06-06-78 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
~__
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Council Letter No. 200
Agenda June 26, 1978
~~ ~d
~ ...Q
Subject: Receipt of Petition for Vacation of 65th Street
United National Corporation, owners of property abutting 65th Street
between Nicollet and Pillsbury Avenue, has petitioned the city to vacate 65th
Street. A copy of the petition from United National Corporation is attached, along
with a diagram of the property they own adjacent to 65th Street.
Vacation of 65th Street between ~Ticollet and Pillsbury Avenues conforms with
the L/H/N Redevelopment Plan. The redevelopment plan provides for vacation of
the existing 65th Street and location of a new 65th Street to the north. United .
National Corporation has also dedicated the right-of-way for the new 65th. Street,
although the city will gain possession of the new right-of-way only after vacation
of the. existing 65th Street right-of-way. '
Since United National Corporation owns more than 50 percent of the land
abutting 65th~Street, this petition can initiate the street vacation process. The
City i~ttorney is preparing a resolution which will provide for acceptance of the
petition from United National, re question vacation of 65th Street, and calling for
a hearing on this street vacation.
This. resolution will be available for council consideration at the June 26,
1978 city council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
j ce .Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW,/e j a
cc: Public Works Director
Planning & Redevelopment Director
City Attorney
~.~ P>11iUi~ r~vi< ~_.,.,`l' Ji~~~..`iiC~~.
._>~._. ~~~ City of Richfield, Minnesota Petition No.
'' Date Received
•;:1
~•To: The City Council of the City of Richfield, rinnesota
:~`_W~,--the undersigned, owners of land abutting on 6th Street between Nicollet
_j. Avenue and Pillsbury Avenue hereby petition that the part of such street,
;;::=~:described Attachment Abe vacated by the City of Richfield.
-~
-__-_ Signature of Owners Record Owners and Legal
Description of the Property
=:_- Deil 0. Gustafson (Attachment f3)
;`~, i~iobil Oil Corporation - Tract C
Registered Land Survey No..o92,
tiles Regiistrar of _ytl`s, ==e_._.~-.
pin County, `ii:,..=so; a
3 .
P.ichfield Plsdical Pro'Jerties --
Tract n, Registered Land S~~:rvey
r?o. 692, files Registrar of Titles
Hennepin County, ~iir.nesota
,~ ~ Ui~7ITED iiATIONAL CORPOR~TI0,3 United National Cortioration -
Block 1 and Bloc:: 2, Richf_eiu
_ ~~ ~-- Plaza Addition
_~
,/
E~:amined, checked and found to be in groper for:, algid to a_c si.,~Ied by the
required number or oc,rners of land ~1Lu~ting the street, allox.• or pu:~lic ~~~'our.cls
(City Code of Ordinances, Section 12.01)
per C~'IIt
ci::~cr~ed t~~•
City Cl~r:;
Map AttacY:ed
~~" t>1 LAC: _•i`.~.'T 3
~ -
_ - :.. Descri tion of Parcel- •
All of that part of the Southeast 1/4 or t:~e .:orth;~rest 1/4
of Section 27, Township 28, Range 24, described as follo~:rs:
Commencing at a point on the East li^e of
said quarter-quarter to a point Sli.6 feet
- Pdorth along said line from the Southeast
."r~ry==~~ corner the:ceof; thence T•lest parallel to the
South Line of said quarter-c;uarter, 50 feet
_ to the actual point of beginning marked by a -
judicial landmark; thence North a1o^g a lire
parallel to said East line a distance of l;?.3
feet to a point marked by a judicial 1ar_d-
_ mark; thence ylest at right angles 158 feet J
=, to an intersection with a lire parallel
:_ - to and 198 feet Ldest of the East line of said
~.~ quarter-quarter at a point 185.2 feet South
Homes Second Addition ~:;hich .,oint`is ~cr':ec
by a judicial landmar':; thence North a1on~ sa; --
parallel lire 186.2 Teems to t e Sout~. tin` _ `^
.said plat :which point is marked by a judici~~
landmark; ther_ce l~iest along said latter line a
_~. _ ~ distance of 162.26 .Feet to ar. intersection
'4~, with an extension of the Hest a - ~ i,
_ lin~ of Blaisc.e__
Avenue at a point marked by a judicial lar_d~~r~;
thence South along said t~lest extended line o
said avenue a distance of 202.15 reef to a
point marred by a judicial land.. ~ Y',; thence
East 60 feet to a point in an extensior_ of the
East line of Blaisdell Avenue, 14 r"eeL ~•Iort_-:
along said line from its intersection c~i; h t_:e
North line of the South I/2 of the Sout_heas = 1/
of the Northc~est 1/4 of said Section 27 ~•rhic~t
point is marked by a j ud i cia 1 lard:~ar:; tY:ence
South along said extended East line o~ Blaisdell
• Avenue 218.98 feet to the point o~ intersection
of said line with the A'ort`: line of the SOUS;':
451 feet of said quarter-quarter ~•;;-~ic:: point is
marked by a judicial landmark; thence East
along said latter lire a distance o~ 12.26
feet to a point mar'-:ed by a ju.~.'.icial tar.-?;; Y',;
thence North par~~llel to the East lire o~ s~ i d
quarter-quarter a distance of 60.6 feet to a
- point marked by a judicial la;.c?~:ar::, c•r::ich is in
a line parallel to the Sou ~'^ line of said c;;ar~.=Y=-
quarter; thence East alone said line 1?5 f~„t to
said actual point of htrinninc.
~,3 ~ a 9 .. _ .. _
.. y2S~3 14Eii
-3
~'... ti
~, ._
. ~ -. -
~ .. ~ .~.
_ _ -~ _ _ .. ~~ •~ L r
G\ .. ~. •.
y ~i
}.+' -
• Y ,_ ® ~ - i
' 1. ~ `J _ +~~ •l
( .~. . ` ~ ~ L R Y
f S
_ ~ s ~ + - _
_ _ r ,~ _
./. ~ '
.- ~n~ "' ~ .
- _. ~.
" - t _ S ~.1~ ..
F^- . ti ~ 4~
,~ ,.. , =,
` ~e
r - _ `
_ ~,z~
_. .
_ V ~~
,:
•y~ e L - ~ ~,~-
~, ...'~,~.o -. --
c :.
_ ~
4
j ~2~
o~
ro "~
~_
,r'
~t ~ IAA fe~_~
--~„~
- - - ~" -
-_ ..-
- b
1
iy 4
~ a ,r ,.
z ~
+•.:
:`~ 16~ 4A '~~
i t'
'_:. -
~K~
~~, ~~ ~ 8
~ ~="" ,~
:~.'~'J.1~ ,
~,
~ ga
\
w ~ = Ps ~ --
~ t .t \ d. ~ ~ '!t
Y 'i ~
ti ~" v ~~
.r
r~ r'~y
...
i ~ ~.,_
~ ,;
,~ '~ 1 ~-~
- .
.
r
,
~•
t ~
j .; - ~
~
t d ~
.
~
j
Yd ...1
' \1 T
1
~
~
.
l ~
'
~
f 1
nr~
•
T i
• `J
.t
O
r
_
i I
.
r
~_ v y
.~ / ~ r
.. ~f-'r y ..
