~ ,~O ~S' ~~ 1° r~2 ~ ~~ C3i~/Y/~/' S ~-~~c~`-,~ !-~'rT~'.~vp T
~ ~ ~ 7~
C~ a
~~~ s~4 ~70~. l~ >> ~s ~~C' j~ussc,~ja,~,~- ~,clr~~c' ~~~2 . ~v
Page 2
I am confident that this process will provide the necessary information to make a
recommendation to the City Council. I appreciate your willingness to participate and
encourage you to contact me at 861-9870 if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kathy Mueller
Licensing
KM:ttf
f f ~
~ G~ ~ ~ /,
e ~ ~.
~~%~~ ~~~- ' ~~ ~.ZGc,c.~f .-tea
G~
v ~~,/
~~°
` ~ ~ l~L.t_YC~Cdi "'Y`.~'4-k^~Q.es~(~ /lT .~~iYta .,//... /l.lS` ~'?.if e, ~
- - - -- - _ i
.;.~
v ~F -
r
~~
` C:ea~ 7'Jar~e,`?) ~v'J a11~p 1JazF~ avLee ,
~ji~~~~~~~~(~~ ~~
d
~~ --.-
.Y
Y ~
i
ICHFIELD
MAYOR
MARTIN J. KIRSCH
CITY COUNCIL
JOHNENGER
SUSAN ROSENBERG
SUZANNE M.SANDAHL
GERTRUDE ULRICH
CITY MANAGER
SAMANTHA ORDUNO
Public Safety Department
Support Services Division
January 29, 2004
Stephen Lewis
6436 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
RE: Your application request for aMulti-Animal Residential Kennel License
This letter is notification that your request for amulti-animal residential kennel license
has been scheduled to appear before the City Council on February 10, 2004 at 6:30
p.m. in the Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South.
It has come to my attention that the licenses for two of your dogs expired on January
11, 2004. I have enclosed the renewal forms for these two dogs. Please license
these dogs ASAP. All animals need to have current licenses before your request for
a multi-animal residential kennel license will be approved.
Please be present at the meeting so that you can address any issues or concerns
that may arise. If you have any questions prior to the date of the meeting, or are
unable to attend the meeting please contact me at (612) 861-9880.
Sincerely,
Kathy Mueller
Business Licensing
KM:ttf
Enclosures
~~
~ 1 ~°.`~
l
The Urban Hometown
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423-2599 NON-EMERGENCY 612.861.9800 EMERGENCY 911
www.ci.richfieltl.mn.us AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ICHFIELD
MAYOR
MARTIN J. KIRSCH
CITY COUNCIL
JOHN ENGER
SUSAN ROSENBERG
SUZANNE M.SANDAHL
GERTRUDE ULRICH
CITY MANAGER
SAMANTHA ORDUNO
Public Safety Department
Support Services Division
May 19, 2004
Resident
6424 Portland
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Resident:
I am writing to you because the four-month temporary multi-pet license issued to your
neighbor at 6436 Portland Ave. So., is due to expire the end of June.
We are contacting neighbors surrounding this address to inquire if there have been
any concerns since the time the temporary license was issued. If you should have
any concerns regarding these neighbors' animals, please call me at (612) 861-9870
or write a brief letter outlining those concerns and return it to me at 6700 Portland
Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423, Attn: Kathy Mueller (Public Safety). Either your
telephone call or letter should be received in our office by June 1, 2004.
You will be contacted and made aware of the next council meeting date for the
consideration of the continuation of this multi-pet license. You may choose to attend
in person to present your testimony (either for or against the license being issued) or
you may request that we include your written letter in the City Council's information
packets.
I appreciate your willingness to participate and encourage you to contact me at 861-
9870 if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
C,~-cy ....._ V ~f~,~~-e~C~~
Kathy Mueller
Licensing
KM:ttf
TJre Urban Hornetoti>>r2
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423-2599 NON-EMERGENCY 612.861.9800 EMERGENCY 911
www.ci.richfield.mn.us AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Public Safety Department
Support Services Division
February 19, 2004
MAYOR
MARTIN J. KIRSCH Stephen Lewis
6436 Portland Avenue South
CITY COUNCIL
JOHN ENGER Richfield, MN 55423
SUSAN ROSENBERG
SUZANNE M. SANDAHL Dear Mr. Lewis:
GERTRUDE ULRICH
This is confirmation of the decision that was made by the City Council on Tuesday, February
CITY MANAGER 10, 2004, regarding your request for amulti-animal residential license. The Cit Council's
SAMANTHA ORDUNO y
decision was to issue you afour-month conditional license.
Per our conversation on February 12, 2004, amulti-animal residential license does not allow
you to breed your animals at your residence. Breeding is not allowed in residential areas
and you must cease breeding immediately. Breeding is only allowed in areas that are zoned
commercial and have a commercial kennel license.
After the four-month conditional license period, the City Council will meet again on June 22,
2004. You must be present at this meeting to address any issues and concerns that may
arise. We will also contact neighbors prior to that meeting to obtain any feedback they may
have to share with the City Council. If you have any questions prior to the date of this
meeting, please feel free to contact me at 612-861-9880.
The City Council will be meeting on April 13, 2004, in the council chambers at City Hall to
discuss the multi-animal residential license process. Discussion regarding this matter will
start when all council members are present, between 5:00 and 5:15 p.m. You expressed an
interest in attending this meeting and are welcome to attend.
