The URL can be used to link to this page

04-26-76 agenda~_ ,lam ' ',' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA- Office,.of-'City Manager :: r Council Letter No. 134 Agenda- April 26, 1976 :The'`Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ~ City of Richfield , l _ Gentlemen:: ' Subjeef: Feasibility Study for Band Shell and Picnic Shelter at Augsburg Park. ~ A ;the March;l8, 1976 city council hearing on the capital improvement program, the city council discussed the need,for a feasibility study of a band shell and picnic shelter at Augsburg Park . The 1976/81 capital improvement program as, finally adopted by the city council, does provide for such a study ~ to be conducted in 1976. ~I i At the Marchj 18, 1976 meeting, the city council asked the city manager ` ~ to .submit a proposal for such a study at the April 26, 1976 city council meeting. After reviewing several proposals for the performance of this' study, it is the recommendation. of the park and recreation director in which I concur, that the city ..council approve an agreement between the City of Richfield and Richard u ose of conductin he r Schwartz and Associates in the amount of $1,750 fort p p g , this feasibility study at Augsburg Park. This firm has been responsible for the remodeling design at the community center and is familiar with not only the area, but the potential uses which the area could accomodate in the future. The feasibility study would. be completed by September, 1976, The capital ' improvement progiram provides for $3,000 for this study. The amount which has ..been negotiated for this study is within that appropriation, and it is therefore recommended tha~ the city council authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute an agreement with Richard Schwartz and Associates for this purpose. Respectfull,y~ su7mitted, ~ ~~ ~~ Q~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager i WSB/eja cc: Park and Recreation Director Finance Director i ,~ ' CITY' OF RICHFIELI?, ;MINNESOTA Officer of City Manager. ~ ' ~ Council Letter No. 133 A n a e d ri1 26 197 A 6 g p , The Honorable Mayor; and Members of the City ...Council City of Richfield ". Gentlemena l Subject: Report on the'Proposed Metropolitan Transit. ' Commission Bus Garage Environmental Impact Statement The. City of Richfield has received. a copy of the draft environmental impact statement prepared by .the U. S. Department of Transportation for ahe. MTC 'bus -Storage facility construction project.. The city has an opportunity to review this draft environmental impact statement and prepare written comments for'submission to the Department of Transportation for inclusion in the final environmental impact statement, Environmental Impact Statement Process The purpose of a~ environmental. impact statement is to provide. information t~ the funding agency (in this case, the Department of Transportation) and other `interested parties . The. EIS is an advisory document, prepared by the funding `agency and submitted to interested or affected parties for review` and comment. -The written comments of the interested parties in response to their review of -the draft EIS are included in the final Environmental Impact Statement. Contents of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement i Draft Environmental Impact Statements are required to include a statement of purpose, descriptioniof the proposed action, and an analysis of; the environmental effect. This environmental analysis must include both the long range and the short range impact o~ the proposed project on man, and his phys eat, 'social and -economic surroundings. The analysis of impact on "the environment must also include an analysis of the secondary and cumulative effects of the proposed 1 -action. (The secondary or indirect consequences of an action are often the -changed patterns of social and economic activities which might arise because ' of the proposed project. Such secondary factors to consider include population , and growth., land use, public services, and resource space. ) ;. Council Letter No; 133 - -2- Agenda April 26, '1976 The environmental;. assessment of the impact of the proposed project .must also discuss any. conflicts which may exist between the proposed action and local land use plans,' policies, and controls; and describe the extent ` ofreconciliation between the proposed project and the local po-licies. The environmental assessment is also concerned: with the, physical envir- onment, such as air quality, noise, hazardous substances, energy supply and redevelopment and construction: A final major'i part of a draft environmental impact statement addresses alternatives. The alternatives to the proposed project must be de cribed and , a summary of the environmental impact of the reasonable alternatives. be included. Some alternatives; might be; 1. Taking 11o action 2. ;Postponing action for further study - 3. ;Significantly different actions which could 'provide similar benefits ' Based on rzview of the nature of the ~ proposed project, and the requirements ~ outlined above for the content of the draft EIS, city staff recommends that the ,city develop comments in the following areas: 1. Additionail Data: The city should provide additional ;information regarding Ithe impact on housing stock, residential dwellings along the north frontage road, and secondary impact on Richfield's southern- most neighborhoods which could result from the proposed action.: The city should also address the issue of congestion on the frontage-roads - and I-494 and 12th Avenue-Portland Avenue arteries., The city should also request inclusion in the data of he secondary ` and cumulative effects of noise and air contaminents':arising from the project ar~Ild the general social impacts of the project on the city as a whole . . 2. Griticism,of the Data: -There are obvious mistakes, fallacious con- clusions end conflicts in the data which is contained in .the draft EIS. These conflicts and mistakes- should be pointed out in the city's commentsl'. An effective means of testing the data would be to duplicate the test daIata through use of a credible testing firm, provide cumulative and secondary data and draw conclusions from our testing ;process. Twin ~ity~ Testing could be used to provide this service. I a . . 3. Criticism~of the Draft EIS Itself; As summarized the draft EIS deviates substantially from the requirements.of federal regulation. 'The city should point out the discr~ancies in the draft environmental impact statements as related to federal. requirements and request the. Department... ,- ;__ Council Letter No. 133 -3- April 26, 1976 ,. of Transportationto amend and-complete the statement .in accord with the requirements . The city's comments are to be relayed to- the Department of Transportation no later than May 30. It is the recommendation of the planning director, in which I concur, that the city develop comments along the lir~,es outlined above to prepare for inclusion in the final environmental impact .statement. Respectfully submitted, r" r ~/, /J' ~~fi' Wayne. S . Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja , cc; i'lanning Director I } j -. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City.Manager Council Letter No. 132 ~' Agenda April 26, 1976 .The Honorable Mayor and 1V~embers of the City Coun'ci1 City of Richfield; (~~ntlemen: . Subject: Request for Tree Removal at 6532 Girard Avenue '' Mr: R. G. Mattern; of 6532 Girard Avenue, has requested the opportunity to `appear before the city council to discuss possible city removal of a tree located on the boulevard adjacent to his property. The- public works director has. determined that it is not necessary to remove this tree for streeit construction purposes. In addition to the request from Mr. Mattern, the~city has begun receiving numerous other requests from res- idents to remove shade trees on street right-of-way in the construction area north of 66th Street and between 35W and Penn Avenue. I During both the information meetings and the public hearings on this street construction project, the most frequent concern voiced by residents in the area was that] the city do everything. possible to avoid removing the shade trees along the c.~ty streets. As a result of this. concern the city staff has many times expressed the position- that we will do everything possible to avoid re- movng trees. Tl~e city council also took a very, firm position in this regard at the .public hearing authorizing. this improvement project. In addition, the city. council has spent more than seven .hours of council meetingtime during the last .couple of months .considering street widths in this area. all for the ,purpose of minimizing the number of trees. which will have to be removed for street construct~dn purposes. Therefore, i view of .the position which both the city staff and the city council have tak non this subject, the staff is extremely re-luctant to remove - trees. at the requ~st of property owners when it is not necessary to do so. I Because of the statements which have been made by city representatives, we are concerned that any substantial amount of selected tree removal through- out the area mayJreflect poorly on the general credibility of the city staff. For example, a specific property owner might not like a certain tree in front of his i_ r '~... ~ ' Council Letter Nq. 132 -2- April 26, 1976 ~. house. However,, the neighbors next door or perhaps residents across the s reet might appreciate the shade which they receive from that tree and could be very upset if the tree were removed at the request of a single property owner. ~~ Mr. Mattern' will beat the ~1pri1 26, 1976 city council meeting to .request council consideration on the removal of a specific tree on the boulevard adjacent to .his property. However, in addition to; considering ~ this request, it iS recommended: that th'e city council also consider adoption- of ageneral policy regarding tree removal which can be used by the staff as a guideline~in this area during the.1976 street improvement, project. ec full submitted es t R p y I' t' ~ '~ ~ ~~ ~~~,, Wayne S. Burggraaff i City Manager ~ WSB/eja cc: Public Works Director I '' /~ i t ~~ - F, , CITY OF RICHFIELD, :.MINNESOTA," Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 131 Agenda April 26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and ` ' , ' Members of the City Council. City of Richfield i Gentlemen: Subject: Washington Park Development Plane Since 1975, monies have been designated in the capital"improvement ~ program for construction of four new tennis. courts on the east side of Richfield at a site to be determined. Lastyear, the park and recreation advisory commission conducted a feasibility study to determine possible ~~ sites for location;' of these four tennis courts. .Since the completion of the feasibility study, city staff sand the park and recreation advisory commission have, continued to review possible locations for the east side tennis' courts. ...The council may recall that Christian, Taft, Legion Lake and Washington Farks were all co',nsidered as possible locations. Based on the results of the studies andthe recommendations and findings contained.in the feasibility study, it has appeared that Washington Park is the. most favorable site for these tennis courts. However, both staff and the park and recreation advisory commission have;~agreed that the tennis courts should not