09-28-87 agenda~~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 300
.Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution confirming special assessment for
property of the Academy of the Holy Angels..
Background-
Subsequent to the receipt. of a petition from the Academy of the
Holy Angels, the city has approved and instituted improvement
project No. 799 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429
(Special Assessment Procedure). This project consists of fire
suppression equipment in buildings owned by Sisters of St. Joseph
of Carondolet - Holy Angels Academy (school).
The total amount of this assessment is $610,000 and is payable
over a period of 20 years. The first installment of the
assessment is payable on or before the first Monday in January,
1988, with interest at the rate of 8% per annum. The interest
rate has been established based upon the net interest rate of the
special assessment bonds sold to finance this project. The
certification of this special assessment to Hennepin County for
collection through the county property tax system is the proper
procedure to use to collect the twenty installments.
A certified copy of the resolution will be forwarded to Holy
Angels Academy upon adoption.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution confirming special assessment for property
of the Academy of the Holy Angels.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The city instituted improvement project No. 799 with Holy
Angels Academy for fire suppression improvements under
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
2. The petition of the Holy Angels Academy for the Chapter 429
proceedings included a 20 year payment schedule for the
special assessments.
3. The attached resolution is the appropriate method of
memorializing and establishing the special assessment
payment process.
Alternative Recommendation:
None, if the city council is to follow through with the special
assessment process for the project previously adopted by the city
council.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action by the city council on September 28 is necessary to make
an October 28 certification deadline.
Respe fully submitted,
Ja a D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP/eja
_"/~ `"/
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT AGAINST PROPERTY OF
HOLY ANGELS ACADEMY
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City has duly instituted and conducted Improvement Project
No. 799 (Project) pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429, consisting of the installation of fire suppression equipment in
buildings owned by Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondolet - Holy Angels
Academy .(School).
2. The Director of Community Development has prepared an assessment
(Assessment) of the costs of the Project to be assessed against the land
owned by the School which has been benefitted by the Project.
3. It is found and determined that the Assessment is proper. The
Assessment as proposed is accepted and each tract of land included therein
is found and determined to be benefitted by the proposed Assessment in an
amount at least equal to the amount of the Assessment. A copy of the
Assessment is attached and made a part of this resolution.
4. The Assessment is payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 20 years. The first installment of the Assessment is
payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1988, with interest at
the rate of 8.007 per annum from the date of this resolution until December
31, 1987. To each subsequent installment when due be added interest for
one year on all unpaid installments.
5. The School may, at any time prior to the certification of the
Assessment to the County Director of Property Taxation, pay the entire
Assessment with accrued interest to date of payment to the City Treasurer,
or make partial payments thereof as outlined by City ordinance, but no
interest will be charged if the Assessment is paid in full within 30 days
of the adoption of this resolution (i.e. October 29, 1987). The School may
also, at any time thereafter pay to the Treasurer the entire amount of the
Assessment unpaid with accrued interest to December 31 of the year in which
the payment is made. The payment must be made prior to November 15 or
interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
6. The Clerk is authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy
of this resolution to the School.
~~~-~
7. The Clerk is authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy
of this resolution to the Director of Property Taxation of Hennepin County
requesting extension of the Assessment on the property tax lists of the
County. The Assessment will be collected and paid over in the same manner
as other municipal taxes.
Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
R4:0025REO1.F16
~/oc -~
Property Address P.I.N. Amount
6699 Nicollet 27-028-24-31-0002 $610,000.00
~'//
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 299
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Resolution confirming special assessment for property of
Independent School District No. 280.
eackground•
In 1985 the city approved and instituted improvement project No.
825 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 (Special Assess-
ment Procedure). This project consisted of the installation of
fire suppression equipment in buildings owned by Independent
School District No. 280. The school district had petitioned for
this project under Chapter 429 procedures, and as such, special
assessment bonds were sold to include financing of this
improvement.
The total amount of the assessment was $994,522. A prepayment of
$300,000 on the assessment was made in 1986. The remaining
balance is to be paid over a period of 10 years in equal annual
installments with an interest rate of 8.5896 per annum, The
interest rate was established based upon the net interest rate of
the bond sale concerning those improvements.
The certification of this special assessment to Hennepin County
for collection through the county property tax system is the
appropriate procedure to use to collect the ten installments.
Annual notice of this assessment must be sent to the school by
the city.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution confirming special assessments against
property of Independent School District No. 280.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The city instituted improvement project No. 825 with
Independent School District No. 280 for fire suppression
improvements under. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
2. The petition of the school district for the Chapter 429
proceedings included a 10 year payment schedule for the
special assessments.
3, The attached resolution is the appropriate method of
memorializing and establishing the special assessment
payment process.
Alternative Recommendation:
None, if the city council is to follow through with the special
assessment process for the project previously adopted by the city
council.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action by the city council on September 28 is necessary to make
an October 10, 1987 certification deadline.
Respect ly submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
~///'/
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT AGAINST PROPERTY OF
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0. 280
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, as -follows:
1. The City has duly instituted and conducted Improvement Project
No. 825 (Project) pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429, consisting of the installation of fire suppression equipment in
buildings owned by Independent School District No. 280 (District).
2. The Director of Community Development has prepared an assessment
(Assessment) of the costs of the Project to be assessed against the land
owned by the District which has been benefitted by the Project.
3. It is found and determined that the Assessment is proper. The
Assessment as proposed is accepted and each tract of land included therein
is found and determined to be benefitted by the proposed Assessment in an
amount at least equal to the amount of the Assessment. A copy of the
Assessment is attached and made a part of this resolution.
4. The Assessment is payable in equal annual installments extending
over a period of 10 years. The first installment of the Assessment is
payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1988, with interest at
the rate of 8.587 per annum from the date of this resolution until December
31, 1987: To each subsequent installment when due be added interest for
one year on all unpaid installments.
5. The District may, at any time prior to the certification of the
Assessment to the County Director of Property Taxation, pay the entire
Assessment with accrued interest to date of payment to the City Treasurer,
or make partial payments thereof as outlined by City ordinance, but no
interest will be charged if the Assessment is paid in full within 30 days
of the adoption of this resolution (i.e. October 29, 1987). The District
may also, at any time thereafter pay to the Treasurer the entire amount of
the Assessmen*_ unpaid with accr+~ed interest to December 31 of the year in
which the payment is made. The payment must be made prior to November 15
or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding
year.
6. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to transmit a certified
copy of this resolution to the Clerk of the District and to further provide
for notice of the Assessment to the District in the manner provided by law.
Attest:
John Hamilton. ~.yor
'PYionias Ferber City Clerk
~//~~.
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis
Minnesota 55402
Telephone (612) 333-0543
Telecopier (612) 333-0540
Clayton L. LeFevere
Herbert P. Lefler
J. Dennis O'Brien
John E. Drawz
David J. Kennedy
Joseph E. Hamilton
John B. Dean
Glenn E. Purdue
Richard J. Schieffer
Charles L. LeFevere
Herbert P. Lefler III
James J. Thomson, Jr.
Thomas R. Galt
Dayle Nolan
John G. Kressel
Steven B. Schmidt
James M. Strommen
R~-~Id H. Batty
\ m P. Jordan
Wnnam R. Skallerud
Rodney D. Anderson
Corrine A. Heine
David D. Beaudoin
Paul E. Rasmussen
Steven M. Tallen
Mary Frances Skala
Christopher J. Harristhal
Timothy J. Pawlenty
Rolf A. Sponheim
Julie A. Bergh
LeFevere
Lefler
Kennedy
O'Brien &
Drawz
a Professional
Association
September 21, 1987
~~C~I~~® ~~~ 2 2 1987
Mr. Steve Devich
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Re: Fire Suppression - Special Assessments
City of Richfield, Minnesota
Dear Steve:
Enclosed you will find the draft of a resolution
confirming a special assessment against Independent
School District No. 280 for the fire suppression
project financed by the city's 1986 improvement bonds.
