Loading...
05-12-86 agenda - _ - - CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 207 - Agenda May 12, 1986 Tfi a Honorable Mayor and Members Of The City Council City of Richfield Subject: Amended Offstreet Parking Permit For ;Crown Auto at 6245 Lyndale Avenue City Council Members: - - - - - Mr. R-obert E._ Mjolsness, -representing drown Auto,- Inc: , has requested an amendment to-allow them to remove a tree and island. in their parking lot to provide two additional parking spaces. With that addition, a total of 18 parking spaces would be provided on the site. City parking guidelines would require that 20 spaces should be provided. The original off-street parking permit for this location (then Crosstown Marine) was issued in about 1970, and contained 20 parking spaces. However, a tree and island eliminated 2 spaces making the actual number of spaces 18. In September and October of 1973, Crown Auto received a special use permit and variance to allow them to locate the site and add an additional _ - service bay to the building. A building permit was issued for the overhead door See Sket h A _ ( c To maint in - a access to the new service bay at least 2 parking stalls along the -east edge hart to be eliminated. There is no record that the offstreet parking contract was ever amended. to approve the elimination of-parking - stalls. Observations of the site indicates that at time vehicles are parked in the area where the stalls were eliminated. The modification requested here would improve the current situation by adding two more spaces and bringing the number of spaces back to the original number of 18. In connection with the amended off-street parking contract, the public safety department inspection division has also requested that trash enclosure presently located immediately adjacent to the building on the north side, be moved further east on the lot, and that a Russian Olive tree which is blocking the fire exit be removed. A new trash enclosure is under construction, and the tree will be removed in the near future. - - _ /D It is recommended that the council approve the..amended offstreet parking permit by passing the attached resolution. The resolution contains a stipulation that the parking area be restriped to include at least 18 parking stalls. Resp~ fully bmitt , e ' c h " Acting City Manager SD/eja RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION APPROVING OFF-STREET PARKING PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICATION N0. 86-3 Crown Auto, Inc. 6245 Lyndale Avenue South BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the proposed geometric layout of the off-street parking as contained in Off-Street Parking Application No. 86-3 is hereby approved. i 2. That responsibility for the proper upkeep and maintenance of said off-street parking lot shall remain the responsibility of the off-street parking lot operator in _ accordance with Ordinance Code 4.05. _ _ _ . Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 12th day of May, 1986. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber City Clerk ! ~ i • ~ EXISTING 30'y 3o a,A°~f p~4fiN W.G.Kw~cO~{A/L ~ ~ ~ . W . h r 5 ~ d M I ~ b J M ~ . ~ P2osr~T`7X~Sslf ; . ` F=~~ . o i ` ~ , t/ P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H .ENCL. K~ LNNOSG4PE ~ ~ i . - ; u~ - / . ~ 1 ~l~' G3~~ sT, P~o~sao JZe,+~o~~-~, PAv¢ ~ STai~e C1000c9n~ ~u?'a S ToR~ ~ Fo?2 iwo P•IR~C?n,5 SP~t,2$, bz45~ Ly,~oAte iqv¢ So. ~ ,~1 ! . . ~ r~ ~ EXISTING . ~3v"'r3oakb~Fy~rcl~ . w~ c-k•,RaiCA~t ~ J i + c- la ~ .i'"' • ~ I i! b ~ ~ y.d~ gE~ ~ ~ ~ b J o m Z r ~i~ a ~ ~ _ f3 ~R~ ~ o - - " - 4 ~ _...<<. n~m~ ~ f a - ~ pR~SFNTT~ilSlt . ' I`1 ~'NCL.~ q . ; ~ ~ 1ti - . _ - ~ - - - - - ~ - - i - - - - i - - ~ Prm~osEn / 1t1 t 7fv9SH ~NtL,. ~ Pig~ki ' t9NOSr,9p~ ~ I ~cg ~~1 ( ~ t 7'R ~ ~ - i ~ ~ ~ • ' _ ' / , ~ 1 ~3Qo 3T, p~topsav jZeltnOv~f-C.,PAu¢ .e.SrRi~G ~12fJlc9ro i¢u?a S1-OR~ • V, • Fa,¢ Iwo P~~~~wc~ SpRCeS. 645• t,Y~oAte,gv¢ Soy ~za~ . „~,-,~,~c Rte.' 1 ~ ?J Q ~ PROPOSED ,r 30"y3o a kb~fH~TiN . ~ r+ I i~ W !'`t n Ra ACA i t r- I ~ ~1a1 ~ grJ ~ x y~~e in ~ I ~ ~ 0 I~--- ~ r ~ OG a 1 ~'~i~~~ L-- ~ RfinvvF_ l" c • ~ P2QSFNTT7eiLShF . r ~•NCL.• o . ~ ~ ~ i I I ~ 11v9 ~.1;N~LR./ 1t1 / ~ • ~ l~/~~ I G3,eo s?; i ~ i . o sea l2en~+ov~-L PAv¢ -e- STa? C ro u?' ToR~ P~~~ ~ ~ CRoc~ aS Fo~2 iwo P•~~x~w5 S~~ace5, ~ bzKS 1.y1~oR~e ~Iv¢ So. ~ •r~ • RiC1,~'1et0~ N'1iwN. Pad K~•vS s~~ces CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 197 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Proclamation Designating May 18-24 as Cable TV Public Access Week Council Members: On May 20, 1986 Rogers Cablesystems is honoring local public access producers in an awards ceremony,. the 1986 Teddy Awards,. carried live on cable channel 6 at 7:00 P.M. The show will be produced at the company's production facilities in Eden Prairie. This program was implemented in 1984 to honor and recognize those individuals in our communities who produce access programming and to encourage others to take part in these valuable community projects. There are over. 12 major categories. for awards including interview, instructional, promotional, and public service announcements. Rogers Cablesystems has requested that the City of Richfield show its support of access programming by proclaiming May 18-24 as Cable TV Access Week in Richfield. A copy of the proclamation is attached to this council letter. Res tfully b 't ed, f en L. Devi c. Acting City Man ger SD/eja PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 18-24, 1986 CABLE TV ACCESS WEEK IN RICHFIELD WHEREAS, cable communications is the newest form of participatory community information, education and expression through electronic"communications, and WHEREAS, public access stimulates the citizens of the city to meet the challenge of developing new and expressive uses for video communications, and WHEREAS, the annual Teddy Awards program is an effort by this city and Rogers Cablesystems to once each year salute those individual and groups of citizens who have shown the ability to excel in the production and use of cable system's public access facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the City of Richfield does hereby wish to join in the praise for those citizens who have demonstrated the unique competencies of video expression through public access by proclaiming the .week of May 18-24, 1986 as CABLE TV PUBLIC ACCESS WEEK IN RICHFIELD. DONE. this 12th day of May, 1986. Ivan Ludeman Mayor Pro Tempore / CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 196 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Interim Traffic Circulation Solution and Status Report for the Hampton Inn Project at 78th Street and Lyndale Avenue ! .Council Members: During the latter part of 1985 the City entered into an agreement with the developers of the Hampton Inn project which called for the City to assist the developer in obtaining-the vacation of the right-of-way of West 78th Street along the - ..southern margin of the Hampton Inn property. At the time of the signing of the agreement the City contemplated tax increment funding to be available from the ILN tax increment area which could be used to make street improvements in the vicinity of the Hampton Inn. Because of the indefinite status of the CDR project II at this time there is not funding available to make the permanent street improvements in the vicinity of the Hampton Inn site. Therefore, a temporary solution needs to be developed to handle area traffic. I The staff and the City's consultant, BRW, have reviewed a I' number of alternatives for a temporary solution to the traffic circulation problem in the area and have selected two of the most promising options for further evaluation.. These two alternatives ~~I are: ~ 1. (Alternative A attached) To vacate West 78th Street east of Lyndale Avenue and to create a separate entrance for the ~ Hampton Inn site. In this alternative, West 78th Street would terminate immediately east of the Hampton Inn property boundary and all local traffic east of Lyndale Avenue would be channeled to West 77th Street via Harriet Avenue. This alternative would include a traffic diverter at the West 77th Street-Harriet Avenue intersection to separate commercial. and residential traffic and to prevent commercial traffic from intruding into the residential neighborhood between 76th and 77th Streets.. 2. (Alternative B attached). The second alternative would be to allow West 78th Street to remain open for local traffic but to provide a channelization island at the Lyndale Avenue-West 78th Street intersection in order to prohibit left turns onto Lyndale /~'-a Avenue. This alternative would divert some of the .traffic via Harriet Avenue to West 77th Street. It would also be necessary under this alternative to construct a traffic diverter at the West 77th Street-Harriet Avenue intersection. The Hampton Inn developers have indicated that they anticipate closing on the property on July 1, 1986: Construction is expected to begin during. the latter part of July. Tfie staff and consultant will next be evaluating these two options in greater detail in terms of traffic circulation characteristics, area and neighborhood impacts, and costs of implementation. A report summarizing the findings and recommendations will be presented to the City Council for consideration at the May 27th. meeting. The department of community services and public safety have conducted traffic counts and speed checks on the streets in the vicinity of the Hampton Inn site. Copies of the summarized data gathered by each department are included in this letter. Resp~ fully submitted, ~ ,~/i evi~l~ Act ng City Manager ,7b .NpRTH o~ ~ Q ~ ~ c~ Q I ~7-~ o ~ . . FF~G D1 ERTER J ~ TR NAT~~E A A~,T~R ~8 ~ EET V A~AT~~N ~ - gTR V ~6 tC ~ - - - NORTH ~ Z W' ~ - 4 . TRAFFIC DI\ `FRYER ~ - ~ ~,w ~ ~ CHANNELIZATION 79 ` _ ISLAND - ,ALTERNATIVE B ....y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM DATE: Wpri1 4, 1986 TO; Steve Devich, Acting City Manager FROM: Don Fondrick, Community Services Director SUBJECT; Hampton Inn Frontage Road The attached map indicates the most recent traffic counts in the Hampton Inn area. A cul-du-sac, a dead end, public ownership and responsibility versus private ownership (possible driveway for Miller Beauty Supply and/or Hampton Inn) and other possibilities are all alternatives being studied. The traffic counts should help in this decision making process. Donald A. Fondrick, Director Community Services Department Attachment: Map with .traffic counts cc : Dennis Kraf t Bruce Palmborg Mike Eastling s1Nno~ ~~~~d~l _ _ ~ ~ ~ LY~LE A:'~. ~ T S ~ '641 39 3]-S, tS Tr 21-2~ .'?611 71`` ' ~ . _ _ _ • T.S r,o, i I 1 V , _ ; c, L7 a D a a`1~ ; n I ~,1 r / J "i \ ~f44 7w 20 Is ! 0~l TI'00 ~ _?S It i ~ / i c' ~ l i _ ~ GARF LO ~ / ~ ~i ~ t 164a ~j •f 21 t~ ~ ~i 16U, ~ _ a??? Lean o w a ? w ro u u r. 7144 St 'E TO N ON O ',44 fa ~ ~rn ~ co HARRIET - ~ _ ~ N ! W i u ~ ~ u d1 ml Owt Ala T w ro - ? ~ - ' 1 ii D~OIn~C7 ? ? D • ~ ~ ' ?444 { tr ~ TO t4 O• 1100 7SN 16 ~ I ~ ~ GRANO I ~r • S ?rte : r t • ~ na no, >w 3~~ ~ I• p D ? L7 ? ~ ? Dr ~c~ I ~ I ~ ~ . s« O G C7 O ~ ~ O ? , I ~ ~z zs t ~4 os • , m a • " N Od, le ! j- ~ ~ ~i ~ PLEw3ANT ~ MINNEAPOLIS ~ . NORTHFIELD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tl~~ I~ C! TY ~ GAFtA GE r . ~ _ 1 ~ ` ~ /R14 OLD 7C ib TS44 _ ~i - PILLS6URY • t+. 07 > 1t4b 1) .J .S OP hC~ •`4S !9 I ~ 11 ~ A _ YN _ _ _ _ ; `~/f /J ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD ' i DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY Police Division Memorandum Date: 4-09-86 To: Acting City Manager Steve Devich From: Captain Ronald Richardson Subject: Traffic Survey, 76-78th and Harriet In response to your concerns about a perceived increase in traffic on Harriet avenue due to the opening of the new Honda dealer on 78th street members of the division conducted a traffic survey for a week. The survey was run on: 3-29-86 1 hour 6 vehicles 3-31-86 2 hours 13 vehicles 4-1-86 2 hours 10 vehicles 4-2-86 1 hour 2 vehicles 4-3-86 2 hours 14 vehicles TOTALS 8 hours 45 vehicles This would indicate to me that there is no longer a traffic problem on Harriet now. None of these vehicles exceeded the 30mph speed limit. _ - / CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 195 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. City of Richfield Subject: Setting of Special Council Meeting Date - May 19, 1986 Council Members: It is my recommendation that the City Council establish Monday, May 19, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. as the time of a special council meeting to be held concurrently with the HRA. At that meeting, the two development proposals for the Lyndale and Graham Avenue site in the L/H/N will be discussed. One. proposal envisions the renovation and expansion of the existing commercial uses while the other proposal is for approximately 200 units of elderly rental housing. At the May 19 meeting, one of the two proposals would be selected by the HRA and City Council to permit negotiation of a developer's agreement. Res tfully mi ed, n L. Devic Acting City Manager SLD/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 194 Agenda May 12, 1986- The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Self-Insurance Account Progress Report Council Members: On January 2, 1986 the city council was presented with a staff report concerning the renewal premium for the city's property and casualty insurance package for 1986 (Council Letter No. 9). Pursuant to city council direction, staff secured liability and property insurance coverage up to a limit of $600,000 through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and $500,000 of Liquor Liability insurance through the Minnesota Assigned Risk Plan (this was the maximum amount of liquor liability insurance available to the city). In addition, the council approved city staff's recommendation to establish to a self-insurance account. The purpose of this city council letter is to report to the council on the progress of the establishing the self-insurance account. On February 10, 1986 city staff reported to the council that in order to establish the proper levels of self-insurance and a adequate self-insurance account, professional help would be needed to make certain actuarial findings on the proper deductible level and exposure to city resources. To that end, the city council approved the hiring of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, (D. H. & S.) the City Auditor, to do w n analysis of the current self-insurance fund which provides for workers' com ensation un m p , e ployment compensation and dental insurance; as well as to make a recommendation as to the funding levels of the proposed tort liability account. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells has now made two interim reports to the city and has done extensive amount of research and analysis on the city's past loss experience in the self-insurance fund and in the claims experience associated with the property and casualty insurance the city has purchased for the past several years. Based on the findings made by Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, this council letter will summarize the actions that are being , proposed by the Acting City Manager as an interim measure and ~ preliminary step to finalizing the level of funding necessary for the proposed tort liability account. Excess Liability According to the interim report provided by Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, (attached), on an overall basis the city I property and liability insurance, program is generally sound and well suited to the city's exposures in financial resources. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells believes that the absence of excess I, liability coverage (umbrella insurance) in the city's portfolio is a potentially serious deficiency. However, in light of statutory limits for tort liability awards and the relatively low policy limits and high premiums for excess liability coverage that was available to the city, they concur with the judgement of the city that it would not be cost effective to purchase excess I, liability coverage under present market conditions. However, D.H. & S. also feel that as capacity problems in the insurance market ease in the liability market place, excess liability coverage should become more affordable and accordingly, the city should endeavor to purchase this coverage in the future as that occurs.. The writer concurs with that opinion. i Modifications to the City Insurance Program Attached to this council letter is a schedule developed by Deloitte, Haskins & Sells which presents a summary of the city's 'III incurred (including reserves) and paid claims for the past six policy years, 1980 through 1985. Policy year 1985 excludes claim activity for the last three months of that year. Based on that review, Deloitte Haskins do Sells has made recommendations to the city staff regarding the city's basic property and liability exposure and current insurance package. The following sections indicate areas where the Acting City Manager feels that the recommendations of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells on the respective insurance coverages are in the best interest of the city and should be implemented immediately. 1. Implement a deductible of $10,000 for liability losses arising under the business (automobiles) liability policy. The administrator for the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) estimates that the annual premium savings for this $10,000 deductible would be approximately $7,000 annually. The city's total losses incurred for auto liability in the prior six years was $26,000. Thus, it appears very cost effective to implement this higher deductible level. 