Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
05-08-95 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, MAY 8, 1995 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M. CHAMBERS AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) CONCURRENT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL/RICHFIELD SCHOOL BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995; AND (3) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995 PRESENTATIONS. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA 2. PRESENTATION OF TEN YEAR SERVICE AWARD TO CITY OF RICHFIELD BY MINNESOTA SPORTS FEDERATION FOR HOSTING SOFTBALL TOURNAMENTS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 121 3. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATIONS RECOGNIZING CLUBS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHICH HAVE ADOPTED RICHFIELD PARKS THROUGH ADOPT- A-PARK PROGRAM COUNCIL LETTER NO. 122 4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING CITY OF RICHFIELD EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND FITNESS WEEK, MAY 15-19, 1995 5. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING STUDENTS AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING WEEK, MAY 8-15, 1995 6. PRESENTATION OF VIDEO OF WATER PLANT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 123 AGENDA APPROVAL 7. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR 8. 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 PURCHASE OF 6929 PENN AVENUE C.L. 124 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION THAT HUMBOLDT AVENUE STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 157-108-19 AS PART OF 77TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT BE AWARDED TO SHAPER CONTRACTING COMPANY INC. IN AMOUNT OF $3,546,258.53 AND PAYMENT AUTHORIZATION OF $4,500 FROM STORM WATER UTILITY FUNDS FOR LOCAL-SHARE OF COSTS FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS C.L.125 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SECOND-AMENDMENT TO JOINT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITIES OF EDINA, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNETONKA, HOPKINS AND RICHFIELD FOR SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION C.L. 126 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALT DRAINAGE SWALE FOR SURFACE DRAINAGE PROBLEM ON FIFTH AVENUE AT HOPE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FROM PLEHAL BLACKTOPPING INC. IN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $6,780 C.L. 127 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR ONE TON 4x4 CAB CHASSIS FROM SUPERIOR FORD, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $22,445 AND FOR BOX TRANSFER, REPAINTING AND MOUNTING OF NEW PLOW FROM CRYSTEEL IN AMOUNT OF $5,747.55 C.L. 128 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR TWO SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS AT WATER PLANT FROM NORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPPLY, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $23,598 C.L. 129 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE WITH FEE WAIVER FOR CHURCH OF ASSUMPTION OF RICHFIELD, 305 EAST 77TH STREET C.L. 130 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF ROOMING HOUSE LICENSE; RICHFIELD SENIOR SUITES, 6808 THIRD AVENUE PUBLIC HEARINGS CANCELLATION OF PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY AT 7216 FIRST AVENUE TO HRA COUNCIL LETTER NO. 131 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE FOR KAREN WELCH, 6220 STEVENS AVENUE; FOUR CATS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 132 11. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF BRUEGGER'S BAGEL BAKERY, 6600 PENN AVENUE COUNCIL LETTER NO. 133 12. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND APPROVAL OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW PHASE II CONSTRUCTION OF CSM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 134 13. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AMENDMENT TO CITY ORDINANCE SECTION 315.01, SUBDIVISIONS 2 AND 7 REGARDING DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY IN POSSESSION OF CITY COUNCIL LETTER NO. 135 PROPOSED ORDINANCE 14. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 925.09 AND REPEALING SECTION 1320.11 OF CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CODE VIOLATIONS AND BRINGING SECTION 925.09 INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT STATE STATUTES COUNCIL LETTER NO. 136 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS 15. CONSIDERATION OF PETITION TO PAVE THE UNPAVED ALLEYS IN RICHFIELD COUNCIL LETTER NO. 137 AIRPORT BUSINESS 16. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT 77TH STREET PROJECT BUSINESS 17. 77TH STREET PROJECT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 18. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 19. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 20. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 21. 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 861-9702. /S CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 137 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Adopt a petition to pave the unpaved alleys in Richfield. Background: In 1994 City staff received a petition from property owners along the alley of the 6300 block between Girard Avenue and I-35W. The petition was signed by owners representing 50.18% of the frontage along the alley. In response to the petition, staff prepared a feasibility study for the proposed project, including a preliminary design and cost estimate. Staff then sent out a letter and a petition form to owners of property on all unimproved alleys in the City to see if there is any interest in paving those alleys. The response to that letter has been very strong and almost universally against any alley paving. The only petitions that were returned were petitions to not pave the alley. Two of these were returned. The property owners along the alley for which paving was originally petitioned were also given the cost estimate that staff developed. In response to that information, the residents circulated a new document asking that all of the affected owners make known their wishes for or against alley paving. The latest document shows that only three owners representing 20% of the affected property are in favor of having the alley paved. Meanwhile, owners representing 73.6% of the affected property have indicated that they do not want their alley paved. One owner representing 6.5% of the property did not indicate any preference. Recommended Motion: Reject the petition to pave unpaved alleys in Richfield. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A large majority of the affected property owners are against the proposed improvement. 2. Less than 35% of the affected owners want the project. It would take a 4/5 vote of the City Council to order any improvement. 3. The cost estimate of $32.20 per assessable foot assumes that the City would pay for half the cost of the alley, because residents live only on one side of the alley. This would amount to an estimated City expenditure of $19,252. r (~- Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could order the paving of the petitioned alley or any other alley in the City with a 4/5 vote. 2. Council could order the paving of any of the unpaved alleys at City expense and avoid the necessity for assessing the cost. 3. Council could hold a public hearing on the alley improvement and make a decision after hearing public input. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting that Council act on this issue at the meeting of May 8, 1995. Respectful) submitted, ,~ i F James ©! Prosser City Manager JDP:ds iy CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 136 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: First reading of ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 of the Code of Ordinances regarding appeal procedures for certain code violations, and bringing Section 925.09 into compliance with current State Statutes. Background: Over the years, Public Safety has been enforcing ordinances dealing with inoperable vehicles. Generally, when Public Safety receives complaints on issues such as this, they: • Send a Community Services Officer to verify the complaint. • Send a letter advising the person or business of the violation, request compliance within five days. • Do a follow-up after five days to see if compliance has been achieved. • If not, a second letter is sent, again requesting compliance within a designated time, depending on the type of violation. • Usually, these issues are resolved at this point. If they are not, a citation (ticket) is issued requiring a fine be paid or court appearance, and/or abatement. Contained in the ordinance under Section 1320.01 is an appeal process that requires staff to inform the aggrieved to their right to appeal to, essentially, the City Council. It appears to staff that this is unnecessary, cumbersome and time consuming. It also puts the Council in a position of interpreting ordinances that they may have initiated. The Council in most of these cases has relied on the City Attorney for their legal interpretation. Changing the ordinance, however, would still not prohibit the Council, as individuals or as a body, from hearing complaints from citizens who believe staff is acting inappropriately. City ordinance Section 925.09 provides the mechanism for the abatement or removal of public nuisances and allows for the assessment of costs against the property. The Minnesota Statute Section 145.23 which allows cities to do this was repealed and now the language is contained in Chapter 429 and other laws. Therefore, staff is recommending City ordinance Section 925.09 be amended to comply with State Statutes. The Council may recall that they amended another ordinance similar to this (Sections 320 and 400) recently. Staff has now discovered that these were omitted in that revision. I`~-I Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of an ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 and schedule the public hearing and second reading for June 12, 1995. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The ordinance in its current state is cumbersome and bureaucratic. Any aggrieved party can avail themselves (and have) to appeal in the informal sense to the supervisor, Department Director, City Manager and, of course, to the City Council. 2. It is expensive, time consuming and inefficient for the Council to hold formal hearings on issues such as these. In fact, it is probably much more cumbersome and confusing to the citizen. Generally, if the citizen has a concern or complaint, it can be dealt with quicker by an appropriate staff person. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Leave the ordinance(s) in place and allow each aggrieved party the opportunity to have a formal hearing before the Council. This has the potential of numerous hearings, expense and frustrations for everyone. 