Loading...
04-12-76 agenda,> ~ s: ~~' l CITY QF RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter: No. '116 Agenda April 12, 1976 L: The`Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council _. City of Richfield _ Gentlemen`• Subject: School Pools and Fees and Charges - On November 20, 197.5. the school board and the city council met to discuss arrangemen s for the city`s use of the new school district swimming pools. Since that time, staff of the .school district and of .the city have further discussed the - operation of the school pools, and the school board and city council have bath adopted a general policy relating to share use!of the facilities: A copy of the city council-policy is attached. • Both the school board and the city council have supported the concept of encouraging .maximum pool- usage for both educational • . and community purposes, with the school district assuming full responsibility .for .operation and. management of the pools. School District Charges You will recall;that initially there was an effort to develop an agreement between the. city and the school district covering the use of district pool facilities. However, the final position o~ theschool district wasthat such an agreement was not necessary and that they would) establish usage fees in accordance with the policies adopted by the Board of Education and the City Council. i Therefore, ~theCschool district has adopted the following schedule of fees which -will be charged to the city .for use. of school district pools: ~ East Junio~ High during the calendar year for instruction time $14/hour East Junior High during the school year for open swim $22/hour East Junior High during the summer months for open swim $22/hour West u i~r Hi h duri .the ca le dar ear for i struction time 17 hour J n g ng n y n $ / West Juni~r High during the school year for open swim $28/hour .West Juni ,r High, during the summer months for open swim $31/hour .., ,. , :. ,, `council Letter No. 11.6 ~ -2- :.April 12, 1976. ~~ .These charges include general operation and 'custodial charges:, lifeguards, locker room attendants and a supervisor. The additional charge for West Junior High during the summer months reflects' the cost of the extra lifeguard needed at the wading pool and patio. area. These chargesare based on an assumed capacity of 60 people. at each -pool during open .swim times. For each additional 30 ,people during open swim, an additional $3 per hour. charge will .= be made for additional lifeguards. Swimming Pool Operating Costs- Beginning .with !,the summer 1976 sea on, the city will provide open swimming and same instructional swimming opportunities. at the' city pool and school district ,pools. A tentative schedule for city use 'of school district pools is 'attached. The use of the outdoor city pool during the summer months will remain substantially the same as in past years. The adopted 1976 operating budget .provides an appropriation ,of $59, 8.64 for. the "operation of the city outdoor pool. .User. fee revenues in the amount of $45, 485 have. been anticipated in the 1976 budget to otfset the expense of operating the outdoor -pool. Therefore; th'e 1976 budget provides for a general .fund subsidy of $14, 379 for the .city outdoor pool operation. -The adopted 1976 budget does not provide ariy funds for use of the school district pools.. It was primarily for this reason that the city council. adopted as part. of its .policy on January 26, 1976 the requirement that citizen usage fees for the . school pools be set,high enough to cover all of the charges which: the city will have to pay to the school, district for use of the pools. Based on the charges which have been adopted by the school district, and the tentative number of ours of school: pool time which would be rented by the city, ft is estimated that the total. payment to the school district for open swimming in 19.76.would be appr ximately $16,000. This would cover the period from June. through December, 1976. Recommendations fob Fees and Charges for the Use of Pool .Facilities i In developing fees and charges for the use of pool .facilities in 1'976, the park" and recreation department staff .took. into consideration the financial information available to us on the outdoor pool, .the desirability to establish a system .which would provide residents the opportunity to .use the different pools, and an assumption of the number of people that would participate in the various swimming pool programs. The system of user fees and services as well as the specific rates developed by the park and recreation department were reviewed by the park and recreation advisory commission at its March 16, 19,76 meeting. The commission unanimously supported the fees and charges proposed by the city staff.. . The specific proposals are as follows: ;, I "~ council Letter No, 116 -3- April 12, 197'6 -1. The season ticket concept used in the past would be replaced with a discounts cket system for Richfield residents. These -tickets, ,, available for use by any famil.y_~member,, would be honoredat all three pools. Ticket books would be va id .for a one year period,, from June 1 through .May 31 of each season: One ticket woula be needed ,for each admission. .This ticket wouldallow up to eight hours of -swimming daily at the: outdoor pool, and one 55-minute riour of swimming at either of the indoor pools. Recommended. prices would be; Book of 50 tickets $19.00 Book of 20 tickets $ 8.40 Book. of 10 .tickets $ 4.50 2. General admission for the outdoor pool w~ul.d remain at $1:00 for open swimming hours of 1; 0 0 p . m . - 9 ; 00 p : m . , Sunday through Saturday . ` General admission would cover the entire:,eight hours or any portion of ..thee. time. 3. General admission at the indoor pools would be $.50.: This admission - -would cover one 55 minute period. At the end of each 55 minute hour the pool would be cleared,• lifeguards would break and an additional admission ',charged for the subsequent 55 minute hour. Programs with general admission would include .general open swim, family .open swim,. • adult open, swim,. team open swim, lap time and special events. 4. A special date would be available for the family open swim at a maximum charge of $2.00 per family per 55 minute hour. . 5. The follow'ng prices are recommended for city sponsored swimming programs during the 1976/77 season:.- Current Outdoor Pools . Indoor Pools .Tiny Tot S im $5.,00 $5.00 $6.50 Adult ?nst ction 5:00 ~. 00 7.00 Diving 3.00 ~ 3.00 i 9.00 (advanceu : - at West only) Red Cross Instruction 3.00 3.00 4, 00 ($5.00 family) ($9.00 family) Mask/Fins/Snorkle Not offered 5.0.0 13.50 ..Summary Members of the city staff and school district staff will continue to work together to provide the widest possible range of swimming programs for the community..: The I _. city is preparedto begin programs at the outdoor pool, East Junior High pool and West ;,. . r ~ - - 'CITY OF RLCHFIELD POLICY REGARDING - THE USE OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT - 'NO, 280 SWIMMING POOL FACILITIES General Concepts ~ 1. Thee City Council- is committed- to support- the concept of maximum pool usage for both educational and community purposes. 2. Tt is an understanding of the .City Council that the 'out-of-pocket operating .expense will be born by the governing unit. or organization using the facilities on an hourly. basis. 3. .The City of Richfield will have first. priority for use after the school use has-been accommodated . Expenses, Related to Renting Pool Facilities 1. It is the policy of the City. that citizen charges and usage fees for municipal use of the district pool facilities will be established at a level which will make it possible for the revenue generated by these fees and charges to cover all expenses which the City must pay to the school district for use of pool facilities . • O eration and Mana ement P g 1. The school will assume full responsibility for the operation and management of the pools . - 2. Usage of the pools .will be governed as any other school facility. Scheduling ~ - 1. During the regular school day both the East and West pools will be used in the Junior High School Physical Education Program: The school will. use its own physical education instructors. ~ 2. Senior High boys and girls swim teams -ballet, etc. will be scheduled into the pools . 3. The school. will work closely with the Richfield :Swim Club both as to time schedule and cost. 4. After seven o'clock on school days, except for scheduled swim. meets, and at all other times the" pools will be available for public usage with first, priority going to the City. A .. ,. _2 _ 'I 5. The school will be responsible for all personne connected with the pools r• guards, attendants, etc.. The. hourly pay for~personnel except custodians and maintenance will be coordinated. with that paid by the City. 6. The school will attempt to .supplement the program offered by the City rather than duplicating their offerings by stressing instructional programs. 