Loading...
07-14-80 agendai CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and ,-~ v 2 ~~ ~Qv ~ o-Q-Q ~ v~ :~,-. ~~Q. Members of the City Council {~~~~ City of Richf field Council Members: Subject: Public Hearing CP 705A and Resolution Ordering City Project 705A At the June 23, 1980 cit established a public hearin ted CP 705A Drive to I35 improvements include the L/H/N except for Lake Shore Drive and the city council provemenLS wltnin Lne L~n~ra area. •1•nose all areas which are presently planned for the construction of 66th Street between I35. original program called for 66th Street improvements from First Avenue to Lake Shore Drive. Recently, the city council approved the design plan for 66th Street between Lake Shore and I35 and requested Hennepin County to amend the contract to bring it into conformance with current county guidelines as well as the new design for the improvements. The county commissioners have approved that amendment at this time. vast majority Drive and 135 While the tween Lake Shore After the public hearing it is recommended that the city i Council Letter No. 247 -2- July 14, 1980 designated project. The enactment of this resolution would allow the city council to proceed with the sale of the bonds which provide permanent financing for the project. Respectfully submitted, ., Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja cc: Director Administrative Services Director Community Development City Engineer [] RESOLUTION ORDERING CITY PROJECT 705-A BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, i•;innesota as follo~•.s 1. The improvement designated as City Project 705-A, described in the notice of hearing and as proposed by the Council in a resolution adopted on the day of 1980, is hereby ordered. The engineer is hereby authorized and directed to proceed to prepare complete plans and specifications for said improvement. 2. Said improvement shall be completed in accordance with the provisions of P~innesota Statutes Chapter 429. 3. Such improvement is hereby combined with City Project 705 and the combined project shall hereafter be known and designated as City Project 705. r ~~ J CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: estimated assessment Council Letter No. 249 Agenda July 14, 1980 ~°~ o 6 ~. ~~o Once all of these costs have been ascertained t compile them into an assessment roll and shall these proposed assessments in the office of the public inspection. The clerk will notify the c esent time it is cially assessed tat. cost of mpleted as a The special he city clerk will then file a copy of city clerk for It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution ordering preparation of the assessment role for CP705. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger ' City Manager KN/jf cc: Community Development Director Deputy City Clerk 9 Subject: Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed in Ordering Preparation of a Proposed Assessment Roll for City Project No. 705 i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR C.P. NO. 705 WHEREAS, the following construction has been performed and will be performed during 1977 through 1981: Permanent Streets in the following areas: That area bounded on the north by 64th Street, on the east by First Avenue, on the west by Emerson Avenue and on the south by 67th Street. WHEREAS, the city share of costs has been or will be in the sum of $9,480,818. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richf field, Minnesota as follows 1. That the cost of improvements made as part of project 705 be specially assessed in an amount of at least 20% of the aforementioned total cost of said project against property benefitted thereby. 2. That said assessment shall run for a period of 20 years and include interest at the rate of 8% per annum. 3. The city clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be assessed for such improvements against every assessabl: lot, piece or parcel of land affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the office of city clerk for public inspection. 4. The clerk shall notify the council upon completion of such proposed assessment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of July, 1980. Donald J. Priebe Dlayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh Deputy City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 248A Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf field Council Members: Subject: Public Hearing Concerning the Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Corporate Travel Office Development at 1400 West 76th Street - Subsequent to your receipt of Council Letter No. 248, I have had an opportunity to meet with Mr. Chuck Erickson to discuss his progress in meeting the stipulations attached to the council's approval of the off-street parking permit and height variance for the proposed development at 1400 West 76th Street. Mr. Erickson indicated that he is working toward obtaining the necessary ease- ments to provide access to 78th Street and that proper signing would be installed in the parking lot to encourage the use of that access. However, he would like to have the city council consiuer a change in the two remaining stipulations. Mr. Erickson indicated that he would provide the city with a five-year performance bond which, if the additional ~g parking stalls are necessary, could be called to install the additional parking spaces. Since on-street parking in the area is limited and would not be a significant neigh- borhood problem, it seems fair to accept the lower number of parking spaces. ,.j Currently, the off-street parking contract requires 365 spaces for the development. It is requested that this number be reduced to 327: spaces, which is 40 spaces below our current require- ments. __ The final stipulation related to the installation of a traffic signal at 76th Street and the freeway entrance across from the access to the development. Mr. Erickson indicated that he would like to contribute $50,000 toward the installation of the traffic signal. The State Department of Transportation has indicated that the maxi- mum cost of a traffic signal would be $70,000, with a typical install- ation costing $50,000 - $60,000. The city would then be responsible for any costs over the $50,000 provided by the developer as well as installation of the signal. We would anticipate contracting that out to the State of Minnesota so that they would provide maintenance services in the future. Based on the above discussion, it is recommended that the city council conduct the public hearing and approve the attached resol- Council Letter No. 248A -2- July 14, 1980 ~-~ 1 ution to proceed with the project and the issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds. In addition, the stipulations on the off-street parking contract should be addopted by the city council: 1. That the off-street parking contract be reduced to 325 spaces and that the developer provided the city with a five-year performance bond in an amount sufficient to construct 3g additional off-street parking spaces to city standards if they are deemed necessary by the city staff. 2. That the developer contribute $50,000 toward the installation of a traffic signal at the 76th Street entrance to the site. Respectfully submitted, ~ / Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/ ej a cc: Community Development Director y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 248 Agenda July 14, 1980 a The Honorable Mayor ~,+~ and Members .of the City Council ~ ~`~ City. of Richfield ~ ~~'~~'~~ M~~nv fig,` Council Members: \,~ Subject: Public Hearing Concerning the Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Corporate Travel Office Development at 1400 West 76th Street t. Four stipulate two-way access roa t should be instal ions but has not provided evidence that they will be met. Subs for July dustrial Respectfully submitted, :~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager • KN/jf the cc: Community Development Director At the May 12, 1980 meeting, th variance and an off-street pa.r_king p It is recommended that the city council conduct the public hearing but take no action until such time as evidence is provided that the above-mentioned stipulations will be met. J CM-00424-01 ' _ This Application must be submitted to Commissioner in duplicate STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE -SECURITIES DIVISION APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL RzVENUE BOND PR0.IECT - Date To: ' Minnesota Department of Commerce Securities Division 500 Metro Square Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 The governing body of Richfield , County Of xPnTlPnin ~ Minnesota, hereby applies to the Commissioner of the State of Minnesota, Securities Division of the Department of Commerce, for approval of this community's proposed municipal Industrial Revenue Bond Issue, as required by Section 1, Subdivision 7, Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes. We have entered into preliminary discussions with: A partnership to be formed by Charles W. Erickson, Steven E. Wirth, FIRM Kathryn E. Wirth, Thomas E. Erickson and Lyla S. Erickson ADDRESS _c/o Charles W Erickson 938 Minnesota Building - CITY St. Paul STATE Minnesota' 55101 State of Incorporation N/A 994 Minnesota Building Attorney Steven E. Wirth Address St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Name of Project (Corporate Travel Buildin Pro' ect This firm is engaged primarily in (nature of business): constructing and leasin>; office F., ..; 7; t;oc fnr incraRtmant The funds received from the sale of the Industrial Revenue Bonds will be used to (general nature of Project): acquire land and construct and equip thereon an office building facility to be leased to Cor orate Travel-Twin Cities Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and others. It well be located in City of Richfield, Minnesota _ The total bond issue will be approximately $ 7,500,000 to be applied toward payment of costs now estimated as follows: Cost Item Amount . Land Acquisition and Site Development S 700 000 ' Construction Contracts Equipment Acquisition and Installation Architectural and Engineering Fees 250 000 Legal Fees ~ 45 000 Interest during Construction ~ „ 3fi0 000 - Initial Bond Reserve _ N/A Contingencies 150 000 Bond Discount N/A .ether.,. .Ti,nanci na costs 115.000 ..