Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
08-25-75 agenda
., \ CITY OF R~~~~~~FIELD~, M~~NN~SOTA Office o~ City Manage. Council :Letter No. 279 Agenda:Augusf 25, 1975: The Honorable Mayor and. ~ ~ Members of the City Council ~ ~ (1" -~ (1':- ~' .City of Richfield., ~ `~ /~"' Gentlemen:. ' Subject: Authorization to take Bids for Ice Arena Storage Building In accordance with city council authorization, bids .were .opened on'"December 3, 19.74 for a storage building to be .attached to the rear of the ice arena.:; Council members will recall that it was the recommendation of both`the city manager a'nd the architect`'that the bids:. were too high for the project and should be rejected . The city council did act to reject the bids and authorized the city manager to ex- plore any alternatives to provide. .the facility-within the amount budgeted. In reviewing this-project we Piave explored the possibility of combining. this project with. one of the :other park projects this year. However, after exploring this alternative it became apparent that simply bidding all of the bzzilding toget- her would not provide a meanin~3ful savings since the buildings are of different design, involve different architects,: and would be at different locations.. The other alternative which was. explored. was the possibility of constructing a similar storage building at a different location. The original proposal had been-to simply add the storage: building to the north end of the ice arena, architecturally blending the new structure 'with the old . By changing the location of the building and making it a free standing building far enough away from .existing buildings, it is possible to reduce estimated costs in the area of expensive code requirements .which would be required if the building were .part of a large structure such as the ice arena . Therefore, some changes have been .made in the design and shape of the building and it is proposed that the building be located just off of the short- service. drive to the chlorne'room at the swimming pool. The attached sketch shows the- new proposed location. This. would make- the bu lding accessible bath to the ice arena and the swimming pool; provide a similar storage capability as the original budding and result in lower. costs. ~~t is .estimated that the redesigned structure can now be constructed at the estimated $3.0, 000 budget forthis facility. Thee. recommendation for the new loca pn;o,f the building is supported by the Park-and. ,,. _,;. . Council Letter No. 279' =2-. August 25, 1975 Recreation. Department and the Advisory Park and Recreation Commission. It is recommended that the cty~council approve the preliminary plans and specifications and final .plans and specifications for the storage bui lding at this. new location and authorize the staff to proceed to advertise for bids on ..this project. Bids would be opened early in October with a comp etion date scheduled .for. the middle of DECember of this year. Respectfully submitted, ~(~ ~ z ~ Z' Lh'~ Wa yne S Burggra sff ~ .. .. , , ... ~• . . Y ' t ~~ . o { ~ ~ a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ," Office of City Manager ` Council Letter No. 27.8 Agenda Augu t 2 5, 19 7 5 ` fihe Honorable Mayor and ~ ~ Members of the City Council `` f;,. Gity of Richfield ~' _ ., Gentlemen: ,~.. , (~-^~`; `: ' Subject: .Request to Barricade Street for Block Party „~ Mrs ..Charles Tooley, 7421 Vincent Avenue requests permission ~-•, ~°+ " to barricade Vincent Avenue between 74th-and 75th Streets on August 30, ~} ~~ 1975 between the hours of 2:00,p.m. and 10.:00 p.m. :; -- .The only stipulation attached to this. request is that the city. erect. _ the ;barricades in such a way so as; to permit ingress or egress of emergency "` vehicles in the event this would be squired during the .time of the block F^ ~ party. `r Respectfully subm'tted, _ '~ ~_ (~`~ Wayne S. Burggraaf `City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Safety Director ,` Public Works Director . August 20, 1875 .City Manager °` City of Richfield - 6700 Portland Avenue South ' Richfield, Minnesota 55423 Dear Sir: The 7400 block of Vincent Avenue requests per- mission to have a block party August 30, 1975, between the hours of 2:00 p.mo,until 10:00 p.m. Thank you, Mrso Charles Tooley " • .~ 7421 Vincent Avenue ..South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 .~, .. I ,, •-1' CIT~'OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA - '~'r '" '~ Office of City .Manager Council Letter.No, 277 Agenda ,August 25.,.:1.975 '` The Honorabie Mayor and f ~ TvIembers of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: , Subject;- Richfield Bikeway Plan In the spring of 1974 the planning commission requested the planning de- partment to develop a bikeway system plan for, Richfield. The city council provided for imp ementation of a bikeway system in the 1975/80 capital improve- ment program. The proposed bikeway plan wa accomplished through the nvolve- ment of a Bikeway Committee whose members have devoted much .time. and effort. in formulating this development plan. • Bikeway Committee Gertrude Ulrich, 7601 Aldrich Avenue Da e Wille, 6232 2nd Avenue Roger Halvorson, 6825 Fenn Avenue ,~., ~4 Bill Hamelink, 6335 Thomas Avenue ~ ~ ~ a Lawrence Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth Avenue Frank Vinella, 6732. Pillsbury Avenue. ' Gary Lichliter, 7700 Penn Avenue " Runs Johnson, 6824 Penn Avenue Don Fondrick, Acting Fark and Recreation Director . Julie Poehling, 7445 14th Avenue ~; ~; The bikeway committee is composed of Richfield residents with various degrees of biking interest. They have served in an,advisory and review capacity to the city ! planning. department. The planning .department has also undertaken the necessary research on bikeway construction, design and guidelines in order to find and eval- uate methods. which may be applicable to Richfield. Park and Recreation Commission Recommendation The park ana recreation commission reviewed the bikeway plan in its prelim- inary and final stages. The park and recreation commission re commended adoption of the bikeway plan. and urges the city council to permit :early implementation of the Class III type bike routes. The commission also indicated the desirability of '•} j~ {~ Council Letter No. 277 -2- August 25, 1.975 -,, signing bikeways in conjunction with the permanent street improvement program: Planning Commission Recommendation The planning commission also has reviewed the bikeway plan.. The commission' adopted the-goals and objectives and agreed with the plan's concept. Summary of Goads and Objectives - ~' Through the bikeway committee and meetings with representatives of various city departments and local interest groups, twelve goals and objectives were '' developed which should be used in implementing a bikeway plain and' program for R ehfield. Tn summary, the goals and .objectives include statements on developiizg a citywide bikeway system, education of the bicyclist, and motorist, providing ,.,., ~ ~ i, .., ~, ` , ,: °-'tjbike/pedestrian. bridges in key locations, financing the system through various ~ ~~ - '.sour~ces`;and evaluating the'. plan and program for..effectiveness. '•`~' ~`~ `' ~~` -The proposed system should be developed through priorities based on potential -; ~, "_ ~.;' {,'rider usage, type and number of biker's destinations connected and intra-commun- ity access. Four priorities have been developed 'which include two major east- ~ ~• `~~' ;~ ` ~~ve~s~t routes, three major north-south routes and routes around Richfield Lake and ~•~A~ Legion Lake, Cost and Funding Sources Y• l~ r~ Each priority details the length of the routes, type of bikeway to be implem- "- ented and the estimated development cost. The bikeway system when: comp eted ` "~ will be 21.6 miles long and cost .approximately $847,, 000.. Priority one.: is_estima;ted to cost $301., 444. This pr-ority and priorities two and three include abike/ped- estrian bridge at an estimated cost. of:$250, 000 each. Priority two wl°l cost ari~: ~• ~~,~ estimated $261, 204; -priority three will cost` an estimated $256, 720 and priority :.four is estimated at $27,813. Bikeway development funds •are available on a very limited and highly competitive basis.. The two sources still available and used by other communities '-are funding through the Federal.Aid Urban. program and the Department of Natural Resources. Any applications for FAU funds. are submitted for priority rating along with the transit improvement projects on a metropolitan wide basis. Another source is the State Recreational Trail Program.. This program is administered by the State .Department of Natural Resources. "The legi'ative appropriation for 1975 was smaller than previous. years,: but the likelihood of more funding in coming years is good. ~, Council Letter No. 277 -3- A'ugu"st 25, 1975 It is recommended .that the city council receive this report for study and authorize the city staff to initiate efforts to obtain funding from federal and state sources . An early council review of the report in detail is desirable to enable planning to proceed in accordance with the capital improvement program if funds e are determined to be available . Respect#uily submitted, ' :~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ :'1 ~r(~.. c Wayne.. S. Burggraaff ~~ City Manager WSB/eja cc: Planning Director Acting Park and Recreation Director - ~, . Finance Director - .,- :.~. ~; +` ~~ 9 ~' .~f „ a' df_.. ~ .. ~_ r r t~ fig, _ w, _~ j,.rr~` 4,.,~ ~. ~Iv~~FI~LD ~I ~~~5~'+'~" PL,~~~ 1 • T,~LE OF CJ~dT~r~TS Page • Introduction I~istorical Perspective 2 American Bicycle Renaissance 3-4 Bikeway Goals and Objectives 5-~ Bikeway Types 8 Bikeway Planning Considerations 9-13 Richfield Bikeway - Long Range Plan 14-15 Richfield Bikeway - Short Range Plan 16-20 Cost Estimates and Funding Sources 21-22 Bibliography 23 • f t- • Y li~ Accident ~ocatior~ ~fap .Proposed Bikeway Plan Bloomington Bikeway Plan Minneapolis bikeway Plan Richfield Bikeway Plan Priority One • ~~riority Two Priority Three Priority Four TA'~LES ~. Richfield Bicycle Licenses Issued 2. Bicvcle Sales and Use 1960-1972 • r/ RICE~FIELD ~I~~"c~AY PLw°J INTRODUCTION. The bicycle boom of the 1970's has sparked a tremendous upsurge of interest in bicycling. Sales of bicycles have more than tripled in the past decade .with over 13 million in sales last year (1974). Perhaps the most significant aspect of the increase is that close to sixtti~ percent of 173 bicycle sales were to adults. TABLE I - RICHFIELD BICYCLE LICENSES ISSUED Year Licenses Issued 1971 1121 1972 1587 1973 2353 1974 2190 Physical fitness, recreation, and environmental protection directly tie to the bike boom and give it vitality. Tne increased use of bicycles is causing an increasing pressure for bikeways and paths that .can be used with relative safety. Recent statistics show a dramatic increase in the number of bic}-cle- automobile accidents. In this number of accidents, there }ias been a substantial increase in the number of deaths associated with the accidents. tiVell designed bikeway facilities have been shown to significantly reduce the number of bicycle-automobile.accidents. From January 1973 to December 1974, 52 bicycle/ mo':,or vehicle accidents were reported in Richfield. The accident locations were scattered ti1r7._{ahoiit ti_e ci,v. As can be s°c-n o.: the ~.ttaciLed ;;;a_~, y:.e obci~ "~.re,tR I 35tid intersection, east 66th Street, Penn Avenue and }^Iest 70th Street has a large percentage of the reported accidents Table #2 gives an indication of the increase in sales and use of bicycles nationwide... 4-- f fn. e.cz 3n~'.'ia~nfs 3~3 ~ ln~.uN31 3nv 10~n3 ant SMn3mOJ 3nY 30 ~l'AO 3nv •~G '3nv w01N~t0 3w W2 3M SM^3n3Y5 3n1 13tt0>iM 3n..~.~.3„ 3nv 13ieesN ,.e.., .. ----- - - ~ F 6 G LL. Z ~ O ~I $~'i~ ~~ W V~ ~ 3 s~_'~ $ W ~.[/~- ~ a ~ ~ 80 ~.~~ ~ ~ g' ~1 -y- i f ~~ ~ Bid} > I--, r~ ~ 3 fFe ~ \ ''. C+ ~_' I~~ ~ ~ G G 6 ~ ode ® . z ... ;1 -,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W a W ~ ~ W W _~ ' ~ ` .rte . a ., _ Y . .~~ r . ~= ~ dE dE ~E dE ~F iE f, , _ 3n..,o= 3nV A.Ott3f0~Ot 3n3n3103Bi 3nv x013nv~~tci 3n0 COV>iM~ i -nv o t 3nV 53nv 315 ~j 3.< ,t3a,.,e \ 3na Ot3~ftlPJ 3nv +:ve0ty -~ ,,. _«< ~ ; o .a oa.~t __ _._. 1T 0~ ~, O a O W O Q '~ m 0 W H O W e .~ u w 0 e 0 N O A V 7 C '~(' Y-~..- • = 1 = TABLE TWO BICYCLE SALES AND .USE 1960-1972* Year Sales 1960 3.7 1965 5.6 1968 7.5 1969 7.1 1970 6.9 1971 8.9 1972 13.8 (Figures are in millions) Bikes in use 23.5 32.9 42.3 47.7 50.0 53.1 56.0 No. of users 35.2 49.3 63.4 71.5 79.6 83.0 88.0 Kecognition of improvements in bicycles is of major importance to this plan. Bicycle manufacturers are mass producing adult bicycles which are light- weight and fast. The modern bicycle expands the opportunity for family recreation. Its variety of speeds (10 speed, 5 speed, 3 speed) makes hill climbing easier and level ground speeds greater than the old heavy balloon tire ''coaster bicycle". Since 1960, the ten speed bicycle has become .popular among adults. This .multi-speed cycle. has made the bicycle a viable alternative mode of transportation. The bicycle has become more than a childhood recreation or exercise activity. With bicycles that-.can climb hills easily and average 10 miles per hour or better on level ground for long periods of time, the feasibility of bicycling becoming a significant mode of transportation has increased. * Bicvcle Institute of America s - 2 - • HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE The bicycle has had a long and turbulent history. A primitive bicycle, dany horse, or Draisian was first introduced in this country in 1819. A later machine, the popular Velocepedes, was introduced in 1869. The Velocepedes was supplemented by a machine ].nown as the "ordinary" or "high wheeler". The British Rover or "safety bicycle" was introduced in 1885. By the turn of the cent~zry the British Rover, with the addition of pneumatic tires, roller chain drive, and diamond frame, .was similar to the bicycle of today. By 1900 the safety bicycle had generally replaced the expensive high wheeler. As the bicycle popularity increased, the United States bicyclists began to demand and obtain better roads upon w~aich to ride. By 1893 American bicyclists in organized group were responsible for legal battles leading to street lighting and street name signs. The Pasadena Freeway in Los Angeles follows a bike route built in 1900 from Pasadena to downtown. The coming of the auto stalled further bicycle development. Besides giving the infant automobile industry the roads it needed, experience in mass production, differential steering, and expansion brakes, provisions for the bicycle served the early auto builders needs as well. It is interesting to note that the first American car was made in the bicycle repair shop of the Duryea Brothers. The auto's range, convenience, carrying capacity, and popularity nearly eliminated the bicycle as a transportation mode except as "childhood wheels". Internationally, the bicycle has long been a viable mode of transportation. Almost all international "cyclepath" systems provide separated lanes exclusively • reserved fer the bicycle. International "cyclepaths" for the most part separate bicycles from vehicles by barriers, hedges, or grade separation. L' k - 3 - • The predominate method of separation employed in the United States to date has amounted to symbolic separation. With several noticeable exceptions, the United States bike paths currently consist of signs to guide bicyclists and at the same time warn motorists of their presence. THE AMERICAN BICYCLE RENAISSANCE In 1961, Homestead, Florida started the current bicycle renaissance. Their desire was to provide a safer way for their children to bicycle to scllool.