08-08-88 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 197
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Setting Dates for Budget Hearing Process.
Background:
The City staff is now working to prepare the 1988 Revised and
1989 Proposed Budgets. It is anticirpated that the budget
documents will be printed and distributed on or about
September 6.
Once budgets have been distributed, it will be necessary for the
City staff to present the budget to City Council members prior to
adoption of the final budget. In .order for council members and
staff to arrange their schedules, the following dates and times
are suggested for the Council's budget review sessions.
Wednesday, September 7, 1988 7:00 p.m.
Overall Budget Presentation Legislative/Executive
General Fund Sewer Fund
Water Fund Golf Course Fund
Community Services
Wednesday, September 14, 1988 7:00 p.m.
Capital Budget Liquor Fund
Public Safety Debt Service Fund
Community Development Internal Service Funds
Administrative Services
Wednesday, September 21, 1988 7:00 p.m.
Special Revenue Fund, Public Safety, Budget Adoption
Wednesday, September 28, 1988 7:00 p.m.
Reserve date, if necessary
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the budget hearing schedule contained herein and direct the
City Clerk to give proper notice of those hearings.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The City must have its budget completed and forwarded to
Hennepin County on or before October 10, 1988. This schedule
allows adequate time to fulfill that requirement.
2. Budget hearings are a required and valuable part of the
budget adoption process.
~~/
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could select other dates for budget
hearings, as long as adequate time exists to complete the
budget well in advance of the October 10 deadline.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City Council should act on this matter at the August 8 City
Council meeting to allow time for proper public notice of the
Budget Hearings.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP:sae
'~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 196
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution Denying a Zoning Amendment for 7312 Lyndale Avenue
Background:
At the July 25, 1988 City Council meeting the City Council denied
first reading of an ordinance amendment to rezone the property at
7312 Lyndale from "R" single family residence to "MR-2" multiple
residence. The applicant had requested the rezoning to allow the
construction of seven townhomes on the property.
The Council requested at that meeting that Findings of Fact be
prepared for the August 8, 1988 City Council meeting..
Recommended Motion:
- Adopt the resolution denying a zoning amendment for 7312 Lyndale
Avenue.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The findings of fact will confirm the denial of the
rezoning.
~9lternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution
2. Continue the .matter to another Council meeting.
Discussion_/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the August 8, 1988 Council agenda
for Council consideration.
Respectf ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
Cit anager
JDP/eja
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DENYING A ZONING
AMENDMENT FOR 7312 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. Mr. and Mrs. C.W. Smith (applicants) have requested
the rezoning of 7312 Lyndale Avenue South from "R" single family
residence district to MR-2 multiple residence district to allow
the construction of seven townhomes in two structures.
1.02. The proposed structures would replace one single
family home that is in poor condition.
1.03. The legal description of the property sought to be
rezoned: Lots 3, 4, 5, 6 and the North 15 feet of Lot 7, Block
1, Irwin Shores 2, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Also the East 15
feet of Lot 20, the East 20 feet of Lot 19 and the East 20 feet
of the North 15 feet of Lot 18 in Block 1.
1.04. The subject site is approximately 215 feet wide by
153.42 in depth plus an offset of 20 feet by 64.9 feet and 15
feet by 49.95 feet.
1.05. The land use and zoning surrounding the subject site
is all single family residential except for a duplex at 7309
Aldrich Avenue South which is west of the proposed north
building.
Section 2. Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Requirements.
2.01. Section 515.01 of the Richfield City Code (Zoning)
states that the intended purpose of the "R" district "to preserve
the single family residential character of neighborhoods by
insuring that new or replacement development will be compatible
with the detached single family dwellings of the neighborhood,
thus preserving neighborhood densities."
2.02. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains the following
policy statements:
To prohibit development proposals which tend to produce
undesired effects to the public health, safety, convenience
and general welfare;
To regulate existing and future development so it will not
adversely affect adjacent land uses; and
To locate new residential development such that the
environment of existing residential uses is improved.
A r~.
Section 3. Findings.
3.01. As zoned, the maximum density would be four single
family units. With a conditional use permit and resubdividing,
the maximum allowable density would be six units in three
structures. The proposed density is seven units in two
structures.
3.02. The adjoining structures are all single family
structures, except for one duplex, and the proposed development
consists of a four unit structure and a three unit structure
which is incompatible with the adjacent land uses.
3.03. Parking is not allowed on Lyndale Avenue, thereby
forcing any overflow parking form the subject site to the
neighborhood streets such as 73rd street.
Section 4. Zoning Amendment Denied.
4.01. Based upon the above, the request by Mr. and Mrs.
C.W. Smith to amend the zoning of 7312 Lyndale Avenue South from
"R" single family residence to MR-2 multiple residence district
is hereby denied.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
. ~ ~r~
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DENYING A ZONING
AMENDMENT FOR 7312 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. Mr. and Mrs. C.W. Smith (applicants) have requested
the rezoning of 7312 Lyndale Avenue South from "R" single family
residence district to MR-2 multiple residence district to allow
the construction of seven townhomes in two structures.
1.02. The proposed structures would replace one single
family home that is in poor condition.
1.03. The legal description of the property sought to be
rezoned: Lots 3, 4, 5, 6 and the North 15 feet of Lot 7, Block
1, Irwin Shores 2, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Also the East 15
feet of Lot 20, the East 20 feet of Lot 19 and the East 20 feet
of the North 15 feet of Lot 18 in Block 1.
1.04. The .subject site is approximately 215 feet wide by
153.42 in depth plus an offset of 20 feet by 64.9 feet and 15
feet by 49.95 feet.
1.05. The land use and zoning surrounding the subject site
is all single family residential except for a duplex at 7309
Aldrich Avenue South which is west of the proposed north
building.
Section 2. Zoninq Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Requirements.
2.01. Section 515.01 of the Richfield City Code (Zoning)
states that the intended purpose of the "R" district is "to
preserve the single family residential character of neighborhoods
by insuring that new or replacement development will be
compatible with the detached single family dwellings of the
neighborhood, thus preserving neighborhood densities."
2.02. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains the following
policy statements:
"To prohibit development proposals which tend to produce
undesired effects to the public health, safety, convenience
and general welfare;"
"To regulate existing and future development so it will not
adversely affect adjacent land uses;" and
"To locate new residential development such that the
environment of existing residential uses is improved."
O
Section 3. Findings.
3.01. As zoned, the maximum density would be four single
family units. With a conditional use permit and resubdividing,
the maximum allowable density would be six units in three
structures. In order to obtain a conditional use permit for that
purpose, the applicant would be required to satisfy the
requirements of Section 545.09, subdivision 5. The proposed
density is seven units in two structures.
3.02. The adjoining structures are all single family
structures, except for one duplex, and the proposed development
consists of a four unit structure and a three unit structure.
From Lyndale Avenue, this will appear as a change in intensity,
use and size of structure not in conformity or magnitude with the
neighborhood.
3.03. The practical parking availability is limited and
there is doubt as to the sufficiency to accommodate the
anticipated need on site as is required by the city. Parking is
not allowed on Lyndale Avenue, thereby forcing any overflow
parking from the subject site to the neighborhood streets such as
73rd street.
Section 4. Zoning Amendment Denied.
4.01. Based upon the above, the request by Mr. and Mrs.
C.W. Smith to amend the zoning of 7312 Lyndale Avenue South from
"R" single family residence to MR-2 multiple residence district
is hereby denied.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~ i
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 195
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Council confirmation of suspension of a Richfield taxi driver's
license.
Background:
On July 19, 1988 Public Safety Director John Erskine sent a
certified letter to a taxicab driver, informing him that,
effective immediately, his Richfield taxi driver's license was
being suspended in accordance with Richfield City Code 1175.11,
Subd. 2.
The suspension was the result of an incident that occurred in
June of 1988 in Bloomington, which was reported to the
Bloomington Police.
This incident involved the driver and three juvenile females who
were allegedly sexually assaulted by him after he had picked them
up in his taxi cab. The driver has been formally charged by the
Hennepin County Attorney's office in connection with this
incident.
The driver was informed in the letter that the Richfield City
Council would consider the suspension at the regularly scheduled
meeting to be held on Monday, August 8, 1988, and that he would
be given the opportunity to be heard before the Council. As of
August 3,1988, the public safety department has had no contact
or .response from the driver. It is unknown if he will be present
at the meeting.
Rec®mmended lotion:
Confirm the Public Safety Director's suspension of the taxi
driver's license until the matter has been adjudicated in
criminal court.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The alleged offense occurred while he was operating
a taxi cab.
2. The alleged offense is so serious that to allow him
to operate a taxi cab, represents a threat to the
community, especially children and the elderly.
Alternatives:
1. The Council could decide to continue the hearing if the
applicant is not present. However, the driver has been
notified of the meeting and continuance does not guarantee
that the driver will be present at the next meeting.
2. The .Council could decide to lift the suspension and grant
the taxi driver's license until the matter has
been resolved in court. This alternative is not
recommended due to the potential threat to the community.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The public hearing to consider the suspension of this taxi
driver's license has been scheduled for August 8, 1988. The
licensee has been informed in writing that he can appear and be
heard at this meeting.