` !t is presently estimated that construction wil{ begin on or about _November 1 , 1980 L , and will he completed on or about _~vemh ,- i , 19 81 . V1-hen completed, there will be approxi:r-ately _ ~5n _, new jobs created by the project at an annual payroll of approximately, ~~.750.000 Sased upon currently prevailing wages. The tentative term of the financing is 25 years, commencing November 1 19 81 The following exhibits are furnish:.~d-with this s;:~plication and are incorporated herein by reference: i. An opinion of bond counsel that the proposal constitutes a project under Minnesota Stat., Chapter 474.02. 2. A copy of the city council resolution giving preliminary approval for the issuance of its revenue bonds. 3. A comprehensive statement by the muricipality indicating ho~v the project satisfies the public purpose of Minnesota Stat., Chapter 474.01. -4. A letter of intent to purchase the bond issue or a letter confirming the feasibility of the project from a financial standpoint. 5. A statement, signed by the Mayor, ~to the effect that upo*~ entering into the revenue agreement, . the information required by Minn. Stat. See. 474.G1 Subd. 3 will be submitted to the Depart- ment of Economic Development. S. A statement signed by the Mayor, that the project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as a permanent residence. 7.- A statement signed by the 4~1ayor.that a pubic hearing was conducted pursuant to Minn. Stat. 474.fl1 Subd. 7b. The statement shall include tha date, time and place of the meeting and that al! interested parties 4vere afforded an opportunity to express their views. 8. A copy of the notice of publication of the public hearing. or appointed bVe, the undersigned, are duly elected/Fepresentatives of Richfield ,Minnesota, and solicit your approval of this project at your earliest convenience so that we may carry it to a final conclusion. Signed by: (Principal Officers) ayor i y onager This approval- shall not be deemed to be an approval by the Commissioner or the state of the feasibility of the project or the terms of the ~a~ to be executed or the bonds to be issued therefor. Revenue Agreement Date of Approval Commissioner of Securities Minnesota Department of Commerce ` COMPREHENSIVE STATEMENT The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Mayor and City Manager of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the Municipality), certify that the City Council has been provided by a representative of a partnership to be formed by Charles W. Erickson, Steven E. Wirth, Kathryn E. Wirth, Thomas E. Erickson and Lyla S. Erickson (the Borrower),~with certain information concerning a~proposed Project under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474. On the basis of such information the City Council, by resolution adopted July 14, 1980, has determined to proceed with the proposed Project and its financing by the issuance of revenue bonds of the Municipality. The following are factors considered by the Council in making such determination: 1. The Project consists generally of: tree acquisition of land in the City and the construction and equipping thereon of an office building facility to be . leased to Corporate Travel-Twin Cities, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and others. 2. Bond Counsel is of the opinion that the Project constitutes a "project" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.02, Subdivision la. ;~ ,i; 3. Based upon an estimated total cost of construction of $ 7,500,000 , it is the opinion of the City Council that the Project, when completed, will aad to the commercial tax base of the N~unicipality, the County and the School District in which the Project is located. 4. Representatives of the Borrower estimate that upon completion of the pzoject, approximately 450 persons will be employed in-the operation of the Project, which would provide increases employment opportunity for the residents of the Municipality and surrounding area. 5. Representatives of the Borrower estimate that the acquisition and construction of the Project will result in an annual payroll of approximately $6,750,000 based on wage rates currently in effect. The City Council believes that a substantial percentage of that payroll will be spent on housing, fool and other goods and services in the Municipality and surrounding area, thus benefiting the local economy. The Municipality will provide the riinnesota Department of Economic Development with the information required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, subdivision fi, upon entering into a revenue agreement, as defined in the Act, with the borrower. f; r r Z~he Project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as a permanent residence. A public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project was conducted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, subdivision 7b, on 3uly 14, 1980, at 7:00 o'clock P. M., in Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, Minnesota 55423, at which public hearing all interested parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. N~ayo r (SEAL) City Manager / , (' CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS Issuer: City of Richfield, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting, held on July 14 , 1980 , at 7 : 00 0' clock P. M. , at the Richfield City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO PROCEED WITH A PROJECT AND ITS FINANCING UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL 'T'0 THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obligations referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and o ther actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said obligations; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of 1980. (SEA L1 Signature Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk Name and Title ,,. .. . ,. .., r Member moved the adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO PROCEED WITH A PROJECT AND ITS FINANCING UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the Municipality), as follows: SECTION 1 Recitals and Findings 1.1. This Council has received a proposal that the Municipality undertake and finance a proposed project under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 (the Act), consisting of the acquisition of land and the construction and equipping thereon of an office building facility (the Project) by a partnership to be formed by Charles W. Erickson, Steven E. Wirth, Kathryn E. Wirth, Thomas E. Erickson and Lyla S. Erickson (the Borrower), to be leased by the Borrower to Corporate Travel-Twin Cities, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and others. 1.2. At a public hearing, duly noticed and held on July 14, 1980, in accordance with the Act, all parties who appeared at the hea-ring were given an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Based on such hearing and such other facts and circumstances as this Council deems relevant, this Council hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: (a) The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, so far~as possible, emergence of blighted lands and areas of chronic unemployment, and the State has encouraged local government units to act to prevent such economic deterioration. (b) The Project would further the general purposes contemplated and described in Section 474.01 of the Act. ` {c) The existence of the Project would add to the tax base of the Municipality, the County and School District in which the Project is located and would provide increased opportunities for employment for residents of the Municipality and surrounding area. {d) This Council has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that conventional, commercial financing to pay the cost of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but thlowerth the aid of municipal borrowing, and its resulting borrowing cost, the Project is economically more feasible. (el This Council has also been advised by representatives of the Borrower that on the basis of their discussions with potential buyers of tax-exempt bonds, revenue bonds of the Municipality (which may be in the form of a.csuedrandlsoldeuponefavorableerates andnterms to could be xs finance the Project. (f) The Municipality is author ized by the Act to issue its revenue bonds to finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue peoassuancenofrsuchebondshbystheat of the Borrower, and t Municipality would be a substantial inducement to the Borrower to acquire and construct the Project. SECTION 2 Determination to Proceed with the Project an Its Financing 2.1. On the basis of information given the Municipality to date, it appears that i.t would be desirable for the Municipality to issue its revenue bonds under the provisions of the Act to finance the Project in the estimated total amount of $7,500,000. 