Loading...
12-08-75 agenda~. ~ ~ L~ CITY OF FICHFIELD, MINNESOTA . Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 376 Agenda December 8, `1975 - -- The_Honorable- Mayor and. _ - Members of the City Council Gity of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject; Stop',Sign Requests At the council meeting of November 24, 1975, the "city-council approved cr"teria fio be used':in evaluating traffic control device requests . A committee .comprised of a representative of the City Manager's-:Office, ;and 'representatives of the Public ' Safety. and Public. Works Departments has been formed to'review requests for traffic .`control devices,' based on. these criteria . _ ,- ~ - ... ; . This committee met. on December 4, " 19.7:5 to begin requewing top sign requests . Minutes of that meeting are `attached. Based on'the committee' review, stop sign- request for.the following intersections are recommended for council approval: Two-Way Stop Signs Four-Wav Stop Signs 67th aril 11th 65th and Vincent _ ';-65th and 21st 67th and" Columbus ~ 75th and Oliver 67th .and Irving ~ `. ..Each of these locations appears to meet he criteria. Residents who signed :.petitions requesting any of the e signs have .been. ngtified of the committee recommendation and that the' council will be receiving the. recommendation at the December. 8,: 1975 meeting. ; It is recommended that the council approve installation of stop signs at-these locations . Respectfully submitted, - Peter G. Ebert Acting. City Manager PGE/bll cc; Public Safety Director Public Works .Director ,, TRAFFIC.CONTROL SIGNS COMMITTEE.MINUTES December 4, 1975 The staff committee formed. to study traffic control device requests met _for the first time on Thursday, December 4, 1975. Present at this meeting were -Peter Ebert, Public Works Director, Tom Morgan, Public Safety Director, and Joyce Wilde, Administrative Assistant. Joyce. Wilde was appointed chairman. The committee decided that, in the interest of providing the most efficient and effective evaluation of traffic control device requests, it would- be advantageous to have additional representation from a Public Safety Officer and a City Engineer. Lieutenant Ron Richardson and Marshall Raaen .were appointed to be additional members of the committee. Other administrative matters addressed included the decision that all residents who have submitted a petition requesting a stop sign or traff~.c light be notified by the committee when committee action is taken,. or if the committee decision is to recommend against placement of a stop sign, before -the committee recommendation is transmitted to the city council. The committee evaluated 15 requests for either two-way or four-way stop signs which had been pending. The Public Safety Director and the Public Works Director reported on results of all site visits to each intersection. Based on these site. visits, .and evaluation of he requests in light of criteria adopted by the city council, the committee recommended the following to the council, for approval of stop signs:.__ . . Two-Way Stop. Signs 65th Street and Z 1st Avenue -There is a small hill at the southwest corner • of this intersection. Based on this obstruction it is: the committee recommenda- tion to request council approval of stop signs to stop traffic. on Zlst Avenue. 67th.Street and 11th Avenue - A tree on the southwest corner of this intersection... provides a visual obstruction. Based on thin obstruction it is the committee recommendation to request council approval of stop signs to stop traffic on .11th Avenue. 67th Street and Columbus Avenue - A visual obstruction. of this: intersection is caused by a hedge at the northeast corner. Based on. this obstruction it is the committee recommendation to .request council approval of stop signs to stop , traffic on Columbus. Avenue. 67th Street and Irving Avenue -Trees and shrubs present a visual hazard on • all four corners at this intersection. (67th :Street does dead-end one quarter of a block west of the intersection) . Based on this obstruction it is the committee recommendation to request council approval of stop signs to stop traffic on .Irving Avenue.. 75th Street and Oliver Avenue -This is an openintersection with no visual obstructions, A school is located at the northeast corner of the intersection, and a church at the southeast .corner of the..intersection, creating heavy pedestrian traffic through the intersection at least six days every. week.. -Based Traffic Control Signs Committee .Minutes ~ Page 2 on the volume of pedestrian traffic through the intersection the committee recommends placement of a two-way stop sign stopping traffic on Oliver Avenue. .Four-Way Stop Signs 65th Street and Vincent Avenue -This intersection. is currently stopped on Vincent. The. park at the southeast corner and a wall which creates a site obstruction at the southwest corner appear to meet the justification for addition of stop signs to stop traffic on 65th Street as well, The committee still has eight four-way stop sign requests pending, Site visits to.these intersections reveal. no visual obstructions such as those identified at some of the other intersections . Vehicle traffic counts and accident reports are currently being compiled for these :intersections. The Public Works Director reported that the vehicle traffic counts have not been completed because of the heavy .snow falls last week and .again in-the early. part. of this week, The committee voted to defer action on these remaining requests until the additional reports have been received.. The city council indicated in its discussion of the criteria for evaluating stop sign requests that the :committee should also take into consideration special circumstances which may be particular to an intersection and which- could • justify placement of a traffic control device at such an intersection without the specific criteria necessary being applicable. It is with this consideration in mind that the committee voted to postpone recommendation on the ,remaining pending requests. .. The. committee voted to notify petitioners of it's recommendation for all of the locations where the committee is recommending placement of a stop sign. Triese .residents have also been notified that the city council will receive. the committee recommendations. at the council meeting of December 8, 1975 , t _ It was further noted that the remaining .requests, if they do not meet the criteria, '. will-.not be acted-.upon by the committee until petitioners have been notified and provided an opportunity to appear before the committee to discuss their requests, The meeting was adjourned with another meeting to be called by the chairman as soon as the vehicle traffic counts and accident reports are available to consider the additional requests . Respectfully submitted. by Joyce L. Wilde, Chairman. Traffic Control Signs Committee ~a Y. _ .. ~. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNE-SOYA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 374 '~ Agenda December 4, 1975 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City council Ci y of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Discussion of Ordinance Amendment Relating To Amusement Establishments At the request of the city council the: city attorney has drafted ,an ordinance amendment relating to the licensing of places of general amusement. The council. may recall that in recent months two such establishments have applied for and been granted licenses to opera a within the city of Richfield. The icenses have been required for operation of the coin-operated machines in the;,:establishment. .The city does not presently have any ordin- ance requiring licensing of these establishments as such. The proposed ordin- ance ,amendment would establish procedures for licensing of the amusement establishments. This :proposed .amendment is -being presented to the -city council for discussion purposes. . Respectfully submitted, `~ .__ Peter G. Eberz ~ ; Acting City Manager PGE/ej a cc; City Clerk Public Safety Director ~7. . ~ ~ . - _ ~ _ .. • . PLACE OF GE• NERAL AMUSEMENTS Subdivision 1. Defi.ni.tion. For he purpose of this section the term "Place of General.Amusement" shall mean any bu>:lding, structure or tract of Land. which has as its principal use or activity the providing of any of the following amusements: ' (1) Billiard, pool or~pigeon hole•tables. (2) Pinball machines - (3) Shooting gallery machines (4) .Any other mechanical or electrical device which . is designed to be played by a contestant or'con- ` ~testantsupon which-contestants receive a score . or rating based upon .their performance.' Subd. 2. License .Required. No person shall operate a place of general amusement without fi.rst'_payng a license fee and ~. obtaining. and having a current license as herein,prov-ided. Subd. 3. Application. Any person desiring to operate a place. of general amusement shall file with the clerk an application on forms provided by the clerk for that purpose. The application form shall contain the following, together with any other information which the manager may. require: t S ,(1) :Name and address of applicant I . (2) Address of the place of general ,amusement ~ j (3) The name and address of all persons owning. ~~-- -~ - ~ - or having an interest in the licensed pre-. wises. In the case of a corporation this shall include the names-and addresses of the officers and directors of the corporation . and all. shareholders who own alone or in conjunction. with their spouse or children 'more than 100 of the issued shares of - corporate stock. (4) Zf the licensed business is owned by a.corpora- tion, a.copy of the certificate of incorporation, _ articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. {5) The name and address of the person who will - manage. or supervise the licensed activity. (6):. Whether any of the persons listed. in .paragraphs (1) ,- (3) or (5) of this subdivision, have been engaged in the business of operating a place of general amusement in the last five years. • ~ ~ ' - -:-{?) Whether any of the, persons listed. in paragraphs ~. ~ (1); '(3) or _(5) of this subdivision have been convicted of a crime or have had an application for a general amusement license denied, revoked or suspended withnthe last year. • Subd. 4. License Fees. -.The. annual .license fee shall be $10.0.