Loading...
2-26-90 agenda CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 67 Agenda, February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Receipt and referral of Rich Acres petition for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Redesignation. Background: On February 21, 1990, City officials received a petition from Rich Acres residents. (Copy Attached). The petition essentially requests redesignation of land use in New Ford Town and development of a reuse plan for that area. This matter had been previously considered by the Planning Commission and City Council. The City Council and the Planning Commission decision not to include Rich Acres in a land use redesignation was based on two factors: e A majority of the New Ford Town neighborhood is in the Ldn 65 and 70 noise contours. No homes within Rich Acres are within either the Ldn 65 or 70 contours. e Resident interest in redesignating the land use in Rich Acres did not appear to be as strong as resident interest expressed by New Ford Town residents. This latter factor appears to have changed. Recommended Motion: Refer the petition to the Planning Commission and request that they conduct a public hearing as soon as possible to consider the redesignation of land use in New Ford Town. Direct staff to initiate a feasibility study for land reuse within New Ford Town. The cost for such a feasibility study is estimated at $1,500. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The residents concerns regarding the future residential character of this area appears to be significant. 2. Conducting a public hearing would permit an opportunity for additional facts to be considered regarding this a proposed redesignation. 3. Undertaking a feasibility analysis may provide additional information to the Council prior to a final decision regarding this matter. 4. Finally the most important factor. Residents are greatly concerned regarding the future of this area, it is appropriate to provide a expeditious review of 'their request. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not conduct public hearing. 2. Wait until a redesignation prior to initiate a feasibility analysis. Decision/Discussion Mode: This matter will be presented at a Council meeting February 26, 1990. It should be noted that if a redesignation is approved by the Planning Commission it will be necessary to seek Metropolitan Council approval prior to final action by the City Council. This requirement will take at least 30 and possibly an additional 60 to 90 days. This is the same process that occurred with the New Ford Town redesignation. Re e "ly submitted Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP:sae • r? • P E T I T I O N To: The City of Richfield, Minnesota James D. Prosser, City Manager Steve Quam, Mayor Council Members: Edwina Garcia Martin Kirsch Ivan Ludeman Michael Sandahl From: The Rich Acres Residents of Richfield, Minnesota We, the undersigned residents of Rich Acres, by signature of this petition express the following concerns regarding our neighborhood : 1. That our neighborhood faces the same problem as New Ford Town residents: increasing isolation in a noisy, commercial area no longer suited for residential purposes. 2. That our neighborhood has been neglected by the City of Richfield as to future planning while New Ford Town residents are well being considered with appropriate zoning provisions and plans for redevelopment. 3. That if New Ford Town is redeveloped, Rich Acres property would become highly undesirable. We do not want to live in a neighborhood that is an island among commercial industry. We want Rich Acres to be a part of any redevelopment plans which involves New Ford Town. After a number of years of uncertainty about our neighborhood, we have the desire to be bought out (either with the New Ford Town redevelopment or independently) so that we (and our families) can finally get on with our lives. N e Address Phone. 3 - aG r'L` 4. ?? - 5. Date ;? -IS-50 -2 -SS-- Sp a r ??? S-?o ?f •K • • Petition to the City of Richfield From the Residents of Rich Acres Page 2 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. C ?- Address Phone Date 4 !?3 ?- o hie, S n4 -s6&i J-i4 to 22* Ss IJ Z-17-10 83.5 026-4 61F S. &oI -cV IF ,1-/7-9 ?S;)j 1 L- f 41. 14 ?/ 0*0? 61 y?3 ,q S o - ov Lim i,0 I• • Petition to the City of Richfield From the Residents of Rich Acres Page 3 Name address 30 . -/ - 31.t Y t y k? 32. 33. i?tc 4 ?r? C 34. Ica .?/? L, z? ?PJZ 35. ' 36 . Q3 37. 90,) 6 SO/?-, - ? X35/ l 39. 40. ` 41. 42. 43- i 44. 45. 46. > A-? 5W A AJZ pit/ l? 47. eve ?v e S A ,v 50A-1 G 48. 491" 6,ho, izlyz 50. 52. 53. Phone Date KL4;?')all -7190 2 aJ? ?l at-17-?c 7a- ?? 2 J? ,may ys Y 5-37/ 3 s4?2 3 _S 0 • Q Petition to the City of Richfield From the Residents of Rich Acres Page 4 54. 55. 56. 57. q-q?'?1 ? -1?3?p 58. r 0 861- 59. 61. qrZ2 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. Name Address Phone Date SUMMARY OF PETITION 54 Homes In Rich Acres Neighborhood 42 Homes Wish to be Bought Homes Not Represented By This Petition 6824 20th Avenue Home presently for sale by owners. 6800 21st Avenue Home presently vacant and for sale. 6810 21st Avenue Home is rental property. Unable to make contact with landlord. 3 Homes - Not home. Unable to make contact with: 6820 19th Ave. 6821 19th Ave. 6821 Longfellow 6820 20th Avenue Do not wish to be bought. 6838 20th Avenue Do not wish to be bought. 6844 20th Avenue Do not wish to be bought. 6832 21st Avenue Do not wish to be bought. 6824 19th Avenue Do not wish to be bought. 6835 19th Avenue Do not wish to be bought. cc: Mr. Alfred Checchi, Chairman and CEO, Northwest Airlines Mr. Jeff Hamill, Executive Director, Metro'. Airports Comm. Mr. Steve Keefe, Chairperson, Metropolitan Council 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 72 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Delay renewal of the On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor license for The Frenchman's, 1400 East 66th Street, until March 12, 1990. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by The Frenchman's. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate, state sales, and withholding taxes. - Mr. Charles Cordray is the owner since June of 1989, Ms. Christine Cordray is the manager. Neither has a known • criminal record. - During the previous twelve months there were 25 public safety contacts with the Frenchman's. This compares with nine contacts for the previous year. Of the 25 contacts, five were of a criminal nature and six were "bar type" including two drunkeness,,three domestics, and one disorderly conduct. - Public Safety staff received a complaint in January of 1990 which indicated that there was a possibility that minors were being served beer at the establishment. On January 5, 1990 and again on January 26, 1990, police officers were present as employees of Frenchmans served two minors on separate occasions without asking the minors for identification. Both employees and the owner of the establishment were charged on February 12, 1990 with a gross misdeameanor. Recommended Motion: 1. Delay the license renewal of the on-sale non'-intoxicating malt liquor license for The Frenchman's until March 12, 1990. 2. Schedule a disciplinary.hearing for March 12, 1990 to consider renewal of their license and possible suspension of the license for a period of up to 60 days for serving beer to minors. 0 3. Consider granting an extension of the license to sell 3.2 beer until the March 12, 1990 hearing. Basis for Reommendation: 1. The applicant has violated provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to the sale of 3.2 beer. 2. Based upon information gathered by staff and an investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there is a valid reason to delay the license renewal until the March 12, 1990 Council meeting. 3. At the March 12, 1990 Council meeting, the Council will need to consider the possibility of suspending the establishment's license for up to 60 days based on the allegations that two employees served beer to minors on two separate occassions in the presence of Richfield police officers. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, according to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to 0 alcoholic beverages. The Council must also note that no revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Sections 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The City Attorney advises that we need a two week notice before conducting a disciplinary hearing. Public Safety recommends the license renewal be delayed until the March 12, 1990 Council meeting so that the owner of Frenchmans can be notified of a hearing on the license renewal. The hearing will be to address a possible suspension of the license as a result of minors being served in the establishment on two separate occasions. Discussion/Decision Mode: A request for the delay of a license renewal for Frenchmans until the March 12, 1990 Council meeting is presented for Council consideration at this time. Resp lly submitted, Jame . Prosser Cit anager 0 JDP:bac • Public Safety Contacts 9 1 9 R. 25 Of the 25 contacts in 1989, *four were of a criminal nature. Those four consisted of 1 disorderly conduct, 1 stolen property, 1 bad check and 1 vandalism. *It should be noted that the council letter indicates there were five contacts of a criminal nature - That should be corrected to four. 3 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 71 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Approval of the•continuation of the agreement with the City of Bloomington for the provision of inspectional services for Richfield for the year 1990. Background: The City of Bloomington has provided inspectional and enforcement services in the areas of plumbing, heating and air conditioning, food service, forestry and plan check for food services for several years. In the 1989 contract with Bloomington, we added to those services listed above the following: - Public outdoor swimming pool inspections (apartment buildings, municipal pools, lodging facilities) - Indoor swimming pool inspections (schools, heal clubs) - Lodging facility inspections (motel/hotel) The contract amount will increase from $70,674 in 1989 to $101,000 in 1990. This increase is necessary due to a change in the term of the contract from 12 months to 14 months. The expiration date of the contract in the past has been October 31st. The 1990 contract date will reflect an expiration date of December 31, 1990. , The second factor in the increase of the contract is a result of an internal audit conducted by Bloomington which indicated that several areas of the contract were not cost effective to the City of Bloomington. The services involved are food and restaurant sanitation inspections, environmental health plan check inspections and plumbing inspections. Richfield and Bloomington staff have met to discuss these increases and Richfield has decreased the amount of time the plumbing inspector spends in Richfield resulting in a savings to Richfield of approximately $5,000. After careful consideration by staff, it was determined that even with the increase in the contract, Richfield could not provide the same level of services for the amount of money Bloomington is requesting. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the city council approve the agreement with the City of Bloomington for the provision of inspectional and enforcement services for the year 1990. 0 1`,/mil _/ Basis For Recommendation: 1. The City of Bloomington has sufficient resources to provide a professional level of inspectional services to Richfield residents. Annual evaluations of their services has shown that they are providing effective services in a very cost-efficient manner. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The council could decide to have Richfield provide its own plumbing, heating and air conditioning, food inspection and forestry services. The cost of hiring the staff necessary to provide the same level of services and administrative support would be more than our current expenditures, and would require a budget increase. Discussion/Decision Mode: The renewal of the agreement between Richfield and the City of Bloomington for the provision of inspectional services is being presented for council approval. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City nager 0 JDP:bac is • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 70 Agenda February 26,.1990 Issue Statement: Resolution amending Letter of Understanding between the City of Richfield and James D. Prosser, City Manager, adjusting compensation. Background: Mayor Quam?has requested that a resolution adjusting the compensation of the City Manager be placed on the February 26, 1990 Council agenda. The current salary of $71,510 was effective September 1, 1989. Attached is a resolution that would increase the manager's salary 6%, 4% pay structure adjustment and 2$ merit increase. In addition, the City Manager's deferred compensation contribution by the city will be increased by 1$, for a total of 5$. Recommended Motion: None Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the February 26, 1990 city council agenda for council consideration. James City JDP/eja y submitted, Prosser 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND JAMES D. PROSSER, CITY MANAGER NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: The following sections of the Letter of Understanding between the City of Richfield, Minnesota and James D. Prosser, dated July 14, 1986, is amended as follows: Section 5, Salary: Employer agrees to pay employee for his services rendered pursuant here to an annual base salary of $75,800, effective September 1, 1989, payable in installments at the same time as other employees of the employer are paid. Employee shall also receive a 1$ increase in deferred compensation. Each January 1, the City will annually adjust the City Manager's salary by adding an amount equal to the difference between the maximum annual amount contributed by the City for Management employees toward the family cost of health and dental insurance coverages, and the total annual family premium costs of these insurance coverages. In addition, employer agrees to increase said base salary and/or other benefits of employee in such amounts and to such extent as the Council may determine that it is desirable to do so on the basis of an annual salary review of said employee on or about August 31 of each year. • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 69 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Adoption of a Resolution Approving Minnesota Department of Transortation Plans for a Storm Sewer Replacement Project. Background: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) owns an existing storm sewer which drains part of I-35W near 63rd Street to an inplace, city owned storm sewer main at 63rd Street and Dupont Avenue South. This existing storm sewer is adequate in capacity, line and grade, but is rapidly deteriorating. MnDOT is proposing to replace two hundred five feet of this deteriorating storm sewer with new,pipe. The replacement pipe will be of the same size as the existing pipe and will be installed in the same location and to the same grade at the existing pipe. Most of the length of this improvement will be situated on private property. MnDOT has been working directly with the owners of the Woodlake Apartments,.6300-04 Dupont on easement and construction details. City staff has contacted representatives of the owners, Highland Property Management, and are satisfied that the owners concerns are being addressed by MnDOT. The Richfield staff has been dealing with MnDOT to assure that the interests of the City are provided for. The issues resolved include detours, street curb and gutter and sidewalk restoration, and the protection of inplace public utilities. The cost of this improvement will be fully funded by MnDOT. Recommended Motion: Approve the construction plans and special provisions for the storm sewer replacement project at 63rd St. and Dupont Avenue South (S.P. 2782-247). Basis of Recommendation: 1. The existing pipe is rapidly deteriorating and if left as is will eventually collapse causing unsafe conditions affecting both vehicular and pedestrian traffic, as well as damage to both private property and city streets. 2. The cost of this improvement will be fully funded by MnDOT. 3. The Owners of the affected private property have been contacted and are working with MnDOT to minimize inconvenience to their property. 0 4. All Richfield staff concerns over this project have been adequately addressed by MnDOT. Alternative Recommendation: Council may decide not to adopt a resolution approving the plans for this project. A City Council decision not to approve this resolution would stop this needed project and could result in severe damage to inplace improvements both public and private. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the February 26, 1990 regular City Council meeting. Staff is requesting approval at this time in order to submit the approved resolution in a timely fashion. RespectfJc[1Jly submitted, Jame P. Prosser City anager JDP/sdr Attachment • 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PLANS AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR A STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT AT 63RD STREET AND DUPONT AVENUE SOUTH. WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared: plans, special provisions, and specifications for the improvement of Trunk Highway No. 394, renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 35W, within the corporate limits of the City of Richfield, located on 63rd Street at Dupont Avenue; and seeks the approval thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said plans and special provisions for the improvement of said Trunk Highway within said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved including the elevations and grades as shown and consent is hereby given to any and all changes in grade occasioned by said construction. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of February, 1990. APPROVED 0 Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 68 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Public Hearing and Second Reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund. Background: On December 6, 1989, the City Council approved the 1990 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) and also adopted the 1990 budget for all funds as outlined in the budget document. The various approved appropriations for 1990 for the capital projects are defined as outlined below: Master Park Plan Study $ 30,000 Veterans Memorial Park 245,000 City Hall Sprinkler System 15,000 City Hall Utilization Study 10,000 $300,000 A transitory ordinance is now necessary to finalize these appropriations pursuant to City Charter. Charter Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 allows expenditures for capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund only by ordinance. Recommended Motion: Hold the public heariang and approve the attached transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements. Basis of Recommendation: 1. On December 6, 1989, the City Council adopted the 1990 Capital Improvement Budget. 