12-08-86 agenda•
"!t////
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 469
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Resolution designating City's contribution toward Health, Term
Life and - Dental Insurance premium for General Services and
Management employees.
Background:
At the present time, the City contributes to the cost of premiums
for four kinds of insurance coverages available to City
employees. General Service and Management employee contributions
are discussed within this letter, other employees are covered
under the terms of labor agreements.
A $10,000 Term Life Insurance policy is provided for all General
Services and Management employees. The $10,000 limit was first
implemented in 1985, and is recommended to remain at that level
through 1987. The City now pays the full premium for this
insurance, which was $1.80 per month per employee for 1986.
Premium rates for Term Life Insurance will remain the same for
1987.
The second type of insurance provided to General Services and
Management employees is a self - funded group Dental Insurance. In
1986, the City contributed $13.50 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, which for 1986 was $17.75. Inasmuch as
Dental Insurance is self- funded, the City establishes the dental
rates from year to year internally, based upon administrative and
benefit pay -out cost data. For 1986 the estimated cost of
employee coverage is $14.00.
The third type of insurance coverage available to Management and
General Services employees is group health coverage. Currently,
employees may select among three optional plans available through
the Hennepin County program. The City pays the full individual
employee premium per month and provides an additional
contribution toward dependent coverage up to a specified maximum
insurance premium. Such maximum contributions vary depending on
the employee group. In 1986, the City contributed up to a
maximum of $140.00 per month per employee for Management and
General Services employees.
Typically, group health insurance rates for the coming year are
made available to each municipality in November of the preceding
year. However, Hennepin County is currently conducting a study
of its Health Insurance plans. The purpose of this study is to
determine the effectiveness of its current health insurance
offerings, which include three HMO plans (Group Health,
MedCenters and Physician's Health). In conjunction with this
study, Hennepin County has negotiated a rate freeze until April
1, 1987. The City can expect that there will be a premium
increase at that time. However, as of this date, it is
impossible to predict exactly what type of increase will be
forthcoming, or how the group health insurance offerings now
available may differ. Thus, any recommendation for increases in
the City's contribution for Group Health Insurance coverage for
Management and General Services employees is being deferred until
the spring of 1987.
The fou 'rth type of insurance provided to General Services and
Management employees is disability insurance. Short -Term
Disability Insurance is self- funded out of the current operating
budget, similar to the manner in which sick leave costs are
covered. Long -Term Disability insurance (LTD) is provided
through a group LTD policy secured by the City. Currently, the
City pays a premium rate of 55� per $100 of salary for covered
employees. The LTD premium rates will remain the same for 1987.
The average monthly premium cost projected for 1987 are $9.91 per
month for General Services employees, and $17.33 per month for
Management employees.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the following actions be taken with
respect to the City's insurance contributions for Management and
General Services employees:
A. Life Insurance
That the city contribution rate remain at $1.80 per month per
employee for 1987.
B. Dental Insurance
That the per employee per month contribution be increased from
$13.50 to $14.00. As in the past, employees who desire dependent
coverage would pay the full cost of such additional premium.
C. Long -Term Disability Insurance
That there be no increase in the Long -Term Disability coverage
and the city contribution rate remain the same at $.55 per $100
of salary.
D. Group Health Insurance
That the City continue the current contribution level of paying
the cost of individual, and up to a maximum of $140.00 per month
until such time as rate increases are known in the spring of
1987. At that time, a recommendation for a contribution
modification may be made.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. To provide adequate insurance protection for the Management
and General Services employee groups, which are comparable to
is other City employee groups as well as employees performing
similar jobs in comparable communities.
2. The 1987 Budget includes the funding necessary to provide the
premium contribution increase recommended, and also contains
funding to provide for additional contribution increases for
group health insurance once those amounts are determined.
3. Premium rates for the Term Life Insurance and the Disability
insurances have remained the same, thus no increases have
been recommended. Additionally, the coverage has been
determined to be comparable and adequate for 1987.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council may take no action to increase the insurance
premiums beyond the 1986 funding level. However, at this
juncture, the only increase recommended is a 500 per month
per employee increase in Dental Insurance.
2. The City Council may take action to establish a contribution
rate for Group Health Insurance. However, it may be easier
to assess the increases necessary and the impact upon
affected employees once increases are known. Insofar as
rates have been frozen until April of 1987, a decision to
delay Health Insurance contribution increases will not have
an adverse impact upon employees until such time as the new
rates are established in April.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
The City should implement the Dental premium increase, and
reestablish the current contribution rate for other insurance
coverages by January 1, 1987, the beginning of the new insurance
coverage period. Further action, of course, will be requested in
the Spring of 1987 when the Health Insurance premium rates are
settled.
Respectfully submitted,
'�V
Ja s D. Prosser
Ci y Manager
JDP:sb
cc: Administrative Services Director
Personnel Manager
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION
TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE
PREMIUM FOR GENERAL SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the hospital- medical /surgical group health insurance
plan is available from the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing
Organization for City employees and their families, and
WHEREAS, 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,
1987, the City shall contribute a maximum of $140.00 per month
toward an employee health insurance premium for all eligible non-
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 $14.00 monthly premium for
the employee dental insurance plan and the $1.80 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 $155.80 per month. Such
contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1, 1987.
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,
Minnesota this 8th day of December, 1986.
John Hamilton Mayor
0 ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 468
December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
First Reading of an Ordinance Amendment establishing and defining
a classification of employee entitled Project (Special Funded)
Employee.
Background:
In the course of administering a variety of public service
programs, the City occasionally has the opportunity to obtain
special funding from a number of non - general revenue sources.
For example, in 1986 and 1987, the City is a recipient of grant
funding from Hennepin County for the City's recycling program.
The City also receives grant funding for a variety of other
programs, such as energy related projects.
Additionally, the City 'occasionally finds itself in a position of
undertaking a large number of capital improvement projects or
special assessment projects which are one or two years in
duration, and which require temporary additional staff. In both
cases, special projects and temporary grants, there is often
adequate funding provided to the City to not only carry out the
respective program, but to also provide for an employee whose
responsibility is dedicated to the accomplishment of that
program. At the same time, it is neither desirable nor necessary
to extend employment beyond the term of the project.
City Personnel Ordinance limits the eligibility of group
insurances and holiday /leave benefits to permanent employees.