be built at Washington' -Park until a preliminary park development plan and study can be completed. By completing the preliminary, park plan now, it will be possible to determine .the most desirable tennis court location within .the totaldesign concept. At the Marchi 18, 1976 city council hearing on the proposed 1976/81 capital improvement program, the staff .presented the proposal for;locating the .four new east side tennis courts at Washington Park. The adopted capital improvement program does provide for the construction of these courts at the ~~'~ashington Park location. In order to insure that the tennis courts construction maybe completed during 1976, it is necessary to finalize the contract providing. for"the preliminary park design. i I i ~'buncil Letter No. 131 -2- `April 26, 1976 ~, An agreement has been negotiated for the design of the preliminary park plans for he Washington Park facility with john Turrittn, landscape architect, in the amount of $93.,4. It is the recoinmenda ion of the park and recreation direction';in which Lconcur, that the city` council authorize the Mayor and City Manager to exe~'cute this agreement for the preliminary park design of Wa hington Park so that the tennis court construction 'project may be .completed this year.:: 'I Respectfully submitted,. Wa ne Bur raaf~ a ~~a °~ gg ` City Manager WSB/eja cc Park and Recreation Director. f i i l ;> CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA Office of City Manager' Council Letter No. I3 Agenda,:Apri1,2,6, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and ~. Members of the City Council City of Richfield. Gentlemen: Subject: Fremont Park Development Plan ~ Fremont Park at 75th. Street acid .Fremont Avenue has been scheduled for fact nor park improvement project-for the last two years . "However., due to the that nsufficjient funds were originally budgeted.,. and the street construction in thearea, this project has been delayed until 1976. Fremont Park is located at 75th Street and Fremont Avenue and is approx- imately 1/3 acre in size. Records indicate that this. park has .one of the most highly and consistently attended summer playgrounds of all the city parks. Since the installation of a skating area, the park also experiences substantial use in the winte~ months . The former curved roadway running along. the north- west to southeast edge of the park has been closed, almost doubling the size of the park area. - Information meetings have been held with neighbors to establish both long and short range goals to establish park facilities and programs at'this park. .The availability of utility service and the increased area gained b,y closing the ' street have made it timely to pursue the development of this project at the present time. Tl~e adopted capital improvement program provides a $10, 000 appropriation. for. this project with an additional $10, 000- to be derived from the 1.976/77 Co munity Block Grant which will be received later this year. i An agreement has been negotiated for the design of this park :facility with David M. Shaffer, landscape architect, in an amounf'of $1200. It is the recommendation bf the Park and Recreation Director. in which I concur, that the city council authorize the>Mayor and City Manager to execute this agreement for the design of Fremont Park so that the project can be completed this year. i Respectfully subp3}'tted, ~ ~ ~/ ~J ,;.:. Wayn~ S. Burggraaff ~ ; City Manager WSB/eja ~• , { w © , I j CITY OF RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA `! Office ,of City .Manager Council ;Lett~r•: N:o . 12 9 I~ Agenda April. 26, 1976,' ..The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield;,. Gentlemen: Subiect: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Family Day Care and .Group. Family~Day Care Home ` At the request of the city council, the planning. commission developed a day care. amendment to the city zoning ordinance. The proposed ordinance amendment would provide for "Family Day Care Homes" ahd' "Group. Family Day .Care Homes" in the "R" and "MR" districts of the city without the nec- essity of obtaining a special use permit. The planning commission. considered this proposed amendment at the February 25, 1976 planning,commission meeting. A copy of the appropriate page from the minutes of that meeting is attached. Thee proposed ordinance amendmen~ has -been put in final form by the city attorney and a copy.is attached. It is the recommendation of the planning director and the planning commission in which I concur, that first reading eon- sideration be gi~en to the proposed amendment at the A ril 26 1976 cit p Y council meeting. I ICI ~ Respectfully submitted, ~ I I 1 ~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/e)a cc: Planning D~.rector City Clerk;' ; i r AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.27, SUBDIVISION 3 AND SECTION 3.30, SUBDLVISION 1 OF THE ORDINANCE •CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: ' Section 3.27,:_Subdivision 3 of the•city ordinance code is . hereby amended by adding, at the end thereof, the following - paragraphs:. - "(37) 'Family Day Care Home' means a residential structure in which a program is conducted providing day care for no more than five (5) children at one time including the day care provider's own children under school age; provided t at such program and the facility in which it is conducted are licensed and meet the requirements for licensure pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 257.101 and all applicable city and state healtYi and safety regulations. - (38) 'Group Family Day Care Home' means a residential .. structure in which a program is conducted providing day care for more than five (5) but fewer than eleven (11) children at any one time, includingthe provider's or helper's children under school age; provided that such program and the facility in which it is conducted are licensed and meet the requirements for licensure pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 257.101 and .all applicable city and state health and safety regulations." Section 3.30, Subdivision 1 of the city ordinance code is hereby amended by adding, at the end thereof, the following additional paragraphs: . "(5) Family Day Care Homes. (6) Group Family Day Care Homes." -~ Passed by the City Council of the City. of Richfield, , Minnesota this day of , 1976. I• Mayor ATTEST: • C~.ty Clerk .. _. ~4 _ y~ s ,~S_ i - ~Iotion carried 7-1 with Commnissioner Ertman abstaining because he considered it. a frivolous motion. Ai/Ulrich, S/Ahlquist to send a letter from the Cliairmari to `the School "Board giving the Com-nission's recommendation. Motion carried 6-1 with Co~tunissioner Ertman abstaining Item #8, Information Letter No. 9, Amendment to the City'S Comprehensive Plan Deferred. 141/Ertman, S/Ahaquist to defer. Motion carried. Item #9, Information Letter No. 10, Day Care -Amendment to tlie~Zoning Ordinance. . Mr. Dick Krier, Planning Director presented the amendment to the zoning ordinance to the Planning Corrmiission. Ni/Ahlquist, S/Ulrich to recoimnend adoption of the amendment to the zoning ordinance. Motion carried 6-1 with Chairman Lien voting no. Mr. Krier, Plaruzing Director, then said this amendment would go to the City Attorney for his recorrnnendation and • that following his recor.~nendation and approval there would be two hearings and after r..~ . . that 3I days it-would go into effect. .This would be published in the paper after the first hearing. Mary Timm,;Hennepin County R'elfare appeared before. the Planning Corrnnission~to answer any questions. Item #l, Information~Letter Iv`o. 5, Election of Officers On the fourth ballot, Commissioner Steven Lindgren was. elected Chairman of the Plan- . ning Co~~nnission for the year 1976. On the third ballot, Commissioner Russell Susag was elected Vice-Chairman for the P1""arming Colrvnission for the year 1976. On the .` .first ballot, Commissioner Joan Helmberger was re-elected Secretary for the Planning Commission for the year 1976. M/Lien, S/Ertman to adjourn the meeting. Adjournment: 11:00 PM. . 4 ~~'~'n ~ r I I ~ .. CITY `OF RIC-H~FIELD MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 128 Agenda April 26, 1976 The .Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council I' City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: :Special Use: Permit - ,6945 Penn Avenue South Mr. Peter Hgversten, 7237 Garfield Avenue South and Mr. Tom Snow, I 7:113:: - .2nd Avenue South, have requested approval of a special use permit to , continue the operation of a tree and plant nursery business at -the corner of 6 9`4 5 Penn Avenue South . i The following items are attached to this letter and will be referred to throughout the report: A l . Exhibit shows the current zoning of the site; 2. Exhibit B shows the current land use in the area of'the site; 3. Exhibit C is a copy of the zoning ordinance conditions governing the: issuance of a special use permit, Section 3.41, .Subdivision 5; 4. Exhibit. D is a copy of the zoning ordinance governing non-conforming uses, Si ction 3.29,..Subdivision 2. licant s r A P o osa 1 pp A . I The applicant proposes to continue the tree and plant nursery, business which has been conducted by various owners at this location since. the rnid-1950's. The business will include the sale of sod, black -dirt and various landscape materials as a seasonal cojmmercial use. The retail operation will include the retail sale of nursery stock ~in spring and summer, and sale of firewood and Christmas trees in the fall and. winter.. No major building or .landscaping improvements are planned . Zoning Ordinance Requirements A retail sales tree and plant nursery was .until 1974 an allowed use in a residential district with a special use permit .per Section 3.30, Subdivision 1, .para.. (2) of the zoning ordinance. However, in-February of 1974, this" paragraph of Section 3.30 ,was repealed.:. The present zoning ordinance provisions prohibit this type of business in a residential district and makes any existing business of this type anon=conforming uses sv.bject to Sec ion 3.29, Subdivision 2, governing non-conforming ,uses.( see Exhibit Ill)'.. Council Letter No 128 ~ -2- April 26, 1976 . , Comprehensive Plan ~~ Richfield's Comprehensive Plan indicates that this site is best suited for medium density, mixed land use. Such a use could include a combnatonof single family dwellings, multi-family dwellings, townhouses, and neighborhood commercial` conveniences such as a grocery store or barber shop, Staff Review and Find ins On Nlay 29,'.1973 the city council approved a special use permit allowing the operation of a,'.nursery on this property, The council action stipulated that the special use permit expire at .the-end of five years or when' a change of ownership outside of-the immediate family occurred, whichever came first. Mr,.Snow, who:: received the special use permit in 1973, is the current owner of the property and is' interested in selling it to 1VIr, Hoversten. Thus commercial use would normally be allowed to continue as anon-.conforming.,. use under Section'; 3,29, Subdivision 2. However, in accordance with the stipulations attached to `the original special use permit, it is now necessary to review the use .again :because. of the ownership change. The zoning ordinance provides that a special use permit cannot be granted- unless thee-proposal is found to be in .compliance with the conditions governing. the issuance of thle special use permit (Exhibit C) , The application has been reviewed in accordance with Section 3.41, Subdivision 5: 1. Wily the use and its operation be detrimental to the health of persons residing ;or working in the nei hborhood? It is possible that the physical and mental health of persons will be affected ibecause of the additional noise, traffic and disruption of social lie;which normally occurs. when acommercial-retail business is located. ~djecent to single family residential homes, 2, Will the fuse and operation be detrimental to the safety of other people?. It is possible that a safety hazard, in terms of traffic entering and - lea~Ting, could. occur because the facility is located: om the corner of an unsigned intersection. The intersection of 70th and Penn Avenue. has a history of accidents, In addition, no provision has been made to secure the area and its materials against theft and/or vandalism, ~ _ 3, Will the fuse and its operation be detrimental to the `.comfort, convenience ~~ or welfare of people working.