09-25-00 agendaAMENDED
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
RICHFIELD CITY HALL
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
Yt&?k*ir**ie?+e?k?kie?k?kfe*?e?k9tie?kie**?k4rok?k***?kAeYe9e?k?k?kye?rYe?. _..". =?.i ?kie*iritie9e?k9t*ynk?k?kitikieek?eye?k*?k*Ynkye4e?k***ink9r?k?k**ak?InkYt?k:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:..k
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSON
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:45 P.M.
Call to Order
Roll Call
1. Discussion of development concept for 6913-37 Penn Avenue
Staff Report No. 22
Adjournment
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
0 AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
Approval of minutes of (1) Special City Council Budget Meeting of August 30, 2000; (2)
Special City Council Study Session of September 5, 2000; and (3) Regular City Council
Meeting of September 11, 2000
PRESENTATIONS
Recognition of City of Richfield September 12, 2000 Primary Election staff
2. Presentation of awards to Richfield Water Division for Best Consumer Confidence
Report for 1999 for the Metro District and State of Minnesota from Minnesota
Section American Water Works Association
Individuals who wish to address the Council are requested to print their name
and address on the Speaker's Register for the record.
3. Opportunity for citizens to address the Council on items not on the agenda
Notes:
•
AGENDA APPROVAL
4. Council approval of agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
5. 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 establishing compensation and authorizing
purchase of 6314, 6320, 6326 and 6332-18th Avenue S.R. No. 246
• B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing City Manager to execute such
agreements necessary to obtain $5 million grant from Minnesota Department of
Trade and Economic Development S.R. No. 247
C. Consideration of approval of setting October 9, 2000 as public hearing for
issuance of club on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for Fred Babcock
VFW Post 5555, Inc., d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink, 6715 Lake Shore Drive
S.R. No. 248
D. Consideration of approval of setting October 23, 2000 as public hearing for
issuance of new on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for Wiltshire
Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar, 6601 Lyndale Avenue
S.R. No. 249
E. Consideration of approval of stipulation of settlement for 1800 East 66th Street for
66th Street/TH77 Interchange Project S.R. No. 253
Notes:
RESOLUTION
6. Disciplinary hearing and civil enforcement for alcohol establishments in Richfield
that recently underwent alcohol compliance checks and failed by selling alcohol to
• underage youth
Staff Report No. 250
Notes:
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
7. Consideration of first reading of ordinance relating to proposed improvements and
studies for possible future improvements for City of Richfield in 2001
Staff Report No. 251
Notes
AIRPORT BUSINESS
8. Acceptance of Final Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee Report
Staff Report.No. 252
Notes:
CORRESPONDENCE
0 Notes:
HRA BUSINESS
9. Housing and Redevelopment Authority report
Notes:
COUNCIL CHOICE
10. Council discussion items
Notes:
11. Claims and payrolls
12. 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.
AGENDASECTION: Airport Business
AGENDA ITEM # 8
REPORT # 252
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
REPORT PREPARED BY: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: E
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: --'
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Acceptance of the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee's Summary Report
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Accept the Summary Report from the Low Frequency
Noise Policy Committee
111. BACKGROUND
The draft Summary Report from the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee
(mandated by the December 1998 agreement between the City and the MAC) was
formally approved by the full MAC Board on September 18, 2000. This action
finalizes the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee's responsibilities. The
committee's Summary Report will now be forwarded to the FAA for their review.
According to FAA officials, the FAA review will take at least one year. The result of
their review will be formalized national standards for mitigation of the impacts of low
frequency noise at all airports, nation-wide.
6
1 111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
It is important to note that the Policy Committee and the MAC Board
were the final governing bodies that had approval authority over the
Summary Report. Therefore, the City Council need take no formal
action on the Policy Committee's Summary Report other than to
accept it, thereby acknowledging completion of the process.
It is also important to note that the committee's Summary Report is a
summary of the two Low Frequency Noise Technical Reports, one
referred to as the "majority report" whose authors are the
independent and the City's noise experts and the "minority report"
whose author is the MAC's noise consultant. As of this month, the
MAC noise expert had not completed his technical report. The City's
technical report was finalized in May and immediately forwarded to
the FAA, consistent with a commitment that the City had made to the
FAA at the March 25 meeting. The summary is an attempt to
recognize the differences between the two technical reports from the
noise experts and formulate findings of fact and recommendations
based on those findings.
The most important items contained in the Summary Report are the
Policy Committee's "Findings" and "Recommendations". It was the
Policy Committee's purpose to frame both the findings and the
recommendations for the FAA's review.
The final report has not changed substantially from the draft report
that was provided to the Council and the public last spring. The noise
contour map that depicts the 87, 78 and 70 dB contours has
remained the same since the Policy Committee's representatives
developed the map early last spring.
New to the Summary Report is Figure 7, which depicts the noise
contours by blocks. Previous maps (which are also included in the
report) indicated noise contours by lines on the map, often making it
difficult to see which areas were "in" and which were "out". Only
areas within the City of Richfield are included in the 87 dB, an area
that according to the Policy Committee's Summary Report, is an area
where noise insulation programs may not be economically feasible.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
Timing
The FAA has stated that their review of the Summary Report and the
two technical reports will take in excess of one year, due primarily to
the fact that there was not consensus among the noise experts on
the impacts of low frequency noise. This means that the development
and adoption of national mitigation standards by the FAA is at least
two years away.
Recognition of Low Frequency Noise Impacts
Perhaps the most important aspect of the almost two year study is
the recognition by the FAA and the MAC that low frequency noise
•
exists and does have significant impacts on residential
neighborhoods surrounding airport runways.
• Next Steps
While the FAA's timeline for national standards is well into the future
and the runway's construction is here today, the City's next steps are
helped by the Summary Report's recommendation No. 4. In the 87
dB noise contour, mitigation via interior noise reduction insulation
methods are "probably not economically feasible".
The City has presented an option to the MAC, which was suggested
by the FAA in March of this year, that mitigation within the current 60
DNL (which also covers all homes within the 87db) be commenced
via acquisition rather than insulation. It has been the MAC's approach
throughout this process that mitigation of the noise impacts, both for
overhead and low frequency noise, can be included in the Part 150
process. The City has provided an opportunity for this to be
accomplished within current federal revenue diversion policies.
The MAC has yet to respond to our proposal.
r
C. FINANCIAL
• While the financial implications of the mitigation process is of
considerable concern, there are no immediate financial implications
to the acceptance of this report.
I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
Take no action. Council's acceptance of the Summary Report does not, by its
action, validate or approve the Report. Council action merely places on the
record that the Council received the Committee's Final Summary Report.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement
• Final Policy Committee's Summary Report
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
jLuy?ra-V Aepor+
is ava (a?it_ pray
+he Ass+ -}v -the,
A-y un a r. a%ei, , P6,m
?Y1r??-I•-r,e?? kc?
•
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement
A. Environmental
1. MAC agrees to develop and implement an air quality monitoring and reporting plan in
accordance with the provisions'of the EIS and through consultation with the MPCA.
