Loading...
07-13-92 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JULY 13, 1992 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER I: PRESENTATION OF 1991 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 31 ADJOURNMENT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS • CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 1992 PRESENTATION 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AGENDA APPROVAL 2. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR NOTE: 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. 3A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION RELATING TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS "NO PARKING ANYTIME" ON BOTH SIDES OF LYNDALE AVENUE FROM 64TH STREET TO 67TH STREET C.L. 156 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPROVING EXPENDITU OF $10,000 FROM RICHFIELD'S MUNICIPAL STATE AID CONSTRUCTIO ACCOUNT AND APPROVING CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FO RESURFACING OF NICOLLET AVENUE C.L. 157 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY WITH OWNE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING HARDSHIP; 7644 GRAND, 7644 WENTWORTH, 7645 NICOLLET AND 7644 CHICAGO AVENUES; 77TH STREET PROJECT C.L. 158 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL-OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 7600 GRAND AVENUE, 5 CATS C.L. 159 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 7425 PLEASANT AVENUE, 3 DOGS AN 2 CATS C.L. 160 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE, AIRPORT PET HOSPITAL, 6301 CEDAR AVENUE C.L. 161 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE, CUTLER ANIMAL HOSPITAL, 7738 COLFAX AVENUE C.L. 162 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL • KENNEL LICENSE, ANIMAL CARE CLINIC, 6521 CEDAR AVENUE C.L. 163 I. ESTIMATE #4 PAYMENT FOR WATER PLANT FILTER UNDERDRAIN REHABILITATION, TONKA EQUIPMENT COMPANY, $57,047.50 J. ESTIMATE #1 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF JEFFERSON PARK BUILDING, C. FIELD COMPANY, $14,141.00 PUBLIC HEARINGS RE N R RS D 0. 4. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 6745 12TH AVENUE TO ALLOW CONVERSION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME INTO TWO FAMILY HOME IN R-RESIDENCE DISTRICT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 164 5. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW RESTAURANT EXPANSION AT 7627 LYNDALE AVENUE COUNCIL LETTER NO. 165 6. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION WAIVER AT 7626-44 KNOX AVENUE COUNCIL LETTER NO. 166 • 7. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 6914 CEDAR AVENUE, 3 DOGS AND 1 CAT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 167 8. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 6533 19TH AVENUE, 3 DOGS C.L. COUNCIL LETTER NO. 168 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS 9. CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1991 COUNCIL LETTER NO. 169 AIRPORT BUSINESS 10. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 0 11. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 12. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 13. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS ADJOURNMENT s • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 169 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Presentation of.the City of Richfield Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1991. Background: The City's. auditing firm of Deloitte & Touche completed the audit of the City's fiscal year ended December 31, 1991 in June 1992. The CAFR was subsequently submitted to the State of Minnesota as required and to the Government Finance Officers Association for compliance review. At the July 13, 1992 City Council study session meeting, representatives from Deloitte & Touche made a presentation of the CAFR to the City Council and answered any questions concerning the report. The action to be taken at the July 13, 1992 City Council meeting is the official receipt of the CAFR by the City Council. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that the City Council-accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the City for the year ended December 31, 1991. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The City's auditor has performed an audit of the City's financial records for the year ended December 31, 1991 and prepared reports to the City Council concerning legal compliance and internal control. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could ask the auditors for further explanation of their findings. Discussion/Decision Mode: Action on this item is requested at the July 13, 1992 City Council meeting. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report has been previously submitted to the State of Minnesota, pursuant to State law. y submitted, Jame Prosser City pager C] e CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 168 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application license for Craig Stodola, 6533 Background: On June 11, 1992, Craig Stodola residential kennel license. He application had all contiguous for a new residential kennel 19th Avenue. submitted an application for a owns three dogs. Mr. Stodola's property owner's signatures on it. On July 5, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for three dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: • 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does not have an adverse.effect on the neighborhood. Mr. Stodola has been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny Mr. Stodola's residential kennel license. This would mean that he would have to reduce the number of dogs he has from three to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for Craig Stodola, 6533 19th Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respe, fully submitted, Jam 'D. Prosser City Manager JDP:cak 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 167 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a new residential kennel license for David Yajko and Teri Schweiss, 6914 Cedar Avenue. Background: On June 29, 1992, David Yajko and Teri Schweiss submitted an application for a residential kennel license. They own three dogs and one cat. David