Also enclosed with that resolution is a notice of
assessment which must be sent to the school district
annually. The language of the resolution is a bit
strange since it refers to dates prior to its adoption,
but I think it is in the form that should be adopted.
Also enclosed is the text of a resolution concerning
the assessment against Holy Angels Academy for the fire
suppression equipment financed with the 1987 improve-
ment bonds. This resolution should be filed with the
Director of Property Taxation for extension of the
assessments for collection. I assume that an attach-
ment will be placed on the resolution showing the
property identification and the amount of the assess-
ment as is the city's usual practice.
On the Holy Angels assessment I assume that the City
wishes to assess at this time and I assume, therefore,
that the assessment will be the amount stated in the
petition. The assessment cannot exceed that amount,
but I suppose it is possible that the actual contracts
for the work might be less. I frankly don't know how
to deal with that if it is your intent, and I suspect
that it is, to certify the assessment this fall. The
only other alternative is to wait until contracts are
let and assess at that tie which would mean that the
first installment of assessments would not be received
by the City until 1989.
~~~, ~
Mr. Steve Devich
September 21, 1987
Page 2
If you have any questions about these materials, please
don't hesitate to call.
Yours very truly,
David J. Kenned
DJK:caw
Enclosure
cc: Clayton LeFevere
John Dean
~~~ ~
Property Address P.I.N. Amount
7001 Harriet 34-028-24-21-0003 $694,522.00
~//- ~
DATE: September 28, 1987
T0: Clerk
Independent School District No. 280
7001 Harriet Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
RE: Notice of Assessment
You are notified that the Richfield City Council has
assessed against property of Independent School District No. 280
(District) the sum of $694,55.2 for the cost of Improvement
Project No. 825 as petitioned for by the District pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.031.
The total cost of the project is $994,552. However,
$300,000 has been forwarded to the City as a prepayment reducing
the assessment to the amount stated herein.
A certified copy of the Resolution adopting the assessment
and outlining methods of payment is enclosed. This notice is
given pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061,
Subdivision 4.
Finance Manager
City of Richfield, Minnesota
City Clerk
City of Richfield, Minnesota
/®
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 298
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution reducing interest rates charged for 1986
Alley Paving and Academy of the Holy Angels special assessments.
Background:
In August, prior to the sale of special assessment bonds, letters
of notification were sent to individuals affected by various
special assessment projects. Within that letter, a notice of the
hearing date and a stated interest charge for unpaid assessments
was established. The interest rate was a best guess of the bond
sale net interest rate, plus an approximate 1% for administrative
overhead, as is normally done. At the hearing of September 14,
1987, the percentage rate per annum for the 1986 Alley Paving was
established at 8 1/2% as the notification letter had stated.
However, inasmuch as the net interest rate for the bond sale was
bid at 6.86%, it is now possible to reduce the interest rate
charge to the tax payer to 8%. This should be accomplished
before certification to the County of the assessments. Also
included in that bond sale was the 1987 Alley Paving project and
the Holy Angels fire suppression improvements. All parties
affected by this bond sale, including Holy Angels, should be
charged the same interest rate.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached
resolution reducing the interest rate for the 1986 Alley Paving
and Holy Angels fire suppression improvements to 8%.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The bond sale was closed at an interest rate of 6.86%.
2. The city normally charges an interest rate approximately 1%
greater than the net interest cost of the special
assessment bonds.
3. At the September 14, 1987 meeting, the rate was set at
8 1/2%.
4. It is relatively easy to make this change before
certification if the City Council chooses to do so.
Alternative Recommendation:
1 Leave the 8 1/2% as it is.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item should be considered on September 28, 1987 if the
change is desired, since this is the last meeting before the 1987
certification is due.
Respec fully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit anager
JDP/eja
/O'
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION REDUCING INTEREST RATE PER ANNUM FOR
UNPAID PORTION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR 1986 ALLEY
PAVING AND ACADEMY OF HOLY ANGELS FIRE
SUPPRESSION IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has adopted special
assessments for the 1986 Alley Paving and Academy of the Holy
Angels fire suppression improvements, and
WHEREAS, the assessments adopted contained a provision which
imposed a 8 1/2~ per annum interest charge on the unpaid balance
of said special assessments, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield sold general obligation
special assessment bonds to finance the cost of said improvements
at a net interest rate of 6.86%, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield normally charges an interest
rate on unpaid special assessments which is approximately 1%
greater than the net interest cost of the respective special
assessment bond,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield that the interest rate per annum for the 1986
Alley Paving and Academy of Holy Angels fire suppression
improvements be reduced to 8~ per annum.
Adopted this 28th day of September, 1987 by the City Council
of the City of Richfield.
John Hamilton Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 297
September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Approval of findings of fact relating to the denial of a
conditional use permit at 6601 Penn Avenue.
Background•
At the September 14, 1987 City Council meeting the council denied
a request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction
of a 16.8 foot by 44.3 foot detached automatic car wash facility
at the existing Amoco service station store at 6601 Penn Avenue.
Staff has been advised by the city attorney's office that this
denial needs to be supported by written findings of fact. A
resolution outlining findings of fact to support the denial of
the conditional use permit is being drafted by the city
attorney's office. The resolution will be available for Council
review and consideration at the September 28, 1987 meeting.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution outlining findings of fact supporting the
denial of the conditional use permit at 6601 Penn Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Written findings of fact are required to sustain a denial of
a conditional use permit. The findings of fact in the
resolution summarize staff's understanding of the council's
denial of the special use permit.
Alternative Recommendation:
The alternative recommendation would be to add to or change the
findings of fact and pass an amended resolution.
Decision Mode-
This matter is scheduled for council consideration on September
28, 1987. No public hearing is required as long as the facts
discussed reflect those which were discussed at the public
hearing on September 14, 1987. No published or mailed notice has
been provided.
Respect u ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
T~ B
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 296
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Ordinance amendment to permit non-police employees to issue
citations.
Background•
The Public•Safety Department is organized in such a manner that
non-peace officer personnel routinely issue citations for
building, fire and housing code violations, animal, zoning and
land use ordinances. It is important that this practice continue
in order to pursue all public safety concerns efficiently and
effectively.
Effective August 1, 1987, Minnesota State Statutes, Chapter 334,
commonly referred to as the "Police Practices Bill", restricts
non-police officer employees from issuing citations for code
violations unless this practice is specifically authorized by
city ordinance. Therefore, the city attorney's office has
drafted an ordinance to enable certain non-police employees to
issue citations.
Recommended Motion:
Approve first reading of the ordinance amendment adding Section
115,11 entitled "Enforcement" to the city code, and schedule
second reading and the public hearing for October 12, 1987.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. This ordinance amendment would formally address the
authority of our licensed Police Officers to issue citations
in lieu of arrest for all petty misdemeanor, misdemeanor or
gross misdemeanor code violations.
2. It would also enable Community Service Officers and Police
Reserve Officers to issue citations at the direction of the
Public Safety Director. Inspection and Fire Division
employees are formally authorized to issue notices of
violation and citations for alleged violations of code
provisions which they are designated to administer and
enforce.
3. This proposed ordinance amendment would give limited
authority to Community Service Department supervisory
employees during declared snow emergencies in order to
insure efficient clearing and plowing of the Richfield
streets.
Alternate Recommendations:
1. The council could determine that only licensed Police
Officers be given the authority to enforce code provisions
by issuing citations in lieu of arrest.