Thus, there is a difficult situation when City staff examines the
need for a full -time employee to serve an employment term of a
year or perhaps two, since these "project" employees are full
time, but not receiving full time benefits.
In an effort to address these concerns, an attached ordinance has
been prepared and recommended for adoption. The amendment
modifies the City's Personnel Ordinance by establishing and
defining a classification of employee entitled Project (Special
Funded) Employee. This classification defines project employees
as full -time employees whose term of employment is directly
related to the operation of a specific program or project, and
whose compensation is specifically allocated from designated
revenues associated with such a project, such as grants or
special assessment proceeds.
The employment of a project employee would terminate upon the
termination of such special funding, or at the end of each year,
unless it was to be renewed by the City Manager. However, for
the term of such an individual's employment with the City, the
employee would be eligible for Group Health Insurance and
Holiday, Vacation, Personal Leave and Disability Insurance, as a
permanent employee would be.
The new classification title attempts to balance the need to
provide some sort of a benefit package to full -time employees who
serve in year -by -year capacity with the City, while limiting the
growth of permanent employees in the City.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached resolution
for First Reading, establishing and defining a classification of
employee entitled Project (Special Funded) Employee.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. With the ongoing pressure to find outside funding for a
number of programs in the City, which may be of limited
duration, it is essential to find a means by which we may
staff such programs, when such staffing involves a commitment
of full -time employment for periods of one year or more. It
is beneficial to both the City and the prospective employee
to offer a limited benefit package to such employees.
2. It is important to have flexibility within the Personnel
Ordinance and budget process, to be able to make hiring
decisions on certain positions which are directly related to
the receipt of special funding which may be discontinued.
It is important for both the City and such employee to have
an understanding that once such funding has terminated, or
once such projects have been completed, that the position
would also terminate. Thus, both parties may have a complete
and accurate expectation of the employment relationship upon
hiring.
3. The City now faces a situation with administration of
recycling grants (Recycling Specialist) and engineering
services (Engineering Technician) for assessment projects
where full -time help is needed and would be paid for by grant
funding and special assessment project funding respectively.
While the 1987 Engineering Division budget provides adequate
funds for these positions, including benefits, it would be
desirable to tie these positions to the respective projects
they would be hired to work on. Thus, with the new
classification of employee, the positions could receive
benefits without adding to the permanent positions of the
City.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City could make no provision to allow limited benefits
for employees who are hired as full -time employees for
periods of a year or more, and who are hired for the
execution of duties and responsibilities related to a special
program.
2. The City could hire employees to perform such programs and
make such employees regular permanent employees incorporated
in the budget. However, this would make it more difficult to
•
•
associate the position with the particular program
responsibilities the individual may have been hired to
perform, and would serve to continually pressure the City to
increase the number of permanent full -time positions in the
City.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt this Ordinance
modification upon First Reading at the December 8, 1986, meeting,
so the Public Hearing and Second Reading may be set for December
22, 1986. This would allow the City an adequate time frame to
hire two such positions which are provided for in the 1987 Budget
in a timely manner.
Respectfully submitted,
jJamD. Prosser
ager
JDP /eja
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER II,
PART III OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Chapter II, Part III of the Ordinance Code of the City
entitled: "Personnel -- Definitions -- Penalties and Separations, is
hereby amended in the following respects:
1. By amending Subdivision 27 of Section 2.29 to read as
follows:
Subd. 27. "Project (Special Funded) Emolovee" means a full-
time employee whose duties are directly related to the operation
of a specific program or project and whose compensation is
specifically allocated from designated non-general revenue funds,
such as, but not limited to grants or special assessments. With
respect to Group Insurance, Holidays, Vacation Leave and Personal
Leave /Short -Term Disability benefits only, such employees shall
be treated as permanent employees.
2. The City Clerk is instructed to renumber Subdivisions 28
through 41 of Section 2.29 to accommodate the above insertion
of the above Subdivision.
3. By amending Subdivision 2 of Section 2.34, adding paragraph
(4) to read as follows:
(4) Termination of Project Employees - The employment of a
Project Employee shall terminate upon the termination of such
funding or at the end of each year unless extended by the City
Manager. Such terminations shall not be construed as layoffs.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this day of , 1986.
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
•
John Hamilton Mayor
V
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 467
December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Public hearing on the appeal of Hearing Examiner's denial of a
variance request to allow the installation of a 6 foot high chain
link fence forward of the front of the building setback at 7731
4th Avenue.
Background:
Mr. Michael A. Blaylock has requested a variance to allow the
installation of a 6 foot high chain link fence forward of the
front line of the building. The property is located at 7731 4th
Avenue and has recently received preliminary plat approval from
the'city.
The case was heard by the Richfield Hearing Examiner on October
7, 1986. The Hearing Examiner denied the variance. The
applicant is now appealing this decision. A copy of the hearing
Examiner's findings is attached.
The property is in the I (General Industrial) district and the
existing commercial use is permitted in the "I" district.
Zoning Ordinance Requirements:
1. Section 3.29, subdivision 15, indicates that no wall, fence
or hedge more than four feet in height shall be constructed
or permitted forward of the front line of the building
extended to the side lot lines.
2. Section 3.40 and 3.40A, outlines the process for granting a
variance.
State Statute Requirements:
Minnesota State Statutes 462.357, subdivision 6 outlines
conditions which must be met for variances to be granted.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the variance request for installation of a
6 foot high chain link fence within the required building setback
area at 7731 4th Avenue be denied.
Basis of Recommendation:
Recommendation for denial of the variance is based on the staff
review and conclusion that the variance request does not meet the
city and state standards for granting of the variance. The
review of the proposal against the city and state legal
requirements is outlined in the following.
1. The granting of the variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights.
There is an eight foot fence securing the property which
currently does not extend into the building setback area.
Applicant proposes to replace the existing fence with a 6
77-17y-
foot chain link fence and extending it into the building
setback area to accommodate a trailer on the lot. It is
staff's opinion that the denial of the variance would not
preclude reasonable use of the property. A 6 foot chain link
fence could be installed securing the property without
extending into the building setback area.
2. There are no unique circumstances present on this particular
site that necessitates granting of the variance.
