08-03-87 agenda•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 2:
August 3, 1987
Issue Statement:
Presentation of the annual financial report for the fiscal year
ending December 31, 1986.
Background:
The annual Financial Report for the period ending December 31,
1986 was recently completed by the Administrative Services
Department. The audited Financial Report which accompanies this
letter, as well as the management letter from the city's
auditors, Deloitte, Haskins and Sells, will be reviewed in detail
by the auditors at the August. 3 study session.
As Council Members may be aware, the city received a reduced
audit fee in return for approval of the auditors to delay their
audit work until after April 15. For the 1986 fiscal year, the
city experienced a number of computer problems which forced a
further delay of the Financial Report and audit past its normal
period. Nevertheless, the city's annual Financial Report has
been submitted to the State of Minnesota in a timely manner and
• has also been submitted to the Government Finance Officers
Association for application of a Certificate Award.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP/eja
0
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 24
August 3, 1987
Issue Statement:
Joint meeting of the Richfield Planning Commission with the
Richfield City.Council
Background:
On Monday, August 3, 1987 the City Council will meet with the
Richfield Planning Commission to discuss past and future
activities of the commission. Attached for information of the
City Council is information regarding past activities during the
January, 1986-June 30, 1987 period.
Recommendation:
Meet with the Planning Commission to discuss their activities.
Decision Mode:
This discussion has been scheduled as the second item on the
August 3, 1987 study session agenda.
• Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City anager
JDP/eja
0
•
•
•
N H C) (7 O
O W A) O
In 'O 3 Cl
r :E r 'O P.
to 4-- w CD w
\D r _-y D
O J CD 0
y H D CD
O. n 3 to
r O O r• w
D y y < 3
D) y O CD CD
r < D
n O" CD 'D C1
(D O 3 r 3
y CD w CD
,[3 D >
CD N ct
I-- rt
w c "0 N
c+ CL I-, CA
CD `< w c ?-'
CL D CD In
.. CA
N N
CA N
c (T
CD
O r•
.. D
w
C2
C1
W
c+
r•
O
D
('+
O
CT
D
CD
r•
to
zr
6
O
O
O
O.
3
(D
CD
c-t
r•
tO
N
C F- c I- CD CD O
0 F C7 w N +y CD
CD C1 r+ O 3 n
*< P. c+ D r r
< r• P. c+ w
< r• > > ?-
w cA to to
n r• C
w O W
ct CD
r
O
Z
N
N In N R CO
C7 -i
w 1-,-
(A-0
CD CD
U) N
O
--I
O
c+
w
F-'
N
O
N•
In
C7
w
U)
cD
CA
---- -- -- -- -- ----- ---- ---
,C) X D
I 'O CD 7
I-• N 1-r W co h n r•
O O N D
< 3 c t CO
' w 3 w
F- CD 4 (7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - D -t) O
0 OL 3
Z CD w 3
\ N I--? o I•- N 3 c•+ r•
w O N
N O r•
O
- 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n
0
n c+
-O r•
r T
V
<
I-? N W I--• N In y CD ? I.-
O n CD c-t
< O 'O I-
w 3 -u O CD
F-' 3 ('? y N
(D c+
--- --- -- -- -- ---- ----- D ^
CL
O w w
Z CD ct D
\ N I? O N In 7 r
n f''. O
w D ??
Cb
CT
--- -- --- - --- ---- ----- --- I
C-i
n c
_0 :3
'o CD
F-- y n
I-• W W t- W In O 0 W
< c+ C) O
w P. C)
N O
,_ -. ?._ - ---_ -? _ - _--- ----- 3 I--
0
(D OD
Z D v
\ F- N O 1-- N r
D w
N
-----
---
co
CD
c+
f D
F-• N CD (O
Z ?J J O CT O CD y
\ Vt W - O (\ o O CD
D OR aR aE ae a2
C7 3
C-) CD
Z)
P. rt
"O
n
. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 23
August 3, 1987
Issue Statement:
Review of enforcement action relating to McCarthy Oldsmobile
parking on boulevard, parking on city owned right-of-way, and
fire codes, and Feldman Imports parking on state owned right-of-
way, parking on boulevard, placement of signs on state right-of-
way, use of adjoining properties (car wash) for display and
storage of vehicles without proper zoning; noncompliance with
offstreet parking permit.
Background:
Several months ago, staff initiated enforcement action against
Wally McCarthy Oldsmobile for violation of the city ordinance
which does not permit parking of vehicles on boulevards, and also
for use of city owned property for display and storage of
vehicles. The City Council was advised of action at study
sessions in November, 1986, and February, 1987; and also through
an S&I article on May 22, 1987 and 4/9/87 meeting notes
distributed to the Council.
