06-22-89 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 154
Agenda June 22, 1989
Issue Statement:
Appointments to the Advisory Board of Health, Community Services
Commission, Human Rights Commission, and the South Hennepin Human
Services Council.
Background•
Because of•resignations, vacancies exist on the Advisory Board of
Health, Community Services Commission, Human Rights Commission
and the South Hennepin Human Services Council.
These vacancies were advertised and applications accepted through
June 9. On Wednesday, June 21, the city council interviewed
applicants.
Recommended Motion:
Make the following appointments:
1. Advisory Board of Health, one appointment for a two year term
expiring January 31, 1990.
2. Community Services Commission, two appointments. One three
year term expiring January 31, 1990, and one three year term
expiring January 31, 1991.
3. Human Rights Commission, one appointment for a three-year
term expiring January 31, 1990.
4. South Hennepin Human Services Council, one appointment for a
two-year term expiring January 31, 1990.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Vacancies exist on these advisory boards.
2. Applications have been submitted, and the council has
conducted interviews.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Defer some of the appointments to a later council meeting.
2. Re-advertise some of the vacancies.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the June 26, 1989 city council
agenda for council action.
Respectf ly submitted,
James Prosser
City nager
JDP/eja
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 153
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement•
Council consideration of cancellation of study session regularly
scheduled for Monday, July 3.
Background•
The city council holds a study session the first Monday evening
of each month on a regular basis. The study session for the
month of July falls on the eve of the Fourth of July holiday.
Recommendation:
The council should discuss whether or not to hold the July study
session.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Because of the upcoming Fourth of July holiday, there may be
other activities planned for that evening.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Hold the study session as usual.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the June 26 city council agenda so
that if the study session is cancelled, proper notice may be
made.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP/eja
~,~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 152
June 26, 1989 Agenda
Issue Statement:
Public hearing concerning the appeal of the Hearing Examiner's
decision regarding a request for a lot coverage variance at 6841
Newton Avenue South.
Background•
Mr. Paul Gunderson has requested that the city grant a variance
to allow the construction of a single family residence which
would occupy more than the allowed 25$ of the lot. The
structure, as proposed, would occupy approximately 37% of the
parcel.
The subject property is located in an "R" single family residence
zoning district. The proposed structure would meet all
applicable setback requirements. A site plan map indicating
setback distances of the proposed structure is attached.
The variance request was denied by a Richfield Hearing Examiner.
A copy of the Hearing Examiner's written findings and decision is
also attached. Mr. Gunderson has subsequently appealed this
denial to the City Council as allowed by City ordinances.
Recommended Motion:
Deny the variance request to allow the construction of a single
family residence which would occupy more than the allowable 250
of the lot at 6841 Newton Avenue South.
Basis of Recommendation:
Recommendation for denial of the variance is based on the staff
review and conclusion that the variance does not meet the city
and state standards for granting of a variance. The review of
the proposal against the city and state legal requirements is
outlined in the following:
1. The granting of the variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. A
single family residence of 1687.5 square feet could be
built without a variance. Further space could be obtained
through an alternative design which could include a
second floor and elevators or stairway lift.
2. There are no unique circumstances present on this particular
site. The 6750 square feet site is similar in shape and
size to other lots in the surrounding area.
3. The granting of the variance would not alter the character of
the neighborhood. It is staff's opinion that the granting
of the variance would not be detrimental to the health,
welfare and safety of the adjoining properties.
Alternative Recommendation:
If the City Council chooses to permit the construction of the
single family residence, consideration should be given to
amending the zoning ordinance lot coverage standards.
~~-/
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A public hearing, is scheduled before the City Council at 7 p.m.,
Monday, June 26, 1989. Legal notice of the hearing before the
City Council was published in the Richfield Sun Current
Newspaper on June 14, 1989.
Respectfully submitted,
James D Prosser
City M ager
JDP:sae
QPU~ p, GUNDERSON
C~st~ia~Co.
6720 Upton Avenue South
RICHFIELD. MINNESOTA 55423
Phone 661.5694
June 6,1989•
City of Richfield
Community Development
6700 Portland Ave. South
Richfield, Minn. 55423
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I wish to appeal a denial for a variance to the city council.
Case no. 89-V-1
Property. location :, 6841 Newton Ave. South
Hearing Examiner: Connie Murray
Hearing date: June 1,1989•
If you have any questions, please call.
Sinderely, '
d~
~_
~~
.~~~
QP~` p. GUNDEgsOy
C~r st~i~o.
1740 Uv~m Aa.rne Sam,
IIIC11F1ELD. MINI~E SpTA 5527
Aqn. !61 •SB6.
May 8,1989
City of Richfield
Community Development Department
Planning and Zoning Division
The following is a required letter explaining the need for the
variance requested:
The square footage of combined house and garage on a Richfield
residential lot can not exceed 2596 of the total square footage of
the *~roperty.
I have built four level homes in Richfield which allow the homeowners
to achieve the .needed space and still stay within the guidelines
of this law.
The party wishing to live at 6841 Newton Ave. So. needs a rambler
because the man is confined to a wheel chair.
Because of this fact, we need a larger garage for ramp to house,
larger hallways, larger bathrooms and more room in general for
mobility.
In turn, this proposed dwelling exceeds the equate footage requirements
set by the city. We are meeting the required setbacks and distances
from lot lines.
The proposed home will be a vast improvement to the neighborhood. I
hope to voice my opinion reguarding this law at the meetings.
Sincerely,
t
r
The following note was received from Diane Healey, 6906 Newton
Avenue (within 350 feet).
"Dear Council Members:
I am opposed to granting this permit to Mr. Gunderson:
1. It will be a hardship on .the two contiguous properties and
decrease their value, having such an overbearing structure
next to them.
2. Our street is perfectly laid out because of prior
ordinances, put in for good reason.
3. The large structure would especially dwarf the neighbor at
6845 Newton.
4. The uniformity of the neighborhood would be in jeopardX.
Once you allow a variance you set a precedent, and someone
else will want to tear down one of these little houses and
do it again.
Please - don't approve this. There are plenty of other places he
can build and plenty of other buyers for the seller - I myself
have had an interest in the property/house and would keep it as
it is.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Diane Healey
6906 Newton Avenue
June 16, 1989"
...~~~ ~ ~
O V .
N ~ N
-• 5000dat~meos^',
- - -- - -
,~
w,
_
~, ~
~
/~1
~-~
rn
x 5.7
~~~~
~52
W
cn
O
i
•
~ 0
'
~ t7
0
-.
I~
w~
%-.
_ ~_.
