Loading...
02-23-87 genda ~j~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 71 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: .Approval of the 1987 and 1988 labor contract with the Richfield. Police Supervisory Association. Background: The City staff has completed negotiations on a labor agreement, subject to City Council approval, with the Richfield Police Supervisory Association, to cover the period of 3anuary 1, 1987 through December 31, 1988. The Richfield Police. Supervisory Association represents the _ positions of Police Captain, Lieutenant, and Sergeant. There are presently ten employees represented within the unit. The 1987_contract year is the first. of a two-year agreement. The changes which have been negotiated for the year 1987 are as follows: 1. An adjustment of 4% over 1986 wage rates for all classifications. _ 2. The addition of Dental Insurance~at $14.00 per month per employee, up to a maximum employer contribution for Health. and Dental Insurance of $182.50. The total package cost of the 1987 settlement is 4.18%, which is comparable to the 1987 settlements of the City's Firefighters and r Patrol Officers-Investigator/Agent Units, and other supervisory units in the Metropolitan area. The changes which have been negotiated for the year 1988 are as follows: 1. An adjustment of 3.8% over 1987 wage rates for all classifications. 2. Effective January 1, 1988, employees in the Sergeant classification will receive, in addition to the holiday hours, time and one-half pay for the hours they are .assigned to work on the following five holidays: i New Year's Da Jul 4th Labor Da' Thanks ivin Da Y, Y ~ Y, 9 9 Y and. Christmas Day.. 3. Effective Januar 1 1988 the maximum em to er contribution Y , , P Y ~ for health and dental insurance would be increased from the 1987 level of $182.50 per month to $193.00 per month, an increase of $10.50 per month. The total package cost for 1988 is 4.18%. Recommendation: a Approve the Labor Agreement with: the Richfield Police Supervisory Association. • Basis For Recommendation: 1. Police Supervisor's wage settlements for 1987 in other communities, which were consistently at 4%. 2. Benefits provided to Police Supervisor's in other Metropolitan area communities - insurance and holiday premiums. 3. Wage and benefit settlements of other City of Richfield employee groups. Alternative Recommendation: Do not approve the Labor Agreement, requiring further negotiations and/or arbitration. Discussion/Decision Mode: In order to allow the•City's accounting personnel to modify payroll records in a timely manner for January 1, 1987, it is recommended that the City Council act on February 23, 1987 to adopt the attached resolution providing for Contract changes, effective January 1, 1987. Respectf ly submitted, James rosser City anager JDP/sae i - ~ RESOLUTION N0. ON APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RESOLUTI RICHFIELD AND THE RICHFIELD POLICE SUPERVISORY ASSOCIATION BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE YEARS 1987-1988. WHEREAS, the City Manager and the Richfield Police Supervisory Association Bargaining Unit have reached a complete understanding concerning rates of pay, hours, and other conditions of employment for the years 1987 and 1.988 .and, WHEREAS, the Personnel Ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the exclusive representative of employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be implemented by Council Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby .approve the Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and the Richfield Police Supervisory. Association Bargaining Unit for the years of 1987 and 1988, and orders the provisions of the Labor Agreement to be implemented, effective January 1, 1987. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd day of February, 1,987. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk ~ O CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 70 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Consideration of an ordinance to vacate a portion of public right-of-way on the northwest. corner of 67th Street and Sheridan Avenue. Background: The property owner of 6644 Sheridan Avenue has requested that the city vacate a portion of the unimproved right-of-way at the northwest corner of 67th Street and Sheridan Avenue. The property owner wishes to add on to the front of the existing dwelling on .the site but cannot do so without obtaining a variance to the city's front yard setback requirement of 30 feet because of the unusual way in which the property was platted. In this particular subdivision (Tingdale Brothers Lincoln Hills Addition) all the corner lots are not rectangular and have a curve adjacent to the intersection. This has resulted in there being an extra amount of boulevard area adjacent to the intersection when compared to a majority of the residential intersections in the city. The new addition would have a setback of approximately 10 feet from.:. the "current" right-of-way line. The property owner does riot wish to apply for a variance because of the expense involved and as an alternative, has requested the vacation of the extra right-of-way area. If a normal right-of- way line had been drawn, no variance would be required. Recommendation: It is recommended that the city council pass the attached resolution accepting the petition to vacate a portion of right- of-way and give first reading consideration to the attached ordinance vacating the extra right-of-way area. It is further recommended that the council refer this matter to the Planning commission for recommendation and that second reading and the public hearing on this matter be scheduled for March 23, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: The right-of-way to be vacated is not needed. There will be sufficient boulevard area maintained to provide for sufficient snow storage and other purposes. The process being followed and the actions recommended to the council are consistent with the process for vacating streets outlined in ordinance 12.04. Alternative Recommendation:. - The alternative recommendation would be to deny the ordinance vacating the street and require the property owner to go through the variance process. Decision Mode: First reading of the ordinance is scheduled for February 23, 1987. Mailed and/or published notice is not required for first reading of an ordinance. Mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing and published notice of the public hearing and second reading of the ordinance by-the Council will be provided. Respec gully submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP/dh III i I I i TRANSITORY ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF WEST 67TH STREET AND SHERIDAN AVENUE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: - Section 1. The following described public street is hereby vacated: Those portions of West 67th Street and Sheridan Avenue bounded on the east by the following described LINE A, on the south by the following .described LINE B, .and on the northwest by the southeasterly. lot line of Lot 14, Block 4, Tingdale Brothers Lincoln Hills: LIMB A: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 14, thence southerly along the easterly lot line of said Lot I4 a distance of 3.7 feet, thence continuing southerly along at: extension of the aforesaid .portion of said easterly lot line ~:;to the point of intersection with LINE B and there terminating. LINE B: Commencing at thre southwest corner of said Lot 14, thence easterly along the southerly lot line of said Lot 14 and distance of , 81.3 feet, thence continuing easterly along an extension of the , aforesaid. portion of said southerly lot line to the point of ~ intersection with LINE A and there terminating. Section 2. This street vacation shall not effect, destroy, or interfere with the right of any person, corporation or municipality owning or having control of any utility located within the vacated right-of-~aay to operate, repair, maintain, reconstruct or remove any public utility facilities upon or within the vacated right-of-way. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1987., John N. Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk OOSSOD03.E14 RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RECEIVING STREET RIGHT-OF-MAY•VACATION PETITION ANO CALLING OF PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the vacation of a street right-of-way described as follows: Those portions of West 67th Street and Sheridan Avenue " bounded on the east by the following described LINE A, on the south by the following described LINE B, and on the northwest by the southeasterly lot line of-Lot 14, Block 4, 7ringdale Brothers Lincoln Hills: LINE A: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 14,' thence southerly along the easterly lot. line of said-Lot 14 a distance of 3.7 Peet, thence continuing southerly along an extension of aforesaid portion of said easterly lot line to the point of intersection with LINE 8 and there terminating. LINE 8: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 14, thence easterly along the southerly lot~~line of said Lot 14 and distance of 81.3 feet, thence continuing easterly along an extension of the aforesaid portion of said southerly lot lire to the point of intersection with LINE A and there terminating. ' MHEREAS, said petition complies in all respects with the ' require rents of Richfield Ordinance Code 12.04. NOw THEREFORE 8E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The petition for vacation of that portion of. the above described right-of-way is received. 2. A public hearing on the street right-of-way vacation in said petition shall be held on March 23, 1987. 3. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of such hearing in the official newspaper of the city and post notice of said hearing in the mariner provided by Richfield Ordinance Code Section 12.04, Subdivision 3. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of February, 1987. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk . ~ .c. W o c7 ~ Z Z z ~ z . a W F- ~ O ~ W Q • r(~ fA W . d f- J O ~ w ~ o~. a m Q O I6 ~A ~ t W •Q _ ROPERTY LINE J BOULEYA.RD /6 .G ~ 67TH STREET PORTIOIU OF RIGHT-OF-~/VAY TO BE VADATED ~>.y~..~ , ` 4 CITY OF RhCHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 69 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Award of Contract for Sludge Dewatering Building at Water Treatment Plant, City Project Number 703-1574 Background: On February.l8, 1987. bids were opened for the third time for a sludge dewatering building. The bids received in June and September, 1986 had been rejected by the city council because they exceeded the engineering estimate and the amount budgeted for this project. For this third bid opening, the Scope of Work and Construction Schedule had been revised. The revised plan provides for a physically separated building .for the sludge dewatering equipment eliminating the need and expense for special footings. These special footings would be required if the sludge dewatering building was an extension of the current building. It has been determined that physically separating the buildings is an acceptable, less expensive alternative design. The sludge dewatering equipment, consisting of two recessed plate filter presses and sludge pumps and air compressors, has already been•bid with a contract awarded to J.W.I., Inc. from Holland, Michigan, at a cost of approximately $170,000. This equipment is to be installed by the successful contractor on this proposed .award of contract. Electrical work for the building will be performed by the city. The total project cost will be approximately $500,000, which is within the range for reasonable return on investment attributable to reduced operating expenses. In addition to a base bid, the specifications for bids opened February 18, 1987 included five alternate deducts which could have been applied, if necessary, to keep the project within budget estimates. Four bids were received February 18, 1987. A copy of the bid minutes and tabulation is attached for city council review. At the time of the bid opening, the engineers' estimate for this project as specified, without deducts, was $420,100. As can be noted, .all four base bids were substantially below the engineers' estimate and it appears it will not be necessary, .from a financial standpoint, to accept any of the deduct alternates. Recommendation: 1. Approve the bid minutes and tabulation. i 2. Award a contract for construction of a sludge dewatering building at the water treatment plant, as specified without accepting any deduct alternates, to Trucker Construction, Inc. of Minneapolis in the amount of $315,400. 