Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
12-13-82 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 382 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Adjustments in Compensation, Benefits and Insurance Contribution for Employees in the General Services, Management and Specialized Pay Plans The purpose of this letter is to recommend 1983 adjust- ments in the General Services and Management pay plans. These pay Olans cover city employees who are not represented by organ- ized bargaining groups. A proposal is also included to adjust the city's contribution toward health insurance premiums for management and general services personnel in 1983. The municipal code requires the city manager to submit a formal recommendation for pay plan and benefit adjustments for the nonunionized city employees to the city council. Section 2.32, subd. 1 of the municipal code states these requirements: "Establishment of Plan. There shall be at all times a compensation plan for all classes of positions included in the classification plan. Such plan shall be estab- lished, and from time to time amended, by city council resolution upon receipt of recommendations from the city manager. The compensation plan resolution shall contain the pay grades, the number of steps or range of each pay grade, the compensation rates in each pay grade, and the method of normal progression through the pay grade. In making such recommendations, the city manager shall give appropriate consideration to the following factors: (1) Maintenance of equitable relationship between classes, based on their relative duties and responsibilities. (2) The general level of rates in the appropriate labor markets for comparable work under similar conditions. (3) Current recruitment and retention experience." is Historically, the city has annually provided for adjust- ments in the pay structure of city employees. The concept of Council Letter No. 382 -2- December 13, 1982 annually adjusting the pay plan structure for General Services and Management employees is based on several factors. A key factor for such adjustments is the need for the city to remain competitive in attracting and retaining a quality workforce. In economic times such as we are now experiencing, it is especially important to maintain a quality workforce which can continue to effectively deliver services to the public in light of a significant reduction in resources. Another factor used in developing a recommendation for salary adjustments is the pattern of wage adjustments for com- parable communities in our immediate area, as well as current wage trends in other public and private sector entities. Anal- ysis of this data reveals that such adjustments now being made in the private sector range from 5% to 7 %. Public sector ad- justments fall within the 5% to 6% range. The wage settlements of organized employees in other public jurisdictions play an important part in determining pay adjust- ments for our city employees, both organized and non - organized. In negotiating settlements with our organized bargaining units, settlements of like employees in other communities have a direct bearing on any ultimate settlement we may attain. Similarly, we must be sensitive to potential wage gains by our organized em- ployees in deciding upon a reasonable and fair wage adjustment for our non - organized employees. Non - organized employees, such as General Services and Management employees, do not bar- gain with the city for wage and /or benefit increases. Instead, those increases are determined by the city manager's proposal and city council approval. Thus, wage and benefit adjustments for all employees must be viewed in determining adjustments for non - organized employees. With respect to this factor, it is important to consider the recent settlement with Local 49 (the city's organized labor and trades, and maintenance per- sonnel), which resulted in wage adjustments ranging from 5.2% to 5.45 %, exclusive of increases in insurance contributions. The adopted budget must also be considered prior to recommending any pay adjustments. The following proposal falls within the total expenditures budgeted for 1983 for pay increases and insurance contribution. General Services Pay Plan The General Services Pay Plan currently consists of 59 office, clerical and technical personnel located throughout the city. This includes all of the non - organized fulltime em- ployees, except for management personnel. Attached is a prop- osed 1983 compensation plan for General Services employees. Basically, the proposed 1983 salary structure is 5.5% higher than the 1982 pay structure. However, Grade 9 (the top General Services pay grade is proposed to be adjusted by only 5.3 %. This was done to maintain equity between that pay grade and the lower two grades of the Management Pay Plan. The adjusted General Services pay plan is reflected in Exhibit A. Council Letter No. 382 -3- December 13, 1982 • Management Pay Plan The Management Pay Plan includes the city's approximately 35 supervisory and management employees. As with General Services employees, this employee group is non - organized and does not bargain with the city for wages or other benefits. In arriving at a proposal for management employees, spec- ial attention was given to previous city council concerns re- garding limiting increases. It is felt that the attached pay plan recommendation reflects those concerns and mirrors action taken by other area communities. As you will see, the adjust- ments proposed for this pay plan vary from 5.5% in the lower management grades to 5% in the middle and upper grades, where the majority of salary costs are incurred. The overall effect of this proposal is a weighted average increase of 5.17% over 1982 (See Exhibit B). Specialized Pav Plan The Specialized Pay Plan applies primarily to part time positions in the Community Services Department and the Liquor Operations. However, other departments do have a limited number of employees covered by this pay plan. In the past few years, the pay plan has been adjusted sub- stantially due to pressure created by escalations of the min- imum wage. Currently, no changes in the minimum wage are scheduled, thus eliminating this factor in proposing an adjust- ment. However, in order for the city to remain competitive in attracting and retaining seasonal and part time employees, a minimal adjustment to this plan is being proposed. The attached resolution reflects a 3% increase for all grades and steps of the specialized pay plan. Insurance Premium Contributions At the present time, the city contributes to the cost of premiums for three kinds of insurance available to city em- ployees. The first type of insurance is a $5,000 term insurance policy for employees. The city pays the full premium cost for this insurance, which is $1.10 per month in 1982, and will re- main the same in 1983. The second type of insurance is group health coverage, of which there are five optional plans available through the Hennepin County Joint Purchasing Organization. The 1982 and 1983 monthly premium costs or these plans are as follows: Blue Cross /Blue Shield • Individual Family (High Plan) Family (Low Plan) 1982 1983 $ 67.15 $ 80.21 283.61 Not available 104.32 144.32 0 Council Letter No. 382 Phvs is ians Health Plan Individual Family Group Health Plan Individual Family MedCenter Health Plan Individual Family Nicollet Eitel Health Plan Individual Family -4- December 13, 1982 1982 1983 69.30 85.24 171.77 181.77 45.45 54.52 132.82 159.04 50.50 56.50 142.45 152.80 54.75 64.45 138.20 151.75 In 1982, the city has contributed a maximum of $100 per month for health insurance for eligible general services or management employees. It is recommended that this amount be increased by $16 per month in 1983, to a maximum of $116. By increasing the city contribution for health insurance to $116 per month, the city would be able to match the average mon- thly premium increase charged by the participating carriers, and prevent sizeable increases from being passed on to the employees. The third type of insurance provided to employees is a group dental insurance. Currently, the city contributes $7.85 per month for the total cost of employee only coverage. Em- ployees who desire dependent coverage must pay the entire cost of such additional coverage. On March 31, 1983, the city's two year contract for dental coverage will expire, and new rates will be established for the remainder of 1983. A review of costs incurred by Delta Dental, the insurer, leads me to be- lieve that premiums for this coverage may increase significant- ly. Thus, it is recommended that the city contribution be in- creased by up to an additional $4 per month for employee dental insurance coverage, effective April 1, 1983. Personal Leave /Disability Insurance Benefits In addition to insurance benefits and wages, the city also provides other fringe benefits to city employees. As prev- iously mentioned, in the case of general services and manage- ment employees, the city council determines the level and types of fringe benefits and salaries, upon recommendations of the city manager. The city provides one such benefit to general service em- ployees which is referred to as sick leave. All general ser- vice employees receive 12 days of sick leave annually, accrued at the reate of one day per month. Employees may use those sick days for the following purposes: Council Letter No. 382 -5- December 13, 1982 • - Physical incapacity incurred on or off -duty; - Personal illness, including medical and dental appointments during work hours; - Enforced quarantine of employee in accordance with community health regulations; - Serious illness or death in the immediate family. Considerable discontent is generated in many organiza- tions that have sick leave plans similar to ours (as do almost all cities), due to the use of sick leave by employees. While there are som tools which the city has and uses to administer the sick leave benefit, it is very difficult for the employer to equitably insure that sick leave is used by all employees only for the appropriate purposes. There are cases where employees use sick leave for reasons not stated above when it is not feasible to verify the illness, i.e. it seems absurd to require a doctor's excuse for a one -day absence, and there are undoubted- ly cases where people nearing retirement seek to use their sick leave, since the accumulated sick leave hours are lost on re- tirement. In addition, there are cases where employees use sick leave on a one -day at a time basis, instead of accumulating days, only to find when an extended illness occurs that they have no accumulated leave to cover their loss of pay during the time of illness. On the other hand, employees who are con- scientious in their use of sick leave sometimes feel frustrated at the inequitable use of, or abuse of, sick leave by other employees. This situation can create a detriment to good working re- lationships. For these reasons, in late 1981 the city began looking for alternatives to the traditional sick leave program that might better serve the employee as well as the city. At that time, as a result of this study, the city council amended the city ordinance to provide a personal leave plan, short -term disability and long -term disability insurance program for the city's management personnel. The city council also approved a short -term and long -term disability insurance program for these employees to provide income protection in the event of extended non -job related illness or injury. This was a significant gap in the previously existing benefit program. It is proposed that the short -term disability /long -term disability benefits also be extended to the General Services employees as part of the personal leave program. Following is a description of the pro- visions of the new plan. PERSONAL LEAVE Commencing February 1, 1983, all employees classified and compensated as part of the General Services Pay Plan will be granted 48 hours (6 days) of annual personal leave, with pay, which may be used by the employee as follows: r� U Council Letter No. 382 -6- December 13, 1982 1) Time lost as aresult of non -job related illness/ injury to the employee or a member of the employee's immediate family; 2) Medical /dental appointments for the employee or a member of the employee's immediate family; 3) To attend to personal business; 4) Leisure time. Employees may accrue unused personal leave from year to year provided, however, that no employee may accrue in excess of 160 hours (20 days) of personal leave. Hours in excess of the 160 hour (20 day) limit shall be forfeited by the employee, without compensation. Utilization Personal leave shall be scheduled and administered under direction of the Department Heads. In the event of illness/ injury for which personal leave is requested, the employee re- questing such leave shall notify the supervisor prior to the scheduled reporting time. Requests for personal leave for reasons other than illness /injury must be submitted to the supervisor a reasonable time in advance of the period of time for which such leave is requested, to enable the supervisor to arrange for normal continuance of the department functions. In • each request for personal leave, the city shall have the author- ity to grant or deny such leave based upon the merit of such request and the reasonable needs of the municipal service. Sick Leave Conversion General Services employees who have accrued sick leave on January 31, 1983, may convert such accrued leave to personal leave according to the following formula: Accrued Sic: Leave Hours 0 -240 241 - 720 (48O Hours) Examples: Conversion Personal Leave _ Factor Hours 3 6 Total Personal Leave `lours Emmlevee X Sick Leave Accrual as of 12/31/81: First 240 hours • Remaining 135 hours (375 -240) Total 0 - 80 (max.) 0 - 80 ('tax ) 0 -160 (max.) 3= 30.0 hours =erscnal leave 6= 22 hou. s p ersenal leave 102.5 hours personal leave • Council Letter No. 382 -7- December 13, 1982 F.mplovee Y Sick Leave Accrual as of 12/31/81: 8 -0 hours First 240 hours 3= 80.0 hours personal leave Next 430 hours (241 thru 720) G= 80.0 hours personal leave Total 160.0 hours personal lave The remaining 120 !lours of si,_-k leave (840 -720) .-jculd ^ot ce el;c- -ible for conversion to personal !nave. SHORT -TERM DISABILITY Definition Short -term disability is leave provided for injury or illness which prevents the employee from performing his /her duties as a city employees. Short -term disability benefits become effective on the eleventh (11th) continuous day of such absence of any eligible employee'. The benefits paid will be coordinated with worker's compensation or any other supple- mental pay plan. Provision Commencing February 1, 1983, all employees classified and compensated as part of the General Services Pay Plan, will become eligible for an employer paid short -term disability benefit, which will provide eligible employees with a paid leave for qualifying absences at the rate of 100% of the employy- ee's regular base wage up to a maximum of 122 working days of disability, or until such emp'loyee's accrued "benefit days" of coverage have been exhausted, whichever comes first; provided, however, that employees shall not be eligible for short -term disability benefits once they have qualified for long -term disability benefits. Effective February 1, 1983, eligible employees will accumu- late 24 benefit days of short -term disability coverage per year for each full year of service, provided, however, that such leave shall be cumulative to a maximum of 122 benefit days. Vesting of Current General Service Employees Eligible employees with accrued sick leave as of January 31, 1983 will be vested with short -term disability coverage according to the following formula: Council Letter No. 382 -8- December 13, 1982 • Total Hours of Accrued Sick Leave (Prior to Personal Leave Conversion) Total Hours of Personal Leave Vested (Frcm Sick Leave Conversion) =Total Ves ed Hours of Shcrt -Term Disability Coverage Examples: Employee X - Sick Leave accrual as of 12/31/81 - 375 hours Total hours of personal leave vested from sick leave con- version process = 102.5 hours (see conversion example-) 375.0 hours sick leave accrued -102.5 hours Personal leave vested 272.34-hours of short-term disability insurance (31.06 benefit day; Lm:.lovee _ - Sic'.: Leave Accr ,ai as e f 12/ 3 1/31 - 310 hours Total hours of rcrsonal leave ve3ticd ::ront sick leave conve. =- sion p recess = 160.0 hours (see conversion exam-10) 840 hours sick, leave accrued -160 hours personal leave vested 680 hours of short term disability insurance (85 benefit days) In order to qualify for short -term disability benefits, the eligible employee must provide the city with a written statement, provided by a duly - licensed physician, which verifies that the employee is unable to satisfactorily perform his /her assigned duties. At any time during the period of absence in which short -term disability benefits are paid to the employee, the city manager may require that the employee submit to an examination by the city- appointed physician to verify that the employee is unable to satisfactorily perform required duties. In all cases, requests for short -term disability benefits must be approved and determined valid by the city manager. LONG -TERM DISABILITY Def inition Long -term disability is income protection provided for injury or illness which prevents the employee from performing his /her duties as a city employee. Long -term disability in- come becomes effective after six continuous calendar months of any absence which is due to non - service related disability. The benefits paid will be coordinated with workers compensation or any other supplemental pay plan. iProvision: Commencing as soon after February 1, 1933 as practicable, Council Letter No. 382 -9- December 13, 1982 40 all employees classified and compensated as part of the Gen- eral Services plan will become eligible for an employer paid long -term disability income for qualifying long -term absences at the rate of 60% of the employee's base wage up to a maximum of $3,000 per month. Long -term disability income will not accrue beyond the disabled employee's 65th birthday. The city manager should annually review the maximum monthly disability payment and make adjustments as deemed necessary. Utilization Guidelines or restrictions relating to the utilization and qualification of this benefit are quite lengthy and complex and would be developed as part of the bid specifications for this coverage. Summary of Recommendations: The recommendations contained within this letter remain within the budgeted appropriation for wage and benefit adjust- ments for General Services employees. The salary adjustments and insurance contribution increases represent a 5.6% package increase. Wage incureases recommended for management employees represent a 5.17% increase and the total management increase for wages and insurance represents a 5.3% package increase. Further, the addition of the Personal Leave /Disability In- surance provision for General Services employees will not