Sincerely,
~~ ...t~
Kathy Mueller
Business Licensing
KM:ttf
Copy: Dan Scott, Director
The Urban Hometown
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423-2599 NON-EMERGENCY 612.861.9800 EMERGENCY 911
www.ci.richfield.mn.us AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
AGENDA SECTION: prnnnGed Ordinance
AGENDA ITEM # ~ Q
REPORT # 113
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. 2H
REPORT PREPARED BY:
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 39
RANDY HUGHES, OPERATIONS
SUPERINTENDENT
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
/I%~
SIGNAT(IRE
d
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of second reading of the attached transitory ordinance authorizing full time
Public Works employees to issue violation notices amending Richfield City Code Subsection
115.11, Subdivision 5
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve second reading of the attached transitory
ordinance authorizing full time Public Works employees to issue
violation notices; amending Richfield City Code Subsection 115.11,
Subdivision 5.
II. BACKGROUND
The expansion of snow regulation enforcement to include part-time and non-police
personnel was set as a goal at the January 2004 Council/Staff Strategic Planning
Worksession. It was also discussed at the April 8, 2004, City Council Worksession.
On May 25, 2004 Council approved the first reading of the attached transitory
ordinance.
PWissue citations
The current City Code allows Public Works supervisors to issue snowbird tickets.
Presently, there are six Public Works supervisors authorized to issue citations.
Public Safety can have up to seven officers, two community service officers and two
reserve officers tagging during a snow event. The problem that occurs is that many
of the staff issuing tags are pulled off the assignment because of other duties or
responsibilities. The Police for example, always have accidents that require their
presence. The Streets and Park supervisors are responsible for fueling the plowing
equipment, are involved in emergency repairs and are dealing with resident
complaints. Both the staff member and the vehicle are lost to a competing task
when this happens. By allowing three or four more non-supervisory Public Works
staff to issue snowbird citations, staff could do a better job of getting cars off the
street for plowing.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City Charter general provisions on adoption of ordinances require
a first and second reading.. on ordinances. A public hearing is not
required unless a separate statute, charter provision or ordinance
requires it. In this case there is no public hearing requirement.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• More staff can be assigned to tag snowbirds. Three or four. select non-
supervisory Public Works staff could supplement the staff now being
used for tagging.
C. FINANCIAL
• More efficient enforcement of snow ordinances will result in faster,
more efficient plowing of the streets.
D. LEGAL
• The transitory ordinance was prepared by Corrine Thomson amending
the current ordinance.
• The first reading was approved by Council on May 25, 2004.
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The Council may choose not to amend the present ordinance and allow only
Public Works supervisors to issue violation notices.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• transitoryordinance
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING FULL TIME PUBLIC WORKS
EMPLOYEES TO ISSUE VIOLATION NOTICES; AMENDING RICHFIELD CITY
CODE SUBSECTION 115.11, SUBDIVISION 5.
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1, Subsection 115.11, Subdivision 5 of the Richfield City code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 5. Full time employees of ^^mm~ ~ni+" c~or.,inoc~ public works
department. Full time employees of the ~nmm,,,,i+„ ~nn,incc• public works
department as designated s h.±vinn c , ~r+cr.,ic nn, .~~ ~~hnri~" by the public
works director may issue notices of violation for violations of subsection
1305.13 of this code.
Section 2, This ordinance is effective in .accordance with Section 3.09 of the
Richfield City Charter.
2004.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of June
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: public Hearings
AGENDA ITEM # q
REPORT # 1 1 ~
J
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
.TUNE 22, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. 9
REPORT PREPARED BY:
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO
PAM BOOKHOUT,
REHABILITATION SPECIALIST
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
20
ITEM FOR. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing and second reading of a transitory ordinance authorizing the sale of the
properties at 6805 12th Avenue and 6329 14th Avenue to the Housing and Redevelopment
Authorit for affordable home develo merit.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Approve the
second reading of a transitory ordinance authorizing the sale of the
properties at 6805 12th Avenue and 6329 14th Avenue to the Housing
and Redevelo merit Authorit for affordable home develo -merit.
II. BACKGROUND
• The first reading of the transitory ordinance for the City to sell 6805 12th Avenue
and 6329 14th Avenue to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) was
on May 25, 2004.
062204 6805 12th_6329 14tH-2"d rdg
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and non-profit funds would
be used to acquire the properties. No City General Fund revenues would be
used for either of the two properties.
• The-City would purchase both properties by the end of June 2004 and convey to
the HRA for development under the New Home Program. After conveyance, the
HRA would provide two affordable homes for first time homebuyers.
• The negotiated purchase price of 6805 12th Avenue is $150,000 based on an
independent appraisal. $110,000 in CDBG funds would be used to purchase the
property; $40,000 would come from the nonprofit developer.
• The purchase price of 6329 14th Avenue is $140,000. Of that, $90,000 would
come from CDBG, and $50,000 would come from the nonprofit developer.
• Both properties would be sold to income-qualifying families, as defined by CDBG
regulations. An eligible family of four would earn less than $57,500 annually (80
percent of the Twin City area median or less).
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City to HRA purchase process ensures that the CDBG funds do
not have to be repaid to Hennepin County at a future time.
• To effectuate aCity-owned property sale to the HRA, a transitory
ordinance must be adopted.
• Upon completion, both homes would meet all zoning requirements
and comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Using CDBG funds to purchase substandard property and develop
with a nonprofit developer, whether through remodeling or new
construction, has been an effective HRA program.
• The house plans would be reviewed to ensure the HRA's design
criteria were met.
• Continuing relationships with nonprofit developers helps resolve
financial gaps and makes it possible to provide affordable homes for
first time buyers.
C. FINANCIAL
• 2003 and 2004 CDBG funds will be available for acquisition of the
properties: $110,000 for 6805 12th Avenue, and $90,000 for 6329
14th Avenue. Proceeds of sale and grants received by nonprofit
developers will make the acquisitions possible.
• The nonprofit developers would cover construction costs.
• No City General Fund revenues would be used for development.
D. LEGAL
• Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current on June
10, 2004.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Do not conduct the second reading of the ordinance.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Transitory Ordinance
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFER OR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA (6805 12TH AVENUE SOUTH AND 6329 14TH AVENUE)
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1.