2.2. It is hereby determined to proceed with the Project and its financing, and this Council hereby declares its present intent to have the Municipality issue its revenue bonds under the Act to finance the Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed to establish a legal obligation on the part of the Municipality or its City Council to issue or to cause the issuance of such revenue -2- bonds. All details of such revenue bond issue and the provisions for payment thereof shall be subject to final approval of the Project by the Minnesota Commissioner of Securities and may be subject to such further conditions as the Municipality may specify. The revenue bonds, if issued, shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the Municipality, except the Project, and each bond, when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that the bond, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenues received from the Project and property pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the Municipality. 2.3. The form of the Application to the Commissioner of Securities, with attachments, is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute said documents in behalf of the Municipality. 2.4. In accordance with Section 474.10, Subdivision 7a of the Act, the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to cause said Application to be submitted to the Commissioner of Securities for approval of the Project. The Mayor, City Manager, City Attorney and other officers, employees and agents of the Municipality are hereby authorized and directed to provide the Commissioner with any preliminary information the Commissioner may need for this purpose, and the City Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the Project, if it is approved by the Commissioner . SECTION 3 General 3.1. If the bonds are issued and sold, the Municipality will enter into a lease, sale or loan agreement or similar agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act (the Revenue Agreement) with the Borrower . The lease rentals , installment sale payments, loan payments or other amounts payable by the Borrower to -the Municipality under the Revenue Agreement shall be sufficient to pay the principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, on the bonds as and when the same shall become due ,and payable. 3.2. The Borrower has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the Municipality in connection with this Project, whether or not the Project is carried to completion, and whether or -3- not approved by the Commissioner of Securities, and whether or not the Municipality by resolution authorizes the issuance of the bonds, will be paid by the Borrower upon request. 3.3. The Mayor and City Manager are directed, if the bonds are issued and sold, thereafter to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, Subdivision 8 . Adopted this day of 1980. Mayor Attest: City Clerk The motion for. the adoption of the for egoina resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by the Mayor whose signature was attested by the City Clerk. _a_ ~3~ v7 .:. -.. , 1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 247 Agenda July 14, 1980 Subject:` Traffic Control Requests The Traffic Control Committee met recently to review several pending traffic control requests. Following are the committee's recommendations on these matters: 1. The northbound roadway on Lyndale Avenue narrows from two lanes to one at 74th Street. Vaseli A. Duvleg, 7345 Lyndale Avenue, reports many incidents of cars failing to merge, causing cars to hit the curb or his tree, and the tree shows wear from the apparent col- lisions. Mr. Duvleg has requested better signing of this area. The Traffic Control Committee recommends that a visual "Road Narrows" sign be installed and the petition request Anytime" restriction. The petition listed two reasons for this request: (1) their driveways are frequently blocked by cars left by people visiting the Nature Center; (2) there is a problem of loitering because of the seclusion of the area. The committee agrees with the petioners and recommends establishment of a "Nb Parking Anytime" restriction on this portion of Bryant Avenue. 3. The council requested that the committee review the G' The Honorable Mayor and _ ct. Members of the City Council City of Richfield c Council D~embers : \-~ 2. Both residents who border the Avenue/Diagonal Boulevard intersection does not have has received a lot cf atte nLersection. tiltnougn tnis a high accident record, it tion over the past two years. ember 11, 1978, the council /0 ' ~ Council Letter No. 247 -2- were placed to July 14, 1980 lution 6065, March 26, 1979. Again the question congestion and visibility was raised. The commi ~S~ ~~~~ intersection. The committee recommends that "No Parking ,°',~\no Here to Corner" signs be placed on the west side of ~;,~~, Cedar Avenue 50 feet south of Diagonal Blvd. and on they`' v~~' south side of Diagonal Blvd. 50 feet west of Cedar. This will increase visibility at the intersection while accom- modating the on-street parking needs of the adjacent apartment building. 4. Betty Poehler, resident at 6525 Standish, requested traffic control to prevent drivers from driving south on Cedar (south of 66th Street) on the wrong side of the road, believing that Cedar Avenue is an entrance ramp to the freeway. The committee recommends that center lines be painted on Cedar to delineate the lanes from 66th Street to 76th Street. 5. Betty Poehler, 6525 Standish, requested that the Traffic Control Committee review the intersection of 66th Street and Standish Avenue, with regard to the increased traffic generated by the golf course. The entrance to the golf .course forms the fourth leg of the intersection causing a conflict between cars which have had a "free" left from 66th Street to Standish Avenue and cars proceeding south on Standish into the golf course. To eliminate this conflict the staff recommends that a 4-way stop be installed. Also, the staff recommends that a "No Parking" zone be established on the south side of 66th Street from Longfellow Avenue to 24th Avenue to allow traffic to flow more freely in-the area of the park and golf course. 6. Captain Richardson received a complaint from a citizen who suggested that we investigate what could be done to just north of 66th Street. He said tha is narrow, even one lane of traffic has through. The committee recommends that because the road trouble aettina Council Letter No. -3- July 14, 1980 The following stop sign requests were submitted to the Traffic ~~~~ Control Committee: .\(a 5C 0 1. 64th Street and 12th Avenue and 65th Street and 12th Avenue. A petition was received, signed by about one-half of the residents abutting 12th Avenue from 64th Street to 66th Street, which requested stop signs on 12th Avenue at 64th and 65th Streets. Traffic counts were taken on the affected street. The counts indicated that the 4-way n warrants were not met. Should the council t some control. is necessary, the committee sug-: at the council wait until a comprehensive stop n is adopted before signing these intersections. `2 ~/ ~' .~ v~ ~ ~~ ~~ .~~~ b ,~ s ,c'~'~t 2. 72nd Street and Elliot Avenue, and 72nd Street and Chicago Avenue . `,,~ v^v ~C The neighborhood residents have petitioned for stop signsr~x°~ fi at each of these intersections. Again, 4-way stop sign ~,~~ warrants are not met. The committee recommends 2-way ~ stop signs, which would fit into the recommended compre- hensive stop sign plan. '`~, ~- S~ 3. 76th Street and Morgan Avenue. j., b ,,,r . ;~ ~ -~ ~ ,J ~: ~~~ The neighborhood petitioners requested stop signs on 76th Street at Morgan Avenue. The warrants for a 4-way stop are not met. Stopping cars on 75th Street will use 40,000 gallons of gas during a one year period. The committee does not see sufficient justification for this expense. 4. 69th Street and Sheridan Avenue. ~y The petitioners request stop signs on 69th Street at 'r~ll- ^~ Sheridan Avenue. The letter accompanying the petition ~~ .complained of accidents and large traffic volumes. The ~ .,~ attached police records do not bear out the accident ~.'~9~ claim, although signing according to a comprehensive '~~r plan could help reduce the traffic volumes through this intersection. Stop signs on 69th Street would make a 4-way stop, which is not warranted. The committee recom- mends that action on this request also be delayed pending adoption of a comprehensive stop sign plan. The city staff is finalizing a recommendation on a comprehensive stop sign plan which will be on the next council agenda. We feel a need to try to put some order in our traffic system in light of a number of confusing intersections that currently exist. With the pressure for stop signs it seems in order to take this comprehensive approach. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenbe`rger City Manager March 10, 1980 Mr. Marshall Rahen Traffic Control Committee Richfield City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 We, the undersigned, would like to rec{uest that the City of Richfield install a NO PARKING ANYTIME sign at the dead end street that intersects between 7140 Oak Grove Boulevard and 7200 Oak Grove Boulevard at Bryant Avenue South. We are experiencing numerous situations where the public is blocking our driveways as they leave their cars for a walk through Wood Lake Nature Center and also an ever increasing problem of loitering because of the seclusion of the area. A NO PARKING ANYTIPdE sign should alleviate these problems. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. tin Dalmasso, 7141 ~-~ ,-° / . `, -'"L' -~ aa....G- c Charles Sumner, Y~ru ..- rove Boulevard, Richfield, Grove 1~OUlevarQ, K1CntlelCl, Mn. 3 - `ti' ~ ~J t~ PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROV.1NIENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No. Dated Received T0: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, owners of the real property abutting hereby petition that such str et be improve: by P . Signature of Owi=er Address 2 L ~ . ~~~+`X-Z/ -~ j .~ "'"°_ . ~ " /f ~ ,J 5• ~ ~ 1 ~ Z ~~ ( ~ /J ~ ` `7i D ~~ ~ ~- ~~ ~ --~-- L' -L ' S ~ Lr L~c~e_._ 6. _._. , 4 9 •~ ~ ~ ~ , io . ~ ~ ~ Z ~-~ S 11. - m~ ~ ~~, 6~~ / /Z %~ /tee s 1~ /1 ~~ ~~ - ~~ f K, ~ 13. ~ ~• /`- ,,, ~ , e ~ 15• ~ ~~~ 7 ~ ~' ~ / _ i7. ,~~•/i~2~~/ ,~~ ~~~`/L ~ - ~.. , Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required nw~;4er of owners of property affected '~y the making of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk ,~,J -r. ,,~, ~ ~ f/~ f PyTITION FOR LGCAL I2~~L'BoVE:'~ r'--- =_ ~ ~ ~ _ , ~~ SEC ~ 4 '979 !~ ` City of Richfield, P~iinnesota ~2 ~~°7/Cf~C C~ t"lUc= ~IC(1i~~i~ %+~y i'r'iT oc~~3' e i ion ~~~ ~ ~~~ Lated Recei~red TO: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, n We, the undersigned, owners of the real property abuttir~~ hereby petiticn fast such street be inarove~: by .r ~._ - __ __. Si nature of Ow?_er A_ddross r ~/ C a ~~ ~ ~ ~ \ 1. ,G /~ Y ~ C 2. '3~ STt:~tCrU~ ~L t r-~~LC~t ~ ~~ ?~~~ o-L~~ ~f ~ ~ -~.c~ 5 • ~' '-7 -E' h . ~ .~e~ ~- ~~ ~ ~ ~zr ~`_ 7 ,_ _ d ~ . ~ ~, ~ ~ ~~ 9• io . ~. _ ~ U ~- , ~ c ..~ 11. 7~ ~`~ ~~1 ~ ~ ~1~e , ~, = Y 1~~~ ~~ '~ 3~-- - i ~~``-;~~. ~-~ . felt-~-~~- ~ ~ ~ ~ 14. ~a - - 15. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __._ 16. ~ ' ~ r f ~L~~ t~ <. _t - Examiged, chec'.~ed, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required r_u;~:ot of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. tier cent City Clerk ~. . ~ > ' PETITION FOR LOCAL IP~iPROVEMENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No. Dated Received TO:~ The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, owners of the real property abutting herby etition that/., such street be iraprove~: by ~ ~ ~ {" -~' l.' ~ .>~cC 4 . GG~~cL G?.CG~' 1X?/x J _.~,71~ ~J > ~ .r.in' ice- .,1~1s y ~/ ~ -:.~ Gcts ~. • , r„ ~i nata.~.. ,:ter of Ow Address _ -~ - ~_, ., :./ I+ ;; ., ` c~ o~ Gr(f~ e.,~ .., . -, ,• ~ - - - 5 . -. - ~ r - -1---- - ,~ a ~, o -r+. p ~- _- ,~ ~ - ~ 2 ,k~ ~ .. , - - l' a.J 84...-- 9 ~ . ~ ~~ ~ _>>% :, ~ --~~% ~ ,~~J ~, ~ , , ~ . - - .r-- _._ , ' • _.__ _ _.. t/C _ - f . ,- r ~:= t . > ~. 12. 13. 1~+. 15. 16. Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form ar_d to be signed by the required number of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk i ' ~ ~ ~ '1, ~ h -- i \/ p l /, ~ _ lt~2J;~~ ~ ~ ~" ~~ ~~~ '~ - t :". ... 3!Yii~r18!~ ~ G) _..1~ y ...' 'L~. V t-.ld.~_ac~_ _. _. ~~ y ~ ~; PETITIOII FOR LCCl-,I, Ii~Tt'RCVEI`~iENT City of Richfield, 1`Qinnesota Petition No. -~ ~~~ T0: The City Council of the City of pichfield, Minnesota. Dated Received 4Te the undersigned, owners of the real property ab~attin~; ='or~an and Ya.Yton Ave~uos. be~ween 75th street and 76th ;troat hereby petition treat such street co i:::urove~ by ~laci:la stogy sign at the Z:~~,~~,Q,.et.; on of ~bth Street and iorTan - ?.ve,~;~~,, '~tq,jci_.~_,j:iia-h. i n~~-ar~arti n=, ~ !~_*.,~, ,+ ~' ~ S ~~rc.ttu e GZ OG^~r ~-1:3dress -- - - -- _ ~ 2: ..7 ,~ /~ - ~-, 7 f/~ ~ i J ~ 7 1 ~7 ~ ~ ~J , r ~ _.~. r / ~ ~ f~-.. L1. ,r' , ` / ~ , f, . .~. l( '~' ~~ `mil ~•" 1 _. .. - f y ~3. ~~'r/~~t`-~ "Y,?+ ~.~~,~-t~!~ , u~ ; .~ ~ ;~ ;71~ ~ 7 ~;t~.~~~~-''~-~ - ~-y`am' =~' . ? , --s`-~ -~'~ ~~--sl.Y.~-ft-i~ - - - ~:~~;, ~ - . ,ILA `~'~~~., .- Jf - -..L / Y~ . ~7' - -----~ ------ - -- - ~~ ~~ ~ "~, i:•'?~ ~~. X: Examined., checked, ar:d found to be in proper form and to be sibried by the required nwrxY~er cf owners of prorerty affected by tre maker:; of the ir.2provement petitioned for. per cent . /k .r " -. Cit~r Clerk L ~i ;nature of i owner ~;ddrass ~ - `fit-,t.~,.~~CY=~-- ;. ~ ~ ~ Z~ I f~~ 4~%i u~ ~~:~ . ~ ~'' ~c~ ~ ~,t~ __ Ja , ~% ~ ' ~ ~~y~~~-~ ~~~ ~~: ' r~. `- l `~" ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~- =-~ ~v ~~~~ "~. ;•~ ~, :,c ei ,: ;i ~ - :..f ~ . 7~ f ~~ ti'~~u ~~~ ~~i~~;`~f~. -7~ ~~ ~u ~'"~- S o tee- ~ 1 `~~:-~? ~ ' -~ t, ~ ~ ~ ~ ,"~ ' ,~ ' ~ . ~~~~~ _. / ~ cl. F .. :'f. ! ~:. ~ . .. ~ ~' .i . ~ t ~, t ~, t ? i is ~. ! ~q / ~ ~!' ~ ~ / ,t / ~ ~ 1 ~v ~tJ lt"l l ~~~ C ~. ~, `~ ' 7 . d .T / ~`~. r l~/ L TC ~ /l~I tt :a c f k 5 ~ ~ ~'~ f 1 T- ~ 2 cj 4 ~: ~y 1 c Cc c' ~ ~` ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~."~ :i ~ it c ~ e n e~ % 1~ ~~r ~' 3c c 'F r t~} X14 c~ 'tG ~j Z ~ .1z~c~ 5z.1 :111..c~~;;,wh iz:.k,:k /t~jC,'~ ~tx~ir~ ( ~~ L' ~.~ iriJ` ~~~~± ~ c~ca•.• •~ ~ ft, 7G~~ ~~ ...; ~ .:~ ,~~ PETITION FOR LOCAL II~~TZOVEI•I SPIT City of Richfield, PQinnesota 1 ~'` Petition .ilo. ~~~` ,,,;~ Dated Received _- ~ . ~,. §, .,,;r T0: The City Council of the City of Richfield, t•1inresota. '~ We, the undersigned, owners of the real property s,butti:rg Nior~-an and Newton AyenLe~,~ between 76~h~treet an3 7'~fh ~+r~Pt ,` heret~;y petition that such street be improves by placing estop sins on ?6 .h ~t.re - . a.nA - ~~F. ~[or an Avenue m - :~ .t ~ _ _ _ _ _ ,~: Signature of Ow?~a-r Address ~~ t 3, ~ ~ ~ ~: p 7• `i( ~~~ 44 ~• -t ~. ,. `r. f 10. .-.. 11.E O. per cent City Clerk Examined, checked, and four:d to be in prcrcr form and to be sip;^~d b;; the required nu:,.~c~r~ of owners of property afi•~cted Ly the matii^~; of the ir::proveWer.t petitioned for. ~,;, *~,+r'a6,±+fiMYrrr~,i~.5d~.v .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - _ .. - . -- PETITION FOR LOCAL IbTPROVEI~iE1VT ' City of Richfield, 1"innesota Petition No. Dated. Received T0: Tree City Council of the City of Richfield, tdinnesota. We, the and°rsi~ned, o,Y-ners of the real property abutting L~-~ /~~~ f~~s~Et~/ ~~ /an:D C'a (ofd S'j~'ETS hereby petition that . A Sto sign die`-er'rectP.~ a~ GN ANA ~~~' ~°'~ 11~r1, ~~ ~i t~{,. ~~~ 11~'!, Cda ~ l~ ~-- y_ wA•l s7Un S'fErN s A~ FAct~ ,N;E~S~-,onl Si ,nature of OT~nler Addz•ess 1, Q...,~ I~ ~v Ic z a, I d ~ yea !,~-~ ~3r~ ~ ~~~'~- , }?c.r.. ~. ~ , ~ /~ ~~~. G `} • f / ! ..~ L 4~n f \h' 1.~~~.~- cl^ ~- ~'7. Cam' ~v" f.! ~.~ ~ 1 l I f £ ------~-j--t- ~ ~ S . ~ S - a ~' Gt-~ _ s . . 9. ~. ~ ~ s ~ v - ~a ~- ,~ ~ J ~ ~~ ~ SJ 14- - < <~- ~`U ~~ ~~ 12 . .~ d d ~ G ,~ ~,. . ~ y y- `~ - ~ ~ ~G~ ~~~ 13 . ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ,. f; i ~-. Examined, checked, and. found to be in proper firm ar:d to ce signed by the required nui;.ber of ow::t>rs of prope.rt:y a.ffect;e% by the ,na'~ing of the irapravemert petit:io.~ed for. ~, ~~er cent City Clerk .. ~ , ~-' U ' DPW 421-2 PETITIOPI FOR LOCAL Ir-1PRC~iEME~~iT Cit/y~ofP,fi-~~hfiel~j' i~ni ~'etiticn P4J. Da Le K^CFi~.F'd To: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, owners of not less tf;an 51~' in front~~ge of th-~ re~~.I ~;rc;~~'-rt; aLut~ing or -- - - --- --- --------- - - ----~et~,veen- dnd _-- _------__- - - ----__., i?ereh'y ~E:t1t1Gn that SUCii 5tr00+-- ,,P "'il:,roVeC by -installation of stop _silns~stopQi_rg_ east-w__est traffic on__69__th_ Street at- Sheridan Avenue- G f 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 -- - --- -- Signatures of Owners ~ Flouse ~1;o. r ---- - ---- ---- - ----------------- i ~~~~~~~~>~~~~~X~~~X%~~~ ~~ - - -- - -- , ;, ~, a c' .- ~ • -~-,; G~ _ - i _ I 18. 19. 20. examined, checked, and found to be in proper fern? and to be sigr~ed by the required number of owners of property affected by the making of the irlprover~ent petitioned for. per cent "-~i ~y CT e rTc-------- .~.., OFFICE OF CRIME ANALYSIS To: Capt. Richardson From: Jean Davis Date: 12-19-79 Re: Accident Analysis - 69th & Sheridan, 67th & Russell/Sheridan 1979 1978 1977 1976 TOTAL 69th & Sheridan 2 1 0 0 3 67th & Russell 0 0 0 0 0 67th & Sheridan 1 1 0 0 2 Analysis of 69th & Sheridan - 3 January - 0 Sunday - 0 0700 - 1500 - 0 February - O Monday - 0 1500 - 2300 - 2 March - 0 Tuesday - 0 2300 - 0700 - 1 April - 0 Wednesday - 1 May - 0 Thursday - 2 June - 0 Friday - 0 July - 0 Saturday - 0 August - 0 September - 1,(1979), 1,(1978) October - 0 November - 1,(1979) December - Weather: Road Surface: Number of Vehicles: Clear - 1 Dry - 2 Two - 3 Cloudy - 2 Ice Snow Packed - 1 Contributin g Factors: Severit~r of Accident: No Improper Driving - 2 P.I. - 1 Inattentive - 2 P.D. - 2 Failure To Yield Right of Way - 1 Speed - 1 Improper Passing - 1 Y ~y • $ » c Y t . - 3 ~`+ / • ' ~ N f ~ [~ k 5y > 3 ~.~. S'i ~; ,f ,• . p L ' 8. Q C h S N ... - 1 '"° ~n ~ e. s$ ~ ~o 0 ~_- ff ,.. i<v= W ~ U •~~ ~' O y Q •n• rv p T ~ Y• y. . z ~ _ U F li . ~ ~ a +, i i. r 7. f ,£ • i t t Y~ 7 ' ( -: 3 ~ f F : S _ r' ~ ~ i .A € ' ..' { w .• ,~ .~ Yt r.~~r:uY ~..., Yn ~p>ll i«•• cvw.nco •x m -~... e+re.u ~.... i,. ruw [~ .1 w n~ sr v~s• •~ ~ :, r..•.. w ...u.w m w +rsr.v i ,~ ....,,,, x a.s •+w• W x . s..s+ T~+ a•.•...• a+..n.x •....e> v. ~w+no W .Pv iw •NGl w wri a ,...•x• >4 •ti.r• •...•r• i I • O• • -.__ OO Q. b O N O O _ D - ..~ - O O .. ~ N .. _~~ - DO.__ - _._ T__. _ p _ -_ p G L .._ - _RO b_! _._-.~ ~..-o f D._. t_ _OO !_.. O_..~ _. 1 - o _ . _° po o X __ n - o . °o _ _ .. r • _ • _ a.. J • D. _ t .. D _. P~ o - o, .~ - - . o s 0 ~O in ... O Q.. D O b D U O^-O D _ n ^.._ D N it oo .o o- o ;--u o- oo "o ~- oa-~oD 4t ~ b e. __._ Ilia ..__ C _..• •.._ D3J. -- -- .~ --D -.-- p---, .