Loading...
11-26-84 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA _At5 Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 420 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Public Hearing Regarding Food and Drink Vending Fees Council Members: There is a public hearing scheduled for November 26, 1984 regarding the fees set by the City Council for food vending, drink vending, and tobacco vending machine-s. - During the budget hearings, a resolution which included fees for all 1985 licenses was presented to the City Council. Proposed fees for food products, drink and tobacco vending machines were included in this resolution. It was noted that these fees would be subject to a subsequent hearing, due to a • new state statute provision which took effect July 1, 1984. This law mandated that thirty (30) days mailed notice must be sent to such vending machine licensees. A timely notice of the November 26, 1984 hearing was mailed by the City Clerk's office to the licensees covered by the statute (See attached notice). Subsequent to that mailing, a study was requested by the affected vending machine licensees. Meetings were held between representatives of the Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council, Clayton LeFevere of the City Attorney's office, and Public Safety Director Tom Morgan, to discuss the proposed fees and to prepare justification of administrative and vending machine inspection costs. (Pursuant to State Statute, a community may not use license fees to generate revenues generally in excess of the total costs incurred by the community for such licensere.) As a result of those meetings, the City and the Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council have agreed to the license fee structure for such machines as proposed by the City in the attached resolution. Certain license fees have been increased from the original resolution which became a part of the budget, and certain other fees have been reduced as a result of the cost analysis related to the licensure process for these particular vending machines. 0 -2- City administration recommends that the fee be $18 for all food products, drink and tobacco vending machines. This ($18.00) is the city cost to inspect and regulate these machines. The fees listed in the City Clerk's notification were the fees proposed for 1985• Based upon the review of the cost to regulate, the recommended fee is $18 for all catagories covered by this council letter. It is recommended that subsequent to the public hearings, the City Council adopt the attached resolution proposing certain food, drink and tobacco licensing fees for the year 1985• Respectfully submitted, John G. rtw ght City Manager JGC:sb cc: Acting Administrative Services Director City Clerk Public Safety Director 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING CERTAIN PORTIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 6957 IN THE FOLLOWING RESPECTS WITH REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS OF APPENDIX OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF'THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND RECINDING THOSE PORTIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 6957 WHICH HEREIN APPLY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: Section 7. Commercial Business and Trade Licenses and Permits. TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING TOTAL VALUATION FEE SCHEDULE FEE (5) Vending Machine 6.01 a. Food vending machine 1 year $ 18 requiring coin or token b. Other food vending Per year for each food dispensing machine unit in the machine $ 18 c. Ice vending machine 1 year $ 18 (9) Tobacco 6.11 (Min nesota Statutes 461.12) a. Retail Sale and Per calendar year or fraction distribution thereof. $ 18 b. Vending machine Per calendar year or fraction thereof $ 18 (10) Soft Drink 6.13 a. Vending machine 1 year $ 18 Per year or fraction thereof per each additional machine $ 18 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of November, 1984. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST : 0 Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk 1LJ l?n M N d' Lfl Lf) Am bL 5 4 O ¦? E a? ?- c'a 0 ? c CU L. O ¦ O 0 O 1 CO • October 12, 1984 To: All Vending Machine Licensees Subject: Public Hearing on Proposed Fee Increases *NOTICE* *NOTICE* *NOTICE* *NOTICE* *NOTICE* Chapter 393 of the Minnesota State Session Laws of 1984 requires that hearings be held on the following categories of licensure: A. 6.01 food and ice vending machines, and B. 6.11 tobacco vending machines and C. 6.13 soft drink vending machines In order to comply.with.state law, the City of Richfield is holding a PUBLIC HEARING in conjunction with the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on Monday, November 26, 1984 at 7:00 P.M.- in the council chambers at 6700 Portland Avenue. Present (1984) Rate Proposed (1985) Rate 6.01 Food a. Food Vending machine required coin or token $17 b. Other food vending machine $12 C. Ice vending machine $17 6.11 Tobacco a. Sale & distribution $4/month or $48 year b. Vending machine $10 6.13 Soft Drink a. Vending machine 1 year $28 b. Each additional year $12 $18 $13 $18 $4.25/month or $51/year $11 $29 $13 Please plan on attending this hearing if you have comments or questions regarding these proposed fee increases or call licensing staff at 869-7521/extensions 240 through 247 between 8:00 A.M. and 4:30 P.M. Monday through Friday. Cites lerk telephone: 869-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 419 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Designation of Auditor to Conduct Audit of 1984 Financial Records Council Members: The City has received a proposal from the firm of Cummings, Keegan & Co. for auditing services for the 1984 financial records. This company has served as Richfield's auditor for the past four years. The proposed cost for the 1984 audit is $20,000 (a 7.2% increase). The cost for the 1983 audit was $18,660 and the cost of the 1982 audit was $17,370. The 1985 budget includes an appropriation of $21,000 for this service. • The City Charter, Section 2.08 provides that "the City Council shall provide for an audit of the City's accounts at least once a year by a State department in charge of such work or by a certified public accountant." In 1980, when the Council authorized retention of Cummings, Keegan & Co., an interest was expressed in retaining this firm for several years to provide continuity in the audit and to permit the auditor to develop a familiarity with Richfield's financial procedures. The audit of the City's-overall financial management practices as well as the accounting records has been carried out in a very pro- fessional mannter. City staff plans to prepare a scope of work and seek proposals from auditing firms during 1985 to again establish a long-term relationship for this service, whether with the Cummings, Keegan & Co. or some other firm. Either a staff committee or a Council/Staff Committee would then interview those selected firms and make a recommendation to the Council for selecting the best proposal. City staff had originally planned to seek proposals during 1984 to select an auditing firm to begin a 5-year-term relationship. However, with the resignation of the Administrative Services Director midway through the 1984 calendar year, this assignment had to be postponed. 0 -2- It is recommended that the City Council approve the proposed contract of the Cummings, Keegan & Co. at the November 26, 1984 Council meeting. JGC:sb cc: Finance Manager Acting Administrative Services Director i 0 ,FAMES J. KEEGAN, C.PA. JOHN M. FREES. C.PA- JEFFREY D. EMERICK, C.PA. ROGER S. WHERRY C.PA. ALD CUMMINGS, C.PA. ( RETIRED) Cummings, Keegan & Co. Certified Public Accountants 6800 France Ave. So. - Suite 465 - Minneapolis, MN 55435 Phone (612) 922-3622 October 29, 1984 City of Richfield City Council c/o John Cartwright City Manager 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Council Members: MEMBERSOF • PRIVATE COMPANIES PRACTICE SECTION OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS - MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS This letter is to confirm the arrangements for our examination of the financial statements of City of Richfield for the year ending December 31, 1984. We will examine the financial statements of the various funds and accounting groups of The City of Richfield, Minnesota, The City of Richfield Police Relief Association and The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the year to end December 31, 1984. Our examination will be in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and will include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we consider necessary in the circumstances. While the objective of our examina- tion is the expression of an unqualified opinion on the aforementioned financial statements, an opinion may have to be qualified or denied as the facts and circumstances dictate. The ordinary examination leading to the expression of an opinion on financial statements is not designed to disclose defalcations and other irregularities, nor can it be relied on for this purpose. However, if such irregularities come to our attention during the examination, we will discuss them with you to determine what course of action to take. • Your accounting department personnel will be available to assist in preparing certain audit schedules and data, locating various supporting documents in the files and typing confirmations and the final audit report. Fees for these services are at our standard hourly rates and will be billed to you, plus out-of-pocket costs, monthly. These invoices are payable on presentation. A service charge of 1 1/2% per month is made on accounts over thirty days old. • ¦ Accounting Firms Associated Inc. City of Richfield City Manager . Page 2 Every effort would be made to.keep our fees to the minimum consistent with the service requirements of the engagement. Assuming that the City and the two related entities have accounting records which are complete, balanced, reconciled and well documented as of December 31, 1984, and that City per- sonnel would be available to assist in preparing certain audit schedules and data, locating various supporting documents in the files and typing confirma- tions and the final audit report, our charges for the various audit examina- tions for the year ending December 31, 1984 would not exceed the following maximum fees: City itself and City Police Relief Association $20,000 Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority $3,200 If at any time during the engagement, any extraordinary matters requiring an extension of our services come to our attention, we will consult with you before proceeding. If the preceding correctly expresses your understanding, please sign the enclosed copy where indicated and return it to us. We are looking forward to serving you again and working with the City staff. Sincerely, CUMMINGS, KEEGAN & CO. Partner The above is in accordance with our understanding. By Title 0 7 4 4 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 418 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Approval of Purchase in Excess of $5,000 for Replacement of Deteriorated Cooler Equipment at Lyndale Liquor Operations Council Members: By resolution of the City Council, the City Council must approve purchases when the amount exceeds $5,000. Cooler Equipment for Lyndale Liquor Store The existing beer cooler equipment at the Lyndale Liquor Store is the original equipment which was installed in the 1940's. This equipment has deteriorated beyond repair and has reached the point where it could be a potential safety hazard • for customers and liquor store employees. The existing doors are difficult to open and close because of worn bearings and slide tracks. Price quotations for complete replacement of the beer cooler doors, shelving, gravity flow flow racks and lighting fixtures have been received as follows: Liquor Store Equipment & Supply Company quoted $12,375 and Carlson Refrigeration quoted $12,900. The revised 1984 capital outlay budget for the Lyndale Store provided $10,000 for new beer cooler doors and shelving. However, the roof repairs to the Lyndale Store were not as costly as the amount budgeted so there is sufficient funding to replace the badly deteriorated cooler equipment. It is recommended that the city council approve the replacement of the beer cooler doors, shelving, gravity flow racks and lighting fixtures from Liquor Store Equipment and Supply Company in the amount of $12,375. Respectfully submitted, 9?LL ;7:?- ohn G. C tw ght • City Manager JGC/eja -Z?' // CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 417 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Temporary Ground Sign at 404 West 65th Street Mark S. Johnson, DDS has requested an advertising permit to erect a temporary sign (for a maximum of 30 days) to publicize his new dental office located at 404 West 65th.Street. _ - The sign is to be. a double faced temporary ground sign, 6' X 3' for a total of 18 square feet. City of Richfield ordinance code 3.49, Subdivision 16 (5) provides that City Council approval is required for temporary ground signs. The sign is to be a total of 18 square feet, and City Ordinance Code limits temporary ground signs to a total of 12 square feet. Therefore, the inspection division staff cannot approve the sign application as presented. However, the City Manager recommends that the City Council approve the sign request with the stipulation that the sign may only be erected if it is reduced in size to a maximum of 12 square feet. Respectfu ,)4ysubmitted, SJ? A4V John G. Ca twr ht City Manager Staff Recommendation: JGC/eja 0 A ' GROUND SIGN/?rt°t?e> PEDESTAL SIGN lE WIDTH -WIDTH --??} 6- L E C END LEGEND /V O k/ 0I°iff ti!/o01ln ,I `bbb-yl?O VI PROJECTING SIGN r-- ---WIDTH l? WALL SIGN WIDTH LEGEND • Indicate legend on the the reverse side in the space below LEGEND o is k? 17??7 zy,7 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 7` ? i. IChTt NORTH LIZ/8/83 ROOF SIGN WIDTH LEGEND IV ROOF r Indicate Distance From The Building ?t 7 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 416 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Transitory Ordinance Providing for Capital Improvements. First Reading. Council Members: On September 27, 1984, the city council approved a revision to the 1984 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB). The total CIB expenditure remains the same. Included in that revision were changes to two capital project appropriations from the Special Revenue Fund. The revisions reduce the public safety building account by $5,500 and increase the city hall remodeling (lobby/licensing area) by $5,500. The CIB projects funded by • special revenues for 1984 and 1984 revised budgets remain the same as adopted, or $393,000. The list of CIB projects funded all or in part by profits from the municipal liquor store operations for 1984 (Special Revenue Fund) are: 1984 1984 Budget Revised Budget Garage Furnace/Roof $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Forestry $ 27,500 $ 27,500 Memorial Park Improve. $200,000 $200,000 Legion Lake $ 10,500 $ 10,500 Swimming Pool Boiler $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Ice Arena Improvements $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Public Safety Buildings (Penn Fire Station) $ 25,000 $ 19,500 City Hall Remodeling (Lower level) $ 20,000 $ 20,000 City Hall Remodeling (Lobby/Licensing) $ 20,000 $ 25,500 $393,000 $393,000 0 -2- It is recommended that the city council give first reading • consideration to the attached transitory ordinance, appropriating monies from the Special Revenue Fund to reflect the revised project allocations for 19814. Projects receiving funding from other sources (Revenue Sharing, Municipal State- Aid, user fees, etc.) do not require a transitory ordinance for implementation. Those projects will proceed in accordance with ' the adopted revised 19814 Capital Improvement Budget. spectf bmitted, 1r2? John G. Ca twright City Manager JGC/eja 0 0 • TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of Capital Improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the city would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, subd. 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Garage Furnace/Roof Forestry Memorial Park Improvements Legion Lake Swimming Pool Boiler Ice Arena Improvements Public Safety Buildings (Penn Fire Station) City Hall Remodeling-lower level City Hall Remodeling - lobby/ license $ 60,000 $ 27,500 $200,000 $ 10,500 $ 15,000 $ 15 , 000 $ 19,500 $ 20,000 $ 25,500 Total $393,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of , 1984. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk is CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 415 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Appeal of Building and Fire Code Orders Council Members: Mrs. Hazel Alvarez has requested an appeal hearing before the City Council to appeal an order issued to her by Assistant Fire Chief Coughlin regarding violations of the building and fire codes at 6605 First Avenue. _ Mrs. Alvarez ownes a home at 6605 First Avenue. On September 10, 1984, Mrs. Alvarez appeared before the City Council to request that the property at 6605 First Avenue be rezoned to two family residential from single family residential. This request was denied. • In the course of considering this request for a zoning change, the City Manager and Assistant Fire Chief inspected the residence. During that inspection visit, the Assistant Fire Chief noted the following three violations of the building and fire code: 1. Abasement room was being used as a sleeping room, but did not have a window which met the emergency exit provisions of the building code, and had a ceiling which was too low to qualify the room as habitable space; 2. Two separate dwelling units had been provided in the home in addition to the space being occupied by the Alvarez family. One unit was being rented to a single adult female, and the other unit was rented to a single adult male and his son. The son was using the basement room noted above. The presence of two dwelling units would categorize the home as a duplex, and the presence of three dwelling units would categorize the home as an apartment building. The home is zoned for single family use, but contains three kitchens; and, 3. Smoke detectors were not present in the dwelling units, . a violation of the fire code. On October 22, 1984, Chief Coughlin issused orders to Mrs. Alvarez to correct the violations. Attached is a copy of these -2- The orders required that the basement vacated immediately, that smoke detectors ten days, and that the kitchens be removed dwelling units within 90 days. sleeping room be be installed within from the rented A dwelling unit is defined in the Richfield zoning code as "any room or group of rooms located within a dwelling and forming a single habitable unit with facilities which are used or are intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking and eating." Removal of the stove from each unit would mean the units were not usable for cooking, and would remove them from the definition of dwelling units. Since Mrs. Alvarez is allowed by the zoning ordinance to have up to three unrelated people in a single family home, the home would no longer be in violation of the ordinances if the living space occupied by Mrs. Alvarez' tenants did not meet the definition of a dwelling unit. In an October 30, 1984 letter to Chief Coughlin, Mrs. Alvarez stated that she had complied with the first two orders, but wished to appeal the order to remove the kitchens. (Copy of letter attached to this council letter.) - After Chief Coughlin's orders had been given to Mrs. Alvarez, one of her tenants contacted Chief Coughlin and stated that her unit did not have a stove. Since the lack of a stove removes the unit from the definition of a dwelling unit, Mrs. Alvarez' appeal would only apply to the remaining dwelling • unit. Granting Mrs. Alvarez an appeal would make the home a duplex, which is not a complying use for an R-1 zoning district. Therefore, the issue is in many respects similar to Mrs. Alvarez' original request of September 10, 1984 to allow the use of her home as a duplex residence in violation of the single family zoning requirement now in effect. Since this issue is somewhat different from the original request, a hearing on this matter has been set for the regular City Council meeting of November 26, 1984. At this hearing, the council will sit as the Board of Appeals. Members of the Public Safety Departmet will be present to discuss the position the city has taken with regard to this matter. Mrs. Alvarez has been notified of the hearing and her rights with regard to this hearing process (Attachment No. 3). 4Respectfu y s itted, hn G. Car wrigh ty Manager 0 JGC/eja 'Y. city of richfield 6700 portsand avenue - rninnesota 55423 October 22, 1984 Mrs. Hazel Alvarez 6605 1st Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mrs. Alvarez: At the time you applied for a zoning change to a two-family dwelling, the City building official and myself inspected your home to evaluate any problems in converting it to a two-family.dwelling. During our inspection I noted three violations of the building and fire code which I must require you to resolve. First, a basement room is being used for a sleeping room in violation of the fire code. The room does not have an approved escape window, nor does it have a smoke detector. Since it appeared that the ceiling is not high enough to allow the room's use for occupancy, we cannot approve the installation of an escape window. The minimum ceiling heighth for a habitable space is 7.5 feet. Second, a kitchen and bath is provided for each of the two living spaces in addition to your family's living space, and they therefore must be defined as dwelling units. The existence of separate dwelling units in a single family home is a violation of the zoning ordinance. Third, the dwelling units do not have smoke detectors. You are hereby ordered to correct the violations noted above in the following manner: 1. Vacate the basement sleeping room immediately. 2. Install an approved smoke detector in each dwelling unit within 10 days. 3. Remove the kitchens from the two rented dwelling units within 90 days. 0 Page 2, Alvarez Telephone Numbers: General C,ty Matters: (612) 869-7521 0-i'l- Cf1f0t- r\Inn-PmPrrPnrV (?Q hrgl (612) $6Fi_5061 POLICE/FIRE /MED'CA1_ EMERGENCY: DIAL 9-1-1 city of_richfield 6700 Portland avenue • minnesota 55423 You have the right to appeal these orders. You may do so by sending me a written request within 10 days, stating which orders you wish to appeal. The City Council is the appeals board, and if you file an appeal it will be scheduled at a regular council meeting. A followup inspection will be scheduled to determine compliance with the above orders. If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me. Si rely, Patrick J. ou lin Asst. Chief- ' e Division Richfield Public Safety Dept. 40 PJC/bac • Telephone Numbers: General City Matters: (6121 869-7521 o ,hi r c?afot.; Nnn-arneraenrv (24 hrs) (6121 566-5061 POLICE/FIRE/MEDICAL EMERGENCY: DIAL 9-1-1 * O2.- • October 30, 1984 Citv of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave. Richfield,Min.55423 To: City Council. %, Patrick J Coughlin Acct . Ch;_eI'---Fi re D_visi on. Dear Member Council: We will Complied with City ordinance in vacaring sleeping room in basement area, due to the fact does not meet standard accordinly to city reculations. We will installed 2 smoke detecto;s; one in each dwelling Aso°;ae ;could liked to au peal to the City Council and request a meetin7 concerning the kitchen on both dwelling, and registration of sar:ie. Sincerily 4/ 4' Mrs. 14rt 1 Alvarez. 6605 1st. Ave. Ric`-field Min 55423 0 - 7?, 0 N Ltd LO ¦ tttttttty 4 y- cc 0 ? CU L.. O Q ¦ ® Q • November 8, 1984 Mrs. Fe V. Alvarez 6605 First Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Mrs. Alvarez: rs- 3 I am in receipt of your October 30, 1984 letter requesting an appeal hearing before the Richfield City Council with regard to orders issued to you by Assistant Fire Chief, Patrick Coughlin, relating to violations of both the uniform building code and our city's zoning code. My under-- standing of your request is that you wish to appeal the order to remove certain kitchen appliances in that portion of your home you are apparently utilizing as rental apart- ments. I have scheduled your requested hearing before the Richfield Citv Council at their regular meeting on Monday, November 26, 1984. The meeting is scheduled to start at 7:00 p.m., and generally anneal hearings are scheduled for the first part of the meeting. I wish to inform you that the hearing process will be open to the public and you have the right to appear and to be represented by legal counsel. At that time you may offer such evidence as you may wish on behalf of your concern re- lated to the orders issued by Assistant Chief Coughlin. You also will have the right to cross examine any witnesses which the city may call in support of the orders issued. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, prior to the hearing date scheduled, please feel free to contact me. Sincerelv, Thomas A. Moraan, Jr. Director of Public Safetv T__-V%i/ 1 j e CC: City Mana4er Assistant Fire Chief telephone: 869-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer ?'5 ? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 414 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request for Permit for Temporary Rooftop Helium Balloon, Ground Round Restaurant The Ground Round Restaurant has requested an advertising permit for a helium balloon to be located on the roof of their restaurant located at 1500 East 78th Street for a period of 30 days. The helium balloon is to be 10 feet in diameter, yellow and brown in color with a white and brown banner. City of Richfield ordinance code 3.49, Subdivision 16 (5) provides that City Council approval is required for temporary • ground signs. The inspection division staff has reviewed the sign permit application and finds that the signs conforms to all city ordinances pertaining to advertising devices of this nature. It is recommended that the City Council approve this request for a temporary advertising device. ectfkdljy/t4bmitted , John G ar?wri9ht City Manager JGC/eja 0 GROUND SIGN --WIDTH ;m-.4 LEGEND PEDESTAL SIGN ?-C!?: WIDTH---a} T LEGEND Indicate Distance From The Building LEGEND ?I AOD KC-O IIr1C7 C_G L.:E B (Z?j O 0 ROOF PROJECTING SIGN --WIDTH LEGEND ROOF SIGN WIDTH Indicate legend on the the reverse side in the space below LEGEND 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 L LIZ/8/83 WALL SIGN -WIDTH CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 413 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Study Session: Legion Lake Council Members: At 5:30 PM, Monday, November 26, 1984, the city council will meet jointly with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, the Planning Commission and the Community Services Advisory Commission. The purpose of the meeting is to have University of Minnesota architectural students provide an update on the Legion Lake study project that they have undertaken during this fall quarter. Legion Lake is appoximately 150 acres in size and is the last large open space area in the city to be developed. For several years Legion Lake has been included in the long-range capital improvement program for park development. Recently there has been some consideration given to providing housing on the site. The 1984 capital budget included funding for a study of Legion Lake focused on park development. However, the city council determined that the study should be expanded to look at Legion Lake in broader terms. To that end, technical data has been amassed which includes soil studies, boundary surveys, and storm water requirements. An agreement with Gair and Associates, a sub-division of Orr- Schelen-Mayeron, was entered into for purposes of analysing available data and preparing a master concept plan for Legion Lake. Working with Mr. Mike Gair is Roger Martin, a professor of architecture with the University of Minnesota, and U of M students in their fifth year of study in a professional degree program. These students will be providing an update of their work to date to the people in attendance at the November 26 meeting. Because time is limited for the presentations the following agenda timetable has been planned: 1. Introductions and background 5 minutes 2. Slide presentations 45 minutes 3. Explanations of sketches 30 minutes 4. Questions and answers 10 minutes -2- The presentations will address three concepts for Legion Lake development. They are: 1. A futuristic type development plan; 2. A plan that incorporates 80 units of housing at the park site; and, 3. A park plan that is more traditional to large community wide parks in the Richfield area. At this time a final proposal for a master plan is not available. The consultants will be continuing their work for approximately another month. The master concept plan will be presented at another meeting, probably in early 1985. At that time the decision will need to be made whether to adopt the concept plan and to proceed with the Legion Lake project. speetr_U_I submitted, John G. Cart- ight City Manager JGC/eja U 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 7/-3 Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 412 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Setting a Public Hearing Date to Consider Adopting Policies Necessary to Preserve Access to Mortgage Subsidy Bonds in 1985. Council Members: During 1984, Congress adopted and the President signed the Deficit Reduction Act. Title VI of the Act concerns mortgage subsidy bonds or tax exempt bonds. These bonds are utilized to help provide below market interest rate mortgages to first time buyers of single family homes. The Act was adopted during the summer of 1984. However, the Treasury Department has not yet formulated regulations which would clarify the requirements of the legislation. Absent specific regulations, bond attorneys and underwriters are of the opinion that for a community to utilize mortgage subsidy bonds in 1985, it is necessary for a City Council to schedule a public hearing and consider a report which is a statement of the "housing, development and income distribution policies" that would be followed in issuing the bonds. Such action must be taken prior to December 31, 1984.. The city staff recommends that the City Council schedule a public hearing for December 10, to consider adopting the necessary policies to preserve access to these bonds in 1985. The policies would be based on the Housing Plan which was adopted by the City Council and HRA on November 29, 1983. Attached is a resolution calling for a public hearing on December 10, 1984. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution setting December 10th as the date for a public hearing to consider adopting policies necessary to preserve access to mortgage subsidy bonds in 1985. RespectfuL?y submitted , John G. Ca twr ht City Manager • RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ADOPTION OF A HOUSING REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES TREASURY Be it Resolved by the City Council of the City of CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. 84- Richfield, Minnesota, as follows. 1. That the City hold a public hearing at 7:00 p.m., December 10, 1984, at the City Hall on the adoption of a Housing Report to be submitted to the Secretary of the United States Treasury--in accordance with Section 103A (j)(5). 2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish a notice for such public hearing in the form set forth in Exhibit A. 0 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of November, 1984. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk 0 "EXHIBIT A" • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF HOUSING REPORT TO THE SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES-TREASURY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Richfield will meet at the City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 10, 1984, to conduct a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Housing Report to be submitted to the Secretary of the United States Treasury. The adoption of the Report is required under Section • 103A (j)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code if the City is to issue its Mortgage Subsidy Bonds as Mortgage Credit Certi- ficatds in calendar year 1985. A draft copy of the program to be submitted to the Secretary of the Treasury, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall, City of Richfield, Minnesota during regular City business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily, except Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) Any person wishing to express a view with respect to the report will be heard at the public hearing. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ City Clerk 10 Dated: November 1984. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 411 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Resolution Providing for Increase to Employee Group Insurance Coverages and Premiums (term life insurance, dental insurance, health insurance, and short term disability insurance) Council Members: At the present time, the city contributes to the cost of premiums for four kinds of insurance coverages available to city employees. The first type of insurance is a $5,000 term life insurance policy provided for all the General Services and Management employees. The city pays the full premium for this insurance, which is $1.10 per month per employee in 1984. The rates will remain the same for 1985. Certain other employee groups, such as the Police Officers, Investigator/Agents, and the Police Supervisory personnel, have insurance provided through their contracts in excess of the $5,000. It is proposed for 1985 that the city provide General Services and Management employees with a $10,000 term life insurance policy, instead of the $5,000 provided in the past. Other Stanton Group V cities provide their office/technical/clerical personnel and management employees with life insurance ranging from $5,000 to $12,000 or more per year. Many of the cities provide $10,000 for such employees. With the raise in coverage for Richfield's General Services and Management employees to $10,000, the city would be providing a level of benefits similar to comparable communities. Additionally, it would bring the Management and General Services employees to a level of greater comparability with the contractual police employees for 1985. The second type of insurance provided to General Services and Management employees is a self-funded group dental insurance. In 1983 and 1984, the city contributed $11.85 per month per employee for the total cost of employee (not dependent) coverage. Employees who desire dependent coverage must pay the full cost of such additional premium. The rate proposed for 1985 will be increased to $13.00 per month per employee for employee only coverage. It is recommended that the 0 -2- city contribute the full cost of $13.00 per month per employee for General Services and Management employees for 1985• As in the past, employees who desire dependent coverage will pay the full cost of such additional premium. The third type of insurance coverage is group health coverage, of which there are three optional plans available through Hennepin County joint purchasing. The city pays the full individual employee premium and provides varying additional contributions, up to a maximum specified premium for dependent coverage. Such contributions vary, depending on the employee group. The 1984 and 1985 monthly premium costs of these plans are as follows: 1984 1985 % Mo. Rate Mo. Rate Increase Group Health Plan Indivi'd u-a-fir $ 58.88 $ 63.20 7.3% Family 160.76 169.83 5.6% MedCenters Health Plan In ivi ual 62.75 67.15 7.0% Family 168.35 180.15 7.0% Physicians Health Plan Individ ual 93.76 97.51 4.0% Family 194.95 204.70 5.0% In 1984, the city contributed up to a maximum of $122.00 per month per employee for employee and dependent coverage for eligible General Services and Management employees. It is recommended that this amount be increased to a maximum of $132.00 per month per employee. By increasing the city contribution for health insurance to a maximum of $132.00 per month, the city would be able to offset a significant portion of the increases charged by the participating providers and prevent sizable increases to be passed on to the employee. Additionally, it would make the total amount of insurance contribution for General Services and Management employees comparable to the total dollars expended for other organized employee groups. The fourth type of insurance provided currently to General Services and Management employees only is disability insurance. Short-term disability insurance is self-insured and funded out of the current operating budget, similar to the manner in which sick leave costs are covered. Long-term disability insurance is provided through a group LTD policy secured by the city. The current premium rate of $.55 per $100 of salary remains in effect through 1985. The average monthly premium cost projected for 1985 is $9.03 per month for General Services employees and $15.80 per month for Management employees. -3- Summary is During the past few years, costs of employee group health insurance coverage has increased significantly from year to year. In 1984, for example, the increases charged by the health care providers exceeded the budgeted amount for Management and General Services employees. Similarly, some of Richfield's bargaining unit employee groups have received greater insurance contributions during the past year or two than the General Services and Management employees have. For 1985, the budget includes a projected 8% cost increase for health insurance coverages for General Services and Management employees. The actual increases which were furnished to the city in the last few weeks indicate a health insurance cost of less than 8%. Because the city's cost increase for employee only coverage, which is fully paid by the city, is 4% and 7.3% respectively for the two most widely selected health plans, the city finds itself in a unique position of having more money budgeted for health insurance costs than was expected. Therefore, the city would be able to provide an additional $10 _ per month for Management and General Services employees for dependent health insurance contribution and increase the life insurance for each employee from $5,000 to $10,000 per year and still remain within the amount of funds budgeted for health insurance contribution for 1985. ?i The additional cost of $5,000 of life insurance per employee would be $1.10 per month. Under this proposal, the total 1985 monthly contribution for management employees would be approximately $163.00 per month and for General Services employees it would be approximately $156.00 per month, as compared to $155.00 for Local 49 employees and approximately $157.00 per month for Police Officers. The Police Supervisory Personnel are given a $150.50 per month per employee contribution for 1984 and the 1985 contribution rate has not been established. The rates for Firefighters have also not been established for 1985. In summary, it is recommended that the council adopt the attached resolution establishing 1985 maximum insurance contributions for General Services and Management employees so that these non-union employees maintain their competitive relationship with organized employee groups. Respectfully submitted, 2 AIR/ John G. rtwr ght" City Manager 0 JGC:sb a • 1984 INS. Mo. $ Health Life Dental Sub-Total LTD TOTAL 1985 INS. Mo. $ Health Life Dental Sub-Total LTD TOTAL GEN. SERV. MGMT. EXHIBIT A LOCAL 49 FIRE 122.00 122.00 1.10 1.10 11.85 11.85 134.95 134.95 8.441 14.772 143.39 149.72 POLICE POLICE OFCR. SUPV. FED. ASSOC. 143.90 128.15 125.00 145.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 5.50 --- 11.85 11.85 --- 145.00 141.10 - - --- 137.95 150.50 --- --- - 145.00 141.10 137.95 150.50 132.00 132.00 1 153.90 N/A 142.00 N/A 2.20 2.20 ; 1.10 N/A 2.20 N/A 13.00 13.00 ; --- N/A 13.00 N/A 147.20 147.20 ; 155.00 N/A 157.20 N/A 9.033 15.804 i --- N/A --- N/A 156.23 163.00 ; 155.00, NIA 157.20 N/A 1Based on average monthly salary of $1,534 (5%+2%) x 1983 Sal. 2Based on average monthly salary of $2,685 (5%+2%) x 1983 Sal. 3Based on average monthly salary of $1,641 (5%+2%) x 1984 Sal. 4Based on average monthly salary of $2,873 (5%+2%) x 1984 Sal. 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE is PREMIUM FOR GENERAL SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, a hospital-medical/surgical group health insurance plan is available from the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Organization for city employees and their families, and WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is available from the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Organization for city employees, and WHEREAS, a self-funded group dental insurance plan is available to city employees and their families, and WHEREAS, a group short-term and long-term disability program is available to city Management and General Services employees, and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by _ resolution the city's contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that commencing January 1, 1985, the city shall contribute a maximum of $132.00 per month toward an employee health insurance premium for all eligible non- 40 unionized employees; in any event said contribution shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. The city shall also pay the $13.00 monthly premium for the employee dental insurance plan and the $2.20 monthly premium for the-term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan for city employees for a total possible maximum insurance premium contribution of $147.20 per month. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1, 1985. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city shall contribute the full cost of long-term disability insurance for the General Services and Management employees' coverage. Such contribution shall be based upon a premium rate of $.55 per $100 of monthly coverage. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall determine the city's contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of the appropriate resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective organized employee groups. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield -this 26th day of November, 1984. 0 John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk ?f CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 410 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Presentation of Certificate of Appreciation Veterans of Foreign Wars Fred Babcock Post 5555 Council Members: Members of the Richfield VFW will be present at-the November 26, 1984 city council meeting to receive a Certificate of Appreciation for their involvement in community services. The Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission and the City Clerk have also planned a presentation to the VFW in Apreciation for their assistance on the Program "Access to Vote 1984". The Richfield VFW assisted a total of 226 disabled persons at the polls during the 1984 general election. A punch and cookie reception has been scheduled by the City Clerk and the Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission following this presentation. The council is invited to attend this reception, but may not be able to do since our council meeting is being c-ablecast on Channel 12. Respectfully submitted, 1v1??t/Lt P John G. Ca tw ght 7,4 City Manager JGC/eja RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THE FRED BABCOCK POST NO. 5555 VFW FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING COMMUNITY SERVICE WHEREAS, the members of the Fred Babcock Post No. 5555 Veterans of Foreign Wars will donate thousands of hours this year in performing community services; and, WHEREAS, these numerous community services include safety programs such as "Lite-A-Bike" in which reflective tape was provided for 450 bikes in Richfield and the delivery of 2000 pamphlets on fire safety in Richfield; community involvement such as providing 10 units for the 4th of July Parade and sponsoring a Halloween party for 250 children; and the access to vote program in which 266 handicapped persons were assisted to vote. Post 5555 is also involved in the distribution of surplus food each month, the blood donor program and many other community service activities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, John Hamilton, Mayor of the City of Richfield and the members of the City Council on behalf of the citizens of Richfield do hereby express our thanks and gratitude to the Fred Babcock Post 5555 VFW and do commend them for their outstanding community service. • PASSED this 26th day of November, 1984. Jo n Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 409 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Second Reading on Proposed Amendments to Chapter III, Section 3.47, "Temporary Election Signs". Council Members: At the October 8, 1984 city council meeting, the city council gave first reading approval to several amen-dments to the municipal code of ordinances regulating temporary election signs. The public hearing was scheduled for the November 13, 1984 city council meeting. At that meeting, the city council tabled the matter until the November 26, 1984 city council meeting. • The amendments to the Temporary Election Sign Ordinance are as follows: 1. Subsection 2 has been amended to permit the placement of election signs 31 days before the date of the primary, special or general election to which the sign relates. This amendment will add one additional weekend before the election for candidates to place signs on private property in Richfield. 2. Subsection 3 has added a sentence that reads "signs relating to unsuccessful primary election candidates shall be removed within four days following the primary election." This amendment should help eliminate the confusion as to whether a successful primary candidate may continue to place more temporary political signs on on private property immediately after the primary election. 3. Subsection 7 is a new subsection with states that "no sign shall be located closer to the travelled roadway than 10 feet behind the nearest curb." -2- 4. Subsection 8 is also a new subsection which prohibits "the placement of any political sign within the 50 foot • triangle of the street intersection." As council members are aware, many problems were encountered this year regarding the placement of election signs on public right-of-way. Sub- sections 7 and 8 should help to alleviate this problem in future elections. Eight municipalities were surveyed to find out what restrictions were placed on political sign placement. A copy of this survey is attached to this council letter. As indicated in the survey, none of the municipalities allow the placement of signs on the public right of way. Most of the municipalities also provide a copy of sign placement regulations to candidates at the time they file for election. This has proved to be a very effective way to ensure that signs are not placed on public right-of-way, or in the visibility triangle of intersection. Respectfully submitted, A,OV John G. Ca tw ght City Manager 0 JGC/eja 0 • • ELECTION SIGN SURVEY WHEN SIGNS DATE SIGNS DISTANCE CITY PLACED REMOVED FROM CURB BLOOMINGTON No Reg. 7 days after 20 feet Election Signs must be kept out of clear-view triangle. Signs are not allowed on public property, or"on public right-of-way. Ordinance is enforced when violations are brought to the attention of city officials. Signs cannot be placed without owners-permission. - EDINA 60 days prior 7 days after to election election Signs may be a maximum of six square feet, one sign allowed per street frontage. Signs cannot be placed on public right of way. Enforcement on a complaint basis. BURNSVILLE 65 days prior 5 days after 15 feet to election election Signs may not be placed on public right of way. Name and address of persons responsible for sign must be on sign itself. No enforcement problems. ROBBINSDALE 7 days prior 45 days after 15 feet to election election Signs may not be placed on public right of way. Sign size in residential areas is five square feet. Signs cannot be placed in intersection visibility triangle. MINNEAPOLIS No reg. 6 days after Signs must be election placed inside sidewalk Signs cannot be more than 32 square feet, and owners permission is required to place signs. MINNETONKA 30 days prior 10 days after 10 feet back from to election election property line 20 feet total Signs cannot be placed in intersection visibility triang-le and enforcement is based on complaints. 0 • C ST. LOUIS PARK No reg. 5 days after Signs cannot be placed on public right of way St. Louis Park is currently in the process of revising its election sign ordinance. "The new ordinance proposes that signs be a maximum size of 16 square feet, with no more than four signs on one parcel. Enforcement is done on a complaint basis, particularly in regard to signs placed on public right-of-way. EDEN PRAIRIE No. reg. No reg - 10-15 feet back , from curb or public right of way 0 AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER III, PART V, SECTION 3.47, SUB- DIVISION 19, OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN; Chapter III, Part V, Section 3.47, Subdivision 19 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield regulating temporary election signs is hereby amended to read: "Subd. 19. Temporary Election Signs. Temporary election signs may be placed and maintained in the residential and multiple residential areas of the city subject to the following regulations: (1) No sign may exceed eleven square feet in area on one side. Sign copy, however, may be placed on both sides of a sign. Signs shall not be designed to have more than two sides. The aggregate area of all of the signs placed on any parcel of land within the city may not exceed thirty-three square feet. • (2) No sign may be placed more than four weeks (28 31 days) before the date of the primary, special or general election to which the sign relates. sigma r-ep€aces-a -an-e€€ ee-wh s?- s-the-sab eel-e€-a- ??€?aey-e1•eet?eaT-?t-spa€€-act-be-??aee?-?e€eee-€ae? weeds-pe€e?-te-saes-pe??a?y-e?eet€es---A-s}gs;-???eh; weep-??aee?;-?e?ates-te-aa-a€€?ee-wh}eh-€s-the-sat?eet e€-a-?e?ae?-a€eetee-may-?e-etaee?-a-p?see-a€ter 4149-pp (3) All signs must be removed from display no later than four days following the election to which they relate. Signs relating to unsuccessful primary election candidates shall be removed within our davs following the primary election. (4) In addition to the other remedies available to the City under this code, any sign remaining on display beyond the times specified in paragraph (3) of this subdivision is deemed abandoned to the city and may in the city's discretion be removed, destroyed or otherwise disposed of. (5) It shall be the responsibility of the sign owner, the property owner, and in the case of a single family residence, the occupants, to comply with the provisions of this subdivision. (6) No such sign shall be placed or maintained without the prior approval of the property owner, and in the case of a single family residence, the occupant. (7) No sign shall be located closer to the traveled roadway than 10 feet behind the nearest curb . (8) No sign shall be located within the 50 foot triangle of the street intersection. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 26th day of November,-1984. John amilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk • 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager -?/- -,3D Council Letter No. 408 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Council Consideration Hearing for Vacation 74th and Upton Council Members: to Change Date of Public of Public Right of Way, At the November 13, 1984 city council meeting, the city council considered a request to vacate an unimproved right-of- way at the intersection of 74th and Upton Avenue, and the disposition of dedicated city park property. Mr. Eric Lindholm had petitioned the city for this vacation and also requested that the city sell to him a small triangular piece of park land owned and maintained by the city. Mr. Lindholm is attempting to acquire enough property to create an additional residential lot for a new single family residence. At that meeting, the City Council referred the matter to the Community Services Commission to look into the adequacy of this small piece of park property for use by small children and to determine if there is good access and space at Adams Hill Park for small children as an alternative site. The City Council then approved a resolution setting a date of public hearing for December 10, 1984 to afford neighbors an opportunity to comment on the CSC recommendations. As the Community Services Commission does not meet until December 11, 1984, it is recommended that the City Council approve the resolution rescheduling the date of hearing to January 14, 1985• JGC/eja Respectfully submitted, ?2ohn G. C tw ght City Manager • x_71 ilJ LV bl. . RESOLUTION RECEIVING REQUEST FOR THE VACATION - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, petitions have been filed with the City Clerk requesting the vacation of a portion of public right-of-way described as follows: "That part of the platted street of Penn Lake Terrace 2nd Addition Lying within the following described lines: Starting at the Northeast corner of Lot 6, Block 1, Penn Lake Terrace 2nd Addition, Thence South along the East line of said Lot 6 41.4 feet to actual point of beginning, thence Southwesterly along curved line of Lot 6 a cord distance of 173.0 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 6 also being the Southeasterly corner of Lot 7, thence Westerly along the curved south line of Lot 7 a cord distance of 75.0 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 7 also being the Southeasterly corner of Lot 8, thence Westerly along the Southerly curved line of Lot 8 a cord distance of 39.45 feet, the curve of the above lot lines has radius of 142.41 feet with A delta angle-of 121 degrees 12 minutes, thence Easterly along a curved line with a radius of 414.84 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Park as shown on plat of Penn Lake Terrace 2nd Addition, thence Northeasterly along the Northerly line of said Park to the Northeasterly corner of Park on the west right-of-way line of Upton Avenue, thence North along the Southerly extension of the West line of Upton Avenue of Block 1 to the actual point of beginning there terminating. WHEREAS, said request complies with the requirements of Richfield Ordinance Code 12.04, Subdivision 2; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The request for vacation of that portion of public right-of-way described above is received. 2. A public hearing on the vacation in said request shall be held on 'January 14,-1985.-- 3. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of such hearing in the official newspaper of the city and post notice of said hearing in the manner provided by Richfield Ordinance Code Section 12.04, Subdivision 3. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of , 1984. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Berg ty er _4? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Market Plaza Development • 0 Council Members: Council Letter No. 407 Agenda November 26, 1984 On May 14, 1984, the City of Richfield (City) and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) entered into a contract for the Sale of Land for Private Development with Market Plaza Corp. (Developer), Arkell Development Corp., (co- developer) and E. J. Plesko Assoc. Inc. (co-developer). The contract identified the obligations of all the parties. The development concept has been refined since the contract was executed. Several amendments and revised exhibits must now be considered by the HRA and the City Council prior to the conveyance of land to the developers (the projected closing date is the week of 11/26 - 11/30). The amendments and exhibits concern the unit mix and size, Certificate of Completion, Assessment Agreement, Agreement to Pay Deficiencies, and Letters of Credit. 1. Project Concept Plans: Exhibit H contained a list of units and sizes for the condominiums and apartments. May 14 Agreement Condominium Component 23 1 bdrm. @ 600 s.f. 45 1 bdrm. @ 780 s.f. 45 1 bdrm. & den @ 1,000 s.f. 23*2 bdrm. @1,200 s.f. 136 Units Condominium Component Amended Unit Mix & Sizes November 17, 1984 12 1 bdrm. 596 s.f. 55 " 783 s.f. 10 " 735 s.f. 10 1 + den 926 s.f. 23 11 932 s.f. 11 IT 950 s.f. 10 2 bdrm. 970 s.f. 22 It 1089 s.f. 1 2 bdr. + den 1510 s.f. 1 " It 1129 s.f. 1 IT it 1261 s.f. 1 if It 1232 s.f. 157 Total Units -2- May 14 Agreement Apartment Apartment Component Comp onent November 1 7, 1984 30 1 bdrm. 600-620 s.f. 22 1 bdrm. 629 s.f. 36 1 bdrm. 700-720 s.f. 23 if 715 s.f. 40 1 bdrm. & den 825-850 s.f. 10 " 629 s.f. 56 2 bdrm. deluxe 950-1050 s.f. 4 " 769 s.f. 8 " Ha ndicapped 687sf 162 Units 32 1 bdrm. + den 829 s.f. - 7 1, « 868 s.f. 48 2 bdrm. 1054 s.f. 8 11 1078 s.f. 10 Units The Final Concept Plans submitted on November 9, 1984, incorporate the above noted amendments. In accordance with the contract,all refinements, or changes must be approved by the HRA and City Council. 2. Certificate of Completion: (Exhibit C) The present contract calls for the issuance of one Certificate of Completion by the HRA upon the notification by the Developer that all the improvements contemplated by the Project Plans are completed. The proposed amendment would provide for three separate Certificates of Completion; the condominiums, the apartments and the shopping center. 3. Assessment Agreement (Exhibit D) The Assessment Agreement establishes a minimum Estimated Market Value (EMV) for the property and improvements to be no less than $21,225,000. It would be more appropriate to have two separate Agreements, one for the condominium housing component, and another for the shopping center/apartment housing component. 4. Short Fall Amendment In Article 5, Section 1 of the Developers Agreement, the developer is obligated to negotiate with the HRA to identify sources of additional revenue if the cost of site assembly exceeds three million dollars. The costs will exceed this amount. 0 -3- . Estimated Project Costs 000's omitte Land - East End $3,444 Land - West End (1) -0- Site and Soil Improvement 268 Demolition 110 Property Taxes & Spec. Assmts. 124 Administration and Legal 375 $4,321 (1) Paid out of a prior bond issue. It has been agreed that this increased cost will be met by increasing the number of units in the condominium and thus the EMV, and also providing the city with a debt partner position in the development. The concept for this arrangement is explained in the September 14, 1984, Richard Krier letter to the City Attorney (see back-up) The EMV will be revised as follows: Previous New Component EMV EMV Change Condominium $10,850,000 $11,466,000 +$616,000 5. Letters of Credit Amendment: (Exhibit E) The Letters of Credit in the present contract hold the Developer liable to the HRA for liquidated damages for each of the two housing components and the shopping center component. The City also requires a developer to post a performance bond for a PUD and an off-street parking contract. It is proposed to modify the developers agreement such that the letters of credit be defined to include the requirements for an off-street parking contract bond and PUD bond. 6. Agreement to Pay Deficiencies Amendment: (Exhibit F) This Agreement states that if the tax increment generated from the development in any given year, commencing in 1986 is insufficient to make the principal and interest payments due on the bonds issued by the City, the Developer shall pay the difference. It is proposed that two Agreements replace the one Agreement. That is, there would be a Deficiency Agreement for the condominium and another for the apartment/shopping center. 7. Financial and Construction Agreements: E. J. Plesko, John Arkell, Roger Derrick and Dick Krier met with the HRA Chairman and the HRA staff on Wednesday, November 14, 1984, to report on the status of their financial commitments and construction contracts. -4- E. J. Plesko will utilize Prudential Bache as the municipal bond underwriter. The estimated 12 million dollar financing • plan consists of a 10 million dollar IDB issue and another two million for balancing the mortgage (gap loan to fund the balance of the construction costs). Mr'. Charles Freeburg of Prudential Bache told the Executive Director that most savings and loan institutions can get a triple A bond rating. How? The S & L's put up government securities and home mortgages at 160 to 180% over collateral. This means there is very little risk for the bond holders. This is the approach being used by First Federal of Minneapolis. To make the bonds even more marketable, insurance has been placed n the issue by Industrial Credit Insurance of New York in turn for points up front. The remaining project costs are covered by a one and one- half million dollar letter of credit from Balcor/American Express in favor of the bond trustee. E. J. Plesko and Roger Derrick will each place one-quarter million dollars-as-equity. Balcor/American Express is the second largest security underwriter in the country. The loan to equity ratio should be approximately 75:25 per cent. This is a very attractive package. Mr. Freeburg says the appraisal on the project is in the sixteen million dollar range. 40 The Executive Board of First Federal approved the guarantee of their collateral on Thursday, November 15, 1984. The full board approved the financial commitment matter on Monday, November 19, 1984. Tenants have submitted letters of intent to lease 42,000 square feet of the 63,000 square feet of leasable floor area in the shopping center. Tenants include two restaurants and a drug store. E. J. Plesko has executed the Borson construction contract. Derrick and Arkell have a signed commitment from Twin City Federal for a nine million dollar, 24 month loan to finance the construction of the condominium. The developers have at their option a one year extension. Sale of the condominium units will retire the loan. Health Central has been added as a limited partner for their one million dollar letter of credit from First Minneapolis. The TCF commitment does not contain a presale requirement. As of November 14, 1984, 106 reservations had been received. Market Plaza officials expect to start converting resevations to sales agreements within the next two weeks. Both Richfield Bank and Trust and First Minneapolis will provide end loan takeouts on their single family homes to condomonium purchasers to assist these buyers, if necessary, until their homes are sold. However, experience to date indicates most condominium purchasers will be paying cash. -5- After the City/HRA finalize the sale of land to Market Plaza during the week of November 26th, Market Plaza officials will then proceed to close on their loan commitments during the week of December 3-7th. Derrick and Arkell reported they expect to sign the Knutson construction contract during the week of November 26-30-, 1984. It is recommended that the City Council approve the amendments and revised exhibits related to the unit mix and size, Certificate of Completion, Assessment Agreement, Letters of Credit and Agreement to Pay Deficiencies. These items were approved by the HRA at their meeting-of November 19, 1984. The City Manager and City staff will follow this outline for its November 26, 1984 agenda report on the Market Plaza Development: A. Revised Project Plans 1. -Condominium component moved to north property line of the site. 2. Eleven additional surface parking spaces added to the condominium component. 3. Results of a parking ratio comparison study of similar condominium projects to Woodlake Point Condominium. Woodlake Point .86 spaces/unit Lake Shore Drive 1.08* 7500 York .88 *LSD has 45 vacant spaces; actual use is .83 spaces per unit. 4. Provision for delivery truck unloading zones. 5. Request to close Graha m Avenue for construction purposes u ntil street is vacated. 6. Request to use two of the four lanes on 65th Street for cranes and staging materials. 7. Payment of $1400 for v acation of Graham Avenue. B. Final PUD Plans 1. Additional floor with 10 units for condo component 2. Status of property exchange with owner (Strom) of Wendy's fast food site. r1 -6- C. Status of Financing And Construction Agreements 1. Condominium Component (a) Health Central added as a limited partner to provide one million dollars of equity (letter of credit) (b) nine million dollar, loan for 24 months with a one year extension option (c) financial closing date - week of 12/3/84 (d) no presale condition - have already exceeded reservation requirement of 49 units (actual 106 reservations) (e) construction contract with Knutson to be executed Friday, November 16, 1984. 2. Commercial/Apartment Components (a) Prudential-Bache underwriter for commercial and Housing Bond Issues (b) Balcor and American Express added as limited partners to provide additional equity to improve the equity to loan ratio (25-.75). (c) Construction contract with Borson executed by all parties except Derrick (d) First Federal provides financial commitment to enhance bond rating and sale. D. Amendments to Agreements 1. Provide that the letters of credit caled for in the developers agreement can also be used as the required performance bonds for the off-street parking contract and the PUD performance. 2. Increase the EMV on the condominium project 3. Provide for city equity participation in the commercial/apartment component 4. Provide that there shall be separate assess- ments agreements and deficiency agreements (in the event captured assessment values are insufficient to meet debt service on the TIF bond issue) for each project component 5. Incorporate the revised project plans into the Developer's Agreement 6. Provide that each component can be issued a certificate of completion when ready for occupancy. NOTE: Items (D2) and (D3) are matters dealing with the city's increased costs to acquire this site. E. Construction Timetable Start Complete Condominium Dec. 1984 Fall 1985 40 Commercial Spring 1985 Spring 1986 Apartments Spring 1985 Summer 1986 -7- 00 F. Demolition and Site Grading 1. Request to start prior to finalizing land sale G. Environmental Assessessment Worksheet 1. November 13, 1984 city council held public hearing and determined no need for EIS H. IDB and Housing Bond Sales 1. IDB issue scheduled for December 10, 1984 city council agenda 2. Housing issue in early 1985 ectful y s itted, ohn G. C rt right City Manager JGC/eja U • i The Derrick Companies 1650 Shelard Tower • Minneapolis, MN 55426 • 612 /546-2276 15 November 1984 Mr. John Cartwright, Executive Director RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Subject: Market Plaza Dear John: I hereby request that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority allow us to proceed with grading on the condominium site and the demolition of the Tanner office building on the Market Plaza site. This grading operation is necessary so that we will be able to stay on schedule for construction of the condominipms. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. S rely, R chard C. Krier, AICP Vice President Derrick Companies RCK:clb 1?1 cc: David Sellergren Steve Yurick i The Derrick Companies 1650 Sheiatd Tower • Minneapolis, MN 55426 • 612 /546-2276 16 November 1984 RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Attention: Mr. John Cartwright, Executive Director Subject: Market Plaza Construction Contracts Dear Commissioners: Under separate cover, I have submitted two construction contracts as required by the "Redevelopment Agreement." After taking competitive bids, a contract was negotiated with Knutson Construction-Company. This contract is for construction of Woodlake Point Condominiums. The second contract was prepared by Bor-Son Construction Company. The Bor-Son contract is for costructing the shopping center and apartment building. Both contractors have provided guaranteed maximum prices on the respective parts of Market Plaza. Both the Woodlake Point . guaranteed maximum price and the shopping center/ apartment building guaranteed maximum price are within the budget. Both guaranteed maximum prices have been accepted by us. E. J. Plesko negotiated the Bor-Son contract. Both E. J. Plesko and Tom Weber, Vice President, Bor-Son, have signed the contract and referred it to us for review and approval. Although there are a number of technical changes which our consultant and legal counsel have recommended, the Guaranteed Maximum Price of $10,586,000 has been agreed to. This means that the shopping center and apartment building can be built within the budget. We are meeting again with Bor-Son Monday to resolve the technical issues and expect to have a fully- signed contract soon. We have negotiated the Knutson Contract and expect to have it signed by Monday evening or very shortly thereafter. All of the items have been agreed upon, including a Guaranteed Maximum Price of $7,390,000. Si erely, Richard C. Krier, AICP Vice President Derrick Companies 0 RCK:clb cc: David Sellergren Steve Yurick i ?? ? ? The Derrick Companies 1650 Sheiard Tower . Minneapolis, MN 55426 • 612 / 546-2276 15 November 1984 Mr. John Cartwright, Executive Director RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Subject: Market Plaza Dear John: I hereby submit.to you revised project plans for the Market Plaza Redevelopment Project. These revised project plans include the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Site Plan Elevations Utility Plan Landscape Plan Grading and Drainage Plan Floor Plans Individual Unit Plans These final project plans are plans which have been discussed with the city staff at various stages of the development. I am requesting that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority approve the project plans at their November 19, 1984, meeting. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. S rely, Richard C. Krier, AICP Vice President Derrick Companies RCK:clb 0 cc: Steve Yurick David Sellergren i 0 The Derrick Companies 1650 Shelard Tower • Minneapolis, MN 55426 • 612 /546-2276 15 November 1984 Mr. John Cartwright, Executive Director RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Subject: Market Plaza Dear John: The purpose of this letter is to request that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority approve the construction contracts and financial commitments for construction of Woodlake Point Condominiums and Market Plaza Shopping Center and Apartment Building. In this regard I am submitting to you the following: 1. A conditional financial commitment from Twin City Federal • Savings and Loan. 2. A construction contract from Knutson Construction Company. This contract has not been signed, but has been agreed to upon review of Knutson's attorney. 3. A conditional financial commitment from Prudential-Bache. 4. A'conditional financial commitment from Balcor-American Express. 5. Construction contract from Bor-Son Construction Company. This contract has not been signed, but has been negotiated and only needs minor modifications. I understand that the credit enhancement commitment will be available Monday evening from First Federal Savings and Loan. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sid er ly, i Richard C. Krier, AICP Vice President • Derrick Companies cc: David Sellergren RCK:clb Steve Yurick .alcor/Amer can Express Real Estate Finance Inc. Balcor Plaza 4849 Golf Road Skokie, Illinois 60077 (312) 676-6700 Mr. E. J. Plesko President E. J. Plesko & Associates, Inc. 220 Oak Street Grafton, WI 53024 RE: Market Place Richfield, Minnesota Dear Mr. Plesko: Pursuant to our previous discussions, this shall serve to confirm that Balcor/American.Express Real Estate Finance, Inc. would consider financing a $2,000,000 gap loan to fund the balance of construction costs associated with the above referenced project. Our proposed commitment would be conditioned upon the following being demonstrated satisfactorily to Balcor: Total project costs including interest reserve and contingencies not to exceed $12 million. Within this budget, total construction (hard) costs not to exceed $10,361,500,.to be confirmed by Balcor's consulting architect. The balance of indirect (soft) costs to be determined based upon underwriting of interest rate movements, lease up and rental income, as well as funds arbitrage and traditional soft cost line items. - Placement of permanent IRB financing of $10 million to be underwritten by Prudential Bache's Municipal Bond Department. Said financing to carry a term not less than 5 years and an interest rate not greater than 9% per annum. Total borrowing costs on the IRB including amortization and agency fees shall not exceed 10% per annum. The aforementioned conditions are an essential and integral component to Balcor's commitment to provide this financing. Any modifications in these conditions will terminate our obligation to fund the gap loan. Sincerely, • Lawrence D. Silberman Assistant Vice President LDS;dc Lending Smart Thinking to Real Estate June 27, 1984 Public Finance Department • Mr. E. J. Plesko & Associates, Inc., Mr. Michael Gould Bor-Son Construction 2001 Killebrew Drive Bloomington, Minnesota 55420 September 14, 1984 Re: Market Plaza Project Richfield, Minnesota Dear Erv and Mike: Prudential-Bache Securities Inc. (the "Underwriter") will purchase the tax-exempt securities issued on behalf of Mr. E. J. Plesko and Bor-Son Construction and Mr. Dederick for the purpose of providing funds for the development of Market Plaza in Richfield, Minnesota This purchase is subject to the following conditions: 1. The securities shall be issued for a term not to exceed 30 years and in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 for the 70,000 square foot shopping center and $6,500,000 for the 162 units of rental housing; and at an interest rate and price acceptable to the underwriter. 2. Receipt of an unqualified opinion of a nationally recognized firm of municipal bond attorneys acceptable to us stating that: a. the securities, when duly authorized and executed, are valid . and legally binding obligations; b. interest to be paid on the securities is not includible in the gross income of the recipient thereof for federal income tax purposes (except in the case of a "substantial user" or "related person" as such terms are defined under the Internal Revenue Code); C. the securities will not constitute "arbitrage bonds" as defined under the Internal Revenue Code. 3. The securities shall be secured by a collateralized loan commitment agreement from First Federal Savings & Loan of Minneapolis or by another savings and loan acceptable to us or by such other security provisions which the Underwriter in its sole discretion shall deem acceptable. The savings and loan mentioned above is favorably impressed by the project and has verbally expressed their willingness to commit to the project. • Prudential-Bache Securities Inc., 135 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1206, Chicago, IL. 60603 Tel% 312 630-7083 OW • Prudential-Bache -- 6e'ciries 4. The purchase commitment shall be subject to submission of all normal trust indenture and loan documents and receipt of normal supporting information required by the Underwriter, with such documents and information to be deemed acceptable by the Underwriter. S. Such other terms and conditions as the Underwriter deems appropriate to insure that the securities are of investment grade quality--AA or AAA, and receipt of such rating from Moody's or Standard & Poor's prior to closing. The timing for issuance and purchase of these bonds shall be 30 days for documentation and another 15 to 21 days to close and to deliver proceeds once the written collateralized loan commitment is.in hand (collateralized loan commitment expected October 1st). Very truly yours, Charles W. Freeburg Vice President • • OW tag • TwiN CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND I-LEAN ASSOCIATION MARQUF.M. AT EIGFifN s(RE,E' • ?tit'ZFAI-0IIS.%IIN-,FNOt% ,540: • ,70-70(.?O November 7, Richfield Lake Joint Venture, 40ft; c/o Arkell Development Corporation 121 E. Seventh Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: $9,000,000 Construction Loan Financing Dear Sirs: 1984 inaj In accordance with the application for construction loan financing, Twin City Savings and Loan Association (the "Lender") has approved a construction loan to Richfield-Lake Joint Venture, 7MObw a Minnesota (the "Borrower") ?•; ?a?+„?gti;?a the amount of $9,000,000. The loan will be for the purpose of financing the construction of improvements on the real estate hereinafter described. The loan proceeds shall be disbursed pursuant to a Construction Loan Agreement satisfactory in form and substance to Lender. Funds advanced will bear interest at the rate of two percent over the interest rate publicly announced from time to time by Norwest Bank Minneapolis, N.A., as its prime or base rate. In the event the Norwest Bank Prime or Base rate shall become unavailable, the Lender shall select a comparable a ternative interest rate indicator and shall so notify the Bci:-:wer. Interest only shall be payable monthly from the loan proceeds. The loan is due and payable two years from closing; provided, however, that so long as Borrower is not in default, Lender shall consent to a 12-month extension of the term of the loan upon payment of a fee equal to 1 - 1/2% of the original principal amount of the note. The Borrower shall complete construction within 1017 months of closing. The security for this loan shall consist of: (a) Approximately 1.5 acres of real estate described on Exhibit A hereto; (b) Any real estate which constitutes an integral pa;t , of the entire premises of wliich4said-real estate is a portion; (c) The improvements existing on said real estate, the improvements to be constructed on said real estate which shall include a 12-story brick, concrete-framed structure with a two-level subterranean garage for 121 cars, and an adjacent guest parking lot for 19 cars. The structure shall contain common areas for residents and 157 condominium units; (d) All hereditaments, easements, rights, privileges, and appurtenances belonging, attached, or in any way per- taining to any of the aforesaid real estate; and (e) All fixtures, machinery, equipment, appliances, vehicles, and personal property now or hereafter owned by the borrower and located in, on or about, or used or inten- ded to be used with or in connection with the use, operation or enjoyment of any of the aforesaid real estate or the improvements thereon. This loan is subject to all the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1. Title to Premises. Fee simple title to the mortgaged premises will be in, and the mortgage documents will be executed by, the Borrower. If title is not now in the Borrower, the Borrower will furnish to the Lender a copy of the purchase agreement pursuant to which the Borrower acquires title. 2. Leases. The Borrower shall have submitted all leases of the mortgaged premises to the Lender and the Lender shall have approved the credit standing of the lessees named therein and shall have found the leases to be satisfactory in form and content. All leases shall be submitted as executed or intended to be executed. Any leases not heretofore executed shall be submitted to the Lender for approval prior to execution. To the extent required by the Lender, the Borrower shall have assigned its interest in the rents on said leases to the Lender by assignments satisfactory in form and content to the Lender. Each lease at the election of the Lender will be either superior or subordinate to the lien of the mortgage and security agreement and all lessees shall have executed appropriate subordination or attornment agreements. Also, to the extent required by Lender each lessee will have executed an estoppel agreement and acknowledged receipt of a notice of assignment of rents, all satisfactory in form and content to the Lender. 3. Su_ rTvey. The Borrower shall have submitted to the Lender a perimeter land survey, in form and substance satisfac- tory to the Lender, showing the exterior lines of the mortgaged premises, the location of all improvements thereon that are to remain after construction starts together with proposed location -2- of the new improvements, showing them to be within the exterior lines, showing no easements, rights-of-way or encroachments except such as may be acceptable to the Lender. The survey shall be currently certified by a civil engineer or registered surveyor to have been prepared for the Lender and the certification shall state that there are no easements, rights-of-way or encroachments except as shown on the survey. 4. Condominium documents; releases. All documents relating to formation of the condominium must be satisfactory in form and substance to Lender. Lender will agree to provide partial-releases as to its mortgage of individual condominium units provided (a) no default exists under the loan documents, (b) Lender shall have received and approved bona fide purchase agreements covering at least 50% of the individual units at an aggregate price of at least $4.5 million, (c) Lender shall receive 90% of the proceeds of any sale, and (d) Lender shall have been given a right of first refusal as to loans obtained by purchasers of individual units. 5. Title. The Lender shall have received a commitment, in form and substance satisfactory to the Lender, of a title insur- ance company approved by the Lender to issue its policy of title insurance which (a) names the Lender as insured in the principal amount of the loan without a "pending disbursement" clause or similar limitation, (b) insures the mortgage and security agree- ment to be a valid first lien on the mortgaged premises and (c) is free from exception for W matters which would be dis- closed by a survey or inspection, (ii) mechanics', contractors' or materialmens' liens and lien claims, (iii) rights and claims of parties in possession (other than lessees approved by Lender), (iv) easements, or claims of easements not shown by the public records, and (v) other exceptions not approved by Lender. The Lender shall also have received an endorsement to such commitment stating its effective date to be the date of the closing and a letter from the title insurance company in which it undertakes not to release the proceeds of the loan until the mortgage and security agreement has been recorded and it has assured itself that it can issue its policy without any exception other than those listed in the commitment and undertakes to deliver such policy to the Lender within two business days of the closing. 6. Soil Test. Borrower shall have submitted a soil test satisfactory to Lender prepared by a soil engineering firm acceptable to Lender. 7. Commencement of Construction. Unless other arrange- ments are made with the title insurance company satisfactory to Lender, no'improvements (including.staking, grading, or removal of trees) shall be commenced and no material delivered to the premises until the note, mortgage and security agreement, and -3- construction loan agreement have been signed, until the mortgage and security agreement has been placed of record, and until the title insurance company has thereafter photographed the premises and such photograph discloses that no such improvements have been commenced or materials delivered. .r 8. Taxes and Special Assessments on Mortgaged All real estate taxes payable in the year of the clos have been paid. 9. General Contractor. The general contractor for construction of the above-described improvements shall be satisfactory to Lender, and the Lender shall have approved construction contract. 10. Completion Date. The new improvements shall be pleted no later than months from the date of closing. IS 11. Sworn Construction Statement. statement satisfactory to Lender shall be to the title insurance company. 1 the the com- M ) ? f i A sworn construction furnished to Lender and 12. Plans and Specifications. The new improvements to be constructed on the mortgaged premises will be constructed accord- ing to the plans and specifications approved by and on file with Lender, and there will be no additions or deletions to said specifications without approval of Lender. 13. Additional Funds. Borrower will provide any funds necessary in addition to the loan proceeds to complete the new improvements including all hard and soft costs associated therewith. 14. Insurance. Borrower will furnish Lender with originals of policies of builder's risk insurance, comprehensive general liability insurance, workmen's compensation insurance, and other such insurance as Lender may request, satisfactory to Lender in form, content, and amount. The policy of builder's risk insur- ance shall contain a loss payable clause in favor of Lender. 15. Disbursements by Title Company. Disbursement of the loan proceeds shall be made by the title insurance company in accordance with the terms of a construction loan agreement to be entered into between Borrower, Lender, and the title insurance company. Said agreement shall require that an architect approved by Lender furnish a certificate with respect to each disbursement stating that the construction for which the disbursement is to be made has been completed according to the plans and specifications approved by Lender in a good, workman-like manner. • -4- 16. Certificate of Completion. At the time of the final disbursement of the loan proceeds, said architect shall furnish a certificate stating that the building was constructed according to plans and specifications on file with Lender, and that the improvements are fully completed -in a good, workman-like manner. 17. Independent Architect. Lender may at its option require that its own independent architect verify and approve each or any of the architect's certificates required with respect to each disbursement of loan proceeds, including the final disbursement. 18. Zoning and Certificate of Occu ancy. The Borrower shall have submitted to the Lender evidence satisfactory to the Lender that all existing and proposed improvements on the mort- gaged premises and uses thereof comply with applicable zoning ordinances and building and use restrictions and codes, any requirements with respect to licenses and permits necessary for the lawful use and operation of the premises and any instruments of record affecting the same. The Lender shall also have received a copy of a certificate of occupancy prior to final disbursement. 19. Documentation. The Borrower shall have furnished such documentation as the Lender deems necessary or desirable for its protection. All loan documents (including the note, mortgage and security agreement, construction loan agreement, buy and sell agreement, assignment of rents, guaranty, financing statements and such other documentation as the Lender may request) shall be prepared by Lender's counsel and be satisfactory in form and content to the Lender. If the Borrower is a corporation, the Borrower shall have furnished to the Lender Board of Directors' resolutions prepared by Lender's counsel and certified by its Secretary authorizing the loan and such other evidence of due corporate authorization and execution as the Lender may request. The mortgage and security agreement shall contain the following provisions, among such others as the Lender may reasonably require: a. Tax Reserve. The Mortgagor shall pay to the Mortgagee monthly installments equal to 1/12th of such amount as the Mortgagee shall estimate to be required for the purpose of accumulating a fund with which to pay when due estimated real estate taxes and assess- ments on the mortgaged premises; such reserve shall bear no interest. • -5- . b. Limited Assumption. The Mortgagor may not sell, assign, convey or mortgage the legal or equitable title or both legal and equitable title to all or any portion of the mortgaged premises without-the written, consent of the Mortgagee. If the Mortgagor is a corpora- tion, partnership or other entity the legal, beneficial or equitable ownership of such entity shall not be changed by sale, convey- ance, transfer, assignment or encumbrance without the written consent of the Mortgagee. C. Financial Statements. The Mortgagor shall keep and maintain, at all times, full, true and accurate books of accounts, in sufficient detail to show the names of the tenants, if any, occupying the Mortgaged Property, the rent paid by each such tenant and security deposits, if any, all adequate to reflect correctly the results of the operation of the Mortgaged Property, which books and the records relating thereto shall be open to inspection and copying by the Mortgagee or its representative during ordinary business hours. The Mortgagor shall furnish to the Mortgagee, within ninety (90) days after the end of each fiscal year of the Mortgagor, a balance sheet and a statement of income and expenses, all in reasonable detail, in form and content satisfactory to the Mortgagee and prepared by a public accountant in accordance with generally accepted accounting princi- ples, showing the results of the operation of the improvements operated or situated upon the Land for such fiscal year. If the Mortgagor is a corporation, partnership, or other entity, the Mortgagor shall further supply annual disclosures (reports) to the Mortgagee setting forth the legal, equitable and beneficial owners of the shares, partnership interests or other interests. The statement shall show all encumbrances and assignments of such interests and shall contain such other information as the Mortgagee may require in order to determine the ownership and control of the Mortgagor. Borrower shall review all loan documentation prior to closing and advise Lender at least 72 hours prior to closing of any objec- tions thereto. • -6- 20. Stand-b, commitment fee of of said fee (less Borrower) must be the balance of sa: ?r Commitment Fee and Loan Fee. A nonrefundable $270,000 must be paid by the Borrower. $20,000 the $2,000 application fee already paid by paid at the time this letter is accepted, and id fee must be paid at or before closing. 21. Financial Statements. The Borrower shall have submit- ted annual operating statements for the mortgaged premises for the last three years acceptable to the Lender and certified by an independent certified public accountant. The Borrower shall also have furnished such financial statements, financial reports and credit reports and information concerning the Borrower, lessees and guarantors as the Lender may request, all acceptable to the Lender and with such certifications as the Lender may specify. 22. Condition of Premises. The mortgaged premises shall be in good condition at the time of each disbursement, substantially undamaged by fire or other hazards, and shall not have been made the subject of any condemnation proceedings. 23. No Defaults, Misrepresentations. There shall be no default in the performance of any undertaking or agreement required to be performed by the application and neither the application nor any information, representation or warranty contained therein or furnished to the Lender in connection with . the loan shall at the time of the closing contain any untrue statement or omit to state any fact necessary to make the application or any such information, representation or warranty not misleading, it being intended by the Borrower that the Lender in the making of any loan shall rely in all respects upon the truth and completeness of the application and such information, representations and warranties. 24. Sewer, Water and Streets. Sewer and water for the mortgaged premises, serviced by a municipality, shall have been completed in accordance with municipal specifications and paid for. Access to the mortgaged premises consisting of hard sur- faced streets serviced by a municipality shall have been com- pleted in accordance with municipal specifications and paid for. 25. Attorney's Opinion. The Borrower shall have submitted to the Lender an opinion of counsel satisfactory in form and content to the Lender, and furnished by counsel approved by the Lender, as to the due authorization, execution, delivery, valid- ity and enforceability of the mortgage documentation, the repre- sentations made in the paragraphs of this letter headed "Litiga- tion' and 'Compliance with Other Instruments' and such other matters as the Lender may reasonably request. 26. Expenses. The Borrower will pay all expenses incurred . by the Lender in connection with the consideration of this -7- • application, the preparation and issuance of the commitment, the closing of the loan, and if the loan is to be purchased from an interim or other lender, the transfer of the loan from such lender to the Lender, whether or not the loan is closed, includ- ing without limitation attorney's-fees, appraiser's fees, archi- tect's fees, survey costs, inspection costs, credit report costs, mortgage registration tax, recording and filing fees, escrow fees and title insurance premiums. The Lender is hereby authorized to deduct from loan proceeds any amounts necessary to pay such expenses or to pay prior liens on the mortgaged premises or establish good title thereto or to complete improvements thereon and to pay such amounts for such purposes. 27. Litigation. There shall at the time of closing be no action, proceeding or investigation pending or threatened (or any basis therefor) which might materially adversely affect the condition, business or prospects of the Borrower or any guarantor of the loan or any properties or assets of any of them, or which might adversely affect the ability of any of them to perform its obligations under the loan documentation. 28. Compliance with Other Instruments. The carrying out of the transactions contemplated hereby will not result in any violation of or be in conflict with any term of the Borrower's organizational documents or of any mortgage, indenture, lease, assignment, agreement or other instrument or any license, permit, judgment, decree, order, statute, law, ordinance, or governmental rule or regulation applicable to it, or result in the creation of any lien upon any of its properties or assets, other than as contemplated hereby. 29. Survival of Warranties and Agreements. All of the representations, warranties and agreements made herein, in the application for the loan, or in connection herewith shall survive the closing and inure to the benefit of the Lender, its succes- sors and assigns. 30. No Assignment. This commitment is not assignable by the Borrower. 31. Secondary Financing. The Borrower at the time of closing will not have obtained any financing secured by the mort- gaged premises other than this loan and will not contemplate any such other financing. 32. Brokerage. There will be no claims for brokerage commissions or fees in connection with the transactions contem- plated hereby and the Borrower hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Lender harmless in respect of any and all losses and expenses sustained by the Lender as a result of any liability to • any broker or any claim of any such liability. -8- • 33. Commitment Termination. The commitment may, at the Lender's option, be terminated if there is any material change in the security, or if either the application or any information, representation or warranty contained therein or furnished to the Lender in connection with the loan shall have contained at the time made or furnished or at any time thereafter any untrue statement or at any such time shall have omitted to state any fact necessary to make the application or any such information, representation or warranty not misleading, or if the Borrower fails to execute the loan documents, or perform any of the terms, conditions or agreements of the application or this commitment,, or if in the reasonable judgment of the Lender any condition contained herein or in the application cannot be fulfilled by the commitment termination date, or in the event of the filing by or against the Borrower of a petition in bankruptcy or insolvency or for reorganization or the appointment of a receiver or trustee or the making by the Borrower of an assignment for the benefit of creditors or the filing of a petition for arrangement by the Borrower, which is not withdrawn or dismissed, cancelled-and/or terminated within sixty (60) days after the filing of the same or entry into the same. If the loan is not delivered in accordance with the terms and conditions of the commitment or if the commit- ment is terminated hereunder or thereunder, no liability of any kind shall accrue to the Lender by reason thereof, and further, • the Borrower agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by the Lender in connection herewith or with the application, including but not limited to those listed in the paragraph hereof headed "Expenses". 34. Credit Reports. The Borrower represents and warrants that all credit information submitted or to be submitted to the Lender is or will be, as the case may be, true and correct-, and the Borrower authorizes the Lender to make such credit investiga- tions and obtain such credit reports and other financial informa- tion, written or oral, respecting the Borrower's credit and financial position as the Lender may deem necessary or desirable. 35. security for Costs and Fees. The mortgage and security agreement, and any other security instruments securing the loan, will secure all obligations of the Borrower hereunder, whether or not the mortgage and security agreement or any such other secur- ity instrument so provides. 36. Right to Inspect. As long as this commitment, or any loan pursuant thereto, is in force and effect, the Lender shall have the right at all reasonable times to inspect the property given as security for the loan. 37. Closing Date. The loan documentation shall be executed no later than December3l, 1984. 0 -9- . 38. Certificate on Outstanding Loans. The Borrower must sign a certificate listing all outstanding loans to the Borrower held by the Lender. 39. Conflict of Interests.- There shall be no relationship between the Borrower or the transaction herein contemplated and the Lender which would cause the loan to be in violation of any conflict of interests regulations applicable to the Lender or require the Lender to disclose the loan under any such regulation. 40. Personal Property. All fixtures and personal property covered by the mortgage and security agreement must have been paid for in full and the Borrower shall have executed a financing statement-in favor of the Lender with respect thereto. The Lender shall have received a Uniform Commercial Code search showing only said financing statement as a security interest. 41. Guaranty. John W. Arkell and Roger D. Derrick shall have executed a-joint and several guaranty of all loan indebted- - ness, satisfactory in form and substance to the Lender. 42. Change in Condition. There shall have been no mate- rial, adverse change in the interim period from the date of this commitment to the closing in the condition of the Borrower or in the assets, net worth or credit standing of the Borrower or any guarantor. 43. Letter of Credit. The Lender shall have received an irrevocable Letter of Credit in such face amount as Lender steal determine naming Lender as beneficiary satisfactory to Lender in form and substance Lissued by a financial institution approved by i_.-. LendTr.C(3.`1/J c» frcdle[.f Cosf tsf,ry,aT s??n;f f? to TCG Ks '4 t?;s c14?C, Can l.C. %h fl?? ++/^if;j ?LrNO NM Or ?4N?1i 1/i O.fN,!' bz re?Kl `'C'[i', ` ?J This commitment shall become null and void unless written acceptance thereof by the Borrower is received within ten days from the date hereof. Very truly yours, F • -10- TWIN CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION This commitment outlined in the foregoing letter and the conditions pertaining thereto are hereby accepted and the sum of $18,000.00 is hereby tendered as a partial payment of the non-refundable, stand-by commitment fee. J BY Its"i ti Dated: ?4? ? 14,7 11984 • 0 • • EXHIBIT A That part of Government Lot 2 lying East of Graham Avenue North of-West 66th Street, and South of West 65th Street as opened, Section 28, Township 20, Range 24, Hennepin County, Richfield, Minnesota. 0 0 co 041 Ct' U) ¦ o ,E CU CU 4n+ >11111 L CL October 18, 1984 Dick Krier Derrick Land Company 1650 Shelard Tower - Mpls., MN 55426 Dear Dick, I have attached for your information the section of the PUD ordinance outlining the final development plan requirements. Final construction drawings are not required as part of the final development plan approval. You will only-need a final site plan, final landscaping plan, and a final grading plan. Final construction must of course be in substantial compliance with the PUD plan and final development plan. The attached materials define what is considered to be "substantial compliance". Please also note that the ordinance prohibits the issuance of building permits for any structures before it is certified that the development depicted in the building permit application is consistent with the PUD plan, final development plan and conditions imposed by the council. That means we can not issue a building permit prior to approval of a final development plan. We could, I believe, issue demolition permits and grading permits but no permits for the new structures themselves. I would therefore encourage you to submit a final development plan as soon as possible for city approval. The deadline for the next regular Planning Commission meeting (November 27th) is noon on November 7th. The first regular council meeting after November 27th is December 10th. If you have any questions feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, qcfj"?q-z- Rick Jopke City Planner cc: Dennis Kraft Clayton LeFevere Bruce Palmborg Sivert Hendrickson telephone: 869-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer i :v L. ZOr??'-??'!e C'.°VS dace' ie^_e -?/?.:? =nc Jlc?^1n 31 =_=3C =^.. 5 repo:_, Ct:e -= ^5 CO?'_:_ss on. Si:.-L_ C IC a JtL _4C I,ea_:''- JC? :he 3JOi_C=-_J^. -fie C..,"? a=_er t: e ?171iC ^_C^.^155i^.^ 5<<all Si:D- '3t ^e -S :ecc--_ endction :o t,,. e c,-:,,, CC'SnC' _^e c i»=c^. 3T =°CC"? ca*?(i a?7roval '.eCC=7:O_n.__ .._Sc:)0r0%a7 . Sl:bd. :. ?i?"T Cou C11 _ Ct7a1 - ?T':) ?1° CilOZ.;; ^ =C-=0n Gy =h°- planning com_.._ssion _ e C_Coun,._l s:.21_ Ccns'Cer razoning one area desc-abed -.^. C?e Dian, in accord-2-c= x = .e ?roce-ur s Be:- =or-._ _ t1.1is Par_. a _h - =n Z_ ap roved, the area shall be rezcned as one cr _Le live t:T7es of _ prior t0 =h°_ CJn._ e.n.cement OL any Co!75 _ :C C.. .. Or ?2 _cnQ =nC a=pe: =ezon_n; _'+-_ aDD:i?dnt shall sL:o ? _ 3i u2`T°_GZ?e C ?'3 i . ., Co-'s sCen= the ?,:?I, plan, :og_t'Dr %1... an appi_CZ?iC_^. -O_ a Soec_sl use per••--= =JZ tde develoomant she'•Tr. i.. suc^ Final 7eve1 went ?la=. special use Der-at, _-- conformance w1::I :ne approved :-1ac_ ]eVeLO?(1Z - ?13n, 15_ 0°_ _SSUed by a Wo-thirds voce o. the council be for -^e PUD =is__act can be ?evoted to the uses provided for in such plan. Slibd. 5. =final Development- ?Ian. A. Final Development Plan shall consist of t.e following: (1) If required, a final plat or the land to be developed. (2) site plan su= lClenC rvr recording the en3i.n°_e_1n? ci•_J1ngs and cersisting of the following on a drawaing to scale o' net more than 50 feet to tie inch.: (a) Thl e adopted ?tiD plan -a 4th. racui_ed no diricatlor_s stipulated by the city' Council; (b) A legal description of the ?GD zoning district; (c) Location and dimension or major natural features and existing features ?Jhich ;dill ranai.-, on the tract o= land; (d) Location, dinersicr_, and arrangement cr buildings, streets, drives, t_uc< loading areas, autor-.obile paring are=as, vehicle entrances and exits, pedestrian eCCrances and exits, walks,,sk-.".IZvs, plazas and courts, bus turn outs and bus shelters, ;Mall fences and Plant'i-s des?g-ec to screen the district __cr. adiacent uses, signs and light1n1g (e) '.o DCIgr ph,,; (L) Lands`Caping; fiC-) Location or uses; (h) he decl,-_r._-_;.On of Covenants, co_nditiOt.s and restrictions and articles of o?.,-ners`tip. (_) Any add_tiCnal in c,=atzor. recuired by the council. S.._'-d. 7. PU:D ?1 _...- Final Deve'_ tr..ent Plan. development. oL t,e pLcnnec un:= _cVe_ ^..an_ G'_S___ pe _.. suJst_..____ _`.. __-nce _ --ved 7 ?l_. n.a_ e le lo.=MerC 71 _ cCndOnS _:n 0S d ?; ?;ie counc__. C -?___..ce =.•_-- ?e c_cs_'_erec subs?_n _'- - 7 C: 77' CD z (d) more t^a_1 5 per; °-1_ C_Lan_a 4- 7'-= Or -o? 1 5. :ace tr j ;ress :_eor arz= _: a :?...1'i _re C_a_.ic .:-1_255 C2r_-,--=- L_ CCCt0=5 _c _ e rJVis=Ors o= C e ?T-] _..7 cr;j Jt 1.r can-,.; _ 70s@C DV _'? COL-_L1. DC', a7DrC^a_ -`; t?2 7_3_^_ ci_ect^,?, ' 7E'_^...i: cDD!_C3C-C 3_O^O '2 - -^7= d-2 - = f required CC: jui1ding- ]e^,,,LCS s:nal! C^-?- i^s72C O_ x`17 _r s r-cCe55 =.ng CLL_?_^.? Je_'C::C _n C.,•__o=a-ce -.:i _e 7u'_-C--= -CC . r _ e5 1 Sind. 3. 30-d :or C .0--a7^e ?- c to .-e iss!=ce :D= 5-oec• - - ?e-- -° o0D__Ca-. SQc?_ 7t0' ?d2 C'e C: tV :v' ' _ 72r=O^a-Co JC"? _ _ _'a_ o r test ei_ o.-2 °sli'aC2 1'_'c OL `::e proposed =S and _-7''OV?'2'C5 in the area dasi3axed as ? ?1_itP.eC Unit d2'J 1 R art --?Ct CO^diticcled ' the sans -*acto:-v development of t;18 DT°] 17, '_0007^d c 'Jit tt 2 ?TD ?i 2 'inal Develoor-enc Kan ai.C aZV aC+d_ ._rJR,=.? CO^C._t_;,^s _=:Dos?C U pan Co^••Dl_t_on 0: t'r,e p1ad unit d?.•elcimeat as _zproved bV t^e Ci pct:-CL1 , :aspections by the plar-i^.g director and _-ie: _-spec_.,_ a: c - ' =DD-ova1 oy ta= city council, =te per er-ar.ce Dord may be -e1e=s 2C Sind. 9. Criteria and S andards (1) TeL.d _52 _..=2. - - - '11t'ad it a 2i1D discriCL all be Bete-~1i-2 o' t_12 ;Cross?la:'Cy_r?a ot':.eer _:CCL of land, t:?e oroDOsed t-,---)e of lanced unit 2`i21 ^a t district and the uses assigned to t:1e ?Tj:) district. `? - , (2) TI -e 12-14 use iAt2Z51.C rating tOr t-0se arC.25 0. .^2?D CLS :_ iCt Ccsi?r3ted ear residential uses, of a coMOlra:Loii o: reside-tial and -tonresi- denti21 uses, shall 72 as ffollot?-s : GRCSS U, D .RR?, ?R PC-1 ?`'? ?C-? & SOUAR-7 77-77 =.CnrS A Z?^T•r' 'T l -T\'. ,''3,300-9i,t20 1-2 0 T J 37,120-130,630 2-3 =-3- 30 130,030-17-,2y0 3-= ;? 17!•,2!'0-2_7,300 ,3 34 217,300-251,360 3-6 50 3_, over 251,300 .6- 35 JJ d use .:1=_-s_C' rat.-z LCC _ 1052 ?C2_5 _ _ C 12 Jt ` -- 7, 1l G,)j -?- =^_ 50_ 7. _ Z' . 1 1 l n?'S J _, J 7? prep ]•..? ?^_? ? 71 7 .1 I SEP 17 1984 City of Richfield The Derrick Corrpanies 1650 Shelcrd Tower Minneapolis, MN 55426 • 612,'546-2276 14 September 1984 Mr. Clayton LeFevere LEFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN, & DRAWZ 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Subject: Market Plaza Development Dear Clayton: The purpose of this letter is to confirm our understanding of how the over-run would be handled by the Development Team. We would propose to handle the over-run the following way: 1. We would increase the condominium market value to $11,466,000. This should give you an additional bonding.capacity of $287,000. 2,. Assuming the difference is not made up by increased increment due to under-projections, the difference between $400,000 and the condominium contribution would • be made up by the apartment building/ commercial, shopping center project. This would be done by providing the City with a second mortgage in the amount of the difference. The mortgage would be due and payable when the shopping center and apartment building are sold. We would not pay any interest on the remaining amount of money, unless we made additional profit. So, for example, if we made more than 147 return on investment, we would then pro-rate that above 147 with the HRA as an interest payment. Of course, this arrangement will have to be formalized, but it represents a concrete concept of how we feel we can maintain project feasibilty and also solve the over-run problem experienced in buying the Godfather and Strom property. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. S' rely, Richard C. Krier, AICP Vice President Derrick Companies RCK:clb cc: E. J. Plesko Mike Gould John Arkell Steve Yurick • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 406 Agenda November 26, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: -Council Consideration of a Proposal to F-und a Promotional Brochure to Highlight the Advantages of our City and School System Council Members:- Is Officials from the School District, the Chamber of Commerce and the City Manger have met on several occasions to explore the possibility of a joint venture to prepare an outstanding promotional brochure that could be used to: 1. Tell Richfield's story to families or individuals seeking a desirable residential community offering excellent schools, quality municipal services and co'nvenient shopping; 2. Promote Richfield to young families; 3. Explain the economic assistant programs available to small businesses; and, 4. Serve as a promotional brochure that can be used by realtors, financial institutions, the Chamber of Commerce, the school district and city government. Mr. Lowell Larson, School Superintendent, has been exploring the cost and other considerations of a promotional brochure for the school district for several months at the request of the School Board. The cost estimates for a 16-20 page high quality promotional brochure will run between $11,000 to $15,000. An initial order of 10,000 copies would be ordered. ,••? ?- ..w,....riw.: •_.?s...?.¢a.:,::dY'r:i.::?a?.:sta.s:?.la?mrmsG+ib*'.. „.?--: -•. .r ,•,,,? .?.-?_:w,?.s4rJ.•.,:.tn:.c•.I?w:ae 3-.n::.??ro..¢?:a,_vrY,.! ?e"x__..a.,m :?uv?.?at,.wiso?s.u.3+Y?.:" -.a=_'??musi?aai -2- At the November 13, 1984 City Council meeting, the City • Council approved the printing of this brochure, from HRA funds as recommended by the City Manager. The HRA considered this matter at their meeting of November 19, 1984. The HRA also unanimously supported the printing of the brochure and to provide the-funds necessary. However, the HRA believes the purpose of the brochure serves both the objectives of the City Council as well as the HRA. Therefore, the HRA requests the City Council to share in 50% of the cost. Funds are available in the City Council and the City Manager revised 1984 budgets to pay for half the cost of printing this brochure. _ It is recommended that the city council approve the payment from the General Fund Budget for one-half of the $7,500 cost to print this brochure. pe,ct£q-;ly submitted, John G. Cartwright City Manager JGC/eja ?J U CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager J;?7 Council Letter No. 405 Agenda November 26, 1784' The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Request By Twin City Novelty Company To Appear Before The City Council Regarding Mechanical Amusement Device (Video Games) License Fees Council Members: During the past year representatives of the mechanical amusement device industry have been in communication with the city staff to request the city to reduce the annual license permit fees for mechanical amusement devices. During the current year the license fee for such devices is $105 per machine. The license fee established by the city council for 1985 is $110 per machine. On March 15, 1984, representatives of the mechanical amusement industry met with the City Clerk, the Public Safety Director, the Director of Administrative Services and myself to discuss this issue. At that meeting, they were informed that the established fees for mechanical amusement devices (generally video games), can be justified and that the city staff would not recommend any decrease in the established license fee. The city staff position with regard to the fees is based on the fact that three to four on-site inspections per year are required to assure that mechanical amusement devices are properly licensed. Additionally, our experience has shown these particular amusement activities generate police service requests based upon the nuisance potential related to these activities. A representative of the Twin City Novelty Company has asked for an opportunity to make a presentation to the city council on behalf of a decrease in the established license fees. This presentation has been scheduled as a part of the regular council meeting on November 26, 1984. Tom Morgan, Director of Public Safety, will be present at that meeting to respond to questions regarding this license fee structure. Respectf y mitted, ohn G. Car Wright City Manager • b Twin M1f wl+.: city Novelty A Subsidiary of Lieberman Enterprises 9549 PENN AVENUE SOUTH • BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 • 612/887-5353 October 30, 1984 Mr. John Cartwright City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mr. Cartwright, I am writing this letter as a request to be slated on your Monday, November 26, 1984 City Council meeting agenda. On that night you will be having a public hearing relating to the increased fees of your vending • machine licenses. Since one of the topics of the evening will be machine licenses, myself and other businessmen in our industry would like to address the Council and Richfield staff as to the concern we have regarding the high coin game machine license fees imposed by the City of Richfield. We did meet earlier this year and you did respond to our questions, but the results do not sit well with the members of our industry and this appears to be a good time and place to discuss these problems and concerns. As in the past, your cooperation is greatly appp eciated. /11 Since y Yo s, Gene Wins-/teeeac f Twin City Novelty cc: Norm Pink (850 Decatur Ave. N., Minneapolis 55427) Scott Nelson (9201 Penn Ave. So., Bloomington 55431) Robert Latz (4550 IDS Center, Minneapolis 55402) 0