The following described real properties located in the City of Richfield, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, are hereby authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise
disposed of and conveyed by the City as herein provided:
6805 12th Avenue:
All of the South seventy-two (72) feet of the North One Hundred Forty-four (144)
feet of Block Five (5), except the East One Hundred Thirty-three (133) feet thereof,
Rich Fields, Hennepin County, Minn., according to the plat or map thereof now on
file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles, in and for said County and
State.
Subject to a right of way for private roadway eight (8) feet wide commencing at road
on the North side of Southeast Quarter (SE'/4) Sec. 26 Twp: 26 R. 24 and running
South along the Westerly side of said tract to the South ten (10) acres of the West
fifty-five (55) rods of the West Half (W'/z) of said Southeast quarter (SE'/4)
according to deeds record in Book 264 of Deeds. page 123 and Book 340 of Deeds
page 129 and Book 460 of Deeds page 192. Also
That part of the South Thirteen Hundred and Ten (1310) feet of the East Eight and
58/100 (8.58) feet of the West Forty-one and 58/100 (41.58) feet of the Southwest
Quarter (SW'/) of Southeast Quarter (SE'/4), Section 26, Township 28, Range 24,
which lies between the north and south lines extended of the South 72 feet of the
North 144 feet of Block 5, Rich Fields, Hennepin County," Minn. according to the
map or plat thereof now on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in
and for said County and State;
6329 14th Avenue:
Lot 17, Block 2, Nokomis Gardens Rearrangement of Block 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Girard
Parkview, Hennepin County; and
Section 2.
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all action as is required to sell,
transfer, or otherwise dispose of and convey the real property described in the foregoing
Section 1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the execution of all
documents, purchase agreements, deeds of conveyance, and other instruments
connected with such sale, transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Passed this 22nd day of June 2004 by the Richfield City Council.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: public Hear; n~G
AGENDA ITEM # $
REPORT # 1 1 1
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 19
CHRISTINE COSTELLO, ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
SLGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing to consider the resolution requesting a Conditional Use Permit at 7141 Portland.
Avenue to allow atwo-famil dwellin in the "R" zonin district.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Recommend
approval of the attached Resolution requesting a Conditional Use Permit
to allow atwo-family dwelling at 7141 Portland Avenue in the "R" zoning
district fora royal in the le al section of this re ort.
II. BACKGROUND
• Mr. Tom Pernecke, owner of 7141 Portland Avenue is requesting a conditional
use permit (CUP) to allow atwo-family dwelling.
• Staff received a call regarding the zoning of this property. Staff informed the
caller the property was zoned "R", for single family residence. The caller
informed staff that the house was being used as atwo-family dwelling.
062204CUP-7141 Portland
• A letter was sent on April 15, 2004 stating that the home was possibly an illegal
dwelling as atwo-family unit and that the homeowner would have to make the
necessary changes to conform to the single-family zoning classification or prove
that the house is a legal non-conforming use.
• 7141 Portland Avenue is zoned `R' Single Family Residential. Mr. Pernecke and
his family currently occupy the lower level of the house. The upper level of the
house is the second unit, which is rented to another tenant.
• A search was conducted of City records for this property. The property dates
back to 1922, and many of the records are vague on its use from 1922 to
present. Through a search of City records there wasn't any solid information
that would deem it a legal non-conforming use.
• Staff did find that the 1944 Zoning Ordinance allowed atwo-family dwelling as a
permitted use, but the 1954 Zoning Ordinance required a special permit for
duplexes in a residential district.
• The present Ordinance classifies atwo-family dwelling as a conditional use
requiring Planning Commission approval.
• The Inspection records indicate that a permit was issued in 1957 for a remodel
of $500.00, another permit was issued for two water heaters in 1960.
• Because this house has existed as a duplex since at least 1960 (based on
building department records), legal counsel has advised that arguably the City
has recognized it as legally non-conforming since that time.
• While the homeowner has indicated that being considered a "legally non-
conforming" use designation. would be sufficient, staff would prefer a CUP for the
property to more clearly define its status. For this reason, the CUP fee has been
waived for this CUP application.
• The Richfield Planning Commission considered this proposed CUP at their May
24, 2004 meeting and unanimously voted to recommend City Council approval.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Two family dwelling is classified as a conditional use. in the R district. The
findings necessary to issue a CUP (521.07, subd.5) are as follows:
a) The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of
the City's Comprehensive Plan. This requirement is met. The
Comprehensive Plan calls for `Single-Family-High Density' at this.
location, which is consistent with atwo-family dwelling.
b) The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment
plans or urban design guidelines. This requirement is met since it is more
in regards to private commercial development and public spaces. There
was a concern about the appearance of the staircase leading to the
second unit but there are no requirements for the owner to meet other
than those related to safety. The staircase has been in compliance with
existing codes since February 26, 2002.
c) The proposed use is or will be in compliance with. the pen`ormance
standards specified in Section 541 of this code. This requirement is only
for new development, and excludes single family, two family, and cluster
housing developments.
d) The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental
facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. This
requirement is met.
e) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety,
or welfare. This requirement is met. The primary concerns associated
with two-family dwelling are noise and additional traffic in the area. Both
of these concerns are addressed.
f) There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. The
proposed use is in keeping with the area uses.
g) The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this
code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is
met. The zoning code specifies six requirements, which must be met for a
two-family dwelling. The current request meets all but two of these
requirements, as explained below.
1, The first requirement, is that the lot abuts an arterial or collector
street. This property abuts Portland Avenue, which is an
arterial street.
2. The lot area, width, and depth shall comply with minimum
standards for the `R' District. The lot meets these standards.
3. Two off-street parking spaces, one of which must be enclosed
in a garage, shall be provided for each dwelling unit. There is
currently atwo-car garage on the property as well as parking
space for cars on the driveway.