3. The granting of the variance would not alter the character of
the neighborhood. The abutting property to the north is used
both for residential and commercial use. To the east of the
property would be the new Arby's restaurant. The proposed
fence would not adversely affect traffic visibility.
The site is across the street from some apartments.. The
proposed chain link fence with slats will provide some
screening of the equipment and materials on the Blaylock
site. Better screening could be provided with a different
fence design. However, the issues being discussed are the
.location and height of the fence not the design of the fence.
The ordinance would allow an 8 foot high fence to be
constructed even with the front of the building and a 4 foot
high fence in front of the building. It is staff's opinion
that the °proposed 6 foot fence forward of the building would
not provide better screening than a 6 or 8 foot fence even
with the front of the building. The apartments are also
located on industrially zoned property which according to
Richfield ordinances, reduces the screening requirements on
the Blaylock property.
Alternative Recommendation:
The alternative recommendation would be to make findings that the
request meets the state and local criteria for granting variances
and overturn the hearing examiner's decision.
Decision Mode:
The public hearing was continued to the December 8, 1986 City
Council meeting.
JDP /eja
•
Respectf lly submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Exe tive Director
lJ
•
1�
W
Z
W
r
ti
T
r,
SITE PLAN
1 -494
� 9 z -
NORTH
1\
STRUCTURE
- -- WOODEN FENCE
PROPOSED 6 FT.
CHAIN LINK FENCE
Ion
N
0
A
U
M
d'
L0
U)
CU
4-+
O
U)
W
E
■
i
cu
Ma
C
CU
L
O
a
O
O
c
Variance Request
CASE NO. 86- V- 9 -VL -5
APPLICANT: Mr. Michael A. Blaylock
PROPERTY LOCATION: 7731 4th Avenue South
HEARING EXAMINER: MR. VERN LUETTINGER
HEARING DATE: October 7, 1986
APPEARANCES: Mr. Michael A. Blaylock
7731 4th Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing,
the undersigned makes the following findings of
fact, conclusions and decisions.
A. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Notice of public hearing was proper. Notice
was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of
the site in question as required by city
ordinances. The ten day notice requirement was
also met.
2. The street address and legal descriptions of the
property in question are as follows:
That part of the West 139.4 feet of the East 630
feet of the South 302 feet of Government Lot 1,
Section 34, Township 28, Range 24, lying
Northerly of State Highway No. 100.
Street address of the property is 7731 4th
Avenue South.
3. The zoning of the site in question is I (General
Industrial) District.
4. The variance requested is to allow the
installation of a 6 foot high chain link fence- -
forward of the front line of the building.
5. The reason for the request is to provide
security to the premise.
telephone: 869 -7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
B. CONCLUSIONS
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, subdivision 6
provides for the granting of variance to the literal
provisions of the zoning regulations in instances
where their strict enforcement would cause undue
hardship to the owners of the property under
consideration. In determining whether to grant or
deny the requested variance, I specifically make the
following conclusions:
1. Is the granting of the variance necessary for
the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights?
I conclude�,��` j 7" l.S iV oZ
2. Are there special circumstances or conditions
affecting the particular land or building
referred to in the application, not caused by
the property owner, which are not common to
other properties in this or similar districts?
I conclude N' PJ
3. Will the granting of the variance alter the
essential character of the neighborhood or -
locality?
I conclude /l7
4. Are there any conditions which must be attached
to the granting of the variance to ensure
compliance and to protect adjacent properties-?--
I conclude �f�ory �'
•
•
•
C. DECISION
Based upon the foregoing, the undersigned
determines that the request be
DATED: /r, / ] , 1986
J
Hearing Examiner
City of Richfiel
BLAYLOCK PLUMBING CO. O ®®
IMTMk An" 10% Ti
7731 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH 612 - 869 -7531 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55423
Cctober 28, 1986
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Ave. So.
Richfield, 1.21. 55423
Attention: Towhid Kazi
This letter is to inform you that we would like to appeal
the dEcision of the Hearing Examiner, regarding the Variance
neo_uest Case #86- V- 9 -VL -5.
Sincerely,
'1 Cc S �
n:ichael z. Blaylock
President
•
r'
. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 466
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of renewal application for the 1987 Club On -Sale
and Sunday Liquor Licenses for the Fred Babcock V.F.W. Post 5555,
710 Lakeshore Drive.
Background:
On December 3, 1986 the city received renewal applications for
the club on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses for the Fred Babcock
V.F.W. Post 5555. The required license and investigative fees
have been paid.
The officers of the V.F.W. are Mr. James W. Robbins, Commander;
Mr. Gerald T. Courteau, Sr. Vice - Commander; Mr. Arthur H.
Paulson, Jr. Vice - Commander. Mr. Roy J. Hitchcock continues'to
be the Club Manager. None of these individuals have any known
criminal record.
The investigation conducted by the Department of Public Safety
has determined that all 1986 real estate, state withholding and
sales taxes have been paid and are current. The building and
property continue to be owned by the V.F.W.
• The required $10,000 surety bond has been submitted and lists the
United Fire & Casualty Company as carrier of the bond. The city
has been notified in writing by the Ken Jarcho Agency, that proof
of public and liquor liability insurance coverage will be
provided through the Transcontinental Insurance Company prior to
January 1, 1987.
An accountant's statement prepared by the accounting firm of
LaFayette and Fairchild, Ltd., has been supplied to the city.
This statement covers the period from July 1, 1985 through June
30, 1986. The breakdown of figures is as follows:
Food Sales: $470,353
Beverage Sales: 452,011
Total Sales: 922,364
From November 1985 through October 1986 there were 16 Public
Safety contacts with the V.F.W. This compares to 28 contacts for
the previous year. The breakdown of these contacts is as
follows:
1985 1986
Criminal: 14 16
(bar -type included ( 4 ) ( 1 )
in criminal)
Parking /Traffic 1 2
Medical Emergency 4 2
Public Assists 7 3
. Licensing /Insp. 2 3
TOTAL: 28 16
Recommendation:
Approve the renewal of the club on -sale and Sunday liquor
licenses for the Fred Babcock VFW Post 5555.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both
the city ordinances and state statutes pertaining to club on
sale and Sunday liquor.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset
to the community.