* Between 1966 and 1971, Dade County, Florida, which includes :Miami as well as I-Iomestead, completed 100 miles of bicycle routes. A bank in Miami even has apedal-up-teller window. The State of Florida, Department of Outdoor Recreation, is considering itself responsible for the development of longer touring trails and coordinating trail development by local interests with • those of the state. The State of Wisconsin has an extensive 300 mile system of bikeways which includes the Elroy-Sparta Trail (The Old Railroad Trail). This trail is 32 miles long, passes through 3 tunnels (one over 2 mile long) and crosses 33 trestles. This section alone was used by 24,000 bikers and hikers in 1973, doable the volume of the year before. The entire system can be cycled in 3 to 10 days and traverses 13 t..ounties. ** Milwaukee, Wisconsin has proposed 127 miles of routes. Currently there is a 64 mile route which enables you to tour around the outskirts of the city. They are contemplating trails in existing parks and on electric company rights-of-way. Madison has planned 150 miles of routes, some outside the city limits, some separate from the roadway, and some on sidewalks and streets. • * Florida State Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks. A S stem of Bic cle Safet Trails as a Part of the Florida Recreation and Par s program, 1971, Epp ~~Wisconsin State Dept. of Natural Resources, Tl~a Wisconsin Bikeway Featuring the Elroy-Sparta Trail, Madison, Wisconsin, Publication 115-71, 1971 Brochure. ~; • - 4 - The State of Ohio has 237 miles of routes in at least seven different portions of the state, ranging from 24-50 miles each. There are specific tours designed to direct the bicyclist to various points of interest and scenic beauty. :~ Minnesota statewide multiple use trail system is being developed along river bottoms and abandoned railway lines. This recreational trail system is being designed to accommodate both bicyclists and other non-automobile oriented traffic. The state is also making limited funds available to local units of government for bicycle trails development (Chapter 648, Section 3, Subd. 6 (b) 1973 Session Laws). The state will reimburse local units of government up to 650 of the cost for trail development and maintenance. The entire state allocation for 1974 was $150,000. I~ennepin County and the i Hennpin County Park Reserve District are in the process of planning a trail system within the County. The trail system is being planned and developed within County Parks and along stream bottoms connecting county parks. Hennepin Cowity's Hyland Lake ?ark Reserve in Bloomington opened a five mile long, 8 foot wide, bike path in 1974. The surrounding cities of Pdina, Bloomington, and ie4inneapolis are also planning trail systems for both recreational and commuting purposes. Botiz Minneapolis and Bloomingtoa~. are now implementing their proposed routes. The attached maps show the proposed bike routes in the adj oi.ning cities . Prom the fe~a examples described previously of current bikeway and multi-use trail developments occuring throughout the country, the bicycle is truly undergoing; a "renaissance" in America. Cities, counties, and states across the • countr}~ are now in the planning and development stages to meet the demands and requirements of the biking public. t 5: - b \ I ` I• 'i I( I x Ielx~. a • A n. t .p e I I~~ F r ?', (\ ~ ~ I. A -s" k ~ '~I ~ /.u s. s'`am. ~:'1 ~ I i Eauolnow E / ~ " c \ ~... ~sl ~ l v ~' MiN.NIEAP~LtS ~ ~ _ w 1 i/ S S \, i ~ I ,, S \- , ., ~ S ., ~. SY~'Y'Et~1 ~ . _. sib /~ ~ S ~ _-_ S z - e I / 1 ' yyy \ I ~ ~/ Pa ~~ 8 €S r~`:1 Y'' ~~ ~ 5.~ ~~ 1 ~~ •i E .i ~/ ~V} r r•D ... _ _ \ .i.a ~/ ; ........ - ^ s~ _[~ "''sue .~~ \\ / _.__... .._.. _I.11-~\\~`\-\ :~ Js.+O / ~ ]. _ Pas ~ I F .i Es '`e,_ .-„ ~ s \\' s ~:_ tell s}.. 1 ~ 8 ~ m5 r< <I S11r ~ I]U _3 I .time J 5 s \ ~. SI 1 ` .. t s !1 ,2 -s. ~ i ~ e. eA:~Y IP[~ `{~l1r~1 ~.,}, (~~I ~` .. i.^.~ ~ ,. L _°.Er.a ~_S' 'i~'41 d 3. wn~ .ot I~~w1Yf ~ i ~ ~ I11 M~ti~1~G AL-'17 i.i ~7` Fle. i IE~h~I~ >: \\ F_~ .,LoP DIES ~' ~ ~I~ I ,. a ~_< -- « cc {yA~F'KF3E1:xRp r .N~ I - E Y.: - 5: 8 \ Q .~ E I s~ d ~~ 1 ; ' < u1 .tn,i ~« ° e ,"~ rw~ ~ '~ ` ~ ~ ~$YSTEtii ' , e ~_ I S t , c ~ y~ :I ax= ~A ~" „d {I s (j J K <[ ]N 5 1 I i I E i E "' ~ S s i n E 0 W ~~W I~ I_ A I I-,•a.; l _LaJ V ,. .. ~, - -~ i ~ ~I j t ~ I ~ s\ ''{> r zluY /z a'y ^•I # c 1G d P ~. - V S E "`p 5. . .'~ ' L Ea~x.. • L a , I i ..~'-~s ~ I I ~ ~ I ~ .~ 1 ~- IY.HrJwn~ho 4\ ! - ~wl~l s m _A.: ~~,y, s I ~5?? } s a,. ~.E ar s 1 a E _ \'t E SI E 1 r n 11 e,.., c>cu Case ~, ~ S , t ~ s ' a e I w ~ • - ] c Itl 61 ~ f si~ ~ ., ~ -l ~ M M'awatha ~ al 1 ~ wmp .} l ' .t wi,ie I I . ` E ~ s e 1 ~ var~ •1..,.` a ~ ~ o F ~ • , ~" s Y 1 ( blh ~V 3t .C . . t-t• 5 .f I ~ _ n h 1 r ,c d Pea la s 3 > > ~ _l. - I i :_ 5 1 , _ 65 .^_E n. st Fey ~~ c .a ~ ~ - s ~ ' ~~ \1 t 4 .., c wj oa - mee " a 1 1 ~ s ^~'" k . vnw. _ - ~ 1 I~. ~ '+ ~ s '~ (o, 't ~ ~Waon 6 Itl ~ a Ia~Y ",K i ,..Ef E ', s Pl / E sal 1 w u e I 1 ~ ,:~ Wis. Ar. ' c: lal I I ~ t stns ', _ E sica' w t -. 51 I - i - ~, r \ a ~I~~~ I I n c ao -. ° M^+` ss ,,, I ,.. a a I s ~- ~\ 2 1 f I~fLQ ~ '. ' ~a 1 e ~ .r r <J Eaua < < 3 ~ < S~! dal I~ r .. W[ a ~ S v ~~ ~ N+e I 11 I L, I J' f:ES n SI I I 61 N 9. \ 9. w n+a s. w sw e w ~a• P .,i ~E~Ia 1-+- Y t r r / Ir. 1 1.J f' t ri a G ~i- s: 15 .h L "ano w• >~ 1 ! G_ 1~ 1 E!. a-r Fa a ,, u F 1 I p^.- \~~ s % t. Yl y P ~ I b g' ; ~ ..w SsU 8 0 ~ sL. E. f -1.... ~~-b - d _ 1 < 6 Ef .£i ~ I ~ - ~ / ~_ \ ~ Il~ orA ~ ~ 11 _ ~ ~ ~ SS 0 '. SE ~ Y E 56t, . •- 1-I 6 E _i ~ I E ~ - I F 1 T $ ~ 1 r , a '~c.. ~. n FFE Wx }' y a••~ I a 1 t ~I \ t l i E ( F ,i h t w 6'm... 1 } F r. `.... ~ .I:4 1 r , 51... _ I~~._-~-..1..L$:: aoi • iR R K Y_ ~ ~, .~Sii ..+~ - ~ 1,\ ~ bw Jc -1 /' '-' ~ . aoa., n ~.x v.e s ~ T j v e w xm e s s r -t . . >r ,r Jk-. .`"1-~-'_i-\ \\\. ~ / I ~\J Id -~ a wf.n ~. s ,a 8:. s1 a - I ~E I _. ie Emte e _FS ~C, s~ ~t _.T pl, \ 551 `\ ~,` 1' ~~ ~ w iae ~ 6 ~ ~ ,° se_`j'd ern ;~ "' s "s`~ b a 1 6 : -1 $ ~ ~~ . , ~ ~~ ~ gQs a 11 1 f ~ ~~ ~ 1 I I '.l: a. u 7L7~[7~OC /~11. J ~ / N-~ Y. 1 r w 'q t 6., e \ I t I 1 1 __ V dse (a T~ ~ e_= ~ ~. S .JiE ~) /c^ _z~ ~ _ :/- \ =T'~r-n-.^' _._._ _. _.• .s S1 ~~~ I~ 4 -~i~ S,~ . __ ~ H x _ ~ < 1 I r E a1n Y ~ Y } ~~ ~ ~ Ill/ ~ l ~1 /. ... < J . I ._ fi y,~ s - ,... ~ - ~ r 1, E a1n ~ ~ s ~~ ~ n0~ \ r '• I €~ w. . F! .____ .. ___.___ .. _. ,^L,._ .. . ~!___._~ _ __1.__... .. .. • w~ Proposed Edina Bikeway • ~ Oox Rrwp~ ~f,T.Ow Country Gu6 r,`: ,'6 ka~4 _._._. ~__.~Y .~.. 6.. 'M~~ ~EW3 ' .Y x.s ~`~ L~ ,,~X ~::<< .~: 'NOPNIN9 __ .~`' ___~ - ~ ~ - a ;~ n . ;~ _.~... V~ - ... .. $1 ~~\l~~ i ~ ~ i ~, .. :. :~ :1 _„ ~ I w, .I .~ y a' <. • ~~ • ... . _ ..... t>v; ~ ~~ ,. .... ~, ,1 :. °:: ~. ~ ~ 1 ,~ . It' ~. ~"' r' i ~ ,~ :_ . i ~ ~ ~, - ' € - -~' 1 ..._ ~ __ 1 ~" ~ .1 ~, 1 ~ i~ 1 '.~ ~ ] - - 1 ~_:~ _~ ~ .,. ~~ - - .._. ~ ` ~~ i '~ r, ,i ..-, y. ~ ~ f':-.s ~ Z c C ~ O Q ~~ c~ U N O~ ~~ ._.._.Q ~ cn co v, cn c`U ~ ~S t- ~ ~ ~> Q >, T >. >. Z ~O ~~ w ~ ~ ~ ~~OT7 W ~~~~Y ~ 1 ~ e } ~~ ~ zw ~ '_ w O ~ m ~ ; Z p n- O ~~~- c~~~~in~ ~~ Qc~>-OUP . _ ,.. r •: i i -~~' /„ . a _a~ ~ _~ ,n~ ~ ~. ~ ' i:. - • ' / ~, < _ ~~• t.t~ ;+' ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,. • •/ ~:\ : 1 ~~ ~;. --- v ~,'/ ~`\ e „m E°- o ~ O OV c r~ E c o Ed ~ `~ L oU ` -5- • BII~JAY -GOALS & OBJECTIVES Richfield is encou~Ltering the safety problem of an increasing nwnber of people riding bicycles for various reasons. In existing built-up Richfield, there are relatively few places for these bikers to ride except for our city streets and sidewalks. The problem is tri-fold; how do we accommodate the biker, the pedestrian, and the motorist with a minimal amount of conflict and maxinnun amount of safety? The task is a difficult one, but not impossible. With the "givens" we are working with and the present "state of the art" of bikeway planning, an equitable and functional bikeway system in Richfield can be implemented. This bikeway plan should supplement the present biking activities of our local cyclists and not restrict their existing activities, rather it should • encourage the use of .bikeways and safe biking habits through education and bicycle safety training. Through bikeway coriunittee meetings and meetings with representatives of various city departments and local interest groups, a series of goals and objectives have been developed. which will be used in implementing a bikeway plan and program for Richfield. These have been incorporated to the extent feasible in the Richfield Bikeway Plan and Program. GOALS ~ OBJECTIVES 1. Develop a city wide bikeway system that will minimize potential conflicts between bicycles, motor vehicles and pedestrians by: - Requiring one-way bikeways when adjacent to streets. - Providing a physical separation between bicycles, motorists and pedestrians whenever possible. - Encourage the upgrading to the highest class possible consistent with the demand for use and safety considerations. -6- 2. Educate bicyclists on the proper use, operation and safety rules governing bicycle operation by: - Promoting public awareness through all media sources. - Expanding the bicycle safety education program in the schools. - Encouraging civic and service club sponsored bicycle education events. 3. Provide a direct, convenient and safe bikeway system by: - Developing bikeways based upon these priorities. a. Access to bicyclists' destination. b. Protection from motor vehicle traffic. c. Continuity of bikeways within Richfield and to adjacent communities. - Providing short bikeways for the recreational bikers and long inter- • city bikeways for the bike commuter. - Routing bikeways to minimize stop signs, cross traffic and conflict with other transportation modes. 4. Provide a degree of bicycling safety not available off the bikeway by: - Designing the bikeway~to minimize cross traffic conflict. - Working towards the co-equal enforcement of the "rules of the road" for the motorist and the biker. - Working towards a mandatory education and safety training program on bicycling for both the biker and the motorist. - Develop Class II and III bikeway routes only on low traffic streets. 5. Develop a system of designated bikeway routes by: - Utilizing standard bikeway signing procedures. • - Providing a Richfield bikeway route map to all residents with additional copies available at appropriate locations. -7- 6. Develop a bikeway system for both recreation and corrnnuting use by: - Providing bicycle parking facilities in all parks and other recreational facilities. - Establishing bikeways that link parks, playfields and recreation facilities to one another. - Giving priority to those sections of the Richfield Bikeway System that will tie into the state, county, and adjacent corrnnunity bikeway systems. - Utilizing existing hard surfaces for bikeways wherever possible. - Providing for security of property at bike parking areas. - Encouraging bicycle parking facilities in all new or redeveloped commercial areas. 7. Retain use of all city streets for bicycles in order to provide unrestricted mobility to and through those areas in Richfield not served by a bikeway. . 8. Amend the Richfield City Code relating to the operation of bicycles and motor vehicles to assure co-equal enforcement of the "rules of the road" with all its attendant rights and responsibilities. 9. Provide access between residential areas, recreational areas and commercial areas now separated by highway barriers by: - Constructing bicycle/pedestrian bridges as an alternative to 66th ~ 76th Street access routes. 10. The bikeway system should be designed to minimize the use of motor vehicles for short trips within Richfield. - Connect major residential areas with schools, shopping areas, civic facilities and other bicyclist's destinations. 11. Finance the Richfield Bikeway System through local, state, federal and all other sources. 12. :Monitor the bikeway system to determine its effectiveness by: - Conducting and publishing surveys on frequency and characteristics of use, safety, design standards, and other factors. r - 8 - BI I~~AY TYPES • In this report the definitions established by the Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering of the University of California, Los Angeles, in the research report "Bikeway Planning Criteria and Guidelines", will be adopted. The term bikeway is used to define all facilities that explicitly provide for bicycle travel. Bikeways, then, can be anything from fully grade-seperated facilities to simple signed streets The following three classes of bikeways are defined: Class I: A completely separate right-of-way designated for the excl~,;sive use of bicycles. Cross flows by pedestrians and motorists are minim~7.zed. Class II: A restricted right-of-way designated for semi-exclusive use • of bicycles. Through-travel by motor vehicles is not allowed, (this is not a through street) vehicle parking may be allowed. Cross flow and directional flow by motor vehicles to gain access to driveways or parking facilities is allowed. Pedestrian cross flow is also allowed. Class III: A shared right-of-way designated by signs placed on vertical poles and/or stencilling on the pavement. Any bikeway which shares its right-of-way with either moving motor vehicles or pedestrians is considered a Class III bikeway. • Class I bikeways typically may be found in parks, various recreation areas, airport property fringe areas, and along utility rights-of-way where the routes are laid out to be completely separate from both roadways and pedestrian paths. In existing built-up Richfield, provision of Class I Bikeways is difficult when considered in light of the available right-of-way, the associated land use, and right-of-way cost. In such cases it is appropriate to consider feasibility in terms of a set of Class II bikeway alternatives. Class III bikeways, as often found in this country, achieve only symbolic separation of the travel modes; as such +h A.,T„a.T hP ~Pa~;hiP nnly ender the most ideal situations. t 1 - n - EII~~~lAY PLA-"Ji~I~dG CO~JSIDERATIO~`VS The art of planning involves the transformation of citizen's goals and technical design standards into a schedule of events for implementation. This part of the planning process must be relative to the urban system. The bikeway plan, therefore, must be designed to reflect the relationship between other modes of transportation and land use. The Richfield bikeway system should be implemented to connect with other bikeway systems in the area, e.g. Edina, Bloomington, Minneapolis, Hennepin County, and the State Trail system. This unification can provide Richfield residents with a system for recreation and commuting far greater than what the city can provide within its boundaries. This unified system can provide a realistic approach to human. movement which does not stop at political boundaries. The planners of bikeways for existing communities must consider that bicycle movement is part of the larger transportation system, and therefore should be planned and designed to reflect this relationship. Realization that the bikeway is a related element in a many faceted transportation system relates the bikeway to such important factors as mixed-mode travel which implies providing planned options for combinations with auto, mass transit facilities, and walking. These interfaces as well as the present and future relation of the bikeway to other systems of travel should be considered not only in long range plans, but also in short term planning of bikeways for areas where immediate action must be taken. FLEXIBILITY When land use and demand changes occur after a bikeway system has been established, appropriate adaptations to accommodate the changes will be necessitated. These may range from realignment of the bikeway to its complete - 10 - removal. The more separated the bikeway is from the abutting or associated land use, the less it will be affected by land use changes. Class I bikeways entirely independent of the roadway are the best planned where the need will be fairly permanent. To account for changes in traffic along the existing bikeway, projections of density within the current zoning should be determined. For .example, a vacant commercially zoned area between two already existing comm- erc_al building areas should have an associated bikeway segment that reflects the area's probable future use rather than its present vacant use. The second consideration involves the adaptability of the bikeway for realignment. A Class III bikeway marked by signs alone provides the most adaptability in such a situation, for the sign can be removed and used elsewhere. More inflexible are physical barriers and separated roadways, • which require still more effort to reconvert or transform to cope with a change in land use or demand. DENSITY PATTERNS Some models of accessibility and population density predict that as the travel time from residence location to work location increases, the number of persons living at that distance decreases. Clark and others* have done empirical work to derive the functional relationship between residential and work locations and have found that population density appears to decrease exponentially from the city centers. Implications of this model for bicycle usage are strong. For trips shorter than two miles, the bicycle may have definite advantages over other forms of transportation as far as the travel time is concerned. As the trip length increases, the bicycle soon loses its advantage. In this respect, general usage of the bicycle for commuter trips implies that *There has been much work on accessibility modes. See,for instance,Ira S.Lowry, Seven Models of Urban Develo ment: A Structural Comparison, Rand Report P-3673 anta onica, a i ., or t e several artic es on ur an models presented in the May 1965. ecl.ition of the American Institute of Planners Journal. - 11 - the distance between home and work must remain small (say 3 miles or less). Accessibility will therefore indicate that if there is a marked increase in population density and more people can live closer to inhere they work, the bicycle may become a popular form of commuting transportation. This discussion, of course, applies to only the larger cities where at present most home to work trips exceed optimal bicycle riding distances. LOCATION CRITERIA WITH RESPECT TO LAND USE Plans for location of bikeways can be generated in the same general manner as plans for highways. However; since the cyclist is very sensitive to minor changes in grade, route length, environmental quality, and congestion, the planning of the route must be done with particular care for the unique demands of the bicycle user. Scenic features, both natural and manmade, should be exploited if at all • feasible. Consideration of some recent work on the perception of the urban user could significantly influence the quality of this aspect of bikeways. Bikeways with a good view of a skyline,a park, an historic monument, or a plaza, if economically feasible, should be considered. Consideration of the different trip types is important, i.e. home-to-work paths might be located in close, conjunction with arterials than would home-to-school trip bikeways where trips would be shorter and would occur at different times of the day. Future projected uses of the land is probably one of the most important criteria for the decision maker, because in allocating land resources for bikeways, the decision maker excludes this land from other use. Consideration of future projections of land use might lead the decision maker to include some areas in the bikeway system and exclude others. Projection data is helpful in determining location, as well as type of bikeway. The bikeway should be compatible with the adjacent land use of the segment. 