6. ~~
.I W
X
~ ~~o
~w`~
yyv~
m~
I ~
6.2 cZi
~~ N
~Q4 ~~~
m-
~o
>~
?-~
00
1
~ Z
-rn
-~ ~
rn
~ ~
r~
~ Z
Z ~
C
rn
Z~
50.E ~meas~..,
54~Opbt
~f-~
~ ~` V 1 v N " ~' ~'
:: -
- s s
t i t 3 c s s i
~~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1
iEr•Lf •Vt f '. +.•a:~~~. •:w---- - .-v.~ •w_-r.+....s.~. _5''
frtrlD•w ~ L~~_JJ1t -! J _~~ ~E
--~. Sf -
KrrwivE ~' ~I ~~~~~, I' •~~~t
rtVTOM I~~i ~~~f''~~f''~~~ If'fId~~ L
t10rt•r J~~I ~ 1 ~~~.J U ,~[
o, OOO
l0i.r r._JU~ ~ ~ C>O~ ~[
tr01
' ~OL~ ~
••r[t
'=-~ -- - - ~ ~ r
nKrart ~ ~~J-~ ~ - -
!r[rtpr ~t~ I~~ ~~~~5;:
OV-DMT ~ ••~•• ~::•~ ::: ~Lr
tNl~•rt I ~ I~~~ .-J~tJ \\ •
fdL OrICM ~IJ~~~~~ ..
MLLpUM I~~-~,~~~ :::• ~••
titrTirORTM J ~ '•~"~;
J_.J • ':
MICOLLET •Vt. ..'~~ • ~~~
111 lQ i •
lTtvErt
!./ ~ •:c:
' 1 M
~N
a1rTOM AV
t
•n ~
ill
pORTI••MO MIL. ,
O•Ilc•ro 1 .~
trllt ~~' N = S
.~
taDt•INivt G 1
' ~
p11C•fA /~ ~ • t
lLLIOT ~
1
10 1/ ' 1
11 // 1i
1= 1• 'I
11 M j~~
M 1• Q ~:~[
1"' .. OO O[
RmYI1MCTpr i
I
i ~
~_ o~
~~*
Kr
c~
....1
-• s-•1 s
' L
s i i
~ ~ ~
a
r
M
• ~s
V
~ ~
strltt •v[
J .ar.uRN
~ YIrCEMT
"~, VItOM
Troll..
DNtrlo•r •
- iutstu
i11ttM
30 ~ R(NM •vL
0-Irtll
~~ MtVTpr
IIORt•M
LOC•r
C__. KMOR
1 ~- i ..rtt
~~~I IRVIrt
~ ~ MVY~O~DT
~1
slll•Ilo
-- ' tttllorT
.. Lr[rfOr
~~ ourorT
_ ill
so-r•t
li irT•MT
~Sil •1elllcr
C ITND•Lt w[
II NII/ItID
~~ '~
~ M•RRI[T
'll tir•MD
~" 1
"+rj~~' h2•f•IR
~i I I I hLLtlYRT
~11 ~
I I ' ~LMT~pRTM
~11
i l l R•ItOELL
MICOLLR wE
111
~ , rnvcN:
~=N
tN
a1NTOr
•M
,....
1 t~plTUll,o Svc
~ ' o.a.ro
I MRIc
COLYri{tt
p11CM0
. ~ [LLN)T
i 11011
I. 11 t1
~) 1=11
1 1~ 11
~ 1.1.
~ It,.
t;00u1NiTOM
Ii /.
> ' 1111
N1•
`~ RMII MK.
YlMLltOi
Mn
!i q
tl a
!! N
• tst•Mi1t:N
!t N
t
t
L~
rZ
~m
-o
O
rn
tt
•
6841 NEWTON AVE. S. T~~'
-~
~`; C-1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL Z O N I N G
N
C-Z GENERAL COMMERCIAL ~ R-1 RESIDENCE ~ MR-2 3-16 UNIT RESIDENCES
I )IiDUSTRIAL MR MULTIPLE DWELLING °ooo PMR PLANNED MULTIPLE DWELLING
•.~ • •.t•::i•:
~°o°0 0
00000
66TH ST. W.
'•
T. W.
68TH T. W.
HST.
-~~~~
°-
~~~~~~~
6841 NEWTON AVE. S.
-~
COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
~~. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ® MIXED LAND USE Q
MEDIUM DENSITY/BUFFER :, INSTITUTIONAL N
~ ~ ~
66TH ST. W.
~' ~.
..~~~
T. w.
8TH .T. w..•
6
- _ _ H ST.
'.'. T ~.
'':i~ _ _~ _ Jo ~o
wv~ ~ - ~Y C4.C£p `r .
• ~,QC OC'~ c
~V~Oy wO• r
,~~~„ ~~-.
_. 'fir. . ~?~'?~:... •.r 2.'°~ .~,,y. ~~o~.ct°
.OFD :4,~e~ ~:`,:.c;.;°
~ c .;:"!•
c ',py x.7"0 •,'~.~ `~S
•.c '~ ' `' ' .~ t
:r~~ QC 3
3 d,..:.,c~•
~• ~~. i ~ ~' CFC
6841 NEWTON AVE. S.
~~/- 7
LAND USE
Q DUPLEX ti. PARK .Q
® APARTMENT ® COMMERCIAL
~ ~ ~
66TH ST. W.
~.
H T. w.
68TH T. W.
. _ TH ST. .
--- `'`
•L ;~,~Yt;~Y~
--•- - ~;
_ ~wa
+~•~
~'s
.~~ o
„~~ ~%,.
1
~~,,~c
N
N
W
~ Q Q
N Ci
O W
~
~~ Q .«
~« ~
W
~ ~~~~~ ~ ~
S~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 151
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement:
Public hearing on a request for a conditional use permit at 7645
Lyndale Avenue South.
Background•
Total Petroleum, located at 7645 Lyndale Avenue South has
requested the granting of a conditional use permit to allow
expanded retail sales (food and beverage coolers, reach in
freezer units, snack and beverage center); anew detached
accessory drive-thru car wash facility on the northern portion of
the property; and a reduction in the size of the existing
building from approximately 2,088 square feet. to 1,176 square
feet.
The car wash structure is proposed to be constructed of concrete
blocks and will house the car wash unit which includes a "drip
through" device to control water discharge on the site. The
structure proposed is 792 square feet. The current lighting will
remain at both the canopy and drive entries. A landscape plan
has been submitted, with some additional plantings proposed to
supplement existing plantings. The proposed hours of operation
are 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
The site is located in the C-2 general commercial zoning
district. A service station/convenience store with an automatic
car wash facility is a permitted use in the C-2 general
commercial district with a conditional use permit.
Recommended Motion:
To deny the granting of the conditional use permit on the basis
that the proposed operation would have an adverse impact on the
surrounding neighborhood, would not meet the licensing standards
for a car wash and would exceed the maximum noise levels.
Basis of Recommendation:
A Reduction in building size with expansion of retail sales
1. A gasoline service station with limited retail sales has
operated at this location for a number of years. The
operation is not in conformance with the current zoning
ordinance in several areas including depth of rear yard,
adjacency to residentially zoned property and 24 hour
operation but, if properly established, may be legally
nonconforming.
2. The retail operation requires six parking spaces and the
proposal provides five stalls, one handicap, and four cars
at the gasoline pumps for a total of nine parking stalls.
3. The handicap parking stall does not provide a ramp or
other access to the sidewalk.
~~-/
4. Three of the four curb cuts do not meet the 26 foot width
requirement and should be widened.
5. The landscape plan has not been approved by staff.
Additional plantings, junipers, are needed in the
northwest and southwest planting areas. Similarly,
additional landscape buffering is needed, in addition to
the existing fence, at the rear of the property.