Y :?1
y
' b
m :~ 1
1
1~ ./
~ \
'
;
.~ __
-
-
~~ S~~~s~~~`~f
~~
~~~t..~ icy
RESOLUTION RECEIVING STREET
VACATION PETITION AND CALLING
_ FOR PUBLIC HEARING
6dHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Clerk
requesting the vacation of the entire width of Guest 65th
Street from the [nest line of Nicollet Avenue in a t^7esterly
direction to the following described line:
"Beginning at the Northwest corner of Block 2,
Richfield Plaza; then North 8 feet; then
Northeasterly 104.67 feet along a tangential
curve, concave to the I\'orthwest 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 Office of the Hennepin
County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
PZinnesota . " and;
WHEREAS, said petition comp lies in all respects with
the requirements of Richfield Ordinance Code Section 12.04,
Subdivision 2
N06V, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AS FOLLOL+7S:
1. The petition for vacation of that portion of Ldest
65th Street described above is received.
2. A public hearing on the street vacation in said
petition shall be held on July ~~ 1978, in the council
chambers beginning at 7:00 p.m.
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 the manner provided by Richfield Ordinance
Code Section 12.04, Subdivision 3.
~s
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA .
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 199
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor.
and '
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Request from Storefront/Youth Action, Inc. to Support
Grant Application
The Storefront/Youth Action, Inc. is preparing a grant application to
to implement a counseling program for adolescents who have been abused.
The Minnesota Crime Control Planning Board is administering the grant
program, using Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Administration monies.
Since the L.E.A.A. program requires that such grant applications be spon-
sored by a local unit of government, the Storefront has requested that
Richfield consider sponsoring their grant application.
Steve Lepinski, Director of the Storefront/Youth Action, has requested
an opportunity to appear at the June 26, 1.978 city council meeting to dis-
cuss the grant proposal. A copy of Mr. Lepinski's letter is attached.
Respectfully submitted,
--~-d~
J ce Wilde
Acting City Manager
jLW/j e f
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
Richfield City
Steve Lepinski,
June 21, 1978
Sponsorship of
Council
Director, Storefront/Youth Action
LEAA grant
The Crime Control Planning Board has recently decided to fund
several programs which respond to the problem of adolescent abuse.
Storefront/Youth Action has decided to apply for a portion of these
funds to provide a program for physically or sexually abused
adolescents in the South Hennepin Area. Since these are LEAA funds
the grant application must be sponsored by a unit of government. I
would like to request that the City of Richfield sponsor this grant.
The grant will provide two staff persons to provide individual
and group counseling to adolescents who have been physically or
sexually abused. The target population is youth who have been
abused and are not able to get help through the welfare or prosecution
system because there is not enough data for child protection services
or the courts to intervene. Storefront/Youth Action is currently
working with about 15 youth who fall into this group. These are youth
who were referred for other reasons (drug use, absenting, family
problems), but in working with them the abuse was discovered. Our
experience with this problem indicates that these youth take more
staff to work with, do not easily fit into other group counseling,
and have extremely resistant families. There seems to be support
from Welfare, Court Services, Schools, police, the Bloomington
Public Health Department, the County attorney's office, and other
social service agencies for such a program.
The application will be for X40,000. to $45,000. The funding
is available for three years with LEAA providing 90% of the funds
w the first two years and 60/ the third year. My hope is that by
using this as a demonstration project we will be able to get
Hennepin County Community Services Department to provide these
services at the end of the grant.
The match for this project will come from those funds currently
provided for Storefront/Youth Action. The deadline for submission of
this grant is August 1, 1878. The grant should be submitted by July 1,
1978 for review by the Hennepin County Criminal Justice Council.
The sponsoring unit of government is responsible for providing
the local match. It is also responsible for all terms of the contract
and has financial responsibility for the funds allocated. The sponsor
can handle the monthly dispursement of funds itself or can sub contract
with the implementing agency to do this. Staff employed by the project
will be employees of Storefront/Youth Action and not the city of
Richfield. The sponsoring unit of government is allowed 5°0 of the
total grant or 10io of salaries and fringe (whichever is least) to
cover its costs of administering the grant. Reporting requirements
are monthly financial reports and quarterly progress reports.
I have discussed sponsorship of this grant with Hennepin County
` and Edina. The Hennepin County beauracracy and recent reorganization
may prevent a decision by July 1. The Edina City Council was interested
and quite supportive but requested additional information regarding
their responsibilities.
I will be available to answer any questions you may have.
_~
<, ri
.~/
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Council Letter No. 198
Agenda June 2 6 , 197 8
r~S.ol~.,ci.~ a~dc~11-~..~1-
~.o be. ~..~„~ ~L.O
,, pr~c, ~ ~..r u . ~ . a~,~.-~
m..~ ~1.:~ ®.~,
Subject: Resolution of Support for Mr. Tony McCartney
The Public Safety Director recently became aware of a serious personal
problem being experienced by a member of Richfield's business community.
Mr. Tony McCartney, who operates the Britahomes paint and wallpaper store
at 7128 Chfcago Avenue, immigrated to Richfield from England in November of
1977. Mr. McCartney came here with the intent of becoming a permanent U.S,
citizen, and planned to establish his- paint and wallpaper business in Richfield.
Mr. McCartney preceded his wife and four children to this country in order
to finalize the purchase of his business and to acquire adequate housing. At
the time Mr. McCartney came to the United States, arrangements had been
approved for his family to join him. However, during the time between when
Mr. McCartney arrived and when his family was due to arrive, a moratorium
was placed on additional immigrations into this country, In the interim, Mr.
McCartney's family had sold their home in England and have been staying
there with no permanent place to live and unable to join Mr. McCartney in the
United States.
Mr. McCartney has been trying to resolve this problem with the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service on his own. Additionally, he
has attempted to appeal on a personal basis for assistance from our congressional
delegation in Washington. To date, his efforts have been unsuccessful.
Since coming to Richfield last fall, Mr. McCartney has become a respected
member of our business community. Since the matter has come to our. attention
it appears appropriate that our city council and our state legislative delegation
might join in supporting Mr. McCartney's efforts to be reunited with his family.
State Senator William Kirchner, State Representative Shirley Hokanson,
and State Representative James Swanson have all been informed of Mr. Mc-
Cartney's situation, and all three expressed an interest in joining with the city
council to support Mr. McCartney's efforts to reunite his family.
Council Letter No. 198. -2- June 26, 1978
Mr. McCartney and Richfield's state legislators and senator will be
present at the June 26, 1978 city council meeting to discuss this matter.
Attached to this council letter is a resolution which the council may wish
' to transmit to Vice President Walter Mondale, requesting him to intervene
with Secretary of State Cyrus Vance to aid Mr. McCartney. Although this is
an unusual situation for council involvement, it does seem appropriate for
our council to send support to a member of our business community faced with
a personal problem that might be resolved by the involvement of local governing
officials,
Respectfully submitted,
J L. Wilde
ding City Manager
JLW/e j a
cc: Public Safety Director
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF TONY MCCARTNEY
:,
WHEREAS, Mr. Tony McCartney is a respected member of the Richfield business
community, and
WHEREAS, Mr. Tony McCartney immigrated to the United States from England
in November of 1977 to establish his Britahomes paint and wallpaper business
in our community, and
WHEREAS, Mr. Tony McCartney is operating a successful business in our
community with the potential of providing jobs within our community, and
WHEREAS, Mr. Tony McCartney's wife and four children have been unable
to join him in the United States, and in fact may be prohibited from joining
him until the summer of 1979, because of restrictive federal immigration
policies, and
WHEREAS, these restrictive federal immigration policies have had the
effect of creating an unreasonable and unfair hardship upon the McCartney
family, and
WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council and the P~innesota State Legislative
Delegation representing the City of Richfield, acting on behalf of the citizens
of the City of Richfield, wish to support Mr. Tony McCartney's effort to have
his family reunited in the United States, and
WHEREAS, the United States Congressional Delegation representing the
City of Richfield and consisting of Senator Wendell Anderson, Senator Muriel
Humphrey and Congressman William Frenzel, have consistently demonstrated a
high degree of responsiveness to the concerns of their constituents, and
WHEREAS, it is the hope of the citizens of Richfield that Vice President
Walter Mondale can greatly assist in the effort to help reunite the McCartney
family in the United States.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Richfield City Council and the
Minnesota State Legislative Delegation representing the City of Richfield do
jointly and unanimously on behalf of the 44,000 citizens of the City of
Richfield appeal to the Minnesota Congressional Delegation, Vice President
Walter Mondale, and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance to intervene in this
situation and effect whatever action may be deemed necessary to remove the
barriers which presently exist to ,prohibit the reuniting of the Tony McCartney
family in our community.