1 - 12 - • For example, if heavy pedestrian traffic is a characteristic of the sidewalk of a shopping area, the separation of the cyclist from the pedestrian is important. A bikeway through a natural park area should not be environmentally incongrous; that is, it should not create barriers (with fences), or be artificially raised or be laid out with only the shortest route or smallest grades in mind, which would ignore the natural landscape or topography. A bikeway through a residential or commercial area should also not be aesthetically incongrous. It should be placed and constructed so as to provide a smooth flow through the area, while. at the same time not presenting an overt barrier to the pedestrian. Therefore; the arrangement of the particular segments of the bikeway should give attention to the characteristics and ecology of the adjacent land uses, • so as to make the bicycle an integral part of and not an intrusion on the existing use pattern. INIAGEAB ILITY In order to achieve maximum usage and enjoyment by the users, bikeways should be planned so that they are "imageable" and pass through an "imageable" environment wherever possible. Kevin Lynch, explains that "imagea:~le" environments are ones which remain as vivid memories even after short ex- posure. Although there are no set characteristics for a facility or an area to c{ualify as being imageable, it is known that some areas with a confusing array of streets and monotonous skylines are not easily recognized by the average person. Lynch's analysis was extended to road systems by Appleyard, Lynch, and Myer, and it does not seem inappropriate to suggest that bikeways, to a lesser degree, can be subject to the same type of consideration. It is generally conceded that finding one's way through a city should be more T S - 13 - • of a pleasurable experience than an ordeal. For the typical cyclist, • the bikeway designer must be concerned with both distance perception and orientation of the cyclist. As an example, a bikeway should not wind indiscriminately through bland areas of the city where major landmarks are not clearly visible. Not only should Class I bikeways be located in particularly scenic areas, but if possible, Class II bikeways should be located in particularly imageable areas, as well. This type of location is important to both the casual cyclists who appreciate the imageability and to the commuter or frec{uent rider who desires the added variety thus afforded. ~J - 14 - RICHFIELD DIf~~~JAY - LOfVG RAf`JGE PL~`J The long range bike system plan is necessary to describe and illustrate a complete system as the desired end goal. The long range plan will serve as a guiding mechanism in the completion of a bikeway system in stages over a number of years. The long range plan should remain flexible so as to reflect changes which occur during the implementation period. The Long Range Bike System Plan will be described here by type classification. Class I Bikeways and their proposed location will be described first, Class II and III Bikeways will then be identified. A map illustrating the long range plan will follow. Class I Bikeways • The Class I Bikeway is the best system for open areas such as parks, and on airport property. The Class I system is the safest system. In Richfield this system will be primarily recreational oriented. Parks Within Community Parks the Class I system should be constructed to provide circunferral flow. The user should be able to "get on" the system at a given point and cycle around to the same point. The Class I system within parks should be connected to the lineal Class II or Class III systems between parks. This type of Class I bike path should be programmed for Richfield Lake and Legion Lake parks. A lineal Class I bike path should be programmed for Wood Lake, Donaldson Park and Adams Hill Park as part of the major east/west routes which would tie into the Edina system near Adams Hill Park. The bikeway on the service road east of Cedar Avenue which is programmed for a Class III route should be upgraded to a linear Class I bike path when the airport property is developed for a municipal golf course. t - 15 - Class II Bikeways'- The semi-exclusive right-of-way of the Class II system makes it ideal for certain residential streets. Low traffic flow streets in residential neighborhoods should be designated as Class II bikeways, thus allowing the street for local traffic and bikes only. At this time the only street planned for a Class II bikeway is Pleasant Avenue from 64th .Street to 76th Street. However, if a Class III route -becomes heavily travelled by bikers and a Class II route is warranted the route could possibly be upgraded. Class III Bikeways The Class III system is developed by signing in right-of-way shared with motor vehicles or pedestrians on vertical posts and/or stencilled signs on the pavement. Class III bikeways as often found. in this country achieve only symbolic • separation of travel modes; as such they may be feasible only•under the most ideal situations. Combining bicycle traffic with pedestrians in Richfield is felt to be extremely undesirable, therefore no Class III routes on sidewalks or pedestrian-pathways are proposed in this plan. All Class III bikeways are on low traffic volume residential streets. It is_the feeling of the Bikeway Committee that there is a need for safe. bike and pedestrian access from west Richfield on Penn .Avenue into South Minneapolis and into Bloomington to the Target/Southtown commercial area. While this is a recognized need it was felt that the Bikeway Plan should not address this difficult situation in the bikeway priorities but rather to encourage city, state and adjacent community involvement in improving these pedestrian crossings. • _ _ lil ` ~ _ . - - . _ _ - .. ® FQ- Eli p ke~f E I & ~i~ f y w.x..1 E !~ 3 3^`i i Q .L ~ ~4 C ~1~ 3n. x19E 3n. r193 W - ~~ - ~ ~ '~ • ~~ y~ 1,Yp! ~ ' ~ 3A. x1a ~ 3A. 3,93 _,.-'~ ~ C~ ~ .~ ~ 3n. »9.9x.,9 i • 9n. xsl9x.u e 6 ~ k d ia. LL g ~ {i~i @ 71 ~[~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ®~~W 3A. W9Z 3Ar m9z ~ -i..~~3y ~ __^^' i . ,~~ ~ G ~ t. E C ~ i 3n. v1oa 3n. x16 I~ ~ _ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ 3 9L ,3 0x0, 3ntl x9„300x0, ~. ~ 3AY9.93a I '3n. tl.03a ~ ~ I . _ ~_ ~ - ~ _ ~A. x 9 3A. r1 t1 Fly ~-._1--~~`~~ ^ ~ _ J I -.~~ j 3A9~191 ~ _ are w 9 333 ~ ~ ~-J L- _ '. ~, 1 __ J - x - N 1100,9 3n. x010x11100'H r ' -. '~~. • x191 .191 1 _ 1 0~0 ~~ ~_ _ I 3n. x1.~ v 3A. ,. n. x191 3n. x,91 3nr x. a , ~ - - r ' --, - ,' -3nr r1 a ~~ 3n. x,1 , , - ~~ ~ ~yy~ -~ 0-- ~ [-~ 3A. x, ~ I 9n. ~~0~ 1 i ~ ~ '~ ~ J I'~k_] LJ l_J ~3A9 lgll3 ~ ' 3n. 39„3 1 I~~ ~- ~ ~~~~~i - Z '~ ~_ ~_.. I_J ~ ~ 3n0 gJYJixa 3nr o9n x3 ~ O W i 1 ~ J-~ - ~.- I ~ ~- r- an. 99.xn,oa ~ ~ } ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i . 9n9xn,9a Q J _ ~~~ ~'[-~I - - _- - J ~ ~ r ,~ ~~ ~ 3n. 9x.,xro j._ r-I [ _ ~ C C C ~ C_ 1! 3A. 9x9„x~ w 3ntl 9x.,.9 _ - _-_~ _~~ ~ _ _r-~,~- 1_ 3A..19 W 3n. x.9 -- ---- - _! ,~ - ~ -. ~ ~ ~ ,, 3nv 3x0Jxn3 -_ .-.: _'- i 9 ~ = - ~ ~L~ I ~ ~ J r J l-J ~ S ~ 3na xoixna li ' .y 3nv wa - =_--J -... .--- ~ o - _ 3nr wz _~~_ I _-- - ~- _- _- -~r-l~ _JI i~at 3nr 315 ~ ~ 3n. 3n.3u9 ~ z --. .- _ .._ _ - - - ~ - -- ~ ~'L. ~~~ • 3n..3„w x - ~ - _ .. - , --. -r-. - `. - _ ~ ~ l~ 3nr „399m9 l- _ i i ~ ~~ _ I'~ 3n. x,99„x3x -_ _ _ _--: _:. I I = "i ~- I - - 3A. x,,,o.,x3. 3nr n9nes„e ~ r .. ~ c ~- ~ - -~~ - ~ ~r~ - - y 3n..m9z„iY ~ i 3nv Jxrs>3,e •i .:_ ___.. 3nr ixasr3,a t~ '~ v 3w 9x.9s '3nv 9».x9 ~ ~__ _ ... _._ ~ ._. . ¢ - --.... f .--.~ _. . _.. ' . T 3n. i3ix9xx ~ '3nv 139x.» ~ -_~ ~. _. -- ~ - . _ _ _ 3M at3iJtlPJ inb 0,3 etl.0 L~ _ .. _.~_. 1 I. x 3nv xa tlO,v ~ ~ \~~ _ ~\ ~ ~ ~__ __ 3nr ax.wxB O W 3nv 1x.~xB J Y i \~ - - - C 1 t W J a ~ ~ laa .nv Fa.ya ~ -_ LL ! .:." 3nv r.0 V ~ .,w`.:-. .. __. _.. __ _. ins 1x0000 ~~ 3nv •G9x3x3 ~~- ~ D ~^x~„ ._ - _. - -:- - 3n. xO9x3n3 w ~ y i ~ ~ ° ~ " 3n. lrgx3ui 3., ,,,. rn.. .. _ ~Q nn. xaxx n . , . s.„a,.. .,..._ .5,. ~ ~ .. xx tls.. - 16 - RICHFIELD BII~~~JAY -SHORT RWVGE PROGRAP~1 Although the bike has been with us for over 100 years, the use of bikes for recreation and commuting has grown tremendously in the last few years. Because the demand for bikeways is a relatively new phenomenon and the auantativP demand for bikeways is not known, high capital program expenses should not be devoted to bikeways in the short range program. The use of bikeways should be tested. It is recommended that the city concentrate on providing Class II and III bikeways for the short range. If the demand for exclusive right-of-way for Class I grows, this could be provided for in the future according_to the long range bikeway plan. RECON~IENDED BICYCLE RELATED PROGRAMS On the city level, bicycle programs other than bicycle facility construction . and maintenance should include education, registration and licensing and the city bicycle ordinance. Unless bicyclists obey common sense rules of bicycle safety, and those rules are enforced, bikeways will not succeed in reducing accidents. In view of the increasing number of bikers and the number of bikeways proposed on streets it is obvious that major improvements in educating bicyclists and motorists are necessary. BICYCLE SAFETY PROGRAMS Richfield bicycle/motor vehicle accident statistics indicate that bicycle safety awareness should be established at all grade levels. Bicycle safety programs must extend to all ages. Major emphasis should be directed to school children, who comprise a large percentage of bicyclists and who are involved in the .majority of bicycle accidents. Bicycle safety as taught in the Richfield. Public School System is the minimum required by the State Board of Education. This is taught in the Health ~ Safety units in grades 4-6. However, at the option of the individual teacher, the school system has resources available in their media center on biking and -17- The Public Safety Department conducts bicycle clinics on a regular basis several times a year. These clinics have been effective with younger bicyclists but they are only beginning to reach the adult bicyclist. Currently-the department is using bicycle patrols in an attempt to upgrade the level of enforcement used with bicycle traffic violation problems. The bicycle patrols are presently being operated by the Police Reserve Officers who have been authorized to issue tags for traffic violations involving the city's bicycle ordinance. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION In addition to bicycle safety education which should be taught on an expanded basis in the schools, a public awareness program is recommended. .The purpose for a public awareness. program is to educate bicyclists, motorists and pedestrians about safety, the bikeway system and how to use it. It is also necessary to increase awareness of bicycles as more than childrens toys, but as part of the overall transportation system in an urban area. ENFORCEMENT The Public Safety Department does not have the staff to provice consistent enforcement of bicycle regulations. More urgent problems associated with motor vehicle violations and other crimes take precedence over issuing citations for bicycle related violations. , Bicycle laws are difficult to enforce, even with increased manpower. Violations are numerous, and many offenders are children. There appears to be confusion and lack of knowledge of bicycle safety rules and regulations. A bicycle court could possibly meet once a month to consider bicycle citations. • Citations should not be recorded on permanent police records until the third violation. An inexpensive means of providing additional manpower for bicycle enforcement might possibly be a special "bicycle patrol" using the Police Explorers and trained volunteers in enforcement of bicycle laws during late P -18- afternoon and early evening hours-and on weekends when most of the bicycle accidents occur. The feasibility of providng such a bicycle patrol in Richfield should be explored. The Richfield City Code relating to bicycles should be examined to determine whether revisions are necessary to assure a basis for standard enforcement of safe biking habits on the bikeways and city streets. The recommendations described in this section are also contained in the Bikeway Plan Goals and Objectives. A strong implementation program of the bicycle related programs is necessary to develop safe biking habits. It is the intent of the. Bikeway Committee to address the problem of implementing bike safety education in future committee work.. DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES Three criteria were-used to establish which parts of the bikeway system should be developed first. The criteria is as follows: 1. .Service most people. 2. Provide connectors between major points - parks, schools, ice arena, and adjacent communities. 