B. Car Wash
1. A license and special use permit in accordance with the
provisions of the zoning ordinance, are required for an
automobile washing establishment under Section 1125 of the
city code.
2. Off street parking for 15 employee's cars is required and
petitioner proposes none.
3. The ordinance requires 40 off street stacking spaces for
cars waiting to be washed and 10 drying and pickup spaces.
Petitioner has suggested that 42 stacking spaces and 4
drying and pickup spaces are available on site by
utilizing the otherwise unused part of the entire site.
Section 1125.03, subd. 2 permits the reduction of parking
spaces for automobiles waiting to be washed if certain
conditions are met. Petitioner is not able to meet the
conditions because the property abuts property zoned for
single family use.
4. No dryer is proposed for the car wash facility. There is
a potential hazard created by the water dripping from cars
as they exist the property under freezing conditions.
5. The concrete block construction is not aesthetically
compatible.
6. The proposed traffic flow circulates the stacking cars
immediately adjacent to the single family residential use
abutting the site at the rear yard lot line. This
resulting air and noise pollution could become an undue
hardship on the adjacent resident. Further, Section
1125.03, Subd. 3, requires a "buffer area at least 15 feet
in width, landscaped with evergreen shrubs to form a
continuous hedge, the remainder of such buffer area to be
maintained as a lawn or flower beds, on the side...of the
site which adjoins property used or zoned for single
family... use." From the driving area to the fence,
petitioner includes only a five foot strip including the
fence .
7. The proposed 24 hour operation could also present an undue
hardship on the immediately adjacent residents. If no one
is in attendance at the car wash, it would have to be
closed between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. the following day.
~~
8. Petitioner has not submitted documentation that the noise
level of Section 930-05 will not be exceeded by the
operation of a car wash adjacent to a residential
district. The maximum levels which may not be exceeded
more than ten percent of the time for a one hour survey
are 60 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 50 dBA
between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Testimony at the
Planning Commission indicated a noise level of 63 to 67
dBA at a similar site in Eagan.
Alternative Recommendation:
Approve the granting of the conditional use permit for the
expanded retail sales and reduction in size of the building but
deny the car wash. The attorney for the Petitioner has requested
the divisibility of this petition.
Decision Mode:
A public hearing is scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on Monday June 26,
1989.
Notice of this hearing was mailed to property owners within 350
feet of the property. Notice was previously published in the Sun
Current Newspaper and the hearing continued to this date.
Respectf ly submitted,
James Prosser
City nager
JDP:sae
~~
~TTA~HMENT A
Site Area (minimum)
Existing Bldg. Area 2,065 sf
Proposed Bldg. Area 1,176 sf
Proposed Car Wash 792 sf
Proposed Total Area 1,968 sf
Parking (1 @ 200 sf)
Retail Uses 1,176 sf
Employees (Car Wash)
Stacking
Entrance
Exit
Setbacks
Front (Lyndale)
Rear (20$ of Lot Depth)
Side (77th Street)
Side
Reauired (C-2)
12,000 sf
Proposed
18,293 sf
9 spaces
(includes 1 hdcp)
6 spaces
15 spaces
40 spaces
10 spaces
42 spaces
4 spaces
40 feet
25 feet
30 feet
0 feet
40 feet
17/40 feet*
62 feet
5 feet
Curb Cuts (minimum) 26 feet 22-27 feet
*The 40 foot rear setback pertains to the location of the car
wash facility only. The existing service/station convenience
store structure is presently nonconforming as it is located 17
feet from the rear yard-lot line.
~~ ~~
0
_ m u~ a - - C o v m ~ m n m m m o
i i i o o w i i ~ a ~ !r ~ p N=
Y s ~ ~ ~ ~ v 'J i ~ ~ S
V N 1 y ~ ~ H N ti ~ ~ H H ~ ~ 1 -~1 y y y
O -. -1 ~1 ti
t
%ER%ES 4VE F~~- ---..---.-t-
VINCENT _. `-- - -
LIPTON I -_,,~~~.`~--,
$HERIOAN ~p`{ ~~`~II L ,
RUSSELL 4 -1 II L~~
Is\N ~, ~U
QUEEN i c ~ I~ I L ~. -_
PENN AVE. ~"'~"-~~-~~ J~
DELVER ~~~~~'~~~
~ ~~T_1 r.
NEWTON II. !~I ~' ~-~
~-
MORG4N ~-J ~~
p`i iU~
LOGAN yI ~ ~.-~
KNOX ~\~-'~ I ~~
JAM E$ ~ ~~
IRVING -'~\~ n ( ~~ ~ ~., AJI
~` I
NUMBOIDT -- -- - ~ -
il
GIRARD 1 ~~~
EMERSON ~,
DUPONT rlr~~Q~('~~~;-~l
COLfAX ~h^~~~JU^
BRYANT I ti~, ~~L~~I>S 1
I S i ,--~
AIDRICN '~ ~~~~
LYNOA LE AVE I ~~9 ~~~
...I,-, ~- U~
GARFIELD I.V7 ~ ~~
HARRIET I~ / ~~~ `^_-~
u~
GR4ND III •~
I~
PLEASANT -r.. ~Y~-~-~ _
T'-
PILL$BURY ~I
WENT WORTH 4I'==
1i1';
BLAISDELL 1~ _
N ICO LLET 4VE. ~-\
I~t ~ _
$TEVEN$
2n0 I--
CUNTON
Q; r
am
srn I~_J''
PORTLAND AVE. ~I\"J
!~
OAKLAND I'
PARK ; ~
COLUMBUS I. ~~.,
CHICAGO i' „^~~
ELLIOT ~; ~
I O 1 h ~, , ~~ I'~J
II to 1';~I. I,~~i
,;
12 ih J-~~~
?'!'-'-l
li th
-~ r-
1
141n ~J~I
IS,h ~ ~; I'-'
j'~'J~
BLOOMINGTON -„--1 ,,
161n ~~!~' I~ `~
IB in III \ I'
CEDAR AVE I' __ _ _ _- _
-- -y_Lii Si____~____-__
LONGFELLOW ----'~'- _
a
Z N ti N ~ ti ~ y
m ..,
f") n
2 ~+
Z ~ ~
-1 m
<r
s ;d
_.
Z~
-" - 1' %ERXES AVE.
~~ ~- ~~~U - - -' r ~ WASMBURN
_ _ ]~ i.ll
_ _ ^~ J((_ J~_CL. Jl ~ VINCENT
__-. __ ~__~~L. -:C I _ _- If
.. ._ -~`~OI -~1.~~ ~ .-_. -' LIPTON
--.r J~U~~O,'r ~ ~~~ ~ THOMAS
-----. r--~- `-~-- -' ~ RUSSELL
,~F~D~J~]I - I:
•~~~;O~~ ~_ IBIT' pENNN 4VE.
