The URL can be used to link to this page

05-14-79 agendaIt is recommended that the city council appro ment with the Richfield School District, and the a the Community Health Services contract between the Richfield and Bloomington. Respectfully submitt J ce & . Wilde A ting City Manager e the agree= endment to cities of d, Iq " CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 146 Agenda May 14, 1979 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: I Subject: Agreement and Contract Amendment Related to Community Health Services The Richfield School District has requested that the city execute an agreement with the school district to provide nurs- ing services to the non- public elementary and secondary schools in the city. State law requires that these services be made available to the non - public schools to the same extent that the services are available in the ublic schools. A state subsidy y is to support the provision of school nursing services _available and the Richfield School District has applied for the subsidy ' • monies to provide these services to the non- public schools. Attached to this council letter is 'a proposed agreement between the Richfield School District and the City of Richfield which provides that the city will deliver communitj health ser- vices to the non - public elementary and secondary schools, I and that the school district will coordinate the services and re- imburse the city from their state subsidy monies. Also attach- "I ed is an amendment to the Community Health Service' contract. between the cities of Richfield and Bloomington which provides for the provision of these nursing services to the non-public i schools. The school district's subsidy funds will fully cover I the cost of providing these services. It is recommended that the city council appro ment with the Richfield School District, and the a the Community Health Services contract between the Richfield and Bloomington. Respectfully submitt J ce & . Wilde A ting City Manager e the agree= endment to cities of d, HEALTH SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1979, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City "), and Independent School District No. 280 (hereinafter the "School District "); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the School District, in order to promote equal educational op- portunity for every school child in the School District and to assure all pupils and their parents freedom of choice in education, has applied for health service subsidies as provided for by Minnesota Statutes § §123.931- 123.937; and WHEREAS, the City has an existing contract for the provision of corrmiunity health services which includes provision of coordination, consultation, and de- livery of health services within the school setting of nonpublic elementary and secondary schools in the City; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and mutual benefits the parties agree to perform the following duties with the intent of this contract: 1. School District Responsibilities A. The School District shall apply for each school termito the Minnesota State Department of Education, State Aids Section, for those subsi- dies made available to fund health services in nonpublic schools. B. The School District shall provide those subsidies applicable to pro- vide health services to nonpublic pupils to the City,. C. The School District shall plan and coordinate with the health ser- vices provider so that the provision of such service's meets the State provisions and is provided in a ratio not to exceed that pro l • vided in the public schools. I • 2. City Responsibilities. A. The City shall amend its City Health Plan and contract with its health services provider to include health services according to the provisions of the State statutes. B. The City shall provide to the health services provider the subsi- dies from the School District necessary to enhance the level of health services in nonpublic schools equal to, but not to exceed, those provided in the public schools. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above mentioned. CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its By INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 280 By Its By is i r AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF RICHFIELD AND BLOOMINGTON FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES k WHEREAS, Independent School_ District No. 280 has applied for supplemental subsidies for nonpublic schools according to the pro- . visions of Minnesota Statutes §§123.931 to 123.935 to provide ad- ditional health services to nonpublic schools in the District and ` is providing those subsidies to the City of Richfield; and WHEREAS, the parties to the above agreement wish to amend said agreement to reflect those additional services; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the parties that the City of Richfield will increase the quarterly payments according to the existing contract with the City of Bloomington to raise the level of health services in the elementary and secondary nonpublic schools to equal, but not to exceed, those provided in the public schools. Dated: • CITY OF RICHFIELD i By Its [SEAL] By Its CITY OF BLOOMINGTON By Its Mayor [SEAL] By Its City Manager 3. 4. 5 6 Prohibits barbed wire and electric fences in zoning districts; Requires fences to be set _back 3 feet from p way to provide for snow storage space; Requires fences to be set back 3 feet from p to protect them from automobile damage and p snow storage; .Establishes standards for fences on corner 1 that corner traffic visibility is not obstru residential blic right -of rking areas ovide for is to insure. ted; COUNCIL LETTER NO. 145- -2- May 14, 1979 50 per cent or more destroyed. The attached ordinance amendment will use this `50 per cent" guideline to distinquish between repair, or reconstruction, or replacement, of existing fences that do not meet provisions of the amended ordinance. Normal fence repair would be allowed, but any replacement or reconstruction of: a fence would have to.conform to the new ordinance regulations. Staff Recommendation Richfield does not require building permits for fence con - struction which will make it difficult for city inspectors,to determine which fences are non'- conforming, and which fences may have been built after adoption of the new ordinance standards. Changing the ordinance regulations regarding fence height and placement, may create some of these enforcement problems. However, it is.the conclusion of the staff that the recommended changes are desirable to protect health ° and welfare, to improve traffic safety and to reduce public and P rivate maintenance costs. It is the recommendation of the Planning and Redevelopment Director and the Public Works. Director that the city council give first reading ' approval to the attached ordinance amendment. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission has reviewed the attached ordinance r amendment and.recommended that the city council approve this • amendment. Respectfully submitted, L. Wil e Pice ng City Manager JLW /skb i cc: Planning and Redevelopment Director j Public Works Director BILL 1979 - AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER III, SECTION 3.39 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter III, Section 3.39, Subdivision 2, Paragraph 1 is hereby 'amended by amending sub - paragraph e thereof to read as follows: (e) A wall, fence, or hedge may occupy part of the required yard; except that C(a)] 1. no wall, fence, or hedge more than four feet in height shall be con - structed or permitted on any front yard, C(b)] 2. no wall, fence, or hedge more than [eight] six feet in height shall be constructed or permitted on any rear yard or sideyard, and C(c)] 3. no wall, fence or hedge more than four feet in height shall be constructed or permitted on the Crear yard] sideyard on the side abut- ting upon a street of corner lot which abut upon a key lot. [, closer to the street than the front yard set- back line of the key lot.] All posts on any fence located on or near the lot line shall be on the inside of the fence unless they are designed as an integral part of the fence. The term "hedges" as used in this paragraph shall not include trees. CNo walls, fences, hedges, trees or other plants or structures shall be established or maintained on the front yard of any corner lot in such manner as to obstruct vision from the adjacent streets of traffic approaching within 50 feet of the adjacent intersection.] All walls, fences, and hedges abutting on the public right -of -way shall be set back three feet from the public right -of -way. Barbed wire and electric fences shall be prohibited. Fences shall be set back three feet from parking areas. On any corner lot nothing shall be erected, placed, planted, or allowed to grow In such a manner as to obstruct vision between the height of two and one -half and ten feet above the intersection of the centerlines of the intersecting streets in the area bounded by the street curb lines abut - ting said corner lot and a line connecting points on the abutting curb lines fifty feet from the intersection of the extensions of the curb lines. All fences, walls, and hedges legally existing at the time this ordinance t, and ment is passed shall be allowed to c st, and ontinue to exi to be repaired. LNo walls, fences, or hedges shall be constructed or permitted on any boulevard area or !public right -of -way.] Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, day of 1979. ATTEST: t Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk Loren L. Law, Mayor Minnesota this i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ?: Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 144 Agenda May 14, 1979 I The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Approval of Preliminary Engineering Report, Alley.Improvements There is an item on;the May 14, 1979 city council agenda providing for council review and acceptance of the preliminary engineering report on improving and upgrading the city's alley- ways. Background Information There are approximately 11 miles of unpaved alleyways in the City of Richfield. In the past, these alleys have been graded and filled each year by street division personnel. How - ever, because of subsoil conditions, or drainage, 'a d the fact that this grading and filling process is merely temporary, the surface condition of the alleys has continued to deteriorate and has become a constant maintenance problem.. During 1978, it cost the city $15,000 just to maintain the existing sur- face of the city's alleys. Because of the continual maintenance problems ith the city's alleyways, the public works department has.b en eval- uating alternatives for resurfacing the public alle s in Richfield. Four areas of the city in which alleys are `concen- trated have been identified. It is the staff's rec mmenda- tion that each area be paved by a single contractor, with one area to be paved per year for the next four years. Grouping the alleys in clusters such as is proposed would result in lower construction costs, and would enable the prof ct to be implemented in workable stages. This approach is c mparable to that used during the permanent street paving pro ram. The schedule for this alley paving program provides that construction begin in 1979, with the improvements tD be com- pleted by 1982. The Capital.Improvement budget provides that funding for construction of these 'alley improvements would be by special assessment. Council Letter NO. 144 -2- May, 14, 1979 ' ` on February 12,`1979, the city council adapted a resole- tion initiating these public 'improvements and ordering prepa- ration of the preliminary engineering report. A copy of this report is attached. Engineering Report The engineering consultants investigated three paving mater - ials, and selected concrete as the most feasible paving material for a city alley program. This proposal provides that all alleys would -be paved with six inches of concrete, to .,a twelve foot wide section with a valley gutter: Although the staff had orig- inally favored asphalt surfacing, due: to its lower cost and availability, the engineering study recommends the use of con- crete, for the following reasons: 1. Concrete can be placed to a better accuracy than asphalt. In flat areas, such as Richfield, it becomes important to place the paving material to close grade tolerances to avoid puddling. Con- . crete can meet these standards more readily than asphalt. 2,. Concrete alleys can'be shaped to provide a dis- tinct center valley gutter. This gutter is im- portant to providing adequate drainage between the public avenues and streets. 3. Concrete is more likely to retain its stru tural integrity throughout its entire width, whi h,should prevent the alley edges from 'breaking up and un- ravelling. 4. Concrete can withstand the higher weight 1 ads associated with delivery, garbage trucks, and other vehicles that frequently use the alleys. It does not need to be constantly compacted to remain structurally sound.: 5. Concrete is less prone to fail due to'petroleum spills, chemicals,, and.other volatile -substances that are. found in garbage and trash containers set in alleys. _Representatives of Orr- Schelen- Mayeron Associates, Inc. will be present at the May 14, 1979 city council meeting to discuss the preliminary engineering report and ans er ques- tions. It is not intended that the material contained in the preliminary engineering report be the subject a public hearing on May 14, 1979. However, if the city`cou lf cil wishes Council Letter No., 144 -3- May 14, 1979 to 'proceed with any major alley improvement work, it will be �. necessary for the city council to adopt a resolution receiving the preliminary report and ordering.the public hearing. FINANCING ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS Prior to holding the public hearing, it will be necessary for the City Council to adopt an assessment policy to be used for the alley improvements. As mentioned, the Long 'Range Capital Improve. ments Program provides that funding for construction of the alley., improvements be by special assessments. The ;cost of this alley improvement program is significant, and the only feasible 'way of financing such improvements is through the special assessment process. It is the opinion. of the staff that the city's public alleys are provided for the sole benefit.of >the adjoining property. Public alleys are not necessary to transport traffic from one area to` another, nor' even to 'collect residential local traffic.. The city alleyways do serve as practical accesses to rear lot _ garages" storage, and refuse areas. However, only those who have access to their land in this means, via the public alleys, accrue the benefits from the city alleyway system. Accordingly, it is the recommendation of the staff that the city council adopt the attached resolution, providing for assessment of 100% of the cost of the alley improvements to the benefiting properties.. attached The map - designates the four proposed alley - paving districts. It is the recommendation of the public works director, in I which I concur, that the 1979 alley paving project be under- taken in the Jefferson Park area. This area includes approximately three and one -half miles of public alleyways. The alleys in this area are more concentrated than alleys in most other parts of the city, and would appear; to offer the most manageable construction project for, the first year's program. Properties within the initial project area, City Project 734, are bounded by 66th Street on the North, Penn Avenue on the East, 70th Street on the South, and Xerxes Avenue on the Nest. This 32- block segment of the Lincoln Hills addition contains 19 ,900 lineal feet of alleys. The total assessible alley