•00 for a place of general amusement, having not more than 'l0 amusement devices.- An additional annual fee of $10.00 shall be charged for each. amusement device above l0 located at any place -the applica- n y of general amusement. The entire fee. shall accompa nded only if the application is ef b ~ u e r tion and such fee-shall • withdrawn before council action .granting or denying the application. Subd. 5. Granting of Licenses. _ -• (1) All applications for licenses. shall be referred », . . . -to the Public.Saf _.. ety:Director and such other ..__ • departments as th _. e city manager shall deem necessary for. ver'~ ificatian and• investigation. persons to wh The om an application has been .. referred shall ma ~e their written recommendations. to the city counci il. ~ , • ~ (2) Upon .receipt of t he written reports-and recommenda- City Cl - tions the erk shall cause to be published ' . in thee-official. n ewspaper, at least 10 days.-in advance, a notice of public hearing to `be ..held by thee 'City'Council~ setting forth theday, time and . .when the he place aring will be held, the name of ; . the applicant and the location where the .business is to be conduct d.. Subd.' 6. Ineli ibli h for License.' Existence of any of applicant. ineligible for 11 render the the following,condita.ons s . - a 1'icense. _ (1) If either the ap licant or the manager of the licensed busines is: a. :under 2l yea s of age _ _. . b. an alien - c. -a foreign"co poration (2) If the applicant , manager, or persons owning the ~, licensed activit y is: ~, a.' not a person of good.. moral character and ,~' ~I repute • b. has <been con victed o.f an offense which relates to t~! he conduct of the. licensed business ~~ , ; ~ ~ ~ I ;' like or similar activity or has had such license suspended, revoked .or canceled (3~) If the manager or person in responsible charge • of he licensed premises is not a resident of -the City of Richfield. Subd. 7. Conditions of Licensure. The following conditions shall govern the issuance and holding of all licenses granted pursuant to this section: . (1)• Only .premises which are. within the general commercial districts of the city may be licensed. ` (2) No place of general amusement which was established after July 1, 1975 may be located on land .which. is adjacent.. to residential or multiple residence districts within the city. • (3) .Places of general amusement shall be closed at ~. 1.0:30 p.m. each day and shall not open until 9: 00, o'clock a.m. of the following .day.. (4) The consumption of alcoholic beverages, whether -classified as intoxicating or non-intoxicating, shad not be permitted on any part of the. licensed ,premises . ~ ~ . (5) _No person under the age of 17 years. shall be, • ~ permitted to remain on any part of the licensed • premises -after 10:00 0' clock p.m. unless . • ~ accompanied by his parent or legal guardian. (6) Adequate off-street parking shall be provided -- for patrons of the premises•in compliance with the provisions of Richfield Ordinance Code • Section .4.05. (7) The~licensedpremises shall fully comply with all applicable state and local regulations 'dealing wth'health, zoning and building. requirements. ~(8) The licensee'shall be responsible for maintaining order on all parts.'of the licensed premises.. _3_ - Subd. 8. -Bond. . III (1~ ~. At the time of~filing...an application for license ! ~ under this section,. the. applicant shall file a • bond with'corporate surety with the City Clerk. - Such .bond .shall be in the amount of $1,000.00. (2) Thee surety on the bond shall be~~a--surety company duly licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota. All surety bonds shall be approved by the City :Attorney as to fog and execution and deposited . with the City Cle ~c. . _ (3) All. such bonds sh~ll be .conditioned as follows: a.~ The licensee shall obe the laws relatin Y g to the licensed'business. i . L ~. b. The. licensee. shall pay to the city when .due all taxes, . license fees, 'penalties and other charges provided b law. Y c. In the event of violation of any law relating to .the .business for which the .license has been . granted,. the bond. shall be forfeited- to the city. - (4) All .such bonds shall. be kept in full force and effect. throughout the license period. - Subd. 9. Revocation. or Sus ensign of License. The license may 'be revoked, suspended or not renewed upon a showing that the _ licensee, its 'owners, manage employees or agents have engaged in any of the following cond ct: (1) Fraud, deception r misrepresentation`in connection. I~ with the securing of a license. • 2 ( ) Conduct inimical to the interests of ublic P ` health,-,aafety, welfare or morals.. (3)_ Engaging in conduct involving moral turpitude. • (4). Conviction of an offense involving moral turpitude by any court of competent jurisdiction. . (5) Failure to :.comply '',, with any of the .provisions of this section or en gaging in conduct which would be grounds for den ial of an initial application for licensure. ~ • - .. ~ ~ . .,4_ - •_~ _ .,,.: ~: • The City Council shall act only after a public hearing at which the licensee shall have the right to be present and be represented- _ by:Iegal counsel. and to offer evidence. Subd. l0. Existing Places of General Amusement. All places of general amusement which are in operation on or before the effective date of this ordinance shall make application not later than 6Q days following the effective date of this ordinance. If an application for licensure is made within that period, they may. continue the activity until the Council shall. have acted upon the application. St shall be unlawful for any place of general amusement which was in existence prior to the effective date of this ordinance . to continue in operation more than 60 days thereafter without having made-application; and for any. such, place of general amusement to continue in operation ~if its application for licensure has been denied by the City Council. ~ • . ., - s '1 . _ ~: .; .. ~ a . ~;. ~' Jr ~ F: , --- .. ~ .. ~, ,CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ;~ Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 373 _ - Agenda December 8, 1975 The Honorable. Mayor ' , and ' ' Members of the City Council - _City of Richfield - Gentlemen: Subject: Ordinance Amendment to City Nuisance Abatement Provisions ---~_' -.~ _. ~__ :..City council approval of.the Richfield Shade Tree Disease:S.ubsdy Program , _ suggests that certain changes should be made to existing city ordiriarices re- ~ _: garding the. abatement of plant and.. tree diseases . The changes: recommended - are designed to accomplish the. following:- 1, To more clearly define the actions that the city forester should take in each instance of nuisance abatement. 2. To simplify procedures for nuisance abatement within the city whether on public: or private property. 3. To streamline nuisanceabatement procedure,. 4. -To impose a 20 day limit for the removal of diseased trees so that residents may become :eligible for the subsidy program.. It is recommended~~that the council, give first reading o this ordinance amendment so that the Richfield ordinance will more. accurately reflect the. state requirements on: the ubject of nuisance abatement.' A copy of the ordinance amendment is .attached. ~_ .. .. _ Respectfully submitted, ----•-. Peter_ G. 'Eberz ..,` =. _": Acting City Manager PGE/e j a cc: Public Works. Director City. Clerk . CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter IV, Section 4.11 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to control 'of plant pests, is amended. by amending subdivisions 9, lA, 11,-12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 to read as follows: "Subd. 9. Abatement of Plant Pest Nuisances. In _' abating the nuisances defined" in this section, the ~ ~': forester shall cause the infected tree or wood to be sprayed,. removed, burned, or otherwise effectively treated so as to destroy and prevent as fully~as possible the spread of plant pests. Such abatement grocedures shall be carried-.out in accordance with • current technical and expert opinions and plan as - designated by the commissioner of agriculture. Stti~~1 -~S---~'reeedttre-few-Reme~e~-e~-~nfeetee~-gees-ane~ Weee~: Whenever the forester: finds with reasonable certainty that..the-tnfestatien-e~e~~ned-in-6t~bd--5 shade tree. disease exists in any tree or wood --_-~-a-}~e~bl~e- r~aay-er-he~~e~rsre~ in the city, he shall p~eeeed-es ~e~le~as- ~~}--~€-the-£erester-~~~ds-.that-tie-e~enger-e~ ~n~estat~en-e~-ether-gees-ems-net-txtmtnent-3~eeat~se-e£ e~erx~ar~e~* ; -he-si~a~~-raahe-e-a~r~tten-repent-o~-hts €~ne~~ngs-te-t~.e-eet~nei~-~rh~e~.