-or residing in the nei .hborhood Comfort;, convenience and we fare are difficult to measure,` However, thg_ practice of zoning to ..separate conflicting land uses was established ,: ~ , ,., ~a i Council Letter No. 1128 -3`- j April 26, 1976 not only to provide for commercial-and residential stability ;through maintaining their independent,character, but also to insure the. comfort, .convenience and welfare of persons residingin our residential neighbor- hoods. Therefore,' when there is a commercial ;activity taking p ace in a residential district, the intent of the original ,zoning is violated and a detriment is likely to occur. i 4, Will the proposed use and-its operation be detrimental to the public welfare ? Commercial activity of this type;in a .Richfield residential dis rict becomes increasingly detrimental as the housing stock ages. Confidence in the stability of an folder neighborhood can be influenced greatly.by the use and general condition of adjacent properties As the level of .confidence in a neighborhood erodes, the neighborhood begins the process of! physical and social deteriora ion. This deterioration is detrimental to the public welfare . • 5. Will_the use and its operation be injurious to property and improvements in the neiahborhood ? The nursery activity can be expected to generate approximately 80 vehicle trips per day, This additional traffic will` not significantly affect the current traffic 's'ituation on Penn Avenue or ZDth Street. Howevery a commercial use, and especially a seasonal use, does have. a slight detrimental affect on the surrounding residential property and its value . ~ As already observed, a commercial use in this residential district can ` affect .the neighborhood stability. The housing .stock..continues to age, and potential property owners .make investment decisions which are often: influenced' by the residential roximit to adverse e A Y nvironmental factors, including nearby. commercial activity. It is the opinion of staff that a commercial. activity in this location will be injurious to property and :improvements in the neighborhood. Staff Recommendation The ,staff reviewed the applicant's proposal for compliance with 'the require- ments for is uance of a special use permit. This review illustrates the detrimental affect this commerciial use could have on this residential neighborhood. It is, therefore, the staff ;recommendation that the-special use permrfbe denied, Alternatives to'commercial use of this residentially zoned property do exist. One alternative would be to develop this site .and-the vacant p;~rcel to the north ~, ~ '~ I i i Council'Letter No'_ ;128 ~' -4- April 26, 19.76 for multi-family use, either as ,a small apartment building or as townhouses'. Multi-family. residential use :would be more compatible with the :residential character of the neighborhood han a commercial use,.. This kind of development would conform withthe mixed medium density residential land use contained in the .Comprehensive Plan, although a zoning district change:. to` Multiple ~Res'idential would b;e,necessary. Although such amulti-family use of this property has the potential to increase neighborhood-.noise and"~traffic, trips per unit and peak hour would be compatible with those of single familt'residentialuses.. With'`proper site design, these could be lessened'for the benefit of adjacent properties. Available figures for establishing, this alternative, at current construction ' costs , are shown below: EIGHT (8) UNIT Land Area - 141, 951 sq, ft. -Land Dimension - 112` ft. x 133.5 ft. Maximum Floor Area - 6,400. sq. ft./two stories • Land Coverage, - 21% Floor Area/Dwelling Unit - 800 sq, ft. Parking Required - 16 spaces Variances Required -Density and recreation space and sideyard requirement Land Cost - $26,400 - $2.8,000 Construction CSost - $160, 000 I Total Developer Cost - $186,400 Total Cost/Dw;elling Unit - $23, 300 '~ Construction Cost/Dwelling .Unit - $20, 000 i Land Cost/Dwelling Unit - $3, 300 Existing Value and Tax - 6941 Penn Estimated Market Value $7,200/tax $289.00 ., ' ..6945 Penn Estimated Market Value $19;,200/tax $716.00 Total $1, 005.00 I ~~ ~~ Estimated Alternative value .and tax properties combined Estimated Market Value .$175, 000/tax $3,300 Planning Commission Recommendation The planning Commission received the special use permit petition at its special meeting of April 20, 1976., .The. commission discussion of the applicant's proposal centered on the traffic problems identified by the_neghbors, maintenance problems during pe~iods when the business was not in operation, and the neighbor's concern for the e#f~ct continuation of such a .non-conforming commercial use would have .on 'the surrounding residential neighborhood. Several residents from the neighborhood appeared at the commission meeting..' J °_ 1 ... „~~ ~t .~ T--"=, ` h ~:~ 9 "• f~~ ~_~ ~~ `V~ < -~i%-~ h~ ~ I C ,a ~b ~: ~, ~~ ` ~ ~11'F. o U +' `?3'Z-~~- ~, - q -- 1 _7J . . . r 1 f. q~` ~ ': __ ~y 21. ~~ p <1 F (/• ... . $ p y --...... 1 ~. L° ' -~ J . _._ _1 y -r l 7 w~ G. ~~ 1 ~ - ~...:.!..,. r ~ -,: i T i 11.+•1 e ~ 1. 6 • 1., p { l `bl p~ : `0 . ,_ < T per ~'.iJ ~~ ~• _ _._ - ._ _. - ._.1._.... Yt~"7^..f....-...1 4'~• J {~7~ y O~"'' -'~'~.....' V s _ 1 ~ 6 ~ Ipl~ F' ~, I ~... ' ~ tie ~ a '~''. ~'~ .....~ j`j f'G ~~ 'v `'/ `..+~ ~ i?, ~------- - _.... ._.,._ ~~ ,, I _ ~. _ 5. o „ ~~ i-~ p r- ~ ....•,.,~ . • 1'.• !d. ry •. Y 7. ~ `fir---~--1•.i ~ ':~(a ~~ ~ 1-.. 4 s. , + III tt h, ~ ~: ~~ . ~ P J4I s h 0 $ ~... ~ f + . ~- < . 3 a .~ i 1~ I ny ` ,0.?. ~(.. T f ~f 7. R y S ' r ~ •~-, -i A a '~ ~• o etie )v '~ t r /~ ~ "'~~ •~~ ~~ t_.._.:.~L12. _~_±`+ ~~ ~ s j\i ~~M ~ ' : s.Z: .v tOn ~~ty =' .....-.N-~r+-- .~ !@ O • ~, -Z' '~~ _^,__.__._~ `-'` ~ ~-- ,, -Q~j _ _'~~ 1~ ~ fly, `? ^ _.4... , - i - -~~ Era ~ ~ hI !G e, i .. .r .__..- ~. y .. ~ , . ._ . rte. ,, f-~,~-9 - ~ ~ ,3 , ~ s is ~ t 4.._ ~ n f y N ... - - --~ 1~.3 . x t; o y --- - _ -~~ ~ __ ._.__.._.. T. ~ '._ A . ~_ M ... ... . t F ~• .~ .~.._.. f _....1.. a<~. t.a t..... _...i.« • ~f A~ '~y(J f ~i0 t' { +~ cy S11s e^l0~ ~4C a~ 3/[ .k ~ t '~O ?~. ~~ i15 w 7 (r~ tt .~ u. -. _ _ _ _ _ Kll_ .~- ~ _ _ ~~ ~_ _ , J_ r ~ ~` j ` ~FII f ~~ ~ ~`~ ~ o e '~"' i ! t ~ =z r I' ~* , ~:~ f j ~ f ~~ ' /~.l = V t.J. ~ Ji A~ y ~ •~4c~ i -rte : k _ ~aM - .. _ .. ... _ ... { _ i C'C • - E ! ,~ 3 ~; I ,~ , ~ ~ , I .. ...~_ -- _ ~~ I :Q 4 ..h' .74' _.. .. ____.. .- p . 1 ~`~ '_ _. . ~. y . •~'°-rzf '_ ._..c+>s.ad~~s-e rs~,r . _ . ...n~c1xt: _.,__ ., _~..~...~,e ~ . __ _! r..-, , ~ . ~E~~R~~ co~~~E~c~A~. i:. 1 MUL~T'iPI~E I `' I RESIDENCE GENERAL LIMt"~'ED iNC~US i RiA[_ ~(:JSINESS ,; ,~ y (] ~ o'~ 7.9 t ao ^ c,si] T2 I ~ ~/ - ig i 1 ~ ~~>~'~"~,~" 1 H~~ (("~'~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ID ~ ~ {.,,j0~{ 05 D ' 23 2.04 Q 09 ~ (1 ~~ ~ s o ~ ~{F*~ 09 )~ ~. ~. yla ~ tfti'a~-s (~ Ip i ~ Z~~~° ° ~ ~ 2 ~,n s ~, N ~ : ^_ N ~a N ~ 8 4 ;'~~' `..~ :~ ( ~ N N a F r 9'• ~ ~y i~} b32 ~ :; ~ i IG / []32 ~°' ~ `:.~'~ ~ 32 ~ Kf (--1 ~ ~ ~~ M l.J 7 ,R1, (`1 M s, ~ • LJ ",~~ ~ j_j y.l ~ '~ .~,~> ~s8 i~l 1Q ~ m `0 6 E3 ~' ~ ( ~ i 9 L. ~,, r", , 3 f 2'a ~~t as t.....1.`4 ,~ ^~`' 9J ~] ~ ® ^ v _~. . h ._ . t -. t. ..1.. F^~. L~o4 0 f ¢=~ -- ~ ~ ~ r23 2 4t.,ir,,,• _~~~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ •~`~' __._ '(~~ ~ ~ r~ . LJ°~ t' ~' >~ ? 2 3 - o s t~1~ :a l_~ ~ ' 03 r Y s~~; ° ~ ~ ~ 4-~ o a" r, [~ 1„ 3 ~,~ c f 4 17 LJ i ~,~ ~ 2 t ~ [Jj r~ , `° y~ ~ t* ,~ ~ "' ~] . ~ ~,t~ ?~' ~ ~] ~ :~'^' ~ 2G I6 ---f "' ~~ 19 5 r'_..2 ~_ ~ ^ _Pa • ~- ~ s ~, I_ry_ ~- 1 -~ i.J ~, C ('1 z o ~-s~u,• ~ ! ~= 6 ^zo ~ i s G ~ a a j ~ ~ ~--~ ~~ l~_.:_ __ _-~ ~~,'~~ v N ~ _~ 17a ~~" v+~ t (l~ 7 ^'~Z ! •~ ; ~~ I U 1 Q 7.'4 N l~J 1 ( 7 ~ ~~ c~! ~ - 1 5 ~ ~l`~' •v N (~~ ~ !~ 1'f 3' Lza ''"` ~ 2~ f] I7 B :># t~ v ~ 16 6 ~ ~ ~ -~~'ro ~~ ~ N m _. r3 >~- ~ ~' 16 9 Clsz ~`:`=`~~ t 6I 't--- n n t 5 0 ~~ r ^ t 3 i ~- ~~ r C j ~K) ~ 5T 1~ iU [~ ~,,. ~~-i~' /~'F J M `~c_ ~.~ (2 7 ~ .n C (..!'4^ 61 J i~ I1 ! ,, ~ ~~ 14 ~ ~ 3~t4a• •1.l (~ ° ~ii .f_1 `f ~ cam' ~ • r - - a's`"°~' _ ~ N : i1i ~ 7 N :V N N O Pr A/ . ca o a c~ o a o ca ~ CI ~ 06 2500 2424 41 24 ^C •e car 2316 2312 23 - • ~'~~~.~ ~] to l~~ ° Q ' 2 0 U G ~+` t - N ~~~~ ~' •i~ ~ N ~ ~..~ '1`.5 u ~L/` N D4;~, N ~' ~] !^ ''~~:'va2~ N 'U (! 6 ` D ~ ~~ ~o ~~ ~ M 0 ~ O M ~ O ~~ ~~ t ~ °s s a I~ t n r- ~j m m C] O Oa ~tJ~ o~ 0 C ! i O u ~~ ,4 ~",~`-~-- G Q ~ _N ~... _ N ~] M a r+ °~ o N ~ -- a .,y . F o~ ~_ T .. ''~ ~ ~ (1) Any of the uses or pur.;.oses for which such pexmits are required o-r permit- ted liy :the. provisions of this chapter. . ~~ ? (2) Y'LibJ.ic ut.ilii:y or public service uses or public building in any district "~~ taken found to lie necessary for the publi_~c health, safety, convenience or welfare.. (3) Con?mercial e}:cavating or natural materials used for building or construe- - t3on purposes, in any dis~rict. . (ti) To classify as a conforrnin use any institutional use existing in any ds- trict at the time of the establiahment of such district:.. (5) To pern?it the location of any of the. followinh uses in a district from whi.c?i *_I~ey are excluded by the provisions of this cede; airpcrt, library, com- ' muni.t}> center, church, hospital and institution of an educational., philanthrop- ic or charitable ~~ature, cemetery, crematory, mausoleum or -any other place for I' . :the disl;osal of 1?uman .dead. ~~ (6) .nor any use covered by section 3.35. Subd, 2. Limitation on Issuance. A special permit may not be issued for the purpgse of granting an adjustr,?ent or appeal pursuant to section 3.40 nor for any use not authorized for the specific district for which the permit is sought, nor '" ~ ior•any use prohibited in all districts by the provisions of this part. . Subd. 3. Application._ Application for the issuance o<f<:-a special use permit shall.. be made to the chief inspector. Any proceedings to c]_assif}~ certain uses as con- ' forming uses as provided in this section may be. initiated either by such applica- tior. or by the council. Subd. 4. Public l:earin~. The. council may hold such hearings on the proposal to a issue a special use peririt as it may consider necessary; but. at least one nuLlic ', hearing shall be held by the council or by a co?nmittee or commission to Ue desig- • '. nated~b~T the couizcil in any application far a use permit for ~he establishment of any use Listed a.n subdivision 1, subsections 5 and 7, of .this s~,ction. ~ . ~` ~Subd. 5. Conditio_zs Governing Issuance. The council shall not grant a permit for '~, .any of the uses enu~:nerated in subdivision 1 hereof unless it finds that the est- ablishment,~maintenance or operation of the use for which a use permit is sought twill not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental; (1) to the health,' safety, morals, ccmfor.t, convenience or welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or (2) to the public we1_fare.or injurious to property or improvements in the neigh~orhood, ` /' ~~~~~~ _ - Subd. 6. Imposition of Conditions on Issuan e. ~The council.tmay impose conditions • and require guarantees in the granting of ~iis~ j e'rmi.ts. Any use permitted uricler L-he terms of any special. use permit shalt be established and conducted in conform-. ity to the terms of such permit and of any conditions designated in connection therewith. ~ ' t . .Subd. 7. Special Use Permit Time Limitations. A special use .permit expires one year after it has been issued unless the use for. cahich the permit has been granted }has commenced within.. such year. or unless, upon taritten application of the o~:~ner of the affected land, tl?e council shall extend-the expiration date of such permit for an additional. period, not to exceed ,one year. `~ ~ - .. ~ ' ,. . . • ~ dl. . . ,~~: ... .r Subd. 2. Non-Conformini;iJses. Any use, building, or structure -lawfully exist- ... i.ng as of .the dale.. on which it L•~as rendered non-conforming by this part or any -~ previous. zoning ordinance of the city or its corporate predecessor may be con- ~ .