3. Provide recreational opportunity to all parts of the city. Priority One A number of maps showing routes for each priority are contained on the following pages. An east/west route across Richfield should be developed utilizing Class I, II and III routes. This priority going from west to east should go through Adams Hill Park (connects here with Edina System) then east on 74th Street through Donaldson Park to the I35W pedestrian bridge. This system should continue east • on 73rd Street to the Minneapolis Northfield Southern Railroad tracks. A section of Class II bikeway should use the road right-of-way adjacent to the railroad tracks from 76th Street north to 64th Street. Priority one should then continue south to connect with the Bloomington bikeway system via c -19- 76th Street and the 2nd Avenue pedestrian bridge. From the railroad tracks the bikeway should continue east along 68th Street to Bloomington Avenue, with connections to Memorial Park and Christian Park. A connection north to Legion Lake should be made on Colwnbus Avenue. From 68th Street this priority should continue north on Bloomington Avenue to South Minneapolis and the Lake Nokomis area. From Bloomington Avenue, the bikeway should continue East on 63rd Street to .connect with Taft Park. It should then cross over T.H. 36 via the proposed pedestrian bridge where it will continue eastward on 63rd and 62nd Streets to the city limits for access into Minneapolis. Priority Two The second priority will complete the two major east/west routes. This priority consists of a Class III bike route west on 68th Street from the route on Pleasant Avenue to Wood Lake. This will then connect with a Class I bikeway around the north side of Wood Lake. A Class III route will continue west from Wood Lake on 68th Street via a proposed pedestrian bridge over I35W to the west city limits. The other major route to be completed in this priority is a Class III route .extending eastward from Pleasant Avenue on 73rd Street and Diagonal Boulevard to Bloomington Avenue. A Class III bikeway will extend south from 73rd Street on 12th Avenue and continue over I494 into Bloomington. These two north/south routes will be connected a 76th Street. This connection will be extended eastward over Cedar Avenue via a proposed pedestrian bridge in priority three. This priorrty will also complete the Class III route on Bloomington Avenue from 68th Street to 76th Street. Priority Three This priority consists primarily of smaller bikeway segments to connect some of the inplace routes. The major route connections in this priority will - 20 - be a Class III route from Girard Avenue west to Xerxes on 64th Street. From 64th Street a route will extend south to 68th Street via Thomas and Sheridan. Another Class III route will extend from 64th Street. and follow Girard Avenue to 68th Street where it will follow .Lake Shore Drive south to Donaldson Park. An additional Class III route will extend from 63rd Street just east of Cedar Avenue and the previously proposed pedestrian bridge extending south to 66th Street where it will follow the service road to I494, then along the north frontage road where it will connect with a state proposed bike trail system from Fort Snelling to St. Peter along the Minnesota River. When the proposed municipal golf course is developed on the airport property the Class III route on the frontage road should be upgraded to a Class I facility. This priority also includes the construction of a pedestrian bridge across Cedar • Avenue at 76th Street as a link for biking and other recreational opportunities at Fort Snelling State Park and the Minnesota River corridor. Priority Four This is the last priority for meeting the long range Richfield Bikeway Plan. This priority will circle Richfield Lake with a Class I route and connect it to the rest of the bikeway system. A Class I system will be developed around Legion Lake with Class III connections to Taft Park to the east and two neighborhood parks to the west.. This priority will connect the Richfield Lake area to the Legion Lake area, providing north central Richfield with bike access to coirnnercial and recreational areas. The Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet commercial area is highlighted in this priority because of potential bikeway opportunities which should be incorporated into the • redevelopment of this area. t ---- s - - ~'~ _\ ------- A Q~i / '~ III ~ ~ ,, Fsl a a, a a !s. ~y 9jq ,,~. ~ _ J ~ ~ ii i 9nr w1i W W -I >~+~ - J a+ ~~~~, I ~~~ a a a a ILL Lt, 'aM xWMU an. wai . ]n. Nwawii ~~ E i i ~ o O~ ~® W W W- W ~ a 'rA. a1i ]MV M li I ~~ ~ 1 4 aM u ~~ C 1M,wW 1 W W 'rN. WTf]a8110, ~ ' IM WI,lMN01 ~. ari wm] an. ima i an. wa i_ - - ;Mr wn I ~~ ,:v, ai. wil DOC~OC~~D Q~~~O .,~ .,M w" d ,. ,M w,. ~~o~ - ~~~ ~~ .aM w.l ~aN. NotrNllle0v i r: ur wiex.colr I nlla ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .aM w. el I ~ i aM wa1 I ~0~0 ~"~~3e ~0~ ~ - 9N. w.l ],.. ww oo~~ oo~~c ~oo~ ,Mail ~ #~. aM n,e ~ ~o~~o ooo~ ~ooo ,;,..r j 0 ~~9i8 I~Qr~r~~~r~r~~~i wwn ] _ rr~~ ,YM~ u m t. ~]n. uo' ~ ~ - ~~~ ~~~~L~~ ~aM amla ai. ~ ~ ~~~ , ~ ~L~~CiC70~~ aM ~,~ _ walr,~ ~ -- D ~OC~C~C~O aer ar.. ~ ~ 1 r ;aM iwe - i & ~C ~OC]DD~~C~O ]M ]n. ~.,]~ ; - C~ ~ O Cif O C~CIO C~ ~ ' 3n. OM1itl0/ 'lM OB.I 3n. ai 1 ~ ~~~- ~ e an. Sx]n315 I ~ ~~- .-- r~J LJ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O 'aM sx]A3iS ~ - j 3n. 113051.,8 ~I J ~ ~ ^ 6 I '3n. lli~ r~,~, ~ lul 3 , ~ l~ ~~ ~ 'aM '3M xiNW1N3r '~~r_______~, ~~ ..~_.I~ - ~L_J~ ~ N 3M Atln85„ia ~-~-L- 1 ~, 3AY 1Wpel,N 3n. LNY5.3L - -~ q 3M i ~'~~ ~ ~ u L~ ~ i G 'aM aMNe ~ 3M OMNB ~r~ 11''~~ ~-l. ~ ~ ~_ ~ f 'i: I _.. -: ~~plr8 •. '3Mi]iee.N ~lJ~ ~~' ~~ ~~~~ ~~ 'aM t}YNYN a~~~: ~ 3n. 0131!8.0 `~ _ \ ~~ ! ~ -~ ^ iM1. 0,31le]Fl 3n. N01WT J~` %~~11~w~~9~R ~ l~-~. I ~' ]n1 M]egA 3na iMnxB ~ =J ~ W 8 /. •`-d' ~ ~~ \ \\m `~'~ r-l~ '3n. iMAW 3nr ..3,00 - _ ~ ~ ~ ii W J 'an. ] U I ]na NczN]N] ~ ~ .- __ __ p fyy -~^ _ '3nr Now3N I ' ~~ ' 3nv aNON38! -~. - } ~ f ~ J~I' ~~ 33 vi 0u tl~0 J' `_ 3na. OavNi0 __ _._. _ __.. ~.~_.~ ~ ./ ~~ -_ I ~ J -~ 3ntl tOroeNnw-_.-._.-~ M 10,08 1 __. _ .._._ _._ -~ .. _. .~_ 3 ~1 3nv 9HinNi ..... .. _ ..._ _ _.. . t _ _ _.. .- _ ~ ~ ant 9x nNi __-._- .._.. _. .. _.. __ ._._. __.._ ..--.. ;~y . - _ - 3oe - - _ _ _'~ $ ~ 3M 53NVr 3n. 53N.~ - - _-~ a Wr1 _ .. .. L - _~ _~ ~ ~. - - n. i~N. J •~ 3n, N,b.~N _ --_ _ - _ ,. - I~ -- - ~~ :r =, 3n> a3n ,o -.- -' - .- .. .- ]M N3n~w ~NM _ r ' _. . _... 3n. NN]a 3n. N]]n0 ~ - - _- -.--.. - -- ._ --- _ _ 3n. N3]~.o 33n.bs.NO~, ~ 3 ~._, ^ ~ .. _ - - - 33n.5NO1. 1 I 3na YNena.s.n _ - _~~ I ' _ _ ~~ 3NON 1N3]Nln I _ br8N5.M _ .: _ _ _ ; 3na 3nv 51,nav - ~. , ` I _ _ .. ~ _ ______ __ __ ~_ _ __ _ _.. 1 .3nv 53na3a F ~ r u n n n n u $ ~ ~ ~ ~ n n s 3 i i i 3 3 3 3 3 3 ^ ] 3 3 8 ] 3 ] c • • a . ~ C C, ~ ~~ C C ~. ~ W MN \ '1~1 M[i 1~~ ~v.+ Woowas ~ ~~ ~~ C C C C ~~~ p" ; J J J J "-1 ~l i rl ~ ~-l l ~ ~. ~.u~ ~ ~OCiO~C ~~: ~~~~~ Q` .,~ w w ~y.V/ ~ tlii QO W .V~ itii ~• F- U C C C 5 C C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J J r r J W ~_~, ~~ ~J ---, i ~n ~~ '~~CI~C~~~ ,~ r.. _ ,' ~~ ! _ ~~~~ ~~ ~~0~ ~. ~,~. - -,r--,.- - i:xvu ~~_ -~ ~~~~I -~ ~- ,.. ,~..,,W ~'` .~ ~ ~~ .\, _L_ ~_--r--~ J ]nY 3TOx~i = -- ~ r~ - t ~~ w ~ J~ ~ e V : ~ ~Y.ecW.= Y ~~t~_ __ _ j: am ixoam-~ ~ !~. __ J ! '~ f 3na xosnan3 ~- --- -- pp s 3,v ,xo.3ve 8 ~ ~ f~~--._- ~ _ 3/v ~Oxr _- _ _ ___- _... __ __ h . inv rTYJ i~ _~ _. _.--_ _ - .. - _... ~~ _ _ ~ i 3nv ~35sa 3 s ~.w.i - -'_-_. - _._a -_ - ~ -- ~ 3 v . _ < ~ 4 _ n u n u $ n n n c n n n ~. n ,~ • ,,,..« lw L~.MP • ]M AR ~..,, ~. ~w ~. ~~ y,..a,3 ~.. ~~ ,..,. ,., .., ~....~ ;~. ~~, ,~ .,., .., .~~ ~aw wa ~,.. ,u,n ~. ~. 3M MYN ~. ~„~ ~. ~. „.. w= ~.. ~~ ~,...~ 3n~ SM1n335 y,. r l~Y 33'1lo3iM ]M 11335~n0 lMM •wcM d ]n. unw3u ~•~ an.e 3nr •Axmx ~nr a~3~3xn N~ 3wOwai 33nv N1M a0 p ~~ ~!~ °` r w Z d 'sue^~'i - ~ ~ U ~ 9! J ~__~~~ C tl tl C U k ~ I.L ~ ~ ° i:} Y~31 ~ ~~ ~ J J J J }I z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t* .,~C:-~~7~~,~ ~_ ~- ~JC~~~~~,^~~~~~~~ -1 __ ~ '_a `~i w '~ ~ . ~~~ _.L ..._ _-.. _______ _ _._. T. U ~ ; ay Y ~ \ ---_ -_- -- °s ~u _~ _ ~3 =- -~.~1,- rid b 3M aSUn~ 33nv a3na 3+r a~aro] ~ ;.e3 ~'~~~~e 3. _,~~ ~ .„ ~- s ~ ,. • • :''. ^4 Y \`~ J 3 8 ~ -.. 3ntl 0131eM ® ,. O z x 0 F- z W d J W W D W d' Z O Z W 6 \l ------- - - ~ .-~ ~ .t. ~ ~ .` w ~ ~ -~ a.Z~~ ~S ~. 3n....: W ~~ ~ C> gS r~x t F9:F ~ ~ -'~-~ a o 0.' ~ ~ g v~~ ,. 9=- tnt.a ~ ~~0~ c.~ p ien= F• K t Cs Y 1-y ~3.. ~ 5 ~ ~ ~~ ~ =ia eFi. ant xsiaxvas i EE _ g ~"' Y 'F \~ ~~ 6 B H ~ O ® a a W 3.. Ott _ -~C~~ W .; W W '. Z a 3nv,. ~; ;~, ~~~~~ ''~C-~_ ~'' ~" w ant .,ae - - ...~ ~ I ~~-~. n f ~,..~„3fOx0, ant v~Si i ~~~~ __~ ~Ft ~ ~ _~v-__ _"'. - ._ ant Y3 t~ ~ -. ~ ._ - 3n.., t - - -~ r- >w~ ~~ - ..o I _.. I 58 -~ -1~ - -~ 3nr omNx~ ]Q[ t ~ I ~I _ _ ~_ _' ~ _ - IfL 1 ~J Ir~ L _~ L __ ant snenrtm .J ~ ~ I _- - ~ = J ~, _._ L ~ -^ L- - _ j f_... _ ant •nte ~ I ___ _ __ ~ .-- ~ _ ~ ant Oxv'ItvO __ S 4 ~- L. _ ~ ~ `~'~~-~-llI ant a~.,.we ~__ - _ ' ~- - - ~ J ~ _ ~ - ' __ ...._ _. _~ _. q-___. .- ~ J f ~- '3nv r~s _- 1 vuve ~_. _.. -. -- @i ~ ~-'_ '_. __ ~ _ 1 ~. -3na r~• ... - __ __ _-_ _ __ ~ _ ..._ - ~ _ ^.__ 9^ ~- F9 w f ~_._ ,~... __.- ___ _ __- _ ..._. ~_. L- 3nv >.f __._ _ ..- _ __ '3nv >ut _ __ -.._ _ __' -- _. _ _ 3nv 5x3n335 _-- _ __ - - - _ I '3nv ui ~ ___... __. _ -- .._-. ~~- ._ _ _ 5 _ _ L { Y -_ _- __ ~1 _ _ 'ant 11305 ti9 `.__.. `.____ _ _- _'_ .-- -_ .-- _. -_, - o ' I( _-_-- - _ - .. _ _.___. N1tlOM1N3n -_ ~ < 3nOM 4 _. _ I ~! ._. _ ~ -.-~ _ L -. _- l •tlMSil d _ _ _ .__.~ . ~_ - _ _ _ 'ant ixt5v33e _ ._ _ -... - _~_. ~ 33 ~ J _~ ins ahs» ~ _ - - __ ~ __- - ~ .3 d _ -_ - Z;a '3nv 13 xety .... - _ --. _ .-.-_ _ _.- _ -. _ _. "3ntl 013 eev0 ~.:: 1 - -- -- 3nv 3'WOx~i - ... ~ ~_ _ _~__. 3nv w7 u0ly .. ~~'' 6 ~ \ ~~~~~, \:- _. --.. .. _ _ _ 3nv LNV~.eB ~ W - s € ~ ~ ~ / _ ----•~ ~ ~ ;.:: $; '._ ~~ ~I~, ant 3ntaw=~ f'1 3nt .~„3eo~, tn.t.3a ant «o.3nt^~, 3.t ~.t 3nt^vSnBwni00 3nv •eva 3nv Oxv3HV6 3nv ]nv roS 3nr 53 an315 W H s 1 , • • - 21 - COST ESTIMATES AND FUNDING SOURCES Total Two-Way Pj~IORITY ONE Linear Feet Cost~Mile Class I 4,000' $11,808 Class II 8,000 23,860 Class III 26,400 1,240 Pedestrian Bridge 63rd ~ Cedar p~IORITY TWO Class I Class III Pedestrian Bridge 68th ~ 35W PRIORITY THREE Class III Pedestrian Bridge 76th ~ Cedar Avenue PRIORITY FOUL Class I Class III Grand Total 2,400 ..11,$08 25,100 1,204 Total Cost $ 8,974 36,267 6,200 51,E 250., 000 $301,441 5,314 5,890 11,20 250,000 28,600 1,204 6,720 250,000 256,720 11,600 11,808 25,978 7,800 1,204 1,835 ..27,813 21.6 miles $ 847,178 Source: City of Richfield Public Works Dept. ,. - 22 - • Possible sources of funding for construction of the proposed bikeways include but are not limited to the following: Local Government 1) general fund 2) bonding 3) direct assessment 4) development rec{uirement State Government 1) trails program . 2) cigarette tax 3) state aid for streets Regional Government 1) regional park fund Federal Government 1) highway funds 2) Land and Water Conservation Fund (LAWCON) 3) Community Development Block Grants ~~ t> • - 23 - • BIBLIOGRAPHY Bikewa Plannin Criteria ~ Guidelines nstitute o Transportation Tra is gineering, UCLA, 1972 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices lte tates epartment o Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 1971 Bicycling for Recreation and Co~mntzting U. S. Department o Transportation, U. S. Department of Interior, 1973 .The View from The Road Appleyar Donal , Lync ,Myer, 1964 'MIT Press Foot Paths ~ Bike Routes Standard ~ Guideline • Gregon State Highway Division, 1972 Bikeways On Highways $'icycle Institute o~ America, Inc. Bike Trails ~ Facilities: A Guide To Their Desi Walter Cook American Institute of Park Executives, 1965 Guide: Model Criteria for Bikeways and Transportation Planning, 1974 ed Criteria for Bikeways Within the Hi Minnesota State~Planning Agency St. Paul, Minn. - 1974 Bikeways in Action: The Davis Experience t7ni~'versity~ Cali ornia Davis, California - 1970 Tempe Arizona Bikeway Study, Background, Preliminary Plans aril Recoirmien ations Tempe Planning Department 1973 r~TY OF RI` HFIE.Tu~, MINNESOTA _ . Office of City Manager ',~ ~~ Council Letter No. 275 ~a ,Agenda August 25, 1975 h The Honorable Mayor ~ ~ ~ '''{ *~. and ..Members of the City Council City:of Richfield Gentlemen: ., ' °, Subject:.. Auction of City Vehicles For some time, now Richfield has participated' in Hennepin County ..Public Auctions . Through these auctions municipalities in the metropolitan area are able to dispose of depreciated vehicles at a favorable price. In many cases, the municipality then applies .the funds obtained from the sale of vehicles to ,the purchase price of replacement vehicles in the following year. On September 20, 1975, Hennepin County will conduct its final auction for 1975 .. Richfield is scheduled to sell:_six vehicles in this auction.. These vehicles .include two fully depreciated dump ,trucks and one pick-up truck which have been replaced by newer models , ,.and three. automobiles which have been replaced by new vehicles . Each of these vehicles has been fully depreciated-. It is` recommended that the council approve the auction of the above named vehicles . Respectfully..submi+ d, ~~ u ~Wayn S. Burggraaff City anager T , WSB/bab f- ~, r~ ~~ '~ ;_ .+ ~~.. , ,~'t ~; CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council better No.~ 2~4 r Agenda August 2 5, 19 7 5 v r, .~~' - - ~- ! r ~~ - ~ _ '~ t=~ The Honorable Mayor 1 d~ .! . ~ and ~ I~ .. - - - Members of the City Council r .- ,. City of Richfield ,.~ . ,, Gentlemen; Subject: Authorization faz the Advancement of Funds Until a few years, ago the City of Richfield and other municipalities: within the state customarily advanced appropriate funds to employees to cover travel • and other related costs and expenses while on business outside the city. At that time ari attorney general's opinion was issued .indicating that Such apro- cedure was not perrsitted under the law and should be discontinued. This" year. the legislature corrected' this situa ion and provided for the advancement of such funds. At a recent council meeting Councilman Jacobsen requested that. a resol- - ution providing for such advancement of funds be placed on both,the city council agenda and the HRA agenda: A resolution for- this: purpose has. been prepared by the city attorney.- A copy of this. resolution together with a copy of the 1975 enabling legislation is attached. It is recommended that the resolution be adopted both-by the city council and the HRA . Respectfully sub 'tted; ~~/""~' ~; - Wagne 5. Burggraaff , City Manager WSB/eja E . , ".~ ~ r ~. wr' ! . , CITIES AND COUNTIES-EXPENSE MONEY.' • ~ CHAPTER 288 ~ • _ s . . [Coded in Part) - _ -. An Act relating. to certain political subdivisions; authorizing the governing bodies of cities and counties to adva i 4 nce expense money; amending Minne- sots Statutes 1974, Section 471.98, Subdivision 1; and Chapter 471, by • adding a section. ' ' #' Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State o~ Minnesota: - ~ ' Section 1. I1linuesota Statutes 1974 Section 471 96 S , . , ubdivision 1, is amend- ed to read: _ . 47f.96 Membership in state and national associations ~ ~ • ' • ~ Subdivision 1. The governing bodies of cities, and counties .are hereby ~ authorized to appropriate ne ~ • `~ ' ' cessary funds to respective municipal corporations or Provide .membership of their political subdivisions respectively in . County regional t . ~ '~ ~ 1 , , s ate, and national associations of a civic, educational or governmental nature which pace as their purpose the betterment and im ro ment f i _ _- p ve- o municipal governmental operations. Cities and Counties are also authorized to participate th ,` rough duly. designated representatives in the meet- cgs and activities of such associations, and the governing bodies f i i ~ ~~ o c t es and Counties respectively are • authorized.. to appropriate necessary fur:ds to de- - fray the actual and necessary expense f • '! s o such representatives ir, connection therewith. ~: . - - .' ~~ . - . - ~y 649. - ~ 3: • ~-._ _ ._ - • ;. . _ .. : .~... :o . Ch. 288 - .. - ~~ i~ ~ : ; } :. 69th LEGISLATItKE ~> ~ Sec. 2. ;tiinnesotl Statutes 1974, Chapter 471, is amended by a6•_lin section to read: r• ~ ~ • g a 471.97 Authority to advance expense money ~ ~ a The. governing bodies of cities and counties may advance.={o any author- ized person the estimated costs of trav li e ng to and attending. meetins both within and outside tiie state on official b i us ness, including but not limited to . attending meetings. under the provisions of sections 465.58 and 471.96. person who reccices advances Every . under this section shall verified itemized claim to the ,governin bod present a properly incurred. If the actual a after the expenses a d e sr ~ re n necessary xpe e of the the amount of the advance, the governin person were more than g body shaI1 reimburse the the difference between th person f { ~ ' ~ ! or e advance and the, actual and necessary expenses. If the.advariee exceeded the actual and nece re i , . / _ ce ssary expenses, the person who ved the advance shall promptly return the excess funds to the governing body, and the governing body may ded c f ! u t the amount of the excess funds rom any moneys which may become due to the person, Including wages or ~ . SeG 3. This act is effective on the day lollowin g final enactment approved Jun 2 • . e , 1975. f ~_ ._ • - t F : [ .. ' . r ti RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADVANCEMENT OF FUNDS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The city .manager and finance director are hereby authorized and directed to advance money to any authorized person for the estimated ,costs of traveling to and attending meetings both within and outside the state on official city business including, but not limited to, attending meetings under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 465.58 and 471.96. 2. Every person who receives advances under this section shall present a properly verified itemized claim to the city council promptly after the ex- penses are incurred. If the actual and necessary expenses of the person were • more than the amount of the advance, the city. shall reimburse the person for the difference between the advance and the actual and necessary expenses. Tf the advances exceeded the actual and necessary expenses, the person -who received the advance shall promptly return ,the excess funds to the city. The city manager, acting on behalf of the city council, may deduct the amount of the excess funds of any monies which may become due to the person, including wages or salary. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this 25th day of August, 1975. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk _ ~ ~' ` ~ `~ ~~- r~ ~ ~ _ , ~. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA' Office of City Manager Gouncil Letter IVo. 275 Agenda August 25 , 1975 .The Honorable Mayor and Members of the,City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen:. Subject: Auction of City'Vehicles For some time now Rchfield`haspartcpated in Hennepin County Public Auctions. Through these auctions municipalities in the metropolitan area are '~` able to dispose of depreciated vehicles at a favorable price. In many cases,- the municipality then applies the funds obtained from the sale of vehicles to the purchase price of replacement vehicles in the following year.. On September 20, 1975, Hennepin. County will conduct its final auction for 1975. Richfield is scheduled to sell six vehicles in this auction. These t. `. ,, ,~; vehicles include two fully depreciated dump trucks and one pick-up tntck which have been replaced .by newermodels,.and=threeautomobiles which have been 9- '_ replaced by new vehicles . Each of these. vehicles has been fully depreciated. It is .recommended that the council approve the auction of the above named... ' vehicles, c . ~~ '~~ ~ ~~.9~ ;~ Respectfully submi d, ~~y~d-0-'~`a' ~ •~~L~~ 2 ~~ _ ~ ~~- t~~ ~ ~' ~~ ~Wayn S. Burggraaff City anager WSB/bab , r r ~~'~ :, `~ CITY OF RICHFIELD; MINNESOTA Office of City Manag '° ~~,C .Council Letter No:. 273 ~ ~~ ,Q~~ Agenda Auguste 25,,, 1975 ~F ~ e~ ~~ ~~~ r,IfrE The Honorable Mayor ~~~ ,~, _ ~ ~, and ,~L, Members of the City .Council ' ~~~ ~ J 1 ~O 1f~ City of Richfield ~ ~ `~b `J ~ =i :Gentlemen.; `~I Subject: Release of Escrow Funds for City Project No. 657 _. On February 3, 1975 the city council closed the contract for the con- struction of .permanent streets in City Project No. 657. ` At that"time the city council agreed,to finalize this contrac provided that the contractor deposited escrow funds to insure the. restoration of any asphalt work .not meeting specif- ications. The contractor has completed. the asphalt repair work as per specif- ications and is requesting the release of the escrow account. The contractor has met all asphalfi overlay requirements a•nd it is the .recommendation of the city staff -that the escrow account provided by Northwest Bituminous Ca. Inc. in the amount of $72,498.29 be released. ~' Respectfully submitted, ~ . ~c~ ~~~c~- Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Finance Director Public Works Director r. , ~~ ~~~ ~~~ << ~k.i e ,, ~ ~ i :. V ~ ~~P CITY OF RICHFIELD,.. IyIINNES.OTA ~~ Office of :City Manager ouncil Letter No..2'72 Agenda August 25, 1.975 . -The Honorable. Mayor ~N~'r r ` and 1.~"' ~ ~` Members of the Gity Council ~ ~' City of Richfield ;~~1~ 0 Gentlemen: Subject; Proposed Amendments to Goals and Policies. y` ~ of the Comprehensive Plan In accordance with State Statutes, a- copy of the proposed amendments ` ~to the Richfield Comprehensive Plan is being forwarded to council members •{ x~a? ~~ The Richfield Planning Commission reviewed these amended goals and policies ~".~`, 1 ~~. at -their July 22, 19'75 meeting and recommended"their approval. ~ ~ec~~, E. ~ ~ ~, It is recommended that the city council receive the proposed- amendments at this time and set the date. of September 8 , 1975 fora :public hearing on the proposed amendments : ' ~~ ^~; Respectfully submitted, ~ i F ~ ,. ~ r Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: .Planning Director ~^ i t } • GOALS AND POLICY STATII~IENTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD • GOALS The following statements express the general goals of the City of iZichfield in the current and future use and management of its' resources. Land Use It shall be a goal of the city: 1. To provide for a broad range of potential land uses and re-uses within its boundaries. 2. To promote complementary land uses with contiguous border property. 3. To assure that future development and redevelopment of the land will not adversely affect adjacent land uses. 4. To promote harmony between various land uses. 5. To protect the property rights of the indi idual, but only, to the extent that they do not infringe upon the property rights of others. 6. To preserve and enhance the predominantly residential character of the community. Population • It shall be a goal of the city: 1. To determine an optimum population size for the community, and to guide development toward that end. 2. To insure that all citizens of the city-have the opportunity to make full use of public facilities and services. s. To maintaina well balanced city which can serve the needs of people of all ages. 4. To encourage the active, constructive participation of all residents in the planning process. Housing It shall be a goal of the- city: 1. To assure that all persons. regardless of race, color, or creed have equal opportunity to secure housing of their choice. 2. To encourage the development of a variety of housing types, at various economic levels and at various intensities, which can satisfy the needs for a variety of life styles and living experiences within the.corrnnunity. 3. To develop housing codes which. provide the acceptable minimum standards for housing in the city, and to make available information and education to those desiring to buy, rent, or .rehabilitate housing units within the community. -2- 4. To review, and revise if necessary, all codes and ordinances which affect the building .and maintenance q~f structures, to insure that they incorporate the most modern, efficient, ana economical methods available. 5. To provide housing opportuniti~'s to accommodate and satisfy the needs of elderly persons within the co~rn'~nunty desiring to .avail themselves of these oppgrtunities. 6. To provide housing opportunities to accommodate and Satisfy the needs of lo~ti and moderate income families within the community desiring to avail themselves of these oppor-~unities. Trarrs~ortat ion It s}iall be a goal of the city: " 1.` To develop a transportation network within the community to serve its' cpmplete range of land uses and its internal ransportatian needs. 2. To enGOUrage the. development of an eXt~rnalsystem which serves the needs of those within the community to reach. areas outside the community and which provides access to thq centers;of activity, commerce, and employment within the comtirunty by those living qutsde the community whi7.e discouraging large traffic volumes from passing through residential areas. 3. Tq promote the develgpm~nt of transportation systems which"serve a variety of modes of travel. • 4. To avoid needless-duplication of transportation facilities, to discourage the. widening of any major arterial ''street qx freeway t}iat exists within qr bprders up©n the cgmmunity, and; where passible, to reduce the amount of land devoted to transportation systems. 5. To reduce noise and air pollut~'~on by ~.nitiating and/or supporting legislation ~.t the state and natignal levels promoting the development use of pollution control devices, and, at the local level, by promoting the development of .public overt buffer .zones betwe1en streets. and adjacent land uses.. 6. To promote the development of all mass transit system at the metropolitan level, which will provide access to al'1 areas ~n Richfield, and which will utilize existing transportation rights,of-way wherever possible, rather than acquiring additional rights-of-way. 7. To integrate transportation functions through innovative design, which provides for improved circulation and attention, to aesthetics. Commercial Tt shwa be a goal of the. city: 1. To encourage the planned .development of commercial areas within specified districts as outlined in the Coiprehensive Plan. 2. To encourage the minimization of the number of commercial locations and concentrated uses of land within these locations. -3- 3. To create a central business district which serves as a community focus for • a broad cross section of community functions such as civic, housing, commercial, cultural, entertainment, religious, educational and health. 4. To provide a planning framework for the orderly and systematic development of commercial areas through a planned unit development ordinance. 5. To insure that existing commmercial land uses. are assimilated into the planned development of the community with as little disruption as possible to those existing commercial establishments. Tnrliistri al It shall be a goal of the city: 1. To encourage the planned development of industrial functions within specified districts as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. To encourage the planned development of industrial functions which have minimal environmental impacts on adjacent land and the community. Community Facilities It shall be a goal of the city: • 1. To provide community facilities and services with an emphasis•on location of .facilities, c{uality of service and timing of improvement. 2. To provide adec{uate community facilities and services without duplicating efforts .by other governmental bodies. 3. To achieve coordination of plans between the appropriate levels of government prior to any major development of school or community facilities in the city. 4. To develop all community facilities and services at the lowest possible per capita expenditure consistent with providing services and facilities which will serve the intended purpose. 5. To make major public expenditures according to a capital improvements plan and budget which establishes priorities and schedules for six years in advance, based upon projections of need and estimated revenues. 6. To provide for conservation and effective use of natural resources in a harmonious relationship with man's uses of the land. 7. To establish a system of community facilities and programs sufficient to satisfy the indoor and outdoor recreational needs of the residents of the city. 8. To provide a diversified year-round program of recreational acitivites • which provide for the growth, development, and self-fulfillment of the individual through intellectual, physical, and social involvement. 9. To develop park and other recreational facilities, based upon a heirarchy -4- of uses as needed by various elements of the. community. 10. To provide neighborhood parks located within a reasonably defined service • area, where children should not be required to cross arterial streets to reach the facility. Human Resource Development It shall be a goal of the city: 1. To provide programs and facilities designed to promote a cli.~nate conducive to meeting the emotional and social needs of the people of Richfield. 2. To inform citizens of Richfield of the full range of human resources available to them. POLICIES The following statements represent the proposed general development policies for the City of Richfield. Policies are the means by which the established goals of the community can be achieved. Following this section, more specific policies have been gxouped according to subject. General It shall be a policy of the city: 1. That all development shall comply with the intent, if not the letter, of regulations established by the city council to guide and direct the development within the community. 2. That rezoning shall not be granted unless the proposal is shown to be in accordance with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. 3. That development proposals which tend to produce undesired effects to the public health, safety, convenience and general welfare will not be permitted. 4. That aesthetic considerations, such as architectural style and appearance, site design, development of open space and the like, will be major factors in the acceptance of all development and redevelopment proposals, both public and private.. • 5. The city, special district, county, metropolitan, and state planning efforts will be coordinated in order to avoid land use conflicts, duplications and excessive public service and facility costs. 6. That industrial and commercial developments within the community shall not constitute a "spot zone", meaning: a single location completely surrounded by a different land use classification. 7. That regulatory measures and procedures will be reviewed and modified in recognition of the needs of contemporary situations; the development policy will not be rigid and inflexible, but neither shall it be indiscriminately permissive. 8. That it shall be a general policy of the city council to encourage and extend full cooperation to new development proposals. However, the welfare of the general public and intent of the Comprehensive Plan will be of primary importance. 9. That special attention will be given to providing the citizens of the community with comprehensive and timely information on all aspects of the Comprehensive Plan, new development proposals, zoning and other regulatory measures adopted by the city council. 10. That the city shall provide and maintain a complete set of policy statements, physical plans, and development program strategies to serve as a relevant and purposeful reference to guide private and public development within the community. _~ Land lls~~ ~ It shall be a policy ol the city: 1. 'That all public improvement programs. or private applications for rezonings, special use permits, variances; or land suhd:ivisions, shall lie approved only if slio~~~l to he in accordance with the .recommendations of the Comprehensive Mall. '. That all private developers sh~ll be encouraged to use air space over existint; public right-of-way to expand existing land uses or in the creation of new uses having a positive benefit ;in ex~~anding the tax base of the community. 5. To Loster the continued economic growth of-the city in a manner which is compatible with a Quality environment and consistent tivith other public and private rights. ~}. To favor patterns of land use Manning, management and development which offer a range of alternative locations for specific activities and. encourage wise aald balanced use of the city's ;land and water .resources. 5. To assist state government and regional conunissions in their responsibility Lor major land use planning and management decisions which are of regional, .interstate and national concern. Population i • It shall be a policy of the city: 1. That new land use opportunities shall be provided only to the extent that they do not increase ~}ie.~oA~ulation of th cit~~F to a size in excess of 55,000 pecT~is in.1990. ~. That all new land use proposals be evaluated in terms of the relative impact the}' will have on the policy o$ controlling population to a size not exceeding 55,000 people in 1990. `rlous ing It shall be a policy of the city: 1. .That high standards of residential development will be rec{uired and promoted through the Comprehensive Plan'and the planning process. 2. That, in the interest of developing a diversified housing. supply, a balance between high and low value hom~s will be sought with the reservation that lo~aex value housing shall not become so extensive as to place an undue financial burden on the local tax base. 3. That absentee oimership of renal housing, commercial and industrial enterprises shall be discouraged. . 4. That citizens shall. be expected' to mai.zta ire their homes to meet t:~c mi.;aiiAu:~,; standards set by the city council, and other appropriate regulatory agencies. -3- • 5. Tliat all types of housing will be permitted, provided each is properly located in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan; and the site plans and structural Quality are in accord with the highest feasible standards. 6. That appropriate rehabilitation measures will be studied, and if feasible, undertaken to assure maintenance of the existing housing supply in good conditions. Suitable standards for structure and yard maintenance will be developed and enforced. 