frontage is calculated to be 35,940 lineal feet. The engineer's estimate of cost to complete the alley'paving program in this -area -is $670,000. A preliminary assessment roll has been 'estimated on this basis.. Using this assessment policy, and spreading the total estimated cost over all properties with alley footage, the average property owner would', be assessed for this project at a rate of $18.60 per alley foot. Using a typical 50 -foot lot, the average homeowner's assessment for the alley impro ement project would be $930. It must be emphasized that these figures are preliminary in nature, and that the actual assessment for any benefiting property would be dependent on the total footage adjacent to the alley,; and the actual 'project cost. However, it must also be remembered that most of the properties with alley footage do not have drive - ways, and did not incur driveway assessments a$ part of the city's Council Letter No. 144 -4- May 14, 1979 permanent paving:, program. The attached resolution does provide that the maximum assessment rate per alley front foot be $18.60, Swhich is the estimated cost for the first year's construction. This effectively-establishes. a ceiling on the assessments for all of the areas to be constructed over the next three years, so that all property owners may be assessed equally, regardless of when their alley improvements are completed. Recommendation If the city council wishes to proceed with the alley improve- ments described in this letter, it is` recommended that the following` procedure be followed`: 1. Adopt a resolution receiving the preliminary engineering report and ordering the public hearing; 2. Adopt the resolution establishing the assessment policy for this alley resurfacing project. It is recommended that the date for public hearing be scheduled for July 23 1979.s Due to the required assessment hearing process,. it does not appear Likely that the work "can be started this year. A late start would also disrupt the area throughout the winter as;the work could not be completed until the middle of the 1980 construction season.' However`, final construction drawings and bid specifications can be finalized this year so that construction. can begin with the start of the 1980 construction season. Respectfully submitted, -� ��I�YOCv%_. e ing.Cty Manager JLW /skb cc:, Public Works Director - Finance Director ORR- SCHELEN- MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. • CONSULTING ENGINEERS MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY REPORT AND AND ESTIMATE OF COST PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT NO. 734 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA I. TYPE OF WORK Alley paving improvements in the Jefferson Park Area of Richfield. I. REASON FOR IMPROVEMENT The alley paving is proposed as a part of a com- plete alley paving program for the City of Rich - field to provide permanent alley surfacing to benefit abutting properties. III. DATE OF PRELIMINARY REPORT • May 14, 1979 IV. LOCATION � 0 That area of Richfield bounded by 66th Street on the north, Xerxes Avenue on the west, 70th Street on the south and Penn Avenue on the east, known as the Jefferson Park Cluster. V. FEASIBILITY The alley paving project is feasible and can best be accomplished as proposed. VI. PROPERTY TO BE ASSESSED All properties within the project area as listed in Item IV above and as listed by description herein: I City Project No. 734. The following described platted properties in the City of Richfield according to the plats thereof on file and of record in the offices of the County Recorder] and Registrar or Titles in and for Hennepin 'County, Minnesota: Blocks 1 -16, Lincoln Hills Addition Blocks 1 -16, Lincoln Hills Third Addition -1 VII. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST Construction of 19,900 lineal feet of concrete alley surfacing in the project area: Estimated Construction Cost $560,000 Admin., Legal, Engineering & Insurance (20%) 110,000 Estimated Project Cost $670,000 VIII. ESTIMATED PROJECT ASSESSMENT ..The cost of the project is proposed to be assessed` totally against the benefitted properties on a per alley footage basis. The assessable alley footage has been determined by totalling the alley footage for all individual parcels of land. When a lot is abutting two alleys (along 66th Street) only one dimension, the shortest of the two dim - ensions, is included. Total Estimated Project Cost $670,000.00 Total Assessable Alley Frontage 35,940 lineal feet • Assessment Rate Per Alley Footage $18.60 Typical Assessments Per 50r Ft. Lot $930.00 I hereby certify that this plan, specific- ation or report was prpeared by me or under my direct supervison and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer underlthe laws of the State of Minnesota. John A. Harwood Date. /May 14, 1979 Reg. No. 11;047 0 W W X ir CITY OF RICHFIELD PROPOSED PROJECT NO. 734 JEFFERSON PARK COMPLEX ALLEY PAVING 66th ST f--7 I 2 7: 2 71:2 7 6 9 if 9 1 59 1169 1 j I llt:9 If 9 F- f- T6 9 Li -j I M- nn FIFn z- lh r-r n n� 1 6 1 1116 ' i i -j L Li 6il 70th ST. > 41t n. 210 392 lz 6 2 pt IT V6 PROJECT AREA LINEAL FEET OF ALLEY 19j900 CITY PROJECT 734 ASSESSABLE FOOTAGE 35,940 cr CL LL! OD CF) ----- - - - - -- 77. Cf) -ld E A i:-, * 7 fF 0 RESOLUTION NO. [0084- RESOLUTION STIPULATING THE POLICY OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON PERMANENT ALLEY SURFACING AND APPURTENANCES THERETO WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to improve the public alleys by the construction of a permanent pavement surface; and WHEREAS, completing the construction of a permanent concrete pavement surface on the public alleys will improve drainage and access to the abutting lots and parcels of land; and WHEREAS, the construction of permanently paved alleys will benefit the abutting lots and parcels of land in the City of Richfield. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota adopts the following policy in relationship to all proposed assessments for a permanent alley improvement program: 1. That the cost of making the permanent alley improvements be assessed in total to the abutting properties; 2. That the paving material be six inches of unreinforced concrete; 3. That the maximum assessment rate per alley front foot be $18.60; 4. That the term of the assessment be twenty years at an interest rate designated by the City Clerk; 5. That the construction begin as soon as the public hearing and.assessment procedures are satisfied and in all cases as soon as possible. r That the cost for preliminary work shall be paid from the Construction Fund, such costs to be reimbursed when financing has been accomplished for the construction project. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of ATTEST: Loren L. Law , Mayor Thomas J. Moran City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT TO LOAN MONEY TO THE RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND PROVIDING FOR THE PERFORMANCE THEREOF BY ADVANCEMENT FROM THE PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND WHEREAS, the HRA desires to borrow money for the purpose of purchasing; certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the L /H /N Redevelop- ment Project heretofore adopted by the City and the HRA, said real property being described as follows: Lot 14, Block 3, Fairwood Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and WHEREAS, the purchase of said real property is necessary to accomplish the purposes of said L /H /N Project, and WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.445, to purchase real property and to borrow money from the City therefore, and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.581, to make loans to the HRA in aid of projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD • 1: That the Mayor and City Manager be, and hereby are, authorized to execute, as agents to the City of Richfield, an agreement with the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority, entitled "Loan Agreement ",,a copy of ai ven Clerk's File No. HRA and is ordered placed on file. 2. That the City Clerk be, and hereby is directed to advance monies to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority in such amount and at such time as is provided in the above agreement, said monies to be taken from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund and to return to said fund all payments made by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority pursuant to said agreement. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of May, 1979. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk I • •- LOAN AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, entered into as of this day of 1979, by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield, Minnesota, a body public and corporate (hereinafter the "HRA "), and the City of Richfield, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter the "City "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the HRA desires to borrow money for the purpose of purchasing certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the L /H /N Redevelop- ment Project heretofore adopted by the City and the HRA, said real property being described as follows.: Lot 14, Block 3, Fairwood Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and WHEREAS, the purchase of said real property is necessary to accomplish the purposes of said L /H /N Project, and WHEREAS, the City desires to lend money so that said purchase may be accomplished, and WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.445 to purchase real property and to borrow money from the City therefore, and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.581 to make loans to the HRA in aid of projects. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual tenants and follows: I. The City agrees to advance to the HRA money in an amount to be determined by the HRA at such time as a decision has been made by the HRA to purchase such property, said amount to be equal to the purchase price of said property plus any relocation benefits payable, and II. The HRA agrees to repay the sum so advanced, plus interest, as follows: A. Interest shall accrue on unpaid principal at the rate of 5.00% per annum from the date of advancement until repaid. B. Payments shall be applied first to reduce interest accrued at the date of payment, and the remainder, if any,,shall reduce the principal balance. C. The HRA may make payment or payments in any amount and at any time, provided that the entire unpaid principal together with accrued interest shall be repaid no later than three years from the date of advancement of funds to the HRA. .b III. This agreement shall be void and of no effect if advancement of funds by the City as provided herein is not made before July 31, 1979. i HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY f By Its Chairman Dated: By ` Its Executive Director CITY OF RICHFIELD Dated: By Its Mayor III By Its City Manager • t: CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening May 4, 1979 Carbon Dioxide Bulk Storage and Appurtenant Work City Project No. 740 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager, who annouced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for C ^rbon Dioxide Bulk Storage and Appurtenant Work, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 18, 1979. Present: Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager Carl Marinics, Public Works Director I. F. Roesler, Environmental Health Director Richard Krier, Planning Director Ken Conway, Water Department Director Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk The following bids were submitted and read aloud: BIDDER BASE ALTERNATES BID SECURITY BID A B C D Shank Mechanical Inc. B.B. 5% $66,800 $22,800 $27,300 $10,800 $35,600 Lee Reichert Plumbing B.B. 5% $63,820 $22,195 $26,650 $ 8,635 $34,370 The Acting City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the regular council meeting of May 14, 1979. I Thomas J. Moran City Clerk F� jet CITY OF. RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Off ice' of City Manager Council 'Letter No. 140 Agenda May 14, 1979 The Honorable.Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Tabulation of Bids,'Minutes and Award of Contract, Pump, House Control Modification On April 20, 1979, the acting city manager opened bids for. pump house control modifications and appurtenant work at the municipal water treatment plant. The public safety director,, public works director, environmental health director, water `superintendent, and deputy city clerk were also present at this bid opening. , The bid minutes and tabulations are attached for city council review. Three bids were received for this work, which will involve replacement of the major pumping control systems at the municipal water plant. The low base bid was `submitted 'by Bentech Engineering Corporation, in the amount of $37, 900. In 'addition to`this base bid, it is recommended that.the city council accept the bids for Alternates E and G, providing for the - temperature and security alarm systems.. Bentech Engineering is the low bidder for the base bid plus the selected alternates, with an aggregate bid in the amount of $44,510. Another item bid with the pump control work inclu es the con- I'I struction -of a- partition wall between the pump control panels and the water softening basin. This wall is for energy conservation purposes, and will enable better temperature controls in both areas. - It is the recommendation of the public works director to award the bid for Alternate B, instal.'lation of the interior wall, to Donnelly Electric Co., in the amount of $9,987. Respectfully submitted J ce Wilde A ting City Manager JLW /skb cc: Public Works Director Finance Director a I, CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening April 20, 1979 Pump House Control Modifications and Appurtenant Work City Project No. 741 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for Pump House Control Modifications and Appurtenant Work as advertised in the official newspaper on April 4, 1979. K] Present: Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager Tom Morgan, Public Safety Director Ken Conway, Water Department Superintendant Carl Marinics, Public Works Director I. Roesler, Public Health Director Sylvia Bergh, Deputy City Clerk The bids were as follows: (Tabulation attached.) The Acting City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the regular council meeting of May 14, 1979. Thomas J. Moran City Clerk f M H E-4 H O �xw U] H 04 z A w O z H H 3 H Pa O oazA • H 1:4 H w E-4 6 w' PCI w H z o x�H E H U P4 n d1 r-I O N -4 .4 a i m w En Ui x 00 � o z a ^ O N Q V) U) w H [_+ t� C7 H H O O O Q O Cl) Pq U U] c/} b N •rl 4-1 •rl a5 O U) O O O rX4 H O N 00 • u1 n Cl) U A R+ cn pa b EW-+ O U ai �4 b w O O O H N I'D 4J H m Pa w a, H -:4 H v A 3 � o o° A CY, a z pq w O a� L +1 v U] U O O O O A if1 M 00 W Z W Pa oo oo r-4 �t M r-1 —4 H rrr Pa ° a O O A Poi r4 N O f-4 00 PQ H 3 � H r-1 4 O O O O HH O � r�1 bO M Pq U -4 rl cn U •rl rl S4 El u a1 o ao w wn L) z mn ,din Cn O w r4 U q z S P� c0 Pa C Pa .0 W O 14 O O W O Pq N PCI U w ti a A Pa Council I;etter NO. 139. =2- May 14„ 1979 J s r I Recommendations The LHN pub is 'improvement and landscapng' project is currently underway and it isnecessary that a'f;inal decision on th ma "tters addressed in'this' change order be made before the- construction is completed. Since the change order` will result %in, reductions to the existing contract while ca inu.ing to ac- complish the "landscaping:iand',furnishings goals ,,of the overall plan, it is `the recommendation of the, public works director, in .:which I'- .concur, ,that the- = city, council approve 'a., change order in' the; amount of $1;0,5T0.30 to the Shafer Construc,tian Company contract. Respectfully submitted," ems..._ c L.de cting City Manager JP4/ j of cc:' Public Works Director f Finance Director a, Planning &:Redevelopment Director I - i xh CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Office' of. City Manager Council' Letter No. 138 Agenda May 14 1979 k__p The Honorable,Mayor and r Members of the City Council City of eRichfleld Council Members: Subject: Review. of Bids Tabulation and,Minutes and Authorization to Readvertise for. Bids, Nicollet Park.Improvements :On May 7, 1979, tha acting °,city manager opened bids for playlot . construction at Nicollet Parkin accordance with previous city council authorization.