2. The council could direct that some select employees, other
than licensed Police Officers, be given this authority.
~~ /
Decision/Discussion Mode:
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 334 was effective August, 1, 1987.
Therefore, unless and until the ordinance is amended., only
licensed police officers are able to issue citations in the city.
If the city council approves first reading, the public hearing
and second reading of the ordinance amendment will be held on
October 12, 1987, The ordinance would become effective
approximately five weeks after approval of second reading.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP/eja
mod--~
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 115
OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 115 of the Code is amended by adding the following
new Subsection 115.11:
115.11 Enforcement
1) By Peace Officers. Peace Officers appointed by the
City shall have the authority to enforce the
provisions of this Code the violation of which
constitutes a misdemeanor, petty misdemeanor or gross
misdemeanor. In connection with such authority, Peace
Officers may make arrests and issue citations in lieu
of arrest in the manner provided by law.
2) By Community Service Officers and Police Reserve
Officers. Community Service Officers and Police
Reserve Officers appointed by the City may, in the
performance of their duties, and under the direction
of the Director of Public Safety, issue notices of
violation and citations in lieu of arrest, but may
not take persons into custody for refusal to sign
such citations.
3) Employees of the Fire Division. Employees of the Fire
Division of the Department of Public Safety may
issue notices of violations which the Fire Division and
its employees are, by Code, designated to administer
and enforce.
4) Employees of Inspections Division. Employees of the
Inspections Division of the Department of Public
Safety may issue notices of violations for. alleged
violations of code provisions which the Inspections
Division and its employees are, by Code, designated
to administer and enforce.
5) Employees of Community Services Department. Employees
of the Community Services Department designated as
having supervisory authority may issue notices of
violation for violations of Subsection 1305.13 of
this Code.
Dated:
John Hamilton Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 295
September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Approval of signs for the Hampton Inn project.
Background•
The developers of the Hampton Inn project have submitted to the
city details of the signage to be used for the Hampton Inn
project located at Lyndale Avenue and 77th Street. The
developers are also proposing to construct an off site
directional sign located on the Blaylock Plumbing site at 4th
Avenue and 78th Street. Specific signage being proposed includes
the following:
1. An illuminated 4' x 6' symbol on
structure.
2. Illuminated 10' x 23' Hampton Inn
the south wall of the structure.
3. An illuminated freestanding sign,
11 1/2' "Hampton Inn" panel and a
panel. This sign will be located
77th Street and Lyndale Avenue.
4. Illuminated "Enter" signs located
the site.
the west wall of the
signs on the west wall and
27' high, with a 7 1/2' x
4' x 8' changeable message
near the intersection of
at each of the entrances to
5. An illuminated freestanding off .site directional sign to be
located on the Blaylock Plumbing site at the intersection of
4th Avenue and 78th Street. The sign will be 25' high with a
9' x 25' sign panel.
Recommended Motions:
1. Approve permits for an illuminated 4' x 6' symbol on the west
wall of the structure; illuminated 10' x 23' Hampton Inn
signs on the west wall and the south wall of the structure;
an illuminated freestanding sign, 27' high, with a 7 1/2' x
11 1/2' "Hampton Inn" panel and a 4' x 8' changeable message
panel to be located near the intersection of 77th Street and
Lyndale Avenue; and illuminated "Enter" signs located at each
of the entrances to the site.
2. Approve an illuminated freestanding off site directional sign
to be located on the Blaylock Plumbing site at the
intersection of 4th Avenue and 78th Street. The sign will be
25' high with a 9' x 25' sign panel.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Proposed signage on the Hampton Inn site at 77th and Lyndale
Avenue meets all city ordinance requirements for such
signage.
2. The off site directional sign is necessary because of limited
visibility of the Hampton Inn site from westbound traffic on
Highway 494. Highway 494 is depressed in the area with high
retaining walls. It is, therefore, difficult for westbound
~'/e
traffic on Highway. 494 to see the site in order to exit on
Lyndale Avenue. Therefore, the developers in lieu of an
extra high sign on the site, and at the suggestion of city
staff, are proposing to provide an off site directional sign
to make westbound traffic aware of which exit to use. The
applicants feel strongly that this sign is necessary to
insure the success of the Hampton Inn and allow them to
compete with other hotels on the strip.
3. The proposed off site directional sign meets all of the
ordinance standards for such signs listed in Section 4.15.25
with the exception of the following:
a. The ordinance indicates that the sign be directional only
announcing an exit at the next intersection or
interchange. This particular sign would be located
between Portland Avenue and Nicollet Avenue and would not
announce an exit at the next interchange. It is staff's
opinion that a sign meeting this provision would be
difficult in this particular case because of the depressed
nature of the freeway between Nicollet Avenue and Lyndale
Avenue and the difficulty in finding the site in that
particular area.
b. The ordinance indicates that the business sign on the
premises being advertised be no more than 80 square feet
in the sign area. It is staff's opinion that the 80
square foot limit on signage on the Hampton Inn site would
be unreasonable. It would not allow them to have proper
signage on the site. The PUD plan previously approved for
the site., while not providing exact detail of the proposed
signage of the site, did clearly indicate that there would
be signage in excess of 80 square feet on the site. The
city has previously approved signage on the Hampton Inn
site, which in staff's opinion would invalidate this
particular condition.
c. The ordinance indicates that the design of the sign and
the lettering thereof will be simple and easily read
containing no more than three or four words with no
unnecessary decoration or pictures. The proposed sign
would have six words on one side of the sign and eight
words on the other side of the sign. It is staff's
opinion that the proposed sign would meet the intent of
this particular condition. The amount of wordage has been
kept to a minimum to provide the necessary directional
information.
4. Section 4.15.39 of the ordinance indicates that the council
has authority to approve a sign of unusual size, design or
location. This would allow the council to approve the off
site directional sign even though as outlined above, the sign
technically does not meet all the conditions for granting of
such off site directional signs.
~/~
5. Because the new sign ordinance is not yet in effect, the old
ordinance provisions are being applied. There is one
provision of the new sign ordinance that the proposed off
site directional sign would not meet. The proposed sign is
approximately 200 square feet in area, while the new sign
ordinance limits such signs to 100 square feet in-area.
Alternative Recommendation:
The alternative recommendation would be to deny the off site
directional sign as proposed or to require that changes to the
location, copy or size of the sign be changed.
Decision Mode:
The city ordinance requires that the City Council conduct a
hearing concerning the off site directional signs. A hearing has
been scheduled for the September 28 City Council meeting.
Written notice of this hearing has been provided as required by
city ordinances. No published notice is required.
Respect lly submitted,
Jam s Prosser
Cit anager
JDP/eja
r
1
~c
n
^` _ V
J
1
'~L._ ~
~. `T
~ -i_
~"
l
Z
1 L. -
r
~: '
,.
Tr
__
_{
~~
~.
r',-,~-
'~
',
f~
~n
~}\ ;i \_
__~_.. ~.
j. T
h ~
} -\~~
• Y
__ E
c
} t
`i J
~-
-i-' ~-
-~
:~
..
~~
i. i
~ ;~~~
I
i ,-
(,T
"~ i--,
~ __
- I ~-
i?
i (S__
:~
~-
___
i
~
-----
_____
__
,. ~~
, ___~
~
~ ~
E -- --~
i
__~
-- 1 ~
,
~
; ~
~
,
r ~ ~_
~ _
- --
~
I- ~
l
i i,
i
i i
i i
~ ~
i
i
-t-------- ~-
i
N
i
-_.____
~.____
I
-_ -- I I ~
I
~
- _
I
__
I
I
~ ~
~.
` \
f
I
i
i ~
I
i
~, 9.2.. .'-~
~.