Done at the City of Richfield this 26th day of June, 1978.
Loren L. Law, Mayor
- .,
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office•of City Manager.
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Council Letter No. 197
Agenda June 26, 1978
~~ _ ~..s ~--- ,.~
~..1- Q....p.,,~:,~
A it
-.,~a.rlc.-._._;~~ ill
Subject: Public Hearing, Determination of Permitted Land Uses
In C-l, Neighborhood Business District,
There is a public hearing scheduled for the June 26, 1978 city council agenda
for the purpose of determining if ari electrical contractors office and inside storage
facility is of the same general character as other land uses which are specifically
permitted by city ordinance in a C-1 neighborhood business district. If the council
determines that the proposed use is of the same general character as permitted uses,
the electrical contractor use will become a permitted use in all areas of the .city
that are zoned as neighborhood business districts.
The council's consideration of this matter is based on a request from Mr.
David Williams, owner of property located. at 7344 Cedar Avenue. Mr. Williams
is proposing to sell that property, which is zoned C-l, to Bolt Electric, Inc. for
use as an office and inside storage facility.
The following items are attached to this council letter and referred to through-
out:
Exhibit A Mr. William's letter describing
present property use
Exhibit B Bolt .Electric Proposal
Exhibit C Sec. 3,32 of zoning ordinance,
describing use regulations for
a C-1 district
The staff has reviewed this matter and is of the opinion that the proposed use
is not of the same character as other land uses listed in the city ordinance as uses
permitted in neighborhood business districts. Section 3_,32, subdivision 1, para-
graph 2 of the zoning ordinance requires that uses permitted in neighborhood business
districts are those which supply a limited variety of commodities or services for. the
benefit. of residents of the immediate neighborhood. In this case, it is improbable
Council Letter No. 197 - -2- June 26, 1978
that the proposed electrical contractors office would be providing services pri-
marily to the immediate neighborhood, or even primarily to the city as a whole.
Therefore, the proposed use cannot be considered to be a neighborhood business,
and would not be of the same character as the uses which are specifically per-
mitted in a C-1 district. The city code prohibits such uses as electrical appliance
shops, and plumbing and heating shops from locating in neighborhood districts.
~It is the opinion of the staff that the proposed use is of a character similar to
those uses that are expressly prohibited from locating in a C-1 district.
In addition to being of a different character, the pro-posed use would pose
problems for the residential neighborhood adjacent to it. -First of all, it would
increase traffic in the area. Residential structures generate from six to ten trips
per unit per day (ADT) while general office structures will generate twelve trips
per day per .1000 square feet of gross area. In this case, the proposed 1600-
square foot office would generate nineteen trips per day.
The proposed use would also involve the inside storage of trucks, electrical
supplies and equipment. This will mean that truck traffic in the area will be increased
as trucks leave to go to job sites and as other trucks deliver and pick up supplies .
Another potentially negative aspect of the proposed use would be the outside
storage of supplies and equipment. While such storage is prohibited in the zoning
ordinance, and while the applicant has indicated that he does not intend to have any
outside storage, such storage could occur for this type of land use, :;nd would present
a code enforcement problem .
An additional potential problem could result as the company- grows and feels
pressure to expand the use and the size of the structure, which would further in-
crease the intensity of the land use and produce more negative impact on the
surrounding neighborhood. Even since the proposal was originally described at
the June 12, 1978 city council meeting, the applicants are proposing to expand the
length and height of the existing garage to allow inside storage of trucks on the
site. This is an example of an increase in the intensity of land use.
A final major consideration is, if the council determines that an electrical
contractor is a permitted use in a neighborhood business district, than any electrical
contractor could locate in any neighborhood business district in the city.
It should be noted that the applicant's proposal fails to meet .the city's off-
street parking requirements. The required 15-foot setback between the parking
area and their west property line is not present, and 24-foot driving aisles are not
provided for in the parking lot.
In summary, it is the opinion of the staff that the proposed electrical con-
tractors office and storage facility is not of the same general character as uses
specifically permitted in C-l, neighborhood business districts, and that the proposed
use could have negative impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood.
Council Letter No. 197 -3- June 26, 1978
It is recommended that the council determine that an electrical contractors
office and inside storage facility is of a different character than the uses specif-
ically permitted in a neighborhood business district and therefore, that the proposed
use is not permitted in a C-1 district.
The council must hear testimony relative to this matter and then determine
if an electrical contractors office and inside storage facility is of the same general
character as those uses which the ordinance specifically permits in general commer-
cial zones. If the council finds that the proposed use is of the same general
character as permitted uses, it is recommended that the council make this finding
only if certain characteristics exist within the electrical contractors use that are
required to exist within the uses specifically permitted in a C-1 zone, including:
1. Thc= +:~,.:~ ~~, ~ comply with all off-street parking requirements;
2, That no outside storage be allowed;
3. That no expansion of the existing structures be allowed.
Respectfully submitted,
o, c L. Wilde
cting City Manager
jLV~i/e j a
cc; Plarining & Redevelopment Director--
City Attorney
9
Proposal for 744 Cedar Ave. ;,o.
Re: Bolt Electric I;zc.
L'se of ~uildi;~g
1. Bolt Llectric is purcriasin~; the above ~rientioned property for
the purpose of occupying .Dart of the building as an of=~ice
for tineir co~ipany and leasing out tr_e remainder of tre building
to a real estate, insurance, or similar low traf'ic business,
2. Bolt electric tivill be storing; r~iat'rials in t_~~e garage ar_d
basement of the building. j'here :•aill be ;~o outside storage of
materials or equipment.
3. There will be no retail sales of appliances or equipment and
the space in t~_e building occupied by Bolt~.lectric wiil be
used for office space and not as a retail unit. The remainder
of the building will be leased as office space and nnot as a
retail store.
4. There will be ro over;zi~;ht or ~.ee.~end parking of trucks or
trailers outside tir=e garage and building oy jolt .~~,lectric.
~. In the event t:~~.t Bolt Electric ::ere to sell the croperty,
any variance in zoning or use per:: it fi=at treyr uay obtain
would not be trans~erable to the new owner.
6. Bolt Electric will abide by all restrictions and covens.nts now
recorded against said property.+~ See attwc~_ed aocu:rent.
~. See attached petition fro~i neighbors stating that trey would
support Bolt .Electric operati;zg from this buildinb.
l~e.~~odeling considerations
1. Bolt ;~,lectric shall install a c' foot privacy fence acid adequate
offstreet par_.ir:g as proposed o_ attached diagra~:.