- The city clerk, park and recreation director, public works director, architect, and representatives. bidding , firms were also present at the bid opening. The bid minutes and tabulations are attached for city council review... The base bid requested provided for a large <playl t. Alternate one was for a small playlot, Alternate Two provided for a picnic able and concrete pad, and Alternate Three provided for deadman construction._ These items were all contained in the project plans previously approved by the city council. This project is designated . in the 1979 Capital Improvement to be funded, by a $25,000 appropra= tion, from Revenue Sharing monies. Three firms submitted bids. Inasmuch as the'`low base bid sub. mitted was $30,900,. it is the recommendation of the park and recrea. tion director, the park and recreation advisory commission and the architect that all bids be 'rejected. It is recommended.that the city council reject th se bids, authorize the staff to revise the bid specifications and readvertise for bids for the-Nicollet Park minor improvements. Respectfully submitted, ll f a`c L. Wilde I. Acting City Manager JLW /skb cc: P,arkand- Recreation Director •� City. Clerk 5 1 CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening May 7, 1979 City Project No. 735 Nicollet Park Playlot- Construction Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for Nicollet Park Playlot Construction, City Project No. 735, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 25, 1979. Present: Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager Don Fondrick, Park & Recreation Director Carl Marinics, Public Works Director Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk The following bids were submitted and read aloud: ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2 BIDDER SMALL PICNIC TABLE BID SECURITY BASE BID TOTLOT AND PAD Socon, Inc. B.B. 5% $30,900 $10,912 $335 each Henry 0. Mikkelson B.B. 5% $31,500 $ 9,700 $500 each Landshapes, Inc. B.B. 5% $32,500 $19,900 $325 each The Acting City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the regular council meeting of May 14, 1979. Thomas J. Moran City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 13.7 ,7 Agenda May 14, 1979 ,U Q� W_ The Honorable Mayor ando- -Q-e Members'of.the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Agreement for Architectural Services, Ice Arena Improvements There is an item on the May 14, 1979 city council agenda pro - viding for council approval of an agreement for architectural services for improvements to the Richfield Ice Arena. The 1979 Capital Improvement Budget provides $35,000 for improve- ments at the Richfield Ice Arena. These improvements are to include refinishing of the wood 'deck and beams and resurfacing portions of the flooring. The schedule for the project calls for the preparation of plans and specifications, advertisement for ;bids and award of contract(s)and the ordering of materials so that actual, work may be done during the arena's annual shutdown period in September. It is the recommendation of the park and recreationjdirector, in which I concur, that the city council authorize execultion of an agreement with the Wold Association for architectural se vices related to the ice arena improvements.. The Wold Association provided the architectural services -in the original design and constriction of the arena and also submitted the lowerof the two quotations received for the architectural services related to this improvement p oject. The proposed agreement establishes a maximum fee of $2,300 f r archi- tectural services associated with the project. It is recommended that the city council authorize tae mayor and acting city manager to execute an agreement with the Woll Association` for these architectural services. Respectfully submitted, c L. Wilde cting City Manager Shipka, Date April 20, 1979 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF RICHFI Y COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION A Emil '►'f"lj ..R. In Last Ci 1 jjam, In HOME ADDRESS 6444 James Ave. S Richfield 55423 Street No. City Zip Code MAILING ADDRESS (if different from home address) Street No. PHONE: Home 866 -9550 APPOINTMENT PREFERENCE: Planning Commission Park and Recreation Advisory Comm. Senior Citizen & Handicapped Advisory Commission City Business 861 -8242 Zip Code Human Rights Commission Civil Service Commission: Advisory Board of Health Other Cable TV Adv. Committee Briefly discuss aspects of your experience which you believe qualify you for this municipal commission/committee and why you are interested in serving: Developing specifications for various types of contracts. Developing criteria for evaluating proposals for recommendation to governing body. With this background I feel that I could provide a service to the community. CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: Richfield Chamber of Commerce Richfield Lions Club - Past Treas. & Past Secretary Minnesota Association of School Business Officials - Past President Assoc. of School Business Officials, U.S. & Canada Chairman, Technical Committee, Association of Metro School Districts Elder, Hope Presbyterian Church - Richfield OCCUPATION: Employing ,firm, agency Richfield Public Schools Address 7001 Harriet Ave., Richfield, Mn. Position Di rector of Business Affairs Years w /firm /agency 18 Other work experience (optional) Designed Telephone System for Richfield Schools Finance Advisory Committee, TIES (Computer Consortium) Return to: City Manager's Office 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield 55423 Att: Eileen Anderson F l • �m REFERENCES (Optional) A. Dr. Bruce R. Anderson Superintendent Full name Relationship Richfield Schools 861 -8245 Mailing address Phone number B. Ivan Ludeman Co- Worker Full name Relationship Richfield 861 -8220 Ext. 310 Mailing address Phone number C. Carl McBride Friend Full name Relationship Richfield Bank & Trust 861 -7355 Mailing address Phone number Return to: City Manager's Office 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield 55423 Att: Eileen Anderson F l • �m r _ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA I' Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 135 Agend "a May, 14; 1979 The.Honorable Mayor and Members: of the City Council ' City. of; Richfield Council,`.Members: Subject: Request for Variance, 7301 Sheridan Avenue,✓Sou.th.,;;, -Jeffrey and Lavon Hanson have applied fora variance to re- duce a streetside sideyard from an established;, 20 -foot sideyard "to. .a,6 -foot sideyard. This variance is requested to, enable them ;to,construct a 33' X 14 " addition to their dwelling; which is located' in an area zoned single family residential. „ The following items are attached to this 'council letter: 1. Petition and map; 2. Site plan; 3. Floor plan and elevations. Zoning Ordinance Requirements Section 3.30, Subdivision 3, establishes sideyard setback requirements. Section 3.41, Subdivision 6, establishes three con - ditions that must be met for granting a: :variance. Staff Findings The staff has reviewed the proposal against the three cond- bons which .must be met in order for a variance to be granted and found the following: 1.' That there are special circumstances 'or co ditions affect- in the particular land, not common to oth r properties in this or similar districts. There are nD special condi- tions affecting this particular_ property. The property is a typical size for residential logs, an is not signifi= candy different from any other corner residential lot; in Richfield. k JyY F ^ t ,y. Gouncil ter No.. 135 -2- May 14 `,, 1979 5 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjo meat of,:.= substantial' property rights. Denial of 'a variance does not preclude' the existing property. use. There are :other ways of adding to the house that would not require ,a variance. 3: That the granting of the application will not'material'ly - and adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the nei hborhood and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare- or injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood. The proposed addition would be an improvement to the property, and would probably< not inhibit 'corner traffic visibility. ;Staff Recommendation Because the three conditions necessary for granting a variance -. are not 'met, it is the recommendation of the staff that the city deny the the requested variance. The Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission has recommended that the city council, approve the requested variance. Respectfully sub m_ittec, J ce L. Wilde cting City Manager. JLW/ j e f cc: Planning and Redevelopment Director -r q f REQUEST FOR VARIAINCE OF c-lxl' _ FOR PURPOSE OF, .-Legal Description: �. V We, the undersigned, being owners of ir:.mediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the variance as requested. Signature of Owners Address Legal D ^scrictic:. Z1„ ). -� -, -/ i • � s 1 i — — lbz. --, -3— 72 nd. 2010 40 x-15 ^• 2.6+ 717 gas A. Street t A 4-3 a, 14 o PETITION MAP) 14, f-AA 400.0% t RES : 's 1;, 4 gal. f % • B'N A. I ABRAM CEMETERY -"--7 -JL'- 0, "114, AA SEC.2 451135 SEC. 1 7 7, 4. -4 L34-�51% 34 54 ///0 ............. Uj > — — lbz. --, -3— 72 nd. Q. 0 0♦ Uj 154-9&;% 134.54• 40 x-15 ^• A. C; t A 4-3 a, 14 o cn 14, f-AA 400.0% t RES : 's 1;, 4 gal. f % • .67 10. 7 0, "114, AA A 'I 7 7, 4. -4 L34-�51% 34 54 4. Aff ............. Uj > Q. 0 0♦ Uj 154-9&;% 34-5c- `e x-15 ^• A. a t A 4-3 a, A o • 14, ft 1% 3. 1 400.0% t 13 4 4 gal. f % • .67 10. 7 0, "114, AA A 'I 7 7, "1 ?'-! L34-�51% 34 54 ri ............. L Q. 0 0♦ Uj 154-9&;% 34-5c- `e x-15 ^• A. a t A 4-3 a, A o 4 14, ft 1% 3. 1 400.0% A i.. 14D (I {34. 51; 4 4 134 f % —154-5� .67 10. 7 0, "114, AA A 'I a & 7, "1 ?'-! L34-�51% 34 54 ri 0 cmm Street West 73rd. Street f:: `e x-15 ^• A. a t A 4-3 a, A o 4 A ft 1% 3. 1 400.0% A i.. 14D (I {34. 51; 4 4 134 134.4 °13 —154-5� .67 10. 7 0, "114, AA A 'I a & 11147" "1 ?'-! West 73rd. Street z Uj Si f:: `e x-15 A. 'z t A 4-3 a, A 'z KE 1'� $- It ft 1% 3. 1 JV N E (I {34. 51; 4 4 134 134.4 °13 —154-5� .67 13457- 13tss 0, "114, AA I 7 114. 7-, - + Sx L34-�51% 34 54 ri 3t91 1 3- .5-Z .Z 3 4 A.S z Uj Si f:: `e x-15 A. 'z t A 4-3 a, A LA KE 1'� $- It ft 1% 3. 1 13+.37 • �44 134-57 (I {34. 51; 13 4. _Iqc 4 134 134.4 °13 —154-5� 54-54 31� 13tss 0, "114, AA I 7 114. 7-, - + Sx L34-�51% 34 54 ri z Uj Si f:: `e • A. 'z TER A 4-110E, N" 3. 134.51, 134-31 4. 4, {34. 51; 134 Z 1 4. Tl�- 134.4 °13 ; LL 31� 13tss 0, "114, AA • —�J 114. 7-, - + Sx L34-�51% 34 54 -j Uj 2 G. c (A Uj I 33 124-41, I24.51; • 'z 14. IF, 3. -Z 4, j L 4-5s 134 Z 1 4. Tl�- LLJ LLS 134 54 ; LL 1 4-64 "114, AA • —�J 114. 7-, - + Sx G. c (A Uj I 33 C. 124-41, I24.51; • 14. 3", 3. -Z 4, j L 4-5s Z LLJ LLS ; LL 1141)� 114. 7-, - + Sx Z4S C. -----74 th. ----------Stream ,1 134.bZ I v, 4 1 5+.s-z 2&6 7. 4 8. SIGNATURES ON PETITION County Surveyor 01AA44 Hennepin CountyMinn, ms 11-52 124-41, I24.51; 5& z -Z 11417 j L 4-5s Z LLJ LLS ; LL 1141)� 114. 7-, - + Sx Z4S 3t91 1 3- .5-Z .Z -----74 th. ----------Stream ,1 134.bZ I v, 4 1 5+.s-z 2&6 7. 4 8. SIGNATURES ON PETITION County Surveyor 01AA44 Hennepin CountyMinn, ms 11-52 W �j Mrs. Jeff Hanson 73rd Sx Sheridan Richfield, T r ff Lp L L C.Uu VAMP LZI 1 NOTr' = x�:�16 rliN(7Gi� is r �i I, i I J il�� +�i I�I;,�ii �� i�i ��,j. ii i')� ' I li l►� i i liflf +jl "�- 2 ,O u I Z f O i W s l� 3 c O C� Z i- - llJ } f 3 3 i i a M cQ U _ c1c ca cu 0 ci cu 0. cn C i �� y � +�0• T:•y� .r+� -}may .... - �� If ��1 jl� •` , I- 1 I r � 1 ��- .?--' =rr—j r=te �• —�r.� -��, i I I r . r > Council;'Letter No. 134 -2- ay 14, 1979 a The proposed restaurant "does—not conform''to required zoning ' standards. The building would have a >frontyard setback (along ` 66th Street) of 35 feet, whereas the average setback on the a block is 88 feet. Therefore,: a,5,3-foot frontyard variance would be required.` The building would 'have a 40 -foot setback along Xerxe,s,Avenue, whereas the average setback onsthe block is 50 feet. Therefore, a -'10 -foot sideyard variance :would be required. The following items are attached to this council. letter: 1. Site plan; 2.: Elevation drawing; s 3. Zoning map; 4. Land use map; 5: Comprehensive plan map; 61. Variance analysis; 7. Staff traffic and parking analysis; 8. Franchise agreement cancellation; x' 9.. Photographs of site; 10. Resolution for parking contract. Zoning and Ordinance Requirements Section 3.33, Subdivision 3` requires that restaurants obtain special use permits before locating. in C -2 general commercial zon- '" 'ing' districts, and Section 3.33, Subdivision 4 -,sets standards which ks� restaurants:'must comply with'. Section 3.41, Subdiv sion 5 requires .that it be demonstrated that a restaurant would riot be detrimental to the public welfare. - F The following sections <establish the front and streetside sideyard s "etbacks in C -2 general 'commercial zoning istricts:' ol Subdivision 4; 3.33,.Subdivision 6; and 3.39, Subdivision 2. Section 3.40 Subdivision 6 lists the three co ditions which, must be resent for granting a variance. _P g g ,. Staff Findings The staff has reviewed the applicant's pro sal for a special use permit and found the following:, 1.' The proposed restaurant would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 2.; The proposed restaurant will not result in undue traffic on surrounding streets. r Council Letter No. 134 -3- 3May 14, 1979 3.; Sufficient: parking is available on the site for cus- tomers -and employees of 'the - .proposed restaurant. 4.< The proposed restaurant would be in compliance with all restaurant standards found in Section 3.33, Subdi- vision 4. 5. There are no sidewalks along Xerxes Avenue,between 66th" Street and Crosstown. 62, which poses a safety problem` for pedestrians in the area. A sidewalk. in this area is important because it would eparate pedestrian travel-,, d from automobile travel. This pedestrian separation is particularly important in areas such as this where there" are high traffic volumes. The traffic volume on Xerxes'' Avenue °is 4,730'A.D.T. On 66th Street, the volume is 18,100 A.D.T. -The applicants have agreed to provide a sidewalk along Xerxes Avenue and 66th Street adjacent to`the proposed restaurant, it is the staff recommenda- tion that a sidewalk also be installed ahong'Xerxes ' Avenue adjacent to Southdale Square Shopping,,,Center between 65th and 66th'Street`s. 6. The existing sidewalk along'66th Street adloacent`to the, - proposed restaurant site is too narrow to provide safe pedestrian /automobile separation. The existinq sidewalk varies from 3 feet to 8, feet' wide. Aminimum width of . 10 feet should,' -be maintained for sidewalk and snow stor- age purposes. The applicant has agreed to; provide the; city with an easement for the sidewalk, varying in width from 2 to 7 feet, and to construct the necessary 10 foot sidewalk. 7. applicant has not finalized the design concept for. signs to be constructed on the site, but has agreed to work with the staff on the final design wh n.'the design concept is completed. 8. The applicant agreed to provide a final lighting plan for staff review. 