The URL can be used to link to this page

07-10-78 agenda4(40;1- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 213 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Vacation of Grand Avenue between 65th Street and 66th Street The HRA is requesting the vacation of Grand Avenue between 65th Street and 66th Street.. The HRA is the only property owner along this portion of Grand Avenue. The proposed vacation of Grand Avenue between 65th Street and 66th Street conforms with the L /H /N Redevelopment Plan, the K -Mart PUD plan and the preliminary plat which the council previously ap- proved. The vacation is also a requirement of the developers agree- ment between the HRA and Financial Properties, Inc. All issues involved in the vacation of this street have been resolved except for finalizing a tentative agreement between NSP and Financial Properties, Inc.. It is anticipated that this will occur very shortly. It is recommended that the attached resolution be adopted. It provides for acceptance of the vacation petition and establishes a hearing date on July 24, 1978. Further, it is recommended that first reading consideration be given to the attached vacation ordinance. Second reading would occur at the time of the hearing on July 24, 1978. Respectfully submitted, Y)i Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /jef cc: Planning & Redevelopment Director Public Works Director City Attorney PETITION FOR STREET VACATION CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Petition No. Date Received To: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota We, the undersigned, owners of land abutting on Grand Avenue between 66th Street and 65th street hereby petition that the part of such street, described Attachment A be vacated by the City of Richfield. Signature of Owners 1. Record Owners and Legal Description of the Property Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield, Minnesota Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8; Block 4, J. N. Hausers Second Addition and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8; Block 3, J. N. Hausers Second Addition. Examined, checked and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required number of owners of land abutting the street, alley or public grounds (City Code of Ordinances, Section 12.01). per cent checked by j Map Attached City Clerk All that part of Grand Avenue South adjoining Lots 1 through 8 inclusive Block 3, and Lots. 1 through 8 inclusive Block 4, lying between the extensions across it of the North line of Lot 1, Block 4 and of the South line of Lot 8, Block 4 all in "J. N. Hauser's Second Addition" according to the plat thereof of file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. .}�e�, e'�y4t. 4 r�sz�/�r•� '"'t3!��".i�"` ^i 1""'"i ��`it�+r -� Y��_r _'. -. _. t ygv tr_•�..a4�`'�•'.b."'Si'. ti-,;i - -.. 'i r4'+µ.`« Y•'S -:Y -~ '�- �� j� Y �.a rt �- 1 �,• :' ' -. �_ a31VOVA 38 01 133a1S JO NOU80d �. s9 ''�''•_a'�r " y f ��.• �.`ti:�:.ta:�. � �.:a..►� >: r � ,. �,a. +.a.....�! .i�;i: +f'� �i rs: � ..4 N011113d NO S3uniVNJIS cps ,r AD do VW :tom a :< _ " t r � - � e R t � - t ,c.'' •�. '► `. ; !2 ter-s ;r � -r `' iF� •sYr � �k{; i i a. _ ` �_ 4 �r r •rks�Y . c. . <..• � ::•.•. � :.•r:� �i:�i:� }:� �i'i }i: {:' } }i:• }:r, :; iii: �•• � .; ...... ..:: :.... . .:......: .. ..::: •:: ::•a: i }::i$:: a :•:C•:i•::.:..... -. ....... is i }i:•ii �:�a: };• }. X: : :':•a' n �ti; ;:tip �': Y •:,;:.v ter: .,5+,�•ry.:`:�t`. :a }.. .•.�vh:•a:.'•y,.. '•+,r{ •n �x ':rr ..,4 � `.e,. E�' S L: w ..HY7F :• l ��:� sx x• -� .-. ......,..........:: a,,. �. �•' r'.'•. •' s'.••• c:.: �s- .ti�4:..:,.: :a.•:,....... - - - -- ...................... ....................�a:,<s.:. -. ..---:...,...... ..:......a'I�,- �.'k..'�.,..�.�. z.. _ -$':• r yr .� s v, *'r rte- mss,,:' •�'Y"32.._ '•`t_ aaa,;� 't!'�p� 3-'s3t '3?�" k '" `.i7- 'e ^at- '.�'.� —i.•'v l'`�e4' -"'� -'j, .y. w... 7 3• _.ta. I .i+�# Cs•y -1 �:�"•T. '�'4 - i °,n ii )' -eS < �-:. r ,vC /�,., 5, -•r`:.;.: � � �� n s ?,� ;ti- g� +a''4'gr 6.: •'.:• _ r >! nc". '.�:t`"�, Y�•�'•+1` vwr.4.F a y,ex� L ,I,.. _ i�Y vs. •4 y+`'` - r- ,. _ �.+ � s..�?d" - 'r^r -E.�i S -,'psi iq` ,t• ?s c3RF��ti`- - �; ^�f :av "'s .� �a�Ci+'s2"�•,,� 's'�,.'�+ �t i r - t _ �',L. r'4` •.� � rt �i4i'c'.- t s. i •Z,°e --. + n v-r��>' K4~ as �1y�� C ;i. - -�� _ �+ } 1 t YI xi` ( •�- }. �. �` "tea r jl!4- tl6.y3S" tit .P i_. - a*' - �~_ + t Y � T.\r �.L• "0.1�,r•;�ERsj .>�. k Y �„ �,. -••� *""°# '!S� }� yc�K =ry• fi - -. - -5 -. rpt�'E` ar`" is �3- ,'r'a•- .•.,,�- s?- 3,:a,J.�. y.. ?1?e`�'S.' -:c s -1,, -x' a-4 i•w- 06 �. � ...{s, y ��•i� a',..r. s I ,� ,fi ''h / //� y� r+4.s.�� '• �'S #Z t a �`+'.� 3 ss . s 1 � „ti.�t.•: �• '¢ '` +s. i:s''.' �3�t �?�'� .�a.,,�'raft �a'L+ r�r` Y�Ri' - '�! V ''•L, za �'� °'""sc1 'a' � i,4�'�� `�`� J'�ri� • ��r. 7 ,q. "`�. -,s � __ - _ � �� _ `T�' �.si' �i4 `.*s..:j.'r� Vii- p-r,.. =x�.;$� -'� •k••i+�, ab�� t �.�wr€ �.ty'� +TM �.�J. -. _ t - #; E— .a, a,,4 r •4l- �..�.a, 'Z .c•'L x, Z- iiI1R .� `�:a�(�,i -- o�. :`t _ O �b' :..; "s" �' '#.. •�.��`ri�l^ rs 1��`d- a'h�"�, �>.�� ,B,y r. a � '.Yt�` - - th . � �,r % �. � +a.,:.r *3 "a a e2' F'.,u i.+k`� .� -s. r v� ,; !� -f ��, 4Fr��.'.•sr'tF_+�t `� E1 �Y - �. WR 9[r s - CC 1: ,a-�• -: c; � �z-z ` - r,.�.� � ��1,"+•..a�t'�a- �°i"�' Y � •� '� r uv�a�n .�+`�; •+. ^fib MW ✓a ' - - -. .�1-�'rrK �;i. ��}�iS.f�'x."�`,!'3Y�� 34r a'•Y fir �a �O�f "s',r� ,,,�+s.s�'.� .s �', ^�' ��°�� - � � -::. _ cam• t. - ' -�` F `� �i"� - -'.r _ k.` ;�•te -; 1` � . . �� ^w•�:z n.r'�' � :. ti,.., i 7- -- s w% 43 a =' �_. w., f+i�i"��"��'�°°.I��{•- alr• ".�,. - ;a •-,. 4; r - �� ?. -. 7.�-.ri�"�::�.•�t3 -r s-�'°y,�.... .'i;:s� .s. -x'.w� y_..r�s� �"`- 4S: i . . .r.{�r*.��...�;� -rr'' �4 "p .. ��Y"��ai tT r.s�'�'::�+• �",��j. : 0��2•�kx � '� •: �.,f� x_y' 1- x.i+4t +�.6.•:..:- .s: i '?q�4,�.�1'?•�•�i�.�'�+a±3', "'dT Ny� .'. ..Z'. ;...x ..-r iJ. s`i.j•4 ' fS,` °•z "43cq`••i - '... "mss r•. �0 r.+':- � �a ,.•,, !::"i•' � t '�` a,r�,_•,�.,.,+ ,ti,'"gy, .ri t � }i'p` a � : x`" � '� ��:'�� - s' -'�'. AV 61AM01- �3' d it�X ! .St d'�! -iY Imo` �Z�t+ {•Y_ fi'R �•► .� , - �. '�'+.•' 'Fu,a'i�.- x.e .y w s,,,rls'�•. '# -4'e} x�v s � er. r�•,t'•i �+?` ix ,�t, s� - s'`t -_ -. ?*scE .p1 f'c'yp s'�-"� in-, ' r � 5 �a :^•,�'' f't 'ry��ws�� !bb ;yL t..�TS tL V •f .i•4 .v.. F >1R v.JY Y 1.`, f y q 4ri'"`h'• i w � ? - • +��li [F 3 .}r. d.. ' �� _p,+t�., y�%a {iTq IC v7) -i >K 'r,•j^ *, r :T • +, s:` �"'ax. F '7f. !•::lC "Sa _ - & _1t' •; _- �'ye'. -+� a. z_� ti -' E, 3 '�l{c: • a"i�''�.��`�d,x• ' x�� r /�+� � �+� ia" ��7J. o- s, .. �?.¢ •.na�"SE � �T x �?i.�• -y€. , L s:. lk �`�.�` •%. •k:y 2=' °afk 5 •='tom £ 7 - • •:' - _..rES`.+.5 : -;7 >_ =t''; a .r , - +k �ir_...mJ•.''t,= - ., �� 1 Y �' F. - 4 4C err 2 wel fi y II 0 A OR Ica X 1;# fi y II Ll NOMT"FIELD AND SOUTHERN MR. f II CSI 0 A If A 7 all ,� f. a J 4 J Fif OR Ica X 1;# fi Ll NOMT"FIELD AND SOUTHERN MR. f II CSI 0 A If A 7 all ,� f. a J 4 J Fif uw 'o k Nv \Z ;1011 C) m _, Foi I JrZil"' It.-Ak. t1k: 21, E-A ....................................... Tr; I I ML� -o C,) 0 n 13 L o z,) ffl W 33 O C r T m cn M 'Q Cf) (= " - 0 DD mm m iijki: (3 g S C'O: Ch ni Fc NE 131 71, f 71' 4L Z' 'Ms� F-4 _ FG-G-4 " 7-1 1=4 00 bo > M 7) T 7-- 01 ..J �A fvr- uw 'o k Nv \Z ;1011 C) m _, Foi I JrZil"' It.-Ak. t1k: 21, E-A ....................................... Tr; I I ML� -o C,) 0 n 13 L o z,) ffl W 33 O C r T m cn M 'Q Cf) (= " - 0 DD mm m iijki: (3 g S C'O: Ch ni Fc NE 131 71, f 71' 4L Z' 'Ms� F-4 _ FG-G-4 " 7-1 1=4 00 bo > M 7) T 7-- 01 ..J �A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECEIVING a'TREET VACATION PETITION AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the vacation of the following described portion of Grand Avenue South: All that part of Grand Avenue South adjoining Lots 1 through 8 inclusive Block 3, and Lots 1 through 8 inclusive Block 4, lying between the extensions across it of the North line of Lot 1, Block 4 and of the South line of Lot 8, Block 4 all in "J. N. Hauser's Second Addition" according to the plat thereof of file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, said petition complies in all respects with the require- ments of Richfield Ordinance Code Section 12.04, Subdivision 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AS FOLLOWS: 1. The petiton for vacation of that portion of Grand Avenue Souuth described above is received. 2. A public hearing on the street vacation in said petition shall be held on July 24, 1978, in the Council Chambers of City Hall beginning at 7:00 PM. 3. The Clerk is directed to publish notice of such hearing in the official newspaper of the.City and post notice of said hearing in manner provided by Richfield Ordinance Code Section 12.04, Subdivision 3. Passes this 10th day of July, 1978 by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. Loren L Law, Mayor ATTEST: omas J Moran, City Clerk /1' __ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 212 Agenda July 10, 1978 k+f_A__0" .t I e X -d-Y S- 0 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Vacation of 65th Street Between Pillsbury Avenue and Nicollet Avenue At the June 26, 1978 city council meetin* a petition from United National Corporation requesting vacation of a portion of 65th..Street.was considered by the city council. The council passed a resolution acknowledging receipt of the petition and set-July 24, 1978 as a public hearing date for the proposed vacation. . The purpose of this letter is to present an ordinance va- cating 65th Street for first reading. The vacation will be from approximately Pillsbury Avenue to the west right -of -way line of Nicollet Avenue. The vacation petition from United National Corporation rep- resents more than 50% of the property abutting that part of 65th Street requested for vacation. Therefore, the petition is sufficient to initiate the process. It is recommended that the city council give first reading consideration to the transitory ordinance providing for the vacation at the July 10, 1978 city council meeting. It may be possible that both Summit Develop- ment Corporation and the Richfield Medical Clinic will have filed supporting petitions by the July 10 meeting. If this does not occur, it is anticipated that the supporting petitions from these two property owners.will be submitted prior to the public hearing