-she~~l-preecee~-by-#a}-abating the-nez~ssnee-ss-a-gtz3~~te-~mpre~ement-t~ne~er-l~i~nneseta Stett~tes,-Ehspter-4Z~;-er--{b}-abating-the..-ntz~sanee-as ~re~~deel-~n-Sn3~e1:-~1-ef-this-seetien: -{~}--~~-the-~ereste~-~~ne~s-that-the-e~anger-e~ ~h~estat~eh-e£-ethertree9-ems-anent;-he-sha~~,notify .the abutting property owner if-the .nuisance~is'on public street right-of--way, or the owner if it is ©n private property, by certified mail, that the nuisance must be abated within a specified time, not less than five (5 ) days nor more than ten. (10) days from-the date of mailing such- notice. ~3~c-forester-aha.~~-tmmediate~p-repent-such aet~eh-te-the-ee~ne$1;-ene1 After the expiration of the time limited by the. notice, he may abate the nuisance- and shall do so within not more than twenty (20) days of the date of such notice.- i. '. .. - e/ r 1 ~ - .~ - ~ , . . Subd. ~~- 13. Transporting Certain Wood Prohibited. I~ is unlawful for any person to transport within the city any bark bearing elmwood without having obtained. a permit from the forester... The forester` shall grant -such permits only when the purposes of this section will be served thereby.. Subd. ~f- 14. Interference Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to prevent, delay or .interfere with the forester or his agents while they are engaged in the performance of the duties imposed by this section." Passed by the.City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1975. Mayor • ATTEST• City Clerk . ~ ~, _g_ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager , . :: ~l Council Letter No . 3 7 2 Agenda December 8; 1975 The. Honorable Iviayor and _ Members of the City Council City o,~ Richfield Gentlemen• .: Subject: Richfield Shade Tree Disease Subsidy Program In recognition of the substantial increase im Dutch Elm and Oak Wilt, di-sease,> he State of Minnesota has initiated aGrant-in-Aid program for Minnesota municipalities: The purpose of the program fs to curb the spread of shade tree disease (Dutch:Elm and-Oak Wilt) by providing for swift removal of diseased trees on private residential property.. Under the program a-Rich- field..reside;nt may become eligible for a subsidy of up to $I00 for the removal " of a disea sed tree . Tn order to become eligible-fir matching `funds from the- sta te, Richfield must possess: 1. An approved Shade Tree- Disease Control Program 2. Local Subsidy Program", Some, time ago:, Richfield fulfilled ,the first requirement by hiring a city forester and initiating a Shade Tree, Disease Control Programwhich was approved by he sfiate. Therefore; to. become eligible for state Grant-in-Aid. funds the city must initiate a~ local subsidy program,. According to state :guidelines, our program must include the following: 1. Council approval and an allocation of city funds for the program., 2 ~Programguide-lines including: A. A method for regularly inspecting and certifying diseased trees . B. A method 'for insuring that the trees are removed within 20 days of notice C. A city subsidy formula and eligibility. criteria for the resident. '~ D. Appropriate recordreeping to insure payment. Council Letter No. 372 -2- December 8, 1975 Overview of Richfield Subsidy Program During the course of the- year the City Forester conducts regular inspections of public and privately owned Elm and Oak trees within the city. If the tree is diseased the forester contacts the affected resident by certified mail,: indicating the actions. which are necessary to abate the problem. Under the subsidy pro- grams the forester will also include a brochure familiarizing the resident with.:. the program . To qualify fora Subsidy under the program the resident must obtain two quotes' from reliable tree contractors and insure that the tree is removed within 20 days of the removal notice. Upon receiving the quotes the resident will in- c` ~, struct~the 1'ow bidder to perform the necessary work. after the contractor-has demonstrated that he is properly insured. After he work',is completed'the resident pays the contractor anc~ submits a "Certificate of Remova_1/Disposa'I" to the city forester. The forester then determines that the resident- has complied with all program guidelines and authorizes the subsidy payment:. A voucher is prepared by the accounting department and a check issued to the resident for: the combined state/city... subsidy. At the end of each. month the city then bills the state for its por ion of the subsidies paid that monthwhich is received by .. the city a s seven ae . _.. Richfield's subsidy formula for each diseased tree.. on private property is a maximum of $50.00, not to exceed 25% of the total cost of treerem,oval. By adding this amount to the state subsidy, aRichfield-resident is eligible for a • ~ maximum of $I00 per tree, .not to exceed 50% of. the total cost of tree removal. The city`s application for Grant-in-Aid outlines the proposed program in greater detail: and is attached for your review. Council Action. Necessary To .submit the Grant-in-Aid.;application it s necessary for the countl to -.approve the attached resolutions... -The .first resolution authorizes. the staff to make application to the-state for the Grant-in-Aid ..program.' In addition, it requests that the state set aside $8,000 in matching funds to help finance. Richfield's.:subsidy program for 1975 and 197`6. In 1975, we have estimated that $1,..000 will be sufficient to cover` resident requests under this program. It should be noted that $SOO of this :allocation. will be received by the city from the fate as revenue. In 1976 we .have estimated-that as much as $TS, OOO will be required-to fund the program . Here again, the city will pay both city :and the state s-hare. of the subsidy and will then be reimbursed by the state . .Thus , it will be RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILTNG OF APPLICATION FOR GRANT TO SUPPORT RESTDENTTAL PROPERTY OWNER SUBSIDT£S .UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 18.023. WHEREAS , the State of Minnesota provides for the .making of grants , pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.023, to assist residential property owners in removal and disposal of diseased trees WHEREAS , the City of Richfield meets all the eligibility criteria for- such grants as set forth in the Department of Agriculture's Regulation Agr 107, including the administration of a shade tree diseasecontrol program approved by the Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture, and a, local subsidy program which is compatible with the administrative requirements of the State grant `program . WHEREAS, $8, 000.00 has been appropriated by the City of Richfield .for. the local subsidy program for the remainder of T975 and the calendar year of 1976,- and based upon the appropriate formulas and tree surveys, it has been. estimated that the amount of State grant will not exceed. $8, 000.00. NOW , THEREFORE, be it resolved by he city council of the City of :Richfield: 1'. That an application be made. to the Department of Agriculture; Shade Tree Disease Control Program,, for agrant-in-aid pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.023, as amended in 1975 for an amount presently estimated to be -$8, 000.00. 2 . That. the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to executa : and to file such application with the State. of Minnesota , Plant Industry Division. of the Department of Agriculture, and to provide additional information and to furnish such documents as may be required by said Agency, to execute such contracts as are required by said Agency and to act as the authorized correspondent of the Applicant. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas'j. Moran City Clerk • . RESOLUTIOi~I NO. A RESOLUTION CONTINUING AGRANT-7N-AID- PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD IN PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE PROGRAM .FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1976 BY AUTHORIZING THE REVISION. OF THE 1976 BUDGET. - ,. WHEREAS , the State of 1Vlinnesota provides .for. the :making of grants , pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.023, to assist residential property owners in removal and disposal of diseased trees, and WHEREAS , the eligibility criteria for the making of such a grant to .the city requires the establishment of a local grant-in-aid program and the allocation of local funds for. that purpose; and WHEREAS, such a program will be beneficial to Richfield residents and ' the. community as a whole by reducing the spread of shade .tree disease, NOW , THEREFOR, be it resolved by the city council of the City of Richfield:. _ - :_ . 1 . That the clay manager. continue to institute and direct the Richfield -- - Grant-in-Aid Program 2. That the .197E budget of the General Fund is revised as follow: a . Than $15 , 000 be ap ropriated from the Unallocated Contingency p . account to the street department. b. That the 1976 estimated revenues be revised to show an increase of $7, 500 in intergovernmental revenues . 