2. On February 12, 1990 the City Council held reading and scheduled the second reading and public hearing for February 26, 1990. 2. Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. The hearing process must be completed in 1990 so the Capital Projects can be completed as approved and the funds expended. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could allocate the funds to a totally new project or projects, but a public hearing for a budget revision would be necessary. 2. The City Council could decide not to authorize the expenditure of Special Revenue Funds. However, that would be contrary to the previously adopted Capital Improvement is Budget. Discussion/Decision Mode: Action on this item is requested at the City Council. This would allow effective in a timely manner so that be ordered as budgeted. JDP : ej a • the February 26 meeting of the ordinance to become the capital improvements can Respectfully submitted, /t Jame Prosser City nager 0 BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Master Park Plan Study $ 30,000 Veteran's Memorial Park 245,000 City Hall Sprinkler System 15,000 City Hall Utilization Study 10,000 $300,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this _ day of February, 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk • BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Master Park Plan Study $ 30,000 Veteran's Memorial Park 245,000 City Hall Sprinkler System 15,000 City Hall Utilization Study 10,000 $300,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this _ day of February, 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 y • NOTE: At first reading of this ordinance, a question was raised regarding use of special revenue funds for non-recreational improvements. Attached is a ten-year history of the use of these funds. • • ?e ? v CITY OF RICHFIELD Memorandum DATE: February 20, 1990 TO: James D. Prosser, City Manager FROM: Steven L. Devich, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Special Revenue Capital Funding Analysis 1981-1990 The following report on Special Revenue Capital financing is divided into four parts: 1) Policy Attached is a copy of the City's Capital Improvement Budget Policies adopted by the City Council. Policy A9 refers specifically to liquor revenue (Special Revenue) expenditures. 2) Capital Improvement Budgeting History A graphic comparison of the last ten years of Capital Budgeting using Special Revenue (SR) funding. The chart shows total SR funding and breaks it down into park and non-park projects by total dollars and percentage of total. 3) Special Revenue Funded Non-Park Projects By Year A listing of non-park projects funded by SR funds from 1981 through 1990.by year. 4) Capital Budgets Attached are the Capital Budgets of the City for the period 1981-1990. SLD•ff cc:? Jean Mitchell, Finance Manager ??, %41, • SPECIAL REVENUE (SR)* CAPTIAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETING 1981-1990 YEAR 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 * Special Revenue Funding is generated by Liquor profits. ** 1981 was unusual in that the current year's SR Funding available was used in addition to most of the Fund balance. TOTAL SR FUNDING $605,000** 388,250 300,000 330,000 350,000 315,000 341,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 SR FUNDED PARK PROJECTS AMT/$ OF TOTAL SR $155,000 / 26% 206,250 / 53% 109,000 / 36% 227,500 / 69% 330,000 / 94% 280,000 / 89% 260,000 / 76% 240,000 / 80% 300,000 /100$ 275,000 / 92% SR FUNDED NON-PARK PROJECTS AMT/$ OF TOTAL SR $450,000 / 74% 182,000 / 47% 191,000 / 64% 102,500 / 31% 20,000 / 6% 35,000 / 11% 81,000 / 24% 60,000 / 20% -0- / 0% 25,000 / 8% • • • SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDED NON-PARK PROJECTS BY YEAR 1981 Ice Arena $ 25,000 Swimming Pool 20,000 Forestry 45,000 Sidewalks 10,000 Central Garage 28,109 Gov't Bldgs. 30,000 Pub. Safety Bldg. 291,891 1982 Forestry $ 45,000 Pub. Safety Bldg. 130,000 Energy Imp. 7,000 1983 Forestry $ 25,000 Ice Arena 35,000 Penn Fire Station 71,000 City Garage 15,000 Energy Imp. 45,000 1984 Forestry Swimming Pool Central Garage $ 27,500 15,000 60,000 1985 1986 City Hall $ 10,000 City Hall $ 20,000 Energy Imp. 10,000 Public Safety Comm. Reserve 15,000 1987 Nature Center $ 29,000 Ice Arena 12,000 Swimming Pool 10,000 Public Safety Comm. Reserve 30,000 1988 Optech Voting System $ 60,000 1989 1990 None City Hall Sprinkler City Hall Util. Study $ 15,000 10,000 11 property taxes, which distribute the costs of municipal services fairly and which provide adequate funds to operate desired program. 7. To provide essential public facilities and prevent deterioration of the City's public facilities and its capital plant. 8. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating and prevent default on any municipal debts. 9. To ensure the legal use and protection of all City funds through a good system of financial and internal controls. 10. To maintain a Risk Management Program that will minimize the impact of legal liabilities, natural disasters or other emergencies tnrough the following activities: Loss Prevention - Prevent negative occurrences. Loss Control - Reduce or mitigate expenses of a negative occurrence. Loss Financing - Provide a means to finance losses. Loss Information Management - Collect and analyze relevant data to make prudent loss prevention, loss control and loss financing decisions. III. FINANCIAL MANASEMENT POLICIES A. Capital Improvement Budget Policies • 1. The City will make all capital improvements in accordance with an adopted Capital Improvement Budget. 2. The City will develop a multi-year plan for capital improvements and update it annually. 3. The City will enact an annual Capital Budget based on the multi-year capital improvement plan. Future capital expenditures necessitated by changes in population, changes in real estate development, or changes in economic base will be calculated and included in Capital Budget projections. 4. The City will coordinate development of the Capital Improvement Budget with the development of the operating budget. Future operating costs associated with new capital improvements will be projected and included in operating budget forecasts. 5. The City will use intergovernmental assistance to finance only those capital improvements that are consistent with the adopted capital improvement plan and City priorities, and for which operating and maintenance costs have been included in operating budget forecasts. 6. The City will project its equipment replacement and maintenance needs for the next several years and will update this projection each year. From this projection, a maintenance and replacement schedule will be developed and followed in the Central Garage Fund. 7. The City staff will identify the estimated costs and potential funding sources for each capital project proposal before it is submitted to the City Council for approval. B. The City will determine the least costly financing method for all new projects. 9. The City will utilize profits from its municipal liquor operation solely for the support of capital' improvements. Each year at least $325,000 of available current year liquor store profits will be transferred to the Special Revenue Fund for capital improvements. Any remaining profits will be retained in the Liquor Fund as working capital for the maintenance and expansion of physical assets, including store facilities. The accumulation of funds in working capital will be reviewed annually by the City Council. B. Revenue Polices 1. The City will attempt to maintain a diversified and stable revenue system to shelter it from short-run fluctuations in any one revenue source. 2. The City will estimate its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process. 3. The City will project revenues for the next three years and will update this projection annually. Each existing and potential revenue source will be reexamined annually. 4. The City will maintain sound appraisal procedures to keep property values correct. Property will be assessed at the legally mandated market value for each type of property. 5. The year-to-year increase of actual revenue f;om the property tax will generally not exceed eight percent, except in unusual conditions. Reassessments will be made.of all property at least every four years. ... ::.r'?A L' .. a. ww a.wqq ••},? ? '?e•.?w. ,r.NK tF.,(?J,:CaMtl?.'A t+.',t. SiLrlYY?/t,oYY7rOtii7Y -- ti" -?.{ / tjr1 G,JM IMA'1: d 3 iI . ?" G ?i"lrN 3.uti?«!+r = T is{ -? - . `?t"`?:`> ? E 1:IL 1Aq•i.lai V. 4..1??1 .??Y.. ?I .M.L W4 rl °' arri.. ?xJ..?ln•.jq IO.s""•:- lp,?r ?r??ty?_,te:,' "? 'a R ?,.H K?.+ ?yrap.t,?! ??yy "C is• MK 1:=?NAr1Mi.? T??' ? + . ._ :?atu Jtr1.KtJ't, LLt•, w • • 1 4 - ,? • _ t !t" F. , tYpM9 l + t1 1 ' ' . • : Y +rr"- "i..w,.. yr, NS ,n•••". ,7u,r ? • t R.M '.?? Ma. 'r! Ito, F 1 R1 MlYeYYyi". ?. it Q/L 4iii7? .s??: iv cr ot'.• w a s?:r? ! l ? w+11 ?- .w...w wr.•M.iw?w.??.r'?wr r.M4 .• ? D ? ` i? ,- - •L: ? _.,,.. `. ? ,NT?