on this street vacation scheduled for July 24, 1978. The utilities in the existing 65th Street will remain in place. The city and public utility companies will have rights of access over utility easements which have been granted by the petitioner and are part of the ordinance for vacating the street. These utilities consist of water lines, electrical overhead lines, and storm sewer. If the council approves the vacation of 65th Street on July 24, 1978 the street as it abuts the United National prop- erty on botft sides will go entirely to Summit Development Corporation. Normally the street would be divided between the adjacent property owners. However, this unusual division is Council Letter No. 212 -2- July 10, 1978 necessitated because the street was dedicated in its entirety by the former owners of the Summit Development Corporation property. The petitioner has provided right -of -way for most of the relocated 65th Street. The balance of the necessary right -of- way will become available to the city on September 1, 1978. Once new 65th Street is constructed and existing 65th Street is physically vacated, the city will bring existing 65th Street up to grade with-the Hub parking lot and the Summit Development parking lot as part of our L /H /N public improvement project. In summary, it is recommended that second reading consid- eration be given to this street vacation ordinance. Council action scheduling the public hearing on this street vacation for July 24, 1978 has occurred previously. Respectfully submitte'd, Wayne S. Burggr aff City Manager WSB /eja cc: Public Works Director City Attorney Planning & Redevelopment Director P1=;`L`i'ilUJ i''Uil 5'1'ilL' L'1` VtiC t�'1`1U o City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No. Date Received she City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota Le undersigned, owners of land abutting on 65th Street between Nicollet and Pillsbury Avenue hereby petition that the-part of such street, gibed Attachment A be vacated by the City of Richfield. Signature of Owners Record Owners and Legal Description of the Property Deil 0. Gustafson (Attachment B) Mobil Oil Corporation - Tract C Registered Land Survey No.:.692, files Registrar of Titles, Henne- pin County, Minnesota Richfield Medical Properties - Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 692, files Registrar of Titles Hennepin County, Minnesota UNITED NATIONAL CORPORATION United National Corporation - Block 1 and Block 2, Richfield / Plaza Addition B -- U Examined, checked and found to be in proper form and to be sinned by the required number of owners of land abutting the street, alley or public grounds (City Code of Ordinances, Section 12.01) per cent checked by Map Attached City Clerk Description of Street to be vacated: The entire width of West 65th Street; from the West line of Nicollet Avenue in a westerly direction to the following described line: Beginning at the nortnWest corner of Block 2, Richfield Plaza; then north 6 feet; then north- easterly 104.67 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest radius 262:00 feet central angle 22 degrees 59 minutes 27 seconds to the south line of Block 1, Richfield Plaza • according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the Of ice of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, P•iinnesota. SIGNATURES PETITION PORTION OF STREET TO BE VACATED 4t • CAN,*,& WE 1*1 WE W M WE ► k+ 4, Wl wag W—M qpw,,W. 0111F It -1 % -vm ---- :"._._._._.1 u Description of Parcel: All of that part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 --f Section 27, Township 28, Range 24, described as follo-:is: Commencing at a point on the East line of said quarter - quarter to a point 511.6 feet North alone said line from the Southeast corner thereof; thence West parallel to the South line of said quarter - quarter, 50 feet to the actual point of beginning marked by a judicial landmark; thence North along a lire parallel to said East line a distance of 174.3 feet to a point marked by a judicial land- mark; thence Nest at right angles 148 feet to an intersection with a line parallel to and 198 feet West of the East line of said quarter - quarter at a point 186.2 feet South of the South line of Rear range-ient of Nicol 1 et Homes Second Addition which point is marked by a judicial landmark; thence North along said parallel line 186.2 feet to the South line of said plat which point is marked by a judicial landmark; thence West along said latter lire a distance of 162.26 feet to an intersection with an extension of the West line of Blaisdell Avenue at a point marked by a judicial land park; thence South along said West extended line o= said avenue a distance of 202.45 feet to a point marked by a judicial landmark; thence East 60 feet to a point in an extension_ of the East line of Blaisdell Avenue, 14 feet North along said line from its intersection with the North line of the South 1/2 of the Sout_Zeas. I/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of said Section 27 which point is marked by a judicial landmark; thence South along said extended East line of Blaisdell Avenue 218.98 feet to the point of intersection of said line with the North line of the South 451 feet of said quarter - quarter �..hich point is marked by a judicial landmark; thence East along said latter line a distance of 125.26 feet to a point marked by a judicial landmark- thence North parallel to the East line of said quarter- quarter a distance of 60.6 feet to a point marked by a judicial landmark, which is in a line parallel to the South line of said qua rter- quarter; thence East along said line 125 fG -�t to said actual_ point of beginni., -1 ;. LL I ONI;� -4�: ' � I I i L-J PILLSEURY Allf 4-7 1--LET Nl� 7, Lj -cw�l n =71 i rz J�l j! fit 0 f 1- > . °A)PpiVq CM!') f o a n och.;-ki 50, t L '�• y..+'i ,._r>45` tn'1 '4�iK":$t.`'4'14 / /`°.j. �,..� f C. \��.:� /{ * 3`.. qv Y 1W it 4.1 A- An -4 1011, 1— i. w 451R� .. ........................ .......... s C: 0 U) Om OX O =z! m m rn mz mo sr 0 C() > m o -o z o >> 0 r: m 'c b— A7 --x- 13 o --i- tk, 0 -zi lo m> sc Pz o 000 4 rl f 'v� 11Z ML X r a 7, Ll 4, "N;5- - 1 7-1 Ic ;. 7,V --vu - T :--io- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 65TH STREET CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The following portion of the west 65th Street right -of -way is hereby vacated: "The entire width of west 65th Street from the west line of Nicollet Avenue in a westerly direction to the following described line: Beginning at the northwest corner of Block 2, Richfield Plaza; thence north 8 feet, thence northeasterly 104.67 feet along a tangential curve, con- cave to the northwest reduces 262.00 feet central angle 22 degrees, 59 minutes, 27 seconds to the south line of Block 1, Richfield Plaza according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 2. There are currently located within the street right -of -way hereby vacated certain public water mains, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, telephone and electrical facilities and their respective appurtanences. Said vacation shall be subject to easements running in favor of the authority or authorities owning or operating such facility for the purpose of operating, maintaining, reconstructing, constructing, and repairing such facilities over, under, across, and through the following described portion of the right -of -way vacated: "Beginning at the northwest corner of Block 2, Richfield Plaza according to the recorded plat thereof; thence northerly and parallel with the west line of said Block 2 a distance of 8 feet to the beginning of the area to be described. Thence easterly and parallel with the north line of said Block 2 and its easterly extension to the west line of Nicollet Avenue; thence north at right angles to the extended north line of said Block 2 to the south- east corner of Tract C, Registered Land Survey 692; thence westerly along the south line of said Tract C and its westerly extension a distance of 310.26 feet more or less to an intersection with the east line of Blaisdell Avenue extended; thence southerly along the extension of the west line of Blaisdell Avenue a distance of 9 feet; thence westerly and parallel with the south line of Block 1, Richfield Plaza according to the recorded plat thereof a distance of 600.64 feet more with a point on the extended Richfield Plaza, thence sout west line of Block 2 43 feet point of beginning and there or less to the intersection west line of Block 2; a along the said extended more or less to the actual terminating. Section 3. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to take all such action as is required to give effect to the vacation of the public street right -of -way as provided in the foregoing Sections 1 and 2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1978. Loren L. Law, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk r e�� CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Council Letter No-211 Agenda July 10, 1978 Council Preliminary Plat for Woodlake Investment Company Addition A preliminary plat has been submitted by Woodlake Invest- ment Company to combine Tracts A and C of Registered Land Sur- vey No. 1131 to create Lots 1 -5, Block 1, Woodlake Investment Addition. The property is located:at 6438 - 6444 Lyndale Ave- nue South. Attached for your reference are the following: Exhibit A - Preliminary Plat Map ` Exhibit B - Site Plan of Proposed Development The staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and made the following findings: Lot Size The proposed re- subdivision of land would create lots which are substandard in terms of the city's subdivision regulations. Lots 1 -4 of the proposed subdivision will not have the required 75 foot minimum width and Lot 2 will -not have the minimum lot area of 8000 square feet. Lot size standards are set up to ensure proper spacing of buildings to allow proper circulation of air, proper penetra- tion of light, sufficient access to structures by emergency equipment, separation of structures from negative noise and pollution effect of streets, and to provide open space amen- ity areas. Proposed Development The site will be used for the proposed Lyndale Business Center which will house the Woodlake Cleaners, Woodlake Vet Hospital Inc., and one other business. The Lyndale Avenue Richfield Municipal Liquor Store is located adjacent to the site and will remain. The proposed new Lyndale Business Center will be an 86' x 106' structure located on lots 1 -3. Where will be shared Council Letter No. 211 -2- July 10, 1978 parking with the liquor store. The new structure will be set up as a business condominium with each occupant owning his space. There will be a 20 foot landscape easement along Lyndale Avenue for the installation of pedestrian amenities. The proposed development will comply with city zoning ordin- ances, the comprehensive plan, and the Lyndale /Hub /Nicollet re- development plan. However, the standards for lot size will have to be varied to allow the development to occur. The lot size standard should only be varied if a business condominium docu- ment is filed with the plat. Because there will be a single structure on the site and the proposed development will provide for sufficient open space and amenities to provide the kind of environment which lot size standards are set up to provide. However, if the structure is destroyed in the future there is the danger of individual structures being constructed on sub- standard lots and a blighting influence occurring in the area. Therefore, it is extremely important to require a business con- dominium document which does the following: 1. Insures a continuity of design over the life of the structure. 