1~i ~~
C: 7'
~~
~, ~ 3
x
~~
-(
w
`A
Y"
N~
~~ y
I ~
- II - L,
{- I`=~jn'' I~'`-f'=
~Si~ sr'Vr~-.{ r'~rJ~sr~
iI~~T'r--_ ~I~,t ~~~E,
~~.
~~~~~~
~-~,~ Ls - tv ~ F{.
I ~ I,,y
I
r... _...LI_IO~~O.G,
_~ ° Q-.
_~,
-_. ~.~-
_. .,, ~ ~,~.+
,~
i I
=~
~ I
I ' I
i _. _...
~ [~M r r
~~ t F~E_ ~n~r.~~r,~ i
Fit l mot{ _ _ _k
~,,
AMPtON INNS, INC~
~: - V I~~~-{ l_
=~
_;
.. ~ _...
-p
I I
I ~..~,_... _.,.,, . _ f- __ ~_._
-- -- - --- ~ !I
I ~ ~ ~~` f'j nt rk-{ ~ ,:) . ~>,nr-y> Gust°rr'et - , ..f f.. I ; ~.4. I
/ it /~[1C1tCSSi'j F-C)•~l..L_ ; L...i .~ i
-. I ~ ..
_..
_ -._ -_ .: -- r
_l _ _ Ci ry (~ ~ c- P . - ,tea
4 ~ i , - ._--------- --- State ~-., 1.1
~_.:
~t~ I h~ct~F:r~~{L t =~.
I ~,
-,- F~,~~~.- t~~~ r-~~~. <s~
_"i........ ~Itrr~.. tai. ~:,-fMi11,L
-~t~f~,.~-~
---__ _ _ ,
I _--
T'-~ ,,
i-.' . i ,
~`~
~.
,Q
~f'~ ~~ oP~Jp
~ i
r~-!
-,
.,
_ ._
~_ _.____._._.__._.__w..~.._____. ~~ (o
,~~
-~_-,
_~~~
_- 5
c
--r---~
oC
~i
„~ i
o~~< , i
;~ ~~ i
r ~.;.
it
,~
`i ° ~
,.. . ~
~` ,i
~~
~ ~
~ r~
~ I
^. ~~
~.. :~
~~'T~ st P~- t
~~~~
~}~t-~r~,c~. rhr~..a,
~~~~ 7~~-KL~r~~.~r~
+- ~w~~.
P~ruy~q~~r~ ~MOF'~~`~
Pj' i SGO~F'~'1~ '.-.1.1 ~ t`u~
~~ci~t 95ic sr~Pf~-~-F~I~K-~
-~--------.: __ _ _ . 300 rte, ~~~ . ~~~ .
a~ ~ ~r ~'F`~~T Fem.
_-~_
Cusrorr+er - ~~--! ~T~ ~J ~ r
Mciress i i ~~ vim. ! W
Cary ~~~i~ f~ F ~E.,~..
Sate h'h f
.. _..__ _ _ 1 1.. ~,
~~
i I
-- ... _ ___ _ L Q u>1- ~
__....... _.,r _. _ . _ J I
_ ~ Vie?-~---
Y
~ I o
I lu °~ ~ ~
"~ I~-p. n
~~-C~
~~ ~~
N n ~ I
:
~~ I ~
->`----~I~--
C
,,,~ ,
-~-- -
~;,~~ __
Q- J
;~ ~
_r__
~:
~~
~__
i
_ f-
i
Lobo iv r„„-~. N~i•..ir~. ~•T^~'~.+.88 k=%r.~ ,_ ~
1-~I-~~TE._ !~F'O~I~iL~ ~ GAjG-'~"O~L'.
~~ ~ -
_„
~ 494 W
BACK TO
LYNDALE
,' EXIT
L Y.
~Ir_~
----_ - __- -- ---~.1~~ __
i is
i
_.~ I .-~ -= Iill ==1111!
~ ~ :1 I ~-iii -
~ ~ li 1111;=
-.~i>~~ -
I _ ~ ~..
V ..
la~i
. I Ip.
I ~ of '
~ ~ -I
~ ..
---
~' ~ ~>'~ ::.ire s~r~ ~-j-~.aTn~l :~' ~'~--~-
_-- =- ~
v
EXIT AT _____~_
~_.
__ =,_
LYNDALE =c
` ~ ;.
AVENUE =~
-_
`Y,
,~
Cif ~ ~,~'I~L u(i-W!~ s
Ct~ u~~r ~°~('1~~.8 a-1
=;r~-ia ~~.:.I poi-Ic._ ~-y.
C,nron+e+
~,~
City ~I~ I~I
Strrc 1.
~/~
t
N
W
Z
W
SIGN LOCATLON MAP
BLAYLOCK PLUMBING
7 g~ N
ST REE
_- PROPERTY LINE
I
I
NAEGELE BILLBQARD
r
^rnr~rrm PROPOSED OFF--SITE DIRECTIONAL SIGN
-~ ~i
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 294
Agenda of September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Request for continuance of public hearing on the request for a
variance at 7234-36 Lyndale Avenue.
Background•
Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Nelson, property owners at 7234-36 Lyndale
Avenue, requested that the city grant a variance to the
requirement that one enclosed parking stall be provided for each
dwelling unit in MR-1 two family zoning districts.
The applicants have proposed to convert the existing two family
dwelling on the site into a "board and lodging home" for a
maximum of six elderly women. The proposed use is permitted in
an MR-1 district. The city ordinance requires. four parking
spaces for two family dwellings in an MR-1 district, two of which
must be enclosed. The site plan indicates all four parking
spaces are not enclosed and thus, a variance is required.
On August 19, 1987 a Richfield Hearing Examiner .held a public
hearing on the variance request. The Hearing Examiner
subsequently denied the variance request.
The applicants are appealing the decision of the Hearing Examiner
to the City Council. A public hearing concerning the appeal has
been scheduled for September 28, 1987. The applicant has
requested that the city postpone the hearing until October 12,
1987. At the September 28, 1987 council meeting, the City
Council may take testimony from anyone wishing to speak on this
matter.
Recommended Motion:
Continue the hearing until October 12, 1987.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant made the request for such a continuation.
2. Legal notice of the public hearing on September 28, 1987,
was published in the Richfield Sun. The council will need to
.take action to continue the hearing until October 12th as
requested. If anyone is present on September 28, 1987, they
should be allowed to speak as well as be notified of the
continuance.
Alternative Recommendation:
The council may take action on the appeal. However, this action
would deny applicants the opportunity to present their case.
Decision Mode-
The public hearing concerning this matter is scheduled for
September 28, 1987. Notice of the public hearing was published
in the Richfield Sun Newspaper. If this matter is continued
until October 12, 1987 no further public hearing notice is
required.
Respec lly submitted,
Jam s D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP/dkh
~ ~~
DANIEL A. AND JEAN L. NELSON
8218 Colfax Avenue South
Bloomington, MN 55420
8$1-18$9
September 18. 1987
Rick Jopke, City Planner and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
RE: Variance Request
Case No. 87-V-7
Applicant: Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Nelson
Prop Loc: 7234-36 Lyndale Ave. S.
Hearing Examiner: Mr. Vern Luettinger
Hearing Date: August 19, 1987
Dear Mr. Jopke and Members of the City Council,
We would like to request a continuance of our appeal hearing
before the City Council to October 12, 1987.
We feel that this is very important to us and we would like
to make the very best presentation that we can. We feel that
the short time remaining between now and Monday, Sept. 28th
is just not enough time for us to accomplish the things we
have to do to present our appeal.
I hope this will not be an inconvenience for you.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
Dan & Jea Nelson
~~
Dan i e 1 A. and Jean L. Ne 1 son
8218 Coifax Avenue South
81 oom i ngt on, MIN 55420
881-1889
September 8, 1987
Mlr. Towhid Kazi,
Assistant City Planner
City of Richfieid
+67CKJ Port I and Avenue
Richfield, MIN 55423
RE: Variance Request
Case No. 87-V-7
App 1 i cant : Mir. and Mlrs. Dar, i e I Ne 1 son
prop Lac: 7234-36 Lyndale Ave. S.
Hearing Examiner: Mir. Vern Luettinger
Hearing Date: August 19, 1987
Dear Mr. Kazi,
We would like to appeal the decision of Mlr. Vern Luettinger,
Hearing Examiner, who denied our request for a parking
requirement variance.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
~t~t
Dan i e 1 A. and Jean L. Ne i son
Tr ~,;,r
CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 293
Agenda of September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Second reading and public hearing on the request for the vacation
of utility and drainage easement at 7744 Fifth Avenue (New Arby's
site).
Background:
Mr. Doug Kennedy, Vice President, Franchise Associates, Inc. has
made a request that the city vacate a utility and drainage
easement at 7744 Fifth Avenue (Arby's restaurant). On October
13, 1986 the City Council gave approval to a final .plat at 7715
and 7731 4th Avenue which included the proposed site.. The
easement to be vacated .runs through the lot owned by Franchise
Associates.
The City Council gave first reading to the ordinance vacating the
proposed easement on September 14, 1987.
Zoning Ordinance Requirement.:
Section 500.29, subdivision 4, indicates the regulations
regarding the vacation of a publicly owned easement.
Recommended Motion:
Approve an ordinance vacating the utility and drainage easement
at 7744 Fifth Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Franchise Associates has removed and relocated the storm
sewer on their site. Northern States Power, Northwestern
8e11 and Minnegasco do not oppose the vacation of the
proposed easement.
2. The city does not have any utilities in the easement area and
staff does not anticipate any future need for utilities in
the area.
3. The Planning Commission voted (6-0) unanimously to recommend
approval of the vacation.
Alternative Recommendation:
The City Council may wish to deny the vacation of the easement.
Decision Mode
Second reading of the ordinance and public hearing on the
vacation of the utility and drainage easement at 7744 Fifth
Avenue is scheduled for Monday, September 28, 1987. Mailed and
published notice was provided for the public hearing and second
reading.
Respectfu ly submitted,
James Prosser
City M Hager
JDP/dkh
'~~//
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION
OF A UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT
7744 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN
Section 1. The following described easement area is hereby
vacated:
That portion of that certain five foot drainage and utility
easement area lying within Lot 3, Block 1, Slaylock Plumbing
Addition as shown and dedicated on the plat of Blaylock Plumbing
addition on file and of record and as shown and dedicated on the
plat of Ranft's Addition on file and of record.
Passed by the City .Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
this 28th day of September, 1987.
ATTEST:
John Hamilton, Mayor
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
0
>_ ~ ~ ~_
-. ., ~ _ N
xERxES Av E. ~- -_-_-_,-_.-__~_. y
_ .- _ -- ~_-~-_-_-__ -.. __~ '--__ xERxES Av E
~~ \~ )V\ r ~~:~-` --~~ WnSH BURN
VIN CE H7 ~'\ ~~---~~-`-- _- -_ ~-~~--~ =-~ ___- _-- _ _t VINCENT
LIPTON •__ ~ '?-_~-____L___ ~`_~
~.-~- __ _ __ _ __ _~ i_~ _ - - - _' LIPTON
TN OMAS ~-~- - - ~_ -_ ~.~~~ ll
SNERIDAN ~-- _~ -^--r -^`Y~O:`~-- - .~{ TNOM45
RUSSELL ;1 '1 ~_ ~ ~1~^ - ^! ~~?~ ~-'.1 SNERIDAN
,I ._.__ ~~L~^! -_ --:11~ RUSSELL
QUEEN ~ ~_ C~~__, ~_~: ~,:~.:. J
' - ~ rte---.-~. ~~~ ~; .. QUEEN
PENN AYE. ___
OLIVER ^rJ ~- --`-1`- -_^^ -- = PENN AYE.
' -^ ~ OLIYER
NEw TON Ir =~~ ~: r~ :`-. ~-'~_.:~$ 1L~' :_.~L_,L~I.
YORGAN tx"-__~'-~~ ~~i ~ ~~;~JC ~C~~ 1 MORGAN
LOGAN 1; it . _`~~_: ~ l`~!
C'~ ^- L-_ ~-~ ~_
F CD~~
KNOx ~ ~ ~,- -~-:--F:----~.~.
JAPES ~. ~~ ,~ I I' ~ ~~l ~l „ "" ~-.-~~ l~~ 1.~ KNO%
. i ~ C ~~
IRV/NG i\Q i ~~li 1 I~~L__~~!~r-ter.' I--~ ~'~t JAMES
`:- AxE~~. a+rvE .{~.I IRVING
HUMBOLDT -- ^- -- _ - I ]f MUMBOLDT
GIRARD ~ ~ 1~ =''7(~~_;__ li -____~- ``` \ ~~~J~~+iI
FRD/OMT ~ /~ ~ L-~l_:~~ ~_ - r~r-~ t GIRARD
~~- ` ~ ~:Ih: FAEN01/T
EMERSON ~/-~` ` ~ ~ f ~ ~~
DUPONT ~^, ~ _ ~ O ~\\~I, EMERSON
COLFAx ,_~~ j ~ ~ t ~~11.
BRYAN? I~~~~ u~i ~L-_IL_+~ ~ - 'I11' COI FAx
AL DRICN ~~~'~~~ -'tu 1 t~ u
(' ICI a.~~`~ 1r~~~~__~`r\~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I' ALDRICH
LY NDALE AVE. ~L'~~" f! --i ~~' ~~~j'~\`~ 7~~
~{~~~ ~~~ 1 V _ it \ LYN DALE AVE.
GARFIELD (i ~ C~-_ a ,
;i_! .~~ ~I-~~,i ~~~ ~L_$ (~` ~`~I-I,.~I~I GARFIELD
HARRIET , I_~ ~- {{L~ ^ ' ~__ LL~~ii^JI ~; (~ ~,L~; (r4 HARRIET
GRAND (:~ ~~ ~ C^_.~~~~ 1N~I { ~~~`-I ~LIC~L~~~ GRAND
{~ '{~ 1
PLEASANT ~: - L^"°~~+~L._._.-i.__~5-~~+i. ___._ J _u L4-:.~.i~~_ ~ ~. _. _ ~~ill PLEASANT
PILLSBURY {I,.--._I '. 'C_.ll__J._. i.L~.C== _ I~~--+~ l_JOI~I{~
"-~j •'-:~-• (~~ j ` PILLSBURY
wENTwORTH I ~~~~L-~~=`~j L_JL_J II
4~ ' 'I ,'-~ ~ ~^'ll 1YENTWORTN
BLAISOELL ~~.,~\ iL_il_:L~L_ ~tl ` ~ I~U~ ~~ II
1_~~_~~.__^I Or-~~ ~~ ~ ~I BLAISOEII
NICOILET AVE. ~ ~' L_ !
; r^!----~--~~-. NICOILET AYE.
t1~~------~~~' t ' ' I-1 ;~ f tl
STEVENS ~L-=~L -=~-^_~1~ J ~~{~,'i_7~ ~~ STEVENS
~j ~ 2nd
3r0 L~~~L~~~~__; (~ 1I ~_y~_~_~p~~j~Jt(~~~~.j,,jjl
CLIN TON ~~~~-C~~~i~L~~~l'T L= ~ I 3r0
~T. {LL ....JJ` l '~
4/p Cam' ~~~.?C,C~ ~~~ ~{, CUN70N
sew ~' ~ slp
~ Cam( =-r ~~~C~C~
PORTLAND AVE.
'' • ~^ !""-'-T~ PORTLAND 4VE.
OAKLAND f;'~ '~L~ -JJ (L~-~I~~C"lL-~ ~ IJIII..
~1- ~~_O L_J~l_J E-J { ~ OAKLAND
PARK ,1
['I~ ~ L_JCJCC' ~_. ~I PARK
COLUMBUS {{ r I COLUMBUS
11:~ r r'1..
CHICAGO i, ~~~' ~ ~~ II CHICAGO
ELLIOT 1.' { m _ {
(t ;~ {~j I ELUOT
10 tp ~; .~j u II 10 to
n rp a~~ ~ 4TH AVE $ - I
{:~ :,1.. ~ Ilrn
Izrp ~ 0 ~~~`, Izrp
13 tp 4
1 ~ 2 u rp
i1 tp ~ ~ ~ ~~ 14 IA
is rp ~ ~ ._..1 iO~ IS to
BLOOMINGTON R.i ~ _
~ '~ ~~~ - BLOOM{NGTON
161p ! ~, 161p
\~ _._ ~ I~
171p
le rn ~~~•a~~.~ -t~ !~D O 5TH AVE S N I~ ~ IB rp
CEDAR AvE. '~_~___ I_ ~ Q ~ ~~~ CEDAR AVE.
LONGFELLOW '-------'-
_T _ 7_____ _ _
_ ter- LONGFELIOW
:~ ~ ~~1
yj _ m f- 19 rn
~~ _~_,
m
z.'7". H m lr it ~ 2oln
~ _ ~Jl~1~ zl.r
n n
z I-l 22 na
o'ZT1 < PORTLAND AVE S ~~= STANDISN
c ... o
Z [TT T ~ ~ 23 f0
r - m -~ ; ~• ~. ~.
_ _ T A Apr
' ' ~_-~ y ~ -~ y
X~"
b
~ ~ ~~
~A
'}"~
_~
2
1
Z
rn
O
2
D
n
D
~~
'' i
~,
N
m
i
,g,
ih
N
r
m
r
1
CATCH BASIN
Site Plan
7744 5TH AVENUE SOUTH
POWER POL£
~__ __ 161.97' _ ___
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT TO BE VACATED
ELECTRIC
TRANSFORMER
I P')
i
.~~
CITY OF RICHFLELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 292
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Application for On-Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses for Discus
Corporation, d/b/a Pizzeria Uno Restaurant, 1420 East 78th
Street.
Background:
On July 21, 1987, Mr. Richard Gottlieb, Director of Real
Estate/Development, submitted applications and supporting
documents for an on-sale and Sunday liquor license on behalf of
the Discus Corporation, for a restaurant to be located at 1420
East 78th Street. In addition, one-half of the pro-rated liquor
license fee, and $825 in investigative fees has been paid to the.
City.
The Discus Corporation is requesting licenses to open and operate
a franchise restaurant called Pizzeria Uno. The franchisor is
based in Boston, Massachusetts and operates over 20 restaurants
world wide. Many of these restaurants are operated by Uno, while
others are owned and operated by francisees similar to Discus
Corporation.
The Discus Corporation is a publicly held restaurant development
firm based in Bloomington, Minnesota, and currently has exclusive
francise rights and operates three Fuddrucker's Restaurants in
the suburbs of Bloomington, St. Louis Park and Roseville. Discus
also holds the exclusive franchise for Brick Oven Restaurants and
operates a Brick Oven Restaurant in Roseville. Discus
Corporation has an excellent reputation in each of these
communities and has never presented a problem in the area of
public safety. However, none of these establishments are located
in an area adjacent to a residential neighborhood.
Principal owners of Discus Corporation are Michael E. Platt and
Reynold M. Anderson, Sr. Mr. Platt is a 44 year old Edina
resident who has served as President and Chief Executive Officer
of Discus since 1983. Prior to his position with Discus, Mr.
Platt was employed for seven years with the Pillsbury Company,
most recently as Director of Acquisitions. Mr. Platt is married
and has no known criminal record.
Mr. Reynold Anderson is a 56 year old Minneapolis resident. Mr.
Anderson has extensive experience in the restaurant construction
business. He currently has ownership interests in several other
entities including Zaeco Leasing, a restaurant equipment leasing
company; Reynold Construction, a company that specializes in
building restaurants; Mexican Village and Flour Bin
International. Mr. Anderson is also a professional civil
engineer who is registered with the State of Minnesota. Mr.
Anderson is married and has no known criminal record.
~~ ~~~
As of December 28, 1986, Discus Corporation had sales totaling
$10,123,542. A copy of the company's annual report to the
stockholders for the first quarter of 1987, also copies of
reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission for 1986 and
the first quarter of 1987 were included in the background
investigation.
Pizzeria Uno is a publicly held corporation that for the fiscal
year ending September, 1986, had sales totaling $16,687,000.
Uno's operates .and franchises a chain of casual dining full
service restaurants that feature gourmet Chicago-style, deep-dish
pizza, also a variety of sandwiches, hamburgers, appetizers,
salads, desserts and beverages. Uno's concept emphasises food
over liquor and .asserts that only 25% of their sales are
alcoholic beverages. Uno's projects itself as a family type of
restaurant rather .than a "pizza joint", or a bar,
Discus proposes to spend approximately $400,000 to $500,000 in
equipment and improvements at the Richfield location. They have
indicated, in writing, that they plan to either secure financing
through a lending institution or use their internal funds in
order to complete the project. They have assured the City that
if their request for licensing is approved, they will supply the
City. with the proper information concerning the lendor and the
amount borrowed. Discus has supplied an initial proposal for the
remodeling of the restaurant. The proposal includes both
interior and exterior remodeling. Final plans will be submitted
to the City and the applicant understands that any licenses
granted will not be issued until all plans and renovations have
been approved by the City's Inspection and Environmental Health
Divisions.
The background investigation conducted by the Public Safety
Department has determined that Discus Corporation has no
outstanding state withholding or sales taxes for any of its
operations. In addition, Discus has entered into a lease
agreement with the owner of the building and property; A. G.
Bogen Company of Minneapolis. City real estate tax information
indicates that the lessor is responsible for the payment of all
property taxes and that the first half of these taxes amounting
to $11,574.80 has been paid. Discus Corporation has also
provided the City of Richfield with the required surety bond,
written by the Travelers Indemnity Company. The applicant has
supplied the required Certificate of Insurance detailing liquor
liability insurance coverage.
The Manager for the proposed Richfield operation is Mr. Jay S.
Severson of Richfield. Mr. Severson has been employed by Discus
since April, 1987. Prior to his position with Discus, Mr.
Severson was the General Manager for the Mr. Steak Restaurant for
over nine years, located at the proposed Uno's site.
-h- ~,~
Recommended Motion:
Move to grant the licenses requested, subject to the following
stipulations:
1. The applicant applies for, and is granted, a restaurant
license.
2. The applicant receives ,final approval and inspection for all
building and remodeling plans.
3. The balance of all license and investigative fees have been
paid in full.
4. The applicant discloses the source(s) of financing of the
project.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the .provisions of both
the city ordinance code and the state statutes pertaining to
on-sale and Sunday liquor licenses.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business will be an
asset to the community.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council should be satisfied that the granting of a
license in t his case is necessary to provide an asset to the
City. If it is not, then a license should not be issued.
2. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
3. The council could decide to deny the licenses requested.
4, The council could decide to amend or drop the stipulations..
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the licenses by
Discus Corporation has been scheduled for September 28, 1987.