Respec fully submitted,
Ja a D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP:sae
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 194
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Continuation of the public hearing on consideration of a
conditional use permit at 6405 Cedar Ave.
Background:
On April 11, 1988, the City Council considered a request for a
conditional use permit to allow Southdale Manor, Inc. to continue
to operate Ugly-Duckling Rent-A-Car business at 6405 Cedar
Avenue. The business had been moved from a permitted location to
this unpermitted site some time prior to December, 1987.
The City Council referred the matter back to the Planning
Commission for further review and comment since the applicant
provided new and different information to the Council which had
not been submitted to the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission had previously recommended denial of the
request. A copy of the minutes of the April 11, 1988 City
Council meeting is attached.
On June 28, 1988 the Planning Commission considered the revised
proposal and unanimously recommended denial of the conditional
use permit.
Applicant stated that the property owner did not intend to
provide the on site drainage as required by the City Engineer nor
would he widen the curb cuts to meet the City requirement of 26
feet. For a chronology of events see Attachment A.
The applicant did not attend the public hearing on July 25, 1988
an_d, as a result, the hearing was continued to August 8, 1988.
On July 26, applicant's attorney contacted staff and stated her
knowledge of, but lack of desire to attend the prior hearing.
The applicant's attorney was notified orally and in writing of
the date and time of the continued hearing.
Recommended lotion:
Deny the conditional use permit for a rent-a-car business (Ugly
Duckling Rent-A-Car) at 6405 Cedar Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Planning Commission at their regular meeting on June
28, 1988 unanimously recommended denial of the conditional
use permit.
2. The curb cut would not be in conformance with the required
curb cut width of 26 feet.
3. The prior parking analysis indicated a shortage of at
least five parking spaces for the two site occupants.
sr /O -~
4. The applicant does not intend to provide the required on
site drainage as requested by the City Engineer.
alternative Recommendation:
Approve the requested conditional use permit for rent-a-car
business (Ugly Duckling Rent-A-Car) at 6405 Cedar Avenue as
submitted with the following stipulations:
1. The building and fire code be met.
2. The offstreet parking area be improved according to the
City ordinances.
3. The drainage plan be submitted for approval by the City
Engineer.
4. The offstreet parking area be properly landscaped and
screened subject to staff approval.
5. The signs meet City sign regulations.
6. Inoperable cars may not be stored on the site for more
than 48 hours.
7. All of the stipulations be met prior to the occupancy
permit.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 P.M. Monday, August 8,
1988. This is a continuation of the public hearing of July 25,
1988 for which proper legal notice was given to the neighbors and
by publication.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:sae
T lv `~..
Adde_ndum_to the__B_asis of Recommendation:
Mr. Jankowski previously operated his rental car business with a
conditional use permit, at 6333 Cedar Avenue.
The property is located in a General Industrial I district which
allows, under a conditional use permit, an auto rental, business.
The existing structure meets all the setback requirements except
the rear yard setback which is 14 feet.
1. The parking space distribution for the site is as follows:
Required Need Max. Available
a. Existing Retail Use
Color Time (2,566 sq. ft.) 13 3 3
b. Rent-A-Car Office Use 1 1 1
Storage Use (224 sq. ft.) 30 30 25
Total 44 34 29
The analysis is based on the applicant's assertion that the
operation maintains a fleet of 30 cars. The letter from the
attorney dated June 3, 1988, indicates that there would be a
need for only 18 parking spaces at any given time.
2. The site plan indicates that the existing three curb cuts,
including the one from the abutting property to the south,
are only 24 feet wide. The required minimum curb cut width
in an industrial district is 26 feet. The applicant does not
propose to bring the curb cut width into conformance with the
City requirement.
3. The City ordinance requires that the offstreet parking areas
be striped and have adequate site drainage. The front
parking area has been striped recently. There is no evidence
that the property owner contacted the City at the time the
front parking area was blacktopped. It is staff's opinion
that the parking area was not improved according to City
ordinance requirements. No drainage plan has been submitted.
The applicant does not intend to do any other improvements in
the parking area.
4. Sufficient screening and buffering has not been provided on
the site. The applicant does not propose to do any
substantial improvements on the site to soften the appearance
of the parking area.
The outside storage of the cars in the parking area without
adequate screening is very unsightly and is not consistent
with the city ordinance requirements for parking areas. The
applicant has proposed a wooden fence at the southeast
quadrant of the site.
It is staff's opinion that the o~rtside storage of cars would
require additional landscaping on 64th Street around the
~ d
parking area in order to make the site aesthetically
pleasing.
5. The Comprehensive Development Plan indicates that the site be
developed for mixed land use. The existing commercial/office
use including the car rental business is consistent with the
city's Comprehensive Development Plan.
`"" ~i '7
ATTACHME~OT A
Chronology:
In December of 1987, staff learned that the Ugly Duckling Rent-A-
Car business had been moved and was being operated at 6405 Cedar
Avenue without the required conditional use permit. The
chronology of events are listed as follows:
®ate Action
12/29/87 City staff issued noncompliance procedure.
1/22/88 Mr. Jankowski was given five days to initiate
compliance action.
2/5/88 A five day notice to discontinue operations
was sent.
3/25/88 The Planning Commission considered the
conditional use permit request and
recommended denial.
4/11/88 The City Council considered the conditional
use permit request and referred the matter
back to the Planning Commission.
6/28/88 The Planning Commission again recommended
denial of the request since the applicant did
not intend to provide the required on site
drainage or widen the curb cut to meet the
City requirements of 26 feet.
~~
Council Meeting Minutes -4- April 11, 19.88
M/Ludeman, S/Garcia to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 4-0.
M/Kirsch, S/Ludeman that the following resolution be
adopted; that it be spread in the resolution book and .that it be
made part of these minutes:
RESOLUTION N0. 7411
RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR. THE
COSTS OF CURRENT MAINTENANCE SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN
THE INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET PROJECT AREA
Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution
No. 7411 in Resolution Book No. 56.
M/Kirsch, S/Ludeman that the following resolution be
'adopted; that it be spread in the resolution book and that it be
made Dart of these minutes:
RESOLUTION N0. 7412
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT
SERVICE PROJECTS
Motion carried 4-0. This resolution appears as Resolution
• No. 7412 in Resolution Book No. 56.
Item#8 PUBLIC HEARING TO PERMIT THE OPERATION OF THE UGLY
DUCKLING CAR RENTAL AT 6405 CEDAR AVENUE. C.L. 97
City Manager Prosser reviewed Council Letter No. 97
regarding a request for a conditional use permit to allow the
operation of the Ugly Duckling Inc. automobile rental business at
6405 Cedar Avenue.
JoAnne Jankowski, attorney representing Ugly Duckling Inc.,
reviewed the operation of the automobile rental business and
slides of the site. She stated that since becoming aware of the
issues presented by city staff, action is being taken to stripe
the parking lot, the signs have been removed, and she has met
with the city engineer regarding drainage of the site. Mrs.
Jankowski stated that adequate parking was provided on the site.
She requested that the City Council continue the hearing and that
she will proceed to resolve the issues necessary to obtain the
conditional use permit. Mrs. Jankowski asked that the council
waive the requirement for 26 foot curb openings and allow the 24
foot curb openings to remain.
~~ ~~
Council Meeting Minuces -5- April 11, 1988
Council Member Ludeman asked that the applicant provide
information on the maximum number of cars that will be parked on
the site.
Mrs. Jankowski provided the company's utilization report for
March of 1988 showing that the maximum on the site in that month
was eight cars. She stated documentation of past operations
could also be made available.
Connie Murray, Planning Commission Chairperson, stated that
the Planning Commission had recommended denial of the conditional
use permit because the applicant did not comply with the
requirements and did•not provide sufficient information.
City Manager Prosser recommended that if the City Council
continues consideration of the conditional use permit, that it be
referred back to the Planning Commission prior to City Council
reconsideration. He recommended that the item not be scheduled
-with the Planning Commission until the applicant provided the
appropriate plans, documentation, and information.
M/Ludeman, S/Kirsch
for a conditional use pe
Cedar Avenue until such
completed a review and r
provided by the applican
Motion carried 4-0.
to continue consideration of_the_request
mit for a car rental business at 6405_
ime as the Planning Commission has
commendation regarding new information
relatino to the aoolication.
Item #9 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE
' ISSUANCE AND SALE OF 51,900,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
REDEVELOPMENT BONGS. C.L. 98 -
City Manager Prosser reviewed Council Letter No. 98
regarding the issuance and sale of $1,900,000 General Obligation
Redevelopment Bonds.
Council Member Ludeman questioned the provision of
$1,000,000 of the proposed bond for land acquisition.
City Manager Prosser stated that the $1,000,000 would
provide funding for land acquisition, public improvements,
demolition, rehabilitation and renovation of areas in the ILN
area. He stated it is essential for the city to be a position to
act, to assist or initiate further development in the ILN.
Lawrence Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth Avenue, stated concerns
regarding the bond discount, arbitrage issues, the term of the
bond, and the interest rate.
-'lv'!