7. Request -for pool time will be made on the form currently in use entitled Community .Use of Schools. ; Policy adopted by the Richfield City Council January 26, 1976. • -, j The Tentative Sche dule for the City 's Use of the Tv~ro School Pools Is; j SUMMER ' : Family - Adult Teen WEST Total Hrs . Open __. ` Only. Only. Only Sunday Monday 4 2 - 4 p.m. 8 - lO p,m. Tuesday 4 2-4p,m; 8-10p.m, Wednesday 2 2 - 4 p,m. Thursday 4 2- 4 p, m. _ 8 - 10 p.m, Friday 2 8 - 10 p, rn, Saturday _ 16 EAST No Hours OUTDOOR Sunday 8 1- 9 p,m, 1- 9 p.m. Monday 8 1- 9 p.m. 1- 9 p,m. 'Tuesday 8 1- 9 p.m, 1- 7 p,m, 7- 9 p.m, Wednesday 8 1- 9 p.m, 1- 9 p,m. Thursday 8 1-9p.m. 1-7p,m, 7-9p.m, Friday 8 1- 9 p.m, 1- 9 p,m, Il Saturday 8 1 -'9 p,m, 1 - 9 p.m, • 56 ~ SCHOOL YEAR WEST Sunday 3 3-4p.m. 1-3p.m, Monday 2 8 - 10 p. m, Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 1 ~ 7 - 8 p,m. Saturday 3 7 - 10 p, m. 9 EAST I Sunday Monday ' 2 7 - 8 p.m. (Seniors) 8 - 9 p. m, Tuesday 1 7 - 8 p,m, Wednesday ' 2 7 - 9 p. m. Thursda Y 3 8 - 10 , m, P .Friday Saturday 8 • OUTDOOR No Hours _ I, '~, The tentative -open swimming schedule is subject to change. depending on attendance. Instructional periods are designated on the assump tion that enrollment will be ~ sufficient to make the program self-supporting. . CITY OF RICHFIELD., ,MINNESOTA .Office of City Manager S f Council Letter No. 11 S Agenda Rpril 12 196 The Honorable Mayor. ~ ~`~,,eS and ,q'~ to ~?-,.~~ Members of the City Council ~, d ~ ~~ ° City of Richfield ~ ~ ~ , Gentlemen: ~ Subject: Bids on Sad Replacement and Tree Planting. I City Project No. 674 i On April 2, 1976 ;bids were opened by the city manager-for sod replacement ' and tree planting tor'District No. 11, City..Project` No:: 674, in accordance with ~ previous city council authorization. The city clerk, public works director,- planninq director and two members of the consulting-engineer`s office also.: represented the city at the bid opening. ; ~, ,_ - District Noy 11 ,includes that area bounded on,the north by 6.2nd Street, I~ • ~ the easit by 35W, the south by 66th Street and the. west by Xerxes Avenue. ! ~ ~ ' The attached did tabulation indicates the amount bid by each of the .five bidders for the prdposed project. Minutes of_ the bid opening are also attached. The consulting~en~neer's cost estimate for construction of his .project was $350,0:00. The low bid,of W . & G': Rehbein Bros . , Tnc.. at $111, 980 is 25% below the estimate. ,. - On April 9, 1976 bids-were opened by the acting city manager for sod , replacement and tree planting in District No. 10, ..City ..Project No. 674, in ~ accordance with previous city council authorization. The city clerk, public safety director, h alth'director and a member of the consulting engineer's office f also represented Iie cifiy at the bid opening. ~ District No. 0 includes that area bounded on the north by 66th Street, the east by Penn Aver e, the south by 78th'Street and the west by Xerxes Avenue. The attached bid tabulation indicates the amount bid by;each of the iwo bidders for the pr ~ posed project:. Minutes of the bid opening are also attached. The consulting en ineer's cost estimate forconstruction of this ,project was $242 , 40Q . The 1 bid ;of W . & G, Rehbein Bros.., Inc:. at $174., 960 is 28% below the estimate. i It is the recommendation of the cansultng engineer, public works director and myself that the city council approve W. & G. Rehbein Bros'. , Incas the f - CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening Apria 2, 1976 TURF ESTABLISHMENT AND PLANT INSTALLATION CITY PROJECT N0. 674, AREA N0. 11 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the administrative staff was called to order by Wayne S. Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for Turf Establishment and Plant Installation, City Project No. 674, Area No. 11 as advertised in the official ne~ospaper on March 10 and 17, 1976. Present: The following bids were submitted and read aloud; Wayne S. B~zrggraaff, , City Manager Peter Eberz, Public Works Director Richard Krier, Planning Director Thomas J. Moran, Gity Clerk LeRoy Nyhus, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron r BIDDER-AND - BID SECURITY TOTAL BID West Incorporated Suburban Utility Contractors B. B. 5% $14.0,792:.50 Lino Lakes Landscaping B. B. 5% - 119,460.00 W. & G. Rehbeiri Bros., Inc. B. B. 5% ~ 111,980.00 Ray Jordan and. Sons Cert. Check $6,872 137,440.00 Central Landscaping B. B. 5% 122,030.00 The 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 t w m i . _o . ~ chi. O r 0 bd ~w m w 0 m H . ~ n w m ~ ~ ~ o ~~ ti ~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ ~ w moo, w r ~ N ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ V ~' H ~ ~ ~ n td c~ bd i~ bd td c] bd ~1 td vi ~ ~n vi vi d og v CZ N H k I EA~ W ~ N O ~1 - N V V V O O O N O H O O O O O bd H d ~ ~ ~ ~~Ot~~ N~ ~ ~ m ~- N. c~+ P~ N ~ ~... ~. o o ~~ ~~~~ ~~¢ ~o~~ ~• ~ ~ ~~ ~'~ t~ ~ ,rd ~ N ~ ~ '~ F~ h~ c+ O ~O r j cam. -J N• H (D rnN ~ n to c+ N ci- ~ o F-' t-' - ~ ~ rn -~ ~- ~ rn ~• ~- 0 c~ w 0 N N RESOLUTION N0. • •_ RESOLUTION ACCPETING BID AND AWARDING~CONTRACT TO W. & G. REHBEIN BROS., INC., 7087 20TH AVENUE NO., HUGO, MINNESOTA, FOR TURF' ESTABLISHMENT A1VD PLANT INSTALLATION, AREA N0. 11 CITY PROJECT NO. 67~+ Clerk's File No. BE IT RESOLVED by the City-Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows. 1. That it is hereby determined that the bid of W. & G. Rehbein Bros., Inc. 7087 20th Avenue North, Hugo, Minnesota, is tree lowest bid by a responsible bidder for turf. establishment and plant installation, City Project. No. 67~+, Area No. 11.. 2. That the bid of W. & G. Rehbein Bros., Inc., for turf establishment and plant installation en the above referenced project on a unit price basis., at the price contained in their proposal of April 2, 1876, with an estimated cost of .$111,980.00 is hereby accepted. 3. That the proposed contract between W. & G. Rehbein Bros., Inc., and the City of Richfield be given Clerk's File No. and be placed on file. That said proposed contract for turf establishment and plant installation is hereby approved and adopted. and the Mayor and Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for or on behalf of the. City of Richfield and the Clerk is authorized and directed to affix the city seal thereto. ~. That payments to be made under the terms of said contract shall be charged against the Construction Fund. ~. That the Corporate Surety Bond in the sum of the estimated contract price which accompanies said proposed contract is hereby accepted and approved. 6. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to return the security documents to the unsuccessful bidders upon execution of said proposed contract. Adopted by the City Counci this 12th day of April, 1976. Loren L. Lawi Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ . _ - x~ ; :' ~ - - ~ ' ~ a .~ • • OF RICHFIELD CITY ~ ~ Bid Opening ~ April 9, 1976 - !. i.. .~{. TURF ESTABLISHMENT AND. PLANT INSTALLATION .AREA N0. 10, CITY PROJECT N0. 674 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution N'o. 1015, a meeting of the administrative ho announced _ -staff was called: to order by Peter Eberz, Acting City Manager, w sealed bids en and read aloud o i e , p ve, ce that the purpose of the meeting was to r blishment and Planf Installation, Area No. 10, City Project No. 674 t f E s a for Tur as advertised in the official newspaper on riarch 17 and 24, 1976.- Present: Peter Eberz, Acting City Manager .~'~, Tom Morgan, Public Safety Director. I. F. Roesler, Public Health Director - Thomas J. Moran., City Cleric i The following bids were submitted. and read aloud: . BIDllER AND TOTAL BID BID SECURITY Ray Jordan & Sons, Inc. 210 380 $ , . Cert. Check $10,552.26 _ J W & G Rehbein, Inc. '~ $174,960 ~.. B. B. 500 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 • ,~ ~x i ~ ~ o ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ o ~ wotrJ~ a~ '~ N m ~- w ~~ ~ ~ ¢N~ • ~ c + ~... ~. o ~, ~ m R~ ~ o ~ ~ N ~ ~ „~N. o ~ ~0~~ ~ ~ ~ F,~p,~ N ~ ~+ o ~ ~ N. cam. t-, -J N H (D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~+ ~ a ~~ ~ ~~ rn ~• _ . ~ ~ .F- ~ ~ ~, ~ ~, ~ z ~ ° m ~, r~ K 0 • N ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ffl- Vl I ~ O ~ H y ~ N p N rC N .~} F-' --J `V^ W T V O O. O .~' '~" N ~ H O ~" y ~ ~ O O t7j O O H O O d ~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. - RESOLUTION ACCPETING BID AND AWARDING~CONTRACT TO W. & G. REHBEIN BROS., INC.,. 7087 20TH AVETNE NO., HUGO, MINNESOTA, FOR TURF ESTABLISHMENT AND PLANT INSTALLATION, AREA N0. 10 CITY PROJECT N0. 67~+ .. Clerk's File No. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: •: • 1. That it is hereby determined that the bid of W. & G. Rehbein Bros., Inc. 7087 20th Avenue North, Hugo, Minnesota, is the lowest bid by a responsible bidder #'or turf establishment and plant installation, City Proj ect Pdo. 67~+ , Area No. 10~. 2. That the bid of W. &. G. Rehbein Bros., Inc., for turf establishment and plant installation on the above referenced project on a unit price basis, at the -price contained in their proposal of April 9., 1976, with an estimated cost of ~17~+,960.00 is .hereby accepted. 