2. Provide staff options that the Council has that staff may have overlooked. Discussion/Decision Mode: Approve first reading of an ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 and set June 12, 1995 as the public hearing and second reading. Respectfully submitted, 3 , Jamey q. Prosser City M~'nager JDP:ds /`~-~1 BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 925.09 AND REPEALING SECTION 1320.11 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE; MODIFYING THE NOTICE AND APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CODE VIOLATIONS; CORRECTING OBSOLETE STATUTORY REFERENCES THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Sec. 6. Subsection 925.09 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 925.09. Assessment of cost. The cost of abatement or removal of a public nuisance shall be assessed against the property as provided in Minnesota Statutes, sestiee '' ^-~-,~ Chapter 429. as other law. Sec. 7. Subsection 1320.11 of the Richfield City Code is repealed as follows: Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk /3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 135 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an amendment to City Ordinance Subsection 315.01, subdivisions 2 and 7 which concern the disposition of unclaimed property in the possession of the City. Background: Subdivisions 2 and 7 of Section 315 require that unclaimed property in the possession of the City be held for a period of six months before it can be disposed of. There is no basis in State Statutes for this lengthy time period. State Statute requires that property be held for 60 days. Experience shows that if recovered property is claimed by the owner, that claim is usually made within a week or two of recovery. The majority of recovered property is never claimed and therefore must be stored. Property must be held in secured areas and, under the current situation, there is simply not enough storage space to hold property for six months. All City-owned, secured storage areas are currently filled and the Public Safety Department is currently leasing storage space from a commercial storage business at a cost of $83.00 per. month. That space is also filled to capacity. Recommended Motion: Conduct a public hearing and second reading regarding the attached ordinance amendments establishing a 60 day holding period for unclaimed property in the possession of the City. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The change to a 60 day holding period would make the City ordinance consistent with State Statute. 2. The City does not have adequate secure storage space to hold property for six months. 3. When claims for property are made, they are generally within several weeks. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council could decide to not adopt the 60 day retention period and keep the ordinance the same. However, this would necessitate the continued leasing of storage space, and costs involved with same. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amending section 315.01 subdivisions 2 and 7 relating to the disposition of unclaimed property are scheduled for May 8, 1995. fitted, James City Ma JDP:cak Attachment BILL NO. / ~-/ AMENDMENT TO SECTION 315 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE. CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:. Subsection 315.01 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled "Disposition of unclaimed property in the possession of the city" is hereby amended: Subd. 2. Method of dis osition. If property has come into the possession of the city and has remained unclaimed by the owner thereof for a period of ~;~ m^^+"c sib door more, the city may dispose of such property by sale at auction or other sale. If the property is a legal firearm, sale may only be to a licensed firearms dealer or destroyed in accordance with state law. In all other cases the sale may be to the public. The auction or sale shall be conducted under the direction of the city manager, following published notice in the official newspaper at least ten days in advance of such sale. Unclaimed properties shall be sold to the highest qualified bidder. Subd. 7. Lost property. The provisions of subdivisions 1 through 6 of this subsection do not apply to any item which is surrendered to the city as lost property. Any such item shall be retained by the city for a period of °~~ m^^+"c sixtysixty davs and shall be returned to its owner upon proper request at any time during that period. -A#~ }hroo rv~nn+h~+ if +ho i+^vv~ "...+ .~,^+ "oon r^+~ ~rnerJ +^ i+c~ ^..m^.- ~4... i'~....J...- ........ . ~, ~ ~ ~r.... - prn~er roM~ iec~+ rv.r+Lo ^ ~I~i~v, fnr r^+~ ern of +he hr^.,^.+,. If. at the time of surrender, the finder makes a aroaer reauest to claim the aroaertv. it shall be returned to the finder upon the expiration of the retention period. The city council may require as a precondition a person pay all cost reasonably incurred by the city in connection with its efforts to identify and locate the owner. After °~~ sixty davs any item which has not been returned to its owner or claimed by the finder shall become the property of the city and may be disposed of as provided in subdivisions 2 or 3 of this subsection. No owner or finder shall have a claim against the city for disposition of lost property if a good faith effort has been made to comply with this subdivision. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to stolen property, keys, firearms, dangerous weapons, illegal items, liquor or narcotics. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of May , 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk l CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 134 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of request for Conditional Use Permit and approval of Final Development Plan to allow Phase II construction of the CSM redevelopment project. Background: A planned unit development for the Lyndale Shops was approved on April 18, 1994. A Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan was subsequently approved for Phase I. On November 1, 1994, CSM was selected by the HRA to develop Phase II. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan is required to initiate Phase II. Phase II will involve development of an additional 102,285 square feet of retail space to the east of Phase I, along with two free-standing restaurants. The area extends from the former Colfax Avenue to Lyndale Avenue south of 77th Street with the exception of the Conoco service station. Recommended Motion: Approve the Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan to allow Phase II construction of the CSM redevelopment project with the following stipulations: 1. That all signage be specifically approved. 2. That the landscape plan be approved by Community Development and a cash escrow agreement be submitted. 3. That the City Engineer approve the erosion control plan and storm water management plan for the site. 4. That approval of the east drive access to the site is subject to approval of the City Engineer. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Construction of Phase II will allow completion of the redevelopment project which significantly improves the area. 2. Traffic flow will be adequate and parking is more than adequate. 3. The Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan are consistent with the approved planned unit development. 4. On April 25, 1995, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan. la-I Alternative Recommendation: Deny the request with a finding that the proposal would have an adverse impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 1995. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of hearing was published in the Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Respectfully bmitted, ,t~ James . F~~rosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment l~-~. ~~ 1 1 ~s R ~X ~ qa ~~ ~Q 3 ~~~~ ~~ '- -- - Ao I COIfAY N&51WfH ~ p ~ ... IIIII~~ ~3 A~ T .~ q' ~~ C ~ IIItl~3 Ce BRYANf AVE.Sp/fH ~ ~ r ~~ e ~~ 3 =1 A~ ~ EEF ~ ~~ _ ~d~ ~~~ A tt 8 0 ~! AIi v'HOAlE Avg 9DtlfH O ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~~~i((` ~~ (( THE SHOPS AT LYNDALE ~ a l( RKYIF/EfA PREPARED ~ ~ S ! ~ ~~' •!~~ (~ ~i pp MIRR£S~OIA fW8 CSM ~~ L. '' (111 ~ ~ ~~~F PF1118E lVW SfTE1NORK PACKAiOE rwar~ ruw // CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 133 Agenda May 8,1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow development of a Bruegger's Bagel Bakery at 6600 Penn Avenue. Background: Bruegger's wishes to purchase the existing Mr. Donut which requires expanding the building to the west in order to accommodate their bakery equipment. The proposed business will include sit-down as well as take-out business. The size and configuration of the lot as well as the existing building requires careful consideration of the necessary landscaping and parking. Recommended Motion: Approve the Conditional Use Permit with the following stipulations: 1. All signs must meet the requirements of Section 416 of the Richfield City Code. 2. An escrow for landscape costs must be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposed use will significantly improve the corner of Penn Avenue and 66th Street. 2. Landscape provisions include a low iron fence with an intense planting of annuals at the corner. Because of the intensity of the salt spray, soil will have to be replaced on a two -three year basis for plants to survive. Because of the salt, the requirement for evergreen plantings at this corner has been waived. 3. The parking requirement takes into consideration the estimate that fifty percent of the business is take out. 4. The proposed use complies with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. On March 28, 1995, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposal. Alternative Recommendation: Deny the request if a finding of fact can be made that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 1995. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of hearing was published in the Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property.. Respectfully submitted, ,~ y ~, James _D.~;Prosser City Mager JDP:ds: Attachment o~ ~~~ Fay d~~ N L~L O $n~ 4 W ~~ ~ ~&~~ CYYY z t'~- A• 6 T'~ Sifs7~ o , ~4 ~~~~ 'Mil AYlMYL l~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 132 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a new residential kennel license for Karen Welch, 6220 Stevens Avenue. Background: On November 14, 1994, Karen Welch submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns three cats and her roommate owns one. Ms. Welch's application did not have all contiguous property owners' signatures on it. On November 18, 1994, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. The City has adopted a policy that staff notify neighbors surrounding the area of the residential kennel license. Staff has received complaints from several of these neighbors. Staff has received letters from two neighbors and telephone calls from several others. - Some of the concerns mentioned involve the cats roaming around and leaving feces in their yards, they bother the dogs in the neighborhood and they no longer have any birds. One neighbor has a son who is allergic to cats. She has also sent a letter since the mediation. It is included in the packet for Council's review. On March 20, 1995, a mediation was held with Ms. Welch, her neighbors and West Suburban Mediation. Ms. Welch agreed to keep her cats inside her home and that she would talk to her cousin (the owner of the fourth cat) and ask her to also keep her cat indoors. The agreement did not constitute approval by her neighbors for the kennel license (see attached Mediation Agreement). Since the mediation, staff has received four calls from neighbors stating that the cats are still outside almost every day. The neighbors have stated that the cats were kept in just the first week after her agreement at the mediation. On April 26, staff received a complaint that a neighbor had an altercation with Vivian Swoke (the owner of the fourth cat) when they contacted Karen's residence to report the cats were a nuisance. During the mediation, the neighbors agreed to directly call the owners of the cats themselves when there was a problem. With the language that was used during the April 26 conversation, this neighbor will not call them directly again. Although this application is for four cats, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. ~~-i Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be denied. Basis for Recommendation: It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two cats does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. The City has been contacted by neighbors who have concerns that staff believes is causing an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Alternative Recommendation: The Council could decide to approve Ms. Welch's residential kennel license. This would mean that she would be able to keep the four cats. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to deny the application for a residential kennel license for Karen Welch, 6220 Stevens Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfull submitted, James~~D:, Prosser City Manager JDP:ds 3 ~Z2 f ~J WEST SUBURBAN MEDIATION CENTER MEDIATION AGREEMENT ON ~ ~ a-~ I ~~ ~~ the following parties: (date) IniClating Party Second Party(s): Other interested parties: '~..)l,l~~y~v ~~rY1~ C. participated in the mediation session which took place at: ~leciiators for the session were: -'['he nature of the complaint was: ~ ~ .. - ~ - ..- ~ ...-•-r.-~-- PHONE: 933-0005 J~ s / CASE ~ ~ ~ ~% ~~~ G)?((¢ ` ~- ~- N~L~'X~-~'~-'~y~~. ,. ~- l.,la,.c.<.) , S i n e d b y: ~,~~zrw~t ~~'~'"'"'~ .. ~~~_ ~ ~ {signature) (date) (signature) (date) '('signature) (date) (s gnat e) - ~ ~ (date) . i/-_~° „ ~/ _ ~;; (signatuYe of Mediator) (date) (signature of Mediator date ( ) All parties agree that all proceedings will be held in strict confidence. Tins Started ~ ;U "~' m pm white Copy/office Time Endpd o~'IS a m pm 9/87 Uuring the course of the mediation the following terms of agreement were reached:. _ } y / ~ ~~ /~ / ~ ~ (~ r. licJO v ~ ~ Ct~ ~`"T ~o ~ 7 ~ • ~~~ -~ ~~~ Cy ~cx.. ~ ~Y~ 7`d ~s ~ ~ ~/ v ~/ / -~ ~e, ~'.. cam- ~ S ~"''~--- 5e-. G%~" C/ G%~ G/ ~ -. • ~% ~ . ,} / / / /~~~ -~~ -~~~ S Cho ~.. s.1~ ~` ~2 v-~'-,-~ Gr~.Ol? ~`.-cJ / -~i~ ~ =2 ~~~ ` ~ ~~ (iG'~y1 ~ P~ h .S° l ~ 7`~ L°-. ~~-C•-T 7~/l~-•~ 7`_~~S' ~/~y<r ' / ~ C~. ~ ~~ G-(~~t% ~~ ~o-% h~~c,Ch, 26 f ~ Q ~'~ c..C,~ ~ ~" ~~33 '_-~-e,~,u-e, .~~,~c~-G,, j ~' 'old . "~`~ mac, u,~.~,~, ~ a ~,~ ~-~e, ~~~ ~~ , --~ ~ A e ~ n.e~pk.Ezo~c,a~ sk' ~-G1e <-P.ieucaa. c.Q~.~ -I-h.p~. CafiA-~ ~~ ~ ~c~'a i~-n,~-~ :~~h~ ~~ ~` swan' ~e¢~ -kw iii, ~~ cul~cG., ~ bpd cQ,f er smut, ~-~a,~~ ~.U`,~' ~U.~ G1.~u2, a, ,Q-~~..601' v~, ~ U C~srU,l~-bu c ~Rhs~ ClhO(, Ul~~ ~GtA~ ~~-~ ~~. ~ / - ~1~ w~tQ, soon; c:la-zealYw 'N~r~v Gt~~,tt.~ 6u2 ~, `~,~ ~ ~~a~f~~ ~~- ~~ - ~~ d~c~ ~ ~~u~C,~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~Q~ ~~~ ~ Q~~d~ ~ ~., ~ h,e~'.CC~-la2 2t lolz/5 9i-~ vla~a d,(Ak,~, u~~~ Gce+,v4,,~, ;~~ 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 131 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Cancellation of public .hearing and second reading of the ordinance authorizing sale of the property at 7216 First Avenue to the HRA. Background: Council authorized acquisition and first reading of the ordinance at the March 27 meeting. Recommended Motion: Cancel public hearing and second reading of ordinance authorizing sale of 7216 First Avenue to the HRA. Basis of Recommendation: The project is not ready to proceed. Alternative Recommendation: The Council could choose to authorize the public hearing and second reading. However, the project is not ready to proceed at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: Cancellation of the public hearing is required. Respectful) submitted, Jam rosser City ger JDP:cak Sys CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 130 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Application for lawful gambling license for Church of the Assumption of Richfield, 305. East 77th Street. Background: On April 28, 1995, Church of the Assumption submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license. The application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations. The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Saturday from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. The pulltabs would be conducted in conjunction with the bingo operation. The Public Safety Department has conducted the required background investigation and has determined that the applicant has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling manager, Ms. Wendy Uhrich, has no known criminal record. Finally, the applicant is requesting that the $100 investigation fee be waived. Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department to review the request for the gambling license and make its review and recommendation to the City Council. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving the gambling activity requested by the applicant inaccordance with Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6. Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation fee. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City Code pertaining to lawful gambling. 2. The applicant has submitted the request within 60 days of the renewal of the license. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity requested is a benefit to the community. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving the renewal request, however, staff has determined that there is no basis for this alternative. C-> 2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee. Discussion/Decision Mode: Approve the renewal of Church of the Assumption. of Richfield's .lawful gambling application and a request for waiver of the investigative fee. Respectf submitted, ,~ James Prosser City Ma ager JDP:ds 8~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR THE CHURCH OF THE ASSUMPTION OF RICHFIELD TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, the Church of the Assumption has submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and WHEREAS, the application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides authority for review of applications by local authorities; and WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City code provides for regulation of lawful gambling; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an investigation of the application and finds the application to be in order; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council, City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Church of the Assumption, 305 East 77th Street. 2. That the investigation fee be waived. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of May, 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk g~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 129 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 for two submersible pumps. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. The equipment will be used to recycle backwash water to the head of the softening plant. The present pumps are too. small for present water wash rates. A bid opening for the purchase of two submersible pumps was held on Thursday April 20, 1995 with the following results: Vendor Total Bid Waldor Pump & Equipment Co. $21,755 Northern Water Works Supply Inc. 23,598 Quality Flow Systems 24,109 Recommended Motion: 1. Accept the bid minutes/tabulation. 2. Reject bid from Waldor Pump & Equipment Company. They did not meet written specifications. The necessary flow conditions with the specified horsepower was too low. 3. Award purchase order to Northern Water Works Supply Inc., the second lowest bidder, in the amount of $23,598. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Waldor Pump & Equipment Co. did not meet specifications as written. 2. Northern Water Works Supply Inc. met all requirements and is a reputable vendor. 3. There are sufficient funds available for the purchase of the pumps. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose not to accept any of the quotations and require new quotes be obtained. However, staff does not believe better prices can be obtained. ~F i Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff requests approval at the May 8, 1995 Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, r Jame '. Prosser City M~ ager JDP:ds Attachment ~'F-~. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 20, 1995 11:00 a.m. Two Submersible Pumps Bid No. 95-8 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Steven L. Devich, Acting City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for submersible pumps, bid no. 95-8, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 12, 1995. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steven Devich, Administrative Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative John Thom, Water/Sewer Superintendent The following bids were submitted .and read aloud: Bidder's Name/City Bid Security Total Bid Amount Northern Water Works Supply 5% Bid Bond $ 23,598.00 Brooklyn Park Quality Flow Systems Cashier's Check $ 24,109.00 Eden Prairie $ 20,543.00 Waldor Pump 5% Bid Bond + sales tax: Minneapolis $ 1,212.00 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 8, 1995 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 8~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 12s Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase of a one-ton 4X4 4WD cab chassis to replace vehicle unit #341. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Unit #341, aone-ton dump truck, was involved in an accident on April 6, 1995, and subsequently totaled by the City of Richfield insurance company. This vehicle was used by the park maintenance division, and was not due for replacement until 1997. The depreciation banked on this unit is currently approximately $20,000. Reimbursement from the insurance company for the responsible party will be approximately $15,000. Anew one-ton dump truck, equipped similar to the destroyed vehicle with dump box and plow,, costs about $32,000. The dump body (box) attached to Unit #341 is still usable, but the plow was also totaled. In an effort to save some money, Garage staff would like to have the box removed from the destroyed unit and attached to the new vehicle. Staff obtained two quotes for a cab chassis replacement truck as follows: Superior Ford Polar Chevrolet $22,445 $21,166 Polar Chevrolet was awarded the state contract for this type of vehicle in 1995; however, the time frame for ordering vehicles under this contract has expired. Staff contacted Polar Chevrolet for a quote and was told the only vehicle they could provide within a close price range to the contract was a red truck with red interior. Since the rest of the vehicle fleet in the Garage Motor Pool is blue, staff does not believe this would be a wise purchase. The cost to paint the vehicle blue would run approximately $2,000 over and above purchase price. Superior Ford will furnish a blue cab chassis for a cost less than would be paid for the Chevrolet truck plus repainting. Staff also obtained quotes for box transfer and repainting from two vendors as follows: Crysteel $5,747.55* L-Z Truck Equipment Co. $7,328.00 *Prices quoted includes cost to furnish- and mount a new plow. g E-~ Total price to replace this vehicle, if staff salvages the old box and hydraulics, would be approximately 28,192. Recommended Motion: Approve the purchase of a new one ton 4X4 4WD cab chassis from Superior Ford, Inc. for the sum of $22,445; and approve a purchase order to Crysteel in the amount of $5,747.55 for box transfer, repainting, and mounting a new plow. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Unit #341 was totalled out in an accident. 2. Replacing this vehicle now is highly desirable, especially with the busy summer season approaching. 3. There are adequate funds between the Garage Motor Pool and the insurance reimbursement to replace this vehicle. Alternative Recommendation: Council may decide to delay replacement of this vehicle; however, staff does not believe a reasonable price for the type of vehicle desired will be obtainable later on. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting- approval at the May 8, 1995 Council meeting. Respectfull submitted, ,I James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 127 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 to repair a surface drainage problem on -Fifth Avenue at Hope Presbyterian Church. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. City staff has received several complaints from both Hope Presbyterian Church and the local residents regarding a ponding problem at 7114 Fifth Avenue. The water ponds about six inches in the street before overtopping a high spot in the parking lot of the church. Apparently the reconstruction of the old Portland Avenue School parking lot as part of the church .renovation several years ago made the problem worse. The City has no drainage easement across the property. Staff conducted a feasibility study which included analyzing several repair alternatives. Constructing a shallow V-shaped asphalt swale across Hope Presbyterian Church's parking lot would remedy the ponding problem with the least expense and inconvenience to the local residents. Hope Presbyterian Church has agreed to provide Right of Entry. Underground piping solutions entails several hundred feet of pipe and street reconstruction costing over $100,000. This solution provides a relatively inexpensive short term solution to buy time until the street is reconstructed and the pipes added. Three asphalt contractors were contacted and proposals were received for the construction of the swale. Vendor Amount Plehal Blacktopping Inc. $6,780 Midwest Asphalt Corporation $6,915 Bituminous Roadways Inc. $7,497 Recommended Motion: Approve a purchase order to Plehal Blacktopping Inc. for the construction of an asphalt drainage swale for an estimated $6,780. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Installation of a drainage swale is the most cost effective remedy to this storm water ponding problem. 2. Phehal Blacktopping Inc. submitted the lowest quotation. 3. The 1995 Storm Sewer Utility Fund includes sufficient funds for constructing the asphalt swale. $!J-I Alternative Recommendation:. 1. Council may choose not to accept any of the quotations and require new quotes be attained. However, staff does not believe better prices can be obtained. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff requests approval at~the May 8, 1995 Council meeting in order to begin construction as soon as possible as to avoid scheduling conflicts with Hope Presbyterian Church. Respectfull ubrnitted, James rosser City Ma ger JDP:ds Attachment n r 3 t 8.. ., .~ ~i~ ~ f} ; a , ~ :~ ' 1 '+ .' ~ a .. o< ~~' ~ :. ~~. a . y;. ~~. ° , k~. ~ '"_ ,,~ ., . `. { ,:.~ ...:. e. ~~ <' . x: , ' . ~:.:..; . .,K„.... f ;: ,,:: ,.. ,. ~:.: ~z:,:,.. ,..... :.. ;'.: .>: , ~. .. ~ ,~. .~ .. . ~' - .. ' ~ ., ' ~~~ a .:~. r,..::~ .~_, . .. ...-r.,r-. ... ~ ~, :. M ? ' ., :. ~ a -~ -~ ,... „ ~•' ,~ ..: .', ..........x..:~'Y.xnziu&Y'. ]~Sx, ..<>yK'b~.'x' :~M...:.. . .rF.-: `.: .. .. ' ~ ^~"'~L: i...x e : x!x~,~ ~Yw~ '~.~ .. .~ ` rz . i . ~~ .. ~~ .. x .. x. ...~.. t . . . x.t . ti.l q. .. .:. : ,y ~: r. .: . ... . ... .... x.... .. ...... x.a. . :.. W:......x:..... .x. .t .. .3 :Y y~ a x :.."r %~ '". y:~ .".. .s.' x.. ~.... ::. ~3~.:'}x. . .. x ,. z. '~ F f. ' a LF. - ~ ..... i : .. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1995 SPECIAL CONCURRENT COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION/ CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 6:00 P.M. VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING 64TH STREET AND PORTLAND AVENUE AGENDA CALL TO ORDER I. BUS TOUR OF CITY INCLUDING FOLLOWING SITES AND TOPICS: • TRAFFIC STUDIES/PROJECTS • PARKS AND PARK FEATURES • STREET IMPROVEMENTS • STORM SEWER PROJECTS • OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST 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 861-9702. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, MAY 8, 1995 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M. CHAMBERS AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) CONCURRENT RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL/RICHFIELD SCHOOL BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995; AND (3) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 24, 1995 PRESENTATIONS. 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA 2. PRESENTATION OF TEN YEAR SERVICE AWARD TO CITY OF RICHFIELD BY MINNESOTA SPORTS FEDERATION FOR HOSTING SOFTBALL TOURNAMENTS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 121 3. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATIONS RECOGNIZING CLUBS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHICH HAVE ADOPTED RICHFIELD PARKS THROUGH ADOPT- A-PARK PROGRAM COUNCIL LETTER NO. 122 4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING CITY OF RICHFIELD EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND FITNESS WEEK, MAY 15-19, 1995 5. .PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING STUDENTS AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING WEEK, MAY 8-15, 1995 6. PRESENTATION OF VIDEO OF WATER PLANT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 123 AGENDA APPROVAL 7. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR 8. 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 PURCHASE OF 6929 PENN AVENUE C.L. 124 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION THAT HUMBOLDT AVENUE STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 157-108-19 AS PART OF 77TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT BE AWARDED TO SHAPER CONTRACTING COMPANY INC. IN AMOUNT OF $3,546,258.53 AND PAYMENT AUTHORIZATION OF $4,500 FROM STORM 1NATER UTILITY FUNDS FOR LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS C.L.125 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SECOND. AMENDMENT TO JOINT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITIES OF EDINA, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNETONKA, HOPKINS AND RICHFIELD FOR SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION C.L. 126 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALT DRAINAGE SWALE FOR SURFACE DRAINAGE PROBLEM ON FIFTH AVENUE AT HOPE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FROM PLEHAL BLACKTOPPING INC. IN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $6,780 C.L. 127 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR ONE TON 4x4 CAB CHASSIS FROM SUPERIOR FORD, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $22,445 AND FOR BOX TRANSFER, REPAINTING AND MOUNTING OF NEW PLOW FROM CRYSTEEL IN AMOUNT OF $5,747.55 C.L. 128 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR TWO SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS AT WATER PLANT FROM NORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPPLY, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $23,598 C.L. 129 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE WITH FEE WAIVER FOR CHURCH OF ASSUMPTION OF RICHFIELD, 305 EAST 77TH STREET C.L. 130 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF ROOMING HOUSE LICENSE; RICHFIELD SENIOR SUITES, 6808 THIRD AVENUE PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. CANCELLATION OF PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY AT 7216 FIRST AVENUE TO HRA COUNCIL LETTER NO. 131 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE FOR KAREN WELCH, 6220 STEVENS AVENUE; FOUR CATS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 132 11. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF BRUEGGER'S BAGEL BAKERY, 6600 PENN AVENUE COUNCIL LETTER NO. 133 12. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND APPROVAL OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW PHASE II CONSTRUCTION OF CSM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 134 13. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AMENDMENT TO CITY ORDINANCE SECTION 315.01, SUBDIVISIONS 2 AND 7 REGARDING DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY IN POSSESSION OF CITY COUNCIL LETTER NO. 135 PROPOSED ORDINANCE 14. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 925.09 AND REPEALING SECTION 1320.11 OF CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CODE VIOLATIONS AND BRINGING SECTION 925.09 INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT STATE STATUTES COUNCIL LETTER NO. 136 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS 15. CONSIDERATION OF PETITION TO PAVE THE UNPAVED ALLEYS IN RICHFIELD COUNCIL LETTER NO. 137 AIRPORT BUSINESS 16. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT 77TH STREET PROJECT BUSINESS 17. 77TH STREET PROJECT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 18. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 19. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 20. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 21. 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 861-9702. l~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 137 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Adopt a petition to pave the unpaved alleys in Richfield. Background: In 1994 City staff received a petition from property owners along the alley of the 6300 block between Girard Avenue and I-35W. The petition was signed by owners representing 50.18% of the frontage along the alley. In response to the petition, staff prepared a feasibility study for the proposed project, including a preliminary design and cost estimate. Staff then sent out a letter and a petition form to owners of property on all unimproved alleys in the City to see if there is any interest in paving those alleys. The response to that letter has been very strong and almost universally against any alley paving. The only petitions that were returned were petitions to not pave the alley. Two of these were returned. The property owners along the alley for which paving was originally petitioned were also given the cost estimate that staff developed. In response to that information, the residents circulated a new document, asking that all of the affected owners make known their wishes for or against alley paving. The latest document shows that only three owners representing 20% of the affected property are in favor of having the alley paved. Meanwhile, owners representing 73.6% of the affected property have indicated that they do not want their alley paved. One owner representing 6.5% of the property did not indicate any preference. Recommended Motion: Reject the petition to pave unpaved alleys in Richfield. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A large majority of the affected property owners are against the proposed improvement. 