2. Bolt electric shall tiring all tfriring up to code and install a
new 200 amp service.
3. Bolt electric ~~rill be doing remoaelin~ worn on the interior as
per city code to Wake it applicable for lease as office space.
{¢ See attached diagram.
4. The garage will be r•smodeied in a r~tanner so t:^~at it can accor~odate
two bf their ver~icles, out not by changing the square footage
by more than 65 square feet.
!7 .
- --1-~----.._-. DAVin A, WILLIAMS
_._.__.-____~___-- REALTY AND CONSTR>iICTION,
15517 EXCEL530R E3LV0., MINNETONY<A, iY1N 55343 • PHONE: 612-933-4004
June 14, 1978
- City of Richfield
Planning and Zoning
6700 Portland Avenue So.
Richfield, Minnesota 55433
To 4Uhom It May Concern:
This memo is in reference to the property located at
7344 Cedar Avenue South. It is in response to your request
as to its existing condition, use and zoning.
The building presently is not being occupied and is in
need of major remodeling. The property has been vandalized
on several occasions.
We had intended to do the remodeling as discussed and
approved by the city council earlier this year. However, due
to a restructuring of the business, we are no longer in need
of the premises.
We have secured a prospective purchaser of the property
who I feel will benefit the surrounding community and the
City of Richfield with your cooperation.
At the time we made our request known for our intentions,
the zoning was changed to a C-1 District. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact us at 933-4004.
f
Sincer y,
r ,
~~~
David A. Williams
DAW/nf
Gated on a corn^r lot in such"district shall have a sid` yard or. the side abutting upon
a street: of not lesa than the mini: :um irons yard depth rerui_remont on the adjoining inter•io
lot but this shall not reduce t!le b~_rildai:le ~~idth of any corner lot to less than 30 ~: yet.
_ -~ (!~) Fear Yard, Eaci: buildinG shall huvr_ a rear yard cc;ual to tc!er.ty percent ci the
' det.th of the 1o t. to a raa::imum required (reptiz of 25 feet.
3.31. USEI;ECUI~iTIO~]S FCR i~^?LTIPL?s .^,F.SIDri~CI3 (i~IP.) PIS GRIST.
Subdivision 1. Per(nztted Uses. In the multiple duelling district, unless otllererise snecif,.
in this chapter, the folloT~ir_g uses are l.~ermitted :
(1) Any use permitted in an '`R" district, subject to the same conditions as are applic-
able to an "R" district.
(2) 1~~~o family de~ellir_gs and their accessory buildings.
(3) i~iultiple family structures ~ihen application is made therefor and duly approved by
the city council pursuant to the "Group Housing Development Project" provisions of Section
3.37 of this chapter.
Subd. 2. Height P.eaula*_ions. r1c building shall be erected or Structurally altered in the
.multiple d~~elling district to exceed three stories in height, subject to the modifications
and e:cceptions provided in Section 3.39 of this chapter. (73-4} 3-2b-73.
_ ~``
`„})r? '~~ TrCt !~rca~ ~'rr-n+-.on, nr? V'+r~ nnn-,{ n-__.. The f0110:71ng :D1nlmllm reCiUlr.'.m~?ntS
apply to all bu~ldings in tie `i1i:` eistrl,,c ~p_-sa;.ter er~octed or structurally altered sub•}~
t: ,~..; ::L,.~_~~ations provided lzl Section 3.3~_ of this chapter.
(1) Lot Area. wvery building designed for the housing of one family shall conform t!>
the area requirements applicable to an "R" district, Every building designed for t.°o fami,_
shall have a lot in one c~~:r_ership having not less than 10,000 square feet. Every bui.'din~ ~';
designed for more than t~~o families _shali have a lot area as determined under L-he pr~wisio'~~:
of Section 3.39, Subd. 2 of this chapter. - ~K
(2) Yard Requirements, I?-roat side and rear yard re:;uiremer_ts shall be the sans in a°ry~"
_ _ ~,:.
"P'IIZ" d1.Str1Ct aS 1T'i an "R" d1Str1CC, Sub~eCt t0 the mOdlflCai:iGii3 ,.JVlued in SeCt10r.` Z.3f%._','
~ ~- _ -_
or Section 3.3G of this chap*_er. -
3,32. USE REGULhTIU\TS I'OR .dr.I~G:;_3G?:?-?OOD $i?SIi`;ESS (C-1) DIST't:ICT, _ --
Subdivision 1. Pr_r:n.it.ted TJses, In the neighborlieod business district, unless ether rise
specified in this chapter, the folloair_g uses are permitted: -~.
(1) Any use permitted in an "R" district or an "i•lZ" district, upon compliance ~~i{:.h
the procedural requirements for each such district provided that no one family or tT'*e fami_1;•
d~•~ellin~ shall be constructed in this district ~~ithout the procurement of a special use
permit in accordance r~~ith the p:covisi.or_s of Section 3.41 of this chapter.
(2) Uses intended for the supplying of a limited variety of commodities or services
primarily for the benefit of resider*_s of the immediate neighborhood. These shall include
any Local retail business or service establishment such as a grocery store, fruit or veget-
able nlar:et, mear_ rrar.lcet, drug store, barber shop, beauty parlor, clothes cleaning and dry
good pic.lcup station, business or professional office, and similar uses.
(3) Restaurant, cafe and soda fountain, ~~lrich uses do not permit dancing, on-sale hee_
or the serving of alcoholic beverages. A restaurant, cafe and soda fountain, iro.;ever, sllal:
not be established in a neighborhood bu§iness district without first securing a special use
permit therefor. ~~. special use permit shall not be granted for any such use in a nei;hbor-
hood business district unless it tom;;^.li~s *:~ith the requirements of Section 3.!-1 of this cod:
and unless the c(~u::ci.l finds that the prc,,oscd us~~ ~~i1~ p-tovide come:cdities and services
primarily for tho residents of the-imt:edi.s.te neighborhood and ;;ill be part of a neighborhoo:
shopping center providing a variety of cor.moditi_es .and services. Drive-in and t<rlce-out
restaurants, cars urul soda fountains shall not be located in the C-1 districts. ,
(!?) Otllcr accessory uses and structures not othcrtiJise prohibited and customarily
a~cessory and incidental to pe!-mitceci uses.
(5) Tao gasoli_no service station, garage car sales lot, or other similar or related
activity is permitted in L-his district.
(b) T11C fol.l.cvir:g retail busznCSSr'S c!n(I :;ervi(:e es tau.:lslrc^ents and others of
;~~i, 3-2ti-73
the same gene
~ and shall not
(a)
_ (b)
(c)
(d)
ral character shall not be considered
be permitted in the "C-1" district:
Electrical appliance shop;
Plumbing and heating shop;
Printing shop;
Furniture shop;
to be local service businesses
(e) Interior decorating and upholstering shop;
(f)
($)
(h)
(i)
(J)
{k)
Theatre;
Hotel;
Funeral home or mortuary;
Garage;
Used car lot;
Filling station.
(7) tiny other use may be permitted ~~hich is determined by the council pursuant
to the provisions of Section 3.40 of this chapter to be of the same general char-
acter as the uses listed as permitted in this section; provided that such use is
not specifically prohibited in this section.
Subd. 2. Specific Conditions - Off-Street Par?:in^. etc.
(1) No overnight or ~~eeicend parking of trucks or truck trailers, or trailers
in excess of one-half (1/2) ton in ~~eight is permitted in the "C-1" district.