2. MAC agrees to evaluate surface and groundwater flows and implement mitigation
measures to ensure no off-airport impacts in accordance with theprovisions of the EIS
and through consultation with the MPCA.
3. MAC agrees to integrate berms and landscaping, in consultation with Richfield, with
development along the west side of MSP airport.
4. MAC agrees to develop lighting in the west side building area in such a manner as to
minimize impacts on Richfield.
5. MAC accepts the findings of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (Exhibit A, 28
through 37) adopted on November 18, 1998 regarding tow frequency noise.
B.
1. Mitigation
MAC agrees to expedite an update of the Part 150 Program in order to re-evaluate and
revise the airport DNL contours, including those impacting the city of Richfield.
2. MAC agrees to flexible use, at Richfield's discretion and consistent with the revised Part
150 Program, of funds associated with proposed soundproofing within the DNL 60 in
3. Richfield.
MAC agrees to pursue amending the Runway 4/22 Record of Decision (ROD) to permit
flexibility in the use of funds identified for mitigation of Runway 4/22 Runway Use
System impacts in Richfield by Richfield at their discretion and subject to FAA approval
ld
Ri
hfi
d b
c
e
y
at a point in time when MAC is assured that there will be no delays cause
in constructing the North/South Runway.
4. Richfield agrees to be responsible for the use of all Part 150 funds reallocated to the city
6y the MAC through the provisions of this agreement.
a. MAC and Richfield agree to jointly petition the FAA for a resolution.that ensures
Richfield will maintain ownership of the properties acquired through this mitigation
process. The MAC does not intend or desire to retain ownership of properties in
Richfield west of Trunk Hwy 77.
8. MAC agrees to immediately address the issue of low frequency noise and vibration. To
this end, MAC agrees to expedite an evaluation of low frequency noise and aircraft
noise induced vibration and mitigation, using the process described in Exhibit B
(attached) within 100 days of the date of the agreement.
7. MAC agrees to incorporate the recommendations of the Low Frequency Noise Policy
Committee or the mediation process (identified in Exhibit B) in MAC's Part 150 Program
unless it determines that those recommendations are not prudent and feasible. MAC's
decision regarding implementation of the Policy Committee's recommendations shall be
deemed to be a final order of the Commission, subject to judicial review as provided by
law. This paragraph is not intended to change the standard of review ordinarily
applicable to orders of the Commission.
8. MAC agrees to vigorously pursue, advocate and support all prudent and feasible
possibilities for funding of the low frequency noise implementation program as
determined in Item B7, including but not limited to state and federal legislation and FAA
funding.
C.
1.
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement
December 17,1998
Page 2
Commercial Redevelopment
MAC agrees, in consultation with Richfield, to assist in encouraging airport and other
businesses that must be relocated due to airport expansion to relocate to the Cedar
Avenue redevelopment area.
MAC and Richfield, with the Metropolitan Council, in the, lead and hopefully in
collaboration with the cities of Minneapolis and Bloomington, agree to propose
establishment of -an Airport Impact Tax Increment finance district (17117), qualified by the
unique characteristics of communities closest to large-scale airport operations, to the
1999 session of the Minnesota Legislature.
MAC and Richfield agree that a potential use of the funds described above could be
used as seed money for the TIF, and MAC agrees to seek FAA approval for this
proposal.
2.
3.
D. Transportation ImDrovements
1. Metropolitan Council agrees to communicate Richfield's needs to MN/DOT in an effort to
ensure that the redesign of the TH 77 interchange with 6e Street does not conflict with
Richfield's redevelopment plans. The interchange construction should be completed
before the new cargo area and North/South Runway become operational
E. Recreational Assets
1. MAC and Richfield agree to enter into a lease agreement for MAC properties in the
northwest quadrant of the TH 62 and TH. 77 interchange, and south of TH 62 adjacent
to 28"' Avenue. The lease would be guaranteed for an,agreed-to number of years, after
which the lease would be year to year subject to MAC. The agreement is subject to a
review of community impacts and study as to whether ballfields, community gardens, an
archery range and other facilities can be built in this location near the runway safety
zones.
2. MAC agrees to enter into a long-term lease, or consider transfer of ownership, of Taft
Park to Richfield.
3. MAC agrees to continue discussing. options to redevelop the upper bluff area into an 18-
hole golf course and recreation area with the Airport Recreation Coordinating Group.
4. MAC agrees to pay Richfield $460,000 for neighborhood parks affected by the
acquisition of New Ford Town and Rich Acres. Richfield may decide to accept this offer
or proceed to condemnation.
F. Social IMDacts
1. MAC agrees to work with communities to develop a legislative proposal for state funding
that addresses the community and social impacts related to the 1996 MSP airport
expansion mandate by the Minnesota Legislature. This agreement is consistent with the
1996 Mitigation Committee Report.
2. MAC agrees to assist affected communities to develop a legislative proposal for state
funding to address the loss of school and city revenues due to MSP airport expansion.
•
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement Page 3
December 17,1998
G. Good Faith
1. MAC agrees to use its best efforts to secure approval of this agreement from the FAA
and other decisionmakers with authority or an interest in these matters.
2. Richfield agrees to withdraw current objections to the project, including but not limited
to, MPCA, Metropolitan Council, and the Minnesota Legislature. Richfield further agrees
not to pursue litigation or other measures in the future that would delay or have the
effect of delaying the North/South Runway or any other part of the MSP airport
expansion plan in the ROD totaling $1.7 billion. However, nothing prohibits either party
from pursuing litigation to enforce the terms of this agreement.
3. The provisions of the agreement are subject to Federal law regarding revenue diversion.
4. MAC and Richfield commit to implement this agreement in a cooperative and
collaborative manner.
0
•
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation AV=nent page 4
December 17,1998
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Record of Agreement
This agreement, made and entered into as of the dates indicated, by the City of Richfield
and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and witnessed by the Metropolitan Council
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Y ,
Date
Y
Date
Approved as to form:
/ Date
METROPOLITAN) AIRPORTS COMMISSION
V M, ^
By - W ? Y V, O
Pierson M. Grieve
Chair
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By -
Cuffl'ohnson
Chair
l? 7ee ?(r?
Date
/Z l3 9'?'
Date
0
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement
December 17, 1999
•
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
page S
EXHIBIT A
RICHFIELD-MAC Noise Mitigation Record of Agreement
MEQB Findings
Low Freauencv Noise
The City of Richfield has expressed the concern that the EIS does not address the
impacts of low frequency noise on the city and its residents, particularly those
residents on the east side of the city nearest the airport and the proposed new north-
south runway. The issue of the impact of noise which will be generated by aircraft on
the ground during takesoffs and landings and mitigation measures to reduce ground
noise impacts was identified during the scoping process and was recognized as an
issue in the FEIS, and in responses to comments in the FEIS.
Low frequency noise is sound energy with frequencies less than about 100 to 200 Hz
(cycles per second). Human hearing is less sensitive to low frequency sound than it is
to higher frequency sound. Low frequency sound is the energy that can cause
buildings to vibrate; it more readily penetrates through structures than does high
frequency sound.
