05-23-88 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 139
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a request to extend the conditional use permit
for UNO's Pizzeria Restaurant at 1420 East 78th Street.
Background:
Mr. Michael E. Plat, President Discus Corporation, has requested
that the city grant a 12-month extension of their conditional use
permit at 1420 East 78th Street.
On July 13, 1987, the City Council approved a conditional use
permit to allow the operation of a 174 seat UNO's Pizzeria
Restaurant. Recently the City Council also approved a liquor
license for the subject restaurant.
Zoning Ordinance Requirements:
Section 545.09, subdivision 8, provides that a conditional use
permit could be extended for one additional year if the applicant
fails to use the site in a year.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the 12-month extension of the conditional use permit for
UNO's Pizzeria Restaurant, 1420 East 78th Street.
• Basis of Recommendation:
1. The approved conditional use permit will expire on July 12,
1988. It is highly unlikely that all the improvements could
be completed in the next eight weeks.
2. The applicant has requested the extension.
3. There is a reasonable basis for the delay in completing work
on the building. The city council approved the conditional
use permit on July 13, 1987. The liquor license was approved
on April 25, 1988. The applicant stated that it was not
economically feasible to proceed with construction until the
liquor license was approved.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Deny the extension.
2. Approve the extension for six months.
Decision Mode:
The item is scheduled on the May 23 Council agenda. No public
hearing is required for such action.
Respectf ly submitted,
. James D. Prosser
City nager
JDP:eja
0 3601 Minnesota Dr. Suite 925 Bloomington, MN 55435 612-831-2326
May 3, 1988
Towhid Kazi
Assistant City Planner
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. Kazi,
The purpose of this letter is to follow up on our recent telephone conversation,
and the conversation I had with Byron Wallace and the City Council at the April
25, 1988 City Council meeting. At that time we were granted a full liquor license,'
subject to certain conditions. One of those conditions was that the construction
of the property be completed by July 1988. I indicated to the Council that
this would be impossible for us to meet as our time table would not allow us
to initiate and complete construction by this date. Therefore, I indicated
• I would be requesting an extension of the conditional use permit.
Therefore, the purpose of this letter is to formally request that Discus Corporation
be granted a 12 month extension for the development of the Mr. Steak property.
We are currently working to find financing for the development of the property,
after which we will complete our plans and work with the city for their approval.
Construction will then follow.
I appreciate your cooperation. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate
to call.
Sincerely,
Michael E. Platt
President and CEO
MEP/ks
I
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 138
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution opposing proposed day care center regulations.
Background:
Sue Dunkley, President of the Building Block Child Care non-
profit organization, has requested that the City Council consider
a resolution opposing proposed day care center regulations.
Current regulations being proposed for day care centers would
substantially increase the costs and difficulty of providing the
service. The changes in regulation would greatly increase the
cost of day care.
Some of the proposed regulations include:
- Separating children into five age groups, instead of
the current three. This would require that centers
would have to undertake substantial remodeling, and
hire additional staff, thus increasing the costs of
day care.
• - Increasing the ratio of staff to infants from the
current one to four to one to three. Again,
additional staff would have to be hired and costs
would increase. Centers now have a one to four
ratio, plus a registered nurse.
- Separating infants into two groups, requiring twice
the amount of space.
- The requirement that a person with a four-year
degree is not qualified to be a head teacher. This
requirement is more stringent than even that of
elementary teachers.
While the City is concerned about the welfare and safety of
children in day care centers, regulations such as these may force
many centers to close or to charge prices that most families
could not afford to pay.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution opposing the day care regulations, and
authorize the Mayor to forward the resolution and comments to the
Administrative Law Judge.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The provision of adequate, affordable, safe day care
• facilities is very important to young families.
4
2. The proposed severe restrictions may force many centers to
move to other states, or to close, thus lowering the
availability of day care for families.