Yajkio and Teri Schweiss' application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it. On July 5, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for three dogs and one cat, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. • Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. David Yajko and Teri Schweiss have been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny David Yajko and Teri Schweiss' residential kennel license. This would mean that they would have to reduce the number of dogs they have from three to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for David Yajko and Teri Schweiss, 6914 Cedar Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respec7ully submitted, ?I Ja es\JD. Prosser Cit Manager JDP:cak 6 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 166 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Request for approval of a subdivision waiver at 7626-44 Knox Avenue. Background: Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership is requesting a subdivision waiver in order to divide 7626-44 Knox Avenue into two separate lots with a commercial building on each lot. Proposed Parcel A is occupied.by Barrel Finish Inc. under a 1971 conditional use permit. Proposed Parcel B is currently offered for sale end consists of three lease spaces including Allied Overhead Door Co., Graphic Prep Printing, and a vacant space recently occupied by Olson Tool Company. The property is properly zoned C-2 and on-site parking is adequate. Variances have been granted allowing the existing lot configuration. No physical changes will be made except to meet the noted stipulations. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution and approve the site plan for subdivision waiver at 7626-44 Knox Avenue with the following stipulations: 1. That it be demonstrated by the applicant that real estate taxes due and payable have been fully paid. 2. That the parking lot be screened pursuant to the landscape requirements, be striped in accord with the proposed site plan, and the curbing be repaired where broken. 3. That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Approval of the subdivision waiver will not interfere with the purposes of platting regulations, Section 500.05. 2. On June 23, 1992, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the division. 3. On June 22, 1992 the Hearing Examiner filed a decision to grant the necessary variances relating to setback of existing structures. A copy of this decision is attached. 4. The subdivision waiver would allow separate ownership of the two buildings. 5. The required improvements would comply with City landscape . standards. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council may deny this subdivision waiver if a finding of fact determines that the proposal would have an adverse impact on adjacent properties. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Monday, July 13, 1992. The hearing will be held in the City Council Chamber of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of public hearing was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Respectfully, submitted, rosser James tager City JDP:cak is ?-a RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBDIVISION WAIVER (7626-44 KNOX AVENUE SOUTH) WHEREAS, an application has been received which requests approval of a subdivision waiver for the division of certain parcels of land generally located at 7626-44 Knox Avenue, legally described on Attachment One, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereafter the subject property); and WHEREAS, the proposed division of land for which the subdivision waiver is sought is as legally described on Attachment Two, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the request was duly considered by the Planning Commission and the recommendation of the Planning Commission has been presented to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the subdivision waiver; and WHEREAS, variances for the lot configuration resulting from is the proposed division have been granted by the Hearing Examiner; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that compliance with City Code Section 500.05, Subd. 1 would result in unnecessary hardship and that failure to comply therewith will not interfere with the purposes of the platting regulations of Section 500.05. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. A waiver for the subdivision of property legally described on Attachment One is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. All future transfer of any of the property described in Attachment One shall be by parcel or parcels described in Attachment Two. b. The applicant shall demonstrate that real estate taxes due and payable have been fully paid. c. The parking areas be screened pursuant to Richfield's landscape requirements, be striped in accord with the approved site plan, and the curbing be repaired where • broken. d. A cash escrow be submitted for all required improvements. ?-3 2. Upon compliance with such conditions, City staff is • authorized and directed to take any action necessary to effectuate this resolution and to authorize the recording of conveyances complying with the request of this resolution. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of July, 1992. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk r: U 0 ATTACHMENT ONE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The South 302 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 618, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. '5 • ATTACHMENT TWO PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PARCEL A The North 124.00 feet of the South 302.00 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 618, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. PARCEL B The South 178.00 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 618, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. 