Aircraft operations generate sounds of low frequency as well as sounds throughout
the frequency spectrum. The low frequency energy is radiated more strongly to the
rear and side of the aircraft and can propagate over considerable: distances without
being reduced as much as is higher frequency sound energy. Aircraft on the runway
during takeoffs and landings generate significantly more low frequency noise, or low
rumbling sounds, than do aircraft in flight. Noise will be generated on the ground by
aircraft using Runway 17-35, the north-south runway, particularly during acceleration
for takeoff and while using reverse thrusters for deceleration on landing.
The sound energy of runway noise, particularly low frequency noise, causes vibration,
rattling of windows,' walls, floors, pictures, and other objects in buildings which are
exposed to levels of low frequency noise:
Higher frequency sounds that are most noticeable to human hearing are generally
measured using what is called an A-weighted scale. Low frequency energy is not
accurately reflected by the A-weighted scale. A C-weighted scale can more accurately
measure these low frequency sounds. The FAA and MAC used the A-weighted scale
in the FEIS to analyze noise impacts of the north-south runway.
There are no standards in either federal or state law for low frequency sounds. The
lack of such standards does not mean that the EIS does not have to address the
environmental impacts associated with low frequency noise.
Sufficient scientific data and information exist to analyze and describe the impact of
low frequency noise, which will result from the operation of the north-south runway.
Due to its production of noise, including low frequency noise, the operation of the
north-south runway has the potential for significant adverse effects on the people
living in Richfield.
The City of Richfield has developed a mitigation plan for reducing the impacts of low
frequency noise on city residents. The FAA has undertaken efforts to reduce low
frequency noise impacts near Baltimore Washington International Airport.
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement page 6
December 17,1998
36. The MEQE has no authority t? require mitigation of low frequency noise.
37. The MEQE rules recognize that an "EIS shall identify and briefly discuss any major
differences of opinion concerning significant impacts of the proposed project on the
environment." Minn. Rules part 4410.2300, item H. The record in this case discusses
at length the differences between MAC and the City of Richfield over the low
frequency noise issue.
•
0
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement
December 17, 1998
EXHIBIT B
STUDY TO BE UNDERTAKEN
page 7
1. Not later than twenty (20) days following the date of this Agreement, MAC will
establish a Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee to conduct a comprehensive
study of low frequency aircraft noise.
2. The Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee shall consist of the following members:
Richfield, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Bloomington, and Minneapolis, with
members appointed by the body they represent. The Federal Aviation
Administration, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Metropolitan Council will
provide technical assistance to the Policy Committee.
3. The Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee will be charged with the following tasks:
a. Review all existing information pertaining to SFO, BOS, BWI and LAX and any
other published studies of the audibility and impact of low frequency noise, not
excluding impacts outside of residential settings.
0 b. Conduct such studies as, in the. opinion of the Low Frequency Noise Policy
Committee, are necessary to address issues related to low frequency noise.
c. Convene an Expert Panel consisting of Sanford Fidell, Andrew Hams, and a
third member to be named by these two, to provide technical input and
information to the Policy Committee for consideration.
d. Present recommendations regarding the appropriate noise metric, compatibility
standards, and recommended mitigation programs, measures or techniques.
e. Prepare a report or reports documenting the Policy Committee's deliberations
and conclusions.
4. The work of the panel shall be completed within 100 days from the date of this
Agreement, unless a majority of the Policy Committee deem it necessary to extend
the time period in order to complete the tasks outlined above. In the event the Low
Frequency Noise Policy Committee is unable to reach meaningful recommendations,
the issues will be submitted to mediation, to be conducted by a certified mediator.
0
Richfield-MAC Noise Mitigation Agreement page 8
December 17,1998
r
•
MAC Resource Commitments
Environmental
• Staff and design consultant time
• Equipment costs
Mitigation
Staff and consultant time and services
• Lobbying of FAA for approval of mitigation program and modification of Runway 422
Record of Decision
• Support of Low Frequency Noise Poilcy Committee
• Funding for noise mitigation efforts
• Reallocation of funding from Runway *22 to area west of Trunk Highway 77
Commercial Redevelopment
• Resources at Legislature regarding TIF estabiishment
• Staff resources with Richfield regarding encouraging Trunk Highway 77 development
Transportation Improvements
• Lobbying resources for 6e Street Interchange and 77 h Street tunnel
Recreational Assets
• Use of MAC property for recreational purposes
• Payment for New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhood parks
• Staff resources relative to Fort Snelling Upper Bluff recreational development
Social Impacts
• Assistance at Legislature for program approval and implementation
0
•
AGENDA SECTION: ProD. Ordinance
AGENDA ITEM # 7
REPORT # 251
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
s
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
REPORT PREPARED BY: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of first reading of an ordinance relating to proposed improvements and studies
for possible future improvements for the City of Richfield in 2001 and setting the public hearing
and second reading for November 13, 2000. ,1
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the proposed public involvement process for
receiving public comments on the proposed 2001 Capital
Improvement Budget and approve first reading of a transitory
ordinance to authorize, in 2001, recreation and open space capital
improvements, right-of-way improvements, public facility capital
improvements, and studies for possible future improvements and set
the public hearing and second reading for November 13, 2001.
•
BACKGROUND
The issue of an annual Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) public hearing was discussed at
the February 7, 2000 Council Study Session. Public hearings for proposed capital
improvements have been held in conjunction with Truth in Taxation hearings. It was the
consensus of Council that staff proceed with a process that would provide an earlier
opportunity for public input on the Capital Improvement Budget than the December 4, 2000
Truth in Taxation public hearing on the proposed 2001 budget.
0925First2001 CI B
Council will be asked to approve the proposed public involvement process for receiving
public comments on the proposed 2001 Capital Improvement Budget.
• A notice will be inserted in the November Your City Newsletter inviting the public to
attend both a public open house and a public hearing on November 13, 2000.
• A public notice will be placed in the Richfield Sun Current two weeks prior to the public
hearing.
• A public open house will precede the public hearing on the same night as the Council
holds the public hearing. At the Open House maps and brief project descriptions (if
available) will be provided and City staff will be present to answer any questions from
residents. The open house will occur from 5:00 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. on November 13,
2000.
• A public hearing will be held on the proposed 2001 Capital Improvement Budget as part
of the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m.
• Residents will also be encouraged to submit their comments in writing or orally to City
staff by November 20, 2000.
The proposed transitory ordinance is as comprehensive as is possible at this time to provide
the public with an opportunity to comment on improvements scheduled or pending in 2001.
As each project comes before the Council for consideration, there is an additional
opportunity for the public and Council to comment. The CIB public hearing and the
proposed public involvement plan described above will serve as an early alert to the
upcoming projects.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
I A. POLICY
• A Charter provision mandating an ordinance to authorize certain City projects
over $500,000, or with design and/or engineering fees over $75,000, took
effect on July 21, 1998.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• It is the desire of the City to provide the public with an opportunity to comment
in a timely manner on proposed improvements scheduled or pending in 2001.