3. The current standards appear to be working well for the
safety and welfare of children.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Not approve the resolution.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is placed on the May 23, 1988 City Council agenda for
council consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
James . Prosser
City anager
JDP/eja
E
n
U
E
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSED
DAY CARE REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, there is a critical need in the Metropolitan Area,
and the City of Richfield, for affordable, adequate, and safe day
care for working parents, and
WHEREAS, the proposed regulations of separating children
into five age groups, and increasing the ratio of staff to
children would mean extensive remodeling costs and increased
staff costs to centers, and
WHEREAS, these regulations would only increase the cost of
day care provisions, which many families could no longer afford,
and
WHEREAS, over-regulation of day care services may ultimately
mean that day care centers would close, thereby reducing the
availability of day care providers.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, that the City opposes these regulations and strongly
urges that these regulations be reconsidered.
PASSED this 23 day of May, 1988.
•
Steven J. Quam Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber City Clerk
0
,*ildlng
oe
CHILD CARE
a non-profit educational organization
May 10, 1988
Council Members
CITY OF RICHFIELD
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Council Members:
I'm delighted that you are willing to take the time to voice your opinion
regarding the adoption of the new child care rule, recognizing that if
this rule were to pass increasing ratios and other requirements, child
care would become unaffordable to the majority of our communities.
The address to send all comments is:
• Administrative Law Judge
500 Flour Exchange
Office of Administrative Hearings
310 4th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
We are very happy to be apart of your community and look forward to
serving this area.
Sincerely,
a,,?7 ?&A?
Sue Dunkley
President
SD: lb
J
n
U
(612) 557-1111
3650 Annapolis Lane North
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 137
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a Resolution Establishing a Uniform Policy with
Respect to Lobbying of Cable Applicants with Individual Council
Members or Staff.
Background:
The City of Richfield, together with four other Southwest
Suburban Cable Commission members, Edina, Eden Prairie,
Minnetonka and Hopkins, have previously approved a resolution
establishing a lobbying policy.
The policy was developed at the time the communities were
initially examining cable franchise operators for our
communities. The purpose of the policy was to discourage cable
operators from contacting elected and appointed officials
individually.
Rogers Cablesystems has recently indicated their intention to
sell their interest in cable operations in the United States.
The Southwest Suburban Cable Commission will soon be reviewing
issues related to the transfer of the cable system to another
operator.
• It is desirable to reestablish the lobby policy in order to avoid
problems such as those described.
After approval of the policy by the communities of the policy,
the cable operators are notified of the policy. Council Members
and staff are encouraged to contact the City Manager if they are
contacted by a cable company regarding the cable franchise.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the procedure establishing uniform policy with respect to
lobbying by cable applicants with individual Council Members or
staff.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The lack of coordinated understanding of
representations made by cable operators.
2. The additional time required to meet with
individual lobby groups.
3. The potential for misunderstandings regarding
proposals generated by the cable operators.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council may elect not to adopt the policy. However,
the selection process would become much more difficult for
the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:This matter will be presented for
discussion at the Council meeting of May 23.
Respectfu y submitted,
James D Prosser
City Manager
JDP/eja
0
0
RESOLUTION NO
• RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A UNIFORM POLICY WITH
RESPECT TO LOBBYING BY CABLE APPLICANTS WITH
INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS OR STAFF
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield in conjunction with others
comprising the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SWSCC") have
been requested by the Grantee of their similar Cable
communications System Franchises ("Franchise"), to evaluate
issues relating to the potential sale off the Franchise; and
WHEREAS, it is the concern of this City Council that in this
process all persons who may have an interest in a particular
cable company (either the existing Grantee under the Franchise
including its parent or affiliates, or interested purchasers of
the Franchise) conduct any communications with regard to this
matter with the City Council as a whole and not with individual
members of the City Council or administration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the
best interest of all of those participating in the franchising
process that all communications be public to avoid any sort of
misunderstanding and unwarranted accusations that would otherwise
develop either against the City or any of its Council Members or
representatives; and
• WHEREAS, the City Council has determined a policy must be
adopted that will be consistently followed by its Council Members
and staff and with the understanding that Council Members of
other communities will likewise adhere to a similar policy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. It is the policy of the Mayor and City Council that all
communications regarding any matter of the cable
communications system proposed sale and transfer shall
be directed to the City Council as a whole and not to
an individual Council Member or staff member. It is not
intended by this that communications by a constituent
acting in a private capacity as a constituent will be
prohibited.
2. It is requested that the Chairman of the SWSCC will
request from the Grantee of the Franchise and other
interested cable companies that they provide a list
designating each person who will be the official
speakers or representatives on behalf of them, and
further, that the SWSCC shall provide to the City
Council from time to time, a report advising it of the
names of any such official speakers or representatives.
03. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded by the City
Clerk to the Chairman of the SWSCC and to the Clerk of
*4
• each of the cities who may be forming the same cable
communications system.
4. The SWSCC is hereby authorized to distribute a copy of
this Resolution to each applicant or potential
applicant of a cable communications system for this
City.
5. This Resolution will be effective beginning with the
day of its passage and continue until an ordinance
granting a franchise for a cable communications system
is adopted.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23 day
of May, 1988.
Steven J. Quam Mayor
ATTEST:
•
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
0
??
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 136
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Resolution Stating the Position of the City of Richfield
Regarding the Extension of Runway 4/22
Background:
Representatives to MASAC, City staff, and the Mayor, have drafted
a position regarding the proposed extension of Runway 4/22.
The attached resolution has been prepared, outlining the City
position. The resolution states continued opposition to the
extension of 4/22, and states that an environmental impact
statement should be prepared if the proposal proceeds.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution stating the position of the City of
Richfield regarding the extension of Runway 4/22.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The City of Richfield has reviewed the environmental
assessment for the extension of Runway 4/22 prepared by
Metropolitan Airports Commission. The City has
• requested that MAC provide further information and
clarification of issues based upon our review, by April'
15. As of May 9, this information has not been
received.
2. Our review of the information included in the
environmental assessment indicates that the
environmental impact of the runway extension on
Richfield may be understated.
3. One of the stated purposes of extending Runway 4/22 is
to increase the use of the "preferential runway system"
("PRS"). The basic concept of the "PRS" is to decrease
traffic over south Minneapolis and north Richfield.
While Richfield supports redistribution of air traffic,
the "PRS" seeks to accomplish this redistribution by
increasing traffic only over south Richfield and
Bloomington. Under the "PRS", no effort is made to
increase air traffic over St. Paul.
4. If the Metropolitan Airports Commission is seeking to
extend Runway 4/22 they have a duty to provide
convincing evidence that the extension would not pose
an environmental hazard. The environmental assessment
prepared does not provide this evidence.
• 5. MAC is currently experimenting with a proposal which
seeks to distribute noise more equitably to surrounding
??
communities, including St. Paul. The extension of
Runway 4/22 would end the increased use of runways over
St. Paul and end an effort to more equitably distribute
noise throughout the entire area.
6. The extension of Runway 4/22 would place air traffic
one-half mile closer to Richfield residences. In
addition, the airplanes would be 134 feet lower over
Richfield residences.
7. The State of Minnesota requires a minimum safety zone
extending from runways. That safety zone has not been
included in the planning for Runway 4/22.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The Metropolitan Airports Commission has scheduled a public
hearing on the proposed runway extension for Wednesday, May 25,
at the Valley View Elementary School in Bloomington. This item
is placed on the May 23 City Council agenda so that a resolution
may be presented at that meeting.
•
JDP/eja
Respectf lly submitted,
James . Prosser
City anager
is
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION STATING THE POSITION
OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
REGARDING THE EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 4/22
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield recognizes the vital
importance of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport to the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area, and
WHEREAS, it is important that MSP operate as efficiently and
safely as possible in order to best serve the region, and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has proposed
that Runway 4/22 be extended 2,750 feet to the southwest. The
stated purpose of which would be to improve noise impact pattern
from aircraft operations at MSP by allowing increased use of the
preferential runway system (PRS), and
WHEREAS, reasonable distribution of the noise impact from
the airport is of concern not only to residents of Richfield, but
also South Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington and adjoining
communities, and
WHEREAS, the appropriate distribution of noise is a highly
controversial topic and
WHEREAS, properly assessing the impact of proposals to alter
the use of the airport is difficult, and
• WHEREAS, there are many organizations, including community
groups, municipalities, environmental organizations, and citizen
groups, that need complete, accurate information about the
impacts in order that they may properly develop informed opinions
about any changes to the airport, and
WHEREAS, MAC has released an environmental assessment for
the extension of Runway 4/22, and
WHEREAS, in the opinion of the City of Richfield this
assessment contains errors and misstatements, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has been unable to complete a
review of the environmental assessment because of lack of data
provided by the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has not received timely
information requested to complete their review of the
environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, in the opinion of the City of Richfield the
preferential runway system does not necessarily assure proper
distribution of noise throughout the area surrounding the
airport, and
• WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airports Commission is currently
evaluating a proposal which provides for a more equitable
distribution of noise through increased flights to the northeast,
and
WHEREAS, the evaluation of this proposal has not yet been
. completed, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has previously approved a
resolution opposing the extension of Runway 4/22 on June 9, 1986.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and the City
Council of the City of Richfield as follows:
Section 1. That pending full and complete disclosure and
study, the City of Richfield continues to oppose the extension of
Runway 4/22.