The fire code violations related to a dispute between the city
and McCarthy Oldsmobile. The dispute began in 1982 when McCarthy
• remodeled his facility by incorporating the Belt Line Bar
facility into the showroom without benefit of building permits.
McCarthy refused to obtain building permits, since he did not
wish to comply with city ordinances relating to handicap
accessibility and fire codes.
Staff had conducted several discussions with McCarthy prior to
September of 1986 regarding enforcement. However, for various
reasons, no formal enforcement action was initiated against Mr.
McCarthy. In November, 1986 enforcement action was re-initiated
by city staff. The staff met with McCarthy representatives on
four separate occasions to explain reasons behind enforcement
actions and to provide McCarthy with an opportunity to review the
matter. At that time, McCarthy was also advised that parking on
city owned property would no longer be permitted without benefit
of a parking agreement and agreement by McCarthy to move vehicles
at least ten feet from the curb line and landscaping of the ten
foot buffer.
The purpose of the landscaping was to improve appearance, and to
provide an area that would be less likely to be used for parking.
Enforcement was part of a general effort to improve appearance of
automobile dealerships in Richfield and to provide a standard
more close to the norm for auto dealerships in surrounding
communities.
• After protracted discussions with Mr. McCarthy, he apparently did
agree to undertake fire code and landscaping improvements.
However, subsequent to that.apparent agreement, Mr. McCarthy has
requested that the matter be reviewed by the City Council. For
parity sake, it was also suggested that the Feldman violations be
presented to the City Council.
Feldman violations include:
(1) Recent use of adjoining property east of 920 W. 78th Street
for storage and display of vehicles without benefit
of proper zoning. Feldman was advised of violations, and
requested relief on the basis that his business had
expanded faster than anticipated, and that he would be
unable to obtain proper zoning because of the new C-3
zoning classification.
(2) City staff had received a complaint from Dr. Mackie of
Cutler Animal Hospital, regarding placement of Feldman's
signs. Mackie complained to the city that Feldman's signs
were not on Feldman property, while Mackie had been
required to place his signs on his own property.
Investigation by staff of complaint indicated that Mackie
was apparently correct and the signs had not been properly
placed on their lot. Feldman was advised of this fact and
requested to relocate the signs. As an alternative,
Feldman was provided the opportunity to prove to the city
that the signs were on private property and not on the
right-of-way. As of July 30, the signs have not been
relocated.
• (3) Again, based upon complaints, the city staff investigated
parking at Feldman Imports and determined that parking in
front of business at 1912 West 77 1/2 Street was in
violation of the offstreet parking permit. As a routine
matter, Feldman was advised to correct this matter, and
also advised that further violations may lead to revocation
of his offstreet parking permit.
(4) As part of routine enforcement action, city staff
investigated parking of vehicles on boulevard and on state
owned property by Feldman. Feldman was requested to remove
vehicles off the right-of-way, or enter into an agreement
with'.the state to permit vehicles to be parked on state
r>ght-o f.-way,: anti to take appropriate:landscaping as a
bu-ffer.:. It should.b-e noted that landscaping was also part
of the offstreet parking requirements.
Letters outlining the enforcement requirements for McCarthy and
Feldman are attached. Also attached is an S&I article indicating
a summary of meeting with Feldman on these matters.
Staff Recommendation:
Continue enforcement action as initiated.
0
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Consistent enforcement of city codes, especially as relates
to businesses, will help improve business climate in the
community and establish greater credibility that the city
will help maintain a positive commercial appearance.
2. Enforcement of the codes in question appear to be reasonable,
at least in the opinion of staff, while enforcement relating
to boulevard parking is clearly a new initiative. That
initiative was taken by the Council for the Walser
Corporation and extended to other car dealerships after
discussions between staff and Council.
3. Enforcement of fire code violations for McCarthy is an
essential life safety issue. Not only is there a significant
property loss potential without adequate fire protection, but
more importantly, there are life safety issues for customers,
workers of McCarthy's, and firefighters who would attempt to
protect that building.
4. Disregard for city building codes by Mr. McCarthy
seriously undermines the overall effectiveness and
credibility of building code enforcement. Rather than
providing "exceptions" for special cases, it is strongly
suggested that problems regarding code enforcement be
presented by Council Members as part of a proposal to amend
ordinances as appropriate.
• Alternative Recommendation:
1. If the Council chooses to not enforce any or all of the
actions initiated against Feldman or McCarthy, it is
recommended that the City Attorney review the need to amend
ordinances accordingly.
2. Continued efforts to establish landscape areas on boulevards
is not specifically a code enforcement item, and could be
abandoned.
Discussion Mode:
This matter is scheduled for discussion at the study session of
August 3, 1987. Enforcement.action relating to these items has
been suspended pending council discussion and direction.