2. Increase the collision deductibility for city automobiles to $10,000. Marsh and McLennan, Inc. indicated that a collision deductible of $10,000 would reduce the annual premium by $3,300. This does not appear to be a significant savings, however, the city's total physical damage losses during the prior six years were approximately $7,400. a 3. Exclude ark shelters well houses lift stations and p dwellings from building and contents coverage under the special multi-peril policy and self-insure these loss exposures. According to the city's property schedule exclusion of these propertie§ would reduce the buildings and contents coverage base by approximately $2.4 million, thereby reducing the city's annual premium by about $9,600. The city's total incurred losses for buildings and contents during the prior six years were about $18,000 and no losses have occurred since 1980. It should be noted that city staff recommended going from a $3,000 to a $10,000 deductible limit for this .type. of coverage in the 1986 renewal package.. The $10,00D deductible was the largest deductible allowed by the LMCIT at that time. However, the approach proposed here is another way of increasing deductibles by simply eliminating the properties from the total listing of city properties quoted for insurance coverage. According to the six year record of the city and in accordance with the city's policy to assume more self-insured risk in each area of risk exposure, this seems like a reasonable approach toward those goals. 4. Increase the deductible for losses to machines and equipment under inland rain coverage from $5,000 to $10,000 per occurrence. This coverage would include voting machines, golf carts and low value contractor's equipment valued at $20,000 or less from the inland marine coverage base. It is estimated that the city could realize annual premium savings of approximately $4,000 by implementing this recommendation. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells was unable to identify any losses to machinery or equipment covered by inland marine in the past six years. 5. Completely cancel the city's liquor store business interruption insurance coverage (loss of income). Since the city owns three liquor stores which are in close proximity to another, business interruption at one location should not result in significant loss of income to the city. Deloitte, Haskins Ec Sells expects that the sales of a store which was damaged or destroyed would be substantially shifted to one of the other city facilities. Moreover, the city's business interruption coverage has a 509K coinsurance provision and the coverage limits are relatively low. By the self-insuring this exposure, the city could save approximately $3,100 in annual premiums. There have been no incidents of business interruption losses during the past six years. 6. Cancel the city's, coverage for theft and destruction of money and securities. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells believe these losses should be self-insured because the value of each potential loss should be low covera a limits are low n a d the cit can 9 ~ Y control such losses to high degree through effective cash handling and deposit procedures. Many of these procedures have been in place for several. years.. By self-insuring this exposure, the. city would save approximately $2,200 in annual premiums.. y During the past six years, total losses of money and securities i were $3,060. 7. Negotiate with the LMCIT to increase the city's per- - location ($10,000) and per-occurrence ($100,000) deductible for buildings and contents coverage. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells believes that the city has adequate financial resources to ~ prudently retain larger shares of potential property .losses. However, the highest deductible level allowed by the LMCIT policies per location and per occurrence were $10,000 and 'i $100,000 respectively. The city should enter into negotiations with LMCIT to explore the .opportunities that may exist for increasing property deductibles and the impact of those modifications to the City of Richfield's annual premiums. A decision could then be made to determine if the increased retention is cost effective in light of premium savings. I i Deloitte, Haskins & Sells would encourage the city consider 'i implementing higher property deductibles. This strategy is li something that the city has considered for the past several years. With the implementation of a tort liability account to set aside funds for such losses, it becomes more and more, a reasonable approach to saving annual insurance premiums while providing adequate coverage to the city for such exposure. It is the Acting City Manager's opinion that the City of Richfield is, in and of itself, a significant enough "insured" of i, the League's program to have the ability to make an impact on the deductible policies allowed by the LMCIT programs. 8. Negotiate with the respective carriers for per claim deductibles for comprehensive general liability, public officials liability, and liquor liability coverages. The city should establish a cost effective retention limit in view of its prior loss experience, premium credits that are provided by the carrier for various deductibles and the city's capacity to retain losses. During the past six years, the city has incurred $671,000 of general liability losses and paid $67,600 of general liability losses. During that same period there were no public official liability or liquor liability losses. For the first time in 1986, city staff recommended that a $5,000 deductible for general liability losses be implemented. Prior to that time, the city had always carried a first dollar coverage for general liability losses. Summary If negotiations with the incumbent carriers would provide enough of a savings for the city to increase the deductibles in these areas, it would be a prudent move for the city to pursue these higher deductibles. The city must also establish a properly funded tort liability account to compliment the additional risk that the cit is assumin b deletin the Y 9 Y 9 • covera es mentioned in this council letter and increasin 9 g deductibles as recommended. Once the city has approached the various carriers to find out the exact savings that could be attained by going to $100,000 property retention plus increasing general liability, public official and liquor liability deductibles, the 'final computations can be made to determine the proper level of funding that the new .tort liability account must have. The insurance modifications proposed in this letter would result in at least $30,000 of annual savings of insurance premiums... More savings might be realized pending negotiations with the LMCIT and the other insurance providers. If implemented immediately, the League may be willing to return some premium dollars for 1986. Recommendation It is the recommendation of the Acting City Manager that the city council authorize the Acting City Manager to pursue the deductibles and self-insurance procedures outlined in this council letter. Once this has been done, the Acting City Manager will be able to finalize a proper funding level for the tort liability account and will make a final report to the city. Reslp tfully ubm'tted, y / C - ,~j _ St n evi 'h Acting City Manager SLD/eja Deloitte . ~ Haskins~Sells Suite 1000 625 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis. Minnesota 55415-1660 (612) 333-2900 Telex: 290234 Mr. Steven L. Devich April 17, 1986 Director of Administrative Services City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Steve: We have completed our review of the City's property and liability (P&L) exposures and loss experience for the six (6) year period January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1985. Except as noted below, we have also reviewed the City's insurance policies and current premiums for P&L coverages that were effective on April 9, 1986. The purpose of this interim report is to summarize the principal findings and recommendations that resulted from our review of the City's P&L exposures and loss history. There are several open items related to insurance coverage provisions and current premiums which are being researched by representatives of Marsh and McLennan (M&M). To the extent that resolution of these issues materially impacts the findings and recommendations presented herein, we will advise the City of the nature of these items and the modifications to this letter that are deemed necessary in the circumstances. We have also asked M&M to .inquire whether the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), would be willing to underwrite several lines on a modified basis which incorporates our recommendations for increasing deductibles and removing certain exposures from the premium base and to determine the reduction in premiums resulting from such modifications. As this information is provided to us, we will advise you of LMCIT's responses to these inquiries. On an overall basis, the City's P&L insurance program is generally sound and well-suited to the City's exposures and financial resources. We believe that the absence of excess liability coverage from the City's portfolio is a potentially serious deficiency; however, in light of the statutory limits for tort liability awards and the relatively low policy limits and high premiums for excess liability coverage thatlwas available to the City, we ~ ffi~.. ~~~~~~n Devich Apr i 1 17 , 1986 2 ~mxn~ ~~r~.t:~n the y~udgement of City management that it would Ott ~ ;~~~it~~~fectiveto purchase excess liability coverage r ~rr~~e~t market conditions. As capacity problems ease ~m f~ ~~a~~~b~~t;~' mar.&etplace, excess liability coverage ~~~xaxuTlc~l mire affordable and, accordingly, we believe t~a(t tu:u~c ~iift~ shouLaL end.:eavor to purchase this coverage. ih=~v~ a~~t~~ied t~at~ schedules for your review in ~n~~~.etGic~?m w'?~tb t:l~e ?recommendations which follow. ~d~ 7t. sh~`~ ~t~Z,~ City's. current annual premiums for ~h s~~.~~~t~y~ Td~i~tifial~le line of coverage. Schedule 2 -~nr~~s a3 es~:um,~,. y o f tie City ' s incurred (i nc 1 ud i ng ~~rrv~s~) a~~ mid clait.ms for the six (6) policy years t~r~ ~.~~5. P~1~icy year 1985 excludes claim E~e~t~~:t~y f:~ ~ :l~~s~t three months of that year . tB~ca~~i c~w~c~~? r me~ge~ ~~he City's P&L exposures and prior ~~s c~~~~.~~i:~„ w~ ;r~~~~end .that the City consider the c~ ~r}~11~e'm~bt ~ ~u~ctibL~ $10,000 for liability losses ~,r~i.<~~i~ ~u~ tt~~: ~f.~s Automobile Policy. North `,Stt~~r,~ r~n~„ tthe: administrator for the LMCIT ~~~r<am,, ~tat:es, tl~rat the annual premium savings .for a ~~Q~f,E.~ c~re~~t~i.~Ze r~rould be approximately $7,000. The C~:zit~t~y`A€~ ~t~t~l ~ ~>>~r.iredl losses for auto liability during ~8.~~ t~r:~~s~r ~s~i~x r:e about $26,000. c~ :kl~errcce ~tle ~l~la~:~~~ ~~.ductible for City automobiles ~~~.,~QC~s ~ we~~r~ ~ll~sed by M&M that a collision e~ke~~xc~tri~hi~~.ce :CIO, m ~;ld reduce the annual premium by :$.~i>,:~Ci~O.. `}T (City's; t:~ot~~l physical damage losses during ~t~~e r:~€~r :sue ~~ai~rs rare approximately $7,400. co i~~c:fL~x i~ .~Iters, well houses, lift stations and ~~~i kt~.:,,,~.~ i~uiLdings and contents coverage under the ~13W.,~,,,, i,z~~i ~1.~~.-Peri. .~'~,~..-~cy (SMPP) and self-insure these e~y~.~.-~s . :mac rn~~ t o the City ' s property sc~r~'i~ i.~ ~s~ att~c~a~d to the SMPP, exclusion of ,~t~c~..~ wnuldi re~d:uce the buildings and contents FL~e' fie' ~~pr®~imr~ltely $2.4 million, thereby m~~~ (Ca~"~ an}nr~~~L premium by about $9, 600. The (Ca~~`,~ ttc~attadi ~uit~r~a1 L®sses for buildings and .contents diuru~rzi Yti ~~a~~ s~~ ~~~rs were about $18, 000 and no I.s ~ a~~ur~r~re~ch ~ i r8~~ 19 8 0 . ® IC~ra~~ ~t~n~ aflew~un~tt~.bslte fir losses to machines and ~uu~i~u,~t u~r in~~~aP year ine coverage from $5 , 000 to ~]~0?~, ~ ~curren~~. exclude voting machines, golf ~m~~ ~.®¢]t ~ value c:®~tr•actors' equipment (e.g. , ~~L®~~ ~t~~~~, frr~~ the inland marine coverage base . ~ Mr. Steven L. Devich April 17, 1986 3 We estimate that the City would realize annual premium savings of approximately $4,000 by implementing both of these recommendations. We were unable to identify any losses to machinery and equipment covered by inland marine insurance during-the prior six years. o Cancel the liquor stores' business interruption (loss of income) coverage. Since the City owns three liquor stores which are in close proximity to each other, business interruption at one store should not result in significant loss of income to the City. We would expect that the sales of a store which is damaged or destroyed will be substantially shifted to one of the other stores. Moreover, the City's business interruption coverage has a 50% coinsurance provision and coverage limits are relatively low. By self-insuring this exposure, the City would save approximately $3,100 in annual premiums. We were unable to identify any business interruption losses during the prior six years. o Cancel the City's coverage for theft and destruction of money and securities. We believe these losses should be self-insured because the value of each potential loss. should be low, coverage limits are low, and the City can control such losses to a very high degree through effective cash handling and deposit procedures. By self-insuring this exposure, the City would save approximately $2,200 in annual premiums. During the prior six years,. total losses of money and securities were $3,360. o Negotiate with LMCIT to increase the City's per location ($10,000) and per occurrence ($100,000) deductibles for buildings and contents coverage. We believe that the City has adequate financial resources to prudently retain a larger share of potential property losses. However, it is our understanding that the highest deductibles generally included in LMCIT policies are $10,000/$100,000. The City should discuss with LMCIT any opportunities that may exist for increasing property deductibles and the impact of such modifications on annual premiums. To the extent that increased retention would be cost-effective in light of premium savings, we would encourage the City to consider implementing higher property deductibles. o Negotiate with incumbent carriers to increase the City's per claim deductibles for Comprehensive General Liability Public Officials' Liability and Liquor Liability coverages. The City should establish a cost-effective retention limit in view of its prior loss experience, 9 Mr. Iia,. Devich April 17, 1986 4 psr~~ ~re~nt~ that use provided by the carrier for vr~sn~ ~~~~ti~sIl.e~ aw~~ the City's capacity to retain ~®s;~e~<. ii tt~ ~rfc~r six years, the City has nm¢c~Lll~'i aantc~ pa~~ (~,,~~inensive General Liability losses 71~i„ ane~ ~~7~37~i, respectively. We were unable ttm fcdi~t~.~ and ~~~Ic: Officials' Liability or Liquor ~r~t~ra~L~r losses ~~~a~ this period. ® tta~blla~~i a ~tiu ac~~unt for insurance premiums, ctf e~utxctt~.~~l.„ ~~l.f:_ns u arced losses and associate d are~~~.t,;~=e~.. l' ~i.l~ assi~~9t the City with determining the f;i~a~~.~a. sy~~t~n. requirements for this fund after 9t~ne? arc~~al~t:iionu~ presented above have been reviewed ~D}y f~71 leaxs~Flltc~ns~u,t.<.. 16d1e sd"mc~~~i meeEt end discuss these recommendations ~~t ~c~~r ~.~.~it:. ~~~n.iie. Irt the meantime, please feel ~`~rc~ E~ m~.~.:~'~//~~-(4'3C3~ if you have any questions. ~V7ce _ it ~ ~ ~~~v~ /~.~.r 1~~s~d~,:;~ o. ion s~ I tan t ~ //i/~ CITY OF RICHFIELD Schedule 1 Schedule of Premiums for Policy Period January 1, 1986 through December 31, 1986 COVERAGE PREMIUMS Buildings and Contents, $101,409 Money and Securities 2,211 Inland Marine 6,778 . Loss of Liquor Income - 3,055 Comprehensive General Liability 133,231 Automobile 34,813 Public Officials' Liability - 14,853 Liquor Liability 56,000 LMCIT Reserve Assessment 28,256 Total Premiums $380.606 City of Richfield Schedule 2 Schedule of Incurred. and Paid Claims for Policy Years 1980 through 1985 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Total Description Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Incurred Paid Water $ 166 $ 166 $ 92,004 $32,004 $ 3,814 $ 3,814 $ 183 $ 183 $ 931 $ 931 $ 0 $ 0 $ 97,098 $ 37,098 Glass 964 964 1,162 1,162 1,715 1,715 183 183 331 331 208 208 4,563 4,563 Personal Injury 0 0 2,000 2,000 0 0 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 4,500 4,500 Property Damage 132 132 2,327 2,327 2,606 2,606 1,216 1,216 745 745 1,475 25 8,501 7,051 Fire 18,059 18,059 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 18,059 18,059 Forgery 0 0 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 2,500 Crime 0 0 0 0 3,360 3,360 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,360 3,360 Bodily Injury 3,500 1,000 1,200 1,200 35,179 20,179 521,058 1,058 4,238 2,538 4,350 0 569,525 25,975 Auto - Physical Damage 1,542 1,542 1,989 1,989 2,488 2,488 156 156 858 858 330 330 7,363 7,363 Liability 4,150 4,150 4,311 4,311 2,754 2,754 9,393 4,393 3,676 3,676 1.,711 1,011 25,995 20,295 Other 0 0 0 0 154 154 0, 0 367 367 536 536 1,057 $ 1,057 TOTAL ~28~51326,013 $107,493 47 493 52 070 $37„070 $534,689 $9.689 $11.146 $9.4468.610 2 110 $742,521 $131,821 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 193 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Establishing Current Interest Rate On Long-Term Advance from the Sewer Utility Fund to the Golf Course Fund Council Members: On October 5, 1981 the city council adopted the .revised 1981 budget and the proposed 1982 budget for the Golf Course. In adopting this budget, a loan from the Sewer Utility Fund was approved to provide financing to undertake necessary capital improvements. In 1981 and 1982, $170,000 and $60,000 respectively, was transferred from the Sewer Utility Fund to the Golf Course Fund. Since that time, an annual interest rate of 9% has been charged to the Golf Course Fund for the use of these funds. To date, $95,000 of the original $230,000 principle borrowed has been repaid, leaving a balance of $135,000. The attached Bond Bulletin dated March 21, 1986 shows a one year U.S. Treasury bond yielding 6.41. This Treasury bond rate is one indicator of a trend of falling interest rates which has been most dramatic during the past six months. Since the rate of return available to the city in its investment portfolio has been reduced far below the 9~ range to closer to 7~, it seems appropriate to adjust the internal interest rate charged between funds to match the present market. Other similar inter-fund borrowing would be set at the 7X rate also. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution authorizing an annual interest rate of 7X be charged on the remaining Golf Course Fund. Resp~ fully bmit ed, ' c h Act' g City Manager • SLD/eja RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A CURRENT ANNUAL INTEREST RATE ON LONG TERM ADVANCE FROM SEWER UTILITY FUNDS TO GOLF COURSE FUND FOR THE YEAR 1986 WHEREAS, a long-term loan of $135,000 remains outstanding ' from the Sewer Utility Fund to the Golf Course Fund; and WHEREAS, the annual interest rate of nine percent has been previously charged to the Golf Course Fund; and WHEREAS, the current interest earnings on investments is yielding a return of approximately seven percent. NOW, .THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by resolution of the City Council that a seven percent per annum interest rate will be _ charged to the Golf Course Fund May 1 and November 1 of each year on the remaining loan value, subject to annual review. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of April, 1986 John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber City Clerk • 9 2 i ' ` C,J ~ ' z• - f ` ` f ~ A weekly summary o f municipal, government and corporate bonds. Week. Ending: ~Y 2. 1986 (figures as of Thursday) ~ - - REPRESENTATIVE NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE TAXABLE YIELDS TAX-FRE .YIELDS L'.S. Treasuries Corporate Bonds Maturity Aaa ' Aa A Baa Maturity (Bond Epuiv. Ylds.1 A-Rated Indust. A-Rated Util. I987 4:50 "._..4.75 5.00. 5.25 3 mop . 6.18 ~ N JA : ; = . N/A . 1991. 5.40 5.60.5.75 6.00• : b ma ~ 6.32 N/A N/A . 1996. b.00 6.25 6.60 6.9Q 1 yr 6.41 ~ . 7.25. :7.30 - - - - - 5 yrs. ~ 7.12 7.85 ; 7.90 2001 b.90 7.10 7,30 7.50 10 yrs.. 7.34 8.10 ~ 8.15 200b 7.00 7.20 7.40 7.60! 20 ycs. 7.54 8.85 9.00. - 30 rs.; - 7.45 ~ ~ 9.00..` 9.15 .r~ y SHORT-TERM INTEREST RATES This Week Last week 86 Higgh 86 Low' Year Aao Prime Rate 8.50 8.50- 9.5U ts.~u iu.3u Fed Funds , ; b 13/16. 7.00 Z ~ 8.75 - b 13/16., 8.75 • Discount Rate, s 6.50 6.50 7.00. 6.50 8.00 Ninety Day Commercial Paper 6.55 6.40. _ 7.75 6.55 8.20 ' ~ One-Year Certificates of Deposit' " { 6.50.. 6.96 7.90 6.50 8.88 - MUNICIPAL INDEXES AND SUPPLY ` FIGURES This Week Last Week 86 Hieh 86 Low Yesr Ado DBI: Regional Muni Index (20-Band, l0 years) 6.39' 6.39 ~ = 7.76 - 6.18 ° ~ 8.30 - ~ Bond Buyers Index. (20-Bond, 20 years) 7.33 - 7.22 ` 8.33 6.88 9.37. ,k,, Revenue Bond Index (25-Bond, 30 years} ~ 7.79 7.69, ~ 8.72 ~ = 7.55 ~ - . 9.73 Blue List (.Million S) ' - - 2127.60 1872.70 ' 2127.60 ~ 1139.70 1638.10 ~ ~ . 30-Day Visible Supply (Million 4931.10 527.5.40. 5592.20 ~ 306.60 4214.80 . ~ TAXABLE EQUIVALENT YIELDS • ~ . Tax-Free Yields Federal Income Tax Rate 5.00% 6.00%q 7.00%q 8•.00%q 9.00%q 10.00%q 11.00%q Taxable Epuivalent Yields Lx 46% Corporate Rate 9.26 11.11 12.96 14.81 16.67 18.52 20.37 : ~ - - 50%Individual Rate 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00- 18.00 20.00 22.00 . . - ~ 1 ~ / f ~./J I ~ ~ CASH FLOT~] SUIrII~1ARY i GOLF COURSE FUND 1980 1981 Budget 1982 Revision Actual Adopted Revision Proposed SOURCES OF CASH Operations: Total Revenues $112,344 $396,620 $379,338 $495,979 Items Not Requiring Cash Depreciation. 21,230 27,349 80,299 83,522 Amortization of Bond Discount 937 937 937 Proceeds of Borrowing 345,256 170,000 60,000 Increase in Accounts .and Salaries Payable 1,421 ~ ~ . TOTAL SOURCES $481,188 $633,574 $640,438 USES OF CASH Total Expenditures $117,311 $413,040 $474,068 $566,063 Capital Outlay 357,591 23,200 101,681 51,250 Bonds Paid 30,000 30,000 35,000 Increase in Accounts Receivable 1,279 Increase in Inventory 1,187 2,000 2,000 Increase in Chance Fund 250 TOTAL USES $487,618 $456,240 $607,749 $654,313 I3et Increase (Decrease) in Cash $ (6,430) $ 25,825 $(13,875) Cash Balance, January 1 (6,430) 19,395 Cash Balance, December 31 S (b.430) S 19.395 S 5.520 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ANPIUAI., BUDGET v I CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 192 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members Of The City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request By Richfield VFW Post 5555 for Off- Premise Gambling License at Frenchman's 1400 East 66th Street Council Members: On April 23, 1986, the city received a gambling license application from the Richfield VFW Club to permit raffles, paddlewheels, tipboards and pull-tabs at the Frenchman's Tavern located at 1400 East 66th Street in Richfield. Under terms of the new charitable gambling law, the application is made directly to the Charitable Gambling Control Board. The city has a period of thirty days from receipt of such license application to allow the city council an opportunity, by resolution, to oppose such licensure. Unless the city council takes specific action to oppose such licensure, approval is handled directly through the State Charitable Gambling Control Board. The off-premises gambling license is permitted under the new charitable gambling license provisions of state statute. While .there are some conditions which must be met, any charitable or nonprofit organization who holds a state gambling license may seek authorization to extend such permissible gambling activity to off-premise sites. This is the first request in the City of Richfield to allow off-premises gambling by one of our community organizations holding a state gambling license. After investigating the ramifications associated with off-premise charitable gambling such as this, the public safety department has identified several concerns which are addressed in the attached resolution. These concerns center around the difficult monitoring necessary for gambling operations and that such gambling operations would hinder guarding against the proliferation of gambling interests which are not in the public interest. Staff Recommendation It is the recommendation of the Public Safety Department, in which I concur, that the city council indicate their opposition L V to the request by the Richfield VFW for an off-premise gambling license by approving the attached resolution which has been prepared by the city attorney's office. A copy of the resolution would then be sent to the State Charitable Gambling Control Board for their consideration before issuing any off-premise gambling license. If the council wishes to permit such activity, no further action is necessary. Attached to this letter is background information on the statutory regulations for charitable gambling prepared by our city attorney's office. - Re fully u ted, - ~-s a en L.~ Devi Acting City Manager SD/eja ~ ~ i Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DISAPPROVING GRANTING OF CLASS B GAMBLING LICENSE TO VFW POST N0.5555 BY CHARITABLE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD FOR PURPOSE OF SETTING LAWFUL GAMBLING OPERATION IN THE FRENCHMAN'S, INC., 1400 EAST 66TH STREET, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the City did on April 23, 1986 receive notification from the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Board (Board) that it was seeking City consideration of an application from VFW Post No. 5555 to conduct lawful gambling on premises located at 1400 East 66th Street and operated under the name of The Frenchman's, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has reviewed and investigated the proposed licensed gambling activity and made its report to the Council on such investigation; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute X349.213 provides that the Board not issue licenses for lawful gambling, if within 30 days of the giving of notice of the pending of the license application the City in which the activity would occur adopts a resolution disapproving such license. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the ~ City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council finds that establishment of or the conducting of lawful gambling in a private enterprise would hinder the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare, and would hinder guarding against the proliferation of gambling activities which are not in the public interest. 2. The City Council finds that establishment of a lawful gambling enterprise in a private establishment would increase the difficulty of preventing commercialization of lawful gambling and insuring the integrity of the operation. 3. The City Council finds that it would be difficult to monitor the operation of lawful gambling in a private enterprise and to ascertain that at all times the gambling operation is not being operated in conjunction with the conduct of the private commercial lessors' business operation, in violation of subpart 7860.0100 of the Rules of the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Board. I~ 4. The City Council therefore disapproves the request for a Class B Lawful Gambling License made to the Charitable Gambling Control Board on behalf of VFW Post No.5555 for lawful gambling ,3 . to be conducted on the premises of the Frenchman's, Inc., at 1400 East 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota., 5. The City Council directs the City Manager to convey to the Charitable Gambling Control Board its disapproval of the license request by VFW Post No. 5555 to conduct .lawful gambling operation in .the Frenchman's, Inc., 1400 East 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota. .Passed this day of May, 1986, by the City Council of the City of Richfield. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Clerk ~ i~.;~~, LeFevere Lefler Kennedy O'Brien & Drawz A Professional Association 2000 First Bank Place West April 28 , 1986 Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 333-0543 Telecopier (612) 333-0540 Clayton L. LeFevere Mr. Thomas Morgan Herbert P. Lefler Director of Public Safety J. Dennis O'Brien Clty of Richfield John E. Drawz 6700 Portland Avenue South David J. Kennedy John B. Dean Richfield, MN 55423 Glenn E. Purdue Richard J. Schieffer Charles L. LeFevere Re: Charitable Gambling Herbert P. Lefler III James J. Thomson, Jr. Dear Chief Morgan Thomas R. Galt Dayle Nolan Brian F. Rice You have asked questions concerning the Richfield City John G.Kressel Council's authority to take action regarding licenses-for Lorraine S. Clugg James M. Strommen pull-tab operations and other related. matters. H. Batty ./ricsonn Minn. Stat. X349.12 indicates that an organization may William R. Skallerud conduct lawful gambling if the organization has. been in Rodney D. Anderson existence at least three years, and has a license from Corrine A. Heine the Minnesota Charitable Gamblin Control Board and also David D. Beaudoin g i Paul E. Rasmussen complies with other portions of Chapter 349 of the Joseph E. Hamihon statutes. Lawful gambling is defined in the statutes as Steven M. Tallen the conduct of such activities as bingo, raffles, paddlewheels, tipboards, and pull-tabs. An organization is defined in §349.12, Subd. 12, as a fraternal, religious, veteran, or non-profit group. An organization may be issued a license by the Charitable Gambling Control Board pursuant to Minn. Stat. X349.16. The Board will notify the local authorities before issuing a license, and if the local government unit wishes to prevent the issuing of a license, it must pass a resolution disapproving the license and notify the Board within thirty days of receiving notice of the Board's intent to issue a license. Minn. Stat. X349.213, Subd. 2. The statute does not outline conditions upon which a local government ,should base its .disapproval of the issuance of a license. However, if the Richfield City Council wishes to disapprove a license, it would be wise to adopt its resolution disapproving based upon failure of the requesting organization to meet the standards outlined in Section 5.19, subd.8, or subd.l3, Mr. Thomas Morgan ~i,~ April 28, 1986 O ~ , , ~ . Page 2 Richfield Ordinance Code, thereby foreclosing arguments that the Council has acted, arbitrarily or capriciously. The legislature also contemplates a city investigating the request before denying it. Chapter 467 of the 1986 laws amends Chapter 349 and allows a local government unit to charge investigation fees which in the case of Richfield would amount to a maximum of $100. This provision is effective June 1, 1986. If after investigating the agency requesting a lawful gambling license, the city council does not wish said agency to have a license, it must within thirty days notify the Charitable Gambling Board of its decision. If the city council does not object to an organization having a license to conduct lawful gambling, the statute does allow the city to have stricter rules than the rules of the State Charitable Gambling Control Board, and the licensee would be required to abide by the city's rules. Minn. Stat. X349.213, Subd. 1. For example, existing ordinances in Richfield allow pull-tab gambling only between the hours of 5:00 and 11:00 p.m. Section 5.19, Subd. 9 (3)(c). Subd. 9(7) of that same ordinance limits the prizes to be won on an individual pull-tab event to $100, while Ch. 467, the new Charitable Gambling Amendments, places the limit at $250. If the city wishes to use standards set state-wide, its ordinances would have to be accordingly amended. There are other statutory requirements and regulatory requirements of the Charitable Gambling Control Board to which an organization would be subject, presuming the city did not object to its having a license. An organization must lease or own the premises on which it conducts charitable gambling. If the organization leases space to run a pull-tab operation, then the state rules require that the premises leased for that purpose be leased for at least a term of one year, and that certain other matters be disclosed in the written lease which must be submitted- to the Board. Also,. both the regulations and the statutes, as already discussed briefly above, place limits on the prizes to be won, and the awarding of prizes. If prizes are to be in merchandise rather than cash, the merchandise must be displayed in full view in the immediate vicinity of the pull-tab game and the merchandise prizes must be in full view of any person prior to that person purchasing the opportunity to play. If a person wins merchandise, the prize won must be removed .immediately from the display and made available to the winner. The organization may not offer to pay cash in lieu of merchandise prizes offerred, and the fair. market value of the merchandise Mr. Thomas Morgan r'_ April 28, 1986 i . , ; Page 3 must not exceed the prize limits imposed by statute or by any local regulation.. If the cash prize a player wins exceeds $100 from the play of any deal of pull-tabs, the organization must make a record of the win as set forth in the rules adopted in Subpart 7, item D of the Charitable Gambling Control Board Rules. The new act allows an organization to be exempt from licensing by the Charitable Gambling Control Board. In the event an organization does fall into this exemption category, Minn. Stat. §349.213 still does authorize a local unit of government to require a permit, presumably using its own standards for. issuing the .permit. The exemption standards are outlined in §26 of Ch. 467, which begins on page 12 of the .Act,. and becomes effective June 1 of 1986. A copy of Ch. 467, the new law which encompasses some changes to the Charitable Gambling Control Statute and a copy of the rules adopted by the Board are attached. If you have further questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, LeFEVER, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ ~'j~1i4..~.t~,uJ orraine S . Clu ~4`~~ gg LSC/mc Enclosures e V / Y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Inter-Office Memorandum DATE: April 23, 1986 T0: Steven L. Devich, Acting City Manager FROM: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk .SUBJECT: VFW Gambling License Application Attached is a copy of a gambling application that the VFW, 710 Lake Shore Drive, is submitting to the Charitable Gambling Control Board to allow them to operate pull-tabs at The. Frenchmans, 1400 East 66th Street. I have acknowledged receipt of the copy of the application as required. If approved by the Charitable Gambling Control Board, it will become effective 30 days from April 23 unless a resolution of the city. council is passed specifically disallowing such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Board within 30 days of April 23. ' Allowing this type of gambling in liquor establishments in the city may be of concern to the city council and community. I understand it has become a subject of some controversy in the City of Bloomington. I suggest that this item be on the May 12 council agenda for consideration. The council may wish to determine a policy regarding these activities. I A copy of the application has been forwarded to Bill Hollick for comment. TPF/cak Attachment cc: ~ Morgan, Director of Public Safety Bill Hollick tslf~r FOR BOARO USE ONLY y`f~~~''~ Charitable Gambling Control Board ~~~p~~j Griggs-Midway Bldg. Rm. N-475 1$?.1 University Ave. I"~~ St. Paul, MN 55104-3383 GAMBLING <r[CENSE APPLICATION . (Class A, B, ur C) INSTRUCT IONS: I. PRINI OR TYPE. 2. Bring completed application to local governing budy, ubtain signature and date un all copies and lease ~ copy. Applicant keeps ~ copy and sends remaining cupies to above address. z; changes in aoolic3tion information must be suhmitted within !0 davs after thQ ch~~. Type of Application: ? Class A -Fee 5100.00 (Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-Tabs) Class B - Fee s 50.00 (Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-Tabs) ? Class C - Fee ; 50.00 (Bingo only) Make checks paveble to; Minnesota Cheritable~Gamblina Control Board. , Applicant (Official, legal name of organization) Site Address i C N 1~2a A15 of F/IC,GJ ~~t/Z~ ~ ~ ~ l~/n~ Business Addreea City State, Zip City,. State, Zip J- County ' RiCr~/~iEcp ~l,N~/P1~7~ ~.SY.