Section 2. That an environmental impact statement is urged
prior to further consideration of the runway
extension.
Section 3. That accurate and complete data be provided to
the public in public information sessions and
this information be provided to further public
hearings on this matter.
Section 4. That the runway extension be delayed until a
method to more equitably distribute noise
throughout the area surrounding the airport has
been developed.
Section 5. That the 4/22 Runway extension not be approved
until a master plan for the airport has been
completed and approved.
Section 6. That all improvements proposed for the airport
comply with applicable state and federal laws,
including maintaining minimum safety zones.
Section 7. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to
the Federal Aviation Administration, the City of
Bloomington, the City of Minneapolis, the City
of Burnsville, the City of Eagen the
Metropolitan Airports Commission, and the
Metropolitan Airports Sound Abatement
Commission.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
23rd day of May, 1988.
Steven J. Quam Mayor
ATTEST:
L
Thomas Ferber City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. .135
Agenda, May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance to repeal
Subsection 840.11, Sale and Consumption of Beer in Parks.
Background:
In the 1987 recodification process of the city ordinances,
subsection 840.11, subdivisions 3,4 and 5 were inadvertently left
in the ordinance code. These subdivisions refer to the permit
process for the sale of beer in the parks. This is in direct
conflict with subdivision 2 of the same ordinance, which
specifically prohibits the sale, possession and consumption of
beer in public parks.
At the April 11, 1988 City Council meeting, the City Council
approved first reading of the repeal of this section, and
scheduled the public hearing for May 23, 1988.
Recommended Motion:
Approve an amendment to subsection 840.11, subdivisions 3,4 and
5.
Basis of Recommendation:
The ordinance is in conflict within itself and also with current
Council policy.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Not approve second reading of the ordinance. However, then
the ordinance would remain in conflict with itself and
Council policy.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
If the ordinance is approved on May 23, 1988 it will become
effective 30 days after publication in the official newspaper.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP/sae
BILL NO. 1988 -
AMENDMENT REPEALING SUBDIVISIONS 3, 4
AND 5 OF SUBSECTION 840.11 OF THE
RICHFIELD CITY CODE OF 1987
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Subsection 840.11 of the city code entitled "Sale and
consumption of beer in parks" is hereby amended by repealing
subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 thereof.
Passed this day of , 1988, by the
Richfield City Council.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
Attest:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
0 Council Letter No. 134
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Approval of an expenditure of $6,300.00 to purchase additional
memory for computer workstations at the City Hall and Central
Garage.
Background:
The City purchased its current computer system in February of
1986. Each computer workstation installed contained 512KB of
memory. This amount of memory has, to date, been adequate to
meet the requirements of the software running on the computer
system.
As the city upgraded various components of its computer software
over the last two years, memory requirements have increased.
Another upgrade is planned when additional equipment and software
is purchased this summer. At that time the 512KB memory capacity
of our workstations will no longer be adequate. The memory needs
to be expanded to 1MB, which is double the current amount.
The City owns three different styles of computer workstations.
Two styles are easily upgraded by city staff. The additional
memory required to upgrade these two styles will be included in
the Request for Proposals (RFP) to be issued for this summer's
purchase. The third type of workstation requires a modification
which staff is not qualified to do. The memory in these
workstations can only be expanded by soldering additional
computer chips to the existing memory board.
The need for this type of memory upgrade was anticipated and
included in the RFP specifications issued by the City for a
computer maintenance contract. The contract was awarded to
Financial Products Corporation (FPC) last December. They bid a
price of $290.00 per workstation for this type of memory upgrade.