-- O-- -- - - • { _ -- _ zz _ _ _... ~ +/ W I ~ U • • O • O ~ O v1 _• D ~~ 1 1 O . _ ... O .r t._ O._-_ a__ ..O .__ t _ _ . _.D _ .-O - _ T O _ _• 1 _ . .o. ..D _ o .__ o__; -__ Do... t.--._ ___ _-O~ • __ _ _ - _ G O O -_~ _ ~D O ~- - O _ ~ p _ _ . D C V _ __. .. - .-. O GO.__Q ~..v. -. f_.._ 60.-_~ - - it N- _~ r_.a :. ~ _ F ~~ O C O Q ,U O _ ~ O O- 6 _ O O fU__S _ s- _~ D! j ._.. f~ O .... • _ • -T --.- • _- • - N • - • O a._. D O .- ~O --___~.3 __ DN .. O _ -_- O D • f~~ O _ .--_ O. •s. ._ O D _. • 1.' -_. O • O O • __.Q ~ ~ O O __ _._ O _a. ~.. p _ _ - D~ d • • _ __ in0 O O ~~' O- r D _ _ OD t1 O O NO O. _- p_.~.__u.. A__.Ca_~..C_-JO _ a ~ O 8. K ~ _ ~ pp _-•__• -a. _- _ ~ t p _ _ n • • •' O. _~ .... Yi D _ O. D O • ~~__ • - J - si1[~ O H O yr --O =~ • r XO -• C ~~`.' O .. _. ¢/' _ ~U ~ a ~ O __ _ _ O _ O P I' \'~ X X . -. _- O._.L~ U O - D '"` > rye b~_• ~;. D;..__. ~~, a S."--~-T( -- -- _ •____ O • • ~• . - p -_ s-.- OD ~• O. _ _•~ r .-- • x~ IJ .. O.. O.. 1 • ~ - . . ~ mom- •._. O O -•.- R_- _. •. ,L._ O_ • O- ~. O __ O _ O ...•~ O~ L D _.__ pc~ U' O __1J _4 O__. Oil _. O ~~ y)_-.O OI __ ~_~D. ~ __ x, O .. lI - o. . . b-'~ ~!-- - ~ ~ a ~ iy ... ~. •=j_LSO~~.. O D o • o _ • • U U X ~-~ u ~ f ,• O O O - C ~~ - O • - `_~ ~ D-_ ~.J __.a_ D b ___4- ______ ~ 1 -... ___ ___O_.____.i_. . ft _ ~ • i • 1 [ • • • • J • • T f • i • i w •.• w .u •Y . d•+1• w •u s: , •" •.[ M •y w •r w ••+~swn i w ...u _ w •w • w . t•• .• , ;,. Y• w4 >.. ~. W ... a.. « >,., • . , fN t•n1 M ura•r w .r•. w w.~..• •r aw•..r w •s M . . w .'s ~• w •~.w:w w a~w.>,~ -.- w •r•.•v )w •wM uw .•rwi . • •w.w ..asf ,. ,r•..i w Jc.~W ~ H wrr 5 w .•>ar,r , . w .. lr •rr w .••. W ww> iv wwcn s+ naw •r ••u~ . 1 w nr+ W ...... ~~'a ~'. W w.a, w .^r :i !; e ;, ~, - •++ - ,.. . ~i ~~~ ~> S a... ~ y~ r. M„~~...,, ~., .,~ ...... ..~.~,> ~~ M yJF^1 ~ ~,..e,., t U IQVAV Z ( i_ y M ~w I e W ~Yi I „ .,.. e ~ r ~~ - r' f r .w~ r rr w a~ s~ rw. } ~ M FwiY * L M ~I~! - !+ .est. W ~1lM1f• .. 1_-. t~~ {ton (C. _ ,+_y h~# ~~ N~f J ~~-~¢ t L L L L ~ ~ t ~ ~ c s ~ . ~ Y • ]C-1 ---fix' if ~ -- o ~.. 1 ~ C `., d -i -- ... x , P--w _ _..~ ~._.__U41 O._._ __.__..-i N.__C_.C L~ Y i i i f .. e c i i r i r ,......~ Yi ~w~M J f ~' ....~.,., r~ ~ ~.~, ~ w .,tl,.. W m ]M t -~1 ~H rw _ >,...,,. O s. «..a ~ ~e m ~' ~f~ I s. mns , ) li,{ N~ ~N II w nor t w ,,,wv fi, M ~~.YY S . Vii: N ~~.+ M •f ~• • 'L ~ 1~ ~ i... .a,F ~ L ; . ~ 5 . ~ • t .. _ .a- f -... , ,~~~: t ":~: ,. v o C. o LA m ~ . ' d ~ F+ S~ ~ ° ~ .~ ~ m ~ r 'y- o• ~,~~ o ~. y o ~ . ~ U ~ ~ FF~ G '., a F E~ ~ ~ : .~ ~D~ c ~ O O ~ ~' c,•~ ~ ' ~ to ~ m •FD w ~, ~ •-• ~ G N O cf 3~~,=. ~ `p o ~ d F v d ~ :~, ~ ~ ~ ~+ ;,, p ~ ti Q' V H d• d O w ,~ G ~ ~ O .^ .Q ~ .ti sF. H m :n w .-, ~' w .~' r {n •.~'~. 2 0 ~ ~ ~ cm. '~ ~ .`^'. ~ .N m - ~ ~. r m w .-~ .r-, v ~ LC N vi 0 ~Y ~ '~' G m m ~+ C ~. ~ O .,, G~ N~ +'~' ~ O~ C~ d ^' R. C d L 1 ~ O d e; •~ O c N~~ w Z: ~ v , f• O m i~ 'c: m C c. m v S~ a F "k ~ m ~ >' •O .'n .p a " ~ O ; ~ O 2i r. .., j r„ V ~~ t ~~ i. d ." tr'. aq G c^f d U : r ~ ''" • cOi . m a' m n d C ~ ~ ~ .O r. ` ~ o ~ r ,.._• - rn ~ .. ..C. ¢-„ '*+ to ~ „ "ai o C ~ °' G. '. ,_.~' `~ O i .O ^a^, m ..~ `•'' ~ ~ "~ o m ~D C, c V .. i,- • G V H m J ~ O '-. v: ~ r m f=. '~ a O cV'. a' G G c' C V~ i+• V n ~~ i.L u .-m• c0. ~ ~ t_ rC m ~C CC O cm+ .~ . v G ~ cG. N m G C tD rs-+n ~ K ~ ~" w ~ w .D r ,~ ~' ~ ... G ~` ~ d FL. _ v f" ~ ~ ^% tr, ~ C ~ rr r• G., G ~ +~ ~ v ran C ~ ~~! ~ K c .+ -- ..> ~ ~ n c. ,~ ~ M t ~ m .. d N m '~ F m m w J .. > m ... .. p m ~ ~+ ~ m ~ LC li, ~ m m a ~ ~ c b .. cm. ~D a '" "" v s. tD a ~ ~ yr: ~ ~ m ° r^ ~ ~ o a ~n ° a v o to N o ^ ~ G a E 4 • ~, ^ ~ ~ r ~ • ~ r • ~ ~ ~ •- ~. ~ '~ F• m C " ~.., o ~"' ° .F.. ~ ~ U] r -^ ~ v `~' "' u 3 ~ N ~ .n^. M Vim", ~ ~ ~ ~ o F p ~ ~N O ~ CA,V~V^, ~+ r '•-' HA O r ~ ~ ~ ~ LA ~ r; y m ^~ ~ C N ~ '.• " O '~ .' ~' .> >%~ y •' r' f-. G.w y" r. v0 •tfO ~ ° v^: C C 'OH" ~: <,~ ~A.„^ O ^ ^ V r '~ ci .. LLC :: W C v • O.~o p aGC-.ate G~z' in CE'A~ c•~a"' c.^=-'•°~ ~aa^~•w mo," ~. -_ - ~ m ~ G ~` ~ ~ m m f• ' o m ~ .. Cn r o .~ 5-, o v o : ~ .?, ~, ^ ; :' ~% ^ c~ w ° ~ . `'" ^~ ~ ,. .G F •c o m c. ~ ~ ° ~ ca -' m ° >, ~>,• r. v c o ~ .~ O a '' y m ~ o o m " .~ w a O r -p ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ a ti ; ~ .~ ~ O ~ `•-~ O s.. .. ~ ~ .. ^ V C " u cCi V ~ '~ C ~ ~ b m F ~ ~ m u d •.^~ O >D _' tD r ~ C-f Y .~ ~ ~ ~ ~- .-o, ° ,+. v o ._. c°. ~' G ~ ~ ~ iN ~_ H m o r m ' 'v,. S"A O O O r• a' F G -D r •N r.F+ / O > w c: ~ is O .~ m .~ '~ 'C ,~. _ ~~", ~' :% •m V m N 'U m ~ Gi ~ d O O ~ C-f T-+ .. O V T ° N c^ a ." .r5 F ~ •'~i :=r L=. C +~.+ ~ r V ~ t. - ~ a ~ y N w U~~ o: Fin O~ m~" ~= > >, C r% C ~v' o emu, r': a s p .f7 F _ c c. ._ O ~ : c. J m co c ~' ~ a G o c: ~ r _ ." ~'G o •u `.' E.•f Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -s N C m t0 ~ G ~ 1 H m ~ ~' q .-i 7 O r"i, GV •~ ir. cj 'c3 0o ti-+ .-. ~ ., r U] A C=. .z. ~n to r ° w ,O ~ G t0 b a.+ O to O .C. .F. •' ~ O tom, ~ •N :-•'+ m O v .^.- G. .N N a ~ > 1v d 'm ~ a~ c -• L V ~ ~. +n ~ ..... - - --~-__ ~_........... .f~ a., W ~ >, F p, m >,'*' o O m '~ v, x W CA o ~' H t0+ ° ~ R• t ~ •~ ° ~ ~ tL cG'!~~ r H O a+ c.. •d, w ~ m •r m tm. ~ 'O ~ ~' ~ 'so.'~! ~ ~ .°, C~ a ,~ ~ ~ F~ ~ $ ~ acs" ~ ~ a ~ o a ~ ,C, ~, ~ - - O p c! ~A i.• G: O m '•"' 'gypp 'C Cr 'C C ^J O i v> - ~ a •~ b ur N m n m C O >a v m •a• O O F u' ~ w O t'A C v e ~ .r-'. 'ZL v ,q G ,~ G O m u w ° Cfi o ~ to ~ ~ c~ `n ~ .°~-. m a" N 1 a ~ - ~ ~ a~i ,°n C a O wr H ~: ~ ~ ~ p ~ [ ~ " .~' ~ F tfi ~ ~A ~ >a~ ~~ m .-. w .3 •~ d~ °.: o C " •~ '_ 21 F ~ 7 w N ~ v m m >,~ c". w ,O .~" m ~^ N >. ~ m ~ a i w •ci O C zr'. Fo+- m m a o V ~ >, E'+ LL ~ ° `i'. ~ u O m y; ~ N ~ C d i m 'd .. c. ~ G F rmir r m .r. ' _• ^' '.yam.. ~'e ~ ~~ - ,~ ~ ~. '~ 'tf .~ . •~ O .n ~ 'r C ~^. 'in ° v, m ~ ~ ~. o '~ a vF ° ~ •,. ~ ... o ~i o ~ •m m p ~ p ~ GV ~ m ~ ~ C r ~~' >~ ~ ~i d ~ " ~ d ~ tD v ~ O ~ G ~ ~. y ~ ~ O t4 ~ - ,. ~ a y N d FO '^ .'_'-- ~ CA iri i ~ C O ~ ': a ti+ d d .~ ~ ~ ~ M a ~ ~ m F ~ N 'm > •„ y O y m~ G v C •O ~ p ~ >a V ~p+ O T C G; •y G~ ~ O a., . ~s O m " o eOi ~ " a N ~ ~ 0 tL r C ~ C+ ~ ti ~; ~ ~ ~ '~' r C _m .~ [ "CS d H ~ ~ ~ v p ~D ~ .~.+ G a ~ ~ - h G ~ V •d w ~ t0 LA o ~ •~ y 'y w ~ ~ b FD ~ r+ • .. ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ F L: ~ # ~ ~ ~ FO ~• ~ ~ O 'OV ^' "°' 'w G C .. '"ayi h ~-' ~ v ~ G ~ O 4 •.O. `~ .~ •rN, u ti p d C a O d p~ a w y~ C .-. >a C A m ~ F+ ~ av'. a F~ ~ O ..O' b '-' O •D .O Oi r V Q O Cq V U' F, .. v C'. 'O N C: ~ ~ tD ~A~ C' v' ~ 4 ,0~, ~ ;? m r ~ CA W O ~ ~ n~i "..' ~ 0 .~: ~ cVn C O ~ m 'L c^ :/1 ~mn ~_ ~., ~ ~ 'x ~ ~ C D O C. ~' y.. " m .O V m 0~ Ul C u m ° © .C 'y ~: J CA N F CO m •N G G. v i • f d A V C d a O G. ~ ~~ m O G C .: to a. a C '~,.~ ~ ~ ~, F. ~ ~ ~ .N ~ ~ m ~ E ~ w OC ~^' ~ D m ~ G m ,F ~Ccy~ C O ~0,, ~ r. 'u, 'n G O •r.-v: ,~ r. ~ tD ' ~ pp 4 ',~. ~ .'°. •~ O _ iV y n d) •m ar H +^[,, ul t..H •V ~ F qCq. .ti p ~1 ~ ~ O m C: ~ V '" _ < S ! G •LD ~ O ~ r v ~ ^ o~ u fl f m ~ ~ ~ .!~ ~' ~~„ m ^ ` ~ ~ O ~ t0 ~ .r O .N ~ .o : ~L .`. LD a p d d~v ~ QI b C/1 ~4' ~ m ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ G •~ fl M U~ O c ~ a ti ~ G H ,~ (~ `i••) Q ~ ~ O ~ ° ~F., tL ~A ED G '~-.:~ } a ~~ QH'~ ~ ° ~ • ~ ~ ~~( m ~ G ~ .y xD.~. ~ N J7vt~ Ca ~ >' ~ .•i r ev rs v~ •y .' C/1 C e.. eF., ~ H ~ % `n _.j. %,N ': k:. L~ pO~' H ~ ' N od N ~I d O m V rn r ~i ~ W°~++ ~ p O. ...> >a N o ~ e~ Vl ~ ~ . ~ m '~ M 'N !ti a ~.: N a r .- w' N G: a m .O m /.~ - ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Off ice of City Manager Council Letter No. 246 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable NTayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Purchases in Excess of $1,000 Chapter Six, Section 6.05 of the city charter stipulates that the city council must approve purchases of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction when the amount exceeds $1,000. There is one such item on the July 14, 1980 city council agenda. Each year, city residents receive four seasonal brochures that include the city Newsletter and program information for a variety of activities offered through the school district and the city. The Fall 1980 brochure is scheduled for distribution in August and it is important that paper be ordered now so that printing of that publi- cation may be done in a timely fashion. The fall brochure is one of the largest and calls for 34 page faces plus front and back cover. The quotations below do not include the cover pages which will be of a heavier paper stock. Written quotations were solicited from three firms. The quota- tion from Butler Paper would provide the paper at a total cost of $2,203.20. The quotation from Turnquist Paper Co. is in the amount of $2,148.48. The quotation from Wilcox Paper Co. is in the amount of $2,612.16. The cost of the paper is shared between the school district and the city. The final cost to the city will be approx- imately one-half of the total cost. It is recommended that the city council approve the purchase of brochure paper from TurngL,ist Paper Co. in the amount of $2,148.48. The cover paper, to be purchased from another vendor, is in the amount of $345.60. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/jf cc: Community Services Director Administrative Services Director /.