result in additional cost to the city. A study of average sick leave usage for the past five years indicates that the savings gained by granting General Services employees 48 hours of Personal Leave per year, compared to the annual average usage of sick leave, which exceeded 60 hours, offsets the costs of the LTD premium. In summary, it is recommended that the city council take the following actions: 1. Adopt the attached resolution establishing the 1983 General Services Pay Plan; 2. Adopt the attached resolution establishing the 1983 Management Pay Plan; 3. Adopt the attached resolution establishing the 1983 Specialized Pay Plan; 4. Adopt the attached resolution establishing the city's 1983 maximum insurance contribution for General Services and Management employees; 5. Adopt the attached resolution providing for Short /Long • Term Disability group insurance for General Services employees: Council Letter No. 382 -10- December 13, 1982 0 6. Give first reading approval to the ordinance amend- 4 ment providing Personal Leave for General Services employees, and schedule the second reading and cy public hearing for January 10, 1983. If the city council adopts these resolutions, a resolution transferring funds from the contingency account to the appropri- ate budget activities will be presented at the January 10, 1983 city council meeting to implement these pay plan adjustments. , KN /ej a Respectfully submitted, a Nollenberger City Manager RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1983 GENERAL SERVICES SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for General Services employees from - time -to -time, and WHEREAS, the City administration has prepared a 1983 pay plan for position classifications for General Services employees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 1983 the following pay plan, which is to be effective January 1, 1983, and subject to all applicable provisions of the city code: GENERAL SERVICES COMPENSATION PLAN GS1 YR $ 9,488.92 10,008.49 10,541.73 11,594.53 MO 790.74 834.04 878.48 966.21 BW 364.96 384.94 405.45 445.94 HR 4.56 4.81 5.07 5.57 GS2 YR 10,610.09 11,198.02 11,785.95 12,961.81 MO 884.17 933.17 982.16 1,080.15 BW 408.08 430.69 453.31 498.53 HR 5.10 5.38 ,5.67 6.23 GS3 YR 11,854.32 12,510.61 13,166.91 14,479.50 MO 987.86 1,042.55 1,097.24 1,206.63 BW 455.94 481.18 506.42 556.90 HR 5.70 6.01 6.33 6.96 GS4 YR 12,551.63 13,289.96 14,028.29 14,766.62 16,243.29 MO 1,045.97 1,107.50-- 1,169.02 .1,230.55 1,353.61 BW 482.76 51.1.15 539.55 567.95 624.74 HR 6.03 6.39 6.74 7.10 7.81 GS5 YR 14,028.29 14,848.66 15,682.70 16,503.07 18,157.48 MO 1,169.02 1,237.39 1,306.89 1,375.26 1,513.12 BW 539.55 571.10 603.18 634.73 698.36 HR 6.74 7.14 7.54 7.93 8.73 GS6 YR 15,737.39 16,667.14 17,583.22 18,512.97 20,358.80 MO 1,311.45 1,388.93 1,465.27 1,542.75 1,696.57 BW 605.28 641.04 676.28 712.04 783.03 HR 7.57 8.01 8.45 8.90 9.79 GS7 YR 17,624.24 18,649.70 19,688.83 20,727.96 22,806.23 MO 1,468.69 1,554.14 1,640.74 1,727.33 1,900.52 • BW 677.86 717.30 757.26 797.23 877.16 HR 8.47 8.97 9.47 9.97 10.96 -2- GS8 YR 19,729.85 20,892.04 22,054.23 23,216.41 25,540.79 MO •11644.15 1,741.0.0 1,837.85 1,934.70 2,128. BW 758.84 803.54 848.24 892.94 982.0 HR 9.49 10.04 10.60 11.16 12.28 GS9 YR 22,053.36 23,349.81 24,646.27 25,942.72 28,535.63 MO 1,837.78 1,945.82 2,053.86 2,161.89 2,377.97 BW 848.21 898.07 947.93 997.80 11097.52 HR 10.60 11.23 11.85 12.47 13.72 Normal_Progression Through General Services Compensation Plan I. Individual full -time employees will receive increases to the next higher grade step in line with their length of time in the pay grade and their individual competence and performance rating according to the following criteria: a. Step B (also Step'C in Grades 1 through 3). Completion of at least 6 months on one or more jobs in the pay grade, and com- petence and performance levels rated at least Adequate. B. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Above Standard or Outstanding. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Adequate or Standard. c. Step D. At least 9 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding, 12 months for those rated Standard or Above Standard, and 18 months for those rated Adequate. d. Merit Range. At least 12 months since previous increase for those rated Outstanding,. and 18 months for those rated Above Standard. Standard and Adequate performers may not advance to or within the Merit Range. Salary increases in the Merit Range will be determined by the supervisor and may range between 3 % -8 %. e. Employees whose competency level and /or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their performance.improves. II. Individual part -time employees will receive increases to the next higher grade step in line with their length of time in the pay grade and their individual competence and performance rating according to the following criteria: a. Step B (Grades 4 through 9) and Step C (Grades 1 through 3). Completion of at least 1,040 hours or 1 year from date of hire, whichever comes first, and competence and performance levels rated at least Adequate. b. Step C (Grades 4 through 9). At least 11560 hours or 9 month* since previous increase for those rated Above Standard or Outstanding. At least 2,080 hours or 12 months since previous increase for those rated Adequate or Standard. -3- c. Step D. At least 1,560 hours or 9 months since previous increase, whichever comes first for those rated Outstanding, . 2,080 hours or 12 months, whichever comes first for those rated Standard or Above Standard, and 3,120 hours or 18 months,. whichever comes first for those rated Adequate. d. Merit Range. At least 2,080 hours or 12 months, whichever comes first, since previous increase for those rated Outstand- ing, and 3,120 hours or 18 months, whichever comes first for those rated Above Standard. Standard and Adequate performers may not advance to or within the Merit Range. Salary increases in the Merit Range will be determined by the supervisor and may range between 3 % -8 %. e. Employees whose competency level and /or performance are rated Unsatisfactory may not advance to the next step until their performance improves. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of December, 1982. • ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk • John Hamilton Mayor GENERAL SERVICES POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE Grade Position Titles 1 Liquor Clerk • 2 Assessment Clerk Clerk Typist 3 Accounting Clerk Communications Aide Data Entry Operator Licensing Clerk Liquor Account Clerk Liquor Clerk /Cashier Receptionist Senior Clerk Typist 4 Accounts Payable Clerk Community Center Aide Community Service Officer Computer Operator Licensing Leadworker Records Specialist Secretary Senior Liquor Account Clerk Transportation Specialist Utility Billing Clerk 5 Community Development Intern • Crime Analyst Custodian Payroll Accountant Personnel Assistant Social Services Supervisor 6 Accountant Administrative Aide Arena Worker Assistant Liquor Store Manager Central Services Technician Community Development Aide Leased Housing Agent 7 Administrative Assistant Assistant Turf Supervisor /Mechanic City Forester Engineering Technician Naturalist 8 Administrative Assistant Lead Naturalist Programmer Analyst Recreation Supervisor 9 Electrician • Housing Specialist Inspector Recreation Supervisor /Designer Senior Engineering Technician EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1983 MANAGEMENT SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, the municipal code of the City of Richfield provides for the adoption of a pay plan for Management Employees from time - to -time, and WHEREAS,.the city administration has prepared a 1983 pay plan for position classifications for management employees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 1983 the following pay plan, which is to be effective January 1,. 1983, and subject to all applic- able provisions of the city code: MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION PLAN PAY GRADE MINIMUM MID -RANGE MAXIMUM A YR $ 19,369.80 22,788.00 26,206.20 MO 1,614.15 1,899.00 2,183.85 BW 744.99 876.46 1,007.93 HR 9.31 10.96 12.60 B YR 20,717.42 24,360.05 28,002.67 MO 1,726.45 2,030.00 2,333.56 BW 796.82 936.93 1,077.03 HR 9.96 11.71 13.46 C YR 22,176.18 26,042.80 29,909.41 MO 1,848.02 2,170.23 2,492.45 BW 852.93 1,001.65 1,150.36 HR 10.66 12.52 14.38 D YR 23,632.13 27,722.30 31,926.10 MO 1,969.34 2,310.19 2,660.51 BW 908.93 1,066.24 1,227.93 HR 1146 13.33 15.35 E YR 25,198.78 29,625.59 34,052.40 MO 2,099.90 2,468.80 2,837.70 BW 969.18 1,139.45 1,309.71 HR 12.11 14.24 16.37 F YR 26,875.80 31,638.60 36,401.40 MO 2,239.65 2,636.55 3,033.45 BW 1,033.68 1,216.87 1,400.05 HR 12.92 15.21 17.50 G YR 28,690.20 33,793.20 38,896.20 • MO 2,390.85 2,816.10 3,241.35 BW 1,103.47 1,299.74 1,496.01 HR 13.79 16.25 18.70 -2- H YR 30,731.40 36,174.60 41,617.80 MO 2,560.95 3,014.55 3,468.15 • BW 1,181.98 1,391.33 1,600.68 HR 14.77 17.39 20.01 I YR 32,886.00 38,669.40 44,452.80 MO 2,740.50 3,222.45 3,704.40 BW 1,264.85 1,487.28 1,709.72 HR 15.81 18.59 21.37 J YR 35,154.00 41,391.00 47,628.00 MO 2,929.50 3,449.25 3,969.00 BW 1,352.08 1,591.96 1,831.85 HR 16.90 19.90 22.90 Normal Progression Through Management Compensation Plan Salary Increase Amounts. Individual salary increases will normally be made effective when the salary range structure changes and will vary in size, depending on the individual's performance rating and current position in the salary range in line with the following cri treria: PERFOP"CE POSITION IN SALARY RANGE RATING UNDER 95% OF MIDPT. 95 -105% OF MIDPT. OVER 105% OF MIDPT. Outstanding Range Adj. + 6% Range Adj. + 4% Range Adj. + 2% Above Standard Range Adj. :+ 4% Range Adj. + 2% % of Range Adj. Standard Range Adj. + 2% % of Range Adj. Range Adj. - 2% Adequate % of Range Adj. Range Adj. - 2% Range Adj. - 4% Unsatisfactory No increase until performance improves. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of December, 1982. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk MANAGEMENT POSITION-CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE 0 Grade Position Titles A Turf Supervisor B Community Services Foreman - Park Community Services Foreman - Sewer Community Services Foreman - Street Community Services Foreman - Water Distribution Community Services Foreman - Water Plant Garage Superintendent Liquor Store Manager C Building Superintendent City Clerk Community Center Manager Recreation Manager D Central Services Manager Chief Building Inspector City Planner Community Services Maintenance Superintendent Golf Course Manager Ice Arena Manager Personnel Manager • Utility Superintendent E Public Safety Administrative Supervisor F City Engineer Facilities /Project Coordinator Finance Coordinator Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator Recreation Program Coordinator G Assistant Fire Chief Technical Operations Coordinator H Liquor Operations Director I I Administrative Services_ Director Community Development Director J Community Services Director Public Safety Director 0 • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE 1983 SPECIALIZED PAY PLAN WHEREAS, Section 2.32 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield provides that the pay grades, the number of steps or range of each pay grade, the compensation rates in each pay grade, and the method of normal progression through the pay grade be estab- lished by council resolution; and WHEREAS, the city administration has prepared a 1983 pay plan for the positions for which there are no essentially similar posi- tion classifications in other regular pay plans. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council do and hereby does establish for the year 1983 the following_ pay plan, which is to be effective on January 1, 1983, and subject to the provisions of the personnel rules and regulations ordinance: SPECIALIZED PAY PLAN INTERMITTENT AND SEASONAL Comp Code A B C D E Step 1 2 3 4 5 SPl -E HR $ 3.11 3..27 3.43 3.61 3.78 SP2. -E HR $ 3.45 3.63 3.80 4.00 4.19 SP3 -E HR $ 3.73 3.91 4.11 4.32 4.53 SP4 -E HR $ 4.03 4.23 4.44 4.67 4.89 SP5 -E HR $ 4.35 4.56 4.79 5.04 5.28 SP6 -E HR $ 4.70 4.93 5.18 5.44 5.71 SP7 -E HR $ 5.07 5.33 5.58 5.87 6.16 SP8 -E HR $ 5.48 5.76 6.05 6.34 6.66 SP9 -E HR $ 5.91 6.21 6.52 6.84 7.19 SP10 -E HR $ 6.39 6.71 7.05 7.40 7.77 SP11 -E HR $ 6.90 7.25 7.61 7.99 8.38 SP12 -E HR $ 7.:45 7.82 8.21 8.62 9.05 Instructor's Range: $4.00 - $15.00 • :W= Normal Progression Through the Specialized Pay Plan • Individual employees will be eligible to receive increases to the next higher grade step based on individual performance and the following progression: Start 1,040 hrs. 2,080 additional 2,080 additional 2,080 additional or hours or one hours or one hours or one one year year since last year since last year since last since increase increase increase anniversary date Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of December, 1982. ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk John Hamilton Mayor • • SPECIALIZED POSITION CLASSIFICATION STRUCTURE Grade Position Titles Grade Position Titles • 1 Driving Range I Pool Attendant 7 Adaptive Team Coordinator Construction Specialist 2 Golf Course Technician Arena Cashier Naturalist II Field Attendant I Playground Coordinator Ice Guard Pool Manager Pool Cashier Survey Crew Person Projectionist , 3 8 Assistant Golf Course Managf Basketball Scorer /Timer Construction Inspector Bike Patrol Officer Greens Foreman Concession. Stand I Winter Sports Technician Driving Range II Field Attendant II 9 None Lifeguard Men's Activity Night Attend. 10 None Pool Night Watchman Tennis Center Attendant 11 None Volleyball Attendant Warming House Attendant 12 None 4 Clerk Typist - Int. & Sub. Instruc - Baton Custodian I tors Belly Dancing Dance Coordinator Cross Country Ski Maintenance Laborer I Figure Skating Playground Leader Golf Professional Ranger Self Defense • Skating School Coordinator Slimnastics Starter Sports Official Tap and Ballet 5 Adaptive Program Leader Tennis I Assistant Pool Manager Tennis II Concession Stand II WSI Custodian II Driving Range Supervisor Other Home Service Worker Home Services Coordinator Intern Licensing Clerk. Liquor Clerk Maintenance Laborer II Playground Specialist Pro Shop Supervisor Senior Playground Leader Special Events Supervisor Substitute Naturalist Substitute Van Driver Warming House Supervisor Winter Sports Attendant Zamboni Operator 6 Adaptive Program Supervisor Center Program Supervisor • Maintenance Laborer III Naturalist I Tennis Coordinator R-28 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION ' TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUM 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, the city is currently in the second year of a two- year dental insurance contract with guaranteed premium rates for employee and.dependent coverage, and WHEREAS, the city will be renegotiating dental insurance premium rates for a new contract period beginning April 1, 1983, and WHEREAS, the City council is required to determine by resolu- tion the city's contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that commencing January 1, 1983, the city shall contribute a maximum of $116.00 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 $.7.:.85 monthly premium for the employee dental insurance plan and the $1.10 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 $124.95 per month. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1, 1983. Commencing April 1, 1983, the city shall contribute up to an additional $4 per month toward an employee dental insurance premium for all eligible non - unionized employees; in any event said contribution shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for such dental insurance plan. The total possible maximum insurance premium contribution for eligible non - unionized employees after April 1, 1983 shall be $128.95 per month. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall deter- mine 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 13th day of December, 1982. • ATTEST: John Hamilton Mayor Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GROUP SHORT -TERM AND LONG -TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE AND CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to make available to employees various group insurance benefits authorized by Minnes- ota Statute 471.61, and WHEREAS, a contract for provision of Long Term Disability insurance for certain City employees has been entered into by the City of Richfield and Schools Insurance Fund, and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield provides a self- insured short -term disability insurance benefit to eligible employees, and WHEREAS, General Services employees are eligible for partici- pation under provisions of such contract, and self- insured disa- bility benefits, and WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized by City Ordinance to provide group insurance coverage for city employees, and establish City contributions for such coverage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall provide Long -term and short -term disability insurance coverage for all eligible full -time General Services employees. Benefits, limita- tions, and exclusions shall be in conformance with the existing policy in effect for Management employees. Such coverage shall be effective February 1, 1983. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall establish the City's Contribution toward Long -Term Disability Insurance for General Services employees at the full cost of employee coverage. Such cost shall be based upon a premium rate of 55� per $100 of monthly salary. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December, 1982. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk 0 • AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2.33 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 2.33 of the Ordinance Code of the Citv of Richfield relating to terms of employment of certain city employees is hereby amended in the following respects: A. Subdivision 5, subparagraph (1) hereof is amended to read: "Eligibility and Accrual. Effective February 1, 1982, each permanent full -time or full -time probationary employee classified and compensated under the Management Pay Plan or General Services Pay Plan, as that those Plans has have been adopted and may be amended from time to time pursuant to Section 2.32 of this Code, shall be eligible to accrue and use personal leave. An eligible employee shall accrue 1 -54 1.85 hours of personal leave biweekly and may accumulate such leave from year to year up to a maximum of 160 hours of personal leave unless written authorization extending this maximum is obtained from the department head and the city manager. Hours in excess of 160 hours shall be forfeited by the employee without compensation." B. Subdivision 6 thereof is amended by adding the following: is "(5) Bereavement Leave. Employees eligible for Personal Leave shall also be eligible for bereavement leave. Eligible employees may be granted up to a maximum of 16 hours of bereave- ment leave for the death of an immediate family member. For the purposes of this subparagraph, immediate family member shall be defined as spouse, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, mother -in -law, father -in -law, brother -in -law, and sister -in- law." Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of , 1983. ATTEST: Sylvia Bergh, City Clerk 0 John Hamilton, Mayor • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 380 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Proposed Guidelines for Fourth of July Celebration Committee Background Although there may have been even earlier celebrations, the City of Richfield did promote July 4th celebrations in the years 1974 and 1976. However, neither of these efforts were success- ful. In January, 1980, the city council requested that the staff • begin planning for a July 4, 1980 community celebration. On Jan- uary 14, 1980, the city council appointed Council Member Bunce to serve as Chairman of a citizen group committee with representa- tion from civic groups, service organizations, churches, schools, etc. While the Fourth of July celebrations in the past three years have been quite successful, there have been some problems which are believed to be primarily related to the informal arrange- ment of the citizen group committee. Committee workers have varied from year to year, and occasionally from meeting to meet- ing, with very sporadic attendance at meetings of some of the members. While trying not to discourage anyone from participating in the planning and execution of the celebration, i-t is the recommendation of the city staff that a designated committee mem- bership would provide a smoother, more efficient and effective organization. U u-t_C.� , nI -T"u � �q S44.PA Qu� R-P P/w Farr -r— Recommendation It is recommended that the committee consist of 9 -11 voting members from the community, with non - voting, ex- officio, liaison members providing support. Everyone is welcome to participate on the various aspects of the celebration. A designated voting membership should provide a broad base of community representa- • tion, necessary follow- through to planning and implementation, and when necessary, for an orderly return or replacement of a committee member. This would provide continuity from year to L� r: 11 Council Letter No. 380 -2- December 13, 1982 year, while also allowing for fresh and innovative ideas. Attached is a staff recommendation relating to the size and purpose of the proposed Fourth of July Committee. It is recommended that the city council adopt the proposed guidelines and appoint committee members. The following recommendations are made for committee appointments (all of whom have previously served on the 4th of July committee): One -Year Term: Ethel Naslund Robert Houlton Stu Swanson Joe Menning George Evans T 4 � 4 --. Two -Year Term: Tim Lindgren Carol Lindgren Paul Kaiser Joanne Wilmes Carole Memmel Ron Jelmo Frank White, Community Services Department Robert Doeden, Public Safety Department Howard Bunce, Richfield City Council Member Community Services Advisory Commission Member Respectfully submitted, kL- ' \IJL r, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Community Services Director KN /eja • GUIDELINES FOR FOURTH OF JULY COMMITTEE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP The committee shall consist of 9 -11 voting members appointed by the Richfield City Council to represent a cross - section of the community, male and female, including a variety of ages, abilities and interests, with a commitment providing the best possible Fourth of July celebration in the City of Richfield on an annual basis, given the limitations of resources including space and finances. With the exception of the first committee organization and appointments, members shall serve two -years terms to expire October 1. Non - voting ex- officio members shall represent the city council, the city staff and the Community Services Advisory Commission. The commission and the council are primarily available for policy discussion and the staff is primarily responsible for coordination of activity, meetings, spaces, finances, and other aspects of the celebration. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES (Including, but not limited to:) i. Develop community communications process and /or network to secure ideas, participants, sub - committee members and to promote the annual celebration; 2. Review and recommend to staff a financial plan for expend- iture and revenues associated with the celebration; 3. Recommend general rules or policy for the celebration. r-1 LJ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 379 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor ) and �� j Z��C Or`tL -�...� �"uL.Ww Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to MR -3 Zoning District Boundaries Over the past few months, the city has been implementing the revised residential zoning district regulations by estab- lishing the boundaries for the revised zoning district designa- tions. The city must now establish the boundaries for the MR -3 multiple residence zoning district. The MR -3 zoning district is the district for multiple family residential developments containing 18 or more dwelling units. . The planning commission has considered this matter and recommended that the city council rezone property to MR -3 Multiple Residence if there are 18 or more dwelling units on parcels which meet the MR -3 district minimum lot area require- ments of one acre and which are presently zoned MR Multiple Residence. The zoning of commercially or industrially zoned properties developed with multiple residential uses with 18 or more dwelling units are recommended to remain the same. Attached to this council letter is an ordinance amendment which would carry out the rezonings as recommended by the planning commission. It is is recommended that the city council give first reading approval to the attached ordinance, and schedule the public hearing for January 10, 1983. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Community Development Director City Planner City Clerk KN /eja BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. iAMENDMENT TO APPENDIX C OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Appendix C of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield, Minnesota defining the boundaries of the various zoning districts of the city enumerated in Chapter III, Part IV, Section 3.28, Subdivision 2 of such code is hereby amended in the following respects; (1) Appendix C Section 4 is amended by repealing paragraphs 3, 37, 57, 59, 98, 112, 113, and 120. (2) Appendix C is amended by adding the following new Section 12: Section 12. Multiple Residence District (MR -3) 1. That area lying between Lyndale Avenue and Lincoln yield and between the north line of Sunset Terrace Addition and a line ru ning parallel with and 334 feet south of the north line of the south half of Section 34, Township 28, Range 24. ` • 2. That area between the center line of Lyndale Avenue and the west line of Adolfson and Peterson's First Addition and between 63rd Street and the north line of Lyndale Oaks Addition. 3. That area lying between Penn Avenue and Thomas Avenue and between 77th Street and Interstate Highway 494, except that area lying between the west line of Penn Avenue and a line 200 feet west of and parallel to the west line of Penn Avenue. 4. That area lying between Penn Avenue and Sheridan Avenue and between 76th Street and 77th Street except the north 258 feet of the west 170 feet thereof. 5. The west 55 feet of Tract B of Registered Land Survey -70675 675 and All of Tract B of Registered Land Survey 1131. _ 6. The north 538.21 feet of that area lying between the centerlines of 76th Street and 77th Street and between the centerline of Knox Avenue and the west right -of -way line of Highway 35W. 7. The north 465 feet of Outlot 1 of Evergreen Gardens • Second Addition. -2- 8. That area between 77th Street and 78th Street and between • the centerline of 11th Avenue extended, and the west line of 12th Avenue except the east 185 feet of the south 135 feet thereof. 9. That part of Block 5, Rays Lynnhurst Second Addition lying between 63rd Street and Mildred Drive and between Dupont and Emerson Avenues and that portion of Block 2, Ray's Lynnhurst Addition lying south of Highway 35W and west of Emerson Avenue and north of 64th Street and includ- ing Parcel 4600, Registered Land Survey No. 877 on Dupont Avenue. 10. The area lying between 77th Street and Interstate Highway 494 and between Chicago Avenue and the centerline of Elliot Avenue extended. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of • ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk , 1983. John Hamilton, Mayor Y) V) p --- •L` - - - -- p� > D. £z _ p j HSIONVIS r V Du 22 — =� � V V Z o C • 1t CZ -_ - - V1 � c e _ c - _ c W 4161 -3AV' aV03O Z: 3G_= _= ______ M0113d9NOl _ 3AV aV03:) 4191 - _'� Vi BI 44 91 NOL9NIw0018 41 t'l 41 cl 41 £ i Vi ZI - -_ _ 4121 V 1 O I �.J _ 44 01 101113 09rolHO — 09v01k0 wsnewm0o _ -- snownl0] T N 0 1xv0 Q 3nv ONrllaoe cl - - -- ^� 3AV ONVIlaOd Vlb O puZ SN3A31S D4Z _- - -- '�"��_— " I Isl - - -_ _— SN3A31S 3AV 1311001N �;� —= ---- _ M - - -1 - -- —' Ada -� '3AV 13110TN 113051x18 _ -- 1130S1V18 (/ NLa0M1N3M I------ HINOM1N3M l� Aan BSllld -� Aan®Sllld NV5V3ltl �_ � _ _ -- _ _ _ _ _ — _ _ - 1NV5v31d QNVWD 31aavN 0131! av9 �!� -� �' =��- -- '-- 1 � I. LU3AV 31vONA1 ��' Jam- _— C13ida09 `�� D gI� -3nV 31YONA1 HOINCIT INVA6v (VI XvdlO 1NVAa6 lNodnC �� \� — --- ,� 1NOdn0 a3w � ; NOS J _ INOw3a!- ^ NOSa3w3 11NOw3tld am 1C108WnH 1 -- 3n� LOIOBwnH 9NIA81 S3wvf ---- - -' - -- - \ :.•s1 9NIAa1 XONx ~ -- _ + S3wvr XONx N V 9O1 Nv9aOw _--- jg ` _', Nv9aow NO1M3N NOl M3N 3AV NN30 = - — - -- ===7 3AV - -'— 1j a3nll0 a _ -- 3nr NN3e N33n0 113SSna I __ __ z N33n0 �� -- - - -- - -� it 1135Sna - _"— ---- + - - - -- NVOIa3HS SVMOHl NOldn __ — . — — SVWOHL 1N3:INIn ' - -. .� ^�s� NOldn NanOwSvM NanBMSVM L �Gr • 3AV 53xa3x - -3nv S3Xtl3x i N � N N N N N V N N VI N N Nbi Fio iD V; u �c m N O O N O • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 378 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf ield Council Members: Subject: Public Hearing - 66th Street and Penn Avenue Improvements CP 780 On November 22, 1982 the city council set the date for a public hearing on the proposed reconstruction of the 66th Street and Penn Avenue intersection for December 13, 1982. Ten days mailed notice and two weekly publications of the re- . quired notice were given as required by law. City and county staff members will be at the December 13, 1982 city council meeting to present the proposed plan and answer questions. Background The proposed plan has resulted from previous actions by the city council, the city staff, and the county staff. 1 -March 23, 198$, the city council passed a resolution encouraging Hennepin County to reconstruct the inter- section and to submit an application for this project for Federal Aid Urban (FAU) funding. The county did submit the project for FAU funding, and the project was approved. However, no additional projects were being funded and the FAU program's future is in question. Therefore, funding for the project would be shared by the city and the county; -May 10, 1982, a city council study session was held to discuss the design alternatives for the improvement of the 66th Street and Penn Avenue intersection. The reasons for the improvements and preliminary designs were discussed. In addition, the city engineer dis- cussed the possibility of using city right -of -way to enhance parking and access in the area by closing some streets. The council directed the staff to meet with • the adjacent businesses to discuss the need for the improvements, as well as design alternatives, parking issues and access issues; Council Letter No. 378 -2- December 13, 1982 -June 7 and 8, 1982, informational meetings were held for businesses and residents of each quadrant of the 66th Street and Penn Avenue intersection. The prop- osed improveemnts were presented and input received from those in attendance. Since those meetings, the city engineer has met with most of the property owners on an individual basis to explain the proposed improve- ments and to explore the feasibility of the use of right -of -way to enhance parking and access; - November 22, 1982, a city council study session was held to discuss the revised plan which is to be pre- sented at the December 13, 1982 city council public hearing. Reasons for the Improvements Improvements to the intersection of 66th Street and Penn Avenue are proposed for three reasons: 1. This intersection is the busiest in the city, with 35,000 cars a day using this intersection. An im- provement to the traffic carrying capacity would re- duce the delays and congestion which now occur. 2. The accident rate at this intersection is higher than the county average. 3. The intersection has physically deteriorated to a point where major repair is necessary. Proposed Plan The proposed plan consists of a raised concrete median, left turn lanes for all four legs of the intersection, and recon- struction of the pavement surface. A new eight -phase traffic signal would be installed at the intersection. Sidewalks and street lighting would be installed on Penn Avenue, 65th Street to 68th Street, where they do not currently exist. Revisions to Original Plan In response to input received from property owners, the city engineer and county engineer made several changes in the plan to better accommodate the needs of the businesses in the area. Revisions were made where it was feasible within the framework of the design needed to handle the tarffic volume, turn movements and safety considerations of this intersection. • Several businesses requested median breaks or no medians be used. The city and county staffs do not recommend that these requests be granted as median breaks, or lack of medians, would severely limit the increased traffic flow and safety Council Letter No. 378 -3- December 13, 1982 characteristics which are needed to resolve the problems at this intersection. The following revisions have been made to the plan: 1. Median width was reduced from six feet to four feet. 2. Median length was reduced at both ends of Penn Ave- nue and the east end of 66th Street. 3. Off - street parking in front of 6623 -6637 Penn Avenue will be accommodated. 4. Vehicles will be allowed to overhang the right -of -way along the 66th Street side of the 66th Street /Penn Avenue shopping center. 5. An additional entrance on 66th Street will be allowed to accommodate the Standard Oil Service Station re- modeling. Right -of -Way Acquisition • Additional right -of -way will be required for construction of the project. Generally, ten to twelve veet will be needed on both sides of Penn Avenue, and eighteen - twenty feet on the north side of 66th Street. This right -of -way acquisition will be necessary to accommodate the turn lanes, medians, and side- walks. Special Assessments Property anutting Penn Avenue will be assessed for street lighting and sidewalks where they do not currently exist. As has been the policy throughout Richfield, special assessments for street lighting will be $2.00 per abutting foot, and for sidewalks it will be 50 percent of the cost (estimated assess- ment to be $9.15 per abutting foot - in 1984 dollars). The project will be primarily funded from the city /county gas tax apportionment. Response to Parking Lot Changes The adjacent businesses have shown interest in the closed street parking lot concept. The owners of the Sir Waxer site have indicated that they will request that a portion of 67th Street be vacated and be used in development of this property. Before proceeding with any parking lot plans, the staff and businessmen will need to know the final plans for improve- ments to the intersection. The city staff will continue to work with businesses who are interested in pursuing this issue. Council Letter No. 378 -4- December 13, 1982 • Land Value Issues Mr. 0. J. Janski, an appraiser, will be present at the December 13, 1982 city council meeting to address the issue of the impact that these street improvements may have on businesses and land values. Mr. Janski has had previous ex- perience with the effect street improvements of this type have had on land values. Recommendation The plan concept as presented addresses the traffic cap- acity, vehicular safety, and pavement deterioration issues. Reduced accidents should save $60,000 per year in medical bills and property damage. An analysis of the two peak hours of traffic at the intersection reveals that over $40,000 will be saved in user fees, i.e. vehicle costs and driver time. In all, over $100,000 per year will be realized in savings. It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution, ordering the project, subsequent to con- clusion of the public hearing. Respectfully submitted, • �n� 'V �it.i�.ilrs'_ YJ Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Community Development Director City Engineer KN /ej a i O J r �\ � Q 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESCLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS FOR 66TH STREET AND PENN AVENUE INTERSECTION - C.F. 780 WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 22nd day of November, 1982, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed improvement of Penn Avenue between the centerline of 65th Street and the centerline of 68th Street; and 66th Street between the centeroine of Morgan. Avenue and the centerline of Sheridan Avenue by widening, construction cf left turn lanes and medians, reconstruction of the pavement surface, curb, gutter, sidewalk installation, street lighting, and traffic signal installation, and appurtenant work, AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weekly publications of the required notice was given as required by law and the hearing was held thereon on the 13th day of December, 1982, at which all perscns desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, 40 NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed. 2. Michael Eastling is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall have plans and specifications prepared for the making of such improvement. Adopted by the city council of Richfield, Minnesota, this 13th day of December, 1982. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: 0 Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk R "RESTAURANTS 1664 UNIVERSITY AVENUE • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55104 PHONE. (612) 645 -6473 December 7, 1982 City Council City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Gentlemen: I have this date reviewed the proposed plans for the 66th and Penn Avenue street and intersection improvements with Mike Eastling, City Engineer and Torn Ferber, Community Development Aid. I find the plans to be a solid improvement over what now exists with the possible exception of how they might affect the southern portion of the Penn /66th shopping center. There could be a roominess problem as it affects the parking area in that portion of the Center which may require some minor further discussion. These plans seem to be an improvement of the kind that ought to lead to a positive influence on the business viability of the entire area, both as it exists today and as it might exist in the future. Your city is to be commended for its thoughtfulness in its design works and Embers backs you in your endeavors in this area. It is my hope the city will proceed with this plan as rapidly as possible. Sincerely, EMBERS RESTAURANTS el H,e�n'ry Kristal President HK /rjb P.S. Embers Restaurants is a 50% owner in the Penn /66th shopping center. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA rOffice of City �,Ianager Council Letter No. 377 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Purchases in Excess of $2,500 The City Charter stipulates that the city council must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction when the amount exceeds $2,500. There are two such items on the December 13, 1982 city council agenda. Enclosed Strobe Light Bar System The public safety department tested several different em- ergency light bars and chose to equip police emergency vehicles with an enclosed strobe light bar system. This system consists of the emergency light on top of the squad car, plus the in- ternal controls for operation. Eight firms were contacted, and three firms provided written quotations for the light bars, sirens, speakers, switch consoles and other items included in the system specifications. Law Enforcement Buyers Association did not provide a trade -in allowance, and quoted $11,424 for 8 units; Don Streicher Guns, Inc., allowed a trade -in, which provided a quotation of $8,600 for 8 units; and Road Rescue, Inc., allowed a trade -in for a quotation of $8,562.64. It is recommended that the city council authorize the purchase of eight enclosed strobe light bar systems, less trade of the existing systems, from Road Rescue, Inc. in the amount of $8,562.64. Funds for this purchase are provided in the 1982 budget document. Squad Cars The public safety department will be replacing five police sedans in 1983. Bids were recently received under the Hennepin County joint purchasing agreement for such vehicles. The low to bid was submitted by Southdale Ford for full -size, four door, Council Letter No. 377 -2- December 13, 1982 Ford LTD Crown Victoria "S" units. Four units would be marked squads with a base price of $8,564, and options to total $8,629.82 per unit. The one unmarked squad car has a total purchase price of $8,462.27. The vehicles being replaced are scheduled to be sold at a Hennepin County auction in 1983. It is recommended that the city council authorize the re- placement purchase of four marked squad cars, and one unmarked squad car for a total purchase price of $42,981.55 from South - dale Ford. Funds for this purchase are provided in the 1983 budget document. cc: Finance Coordinator Community Services Director Public Safety Director KN/ ej a • Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager ��t 18 � • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 376 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Cancellation of December 30, 1982 Richfield City Council Meeting Due to the fact that the regularly scheduled second city council meeting of the month of December fell within the holidays, the city council last month decided to move that meeting to December 30, 1982. It has now become apparent that there will be very few council items for a meeting on December 30, 1982. There- fore, it is recommended that the city council cancel the meeting scheduled for December 30. The city charter stipulates that a special city council meeting be held on the first Monday of a new year. Thus, a meeting has been scheduled for January 3, 1983, for the pur- pose of swearing in the new council members, designating the official newspaper and official depositories, and appoint- ment of council liaisons to the various boards and commissions of the city and the Metropolitan Area. KN /ej a cc: Program Directors • Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager Ll • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield �I Council Letter No. 375 Agenda December 13, 1982 1�;7pfTt. 1- 1r'lANC IoL. 94Z:f10a7r IV foS,ao J Council Members • 5T F�--' ` e r' P,,,, . pteA Subject: Approval of Contract Agreement Between the City of Richfield and the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49 The City of Richfield has four employee groups represented by organized bargaining units. One of these employee groups is comprised primarily of the city's maintenance workers, and is represented by I.U.O.E. Local 49. The City of Richfield bargains with this group of employees jointly with 22 other cities, through the Metropolitan Area Management Association. There are certain local issues which are bargained on the local level, such as the rate of sick leave accrual, vacation leave, etc. However, the major terms and conditions of employment are addressed within the master contract. The MAMA and Local 49 have reached agreement on a contract for 1983 and 1984. The major items of this contract provide that for calendar year 1983, a 53 cent per hour increase be im- plemented for wages in all job classifications. The specific wages for 1984 are to be negotiated at a later date. The agreement also provides that for calendar year 1983, the employer pay a maximum of $125 per month per employee towards employee and dependent insurance coverages. The specific em- ployer insurance contribution for 1984 is also to be reopened for negotiations at a later date. The agreed upon wage rate provides that the light equipment operators will receive a 5.45 percent increases in wages from 1982 to 1983. The heavy equipment operators, which is the highest paid job classification represented by this bargaining group, will receive a 5.2 percent wage adjustment from 1982 to 1983. The increase in the employer's insurance contribution is equal to $20 per employee per month. The overall economic package amounts to approximately a 5.9 percent increase from 1982 to 1983. Council Letter No. 375 -2- December 13, 1982 • It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, approving the Memorandum of Understanding and Master Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and I.U.O.E. Local 49, for the years 1983 and 1984. KN/ ej a 0 Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND MASTER LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 49 AFL /CIO FOR THE YEARS 1983/84 WHEREAS, the City Manager and the Metropolitan Area Management Association have reached an agreement with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49 for the years 1983/84; and WHEREAS, this agreement establishes the 1983/84 contract provisions and provides for new contract provisions for 1984; and WHEREAS, the personnel ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the exclusive representative of employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be implemented by council resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Memorandum of Understanding and Master Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49 for the years 1983/84. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the agreements on behalf of the City of Richfield. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December, 1982. ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk John Hamilton Mayor • E&I CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 374 Agenda December 13, 1932 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Renewal of On -Sale and Sunday Liquor License for Howard Johnson Company dba Ground Round Restaurant, 1500 E. 78th Street On November 15, 1982, Mr. William Behrens, Manager of the Ground Restaurant, 1500 E. 78th Street, submitted an applica- tion and other required information on behalf of the Howard Johnson Company for the renewal of the cn -sale and Sun- day liquor licenses for this establishment. The Public Safety Department has completed their routine background investigation and have found the corporate structure of the Howard Johnson Company unchanged, with the exception of Mr. G. Michael Hostage replacing Mr. Howard B. Johnson as Presi- dent. The remaining corporate officers are unchanged since 1981 and there is no known criminal record for any of these individuals. The A.G. Bogen Company remains the owner of the building and the lease agreement between the Howard Johnson Company and the A.G. Bogen Company is unchanged and in effect. Mr. Bogen indicated that the Howard Johnson Company has been prompt with all lease payments and is considered to be an excellent tenant. In accordance with the city code, an accountant's statement was prepared and submitted by CPA Robert G. King, of the inter- nal auditing department of the Howard Johnson Company. This statement indicated gross food and beverage sales for the period October 3, 1982 through October 1, 1982 in the amount of $1,808,824. Of this, food sales amounted to 57.8% of the gross sales, and beverage sales amounted to 42.8% of the total gross sales. These figures appear to be well within the requirements of Richfield ordinance which stipulates that the serving of food be the principal part of the business. All insurance coverage is in order. The required on -sale intoxicating liquor license bond has been filed with the city, stating that the bond is held by the Reliance Insurance Company of Philadelphia, Pa., in the amount of $10,000 and is effective Council Letter No. 374 -2- December 13, 1982 until December 31, 1983. The certificate of insurance de- tailing public and liquor liability coverage was submitted by the American Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wakefield, Mass. This coverage names the City of Richfield as an addition- al insured and meets the ordinance requirements pertaining to insurance. Real estate taxes have been paid by the A.G. Bogen Company in the amount of $22,600. These taxes reflect a market value of the building in the amount of $500,000. The Minnesota Department of Revenue verified that all sales and withholding taxes have been paid. Federal tax information is protected by the Data Privacy Act and is, therefore, unavailable. Mr. William Behrens, is the manager of this establishment and has been since February, 1981. Incident reports for the Ground Round Restaurant have decreased dramatically over the past year. Requests for service in 1981 indicated that the patrons of the restaurant establishment were not being controlled effect- ively by the management. A series of meetings resulted in some operational changes and training of restaurant personnel by the Public Safety Department geared to minimize the type of problems being experienced. The total public safety contacts in 1982 were 25 percent below those of 1981, and "bar type calls" were down by 54% during this period. This improvement in demand for service statistics is proof that the Ground Round Restaurant • was concerned with its reputation and cooperated fully with the public safety department to gain control of their restaurant establishment. The background investigation revealed nothing that should preclude renewal of the requested licenses. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Public Safety Department, in which I concur, that the council give favorable consideration to the re- newal of the licenses requested by the Ground Round Restaurant establishment for the year 1983. cc: Public Safety Department City Clerk KN /eja 0 Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 373 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Renewal of On -Sale, Tavern and Sunday Liquor License for the Godfather, Inc., d /b /a Vino's The Godfather Restaurant, 708 W. 66th Street On November 15, 1982, Mr. John Anzevino submitted an applica- tion for renewal of the on -sale liquor, Sunday and tavern licenses for the Godfather Restaurant. Mr. Anzevino continues to be the sole stockholder and corporate officer for the God- father, Inc. Mr. Anzevino assumed full control of the corpora- tion on May 12, 1981, when Mr. Gerald Burnett resigned from the corporation. Mr. Anzevino also holds an on -sale liquor license for a restaurant located in Medicine Lake, Minnesota. The accountant's statement required by city ordinance has been submitted by Mr. Anzevino. This statement was compiled by the CPA firm of Schweitzer, Rubin, Gottlieb and Karon and re- flects sales from May 31,1981 through May 31, 1982. During this period, the Godfather Restaurant had total gross sales of $1,377,764. Of this total gross sales figure, food sales represent 54.30, and beverage sales amounted to 45.7%. These figures appear to be within the guidelines of Richfield Ordinance Code 11.06, subd. 12, paragraph 15, which requires food sales to be the principal part of the business. The required "on- sale" intoxicating liquor license bond in the amount of $10,000 is carried with the Continental Casualty Company of Chicago, Illinois. There are three different com- panies that are affording the required public and liquor liabil- ity insurance. These insurance coverages are provided through Professional Writers, Inc., a Minneapolis agency. The coverages appear to meet the ordinance code requirements, with the City of Richfield listed as an additional insured. Tax obligations for the Godfather Restaurant, Inc., reveal that the general tax for this year is current, and a total tax of $34,349 has been paid by the owners of the building. The building is owned by Amos and David Heilicher. The lease agree- ment between the Heilicher's and the Godfather Restaurant, Inc. Council Letter No. 373 -2- December 13, 1982 • remains in effect, and the Heilicher's indicated that all pay- ments are current and that they have experienced no problems with the Godfather Restaurant, Inc., as leasee of the premises. The Department of Revenue, State of Minnesota, has indica- ted that the Godfather Restaurant, Inc., is and has been, current regarding their sales and withholding tax payments. Federal tax information is protected by the Data Privacy Act and is, therefore, unavailable. For approximately six months, Patrick M. Anzevino has been the "on premises" manager of the Richfield restaurant. Included in this year's renewal application was also an application for Patrick Anzevino for "on premises manager ". Patrick, the brother of the applicant, John Anzevino, was a student prior to his em- ployment with the Godfather, first as bartender and later as manager. Patrick Anzevino has no known criminal record. Investi- gation into his background revealed nothing that would preclude him from being licensed as manager of the Richfield restaurant. In 1981, the Department of Public Safety had a problem with the number and character of incidents associated with the Godfather Restaurant. The 1982 licenses for the Godfather were granted with the understanding that Mr. Anzevino would work closely with the Public Safety Department on measures that would reduce the calls for service to a more tolerable level. We are pleased to report that the total calls have been reduced by 48% in 1982, with calls of a criminal nature reduced by 50 %. It appears that Mr. Anzevino has taken significant action to control his establishment, and has been very responsive and cooperative with the Department of Public Safety in attempting to resolve these problems, as well as submitting required information to the Department of Public Safety in a complete and timely manner. The background investigation revealed nothing that should preclude renewal of the requested licenses. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Department of Public Safety, in which I concur, that the city council approve the renewal of the licenses requested by the Godfather Restaurant for the year 1983. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Public Safety Director City Clerk KN 0 /eja ::�t-isG CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 372 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield, MN Council Members: Subject: Setting of Date of Hearing for Liquor License Renewals, VFW and American Legion Post The City of Richfield recently enacted an ordinance change relating to the issuance of liquor licenses for service clubs. This ordinance was enacted to bring the city's ordinance code into conformance with the state code, and provides that liquor licenses for service clubs will be issued by the City of Richfield and not by the State of Minnesota, as been done in the past. Therefore, it is necessary to set a date of hearing to consider the liquor license renewals for the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion Post. It is recommended that the city council set the date of hearing for January 10, 1983. KNjeja cc: Public Safety Director City Clerk Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager • ...1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 371 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Release of Off- Street Parking Bond, Brisson Stucco & Plaster, 6529 Cedar Avenue On August 13, 1979, the city council authorized execution of an off - street parking contract with Brisson Stucco & Plaster, for a new building to be located at 6529 Cedar Avenue. An inspection of the site by the city staff indicates that the owner has complied with terms of the off - street park- ing contract. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, authorizing release of the performance bond for this off - street parking contract. cc: City Engineer KN /eja Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager • RESOLUTION No. RESOLUTION RELATING TO RELEASE OF BOND ON OFF STREET PARKING Brisson Stucco & Plaster 10701 Morgan Ave. S. Bloomington, MN 55431 Location: 6529 Cedar Ave. S. Use: New building Off Street Parking No. 79 -11 Contract No. 2310 WHEREAS, Brisson Stucco & Plaster, 10701 Morgan Avenue South, Bloomington, Minnesota, which contract bears the designation of Contract No. 2310, and which contract was guaranteed by an off street parking operator's bond in the amount of Two Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($2,600.00) on which the United Fire & Casualty Company appears as surety, and WHEREAS, said Brisson Stucco & Plaster has substantially complied with the provisions of said agreement and now seeks to be relieved of any further obligation under said bond, and WHEREAS, there appears to be no justification for requiring • said Brisson Stucco & Plaster to continue to provide a bond for security on the performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: That the city manager is hereby authorized and directed to release North Star Bumper Exchange for any and all acts committed or incurred in violation of said Contract No. 2310, on and after the 13th day of December, 1982. Adopted by the city council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December, 1982. ohn Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: 0 Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk s � � CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 370 Agenda December 13, 1982 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Release of Off- Street Parking Bond, North Star Bumper Exchange, 1912 East 66th Street On December 29, 1981, the city council authorized execution of an off - street parking contract with North Star Bumper Ex- change, for an auto parts dealership to be located at 1912 East 66th Street. An inspection of the site by the city staff indicates that the owner has complied with terms of the off - street parking contract. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, authorizing release of the per- 40 formance bond for this off - street parking contract. cc: City Engineer KN /eja • Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO RELEASE OF BOND ON OFF STREET PARKING North Star Bumper Exchange 1912 E. 66th Street Richfield, MN 55423 Location: 1912 E. 66th St. Use: Auto Parts Dealership Off Street Parking No. 81 -11 Contract No. 2341 WHEREAS North Star Bumper Exchange, 1912 E. 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota, which contract bears the designation of Contract No. 2341, and which contract was guaranteed by an off street parking operator's bond in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) on which the Travelers Indemnity Company appears as surety, and WHEREAS, said North Star Bumper Exchange has substantially complied with the provisions of said agreement and now seeks to is be relieved of any further obligation under said bond, and • WHEREAS, there appears to be no justification for requiring said North Star Bumper Exchange to continue to provide a bond for security on the performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: That the city manager is hereby authorized and directed to release North Star Bumper Exchange for any and all acts committed or incurred in violation of said Contract No. 2341, on and after the 13th day of December, 1982. Adopted by the city council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of December, 1982. ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk John Hamilton, Mayor 0 # 7 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 369 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council embers: Subject: Public Hearing Relating to Renewal of On -Sale, Tavern and Sunday Liquor Licenses for Consul Corporation, d /b /a Chi Chi's Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue On November 15, 1982, the Consul Corporation, D /b /a Chi Chi's Restaurant, 7717 Nicollet Avenue, submitted an application for on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses. Since approximately September 1, 1932, the Maximillian's portion of the restaurant establishment has been closed for remodeling. Upon completion of this renovation project, scheduled for approximately January 15, 1982, the entire restaurant will re -open under the name of Chi Chi's Restaurant. The Public Safety Department has completed their routine background investigation and have found the corporate structure of Consul Corporation unchanged from last year. The corporate officers are as follows: President, James H. Crivits; Vice - President, Theodore J. O'Schaughnessey; Secretary, John PSI. Ham- burger; and Treasurer, Merrill J. Anderson. The corporate officers have no criminal record. The owner of the building continues to be Clark Enterprises and the lease agreement between Clark Enterprises and Chi Chi's Restaurant remains unchanged. Clark Enterprises has indicated that lease payments are, and have been, current and prompt. They also indicated that they have encountered no problems with the leasee. In accordance with Richfield ordinance code 11.06, subd. 7, Mr. hamburger, Corporate Secretary and a Certified Public Accountant, has submitted the required accountant's statement. This statement indicates gross food and beverage sales for the period September, 1981 through August, 1982. Total sales for that period amounted to $3,664,026. This total consisted of food sales in the amount of $1,997,463 or 55% of the total, and beverage sales of $1,666,564 or 45% of the total gross sales. • These figures appear to be well within the guidelines Of Rich- field Ordinance Code 11.06, subd. 12, paragraph 15, which stip- ulates that the principal part of the business for a license year is the serving of foods. • Council Letter No. 369 -2- December 13, 1982 All insurance coverage appears to be in order. The re- quired on -sale liquor bond continues to be held by the American Insurance Company and is effective until December 31, 1983. The general and liquor liability insurance coverage required by city ordinance is carried through the Harris and Company In- surance Agency of Louisville, Kentucky and The Home Insurance Company. The City of Richfield is named as an additional in- sured party on the Certificate of Insurance that was submitted with the application for licensure. The Minnesota Department of Revenue was contacted and in- dicated that all sales and withholding taxes for the restaurant establishment have been paid and are current. Federal tax informa- tion is protected by the Data Privacy Act and is, therefore, un- available. The real estate tax of $61,696 has been paid by the property owner. Mr. Michael Lucore, former operations manager, has been pro- moted to a Vice - President. His successor is Mr. Craig A. Schreiber, former assistant manager of Maximillian's. Mr. Schreiber is an Edina resident who has worked at the Richfield establishment since August, 1981. Mr. Schrieber was a life -long resident of North Dakota prior to his transfer to the Metro area and has extensive experience in the restaurant business, having worked in several of the Consul Corporation's establishments in North Dakota. There was no information revealed by the investigation that would preclude Mr. Schreiber from being licensed as manager of the Richfield restaurant. The incident reports for Chi Chi's Restaurant for the year 1982 have decreased slightly from the previous year. The nature of these incidents has not changed significantly, and it would appear that the majority are day -to -day, service type responses and do not present significant public safety problems. Only 8.4% of the responses were classified as "bar type calls ", that one would expect to be generated by this type of establishment. It is apparant that the licensee has made considerable effort to control the conduct of the patrons of their establishment. Nothing has been revealed in this background investigation that would preclude renewal of the licenses that Consul Corporation is requesting. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Public Safety Department, in which I concur, that the city council approve renewal of the on -sale and Sunday liquor licenses for the Consul Corporation /Chi Chi's Restaurant establishment. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Public Safety Director City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Hanager 'Council Letter No. 368 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mavor and y Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Approval of Contract with Project Charlie III Project Charlie III is a volunteer organization in the City of Richfield that seeks to prevent chemical dependancy through education. This group of volunteers works mainly with elementary students, in an effort to educate them about drug abuse before the problem ever starts. For the past few years, the city council has support -d the activities of this organization through an annual appropria- tion in the amount of $3,160. This amount for 1983 was approved in the 1933 budget document. Attached to this council letter is a copy of a contract with Project Charlie III for crime prevention services in the amount of $3,160. This item has been placed on the December 13, 1982 city council agenda for council action. KN /eja Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager AGRZE.MENT FOR CRIME PREVENTION SERVICES THIS AGREE.MENT :wade and entered into as of the 1ST day o f JANUARY, 19 8 3 by and between CITY OF RIC F LLD , a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "city ") and ?ROB CT C: iARLIE III, RICHFIHLD, INCOF- PORATED, a Minnesota non - profit COrCOraC,On ( "contractor ") , WITNESSETH: 'r.�REAS, the city, in fulfilling its governmental role, has an interest in avoiding anti- social conduct, avoiding or ameliorating social problems, avoiding transgressions of the law, avoiding the governmental expense of processing infractions of the law and other social problems, assisting residents of the city in identifying and finding solutions to their individual problems before such problems become utters of serous community involvement and concern, assisting the police depar` =ent and other law enforcement officials within the community in the handling of their problems, and INTEERFAS, contractor is formed to promote the community welfare of the residents of the city including, but not limited to the identification of persons subject to and the prevention of drug, chemical and alcohol abuse, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned interests of the city can be served by having available to residents of the city the •public information and chemical abuse prevention programs and services of the contractor, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. City hereby engages contractor to perform services, and contractor agrees to provide services to the city consisting of the following: A. Contractor will provide a chemical abuse educational program wi.th_z the city, d_`ecced towards orevention of chemical abuse, and the providing of advice and assistance in dealing with chemical abuse and the problems attendant thereon. Such educational program shall consist, generally, of such activities as providing broc_ ^.ures , pamphlets and other written materials on the subject of chemical abuse and distributichemical such :materials throughout tte co=uni tv ; providin a chemical abuse presentations to youth grouOS, civic organizations, churches and other Croups and wit: in the city; and providing lectures and other presentations on that subject to such groups i within t::e city. B. Contractor will, when requested to do so, refer persons who may have chemical abuse problems to the appropriate ser-rice agencies, public or private who may be able to assist in the resolution of such oroble_ms . C. Contractor will be available for consultation with administrative officers and law enforcement officers of the city to keep them advised of the nature of the services being provided by contractor under this agreement and to work out procedures which will facilitate the providing of contractor's services. D. Contractor will provide city with such informa- tion as city may require concerning the nature, scope and cost of any and all of the services being provided by contractor under this agreement. 2. To assure coordination between the city and contractor under this agreement, the contractor agrees to take the following measures: A. it will at all times while this agreement is in effect permit a person designated by the city to act as Liaison to contractor and its board of directors and committees. • B. it will permit the person so designated by the city to attend, as an observer, all meetings of the board of directors and all committees of contractor's organization and to participate ice: the discussions and deliberations of such board and committees. Such person shall not be entitled to vote at meetings of contractor's board or committees. C. Contractor will send copies of minutes of all meetings of its board and committees _o the city manager of the city and to the person designated as the city's liaison representative under the fore- going paragraph 2 -A. Such minutes shall be sent promptly after each such board or committee meeti g. D. Contractor will send to the city manager cf the city and its designated Liaison representative a quarterly statistical report s=lMarizina the nature of the activities contractor has provided pursuant to this agreement. Contractor shall provide ser'7Zces under th =s acreement to all residents of the city without • recard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, ace, mar_ta'_ status, status wi_h regard to public assistance cr disability. F. Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Richfield, its officers, employees and agents from any and all claims, • causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses or expenses resulting directly or indirectly, from any acts or cmissions en the part of the contractor in connection with the providing of services under this agreement. 3. For the performance of the services described in the foregoing Sections 1 and 2 above, the City agrees to pay con- tractor and the contractor agrees to accept the following: A. City shall pay to contractor the sum of $ 3160 which shall be paid in two equal payments, payable an the first day of June and October, 1983 B. This agreement is for the calendar year 1983 and will be terminated automatically at the end of the calendar year. This agreement may also be terminated by the city, with or without cause upon the giving of 30 days notice prior written notice to contractor. C. The city shall not be obligated to make any payments called for under the provisions of this agreement after it has given notice of termination to contractor. IN WITNESS �v_HEREOF, the parties hereto have ;Wade and executed this agreement as of the day and year first above written. in the presence of.: CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its City Manager PROTECT CHARLIE !I!, RICHFIELD, INCORPORATED By . I s-President By, Its Secretary • • 0 • =�E // CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 367 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and CN Members of the City Council City of Richf ield Council Members: Subject: Request for Variance to Reduce the Front Yard Setback to Construct a Billboard, 6300 Penn Avenue Proposal Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company has requested a var- iance to reduce the required front yard setback of an outdoor advertising sign from 40 feet to 20 feet. The variance is for a billboard which was recently constructed at 6300 Penn Avenue on the Canteen Corporation property. A permit was issued for the sign, since the sign location meets all the requirements of the municipal code of the city. However, a minunderstanding occurred between the Chief Build- ing official and the representative of Naegele's concerning the information on the building permit application, since the form utilized does not lend itself to an outdoor advertising sign permit as opposed to a regular building. Naegele's felt they had received approval for a 20 foot setback on the sign location. Prior to erection of the sign, the city official in charge of this area informed Naegele's of the requirement for the 40 foot setback of the entire sign. Naegele's disregarded this notice and constructed the sign on a weekend when city officials were not in a position to observe the erection of the sign. Naegele's were working an extended work schedule in order to complete their program of upgrading their facilities. The required footing inspection was not called for by the com- pany prior to the placement of the sign. When a staff inspection was done, it was discovered that the sign was set back 20 feet from Penn Avenue, instead of the required 40 feet. The pole supporting the sign is set back approximately 38 feet. An electrical permit for the sign is being withheld until this matter is resolved. The zoning ordinance requires a 40 foot setback for out- door advertising signs and allows for variances if the variance meets the three standard conditions for a variance., Council Letter N.O. 367 -2- December 13, 1982 Staff Findings • The staff has reviewed the re uested va three conditions for granting variances and re ound the nfollowing: 1. It is the opinion of the staff that there are no special circumstances present. The site is suffic- iently large, rectangularly shaped and contains no significant topographic limitations. The average front yard setback of properties along Penn Avenue north of 66th Street is approximately 43 feet. The building setback on the site is 40 feet, which is 3 feet less than the average area setback, and 9 feet less than the average 49 foot setback that Par- ticular block. There are a number of signs in the area which are set back less than the proposed billboard. However, these signs are all signs advertising businesses or products sold on the site on which they are located (on- premise signs). On- premise signs are permitted by the city's sign ordinance and are permitted to be located within the front yard setback areas. 2. It is the opinion of the staff that denial of the variance would not preclude reasonable use of the property. Denial of the variance would not prevent continuation of the existing use or other commercial or industrial uses of the site. The site is suffic- iently large to allow reasonable development within the setback requirements of the city. As indicated earlier, the structure on this site is already 9 feet closer to the street than other structures on the block. There are other locations on the site where the billboard could be constructed in a way which would meet city setback requirements, and which would not require variances. 3. It is the opinion of the staff that the approval of the variance would result in conditions detrimental to the public welfare. Penn Avenue north of 66th Street suffers negative effects from an overabundance Of signs. This overabundance of signs detracts from the area aesthetically and also reduces the effective- ness of the signs. Existing signs tend to compete with each other, and because of the number of signs and varying sizes and locations, people's ability to pick out individual signs as they are driving by is limited. Addition of the subject billboard in the normally required front yard setback area will make the existing conditions worse. The size of the sign • is large and will attract attention away from the on- premise signs in the area, which could potentially have an adverse effect on area businesses. The addi- tion of the large sign also could have a negative M Council Letter No. 367 -3- December 13, 1982 effect on the aesthetics of the area by adding to the existing visual clutter and overabundance of signs in the area. The city's sign ordinance indicates that billboards shall be no closer than the estab- lished or customary building line. The customary building line on this site is 40 feet and, therefore, the sign should be set back at least 40 feet. There are no variance provisions in the sign ordinance. If the zoning variance is granted, the sign would still violate the sign ordinance. Staff Recommendations Because the variance request does not meet anv of the three conditions which must be present for granting variances, it is recommended that the requested variance be denied. It should be recognized that a sign could be constructed on this site as a rooftop sign which would meet all of the building and sign codes of the city. The impact of a rooftop sign would be more displeasing aesthetically than even the sign as it is currently constructed. A free standing sign with a setback of 40 feet would be visible only on the one side, since the south side would be shielded due to the location of the building. A roof top sign would be visible to residential prop- erties in the area. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission, on a 7 -1 vote, recommends that the variance request be denied for the following reasons: 1. There are no special circumstances affecting this land. Average setbacks of buildings on the block are greater than the Canteen Corporation building on the site in question. 2. There is no loss of property rights. The current business can continue to operate as it presently does without the variance being granted. 3. The sign, as presently placed, :-gill be detrimental to the appearance of the neighborhood. Planning Commission member Vern Luettinger cast the dissent- ing vote; he indicated a concern that the legal alternative loca- tions for placement of the sign would have more adverse impact than its placement at the existing location. He also expressed concern about the Naegele Company initiating a lawsuit if they were forced to move the sign, since they were given a sign permit Z rom the city prior to the sign construction. Respectfully submitted, L J earl ::011enberger City iianager • r� LJ NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY OF THE TWIN CITIES 1700 WEST 76TH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423 [612) 869 -1900 NANCY J.JORGENSEN Vlce President Corporate Development and General Counsel December 13, 1982 Mr. Dennis Kraft Community Development Director City of Richfield afield Richfield City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Re: 6300 Penn Avenue Setback Variance for Naegele Advertising Display Dear Mr. Kraft: Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company has an application before the Richfield City Council tonight for a setback variance for an advertising display at 6300 Penn Avenue. We respectfully request additional time in order to research the background in which the permit was issued. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 6� Nan . Jorgensen Vice President Corporate Development and General Counsel NJJ :ah NAEGELE Offices In: Asheville, NC O Columbus, GA • Oes Moines, IA s Evansville, IN • Fayetteville, NC • Gastonia, NC • Greenville, NC Greenville, SC • Indianapolis, IN • Jacksonville, FL • Jacksonville, NC • Kinston, NC • Louisville. KY Memphis, TN • Minneapolis- St.Paul,MN 0 New Orleans, LA • Owensboro, KY • Palm Springs, CA • Raleigh- Durham, NC • I I I • Q U E E N A V E N U E 25' ZO 631 ) PENN AVENUE 3t�� t,aca;nctJ_ I 29' . NAEGELE OUTOOOPI AOVER -nSING COMPANY OF THE TNN CITIES • 1700 WEST 76TH STREET MNNEAROUS. MN 55423 (6121 669 -1900 NANCY L JORGENSEN Prseiaanc Corsorete Development aia Gsniral Caneel December 3, 1982 The Honorable John Hamilton and City Council Members City of Richfield Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mayor Hamilton and City Council Members: At the December 13th City Council meeting, the Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company setback variance application will be considered. To assist with the review, the following information regarding the construction of the display and our position for the setback variance is provided. There are three options available to resolve the situation: • 1) Setback Variance. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company has applied for a setback variance of 20 feet. To be effective, our structures must be readable from 500 feet. If the structure is moved back 20 feet, one -third of the advertising face will be blocked by the Canteen Building. We have invested $3,500 to construct the structure and the two advertising faces have been sold. Moving the structure would cause us to lose one advertising and consequently considerable income. 2) Height Variance. If the structure meets the 40 -foot setback requirements, Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company will find it necessary to apply for a height variance. As stated above, one advertising face will be partially blocked by the Canteen Building. To be visible, the structure must be raised six feet. 3) Roof Sign. Presently, any outdoor advertising company could secure, over the counter, a permit to build a sign on the roof. (Provided the applicant meets all the building requirements.) Under the NAEGELE Offices in: Asnevme. NO a Cciumous. GA • Oes Mo,nea IA • Evsnsvele. IN • Fayettevelle. NO a Gasrcn,a. NC a Greenvme. NO Greenv-ile. SC a Inolanaoohs. IN a Jacksonville. FL a Jackeonvdle. NC a Kinston. NO a Louisville. KY Mempnis. TN • Mmneaoolia- ScPaW,MN • New Orleans. LA apwensocro. KY • Palm Sorings. CA • Raleign- Ournam. NC Soartanburg. SC 0 The.Triao Market:. Greensboro. Winston- Salem, H191M Point 0 Wilmington. NC 0 Youngstown. OH 2 • current ordinance, the roof sign could be built to a maximum of 45 feet. in other words, the roof sign could be 18 feet higher than the current display. It is our company's position to build on the ground when and where possible. We are cognizant of the neighborhood and strongly believe the present structure has the least impact of the three options. The present structure on a single pole at a height of 27 feet conforms best with the business character of Penn Avenue. Please find enclosed information transmitted to the City of Richfield Planning Commission. We appreciate the consideration you have given the application. If there are any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Nancy J. Jorgensen Vice President Corporate Development and General Counsel NJJ :ah Enc. CC: Karl Nollenberger 0 • NAEGELE OUTDOOR AOVERTIS!NG COMPANY OF THE TWIN CITIES 1700 WEST 79TH STREET MINNEAPOLIS. MN 5542316121869-1900 NANCY J. JCRGENSEN V,ce Pre%cent Coroarete oeveicpment ana Generei Counsei November 22, 1982 Planning Commission City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Commissioners: Although delivery of this letter may seem an irregular action, thought it important to respond as soon as possible to a statement in the staff report regarding the Naegele application for a setback variance at 6300 Penn Avenue South. This variance is included as Item r1 on the Planning Commission Agenda for November 23, 1982. The staff report states that: A permit was issued for the sign and the applicant was advised that the sign would have to have a 40 -foot setback. The sign was constructed on a weekend and the applicant did not request the required footing inspections. Although I can understand the staff's view of the facts, believe this view is a little one -sided and will attempt to explain the rest of the facts. On September 30, 1982, John Bodger, a newly employed Naegele real estate representative, received from Sivert Hendrickson, Richfield Building Inspector, a building permit for an advertising sign at 6300 Penn Avenue South. The building permit clearly provided for a 20 -foot front yard setback. (See the enclosed copy of Building Permit, Exhibit One) . The setback provision was discussed and approved by Hendrickson. A fee in the amount of $64 was paid by Naegele and the permit was issued. Based on that permit, Naegele and the property owner determined a 20-foot setback and Naegele purchased for $3,500 a sign structure that would be visible only with a 20 -foot setback. Sometime after the permit was issued on September 30th, but before the sign was constructed on October 9th, Hendrickson informed Bodger by telephone that the sign should be set back 40 feet instead of 20 feet. Bodger disregarded Hendrickson's notice and did not inform anyone else at Naegele. Bodger . —I .', '.. .:J• = ... r.: u. v. 3� • ,.;ds '� J ^a, • .� _ _�a�.,. a 'e ..= ,\i.., • �,y�_..n a. , .� • `y eenv e. ^:C .. • - �Cd�`d:.7 :.\I •,^ uI:KS.J • '�' • : .-. �^J.l. !�I �.-�. 1 SV�..'9. !� Y ?. c 5. -:. • \'. ^ ^.eaao �s- 3t.Paw,h1N • Naw J Fidr :..-. • _s ;e ^scoo. < • :=a:m ac. 75 `.=. • ^d:a gr Gar ^:gym. ^r- �Cartaro.:r2• ��= • ' _ r:di.7 ^J:drKet' Greenaa C. J:rStC �cuem q, r0� ^t • ��V- .C� =an. �G • • • is - 2 - disregarded the notice because he thought he had an enforceable permit. The sign was then constructed by Naegele with a 20 -foot setback as provided in the building permit. Secondly, some question has been raised because the sign was constructed on a "weekend ". Naegele is in the midst of a $3.5 million campaign to upgrade our outdoor advertising facilities in the Twin Cities (see Richfield Sun news clipping, Exhibit Two) and our crews have been working 7 - -day weeks since March 1st. They will continue to do so until the upgrading is completed. Lastly, the footings which were installed at 6300 Penn were exactly those which were submitted to the City and approved by Hendrickson. This letter does not in any way attempt to condone lack of action or condemn Hendrickson's issuance of building permit. I do hope, however, to show that actions were those of new people in positions of new responsibility, and were not an attempt to thwart or- Sincerely , Nancy J. Jorgensen Vice President Corporate Development and General Counsel NJJ :ah Bodger's the both deceive. Delivered to: Karl Nollenberger, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director Rick Jopke, City Planner Sivert O. Hendrickson, Building Inspector - Herbert Ketcham, Planning Commissioner - Barbara Kritzman, Planning Commissioner Charles Kauth , Planning Commissioner Terrill Anderson, Planning Commissioner Maggi %IcDer-mott- Linstrand, Planning Commissioner Connie Hoverson, Planning Commissioner Nlark Ahlquist , Planning Commissioner Vern Luettinger, Planning Commissioner Allan Anderson, Planning Commissioner • C\-- C- I C- �J (1 V� y _ Y C) O E Q% `` •- 7 G G C C U C c r- N J N O, � cD w I Ct• - C.0 IN > = CC J: - U 'z chs U; a } _ I .. ITH y , I l u r1-1-fl v a yJ 1 a h I C- • ma ,_ - > V C , C ' E 4 C L y V E J u 9. O Q M u d ^. W 4 n O g L U C tr O _ C: u w •r 2 T » o 4 O N v _ C, ._ t, C. C c, c C. u s c. C C L.. w L:. Ci - L � L. • •- Y J � J W d s� 7 O N p N ' O y N u x U Y b U U c = UJ u 0 O O >- G C C A V) C 4- b+ C W C:, Li:cE--: ^' C. U i- i E C .. id N — G C C 4 Z (r - C Z Ei p 1 04 +� O N _r 'l. C • � C O a.1 -••, H X " r v o v I9 c U m 0 it w O D U v s C) O E Q% `` •- 7 G G C C U C c r- N J N O, � cD w I Ct• - C.0 IN > = CC J: - U 'z chs a.+ C f- N C +•1 L ••"1 N 4• F+ O to U U G C U; a } _ y , C l u j v a yJ 1 a h I Vt • ma ,_ - F. C , W ' - 4 C L y V E J u 9. O Q M u d ^. W 4 n O g L U C tr O c 6• a w •r 2 T » o 4 O N _ a.+ C f- N C +•1 L ••"1 N 4• F+ O to U U G C U; a } _ y , U ^• l u j v a r o F a w a h I U C w 9 C , W ' L 4' LU Lti d C F-• m 1 � G . —4 a+ E In C c9 C C C ❑ ❑ � O L C Q ca U �U❑ u 1 N Cs N . L aJ G V; ❑ .=G CJ L U N U d cC m cl N CJ O f- L" r� 4� Q Q a } y , l u j W a r o F a w a h I U C w 9 G) U C cai->+ w , W ' - 4 C L y V E J u 9. O Q M u d ^. W 4 n O g L U C tr O c 6• a w •r 2 T » o 4 O N _ O ,.y 3❑ cS3 CL y v O v 1 c w u b O• a U) w N ` " Z 1•-•1 W U Y J � J W d s� 7 O N p N ' O y N u x U Y b U U c = UJ u 0 O O >- lu U J p a N A V) a J w W E CY W C:, v c •° 'U 3 CL ..y❑ .. id N 3 o 0 =. m G o - c G o 4 Z , .d Z Ei p 1 04 c N _r v c o a } y , l u j W a r o F a w a h I U C w 9 b N C cai->+ w , W U - 4 C L y V E J u 9. O Q M u d ^. W 4 n O g L U C tr O c 6• a w •r 2 T » o 4 O N x w O ,.y L1.1 CL y v O v 1 c w u b O• a U) w N ` " Z 1•-•1 W U Y J � J W d s� 7 O N p N ' O y N u x U Y b U U c = UJ u 0 O O >- lu U J p a N A V) a J w W E CY W C:, v c •° a m> 3 CL '- a o I 3 o 0 =. m G o - c G o 4 Z w .d Z CL p 1 04 c N ~ w UI N v c o I W H X " r v o v I9 Q U t E O O w O D U v s Q w w o J J E-+ 0 `J a I x C2 a } y , n j W a r o F a w In h I C cai->+ w , U j 0 N 4 w w L O g a v o tr O c ¢ h ' w •r 2 T » 4 O N v O 3 N u CL y v O v 1 c w u b O• a 4- w w w J U w a O W U N J W d s� 7 O N cr O y N u x U Y b U U c = M 1 u 0 O O >- lu U J p a N A V) a J w W E 1 w .+ O a m> U a C U u W U 3 o 0 =. m G O + O w M 4 Z w .d O y y> CL p ~ w UI N W H w w cC Q U t E O w O D U v s Q w w o U .f > > .0 ti Qa L r = 41 >: Z = c+ u m 3 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: RE: Letter Relating to Billboard Located on Lund's Property As directed by the city council, the city staff and the city attorney have met with representatives of Naegele to discuss this matter. Because of conflicting schedules, it was not possible to arrange this meeting until Friday, December 10, 1982. This meeting did not conclude until late Friday afternoon, at which it appears that a reasonable compromise can be arrived at. More specific information will be presented to the city council at the council meeting on Monday evening. 11 LI CITY OF RICHFIELD, MI`1NESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 366 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Resolution Endorsing Proposed Improvements to the France Avenue /I -494 Interchange About two years ago, a task force of representatives from the A.innesota Department of Transportation, Hennepin County, and the cities of Edina, Bloomington and Richfield devised a plan to reduce the congestion at the interchange of France Avenue and I -494. Although Richfield would not contribute financially to this project, the task force has sought approval from the city for the proposed changes to this interchange. The improvement plan includes construction of loops in the northeast and southwest quadrants of the interchange. The front- age roads and ramps will be rearranged to reduce the number of intersections and, thus, the amount of congestion. A copy of the proposed plan will be available at the December 13, 1982 city council meeting. The changes are designed to increase the traffic- carrying capacity of this interchange. The improved interchange would attract traffic away from 76th Street. The congestion at France Avenue and I -494 is now so severe that it is believed there is a significant amount of traffic escaping to 76th Street to avoid this interchange. The project is scheduled for a 1984 bid letting. The estimated cost of construction, including right -of -way acquisition, is $4,175,000. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution endorsing Layout No. 3 for improving this interchange. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger • City Manager cc: Community Development Director Community Services Director City Engineer 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ENDORSING LAYOUT No. 3 FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE I- 494 /FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Hennepin County, the City of Bloomington, and the City of Edina do intend to make improvements to the I -494 and France Avenue intersection; AND, WHEREAS, such improvements would increase the capacity of this intersection, eliminate traffic congestion, and provide for a more even flow of traffic in the area; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota 1. That the City of Richfield endorses said improvements to the I- 494 /France Avenue intersection as shown in Layout No. 3, because of the positive impact it would have on reduction of commuter traffic utilization of 76th Street through the City of Richfield. • 2. That the City of Richfield endorses said improvements as a positive first step in the improvement of traffic improvement in the I -494 corridor and would be of benefit to the communities of Bloomington, Edina, and Richfield. Adopted by the City Council this 13th day of December, 1982. ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk • John Hamilton, Mayor s � CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 365 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council 1embers: Subject: Request for Special Use Permit for a Restaurant Serving Liquor, 1200 East 78th Street History In August, 1978, the city council granted a special use permit and variance for a restaurant serving liquor at 1200 East 78th Street, subject to staff approval of the site and building plans. In July, 1979, the city council granted the property owner a one -year extension to the special use permit authorizing establishment of a restaurant use on this site. No development has proceeded and the special use permit has ex- pired. The property owner has requested that a new special use permit be issued so that the restaurant development can proceed. Proposal Mr. David Webb, representing Webb Enterprises, Inc. is proposing to convert the vacant structure located at 1200 East 78th Street (formerly the Robert Hall clothing store) into a restaurant serving liquor. The applicant has presented the staff with two alternative site plans. One alternative is the pre- viously approved site plan; and the other is alternative one which shows two levels of parking on the site. The applicant has indicated that the two level parking scheme is the preferred alternative, but that the decision of which alternative to con- struct will be controlled by economics. To deal with this situ- ation, the staff has chosen to consider the development as being in two phases. Phase I would he the construction of the two level parking facility. Phase I and II may occur at the same time if economics allow it. The proposed restaurant would have 200 seats in Phase I and 254 seats in Phase II. Zoning Ordinance Requirements: Section 3.33, subdivision 2 of the zoning ordinance re- quires that restaurants can only be located in C -2 general • commercial zoning districts if a special use permit is obtained. Section 3.33, subdivision 4 establishes the requirements for restaurants in C -2 zoning districts, and Section 3.41, subdivision Council Letter No. 365 -2- December 13, 1982 • 5 outlines conditions for issuing special use permits. Staff Findings ing: The staff has reviewed the proposal and found the follow- 1. The proposed use is consistent with the use pro- visions of the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposed use will not create undue traffic hazards on adjacent streets. The amount of traffic generated by the restaurant would be consistent with traffic generated by uses indicated in the comprehensive plan. According to the traffic study previously provided by the applicant, the restaurant will generate approx- imately 473 vehicle trips per day. The study indicates there will be 106 additional trips on 78th Street be- tween 12th Avenue and Portland Avenue and 38 addition- al trips north of the site on 12th Avenue. Recent traffic counts in the area indicate that there has been a reduction of 140 to 400 vehicles per day on streets in the area since the restaurant was originally approved. Therefore, the overall impact of the res- taurant generated traffic on the surrounding neighbor- hood will be less than originally anticipated. The north curb cut on 12th Avenue could be closed to discourage unnecessary traffic on 12th Avenue. The staff has indicated its concern to the applicant about the design of the rarlp from the lower parking level to 78th Street in Phase II. The design creates a potential problem with visibility and icing during the winter, which could create hazards for cars leaving the site and for cars on 78th Street. The applicant is looking at alternative designs to address this problem. 