~_^~_~~-~~J ~L-1~~~0II DELVER
-tt--~, -~'r'--~II ~ NEWTON
L-J~~L_JU~~ U~~~~ ~ MORG4N
C ~u~~~~OC~C~
lOG4N
~i~-~:-_~I~Ir~-~l~_.JI-J~~U!r--~U~q JAMES
-:--~---~-~±~_' rvE ~I IJ~UU OL_J ~J~I~ IRVING
- ----_ ,` ~~~~Q fI HUMBOLDT
~~~~~` ------- I GIRARD
`~ ~ -_ -_ -__ -_` ____ I,
h FREMONT
r ~ \\~\ II(11, EMERSON
s o
~. II
~~ COI FAX
1 '" o .~^ 11\+i~ BRYANT
^`~r mil, ~~ A®~~2' J~ I~~ AI DRICN
I ` ~J ~ ^ IYNDALE AVE.
~~~`~~~ accJ ~ i^ I; GARFIELD
I~~~, ~I
~~ ~ r~^ i HARRIET
U1U uil ~~~ j I~^~n ~I GRAND
~I ~ ,~~~r -.- .I `~-~--~"_3Lt~ PlE45ANT
~ --~~~II Plll$BURY
(l~l --7' I!~~ i
~J ~,~ ;I ih.~. ~,r=.1111 WENTWORTN
~' I I11
I~L~= ~ 11~ BLAISDELL
~-1, IT i~ ^~~(~~~• NICOLLET AVE.
-~~ .•JI II 1 Itl
.~~ ~~~`--~ $TEVEN$
~ '~~~~~I
-,r-~ zna
~~-1L~--~ ~ ara
-~~ C 1
• I --1~ CLINTON
V „~-~-d ~ II a rn
..~ A t-~. I• Sth
I PORTLAND AVE.
'~ '-'i;~"~ ~ ~ 04KlAND
N ~i_~ i
~ PARK
~ i~~ COLUMBUS
r m i' I
4 ~ " 'I CHICAGO
m o
Z i ELlIOt
LYNOALE AYE. S _ ~; Io to
• ~ ;, n to
~oa,l Iz,n
~U 13th
J~~~ la to
IS to
-~~ BLOOMINGTON
-J v 16,n
~~--++~
'~ pi O~~J~ CEDAR AVE
~i________I ^-
y ~\ LONGFELLOW
~~ I ~ ~~ _~
C ]r ~~ ] zo,n
~~ -J zl a
2z na
~~-J $TAN01$M
O~~ 23 r0
r -r
O
nv
~rn
0
Z~
rn
^
•
--I
' P - -Yti A Ipl N O~ Oi
' m ~ v V1 'J S p N
I' P - - yob~
J ti H 1/i y y 1 -1
~---r
7645 LYNDALE AVE. S.
ZONING
~~~-~ C-1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS
C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL
C-3 HIGH DENSITY COMMERCIAL
® I INDUSTRIAL
R RESIDENCE
-- - -
;.
,.
~~^ 74TH ST.
w. i
~ ~
i
i i
~ i
i ~
i
ST.
N
W
Q
W
J
Q
O
Z
J
ST.
MR MULTIPLE DWELLING
MR-1 2 FAMILY RESIDENCES
MR-2 3-16 UNIT RESIDENCES
.-rw
~~
7645 LYNDALE AVE. S. ~~~ ~
LAND USE
COMMERCIAL PUBLIC
®APARTMENT ®VACANT
DUPLEX ~ RESIDENTIAL
® QUASI-PUBLIC .:.
~,~T, PARK
I ~ ~
_ ~__ ___
--~ N
~ ~
. ,,
--
~~ 74TH ST.
~
~~
•
------ I =~ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ _ 1- -~r-
I- L ----' ~ _~ 7 '~
,
f
r
~ t
_
-- -- ~
~
--•
~1'~'i1 ~~'
' A.1
W. 75TH ST. y
~~' ~1 ~.
.,~~s<.=,," ~:. ^M.:~~s
. ;^;~~,.
f 1
1 I
I I
~
I
W. 76TH ST.
T
W
Q
W
J
Q
D
2
J
7645 LYNDALE AVE. S.
~~_~
COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FREEWAY STRIP
MEDIUM DENSITY/BUFFER
® MIXED LAND USE
® MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
I
-~ ~~~ 1
1,•
I
I
I
1
~ 1
1
:~~ INSTITUTIONAL
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
PARKS & OPEN SPACE
N
T
W
Q
W
J
Q
O
2
J
~~ 0
KiC DESMGN 6112 EXCELSIC~ ~ BL~/D~ MINNE~~F~(_IS, f~~~l.i 55416 (612 922-3226
D SON OF ~AC~ ~CX?~Ai I Jf v
MAR«I lo, 19 a9
PRoj. N0. 8$0"1-29
G1T`( OF p4IcNFiEl,p ~ STAFF pLANrJINt~ GoMMtSIc-.1
~ GIT`~ Gou-JGIL MEMbE0.5
EtJ Gt.o LED t S AN APPl.I ~.ATlvnl 1=oR A LoNDtTIOhIAL USE QERM17 FOR.
THE 'TdT~*t- pE?RoI.EUM PRoPERT'f LOA?Efl AT "7645 ~-YNDAIE Av.so.
(N.E. GoRNER OF '1'iTN ~ (.YND~-t-Ei~. I~ITN THE /-~~RoVAL o~ "rHE
GoND1TID-JAL US•E PERMI"'~, ToTat. pETRul.EVt~'1 Wt1,l. ~,E Al.t.oL~lED
'1'o ExpAN4 I?S GURRENI NII~N G?uAL-TY of SERVICES of 4Asot_~N£
SAES AND RELATED RETAtt,. ITEMS , To INGWb~. FooD AND
gEVERAI~E. G,gnt~E~tS ~ READ IN pREEZ.E'R uNITS~ SNA'GK P-ND
~,eVERAI~E GErJTER AND E?CpAtJUE~ RETAIL. SAl.1ES~ fN~NJ'V-JL'rt0~
~JI'TN THE PRoPostcD GHhtJG1ES D1: THE RE7I-tt. SPADE ~ A NE4J
pRIV~• -TNRu GAR LJAsN WILL bE PSJtt.'t' otJ THE NoRTNERfJ PoRTtot~
OF TkE PROPER1rY+ To HEc.p McE'r 'TNE NEeDS ANA LJANT~S of TNr.
GURREN'r AND Fu'TURE GusToMERS , To PRovI~E THESE LH^N4ES THE
E~CISTING psut~pltJl~ WILL t3E REC~uc.E~ IN s-z~ AbouT 4S% , ANA
REMODt~ED "r0 AGGOMDDA'1"E THE NEW Fl.c7df~ PI~-tJ . 'T'Ntr NEt~I GO~JG.
- F3t.OGK 13vIt.DltJu But~'r oN THE PROPER-'T''Y W1~1. NousE THE cAR
" i,sAt+~ U1J1-f WNLGN IN~IVDES A CRYEF~ AND ~ DftiP TRov4N To
G-O~ITRo~- WATER DISGHAR4E OM To THE SITE ,THE ault.pltJl~ IS
LOCATED IN SvGN A MAN-~ER AS TO HELP GvNTRol,.l. Bo'rN SovND
~?-NC V iSt1RL1r hWA`( FROM 'THE AQypGEN'r t.lEIt~NProRS
'fHE G~RREIJ'r LIt~NTiI~l~t l.AYOuT W1~1. REMAI-•I AT 6aT~1 THE ~-~-NOPY
/~N~ DRIVE EtJTR1ES. AN`~ uEW L14NTlNl~ WILL PSE LvGA?ED IN
SuGI{ P MANn1Ei~ AS Yo NnT DISTvRg trl?NER+ 'rNE AQ1AcEN'('
PROPERTY OR IJATuRAt. TRAFFIC. Ft,ok! vN C.YN~AI.E WJ8 , oP~
11~ S?. "'tNE EXISTI-.Ib L.ANpScAPI~V I.JILL REMAt-.I PND bE
GOMPC.EMfi1J'('ED 1~lITN THE ADDITt01JAL. MATE1CIAlS sHoWr~ Oh,
"1"NE LANDSGAp-E Pc.AIJ.