(2) The businesses specified as permitted shall be conducted ~~holly c=ithin
a completely enclosed building, except for permissible off-street parlcirg and
leading; good) shall consist o?~ primarily nee; merchandise; goods shall not be
stored, processed or sold ~;l:ich are objectionable by re ;son of odor, dust, fumes,
noise, vibration, refuse matter or ~•~ater-carried ~~aste.
Subr~. 3. Hei~l~t ?;eauirements. In a "C-1" district, no building shall be erect-
ed or structurally altered to exceed-three stories or 40 feet in height subject
to modifications and exceptions provided in Section 3.39 of this chapter.
Subd. 4. Lot Area and Yard :;enuirements. The follo~•~ing minimum requirements
apply to all buildings hereafter, erected or structurally altered in a "C-1"
district, subject to modifications and exceptions provided in Section 3.39 of
this chapter. _
(1) t!.11 de~ellins shall conform to the renuirements of an "R" district as
set forth in Section 3.30 of this chapter.
(2) Front Yard: Each building shall have a front yard of not less than
~~0 feet, and shall have a greater front yard ~*here required under. the provisions
of Section 3.39, Subdivision 2, Paragraph (2), If the building lot abuts upon
more than one street the area bet~~een the building and each of such, streets shall
be regarded as front yard. (71-1, 1/25/71)
• (3) Side Yard: `lo side yards shall be re^uired except as folio~~s:
(a) On a corner J.ot adjacent to a i;ey lot in a residential district
there shall be a side yard adjacent to the street of ~ ~~idth equal to not less than
one-half the depth re^uixed for front yards on the lots to the rear of such
corner lots.
{b) Along that side of every lot ir, a commercial district bordering
upon property in the "R" district, there shall be a side yard of not less than 15
feet.
{4) Rear Yard: There shall be a rear yard in ovary lot in a "C-1" district
e^ual to 20% of the depth of- the lot to a ma:cimum re^uired depth of 25 feet for
ouch lot, provided that such rear yard may be reduced one foot for each one foot
of front yard provided in e:;cess of the mini::l~im requirements for front yard set
forth in this code for a `:'C-1" district and provided thzt said rear yard must
be at least ten feet. No :ear yard border.irg upon an "?." district small be used
---- - --
-' GG. 1/2S/71
'~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 196
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the, City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
~~.'L1bJ2Ct: Amci7CiIii~IiC i0 IViOid'tviiillil on i11e Filling of Position Vacancy
During the 1977 budget hearings, the city council established a
moratorium on the filling of full time vacancies . This letter is to request
that the moratorium be lifted to permit the filling of the following full time
position:
Deputy City Clerk-- This vacancy is the result of a resignation.
The position is critical to the operation of the~city clerk division.
The position is responsible for supervising and participating in the
processing of motor vehicle and other licensing operations, voter
registration and elections and acting as custodian of city .records.
Since this position is funded in the 1978 budget and is ~; crucial position
in terms of the workload in this division, it is the recommendation of the staff
that the moratorium be lifted to permit the filling of this position.
Respectfully submitted,
J e .Wilde ~-~~
Acting City Manager
JLw/~ kl
cc: Personnel Director
Finance Director/City Clerk
~O
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 195
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Resolution Approving Temporary Street Improvements to
Harriet Avenue between 66th and 67th Streets
The Richfield Bank and Trust Company, owners of the property immediately
adjacent to Harriet Avenue between 66th Street and 67th Street, have recently
petitioned the city to improve that portion of Harriet Avenue by regrading and _
stabilizing the street's surface with bituminous material.
The public works director has estimated that these improvements can be
completed. for a cost of approximately $2500. It will be necessary to assess these
costs against the benefiting property owner which is, in this case, the Richfield
Bank & Trust Company.
Because the petition for improvement was submitted by the owner of all of the
property to be assessed, it is not necessary that the city council conduct a
public hearing on this improvement project.
It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution
ordering the improvement and authorizing prepar~~tion of final plans and specifica-
tions for temporary street improvement to Harriet Avenue between 66th Street and
67th Street. It is also recommended that the city council adopt the resolution
approving final plans and specifications and ordering construction of these im-
provements by city day labor force .
Respectfully submitted,
_.
J e .Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/e j a
cc: Public Works Director
v
~;
<<'~ -
. o _ Igo ::~ _ ® .
6625LYNDALEAVE.SO. RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 I TELEPHONE: 861-7355
A N I N D E P E N D E N T B A N K
~ it n `~ ~-FF~
I ',1~ l~, ,.~ ~ i 1 'i
1. ., ... - --
,~ ,:-
:i~:,~ ~... ~,
June 6, 1978
City Council
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
ATTENTION: Mr. [Jayne Burggraaff
Dear Sirs:
The Richfield Bank & Trust Co. hereby petitions the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, to improve Harriet Avenue from [lest 66th
Street to West 67th Street by regrading and stabilizing the
street surface with bituminous materials.
It is our understanding this improvement will benefit this
corporation by providing a stable roadc~ray surface for a t~ao
to three year period. Further, it has been related to our
firm that this surface treatment can be anticipated to cost
approximately $2,500.00.
The Richfield Bank & Trust Co. requests the City of P~ichfield
perform the above work and bill this corporation for-the entire
cost.
In order to avoid unnecessary inconveniences to"the public
and our customers, it is suggested our staffs meet to determine
the most appropriate date or dates to complete the above surface
treatment.
Very trul~• yours,
~ ~
~-%~i~,,
L J
Martin V. Chorzempa
President
MVC:lw
_ __ _`
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR TEMPORARY STREET
IMPROVEMENT AND OILING ON HARRIET AVENUE FROM 66TH
TO 67TH STREET
City Project No. 730
WHEREAS, the City has been presented with a valid petition from
the owners of the property abutting Harriet Avenue from 66th to 67th
Street for temporary street improvement and oiling, and to assess
the entire cost thereof against the petitioner, and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes permits the City to proceed with the
making of such an improvement without a public hearing where all the
property owners affected have petitioned for the improvement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That such project is hereby ordered as proposed.
2. That the city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer
for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for
the making of such an improvement.
Adopted by the City Council this 26th day of June, 1978.
ATTEST: Loren L. Law Mayor
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR TEMPORARY STREET IMPROVEMENT AND OILING
AND ORDERING WORK TO BE DONE BY DAY LABOR
CITY PROJECT N0. 730
Clerk's File No.
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution designated as Resolution No.
passed by the City Council on June 26, 1978, the City Engineer has
prepared plans and specifications for the temporary improvement of
Harriet Avenue from 66th to 67th Street and has presented such plans
and specifications to the council for approval, and
WHEREAS, such improvement is in its entirety of a type which
under Minnesota law it is permissible for the city to construct by
day labor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Richfield, as follows:
1. That such plans and specifications be given Clerk's File
No. ~ and the same are hereby approved and ordered placed on file.
2. The City Engineer shall proceed under the direction of the
City Council and tYie City Manager, as given from time to time, to carry
on all work in connection with such improvement in accordance with the
plans and specifications herein approved keeping such account of all
costs and expenses incurred in connection therewith as may be required
by law.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day
of June, 1978.
ATTEST:
Loren L. Law Mayor
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Council Letter. No. 194
Agenda June 26, 1978
a
Subject: Recommendation for Adjustment in Mileage Reimbursement
There is an item scheduled for the June 26, 1978 ciiy council agenda to con-
sider an adjustment from 15~ per mile to 18~ per mile in the reimbursement which
the city provides to employees who use their private vehicles on city business.