3. That the city manager and the finance dixector bring into effect the provisions of this resolution. Loren L. Law Mayor • s _ ~. ~ 1 _ - RESOLUTION NO . A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AGRANT-IN-AID PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND PROVIDING FUNDS FOR THE PROGRAM FOR. THE PERIOD OF JUNE 1 , 1975 TO DECEMBER 31 , 1975 , BY AUTHORIZING THE REVISION OF THE 1975. BUDGET . WHEREAS the State of Minnesota provides for the making of grants , pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.023, to assist residential property owners in removal and disposal of diseased trees., and WHEREAS , the eligibility criteria for the making of such a grant to the city requires the establishment of a local grant-in-aid program and the allocation of local funds for that purpose, and WHEREAS, such a program will be beneficial to Richfield residents and the community as a whole. by reducing the spread of shade tree disease, NOW, ;THEREFOR, be it resolved by the city council of the City of Richfield.: 1 . That the city. manager is empowered to institute and direct the Richfield Grant-in-Aid Program . 2. That the 1.975 budget of the General Fund is hereby revised as follows a . That: $1 , 000 be appropriated from the Unallocated Contingency account to the street department. b. That 1975 estimated revenues be'revised showing an increase in intergovernmental revenues of $500.00. 3. That the city manager and the finance director bring into effect the provisions of this resolution. Thomas J. Moran City Clerk . 67Q Siate Uffice.Buld;ng Sf. Pt:ui, tVfinne~ota` 55155 G~tANT-IN-AID APPLZCATIt~N RL-SID~"NTTAL F:tOf~EKTY T1tEE R}~IOVAL SUBSIDY - F4R STATE USE ONLY Date .Received ~ Contract ~ Application ~` ~ Requisition ~ Date of Atrard Date of Encumberance PRRT I •• GENER_~LL INFOFd~ATION Political Subdivision Applying: - - i (2) Program Tianager - Person to V~,'~c^~ Name: City of Richfield ~ - inquiries about. the aoplicat~ :~ - ' ~ should be directed-. Address; -67.00 Portland Avenue _South ~ ~~~; Peter C . Eberz - - . ~ - County: H ennegin ~ ~ Titles Public Works director i - ' • ~ Address: 6700 Portland Avenue,South • i ~ Phone; 86.9-7521 - Individual authorized to, act in ~ (4) Tree Inspector responsible for behalf of the applicant: - certification of eligible trees; f Name: Wayne. S. Burggraaff - Name:. Bob McGuire- Title; ~ City Manager ~ Address; 6700. Portland Avenue South i Address: 6700 Portland Avenue South Phone; 869-7521 , Ext. 2.35 Phone:. 869-7521, Ext. 220' . Status- (X) Certified (+) Provisional APPENDIX A: Please include evidence of certification. .Fiscal Agent to whom check should be issued. - - N~te; Thomas J. Moran Address: ~ 6700 Portland Avenue. South ~ Richfield , Nlinn~sota 55423 tle: Finance Director - Phone; 869-7521 Payee's Title:- City of Richfield . • .8/75 AGR 36 ~) (x ~ New Application ( ~) Renewal Application } a, If within the Seven-County-Metropolitan area, does the applicant have a Shade Tree Disease Coritrol.Program approved by the Commissioner of Agriculture? (xx) Yes (~ ) no b. If located iri Out-State Minnesota, has the appli cant received the Commissioner of Agriculture`s approval to bring their Shade Tree Disease Control Program under M. S. 18.023? .APPENDIX B:'Please include evidence of approval. 8} -hoes the applicant presently have a APPENDIX C: Fiease include evidence .subsidy program? ~ that progra.*~ is in operation, _ _ or evidence that the pr~~gra..:: (~) yes (~) no . is to be initialed, i, e, r~s:~- lution of the pc:,licy ;ai:~rn Has the governing body of the applicant bcdy".authorizing the local. committed the applicant to a subsidy program? subsidy program and ir.dicatirg _ the financial co:rrmitment t~~ ( •~ . Yes (~) no the program.. ... . 9) Present FY 19 75 Cor.~ina RI 19 76 mount budgeted for Applicant's Subsidy Program $ 500 ~. $ 7 ~ 500 __._ Estimated State grants-in-aid to be received .r,00 7 S(1 (l ..:.,_ , ~~ $1000. $15,000 Ap~;licant's Budget year? 1 - _ 12 (See Appendix G) month month P 0) fias the appropriat,..regional planning - ~ f~, authority been notified that i~ applicant APPENDIX D: Please include a copy of ~ ic: seeking State assistance? the notification and tho reviewing agoncies commorts, _ (~) yes (_) no - Identify the planning body notified: Metropolitan Council ~~ PART II -EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM L) IJumber of .Elms in applicant's .control. areas ~., 75.000 £stimated.Elms on privates property , ~ ~ ~', . . 65,000 Numtber of Oaks in applicant's control areas ~ 100,000 ~stimated Oaks on .private property . 95,000 Elm within control areas .•,, 43°/Q to Oak within control areas . ~ , 57/ . y 2 _ 8/75, AGR 36 ~: ~ ~ Preceding Calendar Present Calendar . Year 19 Year 19 Nurn:~ec of .clm icionti.t ltd as diseased ~6 ~7 . un~c~r of disea~;ed Elm rorno~;ed 2:6 37. urnlr~r of Oal'. identiried.ac disea:~ed 1 6 Number of diseased Oak removed 1 6 °J lo.-s Of. Elm .. 96 7° 86% ° % l ors of Oa: . 4 % ~~,° S) Discuss the-extent oL the Dutch $lmJOak Z~Tilt .problem in the applicant's community,, ie; the rate at-which Elms/Oaks are beirg lost; the potential aesthetic or economic loss; and any other impact peculiar to the applicant's community. (Continue on additional sheet if space is inadequate. Richfield`s Shade Tree Disease Control Program was begun in 1973.. Its first year of operation was a period of development and organization.. During that period, various means of recordkeeping and control were attempted. During 1974, methods of recordkeeping were developed from which we can assess long term trends. However, on the basis of only: two years experience, it is difficult to assess trends realistically: Like the state, we have experienced an increase in Oak-:Wilt and Dutch Elm Disease. While Oaks predominate in Richfield, .our major concern is in-the area of Dutch Elm Disease. On the other. hand, Oak Wilt Disease has been increasing both absolutely and relatively a"s .indicated in the above figures. The aesthetic -and economic losses experienced by Richfield because of shade tree 3isease are interrelated. Tlie community possesses relatively few trees and those that exist are placed at a .premium by potential and existing homeowners. Therefore, the loss of a privately owned tree-affects the owner, the neighborhood. and community currently. An economic loss is experienced by tl'ie homeowner both in tree removal and replacement costs.. It might also be argued that the homeowner also incurs Gloss- in property sales value, Aesthetically, the property owner and neighborhood, in general, -.feel the impact from the toss of an already scarce commodity. Tn addition, Richfield's population is growing older. The percentage of .homeowners age 65 and over is increasing. Their ability to accumulate funds necessary for fast and' efficient #ree'removal is impaired by their socio-economic condition. 8~ ~ 8/75 AGR 36 PART III -CONTROL-PROGRAM 1) Ikite that the a.pplicant's ~zade Tree Lisease Control Program was approved March 18, 1,75 2) Give a ststement~of lcng-term and short-term goals for the Control Program. Short term: To adequately diagnose and control diseased trees to inhibit the spread. - of disease. This can`be accomplished by efficient recordkeeping, 'investigation, sanitation, removal, citizen awareness, .and information dissemination . • Long term: Ideally, ,total elimination of shade .tree disease--realistically, to minimize -. loss to the lowest possible levels.. To reach this goal we will maintain consultation, education, investigation, -and citizen participation at ._< - •. optimum levels for program effectiveness along with. efforts listed under short term goals . • 3) Assess the effzctiue:zess of the .applicant's Control Program. (Continue on additional sheet if space. is inadequate.) _ _.. . _ _, _ .. _ .. _: ..Richfield`s shade tree disease control .efforts are increasing in excellence. We now - possess excellent equipment for sanitation efforts: Two hi-ranger tree trimming trucks along with one tree chipper make it possible to conduct tree .trimming operations. year around except during the months high shade tree disease propogates and infects: In ldition, the city has two crews of four. men who are fully trained in trimming operations . We also' possess an efficient Vapam program and our shade tree disease control program has easy access to laboratory facilities. for disease recognition and correction. Oar city forester is well qualified in his field and able to draw on extensive experience in shade f tree disease control methods. Finally.,- the .City of Richfield is almost totally developed, leaving very little wilderness area for the disease to develop.. Efforts toward disease control are, therefore, significantly enhanced because most diseased trees are visible 6} Discuss the problems of the control program; administrative,. technical, 3rid any others, (Continue. on additional sheet if space is inadequate,) - The major problem of our program is attemptir~gto get:`all necessary administrative procedures taken care of within the 20 day period in cases where removal costs must be • assessed against the property owner.- Richfield ordinance requires a public hearing in - these instances which .can. produce. delays.. To alleviate this problem, the ordinance is berg .amended to speed the administrative processes leading to removal of a tree.. It is anticipated that the ordinance amendment will be executed prior to state approval of Richfield's Grant-in-Aid Program, :• • 4 w 8/75 AGR ~36 RICHFIELD SHADE TREE DISEASE SUBSIDY PROGRAM a. 1. Persons eligible for the local subsidy: Any person owning residential property within the boundaries of the City of Richfield.. 