ATTACHMENT A
Chronology:
In December of 1987, staff learned that the Ugly Duckling Rent-A-
Car business had been moved and was being operated at 6405 Cedar
Avenue without the required conditional use permit. The
chronology of events are listed as follows:
Date- Action
12/29/87 City staff issued noncompliance procedure.
1/22/88 Mr. Jankowski was given .five days to initiate
compliance action.
2/5/88 A five day notice to discontinue operations
was sent.
3/25/88 The Planning Commission considered the
conditional use permit request and
recommended denial.
4/11/88 The City Council considered the conditional
use permit request and referred the matter
back to the Planning Commission.
6/28/88 The Planning Commission again recommended
denial of the request since the applicant did
not intend to provide the required on site
drainage or widen the curb .cut to meet the
City requirements of 26 feet. '
~/p~d
LAW OFFICES
JOANNE JANKOWSKI
RALPH E. CARTER
JAMIE L. KOVACS
June 3, 1988
Towhid Kazi
Community Development
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, T~IIJ 55423
Dear Pair. Kazi:
HOLM & JANKOWSKI
6901 787H AVENUE NORTH
BROOKLYN BLVD. AT 78TH
BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55445
TELEPHONE 612-561-8222
Department
South
RE: Ugly Duckling
Rent-a-Car
Enclosed please find a proposed drawing for 6405 Cedar Avenue
South in conjunction with the application of Ugly Duckling
Rent-a-Car for a special use permit at 6405 Cedar Avenue South.
The previous information submitted to you regarding the application
was evidently taken to mean that the owner of the property is
the applicant. That is incorrect. The owner of the property is
Harold O. Toupin, who is the principle of Color Specialties, Inc.,
a business which has occupied the premises for many years.
The difficulties which have occurred in the past several months
are regretable, and it is hoped that there will be a way to work
out the problems which exist.
In order to have a thorough understanding of the events which have
led up to the present situation, I will try to outline the develop-
ment of the problems and attempt to address each issue which has
been raised in the information provided to me.
Ugly Duckling has operated in Richfield for a number of years.
Before last fall the business was located at 6333 Cedar Avenue,
a block north of the subject property. At that location there
were many fewer parking places, only one exit from the parking
lot, and much maintenance was done at the location. There were
often vehicles stored on the lot which did not run. My inquiries
have brought no reports of complaints while the business was
located there, inspite of the repair garage which was part of
the operation at that time.
Upon moving to the subject property, Ugly Duckling removed many
of the older vehicles from its fleet, and suspended its operation
of a repair garage. Since the move to the present location, the
local businesses have been engaged to provide necessary repairs
for the rental cars.
~~lp_~
Towhid Kazi
Page 2
June 3, 1988
In addition, because many of .the customers of the business are
local people, cars are rented without the requirement of a
national credit card. This rental business is one of a very few
which does not require a credit card to rent a car. Customers
from out of town are referred daily to restaurants and hotels
nearby.
The subject property is probably the best-looking property on the
east side of Cedar north of 66th St. East. It has a rough-sawn
cedar front, and has vegetation screening the parking area in
the front which is several feet high. This hedge has been in
place for several years and has been well-maintained.
The parking surface is blacktop, which unlike many of the gravel
lots in the neighborhood is in very good condition. The appearance
of the building is neat and well-kept.
The issues which have been raised in the previous meetings and in
my discussions with the parties involved are as follows:
1. Offstreet parking.
Paving and striping. In previous memoranda, there was
an indication that the parking surface is gravel. This. was
incorrect. The lot has been paved. for some time, and is in
very good condition. The front lot has been striped to
accommodate 14 cars. While there is room for more, there has
been no need to park more cars in the area because there are
rarely more than a few cars which are not rented. Ugly
Duckling estimates that the maximum number of cars it would
ever need to park at one time would be 15. Cars are not
parked on the street. A copy of the March 30 letter from
Harold Turpin stating his need for parking spaces at not
more than 3 is attached. While the proposed plan for the
lot shows 30 parking spaces, there is an anticipated need for
not more than 18 at any one time.
2. Curb Cuts.
The two curb cuts which are on the 64th St. East side of the
property are 24 feet. These curbs are in very good condition.
To re-do them would be prohibitively expensive for this small
business. New curbs put in last..fall across the street are
also 24 feet. While all driveways on the street were not
measured, the applicant believes that there are no curb cuts.
in the immediate area which are 26 feet. The applicant
therefore respectfully requests that the 26 foot curb cut
requirement be waived.
3. Screening and buffering.
The entire front o the two lots which make up the subject
property is screened by a hedge several feet high. It is
well-maintained, as is the grass which surrounds it. There
is no screening on the small curb areas on 64th Street.
Those areas are blacktopped, which is in good condition. The
' l0 ,/D
i
Towhid Kazi
Page 3
June 3, 1988
owner of the building indicates that those areas were surfaced
with blacktop as required by the city when the blacktop was
installed. The applicant has offered to install further screening
on the fence which surrounds part of the parking area. It was
indicated to me that such screening would not be necessary, and
was not being requested at this time. Since cars parked in the
front of the building are screened. from the view of properties
to the west, and around the corner, it does not seem that much
more could be done to improve that situation. No other suggest-
ions have been made to me in my discussions on the matter. Re-
garding the screening on the north side of the lot, the applicant
feels that the present situation is neat and not at all unsightly,
and therefore requests that no further screening be required.
4. Site Drainage.
Currently, the site is drained by run off water going into the
storm drain at the northwest corner of the site on the Cedar
Avenue side of the property. In discussions with Mr. Eastling,
I have been unable to determine what additional requirements the
city might make, except the indication that underground drains
are required. To .install underground drains would require the
removal of approximately 50~ of the blacktop, regrading of the
area, so that effective drains could be installed. The cost
of such an installation cannot be borne by this business. I
have requested further information and alternative suggestions
from the engineering department, and will submit any further
information which may become available. The surface of the lots
are in very good condition, and I have been unable to determine
that any problem exists in the current drainage system.
5. Signs.
Signs in violation of the city ordinance have been removed. No
auto repair business is being conducted, so future signs will
be installed with appropriate permits, and accurately describe.
the rental business.
6. Building and Fire Codes.
The applicant is unaware of any violations of building or fire
codes, and will take immediate steps to correct any violations
which may develop.
7. Poor Condition Cars.
The applicant has made it a practice to remove damaged cars as
soon as possible. No damaged cars are ever stored in the front
lot. Cars are generally removed within a few hours, however, the
applicant is happy to comply with the staff request that cars
not be kept on the lot for more than 48 hours if they are not
in running condition, or have been damaged.
8. Utilization of Cars.
The applicant has asserted that the fleet of cars it owns is
approximately 30. Its business is renting cars, so they must
be rented out i.f the applicant is to stay in business. The
utilization rate averages approximately 80~. P•Zarch 1988 was
s ~~ - //
Towhid Y.azi
Page 4
June 3, 1988
a typical month. A copy of the March 1988 utilization record
is also included with the attached material.
If there are any other issues of concern to you or the planning
commission, I would ask that you contact me so that I can
provide whatever information you may require.
Thank you for your assistance in working through these issues.
Unfortunately, it will not be possible for this business to
afford all the items you have requested. I sincerely hope that
there will be a way for the business to continue to operate
in Richfield by reaching a compromise. on some of these items.
ery truly, yours,
.~ /'
JoAnne ankowski
PRO PG?F D
b 4 U 5 ~ ~ ! ~ A F~ ~=~ F~c ~ 5
. ~'~- ~~
CEDAR AVE S
Ex~~
~semPn't
~~i
ao
N
r
N.C.
5
(UGLY DUCKLING OFFICE
~ ~ ~
~ ~~~
U~Iy~cteKCns~C~h~~
W ~ ~
Q ~ '~~
C3
c~
103.8
\""
~~~~ TREE
A
"~-'~'- FENCE
~~'~ ~~'~ SHRUBS
~{,. t~TA.. /
W
N
t'~`? F~
~ ~~
RECOMMENDED
T
6405 CEDAR AVE S .
CEDAR AVE~ S
W
~ os.a'
1-
N
Z
i-
cQ
~~~9-• TREE
"~"~' FENCE
~ r. ' ~.f ..,.
~~;;~~y SHRUBS
~ fi? } °~.
i ,~
•.
'3.~ Drainage Plan
~ ~ F
~ M Off-Street Parking
C
'" o
~~~Q„~ ~
~~ `a;
/~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
,~ ~"` ~ '4
~, ~
r a'
~ 6
~ ~
,~ ~; t~fi
r'
S, d
~:,
r ~,
r-.~
`,- ~ ~ .,,
,.~ ~ i Ey
a
( r~
~ i ~~~ `~`~ 7~
i~
t ~~
~°
r ~
,, ~ ~ 1
~ ~y
t
~. ,-~
~~a~~~
'~
~ ~
7 ' /~. i /~
City of Richfield • 6700 Portland Avenue • Minnesota 55423
City Manager Mayor Council
James D. Prosser Steve Quam Edwina Garcia Ivan Ludeman
Martin Kirsch Michael Sandahl
July 28, 1988
JoAnne Jankowski
Holm & Jankowski
6901 78th Avenue North
Brooklyn Blvd at 78th
Brooklyn, Park,. MN 55445
Subject: Ugly Duckling Rent-A-Car at 6405 Cedar Avenue South
Dear Ms. Jankowski:
On July 25, 1988, the City Council at their regular meeting
continued the public hearing on the consideration of a
conditional use permit at 6405 Cedar Avenue for the Ugly Duckling
Rent-A-Car business. This action was taken due to your absence
at the public hearing. The City Council will hold the public
hearing on August 8, 1988.