3. That the proposed contract between W. & G. Rehbein 'Bros., Inc., and the City of Richfield be given Clerk's File No. and be placed on file. That: said proposed contract for turf establishment and plant installation is hereby approved and adopted and. the Mayor and Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for or on behalf of the City of Richfield and the Clerk is authorized and directed to affix the city seal thereto. E ~. That payments to be made under the terms of said contract shall be charged • ~ against .the Construction Fund. 5. That the Corporate Surety Bond in the sum of the estimated contract price which accompanies said proposed contract is hereby accepted and approved. 6. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to return the security documents to the unsuccessful bidders upon execution of said proposed contract.: Adopted by the City Counci this 12th day of April, 1976. Loren L. Law` Mayor -; d~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of-.City Manager Gouncil Letter 1Va. 114 Agenda April 12, 1976 ,; - The Honorable Mayor . - and - - Mernbers of the City Gouncil t Gity of Richfield f Genfilemen: Subject: Loan to HRA for the Purchase of Property in the L/H/N/ Area I Mr.. Jacob Ma~thesen, 6617 Graham .Avenue South, has requested the Richfield liousinc~ and Redevelopment Authority to purchase his single family home, which. - will become available for sale soon. Thin home is located within the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Project acquisition area " for the home and .garden center. (See attached map) .Because the H.R.A. has no acquisition funds at this.time, it will be necessary to borrow funds from the city to accomplish the purchase of this property.. The recommended procedure provides hat, the H.R.A. and the city execute a loan agreement for the borrowing of the money, with-the understanding that the H.R,A. will repay the borrowed funds to the city with.inter;est. The city council will have to execute the attached loan agreement and res~,olution before the H,R.A. may proceed with the purchase of this property . The estimated amount of the city loan will be $42,000. This. amount would cover the purchase price, which has not yet been negotiated," and the cost of relocation. The home is a two story frame dwelling which was built in .19.20. It -has 952 square feet on the first floor with four bedrooms and' one and one-half baths .. -The city assessors office. has recorded a current market value for this property of $29, 600. "Because Mr. Mathieson's company is paying for his family's move, the H.R.A ~ would not be required to pay moving- costs. Hovi~ever, the H.R.A. is require to pay comparable housing relocation costs. The loan from the city would be paid back with interest by the end of three years . The interest rate would be five .percent per-annum ($2,100 per year) on the unpaid balanoe. The interest. on the loan would be paid ;from two sources: 1. Until the land is needed for the L/H/N project, the home would be rented. ross rental income could. be $275 to $300 per month. Z. When th , and is needed for redevelopment, the home would be sold to a mover for. $3. , 50D - $3, 000. "i :: • . ~. '. ~ ' . .. - .. .NOW, •TI~EFZEFORL, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein set forth, the HR1~ and the'City do :~ . '_ ~ hereby ..agree as follows: ... •- .. ,• I.~ ^The City agrees to advance to the HRA money in an amount to be determined .by the.HRA at such time .as a decision has been made by the HRA to purchase such property, said amount .to be equal to the purchase price of said property, and - ~ - - I2. The HRA agrees to repay the sum so advanced, plus interest, as follows: • A. Interest shall 'accrue on unpaid principal at the rate of S.OOo per annum ,from the date of .. . . advancement until. repaid. ~-- - - ~• B. Payments shall be applied first to reduce -- •. -~ - :interest accrued at the date of .payment, and ., the"remainder, if any, shall reduce the - - principal balance. _ _. _ .. . C. The HRA may make payment or payments in any - amount and at any-time; provided that the entire. • . unpaid principal together with accrued interest . •shall be repaid no later than three years frog the • •- date of advancement of funds. to the HRA. III. This agreement shall be void and of no effect if advance- merit of funds by the City as provided herein is not made before -~ _ - y- «. ~ da . THIS AGREEMENT, entered into as of this Y ~ 1976.,: by and between the Housing of - - ~ .-.and R~development-Authority of Richfield,-Minnesota, a body public - and .corporate, {hereinafter the "HRA"), and the City of Richfield, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the la~•:s of the - -. State of I~~innesota (hereinafter. the "City") ; - - WITNESSETH: . . WHEREAS, the HRA desires to borrow money~.for .the purpose of purchasing certain real property. pursuant to and in furtherance ..ot the L/,H/N Redevelopment Project heretofore•adopted by the City and the HRA,'said real property being described as follows: Lot 10, ocl: 1,.. Fairt•:ood Shores, . Hennepin County, Minnesota, and - - - - - WIiEREAS, the purchase of said real property is necessary to accomplish the purposes of said L/H/N Project, and - WHEREAS, the City desires to lend money so that said purchase may be accomplsihed, and. • WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 452.445 to purchase real property and to borrow money from the City therefor, and -- ~ - - WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, • Section 462.581 to make loans to the HRA in aid of projects. • - _ ~ _ _ _ ~' ~ .. _ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZIIQG THE EXECUTION . - . OF ~AN hGREEP•'iENT TO LOAN MONEY TO THE ~ _ _ _ _ P ~ N7. ,VLLO ME G ND REDL A IFIELD HOUSIN FtICI . _ .. _ T • AUTHORITY AND PROVIDITvG FOR rHh . 2:_'ERFORMAr1CE TIiERi:,OF BY ADVAIICEMENT - #. .. .PROM THE GENERAL- FUIQD _... _ •... • .. :. :. _- `. M WHEREAS, the HRA desires to .borrow money for the purpose -. - _ .. .. .. . - ante _ _ ~ ~ o and in further ~.rsuant t of purchasing certain real property p_ . of the L/H/N Redevelopment Project heretofore•adopted by the City and the HRA, said real property being described as followss Lot 10, - _ Block 1, Fairwood Shores, Hennepin County,,?Minnesota, and WIiEREAS, the purchase of said real property is necessary to accompli-sh the purposes of said L/H/N Project, and w WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized by Minnesota. Statutes, Section 462.445, to purchase real property and to borrow~inoney from ~he.City therefor, and _ • WHERET~S, the City is authorized. by_ Minnesota -Sta~:utes,~ ' . ~: Section 462.581, to make Loans to the HRA in aid of projects. • ~ 210W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD: - •---- -.•----1. ~ - That-'the Mayor, and._.the _City Manager be, and hereby are, authorized to execute, as agents to the City of Richfield, an agreement. with the Richfield Housing-and Redevelopment Authority, entitled "Loan agreement", a copy of which is hereby given Clerk's File No. and is ordered placed on file. • • • .. . _ .. ~ _.. .. - 't ,. ' ~. ~•= ~.-__ -- - - ...7 35tH _ _ -''~:=-=:-- ~Y -- _ _~ --_-~ C.-- __ _ __ _ _ -_-- - _ _ - - _ _ r ~ ; ~ . , ~ I .. -i 1Tll1~c1~1. - . QT_T_Li:_~__L~1~_[__1:1_~ Q.l_II L~1.11.. ,~ Cl1 .1.1-1. ( J .__ ~ I.. I ~ [MLRSON aV[. \ __ • I~~H10LN ___~IItLNN1[IYNLLOLLNbLI \.. .. _ _ (1 1.1 .I j ~ f. ,. .~ ~~ • _ Q ~1,'(I-_( .~41 h ~ lnzaueruNSLL _.i C_~ ~ ~ t.I:V I I~ I ~~ ' lYKW000- ~~` "' ~ I pCDUYDMT IV[. ~' ~` ` r.` ~ r wLraz avE. • - ~ d ~..8 / ~G / 7 ~ • ~IIa1I. fRYANT AYE. _ 1 Y ~ ff '~ i ~ R ~ ~ i ~ __ \ ," j t•~~: - ' 'r ~~ MLRRICT AYE. t ~j " ~ ~ _ -La~L.>•~ILVf•uNLOUiRC ---+- ~- ~ ~-~-J ~- ~- LRRXD aYC. . I~~~ ~ ; ~_~ i 111 r----- - I - ~ L_.-~ ~- • ~ ~ /lLafaNT aY[. ~ ; ~~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ 1 g - aE . I ~- I I- -I~ ~l LJ_I__i._IJ ~ . ~ _ -__ _ -R1fBURT aYE. 0 . i L J m ~ ^ ~ - _ ~_ W[NT WORTH aV[.- - I i 1G m °> __, ~ D ~ v • E i~T ~ ~ ~; o ~ j t _~~~-.. ;_ -J-1--1-_ NL41fp[Ll aYt. ~ ( I I_ ! ! ~ .e. '~Ir~.sIY 'S~~~I.~ -rj-- -i ~ 1~ -~~] _, i _ T - L~. .._ _ - ^ a ~` L; r. W/ - r.l - Vj/ ~NLNYLBYILrLO ILOYLLL~II~LL~Yr1YNlr - L_ _ _ _ - f _~__1_~_ ~_~ E_ _- _ ~ _ fTLYLMf aYL. .~. ~ ' __ __.. _. E T - - D ~~ __.i~_~_.___....__.-._ _.o ' - :: .. ;, CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESC3TA Offiee of City Manager .. ' Council Letter No. I13 :Agenda April 12, .1976 ~ - } ... - _ _ .The' Honorable Mayor and Members of-.the City Council 'City of Richfield Gentlemen:. L Subject: Compensation ;and Position Classification Study Earlier thi year the city council requested that a study be; conducted to deter- mine appropriate salaries and accurate job descriptions #or employees covered by the General Services Pay `Plan. Some council members expressEd the belief that _ such a study could be conducted by my office. However, 'I requested the opportun- ity to explore the matter and provide members of the city council with information on the type of study ~, to be conducted and the: advantages and disadvantages of having fihis work co:~ducted',by an individual in my office or a professional personnel consult- ant. The purpose of this council letter is to provide council members with the back- ..ground information and to recommend Ghat the city manager be authorized to select an experienced professional personnel consultant., prepare a tentative agreement and . submit such an agreement for these services to the city council for consideration.. i, _ _ History The most recent] comprehensive study of position classification and compensation plans far the City of Richfield municipal service was conducted nearly six years ago `-in 1970 by the Jacob Company. The recommendations of that firm were considered by the' city council nd implemented in January, 1971. Although there have been a few changes, the pa. plan structures, internal percentage relationships, and job- .