~i timed even though such use, building,`or structure may not conform in use, height, location, or size, or any one or more of these, L•~ith provisions of this chapter for.regulati.ons of the district in which it is located, with the follocaing excep- ~~ Lions and restrictions: (1) No existing building or premises devoted to a use not permitted by this ~ chapter in the district in L~hich t-he building or premises is located may. be en- lagged, extended, reconstructed, substituted or structurally altered, unless the use thereof-is changed to a use .permitted in the district in which it is_located, • except Lahen required by laL•~ to do so. ' (Z) No such ~io'n-conforming use may be extended to occupy a greater area of ' land, or be moved to another part of the parcel. 3-24-69 (69-5) (3) Anon-cotforming use may be extended throughout an existing building pro- . , ~iaea no structural alterations, age-made.: • (4) If such non-conforming use ceases for a period of tL•~o years, any sub§e- quent use shall be in conformance L•Jith the provisions of this chapter. (S) If any non=conforming use of lands,on which there is no substantial building is discontinued for any period of time, any subsequent use of land shall. be in conformity Lvith the provisions of this chapL-er. - (6) If at any time a non-conforming building or structure is damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, water, explosion, riot, war or act of~God to the extent of more than SO% of i,ts then .market value at the time of~the damage, then without further action by the Council, the said building and the land on which tiie building was • .located shall from and. after the date of such damage conform to all regulations of this chapter. The determination of the extent of the damage and the fair market value of the building or structure shall be made by the City Council. • (7) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code, no junk yard existing as a non-conforming use in a P,esidential or Commercial District such-junk .be completely enclosed c•~ithin a building or within a.continuous solid fence not less than eight.. (II) feet in height and in any case of•such height as to screen completely. all the. operations of such junk yard. The plans of such tsi:zlding or fence shall have first been approved by the Chief Inspector, j • (v) Nothing in this Code shall be construed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any part of any building or.st-ructure declared • unsafe by a proper authority. .Subd.. 3. A~ricultur.al Use. Nothing contained in this chapter shall prohibit the use of any land for agricultural purposes or the construction or use of buildings ~• or structures incident to the use of -agricultural purposes of the land on which such • buildings or structures are located in unplatted areas of five acres or more. Subd. 4. excavation of Natural 1`T~zterials. Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit the excavatio n of natural materials for the construction o'f a buildin~•,permitted i_n a district- in which the same is located if the building is tb be constructed in.thc -lot from L•~hich the material is excavated. excavations shall not be made, hoL~~ever, i in violation of any other applicable provision of this code. No service station or public garage shall be 3.0- ', • ~ .:.. . §`~ y ~~ j CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager A Council, Letter No. 127 AgQnda April'26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and ~ Members of the City .Council _Cty of Richfield',, i Gentlemen: Subject: Authorza ion to Sell Certain City Vehicles The purpose; of his council' letter is to obtain city. council authorization to sell four automobiles at the May 8,.1976 Hennepin County auction. I The four vehicles to be sold at this auction are fully depredated police squad cars which have been replaced by newer models. Last August, the city . council directed the city manager to sell one of the three city pool cars there- ~~ by.reducing the pool car fleet to two cars. In subsequent discussion of this matter,.; the city council agreed. that inasmuch as the oldest :pool car was fully depreciated, that it should be retained for use as a pool car if such action. ..proved to be advantageous to the city. Since January of this year, detailed records have been maintained of the .pool car use. During that time over 6,000 miles have: been accumulated on the three pool cars at a cost to the city. ~f less than) what it would have cost- the city to reimburse :employees at the rate of 15 er mile ~ I a n dditio p n, the availability of pool cars does provide flexibility for city employees who must use a car and do not drive their own car to work. Therefore, in view of this level of usage and cost information, our intent is to Continue to utilize the three existing pool cars and not sell one of these car at the spring auction. ' In summary, it is recommended that the city council authorize the sale of four depreciated and replaced police squad cars at the May 8, '1976 Hennepin ' County. auction. Respectfully submitte `~ ~ t fr l 1 ~1. ~ ; ,, ; '~n7ayn_e'1S. urggraaff ~ 'J ~ City. l~ianager ,, WSB/eja . -; i I ~~~ - / ` ~ r ~ ;. i ', CITY OF RICHFIELD; MINNESOTA Office of City Manager - Council Letter No. 126 Agenda April-26, 1976 - ,. The Honorable Mayor and ' `Members of the !City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: '~ Subject: Purchases in Excess of $1,000 , ' Chapter 6, 'Section. 6..05 of the' city charter stipulates that the city council must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment'or ` construction when the amount exceeds. $1, 000..__. This letter contains one such ...item. Mobile Radios ~ • The: adopted 1'976 budget provides funds for the purchase of three mobile radios to-be used on city equipment. Two of these radios are budgeted for-the street division and are to be installed in the sign van and frontend loader.. The third radio is budgeted in the. water division and is to be installed in a pickup truck. Each of these radios is portable and can be transferred to other equipment during seasonal fluctuations. of equipment usage. Quotations have been solicited and it is recommended that the council approve this purchase in excess of $1 000 in the amount of $2,037.30. i Respectfully submitted, L I i +-~ • • ~~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Public Works Director` Finance Director Administratkve Assistant _~ , ~' _;.. - P .r~ ~-. .. CITY: OF RICHFIELD; MINNESOTA '~ Office. of City Manager Council Letter No. 125 Agenda April 26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and NTembers of the City Council City of Richfield i Gentlemen: Subject : Bids on Water Meters and Remote Registration Kits On April 1, 1976 bids were opened by the acting city manager in accordance .with previous council authorization, for 200 water meters and. 300 remote regis- tration kits. The '.planning director, environmental health director and deputy city :clerk. also represented the city at thebid opening. ;The bid minutes and tabulation are attached for city council review. Four bids were received for water meters and remote re istration kits i g B ds ranged from $I7, 8!95 to $1,9, 502. The low bid was submitted by Badger Meters, Inca. Although this bid complied with most aspects of the bid"specifications, it included plasti'.casings which neither the American Water Works Association " specifications no~the City of Richfield specifications allow.: The second low bid received from Neptune Water Meter Company in the amount of $18, 338 meets all aspects of the I'Ispecifications. The unit prices for this bid are $1.50 more for registration kits and $. 50' less for the meters when compared with 1975 pur- i chases. - ~~ Tt is therefor the tabulation of ible bidder meeti " registration kits recommended that the city council approve the bid minutes,` ds and the attached resolution determining' the lowest. respons- specifications and award the bid for water meters and remote the Neptune Water Meter Company in the amount of $18 , 3 3 8 . i Respectfully submitted, I ~~ ~ . ~ ~~~ Wayne S . Burggraaff ii City Manager . I WSB/eja ~ ;~ cc Pub is Works Director Finance Director Administrative Assistant ` RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DETERT~IINING LOWEST RESPONSBILE BIDDER AND AWARDING BID FOR PURCHASE OF WATER METERS AND REMOTE REGISTRATION KITS WHEREAS, competitive bids have been received by the city for the sale . to the city of water meters and remote registration kits, and WHEREAS, it appears necessary for the council to evaluate the bids I, received and to make a determination as to the .lowest responsible bidder based upon such evaluation: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council°of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The city council herewith makes the following determination: I a. That the low bid received from the Badger Meter., Inc. is not acceptable as a bid as neither-the American Water Works Association specifications- nor the City of Richfield specifications allow plastic casings for water meters. b. The review of the second low bid received from Neptune Water Meter Company is hereby found and determined to be a responsible bid on the water meters and remote registration • kits. c. This determinatian is based upon such consideration as: (1) The bid by Neptune Water Meter Company meets the specifications required by the American Water Works Association and the City of Richfield. (2) The price bid by Neptune Water Meter Company is III reasonable and it would be to the advantage of the .--city to accept this bid. (3) The bid of the PTeptune Water Meter Company for water meters and remote registration kits in thz amount of $18,338.C0 is hereby accepted. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th 'flay of April, .1976- ,, Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk . ~ w ~ 'C <7. CITY OF RICHFIELD Bi.d .Opening - ('-,, ~ . April 3., 1976. WATER METERS • Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the administrai:ve staff was called to order by Peter Eberz, Acting City Manager, who announced. that .the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids on Water.Meters as advertised in the official newspaper on March 17, 1976. Present: Peter Eberz, Acting City Manager, ' Ken Conway, Water Department Director.. _ ~ Immanuel Roesler, Public Health Director Richard Krier, Planning Director • _ Dorothy Johnson, Deputy City Clerk ~ ~ 1'he:following bids were submitted and read. aloud: '. ' ~ k'ATER METERS COTIPLETE WITH REMOTE ~~ $IDDER AND REMOTE REG & EXTRA REG KTT REGISTRATION KITS ~~ BID SECURITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST- UNIT COST-TOTAL COST i . Power Process Equipment Co. ..... ~ -B. B. 5'/° $66.01 $13,202 $21.00 $6,300 . Neptune Water Meter Co. B. S, 5% + 20.00 + 4,000 • 8 338 20.00 6 000 . 41..69 , ~ I` Badger Meter Inc. .-~ ~~~ Cert. Check $1,000 60,50 12,100 22.55 6,765 ~ .Badger Meter Tnc. ~ - . .Cert. Check $1,000 55.65. 11,130 22.55 6,765 -.The Acting City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and "considered _ ~at the regular council meeting of April 12, 1976. . Thomas J. Moran City: Clerk (,~ .. ~ . ~.~~ .~ . • I'~ - -- - H .~' ~ . ti ~ ~ F--1 ~O ~ ~ ~O tiHati U~ H O~ H ~i r{ W ~ ^ ~ A ~ ^~ N ~ N ~ ~ ~a O H ^~~~ ^ N ! ~ M~ P4 - 4i .~ ~ W O H H ~4 F~-j ~~wa Q W o~ ~~m H A ~ H C o w w W E-i ; ~ a~ A H o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H N ap ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ O~ 00 op N ~} r-I r-~ r--I .-I ~ ~ ~- ~ xc 0 0 0 0 H CH O O O O x o 0 0 ~ ~ ~ o o ~o ~ o ~ ~ m o ti ti H H ~ ~ ~ ~ H f-t W W p o O t11 L!~ O O O I.n ~ ~ H N ~ N N ~ -E{~ ~3- {f} ~ ~ O Q O O O O W C11 ~ O O P4 vj 0 m ~ N ( r -~ , { fYl N N r-I H E-I rl r--I r--I rl ~ H {~} ~ -EF} -Ef} Wx H W W a C'3 O U Lf1 ~ . - " W W O rl ~ O u~ H U O ~ lf~ ~p A E-i ~ ri O to . H ~ ~ ~ ~ H C~ H ~ O ~ O Pq U ~ W j W d H F'. ca F-i ^ O ^ O v ~o o r~ ~ ~ A o o ~ 0 3 ~ i ~ ~ i - a e i ~ ° ~ ai a ~~ ~. ~~ ~~ O O M m ^ 0 O .,-I O U f-~ N N N N ~i t O •~ cad U •r-I 4-t .~ v' N Pa ,. ~ ~~ +~ N •~ O a i 0 H 4 A O U a a~a T~ ., ,. _~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 124 Agenda April _26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and j Members of the Ci4ty Council City of Richfield Gentlemen Subject: Agreement Between the`City of Edina and the-City ,of Richfield for Joint.. Participation in the Construction of '- Xerxes Avenue On the April 2~6, 1976 city council agenda there is an :item requesting the city council to approve. an agreement with the City of Edina .for the construction of :Xerxes Avenue. ~! Xerxes-Avenue; between 66th Street and-Washburn Circle is jointlyowned by the City of Richfield. and the Ci y, of Edina . The City. of Edina has sindicated a willingness to have the street constructed as part of our permanent street paving.. program. and has agreed to .bear the cost of construction. work on its portion of Xerxes Avenue. The ,agreement generally provides Ghat: i ', . 1. Xerxes Avlenue will be constructed by the City of Richfield as '~, part o£ it 1976 permanent; street paving program. I I 2. That Xerxes Avenue will be constructed to a width of 34 feet. i 3. ' That'the City of Edina will pay for all work that is constructed is within th ~ City of Edina . It is the reco 'mendation of the city staff, in which I concur, that the city council approve th : attached agreement between. the City of :Edina and the City of ~2ichfield forjoi t participation in the construction of Xerxes Avenue. -Respectfully submitted, ~. ~ ~~ G~ / ~ ' ,r~ Wayne 5. -Burggraaff City Manager cc: Public Works Director Finance. Director City Attorney 1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN .CITY OF EDINA AND CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION IN CONSTRUCTION OI' STREET GRELDING, STREET SURFACING AND CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS OId XERXES AVENUE I ~~ .,~' THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the day of ~ 1976• The parties to this agreement are the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Edina"), and the. CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Richfield."). The purpose of this agreement is to provide the basis for joint participation by Edina and Richfield in the improvement of portions of Xerxes Avenue (the boundary street.. between .Edina and Richfield) by_: regrading, resurfacing, curb, gutter and driveway improvements and incidental storm sewer construction: Such improvements are hereinafter collectively referred to as "the. improvements." In consideration of ,their mutual covenants and agreements, the parties hereto contract and agree as follows: Section 1. Richfield will construct the improvements in .accordance with plans and specifications dated entitled Street Paving, Richfield, Minnesota, prepared by Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc., and approved by Edina and Richfield, which plans and specifications are hereby made a-part hereof by reference thereto. The total estimated cost of the improvements on Xerxes. Avenue is $199,107, with which estimate Edina and Richfield hereby agree. Section 2. Richfield will advertise for bids for the construction of such project in conjunction with its 1976 street improvement program, which, is designated as Richfield's "City Project No. 674.. Richfield will, upon receipt of such bids, award a contract for the construction of such project to the lowest responsible bidder. Proceedings taken by Richfield in awarding the contract and making the improvements shall be in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. In the contract Richfield shall provide that Edina. shall have the right to enforce, as to any of the improvement work done within Edina, any bonds and also any warranties and guaranties given by the contractor pursuant to the contract. Edina and Richfield, and their respective officers,magents and employees, shall cooperate fully with each other in the construction of the project .and in carrying through the provisions of this agreement and the provisions of the contract awarded by Richfield pursuant hereto, including enforcement of and recovering under any bonds or other security, and any warranties or guaranties, given by the contractor pursuant to the contract. Section 3. The costs of each type of construction work comprising ' ..part of the improvements shall be prorated between Edina and Richfield on the basis of the amount of such work which is performed in.each of the two municipalities. Edina will pay its pro rata share of the costs of con- . struction.of such improvements when construction is completed. .Prior to such payment, Richfield will provide Edina with a verified. statement of all costs incurred in connection with the making of the improvements with a prorating of such costs showing the basis of prorating. Within one month after receipt of such verified statement, Edina will pay its pro rata share of such costs to Richfield in a lump sum. Interest on Edina's share of progress payments on the costs of the improvements, at a rate not in excess of six percent (6~) per annum, may be included as a cost of the improvements, along with legal, engineering and other incidental expenses, to the extent that they are directly attributable to the making of the improvements. Section i;. Upon completion of the improvements each of the municipalities shall have sole responsiblity for the maintenance and repvir of those se~nents thereof lying within its boundaries. The .im,;r.,~•cvements which are located within tYle boundaries of a city sP:all be the property of that city. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their appropriate officers, after due authorization, and have caused their corporate seals tc be affixed hereto as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF EDINA $Y Its Mayor (CORPORAT:E SEAL) By Its Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD By ' Its Mayor (COR~'ORATE SEAL) BY' Its N,anager .~ i. ~: r .CITY OF RICHFiELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Gouncil.Letter. No, 123 j;, L Ag~en'da,April>26, 1976 The- Honorable Mayor ;and 4 Members, of the' City .Council i City of Richfield i Gentlemen: ~!' ~ ~Subj;'ect: Traffic Control Requests The Traffic',Control.Committee met on Tuesday, April 2'0, 1976 to review several ,pending] stop sign requests.: and. a request for. reconsideration of parking regulatory signs. Minutes of that meeting are attached.. -The committee reviewed new traffic counts for the intersection `of 68th and Bloomington and recommended that the request for stop signs at that intersection be denied . ~~ Based on the committee's review, stop sign installation for the intersections of 71st and Garfield and 71st and Harriet is recommended for council approval. In addition!to the three stop sign requests, the committee also reviewed: and is recommending to the council a posting of new parking restrictions in the area of 65th and Rae Drive, as follows: 1. 65th Street eastward from the east curb line of Rae Drive to Graham Avenue, South be posted "No Parking 2; 00 a . m. to 6:00 a . m. ". 2 . 65th S greet westward from the east curb line of Rae Drive, around corner Ito apartment driveway, be posted "No Parking Between Signs" . I 3, On the west side of Rae Drive from the apartment driveway south to 66th S~reet be posted "No Parking 2:00 a . m. to 6:00 a , m , " . I 4. Tht east side of Rae Drive from 66th to 65th Street,-the south side of 65t1~ .Street from Rae Drive to Graham Avenue and' both sides of Graharr~ Avenue- from 65th to 66th Street retain the `present posted signs 'Two Hour Parking" . - ~ TRAFFIC. CONTROL COMMTiTEE-MINUTES, APRIL 20, 1976 . • The Traffic Control Committee convened at 9;00 a.m.,. April 20, 1976. Members present were: P. Eberz, T: Morgan, M. Raaen, R. Richardson, and Chairman j. Wilde. The committee considered three items of business: 1. 68th and Bloomington -The chairman reported. that the public works department had taken new traffic counts at this intersection on April 14 thru 16th, 19.76 in response to a request by the city council. It was -noted that the committee had previously recommended against a fbur- way stop sign-at this intersection, but the. city council had requested, further consideration after taking additional traffic counts. The chairman observed that the April traffic counts are quite similar to those taken in December, and show an average hourly traffic volume of approximately 122 cars per hour. - Average vehicular traffic of 500 cars per hour is required to warrant installation of four-way stop signs. The committee voted to recommend that the request for four-way stop signs be denied. Mr. Brad Seagren, the :most recent petitioner for trafficcontrol at this intersection, will be .notified that the city council wi1.1 consider this .committee recommendation on April 2 6 , 197 6 at the regular city council meeting . 2. 71st and Garfield, 71st and Harriet -The public safety director reported.. that the public safety department has experienced numerous traffic problems, including excessive speeding and congestion, at both of these intersections.. He recommended that some type of traffic. control signs be installed on the basis of public safety concerns. The committee voted to recommend installa- tion of a one-way stop sign on 71st Street at Harriet Avenue, stopping traffic on 71st Street. The committee also voted to recommend installation of a two-way stop sign stopping traffic both ways on 71st Street at Garfield Avenue. 