~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Off ice of City Manager Council Letter No. 245 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Nlayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf field Council Members: Subject: Request for Temporary "No Parking" Signs As the city council is aware, the State American Legion Base- ball tournament is scheduled for August 8-11, 1980 at Donaldson Park. Because of the anticipated heavy volume of traffic, the staff has recommended that the east side of Humboldt Avenue be posted "No Parking" during the tournament, for safety and main- tenance reasons. It is recommended that the city council approve temporary "No Parking" signs on the east side of Humboldt Avenue, 72nd Street to 76th Street, for the period of~August 8-11, 1980. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja cc: Community Services Director Public Safety Director r 1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 244 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members': Subject: Transitory Ordinance Providing for Expend- iture of Money from the Special Revenue Fund for Certain Capital Improvements. Second Reading. At the June 9, 1980 city council meeting, the city council gave first reading approval to a transitory ordinance providing for the transfer of $10,000 from the Special Revenue Fund to the Park Respectfully submitted, I i.~( (1 (~ 1~C1~ ~ V ct L~,_ ~ 1..~ ,~~ -~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager 6 .~ KN~eja cc: Community Services Director A copy of the transitory ordinance is attached to this council letter. This item has been scheduled for second reading consid- eration at the July 14, 1980 city council meeting. +~ LEGAL NOTICE ~ Bill 1980-14 TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. 16.65 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOP, THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM TF-IE SPECIAL REVENUE FU:1D FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS City of Richfield does Ordain: Section 1. It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the city to expend money from The Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the city would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2. The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from The Special Revenue Fund undex Section 7.12, subd. 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Park Improvements $10,000 Section 3. The expenditure herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1980. Donald J. Priebe ~~Iayor ATTEST: __ Sylvia K. Bergh Deputy City Clerk Publish June 18, 1980 t -,'~ r r ~' ~ _ .. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Off ice of City Manager Council Letter No. 243 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf field Council Members: ~~ ~' s ~_ O In 1979, the Minnesota Legislature enacted legislation whic provides for the licensing of building movers by the Minnesota Public Service Commission. This licensing provision supplants any local licensure which existed prior to that time.. Richfield has required building movers to provide performance bonds and evidence of insurance.. The 1979 legislation provides that licen sed building movers are to give such bonds and provide proof of insurance to the State of Minnesota in lieu of providing this security to individual municipalities. At the June 9, 1980 city council meeting, the city council gave first reading to an ordinance amendment which incorporated the new state licensing and bonding requirements into the Rich- field ordinance. A copy of the proposed ordinance amendment is attached. The ordinance amendment has been amended to reflect the recent reorganizational changes. recommended Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja cc: Community Services Director Deputy City Clerk Public Safety Director Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Moving of Buildings, Second Reading • AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER IV, SECTION 4.07 OF THE RICHFIELD ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO THE MOVING OF BUILDINGS CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 4 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to applications for per- mits for the moving of buildings is hereby amended to provide as follows: "Subd. 4. Contents of Application. The application shall be made in writing, upon forms provided by the Director of Community Services and shall contain such information as the director finds necessary to a deter- mination of whether a permit should be issued. The following items shall accompany all applications: "(1) The owner of the building to be moved shall file with the application sufficient evidence that all real estate taxes and special assessments against the building and lot from which it is to be removed are paid in full. "(2) The applicant, if other than the owner, shall file with the application sufficient written evidence that he is entitled to move the building. "(3) The applicant shall file with the applica- tion prior to issuance of permit, written evidence of arrangements with all public utility companies whose wires, lamps or poles are required to be removed, for the removal thereof by the company. "(4) The applicant shall furnish proof satisfac- tory to the Director of Community Services that the building mover is fully licensed under all applicable laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 221.81, and complies with 'and has satisfied all rules and regulations promul ated there- under." Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 5 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to building movers' permit fees is hereby amended to provide as follows: 1 "Subd. 5. Permit Fee. The application shall be accom- panied by a nonrefundable permit fee as provided in Appendix D of this Code." Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 6 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to building movers' cash security deposits is hereby repealed in its entirety as follows: "Subd. 6. [Security Requirement - Cash De osit. Each application shall be accompanied by a cash deposit in the"sum of $500 as an indemnity for any damage which the city may sustain by reason of damage or injury to any highway, street or alley, sidewalk, fire hydrant or other property of the city, which may be caused by or be incidental to the removal of any building over, -along or across any street in the city, and for any expense incurred by the city.]" Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 7 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to building movers' insur- ance requirements is hereby repealed in its entirety as follows: "Subd. 7. [Security Requirements - Insurance. Each application shall be accompanied by a liability insur- ance policy or certificate of such insurance, issued by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota,. and approved as to form by the city attorney. The policy shall insure the applicant, and the city as an insured, in the sum of at least $25,000 for injury to one person, and $50,000 for one accident, and at least $25,000 property damage. The policy shall be kept in effect until after the building has been moved.]" Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 9 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to the standards for issuance of a permit to move buildings is hereby amended to provide as follows: "Subd. 9. Standards for Issuance. The council shall refuse to issue a permit if it finds: 2 I "(1) [That any application requirement or any fee or deposit bond, or insurance requirement, has not been satisfied.] That the mover is not duly licensed by the State of Minnesota; "(2) That the building is too large to move with- out endangering persons or property in the city; "(3) That the building is in such a state of deterioration or disrepair or is otherwise so struc- turally unsafe that it could not be moved without endangering persons and property in the city; "(4) That the building is structurally unsafe or unfit for the purpose for which moved, if the location to which the building is to be moved is in the city. "{5) That the applicant's equipment is unsafe and that persons and property would be endangered by its use; "(6) That the zoning or building provisions or any other provisions of this code would be violated by the building in its new location; "(7) That for any other reason persons or property in the city would be endangered by the moving of the building." Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 12 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to building movers' fees and deposits is hereby repealed in its entirety as follows: "Subd. 12. [Fees and Deposits. If the council refuses to issue a permit, he shall direct the return to the applicant of all deposits, bonds and insurance poli- cies. Permit fees filed with the applicant shall not be returned. After the building has been removed, the director shall furnish the City Manager with a written statement- of all expenses incurred and of all damage caused to or inflicted upon property belonging to the City by reason of the removal. The city manager shall authorize the return to the applicant of all deposits after deducting a sum sufficient to pay for all of the costs and expenses and for all damage done to property of the city. Permit fees deposited with the application shall not be returned.]" 