~~~v - ~
'THE GuRRENT HouRS O~ oPPERh?Io1~l AKE 24 NRt. /DAY
'~ !~A`{S A t~iEEK ,THIS W l l.l. PSE MAI-~TAINED AFTER THE EXPANst oi.l ,
DELIVERY NovRS VARRY ?HRoU4N-o~T 'THE Dr-•`( WITt~ Ct>asot.I~lE
C~EI.IVERIES LoNTRot.t_et~ -TO NoT ~.oNFI.tGT klITN PEAK.
GUS'rOMER+ 'TRAFFI C.
~fHE GUS'fOMER, oovNT POR 'T'HIS T`A'E of RETt~1l. oppE>~Tlva IS
St.I1~N7lY piK1:EREIJT -T'HA-J A T7PICAt, RETA-~ STORE, BASES oN
TNi: GuRREtJ'r 4utDELINES A RATioI~ of S STALES PER leao0 4Ro55
S ~~ oft 1 PER Zoo yRoss s,>` Wovc,D EE Rea~~IR~c~ (~ sTAt.~s~
Fob THIS TYPE of oPPERAT~~n1 WE NAVE GVSTOMERS 'THAW
p~1a~NASE C~cTN INsipE sr pvT51pE. THE Prull.Cit`11a THEREFORE, l~lE
REGOMMENa 'THAT SI~tGE OVER Soo of THE CtRS GdSTvMF-R ARE
PASO RETAtL GUSToMERS 50 GoNS~DERPTio~ Mt)r.T RSE G~VE-J To
TNosE STAt.i.s kIHEN GAI.GULATI~Jb 'THE PAIZKII~lIa I.IEEDS .THE SITE
PRoV 106 S 6 pES 14FJA'rEl~ PARKihll~ STAI.t,S ~I~IGLuDitJL~ ! NDcP gTAI.L> ~
$ GARS CSTAI.I.S~ AT THE LIRS PUMPS P~uS WRITI-Jy SPADE ~ i t~Not~IE.
STAt.t. AhID A STAGki/~4 LgNE FvR '1 GARS AT THE GFaiC WA~i-~, ~'NE
PARK11r1t~ PROVIDED SNo~~G bt A~Ee'siuRTE AS A1~1 EKAMPt.~ !F oNc.Y
4 of 'THE GRs PUMP STAU.S ARE INLLuDED WITH TNIr 5 pESi4~lATE~
STAt.~S R ToTE*l. OF ~1 s-rP~t.S ARE ~RoV~DED To MEET THE CITY
~ZEa?vIRE M E13">r o F to ST~LL~
" JT IS 'TOTAL PETRdI.EuMS pESiRE To GoNTINuE MEETINI~ 'THE
GuS-ToMERS IJEEDS kJl't}~ -tHE 'rYPr of HI~N CQuRc.l-rY SERV/LES
'THEY DESIRE. , IT IS OvR oplNlo~t 'TNRT '1'NIS PRoPoSAI. t~liltr
MEET THOSE NEEDS, WN~I.E MEETfIJl~~134TH ToTAI.S AND THE
GtT~ of R~GHFIEI.DS 4?VAI.ITY 'STAN-t~ARDS
'THANK Yov
~oH>~ Kos M R5
~~~/
l.- i ~~ff NN 2~
rr)rr r ..,. r. rr r.. erlrrr~lTiTr_r~,•.~_'__ ,..-~ ~. ~ ~ C! /' O /~ r / fL~~ times /`~p~-I '1 _ ~(r / 1L/ ~v /~G.l"
! ~~ U
~,p ~~
'l,Q. C2r !~~ '77)2 ~e ~ G jL~ N Q~ /I~O7~ ~¢~~
_ ~.y;gar, ~+rr...,.~ear~rrrrlr t. tr'~C y/~- //~j ~ Qom(/~J~~ /~ . / / // ' /~.. ~~ ~~e~~ ~J ~j `'
_ ~ L ~ ! A d
~' l`l~'~ A~'~ /t"~~dLC~ ~ N }~/1(0~~2~ C~~' IUf~S/j / qtr 77~ ~
_ !
s,;--;, ;, ,,, qty.°- - ,r+~~l r.l;,;-- . A'~ ~A ~s I~~~ID~v of ~~~o ~.
~~ ,¢QE b o m~ ~957~d Th m ~Slo i s e m
~ G~j ` 0~0' ~/oA~1~ %N ~ ~ N /~ CAS- L!' ~9-S ~ O c1~
u~ . ~~.•,~ 6, ~ /~d ~f'!) ~ o z~ ,-s Ewa ~~
~~~![~I~~~~~~~~~~k1~~i1~Nf)tNf1~11M~~~~j~~ki}~' 7 N / '/~ ~ ~/ N / ~JGf i!'~/»~ ~ ~I~~ >~~Q /Y ~j p ~! C.~/4'~~~
. _ ~' (~ ~
~~
us „7 -~~ ~ cs~. /Y~ 7~ -~ ~ ~Q~ o ~ Aree.
r~ ^-
fir,,.
!i i
~^.
,- ~ ,o
//)iS A"~iQ~ G~~f}it/NO~C~ ~DL(l0~ ~VC7~ A~ F~ ~-.
/~~'~-T e U ~ ~}"~S6~b ~/~ /)"fib ~~ /~(~~S y, J C1~
~ ~+ lJ ~ o
aS asfit C~~s . ~/~ ~s ~~ ~A •s~~
~// ~~
` / ~
(Y C/ ~ ~'~y e•(! G. ~LI'~ / /rC' ~' Cs ~i47` P-i1/
~JJ ~ /
•~~ .. .... ~. ~.. ~f tr. nlTji, - •-. -- IppIII ~u/L_ // ~~ J/Y Plr~:.-+'U l~I~ F
I. ~/
'~ /
-~~s ~e ~ 1~ c~~.~~r u ~~ ~ ,mil
1
~~ ~o ~~, ~
.,.;.,, , ..~,~,.~r,,....,..,.,.~.~.,_t,
1 ,~ ~-~.
`/ ~~ ~~ /
,~//~C,, U~ ~~\ / f
~lj e!:ij i7-T ~~~~iF.::~-~i. ~"-iii}t{- -'"r ~~~' /.`• L // /~ O~/VG~ 'y~C /I
~ 38 t~~-r~eae~ ~ .
