The URL can be used to link to this page

6-10-91 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 143 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement: Presentation of Certificates of Appreciation to the 1991 Miss Richfield candidates. Background• Each year,•a young lady is selected as Miss Richfield during the Fourth of July activities. This year there are twelve candidates. Recommended Motion: Present each candidate with a Certificate of Appreciation. Basis for Recommendation: 1. This has been a long-standing tradition. 2. The candidates will be present to receive these certificates. Alternative Recommendation: 1. None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the June 10 agenda, and certificates have been prepared. Respectf y submitted, James Prosser City M alter JDP:ds l-~ KRISTI KRINHOP Kristi is a 1991 graduate of Richfield High School. She was a member of the golf team, S.A.D.D. and played broomball. In the fall she plans to attend the University of Wisconsin to pursue a career in elementary education. Her mother is Nancy Krinhop. Kristi is sponsored by The Ground Round. ANN MARIE STROSHANE Ann Marie is a 1991 Richfield High School .graduate. In the fall she will attend the University of St. Thomas to study law. She was a member of the National Honor Society, yearbook editor, S.A.D.D. president and on the school danceline. Her parents are Earl and Patricia Stroshane. Ann Marie is sponsored by McDonalds. JILL URBANSKI Jill graduated from Richfield High School in 1990.. She was a member of the Student Senate, played softball and was a competition squad cheerleader. She currently attends the University of St. Thomas pursuing a career in corporate law. Her parents are Dennis and Darlene Urbanski. Jill is sponsored by the Hub Merchants. SUSAN NICOLE VANDEN BURG Susan is 18 years old and a 1991 graduate of Richfield High School. She is a member of Richfield's Human Rights Commission, the National Honor Society and was a part of the school musicals. She plans on attending Normandale College and Luther College majoring in theatre arts and music. Her parents are Maurice and Dawn Vanden Burg. Susan is sponsored by the Hub Dairy Queen. LYNETTE NICOLE WILKES Lynette graduated from Richfield High School in 1990. She was a member of the school danceline and played softball. She is a member of the school danceline and played softball. She is currently a freshman at Mankato State University and will pursue a career in psychology after graduation. Her mother is Darlene Wilkes. Lynette is sponsored by the Hampton Inn. 1991 RICHFIELD QUEEN CANDIDATES KAREN ALTHEN Karen graduated from Richfield High School in 1991. She was a member of the school government, S.A.D.D., and on the yearbook staff. Her plans are to attend the University of Minnesota Duluth to study business administration and pre-law. Her parents are John and Mary Althen. Karen is sponsored by the Rotary Club. AMY BUCK Amy is a 1990 graduate of Richfield High School and is currently attending Bethel College. She hopes to pursue a career in secondary education. She is very involved with church activities, Girl Scouting and was an accompanist for the 70th Street Singers. Her parents are Don and Nancy Buck. Amy is sponsored by Spirit Unlimited. KATE TAYLOR-EDWARDS Kate is 18 years old and graduated from Richfield High School in 1991. She received a scholarship to attend the Children's Theatre School and was in the Angelica Cantanti Choir. She plans on attending college in the fall to study criminology and psychology. Her parent is Beryl-Taylor Edwards. Kate is sponsored by The Print Shop. SHANNON DUFFY Shannon graduated from Richfield High School in 1990. For the past two years she has been very involved with a day-care program. In the fall she will attend Normandale Community College majoring in business management. Her parents are Colleen Duffy and Terry Hansen. Shannon is sponsored by the American Legion. JESSICA HULETT Jessica is a 1990 graduate of Richfield High School and is currently attending Normandale College and will be pursuing a career in business/computers. In high school she played softball and was on the baccalaureate committee. Her parents are Ray and Mary Hulett. Jessica is sponsored by the Optimist Club. TANYA HUTCHINSON Tanya is 19 years old and a Richfield High School graduate. She was very active in sports and tutored the mentally handicapped several times a week. She is currently attending Lowthian College and would like to pursue a career in the fashion buying field after graduation. Her parents are Mike and Elaine Hutchinson. Tanya is sponsored by Bloomington Chrysler Plymouth. WENDY ANN JOHNSTON Wendy graduated from the Academy of the Holy Angels in 1990. She was active in soccer, track and in school plays. She plans to attend the University of Minnesota and will pursue a career in computers and management. Her parents are Wayne and Kathy Johnston. Wendy is sponsored by Fred Babcock VFW. -~ 1990 RICHFIELD ROYALTY CATHY SULLA, QUEEN Cathy is a 1990 graduate of Richfield High School and recently completed her sophomore year at St. Cloud State. She plans on attending the the University of Minnesota in the fall majoring in mass communications with an emphasis on public relations. Her parents are Mary Sulla and the late Jim Sulla. KATHY LINDSTROM, PRINCESS Kathy is a 1987 graduate of Richfield High School and a 1991 graduate of the University of Minnesota. She majored in sociology and hopes to pursue a career in criminal justice. Her parents are Jerry and Marcy Lindstrom. KELLY KISPERT, PRINCESS Kelly graduated from Richfield High School in 1990 and is currently a student at Gustafus Adolphus College majoring in elementary education. She is a member of Delta Phi Omega sorority, teaches figure skating and is one the Gustavus danceline. Her parents are Brian and Jan Kispert. ~t ~1 DITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 144 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Proposed 1992 alley maintenance special assessment project - City Project No. 872. Background• The alley policy adopted by the City Council in 1980 provides that "all costs involved in maintaining an alley will be assessed against the property abutting the alley." In 1981, the maintenance functions to unpaved alleys covered sweeping, cleaning of potholes and cold patching. In 1982 and years since, the maintenance functions covered by this assessment included not only repair work to unpaved alleys, but also an assessment to all alleys, paved or unpaved, for snowplowing services. The actual 1989 maintenance costs for all alleys totalled $17,725.98, or approximately 59.60/per fifty-foot lot. These charges were primarily for sweeping, snowplowing and joint repair on paved alleys. The 1990 estimates for alley maintenance were $20,000, or approximately $10.75/per fifty-foot lot on a paved alley. Actual costs were 517,213.95. The 1991 estimate for alley maintenance is also $20,000. This estimate is anticipating a normal winter of snowplowing and sweeping; plus the concrete joint sealing maintenance program initiated in the 1989 alley maintenance program. As for 1992, the estimates are also $20,000 for alley maintenance or approximately $10.75 for a fifty-foot lot. $7.75/per lot is the estimate for sweeping and a normal winter of snowplowing. The additional 53.00/per lot is an estimate of costs to continue a concrete joint sealing maintenance program on paved alleys as a part of routine maintenance. Estimates of additional costs on unpaved alleys each year have been about $23.00/per lot. Costs have varied depending on the amount of patching required. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution which proposes to specially assess the costs of 1992 services for alley maintenance and sets the public hearing on this special assessment project for July 22, 1991. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Previously adopted policy mandates the assessments. 2. The project is feasible. ~' Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose to establish a set however, the remaining unpaved alleys require yearly maintenance; as well as require cracksealing. rate for snowplowing; in the City will still the older alleys which now Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may choose to delay adoption of this resolution until the next meeting; however, any further delay would cause scheduling problems with legal notices required by Minnesota State Statute. Respectfu ly submitted, James Prosser City Ma ager JDP:ds Attachment ~~~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 872 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That area which includes the property which abuts improved alleys in Richfield (the "District") is hereby established as a special assessment district for the purpose of assessing for current services provided by the City. 2. That the following current services of the City are hereby proposed to be undertaken by the City in the District with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against the benefited property within the District: the maintenance and snowplowing of alleys. 3. That the area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the District. It is proposed that special assessments on property be made on the basis of prorated share of assessable abutting footage as defined in the alley improvement policy, Resolution No. 6345.. 4. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish notice of a public hearing by this Council at which time the Council will consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. Such notice shall be published in the official newspaper at least once and at least two weeks prior to the date of hearing. Such hearing shall be held on Monday, July 22, 1991, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda. 5. That it is hereby proposed the project consist of the costs of the aforementioned services for the period from January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned current services during that period, using day labor, is $20,000. 6. That the project is feasible. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 10th day of June, 1991. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch Mayor Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 1'45 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Resolution relating to 1992 Maintenance Assessments, LHN (Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet) Redevelopment Area, City Project No. 873. Background• On January•26, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6372, which established a service in the LHN area (approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue) which would be specially assessed. The special assessment to commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable commercial property within the district being assessed an equal amount. All single family, two family and multiple family residential property within this area were eliminated from the special assessment levy. In 1982, agreements were reached with owners in the LHN area related to maintenance of property. For the most part, each owner was to be responsible for property to the curb while the City is responsible for common areas such as street islands. Although the City does perform some maintenance work for individual property owners, these costs are directly assessed to the appropriate owner and maintenance of common areas continues to be assessed to the entire district. Current maintenance services for the district would include, but not necessarily be limited to, one or more of the following: Landscaping, including tree trimming; Sidewalk sweeping in the summer; Snow removal in the winter; Sidewalk deicing; Painting and repair of wood furniture; Trash removal; General maintenance, including repairs and replacement; Irrigation maintenance. These items are extra services provided directly to the LHN Redevelopment Area and do not include services provided to the entire City. For example, all City streets are swept twice a year, and for this service there would be no charge to the LHN maintenance assessment. However, any additional street sweeping in the LHN area would be an assessable item. Estimated and 1992 were/are: Year 1989 1990 1991 1992 actual costs for LHN maintenance services 1989 - Estimated 544,560 $44,153 $44,576 Actual 543,151.19 $43,539.10 ~~' Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution proposing to specially assess for the costs of current services provided within the LHN project area for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992, and to set the public hearing date for July 22, 1991. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Resolution No. 6372, adopted in 1981, established a policy for assessing the costs. 2. This policy allows staff to continue to provide excellent service to the LHN Redevelopment Area. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose to establish a set rate and limit the maintenance performed to that dollar amount; however, staff believes the redevelopment area would suffer if limited maintenance was performed. Discussion/Decision Mode: Continued maintenance service for this commercial area is recommended by staff in order to sustain the current standards for landscaping and maintenance which have been successful over the past years. Respectf ly submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment '! JJ ~~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 873 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. There is hereby established a special assessment district, the boundaries of which are conterminous with the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area, for the purposes of assessing for current services provided by the City. 2. The following current services of the City are hereby proposed to be undertaken by the City in the district, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against benefited property within the district: Snow, ice or rubbish removal; Weed elimination; Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding and structure included under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26; Installation or repair of water service lines; Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets; Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees; Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks, and other pedestrian walkways; Operation of the street lighting system; Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent to street right-of-way; Maintenance of Civic Plaza; Snow removal and other maintenance of streets; Painting and repair of wood furniture; General maintenance, including repairs and replacement. 3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the district. It is proposed that special assessments on commercial property be made on the basis of the area with each square foot of assessable commercial property within the district being assessed an equal amount for maintenance of common area. Exempt from the special assessment levy shall be all single family, two-family, multiple family residential property within the LHN redevelopment district. Special maintenance of individual commercial properties shall be assessed directly for costs incurred in performing said maintenance to said property. `C~ -/ 4. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give public notice of a hearing by this Council at which the Council will consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. The City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing as required by law. Such hearing shall be held on Monday, July 22, 1991, commencing at 7:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda. 5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the aforementioned services for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned current services during that period is $44,576. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk ~C CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 146 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Resolution relating to 1992 Maintenance Assessments, ILN (Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment) Project Area, City Project No. 874. Background• On March 14, 1988, the Council adopted Resolution No. 7405 establishing a policy that the actual cost of performing current maintenance services in the ILN Project Area (area approximately bounded by Lyndale on the east and 77th Street on the south) would be assessed. The special assessment to multi-residential and commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable property within the district being assessed an equal amount. Current maintenance services for the district would include, but not necessarily be limited to: 1. Landscape maintenance of common properties including, among other things, tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing and edging. 2. Irrigation maintenance. 3. Painting and repair of wood furniture. 4. Trash removal and general maintenance including repair and replacement of lights, sidewalks, curbs, furniture and plantings. These items are extra services provided directly to the ILN Project Area and do not include services provided to the entire City. Estimated and actual costs for the ILN maintenance services 1988- 1992 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $7,001.47 1989 57,254 $6,135.54 1990 $7,514 $7 762.52 1991 $7,780 1992 $8,105 Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution proposing to specially assess the ILN Project Area for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992, and to set July 22, 1991 as the public hearing date for said proposed special assessment. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a policy for assessing the costs. yC-I 2. This policy will allow staff to continue to provide excellent service to the ILN Project Area. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose to establish a set rate and limit the maintenance performed to that dollar amount; however, staff believes the redevelopment area would suffer if limited maintenance was performed. Discussion/Decision Mode: Continued maintenance service for this area is recommended by staff in order to sustain current standards for landscaping and maintenance. Action on this item should be taken at this time to meet the requirements for the public hearing date. Respectf ly submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment RESOLUTION NO. ~ l._.~ RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE ILN (INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET) PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992. CITY PROJECT NO. 874 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. There is hereby established a special assessment district, the boundaries of which are Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, for the purposes of assessing for current services provided by the City. 2. The current services hereby proposed to be undertaken by the City in the district, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against benefited commercial and multiple family residential property within the district, include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Landscape maintenance of common properties including tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing, edging; Irrigation maintenance; Painting and repair of wood furniture; Trash removal and general maintenance including repairs and replacement of lights, sidewalks, curbs, plantings. 3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the district. It is proposed special assessments on commercial and multifamily residential property be made on the basis of the area with each square foot of assessable property within the district being assessed an equal amount for maintenance of common area. 4. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give notice of a hearing by this Council at which time the Council will consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. The city clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing as required by law. Such hearing shall be Monday, July 22, 1991, commencing 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda. 5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the aforementioned services for the period January 1 through December 31, 1992. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned current services during that period is $8,105. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.147 ~D Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Resolution declaring costs to be assessed for alley maintenance and snowplowing for the period January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1990, and setting a public hearing date for City Project No. 852, 1990 Alley Maintenance. Background• City staff•has determined costs to be assessed for alley maintenance, City Project No. 852. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Property owners on permanently paved concrete alleys are assessed for snowplowing, joint repair, and patching work done on the alley right of way. Estimated and actual costs for the alley maintenance services 1988 - 1992 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $ 8,453.93 1989 520,000 $17,725.98 1990 520,000 $17,213.95 1991 $20,000 1992 ,$20,000 Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll; and the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 22, 1991. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Council ordered this work to be done. 2. Adoption of the resolutions at this time will allow adequate time for staff to complete necessary legal requirements in order to meet certification deadlines. Alternative Recommendation: Council may revise the special assessment roll after the public hearing as deemed necessary. Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may choose to delay action on the attached resolution; however, Minnesota state law requires specific notices and public meetings, and scheduling problems may occur beyond a two week delay. Resp ully submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP:ds RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~-I RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1990 ALLEY MAINTENANCE AND SNOWPLOWING - CITY PROJECT NO. 852 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance and snowplowing of the following alleys in the City of Richfield. The expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance and snowplowing for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990 amount to $17,213.95. Number Surroundina Avenues Surroundin a Streets 1001 Xerxes - Washburn 66th - 67th 1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th - 68th 1003 Xerxes - Washburn 68th - 69th 1004 Xerxes -.Washburn 69th - 70th 1005 Washburn - Vincent 66th - 67th 1006 Washburn - Vincent 67th - 68th 1007 Washburn - Vincent 68th - 69th 1008 Washburn - Vincent 69th - 70th 1009 Vincent - Upton 66th - 67th 1010 Vincent - Upton 67th - 68th 1011 Vincent - Upton 68th - 69th 1012 Vincent - Upton 69th - 70th 1013 Upton - Thomas 66th - 67th 1014 Upton - Thomas 68th - 69th 1015 Upton - Thomas 69th - 70th 1016 Thomas - Sheridan 66th - 67th 1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th - 68th 1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th - 69th 1019 Thomas - Sheridan 69th - 70th 1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th - 67th 1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th - 68th 1022 Sheridan - Russell 68th - 69th 1023 Sheridan - Russell 69th - 70th 1024 Russell - Queen 66th - 67th 1025 Russell - Queen 67th - 68th 1026 Russell - Queen 68th - 69th 1027 Russell - Queen 69th - 70th 1028 Queen - Penn 66th - 67th 1029 Queen - Penn 67th - 68th 1030 Queen - Penn 68th - 69th 1031 Queen - Penn 69th - 70th 2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd - 64th 2002 Oliver - Newton 63rd - 64th 2004 Morgan - Logan 63rd - 64th 2005 Logan - Knox 63rd - 64th 2007 James - Irving 63rd - 64th 2008 Irving - Humboldt 63rd - 64th 2009 Humboldt - Girard 63rd - 64th 2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd - 64th 2011 Girard - Fremont (35W) 64th - 65th 2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th - 66th yD~~ Resolution No. Page 2 2013 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 64th - 65th 2014 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 65th - 66th 2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred 2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred 2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr 2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th 2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th 3002 Lyndale - Garfield 68th - 69th 3003 Augsburg - Garfield 70th - 71th 3004 Augsburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd 3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72nd - 73rd 3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th 3007 Garfield - Harriet 71st - 72nd 3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd 3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th 3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th 3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th 3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd 3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th 3015 Grand - Pleasant 6$th - 69th 3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd 3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th 3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th 3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th 3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th 3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th 3025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st 3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd 3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd 3029 1st - Stevens 72nd - 73rd 3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3032 2nd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th 3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th 3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th 3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th 3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th 3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th 3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th 4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th 4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd 4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd 4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th 4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th 4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th 4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th 4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th ~~~~ Resolution No. 4012 4013 22nd - Standish 13th - 14th Avenue Page 3 65th - 66th 66th - 67th NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $17,213.95. 2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected, without regard to cash valuation as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. ~!Q-~ RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1990 ALLEY MAINTENANCE - CITY PROJECT NO. 852 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 10, 1991, the City Clerk was directed to prepare assessment of the cost of mai ntaining the following alleys in the City of Richfield for the period of January 1 1990 through December 31, 1990. , Number Surrounding Avenues Surround ing Streets 1001 Xerxes - Washburn 66th - 67th 1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th - 68th 1003 Xerxes - Washburn 68th - 69th 1004 Xerxes - Washburn 69th - 70th 1005 Washburn - Vincent 66th - 67th 1006 Washburn - Vincent 67th - 68th 1007 Washburn - Vincent 68th - 69th 1008 Washburn - Vincent 69th - 70th 1009 Vincent - Upton 66th - 67th 1010 Vincent - Upton 67th - 68th 1011 Vincent - Upton 68th - 69th 1012 Vincent - Upton 69th - 70th 1013 Upton - Thomas 66th - 67th 1014 Upton - Thomas 68th - 69th 1015 Upton - Thomas 69th - 70th 1016 Thomas - Sheridan 66th - 67th 1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th - 68th 1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th - 69th 1019 Thomas - Sheridan 69th - 70th 1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th - 67th 1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th - 68th 1022 Sheridan - Russell 68th - 69th 1023 Sheridan - Russell 69th - 70th 1024 Russell - Queen 66th - 67th 1025 Russell - Queen 67th - 68th 1026 Russell - Queen 68th - 69th 1027 Russell - Queen 69th - 70th 1028 Queen - Penn 66th - 67th 1029 Queen - Penn 67th - 68th 1030 Queen - Penn 68th - 69th 1031 Queen - Penn 69th - 70th 2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd - 64th 2002 Oliver - Newton 63rd - 64th 2004 Morgan - Logan 63rd - 64th 2005 Logan - Knox 63rd - 64th 2007 James - Irving 63rd - 64th 2008 Irving - Humboldt 63rd - 64th 2009 Humboldt - Girard 63rd - 64th 2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd - 64th 2011 Girard - Fremont (35W) 64th - 65th 2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th - 66th 2013 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 64th - 65th 2014 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 65th - 66th 2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred ~- Resolution Page two 2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred 2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr 2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th 2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th 3002 Lyndale - Garfield 68th - 69th 3003 Augsburg - Garfield 70th - 71th 3004 Augsburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd 3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72nd - 73rd 3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th 3007 Garfield - Harriet 71st - 72nd 3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd 3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th 3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th 3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th 3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd 3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th 3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th - 69th 3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd 3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th 3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th 3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th 3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th 3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th 3025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st 3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd 3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd 3029 1st - Stevens 72nd - 73rd 3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3032 2nd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th 3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th 3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th 3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th 3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th 3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th 3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th 4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th 4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd 4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd 4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th 4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th 4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th 4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th 4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th 4012 22nd - Standish 65th - 66th 4013 13th - 14th Avenue 66th - 67th WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. Resolution y~~~ Page three NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of July, 1991, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such proposed assessment. At such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assesment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing. He shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance, and also caused mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll, not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch ATTEST: Mayor Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA L~~~ Council Letter No. 148 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Preparation of assessment rolls and setting hearing date for City Project 853, 1990 LHN (Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Area) Maintenance. Background• City staff•has determined costs to be assessed for the maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area, City Project 853, the 1990 LHN Maintenance Project. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Estimated and actual costs for the LHN maintenance services 1988- 1992 were: Year Estimated 1988 1989 $40,614 1990 544,560 1991 $44,153 1992 544,576 Recommended Motion: Adopt the resolution declaring costs to preparation of the proposed assessment and the resolution setting the date of assessment for July 22, 1991. Actual 544,159.33 543,151.19 $43,539.10 be assessed and ordering roll for LHN maintenance, hearing on the proposed Basis of Recommendation: Council ordered the work, and the work is done. Alternative Recommendation: Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing. Discussion/Decision Mode: In order to meet certification approval at this time. deadlines, staff is requesting James Prosser City Manager Respect ully submitted, JDP:ds Attachments ~~-i RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LHN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990 CITY PROJECT NO. 853 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance amount to $43,539.10 for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $43,539.10. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer and the operations coordinator, shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. The City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Cler y~-a RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LHN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990 CITY PROJECT NO. 853 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 10, 1991, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of maintaining the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield, Minnesota for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of July, 1991, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA (,.~~ Council Letter No. 14.9 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Preparation of assessment rolls and setting hearing date for City Project No. 854, 1990 ILN (Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment Area) Maintenance. Background• City staff•has determined costs to be assessed for the maintenance of the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment Area, City Project No. 854, the 1990 ILN Maintenance Project. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Estimated and actual costs for the ILN maintenance services 1988- 1992 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 57,001.47 1989 57,254 56,135.54 1990 $7,514 $7,762.52 1991 $7,780 1992 58,105 Recommended Motion: Adopt the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of the proposed assessment roll for I/L/N maintenance, and the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 22, 1991. Basis of Recommendation: Council ordered the work, and the work is done. Alternative Recommendation: Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing. Discussion/Decision Mode: In order to meet certain legal requirements for publishing legal notices and notifying affected property owners, staff is requesting approval at this time. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment ~F l RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR ILN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990 CITY PROJECT NO. 854 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance of the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet (I/L/N) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance amount to $7,762.52 for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $7,762.52. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer and the facilities/project coordinator, shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. The City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk LI ~ _ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR I/L/N MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1990 CITY PROJECT NO. 854 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 10, 1991, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of maintaining the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet (I/L/N) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, in the City of Richfield, Minnesota for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of July, 1991, in the council chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 150 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Approval of resolutions declaring costs to be assessed for removal of diseased trees from private property for the period January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1990, and setting date of hearing. Background• The costs to be assessed for the removal of Dutch Elm diseased trees on private property for the period of January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1990 have been determined to be $23,123.43. The property owner of a diseased tree has four options available: 1. Remove the tree themselves. 2. Hire and pay their own contractor. 3. Hire the City's contractor and pay for the removal within 30 days, or 4. Use the City's contractor and request that the cost of the tree removal be assessed, against their property tax. In the period from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1990, fifty-four property owners chose the fourth option. The original source of funding to have the work done is through the City's Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund. The property owner may prepay the special assessment, but if it is certified on or before October 10, 1991, for the 1991 taxes, the interest rate is eight percent with payment spread over three years. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll, and the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 22, 1991. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The work has been done with prior approval from the affected residents. 2. Minnesota State Statute requires the County to be notified of all special assessments. Alternative Recommendation: Council may revise the special assessment roll as deemed necessary following the public hearing. DiscussionJDecision Mode: All work was performed with prior approval from homeowners. Staff is requesting adoption of the attached resolutions at this time in order to meet certification deadlines. Resp t lly submitted, James Prosser City Manager ~~-1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1990 TO DECEMBER 31, 1990. WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the removal of diseased trees from the following private properties in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such work during the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990 amount to $23,123.43. Prop erty Address Property Identification Number 6748 Grand Avenue 27-02824-32-0079 6701 Stevens Avenue 27-02824-42-0132 6709 Washburn Avenue 29-02824-42-0121 7432 Upton Avenue 32-02824-42-0038 6617 Park Avenue 26-02824-32-0015 6237 -15th Avenue 26-02824-12-0054 6236 Bloomington Avenue 26-02824-12-0049 6639 Chicago Avenue 26-02824-31-0053 7124 Oak Grove Boulevard 33-02824-14-0146 6838-14th Avenue 26-02824-43-0033 6239-13th Avenue 26-02824-12-0129 6921-13th Avenue 26-02824-43-0063 1715 West 72nd Street 33-02824-24-0060 7324 Blaisdell Avenue 34-02824-24-0093 7227 Knox Avenue 33-02824-24-0030 7401 Colfax Avenue 33-02824-41-0060 6612 Sheridan Avenue 29-02824-41-0054 400 West 64th Street 27-02824-22-0075 6625 Oakland Avenue 26-02824-32-0028 6512-16th Avenue 26-02824-14-0100 6516-16th Avenue 26-02824-14-0101 6641 Thomas Avenue 29-02824-41-0063 6317-21st Avenue 25-02824-21-0041 6900 Cedar Avenue 26-02824-44-0065 7044 Knox Avenue 33-02824-21-0067 7211 Portland Avenue 35-02824-23-0002 7439 Washburn Avenue 32-02824-42-0058 7413 Emerson Avenue 33-02824-42-0018 7304 Fifth Avenue 34-02824-14-0037 2204 East 66th Street 25-02824-24-0024 6909 Upton Avenue 29-02824-43-0187 6305 Bloomington Avenue 26-02824-11-0031 6633 Lynwood Boulevard 28-02824-41-0032 7011 Fourth Avenue 34-02824-11-0103 7544 Stevens Avenue 34-02824-42-0088 7045 Penn Avenue 33-02824-22-0061 7357 Portland Avenue 35-02824-23-0007 6325- 22nd Avenue 25-02824-21-0019 7626 Nicollet Avenue 34-02824-34-0006 6500 James Avenue 28-02824-24-0096 6439- 13th Avenue 26-02824-13-0125 7035 Oak Grove Boulevard 33-02824-11-0005 7104 Fifth Avenue 34-02824-11-0110 7327 Tenth Avenue 35-02824-24-0044 ~~~ Resolution No. Page 2 Property Address 6449 Girard Avenue 121 East 68th Street 7305 Emerson Avenue 7300 Dupont Avenue 6933-18th Avenue 6619 Irving Avenue 6612 Newton Avenue 6407-15th Avenue 7301 Third Avenue 7341 Humboldt Avenue Property Identification Number 28-02824-13-0011 27-02824-43-0105 33-02824-13-0096 33-02824-13-0077 26-02824-44-0075 28-02824-31-0090 28-02824-32-0037 26-02824-13-0049 34-02824-14-0102 33-02824-13-0107 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $23,123.43. 