3 Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 13 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to building movers' rout- ing and other restrictions is hereby amended to read as follows: "Subd. 13. Designation of Streets for Removal. The Director of Community Services shall designate streets over which the building may be moved. The director shall have the list approved by the Director [Chief] of Public Safety [Police) and shall reproduce the list upon the permit iri writing. In making their determina- tions, the Director of Community Services and the Director of Public Safety [chief of police] shall endeavor to insure maximum safety to persons and prop- erty in the city and to minimize congestion and traffic hazards on public streets. The Director of Community Services may also desi ate the hours, movement, ark- zng, or speed limit of the buildin mover." Chapter IV, Section 4.07, Subdivision 16 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to the rehabilitation of building removal sites is hereby repealed in its entirety as follows: "Subd. 16. [Original Premises Left Unsafe. If the original building site is .within the city, the city shall proceed to do the work necessary to leaving the original premises in a safe and sanitary condition, where the permittee does not comply with the require- ments of this section, and the cost thereof shall be charged against the cash deposit.]" Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minne- _sota, this day of ayor ATTEST: City Clerk , 1980. 4 3 -~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 24L~ Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Award of Bid for Audio Recording Equipment - Public Safety Communications System On June 9, 1980, the city council awarded a bid for a public safety communications system. At that time, the council also auth- orized the staff to advertise for bids for a compatible audio recorder to complete the equipment required for the new system. On July 1, 1980, bids were opened for the audio recorder. There was only one bidder, the Dictaphone Corporation, which submitted a bid in the amount of $12,189.80. The bid proposal meets our speci- f ications in. all respects. It is the recommendation of the public safety director, in which I concur, that the award of bid for the audio recorder be made to the Dictaphone Corporation. Funds are available for this purchase in the portion of the capital improvement project dedicated for the public safety communications system. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/jf cc: Public Safety Director Deputy City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening July 1, 1980 Public Safety Communications Multi Channel Logging Recorder/Reproducer Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Karl Nollenberger, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for the Multi Channel Logging Recorder/Reproducer as advertised in the official newspaper on June 18, 1980. Present: Karl Nollenberger, City Manager Tom Morgan, Director of Public Safety Paul Linnee, Public Safety Administrator Sylvia K. Bergh, Acting City Clerk The following bid was submitted and read aloud: BIDDER BID SECURITY BID AMOUNT Dictaphone Certified Check $650 $12,189.80 The City Manager announced that the bid would be tabulated and considered at the regular city council meeting of July 14, 1980. Sylvia K. Bergh Acting City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 241 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richf field Council Members: Subject: License Renewal Request for Tip-Top Car Wash, 6601 Bloomington Avenue South On June 23, 1980, the city council considered a request for the renewal of the business license for the Tip-Top Car Wash. Council Letter #220, dated June 23, 1980, outlined a number of problems which both the city and the residents in the area of the car wash have ex- perienced with this business operation. After considering these issues and providing an opportunity for the applicant to address the council on behalf of his license application, the council voted to deny the 1980 business license for this establishment. On June 24, 1980, the applicant, through his attorney, obtained a temporary restraining order which prevented the city from taking any action to close the business. A hearing on the temporary re- straining order was held in Hennepin County District Court on June 27 1980. During this hearing the applicant, through his attorney, in- formed the court of his desire to present a plan of corrective action to remedy the problems which had been the basis for the denial of the business license renewal. Based upon this information, Judge Irving Iverson continued the temporary restraining order to July 15, 1980. The court directed that the applicant file a new business license application in time for council consideration on July 14, 1980. At that time, the applicant is to present to the city council his pro- gram for corrective action. The action of the court in this matter is in no way directing the council with regard to their action on a new business license application. The action taken by the court was to assure that the applicant could retain legal counsel and could have an opportunity to attempt to comply with the concerns of the city. A hearing on con- tinuation of the temporary restraining order has been scheduled in District Court for July 15, 1980. Both the city and the applicant must appear at that hearing to report on results of the council's July 14, 1980, consideration of this matter. At that time, the court will determine the disposition of the temporary restraining order. ,~' S9' ~ `~ ~ `°1 c `~ ~ ~ °~ ~~'? ~. . ~ ~ Q ~ Ls ~, ~ U~~~3 ~_J~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ Council Letter No. 241 -2- Agenda July 14, 1980 On July 1, 1980, the applicant submitted a new business license renewal application for the current year and again paid the $25 licensing fee. Therefore., the matter before the city council on July 14, is not a reconsideration of the council action taken at the June 23rd meeting, but rather should be viewed as consideration of a new business license renewal application. Attached for council consideration is a copy of a letter from the applicant requesting permission to appear before the council, and stating his intent to attempt to correct some of the problems which resulted in thejdenial of his original business license re- newal application. I am also attaching a copy of a letter from the public safety director to the attorney for the applicant, outlining the city's concerns and position in this matter. We will attempt to schedule discussion of this item for approximately 8:00 p.m., and will again notify the residents in the vicinity of the car wash of this new hearing. Respectfully submitted, 1 { Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/jf cc: Public Safety Director City Attorney Deputy City Clerk J w L Ii~dTT:,CTi!~ia T CJ~'IP:~idY 470 F'airhills Rd. B. •~innetonka, ''•'in. 55:43 June 26, 19x0 CTTY OF RICHFIELD 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, i~~:innesota 55423 Dear ;sirs I am requesting to be placed on the agenda of the City Council P•Zeeting, July 14, 19F30 for our License P~ene~,val for Tip Too Car ti~lash at 6601 Bloomington Avenue Couth, Richfield, i•Zinnesota 55423. At one time during the last Council eeting of June 23, 19 d0, the Council indicated that I could come back July 14th after all the tirork v~ras ozone. By the time the Council meets I erect to have all the thinF;s done that the Council requested in:luding painting the roof of the Car '~~ash, repairing the building and putting signs on all the entrances to the Car I'Iash and on each Bay informing the Car ~'Jash customers that the Car °~ash v1i11 be closed from 12 I~~Iidnight to 6 A.i~I. All violators are subject to arrest. Yours truly, ~: L I vest nt o~~ ~ a _ ~ = ~ ~~- 1~A~D S.~CO r 0 ?~, PZ!~,SIDuivT DSC/met July 3, 1980 M N Richard H. Speeter ~ Attorney at Law ~ ~ 604 Minnesota Federal Building ~ Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 ~ ~ ~ Dear Mr. Speeter: The city has received a new application for the renewal of ~ the 1980 business license for the Tip-Top Car Wash which C has been submitted by your client, Mr. David Colehour. .,.. Following our court appearance on Friday, June 27th, our Assistant City Attorney, Mr. Charles LeFevere, and I visited with you and your client about the major concern that seemed ~ to have contributed to the action of our city. council to deny the original business license application. As you re- ~ quested, I will attempt to outline these issues, as I under- stand them, for your consideration prior to the city council ~ hearing on the new business license application which has been submitted. ~ ~ I believe you have copies of the four exhibits I introduced at the hearing on June 23rd, when this matter first came be- "~ fore our city council. These exhibits define the basis for ~ the council action in denying the business license and enum- erate specific issues which contributed toward our recommend- ~ ..,. ation to our city council to deny the original business ` , license application. In addition to the fact that your client was operating his business without the required business license, the following specific problems were identified: Q 1. The driveway area of the business establishment is ~ ~ ~ frequently littered with refuse. ~ 2. The trash cans are frequently overflowing and are not ~ , properly covered. ~3. The general condition of the landscaping is neglected and the lawn buffer area is frequently littered with trash. telephone: 869-7521 (812) an equal opportunity employer July 3, 1980 Page Two 4. Customers are permitted to use the car wash after 12:00 mid-night in violation of the city licensing code. 5. The building structure is not maintained in a responsible manner and has become a blight upon the neighborhood. More specifically, there is damaged siding in the washing bays and the exterior paint on the structure has badly peeled. 