3. Adequate off - street parking will be provided in both Phase I and Phase II. 4. The proposed parking areas will meet all off - street parking standards. 5. The design of the building and site will enhance the aesthetic appearance of the area. 6. The site will be screened from the residential neighborhood north of the site. The final design de- tails of that screening have not been provided. Staff Recommendation It is recommended that the city council approve the special Council Letter No. 365 -3- December 13, 1982 • use permit for a restaurant at 1200 East 78th Street, subject to the stipulations that final site, landscaping, and screen- ing plans be submitted for city staff approval and that the curb cut to 12th Avenue which is shown in Phase I be closed. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission recommends unanimously that the special use permit be granted with the stipulations that the final site, landscaping and screening plans be submitted for city staff approval and that the curb cut on 12th Avenue which is shown in Phase I be closed. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Community Development Director City Planner KN /eja • • _= Zoning Map � •� •� � Uzi L T• r � r - _� � Ir _ � .. - �' � i 1� �• ., r ,+, ,� C�y iP+. � , -' 4 -- - -� -•r'� , .� ;�- �i __ T � � J t. is = ' i,� ��cy —_�� � , ,_ 1 imp ift i ate.. y",� -� -�' _ ' :� : s I ; 2 1 - _.tea._ -. -. �.-- -.i �.� -. �._.�• �_�.� ,_? � � t 2 el �• 23 + • 11 r } t : 5�O \' MULTIPLE RESIDENCE GENERA ' •. ``'• � l>,. -. L COMMERCIAL XT SOO _ .. �, . • ,` _ .t -tom �i3�' ;i °• .; '�' ?. .� ''. �c`�� .z��r• .. •�•_ . Q'_ +.. - -` fit'. ._Z 98 _ 5_ T. _. 33 33 --- '!• —•- - - - �c�y� �!•s'�- -- ^�. t'+r slit - ., -_ _.__ �„�...� .. .�.. � - .. .' -+ 1r YYY r.. • t:� Y�' '� ��e. � +iii r� 1 ' e �t _ t j Azo I'V C V i7z AZ' ' +i ?�', , t*tl 1. �,�• Y- • SOO _ .. �, . • ,` _ .t -tom �i3�' ;i °• .; '�' ?. .� ''. �c`�� .z��r• .. •�•_ . Q'_ +.. - -` fit'. ._Z 98 _ 5_ T. _. 33 33 --- '!• —•- - - - �c�y� �!•s'�- -- ^�. t'+r slit - ., -_ _.__ �„�...� .. .�.. Land Use Map h-21 e3 S T. MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 'COMMERCIAL JTH: io L r. 1 Z5 z L3 uo1A It 3. ;4 is 16% �tzj Yea %woo a A I 133, Z3 lz IV& J." 7 017 131. 73 gc1 'PUBLIC 3;. 74 eo SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL —4 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 'COMMERCIAL JTH: io L r. 1 ft wn% 3r1 5 43 1 it Z5 z L3 It 3. ;4 is 16% �tzj Yea %woo a A I 133, Z3 lz IV& J." 7 017 131. 73 gc1 3;. 74 ft wn% 3r1 5 43 1 it 11 [�l v > ti Z5 z L3 r, 3 is 16% �tzj Yea %woo 133- - T 133, Z3 IV& ,33- z4 3 1 Z4 11 [�l v > ti Z5 z r, 3 is 16% �tzj ;a zz 133, Z3 IV& ,33- z4 3 1 Z4 133 it 131. 73 3;. 74 Z5 z r, 3 is 16% �tzj ;a zz 133, Z3 IV& ,33- z4 3 1 Z4 133 it .• • 0 E. 77TH ST. I 24 FEET 7 « OUANORAH. }}`i'}:.:;.i., .;;<� ,�} ; ,�;$,•.;..•,'••{•'�v.C: •:;yti�} rr fr r r i � }y. :`L,r1�',��:;5;1. `r..;\•,, •�' �r�' ,�r% �, r i CURD --�..J ?�`r ;': }r; ?:ti'i •`` {� {}fi`.`'�:r"+` ^ ?•x`r. �::?:• .` ui ti {} r •}; fr::::.`i}:'r$' }�` `'%$'r:%:....,'r,,,.,u X•?•r • r w.v:'r«• ':} ��• } . .,�� rev ; . .}•. }:•; {r..:: r,:.. :v y r r ry...; •r.. 2•y: � : }::•f:::• }:•:• }::<`%;: Kam, 4: ,•} }. •:: r: r: } } } } }::•f•} r }:;:•�:: }:ti ? %: %: %: � : %:i %:C:;Y:•:;.vn;::f,:�,':; r }�fv`? : ;,r ;: N Ir E.78 TH STREET i i .0. 24 FIGURE 5 RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN +WTE: ".AN ►ROVIOES• 9•X 20• DAAXINO STALLS WITM 24• C:RCLIATION AMES EXCEPT IN FRONT Of SUILOING wMERE CiACULATION AISLE 43 30' *VE TOTAL Of w iARRINO SPACES WINFIELD POTTERS RESTAURANT *4tl% SCALE 11 to 2' =0 FEET �.......�.���.. NORTH PAVING SIOEWALK RAMP 24 +—�-y. C s GuARGRAII CROWN 127 • !li W Q 1-� N . e& rrW_ *AAKtNG LOT w4 wAVG A •Ew 13"ANCIA SURFACE • O'. EXISTING airx -INCUS SURFACE A • • 2- SITW-VA US WCAR 4 C OL$m JvEr% Ar NIL,. Be ::Nsr.lxl %o .NE" aAVW AaEAS «4. 3E :.iSr=tx.TE✓ Mrf- A S_ AGGaEC.►tE BASE :LASE I v2- 31rt Ar10US SASE :OLNSE. AM i' 31rum4cus ote.ARP4 :OtAsa CURBING . eNrQE -Iw_R%*TER OF �"IMPJG .0T HILL .aVE A 5. :ONCMTE CLf% 1-%4Z; •IG EXISTING C'.AB w►ERE , r C.XISTS IN C—DIX =POIrtCN A.•Q Ew „Fta aumm cup$ i STOPS t —. � � 2T• 19• 'i i t NO J VOE \ StoEwAt,x RAMP — E=STtNG CONCRETE SOE'NALK i T 11S S \ 461. ice^ 5t0EwA1 K `�' C Z ` RA'!P - - T C. - „a.9A E.78 TH STREET NOTE \ . saor ELEVATIONS To GE oETEAMINEO s AMEWFM PCIOR TO OBTAINING OFF- STREET PARKING CONTRACT FIGURE 6 RECOMMENDED CURSING, PAVING, AND DRAINAGE PLAN �— :RAINAGE FLOW PATTERN I� • a <RATE cm Now =Zwftx OVER CPArMaiE C►MMB. i t r-Irl y Ca i 24' - NEW SIOEWAIx RAW \O T Of O G PE AY Lp 20 fJ�S7 Of QTY l.tE T.0 - OOSTgKf COLT 31TTMR CRAJNS To rrni ST. , ACOF OPAN i' i I 29s• • WINFIELD POTTERS RESTAURANT 01"* 'SCALE 0 10 20 40 FEE7 ..�..�.�......��.... NORTH CC:SrWA STORM SEwEN ar Rr9 E. 77TH ST. -\ r c +s.rz vEw I— < � .�.� ��� —11110— 910E1VAI-n 1 aAw. l I —e o3TwG C$ CONSTRICT WW S WEWALK TG� n + +s •a 4- - --- zoo• ^ �• � I � 1 I I I I I I PAVING SIOEWALK RAMP 24 +—�-y. C s GuARGRAII CROWN 127 • !li W Q 1-� N . e& rrW_ *AAKtNG LOT w4 wAVG A •Ew 13"ANCIA SURFACE • O'. EXISTING airx -INCUS SURFACE A • • 2- SITW-VA US WCAR 4 C OL$m JvEr% Ar NIL,. Be ::Nsr.lxl %o .NE" aAVW AaEAS «4. 3E :.iSr=tx.TE✓ Mrf- A S_ AGGaEC.►tE BASE :LASE I v2- 31rt Ar10US SASE :OLNSE. AM i' 31rum4cus ote.ARP4 :OtAsa CURBING . eNrQE -Iw_R%*TER OF �"IMPJG .0T HILL .aVE A 5. :ONCMTE CLf% 1-%4Z; •IG EXISTING C'.AB w►ERE , r C.XISTS IN C—DIX =POIrtCN A.•Q Ew „Fta aumm cup$ i STOPS t —. � � 2T• 19• 'i i t NO J VOE \ StoEwAt,x RAMP — E=STtNG CONCRETE SOE'NALK i T 11S S \ 461. ice^ 5t0EwA1 K `�' C Z ` RA'!P - - T C. - „a.9A E.78 TH STREET NOTE \ . saor ELEVATIONS To GE oETEAMINEO s AMEWFM PCIOR TO OBTAINING OFF- STREET PARKING CONTRACT FIGURE 6 RECOMMENDED CURSING, PAVING, AND DRAINAGE PLAN �— :RAINAGE FLOW PATTERN I� • a <RATE cm Now =Zwftx OVER CPArMaiE C►MMB. i t r-Irl y Ca i 24' - NEW SIOEWAIx RAW \O T Of O G PE AY Lp 20 fJ�S7 Of QTY l.tE T.0 - OOSTgKf COLT 31TTMR CRAJNS To rrni ST. , ACOF OPAN i' i I 29s• • WINFIELD POTTERS RESTAURANT 01"* 'SCALE 0 10 20 40 FEE7 ..�..�.�......��.... NORTH EXISTING W Q H - N • u:r4l NTTNSTY OtJTSIOE -9)O6'ERTY uPE •YELL 'OT EXCEED , FOOTCArCLE E. 77TH ST. -RETAIN EXISTING ASH aETAIN EXISTING ASH n ^EW s• SIOEWA" - -- - 17RVAAI F=T*4 ASH -`� EXISTING WALM %XST.IU * i / i I ( ( MOUNTED ON • fEXISTV4 i I ........... PAA KLr4Q AREA EYERCMINS TO BE RETAINED IP '"2 Irr CAI. ;.BEEN ASH, DESIGN TO SE COMPATISLE WITH PENCE TO rME EASCOMMON GOMON WLAC S' 9'� POSSSLE LILAC TO SE PLANTED ONLY n a -., t-h- EXIbnNG ASH pol1 ■ i 2 I12' CAI, GMEN ASH i m EXIST) UGHt To 9E ESIERGRE -c.YS EXISTING -CONC OAAWACE :HA-EL ;EbST UGHf* kxIsT PYI.CH sai �` 2 Ivr CAL. GREEN A d I to E.78 TH STREET sao �TANDAMS i 2 112• CAI_ :i$EN ASH � t SOD FICaUFE 7 RECOMMENDED LANDSCAPING, SCREENING, AND LIGHTING PLAN WINFIELD POTTERS RESTAURANT 1Z��1i� SCALE ' 10 20 40 FEET NORTH New UGHT <<! {' MOUNTED ON SUILOING To fU.M4NATE ........... PAA KLr4Q AREA EXISTING -CONC OAAWACE :HA-EL ;EbST UGHf* kxIsT PYI.CH sai �` 2 Ivr CAL. GREEN A d I to E.78 TH STREET sao �TANDAMS i 2 112• CAI_ :i$EN ASH � t SOD FICaUFE 7 RECOMMENDED LANDSCAPING, SCREENING, AND LIGHTING PLAN WINFIELD POTTERS RESTAURANT 1Z��1i� SCALE ' 10 20 40 FEET NORTH m 7 T T r � T � T v a ti Fl I � I ' I 0 12TH . VE. S. i n a i jjM> =SS r .Ti mix 1 ! y • wvim > !C 3 ° �iNloARl> • i I �1= s WINFIELD POTTER r. V V 1 Z PA m m c " b 1 .wl Mu- J • t m _ a j _ Ad► t• I m �n f •� I Fq r... a I� H V WINFIELD POTTERS I WOOD EntarOrtaea RIOtlflatd. MinnaaOta .q q SISONI O.f[ �wac[o AN 77" 4t, tQ- 14, E 0 Iq :5z AN 77" 4t, tQ- 14, E 0 17- AN 77" 4t, tQ- 14, E 0 n ilk �I •I ns — 45 Ar2Z 1 II ED I C) O I . O I — 0 ' I I ' I I 461 �3 i IO O a 10 OI Z. = 37 O \ � O CJ N A A NCO A j u . r 1ll' , I�IL IL 4i. !U It_ �;� 1` � - - re! Mo 2 t aMnteC'Sr=r=&eCiala. nrc=. aw=ecUeiryamngim terrors /smo cs /(3enreatio /&I6 west T3th 5traetimuxneacas m resota �5a20/612 8846204 t 71 ti Z H■� low .0 In u■ _ _ law� low .M w a 7ir _ -IO -ins -u■ .� lu iii . M Ins u sw�1 f - J . I ins INOWN • �� ' -- - crchiects • � "-. 0 v�iJ;jF � TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN T00 GOOD'S RESTAURANT Prepared For: Wepo Construction, Inc. Prepared By: BRW, Inc. May, 1978 r y � tip TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa.? INTRODUCTION 1 TRAFFIC AND PARKING CHARACTERISTICS 2 Trip Generation 2 Trip Distribution 3 Existing and Post- Development Volumes 3 Parking Space Requirements DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN 9 Traffic and Parking Objectives 9 Traffic Access and Parking Plan 9 Evaluation of Plan Relative to Objectives 12 Conclusions 12 • 0 11� 0 ME INTRODUCTION The Wepo Construction Company is proposing to develop a new restaurant, called Too Good's Restaurant, in the City of Richfield. The proposed restaurant site is in the northeast corner of the 12th Avenue South and East 78th Street intersection. The project involves converting the existing building on the site, formerly occupied by the Robert Hall Clothing Store, into a restaurant. 6RW has been retained to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed restaurant and to develop a recommended traffic and paring plan. Key issues which this traffic and parking study address include: • Impacts of traffic generated by the development on the adjacent street system, particularly on local residential streets north of the site. • Capability of the site to provide the required number of parking spaces. Traffic and parking characteris.tics of the restaurant are presented next and are followed by development of a recommended traffic and parking plan. ■ 0 _ ■ - TRAFFIC AND PARKING CHARACTERISTICS Traffic and parking characteristics of the proposed restaurant are determined through the following four -step process: 1) Determine the number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed restaurant. 2) Determine the restaurant traffic volumes by approach route and direction. 3) Document the existing and expected post - development traffic volumes. 4) Determine the parking space requirements for the proposed restaurant. TRIP GENERATION Previous traffic studies have shown that other restaurants similar to the proposed Too Good's Restaurant generate an average of 50.3 vehicle trips endsi/ per day per 1,000 square feet GFA.?/ Applying this rate to the proposed restaurant size, 81400 square feet GFA, results in a projected trip generation of 473 vehicle trip ends per day. In addition to the above daily statistics, trip generation information also is needed for the p.m. peak hour, which is the critical period regarding traffic operation on the adjacent street system and also is a period when the restaurant would have significant activity. Applying trip generation rates determined through previous studies of similar restaurants to the proposed restaurant indicates, as shown below, that during the p.m. peak hour 23 vehicle trips would enter the site and 14 trips would exit from the site. I/ A trip end is either on origin or destination. Two trips ends are generated by each customer who drives to the restaurant, one when the person arrives and the second when he /she leaves. ?/ Trio Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1970. • - 2 - Inbound Trips Outbound Trips TRIP DISTRIBUTION Trip Generation Rated/ (Trips /1000 Ft. GFA) 2.77 1.69 Number Of Vehicle Trios 23 14 The next step is to determine the direction of approach for trips generated by the restaurant. Considering the market area;af the restaurant and the street system serving the site, trips are expected to be distributed as shown in Figure 1. Two important points shown in this figure are: • 75 percent of the trips are expected to approach the site from the east and west on I -494. • Since 12th Avenue north of the site and the intersecting streets are local routes, all eight percent of the traffic approaching from the north on 12th:Avenue is expected to consist of motorists coming from.l.ocations in Richfield. Traffic coming from locations north of'Richfield would be expected to use - I -35W or Cedar Avenue and I -494 to approach the site. EXISTING AND POST- OEVgLOPMENT VOLUMES Two volume issues that need to be addressed are the impacts of restaurant traffic on: • Daily volumes on affected roadways. • Peak hour volumes at major intersections affected by restaurant traffic. Based on the preceding trip generation and distribution analyses, the daily volumes of restaurant traffic are expected to be as shown in Figure 2. Adding this traffic to the existing volumes, as obtained from City counts, resuits in the total post - development volumes shown in Figure 3. As shown in these figures, volumes on 12th Avenue would increase -by y just 38 vehicles per day . , ?/ Trio Generation, institute of Transportation Engineers, 1976. - 3 - FIGURE 3 EXISTING AND POST— DEVELOPMENT 1 DAILY VOLUMES J L—� J. E 78TH ST. W I { (29694) 4346 (4,375) 3235•, (3, 273) 1,528 (1,5283 4.7443 (4,616) W a r 3,221 (3,221) 11363 (1,363) SITE E 75TH ST. _ E 76TH ST., E 77TI-L ST. .- E 78TH ST. E -484 2, 685 EXISTING DAILY VOLUME (FROM CITY OF -- RfCHFiE_D COUNTS) i-R 41 PROJEOTF (one percent) between the site and 76th Street and by just nine vehicles per day north of 76th Street (less than one percent). Volumes on 76th Street west of 12th Avenue would increase by,just 29 vehicles per day (less than one percent). The three intersections that would be most affected by restaurant traffic volumes are 12th Avenue /East 78th Street, 12th Avenue /westbound exit ramp for I -494 and 12th Avenue /eastbound frontage road for I -494. The two intersections at 1-494 are signalized and provide adequate capacity to accommodate the restaurant traffic. The intersection of 12th Avenue South and East 78th Street is controlled by a stop sign on East 78th Street. To assess traffic conditions at this intersection, BRW conducted a p.m. peak period turning movement count on May 17, 1978. Figure 4 shows the resulting existing peak hour volumes, together with the projected post- development peak hour volumes that were determined by adding restaurant traffic to the existing traffic. As shown, the restaurant would be expected to increase the right turns from the south to the east by 21 vehicles per hour (13 percent) -and to increase the left turns from the east to the south by 13 vehicles per'hour (13 percent). These volume increases are not expected to have any significant effects on traffic operation at the intersection. The stop sign on East 78th Street should continue to provide safe and efficient traffic flow. PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS The proposed restaurant would have 192 seats and a maximum of 16 employees on duty at one time. For the type of restaurant proposed, City Code requires one parking space per 2.5 seats plus 0.5 space per employee. Based on these requirements, a total of 85 parking spaces are needed. - 7 - FIGURE 4 EXISTING AND POST - DEVELOPMENT 0 PEAK HOUR VOLUMES AT 12TH AVENUE S. AND E. 78TH STREET EXISTING VOLUMES 12TH AVENUE 218 284 oN 1 N ~ " i, 16 <O 100 c0 co c0 E. 78TH STREET N *� 306 424 p. m, peak hour volume 4:18 -8:15 PA SOURCE: BRW COUNT ON 5117178 T POST-DEVELOPMENT VOLUMES DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN The process used to develop the recommended traffic and parking plan consists of the following four steps: 1. Identify pertinent traffic and parking objectives; 2. Develop a traffic access and parking plan; 3. Assess the plan relative to the objectives; 4. Document conclusions /recommendations regarding the plan. TRAFFIC AND PARKING OBJECTIVES Traffic access and parking arrangements for the proposed .restaurant are im- portant to residents in nearby neighborhoods and to motoris`s using the affected roadways. Taking concerns of these interest groups into account, together with needs of the City and of the developer, it has been determined that the traffic and parking -pl*an for the proposed restaurant should meet the following objectives: • Provide effective access between the site and the adjacent . roadways. • Provide sufficient parking spaces on the site to meet the restaurant parking demand. • Create no negative impacts on adjacent residential ..neighbor- hoods in terms of increased traffic volumes. • Meet City Code requirements. W Provide safe and efficient traffic circulation on the site. • Provide safe and efficient traffic operation on 12th Avenue South and East 78th Street. TRAFFIC ACCESS AND PARKING PLAN The first step in developing a traffic and parking plan was to determine the entrance /exit location(s). Based on a review of several alternative confi- gurations, it was concluded that the two existing driveways - one on East 78th Street and one on 12th Avenue South - should be used with the drive- _ way on East 78th Street being designed as the main entrance /exit location. One alternative solution that was considered involved closing the driveway on 12th Avenue South; this alternative is not recommended for several reasons, including: .9 .- .— r_1 L-A i It would not noticeably decrease the restaurant traffic volume on 12th Avenue South north of 77th Street. As the trip distri- bution analysis showed, the volume of restaurant traffic oriented to the north on 12th Avenue South is expected to be quite low and is expected to consist just of local traffic. These motorists would be expected to utilize 12th Avenue regardless of whether the site has an entrance /exit on that street. o It would be more confusing for traffic approaching from I -494 and the south on 12th Avenue_ If these motorists missed the right turn at East 78th Street, they would have to make an awkward U -turn maneuver. t It would increase the traffic burden on East 78th Street at 12th Avenue South. Based on an analysis of several alternative parking layouts, the plan that best meets the objectives from an overall The plan provides a total: of 91 The is shown in Figure 5. parking spaces, six more than the 85 spaces required. Bumper curb wheel stops will be installed for the eight spaces on the western side of the building to prevent the front overhang of cars from obstructing the sidewalk adjacent to the building. The three dead end parking aisles included in the plan are%expected to function adequately due to the relatively short length of each such aisle and the small number of spaces • served. The two such aisles on the south side of the building serve just 10 and 16 such spaces, respectively, and the aisle on the north side serves 20 spaces, eight of which would be for employees. The plan provides a six -foot setback between the parking lot and the east _ property line. This situation will require a variance because City Code requires a 25 foot setback where a commercial property adjoins residential property. Two major reasons for the variance are: e conformance to the 25 foot setback requirement would eliminate 19 parking spaces, posing a severe hardship on opportunities to develop the site. •,.._The abutting portion of the adjacent residential property con- of a panking lot, two rows of parking and a two -way circulation aisle. - 10 - � I-, w a N r v E. 77TH ST. sukom «u. WHEEL STOPS III — A. f E.78 TH STRE_"T i i FIGURE 5 RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN NOTE: FLAN "OV10E3. 