Alternatives:
1. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
2.. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses
requested. However, based upon the information submitted by
the applicant and the investigation conducted by the
Department of Public Safety, there appears to be no reason to
deny the renewal of the licenses requested.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the renewal of
all on -sale, club on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses has been
scheduled for December 8, 1986. These licenses expire January 1,
1987. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing
regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond December 8th, any
subsequent hearing must be held before the licenses expire.
Respe tfully submitted,
Ja s D. Prosser
Cit Manager
JDP /eja
�7
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 465
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of Renewal application of 1987 On -Sale Liquor and
Sunday Liquor Licenses for the Ground Round, Inc., 1500 East 78th
Street.
Background:
On November 20, 1986, the city received renewal applications for
the on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses for the Ground Round
restaurant. The required license fees were submitted with the
application.
The corporate structure of the Ground Round, Inc., has changed
significantly during the past year. Mr. Eric Bernard continues
to serve as Chairman of the Board and CEO, however, Mr. Harold F.
Von Ulmer of Boston, Massachusetts, replaced Mr. David Goebel as
Vice - President and Director of the corporation. Mr. Stuart R.
Plumer of Norwood, Massachusetts, replaced Mr. Robert Brady"as
Corporate Secretary and Mr. Robert G. King of Hingham,
Massachusetts, replaced Mr. David Halligan as Corporate
Treasurer. None of these individuals has any known criminal
record.
During 1986, Mr. Robert E. Schams replaced Mr. Karl Gaardsmoe as
Manager of the restaurant. Mr. Schams is a resident of
Minneapolis who has no known criminal record and appears to be
well qualified for this position.
The investigation conducted by the Department of Public Safety
determined that all 1986 real estate, state withholding and sales
taxes have been paid and are current. The building and property
continue to be owned by the A.G. Bogen Company. The lease
agreement between the property owner and the applicant remains in
effect and all lease payments are current.
The required $10,000 surety bond has been submitted and lists the
Reliance Insurance Company as carrier of the bond. A
certificate of insurance detailing public and liquor liability
coverages has also been supplied and lists National Union Fire
and Birmingham Insurance Companies as affording the required
coverages.
An accountant's statement prepared by Mr. Gary E. Serino, CPA,
has been supplied to the city. The statement covers the period
from October 1, 1985 through September 30, 1986. The breakdown
of sales is as follows:
Food Sales: $1,140,618
Beverage Sales: 689,822
Total Sales: 12830,440
From November 1985 through October of 1986, there were 34 public
safety contacts with the Ground Round. This compares with 33
contacts for the previous year. A breakdown of these contacts is
as follows:
1985 1986
Criminal Contacts 13 15
"bar type" ( 4 ) ( 4 )
(included in criminal)
Misc. Non - Criminal 3 0
Assists 9 12
Traffic /Parking 6 5
Inspections /Licensing 2 2
TOTAL CONTACTS 33 34
Recommendation:
Approve the renewal of the 1987 on -sale liquor and Sunday liquor
licenses for the Ground Round Restaurant, Inc. 1500 East 78th
Street.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both
the city ordinance code and the state statutes pertaining to
on -sale and Sunday liquor licensing.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset
to the community.
Alternatives:
1. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses
requested. However, based upon the information supplied by
the applicant and the investigation conducted by the
Department of Public Safety, there appears to be no reason to
deny the renewal of the license requested.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the renewal of
all on -sale, and Sunday liquor licenses has been scheduled for
December 8, 1986. These licenses expire January 1, 1987,
therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing
regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond December 8th, any
subsequent hearing must be held before the license expires.
Respectfully submitted,
Jaf
Prosser
Ciger
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 464
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of renewal application of 1987 On -Sale Liquor,
Sunday Liquor and Tavern Licenses for the Consul Restaurant
Corporation d /b /a Chi's Chi's Mexican Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet
Avenue South.
Background:
On November 24, 1986, the city received renewal applications for
the on -sale, Sunday liquor and Tavern (dance) licenses for the
Consul Restaurant Corporation d /b /a Chi -Chi's Mexican
Restaurant. The required license and investigative fees have
been submitted.
With one exception, the corporate structure of the organization
remains the same as last year and is as follows: Mr. James H.
Crivits, Chairman and CEO; Mr. William D. Etter, President; Mr.
David C. Stevens, Vice - President; Mr. William C. Kuhlmann,
Secretary; Mr. Robert A. Lamp, Treasurer; Mr. David Stevens
replaced Mr. Ted O'Shaugnessy as Vice - President. None of the
above listed individuals have any known criminal record.
During 1986, Mr. Chris J. McHugh replaced Mr. Craig Schreiber,
who accepted employment in another state, as Manager of the
Richfield restaurant. Mr. McHugh served as Manager of the St.
Paul Chi -Chi's before being appointed Manager of the Richfield
operation. Mr. McHugh seems to be well qualified for his
position and has no known criminal record.
The investigation conducted by the Department of Public Safety
has determined that all 1986 real estate, state withholding and
sales taxes have been paid and are current. The building and the
property continue to be owned by the Marno -Max Company. The
lease agreement between the applicant and the property owner
continue to be in effect and all lease payments are current.
The $10,000 surety bond has been submitted and lists the Aetna
Casualty and Surety Company as carrier of the bond. A
certificate of insurance detailing public and liquor liability
has also been supplied and also lists the Aetna Casualty and
Surety Company as affording the required coverage.
An accountant's statement prepared by the internal auditing
department of Consul Corporation has been supplied to the city.
This statement covers the period from October 1, 1985 through
September 30, 1986. The breakdown of these figures is as
follows:
Food Sales: $2,743,970
Beverage Sales: 1,864,912
Total Sales: 4,608,882
During the 1986 license renewal process the city brought to the
attention of the applicant areas of concern regarding the
preparation of food and the cleanliness of the kitchen area of
the restaurant. During the past year, the applicant has worked
closely with the city in developing a self- inspection program in
order to resolve these problems. As a result, the applicant has
maintained an inspection rating above the minimum standards set
by the Environmental Health Department for a restaurant with a
liquor license.