2. Less than 35% of the affected owners want the project. It would take a 4/5 vote of the City Council to order any improvement. 3. The cost estimate of $32.20 per assessable foot assumes that the City would pay for half the cost of the alley, because residents live only on one side of the alley. This would amount to an estimated City expenditure of $19,252. T /~- Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could order the paving of the petitioned alley or any other alley in the City with a 4/5 vote. 2. Council could order the paving of any of the unpaved alleys at City expense and avoid the necessity for assessing the cost. 3. Council could hold a public hearing on the alley improvement and make a decision after hearing public input. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting that Council act on this issue at the meeting of May 8, 1995. Respectful) submitted, F James ©! Prosser City Manager JDP:ds i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 136 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: First reading of ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 of the Code of Ordinances regarding appeal procedures for certain code violations, and bringing Section 925.09 into compliance with current State Statutes. Background: Over the years, Public Safety has been enforcing ordinances dealing with inoperable vehicles. Generally, when Public Safety receives complaints on issues such as this, they: • Send a Community Services Officer to verify the complaint. • Send a letter advising the person or business of the violation, request compliance within five days. • Do a follow-up after five days to see if compliance has been achieved. • If not, a second letter is sent, again requesting compliance within a designated time, depending on the type of violation. • Usually, these issues are resolved at this point. If they are not, a citation (ticket) is issued requiring a fine be paid or court appearance, and/or abatement. Contained in the ordinance under Section 1320.01 is an appeal process that requires staff to inform the aggrieved to their right to appeal to, essentially, the City Council. It appears to staff that this is unnecessary, cumbersome and time consuming. It also puts the Council in a position of interpreting ordinances that they may have initiated. The Council in most of these cases has relied on the City Attorney for their legal interpretation. Changing the ordinance, however, would still not prohibit the Council, as individuals or as a body, from hearing complaints from citizens who believe staff is acting inappropriately. City ordinance Section 925.09 provides the mechanism for the abatement or removal of public nuisances and allows for the assessment of costs against the property. The Minnesota Statute Section 145.23 which allows cities to do this was repealed and now the language is contained in Chapter 429 and other laws. Therefore, staff is recommending City ordinance Section 925.09 be amended to comply with State Statutes. The Council may recall that they amended another ordinance similar to this (Sections 320 and 400) recently. Staff has now discovered that these were omitted in that revision. I`~-I Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of an ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 and schedule the public hearing and second reading for June 12, 1995. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The ordinance in its current state is cumbersome and bureaucratic. Any aggrieved party can avail themselves (and have) to appeal in the informal sense to the supervisor, Department Director, City Manager and, of course, to the City Council 2. It is expensive, time consuming and inefficient for the Council to hold formal hearings on issues such as these. In fact, it is probably much more cumbersome and confusing to the citizen. Generally, if the citizen has a concern or complaint, it can be dealt with quicker by an appropriate staff person. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Leave the ordinance(s) in place and allow each aggrieved party the opportunity to have a formal hearing before the Council. This has the potential of numerous hearings, expense and frustrations for everyone. 2. Provide staff options that the Council has that staff may have overlooked. Discussion/Decision Mode: Approve first reading of an ordinance amending Section 925.09 and repealing Section 1320.11 and set June 12, 1995 as the public hearing and second reading. Respectfully submitted, 3 ._ 4 I 3 Jamey q. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds i4 a BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 925.09 AND REPEALING SECTION 1320.11 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE; MODIFYING THE NOTICE AND APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CODE VIOLATIONS; CORRECTING OBSOLETE STATUTORY REFERENCES THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Sec. 6. Subsection 925.09 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 925.09. Assessment of cost. The cost of abatement or removal of a public nuisance shall be assessed against the property as provided in Minnesota Statutes, sest+e~ ~-4.52.3 Chapter 429, as other law Sec. 7. Subsection 1320.11 of the Richfield City Code is repealed as follows: Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk /~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 135 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an amendment to City Ordinance Subsection 315.01, subdivisions 2 and 7 which concern the disposition of unclaimed property in the possession of the City. Background: Subdivisions 2 and 7 of Section 315 require that unclaimed property in the possession of the City be held for a period of six months before it can be disposed of. There is no basis in State Statutes for this lengthy time period. State Statute requires that property be held for 60 days. Experience shows that if recovered property is claimed by the owner, that claim is usually made within a week or two of recovery. The majority of recovered property is never. claimed and therefore must be stored. Property must be held in secured areas and, under the current situation, there is simply not enough storage space to hold property for six months. All City-owned, secured storage areas are currently filled and the Public Safety Department is currently .leasing storage space from a commercial storage business at a cost of $83.00 per. month. That space is also filled to capacity. Recommended Motion: Conduct a public hearing and second reading regarding the attached ordinance amendments establishing a 60 day holding period for unclaimed property in the possession of the City. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The change to a 60 day holding period would make the City ordinance consistent with State Statute. 2. The City does not have adequate secure storage space to hold property for six months. 3. When claims for property are made, they are generally within several weeks. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council could decide to not adopt the 60 day retention period and keep the ordinance the same. However, this would necessitate the continued leasing of storage space, and costs involved with same. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amending section 315.01 subdivisions 2 and 7 relating to the disposition of unclaimed property are scheduled for May 8, 1995. Respe submitted, James rosser City Ma er JDP:cak Attachment BILL NO. /~-/ AMENDMENT TO SECTION 315 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE. CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:. Subsection 315.01 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield entitled "Disposition of unclaimed property in the possession of the city" is hereby amended: Subd. 2. Method of disposition. If property has come into the possession of the city and has remained unclaimed by the owner thereof for a period of ~~~ n,^n+hc. sixty door more, the city may dispose of such property by sale at auction or other sale. If the property is a legal firearm, sale may only be to a licensed firearms dealer or destroyed in accordance with state law. In all other cases the sale may be to the public. The auction or sale shall be conducted under the direction of the city manager, following published notice in the official newspaper at least ten days in advance of such sale. Unclaimed properties shall be sold to the highest qualified bidder. Subd. 7. Lost property. The provisions of subdivisions 1 through 6 of this subsection do not apply to any item which is surrendered to the city as lost property. Any such item shall be retained by the city for a period of °~~„~;T sixty demand shall be returned to its owner upon proper request at any time during that period. -A#t~r If at the time of surrender the finder makes a aroaer reauest to claim the aroaertv. it shall be returned to the finder upon the expiration of the retention period. The city council may require as a precondition a person pay all cost reasonably incurred by the city in connection with its efforts to identify and locate the owner. After ~~~-sixty days any item which has not been returned to its owner or claimed by the finder shall become the property of the city and may be disposed of as provided in subdivisions 2 or 3 of this subsection. No owner or finder shall have a claim against the city for disposition of lost property if a good faith effort has been made to comply with this subdivision. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to stolen property, keys, firearms, dangerous weapons, illegal items, liquor or narcotics. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of May , 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk C CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 134 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of request for Conditional Use Permit and approval of Final Development Plan to allow Phase II construction of the CSM redevelopment project. Background: A planned unit development for the Lyndale Shops was approved on April 18, 1994. A Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan was subsequently approved for Phase I. On November 1, 1994, CSM was selected by the HRA to develop Phase II. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan is required to initiate Phase II. Phase II will involve development of an additional 102,285 square feet of retail space to the east of Phase I, along with two free-standing restaurants. The area extends from the former Colfax Avenue to Lyndale Avenue south of 77th Street with the exception of the Conoco service station. Recommended Motion: Approve the Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan to allow Phase II construction of the CSM redevelopment project with the following stipulations: 1. That all signage be specifically approved. 2. That the landscape plan be approved by Community Development and a cash escrow agreement be submitted. 3. That the City Engineer approve the erosion control plan and storm water management plan for the site. 4. That approval of the east drive access to the site is subject to approval of the City Engineer. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Construction of Phase II will allow completion of the redevelopment project which significantly improves the area. 2. Traffic flow will be adequate and parking is more than adequate. 3. The Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan are consistent with the approved planned unit development. 