6. The applicant has not filed the required certificate of public liability and property damage insurance providing for notice to the City of Richfield of termination or cancellation of such policy as required by our city ord- inance code. 7. The city has received complaints which indicate that the applicant has not had someone available on call at all times to provide service when needed as required by our ordinance code. 8. The general manner of operation of this business has created a community nuisance, which is not compatible with the re- sidential neighborhood in which it is, located, and is both obnoxious and detrimental to the community in violation of the conditions set forth in the special use permit granted for the operation of this business enterprise. During our conversation on June 27th, there was one additional issue which I mentioned that remains to be resolved. That deals with the need to provide a barrier screen around the refuse "dumpster'' located on the premises. Our ordinance code does require the use of a dumpster with water-tight and rodent proof self-closing lids, and also requires that this dumpster be kept in an enclosed structure concealing the dumpster from public view: For yqur information Y am enclosing a copy of the provisions of Chapter 6.06 of qur ordinance code which relates to this matter. While the foregoing list of problems is perhaps not all inclusive of the concerns discussed by our city council at their June 23rd hearing regarding the original business license application for your client, I believe-these issues represent the majority of the problems which were discussed. As Mr. LeFevere and I explained to you and your client, we are not in a position to make any committment on behalf of our city council with regard to the potential success of the new business license application which has been submitted. The action of the city council in denying the original 1980 business license appli- cation was final. Therefore, any action taken by your client in an ~~ attempt to resolve these problems places no committment on our city council with regard to their consideration of this new business license application which has been submitted. However, I do feel that it is critically important that your client be prepared to address these matters at the time the city council considers the new i July 3, 1980 Page Three business license application. The consideration of the new business license application has been scheduled for the regular council meeting on July 14, 1980. We would anticipate that this discussion would take place at approx- imately 8:00 p.m., on the agenda which has been established for that council meeting. If I can be of any further assistance to you, or if you have any questions prior to the council meeting on July 14th, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, ~/Yv / rls~q~, Thomas A. Morgan, Jr. Director of Public Safety TAM/lje cc: Mr. David Colehour Mr. Karl Nollenberger Mr. Charles LeFevere r c R7 CfIF t L;LD C1'I'Y O12llINANCI~. c'c~UL (Regulations Relating to Air Pull.ution, Gart,acle and Refuse Hauling) CHAPTER 6.06 Subdivision 4. Precollc.ction I~ractices (6) Multiple reside,~ce units having more than three (3) family units and which require garbage and refuse pickup more frenuently titan once each week shall either be equipped with refuse c~~ntainers and refuse pickup <;ervice as'provided in this para- graph (6) or be equipped coith a commercial incinerator complying with the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and licensed by the city as provided in this section. Refuse containers provided as an alternative to or in addition to such in- cineration shall be at least one (1) cubic yard in capacity, shall be conveniently located in relationahil• to the resid~noe unite for c,hich they are provided, shall be seater-tight and rodent proof t,itti self-closing lids and shall be kept in an enclosing structure concealing them from public view. Such structure shall have a raised con- crete floor. Such structure shall be kept in a stare of good repair at all times. The refuse containers shall be located so that their contents are inaccessible to at least three (3) feet above the base of the enclosinf; structure. The owner or operator of such multiple reside-nee property shall provide fur garbage pickup from such conL tainers. Refuse, debris, garbage, and other haste materials shall not be permitted to be accumulated in or- near the enclosing structures (except in the containers). There shall be daily cleanup in and around each auc~lt enclosing structure. (7) The owner or occupant of any commercial establishment or any other property iahich produces a volume of garbage or refuse or both, which requires garbage and refuse piel;up more fre~~uently than once each creek, shall also comply t•~ith the pro- visions of the foregoi-,g paragraph (6). Subdivision 5. Air Pollution Control Itc ulations. K Pursuant to Pinnesota Statutes, Section 471.62, Air Pollution Controls and Regulations and Ambient Air Quality Stana- ards 1-15, inclusive, of the Minnesota Pollution Co,ttrol Agency are hereby adopted by reference. The City Clerk shall mark and keep Ott file in his office three (3) copies of said regulations, marked "official copies," for use and examination by the public and shall furnish a copy of this ordinance and said regulations at cost to any person upon regt,esr. Subdivision 6. Burnint; Pe,mit. (1) No person shall willfully burn ~,r set fire to any grass, weeds, or other natural ground cover, or any building, fixture or appurtenance of. real property unless a per- mit therefor h~~ts been secured from the P'irr Chiof. ltl2. L S-2 5-70 l .~'.f3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 240 Agenda July 14, 1980 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Award of Bid for Fire Pumping Engine On July 24, 1980, the city council authorized the development of specifications and the solicitation of bids for a fire pumping engine. This vehicle would replace, in a first .line capacity, the mini-pumper presently located at the Penn Avenue fire station. On June 26, 1980, bids were opened. The city received six bids on this piece of equipment. For the information of the council, the bid tabulation sheets are attached. The low bid of $120,485 was submitted by the Mid-Central Fire and Safety Company of Edina, for a pumping engine built to our specifications by the 3D Metal Company of Bonduel, Wisconsin. Our staff has analyzed the bid proposal and found it to be completely compliant or comparible to our established specifications. Additionally, the public safety director has visited the manufacturing plant in Wisconsin and examined a number of fire vehicles in the process of production, and has found the production quality of the low bidder to be acceptable. The bid presented by Mid-Central also provides an option which would give a $2,500 discount to the city if payment was made for the chassis of the vehicle at the time it was received by the manufacturer. The chassis itself is $52,000 of the total bid price. Delivery of the chassis would be made approximately four months after the award of the bid. The completed pumper would be delivered to the city within six months after receipt of the chassis. Based upon the foregoing analysis of the bids received, it is the recommendation of the public safety director, in which I concur, that the city award the contract for the new fire pumping engine to the low bidder, Mid-Central Fire and Safety Company, in the amount of $120,485. It pay for $2,500 reduce is further recommended that the city exercise the option to the chassis upon delivery. If this plan was exercised the discount toward the full price of this pumping engine would the net cost to the city to the amount of $117,985. At the Council Letter No. 240 -2- July 14, 1980 time the chassis is received by the manufacturer the city would make the determination, based upon the current market for city funds, of the economic feasibility of exercising the option or waiting to pay the full price for the vehicle at the time of delivery. Funds for this purchase .will be available from the accrued amortization of the mini-pumper, and the fire vehicle reserve fund. There is over $103,000 available at the present time in the fund. The annual appropriation from the.Special Revenue Fund is $40,000. By the delivery time of the larger pumper in 1981, over $143,000 will be available. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/jf cc: Public Safety Director Deputy City Clerk r T CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening June 26, 1980 One 1500 GPM Fire Pumper Truck Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Karl Nollenberger, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for One 1500 GPM Fire Pumper Truck as advertised in the official newspaper on May 28, June 4, and June 11, 1980. Present: Karl Nollenberger, City Manager Tom Morgan, Public Safety Director Pat Coughlin, Fire Chief Steve Devich, Acting City Clerk The following bids were submitted and read aloud: BIDDER AND BID SECURITY OPTION ~~1 OPTION ~~2 VEHICLE AS SPECIFIED Fire Safety Products Duluth B B. 5% Deduct $658 $133, 612 Fireap Associates Rochester B.B. 5% Deduct $2,000 $127, 885 Mid-Central Fire Edina B.B. 5% Deduct $658 $120, 485 Thomas Fire Equipment Detroit Lakes B.B. 5% Deduct $600 $139, 500 B. J. McLennon St. Paul B.B. 5% Deduct $655 $130, 317 American LaFrance Elmira, N.Y. B.B. 5% Add $898 $148, 820 The City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the regular city council meeting of July 14, 1980.