7. That the city shall reQuire the removal of vacant or abandoned structures which are deemed a hazard to citizen health or safety, at cost to the owner of record, if such structures cannot be brought up to acceptable standards within a reasonable period of time. 8. That programs designed to sustain the existing housing supply in a safe, sound condition shall be developed and administered in a manner consistent with the housing goals of the corrnnunity. Transportation It shall be a policy of the city: l.' That local transportation systems must be consistent with the overall needs of the metropolitan area, and will contribute what it can of its resources and planning activity towards the resolution of area-wide transportation problems. • 2. That non-local automobile traffic will be encouraged to utilize a relatively small number of thoroughfares rather than allowed to use minor streets through residential areas, which are designed primarily to serve adjacent residential property. 3. That each street will be classified and developed according to its principal function as assigned in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. That major streets will have restricted left-turn movements and restricted access to adjacent properties, in order to reduce accident potential and avoid congestion caused by slow traffic and turning movements. However, access and turning movements of emergency vehicles shall not be restricted. 5. That primary road entrances to the corrnnunity, and to the extent feasible all major roads, will be given special treatment so as to provide identity, and produce a good visual impression to residents and visitors. 6. That public streets are intended to serve the function of moving traffic and not as parking space; as such, each individual future land use shall be rec{uired to provide off-street parking sufficient for its needs. 7. That liaison will be developed and maintained between the city and other governmental units, such as state and county highway departments, the Metropolitan Council, and other transportation planning agencies. 8. That mass transit is considered an important element in the Richfield transportation system.. Every effort will be made at the local level to facilitate and encourage the development of an appropriate mass transit system for the metropolitan area. -4- 9, To work with the Metropolitan Transit Commission and other relevant agencies or .communities to determine they type, location and scope, of rapid transit . service to the residents o~ the community. 10. To maintain 66th and 76th Streets as major thoroughfares for the; movement of traffic. within .the city. ll. To iimpreve the design of 66th and 76th Streets so that these r;tajor thoroughfares canhazidle traffic most effectively in the future by: ~) more .effectively controlling congestion through design features which assist in improving turning rrtovements onto. and off pf minor streets. 1~) supplement the traffic car~~ying capabilities of these two thoroughfares by experimenting with mass'and rapid transit systems designed to alleviate the problems of congestion, glare, pollution and accidents on these thoroughfares. c) developing those amenities !which will help control noise on these two thoroughfares. as well as beautify their appearance. 1Z. That the transportation system be based on classification of .streets as follows: 1. Fedexal did Interstate' 4. [Jrban Collector 2, Principle arterial 5. Residential streets 3. ;,,linos arterial r'1 LJ Commercial ~t shall be a policy of the city: `, 1. That boundaries of commercial ~reas shall be well defined so as to prevent envirorunental intrusion into adjacent land uses; and the owner shall provide buffering to preserve the existing aesthetic and environmental values of adjacent properties. 2. That while the city recognizes the need for a strong commercial base in order to maintain its economic well being and to support necessary public services and improvements, it believes that commercial development must be properly regulated to insure conformance with-the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.. 3. .That future commercial develop lent shall be based upon the concept of planned districts, developed according~to-the intent of the .Comprehensive Plan, and justified by an economic analysis of the area to be served. 4. That no area within the city shall be rezoned to commercial use, unless the proposed site locatipn has beef justified by a feasibility study and reviewed by the planning commission. The feasibility study shall demonstrate the advantage of rezoning an area as opposed to accepting a location within one of the presently zoned conanexc~.al areas and its conformance with the intent of tY~e Comprehensive Plan: 5, That corrnnercial establishments will be expected to achieve and maintain an acceptable level of maintenancee and xepair as determined by the City Building Cade.. The, quality. of a building and landscape design, proper .storage of -5- trash, and the maintenance of the grounds, provision for security, control • of adverse environmental factors such as noise, odors, etc., and other factors as defined by ordinance will be considered important to the acceptance of proposed commercial developments. 6. That the effect of proposed commercial developments on the existing and proposed pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation patterns of the city will be considered. 7. To regulate the size, type and locations of signs in any commercial district to insure conformance with the sign ordinance. 8. That off-street parking is an integral part of any corrnrtercial development and its aesthetic value and environmental effect on adjacent properties will be considered important to the acceptance of the proposed commercial development Industrial It shall be a policy of the city: 1. That conformance with quality industrial building design and community environmental criteria will be important factors in judging industrial development proposals by the city staff and the planning commission. 2. That federal, state and metropolitan environmental standards will be used to judge all industrial proposals, and no industrial proposal would be accepted which violates these standards. 3. That special emphasis and. consideration will be given to encouraging industrial proposals which are directed toward providing answers to critical social, technological and environmental problems. 4. That industrial developments will be expected to achieve and maintain an acceptable level of maintenance and repair as determined by the City Building Code. The quality of building and landscape design, proper storage of trash, maintenance of the grounds, provision for security, control of adverse environmental factors such as noise, odor, etc., and other factors as defined by city ordinances will be considered important to the acceptance of proposed developments. 5. That the city and interested community promotional groups are encouraged to initiate, promote and assist industrial development with the city. Community Facilities It shal]. be a policy of the city: 1. -That the location of all community facilities be based on the Comprehensive Plan. • 2. That the level of comnnuiity facilities and services be based upon the needs of .the areas services, the size and type of population served, and be scaled within the city's capacity to pay for the facilities and services. 6 3. That the city coordinate all pplaruiing efforts with those of the school district in an effort to achidve full cooperation, mutually beneficial goals, • and economies. 4. That public. educational institiutions be encouraged to provide a means through which the goals, plans, and needs of the school system can be expressed, and coordinated with the Comprehexisive Plan. 5. That all levels of government be encouraged to actively participate in the planning, development, and .operation of a coordinated open space system. ' 6. That the city seek cooperation, advice, and assistance from other levels and agencies of government, such as the county, Metropolitan Council, and state in the acquisition and development of open space and recreational facilities. 7. That community facilities and services such as police and fire protection, parks, playgrounds, be provided by the city where there is an acutal need for such services, in accordance c~ith the uniform set of standards. Duplication of facilities provided by other lwels of government or by private or seili- private interests should be avoided. 8. That priority be given to those community facilities and services needed by the largest number of people. 9. That high quality design stan~ards be encouraged for bath public improvements and private development to insure compatability with the surroundings. • 10. That utility lines avoid disrlpting or infringing upon existing or designated open .space parks. 11. That scenic land. easements along the .roadways be required when rights-of-way are acquired. 12. That a conservation area be maintained for wildlife management, educational and scienta;fic purposes at Wood L~ke. 13. That educational institutions and other organizations be encouraged to utilize the }wood Lake Nature Center a apart of .their education program. 14. That, in keeping. with the neighborhood concept of residential development, the neighborhood school playground or neighborhood park be the central focus within the neighborhood. Cooperation with the school districts to develop park sites adjacent to and on!school grounds be of major priority. 15. That public educational institutions and the city be encouraged to formulate a uniform set of development standards and criteria for the improvement of existing outdoor recreational areas which are designed to be developed jointly or to serve joint uses within the community. Human Resource Development It-shall be the policy of the city: 1. That .the city shall establish a citizen's advisory commission to study the availability of human resources to it's citizens and recommend programs to promote a satisfying social and emotional climate. -7- 2. That the citizen's advisory commission shall inform the community of the full range of human resources available to them. 3. That all existing churches and church related facilities be clearly shown on the Comprehensive Plan or continued in any future land use classification nomenclature. 4. That all c{uasi-public groups will be encouraged to join with the city in efforts to provide for the social, emotional and hwnan service needs of the residents of the community. L i CITY OF RICHFIELD; MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No . 2 71 Agenda August 25, 1975 The Honorable Mayor , and,. Members of the City .Council City of Richfield Gentlemen• , . Subject: Discussion on Proposed.. Golf Course Mayon Law.-has. requested. that there be an item. on the agenda to discuss the recent meeting of .city representatives with the Metropolitan Airports _, Commission."'Planning and Physical Development Committee relating to a go f course on MAC property: Respectfully submitte ~~ Wayne ~. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/e j a ~' . t° s ;;,~-"' CITY OF:RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~~ ' Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 270 Agenda August 25, -1975 -~ - k The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City- Council City of Richfield ._.._ s, Gentlemen: Subject: Park Curfew Proposal Attached` is a draft of a -proposed'-ordirianee am~endrnent which would provide curfew regulations for closing most public park facilities late at night and during the early morning hours. The-proposal has been reviewed by members of the- staff and has been drafted in-such` a way so as -to accomodate any exceptions that might occur. However, inasmuch as this is a substantial, change from the present practice and. due to the great .variety • of -park activities; it is being 'submitted-to the. city council at this time not for first reading consideration, but for discussion purposes. After discussing the proposed draft, we will be happy to make: -any changes that might be desired and submit it fox city council consideration at a subsequent city council meeting: _ _ , .Respectfully:: submitted, cC~ ~ _. _ h- ~% .~ ~~ Wayne-S. Burggraaff _ City `Manager WSB/eja - cc: 'Acting Park and Recreation Director Finance Director • AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER IV OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ADDING SECTION 4.14 CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter IV of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield is amended by adding Section 4.14 relating to closing of public parks and providing penalties for being in public parks after closing which reads as follows: "4.14 REGULATING CLGSING OF PUBLIC PARKS Subdivision 1. Parks to be Closed. All public parks will close at 11;00 o'clock p. m, each day and shall remain closed to the public until 5:00 o' clock a , m, on the next day . Except a s provided in Subd . 2 , no person shall be in, remain in or enter any public park between the hours of 11:00 o'clock p . m. and 5 :00 0' clock a . m . and no person shall drive into or remain in a public parking area within or immediately adjacent to a public park during the hours when such park is closed. Subd. 2. Activities Permitted After Closing. The following activities may continue in the public parks after the parks have closed pursuant to subdivision 1 of this section: (1) Use of the indoor ice arena . (2) City sponsored and supervised activities, which, because of the nature of the activity, cannot be held during the times when the parks are open. (3) Activities sponsored by any other group, association or organization when s uch group, association or organization #~as applied for and received a permit for such activity pursuant to Subd. 3 of this section. Subd. 3. Permits. A group, association or organization wishing to sponsor any activity which will use city parks between the hours of 11:00 o'clock p . m . and 5 :00 0' clock a . m . shall apply to the city manager ~~iot less than 10 days before such planned activity for a permit to conduct that activity. The application shall be on forms prepared by the city manager. No permit shall be issued unless the_city manager determines that the proposed activity: (1) Could not be conducted during hours when the park is open to the public. • (2) Will not be likely to disturb the residents of property surrounding the park • (3) Will not be likely to cause or create crowd control or traffic or park maintenance problems . (4) Will not interfere with any other activities previously scheduled for the park. The manager may limit the time of the activity, the area in the park where the activity may occur and may impose other conditions upon the conduct of the proposed activity. The manager may also require as a condition for issuance of the permit an indemnity bond holding the city harmless from liability of any kind or character and reimbursing the city for any property damage or cleanup cost. Subd. 4. Closing of Parks by Police. The city manager may upon his order, close any public park and any parking area within or immediately adjacent to such park, for such period as he shall deem necessary in order to protect or restore order or terminate or prevent breaches of the peace and order. Such order to close shall apply without exception to all activities conducted in the park. No person ?saving been informed of such an order closing any such area shall remain in the area longer than is reasonably necessary to leave. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this • day of 1975. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J . Moran City Clerk i r - CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA !~ Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 26-9 Agenda August 25, 1975 The-Honorable Mayor and _ _ - Members of the pity Council City of. Richfield. - Gentlemen. Subject: Intersection Contro Study Earlier this year the city council authorized the city-staff to make a study of traffic control devices at intersections throughout the city. " At tYat time the staff indicated that the study should; be completed by the' end of August and submitted. to the council shortly `thereafter. The study has not been completed for the August 25, 1975 city council meeting and- the staff anticipates subrnitt~ing ., it to the council in September. However, the administration has received a petition from. the residents in.v~. _. - the,area of 70th Street and Harriet Avenue requesting the installation of a 4-way -stop; at the intersection of 70th and Harriet. The residents have expressed a ` - .desire to have this matter considered prior to the opening. of the-fall school term wince this. intersection is affected by school traffic: The petition was signed by 35 of the property owners in the immediate area of 70th' and Harriet. The staff has reviewed this request and recommends that the request for the installation of a 4-way stop. sign at 70th and Harriet be denied `'sizice this intersection does not meet the criteria established by the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control .Devices for the installation of 4-way stop igns .