-descriptions have re~iained essentially the same. In general, the changes relate' to reconsideration of individual situations., the removal of management positions from the Genexal Ser~rices Pay Plan and other pay plan changes necessitated by the State Labor. Relations Act. - - However, conditions do change with respect fio salaries and nature of work . performed ..over a period of 'years . In the five years that the ja cobs plan has been in effect, there. have been changes in -state legislation, considerable inflation and the ~ - evolution .of new metihods and thinking concerning procedures and administration. of compensation plans.' Therefore,.. it would appear advisable to conduct a comprehen- • Council Letter No. 113 -2- April 12, 1976 ' sive study of not only the General Services Pay. Plan; -but the management pay plan - as well. Purpose of Study Material relating to the purpose of such a study has been attached to this... letter. However, the ultimate ,goal of such a .study and the adoption of an up- ~o-date compensation and classification plan- should be to provide for the following: l", An accurate, description of work performed which can be used as a basis for measuring performance of an individual in a specific position. 2. A wage and salary structure which provides for internal equity in an organization and competitive salaries in tl~e market area for a given. ~'i position. o u i co ti ued 'i to ale it a s well a s obtainin 3. A rocedure f r ins r n n n n rn g 9' ~ Y P ~ realistic outside comparisons for the wage and salary `structure. 4. An accepted procedure: for establishing wage and salary rates for new or changed positions.' . 5. A means to !reduce and resolve complaints over wage and salary rates.. I • 6 A system which provides incentive value to employees:... 7. Informations on jab relationships for use in recrutiing, election, training, transfers and promotions . 8. An objecti~,e basis for personnel administration. decisions to fulfill state and federal requirements onequal employment opportunity ~ guidelines concerning discrimination in employment. i Alternative Approaches of Conducting Study i Theoretically., i~t is possible to conduct a compensation and classification study through -the use of city staff or in the alternative., through the use of a professional personnel consultant. In most instances, it is advisable for smaller organizations such as ours, without a large personnel administrative staff, to arrange to have such work performed by a consultant. However, I have attempted to list the advantages and disadvantages f both approaches in the following paragraphs. . Consideration of Stdff Conducted Study... -The primary advantage of conducting sucha study by a city staff member would be that the cost cou~d be expected to be less than if such services were purchased from a private consultant.. ,; Council Letter No. 113 -3- April _12, 1976 I The disadvantages associated; with conducting such a study.by a member of the city. staff include the .following: t 1. Neither nox I nor. any other-member of` my staff has ever conducted such a study. 2. `Such. a study is .extremely. time consuming especially in the area of assessing and confirming job duty responsibilities. In my opinion; i;t would not be possible for a staff member to perform this work without adversely affecting other areas of job responsibility. ::3. Unless an organization is quite large in size, it-does. not normally maintain the number of personsnecessary in the area'of personnel administration to .conduct such a study. 4. Any study of this kind conducted by a member of the city staff would be subject to questions of credibility and the kinds of criticism related to objectivity due 'to that individual's role in the organization. Consideration of Aersonnel Consultant Conducted Study The primary disadvantage of employing an outside professional personnel- con= sultant would be that he study is more expensive and that once- completed,; the consultant is not noxmally retained to assist in continued administration,. • . Dn the other hand, there are considerable advantages to employing an outside . consultant. These include:: 1. Expertise in the subject area due to the fact th3 t the. consultant does thin type of work on a continuing basis and is, therefore, able to do it quickly and well while at the same time being knowledgeable about most recent thinking and activity fn the field. 2'. A professional consultant who does this kind of work fora living would be in a better position to perform a more comprehensive and thorough study.' 'In !short,. the consultant has proven ability. i 3. An outside consultant who has had the opportunity to examine numerous organizations (both public and private) is in a better position to objectivl ly evaluate our compensation and classification plans and provide recommendations for improvements. 4. Good acce s to comparative information and situations. 5: Such a study almost inevitably. results in recommendations and ultimate implementation which is not viewed in the same favorable light by all • employees. Such a study may indicate ..that some salaries are, too low, but that otihers are too high. An objective outside consultant can bring Council Letter- No. 1,13 -4- April 12 , 1976 more credibility to this process than can the in-house alternative. ~' 6. Once a- study has been completed and implemented, it must be administered by the in-house staff and it is easier for"this to occur if any adverse feelings created by the study are related to an out- `side consultant. xather .than. in-house staff members. Analysis., In considering the bes approach to conducting a compensation and classification. plan study, I have. relied not only on my -own personal experience, but on contacts v~hich I have made with other municipalities in our area. Both the cities of St. Louis. i Park .and Bloomington recently conducted compensation and classification-plan studies. Both of these cities !have full time personnel directors and in the ease of at least one .city, more than one person:in the area of personnel administration. However, both - have expressed to me the belief .that it would be virtually impossible to not only i :provide he time required for such a study>., but that.. the conduct of such a study on an in-house basis would not provide the kind of outside objectivity brought o the proce s by II an experienced consultant. ;Inasmuch. as a 1!arge percentage of our operating budget is devoted to personal ervice costs, it would seem advisable that we make use of the best possible methods, ~~ to not only control these costs; .but provide for the best possible methods to obtain ~ • the .greatest return .from these expenditures. Any study should define job tasks in ~ such a way sous toyprovide for a clear definition of not only job accountability, but a criteria for performance review. Primary requirements must be carefully analy- zed both from the standpoint of internal relationships within the organization and' ', external relationshi ~~ s in the `job market. The study should also recommend the most desirable plan~for administration of the compensation and classification plan since the way in which these matters are .administered is perhaps as: important as i ,the component parts of the plan. If could be anticipated that such a study conducted by a consultant would cos somewhere in the vicinity of $10, 000 to $15, 000 for the General Services Pay Plan r ~ and the. Management~~ Pay Plana In view of the overall expenditure for personal services covered. by these twp pay plans, such. a survey .would represent. a .good. investment: in future personnel ad Ministration practices. L Recommendations :Therefore, it is~recommended that the city council authorize the city manager to solicit proposals select a consultant and negotiate altenative agreement for such a study with the. ten ative agreement to be presented to the city council for consider- ation at the .earliest possible date. Res ectfully submitted,; Wayne S. Burgg_raaff cc: Personnel Director City:- Manager { ', , COMPENSATION PLAN CHARACTERISTICS . _ ~ -- _ . Pay Program Development: 1. Pay programs are based ,upon the following principles: . a. The wage/salary range midpoint represents the competitive dollar amount for work ,performed at "job standard". . { ~b. . The labor market's average .wages ox saI_aries represent the current "going rates" for various types of work based upon overall work•farce characteristics/productivity. ' c. In a merit program, .the difference between the pay range's minimum and maximum doll~_r amounts is designed _.. to permit differing pay rates based upon individual performance variations. 2. Basic steps in developing a pay .program are: a. Identify the pay program's objectives with emphasis on operating problems or opportunities that a pay program . can be designed to help. b. Collecting and analyzing accurate .labor market data: . 1. Insure all appropriate employers are included. 2. Insure our jobs are accurately matched with market jobs. 3. Calculate present relationships .with the labor • market and identify market trends. ' c. I Measuring the effectiveness of the current pay program. d. i Comparing program objectives with our present and antici- pated position, and-then determining necessary actions. 1 (This includes pay ranges and increase guidelines.) ', e. Estimating the proposed program's cost. ~ f. Presenting and obtaining necessary management approvals. g. Effectively communicating the new pay program to~~super- visors and affected employees. Job Evaluation: ` 1. Job evaluation is L-he "keystone " of any Compensation system. It's primary purpose is assignment of a job to a pay range that has a competitive relationship with the labor market, and. which.~~ill be perceived as fair by our employees. -.... .m: ... .. ~. :.r.-. - . ,. M1 ._-.. .. .,,,,-.--.-.,_. .. 2. Specific advantages of formally describing and evaluating a Sob are• a. Improved organization design and control. b.. More effective delegation of work-. c. Increased employee morale. by helping them understand their job while."proving" that this is an "organized" place to work, , d. Better pay relationships with the labor market and other jobs . - 3. Job evaluation steps are: a. Manager determines best work flow and writes the job . description and provides necessary job evaluation data. b.` "Personnel representative" reviews description and. collects necessary evaluation information. c. Final job description and data approved by necessary level of requesting management. d. "Evaluation Committee" applies the formal job evaluation plan, reviews individual findings, and assigns to the appropriate-pay range. -e. Pay range assignment (slotting) communicated to cancerned management. If they disagree, Evaluation Committee should be informed about the reasons why and another evaluation analysis can be conducted. 4. A good,job description is a management tool that can be used for: a. Providing a concise outline for briefing an applicant on,the job's duties, especially b~ underlining key phrases. b. Organizing on-the-job training. Anew job incumbent can be given a job description with written priority on the job duties he should learn first, next, etc. c. Providing. a performance appraisal checklist to insure . evaluation on all major job duties. • d. Providing basic data for the recruiting ..and selection process. I 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, OOG. This letter contains three . such items . Community Ceniter Two purchases in excess of $1,000 are necessary for completion of the community center project.. Draperies are to be provided .for the upper level of the center in four office areas , the general purpose room , -the lounge , and the arts and crafts room. It is recommended that the council approve this purchase in they amount of $1,.952.80,.which vaas the lowest bidby a respons- ible bidder. It is recommended that the city council approve the low bid quotations for the following furnishings: I .`r . $4,628.90 for the purchase, delivery and placement of 200 folding ~~,~~~ . chairs with upholstered foam cushion seat and. upholstered backt 2 chair caddies, 40 folding tables; 2 table caddies, 3 double faced coatracks with hangers; 6 general purpose tables, 2 lounge tables and 2 table lamps. ~~~ $2,567.88 for the purchase, delivery and placement of one sofa, 6 . chairs, 8 side chairs; 4 conference chairs, Send tables. and 2 coffee tables. ' Mailings .The city newsletter is prepared and distributed to all Richfield residents i four times annually. In an effort to reduce total mailing costs, the Spring ~I Newsletter mailing will be combined. with the Spring .Park and Recreation Activities 'Council Letter No. 112 ~ --2- - April 12, 1976 Brochure and Questionnaire, and. the Bicentennial Brochure. The increased mailing weight, and the increase in postal service rates since the Winter Newsletter was mailed, will mean.that this mailing. will cost in excess of $1;000. Until the publications are printed and assembled staff will be unable to assess the' specific mailing cost. However, if the publications were mailed separately, the total cost' would be $4.,.6.82 .. Tentative quotations from the postal sercTice indicate that the combined. mailing costs should be in a range from approximately $]. , 200 to approximately' $1, 6.90, depending upon on _. the weight. It is recommended that the. city council approve this purchase item in an amount not to exceed $2,000. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~` ~~ ~ ~ ~ • Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager .. WSB/eja cc: Administrative Assistant Park and Recrea tion Director Finance Director On the-April 12, 1976 city council agenda there is an application from LeRoy Signs,- Inc. , 6325 Wicome Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota,. .requesting permission to install a temporary sign. for 45 days (April 15 to June 1, 197.6) at the Budget Inn Motel,- 7640 Gedar Avenue. The sign is a 4' x 12' single face ground sign constructed of plastic cloth . The staff has 'reviewed. the temporary sign permit application and . recommends that it be approved. ~ Respectfully submitted, -Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager cc: Public Works! Director j CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA .Office of Cit Mana er y g '...Council Letter No. 110 Agenda April 12 , 1976 The Honorable Mayor and Members of tree City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: . . Subject: High School Parking City council members will recall that at the regular council meeting of ~ ~ ; November 10, 1975,, action was taken to adopt recommendations of the citizen ; ~I task force which studied the parking problem. in the vicinity of the Richfield High School. At that meeting, the :council adopted a resolution based on a petition of area residents, which established or redefined various restricted parking provisions';in the area of the Richfield High School. In addition, the council directed city staff to petition remaining residents in the area of the high school to assist in determining parking restrictions which might best meet. . 'the needs of each particular neighborhood in the high school parking control district.. The city staff has completed this process and evaluated the petition re- quests from the res,'idents. The attached resolution vahich is proposed for council- action reflects both -the sentiment of a majority of those responding in petitions as well as the staff recommendations. The proposed resolution is consistent with the action taken by the city council on November 10, 1975, with one exception. The original proposal of the task force provided for "No Parking" restrictions between 8 a.m. and 10;30 a , m, or between 14 a . m, and 1 p, m. However, after petitioning remaining area residents, there was a unanimous request in some areas to have a third ai.ternative providing restricted parking between 8 a.m. and 4;30 p.m. 'The public works director and the. public safety director have reviewed these xequests, as well as the parking problems of the areas for which the requests have been made. Based on this review, it is the opinion of the public works director and the public safety director that. this option should remain available to those residents who have particular parking problems. This option is reflected in the attached resolution. This proposed resolution will complete establishment of the parking restrictions in the high school area. _ In addition to responding to the petitions received, the public safety director 6 Council Letter No. 110- -2- April 12 , i 976 and the public works director are proposing one additional restriction for council consideration. The council may re~~ll,that periodic concern has been expressed by residents with regard to the street widths of both East and-West Pleasant Avenues, and 5orne severe traffic congestion problems have been experienced on both of these streets. .These problems have resulted in difficulty in snow removal during the winter season, and public safety problems in moving emergency vehicles in and out of these' areas. Because of the- very unique problems caused by these two streets , the public works director and,the public safety director have considered these areas indep- endently of the high school parting control issue, in an. attempt to provide a long range solution to the problem. `The proposal to assure adequate. traffic flow on these two streets i to prohibit parking on the side of the street bordering the railroad property. 