9. The proposed parking layout would be in compliance with city off - street parking area requirements'. The staff review of ; the ;proposal against the' three conditions. which must be met to grant a variance indicates that the proposal does not meet these condition. (See attached variance analysis),. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal at their April" 24, 1.979 meeting. The commission recommends that >t e'special.,use permit and variances be granted with the following tipulationsi: ;n fS i i SITE PLAN FOR PROPOSED COUNTRY KITCHEN RESTAURANT AT SOUTHDALE SQUARE PREPARED FOR: SOUTHDALE. SQUARE, INC. PREPARED BY: BRW, INC. APRIL, 1979 i t <; TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION........... I ............ .0............................ 1 EXISTING TRAFFIC AND PARKIE� CONDITIONS 2 Traffic Volumes ............... ............................... 2 Parking Demand and Supply ......................... 6.......... 4 TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS AND PARKING SPACE NEEDS 6 Trip Generation Characteristics .............................. 6 Parking Space Needs ............. 0............................ 6 DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC ACCESS AND PARKING PLAN .................... 7 Traffic and Parking Objectives 7 Preparation of Traffic and Parking Plan 8 Traffic Impacts of the Plan ... ............................... 10 Parking Impacts of the Plan ............................... 13 DEVELOPMENTOF THE LANDSCAPING PLAN ............................... 15 DEVELOPMENT OF THE DRAINAGE, CURSING AND PAVING PLAN .............. 17 Existing Conditions ................................... 17 Drainage, Curbing and Paving Objectives ...................... 17 Preparation of Drainage, Curbing and Paving Plan ............. 18 0 • A Country Kitchen restaurant is being proposed at the Soudhdale Square Shopping Center. The restaurant would be Rotated in the southwest corner of the shopping center site, on property now occupied by a service station which has been closed for several months. ERN has been retained to develop a site plan for the development. This site plan consists of three elements, which are: • Traffic and Parking _Plan • Landscaping Plan • Drainage, Curbing, and Paving Plan In order to develop the above plans, several key issues have to be addressed. These include: • Impacts of traffic generated by the development on the adjacent, street system. Capability of the parking facilities to accomnodate the parking needs of the restaurant as well as the parking demand generated by other uses in the Southdale Square Center. 17 -30 • Impacts of the development on existing drainage patterns and facili ties in the area: The process to analyze these issues and.document the recommended site plan consists of the following five steps: JIM RIP • Document existing traffic and parking conditions. 9 Determine trip generation characteristics and parking space needs of proposed restaurant. • Develop a recommended traffic access and parking plan. • -Develop a recommended landscaping plan. { • Develop a recommended drainage, curbing, and paving plan) 3{ 1 • 0 d' EXISTING TRAFFIC AND PARKING CONDITIONS To assess the traffic and parking impacts of a proposed development, it is important to gain a sound understanding of the existing situation. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Based on information provided by Hennepin County and on counts conducted by BRW, Figure I shows current daily traffic volumes on roadways that will be affected near the Southdale Square Center and volumes on entrances to /from the center. Major characteristics of these counts include: • Xerxes Avenue between York Avenue and ,66th Street serves 4,700 vehicles per day, which creates significant potential conflicts at t the intersections with York Avenue and 66th Street, both of which carry high volumes. • The predominant entrance to the SouthdaIe Square Center is on 66th Street just east of the Poppin Fresh Pie Shop. This entrance serves 6,411 vehicles per day, 44 percent of the total 14,418 vehicles per day using the five main entrances. Volumes on the other entrances range from 1,394 to 2,736 vehicles per day. No information is shown for other streets, such as West 65th Street and Vincent Avenue South, because the only restaurant traffic using them would be generated by persons who live in that neighborhood. �y j.. lL. L i U 'OS '3AV 1N30NIA f co /T OS '3AV NL!nSHSVM O 'P!9 L) u 0 CC) C) C) '3AV S3XHSX 'OS'3AV S3XH3X (D= N c,5 b,q Fo co z uj to LU r---j I . , _o o�; 0 0 mam O O U) uj 2 M -j 0 C.) X LL cc O z UJ (n u- UJ PARKING DEMAND AND SUPPLY BRW inventoried the existing number of spaces in the Southdale Square parking lot and conducted a parking usage survey during a peak shopping period. 1/ The survey consisted of counting the number of cars parked in each of nine different sub- areas of the lot at the following times: 12:00 noon, 1:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m., 5:30 p.m., 7:00 p.m., and 8:00 p.m. For each of the nine sub— areas, Figure 2 shows the parking supply and the number of cars parked at 12:00 noon and 7 :00 p.m., the two time periods when the restaurant would have a high level of activity. For each sub —area, it is important to note that the peak parking demand. occurred at either 12:00 noon or 7:00 p.m. 2/ Important characteristics shown in Figure 2 include • The only portion of the parking lot that is fully utilized is the spaces adjacent to the Poppin Fresh Pie Shop. Of the 74 spaces available in this 'part of the lot, 67'were occupied at noon and 68 at 7:00 p.m. • The portion of the main lot nearest the proposed restaurant site, southwest corner, had a peak parking demand of only eight cars, com- pared to the total 65 spaces available. I/The parking usage survey was conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday, December,20 and 21, 1977. The survey is representative of current peak parking demand conditions since existing uses in the center essentially are the same as when the survey was conducted. 2/The only exception is that the number of cars parked in the sub —area encompassing the northeast part of the main lot was four cars greater at 4:00 p.m. than at 12:00 noon. 4 OS '3Ab 1N30NIA LO T co to I-- CD r-- � 'OS 3Atl Ntlf18HSVM h w 3 'OS '3AV S3Xa3X r os� I i V Y Z r� � a LL t a 3 ,,_ V / W J is a i a o 0 � �tl CL > g g R Xul g g Loa # � .-. COL 4 �a zz a XW ac CL C7 � z a �J a N as LL w V) 1 TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS AND PARKING SPACE NEEDS The first step in the development and analysis of alternative traffic and parking plans is to determine the number of trips that the restaurant would generate and its parking requirements. 8 TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS The number of trips generated by the proposed Country Kitchen can be pro - jected by applying trip generation rates that have been determined through actual vehicle traffic counts at other similar types of restaurants. Surveys at nine similar types of restaurants indicated that the average trip generation rate was 164.4 vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area./ Applying this rate to the proposed restaurant, which would have 4,800 square feet, results in a projection of 789 vehicle trip ends per day. The restaurant traffic is expected to peak during the early morning and noon —hour periods, when volumes on the street system are below peak levels. The critical period in terms of impacts on the street system is expected to be the p.m. peak hour (4:30 -5:30 p.m.) when volumes on the street system e at their highest hest levels. g Based on anticipated hourly variation in customer traffic, it is estimated that 8 percent of the traffic will occur in the p.m. peak hour, with 70 percent of the trips inbound and 30, percent outbound. Therefore, during the p.m. peak hour (4:30 — 5:30 p.m.), the projected traffic volumes are:/ • 47 vehicle trips to the restaurant 0 20 vehicle trips from the restaurant i The directional orientation of these trips is expected to be: 30 percent to /from the north on Xerxes Avenue, 25 percent to /from the south on York Avenue, 25 percent to /from the west on 66th Street, and 20 percent to /from the east on 66th Street. This is based on the location of residences -within the expected market area. ' ' PARKING SPACE NEEDS The proposed restaurant would have 150 seats. For the type of 'restaurant f proposed, City Code requires 1 parking space per 3 seats. Based on these requirements, the total number of parking spaces needed is 50 spaces. "Trip Generation ", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1976. v DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC ACCESS AND PARKING PLAN 9 The process used to develop the traffic and parking plan consists of the following four steps: 1) Identify traffic and parking objectives. 2) Develop the recommended plan. 3) Assess traffic impacts of the plan. 4) Assess parking impacts of the plan. TRAFFIC AND PARKING OBJECTIVES Traffic access and parking arrangements for the Southdale Square Center affect a variety of interest groups, including Southdale Square, Inc., which owns the Center; tenants of the Center; Midwest Federal Savings and Loan; Cities of Richfield and Edina; Hennepin County; and residents of the area. Taking into account the concerns of these various groups, the following traffic access and parking objectives have been established: Provide sufficient parking spaces to meet existing demands plus the needs of the proposed restaurant. • Reduce the number of curb cuts on the north side of 66th Street be- tween Xerxes Avenue and Vincent Avenue. • Reduce the number of curb cuts on the east side of Xerxes Avenue between 66th Street and 65th Street. • Provide safe and efficient traffic operation on site to accommodate internal traffic circulation and vehicle storage at entry and exit points. • The development should not cause any negative traffic impacts on the adjacent street system. 7 • PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING PLAN In order to meet the previously stated objectives, the specific access and iparking plan shown in Figure 3 has been developed. Major features of the i? plan include: - • Closure of two existing curb cuts on 66th Street and closure of two existing curb cuts on Xerxes Avenue. Other existing driveways V to /from the Southdale Square Center would remain in their existing locations. • The layout. of the parking area is consistent with and incorporated into the Southdale Square Center parking lot in terms of alignment and design. • Southdale Square Center would have a total of 465 parking spaces, 20 more than presently provided. I �u • i I L I b W *� I - .., 0 1 3AV IN33NIA -------- - - - - -- ----- L 'S *3AV S3XU3X -I ,At j z • CL cn co LLJ L) LAI LL LL -::c cc F- in LL J LO z LU 2 0 cr) :E w 0 T- (.) D LU 0 LL La cc Cy (n LU M M 0 z • CL cn co LLJ L) LAI LL LL -::c cc F- in LL J LO z LU 2 0 cr) :E w 0 T- (.) D LU 0 LL TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF THE PLAN In order to assess the traffic impacts of the plan, it is important to pro- ject future volumes based on additional trips generated by the restaurant. Future daily volumes on affected roadways and site entrances, together with existing volumes, are shown in Figure 4. The growth in volumes on the affected streets (66th Street, Xerxes Avenue north of 66th Street, and York Avenue) ranges from four to eight percent. With the major street system providing effective access, the only restaurant traffic expected to use local streets in the area (e.g. 65th Street and Vincent Avenue) will be per- sons who live in the neighborhood. An analysis has been performed of the traffic impacts during the p.m. peak hour (4:30 -5:30 p.m.), the critical period for traffic operation on the street system. This analysis has shown that: • During the p.m. peak hour about 26 additional vehicles would enter the site from the entrance on Xerxes Avenue and 21 vehicles would enter from the 66th Street entrance. Neither of these movements is expected to cause any difficulty. 0 Peak hour volumes entering the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 66th Street would increase only 34 vehicles (one percent) from the existing 2,300 vehicles. With this negligible increase, no change in traffic control would be needed at this intersection. • Peak hour volumes at the intersection of York Avenue and 66th Street after the restaurant is developed are shown in Figure 5. The mini- mal increase projected is expected to have no effect on traffic operation at this intersection. Overall, the traffic analysis has shown that the restaurant should have no negative impacts on the adjacent street system. C i� r J i FZ- F lu w w 3 ow Z �w w U O 2 " �a 0 OS '3AV LN30NIA N v I llti9 �-- .i it 11. I II III.I iIIi'I II it -ii I^I Ilil ill �I � \J C H II!;!�',I�i II' II. 'OS '3AV NaneHSVM O I�I'� III II'III �!Il�llilill II �i i�i i�l�l vj O ' 9991 co I. ,I ��. CO f0 yr N N v S awemx83x .— p O �0 • TLS CD N c,5 s\ �b �6 O' Ilil — O iY W v rc /N Q �% 3¢ w �u uj V 1 I I i O O LO I C os 3AV S3x83x FI i O O �p O V Z 3 -a 7 W Cie a OFF L W 2 �o L_e U) W J O LL U UL H U � Q � Q � J �LLIo W� �W U Z Z a w O CO d' t-- L � w J O U LL OaC } J O LJ U v W Lu O m a' 1-:• • H uj ,ernco C: 0 � I a z I L Uo y., YE Q I Q } +00 l88 Lt! J �OO L O> Q ti Cl) V.j �.. t � (, D J 0 u. > =: D r. or Q Lij Y w IL a- o +`o W LJ CO. i I �- .. cot i) 'U` W I 0 W U cc ; 00 l ri + I .r (�f z 0 Lt! J � ~ O> z O� ti Z O z T Lo =: = N w Y w IL a- }. ~ z o U u d W w cn cot i) W U tY 1 O cn LLJ i w O > O � �- > w t7bbo �w Cl) o � v O LD OJ >. co U = Z z uj }— Y Q W Q Lr — It W uw.. Q W >W W CO W a Ct cn U to W X LL X 4 Z I 0 Lt! J � ~ O> z O� ti Z O z T Lo =: = N w Y w IL a- }. ~ z o U u d W w cn W U tY O cn PARKING IMPACTS OF THE PLAN As previously indicated, the restaurant needs 50 parking spaces to conform with City Code. Parking space requirements for other uses in the shopping center are calculated as follows: General Retail, 76,735 sq.ft. @ 5.0 spaces /1,000 sq.ft. = 384 spaces Poppin Fresh Pie Shop,'125 seats @ .33 spaces /seat = 41 spaces Therefore, a total of 475 spaces are needed to meet Code requirements for existing uses at the Southdale Square Center plus the proposed restaurant. The plan provides a total of 465 spaces, 10 spaces (2.190) short of the Code r requirement. To assess the implications of this situation, it is important to consider the following three factors: • Measured peak parking demand, updated to include the restaurant parking needs, as related to the available number of spaces. Utilizing the parking survey data and restaurant parking needs as per City Code requirements, Figure 6. shows the resultant parking supply /demand statistics. This figure indicates that the entire lot would have a surplus of 271 spaces, of which 93 of the extra spaces ( would be located in the area affected by the proposed restaurant. 