4. Driveway access to the property from the public street shall be
allowed in accordance with driveway standards. Currently the
driveway is gravel and may continue to exist in that state since
it existed before December 31, 1993. The driveway can be
repaired and maintained, except that upon .full replacement
such driveway, parking areas, and sidewalk shall comply with
the current driveway requirements. The petitioner would also
need to ensure open space requirement is met when meeting
current driveway requirements. The issue of front yard.
regulations has been a concern for the City Council. A Council
memorandum dated March 11, 2004, reviewed the pros and
cons of addressing front yard regulations. It has been a
concern of residents, elected officials, and City staff that
property owners are covering their front yards with an
increasing amount of pavement to accommodate vehicle
parking, which has been an issue in Richfield for many years.
The Council memorandum specifically addresses major streets
such as Penn and Portland Avenues. No further action has
been taken on this Council item therefore; no changes to the
.Zoning Ordinance have been made at this time and the
petitioner is allowed to use his driveway in its current. state.
The existing curb cut is less than the maximum of 22 feet.
5. The fifth requirement is in regards to new construction and this
is not a new construction project, so it does not apply.
6. For the final requirement, the house meets all setback
requirements except the rear yard setback of 25 feet. The
current setback is 20 feet but due to the age of the house as
well as the fact that the detached garage is the required 3 feet
from the rear property line, staff does not see this a crucial
point since the garage is closer to the property line.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Spot Zoning. If atwo-family dwelling is approved for the CUP it might
seem as if the City is conducting spot zoning. Looking at a Richfield
Zoning Map one can see that the City has scattered multi-family units all
around the City even along Portland Avenue currently. Atwo-family
dwelling would not change the overall zoning scheme for the community.
C. FINANCIAL
• Fee waived since it is a staff sponsored CUP.
D. LEGAL
Notification: Notification for the City Council public hearing on this
proposed Conditional Use Permit was published in the
Sun Current on June 10, 2004 as required by City
Ordinances and State Statutes.
• Zoning:
• Land Use:
duplex.
• Proposed:
• Comprehensive Plan:
• Notification:
• Other Actions:
• Planning Commission:
May 24th, 2004, meeting
• HRA:
• Hearing Examiner:
'R', Single Family Residential
Current: Single Family home being used as a
Duplex.
Single Family /High Density Residential
Neighbors and property-owners within 350 feet
N/A
Unanimously recommended approval of CUP at
N/A
N/A.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMfiNDATION(S~
• Deny the requested CUP to allow atwo-family dwelling at 7141 Portland
Avenue.
• Approve the requested CUP to allow atwo-family dwelling at 7141 Portland
Avenue with stipulations.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Draft Resolution for City Council
• Code Reference: Section 546-Zoning -Administration 546.05 Conditional Use
Permit
• Site plan and area maps
• Letters concerning 7141 Portland Avenue
~ VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~
om NernecKe, app
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
TWO-FAMILY DWELLING AT
7141 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which request
approval of a conditional use permit to allow atwo-family dwelling at 7141 Portland Avenue
South, legally described as:
The west 1/8 of that part of the north 3/ of the southwest'/4 of the northwest'/4 lying
south of the north 876.8 feet thereof excluding highway.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield has recommended
approval of this requested conditional use permit at 7141 Portland Avenue South at its May
24th, 2004 meeting, and
WHEREAS, this requested conditional use permit at 7141 Portland Avenue South
meets those requirements necessary for issuing a conditional use permit as specified in
Richfield's Zoning Code, section 546.05, subd.6, and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the conditional use
permit;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. A conditional use permit is issued for atwo-family dwelling, as described in City
Council Letter No. , on the Subject Property legally described above.
2. This conditional use permit at 7141 Portland Avenue South is subject to the following
conditions in Section 521.07 Subdivisions 5 of the City's Zoning Ordinance.
3. The conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating
it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the
use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the Zoning
Ordinance, Section 546.05, Subd. 9.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of June,
2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
SECTION 546 -ZONING: ADMINISTRATION
546.05. Conditional use permits. Subdivision 1. Permit required. It shall be unlawful to
engage in any use listed in this code as a conditional use without first obtaining a conditional
use permit (CUP) from the City pursuant to this subsection.
Subd. 2. Limitations. A conditional use permit may not be issued for the purpose of
granting an adjustment or appeal, or for any use prohibited in the zoning district for
which the permit is sought.
Subd. 3. Application. Application for a conditional use .permit shall be made to the
Director on forms provided by the City.
Subd. 4. Planning Commission review. After receipt of a completed application, a date
shall be set for consideration before the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission may offer whatever public notice of its review it deems necessary.
Following this consideration, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to
the City Council regarding the application.
Subd. 5. Public hearing. After receipt of the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, a date shall be set for a public hearing. Not less than 10 days prior to the
public hearing, notice shall be published once in the official newspaper and sent by mail
to all the owners of properties located wholly or partially within 350 feet. The Council
shall make the final determination on the application, and in doing so shall make
findings regarding its review. The Council may impose conditions and require
guarantees on the granting of the permit in order to ensure compliance with the
conditions designated in connection therewith. The Council shall make a decision
within 60 days of submission of a completed application unless written notice of an
extension is provided to the applicant. The notification must state the reasons for the
extension and its anticipated length, which may not exceed 60 days unless approved by
the applicant. If the Council fails to make a timely decision, the conditional use permit
shall be deemed to have been approved. (Amended, Bill No. 1995-19, Sec. 4)
Subd. 6. Conditions for issuance. The Council may not grant a conditional use permit
unless it finds that all of the following conditions will be met:
a) the proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the
City's Comprehensive Plan;
b) the proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans
or urban design guidelines;
c) the proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards
specified in Sectibn 541 of this code;
d) the proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental
facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements;
e) the use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or
welfare; and
f) there is a public need for such use at the proposed location; and
g) the proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code
for the granting of such conditional use permit.