3. 65th and Rae Drive - Lt. Richardson reported that the public safety department has great difficulty enforcing the present two-hour parking restrictions posted iri this area . The public works .director reported that although the original purpose of the signing was to facilitate snow removal some other signing .could accomplish that purpose and also resolve problems of enforcement and traffic congestion in the area. The committee voted to recommend that parking .restrictions in the area be posted as follows: A. 65th Street eastward from the east curb line of Rae Drive to Graham Avenue South be posted "No Parking 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. ". -2- . B. 65th .Street westward from the east curb line of Rae Drive, around corner to apartment driveway,- be posted "No Parking Between Signs" . C. On the west. side of Rae Drive from the apartment driveway south to .. 66th Street be posted "No Parking 2:00 a . m, to 6:00 a . m . ". D. The east side of Rae Drive from 66th to 65th Street, the south side ~ of 6Sth Street from Rae IUrive to Graham Avenue and both sides of Graham Avenue. from 65th to 66th Street retain the present posted signs "Two Hour Parking" . n U i ~. ~ . CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager i Council L°tier No. 122 Agenda April 26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and 'r Members of the C!,ity .Council ~ City of Richfield - Gentlemen: Subject: Presentation on Minnesota Local Government :Aid to Hennepin County Municipalities At -the 1VIarch ~18, 1976 city council meeting Councilman Ludeman suggested- that Mr. Lyle Olson, Director of Administration for the City. of Bloomington, be requested to make a presentation to the Richfield City Council on the sub- -ject of Minnesota:. local government aid to Hennepin County rri`unicipalites. Councilman Ludeman indicated that he had previously heard this presentation and thought that it would be beneficial for all council members. Councilman Ludeman has made arrangements for Mr. Olson to attend. the April 26 city council meeting. Mr. Olson will be prepared to make his present- ation at about 7:30 p. m. or shortly thereafter. Mr. Olson's presentation, together with any ;subsequent discussion can be expected to take. approximately.. 1./2 hour: I Respectfully submitted, i - . // :; Wayne/S. Bu~rggraaff City Manager ~.>~., ~_ . _ j - c r CITY OE RICHFIEZD, MINNESOTA i Office of City Manager Council Letter No . 1 ~ 1 Agenda April 21, 19 7 6 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield (_ ~ Gentlemen; Subject: Issuance of Temporary. Bonds j . At`the April 12,: 1976 city council meeting, the city council awarded bids for construction of the 1976. permanent.. street improvement project; City Project No. 674. Following this award of bids, the city implements procedures for ' the issuance of permanent bonds to finance the project. Several factors were considered in the 19'76 project: 1. The current bond market and cost of borrowing 2. The status of previous. permanent bonds and the record. of special"assessment prepayments 3. The funding' requirements. needed to complete the cti.ty's permanent- street program Based on consideration'of the above factors, it is the staff's recommendation in .which T concur, that the city should finance the 1976 project with a .temporary, - bond. issue, using the special asse sment prepayments on the 1:973 and 1974 projects as the prim~ry revenue source to invest in the temporary bonds. It is estimated that the 19.76 and 1977 permanent street improvements: cari be funded through such temporary improvement bonds. Perrrianent funding can be deter- mined after these projects have been specially assessed and the amount of the first year's prepayment is known. The city has had an unusual experience in that beginning in 1973 and the subsequent assessments of .the street projects, approximately one-third to one-half of the adopted assessment roll has been prepaid: With this record, it is advisable to defer any permanent borrowing until the 1976 and 1977 projects are completed. The city could hen borrow only what is actually needed. t Attached to this council letter is a resolution directing the issuance and .sale of temporary improvement bonds in the amount of $3, 800, 000 to be used for the 1976 germane t street improvement program. These temporary bonds would >be ..dated May ~, .1976 and have a maximum three- ear life- h Y T e bond s would be issued at 5~0 interest per annum. It is anticipated that this temporary spat=ial assessment bond"will be replaced by a permanent bond iasue in 1978 Council Letter 1Vo. T21 -2- April 21, 1976 when permanent, funding requirements will more accurately be known. The bonds are proposed to:be sold to various improvement bond sinking funds and other city funds as direct investments: Perman''ent Improvement Revolving Fund $ 5:00, 000 Im: rov' . p ement Bonds of 1965 200 000 Improvement Bonds of 1973 2, 200, 000- Improvement Bonds of 1974 ' 900,000 $3, 8'00, 000 ~ This proposal has been discussed with the city's bond.::c~nsultant, T.G. £vensen:ASsociates, who concurs that the city should sell Temporary bonds to those funds within its. own resources if possible. The city attorney has re- viewed the form land content of the attachment for compliance with Minnesota Statutes I is recommended that the city council adopt the resolution directing the issuance and sale of temporary improvement bonds in the amount of $3,800,000. `' Respectfully submittied, 1 ~~~7t/ ~' ~' _ Gv~~ o,,,a. Wayne S. Burggraaff ~~~ City Manager WSB/eja I~I cc; Finance Director RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DIRECT]NG THE' ISSUANCE AND SALE OF TEMPORARY - ..IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 30, TO THE INPi ROVEMENT BONDS OF 1965, 1973 AND 1974 SINKING FUNDS AND THE PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND IN ACCORDL~VCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 429 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The total estimated costs of City Project No. 674, otherwise known as permanent street surfacing and street lighting construction, has been estimated at $3,800,000. It is now estimated that the sum of $3,800,-000 is currently necessary to provide financing for the cost of said projects, and it is hereby determined to be necessary to borrow said amount for the payment of obligations now incurred and for expenses necessarily incurred in connection with the construction of said project. There is hereby created City Project No. 674 Bond Funds into which. shall be paid the proceeds of temporary bonds issued pursuant to. this resolution and out of which shall be paid all amounts due and payable as costs or expenses incident to or incurred in connection with the making of said improvements. There is also hereby created Series 30 account s in the Temporary Improvement Bonds Common Sinking Fund into which fund shall be paid the proceeds of all special assessments levied against benefited property by reason • . of the making of said improvements and out of which shall be paid principal and interest on all temporary improvement bonds issued to finance said projects. 2. It is hereby determined that the sum of $3,800,000 shall be borrowed to finance said City Project: City Project No. 674 $3,$00,000 by issuance of Temporary Improvement Bonds of the city as authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 429..091, Subdivision 3. Said bonds shall~be payable from the Temporary Improvement Bonds Common Sinking Fund, Series 30 accounts, but the city further recognizes its statutory duty, as provided by Section 429.091, and cove- nants and agrees with the purchaser and all holders from time to time of-said ,temporary. improvement bonds, at or prior to the maturity thereof it will pay and retire such bonds and the interest thereon out of the proceeds of definitive im- provement bonds which the council shall issue and sell at or prior to the maturity of the Temporary Improvement Bonds, to the extent that the same cannot be paid. out of funds available in the Temporary Improvement Bonds Common Sinking Fund, Series 30 accounts, or out of other municipal funds which are properly available and are appropriated by the council for such purpose. ~' -2- 3. It is hereby determined to levy special assessments against benefited property by reason of the making of City Project No. 674 and ad valorem taxes, if necessary, to produce sums at least 5% in excess of the amounts sufficient to pay .principal and interest when due on said temporary improvement bonds and on .any definitive .bonds to be issued as herein provided, such special. assessments to be placed on the tax rolls subsequent to the time when said City Projects have been completed and the total costs thereof have been determined. 4. Said temporary improvement bonds in the amount of $3,800,000 shall be dated May 1, 1976., shall be gone in number inclusive, in the denomination of $3,800,000 - sha11 bear interest at the rate of 5% per annum, payable November 1, and May 1, semi-annually of each year and. shall mature on ~iay 1, 1979,, shall be subject to - redemption and prepayment of any interest payment date, at par and accrued interest. Not less than 30 days before the date specified for redemption of said bonds the City Treasurer shall mail notice of the call thereof to the holder, if known, and said Treasurer shall maintain a record of the names and addresses of the holders o £ said bond insofar as such information is made available to him by the holders thereof, for the purpose of mailing said notice. The principal of and interest on .said bond shall be payable at the Richfield City Ha11, 6700 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota; 55423. 5. Said Temporary Improvement Bond shall be offset printed with attached interest coupon in substantially the following form: r ~- ~ , 4~~ _ -' • _3- UNITED STATRS OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA. ' COUNTY OF,HENNEPIN . CITY OF RICHFIELD TEMPORARY ITfPROVEMENT BOND SERIES THIRTY N0. $3,800,000 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the City of Richfield, a duly organized municipal corporation of Hennepin County, Minnesota, acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received, promises to pay to .bearer the sum of THREE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS on the first day of May, 1979 or on a date prior thereto on which this bond has been duly called for re- demption, and to pay interest thereon from the date hereof until paid or until this bond has been duly called for redemption at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum, payable semi-annually on the first day of May and the first day of November in each year, interest to maturity being payable in accordance with-and upon purchase and surrender of the interest coupon appurtenant thereto.. Both principal and interest are .payable at the City Ha11, City of Richfield, 6700 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55423, in any currency or coin of the United States of America on which the respective dates of payment is public tender for private and public debts. For the prompt and • full payment of such principal and interest as the same became due the full -faith, credit and taxing powers of the city are hereby irrevocably pledged. This bond is one, a series in the aggregate principal amount of $3,800,000 issued by said city for the purpose of defraying expenses incurred and to be incurred in the construction of unprovements designated as"City Project No. 674" by the City of Richfield, consisting of permanent street surfacing and street lighting construction, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with resolutions duly adopted by the city council after hearing as required by -law and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and Laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.091, Subdivision 3. This bond is payable primarily from the Temporary Improvement Bonds Common Sinking Fund, Series. 