3 • Parking demand for the Southdale Square Center could increase if 1= some of the existing uses were converted to different uses that ! generate more traffic. • The prime parking area for the restaurant is in the southwest por- tion of the Southdale Square Center site, the parking area that is most remote and least used for existing businesses at the Southdale jj Square Center. Based on these factors and the point that the parking plan is just 10 1:5 spaces (2.190) short of the Code requirement, it is concluded that the pro- ! posed plan provides sufficient parking spaces to meet the needs of the pro- -posed restaurant and all other uses at the Southdale Square Center. i C" y 13 9 • OS 3AH 1N90NIA i y N x N.. ID ui 3 aW l CO U, z C w LU N! v - O CL O 'OS '3AV S3X83X I i i i In x :D ID 'OS 3AV N8nSHSVM IN W j f i I i U OS -3AV S3X83X - i � 1 i i 1 3:uj ! W I i v Z zZ W -� XU W F- Z Q Q VJ uj W •J p Q LL I z L 1Ep U wU to \o zZ W -� XU W F- Z Q Q �Y W Q LL c� z L 1Ep U wU Q ocn a CL LL O CL Y z LU IL o c� W H X z ^ UA W j .. i VJ I a z I J CL CL N Q g } a Z o w Y cc CL 0 �.f IJ DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPING PLAN 9 The landscaping objective is two —fold: • To provide an attractive setting for the proposed restaurant, con- sistent with the character of the restaurant. • To coordinate the site landscaping with existing landscaping at other locations along 66th Street. The landscaping plan, shown in Figure 7, includes the following major features: • A sidewalk system near the bulding, extending around all four sides to connect with the parking areas and with the new sidewalk on the north side of 66th Street. • Four Honeylocusts along the south and west sides of the building, which will be sized to match existing Honeylocusts to the east on 66th Street. • A three —foot berm on the west side of the site which is beneficial in providing relief from the generally flat existing terrain and in defining the site. • Flowering crabs which provide a background for the pylon sign and a • terminus at the north end of the site. • Foundation plantings, located between the sidewalk and the building, which consist of Pftizer Juniper and massed potentilla in mulched beds. • Dwarf Honeysuckle to separate the sidewalk in front of the building from the street, provide some screening for parking east of the building, and continue the landscaping theme that exists to the east on 66th Street. • Accent lighting for the landscaping, and possibly building, features. This lighting would not illuminate areas beyond the site. A complete irrigation system will, be installed as part of the project to assure that the landscaping is maintained in a healthy and attractive condition. 15 i is r� 3 i I S " 3AV 1N33NIA �'S '3AV S3xa3x F N 2 H t0 3 b �I f U LU s N cr-� e3� Eno C7 ! ui F- O co 0 F ee`SSSS Or � All } 1 z d J a U z Q U D O W in L W ~`s W O a (� i:) LL W k DEVELOPMENT OF DRAINAGE CURBING AND PAVING PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS Flooding problems have been experienced on several occasions in the area near 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. Contacts with City staff, with consultant engineers who have worked on drainage analyses, and with the operator of the Goodyear Store have revealed that the floor of the Goodyear Store has been flooded by water up to one foot in depth. There is an existing bituminous curb on 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue with openings for two entrances from each street into the site. Most of this existing curb is in poor condition. An existing sidewalk is located at the outside edge of curb along the south �+ side of the site. This sidewalk continues east across the Pillsbury Pie Shop site. There is also a walk on the east side of Xerxes Avenue, south �? of 66th Street. There is no walk on Xerxes Avenue north of 66th Street.. I J I 7� F. DRAINAGE, CURBING & PAVING OBJECTIVES The objectives of the drainage, curbing and paving plan are: • Provide for storm water runoff from the site. • Minimize potential for flooding in the proposed restaurant. Avoid creating a disruption of existing drainage patterns. • Determine proper elevation for proposed building and parking areas to minimize risk of storm water drainage. • Provide curbing to present direct vehicular access into the site from 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. • Provide curbing to control on —site parking. 17 is 0 Currently drainage in the vicinity of the site is carried on the surface of the parking area north of the site and on the entrance road on the east side of the site. The surface of the parking lot for the Southdale Square Center slopes at a grade of approximately one foot in a hundred feet from north to south. Grades from east to west are generally flat. At the north l ( side of the site, an existing curb directs the flow west to Xerxes Avenue. On the east side of the site there is also a curb which prevents any flow from entering the site. Flow is carried southerly down the east side of the entrance road to 66th Street. Runoff onto 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue is collected in a storm sewer system. Flooding problems have been experienced on several occasions in the area near 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. Contacts with City staff, with consultant engineers who have worked on drainage analyses, and with the operator of the Goodyear Store have revealed that the floor of the Goodyear Store has been flooded by water up to one foot in depth. There is an existing bituminous curb on 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue with openings for two entrances from each street into the site. Most of this existing curb is in poor condition. An existing sidewalk is located at the outside edge of curb along the south �+ side of the site. This sidewalk continues east across the Pillsbury Pie Shop site. There is also a walk on the east side of Xerxes Avenue, south �? of 66th Street. There is no walk on Xerxes Avenue north of 66th Street.. I J I 7� F. DRAINAGE, CURBING & PAVING OBJECTIVES The objectives of the drainage, curbing and paving plan are: • Provide for storm water runoff from the site. • Minimize potential for flooding in the proposed restaurant. Avoid creating a disruption of existing drainage patterns. • Determine proper elevation for proposed building and parking areas to minimize risk of storm water drainage. • Provide curbing to present direct vehicular access into the site from 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. • Provide curbing to control on —site parking. 17 is 0 11 i' U PREPARATION OF DRAINAGE, CURBING AND PAVING PLAN The proposed plan is shown on Figure 8. Following is a description of the major elements: • Close the existing entrances from 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. This will be accomplished by removing the existing bituminous curb and constructing concrete curb and gutter continuously along the site frontage on 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue. A type B624 curb and gutter is proposed. • A concrete curb will be constructed along the perimeter of the on site parking areas to define these areas. In addition, concrete curbing will be constructed on the north boundary of the Country Kitchen site parking lot to prevent parked cars from encroaching on the east —west cir- culation aisle. • Pave the new parking areas with a 1 1/2" bituminous wearing course, supplemented with a bituminous base course where the finished eleva- tion will be more than 1 1/2" above the existing elevation. • As shown on the Landscaping Plan, construct new sidewalk near the building, extending around all four sides to connect with the parking areas, and with the new sidewalk on the north side of 66th Street. • The proposed building floor elevation is 167.2 feet. This is 0.83 feet higher than the Pillsbury Pie Shop floor, 2.33 feet higher than the floor of the existing service station building, and 2.88 feet higher than the floor in the Goodyear Tire store on the south side of 66th Street. Drainage on the site will be away from the building in all directions. No changes in existing drainage patterns on adjacent property will be caused by the proposed development. The site drainage will have no impacts upon other properties. Total runoff from the site will be slightly decreased due to the introduc- tion of turf areas. Presently the entire site is paved or roof area. The estimated present runoff from a 10 —year stormjis 2.6 cubic feet per second. From this same storm, after the 'site is developed, the predicted runoff is 1.9 cubic feet per second. Based on these findings, it is concluded that this drainage plan provides effective protection against flooding of the proposed restaurant and does not cause any negative impacts on the existing drainage system. a I� 'S '3AV 1N33NIA �(Tl HIM I I I Will IIIIII s 1 .1 Fri 1 11111111111 J Si > !S-_:3AV S3XH3X aI 3 P I- fA S F 3 - a �aa rQ V a v :lPl 3 LU LU E)s J Q Cl) 0 �g 3 3 3 o as CD MM C13 cc D U W z a z W J 0 C Z LU Z' co j 0a � o2S 0 • 0 The proposed Country Kitchen for.Richfield will be a j "New Look" 150 seat prototype. This "New Look" restaurant will offer a dining experience unique to family dining "Country Kitchen" style. Emphasis will shift toward the I dinner hour with a new menu and dining environment. The architectural style will compliment and blend with higher density suburban communities. Building materials have been selected to enhance the eclectic turn -of- the - century- architecture for Country Kitchen's "New Look ". Where fire zone one requires noncombustible exterior; materials, rough grained aluminum siding painted a putty color will be used on all sides of the restaurant. The mansard roof will be ' clad with charcoal colored 350 lb. asbestos shingles. In Richfield, special attention will be given to land- scaping, site lighting and signage to assure compatability with the neighborhood. Landscaping will be planned to en- hance the 66th and Xerxes location with a park -like quality creating a new gateway to the Southdale Square Shopping Center. All exterior mechanical equipment will be mounted on the roof of the restaurant and will be totally screened from sight by the mansard. Initially, site lighting and signage will be similar to that used by Pillsbury's "Poppin Fresh Pie" shop. However, further development in those two areas is anticipated as the facility matures. This develop- ment will be coordinated with Richfield officials. c: { °two N er i3R�ifi Lzzm Ai 2_ � I t �l s , i L' i n LJ 0 • II, V Z d g • • U Zoning Ma aK 1' ( 44C j o # i • a C _ - - _ # 0 i__ -134i� 14 i-4 44� Z 4 t ni a -- r "�iZo iY)ry eeOl 1 M Ji .41 j • _ •�` s °W8i+ -- k � �a r � I r•� a'' i a a + F 1 _ 1 ..•y.'. -y U r r�•' --^ jdyV \�'t ^z ; N w— o�. r ; Z6t76 isd Zf M 4 to La { v. i 9 � 4 f '� F _�1 n' 1 s T!�� -f i� •i.b .. 4 ` :,!!� , ^T �v?ii :4 s- 1 S' '1�•, t4 t°n t S • r LAO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE L -�- . "'Y'•TT -4T•� �F '-'c-; •�+� �, jam'+ —�- _ �' ��. � � ; GENERAL COMMERCIAL site M N E Nr '! '' r ro L o+ s. Land Use Map Tt `r- � ti �1♦ y� ato 32.45 A ,, E,;; I�b � � yv »z � : G y talo � 5 JIB 14{ Fs4 3 o 2810 2220 m — c QI C 4C 2820 t o sow; S r,; ' t + �; ^4�m i 2433 � h' _ �� • •� 3 M4 i�� t 2830 � ry rj oZ iZ •e ' O 1660 l i34.41,�'il �s Z ' ,A Mz tc�s I �Ily l.. c Wig • n 1675 f �F ;I 14 5 h . /680 ! N.Gi�N`S I Jt.JI 33 r 2415 J" !� M iy 65 Tn it , 77 X4 33 JO 30 h / 1 ! y ti s\ ~ \� �• �" •i ♦ ,, +/ Mi , v - site M N E Nr '! '' r ro t�1 Tt `r- � ti �1♦ y� s3 -4 - 4�, 5 14 PUBLIC -- _� T. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 14 la 1e ti ,a• �t 17 17 1} _ __t 9L. MULTI — FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" '' '�',,�; :� I +. j- r •s. J a ` 5 24• 1-7i COMMERCIAL t3' s,t7 w a Z. t. � Ty 1 _1 � 0 cnTr�ehensive development plan for the ity of richf field LAND USE: dwellings, multiple dwellings, description density principal uses Medium townhouses, and. neighborhood Combination of multiple convenience commercial dwellings, office, research Light and research oriented Mixed Land Use High industrial, hotel, motel, industrial uses. institutional, and retail Multiple High commercial 0 Convenience Low Combination of office, Shopping Area institutional, light and Single family or two family Mixed Land Use High /Medium research oriented industrial, units and accessory uses Residential retail commercial, and multiple dwellings two family units COMMUNITY FACILITIES: Combination of office, retail { commercial, entertainment and Public parks and open space Central Business eating establishments, small ® Public schools District High /Medium comparison shopping and service Churches or church-related L Mixed Land Use facilities businesses, institutional, Other public, quasi- public, or 1' 4 d 1 1 1 t� unite cu tura , recreaona facilities, and multiple dwellings Combination of single family adopted by the city of richfield this 15th day of January ,1973 dwellings, multiple dwellings, Mixed Land Use Medium townhouses, and. neighborhood convenience commercial Light and research oriented Industrial Medium industrial uses. Multiple units with related Multiple High accessory uses. 0 Convenience Low Grocery, drug, hardware. stores. Shopping Area Single family or two family Single Family Low units and accessory uses Residential compatible with single Or two family units COMMUNITY FACILITIES: { - - - -- Public parks and open space ® - - - -- Public schools Churches or church-related L - -- -- facilities Other public, quasi- public, or -- - -- private institutional facilitie ,TRANSPORTATION:. - - - -- Major arterial thoroughfare adopted by the city of richfield this 15th day of January ,1973 .10T :-IT 11 111 E ,,,..17 ,E I. t F'--- =Z=7, T .1 -.1 E 77"71 MLIM -11ZX .. .... .. .. • 0 • • • S T' A F F' T R A F F I C A N D P A R K I N G A N A L Y S I S TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Trip Generation Former Use: A Sinclair Service Station formerly occupied the site. According to studies conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, service stations have average trip generation rates of 748 vehicle trip ends per day. Proposed Use: :Institute of Transportation Engineers studies indicate that restaurants similar to the pro- posed restaurant generate 164.4 average vehi- cle trip ends per day for each 1,000 square feet of floor area. The proposed restaurant would have 4,800 square feet. This would mean that 789 vehicle trip ends per day would be generated by the proposed restaurant. The proposed restaurant would generate 41 vehicle .trip ends per day more than the former use. Traffic Flow: Four existing driveways, two on 66th Street and two on Xerxes Avenue, will be closed as a part of the restaurant development. This will result in safer traffic conditions by reducing sources of conflicting turning movements. This is consistent with city and county policies for reducing the number of driveways on major streets to reduce accident potential. Existing traffic flow in the shopping center will not be adversely affected by the proposed restaurant development. Conclusion: The proposed restaurant development will not create undue traffic hazards or traffic congestion. PARKING ANALYSIS Parking Requirements: Retail Commercial Uses: One space for each 200 square feet of floor area Restaurant Uses: One space for each three seats Number of Spaces Required: Retail Commercial Uses: 76,735 square feet 76,735 _ 200 = 384 spaces Poppin Fresh Pie Shop: 125 seats 125 _ 3 = 42 spaces Proposed Restaurant: 150 seats 150 = 3 = 50 spaces Total Required: 476 spaces _2_ Number of Spaces Provided: 465 spaces Conclusion: The shopping center would be 11 spaces short of what is required by city parking guidelines. The applicant's parking utilization study indi- cates that the portion of the shopping center parking lot adjacent to the proposed restaurant is underutilized. We would concur with that conclusion. If the shopping center uses change in the near future to higher volume uses, the parking lot utilization could change. We would conclude that there is sufficient parking on the site to handle the existing uses and the proposed restaurant use. • • 0 V A R. T A N C F A N A L Y S I S Condition 1: That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the particular land, building, or use referred to in the application, not common to other properties in this district or similar districts. There are special conditions present on the site. The required front and streetside sideyard setback requirements in this case are greater than is normally required in general commercial districts. This is because more than 25 per cent of buildings on the block have been developed with setbacks greater than the normally required 40 feet. The required setbacks are the average setbacks on the blocks or 50 feet on Xerxes