0 PARCEL A PARCEL B -+- 16.91 West 77th Street x = bcation of security fights Pr®p®se& subdivision 7626-44 Knox Avenue Division of parcel into two lots. Landscape screening to be added . ?? ,4ulll??l N PLANNING ZONING J 6700 Portland Avenue - Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599 40 6 City Manager Mayor Council James D. Prosser Martin Kirsch William Bullock Michael Sandahl Ivan Ludeman Kristal Stokes D D Q s CASE NO.: APPLICANT: 92-V-4 Leaseback Properties Limited Partnership PROPERTY LOCATION: 7626-44 Knox Avenue South HEARING EXAMINER: Connie Murray APPEARANCES: J. Michael Thornton Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the undersigned makes the following findings of fact, determinations, and decision: • A. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Notice of public hearing was proper. Notice was published in the Sun-Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the site as required by City Ordinance. The ten day notice requirement was also met. .2. The street address and legal description of the property in question are as follows: 7626-44 Knox Avenue South, The South 302 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 0618, Hennepin County. 3. The zoning of the site in question is C-2, general commercial 4. The variances would allow a rear yard setback on Parcel A of 5.78 feet, where 20.34 feet is the minimum requirement; a streetside sideyaid setback on Parcel B of 6.79 feet, where 40 feet js the minimum requirement; and a rear yard setback on Parcel B of 16.24 feet, where 16.74 feet is the minimum requirement. 5. The reason for the request is to legitimize the nonconforming setbacks so the parcel can be divided into two separate lots with one building on each lot. B. DETERMINATIONS Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their enforcement would cause undue hardship to the owners of the property under • consideration. In determining whether to grant or deny the requested variance, I specifically make the following conclusions: The Urban Hometown Telephone (612) 261.9700 Fax 861-9749 An Equal Opportunity Employer 64 • 1. Would strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the ordinance cause undue hardship, because the property could not reasonably be used under the conditions of the official controls? I conclude: There is an undue Hardship. Without the variances, the property could not be subdivided and the two buildings could not have separate ownership. 2. Are there unique circumstances or unusual conditions affecting the property or building which were not created by the land owner? I conclude: There are unique circumstances related to the proRerty. Two principal buildings occupy one lot, which is nonconforming to present City Codes. 0 3. Will the granting of the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood or locality? I conclude: There will be no adverse impacts on the neighborhood. The property has been in the existing condition for several years. There would be no physical changes to the property, except for those improvements required by the City. 4. Are there any stipulations which must be attached to the granting of the variance to ensure compliance and to protect adjacent properties? (If yes, specify stipulations under Item C "DECISION" on the next page). I conclude: (circle one) YES NO 0 64 • C. DECISION ' Based upon the foregoing, the undersigned.determines that the request be It'fl P R O V ?D Stipulations: 1. That the City Council grant approval of the request for a subdivsion waiver. 2. That the parking lot be screened pursuant to landscape requirements, striped, and repaired where necessary. 3. That a cash escrow be provided for all required improvements. D. APPEALS Any party not in agreement with the decision of the Hearing Examiner may appeal the decision by delivering to the Community Development Director a notice of appeal within ten days of the date the decision is filed. The appeal shall be to the Board of • Adjustment and Appeals. Byron Wallace Community Development Director City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423-2599 (612) 861-9760 HEARING EXAMINE CITY OF RICHFIELD DATE: ( 0 ?r CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 165 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Request for an amended conditional use permit to allow a restaurant expansion at 7627 Lyndale Avenue. Background: Hope's Chow Mein is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a restaurant expansion within the existing commercial area on the east side of the 7600 block of Lyndale. Hope's current conditional use permit request is for an expansion of their kitchen facility and the addition of 24 seats. The changes will add 1,200 square feet to the existing restaurant increasing the parking requirement by ten. Although 80% of Hope's business is said to be take out, this type of service places a heavy demand on parking capacity since the turn over of spaces is much closer to that of adjacent retail uses. Thus when coupled with a coincidence of peak demand periods, the demand for parking spaces becomes very competitive. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit by a 6-2 vote. The Commission stated that the owners should be left to work the parking problems out among themselves and did not wish to limit the ability of a business to expand because of the unresolved parking problems of the entire area. The Commission also recommended that the parking issues facing the Lyndale/I-494 area should be addressed as a whole in order to improve the district's commercial climate. They recommended that the City Planner's office examine the overall situation further. Recommended Motion: The request for a conditional use permit should be denied. Basis of Recommendation: Approval will cause an increase likely exceed existing capacity, problem worse. in parking demand that will very making the existing parking The Lyndale/I-494 commercial area has historically experienced parking problems as the type of businesses have changed, placing subsequently higher demand on parking than available capacity. A contributing factor to the problem is the very nature of the location. The area presents the image of a strip center operated under one owner, a perception which would encourage random parking. However, the buildings occupied by each business are owned separately, either singularly or in groups of buildings, by persons other than the occupants. Normally, parking for a shopping center, regardless of size, would be calculated based on the capacity of the entire site. Each separate