3. Direct staff to retain all bid securities until such time as a properly executed contract has been duly processed. I Basis of Recommendation: 1. All bids received on February 18, 1987 were below engineers' estimates for the work specified. 2. Sufficient funding for the work is available in the water maintenance budget. - 3. Trucker Construction, Inc. appears to be a reliable contractor for the work proposed in this contract. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not award the bid. However, as this is the third time the work has been bid, and the bid is within engineers' estimates, this action would not appear to be in the best interests of the city. Discussion/Decision Mode: The intent is to start work as soon as possible following proper execution of a contract to afford sufficient time to achieve completion and place the facility into full scale serviceability by October 1, 1987. .Therefore, this item has been placed on the February 23, 1987 council agenda. Bids received on February 18, 1987 remain in effect for 60 calendar days.- Action to accept or reject should be taken no later than within that period of time. Respect ully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP/eja CITY Of RICi1FiK1.D Bid O}~.+eninq E~ebrurzry 18, 1987 1 } :ot) n.M. Sludge Dewaterir+q Bui l.di.nq tit t~.he Water 'I'reat.ment F'].ant City Project No. 703-}57~ Pursuant to requires+ents of Resolution No. ]015,. a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerlc, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for sludge dewatering building at the water treatment plant, City Project Nu. 703-15?4 as advertised in the official newspaper on January 28, 1987. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerlc Donald Fondr.iclc, Community Services Director Eileen Anderson, City Manri~;er }2c,presentative Marshall Ftaaen, Technical Operations Supervisor The following bids were submitted and read aloud: w A. BASE BIO B. DEDUCT ALTERNATES ALT. #1 ALT. #2 ALT. #3 ALT. #4 ALT. #5 gip PAINTING COLORED UTILITY CURB, GUTTER SOD, SEED,. .CONTRACTOR SECURITY _ BLOCK PIPING b BITUMINOUS RET. WALL TRUCKER CONSTRUCTION 5~ $315,400.00 $ 6,500.00 $3,300.00 $16,455.00 $12,229.00 $ 4,996.00 ' FULLERTON CONSTRUCTION 5~ $328,400.00 512,000.00 $ 900.00 $16,455.00 $12,929.00 $ 6,048.00. CY-CON, INC. 5~ $352,000.00 $10,500.00 $2,954.00 $16,455.00 $12,929.00 $12,300.00 M. A. MORTENSON CO. 5~ $370,120.00 5,10,000.00 $2,500.00 $15,293.40 $11,085.10 $ 3,200.(30 The City Clerl: announced that t}re bids would be tabulated and considered at the February 23, 1987 City Council Meeting. 'T'homas Y. b'erber Cit~l.erk ~jd CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 68 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Consideration of a Resolution proposing an Amendment to the City Charter. regarding Filing Dates for Municipal Elective Office. Background: Section 4.04 of the City Charter regarding the filing of nomination petitions for municipal elective office states: The name of any registered voter of the city shall be printed upon the ballot as a candidate for office whenever a petition signed by at least ten registered voters has been filed with the city clerk in his behalf not more than six nor less than four weeks before the municipal primary election date provided in Section 4.02.." The filing dates in the Charter are not consistent with Minnesota Statute 205.13 subdivision which states: "Affidavit of Candidacy. Not more than eight nor less than six weeks before the municipal primary......an individual who. is eligible and desires to become a candidate for an:._.office to be voted for at the election shall file an affidavit of candidacy with 'the municipal clerk." The current Charter provision also conflicts with compliance to Minnesota Statute 2048.35 Subdivision 4 regarding the availability and preparation of absentee ballots. The statute states: ~"Absentee ballots; preparation, delivery. Ballots necessary to fill applications of absentee voters shall be prepared and delivered at least 30 days before the election to the officials who administer the provisions of Chapter 2038." A referendum in 1984 revised the Charter regarding the length of terms for the Mayor and city council members and provided that munici al .elections will be held ever two ears after 1988•- , P Y Y , thus, coinciding with the conduct of state and federal elections. Additionally, the City has committed to the purchase of optical scan voting equipment in 1987. Ballot preparation and programming of the device will be done by Hennepin County. Under the current Charter provisions for filing, the city cannot meet the 30 day requirement-for the preparation of ballots because candidates may still file up to 28 days prior to the election. Consequently, the county would be required to print and have the county, state, and federal ballots available prior to finalization of Richfield's slate of candidates. This would cause the city to use a separate paper ballot for the municipal offices, resulting in two separate ballots and two tabulation methods. The result would be confusion for the voter and election judges, and defeat the purpose of the standardization of voting. equipment and procedures in Hennepin County.. ~j~'~ In order for the City to effectively conduct it's elections in conjunction with county, state and federal elections and be consistent with Minnesota-State Election Laws, it is recommended that the City Charter be amended to reflect the filing dates noted in Minnesota Election Law Section 206.13, subdivision 1. R ecommendation: Adopt,~the attached resolution referring the proposed amendment to the City Charter changing the filing dates for municipal elective office to the Charter Commission for review and recommendation. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The filing .period in the Richfield City Charter is _ inconsistent with the filing period provided by state law. 2. Mayoral and City Council elections will be held every two years after 1988, thus coinciding with state and federal elections. 3. The City has committed to the purchase of optical scan voting equipment with ballot preparation and programming provided by, Hennepin County. 4. Inconsistent filing periods would cause the city to use a separate paper ballot for the municipal elections which would defeat the purpose of the standardization of voting equipment and procedures in Hennepin County, cause confusion for. voters and election judges, cause the city to incur additional printing and administrative costs__,_ and be.difficult to administer. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide not to refer the proposed Charter amendment to the Charter Commission for review and allow the Charter to remain unchanged. 2. The City Council could propose alternative filing dates different than those recommended. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter has been scheduled for consideration on February 23, I987. Action is requested to allow time for Charter Commission review and city council consideration of the proposed amendment at a public hearing so that the amendment can be in effect prior to the September, 1987 municipal primary election. Respe tfully submitted, Ja D. Prosser Ci Manager JDP/sae die-~ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER WHEREAS, the Richfield City Code provides in Section 4.04 for the filing of nomination petitions for municipal elective offices-not more than six nor less than four weeks before the municipal primary election; and . WHEREAS, Section 205.13, subd. 1 of Minnesota Statutes provides for the filing of affidavits of candidacy for municipal offices not more than eight. nor less than six weeks before the municipal primary; and WHEREAS, the filing period in the Richfield Code is inconsistent with the filing period=-provided for by state law; and WHEREAS b a 1984 referendum Ma ~ Y yoral and City Counca.l elections will be held every two years after 1988 coinciding with state and federal elections; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is committed to the purchase of optical scan voting equipment; and - WHEREAS, ballot preparation and- programming of the optical scan voting equipment will be done by Hennepin County; and WHEREAS,. inconsistent filing periods 'would cause the city to use a separate paper ballot for municipal elections which would defeat -the purpose of the standardization of voting equipment and procedures in Hennepin County, cause confusion for voters and election judges, and be difficult to administer; and WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council finds that it is in the. interest of the .City to conduct its elections in conjunction with ~j~-_,.3 . county, state, and federal elections and be more consistent with the Minnesota State Election Laws; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: That the following proposed amendment to the City Charter be referred to the Charter Commission for review and recommendation: - Section 4.04. Nominations by Petition. All candidates for elective office provided for by this charter shall be nominated by petition. The name of any registered voter of the City shall be printed upon the ballot as a candidate for an office whenever a petition signed by at least ten registered voters has been filed with the City Clerk in his behalf not more .than eix eight nor less than fear six weeks before the municipal primary election date provided in Section 4.02. No registered voter shall. sign petitions for more candidates for any office than the number of person to be chosen for that office at the election; should he do so, his signature shall be void as -to the petition or petitions last filed. Each petition presented shall be accompanied by a Five Dollar ($5.00) filing fee. Dated: - John N. Hamilton, .Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council-Letter No. 67 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Resolution designating City's contribution toward Health Insurance premium for General Services and Management employees. Background: The City provides group health coverage for the employee groups through a Joint Purchasing .Agreement with Hennepin County. The County conducted a study in late 1986 to determine the effectiveness of its current health insurance plans, which included three HMO Plans (Group Health, MedCenters and Physicians Health). In conjunction with the study, the three plans agreed to freeze their rates- until April 1, 1987. -The City has received the 1987 premium rates for the Group Health, MedCenters and Physician Health Plans, and information and rates for a fourth plan, Metropolitan Health Plan, which will be added effective April 1, 1987. The Metropolitan Health Plan is sponsored by the Hennepin County Bureau of Health and is a Health Maintenance Organization with benefit levels similar to the three current plans, but includes coverage (subject to a deductible and coinsurance) should the Plan member-wish to use- a non-participating provider. Participating providers are physicians and clinics located in the Hennepin County Medical Center and Pilot City Health Center. Participating Hospitals are the Hennepin County Medical Center and Metropolitan Medical Center. The City pays the full individual employee premium per month and provides an additional contribution. toward dependent coverage, to a specified maximum insurance premium. Such maximum contributions vary slightly, depending on the employee group. The 1986 and 1987 monthly premium costs of the plans are as follows: 1986 Monthly 1987 Monthly Percentage Group Health Plan Rate. Rate Increase Individual $ 68.35 $ 69.65 1.9% Family $183.05 $186.70 2 % MedCenters Health Plan Individual $ 69.85 $ 73.35 5 % Family $187.35 $196.70 5 % Physicians Of Minnesota Individual $ 99.57 $104.55 5 % Family $211.07 $221.62 5 % Metropolitan Health Plan Individual $ 68.65 Family $165.00 In 1986 and the first quarter of 1987, the City contributed $140.00 per month per employee for employee dependent coverage for eligible General Services and Management employees. Recommendations: It is recommended that the City increase its maximum Health Insurance contribution for General Services and Management Employees by $10.00 per month per employee, to a maximum of $150.00/month. Basis for Recommendation: 1. By increasing the maximum City contribution, the City would be able to offset the dependent coverage increase for 63~ of the General Services and Management employees who carry family coverage under the Group Health, MedCenters and.Physicians Health plans. 