2. Insures that if destroyed by fire the building will be rebuilt to a similar design. 3. Insures that the building does not become a blighting influence on the neighborhood. The utility services shown on the plat should be corrected to reflect new water service to be provided in accordance with the development agreement with the city. The applicant has agreed to make these changes. Staff Recommendation The staff recommends preliminary plat approval subject to the following conditions: 1. That Business Condominium Documents be submitted to the city to ensure that development occurs as proposed and that individual structures are not constructed on substandard lots. 2. That the utility locations and size be corrected on the plat map. Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission considered this item at their June 27, 1978 meeting and on a 9 -0 vote moved to recommend that the council give preliminary plat approval to the proposed plat with the two stipulations listed above in the staff recommendation. Respectfully submitted, �c s� 'g4 ' C Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager 3 LY�vvr�- -N--E-- Scale: dscape ement NI -\ 6 \l to�Mzi, / 5 PaG�a .• Eta P xy0 y� ``\ woc $ S \ �scs LEGEND 0—IRON MONUMENT 0—MANHOLE O -CATCH BASIN ®- GATE VALVE a- HYDRANT BASIS FOR BEARINGS ON ASSUMED DATUM ...13 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 209 Agenda July 10, 1978 , S - C) The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, 7229 Humboldt Avenue Sharon Brunner has requested,-a variance to the frontyard setback requirements of the zoning ordinance to allow her to construct an attached garage on the front of her existing residence at 7229 Humboldt Avenue. The following exhibits are attached for your reference: Exhibit A = site plan Exhibit B = land use map Exhibit C = zoning map Exhibit D = elevation drawings Exhibit E = petition Exhibit F = letter from applicant BACKGROUND Parcel size: 50' x 83.50' (4250 square feet) Existing Structures: One 24' x 35' dwelling Proposed Structures: Existing structure and a 16' x 22' attached garage Existing land use and Zoning: N: single family residential E: single family residential W: interstate 35W S: single family residential Existing Setbacks: Front- 30 feet from property line 73 feet from street Rear- 30 feet North side: 5 feet South side: 10 feet Proposed Setbacks: Front- 8 feet from property line 51 feet from street Rear- 30 feet North side - 5 feet South side -10 feet Council Letter No. 209 -2- July 10, 1978 .Section 3.30, subdivision 4, paragraph 2 of the zoning ordinance requries that structures have a frontyard setback of at least 30 feet._ The proposed garage addition would provide a frontyard setback of only 8 feet. This means that a 22 foot variance would be necessary. In order for a variance to be granted it must be demon- strated that the three conditions found in Section 3.40, sub- division 6 of the zoning ordinance are met. The city council should grant the variance only if they feel that all three con- ditions are present on the site in question. STAFF REVIEW The staff has reviewed the the three conditions necessary found the following: request for a variance against for granting a variance and 1. That there are special circumstances-or conditions affecting the arti nd, buil in or use re- Erred to in the a i.cation not common to of er properties in this district or similar districts. The staff has found that there are special conditions present on the site. The lot is located adjacent to Interstate 35W and on this particular block the 35W right -of -way extends beyond the street in-front of the houses being set-back from the 'road (Humboldt Avenue) a distance of 70 feet as compared with the typical 40 -45 feet. While the proposed garage would project 16 feet beyond other houses on the block, it would still be.51 feet away from Humboldt Avenue. It should also be noted that because of the drop in the rear yard, the narrow lot, and the high water level in the rear yard, the applicant is pre- vented from constructing the garage at any other location on the lot. 2. That the granting of the a location is necessary or t e preservation and enjoyment ot substantial Property rig ts. , The denial of the variance does not preclude the applicant from using the property for the existing single family use. However, denying the variance prevents the construction of a garage on the lot. Garages are typical in Richfield and can be considered a necessity in Minnesota climate. Therefore, it can be argued that the variance is necessary to protect the property right of the applicant given the other circumstances in this case alone. 3. That the granting of the variance will not materially or adversely attect the health and safety ot person s rest in or working in the neighborhood ot the prop - erty of the applicant and will not be materially cl-e-trimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. Council Letter No. 209 -3- July 10, 1978 The staff feels that while the proposal would improve the applicant's property it could be detrimental to the rest of the neighborhood. Front yard setbacks are established to: 1. Provide uniformity to neighborhoods. 2. Provide aesthetic front yard open space 3. Provide separation between homes and the negative noise and pollution impacts of streets 4. Provide open areas for the movement of air, for the penetration of light and for unobstructed views. The conforming front yard is an important aspect of the character and desirability of the Richfield type single family neighborhood.. Conformity protects views and aesthetics, and establishes and maintains the character of the neighborhood. A disruption in that conformity would have a negative effect on the character and desirability of the neighborhood and would over a period of time, create decay and blight in the neigh- borhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Because the staff has found the conditions which must.be met for the variance to be granted have not been met, it must recommend that the variance be denied. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The planning commission considered this variance request at.their June 27, 1978 meeting. One area resident appeared in favor of the proposal. The commission voted to recommend that the council grant the variance. Respectfully mitted, W&J'a � Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /eja cc: Planning and Redevelopment Director Public Works Director I& - - - - - - - - - - - - 30 8 3. 5 _ 8 24 bd _ 3 Q � Green Area JM.H. 81 Q Curb 5.5' wr VARIANCE 7229 HUMBOLDT AV. N30aa' 7229 0 _o �N Scale: I "= 30' E.K.S. 60118 14 15 rz 12 4% , . Ad4� ST. Land Use. Map _A kO CD lot )T. 4431 Lj IU Uf lee' `4 is '3 -.73 1 � I � KEStERTIDN'S 13 /::!fE$TE TONS > 'Ah n 13 < 02 7 n 4 fADD 1-3. FlrisT 1 7 177 4 < P � 7? A 0 4,0 7 otlo M l noo Add- I 'zoo Sit e r- A 40 A Wn lop 10 qi 31 > d ST. 14� 4 1 11 M 10 100 133.77 PUBLIC 71 41 co 7 X25? .5 14 1:4 N F14 14 3 w > Land Use. Map _A kO CD lot )T. 4431 Lj IU Uf lee' `4 is '3 -.73 1 � I � KEStERTIDN'S 13 /::!fE$TE TONS > 'Ah n 13 < 02 7 n 4 fADD 1-3. FlrisT 1 7 177 4 < P � 7? A 0 4,0 7 otlo M l noo Add- I 'zoo Sit e r- A 40 A Wn lop 10 qi 31 > d ST. 14� 4 1 11 M 10 100 133.77 PUBLIC 71 41 co 7 X25? .5 14 1:4 N F14 14 Land Use. Map _A kO CD lot )T. 4431 Lj IU Uf lee' `4 is '3 -.73 1 � I � KEStERTIDN'S 13 /::!fE$TE TONS > 'Ah n 13 < 02 7 n 4 fADD 1-3. FlrisT 1 7 177 4 < P � 7? A 0 4,0 7 otlo M l noo Add- I 'zoo Sit e r- A 40 A Wn lop 10 qi 31 > d ST. 14� 4 1 11 M 10 100 133.77 PUBLIC 71 41 co 7 X25? .5 14 1:4 N F14 El Zoning Map 10 fi 11 Al i5 7Z J'site j0d !, .; I , Q cl jr L�L P4 KI W 14 - , ) > v cp12 4 CL lip If 71 4Z Ll SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL c i F=4� 3 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 i I T -} r. I t y I ` i f 1 I FT- _71 , ul� +l i kid I I !n � s t I I Hl it i I ° i 1 _ i I i _� I I ^I!ItI I ►�iY1_I! ! I ! _ .......... li .I I � s t REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF Sharon Y. Brunner FOR PURPOSE OF building; an attached crarace to the front of my house-. Legal Description: Lot Fourteen (14), Block Five (5), Irwin Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the variance as requested. Signature of Owners Address Legal Description C'- I k4i�-D A/c. 50 S' 11,14 I--- -- - . --- -- I --- --- - City of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave. Richfield, Minn. June 13, 1978 To whom it may concern: I, Sharon M. Brunner, widow and homemaker for three child- ren ages twelve, ten and six, moved to Richfield approximately two years ago from south Minneapolis. I like everything about shere I live, primarily the school system and the convenience T fi.