`'. "t -'1`y _ - 4t .w: a??_ ••; `:fit ' 4X W;`{ ', ruR.MY a.i.w lkr tr..» ..wiw..r. lalretas...w ' " . aNr•YN ,ws;.0'. a?Lua? wa.n.ew Mw wi: x+.a7ard? rfrxW, wt . ?rf g-a t i t . t? ", . i 41f t€ 1 i j`?C!'t ?81 R ?(? ?y???'1?1A NEy£l igntd"[Y]tA?.? f l-2i7 F.a: t 1 F ItT rC ,!„ . ,/ L,Y Y[1L i?iY Or?.L U'J FTMS S r•rrL? a . _ ... t .r?i{t•C_-.L.iri't" ?!VI"au?lktil.an ?»t ..q.. v. )?tti ta. 7t. a 3 :v _ -t'- , ?w^ r . -,,.?a Project Project _- rr Balance - Revenues Expenditures Balance. Pro es _12131%80 ' 1981 1981` t 12/31/81 Recreational and Open --- r1 .. . -1.c'i. i[t ti-riYi t it•.?i'3'•„-,i a' 7 ,'.. :',rp.?, ,.- - Space Development+,r .t..,, r? .r wctf t , 1 M _. t; > "N C ommunity. Center' $,! 102,000FG ..'$ ..1029000 $, - `s Ice. Arena ".r t . , tx? ? t?,c-ct. ,7 ,?:e =• :` r ? "??AISA' 15,000SR '25,000 Swiaaaing Pool'" 0,000SR :-:_,: 20,000 -- M t tr^ J r VI w 4 Rich Acres Park M ,€ 50,000SR 50;000 " Monroe/Fairwood Park .., ' - *0,000SR 40,000 Legion Lake. Park - 10, OOOSR 10, 000 Park Land Acquisition:' 55,000SR 30,000 25,000 Forestr y i = - .,:45.000SR 45,000 Total Recreational Development t,+ ' p $ 347,000 -322 000 25 000 Right-of-Way Improvements Sidewalks $ (1,000) J+m: 10,000SR $ 195,000 $(1,000) 160,000MSA • 25,000SAB Street Lighting-Arterial 180,000SAB 180,000 Traffic Signals 1-35/76 50,000P "70,000 - _ 20,000MSA Alleys (10,000) 475,000SAB 465,000 Storm Sewers 1,000,000SAB 1,000,000 Lyndale Ave. 64th-67th Streets (80,000) 519,000FAU 761,473 205,298MSA 117,175FG Lyndale Ave, 67th-494 (1,000) 37,000MSA 48,000 12,000SAB 66th St.-Grand to 1-35 (100,000) 967,000C 1,515,000 473,000MSA 17-5 OOOFG Total Right-of-Way Improvements 192 000) $4,425,473 $4,234,473 $(1,000) Public Facilities Central Garage (28,109)" 28,109SR General Government Buildings p (20,000) 30,000SR . ,. :: 10,000 Public Safety Building .-_? 208,109RS .800,000• 291, 891SR Total __=' 3: n Public Facilities' "- 48 109)V $ 858,109 $y? 810,000' Total Projects s' rS5 366.473 X24,000. $5.630.582 _ : t. .. .. N N -tac eta r_ f.ty' YR. '4Y' .."1"L`tc.+ r. ?•:, .it ' r . a n •: • rr•??s-+ 4 1"C>•tlLtW.XttPl:.,r^1T:V R ?wt 1 'itlY'. ' . SF -crr .u3 s r_ctrv_s-•tr t{n's?l xr tt• r-.;?%^-ct":- r'Y:?~ K 1 r n ? rtiii:ry f? t ( ,i r ?;f- •? t '. Z " tr 7hJr ! w -4Y;? `/1' ,: tm{R ?py +,.1 ,, .Tl t..;'. •t F ?` ao i' } Y ....T ti,?::f-.i,. .•1 fj??:r r? t?F. ??. :~J?:irln.. ?tr>. '-tA" r ec , i :?tr;?rs•.MrA.T?S;?/t°RS ML S a F 3*rtW11,1% y,'?4 qtr c 0 t L e CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA C-2 ANNUAL BUDGET ........?.: a?wl.:•.w• •.•+"•. . 1,+.:. nvrawYww.Rtr-ynn vwdw .-•••, • .. ...•s,,,sve.rw.r-r?ararrrr.x-•, w•v..»,rr. •.rr ri usu.:...,. r - B7UDGET. SUMMARY •+.. t • Lr L? , -e= a K i16P',>sis?sfS"!Y!' ii,?7b!P..t :.L.t1t l lni.r: ?'??Q Y ISL•li+ : ?:• '...... ?:. '^:....'L. = r ..•=,:it? .-Ti'=..? •=? ? ?'. .= . a. L'r w-' . ?«• •• •_•• .?i'. ~$' i ?7 ?t T ..'Wif. yYt .Et.ex>•I' nid(' ?+7•Err#:a..w i+ roc,. -4 oVa- A+wc 'r ecreation- and Open Space bevelopment Tr•?Y`?^`L?"^,FSS'i"'?l'.L' i . .5• OQQ?`?'?'u.'? Richr Acres .Park 4 .; 4a;ritx{ rr•v?ai ?z+xi s,as x$,aw sY r o . _. a ?...a ?.=y. :.11.•A. L-LYMd't?N+.4fivh.L•?,:M:?ctSL?ttii•lL2r-= K '[ri'UY-'f;t•r'71i?. ?S.?cu6..F iP, t7 .r ';.r , i PaikT ?• 1?. ,.t' ?? 9'i' mmumm' R` 143,750?SG s! 0,000 -S :Sw;?e',3 ?,3.ru? vif3'ti?3v:a.a«F 'Ka,i.T.art?3'lr'?1'3Q?000 RS y f?lTUrs 1 b =rx iVH53?L.. VYiV?Siilriz9i!•.ifs't/ Mrlti'+63+pirJ'::3+?3rYFi+•'WJOr?E!.iFi"'ir'R!,-4R•,+ii. •?=/?' r-? ?. •?•^•••'?'T-^ l-••_. •?•?-Zf' Lr7V 1TLt.. L.TF3 i•rC. •4-i F .rOV.,+?r. 43,.3.4 a y • ? . r K •r?asz ullT?rsk? 5+-t+Ftier..t^Ktu?'st>4 v?t+rr?? ? +•r• r.:xN;,?-r??rs-•.^ ?r? r . ?- n•• s :x????K. ? .•+?srlnrQ r Community,Center--Elevatot- cquisition s Park Land A 000 Y ?. 45' 000' c • Pores try W. ?F r ,%t,5? ,.s. a -• ,4?-.+ - . AR.. F. r r t s; Ice Arena Improvements 2,000', _ .? ' Total Recreational jDevelopment 525,000 ?S 105,000' 3 T* 7 4 a•re. xiM,cy,l jn-r e n Yw e.- x `: r Right-of-Way Improvements 136,000 MSk. Sidewalks 170,000 34, 000 SAB Alleys ..;. 400,000 AB _ 400,000 Lyndale Avenue 74th to 494 = .50,000-MSA 50,000 Adams Hill Storm Sewer •- _ 100,000 OF 98,000 Traffic Signals I-35/76th Street - 50,000 P 50,000 Total Right-of-Way Improvements $ -7709000 $ 768,000 Public Facilities: <t Public Safety Building $ _.°.130,000 SR,.:$ ' .50,000 -45 000 RS._ Water Plant Roof .120 - - - , 000 B _ 120, 000 Well #4 12, 000 OF 12, 000 Lime Slaker :•35,000 OF ':- 351000 :Lift Station #Z 0,000 OF 50,000 -.t 5 Energy Improvements -7 , 000 ..SR: Total Public Fatc?I tjt? mprovements.;t _ ;_:?,?. w. 399 ,000 $ 267,000 + '+.`', :_?.:p ,.. pk."3fJY.`,,CIiK'Ai?iu'sSkttl?r.?rt?ff?l-i"rci$•r7t-. 4 ?+?"y,Fh'tQws?.?r'Ar -I r" w-t,.-..s....?.a.,. La•+"'?'. .?. .. 1 -'3LTcf[?G'M?l?3K?i.'{ ?•.I.uliia?M• +r? ?t?"s' 4 ?KAleu+ ?, ' .. ?.3!; T, e, t 66 Total Projects 594 0 S1? 140Y:000 ? ?.wsRw? +?..s?_ 1? ,r '• ?.. .., gTL•'7la ivy 't .J3flr +' .Y 9NS?17Cf L'.:^: .L. -LSS ? d?iL YILY:!?7Fk?c?F'•'•a ? it{L• v r ?. ;,? s F e s er''x+? f r., • .• I- S',. 1 r -` ??•t• N.?F L i It tu.Y aaa kY? W(.i Yr+•yr?1+ " SPecial Revenues'.. {SR`s X388 2'50 State Grants rrSG ';`so max..;.,r uF 4Z a:":?trv_.s.aa+?ar Qi{3ss?yar.?+?r..J??'wsie? ?y7P!i!MSe.?`.'"?Si!!'.??S+.r_•!? { } ' a.• ?.. tal ;?s"tuna ?;a:???:?--? - . _ _- ? - ?''' _...?,??.•,.•s.? ' i.e •A 1 BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 1983 Projects Recreation and Open Space Development Richfield Lake Pathway System Park Land Acquisition *Forestry Lincoln Hills Park Memorial Park - Fanning ice Arena Improvements . Total Recreational Development Project Revenues $ 105,000 SG 15,000 SR 180,000 SAB 30,000 SR -25,000 SR 54,000 SR 10,000 SR • - -35.000 SR 454 000 Project Expenditure., $ 300,000 30,000 25,000 10,000 35,000 400,000 Right-of-Wav Improvements Sidewalks Alleys Traffic Signals, 76th Street/I-35W Storm Sewer Improvements Penn/66th Street Area Parking Lots Traffic Study, 76th Street and Penn Area Total Right-of-Way Improvements Public Facilities Public Safety Building n"2enn Fire Station Improvements -City Garage Improvements Well No. 5 Replacement rgy Improvements Total Public Facility Improvements TOTAL PROJECTS $ 100,000 MSA 50,000 SAB 180,000 SAB 50,000 P 10,000 MSA 100,000 OF 150,000 SAB 10,000 MSA 650,000 $ 75,000 RS 114,000 RS =-71,000 SR 5,000 SR 20,000 OF 0`45.000 SR 340,000 Al ESTIMATED 1983 REVENUES BY SOURCE Special Revenues (SR) State Grants (SG) Special Assessment Bonds (SAB) Municipal State Aid (MSA) Revenue Sharing (RS) User Fees (UF) Private (P) TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES $ 150,000 180,000 60,000 100,000 150,000 10,000 650,000 $ 75,000 185,000 15,000 20,000 10,000 305. 11.355.000 $ 300,000 105,000 560,000 120,000 189,000 120,000 50,000. 11,444,000 Cr" or :1c14ruLD. "INNISpTA C 1 ANNUAL =l1DG" -/- /J BUDGET SUrY CAPITAL M-PROW NT FUNDS 1984 Project PROJECTS Revenues Rereational and Open Space Development *-, orestry oft-X279500 SR Park Land Acquisition 33,000 RS Memorial Park 200,000 ER , Lincoln Hills Park 000 17 SR 37,000 RS Legion Lake 0,500 SR --ewimning Pool Boiler -45,000 SR Total Recreational Development $ 437,000 Right-of-Way Improvements Sidewa s Alleys Traffic Signal 76/I-35W Storm Sewer Improvements Traffic Study 76/Penn Total Right-of-Way Improvements Project Expenditures $ 27,500 33,000 297,000 54,000 10,500 15,000 $ 437,000 $ 133,000 MSA $ 140,000 7,000 SAB 100,000 SAB 100,000 50,000 P - - 60;000 - - 10,000 MSA 100,000 OF ' 100,000 10,000 NSA 10,000 $ 410,000 410,000 Public Facilities Infrastructure Study $ 10,000 RS $ 10,000 Water Meters 287,000 OF 287,000 Water Filters & Controls 80,000 OF 80,000 Public Safety Communication Reserve 30,000 RS 30,000 Fire Vehicle Reserve 40,000 RS 40,000 amity Garage Furnace/Roof!?60,000 SR 60,000 Total Public Facilities $ 507,000 _ ?507vOOO TOTAL PROJECTS $1,354,000 $1,354,000 ESTIMATED 1984 REVENUES BY SOURCE Special Revenues (SR) 3309000 State Grants (SG) 97,000 Special Assessment Bands (SAB) 107,000 Municipal State Aid (MSA) 153,000 Revenue Sharing (RS) 150,000 User Fees (UF) 467,000 Private (P) 50,000 Total Estimated Revenues $1,354,000 MY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA C 1 - ANNUAL BUDGET BUDGET SUMMARY CAPIT - 1 r S 1985 Project PROTECTS Revenues Rereational and Open Space Development Forestry -- $ 25,600 RS x;700 ;SR Park Land Acquisition 36,400 RS Legion Lake Park IM-30C 12,200 SG Little Bob's Park fi0;000-SF Parking Lots/Drives g74000M; (Lincoln Field and Donaldson Park) Total Recreational Development $'-04,0 Right-of-Way Improvements Alleys Storm Sewer Improvements Traffic Study 76/Penn Penn/66th West Longfellow/66th-69th Frontage Road 69t1h-24th Avenue RSA Strom Sewer Market Plaza Sidewalk 66th/Pillsbury Signal Crosswalk Replacement Total Right-of-Way Improvements Public Facilities Water Meters ;.pity Hall Improvements Well #4 Replacement w-+aergy Improvements Fire Vehicle Reserve Public Safety Communication Reserve Total Public Facilities TOTAL PROTECTS $ 100,000 SAB 100,000 OF 10,000 MA 545,000 MSA 146,000 SG 10,000 SAB 123,000 GS 180,000 SAB 25,000 SO 60,000 P 30,000 SAB 1,329,000 $ 274,500 OF 25,000 RS ;OOO-R 18,000 OF O== 45,000 RS 30,000 RS 412, 0 $2,145,700 Project Expenditures $ 30,300 36,400 260,500 50,000 27,000 $ 404,2M $ 100,000 100,000 10,000 545,000 156,000 123,000 180,000 25,000 60,000 30,000 1,329,000 $ 274,500 35,000 18,000 10,000 45,000 30,000 412,5M $2,145,700 ESTIMATID 1985 REVENUES BY SOURCE ,Special Revenues (SR) $ 350,000 State Grants (SG) 281,200 - Special Assessment Bonds (SAB) 345,000 Municipal State Aid (MSA) 555,000 Revenue Sharing (RS) 162,000 User Fees (UF) 392,500 Private (P) 60,000 Total Estimated Revenues $2,145,700 CITY OF RICHFIELD. MINNESOTA C-1 *- 7/; BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL MP. VII01 1 FUNDS 1986 PROJECTS Project Revenues Project Expenditures Rereational and Open Space Developme nt Forestry $ 25,000 SR $ 25,000 Park Land Acquisition Legion Lake Park 15,000 RS 15,000 725,000 SR 425,000 Nature Center Improvements 200,000 SG 15,000 SR 15 000 Parking Lots/Drives (Lincoln Field and Donaldson Park) 159000 SR , 15,000 Total Recreational Development S 495,000 $ 495,000 Right-of-Way Improvements Alley s Storm Sewer Improvements $ 150,000 SAB 1,700,000 OF $ 150,000 1 700 000 Penn/66th West 356,500 NSA , , 1,238,000 525,000 FAU Frontage Road 69th-24th Avenue 356,500 HC 175,000 SG 350,000 25 , 000 SAB 66t",.