• Preparation and execution of Capital Budgets and Capital Improvement
Projects are an on-going process. A schedule for public input and comment
will add definition and clarification to the process. It also will enhance the
City's chances when applying for certain federal grant programs where
Council approval of the Capital Improvements Budget is a requirement.
• The time needed for first reading, publication, second reading/public hearing
can be critical in preparing for construction of an improvement project.
If Council approves, the Council will hold a public hearing annually in late fall
for the following year's proposed Capital Improvement Budget.
C. FINANCIAL I
• As noted on the attached summary of 2001 capital improvements and
studies, there are a variety of funding sources.
•
D. LEGAL
• The City Attorney will be available to discuss the Charter provision.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Council may decide to delay first reading until additional information is provided. If
this option is chosen, the Council should identify the specific additional information
requested.
• Council may decide to not approve first reading. This would result in the proposed
Capital Improvement Budget being discussed at the same time as the City's Annual
Operating Budget as part of the Truth in Taxation Public Hearing. This has a
tendency to divert public attention away from the proposed Capital Improvement
Budget.
• Council may select a later date for the public hearing and second reading.
• Council may decide that each improvement or proposed improvement must have its
own public hearing and transitory ordinance. A public hearing on each individual
improvement or study may add 60 to 90 days to the approval process needed
before a project can be built.
ATTACHMENTS
Proposed transitory ordinance approving certain improvement projects pursuant to
Richfield City Charter Section 8.04, including summary list of proposed 2001 capital
improvement projects and studies related to possible future improvement projects.
•
•
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
J
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING CERTAIN 2001 IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PURSUANT TO RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER SECTION 8.04
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Background: findinas.
1.01 Section 8.04 of the Richfield City Charter requires that any capital improvement
on City-owned property that has an estimated cost exceeding $500,000 or
expenditures for design or engineering costs exceeding $75,000 must be
approved by ordinance after a public hearing.
• The City's Department of Public Works has identified 21 capital
improvement projects to be constructed in the year 2001. Each project
requiring a public hearing to meet the Charter requirement is identified on
the attached Exhibit A, together with the location of the project, and the
estimated total cost of the project. Other improvement projects not requiring
a public hearing to meet the Charter requirement but to be constructed in
the year 2001 are identified on the attached Exhibit B, together with the
location of the project and the estimated total cost of the project. The
• design/engineering costs for projects on Exhibit B do not exceed $75,000.
1.02 The estimated costs for each of the capital improvement projects listed on the
attached Exhibit A and Exhibit B include estimated costs for land acquisition,
design, engineering, and/or construction.
1.03 Of the projects listed on the attached Exhibit A, four projects have design and
engineering and/or construction costs that exceed the amounts specified in
Section 8.04 of the Richfield City Charter.
1.03 A public hearing was held on November 13, 2000 after due notice as required
by Section 8.05 of the Richfield City Charter.
1.04 The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City and
its inhabitants that these capital improvement projects be approved.
Section 2. ADDroval: effective date.
2.01 The listed capital improvement projects are approved, and land acquisition,
planning, design, and/or construction for and of these projects may proceed
according to the procedures required by law.
40
• 2.02 The purpose of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of Section
8.04 of the Richfield City Charter and to provide additional notice to Richfield
residents regarding other capital improvement projects that are not governed by
said Section 8.04. This Ordinance shall not be construed to require that the
City proceed with the capital improvement projects; nor does it vest any rights in
the listed capital improvement projects to any individual or entity. The City
Council reserves the right to abandon any or all of the listed capital
improvement projects or to modify elements of the listed capital improvement
projects, if the Council deems abandonment or modification to be in the public
interest. The funding sources listed in the attached Exhibit A and Exhibit B are
for informational purposes only; the City Council reserves the right to finance
such projects with other or additional funding sources, in accordance with
applicable law.
2.03 This ordinance is effective the day following its publication.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this
day of , 2000.
0
ATTEST:
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
0
EXHIBIT A
0
•
East side of Highway 77 at 66th Street (Total Cost
$7,000,000)
2. Public Safety 800 MHz Radio System * Police & Fire Fund $500,000
6700 Portland Avenue
3. Airport Service Pipe * User Fees $650,000
From Water Plant at 6221 Portland to Metropolitan MAC $650,000
Airports Commission in vicinity of 66th Street and
Highway 77
4. Richfield Lake Area Stormwater Retention Pond MnDOT $800,000
Approximately bounded by 65th Street, Emerson User Fees $50,000
Avenue, Mildred Drive and Aldrich Avenue
PROPOSED 2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
AND STUDIES RELATED TO POSSIBLE FUTURE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO CHARTER PROVISION
Improvement/Study Title Funding Source(s) Est. Total
Location Cost
1. City Maintenance Facility * User Fees $1,050,000
* 2001 Proposed Capital Improvement Budget
0
EXHIBIT B
0
•
•
PROPOSED 2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
AND STUDIES RELATED TO POSSIBLE FUTURE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
(NO PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED RELATED TO CHARTER PROVISION)
Improvement/Study Title
Location
1. Park Shelter Replacement - Monroe Park
6710 Irving Avenue & Fairwood Park, 6700 Logan
Avenue
2. Community Center Room Dividers
7000 Nicollet Avenue
3. Community Center Carpet/Paint/Repair
7000 Nicollet Avenue
4. City Owned Parking Lots - Replace
Donaldson Park
7400 Irving Avenue
Community Center
7000 Nicollet Avenue
Wood Lake Nature Center
6710 Lake Shore Drive
Taft Park
6200-18th Avenue
5. Park Maintenance
Augsburg Park
7145 Wentworth Avenue
Christian Park
6900 Bloomington Avenue
Jefferson Park
6700 Thomas Avenue
Taft Park
6300-18th Avenue
6. Ice Arena Second Sheet Repayment
636 East 66th Street
7. Ice Arena Air Conditioning
636 East 66th Street
8. Widen 76th. Street *
1-35W to Penn Avenue
9. Reconstruct 66th Street interchange at Highway 77
10. Replace Penn Avenue bridge over 1-494 *
11. County Road enhancements (move sidewalks away
from curb/underground utilities) *
North side of 66th Street between 11th Avenue to
Swimming Pool/Portland Avenue, east side of
Portland Avenue between the Water Treatment Plant
and the American Legion Club
Funding Source(s)
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Special Revenue
Municipal State Aid
Federal Grant
State Grant
Municipal State Aid
State Grant
State Loan
H RA
Best Buy Loan
Hennepin County
Municipal State Aid
NSP ratepayers
Est. Total
Cost
$175,000
$25,000
$30,000
$120,000
$100,000
$75,000
$25,000
$3,700,000
$3,680,000
$2,520,000
$100,000
$1,800,000
$6,700,000
$7,000,000
$7,000,000
$125,000
$25,000
$100,000
12. Emergency Police/Fire Generator
6700 Portland Avenue
,4p 13. Water Plant Parking Lot
6221 Portland Avenue
14. Reconstruct 7600 block of Lyndale Avenue
15. 77th Street - Phase III - Underpass at Highway 77
17th Avenue to 24th Avenue
16. 35W/62 Crosstown Commons-Aesthetic Design,
Traffic Signals, Watermains
* 2001 Proposed Capital Improvement Budget
•
Police & Fire Fund
Special Revenue
User Fees
H RA
Municipal State Aid
Federal Highway Grant
State Highway Grant
Municipal State Sid
Municipal State Aid
State Highway Grant
$175,000
$75,000
$85,000
$500,000
$300,000
$12,464,368
$2,327,546
$788,546
$200,000
$50,000
0
•
AGENDA SECTION: Resolution
AGENDA ITEM # 6
REPORT # 250
..tp ' STAFF REPORT
UAm
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, SUPPORT SERVICES
DIVISION MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
NAME, TITLE
•
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Council consideration of a disciplinary hearing and resolution 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.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
•
By Motion:
Approve the resolution suspending each of the first time violating establishments' licenses to
sell alcohol for two consecutive days; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount
of $500 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 attending an alcohol sales and awareness program presented by the Crime
Prevention staff.