use could not place a higher demand on parking than the site's capacity. Since S/ the property along east Lyndale Avenue is under several owners, • the overall control of parking demand is limited to informal agreements between property owners. Each landlord has tended to "promise" occupants parking without respect for real parking demand generated by each respective use. This practice is illustrated by the allocation in 1990 of nine spaces to Hope's by the building owner of the middle area. Such practices can lead to demands that exceed available capacity. Applying this principle to the Lyndale commercial area, and particularly to the east side, the parking requirement for each occupant is indicated on the attached graphic. Consequently, no individual business, when added to the total, should exceed available capacity. A detailed parking demand study of the area could indicate variations in demand that would offset individual high demands, particularly if peak demand times do not overlap. A petition in opposition to the expansion was received from businesses immediately adjacent and to the north. A parking shortage during the lunch and dinner hours is the major issue. A similar petition was received in 1990 and the parking area was reconfigured to add parking stalls. No additional parking appears available at this time. Alternative Recommendation 1: Approve the request for a conditional use permit subject to: • 1. A detailed parking study of the east side of the commercial area. The parking study should be approved by City staff. 2. Repair of parking lot owned by Fred Ryan. 3. Location of handicapped parking spaces calculated on the capacity identified from the detailed parking study. 4. Meeting building code and health department regulations as previously outlined. Basis of Recommendation: Approval of Alternative Recommendation 1 would result in a detailed parking study of the east Lyndale commercial area. The parking study is needed to: 1. Identify strategies for more successfully coping with parking. 2. Establish true parameters of the area's parking capacity. 3. Avoid piecemeal parking solutions which could only complicate the existing problem. The existing parking lot is in a poor state of maintenance and • warrants substantial repair. S-'), Handicapped parking must be located to meet statutory requirements. Alternative Recommendation 2: Approve the request subject to: 1. A joint parking agreement between all of the property owners and occupants of the east Lyndale commercial area. 2. Repair of parking lot owned by Fred Ryan. 3. Location of handicapped parking spaces as required by law. 4. Meeting building code and health department requirements as previously outlined. Basis of Recommendation: Approval of Alternative Recommendation 2 would allow the separate property owners to develop a general parking plan that can meet the needs of this area. The plan should take into consideration the needs of each of the businesses as well as the ultimate parking capacity of the subject area. Any agreement should be prepared with the cooperation of City staff to ensure that parking demand is adequately met. Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, July 13, 1992. The hearing will be held in the Council Chambers of the City of Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue. Notice of public hearing was published in the Sun-Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Respe lly submitted, Jame . Prosser City pager JDP:cak U 5-3 • Summary of le/1- 494 Size (S.F) I Use 0 * Restaurant requirement calculated based on number of seats. The parking capacity for the entire east commercial area if computed on the basis of total square feet. of retail space would require 94 spaces. When the 11 spaces required for Hope's is added the total requirement for the area would amount to 105 on site spaces. Broken down it looks like the following: 23,435 SF of retail 94 26 Restaurant seats 11 TOTAL 105 63 east side. 22,235 SF of retail 89 50 Restaurant seats 21 TOTAL 110 63 east side S-9 11 .:... Z J9 c J o Z% ¦a ? ? .? Z ' ° `? O '? a N. N y J IN , CL Cc CL 0 r .16 LL '?? p UII -11111plill 1111111111111111"Imil o O FenuGAVeIBPUA-l O rf- f o o CD c o Id ??? t] Id o1 d I 1. ' - ? -- -?°- 1 -- -ice ? 0 bo ? u ? 4a 0 0 ? anueny elupuA-1 v O c? ? U C? Zq BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE FOR ALL OUR CUSTOMERS, WE.ARE OPPOSED TO "HOPE'S RESTAURANT" EXPANDING THEIR SEATING CAPACITY. THE EXPANSION DOES NOT ALLOW THE PROPER QUANTITY OF PARKING SPACES TO ACCOMODATE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE. IF A CUSTOMER CANNOT EASILY GET TO YOUR STORE THEY MAY NOT COME AT ALL. J _ -11 ' ? ? F / :.c,- v-d v cr, o lrJl ?L?i?t.?.-, (? ,.? r 0 REQUEST FOR CONL FOR PURPOSE, OF Legal Descriptions We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the Conditional Use as requested. Si_gnatu J u? tONAL USE PERMIT OF ?l t s* i 0 • -ex C -- f zCi ,ui f 1, d, ?T 1 111 / Address ?f tt 01-1, /C" C.. c i 'i: t.L!!4 e .f !' :2 Ll 7?3 L ?" 6-1 L1-- *Signatures may not be removed once the petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division LYNDALE AGENCY. INC. 7646 LYNDALE AVENUL SDUIN • MINNEAPOLIS. MINN 55473 617-666.4907. • July 1, 1992 0 Shawn Drill Zoning Administrator 6700 Portland Ave. So. Richfield, Minnesota 55423 RE: Hope's Chow Mien ANWRANtV +tAOK6Rt ' Rec . .As a business owner of both the Insurance Agency, Inc. and building located at 7646 Lyndale Ave. So. I have a concern about Hope's expansion from 25 to 50 seat capacity restaurant. Parking is a big problem in our area. On street and off street parking is in such a shortage that the Total Gas Station has now become a parking lot during the day for local business now that they have closed down. As some of the former employees of St. Paul Book & Stationary said, "If we have problems with parking now, where are the new customers going to park when they double their size?" If the issue of parking can be resolved, then I have no problem with their expansion because they have been a good neighbor to have. Cor ally, x-? Gary RBI Andren Partner of Lyndale Agency, Inc. Partner of 7646 Group, owners of the building. 