Action will be taken at this meeting and you may appear if you so
desire. The public hearing will take place at 7:00 p.m.,
Richfield City Council Chambers, 6700 Portland Avenue.
If you have any questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
Towhid Kazi
Assistant City Planner
TK: jls
Telephone 869-7521 (612
An Equal Opportunity Employer
~-i~rr
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Memorandum
DATE: June 9, 1988
TO: Towhid Kazi, Assistant Planner
FROM: Mike Eastling, City Engineer
SUBJECT: 6405 Cedar - Drainage
A review of the drainage at 6405 Cedar reveals:
1) There is no on site catch basins to pick up on site drainage.
It has been city policy to require the installation of on site
catch basins with construction or revision to parking lots.
2) Some regrading of the site will be needed so that the lot
drains to the catch basin.
cc: Art Bailey
Don Fondrick
ME:pt
~' (~ - i ~
- City of Richfield • 6700 Portland Avenue • Minnesota 55423
City Manager Mayor Cpuncii
James O. Prosser Steve Guam Memh Kirscha M~chaendahl
May 13, 1988
Ms. Joanne Jankowski, Attorney
Holm & Jankowski
6901 78th Avenue North, Suite 104
Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
Subject: Ugly Duckling Rent-A-Car at 6405 Cedar Avenue South
Dear Ms. Jankowski:
As per our last conversation, you were to submit a revised site
plan for the Ugly Duckling .Rent-A-Car business at 6405 Gedar
Avenue by May 6, 1988. As of today I have not received the
revised site plan from you. Therefore, the conditional use
permit request for the subject operation can not be scheduled for
Planning Commission review on May 24, 1988.
I would like to inform you that the next Planning Commission
meeting will be on June 28, 1988. You are asked to submit the
revised .plan by June 6, 1988 for Planning Commission
consideration on June 28, 1988.
If you fail to submit your revised plan by June 6, 1988, the city
will take the appropriate measures to ensure that the Ugly
Duckling Rent-A-Car business cease operation at 6405 Cedar
Avenue.
Please call me if you have any questions.
_ Sincerely,
c~,~h~~'
Towhid Kazi
Assistant City Planner
TK:31s
cc: Mr. Eugene Jankowski, Manager
Ugly Duckling Rent-A-Car
6405 Cedar Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
Telephone 869-7521 (612)
An Equai Opportunity Employer
~'~~ ~ /~'
s ~ .
6405 CEDAR AVE. SO.
612/861-1555 RICHFIELD, MN 55423
March 30,.1088
Planning Commission
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield MN 55423
Dear Sirs:
This letter is to inform you as to the use Color Specialties
Inc. makes of the property at 5405 CedarAvenue South. Our
business is all done by phone order or mail order. The orders
come in and are filled by a part time person who works from
one to three hours per day. A secretary does all the other
necessary tasks here. UPS picks up all the orders being
shipped once each day.
My secretary, parks her car here all day. The part time
worker uses a bicycle in good weather, and a pick up the rest
of the year. The company has no local customers and has no
walk in, or drive in trade. In the past 12 years the company
has never needed any more personnel than that described above.
I, as the owner, spend from one to three hours a day at-the
office. We therefore, never park more than two vehicles
here at any-time.
I feel that the Ugly Duckling management runs a good clean
business and is an asset to this community. They always
strive to keep the area clean and in good order.
Cordially yours,
COLOR SPECIALTIES INCORPORATED
-.,-_-Y--~ ~
Harold 0. Toupin
President
' cc: Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, LTD
'. Attorney
' /
~. ~ ~,
F .; 'r i
.. I. i a.j. ~~. .: _ ...
~~ "~ ARBOR CONSTRt~CT10N~ .. .: ~ ~.,.. ~: , ~~ , ,-~ Y : _ -
~...~.r.yar` r_~.~Iai - ` ' A~~ -af.n+va.ailr '`. ~. "^rr: r~''~'~ .....e.~, ~..~.'a.~.....:.«irrr3~.ia:~-~`~•~eo'....
March 14, 1988
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423
To: Richfield City Planning Commission
In response to the public hearing notice for granting a conditional use permit.
for Ugly-Duckling Rent-a-Car, Inc, located at 6405 Cedar Avenue South.
I own the building across the street at 6345 Cedar and operate Arbor Construction
and Lawnmasters Landscaping Inc. fran that sight. My concern with a rental car
company would be the number of cars attempted to handle in such a limited space.
We need on street parking on our side of 64th for our business purposes.
If they are granted a conditional use permit, I feel strongly that they should
- not be allowed to have more vehichles than their parking lot can. handle.
My other concern would be the quality of the vehicles he has parked on his
lot or on the street. I feel it would be important that all vehicles be in
o~~erating condition.
Thank you very much.
~ ~~
Randy J. Johnson
C.E.O.
Arbor Construction
-~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 193
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Approve the resolution authorizing execution of a public services
agreement with South Hennepin Human Services Council for the
H.O.M.E. program, and authorizing assignment of administrative
responsibilities to Hennepin County..
Background:
On March 14, 1988, the City Council approved the CDBG Year XIV
allocation of $13,100 to the H.O.M.E. (Household and Outside
Maintenance for the Elderly) program. In 1987 H.O.M.E. provided
3,758 hours of homemaker, chore and maintenance services to 136
Richfield senior households.
Hennepin County has requested that Richfield turn over direct
administration of the project to the County with quarterly
reports to the City. The agreement is basically the same as in
prior years.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution authorizing execution of a public services
agreement with South Hennepin Human Services Council for the
H.O.M.E. program, and authorizing assignment of administrative
responsibilities to Hennepin County.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The agreement streamlines
procedure for the program.
the accounting and documentation
2. HUD local office has approved this procedure for auditing
purposes.
3. Eliminates one layer of bureaucracy in terms of financial
recordkeeping.
Alternative Recommendation:
Not approve the resolution. However, this would maintain the
present administrative procedure for which the City does not
receive any funds.
Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the consent calendar portion of the
August 8 council agenda.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP :sae
. nG/ ' /
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PUBLIC
SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN
SERVICES COUNCIL AND AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT OF
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES TO HENNEPIN COUNTY
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is an authorized subgrantee
participant in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development
Block Grant program by virtue of a Joint Cooperation Agreement
executed between the City and Hennepin County pursuant to the
provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1973,
Title I of public Law 93-383, as amended, and
WHEREAS, the City will utilize Block Grant funds to support
the H.O.M.E. Program as a public service activity in program year
XIV, and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to enter into a public
service agreement with the provider, South Hennepin Human
Services Council, and
WHEREAS, the public service agreement allows the City to
assign administrative responsibilities to another cooperating
unit.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the City Manager are
authorized to execute an agreement with South Hennepin Human
Services Council to provide financial support to the H.O.M.E.
Program, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City assigns its
administrative responsibility for this program to Hennepin County
through its Office of Planning and Development.
teven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
. _~_ ~ .Z,
This agreement made and entered into by and between the city of ~ ..
,hereinafter referred to as the "City" and South Hennepin HLnman
SeYVioes Caw~cil, a public service agency, hereinafter referred to as the
"Agency", for the PurPose.of Providing financial assistance to H.O.M.E.
(Household and Outside Maintrerjance for Elderly), hereinafter referred to as
the '~P1'~OCJrdm" .
Wf~RE'AS, the City is an authorized subgrantee Participant in the Urban
Hennepin Canty pity DeveloYamexit Block Grant program by virtue of a j oint
cooperation agreement executed betweexi the City and Hennepin Crnmty Pursuant
to MSA 471.59, and
WHEREAS, the City has allocated Urban Hennepin County C7oatntamity Develop-
ear. ,project rnmiber for the
went Block Grant funds in pt ~ ~Y ~ administered by,the Agency-
purpose of providing suppo
NdW Tf~RE, in consideration of the aa~tual covenants and Prcani-ses
contained in this Agreement, the Parties hereto mutually agree to the follow-
ing terms and conditions:
I
Zhe City agrees to Provide dollars in Urban Hennepin County
poan¢~auiity Development Block Grant funds to the Agency in support of the Pro-
~e City .reserves the right to assign achainistxative responsibilities pursuant.
to the C7ommunity Developomexit Block Grant Program to any other Cooperating
Unit.
II
'Ihe Agency agrees to administer the Program in aooordaix~e with the following
r~quir~ents
1. Household Ir~oame for households reoeivir~g assistance wider the Pro-
gram shall mat e~roeed 80 percent of the median household incc~~e by
household size established by the Department of Housing ar-d Urban
Devel,apanent (gyp) . Maximna annual household income for federal
Fiscal Year 1988 shall be:
one person - $22,700
t~ person - $25, 900
Zl~ese inoame figures shall remain in effect until they are revised by
HUD.