From November 1985 through October 1986, there were 113 public
safety contacts with Chi -Chi's Restaurant. This compares with 91
contacts for the previous year. The breakdown of these contacts
is as follows:
1985
Criminal 24
(bar -type included
in criminal)
Traffic /Parking
Medical Emergency
Assists
Insp. /Licensing
1986
34
8 )
( 3 )
12
11
3
9
48
53
3
6
TOTAL 91 113
Is It should be noted that in 1986 the applicant cooperated with the
Public Safety Department during the course of an ongoing criminal
investigation related to narcotics. In addition, the applicant
has hired extra security personnel in order to more effectively
check the identification of individuals who attempt to purchase
alcoholic beverages.
Recommendation:
Approve the license renewals for on -sale liquor, Sunday liquor,
and Tavern Licenses for the Consul Restaurant Corporation d /b /a
Chi's Chi's Mexican Restaurant for 1987.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both
the city ordinances and the state statutes pertaining to on-
sale and Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset
to the community.
Alternatives:
1. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses
requested. However, based upon the information supplied by
the applicant and the investigation conducted by the
Department of Public Safety, there appears to be no reason to
deny the renewal of the licenses requested.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the renewal of
all on -sale, Sunday liquor and Tavern licenses has been scheduled
for December 8, 1986. These licenses expire January 1, 1987.
Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing
regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond December 8th, any
subsequent hearing must be held before the licenses expire.
JDP /eja
•
C�
Res e fully submitted,
Ja s D. Prosser
C' y Manager
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 463
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of renewal application for 1987 On -Sale, Sunday
Liquor and Tavern (dance) Licenses for Champps of Richfield,
Inc., 700 West 66th Street.
Background:
On December 2, 1986, the city received renewal applications for
the on -sale, Sunday liquor and tavern (dance) licenses for
Champps of Richfield, Inc.
The corporate structure remains the same as when the licenses
were first granted in September, 1986. Mr. Dean Vlahos continues
to be the sole officer and stockholder of the corporation. Mr.
Vlahos has no known criminal record.
Since the opening of the restaurant has.been delayed until at
least February, 1987, no Manager has yet been appointed.
However, once a Manager has been appointed, an application will
be made for a Manager's license and the necessary investigative
fees will be paid.
The lease agreement between the applicant and the owner of the
building continues to be in effect. Payments on the lease
commenced in November, 1986.
The required $10,000 surety bond has been renewed for 1987. This
bond lists the Great American Insurance Company as carrier of the
bond. A certificate of insurance detailing public and liquor
liability coverages will be supplied by the applicant's insurance
agent, Paulet /Slater, Inc., prior to the opening of the
restaurant and prior to the issuance of any licenses.
No accountant's statement is available nor has the Department of
Public Safety had any contacts With the establishment due to the
delay in the opening of the restaurant.
The applicant has requested that the pro -rated license fees in
the amount of $2,604.75 that he paid for his 1986 license, either
be refunded to him or applied to his 1987 license fees. The
applicant understands that all investigative fees are not
refundable.
Recommendation:
1. Approve the renewal of the
tavern licences for Champps
following stipulations:
1987 on -sale, Sunday liquor and
of Richfield, Inc., with the
0 A. The applicant receives final approval and inspection for
all building plans.
•
_A ./
B. The applicant supplies proof of public and liquor
liability coverage.
C. The applicant designates a Manager for the Richfield
restaurant and that person is granted a Manager's
license.
D. The balance of all license and investigative fees are
paid in full.
2. Approve a credit in the amount of $2,604.75 to be applied
to his 1987 license fees.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both
the city ordinance codes and the state statutes pertaining to
on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business will be an
asset to the community.
Alternatives:
1. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses
requested. However, based upon the information supplied by
the applicant and the investigation conducted by the
Department of Public Safety, there appears to be no reason to
deny the renewal of the licenses requested.
3. The council could decide to amend or drop the stipulations.
4. The council could decide not to refund or credit the 1986
license fees that have already been paid.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the renewal of
all on -sale, Sunday liquor and tavern licenses has been scheduled
for December 8, 1986. These licenses expire January 1, 1987,
therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing
regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond December 8th, any
subsequent hearing must be held before the licenses expire.
JDP /eja
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
Ci Manager
V.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 462
AGENDA DECEMBER 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of renewal application for the 1987 Club On -Sale
and Sunday Liquor Licences for the Minneapolis /Richfield American
Legion Post #435, located at 6501 Portland Avenue South.
Background:
On November 22, 1986, the city received renewal applications for
the club on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses for the
Minneapolis /Richfield American Legion Post #435. The required
license and investigative fees have been paid.
The officers of the American Legion are Mr. Henry Vogelgesang,
Commander; Mr. Ted Stage, Adjutant; Mr. James Daly, Finance
Officer. During 1986, Mr. Thomas Hanson replaced Mr. Fred
Primoli as Club Manager. Mr. Hanson appears to be well qualified
for his position. None of the above listed individuals have any
known criminal record.
The investigation conducted by the Department of Public Safety
has determined that all 1986 real estate, state withholding and
sales tax have been paid and are current. The building and the
property continue to be owned by the American Legion.
The required $10,000 surety bond has been submitted and lists the
United Fire and Casualty Company as carrier of the bond. A
certificate of insurance detailing public and liquor liability
has also been supplied and lists the Transcontinental Insurance'
Company as affording the required coverages.
An accountant's statement prepared by the accounting firm of D.M.
Miller & Associates has been supplied to the city. This
statement covers the period from July 1, 1985 through June 30,
1986. A breakdown of figures is as follows:
Food Sales: $ 858,448
Beverage Sales: 736,533
Total Sales: $1,594,981
From November 1985 through October 1986 there were 58 public
safety contacts with the American Legion. This compares with 66
contacts for the previous year. A breakdown of these contacts is
as follows:
1985 1986
• Criminal: 33 17
(bar -type included
in criminal) ( 6 ) ( 8 )
Traffic /Parking 5 8
Medical Emergency 13 15
Assists 13 15
Inspections /Licensing 2 3
TOTAL: 66 58
Recommendation:
Approve the renewal of the 1987 Club On -Sale and Sunday liquor
licenses for the Minneapolis /Richfield American Legion Post 4435.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both
the city ordinance code and the state statutes pertaining to
club on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses.
2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset
to the community.
Alternatives:
1. The council could decide to continue the hearing.
2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses
requested. However, based upon the information submitted by
the applicant and the investigation conducted by the Depart-
ment of Public Safety, there appears to be no reason to deny
the renewal of the licenses requested.