Respe t u ly submitted,
Jam s D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP/eja
0
city Of
.
richfield
6700 portland avenue ¦ minnesota 55423
May , 1966
Mr. John Dean
r
LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy,
O'Brien and Drawz
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Mr. Dean:
This is to summarize the position of the City of Richfield
regarding the building and fire code compliance issues which we
are seeking to resolve for the Wally McCarthy's Lindahl
Oldsmobile buildings at 1900 W. 78th Street.
The first two items concern the allowable area of the building
and the separation of the occupancy classifications within it.
The issues of total building area and occupancy classification
are interrelated. The total allowable area of a building depends
upon the occupancy classifications within it. The less hazardous
occupancy classifications are allowed larger building areas than
the more hazardous occupancy classifications.
The State Building Code sets maximum area sizes for buildings
based upon the type of construction and the uses of the building.
The building construction type of the building in question is
type III-N. It houses three uses, or occupancy classification the
showroom/offices, parts department and repair shop.
The State Building. Code -requires that the different uses within a
building be separated by fire resistive occupancy separations. If
the different uses are not separated by code-complying occupancy
separations the building must be given the occupancy
classification of the most hazardous classification located
therein. The building contains three different occupancy
classifications. The repair shop is classed as an H-4, the parts
department as a B-2, and the showroom/offices as a B-1.
Prior to our series of meetings to resolve the building permit
and stop work order violations which occurred in 1982, the
allowable area and occupancy separation issues were raised.
The required occupancy separation between the repair shop and
parts department does not comply with code requirements.
TPlnnhnn0 fllnmhonc• hone ,I r It,, NAorrorc• Ml P1 j:tMq_7cZn j
John Dean, Page Two
s
It was determined that the wall between those areas and the
showroom does not qualify as an occupancy separation wall due to
modifications made in the wall to install ductwork and air
conditioners. Without complying occupancy separations, the entire
building is required by the State Building Code to be classified
as an H-4 occupancy.
Another factor affecting building area is the lack of open space
around the building. After the construction type and occupancy
classification has been determined, Section 506(a) of the State
Building Code allows a 50 percent increase in allowable area
where "public space, streets or yards more than 20 feet in width
extend along and adjoin two sides of the building," and a 100
percent increase in area if those conditions exist on three sides
of the building.
The building in question does not qualify for an area increase
based upon Section 506(a). Parked cars abut the building on the
east, west and south sides, and the body shop building is closer
than the required width on the north side.
Mr. McCarthy's attorney had noted during our meetings that he
disagreed with our interpretation of that code section. Based
upon his interpretation of the State Building Code requirements
he felt that the building should be defined as being open on
three sides. Our determination is based upon the fact that the
sides of the building do not adjoin a public space or a street.
Further, the areas which the building adjoins are used for
parking vehicles, and thus do not meet the definition of a yard.
Section 426 of the State Building Code defines a yard as "an
open, unoccupied space...". As we had noted before, we cannot
consider the yard areas to qualify unless parking is prohibited
in accordance with the State Building Code requirements in
Section 506(a).
..Based_upon:the-abpve., we have determined `hat either of the two
following courses-of action would bring the building into
compliance with the State Building Code.
1. The required occupancy separation and property line walls
could be constructed. We could then allow the areas based upon
occupancy that are listed in Table 5-C of the State Building
Code. This would require an approved occupancy separation wall
between the repair shop and the parts department, and the same
between those areas and the showroom. Further, the showroom would
need the property line separation wall between it and the former
Belt Line Bar building reconstructed in order to both bring the
showroom to within its allowable area and also conform to section
504(b), the requirements for walls at property lines.
i
P
John Dean, Page Three
2. An automatic sprinkler system could be installed in the entire
building. Although the State Building Code does not allow the
installation of a sprinkler system as a substitute for occupancy
separation walls in new buildings, we feel that we are justified
in accepting it as a substitute in this case under the provisions
of Section 106 of the State Building Code.
Section 106 states that "Whenever there are practical
difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this
code, the building official may grant modifications for
individual cases, provided that he shall first find that a
special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code
impractical and that the modification is in conformity with the
intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does
not lessen any fire protection requirements or any degree of
structural integrity. ...
Mr. McCarthy has stated that the configuration of the parts
department counter would make it difficult and expensive to
construct roll-down doors between it and the repair shop. He has
also stated that the removal of the air conditioning unit between
the parts department and the offices would create poor working
conditions for the office staff. Further, he has stated that the
reinstallation of the wall between the showroom and the former
Belt Line Bar property would defeat the purpose of using that
area for a showroom.
We feel that the attributes of an automatic sprinkler system
throughout the building would make it an acceptable alternate to
the State Building Code requirements. Sprinkler systems detect
and control fires while they are still small, and thus act to
limit fire spread. That would substitute for the function of
occupancy separation walls, and property line separation walls
which are intended to limit fire spread.