Subd. 7. Recording of CUP. Upon commencement of an approved conditional use, a
certified copy of the conditional use permit shall be filed by the applicant with the
Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. The permit shall contain the legal
description of the property.
Subd. 8. Expiration of CUP. A conditional use permit shall expire one year after it has
been issued unless:
a) the use for which the permit was granted has commenced within the one year
period; or
b) upon written request of the person or corporation holding the CUP, the Council
extends the expiration date for an additional period not to exceed one year.
Subd. 9. Term of CUP. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as
the conditions regulating it are observed, unless specifically stated otherwise. A
conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued
for 12 or more months. Time shall be calculated as beginning, on the day following the
last day in which the use was in normal operation and shall run continuously thereafter.
Subd. 10. Amendment to CUP. Holders of a conditional use permit may propose
amendments to the permit by following the procedure set in this subsection for issuance
of a new permit. Significant changes in the circumstances or scope of the use shall
require approval of the Council. Such changes may include, but are not limited to,
hours of operation, increase in number of employees, expansion of structure or
premises, or major operational modifications, as determined by the Director. The
Planning Commission may recommend, and the Council may impose, additional or
modified conditions as a result of the amendment.
Subd. 11. Fee. The fee for a conditional use permit or amendment thereto is set by
Appendix D of the City Code.
CUP REQUEST FOR 7141 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH -MAY 24, 2004
ZONING OF PROPERTIES WITHIN 350 FEET
71ST ST.
~~
a
LLi
a
Y
oc
a
~sao sr.
~~~^~ ~~~
ZONING SYMBOLS
R =SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
N
100 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet ~5_~
CUP REQUEST FOR 7141 PORTLAND AVENUE SOUTH -MAY 24, 2004
LAND USES OF PROPERTIES WITHIN 350 FEET
~~
ui
a w
Q = ~
~ ~ RE RES J
d' RES
0
aso, a
R.
HOPE
PRESBYTE IAN
CHURC
RES
CHURCH RES
RES
RES
71ST ST.
RES RES
RES RES
RES RES
RES RES
RES
7141
RES
RES RES
RES
RES
ui
a u;
RES Q
Z
~ Y
Y RE Q
a • ~-
0 RES RES
RES TIRES
RES TIRES
72ND ST.
RES RES RES
RES RES R S
RES RES RES
RES
RES
.73RD ST.
LAND USE SYMBOLS
RES = SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
CHURCH = CHURCH
N
100 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet ~5_~
.~- ..~ -
Hello Neighbor,
This letter is to inform you that my wife and I are petitioning the city of Richfield
to obtain a permit of use. On April 15 of this year Jennifer and I received a letter from
the city stating that the duplex we purchased at 7141 Portland avenue south was an illegal
structure, as the lot that it stands on is currently zoned for single family residence. The
house was built in 1922 and has been used as a duplex since at least the early 1980's.
More research is being done on this to see how long it has been a duplex.
The city has given us several avenues to pursue in legalizing the use of our home.
1. Completely remodel the house to fit zoning as a single family dwelling and remove
the tenant. This would cost us tens of thousands of dollars.
2. Obtain a permit of use which will allow us to continue to use the duplex as a duplex
according to any provisions set by the city planning commision and council.
3. Have the structure declared a legal nonconforming structure. Basically,
grandfathered in under a 19521aw. We are researching how long the house has been
a duplex for this reason.
4. Have the zoning changed to allow for multifamily use.
Jennifer and I have decided to follow with option 2 for right now as it is the most cost
effective and expediant way to legally keep our home as is.
I want to restate that we are not looking to change a current single family residence to
a duplex. We are just going through the formality of legalizing the use of a homesteaded
duplex that has been in operation for at least 20 years.
We thank you for any support you can give. If you have any questions feel free to
call me at (612)-869-2182. Or the city zoning department.
Thank you,
Tom and Jennifer Pernecke
05/05/04
7141 Portland avenue south
stay ~~, ~Da4
Dear Four &r ~enrrr#er~ Rernecke &- Ehrrstrrre Eosteffa,
f am rrot sure %# are arrfF b-e at fine 1~tay 2~k meet"rng at pity Hatt there#ore; ~ arrr
g~v~g ~ ~y ~# ~~s-.~e~~er ~~x,ba~~ ~~ Pere' -s4~ ~~ ~~e: ~~y ~a~r~g
~4dmkrttstr~cttor.
~y hrtst 8r F ~ve~-frr~v -f~c~rre f}e~o~er 4}~E}: f~-may nretttory serves-tee
rat, ~~e-1~o.~ts~ ~ ~~~~ -P~tl4 ays. huh •.a -~e~~P.r.
Tofn- -beeps-his pro~e~ty rRea-t, Fre -has ~f~r*e~4 & ad~e#e~ a- dear eras-~~r ~~e rrtr~sfde
€~# the. h€~tse:eh~ives -~~ ,a ~cery:~4easa -lam. ~t4le.ds~:--~ -~a~~ce- ~he~ -~e~ter s€~:
the individaa{ is no problem to the-neighborhood.
I cant~ccrt understzr-td aihy tyre"rr~ house should ae scrch a ccrrrcerrr to ~2"rch#ield ar~terr
#~e .liar ~.u~ Saar ~€~ ~kae- ~erx~cl~' •~ 1 ~he~ ~ra~~ y€~rd # €~# cars: ~~:Er
years uae have asked-Rich#ield to do something about this house arhich-still-remains
arr eye sore to fire neig~rtro~-hood: S"r~-cars-& a trcrcl~ snoai~rtoar are irr tyre #rorrt
y4rd. 4.r~ car -has. ~ ~IQt fire.,& three caps •have.~t ~~red ~ar.ave~ a yr.