The pricing and availability of the computer chips needed varies
from month to month. At the present time, FPC can do the upgrade
for $225.00 per workstation.
The City owns 28 workstations which require this type of memory
upgrade. At $225.00 each, the total purchase comes to $6,300.00.
Recommended Motion:
Approve a purchase in the amount of $6,300.00 from Financial
Products Corporation for the upgrade of 28 computer workstations.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The memory upgrade is necessary to allow the expansion of the
City's computer system to proceed as planned. The RFP is
expected to be reissued this summer with installation
targeted for this fall. The City's existing equipment needs
to be upgraded by the time new equipment arrives. (A RFP for
0
4??-ev
new equipment and software was originally issued this past
winter. All bids received were rejected by the Council for
nonconformance.)
2. Staff considers the price quoted by FPC to be very
reasonable. FPC personnel will do the upgrade in their Omaha
office. They will loan us equipment to use while our
equipment is out of the City. An FPC technician will handle
the removal, installation and shipping of both the loaner and
the City's equipment.
3. It is advisable to have the same company which is under
contract to maintain our computer hardware be responsible for
this upgrade as well. If a piece of upgraded equipment
malfunctions, the City will not have to negotiate
responsibility for repairs between multiple vendors.
Alternative Recommendations:
1. Council could direct that this upgrade be included in the RFP
to be issued later this year for new equipment.
2. Council could direct that staff request additional written
quotes at this time.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval of this purchase is requested at the May 23, 1988 City
Council meeting for two reasons:
1. FPC has the computer chips needed for our upgrade in stock
and is holding them for the City pending Council action on
May 23. Because the availability and price of these chips
fluctuates, FPC cannot commit to the lower than bid price
after the current stock is depleted.
2. The upgrade needs to be completed prior to the installation
of additional equipment this fall. We expect it will take
six to eight weeks to complete the upgrade of all 28
workstations.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 133
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Purchase of Pump for Well V.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds $5,000, authority to purchase shall be
submitted to the city council for consideration.
On February 24, 1988 deep well #7, which is located immediately
in front of the water plant, collapsed. The collapse was caused
by natural geological erosion. The pump was ruined by sand and
must be replaced to put the well back into service. The collapse
of well #7 was unanticipated and no funding has been provided in
the adopted 1988 operating budget for repairs. Cost of repairs
will be included in the Revised 1988 budget proposal.
On May 13, 1988 informal quotes were received at the offices of
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and Associates, Inc. (OSM) for bowls and
setting of the pump for Well #7:
Contractor
Quote
E.H. Renner & Sons, Inc. $ 9,635.00
Keys Well Drilling Company 10,430.00
Layne Minnesota 13,975.00
Bergerson-Caswell, Inc. 17,805.00
Recommended Motion:
Authorize purchase and installation of a new pump for Well #7
from/by E.H. Renner & Sons, Inc. in the amount of $9,635.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Replacing the pump at this time is required to have the well
in operation for summer peak pumping.
2. E.H. Renner & Sons, Inc. submitted the lowest quotation.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose to reject all quotations and instruct staff to
obtain additional quotations; however, staff doubts we could
obtain a better price from a reputable vendor.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item appears on the May 23, 1988 regular council agenda.
Staff is asking for approval at this time in order to expedite
the repair of Well V.
Respectfully submitted,
Prosser
Jamelanager
City JDP/e j a
0
0
•
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 132
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Approval of a change to the 1988 Joint Powers Agreement with the.
City of Bloomington for the provision of public health services.
Background:
The Joint Powers Agreement that was approved by Council on
January 11, 1988 contained language that was used to identify the
health service categories provided by Bloomington as it was
contained in the 1987 contract. While the level of service has
remained the same, the category language has been changed for
1988. The proposed category change would be as follows:
Current Language
Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, agrees to
provide residents of Richfield with those community health
services ("Health Services"), that Richfield has outlined in its
1988 Community Health Services Plan, which includes home nursing,
disease prevention and control, health promotion counseling,
child and adult health, and public information and education.
Proposed Language
Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, agrees to
provide residents of Richfield with those community health
services ("Health Services"), that Richfield has outlined in its
1988 Community Health Services Plan, which includes home health,
family health, disease prevention and control, and health
promotion.