2. Trees eligible: Any standing, privately-owned Elm or Oak tree located on residential property within the boundaries of the City of Richfield which has been declared by the city forester to be a public nuisance pursuant to Richfield Ordinance Code and have been removed or are to be removed after June 1, 1975'.. b. The method for determining the amount of subsidy: The Grant-in-Aid formula to be used by the City. of Richfield is as follows: .The combined city and state .subsidy to residential property- owners ..will have the following limits: a. The grant-in-aid per diseased tree shall not exceed 50% of the cost of removal and disposal of that tree.. b. The grant-in-aid per diseased tree shall not exceed $100.00: • c. The city's grant-in-aid per diseased tree shall not exceed the ~ state's subsidy per tree for removal and. disposal costs. . c. Records maintained, accounting methods used., and paper work involved: Standard -shade tree control program records -are maintained at city hall including: 1) ..Monies expended for personnel and equipment , '. 2) Man hours spent on tree sanitation inventory and chemical control efforts 3) Initial inventory of trees 4) Number of free samples submitted for diagnosis and the results. 5) Number of diseased trees identified 6) Number of removal notices issued for- diseased. trees on private property . - 7) Total number of trees removed, diseased and otherwise 8) _ Number of notices issued for the removal. of wood which might spread shade tree disease. The following records will be employed for efficient accounting of the city's i subsidy program: 1) The Certificate of Removal/Disposal will be used with minor modifications a. An addition will be made to the instruction section of the form indicating that property owners wishing to obtain a subsidy from • the city must use a contractor which has shown proof of Worker's . .compensation and General Liability insurance to the city. .The - purpose here will be to guarantee that the contractor is licensed and insured and will remove the tree pursuant to state. regulations . b. A space will be provided for the property owner to indicate the companies contacted and quotations received to help insure compliance with state regulations e ,(modified Agr 37 enclosed) - Z) Upon receipt of a properly filled out Agr 37, together with appropriate .receipts submitted by the owner of the diseased tree, the city forester • will verify the information on the municipal portion of the form and will submit it to the city accounting department. A voucher will then be filled out and check sent to. eligible property owners covering the costs of both state and local subsidy. 3) The appropriate number of Agr 37 forms in addition to the "Request for Payment" form (Agr 38) will then be sent to the state on a regular basis, so that the city will be reimbursed for the state subsidy..: All necessary accounting practices will be employed to insure funds are recorded, adjusted and maintained according to generally accepted accounting principles . ~ - • d. Procedures for removing diseased trees from rivate residential ro ert p p p Y• 1. The city's grant-in-aid program will b_ e, publicized through city publica- tions and. local newspapers. 2. When a resident calls the public works department or is informed through our Shade Tree Disease Control Program that his privately owned tree - constitutes apublic-nuisance, he will be provided with a brochure detailing the purpose and procedures necessary to qualify for the program. (example enclosed) 3. In the event that the individual has been served notice that his tree constitutes a public nuisance, he will also receive an Agr 37. 4. The individual will then be responsible for securing estimates and following procedures for the removal of the standing diseased tree. 5. The Agr 37 will be sent to the city for appropriate action by the city forester and accounting department and subsequent referral to the state for payment. i . _ _. _ __ +._ _ ____ __ ~r.~ -_ _ _ ___ f ~: ~ •; _ - .. . '-T -; October 10, 1975 - A .. _ Mt. John Rutford } ~ ~ lvletropolitan council ' ~ 300 Metro Square Building. _ St.-Paul, MN 55107. ,~' F ~~ SubJec~t: Minnesota Grant-in--Aid Program for Residential _ Property Tree Removal Subsidy Dear Mr« Rutford: - The City of Richfield is in the process of applying for stake assistance - One of the . for the removal of diseased trees on private property. stipulations of the application is that the . "appropriate regional planning authority" be notified. F have written this letter for that (~ l ~ :~ _ . purpose. _ f ~ ~ Richfield's immediate goals in this program. are to help. Richfield i residents to pay the costs of diseased tree removal. The program is ~'~ ' designed to stimulate immediate tree removal to minimize- infection M _ ~ of healthy trees in the swcrounding area.. This, in addition to educa ative and consultative efforts embodied in our Shade esti i l . ~ ~ g nv , tiona Tree Disease Control Program will help Richfield to minimize economic f ( loss and maximize the aesthetic and ecological benefits of our' _ i } residential shade trees. These benefits accrue not only to Richfield but also indirectly to the overall character of the metropolitan area, Therefore ~ I would appreciate it if -you would draft a letter to me Y indicating that You have been notified of our interest in this regard. `After receiving this letter. I will then be able to proceed with the . ~ application process, If you have any questions, please da not hesitate to call. _ ~: r .~ ..... ~3 ~ _ - .._ Yours very truly, ,Frank Boyles ~. Administrative.Aide .. - FB~~ - . - .: _. _.. .. :. . .., -_ - APPENDIX E INTRODUCING RICHFIELD`S GRANT-IN-AID PROGRAM TO HELP YOU PAY THE COSTS OF " REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF THE DISEASED TREE ON YOUR PROPERTY Are you eligible? Any Richfield residential property owner whose privately owned standing Elm or Oak tree located on private residential property which has been declared diseased and ordered removed by the City Forester on or after June 1, 1975 , is eligible to the benefits - . of this program . - :What are the benefits of the program? If you. are eligible to the program , the city and state will provide money. to help you finance the removal and disposal of your diseased tree. The subsidy you can receive is governed by th'e following: 1) .Thee maximum you can receive under this program is $100.00 for each diseased tree. 2) The total money provided to you for. each diseased tree will not exceed 50% of the total costs of tree removal and disposal. - ~~_- For example: If your tree is discovered to be diseased and required removed and the total cost of removal is $100.00, then you are eligible to receive a $50.00 subsidy under - rule. #2 of this program . However, if the removal and disposal cost is $300.00, you.. - . - will receive the maximum of $100.00 under rule #1. What must you do to receive a subsidy? After your Dutch Elm or Oak tree has been tested, found to be diseased and ordered removed by the City Forester, you must: - 1. Have at least two tree removal contractors submit quotes to you for the removal of the tree. Instruct the winning bidder that they must provide proof. of insurance to the City of Richfield rior to the removal of your tree. 2 .: Accept the low bid and make arrangements for removing and disposing of the tree within 20 days of receiving the, Gity ,Forester's letter. If the tree is not removed within 20 days of receiving notice from the city, you may not be eligible to subsidy benefits .. 3. After the tree is removed, pay the contractor and fill out the enclosed "Certificate of Removal/ Disposal. • 4. Attach your paid receipt from the contractor to the Certificate of Removal/Disposal and send it to the Public Works Department at city hall....-,(Keep a copy of each for your own records) 5. After receiving your Certificate, the City Forester will determine whether you have complied with all program rules . 6 . If all rules have. been complied with, a check will be sent to you covering the total subsidy you are eligible for under the program. What if you can't afford pavina for the removal of the tree? - i . __,_, If it is impossible for you to pay the costs of tree removal, you should: 1. Contact the Public Works Department at city hall immediately upon receiving the notice to remove the tree . Z . The city will make arrangements to have the tree removed and will assess the costs against your property. You will then pay part of the costs for re- • moving the tree every year up to a three year period along with your regular yearly property tax payment. _ 3. You may still be eligible for the subsidy if you contact the city on the same day you receive the removal notice so that the tree can be removed within 20 days . If you are eligible for the subsidy the city will subtract the amount of the subsidy from the special assessment levied against your property. Do You Have Any Questions ? Feel free to contact the Richfield Public Works Department, 6700. Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN/55423. Phone: 869-7521, Ext. 234. Instructions to eligible property owner. To be eligible for agrant-in-aid the property owner must: (1) Obtain two independent estimates from responsible and qualified tree services for removal and disposal. (2) Contractors performing tree removal services under the provisions of the city/state grant-in-aid program must provide proof of Worker's Compensation and General Liability insurance to the city rior to removing diseased tree(s), (3) Select the lowest responsible 'and qualified bidder. (4) Remove the diseased tree within 20 days of notification of removal by local authorities, (5) Submit an invoice or receipt of payment from the contractor perform- ing the service. . (6) Submit the attached Form AGR 37 verifying date of removal and compliance with estimate requirement. Note: If the above eligibility requirements cannot be met, the property owner must submit a brief justification stating the extenuating circumstances preventing compli- ance. The. statement will be reviewed by local authorities . - I do hereby certify, that two independent estimates for tree removal/disposal were. - .obtained from responsible and qualified tree service contractors,, and that the lowest bidder was selected. And further, that the trees claimed eligible for the local and' - • ~ state subsidies were removed on day of (day) 19 (month) Name: .Address: - Phone: Location of removed tree:. Quotations received: $ Company $ Company .(Signature) (Date) FOR MUNICIPAL USE ONLY - Number of Trees Removed Local Subsidy $ . Total Cost of Removal/Disposal $ State Subsidy $ Cost to Property Owner $ I hereby certify that the above claimed removal/disposal has complied with the Department of Agriculture's Regulation Agr 107, or is in as near compliance as practically. possible. .Signature of Tree Inspector Date ORIGINAL-Dept, of Agriculture YELLOW-Property Owner PINK-Municipality Minn. Dept. of Agr. ~- ,_ :. ,' _ . 8/75 Form AGR 37 -. ~. SUMMARY SHEET OF CERTIFIED REMOVALS/DISPOSALS Copt; aiue of Property Orti=ner Date of Noti- Date of .Charge for Local State Cost-to address ~ ~ fication of Removal Removal - Subsic~f .Subsidy Froperty e~one # '• Removal Disposal Owner ocal'lon of Reruoved Tree • . :. } ~. ~~ Form AGR 38 :APPENDIX G JUSTIFICATION FOR STATE MONIES REQUESTED IN 1975 AND 1976 1975 To date, approximately 43 cases of Dutch Elm Disease and Oak Wilt have required. the removal of trees from public and private. properties within the City. Because of the late date and the dormant season, we feel that there is little likelihood that many new cases will be discovered. It is anticipated that a number of Richfield residents who have had diseased trees removed since June 1, 1975 , will respond. to the program this year. However, we feel that. the response will be limited as .many individuals will not qualify. under the conditions of the program. Among the reasons for this are that many people removed. their own trees , others had them removed prior to. June 1 , 1975 , and still others failed to obtain two quotations. We., therefore, feel that a $500 state contribution should be sufficient to handle 1975 subsidy requests . 1976 The inciderits of Dutch Elm and Oak Wilt increased 66% from 1974 0 . 1975. It should be noted That the rise is based on 1975 figures which were .current to July- 28, 1975. It is , therefore, possible that our year end. report.. will reveal an even greater increase in Oak Wilt and' Dutch Elm. In numerical.., .'• terms,. 26 .cases of shade tree disease were diagnosed in 1974 compared. with 43 cases in 1975. Consistent with state-wide trends , we expect shade tree _ disease to increase substantially in 1976. It is reasonable to assume that we might experience an increase of 100% to 150% in 1976, which would bring the total cases to 86 to 129. Since it is difficult to estimate the number of trees which will be involved in each case and the amount of each subsidy.. due to the resident, we are requesting a state subsidy of $7,500 and a match- - ing city contribution. It is felt that setting this amount of money aside for 'the program will -help to insure its vitality throughout 1976 . - 4 t .. ~ ,'` ~ ` p. ,, CITY OF RICHFIELD,. MINNESOTA ` ; ~"~' ~'~,, Office of City Manager ~~ ~` Council Letter No. 371., °~. f~, ~..~~ Agenda December 8, 1975 The Honorable -Mayor and , Members of the City Council City of Richfield " Gentlemen: Subject: Contingency Fund Transfer On the December 8, 1975 city counci agenda there is an item requesting .that the- city council transfer $5, OOO from the Contingency Fund to the Public. Works Department. This transfer will provide funds for the purchase of add- itional sand and salt for .snow and ice control throughout the city. As you know, the months of January .through 1Vlarch are usually. the most "severe in terms of weather, requiring aconsiderable:-expenditure of funds for the purchase of sand and salt. The revised L975 budget as adopted by the ~• '~~'ct ,council allocated funds for the urchase of these roducts normally re- it y p p ,;, ~,. squired during the months of November and December. However, because vwe Piave 'experienced heauy snowfall and ice conditions. this November and ~"i ~ ,, DDecember, 'it has become necessary to use unusually large amounts of sand i }~ ~': `~ ~ ;a'ri'd salt. Therefore, to insure that we po sess an'adequate supply of each for the remainder of this year, -it is .necessary that -the council adopt the ~~ ~ .~ `'~ 's 'attached resolution transferring '$5, 000 from the contingency fund to the :public works department. This will provide for the purchase of an_ additional 400 tons of sand and-:salt.: t~`; It is recommended thaw the council approve this fund. transfer. -This transfer with the transfer needed to create the .diseased .tree subsidy program, will bring the balance of the Unallocated .:Contingency Account from $10, 000 to a new remaining balance_of $4, 000. ~;~ Respectfully submitted,; Peter G. Eberz ~` ...Acting City Manager PGE/eja cc: Finance Director Public Works Director ,, RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION FROM . 1975 CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO PUBLIC WORKS. DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, Resolutions. Nos. 52+9 and.5~+21 appropriated-funds for each department of the city for the year 1975; and WHEREAS, a contingency of $10,000 was made in the General Fund-for unforeseen emergencies or unanticipated services; and WHEREAS, unusual-early cold. weather conditions in November and December have caused a depletion of the .normal sand and salt supply for maintaining the streets in reasonably safe condition and it appears necessary to provide an emergency appropriation of $5,000 to relieve the situation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfeild Minnesota that the sum of $5,000 be transferred from the contingency appropriation of the General Fund to the following ~.epartment: Public Works $5,000 increase. Passed by-the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of December,. 1975• Loren L. Law Mayor .ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk y ,y - .- .CITY OF RICHFIELD, 'MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council .Letter No. 370 Agenda December 8, 19:75 The Honorable Mayor ' and - .Members of the City Council , ,F', City of Richfield ` Gentlemen: Subject: Authorization to Call for Bids :~ ~s ,_f r tt ~ .~ `" ;,L~~~ Qn the. December 8, 1975 city council agenda .there. is an item requesting ~~ city, council authorization to seek bids for the selling of the Public Safety De:partment's: Fire Division. aerial ladder truck. ~„ ~ The city manager-has recently .sent the city council a'memorandum indicating that the Public Safety.Department was reviewing: the +status of the aerial- ladder ,;: truck. While this review is .not completed, it appears that the' city should %consider the possibility of disposing of this truck. 'l~, The city's need for aerial equipment is limited due to the structural composition of the..<community'. The particular piece of aerial equipment owned by the City of Richfield is largely inappropriate in meeting the fire fighting needs of-the community and it appears tha the present aerial ladder truck will become. more inappropriate in meeting our needs in the future. This truck is a tandem. mounted aerial ladder with rear steering capability, which means tha t each tune the truck is moved, even•just to the driveway of tYp station, it requires two men to operate it .. Our present.-manpower allocations inhibit regular use of equipment requiring two men. .Also, other pieces of aerial equipment might better meet Richfield's Tang range fire equipment needs, such as aerial platform trucks rather than the aerial ladder truck. An aerial platform would provide greater versatility, extension and maneuverability. than` the present aerial ladder truck. Many locations within Richfield cannot be reached with. the aerial ladder truck because of the lanascape design- or aayout of the driveway and parking areas s~arrot~rdng the structures ~A single axle aerial platform would provide mare .flexibility in overcc[ning .many of :'the natural obstructions to the use of aerial-equi~nlent. Our current need for an aerial ladder .rests primary y with the potential. life safety hazard of two Richfield structures, `'the Rich-Jiew Nursing Home and. the -. Hoiy Angel's Academy. Presently,we have a-first alarm agreement with Edina :.; :, !ta supply an aerial ladder truck at both these locations. =Ou'r normal first alarm . res:pon e at either of these locations would be with pumping equipment and not +~ ~ ~ with~aYe ladder truck. ' With the ;first alarm agreement we have with Edina we '1I t-E ~ :h ~ .fit - ~..,~ Council Letter No. 370 -2-, December 8, 19Z5~ would :,have their ladder truck on the scene before we would normally be .able to respond with a-.callback; crew on our own aerial ladder truck:..." In addition to ~~ - the life safety factors- provided by an aerial ladder truck, we do need such a piece of equipment for uses as an aerial water tower. iri fighting. major structural ~~ " fires, Again. the: establishment of a water tower at a fire scene would not receive "~~ ' ~ `first.: priority and would not normally be acccmplshed before arrival of mutual ~-~.