~ a-otrl-d~ ratlTer~-have ~heferneckes' & their rerr~er across-tire street than tote
harts that ~ ..o ~ 4at.
~'rncerely,
J//p., r
/t~ ^ ~~~~
(tee 'v{ . r ti-i t _ / _ F\
Earof ~t .f ohrr E}`{-ifrra-
~iCME#FeEd--Ah~l- ~J- 42~
-Ee: ~v~r Perr°r~eke &
~hr~tir~e.-~i:~te~-4a, -?oai.~g -~!€i~t~~to~
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 6E
REPORT # 1 1 (1
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 13, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO. N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO 31
BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
® J~
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a request for a new taxi license for A New Star Limousine and Taxi Service,
Inc., 3501 23rd Avenue South, Minnea olis.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a request for a new taxi license for A New Star
Limousine and Taxi Service, Inc., 3501 23rd Avenue South,
Minneapolis.
IL BACKGROUND
On May 5, 2004, the City received an application for a new taxi license for A New
Star Limousine and Taxi Service, Inc. The applicant has paid the required fees.
The applicant is the sole owner and operator of the business. At the present time,
only one vehicle will be licensed.
0622 A New Star Limousine and Taxi Service
The Public Safety background investigation has been completed and reveals the
following:
• Luis A. Paucar is the owner of the business. He has no known criminal record,
and he has no violations on his driving record.
• The certificate of liability insurance has been submitted showing American
Country Insurance Company affording the coverage.
• At the present time, the number of vehicles the applicant is proposing to operate
in Richfield would not exceed one. However, there is a possibility new vehicles
could be added.
• The applicant has supplied the information regarding the make, body style and
year of the vehicle to be operated by the applicant and agrees to supply this
information for any added vehicles in the future, as well as pay fees for
additional vehicles making pick-ups within the City of Richfield.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The applicant meets the standards that are contained in the City's
ordinance.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Deny the request for a new taxi license for A New Star Limousine & Taxi
Service Inc. This would mean that the applicant could not pick up fares
within Richfield.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• N/A
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Luis Paucar, owner
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 6D
REPORT # 1 ~ 9
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
RELATED TO: AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ N/A
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~N/A
BETSY OSBORN, SUPPORT SERVICES
REPORT PREPARED BY: DIVISION MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
~v, ~O~
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of an annual request for temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor and itinerant
food licenses for activities scheduled to take place on July 4, 2004 for the Minneapolis-
Richfield American Le ion Post 435, 6501 Portland Avenue.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor and
itinerant food licenses for the Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion
Post 435, 6501 Portland Avenue, for activities scheduled to take place
on Julv 4, 2004.
II. BACKGROUND
On May 14, 2004, the Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 submitted
their annual request for a temporary license to serve on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor
and an itinerant food license for the Fourth of July activities. The required licensing
fees have been received. The event is scheduled to occur from 11 a.m. to 10 p.m.
This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has
been organized by the Fourth of July Committee. The Legion plans to have an
0622 American Legion Fourth of July Licenses
open house and community dance outside on their property, and they would like to
serve refreshments, including beer. Their food menu will consist of items such as
hot dogs, brats, polish sausage, chips, cookies, hamburgers, chicken wings, French
fries, pork chops, corn, pronto pups and pop.
Their current liquor license is only valid for the serving of alcohol within the
establishment and does not cover the exterior serving. Proof of liquor liability
insurance coverage, to cover the exterior of their property, has been provided
showing Western World Insurance Company as affording the coverage.
The applicant has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure
that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington
sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome food
handling.
The Public Safety Department received three calls in connection with this
celebration for the previous year. All three were medical in nature.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a
temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license.
• The City has previously issued temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt
liquor licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• That the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquors. cease no later than 10 p.m.
• The applicant has hired a professional security organization to
oversee all hours of operation for this event.
• There have been no alcohol-related incidents in the past for this event.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Deny the request of a temporary 3.2 percent malt liquor license. This would
result in the applicant not being able to conduct activities, especially those
concerning the temporary sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor, in conjunction with
the Fourth of July Celebration. However, the Public Safety Department has
not found any basis for denial.
~ V. ATTACHMENTS ~
~ VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING ~
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 6C
REPORT # 1 ~ H
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
RELATED TO: AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ N/A
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ N/A
BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
REPORT PREPARED BY: SERVICES MANAGER
NAME, T/TLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: „~
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of an annual request for a community celebration event license and a temporary
on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license, with a request for a fee waiver, for the Fourth of July
Committee for events scheduled to take place at Veterans Memorial Park, July 1 through July
5, 2004.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a community celebration event license and a
temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license, with a fee waiver,
for the Fourth of July Committee for the annual events scheduled to
take glace July 1 through July 5, 2004.
II. BACKGROUND
Each year the Fourth of July Committee makes application for a community
celebration event license and requests that the community celebration fee of $5,000
be waived for the activities that take place throughout the City for this celebration.
This year's celebration is scheduled to take place July 1 through July 5, 2004.
0622 Fourth of July Committee Licenses
As in the past four years, they have also included a request for a temporary on-sale
3.2 percent malt liquor license which would allow them to serve beer and wine
coolers at Veterans Memorial park during the July 3rd activities. A copy of the
liquor liability insurance has been provided and is afforded by Great American
Assurance Company.
A detailed activity plan of the days' events is on file. Members of various
organizations will staff the food concessions, most of whom have been with the
committee since the celebration began.
The committee has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to
ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with
Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome
food handling. In addition, each individual concessionaire has been approved by
the Bloomington Health Department.
All fees for each concession have been received.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City
application process and meets the requirements for fee waiver.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Public Safety police officers have been hired by the Fourth of July
Committee to patrol the area for this event.