30 accounts of the city, but the council is required to .pay the principal and interest thereon out of any funds in the treasury in the event that the monies on hand in said funds are at any time sufficient to meet the payment, of maturing principal and interest, and is further required at or prior to the maturity of this bond, to provide for the payment and retirement ,thereof by the issuance of definitive bonds, to the extent, if any, that the assessments and taxes or other municipal funds there- tofore collected and received in said Sinking Fund may be insufficient-for such purpose. -4- This bond is subject to redemption and pre-payment at the option of the city on any interest payment date, at a price of par and accrued interest upon notice of call for redemption mailed not less than 30 days prior to the date specified .for such redemption, to the holder, if known. Bond holders desiring to receive such notice may have their names and addresses and the serial numbers of their bonds recorded by the City Treasurer, . IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED,~RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that al L acts,. conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of said .city according to its terms have been done, to exist, have happened and have been performed.. as so required; that the city has duly determined the necessity of-and provided for the construction of said improvements; that the Temporary Improvement .Bonds Common Sinking Fund, Series 30, accounts have been duly created and provision has been made for the support thereof by ad valorem-taxes and special assessments to be levied, at or prior to the time of issuance of said definitive bonds, for the years and in aggregate amounts not .less than-five percent (5%) in excess of sums sufficient to pay the principal and interest on all bonds payable from said fund as such principal and interest become due, and additional taxes, if needed for said purpose, may be levied upon alI taxable property in the city, without limitation as •to rate or amount; that the holder hereof shall have and may enforce by appropriate proceedings all duties imposed by said Chapter 429 upon the city and its officers with reference to the lev;T and collection of said assessments and taxes and the issuance of said definitive bonds; and that the issuance of this bond did not cause the indebtedness of said city to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this bond to be executed in its behalf by the signature of .its. mayor and manager and sealed with its official seal, and the interest coupons appurtenant thereto to be executed and authenticated by the facsimile signatures of said officers., and has caused this bond to be dated as of May 1, 1976. .. Mayor Manager • • r y~r Unless the bond described below is called for earlier redemption N0. $95,000.00 .I On the first day of May, November, 19 , the City of Richfield, Hennepin =." County, Minnesota, will pay to bearer at the City Hall of the City of Richfield, 1 6700. Portland Avenue,~Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55423, the sum~of NINETY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS lawful money of the United States of America for interest then due'on its Temporary Improvement Bonds, Series 30, Dated May 1, 1976. ~~, ~ Mayor ~ Manager 6. Said bond shall be prepared under the direction of the city clerk and shall be executed on behalf of the city by the signatures of the Mayor and Manager, and the corporate seal of the city shall be affixed thereto, and the appurtenant interest coupon shall be executed and authenticated, by the printed, . engraved or lithographed facsimile signature of said i~iayor and Manager. When said bond has been executed and authenticated, it~shall be delivered by the Treasurer to the purchaser thereof, upon payment of the purchase price heretofore agreed upon and said purchaser shall not be obliged to see the application thereof. 7. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County, together with such other information as he shall require and to obtain from said County Auditor a certificate that said bonds have been entered on his bond register. 8. The officers of the city and the County Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the purchaser of said bond and to the attorneys approving the legality of the issuance thereof, "certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to said bond and to the financial affairs of said city, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of said .,bond as the"same appear-from the books. and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and such certificates, certified copies and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the city as to the correctness of all statements contained thereon. -6- s'"` i 9. It is hereby .determined that there is at the present time a total amount ` . in excess of $3,800,000 in the various sinking funds-and other funds of the city which will not be required for other purposes prior to May, 1979, 10.. It is hereby determined to purchase the aforementioned $3,80O,D00 Temporary Improvement Bond, Series 30 upon initial issuance, in accordance with the pro visions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.56_ and .475.66,. out of funds in the -- following Funds and in the following amounts and on behalf of said funds, at par and accrued interest as of the date of delivery. of said bond and completion, of such sale: Fund Amount Permanent I~~iprovement Revolving Fund $ 500,000 Improvement.-Bonds of 1965 200,000 Improvement Bonds of 1973. 2,200,000 . Improvement Bonds of 1974 900.,000 X3,800,000 it being further determined to be reasonable and advantageous to the above funds . to invest in said Temporary Improvement Bond, Series 30, and it being further determined to be reasonable and advantageous to the city to sell said Temporary Improvement Bond, Series 30, in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. 11 The city manager, mayor, and finance officer are hereby authorized and • directed to take any and all steps necessary to affect the provisions of the foregoing resolutions and to make transfers of funds as may be necessary from time to time, to give effect, to the provisions thereof. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of April, 1976. - Loren L, Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk i~ 1 ~. CITY OF .RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA Office of -City Manager A Council Letter No: 120 .f Agenda. April 2 6 19 7`6 The Honorable Mayor r and ~ , . .Members of the City Council City of Richfield; Gentlemen' x Subject: Resolution Approving Classification and Sale of ~~ Tax Forfeited Land. Each year the city receives ..from Hennepin County a list of tax forfeited land located in the Ci;'ty of Richfield.: There is one such parcel. on the current list, located at 68th Street bordering 35W." This parcel is shown in red on the attached map. The Hennepin County Board has classified this parcel as non-conservation land and authorized its sale. However, Minnesota Statutes re quire that the city council approve the non-conservation classification in order.: to make the land. available for pubi~ic sale. . This parcel ~as been review . ed by members of the city staff and it is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution approving the classification ofthis parcel as non-conservation land and. approving its' sale. Respectfully submitted,. ..-,. y ~., 4,. Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/bll cc• Finance D :~ ctor RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CLASSIFICATION OF TAX DELINQUENT LAND AS NON-CONSERVATION LAND AND PROVIDING FOR SALE THEREOF WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, 1VIinn2sOta, haS I"eC21Ved fr0~1 the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota, a list of lands in said city which became the property of the State of Minnesota under the provisions of law declaring the forfeiture of lands to the State for non-payment of taxes, which said list has been designated as Classification List "650-C" , and described as follows: Parcel 0800, Plat 46950, which is Lot 19, Block 1 of Wood Lake Highlands, except state highway. WHEREAS, the parcel of land described above has heretofore been classified • by the Board of County Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota, as non- conservation land and the sale thereof has heretofore been authorized by said Board of County Commissioners: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by said City Council, acting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1957, Section 282.01, Subd. 1, that the said classification by said Board of County Commissioners of each parcel of land described above as non-conservation land be and the same is hereby approved and that the sale of such parcel of land be and the same is hereby approved. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 26th day of April, 1976: • Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas j. Moran City Clerk • / I m • ~~ ~ l t CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNE-SOYA Office of City Manager ;~ Council, Letter No. 119 Agenda April 26, 1976 ~. The Honorable Mayor - and Members of the City :Council City of Richfield Gentlemen:• Subject:! Ordinance Amendment Defining Main Thoroughfares.: for ' Liquor License Purposes At he April 12,', 1976 city council meeting., the city council gave first reading consideration to an ordinance, amendment defining main horoughfares for the purpose of the on-sale liquor license ordinance. :The purpose of the amendment is, to make it clear that the licensing of on-sale establishments. is not limited to locations which are located on the ' major streets listed in the platting ordinance. A copy of the proposed ordinance amendment is attached, It is recommended that this amendment be given second-reading consideration at the April 26, 1.976 city council meeting , Respectfully submitted, i i ~ . ._ ,,' Wayne S. Burggraaff _,~+; ~r ` •` I City Manager r AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3 , 33 , SUBDIVISION 4 (e) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 3.33, Subdivision 4 (e) of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield, relating to the granting of special use permits for hotels, motels, restaurants and cafes, is hereby amended to read as follows: "(e) If liquor is to be sold on the premises (1) the property abuts upon a [major street,] main thoroughfare of the city, (2) access to all off-street parking space is from internal driveway systems and is not directly from public streets, and (3) provision is made for well-designed vehicular stacking space allowing for an efficient and orderly flow of traffic from the site onto adjacent [main streetsl main- thoroughfares of the city 'Main thorou hfares of the city' , as used in this paragraph, means a street designated as a state trunk hi hway • or a service drive adiacent to the state trunk highway, a state aid hi hway, a county aid highway, a county hi hway, or a street which is so located as to serve, primarily, commercial development," Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 1976, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Council Letter No. 118 Agenda April 2 6 , 19'7 6 The Honorable Mayor and ', Members of the City Council S ~S~ City of .Richfield ~ ~ ~ Gentlemen: Subject; .Contingency Transfer On January 2;6, 1976, the city council approved second reading of an ordinance amendment establishing a curfew in city parks.. At that time the council also requested city staff to install a sufficient number of signs in . the parks to help jassure public knowledge. of and compliance with the curfew. The park and recreation department has ordered 63 signs for posting, of the park curfew regulations in the major park entrance points. However, the $840 cost for these signs was not included in the 1976 budget. It' is recommended the city council approve. the attached resolution for transfer of contingency funds..