~ ~-_
2. Prior to receiving assistance fxnm the Program each huh°ld shall
receive, complete aryd submit an application (Attadvment A). This
applicatiari shall regnain in effect for twelve (12) months from the
date on the application. Verification of inooa-e will not~be
~~•
III
The Agency provides assuranc•,e that it will Damply with:
1. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (PL88-352) (Nondiscrimina-
tion in programs or activities receiving federal financial assis-
tance.)
2. Section 109 of the Housing arr7 Oaarramity Develapanent Act of 1974 as
amended. (Nondiscrimination in any program or activity subject to
provision of the HCDA.)
3. ONE Circular A-102 Attadunerit O, Sec,~tion 14, paragraph (h) by assur-
ing the subgrantee, federal grantor agency, the Comptroller General
of the United States or any duly authorized representative aooess to
all records directly pertinent to this oontxact for the purpose of
making audit examinations, excerpts and transcriptions.
4. OMB Circular A 102 Attad~¢nent C (2), and maintain all required
records for a period of three years after receiving final payment.
5. ~ Circular A-87 "Oast Principles for State and Ipcal Goverrm-ents."
IV
'Ihe Agency, prior to financial reimbursement frcm the City shall provide the
City with:
1. CDBG payment Request (H.O.M.E. form)
The Agency shall retain the following completed forms in the client file:
1. Client Application (annual)
2. Client Maintenance Service Plan
3. maker Program Task Sheet
Ztiese forms are attached hereto and made a part of this Agreea~'~t. Any
changes to these forms Host be mitually aclreed to.
V
This AgreemexYt is effective as of July 1, 1988, and shall continue in full
faros and effect until all funds made available under this agreement have been
expended, but rya later than December 31, 1989.
~ ~~~
Ild TES~Il~TY ~2EDF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed
their seals this day of - 198
Upon Proper execution,
this Agreegd~nt will be
legally valid and binding.
QTY OF
STATE OF N~OTA
BY Chair, South Hern~in H~m~an
SeYVioes Qau~cil
and
Executive Direc-tor, South
Hennepin Htunan SeYVioes Cbtu~Cil
CITY OF
By
Mayor
and
atr
Ii~AC~RE. DOC
~~~~~
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS
OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD
JANUARY 1, 1989 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1989
CITY PROJECT N0. 844
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. There is hereby established a special assessment
district, the boundaries of which are counterminous with the
Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area, for the purposes
of assessing for current services provided by the city.
2. The. following current services of the city are hereby
proposed to be undertaken by the city in the district, with the
cost of such services to be specially assessed against benefited
property within the district:
Snow, ice or rubbish removal;
Weed elimination;
Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards
from private property, excluding and structure included
under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15
to 463.26;
Installation or repair of water service lines;
Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets;
Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees;
Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks, and other pedestrian
walkways;
Operation of the street lighting system;
Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities
on or adjacent to street right-of-way;
Maintenance of Civic Plaza;
Snow removal and other maintenance of streets;
Painting and repair of wood furniture;
General maintenance, including repairs and replacement.
3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such
current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of
land within the district. It is proposed that special
assessments on commercial property be made on the basis of the
area with each square foot of assessable commercial property
within the district being assessed an equal amount for mainten-
ance of common area. Exempt from the special assessment levy
shall be all single family, two-family, multiple family
residential property within the L/H/N redevelopment district.
Special maintenance of individual commercial properties shall be
assessed directly for costs incurred in performing said
maintenance to said property.
~~/
.~"~
4. The city clerk is authorized and directed to give public
notice of a hearing by this council at which the council will
consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying
of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. The city clerk
shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing as
required by law. Such hearing shall be held on Monday, September
12, 1988, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the
matter can be reached on the agenda.
5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the
costs of the aforementioned services for the period of January 1,
1989 through December 31, 1989. The estimated cost of providing
all of the aforementioned current services during that period is
$48,796.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
„~,~r~
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION
OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LHN MAINTENANCE
JANUARY 1, 1987 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1987
CITY PROJECT N0. 830
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance of
the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (L/H/N) Redevelopment Area which is
approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street
and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield. Expenses incurred
or to be incurred for such maintenance amount to $45,694.16 for
the period of January 1, 1987 through December 31,1987.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited
property owners is declared to be $45,694.16.
2. The city clerk, with the assistance of the city engineer
and the operations coordinator, shall forthwith calculate
the proper amount to be specially assessed for such
maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of
land within the district affected, without regard to cash
valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such
proposed assessment in his office for public inspection.
3. The city clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
FOR L/H/N MAINTENANCE
JANUARY 1, 1987 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1987
CITY PROJECT N0, 830
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the
City of Richfield on August 8, 1988, the city clerk was directed
to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of maintaining the
Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (L/H/N) Redevelopment Area, that area which
is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th
Street and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
for the period of January 1, 1987 through December 31, 1987.
WHEREAS, the city clerk has notified the City Council that
such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his
office for public inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 12th day of September,
1988, in the council chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m.
to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and
place all persons owning property affected by said
maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be
heard in reference to such assessment.
2. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of
the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once
in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the
hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of
the maintenance. The city clerk shall also cause mailed
notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in
the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~~ ~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 192 A
Agenda:. August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution Relating to 1989 Maintenance Assessments, L/H/N
Redevelopment Area, City Project No. 844.
Background:
On January 26, 1981, the City Council adoptedResolution No. 6372,
which established a service in the L/H/N area (approximately
bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson
Avenue) would be specially assessed. The special assessment to
commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each
square foot of assessable commercial property within the district
being assessed an equal amount. All single family, two family.
and multiple family residential property within this area were
eliminated from the special assessment levy.
In 1982, agreements were reached with owners in the L/H/N area
related to maintenance of property. For the most part, each
owner was to be responsible for property to the curb while the
city is responsible for common areas such as street islands.
Although the city does do some maintenance work for individual
property owners, these costs are directly assessed to the
appropriate owner and maintenance of common areas continues to be
assessed to the entire district. Current maintenance services
for the district would include, but not necessarily be limited
to, one or more of the following:
1. Landscaping, including tree trimming
2. Sidewalk sweeping in the summer
3. Snow removal in the winter
4. Sidewalk deicing
5. Painting and repair of wood furniture
6. Trash removal
7. General maintenance, including repairs and replacement
8. Irrigation maintenance
These items are extra services provided directly to the L/H/N
Redevelopment Area and do not include services provided to the
entire city. For example, all city streets are swept twice a
year, and for this service there would be no charge to the L/H/N
maintenance assessment. However, any additional street sweeping
in the L/H/N area would be an assessable item.
1987 actual costs for these services were $45,694.16. Estimated
1988 costs are $47,796.00 and estimated 1989 costs are
$48,796.00.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached
Resolution proposing to specially assess for the costs of current
~~~ f-~-i
services provided within the L/H/N project area for the period of
January 1, 1989 through December 31, 1989, and to set the public
hearing date for September 19, 1988.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Resolution No. 6372, adopted in 1981, established a policy
for assessing the costs.
2. This policy allows staff to continue to provide excellent
service to the L/H/N Redevelopment Area.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose to establish a set rate and limit the
maintenance performed to that dollar amount; however, staff
believes the redevelopment area would suffer if limited
maintenance was performed.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Continued maintenance service for this commercial area is
recommended by staff in order to sustain the current standards
for landscaping and maintenance which have been successful over
the past years.
Respectf ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
Cit anager
JDP/tjk
v i/
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 192
Agenda August 8, 1988
the proposed assessm
Issue Statement:
Resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering
preparation of the proposed assessment roll for L/H/N
maintenance, and the Resolution setting the date of hearing on
ent for September 12, 1988.
Background:
City Staff has determined costs to be assessed for the
maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (L/H/N) Redevelopment
Area, City Project 830, the 1987 L/H/N Maintenance Project.
The actual cost for 1986 was $40,110.12.. Estimated costs for
1987 were $49,936.00. Actual 1987 costs amounted to $45,694.16.
Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and
ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and
setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering
preparation of the proposed assessment roll for L/H/N
maintenance, and the resolution setting the date of hearing on
the proposed assessment for September 12, 1988.
Basis of Recommendation:
Council ordered the work and the work is done.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed
necessary after the public hearing.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Hennepin County requires assessments to be certified to them by
October 10, 1988. Adopting the attached resolutions at this time
will-allow staff to complete all of the legal requirements in
order to meet .this deadline.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City Hager
JDP/tjk
Attachments
d ~
CITY OF RICIHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 191
Agenda, August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
1989 Alley Maintenance Special Assessment Project - City Project
No . 845
Oackground:
The alley policy adopted by the City Council in 1980 provides
that "all costs involved in maintaining an alley will be
assessed against the property abutting the alley." In 1981, the
maintenance functions to unpaved alleys covered sweeping,
cleaning of potholes and cold patching. In 1982 and years since,
the maintenance functions covered by this assessment included not
only repair work to unpaved alleys, but also an assessment to all
alleys, paved or unpaved, for snowplowing services.
The actual 1987 maintenance costs for all alleys totalled
$10,017.03 or approximately $5.39/per 50-foot lot. These
charges were primarily for sweeping. The mild winter of 1986-
1987 resulted in very low costs for snowplowing.