0 64 • June 18, 1992 Subject: Hope's Chow Mein Dear City of Richfield: Please change my application to allow 50 seats. Thank you. IC-- 0 5-9 TELEPHONE 666-3053 June 17, 1992 City Council Richfield City 6700 Portland Richfield, MN FUNK-HANECY DISTRIBUTORS, INC. Hall Avenue South 55423 Att'n: Shawn Drill, Zoning Administrator 7623 LYNOALE AVENUE SO. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55423 Re: Hope's Chow Mein, 7627 Lyndale Avenue'South, f1equest for amended conditional use permit. We have been at our location for approximately 25 years. Hopes have been good neighbors and our firm has tried to go along with their • present state of occupancy. Many of the local firms have had to put up "no restaurant parking" signs due to congestion in front of their stores as under the current Hopes permit. Hopes have only parking space in front of their building for two vehicles and to seat the current allowed 25 seats they have to spill their parking into all of the other tenants' spaces. As I understand, Hopes are applying to lease additional space in the store next door to them. This total new space would provide a maximum of 8 parking spots under their new lease. I also believe that they are planning on subleasing all but 1200 sq feet to another retail operation and this would then provide parking for an additional three or four vehicles in net new space. With an estimate of two people per vehicle this would provide parking space for an estimated six to eight people, not the additional 37 seats that they are requesting. Although my son had signed a petition for approval without adequate information, I want to state that' Funk-Hanecy Distributors, Inc. and • Funk-Hanecy, Inc. (occupants at 7623 Lyndale Avenue South) want to 5?'10 0 oppose the granting of any amendment to the Conditional.Use Permit. Sincerely, Ron Funk Owner & Director 11 0 ,??-tee z ? >6ir di g y yi 761,17 y?s- June 10, 1992 W.W. Properties F'0 En * 444 Hop k i n , Chi;. 55343 Shawn Drill City of Richfield 6 700 Portland Ave Richfield, i`'11 . 55423 Re: Proposed expansion o Hope's Chow Mein - 7627 Lynda l e Ave We are not opposed to the proposed expansion of Hope's Chow Mein into the adjoining building owned by Fred Ryan, to the south of our building, as long as tit-, Ryan can provide the additional parking spaces needed for the additional restaurant seating, This is our opinion and does not reflect the opinion of our tena nts or other b s i'neses in the area • Also before Qope'c Chow Mein proceeds with their expansion we will need ,to approve he plans and they will need to sign an amendment to their lease pertaining to.the modifications to our building, such as the openings connecting the two buildings, etc. Sincerely. Russell Wal zer 0 5-13 • June 8, 1992 - City of Richfield Shawn B. Drill, Zoning Administration 6700 Portland Ave. S. Richfield, MN 55423-2599 Project Address: 7627 Lyndale Ave. S. Case No.: 92-ACUP-2 Regarding: Parking availability The parking spaces available for the restaurant follow: 1. Eight spaces in front of the store property. 2. Three spaces of parallel parking next to the south wall of the store. 3. Three spaces in front of the store adjacent to the curb. Therefore, a total of fourteen spacesare available for customer parking. Another tenant in this building will be informed .of the restaurant's parking needs. If there are any questions, please call me at (612) 831-3300. S jncerely, i\ Fred S. Ryan, PropFyyOwner 7629 Lyndale Ave. S. Richfield, Minnesota v CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 164 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Request for approval of a conditional use permit at 6745 12th Avenue to allow conversion of a single family home into a two- family home in the R-residence district. Background: Applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to convert her single-family dwelling into a two-family dwelling. The applicant requested and was issued a conditional use permit in 1984; but nothing was done and the permit expired. The subject property will be physically changed to include the addition of a 12 foot dormer, which will extend across the back side of the house. The apartment will have an outside stairway, separate entrance, kitchen and bath. The apartment will be 17 x 42 feet, providing over 700 square feet. Recommended Motion: Approve the conditional use permit for a two unit dwelling at 6745 12th Avenue with the following stipulations: 1. That the dwelling meet building and fire code requirements; • specifically, that an egress window be provided in the sleeping room. 2. That a hard-wired smoke detector be installed in the unit. 3. That the ceiling height be at least seven feet six inches. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Planning Commission recommended approval unanimously at its meeting on June 23, 1992. 2. The following conditional use permit factors have been met: a) Located on collector street. b) Two off-street parking places, one enclosed, per unit. c) Only one access point to street. d) Meets setback requirements. 3. Applicant has requested a rebate of the $400 application fee. It is the Council's prerogative to consider such waiver. The usual waiver case involves a not-for-profit organization. Applicant's letter is attached. The Zoning Ordinance provides that such permit expires after one year unless a written request is made for an extension. Alternative Recommendation: • Deny the request for the conditional use permit with a finding of fact that the requirements for allowing a conditional use permit are not met. y• Discussion/Decision Mode: A public hearing is scheduled for 1992. The hearing will be held in Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland hearing was mailed to property own subject property. JDP:cak 0 7:00 p.m. on Monday, July 13, the City Council Chamber of Avenue. Notice of public ers within 350 feet of the Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City Manager 0 y.a July 2, 1992 • 1 City of Richfield I am asking that the $400 application fee for a Special Use Permit to construct an accessory apartment be refunded. My reasons for asking for this refund are that I had applied for a Special Use Permit in 1984, paid the fee at that time, and the application was approved. However, I was unable to arrange financing