• There have been no alcohol-related incidents in the past for this event.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
~ IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) ~
Deny the request for a community celebration event license and a temporary
on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license. This would result in the applicant not
being able to conduct activities, especially those concerning food preparation
and temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor sales, on July 1 through July 5,
2004.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Copy of the schedule of events.
I V 1. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I
• Pat Rickert, President of the Fourth of July Committee, has been notified of
the date for Council consideration of this request.
Q ~. Y Z -~
~-~ ~ Op
U o O ~~ w 0
F~ ~~ ~~~OU ~C~Qoooa~ip ~OZ ~~~^~ •~~
~( ._i l ~ 0 t~1. 1- ~~ a ~ u1 ~ ~ ~ = U W
~~ -..~_ ": oYZg Cgz ~ ~w ~ w~ U~~~~
._ ~~0 V~ ouzo ~°~ ~~wO o
w w on-~o ~ ~cn~~~ x
tiQ ~ ~ ~~ Qua
Q
O ~a> ~o ~^ QW ~ ~Z ~C7cn ~
~ ogo ~~~ ~~~ ~a ~ ~~~ ~~~ a~ -
~_JO Z• OQw °•~ O ~ °¢U owQ oc~
a~'~'~g n.O~p °Z~ ~U ~~ owe o~~ ~~
p~az~ ~wU am0 zdS =~ ¢LZ~ a[~z a ., {-
~~t° ~~ ncn ~~ O ~¢ ~w M
g > ~ >
~ ~. Q ~ z ~
Q ui ~u F- ~ O ~ ¢ uw ,;~ ~ O z z
a~ t7 2 ~ J p ~n.~
J ¢ ~ w ~ ~ C7 w '-' a: J ¢ ~ w H w
~ UZ Z z o p ;;,_. ~ O
g J O ~ N O O >
OZ ~WQ~ ZO ~~w ~ ~Q~~Z ',~~~ ~~^zF- Q
w~ cn~~~j ~~ a~nY a~ ~z'i wg ,~~~ a'4Ow-~w~
g0 pU~ ~~ Q ~ i ~ ~O ,'. oocnQO O
cno- w0~~ u~lw z~Q f0 F¢-U~cna ~° z..iz U'~-'F--
Z~ i-- ~ w= w~a V O aZ~ ,.~, ~ ~~~~
_ ~ o ~ Q df cn ~ "~ ~ F1--
w o O w J I- w
~'~ui° ~~ H FoN
> g > z ~o
Q ~ D ~ ~ ~ Q
d iL o ~mN ~z~ ~> ~ ~ ~ o ~
~ ~"3 ~..5 ~"' :~ Ha~Oa~ Qom,--Iw Oz ~'~ ¢z~ ~Qo
~ ~ ~ .~ C7 of o p a ri ~ ~ i-- C7 0 ~ L7 > ,'~'-~
'~~ ~ ~~ O zo~z z~,~ zoo ~_;~- ~n~o VO a
J
N -.. g O ~io l0 > O ~
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
Consent
6B
l~~
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) No. 30, 32
REPORT PREPARED BY:
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 37, 39
THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
.~
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution supporting legislation to provide improved funding foal-35W
Corridor im rovements.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution urging the state
legislature to increase funding for necessary transportation
improvements in the Twin Cities metro area.
II. BACKGROUND
The 35W Solutions Alliance has requested its member cities to adopt the attached
resolution urging the state legislature to approve an increase of $1 billion per year in
transportation funding for the next ten years. This is the current estimate of what is needed
to correct deficiencies in both roads. and transit for the Twin Cities area according to the
Minnesota Department of Transportation Systems Plan.
0622Transportation
The 35W Solutions Alliance is concerned that the Twin Cities area is falling behind other
major cities in making transportation improvements and, consequently, is losing its
economic competitive edge in comparison to other large cities.
Council Member Sandahl represents the Richfield City Council on the 35W Solutions
Alliance Board.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City's comprehensive plan has identified improvements that are
needed to the regional highway network, including I-35W, surrounding
Richfield. Current funding is inadequate to make the necessary
improvements.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Inaction by the state legislature in its recently adjourned session has
led the 35W Solutions Alliance to organize local leaders to speak with
legislators prior to the next state legislative session about the need for
increased transportation funding for the Twin Cities area.
C. FINANCIAL
• The resolution has no financial impact on the City.
D. LEGAL
• The resolution does not have legal implications for the City.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Oppose passing the resolution. Some people may believe that the amount of
funding requested is too high. However, MnDOT staff believes the cost
estimate of Twin Cities area road needs in the MnDOT Systems Plan is too
low.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution Supporting Legislation to Provide Improved Funding for 1-35W
Corridor Improvements.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None anticipated
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO
PROVIDE IMPROVED FUNDING FOR I-35W CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the counties of Dakota, Hennepin and Scott and the Cities of
Bloomington, Burnsville, Lakeville, Richfield and Minneapolis, formed The I-35W Solutions
Alliance to improve transportation capacity in the I-35W corridor; and
WHEREAS, I-35W is a major corridor of commerce between Mexico and Canada
connecting the region and state to international markets; and
WHEREAS, I-35W is an integral part of this international corridor of commerce; and
WHEREAS, I-35W is a major mass transit corridor; and
WHEREAS, the I-35W/494 interchange is the most congested transportation
bottleneck in the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, this bottleneck severely and adversely affects the region and the
state's competitive position in the country and the world; and
WHEREAS, according to the Texas Transportation Institute study of 2000,
congestion increases the cost to individuals and businesses in the Twin Cities Metropolitan
Area by wasting an average of 79 gallons of fuel and 54 hours of time per peak road
traveler per year, and increased air and water .pollution; and
WHEREAS, funding for improvement to the I-35W corridor has been insufficient and
has not kept pace with growth of traffic and demand due to a lack of increased funding
since 1988; and
WHEREAS, transportation spending as a percentage of the state's gross domestic
product has declined over the past decade, transit is funded at 65% of similarly sized
regions, and planners estimate that at least $1 billion in improvements per year for the next
10 years is needed to keep congestion from increasing; and
WHEREAS, congestion is impediment to business development, growth,
employment and reduces the overall quality of life in the region and the state.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Richfield City Council that this
Council (1) respectfully requests that the legislature increase revenues through various
taxes of at least $1 billion per year for the next 10 years to build a balanced transportation
system in the metropolitan area and of additional amounts for the entire state; (2) that
immediate priority be given to full funding and completion of the I-35W/Hy.62 Crosstown
interchange, reconstruction of the I-35W/I-494 interchange, reconstruction of I-35W from
46th Street to downtown Minneapolis, improvements to Mn.Hy.13 from I-35W to
Mn.Hy.169, and completion and operation of high speed bus service on I-35W from
Lakeville to Minneapolis; and (3) that the county state aid highway formula be revised to
reflect the concentration of population in the urban areas.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of
June, 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 6A
REPORT # 1 ~ 6
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 22, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A arm/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY: SALLY MORTON, IT MANAGER
Na,~, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the attached resolution authorizing the donation of used City computer
e ui ment to the Richfield School District.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the donation
of used com uter a ui ment to Independent School District #280.