2. The 1987 budget provides for a 4~ increase for premium contributions. The proposed increase amounts to a 4.3~ increase. However, this represents only a $370.00 overage for the year 1987 for all management and general services employees. 3. The proposed increase would ensure adequate insurance protection for management and general services employees and maintain a comparable relationship with the unionized police, fire and maintenance employees. Alternative Recommendations: 1. The Council may take no action to increase the City's Health Insurance contributions beyond the 1986 funding load. 2. The Council may approve a funding level different than recommended. Discussion/Decision Mode: The City should implement any Health Insurance premium contribution increase by February 23, 1987, as the City will conduct an open enrollment for General Services and Management Employee groups during the period from February 24 through March, 3, 1987. One of the important criteria for employees selecting or changing a Health Plan is how much this contribution will be. Respec fully submitted, Ja s D. Prosser Ci y Manager JDP:sae 9~ RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM FOR GENERAL SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the Hospital, Medical/Surgical Group Health Insurance plan is available from .the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Organization for City employees and their families, and WHEREAS, the-City Council is required to determine by Resolution the City's contribution toward the premium for Employee Group Insurance Coverages. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that. commencing April 1, 1987, the City shall contribute a maximum of .$150.00 per month toward an Employee .Health Insurance premium for all eligible non- unionized employees. In any event, the said contribution shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council shall determine the City's contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of the appropriate Resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective • organized employee groups. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 23rd day of February, 1987. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk r~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~i Council Letter No. 66 February 23, 1987 I Issue Statement: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Transitory Ordinance Providing Funding for Certain Capital Improvements from the Special Revenue Fund. Background On October 1, 1986 the City Council approved the 1987 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) and also adopted the 1987 budget for all Funds as outlined in the budget document. The various approved appropriations for 1987 for the capital projects are defined as outlined below: Legion Lake Park $40,000 Ice Arena Improvements 12,000 Park Land Acquisition 195,000 Nature Center Improvements 29,000 Forestry 25,000 Public Safety Communications 30,000 Swimming Pool Improvements 10,000 $341,000 A transitory ordinance is now necessary to finalize these . appropriations pursuant to City Charter. Charter Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 allows expenditures for capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund only by ordinance. The City Council gave first reading to the Transitory Ordinance and scheduled second reading and the public hearing for February 23, 1987. ~ Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council hold the public hearing and approve the attached transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds from-the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements. Basic for Recommendation: 1. On October 1, the City Council adopted the 1987 Capital Improvement Budget. 2. Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory .ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. The hearing process must be completed in 1987 so the capital projects can be .completed as approved and the funds expended. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could allocate the funds to a totally new project or projects, but a public hearing for a budget revision would be necessary. 2. The City Council could decide not to authorize the expenditure of Special Revenue Funds. However, that would be contrary. to the previously adopted Capital Improvement Budget. T Discussion/Decision Mode: Action on this item is requested at the February 23 meeting of the City Council to allow sufficient time for publication of the ordinance to become effective so that the capital improvements can be ordered as budgeted. Respe tf ly submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP/eja Bill No. 1987 TRANSITORY ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund far the making of Capital Improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements ;:which are authorized to,be paid from-the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Legion Lake Park $ 40,000 Ice Arena Improvements 12,000 Park Land Acquisition- 195,000 Nature Center Improvements 29,000 Forestry 25,000 Public Safety Communications 30,000 Swimming Pool Improvements 10,000. Total $341,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23 day of February, 1987. John .Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 65 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance giving the city the authority to require erosion control measures and drainage plans. Background: During the process of formulating the watershed management plan for the Richfield-Bloomington Watershed Management Organization, staff recognized a need for more formal control of drainage and erosion plans in tfie development, improvement or alteration of land. Basically, the ordinance amendment requires that the plans for drainage, erosion and sediment control must be submitted. to the city engineer for approval. The purpose of these measures is to limit by control, sedimentation into storm water control devices which impair their effectiveness, an d_ to prevent inappropriate diversion of storm water.. The city council gave first reading consideration to this matter at the February 9, 1987 city council meeting, and scheduled the public hearing and second reading for February 23, 1987. Recommendation: Hold the public hearing and approve the ordinance amendment which would give the city the authority to require drainage plans and erosion control measures in the development, improvement or alteration of land. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The content of the ordinance amendment is consistent with existing watershed district's rules and regulations. i 2. Puts these rules and regulations in city ordinance form so city staff has tighter control over drainage and erosion control measures in conjunction with building and grading permits. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not approve second reading of the ordinance. However, staff has identified a need for more formal control of regulations involving erosion control measures and drainage plans. it Discussion/Decision Mode: Notice of a public hearing on February 23, 1987 has been. published in the official newspaper. If the city council approves the ordinance amendment at the February 23 meeting, the ordinance will become effective 30~days after publication in the official newspaper. Respectf ly submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP/eja V~ ~CO BILL NO. 1987 - AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VIII, PART VI OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter VIII, Part VI of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "Storm Sewer System" is hereby amended in the following respect: Section 8.40 is amended by adding the following new subdivision: Subdivision 11. Drainage and Erosion Control (1) Drainage plan. In the development, improvement or alteration of land, the direction, quantity or quality of drainage shall not be changed unless plans for the development are submitted to the city engineer. Run-off shall be properly channeled into a storm drain, watercourse, ponding area or other public facility. (2) Erosion and sediment control -plan. Prior to-the issuance of a building or grading p~r.mit for any development, improvement or alteration of land, a plan for erosion and sedimentation control shall be presented with the site plan. The erosion and sedimentation control plan shall specify the measures to be used before, during and after construction until the soil and slope are stabilized by permanent cover. These control measures shall be maintained in good working order until site stabilization occurs. (3) Plan approval. In areas which are .susceptible to erosion hazard or sedimentation damage, the city may require the erosion and sedimentation control-plan to be approved by the appropriate water management organization prior to the issuance of a permit. (4) City engineer approval. All plans and provisions required for compliance with this subdivision must be submitted to the city engineer for his approval. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of , 1987. John Hamilton, Mavor Attest: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 64 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Consideration of Authorization for City Manager to Execute a Termination Agreement with Thomas Morgan and approve a revised personnel policy relatiing to termination of department heads due to medical disability. Background: For health reasons, Thomas Morgan has indicated his intention to conclude employment with the City of Richfield effective April 24, 1987, the date on which his sick leave expires. Because of his extended service to the city and the unusual circumstances related to his medical leave, the city council has been consulted regarding a severance benefit which would include payment equivalent to one week of salary for each year of service, up to 12 weeks; and continuation of health insurance by the city for a two year period. The termination agreement provides for the payment of these benefits. The policy authorizing these agreements limits its application to department heads retiring from the city for. medical reasons with 12 or more years of service, obviously limiting its application. Recommendation: ' Approve the agreement and revised personnel policy. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Appropriate consideration for extended years of service by a department head. Alternative Recommendation: 1. None Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented as a consent item at the council meeting of February 23, 1987. A press release announcing Tom's resignation from the city will be provided. Questions relating to this matter may be referred to the city manager. At an appropriate time in the near future, the city will provide special recognition for Tom's years of service. Respect lly submitted, Jame osser City anager JDP/eja / REVISED PERSONNEL POLICY DATE: Feb~~a~~*-28T-188 February 23, 1987 SUBJECT: Optional Granting of Ee~ge~sa~ie~ Severance Benefits Upon Termination of Employment Bt~e-te-Pe~x~aae~~-Baye€~ Under Certain Circumstances Introduction The purpose of this policy is to establish a procedure by which the City Manager may, when deemed advisable, grant a form of severance to certain employees whose employment is terminated e~~te ~e-ge~~a~e~t-~aye~€-e~-e~~~~~at~e~-e~-a-ge9~~ie~. Policy It is the policy of the city that a termination leave compensation (severance benefit) may be granted by the City Manager to (a) any full-time permanent employee not covered by a collective bargaining agreement and whose employment with the city has been terminated due to layoff or abolition of position(s) or (b) any full-time permanent employee who has served as a city department head for at least twelve years and who has experienced health problems of such a severe nature that the city and the employee have agreed upon a date when the employee's employment ~ the city will be concluded. Such termination leave compensation will be funded through current operations and will be determined according to the following formula: One week of compensation for each full year of service, up to a maximum of twelve weeks of compensation. The City Manager will determine in each case the method of compensation to be utilized, whether it be a lump sum payment or bi-weekly payments. In those situations where an employee continues to receive a bi-weekly compensation for the duration of the eligible period, the City Manager may authorize the continued city contribution for insurance benefits. Any leave benefits accrued during such period would be utilized as they are earned to maintain the employee's bi-weekly salary at the time of termination. ` In those situations involving an emplo ee who comes within clause (b) above, the City Manager ma authorize the continued provision of medical and hospitalization insurance benefits at city expense for a period not to exceed two years. Approved: City Manager _ _ MEMORANDUM AGREEMENT RELATING TO TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT DATE This memorandum agreement is dated as. of February , 1987. PARTIES The parties .to this agreement are: THOMAS A. MORGAN, JR. ("Morgan") and CITY OF RICHFIELD ("the City"). BACKGROUND The background of this agreement is as follows: Morgan is now and since , 19 , has been Public Safety Director of the City. In recent months he has encountered serious health problems which have prevented him from working in his capacity as Public Safety Director. Based upon opinions he has received from his attending medical doctors, he believes that it will not be possible for him to resume his duties with the City. At the present time he is on sick leave from the City and such sick leave time will be exhausted on April 24, 1987. It is in the interests of the City to establish the employment status of Morgan so that if he is not going to return to his position as Public Safety Director, the City can take steps, as promptly as possible, to seek his successor. Morgan intends to make claim for disability benefits under (1) the worker's compensation .law, (2) the public employees' retire- ment association law and (3) the City's so-called Long-Term Income Protection insurance program provided in a policy written by Firemen's Fund Insurance Company and administered by Schools Insurance Fund. Neither Morgan nor City can determine, at this time, the extent to which benefits will be payable to Morgan under any or all of the afore-mentioned disability .benefit programs. The City, however, is willing to provide a written commitment to Morgan assuring him of certain severance benefits (hereinafter described) upon termination of his employment with the City. Morgan desires to obtain such a specific commitment from the City so that he will be assured of such severance benefits upon the conclusion of his employment by the City. It is .the purpose of this. memorandum agreement, therefore,. to provide a written commitment by City for certain severance benefits which will be provided to Morgan upon the conclusion of .his .employment with the City and, further, to fix the time when _ - _ 1 #v -~'.~J Morgan's employment by City will be concluded. In fixing the time when such employment by the City will be concluded, however, the parties desire to avoid making any statements or taking any action which will prejudice or otherwise affect Morgan's claim for disability benefits. AGREEMENTS Therefore, the parties agree~as follows: 1. City will pay Morgan Twelve Thousand Dollars ($12,000.00) as a lump sum severance benefit on the first business day after Morgan ceases to be an employee of the City. 2. As an additional severance benefit City will, at its ex- pense, provide Morgan with medical and hospitalization insurance with the same coverage as the City's insurance is now providing him, for the next succeeding two t2) years after the conclusion of his employment by the City. 3. Morgan hereby notifies City that he is unable to return to work and that he will not be returning to work with the City when his sick leave has been exhausted on April 24, 1987. This notice is given in reliance upon the severance benefit agreements contained in the foregoing paragraphs 1 and 2 and is also given in reliance upon the advice of Morgan's medical doctors. 4. The parties agree that as of April 25, 1987, Morgan's . employment by the City shall be deemed to have been conclud- ed. II WITNESS: I~I THOMAS A. MORGAN, JR. Y7ITNESS: CITY OF RICHFIELD BY James D. Prosser, City Manager 2 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 63 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of fuel for operation of city equipment. 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. The City continually shops for the best prices available when purchasing fuel for operation of city equipment. Recently, Kelley Fuels Inc. of Bloomington offered unleaded gasoline at $.677 a gallon, which was under the bid obtained through joint agareement with Hennepin County. As the City was in need of fuel at the time, 8,000 gallons were ordered and delivered. Recommendation: It is recommended the city council authorize payment of $5,416 for the purchase of 8,000 gallons of unleaded fuel from Kelley Fuels Inc. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City must have fuel to operate its equipment. 2. The price recently offered by Kelley Fuels Inc. for unleaded gasoline was the lowest in the area at the time. Alternative Recommendation: There is no alternate recommendation. Discussion/Decision Mode: As the fuel has already been delivered, it is recommended action be taken at the February 23, 1987 meeting to provide timely payment for the goods received. Respe tfully submitted, i Ja s D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP/eja _ ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 62 Agenda February 23, 1987 .Issue Statement: Request for Advertising Permits for: Animal Care Clinic, 6521 Cedar Avenue; Walser Mazda, 7745 Penn Avenue; Jet Station, 7700 Lyndale Avenue; and Cedar Liquor Store, 6600 Cedar Avenue Background: City ordinance provides that the. city council must approve all permits for illuminated and temporary signs. Animal Care Clinic requests a permit to erect a new sign on the existing pedestal. The si n is to measure 6'.x4'.- Walser Mazda 9 requests a permit to erect a new sign reading "Sterling" below the existing Mazda sign. The illuminated sign will measure 4' x 6'. The Jet Station at 7700 Lyndale requests a permit for a temporary non-illuminated advertisin si n which i m ' g g w 11 easure 3 x 4'. The portable sign will not be placed on the right-of-way or in a parking stall.. The Cedar Liquor Store requests permits for three new si ns for the new li uor store buildin T 9 q wo are 9 to be 21' 3" by 13" wall signs, and one will be a pedestal sign 12' 9" x 8" with a reader board below the city logo. Recommendation: Approve the permits for these illuminated signs. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The Inspection Division and the Planning Division have approved the signs. 2. The signs conform to all applicable city ordinances. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not approve the signs.. However, the city has no alternative design criteria to suggest for substitutes for these signs. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the consent calendar portion of the February 23, 1987 council agenda for consideration. The businesses are requesting action to complete their sign placement. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP/eja ' City Manager t hispector Date ' . Date 7 - APPROVE ( 7~ f :DENY ~ • .at ~a,r~'•-- s: <,.~.iAPPROVE I ~ ~DENYI .,~:a ~ .as~:.,,.,.r.. . IJ µ~T NoT o~~. Plannin Department ~ ~ City Council (~-o-W Date •~-1 I z~~~ ' .:Date ' ~ - . Ro ute to above f or 's ecia p 1 approval per code General SiQns~• APPLICATION FOR'ADVERTISING PERMIT . City of Richfield,, Minnesota Date 2-10-87 Zoniag Sign Erected - Yes -X No Fee 18.00 . . Address of Sign .6521 Cedar Ave. So. Proprietor Name Lou Ann Wendlan~jBA Animal Care. Clinic Sign Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield, MN 554L,i Type of Sign Design Weather Cover Lighting Wall ~ Single Face _ Clear Lexon X Constant Projecting Double Face _ Frosted Lexon ~ Flashing Ground ~ Multi-Faced ~ Plastic Covered _ Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp ~ _ Shaded _ Traveling X Pedestal Searchlight _ Neon ~ Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants _ Other Other(Explain) Tem orar Portable Ivor & Tronze p y Frame: Si n Colors Y g Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post Illuminated - Yes X No Watts ~ctrical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost 85G.00 Sign Width 6 ~ Height 4 ~ Total Square Feet 24 ~ Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on .drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Tao blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: includin s ecifications list of materials and " g P , explicit anchorin or =astening details I g and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to .the business, institution, or activity conducted on the remises? Yes P ~ Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over fo/r safe 'access by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? No Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm Date 2-10-87 Phone Number 866-3047 LICt 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official,- 866-5061 r ~ . 1 `~•l r ~ l.J -~r . ~,1 ~~r \ ? r_.~- !r . C v1~~~ ~ ` g4~ p~NN A MINN~~~A . ~ovlalone Ll~s 6g'"3~? Sc alo r~ ~ ~~tr~N~ 8 ' _ ~D b~Y ~ ~u~aiom°~ ~AQQrQVaI~ n Y4~~ ©[8Qn o~u.'.v?:., 5 ra~o~utEO~r~~upctEO ~CjaloaP sNEDtt+ A t41ECY ~p~ED O 11 Y:. VNp~~ls ~ ~nC~OOVC AfT11t~tR ~ . nits 1S 1J~ ~E lµ COttttirt `~tr~ T ~~~n~SSr~~r ~f ~asoru1. s,cr~. r?rc ,,,nmc?+ . pato er 5t rpri . y.. r=2.: S:SQL p"'~-( ~ AP~SZE. 1~ ` I DENY I : ( ~ 'rUVL1.~.~~/ APPROVE ~ DE`'Y~ ~ : ta~~,.~ Cit; Ian a `y~ IrrspectoX,4/ Date ~~b t Date APPROVE ~ h ~ DENY` ~ : APPROVE DE~1YI Planning Department - City Council Date y ~ 3~ (S-7 Date Route to above for special approval per code Ganeral Suns APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PER'~iIT City. of Richfield, Minnesota Date J -p(,4 ~i~ 7 Zoning Sign Erected -Yes No v Fee Address of Sign ° ~%'/~}r`' /~~~M, Proprietor Name K/'d~,Qc2h~ DBA Sign Erector das~,,,,r,t,. i,r, Address 777c5~ ~F..~h Type. of Sign Desi~ - Weather Cover Lighting Wa11 Single .Face _ Clear Lexon Constant Projecting Double Face Frosted Le.YOn I Flashing Ground Multi-Faced ~ plastic Covered ~ Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp _ Shaded Traveling Pedestal Searchlight neon Zip Lite Changeable f Banner/Pennants Other _,4 Other(E:cplain) -,Temporary J ?ortabie Frame: Sign Colors I Trailer 1 T ~ A ~ Post Illuminated -Yes No Watts 2. ? l~,~~ Electrical Contractor LvAS~i!~e.1~7/~~, Address~"7,,'~?'tfb.s.~,~j~.~. Phone ~~'7( ~,4~7.1" Property Owner . or 'his Agent Signature j~%ZGL~ ~~-,e~, Prone S7~ ''Z~L~.~ Estimated Cosh' `t0 ~ Sign Width ;ieightU ~i ~ Total Square reet K. ~ i Position of the advertisement struct:4re in relationship to the adjacent buildings, side•.ralks, i curbs, roadways, overhead utility Lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities oa drawing with significant diWensions and attached hereto o= major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising str•.zeture construction plans: II including specifications, List of materials,. and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheers, calculations, color of sign strscture. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activit,~ conduced on the premises? Will the siga,.s~ructure, or billboard restrict nay sight distance under, around, or over ~ for safe access b person destined for or passing the subject premises? Applicant's Signature ~id Title with F~~ t q Q G Date ~ 1 e dumber cJ~L ~ G T ~ ' nUT _ _ Lkt 1485 PL SSE SEE Rr.vetcSE SIDE FOR SiG:s LOCATZOIS ac~ciCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 ~i t ~ ~ ~ ,rte ''(s ` 1 ~ 1. I~ ~ 4 Il• _ I C , ~ 1 •_AV y~ei' _ e~, ~t!{ l ~ it ~~?t~y i,~: I~ ~ ~ ice' ~s~~ ill' ~ ~ y°C t• ~ a yy ~ ~ ors ~ ~ II ~ 'A 1 G > i ~ ~ i 1:??. ~ ~ ,~ni; ~ n.~t. P , r• r 1 ~ 11'1 ~ 'y' 1 4v ~ .7 ~ r; j II ~~6~:.• . . ~ ~ , ~ o ~ • ~ of -.N~ n ~ ~ ~ •~9 /nom _ "R. ~ "1 1,~~ - - - - 1 t' ( (j N z Z J `P\ A W J Z ` E°+ ~ Q w ` RpR ~ ~ ~til~ ~ ~ nl Al ----J'""-~r 1- v- Z ~ i ~ ~ . !1! - - - - - - c U - . . o N ~ ' 0 ~ . - I ~ F ul v af. ~ f. z pit ~ ' 1 ~Q v 1~~ Q 4- Z ~ ~ r u~ n~ ' ~ • (~l w 0 ~ • ~ . . , APPROVE ~ DENY ~ : ~ //,t~~~ APPROVE ~ DENY ~ CtyManager .Ins ector P Date Date APPROVE ~ ~ I DENY T APPROVE ~ DENY ' ,.o~-s,G;,,~.r :.,~H,-a N~ Planning Department City Council ' ~u R-c-~; o(L .ra r'jO~K+n,b Date ~t~~"' Date w~ ~ oute to above for special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PER.'~fIT City of Richfield, .Minnesota Date /-s/`~ 7 Zoning Sign Erected - Yes No Fee • °Q Address of Sign ~j)~ ,~urj ~ ,~p Proprietor Name DBA'~ / ~ ~ a1: r,~nc_~ Sign Erector ~ l~,,l-y~y~, Address Type of Sign Design Weather Cover ff Lighting Wall _ Single Face Clear Lexon F ~ Constant Projecting Double Face Frosted Lexon _ Flashing Ground _ Multi-Faced Plastic Covered _ Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp Shaded Traveling _ Pedestal Searchlight ~ Neon I Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants I I Other ~ Other(Explain) Temporary I < Portab~ Frame: ~ ~ Sign Colors Trailer ~ T ~A ~ Post ~ ~ ~ „3 If Illuminated - Yes No Watts ~ctrical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agert Signature ~ ~ ~ Phone ~ ' ~~3, ~ Estimated Cost ~ Sign Width ~ Height 3 Total Square Feet /2 Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement Lines, or public facilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs: Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by persons destined .for or passing the subject premises? ~ ~ Aga G/~~;n Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm ~ /y Date Phone Number ' ~t 1985 PLE.~SE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 • r1Pt~iZ0VE ( DENY ~ : APPROVE DENY ~ ~ : -k/-`^c~•^• ~ City Manager InspectorZ/~L/~, Date Date APPROVE ' ~ ~ ~ENY~ ~ : APPROVE DENY Plannin Department City Council Date 'Z~j?I q~ Date ~ute to abo ve for special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield, .Minnesota Date 2-12-87 Zoning Sign Erected - Yes X No Fee 41.00 Address of Sign 6600 So. Cedar Ave. Proprietor Name William Fillmor~BARichfield Liquor Sign Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield Type of Sign Design Weather Cover Lighting Wall ~ Single Face _ Clear Lexon Constant _ Projecting. ~ Double Face _ Frosted Lexon Flashing Ground. _ Multi-Faced Plastic Covered _ Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp _ Shaded _ .Traveling ~ Pedestal ~ ~ Searchlight _ Neon ~ Zip Lite Changeable I I Banner/Pennants _ Other ~ Other(Explain) Temporary I Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post ~ White, ~ _Bronze & Blue Illuminated - Yes No Watts ctrical Contractor Address Phone Proparty Owner or his Agent Signature ~ Phone Estimated Cost a~_ nnn . nn Sign Widths ~ ~ q~~ Height R ~ Total Square Feet 1 0~ Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, cu~+bs, roadways,. overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on _ ~ drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. ~Iwnor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? vPC Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access bg/pe/rs~on~s destine for or passing the subject premises? No. . Applicant's' Signature and Title wi"'[fi Firm Date 2-12-87 - Phoae Number 866-3047 ~[ct 1985 PLEASE SEE Rr.vrtcSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION a~,iCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 . T _ APPROVE ~ ~ DENYI ~ : APPROVE ~ DENY /,~~-e="-e'~ City Manager Inspecto~/~~/u~ Date Date APPROVE I,~ DENY ~ : ~ APPROVE I DENY Planning$ D~p~nt City Council Date ZJi2 Date Route to above for special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield, .Minnesota Date ~ _ ~ ~ _ R ~ Zoning Sign Erected - Yes X No Fee 18.0 0 Address of Sign 6600 So. Cedar Ave. Proprietor NameWm. Fillmore DBA Richfield Liquor Sign Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield Type of Sign _ Design ~ Weather Cover Lighting x Wall Single Face _ Clear Leson t ~ Constant _ Projecting Double Face _ Frosted Lexon Flashing. Ground Multi-Faced ~ Plastic Covered Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp ~ Shaded Traveling Pedestal ~ Searchlight Neon Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants I Other ~ Other(Explain) Temporary Portable Frame: ~ ~ Sign Colors R 1 „P rah; t A Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post ~ . Illuminated - Yes No Watts ~ectrical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agert Signature Phone Estimated Cost 900.00 Sign Widths ~.~~~Ieight ~ Total Square reet Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, .curbs, roadways, overhead uQility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public racili2ies on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as des"fined on page 2. .Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specif ications, list of materials, and e. licit anchorin or fastenin details YP g g and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? vow Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe access by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? No . ~ - Applicant s Signature and Title`'~iith Firm Date February 12, 1987 Phone Number 86.6-3047 Lkt 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH. Sivert HendricksonlBuilding Official - 866-5061 APPRaVE ~ ~ .DENYI ~ : APPROVE ~ DENY' ( : ~'~`4 d.. ~je City Manager Inspector Date Date `APPROVE DENYI ~ ; ~i L ' APPROVE ~ ~ DENYI ~ : Plannin re artment City Council Date 'Z~iZ ~ Date oute to above for special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield, .Minnesota Date ~ _ i ~ _ R ~ Zoning Sign Erected - Yes X No Fee 18.0 0 Address of Sign 6600 So. Cedar Ave. Proprietor NameWm. Fillmore DBA Richfield Liquor Sign Erector Attracta Sign, Inc. Address 6417 Penn Ave. So. Richfield Type of Sign Design Weather Cover Lighting Wall X Singe Face Clear Lexon Constant Projecting Double Face Frosted Lexon _ Flashing Ground Multi-Faced ~ Plastic Covered _ Revolving Roof Aerial/Blimp Shaded Traveling Pedestal ~ Searchlight Neon Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants _ Other _ Other(Explain) Temporary Portable Frame: Sign Colors Ri„A wr,:tA Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post Illuminated - Yes No Watts ctrical Contractor Address Phone Property. Owner or his Agerr_ Signature ,Phone Estimated Cost 900.00 Sign Width 21, 3,fieight ~ ~n Total Square Feet Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on .drawing with signif icant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure. Does the sign copy relate ,solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on the premises? vow Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for saf e~ ess by persons desti ed for or passing the subject premises? No . Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm Date February 12 , 19 8 7 Phone Number 866-304 7 "pct 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 x i ~j r :11!1: ~:<~'.i`?iP '~'If'~ki.`y#: i... " _ v v; ~,1 ~u ' ? +,t~!,w .~a?"c. .:.i4;T`i.>.i. `:i:2t';:7': ,i:.rat to l'yr^![~~ .~..~^~a~."1~1:~"GC:tr•~~'i~ yvi1'!W .>'~%e_. ~r::l~.~l':~.:Aw~~:!..:'}v:• d.:re:; ~..sY: .Y. • r• ~ ~ . ~ - ~ y t' ~ f 1• 71~i:' ~OL.17. ~L.V L. 1 13 + j 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~8 K ~ ~ 3 _:o.... 2~ , . - ~ ~ ' ~i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 61 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Authorization to replace backwash reclaim pump at the Water Plant. Background: The backwash reclaim pump pumps water off of the backwash cycle back to the head of the water plant to be treated and used as potable water. The water it pumps is initially used to clean the water plant filters. The present backwash reclaim pump is approximately ten years old and requires major repair. In addition, it is not large enough to pump water efficiently. Quotations were received for an appropriately .sized pump as follows: Water Products Company $10,334.00 General Repair Service $ 8.613.00 An appropriation in the amount of $26,00.00 was approved for this purchase in the 1987 Water Maintenance (703-4836) capital outlay budget. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council approve the purchase of a water plant backwash reclaim pump from General Repair Service of Minneapolis in the amount of $8,613.00 as outlined in their quotation dated February 10, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The quotation submitted by General Repair Service meets the requirements of the City's specifications and is the lowest quotation submitted. 2. Replacement of the existing backwash reclaim pump with a larger, more efficient pump will allow us to reclaim and treat approximately 1500 more gallons of water a minute, that are now being lost. The savings in water lost at the present time will pay far the new pump in approximately one year. Alternative Recommendation: i. The Council may choose to not approve the quotation of General Repair Service and direct staff to obtain additional quotations. 2. Replacement of the pump could be postponed until a later date, however, there is sufficient funding available for this purchase. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the February 23, 1987 City Council • agenda for council consideration.: The quotation submitted by General Repair Service is firm for acceptance within thirty days; f"~~ ~ ~ / 1 therefore, council approval should be received soon to take advantage of the low quotation. Respectfully submitted, Jame D. Prosser City Manager JDP/sae i ' CITY OF RICHFIELQ, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 60 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Authorization to purchase exterior signage for the Cedar Avenu e Liquor Store Background: Exterior construction of the new liquor store is nearing completion and exterior signage must be ordered in advance. Five area sign companies were contacted to submit quotes for the purchase and installation of two 21' 3" x 13" wall signs, and one 12' 9" x 8' pedestal sign with reader board below the city logo. The quotes received were as follows: Sign Service, Inc. $7,561 Nordquist Signs 7,040 Universal Sign Co. 7,037 Cragg Sign Co. 6,735 permit fees) Attracta Sign Co. 6,735 (includes fees) Recommendation: Approve the purchase and installation of three exterior signs for the Cedar Avenue Liquor Store in the amount of $6,735 from Attracta Sign Co. • Basis for Recommendation: 1. The amount is the lowest quote received. 2. The signs meet specifications. 3. Adequate funds are provided for this purchase. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not authorize the purchase and installation of exterior signage for the Cedar Avenue Liquor Store. Discussion/Decision Mode: The signs will take several weeks for delivery, and should be ordered now to allow sufficient time so that the signs can be installed prior to opening the new liquor store. Respect ully submitted, Jame D. Prosser City onager JDP/eja t~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ichfield I i ~.x~~ - ~ _ _ _ quor store ~ _ : ~ t~ coo L, r_~ i~ ~ V~ C7 eA~ - ~ osvw t w hdt ~„i"~ ~ ~ ~ . . ¦ _ r~chfield liquor store f _ • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 59 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Approval of purchase of checkout/service counter and appurtenant work for the Cedar Avenue Liquor Store Background: Council policy provides that purchases in excess of $5,000 must be approved by the city council. Quotations have been received for checkout/service counter and appurtenant work at the Cedar Liquor Store. Two quotations were received: Carbonic Machines Inc. $11,200 National Store Fixtures 9,435 The amount includes freight, installation and performance bonds. Recommendation: Authorize the purchase of checkout/service counter and appurtenant work in the amount of $9,435 from National Store Fixtures. Basis for Recommendation: • 1. The quotation from National Store Fixtures meets specifications for this work. 2. The quotation from National Store Fixtures is the lowest quote received. 3. The checkout/service counter is needed for the new liquor store facility. 4. Funds are available in the liquor construction budget for this purpose. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not authorize the purchase and request staff to obtain additional quotations for this purpose. Discussion/Decision Mode: The installation of the checkout/service counter and appurtenant work must be coordinated with other contractors at the liquor store site. To facilitate the work in a timely manner, this item has been scheduled for council action on February 23, 1987. Respect lly submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP/eja _ '/0 ~~~~~1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 58 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of two front-mount turf mowers for city maintenance operations. Background: Front-mount mowers are used primarily by the park maintenance division to cut the grass in the city parks and at other city facilities such as the Ice Arena/Swimming Pool complex and the. Community Center. Two units used for these operations were on a five year depreciation schedule and are ready for r8placement, .due to increasing mechanical. failures. Unit 213, a Toro Groundsmaster 72" front-mount mower, was purchased in 1976 anal, although fully depreciated in 1981, has continued to be used through 1986.. Unit 248., also a Toro Groundsmaster, was purchased in 1980, was fully depreciated in 1985 and was used through 1986. An appropriation in the amount of $2.0,000 was approved in the 1987 Central Garage capital outlay budget for the purchase of two new mowers. Quotations for the purchase of these mowers were received from five area vendors: Vendor ~ Brand Net Quotation Howard Price $19 210 Kromer. Company Terra Care, Inc. Hustler 14,900. MTI Distributing Company Toro 14,436 R. L. Gould & Company Jacobsen 13,800 Carlson's Lake State Equipment Co. John Deere 12,950 The lowest quotation was received from Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company of Burnsville. The price for two John Deere F935 front-mount mowers with 72" mower decks was $24,950 with a trade-in allowance of $12,000 for the two existing Toro Groundsmaters making a net quotation of $12,950. In all cases, the net quotation includes a price quotation for the two new mowers less a trade-in value for the two existing mowers. Because, in effect, a net quotation was requested, the total price does not exceed $15,000; therefore, quotations were accepted rather than following the sealed bidding process. Recommendation: Approve the purchase of two John Deere turf mowers less trade-in of two Toro Groundsmaster units from Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company for a net purchase .price of $12,950 per the quotation of February 6, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: - 1. Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company submitted the lowest quotation for the purchase of two turf mowers. 2. The. John Deere Company is recognized as a leader in their industry. Although the City of Richfield has never purchased this brand of mower before, several municipalities in the metropolitan area own mowers of this type and are very satisfied with their performance. The City of Minneapolis, for example, recently purchased •32 such mowers for use in their park system. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do n.ot purchase mowers at this time. However, the existing units are two to six years beyond full depreciation and are in need of replacement. 2. Do not accept any of the five quotations received at this time and direct staff to obtain bids from .other vendors. Discussion/Decision Mode: Equipment is usually purchased during the first part of the new year so it is available when needed. To assure sufficient time for delivery and to put the new .units into service, this item is scheduled for the consent calendar of February 23, 1987.. Respectfully .submitted, • Jame Prosser City anager JDP/eja I CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 57 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of a self-powered snowblower attachment for the City's existing front-end loader. Background: Occasionally the snow depth in the City's commercial areas along the major arterial streets, such as Lyndale Avenue, is so high that it becomes a visibility problem for traffic. Therefore, for safety reasons and additional future snow storage space, it is necessary to load it into trucks and haul it away. The City currently owns a Root snowblower to assist the Street Maintenance Division in this operation. A snowplow with a blade is used to push the snow into a windrow. The snowblower attached to the Caterpillar 950 front-end loader then intakes the snow and blows it into a dump truck to be transported. The existing snowblower was purchased in 1968 .and was expected to provide services for 15 years. Several years ago the unit was substantially rebuilt. However, it is now in need of replacement. The unit is experiencing increasing mechanical breakdowns and is no longer reliable for front line use. The unit will remain in the motor pool as a backup unit. Its . estimated salvage value is $1,500.00. Sealed bids for this purchase were opened on Friday, February 13, 1987. A copy of the bid minutes and tabulation are attached for Council review. Three bids were received: Ruffridge-Johnson - Minneapolis .$39,310.00 Itasca Equipment Company - Savage $48,647.00 MacQueen Equipment Incorporated - $69,350.00 St. Paul The Central Garage Division capital outlay budget (602-4862) for 1987 provides an appropriation of $55,OOD for the purchase of the i new snowblower. Recommendation: It is recommended the Council authorize the purchase of a new I~' -self-powered snowblower attachment from Ruffridge-Johnson _ Equipment Company in the amount of $39,310.00. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The bid by Ruffridge-Johnson Equipment company meets the requirements outlined in the specifications for the new snowblower unit and is the lowest bid submitted by a responsible bidder. 2. Sufficient funding is available for this purchase. - - i Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not approve the purchase and direct staff to obtain quotations from other companies in an effort to obtain a lower bid price. 2. Not purchase a new snawblawer attachment at this time, however, the existing unit is no longer reliable and to avoid future maintenance problems should be replaced. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item will be placed on the agenda for consideration on February 23, 1987. Delivery of this unit is guaranteed thirty days after placement of the order. In all probability, this machine will not be delivered in time to be used during the 1986- 1987 snow season. Therefore, it is not necessary for the City Council to approve the purchase at this time. However, sufficient funding is now availak~le and staff recommends. that the unit be purchased soon.. Respectfu y submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP/sae ~~~z CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening February 13, 1987 11:30 A.M. Purchase of One (1) New Snowblower Bid No. 87-1 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 purchase of one {1) New Snowblower, bid no. 87-1, as advertised in-the official newspaper on January 28, 1987. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Sandy Rosenow, Community Services Director Representative Eileen Anderson, City Manager Representative Roger Spencer, Maintenance Superintendent The following. bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR BID ; TOTAL ; SECURITY ' Ruffridge-Johnson Mpls. 5% Bond $39,310 ; Itasca Equipment Co. Savage 5~ Bond $48,647 II MacQueen Equipment Co. St. Paul. 59~ Bond $69,350 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and ~I considered at the February 23, 1.987 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk - CITY DF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 56 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Authorization for removal and replacement of well pump 4~6. Background: The 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. The Water Maintenance Division operates seven wells which supply the City's water needs. The first six wells were constructed in the early 196D's with:-the seventh well being added in 1979. The pump in each well is set. up on a maintenance schedule of repair or replacement on a seven-year maintenance plan. Well ~~6, located at 66th Street and 11th Avenue, was initially constructed in-1964. Since installation, the well has received periodic maintenance. As part of the continuing preventative maintenance effort, quotations were received for the removal and replacement of well pump 4~6 as follows: E. H. Renner and Sons $ 8,890.00 Mark Tracet $10,200.00 Keyes Well Drilling Company $11,750.00 McCarthy Well Company- $12,481.43 Bergerson Caswell Incorporated $12,998.00 An appropriation in the amount of $18,000 was approved in the 1987 water maintenance capital outlay. budget for this work which involves labor and equipment to pull and replace the motor, column and pump assembly. Recommendation:. It is recommended the Council authorize a purchase order in the amount of $8,890 with E. H. Renner and Sons for the removal and replacement of well pump X66 as outlined in their proposal date February 5, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The existing pump has been in operation since 1980. Well pumps are on a seven-year replacement schedule, therefore, this pump is scheduled to be replaced in 1987. 2. .The quotation submitted by E. H. Renner and Sons meets the requirements as outlined in the specifications and is the lowest quotation submitted by a responsible vendor. 3. Sufficient funding is available for this work. Alternative Recommendation: ' 1. The Council may choose not to approve the quotations of E. H. Renner and Sons or the other four vendors submitting quotations at this time and direct staff to obtain quotations from other companies in an effort to obtain a lower price. However, this quotation appears to be very good. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the February 23, 1987 City Council agenda for Council consideration. Approval at this time will insure the .work will be done before the heavy water demand of late Spring and Summer occurs. Respectf lly submitted, . Jame D. Prosser City Manager JDP/sae I I ~I V I • ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 55 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Consideration to approve a resolution authorizing the city.. manager to execute a lease agreement with Walser Corporation and accepting lease agreement as meeting stipulation requirement for special use permit related to Walser Corporation. Background: The City of Richfield has previously identified the fact that Walser Corporation was using a portion of city right-of-way to park vehicles for display and storage purposes. Part of the conditions for issuance of the special use permit for the improvements to'the Buick building and also as a stipulation for improvements to the Viking Center for use as the new Mazda site, the city council required execution of a lease for use of that property. In the case of the Mazda site, the lease was to have been executed by December 13, 1986. Walser has now executed a lease acceptable to the staff and city attorney. The lease basically provides for payments of $5,500 per year for rent. That amount to be adjusted on an annual basis, but no increase shall be more than 10% per year. Approximately ten feet of the area immediately adjacent to 78th Street to be landscaped. If the lease:_is terminated prior to the initial 12 month period, all rent shall be refunded to the Lessee in recognition of the cost of landscaping. Recommendation: Approve the lease and approve lease as satisfaction in terms of stipulations relating to special use permits for the Buick and Mazda sites. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The lease satisfies the intentions and purposes of the city. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not approve the lease. However, the Walser Corporation is currently using city owned property for monetary gain without compensation to the city. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented as a consent item on the February 23, 1987 city council agenda. Respe ~ lly submitted, Jam s Prosser Cit anager JDPleja RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LEASE OF CITY PROPERTY TO WALSER.CORPORATION WHEREAS, at the October 13, 1986 city council meeting, the city council approved a request of Walser Corporation for a special use permit fora new Mazda Automobile Sales and Service Facility at 7700-7750 Morgan Avenue, 7701 Newton Avenue, and 2016-2026 West 78th Street subject to several stipulations; and WHEREAS, stipulation No. ll provided that the Walser Corporation execute a lease for the .use of city owned right-of- way within 60 days; and .WHEREAS, the Walser Corporation did not execute this lease agreement until February 13, 1987; and WHEREAS, the city recognizes that although the 60 day deadline to execute the lease expired previous to February 13, 1987, the city will nevertheless accept this lease as a condition, of the special use permit granted October 13, 1986. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: ' 1. A proposed lease of the 11,276 square feet of the following described tract of:_land, t•o wit: Parcel A. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter Section 33, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33; thence •Easterly along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33 a distance of 656.00 feet, more or less, to the West line of Registered Land Survey No. 800, files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin; thence Northerly along said .West. line of Registered Land Survey No. 800 a distance of 108.00 feet to the actual point of beginning. of the easement to be described, thence continuing Northerly along said West line of Registered Land Survey No. 800 a distance of 12.00 feet, more or less, to the Northeasterly right of way line of Trunk Highway 494, as defined by Doc. No. 3419310; .thence on an assumed bearing of N70~30'28"W along said Northeasterly right of way line a distance of 118.94 feet; thence S17*41'S9"W a distance of 10.54 feet; thence S27~18'O1"E a distance of 28.28 feet; thence S72~18'O1"E a distance of 8.50 feet; thence S78*44'02"E a distance of 46.48 feet; thence S84*18'32"E a distance of 48.93-feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning. Parcel A contains 2673 square feet or 0.061 acres. Parcel B. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota,. described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said.Southwest- Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33; thence Easterly along the South line of said Southwest Quarter .~~a~ of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33 a distance of 656.00 feet, more or less, to the West line of Registered Land Survey No. 800, files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, thence Northerly along said West line of Registered Land Surve No. 800 a y .distance of 120.00-feet, more or less, to the North- easterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 494, as defined by Doc. No. 3419310; thence on an assumed bearing of N70*30'28"W along said Northeasterly right of way line a distance of 148.96 feet to the actual point of beginning of the easement to be described; thence continuing N70~30'28"W along said Northeasterly right of way line a distance of 299.08. feet; thence S26*29'40"E a distance of 35.56 feet; thence S67•~09'46"E a distance of 171.25 feet; thence S72*18'O1"E a distance of 83.58 feet; thence N62*41'S9"E a distance of 28.28 feet; thence N17*41'S9"E a distance of 11.48 feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning. Parcel B contains 8603 square feet or 0.197 acres. to Walser Corporation is hereby ordered to be placed on file. 2. It is hereby determined that the premises described in said lease are not presently needed for municipal purposes. 3. It is hereby determined to be necessary and expedient for the city to lease such premises to Walser Corpora- tion for use in•connection with an automobile dealership and such proposed lease is hereby approved. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute such lease for and on behalf of the City of •Richfield. • 4. It is hereby determined that the first year rental for .the property shall be $5,500, and the annual rental increase shall not exceed 10~. 5. All rental sums received under the provision of such lease shall be paid into the General Fund. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 23 day of February, 1987. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: i ..Thomas Ferber City Clerk ~I I - - ~f. n . LEASE AGREEMENT THI S LEASE AGREEMENT is made this ~ ~ day of F~ ~ i uar~, , ~ Z98 , by and bet~~,~een the CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota ~ municipal corporation {herein referred to as "Lessor"), and WALSER CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation (herein referred to as "Lessee"). RECITALS ' 1. Lessor is the sole owner of the premises described. on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (Premises). 2. Lessor owns and holds the Premises for street and highway purposes. However, Lessor has no immediate need to utilize the Premises and does not have any current expectation of a need to do so during the term of this Lease. 3. .Lessee owns certain lands adjacent to the Premises which are used as an automobile deal_ership.'~~ 4. The parties desire to enter into a lease agreement and to define their respective rights, duties and liabilities relating to-the Premises during such Lease. Lessee wishes to use the Premises for certain purposes hereinafter described in connection with operation of its automobile dealership. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Premises. Lessor hereby demises, leases and lets unto Lessee, and Lessee hereby hires and takes from Lessor the property described in Exhibit A hereto. (Premises), to have and to hold for the term of this Lease and subject to the obligations hereinafter contained. 2. Permitted Uses. The Premises shall be used by Lessee as a parking area for Lessee's new or used motor vehicles and for the motor vehicles of .Lessee's employees, agents, customers, and invitee;s, and for no other purpose unless prior written co nsent is f' first obtained from Lessor. In the event the Lessee shall; permit or- allow any vehicle to be parked on the Premises so that any part of such vehicle encroaches into ' or upon that portion of the Premises lying southerly of line "A" as shown on Exhibit B (encroachment), then the Lessor shall deliver written notice of such encroachment to the Lessee. With respect to the first time that a notice of encroachment is . given during this lease, Zessee-shall have 24 hours from delivery of such notirication to remove the encroachment and ~y provide the Lessor with assurance that Lessee has taken reasonable steps to prevent turtne: encroachments. Upon the giving of any notice of encroachment follo~:~ing the first notice of encroacrment, Lessee shall have 24 hours from receipt of such notice to i) remove the encroachme:~t, and ii) pay to the Lessor the .sum of $100.00, which the parties stipulate and agree reasonably compensates the Lessor for its administrative work in securing removal of the encroachment. If the Lessor fails to take the corrective steps required by this paragraph the Lessor may, upon the. giving of thirty (30) days written notice to do so, terminate this Lease. 3. Desicn and Maintenance. .The Premises shall be designed, laid out and constructed in accordance with the Plans which are attached hereto in Exhibit B, and Lessee may not thereafter modify or alter the Premises without the prior written approval o~-Lessor. Lessee warrants to Lessor that all sodding and planting will be established within 6 months of the date of this Lease pursuant to Exhibit B and will be alive for at least one _year following their installation. Prior to the completion of construction, as certified by the Lessor, Lessee shall not utilize or occupy ary portion of the Premises lying southerly of line "A" as shown on Exhibit B for parking purposes. Lessee shall, during the term of_this Lease maintain the premises in a .safe, clean and operational condition and shall install and maintain the landscaping and other improvements shown on Exhibit B. 4. Term. The term of this Lease shall be one year commencing on. December 2, 1986, and terminating at 12:00 midnight on December 1, 1987 (the Term). Subject to paragraph 5, the Lessee shall have the right to renew the Lease annually upon the giving of written notice to the Lessor at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the Term or any annual renewal thereof. In the event that the Lessor shall require the Premises for street or highway purposes, it shall deliver writt F en notice o~ terminat' ion to t he Lessor. Upon the giving of such not' ice,. this Lease shall terminate as follows: a.) If, at the time of the giving of such notice, there remains at least one hundred eighty (180) da s of the Term or an annual renewal then the y Y Lease shall terminate one hundred eighty (180) days from the giving of such notice. b.) If, at the time of the giving of such notice, there remains less than one hundred eighty (180) days of the Term or any annual renewal, then i. The Lease shall terminate at the end of such-Term or annual renewal; unless ii. Lessee shall provide Lessor with the notice of renewal (provided for in this 2. paragraph 4), and :.he parties. agree upor. the amount of rent payable during such renewal, in wh;ch case this Lease shall terminate one hundred eighty (180) days following the giving of notice of termination. 5. Rent. Lessee shah~ ugo execution of this Lease pay Lessor the sum of $,~@~0"''~S ~ri~ for the Term (which the parties stipulate to be the fair rental value for the Premises when used in connection with Lessee`s auto dealership).. On or before the date on which Lessee gives notice of rene~~~al, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith the rent. for such annual renewal term. The parties agree that in'no event may the rent for any annual renewal term exceed the rent for the .immediate preceding term by more than 100. If the parties are unable to agree upon a rent for the renewal terr.~,,.then the Lessor shall have the right to reject the Lessee's renewal notice. This Lease shall then terminate upon the expiration of .the then current term, unless Lessee tenders to Lessor an amount equal to one-half of the rent for the immediately- precedirg term, plus 10%, in which case this Lease shall. terminate 180 days following the expiration of th'~ then cur~ent_ term. The negotiated annual rent for any renewal term shall bey- paid to Lessor on the first day of .such renewal term. Failure to make any sucr. payments when due shall, upon the giving of thirty (30) days written notice of termination, be grounds nor • immediate termination of this Lease. 6. Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessr~:enta. In the event that the Premises should become subject to either ad valorem real estate taxation or special assessments, Lessee agrees that, in addition to the rent payable to Lessor pursuant to Paragraph 5, it will, for all years in which this Lease remains in effect, pay to Lessor an amount equal to the real property taxes and special assessments due and payable in that year. Failure to make any such payments when due shall, upon -the giving of thirty (30) days written notice of termination, be ground for immediate termination of this Lease. 