at that time. Secondly, the Special Use Permit I was granted in 1984 has no expiration date on it. When I was considering the work this spring I immediately checked to see if there was an expiration date on the permit and there was none. I therefore assumed that was no expiration date and proceeded with my plans for the accessory apartment. It was not until I applied for a building permit that I discovered the Special Use permit had expired. In view of the fact that on the permit and thatI permit, I am asking that Thank you, Norma Jean Si. 6745 - 12th Av S Richfield, Mn 55423 869-4929 there was no expiration date have already paid a fee for the the $400 be refunded to me. Attachment: 1984 Special Use Permit CITY OF RICHFIELD 6700 Portland Avenue South RMIT FOR: FO SPECIAL USE PERMIT CSI APARTMENT USE PERMIT C3 REZONING Q VARIANCE r'J ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS " PUD PLAN M FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO: Norma Jean Sims 6745 - 12th Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 You are hereby notified:that your application dated July 9, 1984 for "construction and use of an accessory apartment has been Approved) (Denied) The following is the 'legal, description oof *land affected by 'the above action: Terrace Gardens, 2nd Addition,.Lot 9 6745 - 12th Avenue South Special Conditions: 0 Approved)} (Denied) by the City Council Au crust 13,1984 Date By Rick Jo ke City Planner 41ginal to Applicant 1 copy Chief inspector w 0 z z ZLN as I I` 0 jam, I ? O N r w I ? r I S N I r r ? 3 d as N 1!! L? h 3N CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 163 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a commercial kennel license for Animal Care Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue. Background: On May 27,•1992, Animal Care Clinic submitted an application for the renewal of their commercial kennel license. On June 29, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a commercial kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a commercial kennel license. 2. The City has previously issued a kennel license to Animal Care Clinic. • Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request fora commercial kennel license. However, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a commercial kennel license for Animal Care Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. r Resp ct?fully submitted, Jame i I D . Prosser City?anager JDP:cak 3G CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 162 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a commercial kennel license for Cutler Animal Hospital, 7738 Colfax Avenue. Background: On May 28,•1992, Cutler Animal Hospital submitted an application for the renewal of their commercial kennel license. On June 29, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a commercial kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a commercial kennel license. 2. The City has previously issued a kennel license to Cutler • Animal Hospital. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a commercial kennel license. However, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a commercial kennel license for Cutler Animal Hospital, 7738 Colfax Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfq, ly submitted, James Prosser City 2a'- anager JDP:cak 3F CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.161 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for a commercial kennel license for Airport Pet Hospital, 6301 Cedar Avenue. Background: On May 27, 1992, Airport Pet Hospital submitted an application for the renewal of their commercial kennel license. On June 29, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a commercial kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a commercial kennel license. 2. The City has previously issued a kennel license to Airport Pet Hospital. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request for a commercial kennel license. However, the Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a commercial kennel license for Airport Pet Hospital, 6301 Cedar Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City 6nager JDP:cak 0 31,15"- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No.•160 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license.for Claire Todd, 7425 Pleasant Avenue. Background: On June 26, 1992, Claire Todd submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns three dogs and two cats. Ms. Todd's application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it. On July 5, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for three dogs and two cats, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. • Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs and two cats does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Todd has been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny Ms. Todd's residential kennel license. This would mean that she would have to reduce the number of dogs she has from three to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for Claire Todd, 7425 Pleasant Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. tfully submitted, Ci JDP:cak . Prosser .7 30 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 159 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license for James Ruedy, 7600 Grand Avenue. Background: On June 30, 1992, James Ruedy submitted an application for a residential kennel license. He owns five cats. Mr. Ruedy's application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it. On July 5, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for five cats, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: • 1. It is up to the animal owner more than two cats not have neighborhood. Mr. Ruedy has Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to kennel license. This would reduce the number of cats he to prove that the keeping of an adverse effect on the been able to do this. deny Mr. Ruedy's residential mean that he would have to has from five to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for James Ruedy, 7600 Grand Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfully submitted, Jame (D. Prosser City N`nager JDP:cak LJ 3C • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 158 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Adoption of resolution establishing just compensation and authorizing the purchase of property with owners who are experiencing a hardship; 7644 Grand, 7644 Wentworth, 7645 Nicollet and 7644 Chicago Avenues; 77th Street project. Background: MnDOT and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) procedures recognize property owners who are experiencing a hardship. The City is anticipating approval of a right of way plan within the next few weeks. Once this plan is approved, it is possible to purchase "hardship property" with specific state and federal approval. This process makes it possible to purchase property using project funds. It is no longer necessary to purchase property using RALF. This new option makes it possible to respond more quickly to owners. The RALF process requires six to nine months. Several weeks ago, a list of hardship acquisitions was submitted to MnDOT for review with FHWA. MnDOT has indicated review and approval of the request is imminent. • Because of the imminency of approval, it is appropriate at this time to be'ready to make offers on four of the five properties. Three of the properties identified in this letter are single family homes. The fourth property is a commercial property, Video Update. Each property has been appraised in accordance with MnDOT and FHWA procedures and standards. The resulting values including fixtures, if any, are: ? 7644 Grand, $78,000; ? 7644 Wentworth, $90,000; ? 7644 Chicago, $81,000; and ? 7645 Nicollet, $194,371. The Grand Avenue property is vacant and in probate. Preliminary estimates for relocation for the homes are $13,000 each; Video Update $20,000. Both 7644 Grand and 7644 Chicago were in the RALF process but a conversion to project funding will permit swifter action. The offer for 7645 Nicollet assumes no soil remediation work will be necessary. Previously this site was occupied by a series of gas stations. Appraisal work is being completed on the fifth property, a single family home. A request to proceed with this'property will be made when the work has been completed. • If project plan approval is forthcoming within the next several weeks, there would be no additional hardship requests. Recommended Motion: • Adopt the attached resolution which, subject to MnDOT and FHWA approval, does the following: 1. Sets just compensation and authorizes staff to negotiate and purchase the property at the value and under the conditions indicated. 2. Authorizes the City Manager and Mayor to execute a purchase agreement in the amount of just compensation. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Approval of the hardship application by MnDOT and FHWA is imminent. 2. MNDOT and FHWA appraisal procedures were followed. 3. Project funds are available. Alternative Recommendation: Do not set the purchase price and authorize purchase. Discussion/Decision Mode: Approval will make it possible to ease the owner's hardships. Resp y submitted, • James D Prosser City ager JDP:cak 0 3c, 49S. RESOLUTION NO. • THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION, AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY 7644 GRAND AVENUE 7644 WENTWORTH AVENUE 7645 NICOLLET AVENUE 7644 CHICAGO AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota desires to purchase certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the 77th Street Project (Project) heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (City) said real property being described as follows: Lot 8, Block 3, Sunset Terrance Addition '(Grand) Lot 8, Block 3, RC Svens Addition (Wentworth) Lots 9 & 10, Block 4, A.G. Bogen Co. Nicollet Avenue Addition (Nicollet) Lot 9, Block 1, Mattson Heights 4th Addition (Chicago); and WHEREAS, the City has adopted an official map for improvements to 77th Street; and • WHEREAS, the improvements to 77th Street necessitate the purchase of real estate; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes to acquire real property within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) are funding this project; and WHEREAS, MnDOT and FHWA procedures provide for purchase of property when the owner is experiencing a hardship; and WHEREAS, recognition by MNDOT and FHWA of these properties as "hardship" has been requested and such recognition is imminent; and WHEREAS, the City has caused an appraisal of the subject properties to be made by qualified independent professional real estate appraisers to determine fair market value; and WHEREAS, a qualified review appraiser has certified the appraisal reports as to.conformity with appraisal standards and has certified same. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 3C-3 1. That just compensation including fixtures, if any, determined to be as follows; 7644 Grand Avenue $ 78,000 7644 Wentworth Avenue $ 90,000 7645 Nicollet Avenue $ 194,371 7644 Chicago $ 81,000 2. That an adjust in just compensation shall be made if soil contamination is found at 7645 Nicollet Avenue. 3. That the City Manager is authorized and directed to commence negotiations for the purchase of said real property following MnDOT and FHWA approval. 4. That the City Manager and Mayor are authorized to execute a purchase agreement for the amount of just compensation set fourth in this resolution. 5. That the City Manager is hereby directed to notify, in writing, the owner of subject property as soon as possible that the City intends to acquire his/her property and establish eligibility for relocation benefits. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, • Minnesota this 13th day of July, 1992. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 36 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 157 Agenda July 13, 1992 Issue Statement: Adoption of a resolution approving expenditure of $10,000 from Richfield's Municipal State Aid (MSA) construction account and approving Construction Cooperative Agreement. Background: The Hennepin County Department of Transportation is proposing to apply a new blacktop surface on Nicollet Avenue from Trunk Highway 62 (Crosstown) to 1494 this summer. County policy requires that the City participate in certain costs associated with this project as follows: 1. Fifty percent of the replacement cost for sidewalk, curb and gutter and driveway apron when the existing concrete must be replaced only because of its condition. If the replacement is to facilitate the County's work, the County pays 100% of the cost. Richfield's cost, based on the 50% replacement, is estimated at $10,000 including contingency and engineering costs. This cost is MSA eligible. 