Background Information
The last time the city council adjusted the mileage reimbursement schedule
for employees who use their personal automobiles on city business was in June,
1974. At that time, reimbursement was increased from 11~ per mile to 15~ per
mile. The City of Richfield has generally supported the concept that providing
a mileage reimbursement is the most economical means of allowing city employees
to conduct city business where it is not possible or economically. feasible to
provide those employees with acity-owned vehicle.
The purpose of a mileage reimbursement is to provide fair compensation for
city employees who are required to use their own vehicles on official city bus-
iness, It has been the city's practice to provide mileage reimbursement at a rate
which neither rewards nor penalizes the individual for using his private vehicle,
However, since the city council last adjusted the mileage reimbursement rate,
the cost for operating a vehicle has increased substantially. This is evident in
the frequent increases in the cost of gasoline, as well as in the much higher
purchase cost of a vehicle this year compared with four years ago. Rises in
premium cost for insurance against personal injury and property damage have also
contributed to an increase in the overall cost of operating a car, Recent. statis-
tics compiled by the American Automobile Association show that the cost of
operating an intermediate-size car is now 20.94 per mile,
Council Letter No. 194 -2- June 26, 1978
Analysis of Costs
In the past, the city has att2mpted to relate the mileage reimbursement
paid to employees to the actual cost per mile for the operation of a motor ve-
hicle. This per mile operating cost includes not .only expenditures for gas and
oil, but also maintenance, insurance and depreciation costs.
The AAA, in determining the vehicle cost per mile, breaks the costs -into
two categories: variable and fixed.. ~'he variable items relate directly to the
number of miles driven, how the car is used, and the costs of service and re-
pair, and would include items such as gasoline, oil, maintenance, and tires.
Fixed costs, though they may vary slightly from car to car or place to place,
are generally established beyond the control of the motorist and change very
little with the amount or type of driving that is done. .These costs generally
include items such a~ °axas 'licen_se ?*:~? r°~~is*_:atioT? fees}, depreciation and
insurarc~.
In August, 1977, the American Automobile Association issued its most
recent figures describing the cost of operating a vehicle. These costs were
determined fora 1977 Chevrolet Chevelle Malibu, four-door hardtop, having
an eight-cylinder engine, and equipped with standard accessories, including
a radio, automatic transmission, and power steering and brakes. These costs
are broken down by the AAA as follows;
Variable Costs
Gasoline and oil
Maintenance
Tires
Average Per Mile
4.23
1.06
.68
5.97 per mile
Fixed Costs
Fire and theft insurance
Collision ($100 deductible)
Property damage and liability
($100/$300/$25M)
License and registration
Depreciation
Annua llY
$ 83.20
195.51
260.00
76.93
880.86
$1,496.50 (or $4.10 per day)
The AAA assumes that the vehicle is fully paid for, and that an average of
10, 000 miles are driven annually. Assuming that this number of miles are driven
each year, the fixed cost per mile would equal 15~. Added to the 5.97 average
cost per mile for the variable items, the total vehicle operating cost would equal
20.94 per mile;
Council Letter No. 194 -3- June 26, 1978
l0, 000 miles x 5.97/mile
365 days x $4,10/day
_ $ 597.00
= 1,496.50
$2,093.50 annual cost
10, 000 miles
20.9 mile
For mileage in excess of 15 , 000 miles a' year, an additional depreciation
allowance of $36.00 per thousand miles should be added to the fixed cost. By
using these figures, it can be seen that a car driven twice as far (20, 000 miles)
during a one year period would actually cost less per mile:
20, 000 miles x 5.97 mile = $l, 194.00
365 days x $4.10 per day = 1, 496.00
5,.000 x $36/thousand (miles
over 15, 000 x excess de-
pre cia ~.,~ _ . Y i
$2, 870.00 annual cost
=- 20, 000 miles
14.4 mile
Since all of the Richfield employees who receive mileage reimbursement for
use of their own vehicles on city business drive their cars fewer than 15,000
miles per year for the city, the higher cost of 20.94 per mile is probably most
reflective of the costs those employees incur while driving. their personal vehicle
on city business. Of course, the use of personal vehicles for business, as well
as recreational purposes may mean that the total mileage put on such personal
vehicles by city employees is higher than it would be otherwise, making the per
mile cost of operating the vehicle something between 14.4 and 20.94 per mile.
It is proposed that the city establish a mileage reimbursement of 18~ per
mile. This rate ;would acknowledge the increased costs of operating a car which
have occurred since the reimbursement rate was last adjusted.
A survey of other cities in our area indicates that the average mileage re-
imbursement presently authorized by suburban municipalities is between 15~ and
16~ per mile. Several cities have recently increased their mileage reimbursement
rate in acknowledgement of the increasing cost of operating a motor vehicle. An
18~ per mile reimbursement policy would be consistent with recent changes in the
mileage. reimbursement rate of other area cities.
Implementation of a new 18~ per mile reimbursement rate could be expected
to cost an additional $1,214.90 per year. In 1977, 70 Richfield employees used
their own cars on city business. These individuals drove a total of _40,505 miles
and were reimbursed a total of $6, 076.00. If the same number of city employees
were to drive the same number of miles and were reimbursed at a rate of 18~ per
mile, the total annual cost would be approximately $7,290.90.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the city council approve a change: in the mileage re-
Council Letter No. 194 ' -4- June 26, 1978
imbursement from 15~ per mile to 18~ per mile, and authorize the city manager
to implement the .new reimbursement rate effective July 1 , 1978.
Respectfully submitted,
o ce ..Wilde
Acting City Manager
jLW/e j a
cc: Administrative Assistant
Finance Director
i~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 193
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Resolution Indicating Support for H.E.C.O.Participation
During 1977, the city council approved the joint powers agreement
establishing the Hennepin Emergency Communications Organization (H.E.C.O.).
This organization was formed to develop acounty-wide system for public safety
communications, and, specifically, for implementation of the 911 emergency
telephone system. The city manager and public .safety director have been
actively working through HEGO in development of the Hennepin County
emergency communications plan.
In order to coordinate with the proposed 91.1 system, HECO must complete
its plan by April, 1979. If this plan reduces the number of public safety
dispatch points in Hennepin County, and it appears that it will, then substantial
tax savings can be realized in the implementation of 911 .
The HECO plan requires some re-allocation of public safety communications
frequencies in Hennepin County. Attached to this council letter is a resolution
which would commit Richfield's public safety radio frequencies to be transferred
to HECO at such time as the system becomes fully operational and the frequencies
are needed to implement an integrated public safety communications plan.
It is significant to note that this pledge to transfer our radio frequencies
is conditioned upon the following:
1 . The adoption of a consolidation plan by April 1 , 1979;
2. That a sufficient number of public safety frequencies are pledged to
effectively implement this project, and;
3. That the plan itself can be effectively implemented to the satisfaction
of all participating parties .
Council Letter No. 193 - - 2 - June 26, 1978
The actual transfer of Richfield's public safety radio frequencies will
require formal council action at a later date.