and 88 feet.on 66th Street. The intent of this requirement is to insure orderly aesthetic development. The proposed building would meet this intent. The proposed building would meet the normal setback requirement of 40 feet along Xerxes and because of its separation from the portion of shopping center fronting on Xerxes, an aesthetic appearance would be maintained. The main portion of the proposed building (excluding the entry porch) would also meet the normal setback requirement of 40 feet along 66th Street. The entry porch would be set back 35 feet which would equal that of the adjacent Poppin Fresh Pie Shop. It would present an aesthetic appearance. Condition 2 That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial pro- perty rights. The variance is not necessary to preserve substantial property rights. The denial of the variance would not prevent the property owners from using the pro- perty. The existing service station use could be maintained or a new commercial building'Icould be constructed to meet setback requirements. Conditibn 3: That the granting of the application wi ally or adversely affect the health and persons residing or working in the neig the property of the applicant and will ally detrimental to the public welfare to property or improvements in the n 1 not materi- safety of borhood of of be materi- r injurious borhood. The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare. The proposed development would have a positive effect on the aesthetic appearance of the corner. Substantial landscaping will be put in which will soften the appearance of thelsite. The aesthetic apperance is important because the area has a high visibility and it is a gateway to the com- munity. It is important that the site presents a positive image for the community. No undue traffic congestion or hazards will result from the proposal. There will be no adverse impacts on surrounding property. KITCHEN Cozialry lrlche,,afalera.?Iloaallar.. zeoamalmParkavy, Mimeapolis, Mioneso /.755920 /612fB54-6333 March 19, 1979 Country Kitchen of Richfield, Inc. William D. Willhite Verne E. Betlach Curtis 0. Hogenson Gentlemen: Reference is made to an Agreement dated May 23, 1978 between COUNTRY KITCHEN INTERNATIONAL, INC., Country Kitchen of Richfield, Inc., William D. Willhite, Verne E. Betlach and Curtis 0. Hogenson. This will confirm that the parties hereto mutually agree that said Agreement is hereby terminated and cancelled and shall have no further force or • effect and the parties are released from all obligations and'liabilities thereunder. If the above is in accordance with your understanding and agreement please sign the duplicate copy of this letter in the indicated place. Country Kitchen of Richfield, Inc. By Its zs 7 William D. Willhite Verne E. Betlach • Curtis T7 .' :, 6** 0. Hogenson !� iaxdQSsiri3wsCov,Ani�/ COUNTRY KITCHEN INTEP.N IONAL, INC. By Its Executive Vice President ]A J / V SITE PHOTOGRAPHS • "S • W D 2 W w P4 W O x w w H H U) H W W a N +J 0 x w w H H U1 w w H H O P4 w w a a of w a Q x H O m W a U) W a Q x N x 0 O a w w N H RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT AND CONTRACT FOR OFF STREET PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICATION NO. CONTRACT NO. Carlson Properties Inc. 12805 Highway 55, Minneapolis Location: 3020 W. 66th Street Use: Restaurant BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the proposed geometric layout of the off - street parking as contained in Off- Street Parking Application No. Contract No. is hereby approved subject to and upon completion of performance of the contract for such off - street parking as herein- after authorized. 2. That the proposed off - street parking contract for the improvement of said off - street parking, bearing Contract No. be placed on file and that the acting city manager be authorized to sign said contract and the Clerk be authorized to seal the same for and on behalf of this city. 3. That the off - street parking operator's bond for the performance of the conditions of said off - street parking contract, in the amount of appears as Surety, is hereby approved. 4. That responsibility for the proper upkeep and maintenance of said Off - Street Parking lot shall remain the responsibility of the off - street parking lot operator in accordance with ',Ordinance Code 4.05. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1979. I Loren L. Law, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk s' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA - Office of C'it M ana Y g er Council Letter NO. 133 Agenda =.May 14, 1979 The Honorable Mayord' and Members of the City 'Council City, of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Request for Special Use Permit and Off- street . Parking- Contract, 7444 Lynda le Avenue South Robert W. Grant, Richfield Transmission Center; is request ing a special use permit to allow.Constructionyof a!33' X 20' addition onto the rear of the existing building. The addition' would provide two storage rooms. The site is- 'z.oned C -2, general Y commercial. In 1974,,a vacant gasoline service station on the. property at 7444 Lyndale Avenue South was re- opened as a public; garage " " -; transmission center. The service station and 'gublic garage which have been located on this property, had both received special use permits. However, because the applicant is changing "the size of .� the original building, it is- necessary for the especial use permit to be amended. It is also necessary for the existing off- street, parking agreement to be amended: The following.items are attached to this c;ounctl letter: 1. Site map; 2. Zoning map; 3. - Land use map; 4. Comprehensive plan;` 5. Parking analysis,. Zoning and Ordinance Requirements Section 3.33, Subdivision 2 requires that .gara es obtain special use permits. The garage must obtain anothey special use permit for any additions =. Section 3.33, Subdi.,isior.3 establishes standards with ;which public garages must comply. Section 3.41; `.. Subdivision 5-requires that issuance of a special use permit would not be injurious to property or improvements in: `the neighborhood. Section 4.05 establishes standards for parking areas. , I i SSr219 csra7 AD1117 7Nr1S1A'3 /' .° i I ` d1 r 74 Ira Yd I 1 7N1 N7Y<1 i -7 rawd a - � a r I IN T I O I I i N Ig IL 19 IS WWi T i.El hl •n LL'°< < 101 111 dal I If LL I 1- - - - - -L .. 0 ] a „0;Sh I I �I I I I II « -1� I yNl l >I aMdl I I� u— y �r 1 01 4 = I•Tdh C—� ��o ESL 11� CL W I K 1 p� O cr 3 CL a t ei r 11 f i 1 I t � 1 I i 1 T i I I li I I I I3K I I I i i I t I I '`�� ' :.�)vl+raDyel � _ I hHI>labld I i 17r.,1>Itlad I I /-S.�� ' I ' i9L ESL Y B I I 16 181 91 [ IZ 01 I I J \ II SI ssbn7 II _Q N a I J to L Q nJ N" 0 p- C-4 W C �tk I cnOHU C M N t 'd v o Ts r-+ v .fie Ctl -� m rl P, I W v' I wi•� 1 � J � L ' r WL _J a u_ p ? a J o z a _ _Q N a I J to L Q nJ N" 0 p- C-4 W C �tk I cnOHU C M N t 'd v o Ts r-+ v .fie Ctl -� m rl P, I i I Go' d V 4 z ST. 24 • .4p'l 23 zz 21 4 20 4 5 5 N 17 JN Z 14 vi a 1 16 tA! ST. O j30.0 24 • .4p'l 23 k7;0-' 4 5 N 1 16 tA! 60 0 (n uj Zoning -.4 -L, 7 4 i4 LIMITED BUSINESS GENERAL COMMERCIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL A &.1 Iri: "u 'I A 4r* CO 4 Z4 f otb 4 a: If 416 LL L.L C3 In x 3o! ZA 3 uj 41ift 1 460 0 Ld .4 ZZ 3 21 zo -Z 9 _AW 17 15 Q-z KiJ 14 ST. 0 �A 24 o 23 • , .20 10 :4 6o r Land Use Map OWL O Mobile Home Park zo L) 4 L :;a • 34 IZ 3 3 u .3 5"a 4 4- r --- 7. 36 3c y.�,r...�._.�_ _ .14 - -- ;.-,_,'... • -- ' ---- ;�.+- -....-- :-t .._. COMMERCIAL' -,c 3 ct 01 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL `' ZI cn MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LIJ TZ 77 •c—, - A- t- 31 - -.1 - - - - —4 -,c 3 ct i � 9 (%.ia. �n aylev-lslve development plan for the ciiiy of rachfieid LAND USE: description density principal uses Mixed Land Use Mixed Land Use Central Business ,District i Mixed Land Use Multiple units with related High accessory uses. Low Grocery, drug, hardware store! Single family or two family Low units and accessory uses CowPdLlble with single or two .family units''; - - - -- Public parks and open space - - - -- Public schools Churches or church- related facilities - - - -- Other public, quasi - public, or private institutional faciliti - - - -- 1a,jor .arterial tnor;ugnfare f odopt.d by the city of richfiold this i�t� day of Janu a y 1973 Mixed Land Usd Industrial High Multiple Convenience Shopping Area commercial Single Family institutional, light and High /Medium Residential CC >MP4UNITY FACILITIES: retail commercial, 'Li0 .'°F U �qA - and multiple dwellings Combination of office, retail commercial, entertainment and eating establishments, small sT' i comparison shopping and service i4AW;P02TATION: businesses, institutional, i limited cultural, recreational i facilities, and multiple Multiple units with related High accessory uses. Low Grocery, drug, hardware store! Single family or two family Low units and accessory uses CowPdLlble with single or two .family units''; - - - -- Public parks and open space - - - -- Public schools Churches or church- related facilities - - - -- Other public, quasi - public, or private institutional faciliti - - - -- 1a,jor .arterial tnor;ugnfare f odopt.d by the city of richfiold this i�t� day of Janu a y 1973 Combination of multiple dwellings, office, research High industr al, hotel, motel, institutional, and retail commercial Comoination of office, institutional, light and High /Medium research oriented industrial, retail commercial, and multiple dwellings Combination of office, retail commercial, entertainment and eating establishments, small High /Medium comparison shopping and service businesses, institutional, limited cultural, recreational facilities, and multiple dwellings Combination of single family dwellings, multiple dwellings, Medium townhouses, ana neighborhood convenience commercial Medium Light Light and research oriented uses. Multiple units with related High accessory uses. Low Grocery, drug, hardware store! Single family or two family Low units and accessory uses CowPdLlble with single or two .family units''; - - - -- Public parks and open space - - - -- Public schools Churches or church- related facilities - - - -- Other public, quasi - public, or private institutional faciliti - - - -- 1a,jor .arterial tnor;ugnfare f odopt.d by the city of richfiold this i�t� day of Janu a y 1973 i 'I 11 t t r F r PARKING ANALYSIS Number of Spaces Required 3 spaces for each enclosed bay 1 space for each fulltime employee Number of bays 3 Number of employees 4 Spaces required 3 x 3 + 4 = 13 spaces Parking Provided 26 spaces I 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ' Office' of, City Manager Council Letter No. 131 Agenda May 14, 1979 bl Mayor h H no e T e o ra Y And, Members. of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject:. Request for Special Use Permit, Variance, - Street P and O ff r i n C ontra c t 6 4 20 Nicollet i. A Nelson's Family Restaurant legally existed on the site at 6420 Nicollet Avenue south when'a portion of the property was acquired by the c i t Y a s Par_ t of the L n. dale Hub Nic ollet Redeve l o ment Plan 'Street Im rovement Prog ra m The P ubli c acquisition _ � I: of,this property was necessary for the relocation, of 65th Street, although it also required that the existing restaurant building be removed. Lee and David Nelson are now applying for a special. use permit, variances, and off - street parking permit to allow them to construct a new restaurant on the remainder, of the site at 6420' Nicollet Avenue. The site is zoned C -2. The new restaurant would be constructed adjacent to the existing barber `shop and beauty shop on the north end of the site. The existing parking lot on the south portion of the site would remain, to serve the new restaurant as well as theexisting beauty and barber shop. The existing fence and re,aining wall along the west property line would be moved approximately six feet to the west to provide additional space for t e restaurant development. The area of the site is 27,000 square feet. 9he restaurant would occupy approximately 3,000 square feet and have seating for 75 persons. The applicant has agreed to construct the restaurant in accordance with the attached site plan and letters from Lee Nelson and Pope Associates. City ordinance provides that res- taurants can exist in a C -2 zoning district with a special use permit'. In addition to a special use permit and off-street park - ing contract, the proposed restaurant would requir a 12 -foot variance to the rear yard building and parking lot setback require- ments. Variances to the 24 -foot driving aisles an 20 -foot deep ' parking stalls requirements for parking areas woul also be nec- essary, Council Letter NO. 131 -2- May 14, 1.979 The following items are attached to this council letter: T. Site plan;' 2: Letter from Pope Associates,, 3. Letters from.Lee Nelson.; 4. Off- street parking plan; 5. Zoning map; 6. Land use map; 7. Comprehensive Plan map; 8.- Variance analysis; 9. Traffic and parking analysis; 10. Letter from neighbor. Zoning and Other Ordinance Requirements Section 3.33, Subdivision 3 requires that restaurants obtain a special use permit before locating in C -2 general commercial zoning districts. Section 3.33, Subdivision 4 and Section, 3.41, Subdivision 5 sets standards which restaurants must comply with. Section 3.41, Subdivision 5A, requires that the restaurant be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, the L /H /N Redevelopment Plan, the Urban Design Guidelines and city parking and landscape regulations. _ The following sections establish the rear.yard! setback re- quirements in C -2 general` commercial districts: 3.32, Subdivision 4 -and 3.33, Subdivision 6. Section 3.40, Subdivisi n.6 lists the three conditions which must be present for granting a variance. Section 3.29, Subdivision 7 requires that off- treet parking can be provided in accordance with city code, and S ction 4.05 establishes parking area standards. Staff Findings The staff has reviewed the applicant's proposaL for a special use permit and found the following: 1. The proposed restaurant would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed restaurant will not result in undue traffic on surrounding streets. 3. Sufficient parking will be available on the site for customers and employees of the propose res- taurant. -i Council Letter NO. 131 -3- May 14, 1979 4. The proposed restaurant would be in compliance � with all restaurant standards found in Section s 3.33, Subdivision 4, 5 The proposed restaurant would not be detrimen- tal to the public welfare. 6. The proposed restaurant would meet the goals and objectives of the L /H /N Redevelopment Plan,_al- though the land use plan specifies office type use n`'the area. 7. As proposed, the restaurant would be in compliance with the L /H /N, Urban Design Guidelines. 8. Additional information is necessary to determine- if the city's landscape guidelines will be met, and to determine if proper site drainage will be provided. 9. A new Hennepin County light standard is located on- Nicollet Avenue at the edge of the proposed ' driveway. It will be necessary to either move the light standards' or to change the driveway alignment. 10. The applicant has requested that the city install a.curb cut on 65th Street, to provide access to their, parking lot. It is. estimated that the curb cut would cost approximately $1,500 to $2,.000. iThe applicant is proposing to install a sprinkler system to water landscaped areas along the boulevard and to maintain the boulevard green areas, as a trade -off, to the city's installation of the curb cut. The city has budgeted no funds for -the cur cut on 65th Street. The proposed development would not meet city parking area requirements in the following ways: 1 The required 15 -foot rear yard between the parking area and the single family residences to the west will not be provided. The applicants are pro- posing to. provide three -foot rear yard and screen - ing fence instead. 