-These funds will ~be transferred from the , unallocated contingency account to the supplies budget of the park and recreation department to provide for purchase of park curfew regulatory signs. Respectfully submitted:, ~.--., % ~ ,/~ ~ - Wayne S. Burggraaff (; ,' City Manager cc; Park and Recreation Director Finance Dire~tor Administrative Assistant RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION, AUTHORIZING TRANSFEP. OF .APPROPRIATION FROf1 THE 1975-CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO PARK AND RECRERTION DEPART"1EPJT tJHEREAS; Resolution No. appropriated funds for each department of the City of Richfield for the year 1976, and • 4 WHEREAS, acontingency.-appropriation was made in the General. Fund for .various purposes, and _ ~rJHEREAS, the city council on January, 26, 1976 did approve second reading of an amendment to Chapter IV of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield by add- - ing Section 4.14, establishing a curfew in the parks, and WHEREAS, the city council has recorunended the posting of said ordinance rebating to park curfe~•~, and 4dHEREAS, it is hereby determined necessary to adjust the 1976 budget • appropriation by X840 to reflect purchase of said signs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the City of Richfield that the sum of X840 be transferred. from tt~e 1976 contingency appropriation of the. General Fund to the park maintenance division of the park and recreation department. Passed by the city council of the t;ity of Richfield this 26th day of April, 1976. Loren L. Lati~a ~tayor ATTEST: CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City- Manager Council Letter No. 117 . Agenda April: 26, 1976 The Honorable Mayor' and Members of the. City Council ` City of Richfield Gentlemen: I Subject:.;:Amendments to Liquor Control Ordinance Relating ,'to "19 year old law" At the March 22,! 1976 city council meeting the city_counc'l requested that the.city liquor ordinance be reviewed and appropriate changes be made to reflect new state legislation raising the age for drinking to l~,years. Attached is a proposed ordinance amendment which has beenprepared • by the city attorney for the purpose of ra-sing .the age for drinking, purchase, employment and licens;ure to .age 19 as -that age is defined in Chapter 66 of the Laws of 1y76. ~ In addition to the amendments to make our municipal ordinance conform with Chapter 66, the attached ordinance amendment also includes a change requiring proof. of age by drivers license on non-qualification certificate. They are currently th 'only valid types. of identification which .may be used to prove age. , This ordinance amendment is rese p nted to the cit council for f' Y first readi consideration at the'A~pril 26, 1976 city council meeting. You will note;thaE the .effective date of the ordinance is established as September 1 , 1y76 which is the effective date of t~ a age change in Chapter 66~-of the Laws of 1y76 .Respectfully submitted, / ~ `- ,~ t,~~/_ _ ' ~, ~y, ~ Wayne. S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja .. cc: City Attorney Liquor Store Manaiger Public Safet ~' Y irec for ' ~ _ ~` AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XI SE T C r N O S ll . O1 ll . 02 1.1.03 11.04 11.05 AND 11.06 OF ~ THE ORDINANCE ,CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter XI, Section 11.01, 11.02, ].1.03, 11.04, 21.05 -and 11.06 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating _to liquor and intoxicating beverage control are hereby amended by amending Section 11.01 subdivision ]. paragraph (4), subd. 4 paragraph (2), subd. 4 paragraph (9); Section 11.02 subdivision Z paragraph (.3), subd. 8 paragraph (13), subd. 8 paragraph (14); Section 11.03 subdivision 1 paragraph (7), subd. 12 paragraph (1), subd. 14 paragraph (6), subd. 1.6 paragraph {1), subd. 16 paragraph (2), subd. 16 paragraph (3)~; Section 11..04 subdivision l paragraph ~• (l), subdivision 1 paragraph (2), subd. 2, subd. 3; Section 11.05 . subdivision 1;~ Section 11.06 subdivision 1 paragraph (7) to read as follows: "Section 21.01 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORES **~ Subdivision 1 (4) 'minor' means-any person under the age of l9 years who has not attained the age of 18 years on or before August 3l, 1976 **~ "Subd. 4 (2) The liquor store manager shall be assisted by such other enipioyees as the council may authorize, provided, however, no [person under 21 years of age] minor may be authorized to be an employee. All employees, in~uding the liquor store manager, hold their positions at the pleasure of the council." *~* ~~ :...Subd. 4 (.9). No li uor • q shall be sold to any [person under 21 earn of a e m' Y l inor nort 0 9 an e v rson who in th T. _ p e opinion ~~ of the seller, is intoxicated. "11.02. SALE AND DISPENSATION~OF NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUORS ~~~ Subdivision 1 -(3) 'Minor means any person .under [21] 19 years of age who has not attained the age of 18 years on or before August. 31, 1976. . ~~* "Subd. 8 (.l3) No [person under 21 .years of age] minor shall be employed in any. rooms constituting the place in which. non-intoxicating malt liquor is sold at retail 'on-sale'." *** . "Subd. 8 (14) No minor [person under 2l years of age] shall offer for sale, sell, or in any way. assist in the sale .of non-intoxicating malt liquor at retail 'off-sale'; said prohibition shall not extend to activities merely incidental ~' to the sale of non-intoxicating liquors such as stocking beer on shelves- or carrXing beer from-the store. at the ~_ customers request." ~~* "11.03. SALE OF SET-UPS FOR CONSUMPTION OF LIQUOR ON PREMISES ~*~ • Subdivision 1 (7) A 'minor' means any x~erson under the age of l9 years who has not attained the age of l8 years on or before August 31, 1976." ~~~ "Subd. l2 (1) [Under 21 years of age] who is a minor. " • *~* "Subd. 14 (6') No [person under 21 years of age] minor shall be employed in a room where 'set-up'• sales are made and no such person shall be allowed to be or remain in such room unless accompanied by his parent or guardian except that [persons under 2l years of age] minors may be employed to perform the duties of a bus boy or dishwashing services in restaurants in which set-ups are sold." "Subd. 16 Restrictions.Involving Sale to P~Iinors. (1) No ~. licensee, his agent or employee shall nerve,or'dispense upon the licensed premises any intoxicating Liquor or non-intoxi- cating malt liquors to any [person under the age of 21 years] minor; nor shall such licensee, or his agent or employee, -permit any [person under the age of 21 years] minor to be furnished or consume any such liquors on the licensed premises. ~, - (2) Any person who may appear to the licensee, his employees or a ents to be a minor under the a e f 2 g I g o 1 years].shall, upon demand of the licensee, his. employee or agent, produce and permit to be examined [an identification certificate issued by any clerk of the district court in the State of Minnesota pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 62b.311 throw h 626.319 a valid driver's license or a cur_r g 7 _ent nonqualification .certificate issued pursuant to Minn. 5tat. '. Section 171. G7. , i, (3) In every- prosecution for a violation of the provisions of this section relating to the sale or furnishing of intox- icating liquor or non-intoxicating malt beverage to [persons under the age of 21 years]' minors, and in every proceeding before the city council with: respect thereto, the fact that the minor involved has o~ btained and resented to the licensee P , his employee or agent [ a verified identification card issue d by the. clerk of any district court in the State~of Minnesota]' one of the identifications described in paragraph (2) of this subdivision, from which it appears that said person was {27. • ~ years of age and was regularly issued such identification card] not a minor, shall be prima facie evidence that the licensee, his agent or employee is not guilty. of such a provision and shall be conclusive evidence that a violation if one has occured, was not willful or intentional." *~~ ~. "11.04. REGULATION OF THE POSSESSION OR COPISUMPTION OF LIQUOR OR NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR BY MITTORS . Subdivision 1. Adoption of Certain Provisions:°af Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 3.O by Reference. The following provisions • and sections of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340 are hereby adopted by reference and made apart of this chapter as if full set forth herein: ~:II'~ Y (1) Minnesota Statutes 340.035, ['Minors;. Purchase, Consumption, Possession'] '.Persons Under 19'. (2) Minnesota Statutes 340.731, '[Minors] Persons Under 19; Forbidden Acts or Statements' ,. f - .. . ~ . . . ,. Subd. 3. Inducing Minor to Enter Saloon. Any person who shall assist, procure or induce any. [minor) person under the age of 19 years o.f age 'who has not attained the age. of 18 years by August 31, 1976 or other person to whom the sale of liquor is by law forbidden, to enter or visit any saloon, -.bar, buffet ar public drinking p1.aCe for the purpose of obtaining intaxicating liquor or rion-intoxicating malt liquor is guilty of a misdemeanor." ~** "11.05 ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO MINORS. ~. .. Subdivision 1. Loitering. No [minor] person under the age of 19 years caho has not attained the age of 18 years on or before August 31, 1976 shall loiter in or near any place where liquor or non-intoxicating malt liquor is sold unless accompanied by his parent or legal guardian.'° ~** "11.06. ON-SALE LIQUOR **~ I• Subdivision 1. (7} 'minor' means ariy person under the age of [18] 19 years taho has not attained the age of 18 years on or before August 31, 1.976." This amendment shall be effective 30 days after publication or September 1, 1976 whichever comes later. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 1976. • • Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk