Loading...
09-27-76 agendaf .;~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of Cit;~ Manager Council Letter No. 3Q3 Agenda September 27, 1976 ,;The Honorable 1Vlayor and f Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: - Subject: Setting Date of Hearing for On-Sale- Liquor License The municipal ooda requires that the .city council set dates for the hearing of application for on-sale liquor licenses. Notice of ariy hearing ~ dates must ba estaYalish::d in the official.. newspaper at least ten days in advance of-such a hearing. jimmy's Lemon Tree Restaurant and Barbeque located at 818 VlTest 77 1/2 Street, has applied for. an on-sale iiquor license. Pachfield city ordinance requires that a restaurant intending to serve liquor apply fora special use ~~ permit as a restaurant intending to serve liquor. The' Lemon Tree Restaurant .has made. application for such a special use pern~i.t, and the Richfield Planning Commission will. review this applicatior.~ at its September 28, 1y76 meeting.. ~:~h.c app?ic~ation for special use permit will be on the city council agenda cf October 12, .1976, and it is recommended that the hearing on the liquor license application be scheduled for that council meeting also. Respectfully submitted, _ 1 ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~J'Jayne S. I?urggraaff ~ . City A/ianagFr. . WSb/e ja ` cci -City Clerk ~~ F'u1~1ic Safety I~irec:.tor _ _ _ ._ ..;a.. ~~ - .. ~ ~ /~ CITY U.t RIC:EII'iELD., I~~IN~,TESC~TA . . Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 302 Agenda September 27, 1975 . The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Disposal of City Equipment -, At the August`9 ,_ 1976, city council meeting, the council authorized the call for bids for the sale of fire engine, No . 3 ; a 1946 5 0.0 G . P . M . pumper, ~Nhich rs the city's ` oldest fire pumping engine. ,Council members may recall that this particular piece of apparatus is now 30 years. old and is only used by the city in a second line reserve status.. The engine is- housed at the west. side fire station; which also houses the. new mini-pumper to corr.pliment-the first line. maxi-pumper located at that station. The combination of the new mini-pumper and the first line maxi-pumper,. manned on a call-back basis, provides adequate first a:iarm fire response equipment for the west side station, and for all practical purposes, the 1946 5D0 G.M.P. pumper equipment ~ has .been fully replaced by the .mini--pumper. -Because. the equipment•is-.not used, or usable, and since removal of this truck from service will have no significant impact on ....the: city's fire insurance rating, the public safety director recommended .disposal of the equipment, and the council authorization to advertise for bids was granted for-the purpose of disposing of this piece of surpi_us fire apparatus. In an attempt to m~ximize the return on disposal of this piece of apparatus, .the public safety department. established, a-minimum desirable bid. for the completely equipped truck of $3,500. On.August 23, 1976, the city manager opened the single . d en-re ~.eved for this item. This bid was submitted in the amount of 'd whi h ha be bi c $2 , 000.00 by the Gityi of Willow River, Minnesota . After the council granted authorization to advertise forbids to dispose of the equipment, the public safety department actively attempted to invite offers for this ...:piece of fire apparatus . Only two-other inquiries were received, other than the offer made by the City of Willow River, and neither of theseinquiries resulted in a firm bid offer because of t~}~e age acid condition of the equipment. ; I Because the singl~,e bid received was below the. rninirnum amount specified in the bid announcement, it is necessary for the city council to-formally reject this bid..- H~uvever, since this piece of equipment is not used., it does still appear desirable to take advantage o~ the opportunity to dispose of this truck, and the public safety department .. _ ..... Council Letter No. _ 302 2 September- 27, -.1976 is interested in selling the equipment for the amount affer.ed by the City of Willow River. Since: it now appears .that the dollar amount involved will be'under $5 ,.000.00, disposal ~ of the equipment ,can be' effected. through. negotiation rather than through the formal bidding. process. The public safety department has negotiated the offer of $2,000.00 with' the bidder, the City of Willow River, on the condition: that Richfield retains some of the equipment originally included in the anticipated sale price of $3,500.00. Several hundred feet of fire hose can .be retained by the city for reserve purpcases. .. _ .. Because this equipment is not usable b~:the city; and since we do now have an opportunity to dispose of the equipment, it is the recommendation of the public safety ~I director, ,in which I concur,. that the council accept the negotiated offer for the purchase of this equipment by the. City of Willow River in tree amount of $2;000.00. The attached resolution pro~Tides for council rejection of the formal bid submitted • r p 'rtisement far bids, and acceptance of the offer-for purchaa~e in .es onse to the adve of .this .equipment in the amount of $2, 000.00. It is .recommended that. the city council take these actions through adoption of this resolution. .Respectfully subm`- ed, - ;... - - Wayne S . Burggraaff _-. City Manager __ - _- _ W SB/j kl cc: Public Safety Director ..Finance .Director ,. I M i RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DISPOSAL OF CITY EQUIPMENT WHEREAS, on August 9, 1976 the Richfield City Council authorized the. advertisement for bids for the .sale of Fire. Engine No. 3, and WHEREAS,.one bid was received in the amount of $2,000, and WHEREAS, ~a minimum bid of $3, 5.00 was established for sale of this equipment, and - WHEREAS, it is desirable. for the .city to dispose of this equipment and transfer revenues from this ale to the reserve fund for acquisition of fire equipment. NOW., THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by-the City Council of the City of - Richfield as follows: 1. That the formal bid in the amount of $2,000 .submitted in response to the advertisement for bids be rejected. 2.. That a negotiated offer of $2, 000 for purchase of .the equipment be approved. 3: That the revenues from sale of this piece of equipment be transferred to the reserve account established in the central garage and equipment fund for replacement of fire equipment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 27th day of September, 1976. L"oren L. Law MAYOR ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk .Y ~. .~1- / .t CITY ~JF RIC~IPIETT'~, T~,ZTiv?NESCTA. Office of City Manger Council Letter No. 301 Agenda September 27 ,: 1976 'Fhe Honorable Mayor and 1Vle~nbers of the City Coun.ci.l City of Richfield' Gentlemen• Uubject: Sign ' Ordina nLe Cotrzrnit~:ee At the September i 3 , 1976 city council Yneeting .the -city council approved the staff recorr%mendation concerning the development of a new sign ordinance. Tha recommendation included the establishment of an advisory committee as oatlined in Council` Letter! No. 284, of which a copy is attached. CaunciF members. deferred appointing the .comrr~ittee until the September • _ 20, 1~~6 s~ec~al meeting in order to.c~ive ccris.dcration to the addition of:.tv~c citizenmembers ; At the September 20, 19%n meeting the city cour~cil appointed the members-of t' e committee as suggested iii the attached letter with the 'ex- cepti,on of a council member, having concluded-that it would be best not to appb-ini ~ a council membe to-the committee at this time. In addition, 1VIr. Gordon McKinnon .was appointed asi a r_.itizen member. Council rnerr~bers .asked that the matter be planed on the September 27=city council agenda to provide an opportunity for the appointment of a second citizen members. When this appointment has been made, the members wi1T be contacted by 'the staff and the- project will get- underway. Respectfully subm' ted, '~ ~ ~ I'~ . ~. Wayne S. Burggraaff City NIana~ger WSB/ea cc: _Planning DirPCtor - ~~ r° ~-' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City h~ianager • Council Letter No. 2~4 ' Agenda September 13, 1y76 The Honorable Mayor and ' Members of the City Council ~~ • City of Richfield f - Gentlemen: • It Subject: Revising the Richfield Sign Ordinance At the August 9, 1976 city council meeting, city staff was instructed to investigate fihe time required and the work activities involved in a sign ordinance revision.. It is the feeling. of the staff that considerable time would be saved if the proposed sign ordinance revision completed in 1972 were utilized. ' Staff propcses that a committee of individuals representative of the interests involved be formed. This ccr:.mitto: should Have rep.~esertatives from the sign industry, local businessmen an environmentalist and an architect. I would recommend that the following people be appointed to the sign committee: ' Craig Lofquist - Naegele Outdoor Advertising Donald Erickson, representative of National. Electric. Sign Contractors Toni Doherty -Doherty Furniture and Carpet Company George Johnson, environmentalist and Richfield resident Bob Nelson, architect Planning commissioner, to be appointed by Chairman of Commission City council member Bill Schlegel -. former member of 1972 committee The following is a list of tasks .this committee would be involved in and the amount of time staff feels is necessary to complete each task: FIRST' MONTH 1. Organize committee A. Establish goals anal ob~~,;tives B. Become familiar with sign ordinances and sign legislation . Council Letter No. 284. _2_ September 13, 1976 ,~ It SECOND MONTH - 2. Review of existing sign ordinance THIRD AND FOURTI-I MONTHS 3.~- Review of proposed sign ordinance revision completed in 1972 A. Determine if this document is consistent with the established goals and- objectives B. Make changes in this document as needed C. Complete first draft FIFTH MONTH, 4. Refer first draft to other city departments and interested parties A. Review comments and make any revisions 5. Hold piann"ing commission public hearing on the proposed sign ordinance revision A. Review comments and make any revisions SIXTH l~./iONTH 6. Present proposed sign ordinance to city council A. City council adopts ne~n~ sign ordinance These committee wor}c tas}cs and time involved are tentati.ve., but are representative of the level of detail required for a comprehensive sign ordinance revision using the proposal formulated in 1972. " Respectfully submitted, 14 ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ a ~ Wayne S. Burggraaff ~ I . City Manager ~~, WSB/eja II cc: Planning Director ~ . w ~.^ ' CTi"1'' OF RICi-3FIELD j. 1~IIN.i~ESL7TA :. Of~ficc~ .c,f City 1`v~Zanag~r Council. Letter No. 300. Agenda. September 27, 1976 The Honorable Mayor . and . Members. o~ the City Council - City. of Richfield': ,` Gentlemen: , Subject: Resolution Providing for Polling Places and Designating Judges for the General Election The city council agenda for September 27, 19.76 has on it a resolution naming. polling places and election judges for the general election on November 2, 1976. There is a provision for placing two judges i.n earh precinct to handle I~ voter registration on the day of the election. ' _ ~ - State laTrv requires that po).l.ing places be designated 25 days before the __ election. T1: is recommended that the attached resolution be adopted; Respectfully submitted, Wayne.S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Finance Dire Deputy City Clerk RESOLUTION N0. i RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR POLLING PLACES A.ND DESIGNATING JUDGES-FOR GENERAL ELECTION -NOVEMBER Z, 1976 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Ceunci.l of the City of Richfield,- as follows: 1. That there will b~ a general election on Tuesday, November 2, 1976. 2.. That said election shall be held at the polling places as herein appear specified, and that the following are hereby appointed as judges for said elections PRECINCT NOo POLLING PLACE FZRST SIIIF'T SECOND SHIFT 1 . Mt. Calvary Educational Bldg. S. Gisselc{uist;,Chmn. S. Gisselquist,-Chinn. . 6541. 16th Ave. South D. Seldon E. Pangilo P. Brenner J. Morrell B. Goodin H. Soderstrom h1. Lindgren L. Watson B. Utter H. Connelly E. Gilhousen G. Saunders H. Lundgxeia J. Nunn F~ O1_scn C Nor.l.ing - • A. Bjerva 2 City Hall V. Bennis, CI-mm. V. Bennis, Chinn. 6700 Portland Ave. South F. Doerfler S. Cully A. Burkhardt J. Mahon M. Lund M, Linder4ve11 F. Oreck J. Sveum I. Lang E. Brandon D. Wroge M. Flen~ s_zig , Jo Gera M. Kvaale M. Norling B. Lais S. Bjerkan N. Johnson 3 Sheridan School J. Emerson, Ch,-~in. Je Emerson; Chinn. 64th St. at Sheridan Ave. W. J. Barnett H. Iverson L. Bran.dell E. Horrnnes D, Fischer M. Okerman - B. t'dorkman P. Swanson A. Witte H. Peterson M. Larson N. Gleason H. I~utchinson M. Hines B. Belk B. Belk • PRECINCT N0. 4 5 2 POLLING PLACE FIRST SHIFT SECOND-SHIFT 6 7 Lincoln L-Ii11s School S. Olsen, Cl~smz.. S. Olser_, Chinn.. 75th F~ Penn Ave. South K. Laws P. Brestrup M. Prottengeier M. Prottengeier J. Bray J. Schleuder M. Hel1_eckson M. Furstnow M, -Smith M. Smith L. Lerom N. Gibbons C. Alfano D. Lace M. Gera P. Anderson L. Awes L. .Awes . West Jr. High School P. Bunting, Chinn. P. Bunting, Chinn. 74th ~ Oliver Ave. South A. Pillard Z. Carlson R. Nelson A. Zeidler D. Peterson J. Bloomberg B. Stelman R. Mita.l E. Kranz E. Anderson G. Dahlien C. Condon G. Hegdahl L. DeSantis P, Sazdoff J. Keller Boroa Lutreran C:rarch G. Stoffel, Chinn. G. Stoffel, Glz~n. 76th ~ Emerson Ave. South E. .Richmond N. Solberg K. Lecklier M. Cummings M. Evans P. Reinmuth B. Carr C. Meyer A. Joubert A. Joubert D. Arnold D. Arnold C. Walker C. Walker H. O'Neil M. LaValle Central School D. Vidas, Chinn. D. Vidas, Chinn. 72nd F7I-Iarri_et Ave. South J. Kallstrom R. Reynolds L. Utterberg L. Utterberg L. Schumacher J. Nelson A. Bramwell P. Farnham - J. Toler F. Sullivan K. Nelson H. Hillstrom E. Friend ~ R. Glover J. Jackelen E. Haight D. Leslie D. Leslie -3- PRECINCT N0. - POLLING PLACE • FIRST SHTFT SECOND-SIiIFT 8 Portland School B. Lake,,Chnu7. M. Lofstrom, Chinn. 72nd ~ 4th Ave. South M. Richardson L. Nimerfro E. Gz-undmayer E. Grundmayer R. A•Iarks G . Skulbors tad H. Spear P. Toney M. Suess A. Johnson M. Alauist J. Hel~~iberger A. j'Jick Bo Lundeen E. Zimmerman E. Zimmerman F. Gray F. Gray 9 •Assumption Activities Bldg. Bo Obenchain, Chinn. B. Obenchain, Crilnn. 305 E. 77th St. G. Sanders J. Chesney S. Kenr!etli Kouth J. Rodel.~?rg B. Mahon M. Bernstein M. Joubert M. Joubert G. Erickson V. Mohs C. I?wnas L. Kovach A. Winslow ~ B. Hjerpe P. Haupt J. Krussow G. Herll L. Ostlund 10 Centennial School C. Cosgrove, Chinn. C. Cosgrove, Chinn. 73rd ~ Bloomington Ave. S. R. Holm A. Neuberger R. Koelln Ro Koelln Co Oswald B. Cook S. Comstock M. Friberg I. Holen M. Boler S. Lewis So Lewis D. Chellsen S. Spain R4. Siddy J. Schaefer b1. Calvin Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 27th day of September, 1976. Loren L. Law, Mayor ____. Attest: • 'I7~omas J~, Mozan, City C7~~er~c M~~ ~, ~ -CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTI~ Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 299 Agenda September 27, 1976 i ' , The Honorable Mayor and `Members of the City Council City of Richfield`_ , Gentlemen: Subject: Resolutions Certifying Delinquent Assessments On the September 27, 19.76 city council agenda there are .the following resolutions certifying special assessments to Hennepin. County: 1. Certification of delinquent water utility accounts 2. Certification of delinquent sewer utility accounts 3. Certification of weed and nuisance abatement assessments i 4. • Certification of diseased tree removal assessrrients It is recomm nded that the city councii_ adopt these resolutions so that the 'necessary payme ,its can be included with property taxes to be paid in 1977. 'Res ectfull submitted i p Y , ~~~ ~. Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager - WSB/eja - cc: Finance Director 'i ;, RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION CEI',TIFYING UNPAID WATER SERVICE Cl-IARGES TO TriE - - COUNTY.AUDITOR TO BE COLLECTEB WITI3 OTI~ER TAXES ON-SAID P.ROPERTTES s. WHEREAS, Ordinance "Code '8:?_3 estaYalishes rues, "rates. 'and.: charges for water.' service in the City of Richfield, and WHEREAS, Mir~nesoaa Statutes. 44.O7S, Subd. 3, provides that all delinquent water service charges-.not paid may be certified to the County Auditor with the ~ taxes against such property, and shall be co11"ected with other. ta.>es "orr such property, and WHEREAS, An assessment roll has been prepared specifying the amounts which shall be certified against-each particular property. ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of . Richfield, that ' l.~ There is hereby determined to be a-total uncollected amount of $11,354.09. 2. That such amount is hereby certified to the County Auditor far- , ~ collection with other taxes on said properties. . 3. That a copy of this resolution shall be sent to the Hennepin County Auditor. Passed by the City Council of-the City of Richfield this 27th day of September, 1976. - Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas 3. Moran City Clerk ' • 11 -; jj i tf. RESOLUTION NO. ~ _,_ ~..a :, - RESOLUTION. CERTIFYING UNP~'~ID SEWER SER.~zIGE CHARGES TO THE COUNTY AI7DITOR TO BE COLLECTED WITH OTHER TAPES ON SAID PROPERTIES j I i ~; WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 8.x.2 establishes.rule~, rates and charges fo-r _.. . _ sanitary sewer. service in the -City of Richfield-, and '. WHEREAS, Subdivision 12 thereof provides that all sewer service charges ~ <not paid within fifteen (15)'days~after the quay°terly due date may be'certi-~ - ' fled to-the County Auditor ,with taxes against-such property, .and sha11'be . collected with other taxes on such property, and ' _ WHEREAS,- An assessment. roll .has.. been prepa:ced specifying the amoants which sha11 be. certified-against..each particular property; - - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of.-the City. of Richfield, that ( 1. There is hereby determined to be a total uncollected amount of $3,885,09. _ 2, .That.such_amount is h~eb.y certified to the .County Auditor for collection with other taxes on said ro erties - - ~ - , - p p . _ I 3. ...That a copy of this .resolution shall be. sent to the Hennepin ` County Auditor.• Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minrae~ota, this 27th day of September, 1976. Loren ?„ Law Mayor ATTEST: • Thomas J. Moran City Clerk - I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR WEED DESTRUCTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The following described property is hereby,especial.2y assessed in the following amounts for expenses incurred bar-the City in connection- with abatement for weed destruction pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, 1969, Chapter 715, Sece 17.271,. to-wit: PLAT PARCEL ADDKESS AMOUNT 44827 0875 708 West G6th Street $ 15.00 44833 OSIS 7201 Penn Avenue 22.50 45340 5200 6344 Newton Avenue 25.00 45414 6500. 7145 Penn Avenue 27.5,5 45880 0930 6504 21st Avenue 20..00 45880 4785 6321 21st Avenue 40.00 46530 0700 7644 Nicollet Avenue 24.00 _ 4792. 3000 6805 Penn Avenue 15.00 _ 46793 8625 6909 Russell Avenue .15.00 _ Total 204.05 2_. The city clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed by the; City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 27th day of September, 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk Ir RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The following described property is hereby especially assessed in the following amounts for expenses incurred by the city in connection ~iith abatement of a nuisance health hazard pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 145.23, to-wit. PLAT PARCEL ADDRESS AMOUNT 36.40 44827 6090 132 East 70th Street $ 70.14 44833 6900 7015 Penn Avenue 27,00 44985 4022 6901 Elliot Avenue 67.60 45880 0930 6504 21st Avenue 39.00 46006 9300 7109 13th Avenue 20,25 46793 0650 6841 Russell Avenue 18.00 46950 3100 2.118 West 69th Street ' Total 2-~-78°39 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this 27th day of September, 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk k RESO'LU'I'IO?3 N0. -~ RESOLUTION LEVYING' SPECJAL ASSLSSM;~,NTS I`OR ABATEMENT OF DISEASED TREE .WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 4.11 estahlishss rules and regulations with referer..ce to the ,abatement of diseased. trees on private property in the City of Richfield by tree-removal, and WHEItEA.S, Pinnesota Statutes 429..i0Z.provides that all unpaid or.. ' special charges for such. tree removal ma.y be certfied.to'the county audi-tor with .the.-taxes against such: property, and shall be collected with other taxes on such property, and - - -WHEREAS, an. ,assessment roll has been. prepared specifying the:arnou~ s . which sl~.all be certified against each particular property. NOW, THEREFORE,. BE.IT RESOLVED by the.Ci.ty Council of the City .of Richfield as follows: 1, That the .following described properties are hereby specially ~ assessed in -the following amounts for e.>penses incurred by the city in connection with abatement or removal of diseased tree pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.101: . - i LAT PARCEL . ADDRESS . _, . _ _ A2~i0U1~TT :.. _ . ~_-_. __ . 46793 1925 6829 Thomas .Avenue $115.42 46710 3200. 7527 Harriet Avenue 57.98 44828 5170 6500 Girard Avenue 88.23 . Total. 261, 63 2, That the above listed assessments be spread over a period of 3 years at the rate of 8% interest per annum on the unpaid balances. ~ 3. That the city clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify t a co of this-resplution to the Count Auditor of Henne ( py y pin County, Minnesota, k Passed by the City Council. of the City of.Richfi_eld, Minnesota, this. 27th day of September, 1976. • Loren L. Law ivlayor ATTEST: . ~nomas J. Z~ioran ~C:ity Clerk E'~ • f CITY OF RICIIFIELD, MI"~NESOTA Office `of City Manager • _ Council.Letter No. 298 Agenda September 27, 1°76. The Honorable Mayor and IVlembers cf they City Council City of Richfield ~ . C~en.tlemen: Subject: Report on Wine Dispensing- Licensing At the-.August 23, 1976 city council meeting i:he president of. Los Bravos Restaurant asked the city council o consider adoption' of an ordinance which would provide for issuance of on-sale-wine. licenses.. The city council d~i~erred, action- on the request and asked the staff to' prepare a report on he wine licen- `singlaw and the experiences of other municipalities. ` The legislation providing for on-sale vaine licenses. was enacted by the legislature in 1975. The provisions of this law are as follows: . 1 ~~ 340.11 ; Subd. 20. [ ON-SALE WINE .LICENSES.] (a) "On-sale wine licenses" s hall. mean licenses authorizing-the sale of wine not: exceeding ' 14 percent alcohol by volume, for consumption on the- licnesed pr emises only, in conjunction with the s:a1e of food.. i (b) .. For purposes of this subdivision "resta~,~rant'' "shall. mean - an establis hment, under the control of a single proprietor or manager, Y~ aving appropriate facilities for"serving meals, and where, in c onsideration of payment. therefor, meals are regularly. served at t ~ tiles to th,e general public, ar~d which employs an adequate s ~aff to provide the usual and suitable service to its = guests. (c) Any municipality which maintains a municipal liquor store or an y municipality or county authorized to issue "on-sale" licenses fo r the sale of intoxicating liquor may issue on-sale wine -licenses -to ary restaurant having facilities for seating- .not fewer ~' ti~an 15 c~~aesls at one tAme, -ilia lzr~nses sli<~ll be itz addition to t~~e number`of on-satF li.cezses for the sale of intoxicating liquor } -Council Letter No. 298 -2- September 27, 1976 authorized by the intoxicating liquors act.- The fee for on-sale. wine licenses shall be set by the issuing authority, but sl-iall -..not exceed one half of the' license fey charged by the_;municipa ity for an on-sale license, or $2,.000, v~hichever as less., Licenses - issued pursuant to this. subdivision shall riot. be effective until approved l.y the commissioner. The..licenses shall authorize the :sale of wine as herein provided on a?1 days of the week unless the sssuing authority restricts the license's autl-iorization to the sale of wine on all days other than Sunday. If'the~ Cit?y of Richfield .:wishes to 'provide for the issuance of on-sale wine 13censes i vz~uld be necessary to prepare an ordinance to provide,_for this, `: .form of lcense. A cdpy of a League of Minnesota Cities information bulletin on a model wine licensing ordinance is attached for ye~rinformaton. C We have found that the following list of cities 'in the metropolitan area provide for issuing wine licenses. Representatives of the Public .Safety De- `partment have contacted these: cities and have found none of the existing .licenses.. to be creating additional public safety .problems- within their respective. commun- ` ities: It should be noted, .however, that the. law is relativelynew and apparently , all of the licenses have been. held for periods of less. than one year. License - Outstanding Time- Licenses Public Safety Community. Fee Licenses. Held Pr~berris ' Apple Valley $• 500 1 2 mo. None Blaine 600 -0- --- Fridley j 700 1 1 mo. None Golden Valley i 2, 000 1 ~ 5 mo: None Hopkins 500 1 9 mo. None Prior Lake 1, 250' -0- --- ----- St. Anthony 350 1 4 mo. None Stillwater 200 2 7 mo. None - The City of Minneapolis is in the. process. of .establishing an ordinance . to provide for the issuance of on-sale wine-licenses. However, a minimum seating requirement contained in their ordinance has been questioned and is delaying implementation of the. wine licensing ordinance in Minneapolis . Tf fho nif~ nn::nnil cn~ichnc i•n Ylrn~Tl/a/~ fnr nn-~aiP WinA linPnRPR _ tt WOUld q. ~~~ .300 hanover building. 480 cedar sL-., saint paul, minn. 551 01 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ` , ~ r 360a.2 - f®r e~a~.e~i~ipai ta~~icial~ August, 1975 Contents Page A. Introductory Comment ................................................... 1 B. Model Ordinance .:...................:... ............................. 2 Containing the following sections: Section 1. Provisions of State Law Adopted .................................. 2 Section 2. ~Yine .Licenses ..... ..............'.... , ...................... 2 Section 3. Application for. License ......................................... 2 Section 4. License Fees .......... ..................................... 4 Section 5. Granting of Licenses ........................................... 4 Sectior. 6. Persons Ineligible for License ...................................... 5 Section 7. Places ineligible for License ...................................... S • Section a. Conditions of License ..... ... ....... ......... .. , . ... 5 Section 9. Suspension arid Revocation .... ... ..... . ......... .... 6 Section 10. Penalty ................................................... 6 Section 11. Repeal. ........................... ..................... 6 Section 12.. Effective- Date ............................................... 7 ~ 6 A. Introductory Comment. Minnesota Statutes Section 340.11, Subdivi- sion 20, enacted as Laws 1975, Chapter 345, See- tion 4, authorizes any municipality to issue wine licenses to restaurants. if it maintains a municipal liquor store or is authorized to issue on-sale liquor licenses.. A wine license permits the sale of wine not exceeding 14 percent alcohol by volume for consumption on the licensed premises only, in con- junction with the°sale of food. To qualify for a wine license, a restaurant must be under the control of a single proprietor or manager, have appropriate facilities for serving -meals and seating at least 25 guests at a time, regularly serve meals at tables to the general public for pay, and employ an adequate. staff to provide the usual and suitable service to its guests. The Liquor Control Division of the' Depart- ment of Public Safety, which must approve wine licenses, interprets the law as precluding the issu- ance of a wine license to the holder of a special club license, since a restaurant must serve meals to the general public but a club may not sell intoxi- cating liquors except to members and guests. A city is not required to provide for wine lic- enses merely because it provides for the sale of in- toxicating liquor. Furthermore, i f it does so, it may impose restrictions beyond those contained in the state law, as in defining, eligible restaurants more strictly, as long as its stricter requirements are not in conflict with the state law; it may not, for example, provide for a license fee higher than half that provided for on-sale liquor licenses or $2;000, whichever is less. The state law on wine licenses is not self-exe- cuting; if a city wishes to issue wine licenses, it must adopt ordinance provisions to authorize them. If the city already issues general liquor lic- enses, wine license authority. usually may be most easily provided by .appropriate amendments to the existing liquor licensing ordinance.. If the.city has. a municipal liquor dispensary, a new wine lic- ensing ordinance will be required. If a city is dry by local .option, wine licenses are not authorized. The model ordinance which follows is a sepa- rate ordinance for wine licenses and is intended mainly for cities with municipal liquor dispen- saries. A city with a liquor licensing ordinance will find many of the provisions in the wine licensing ordinance superfluous-since they are already in- cluded in the liquor licensing ordinance, Sample wine licensing provisions for inclusion in.a liquor licensing ordinance are included in the League's Model Liquor Licensing., Ordinance, 360a,1, which is available to member cities an request. The wine licensing ordinance, Pike the general liquor licensing ordinance of the League, adopts .regulatory and definition sections of the state liquor law by reference, leaving to the .ordinance only those provisions not found in the state law or necessary to exercise an option permitted by the law. This method of adoption of statutes by ref- erence is specifically authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.62, It has the advantage of brevity (and thus a saving in publication costsl but the disadvantage of requiring search in tl~e state law for many of the details of the ordinance, The ordinance may be -used most effectively if it is considered as a working draft.. In no case should the ordinance be merely copied or followed blindly. It is intended only as a guide and should in all cases be adapted to local conditions after thorough analysis. Thus, when a municipal liquor store ordinance forbids the retail sale of intoxicat- ing liquor except through the municipal.store, that prohibition may need amendment to take account of authorized wine sale by holders of wine licenses. -2- B. Model Ordinance AN ORDINANCE LICENSING AND REGULATING 'THE SA1_E AND CONSUMPTLON OF WiNEf REPEALING INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES, AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION. The Council of .the City of ordains: • Section 1-; Pr®visions of State Law Adopted. The provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340, relating to the definition of terms, licensing, con- " sumption, sales, ccinditior7s of bonds of licensees, hours of sale, and all other" matters pertaining to the retail sale, distribution, and consumption of intoxicating Liquor .insofar as they are applicable to wine licenses authorizing the safe of wrine riot .exceeding 14 percent, alcohol by volume For con- sumption on the licensed premises only, in con- 'the sale of .wine not exceeding 14 percent alcohol by volume, for consumption on the licensed preen- ises only, in conjunction with the sale of food. An on-sale ,wine license may be issued only to a restau- rant having facilities for seating npt fewer than 25 guests at one time. For purposes of this ordinance, a restaurant means an establishment, under .the control of a single proprietor or manager, having appropriate facilities for serving meals, and where, in consideration of payment therefor, meals are junction with the sale of food,. are adopted and regularly served at tables to the general public, and made a part of this. ordinance as if set out in full. Comment: This is intended to tie in the pro- visions ofthe state la~,v with ±he local crdi- Hance through their ado~tion bl referer~ce in such a way that regu~ations rn the state law become regulations of the ordinance. The section is superfluous in a sensesince the statutory pprovisions apply anyway, but there inay bz some value in informi:rg the public of that applicability ..since -otherwise the ordinance may appea+~ tc, tie lacking in some necessary subs~antiye regulations. Under this section violation of the state law is a vi~iation of the local ordinance and can be prosecuted as such; however, changes rn statute and recent .court decisions make. ordinance prosecu•• tions of little or no advantage to the city as compared to prosecutions under s*a~e law. Sec. 2. Wine Licenses. No person, except a wholesaler or manufacturer to the extent authori- zed under state license, and the municipal liquor dispensary, shall. directly or indirectly deal in, sell, or keep for sale .in the city any wine not exceeding 14 percent alcohol by volume. without an on-sale wine license. An on-sale wine license authorizes which .employs an adequate staff to provide the usual and suitable service to -its guests. Comment: If clubs are licensed, they-may be added to. the exceptions in the first sentence. l-he scope of the authorization for wine licenses and the definition'of res- taurants eligible for such licenses are taken directly-from the state law, M.S. 340."I i, Subd. 20. The council may limit e{igibility to certain restaurants within this class, e:g. by requiring table-seating. ' . capacity greater than 25. Such a license may not authorize sales of wine exceeding l'~•. percent at alcohol by volume. The state law does not limit the number of rl~in.e licenses, A local limit may be in- serted in this section if desired. Sec: 3. Application for License; Subdivision 1. Form. Ever/ application for on-sale wine license snaCl state the name of the applicant, his age, rep- resentations as to his character, with such referen- ces as the council-may .require, his citizenship, the restaurant in connection with which -the proposed lic~,nse will operate end -its location, whether the rtppiicarMt is o~vner and operator of. the restaurant, ~. -3- 'how Inng he has been in the restaurant business at' proved by the city council and the state liquor con- "that place, and such other information as the coun- trot director. Surety bonds and liability insurance ell may require from time to time. In addition to policies shall be approved as to form by the city at- containing such information, the application shall torney: Operation of a Incensed business without be in the form prescribed by the liquor control having on file with .the city at all times: effective director and shall be verified and filed with the city security as required in Subdivisions 2 and 3 is a clerk. No person shall make a false statement in an application. - Comment: Under the law the form of appli- cation. is .prescribed by the liquor control- : director with such additional information as is required by the council. The require- - ment for verification and filing is in the law (M.S. 340.12). Subd. 2. Bond. Each application for a license shat! be accompanied by a surety bond or, in lieu thereof, cash or United States Government bonds of equivalent market value as provided in Minne- sota Statutes, Section 340.12. Such surety bond or other security shall be in the sum of $ cause r`or revocation of the license, Comment on Subds, 2, 3, 4: These.: pr-ovi- sions assume, as the liquor control di~ec- for does, that. the statutory provisions on bonds for on-sale liquor licenses apply to wine licenses. At any rate, .the council -may include these provisions in its ordi- Hance. The state law on liquor ?icenses ;~e- quires abond or other equivalent security or, in lieu of a bond if the council so pro- vides, aliability insurance pol~.cy, Under the law the bond runs to the cii:y and the amount is fixed by the counci! at between $3,000 and $5,000. for an on-sale license, (M.S. 340.12,) Sir.ce the I?censes must be approved by the liquor control director, it seems appropriate to provide fo~~ such approval in the case of the bond as well, as in the case of off-sale I%quor IicEnses., The conditions for a bond a; e stated ir1 the law: for an applicant. for an "on-sale" wine license. ' • 1 That the licensee vrill obey the law; Comment: See comment at end of Subdivi- ~2~ That he will pay to the city when due Sion 4. a!I taxes, icenses; arid other charges; (3) That in case o` violation of the .?quo, Subd. 3. Liability insurance. Prior to the issu- law, the bond s forfeacd to the city; (4) That he will pay to .the extent of the ance of a wine license, the applicant shall file with coverage damages fo•r dear_h or in3ur-y resulting from the violation of the the city clerk a liability insurance policy in the a- liquor laws, mount of $ coverage for one person The !aw permitted use of a liability in- surance policy in i'seu of a bond as long as and $ coverage for more than one it met these conditions. A number cf years ago this section of the ~~quor law person and shall comply with the provisions of was amended to permit a dsfferent kind of liability. insurance policy when autho~~z.ed Minnesota Statutes, Section 340.12 relating to lia- by the council.. This policy must provide ~ $10,000 coverage for one person and bility insurance policies. If a liability insurance $20,000 for more than one person; ho~•- apolicy complying only with this ever, policy is made subject to all the conditions of a , requirement provides no protection to the city because the fast three conditions of bond under that statute, the policy may be accept- the bond outlined above are not made part of the policy.. Section 3 ed by the council in lieu of the bond required of the ordinance therefore does not per- of the bond mit use of the pol>:cy in lieu under Subdivision 2. , where it covers only the liability specsfied in this paragraph of the statutes, but it Comment: See comment at end of Subdivi- does require. use of such a policy in addi- Sion 4. tion to the bond. A number of ordo- nances so provide. The model ordinance Subd. 4. Approval of security. .The security does permit use of the liability policy ?n- stead of a bond if it includes the condi- offered under. Subdivisions 2 and. 3 shall be ap- tions stated previously for the bond. _. _ ~•' s -4- On the assumption that the statutory pro- licenses expiring on the same date, That•• ~ ' visions impose only minimum requite- ments,.some liquor licensing ordinances section expressly provides for pro rata fees for off-sale licenses in order to coo~- require substanti-ally higher coverages on liability- policies and others, tike the dinate expiratior~r dates. While there is no d model, require both a bond and a. liability correspon ing provision for on-sale iicen- ses or far wine licenses the model ordi- insurance. policy. The. statutoryy figures. have never been Chan d sin e the' li , Hance applies the pro, rata provision to ge c quor control act and the later liability incur- wine licenses -since there seems to be no ggood reason for treating them differently. ante provisions were adopted. The latter, adopted by reference in Subdivision 3 of ilAost cities seem to provide for a reduced, but not necessarily pro ratEd tee for lie- - thin section of the ordinance, specifically , enses issued during the license year. provides that .the policy covers liability under the civil damage or dram shop act (M.S. 340 95) that no cancellation ma Subd, 4. Refunds. No refund of any fee shall . , y be made without -ten days' notice to the be made except as authofized by statute. city; and that no payment of any claim by the insurance company may decrease Comment: MS, 340..112 authorizes refunds coverage for-any other claim. The ordi- of off-sale and on-sale intoxicating liquor Hance omits the further provision of the license fees in case of destruction or darn- statute that v/hen the council provides for such a policy it is not necessary that . age of the licensed premises by fire or other catastrophe, the liceraee's illness or the policy include the provisions of the death, or a change making ;t unlawful far bond ..set out earlier in this comment, the licensed bus.ness to continue (i;e. Sec, 4, License Fees: Subdivision 1. Amount. by some act of the leggislature or a loca~ option election -- A,G. Op., 218-G-14, The. annual fee for a wine license is $ April 7, 1953), Refunds upon revocation .are forbidden, The part or the license fee Comment: The fee is limited to half the on- to be refunded corresponds to the time the license had to run. The c ity may ap- sale license fee or $2,000, whichever is lower: Where the city has no on-sale lie- r patently not permit refunds to any other case P bl hi enses; $2,000 is the maximum. (M.S, , resuma y-t s statute applies to wine licenses, 340,11, S:,~bd. 20.) Subd. 2. Nayment. Each application fora -Sec,- S, Granting of I icPnse~. Subdivision 1. • wine license shall be accompanied by a receipt Investigation and issuance. The city council shall ' from the city treasurer for payment in full of the investigate al! facts set out in the application. Op- license fee. A!I fees shall be paid into the general portunity shall be given to any person to be heard fund. (f an application far a license is rejected, for or against the granting of the license, After the-. the treasurer shall refund the amount paid, investigation and hearing, the council shall, in -its . Comment: This procedure is not prescribed discretion, grant or refuse the application, No by .law but seems appropriate, A state- wine license shall become effective until it toget- tory provision requiring advance payment , of the license fee in full applies onlyy to her .with the security furnished by the applicant manufacturers and wholesalers (M.S. , 340.1 1, Subd. 14) but is commonly. ap- has been approved by the state liquor control dir- plied to retailers by -local ordinances. Subd. 3. Term; pro rata fee. Each license shall ector. be issued for a period of one. year except that if the Comment: Both the wine licensing law and the liquor control act generally are silent application is made- during the license year, a lie- as to licensing procedure except for the requirement that wine licenses be appro- ense may. be issued for the remainder of the year ved by the liquor control dir-ect~r, If a charter so provides, a mayor's veto power for a pro rata fee, with any unexpired fraction of a may apply to liquor licenses, (Green Bar Inc. v. Johnson 2/5 Minn, 471 147 N W month being counted as one month. Every license. , , . . 2d 686, 1967,) The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that a council. may grantor S. shall expire on the fast day of ~~ refuse a liquor license in "its discretion, a.l- though it may r,ot act arbitrarily or capri- Comment: M.S, 340.11 provides for annual ciously. (See Paton v. City of Shakopee 226 Minn, 222, 3?_ N,W. 2d 603, 1948.] -5- ' ~ Subd. 2, Person and premises .licensed; transfer. Each, license shall 6e issued only to the applicant and 'for the. premises described in the application. No license may be transferred to another. person or place without city council approval. Any transfer of stock of a corporate licensee is deemed a trans- for of the license and a transfer of stock without . prior council approval is a ground for revocation of the license. Comment: Transfers of liquor licenses with the consent of the councrl are implicitly authorized by M.S. 340.13. I n case a liquor licensee dies, his personal represent- ative mayy continue operation of the busi- Hess within the terms of the license for not more than 90 days.. (M.S. 340.112.) Since a transfer of stock of a corporate licensee may result in substantial interest by persons to whom the council would not have issued a license, a provision is in- cluded to require a formal transfer of the license when stockholders are changed. Some ordinances confine this requirement to cases involving transfer of a stipulated percentage of the stock, but the provision as drawn retains a more substantial con- trot by the city aver corporate ownership changes. Sec. 6. Persons Ineligible for License. No wine license shall be granted to any person made ineligi- ble for such a license by state law. No license shat! be issued to an individual who is not a resident of the city. Comment: The state. law prohibits the ggranting of a license to any person under . 18; any person Hat of good moral charac- ter or repute; anyy person who within five years of his applicatron has been convic- ted of a violation of a liquor law or local liquor ordinance; any person whose lic- ense has been revoked; any person who- has another liquor license from the city. (M.S. 340.13, Subds. 3, 7, 12.) While these provisions were adopted before the authorization for wine licenses, presum- ably they apply. The provision on local residence rs not re uired by law but has been commonly included in liqquor I:cens- ing ordinances. White the judicial trend is toward invalidating citizenship and resi- deuce requirements in Licensing ordi- nances; such requ~rerryents in liquor licen- • sing ordinances generally have been. sus- tained. Sec. 7, Places Ineligible for License, Subdivi- sion `I .- General prohibition. No wine license shall be issued -for any restaurant ineligible for such a license under state law. Comment: The state law forbids issuance of a liquor license (1) for any premises owned by a person to whom a Incense may not be granted under the ordinance, with certain exceptions (M.S, 340,13, Subd. 7); (2) for any place which a wholesaler or manufacturer of liquor direct)yy or indir- . ectly owns or controls (M.S. 340,13, Subd. 1); and (3) for any place for which. a liquor license of another class ha.s been .granted (M.S. 340,13, Subd. 3). Subd, 2. Time in business. No license shall be issued to any restaurant until it has .been in opera- tion continuously for at least months (years). Comment: This is optional but .has often been included in liquor licensing ordinan- ces. A period of six months or one yeas is a common minimum. Subd. 3. Delinquent taxes and charges. No license shall be granted far operation on any prem- ISeS On Which taxes, assessments, Or athei' financial claims of the city are delinquent -and unpaid. Comment: This is optional. Similar provi- sions are included in many liquor licensing ordinances. Subd. 4. Distance from school or church, No license shall be granted for a building within__•,feet of any school or within feet of any church. Comment: This is optional, While the state law prohibits liquor sales within prescri- bed d;'stances of certain state institutions and colleges and the state fa.r, there is no statutory minimum distance from schools and churches. Sec. 8. Conditions of License, Subdivision 1. In general. Every license is subjec± to the condi- tions in the following subdivisions and all other provisions of this ordinance and of any other appli- cable ordinance, state law or regulation; Comment: Conditions imposed by state law include- the following: the posting of the license in a conspicuous place on tyre pre- mises. (M:S. 340.13, Subd. 10); the con- fining of sales. to -the compact and con- - tigguous place named. in the license (M.S. 340.14, Subd: 5); a prohibition against sales to intoxicated .persons, persons. un- der 18, and habitual drunkards {M.S. :.340.1.4, Subd. 1 a, 340.78); a restrict'son '.against the. employment of minors in on- sale places except as musicians or bus boys or dishwashers (M.S. 340.14, Subd. 2.); prohibition against gambling or garrzb- ling devices on licensed premises (rVi.S. 340.14, Subd. 2); prohibition against the use of licensed premises or adjoining pre- • mises under the licensee's control as a re- :sort far pprostitutes or other .disorderly persons (M.S. 340,14, Subd. 2); restric- trons against any interest by manufactur- ers or wholesalers u~ a licensed place (M.S. 340.13, Subd. 1),• prohibition against re- fills (M,S. 340.141). ' Subd. 2. .Licensee's responsibility, Every lic- ensee is responsible for- the conduct of his place of business and the conditions of sobriety and or- der in it. The a.ct of any employee on the ficei?sed premises authorized to sell intoxicating, liquor there.is deemed the act of the. licensee as well, and the licensee shall be liable to all penalties provided by this' ordinance and the law equally with the ern- ployee. Comment: .These provisions are taken .from M.S..•340.~4, Subd. 2 and 340.94:1, which have been held to make the act of the em- ployee the act of the licensee. Such pro- vrs;ons .prevent evasion of respor?sibrlity oy the licensee. Thus when an employee sells liquor to a minor, the licensee as well _ as the employee have violated the ordi- nar,ce, although the employee acted with- out. the licensee's. knowledge or consent. (State v. Sohelman, 199 Minn. 23?., 271 N.W. 484, 1937; State v. Lund7ren, 11~ Minn. 1$2, 144 N.W. 752, 1913. Subd. 3. Inspections. Every. licensee shall al- lo~,v any peace officer, health officer, or properly designated officer or employee of the city to enter, inspect, and search the premises of the licensee during business hours withcut a warrant. Comment: Optionaf; there is no provision in the slate law. Subd. 4. Display during prohibited t?ours. No licensee shall display wine to the public during - V - hours when the sale of wine is prohibited. ' Comment: Optional. but .similar provisions have often been included in liquor licens- ing ordinances.. Subd. S. Federal stamps: No licensee steal{ possess a federal wholesale liquor dealers special tax stamp or a federal gambling stamp. Comment: Since a .wholesale dealer may not have an interest in a retail establish- rnent and licensees may not allow gamb- ling on the premises, this subdivision, commonly included in ordinances, butt- . resses the statutory provisions, Sec. 9. Sa.rspension and Revocation, The coun- cil may either suspend for not to exceed 60 days or revoke. any on-sale wine license upon a finding that the l~;censee has failed to comply with any appli- cable statute, regulation or ord6nance relating to intoxicating liquor. No suspension or revocation shat! take effect until the licensee has been affor- ded an.opporti.rnity-for a hearing pursuant to Min- nesota Stat!rtes, Sections 15.0418 ±o .15.0425. • Comment: This section contains substantial- ly the ionguage of the statute, M.S. 340.135, While the statute is adopted by reference in Section 1 of the ordinance; there is some merit in including. procedra- ral prcvisions of this kind in the ordinance itself. The statutes refe~•red to in the sec- . tion are the pertinent provisions of the ad- minist~ative procedure act. Sec. 10. Penalty. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance is guilty~of a misdemea- r~or and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not more than $300 or imprisonment in the city (county}jail for not more than 90 days, plus the cost of prosecution in any case. Comment: This is the maximum penalty au- thorized by state law. Sec. 11. Repeal. Ordinance No. , adopted , 19~ and Ordi- nance No. ,adapted ; 19_,;.,, are repealed: r ,~ ~ -7- ~t/omment: If this ordinance super=sedes.'any tine, such as the beginning of the license • . other liquor licensing or regulatory ordi- ,year for other liquorJicEnses. nances, the existing ordinances should be repealed by name, number, and if desired, Passed by the council this day of by title. If the city has published an ordi- nance code, the code section numbers can , 19_ . be used instead. If there .are no conflict- ing provisions in previous ordinances, this section may be omitted. • Mayor Sec. 12: Effective Date. This ordinance be- .: comes effective upon its passage and publication (SEAL) according to law. Attest: Comment:. This provision inconsistent with the law applying to statutory cities, but many home rule charter cities require Clerk . the lapse of a specified period before ordi- . nances can become e ffective. In such - cities, the-date provision should be altered Published in ~ ~n accord.inggfy.. Some cities may prefer de- ferring the effective .date to some other - , 19„ . • OCP:Is • 8/75 u ~, ~ CTTY OE RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City h/Ianager ,, Council Letter I\fo. 297 Agenda S:epti? tuber 2 7 , 19 7 6 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council' City of Richfield Gentlemen• ', Subject; Resolution Permitting Hennepin County..- Highway Department to Use City-Owned. Land The.Hennepi:n County Highvaay Department has asked the City of Richfield for permission to use city-owned land as a site for locating a traffic control unit: The land which the county has requested to use is a 10' x 5' parcel of boulevard space adjacent to Nicollet Avenue (map attached) by the Richfield Community Center. The control unit will regulate the traffic signals which the county is rebuilding at 70th and Nicollet. i . This request has been reviewed by city staff and the city attorney and it is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution granting the county permis ion to us'e the land. ~ Respectfully submia i ~{ ~, /' ~ ~~ ~ Wayne S. Burggraaff ~ City Manager - WSB/bll , RESOLUTION NC:. RESOLUTION AciTHORIZTNG HFNNEPIN COL~ITY' TO PLACE • A TRAFT'IC SIGNE?J~ C0NTI~0LLER OP7 PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF RiCII~'IELD WHEREAS, Agents and Representat~.ves of the -?ennepiri County ~>ip~hway Department- have entered into Project No. 7530 for the impro~tement of traffic Reg,ulatorv ~' Signals at the intersection of Nicallet Avenue South and 70th Street within the corporate limits of the Cit?~ of Richfield, and - WHEREAS, such improvement recyuiras the installation. of a traffic signal controller on property owned by the City of Richfieldlocated at 7000 Nicollet Avenue South,. and WIiEREAS, such improvement in traffic regulatory devices within the city appears beneficial to the safety* of Richfield residents. N~JkT, TIiEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that 1. The county is hereby autl.ori.zed tv locate a traf_ fic signal control-ler on city-owned property located at 7OO0 Nicollet Avenue South as shown en the Hennepin. County Land and Building Acncz9sition Data sheet for;,I'roject No. 7530, which is hereby assigned-Clerk's file No, and be placed on file. 2. To the ex~ent necessary, the mayor and city manager are here-~v authorized to execute any documents necessary to effect the foregoing provisions of this resol.utior. Loren L . Laca Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk .. +V • Itr~ •1 {1 ~ fit./v . • . ~ . 1av. I • r/ • . L/•... i 1. 4.. ~ Y - - ,, 320 1h'asftin~ton Avenue South Hopkins, f~1sinnesoza • - GL•iG~~ ~~•~~ LDY.PL'~P.dd~~a~~~ l~t~r~-i~JIC.~.'lQii'~s''eVi- 69B'1~a~ r° ;~ t' ~ ~ oa~J No. - Y~ _ Proj. No. !~ ~'~ __... Parcr_i - t t yy tim~-_._ ~-~'-~~~~--~5~`~~L~F.~.l..~__.~__._ Address: _~- opographic inforrt~ation required: Lot lines and dimensions. Street or highway frontage Proposed R/VJ line: and access Making. Show !aorr.i~ ~~,rrow Outline. and location of all buildings and improvements (nYerior arrangements of buildings and equipment if rearrangement is necessary due to R/W taking. SKETGP~ - • • a Y • • a.• ~~'~ ~~}------~ e .~y ~. • (~~• ~ °~c~ 5 t, 1.3. D:; . cv ~` u, l ~ ' ~, -,. ~ ~-- (5500) E }, ~, .n '93.39- '~GJL'~ C •O i 5~~%lIc?~-v/ _ 133_.3&._ !33.38--- ~ `I ' ~ ~ " ! iz3.S - ~! f ~L1 ,r, , L..~/; 255 .Q = ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ (Z45G I !Z~5O) ' • ~ 4 ~:r- 6 C' ~/~ ' __~_c_ ` ~ ~~ lam/) pMC4J ~ '~ 21 • • • 6 Y • • • • • • f~ • i • ~I • • P f. Y O • • • t ..,~~.~..~....___...._...-~-_..-....-...-..._-__.........,~_..~~._..~_._.._.........~........_..__~.....~..._.--...--....~~....__~._.._..~_... . ~~...~.-.~ .... i. _ -.~.~..._.__-..L.................-. l ~ .~; I ~! ~: ;~~ t~ • ° ~ ' `' j) ~a ~~ ~% ~ I .i .r~ ~•~! ~ ~ '~ ~~1 h. ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~-~ ~ :, ,~,~ , :: 'J f: ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~'/ '~ ~ ~~ !1 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ . • .: , t~~ F~ ~s(r µ1 _ ~vi ~~ ~~e 1~ o e O ~` ~ ~ ~~~ ~ v ~ ~ i t• ~~ `+ - ~ ..~ { ` j.l .. ~ ,. c, f "~:..t e~ U ~ ;..: ~ ~ ~, ~ i. p ~ ~,~ . , ~~ ~. ~ j.. ~ . ~ ~~:._ ~. ~ \ ~~~ ~; r.5~ i ~.. ,i ' cy I " ° ~ n~ ~ ~ ~ .. _j' ,. ~ ~:: ~. . • ~ V C3 ~~~~~ J I . ~~e ..-~ ;~' •'~l -~'_- - -- - - --~ i,,l :~~'~ II, .•~ :~ ( C j :I`~ . ~ ~~:..,. ,~,., e~ ~j CITY OF"RI~'HFIIILD, NiIT\NESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 296 A enda e tember 27 1976 S g A , The Honorable Mayor and Members of.the City Council , City of Richfield ; '` . , 1 Gentlemen: Subject:Ambulance Study _Report On August 31, 1976, I forwarded. to members of the city.. council copies of the final report of the Ambulance Study Committee. This report is scheduled. ;for discussion ate the regular council meeting on September 27, 1976. For your review prior to the council meeting I am enclosing a summary of the recommendations made as a result of this study by the committee. Several ..members. of the committee will be in attendance. at the council meeting on September 27th tc~ respond to any questions that the council may have regarding, this matter, ~ - i It appears thiat the committee has done a comprehensive job of reviewing i the issues vaith which they were charged. It is the recommendation of the".Public Safety Director, 'n which I concur, that the council receive the report and give. favorable consid ration to the report's. recommendations. "Respectfully submi red, ~ ~ _~ Wayne S. Bur~graaff City TVlanager WSB/eja cc: Public Safet ~ Director i ~. .- i• SUMIh'{~R"t' OF r FFG~~T AMBULANCE S"(UDY COMMITTEE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA On February 23:,.1976, the City Council accepted a recommendation from the City Manager for the. appointments to the Ambulance Study Committee. At that time the Council charged the Committee with looking into the:feasibility of developing a city owned ambulance service. Additionally, the Council charged the Committee with conducting a comprehensive study on the ambulance service currently provided, as well as the optional ambulance services available to the City of Richfield. Since March of 1976 the Committee F~as met a total of seven times. The Committee consisted of seven citizen members and three staff members. To date, the Commit- tee figs-spent over 360 hours researching the total emergency medical service de- livery system within Richfield and discussing the many options available in such a system. Additionally, the Committee has used as resources many of the leading experts in the area of emergencymedical services within kennepin County.....Fol.- lowing is a summary of the Committee's meeting schedule: March 31st - Organizational meeting to discuss the current emergency medical service delivery syst~ir operating withr Richfield and to determine what areas should be explored by the Com- mittee. April 27th - Meeting with Dr. Ernest Ruiz, the Director of Emergency Medical Services of Hennepin County Medical Center and . Dr: Patrick Lilja, Emergency Medical- Services Department of the Hennepin County Medical. Center, discussing the minimal emergency medical service requirements a community such as Richfield should provide. As a result of this .meeting the Committee adopted the follo~~~ing minimal stan- dards for the delivery of ambulance service to the City of Richfield: a. Ambulance service should be provided to the residents of the City of Richfield with re- sponse times a~,~eraging roc more than six minutes. b. Ambulance service should be provided to the _ citizens of Richfield staffed with paramedic attendants who have op?rating arrangements with a regional emergency medical center. c. Ambulance service should be provided to the citizens cf ~;ichfic~lu on a cost to the in- dividual user basis rather tha~i on a basis whereby the entire community pays for the charge. May 25th - The Committee met with County Commissioner Thomas Ticen, Deputy County Administrator Daie Ackmann, and Deputy Hennepin County Medical Center Administrator Dave Lesperance, to discuss the possible provision of County ambulance service to the City of Richfielde Commissioner Ticei~t indicateo that if the City wished the County to provide ambulance service it should make a formal request of the County Board. Commissioner Ticen also pointed out that the ambulance resources in Hennepin County were currently adequate, but service could be greatly imprcived with a County system of coordination of existing servi-ces. - Mr. Lesperance again discussed the desirability of para-medically staffed ambulances to back up local emergency medical technicians ' who generally provided the-first response for emergency medica l calls within a community. . June 3rd - The Committee met with Mr. John Miller, the President of the Olsen Ambulance Service,-and Mr. George Larson, the President of the hlidwest Ambulance Service, to discuss the private am- bulance service currently available to .the City. Mr. Miller .indicated that Olsen presently has paramedic teams available, but not on a 24-hour basis. Mr. Larson indicated that Midvaest is moving into the paramedic field, but-does not presently operate paramedic teams. Both gentlemen recommended paramedically staffed ambulances as a backup to the community's first response to medical emergencies. Both men indicated the need for constant practice on the part of paramedics to keep their skills at the optimum level. June 8th - .The Committee met with h1r. Robert Lossie, the President of the .~Smi th Ambulance Service, and htr. Donald !~legm'i 11 er, the Admi n- 'istrator of the i=airvie4v-Southdale Hospital, to continue the ;discussion of private ambulance service and to attempt to deal 'with performance standards for an ambulance service. P~tr. Lossie indicated that Smith currently has 24-hour paramedically staffed ambulance capabilities for the Richfield area and indicated that 'his firm would be interested in establishing a sub-station with- in the City of Richfield. All three private ambulance firms indicated that the cost for paramedically staffed mohi1e li~Fe .support unit, dedicated to service .Richfield only, would run approximately $180,000 to $190,000 per year. -2- Mr. Wegmiller° discussed the types of performance. standards the City should cc~r~sider in doaling with a private ambulance car- rier. Specifically, Mr. Wegn2i11er painted out the issue of re- sponse time and felt that our standard of a five to .six minute ' response time was far better than average. Mr. Wegmiller also _ pointed .cut -the need for paramedically staffed ambulances as a backup to local emergency medical technician capabilities. F-tr. lriegmiller emphasized the fact that paramedics need to continu- ally use their medical skills in or°der to maintain them at the. optimum level of performance. June 15th - The .Committee .met with Mr. Robert Buresh, the Public Safety .,Director from Edina, to discuss the area of municipal owned ambulance services. Mr. Buresh indicated that Edina is cur- rently spending $28,000-for a new rnobile life support unit ambulance and Edina currently operates-both a. primary anal a backup ambulance as apart of the operating costs .of their fire division. Edina residents rECeive the ambulance service at no charge with. the cast of the service being spread over the entire tax base. Mr. Buresh indicated -that the Edina system relies an call-back of fire division personnel when the ambulance is in use. Edina does have.six trained Para- medics who spend: regular duty hifts in the Fairview-Southdale emergency room to maintain their paramedical skills because of the relatively low demand for the use of these skills in duty related situations. ' ~ Following Mr. Buresh's discussion, the Committee evaluated. the testimony presented at all meetings. On the basis of the re-~ .search conducted throughout this project the. Corr~nittee adopted, .~ 'in concept, the first seven recommendations outlined in the following paragraphs of this report. July 29th - The. Committee held their final meeting to review the draft. report prepared under Committee direction by the staff. With several modifications and the addition of the eighth recomrnen- dation, the Committee unanimously voted to approve the report . ~ for submission to the City Council. The Committee has recognized that the areas of both public safety and the delivery of emergency medical service are areas which need constant review and modification - to continually provide the max~irnum service possible for-the community. Therefore,. the committee recognizes that future development of the public safety services in" our community might require a change in~the delivery of emergency medical service to meet a changing-,need within the community, or provide a new resource that may . be unavailable to the carrmunity. . However, the Committee feels that the present delivery system for emergency medical services in Richfield is basical-1y satisfactory and therefore recommends .that the primary response to an emergency medical incident be continued in a manner similar ~~ to that in which the Public Safety Department is Currenf;ly operating. • .. -3- On the basis of the independent research conduced by the Committee members, and ~~ the extensive corrrnittee discussions with expert resource:personrel, the Ambulance .,Study Committee makes the following, specific recommendations for consideration by the Richfield Gity Co~anc~l: 1. The provision of emergency medical services and the transportation of emergency medical victims appears to be a logical and compatible, responsibility to be coordinated with the City's other public safety services. Therefore, it is recommended that the provision of appro- priate emergency medical care and transportation be a responsibility . to be coordinated by the Director of .Public. Safety. 2. In addition'to the provision of emergency medical care, it is recom- mended that the Public Safety Llepartment gi.~e high priority to an expanded communications and community educational program for both training in, and dealing with, emergency medical problems. Addition- ally, this community educational program should deal with training - in how citizens may gain access to the emergency medical services provided by the City. 3. That the City of Richfield, by Council resolution, request that Hennepin County .expedite a plan recently promulgated for the coordi- nation, utilization, dispatching: and personnel training. for both publ i c and pri vai;e ambulance services 4~,!i thi n the County under author- ity granted to the Courity by the P1innesota State legislature. ~. 5. 6. That the-City of Kichf`ield support effects to house or.e or more ambulances from either a private ambulance carrier or Hennepin County within a suitable location within the City of Richfield. To accomplish this end the Committee recommends that, if necessary, a-city owned facility be made available for the housing of-such ambulance, or ambulance units, designated to service the City of Richfield. However, the primary ambulance vehicle housed at a city owned facility, or servicing the City of Richfield, must be equip- ped with advanced life support systems and manned by personnel with a paramedic, training meeting or exceeding the criteria established by the Emergency Medical Service Council of Hennepin County. The personnel and vehicle or vehicles must be able to cope with emergencies arising in the City of Richfield 24-hours each day. This capability should have. as 'its basis the Richfield unit, but must be -supplemented .by backup units, preferably advanced life ,support systems manned by personnel with paramedic train ing, from nearby locations. The City of Richfield shall be held harmless in the event of any liability-or malpractice-allegations involving the .ambulance units or crews. That the ambulance contractors servicing Richfield be encouraged to maintain, and constantly strive to improve, relationships with regional emergency hospitals in the metropolitan area. That the ambulance contractors servicing Richfield agree to partici- pate in the provision of ongoing training for public safety personnel,. as well as con~runity training provided by the Public Safety Depart- ment.. .. 4 ... 4 C ' ~: - 7. That the City of Richfield continue-to enc~ur~ge the appropriate training of Public safety C~N~~rt~ent per•sannel in: emergency medical techniques ar-d make every `effort to continue the prompt response to .emergency calls from Richfield citizens. 8. -That tiie City of Ri ch~fi el d direct its public safety .staff, to solicit proposals-for the provision of emergency ambulance service from-both public and private carriers in accordance v;ith-the criteria as estab- . fished in this .report. .+ .ri - ,- ,.~- 9 CI'T'Y OF' kIC:HI'I?3L1D, Ml~?r1ESO~.CA - ~ . . .. Office of City iVEanayFr C,;ouncil Utter No. 295 Agenda September 27 , 19 7 6 The Honorable Mayor and . -Members of the City Council City of Richfield.; C-entlemen: :- Subject.:- Community Development, Block ,Gi:ant' -Richfield Community .Center Project In February,; ].97v the city council authorized the staff to submit ari applica- tioxi for the 1976/77 Corrim.unity Development Block- Grant.- Included fn this -.application. was !$10, S00 for additional work to b~ done at the Richfield Comm- unity .Center, 70,00 hl i.collet Avenue . It is anticipated that the city will receive funding for the 1976/77 Community Development Block Grant by October 1 ,: 1976. ~ - . The community center project includes repair of the roof at the center. ' Weather conditions are a significant. factor affecting our ability to have .this portion of the w^~rk completed this autumn. - This project will include such ~ items as installation of acoustical ceiling tile, and construction of shelving in addition to the roof repairs. Because of the time restrictions imposed by the. weather; and since funding is anticipated to be received- shortly, ii is recomm-` ended that the city council at this. time adopt the attached- resolution, thereby taking the folio ing actions: ~. Orderi g the project for improvements to the Richfield Community Center - Z: Authori~ir~ the advertisement for-bids for construction of the g improv . men is . • .. : _ l . Respectfully submitted, i _ ~.2 ~ . Wayne S . Burggraaff City manager WSB/eja ~ ,' cc: Finance Director Park and Recreation. Li.rcctor ,. .. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AT RICHFIELD COMMTJNITY CENTER AND AUTHORIZING CALL FOR BIDS WHEREAS, application for Community Development-Block Grant funding. for the .1976 - 1977 fiscal year has been made with city council recommendation, and ' WHEREAS, $10, 500 is included in said application. for improvements at the Richfield Community Center, 7000 Nicollet Avenue South, and WHEREAS, it has been determ-fined to be necessary, expedient and in the best interest of the city to proceed with this improvement, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by-.the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. .That such improvement: is hereby ordered at an estimated project .cost of $10, 500 in Community Development Block Grant-Funds . 2 , That such improvement will hereinafter be referred to as City Project • I~To. 699. 3. That the city staff is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for . bids ors said improvement as required by the Community Development Block Grant Program and as required by law. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 27th da.y of September, 1976. Loren L. Law ATTEST: Mayor Thomas j. Moran City Clerk i GITY C~1' RICHFIEL.L`, MIIJ_1~TESOTA Qfi;ice of City IVianager Council Letter No. 294 Agenda Septerriber 2: 197.6 . The Flonorable IVlayor and :Members. of the City Council G~ity of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: Purchase in Excess. of $1,000 Chapter 6,';Secti,on 6.05 of the clay charter sti.pul«tes that the city council must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials,, .equipment, or constru.cti.on vahen the amount exceeds $1,000. This letter contains several such items. Donaldson Park' The Donaldson Park redevelopment project is new nearing completion. ,~ However, there 'fare still some improverrients scheduled to 17e completed this Fall. These remaining improvements include fencing of the Babe Ruth baseball field, ;and consideration of backstop improvments for the city-controlled baseball field at the park . i Following a detailed study by Brauer and Associates and a comprehensive staff review of ~he present backstop and proposed alternatives, the city -staff and the Richfiel~ Park and Recreation Advisory Commission recommend the folloti7ing improvements to tre backstop: A. In addii ion to the batters cage used during practice ar~d warm-up times, it is re~cammended that the existing backstop be clamped to slow down metal fatigue. The cost of materials and man hours required to do this would be negligible at this .time, although the backstop may still need to be replaced at some future date. B. Based on a site survey, there are statistically a large number of foul ' balls g ing into the general area of the newly remodeled shelter. An increase in the height of the right field fence wouJ.d help to alleviate this pry blem. It is recommended that a .twenty-four foot fence (twenty- four fe~t bight to-match the height of the existing backs op) be installed.. Quotat ~ons .have been received for this fencing, and i.t is recommended I that the-city council approve the purchase of fencing for this purpose rn -~~ the amount of $1, 865.00. Funds fo~~ this purchase ark av«ilable in the project; budget. i _ ,~ Council Letter No. 294 -2-- ,September 27, ?976 . ,. C. It is rPCOmmended that eight (8} additional trees be planted to provzde long-range protection to the tot lot area. Quotations -have been received, and it is recommended that the city coun~ilapprove the purchase of ~ said trees in'the amount of $397, 00 per 7" diameter. greQn ash tree. This price includes planting and a one year guarantee . .Funds for this purchase are available in the project budget. Iri addition, the Donaldson Park project and other park area projects .include. monies for some. more tree plantings., It is recommended that the city council authorize` th.e purchase of additional trees at an average cost of $397 ; 00 der tree including planting and a one year guarantee.. The number' of trees to be purchased will •be de~termiried by .the funds remaining in the project budget when all .other work: is completed. The. West Babe Ruth baseball field fence in Donaldson Park -needs replacement:. . Quota ions have been received for purchase of an 8' high outfield, fence, and it is recommended that the city council approve the purchase of this fencing in the amount of $1, 89,9.00. Funds for this purchase are available in the project budget,: Ice Arena Site improvements at the Richfield Ice Arena and' Swimming -Pool complex are - also nearing corhpl~tion. Project items remaining include construction of retaini~~g walls,,asphalt work~and plantings. A.- Quotatonshave been received for asphalt v~ork in the vicinity of the driveway to the arena .storage building: and the entrance- area to the arena It is r commended that the city. council approve: the purchase of .this asphal work in the amount of $4, 529.00. Funds for this purchase are availa ~ le in the project budget. - ,I _B. It has been deterrr:ined that the city staff -will be able to install the retaini g walls and -other wood work items at th.e_ Ice Arena site ... This work ust be completed prior to installation of the asphalt andplantings. Therefore; it is recommended that the city council approve the purchase of lumber and materials at a costof $].,850.00. .Funds for this purchase are available in the project budget. _ ~ . Summary Fencing; p.~.antings and asphalt work are detailed above: 'To summarize; • the aity courxcil is requested to approve the following purchases; CI`.I'Y OP RICHFII'LD, MIT~INESOTA ~' Office: -~f ~.:'ity I~~an~,ger Council' Letter No. 293 Agenda September ~27', 1976' , The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council " City of Richfield`! G~ntlemen• Subject: Authorization to Call for Bids for the Installation of a Fire.Suppression Sprinkler System At the August 23, -1976 regularly scheduled council meeting, the city- council approvedCity Project 693, the installation of a fire suppression sprink- ing system for the lower level of the city hall building. In `addition, the council ordered the. prepairation of plans and specifications and approved an agreement ' `for engineering services. • ,Orr-~Schelen ;Mayeron and Associates Incorporated have prepared specifi- cation for"this. p' oject and it is, therefore, requested that the council authorize the call for bids or this project. It is anticipated that bids' will be opened on Wednesday, Ort ber 20, 1976 and will be ready for council consideration at the October~25, 1976 council meeting. .Funds are available for this project in the `Capital Improvement Program. Respectfully submitted, l ~~ V ~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Works Director Finance Dire for L j . ,: " i ~i CITY OF 12:~CfTt'IrLD , Tt%1TtvNESOTA ' Office ci: C"ty lvic~r:ager Council Letter No. 2~2 i Agenda September 27, 1976 Thee Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City' of Richfie Id Gentlemen: Subject: Presentation of Master Plan Report- for .Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport Rarler,this r~onth T distributed copies of the summary. report for the Minne- apolis-St. Paul International Airport Master Plan Study to mernbers of the city council. Arrargenents -have been made for representatives of the Metropolitan: Airports Commission and the consultants who, conducted the study to make a presE~r~tation to tl'ie. city council at the September 27; 1976~city council rro eting. I have suggested to the repres-entatives of the MAC that it would be ossible p for them to make their presentation to the city council at about' 8:30 p: m. so they ` w l plan to be present by that time. T would anticipate that the presentation and some discussion would require 30-4G minutes. Respectfully submitt d, ~ ~~ ^ Wayne. S. Burggraaff City Manager cc: Planning Director City Attorney Park and Rec cation Director Public V~lorks Director CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of~ Gity ManagEr Council Letter No. ZO1 Agenda September 27, iy76 -The Honorable Mayor and ....Members of the± Cifiy Council. ' Gity of Lichfield _ - r Gentlemen• Subject: Proposed Amendment Regulating the Licensing and Playing of Bingo This year the legislature gassed a Iaw which gives municipalities much more.-authority and responsibility for the regulation of bingo activities than did the former statute. The city attorney reviewed the new legislation and concluded-that i~t was necessary for the city to review our ordinance to take into account tr~el provisions of the new statute. The city council reviewed the' prypaSed ordinance .amendment a the _ - . September l3, .1y76 city council meeting. At that time the council requested that copies of t}e proposed amendment be distributed to those organizations who currently conduct bingo games- in the city and that the ordinance be scheduled for first reading consideration at the September 27, 1y76 meeting. The city council also requested that the city manager propose a license fee: to be includ~d as part of the ordinance amendment when. it is considered on Se tember 2 7 h P T e casts which co uld be ex e p cted to be incurred. from enforcn g .the provisions of .the proposed ordinance have been reviewed by the city clerk and the ptf~ lic s~fety director. It is their recorr~mAndation in wii ich I concur, that the license ~ee be set at $200. Actual experience may indicate the need to increase that ~ee, but until that experience develops, we believe that the $200 figure is ari adequate amount. The fee would be expected to cover the cost which the ~ity would incur in the following activities which would have to be conducted for each license holder: 1. The pu lic safety department would invEStigate the truth of the: info mation given on the license application. 2. The pub is .safety department would also conduct a safety inspection of the premises. • ,,, w ._ Council Letter No. 291 -~- Septemuer 27, 197n 3. The, public safety cle~,artin~rit would make one investigation of the hinga records of the orc~ans~ation at least once. during the year, other than when a discrepancy of S20is reported.: on a bingo occasion. The finance department would offer assistance to the public safety department in this, however, ifi should be noted that the law enforcement agency of tine Ii~censing autr~ority' has theauthority to make the investigation. E- 4. The public safety department-would make at least one _physical fnspecfion of a bingo game. 'i'he law does not specifically require ~: • this, but, the city should be involved in same type of on-going systematic enforcement effort and this limited periodic cheek of each bingosite, the bingo records and a bingo game wouldsupport this requirement. 5. The finance department would review all reports filed with the city ~; as required by the law ahd should such. reports generate a legal question, refer the items to the .city attorney. Tt is recommended that the city council give first reading consideration to ~ the attached ordinance amendment. Respectfully submitt d, • ~.. ~~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: City .Clerk. Pub is Safety Department Cits~ Attorney I I . Q`". .:: AMENDMENT TO' CFiA:PTER ~7,_ ..- -:... ,. FART II, ..SECTION 5.19 .. _ OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:- ~ - Chapter V, Part.Il, Section 5.19 of the Ordinance-Code of the City of Richfield relating to .the licensing and play- _ II ing of bingo is .hereby amended to read as foll.aws: ~, 5.19 Bingo Subdivision 1. Definitions The following terms shall have the meaning given to them by Minnesota Statutes, 197.6, . Section 349.12: _ {1) Active member {2) Bingo (3) Bingo occasion . {4) Checker ~ 5) ...Lawful purpose (6) Organization (7) Profit i • - (~) Bnnao manager:. i Subd. [1] 2. - i~icense Required;: Any- [association] organ- - - izaton authorized to apply for a bingo Incense [conduct the game of bingo] pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, .[Section 349.03] 1976, Chapter 349, shall apply to-.the clerk for a license before conducting the game of bingo within .the city. Bingo may not be conducted until the. license is issued. Subd. [2] 3. Application. Application shall be made on forms prepared for that purpose by the city clerk. Applications sh~11 be verified by a dray appo~.n_ted officer - .._ ar the organization and [s~gred] by the person designated ' by the organization as bingo n?anager [conducting, operating and managing the game].. Applications shall state the dates for which. permission to play the game ns requested and -the place where the-games will be played. The city clerk raay require additional information on~the application for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this sectior_.' -Subd [3] 4. Charge in [Association] Or animation Officers or Bin ol~fanager. If during t e per o~for ' which: the ? cen e is issues' there is a change in -the ~ `'~ officers of-the [association] organization, or in the... person designated to act as bingo manager, a new application d~.sclosing~ such change must ae-made and filed with the c~.ty clerlr w e ~,:.; Subd. [4) 5. I~icen~,Fe~,•,and License Year.. [There is ,no license fee) The annual i~T"cense~ee s~'ia.Cl be $ •. - The annual license shall run from. January _1_ to December 3I of the year • Subd. 6. Btznd... (1) At the time of filing the application, the designated bingo manager shall file with the city clerk a bond`%~ith corporate surety-duly licensed to do 'business in the State of I~'iinne- sofa. Such bo'r_c~ 'shal'l be in -che amount of $i0,00~.00 and shill be subject to approval bathe city attorl°y as to form and execution. .The bond shall run-in favor of the organization conducting the bingo activity and conditioned • _ ,. as follows: _ .. (a) The designated bingo manager will obey alh ordinances and statutes relating to the licensed activity. (b) The designated bingo manager shall fully. and faithfully performehisduties_ (c) The bond may .not be cancelled for any reason ~,~ithoutthe written consent of the city and-then only after at least 3Q days written notice of intention to cancel the bond. . (2) The city council may upon unanimous vote waive the bonding requirement. If waived, the license shall state that it is issued with a waiver of surety bond. (3) Should there be any change in the. designated bingo: manager' du.rin.q the license year, the necv bingo manager shall, before assuming hZS duties, comply with all of the bond requirements of . this subdivision. Subd. [5)- 7. 1~pproval and Issuance of license .The application shall be referred to the [city police de=` • partment] Police and fire .divisions of the Public Safety Department, to the inspection division of the Public VJorks Department and to such other persons or departments as the city .manager shall deem appropriate for invest- igation and recommendations.. The application shall thereupon be returned to the-city manager who shall note .his own xecorimendations.ond comments thereon. The appli- cation shall be then presented to the council forfinal. < approva'1 or denial. The council may note act on the • s 0 lication until at: ].east 30 days after it has~been mitted in completed form,.-:and must act within 180 days submission. _ _ Subd. 8. Conditions Governing Issuance- .The following conditions govern the issuance of licenses pursuant to ..this section: is ion of any offense which relates to the competency of the designated manager or the organ- ization to perform the licensed activity. ~: (2) [No game of bingo shall-be played more-than ~1 twice a week on the same premises, nor-fora period longer than four hours on any one day nor beyond the calendar year during which the first date Covered. by the license is played ] (1) [The licensee shall not conduct the-game on any . date nor at any place other than those dates .and. placesenumerated in the application] No license shall be issued~to an organization whose desict- _. noted manager,,or any organization officer, has been convicted b any. court of competent juris- a t Licenses shall be issued .only upon applications ~'~~ which are complete in every respect and•have been ~'. accom anied b the P payment of the annual license +~ fee and filing of the bingo manager's surety. bond.:.. ~'I _ __ • (~) [Bingo may be played only in the hall ~,rhere ~I regular meetings of the association are held unless otherwise permitted by the council.] [(4)] No license shall be issued to any [associ- ation] organization unless such [association] organization has existed in the city for at least [two] three years prior to the date of appli- ~ cation. This restriction shah. not apply if the [association) organization making appli- - cation is, or is a subsidary or, any religions, _ charitable or fraterr_al organization of national or statewide jurisdiction. which has.. been in - existence [in excess of two]- at beast three years.. _ (4) No license sYiall be issued to any organization- . which does not have, on the'date of application , at least 30 active members. (5) No license shall be issued to any organization whose designated bingo manager is not a mem er _ in_ good stand~.nq of the organization and crho ha s not been a member for at least two years p to the date on. which application is made: [(5) The game of bingo shall not be operated or l d b • ' p aye . y any person under the age of eighteen - years except when su.ci~ person is accarrpanied - by his. parent or guar-than.] ; . 1 ' ~ F. _ _ ~h E .~:W ,. r .. t! '~ (6) No license sha11 be issued permitting. ' bingo to. be conducted in any district of the city other than commercial district." [(6)l 7. [The game of bingo may be conducted ' only by members of the licensed association. No member shall receive compensation of any kind for his- services in conducting the game in excess: of 'the compensation provided by State La~•~, and no person shall assist in oper- ating the game unless he has been and is a member of the spouse of-a member in good stand- of the association for at least one year. ing _ No organization may be licensed to conduct bingo on any Leased premiseswithout a written lease for a term at least equal to the term of the bingo license sought. Lease payments shall be at a.fixed monthly rate or rato per bingo occasion, not subject to change. during the term of the lease. No such lease shall provide that rental payment be based on a percentage of receipts~or profits from bingo occasions. Subd. 9. Conditions Governncr:Conduct of Bingo (h) The bingo manager shall not be the bingo manager for any other organization. ~ • . . (2) Tdo compensation shall be paid to'-any person ~` in connection with a bingo occasion except an activemem~er of the organization, or .its ' auxillary, or the spouse or surviving spouse of an active. r.:P~rak;er, corductincr the bingo . occasion nom shall any person not an active _ member of the organization or its auxillary_ or the spouse or surviving spouse of an active. member artici:nate in the. conduct of a bingo occasion, except bv.resolution of a majority " of the membership recorded in the official r%inutes -of the organization. .Non-management assistants who are not active meribers of the organization, or 'its auxillary, or the spouse or surviving spouse of an active member, may be hired to assist members in-conducting the. bingo occasion. Compensation shall not exceed $12.00 per bingo occasion. (3) Unless the city council shall so provide in -the license,. no more than 104 bingo occasions- .. - each year or two bingo occasions per week rtay be cond~.acted by the.. organization. P1o bingo ' ~ occasion shall continue for more than four consecutive hours.. ` 1 ,' _, ' (4) Any erson or corporation, other than an organi- ~- • zat_ion, which leases any .premises that ~.t owns to two ar' more or anizations for purposes in- @' ~ !. 0 occasions `shall e conduct of .bin ludin th , c g g t ~I not allow to be ons more than four bingo occasi conducted on the premises inJany week. (5) Any organization which leases any premises to one or more other organizations for purposes in- eluding the conduct of bingo .occasions shall use -the proceeds of the rental, less reasonable sums for maintenance, urnishin~s and other ' necessary expenses,..only for lawful purposes as defined. in Minnesota Statutes, 1976, Section i. 349.12. At the end of each license year the organization shall report to the city clerk ~` the disposition of all receipts which it has received during the license period from the rental on its facilities to other organizations .for purposes including. the conduct of bingo . occasions. - (6) Prizes fora single bingo game shall not exceed $100.00 except for .prizes fora game of the type commonly known as a "cover-a11":game which shall ~f in aggragate value not,exceed,_$50.0.00. The ~ • ~gragate of prizes for a bingo occasion shall not exceed $2, 500. 00, .except that. when-the bingo . occasion includes a "cover-all_' game, the aggragate of prizes shall not exceed $3, 000.00. i Merchandise prizes shall be valued at fair i market retail value. (7) No expense shall be incurred or amounts paid in connection with the conduct of bingo, except those reasonably expended for bingo supplies and equipment, prizes, rent,. or utilities used during the bingo occasion, bingo license fees, taxes related to bingo and conpensation to active members who conduct the game. (g} Each bingo winner. shall be determined and every prize shall be awarded and delivered the same day: on whicYi the bingo occasion is conducted. (9) All bingo occasions shall be under the direct supervision of the designated bingo manager who shall be responsible for gross receipts an '~ profits from bingo and for the conduct o~the bingo occasion in corlpliance with all applicable statutes and ordinances.. (10) Bingo shall not b~ conducted on dates or at -es and places enumer-~ places other than, those dat ated in the appl:~ca~ion. (11 )' Bingoma~ be played only in the hall where regular meetings on the organization are held unless otherwise permitted by the council. (12} Bingo shall not be p7.ayed by-any person under eighteen years of age unless accompanied by_ his parent or legal guardian. 5ubd. [7] 10. Recording Players and Receipts. [Each. association permitted to play bingo shall keep a perm- anent record containing the names and addresses of all winners of prizes o€ a value of-one hundred dollars or more and the. dates.`when~such prizes crere awarded.] One or more checkers shall be engaged for each bingo occasion. The checker or'checker.s shall record the number of cards played in each carte prior to the completion of each game and record the prizes awarded to the recorded cards. Each checker shall certify all figures which ~e has __ recorded as accurate and correct to the best of his knowledge ._ This record shall be kept on file by the association within the city and shall be open to inspec- t-ion by city police officers. Subd 11, Records.. Each organizatiori shall keep records of its gross receipts and profits for each bingo occasion. Gross receipts shall be compared to the checker's records -for the bingo occasion by a person-who did not sell cards for the .bingo occasion. All deductions from gross re- ceipts or other records, The distribution of profits shall be itemized as to payee, amount and date of pay- menu.. Bingo ar_oss receipts shall be segregated from other re=revues of an organization and placed ir. a.separate account Each. organization shall maintain separate records of its bingo operations. The person who accounts for bingo gross receipts and profits shall not be the same person who accounts .for other revenues of the organization. Records required to be kept by this ordinance and by Minnesota Statutes, 1976, Chapter 34J shall be preserved for at least three years. Licensees shall make their bingo records available to the police department at any reasonable tune and after proper notice.- .. • • lease agreements required by this ' e, An , .. ~ a.r_ain~.nce executed by the organa.zat~on in • regard to premises leased for the conduct . ~ ofbingo, 13. Revocation or Suspension of License. Su d . - e icertse may~Te revo ~? or suspen e - py e city mana~hPnever .the licensee, its owners, directors, ;• bingo manager,: or employees.or,agents have engaged in . any of t:ne following conduct: ~~ ~ (1) Fraud, deception or misrepresentation in ~ - ~ . connecticn w~.th the securing of a license. (2} Conduct inim:i_cal to the interests of public.. health, safety, welfare or morals. (3) ~Cbnduct involvingmoral turpitude. (4) Conviction for an off_enseinvolving moral turpitude or relating to the conduct of the licensed activity. (5) Failure to~ promptly comply` with any o~ the_ re-- . Pments on >~his ordinance or -state laws re- c tzr • ~ .. laving. to bingo. _ - (6) Eriaaging in activity, action or- change which .. would have disqualified 1.~censee from;obtain- . ing a license._ The matter shall. then proceed .as provided in Richfield Ordinance Code 5.14 Subdivision 4. Subd. 14. Penalty. Any alleged violation of the nrovis- • ions of this sectior.~~~hich shall also constitute a vio- lation of tno provisions of r~,innesota Statutes, 19;6, _ Chapter 349 shrtll first be presented to one o_fice of the Hennepin County Attorney for_ prosecution of a gross mis-- r. Zn any instance where the county attorney demeana , -shall decline, for any reason to prosecute the alleged - violation, and in all other cases involving alleged violations of this section thc~ matter shall be pre- • sented'to the. city attorney for: prosecution as a mis- demeaazor . " ubd 15. Existing Licenses. All licenses. .heretofore S . issued s}tall terminate a on the effective date of this ord~nartce. Any organization winose hicenses is termin- bingo not later than t~~~eni:y aced must. cease conducting - . days thereafter. utzless wa.thin that c~riod it ma}:es a~~~cati.cin as ~-xbove pry ~. Zf_ aP}?lica~,ion i:~ mader_ ., 1' . . with the Departr:lent of the Treasury;. _ • b. Department of Treasury-; internal Revenue Ser- "Exempt Oraan.r.zat7.on Eusi.ness Income ~ vice , ,~ " Fern 990-T, or a codparable form if the Tax , organization 7.s required tO file the form with the Department of the Treasury;. The annual report required of. charitable • c " . J4 organizations by Minnesota Statutes 19 Section 309.53, provided 'that ar. organizatior_ _ that conducts bingo but is e::eTM~~t from submitting this renor~. to the li::Jartn~rt o Com?~?erce under. section 39.53, subdivision la~, sha11 nevertheless submit such a report under this SLlbd7_V151On; The rinnesota Dopartment~' of Commerce "State- d . ~ent of Birgo Operations:" ~~1~. information contained in the statement shall be true, correct, and comr~lete i:o', tine lest of the ~ ersons signing knowledge of the-.person- or knowingly hall ~ c A_ny_p_er~on_~~~ho s i-.h^ e stat.emenf~: ly conceal t o~• }cnocair~g . make a false statemen r a material fact. in i:}ie s~atemc:rlt shal]. hc~ ' proviced in sub- subject to the penalties', aivision 19 of this Section. . Subd.' 12. Reports and Applicatior~s_. • (].) If any discrepancy is found between the amount of gross rece7.p-Ls for a b7_ngo occasion as de- termined by the ckecker`s records and the amount of gross receipts a.s determined by totaling the cash receipts and the discrepancy exceeds $20.00, the discrepancy shall be reported to the city ~. .~ clerk within -five iausiness days of its discovery. • ~ (2) An organization shall report monthly to its 7 membership gross receipts from bingo, its profits from bingo and the distribution of those profits itemized as required by subdivision 11 of this Section. ____---- (3) At lea.st.30 days prior to conducting its first bingo occasion of ;thy license 'year, an •orga.ni- • nation. sha'17. file with the city clerk conies _of the following: • a. Department of . the . Treasury, internal Revenue Service, "P.eturn~of Organization Exempt. from `., Income .Tax, " For 994, or a cor?tnarable form if . the organization is required to file the form . , -. i - - 9 the organization maw continue to conduct bingo until • the council shall act upon .the application and thereafter if a license is granted. Subd. l6. Exemptions.. Bingo can be conducted without a bingolicense l conducted: • (l} In connection with a county fair conducted • by a county agricultural society or associ- k~' ation, the state fair conducted by the state _' agricultural socie~, or a civic celebration recognized by resolution or other similar action by the city council provided that -bingo is riot conducted r~~ore than twelve con- secutiye days in any one calenday year, or (2) By an organization which conducts less than five bingo occasions in any calendar year. Passed by the City Council of .the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1976. Loren La~,r, r•?ayor ' ATTEST Thomas Moran, City Clerk ~. Council Letter No. 290 Agenda September 27, 197E ~ .The Honorable Mayor _ ' ~ and ..Members of the City Council City. of Ricizfield~ l.~entlemene Subject: Second Reading of Trans,,itory Appropriatien Ordinance" ,. ~ For Richfield Lake Property Acquisition ~ At the September. 13, 1976 city council ..meeting the city council approved exercising Lhe option to purchase certain Richfield Lake bottom property. It was determined chat the purchase pric:. of $35, 71'4 would be jointly financed by the sewer. utility and the special revenue fund. The sum. of. $17, 814 will - come from. the .sewer utility fund .with the balance. of $17, 9.0`0 to be financed by the special revenue fund. The city council gave fig°st reading consideration to a transitory ordinance .appropriating $1,960 from the special revenue fund. This ordinance amendment is on the September 27 city council- agenda nor second reading consideration. It is recorr~~mended That the ordinance be given second reading and adopted . Respectfully su fitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja i cc: Finance Director- i ~_ Transitory Ordinance No. 16.38 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND LOCATED IN THE ' VICINITY OF RICHFIELD LAKE The City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1. It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the city to expend money from The Special Revenue Fund for the making of a capital improvement for which the city would'be authorized to issue general obligation bonds, such capital improve- ment being the acquisition of certain land Located in the vicinity of Richfield Lake to be used for general municipal purposes. Section 2. The sum of $17,900 is hereby authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund for such purposes. Section 3. The expenditure herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by council resolution. - Passed by the City Council of the City o.f Richfie~ d this . . 27th day of September, 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk ._._ _ ~ ; ~-, ~. ~. ., , ;. CITY` OF RLCHFIELD, MINNESOTA '_ Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 289 Agenda September 27, 1976 The Hanorable:lVlayar - _ and Members of the :;City Council City of Richfield' Gentlemen• Subject: Permanent Street Improvement Deferred; Assessments and . Related Reports At the July ;26, August 9, and August 23 :Permanent Street Paving Assessment Hearings, the city council deferred adoption of the assessments "for several parcels, to permit further council consideration and staff investi- gation. Following is a report of the. staff findings related to these deferred • parcels' 3.. Programmed Land -Parcel 44834-0715 < Mr. George Kenealey, representing Program Land Inc. , appeared at the jury 26, 1976 assessment hearing and objected to the proposed . assessment for Program Land Inc. It was Program- Land Inca's opinion that the proposed assessment on their property should be reduced since they had been denied access onto 77th Street. Thee city council voted to defer action on -this parcel so that the city could obtain an independent appraisal of .the benefits to the property. We ha~e now obtained this appraisal, and it is the opinion of the apprai er that the property was benefitted by approximately $7, 300. This i equal to about one-third of-the proposed front .street and street lightin, assessment glus the side street and driveway assessment.. The city council might wish to consider aidjusting the proposed assess- ment t~ conform to the appraiser's recommendation. In addition, at the September 13, 1976 assessment hearing, Mr. M. Wolfer~son, representing Northwest Unit Development Corporation, reques~ed adjustment to his assessment for the apartment complex located at 74th and. Lyndale for the .same reasons.. The council might ~+ wish to consider adjusting. this assessment by 66 2/3%, if they make such an adjustment for Program Land" Inca's. assessrrient. o ~., :, .. _.. _ _. _ _ .. .. ~~_ ? ~ , ,. ~". Council Letter.lVo. 289 ~ -2-- September 27,. T97.6 - 2 ;Mr. Redman - 712.0 Irving Avenue South IVIr, Redman appeared at the August 9, 19.76 assessment hearing expressing his concern odsr several items: Boulevard shaping, fence restoration; ~ the driveway assessment, and. the replacement of a small planter located ~~ on the -city boulevard. .+ ~ City staff has met with Mr. Redman and resolved, these-items except for the drivewayassessment and replacement of the planter. In order to have proper grade. adjustment on thin driveway, it wasnecessary to install 52:5 s°quare yards of concrete behind the apron, at a cost of $498, 7'S .; In accordance with the permanent street improvement program assessment policies, the cost has been included in the proposed assessment. Prior to-construction, Mr. Redman had a-small brick planter located on the city boulevard. At the time of construction, it was our understanding that Mr. Redman was not concerned about the planter, and it was removed. during the construction process . Mr. Redman contends that he had indicated desire to retain the planter, and has requested that the planter either be replaced. or that he receive a credit of $180.00 on his assessment,. to cover his estimated value of the planter. i ~3., Mr, j.~ ]'. Hyman - 6935 Irving Avenue South - Mr. H~man appeared at the August 9, 1976 special assessment hearing and indicated concern that water stands in his driveway. The staff. has invest gated Mr. Hyman's complaint and finds that the .driveway does drain. All of the driveway, including the portion that existed before the perma ent street construction, is relatively flat, and problems could develop if snow or ice were allowed to build-up during the winter months. 4,. Mr. R., G. Anderson - 7308 James Avenue South _ . - Mr. A derson appeared. at the August 9, 1976 special assessment hearing requesting credit in. the amount of $280.00 -for work behind the apron that . he had completed himself.. 5. Mr. Rgbert T. Anderson - 7501 Girard Avenue S Mr, A~derson requested that the city plant a tree to replace one that was remov id :during the street construction project. In addition, Mr, Anderson requested the- staff to inspect his driveway. The staff has met with Mr. Anderson to resolve "his question regarding .the driveway. The tree `I ordered by the city eounci on August 23, 1976 has been planted. I 4 / ,. a . Council Letter: Nio,' 289 ` -3- September.27, 1'976 ,, . 6. Mr. Jaek Frolund :- 754'1 Emerson Avenue South 1Vlr. Frglund questioned the location of his driveway apron.: At the time of construction, Mr. 'Frolund indicated a desire for a ten foot driveway apron. Pursuant to that, request, the apron was constructed at a ten#oot width to match his existing driveway, the south edge of which abuts the property line, A copy- of Mr. Frolund's letter and his dia-gram of the driveway is attached. - 1 ;-?, Larry Beckman - 7309 Bryant Avenue South In order to have'the proper grade adjustment on this driveway, it, was, necessary to install 31.7 square yards of concrete. behind the driveway ~ ,apron as a :cost of -:$301;15, in a'ccordarice with the permanent street improvement program assessment policies, this cost has been. included in the proposed assessment. ~ ~In addition to the deferred assessments cited above, the city council aiso .requested. that the staff report on the following items: ~: 1. j~ames Martin - 1320 West 73rd Street" ~ Mr. Martin has requested that the sidewalk in front of his house be finished to the street. The staff' has met with Mr, lviartin and scheduled I the completion of this work. 2.• Randol .li Ber - 7316 Colfax Avenue South The stagy f has met with Mr. Berg regarding the grading problem in his drivew ly along the retaining wall, and additional work has .been ordered . 3. Mrs . Earl M . Olson - 1319 West 73rd Street ' Mrs. O~son re quested 'the replacement of her boulevard tree. After re reviewi}~g this matter, the staff has scheduled replacement of the tree. October 9, 1976- is the county deadline for certifying the assessment rolls. i It' is therefore irr~portant that the city council.. conclude their hearings on the deferred assess ~ ents so that the assessment on the remaining parcels can. be finalized and in luded on the assessment rolls. Respectfully submitted; ~~. ~ :. '~' Wayne -S. Burggraaff ' :City Manager - . WSB/bll cc: Public: Works Director Finance Director Mr. Peter G. Eberz September~.21.,: 1976 ~. Dixector of Public Works Richfield City Hall. 6700 Portland Avenue South 8ichfield, NiN 55423 Dear Mr. Eberz: T was at the counsel meeting on August 23, 1976'. The counsel agreed .. - to send someone-out to check the placement of my driveway. Ivan - Ludeman came out and agreed that .the driveway .apron is not placed _ _ • properly and that it should be moved two feet. The driveway apron is one foot over my neighbor's property line, - therefore making it impossible for me to have a standard ten foot driveway running straight onto my property. If two additional feet were -added to the north end of the apron, I could angle in afoot from each side to make a ten foot driveway without having to move the entire apron. I am enclosing a rough. diagram of the driveway illustrating the present placement of .the apron and the suggested solution. T was to attend the meeting on September 27 but will be out of town on that date, hence the reason for this letter. I would greatly appreciate your help on this matter. Thank you-fox your time. Sincerely _ ~ v~/ 1 ~~. ~f Sack W. Frolund cc: Mr. Tvan'Ludeman ~i -_ I ~~ ~ I ___. ----. ~ ---_ K :_ --- ---- ~ ; I ~- .,,, ! ~ ~ i , J ~ ~ ; i '0.i ~ ~ 0 ~ j 1 I I ~ i ~ i 1 I ~ j .-__ i s ' ... 1 .. ~ _.-- ~~_- I I ~ ~ ~ I ~ i `- ~-' I t I ~ ~ 1 ' --- i I I ' ~ ' I ~ ~ i I ~ i I~ ' ` ` ~ ~. ! .. I i I I ' I ; ~ i ' ~ -L-- - .. _.... -._l.___ r -~-_ L__'.___-..- _ -- .. _ _.._....._ .... _ .. .. ...._ _ r_ ...--1- -- --- ~ i ~ f I !, I ~ _ _. . ._.- __- _ _. .. .. .. _ ... .... .~.. r ._ . ~~- , `- - _!_ ~ -~ it ~ y ~ ~~_' _.4 _ _._.. ~ I ;___ _ _.. ' ~ f I I ~. I !--- _,... _. I I :__ . , .__ i 1 I 1 ~ ~ i ~ ~ i i _.- _ _....- ._ -- -r- __ - _- .. _..__ .. __ r- I I I I I ~ ----1--- -' - -•- - - --- -+ ~ - I- i---- --~ ~-- --~- I i I ~ ~___ i i 7 I I I i i i i -{---~- ~ ~ I ~ ~ 7 _ t f I i i i ' ' I ~. ~. i , ~ _ ___l. :__.__, ~ 1 . • .._<. I I , I I ~ I _ i..__ IF _ ~_ ,!, __ r__ ._ } i i i ~__ ,. I - t. _--~--- f... __ i_.~ 1 I i ~ (_- ..... _. ~ ... _ ~ . _- . _ -- I t "_ I . _.' :. ~ _... t L.._.. I I a: i i i ( "3; I ---~ -r -- -- -r r _ ___~~ ~ - ~ l--- I ~ ~ ,.` ~ _ .~..~A~ __~_ ( j` .,v, .;_... ~ , CITY OF RICHPIET~D, MINT: ESOTA Office of C:.~y Manager Council- Letter No. 288 ,, -Agenda September 27, 1976 The-.Honorable Mayor I .and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen• Subject: Hering on proposed. Permanent Street Constructidn and Ornamental Street Lighting Scheduled for 1977 A city council hearing is scheduled for Monday, September 27, 1926 :for the purpose of hearing affected property owners and authorizing permanenj,: street construction ' and ornamental lighting scheduled for .1977. The areas scheduled for construction in 1977 conform with the 1.975/80 Capital mprovements Program which was adopted by the city council on Februarj ? 8., 1975.. n ,July 26, ,1976: the, preliminary. engineering estimates :Eor the scheduled .construction ~ work were presented to the-city council. At that time, the city council set September 27, .1976 as the .hearing date for. the proposed 1977 permanent street construction ar~d ornaxnental F street lighting work and autr~orized the city staff to send out notices: and hold informational, meetings with residents prior to the council hearing. •r The construction worl~ scheduled for 1977 is shown by the shaded areas in the attached ..permanent street improvements map, For administrative purposes, the construction projecthas.beendivided into the following districts: 1. District No. 12. Bounded on the north by the 62nd Cross-town, east by west Pleasant Avenue north of 66th Street and south of 66th Street by F Lyndale Avenue South, en the south by 66th Street from. west Pleasant Avemae to Lyndale Avenue South and Woodlake west of Lake Share Driva and Lynd«le Avenue South, and on the west by I-35W. The streets in I thin area not included in this project are 66th Street from I-35W to west Pte ~ sant Avenue, 65th Street from Rae Drive to west Pleasant Rvenue, ~ ae Drive from 65th Street to 66th Street, Graham Avenue from- 65t1~~ Street to Lyndale Avenue South, Circle Place from Graham ,Avenue to Lyndale Avenue South, Lyndale Avenue South from the 62nd Crosstown to Lake Shore Drive and Grand Avenue-South from ~ 65th Stre~t to 66th Street. .: €, ;~~ •.,.. i I Council Letter No. 288 2 September 27 1976 2. Dsirict~No..14A, Bounded on the north by East 68th Street,. on the east. by 21st Avenue South, on the south by East 69th Street - _•' and on the: west by State Highway No. 36 . This area also included ; the East; Service Road, 'State. Highway No. 36' from East 68th Street • to East .66th Street. 3. - District';No. 15 . Including Lyndale Avenue South from West 74th Street to Lake'Shore Drive: 'The total project scheduled for 1977`includes approximately 9.5 street miles. The parcels included in the improvement wih be assessed in accordance with the city's - I :assessment policy for street and lighting improvements-. a.. (. ~. Prior to the information meeting, each property owner was sent a packet of information which included the following items: l .'~ A cover ~:etter listing the date for the information meeting and the city councilhearing . y 2. A copy of the official legal notice for the. city. council. hearing. • ~ 3 ~ A copy of a brochure pertaining to permanent street~.'improvements .proposed for 1977. A sample copy of this packet of information is attached hereto. Also included is ~a map of the-project area. ;.The total estimated cost for ah.e 1977 project is $1_.,203,200. The procedures and ' aterials provided at the information meeting was similar to the procedures and materials provided for the-1972, 1973, 1974,-1975 and 1976 projects. - Each property owner who !attended the information meeting- had the opportunity to obtain a detailed estimate of his proposed assessment and raise questions pertinent to 'the proposed project. The information meeting was held on September 2'2, 1976 and 75 individuals were present. Those individuals present generally favored the permanent street improvement and lighting project. It is recommended t at the city council adopt the resolution attached to this letter_ for the purpos a of orderi J the improvement and authorizing the preparation of -plans and specifications for City Project 686.. Respectfully submitted, ' ~ ~. ~" "~ _ Wayne S. Lurggraaf ~~ _, City Manager W SB/jkl cc; ~'ublic Works Direct~ir '' . ,~ • • > o ~r y -~ -i -+ r ti -~ ~ _ xERxES AvE - E I I WASnBURH AvE I I V iNCE NT nvf. I I VPTON AVE 1NOMA5 AvE SnE RiDAN AvE I RUSSE.L nvE OVEEN 4vE PE NN 0.vE OIiVER AvE NEWTON AVE MORGAN nvE LOGnN 4vE KNO% 4vE DAMES AVE IRV'NG AVE R~IMBOL DT AvE GIRARO AVE FPE MONf AVE EMERSON AVE DUPONT A.F I COLFAr a~E gR~eNr AvE ALDRI[R nvE ~rND4LE 4VE GARf IE LO AVE u4RRIET AvF GRgNO AVE PLE454Ni AvE ~I F'l LSBI'RY AVE { ~~~ ~ ~~ wENTwoPYn Ave ~~ d. A~SDELL AvE 1'i .:E v:l~~ .~. r.F 4~T~ 11. STE vE NS n:E ~ y ra AvE ~ ~' 3.a nvE ~~11 CI iNTON 4vE a rn avt Sin AvE PORT~ANO avE aae, aa. ..,. F6R~ n. E I _.~¢- ~b - 1 d ~E __.- ~ ___~_F_-__.-_ ,. _ ----.~ ~--~, ~-~ ~ i ,~ ~ i -, _ r ~~~~J` ~ ~ j r cFEp41N,~ ~V( ~) _ V 1„j ~ f' r ~ ,; ~ D ---. ~ _ _ ~---. ~ - _ - ~ - --- ' ~ ~ D yE'-~-\/ D - - ..__ ~.. -- ~- (~)\']~ ~ ran .. ~ V ~ ~~ I ~"1 ~ z D <0 D ~ ~ a~j;yc . u ~ ~~ 'n ---~ 7 ~ ~ ~ T~ ~ ` ) ~ ~ oANn r~ m= ~g z ~4 rn ~~, _D ~Y z •~~ O ~.. r ~ ~ ..~ . ni ~, ~ m c cD ~~i .. - ._ ~. ~~ rn -~ b t; ~ ~~ ~ ~ z O -~ o ~ ~., D rn A :Z cp.. - Dom' ~1 • N ~ ~ ao rn D MEAggIAI RARK ; -. ~ D . i. ~g D m - D ~ N ~ C~i~R z ~ ~ G ~~~_~ -P ~ ~ - z D 1 - zOD 1 ~ ~ ~~ - D ~Y~ f ~ ~m ;°<'J v A 0 A D 3 'T1 D cn C7 D C7 o m C'7 Z -• O~ ~ N ~ ~• d ~' d 3 "a o ~ ~ ~ ~• o o o N ~ ~ h m ~ o ,~ 'a o m c N co ~ m ~ °-o <n :.o ~ °-o ~ na cD ~ s ~ m m m ~ ~ m ° < ~ ~ m ~ ~'~,s <n c, m n ~ ~ a _~ ~-o m t 3 pp , 'G ~ ~' o O O N O ~ N O O (D ~, ~ D7 O ~ O O O C) O - O Q t O CD ~ ~ t0 ~ cn N ~ O N ~' N~ N F ~ _ ~ -~ W O d 7 C ~ ~ .+ ~• N = n r+ fl. O _ ~• H> ~ ~ -i. N N ~ '~ O O O O O d O ~ N ~ O T ~ O C N ~• 3 ~ ~ ~ O 7 ~ ~' N O K fn ~ (D (n f~D i, i v , cn _. ~ ~ ^` N (D ~ cn ~. a ~ ~1 0 0 d 0• _ n p .~ ~ , S o~ Z O~ m f 3 ~ c '!' c a m ~' c~ m O fD T m o p c ~ n3 ~ - yw o o ~ ~ ~ '•* ~ •< o ~~ _ -~ , _„ ~' ~ W ~ !" t (p = • .c o to 7 D ; -p ~ N• ;-r < i o ~, n ~c v CD ~ N O C N O ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ S n v~ ~ d N ~ O ~ ~ O 3 .-t O d ( D O N d Oho lD O Oil ~ 2 Vl O V ~ p p ; ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 H ~ ~ `G X X ~ O O 0° =: O ~ ~ N ~ Q C Q O • ~ m ° • _ :.°+ ~- ~'~ ~6 ~ Ufa ~ c g ~ oS _=~fD`DT O O ~ W ~ : 3 Vii d : : : ~. ~ O ~ N O : ~ N d N C ~ 7• X n d (~ O ~ ; fD ~ N D d II O N ~ O -~. a' C ~ (n ~ G ~, Q O ; O rt ( ~ O : O ~ .t ~ O ~ ~ ~ (~ Q. d ~ .Z '"' r* : ~ Z ~ • ~ O C - b rt 3 . rt (D - O ? N O cD (D rn S d N ~ O .l7 to d O' tn R 1 ,, N O , . . ~ • lD O ~ N ~ ~ ~ : v ~ N A O N (D N rn (n ~ ~ d ~ ~ 7 C ~. ~ _ _ C N ~ ~ Vi N ~ N 00 O ~ ~ O d ~. m <D I ~l ~ I ~ I I 'O O W ~! ~ (D f11 J - 00 V ~ ~ 00 ~ N tU V _ Q1 ~ ry C N O N O N ,~ ~ =~ fl. (D - • ~I v 0 m 3 m z i N m m rn 3 a z m z • n r v n 1 ~ II rn r v c a~ca~.-. aJ U° -o o NN ca~Emco .~ ~o-°° ~oa~•-~ cic~ of Lo_° y Oy°+~ 'DON in (D~ N OC to O-O N 3 ~ O.O T((~~L Q1 O - - ~ 'O +' C i N y bUD ~ V (~ ~ 0'- a ..,. ~'~ c~icm~ -a~•-co 'D~-~o 3-D -D = `ouca~- r.. a~ ~c ~ c c ~ m p oNON °-a~T`6 ~oEa `°°~3 ~cc° vi a :=°'~oo G1 ~ E'-s ~ ~ ~ EN ~ _w E N c~a~ -° 3 3 ~' S ~ .c~.~U °- Q_-a E±~U... ~ a~ N~o~ -nccv OJCa~ O co Oc V. C U ..D a ~.Q~ O ~T ~ 0i"' O D ~ N N -p "d ~ L ~ aN"D'D O a ° E ~o _ ~ N U-D- ~ o C > NiT.r ~-D~N 0 (n~~a..1 O t ~Cd~IJ'D Vi ~ ,~ =OOEO G1 .Q Q= c ~tia~ •D = ~,°cno U-m~o~ ~ _ ~ ao3 ~ i ° Oocn fl-O~X.-o cwt= y?~,o_ °~ -D3 i d mEE3oo p UcE• LO°~o_ ° },~ ~ conc° ~.. ~ _~'-+~c a (O (Q 7 N N O X U C bD ~._ ~ (O N w dfl 0 .- ~ Y `r.Ein O CUN 0- 0•-C Y++N ~ aN+OL p,N O•- ~. 00>; vJ O _ 000 _ ' 0 ~ X a ,ap,. ~a°°~ ~a~°-aim= ~oc~_. °~cvJ oQ.E=o a O a~°- cap p0 •3iE• N ONfO U O++ L E O ~~ N 'L] >' O O C 0 (6 E 'O .D a.+ ~,,, 0 ,~ ~ a.+ ~ a a N U~ C i ~ +J~ ° ° ~ E '~u-o c°i•E vJ a~ tw-D o ~~ U-D o i ~ ._ c~ E aEi ~i ~ ~ C ON jO~NCC O+L+iN ~ (QN ~OOOU O O dOCC UC ~ = ccm~ cnfl-ami_DCy cm~ca'i> u~a`~LE inL~'c..s y ; y0•-omo a a m'- ~ m a> >• ca a~ o a~ co ~ o °' °-' " o ~ °' i H = E u°'~ a U 1+ L N H Ea`ni~c Ear a0 cnn ° c ~~ c3"~~ a d ti°a}cm ~ r. ... a`~.- j •• c ~t 0 ~ ~0.~ ~~ N Q3 ° aJ >,ppin t-°-D N a ~ a.~ _ ~ L ~ L E m E ~ ~ ~, ~ ° ao °- w ~ a~ a~ a~ ~ '"t- a °.°-n o ~ ~ 3 L D O '0 N C O TO E E N.C O E U O NL '_ ~.FL., . N LE.E>• ~=~0°m Lo~c~ ~_.D= ° a~.J 3 = a aye 1- E E ~ ~.E ° ~ °am ~ ~ = o d ~~= d~ E ~ o ~naL,, ~=L~a~ M .u.=.,E •Ea>>tnaL •~`o3a •NCn3 •>°=.E ~ •3 n3 s d~~ co c t a a. c c :°-.Dio E m ~~- c • L eY`v o`°n ~ Lon -° s w y c ° E i ~.oy v-D v c~ ~ v w , a[ °° tq E ,a °' °' o 3 E a` > v= o +. o as c i 'D aQ c o•v°i.E ~ m '° ~ ~ ~ ° °' ~ ~ °, ~ R ~ ~ ~ aci .a~ o ~ .'c. ,n ~ omn _ a o- ~s a> ~ c E H R ~ ~ ~ ,... ,~ aoE.EEoL~~~ R C d N O U C w +. av ~ 3 d oo = c 3 c ay > -oc.a~°.N-E-•`°'> H w a~. c~ a c~ °, 0 3 m a LEo +'incn~ °~ L d ° bD y a 6f y N d ~ UO'D dN 0 UE N w L N L ~ ~ CL N C O C N •X O L y ° 10 + ~ 0 0 i ~' N E'6 F N fA ~ +• d f/1 L ~ VI tQ N ,~ .° .~ ai ..- is a> R H ~ - c o o L = N ~'~ o c N~ :;~ ,« ° y E c R c n°'. ~ -om'-'Q'''°u''i,n,~ a vs A o 3 L c E 'u, c is ~ +' ° L d .,.., ~ c E > o = v a-°i = ` ~ E $ o .s.. ~.o ~ ~'.cc3aEi~aEi'~„aUi E.. v L ~ ~ d c o c w, a~i ° s a O p. °a~ NOE°U~v-o "c "_ ~ = oy H o'" E n o ~ c w'a°-, ~ ~ ~ ~~oa~a~NS~ am E •- en' .~ r :: ~ s .~ V ~ R ° ~. s G S~ C C ~ ` ~ p~~.C OY Oy ~ U~ L ~ ~_ ~ ° Q y s as ~ L Q C b0 N ~3~°cNCYNi ~~ 'o o c~ ° _.~ L Q' bn L o oOE~ cm° E ~ n~ ~~3t~n ~ e ~a .- onL:.EcoEaaw ~ Q~ 3~..' ~ ~ ra vi 'D c O 0 NL.n E Oo ~ >, ~ bn cn ~ +' -NUN N 'f'' (Q C C O~_ D ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ U N UL 3 X d 0 N C Jn N ~ aNLL O- ~ ~ a.+ 0 -D on °-'- L 3 >+ N E c-~ 3 U H +~ _ ~~o3~Lm W E -o N N d N N b~A~ U Y LL Q O U en o _'~ °o O ° ~ E m _ _ o c ~'y~L m UL CJ U -C 0 ~ N CL cF-= O Z O O D U C 0 pq•D O. L -D ~ N . U •a ~ ui ~ ~ +~ m E- U i ~ p C S N U en E _ OL U O-Otll. +~LOvNi H N E O ~~ 0 0L '3H 0~ W F ~ O 0 O +>>+ c n~-a w °'cc~°o~c H W ° a~ o U o a ca Z U vi w +`~ `~O+3~n jdN~ N W -O 7 O U °•~ 3°` N N `~ Z Z ~~ o c ° `o °~°c°~mmo~ ~ ~ L~ U ° a~ E C d ~ _ ~ - - - N ~ ~L C.'~.+ O O E ~ d ~ C ~ ~ ~ UO a oD ° ~ ~ +3• v= O ~ • • • • ~nacc ~nNN NN !.c-D N a~ o a~ a~ L •- E s o~ - •- c o `m O ~ ~ O yL~ UL ` 0 y > N t0~ Nw.-.V L C~+ E ~ dnC QN CY ~vJ ~ OL 0++•- N O Y _ p o°_ iny3o~oN.. `oLi~w N~ r 3 ` L 'D p- `L ~N ~ ` ~ f0'D '~ N U U 0~ a O O 0~ ~ O 7~ f6 ~~ O (Q N ~w ~ ~ ~ ~~•'~~ O N 0aT' i L N.•L..~ Q) OU1~UE L 00 NOOa.~O w Eo`QU °a~vJn~NC~ ~ U~ YI +O+ ~ O a O +' C ~ m 0 LT O~ 0~ N~ h0•C ~n ~ ° m a+ ~ O i 0 fa ~,,, N +'C+ do fC ~ C O~ d `'D L~ R pin+N+ N D "'CNN y a ~~ •a aiiEL.~n .mcELO`Eaoo .cEy-Da ~. a+ U U C N c6 N L !6 ~ (C 9.. ~ O.~ N ~ ~N'O ~ y0 ~~ N~ Ny O 0 0 "' aciN °~~ Eop °mN ~ ni°3° a ~, >N ~, may'-~U~, ~o~m v L ~ ~.., E ~; ,_ ~ E~On `y .~ a-DN3woE.-. ,~ ~aNiCYi~ja cj m'3 ° caa E N E °a m Y E a Y~ °-' September 10, 1976 N ^ ~ • U ^ ~ 0 ~U M 'd LA ^ '~'- ^ L 0 ~~J~LUTIpN 6 /~ v ~ m =2 b ^'a r~~6 -196 Dear Resident: You. are cordially invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting on a street improvement project on Wednesday, September 22, 1976 in the council chambers of the city hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South. Due to increasing technical problems with temporary street main- tenance, it is no longer possible to maintain these temporary streets in as good a condition as they have been maintained in the past. Therefore, the purpose of this meeting is to provide you with information on a proposed city improvement project for permanent bituminous streets, concrete curbs and gutters, and ornamental street lights. The attached Notice of Hearing indicates that the formal hearing before the city council will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, September 27, 1976 in the city hall council chambers. As in- dicated, the neighborhood information meeting will be at 7:00 p.m., September 22, 1976-and precedes the hearing so that you will have an opportunity to obtain information on the project before the city council hearing. The following information will be presented at the September 22, 1976 neighborhood information meeting: 1. A presentation showing the need for street and lighting improvements. 2. Assessment policy explanations and an estimate of your assessment for this project. 3. The engineers will explain the improvements and answer any questions raised by property owners. I am looking forward to meeting with you at your neighborhood in- formation meeting on Wednesday, September 22, 1976. Yours very truly, - _~~~~ Peter G. Eberz Public Works Director PGE:cr telephone: 869-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer L E G A L N O T I C E • NOTICE OF HEARING ON PERMANENT STREET IMPROVEMENT, ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTS AND APPURTENANCES THERETO ' CITY PROJECT N0. 686 District No. 14-A NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Council of the City of Richfield will meet in the council chambers of the city hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South, at 7:00 p.m. on Monday the 27th day of September, 1976 to consider the making of improvements in the following area: City Project No. 686, District No. l~+-A. That area bounded on the east by 21st Avenue South, on the south by East 69th Street, on the west by State Highway No. 36 and on the north by East 68th Street. This area also includes the East Service Road, State Highway No. 36 from East 68th Street to East 66th Street. by permanent street surfacing, ornamental street lights, concrete curb and gutter and appurtenances thereto. The area which may be specially assessed by reason of the making of such improvements . is as follows: Every abutting lot, piece and parcel of land in the area bounded on the east by 21st Avenue South, on the south by East 69th Street, on the west by State Highway No. 36 and on the north by East 68th Street. This also includes the East Service Road, State Highway No. 36 from East 68th Street to East 66th Street. The estimated cost of such improvement is $176,600.00. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. BY ORDER OF THE COUNCIL: DATED: July 26, 1976 Thomas J. ran City Clerk (Publish: September 15 and 22, 1976) RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PERMANENT PAVING, CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTS AND APPURTENANCES THERETO. CITY PROJECT. N0. 686 Districts 12, l~+A and 15 WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council, adopted on the 26th day of July,. 1976 fixed a date for a hearing on the proposed improvement of: Street Improvement District 12. Bounded on the north by the 62nd Crosstown, east by west Pleasant Avenue north of 66th Street and south of .66th Street by Lyndale Avenue South, on the south by 66th Street from west .Pleasant Avenue to Lyndale Avenue South and Woodlake west of Lake Shore Drive and Lyndale Avenue South, and on the west by I-35W. The streets in this area not included in this project are 66th Street from I-35W to west Pleasant Avenue, 65th Street from Rae Drive to west Pleasant Avenue, Rae Drive from 65th Street to 66th Street; Graham Avenue from 65th Street to Lyndale Avenue South, Circle Place from Graham Avenue to Lyndale Avenue Southp Lyndale Avenue South from the 62nd Street Crosstown to Lake Shore Drive-and Grand Avenue South from 65th Street to 66th Street. • Street Improvement District l~+A. Bounded on the north by East 68th Street, on the east by 21st Avenue South, on the south by East 69th Street and on the west by State Highway No. 36. This area also included the East Service Road, State Highway No. 36 from East 68th Street to East 66th Street. Street Im rovement District 15. Including Lyndale Avenue South from West 7 th Street to Lake Shore Drive. by permanent paving, concrete curb and gutter, ornamental street lights and appurtenances, and WHEREAS, all property owners whose property is liable to be assessed for the making of this improvement, were given ten days published notice of the council hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice, and mailed notice as required by law, and the hearing was held thereon on the 27th day of September, 1976. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: ' 1. That such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in Council Resolution No. 55~+~+, adopted on the l~+th day of June, 1976. 2. That Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. are hereby designated as the Engineers for this improvement. They shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. t s. ~ w ' '~ j Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield .this 27th day of September, 1976. Loren. L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk - l i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office. of Cite Manager Council Letter No. 2$T. Agenda September. 27, 1976 , _. The Honorable Mayor . and ~ . Members of the Gity Couhcil City of Richfield '; _ . J Gentlemen: ~. Subject: Police Division commendation Awards ~„ ~ The first scheduled agenda. item for the regular council meeting of Septem- ; ber 27, 1976 is the presentation of the semi-annual employee commendation awards which have been recommended by the .public safety department. Two ~~ police officers have been selected to receive awards for actions taken during the period of January 1 through June 30 of this year. i ~ ' Police Agent Michael Sankey has. been. recommended to:receive an award for his: management of the investigation of a series of sexual assaults and in- decent liberties incidents which. resulted in the arrest of a suspect on June 22, ~ 1976. Police Thoma Carroll has been nominated to receive an award for the actions he .took w'th regard to a burglary in progress incident in Bloomington on a 2 1 M 9 976 whi h y c culminated in his arrest of a sus ect. You ma be P Y interested in the act that on June 7, 1976, Officer Carroll received a letter of commendation firom the City of Bloomington for his actions' in this situation. i. Both of these members of the Public Safety Department and .their. families have been invited to .attend this presentation ceremony. Respectfully submitted, ' ` I ~~ f V~layne S. Burggraaff I City Manager _ ~ WSB/eja ~' f i cc: Public Safety Director ;, I ,.