The 1988 estimates for alley maintenance are $17,000, or
approximately $7.50/per 50-foot lot on a paved alley. This
is anticipating increased snowplowing costs over 1987's actual
expenses.
As for 1989, the estimates are $20,000. for alley mainten-
ance or approximately $10.75 for a 50-foot lot. Again, $7.50/
per lot is the estimate for sweeping and a normal winter of
snowplowing. The additional $3.25/per lot is an estimate of
costs to initiate a concrete joint sealing maintenance program
on a paved alley as a part of routine maintenance.
Estimates of additional costs on unpaved alleys each year
has been about $23.00/per lot. Costs have varied depending on
the amount of patching required.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution which proposes to specially assess the costs
of 1989 services for alley maintenance and sets the public
hearing on this special assessment project for September 12,
1988.
Basis of Recommendation:
' _ 1. "Previously adopted policy mandates the assessments.
2. The project is feasible.
~J ~ ~
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council may choose to delay adoption of this resolution until the
next meeting; however, any further delay would cause scheduling
problems with legal notices required by Minnesota State Statute.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP/eja
~ co - °~..
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS
FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES
PROVIDED FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
JANUARY 1, 1989 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1989
CITY PROJECT N0. 845
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as
follows:
1. That area which includes the property which abuts improved alleys
in Richfield (the "District") is hereby established as a special
assessment district for the purpose of assessing for current
services provided by the City;
2. That the following current services of the city are hereby
proposed to be undertaken by the City in the District with the
cost of such services to be specially assessed against the
benefited property within the District: the maintenance and snow
plowing of alleys;
3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current
services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land
within the District. It is proposed that special assessments on
property be made on the basis of pro-rated share of assessable
abutting footage as defined in the alley improvement policy,
Resolution No. 6345;
4. The city clerk is authorized and directed to publish notice of a
public hearing by this council at which time the City Council will
consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying
of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. Such notice
shall be published in the official newspaper at least once and at
least two weeks prior to the date of hearing. Such hearing shall
be held on Monday, September 12, 1988, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or
as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda.
5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the
aforementioned services for the period from January 1, 1989
through December 31, 1989. The estimated cost of providing all of
the aforementioned current services during that period, using day
labor, is $20,000.00.
6. The project is feasible.
s
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 8th
day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~~ ~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 190
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Approval of Resolutions Declaring Costs to be Assessed for
Removal of Diseased Trees from Private Property for the Period
August 1, 1987 to July 31, 1988, and Setting Date of Hearing.
Background:
The costs incurred for the removal of Dutch Elm diseased trees on
private property for the period of August 1, 1987 to July 31,
1988 have been determined to be $10,500.93.
The property owner of a diseased tree has four options available:
1. Remove the tree themselves.
2. Hire and pay their own contractor.
3. Hire the City's contractor and pay for the removal within
30 days, or
4. Use the City's contractor and request that the cost of the
tree removal be assessed against their property tax.
In the period from August 1, 1987 to July 31, 1988, 29 property
owners chose the fourth option. The original source of funding
to have the work done is through the City's Permanent Improvement
Revolving Fund. The property owner may prepay the special
assessment, but if it is certified on or before October 10, 1988,
for the 1988 taxes, the interest rate is eight percent with
payment spread over three years.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution declaring costs to be assessed and
ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll, and the
resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment
for September 12, 1988.
Basis of Recommendlation:
1. The work has been done with prior approval from the affected
residents.
2. Minnesota State Statute requires the County to be notified of
all special assessments.
Alternative Recommendati®n:
Council may revise the special assessment roll as deemed
necessary following the public hearing.
~~-- ~ ~
Discussion/Decision Mode:
All work was performed with prior approval from homeowners.
Council may delay a decision until August 22, 1988, keeping in
mind the October 10, 1988 deadline for City certification.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP/eja
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING
PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES
FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF AUGUST 1, 1987 TO JULY
31, 1988.
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the removal of
diseased trees from the following private properties in the City
of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such
work during the period of August 1, 1987 through July 31, 1988
amount to $10,500.93.
Property_Address
2832 West 70-1/2 Street
6507 Bloomington Avenue
6608 Second Avenue
6629 Morgan Avenue
6314 Standish Avenue
7333 Tenth Avenue
6625 Second Avenue
6244 Aldrich Avenue
6844 Newton Avenue
7101 Penn Avenue
6625 Lynwood Avenue
6836 Upton Avenue
7601 Morgan Avenue
7609 Xerxes Avenue
6305 Bloomington Avenue
6327 13th Avenue
6326 14th Avenue
6630 Humboldt Avenue
7500 Girard Avenue
6609 Girard Avenue
6840 Washburn Avenue
7321 Oliver Avenue
6946 Irving Avenue
6932 Fourth Avenue
6244 Aldrich Avenue
6421 14th Avenue
6639 Logan Avenue
7021 Fifth Avenue
6328 21st Avenue
6633 Lynwood Boulevard
Property Identification Number
32-028-24-12-0062
26-028-24-14-0116
27-028-24-42-0067
28-028024-32-0010
25-028-24-21-0029
35-028-24-24-0043
27-028-24-42-0082
28-028-24-11-0023
28-028-24-33-0140
33-028-24-22-0127
28-028-24-41-0030
29-028-24-43-0034
33-028-24-33-0090
32-028-24-43-0055
26-028-24-11-0031
26-028-24-12-0147
26-028-24-12-0140
28-028-24-31-0084
23-028-24-42-0067
28-028-24-42-0029
29-028-24-43-0083
33-028-24-23-0071
28-028-24-34-0095
27-028-24-44-0105
28-028-24-11-0023
26-028-24-13-0069
28-028-24-31-0052
34-028-24-11-0083
25-028-24-22-0055
28-028-24-41-0032
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. The total cast to be assessed against benefited
property owners is declared to be $10,500.93.
2. The city clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper
amount to be specially assessed for such work against each
~ ~cv-~-
benefited property, and shall file a copy of such proposed
assessment in his office for public inspection.
3. The clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed
assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THIS 8TH DAY
OF AUGUST, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~~~~~' ~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR DISEASED TREE
REMOVAL FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 1987 TO
JULY 31, 1988.
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Couneil of the
City of Richfield on August 8, 1988, the city clerk was directed
to prepare the assessment of the cost of removing diseased trees
from the following private properties in the City of Richfield
for the period August 1, 1987 through July 31, 1988:
Property Address
Property Identification Number
2832 West 70-1/2 Street
6507 Bloomington Avenue
6608 Second Avenue
6629 Morgan Avenue
6314 Standish Avenue
7333 Tenth Avenue
6625 Second Avenue
6244 Aldrich Avenue
6844 Newton Avenue
7101 Penn Avenue
6625 Lynwood Avenue
6836 Upton Avenue
7601 Morgan Avenue
7609 Xerxes Avenue
6305 Bloomington Avenue
6327 13th Avenue
6326 14th Avenue
6630 Humboldt Avenue
7500 Girard Avenue
6609 Girard Avenue
6840 Washburn Avenue
7321 Oliver Avenue
6946 Irving Avenue
6932 Fourth Avenue
6244 Aldrich Avenue
6421 14th Avenue
6639 Logan Avenue
7021 Fifth Avenue
6328 21st Avenue
6633 Lynwood Boulevard
32-028-24-12-0062
26-028-24-14-0116
27-028-24-42-0067
28-028024-32-0010
25-028-24-21-0029
35-028-24-24-0043
27-028-24-42-0082
28-028-24-11-0023
28-028-24-33-0140
33-028-24-22-0127
28-028-24-41-0030
29-028-24-43-0034
33-028-24-33-0090
32-028-24-43-0055
26-028-24-11-0031
26-028-24-12-0147
26-028-24-12-0140
28-028-24-31-0084
23-028-24-42-0067
28-028-24-42-0029
29-028-24-43-0083
33-028-24-23-0071
28-028-24-34-0095
27-028-24-44-0105
28-028-24-11-0023
26-028-24-13-0069
28-028-24-31-0052
34-028-24-11-0083
25-028-24-22-0055
28-028-24-41-0032
WHEREAS, the city clerk has notified the City Council that
such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his
office for public inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 12th day of September,
.. ~ ~~
1988, in the city hall council chambers at 7 p.m., or as soon as
thereafter as it may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such
proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons awning
property affected by said diseased tree removal assessment will
be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such
assessment.
2. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of
the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in
the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing,
and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the diseased
tree removal. He shall also cause mailed notice to be given to
the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not
less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,
MINNESOTA THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~' .,~ ~ \
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 189
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution Relating to Maintenance Assessments, Interstate/Lyndale/Nicoll~t
Project Area (I/L/N) City Project No. 846.
Background:
On March 14, 1988, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7405
establishing a policy that the actual cost of performing current
maintenance services in the I/L/N Project Area, that area approximately
bounded by Lyndale on the east and 77th Street on the south, would be
assessed.
The special assessment. to .multiple residential and commercial property
would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable
property within the district being assessed an equal amount.
Current maintenance services for the district would. include, but not
necessarily be limited to, the following:
1. Landscape maihtenance of common properties including,
tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing and edging.
2. Irrigation maintenance.
3. Painting and repair of wood furniture.
4. Trash removal and general maintenance including repair and
replacement of lights, sidewalks, curbs, furniture and plantings.
These items are extra services provided directly to the I/L/N Project Area
and do not include services provided to the entire City. The estimated
cost for this additional maintenance is $6,700 annually.
Recommended Notion:
Adopt the attached Resolution proposing to specially assess the I/L/N
Project Area for the period of January 1, 1989 through December 31, 1989,
and to set the public hearing date for September 12, X988.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a policy for
assessing the costs.
2. This policy will allow staff to continue to provide excellent .
service to the I/L/N Project Area.
Alternative Recommendation:
The City Council may choose to establish a set rate and limit the
maintenance performed to that dollar amount; however, staff believes the
redevelopment area would suffer if limited maintenance was performed.
';~ -L -~
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Continued maintenance service for this area is recommended by staff in
order to sustain current standards for landscaping and maintenance. Action
on this item should be taken at this time to meet the requirements for the
public hearing date.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP/sae
Resolution No.
RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES
PROVIDED WITHIN THE INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET PROJECT AREA
FOR THE PERIOD 3ANUARY 1, 1989 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1989.
CITY PROJECT NO. 846
BE TT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as
follows:
1. There is hereby established a special assessment district, the
boundaries of which are Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks
and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property
Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, for the purposes of assessing for
current services provided by the City.
2. The following current services of the City are hereby proposed to be
undertaken by the City in the district, with the cost of such services to
be specially assessed against benefited commercial and multiple residential
property within the district include, but are not necessarily limited to,
the following:
Landscape maintenance of common properties; including, but not
limited to, tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing, edging;
Irrigation maintenance;
Painting and repair of wood furniture;
Trash removal and general maintenance; including, but not
limited to, repairs and replacement of lights, sidewalks,
curbs, furniture, plantings.
!'7~ ~ /o oC
3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services
consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the district.
It is proposed that special assessments on commercial and multiple
residential property be made on the basis of the area with each square foot
of assessable property within the district 'being assessed an equal amount
for maintenance of common area.
4. The city clerk is authorized and directed to give notice of a hearing
by this. council at which time the City Council will consider the
undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments
to bear the costs thereof. The city clerk shall give mailed and published
notice of such hearing as required by law. Such hearing shall be held on
Monday, September 12, 1988, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter
as the matter can be reached on the agenda.
5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the
aforementioned services for the period of January 1, 1989 through December
31, 1989. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned
current services during that period is $6,700.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day
of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
T, ^ ~ ~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 188
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed for Alley Maintenance
and Snowplowing for the Period January 1, 1987 to December 1,
1987, and Resolution Setting a Public Hearing Date for City
Project No. 831, 1987 Alley Maintenance.
Background:
The costs incurred for alley
period of January 1, 1987 to
determined to be $10,017.13.
$11,834.29, and the estimated
maintenance and snowplowing for the
December 31, 1987 have been
The actual cost in 1986 was
1987 cost amounted to $7,000.
Property owners on permanently paved concrete alleys are assessed
for snowplowing only, while property owners on all other alleys
are assessed actual maintenance costs and snowplowing costs for
their individual alley.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and
ordering the preparation of .the proposed assessment roll and the
resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment
for September 12, 1988.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Council ordered this work to be done.
2. State statute requires assessments to be certified to the
County by October 10, 1988; and adoption of the resolutions
at this time will allow staff sufficient time to complete
necessary legal requirements in order to meet this deadline.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may revise the special assessment roll as deemed
necessary after the public hearing.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council may choose to delay action on the attached resolutions.
However,.MiSchedulintaproblemsemayroccurp ebeyondnattwosweek delayc
meetings 9
Respectf ly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:tjk
~ "/J
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING
PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1987 ALLEY MAINTENANCE
AND SNOWPLOWING - CITY PROJECT NO. 831.
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance and
snowplowing of the following alleys in the City of Richfield.
The expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance
and snowplowing for the period of January 1, 1987 through
December 31, 1987 amount to $10,017.13.
ding Avenues Surrounding Streets
Number Surroun
1001 Xerxes - Washburn 66th - 67th
1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th - 68th
1003 Xerxes - Washburn 68th - 69th
1004 Xerxes - Washburn 69th - 70th
1005 Washburn - Vincent 66th - 67th
1006 Washburn - Vincent 67th - 68th
1007 Washburn - Vincent 68th - 69th
1008 Washburn - Vincent 69th - 70th
1009 Vincent - Upton 66th - 67th
1010 Vincent - Upton 67th - 68th
1011 Vincent - Upton 68th - 69th
1012 Vincent - Upton 69th - 70th
1013 Upton - Thomas 66th - 67th
1014 Upton - Thomas 68th - 69th
1015 Upton - Thomas 69th - 70th
~~ .~ ~
1016 Thomas - Sheridan 66th - 67th
1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th - 68th
1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th - 69th
1018 Thomas - Sheridan 69th - 70th
1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th - 67th
1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th - 68th
1022 Sheridan - Russell 68th - 69th
1023 Sheridan - Russell 69th - 70th
1024 Russell - Queen 66th - 67th
1025 Russell - Queen 67th - 68th
1026 Russell - Queen 68th - 69th
1027 Russell - Queen 69th - 70th
1028 Queen - Penn 66th - 67th
1029 Queen - Penn 67th - 68th
1030 Queen - Penn 68th - 69th
1031 Queen - Penn 69th - 70th
2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd - 64th
2002 Oliver - Newton 63rd - 64th
2004 Morgan - Logan 63rd - 64th
2005 Logan - Knox 63rd - 64th
2007 James - Irving 63rd - 64th
2008 Irving - Humboldt 63rd - 64th
2009 Humboldt - Girard 63rd - 64th
2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd - 64th
2011 Girard - Fremont (35W} 64th - 65th
2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th - 66th
~ ~~
2013 Fremont (35W} - Emerson 64th - 65th
2014 Fremont (35W} - Emerson 65th - 66th
2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred
2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred
2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred
2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr
2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th
2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th
3002 Lyndale - Garfield 6$th - 69th
3003 Augusburg - Garfield 70th - 71th
3004 Augusburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd
3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72rd - 73th
3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th
3007 Garfield - Harriet 71st - 72nd
3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd
3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th
3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th
3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th
3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd
3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th
3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th - 69th
3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd
3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th
3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd
3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th
3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th
~~
3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th
3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th
3025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st
3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd
3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd
3029 1st - Stevens 72nd - 73rd
3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd
3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3032 2nd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th
3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd
3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th
3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th
3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th
3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th
3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th
3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th
4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th
4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd
4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd
4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th
4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th
4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th
4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th
4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th
QJ U d
4010 19th - 20th Avenue 65th - 66th
4012 22nd - Standish 65th - 66th
4013 13th - 14th Avenue 66th - 67th
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited
property owners is declared to be $10,017.13.
2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper
amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance against
every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected,
without regard to cash valuation as provided by law, and
shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office
for public inspection.
3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed
assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
v
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1987
ALLEY MAINTENANCE - CITY PROJECT NO. 831
WHEREAS, by a resolution passes by the City Council of the
City of Richfield on August 8, 1988, the City Clerk was directed
to prepare assessment of the cost of maintaining the following
alleys in the City of Richfield for the period of January 1, 1987
through December 31, 1987.
Number Surrounding Avenues Surrounding Streets
1001 Xerxes - Washburn 66th - 67th
1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th - 68th
1003 Xerxes - Washburn 68th - 69th
1004 Xerxes - Washburn 69th - 70th
1005 Washburn - Vincent 66th - 67th
1006 Washburn - Vincent 67th - 68th
1007 Washburn - Vincent 68th - 69th
1008 Washburn - Vincent 69th - 70th
1009 Vincent - Upton 66th - 67th
1010 Vincent - Upton 67th - 68th
1011 Vincent - Upton 68th - 69th
1012 Vincent - Upton 69th - 70th
1013 Upton - Thomas 66th - 67th
1014 Upton - Thomas 68th - 69th
1015 Upton - Thomas 69th - 70th
1016 Thomas - Sheridan 66th - 67th
1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th - 68th
1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th - 69th
1019 Thomas - Sheridan 69th - 70th
1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th - 67th
1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th - 68th
1022 Sheridan - Russell 68th - 69th
1023 Sheridan - Russell 69th - 70th
1024 Russell - Queen 66th - 67th
1025 Russell - Queen 67th - 68th
2026 Russell - Queen 68th - 69th
1027 Russell - Queen 69th - 70th
2028 Queen - Penn 66th - 67th
1029 Queen - Penn 67th - 68th
1030 Queen - Penn 68th - 69th
1032 Queen - Penn 69th - 70th
2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd - 64th
2002 Oliver - Newton 63rd - 64th
2004 Morgan - Logan 63rd - 64th
2005 Logan - Knox 63rd - 64th
2007 James - Irving 63rd - 64th
2008 Irving - Humboldt 63rd - 64th
2009 Humboldt - Girard 63rd - 64th
2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd - 64th
2011 Girard - Fremont (35W) 64th - 65th
2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th - 66th
~ -~- O
2013 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 64th - 65th
2014 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 65th - 66th
2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred
2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred
2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred
2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr
2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th
2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th
3002 Lyndale - Garfield 68th - 69th
3003 Augusburg - Garfield 70th - 71th
3004 Augusburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd
3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72rd - 73th
3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th
300? Garfield - Harriet 71st - 72nd
3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd
3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th
3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th
3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th
3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd
3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th
3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th - 69th
3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd
3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th
3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd
3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th
3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th
'~"~~/
3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th
3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th
8025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st
3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd
3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd
3029 1st - Stevens 72nd - 73rd
3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd
3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3032 Znd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th
3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd
3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd
3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th
3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th
3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th
3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th
3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th
3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th
4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th
4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd
4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd
4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th
4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th
4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th
40pg Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th
4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th
~~ " ~Pi'
4010 19th - 20th Avenue 65th - 66th
4012 22nd - Standish 65th - 66th
4013 13th - 14th Avenue 66th - 67th
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that
such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his
office for public inspection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 12th day of September,
1988, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. or
as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached on the agenda,
to pass upon such proposed assessment. At such time and place
all persons owning property affected by said maintenance
assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference
to such assessment.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of
the hearing on the proposed assessment~to be published once in
the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing.
He shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance,
and also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each
parcel described in the assessment roll, not less than two weeks
prior to the hearing.
`~~ s~-~/
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 8th day of August, 1988.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
r~ -`
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No •1988
Agenda August 8,
Issue Statement:
Resolution Providing for Polling Places and Designating Election.
Judges for the September 13, 1988 Primary Election
Background:
Minnesota Statute 2048.21, Subd. 2 provides ointedlbytthe fudges
for precincts in a municipality shall be app
governing bsdty25fdahs beforepthetelecdtionaattwhichpthetelection
made at lea Y
judges will serve.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council adoptointinttelecaion
resolution designating polling places and app 9
judges for the primary election to be held on Tuesday, September
13, 1988.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Compliance with Minnesota Statute 2048.21, Subd. 2
-,2. The proposed resolution contains names of those who have
indicated a willingness and ability to serve as an election
judge for the September 13, 1988 Primary Election. The
names come from a pool of about 200 people who have
indicated their interest in serving as an election judge to
the County Auditor and City Clerk.
Alternative Recommendation: Dint others who are not
1. The City Council could chose to app
named in the resolution.
2. If the City Council does not appoint election judges, the
conduct of the election would not be valid.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City Council is required by state statute to make election
judge appointments at least 25 days prior to the election.
Therefore, it is recommended the City Council pass the attached
resolution at this meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
J DP :sae
~,
~ i~ ~
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR POLLING PLACES
AND DESIGNATING JUDGES FOR THE PRIMARY
ELECTION OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
MHEREAS, a primary election will be held on Tuesday,
September 13, 1988.
NOM, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, that said election shall be held at the
polling places as herein appear specified:
Precinct No. 1 Mt. Calvary Education Building
6541 16th Avenue
Precinct No. 2 St. Peter's Catholic Church
6720 Nicollet Avenue
Precinct No. 3 Sheridan Hills School
x 6400 Sheridan Avenue
Precinct No. 4 St. Richard's Catholic Church
7540 Penn Avenue
Precinct No. 5 Richfield Junior High School
7461 Oliver Avenue
Precinct No. 6 Central School Building
7145 Harriet Avenue
Precinct No. 7 Hope Presbyterian Church Facility
7201 4th Avenue
Precinct No. 8 Richfield Intermediate School
7000 12th Avenue
Precinct No. 9 Centennial School
7315 Bloomington Avenue
~~~i~
Re5~lution o.
Page 2
and, that the following are hereby appointed as judges for
said election:
Shirley Gisselquist (DFL)
Ralph Roberts (IR)
Bernice Utter (DFL)
Martha Grace (DFL)
Edith Nye (IR)
Elaine Gilhousen (IR)
Fern Oreck (DFL)
Margaret Fleming (DFL)
Ann Eid (IR)
Frederick Moore (DFL)
Lem Cotterman (IR)
Jan Andersen (IR)
Linda Bloomgren (DFL)
Bob Mack (DFL)
Alvina Mjelre (IR)
Jean Fay (DFL)
Catherine Alfano (DFL)
Jacklyn Schwab (DFL)
Beverly Clark (DFL)
Sue Raymond (IR)
Linda Boyd (IR)
Garnett Kirchner (IR)
Corrine Cosgrove (DFL)
Beverly Welsh (DFL)
Rosemary Koelln (IR)
Irene Anderson (IR)
David Ophoven (DFL)
Alternates:
Edward Eastman (DFL)
Olga Kelash (DFL)
Barb Kmetz (DFL)
William Bullock (IR)
Carol Tulikamgas (DFL)
Lucille Gilberstad (DFL)
Dee Wilcox (IR)
Phyllis Reinmuth (IR)
Lois Karnas (IR)
Howard Mortenson (IR)
Angela Aylward (DFL)
Donna Jordahl (DFL)
Ruth Cook (DFL)
Vivian Bennis (IR)
Betty Halloran (IR)
Ida Mae Hoyne (IR)
Muriel Bernstein (DFL)
Patricia Medley (DFL)
Warren Olson (DFL)
Donna Vidas (IR)
Jeanne Frenz (IR)
Betty Funk (IR)
Pat Brenner (DFL)
Vernette Carlson (DFL)
Marvis Spencer (DFL)
Gertrude Herll (DFL)
Audrey Winslow (IR)
Marron Horning (DFL)
Ilene Holen (IR)
Stephanie Muenzhuber (DFL)
Barb Cook (DFL)
Marion Anderson (IR)
Sue Lewis ( IR)
Clara Darsow (DFL)
Thomas Muilenberg (IR)
Eric Fulderson (DFL)
Orin Sandberg (IR)
Claire Todd (DFL)
Alta Harmon (DFL)
PASSED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th
day of August, 1988.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Quam Mayor
I 1 y er
Thomas P. Ferber
_.~
_.. _ _ __
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MIIMIWESOTA
Council Letter No. 186
Agenda August 8, 1988
.Issue Statement:
Presentation of the FRtYfor FiscaleYearoEpdedeDecembern3l, 1987.
Financial Report (CA )
Backclround: Haskins & Sells completed
The City's auditing firm of Deloitte,
the audit of the City's fiscal year ending December 31, 1987 late
in June. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report was
subsequently submitted to OfficerseAssociationtforscompliancdeand
to the Government Financ
review.
At the City Council Study Session of August 1, 1988,
representatives from Deloitte, Haskins & Sells made a detailed
presentation of the financial report to the City Council and
answered any questions concerning the report. The action to be
taken at the August 8, 1988 meeting is the official receipt of
the CAFR by the City Council.
" Recommendation:
is recommended that the City Council accept the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report of the City for the year ending
December 31, 1987.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The City's Auditor has performed an audit of the City's
financial records for the year ending December 31, 1987 and
is making a report to the City Council concerning legal
compliance and internal control.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could ask the auditors for further
explanation of their findings.
Discussion/Decision Mode: g 1988 Cit
Action on this item is requested at the Au ust 8, Y
Council meeting. aTheuRspant tosState paWViously submitted to the
State of Minnesot , p
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Ci Manager
,,~. _ sae
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 185.
Agenda August 8, 1988
Issue Statement:
Proclamation designating the City of Richfield's support for the
United Way Campaign.
Backclround:
The 1989 United Way campaign in the Richfield area will be
conducted from September 12 through September 23, 1988.
Ms. Libby Carrier, United Way representative, has requested that
the City formally show its support for this campaign through the
issuance of a proclamation.
Recommended Motion:
Present a proclamation supporting the United Way and the United
Way Campaign to Ms. Libby Carrier.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Ms. Carrier will be present at the August 8, 1988 City
Council meeting to receive this proclamation.
The City Council has supported United Way activities in the
past.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not present the proclamation.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been scheduled on the Presentation section of the
August 8, 1988 City Council agenda.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP/sae
~/ /
,lty _.zsolution for 1988 Richfield Community Campaign
WHEREAS the United Way of Minneapolis Area currently provides
funding to more than 360 programs in 116 agencies, many
of which are located in and serving suburban
communities. For example, agencies in Richfield range
from Storefront / Youth Action, which provides
counseling for adolescent victims of physical abuse as
well as family education programs, to Emergency Food
Shelves in Hennepin County, which coordinates food
shelf networks, to American Red Cross, whose programs
include health services in disaster situations and
safety programs for today's "latchkey" children; and
WHEREAS the efforts of thousands of community volunteers enable
the United Way to maintain fundraising and
administrative costs at under ten cents to a dollar;
and
WHEREAS in 1988 funds are being distributed to quality programs
that reach more people in suburban communities. The
United Way works with county planning boards and
private planning groups to identify gaps in services in
a continuing effort to meet the comprehensive needs of
people in the six county service area;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of Richfield
hereby support the United Way's Hopkins Community
Campaign from September 12 .through September 23, 1988,
and encourage local businesses and their employees to
participate in this event.
LC/lb
7/28/88