It is the recommendation of the public safety director, in which I concur,
that the city council adopt the attached resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
_Jo e .Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/j kl
cc: Public Safety Director
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION INDICATING SUPPORT FOR H . E . C . O . PARTICIPATION
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota has committed itself to the
goal of improving public safety dispatching in Hennepin County by participating
as a member of the Hennepin Emergency Communications Organization; and
WHEREAS, the Hennepin Emergency Communications Organization (HECO)
resulted from, among other things, a realization that effective public safety
dispatching in Hennepin County requires the re-allocation and sharing of the
limited number of radio frequencies which are available to public safety agencies;
and
WHEREAS, the command and control of public safety and emergency service
agencies should remain with the chief or the director of such agency; and
WHEREAS, it is feasible and practical to reduce the number of public safety
dispatching facilities which serve the residents of Hennepin County; and
WHEREAS, the development of a consolidated dispatching facility will
require several years to complete and such a complex development process may
require intermediate stages of consolidation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield, Minnesota
does hereby pledge the following radio frequencies to HECO:
155.790 KHz Main Police Dispatch Frequency
154.205 KHz Main Fire Dispatch Frequency
and will assign these frequencies to HECO at such time as they are needed to
implement the consolidation plans as approved by the FiECO Board of Directors .
The City will take the actions necessary to transfer the FCC operating license
to HECO on or before the date the frequency will be used by HECO and on the
date of the license transfer the City will relinquish all rights to the use of such
radio frequencies except as specifically authorized by HECO.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this pledge and the ultimate transfer of the
frequency license to HECO are conditioned upon HECO members pledging a
sufficient number of radio frequencies to HECO to be able to implement the
consolidation plan. If, for any reason, a consolidation plan is not adopted by
the HECO Board of Directors by April 1, 1979, or an adopted plan cannot be or
is not implemented and an alternative plan is not approved by the Board, or if
the City ceases to be a member of HECO before the radio frequencies are assigned
to HECO, this pledge is automatically withdrawn.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of June, 1978.
Loren L. Law Mayor
ATTEST:
9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No . 192
Agenda June 26, 1978
o~~...A-a--«~1.
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Subject: Off Street .Parking Contract, o5uii %~yrzale Avenue Soatn
An application has been received from Mr. & Mrs . Gordon Strom,
6530 Lyndale Avenue South, for permission to establish an off-street
parking lot at 6500 Lyndale Avenue. This parking lot will be used to
support the commercial activity anticipated by the construction of a
Wendy's Restaurant at the corner of 65th Street and Lyndale Avenue.
The applicant. indicates that the existing restaurant building will
be replaced with a one. story masonry commercial structure occupying
2, 240 of the 26, 000 square feet of property. Interior seating capacity
is expected to be slightly more than double the thirty-four parking spaces
proposed.
Ingress and egress will be provided by two twenty-four feet wide
driveways on Lyndale Avenue and a similar driveway located at the rear
of the property fronting 65th Street. New asphalt surfacing will be
placed on the existing parking surface and sloped to provide storm water
drainage into the 65th Street sewer.
The applicant. proposes to comply with ordinance provisions relating
to off-street parking and the engineering specifications of the off-street
parking agreement, with the following stipulations:
1 . That the applicant provide the city with a twenty foot easement
along Lyndale Avenue for sidewalk and landscape purposes;
2. That the applicant provide the city with a ten foot easement,
ten feet wide, at the northeast corner of the property for traffic
signal control purposes;
Council Letter No. 192 - 2 - June 26, 1978
3. That sidewalks and landscaping fronting Lyndale and 65th Street
will be provided by the' city and assessed to the applicant.
It is recommended that the city council authorize the city manager to
execute an off-street parking agreement for 6500 Lyndale Avenue South,
subject to the above stipulations .
Respectfully submitted ,
J ce .Wilde.
Acting City Manager
r?'•.sj :'{'
--+ / i :..
cc: Public Works Director
Planning & Redevelopment Director
5~•
6~~r ~
Enter only
sign
2'S /
~
c Ramp
~R'
Enter-
' P• Han
Exit Sign ~ onl Pryg. W
y Q
56~ 7. ~
I LJ.I
pace J
conc. ~ Planters Q
Menu
&
Bd
Q apron endys 0
.
Order S
20~~1 Encl
trash sign Z
~,,,
J
Ramp ~, I
_ Drive-up window Ramp lj
K-40~ _~
cT
N
Exit only sign v
N
9~ /
_ _
OFF STREET PARKING N0. 78-7
OWNER AND ADDRESS: Mr. & Mrs. Gordon Strom
Location: 6500 Lyndale Av enue South
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: R.L.S. No. 1318, Tract A, except Road plat
46143, parcel 1500 Dist. 4 2
USE: Restaurant
DATE OF APPLICATION: May 30, 1978
COUNCIL ACTION: June 26, 1978
NO. PARKING SPACES: 34
N
Scale: I~~= ao~
~-
.~ _.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 191
Agenda June 26, 1978
~R ~~~
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Application to Move Dwelling into the City
There is an application on the June 26, 1978 city council agenda from
Mr. & Mrs . Louis Couture, 8554. Cedar Avenue South, Bloomington, to move
a dwelling into the city.
The dwelling is proposed to be moved from 8554 Cedar Avenue South,
Bloomington, to 6539 22nd Avenue South, Richfield. This dwelling is forty-
three years old and structurally sound. The stucco siding is well-preserved
and the roof is relatively new.
The house is thirty feet long and is proposed to be relocated onto a fifty
foot lot. The front setback will be thirty feet from the property line. The north
side setback will be six feet, and the south side setback will be thirteen feet,
five inches. The detached garage is proposed to be located five feet from the
north lot line, twenty-five feet from the alley side lot line, and fifteen feet from
the rear lot line.
It will be necessary to make significant improvements to this structure if it
is moved into Richfield. These improvements include the construction of a new
basement floor and footings, chimney repairs, new electric service and replace-
ment of the heating plant. It is the opinion of the chief building inspector that
completion of these repairs would result in a dwelling that would meet all building
codes , standards and regulations .
It is recommended that the city council approve this application to move the
house from 8554 Cedar Avenue South to the lot at 6539 22nd Avenue, subject to
the following stipulations:
Council Letter No . 191 - 2 -
June 26, 1978
1 . Install new basement floor and make wall repairs.
2. Redo masonry work for fireplace.
3. Repaint all interior and exterior surfaces.
4. Repair or replace stucco.
5. Increase attic height and insulation.
6. Install new heating plant.
7. Install new electric service.
9. Repair garage.
10. Obtain proper permits as required. by inspection division.
11 . Provide surety in the form of a bond or cash deposit, in the amount of
$10,550, to insure compliance with the above stated stipulations.
Respectfully submitted,
~~~.A.s~..t-.--,
Jo e Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/j kl
cc: Public Works Director
R~ .,
_::~.
..+
~~,~
~
~~,:. '
-- ~
w
a
` ~
C
N
N
.,:=r:Jr. ,.
~ +27.2
Proposed
30~ ~ Bldg.
2'
~ rn 282
~,
- M
ALLEY
_ 135 _
20~
"r~-
oi Prop.
Gar.
15~
" N
N _
`t Scale= 1~~= 30~
y
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 190
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Purchase in Excess of $1,000
Chapter Six, section 6.05 of the city charter stipulates that the city
council must approve purchases of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction when the amount exceeds $1,000. There is one such item
for the June 26, 1978 city council agenda.
Newsletter Postage
The city staff is preparing a newsletter to be distributed next week to
all Richfield residents and businesses. This newsletter will be devoted
entirely to describing public safety services and programs, and is being pre-
pared as a follow-up to the community survey conducted last year as part of
the team policing program. The cost of preparing this newsletter will be re-
imbursed by the team policing grant.
HOW.ever, the COSt Of mailing tl;e newsletter exceeds 51,000 and it is,
therefore, necessary that the city council approve a puchase in excess of
$1,000, in the amount of $1,215, for postal costs of this newsletter public-
ation.