4. On April 25, 1995, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plan. ~~-I Alternative Recommendation: Deny the request with a finding that the proposal would have an adverse impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 1995. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of hearing was published in the Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Respectfully bmitted, ~3 -,.s James ~ grosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment I~~~ L_ ~' i~ Z ~ ~ I"II ~ ~s X ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~. ~n 3 >~ ~ ~~ ~ a$ 2 °° ' ~~~~ ,;- ' " _ ,- - - - - _- ~o I COLPAY N~StiVfN ~~ ~ ~~___ _-1 ___~ __ !G ~. px ~~ ~ p~ ~~ ro -.. . 'j1''1f'''~j1~I''I~' Y ~ ~ aF J_4 q~ ~~ ~ C ~ !~ ~-~ i~ti~l~ C ~ ~ ~~ R ~ BRVANf A!E SOVIN ~~~~~~~~ C ~~ / ~ A~ ~~ ~~~ ~Q~ N ^~ S ~ ~~ A~ lYRAKE N& SLf1IM o - . ~ n~~ f I~~~l'~` ~~ jt) THE SHOPS AT LYNDALE / ~ ~;i j{ ~ ~~ 1` RKWF/Ef11. PREPARED i 111 ! f p YIRMESOIA ~` M G~~~ 'i''lil ~ ~) /~~F PHASE ,vw SREINORK PACKAGE rr~trr~iYUwY /i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 133 Agenda May 8,1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow development of a Bruegger's Bagel Bakery at 6600 Penn Avenue. Background: Bruegger's wishes to purchase the existing Mr. Donut which requires expanding the building to the west in order to accommodate their bakery equipment. The proposed business will include sit-down as well as take-out business. The size and configuration of the lot as well as the existing building requires careful consideration of the necessary landscaping and parking. Recommended Motion: Approve the Conditional Use Permit with the following stipulations: 1. All signs must meet the requirements of Section 416 of the Richfield City Code. 2. An escrow for landscape costs must be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposed use will significantly improve the corner of Penn Avenue and 66th Street. 2. Landscape provisions include a low iron fence with an intense planting of annuals at the corner. Because of the intensity of the salt spray, soil will have to be replaced on a two -three year basis for plants to survive. Because of the salt, the requirement for evergreen plantings at this corner has been waived. 3. The parking requirement takes into consideration the estimate that fifty percent of the business is take out. 4. The proposed use complies with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. On March 28, 1995, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposal. Alternative Recommendation: Deny the request if a finding of fact can be made that the proposed use would have an adverse impact on surrounding properties or the City as a whole. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 1995. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of hearing was published in the Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property.. Respectfully submitted, ~; _~_ James D.1jProsser City Manager JDP:ds: Attachment o~ ~~~ fay 0.~~ J ~~ p$~ ~ ~&~~ fizzz Z ~~ ~~ o . ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~- V ~_ t n I T~ A-4-•`•sarvn ~iNN AYENVE d~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 132 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a new residential kennel license for Karen Welch, 6220 Stevens Avenue. Background: On November 14, 1994, Karen Welch submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns three cats and her roommate owns one. Ms. Welch's application did not have all contiguous property owners' signatures on it. On November 18, 1994, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. The City has adopted a policy that staff notify neighbors surrounding the area of the residential kennel license. Staff has received complaints from several of these neighbors. Staff has received letters from two neighbors and telephone calls from several others. Some of the concerns mentioned involve the cats roaming around and leaving feces in their yards, they bother the dogs in the neighborhood and they no longer have any birds. One neighbor has a son who is allergic to cats. She has also sent a letter since the mediation. It is included in the packet for Council's review. On March 20, 1995, a mediation was held with Ms. Welch, her neighbors and West Suburban Mediation. Ms. Welch agreed to keep her cats inside her home and that she would talk to her cousin (the owner of the fourth cat) and ask her to also keep her cat indoors. The agreement did not constitute approval by her neighbors for the kennel license (see attached Mediation Agreement). Since the mediation, staff has received four calls from neighbors stating that the cats are still outside almost every day. The neighbors have stated that the cats were kept in just the first week after her agreement at the mediation. On April 26, staff received a complaint that a neighbor had an altercation with Vivian Swoke (the owner of the fourth cat) when they contacted Karen's residence to report the cats were a nuisance. During the mediation, the neighbors agreed to directly call the owners of the cats themselves when there was a problem. With the language that was used during the April 26 conversation, this neighbor will not call them directly again. Although this application is for four cats, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. ~c~-1 Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be denied. Basis for Recommendation: It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two cats does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. The City has been contacted by neighbors who have concerns that staff believes is causing an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Alternative Recommendation: The Council could decide to approve Ms. Welch's residential kennel license. This would mean that she would be able to keep the four cats. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to deny the application for a residential kennel license for Karen Welch, 6220 Stevens Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectful submitted, D JProsser City Manager JDP:ds .3~2Z1 J~ WEST SUBURBAN MEDIATION CENTER MEDIATION AG#tEEMENT ON ~ ~ ~.D I ~1!~~ the following parties: (date) Initiating Party Second Party(s): ~ /V/ PHONE: 933-0005 ~~ CASE # ~~ ~ ~~' ~~~ G~ ? ((p- Other interested parties: 'Ul,~~t~V~~~~Y~n~ ~ participated in the mediation session which took place at: 2~~~u~ (~(:~f Z,~ ~`~/~( 1. PiECiiators for the session were: -'['he nature of the complaint was -_ ._.. t~,~~, S i n e d b y: ~,ta'au~ ~~'Y"-"'9 {, {sgn~~at^^ure) (date) (signature) (date) (signature) (date) (s gnat e) ~ ~ (date) -~ ~_;~. (signatu a of Mediator) (date) (signature of Mediator) (date) All parties agree that all proceedings will be held in strict confidence. Tire Started ~ ;Uri pm y~ite Copy/Office Time Ended o~'.15 am pm 9/87 UurinK the course of the mediation the following terms of agreement were reached:. / v f~~~ ._ -e. r-...,~c~s ~ o v ~~ ~/ ~.~--~-~ ~ ©h ~ rJ / .~~ /~-"- ~.S' > S U cam /% c G~~° G~ ~ _. _ ~~ ~/ 1i~---' i-v Ow~ ~ /~ /-~ ~0 ~~ ~-- ~ Cry ~ ,~ /~ f -!~ ~ KJ e~c~= C~-~7 GV ~ r c.1~ l S d ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~--_ ~ ~ . ~~~% ~~- i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~e. ~ ~ /~-~~~,~- '~ ~~ G-~--` C~ `2.,tJ-~-,r ~i ~-~ ~ -~G~ c,~:-~ ham, ~ ~~ / v c 1- ~~ 1 ~~' ~"~_~.- ~ o~-., ~ ,, °'SC"~, ~.-, o~, o ~ ~?~- / ~ ~e~v-a-,--cam .-- ~_ . ~ ~. J S' /o ~{ ~u~ ~ ~ ~.e.~:~ . --~ ~ e ~ ~eipk.bo.~c,a~ heA-~.ce.sk" ~e ~Qt;ctt~,ae ~-2~.f- -f~,uc, Ca,IA-~ ~~~~'~'' ~ mil' G~~'~~~~ ~¢an~ ~~ ~° ~c~v i~ ~~ ~~ cutizclti rhy ~pc~cQ,l er smw ~ka,CV~~ ~u`,~,~'~' 0 GU.~ 6~~,,~, ~; ,~~~', ~oX ~ Q,tt~c, ~Qahs~ ana(, lUi~ ~u Ca,~s ru,~,a~,' ~1~2~ wc(k,~so0.h, _et,y~ ~~ . ~ Uazco.~hz- ~t~c~ ~~a~.e~ ~ ~~ ~n ~~~ ~~~ ~ Q~~r~ ~~~ f a - ~j ~~ ~( ~,Q , ,t:~~ ~ (~ `~-~~ ~2~Q,c C~,~ctd, ~u,uz ~~ ~~ 1 V ~.ec G~~~.~-~ot~ n-~llSi~~ , / ^~ ~ w~~ ! -~, ~, , ~ ~~~~ ~~-~ ~c~3-o ~(,c~.c, ~~~ ~~~ `~°~~ s ~~ ~~~~ ~~CLV4GF 0 zeu~ 4 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 131 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Cancellation of public .hearing and second reading of the ordinance authorizing sale of the property at 7216 First Avenue to the HRA. Background: Council authorized acquisition and first reading of the ordinance at the March 27 meeting. Recommended Motion: Cancel public hearing and second reading of ordinance authorizing sale of 7216 First Avenue to the HRA. Basis of Recommendation: The project is not ready to proceed. Alternative Recommendation: The Council could choose to authorize the public hearing and second reading. However, the project is not ready to proceed at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: Cancellation of the public hearing is required. Respectful) submitted, Jam rosser City ger JDP:cak RCS CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 130 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Application for lawful gambling license for Church of the Assumption of Richfield, 305 East 77th Street. Background: On April 28, 1995, Church of the Assumption submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license. The application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations. The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Saturday from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. The pulltabs would be conducted in conjunction with the bingo operation. The Public Safety Department has conducted the required background investigation and has determined that the applicant has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling manager, Ms. Wendy Uhrich, has no known criminal record. Finally, the applicant is requesting that the $100 investigation fee be waived. Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department to review the request for the gambling license and make its review and recommendation to the City Council. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving the gambling activity requested by the applicant inaccordance with Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6. Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation fee. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied. with the State Statutes and City Code pertaining to lawful gambling. 2. The applicant has submitted the request within 60 days of the renewal of the license. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity requested is a benefit to the community. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving the renewal request, however, staff has determined that there is no basis for this alternative. ~ G- 1 2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee. Discussion/Decision Mode: Approve the renewal of Church of the Assumption. of Richfield's .lawful gambling application and a request for waiver of the investigative fee. Respectf submitted, ~~ James Prosser City Ma ager JDP:ds SC ,2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR THE CHURCH OF THE ASSUMPTION OF RICHFIELD TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, the Church of the Assumption has submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and WHEREAS, the application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides authority for review of applications by local authorities; and WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City code provides for regulation of lawful gambling; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an investigation of the application and finds the application to be in order; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council, City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Church of the Assumption, 305 East 77th Street. 