__r. - ecessit'r to ha,e � ^arn TA. :! Q (�� o_1. A t one _ -_ resent, 11 1 srl -re a (d rive °,`;ay the south. There are only ten feet between_ ny house and the lot line. Therefore, this makes it impossible to build a gar- age on that area of my lot. In examining the options available there is only one other that would be feasible, that one being behind my house. How - ever water collects in the back due to the layout of my property. To construct the necessary footings and foundation is prohibi- tive because of the high v.,ater table and the cost involved in :protecting the above mentioned footings and foundation from the %Vater in the low area of my backyard. The one area remaining where a ?ara -e could be constructed is by attaching one directly to the front of my house as shown on the plan which I'm submitting. The sound barrier in front well and also would shield the perty to the west. of my house serves its purpose proposed garage from any pro- I trust this explanation is adeauate. Should you have any auestions or should I need to supply any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Sfi77n''cerely Yoy, Sharon "1. Brunner F CITY OF RICHFIELD,.MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Council Letter No. 208 Agenda July 10, 1978 4-- -P Council Storm Drainage - Engineering Study General Technical Services Agreement At the last city council meeting, the city council requested considerable information on the flooding due to the rainstorm of June 25, 1978, and scheduled further consideration of this matter for August 28, 1978. On May 30, 1978 the city council also requested the staff to obtain costs for preparing preliminary engineering reports on the feasibility of constructing additional storm sewers in the area of 73rd Street and First Avenue; and in the vicinity of Washburn Ave- nue and 76th Street. The cost of the feasibility study and pre- liminary engineering report for 73rd Street and First Avenue and 76th Street and Washburn Avenue is estimated to be $7,850. Preliminary analysis of storm sewer problems requested at .►°f, the last council meeting include 65th Street and 15th Avenue; 69th Street and Columbus Avenue; 77 Street and Bryant.Avenue; 68th Street and Stevens Avenue; and.63rd Street and Girard Avenue.The cost for A9 am'� making a preliminary analysis of the sewers serving those areas is V estimated to be $3,500. Under the terms of the City's General Technical Services Agree- ment with Orr Schelen Mayeron, a portion of these storm sewers were analyzed earlier this year. It is necessary at this time to perform additional studies on the feasibility of actually making these im- provements and investigating the areas of flooding which have only recently been brought to our attention. Further, the city council is-desirous of having this information prepared by August 28 and having the consultants, who possess the records and background necessary to answer questions on the various complexities of the city's drainage system, present for this public hearing. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the public works dir- ector, in which I concur, that the existing agreement with Orr - Schelen- Mayeron be amended to permit preparation of the engineering A + Council Letter No. 208 -2- July 10, 1978 reports described herein and authorization by -the city council to increase the total amount to be paid to the consultant under the terms of this agreement from $5,000 to $16,500. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /eja cc: Public Works Director Finance Director CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager W Council Letter No. 207 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor v and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Proposed Ordinance Providing for Charter Amendment on Election of Mayor and Council Members Attached hereto you will find a proposed transitory ordinance which would amend the city charter with respect to the way in which the mayor and members of the council are elected. The prop- osed amendment was delivered to.my office by Gordon Anderson, Chairperson of the Charter Commission. On May 11, 1978 the charter commission voted to recommend a similar charter amendment to the city council. Attached you will find the signatures of several charter commission members who supported the May 11 action. At a subsequent meeting on June 29, 1978 the charter commission changed the effective dates in the proposed amendment. The attached transitory ordinance which has been proposed by the commission includes the changed implementation dates on which the commission acted at their June 29, 1978 meeting. Minutes are not yet available for either the May 11 or June 29 charter comm- ission meetings. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB /eja cc: City Attorney r Transitory Ordinance No. CHARTER AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO. 5 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: The City Charter of the City of Richfield, adopted November 3, 1964, as subsequently amended, is hereby amended in the following respects: (1) Section 2.03 thereof, entitled "Elective Officers" is hereby deleted. (2) A new Section 2.03 shall be added to the City Charter, providing as follows: "Section 2.03. Elective Officers. The council shall be composed of a mayor and four council members who shall be registered voters. The mayor and one council member shall be elected at- large. Three council members shall be elected from apportioned council districts in which they reside. Each council member shall serve a term of three years commencing with the1982 election. The at -large council member shall serve for a term of three years commencing with the 1981 election. The mayor shall serve for a term of two years commencing in 1981. When the amendment is ratified, the mayor and council members who had been elected to office under the at -large system, may continue in office until their terms expire. Prior to the 1981 election and everytime there is a United States Census thereafter, the city council shall establish council districts to be apportioned by population and area as nearly equal as practical." Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of 1978. ATTEST: Thomas Moran, City Clerk Loren L. Law, Mayor The undersigned members of the Richfield Charter Commission being a number of Commission members sufficient to recommend amendments to the Richfield Charter acknowledge that they have considered and do hereby recommend to the City Counsel of the City of Richfield for enactment as a Charter amendment by ordinance the proposed Charter Amendment Ordinance No. 5 amending Section 2.03 of the Richfield Charter with respect to elective officers. Jan R ay' Thomas E. Harms Donald Dacobsonl Sister Charlotte Ann LeClai - Earl Maffett Gordon Anderson Darrell —Deniton ' 9,,: 1 i f/ l J hnjLanders, Jr., Jeannie -Juen n � �//I.kjov, 7 r J � 4 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 206 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for variance at 7345 Columbus Avenue South Mr. Gerichs Sundquist has requested a variance-to allow him to construct a metal storage shed 2 feet beyond the established side - yard setback width on the streetside of a corner lot. The following are attached for your reference: Exhibit A - Letter from Applicant Exhibit B - Site plan Exhibit C — Elevation Drawings Exhibit D - Zoning map Exhibit E - Land Use map Exhibit F - Petition Exhibit G - Letters from neighbors BACKGROUND Parcel Size: 72' X 132' (9504) square feet) Existing Structures: Residence: ,24' X 37' Breezeway: 12' X 12' Garage: 24' X 24" Proposed Structures: The existing structure and a 12' X 18' metal storage shed. Existing Setbacks: Front: 42' Rear: 30' Interior sideyard: 10' Streetside Sideyard: 24' Proposed Setbacks: Storage shed would be 5' from the rear property line, 3' from the property line along 74th Street, 108' from the property line along Columbus Ave., and 56' from the interior property line. The Zoning Ordinance in Section 3.39, Subdivision 3, Paragraph 5 states that on a corner lot accessory buildings shall have a street - side sideyard setback equal to or greater than the established side - yard on that block. In this case the streetside sideyard has been established at 5 feet by the garage which is adjacent to the east. Council Letter No. 206 -2- July 10, 1978 The applicant wishes to locate the storage shed 3 feet from the property line so a 2 foot variance would be necessary. It must be demonstrated that the three conditions enumerated in Section 3.40 Subdivision 6 of the Zoning Ordinance are met on the site for a variance to be granted. The city council should only grant the variance if the three conditions are met. STAFF REVIEW The staff has reviewed the proposal against the three conditions necessary to grant a variance and made the following findings: - 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting t e. articu ar an d,' BUiMin& or use -fe'fFr—red to in the a i- cation not common to other pro2erties in t is district or similar districts. The staff has found that there are no special conditions present on the lot. The lot is similar in size to other lots in the neighborhood and in the city as a whole. The lot is a corner lot which narrows the choice of-possible accessory building locations but this is true on every corner lot in the city.. 2. That the &ranting of the aRplication is necesaarX for the reser- vation and en o ent ot substantial ro ert rights. It is staff's opinion that the variance is not necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights. The property could still be used for the existing single family residential use if the variance is denied. Although more costly other alternative locations are avail- able to the placement of the shed. 3. That the granting of a verse��a ect the or woror -in in the ne cant and will not be welfare or injurious Bo ood. the application will not materiall or -health and satety of ersons rest in i or oo o the pr o ert ot the a i- mat_eria y detrimental to the pu is to property or improvements in t e nei -gh- It is the opinion of staff that the proposal could be detrimental to the public welfare. The storage shed is quite large and at its proposed location could block the view to the east of people backing out of the driveway onto 74th Street. This could lead to accidents. Another possible detriment to the public welfare would be the appear- ance of the proposed building. It is staff's opinion that manufac- tured metal buildings such as the one proposed here are not aesthetically pleasing. They tend to have a "cold" industrial look and unless prop- erly maintained can deteriorate quickly. They are easily bent, dented, and chipped by such things as wind, hail, falling tree limbs and van- dalism. Metal storage sheds can detract from the appearance of the neighborhood and affect its character. Particularly because of the location adjacent to the street, the potential for adverse appearance in the neighborhood is increased. Council _Letter No. 206 -3- July 10, 1978 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Because the three conditions have not been met on the site, it is the staff recommendation that the variance not be granted. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission considered this matter at their June 27, 1978 meeting. No area residents appeared before the planning commis- sion concerning this matter. The planning commission recommended that the city council deny the variance request. The planning commision recommendation was based primarily on the adverse affect the shed would have on the neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /jef cc: Planning & Redevelopment Director_ Public Works Director 10t 78 r _ r , T TG i-I'll I n- -UL i. Id -. T - TI---- rewso-ns vIllv 1 -a-D --a to F-ble- to Z steel stores --a is: L.;; -; — 'J ; -- a 1. T'--.-- C 17 --jaCe 4-0 --:DUI 2. 1 h-ave 1 -et L) line. 3. drive-i-,,ay sloes up to-Itaras rmy were to --,u'u tl-_-_ buildinir where the Ins,-,ectcre�, say it should be i -,;ould -roble:2 c.-L" t -1,- co-nc-t= slab �c I laculd a cl-.a-n-e i.. -i 2-;�- feet -Crom tlie a e t��ad off' feet, the fence is located iz . - -, u 611 inside the side street lot lines. I will ccm- lJ - Ath- l ti-le -I u i--sd cc-:es. The load ratinl- oni tha rco-f cf the building: T'.-L-- side •--',Tld is 15 lbs. -,-,�er s:'. 't The slab rill bo 121U "0-:51 a,-, ro'n The bu'lluJinre- Is sju--:'el any "co +'-n-- cent ar i s, -e he.L� L.- - - U- 3ince-rely, is 27 lb s. v) e r s, ft Ccncrete U 734 -z-423 6-9-5102 U k. W a m m D J 0 U 74th ST. y 5' i M �f N Scale: 1 " =30 c.n�rr e Sears OWNERS MANUAL MODEL NO. 696.60659 12'x18' (INSIDE DIMENSIONS) CAUTION: Read Rules for Safe Assembly of Lawn Buildings 4 jye ry i lv 11* t, A S L A qN B U i L'U"""' 11 N • Rules for Safety • Selecting the Site • Assembly Tips • Tools and Material • Basic Fasteners ?S, ROEBUCK AND CO., Chicago, IL 60684 GU`dILNIJ • Assembling the Floor Frame • Anchoring the Building • Assembling the Building • Optional Accessories • Replacement Parts • Building Diagram and Parts List • Care and Maintenance IG v r c r c C f•' r L C C C C C- Ic f ' ..� i �i I �l •' i ' t . /.Z 4 jye ry i lv 11* t, A S L A qN B U i L'U"""' 11 N • Rules for Safety • Selecting the Site • Assembly Tips • Tools and Material • Basic Fasteners ?S, ROEBUCK AND CO., Chicago, IL 60684 GU`dILNIJ • Assembling the Floor Frame • Anchoring the Building • Assembling the Building • Optional Accessories • Replacement Parts • Building Diagram and Parts List • Care and Maintenance IG v r c r c C f•' r L C C C C C- Ic ��USCHEN _ (4 7, I "�i1r0? ` y.a 9.eoo . :j HE'✓OHTS c (4740) (4730 1Z Z� t-St -S_ a (510/) (,,slo) ° JOhnson Burwell - (If s6o)- (If 500 v:rsonl iharnPs - 1 • (/f 70) ur /ink :-� _ - . W (1530) Q W O (15 46) 90o). r-, (401o) 2 BsrJr»8l7n ° -' (6516) 1 • (1544) I a r PJufhe5 r- 133 ; 5 133.0 IS .' r- 133. r a (510/) (,,slo) ° JOhnson Burwell - (If s6o)- (If 500 �� •" > (5/69) (/f 70) (fsZO) PutZ 6411-we// ' (1566) (1530) Ne lson W O (15 46) (1541) 2 BsrJr»8l7n ° -' (6516) 1 • (1544) I 40 O O fl °° , J 3 r �7125� I ()322) W I ( I- ma� S � 131x1 6w o i31.Z 33 31 a ling Map M _ M (5174) ®133 -n1 w LS.4 ?I ;23.41 a• l �1 'Z z z J 4 0 co N 133.Zt ° 0 cel -1son 4 n 133. Z4 Q 133C �� •" > (5/69) OSo° ' 2 0 Q ,Oea(e. -sol 13 3.0 M.ss 13 3.33 W o (5l W o 13'1 3 t 1 ,•� . 0 0 \S0Oej a r 3 r- Q 5 133.0 IS .' LS.4 ?I ;23.41 a• l �1 'Z z z J 4 0 co N 133.Zt ° 0 133.11 1;3.Z4 133. Z4 Q 141= -131.1's 54,-' 3 133. 133.31 13 1P?' W* 4 M.ss 13 3.33 W 13'1 3 t 1 ,•� . G 03.42 a r 3 3.4 Q 5 133.0 r- 133. r 133 .4� 00 $ Q Q- G0 U ; 3e l 30 � 133.21 � . s..... :: 133.21 N Q • J.� _l t 3314 133.24 �f 15 ,)&D,O W 133. 13.ZP I4� 3 3. Q 5 133.0 + 6 0a i Z 133 13 13 3 133.3 133.4Z ti�`0130 -' Z 10 •� ,1000 7 133.4- )33.45 N r 133.0 133.41 r tai LIMITED BUSINESS _Z t MULTIPLE RESIDENCE 2 , r� �.rtt a. --.- ��-�1- - - • ., 1. ,• g • 07-11ROPTIq" �.�; >:31:�: ,.• 131:51; o _... �:..: 4 z N �:$;; 13ti�►1 1 1.56 :..,. Z 131-43 4 \h / . s..... :: co Q • J.� _l 1 a�st3 .e �f W sSoo Q 5 133.0 + 6 133 13 r • 07-11ROPTIq" �.�; >:31:�: ,.• 131:51; o _... �:..: 4 z N �:$;; 13ti�►1 1 1.56 :..,. Z 131-43 4 \h / co Ivy 1 J 0 co rte- 'YpOt N N �p0° ( �• ' 3.Z X110.2 °0 0 r r i•. 4 �°° &!,a 4 133.35 130.35 e 133.38 10.; Lu 135.4Z i Z ° V, °o 4 Qe3 . r N N o g�� ` 133.41 r 0 M o °,•o j I 13.•9] �rO 16r 1 :1, 0 °0 •. ° ° i4 , 3 0!32 'is.�Z: 0 4 ice• 132.'t °.. o° 12 5 U) 6i I333 °•'.4 3Z 33 I It IJ �w 9 80" N 4G 0.e•4 0 v_ V v v 13i: 131 'T r 31.T N 4 e ° Z r �I. 131.6 1411+ ° °: ao�50 3 131 54 '3i.9 4 318! :, i 12 ,�� °.',c° 5 r !) ! 13!• Q 132.05 p 132.05 e ' !3 .o! ° ! Z.0 r 15 �^ �,,�•' Z s '31, .IZ I 1212 14,0 i3 -: - - :5 Ij 13i !3' M 1° '�� ,•�5e 7 9 Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L co Ivy 1 J 0 co rte- 'YpOt N N �p0° ( �• ' 3.Z X110.2 °0 0 r r i•. 4 �°° &!,a 4 133.35 130.35 e 133.38 10.; Lu 135.4Z i Z ° V, °o 4 Qe3 . r N N o g�� ` 133.41 r 0 M o °,•o j I 13.•9] �rO 16r 1 :1, 0 °0 •. ° ° i4 , 3 0!32 'is.�Z: 0 4 ice• 132.'t °.. o° 12 5 U) 6i I333 °•'.4 3Z 33 I It IJ �w 9 80" N 4G 0.e•4 0 v_ V v v 13i: 131 'T r 31.T N 4 e ° Z r �I. 131.6 1411+ ° °: ao�50 3 131 54 '3i.9 4 318! :, i 12 ,�� °.',c° 5 r !) ! 13!• Q 132.05 p 132.05 e ' !3 .o! ° ! Z.0 r 15 �^ �,,�•' Z s '31, .IZ I 1212 14,0 i3 -: - - :5 Ij 13i !3' M 1° '�� ,•�5e 7 9 Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L 0 M o °,•o j I 13.•9] �rO 16r 1 :1, 0 °0 •. ° ° i4 , 3 0!32 'is.�Z: 0 4 ice• 132.'t °.. o° 12 5 U) 6i I333 °•'.4 3Z 33 I It IJ �w 9 80" N 4G 0.e•4 0 v_ V v v 13i: 131 'T r 31.T N 4 e ° Z r �I. 131.6 1411+ ° °: ao�50 3 131 54 '3i.9 4 318! :, i 12 ,�� °.',c° 5 r !) ! 13!• Q 132.05 p 132.05 e ' !3 .o! ° ! Z.0 r 15 �^ �,,�•' Z s '31, .IZ I 1212 14,0 i3 -: - - :5 Ij 13i !3' M 1° '�� ,•�5e 7 9 Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L 0 v_ V v v 13i: 131 'T r 31.T N 4 e ° Z r �I. 131.6 1411+ ° °: ao�50 3 131 54 '3i.9 4 318! :, i 12 ,�� °.',c° 5 r !) ! 13!• Q 132.05 p 132.05 e ' !3 .o! ° ! Z.0 r 15 �^ �,,�•' Z s '31, .IZ I 1212 14,0 i3 -: - - :5 Ij 13i !3' M 1° '�� ,•�5e 7 9 Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L Q 132.05 p 132.05 e ' !3 .o! ° ! Z.0 r 15 �^ �,,�•' Z s '31, .IZ I 1212 14,0 i3 -: - - :5 Ij 13i !3' M 1° '�� ,•�5e 7 9 Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L Lu W a 0 J W 3 33 G0 L 4L-USCHEN- iHEIGH TS 14 E. 71st ST 0. (1.5 C LLJ Z 31 Z4 Of ("r.;oo 7? 050, 15 ;v' 1� oQ • r!s__9 33 > Oz < 2 0. (1.5 C LLJ Z 31 Z4 Of ("r.;oo 15 ;v' 1� oQ • r!s__9 33 o Oz 14 2 L LLJ Z 31 Z4 13. 15 ;v' 1� oQ • r!s__9 33 V) Oz 14 2 33 Oft Z o 4 o "5.''2 < _j 33. 23 _j 22 < 3 �S v 0 00 .3 '33 4' A, 7 Ln .33 �P4 �a�v 1) ?4 45 11 A' Lj Nd cr_ CL vlz Land Use Map C) 3 L.LJ V- > < UJ -13 LLJ Z 13. -A' " oQ 3 33 V) Oz %00 3 2 33 Oft V o "5.''2 :D %(o 0 _j 22 0 2. v C) C) 3 L.LJ V- > < UJ -13 'Z LL.J to tO" F 0 :4Q) 30 < MULTI—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL b CON11MERCIAL 114 LLJ I . LLJ Z 13. -A' " oQ 3 33 V) Oz %00 3 co 33 �co :D _j 22 0 2. v C) L4 I c 7 'Z LL.J to tO" F 0 :4Q) 30 < MULTI—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL b CON11MERCIAL 114 LLJ I . 0 U m: L) LLJ Z C) oQ 3 V) Oz 4__ �co 22 co 0 U m: L) 0 - 2, �o -I 3: z 4 Aq 0 .0 6 % 5 i4 10 0 r �P A , Ld LLJ 0 _j _j ui 15 Z3 I 0—i oQ 3 Oz 4__ co 0 - 2, �o -I 3: z 4 Aq 0 .0 6 % 5 i4 10 0 r �P A , Ld LLJ 0 _j _j ui 15 Z3 I REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF FOR PURPOSE OF Legal Description: Blair's Wooddale Columbus 7th Addition, District 42 Plat 45030, Parcel 4500, Lot 9 7345 Columbus Avenue South We, the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, do hereby concur with the variance as requested. Signature of Owners Address Legal Description z- A /T c A I I - J I - I Va-Ak" 40 (,Vie Al S(Icrle "7 7-72 9 C f re / I I rdr w %'j4 -1 01 IT, 09 4'- -.7 =F=� CUP - I ti 71 01 Z, zi, :c4I !—se 9 'e., it --, ED o" f 17 ti Ef do 00" tt call rrl cn CIO jj Zi'2f I I rdr w %'j4 -1 01 IT, 09 4'- -.7 =F=� CUP - I ti 71 01 Z, zi, :c4I !—se 9 'e., it --, ED Ef do 13 tt call rrl cn jj it do 13 call rrl cn o it 13 I / r7 -7 C/ — Sl Ica � n ri - -R ) .t - 4-1 '17 jez, � 77 s Z02 IN: rz -� -14 ... CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 205 Agenda July 10, 1978 S -D The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Request for Variance, 6738 13th Avenue Mr. and Mrs. Franklin Duffy have requested a variance to the in- terior sideyard setback requirements to allow them to construct a second story addition to their existing dwelling located at 6738 13th Avenue. The following exhibits are attached for your reference: BACKGROUND Parcel Size: Existing Struct: Prop. Structure: Existing Zoning and land use: Exhibit A Site Plan Exhibit B Land Use Map Exhibit C Zoning Map Exhibit D Elevation Drawings Exhibit E Letter from applicant Exhibit F Petition 75' x 131' (9825 square feet) 1 1/2 story dwelling 24' x 32' and detached single garage (24' x 28') Existing structures plus second story addition over existing dwelling Single family residential on all sides Section 3.30 subdivision 4, paragraph 3 of the zoning ordinance requires that two story structures shall have an interior sideyard setback of at least ten feet. The applicant's dwelling has an inter- ior sideyard setback of seven feet. The existing setback will be maintained when the proposed second story addition is constructed. Therefore, a three foot variance is necessary. The zoning ordinance in Section 3.40, subdivision 6 sets froth the conditions which must be met if a variance is to be granted. The city council should only grant the variance if the three conditions are met. STAFF REVIEW Staff has reviewed the proposal against the three conditions which must be met and found the following: Council Letter No. 205 -2- July 10, 1978 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions attecting the particular building or use refer to in the application, not common to other ro ernes in this HiRtvirt or szmi ar istri.cts. Staff has found that there are no special circumstances present on this particular site. The lot and dwelling are similar in size to what is typical of Richfield. 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for t e reservation an en o ment o su stantia property ri ts. Staff has found that the granting of the variance is not nec- essary for the protection of property rights. Denial of the variance does not prevent the use of the property for single family residence. 3. That the granting of the a lication will not materially or adversely attect the health and safety oF persons re- siding or workin& in the neighborhood ot the propertV of The—applicant and will—not be materially detrimental to the public we are or injurious to property or improve- ments in the neig or ood. The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare. The proposal would be an improvement to the property, an investment in the neighborhood, and would continue the residential character of Richfield. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff has found that all three conditions which must be met on the property for the variance to be granted have not been met. We must, therefore, recommend that the variance be denied. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The planning commission considered this matter at their June 27, 1978 meeting, and recommended that the city council grant the variance. No area residents appeared concerning this matter. Respectfully submitted, V�j� Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /eja cc: Planning and Redevelopment Director Public Works Director J j I R e, -IN i-D c, -470 —U;?VEYCR8-- BL G. Fo UJITH PHONE: ATLANTIC 3DS, MINNGAPOLIS, MINN. For 24 a .7" 4� w `h4 451 M-1 mm''iei.f ";; imm%j tit.mmm tt,.1 2 is I V tL . `o Land Use Map K, � • r s r J ttl 0 `h4 451 M-1 .`—fit .b�'•41 w. — VIIJ EAST tt•. tt,.1 2 is I V tL . `o Land Use Map K, � • r s r J ttl 0 � N 110 c 1p° '100 .`—fit .b�'•41 w. — VIIJ EAST iP � I v j .o I N I I �I f - M F1 p PUBLIC I I. CO1 INlERCIAL It -PIDUSTR I f, L 'L 1 jj 1 1Z .a I IL rJ ^4r. 1k -! .lip 130?Ii t . � 13'•�� ,� . 4 r IZ,j a 4f � r • 1� b 0 y —/A l.> I 5 .l fSoo S�� Io0 Y 0 S11A � ci TZ - 4 w� .n �r4 W Q co 133.Yfs 40 .i11ti �t3) 1 �1t4 qe\o t � iO6o S`3O° h '4ya �j Ado is'' j�lo y � s j{.10 14 10 J l+ 44/a 0110 ,)11. bt Lift ISW ' 5. o , ^italtt� /w,th Ht E. W 1A t1M1C �wSO SI.10 —r.o W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: tt•. tt,.1 2 is tL . K, . tt • r J 0 iP � I v j .o I N I I �I f - M F1 p PUBLIC I I. CO1 INlERCIAL It -PIDUSTR I f, L 'L 1 jj 1 1Z .a I IL rJ ^4r. 1k -! .lip 130?Ii t . � 13'•�� ,� . 4 r IZ,j a 4f � r • 1� b 0 y —/A l.> I 5 .l fSoo S�� Io0 Y 0 S11A � ci TZ - 4 w� .n �r4 W Q co 133.Yfs 40 .i11ti �t3) 1 �1t4 qe\o t � iO6o S`3O° h '4ya �j Ado is'' j�lo y � s j{.10 14 10 J l+ 44/a 0110 ,)11. bt Lift ISW ' 5. o , ^italtt� /w,th Ht E. W 1A t1M1C �wSO SI.10 —r.o W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: y —/A l.> I 5 .l fSoo S�� Io0 Y 0 S11A � ci TZ - 4 w� .n �r4 W Q co 133.Yfs 40 .i11ti �t3) 1 �1t4 qe\o t � iO6o S`3O° h '4ya �j Ado is'' j�lo y � s j{.10 14 10 J l+ 44/a 0110 ,)11. bt Lift ISW ' 5. o , ^italtt� /w,th Ht E. W 1A t1M1C �wSO SI.10 —r.o W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: �r4 W Q co 133.Yfs 40 .i11ti �t3) 1 �1t4 qe\o t � iO6o S`3O° h '4ya �j Ado is'' j�lo y � s j{.10 14 10 J l+ 44/a 0110 ,)11. bt Lift ISW ' 5. o , ^italtt� /w,th Ht E. W 1A t1M1C �wSO SI.10 —r.o W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: 44/a 0110 ,)11. bt Lift ISW ' 5. o , ^italtt� /w,th Ht E. W 1A t1M1C �wSO SI.10 —r.o W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: W Q • I ISf 40 AdA r t Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: Z11. k1,° A }�1:1Q ,I,ZSS o 425. 4Z`s .t1? IVA 4A A I3 .; 73;'- �,z 11A 3 n 451° 4)�O ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: ?1I£ t; $ 144 t:a,- r n _ la, 1): 't r— Ii1 N ;L li ) ... A .� ♦6i0 �iIO _. _ s N _ A.: C. Zoning Map 61 E ST. EAST 131.3 61 .�7 z L It S It Lm j 4!_ uj .1 ST. ST 711 Tz S500 6N, 1-4 ik- V_q GENERAL COMMERCIAL' MULTIPLE RESIDENCE 0 VV < 44' WI! C. Zoning Map 61 E ST. EAST 131.3 61 .�7 z L It S It Lm j 4!_ uj .1 ST. ST 711 Tz S500 6N, 1-4 ik- V_q GENERAL COMMERCIAL' MULTIPLE RESIDENCE 0 .�. } _- :� . , i�: Ott•.. t,t _ Q -a i- . v (3 Cl c CY) E CL to cz cu E O cn _ c .�. } _- :� . , i�: Ott•.. t,t _ Q -a i- . v (3 Cl c CY) E CL to cz cu E O cn tZe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 If 'M wr—_ M Ln ri PO op r r ,-r I �;o cl Ii tr 11 k- 7-L C ..'q :. � ri , ��" .# • 9 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF FOR PURPOSE OF :1 Description: the undersigned, being owners of immediate adjoining land as above described, iereby concur with the variance as requested. Signature of Owners Address Legal Description -- 6' A —t , '" A927-'\ 112 — 3 S<� a 73 - 7-3 3 - i ;z a f. — C��a 7 - ut ee S(12 I I '" A927-'\ cnn Lj_ 4�.+ - 33."7, a. • +e c 135 y ;� `� „4 F.J. Christian ;`a io :1 •s Y •;.3 •Q. YI ` °J 2Z (5 - I_ •ti e ` ` ^�i ., ,S 4b ✓<'S 1��c ... 1"It 10 9� 4 155A ; y�;; } , a , . ° 210 _.3.. ' 1Z � ; M - I � s l: • 153 4: 141 O CO r~ 134- 0 17 u cn " EAST '! I X —„1q S_ .)0''0� ��2,,p.�� -O•. 053 ). • I 11: Sty„ 5 e �� t V -tai `°� V ,� '• �,� j.1o0 � �. ; ti> :iz L Lit 14 30 •S _� >t aC joc Ijc °., M 6 I b >= 14., -��- 2 :l` "?'� /f1 - - - -�•.– n ,121 _ o_ � -ti'.� I i1�J is 1 00 Srat '` _� ""''- -='� T ....��1, - j)lY C • s i. =- tL 11 4 1 •t,. .�, p :y), -1 1 U ':.t1 a. y�t . }S jO `13'i0 � �I 1� I '�9 W _;` •i rl ,� ,• Li1 �.s�z,� °C�i' iLj a�,a' , W -- �= •a to �0' 1��,.. 8 i , 4510 Ln .1 .asb — - -- -- ' -- - - - - — -- EAST-- — - - - -- -- s.. s'. t a T ao c 6600 At too bloo i 5114` Lj :.rte ♦ �� , e1 ,� M yy a` L %• M/ �? ~ loco v a \� q) 444 Flo S° rti i+1� S C - �vo Z '.V7 1•�, lop ,, .• .0 AC •4c EAST C, +y ,, _ � � ... =�— moo= 1 .r " (�Ic.) '�!.['•`o / - - t _- >�_ is �:• I A i _ r 77 I Id CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 204 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Application for Sign Permit, St. Nicholas Church, 7227 Penn Avenue Representatives of filed an application wi of the property located would be 4' 6" wide and above ground level. It be illuminated. St. Nicholas Episcopal Church recently th the city to install a sign in front at 7227 Penn Avenue. The proposed sign 6' long, and located on a pedestal 2' 6" would be a double faced sign and would St. Nicholas Church is'located in a residentially zoned district. According to the city's sign ordinance, signs in resi- dential districts cannot exceed ten square feet in area, or be illuminated. The ordinance also requires that signs be positioned at least seven feet above the surface of the street adjacent to the property on which the sign is located. If the city council chooses to approve this sign permit, it is recommended that the council do so with the stipulation that the sign be erected in such a way as to conform with re- quirements of the sign ordinance. However, in the past, the city council has on occasion waived this sign permit provision for other churches or institutions in similar situations. St. Nicholas Episcopal Church is requesting a waiver of these provi- sions and approval of their sign as proposed. Respectfull submitted, Wayne S. Burggra f City Manager WSB /eja cc: Public Works Director Planning & Redevelopment Director • �al j' t.�� +� V � S{ •�£ t f �_._�n iii �.� � tr� ` Y � l IL fie. =y • �al j' t.�� +� V � S{ •�£ t f �_._�n iii �.� � tr� ` Y � l /3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 203 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assess- ment Roll for 1977 Permanent Street Construction City Project No. 686 Attached to this council letter is a resolution initiating the process for conducting special assessment hearings on the 1977 per- manent street paving project. The 1977 project included districts 12 and 14A. District 12 is that area bounded on the north by 62nd Street, west by 35W, south by 66th Street and on the east by Pleasant Avenue. District 14A is that area bounded on the north by 66th Street, west by Highway 36, south by 69th Street and on the east by 21st Avenue. The total cost of this 1977 project amounted to $1,050,000.. The estimated assess- ment roll is $463,784. The city received state aids on the project totaling $41,688. The necessary balance will be funded through debt service levies. Following preparation of the assessment roll, this project will be brought back to the council for a public hearing later this year. It is recommended that the council adopt the attached eeso- lution ordering preparation of the assessment roll. Respectfully ubmitted, W&VA S -� Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB /eja cc: Finance Director Public Works Director and, RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR C. P. NO. 686 WHEREAS, the following construction was performed during the year 1977: Permanent Streets in the following areas: Street Improvement District No. 12 Bounded on the north by the 62nd Crosstown, east by west Pleasant Avenue north of 66th Street and south of 66th Street by Lyndale Avenue South, on the south by 66th Street from west Pleasant Avenue to Lyndale Avenue South and Woodlake west of Lake Shore Drive and Lyndale Avenue South, and on the west by I -35W. The streets in this area not included in this project are 66th Street from I -35W to west Pleasant Avenue, 65th Street from Rae Drive to west Pleasant Avenue, Rae Drive from 65th Street to 66th Street, Graham`,Avenue from 65th Street to Lyndale Avenue South, Circle Place from Graham Avenue to Lyndale Avenue South, Lyndale Avenue South from the 62nd Street Crosstown to Lake Shore Drive and Grand Avenue South from 65th Street to 66th Street. Street Improvement District No. 14A Bounded on the north by East 68th Street, on the east by 21st Avenue South, on the south by East 69th Street and on the west by State Highway No. 36. This area also included the East Service Road, State Highway No. 36 from East 68th Street to East 66th Street. WHEREAS, the City share of costs has been paid in the sume of $1,050,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,. Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the cost of permanent street construction in the above described areas to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be at least 20% of the total cost, and is presently estimated to be approximately $463,784, and therefore this sum will be assessed against privately owned property benefited thereby. 2. That said assessment shall run for a period of 20 years and include interest at the rate of 8% per annum. 3. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. Resolution No. -2- 4. The Clerk shall notify the council upon completion of such proposed assessment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of July, 1978. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk `1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City City of Richfield Gentlemen: a Council Letter No. 202 �Agenda July 10, 1978 Aq Council t9L' Subject: Request for Reconsideration of Stipulations Attached to Variance On May 8, 1978, the city council approved a variance requested by Mr. Clifford-Hoffman to permit construction of a free standing canopy at a service station located at 817 East 66th Street. The council approval of this variance-included a stipulation that the southernmost curb cut from the property onto Elliot Avenue be closed, and that the curb cut on Elliot Avenue closest to 66th Street be modified so that traffic would enter and exit the site at a 90- degree angle to Elliot Avenue. Mr. Hoffman has since re- quested that the council remove these stipulations from the vari- ance because he feels he would experience heavy expenses in comply- ing with the stipulations. Background The staff had recommended that the applicant be required to close the east curb cut on 66th Street and the north curb cut on.Elliot Avenue, as a stipulation for the variance. The staff had also re- commended that the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be relocated and that all driveways enter. the site at a 90 degree angle rather than the existing 60 degree angle. These recommendations for changes in the curb cuts were made because the curb cuts existing on the site create dangerous traffic movements in the area. Angle drives narrow the field of vision, which contributes to accidents, and the number of curb cuts encour- ages unsafe turning movements, which conflict with the city's ad- opted comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan indicates that "major streets will have restricted left -turn movements and re- stricted access-to adjacent properties, in order to reduce accident potential and avoid congestion caused by slow traffic and turning movements......" The city council approved - granting of the variance with the' stipulation that the south curb cut on Elliot Avenue be closed and the north curb cut on Elliot Avenue be changed to a 90 degree 4 r Council Letter No. 202 July 10, 1978 entrance. Since-relocation of the.north curb cut on Elliot Avenue would involve moving a fire hydrant, relocation of this curb cut was not made a stipulation to the variance. The.council reviewed Mr. Hoffman's request to reconsider the stipulations-at the June 12, 1978 city.council meeting. At that time, the council asked the staff for additional.information regard- ing-the possible cost of implementing.-the-curb cut closing and modi- fications required by the stipulations. The public works department has inspected.the site and estimated that the south curb cut closing and changes could-be completed at a cost of $750 -$800. The council asked the staff to determine the cost of constructing the proposed canopy with brick.facing or a similar "soft" material rather than with the steel columns proposed by Mr. Hoffman. The staff has found that actual construction costs for the canopy recent- ly built at the Super America Station (66th and Graham) are as foll- ows: 1. $250 bricking cost per column 2. Aggregate facia material $1.80 per square_ foot plus $.17 per square foot for structural changes. Applying these prices to the canopy proposed to be built at Hoff - man's station, it would cost Mr. Hoffman an additional $2110 to use brick and.aggregate, or if only brick were used, an additional $1,000 to construct the canopy. Respectfully mitted, �� S. 70P -0 Wayne S. Burggra City Manager WSB /eja cc: Public Works Director Planning & Redevelopment Director 41 I CITY OF RICHFIELD,..MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 201 Agenda July 10, 1978 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of .Richfield Gentlemen: h� Subject: Traffic Control Requests The traffic control committee met on Tuesday, June 20, 1978 to consider several-requests for traffic control devices. These requests were evaluated.based on the criteria previously adopted by the city council,_a copy of which is attached. Min- utes of the. June 20, 1978 traffic control committee meeting are also attached. The committee makes the following recommendations: _64th Street and Newton Avenue: _ The committee recommends insta ation o a two -way stop sign at this intersection, to stop 64th Street traffic. 74th Street and Park Avenue: The committee recommends that no stop sign be in stalled at t is intersection. 64th Street and--Logan Avenue:- The committee recommends that stop sign be insta lied at this intersection. y W' 73rd Street and 17th Avenue: The committee recommends that �o stop be installed at this intersection. 67th Street and Russell Avenue: The committee recommends that no stop signs be insta e at this intersection. Cedar Avenue and Diagonal Boulevard:�he committee recommen� d'S`. AJ no changes in tra is control at this intersection. 6700 Block of East Pleasant Avenue: The committee recommends that the east side of this block be posted "No Parking Midnight to 6:00 A.M." and that the west side be posted "No Parking Anytime ". Copies of petitions received by the committee, requesting changes in traffic control devices, are attached. The petitioners have been notified of the committee's recommendations. Respectfully submitted, WIV4 S .u� Wayne S. Burggraaf City Manager WSB /eja _s ! J The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices lists four criteria or warrants that should be reviewed in considering two -way stop sign install- ations. These criteria are: 1 . Intersection of a less important road with a main road where application of the normal right -of -way is unduly hazardous. Where total traffic entering an intersection averages 500 cars for a 24 -hour period the street with the larger volume should be classified as the main road and stop signs shall be installed stopping traffic on the minor street. 2. Street entering a through highway or street. It is recommended that this warrant remain as is. An example of this type of warrant application would be where residential streets enter into 76th Street, Nicollet Avenue, Lyndale Avenue, etc. 3. Unsignalized intersection in a signalized area. It is recommended that this warrant remain as is. 4. Other intersections where a combination of high speed, restricted view, and serious accident record indicates a need for control by the stop sign. High speed shall mean where one street is posted in excess of 30 miles an hour or where public safety department radar checks indicate that a substantial number of people driving are exceeding the 30 mile per hour speed limit. Serious accident record shall mean three accidents in a twelve month period or five accidents in a 24 -month period. Four -way or Multi -way Stop Signs The Manual on Uniform Control Devices lists three criteria or warrants that should be reviewed in considering four -way or multi -way stop sign in- stallations. These criteria or warrants are: 1. An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents of a type susceptible of correction by a multi -way stop installation in a 12 -month period. Such accidents include right and left turn collisions as well as right angle collisions. 2. The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and 3. Potential obstructions and /or other street geometric problems that affect the safety of an intersection. TRAFFIC CONTROL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES June 20, 1978 ?BERS PRESENT: Carl Marinics, Tom Morgan, Marshall Raaen, Ron . - hardson, Joyce Wilde. Richfield Traffic Control Committee met at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 20, 1978 to review pending requests for traffic control changes. I- LIC committee considered the following items: 64th Street and Newton Avenue: J. [,v'ilde reported that neighbors of this intersection had submitted a _-ition requesting the installation of a stop sign on either 64th Street Tewton Avenue. Committee members observed that their visits to this _-rsection had revealed major site obstructions resulting from a large e and stone retaining walls. R. Richardson noted that police reports the past six and one -half years indicate only two accidents during .,it time. M. Raaen stated that traffic volumes in this area are minimal, do not meet the warrants for installation of either a two -way or a Our -way stop sign. He also observed, however, that the site obstructions ,'light warrant installation of a stop sign under that criteria. committee voted to recommend the installation of a two -way stop sign to stop 64th Street traffic at Newton Avenue. 74th Street and Park Avenue: J. t�Iilde reported that neighbors of this area had submitted a petition requesting the installation of a two -way stop sign on Park Avenue at the intersection with 74th Street. T. Morgan indicated that only three acci- dents had been reported to the police division in the past six and one - half years, and that the intersection is completely open with no site ob- :,tructions. C. Marinics noted that very little traffic travels through t(iis intersection. J. Wilde mentioned that the concern of the petitioners appeared to be speeding on Park Avenue, although R. Richardson reported that they had no evidence of a speeding problem in this area. C. Marinics cciLerated that the use of stop signs as a device to slow traffic speeds had never been successful. The committee voted to recommend denial of the request for a two -way stop si;,n at the intersection of 74th Street and Park Avenue. 64th Street and Logan Avenue: J. jlilde submitted a petition received from neighbors of this intersection requesting a four -way stop at the intersection of 64th Street and Logan Avenue. She observed that the petitioners requested a stop sign for sev- eral reasons, including the alleged high traffic volume, speeding cars, and numerous children in the neighborhood. C. Marinics observed that the intersection has a minor site obstruction with pine trees on the southwest corner. R. Richardson reported that two accidents had been reported to the police department from this intersection in the past six and one -half years. Several committee members observed that the city council had indicated on previous occasions that placement of a Traffic Control Committee Minutes Page Two June 20, 1978 Meeting stop at an intersection may be considered in evaluating requests traffic control devices. However, the committee found that this _ rsection did not meet the minimum warrants for a four -way stop, d the committee voted to recommend that the request for a four -way =.gyp sign at 64th Street and Logan Avenue be denied. i:rd Street and 17th Avenue: J. ;•Tilde reported that neighbors in this area had petitioned to request installation of a four -way stop sign at the intersection of 73rd Street anid 17th Avenue. Committee members who had visited the site observed t!iat the intersection is clear and open with no apparent vision obstruction. �. Richardson summarized the accident history, which has been three re- accidents in six and one -half years. J. Wilde commented that the :tern of the petitioners appeared to be speeding cars. T. Morgan re- ..ded that the police division had no experience with excessive speed =his area. committee voted to recommend that the request for installation of -way stop signs at the intersection of 73rd Street and 17th Avenue denied. =i1 Street and Russell Avenue: -.,ilde distributed copies of a petition submitted by neighbors in this ....,a, requesting the installation of stop signs to stop 67th Street �:_-..ffic at Russell Avenue. She noted that these petitioners also expressed concern with speeding cars. R. Richardson and T. Morgan indicated that no police problems with excessive speed had been experienced in this area. C. :Marinics again observed that the installation of stop signs as a device to glow down traffic had never been successful. R. Richardson stated that petitioners indicating problems with speeding often know who the violators aria, since the speeders generally are area residents. He suggested that police would like to know that information so that they can make direct ,ontact with speeders and careless drivers in order to advise them that cii,,_y are concerned about how they operate their cars in the neighborhood. ',I. Raaen reported that traffic volumes through this intersection do not meet the warrants for installation of a two way stop sign. Tlie committee voted to recommend that the request to install stop signs to stop 67th Street traffic at Russell Avenue be denied. Diagonal Boulevard and Cedar Avenue: J. Wilde reported that a telephone request had been received on several occasions to review this intersection for installation of four -way stop signs. M. Raaen noted that there is currently a two -way stop sign con- trolling east -west traffic on Diagonal Boulevard at Cedar Avenue. R. Richardson stated that nine accidents have been reported to the police division in six and one -half years, which does not appear excessive given ttie number of cars travelling through this intersection. T. Morgan ob- served that experience with controlled intersections and other areas does not indicate that stop signs serve as a major deterent to traffic accidents; he also stated that the disparity between traffic volumes on Cedar Avenue and Diagonal Boulevard would probably create additional traffic hazards if the intersection were to be upgraded from a two -way Traffic Control Committee Minutes Page Three June 20, 1978 to a four -way stop. The committee voted to recommend. that the request to install a four -way 'stop at Diagonal Boulevard and Cedar Avenue be denied. 6700 Block of East Pleasant Avenue: J. Wilde reported that the owners of the two apartment buildings located in this block have requested the establishment of on- street parking re- strictions. T. Morgan suggested that the appropriate restrictions might be those which have been placed adjacent to other apartment buildings in other parts of the city, which restrict on- street parking between the hours of midnight and 6:00 a.m. The committee voted to recommend that the.following restrictions be estab- lished in the 6700 block of East Pleasant Avenue: (1) "No Parking Midnight to 6:00 a.m. ", on the east side of the street; (2) "No Parking Anytime" restrictions be established on the west side of the street. At this meeting, the committee discussed possible parking prohibitions which could be established to control unauthorized parking in public parking areas. J. Wilde explained that the city council had recently adopted an ordinance amendment which would provide for establishment of parking prohibitions for public parking areas. Since the council's con- cerns appeared directed toward the parking lots of the three municipal liquor stores, the committee decided to consider establishment of parking restrictions for those lots. T. Morgan suggested that a prohibition on parking between the hours of midnight and 6:00 a.m. could alleviate the overnight parking problems, while not unduly restricting the use of the lots by vehicles which need to be there to service the liquor stores. The committee requested the chairman to contact the liquor store manager and review this proposal with him before taking final action. The committee deferred final action on this recommendation for parking pro- hibitions in public parking areas until its next meeting. M. Raaen distributed a list of intersections which the city forester had identified as having site obstructions. He commented that the forester had begun compiling this list informally as he travelled throughout the the city. The committee reviewed these intersections with the map show- ing placement of stop signs within the city, and found that approximately one -half of the intersections were already controlled in way which would eliminate the problem of site obstructions. The committee recommended that individual members attempt to visit these intersections and review accident data etc., so that the committee might consider further action on controlling these intersections at some future date. Respectfully submitted, J y L. Wilde N DPW 421-2 V 1, 1E 16 17 18 19 '_/ Y 7L,10 0 "Q A/e U)Ie4' PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT City of Richfield, MN Petition No. To-: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. " 'PR 23 1978 1 We, the Undersigned owners of not l(e§s than 51T in frontage of �.he -real property tting on ge-u.P7�oi� ✓e Lbetween - ---- - Clt'v Man and hereby petition that such stret be improved by Signatures of Owners House No. Legal. Description of the Property Ak '7 4z 07_HL_,� 37 'f'i2 1366 �S, Ghee a" ez� Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required number of owners of property affected by the making of the improverent petitioned for. per cent City Clerk PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No. Dated Received TO: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, owners oF the real property abutting � yutG c�cc jjC.[ G:,1J/ 1JG V11�1 V11 U Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required ntu11ber of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. Der cent City Clerk Signature of O�Pnt Address 2. / L- 3 • ti-� pro- ��f�� a, . a :, _ �Z �v 10. l L1. , C <e � C�FL 14. 15. y 7yv c Of U Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required ntu11ber of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. Der cent City Clerk PET IT ION FOR LOCAL VJFROVEi,E:NT CITY OF JtICEFIELD, IJINN, THE CITY COUCCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD., I.ANNE.OTA• PETITION 140. DATE RECEIVED ti:E, TH UNDERSICNED, OCJNERS OF NOT LESS THAN 51 PER CENT IN FRONTAGE OF THE REAL PROPERTY ABUTTING Of! I �� ,� T_h c BETWEEN — AND HEREBY PET17ION THAT SUCH STREET DE ILiPR.Vl— E3Y�r, \yi� ; �bii� �l ] C�1 1 r�� P S( cam i O Y� O� �o U�� SIGNATURE OF OI';NERS HOUSE NO, LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY 2_ a,i , 1 .�.� b oG 5. Z'L� L' Zo ui f L _ -e 1 - — p -Ci d 6 12X r , + Y L' `�� 1 ! =-4 ;=- Psi // r/r✓y�x. •. _ 5, 6yel0 -- / v ,t — t r 19* v J - EXAMINED, CHECKLDjo AND FOUND TO BE IN PROPER FCRM AND TO DE S ICNED BY THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF 017 PROPERTY AFFECTED BY TI-E MAKING OF' THE IMPROVEIl.ENT PETITIONED FOR* PER CENT .. hpl ,_2 C I TY CLEN —K PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No._ Dated Received TO: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We, the undersigned, owners of the real property abutting ,/ cg �:b . Examined, c�iecked, and fg3ind to be in proper fdrm a� to b��igne by the required nu :cer of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk Signature of Owner Address wLV' 2. A 7. G - /,7 U. 12.2 13. 14. 4: 16. /7 rY i ,/ cg �:b . Examined, c�iecked, and fg3ind to be in proper fdrm a� to b��igne by the required nu :cer of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Eq# Peti n $. nn TO: The City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. We,.the undersigned, owners of the real property abutting in the vicinity of 67th Street and Russell Avenue hereby petition that such street be improved: by the installation of stop sigma, stopping 67th Street traffic at Russell Avenue Signature of Owner Address 2 , �. _ Q 6701 3 • -�� <S_ l � 8. ::Tc, t/, C L2. L3. L4. L5. L6. L7. Examined, checked, and found to be in pro-per form and to be signed by the required nuit:ber of owners of property affected by the making of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No. Dated Received e City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. undersigned, owners of the real property abutting (M � J2 / � Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed by the required nwl,ber of owners of property affected by the :Waking of the improvement petitioned for. per cent City Clerk