'This recommendation would involve the west side of East Pleasant Avenue from 68th Street to 76th Street and the east side of West Pleasant Avenue from 66th Street to 77th Street. The public safety director and the public . works director are also recommending that parking. be prohibited on West 77th Street between West Pleasant Avenue and Harriet Avenue since this area is simply a continuation of West Pleasant Avenue at the same street width. Both of these recommendations a,re reflected in the, proposed resolution. Other restrictions proposed for East and West Pleasant Avenues are based on Petitions from the residents .• . j The city. has made a comprehensive effort to contact all of the residents in `• the area of the high school parking control zone to determine the specific control ' patterns that best meet the needs of the various residential areas. in the area. A total of 134 responses were received to the questionnaire. The attached resolution reflects the majority opinion based on these 134 responses. It is the recommendation. of both the public safety director and the public works director, in which;I concur, that the city council adopt the attached resolution establishing parking control zones in the area of the Richfield High School, and .limiting parking to' one side of East and West Pleasant Avenues. Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff . City l~Jlanager - WSB/eja cc: Public Safety Director - ~ Public Works 'Director ' .~ ~, RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RELATING TO TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS - PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN THE VICINITY OF THE RICHFIELD HIGH SCHOOL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the City .Engineering. Division is hereby authorized and directeo to erect the following signs at the. following locations., to-wit: "NO PARKING SCHOOL DAYS, 8x00 A.M. TO 10:30 A.M." - Both sides Harriet Avenue, 73rd Street to 74th Street Both sides 73rd Street, Garfield Avenue to West Pleasant Avenue- North side 73rd Street, Pillsbury Avenue to East Pleasant Avenue South-side. 72nd .Street, Harriet Avenue to Grand Avenue East-side East Pleasant Avenue, 68th Street to 69th Street East side East Pleasant Avenue,.72nd Street to 74th .Street West .side West Pleasant Avenue, 72nd Street to 73rd Street rrNO PARKING SCHOOL DAYS, 10:00 A.M. TO 1:00 P.M." Both sides Wentworth Avenue, 69th Street to 70th Street "NO PARKING SCHOOL DAYS, 8:00 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M." Both sides Harriet Avenue, 69th Street to 70th Street East side Harriet Avenue, 70th Street to 71st Street Both sides Harriet Avenue, 71st Street to 72nd Strut Both sides Grand Avenue, 69th Street to 70th Street Both sides Pillsbury Avenue, 69th Street to 70th Street .North side 72nd Street, Harriet Avenue to Grand Avenue ..South side 72nd Street, Grand Avenue to West Pleasant Avenue East-side East Pleasant Avenue, 69th Street to 70th Street West side Z~dest Pleasant Avenue, 66th Street tq 70th Street "NO.PARKING ANY TIME" West-side East Pleasant Avenue, 68th Street to 76th Street East side West. Pleasant Avenue, 66th Street~to 70th Street .East side West Pleasant Avenue, 72nd Street to 74th Street j. East side West Pleasant Avenue, 75th Street to 77th Street South side West 77th Street, West Pleasant Avenue to Harriet j Avenue 2. That when the aforementioned traffic control signs have been so erected on said streets, they shall be official traffic control signs of the City of Richfield, and failure to observe such signs shall constitute a violation of the .traffic Ordinance of this City. 3. That-the .City Engineering Division is hereby authorized and direr ected to remove all existing parking restriction signs at the above loca- trans. 4, That this resolution supersedes all previous conflicting resolu ,sons. J . _ /o '- CITY OF RICHFIELD,. MINNESOTA Office of City Manager ' ~"' ~- Council Letter No. 109 Agenda April 12, 1976 The, Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject:: Special Use Permit, 6945 Penn Avenue On May 29, 1973 the city council approved a special use permit allowing operation of a nursery on the- property located at 6945 Penn Avenue . The council action included the stipulation that the special use permit was limited to a period of five years or until there was a change of ownership outside of the immediate .family, whichever occured first. Mr. Snow, thee. owner of the property, is interested in selling the .property ~' to a I~r. Peter Q. Hoverster~, who wishes to continue operation of a izursery at ', • this site.. Because',gf the stipulations of the special use permit issued in 1973, it is now- necessary for Mr. Hoversten to apply for a new special use permit. Mr. Hoversten', has applied for a special use permit and has also requested that the ,city counc!1 waive the normal procedure of planning commission review and recommendation of special use permit applications. The staff has reviewed Mr. Hoversten's request and. recommends that the city .council deny tl~e request to waive the normal procedure. This recommendation is based on the fact that the operation of the nursery at this site is a permanent. = development activity, rather-than a temporary operation. .The staff feels that a complete review of ',,the special use permit including notification of area property ,owners, planning commission consideration and formal hearing notice publication should be undertaken prior to city council action. Respectfully submitt , G~ ~~ Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager `~ WSB/eja - cc: Public Works Director Planning Director 1 ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA ~'~, Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 108 Agenda April 12, 1976 ~~ The. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: ~I _ ' Subject: Discussion of Procedure for Golf Course Project Mayor Law has requested that there be a discussion item on the April 12, 7976 city council agenda for the purpose of considering a special advisory c~mmi'tte,e for the golf course project.. About a month. ago I provided council members wi h a status report on the MAC golf _course'lease project. At that time a schedule wasr attached to my +~ re.port indicting,the major items which must be accomplished in order to con- sides abond- issu ' e referendum this coming fall and construction in 19'77. A copy of that s~~iedule 'i$ enclosed herewith. h T e sc h ed~ul ~~ ro e p poses that the initial exploration of this issue be done under th@ auspices of the ,city -co'uncil°and the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission with a special golf course advisory committee to be established once it has been final:~y determined that a lease can be negotiated and executed with the MAC. The hatter has been discussed by the Park and Recreation Aduisory Commission 'and we are proceeding with the major items listed for the month of April. In this ~ regard the. attached questionnaire has been :designed and prijZted for distribution with the: ,quarterl~ report this:. coming week: It is ,hoped that; the results of•`this questionnaire will provide a ":good indication of community s~ntime~nt and be helpful in soliciting the amen.: of individuals who would be interested in actively working in support of the golf course ::project. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ i ' ~ ~ Wayne S. Burggraaff ~ ' City Manager ~: .~. PROPOSED GOLF COURSE SCHEDULE April, 1'97G -Confirm MAC lease language and obtain indications from MAC and Richfield City Council that both governing bodies would be willing to enter into such a lease. Establish initial advisory committee (preferably the Richfield Park . 'and Recreation Advisory Commissions . l Develop specifications for feasibility studies to include site analysis, -market area analysis and cost and rev~nu.e projections:. Conduct limited community survey to obtain indications of support for a golf course project. . May, 1976 Select consultant for feasibility study and initiate fihis study, . Acquire necessary boundary survey topographical leasing information, utility plans, airport operatipnal restraints, etc. June, 1976 - .Complete feasibility study. duly, 1976 Consideration of the results of the feasibility study by advisory committee and city council. - Execution of lease with MAC. August, 19.76 ~ . . ~ - Initiate planning for bond issue referendum. November, 1976 Bond issue referendum vote. Employment of golf course architect. December, -1976 Completion of preliminary design plan for golf course and any other recreational facilities. `:, _ j'anuary, 1977 Preliminary plans approved by the city council. March, 1977- Construction drawings completed and bidding: process initiated. April, 1977 Construction to start. May, 1977 Develop maintenance program and obtain delivery on maintenance equipment. '~ uly, 1977 ~ , Situ construction substanfiially completed. Employ professional golf course staff personnel August, 1977 Seeding of golf course September, 1977 .Golf course club house substanfiially completed and sodding worm completed. August, 1978 _ Course open for play. February, 1976 ' ~ GOLF COURSE QUESTIONNAIRE . . ~_ - .. Dear Resident: - . _ ~ ~ e City of Richfield is researching the possibility of,developing a golf course to be { -. ~cated on an approximate 200 acre site east of Cedar Avenue between 66th Street and Highway 494 on Metropolitan Airport Commission land. This golf course would be in addition to any current recreational use of MAC. property in this area. A most important part of our research is the response from ttie community. We have developed this questionnaire so that-your thoughts can be considered. when the time. =~ comes to decide how and if the land should 6e leased and developed. Please take a few minutes. to complete and return this questionnaire. Postage is not _ required. The deadline for returning this questionnaire is Friday, April 30, 1976. . Your-cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thank you. RICHFIELD PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -FOLD - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - -~- - - - - - FAMILY INFORPIATION:' Please fill in one line for each individual living in your household. ('the numbers in the parenthesis are for computer purposes.) . ~ ~ SEX ~ ~ ' AGE. Male ~ Female 0-17 18-35 35-59~ 60 & Over . Spouse - - _ _ ____ <7) Children.. .. _ - _ - .