Approve the resolution suspending each of the second time violating establishments' license
to sell alcohol for five consecutive days; levying a fine against each establishment in the
amount of $1500 for the second violation; proposing that the Public Safety Director select the
five consecutive days their licenses will be suspended; and 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 either a private firm approved by Public Safety
officials, or by Public Safety staff, with all costs to be paid by the establishment.
_J
0925Liqu
Approve the resolution suspending each of the third time violating establishments' license to
sell alcohol for ten consecutive days; levying a fine against each establishment in the amount
of $1750 for the third violation; and proposing that the Public Safety Director select the ten
consecutive days their licenses will be suspended.
J
111. BACKGROUND
On August 7 and 8, 2000, Richfield Public Safety staff conducted alcohol
compliance checks at all of Richfield's alcohol establishments, assisted by five
underage youths between 15-20 years of age. These compliance checks were the
second round of checks conducted in 2000.
On August 7 and 8, 2000, the police division made arrangments for the minors to
enter the establishments with undercover police officers. In six instances, the
youths were successful in being served alcohol.
The businesses that made sales to underage youth on August 7, 2000, are as
follows:
• Phillips 66 Gas Station - 7744 12th Avenue
• Superamerica - 826 West 66th Street
This is a third offense for Phillip's 66 Gas Station. They were previously fined $500
and received a two-day suspension of their license for their first offense. They were
also previously fined $1500 and received a five-day suspension of their license for
the second offense.
This is a first offense for this particular Superamerica location.
On August 8, 2000, Richfield Public Safety staff conducted additional alcohol
compliance checks. They were assisted by five underage youth, 15-20 years of
age. Again, the police division made arrangements for the minors to enter the
establishments with an undercover police officer. In four instances, the youth were
successful in being served alcohol.
The businesses that made sales to underage youth on August 8, 2000 are as
follows:
• Chi Chi's - 7717 Nicollet Avenue
• Don Pablos - 980 West 78th Street
• Vina Restaurant - 6401 Nicollet Avenue
• VFW - 6401 Lyndale Avenue
This is a third offense for Chi Chi's. They were previously fined $500 and received
a two-day suspension of their license for their first offense. For their second
offense, they were fined $1500 and received a five-day suspension of their license.
This is a second offense for Don Pablos, Vina Restaurant and the VFW. They were
previously fined $500 and received a two-day suspension of their license as a result
of selling alcohol to a minor.
At no time did any of the minors consume any of the alcohol. The youth presented
their personal valid 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 2000 at the rate of at
least two to three a year. Any establishments found to be guilty of selling again on
a second, third, or fourth check would receive progressive discipline in the way of
license suspension and fines as outlined in Resolution 8808. Public Safety staff is
also recommending that 15% of the punitive fines be designated for future alcohol
0 and tobacco education efforts within the community.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY I
• Resolution 8808 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 establishments' licenses to sell alcohol for two consecutive
days and to levy a fine against each establishment in the amount of
$500 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 plans to
ensure eliminating any future actions of this kind. In addition, a
representative of each of the establishments is to attend an alcohol
sales and awareness program presented by the Crime Prevention
staff.
• Staff recommends that the City Council suspend each of the second-
time violating establishments' license to sell alcohol for five
consecutive days and to levy a fine against each establishment in the
amount of $1500 for the second violation. Staff is also proposing that
the Public Safety Director will select the five 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
i training will be provided by either a private firm approved by Public
Safety officials, or by Public Safety staff, with all costs for the training
to be paid by the establishment.
• Staff recommends that the City Council suspend each of the third-time
violating establishments' license to sell alcohol for ten consecutive
days and to levy a fine against each establishment in the amount of
$1750 for the third violation. Staff is also proposing that the Public
Safety Director will select the ten consecutive days that the licenses
will be suspended.
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 result, however, in sending 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.
8808.
V. ATTACHMENTS
0 Resolution 8808
• Resolution suspending liquor license for two consecutive days, with a civil
penalty of $500.
• Resolution suspending liquor license for five consecutive days, with a civil
penalty of $1500.
• Resolution suspending liquor license for 10 consecutive days, with a civil
penalty of $1750.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Representatives from each of the establishments can be expected to attend
the meeting as they were notified in writing of the need for someone to be
present.
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 8808
RESOLUTION SPECIFYING CERTAIN IMPROPER CONDUCT OF ON-SALE
INTOXICATING LIQUOR, WINE AND 3.2 MALT LIQUOR LICENSEES AND
STATING RECOMMENDED DISCIPLINE REPLACING RESOLUTION NO. 8714
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows:
1. BACKGROUND STATEMENT
The City of Richfield annually issues a number of licenses permitting the sale of
on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor within the City. The conduct
of the.licensed activity is governed by the provisions of Section 1200 of the City
Code. Although, the provisions of that Section describe in a general way what is
expected of licensees in the proper conduct of the licensed activity, the City
Council is concerned that licensees should have a more specific understanding
of the types of conduct, generally described in the Code, which may subject their
licenses to discipline; and further that they have a clear understanding of the
scope and nature of the discipline which may be imposed for certain specific
conduct. The levels of discipline described in this resolution will be imposed only
in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. The list of activities and
conduct contained in this resolution is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
concentrates on the types of conduct most frequently observed at licensed
establishments. Other activity or conduct which is detrimental to the public
safety, health, morals and welfare and which constitutes a violation of the
provisions of Section 1200 of the City Code may also subject liquor licenses to
discipline. The actions, which the City may take in accordance with this
resolution, are not intended to preclude such further actions such as actions in
law or in equity or criminal prosecution available to the City for the conduct
described in this resolution.