The applicant is anxious to begin remodeling of the building so
that they can open before Christmas of this year. Therefore,
they are requesting that the council make a decision as soon as
is reasonably possible so they will know if they can proceed with
the project,
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP/sae
,~_~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 291
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Authorization to prepare plans and demolition specifications for
the removal of the Cedar Avenue liquor store.
Background:
In August, 1986, the City Council selected Lincoln Companies as
the developer for the old Cedar Avenue liquor store site. As a
part of that decision, the Developer agreed to purchase the land
and to assume all demolition responsibilities. The project was
to be under .construction by this time, but the developer has been
contacted by a company interested in occupying a building on the
site. The developer is evaluating the .appropriateness of the
site for the company. The vacant liquor store building has
continued to deteriorate. It would be advantageous to clear the
building from the site as soon as possible.
The Cedar Avenue liquor store building is approximately 8,000
square feet, plus the basement. The estimated cost of the
structure demolition, removal of footings and foundation, and
back filling the hole and soil compaction is $25,000. The cost
of the demolition would be added to the cost of the land so
Lincoln Companies would pay for the demolition at the time of
closing on the site. The city would provide the funds needed to
pay the demolition contractor. If the Council authorizes
preparation of the plans and specifications, they would be
presented to the Council at the October 12, 1987 meeting. The
source of the interim financing for the city to pay for the
demolition would also be identified.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution authorizing preparation of demolition
plans and specifications for the removal of the old Cedar Avenue
liquor store.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The old Cedar Avenue liquor store is a "blighting
influence" to the neighborhood and City of Richfield.
2. The Developer will reimburse the city, in full, for all the
incurred expenses.
Alternative Recommendation:
Direct staff to continue to manage the property "as is" until
removed by-the developer.
Decision Mode:
It would be advantageous to have the building removed prior to
the onset of winter.
Respectf ly submitted,
Ja a D. Prosser
Ci Manager
JDP/eja
"~-~-/
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION ORDERING CITY OF RICHFIELD TO PREPARE
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE
STRUCTURE AT 6636 CEDAR AVENUE.
WHEREAS, the city owned structure at 6636. Cedar Avenue has
been vacated and is deteriorating.
WHEREAS., redevelopment by a private developer has been
delayed; and
WHEREAS., the developer has agreed to reimburse the City of
Richfield for the cost of demolition at a later date.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
1. It .would be in the best interest to the community to .have the
building demolished.
2. Staff is directed to prepare demolition plans and
specifications for the building for presentation to-the City
Council.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 28th day of September, 1987.
John Hamilton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
~'~ _,~j
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 290
Agenda September 28,.1987
Issue Statement:
Resolution Providing for Polling Places and Designating Election
Judges for the November 3, 1987 City Election.
Background-
Minnesota Statute 2048.21, Subd. 2 provides that election judges
for precincts in a municipality shall be appointed by the
governing body of the municipality and that the appointments be
made at least 25 days before the election at which the election
judges will serve.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution designating polling places and appointing
election judges for the city election to be held on Tuesday,
November 3, 1987.
Basis of 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 November 3, 1987 City 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.
3. State laws requires party balance in the appointment of
judges.
Alternate Recommendation:
1. The city council could choose to appoint others who are not
named in the resolution.
2. If the city council does not appoint election .judges, the
conduct of the election would not be valid.
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,
James rosser
City M ~ager
~~ ,~/
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR POLLING PLACES
AND DESIGNATING JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL
ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 3, 198.7
MLHEREAS, a primary election will be held on Tuesday,
November 3, 1987.
NOW,. 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
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
~~~~
Resolution No.
Page 2
and, that the following are hereby appointed as judges for
said election:
Shirley Gisselquist (DFL)
Ralph Roberts (IR)
Bernice Utter (DFL)
Edith Nye (IR)
Elaine Gilhousen (IR)
Ellen Brandon (IR)
Margaret Fleming (DFL)
Fern Oreck (DFL)
Jan Anderson (IR)
Linda Bloomgren (DFL)
Bob Mack (DFL)
Cher Merrill (IR)
Catherine Alfano (DFL)
Beverly Clark (DFL)
Sue Raymond (IR)
Phyllis Reinmuth (IR)
Lois Karnas (IR)
Jaclyn Schwab (DFL)
Alternates:
Elizabeth Swanson (DFL)
Michaeline Kvaale (IR)
Mary Jane Suess (DFL)
Edward Thornton (DFL)
Marilyn Wagner (IR)
Lorraine Schreyer (DFL)
Alice Strom (IR)
Dee Wilcox (IR)
Angela Aylward (DFL)
Donna Jordahl (DFL)
Vivian Bennis (IR)
Betty Halloran (IR)
Muriel Bernstein (DFL)
Donna Vidas (IR)
Jeanne Frenz (IR}
Pat Brenner (DFL)
Gertrude Herll (DFL)
Audrey Winslow (IR)
Marion Horning (DFL)
Ilene Holen (IR)
Corrine Cosgrove (DFL)
Barb Cook (DFL)
Rosemary Koelln (IR)
Sue Lewis (IR)
Nancy Eckstein (DFL)
Joanne Wilmes (DFL)
Arville Beckman (DFL)
June Lindstrom (IR)
Lawrence Marks (IR)
Doris Long (IR)
Margaret Mortensen (IR)
Julie Schleuder (DFL)
PASSED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th
day of September, 1987.
ATTEST:
John Hamilton Mayor
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
n~~ ~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
COUNCIL LETTER N0. 289
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Authorization to extend the Energy Audit and Housedoctoring
Agreement with the Self Reliance Center (SRC).
Background•
Since December, 1985, the city has contracted with SRC to provide
audit and housedoctoring (weatherization) services to Richfield
residents. NSP uses rate payer (customer) funds to cover $95 of
the cost of the energy audits. Participating households are
charged $10. For this fall, NSP is also considering marketing
the Richfield audit program to Richfield utility customers. In
the past, the city has solely performed the marketing
responsibilities.
The city also offers housedoctor weatherization grants to low-
income residents through a federal CDBG grant and Minnegasco rate
payer fund, when available. The CDBG funds pay for the total
cost of housedoctoring for families with income at or below 50%
of the areas median income ($13,500 to $25,500 depending on
family size). Minnegasco funds pay the total cost of
housedoctoring for .families with incomes between 50%-80% of
median income ($21,300 to $38,000 depending on family size).
Persons not qualifying for housedoctoring because of their income
levels, would contract with a firm of their choice.
Housedoctoring costs approximately $420 per household. Neither
the audit or housedoctor program utilize city general fund
revenues.
SRC is the only metropolitan area subcontractor with the
knowledge and ability to provide both energy audits and the
housedoctor services. SRC has provided over 400 audits and
approximately 35 housedoctor services since the contract was
initiated.The contract remains basically the same as previously
utilized. The proposed contract would extend the agreement with
SRC from October 1, 1987 through September 30, 1988.
The contract requires the city to identify, and SRC to perform,
approximately 45 audits a month during October, 1987 through
March, 1988. During the remainder of the contract period, (April
through September, 1988), lesser numbers would be completed on a
resident requested basis, consistent with a drop in demand
following the end of the heating season. A total of 315 audits
are anticipated and NSP has sufficient revenues to fund this
amount. With approximately $15,000 available in CDBG funds, 28
housedoctor services can be provided during the contract period.
More will be provided if Minnegasco has funds available during
the contract period.
~~~ ~~~ /
Other elements of the contract include:
-a description of the scope of services.
-requirements of workmanship, training, and certification
-explanation of compensation and billing
-assignment of liability
-insurance requirements
-opportunity for renewal
City legal counsel has reviewed the contract for form and content
and their suggestions have been utilized.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the contract to extend the audit and housedoctoring
services with SRC through September 30, 1988.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The present Auditing and Housedoctoring Agreement is due to
expire on September 30, 1987.