~~~a/aC ~~ ~~.z~
~~y~~6~
1~~441L` t~C~~L~~:YLLi6I.LLLILikiiLlLL~LN•i6t
~ ~~
4
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 150
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement•
Change Order No. 1 for Bituminous Work at Veterans Memorial Park
of Richfield and Rich Acres Golf Course.
Background•
Barber Construction Company was awarded the contract for
Bituminous Mixture for Path and Construction of Driveways,
Parking Lots and Appurtenant work earlier this spring under
Contract Number 2481. Staff discovered an error in the original
proposal form for the estimated amount of blacktop, which
amounted to 640 ton less than what is needed. The correct
tonnage of blacktop will increase the contract by $7,680, or 4.7%
of the contract price.
A decision was made after the contract was awarded to blacktop
the maintenance yard at the Golf Course in order to eliminate
dust and mud problems. This work was projected to be done in
1992, depending on the revenue projections of the Golf Course
Enterprise Fund. However, the contract prices quoted by Barber
Construction plus revenue projections for 1989 makes this work
possible at this time for a more than reasonable price.
Recommended Motion:
Approve Change Order No. 1 to Barber Construction Company, Inc.
in the sum of $13,681.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The additional 640 ton of blacktop is needed to complete
the work originally scheduled under this contract.
2. Performing the additional work now at the Golf Course is
economically sound.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose to delay approval of this change order.
However, by doing so, the path work at Veterans Memorial Park of
Richfield will not be completed by the July 4th deadline.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item appears on the June 26, 1989 Council agenda. Staff is
requesting approval at this time in order to facilitate timely
completion of the project at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield;
and so that the work at the Golf Course may proceed.
Respectfu ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
~ ~'~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 149
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement:
Request to reject three proposals submitted by towing firms on
June 15, 1989, and to authorize a revised request for proposals
for the Towing, Impounding and Storage of Vehicles for the City
of Richfield.
Background•
Public Safety staff advertised for proposals to tow, impound, and
store vehicles in the Richfield Sun on May 31, 1989. Three
proposals were submitted and opened on .June 15, 1989.
Four issues have surfaced which were inadvertently left off the
original RFP:
s The City should pay the same contracted rates as the public
for the towing of City vehicles.
s All City initiated impounds, whether impounds or private
tows, should be charged at the contracted rate.
• Telephone, as well as radio equipment in tow trucks is
allowable for contact with public safety dispatching
personnel.
s Two items requiring cost proposals should be revised to
allow for a per mile charge on the proposal forms.
Recommended Motion:
Reject the submitted proposals, and direct staff to do a revised
request for proposals that incorporates the changes listed above.
Basis for Recommendation:
The revised request for proposals will provide a better agreement
between the City and Contractor for these services.
Alternative Recommendation:
Using the submitted proposals would not address these issues.
Decision/Discussion Mode:
Rejection of submitted proposals and authorization for revised
request for proposals should be made as quickly as possible to
allow timely advertisement for new proposals.
Respectf ly submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP/was
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
June 15, 1989
11:00 A.M.
Towing, Impounding and Storage of Vehicles
for the City of Richfield Department of Public Safety
(Two Year Contract)
~~=~~
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 towing, impounding and storage of vehicles for
the City of Richfield Department of Public Safety,. two year contract,
as advertised in the official newspaper on May 31, 1989.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
Byron Wallace, Community Development Director
Shirley Evenson, City Manager Representative
Bill Suech, Public Safety Department
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
UNWEZGHTED PROPOSALS
CHIEF' S
ITEM A B MARK'S MORROW'S
Towing of impounded cars
trucks under 1'~ ton cap.,
mc's, scooters, etc. 40.00 35.00 34.50 50.00
Same outside of city* 48.75 0 42.00 55.00
1'~ ton trucks + 85.00 45.00 65.00 115.00
Same outside of city* 95.00 0 85.00 125.00
Use of winch with tow** 10/45 10.00 30.00 35.00
(tk) 75/125
Use of a dolly(s) 25.00 20.00 30.00 35.00
Low-bed trailer or truck 65.00 55.00 65.00 75.00
Storage charges:
1st 24 hours
Inside: 10.00 0 15.00 0
Outside: 7.50 0 8.00 0
Each add. 24 hours
Inside: 10.00 0 15.00 10.00
Outside: 7.50 7.50 8.00 8.00
*Where proposals included an additional charge per mile, the
assumed mileage of 5.0 miles was used to compute the proposal
price
** Proposal A from Chief's contained two proposed figures, one
for cars and one for trucks - No computation was made in this
category for Proposal A
All bidders supplied $1,000 bid security check.
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and
considered at the June 26, 1989 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
~'l .~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 148
Agenda June 26,1989
Issue Statement•
Resolution approving Lawful Gambling Exemption for Sons of the
American Legion Squadron 435, 6501 Portland Avenue, and waiver of
$100 permit fee.
Background:
On June 16, 1989 Sons of the American Legion Squadron 435
submitted an application for a Lawful Gambling Exemption for
1989. They propose to sponsor no more that five gambling events
consisting of only raffles.
The Public Safety Department has conducted the required
background investigation and has determined that the applicant
has complied with all lawful gambling requirements and that the
gambling manager and Post Commander have no criminal record.
Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department
to review the request for the gambling exemption and make a
recommendation to the City Council.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution approving the gambling exemption requested
by the applicant in accordance with Richfield City Code 1100.13,
Subd. 6, and waive the permit fee.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicants have complied with state statutes and the
City Code pertaining to lawful gambling.
2. The applicants have submitted their requests within 30 days
of the requested events.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could pass a resolution disapproving the
gambling exemption request. However, staff has determined
that there is no basis for this alternative.
2. The Council could decide to not waive the permit fees.
3. The Council could continue the request. This is not
recommended since any continuance would be considered in
less than 30 days of the requested events and any
resolutions disapproving these requests could not be
considered by the Charitable Gambling Control Board in
accordance with Minnesota State Statutes 349.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The request for the exemption and waiver of the permit fee has
been placed on the consent calendar for June 26, 1989.
JDP:sae
Res tfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
C y Manager
~~~-~ -/
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING LAWFUL GAMBLING EXEMPTION FOR SONS OF THE
AMERICAN LEGION SQUADRON 435
WHEREAS, the Sons of the American Legion Squadron 435 have
requested a lawful gambling exemption to conduct no more than
five raffle events in 1989, and
WHEREAS, Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public
Safety Department to review gambling exemption requests and make
a recommendation to the City Council, and
WHEREAS, Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6, requires
Council approval of gambling exemptions, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has complied with the state statutes
and the city code pertaining to lawful gambling.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Richfield that the City Council does approve the
gambling exemption requested by the Sons of the American Legion
Squadron 435, and does waive the $100 permit fee.
PASSED this 26th day of June, 1989.
Steven J. Quam Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber City Clerk
f ~! _ ~oi
,..
Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board LAWFUL ~GAMBL,ING fXEMPTtON
`- '~ ;- ••'•..~ Roorn N475 Griggs-Midway $ullding FOR BOARD USE OIVIY ~
1821 University Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104-3383 , ' ,,
` "`+• !6121642-0555
INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Submit request for exemption at least 3q days pl•ior to the occasion. ;
2. When completing form, do not complete shaded areas.
- 3. Give the gold copyto the City or County. Send the rernaining copies to the Board. The,copies will,'be
°' returned with an exemption numbQr added to he form. When your'acti~ity is concluded; complete the-
,PLEASETYPE financial information, sign and date the form, and return to the Board within 30 days. '~
~QrganizationName --. ~ LicenseNurnberlltcurtentlyorprevfo~~911!Nceraed)
~ Vitae Aa»~car- ~ #~) ,ti~~'t:7iCt 435
ddre8s, ; City, County, Stste, Zip Code .
~D'L_ ~xt~a~d A~r~rlui~ RiaY~'~+~de l±tnesvtae 55423
• f Executive Officer's Name Phone Number Manager's Name Phone Number
£~r~.trhR ~tu~nelrx~ $66-3649 86f*~~4~
ype of Organization If OtherNonprofiiOrganization (Check Onel
Fraternal. I~ Veterans ^ IRS Designation
;,c^ `Religion L$ Other Nonprofit Organization ~ lncorporated with Secretary of State
.Y '~• ;
®Affiliate of Parent Nonprofit Organization
~~. , me of F remises Where Activity Will Occur Dateisl of Activity
-w .. ~c>,~fia~~.d ican ~ t X435 7/t1'!/ffi~ ~
t
,
' ~f Games Yes No Gross Receipts Value of Prizes Expenses Profit
~~!.F;Zingo
. X
~,,
Raffles
:'
~ r
, ,
1.
r'addlewheels ~
-
s:.
~Tipboards ~
ull-Tabs ~
t of Profit
r - ..
istributgr From Whom Gambling Equipment Acquired Distributor's License No.
affirm i3ll information submitted to the Board is true,. accu- I affirm all financial information submitted to the Board is "
Mate, and comple fi true, accurate, and complete.
C f Executive 0 cer Sign. lure ~ Date. Chief Executive Officer Sig, ature Date
s. _
~I~ "~ ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL:GOVERNINGBQDY'
hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt,l.admit having.been served with notice
hat this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board aid will become effectixe 30 days from the
ate of receipt (noted below) by the City or County,. unless a resolution of the local governing body.is passed which specifi-
~cally•disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30
- ; ays of the-below noted date. ,.
- CITY.:OR C"OUNTY T011HNSMIP
ame of Ltocal Govemin~Body ,or;4qunfy) Township Name (Must be notified when.County is the approving body)
tg
-~& natur~f Pe sort. e~e ing A plication Signature of Person Receiving Application
,.r ...
. ~
...
Date ecei ed Title Date
~G 00020-01 (4/B6i White -Board Canary - Boardreturns to prganization to keep
Pink -Organization w Gold -.City or County
:~` c~=a
1100.07, Subd. 11
;~ichf field City Code .
Subd. 11. Intoxicating liquor, No. intoxicating liquor- may be consumed,
sold or be permitted. to b~nsumed Q e sr~lative h to r intoxicating8e aadornone
enterprise. Provisions of this cock
intoxicating liquors shall be strictly`observed.
Subd. 12. Additional conditions.. The city, in granting a license tQ as
impose additional conditions as may be deemed necessary and to
'applicant, may _
secure the public health, safety, convituteca violation aof this subsection.e to •
observe the additional conditions coast.
1100.09. Suspension of license. Upop conviction for a willful violation of
immediatel suspend the license of the ~:
subsection 1100.07, the manager gay Y '~
'' licensee hereunder. Upon suspension, the director of public safety shall order
~• the licears~ee or say of his agents or employees to-cease 'the activities in wwith ,•,
they are engaged is connection with the enterprise, an The suspensioa isi effec~
the order constitutes a.violation of this subsection. either•
,, .
tive until the next meeting of the council, at which time the council may
continue the suspension for a specified period', lift the suspension or revoke
the license. Failure to act at the meeting shall .result 1n a lifting of the
suspensioa. A suspensionpr revocation is in addition to the penalties provided
elsewhere in this code. •
"' 1100.11. .Itinerant carnivals• state regulation. Nothing contained in this
sectiaa abrogatea,,or limits the provisions of Minnesota St$tutes, section 624.65
or Minnesota Statutes, sections 437.09 to 437.11.
.~
1100.13. Lawful gambling. Subdivision 1. Adoption b~ reference. Minnesota
• Statutes, chapter 349 relating to charitable. gambling and MCAR 7860 adopted
pursuant thereto axe adopted by reference.
Subd. 2. Definitions. The definitions contained in Minnesota Statutes,
section, 349.12, subdivision 1 are adopted and• incorporated by reference and
shall constitute the definitions of those terms as used in this subsection.
Subd. 3. License or permit required. Lawful types of gambling shall be
permitted but only by organizations which have been issued either a currently
valid gambling license issued by the state chariexem t from i lice sing nder
~'~ permit; issued by the city to conduct gambling P
"' Minnesota Statutes, section 349.214.
Subd, 4. Investigation: state license. Upon receipt of notification from
the charitable gambling board of the pendency of an application for issuance o•~
~~~-: renewal.of'an organization gambling license, the city manager shall transmit the
~'~~notification to the public safety department for its review and recommendation.
`: The public safety department "shall investigate 1:he matter and make its review
~• and recommendation to the city council:as soon as possible, but in no event
'~' later than 25 days following •receipt of the notification by the city. The
applicant shall be notified in writing of the date on which the recommendation•
will be considered by the city council..
1100.13, Subd, 5 r
.[chfield City Code .
j
Subd. 5. Investigation fee. The applicant for an organization gambling k
license shall pay to the city. an investigation fee as provided in appendix D of cif,
this code. The public safety departmept shall-notify the applicant in writing
when bha fee is due in full, wbich duet ..date shall::.be`"at least five days before
•the.date that the report is to be presented to the city council..
:.•
Subd. .6. Council action. The city council shall consider the application
..sot later than 25 days aftex written notification of the application has b$en
received. by the city. .The council shall consider the report of the department
:off public safety, statements from the applicant, and any other information which
-the council believes to be relevant to the application. Thereafter the caunci~,
.shalt, by resolution, approve or disapprove of the license.. If the investiga-
tiou fee provided in subdivision 5 of this subsection has not been paid withiA
the time limit provided is such subdivision 5, the council may disapprove the.;
licence on this basis. ~ ~ .
' Subd. 7. Off premises gambling. The .city will disapprove of any applica-
tion wherein the applicant seeks to be permitted to conduct gambling on premises' .
which are sot: '
(a) owned or leased by the applicant, and
(b) located within the property Which constitutes the- principal place of
business of the applicant, .
~~pon the rece.i,p~t of notification of the pendency of any license application '
oefore the chaFitable gambling board requesting-such off-premises gambling the
clerk shall, in lieu of the provisions contained in subdivisions 4,. 5, 6 and 9
of this subsection, transmit a certified copy of subdivision 7 to the charitable
.gambling board, together with a statement from the city clerk that subdivision 7 .
is is full. force and effect and that the application is disapproved pursuant to
that subdivision. Such. action by the city, clerk shall constitute the official
action of the city. The provisions of this subdivision shall sot apply to the,..
sale of taffle tickets.