Decision /Discussion Mode:
The public hearing to consider the requests for the renewal of
all on -sale, club on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses has been
scheduled for December 8, 1986. These licenses expire January 1,
1987. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing
regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond December 8th, any
subsequent hearing must be held before the license expires.
JDP /eja
•
Respectfully submitted,
_(Y
Ja es D. Prosser
City Manager
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 461
AGENDA DECEMBER 8, 1986
- �— (f!
Issue Statement:
Request for Illuminated signs at The Athletic Shoe Factory, 38
West 66th Street and Arby's, 7744 5th Avenue South.
Background:
City ordinance provides that the city council must approve all
permits for illuminated signs.
The Athletic Shoe Factory has requested a permit for an
illuminated wall sign with a size of 916" X 30 ".
Arby's has requested advertising permits for 5 signs. Three
ground signs 4' X 2' illuminated. The wall sign is 316" X 8'
and the pedestal sign is 259 sq. ft. (Special height of 34' was
approved previously by the council).
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the city council approve the permits for
these illuminated signs.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The Inspection Division and the Planning Division have
approved the signs.
2. The signs conform to all applicable city ordinances.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Not approve the permits. However, the city °has no
alternative design criteria to suggest for substitutes
for these signs.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the consent calendar portion of the
December 8, 1986 council agenda for consideration. The
businesses are requesting action to complete their sign placement
of these new business establishments.
Resp,pQ^lly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
•
APPROVE ' I DENY
Wall
Projecting
Ground
Roof
Pedestal
Changeable
Temporary
Trailer
APPROVE
DENY
;5 u
City Manager
Date
inspector
c-/ e;
Date ! Z C
APPROVE I)ENY[-�
:_L- L, ]E
APPROVE ❑
DENY 7:
P anni g apartment
City Council
Date )) 2- 1(
Date
Route to above for special approval per code
General
Signs
Date ll o�5--F Zo:
."-,P
Address of Sign
Sign Erector
Type of Sign
APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT
City of Richfield, . Minnesota
esiQn
Sign Erected - Yes No Fee
_Proprietor Name DBA
Address
Weather Cover Lighting
9If Illuminated No _Watts
lectrical Contractor
Property Owner or his
� 1-
Phone3 71 -7.9 2
Phone
Estimated Cost Sign Width Leb t r Total Square Feet
Position of the advertisement stru ture in relations ip to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks,
curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on
drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as
defined on page 2.
Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans:
including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details
and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure.
Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on
the premises?
Will the sign, structur or billboard restrict any
for sar;z. access,.�y per on destine4or or passing
Applicant's Signature-and Tit (with Firm
Phone Number
sight distance under, around, or over
the subject premises?
Date �7
0
Lkt
1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH
Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061
Wall
Projecting
Ground
Roof
Pedestal
Changeable
Temporary
Trailer
,C.:Z
-"
Double Face yGC.v
Multi -Faced
Aerial /Blimp
Searchlight
Banner /Pennants
Portable Frame:
T [] A 7 Post M
Clear Lexon Constant
Frosted Lexon Flashing
Plastic Covered Revolving
Shaded Traveling
Neon Zip Lite
Other Other(Explain)
Sign Colors
9If Illuminated No _Watts
lectrical Contractor
Property Owner or his
� 1-
Phone3 71 -7.9 2
Phone
Estimated Cost Sign Width Leb t r Total Square Feet
Position of the advertisement stru ture in relations ip to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks,
curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on
drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as
defined on page 2.
Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans:
including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details
and a copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure.
Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on
the premises?
Will the sign, structur or billboard restrict any
for sar;z. access,.�y per on destine4or or passing
Applicant's Signature-and Tit (with Firm
Phone Number
sight distance under, around, or over
the subject premises?
Date �7
0
Lkt
1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH
Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061
APPROVE
APPROVE
0
❑ DENY ❑
City Manager
Date
X j 'DENYF
atoix-
glannin�g Department
Date
APPROVE Fx ❑:`� �°Z
DEFY
Inspector
Date
APPROVE a DENY a :
City Council
Date
Route to above for special approval per code General Signs
APPLICATION FOR ADVERTISING PERMIT
City of Richfield, . Minnesota
Date Zoning �, Sign Erected - Yes No !/ Fee
Address of Sign -7,4 S^ , Proprietor Name DBA
Sign Erector Address 777 'd I/,
Type of Sign Design Weather Cover Lighting
"
Wall 1--
Projecting
Ground 5:6n%s
Roof
Pedestal
Changeable
Temporary
Trailer
Single Face
Double Face
Multi -Faced
Aerial /Blimp
Searchlight
Banner /Pennants
Portable Frame:
T ❑ A F� Post ❑
Clear Lexon Constant
Frosted Lexon Flashing
Plastic Covered Revolving
Shaded Traveling
Neon Zip Lite
Other Other(Explain)
Sign Gees
_'.i .i0% w_rn _ mac_ A — I — 7- -- -
f Illuminated - ire No Watts 6�(�
Electrical Contractor S,G�I�� Address Phone
Property Owner or his t Signature Phone
Estimated Cost Agent
Q Sign Width - Height �.� Total Square Feet
Position of the advertisement structure in relationship to the adjacent buildings, sidewalks,
curbs, roadways, overhead utility lines, vehicle movement lines, or public facilities on
drawing with significant dimensions and attached hereto of major signs. Minor signs as
defined on page 2.
Two blueprints of the sign, billboard, or outdoor advertising structure construction plans:
including specifications, list of materials, and explicit anchoring or fastening details
and a�copy of the stress sheets, calculations, color of sign structure.
Does the sign copy relate solely to the business, institution, or activity conducted on
the premises?
Will the sign, structure, or billboard restrict any sight distance under, around, or over
for sat access by per s destin for or passing the subject premises?
Applicant's Signature and Tit16 with Firm r
Date _ —O
Phone Number f %x�
0
Lkt
1985 PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION SKETCH
Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061
., r r � -L' -, � � l � /'� � 1. •r, � -•.'fi � � ��� �
/ld.17
.. t 'fib \•� �� y �
E— V1 't4a''��� !1>sr,y- Rte v Q,r7 F,
141 -M rFCAfW-
_� Pcv � 1 ® •-fir r+a+.�a "
�� !� � t" ..t' (! 1 Ill i s' { �, wa•� b �
•I it ,� 9 � it t
1..
:�11 �� !i '�: 1 •14 1��.: l t'7 HOC r-1•�%,` !IV 7�%
tFiai' !
_ � I:.1. I'� it � i •r,o(i r (_ ,
Er wnu, w/ ii+�il� • III I -I Igi �' +� f li �. r.,T N
it I IF v
Au- 4LIF-5
/ 71f�N I
� r J� N •
i
►1 a t A "T � 2a R{G
T� ti
9
4,
t
DUP.DNODIC COLGK
• fLUROPON ALUMINUM
FACE AND FILLER
FIel P AS':GMBLE AND
I I _ r — , VJCLL TOP INTO PG- II'IG1J
•I �
10" (250' VVALO, rp. 76. 0441
t 2'x 2'x';+' ANGLZ IRON CI:055
CP:ACr Y,'CLPr -P TG PIPES I
f1ELP WCLD CKla' c -c S TO
FIPR� oli CCI H GO'TTGM f.IGN5
c1 �
1 y'x2 "x %' GGUBLC tNGLB
x, IP,ON PRAMS ►N`SIGE ALUM-
' INUM et614 CAt;114GT
— HIGH= IMPACT' fbLYCAF.EGN-
- PLASTIC SKIN FAZe6 .J
1
3 STCCL F' LA'TGS (CAP)
$" �FCBL PLJ�Tt33 (RINGS)
I21x 12p 0240" WALL) G• !9. -+5*
50UAKIS .TUBING
CLECTFLICAL LoA D&
. - LOGO B -I&— 51.14 AMPS ..
5 =-1= CENTGR 25-m11 =j` PCX-•- 5.60 AMPS
4a5'xV- BCX— 5.40 AMPS •'
l SCIRCUITS 13.Ovoua RCOUIRCO
�N _ ELCGTKICI�L'S1SRVIGE CY
y G'.FINGK- CGNNECTION
°trySZ I MY INSSTt.LLER
;NHOLG IRON 1`URNI
SHED n
� �hY I— )13• I BY I�irTALLCR
,o .. • ._ I • • I I 1 . �_ :i.�saz . • •.I•, • , Y ••':
. .
CONCRCTC POOTL'1. iA*A* I, I
WAY ACCOKD I NB TC• _•C•IL.
55 I Lk I I I I` CC14 GITI ONs - GC.N S.ULT
3 @a. .1 I' I I LOCP.L CNGIWEER �
was
i`
\Q
mr
•'1
-� 7*2 -�
IL
' • ti 'I • / Ili
I�Y sd V J t V z' M L 1
2 Ut U J ; _..fir'...•,••;• � �M•: .,� X � O �_ V O .� �
Li V2 u 5 �� S„ VA
~ ` J tri
OJ W� >x w X x0 �K M� Z f- .Ui ha
O '( F O j. 1 O Y M n= S a •.. X W (..
z -Z .0
v
• -® W �'
IA
2 W a% C
<'1 < V to
.+ „ ....
PA
i ,. W • • Cl)
' p N ti n Q1
lu
O cn
tj
dlC { K tL IL
a
•
•i
I - G
tueJBOJd 06eu8i sfiq
6-U09 *ON 'SM40
i
See � cificacionsor go
..f logo
� �
type A sign; drawing #7711 -7.'
Co .• Which Can .6e� Used:
� ....
.... OIN /OUT- . - ' ' - - • •
NTER 's
ENTER ONLY �l
EXIT ;cl' �,.: r:
°t:5 .
VEXIT ONLY • . D
ENTER /EXIT. H.ME ✓ORI �,c R oIE VE THRU
- CIRCLE BUILDING FOR DRIVE -THRU
THANK..YOU. _
THRU TRAFFIC
3 STEEL PIPE± v
urive
I -
PIP E Thr COVER -o
/ �l
CONCRETE
PO0TEF,
LJ
I O
L "
15 Dln.
Notes: `
mss: ui _
may : - - • ,
I
. Dwg. No. 7717 -10 c.
Toys' • Signage Program ` ' •
.1 Manager
Date
A2? OVE
7A
DE`(Y7: 3
MQ
Planning! Dep rtt:ent
Date__T� 4�
Inspector
Date II AX p
AP °ROVE DENY❑
City Council
Date
Route to above for special approval per code Caneral Si =s
APPLICATION FOR' ADVERTISING PERMIT
City of Richfield, , Minnesota
Date Zoning Sign Erected -Yes No Fee �' e
Address of Sign_ ��cc� ��- Proprietor vame,¢AA24.c_,94l,,- e- 4,,,,.DBA
Sign Erector Address
Tvoe of Sian: Desi?n Weather Cover Lishtine
Wall
Slagle Face
Pro j acting
Double Face
Ground
Multi -.aced
Roof
Aerial /B1i=
.� ?edestal
Sear= :light
l Changeable
I Banner/Pennants
I re =porar7
I Portable Fra =e:
I Trailer
T A E] Post F7
Other(Expla_
Clear Le_Yon
Constant
Frosted Leson
Flashing
Plastic Covered
Revolving
Shaded
Traveling
Neon
Zip Lite
Other
Other(Expla_
Sion Colors���
0 If No Watts
Elec =riCal CCntractor,4/jzjr; Ae S,s1., ',963i-v't4•ddrass
?rcpert� Comer or his Age = = S_gnat::ra_
=s =meted C:.st , ,�� ?A "a c- 7T.
"I
or e
n/ on
HiCt., L .e_; q..t >C� _ocal Square Feet �-
�oS� =won G�ctt�32�2. $: �.:CJ..C3 �-;.n re- at- onsn'.0 to " :2 r , �? +- J ,
aG� aC_n� bL� .�5, SJ_de qa_
c::r!s, roadways, everead uti_ -_. __ =es, vehic?e acvement 1. es, or public facilities on
a «Y. g w_.. significant dine ^s_c::s and attache_ he__to of tza�cr sign uinor signs as
de=i :ed on page Z. S.
bluepri=.ts of t a sign, billboard, or Outdoor advert-;s-;-- Str•_c=::ra ccnstructien plans:
_nclud_:g speci°ications, 1_st of natarials, and espiici= anc o._ g or fastaning details
and a copy of the stress Sheets, calculations, color Of Sign
::OeS = 2 Sim COpv =elate SOLe:•t to c:.-.e business, _nStizu,cion, Or ac: =7:_ ccnd•: C =ad On
Sig^, str'.:cz::_e, or b. lboard restrict any distance under, a-- -a Or Over
for;s;_4 access by persons des ti :ed for or passing tiMle subject pra=ises?