Thus, it is•our position_-that the conditions in this case warrant
.the modification allowed in Section 106 of the State Building
Code and the installation of a sprinkler system would be a
reasonable alternate to compliance with the State Building Code
requirements noted in the above paragraphs. We are willing to
consider installation in two phases. First, the repair shop and
parts department would need to have sprinkler installation begin
within 90 days and completed by the end of 1986. Second, the
remainder of the building would need to have sprinkler
installation begin by July 1, 1987 and be completed by the end of
1987.
0
rI
Lli
John Dean, Page Four
Three other items still remain to be resolved. First, the
restrooms in the Beltline Bar area are not in compliance with the
State Building Code and must be modified in order to comply.
The last two items, the pending criminal charges for violation of
the building permit requirements for the showroom and bathrooms,.
and violation of the subsequent stop work order have not been
addressed.
Sincerely,
Patri ky J . r oughl in
Fire Division Commander
Richfield Public 9-a*fety Dept.
t
0
Meeting Notes 4/9/87
Present: JDP, John Dean, Wally McCarthy, Roger Miller, Attorney
for McCarthy and Ray Hoberoff, General Manager for McCarthy.
Miller asked for clarification on a number of issues relating to
the lease of city owned property. Clarifications provided
includedthe following:
1. The city was seeking landscape improvements along a 10 foot
strip from Morgan to Knox on the north side of 78th Street.
2. The scope of the landscape improvements were negotiable and
a plan should be prepared by McCarthy for staff review.
3. The balance of the property could be leased by McCarthy at
the stated rate. McCarthy indicated he did not feel it was
fair to require him to lease that property and wanted to know
what precedent there was for this requirement. Prosser
responded that Walser had also been requested, but that in
any case, the requirement was due to the need of the city to
address a safety, health and welfare concern of the city.
McCarthy said he would be willing to undertake the improve-
ments only if everyone else in the city was also required to
do so.
Dean responded that that was not relevant to this particular
matter. Miller asked for information relating to the form of
title held by the city for the property. Dean said he would
provide. McCarthy indicated that requiring a ten foot
landscape buffer in front of his business would pose a
significant hardship. He indicated that he had been allowed
to operate many years without that improvement and should not
be required to do so at this.time. He also indicated that he
had greatly enhanced the appearance of that area and that to
his knowledge the city had never experienced any problems
with his operation. He felt he should not be penalized at
this point in time by requiring him to install the buffer.
He indicated he could understand that Walser would be
required to do so since Walser had reques.te.d a special use.
..Again, Prosser emphasized the need`to make the improvement
for health, safety and welfare reasons. Miller asked what
option there was for McCarthy. Prosser responded that
first of all, McCarthy is expected to submit a landscaping
plan which accomplishes the basic purpose of providing a
buffer and that the exact form of that landscaping plan is
negotiable. If McCarthy decides not to lease the property,
they would be required to remove all vehicles from the
right-of-way.
McCarthy again protested indicating he believed his operation
was a higher quality than Walsers' and did not deserve the
same treatment.
• 3. Discussion was then held on the requirement to abate fire
code nuisances at the McCarthy building. Prosser indicated
that his inspection with the fire chief revealed significant
hazard to firefighter operations, including rescue operations
and that the city had significant concerns about the safety
of patrons and employees of the building as well as fire-
fighters should a fire occur. He indicated that this matter
needed to be resolved in an expeditious fashion. Miller
asked what options were available. Prosser indicated that
the fire department had previously indicated that
compartmentalizing the building would be an option. However,
in his opinion, the best solution would be to sprinkler the
building. McCarthy indicated that he had received quotes for
the sprinkling. He indicated the person who provided the
quote indicated that sprinkling was unnecessary. Dean asked
for the basis for that conclusion. McCarthy indicated that
the sprinkling contractor generally indicated that it didn't
make sense to sprinkle the building.
McCarthy suggested that it may be better to contribute half
of the cost of the sprinkling to charities in lieu of the
protection.- Prosser indicated that the fire protection
issue must be resolved and that charitable contributions
would not address the public safety concerns at the
building.
• Miller asked for more information on the
compartmentalization. Dean responded that additional
information had been provided in the past and we could
provide that again if desired. Dean reminded McCarthy that
whatever course of action they wanted to take they needed
to work with the city closely in order to make sure that
appropriate action was taken.
McCarthy showed Prosser and Dean a number of envelopes which
he stated contained requests for funding from charitable and
civic organizations within Richfield. He stated that he was
not going to respond positively to any of these requests
until the city became more reasonable in their request on
'these particular matters. Prosser indicated that he
regretted McCarthy's position on that p,articular matter, but
that the-'city's position could not be influenced by
McCarthy's charitable inclinations.
McCarthy indicated a desire to bring these issues to the
city council. Prosser responded that that would be fine,
since as city manager he was charged with the responsibility
of managing the city under the direction of the city council
and that if the city council is not supportive of these
actions, then McCarthy should not be required to fulfill
these obligations.
It was agreed that this issue
that the fire.department issue
possible, but prior to May 30.
would be resolved by May 30 and
would be resolved as soon as
•.
0
cc: City Council
Pat Coughlin'
Sivert Hendrickson
Byron Wallace
John Dean
Addendum to Notes: Miller asked if the city would be willing to
provide financing through special assessment bonds for this
purpose, and if so, at what rate. Dean responded that the city
is legally able to do so, but that he could not speak for the
council on their willingness to do so. Prosser indicated that if
McCarthy was interested in that option, they should make a formal
request to the city council. Financing would depend upon the
financing rate available at the time the request is processed.
JDP/eja
U
4
STATUS & INFORMATION
Behold the turtle.
out.
MAY 22, 1987
He makes progress only when he sticks his neck
Executive-City Manager
CHARTER COMMISSION MEMBER APPOINTED: Hennepin County Chief Judge
Robert Forsythe has advised the City that Robert M. Doebler, 6920
10th Avenue, has been appointed to the Charter Commission to fill
the unexpired term of J. B. Clarkson.
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FAMILY COMMITTEE: Three representatives
from the LWV recently met with City staff members to discuss a
proposal to establish a family committee. The result of the
meeting was an agreement to establish a community committee
consisting of representatives from various organizations directed
at formulating strategies for establishing and marketing an
environment to attract and retain families in Richfield. The next
meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 3, at 1:30 P.M. at City
Hall.
•
MCCARTHY STATUS: In February, 1987 City staff met with Wally
McCarthy to review status of unresolved building code violations,
including a serious violation relating to fire code safety. At
that meeting Mr. McCarthy acknowledged the long-standing dispute
and indicated a desire for an opportunity to examine options. A
subsequent meeting was held on April 9. Mr. McCarthy was reminded
of the serious nature of the fire code violation and requested to
indicate a course of action to correct this in the near future.
The City offered to provide some technical assistance for Mr.
McCarthy in this regard. In early May, Pat Coughlin contacted
McCarthy's general manager, Ray Haberoth, to inquire about the
status and was advised that no action had been taken.
Accordingly, the City Manager directed the fire chief to issue
orders to` comply with the fire code regulations. The orders
require installation of a fire detector or construction of fire
separation between specific areas within the building; and
reconstruction of restrooms to comply with building handicap
requirements. A deadline of May 30 has also been provided Mr.
McCarthy for an indication of his intention regarding use of City
right-of-way.
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE STATISTICS: So far in 1987, the inspection
division has closed 245 cases, currently has 306 active cases, and
received 40 new complaints this past week.
MET COUNCIL TASK FORCE: The Metropolitan Council has established
an advisory task force for the Minneapolis St. Paul International
Airport long term adequacy study. The study was initiated at the
request of a number of area officials and will reevaluate the
long term adequacy of MSP. International to satisfy the aviation
needs of the region. Richfield is presently represented on that
committee by the City Manager. Additionally, Richfield
representative to the Met Council, Gertrude Ulrich, is also a
member of the committee. It is expected that a completed report
will be provided in March, 1988.
city of richfield
6700 Portland avenue ¦ minnesota 55423
D
May 13, 1987
Mr. Wally McCarthy,
President
Wally McCarthy-
Lindahl Oldsmobile
1900 W. 78th Street
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. McCarthy:
At the meeting on April 9, 1987 between you, your attorney and
city staff members, it was understood that you would act to
• resolve the outstanding building and fire code violations at the
above address as soon as possible. I contacted Mr. Ray Haberoph
to inquire about the status of this matter and was informed that
no action had yet been taken.
You are hereby ordered to comply with the following requirements
within 30 days:
1. Construct approved occupancy separation walls between:
A. the repair garage and the parts department.
B. the parts department and the showroom/offices.
2. Reconstruct the property line wall between the former west end
of the: showroom and the Beltline Bar.
3'. Reconstruct the restrooms in the office area to comply with
the building code handicap requirements.
As we have discussed previously, we will accept the installation
of an approved sprinkler system throughout the entire building as
an alternate to complying with the above orders.
You have the right to appeal these orders. If you wish to appeal,
you must do so by submitting a Written request for an appeal
hearing to the city manager. The request must be submitted within
• 15 days after receipt of this notice.
Telephone Numbers: General City Matters: (13121869-7521
Public Safety Non-emergency (24 hrs) (6121866-5061 POLICE/FIRE/MEDICAL EMERGENCY: DIAL 9-1-1
• Wally McCarthy, May 13, 1987
Page_ Two
The City Council acts as the appeals board. If a request for an
appeal is received, the appeal will be scheduled during a regular
city council meeting.
If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact
me.
Sincerely,
atrick Coughlin
Fire Divi ion Co a der
Richfield Public afety Dept.
I•
? 0
. .r
City of Richfield - 6700 Portland Avenue - Minnesota 55423
Mayor City Manager Council
• John Hamilton James D. Prosser Edwina Garcia Ivan Ludeman
Martin Kirsch Michael Sandahl
July 2, 1987
Mr. Wally McCarthy
McCarthy Oldsmobile Company
1494 and Lyndale Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. McCarthy:
As we have discussed, attached is the landscaping plan for your
facility. I would appreciate an opportunity to meet with you, at
your convenience, to discuss the plan in more detail.
Sincerely,
gvam c
D. Prosser
Manager
JDP/eja
•
Telephone 869-7521 (612)
An Equal Opportunity Employer
goy \
'OS -3AV XONA
?
I
Cl) I
a
a
Cl)
o
a
I
U
W
~ I
z
z o
U I
? I
.. O
LL
w
a 0
z I Q z
z
I I (V W
C%j C)
W W
m
W W
W
IT =
O 0[
y co
Z
LU
0
c?
j
j I
0 °
z _ co
b
_J
m
s' I
l1J
?
(
I
U I
l
?
O c
N
w
I
06
Z
2 3
2
. i a
o
0
?r
I ?. a
rn 3
zLL
2o
zr
_
W
rI
.09 • „1 31YOS I 0
z
'OS '3AV NV080W
City of Richfield - 6700 Portland Avenue - Minnesota 55423
Mayor City Manager Council
John Hamilton James D. Prosser Edwina Garcia Ivan Ludeman
Martin Kirsch Michael Sandahl
June 12, 1987
Mr. Wally McCarthy
Wally McCarthy Oldsmobile
1494 and Lyndale Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. McCarthy:
The City of Richfield is very pleased that we have been able to
work out our differences relating to code compliance and right of
way use at your automobile dealership. To confirm that
agreement, it is my understanding that the following actions will
take place:
1. The fire suppression system will be installed at your
facility within a reasonable period of time. The details
for completion are currently being discussed by your
• General Manager, Mr. Ray Hueberoff, and Assistant Fire
Chief, Pat Coughlin.
2. The bathrooms which were constructed without benefit of
building permit in the addition to the showroom, will be
made handicapped accessible in accordance with state law.
3. That a lease agreement between the City and McCarthy
Oldsmobile will be executed. The details relating to the
landscaping referred to in the agreement will also be
resolved in the near future.- To that end, the City will
submit a suggested landscaping design for that area_for
discussion purposes.
The City is confident that we will be able to'siiccessfully
conclude these matters in the near future. Obviously, given the
rather protracted discussion that has taken place prior to this
time, it is in all of our best interests that these matters be
concluded as speedily as possible.
Sincerely,
ame D. Prosser
C Manager
• JDP/eja
Telephone 869-7521 (612)
An Equal Opportunity Employer
?Qlly 1 curves 1900 WEST 78th STREET, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55423 -Phone 869-1414
Oldsmbiile
dune 18, 1987
Pat Coughlin
Assistant Fire Chief
6700 Portland Ave.
City of Richfield
Richfield, Mn., 55423
Dear Pat Coughlin:
We are working with Mr. Gene Peil, Land-O-Ickes Fire Pro-
tection, Inc. They are drawing up plans for a wet pipe
auto-matic sprinkler system. They will submit the plans
to you for approval in about 30 days.
A completion date will be set tentatively for the end of
this year.
. Sincerely,
Ray Haberoth
General Operations Mgr.
Wa]]?y McCarthy's Oldsmobile
H/ek
RI
? 0
M
N
Ln
¦ tl•
T ?
¦
C
0
%imm >
M
o ?
0
¦ tl_ O
O
W
May 29, 1987
Mr. Terry Feldman
920 West 78th Street
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. Feldman,
On May 29, 1987 at 9:45 a.m., I drove by your dealership and
note the following violations of City Ordinances and your
Special Use Permit stipulations.
The lot adjacent to your dealership to the east (carwash), is
being used to display and store new vehicles. You have not
obtained the required special use permit for that use and it
must discontinue upon receipt of this Notice of Violation of
Richfield City Ordinances Sec. 3.33, Subd. 2, Sec. 6.07, Subd.. 3,
and Sec. 4.05, Subd. 1.
Your facility at 850 West 7711 Street was being used in violation
of your special use permit stipulations. The front parking area..
was occupied by a new vehicle display except for two open spaces.
Your special use permit requires that 10 spaces be reserved for
employee and customer parking. You have been advised of previous
violation of this section. Continued violation will result in
a hearing for revocation of your license and recision of your
special use permit.
Should you have any questions regarding this Notice of Violation,
please contact me at 866-5061, X 370.
Yours truly,
all_
Sivert Hendrickson
Building Official
SH/lkt
cc: J. Prosser
• P. Coughlin
R. Jopke
telephone: 869-7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
t! .1 r
??
July 16, 1986
L
00
M
qt
L0
L()
4-0
O
Cl)
¦
cc
f+
L
O
O
O
Mr. Terry Feldman
Terry Feldman's Imports
920 West 78th Street
Richfield, MN 55423
Re: Special Use Permit for 1918 West 7711 Street - Richfield.
Dear Mr. Feldman,
0
Enclosed is a copy of the special use permit stipulations
as granted by the City Council on December 17, 1984 for
use of the above premises for new and used car sales.
A review of conditions on 7/15/86 indicated the entire front
parking area is used for new car sales. Ten spaces must be
reserved for customer and employee parking.
We have not received the hold-harmless agreement as indicated
in the second stipulations, and the display vehicles may not
be parked on the Colfax Avenue boulevard until such an agreement
is on file in the City offices.
Your attorney has advised me that the illegal canvas canopy over
the entry door to your main building showroom would be removed
but that has not been done.
Your request for a sign permit for use of the arial balloon
every Thursday and Saturday has been denied for the following
reasons.
Promotional display devices are intended for use at occasional
special events or ;
promotions and not° for continuous use., Richfield...;
Sign Ordinances require that promotional display device??_b,el
situated entirely on the premises where such activity is conducted.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact
me at 866-5061, X 370.-
Yours-truly,
Sivert Hendrickson
Building Official .?
SH/lkt
telephone: 869-7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
V
c ___, .: !.. -_
`
ii
agier
Data Inspaccor
Date V/!,
APPROVE VEiTIa : _
AP
PROVE DEN?'r7 :
19 A ?ftmcTlowN. Plannin DD pnc
?s0(A4 V4aAL * D
t City Council
• a
e ?
+?f'
Date
Route to above for special approval per code General Si s
APPLICATION FOR' ADVERTISING PERMIT
City of Richfield, . Minnesota
Date Zoning Sign Erected - Yes No Fee -
Address of Sign -_ Proprietor Name - DBA
Sign Erector
rpe of Sign
Wall
Projecting
Ground
Roof
Pedestal
Changeable
Temporary
f .? ,
I Traiiler
Desi
Address
Weather Cover Li2htine
Single Face
Double Face
Multi-Faced
Aerial/
Saarc .light
/P ennants
Portable Frame:
T A[] Post
If Illuminated - Yes ))
Slectri.cal Contractor
/?;? 1-?
Clear Le.-ton
Frosted Lexon
Plastic Covered
Shaded
Neon
Other
Sign Colors
Watts
Address
Phone
rcper-y Owner or h: s Agent Signature Phone
Est::_.ated Cost /?. S_-^ W'd;. Hei;ht
? • Lotal Square Feet i-LC?-;-
?cs__4.on of the ad•iert nt st_.:c -sane tune in relationsnip to the adjacent buildings, , si
sidewal:s
chubs, roadwavs, overhead ut?l:t lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on
draw:zg with significant d= easicns and actacaed hereto of major signs. Manor signs as
defined on page 2.
Two bluep.rincs of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans:
'ncluding specificat-ons, list of aatarials, and:explicit anchoring or fastening details
and a copy of the stress sweets.,. calcc?ac°ons, color of.si;n structure.
.'-leas _ae Sign .copy," relate so e'. to 't c: us4:1PsS, 1;S t, t:1:tc _1 ::; _,v -or activity conducted on,
the ore-ises'.
ntae sign, structure, or billboard restrict an, si-hc distance under, around, or over
for safe access by-persons destined for or passing the subject premises?
applicant's Signature and Title with Firm
Data ?hona Number - ?-,?
Out
198 3 PL:.-ASZ SE RE VEZSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION S=TCH
Slvert Hendrickson/Building Official - 566-:061-
Constant
Flashing
Revolving
Traveling
Zip Lite
Other (Expia'_:
CITY OF R1CHF17-Lo
•
Q??%t7-'r FOR:
6700 Portland Avenue Scut:
SPEC7AI US-7 ---!7 r"
r?DJLTSTu V'' A:1D ADPEA-LS Q ?UD PLAN Q FINAL DZ LOP` NT P?:?i ?J
TO: Terry Feldman Import
920 West 78th Street
Richf£ield, MN55423
You are herenv notified that your application dated November 1, 1984`or
a special use permit for a new and used car sales, service, and parts sale
facility at 918 West 77 1/2 Street.