~~ ,, -~a>id un~its~ori the scene. ~r The possibilities of starting a reserve fund for the purchase of appropriate aerial ladder equipment .such. as the ..reserve fund established for replacing pumping equipment hasbeen considered....One of the problems is .that there-would be liatle opportunity for disposal of our particular kind of a'e,rial ladder truck on a sale or trade, which would iimit our-ability to recover the equity we have in this equipment, However; the City of Minneapolis -is critically short. of aerial equipment at the present time, due to mechanical breakdowns on their' present fleet, and .members of the Minneapolis Fire Department have recently visited Richfield and inspected our aerial ladder truck. They have indicated that this truck would complement the present equipment operating in their fire fleet; and-have expressed an interest in - negotiating. for the purchase of this aeriahladder .truck. Before the Public Safety. Department can seriously-evaluate such ;a sale and .the - possibility.. of updating the Fire Division's aerial equipment, they must determine '~~'' ~" _,~: the: marketability and revenue that v~ uld be generated by the sale of the city's ~~ existing aerial ladder. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Public Safety Director and the City 1Vlanager that he city advertise .for-bids for the ale of the aerial ladder truck with the option to reject all bids if it is determined that Sale of this aerial .ladder would >not be in the best interests of the City of Richfield and"tlie safety of its residents. Respectfully submitted, ~,. .: Fetes G.~ Eberz .r Acting City Manager ~ ;~ PGE/bll ' ~.~_~;; ,''_ cc: Public Safety Director RESOLUTION RICHFIELD HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION REGARDING COMMISSION BROCHURE WHEREAS, the Richfield Human Rights Commission was established by the Richfield City Council, and WHEREAS, the Richfield Human Rights Commission's purpose is to secure for all citizens equal opportunity, and WHEREAS, the Commission is also to advise the City Council on long range programs to improve human relations in the city, and WHEREAS, the Commission moved at their December 2nd, 1975 Meeting that the publication of a brochure describing the different commissions of the City of Richfield, should be published for all residents, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Richfield Human Rights Commission requests the City to undertake the publication of this brochure and forward it to all residents . Passed by the Richfield Human Rights Commission on this 2nd Day of December, 1975. William Siemers, Chairman Richfield Human Rights Commission C ~. ~> ~. _ , 'CITY OF RICI~FIELD, ,:MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council .Letter No. 367 Agenda December 8 , 19..75 The I~onorab e Mayor and' Members of the City Council ' .. ...City of`Richfield Genflemen• Subject:. Liquor' License Renewals for-Nick Minotte's,:Inc. . At the November 24, 1975 city council meeting the city council set December 8, 19-75 as the date for a public hearing on .the request forthe -on-sale and Sunday liquor licenses for Nick Minotte's Inc. ~~.~, The application for this license was submitted by Mr. Matthew Bohan, representing himself, Mr. Nick Mi°notte; and ;1VIr.; .Gene 'Chessen. The 'application was submitted within ;the prescribed time limit and has been i5 ~ properly verified by the city e;lerk` in accordance with ordinance requirements. ~' All necessary information .including a surety bond, insurance 'certification, political contribution. certificates, and license fees have been filed along with the application. Nick Minotte, Inc. is operating the restaurant at 708 W::~66th .Street under a management lease with the Heidelberg'Dinng Lounge, Inca.., and Mr. Jerome G. Dayton and Mr. Hershel S. Swain, as owners of that corpor- ation . Nick Minotte , Inca has made arrangements to purcha a the estab- lishment from Mr. Dayton and Mr. Swain. Apparently arrangements for doing so and the 'previous legal cons raints preventing such. purchase have been re- solved and -the Minotte Corporation :has begun; procedures for purchase of'the establishment contingent upon approeal of the license: The first on-sale liquor license approved for the restaurant at hat sate -was to the. Rush Estate and family on August 10, T970. The Heidelberg Dining Lounge, Inc. purchased the restaurant January 2, 1`973:and were issued their first license on January 15, 3973." The original licenses: issued for 1975 were issued to the Heidelberg Dining Lounge, `Inc., with-Dayton and Swain `as corporate. owners of the establishment. Minotte's previous efforts to would:have'retaned the corporate entity as the purchase the Heidelberg , ~~, Heidelberg Dining Lounge, Inc. and no; riew licenses had°to be issued (i.e. , the licensee .remained the same) . However, _a new corporation .has been 4 -~- ,- - _ Council Letter No. 3'67 -2- December-8, 1.975 'i~ formed, Nick Mnotte, Inc. , and it is this corporation which will be operating . =' ~ :>: the restaurant"after the purchase from Dayton and Swain. ,, ,~ ~.~~V Application Investigation ' In accordance with. the ordinance .the public safety department did make '~.~ , an investigation of information required by Section 11 .06, subdivision 4 of the on-sale liquor ordinance. The. public safety department report which has -been previously submitted to the city council, indicates that despite the confusion with ,ownership of the establishment, they have experienced no major public incidents. on the premises since Minott° took over the rest- aurant in August, 19 75 . Furthermore, it appears that some .problems which had been experienced by the previous owners have been resolved by Minotte. It is the recommendation, therefore, of the public safety department hat consideration be given to the request. for approval. of the liquor: license for 1975 and a renewal of that' license for 1976. Accountant's Report The on-sale liquor ordinance requires that the applicant file with the city olerk a statement made by a certified public accountant which 'shows the. total gross sales and the total food sales of the restaurant for the preced- ing 12 month period. Since Minotte is a new applicant, and has net been op- -~ erating the establishment for the preceding 12 month period., this information is not available. Health and Safety Regulations The restaurant and cocktail lounge at 7'0$ :West 66th Street have been inspected numerous times over the' past several years, and routine-environ- mental health inspections and fire prevention: ns~ecticns havE been conducted at the establishment within recent. months . There were same' difficulties in- spectingthe restaurant during the time of the ownership ransfers; `however, ~' ~~ ~,` there has been a general effort on the part"of Nick Minotte to. comply with code ,~a R ~.y~ ~ ~ , requirements . e ` There have been some health problems with housekeeping, storage of materials, lighting and .building .maintenance. `` Many of the major improvements ~~ ordered have-already been completed.: Although some additional work remains to be done, Minotte has proven- cooperative in working with the environmental ... ` health department'in efforts fio comply with the code, and it is, anticipated that , compliance -with code requirements will be made shortly: Minotte has also agreed to submit a layout plan .far any future remodeling of the establishment k. or installation of large equipment. Off-Street Parking-Contract Provisions The original off-street parking contract for the. Heidelberg Dining Lounge., Inc. was approved by the Richfield City Council on July 27, 1970. The performance bond required as a condYtion of the. off-street parking contract required numerous improvements, most of which have been completed. As the council will recall, the stipulations for landscaping and sidewalk improve- ments were waived due to the fact that the Lyndale,!Hub/Nicollet project could require further changes . ` The final council required improvement which 'was not completed was tha " removal of the roof billboard. -The billboard advertising sign was_to be removed on or about March 31, 1974, but is still on the roof of the building. •The council stipulation that the billboard advertising:-sign on :the roof be; removed~oceurred, of course, before Minotte-became involved with the restaurant.. While this sign removal has not taken place, the longstanding request of the council that tYie ,I sign be removed has' been relayed to:Minotte. The city has been advised. that- Minotte is willing,to remove the sign; and that.he has, in fact, contacted Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company of his .intent to do so. Miscellaneous .Information. - ~~ The app icant has filed the, necessary political contribution declarations indicating that nei`~ner of the owners have made: political contributions during the past year. The city assessor reports that the following information concern- ing .market value and taxes paid reflect that. data as it appears on city records: 12 months ending 12 months ending October 31, 1975 October 3 L , 1974 Market Value $520, 000:00 $510, 000:00 f Taxes Paid... $;.24,.799.40 `$• 22, 283.24 Recommendation It is recommended that th e application for renewal. ofthe on-sale liquor and Sunday liquor licenses for :.Nick Minotte'.s Inc. be granted'subject to the following pravision•s That theapplicant complete the improvements necessary to comply with the environmental health requirements.. Respectfully submitted, "~.