~~ t~e~~~P~r~ Cwnty , / Yea No 1. Are all gaabling activities conducted at h'F~?/f~t /~/Iv i the above site? I f no, cowplete a seps- Buainesa telephone Number Federal I.O. Number ~ rate application forty for each site as a ( ) ~'$-,SS`,~ ( 7~ 7 7 ~ separate license is issued for each site.. of Organization f~ 2. Is site located within city liwits? ~ Fraternal ~ Veterans ? Religious ? Other Nonprofit Organization Does organization own the site where iypa of Organization Charter _ / gambling activity will be conducted? If ? International ~ National ? State no, attach copy of the lease for the Number of Years in Number of Articles of site. L•xiatence (in Mimesote) Incorporation (if incorporated) l.easor Name lil tease or rent) 33 Y~-2.S ~qy THE ~~.Ic~MA~s ZIJC. Location Mere Articles are Filed Address .~~,EC Rci/~I2Y $r.¢~-,~ t~1 t~C~ ~ ~7~ ST. Yes No 1. Does organization have a dues structure? City, State, Zip 1i number of active members_ ~ 1 C• i-1 F ? C~ _T1 ~ f~'l : N P.~ ~S~'4a. ~ ? 2. Has organization been previously licensed (ambling Manager Name by the Board? If vas„ give date .C e / N ~,v ~2 3. Has license ever been denied, suspended Addres/s~ 1 V ' or revoked? I f yes check all that apply : ~-f l L YNl7AtE /9v~ ~ ~P~ ? Denied ? Suspended ? Revoked City, State, Zip 4. Is organization exempt from payment of ~~IX~Mi~VG ~~t/ /Lj,,~,u ,T,S~J~/1 U.S. income tax? If yea, attach copy of The 510,000 fidelity bond required by Minnesota letter declaring exemption. Statutes 349.20 has been obtained. / S. Is organization tax exempt from payment Company Name Bond Number of Minnesota tax? If yes, attach copy of UN C~~9 r~a~ ~ ~ ~o~~~ letter declaring exemption.- ~ C/9d'~`iL7Y O Name of Organization's Officers and Titles (~?lCNg2n ,5;"F'~NR2~ G'MD2 c~.r`(?~.~`~ ~`C~Ut, ~Av ~cz vice b. ~~r~n t=5 kv6h~NS s~ ~~c~ ~ ~ d. ~c Nr12~ c,r~ ~~S i i~ ~vAnl~~S~ 2 CG-00001-O1-(12/84) Continued o~ Page 2 _2_ Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION (Class A, B, or C) GAMBLING SITE AUTHORItATION By my signature below, local law enforcement officers or agents of the. Board ere hereby author-ized to enter upon the site, at any lima gambling is being conducted, to observe the gambling and to enforce the law for any unauthprized game or practice. BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION ' 8y my signature below, the Board is hereby authorized to inspect the bank records of the General Gambling Bank Account whenever necessary to fulfill requiresents of current gawblinc3 rules and law. ' OATH 1 hereby declare that 1. I have read this application and all information submitted to the Board;' 2. All information submitted is true, accurate, end cowplete; 3. ell other required information has bean fully disclosed; 4: 1 am the chief executive officer of the organization;. S. T assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful operation of all activities to be conducted; 6. T will familiarize wyself with the laws of the State of Minnesota respecting gambling and rules of the Board an'd agree, if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments thereto. Official, legal Naiae of Organizatyn {l S st~ Rtc~fiFc~ l~-~rtrlus or to2~~6~c~ ~A2S Si "e re (Mus a ne Ezecutiv Officer) Title Date ,c,//~b / ~ ACKNOMLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. ey acknowledging receipt, I admit having bean served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gawbling Control Board and if approved by the Board, will becowe effective 30 days from, the date of receipt (noted below), unless s resolution of the local governing body is passed which specifically disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the below noted date. LOCAL GOVERNING BODY- Nerve of Lacal Governing Sod Ci i ~iLtt~~EL~ signs r of Person Receivin Ap licetion / . L~A ~ lil~ ~teJQl~ ORCANItATION Ilat~ Received (Tfiis is date. from which the'30 day Name of Representative for Gawbling. license Applicant a1K~roval begins) n~ t serving notice) CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 191 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City.Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Relating to $900,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds {Corporate Travel Building Project); Requesting the Trustee to Enter into a Supplemental Indenture of Trust Council Members: On November 22, 1982, the City Council adopted a resolution. authorizing the sale and issuance of $900,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds for Dacotah Properties (Corporate Travel.) for the development of a 5-story, 61,660 square foot .commercial office building at a site located adjacent to 76th Street and I35W. The resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of the Commercial Development Revenue Bonds also provided that a Letter of Credit from the First National Bank of St. Paul, securing the. bonds, be made part of the bond proceedings. On May 5, 1986, Dacotah Properties contacted the City Attorney's office, requesting that the Letter of Credit provided for in the $900,000 Bond Issue from the First National Bank of St. Paul be removed and substituted with a equal letter of credit by the Marquette Bank of Minneapolis. The request has been reviewed by the City Attorney's office, and it is the City Attorneys opinion that the City is unaffected by the transaction, but that the City must consent to the substitution. The City Attorney also indicated that the proceedings are in proper form for consideration by the City Council. Attached to this Council Letter is a resolution relating to $900,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project); requesting the trustee to enter into a Supplemental Indenture of Trust. The Resolution gives consent to the substitution of the Letter of Credit by Marquette Bank Minneapolis, N.A., instead of First National Bank of St. Paul, and also provides that the City is held harmless with respect to any costs or expenses incurred due to this substitution.. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached i resolution providing for the substitution of the Letter of Credit for Corporate Travel Commercial Development Revenue Bonds. Resp ctfully s mitted, i i v n L. Devich Acting City Manager ~ SLD/eja I II I i ~I 7-.3 LeFevere Lefler Kennedy O'Srien R Dra~1'z Professional .4ssociation 2000 First Bank Place West May 6 , 19 8 6 Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 333-0543 Telecopier (612) 333-0540 Mr . Steve Devich Clayton L. LeFevere Acting City Manager Herbert P. Lefler Clty Of Richfield J. Dennis O'Brien 6 7 0 0 Port land Avenue S . John E. Drawz David J. Kennedy Richfield, MN 55423 John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue RE: Corporate Travel C Richard J. Schieffer ~~~LL«ercial Development Revenue Charles L. LeFevere BOridS Herbert P. Lefler III James J. Thomson, Jr. Dear Steve Thomas R. Galt Dayle Nolan Brian F. Rice Enclosed please find correspondence and proceedings John G. Kressel Lorraine S. Clugg relating to a supplemental indenture for the above bonds. James M. Strommen The supplement will permit the substitution of Marquette H. Batty Bank Minneapolis, N.A. as the supplier of the letter of P. Jordan credit securin the bonds The resent letter of credit S Dickel Minsberg g p Kurt J. Erickson 1.SSUer 7.S First National Bank of St. Paul. Wiliiam R. Skallerud Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine The proceedings are in proper form for consideration by John R. McDonald, Jr. the City Council. The City is unaffected by the trans- David D. Beaudoin action, but its consent is required. ry my yours, David J. Kennedy 0055LT02.E14 Enc. cc: P. Rindels C. Erickson • 7 . DACOTAH COMPANIES 200 CTS Center, 1401 W. 76th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55423 • (612) 869-1122 Telex: 291105 May 5, 1986 John Dean LeFevere Lefler,. Kennedy O'Brien & Drawz 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Corporate Travel Building Series B Dear Mr. Dean: Pursuant to our conversation today, please find enclosed a proposed Resolution and Certification for City Council action to substitute banks for the above bonds. As you can see, no other changes are requested. If you have any questions, please contact either myself or Paula Rindels, our bond counsel at Dorsey & Whitney. Her telephone number is 343-7983. I would appreciate your prompt action on this so that it could be submitted for .Council approval at .their May 12th meeting. Thank you for your cooperation. S nc 1 \ ~~j Charles W. Erickson - ~ cc: Paula Rindels CWE:m Corporate Travel•Twin Cities • Dacotah-Properties • J.E. Erickson & Sons. • Sun Products Processing., inc. CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS Issuer: .City of Richfield, Minnesota Governing body: City Council Kind, date, time and-place of meeting: Members present: Members absent: Documents attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages): RESOLUTION RELATING TO $900,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (CORPORATE TRAVEL BUILDING PROJECT); REQUESTING THE TRUSTEE TO ENTER INTO A SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obliga- tions referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said cor- poration in my legal custody, from which they have been tran- scribed; that said documents are a correct and complete tran- script of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all reso- lotions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said obligations; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of 1986. Signature City Clerk Name and Title ~1 Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $900,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE-BONDS (CORPORATE TRAVEL BUILDING PROJECT); REQUESTING THE TRUSTEE TO ENTER INTO A SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the City), as follows: . Section 1. The City. has previously issued its $900,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project), Series B, dated as of December 1, 1982 (the Bonds). In connection therewith, Dacotah Properties Partnership (the Partnership) entered into a Loan Agreement with the City dated as of December 1, 1982. Section 2. The Partnership now desires that the Indenture of Trust, dated as of December 1, 1982 {the Indenture), between the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the Trustee) entered into in connection with the Bonds be amended by the • execution and delivery of a first supplemental indenture to be entered into between the City and the Trustee for the purpose of substituting for the irrevocable letter of credit given by The First National Bank of St. Paul in favor of the Trustee, an irrevocable letter of credit of Marquette Bank Minneapolis, N.A. in the same amount and with the same terms. Section 3. Pursuant to Section 10-2 of the Indenture, the City must request the Trustee to enter into a supplemental indenture which requires the consent of the holders of the .Bonds and to give notice to the holders of the Bonds of such proposed supplemental indenture. Representati~res of the Partnership have requested that. the City make such request with respect to the proposed first supplemental indenture and have agreed to indemnify the Trustee with respect to expenses. The City hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Manager to make such request by executing the form of request attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 4. The Council hereby .authorizes that a draft of a first supplemental indenture be prepared and be placed on file with the Trustee and with the City Clerk. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and without publication. Passed this day of 1986. .Mayor Attest: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by ~ , and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by the Mayor,-which was attested by the City • Clerk. ~I ~I • -2- t. EXHIBIT A • REQUEST TO TRUSTEE Pursuant to Section 10-2 of the Indenture of Trust, dated as of December 1, 1982, between the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the City) and First Trust Company, Inc. (the Trustee), the City hereby requests the Trustee to enter into a supplemental indenture, the form of which is to be prepared and furnished to the Trustee, for the purpose of .substituting for the irrevocable letter of credit given by The First National Bank of St. Paul in favor of the Trustee, an irrevocable letter of credit given by Marquette Bank Minneapolis, N.A. in the same amount and with the same terms. The City also requests the Trustee, upon being satisfactorily indemnified by Dacotah Properties Partnership with respect to expenses, to cause a notice, in the form attached hereto as Appendix A, to be mailed by first class mail to all holders of the City's $900,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project), Series B, dated as of December 1, 1982. Dated this day of 1986. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor And Its City Manager r ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA. Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 361 Agenda,November 22, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and tiembers of the City Council City of ~ Richf field Council Members.: Subject: Resolution Authorizing the Sale and Issuance of 5900,000 of C...«...ercial .Development Reven- ' ue Bonds. for Decotah Properties (Corporate Travel) t At t~e July 14, 1980 city council meeting, the city council held a public hearing and passed a resolution giving prelimin- ary approval for the issuance of Commercial Development Revenue Bonds for the development of a five story, 61,660 square foot c~,.~..ercial off ice building on the- vacant site lying adjacent to 76th Street and I35W. The final step in this .process is for the city council to adopt a resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of the Commercial Development Revenue Bonds. The attached resolution is a general description of the transaction that is to occur and it also approves all the necessary documentation, as well as orders the execution and delivery of the bonds and related underlying documents.. A file copy of all of the documents to be approved is available at the city hall offices. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution. authorizing the the sale and issuance of these bonds. Respectfully submitted, ~ 1 Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: City Clerk Finance Coordinator Community Development Director City Planner.. RN/e~a . 7 io = CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $900,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOP"~ENT REVENUE BONDS Issuer: City of Richfield, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Rind, date, time and place of .meeting: A regular meeting, -held on November 22, 198 2, at o'clock p.m., at the City Hall. • Members present: • Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting {pages): RESOLiITION NO. RESOLIITION ADTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMrir ~ Rr. v ~11UE 80NDS UNDER THE MINNESOTA MULIICIPAL INDIISTRIAL Dcv~i.OPMENT ACT TO FINANCE A PROJECT THEREIINDER, SECDRED BY PAYMENTS TO BE RECEiv~D PQRSUANT TO A LOAN AGREEMENT, A PLEDGE AND ASSIGNMENT OP CITY'S INTEREST IN THE LOAN AGREEMENT AND PAYMENTS THEREu~ru6R TO A TRIISTEE, AND A LETTER OF CREDIT FROM FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SA~,r~ PAUL IN FAVOR OF THE TRIISTEE, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECIITIObi OF DOCUMENTS I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obligations referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that-the documents attached hereto. as described above, have been carefully cLW~.ared with the original records of said corporation i.n my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents • are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the govsrning body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said obligations; and that said meeting, was duly held by the governing body at the.~time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to .call and notice of. such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of November, 1982. Signature (SEAL).. Sylvia R. Bergh,. . _ City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 190 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor - and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Approving a Refinancing Plan, Sale and Transfer of Rogers Cablesystems Franchise and Extending the Franchise Period Council Members: At the City Council meeting of April 28, 1986, the City Council held a Public Hearing on a request by Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, LTD. Partnership for City Council approval of the following actions (see attached Council Letter No. 171): 1. A Refinancing Plan which provides for alternative financing mechanisms to relieve Rogers of its' unfavorable long-term debt, and 2. The sale and transfer of the Cable T.V. franchise from Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, Ltd. Partnership to Rogers Cablesystems of America. The operation would stay within the Rogers family of companies, but the long-term outstanding debt of the company would be refinanced under the much larger credit line of Rogers Cablesystems of America, and 3. The extension of the terms of the Rogers Cable television franchise for an additional four years. The refinancing plan and extension of the franchise for an additional four year period were two items provided for in the relief ordinance adopted by-the five cities of the Southwest .Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) approximately one year ago. At the public hearing on April 28, 1986, testimony was heard from representatives of Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, Adrian Herbst (Attorney for the SWSCC), and members of the public. The official action approving the request was to be a resolution. H owever, the exact wording of that resolution was not available _ at the April 28th meeting, thus the resolution was to be pre ared P by the City Attorney and presented to the City Council at the May 12, 1986, City .Council meeting., i lS? Attached is a resolution entitled "A Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to a Change of Ownership and of a Refinancing Plan of the City's Cable Television Franchise". .The previously adopted Franchise Ordinance provides for a four year extension of the Franchise if Rogers completes refinancing of -its'- existing long-term indebtedness before December 31, 1987, and provides the City with acceptable evidence thereof. Thus .adoption of this resolution would indirectly also extend the City's franchise with Rogers for four additional years (from December 31, 1995 to December 31, 1999).. Finally, the resolution gives preliminary approval of the change of ownership and refinancing plan pending. the acceptable submission and execution of all appropriate documentation as necessary for this transaction. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Refinancing Plan and transfer of ownership of Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, LTD. Partnership. Respe ully submitted, _ to Devic Act',ng City Manager SLD/era 2) I ~~V RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP AND OF A REFINANCING PLAN OF THE CITY'S CABLE TELEVISLON FRANCHISE. WHEREAS, the City of , Minnesota, ("City") has granted a cable. television franchise ("the Franchise") to Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota Limited Partnership ("the Grantee") pursuant to City's cable communications ordinance ("the Franchise Ordinance"); and WHEREAS, City has also adopted an ordinance (the "Relief Ordinance") intended to provide financial relief to Grantee by providing for a modification of Grantee's obligations for a period of time in order to permit refinancing of Grantee's • long-term debt and to enhance its financial viability; and WHEREAS, Grantee has now proposed a refinancing plan, as contemplated by the Franchise Ordinance and the Relief Ordinance and seeks approval of such plan; and WHEREAS, Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, Inc. ("RCMI") is the general partner of Grantee and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Rogers U.S. Cablesystems, Inc. ("RUSCI"); and WHEREAS, the proposed refinancing calls for a change in ownership of Grantee's general partner through transfer of the ownership of the shares of RCMI from RUSCI to Rogers American Cable Corp. ("RACC"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Rogers Cablesystems of America, Inc. ("RCA"); and WHEREAS, RCMI has represented to the Southwest Suburban Cable Communications Commission ("SWSCC"), which acts on behalf of the City on certain matters related to cable television, that in conjunction with the proposed refinancing of Grantee, RCA will make use of its line of credit from time to time as necessary to ~I~ provide funds to Grantee to meet operating expenses and debt service payments; and WHEREAS, it has also been represented by Grantee to SWSCC that such transfer of stock ownership of RCMI will strengthen the ~ financial .position of RCMI and will facilitate the refinancing of Grantee's long-term debt; and WHEREAS, SWSCC has engaged the firm of Touche Ross, certified public accountants, to review this proposed transfer of stock ownership of RCMI and the proposed refinancing; and REAS Touche Ross has made an interim re ort to SWSCC WHE , p . indicating that the proposed refinancing will lighten the debt - l - service burden of Grantee through a reduction of interest rates . and-an extension of the loan period; and WHEREAS, Touche Ross recommend that, before final approval of such proposed refinancing and stock ownership transfer, certain additional information be provided and certain written commitments be made by RACC and RCA; and WHEREAS, RACC has indicated that it will offer to purchase the interests of all the individual limited partners of Grantee, which offer, if accepted, will also result in a change in ownership of Grantee; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 238.083, and Article XII of the Franchise Ordinance, require City approval of any change in ownership of Grantee; and WHEREAS, Article II, Section 4, of the Franchise Ordinance provides for a four-year extension of the Franchise if Grantee completes refinancing of its. existing long-term indebtedness before December 31, 1987, and provides written evidence thereof acceptable to the City; and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed change of ownership will not adversely affect the Grantee's subscribers; and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed refinancing is likely to benefit Grantee and may, in turn, permit Grantee to provide better service to its subscribers than it would otherwise be able to provide. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of , Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City herewith gives preliminary approval to the following actions: A. The transfer of the stock of RCMI from RUSCI to RACC; - B. The purchase of the interests of the limited partners of Grantee by RACC; C. The refinancing of the long-term debt of Grantee as proposed to SWSCC and as contemplated in Article II, Section 4, of the Franchise Ordinance. 2. Final approval of these actions will be considered by City, upon the occurrence of the following: A. Grantee has filed with City copies of executed loan documents evidencing that Grantee has refinanced its - 2 - long term debt as contemplated by Article II, Section 4, of _ the Franchise Ordinance and as represented to SWSCC. B. RCA has given written contractual commitment to City, satisfactory to City, that it will provide financial assistance as necessary to Grantee, during the term of the refinancing loan, to enable Grantee to meet its operating expenses and debt service payments. C. Grantee, RCMI or RACC have certified to City that the ownership of the stock of RCMI has been transferred from RUSCI to RACC and that all actions incident to such transfer have been duly authorized and taken. D. RACC has executed and delivered to City an acceptance and a guarantee of RCMI's performance of the Franchise Ordinance, the Relief Ordinance and the Performance Agreement between City and Grantee, accompanied by such opinions of counsel as are required by Article XIV of the Franchise Ordinance. E. SWSCC has recommended to City that it give final approval of the actions described in paragraph 1 of this - Resolution. 3. Upon final City approval of the actions described in paragraph 1 of this Resolution, the City will execute and deliver • an agreement with Grantee evidencing extension of the Franchise to December 31, 1999. Dated this day of 1986. Mayor 3 ~ (((...,,,PPP r T~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 171 Agenda April 28, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield • Subject: Public Hearing on Rogers Cablesystem's • Application for Approval of Refinancing Plan Transfer and Sale of Ownership of Franchise and Extension of the Term of the Franchise Council Members: .Approximately one year ago, the City of Richfield along with other member cities of the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission, (hereafter SWSCC adopted a relief ordinance which enabled Rogers to provide for refinancing of their unfavorable long-term debt. Since that time Rogers Cablesystems has developed a refinancing plan and is now in the process of submitting that plan to five member cities of the SWSCC which includes, Edina, Eden Prairie, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield. At the council meeting of April 14, 1986 council members were informed that on April 2, 1986, the SWSCC had received a completed application from Rogers Cablesystems to approve the following: 1. The refinancing plan which provides for alternative financing mechanisms to relieve Rogers of its unfavorable long-term debt, and 2. A request for approval of the sale and transfer of the cable franchise. Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota would be acquired by Rogers Cablesystems of America, thus the operation would stay within the Rogers Cablesystems family of companies, but the long-term outstanding debt of the company would be refinanced under the much larger credit line of Rogers Cablesystems of America, and 3. Approval of the extension of the terms of the city' franchises for an additional four year term. At its April 2 meeting, the SWSCC considered the application by Rogers Cablesystems and unanimously adopted a resolution which provided for a recommendation to the member cities on the F following findings: 1. The SWSCC found that the applications of Rogers for its refinancing plan is complete subject to the receipt of the buy-sell agreements and related financial information between the transferrer and the transferee-and the process for evaluation may be started by member cities; 2. That the cities adopt a schedule of proceedings that was prepared by the Administrator of the SWSCC, Adrian Herbst, for review and processing of the Rogers application; 3. That the member cities notify Rogers within 30 days of the date of the application (April 2, 1986) that a public hearing is being scheduled for April 28, 1986 because the proposed actions may have an adverse effect on company subscribers. 4. That the public hearing not be closed and all necessary approvals finalized until. Rogers has sub- . mitted to the cities and the SWSCC its buy and sell agreements and related financial information and the SWSCC has provided its recommendation to the cities, or ' alternatively that the hearing is closed but approval are not final and ordinances not published until the. SWSCC has filed its recommendation with the cities that the buy sell agreements information related thereto _ are in conformance with the representation of Rogers. public hearings. 5. That the city attorney's of each member city assist and coordinate the commission's attorney in the steps necessary toward the preparation and documentation necessary for each individual city to act upon the request as provided for in the scheduled proceedings. On April 14, 1986 the city council made a finding that the Rogers application may have an adverse impact upon company subscribers and took action to: 1. Authorize the Acting City Manager to notify Rogers Cablesystems that the application may have an adverse impact upon company subscribers. Thus, a public hearing has been scheduled, 2. That a public hearing be scheduled .and published for April 28, at 7:00 P.M. At the April 28, 1986 public hearing, representatives from Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota LTC, Partnership and Adrian Herbst, attorney for the SWSCC, will be in attendance to present (.l/ r information regarding the application and to answer any questions the council members and public may have. Once again the three issues which will be considered at the public hearing are the following: 1. A request for approval by each of the member cities of a refinancing plan of R~aers Cablesvstems of Minnesota Limited Partnership. During the course of the past year, Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota has attempted to secure financing to alleviate the cash flow problems caused by their long-term debt. However, several problems arose. in that refinancing including a reluctance on the part of at least one lender because of the provision in the franchise agreement which provides that the system could be taken .over by the member cities at the net book value of Rogers in the-event of a default of the franchise agreement. Thus., the possibility arose in the mind of the potential lender that in the event of a default there would not be sufficient funds to insure that .t he lender was. properly paid. Secondly, the interest rates available at the time Rogers attempted to secure refinancing were in excess of 11X interest their cost under the current bank loan-agreement. The refinancing proposal now up for approval includes the provision wherein the bank loan of Rogers Cablesystems of . Minnesota would be amended to match the terms of Rogers Cablesvstems of America's long-term debt. This long-term debt bears an interest rate at the prime rate plus one percent (as ..compared to the Minnesota loan rate which is the prime plus one and one-half per cent. The refinancing if approved would result in reduced interest costs, extending payment terms and a greater degree of flexibility for the Minnesota Limited Partnership. A copy of a letter from the Touche Ross accounting firm reviewing the proposed refinancing plan is attached to this letter. 2. Hand in hand with the refinancing of the Cablesystems of Minnesota debt, with the Rogers Cablesystems of America credit line, would be the request for sale and transfer of the franchise_ from Rogers Cablesvstems of Minnesota Limited Partnership to Rogers Cablesvstems of America, Inc. Both companies operate within the Rogers Cablesystems of America corporate group. 3. The reouest to extend the franchise term by four years in each of the member cities. In the relief ordinance, executed approximately one year ago, the cities recognized that with the refinancing there was also a need to permit an extension of the franchise term to make the best possible long-term debt restruct- uring and at that time the cities agreed that upon approval of the refinancing of the long-term debt they would also extend the franchise term by four years. Thus, along .with approval of the financing plan, would come approval to extend the franchise for (L " s another four year term for the City of Richfield as well as the other four member cities of the SWSCC. In summary, the proposals that are before the city council for action have been reviewed and acted upon by the SWSCC and have all been approved by the SWSCC, The SWSCC has also made recommendations to each of the five member cities to approve the refinancing plan, the sale and transfer of the franchise and to extend-the franchise term for an additional four years. In order for the council to take official action on these three matters, an ordinance must be passed amending the cable franchise communications ordinance, and a resolution must be adopted. accepting the terms of the refinancing plan. At the time of this writing, a final draft of an ordinance for first reading. is not available nor is a final draft of .the resolution available. Attached to this council letter is a rough draft developed by Adrian Herbst which was used for the basis of discussion with the five city attorneys to develop a final copy of .those documents. A final copy of the ordinance and resolution may be available by the time of the public hearing. Rogers has requested that the SWSCC and member cities take action on this matter as soon as possible so they may proceed with the refinancing. The SWSCC has targeted the end of May as the date by which all member cities should have acted on this • matter. If the ordinance and resolution are available at the time of the April 28 public hearing, it is recommended that the city council adopt that resolution approving the refinancing plan of Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, LTD., and adopt the ordinance amending the cable communications ordinance providing for the sale and transfer. of the franchise and extending the terms of the franchise. If the ordinance and resolution are not available at the time of April 28 public hearing, it is recommended that the .city council take the above actions during the May 12, 1986 .council. meeting and that in either event, the second reading of the ordinance be scheduled for the second. meeting in May. Res~c fully s mitt , i~ L. CYlI. Acti g City Manager SD/eja S~ Attachments: A-Rou h Draft of a Pro osed Ordinance for First Reading B-Rough Draft of a Coupcil Resolution Accepting Refinancing Plan. C-Ten-Year Proforma Concerning the Refinancing D-A Letter to the SWSCC from Rogers Cablesystems Dated March 4 explaining the steps taken to secure the refinancing E-A Letter from Adrian Herbst to Touche Ross & Company Concerning the Analysis of the Refinancing Plan F-A Letter from Touche Ross Reviewing the Refinancing Plan ~~i i FIELD MINNESOTA CITY OF RICH , Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 189 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Nonarable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: .Request for Permit to Erect Temporary Oversize Signs at Three Locations and far Waiver of Permit Fees (Chamber of Commerce Council Members: The Richfield Chamber of Commerce is requesting a permit to erect an oversized temporary trailer sign at three different locations during the month of May, 1986. The Chamber is also requesting that the fee be waived. The sign is billboard size, measuring 12' x 25' (300 square feet?. The city ordinance provides that such temporary signs be a maximum of 12 square feet. The Aorta panel will read "Richfield At Work - Salute to Small Business Week May 18-24". The Chamber is proposing to place the sign in front of the former Arthur Treacher's Restaurant at 66th and Penn from May 8-May 12; at the Colonial Motel, 77th and Lyndale from May 12-19; and at the Chamber of Commerce office, 6637 Lyndale Avenue, from May 19 to May 27. Staff Review: The inspection and planning divisions have reviewed the sign permit application and recommend that the city council deny the request since the maximum temporary sign permitted by city ordinance is 12 square feet. Res~~ fully submitted, ` Leven L. 0 vic Acting. City Manager ~ SO/eja ' PAT FpCKERT - ~ ACCOIlff EXECUTIVE • . NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING OF THE TWIN GIIES 1700 WEST 78TH a ~ ncET MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55`123 [612] 869-1900 i • APPROVE ~ DENY APPROVE DENY City. Manager - Inspector ~ - Date ~ - - - • . ~ . Date (J t% APPROVE - DENY ~ - ~ : - - APPROVE • . ~ i,ra~ x ~ ~ : ~ - - Planning-Department - City Council Date . Date Route to above for 'special approval per code General Sins O~~ .5 '('•0 ~ e ~ 1 ~cQ. s~ APPLICATION FOR' ADVERTISING PERMIT s N Uti.J ~O~p~,; ixv : j City of Richfield, .Minnesota 514+arr. r Date [J ~ ~ ( ~ Zoning Sign Erected - Yes No Fee may, Address of Sign loln~"Y PQ r,~N ) Proprietor Name,~,~k~„ ~DBA Sign Erector: Jvp~pLp Qu-~,~bnr` Address )7or~ Gv. ~~~~~-1- ~,7'~,~Pl..~,~w. 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.; Banner/Pennants Other pas~e~IO~ti ~L Other(Explain) Temporary.. _ Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer: T ~ A ~ Post lluminated - Yes No Watts ectrical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agent Signature Phone Estimated Cost Sign Width aria Height Total Square Feet ~ 0 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 ex licit anchorin or fastenin details P 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? Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe acce-ss- by persons destined for. or passing the subject premises? JU ~a,L u~ ~~2J ~~(C~F N qe FAQ (~t,~}dOC~ Appli nt's Signature and Title with Fi~ Date Ll ' s. I ~ g Phone -Number 41, (~G - ~ y a~ ' Lkt _ 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 GROUND SIGN - PEDESTAL SIGN - PRbJECTING SIGN ~ TJIDTH ~ } ~ WIDTH , WIDTH ~a x ~,c ~ ~ LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND a Indicate Distance ' - From The Building V ~ GROUND WALL SIGN ROOF SIGN Indicate legend on the WIDTH ~ WIDTH ~ the reverse side in the space below LEGEND. ~ LEGEND LEGEND GROUND ROOF Place location of sign on this sketch with distance the sign is from property lines. Locate any traffic lights within 300 feet. DEFINITION: Minor Signs --Single or double .faced sign less than 32 sq. ft. on a common board INDICATE NORTH LRf/8/$3 APPROVE ~ DENY ~ ~ . Cit Man APPROVE ~ ~ DENY ~ : - y ager Inspector _ _ _ Date. - . - ~ Date APPROVE J:DENY:~: APPROVE J DENY - Planning Department City Council Date Date Route to above for'special a~iproval per code General Sins ~ f5 -~~o ~ e p I q ~C O . APPLICATION FOR' ADVERTISING PERMIT ~e~Gh~) oc~i~~nJ ~II~ ~L City of Richfield, .Minnesota - i Date A`., Zoning Sign Erected - Yes No X Fee ~),aa v~.-~ Address of ~ ~ Sign, M~e ~ _ L+,,,,„ Proprietor Name DBA .Sign Erector /V ,~ca~~ ,ro (')~r'~'d h D2 Address (>(~O ~~'~''i ~I . r2,'~ ~~-i QLh~ (i~7 tom: Type of Sign Design .Weather Cover Li~htinA ~',~'~-Z, Wali ~ Single Face _ Clear Lexon _ Constant Projecting ,7 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 ~~5~}e~ ~Y~r'' Q L i Other (Explain) Temporary Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post Illuminated - Yes No Watts Electrical Contractor Address Phone Pro rt Owner or his A ent Si ature °y~ Pe y g ~ tl t+-, ~Q i CQ 1 ~ i Phone ~~i ~ ~ ~.3~ Estimated Cost - - Sign Width`Z~~ Heights ~ ` Total Square Feet ~ Q{~ S` 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? !U h ~J a~i, ~u~~_ f~'v~2~~s~-~ 1V A~ci e~~ (U~~~4v2 Appl' ant's Signature and Title with Firm' M Date i ` ~ y rj , ~ C(~ Phone Number ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - Lkt 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official.- 866-5061 - GROUND SIGN - PEDESTAL SIGN PROJECTING SIGN ~C ~ =WIDTH ~ WIDTH ~ I'E W13TH _ _ F LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND ~Z Indicate Distance - tlI From The Building - W GROUND WALL SIGN ROOF SIGN Indicate legend on the ~7IDTH ~ } ~ ' WIDTH ~ the reverse side in the space below LEGEND ~ LEGEND LEGEND GROUND ~ ROOF • f Place location of sign on this sketch with distance the sign is from property lines. Locate any traffic lights within 300 feet. , DEFINITION: Minor Signs Single or double faced sign less than 32 sq. ft. • oa a commoa board - • INDICATE NORTH LICE/8/83 APPROVE U DENY ~ : APPROVE ~ ~ DENY ~ : • City Manager- t Inspector - - _ Date ~ ~ ~ -Date- APPROVE U:DENY APPROVE DENY,. - - Planning Departa~nt City Council Date ~ Date Route to above for'special approval per code General Sims fiU ~ h ~ A ~J APPLICATION FOR' ADVERTISING PERMIT ' N ~e ~ Uh/ ~ bc~s~'~~c;~ S l~yl ~t~ City of Richfield, .Minnesota Date L,~ Zoning Sign Er cted -Yes _ Nox` Fee W/1; J e h Address of Sign t.~ . .~~1'.~t Proprietor Nam ri , j DBA Sign erector ~Aec~ L ~ Uc-{i' ~ DU~'L Address ~'~C~.b LJ: 7 ~~i ~~'C~'if'i'PL ~.E~~ ICI Type of Sign Design .Weather Cover Lighting ~~3[(< ' i Wall ~ Single Face ~ _ Clear Lexon _ Constant _ Projecting Double Face Frosted Lexon _ Flashing. ~I _ Ground Multi-Faced _ Plastic Covered _ Revolving _ Roof.. ~ Aerial/Blimp ~ Shaded _ Traveling _ Pedestal Searchlight Neon _ Zip Lite _ II _ Changeable ~ Banner/Pennants Jc Other p~('rz ~r~~LQL ~ Other(Explain) X Temporary Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer T ~ A ~ Post ~ ~ Illuminated -Yes No Watts ~ctrical Contractor Address Phone Property Owner or his Agent Signature QXlwh~/ ~j2~5 ~ Phone II', Estimated Cost Si n Widt r g ~ Height / 'Z Total Square Feet .3p 0 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? lti C 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? ~ll Applicd~'s Signatureaand Title with Firm Date ~ Phone Number ~b l ~ 1 ~ ~ C~ C~ ,.mot 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 ~ ; ' . • , a ' ~ ElE OUTDOOR ADV• ' S ~ . ING , AND NAEG • ~ SUBURBAN NEWSPAPER ER'.µiNNE50TA ~ c~~ ELD. GHANA `c Y SNE RiCHFI 1]'~' • ,.SPOa~OREO 8 11 • ~SG-/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA . Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 188 Agenda: May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Signs At the One Sto Mail Sho a 2208 West P pP 66th Street Council Members: All-Brite Sign Incorporated has requested an advertising permit to erect two illuminated signs at the One Stop Mail Shoppe located at 2208 West 66th Street in Richfield. City ordinance provides that permits for illuminated signs must be approved by the City Council. The signs will measure 6' x 3' and are to be installed on the south and west sides of the building. The signs will read "Western Union". Staff Review: The inspection division staff has reviewed the sign permit applications and finds that the signs conform to all applicable city ordinances. Resp,~c fully submitted, ev n L. Dev"ch Acting City Manager SD/eja i I • I ~,i `r 1 ~ . } 1 xa gg ~ i *.t``- ~ ~r,~ ~ _ - APP30GE ~ ~ DENY ~ : r1~°PRU'v E ~ DENY ~ i : - City Manager Inspector Date Date s~Z~S APPROVE ~ DENY ~ ~ Q~ APPROVE DENYa ~5~ - Plannin D1~partment City Council Date 5 ~2~Q(o Date Route to above for 'special approval per code General Signs APPLICATION FOR'ADVERTISING PERMIT City of Richfield,., Minnesota Date ~'-.~p Zoning Sign Erected - Yes ~ No Fee ~ Address of Sign ~o?(rQ i~li/v ~,.Y~~wy Proprietor Name DBA Sign Erector ~ Address - _ - Tyve 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 Banner/Pennants _ Other i Other (Explain) _ Temporary ~ Portable Frame: Sign Colors Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post ~ , If Illuminated ,Yes o _ Watts ~6~ ,~;('f ~ .llG Electrical Contractor ~ ~~L~e. t~(~,Address~~~ ~ Phone ~ ~ Property Owner or his A ent Signature `-t " - ~ Phone - "7/ 7 i Estimated Cost.., %,c' :A-_ lSign Width Height ,_j Total Square Feet /;~(^n ,,~,j r Position of the advertisement structure in relationshig~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 s*_ruct~~re constrsction plans• including specif ications, 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? ,4./~/ Will the-sign astructure, or billboard restrict-any sight distance under, aro nd, or over for safe access by persons destined for or passing the subject premises? I'~'~~7- Applicant's Signature and Title with Firm Date CZ~`~c ,..~Q~ ~y~~" Phone Number 0~02~0 v Lkt 1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building Official - 866-5061 / CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 187 I! Agenda: May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Signs at_Walgreens, Hub Shopping Center Council Members: Universal Sign Company has requested advertising permits to erect two illuminated. wall signs at Walgreen's, 12 West 66th Street in the Hub Shopping Center. The two signs will measure 15' x 1'4" and be illuminated. The signs will read "Open 24 Hours", and will be placed on each side of the building where there are presently temporary banners. City ordinance provides that the City Council must approve all permits for illuminated signs. Staff Review: The inspection division has reviewed the sign permit applications and finds that the signs conform to all applicable city ordinances. Resp~ tfully ubmitted, ~!/l~ ~ ven L. Devi~h Ac ing City Manager SD/eja _ I ~''PROZ,~E f DE'~'YI APPROVE ~ ~ DE\'Yf ,/,~~~'i~-<-~%~ r Cit} :7anager inspector ~ s. Date Date ~~/-~~~p~ ~saPROV£ Z)ENY~ K~.~ ~ APPROVE ~ DE:1'I Planninb ~artment City Council ~~,-a.~ ~¢,4~P-?' t'~4 Date S ~t~ Da t e Route to above for special anoroval per code General Signs . ~ A.pPL:CdTZ01? FOR .~DCERTISIrG PE:L"!ZT v~~ City of Richfield, ainnesota - / 1T ~ G Date Zoning Sign Erected - dies :~o Fee ~ / ~ ~ a .Address of Sign ~=J - . ~~'j- ' i Proprietor name -i%- DBA Sign Erector _ .r'. Address ~,J:,~.~ - Tune of Sien Desicn Weather Cover _ _ LiQhtinc _ . • ~ Wall . ~ Single Face Cleat Lexon y ~ Constant _ Projecting Douole Face Froste? Le::en ~ Flashing. Ground aulti-raced Plastic Covered .Revolving Roof. ~ Aerial/Blimp t Shaded Traveling Pedestal Searcalight I ~ Neon Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants ~ r Other -.n ~ Other(E.Yplain) Temporary Portable Frame: ~ i Sign Colors ~ Cr^ Trailer ~ T ~ A ~ Post Illuainated - Yes Ko Watts , e-~ ~trical Contractor ~ tiddress Phone - . . lroperty Qwner or his Agent Signature ~ - Phone Esti.:.ated Cost % - - ~ Sign Width.; Height Total Square Feetl`~. ~ ~c=t- Position of the advertisement str~,:cture in relationship to the adjacent buildings. sidewalks, curbs, roadways, overhead utilit:• lines, vehicle movement lines, or public tacilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. *iinor signs as defined on page 2. - ?vo blueprints of the sicn, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure constructior. 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? kill the sign, structure. or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for safe_access.bj+ persons destined for or passing the subject premises? i','~~' M App/l'.icant's Signature and Title with Firm Date Phone dumber - - ~ 8/53.. PLE.~SE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGfi LCCATIOS SKETCH Sivert Hendrickson/Building. Official - 866-5061 , • ~ .s. %;,J. _ Z.GS 4t . - _ • `K r f:~ e r 1 ' r . ~ - ~Y ~ i ~ r ~ ~ r-•- Ewe t • . a ,yam- "t ~ - ` t ~ ii /l I J ~ ~ ` . r s1 i --r~l 1 i 4 S . ~ .i s ~ rJ, ~ 1 Y . < ~ ,fie-~~...,. l Y3i/1.'i~/ /1.L/ ~ - ~ t f nA A'EL S ~ , i ~ - ~ ~ } ~ i f SOUTHEAST EXTERIOR ELEVATIQN ~x sl ~~s ~~~F w ~ o - ARK o~+~:~F Rt.U"! - .NT_ R: C. t~.-~.=iF.. .vii?.~ ,:N agCY.~t L;' :S y.'i~ 1 _ - _ . ____.1L _ --____.r------. - - . 1 ~ - •t~ • A1~n _ ' Vic' 3it'; : i4,.: ' Tt'V~'~ST EXTERIOR ELEVATION ` ,r---. ~ls~;-;--~'~~...."•,s:..._. 1 ,,ti o~.~ r.t ~ mac. _ . . 4 i _ - i . CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 186 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Illuminated Wall An d. Pedestal Signs at Terry Feldman Imports 918-920 West 77 1/2 Street Council Members: Signcrafters Inc. has requested advertising permits to install two pedestal and two wall signs at Terry Feldman's Imports located at 918-520 West 77 1/2 Street. All of the signs will have constant illumination. The four signs will replace five existing signs. City ordinance provides that the city council must approve all permits for illuminated signs. ~ A pedestal sign measuring 17' 2" x 26' will be located at 918 West 771/2 Street. At 920 West 77 1/2 Street, there will be three signs as follows: Pedestal-Sign - One Double Faced w/constant illumination measuring 17'2" x 26'. Wall Signs - One Single faced w/constant illumination located on the north wall measurin 40"x30". 9 One Single faced w/constant illumination located on the south wall measuring 18'x16". Staff Review: The inspection division staff has reviewed the sign permit applications and finds that the signs conform to all a licable PP city ordinances. Re p~ tfully ubmi ed, t n va 1C Act'ng City Manager • SD/e 'a J • ~ J NISSAN P4utu~ati CORPORATIOR IN II.S.A. SIGNA~GS.ENTITLEMENT VERIFICATION i DEALERSBIP REIDENTZPICATIOI~ PROGRAM (Refer to instructions for completing this form) . DEALER TERRY FELL'MANS 16 920 W. 78TH STREET ADDRESS 'f'***+*'~" - - MN 5 54 Z 3 j~/C1j~E-~n/ ~llic/ . 2117 CHICAGO CITY, STATE A. EXISTING SIGNS - To be removed (list additional sign removals in comments): SIGN DESCRIPTION APPROX. SIZE MOUNTING APPROX. HEIGHT E1. ~e~~~~'ti ~ Iy~~-1~v~~~. ~o ~S e~~~ 7 ~ ~D~r ~ XG ~ .ST ~Jc~:t~ E2. s lam' rn~~~/,~~ ~ ' Y ' ,~31~g , y, E4. l1//sSAn/ 5~ Rvcf- ~.O _ _ ~ _ , , = - ~ ~ COMMENTS - , As'PROVE I ~ DEIQY APPROVE I \ DEN'YI .'.-h~_'•~- i Cit}• Manage: Inspector , j _ Date Date APPROVE ~ ~ ~E1TY` ~ : ~ ~i APPROVE , ~ DE~1'1 ~ P1 nning L partment City Guuncil Date L(~Z3~~ Date ~ i Route to above for special approve: per code General Siens APPLICd~IO:: FOR AD~'ERTISIhG PER*fIT City of Richfield, ::innesota Date y-ZZ-~~ Zoning, ~ Sign Er~ ed - T~es~ ~.D ro Fee address of Sign ~.~D -~t/--~~T~ Prop ~eto ~Am~~~~ DBA Address 7 ~ 7Jr i~/1//.Ne f'! 5' Sign Erector ~,u1q,~/1.21~ T~roe of Sien r Design ~ ~Jeather Cover Lighting Constant ~ kall ~_Single Face Clear Lexon Projecting. Double Face Frosted Lexon Flaszing Ground Multi-Faced Plastic Covered ~ Revolving Roof aerial/Blimp- I Shaded ~ ~ Traveling . _ Pedestal Searchlight- ~ Neon ~ Zip Lite _ Changeable BannerlPennants _ I Other Other{Explain) _ Temporary Portable Frame: ~ I Sign Colors ~ ~ i Trailer- i T ~ h ~ Post ~ ` Zf Illuminated ~esj No k`atts Electrical Contr or ~ address ,~~c.cfit~~ Phone~7/~'~~ ~ Phones j Property Owner or his Agent Signature ~ ~ ~ _ i Estimated Cost s~ v Sign S~idth1n Height l~ Total Square Feet Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidec:alks, curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. *:inor signs as defined on page Z. 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? Fill the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over for ~ access by pe s des ed for or passing the subject premises? Applicant's Signature and Tide with Firm . ~ ~ Date ~j l/ . Phone Nur:ber lkt 8/63- - PLEASE SEE RL~'ERSE SIDE FOR SIG\ LOCATION SF~ETCH SiverL.Hendrickson/Building Official -.8.66-5061 . ~ C~V / - - ----1- ----I ' - - ~ =r - - - - .t - ~-I- I L - r ~ - _ - - - _ - _~4_ I - - ~ _ _ _ G L - - - - - ~ r --I 1 I _L~ ~ i - - - -r ~ ~ __.-I----. - -~--~i- - fi ~ - i---_ a - - - ~ - - w - - - - _ _-b7 ~ - - ~ _ _ _ _ . _1_~ - - - - - I~ ~ u- - k - - ~ - - -r- - - - - i i - _V- - - _ _ - - _-V - - - - ~ - - - _ I' ~I X52 Ire r t. >~1,., d~~ « ~ - faclhly Intl for each olhfde local7on not 7r»rnod7alelyadlacen7 ~ Whlch Is a (5peeily) REST, ILLINOIS 60d6G to ore main latdur. . tso. cans. - ~.q • ~ PLOT PLAN _ ~ • • , :ATIOtJ At10 ft•lFORF:IATIOfJ SURVE'( ~ • • -(`-------.-._T--- -T_"------r"`-`------ _ t ~1 1-I _ 1 I 11~ 1 1 1 1 1 TIONS:7neDlotplanslouldDaageneraldlagrarnollhobuslnes7 'I--'-'--------I-------_i --T__I__~_~~---~-_--~-c,.'r~~'„~~_i' ~ l I 1 .lnd a~lacenl property and must show your recorrimendallons as,lo ~_'-_'_---_--_--_'-_'_1-_-_--_--__-__ _ .11 new signs. ~ r _/;L_{~~-jf_._-' lit-cam'(- (;11.1 1 1 liesra Ine aDGro,imale scale used on drawings: f = ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ - - - - - -I- I- - _ _ I, r I'~-„- -I h r t I I,r 7 I I r _ _ _ ~ -r- -f- - - - - - = -~-._t" +-i r 1 I 1~-~1 1 1 I r•r e. I I I7 PLi1N SNOUL[) SItOtiY THE fOLt04'lltlG: ~ 1 - ttt -_-~L. 1 , scatien of all buildings found on the business properly. _I_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . I _I-._ - - - - - - _ _ _1. -S -L , 1 E acnl. ~ ~ - I I _.,a .~'~A'~1'1l~G.E.' - --kµl,.-~- - - - r ~ -r 1 r -1 ~ ~1-~i I-/`• 1 Builrlin 1 9 Y. ( 1 1 r I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x 1, I r r 1 D g(s) on adoinin propcn 11 is imoorlanl Thal These I _ ~ ____CI _I_ 'L~I._ ~~_I~~_IN.~ y~ 1 I l 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I',. U 1 1 ny^s De pluued accurately in relation to Iha busines3 builJurgrsl) ' - - : _ 1-I~T' _ _ ~~t~~__ , _ _~i_Lt~-1_~1~~_1_1-!_7-I,..M4.1. ~~~~~1{;~ 1_~_~- ~ I "v r 1 1 rarwal or rnan~n~a•1e obsuutlions, i e. Trees. Irallit Signals, sewer - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -r_~~_~~..