Applicant's Signature and Title Grit.',. Firs /
Data
?`.:cne Nuaber
Lkt
1985 PL= -ASE S'cr R."S'c SIDE FOR SIGN LOCATION S=-ZCH
Sivert Hendrickson /Building Official - 866 -5061
!`2,W. f �'',1 f ,�,V" .w`► 1.
.. �; r�1� -�• , * -l` MTV?,' c. � . , g1 -- t �
• C F Il .i..- .1. � , i ' f f f i C Y 4� �,, k •ti y v � f t a di� ✓yV; - "'a� =1. � a .c f• � A",R�� .^,. ,r3f ` . r } , � �`.� rte' . ~ .' \. _ _. q i ..M•�.."+U y , y q r
'z ,n� '7
. r�s -j4 _ ' w �A •� � - r � ,•... ! _ F � _ rk
ol
vw-
fl
. z
ss r.�
1 .s� , , •
`^ .
.t .•• -tom+ ,t' ...`r'.
•. � -. i,,. \ iv A-f— tJ�Ft ` s•�:`�, ..,'- Y .t 'G1�3q���. :♦
":�. - .: „r, _ N �'� "� • •.ec�,`i� Vii. � ' r.�•,�4�. •!'%,
•. _ ,� -��, �� . _ ' a,.� -• iv�? :fit;
1 •. �1
�x_
la;-�
gR
Ti liz�L
7T
2.
Tr, _4
ti
gig
4NO i
I " %
. . . . . . . . . .
Y
L x;.
.74
72 . . . . . . . .
11 ...........
Ls AID-
- ZI
low^
. _tI
zi
wr
xallr _N
.0;5
•
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 460
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of Approval of 1987 Master Purchase Order for Water
Treatment Chemicals.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
Quotations have been received for an estimated 6,000 gallons
Hydrofloursilic Acid and an estimated 8 tons Chlorine, two of the
several chemicals used in water treatment:
Van Waters & Rogers
Hawkins Chemical, Inc.
Nalco Chemical Company
General Chemical Corporation
Western Chemical Company
Jones Chemicals, Inc.
Hydrofloursilic Acid
No Bid
$1.200 /gallon
No Bid
No Bid
No Bid
$1.133 /gallon
Chlorine
No Bid
$21 /cwt($420 /ton)
No Bid
No Bid
No Bid
$383 /ton
Funding for these chemicals is included in the 1987 adopted
operating budget for water maintenance.
Recommendation:
It is recommended the city council authorize a Master Purchase
Order for 1987 with Jones Chemicals, Inc. for an estimated 6,000
gallons, each at $1.133, of Hydrofloursilic Acid and an estimated
8 tons, each at $383, of Chlorine for a total estimated purchase
price of $9,862.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Jones Chemicals, Inc. submitted the lowest quotation for the
hydrofloursilic acid and chlorine used in water treatment.
2. Products and service supplied in the past by Jones Chemicals,
Inc. have been satisfactory.
3. Sufficient funding is available for purchase of these water
treatment chemicals.
Alternative Recommendation:
As the primary reason for the "No Bid" quotation is that the
vendor does not manufacture the product, it appears unlikely
additional vendors would be willing or able to provide
quotations. It is assumed the city still desires to continue its
program of water treatment; therefore, there is no alternate
recommendation.
•
Discussion /Decision Mode:
As the 1986 Master Purchase Orders will expire at year end,
authorization to enter into agreement for 1987 should be prior to
January 1, 1987.
JDP /eja
Respectf lly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
•
&— Xx4y
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 459
Agenda December 8, 1986
Issue Statement:
Consideration of purchase of three unmarked squad cars; four
marked squad cars; one inspection division car and replacement
vehicle for city manager.
Background:
As existing motor pool vehicles become fully depreciated, they
are replaced with new vehicles, and the depreciated vehicles are
sold at auction. Nine fully depreciated vehicles are scheduled
for replacement in 1987. Purchase of new vehicles is coordinated
through the Hennepin County bidding process. Cars to be replaced
in 1987 are as follows:
Four Ford LTD marked squad cars, purchased in 1985. The
excessive amount of hours these cars are used and the nature
of their use hastens their replacement schedule.
One 1980 Chevrolet Malibu currently used by the inspection
division.
These vehicles are to be replaced with full size Chevrolet
Caprices.
Three 1983 unmarked squad cars, and a 1983 Buick Century
currently used by the city manager.
These vehicles are to be replaced with midsize Pontiac 6000's.
A total of $100,000 has been appropriated in the 1987 Central
Garage Capital Outlay budget for purchase of these vehicles.
Recommendation:
1. Approve the purchase of five Chevrolet Caprices through the
Hennepin County bidding process from Thane Hawkins Polar
Chevrolet for a total purchase price of $57,065.
2. Approve the purchase of four Pontiac 6000 automobiles through
the Hennepin County bidding process from Thomas Pontiac /Buick
/GMC of Coon Rapids for a total purchase price of $35,400.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Chevrolet Caprices. Several manufacturers of fullsize cars
were requested to submit bids, following predetermined
specifications. Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet, Inc. was the
lowest responsible bidder for the type of car requested.
2. Pontiac 6000. Several manufacturers of midsize cars were
requested to submit bids, following predetermined
specifications. Thomas Pontiac was the lowest responsible
bidder for the type of car requested.
3. Funds are provided in the 1987 budget for purchase of these
vehicles.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The council may choose to reject these bids and request staff
to obtain bids from other sources in an attempt to receive a
lower purchase price.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
The purchase prices as stated above are guaranteed through
December 19, 1986. Therefore, in order to take advantage of the
lower cost, it is recommended that the city council act on the
purchase of these vehicles at the December 8, 1986 city council
meeting.
•
JDP /eja
•
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit Manager