II. SPECIFIC PROHIBITED CONDUCT AND PROPOSED SANCTIONS.
A. Noise and Other Disturbing Conduct Within or Near the Licensed Premises.
Licensees are responsible for the conduct of their patrons while within the licensed
establishment; and of individuals within the immediate vicinity of the establishment
whom are either coming to or leaving the establishment. The City is unwilling to permit
the continued operation of a licensed alcohol establishment in circumstances where it is
evident that the licensed activity is having a detrimental impact upon the health, welfare,
safety and morals of the community and patrons of the establishment. The following
discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor
• licenses for verified reports of criminal misconduct occurring on or near the licensed
premises and attributable to patrons of the establishment (including persons entering or
leaving):
1) For five (5) such incidents occurring within less than a 31-day period
(beginning with the date of the first of such five incidents) - suspension of the
license for up to 10 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident.
2) For ten (10) such incidents occurring within less than a 61-day period
(beginning with the date of the first of such incidents) - suspension of the
license for up to 30 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident.
3) For fifteen (15) such incidents occurring within any 91-day period (beginning
with the date of the first of such incidents) - suspension of the license for up
to 60 days and a civil fine of $2,000 for each incident.
The discipline outlined above is intended to be cumulative in nature, and
incidents which give rise to discipline (or the right to discipline) during a shorter period
may be counted in determining whether discipline is appropriate during a longer period.
The term "verified reports of criminal misconduct" means a report made to the
Director of Public Safety by the licensee or a complaint made by others concerning an
incident constituting a crime under the City Code of the laws of the State of Minnesota,
which, in the opinion of the Director, is directly attributable to the licensed activity.
• Verified reports of criminal misconduct do not of necessity mean requests
for service, and licensees shall not be required to make requests for services in
situations where the licensee is capable of resolving the incident without police
assistance. However, it is necessary for the City to have an accurate measure of the
level of criminal misconduct. The Department of Public Safety shall establish standards
and criteria for the making of such reports by the licensee. If the licensee fails to make
the required reports of criminal misconduct in accordance with such standards and
criteria, the following additional discipline may be imposed upon its on-sale intoxicating
liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor license:
1) For the first incident of failure to report criminal misconduct within any
license year - suspension of license for up to five days and a civil fine
of $2,000.
2) For the second such incident in any license year - suspension of
license for up to 10 days and a civil fine of $2,000.
3) For the third such incident in any license year - suspension of license
for up to 15 days and a civil fine of $2,000.
B. Serving Alcoholic Beverages Beyond the Interior of the Licensed Premises or
Permitting Patrons to Leave such Licensed Premises with Alcoholic
Beverages.
Licensees must assure that the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages will
be confined only to those areas permitted by the license. Failure to do so may have
an evident and adverse impact upon other activities lawfully occurring within the
area and creates a substantial risk of criminal behavior such as violation of the Open
Bottle Law. The following discipline may be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating
liquor, wine and 3.2 malt liquor licenses:
1) The first incident during the license year- up to a 10-day suspension and
$2,000 civil fine.
2) The second incident during the license year -- up to a 30-day suspension and
$2,000 civil fine.
3) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-day suspension and
$2,000 civil fine.
4) The fourth incident during the license year - revocation of license.
C. Permitting Occupancy to Exceed the Limits Permitted Under the Uniform Fire
Code 25.114 (overcrowding)
Licensees are absolutely bound to prevent situations in which the licensed premises
become overcrowded. The City finds that the opportunity to serve alcoholic
beverages contributes to an environment wherein overcrowding, if not strictly
controlled by the licensee, may occur. Each liquor license issued shall state the
maximum occupancy limit for the licensed premises. The following discipline may
be imposed upon on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses for
incidents of overcrowding verified by the City's Public Safety Director or their
designee:
1) The first incident during the license year- up to a 10-day license suspension
and $2,000 civil fine.
2) The second incident during the license year - up to a 30-day suspension and
$2,000 civil fine.
3) The third incident during the license year - up to a 60-day suspension and
$2,000 civil fine.
4) The fourth or subsequent incident during the license year - revocation of the
license.
D. Facilitating Gambling. Licensees must not permit or allow any condition to
occur on the licensed premises, which would facilitate gambling activity.
Licensees may not permit any device on the licensed premises, which could be
used, for gambling. Such devices include blackjack tables, video games of chance,
roulette wheels and any other amusement or gambling device as defined in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 349 and 609, and Richfield City code Subsections
1100.13 and 1100.01.
For any incident of facilitation of gambling, the on-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2
malt liquor license may be suspended for up to a period of days equal in number to
the period of days that such incident continued.
0 E. Effect of Suspension or Revocation of Food License.
On-sale intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses which are issued to
establishments because they qualify as restaurants shall cease to be valid for any
period of time during which the establishment's food license is under suspension or
revocation as the result of actions taken by the City Manager, enforcement officer or
both pursuant to Subsection 615.05, subdivision 6 of the City Code.
The on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor, wine or 3.2 malt liquor during such period
shall constitute an unlicensed sale.
F. The Sale, Consumption or Service to a Minor of Intoxicating Liquor, Wine or
3.2 Malt Liquor.
Licensees must assure that the sale, consumption or service to a minor of any
alcoholic beverage is prohibited under any condition. Failure to do so will result in
swift and severe progressive civil penalties. The following discipline will be imposed
upon on-sale intoxicating, wine or 3.2 malt liquor licenses for verified reports or
compliance checks of misconduct occurring at the establishment:
1) For a first offense, the establishment's license will be suspended for 2 days and
a civil fine of $500 will be due and payable to the City.
2) For a second offense, (if within 2 years of the 1st offense), the establishment's
license will be suspended for 5 days and a civil fine of $1500 will be due and
payable to the City. If the offense occurs outside of 2 years of a 1st offense, it
will be considered a first offense.
3) For a third offense, (if within 3 years of the 2nd offense), the establishment's
license will be suspended for 10 days and a civil fine of $1750 will be due and
payable to the City. If the offense occurs outside of three years of a second
offense, it will be considered a 2nd offense.
4) For a fourth offense, (if within 4 years of the 3rd offense), the establishment's
license will be revoked and a civil fine of $2000 will be due and payable to the
City. If the offense occurs outside of four years of a third offense, it will be
considered a 3rd offense.
G. General provisions regarding sanctions.
In addition to the sanctions listed for specific offenses listed in paragraphs A through F
above, the City Council may impose other mandatory requirements upon the
establishment such as: meetings with the Public Safety Director to present a plan of
action to assure that the problem will not continue; mandatory educational sessions with
Crime Prevention staff; or other actions that the City Council deems appropriate.
The City Council retains the right to modify the provisions of this resolution from time to
01 time and to impose penalties greater than or less than those contained herein when in
the judgment of the Council it is appropriate to do so. The City Council may suspend all
or a portion of any penalty or license suspension upon compliance with such conditions
as the Council deems appropriate.
Prior to imposing any monetary penalty or license suspension or revocation, the City
Council will set an initial appearance at which the licensed establishment must appear
before the City Council to admit or deny the violation. If the violation is admitted, the
licensed establishment will be allowed to explain any mitigating circumstances at the
time of the initial appearance. If the violation is denied, the licensed establishment may
request a hearing at or prior to the initial appearance. Licensed establishments may
explain mitigating circumstances or request a hearing in writing prior to the initial
appearance or may do so orally by appearing at the initial appearance. The City
Council strongly encourages licensed establishments to make a personal appearance at
the initial appearance. A licensed establishment that does not request a hearing at or
prior to the initial appearance will be deemed to have waived its right to a hearing, and
the City Council may deem the violation admitted and impose sanctions as provided in
this resolution.