` ~ Neither the traffic volumes nor the accident history. indicate a need for the in to lia tion of a 4-way stop sign . A copyof the. petition-received from the residents in this area is attached. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff _. City Manager V1WSB/eja cc: Public Safety Director Public Works Director .. ~ ,, ~. . ~ ~ ~~ ~~r Ir tors rots Locnt_ I,~rROVt~.EnT ' •r ~ ~ CITY of Etlct:r• IC:LDp tdlNNa 1'ETlr~pjj• tdot, 9~t~r° . ~ ~ . ~ l)A T~~ E;~ c E a v~ opt-•----~--_____ TO; THC CITY .000f;CIL OF THE- CITY CF RIC~-{FIELDt G1NNC:ATA~ , S/E~•TIiE UNDERSIGf:EDi Ol':NERS OF N~3S"X~FQ~~Ix~'Y+l?TXOT~L~:7~~~t~'.~2`~C~ •~HE REAL PRQFERTY ABUTTING ~X a.n the vicinity of Harriet Avenue ~~~~ and 70th Street A~.X ~~- HERi=RY PETITION THAT SUCH STREET OE IiAPROVED BY the installation of Stog sins on 'tOth Street stopping Eastbound and Westbound traffic Anr3 maki n~ the intersection- afour-way stop_____~__ ' SI G~ATUF.E OF 064IvERS HOUSE IJOe ON OF THE PROPERTY LEGAL DESCr,I PTI i ~<.l~ 1?~ ~'^•~' ~,r~s ~>, °/l `::a.~ - 4i.~--'' /._..l'"/'T~ll'i./j'!~- ~.-~...~ _ fc`~a ~ ~C.r _ ~ ~~ e~~ ~ J ~ ~ f~ /.~ ~ ~ ~Jf~~. ._ ~` ~ ' /, , " / 0 - '~~ ~ 7 4 ?!. ~ ~ 1.t c%L' 1 • y/ / -ice/ _"iy+ f% / a ~ , ~ ~ i ~ t 2.. '~ ~ ~fi~~- it ~r/; ~ ~,1 ~~,, ~ 1/~, 1~ ~~ ~ ~~~1~ r~{y~ ft X30 /~'/l%. ~,5.~ ~t~_ ~~r/ J -~ L/ '/ YY ~ 15 ~ ./~ /~ ~~, ~ ~ ~.. ~~,~ . (mac- ,-y.~ .1.(.~ ~G -~~ °-~ ~.~-C.l_ _ _ • ~ _ '~ v l ~ . • .~ d ~. _ ~~ 1 r ~ . s f,~ ,. r t. o ~---f• r-•- , -.,, -,-, . [~II~~JIN£0~ CC!ECi:F.D~ ANO FGUNO TQ B ' 1N s`ttOP(.P: FC'Rtd. Af4b Tc) OE S ICi~EC Cpl' fHE REQUIRED NU:.taeR OF 0!71VCR.~ OF PR~NEFtTY AFFEt:'fED DY TI=E !AAi<IfJG OF THE. If.il'kOVEt:CiNT i~ETti'IOf~Eti FCRo S ~, l PER cEN'j ~; " _ -- ~121••2 CITY CLERK .. .,. . ~~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESQTA . ~. Office`of City Manager Council' Letter No. 268 Agenda August 25, 1975.... -The Honorable Mayor. ;a rid Members of the City Council ' City _of Richfield " Gentlemen: Subject:.Authorization to Request.BidS for Tennis Court Construction The 19.75 Capital Impxovernent budget provides for the construction of two additional tennis courts at Donaldson Park and funds are provided for this spur- pose. It is the opinion of the park and recreation department,. supported by the park and recreation advisory commission, thattwo additional courts and one practice bounce board should be constructed directly west of the existing courts. Thin. configuration would minimize the cost of lighting these courts at a future date. Pla-ns and specifications for the tennis courts are being prepared by the public works department and it is requested that the city council authorize calling for bids so-that construction can be completed this :fall. Respectfully submitted, ~~ , ~ ~'1 , - ~ Wayne S. Burggraaff . ~ City Manager WSB/eja cc: Acting Park and Recreation Director Finance Director Public Works Director ~: ~x ~~~. ~. ~~ CITY OF RICHFIEZD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 267 Agenda hugust 25 1975 The Honorable Niayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Commission Appointments The following appointment has yet to be made to the planning commission: ,. ,. ~' f~.Y.: One unexpired three year term, expiring January 12, 1976. Council 'mem- ber have previously received copies of applications from Charles Robbins,,.... Connie Hoverson, Sister Charlotte Ann LeClair and Mark Ahlquist In addition, Bill Schegel'has recently submitted an application of which a copy is attached+. Respectfully submitte C 1 '~~~- Wayne S. Burggraaff ~ ~ City Manager WSB/eja , ~J" ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD ' .APPLICATION FD D ISORY COMMISSIONS ORICOMMITTEES ON MUNICIPAL A Committee or commission for which application is being made ~~~•~~~~~/~- b ~~~?'~^'~^ 1. 2 . Name /~ ~. ~ f~~ F (rte' [_.. 7 Sy'~/ ~~iN/vi~ So ~'ic Ll T/~~ /~ ~~ ~~-3y~~ 3. , Residence address. City Phone No . Street 4, Business address /1/0. CF_N7. Address rositi~n Held Name of employing agency ~ 3~ 5. Date of birth ~ Date Year Month 6. Local organizational memberships and affiliations: a. b.~ i - c. Briefly discuss aspects of your .experience which you believe qualify you for tr~is Municipal Committee and why you are interested in serving. x ~.-~.~ -- - - U /-~C~r-~ ~-~",,.,~'~ dh_ ,/,L-ter ~ ~ ~ i ~..~ 1 /a~~~r" U ~ ~ 8. List the names of -three persons who are thoroughly acquainted with your qualifications Address . Ph._ Name Occupation 2. Cv~y~-~ - -°~ s3 3 . a~u~-z _p Gc~ ~~~ 9. Signature of applicant CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid .Opening REPAINTING LOGAN WATER TOWER Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the administrative staff was called to order by Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids on repainting the Logan Water Tower as advertised in the official newspaper on "August 14, 1975. " present: Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager Peter Eberz, Public Works Director Don Fondrick, Acting Park & Recreation Director " Ren Conway, Water, Department Supervisor, .. Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk The following bids were submitted and read aloud: BIDDER ANDTOTAL BID BID SECURITY FIRST ALTERNATE SECOND ALTERNATE Larson Tank Co. g.B. _ 5% $33,600 $33,600 Apex Contracting,"Inc.. - ' B.B. - 5% '• $38,300 $39,800 The city manager announced that the bids. would be tabulated and considered at .the regular council meeting on August 25, 1975. . Thomas J. Moran City Clerk " ~k W • `~ lD K m fD c~l- w 0 pry w O _ '~ H .. C] O ~d i r • $ Gd N. W W O\ O O O O N. c+ s' O fD lD K N V ,~ W Q `d F--' O c+ ~. ~ N• O d fD Fd 5S H n :K O ~ c~ j d Gd tz1 G1 H t7 tai bd ~ O ~ ~ f--I y K ~ ~ O ~ ~ 4 ~ W O ~ v D ( ' W O~ cF (p ~ O O O N ~ O O d ~ ~ H O r d ~ W W ` W W q ~ ~+' O O ~ ~ O O d d\ ~ + c fD c1 bd `~1 bd H O N• fD I--'• p~ tz '~ ~+ ~ m P~ N•O~ O 1b N ~ c+ cl- c~~i- ¢~ vii ~ w •• r ~ o 0 0 ~ ~~ ~ o o~ ~+ ~+ u~i N K c+ Vl H NV O v1 I--' ~ ~ o -~ K N vt vt • G1TY OF RICHFIELD,,MINNESOTA Office of City. Manager . Council- Letter No. 265 Agenda August 25, 1975 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of :Richfield ~:~.. ', Gentlemen: Subject:.Ordinance Amendment Relating to Possession or Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Places Second:Reading At the August 11 , 1975 city council meeting the .city ;council approved.: first reading of an ordinance` amend-menu relating to the prohibition. of possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages in'public places . A copy of the ordinance amendment is attached for second reading consideration Respectfully submitted, ~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WS'B/e j a; cc: Public Safety. Director Park and Recreation Director `: ~, - _ ~ 1-. } ~~ ~ • ~ AMENDMENT TO CIiAPTER X~, PART III, SECTION 10.16 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA " CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter X, Part III, Section 10.16, Subd. 5 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield, Minnesota making - the consumption and possession of alcoYiolic beverages a mis-- ,demeanor offense is hereby.amended as follows:. _ " ~ "`Subd. 5. Public jlntoxication or] Possession _ and Consumption of Alcoholic Bevera es. [~4hoever ._ appears in an intoxicatea condition or] ~ person who consumes intoxicating liquor as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section. 340. 07, Subd. 2 or non- ~'• ~ intoxicatincL malt "liquor. as defined b~y M_innesota Statutes Section 340.001, Subd. 2 while (1) on a public street, park or other public place, or (2) - - on any private property without the consent of the " owner of such property, or (3) while. in a vehicle upon any public street and an person who possesses such intoxicating or non-intoxicating liquor in any park including all public parkzng areas located . within or immediately adjacent to any park. Passed by the City Council of the City. of Richfield this day of , 1875... Mayor Attest: ... , - ~, City Clerk ~ . ~:. t.:~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No . 2 64 Agenda August. 25, 1975 The Honorable Mayor and ,~, Members of the City Council I:Y Gity of Richfield Gentlem~n• Subject: Report on Questions Raised at the Assessment Hearing for 1974 Street-Improvements Qn Augus ll, 1975 the city :council held a hearing on the proposed assess- ment fore the 1974-street: improvement project: Approximately 20 miles of street construction with 40 miles, of curb construction wexe included in that project. Approximately 10p people attended the assessment hearing. 15 individuals spoke a't the assessment hearing. In' some;-cases it was possible to answer questions or comments at-the assessment hearing. In other cases staff members were able to provide the necessary i~riformation. ..However, in those instances where there were some question's as to what-the assessment should be or whether the work was properly performed, -the city council asked the staff to investigate further and 'make-a report at the August 25, 1975 city council meeting. Therefore, the following. report includes references to the. questions which'-_ were not only raised at-the `assessment hearing, but which may have been presen ed to staff members. at the meeting or received during the intervening' period since the hearing was held on August 11. ' Discu sion of DxivewaY Policy At.the August 11, 1975 special assessment hearing there was discussion om the question as to whether or not~the city should. assess .for driveway work cam- pleted behind the apron. -`'The following residents have requested relief from': this policy: , ~. w'~ ~ ~' ].. T. J. Malchew, 6832 Blaisdell Avenue. ~,/ Q~`-~' ~~s The apron cost was $89. Cost behind the apron. $295.2D l s ~~5'2"0 ~e r°.. ~ ~.r1>- 2. 1VIr. Paul Hawkinson, 6321 Second Avenue ~,/ The apron cost was '$81.44. .Cost behind the apron .$33.6.96 ~/~ ~ ~3~~6 ' !~ r Council Letter No. 264' -2- ,,~,p,~ ~{W''- .August 26, 1975 ~R3. Mr. Eruce Berg, 6315 Second Avenue ~eo~~"'" The apron cost was; $85.89. Cost behind the apron $330.12 " ~~~,p~ 4. NTr'. Donald Cumberland, 6222 Third Avenue ! ' w`Yr"r"" Theeapron cost was $91.23. Cost behind the apron $76.68. ~~~ 5. M~. P.N. Peterson, 63:38 5th Avenue a~`"`~" The apron cost was $89.00.' Cost behind the apron $260.01 ~3 ~#ab~•~i; ~~-- ~v 6. Mr. Fred Habegger, 674.0 Blaisdell Avenue ~~ ,'. ' r ` ~~ The apron. cost was $85; 89, Cost behind the apron.$13 8.60 ~lin~~cL~.a ~138.(~0 ' 7: iVir. Gerald D. Evenspm, 7039 5th .Avenue The apron cost was $122.82. Cosa behind the apron $1:3.59 ~~~m;„~ ~i3;S9 8, Oswald C. Breviu, 6945 4th Avenue The apron cost was $151.30. Cost behind the apron was $143..55 /gprh-a~'~3co.? The current assessment policy of the city of charging each'resdent for work done on his or'her particular driveway is consistent with the assessment policy used in City Project No. 642 and City. Project No. 650, the 1972 and 1973 perma~±- ent street improvement, programs. If tk~e city council elected `to change this drive way policy it would be necessary to .cover the cost of this work amounting to approximately $60, 000. This was the amount of driveway repair work behind the apron that was.-constructed during the 1974 stree improvement program. As the city council will recall, over "$110, 000 of this type of work was done during the 1972 and, 1973 'permanent paving program and has already been assessed. It `is the opinion of the staff that changing this policy would result in an,increased cost to~the project and, consequently, could make it necessary to raise the front footage assessment rate. Since the driveway widths and composition varygreatly within the project area, it would be unfair to spread the cost of this work equally among all; property owners. For example, the following instances could be cited:. l A person without a driveway would be forced to pay a share. of the cost: of someone else's. driveway. 2 . A person 'with a gravel driveway would be paying a share of his neighbor's concrete .driveway. 3. A person with a nine foot driveway would be paying a portion of the cost of his .neighbor's twenty foot driveway. Therefore, we recommend that the current policy of assessing the individual owner for all driveway work be unchanged since ..the benefitted property owner ~:~To~_ild bear the cost of work that benefits him or her directly. The council, i.owevcr, may xevew individual cases without changing the basic assessment policy.. Council Letter No. 264 -3- August 25, ,1975 ° " ;~ Credit. for Prior. Assessment Mr. R. E: Erickson, of 6526 3rd Avenue, requested the council to "give him, credit for'street work that was° arse sed against his property in 1950. ,The ~ ' ~ ' wa~rk completed in 1950 consisted of City Project No. 76, an oiling .program . completed in that year. The city's current assessment policy does allow credit for those residents who are paying, or who have paid an oiling assessment within three years of the permanent street assessment. _In.this particular ease, the assessment is'over 20 years old and it is recommended that the property not be given a credit in accordance with the policies that have been adapted by the city.-council and followed. as recently as. the assessment hearing .last year. Defects in Workmanship. Eight, individuals at the August 11 assessment hearings reported certain minor defects in workmanship. These instances .:have been investigated and the property owners havE been advised of the action that will be taken. A copy of the letter tha these residers s have received is attached for your review. Sod Complaints Eight 'individuals commented on -the placement. and condition of the sod. The city staff is in the process of reviewing these sod complaints and all necessary repair. work has been ordered. A copy of the letter that these residents have received is "attached for your review. Assessment for Irregularly Shaped Lots `The present assessment-policy adopted by the city council provides specific procedures for assessing lots of various shapes and types of lots. This policy ,z ha been in effect since the. start of the permanent street improvement`progra;m:. ~,~~~ 9~ Mr. Braun of 420 E. 73rd Street has requested that thecouncil review the ~~~ assessment policy for commercial. property. He is especially concerned about land locked parcels . The present assessment policy dictates that those parcels. abutting on a- ded- ica ed street or avenue will be assessed for a front footage assessment,. side street assessment, street lighting and driveway assessments. Those parcels that do not abut an a street will be assessed for a side street only.. Those par- - cell that abut on a street that has already been paved will have their assessments adjusted accordingly. -For your review we have attached a breakdown of the assessment calculations for Mr. Braun's property and the properties adjacent to his:... ~, t;`, { `,~ 'Council Letter No. 264 -4- August 25,.19.75 ` ~-- ~IyI~scellaneous Reque is Mr. Carl Palmquist of 6215 .5th Avenue indicated that he was having difficulties with people driving on his lawn after failing to negotiate the ,' ~ a,- turn at 67th and 5th Avenue.: The city staff has reviewed this .area and. has ~,'1~ given orders to the street department to install additional barricades to prevent ~~' a recurrence. -. Respectfully submitted, F ~ ~ 3 ~' ~ Wayne Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Works .Director. Finance 'Director City :Attorney ~~ ,a •. August 19, 1975 ;z Mr. Gerald D. Evanson + ~ ! 7039 Nifth• Avenue South ' ~ ; ~--% Richfield, MN 55423 /~ . Dear Mr. Evanson: ~ \I ;j ij 'This letter is to confirm our conversation of August lS, 1975 '~ '~ regarding complaints you registered at the permanent street ~~ ') assessment hearing of August lI, 1975. As I indicated on the ~! telephone, we will be submitting your objection to the driveway policy to the city council at its meeting of August 25, 1975. ._.