• I ~ - - -I ~T-~-` ~r !i-f"r1-~ I ~ 1'T• :IC. -I- - - - - - - - - - - - _ - -f_. _1_i~-f i r-I I-i-I`t-I I ~-~-~tT - ' ' _ - , . . re side++~all s. ParAing loss, used car loll, pans and/or service _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /-~1-.1 ~ \ ~ ~ ~~r- - _-1 - 1-''• ' 11~LI I I I •-i C .c es and en•.r,.ays. Include any signs on neigliboring propeny which - - - - - - - - - - - -f- _ -r J-_ - - - - - r~ i f 1- - - 1 ~ - - _ _ ^ Fri i r l r l T geenou9hwbeconsidered. `"-'-,F`~ qn _ ~ I _ - ( I I.r 1 1 11111 Nle slreelf which bound the propeny. and show directional Ilow of _ 11 ~ -`-I --T' - - tl 1^ ~ - -'S- - - - - , _ _ I I 1 ~~~jjj ' 1 1 T-1 ` 1 1 1 I I as "S Primary Secondary Q Residential _ _ - v _ ^ ~ 4• _ _ - - - _ `S: _ _ - , ~ I ~ , '~~,r 1 1 i li- L - ; - - - - - - - .I.'. ~ _ ~ 111 1--.- --LT - :commended IOCalign of the new Si ns. Label and circle each si n al _ _ _ - I_ _ _ asl. - - _ - _ _ ~ T • x -~If i 1~• r 1 r :ommended silt acccrdin< to carespondin sigh number slYOwn in - - - - - - - ~ Z ~ - - - - - - - tt^^ _ _-I . _ _ _ - _--1 1 1 I ' i L ~r--~~I J 9 i - - - ~1- '-'^I-~ - _ r rl~ - + -li- _ ~ _ T i ~l 1 1 :-s-r rn Vll of quasuonnave;i.e. L) O Ll ~ .Fascia Qands ~ - - - -I--- _ _ r_I 1 1 r - i be sho:: n by a avy line on each side of the number, i.e. ---1.3)--- - - - - - - - - - ` - - ~ -f- - -~c - -I ' - - - ~ ~ - - -I - - I 1 r _ r r_ I 1`I I I I' I_____ 1~_~!_~ _ II~_i 4_ _ ;,IeGcr dimensions of all buildings-corner radius & angle eft. * _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ * - ' r 1 - _~L~ ( ~L'~._-~ `I~.-.1 1`: I I I i~~'.~f: ire nc•m .virh an arrow in boe al upper right of loan. - - - I I_ _ ' _ - _ ~ 'I ' ' - ~ - _ - - - - - - ~ _ _r_,p,(~1~ _ 1 1 1 1 7 r j~jr r r i .it Ine Icu1,Cn of the po~•rer foWG where eIOCUital hOOk•vP vrill - - - - - _ _+~7- - - _ _ _ _1-_ - _ - -.y - _ - - - ' - 1 J~ I C I I I r I~ r r 1 I I 1 1 1 1 t] _ id[-if (P$) _y ~ •`r I ~ ~C-~ i I 1,4~ I I 1~ 1 III 1 I I 1 1 r- 1r •Icc shoo of~.e..vsling signs and num er iherQln seauenee to eointida _ _ _ J - "`I - _ - - - . ~~S_ I_9IT ICI ' I I I I I 1 1 1'TT 1 1 I _ _ 1 1 1 I- I 11 1 I I I 1; 1 i i Senrori 6 0l Ibe Guesuonnaire- E t ~ ,exc. - ` _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ ~ _ _ Pf10~'IUE TfIE FOILOWiNG li'lFORM1tATI0f1; ! r~ o'. 1 1 1 r I DislanCe- ~ --------'v - - ~I-I 7-1 ---I--- _I .-1-'`-'t--- 1~ 11_1_ • Building SPoed - - - -w~ ~ - t ` - 'C - - - - - - - - - - I- - _ - _t _I_~ ` 1 ~ t i 1 ~ SueelName - IoSueel Limit -_------/=-'1~--•'-1=- r•'r- 1 -i,~ - 1 I 1 i.ITI r 1 I ~T r~,•7 ^r- 3 ~ - - - - - - i r ~ - . _ _ _ - ~ _-C~;- T'^T - - ~ _ . _ _ - - 1~ Y r'-I ~ _ _ _ - _ I I 1 r I I_ I 1 ~ ~ -L//LFeaI fdPH _.y, ~ _ _ _ - - -I i'-- i_I~_ _ rr r r L Jr, v ~s _ r Feel ~n MP11 - - - -r ...I_1_.! I ir ----'----i------I- - r -I- = _--..1-._~_.__- - t--- - - - 1 _ i"T r rIT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1_ _ I I 1 1 7 1 r~1~ `-r--~-t---- T Imo- - i x 1 1 r 1 1. r I 1 I - - / Feel MPH i' T h 1 r r r r r r r i Irnq idenUliztle Irom distance ol: - - - - - -•t: -I ° - - ' 'I` fy - - ~-T' - 1 _ f 1 I I i I 1 r r 1 I i $Iree1 Name ~r 1 1 r _ 1 I. 1 1, I 1 1 I _I_. _ _~T f(- _ I I_ ~ _ ~ " j_I I r r I r r I r r I ~L• Feel: On ~1 Heading 11 _ _ -h r-_ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~`'i':._L ~.y~~~•;~~ a - _~c; c~• I t 1 ~ , I 1 I r ~_Feer,On Heading LV r - -'r f__i ~ °~"r:~; = .~~i_!-~_~:rTtL'`I-1.1 I 1 I 1 r 1~ C.i 1leadinp I-I-T.1._~_ -f- I rr l l l l l l l r r __,_Feel: On . . I-- - - _ _ _ _ j[~ T °r I 1 r 1 I - ~1_I_1 i 1 it-LI r l II 1~rp I~^,~Fee1:On Ileadinq S 1I nl*~*^ -~"~.~------lj»yr=+~~~~ t-I I1 •7 ~~r~j~r•'•~1'~I-~g~(~ ~ / ~l _ - ----.Tr__ ~ 1 yes- I'1~I r•r.• f;iS:-2? ~7.r!~~ ~7 v~l SZ'_ n~_- T- _ III~~~ !_G i7i-cps=r~r:riCr.yuu ru ~ / ~k ~ . - --7--- - Err f~-y~}-~•r•1- ~rF~ - , ? r4 ! . - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - ~ ~ , ,-H-f-ti-~-.. . it -----o-- ....,,y.,, I Date Date - i A_aPROVr ~ I ~ ~E~Y~ ~ : C-wUi , APPROVE ~ ~ DE:~'Y Plannin~ Le artment City Cuuncil Date Z?, CCG Date ~ 1 ute to above for special approval per code General Siens ' hG PER~'1ZT APPLICATIO:. FOR ADS ERTZSI Cit~• of Richfield, .:innesota Date ~ Zoning Sign Erected - Tes ho Fee p Address of Sign ~d~~'~"?/~"7v Proprietor tame DBA Address ~r7~ ~~"LL/~l-s~~ r4GV Sign Erector-LG/~/ , _ Tune of Sien ~ Design - Weather Cover Lighting X Wall Imo, Single Face ~ ~ Clear Lexon ~jConstant Projecting _ Double Face _ Frosted Lexon Flashing Ground Multi-Faced X _Plastic Covered Revaluing Roof Aerial/Blimp Shaded ~ Traveling Pedestal Searchlight _ Neon Zip Lite Changeable Banner/Pennants Other ~ Other(Explain) Temporary Portable Frame: Sign ors Trailer T ~ A ~ Post ~ ~ e~WiC(~'C~ If Illuminated Yes ~ I3o Watts Electrical Contractor~~,/) Addres~7~'7~fif~ 7~` PhoneJ~~-~p~/ .y ~rty Owzier or his Agent Signature Phone ~7~ ZgSi Estimated Cost Sign Width ,L ~j~ieight 3'~ ~ 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 significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. *".inor signs as defined on page 2. Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, oz outdoor advertising structure construction plans: including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring ar 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? 4,'ill the sign, structure, or bi lboard restrict any sicht distance under, around, or over for s - acce by p sons de tYned for or passing the subject premises? , d applicant) s Signat re and ~?tle c~ith Firm Date -~`'G~~ Phone :umber ~ C C lkt g PLEASE SEE RE~'rRSE SIDE FOR SIG\ LOCATION SKETCH c Sx~erL Hendrickson/Building Of~icial - 866-5061 pan ' ~ ~ Dealership LD. lership Identification Signs Individual Letters ~ C1 TY'.~ ~::N 15-SA11 - - ~ J . '~1'M~ .i f.~ty~ .imp ~i ~ ~ f '~~5 _ ~ '~L ' ++a * J.~~ 1 i~Y r~A aY~, _ 1. - C.~s~e 2 f ~rR~r ~ ~ = y $ PARTS ! ~ / r -g ~ 4• ~i j ~ ~ l / ` -''3 i • \ ~ - .'~j , .r. DEALERSHIP NAME A 30" 24" 18" Hts. COLOR WHITE OR BLUE STYLE ILLUMINATED OR NON-ILLUMINATED SECONDARY AREAS I B 16" 12" 8" Hts. COLOR WHITE OR BLUE f I STYLE NON-ILLUMINATED- 1ViESSAGES SERVICE/PARTS/LEASING BODY SHOP/PAR'IS~ER4~CE - NOTE I - BOTH FILLERS FACE (I-PIECE) Ml _ BE REMOVED FOR MOUNTING LETT o TO WALL OR SERVICING. X12 MM NEON _ TUBING. '~b500 WHITE \ , WHITE OR BLUE ~ 3-$THK ARMORPLY ACRYLIC FACE BACK ~ _ . -I+ ~ ~ - - _ ~ - ~~ELEC. OUTLET: CONNECT ION HARDWARE FROM- LETTER TO - . . _ LETTER BEHIND WALL PER _ - LOCAL CODE (BY ERECTOR) _ o 30 MA. T R A N 5 F• O N ~ ~~GDIA.I-40LE5 FOR L~DIA. MOUNTING BRUSHED. STAINLESS HARDWARE • (BY ERECTOR) STEEL. FILLER, ~-~.1NgLL--TYPE CONSTRUCTION WILL VARY. _ P/asti Li A FULL SIZED MOUNTING KNOXVIL~F PATTERN IS SUPPLIED W ITN SCALE AFP'D BY EACH. SET O F FETTERS . DATE 2-.4-~ ~H'K BY OF NE.Oa ~C.vw M CUSTOMER ~ 15~1J w DRAWING SHEET OF~ _ uu?-trur~~~II~,~, • ~ flOTE: Separate queshennaua muse be prepared for Iha main This aurvay Is lu~l~ Idaln laclllly or UII•allu locolfon of (5Uae1 AUdlass!- ~ -I:clhry anq for each orl sne location not irhrnudialely adlaconl Wl,ich Is a(Spanily) Jf, ILLIitOIS 6046& to lnr morn l:ulilx _ ~ wf/.G~/T-.l!/~A-~'~• ~ . PLOT PLAN ' Iorl :~'.rro Irrror+r.I:~(riorrsunvcv r7' I t 1 -~----_~-__-_-I-__ -T----_---- -r-- r-;--- _t1 t r15: 7np p!ct plan ::.curd ea a general diagram of Ine business r' - - - I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Y _ - - - t_.._ 1 aGla.er,l prcp`rty zr.A mull show your recommenAallons as l0 - ~fl hl/i.-1- ~ j~ . -r-------- I I '..signs. ~ _ - _ _eu',esf•Grwrrt.eia scale used on drai,ings: f _'_r.- _ rc--~-!!_!1 t 1 _It:(- - - - _ r~~N sunu~n siinvrnle Fo~~owlNa; - _ I;1~•r-- ucn r,l all L,nb.m ~g Iruad on the business properly. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ° - i- / ~ f ~Z i fl_(i•~;- - - - - ^ -1 - - - _ I - - _ - nl.f,nq(sl on. adlo,ning properly. 111 is imnonam Thal Ihese - - - ^ - - _ - - - _ - _i _ _ +I I ti - Iti`± 1 - - - T - - - - r - - ~t- ~ I i / I! ~I s e[ GrcHed ac:walely m telauon to Ina busmzss buirduuJls) l - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _-I - _I, _ _ ' - _ -~_I -I-I-I-`I-l- _I-I-_ -l-I_ -,I~•L'1 - -~fl- - - -~-.~lu{V)- - f l - _ _1=l_(_i= ~ cf L _ ,r al u. man~rt~tde cb;uuuions, i e. trees, Irallic signals. se•aer _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - I- T ~ -~-I-- - ~~J - • -I- - - -I' s ' '~,-~1-1'r-1-f-i-t--t-r n. r ude•,all s. parl.ing roes. used cap lots. Palls and/or service -i - - - - - - - - ~ - r~ - fr``- - _ . - _j _ _I_ - _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ r ~ - - - - - I _ •~j i L'``1}~.`I I- i ; u,C ci„e,.a rs Include any sans on naghbonng progeny vduerl - - - -r '~-y - iL,a•~{ - y- - - - - - - - " - ` - - _ - - - _-J_ _ _y--~_ I t 1 r I r 1 i-. e r~ouyt\ia be conildergd. - - - - 1 i 1 l~ 1 ~ I r-I I T-~ sua_IS-+vAICh CJUnd Ine proPenY. and show di~eclional IIOw of _ - - - ~ - -I - _ _ _I^ - C7 ~ ~ - I- - _ - - - I J - I _ _ I t s': ?unary i7 Sec cndary Q Residential. ~ _ _ _ _ -C _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - I r : - j- . _ _I z ~ o- - - - yti r' • - - _ - ` --r r- - - - - -t~ri I I ~r-1 r r~ 'r .rr.mtndtd lounon of the new signs. Label sod circle each sign bl - - - c-.- - - - - _ _ _ 1 S}J - -r-_ I 1_I y/ll ~ I i r nmenAed sus accerding Io touesponding signnumber sho.vn in - '''I j- -I ~ ~ - - - _ ,Q- _ ^ ' 1 = _I ~•1.- _ - - - - - - - _ 'I~ ~ -I - T- - -_i • Q - -r 1_• ii-;( I 111'-47 •/u of ,uesucnnaue: i e. I i) 1j Is) 1$1 .Fascia (lands - - _ ~ - _ - i ) r I _ i- ^ _ -1 _~/t,S- _ -r- - =[I t-' l_LI ' ~ ' :sr.or•nb/a•r:avfl,naoneachsldeollbenumt,er,i.e.•----.)~^ (-___I ~-j___i_i_~-i-~~1 Il_Q,--~ - _ itnOr Crmtrssranf dl. all buildmgf -corner radars L an<le eIC. .i ~ _ n c c:- _ rc- - "H`--' _ _ _ =,j ^ - -r-r~ -I - 1 r~_' i-r I~i _~,I; . _z - north w,th an trrowin boa H uPPar right of lolm. ~ - - 4 _ _ _ _~_i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - ~k~-+ ~ 1 T- i i I r : Ine Iee a'JAn of the Dowd sower whoa elaeuical hookup v ill _ _ _ _ _ - ~r , - - - - - - - - -•----_yr =r-_p 1 • i _ _T' i r~i`i r r~'` i _j~ e_at - - ==-=I-====--_---- I`ar~[ ---r~ _ - i -III 1 rr • c •uc ncl n~slinp signs and number IherlLin ttqutner to coincide - -~-,`I-r-_- _ - ~~I-~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . _ _ ~ 1 -__-=I . _ '"~~r `T-1 r 1 ~ .u.on5cllneoueuronnaue- E.r ~ .ale. .1.~4 ----r~------~-•------- 11?+c-_`r-'~~...-__ -1-ii r f" - - F0;'ID: THE FOLL011'N,G INFORMATION: ~_~-i~_~--_~~~ -C--- ~ ~ "---i--___t~--I TT'i ~ --------•v-r__--------- r _ ------=~i - .-1--r--j--- t' _ 1 ~ r-T-1 r 1 I t, Distance.- i -------''1- 1t r - 1 1 1 1 ; 1 ,,-i r BuIl0ing SPard - - - - l CT- - - - - - - - _I ~ Y - -~r_ i- - r - - -t I~h) '~-1 I I_i I-~ Suers fame IoSueer limit I?-~'-.._----__~ --r- - t - ~•r-~ - - ----rl I t ri r ~ - ~ I,' ~ Fen ~.CA/ PI I ` - - - - - _ _ ~ - - -I- - - - ' - - ' _ _ - -+.-I- --i-~ _ - _ '1- - - - - - - --i . _ - -i'- 1- - - - - - - -I ~ ~ ~ 1 -Tr il` cr.Fael ._~''t<' fdPFl ` - - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - -4- _ n - -i- ~ - - - _ - - - - -j. ~-I 1 t rr t ; - - - - -I- - - - - - - - - - - -r- - - - - - - I - -(?+r• - - - - - _r- I- - - 1-_ - - i-ri`I-T- r 1 I i 1 - - Feel tv1PH _I-. _ ~ I S.I-T- r I r 1 r r 1 t-t I~T- - - - - - - • -I • - i- - ~ - - T`i' 1_r-_'._ _ _....._.-1~-If- _ ~r ~ r r r I I I r .71-. I .-__C" ---1~r tT"'~t i- ? --Lt' a>%S_-~___ f"-_._ 1 1-r- 1 t r ~1 1 i:emniaDlf lrom dlslance ol: ~+_I - _ `.J F=~--.Z~_-~s==~~_'-_----• l r C--------^---- - - Suter Name - - - - - - ~ _ ' 1 Y _ ~ _ _ _ _ ~_.L_!_ I i I r t , t lG 1 - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - ` - ~ _ R?,t _.~r~ - _ ~rli~ a _ _ - - - - - - - ` - - - - - - fir- - - - - _ - - - - - - - _J r I I I %err: 0 fl Haading_~ - - - " _ _ - - - - - - - - - i- ~ - - - ;~r;:1-_'l t sIL ~1 " r - - _ _ t- t r i l r I r- n } --L_ r-t- s t• L l L ~ t~r r7. Iltadn,g ~ _ Is E~. - 1 fr- rrr ~_%..I.nn._---f C fr r i~ ~r rc--~ .1 tc~- f_~•_~r=~• =t"1-r i -r-i_t - '/~_Feel:On.. HeaAin ~J - - I r--I j-- r 1111._i !-r~~i-r-i r II ----------------_-___-r- _ _a;l , .,.11 ; -r 1,_==l=rT-r-i--~--_-.~C=-'~rlr ~r I--,r / I , I saes On_.-..--'~ Heading _ ! _L- ov- - ~ ' ~{_.1r(-."~rr r ~ r -1r.1 i _ 1 / f.. ^ITI L11=!'..i; .•'.Ir',. i.,ll I I I I. , /V APPP.OV~ DEiIYI I ELpPRO~'C ~ DE\: ' . ~ ~ ~ City Manager Inspecto Date Date S~i~6~ ~l ~l(1 A- ~~pR04= I N ~L~ ~ ~ ~LGiC~ :JLn~,: ='R0:'.. ~ DE:iY+ ~ ~ ~ Plannin~• Le cment City Cuuncil Date y/~3~~ Date Route to aoove for special approva? per code Ge^.:ral Siens APPLIC :IO:. FOF. aD.'ERTISIKG Pc.R_'iIT Cit~• o: Richfield, *:innesota General Date 4/18/86 Zoning Commercial Sign Erected - !'es ~o X Fee Terry Feldmann's address of Sign 914 and 918 77 1/2 St. Proprietor .cane Imports. Inc. DBA Sign Erector Signcrafters address 7775 Main Street Northeast Tv~e o: SiEn TJesi.n ~ I ~:eatile= Cover Lif2i:t:n~ hall _ Single Face 4 Clear Lexon x ! Constant °rojecling X Double race ,rested L_xon Flawing Ground ~ ~ Mu1L=-F aced (X Plastic Covered ~ i Rey:olri^.g koof I ~ Aerial/3'_iWp I ~ S:.aded ~ ~ Traveling X Pedestal j Searc^li~at f ! Zi? Lite Caangeable l banner/Pea Hants ~ X ~ Otaer Stainless ~ 1 Otaer(F..Ypla_n) Tea:?crar ~ I Portable Frame: ~ : steel column y ~X ~ Si, Colors _railer ~ ~ T ~'f ~ Post ~ Red, cahite arc blue ~liuWinated Yes do harts see bli:e~ri nt __ect_icsl Ce^=raclor Si anerafters :,dcr.ess 7775 n+a; ~ gtr~ot 'acne 571-2aa5 J /fir ~~Zeas Lroae.ly 0:.-ler or his Sent Sigaat;:re ~/,v""~/(~:.;•` i ?acne 8'0'o-50Q2 Es=~.._ted Cast S1.500 S•_~. ;;'d1h17'2"?:e;_._ 25*"t~2ota1 Scua:_ =eat 60 ~CS~LIC^. C: C!'1: advertiS2»_nC SC:LIC:ilr2 In relati0AS:1I? CO tIIe adjaC221C Dl:ilG^.;S, S_aE`:aIKS, Cl1rDS, rOaGtia~•5, OVerilead ulil~t,: ? ~n°_S, Ve^'_Cle t:OVe:.^.2a l,nes, Or ~L'bliC L2Cai~ie~ On cramming l~ilil 51~,^.i:Kant Gi~eflSlOnS a::~ attaC:le~i her°_LO Oi ~alOr 51onS. ~`.:.^.Or S~nS aS de:ined on pace 2. Tuo blue?tints of the sign, bil'_boa:c, cr outdoor adve:rising structure censlruclion ?1~rs: i^Cludini S?eCifiCaL1.OI1S, list OI CSte=i11S, and e::plici_ anC:lOri^.5 Or faSte::_n~ Qe13=15 and a co?~• cf•tae stress saeels, calculations, color of sign slr•.:clure. DOeS Lt a ~iin CODy relaCe SOlc l J l0 file bl:SineSS, _..^.S ~it:aiOP., Or aCliVil} COaCI:CIeC~. On tae rte wises? ves ~ ~ . '+~:1_l t::^.e s'_ slr,:ct:.rc. or b:_li:oar~' castr:c_ 3r_ s__-_ d:sl_nce u.^.der, a:c::..d, or over .or .sate access b• ?erscns d~sl_nec or ?assi:g lh~~subjec_ ?re.ises'. no , ~1~ n??l~~canl's S.:_natu:e a:.c T~ lle wit.^. : ~r:a ttdrnev for Terry FelGmann' s I:naorts , Inc _ Date aaril /6 1986 Pacne `:..-bcr 339-7v'33 i °/S3` . p:.EASF SEE 3:!'rBSE SIL'E :'Oct SIG': LOC TIO\ S'r.:'7CH Siver* i:andric!{so-:/3~i1,~'.in5 Cfticial -_866-SC61 - (ypera~ons Sites Trucks ~ lased Care -identification Signs 1 issan M • ~e YieT..~nlp tti.li. ~v:lu ~ , _ . B. _ i> 1 1 _ _ a y y. t• f' 4 -...JJY f, ` S J k r'~ ~ s S~'A 4 I C D 1lun~meriL B ~ ~ ~ . ~ . mush alt - - ~ B ~ _ _ _ ~ - - A A G t c ~ D i_ ~ - , p' ~ ~ f ~ C • t FLUSI~' WAIL 1E~ fiQ 5~1. Ft- 30 Sq• Ft. iVtONLrn pYL~~ to sal. F~• :j~;-,- i ~ a. r~ r~ 13 ~ i ,~r 1. in' ,y, t, 1 , r, .,r 1 d,.Cl\l Which la alSP°oity)~~~.' ` ott•alte wcation nonmmad,atary ao( Ot P 4~' " ~ . - a~+d for each " ~ + tactlUY gin 1aClift • to them X 592 INptS 60466 ,~RSc f J ZION SURVEY ~ , , A of the busing to I N ~ INFOEtM be eneral dia9ra ~andat4ons as .A+ T- "r1CA110 AN should s 9 w your racom rI / , the plot 4eraiY and must sho _ 0 + ' ppSIOHS: ~ and ad{acent prop drawings: 1 + , ns. scale U58d °n ' ` of news 9 oximate ~4LlOWING • , + + t indicate the aptN $HOW '[HE ertY• + + ' (J SNOUtO busrness,prop ( pLtJ"( PIA oscant that t sl! buRdin9s found on the 4. pt alt - propem' (1 the bus ness buildin sewer tie location oats. abet EachL on ad'IOinin9tn relation to acs. traffic st9 ~ itdin¢tsl curatety t.n. tr andl~ Service ` lain Bu lotted goad bstNCtionR . ' uitdtn9s sI of man•m ° ° , ' " nY natur tots. used c cn t~~,ghbo~~9 ProPe~ which ( nas etc. elks. Parkin9lude any s+$~ sho d118ctiona111ow of , , sdew sin w ~ , ,dicate o 9nve tie cansund d ro4enY• and ~ , nuances a h to the 9 pes,denrial' circle sash swn in t + re large a suEets whit O Sscandary piSns. 4abe15 9M1 ~mbet sbo ands rosi9natc Qrimary ondin9 pascia ~ attic. as Cl ~ locaaccordi 9°t ~ ~ `r~P ® ~ombet. i.e. 1s ~ , end ~ + .ha tecomm ded sae aeh side o radNS ~ + , ( is tecommen uesdonnaire~ as oO a hoar sn ~ttof Wn~awavvol all buiidin9s^ m. iN ~ ` ;ec$on ho ht of lot hook-up w ,hould be s dtn,ansians hox at upP°r ti9 alecuicat + fha exterior acts where coincide snow in ecluancs to north with Rnol the gowar so + + + ndicate t~ tuL et the^~ + ' (~S} ns and num~ ~J(n s ere. t+dicate th as + + r ~a made xiatin8 s9 , + Show location t the 4ueshonnaaa-G INf ORN1Aj~ON ~ ~ •r , Sachon 8 o S ~ + ( -,kith Ol1.OW?N Speed E P40VlDE SNE f ~~udin9` t.,m't + ' AS to Street MpH Street Nam 7 ~j _Feet ~ n MPH . „ t. ~s j~/-_peet .•'r+~n`- MPH , " , o ~i j'" p, ~eet MPH \ -`Peet B C n ~ distance ot: • U"~ tNiable from Headin9~ Nam idea a L(1 , . gufldM9 ~tsst rl Headin9~ Feet:t)n t,tasdinti s 'JMMENSS ~ t' " ~ J il/ ~°PPOtic DE,dy~ ~'~DP?Z0~'E ~ DE,:fI , ~ ~ - Cit}• Manager. Inspector `/6 . Date Date l °G J~r~J e??PROVE ~ ~ ~eNl ~ ~ : A.T'°RO~'E U DE ;'1 Pianninb Lep~rtment City Council Date `'{'23 « Date Route to above for special approval Der code Gen_ral Silas APPL.CiTIO:: FOR AD~'cRISi:~G PE3:`IIT Citt• of c2ichfield, ::innesota General Date 4/18/86 Zoning Commercial Sign Erected - Tes ;.o X Fee 920 West 78th Street Terry Feldmann's Address of Sign (adjacent to 77 1/2 St. )Proprietor :~aae Imports, Inc. DBA Sign Erector Signerafters Address 7775 Main Street Northeast 'r'voe 'of Sien Design ~ j:eather Cover LiII_^ting hall ~ SinFle Face Clear Lexon X I Cor_stant ~?.ojecting X Double :ace =rested Lexon ~ Flashing Ground I iiulti-Faced I X ~ Plastic Covered ( i 3evoly_^.g Roof ~ Aerial/31inp I I S aded I ~ Traveling . X Pedestal ` Searchli gist } ~ neon 1 ____f Zip Litz _ Changeable { banner/?eaaants X Otnersteel column Otner(F..Yp_~_n) _ Te:cporary Portable Frame: ~ Si;n Colors ;railer ~ T ~ A ~ rost ~ Red, white anc blue I= Z1suW_naLed YES No watts see blueor?nt ~r_cal Ce^.tractor Siancra=tern Adc=ess 7775 .fain St:esr.?none 571-24Q5 'i ,,99 ,vcr ~neas Yrop$rt} Owner or his Age^.t Signature /~.