Where a hearing is requested, the City Council may conduct the hearing or refer the
hearing to an independent hearing examiner. All hearings involving possible
suspension or revocation of a license will be conducted in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 14.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December
1999.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE
FOR ; AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY
WHEREAS, .("Licensee") holds an
license from the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, on , the City of Richfield public safety department
conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and
WHEREAS, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold
alcohol to a minor with the civil penalty being imposed on ; and
WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on September
25, 2000 and admitted the violation; and
WHEREAS, the Licensee has 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 license is hereby suspended for a
period of two consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public
Safety Director, but commencing no later than October 25, 2000.
2. A civil penalty of $500 is hereby imposed. On or before October 25, 2000, the
Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the
amount of $500.
3. Meet with the Director of Public Safety to present an action plan to ensure future
compliance by October 25, 2000; and attend an alcohol compliance and sales
awareness presentation conducted by Public Safety staff by October 25, 2000.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 25th of September, 2000.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
is
CITY OF RICHFIELD
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE LIQUOR LICENSE
FOR AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY
WHEREAS, ("Licensee") holds an
Liquor license from the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, on , the City of Richfield public safety
department conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and
WHEREAS, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold
alcohol to a minor with the civil penalty being imposed on
and
WHEREAS, this is a second violation of the sale of alcohol to a minor with the first
civil penalty being imposed on
WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on September
25, 2000 and admitted the violation; and
WHEREAS, the Licensee has 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 license is hereby suspended for a
period of five consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public
Safety Director, but commencing no later than October 25, 2000.
2. A civil penalty of $1500 is hereby imposed. On or before October 25, 2000, the
Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the
amount of $1500.
3. Licensee must schedule mandatory alcohol compliance and 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 October 25, 2000. This training will be provided at a location to be.
determined by Public Safety staff and all costs associated with the training, to include
staff time and materials, will be the responsibility of the Licensee.
4. Meet with the Director of Public Safety to review why the Licensee's action plan didn't
work and discuss opportunities for change and improvement on or before October 25,
2000.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 25th day of September,
2000.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUSPENDING THE
FOR ; AND IMPOSING A CIVIL PENALTY
WHEREAS, ("Licensee") holds an
license from the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, on , the City of Richfield public safety department
conducted a compliance check of the Licensee's establishment; and
WHEREAS, during the compliance check, an employee of the Licensee sold
alcohol to a minor with the civil penalty being imposed on ; and
WHEREAS, this is a third violation of the sale of alcohol to a minor with the first civil
penalty being imposed on , and the second civil penalty being
imposed of ;
WHEREAS, the Licensee appeared before the Richfield City Council on September
25, 2000 and admitted the violation; and
WHEREAS, the Licensee has 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 license is hereby suspended for a
period of ten consecutive days, commencing on a date to be determined by the Public
Safety Director, but commencing no later than October 25, 2000.
2. A civil penalty of $1,750 is hereby imposed. On or before October 25, 2000, the
Licensee shall deliver a check or money order payable to the City of Richfield in the
amount of $1,750.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 25th day of September,
2000.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE PALMEORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: 9
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a Stipulation of Settlement for 1800 East 66th Street for the 66th Street/Trunk
Highway 77 Interchange Project. _J
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the Stipulation of Settlement for 1800 East 66th
Street for the 66th Street/Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77) Interchange
Project.
II. BACKGROUND
On July 24, 2000, the City Council set just compensation and authorized
negotiations for several properties in the project. The residence at 1800 East 66th
Street was one of the properties. Just compensation was set at $141,000. More
recently, on August 14, 2000, the use of eminent domain on this property and
several others was authorized. However, negotiations have continued. Staff and
the property owner have agreed on a price of $145,000.
The $145,000 is the purchase price paid by the current owner for the property.
Legal counsel has indicated that if this property were to complete the condemnation
process, it is a virtual certainty that the award would be at least $145,000.
0925-180066th
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The proposed Stipulation is consistent with the policy of continuing
negotiations even after eminent domain proceedings have been
initiated.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• While the proposed settlement is more than the offering price, it is
virtually certain that completing the eminent domain process would
result in at least the proposed settlement. Fees would push the cost
higher.
C. FINANCIAL
• This purchase is funded by Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
based on the agreements in place.
D. LEGAL
• Legal counsel is recommending this settlement.
E. TIMING
• The owner needs to close on a replacement dwelling the first week in
October 2000.
IV. . ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Delay consideration.
• Modify the proposed settlement cost.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• N/A
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
0 N/A
0
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 5D
REPORT # 249
?J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
•
•
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORT PREPARED BY: SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
NAME, TITLE
SIGN RE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the issuance of new on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for
Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar, 6601 Lyndale Avenue South,
and setting the date for a public hearing. I
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a public hearing to be held October 23, 2000 for
the issuance of new on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses
for Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar,
6601 Lyndale Avenue South. I
III. BACKGROUND
An application for new on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license for Wiltshire
Restaurants, LLC d/b/a/ Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar, was received by the City
on May 24, 2000. The new restaurant and bar will be located at 6601 Lyndale
Avenue South.
0925Houlihans hearing
r
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City ordinance provides that the City Council is to conduct a public
hearing to consider all on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license
applications and that a date be set for the public hearing prior to the
hearing.
• The Hearing must be scheduled and held before a new license may
be considered.
• The new process has been initiated.
• Holding a public hearing on October 23, 2000 will provide ample time
to complete the licensing process.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
•
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Reject the application for new on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses
for Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar.
• Schedule hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing
process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
N/A
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None
0
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 5C
REPORT # 248
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
NAME, TITTLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
/f S/GNATL?RE?
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the issuance of club on-sale intoxicating liquor license and Sunday liquor
licenses for Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555, Inc d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink, 6715 Lake
p Shore Drive, and setting date of public hearing.
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a public hearing to be held October 9, 2000 for
the issuance of club on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses
for Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555, Inc, d/b/a Four Nickels Food and
Drink, 6715 Lake Shore Drive, previously licensed and located at 6401
Lyndale Avenue.
III. BACKGROUND
An application for club on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for Fred
Babcock VFW Post 5555, Inc d/b/a/ Four Nickels Food and Drink was received by
the City on August 24, 2000.
They were previously licensed at 6401 Lyndale Avenue but are reapplying at this
time for their new address of 6715 Lake Shore Drive.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
0925Houlihans hearing
A. POLICY
• City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing
to consider all club on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license
applications and that a date be set for the public hearing prior to the
hearing.
The hearing must be scheduled and held before a new license may be
considered.
The new process has been initiated.
• Holding a public hearing on October 9, 2000 will provide ample time to
complete the licensing process.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• N/A
C. FINANCIAL
N/A
D. LEGAL
N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Reject the application for club on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses
for Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555, Inc d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink.