Respectfully submitted,
c L. Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/e ja
cc: Administrative Assistant
Finance Director
Public Safety Director
.~
CITY OF RLCHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
~~
Council Letter No . 189
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subj~ ;'t: ~ ~O~=7.~~ .'t.i~~.__ .__,_ ~~5tri.iCt.iGi1 Of Cc:'.~_... ~1~'~., ~°~.~;
.Attached to this council letter is a resolution providing for authorization
to destroy. certain public records in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. In
general, a municipality must retain non-permanent records for a period. of
seven years, with the exception of debt service records, which must be
retained ten years, and voter registration, which must be kept for one year
after an election.
The records described in the attached resolution have been reviewed by
the Director of Finance in that capacity and in his capacity as City Clerk.
It has been determined that there is no need to keep these records, and that
they may be destroyed in accordance with state statutes .
Copies of the resolution authorizing destruction of records must be sent
to the State Department of Administration, Minnesota Historical Society, the
Attorney General and the State Auditor for final approval to destroy or transfer
records . It should be noted that the resolution- provides for transfer to the
Richfield Historical Society permanently bound copies of -the Richfield Sun for
the years 196.7 - 1971 .
It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
J ce .Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/j k 1
cc: Finance Director
City Attorney
5
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No . 188
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentle~,en:
i:'1i 1Jj C: vr: Ta1~3Llid t7.vi7 vS 1dS u ri i'-=~:s i'.~~ JI Contract, Your°-'.`wheel Drive Vehici.°.
On June 15, 1978, bids were opened by the city manager in accordance with
previous city council authorization, fora 27, 500 G . V.W . four-wheel drive
truck. The city clerk, environmental health director and public works director
were also present at the bid opening. The bid minutes and tabulations are
attached for council review.
Four bids were received, as follows:
G.M.C. Truck & Coach $28,008.75
Harold Chevrolet, Inc. $28, 757.85
Freeway Ford $28, 760.00
Bob Carter Ford $27, 233.12
It is the recommendation of the public works director, in which I concur,
that the low bid of Bob Carter Ford, be awarded.
Funds for purchase of this vehicle are included in the 1978 Central Garage
budget.
Respectfully submitted,
- ---
J y L Wilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/j kl
cc: Public Works Director
Finance Director
~+
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Bid Opening
June 15, 1978
Four Wheel Drive Truck
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative
Staff was called by Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose
of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for a Four Wheel
Drive Truck as advertised in~ Construction Bulletin on June 2, and 9, 1978.
- Present: Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager
Carl Marinics, Public Works Director
I. F. Roesler, Environmental Health Director
Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk
The following bids were submitted and read aloud;
BIDDER AND
BID SECURITY TOTAL BID
G.M.C. Truck and Coach Division
of General Motors
B.B. 5% $28,008.75
Bob Carter Ford, Inc.
B.B. 5% $27,233.12
Harold Chevrolet
B.B. 5% $28,757.85
Freeway Ford
B.B. 5% $28,760.00
The city manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered
at the regular council meeting of June 26, 1978.
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
~~ .~ ~ ~.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 187
Agenda June 26, 1978
o`-l~P ~o--~e.~
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: `Tabulation or Bids,,Award of Contract, vV>>c_:r ~1~=t Controls
On June 9, 1978, bids were opened by the acting city manager in
accordance with previous city council authorization for control modifica-
tions and appurtenant work at the water treatment plant. The city clerk,
environmental health director and public works director were also present
at the bid opening. The bid minutes and tabulations are attached for
council review .
Four bids were received for this work, in amounts ranging from $6,943 to
$11 ,143 . -These bids have been reviewed by the consulting engineering
firm of Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and it is their recommendation, in which I
concur, that the low bid of Bentec Engineering Corporation, in the amount
of $6,943, be awarded. This bid is for equipment that met or exceeded the
specifications .
Funds for this work are included in the 1978 water division budget.
Respectfully submitted,
e.~.-~
j ce .Wilde
Acting City Manager
jLW/j kl
cc: Public Works Director
Finance Director
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Bid Opening
June 9, 1978
Control Modifications and
Appurtenant Work at the
Water Treatment Plant
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
Control Modifications and Appurtenant Work at the Water Treatment Plant as
advertised in the official newspaper on May 26, 1978.
Present: Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager
I. F. Roesler.. :r?mental Health Director
Carl Marini:~_ _ ~~:_iic `~iorks Director
Tom Moran, City i~ie'L1L
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
BIDDER AND
BID SECURITY TOTAL BID
Auto con Industries, Inc.
B.B. 5% $11, 143.00
Northwestern Power Equipment Co.
B.B. 5% $10, 400.00
Betttec Engineering Corp. '
S.B. 5% $ 6, 943.00
Walder Pump & Engineering Co.
B.B. 5% ______ ____ $10, 400.00
The acting city manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered
at the regular council meeting of June 26, 1978.
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
,y
G ~~
q
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
,~ Office of City Manager
~ ~
T
Council Letter No . 186
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen: ~ r ~ -
Subject: Tabulation of Bids aid Award of Contract, 12th Avenue Slurry Coat
On June 15, 1978, bids were opened by the city .manager in accordance
with previous 'city council authorization to slurry coat and fill cracks on
12th Avenue from 66th Street to 70th Street. The city clerk, environmental
health director, public works director and public safety director were also
present at the bid opening. The bid minutes and tabulations are attached
for council review.
One bid was received for this work from Slurry Kote Service, Inc. ,
4109 West Broadway, in the amount of $7, 494.
It is the recommendation of the public works director, in which I con-
cur, that the bid submitted Slurry Kote Service, Inc. in the amount of $7,494
be awarded.
Fuirds for this work are available in the State Aid Maintenance Fund.
Respectfully submitted,
c L. "vVil e
cting City Manager
JLW/j kl
ce: Public Works- Director
Finance Director
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Bid Opening
June 15, 1978
Crack Sealing, Patching and
Slurry Coat Resurfacing for
12th Avenue Overlay
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative
Staff was called by Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose
of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for Crack Sealing,
Patching and Slurry Coat Resurfacing for 12th Avenue Overlay as advertised in
Construction Bulletin on June 2, and 9, 1978,
Present: Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager
Carl Marinics, Public Works Director
I. E. Roesler, Environmental Health Director
Tom Morgan, Public Safety Director
Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk
The following bid was submitted and read aloud:
BIDDER AND
BID SECURITY
Slurry Kote Service, Inc.
B.B. 5%
$7,494.00
The City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at
the regular council meeting of June 26, 1978.
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
/~
R
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No . 185
Agenda June 26, 1978
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Ger_tle:nen:
Sui~ject: xeccmrnendation for Denial. of Taxicab Drivers .,icense
The June 26, 1978 city council agenda lists Mr. Kenneth Charles Birnell
as an applicant for a taxicab drivers license. On the basis of the background
investigation conducted by the public safety department, we are recommending
the denial of this application.
The applicant has had five traffic violation convictions since June, 1976.
As a result of these convictions, Mr. Birnell's drivers license has been
suspended on two occasions. The applicant's drivers license was just returned
to him on June 2, 1978, after the second suspension.
It is the opinion of the public safety director that NIr. Birnell`s history of
traffic violation convictions relate directly to the license for which he has
applied. Therefore,. it is recommended that the city council deny this appli-
cation for a taxicab drivers license.
Respectfully submitted,
c L. V+Tilde
Acting City Manager
JLW/j k 1
cc: Public Safety Director
City Clerk
City Attorney