2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such work against each benefited property, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 10th day of June, 1991. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch Mayor Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk ~- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1990 TO DECEMBER 31, 1990. WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 10, 1991, the City Clerk was directed to prepare the assessment of the cost of removing diseased trees from the following private properties in the City of Richfield for the period January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. Property Address 6748 Grand Avenue 6701 Stevens Avenue 6709 Washburn Avenue 7432 Upton Avenue 6617 Park Avenue 6237-15th Avenue 6236 Bloomington Avenue 6639 Chicago Avenue 7124 Oak Grove Boulevard 6838-14th Avenue 6239-13th Avenue 6921-13th Avenue 1715 West 72nd Street 7324 Blaisdell Avenue 7227 Knox Avenue 7401 Colfax Avenue 6612 Sheridan Avenue 400 West 64th Street 6625 Oakland Avenue 6512-16th Avenue 6516-16th Avenue 6641 Thomas Avenue 6317-21st Avenue 6900 Cedar Avenue 7044 Knox Avenue 7211 Portland Avenue 7439 Washburn Avenue 7413 Emerson Avenue 7304 Fifth Avenue 2204 East 66th Street 6909 Upton Avenue 6305 Bloomington Avenue 6633 Lynwood Boulevard 7011 Fourth Avenue 7544 Stevens Avenue 7045 Penn Avenue 7357 Portland Avenue 6325-22nd Avenue 7626 Nicollet Avenue 6500 James Avenue 6439-13th Avenue 7035 Oak Grove Boulevard 7104 Fifth Avenue Property Identification Number 27-02824-32-0079 27-02824-42-0132 29-02824-42-0121 32-02824-42-0038 26-02824-32-0015 26-02824-12-0054 26-02824-12-0049 26-02824-31-0053 33-02824-14-0146 26-02824-43-0033 26-02824-12-0129 26-02824-43-0063 33-02824-24-0060 34-02824-24-0093 33-02824-24-0030 33-02824-41-0060 29-02824-41-0054 27-02824-22-0075 26-02824-32-0028 26-02824-14-0100 26-02824-14-0101 29-02824-41-0063 25-02824-21-0041 26-02824-44-0065 33-02824-21-0067 35-02824-23-0002 32-02824-42-0058 33-02824-42-0018 34-02824-14-0037 25-02824-24-0024 29-02824-43-0187 26-02824-11-0031 28-02824-41-0032 34-02824-11-0103 34-02824-42-0088 33-02824-22-0061 35-02824-23-0007 25-02824-21-0019 34-02824-34-0006 28-02824-24-0096 26-02824-13-0125 33-02824-11-0005 34-02824-11-0110 Resolution No. Page 2 Property Address 7327 Tenth Avenue 6449 Girard Avenue 121 East 68th Street 7305 Emerson Avenue 7300 Dupont Avenue 6933-18th Avenue 6619 Irving Avenue 6612 Newton Avenue 6407-15th Avenue 7301 Third Avenue 7341 Humboldt Avenue ~ CS- ~ Property Identification Number 35-02824-24-0044 28-02824-13-0011 27-02824-43-0105 33-02824-13-0096 33-02824-13-0077 26-02824-44-0075 28-02824-31-0090 28-02824-32-0037 26-02824-13-0049 34-02824-14-0102 33-02824-13-0107 WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of July, 1991, in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7 p.m., or as soon as hereafter as it may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said diseased tree removal assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the diseased tree removal. He shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. By order of the City council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch Mayor Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk ~ /-E CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 151 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Approval of a subdivision waiver for the Hub West/Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) property. Background: Bradley Real Estate Investment Trust and KFC are requesting a subdivision waiver to reconfigure the KFC site along 66th Street. The small office building lot located on 66th Street adjacent to the Soo Line would be divided in two with KFC acquiring the southerly parcel. The northerly part would be attached to the Rainbow site. The existing KFC lot would be divided by transferring a strip of land along the north side and the easterly side to Bradley for inclusion in the Rainbow site. After the divisions, KFC would end up with a parcel of land of approximately the same square footage extending to the Soo Line. Recommended Motion: Approve the subdivision waiver and adopt the attached resolution. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The resulting parcel configurations would meet City requirements. 2. The Hub West and KFC redevelopment proposal has been reviewed and approved by the City Council and HRA. 3. A yard variance along 66th Street has been granted to KFC. 4. Approval of the subdivision waiver will not interfere with the purposes of the platting regulations of Section 500.05. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council may deny the subdivision waiver but the redevelopment project cannot go forward without such. Discussion/Decision Mode: No public hearing is required for this matter. A decision is necessary at the June 10, 1991 meeting in order to keep the project on schedule. Respec lly submitted, Jam Prosser Cit' anager JDP:cak RESOLUTION NO.~ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBDIVISION WAIVER WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has been requested to approve a subdivision waiver for the division of certain parcels of land 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 here to and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of the subdivision waiver; and WHEREAS, the lots resulting from the proposed division will comply with the requirements of City Code, Section 515.09; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that compliance with City Code Section 500.05, Subd. 1, would result in unnecessary hardships 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 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 for the Subject Project which are due and payable in 1990 and prior years has been fully paid. c. This resolution shall not be effective until the applicant has acquired title to the Subject Property. 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 requests of this resolution. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.152 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Adoption of a resolution authorizing submittal of Richfield's 1991 yard waste rebate application from Hennepin County. Background• In 1990, the County established a yard waste rebate program to reimburse cities for eligible yard waste management costs. Residents pay into the program through yard waste disposal tipping fees paid by haulers. In 1991, the City of Richfield is eligible to receive $33,045 in yard waste funds from Hennepin County. It is unclear whether or not the yard waste rebate program will continue beyond 1991. In 1990, the yard waste rebate was returned to residents as a credit on their water/sewer utility bills. Staff recommends that the same system be used in 1991. Recommended Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing staff to submit to Hennepin County the City of Richfield's 1991 yard waste rebate application and authorize staff to return the yard waste rebate to citizens via a credit on their utility (water) bill. Basis of Recommendation: 1. County approval of our yard waste rebate application is contingent on formal approval of the application by the City Council. 2. The return of the funds via a utility credit minimizes the City's involvement in the yard waste management system. It also avoids the creation of an expectation on the part of residents that a yard waste disposal program, once begun, will continue each year. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council may choose to delay a decision on this issue; however, approval at this time will facilitate the timely return of the yard waste rebate to the City and its residents. 2. Council could choose to initiate and fund a more ambitious yard waste disposal program with the rebate; however, there are indications from the County that the rebate may be discontinued in the near future, and the City does not currently have an alternative mechanism for funding a disposal program. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting approval at the June 10, 1991 Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser JDP:ds City anager x.1-1 RESOLUTION NO. HENNEPIN COUNTY YARD WASTE REBATE APPLICATION WHEREAS, Hennepin County is providing a rebate to cities whose yard waste has been handled this year at no extra cost to the County; and WHEREAS, The City of Richfield will be eligible for a rebate of 533,045 (approximately $3.00 per household); and WHEREAS, The City is committed to keeping solid waste collection in the hands of the private sector; and WHEREAS, Richfield residents will be expected to make their own arrangements for yard waste disposal in the fall; and WHEREAS, The method for returning the yard waste money to residents that is the least disruptive to the current system is a rebate on residential water bills. BE IT RESOLVED, THEREFORE, that the City Council authorize the City Manager and Mayor to sign and submit an application for the yard waste rebate, to be distributed through residential water bills, from Hennepin County. Said rebate will not exceed $33,045, the amount specified by the County as the portion of the solid waste tip fee paid by Richfield residents for yard waste composting. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk ~J CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 153 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Request from the I-494 Corridor Commission (Joint Powers Organization) for adoption of a resolution supporting the goals and beliefs of the JPO relative to Travel-Demand Management (TDM). Background: The attached I-494 Corridor Commission letter and related material describes the role of the Commission and the TDM program. Recommended Motion: Approve the resolution as presented. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City of Richfield is an active participant in the Corridor Commission and should support the Commission's efforts to reduce congestion on I-494. 2. A coordinated TDM strategy is critical for improving traffic conditions along I-494. Alternative Recommendation: Do not approve the support resolution. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is placed on the consent JDP:ds Attachment calendar for Council approval. Respectfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager ~s I RESOLUTION NO. THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION REGARDING ENDORSEMENT OF I-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION TRAVEL-DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) BELIEFS AND GOALS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota is the official governing body of the .City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, the City Council encourages improvements to allow maximum use of transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the I-494 Corridor Commission (JPO) was established to develop Travel-Demand Management strategies and a model ordinance for the member Cities; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is a participant in the I-494 Corridor Commission (JPO); and WHEREAS, after study the I-494 Corridor Commission has adopted the following nine underlying beliefs regarding Travel- Demand Management: 1. We need to expand the I-494 transportation system. 2. Travel-Demand Management strategy with the I-494 corridor needs to begin making an impact by 1995 and make an increasingly significant impact on commuter behavior by the present design year of 2010. 3. A coordinated metro-wide TDM strategy is needed to fully address regional traffic congestion. 4. The JPO will develop a TDM strategy that will be easy to understand, can be administered with a minimum of staff additions, and will have reasonable fees for noncompliance. 5. An informed public will support the intent of our TDM strategy. 6. We should support ongoing Regional Transit Board, Southwest Metro and municipal legislative agendas and efforts as they relate to TDM and the I-494 corridor strategies. 7. Greater attention needs to be given to land use planning that allows for pedestrian, bicycling, and transportation modes other than driving alone within the I-494 corridor specifically,. and throughout each of our cities generally. '1" .J 8. Application of TDM strategies to new businesses and development is expected and that application to existing businesses over time will be necessary to make a meaningful and noticeable impact on I-494 or any of its intersecting roads and freeways. 9. Each city as an employer should be able to demonstrate to its constituents through its own TDM programs that it is serious about a balanced approach to traffic congestion and will do as much as reasonably possible to be an appropriate role model; and WHEREAS, after study the I-494 Corridor Commission has adopted the following seven goals regarding a model Travel-Demand Management Strategy: 1. Support the construction of an adequate transportation system throughout the I-494 corridor. 2. Address and examine present zoning and land development standards to encourage TDM site planning and land use goals. 3. Reduce the number of peak-period single occupant vehicles and raise the number of high occupant vehicles throughout the I- 494 corridor measurably using a variety of incentives by the year 2000 (currently 1.1 persons per auto with Metropolitan Council goal of 1.3 persons per auto by the year 2010). 4. Develop the final model strategy via consensus among the Corridor Commission communities, maintaining communication with and having support by the .private sector. 5. Have the selected core strategies of the model policy/ordinance applied to targeted areas of the I-494 corridor first. 6. Utilize the phasing element of the strategy to link all member communities with a common strategy by the year 2000. 7. Develop a strong ongoing public relations and education program as part of the balanced approach to traffic congestion; and WHEREAS, the City Council support of said beliefs and goals is important to the success of future I-494 Corridor Commission work; and WHEREAS, a successful Travel-Demand Management strategy will help mitigate traffic congestion on the roads and freeways serving Richfield. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota that full support and endorsement of the beliefs and goals presented by the I-494 Corridor Commission regarding Travel-Demand Management is hereby granted. J ~J BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to forward copies of this Resolution to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the MnDot District 5 Engineer, I-494 Corridor Commission and the Chair of the Metropolitan Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 1991. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Bloomington Eden Prairie Edina Minnetonka Richfield April 10, 1991 (.~.J - Mayor, City Council, Mgr. City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Re: Council Support for Travel-Demand Management Strategies in the I-494 Corridor The I-494 Corridor Commission (Joint Powers Organization) was established in 1988 to help improve traffic conditions on Interstate Highway 494. The Commission is working toward this objective by planning for increased highway capacity and improved transit service, and by developing strategies for voluntary and mandatory travel-demand management (TDM) programs. TDM reduces congestion by diverting commuters into higher-occupancy means of travel (for example, transit, .car pools and van pools) and away from peak travel periods la.m. and p.m. rush hours). The Commission's efforts in 1991 are focusing on completing a model TDM strategy for our cities. The congestion problem cannot be solved only by increased highway capacity and transit service in the I-494 corridor. The effort to reduce congestion on I-494 through TDM needs the active support of your city council. To introduce you to TDM, please view the short, seven-minute video accompanying this letter. An aggressive TDM program will be a key opportunity to mitigate congestion on I-494 (and on adjacent city arterials and collector streets), while maintaining employment and growth in our business communities. An effective TDM program will also help ensure adequate circulation during. reconstruction on any of the highways and freeways that serve our cities. This is important because any proposed new highway lanes or bridges will temporarily narrow and reduce our current highway capacity. Action Requested 1) The Commission is requesting that you. support the travel-demand management effort by endorsing the enclosed beliefs and goals. The endorsement will be a signal to the community that member cities and agencies are unified in the belief that it is in the public interest to manage the demand on our roadway system and to decrease single-occupancy automobile commuting. 2) The Commission is also requesting information from each city and agency about the progress it has made as an employer in its own TDM program. A TDM strategy includes ridesharing, variable work hours 1"flextime"), parking management (for example, restriping and signing of parking lots for preferential use by car pools or van pools, compacts and motorcycles), subsidies for transit use or close-in parking for car or van pools, and improved facilities for bicycle commuters. We are interested in your current progress because we want our future model strategies taken seriously by the business community, the region and our constituents. Please contact your JPO Staff member with questions about this request or information you have about TDM efforts. We would greatly appreciate your cooperation in improving traffic conditions in the I-494 corridor, which is crucial to the future of all our cities. Sincerely, i~f'~s~ - Karen J. A Berson, 1991 Chair William W. Weaver, 1991 Vice Chair I-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION -JOINT POWERS ORGANIZATION y T- ~ ATTACHMENT #1 1991 Direction The I-494 Corridor Commission intends to explore all the travel-demand management (TDM) solutions it can identify, ranging from public relations and advertising efforts to encouraging innovative land use policies. As part of the implementation process for a model (TDM) strategy and policy/ordinance, underlying beliefs, goals, objectives, policy and ordinance language will be adopted by the Joint Powers Organization (JPO). Presently, the JPO has agreed upon the following underlying beliefs and goals: APO Under/vine Be/refs Reaardinn Travel-Demand Management 1) We need to expand the I-494 transportation system. 2) Travel-demand management strategy within the I-494 corridor needs to begin making an impact by 1995 and make an increasingly significant impact on commuter behavior by the present design year of 2010. 3) A coordinated metro-wide TDM strategy is needed to fully address regional traffic congestion. 4) The JPO will develop a TDM strategy that will be easy to understand, can be administered with a minimum of staff additions, and will have reasonable fees for noncompliance. 5) An informed public will support the intent of our TDM strategy. 