2. Not all driving aisles will be the require 24- foot width. The narrowest aisle will be 2 feet 'wide 3. Some of the parking stalls will be 18 feet deep in- stead of the required 20 feet. The applicants are requesting variances to these re uirements." I n LJ 0 -1 a t t' hi NELSON ��- �► I!'1� IM L rn p 6 t n LJ 0 -1 a t t' hi NELSON ��- �► I!'1� 4 O' kh*'4, r i 2 Sp Pope Associates Inc. kn ` e f! r1t f-} 1 � � 11 i "Architects •Engineers •Planners ,7,, I°4, St. Clair Avenue •` St. Paul, MN 55102 • 612/226 -8894 f J yi r f� erg t }}} 4 - Z May 4, 1979 a 9 Mr. Richard Jopke Richfield City Hall °6700 Portland Ave. yr�fi` Minneapolis', MN 55423 J Y K Re: Nelson's Mr. Big Restaurant Richfield, Minnesota r, Dear Mr. Jopke: rl �, Enclosed please find addendum, #1 to the drawing on the above referenced —,,,',project. Changes to the original tracing have been made as noted on this addendum. Very truly yours, ' POE ASSOCIATES INC. I�17t4 • ♦ • �, Daniel M. Klecker s d r 1 DMK:kao Enclosure Si? F cc: Mr. Dick Krier Mr. Lee Nelson f Mr. Dave Nelson ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO PLAN NELSON'S RESTAURANT • RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MAY 3, 1979 This addendum forms a part of the documents dated April 6, 1979 (revised April 13, 1979( and modifies the original drawing as noted below. This addendum may apply to any or all contracts and subcontracts. DRAWING 1. Site to be graded to drain from northwest of site to new curb cuts at south and east. 2. Roof top units to be screened. 3. Noise.limits for exterior mechanical equipment to meet state requirements. 4. Exterior lights to have screen to shield light from adjacent property. 5. New .retaining wall at west property line to be precast concrete to match city selection. Approximately 3' -0" high. . 6. Existing sign for barber /beauty shops to be remodeled. 7. New sign. at southeast corner of site to rotate 900 (to read from north and south). Lee A. Nelson 6421 Wilryan Avenue South Edina, Minnesota 55435 May 7, 1979 Mr. Richard Jopke City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Re: Nelson's Family Restaurant Richfield., Minnesota Dear Mr. Jopke: On May 4, 1979: our architects, Pope Associates Inc.' submitted an addendum to the drawing for our proposed project. He made an error on item #6. Item #6 was only to indicate on the drawing gar ti, that the barber/beauty shop sign exists and its location. Our position regarding this issue hasn't changed from our letter to you dated April 18, 1979. • I would also like to assure ou and the surrounding ing residents that garbage collection for our establishment will not occur before 8 a.m. daily, Respectfully siAbmitted,, Lee A. Nelson • 0 We agree with the planning staff that a remodeled sign would be more presentable in appearance than the existing sign. However,, we aren't in a position to tell our tenant, Leigh Gardener: to remodel his sign. Air. Gardener recently updated his sign•and it would be difficult to ask him to do additional remodeling, We feel that in the future this problem is solvable, but definitely shouldn't effect our restaurant proposal now before you. Respectfully submitted, Lee A. Ne son We propose to use black square poles with black luminaires - i�y ,4 Nelson's Family Restaurant, Inc. t F 6420 Nicollet Avenue South 'An Richfield, .Minnesota 55423 .. located on the west side of the parking lots however, it may .r. Abe necessary to locate parking lot lights on the south and April 18, 1979 will be indicated on our final set of plans for your approval. ' City of Richfi3l€i 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55123 light pole interferes with our proposed curb cut, but if the Dear Rick Jop'xe s problem. In regards to our restaurant plans that have been submitted f th or e planning nning commission meeting p g on April 24 the following items need some clarification: , Parking Lot Lighting 0 We agree with the planning staff that a remodeled sign would be more presentable in appearance than the existing sign. However,, we aren't in a position to tell our tenant, Leigh Gardener: to remodel his sign. Air. Gardener recently updated his sign•and it would be difficult to ask him to do additional remodeling, We feel that in the future this problem is solvable, but definitely shouldn't effect our restaurant proposal now before you. Respectfully submitted, Lee A. Ne son We propose to use black square poles with black luminaires using high pressure; sodium. The design and implementation of the lighting system shall be such that it does not allow f. the amount of light falling onto adjacent residential areas 'An to exceed 1 foot candle. Our plans indicate two light poles r� K 1. - located on the west side of the parking lots however, it may Abe necessary to locate parking lot lights on the south and east sides of the lot. If additional lights are needed they will be indicated on our final set of plans for your approval. City bight Standard Location The new city light standard is located approximately 1109 -0" south from our north property line. The location of this light pole interferes with our proposed curb cut, but if the curb cut is reduced to 241 -0" the pole shouldn't present any problem. Leights_Barber/Beauty Shoo Signage 0 We agree with the planning staff that a remodeled sign would be more presentable in appearance than the existing sign. However,, we aren't in a position to tell our tenant, Leigh Gardener: to remodel his sign. Air. Gardener recently updated his sign•and it would be difficult to ask him to do additional remodeling, We feel that in the future this problem is solvable, but definitely shouldn't effect our restaurant proposal now before you. Respectfully submitted, Lee A. Ne son e � x � � v- �rrrs'r,.� � i > 4�- %rte a- � ; •. r f Ju '7P •l�ii'�iiii�r��l r a. �• 1 e � � a I I La 4 v? N 4 '00 zee rewV lcy!!� ti *WEST .00 00 - .00 I 0 Zoning M 'A : 4 t3 5.A JS 4p XzZC :4 ........... wl ........... T*.7 4 > . 04 7 p SO MI-WA 2a p"'o-op Emom /i - 1/<% V. kC -- ---- - .- - --- - . - ._ -.. -- I . - . I A . - - -- F-7-1 LIMITED BUSINESS GENERAL COMMERCIAL 0 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IV 31 r .7\ nom. r 5 Land Use Map ;UIl_.a , 13 ' b L N 7ii.5� H ! .I• ; iii.it .�� . N � .N Its y7 I I } i N Z i• , J IN r —r e a a ,3 xti 0 it i> N � ^� ..,i � � � IN} <` ,� rj of +tom a.�� d � .•I� iCb�� GO ,7�� i "WEST 64 1/7 STS ! 1 a 1 •� r a N W 4� 0 O d I i ct o = xLL io �o NI ® COMMERCIAL' SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL �� MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL • coMwehens ve' development plan for the city of richfieid LAND USE: description density principal uses Cumbination of multiple dwellings, office, research Mixed Land Use High industrial, hotel, motel, institutional, and retail com.mercia l Combination of office, institutional, light and Mixed Land Use High /Medium research oriented industrial, retail commercial, and multiple dwellings Combination of office, retail commercial, entertainment and Central Business eating establishments, small District High /Medium comparison shopping and service Mixed Land Use businesses, institutional, limited cultural, recreational facilities, and multiple dwei l i ngs Combination of single family dwellings, multiple dwellings, Mixed Land Use Medium townhouses, and neighborhood convenience commercial Light and research oriented Industrial Medium industrial uses. Multiple High Multiple units with related accessory uses. Convenience Shopping Area Low Grocery, drug, hardware stores. Single family or two family Single Family units and accessory uses Residential Low cowpatible with single or two family units COMMUNITY FACILITIES: Public parks and open space ® - - - -- Public schools Churches or church related - - --- facilities -- - -- Other public, Quasj- public, or private institutio al facilitie -TRANSPORTATION: - - - -- Major arterial thoroughfare adopted by the city of richfield thisl5th day of January ,1973 Al _.O rN - -� I _ [ • 0 • • V A R I A N C E A N A L Y S I S Condition 1: That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the particular land, building, or use referred to in the application, not common to other properties in this district or similar districts. Condition 2: Condition 3: There are special conditions present on the site. The city acquired approximately 22,600 square feet or 46 per cent of the total site area by eminent domain. Approximately 27,000 square feet of the site area remain of which approximately 21,000 square feet are open for development. This acquisition resulted in the removal of the existing restaurant. The variances requested are necessary to provide the applicant a reasonable opportunity to reconstruct the restaurant. Even with the proposed restaurant size the seating capacities will be considerably less than the original restaurant because of the small area open for development. That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial pro- perty rights. The variances are necessary to preserve substantial property rights. The city took a large portion of the site and the existing restaurant. The variances are necessary to allow the applicants reasonable use of the remainder of their property. That the granting of the application will not materi- ally or adversely affect the health and safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to pro- perty or improvements in the neighborhood'. The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare. The proposal will result in an improvement in the area. The new building will be more aesthetically pleasing and the existing barber and beauty shop will be renovated to tie into the new building! No traffic congestion or traffic hazards will be created because the proposed restaurant would be replacing the same type use. The proposed restaurant would have 75 seats as compared to 140 for the original restaurant. The abutting residences would be adequately buffered from the use because of the screen fence, the trade differ- ence between them and the restaurant property, and because the residences' rear vards abut on the rest- aurant property which provides sufficient separation between the homes and the restaurant use. The 22 -toot . driving aisle width and the 18 -foot deep parking stalls are consistent with what was approved in the Hub develop- ment and should be sufficient in light of the trend towards smaller cars. T R A F F I C SITE USE: TRAFFIC FLOW: nnT,T('T TT0 TnTT A N D P A R K I N G A N A L Y S I S TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The proposed use would be replacing the same type of use on the site. Less traffic should be generated because the new restaurant would have fewer seats and less space. Safer traffic conditions should result because of the proposal. No left turns into or out of the site will be possible onto Nicollet Avenue. Customers wishing to come or go to the site from the north will have to use the driveway on 65th Street. This will confine left.turn move- ments onto Nicollet at a controlled intersec- tion. The two driveways will be far enough away from the intersection to insure safe traf- fic flow. No traffi hazards or congestion will result from the a pro 1 PARKING PARKING REQUIREMENTS: Barber Shop square feet Restaurant: NUMBER OF pos . ANALYSIS /Beauty Shop: One space for each 200 of gross floor area One space for each three seats. SPACES REQUIRED: Barber Shop /Beauty Shop: 2,200 square feet; 2200 _ 200 = 11 spaces Restaurant: 75 seats; 75 _ 3 = 25 spaces Total Required: 36 spaces NUMBER OF SPACES PROVIDED: 43 spaces CONCLUSION: Sufficient parking will be available for customers and employees. • • 0 � 0 L kp o 2 7 49179 .'y Of tfickuww - !/' `. GP( ELI �� / /✓✓�� `/O.�L -t.r+K ./ li V(J /J/ /�r F A �� W N =�- - J �L.�.. � -�� j t k � ,y� �L.- -� ✓ .'tam.. -C �7 i J { I r, CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of, City Manager ` Couricil Letter No. 130; Agenda May 14, 1979 i -�k-o U-4 -10 The Honorable Mayor and Members of'the City Council City ° of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Establishment of Just Compensation and F Authorization to Commence Negotiations for Purchase of Lyndale ' Avenue Sidewalk and Landscape Easement Areas At the January'; 26, 1979, city council meeting, the council discussed the status of'the.Lyndale Avenue Public.Improvement x Project in the.LHN redevelopment area. At that time", the.. council approved a staff recommendation that the Lyndale Avenue t; improvements -be undertaken in 1980 rather than 79. The city must acquire certain sidewalk and landscape ease- ment areas in order to implement the Lyndale Avenue street m rovement ro'.ect. To permit 1980 construction; negotiations P P 7 P soon and acquisition of these easement areas must begin as as po,ssible.- At the April;9, 1979 city council meeting, the council` established.just compensation for most of, -these easement areas along Lyndale Avenue, and authorized the staff to:intiate negotiations for acquisition of these parcels.. Attached to this letter is a resolution :which establishes just compensation and authorizes the commencement of negotiations to acquire the remaining four easements along Lyndale Avenue. Just compensation to acquire all of the easement areas totals $212,200. It is.recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution setting just.compensation and authorizing; egotiations. for purchase of the Lyndale Avenue. sidewalk and-easement. areas. Respectfully submitted, J y e Wilde_ Ac ing City Manager JLW /.skb c.c:. Planning and Redevelopment `Director City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING JUST COMPENSATION AND PROVIDING FOR THE COMMENCEMENT OF NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF PERPETUAL EASEMENTS, LYNDALE AVENUE WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council (City) desires to make certain improvements to Lyndale Avenue in the area of the LHN Redevelopment Project; and, WHEREAS, these improvements . will provide for increased pedestrian and motor vehicular safety as well as enhancement of the visual image of the area; and, WHEREAS, the improvements will provide expanded roadway areas to accomodate medians and turning lanes and for the installation of landscape elements such as sidewalks, plant materials and street furniture; and, WHEREAS, to install these improvements it is necessary to acquire additional land from private property owners; and WHEREAS, the City has caused appraisals of the affected property to be made, has carefully considered such appraisals, and believes the work of such appraisers was performed in a competent manner and in accordance with applicable law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD: 1. That it is necessary to acquire premanent easements over, under and across the following described areas with Just Compensation set as indicated. For improvements to the roadway Easement Area #7 Richfield Investment Company The northwesterly 17.00 feet of the following property: Lots 8, 9, and 10, Block 3, Lyndale Shores on -blood Lake, according to the recorded plat thereof, except that part of said Lot s described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northwesterly line of said Lot 3 distant 30.00 feet northeasterly from the southwesterly corner thereof; thence southwesterly to said southwesterly corner;' thence southeasterly 40.00 feet along the southwesterly line. of said Lot 8; thence northwesterly to the point of beninnincl. For improvements to pedestrian areas $12,500 Easement Area ;:'12 6439 -05 Lyndale Avenue South S1O,000 That part of Lots 13, 19, and 21, Glock o, Lyndale Oaks lyino. sou,,,,.resterly c} line "X" and northeasterly �f line "Y" Line "X" is