II. BACKGROUND
The City has 47 PCs (without monitors), 5 laptop computers, and 3 computer
monitors that have been replaced with new equipment. The retired equipment is still
in good operating condition, but the technology no longer performs adequately in
the City's environment. The Richfield School District accepts donations of used
computers and is interested in receiving this retired equipment. The City has made
several similar donations to the School District in the past.
0622PCDonation.doc
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The retired equipment was purchased with tax dollars from the same
taxpayers that fund the School District.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
• The cost to the City to recycle a personal computer is about $8.75 and
the cost to recycle a monitor is about $14.
• A quick survey by City staff revealed that similar used PCs are selling
for $50 - $200. The City's would be worth less because they are not
refurbished and do not include monitors or a warranty. Similar laptops
were selling for about $300 and monitors for $35 - $99.
• If the City were to sell this equipment there would be costs associated
with that effort and staff time would be diverted from other projects.
D. LEGAL
• The donation to the School District is authorized by Minnesota
Statutes, Section 471.85 which provides: "Any county, city, town, or
school district may transfer its personal property for a nominal or
without consideration to another public corporation for public use
when duly authorized by its governing body."
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Direct staff to research options for selling the equipment.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF USED COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
TO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #280
WHEREAS, the City owns some computer equipment for which it no longer has any
use; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 471.85 permits the City to transfer this
property to the School District for public use; and
WHEREAS, representatives of Independent School District #280 have indicated
that they will accept the donation and use it in a manner permitted by Minnesota Statutes
Section 471.85.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, that 47 personal computers, 5 laptop computers, and 3 computer monitors
owned by the City be transferred to Independent School District #280.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 22nd day of
June, 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~- Y Z -J
}~ ¢ z' ~ 00
,~~, 0 0 ~p w0 0¢
~~ ~N~OU f~~Qoa~o ~z ~~~~~
L= ~~/ ap i~ ~C7~op~piri ~~ 20Vp . WWj
( - o oC cn I- V U ~ cn a cn p p ~
_.._ ._'-~~~p V~ ouzo has '-'canw0~°
- W w o a ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~,
ti¢ ~ ~ O ~~ Q~¢
Q Y N Y
p ~n¢.j ~p ~~ a¢.w cA ~z ~C7cn ~
~ oJ¢ LL.C¢A~ ol- J¢ IL opJ a~~ a~ r~
H-'°•~z. •OQW ~~¢d ~O ~ui°•QC0.7 oW¢ °o~
~ ,-~ C7 w
a~,-a~g a:O~p oz~ ~V = o ~ 0~0 ~~ ~
~.a¢~g~poo•~p¢p I ~U ~= a V I owc~ I z~ J ,F~~
V OVaZoTS ^pwtQ3 n:>'O zoZS W~ ¢~z a¢V a•O ~ ~~~
Z '~ W1~0 Z~V+ I~~ w~ O ,,--iQ °~U M
~> ~~ ~
~ F- Q ~ z ~
w=
~w ru = O ~ ~¢~w ~~ O ~
J Q ~ w ~ in C7 w . ~ a J ¢ . ~ w °~ ~_.. z w
p UZ z ~Z-i ~ ' ~ o p ~-~ p °z ~00>
~Z W W Z~ ZD Y~ W ~ UJO~Z .. NOI-~Q
~~ C~ ,per ~j a~¢ ~ ¢~~~~ I~S.~ aaZw~~N
~0 Q~ I ~~ ¢~~ i~ ~~ I•~~ ~ ~OOQQ--10
zo2S ~OHa "'2 w~l1OOn' V QUfiZp~ ~'` ~.--~U~~~F--
~~ ~ ~ H ~ ~~~ f_i' H ~N
Z
d' Q p p ~ ~ H ¢
~;
C'} tL ~ ~ ~m~ QZ~ a> s`~~ o2S~~ 0 ~
!3 ~ ~ ~~ U Jwo~~ w ~n ~p ;~ wwo o
W t~ ~ `'~O ~ r~~r-~ a'Z ~ ~z~ V ~ O
~ h ....3 ~" . ~ w o p ~ a~-: t7 O .-~
~ LL ~~ ~ i=. ~~a I•~w Y~ I ~ w~ zV ~ ,_~~ I
,~ ~ ~ # t,~ V O Zo~Z Z~~ ¢z~, ;~ ~Qo VO n.
+- r. ~ z Sri w ¢ O ~° ~ p ,-~ z ,-~
~ t':~ _ ~ ~ ~ o ~ - --~
g o ifl > O ~