2. That the investigation fee be waived. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of May, 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk g~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 129 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 for two submersible pumps. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. The equipment will be used to recycle backwash water to the head of the softening plant. The present pumps are too small for present water wash rates. A bid opening for the purchase of two submersible pumps was held on Thursday April 20, 1995 with the following results: Vendor Total Bid Waldor Pump & Equipment Co. $21,755 Northern Water Works Supply Inc. 23,598 Quality Flow Systems 24,109 Recommended Motion: 1. Accept the bid minutes/tabulation. 2. Reject bid from Waldor Pump & Equipment Company. They did not meet written specifications. The necessary flow conditions with the specified horsepower was too low. 3. Award purchase order to Northern Water Works Supply Inc., the second lowest bidder, in the amount of $23,598. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Waldor Pump & Equipment Co. did not meet specifications as written. 2. Northern Water Works Supply Inc. met all requirements and is a reputable vendor. 3. There are sufficient funds available for the purchase of the pumps. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose not to accept any of the quotations and require new quotes be obtained. However, staff does not believe better prices can be obtained. S; F Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff requests approval at the May 8, 1995 Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, Jame 'Prosser City M~ ager JDP:ds Attachment ~F-~. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 20, 1995 11:00 a.m. Two Submersible Pumps Bid No. 95-8 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Steven L. Devich, Acting City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for submersible pumps, bid no. 95-8, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 12, 1995. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steven Devich, Administrative Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative John Thom, Water/Sewer Superintendent The following bids were submitted and read aloud: Bidder's Name/City Bid Security Total Bid Amount Northern Water Works Supply 5% Bid Bond $ 23,598.00 Brooklyn Park Quality Flow Systems Cashier's Check $ 24,109.00 Eden Prairie $ 20,543.00 Waldor Pump 5% Bid Bond + sales tax: Minneapolis $ 1,212.00 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 8, 1995 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 8~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. its Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase of a one-ton 4X4 4WD cab chassis to replace vehicle unit #341. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Unit #341, cone-ton dump truck, was involved in an accident on April 6, 1995, and subsequently totaled by the City of Richfield insurance company. This vehicle was used by the park maintenance division, and was not due for replacement until 1997. The depreciation banked on this unit is currently approximately $20,000. Reimbursement from the insurance company for the responsible party will be approximately $15,000. Anew one-ton dump truck, equipped similar to the destroyed vehicle with dump box and plow, costs about $32,000. The dump body (box) attached to Unit #341 is still usable, but the plow was also totaled. In an effort to save some money, Garage staff would like to have the box removed from the destroyed unit and attached to the new vehicle. Staff obtained two quotes for a cab chassis replacement truck as follows: Superior Ford Polar Chevrolet $22,445 $21,166 Polar Chevrolet was awarded the state contract for this type of vehicle in 1995; however, the time frame for ordering vehicles under this contract has expired. Staff contacted Polar Chevrolet for a quote and was told the only vehicle they could provide within a close price range to the contract was a red truck with red interior. Since the rest of the vehicle fleet in the Garage Motor Pool is blue, staff does not believe this would be a wise purchase. The cost to paint the vehicle blue would run approximately $2,000 over and above purchase price. Superior Ford will furnish a blue cab chassis for a cost less than would be paid for the Chevrolet truck plus repainting. Staff also obtained quotes for box transfer and repainting from two vendors as follows: Crysteel $5,747.55* L-Z Truck Equipment Co. $7,328.00 *Prices quoted includes cost to furnish and mount a new plow. ~ E~1 Total price to replace this vehicle, if staff salvages the old box and hydraulics, would be approximately 28,192. Recommended Motion: Approve the purchase of a new one ton 4X4 4WD cab chassis from Superior Ford, Inc. for the sum of $22,445; and approve a purchase order to Crysteel in the amount of $5,747.55 for box transfer, repainting, and mounting a new plow. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Unit #341 was totalled out in an accident. 2. Replacing this vehicle now is highly desirable, especially with the busy summer season approaching. 3. There are adequate funds between the Garage Motor Pool and the insurance reimbursement to replace this vehicle. Alternative Recommendation: Council may decide to delay replacement of this vehicle; however, staff does not believe a reasonable price for the type of vehicle desired will be obtainable later on. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting approval at the May 8, 1995 Council meeting. Respectful) submitted, ~~ James Prosser ~. City Manager JDP:ds ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 127 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 to repair a surtace drainage problem on -Fifth Avenue at Hope Presbyterian Church. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. City staff has received several complaints from both Hope Presbyterian Church and the local residents regarding a ponding problem at 7114 Fifth Avenue. The water ponds about six inches in the street before overtopping a high spot in the parking lot of the church. Apparently the reconstruction of the old Portland Avenue School parking lot as part of the church renovation several years ago made the problem worse. The City has no drainage easement across the property. Staff conducted a feasibility study which included analyzing several repair alternatives. Constructing a shallow V-shaped asphalt swale across Hope Presbyterian Church's parking lot would remedy the ponding problem with the least expense and inconvenience to the local residents. Hope Presbyterian Church has agreed to provide Right of Entry. Underground piping solutions entails several hundred feet of pipe and street reconstruction costing over $100,000. This solution provides a relatively inexpensive short term solution to buy time until the street is reconstructed and the pipes added. Three asphalt contractors were contacted and proposals were received for the construction of the swale. Vendor Amount Plehal Blacktopping Inc. $6,780 Midwest Asphalt Corporation $6,915 Bituminous Roadways Inc. $7,497 Recommended Motion: Approve a purchase order to Plehal Blacktopping Inc. for the construction of an asphalt drainage swale for an estimated $6,780. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Installation of a drainage swale is the most cost effective remedy to this storm water ponding problem. 2. Phehal Blacktopping Inc. submitted the lowest quotation. 3. The 1995 Storm Sewer Utility Fund includes sufficient funds for constructing the asphalt swale. gIJ-I Alternative Recommendation:.. 1. Council may choose not to accept any of the quotations and require new quotes be attained. However, staff does not believe better prices can be obtained. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff requests approval at~the May 8, 1995 Council meeting in order to begin construction as soon as possible as to avoid scheduling conflicts with Hope Presbyterian Church. Respectfull ubrnitted, James rosser City Ma ger JDP:ds Attachment ' S~i: ~~~~ ~~ ~a~ ~ ~~ ..< . .4 ~. t t+ ~F1 '^~.: ,H• '. -.r '3 L x. r .........:... .....:..:.X '.: ~~' ..¢:. 'llle'~.:... ....._.... m. :x:.:rv ........ . ...< .... w. . ~ X ::: . ., i . x:y: ... s. k::E, a: . ~.m :Jm+.. :. 4S '.~ . r' .... .... ::.. ....::..:~r,'~.. :''x:xa...kX:4.:..:5~.'.' ' ..: .:..- ' ~~. ~ ~ ;. ~a~~ < ~~ ~ : ~ ~~, r i ; . ~~ :~'~~ ~ ~,,: T. ~ :. '~:~ i ..~.... :~~ .... fp~ ~..:q n ~ . .£ ~:.. . . . r: z:Y': .r ~' ~: ,,..~.~.~. .3 s. X:; ~~ .. . .:. ..:::: K .. .. .: ~: ,. ,....e...< Y ~~ ~. '~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ ,_ ~ ~~ yy~ i i ~. ,,ss ~£~6a ~a.3 ~ x $ ~ ~ ~~ ° . ° ~ ~l ` S kl4 ~ , i i ~; ' ~ ~ }. t ~ ! ~~< ' $ ~ 'C~' Y { ~~ .. ~r~! . ` ~ ' 'C'Js k' ~ 9F. • '+w ... Y '.1 ._ ~~ ~„ ~, ;w i ' ,zt 3~c ~--~'g '-' A b z°~ ~~~ ~A ,.d d ~~k ~~.. y ~ ~. t x t, ~i F~ ~~y~ y r ~x r~~y ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ zr~d~ ~ ~ ~t... aai. _yr~. ' u'._ ~ ~ C - ll" „ z ~ r', ~•, - ~; _, ~,+~: ,~ ,: d ,-: wyY1 ~ `~--~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 126 Issue Statement: Approval of Second Amendment to Joint Cooperative Agreement between the cities of Edina, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Richfield and Hopkins for the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission. Background: The five cities of the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWCC) originally entered into an agreement to create the SWCC and the administration of the Commission. Since that time, there has been one amendment to the agreement. Currently, the five cities-have agreed to utilize the Operating Committee of the SWCC to review the cable franchise ordinance which will soon be open to negotiations. In using the Operating Committee for that purpose, a housekeeping change in the original agreement is necessary. The Second Amendment to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement attached to this Council Letter provides the flexibility to schedule, set agendas and reassign functions of the Operating Committee and the full Commission. Under the Amendment, the Commission retains the control of directing the Operating Committee. Recommended Motion: Approve the Second Amendment to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement of the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of Richfield. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The cable television franchise ordinance for the five city SWCC will soon be up for renegotiation. To prepare for this event, the SWCC has decided to use the Operating Committee to work on the matter. 2. The SWCC has decided to use greater flexibility in the direction of the Operating Committee as well as the Commission in setting dates of meetings, setting agendas, etc. 3. In order to make such changes, it is appropriate to officially amend the Joint and Cooperative Agreement of the SWCC. 4. Representatives of the SWCC who are officials of the five cities approved the amendment to the agreement at their April 12, 1995 meeting and have sent it to each respective city for approval. ge-- Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide not to approve the Second Amendment. 