~~~^-~~~'ls1".~o'''i`~ Pnare 5~a-097$ I'I Es__~:a_ea Cost $1,500 Si_nl.~Ta~•tn 17'2'::e~_ 26 Total Scuar-_ Feet 60 ?osition of the advertisement structure in relationship to the acjacenr build. gs, sidewa::{s, C:,:~~5, ~OaGtiaYS, Overhead llti,._~: 1-^e5, Vehicle ~:.OV°^:.el:t llneS, Or '~L1D11C IaC~I-~1eS On • Gra»1.n; ~1t1 Slg~iilCant CiIIlenSJ.OP.S a^.C attaCi7ed ne.er0 OL mayor 51onS. ..1P,Or Si,,:1S aS def i::ed on Dace Z . Tao blueprints Of L:le 5i~:., OiZljOa_C, C: OutdOOr advertising Structure COnSt.uCtlon Dlans: _^ciuc:n; saecifications, list o cate:ials, and e::plicir anchoring or faste:;n; details and a coo~• of the stress sneers, calculations, color o sign structure. Does the sign copy relate solel~~ to the business, _.stitution, or act:viry concocted on t he YreWises? ves .::e s_c^, strucrur~, or ba_~o~r~ rest__.._ ~r_ s'__._ distance ur.de-, aroar.~, or over .a: sc_e access by persons dest_::e~ fc: or pass_-:g _iie subiecr prenises": no ~,ppliczTt's Signature and ::tle ~:ita =:r~ Attor:?°V for Ter'rv FelGmanri's Imports, 7no• Date Aril 1~, 1986 ?hone ::u~bcr 339-7633 8/b3~ ptZASE SE.. Rr.•raSE SZDE :uR SIG.`: LOCATIO:: Siy"iCH . Sivert 'renCrickson/~uilding O:t;cisl - 566-5061 i~ Nissan Operations Sills De rlet°sciip Tdenr.ification Sims Trucks & Used Cars F'ylun S - I Flesh ~i':di . ~ _ D ' _ Monument B ~.i 11 y m 1 _ I ~ - _ /R _ I . ~ . G,~ . _ - ~ - . . D ~(~mununc i B ~i ~ I~ Y . . y i . :PYLON 1~10~(IJ1~IL•'N"I' FLliSII tiVALL tit) Sit. Fc. :3i) Srl. t'c. fic) Sy. Ft.. :3r) Sri. Ft_ i3t) Sri. Fr_ :3i) Sr~_ >:t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 15 I , _ ~Eag6TAL ~ ~ - .I _ - Y acenl S ecilyl- ~ tf~~1 ^ ~G _ ~ WRichisal P laulrty and for each oll•sue locauun~~, tpp1e~'atel awl ' • r tl NOI$ 60466 to the maintachttvr ~ Y"'T"1 1 1 f REST, • PLOT PLAN _ ' ' , • r' 1 l^, t 1 1 ~~1 1 1 ''"'I'r , r + - 1I r 1 1 1 11 II l~ i 1 ~~-r- l 1 AT10N SURVi±Y -r'l ' _ - - IhFORM ~.._:_---r____:_}_i~---_ f t , ~ ~'~;-~t' { , 1~-?0 eneral diagram of the business t j f ' ~ ; 1 1 1: t ' ~ 1 Ilptl$: The Dlol plan shpOld be a 9 our recommendations as to t ----'"f ~ 1 _ ~ , erly and must show Y ~ , , _ t 1 _ Ind ad'lacent prof d _ ~ , , i , + , j ~.~-~~~t + r t ' ' ' t new srgns. It' ~ 1 , r "I ~ r --t 1 ' on drawings: f ~~i I t t t 1 I t t t t t, t t l_J_l.- t/ roximate scale used ~ _ _ •-t-~"`•1 ~i.~.~~~r~~.~'," , 1 t 1 ' t T, ~1 ~t 1_~__ icafethe aPD _ ,IIt1G: _ _ _ .~I...._'.+~~~ r r + + + f I t 1 .fs-•-•^--T,_.,r~,...------'-'~ ~ lT PLAN 5}IOULO SHOW THE FOLLOW 111--- 1 t I f,'1'~-. 11- , ' 1 found on the bustness properly. 1 t~ T ~ ,,~~~y"iT I ' - t~:J 1 f i Ti yl 1 n, . ' `~1~-l, nation of alt buildings I~'t- 1 1 I ~ ~-~-i-j•~-1 1 I ~ ~ 1--I I ' f I I -j-}r--j` , ~I Each1• ro env (lt is important that these T--!•~, i--{--}-f I + ' I l ' f t _ A 1 - f I t , on adjoining P p lr I ' - ti Building(sl in relation to the business bn'ad'n9ewer , ' ~ r 1.ti _ ngs De plotted accuralefy 1•e• trees. Naltic sig •T~_____.._.-- { , _ , 1 1 1 I ' 't~~ t +atural or man-made obsuuctions. _ r , 4 I ~ ~ , ~""~-1 t ~1 1 I I Y ac. used car lots. Parts andlor service a- _ 'aY 1 _ arking lots, hboring Property which ~ _ - ~ t ; ! i I I ~ ~ - le sidewalks. P t--(, , 1~ ~ t+ I ! fi r I ~ 1 t ~ i ' _ `4`' - t I t t r 1 t t t - ~ _ i 4_ ,ces and d+ivewaYS. Include any signs on neig , rr ~ ~ I q„ - t f , ~ •---j j' ,i,~-it-'-try' li~_-11,L_}IL-_,St i-tti t r r' 1 t ge enough to be considered. +o eny, and show directional flow of ~ t l - ~ - ~ I~~ t 1~ Hale streets which bound the p p Residential. ~xti r f i`"~_ ~ f - ~ ' ' ' ' ' I ! t Iyllt as D P+imarv ? Secondary O _ , l 1 _ si n number shown in , _ : -•1-.----~~' -+-%^-f'tT'.y-'~n.G...... :commended location of them c rresPO©n9®gd circleFa c es~ands ` ~ ~ ~ t~ ~1 t ' ~ :ommes+ded site according ~1 f 1~- 1 1; T~I_I f f ' I f ,_T -,r' ~T .l ' hne on each srde of the number, i.e. an^'^'Q~~ ~ l ~ . t ~L-..-}- ' ,n vll of questionnaire: i•e• ~ _oorner radius ~ ~ t-"vr-' T~ i-•~ """1' 1 ' d be shown by a wavy , _ - , + ~ _t~.- 1- ' I t _ 1, l ' ~ ~ txferior dimensions of all buildingser right of form. v„{II ' ' t - 1 ~ ~r~ - - ~ ~ n artow in box at uPP ` . 't , ~ r f Ite north with a ower spew whets electrical hook•uP 'j `t~~G 1 I t - ~ ' ' f f r f T ,ts the Iota • n at the 0 - ~t I u-~•-'~ q~ r ' ' ' ' Ide-as PS , r "TT 1 ~ ,-1 f 1 , , T ins and num4!r tharp~n t E cants to cofndda , ~ ~ I ~ r 1 T" .location o1 existing s 9 (EJ ~ ~ i 1 1 l ~ -t _ ' i the questionnaire- ~7 r ~ ~ t 1 Section 8 0 ~ t ~ t I t l Its I s--- WING INFORfi1ATIDN: - 1. ~-4-; t-iT~~y I ' OE 1'HE FOLtO ' ' `~Zi--I ---c'G~ _ ".-.1 - -~rTl~ 1?-~--= ' ' PROUI Distance- Speed ' _ ' - - - ++1L---r - f _ Building limit j`_- - ~'-~---'I f '1'"`{ 1 Ir~• t I ~ I + r r r to SUeal ~ "--{--~'-t••~'• ~1 1 ~ -_{}.--11}' + ~ ~ 1 1 r + f I 1 r. t 1~ 1 1 ~ _t,_1' 1 1 t r t , , r 1 ' j Strett Name SMPH t ' . ~ + r ' y,t, ~ ' 11 ' ~ --iiT - -$^r t ~ i ' ' ~ t t r It .Feet - ~ L~-~ + y~-',,. f r ~ y^ l~ •t.. - - r r , I _ l 1 t 1 t 1 , s( 1 . t. „ 1 1 I I -1 I-t r f l 1 t=r r 1 1 1 , ~ .,MPH ~ T ~~,Feet P1i Y _t ~ 1 f 1 ~ I l 1 1 ! 'i-- • ? - , , t ,`.,Feet -----~M l{~' ~1 1 i -Y _ ' 1 y ';;~=:I~r„ , r T ! ' ' ling Identifiable from distance ot: ~ t , , - t~'r li 1 , ~ r n„ , . ~t Sweet Name ~ t t ~ i b _ , [.•c T ~'t f d Heading ~J --`I - ~~j ~,'~'r ~ ^ •t t 1 t t L t.. _ J.. , r / - C et: jl t t t t• FH-1'it'v"+'~r._L ~Fe On._ ~ Heading..~~ `J 1 r sj:, '`f' -.'"'•'l.r t 1 t 1 .5,~ r FeeC On...--- Neading~.---^' _-""""..I r I I " ~ . ^..L` -Feet: On ~ ~ Headinfl sr~- _ l l ' r r 1-1--1 r ~ _ ' " ~ ~ ~ lion nat immndlately adjacent YYhleh Is a7S~ ~ ~ ~ to the ma n1lacltU h oti•slte {oc~.r ~ PLAN ~ ~ _ _ ~ Rf:STr ILLINOIS 60466 ~ PLOT ' ' ~ I 1 _r_1 ? t -''t-~ 1 ~ _ _ t , , ~t " r ';ATION ANO INFORMATION 5URVSY _ - ~ ~ ; I eneral diagram of the business 1 iot plan s~loutd be a 9 iIONS:the D and must show Your recommendations a` to r 1 ! and adjacent Property J d... Q - - 1 1 d - G-.••~ i-t-° ~ 11 new signs. ate scale used on drawings: ! , ` ~ l._ 1 ,y.,`or - • 1 ~ - licata the rtpProxim 1 - _ N SHOULD SNOW THE FOLLOWI pOerty. t _ , 1 _ s lound an the business P P ~ ' ~ a~ {I- r ~ y1t PIA - ' ' >cation of a0 building 1 1 i i i Eachj• roaenv In is imaortant that these t I + - n adjoining C sewer ~ 1 } i 1 1-1--- 1 8uitdinglsl o in relation to the business bnia }log(s).) ~ ~ 1 ~i i ngs be Plotted accurately e, trees, 1rs11ie sig ~ ~ r t ~ 1 ~i n•made obsuuciions. I• a L . r~'~~/~~~ lawrat or ma arts andtor service tl-'"' - ~ ~ t T ' "S-1 used car fors, P roPCrtY which ~ ~ Y t ~ • ~•rc• arkin9 fats, hboringP 'Ii, ~ t ~ S~' -•`•-{`C to sider+alks. D si ns on nci9 ~ 1 t ,ces and drivewaVS• Include anY 9 and show directional slow of • _ ge enough to be considered. ro ertY• _ ` i ~ ` Pesidential. ~ t nate sweets which b SzcondarY ~ ns. label end circle Beth sign at ~ ~ •1 t . as O Pnmary D ondin9~gn ®nlber shown Os _ t ' nded location of iheto conesp ~ Fastia @ 1 i t tcomme site according _ ~ ~ ` ' :ommended i c. U le ate. - ~ ` In VI10l questionnaire; } , ~ 1 wn by a wavy line on each side oloo ne u Bdeus; & a^~~~ i be sho II bui{dings" - . ! t t dimensions of a er right of form. will 1 t l ' I~t ~tY Exterior t ~ I-, r i 'T , 1 ...tti"' lu oath with en snow mower source where electrical hook•uP ~ - ~ j-f'~~;,. 1 • n of the 4 ~ 1 Idathas ocaP.$ si ns and num er ther9an aBpuenee to coincide - ~ r I . ,t-~ T v I ~ 1 ~y ,eta , r _ ~ •j- • location dQ exhe'quesuonnaire- - ~ _ - . ~ ' ' ~ 1 ; r Section 8 Q i C- 1'. - t- ~i h, i / ..t t i 1.- G INfORh1ATi0N' ~ ~-Z- _ TT - _ _ E FOLLOWiN 1 - r 'r 7~' ~ ~ I ~ Y -T-I _ t it_' PROVIDE 111 pistance-' Speed _ _.j._`j t-- - - ; i _ 1 1 , ~ ' i 13uildln4 Limit ~ -j- _ ~1~ ~ - _ - - '-T r to Street _ t.: - ` ~ MPH ~"'T_1 r U{, _ ` 1 i t t Sweet Nam_ef ~fect _ 1 ~ 1 1 i t ~ ' ~ Feet (~+„MPH t - _L ~ 1 L t . 1 t/ r r 1 1 1 Feet - - - _ - MPH ' t - i t .a s - a-- ~ ~ = s,.tJ ti f ~ y ....r" ~ 1 - t LJ fl t~'~ ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 i ri t- nrv 1 distance _ ~ Y ~ r ~C}.tiµ t 7 ling identifiable Irom _ _ - _ - . - _ r Name ~ r t 1 ~ ~ueet Heading- ~J ' .1 - - _ 7 r v - et: Qn ' I Heading--""" r { r ~ T 1' ~ ` , J _..w.... ~Fe 4J r t~ Heeding-~"~'--~ ~ YFeet:Onr s' t t f rtl nl'. ~FteC On ~ Heading--^" I - t ...+-~^""""e"e ~ _ ~Gfeet: Ong.----- ~ - j t/,F . , to the mam lacdn~i„~ ~ , . i. 1441i~ViJ uuwuv 1 • ~r 1 PLOT PLAN 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + - t - 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 ~-1'---jf-+t_'^_ ~ 1 1 1~.. ,,,1"~ I 1~ ;ATION ANO INFORMATION SURVE_______. - T I ~ r eneral diagram of the business 1 ~ 1-~ 1 - . iIONS: She Plot plan should be a 9 our recommendations as to """1 _ I + 1 1 , ro ertY and must showy r 1 1 1" r 1~ 1 and adisl:ent P P ~ d_ © 1 1 1 + ~ -~"'-1 1 1 1 i 1 ' ' ' ~ ~ ' ` ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '1 I 1' 1 d new signs. 1 i i It ' 1 1 f t+ roximste scale used on drawings 1 t ~ ,e•;.1 i 1 1 It - ~ ucate the apP ~ 1 i ~ V r + 1 1- p+A' ~ ` ~ 1T PLAN SN011LO SHOW THE FOIIOWING: 1 1 ' ' _I 1 t- --1=~"~ t r - !a eAY. { 1 I 1 (cation of ail buildings lound on the buslnesa p P 1 1 1 , ~ j I Ir ~ ~ i Each). ro env (It is imoortant that these ~ 1 ~ i 1 , ' f i`T' ~ I ' ' ~ 1 1 1 r t ~ I 1 on adjoining P P 1 i l' ~ 1 1 1 i i 1 1 ' 1 guilding(s1 in relatwn to the b t~atfic si9nialsinsewer 1 1 1 , ' ` f ngs De plotted accurately , t 1 1 1 ' ' manmade obstructions. i•e. Uees. Ly` 1 1 t .+J iatural or arts andlm service 1 1 f 1 + 1 f. 1 t;y,• , i f f u Itc• lots, used car Iots,hboring DroPertY which 1 I 1 , { 1 ""rli ~ i y 1 ~ to sidewalks. Darkin9 si ns on neig ~ ' 1 t I ~I i 1- 1 1 1 1 ces and dhto be tons•dered.nY g and show directional llow of _ .d , 1 ~ + 4 -{~=oi + ' 3eenou9 ` r 1 I 1 _ ~ ResidentlaL , I a ~ tact streets which b Se andarY oD ~ _ y ~ 1 1 , _ y , 1 as O Primary ? ' ~ ~ 1 _ s, n number shown rn t 1 i• , ~ , Commended location of th to eorr®Po®ng~gd ®C1eFasc sl ands _ 1 _ "I ommended site according ( 1 n Yp of questionnaire ,i•e. ~ la etc. ~ TI 1 1 5. 1 + e shown by a waW line on each side ocothrs ~u ad us - 6 an + ` ~ ~ + ' b 1 1 1' r 1 1~ ' 1' I- 1 ~ ixteriw dimensions of all buildings- 1 ~ 1 1 ~ 1 er right of form. will , 1 ~ ; -1- • ' TI 1 1 ~'1 r ' to north with an snow in box at uPP - 1 1 1 1 ' + E + 1 - i 1 1 1 + tl • n of the Power source where elecuical hook-uP ~ i t to the Iota_ S in seauents to coincide , s 1-, 1 1 ~ t , ii ' de-as n£ and number them . tee. , "1"- `t '1 "1 1 1 location o~aisting sig `E•tJ lt9 _ : ',t'. 1 1 1 _ i f I 1 iection g of the questionnaire- i , I 1 c't"~_____,~' + 't' 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 I l f l 1 , ~ l 1 1 tl PROVIDE 7HE FDItOWINO INFORMATION: 1 1 1 1 1+ _t 1 ' ~ 1 1 7 ~1 uu~~.. t r. 1 1 1 pistanee•' Speed ' ' ' 1 'f ~ ' ' guflding Limit 1 1 ' , . , to Street 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 ~ 1 1 $ereet Name ~Faet ' ~ ' 111 + ~ 1 1 1.~.~-- 1 f 1,~~ 1 1 1 1 I, I l l ' 1 ~ 1 ~C1~'T" Feet . : -1 1 + ' ~~.Feet t 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 -Meet _.---MPH _ 1 ` .1 3' ' + 1' 1' 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 -f 1 1 1 1 1 1 f l l i l l l' ng IdenUtiable trom distance af: t ~1 1 + 1 1 1 + 1 1 1 + 1 t~+.. street Nama ~ I A ' 1 1 ' I 1 •~.1~' /7 _ Heading---~- 1 1 i ' 1 ' i ' 1 ~~1 '''1 ~ a , ~Feat:On. Heading ~ ' } , ~ r r• r t • .r~• I f . r tt t t 1 ~L' _Feet; 0 Heading S '1 1 1 1 _ I "=rr, 1" _ )~Feet:On~ , 1 1 Heading 1 r , ' ~Feet:On ~ '77~ I ' 1 + + ' ' f . . YTS: ~7 { - 7~4-~--t't"t"' ' ' f-~ n ' f CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 185 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members Of The City Council City of Richfield Subject: Setting Date of Hearing for Wine and Non- Intoxicating Malt Liquor License/Frogi's _ Family Restaurant. Council Members: The city has received an application for an on-sale wine. and non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Frogi's Family Restaurant, 6344 Penn Avenue South. As required by ordinance code, the Public Safety Department has completed the background investigation and is recommending that the city council set the hearing for this license request for the council meeting scheduled for May 27, 1986. Res tfully ubm' ted, ~ S-t~e n v i Ac ing City Ma ager SLD/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 184 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council- City of Richfield Subject: Rescheduling of Second Council Meeting In May Council Members: . The Memorial Day holiday falls on Monday, May 26, and all city offices will be closed. Chapter II, Section 2.01 Regular. Meetings, of the city ordinance provides that if any such Monday is a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next following day at the same hour and place. It is recommended that the City Council schedule Tuesday, May 27, at 7:00 P.M. as the date for the second council meeting in May. Res tfully subm'tted, iii S eri Devi Fi - Acting City Manager SD/eja • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 182 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor. and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Advertisement for Bid - Sludge Dewatering Building Council Members:. The adopted 1986 Water Utility Budget provides $432,500 for purchase of sludge dewatering equipment and the construction of a sludge dewatering plant. This will allow the water plant operating staff to dewater the solids from the plant to a more dense form for disposal, and ultimately decrease the costs for sludge removal. At the January 28, 1986. city council meeting, the city council. approved the contract in the amount of $162,000 for the purchase of sludge dewatering equipment. Since that time, the city staff has been preparing the plans. and specifications for the building to house the presses and improve the sludge removal process and procedures. This building will be a two story addition to the east side of the Water Plant. the The plans and specifications have been reviewed by public safety, community development and community services staff. It is anticipated bids would be opened in mid-June with city council action on award of contract tentatively scheduled for the end of June. The building is estimated to cost between $175,000-$250,000, and funds are provided in the Water Utility Fund budget for this purpose. Construction is estimated to begin in July with the work to be completed by year end 1986. The Community Services Director will be available to answer any questions about the proposed work or time table. It is recommended the city council approve the plans and specifications and authorize the advertisement for bids. Res ~ tfully ubmit d, , ~'sl.e L. Uevich Act ng City Manager SDleja / CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office. of City Manager Council Letter No. 181 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Purchase in Excess of $5,000. Council Members: 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. There is one such item on the agenda for May 12, 1986. Asphalt Patching Materials Each year the city sealcoats approximately 1/7 of the city streets. Prior to this work, city crews cut and patch cracks in the area to be sealcoated. A Hiway Mix is used for this process. City parking lots and city streets, where street cuts have been made for items such as water and sewer utilities, are also patched throughout the year. For this work a Driveway Mix is used. With both the Hiway Mix and the Driveway Mix, a liquid, known as 551 Tack, is applied to the area prior to patching. It is estimated 100 ton of Hiway Mix, 200 tons of Driveway Mix and 200 gallons of 551 Tack will be used during 1986. Funding for these materials is provided in-the adopted street maintenance budget. Three quotations were received for the Hiway Mix and the Driveway Mix: Vendor Hiway Mix Driveway Mix Commercial Asphalt. $18.25/ton $19.03/ton McNamara Co. $20.25/ton $24.75/ton Bituminous Roadways $21.05/ton $22.00/ton Because the city picks up the asphalt materials on an "as needed" basis, 551 Tack, which generally is comparably priced, is secured from the same vendor providing the asphalt materials. It is recommended the city council authorize a 1986 master purchase order for asphalt patching materials, as outlined above, from Commercial Asphalt Company for an estimated total purchase price of $6,431.. Res e fully ubmi ed, e en vich Acting City Manager SD/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 180 Agenda May 12, 1986 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of .Richfield Subject: Volunteer Recognition/Energy Awareness Commission Council Members: On April 18, 1986 members of the Richfield Energy Awareness Commission were presented with special "Volunteer Certificates of Appreciation" from Department of Energy. and Economic Development Commissioner Mark Dayton in recognition of their contributions .toward conserving energy in Minnesota. The City of Richfield was one of the Governor's original 15 "energy council" communities in Minnesota and the city has often been recognized for its conservation accomplishments. The members of the Energy Awareness Commission have been invited to attend the May 12, 1986 city council meeting so that the-city council may also present them with Certificates of Appreciation for their energy conservation efforts. Resb,~ tfully submi ed, ~ r teven L. evic Acting City Manager SD/eja s ~ f CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION HERBERT DOTY ENERGY AWARENESS COMMISSION Presented in appreciation to members of the Richfield Energy Awareness Commission for their outstanding energy conservation accomplishments, es eciall in the area of rec clin and home energy improvementsp y Y g Done this 12th day of May, 1986. i Ivan Ludeman Mayor Pro Tempore i