• Schedule hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing
process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
N/A
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None
0
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 5B
REPORT # 247
AM REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
•
PERRY THORVIG,
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
NAME, TITLE
BRUCE PALMBORG,
REPORT PRESENTER: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute such agreements necessary to obtain a $5
million grant from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the City
Manager to execute such agreements necessary to obtain a $5 million
grant from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic
Development. .1
II. BACKGROUND
The 2000 Minnesota Legislature appropriated $5 million for the City of Richfield to
acquire residential properties within two blocks of Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77) for the
purposes of removing the homes and relocating the residents so that they would not
be subject to severe airport noise upon completion of the new runway.
The legislation requires that Richfield apply to the Minnesota Department of Trade
• and Economic Development for release of the funds. The application period begins
on October 1, 2000. If the resolution is passed, staff will make the application on
Monday, October 2 so that Department of Trade and Economic Development
0925DTEDres
(DTED) staff can review and approve the application.. (No other jurisdiction is
eligible to receive these funds.)
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City of Richfield has amended its Comprehensive Plan to
encourage the change of land uses in the two blocks west of TH
77 so that the future land uses are consistent with airport
operations.
• The City of Richfield has consistently advocated the purchase and
redevelopment of properties in immediate blocks west of the
airport.
B CRITICAL ISSUES
• The purchase process for properties along 18th Avenue is well
underway. Appraisals have been completed and offers made to 20
homeowners contingent upon the receipt of $5 million of DTED
funds.
C. FINANCIAL
• Funds must be received from DTED to finish the property
• acquisition this year so that additional funds can be sought during
the 2001 legislative session.
D. LEGAL I
• The DTED requires that the accompanying resolution be submitted
with the application before it will be considered an official Richfield
request.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS)
• Postpone the approval of the resolution. However, this will delay the
acquisition of funding and jeopardize obtaining more funding next year.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT
MEETING
• N/A
0
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SUCH
AGREEMENTS NECESSARY TO OBTAIN A $5 MILLION GRANT FROM THE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has authorized a grant of $5 million to be used
to purchase residential properties (hereinafter referred to as "project") affected by low
frequency noise in the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield must apply to the Department of Trade and
Economic Development for said grant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield act as legal
sponsor for the project contained in the Redevelopment Grant Program to be submitted on
October 1, 2000 and that Samantha Orduno, City Manager, is hereby authorized to apply
to the Department of Trade and Economic Development for funding of this project on
behalf of the City of Richfield.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sources and amounts of local match
identified in the application are committed to the project identified.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Richfield has not violated any
Federal, State or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict
of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Samantha Orduno, City Manager, is hereby
authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on
behalf of the applicant.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of
September, 2000.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
9
•
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 5A
REPORT # 246
STAFF REPORT
M0990 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 259 2000
•
REPORT PREPARED BY: PERRY THORVIG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
NA&', TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ET
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of
four single family homes located at 6314, 6320, 6326, and 6332-18th Avenue South. 11
1. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution establishing just
compensation and authorize the purchase of 6314, 6320, 6326, and
6332-18th Avenue South.
II. BACKGROUND
The 2000 Minnesota State Legislature appropriated $5 million for the City of
Richfield to purchase residential properties (including all related costs) in the first
two blocks west of Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77). The purpose of these purchases is to
remove these homes from the extreme low frequency noise that will be caused by
the new north-south runway under construction at the airport.
Just compensation on the first twenty houses on the east side of 18th Avenue was
approved by the City Council on September 11 and September 18, 2000. Staff now
has a good estimate of the total project costs and projects that there will be enough
0925justcomp
NAME, TITLE
money to purchase 24 houses. Based on the outcome of the appraisal process,
staff is recommending just compensation in the following amounts:
0
Property Address I Just Compensation Amount
6314-18th Ave. S. I $135,000
6320-18th Ave. S. I $130,000
6326-18th Ave. S. I $128,500
6332-18th Ave. S. I $138,000
In addition to the above, the property owners may also be eligible for relocation
benefits. The relocation benefits will be calculated separately once an offer is made
to the property owner in accordance wit the Uniform Relocation Act.
Attached is the resolution for consideration
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I
A. POLICY
• The City Council has identified these properties for purchase for the
project.
• The properties are within the 87dB contour.
• Uniform acquisition procedures are being followed.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• An offer will be made to the homeowners upon the Council's approval
by representatives of Conworth, Inc. on behalf of the City.
•
C. FINANCIAL
• The Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development
(DTED) must review the City of Richfield's application and transfer the
$5 million to Richfield. The funding application will be submitted to the
DTED on October 2, 2000.
D. LEGAL
• Offers will be made contingent on receipt of the grant funds from
DTED.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Delay approval of just compensation.
• Do not approve just compensation and property acquisition.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of
the four properties above
• Map
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
9 N/A
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING
PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT
6314, 6320, 6326, AND 6332-18TH AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the 2000 Minnesota State Legislature authorized the City of Richfield
(City) to acquire residential property within two blocks of Trunk Highway 77 and within the
87d B;
WHEREAS, within the aforenoted area the following real property is identified for
purchase:
Lots 11-14, Block 6 Iverson's Second Addition Hennepin County, Minnesota
Together with all abutting streets and alleys, vacated or to be vacated, and all
easements, gaps, overlaps and gores, appurtenant thereto; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the application process with the Department of
Trade and Economic Development (DTED) funds in the amount of $5 million will become
available to the City for the purchase of the real property and related expenses; and
WHEREAS, the City has accepted a plan for the purchase of properties along 18th
Avenue S. north of 66th Street; and
Is WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property
within its corporate boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals for the subject properties to be made by
qualified independent professional appraisers to determine fair market value of real estate;
and
WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the appraisal reports as being
in conformity with appraisal standards; and
WHEREAS, those values are as follows:
Property Address
6314-18th Ave. S.
6320-18th Ave. S.
6326-18th Ave. S.
6332-18th Ave. S.
Fair Market Value
$135,500
$130,000
$128,500
$138,000
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. That the just compensation amounts in the table above are approved.
2. That performance on the offers to purchase and related expenses is subject to receipt
by the City of the funds from DTED.
3. That the City's consultant is authorized to present offers of said amount to the
respective property owners.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of
September, 2000.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah J. Guiher, Deputy City Clerk
•
0
(S
62ND-ST--
1 In Ad
Q
o D
O
a o
D
mt?0
,Q
63RD ST.
d3 kb
_o
n
z
C3 I ;
o00
ct3
k,913 O
1; Q_I?
rrl ? n I
? PQ
?7'i 9
? ?IG? 3
o0--
i
T-M-7-
fl rF r-L-
q a
D -Q
a a
q
a id
of ;
?//
JUST COMPENSATION
P IPROPERTIES
SEPTEM$ER 257rv
I,
Ir
AREA WHERE
LEGISLATIVE
GRANT CAN
BE SPENT
s ?
i
I
1
"TMW
I•
NORTH
DATE: 9-11-00