- (~3) -or Other" (Oldest _ _ . _ ..:_ .-. (19) -. FYRST) ~ ~ ~ (25) . ~ ~ (31) r .~ - ---- . _ ~ _ (37) •~1: Do you and/or your family feel there is a need for additional recreational facilities -in the City of Richfield ? Yes tdo (43) - - 2. Would you and/or your family favor construction of a golf course at the Metropolitan Airport Commission site with all construction costs and operating expenses paid by 'revenues generated by the golf course ? Yes No (44) ., 3. How many members of your family would use the golf course if built ? (45) !, 4.Please check the appropriate line below to indicate how often you or members of your family. would use the golf course if built . Once a day Once a month Never ~~+~-~1~ .. Once a week Once a season. Other please specify _ as •l'., CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ' Office of City: Manager ; . Ccuncil Letter hTo. 107 Agenda April l2, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and Members of'the City Council . -:City of Richfield Gentlemen• Subject: Discussion of Task Force for Fire. Prevention Study., Mayor Law has requested that there be an item on the April 12, 1976 city council. agenda for the purpose of considering appointments to a task force which will have the responsibility, for preparing a fire protection plan for the city. About a month ago I sent council members a copy of a ba sic fire protection sjtudy which had beer. prepared by Fire Chief Dick Simpson. • At that time I indicated that I wanted to appoint a task force in the near future to work on the preparation of such a _fire protection plan. I indicated that members of the task force would be primarily city staff members con- cerned with code enforcement and fire protection, but would request. suggestions from council members for citizen rnembership on the task fcrce. Respectfully submitted, (~~ ~, Wayne S. Burggraaff . City Manager WSB/eja ` cc: Public Safety Director !r, . { ~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA '~ Office of CityManager - Council Letter No. 106 Agenda April:l~, 1976 The Honorable Mayor and ~`` Members. of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: . Subject: Confirmation of Board of Review Citizen Appointments Section 7.04 of the city charter states that the Board of Review shall consist of members of the city council and two residents of the city appointed for one year terms by the city manager and approved by the city council. The charter further.states that the two resident members must be experienced in real estate matters. The city council has set 7:00 p.m. Monday, May 17, 1976 as the time and date for 'the 1976 Board of Review. In accordance with the city charter I have selected Mr. Harry Tickner, 6429 Russell Avenue and Mr. Walter Hoffman, 6524 Grand Avenue for appointment as the two citizen members on that board... The charter requires that the appointment of the two citizen . .members- be approved by the city council. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution. ', Respectfully submitted, Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB/eja cc: Finance Director ..City .Assessor .~ Mr. Scott, Yackley, 714 ..10th Street South, and Mr. William Fore, .Route 1, Cold Spring, Mi~T. are listed on the April 12, 1976 city council agenda as applicants for new taxicab driver licenses. ~ ,~~ ~ ~~ Investigation conducted a s part of the license application proce s s has substant',iated the fact that Mr. Fore has a number of moving traffic violations and Mr. Yackley a number of other charges. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council deny these two applications for axcab. 'v t dri er lice ses n - 7 .Z 3 C'IT`Y OP RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA- Office of C'it~,~ i~~'fanager Counc'i1 Letter No. 104 Agenda April 12, 1976 The Honorable Ma_oor ,' and ', I~Iernbers of theCity Council City of Richfield ~ Gentlemen: ; ~ Subject: Discussion of Facilities. for Richfield Boxji~g C~Iub ~ Councilman Luettinger has as}:ed that there be a discussion item on the April 12`," 1976: city council agenda for the purposeof consider~ing~the .need of ~ ~ new facilities for the Richfield Boxing C'1ub. ~, r` ~ At the present time facilities are provided by he Richfield School District in the basement of, theWoodLake School. That school building will '~e closed ` at .the end of the present school ~~ear. It is anticipated that it will be sold and demolished shortly, thereafter.` ~' ~ ,., Respectfully submitted, - ,: ~~ ~, ~ ~. J ((( ~ ~) i. ~ G~ 1 Wayne S. Burggraaff '` ,: City Manager ; ~~ ~' , ~~VS B/e j a _ ~ ` cc: ParkandRecreationDirector ~ `' ~~ ~. i 4, ``~ t i r' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA . Office of City Manager ` Council Letter No. 103 Agm da April 12 , 1976 The Honorable Mayor and - .Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: -, Subject:' Special Use Permit, .Burger King Restaurant, T40 E. 78th St. Mr. Jerry Sisk',, Vice President of BK Associates, Inc. , owners of the Burger \ . King Restaurant. at 140 East 78th Street, has requested a special use permit in order to :establish adrive-up/serve through window in the Burger King Restaur- ant located at 140 East 78th Street. i The following items are attached to this letter for reference: 1. Exhibit A ,shows the current zoning of the site 2, Exhibit B shows the current land use on the site 3. ~ Exhibit C,' is a copy of the zoning ordinance conditions governing the issuance of a special use permit 4. Exhibit D, is a proposed site plan prepared by the applicant 5. Exhibit E I,is a sketch showing -how the off-street parking contract would have to be amended. if the permit is granted Applicants Proposal The applicant (proposes to construct adrive-up/serve-through window on the wrest side of the existing building. This serve-through window is designed primar- ily for customers who purchase large quantities of food and/or those who come ..during.. their lunch. hour. A food order is first placed at a menu/speaker sign,. which will be located on the north side of the building as shown on Exhibit D. •After an order has been placed, the customer would drive- around the northwest corner of the building to pick up and pay for his' purchase at the service window - on the west side o~~f the building. Customers would then exit from the western frontage road driveway. Access to this drive-up system is from Second Avenue and the easternmost :frontage road driveway. The .traffic flow wi 11 move counter- clockwise around the building. The area proposed for the service window drive presently contains 11 parking stalls. Additional parking stalls on the west .side of the building would be sep- crated: -from the drive through lane by a buffer strip separating the driving area ~Y Council Letter No. 103 -2- Agenda April 12, 19T6 from the west side parking area. The only alteration to the exterior of the t ~ ~ existing building would be the addition of the service window. Zoning: Ordinance Requirements The zoning ordinance` allows drive-in business, where- people are served in automobiles, in an industrial zone. upon the issuance of a special use permit. 'The conditions governing issuance.of a special use permit are attached a•s Exhibit C. The zoning ordinance provides that. a special use permit- for this purpose -cannot be granted unless the proposal is found to be in compliance witri the con- ditions governing issuance. of the special use permit. Findings. In reviewing this proposal, attention was given to customer accessibility, ~. parking requirements and traffic congestion and turning movements. No changes . are proposed in the location of the existing parking lot entrances.. As described earlier, access to the drive-through facility will be from the east side of the restaurant building,' and exiting will be from the west side.. Adequate space exists - within the site to allow for a reasonable buildup of customers waiting to order . ~ without. causing backup onto the frontage road or Second Avenue. Because traffic. .movement would b~ counter clockwise around the. existing building, some traffic _ congestion and a potentially conflicting traffic flow pattern could be expected to ~~ occur at the west exit/entrance and the frontage road. The potential traffic conflicts result from serve-through window traffic exiting on the left side of the drive and traffic from the frontage road entering om the same side. Thee situation is slightly compounded by the close proximity of the commer- vial parking lot entrance immediately to the west. HoN ever, the LaBelle's and Lee Ward's peak business hours do not normally coincide with Burger King's .prime business hours and this traffic flow pattern may not create serious problems. -•~=$u_rger King experience indicates that the average number of customers per auto is 1. 