2. One hundred percent of the cost to repair sewer manholes within the street that are in need of repair. This cost, • estimated at $6,050, will be paid for by the sanitary sewer utility fund. 3. The cost of material needed to raise manholes and water valves to the height of the new pavement surface. The County will pay for the cost of labor to install the material. This cost of the material is estimated at $4,700. Because the proposed improvement is an "off-system" improvement (not part of the City's MSA system), State Aid rules will not allow the City to receive more funds from the account than the City Council authorizes. Therefore, staff has included a 20% contingency. Any funds that are approved but not spent will remain in Richfield's MSA construction account. Further, staff is requesting the City Council to approve a construction cooperative agreement to cost share the work as outlined above. Recommended Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing expenditure of $10,000 from Richfield's MSA construction account for the proposed improvement and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a cost sharing Construction Cooperative Agreement. • Basis for Recommendation: 1. Overlaying Nicollet Avenue is necessary to maintain the road in good order. M-/ • 2. The cost to Richfield is relatively small, and will be paid by MSA or the sewer utility fund. No general fund monies will be required. 3. Council approval is necessary to obtain the MSA funding required for this project. Alternative Recommendation: Council could choose to not.participate in this project; however, funding is available now and non-participation could delay or halt a much-needed improvement. Discussion/Decision. Mode: This item appears on the July 13, 1992 Council agenda. Staff is requesting approval at this time in order to allow Hennepin County to complete the work in a timely manner. Respectful ]?y submitted, James D. ;Prosser City Ma Eger JDP:cak • Attachment n LJ 3,3-,?, LJ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF $10,000 OF RICHFIELD'S MUNICIPAL STATE AID CONSTRUCTION MONIES TO OFFSET CERTAIN EXPENSES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RESURFACING OF NICOLLET AVENUE WHEREAS, it has been deemed advisable and necessary for the City of Richfield to participate in the cost of the applying of a new driving surface on Nicollet Avenue from T.H. 62 (Crosstown Highway) to 1494; and WHEREAS, County policy requires that the City participate in certain costs associated with this project; and WHEREAS, the cost of such improvement is estimated to be approximately $10,000; and WHEREAS, the approval of the City Council is needed to expend Municipal State Aid funds on an off-system improvement; and WHEREAS, approval of the City Council is needed to enter into a Construction Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County. • NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield does hereby appropriate from its Municipal State Aid Construction Account the sum of $10,000 to apply toward the said improvement and request the Commissioner of Transportation to approve this authorization and hereby approves entering into a Construction Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County for the purpose of constructing said improvement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of July, 1992. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk r 1 U J? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.156 Agenda July 13, 1992 of • Issue Statement: Resolution relating to traffic control signs "No Parking Anytime" on both sides of Lyndale Avenue from 64th Street to 67th Street. Background: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is requiring a Council resolution regarding the above No Parking restrictions in order to approve the plans for the pavement rehabilitation of Lyndale Avenue from 64th to 67th Streets. Recommended Motion: Approve the attached resolution relating to "No Parking Anytime" on Lyndale Avenue from 64th to 67th Streets. Basis for Recommendation: 1. This area has had parking restrictions since before the City kept records on traffic signs. The heavy traffic on Lyndale Avenue points to the need for continued parking restrictions. 2. A certified resolution is required by the Minnesota Department of Transportation in order to obtain approval of the plans for pavement rehabilitation. 3. The resolution will be required in order for the State to approve Municipal State Aid (MSA) reimbursement monies. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item appears on the July 13, 1992 Council agenda. Staff is requesting approval at this-time in order to assure timely approval of plans and reimbursement by MnDOT. Respec?tf,ully submitted, Jame' ?•D?. Prosser City?Manager JDP:cak Attachment U 3A-l • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS "NO PARKING ANYTIME" ON BOTH SIDES OF LYNDALE AVENUE FROM 64TH STREET TO 67TH STREET. WHEREAS, the above referenced traffic control devices are necessary in order to obtain Minnesota Department of Transportation requirements for Municipal State Aid streets: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that 1. The Community Services Department is hereby authorized and directed to erect the following signs at the following locations, to wit: "No Parking Anytime" and on both sides of Lyndale Avenue from 64th to 67th Streets; 2. When the aforementioned traffic control signs have been so erected on said street, they shall be official traffic control signs of the City of Richfield and failure to observe such signs shall constitute a violation of the traffic ordinance of this city; and • 3. This resolution supersedes all previous conflicting resolutions. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of July, 1992. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0