-Sherdian/Xerxes 150,000 NSA 143,500,MSA 1,080,000 584,500 FAU 2&4,500 HC 67,500 E Total Right-of-Way Improvements $4,518,000 4,518,000 Public Facilities City Hall Cooling Tower Water Meters $ 10,000 RS $ 10,000 ft-A-City Hall Improvements 50,000 OF ,000 SR 50,000. 20 000 Sludge Dryer Well #? Replacement 432,500 OF 432,500 Energy Improvements 18,000 OF 10,000 RS 18,000 10 000 Fire Vehicle Reserve *,ww,.- Public Safety Communication Reserve 30,000 RS 000 SR X5 , 30, 30,000 , 30,000 15,000 RS Total Public Facilities $ 00,500 $ 00 500 TOTAL PROJECTS 35,613,500 , $5,613,500 ESTIMATED 1986 REVENUES BY SOURCE Special Revenues (SR) S State Grants (SG) 3159000 *User Fees (iJF) $2,200,500 375,000-- Edina (E) 67,5002?tio? S Special Assessment Bonds (SAB) 175.,000 v Hennepin county (HC) 641,000 Municipal State Aid (MSA) '650,000 Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Revenue Sharing (RS) x;000` 1,109,500-- Total Estimated Revenues $5,613,500 *Those projects supported by User Fees are also a part of the individual enterprise fund capital outlay. CITY OF RICNRMA MINNESOTA C-1 ANNUAL BUDGET BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 1987 Project Project PROJECTS Revenues Expenditures Recreational and Open Space Develop ment Forestry $ 25,000 SR $ 25,000 Park Land Acquisition 28,000 RS 28,000 195,000 SR' 195,000 Legion Lake Park 40,000 SR 40,000 w-• .Nature Center Improvements .... a29, 000 SR 29 , 000 +. -ce Arena Improvements -.r -12,000 SR 12,000 o- +Swimming Pool Improvements `.. 40,000 SR 10,000 Golf Course Improvements 13,600 OF 13,600 Community Center Improvements 12,000 CDBG 12,000 Total Recreational/Open Space $ 364,600 $ 364,600 Rieht-of-Wav Improvements Alley Paving $ 295,000 SAB $ 295,000 Storm Sewer Improvements 32,700 OF 32,700 Reconstruct Frontage Roads 88,000 SG 275,000 33,000 SAB 154,000 MSA ILN Phase 1, Traffic Improvements 4,186,960 TIF 5,299,950 583,000 MSA 529,990 SG Total Right-of-Way Improvements $5,902,650 $5,902,650 Public Facilities Water deters $ 65,000 OF $ 65,000 Sludge Dryer 452,500 OF 452,500 po public Safety Communication Reserve r 0,000 SR 30,000 Well #6 Replacement/Repair 18,000 OF 18,000 Loop Dead Ends 33,000 OF 33,000 Replace High Service Pumps 20,000 OF 20,000 Backwash Reclaim Pump 26,000 OF 26,000 Sanitary Sewer Station Alarms 22,000 OF 22,000 Total Public Facilities $ 666,500 $ 666,500 TOTAL PROJECTS $6,933,750 $6,933,750 ESTIMATED 1987 REVENUES BY SOURCE ¦ Special Revenues (SR) $ 1,000 Revenue Sharing (RS) ` 28,000 State Grants (SG) 617,990 *Users Fees (UF) 682,800 Total Estimated Reveunues *Those projects supported by User Enterprise Fund capital outlay. Municipal State Aid (MSA) $ 737,000 Comm Dev Block Grant (CDBG) 12,000 Special Assessment Bonds (SAB) 328,000 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) 4,186,960 $6,933,73-0 Fees are also a part of the individual CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA C-1 ANNUAL BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 1988 PROJECTS Recreational & Open Space Development Park Land Acquisition Veterans Memorial Park Total Recreational/Open Space Right-of-Way Improvements Boulevard Retaining Walls ILN Street Improvements Total Right-of-Way Improvements Public Facilities OPrECH III Voting System well #1 Replacement/Repair Loop Dead Ends Replace High Service Pumps Total Public Facilities TOTAL PROJECTS Project Revenues $ 30, 000? R' 210,000'R; -200-; 000 -S-- $ 440,000 $ 20,000 M 2,446,000 T 750,000 M 100,000 S $3,316,000 0 60,000 R 20,000 U 30,000 U 20,000 U $ 130,000 ?'? AP9 nnn Project Expenditures $ 30,000 R 210,000 R 200,000 S $ 440,000 $ 20,000 M 3,296,000 T $3,316,000 $ 60,000 R 20,000 U 30,000 U 20,000 U $ 130,000 $3,886,000 ESTIMATED 1988 REVENUES BY SOURCE Municipal State Aid (M) $ 770,000 Tax Increment Financing (T) 2,446,000 .Special Revenue (R) 300,000: *Users Fees (U) 70,000 State Grants (S) 300,000 Total Estimated Revenues $3,886,000 *Those projects supported by User Fees are also a part of the individual Enterprise Fund capital outlay. 111 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA C- 3 ANNUAL BUDGET BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 1989 PROJECTS Project Project Revenues Expenditures Recreational 8 Open Space Develo ment Park Land Acquisition- w-- S 270,000 R S 270,000 P Master Park Plan Study 30,000 R 30,000 R Golf Course Road/Parking Lot 58,740 U 58,740 U Total Recreational/Open Space $ 358,740 $ 358,740 Right-of-Way Improvements 66th Street Bus Turnaround $ 40,000 F $ 40,000 F Total Right-of-Way Improvements $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Public Facilities Replace High Service Pumps S 20,000 U S 20,000 U Storm Sewer improvements 10,000 U 10,000 U LHN - GOBAL 100,000 T 100,000 T Total Public Facilities S 130,000 $ 130,000 TOTAL PROJECTS $ 528,740 S 528,740 ESTIMATED 1988 REVENUES BY SOURCE Special Revenue (R) 3300,000 Users Fees (U) 88,740 Federal Grants (F) 40,000 Tax Increment Financing (T) 100,000 Total Estimated Revenues S 5281740 *Those projects supported by User Fees (U) are also a part of the individual Enterprise Fund capital outlay. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA I C-3 ANNUAL SUDGET 7 • • BUDGET SUMMARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 990 PROJECTS Project Project Recreational b Open Space Develooment Revenues Expenditures Park Land Acquisition $ 35,000 R $ 35 000 R Veterans Memorial Park 245,000 R , 245,000 R *Golf Course Regulation Greens 33,000 17,500 D U 33,000 17 500 D U *Golf Course Irrigation 10,000 U , 10,000 U Total Recreational/Open Space S 335,500 S 335,500 Right-of-Way Improvements I/L/N Right-of-Way acquisition Emergency Vehicle Preemption $ 600,000 40 000 M M $ 600,000 4 M Portland/66th Intersection , 750,000 C 0,000 750,000 M C 250,000 M 250,000 M Total Right-of-Way Improvements $1,640,000 $1,640,000 Public Facilities City Hall Sprinkler System 15,000 R 15 000 R City Hall Utilization Study 10,000 R , 10,000 R Total Public Facilities $ 25,000 S 25,000 TOTAL PROJECTS $2,000,500 $2,000,500 ESTIMATED 1990 REVENUES BY SOURCE Hennepin County (C) Donations (D) Municipal State Aid (M) Special Revenue (R) User Fees (U) $ 750,000 33,000 890,000 -300,000 27,500 Total Estimated Revenues • $2,000,5100 *Those projects supported by User Fees (U) are also a part of the individual Enterprise Fund capital outlay C-4 0 Issue Statement: Public Hearing and Chapter XX, adding Skates". CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 66 Agenda February 26, 1990 Second reading of an ordinance amendment to Section 2025 - "Skateboards and Roller Background: Because of•the skateboard activities in the Hub Shopping Center and in public areas of the Richfield Pool, Ice Arena, various tennis courts, Community Center and Nature Center, staff has prepared an ordinance regulating the use of skateboards, rollerblades, roller skates and roller skis in certain areas. Both the Hub Merchants Association and Richfield citizens have asked for assistance in regulating the use of these devices in shopping areas, where pedestrians are endangered and private property becomes damaged from these activities. The Community Services Department has also requested that tennis courts, the entrance/sidewalk areas at the Pool, Ice Arena, Community Center and Nature Center be included in this ordinance in an effort to reduce risk to people and city-owned facilities by the use of these devices. The proposed ordinance addresses these concerns and imposes certain restrictions on the operation of these devices during nighttimes, on state highways, careless/reckless or negligent operation, yielding of the right of way, and attaching to any vehicle upon a roadway. Many cities, both nationwide and in Minnesota, have adopted similar ordinances, and the one proposed here reflects the best from these existing ordinances. Recommended Motion: Approve second reading of an ordinance amendment to Chapter XX, adding Section 2025 - Skateboards and Rollerskates. Basis for Recommendation: This ordinance should effectively provide the public and local merchants with a tool that can protect both pedestrians and property, and can enhance the safety of those using the devices. Alternative Recommendation: Not approve second reading of this ordinance amendment/addition. Discussion/Decision Mode: The Public Hearing and second reading was scheduled for the February 26, 1990 City Council Meeting. Res ec ully submitted, Jame . Prosser City anager JDP:ws )JAN 18 '90 10:10 HOLMES & GRAVEN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XX OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter XX of the Ordinance Code of ?? the City of Richfield entitled Misdemeanors„ is hereby amended by adding the following new section. For or upon or to control the operation of uOd. Z. On the private f the owner or oceuoan' ubd. 3. On private pro ie operation of skatebo abd. 4. On all public to 3laeent to the municip ature Center_ es. ter and Woodlake VM4/Y. J. yit aul PUDIIC areas wnere SIKBS have bee council resolution rohibitin the operation of skatebo: Subd. S. On any state highway located within the city. Section 2025 - Skateboards and Roller Skates. • JAN 18 '90 10:11 HOLMES & GRAVEN is street, sidewalk 8. f7- period. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnsota. This day of , 19_. Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 RC150-405 P.4 f ,go-- !O - Subd 10To fail to yield the right of way to any vehicle upon entering upon any roadway. Subd 11. To attach the skateboard or roller skates or the person of the operator to any vehicle upon a roadway. ;P- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 65 Agenda, February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Second Reading and Public Hearing of an Amendment to Chapter XI, Section 1100, Subsection 1110.03 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield. Background: The Legislature repealed Minnesota Statutes 624.42 through 624.54 during the 1989 session. Those provisions required dance hall operators to be licensed by local units of government and set out the mechanism for the licensing and regulatory activities of the local unit of government. The City Code references that statute as the source of authority for its public dance/dance hall ordinance and also for all matters not specifically addressed in the ordinance itself. Recommended Motion: Approve the revised dance hall ordinance . Basis for Recommendation: 1. Because the existing ordinance is directly tied to the repealed statute, it is probably no longer',enforceable. 2. The Legislature, on the other hand, did not repeal Minnesota Statute 412.221, Subsection 27, which gives the Council authority to license and regulate the operation of public dance halls and the conduct of public dances. Alternative Recommendation: The City Council may deny the request to revise Subsection 1110.03 and decide not to license and regulate dance halls and public dances. Discussion/Decision Mode: If the ordinance amendment is approved on February 26, 1990, it will become effective 30 days after publicatioon, or approximately March 30. Respect ly submitted, Jame Prosser City anager 0 JDP:JDE/lmv AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XI SECTION 1100, SUBSECTION 1110.03 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter XI, Section 1100 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended by amending Subsection 1110.03 thereof to read as follows: 1110.03. Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Subsection, "public dance" means a dance which is or may be attended or patronized by the public generally, ?ither with or without tickets or the charging of admission, and where the object is, and the proceeds thereon are, to be devoted to other than benevolent, fraternal, educational or charitable purposes. The term "dance hall" means any room, space or place in which a public dance is to take place. The terms above defined shall not include a public dance being conducted on premises for which a Tavern License has been issued and is in effect pursuant to Subsection 1210.07, Subd. 4 of this Code. -- Subd. 2. Permit Required. No person may keep, maintain, conduct or operate any public dance hall or place for holding public dances in the city without first paying the permit fee and obtaining a permit. Perms sha-H be fsqued by the ei-ty pursuant to -the atitherity granted 4n Wnnesei a 6tattAes; Seet4ens 6$442 to 624:54: Subd. 3. Duration of Permit. Permits issued in accordance with this Subsection shall authorize the permittee to hold public dances in the city during the period of one calendar month from the date of the permit. Subd. 4. Application. Permits shall be applied for on forms provided by the city and shall be issued at or before the last regular meeting of the council in the month preceding the month in which the dance is to be held. The application shall enumerate the days on which dances are to be held and permits issued therefor shall permit the holding of dances on such enumerated days only. The permit fee shall accompany the application. Subd. 5. Permit Fee. The permit fee is fixed by appendix D. Subd. 6. Conditions Governing Issuance. The following conditions shall govern the issuance of permits under this Subsection. --(a) Permits shall be issued only if the remises are located within a commercial C-2 or PC-2 or industrial districts of the City. (b) Permits shall be issued only to applicants who are free of convictions for offences which, in the opinion o the City, directly relate to the permitted (c) Permits shall be issued only to applicants who are of good character and reputation. (d) Permits shall not be issued, if in the opinion of the City, the conduct of a public dance at the proposed location would be likely to have an adverse effect on the public health, safety or welfare. (e) Permits shall be issued only to applicants who can demonstrate, to - the satisfaction of the Cit that the a lieant possesses adequate liability insurance, insuring applicant from claims or property damage, personal injury, or death occasioned by or arising out of the conduct at the public dance. Subd. 7. Approval and Issuance. The council shall review and act on each application. If a permit is anted the clerk shall granted issue a permit authorizing the applicant to hold public dances in the n t e city, at the place and on the days specified in the permit. Subd. 8. Additional Dances. Additional dances may be held from time to time during the permit period by a permittee upon his a fee of $2.00 paying and obtaining approval of the clerk for each additional dance. Subd. 9. Intoxicating Liquor. No person may bring to or sell, dispense, give away, use or drink intoxicating liquor or non-intoxicating liquor as defined in this code in any public dance hall or Y P place for holding public dances in the city unless the ermittee also possesses a currently valid license permitting he t sale and consumption o such beverages on the remises o the public dance. This previ i does net prevent the eensxmptien }ntewiea+ft Rquar er nen4ntex%ieet}ng Mauer as defined in this eede en the premises having a tavern i}eense and a Heense under Seetiens 1299 at Subd. 10. Conditions of Permit. The permit is issued subject to the following conditions. (a) No erson shall dance, nor shall any Person to whom such permit is issued permit or suffer any person to dance in any public dance hall any indecent or immoral dances or an dance which is characterized by immodest motion of the bod . No rson shall in an public dance hall act or speak in rude, oisterous, obscene, or indecent manner, nor s 1 any person to whom a permit has been issued suffer or permit any person to so act or speak therein- (b) Every public dancing place shall be brightly illuminated while in public use and dance therein while the lights are extinguished, dimmed or turned low, so as to give imperfect illumination, is hereby Prohibited. (c) No person to whom a permit has been issued shall permit to be' or remain in an public dance lace an intoxicated erson an Prostitute. an person o known immoralit z or any unmarried person under t e age o 16 ears unless such person is accompanied b a parent or guardian, nor an unmarried person more than 16, and under the age o 18, years unless such person is accompanied b a parent or guardian or resents the written consent o a parent or guardian to the officer in charge o such dance. and every such written permit shall be retained by such o ficer. 0 (d) It shall be incumbent upon the person to whom such permit is issued to have a peace officer, designated by the Director o Public Safety, resent at every public dance. In all cases the fees and expenses of such peace officer shall be aid in advance b the person to whom the permit has been issued. either the City, nor its officers, agent or employees shall be liable or the conduct of any designated peace officer who is not an employee of the City. Subd. 11. Hours. Dances to be held on Saturday nights shall end promptly at 12:00 p.m. No dance shall be held before 12:00 noon on any Sunday nor between 1:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on any day. Subd. 12. 6tate baw: Revocation. 4n all ether respeets the previeiens of Minnesota Statutes; See4ens 624:49 to 694:54 apply to perrm4ts and eempHanee w44h this sul3seetien 3s required Nem-eempl+anee w4th the statutery prev3siens e€ the previsiens of tH+rs seet+en is greends for reveeatien. The Director of Public Safety may revoke or suspend the permit upon non- compliance by the permittee of any of the provisions of this Subsection. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 19 . Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas.P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 58 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Renewal of On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Kinhdo Restaurant, 6345 Penn Avenue. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by Kinhdo Restaurant. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate, state sales, and withholding taxes. - Ms. Jennifer Bui continues to be the owner and manager. Ms. Bui has no known criminal record. - During the previous twelve months there were four public safety contacts with Kinhdo Restaurant. This compares with eight contacts for the previous year. Of the four contacts none were of a criminal nature, one of the four was a "bar type" incident, that was a detox commitment. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for the Kinhdo Restaurant. Basis For Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to 3.2 beer licensing. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and the investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there appears to be no reason to deny the renewal of the license requested. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to continue the renewal. If the license renewal is continued, the Council must consider granting an extension of the applicant's license to allow the applicant to continue to sell 3'.2 beer until the matter can be concluded. 2. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, according ?X/- X to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to alcoholic beverages. The council must also note that no revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Sections 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Public Safety has determined that the licensee has not committed any violation relating to alcoholic beverages and therefore, recommends the license not be revoked or suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the renewal of this license has been placed on Resp fully submitted, Jame D. Prosser City Manager JDP:bac • • l? J Public Safety Contacts 8 4 Of the 4 contacts in 1989, none were of a criminal nature. is • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 59 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Renewal of On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Airport Bowl, 7711 14th Avenue. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by Airport Bowl. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate, state sales, and withholding taxes. - Ms. Doris White continues to be the owner and manager of the establishment. She has no known criminal record. During the previous twelve months there were fourteen public safety contacts with Airport Bowl. This compares with eighteen contacts for the previous year. Of the fourteen contacts, eight were of a criminal nature, one was a "bar type" incident, that being an assault. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Airport Bowl. Basis For Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to 3.2 beer licensing. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and the investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there appears to be no reason to deny the renewal of the license requested. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to continue the renewal. If the license hearing is continued, the Council must consider granting an extension of the applicant's license to allow the applicant to continue to sell 3.2 beer until the matter has been concluded. 2. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, according to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to alcoholic beverages. The Council must also note that no revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Section 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Public Safety has determined the licensee has not committed any violation relating to alcoholic beverages and recommends the license not be revoked or suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the renewal of this license has been placed on the consent calendar for February 26, 1990. Resp ct ly submitted, James . Prosser City M pager JDP:bac • 0 • 1989 Pt In TC• CAF Ty tbNTA(' C t o AIRPORT RQWT. _ 7711 14TH A<1FN(tF Public Safety Contacts 18 14 Of the 14 contacts in 1989, 8 were of a criminal nature. Those eight consisted of 4 thefts, l malicious mischief, 1 vehicle theft, l assault and l hit and run. 0 e . CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 60 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Renewal of On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Godfather's Pizza, 2 West 66th Street. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by Godfather's Pizza. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate, state sales, and withholding taxes. - Mr. Michael Kling is the manager of the restaurant. Mr. Kling has no known criminal record. During the previous twelve months there were six public safety contacts with Godfather's Pizza. This compares with seven contacts for the previous year. Of the six contacts four were of a criminal nature, one of the four was a "bar type" incident, that being an assault. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Godfather's Pizza. Basis For Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to 3.2 beer licensing. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and the investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there appears to be no reason to deny the renewal of the license requested. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to continue the renewal hearing. If the license renewal is continued, the Council must consider granting an extension of the applicant's license to allow the applicant to continue to sell 3.2 beer until the matter is concluded. . 2. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, ;el ?/- e according to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to alcoholic beverages. The Council must also note that no revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Sections 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Public Safety Department has determined that the licensee has not committed any violation relating to alcoholic beverages and therefore, recommends that the license not be revoked or suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the renewal of this license has been placed on the consent calendar for February 26, 1990. Respe lly submitted, James Prosser City Hager 0 JDP:bac lJ • 19$9 P[JS .Tr- RA FTV p TArTR F-- Public Safety Contacts 7 6 Of the 6 contacts in 1989, four were of a criminal nature. Those four consisted of 1 assault, 1 vandalism, 1 malicious mischief and 1 bike theft. 0 0 Z7, • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 61 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Renewal of On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Lariat Lanes, 6320 Penn Avenue. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by Lariat Lanes. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate taxes. The applicant has not paid the sales and withholding taxes due to the State of Minnesota in the amount of $1,038.69. The applicant was notified by the Department of Revenue on January 30, 1990 by letter of the need to make payment and is aware that failure to pay those taxes due may result in the license not being renewed in the City of Richfield. - Mr. John Powers Jr. is the manager of the restaurant. Mr. John Powers Sr. is the owner. Neither has a'known criminal record. - During the previous twelve months there were fifteen public safety contacts with Lariat Lanes. This compares with nine contacts for the previous year. Of the fifteen contacts six were of a criminal nature, two of the six were "bar type" incidents, one assault, one drunkeness. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Lariat Lanes provided that payment of all Minnesota state sales and withholding taxes in arrears is made by February 26, 1990. Basis For Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to 3.2 beer licensing with the exception of payment of state sales and withholding taxes. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and ;e/z/ ? . the investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there appears to be no reason to deny the renewal of the license requested providing state sales and withholding taxes are paid. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to continue the renewal hearing. If the license renewal is continued, the Council must consider granting an extension of the applicant's license to allow the applicant to continue to sell 3.2 beer until the matter is concluded. 2. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, according to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to alcoholic beverages. The Council must also note that no revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Sections 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Public Safety has determined that the licensee has not committed any violation relating to alcoholic beverages and recommends the license not be revoked or suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the renewal of this license has been placed on the consent calendar for February 26, 1990. Resp ct ly submitted, James . Prosser City Manager JDP:bac r1 L 0 • Public Safety Contacts 9 Of the 15 contacts in 1989, six were six consisted of 3 thefts, 1 assault, in the parking lot and 1 runaway. 