~ Peter G: Eberz ` Acting City Manager' `~' PGE/eja cc: Public Safety Director City Clerk Environmental Health .Director <r °- 3 ~ r-- ~~ ~ ~... , ~ ,~ ~ r ~ ~ ~~ 4 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager t. ; ~:? ~, Council Letter No ,3.66°- ' 4' ~ ; ~ ,.~_ Agenda December 8, 1975 .. ,, ,~ ~, .., ~~ ~~ The Honorable Mayor .and `Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Amendment to Off=Street Parking Contract No. 2114,. Left Guard,, Inc. On June 12, 1972 the City of Richfield entered into an off-street parking .agreement with Left Guard, Inc. This agreement called for certain improve- ments to be completed before the performance bond was released. After the above contract was executed, parking problems developed in ~~ the. vicinity of the Left Guard,' Inc. and Left Guard, Inc. negotiated with Programmed Land, Inc. the property, owner to the east, with respect of.off- street parking arrangements. These negotiations resulted in an agreement that. provided, extra parking for Left Guard., Inc.. during peak .use periods, ~n, ` ~'~ ~`, but resulted in a need to amend the off-street parking, contract: '~; ~~ ;~, ~~~ ~ ~` ~ Attached is a copy of a letter from Left Guard, Inc.. requesting that the 1~city council approve an'amendment to the existing off-street parking contract ~_`No. 2114. ~ ~ ~ ~ ;The staff Yas re"viewed the sketch submitted by Left Guard,. Inc. and it is recommended that the city' council approve the proposed revision. ::~ Respectfully submitted, 3 ' ,~/ ~ Peterr G-. Eberz 1 ,~ - Acting City Manager PGE/e j a cc: Public Works Director ~ `'± zl - - ~'' ~ . -rn rr ~T- - .~ ~ III ~ I~~,Tas ,.~. i. ~ -- -- A -- ~_ _ -- ----~ F---~ -- --N-- - -tl-- - 1 - _'}L- - - - ~`- - - -1r-_ _ - - -Fa- - - - -u - - -~ ( -ter- --,r- -ter- - -~t- --+~- -1r- - =.- -,+- --~++-- --err - ' - --I--- -+r~- - - _1,-- -ter- _ - r- -~r-- -~.F_. -i}.- - - ~{ - j41GN --1+~- - - -+ +- - - ~ rt L~ - .,.L- - `L _ •~; - - ~ PARKING LOT LIGHTING ~l BARRIER- CURB ~r GREEN AREA ~~ `~ ~~ \~ Council LEtter No . 3 6 S -2 - December 8 , 19 7 5 No ordinance violations have been recorded against the establishment within the past year, During the year, there-were 18 reported police incidents. In ea~cii~ s, instance, the management of the establishment were .cooperative with the police , division of the public safety department in attempting to resolve the problems. The manager and employees of .the establishment have taken an active part; in policing.;their own premises. In addition, it appears that a number of the problems ~~. , experienced in 1975-were-non-recurring, and the management has sought to address such problems as they have arisen. Based on this information, it is tie' recomm= ~ .x erida_tion of the public safety department::tha t consideration be given to renewing the license in accordancewith the .application. Accountant's Report The on-sale liquor ordinance requires:-that the applicant file' with the city clerk a.statement made by a certified public accountant which shows the total gross sales and the total food sales of the' restaurant for-the preceding 12 month period, ' This information together with a compariaon of the previous year is as follows: 12 months ending 12 months ending October 31, 1975 October 31, 1974 Total Sales $1,416,576.66 $1,879,973.86 Food Sales 494,772.35 547.,913.74 '% of Food Sales to Total 34.9% 29.1:% % of Liquor Sales to Total 65.1% 70.9% ~- The purpose for obtaining this i-nformation is that tk~e state statute requires the serving. of food to be a principal part of 'the business of a restaurant which' has an on-sale: liquor license. Council members will. recall- that originally the city ardin- ance inc uded a definition of;the phrase "principal part of the`busness" stating " that-:more than 50% of the gross retail sales of licensed premises must be derived °: ''from'-.the sale. of food. That definition was deleted "in 19`71 leaving only_ ;the statutory requirement which does not .include a :definition of• the phrase The city attorney has advised that "principal part of the business" :may be interpreted to refer to percent of. gross sales,. but .also to such things. as the :amount of ';investment necessary to serve food compared to' the serving, of beverages.;. or the number of employees engaged in .the preparation and serving of food compared with beverages; or the amount of pace provided for the preparation and.- serving of food as-compared with beverages. In-short, .the state statute could be defined in°a- number of ways and in_no way<nfers that the definition. must be limited to percent of gross retail sales . Health and Safety Regulations' Various improvements dealing with health and safety regulations have been required of the Left Guard, Inc. over the past years. In addition, routine environ- mentalhealth inspections and fire prevention-inspections are. conducted. at the establishment. ~; s ,. r« Council' Letter No. 365 -3- December 8 1975 At the present timethe fire division of the public safety department reports that Left Guard, Inc. has complied with. all the fire code regulations. (The en- vironmental health department has been meeting with Left Guard, Inc. to insure continued compliance with health code requirements) Off-Street Parking Contract- Provisions . The original off-street parking contract- for Left Guard, Inc. was approved by the Richfield City Council on June 12, 1972. The ;performance bond required a~s~a.;=condition of the off-street parking contract still has not been released in- asmuch as improvements required by the contract have riot been completed... Execution of the off-street parking contract requirements was delayed due to negotiations by the Left. Guard, -Inc. and Programmed: Land,-Inca, the property - owner to. thee:°east with respect to off-street parking arrangements. Off-street :parking arrangements have been successfully negotiated between the two parties and details of the arrangement require some changes in the off-street parking contract. Therefore,. it is necessary for the Left Guard., Inca to request an amendment to their off-street parking contract before the work can be completed and the bond can be released. A request for this amendment to the off:-street parking contract son the December 8, 1975 agenda for city council consideration. Iylscellanaous Information The applicant has .filed the necessary political contribution declarations in- - dicating that officers of the corporation have -not made any .political contributions during the past year. - .; The city assessor reports that the-following information concerning. market ` value and taxes reflect that data as it appears on `city records: 12 months ending 12 months ending - October 31, 19'75 October-31, 19 7 4 Marken Value $1,100, 000.00 $970, 000.00 ..'...Taxes Paid 51,677.14 41,660.12` The -county records. have not yet recorded any payments on the $51, 677.14 tax bill. The: applicant has been notified that proof of tax payment must be received before ': the license .may be issued.. The city attorney has received and reviewed the Left Guard's bond and ,x,:. ;. , found that the bond does not comply with the-ordinance requirements. Section 1.1.06, Subdivision .13 of the. city code requires that the band be :forfeited to .,_: the city in event of a violation by the licensee of any law relating to the licensed b~isiness, _ The bond of the Left Guard does not contain .such a. forfeiture `~ prov;~sior~;. the Left Guard has been notified that he bond must have such a ~provisi'on to `comply. with the ordinance. ~; ,~~ - _ RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RELATING TO RELEASE OF BOND ON OFF-STREET PARKING C. M. Carlson Construction Co. 1800 West ~+gth Street, Minneapolis Location: 7705 Pillsbury Avenue South Use: Office and Warehouse WHEREAS, C. M. Carlson Construction Co., 1800 West ~+gth Street, Minneapolis,' Minnesota, had an off-street parking agreement with the~-City of Richfield,.relating to 7705 Pillsbury Avenue South, which contract bears the designation of Contract No. 2158 and which contract was guaranteed by a bond of the American Casualty Company,. Chicago, Illinois, in the amount of $1,700.00 'and WHEREAS, C. M. Carlson Construction Co. has complied with .the provisions of said agreement and the American Casualty Company, Chicago,'Illinois now seeks to be relieved of any further obligation under said bond, and WHEREAS, there appears to"be no justification for requiring C. M. Carlson Construction Co. to continue to provide a bond .for security on the performance of said agreement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of .Richfield, ' ..Minnesota, as follows: That the city manager is hereby authorized and directed to release the American Casualty Company, Chicago, Illinois for any and all acts of C. M. Carlson Construction Co., committed or incurred in violation of Contract No. 2158, on and after the 8th day of December, 1975• Adopted by_the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of,December, 1975• ATTEST: Loren L. Law Manager. Thomas J. Moran City-Clerk .