2. The City Council could decide to approve the Second Amendment with some changes. Discussion/Decision Mode: Action on this item is scheduled for the May 8, 1995 City Council meeting so that action may be taken on this item and returned to the SWCC in a timely manner. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:cak r 8c-a SECOND AMENDMENT JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This Second Amendment to Joint and Cooperative Agreement, made and entered into this day of 1995, by and between the CITIES OF EDINA, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNETONKA, RICHFIELD AND HOPK3NS, MINNESOTA, constitutes the Second Amendment to that certain Joint .and Cooperative Agreement now existing and entered into by each of the above Cities to create the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission; and this Second Amendment is made to record the agreements by each of the Member Cities and in consideration of the mutual promises of each of the Member Cities: 1. Article VII, Section 3, to add a new paragraph T to read as follows: VII. Powers and Duties of the Commission and Parties. Section 3. Powers and Duties of the Commission. Subject to the provisions of Section 2, the following powers and duties are delegated by the Parties to the Commission: T. Procedures Relating to the Governance of Commission erations. Notwithstanding any provision contained in this Agreement, with respect to the operating procedures of the Commission, the Commission is hereby authorized to establish from time to time bylaws or other policies and procedures relating to its own governance and operations including procedures relating to meetings, dates of meetings, agendas, information contained on agendas and the functions of the Operating Committee and Commission. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities hereto have caused this Second Amendment to Joint and Cooperative Agreement to be duly executed the first date written above. CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA By Its -1- C -3 402707 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA By Its CITY OF MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA By I' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MII~]NESOTA By Its CITY OF HOPKINS, l~s[NNESOTA By I -2- ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 125 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Recommendation to the Commissioner of Transportation that the Humboldt Avenue Storm Sewer Contract 157-108-19 be awarded to Shafer Contracting Company Inc. and approval of payment of local share of storm sewer work. Background: On May 1, 1995 the Director of Administration and City Engineer opened bids for Humboldt Avenue Storm Sewer of the 77th Street Project with the following results: Shafer Contracting Company $3,546,258.53 Park Construction $3,631,605.85 Lametti & Sons Inc. $3,887,343.40 Carl Bolander & Sons $3,994,793.00 Barbarossa & Sons $4,371,444.58 The apparent low bidder is the same contractor as for Phases I and II of the 77th Street Reconstruction Project. The Shafer Bid compares favorably to the engineer's estimate of over $4.3 million. Shafer has performed well in Phases I and II. Staff recommends that the Council forward their recommendation of awarding the contract to Shafer Contracting Company Inc. to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The estimated cost split for this project is as follows: Federal Demonstration Funds $2,834,007 State Trunk Highway Funds $ 708,501 Storm Water Utility $ 3,751 The storm water utility funds will be used to haul salvaged material to a City storage site and to install chimney seals that are not eligible for state and federal funds as part of 11 catch basins to be constructed A payment authorization of $4,500 is requested from the storm water utility.. The amount of the authorization includes our portion plus a 20% contingency to account for changes in estimated quantities and variation between engineer's estimate and the bid. Recommended Motion: Make recommendation for award of contract for the Humboldt Avenue Storm Sewer construction as part of the 77th Street Reconstruction Project to Shafer Contracting Company Inc. for. $3,546,258.53 and approve payment of up to $4,500 (including contingency) from the storm water utility for the local share of the costs for improvements that are not eligible for state and federal highway funds. S~-I Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City is required to make a recommendation for action on the award of contract as part of the MnDOT process. 2. Shafer Contracting has submitted the lowest responsible bid and a review by MnDOT and City staffs of their bid gives no cause to reject it. 3. The total amount specified by Shafer Contracting Company Inc. to complete the construction work is in keeping with the engineer's estimate of $4,032,620. 4. The local share is an accurate reflection of improvements that are not eligible for state and federal highway funds. Alternative Recommendation: 1. None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Council is asked to make a recommendation at the May 8, 1995 Council meeting in order to allow construction to proceed this June. submitted, James~Pro City Manager JDP:ds Attachment ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 124 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Authorization to purchase 6929 Penn Avenue, Background: An offer was made to the homeowner in September 1994 for $84,000 following City Council authorization. The owner retained an appraiser who valued the property at $94,500. Upon review of the appraisal, an offer of $89,000 was made. The owner is willing to sell for $89,500. Recommended Motion: Adopt a motion which approves the attached resolution which authorizes purchase of 6929 Penn Avenue for $89,500. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City Council has offered the homeowners in this block face an opportunity to sell voluntarily due to periodic flooding. 2. No relocation benefits are proposed. 3. Funds are available from the storm water utility fund. 4. This homeowner has appeared before the Council on several occasions to express a desire a sell. Alternative Recommendation: Reject proposed purchase price. Discussion/Decision Mode: The seller would like to close prior to May 15. Respectfully s mitted, James D. P osser City Manager JDP:ds BA-~ RESOLUTION NO. THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY 6929 PENN AVENUE WHEREAS, The City of Richfield, Minnesota desires to purchase certain real property impacted by storm water said real property being described as: 6929 Penn Avenue Lot 16, Block 10, Tingdale Bros', Lincoln Hills Addition WHEREAS, said acquisitions are contingent upon the voluntary sale of the property by owners who would waive any and all potential relocation benefits; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals of the subject property to be made by qualified independent professional real estate appraisers to determine fair market value; and WHEREAS, the owner of said property provided an appraisal report completed by a professional appraiser of their selection; and WHEREAS, a certified review appraiser has evaluated the appraisal reports; and WHEREAS, the owner is agreeable to a sale at $89,500. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: That the City Manger and Mayor are authorized to execute appropriate documents in the amount of $89,500. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of MAY, 1995. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 123 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Video of Richfield Water Plant. Background: A seven minute video of the Water Plant and its operations was recently produced. The video will be used for educational purposes including airing on cable television and at the Water Plant Open House. Recommended Motion: View the video of the Richfield Water Plant. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This is a positive educational effort. 2. The Council will be aware of the video and its contents if questions are raised when the video is aired on television or used for other educational purposes. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This is a brief item on the May 8, 1995 Council meeting agenda. Respectful) submitted, -''i James , rosser City Man~(ger JDP:ds 3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. ...,.122 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Recognition of organizations which have adopted Richfield parks. Background: Adopt-A-Park is a public service program for volunteers to pick up litter and keep Richfield's parks clean. It enables citizens to contribute to a cleaner environment. Litter is expensive. Citizens lending a hand to keep parks clean help the City save money on maintenance costs. The Community Services Commission approved the program at its April 9, 1991 meeting. Richfield community groups and businesses may "adopt a park" by contacting the Community Services Department. Terms and conditions of the program, safety tips and a copy of the permit/agreement are made available to the groups adopting a park. In 1992, a markteting task force/subcommittee of the Community Services Commission sought groups to adopt the remaining, unclaimed parks and to establish Adopt-A-Park group meetings. Adoption of City parks was complete in 1993. Recommended Motion: Extend a thank you to the Adopt-A-Park groups for their contributions; present certificates of appreciation to the groups on the attached list. Basis of Recommendation: These clubs and organizations provide a tremendous service to the City of Richfield and are to be commended for their contribution. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Members of the Community Services Commission have been invited to share the expression of the thanks to the Adopt-A-Park groups. Respec Ily submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment ~-l Z O Q U W a Q O w U w U rn rn a 0 J W LL 2 U z Z O H Q ~_ U O D w Z W W Y Q Q a O 0 Y Q Z O QH N z C7 O ~~ a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 121 Agenda May 8, 1995 Issue Statement: Presentation of Ten Year Service Award by Minnesota Sports Federation. Background: This award is presented to organizations and cities that have hosted softball tournaments for ten years. The service Richfield has provided to amateur sports participants from the State of .Minnesota has been deemed invaluable. Besides the benefits provided to the amateur athlete, Richfield's businesses and beautiful recreation facilities have been exposed to many participants and fans throughout the state. Recommended Motion: Accept the Ten Year Service Award from the Minnesota Sports Federation. City staff members Frank White, Recreation Manager, and Jim Kruse, Park Foreman, will be on hand to accept the award on behalf of the City. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Ten Year Service Award. Richfield has hosted softball tournaments for ten years and been the site for such tournaments for many more years. 2. The Minnesota Sports Federation wishes to honor the City of Richfield by presenting a Ten Year Service Award. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Mr. Perry Coonce from the Minnesota Sports Federation will be on hand to make the award presentation. Respectfully submitted, ~j; ,I James C~~~rosser City Manager JDP:ds