15 of a criminal nature. Those 1 juvenile alcohol problem 40 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 62 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Renewal of On-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Sandy's Tavern, 6612 Penn Avenue. Background: The application for the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been submitted by Sandyw's Tavern. The required license fee has been paid. The public safety investigation has been conducted and revealed the following: - The applicant has submitted the required liquor liability insurance coverage. - The applicant has paid all general real estate, state sales, and withholding taxes. - Ms. Debra Erickson is the manager of the tavern. Mr. Jeffrey Erickson is the applicant. Neither has a known criminal record. During the previous twelve months there were four public safety contacts with Sandy's Tavern. This compares with four contacts for the previous year. Of the four contacts two were of a criminal nature, two of the four were "bar type" incidents, one domestic, one assault. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Sandy's Tavern. Basis For Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both the city code and state statute pertaining to 3.2 beer licensing. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant and the investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department, there appears to be no reason to deny the renewal of the license requested. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to continue the renewal. If the license hearing is continued, the Council must consider granting an extension of the applicant's license to allow the applicant to continue to sell 3.2 beer until the matter can be concluded. 2. The Council could decide to suspend or revoke the license. Any suspension or revocation must, according to Minnesota State Statute 340A, be based upon a finding that the licensee has failed to comply with an applicable statute, rule or ordinance pertaining to alcoholic beverages. The Council must also note that no /i/_ _ revocation or suspension takes effect until the licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing under Sections 14.57 to 14.70 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Public Safety has determined that the licensee has not committed any violation relating to alcoholic beverages and recommends the license not be revoked or suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the renewal of this license has been placed on the consent calendar for February 26, 1990. Respec y submitted, James Prosser City M alter JDP:bac r? 0 • Public Safety Contacts 4 4 Of the 4 contacts in 1989, two were of a criminal nature. Those two consisted of 1 vehicle theft and 1 assault. • 11 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 63 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Payment to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Administrator in excess of $5,000. Background: The City purchases general liability insurance from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust with GAB Business Services as Administrator. The City's insurance policy has a $50,000 deductible for liability claims. In 1986, the City significantly reduced its premium by having a large deductible. The premium savings and additional monies have been used to create a Self- Insurance Fund to cover payments made which are under the deductible as claims arise. On August 4, 1987, a youth was allegedly injured while playing on the waterslide at Fairwood Park. A lawsuit against the City was subsequently commenced by the child's parents claiming the City was negligent. A compromise settlement was agreed to by the claimants and the City's insurance administrator through the League of MN Cities Insurance Trust. The settlement includes a lump sum payment of $2,500. In addition, attorney fees totaled $2,900.43. Since the settlement and legal costs fall within our deductible limit, the City is directly responsible for the payment. • Recommended Motion: Approve the payment to GAB Business Services in the amount of $5,400.43. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City's insurance policy provides that the insurance carrier shall, at its discretion, investigate, settle, or defend any claims or suit against the City. The insurance carrier and its attorneys have settled this claim. 2. Funding is provided for defense or payment of claims costing less than the $50,000 deductible. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is on the February 26, 1990 regular City Council meeting consent calendar. Payment should be made to reimburse the insurance administrator as quickly as possible. ly submitted, Prosser JDP:ff 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 64 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 for Madison Park and Jefferson Park playfeature additions. Background: The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. In 1988, the City began a four year phased acquisition of improved playfeatures at Madison and Jefferson Parks. This purchase marks phase three. Each park has had installed a series of decks for accessing various components of the playfeature, a tire swing, straight slide, fire pole, and ladder. Phase three will include a Track Ride with two decks, an E1 Slide, and a safety wall. The supplier for this equipment for the first two phases has been Earl F. Anderson & Associates, Inc., representing Landscape Structures. To insure compatibility, the same company will be supplying phase three. Recommended Motion: -Approve the purchase of the playfeature components from Earl F. Anderson & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $5,000. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Earl F. Anderson & Associates, Inc. has provided the previous two phases. 2. Using the same manufacturer insures compatibility. 3. Landscape-Structures has a national reputation for safety and quality. 4. There is $5,000 for purchase of this equipment in the 1990 park maintenance budget. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could decide not to expand the playfeatures at Madison Park or Jefferson Park. 2. Council could expand only one of the parks this year. 3. Council could request that staff research other manufacturers; however, compatibility would be nonexistent. E Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the February 26, 1990 regular City Council meeting. Staff is asking for approval at this time so the equipment can be ordered and installed this spring. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City M nager JDP/GLB • 40 7e7l/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.-57 Agenda February 26, 1990 Issue Statement: Acknowledging Engineering Excellence Award for Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. Background: The Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota, now in its 40th year, is an association dedicated to the advancement of consulting engineering and the maintenance of highest ethical and technical standards in engineering. Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield, specifically the pathways and amphitheater, was entered into competition for the 23rd annual Engineering Excellence Awards. On February 2, 1990, Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield was named an Honor Award Winner in the competition. Geotechnical Engineering Corporation, the geotechnical consultant, coordinated the competition entry. The City of Richfield is the project owner. Orr, Schelen, Mayeron & Associates, Inc. served as the civil engineering consultant. Gair & Associates served as planning consultant while Martin & Pitz Associates served as design consultant. Dr. Tuncer Edil also served as a geotechnical consultant. The project was described as follows: Pathways and an amphitheater were constructed in the wetlands at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. The park offers recreational, athletic and cultural experiences in a wetland setting for urbanites. Geotechnical Engineering Corporation demonstrated the feasibility of supporting the structures on existing material as opposed to utilizing more costly conventional excavate/refill techniques by: 1) Constructing the amphitheater embankment in stages to consolidate and increase the strength of swamp deposits. 2) Strengthening the amphitheater embankment with geotextiles. 3) Using wood chips as a lightweight pathway embankment material. This project represents advances in state-of- practice for design construction of ecologically compatible structures in wetlands. By not using excavate/refill operations, disturbance of the wetland ecosystem was minimized. Recommended Motion: Accept the Engineering Excellence Honor Award plaque for Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield on behalf of the City of Richfield and extend appreciation to the consultants who worked on the project. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield project has been named an Engineering Excellence Honor Award winner. #/- 2. Several consultants were involved in the improvements used to expand the use of the Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield wetlands in an ecologically compatible, financially reasonable and technologically innovative manner. Alternative Recommendation: Do not accept the award. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the February 26 City Council meeting. Representatives of the various consulting firms have been invited to attend this meeting. Respectf ly submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP/sdr C7 0