6) We should support ongoing Regional Transit Board, Southwest Metro and municipal legislative ' agendas and efforts as they relate to TDM and the I-494 corridor strategies. 7) Greater attention needs to be given to land use planning that allows for pedestrian, bicycling, and transportation modes other than driving alone within the I-494 corridor specifically, .and throughout each of our cities generally. 8) Application of TDM strategies to new businesses and development is expected and that application to existing businesses over time will be necessary to make a meaningful and noticeable impact on I-494 or any of its intersecting roads and. freeways. ~. 9) Each city as an employer should be able to demonstrate to its constituents through its own TDM programs that it is serious about a balanced approach to traffic congestion and will do as much as reasonably possible to be an appropriate role model. `t ~ ID ATTACHMENT #1 (cont.) ,IPO Goals renardin,v a mode/ Travel-Demand Manavement Strates~v 1) Support the construction of an adequate transportation system throughout the I-494 corridor. 2) Address and examine present zoning and land development standards to encourage TDM site planning and land use goals. 3) Reduce the number of peak-period single occupant vehicles and raise the number of high occupant vehicles throughout the I-494 corridor measurably using a variety of incentives by the year 2000 (currently 1. 1 persons per auto with Metropolitan Council goal of 1.3 persons per auto by the year 2010). 4) Develop the final model strategy via consensus among the Corridor Commission communities, maintaining communication with and having support by the private sector. 5) Have the selected core strategies of the model policy/ordinance applied to targeted areas of the I- 494corridor first. 6) Utilize the phasing element of the strategy to link all communities with a common strategy by the year 2000. 7) Prioritize the reconstruction improvements in the I-494 corridor to enhance regional TDM and existing street connections between cities and minimize interruptions to operating TDM programs. 8) Develop a strong on-going public relations and education program as part of the balanced approach to traffic congestion. ~. ~J - `~ ATTACHMENT #2 Background and Status of I-494 Corridor Studv Recommendations Because of increasing traffic congestion, the expectations of further growth and severe funding limitations, the Metropolitan Significance Review of both the Mall of America and the Homart proposals emphasized the need for a transportation planning study of the I-494 corridor. Participants in the planning process included our five cities, the Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Development of Transportation (MnDOT), Regional Transit Board (RTB), Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and Hennepin County. Initiated in 1986 and concluded in October of 1987, the I-494 Corridor Study prepared by the engineering firm, BRW, concluded that "a balanced approach between land development, new roadway facilities, transit services, travel-demand management, and funding would be required" in order to achieve reasonable return on investment of our transportation dollars regarding 1- 494 and the road network that leads to and from I-494. short Ranne Goals Pronress Eleven short-range goals of the Corridor Study were to be completed by early 1991. The following four goals are substantially complete: 1. Implement a joint powers agreement; 2. Begin an Environmental Impact Statement; 3. Create a private sector Transportation Management Organization (TMO); and 4. Meter highway entrance ramps between 34th Avenue and Highway 169. The following three goals are nearing completion: 5. Short-range interchange and lane improvements on I-494; 6. Short-range transit planning; and 7. Work on the I-494 Financial Plan. - The last four goals will continue throughout the next two years: 8. Prepare and Implement a model TDM strategy and ordinance; 9. Comprehensive/Guide Plan amendments to assure that travel demand and facilities/services are balanced; 10. Monitor land use development, traffic volumes and user characteristics; and 11. Obtain positive changes to frontage road and freeway access as opportunities arise. Medium-Ranne Goals The Corridor Study set four medium-range goals for the years 1991 to 1995 which the JPO will continue to work on. They are to: 1. Implement atravel-demand ordinance in each city; . 2. Recommend and implement transit service improvements; 3. Monitor land use development, traffic volumes and travel characteristics; and 4. Amend the 1-494 Corridor Plan as appropriate to assure that TDM and transportation services/facilities are balance. O Q Q W a w zU Q z A x 0 Q z w U n ~ ~ ~• •~ n n n n n n n ~ ~ n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n * n n n n n ,- n n ~ n n n ~ n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n ~ ~ ~ n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n ~'~ ~ n n ~ ~ n n n n n n ~ n n n n n n n n n n n n n F, n n n n n n n ~• n n Z` ' n n n n n n n -' n n W ' v, n n n n n n n n ~ n n n n n n n n a :~ n n n n n n n n ~ ~ n * ~ n n n n n n n n n n :' n W, n n n n n n n Q n n n n n n n . n n n n n n n W n n n n n Q n n n n n n n O A n n n n n ~ ^ n n " E.,,, n n , , W . x n n n n n ~ ~" :. . n n n n n w ' " n n n n n :: A n n n n Q n n n n n ' :; n n n n n n n n n n n n n n Q n n n n Q n n n ;~ R ~ _ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ o w ~ a ~ '" 5 ~a Syr :: C _ o:~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ o ~ a a ~ ^ .L~ ~ • h Cn ~ • C O~• ~ 7 p U ~ O 0 ~ ' ~ fl t0 ~ t ~ A _ ~ d ,~ y~ ~ f ~ 7 y ~ O • 7 ~ ip. ~ . .l ~.. i ~ ~ ~ ~c~ ~ ; ~ e ° = o w ~ g ~ 3 . ~ ~ ~ •7 7 PA C K U Q E ~ E - i U O l0 C y V on M C C ~ .~ •5 3 • °~ O •O aoi E co °' u u R ~ ' • y ~ ° y y u a a E '`• R7 "' H O ~ R: f d ~•y x $ C~ C O v a ~ N 7 ~' 1~.• ~0. O . ~ C C N. •C •O LL. 4 '' w v , a a x G a U U C a Q ¢ ~ 0 a 3 z 0 c~ G 0 U Q O O O U o~i ~J -~' ~ 9F G .~ .~ ~, r C 0 4 W A •~ O m t" c 0 ~ o '~ w R'¢ F .. •~ h ~ o •o v. C :: ~ •o ~ d L.i b~0 4p. V w 4:. l0 R. y N N A L 3 o~ L ~ •O Oa ~ ~~ tsioomington tden Frame tdina Minnetonka Richfield ~~ / TO: JPO Staff members FROM: Don Jensen, JPO Coordinator DATE: April 16, 1991 RE: Resolution draft for use at City Council meetings Action recommended Use the draft model resolution as you see fit for the Council Support letter, beliefs and goals attachments, and TDM video tape presentation to your City Council. Background The Bloomington Council passed a motion Monday the 15th supporting the beliefs and goals adopted by the JPO and directed staff to proceed with a resolution and to work with the personnel department to create a TDM management plan for the City by the end of Maya Lois Sarantakis will send each of you 10 of the Improve 494 folders for use in presenting this item. We clarified that the guaranteed ride home program is now a no fee program. I also included the Final frequency report employee survey for .areas 1, 2 and 3 in the folder as an update regarding the key conclusion that trip-making before, after and during the work day would not preclude most employees from ride- sharing at least 2 days per week. In our presentation, we added that telecommuting, as introduced in the video, does not mean consistent work at home, but is likely to operate like flextime, using a core hours period, and a 3 days in the office and 2 days away from the office approach. I-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION -JOINT POWERS ORGANIZATION 2215 W. Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, MN 55431-3096 (612) 887-9635 FINAL ~ ~ /0 FREQUENCY REPORT I-494 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION SURVEY AREAS 1, 2 AND 3 SURVEY RESPONSE This report summarizes and analyzes the 6,552 employee survey responses received in the Improve- 494 Employee Transportation Survey distributed within demonstration areas 1, 2 and 3 between July 1989 and August 1990. Area 1 is located in Bloomington at .the Southwest Quadrant of I-494 and Normandale Blvd. Area 2 is located in Bloomington and Edina north of I-494, both east and west of France Ave. Area 3 is located in the northern pazt of the Golden Triangle in Eden Prairie. The estimated number of employees in these three areas is 11,634. Employee characteristics of the three areas vary. Area 2 is the largest, with 42 percent of the employees. Area 3 has 31 percent and Area 1, 27 percent. The larger size of Area 2 gives greater weight to responses from this area than to the other areas in this combined report. The distribution of responses for almost every factor is nearly identical to the responses reported from Area 2. The most significant differences between the three areas revolve around the composition of the population and the kinds of jobs found in the three areas. This is most apparent in the male/female ratios and in employee occupations. Area 1 has the most office-related workers and the highest percentage of female workers of the three, while Area 3 has significant industrial employment and by far the highest percentage of male workers. Further differences are reflected in the earlier working hours of many Area 3 production/assembly employees and the trip-making patterns of executives and managers in Area 1. This group makes more stops for business purposes going to and from work, as well as more mid-day business trips. Female Male f~ 3~1~3~~! ~~ Area Z I~ Area 3 57% SS% 38% 41% 43% 61% ~.~ - l 1 OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS (Percent) Area 1 -Area 2 Area 3 Managerial/Exec. 24 18 13 Sales 10 11 7 Service 2 4 4 Tech/Prof 26 27 29 Clerical 30 24 11 Student/I'emp 1 1 1 Production 0 6 29 Other 3 6 4 No Response 3 3 2 6,552 of 11;634 employees in the three areas completed the Employee Transportation Survey, about a 56 percent response rate. Response rates from the three areas varied from a high of 61 percent in Area 1, to 56 percent in Area 2, to 52 percent in Area 3. The higher response from Area 1 versus Area 3 may mean the responses from Area 1 are slightly more reflective of the entire population of this area than the responses from Area 3. TRAVEL HABITS Commute Mode - 90 percent of Areas 1, 2 and 3 survey respondents drive alone to and from work; 10 percent either pool, take the bus, walk or bike. The numbers and proportions of survey respondents commuting by different modes is as follows: MODE NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT OF RESPONDENTS Drove alone 5,874 90% 2 person carpool 536 g% 3+ person carpool 55 1% Bus 32 1% Vanpool 15 < 1% Other ~ 24 <1% 2 ~~=f~ The somewhat greater proportion of managers and executives in Area 1 may explain the greater reliance on driving alone in this area (93 percent) as contrasted with Area 3 with its large proportion of production employees (87 percent). Area 2 respondents reflect the overall distribution for the three areas combined. Stops on the Way to or From Work Eighty-two percent of survey respondents do not make any work-related stops on their way to and from work; 9 percent stop one day a week, 4 percent stop two days a week, 2 percent stop three days a week, 1 percent stop four days a week and 2 percent stop five days a week on their way to or from work for work-related business. - . _ , Differences between the three areas on the number of stops on the way to or from work are slight. A few more stops (21 percent) are. made by employees in Area 1 with its greater proportion of executives than in Area 3 (16 percent). Twenty-seven percent of survey respondents do not typically make stODS on their way to or from work for personal business: 23 percent stop one day a week, 21 percent stop two days a week, 13 percent stop three days a week, 4 percent stop four days a week, and 12 percent stop five days a week for personal business (includes trips to day care, school, grocers, dry cleaners, etc.). Responses by employees on the frequency of stops on their way to or from work for ersonal purposes from each of the three areas is remarkably similar. Mid-day Trips ~... . ~ ._ Once employees have arrived at their work site, 66 percent do not make any business-related trips during the work day; 13 of survey respondents use their vehicles one day ~ week, 6 percent two days a week, 4 percent three, days a week 2 percent four days a week and 8 percent five days a week for work-related business trips during the work day. Business-related trips during the mid-day vary considerably between Area 1 and the other two areas. ~- Areas 2 and 3 have nearly identical patterns. However, many more employees in Area 1 make business-related trips than employees in the other two areas. This may again reflect the greater " proportion of executives and managers in this area. Most survey respondents use their vehicles at least one day a week during the work day (including lunch time) for personal business; 40 percent do not leave the work site during the work day for personal business. The numbers and proportion of survey respondents who use their vehicles during the work day for personal business is shown in the table below. 3 ~/~-i3 PERSONAL TRIPS DURING THE WORKDAY No. of Days/Week ~ No. of Employees Percent of Employees 0 2,595 40% 1 1,469 22% 2 861 13% 3 651 10% 4 307 5% 5 663 10% According to these figures, the average number of personal trips per employee per week taken by respondents during the work day is 1.5 trips. The high proportion of managers and clerical workers in Area 1 and production/assembly workers in Area 3 may explain the greater frequency of mid-day trips for ersonal purposes in Area 1 than in Area 3. This is because production workers tend to have a much more structured work day. The differences are most apparent between those who make no trips and those who make trips one or two days a week. ' MID-DAY TRIPS FOR PERSONAL BUSINESS Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 None 33% ~ 39% 48%- 1 day 27% 22% 19% 2 days 15% 13% 12% The purposes of mid-day trips by employees working in a number of sites within Areas 1 and 2 were identified in a 1988 NCI~tP study. Forty-two percent of NCHRP respondents in the study area said that on the day they were surveyed they had taken amid-day trip. 4 ~~-~~ TRIP PURPOSE PERCENT OF MID-DAY TRIPS Work-related ~oJo Meal/snack 33% Shopping 16% Banking _ .. 10% Home 4% Social/Recreation/Health Club 3% Medical ~ 2% Gas Station 2% Passenger Pick-up/drop-off ~ 2% Other 3% About half of the mid-day trips, according to NCHRP, are to~ restaurants and for shopping. Working Hours Sixty-four percent of survey respondents arrive at the work place between 7:00 and 8:30 a.m. Sixty- seven percent leave their work sites between 4:00 and 5:45 p.m. The following graphic shows the current spread of arrival and departure times over the a.m. and p.m. peak traffic periods for Areas 1, 2 and 3 employees. The following shows the number and proportions of employees' arrival and departure times by half-hour intervals: USUAL ARRIVE TIMES ~ USUAL DEPARTURE TIMES Before 6:45 a.m., 714 - 11% Before 3:15 p.m., 642 - 10% 6:45. - 7:14 a.m., 1,001 - 15% 3:15 - 3:44 p.m., 435 - 7% 7:15 - 7:44 a.m., 1,468 - 22% 3:45 - 4:14 p.m., 846 - 13% 7:45 - 8:14 a.m., 1,785 - 27% 4:15 - 4:44 p.m., 1,110 - 17% 8:15 - 8:45 a.m., 741 - 11% 4:45 - 5:14 p.m., 1,566 - 24% After 8:45, 816 - 13% 5:15 - 5:45 p.m., 963 - 15% 5:45 - 6:15 p.m.; 371 - 6% After 6:15 p.m., 567 - 9% S `~~ ~~ Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that they could adjust starting and ending work times by 15 to 30 minutes, while 37 percent said they could not. There are significant differences in the spread of working hours and the nature of the peak periods between areas. A much higher proportion of employees in Area 1 arrive at work during the peak two hour period than in Areas 2 or 3. Similarly, a greater proportion of arrivals occur during the peak one-half hour period in Area 1 (31%) than in Area 3 (20%). Finally, the peak period in Area 3 is somewhat earlier because of the earlier working hours of production employees. The higher concentration of trips arriving during the morning than trips departing in the afternoon is noted in all three areas. This is consistent with travel patterns in the region. PEAK ARRIVAL PERIODS PEAK PERIODS .AREA 1 -AREA 2 AREA 3 One-half 7:45-8:14 ,. 31% 7:45-8:15 30% 8:45-7:14 20% hour One hour 7:15-8:14 61% 7:15-8:14 50% 6:45-7:45 38% One & 7:15-8:14 78% 6:45-8:14 66% 6:45-8:14 58% one-half hours Two hours 6:45-8:44 95% 6:45-8:44 77% before 82% 6:45-8:14 PEAK DEPARTURE PERIODS PEAK PERIODS AREA 1 AREA Z AREA 3 One-half 4:45-5:14 25% 4:45-5:14 28% 4:45-5:14 17% hour One hour 4:15-5:14 45% 4:15-5:14 46% 4:15-5:14 30% One & 4:145:44 65% 4:45-5:44 59% 3:45-5:14 45% one-half hours Two hours 3:45-5:44 80% 3:45-5:44 69% 3:15-5:14 59% 6 ~~ l~ HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION Empoovee Home Locations Employees of Area 1 live considerably closer to work than those in Area 3. While the proportion of those living more than 10 miles from work is comparable between Areas 1 and 2 (30%), many more live longer distances in Area 3 (41%).. ...: ~ .. . DISTANCE OF HOME LOCATIONS FROM WORK Area 1 Area 2 ' Area 3 Within 5 miles 34% 30% 25% 5-10 miles 36% ~ 38% 32% 10+~miles .. 30% 30% Q~or Household Size Survey respondents reported the following number of people over age 151iving in their households: :. . ~ _ NUMBER;. - ~NUIVIBER -: PERCENT OF ... . _ _ OVER AGE :. OF _ . __.___ _. - RESPONDENTS..' .-- . 15 RESPONDENTS . - __ No answer : ~ 75 ~ _. 1% 1 1,092 _ 17% - 2 - _ 3,909 60% . 3 871 13% 4 449 7% 5+ 140 2% Household sizes were nearly identical in each of the three areas. Household Workers The number of full and part-time workers in survey respondents' households have been reported as follows: 7~ ~/J~-1 `~ J FULL-TIME PART-TIME No. of Workers Number Percent Number Percent 0 102 2% 5,100 79% 1 2,325 36% 1,047 16% 2 3,381 52% 242 4% 3 482 7% 42 1% 4 152 2% 12 <1% 5+ 32 1% 11 <1% No response 74 1% 94 1% The number of full-time workers in survey respondent households varies considerably between each of the areas. These variations are not readily explainable. The number of part-time workers in these households, however, is similar in each of three areas. ' FULL-TIME HOUSEHOLD WORKERS NO. OF WORKERS AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 1 37% 18% 37% 2 51% 60% 49% 3 7% 13% 9% 4 2% 6% 3% 5+ <1% 2% 1% The majority of survey respondents have two full-time workers and no part-time workers. Household vehicles Twenty-six percent of survey respondents' households have one vehicle, 56 percent have two vehicles, 12 percent have three vehicles, 3 percent have four vehicles, 1 percent have five or more vehicles, and 1 percent do not have any vehicles. Overall, respondents have an average of 1.9 vehicles per household; 73 percent have two or more vehicles. The average number of vehicles is nearly the same in all three areas. Similarly, households with two or more vehicles are nearly the same for all three areas, ranging from 74 percent in both Areas 1 and 3 to 71 percent in. Area 2. 8 Occupation ~ J - 1 ~' The following table shows a breakdown by frequency and proportions of employees' occupations: Occupation Category Number Percent Managerial/Fxecutive 1,199 18% Sales/Account Rep. -- ~ 633 -- - 10% Service/Repair - - - .. 222 -. _ - - 3% Technical/Professional 1,796 27010 Clerical/Support - • 1,451 - - 22% Student/Intern/Temp 56 1% Production/Assembly 723 11% • Other 280 4% No Response 188 3% PERCEPTION OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION Of those who responded to the question regarding the severity -of traffic congestion on I-494 and:- major streets near it, 53 percent felt that congestion is quite, a.serious problem. The table. below. indicates the breakdown of responses to the traffic congestion perception question. ----• .SEVERITY OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION PROPORTION OF RESPONDENTS PROBLEM ~ . _ 1 (no problem) ... - ~ 8010 ._ 2 - _ - 11% - 3 24% 4 33% 5 (serious problem) 20% The perception of congestion differs significantly between Area 1 and the other two areas. The greater concentration of work trips and the limited number of routes into and out of Area 1 may contribute to a greater perception of congestion by employees in that area. While working hours are more spread out in Area 3, employees travel somewhat earlier, and they travel longer distances than those in Area 2. The somewhat lower perception of congestion in Area 2 compared with Area 1 may result from the greater. ease of access to this azea and the number of production employees who travel at earlier hours. 9 ~J -1 ~ PERCEPTION OF CONGESTION Number Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 1 (no problem) 5% 8% 10% 3 _ - 23% 27% 24% 4 38% 34% 31% 5 (serious) 24% - 19% 21% 4+5 (quite serious) ~ - 62% ~ 53% 52% SURVEY CONCLUSIONS • Trip-making before, after and during the work day would not preclude most employees from ride-sharing at least 2 days per week. • -: Peak spreading is already occurring in the corridor. Some portion-of the work force in most firms can flex their hours. Further peak spreading would likely help to alleviate congestion, but peak spreading alone will not solve the congestion problem in the corridor. • The acknowledged openness of employers' to flex time increases the likelihood of successful rideshare matching among employees of firms in the same general area. • Because a relatively small percentage of employees live more than 10 miles from their place of employment, the market for vanpooling is relatively limited in the corridor. • The .tremendous investment in automobiles (nearly 75 percent have two or more cars per household) poses areal challenge for successful implementation of travel demand management programs. c9POO~ls 22191 10 Commuter Transportation Management Program 11~1:~~\r•Il~~~l:~1~ The newest initiative in commuter transportation is the I-494 Guaranteed Ride Home program. Experience shows that the biggest hindrance to regular employee participation in car/van pools and transit systems is the lack of immediate transportation in the event of an emergency or schedule conflict. The I-494 Guaranteed Ride Home program eliminates the hidden costs and inconveniences that employees sometimes associate with caravan pool and transit use. Now you can make this new "employee benefit" available within your company. It's an inexpensive and easy way to show your company's commitment to employees' needs. How does the I-494 Guaranteed Ride Home program work? • If an employee rides the bus, car/van pools, walks or rides their bike at least two days a week, they can register for the program by calling Minnesota Rideshare at 349-RIDE to request a registration form. • The second step is to fill out the registration form, have it signed by their work supervisor or Employee Transportation Coordinator and pay a $2 fee. The form is then sent to Minnesota Rideshare. • Once registered, any employee requiring an unexpected trip to or from work simply calls a taxi, has the receipt signed by the driver and mails it in with a reimbursement voucher signed by their work supervisor or Employee Transportation Coordinator. Reimbursement is on a sliding scale with the first ride being reimbursed 100%; the second, 80%; third, 60%; and the last three 50%. Employees are limited to 6 taxi rides or up to 75 miles, whichever comes first. How can my company -make this new "employee benefit" available? • It's already available to your company as part of your Transportation Management Program. Participation is easy, just follow the steps below. • There is a $2 fee for each employee who enrolls in the program. Employees can pay this fee out of their own pocket, or your company can pay the fee for them. Your company will receive a bill from Minnesota Rideshare each quarter for your employees that have enrolled in the program during that time. • Handling the fee and having a work supervisor or Employee Transportation Coordinator sign registration forms and vouchers is the extent of your company's involvement. • Minnesota Rideshare will take care of the rest -- from promotion and paperwork to reimbursement and tracking. Now your employees can reduce traffic congestion, save their environment and work late. The I-494 corridor Guaranteed Ride Home Program is an important incentive to help your employees make wiser commuting choices, including getting out of the habit of driving alone to work. When employers and employees work together to decrease traffic congestion and auto pollution, everyone benefits! tl:t~.`11~1II~~1:~~F.YJ~~.`i,.`i3~`i~:l' How can you add an employee benefit without breaking the budget? By enrolling in the MTC Payroll Deduction Program. You can help your employees and your company -- without paying any out-of- pocket costs. How does it work? • When you join the program, "All You Can Ride" passes are offered to your employees at an 8% discount for a yearly savings of $24 to $54. They can take the bus anytime for a monthly cost of $18.50 to $45.50. The card can also be used by family and friends, but each employee can purchase one card only. • The cost of the card is automatically deducted from an employee's paycheck. Cards are auto- matically sent to your office, so your employees don't need to go out and buy passes every month, or carry the exact fare every day. • These benefits are provided without any out-of-pocket expenses for your company. The only requirement is that your company process employee enrollment forms and distribute monthly passes. How can my company qualify for the program? • To qualify, a minimum enrollment of 5 employees is required. • To join the program, ask your Minnesota Rideshare representative for an enrollment form; or just call MTC at 349-7683. With the cost of employee benefits going through the roof, it makes sense to enroll in a program that does so much for so little. Hundreds of companies have already joined the MTC Payroll Deduction Program. Dayton Hudson, Honeywell, .Baker Square Restaurants and First Bank Minneapolis, to name a few. Why not be the next to come on board? n,,.,.~~ a„ ,.,.~ ~ ...... ............. „ ~~.,a:..., ate.:... ~ .., e~,~t,r~ti ~ ..~~.,e *.~.,~.,,,.a~,~,....., .,. ii' ir'r - ~, fi ii - it~tJ ~Ui~i,Hi' 4Lr~.r V.ifL~~ G1i LWY iVY aii6' LiY ice, •• program, not only in congested urban areas, but also in the industrial bands that line our suburban highways. The south suburban area is no different. Almost 300,000 vehicles travel on freeways daily in the Bloomington and Richfield area. Carpooling and vanpooling can play an important role in preventing commuter gridlock. Why should my company get involved in carpooling and vanpooling? • With employees driving alone, more and more land must be devoted to parking as your company grows. The need for parking can be reduced when employees share a ride. Additional space can be put to better use, such as building expansion. • Traffic congestion on highways and local streets surrounding work sites has prompted many employers to look at pooling as an effective traffic management solution. • Carpooling and vanpooling can help companies retain skilled labor in the face of ever-rising fuel prices. It can help expand your geographic recruiting area and help achieve equal opportunity employment goals. What can my company do? • Be committed to transportation management and communicate that commitment to your employees • Work with your Minnesota Rideshare representative to promote carpooling and vanpooling to your employees. • Then, we'll take it from there. Minnesota Rideshare will supply the information needed to help your employees form carpools and register them. We'll be there to answer all their questions. Carpooling and vanpooling makes good business sense. It can be viewed as a contingency plan for gas shortages and other emergencies. Remember, employee transportation is an economic necessity for your business. Flexible Working Hours ("Flextime") is a rapidly expanding work scheduling system that benefits both employers and employees through increased efficiency, productivity and employee morale. What is flextime? • Flextime is a system of varying work hours in which the employees themselves are given some degree of responsibility -- and choice -- for their own starting and quitting times. • The total length of the operating day is usually extended to include earlier morning hours and later afternoon hours. • A "core time" during which everyone is expected to be on the job is usually maintained. For example, core time might be from 9:30 in the morning to 3:30 in the afternoon. Flexible arrival and departure periods would be added to either end of the day. What does flextime have to do with transportation management? • Road and highway development can no longer keep up with the ever-increasing traffic congestion. With highway construction costs of $100 million per mile, adding sufficient capacity is simply not an option in the Twin Cities today. • Through flextime we can manage the existing system more ,efficiently by managing the primary users -- the commuters. • Flextime will give your employees the advantage they need to make wiser commuter choices -- bus riding, car/van pooling, walking or biking. • And, flextime results in a natural tendency for commuters to shift away from periods when traffic congestion is at its peak. Your company's flextime system can be designed to accommodate your specific objectives in productivity and work environment. The bicycle is an efficient and healthful mode of transportation that more and more people are choosing as an alternative to the car. Per capita, Minnesotans bicycle for transportation, recreation and exercise nearly twice as often as the rest of the nation. On the average, 60% of Minnesota residents bicycle annually. Are you saying my company should promote bicycle commuting? • Why not? Adults today are very health conscious and bicycling is one of the best forms of exercise. • Plus, by bicycling to work your employee is freeing up one more parking space in your lot. There's one less car causing traffic congestion and one less car polluting the air with carbon monoxide and nitrous oxide. • And by encouraging bicycle commuting, you can help your employee save roughly 150 gallons of gasoline each year. When you translate that savings into dollars and cents, it becomes an excellent "employee benefit." What can my company do? • Work with Minnesota Rideshare to make information available to your employees about bicycle commuting and safety. • If there is employee interest, make safe bicycle parking available at your site. Atwo-bicycle security rack can be installed for about $50. More racks can be easily added as interest grows. You may be surprised at how many of your employees are interested in bicycle commuting and would appreciate a safe place to park their bike. With our crowded highways and city streets clogged with one-person vehicles, we can all appreciate the benefits of this low-cost, energy-saving. transportation mode. While there has never been a comprehensive study of the impact of preferential parking on carpooling and vanpooling, it is generally recognized that this incentive can have a strong effect on an employee's motivation to share a ride. What do you mean by preferential parking? ~ Preferential parking means setting a policy that allocates choice parking spaces to people who car- pool or vanpool. "Choice" parking spaces are under cover, closest to the workplace or most accessible. • It means assigning these choice spaces to vehicles with two or more occupants. • Because the assignment of parking spaces is often an indicator of an employee's status within the company, assignment of preferential parking spaces for poolers can be a powertul tool to increase carpooling and vanpooling. Everyone wins! Preferential parking makes pooling more attractive to the employee as well as giving emoloyers an opportunity to recognize the contribution carpoolers and vanpoolers are making to their community and the environment. ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 154 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• The Public Safety Department's Police Division has requested and received bids from vendors for the purchase of forty-seven (47) Smith & Wesson, .40 calibre, semiautomatic handguns with appropriate night sights and leather gear. Staff requests approval for the acceptance of the lowest bid from Sioux Sales and for the purchase of the guns and equipment from this vendor. Funds for this purchase are provided entirely from seized and forfeited funds of persons arrested and charged with narcotics and certain other felony offenses. These funds are designated by law to be used for the purchase of law enforcement equipment. Background: The Police Division issues its police officers service weapons. Approximately ten years ago, the Division purchased Smith & Wesson, .357 calibre, revolvers and issued them to all the Division's officers. As a result of much testing and technological advances, police departments throughout the country are switching to semiautomatic handguns. Several years ago, many of our police officers requested and received permission to purchase their own semiautomatic, nine millimeter, pistols to use as their service weapon. As a result, the Division now has officers carrying a variety of different handguns of different calibre and function. The Division has determined that the new Smith & Wesson, Model 4046, double action only, pistol is the weapon the entire Division should carry. Numerous other departments both in Minnesota and throughout the country, have changed to this service weapon. Purchase of this weapon would allow the use of only one type of ammunition carried by all officers, and give the Department control over the type of weapon carried by all of its officers. The bid also reflects trading in the Division's existing revolvers and holsters. Recommended Motion: Approve acceptance of the bid from Sioux Sales, and authorize the purchase of the guns and equipment as stated in the bid. Basis for Recommendation: For both safety and liability concerns, staff has determined this pistol as being the most desirable for use as a Department-owned and issued service weapon. Our officers have all fired this pistol and have had input into its selection for purchase. F.B.I. testing determined the .40 calibre round to be best suited for law enforcement use. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may choose to reject all bids and direct staff to advertise for new bids. ~~ 1 Discussion/Decision Mode: Authorize staff to accept the recommended bid and enter into an agreement with the selected vendor (Sioux Sales) for delivery as soon as possible. Respec ly submitted, James D Prosser City M ager JDP:ds CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening May 30, 1991 11:00 A.M. Purchase of Smith & Wesson Semiautomatic Pistols, Magazines, and appropriate Holsters and Carriers Bid No. 91-3 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for purchase of semiautomatic pistols, magazines, and appropriate. holsters and carriers, bid no. 91-3, as advertised in the official newspaper on May 15, 1991. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Jack Erskine, Public Safety Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR BID TOTAL SECURITY Streicher's Mpls Cashiers $22,704.15 Check Law Enforcement Equipment Co. BID $24,799.89 Kansas City, Missouri BOND Sioux Sales Company Cashiers $22,191.72 Sioux City, Iowa Check The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 10, 1991 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 155 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Award of contract for a 5-unit fairway mower. Background• One fully depreciated fairway mower, Unit #9, is due to be replaced in 1991. This is a fifteen foot gang mower. State of the art in fairway mowing has lead to downsizing of the mowers to improve the quality of the cut. The specifications written for a replacement mower were a new style fairway mower with an approximate eight foot cut. Eventually, staff intends to add another of these mowers to replace the old mower. Specifications were requested by five vendors for this equipment; only one bid was received. A formal bid opening was held on Friday, May 31 with the following results: M.T.I. Distributing Company 525,317 Recommended Motion: Approve the bid minutes/tabulation and authorize a purchase order to M.T.I. Distributing Company in the amount of 525,317 for a new fairway mower. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This piece of equipment has been tested extensively at the golf course, and staff feels it is the best mower for our needs. 2. Due to a factory rebate at this time, the price quoted is excellent for this mower. 3. The Adopted 1991 Garage Budget contains adequate funds for the purchase. Alternative Recommendation: Council could choose to reject the bid received and instruct staff to re-bid; however, staff does not believe we can receive a better price on this equipment at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting approval at the June 10, 1991 Council meeting in order to facilitate delivery of this piece of equipment. Respe f ly submitted, Jame D. Prosser City nager JDP:ds Attachment CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~ ~'~) Bid Opening May 31, 1991 11:00 A.M. Purchase of One New Five-Unit Hydraulic fairway Mower Bid No. 91-12 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for purchase of one new five-unit hydraulic fairway mower, bid no. 91-12, as advertised in the official newspaper on May 15, 1991. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Donald Fondrick, Community Services Director Doris Swanson, City Manager Representative Roxi Braa, Administrative Aide The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR MTI Distributing Co. BID SECURITY 5~ Bid Bond Plymouth, MN TOTAL Base Bid $25,317.00 w/option $25,757.00 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 10, 1991 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk Um CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.156 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Request by Fred.Babcock V.F.W. Post 5555 for a Temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for July 3-4, 1991. Background• On June 4,•1991, Fred Babcock V.F.W. Post 5555 submitted a request for a temporary license to serve non-intoxicating malt liquor (3.2 beer) on the evening of July 3 and during the day on July 4. They are requesting that any fee be waived. This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has been organized by the Fourth of July committee. Their plans are to have an open house and community dance outside on their property and they would like to serve refreshments, including beer. Recommended Motion: Approve a fee waived, temporary license for July 3-4, 1991 with the stipulations that the sale of 3.2 beer cease no later than midnight on both dates, and that the applicant submit proof of liquor liability insurance coverage for the outside property where the beer will be served and consumed. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a temporary on-sale beer license. 2. The applicant has agreed to supply additional liquor liability insurance coverage. 3. The City has previously issued temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Discussion/Decision Mode• The request for the temporary non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been placed on the consent calendar for June 10, 1991. Respe t ly submitted, Jam s Prosser Cit anager JDP:ds CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~/~,' Council Letter No.157 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Request by Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 for a Temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for July 3- 4, 1991. Background• On June 4,•1991, Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 submitted a request for a temporary license to serve non- intoxicating malt liquor (3.2 beer) on the evening of July 3 and during the day on July 4. They are requesting that any fee be waived. This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has been organized by the Fourth of July committee. Recommended Motion: Approve a fee waived, temporary license for July 3-4, 1991 with the stipulations that the sale of 3.2 beer cease no later than midnight on both dates, and that the applicant submit proof of liquor liability insurance coverage for the outside property where the beer will be served and consumed. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a temporary on-sale beer license. 2. The applicant has agreed to supply additional liquor liability insurance coverage. 3. The City has previously issued temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Discussion/Decision Mode• The request for the temporary non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been placed on the consent calendar for June 10, 1991. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City.. nager JDP:ds CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 158 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Public hearing and second reading of a proposed ordinance amendment to City Ordinance Code 310.45 Retirement Aae. Background• City Ordinance Code 310.45 Retirement Aae addresses a mandatory retirement age of 70 with a possible extension to 75 years of age by the City Manager on a year by year, case by case basis. When the City Ordinance was written, it was permissible to establish such age limits for general employment. However, more recent federal law makes this ordinance provision obsolete. Subdivision 1 and 2 of Section 310.45 should be modified to comply with the current Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The current federal law and proposed ordinance amendment do not establish a set retirement age. Instead, a mandatory retirement is imposed only when the employee's age is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) reasonably necessary to the City's normal operation. Courts have held that with respect to municipal employment, positions such as Police Officers and Firefighters may fit such a BFOQ. Recommended Motion: Conduct a public hearing and approve the second reading of the attached ordinance amendment to City Ordinance Section 310.45 Subdivisions (1) and (2). Basis of Recommendation: 1. The current City Ordinance is in conflict with the current Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act by requiring a general mandatory retirement at age 70. 2. The Federal Act takes precedence over the City Ordinance and as such the ordinance is obsolete as written. 3. The proposed amendment would place the City Ordinance in concert with the relevant federal law. 4. The City Attorney recommended this amendment. 5. The first reading of the ordinance amendment was conducted on May 13, 1991. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Fail to amend the ordinance leaving it in conflict with federal law. 2. Amend the ordinance to provide some other mechanism or age to trigger mandatory retirement. However any standards other than those established by federal law would not be legal. -~ Discussion/Decision Mode: It is recommended that the City Council take action on this item as quickly as possible to place this ordinance in accordance with federal law. Respectful submitted, James Prosser City Ma ager JDP:ds BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 310 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 310 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended by amending Subdivisions 1, 2 and 6 of Subsection 310.45 to read as follows: 310.45 Retirement AQe. Subdivision 1. General rule. The retirement age for employees except elected officials but including the Manager, City Attorney and Health Officer, shall be as provided in the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967, as amended, and subject to all applicable exceptions contained therein. eke-~e~~~emes~-age-shall-be-sab~ee~-te-the-~e1~ew}ag g~evis#ess-ef-~k}s-Sabsee~}es- Subd. 2. Age-7A---Where-the-Masage~-€~ads-~ha~-the ees~~ssed-emg~eymest-ef-as-emg~eyee-beyesd-age-7A-Weald-be-ef spee~a~-besef~t-te-the-eity--fie-may-extend-saeh-~et~~emeat-age-ea a-yeas-fie-gear-basis-set-~e-exeeed-the-age-of-75--ages-~eee~gt-ef adeQaate-medieai-isfe~ma~ies-isdiea~isg-the-empieyee-is-is-geed heai~h-and-abie-te-pe~~e~m-kis-Week---Hges-w~~~tes-se~iee-te-the emgieyee;-tke-Masage~-may-easee~-a-de€e~~ai-ef-~e~i~emes~-a~-nay dime- Occupational qualification Where the employee's age is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the City's normal operation, a mandatory retirement age may be imposed. Sabd--6---Sega~abiiity---the-g~evis}ens-a€-phis-Sabseeties de-set-amend-ems-modify-any-age-~e~i~emest-g~evis}ens-~eiatisg-fie eke-~eQai~emes~-ef-members-ef-the-Peliee-sue-Fire-Bivisiess-whieh awe-eestaised-is-any-State-Statate-e~-is-any-~aie-a€-the-fie}at Pe~iee-and-Fire-Eiv~i-Se~viee-Ee~aissies- Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber City Clerk l(~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.159 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Consideration of an application for a residential kennel license for Philip Mortenson, 7315 Thomas Avenue, Richfield. Background: On April 29, 1991 Philip Mortenson submitted an application for a residential kennel license. He owns ten cats (all are Domestic Short Hairs). Mr. Mortenson's application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it with the exception of the resident living behind them at 7315 Sheridan Avenue. On May 4, 1991, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. The Community Service Officer did note that one of the abutting property owners had not signed the petition. A kennel inspection of the property found no apparent problems other than a portion of the fence has been removed and is leaning against the fence. Staff has received calls from four of Mr. Mortenson's neighbors who do not support the issuance of a kennel license. They have had problems with feces in their yards and do not feel the cats should be allowed to run free like they do. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be denied. Basis for Recommendation: 1. 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 have caused an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to approve Mr. Mortenson's residential kennel license. This would mean that he would be able to keep his ten cats. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to deny the application for license for Philip Mortenson, 7315 Thomas Council consideration at this time. Jame City a residential kennel Avenue is presented for fully submitted, . Prosser JDP:ds ~-) June 1990 Complaint received regarding long grass February 1991 Inoperable vehicle reported April 1991 Complaint regarding no animal licenses or kennel license May 31, 1991 Betsy Christensen- Health-Administrator Richfield Public Safety Department 6700 Portland AYenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599 RE: Kennel License: Philip Mortenson Dear Mr. Christensen: (Or ~ ~~.~~/~ ~ /q / 91 I am responding to the letter I received yesterday for consideration of issuing Mr. Mortenson a kennel license. I am unable to attend the City Council meeting on Monday, June 10th, so I am responding by letter. Considering the fact that Mr. Mortenson's north side neighbors have a dog and a cat; his south side neighbors have a cat and 2 dogs plus there are 5 other dogs on the block, I feel that his having a kennel would be too much. I have been awakened at night by the sounds of cats fighting (I can't say for sure whose cats they were but from my under- standing the Mortensons let their cats out at night), I am tired of picking up after cats in my yard and spending money for repellant to keep them from urinating along .side of my house. S have also been over to the Mortensons on a few occasions and the stench was more than I could stand. With all the cats and kittens that they have in their house it is unfit for human occupancy. On summer nights if they have their front door open you can smell the stench out in the street :•:hen walking by. I don't feel that people living within the city limits should be allowed to have more than two animals at one time and kennel licenses should be issued only to people who live out in the country where these animals wouldn't disturb their neighbors. Thank you for consideration of my letter. Sincerely, Thomas Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 June t~, X991 lp'~ Betsy Christensen Health Administrator Richfield Public Safety Department Richfield, Minnesota 5523 Dear Betsy Christensen: We the undersigned opposed to .granting a kennel license at ?315 Thomas Avenue South for Philip Mortensen because of the following reasons: 1. Public nuisance - applicant has now more than 10 cats. 2. Health - cats feces or excrement in neighborhood back- yards and bushes. 3. Cats are not under lease or control. ~, Cats are allowed to freely:; roam. This has been an ongoing problems for nearly 10 years. Previous petitions have been signed by neighbors and telephone calls made by several persons to the City.. The City: did response to the complaints, but little if any correction Was takes. We feel if such an application is granted, it will only lead to greater abuse and nuisance to our neigborhood. We therefor request that you advise the City Council to turn down the application for.: this kennel license. Respectfully submitted, Name. ~ ~ Address Tel.# /~~~~, 7.~'~ Trs~aa~s ~~' ~~ X66-~/~~ ~_ '~~ . ~G G - Sys ~z cY6/-6857 a it ~~ ~~ ccs J Mayor Martin Kirsch ~,~ t - ~, ~ ~~~~~~~- ~~~ ~~/ ~e r~~ ~'~ ~ June 7, 1991 Steve and Janet Benner 7314 Sheridan Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Ms. Betsy Christensen Health Administrator City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Ms. Christensen: We would like to express opposition to the issuance of a residential kennel license .to Philip Mortenson, 7315 Thomas Avenue South. It has been our experience that the cats owned be the applicant roam our property freely. We have found .cat feces in the sandy area around our children~s swingset and have seen these cats in our back yard Gate at night. Our concern is simply for the health of our three small children, as we understand animal feces can carry diseases. As a neighboring property to the applicant, we hope you take our opposition into consideration. Sincerely, S eve net Benner CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 160 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• First reading of an ordinance regulating the parking of trucks with trailers attached on public streets. Background: At a recent Study Session, the City Council instructed staff to prepare an ordinance limiting the time a commercial truck with a trailer attached can park on City streets in a residential neighborhood. This idea was fostered during the recent enactment of an ordinance limiting the time unattached utility trailers may park on the streets (2 hours). Staff has received some complaints on this issue. The parking of vehicles on City streets is always a difficult issue to address, especially in Richfield where many residents have two cars and a single car garage. Currently, City ordinances regulate parking in a number of ways: -- No vehicle may park for more than 48 hours; -- Trucks over 10,0.00 Gross Vehicle Weight are limited to two (2) hours; -- Unattached utility trailers -- two (2) hours; -- Recreational vehicles - 48 hours; -- Other ordinances regulating how and where vehicles can park, (i.e., on sidewalks, in front of driveways, within 20' of a fire hydrant, within 20' of a crosswalk at an intersection, etc.) The ordinance as drafted restricts "commercial vehicles with trailers". It should be recognized that this definition is somewhat vague and may cause enforcement difficulties in some circumstances. Recommended Motion: Review the attached ordinance at first reading which regulates the parking of trailers attached to a towing vehicle which is used for commercial purposes. Basis of Recommendation: Staff has received some complaints on this problem. It is also consistent with the philosophy that City streets are not meant for the storage of vehicles and that it patterns the recently enacted ordinance on unattached utility vehicles. Staff has also received comments in opposition to this ordinance. ~-~ Alternative Recommendation: 1. Restrict the parking of trailers attached to tow vehicles entirely. This would be almost impossible from an enforcement standpoint. Contractors, delivery companies, etc., would be unduly penalized with this restriction. 2. Do nothing. Do not enact this ordinance and allow these few vehicles to continue as they have (i.e., parked up to 48 hours). Discussion/Decision Mode: Consideration and first reading of an ordinance regulating the parking of trailers attached to tow vehicles for more than two (2) hours and schedule second reading and public hearing for July 8, 1991. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City M ger JDP:cak ~- BILL N0. 1991- AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XIII SECTION 1305.27 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN. Section 1305.27 of Section 1300 of the City of Richfield Ordinance Code is hereby amended by adding the following new Subdivision 7. Subd 7 Trailers No person may park or let stand for more than two hours on any public street or highway adiacent to an residential district a trailer when such trailer is attached to a towina vehicle which towing vehicle is used to any extent,_ for commercial purposes The limitation contained in this subdivision does not apply to parking of such attached trailer when actively engaaed in commercial activity at an adiacent site but only to the extent that such commercial activity necessitates the use of the trailer and only for periods during which the commercial activity is actually occurring For the purpose of this subdivision, trailer means any motorless vehicle. exceAt recreational vehicles as defined in Subsection 1325.03 of this Code, used for carrying oroperty on its own structure while being drawn by a motor vehicle. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1991. Martin Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk D CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 161 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Adoption of a resolution giving preliminary approval to consolidation of the Richfield Police Relief Association with PERA Police and Fire. Background: At the October 8, 1990 City Council meeting, a resolution supporting certain improvements to the Police Relief Association benefit structure and an expression of intent to consolidate with Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Police Fire Fund was presented and adopted. The benefit improvements included the following changes: • College incentive pay to be included in salary calculations for pension computations. • A reduced retirement based upon earned service credit upon age 50. • Elimination of the two unit reduction for deferred pensions. The Police Relief Association Board has requested consolidation with PERA contingent upon legislative approval of these benefit improvements. While the benefit improvements are very desirable to Police Relief Association members, the entire issue of consolidation is desirable and a long term financial benefit to the City. Since the adoption of the resolution in October, a number of additional events have taken place which further move toward consolidation. s On May 3, 1991 an election of all eligible members of the Richfield Police Relief Association was conducted which resulted in overwhelming member support for consolidation. In that vote, 44 members voted for consolidation, 5 against and 4 did not return their ballots. • The legislature passed, and the governor signed, a bill authorizing the proposed member benefit improvements upon the approval of the City Council. With these two critical issues resolved, the way is cleared to proceed with the next steps in the consolidation process. ~^i Minnesota Statutes Chapter 353A set forth the next steps necessary to complete this consolidation. The Richfield City Council should now consider a resolution granting preliminary approval to consolidation and authorizing continuation of the process of consolidation. If the resolution is adopted, notification of that action will be forwarded to a number of state officials as specified by law. That notification will trigger another series of actions including an actuarial study and review of the Relief Association's portfolio by the State Board of Investments. After all necessary actuarial studies and related report are done, the City Council will have an opportunity to review the consolidation issue one final time before taking a last vote on the issue. Preliminary indications are that the additional review will provide a positive recommendation for this consolidation. Recommended Motion: Adopt a resolution approving continuation of the process of consolidation of the Richfield Police Relief Association with the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The City Council previously indicated support of the Richfield Police Relief Association benefit enhancements and consolidation with PERA Police and Fire Fund. 2. The preliminary steps in the consolidation process have now been completed. If the City Council wishes to continue the consolidation process the attached resolution must be approved within two months of May 3, 1991 (the day of the Relief Association consolidation election) or the process to consolidate will terminate pursuant to statute. 3. The City Council will have a final opportunity to review the consolidation after actuarial data has been prepared. 4. The City Auditor has recommended that the City consolidate City pensions with PERA Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could fail to approve continuation of the process. 