Subd. 8. Reports. As a condition to approval of the license, the council.
may require that the applicant agree to promptly furnish the city with copies of
'elI records,: reports, accounts and other data which applicant will be required:
Ito submit to the charitable gambling board during .the term of the. license,.;..
Failure of the applicant, to fulfill such requirement may constitute grounds for
disapproval of licenses in subsequent years.
.~,
,,
I
L,,y
)r) - .~ 4.
Y -
Subd. 9. ,,.Notification to Charitable Gambling Board. The city manager
shall transmit a certified copy of tide council resolution to the charitable
gambling board.. If the council has- disapproved the license, the city manager -
shall take such actions as are reasonably necessary to deliver a copy of such
resolution to the board within 30 days ,from the date that the city received
.notice of the license applicatiop.' q copy of the resolution shall .also be
provided to the applicant upon request.
~~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 147
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement•
Award of Contract for Tennis Court Repair.
Background•
In the spring of 1988, staff initiated a program to repair and
replace tennis courts throughout the City with the priority of
repairs based on the condition of the courts. Tennis courts at
Augsburg, Jefferson, Sheridan and Christian Parks were repaired
in 1988. Major repair and replacement of courts at Donaldson,
Fairwood and Memorial Parks is scheduled for this summer.
The 1989 budget provides $24,000 for this work. The additional
$13,000 will be included in the proposed Revised Park Maintenance
budget. A formal bid opening for this work was held on Friday,
June 23, 1989 with the following results:
Tennis West Ltd. $37,601
Barber Construction Co. 47,732
Recommended Motion:
Award a contract for tennis court repair and resurfacing to
Tennis West Ltd. in the amount of $37,601.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Tennis West, Ltd. submitted the low bid for this work, and
they are a reputable tennis court contractor.
2. Funds for this work are available in the 1989 Budget, and the
proposed Revised Budget.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose to reject all bids and instruct staff to
rebid the project; however, delays caused by rebidding could
lead to the work being delayed another year, and would be more
expensive at a later date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for the June 26 City Council meeting. If
action is not taken at this meeting, there will not be sufficient
time to accomplish the work this summer.
Respec fully submitted,
Ja Prosser
Ci. Manager
JDP/reb
~~"~f
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 146
Agenda, June 26, 1989
Issue Statement:
Replacing Windows in the Water Plant in Excess of $5,000.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of 55,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
The windows in the Water Plant are the original windows installed
when the plan was built in the early 60's. The windows are
deteriorating, are not energy-efficient and need to be replaced.
The 1989 revised water maintenance budget contains $10,000 for
replacement of windows and energy improvements at the Water
Plant. Quotations were received from three window contractors as
follows:
Telar Industries
Midwest Glass Block
Twin City Glass Block
Recommended Motion:
Approve a purchase order for
Industries for windows at the
$ 7,900
511,680
$12,827
the sum of $7,900 to Telar
Water Plant.
Basis of Recommendation:
Telar Industries submitted the low quotation and have a good
reputation as a window contractor.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Council could reject all quotations and instruct staff to
obtain new quotes, however, staff does not believe we
will obtain a better price for the type of energy-
efficient windows wanted.
2. Do not make any energy improvements; i.e., replace
windows, at the Water Plant at this time.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item appears on the June 26, 1989 regular Council agenda.
Staff is requesting approval at this time so that the work may be
done during the summer months.
Respec u submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 145
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement•
Authorization for Richfield Human Rights Commission to
Participate in Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Celebration.
Background•
In cooperation with the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, and
Edina, the Richfield Human Rights Commission is requesting
authorization to participate in a Martin .Luther King, Jr. Day
Celebration in January, 1990.
The purpose of the celebration is to gather together people of
diverse ethnic heritages to become acquainted with each other and
to enjoy learning about each other cultures. This is to be
accomplished through a series of potluck dinners hosted by
various persons in the community.
Gordon Anderson, Chair of the Human Rights Commission, and Julie
Heinz of Bloomington, will be present at the Monday evening
council meeting to provide the council with more specific
information on the program.
Recommended Motion:
Hear the presentation on the proposed celebration, and make a
determination if the Richfield Human Rights Commission will
participate.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The Richfield Human Rights Commission is willing to
participate in this program.
2. The program would be a way to draw residents together to
share diverse cultures in the city.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the participation.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the June 26, 1989 city council
agenda for council consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP/eja
~/
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 144
Agenda June 26, 1989
Issue Statement:
Configuration of 77th Street as alternate I494 frontage road east
of I35W.
Background•
In 1986 the City Council created the Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic
Committee. This committee has been discussing and considering
many traffic related items including the I494 Traffic Corridor
Study which is now beginning the Environmental Impact (EIS)
phase. With the exception of the "No Build" option, all the
alternatives being considered in the EIS would result in the loss
of the existing frontage road on the north side of I494 east of
I35W. The Ad Hoc Committee has been considering alternatives to
the frontage road. 77th Street has been determined, and
reaffirmed, as the replacement I494 frontage road east of I35W.
After considering eight alternatives, four were discussed at a
public meeting held at City Hall on Tuesday, June 20, 1989. The
four alternatives were 1) No Build, 2) Four Lane Undivided with
right of way acquisition to the south, 3) Four Lane Divided with
right of way acquisition to the south and 4) Four Lane Divided
with right of way acquisition to the north. About 100 property
owners were in attendance for the meeting which was also
broadcast live on Richfield cable television channel 34. A home
VCR tape of the meeting is available in the Community Services
Department office at City Hall.
Recommended Motion:
For use of 77th Street as
east of I35W, accept the
for four lanes, divided,
north of 77th Street.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The eight members
Committee are in
recommendation.
the I494 frontage road in Richfield
configuration proposal which provides
with right of way acquisition to the
of the Richfield Ad Hoc 135W/I494
unanimous agreement on the
2. It is required that reasonably suitable and convenient
access continue to be provided to the properties now
fronting on the 78th frontage road. Although it may be
several years before the existing frontage road is lost,
it is advantageous to have in place a plan for providing
alternate access. The advantages include; an orderly
process which may occur naturally with renovation/
remodeling of commercial properties and the sale/purchase
of residential properties; the potential ability to
receive state funding for the alternate frontage road
costs.
-~
3. Through careful planning, Richfield can continue to
support the existing commercial base in this area.
4. Through this same careful planning, Richfield can
properly prepare for future development in this area.
5. It has long been the City's desire to provide adequate
protection for our single family residential
neighborhoods. The recommended configuration includes
buffering and other measures to help insure this
protection.
6. Through this careful planning, Richfield residents will
be in a position of awareness and may make their own
future plans.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Select one of the other three alternates.
2. Do not select any alternative proposed and ask for
consideration of other alternatives.
3. Do not make any plans now or in the future for an
alternate 1494 frontage road east of 135W.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for the June 26, 1989 Council meeting.
While it is not necessary for the Council to make any final
decision at this time, an early decision will aid the
conversations with the state and other entities related to
financing of improvements. Don Fondrick, Director of Community
Services, Tony Heppelmann, consultant with BRW, and members of
the Richfield Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic Committee will be in
attendance at the June 26 meeting to answer questions.
Respectful y submitted,
James Prosser
City ager
JDP/sdr