1
has bee. (Approves) (Denies)
T`_:e followina is the -legal description of lard of=ected by the above acticr_:
All of Lot'8 except the easterly 4 ?' thereof and"lots 9, 10, 11, Block 1,
Strand Bowen 2nd addition (918 West 77h Street)
Steci-- Conditions:
1. The ten parking stalls along the front of the building should
be reserved for employee and customer parking. These ten stalls
should not be used for new or used vehicles which are for sale.
-? 2. That the applicant enter into a hold harmless agreement with the
City for allowing the use of.the boulevard area of Colfax Avenue
for the display of new vehicles.
?paroved) (Denied) by t e City Council December 17, 1984
(Date)
By Rick Jocke
City P_a n: e:;,.
Orizinal to Aa^1icant
city of richfield
t 6700 portland avenue ¦ minnesota 55423
June 18, 1987
Mr. Terry Feldmann
920 West 78th Street
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. Feldmann,
This letter is to summarize the items of non-compliance that were
discussed at the meeting of June 12, 1987.
Attending the meeting were Jim Prosser, Patrick Coughlin, Byron
Wallace, Rick Jopke and Sivert Hendrickson from the city and
Mr. Harold Fox and yourself of your dealership.
We discussed the problem of signs on or extending over the street
right-of-way at both your dealership buildings, 920 West 78th St.
and 914-918 West 77 1/2 Street. These signs are three new
pedestal signs erected in 1986 and a directional sign for 920
West 78th Street at the service entry from West 77 1/2 Street.
These must be relocated to be on your property, or you must
furnish evidence that they are on your property and do not extend
over the right-of-way. The relocation must be done prior to July
13th, 1987 or the permits will be revoked. The applicable
ordinance sections are 3.48(3) and 3.49, Subd. 7(5).
The second item of discussion related to parking of new and used
cars for sale or storage on boulevards at 920 West 78th Street.
The applicable ordinance sections are 4.05, Subd. 8 and 6.07,
Subd. 7(2`) and:(6),, You were given,ten days from receipt of
this ?7otico :of, ;Violation to remove -the vehicles -from the
boulevards.
The third item was the use of the property adjacent to 920 West
78th Street (formerly a car wash) without first having obtained
the required special use permit and off-street parking permit.
You were advised by letter on May 29, 1987 of this violation,
specifically sections 3.33, Subd. 2(4), 6.07, Subd. 3 and 4.05,
Subd. 1 and directed to discontinue the use of the property in
violation of City Ordinances.
v
Telephone Numbers: Genera; C;ty Matters: (6121 SSS-7521
Public Safety Von-emercency 124 '"rs; (6121 8SS-5051 =rII . C PE, 1,1EGICaLEME=+GcNCY: DIAL 9-1-1
-2-
The fourth item we discussed was non-compliance with the Special
Use Permit stipulation regarding 914-918 West 77 1/2 Street that
required reserving 10 spaces in front of the building for parking
of employee and customer automobiles. The stipulation must be'-,
complied with until such time as the council may withdraw it upon
your petition. You indicated that the building use has changed
and you would petition for a removal of that stipulation.
Youwere provided with copies of the above noted ordinances
while we were there.
We appreciate your advising us of your future plans for an
enclosed dealership which would be compatible with the proposed
C-3 Zoning District requirements, and in compliance with all
other applicable City Ordinances.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 866-5061, X 370.
Yours truly,
Sivert Hendrickson
Building Official
cc: J. Prosser
P. Coughlin
B. Wallace
R. Jopke
i -?
• STATUS & INFORMATION June 26, 1987
If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people jumping up and down
for joy?
FELDMAN ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS: Based upon complaints from
adjoining businesses and observations from city inspectors, city
staff has advised the owners of Feldman Imports of the need to
correct the ordinance violations. A meeting was held with Mr.
Feldman and the representatives from his company and city staff
on June 12. Discussion included the following: (1) The need to
relocate signs at 920 West 78th Street and 914-918 West 77 1/2
Street. The signs have apparently been relocated on city right-
of-way. However, the city encouraged Feldman to contact the sign
erector to determine if the sign company had more accurate
information regarding right-of-way which would indicate that this
would not be a violation. (2) Parking of new and used cars for
sale or storage on boulevards at 920 West 78th Street is a
violation of city code: (3) Mr. Feldman recently obtained
• -ownership of 920 West 78th Street, formerly a car wash. Zoning
ordinance requires a special use permit and off-street parking
permit prior to use of the facility for storage of vehicles.
A special use stipulation approved Commission (4)
City council for 914 and 918West771/2 h Street n requires that tend
spaces be reserved in front of.building for employees and
customer automobiles. Mr. Feldman was advised that he is not in
compliance with this provision.
Mr. Feldman also provided the city with information regarding
future plans for enclosed dealership which might possible by
vcompatible with the C-3 zoning district requirements. _
0