~ - Should ahe city council concur with you that you should not '~' be charged for the•wark completed behind the concrete a~sran, the assessment would be reduced accordingly. In any case, ~' - the results of the council meeting will be forwarded to you !' ~ as saon as possible. . ~ ,~ If you have any questions regarding this. matter,-please feel , ~: free to Contact my office. f 1 ~% / ( ;j , ,~ Sincexe2y, • i~ , Peter G. Ebert Public ~dorks Director PGH:vg August 19, 1~$5 ~~~ ~ ! Op i ~ " ' ! Mr. Fred Habegger , , 6740 Blaisdell Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 ,(` -~ ` ~~ ~~ar Mr. Habegger: i; '~ At the August 11, 1975 assessment hearing, the city council deferred ~~~ ~ action on approving the proposed assessment for your property in-order to review the driveway work ~do~ on your property. ~ We are supplying, the city council with your name, address, and ~ ~ I ~ cost breakdown of the driveway work done on your property ao , ~ ~ that they can review .your case prior to making a decision on '~ ~ the matter. It is anticipated that the city council will ~ ~~ be deciding this matter at its meeting of August 25, 1975. Should you have any Questions regarding this matter, please ~- ~7 • , ,feel free to oentact my office. - ~; ~ ,, . ~ y/ ~ Sincerely, ~. ~l_~ ~• Peter G. Eberz • ~ Public Works Director PGE:vg F ~, ~ r August 19, 1975 ' • ., ~r;, ~, 4 Mr. P. 2d. Peterson 6338 Fifth Av€~nue South ;~ r-; Richfield, ~ 55423 ~!, . Dead Mr. Peterson: - I,) ;; At the August 1~,-1975 assessment heaxing, the city council deferred ,~ ;~ action on appro~rin~; the proposed assessment far-your property:- f< <' in order to review the driveway ~rork done on your property. t~' l We are su 1 in the. cit council with PP y g y your name, address, and cost • brealido~-s of the dpi V~way woxk done ox~ your property so that ~ ~ ~ they can review your case pxiar to matting a decision ors the matter. f; - Zt is anticipated that the city council will 6e deciding this matter I1 -., at its meeting Qf August 25,: 1975,• -, Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please.. `~" ~ feels free to contact my office. ~~ ~ ~ :' `Sincerely= . ~,~/,~ ~; ( ...- fi ~~ '-` Peter G. Eberz Fublic.Works llirecoor PGS:vg Y F `f • ` 3 August 19, 1975 ~.,,~. ~~ ` Mr. Donald Cumberland ` ~ - ' b222 Third Avenue South ~.~ ' Richfield, tai 55423 ~ . Dear Mr, Cumberland: I. i. At the August 11, 1975 assessment hearing, the city council deferred I ~~ action on approving the proposed assessment for your property in order ~(~ to review the driveway work done on your property. . - We are supplying the city council with ,your name, address, and cost breakdown of the driveway work done on your property so that ( ~ they can review your case prior to making a decision on the matter. ' J ,;--~ It is anticipated that the city council will be deciding this matter at its meeting of August 2S, 1975. - Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact my office. ~ .. i '' I ~ Sincerely, ~~% ~ U ~- •~ Peter G. Rberz •Public Works Direcbor - PGE:vg - ' r r 0 ' August 19, 1975 ~'~~ ~, ~ ~' Mr. Bruce Berg ~-'" 6315 Second Avenue South Richfield, IwiN 55423 • • Dear tir. Berg: E j~ ~ At the August 11, 1975 assessment hearing, the city council •deferred action on approving the proposed assessment for your U property in order to review the driveway work done on your. property. Lf~ . We are supplying the city council with your name, address, and r._.._ ~ cost }~reakdown of the driveway work. done on your prope.rty• so that ~~ •they can review your. case prior to making a decision on the mat~ex'. ;~ ~ It is anticipated that the city council will be deciding this ~ _. matter at its meeting of August 25, 19753 • ~~ r; ~ Should you have any questions regarding this matter,. please ~' ~` ~ feel free to contact my office. . ~ 1~~~ Sincerely, L! • Peter G. Ebert Public Works Director PGE:vg -.,.: ~t e ~: r August 29, 2975 .. ,~~ . Li ~?r. Mr. Paul Hawkinson ~ ~ 6321 Second Avenue South ' ~~; Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mr. Hawkinson: ~`~` At the August 22, 2975 assessment hearing, the city eouncil deferred ~ ~~ action on approving the proposed assessment .for your property ~ i ~ ' ~ in order to review the drivewaq work done on ypur property. i ~ `"~~ We are supplying the city council with your name, address, and cost breakdown of the driveway woxk dome on your property so that they can. review your case prior to making a decision k ' ~ ~ on the matter. It is anticipated that the city council will be ~ --~ decidi.ag this mater at its meeting of August 25, X975. ,_ ', ~ Should you have any questions regarding this matter,'please €eel free to contact mq office.. %~ Sincerely, ; ~ y . / l~~(~ ~ . ~ ,¢ . Peter G. Eberz Public ~'arka Director - ,q PGE :vg ~` r r # - August 19, 1975 • ~ Mr. C. palmc~,uist, , , 6215 5th Avenue .South, ° Richfield, P~ixulesota 551+23. ~;•~'~ ~ Dear Air . Palmquist : R ,~ As per your request we nave investigated the occurrences of ~~-! people driving onto your property after failing to make the turn at 62nd. and 15th. We have made arrangements with the street department to have the necessary barriers installed to prevent thie frog: happening in the future. ~ j ~ I hope this wi11 relieve you of the problerss you have been e }! experiencing in the past. t '~ • `J ~ Sincerely, - .~ !,~! - L_.i ~ - Peter •c~. Eberz ~ ~ - ;; Director, of Public Works ;; t~ ~ PGE : cr - h .~% o- Ll i .. . f • o - 1. c .. • - .. i - R. August 19, 1975 r~r. 13. E. kric~san, ~ . • 6526 3rd Avenue South, . Richfield, r~:innesota 55+23. ~~~ Dear 2~r. Erickson: `° int that ou had a]xe We hove investigated your eompla Y ~,Y ~ been partially assessed far blacktop installation durir~r ~~' ' 1950• We hn.ve revie~;ed our records r~ucl found that in 1~y0 ~ the city did conduct City Pra~ect i`76 on your street. City Pro~eet N76 was an oiling pro3ect and was assessed as nn ~~-~ ailing project. "` ~ { tinder ti~a permanent street rssse~sment policy adopted by t:.® ~ I I ~ city council only those. properties uLo have received an ensessment for streetoiling with~,n 3 years of the co:~rletion ` " ~ ~ f ible Para credit. fiherefore, of the permanent street is el g tde t2E1:vE na CL10~.CC but to _recott~end tC1 the city COUt1Cil that . ~ your re~,uest for credit bg denied and the assessm~snt si:and ~ ~ _ shown an your original notice. ~ y ~~ ~~ ~ .. Should you have any questions rebaxding this watter, please Peel free to contact ~Zy office or attena toe city council. u r,~eeting of August 25, 175• t `i 14~ Sincerely, . ' _ . . ~( " y Peter G. Eberx ~ ~ Public Works Lirector 4 ~ PGE:cr ~ ¢ _ _ - ;Y ~ I Richfield, Minnesota 55423. ~' /;--~ _~ Dear N{r. Garcia: '; This letter is to confirm our conversation With your wife on ~I~ August 15.1975• ,v . As per your request, we investigated the condition of your 1 driveway and. sod. . 111 While the driveNtzy ;does have some pop outs it is our feeling. ~ , ~ ~ ~ that they will not present a problem r~.nd no remedial action j i ~ ~ - is necessary. Tkze complaints that your wife poi;~ted out ~~ regaxdin,~, the sod will be taken care of in the imsaediate • Yutura. `. I Il -.~ . ~ Should you. have any questions on this matter, please feel ~' l% free to contact me. ,~ ~~ ~; i Sincerely, . C~, /7 . , / ,~ ` Peter G. Eberz ~~ ~' i Director of Public Worits :,.j . ,~' PGE:cr - < ~.. ` ,, r• ~,\ ',~ r. ~ .. ~ .~ ,~`~ \ , i 1~ ` r i~, \ \ 1 ~~ `, 6ti44 5th Avenue South, . Richfield, Minnesota 5523. . --. "^ ` -. Dear Mrs. Krantz• ! ~'; This is to confirm our conversation oP August lk, 1975 re~,arding ~J~ the repair work~to the sodding done on your property during City _ ~~~% Project Ira. b57. . ~ , We will. be instructing the contractor to do any necessary top dressing and xepair work, especially where the new sod meets i your. existing sod. Should you have any questions on this matter please feel free to '`_; contact me. . ~~ ~ Sincerely; ..~ -, . Peter G. k~'berz - .~ ' - `; Director of Public Works . _ ' ~PGE:cr , 1 ;j? ~ i '~,=y~' : ~ ,~ ', \, l ~ // J J ~.ct" .. ~ ~` + ~ y / ~ ~` ,, ' - ~ t i~l ~ ~ • ~ ' ~ I \ . I 1:.' \1~ . t c, s August 19, 1975 . A;r . .Pert C . Gus.k,3 olen , y ' 7001 2nd Avenue South, ' Richfield, A~innesota 55+23. ~~~ - • Dear Mr. Gusk~olen: `~ ;~ ~ This letter is to confirm our conversation of August lit, 1975 ~-' ~, ~` regarding the sod work done during City Pra~ect T1o. 657. r ~~: It is ~qy understanding of this couversati.on that you do nat feel it is necesssry.for the contractor to do additional work • l~ ~~ i on the sod on your property. ~E ~ If I misinterpret your feelings, please feel free to contact j' ~ ~ J ~ / ate so we c~cn discuss the utter again.. .. . Sincerely, - - ~ ` - - L ., ' i- - Peter G, Ebexz - r '~ `' Publie.Works Director ~i PGE:cr r,; • . ~ ,. 1 • , t ~ ' ~f. t 1 "' ~ ~ ~ w ~ V r .. ~~ r August 24, 1975 rir . Ricna.rd P . fiolmberg,• ' ~. 12 West 70th Street, ' Richfiela, N:innesote~ 5523. . ..-~,~, . Lear i~ir . kolmberg : - z_ \ . At tre .~u;ust 21, 1975 public assessment hears - ng you + ~ andicateci concern -and problems arising from the sad ~~~ placement on your property. We nave been unable ~o contact you to discuss these compaints and would Like to arrange a time with you'to discuss them. We would appreciate your contacting the Public Works Department ~~ i ~ ~ to arranEe the time that .would be corvenisnt for you ~ ~ I to discuss these problems. E j~ y ~L--' Sincerely, - - ~ ~ :.._: t - Peter G. ~bera '"`~ Director of Public Works "' 4 L.~ PGR:cr - -1 n i - '? _ ~,, ~~ . .- i~~ L.i ' ' ~f i' ,~ ~ ~. ` August 20, x.975 ~~ 2~r. Robert J. Hoeppner, . 6915 Wentworth Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55+23. " ~ ~ . ' . Dear Mr. ~Ioeppner: ;: The city staff has attempted to contact you regexding f\~ complaints lodged at the Augv.st l:t, 1975 "permanent street assessment hearing. ~ We have been unable to contact you a~ of this date ~j 1 i and would appreciate your contacting the Public Works j ~ Office to arrange a time xhen your questions and concerns 4 ~~ can be reviewed. Sincerely, i ~ tJ~ --~ - Peter G. Lberz : ~~ ~: .~ ~:. ~ liirector of Public Works -~ , PGE : cr . ~ n n ; _ ~ . 1r ~ ( ~ , . ~; ~ Li . , ~ .. • ~ Ay . ,.\. . ~ ~~ .\-,. . \ . \ ~:'. '. ,. c .Y E August 19, 1975 ~, .~ ~i_, ~"~ T. J. Malchow , 6832 Blaisdell Avenue South i\,`J`1 Richfield, riN 55423 Dear Mr. Malchow: I~~ At the August 11, 1975 assessment heaxing, the city council de€erred ~; ~' 'J ~~ action on approving the proposed assessment for your property in order. to review the driveway work done on your property. -~ ~We are_supplping the city council with your name, address, and cost breakdown of the driveway work done on your property so ~ ~~~ • , .that they can. review .your case pricer to making a decision on ~,J - the matter. It is anticipated that the cite council will _ { ,~ - ~' be deciding this matter at its meeting of August 25, 1975. [i > Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please ~' ~ ~ feel free to contact my office. n n ~ Sincerely, ,- y . ,~ ;`.,t l ~ ~ .. f .. j ~ .- Peter G. Eberz ~. L Public Works Director f PGE:dg ~: z - 1 ~ :S - .„ - t August 19~ 1975 . her. dinar B. Jensen, G~+30 Pillsbury lwenue, Richfield, P;innesata 55+43. .~ 1 Dear Nor . Jensen : - • • . ,~ As per your request we have inspected the driveway and agree that it will be necessary to da repair work on your driveway ~~:'. ~to prevent the dragging of cars entering the driveway. In addition we have investigated your complaint that you have alxeady been assessed the side street share anc find this is ~~; correct. Therefore, we have reduced your assessrnent.~125.2u ii ! _ which is the credit that you will receive for previous. assess- ~ merits. Your new totai. therefore, is ~8g~+.57. ..Should you have any questions please feel free. to contact me. .. - . Sincerely, ~ ~ l ~' ._~ _. - i; _ Peter G. Eberz ._. ~"~ Public Works Director ' i __ ~'~ ; `~ PGE : cr `.,1PI ~ ~ 1i • . • _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~- ~ ' t -~ - - ~ _. 't > .r .t a N • August lq, 1975 Mr . Lyle F. B4311er , y . 7235 nth Avenue South, Richfield, 2iinnesota 5523. ;^ ,, Dear i~':C'. Mi13.er • _ •,; `~ At the August I1, 1g75 assesszaent hearing you requested the city to investigate the curb wor1~ located adjacent to your property. The city staff has revie~red tl^~is work and finch ~~,: that the work was done in a.ccorda~;ce with the specifications for this work. The concrete sample that you suppliea was not an integral part of the curb and sloes not effect the strength ~~ or durability of the curb. 1 ~• ~~ If you would like to meet with you to personally discuss the ~jF ~ matter we will be happy to arranga such a meeting at your conve:.ience . • t ._ . Sincerely,: ;~ ;~ - _.=..' __ . I - -~ . u Peter G. Ebert Director of Public Works ~ ~ YGE:cr .. ~~~• r• -• •.1' L~ _ ~ ~. J ' ~ ~ .`i t • E.': ' ` \, • r ! ,~~ ~. 1 1' . ~ • `1 `\ ,.. '•~ ~. !~~ ,\ ^ ~ '\ • i ~~' ~ 3-17 t~u~Llf','L ~ . I~au~;e :. T~ - ~. " Au~nzst 19 s 1975 . rir. Bert 2'relstad, ~" •~ ~ 72+5 Pillsbury Avenue South, Richfield, 2rannesota 55+23. - ~"~~ Dear Mr. Trelstad: " .~ ,~: We have investigated the complaints you listed regarding the ~ work done during City Project X10.-657• - \. The driveway hsa some pop. outs which is normal in concrete - work and-.in our opinion does not present a problem. ~ The sidewalls adjacent to 73rd Street is"heaved and will have _ ~' to he re laced." ~l~i.s sidewalit:, however, :will not be replaced. ~! II p under the guaranty of the city's contract-for City Project No. ~~ 657 since the defect is not a result of the worl~anship of the contractor. `t'herefore ,. we will.. schedule the replaceaent of this wa1'.c as soon as passible cut it can not be done under the ;,_, guaranty clause in~last year's paving contract. j - - f _~ ,~+ _ Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please .r "i _, feel. free to contact us an3 we will be happy to meet with you " ~ to further discuss it. Sincerely, n ` lti ~ . ~~ Peter G. Ebert . ~ ~ Director of Public Works L PGh:cr ,,, { " ~.~ w s - ~. ~ .. August l9~ 1975 Nor. 0. C. Breviu, - ' -- 6945 4th Avenue, .. Richfield, Minnesota. 55423. ,. i,;~ ,, . Deex ASr. Breviu: `~-`~' ~' This letter is to confirm the verbal cou-m3.tment made by the - city staff that the driveway extension on youx property will - - be reworked to eliminate tYse current problems you have.. We anticipate-this work to be done in the near future to eliminate any problems you may have. Tf you have any questions ~~ - on this matter please feel free to contact me. i~ 1 Sincerely., . ~' - ~. Peter G. L'berz . ~) -= -- - Public Worts Director a - . ,i - PGE : cr - - . - J ./- - /~/ / ~ • . ~. ~lli ~ E Li ' 3 r ;_ . ~ ~ ' ' .S k ` tM1.. x. w • ' August 19~ 1975 tir. Delton A. Boll, • 21~+ Pleasant Lane., RicYifield, Piinnesota 55+23. i^\ Deax Iir. Boll: . U t X ~ T,Ie 3ng•uired at your home. on August 2~ , 1975 and found that ~~ ~ you were out of town for a period of time. •~ ~:, `~l*, would•be happy to meet with you to discuss any shaping problems. you had with the City Project No. 65'j. Please let ~~`` us know when you have returned to town and we will be happy (`~1 ' to set up an appointment with you. ~~ J I~ Sincerely, t.... ~- ~ ~ ~ Peter G. E`berz , { ~, . _ D3xector of Public Works ' ~ - .~.~ PGE:cr .f t V ~ . ' ~ - . .~ f>-- I.•, ` r .. <+~ .i ,, • `, ' `'~, . . ,., ,~ ;\ ,l ~ ~ ~ti w '.b .. august 19, 1975 Mr. Lawrence K. Wozniczka, _ • 67k4 Wentworth Avenue South, Richfield, Pannesota 55+23. /~ Dear Mx. Wozniczka: ,~ ~ ,~ a . ~! We have a~,a~in reviewed. your driveway constructed during the '~ ~ permanent street paving program last summer. The deterioration `i ~~ in the gutter seetas to be increasing and while at this point it l !~ , is marginal we have discussed the matter with the contractor and he agrees to remove and replace the driveway. ~~ .. The question of the sloping was not discussed with the contractor '~ 1~ since it is our feeling that the problem would be rectified with ~i I the replacement of-the driveway because of trie gutter deterioration. !`; If you have any questions regarding this, please feel free to contac~c me. t~~ ~ .~ Sincerely, ,. ,. ~. • • Peter G. Eberz • Director of Public Works C, n ~,~ 1 PGE:cr ~.. ~R _ F r .fi y ~ '' ,° a i~ t e ~" ~ 1 !' i `' - J `E ` . _ ~. ' August 19, 1975 , .. ~, . Mr. '1". H. Christensen, . ~ 6736 Clinton avenue, .. `' `:~, Richfield, fY;innesota 55+23. ~ f-'. • /.. ;;^, Dear Mr. Christensen: t:~ , ~~ ' The city has reviewed your complaint regarding the work done during City f?ro3eet No. 657 and understands that the contractor itJ~ `:~ failed to supply suYficient crushed rock in your driveway. The ~-' `; contractor will be ordered to have this work done as soon as possible. .-..` Should you have any other questions regarding City Project I3o. ~ ~ . Ii ~ 657 please. feel free-to contact me. • Sincerely, ~' k i : ~ ~ ..,, Peter G. Ebert i. =, Director of •I?ublic Works v - •., PGE s cr l a / ~, j-, , _ r ~}~ ;~ ~ . L ,- ,~ _ s ~~ ~. ~~ _ *~ I~ 98.83 n W .~Q s +- d' ~ 110.83-~I E. 73rd ST. o r • . W ti. t ~ . ~ / PARCEL FOOTAGE FRONT SIDE STREET LIGHTS DRIVES TOTAL 70 (Braun ~- 110.83 2,022.65 769.16 221.66 77.88 3,o91y35 . 82 98.8 - ~ 685.67 ~ - 685.67 93 301:.7 - - 2,176.96 - 189.13 2,666.09 f ~ ! $/20175