2. The issue could be postponed to the June 24 meeting for consideration. Discussion/Decision Mode: The City Council must act on this matter on or before July 3, 1991 if the consolidation process is to continue. Resp ully submitted, Jame Prosser City nager JDP:ds 8-~ RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTINUATION OF THE PROCESS OF CONSOLIDATION OF THE RICHFIELD POLICE RELIEF ASSOCIATION WITH THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION POLICE AND FIRE FUND WHEREAS, The 1987 legislature adopted legislation (Laws 1987, Chapter 296, codified a Chapter 353A of Minnesota Statutes) enabling local police and firefighters relief associations to be voluntarily consolidated with the Public Employees Retirement Association Police an Fire Fund (P.E.R.A.) with the consent of the relief association membership and the approval of the governing body of the affected municipality; and WHEREAS, pursuant to such legislation, a sufficient petition initiating the consolidation process was submitted by members of the Richfield Police Relief Association (Association) to the Board of .Trustees of such Association, and the Board held the required public hearing on March 18, 1991 and conducted the required membership referendum on the issue on May 3, 1991; and WHEREAS, the membership of the Association has approved consolidation by a vote of 44 Yes, 5 No and 4 No Reply, and therefore, the Board of Trustees of the Association has recommended that the Association be consolidated with the P.E.R.A.; and WHEREAS, the next step required in the consolidation process is the adoption by the City Council of a resolution granting preliminary approval to consolidation, for the purpose of continuing the process via the preparation of actuarial, investment, and membership data studies; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield hereby gives its preliminary approval for the purpose of continuation of the process of considering the proposed consolidation of the Richfield Police Relief Association with the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) I, James D. Prosser, City Manager for the City of Richfield, and I, Robert Burge, President of the Richfield Police Relief Association, do hereby certify that the City of Richfield and the Richfield Police Relief Association complied with the procedures mandated by Minnesota Statute 353A.04. Dated: June 10, 1991 James D. Prosser, City Manager Robert Burge, President RPRA State of Minnesota) )SS County of Hennepin) On this day of 1991, before me a notary public within and for said County personally appeared James D. Prosser and Robert Burge an being duly sworn did say that they executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as a free act and deed. Notary CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 250 Agenda October 8, 1990 Issue Statement• Approval of a resolution relating to the benefit structure of the Richfield Police Relief Association and expression of intent to consolidate with Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). Background: All Police and Firefighters who were hired after June 15, 1980, are covered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). However, Police and Firefighters hired before that date are covered by locally operated Relief Associations. There are currently 26 retired and disabled beneficiaries and 22 active members of the Police Relief Association. Recently, City staff and Richfield Police Relief Association have initiated discussions regarding the possibility of merging the Relief Association with PERA. State law permits consolidation if approved by the members of the pension organization and the City. At the same time, the Relief Association has asked for certain changes in benefits. The changes include: • College incentive pay to be included in salary calculations for pension computations. • A reduced retirement based upon earned service credit upon age 50. • Elimination of the two unit reduction for deferred positions. The Police Relief Association Board has requested consolidation with PERA contingent upon changes in the benefits. The basis of this request is that after consolidation, Relief Association members will have the opportunity to choose from either PERA benefits or Police Relief Association benefits. Without the change in benefits proposed, there may not be enough incentive for some of the members to approve the consolidation. The consolidation would be a long term financial benefit to the City while the enhanced benefits would be advantageous to Police Relief Association members. However, consolidation without benefit enhancements would not be acceptable to Relief Association members, and benefit enhancements without consolidation with PERA would be unacceptable to the City. A further complication exists in that the benefit changes requested must be approved by the State Legislature in addition to the City. Thus, a carefully planned series of actions are necessary to ensure that interests of both the City and Police Relief Association are protected. The first step recommended in this process on behalf of the City is the approval of the attached resolution expressing support for the requested benefit changes. Recommended Motion: ~- Approval of a resolution relating to the benefit structure of the Richfield Police Relief Association recommending changes and expressing intent to consolidate with PERA. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Police Relief Association Board has approved a resolution requesting consideration of consolidation. 2. The City Auditor has recommended that the City consider Police and Fire Relief Association consolidate with PERA. 3. The cost of administration would be significantly reduced if consolidated. 4. The logistics of administration are becoming more difficult as more members of the Relief Association reach retirement age. 5. The State has provided cost estimates for consolidation and benefit increase would appear to be reasonable (attached). Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not approve the resolution supporting benefit changes and consolidation. 2. Modify the resolution by supporting only one or more of the benefit changes requested. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter is under consideration on the October 8, 1990 City Council agenda. If approved, the following events would need to occur before consolidation could occur: • The State Legislature will need to approve a bill authorizing the changes in benefits for the Relief Association. • The Governor will need to sign the bill. • The Relief Association members (active and retired) need to vote in favor. of consolidation, contingent upon the benefit change. • The City Council will need to approve the change in benefits contingent upon consolidation. Res~ec~f~lly submitted, Jam~sV/b. Prosser Cit anaQer RESOLUTION N0. 8 RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE OF THE RICHFIELD POLICE RELIEF ASSOCIATION; RECOMMENDING CHANGES AND EXPRESSING INTENT TO CONSOLIDATE WITH P.E.R.A. WHEREAS, members of the Richfield Police Relief Association (the "Association") are interested in improving the pension benefits to members to have a more equitable, fair and competitive plan; and WHEREAS, the Association has examined the issue of college incentive pay and believes it should be included in the definition of pension benefits; and WHEREAS, the Association would like to improve benefits to members by having age 50 retirement under the current plan and amending the bylaws to allow members to retire on a deferred pension without the current two unit penalty provision; and ~~WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield (the City ) desires to have the membership of the Association consolidate with the Public Employees Retirement Association (P.E.R.A.); and WHEREAS, the City and Association officials believe that both the goals of the Association membership for improved pensions and the City's goal of consolidation could be accommodated . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City supports legislation for the 1991 Session which would: 1. Codify the interpretation that college incentive pay is included in the definition of salary for the purpose of pension computation effective retroactive to January 1, 1990; 2. Provide for retirement based on earned service credit at age 50; and 3. Elimination of the two unit reduction for deferred pensions; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City and the Association ,jointly lobby and support the legislation in the 1991 Session of the Minnesota Legislature; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City supports the initiation of a consolidation process into P.E.R.A. in January, 1991 with the intention of having the benefit changes being accomplished in conjunction with the Association consolidating with P.E.R.A.; and BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if the Association fail approve consolidation into P.E.R.A. that the City will not approve the benefit changes proposed herein. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of October, 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 162 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement• Consideration of a resolution urging County adoption of a one- half cent local option sales tax and supporting the Local Government Trust Fund. Background• The 1991 legislature recently enacted a new tax bill which includes a provision wherein a one-half cent optional sales tax may be adopted, either by counties or cities constituting a majority of the county's population, to augment local government property tax relief and create a dedicated two cent revenue stream called the Local Government Trust Fund. Under the law, an increase in the state sales tax rate of one- half percent automatically goes into effect July 1, 1991 and automatically expires on December 31, 1991. For the period after December 31, 1991 the law provides each county board the option of imposing a one-half percent local sales tax in the county. In order to enact that one-half percent local option sales tax, the County Board must take that action by July 1, 1991. Once the County Board has decided to impose the tax, it remains in effect until it acts to rescind the tax unless cites and towns or voters take action to rescind the tax as prescribed in the law. If imposed, the local option sales tax is to be collected by the Department of Revenue along with state sales tax. All of the administrative requirements of imposing and collecting the tax, including notification of retailers, would be handled by the Department of Revenue. If the County decides not to impose the local sales tax option for any year, the cities, townships, county and special taxing jurisdictions within the county would not receive payments of state aids in the following year for • Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) • Disparity Reduction Aid and attached Machinery Aid • Homestead and Agricultural Credit Guarantee s Supplemental Homestead Credit • Disparity Reduction Credit 0 25$ of the base aid for county human service programs s Local Government Aid and Equalization Aid. g -l Where a county does not adopt a local sales tax option, the sales tax rate for that county does not drop to four and one-half cents, it instead remains at the six percent level. Revenue from the one and one-half cent portion of the sales tax would be deposited in the new Local Government Trust Fund and distributed to cities as a windfall within counties that have adopted the local one-half cent sales tax option. The failure of Hennepin County to adopt the one-half cent local option sales tax would be an extremely critical issue to Richfield. It is estimated that if Hennepin County does not adopt that local one-half cent tax the City of Richfield will lose a total of $4,768,701 in lost state aids. If the City of Richfield were to try to recover that loss of aid in property taxes, the City portion of the tax capacity rate itself would increase by a tax capacity rate of 26. To put that in perspective, the City's total tax capacity rate for property taxes payable in 1991 was approximately 20.2 tax capacity rate. Thus, the City's tax capacity rate would more than double; increasing some 129$ for next year. A resolution which summarizes the City's position on the local option sales tax is included for Council consideration. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution urging Hennepin County Board to adopt the one-half cent local option sales tax and supporting the Local Government Trust Fund. Basis of Recommendation: 1. In order to ensure that Hennepin County understands the critical nature of the adoption of the one-half cent local option sales tax to Richfield, it is imperative that the City of Richfield pass a resolution indicating the City's support of that optional sales tax so that it may be forwarded to Hennepin County prior to official board action. 2. The Minnesota Legislature has provided a one-half cent local option sales tax which may be implemented by counties and cities. 3. The one-half cent local option sales tax is tied to another one and one-half cent portion of the existing sales tax which combined to form a two percent revenue stream called the Local Government Trust Fund. 4. If the County Board does not adopt the one-half cent local option sales tax by July first of any year, the remaining one and one-half cent portion of the sales tax would go to the Local Government Trust Fund to be spent within counties that have adopted the one-half cent local option sales tax. ~-~ 5. The County Board has requested that cities indicate their position on the one-half cent sales tax increase to the County Board by June 10, 1991. 6. If Hennepin County or any county does not adopt the local option sales tax, all cities and townships within the county lose all state aids for the following year including HACA and Local Government Aid. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide not to take any action on this resolution and leave it up to the County Board to decide whether or not they want to adopt the one-half cent local option sales tax. 2. The City Council could take the position of urging the County not to adopt the one-half cent local option sales tax. 3. It should also be noted that utilization of any of the alternatives mentioned in this section could result in the City of Richfield facing very dramatic reductions in service or property tax increases of a proportion never considered before this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: It is imperative that the City of Richfield take action on this resolution if it is the City's position to endorse the local option sales tax since Hennepin County must take action by July 1, 1991 on this item. Resp ly submitted, James D Prosser City M nager JDP:ds RESOLUTION NO. %-~ A RESOLUTION URGING COUNTY ADOPTION OF ONE-HALF CENT LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX AND SUPPORTING A DEDICATED TWO-CENT REVENUE STREAM FOR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TRUST FUND WHEREAS, the 1991 Legislature establish a one-half cent optional sales tax that may be adopted by counties or cities within counties to augment local government property tax relief and create a dedicated two-cent revenue stream called the Local Government Trust Fund; and, WHEREAS, the adoption of the one-half cent local option tax by Hennepin County would maintain aides to the counties and the cities and townships within the County; and, WHEREAS, failure of Hennepin County to adopt local option sales tax would result in the loss of all county, city and township aids within the county amounting to an aid loss of about 2.4 times as much as the County revenues from the one-half percent sales tax; and, WHEREAS, the failure of Hennepin County to adopt the local option sales tax would result in the County's share of the 1.5 cent share of the revenue stream to be distributed to other counties and cities within the State of Minnesota that have adopted the local option sales tax; and, WHEREAS, the failure of Hennepin County to adopt the local option sales tax would result in the aids currently being received by the City of Richfield to be reduced by some $4,768,701; and, WHEREAS, the failure of Hennepin County to adopt the local option sales tax would greatly increase property taxes throughout Hennepin County including more than doubling property taxes in the City of Richfield, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Richfield does support and request that the County Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County do adopt the optional one-half cent local option sales tax by July 1, 1991, as stipulated in Session Laws Chapter 291. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 163 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement: Consideration of a Council resolution authorizing the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to initiate a joint feasibility study of New Ford Town/Rich Acres buyout, relocation and redevelopment. Background• Residents within New Ford Town and Rich Acres have previously indicated a desire that their homes be bought out and that they be relocated. Residents within this area are experiencing continued noise from airport operations. At the same time, the residents are experiencing an uncertain future due to various and continuing proposals for airport expansion. This uncertainty has caused economic and social disinvestment within those neighborhoods. The City Council has previously authorized the staff to initiate a process which would lead to a proposal for the buyout of New Ford Town and Rich Acres by Metropolitan Airports Commission. The result of that initial effort by staff and consultants indicates the following: s There are a variety of financial mechanisms available which would provide a viable financing mechanism to accomplish the buyout, relocation and redevelopment. • An acquisition, relocation, property management capacity can be developed in order to accomplish a buyout within a three to five year period. ® There are a variety of viable redevelopment options for the New Ford Town/Rich Acres area including direct airport uses as well as airport related uses. ® There is a net tax loss to the City and school district if these neighborhoods are bought out. It will be necessary to provide a mechanism to reimburse both the City and the schools for this next tax loss. With the completion of this preliminary analysis, it is appropriate to initiate direct discussions with the Metropolitan Airports Commission in order to develop a financing mechanism and management plan in order to accomplish the buyout, relocation and redevelopment. MAC needs to be involved with those discussions in order that a product acceptable to them is developed for consideration by the MAC board. l0-1 Two resolutions have been prepared that would authorize MAC and City staff to initiate this feasibility study process. It is anticipated that the City of Richfield would continue to provide staff support for the service but that MAC would provide payment for the majority of the cost of consultants necessary to complete final analysis. Some of the specific issues that will be included in the feasibility study include: 1. Development of a work plan, specifically describing the issues that will need to be analyzed and the method of analysis. 2. Financial analysis, including identification of potential funding sources. 3. Legal and regulatory requirements to permit acquisition, relocation and redevelopment. 4. Acquisition, relocation, demolition and management. 5. Disposition of redevelopment alternatives. 6. Identification and mitigation of financial impacts on City and school finances. 7. Disposition of property upon full acquisition. 8. Structure of relationship between City and MAC to accomplish the buyout, relocation and redevelopment. At the MAC Planning and Environment meeting on July 2, 1991, City staff will request the MAC to adopt the same resolution as the City's authorizing its staff to initiate the feasibility study with staff from the City of Richfield. Attached is a copy of the resolution that will be presented at the meeting. Recommended Motion: Approve a resolution authorizing the feasibility analysis of New Ford Town/Rich Acres buyout, relocation and redevelopment and directing staff to initiate discussions with MAC regarding the resolution. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Residents within Rich Acres and New Ford Town have previously indicated a desire for their homes to be purchased and they be relocated. 2. Metropolitan Airports Commission staff has previously indicated a desire to assist the City in redeveloping New Ford Town and Rich Acres. l o ~-~ 3. It is necessary for the City to propose a positive action to proceed with a buyout, relocation and redevelopment effort. 4. It will be necessary for MAC to participate in a feasibility analysis in order that they are comfortable with the recommended funding and management mechanisms. 5. Preliminary analysis by staff and consultants indicates viable financing and management options are available to accomplish the buyout, relocation and redevelopment effort. 6. The Planning Commission conducted a information session on May 28, 1991, to discuss airport update issues. The concept of the feasibility analysis was presented at that time and favorably received. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may decide to take additional time to examine options. 2. The Council may direct staff to initiate the feasibility analysis effort independent of MAC. 3. The Council may decide to take no action on this matter. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for action at the Council meeting of June 10, 1991. Respect ul submitted, James D rosser City Man er JDP:ds Attachments ~a -~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR JOINT AND COOPERATIVE ACTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA AND THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 473.601 through 473.697 assign to the Metropolitan Airports Commission responsibility for operating, managing and improving the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP); and WHEREAS, the Commission is currently reviewing options for the future improvement and use of MSP at its current location as well as options involving relocation of MSP airport operations to a new major airport; all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.616; and WHEREAS, the New Ford Town and Rich Acres areas of the City of Richfield (the "City") are primarily residential neighborhoods lying west of MSP and east of TH77; and WHEREAS, the Commission and the City have long recognized that residential uses in these neighborhoods are not compatible with current airport uses, with any reasonably foreseeable future airport uses of MSP, or with any foreseeable uses of the MSP property should some or all of the airport operations at MSP be moved to a major new airport; and WHEREAS, the presence of residential uses in these neighborhoods has an impact on current airport operations and reduces the options available for future airport improvements and operations; and WHEREAS, these residential neighborhoods are adversely affected both by the proximity of the airport and by uncertainty about how future airport operations or improvements will affect the neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, such adverse effects include reduction in property value, general disinvestment in the properties in the neighborhood, and the resulting blight and deterioration, all of which result in severe personal and financial hardships for the residents and owners of properties in these neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Commission has identified these neighborhoods as among those which should be acquired with Part 150 funds for noise abatement purposes; and WHEREAS, the acquisition and clearance of these neighborhoods would mitigate adverse environmental effects of airport operations, alleviate personal and financial hardships, and facilitate airport planning. by increasing options available for future airport operations and improvements; and id-~ WHEREAS, the residents of these neighborhoods have indicated a clear and urgent desire that their homes be acquired and that they be relocated; and WHEREAS, the City has requested that the Commission consider a cooperative effort to study the feasibility of acquiring the property in these neighborhoods and putting it to appropriate and productive use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. That its staff is directed to meet with staff of the Metropolitan Airports Commission to negotiate an agreement for the joint preparation and sharing of costs of a feasibility study and program for the acquisition, relocation and redevelopment of the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods in the City of Richfield; and 2. That staff shall report back to the City Council with its recommendations as to the execution of such an agreement by September 10, 1991. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of June, 1991. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk IC~~~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR JOINT AND COOPERATIVE ACTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA AND THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 473.601 through 473.697 assign to the Metropolitan Airports Commission responsibility for operating, managing and improving the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP); and WHEREAS, the Commission is currently reviewing options for the future improvement and use of MSP at its current location as well as options involving relocation of MSP airport operations to a new major airport; all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.616; and WHEREAS, the New Ford Town and Rich Acres areas of the City of Richfield (the "City") are primarily residential neighborhoods lying west of MSP and east of TH77; and WHEREAS, the Commission and the City have long recognized that residential uses in these neighborhoods are not compatible with current airport uses, with any reasonably foreseeable future airport uses of MSP, or with any foreseeable uses of the MSP property should some or all of the airport operations at MSP be moved to a major new airport; and WHEREAS, the presence of residential uses in these neighborhoods has an impact on current airport operations and reduces the options available for future airport improvements and operations; and WHEREAS, these residential neighborhoods are adversely affected both by the proximity of the airport and by uncertainty about how future airport operations or improvements will affect the neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, such adverse effects include reduction in property value, general disinvestment in the properties in the neighborhood, and the resulting blight and deterioration, all of which result in severe personal and financial hardships for the residents and owners of properties in these neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the Commission has identified these neighborhoods as among those which should be acquired with Part 150 funds for noise abatement purposes; and WHEREAS, the acquisition and clearance of these neighborhoods would mitigate adverse environmental effects of airport operations, alleviate personal and financial hardships, and facilitate airport planning by increasing options available for future airport operations and improvements; and ~~ ~~ WHEREAS, the residents of these neighborhoods have indicated a clear and urgent desire that their homes be acquired and that they be relocated; and WHEREAS, the City has requested that the Commission consider a cooperative effort to study the feasibility of acquiring the property in these neighborhoods and putting it to appropriate and productive use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Metropolitan Airports Commission: 1. That its staff is directed to meet with staff of the City of Richfield to negotiate an agreement for the joint preparation and sharing of costs of a feasibility study and program for the acquisition, relocation and redevelopment of the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods in the City of Richfield; and 2. That staff shall report back to the Commission with its recommendations as to the execution of such an agreement by September 10, 1991. Dated: Hugh K. Shilling Chairman Secretary CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 164 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Stateraent• Award of contract for multipurpose building at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. Background• The Capital Improvements Fund includes $230,000 for construction of a multipurpose building at Veterans Memorial Park. The multipurpose building will provide restrooms, storage, concessions and winter warming facilities at the park. Nine bids were received for the building construction. The bids range from $278,800 to $338,642. Analysis of the bids indicates that the primary reason for the increased cost of bids over estimates relate to the soils at Veterans Memorial Park. The soils will cause extremely difficult construction conditions. The site will also require the construction of a sanitary sewer lift station. The City is faced with three basic alternatives: • Reject all bids and readvertise for a smaller building. • Reject all bids and wait for additional funding in 1992. • Accept the low bid with direction to staff to identify ways to complete the project on budget. This third option could be accommodated by a variety of means, including: • Acceptance of an alternative which would eliminate spectroglaze in the restrooms and replacing the spectroglaze with a quality epoxy glaze. ($12,250 credit) • Complete some exterior work using City crews. ($17,525 credit) s Reduction in architect fee. ($5,000 credit) The total of these efforts would reduce the base bid by approximately 535,000. • Finance the sanitary sewer lift station from the sanitary sewer utility in the cost of $23,475. This would not be a reduction in base bid but would identify additional funding source. There are sufficient funds within the sanitary sewer utility to accomplish this financing. Recommended Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation, accept Alternate 2 in the amount of $12,250, authorize staff to make other reductions to the base bid in the amount of $17,525, authorize funding of the the lift station through the sanitary sewer fund and award a contract to R. P. Vogel and Company, Inc. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A multipurpose building has been determined to be important to Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. 2. R. P. Vogel and Company, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. 3. The City has the ability to reduce the base bid amount. 4. The building can be constructed within the allocation. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may choose to reject all bids and direct staff to advertise for new bids. This would delay construction of a multipurpose building at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield until at least late fall. The building would not be available for the first annual Cattail Days fall festival being planned by Visions 2004. In addition, the bids submitted reflect the cost of a quality building. Bidding at a later time may reduce the quality of the building and, most likely, would not reduce the cost of the building. 2. Council may direct changes to the building in an effort to reduce costs. However, changes made in an attempt to reduce costs would be non-recoverable; i.e., the size of the building reduced to a level unable to serve the needs of the park and its users. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for Council action on June 10, 1991. Action is requested at this time if the building is to be available for the September 1991 Cattail Days Celebration. Respec u y submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds Attachment ~ A~ N ~o a ~ ~ ~ a ia i ~+ a a ~ o ~ ~ ~ ai • ~ 3 • •~ ow w ~~ a~ ~~~ a~ ~ O O •rl R1 •~ +~ 3 ~ o' ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~• a a ~ `~ ~ ~ H 0 ~~ro a ~ ~ a i w ~ w a z o . ~ i z o ~ oa H ~ a~ ~ ~ U *„~ A ~ w ~ Mi ~1 .•i ~ a ~ ~ ~I ~' rn a , a a i • wo ° o m o o ~o ~ .~ a~ x x~° o w ~ ~ •~E • l ro N • co a i a i r N U E ~ •--I ~ .. fx ~ + U ~ b ~' U o O~ ~UU O O c o I r E •a~+~ xN b ~ U ~ ~ z o ~ ~ ~ o ~ a i . W O H O W A~~ b ~ O w ~ o ~ +~ c O f + [~ a4 c o ~ ~ f-t .--I O .O co ~, ~ O R1 cA 3 'L7 ~ co i-~ +~ £ •~ °" x ~ HAU ~ C O N 'A to , ~ O ~ ~ ~U ~ ~ N a~ a ~ a as ~ ~ ~ O ~ O 3 U ~ b ~ ~ b N O ' " '~~ A ~ ~+ OA•~rn b~ R +~ N f•+ A rn to ~ •~ ~aU ~ .~ 3 ui Cq co co R1 V1 Ri ~, O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O a °~ aF ~ s o H £ ~ ~ I I I ~ b ~ w ~ ~ w+~ ~ ~ I x I k I ~ I 3 O G3~'L3 o •~ ~ a +~ a~ a~ xa~b ~ U N Ob a x x I ~ I ~ I ~ as~a ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ a a ~° o '~ zs b aca o a o 0 0 O ~ °1 rn rn U ° ~ ° zHoa ` ~ rn o ~ a ~ ao ao ~ ~ HU ~ p ~ ~ p ~ a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ao ° ° ° ° ° -~ o o o o o ~U O ~O O O O O N 'd~ N d~ H W ~l Q O ri N N a ... r-I ~ r-I ~ ri ~ r-i ~ ~ ~ ° ° ° ° ° o o o o o ~U O M p~ ~ O W ~ O ~ O 'd H i-7 A O ~ N ~ N ~ rl ~ ~ O O O O O A • • a H ao N O- co ~ R1 nl CO M In 00 d~ C- C~ M L~ N N N M N M ~ '~ t•" ~ A~ b °~o 'C3 ~o br ~I b b °q '~ 'CS ~ ob o o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ to • Asa ax ~, U ~ ~ ~ a ~ • +~a ~ oro •~a o ro x o ~ a~ ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 r I 3 ~ ~ ~~ , ~w ~ 0 ~U~ a c o s ~O~ U~ win w al xE ~U3 x N 0.y a O O O O O 1 p rl b .--I rl tt~ x c~ ~O N \ O O a a Ian i ik i i x I x I x I x I k I ~ I ~ I k I C b 0 c t cd b b b b ~ N O p~ .-1 •-i r-I O ~ t O ~ O~ 00 00 • [~ ° ° ° o 1 n o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ° ° o o o O O O tM O s~ t~ O d~ N N N ri 1 r-1 1 r-I 1 O O O ~ N O ( ~ N to p .-~ rn O rl 1 1 .--1 1 O O O ~ O N O d' ~ t~ O~ 00 r-r O M ('~ M (+~ 'd 'Cy 'O W O W C," W 1~ W ~ w x o s~ a ~ x ~ O r -IH N ~ ,~ ~ ro .°~ o~~ ~ w+~ a~ visa ,x r-1 H ~., rl (0 G FE U ~ G vU3 C 7UN ~, ~ 1 I --~ ~ °~ U U ~ ~ rn +~ ~ U O I H tv O O h O ~ ~ O +~ A ~ c tl w b a~ a a~ ~ b cry ~ ~ ~ o 0 O U .p O O ~ O o~ T} ~ ~ I }~ fr3 .--I .G O ~ O A O- 'd ~ ~ 1 ~ 0 3 O ~ , -i • A O ~ ~ }~ M H ~ M It1 '~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C,' IC m~ x a ~ b ~ a i i ~ a ~a ~ U m n i i ~~ ~~ U ~ A 3 ,C O H U /a. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 165 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement: Appointment to the Advisory Board of Health. Background• A vacancy on this Board has resulted due to a resignation. One applicant was interviewed on June 10, 1991. Two candidates who were interviewed last January, but were not appointed, are also being considered. Recommended Motion: Appoint a member to fill the term on the Advisory Board of Health. Basis for Recommendation: 1. In order to assure a quorum for future meetings, the appointment should be made at this time. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Defer the appointment to a later Council meeting. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the June 10, 1991 Council agenda for Council consideration. The appointment will begin immediately. Res fully submitted, Jame Prosser City Manager JDP:ds f .~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 166 Agenda June 10, 1991 Issue Statement: Presentation made by Sister City Committee members of their trip to Heredia, Costa Rica in May 1991. Background• The City of Richfield, through its Sister City Committee, established a Sister City relationship with Heredia, Costa Rica. As a way to solidify the Sister City relationship and to gain a better understanding of the city, members of the Sister City Committee, Mayor Martin Kirsch, and a spouse of a committee member traveled to Heredia, Costa Rica from May 15 t0 May 22, 1991. City officials from Heredia, Costa Rica provided hospitality and a trip itinerary for the Richfield Sister City Committee delegation. Attached is the trip itinerary. During their visit, the City of Heredia held an special municipal session for the Richfield delegation. At the session, two versions of a Contract of Friendship, written in English and Spanish, between the two cities were signed by Mayor Martin Kirsch and Senor Lic. Julio Ballestero Campos, President of the City of Heredia. The signed friendship contract written in Spanish remained with officials in Heredia. The signed contract written in English will be kept in the City of Richfield and will be presented at the June 10, 1991 Council meeting. Copies of the contracts are attached. In September 1991, a delegation of city officials from Heredia, Costa Rica will visit the City of Richfield to further solidify the relationship between the two cities and to give Heredia officials a better understanding of Richfield. The Richfield Sister City Committee is planning a city-wide celebration in conjunction with the Richfield Art Fair and Family Festival on September 21, 1991. The committee will provide hospitality and develop a trip itinerary for the delegation from Costa Rica. Recommended Motion: The Sister City Committee members who traveled to Costa Rica will share their trip experiences and present items they received from city officials in Heredia who hosted the Richfield delegation. Basis of Recommendation: This is an important and meaningful project for the City of Richfield. The sister city relationship between the two cities will provide a mutual community-wide relationship through the development of programs fostering understanding, friendship, and reciprocity. ~3~1 Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This is the last item scheduled on the June 10, 1991 Council agenda. Respectf 1 submitted, James Prosser Cit na r y ge JDP:kab Attachments ~" ~ ~, ~t /3-~ I T i ht E R A R Y tf2r;ITC`_•~'t_S FROF" sJ!IR _=~T`FC ~iTY R I C H F I E L D- M I C~; A.t E S O T A TH;_!RSDA`', f^A'~ ~ b - ;;~ELCC$`n.E s s e v s e e: t '=t : a =f? P . M . - ~';E,=T ~ i Tf-! CITY COC!h3C I L PEOPLE OF HERED I A s~T THE POUGAN r' i LLEA ~-tOTEL - =t : -?x j : P _ }y! . - L~1~3C3-t SPOl+1SORED SY E~:R . -L! s I S AE? I AS •• RELOf~EP I A ELOEA'• ~• : C:D P . #°:. - GHEC t:. OUT OF THE HOTEL - TRAf`~SFE; ~ TO EACH "HOf`1E" 7 : i?~x P . M . - MEET TNG AT THE CHAMFER OF INDUSTRY AND CO!°lMERCE OF 1-!FRET? i A . 8;t~? P.M. -DINNER AT THE "GRAN PAPA" RESTAURANT - SPONSORED PY THE CHAMFER OF i~.#D!!STRY AND COMt~ERGE OF HEREI}IA. FRIDAY, MAY 1? - OUR PUSiNESSES 5:1~~ A.M. - VISIT TO THE COO~_IE FACTORY °COPOZ„ 1: ~ ; Ds? A . f~! . - V i S I T TO THE DUTY FREE METROPOLITAN ZONE 1~:DQ P.M. -LUNCH AL THE "GRAN PAPA" RESTAURANT - SPONSORED HY MR. iSAIAS G!=!C~(EZ "TENERIA PiRRC!" . =: Di? P.wt. - VISIT TO "SARCHI DE VALVERDE VEGA" ~S!_'UVENIER SHOP . PINGS ,,. ..~.~ . ; t1D P . M . - D I itiNER AT THE "RESTAURANTE EL PR i NC I PE" - SPOP.iSORED PY ;"tUNICiFALII?AI}. SATURDAY, MAY IS - OU., AGRICULTURAL AREAS AND A VOLCAP.iO 8 : i~C; A . M . - DEPARTURE 8:~s~ A.M. - PREAk.FAST Ito "POASiTO" 9:1~ A.M. - DEPARTURE TO THE POAS VOLCANO 1=:~t~ P.`M. - OJT-DOOR-LUNCH IN "SAN RAFAEL DE VARAPLANGA" 5:~~' P.M. - DINNER AT THE "RODEO RESTAURANT" - SPONSORED PY SL!RGER k: I I4G CORPORAT i ON 13 ~~ SU.~EIE;Y , MAY 14 - A TRIP TO PARAD i SE' + _ :: s s s s s : s WILL _P.E i P}FflRE~tED LATER Ot'~ E{ ;' i L5E DR 3flL I p . MfllE'.DA'r , MAY icl - fl! #4 Gps tNTIES S:-=t~ A.M. - t1ISIT: SAN RAFAEL SAN PAE-~Lt3 SAN ISIDRp SA#ylTfJ Di7MIhtGt3 `,,,r1.t.3tetCN) s~nn~~n~zs=n RY Mt~1VZCSL}L3L I TY pF SANTA DflP3I NOp BARt1A Sr s~3TA B{~Sr~R€~ SAN JflAQUIN SAPd ANTflN I O DE BELEN t D i NNER 3 SPflt~.iSORED EY MIEN I G I PAL I TY OF DELE#`d TUESDAY, MAY ~1 - pUR PUPLIC INSTITUTIQNS 8 ..:rD A . M . -LOS LAGflS SCHOOL SGHflOL FQR THE ARTS `.'OGATIflNAL HIGH SG:ft7pL 1z:=;cf P.M. -LUNCH AT THE "RODEO STEA~ti HOUSE" RESTAURANT - Sr''O14tSORE:1 ELY FREE DUTY METRpPCLiTAN Lp=~tE ~: _i, P.i''!. - i`.3s=~TIpNAL : fh~i~lEFtuITY ~ _ ~iD P . M . - CULTURAL HOUSE OF : -EEP.ED I C~ 7 : ~Q P . t`3 . - !"!UN I C I PAL SOLEF1~t SESS I L~l~! -- - FAREWELL PARTY - WINE, GHEESE AND MORE l3- ~ CONTRACT OF FRIENDSHIP between the Cities of RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA (USA) and HEREDIA, COSTA RICA The City of RICHFIELD, represented by MAYOR. MARTIN J. KIRSCH, and the"'City of HEREDIA, represented by SENOR LIC.'JULIO BALLESTERO CAMPOS, have entered into a relationship of friendship. These bonds of friendship between the cities of RICHFIELD and r HEREDIA will help us understand one another better, promote mutual exchanges and strengthen peace in the world. The cities of RICHFIELD and HEREDIA agree to: l) organize mutual exchanges between both cities without any ~. major financial effect on the municipality budget. '- _~- - -; 2) explore and develop exchanges in the area of education,-.-_ culture, sports life, and service organizations in order to gain a better understanding of both communities. 3) take steps to strengthen peace between both countries and solidify bonds of friendship between citizens of both cities. It is anticipated that the municipal management of RICHFIELD and.HEREDIA will acknowledge this Sister City relationship and be supportive in our efforts to collaborate activities which will bring both cities closer together. This contract shall become official at the signing thereof and has been drafted in English and Spanish, both of which are the official languages. MARTIN J. KIRSCH SENOR LIC. JULIO BALLESTERO CAMPOS Mayor of RICHFIELD President of the City of HEREDIA w ~ " CONTRATO DE AMISTAD ~~ entre las ciudades de RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA (EE.W.) Y HEREDIA, COSTA RICA La Ciudad de RICHFIELD, represeritada por ALCALDE MARTIN•J. KIRSCH, Y 'La `Ciudad de HEREDIA,'representada por SENOR LIC. JULIO BALLESTERO CAMPOS, , han establecido relaciones amistosas. Estos lazos de amistad entre las ciudades de RICHFIELD y .. HEREDIA nos ayudaran a entendernos mejor, fomentar intercambios mutuosos y fortalecer la paz mundial. Las ciudades de RICHFIELD y HEREDIA se acuerdan: • 1) Organizar intercambios mutuosos entre ambas ciudades sin afectar grandemente los fondos del presupuesto municipio. 2) Examinar y desarollar intercambios en el Campo de educacibn, cultura, deportes, y las organizaciones de servicio para adquerir un mejor entidimiento de ambas ----_-_-_ - -----.- __ _ communidades . 3) Tomar medida para realzar la paz entre ambos paises y fortalecer los lazos de amistad entre los ciudadanos de ambos paises. Se preve que la direction munipal de RICHFIELD y HEREDIA reconocera esta relaci'on "Sister City" y apoyar nuestros esfuerzos colaborar actividades que mejoraran la amistad entre los dos ciudades. Este contrato no se autorizara hasta que sea firmado y fue redactado en ingl'es y espanol que son los dos idiomas oficiales. MARTIN J. KIRSCH SENOR LIC. JULIO BALLESTERO CAMPOS Mayor of RICHFIELD Presidente de Municipalidad de HEREDIA