described as commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 20; thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, along the south line of said Lot 20, 102.75 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 43 degrees 32 minutes 29 seconds, 27.99 feet; thence North 43 degrees 09 minutes 20 seconds west, 125.01 feet; thence south 79 degrees 50 minutes 40 seconds west to the north- easterly right -of -way line of Lyndale Avenue and there terminating. Line "Y" described as commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 20. thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, along the south line of said Lot 20, 112.60 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence north 43 degrees 09 minutes 20 seconds west, 124.56 feet; thence south 79 degrees 50 minutes 40 seconds west, 6.56 feet; thence north 43 degrees 09 minutes 20 seconds west; 17.09 feet; thence south 79 degrees 50 minutes 40 seconds west; to the northeasterly right-of- way line of Lyndale Avenue, and there terminating; and, That part of Lot 2, Block 2, J. N. Hauser's Second Addition lying northerly and northeasterly of line "X" and southerly and southwesterly of line "Y" Line "X" is described as commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2; thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, along the south line of said Lot 2, 101.56 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 00 degrees 05 minutes 50 seconds West, 19.44 feet; thence South 89 degrees 54 minutes 10 seconds West, 69.53 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as point "A "; thence North 43 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, to the north line of said Lot 2, and there terminating. Line "Y" is described as commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2; thence on a bearing of West, assumed basis for bearings, along the south line of said Lot 2, 93.56 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 00 degrees 05 minutes 50 seconds West, 24.45 feet; thence South 89 degrees 54 minutes 10 seconds West, 72.14 feet; thence North 56 degrees 51 minutes 25 seconds West, 11.00 feet; thence North 26 degrees 22 minutes 24 seconds West 26..23 feet; thence North '69 degrees 28 minutes 59 seconds West, 10.09 feet; thence North 43 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, to the north line of said Lot 2, thence westerly along said north line, to the northwest corner of said Lot 2, and there terminating. also that part of said Lot 2 described as beginning at said !point "A "; thence North 43 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West 10.27 feet; thence South 59 degrees 54 minutes 10 seconds West, 20.00 feet; thence North 43 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, 29.00 feet; thence South 16 degrees_ 38 minutes 28 seconds West to'the northeasterly right -of -way line of Lyndale Avenue; thence southeasterly along said right -of -way line to its intersection with a line that bears South 59 degrees 54 minutes 10 seconds West from said point A. Easement Area #28 6634 Lyndale Avenue South $1,200 The northeasterly 20.00 feet of the northwesterly 15.00 feet of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 675, files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. � 0 � 0 � 46 Easement Area #52 6630 Lyndale Avenue South $11,000 The easterly 10.00 feet of Block 2, Fairwood Shores, according to the recorded plat thereof. 2. That the City Manager and the City Attorney are authorized and directed to commence negotiations for the purchase of the perpetual easements described above. 3. That the City Manager is hereby directed to notify, in writing, the owners of the subject properties, as soon as possible, that the City presently intends to acquire a perpetual easement provided negotiations result in the determination of a mutually agreeable sales price. The City Manager shall include with such notifications a statement which complies with requirements of regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24 C.F.R. § 42.135. 4. That upon the completion of the negotiations, the City Manager shall report back to the City with a proposal for the purchase of said perpetual easements which is acceptable to the owner(s), and shall report his recommenda- tions relating to said proposals. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk Loren L. Law Mayor it CITY OF RICHFIELD RIGHT -OF -WAY AND /OR EASEMENT AQUISITION ji� fw I AT .. ► +� ;�1, •a, .s s #• :. s' • �� • •r s �•• TOTAL AREA 106,.830 50. Ft. PARCEL NUMBER 7 RIGHT -OF -WAY /800 SQ. Ff. APPARENT OWNER SIC h fie Id BQNk e T YS f NET AREA Zm 030 SO, Ff. PERMANENT EASEMENT I I Lil TEMPORARY EASEMENT CITY OF RICHFIELD RIGHT -OF -WAY AND /OR EASEMENT AQUISITION TOTAL AREA PARCEL NUMBER- RIGHT -OF -WAY APPARENT OWNER NET AREA 1� PERMANENT EASEMENT 4397 Sq. Ft 1 I-y_ANNING 'HANSPORTAIIUN ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE TEMPORARY EASEMENT A "H•Ea A-E SE LILT cEiU INC ;OTA 55435 �:.i+ .��vK AvE Nt,E SUU'++ EDINA MiNNF.SOTA SSd75 i e 1 TOTAL AREA PARCEL NUMBER /Z RIGHT —OF —WAY APPARENT OWNER'ti NET AREA in PERMANENT EASEMENT 2375 -54. ,4 PLANNWG TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE TEMPORARY EASEMENT BATHER RINGROSE. WOLSEELD, INC 6121S31-2300 7101 YORK AVENUE SOUTH EDINA, MINNESOTA 55/7 DF HIGHFIFLE ��, ,,.r >:• ��} � ^k "'yam' A.�� °'�.z "irk t��' �� -..� �.. � � h rr �+ ~k. Ir, , CITY OF RICHFIELD RIGHT -OF -WAY AND /OR EASEMENT AQUISITION 0 TOTAL AREA , /7, /00 S4 Fi`. PARCEL NUMBER 52 RIGHT -OF -WAY APPARENT OWNER Tres Gnaw Music NET AREA PERMANENT EASEMENT /.37/ 54� Ff: in PLANNING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING. ARCHITECTURE TEMPORARY EASEMENT 6A7HEA RNGROSE WO TSIELO c'N s "'_612831`2300 i CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening April 26, 1979 Turf Sweeper Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for a turf sweeper as advertised in the official newspaper on April 18, 1979. Present: Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager Carl Marinics, Public Works Director I. F. Roesler, Public Health Director Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk Don Fondrick, Park & Recreation Director The following bid was submitted and read aloud: BID SECURITY TOTAL BID R. L. Gould & Co. B.B. 5% $4,100 Less Trade 600 $3,500 The Acting City Manager announced that the bid would be tabulated and considered at the regular council meeting of May 14; 1979. Thomas J. Moran City Clerk k . CITY OF RIC�iFELD, MINNESOTA d ` Office of City Manager Council .. Letter No. , 1128- . Agenda.May`14, 1979 The Honorable Mayor and Members'af the City Council it of ,.Richfield Council Members: Subject: Recommendation for Denial of Taxi Cab Priver License `The city has receivedsan application for a taxi cab driver 'r license from Mr. Shannon Timothy Kille. The background investi - ys." gation conducted by the Public Safety Department with regard to this application reveals that the applicant has accumulated six driving violation convictions during the 'past 'year: and one - half. These include a conviction for driving while under the influence of an intoxicating beverage, on December 17, 1978, and another conviction for driving after the - revocation of a drivers license-, o.n March 11, 1979. It is the opinion, of the Public.Safety Director,; in which I' concur, that this series of six driving violation convictions within the 'past eighteen month period is directly related to the license which the applicant is seeking. It is:, th refore, recommended that the city council deny this applidatiot for a_ taxi cab drivers'licen'se. Respectfully submitted J e L. Wilde A ing City Manager JLW /skb cc: City Clerk Public Safety Director 4 4 rt r CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA Office of City 'Manager. Council. Letter < No. :127 .. Agenda May; 14, "1979< Tle Honorable, ,Mayor and a Members of the City "Council :City of Rchf ield Council Members: r Subject: ',"Report on Community Facilities" Inventory In 1976, the Minnesot a, Legislature passed the Metropolitan t Land Planning Act. This act required each community in the metropolitan area to develop -.or- update its comprehensive plan, coordinating localdevelopment" withdevelopment plans for the metropolitan area..The Metropolitan Council is charged with reviewing. the local comprehensive plans and generally �coordi- Hating the; process for revising and producing the se"" local ` plans. t. In June, 1977, the. Metropolitan Council transmitted a systems statement to "each community which provides a framework for development or 'revision of the local comprehensv plan. A t that time, the' city council accepted the Richfield systems statement, and initiated a three -year process for`rev'sing and" amending the.Richfield- comprehensive plan. In Septem er, 19.77, the council adopted a work program for this comprehensive plan revision process, and in July,,1978, a comprehensive lanner was h'ired"'to "implement'the. comprehensive planning =program. The first "stage in the adopted work program provides that data will be gathered on existing conditions, problem E, facili- ties ; and issues in Richfield. This data is to be; the basis for reviewing andrevising the comprehensive plan. At th March 12, 1979.city council meeting, the council received repot s on the housing and land use inventories, and on April ,9f-,* 1979, the, council received a report on•the public utilities ihv ntory. -The community; facilities` inventory has now been developed. and reviewed by the planning commission. The community facili- ties inventory analyzes public and semi - public "r'ecrea ional and.community service facilities, including parks, sc ools, libraries,. and municipal-buildings and structures,, re iews the condition and adequacy of these facilities. A co y of this inventory is ' attached to this letter for city council review. t 77 T f CITY OF RTCHFIELD`° MINNESOTA Y , F Office '.o,€ .City Manager Council Letter No. 125 , Deferred May 141, 1,979 Honorable, Mayor 's and Members of. , the City , Counc it% City of, Richf ield Council Members: F Subject: Commission Vacancies'. The following vacancies currently exist bA',two city commissions: `Human Rights Commission Two three -year terms which will expire in May, 1982 tor' ;fill vacancies for the terms'of Ms. JoAnn Bloomberg and Ms. Bel en.Andrada which expired in May, 1979.' Neither df these persons desired reappointment to this commission There are also two one -year youth terms which will expire: in May, 1980. Nls. Dawn Nilsen, a high school student currently serwing.on the 'commission has .indicated an interest to serve another term. Attached are applications from Ms. Linda Bloom ren, a =' Richfield citizen, and Steve Sable, a student` who'= aye in- r _.;dicated -an interest in being considered for appointment, to this commission. I Advisory Board of Health There are currently two vacancies on this commission for terms which will expire in January, 1981. No a p plications `have been received for appointment to this commissio . Respectfully submitted ,J y L. Wilde. cting City Manager JLW/ ej a l ..o s j Date April 28, 1979 APPLICATION FOR CIT`' OF RICHFIEL '' u ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION APP �iil, ;��T�� 1979 Aj NAME Bloomgren Linda VjLhi1eWaWi manager Last i= irst INAic ie HOME ADDRESS 6220 Newton Avenue South Richfield 55423 Street No. City Zip Code MAILING ADDRESS (if different from home address) Street No: City Zip Code PHONE: Home 866 -7818 Business APPOINTMENT PREFERENCE: Planning Commission Human Rights Commission X Park and Recreation Advisory Comm. Civil Service Commission Senior Citizen & Handicapped Advisory Board of Health Advisory Commission Other Briefly discuss aspects of your experience which you believe qualify you for this municipal commission/committee and why you are interested in serving: Please see attached sheet. CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: Please see attached sheet. OCCUPATION: I am respon; ible for my two children during the Employing ,firm, agency day and I work 7 -12 hours a week at Korner Plaza. Address Korner Plaza, 66th and Nicollet Avenue South Position salesperson ;'ears w /firm, /agency four Other work experience (optional) From 1969 -1973 I taught fifth grade as an elementary school teacher in the Richfield Public Schools. REFERENCES (Optional) A. Mrs. Claire Brandt, Education Director of Oak Grove Lutheran Church Full name Relationship 71st and Lyndale Avenue South 869 -4917 Mailing address Phone number B. Mr. James Burkhardt, General Manager of Korner Plaza Full name, Relationship 66th and Nicollet Avenue South 866 -5071 Mailing address Phone number C. Rev. Harald Grindal, Senior Pastor of Oak Grove Lutheran Church Full name Relationship 71st and Lyndale Avenue South 869 -4917 Mailing address Phone number Return to: City Manager's Office 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield 55423 Att: Eileen Anierson � 41-.- Aspects of .my experience which- `I believe - qualify me for this municipal commission and why I am interested in serving: When I taught in the_.Richfield Public Schools, my goal was to pro -- vide the best possible education for each child regardless of race, religion, or family background. It was each child's human right to expect the best the community school system could offer him. I believe that as the community's responsibility to insure human rights expands beyond the child and his education, the individual's expectations can realistically remain the same. Each individual has the right to expect from his community the best possible opportunity to enjoy the human rights outlined and guaranteed in the United States Constitution. I would like to serve on a committee involved in making the value judgements necessary to insure equal human rights to all • members of our community. CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL, AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: During the past year I have been a sixth -grade Sunday School teacher at Oak Grove Lutheran Church in Richfield, a Mothers March on Birth Defects volunteer, and a member of a Hennepin County jury on a criminal case. My professional activities have been course work beyond my Bachelor of Science degree. My specific area of interest has been an American Studies series of classes which examined the value systems and ideals that have shaped American society and included such diverse reading as from Franklin and Thoreau to Charles Silberman and M. L. King. • mlw- MA • 4 ► � � � � t�1 Date L ",, "' � �' mAY 4 1979 n rlailub�f APPLICATION FOR CITY OF RICHFIELD City ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION APPOINTME?v?T NAME SWI3 (. c Last irst ivi!uclie HOME ADDRESS r.NrFI Li3, Street No. Citr Zip Cede MAILING ADDRESS (if different from home address) Street No. City Zip Code PHONE: Home C 9 —3 — Iq Business APPOINTMENT PREFERENCE: Planning Commission Human Rights Commission �, { Park and Recreation Advisory Comm. Civil Service Commission Senior Citizen & Handicapped Advisory Board of Health • Advisory Commission Other Briefly discuss aspects of your experience which you believe qualify you for this municipal commission committee and why You are interested in serving: �i/`..''(✓t` d .? G'�^1.� ��4 /2 �rl6VC? �,� \ �'f't.L� � �� - ,lrY.� 1�! c ''i��/`�'s ��C' 1 1�� i CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: OCCUPATION: Employing firm, agency Address'C 1 - ran -'{ /cT " Position `Tears w /firr,%agenc Other work experience (optional) REFERENCES (Optional) A. Full name Relationship Mailing address Phone number B. Full name Relationship - Mailing address Phone number C. Full name Relationship Mailing address 1; � Phone number Return to: City Manager's Office 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield 55423 Att: L.leen Anierson R ti