7. Termination - Removal of Improvements. Upon termination of this Lease by any of the means provided herein, Lessee shall peacefully surrender unto Lessor the Premises. Lessee shall have the right, prior to the date of termination to remove any improvements placed thereon by it except those lying southerly on line "A" on Exhibit B. Any improvements- remaining on the Premises.at the date of termination, including those lying southerly of said line "A,".shall be deemed to have been abandoned to Lessor without cost to Lessor. Lessee further covenants and agrees that it wily make no claim against Lessor (in the event of termination) for loss of use of the premises (or the value of such lost use) or for any diminution • in the value of its adjacent land (or business enterprise) by ! ~ 1 such termination. ~CP ~~F[N+~+[ti 3. • ~~~~J i 8. Option to Purci:ase. In the event teat Lessor should ever determine Lhe Premises to be unnecessary for street or highway purposes, Lessee shall have the first option to purchase the Premises from Lessor at an amount to be agreed or. by the parties at that time. 9. Indemnification. Lessee shall indemnify Lessor and.. hold Lessor harmless against any claims, actions, causes of action, or costs or expenses of defending the same, arising out of or by reason of this Lease or by reason of the use or occupancy of the Premises by Lessee pursuant to this Lease. In addition to the foregoing (and not as a limitation thereof) Lessee .shall at the time of execution of this Lease furnish Lessor with evidence that Lessee's liability insurance policies include coverage of the Premises at the same level as Lessee's liability= coverage on tre lands immediately adjacent to the Premises which are used by Lessee for the purposes of an auto dealership. Lessee agrees to continue in full force and effect-. such coverage during the Tern and any extension thereof. 10. Miscellaneous. This Lease shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. :This Lease cannot be altered or modified, except by a written instrument executed by both parties.. 11. Notices. Any notice required to be given herein shall be deemed given upon mailing in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid addressed as follows: Notices to Lessor: City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave., S. Richfield, MN 55423 Notices to Lessee: Walser Corporation Attn: John Oliva Director of Corporate Planning 7380 France Avenue South Suite 102 Edina, MN 55435 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Lease as of the day and year first above written.- LESSEE: LESSOR: WALSER CORPORATION CITY OF RICHFIELD B u~ By Y Its :-~r~J~~t~1f Its : Mayor By. Its: City Manager . 4. ~J~~ ~ STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COL'hTY OF HENNEPIN) This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19.86, by and the ~~?avor and Cit Manager, respectively, of the City of Ric: field, a Minnesota .municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary .Public STATE OF MINN'ESO`TA) } SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)~ This instrument was ackrowled d before me this /3 day of ~-.c~~,.~ , 198, by ~ - ~ )Q Q~ o n the "of Walser Corporation, a Minnesota corporation,: on behalf of the cor prat' t inn. ~ ~_h! Nw ~~J _ ~AnM./tl\h/Jv4~1?s',.Sl ± i No ary Public z:'===s _ .:.,;.y :`i~t~`~c~'~~_~`TK F ~ 4.~ ~ I TH I S INSTRUMENT WAS DRAr TED BY : ~ rca;rr. ~;:F~::~s ~^~e y ti ~wr-.~iv~.vwvwvivwvwwwv~r~wvv~. LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz A Professional Association 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612)333-0543 PKB:AJ6 5. / , _1 . , E~ .BiT A LO LEASE AGREElfiLNT PROPOSED EASEMENT'FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY PURPOSES PAnGEL A That .part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, township 28,. Range 24, Hennepin County, ,Iinnesota, described as follows: Commencing~at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter .of Section 33; thence Easterly along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of the South~•~est Quarter of Section 33 a distance of 656.D0 feet,.. more or less, to the West line of°.egistered Land Survey No. 800, fifes of the Registrar of :Titles, County. of Hennepin; thence.A'ortherly along said ?•lest .line of Registered Land Survey P;o. 800 a distance of 108.00' feet to the• actual point of .beginning ~of the easement to~be described; thence continuing Northerly along said ?•lest.line of Registered Land Survey No. 800 a distance of 12,00.-feet, more or less, to the tdortheasterly right of way line of •Trunk Hijhway No. 494, as defined by .Doc. No. 3419310; thence on an assumed bearing of N70°30`28"?d along said Northeasterly right of tray line a • distance of 11,$.'94 feet; thei}Ce S17 ~=41'59"W a distance of 10.54 feet ; thence S27~=18' O1 "E ~ a distance of 28.28 feet ; thence ST2"~18' O1 "E _ a distance of 8.50 feet; thence S78~`44'02"E a distance of 46:48 feet; thence S84'~18'32"•E a distance of .48.93 feet, more or less, to the actual point of beginning. Parcel A contains 2673 square feet or 0.061 acres. • ~:ote: T denotes degrees; ' denotes .minutes; " denotes seconds; JOHN A. PETERSON FRANK R. LENZ JR. _ PROFESSIOWAL RtGi3TERED S~7RVEY~RS REGISTERED tN a11NNE30TA A 1N13CONSIN ~ LIC£7~lSEO Mr CRY Of tAPOLta . 3300 LYN~ALE -AVE. S0. MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 83408 . • TELEPHONE ~ 612 - 824 - 0370 EIlY CERTIFY THAT THis >SURVEY .PLAN, OR AEPOAT IMAS PREPARED dY ~ CLIENT WALSER CORPORATION R UNDER dl DIRECT SUPERVISION AND TMAT 1 AM A DULY REfiISTERED 1. No Sus;YEYOR DER TMs: LA Os< TH ST ATE OF MINhE110TA. dOd NO. 10, 769 8CALE • C~.,~I~c~-~.w~--. OATF IO ~ j ~ REQ. N0. ~ 37gZ bK./P0..312-1/229 SHEET 1 OF 2 ~ ~L.~ _ a 7 Li ~ I~ EXHIBIT A to , LEASE AGREEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROPOSED EASEMENT FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY PURPOSES. PARCEL B That. part of the Southwest Quarter of-the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33; thence Easterly along the South line of saki Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33 a distance of 656.00 feet, wore or .less, to the [Jest line of Registered Land Survey Flo. 800, files of the Registrar of Titles,. County of Hennepin; thence Plortherly along said [Jest. line of Registered Land Survey No. 800 a distance of 120.00 feet, taore ~or. less, to the Northeasterly right of way .line of Trunk Highway No. 494, as defined by Doc. ido. 3419310; thence on an assumed bearing of :l70=~30' 28"[•! along said northeasterly right of way line a distance of 148.96 feet • to the actual point of beginning of the easement to be described; .thence continuing N70~°30' 28"[•1 along.. said Plorth2asterly right of way line a' distance of 299.08 feet; thence S26°~~29' 4(~"E a distance • of 35.56 feet; thence S67~U9'46"E a distance of 171.25 feet; thence S7,2'~`18'O1"E ~a distance of S3.58 feet; thence iv62'~=41'59"E a distance of 28.28 feet; thence Pl17T41'S9"h a distance of 11.48 feet, more or less, to the actual point of beoinnin~. Parcel~B contains 8603 square feet or 0.197 acres. Note: denotes degrees; ' denotes ninutes; " denotes seconds. c. c~~~-~~~ ~ ~?~~~c~~~~s,~ ~~c. JOti+Y A. PETERSON FRAFtK R. LENZ JR. PROFESSION~I: REGISTERED SURVEYORS- REGISTERED IN MINRE80TA • YfisCON31N - LiCEN8ED G/ CRY Of QAEi#IEAPOLIB 3300 LYNDALE .AVE. S0. M{NNEAPOL{S, MINN. 55408 TELEPHONE + 612 - 824 -0370 , , , ~ ~EOY CERTIFY THAT THIS >sURVEY, PLAM, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED EY CLIENT WALSER CORPORATION R UNDER 0lRECT StJPERV1810M ANO THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED LA / EY DER T}IE LA~hNE~RjA~ IN~NES,OTA. `!tea t,`,!~• ~Ct JOS k0. 10, 769 SCALE DATE \Z 4 g~O REG. NO 13~QZ dK./PO..312-1/229 SHEET 2 OF 2 EX~ :.5 ym B to arnENT LEASE p,G%E-'-' PL---~~ PI^.E : A~ 6 ~.Sf1- ATTACHMENT ~~1 I~is lease is terminated prior to the initial 12 month period all rents paid shall be refunded to leasee. I CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 54 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement Acceptance of the donation of two resuscitators for the Fire Division; funds to purchase three body armor vests for the Police Division; and a scoreboard for Donaldson Park by American Legion Post 435. Background Fire Division Emergency Medical Technicians respond to all medical emergencies in the city, and oxygen resuscitators are part of .the medical equipment carried on Fire Division vehicles. American Legion Post 435 has purchased two resuscitators and carrying cases to replace worn out equipment at a total price of $1,160..00. Body armor vests are worn under clothing of police officers and are found to be very effective in the performance of their duties. American Legion Post ~~435 has indicated that the post would like to donate a check sufficient to purchase three of tfiese vests. The Post has also indicated that they would like to donate a scoreboard for use at Donaldson Park to the city. Representatives of the Post wish to make these donations at the February 23, 1987 City Council meeting. Recommendation The City Council acknowledge and accept these donations to the city by the American Legion Post 435. Basis of Recommendation 1. Representatives of the Post will be present at the February 23 City Council meeting to make these. presentations. 2. The city is in need of the armor vests, the resuscitators and the scoreboard for Donaldson Park. Alternative Recommendation 1. Do not accept the donations. However, as the city is in need of the items to be donated., not accepting them would increase the city's operating budgets. Decision/Discussion Mode Representatives of the American Legion Post 435 will be present at the February 23, 1987 city council meeting to make these presentations. Resp ully Submitted, Jame D. Prosser City snager CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 53 Agenda February 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Reinstatement of process whereby all new police officers hired by the City of Richfield, are officially sworn in at a public ceremony before the Richfield City Council. .Background: It was common practice years ago that all police officers-hired by the City of Richfield be required to swear town. Oath of Office before the-City Clerk. This practice was discontinued a number of years ago and the most that officers were afforded was a formal introduction to the Richfield City Council. Other agencies routinely swear in new officers, either by having the City Clerk administer the oath on their day of hire, or at a formal ceremony where all new officers are sworn. in by the City Clerk in the presence of the City Council. Recommendation.: It is recommended that from this date forward, the City Clerk administer the Oath of Office to all new officers during a council meeting. This process will allow for the formal recordn and notarizing procedures required of all new officers, 9 as well as affording an opportunity to the members of the City. Council to meet the new officers. Basis of Recommendation: The public swearing in of new police officers is an important and necessary process for consideration. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Continue to select officers as we have in recent years without administering the Oath of Office. 2. Recommend that all new officers be brought to the City Clerk on the date of hire to receive the Oath of Office. Decision/Discussion Mode: A donation of funds to purchase three armored vests for use by three new officers is scheduled for the February 23, 1987 city council meeting. If the city council reinstates the public swearing in policy, it is recommended that three new officers- Officer Michael Koob, Officer Kenneth Mikle and Officer Michael Honan, be given the Oath of Office at this meeting. Respec ully submitted, i Jams Prosser Cit anager JDP/eja