2. Extending the agreement through September 30, 1988 would
allow the city's energy program to continue operating as
the next heating season begins and demand for the services
peaks.
3. The modifications made to the contract improve overall
management and delivery of this energy service.
Alternative Recommendation:
Not approve the extension and modification of the contract with
SRC. However, there is no other contractor available to provide
this package of services at this time and residents are
interested in the service with the heating season approaching.
Discussion./Decision Mode:
The existing contract expires September 30, 1987. For the
program to continue in an uninterrupted manner, the contract
should be approved at the September 28th Council meeting.
Respec fully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP/sae
~~ ~~_~
RESOLUTION N0.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRACT RENEWAL
TO PROVIDE ENERGY
AUDITING AND WEATHERIZATION SERVICES
WHEREAS, the Home Energy Checkup Program, funded by Northern
States Power, and the House Doctor Program, funded by Minnegasco and
by Community Development Block Grants, are important elements of the
City's "Bundle Up Richfield" energy conservation program activities.
WHEREAS, the Self Reliance Center is the only metropolitan area
subcontractor with the knowledge and the ability to provide both Home
Energy Checkup Audits and House Doctor services.
WHEREAS, the Self Reliance Center has successfully delivered more
than 400 Audits and 35 House Doctor weatherization services for the
City of Richfield since January of 1986.
WHEREAS, the existing contract will expire on September 30, 1987
and a revised contract has been negotiated with the Self Reliance
Center to better clarify the responsibilities of both parties, to
improve program management, to identify a new contract term, and to
define the scope of services.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, MN that:
-The .City Manager is authorized to execute the revised contract
between the City of Richfield and the Self Reliance Center, Inc.
to provide Home Energy Checkup and House Doctor weatherization
services to Richfield residents starting October 1, 1987; and
-This contract shall terminate on September 30, 1988,
unless extended in writing by both parties.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this 28th day of
September, 1987.
John Hamilton Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
m1 `~'
CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 288
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Award of Contract for Rich Acres Golf Course pole building.
Background:
On September 15 ,1987 bids were opened in accordance with legal
requirements. Of the five plan holders, only two out-of-state
vendors, both appearing to have done work in the State of
Minnesota, submitted bids:
Vendor Base Bid Alternate
Holst Construction, Inc. 17,940 Add 1,098
Prescott, Wisconsin
Morton Buildings, Inc. $18,129* No Bid
Morton, Illinois
The base bid called for knee bracing and the alternate specified
concrete footing in lieu of knee bracing. Morton Buildings, Inc.
indicated in their bid that knee braces are not required as part
of the building and the bid price reflected Morton Buildings,
Inc. specifications,
The 72' x 40' pole building to be constructed this year near the
maintenance building at the golf course is intended for use as
cold storage. The total budget for the project is $20,350. The
engineer's estimate for this contract was $18,000. The balance
of funding is for cost of consultants and the city's portion of
the work for this building. The plan is to add a concrete floor
in 1989 although the building as specified and constructed at
this time will be usable upon completion.. Standards of the trade
indicate either knee bracing or concrete footings are acceptable.
Both were specified in an attempt to identify the most economical
method of construction.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the bid minutes and tabulation and award a contract to
the low bidder, Holst Construction, Inc. in the amount of $17,940
for construction of a pole building at Rich Acres Golf Course.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The golf course is in need of additional storage space.
2. Funding is available for construction of a pole building.
3. Legal bidding requirements have been met.
4. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and Associates, Inc., the consultant for
this building, has recommended award of contract to Holst
Construction, Inc.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Reject all bids and direct staff to readvertise in an attempt
to obtain additional bids at lower prices. However, because
the bids received were similar in price and at the engineer's
~',tJ~/
estimate, it appears the bids received were at a level that
could be again expected if the work were to be readvertised.
2. Reject all bids and delay construction of additional storage
to a later date. However, it is anticipated the cost of such
construction will increase in the coming years.
3. Reject all bids and do not plan for additional storage space.
However., storage space is already limited and it is expected
the need will continue to increase.
4. Reject all bids and direct staff to prepare specifications
for a larger, more elaborate storage facility. However, the
cost for such is not felt to be justified at this time.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is on the September 28, 1987 city council agenda in an
effort to begin and complete construction this Fall season. With
action at this time, the completion date is mid-November. The
city council may choose to delay action but to do so could mean
construction during inclement weather or a delay of construction
into next year.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP/eja
,~~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Bid Opening
September 28, 1987
11:00 A.M.
Pole Building at the Rich Acres Golf Course
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the
Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk,
who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive,
open and read aloud, bids for construction of a pole building at
the Rich Acres Golf Course, as advertised in the official
newspaper on August 26, 1987.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk
Rick Jopke, City Planner
Eileen Anderson, City Manager Representative
Al Payne, Ice Arena Manager
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
( ENDOR 1 BID ( TOTAL 1 ALT. I
I I SECURITY ( BASE BID I BID (
I I I I
I l I
( Morton Buildings, Inc. I Certified 1 18,129.00 I ---
( Morton, Illinois I Check ( I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
( Holst Construction, Inc. i Sid Bond 117,940.00 I +1,098 I
( Prescott, Wisconsin I 5~ i I
I I I I I
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and
considered at the September 28, 1987 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
`~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council fetter No. 287
Agenda September 28, 1987
Issue Statement:
Request for authorization of a purchase over $5,000 for the
rental of a Kodak photocopier.
Background:
The City is currently without a permanent high speed copier in
the print shop at City Hall. An IBM copier was installed in
January of 1986 and used by staff until this past June. The
copier could not perform according to the specifications under
which it was bid and after many attempts by IBM to rectify the
problems, the installment purchase agreement for the copier was
terminated.
Anticipating the loss of the IBM copier, staff researched the
copier marketplace and identified two copiers which appeared to
meet the original set of specifications drafted by the City two
years ago. It was decided to try out both copiers before writing
specifications .and seeking bids again. The least costly of the
copiers, a Canon NP-8570, was brought in for a three month rental
which will expire at the end of October. This copier has proven
to have several drawbacks. It is too slow for some applications,
the capacity of the sorter bins and document feeder is too
limited, and it is difficult to collate the blue tab sheets which
are a part of this Council packet.
The second copier which appears to meet the original
specifications is a Kodak 225F. Rental of this copier would
begin on October 21, 1987 and extend through February 28, 1988.
The first two weeks of the rental period are at no charge. The
rental charge for the remaining nearly four months will be $1,670
per month, for a total of $6,680, an additional $430 for freight
and installation, plus 1.03 cents for each copy over 25,000 each
month. The City averages 60,000 copies per month.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the expenditure of $7,110.00 plus 1.03 cents per copy
over the monthly allowance of 25,000 copies, for the rental of a
Kodak 225E photocopier from the Eastman Kodak Company.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Based on the City's disappointing experiences with high speed
copiers, staff strongly recommends that any such copier be
.tested for at least three months prior to agreement on a long
term contract.
2. The City's experiences with both the Canon and Kodak copiers
during these short rental periods will provide valuable
information regarding minimum requirements for the
specifications upon which the city will seek bids later this
year.
~-~ ~
3. The City requires a high speed copier and will be without one
at the end of October unless another rental agreement is
arranged.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The council could choose to renew the rental agreement for
the Canon copier for another three or four months at cost of
$752 per month plus 0.8 cents per copy over the monthly
allowance of 25,000.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Authorization of this expenditure is requested at the
September. 28 meeting in order to allow adequate lead time for
delivery and installation of the new copier prior to the removal
of the currently installed copier.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP/sae