This is a housekeeping item and is not a substantial change in
the contract.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the change in the category language for the 1988 Joint
Powers Agreement with the City of Bloomington for the provision
of public health services.
Basis of Recommendation:
This change will bring the agreement into conformance with the
language that is being used in the 1988 Community Health Services
Plan with the Minnesota Health Department.
Alternative Recommendation:
The council could decide not to approve the language change in
the Bloomington contract. Richfield's contract with Bloomington
would then contain 1987 category language.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The category language change of the joint powers agreement
between Richfield and Bloomington for the provision of public
health services is being presented for Council approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP/sae
40
0
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 131
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Purchase of 1988 Turf Truckster Chassis, a replacement item, for
use at Richfield's Rich Acres Golf Course.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the city council for consideration.
On May 13, 1988, staff received quotations
for a 1988 Cushman Turf Truckster Chassis.
asked to quote a base bid, less a trade-in
Cushman, and a total bid. Three quotation
follows:
Base
Bid
in an informal process
The vendors were
price for a 1980
s were received as
Less Total
Trade-In Bid
Cushman Motor Company, Inc. $7,770 ($1,220) $6,550
Illinois Lawn Equipment, Inc. $7,992 ($ 600) $7,392
Horst Distributing, Inc. $7,995 ($ 795) $7,200
• Recommended Motion:
Approve the purchase of a 1988 Cushman Model 53087 Turf Truckster
Chassis from Cushman Motor Company, Inc. in the sum of $7,770.
With the trade-in for $1,220, the net total amount is $6,550.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The 1988 approved Capital Outlay budget for the central
garage motor pool division contains $7,500 for this purchase.
2. The existing 1980 unit was fully depreciated in 1986.
3. Cushman Motor Company, Inc. submitted the lowest base
quotation as well as the best trade-in value for the existing
1980 model.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose to reject all quotations and direct staff to
obtain additional quotations; however, staff doubts we could
obtain a better price from a reputable vendor.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item appears on the May 23, 1988 consent agenda.
Respec ully submitted,
CAI
• Jame D. Prosser
Cit /Manager
JDP/eja
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No-130
Agenda May 23, 1988
Issue Statement:
Purchase of concrete flooring for pole building in golf course
maintenance area.
Background:
The city council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment of
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
The state building code requires that pole buildings used for
storage of vehicles operated by gas and oil have a concrete
floor. When construction of the golf course pole building was
approved in the fall of 1987, the floor was planned to be added
in the spring.
Quotations were sought on three flooring strengths.
- #1 option specification is the most elaborate and heavily
reinforced.
• - #2 option specification incorporates a joint and a wire
mesh reinforcement. It is the option preferred based on
the usage the flooring will serve.
- #3 option specification, similar to the standard garage
floor found at a residence, is not recommended by staff
for this size of building and weight of equipment.
The adopted 1988 Rich Acres Golf Course operating budget includes
$8,500 for concrete flooring in the pole building.
The quotations received were:
Vendor Option #1 Option #2 Option #3
Hines & Sons, Inc. 7,100 5,240 49885
B.N.K. Masonry $ 7,295 $6,240 $5,800
DayCo Concrete Company $ 8,700 $6,200 $5,342
Vidco, Inc. $ 91700 $8,100 $6,400
Hage Construction $10,984 $92170 $72800
Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc. $11,680 $9,985 $8,275
Recommendation:
Authorize the purchase of labor, equipment and material for
concrete flooring in the pole building in the golf cour se
maintenance area based on specification op tion #2 from Hines &
Sons, Inc. for a total price of $5,240.
•
Basis of Recommendation:
1. State building codes require a concrete floor when storing
vehicles operated by gas, oil and diesel fuel.
2. The adopted 1988 budget includes sufficient funding for the
cost of the work outlined above.
3. The quotation by Hines & Sons, Inc. is the lowest submitted
by a responsible vendor.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Direct staff to obtain additional quotations in an attempt to
secure lower prices. However, the quotations received were
within the amount budgeted.
2. Reject all quotations and delay the construction to a later
date, but construction costs will continue to increase.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been scheduled for the May 23, 1988 city council
agenda. It is recommended action be taken at that time.
JDP/eja
y submitted,
RespecY.Prosser
James City Manager
0