9'X 20' PAAKING STA"S ri1TM 24' CIACULATION AISLES EXCEPT. IN FRONT OF BUIL0ING "ARE CIACULAt10N AASLE 15 = V40E TOTAL OF 91 PAAKINO SP *CES TOO GOOD'S RESTAURANT SCALE 0 10 20 40 FEET .- ■ 1- EVALUATION OF PLAN RELATIVE TO OBJECTIVES The capabilities of the plan to meet the objectives previously defined are discussed below. • Provide effective access between the site and the adjacent roadways The two proposed driveways, one on 12th Avenue South and one on cast 78th will provide effective access to /from the site. a Provide sufficient parking soaces on the site to meat the res- taurant parking demand. The plan provides 91 spaces, which is S.i'x more than required under City Code. ;11 , .a Streets would increase by just 38 vehicles per day, and all of this traffic would be expected to be oriented to locations in Richfield. a Meet City Code requirements. The plan meets all code. requirements, except that a variance will be needed for a six foot setback on the east side. This variance from the 25 foot standard is justified to overcome hardships on development of the site and because the adjoining apartment complex has two rows of parking imrediately abutting the site. • Provide safe and efficient traffic circulation on the.site. The plan provides two -way circulation aisles that will effec- Lively accommodate traffic movements on the site. The three dead end aisles are not expected to cause difficulties be- cause one such aisle largely will be used by employee parking and the remaining two aisles serve just 10 and 16 spaces, respectively. _i Provide safe and efficient traffic operation on 12th Avenue South and cast 79th Street. The street system, with existing traffic control devices, will effectively accommodate the restaurant traffic. No adverse impacts are expected at the intersection of 124th Avenue South and East 78th Street. CONCLUSIONS Based on the preceding evaluation, it is concluded that the Traffic and parking plan shown in Figure 5 will effectively meet the restaurant's needs and will cause no adverse imoacts on the street system or on nearby residential neighborhoods. 0 _::41 5 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 364 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Alember s : Subject: Request for Variance to the Minimum Lot Area Requirements for an 8 -Unit VIultiple Residence at 6945 Penn Avenue History In January, 1973, the city council approved a special use permit and four variances to allow the construction of a three- story, six -unit apartment at this site. The variances approved were as follows: • 1 -to reduce an interior sideyard adjacent to an R zone from the required 25 feet to 23 feet; 2 -to reduce the side street sideyard from 30 feet to 29 feet; 3 -to reduce the required sideyard parking lot on the side street sideyard from 10 feet to 5 feet; 4 -to reduce the required outdoor living space from 300 square feet per unit to 200 square feet per unit. However, this proposed development did not proceed. In July, 1980, the city council approved a special use permit for a six - unit three-story condominium subject to the following stipula- tions'and variances: 1 -That the proposed elevations cf the site be approved by the city engineer to insure proper.drainage on the site and the surrounding properties; 2 -to reduce the required frontyard setback of 30 feet to 22 feet; 3 -To increase the maximum allowable gross floor area of the structure from 20 percent of the total devel- opment site to 48 percent of the total development site; Council Letter No. 364 -2- December 13, 1982 4 -to decrease the required parking lot setbacks from a property line of 10 feet to 4 feet along the east property line and 3 feet along the north property line. This development also did not proceed. The variances approved for this site remain in effect and can be utilized by the prop- erty owner. A special use permit is no longer required. Proposal Mr. James B. Hauptman and Attilio S. DeMarco, representing Associated Brokers, have requested that the city council approve a variance to the minimum lot area requirement for an 8 -unit multiple residence to allow the construction of 8 -unit two -story condominium structure on a vacant parcel located at 6945 Penn Avenue. City ordinances require a minimum lot area of 2,500 square feet per unit. In this case a total lot area of 20,000 square feet would be required for an 8 -unit building. The parcel in question has a total lot area of 14,952 square feet. The proposed structure would be similar in concept to the structures of the "Coach Homes of Richfield Lake" project. • Each individual dwelling unit would be one -story and have its own separate exterior entrance. One enclosed and one open park- ing space would be provided for each dwelling unit. The propos- al would meet or exceed all MR -1 zoning district requirements except the minimum lot area requirements. Zoning Ordinance Requirements Section 3.31A, subd. 4 indicates that the minimum lot area requirements in an MR -2 zoning district is 2,500 square feet per dwelling unit, and Section 3.40, subd. 6 lists the three conditions which must be present before a variance can be granted. Staff Findings The staff reviewed the three conditions for granting var- iances and found the following: 1. It is the staff's opinion that there are no special circumstances present on this site. The size and configuration of the parcel is similar to other multiple residence zoning district sites in the area and community as a whole. 2. It is the staff's opinion that denial of the var- iance would not prevent reasonable use of the prop- . erty. A five -unit multiple residence could be developed on the site without a variance. Council Letter No. 364 -3- December 13, 1982 • 3. It is the staff's opinion that the proposal will not materially or adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The scale and design of the prop- osed structure is of the character of a single family residence which is the character of the area. Traffic generated by the proposed struct- ure should be minimal because of the residential nature of the unit and the fact that there will only be studio and one bedroom units. Screening will be provided between the proposed structure and the adjacent single family residences. It will also benefit the community by providing additional affordable housing units and tax base in the community, as well as clean up a presently poorly maintained vacant lot. A drainage plan has not been submitted to insure that the project will not add to existing drainage problems in the area. Staff Recommendation The staff feels that the proposal is a good project which will not be detrimental to the neighborhood, and one which will be a benefit to the community. However, because the proposal does not meet the three conditions for granting variances, • the plannina staff must recommend that the variance request be denied. The city manager recommends approval of this variance. If the city council approves the variance request, it is the suggestion of the city staff that it be stipulated that the applicants should submit a drainage plan for city staff approval. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission unanimously recommends that the variance request be approved with the stipulation that a drain- age plan be submitted for city staff approval. Respectfully submitted, �7 /y Karl Nollenberger G Q' City Manager ✓/ cc: Community Development Director Planning Director City Engineer KN /eja Pi • r 0 • • MR -2 DISTRICT REGULATION ANALYSIS Minimum Lot Area Lot Dimensions Maximum Lot Coverage Minimum Outdoor Open Space Front Yard Setback (Penn Ave) Streetside Sideyard Setback ( 70th Street) Interior Sideyard Setback Rear Yard Maximum Height Minimum Floor Area: Studio Unit Minimum Floor Area: 1 Bedroom Unit Minimum Parking Previous variance (300) Normally Required REQUIRED PROPOSED 20,000 sq ft 14,952 sq ft 75 ft 112 ft 300 2go 200 sq ft per 211 sq ft per unit* (300) unit 22 *(30) 22 ft Height of Building 29 ft = 25 ft Height of Building 26 ft = 25 ft 25 ft 43 ft 42 ft .25 ft 500 sq ft 500 sq ft 650 sq ft 662 sq ft 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit _t coccc -UaS� Public_ it I ' _ •7, � i _ r - -�_ �, 1a j � 1 _ Commercial 41 C. ` � , � :apartments r Single _ alit � l V X78; 's _ Al; Vacant au•, 57L, Yqi cTn EET 16 5 �,,2i (fig .. - P 5 y►� (g3;r� r,., Z 1 Q _ - -- z �5 7l1 `�� Ski),� a Site 70th 1 ` � �zl %4� �e� �S� � 1 '7i �3 66J ��` 9.n '- - n •' +t eJ ie :A ♦� I j � � �T T' -- +— �°— (� i ;, "'- '_ `c�ai 2 I � i y51) � �� Z T ice• �, ,SCI:. 60 STREET - .AJ ,t 141 /da) d �r 0 rallml CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 363 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: 1983 Health Services Contract For several years, the City of Richfield has contracted with the City of Bloomington to provide certain personal health services to residents. These services are supported in part by a community health services grant from the State of Minnesota. The adopted 1983 budget includes an appropriation of $90,000 for such personal health services. • The contract for services between the cities of Bloom- ington and Richfield for 1983 has now been negotiated. The con- tract will provide essentially the same services as have been provided in past years, with the exception of nursing services for private schools. In the past, nursing services for private schools have been included in this contract, and the Richfield School District has paid the City of Richfield, who in turn paid the City of Bloomington for these services. The State of Minn- esota has provided funds to the school district to cover costs of such services, the state subsidy has been passed through the Richfield School District to the city. It appears that the direct application by the school district for the subsidy and arrange- ment for provision of these nursing services to the private schools can best be arranged through an arrangement directly be- tween the private schools and the Richfield School District, with no need for the cities to be involved. Therefore, these private school nursing services are not a subject of the contract between the cities of Bloomington and Richfield for 1983. It is recommended that the city council authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract for health services with the City of Bloomington for 1983. Respectfully submitted, 0 -��Z 1� "' -1,CA'tz- Karl Nollenber g er City Manager KN /eja 0 • _�t /8G CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 362 Agenda December 13, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Agreement for Counseling Services with Storefront /Youth Action, Inc. 1983 There is an item on the December 13, 1982 city council agenda providing for council approval of an agreement for counseling services with the Storefront /Youth Action, Inc. The city council approved an appropriation of $30,300 for the Storefront /Youth Action, Inc. for 1983. The attached contractual agreement summarizes the services which are to be provided; the described services are the same as those which have been contracted for by the city, with the Store- front /Youth Action, Inc. agency for the past several years. It is recommended that the city council approve the prop- osed agreement. KN /eja Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager AGREEMENT FOR COUNSELING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the 1st day of January, 1983 for the period from January 1,1983 through December 31, 1983, by and between 4 CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ( "city "), and the STOREFRONT /YOUTH ACTION, INC., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, ( "contractor "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the city, in fulfilling its governmetnal role, has an interest in avoiding antisocial conduct, avoiding or ameliorating social problems, avoiding infactions of the law, diverting youth from the criminal justice system, assisting young.people in.finding solutions to their individual problems, assisting the police department, school officials and others-within the community in the handling of the problems of youthful residents of the city, and WHEREAS, such interests of the city can be served by having available to the youthful residents of the city a diversion program which provides youth counseling and referral services, and WHEREAS, contractor is in existence for the purpose of providing such youth counseling and referral services and.is willing to provide such services for.the city. NOW, THEREFORE, be it agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. City herewith engages contractor to perform services, and contractor agrees to provide services to the city, consisting of the following: A. Counseling and referral services to juvenile residents of the city who are referred to,contractor by members of the city police department, representatives of the school district, the Hennepin County Municipal Court, the Hennepin County District Court, social welfare -4 -2 -. 1�1 agencies of Kenmepin County,- and.:parents;'custodians, guardians or other persons having,resp ansibility f6r 9u ''h youtH "residents of the c3. ty, A, go.al..of contra-c:tor. for-the time- Jri Tahic�i this agreement is in effect. shall be , o z rk. with 1 -54 cases from city of `hich 80% will be youth diverted from the crimiaal�justire�sys'tem as defined in goal "A" of the HAYDP FY 76 grant application to the Governor's Commission ' on Crime Prevention and Control. In cases whee,..p.ers�ons :referred to contractor Have problems 4 which cannot be. - fully;,pr. adeguateLy steaa't, with through services by contractor, approprriate �,rgfecra:ls-.will =be made- by- can tractor to other persons or organizations: r C.�marX gmp�hasfs.: in .essel.ixig will be- on "individual diagnosis ... _ :.. of the persat4 referred. to. determine, -hi;s or her basic needs, but such y M diagnosis., ahall not irxcluride; psychologicala'or vocational testing, D::-In appropriate cases such counseling shall` include, as an adjunct to the counseling�-of,a juvenile, diagnostic eounseling of other family members .^or.; other ::persons? � in the'housel old wl eie he or she resides. E A followup on referrals will be made by cantrac,tor,,on all referrals from police, court services, and juvenile court, in order to determine,the..extent.ao; which an- individual client's problem or problems sr have been resolyed.through the..efforts`�of` the contractor or through the efforts of .,others to yhom,the,contractor has 'referred'the client. -3- F. Contractor wi;.;,consult. with law enforcement officers of the city, y, o als of the school district and .other appropriate persons to keep them advised of ..the natture of,.-the services. b-: provided under this agreement; and., to work., out procedures �7hfdh wAl facilitate the providing of contractor's se;v?jces-:- ? '•' -`' G, ±'Contractor shall use its best efforts to coordinate the programs of various youth service organizations .,and agencies within and outside of the city which.provid•e ,services .to. :_youthful residents o °f the city, with the object of. improving upon,- th$' eoordiitation and performance of such organizations,;,and agencies in- tweeting= •the,'totk ne'eds`of the client youth involved. , H. Contractor shallrAald,itself aveilabrd for• consultation with -. juvenile aut4orities, of the city: -so that -'such 4irtlorities are kept advised of the status .. of those, situations which 'fall with their areas of responsibility. I. Contractor will undertake to.identify`.ariy new or different kinds of services , whi.ch , shquld. be .;made , available' to 'yoiiehful residents 'of the city in order to meet their unmet needs in personal development and t. social ad ustment. J. Contractor..will provide the .equivalent of at-:least one full time youth worker. to serve ,residents of chef ci y teferred 'for services. The entire.s,teff. of,00ntractor,-will be available to`work wi h said residents as needed. Said youth workers will have access to services of secretrar y provided by contractor. yr.. K. ,.City will - ece ,ve. all •,serx ipes.prav�.de &byd3rhe Storefront/ „ y Youth Action,, Inc.,, cen ;ral.:sta -f ',.- -. ing ing :the. thonitbtlh t' of agency budget, the maintenance of fiscal re©ofds4 — and- � program "- faoni tor ing and evaluation. City will also receive support of the board of ` tiedtofs o£ Thi-:Storefront /Youth Action, +Inc. L. YouAtjh, wo ;kers.f provid.ng ,,cervices. to •`residents -.of 'city will - receive supervision and in- service staff training from contractor and pt'ofe "ssional' support and growth through contact with other staff 6f6eis o£ contractor. aa w� M. Residents of city will be eligible to particip.ate:in all programs offered by contractor. These currently include a chemical 4' eneation program for families, groups focusing on drug die`for''adolescents, a concerned persons group for parents concerned out—drug'use of a child, and self - awareness groups for young women. 2. To assure „prcper coos�d�zbat on 4t sem •the ,crit and contractor, under A .” A.. .. . ... .+. this agreement;' the contractor agrees. to bake the .fo.11o4 -jWg! measures: A. It will, at all times while this contract is in effect, keep a "person to be designated'by the city, on its board of directors. B.: will permit a - membgr. of the city's goveltirig`body ` to be designated by the 'city, to. ttenc as :an °observer;- 'al 41' m6etzngs of the - board of directors -of' contractor, and to participate in the discussions and deliberations of such board, without the right to vote. i T - __51,.,,, sestd cop-i:es --o- miiiutesr iif all meetings 'of its board of _ dire tors to- ithose petwoht designated by``' lae- city,' proiaptiy after each board efg,,4it-;ectors..meetiftg. D. It will send to all members of.the city•,cpuncil, a.guarerly statistical report summarizing the nature of the activities of contractor , in proyid ng _th.p ,services. d'esczSi:bed `ire '`this 'agreement. E. It will provide services to all' persons withouet regapd- to� race, color, creed_, religion, ;national` origin, sex, marital status, ;tat us with regard to pub-1 c,- a,ssis,taace- ors:Aisability.' F. It will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City.of Richfield, its employees and,.-, agents., from any and all claims, .causes gf tion, lawsuits, damages,:.lossew-. -or expenses on account of bodily- sickness, disease, *death or property damage as a result, di..rectly or indir*4t3y, ©f;any.actions or omissions on the part 6 Uthe`c"ottitractor's perso}}ne� •�:n, cnection.- witty- thee r �......_. ,._`..,.._ .e p awls air cf:..e'ervf'ces..: i1_.accorciance with . t4a, .tee ; ,o f; ::ttLf s. conttact. G. It will perform the counseling and referral services i a competent, professional manner and in compliance with all applicable laws, :ordinances; rules, regulations, and„ polX_d es;_whioh ...are , now .. in affect.>or wh chAmay her.,eafter be -adopted. 3. For the performance of the services described in SecZ,ion No. l above, the city agrees to pay and the contractor agrees to accept payments on the following basis: -6- y