5. A 100. seat restaurant of this type experiences turnovers about three times per hour during peak hours, and once every two hours during. non- . peak hours. During a 12 hour day the following traffic is estimated to be gener- ~. ated by Burger King: ,' Peak Hours (4 hours) 800 cars (75%) Other (8 hours} 267 cars (25%) Tota'1 1, 067 cars (100%) Burger King`s peak hour traffic occurs between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p. m. and between 5:00 p.m.', and 7:00 p.m. Of this number of cars per 12-hour day it is _ .estimated that 22%, of 23:5 cars, :will use the serve-through window. Traffic counts'conductea an 1974 indicate the following non-Burger King related ~.- Council Letter No. 103 --~- ~ April 12, 1976 - -traffic on the frontage road: - ' _. - ~'®ftal. Cary Eastbound Westbound Noon-time peak hours . 1~1 87 104 ' 11:00. a.m. - 1:00 p.m. Evening peak hours ~ ~~~ 140 121 5:00 p. m. - 7:00 p.m. There are three entrances to the Burger I~~".r~g restaurant: Second Avenue, east . frontage road and west frontage road. ..Assuming a proportional use of both the east frontage road entrance and th.e ~avest fran~ge road entrance, and limited use - o£ the Second Avenue enhance, the falflo~ang use of cntrancas can be anticipated: East enhance ~7/a 605 cars . West entrance ~6`~ 387 cars Second. Avenue entrance 7% 75 cars Total 1©~% 1, Ofi7 cars It is estimated that 22 % or 235 of the total. number of cars would use the serve- through ~vindow. Thus, there is the pot~:rlt%al. far the 387 cars entering the west entrance to come in conflict with tiie 35 tears ex.ting }he west exit on the same side. of the drive as those entering. HDwe~er, t31e exit traffic is spread over a . four-hour peak period and an eight-lss~ur ~n-beak period. Thus, the average hourly potential traffic conflict would ~e ~pproxate3.y: . Peak hour's 171D ears or 44 cars per .hour . Non-peak hours _5?l cars or $ cars per haur ~~ - Totah ~~5 ors The existing seating capacity of t'he restant is 100 seats , which means that 34 off-street parking spaces arf: re~.~ed. In addition, 18 more parking spaces are needed 'to accomodate those custaraers using the carryout food a rea . Therefore, a total of 52 parking. spaces are necessary. The applicant presently has F1 off-street parking spaces. Construcia.an of the drive-through lane requires the removal of 11 parking spaces, bringing ~'ie site. total down to 50. .However, six automobiles can be accomodated in the. drive-through lane without interfering with the other parking area traffic. ~usta~•ner use of thc.drive-up service window should reduce the demand for parking. spaces naw used by carryout customers. - Vehicles greater than 8' 6" in height would be restricted from using the drive- .through facility because. of tie roof overhang of ~e restaurant building, and a - warning sign-will be installed. Signs wl.~in the parking area-will direct the - users of the facility. - - Staff Recommendai:i~on Construction of the driveup window will. reduce the demand placed on the _- Council Letter No. 103 -4-- April 12, .1976 existing parking facilities by allowing customers to remain in their car while placing and receiving their order. A Burger King facility of this type is presently located in~Excelsor. It is estimated .that approximately 35% of the Excelsior 'Burger King store customers. use the drive-through ordering facilities during peak. hours, and 22% during a 12-hour day, This facility has become a popular ordering '. alternative for Burger-King customers The addition of the drive-through. window will. create some traffic hazards and -traffic congestion on' public streets adjacent to the site and in the parking area. However, the proposed design appears to give sufficient direction for guiding the . user of the facility through: the parking area in such a way as to minimize conflict with regular parking lot traffic or street traffic. It is the opinion of the staff that the-issuance of this special use permit would ' ~ not -have a detrimental effect or be injurious to other property in the immediate . neighborhood. The stipulations contained in the original special use permit for the restaurant have been met. -The staff. recommends issuance of the special use permit with the following stipulations: 1. .That a new off-street parking contract be submitted and approved. 2. That additional- landscaping be accomplished. o ake an remedial action required by 3. That the a licant agree t t y PA ' the city if the. new design results in congested or hazardous conditions on street right-of-way. . Planning Commission Recommendation ~~ The planning commission reviewed .this application at its March 23rd meeting> The. traffic flow pattern on the west side of the building was discussed thoroughly and several alternatives were considered, including:.. 1. Creation of a larger curb cut to bring the drive-in window. traffic straight out to the frontage road. This alternative was rejected because potential- traffic conflicts would be transferred from the private driveway on the site to the public frontage road . 2. Making the west entrance/exit an exit only. This alternative _ ~ ~ was rejected because the "exit only" would make the west parking lot inoperable. 3. Making two di°iveway curb cuts, one for the parking lot and one for the. window. service exit. This alternative was rejected be- cause of the confusion it could create for people entering the westparking -lot and the traffic hazard. . The applicant appeared before the planning commission and although notices had been sent, no one ,else appeared to offer testimony before the commission. The ..Council Letter No. 103 :..5~ ~April 12, 19.76 . ,_ .. ; . commission recommended issuance of the special use permit with the staff recommended stipulations. Amendment to the Existing Off-Street Parking .Contract .:. If the special use permit is granted for the driveu~ serve-through window, it wilt be necessary to amend the existing off-street parking contract. It is recommended that it be amended to comply with the new off-street parking ' .. sketch (Exhibit E) . ;Respectful'iy submitted., . ~ f - ~l~ ~ " . Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager ce: Planning Director Public Works 1~i.rector . ', .erg ~ '• , ~. ~` .> >~~ ,~ `.~\ .~„ R 9 ~~-.~ •. ~1 \ ~ i ~ . 1 inc. tf' 7 ~ , ~ ' ~ ...,` ' ~ cr • ~ .. ~ ~ y ~ n ~. y ~\ ~`\ r `ti ~ ~ ~ ~` ~ .~ ~ "~ ~ ~ ovgg .F r o..r . va'sE ••vt aces •a9 OIL lf' ~ SL~~~t~~ent~ ~~ . . r .__ ~ -~k~l .a i N! N i ~ ~ N N i ~ ~ 'iP" w o - v^~ Tt '~ ~ +r. - IIPZ `r -.' c N ~' tr av t •~ a0a i ; am } oa+ ee~oF~ ~ I . ae=r f Oa// ~ evot. r 0a~, ooh' ~ ~iQe~ _ N ~ el Cp_. N N ~ ' h~ . ~ ? k} ~ - - ~- - ~w~ 1'ti SLR.. ~ _ 1 q• ~~' ~~ ~ ~. ~ t~" ~". ~ H N EMI •aJ' j ~ e / ~ ~~-'{ ; voyr~l N ' `d' v seg~~ ~ - N ~ uR v ~. .,v•6L, l$ ~ ea N N ~N ~ r- v~ ~p M OO('~ Oo~r o°p E~~ ~ COdC °pSC,. POI. L' ~ ~_~%~ 00/,~r ~9fC~ e" N} ~} `I {{ N~ NI . C~V~ N~ . } ~ I ~ N N [i ~ ~ t' g ; f:. .'.:.~ SC .'z.. 1. ((fkk I t 1 L ~` L s' ~ _. a} . .. cH+ ee- ~ ~ r d-v f ~ i ~ ... N ~ . awn eo F OO ~ ~ao ' r~ Oe t I +Cl ~ ~a °° ' rr' r-, ( uO a/Rt 'r' . ~g ~ e. I ~r9~ - ~ C~fi ( oos~i o^s=n °•~,~ (fff ooF H ooh M ~ eov t ZI~ o0 FI i -, .e -. e M W, te1 VV . C~~ e~/S N a ~R '_'t aemng ~. i ~. N •N~ ' ~. we.~i ---- N1 _ ~ ~N~ ar~~1 y~r~i . s I' fl9 ~~'~ _ J Q W .:.. /W~(~ t./ i '; 1. OQ9[ D BG D bt D DZ D 9Z 9£ 9i ~ Q~ bb9L ~ N t4 V' ~ M t0 ~ M N O ~ ~ w D D D D 1091. 50 6! 'Z LZ ££ 6i Si49L ~ ~ 0091 8'.0: 'bl Q, 0'Z D` _y Z£ D 9£ D yb L D ' ~ N M ' n D r ~ ~.. 1 ~. W J ~ ,~ - } v "~ I i - ' ' A V! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- '-' Q ~ ~ i ' X ~ ~ i ~- o o ~`- D 9L 60 SI' i2 ^~ ~ £i 6£ 5x91 ~- ~ j _ - ~~ ~ y - 009L 80 41 OZ 9 . Z£ B£ b b3L ..- N M ~ ~ 0 r„ 09 - - _. - - `° , r, a ,,, _ ~? _ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ s y _.. ~ - . 6~ La s c ! 00 90-- '~ 'b t OZ - 9Z c Z£ Sri >Y91 ' ' . .. ~ N p .. d. ~ t0 r.. ~~ to ~ M N ~ ~ . ... ~:.. _. 7--~ D ` ~ ~. :109` GO._ 5t L2: £f - 1..';. q~ .. ~"~ ~ _- -- --- ` (1) Any of the. uses or pur::oses for which such permits are required or permit- ' ted by the provisions. of this chapter. ~! (2) Public utility or public service uses or pul;lic building in any district when found to be necessary far the public health, safety, convenience or welfare. (3) Commercial excavating or natural materiaJ_s used for building or construc- tion purposes, in any district. (4) To classify as a conforming use any institutional use existing in any dis- trct at .the time of the establishment of such district. (5)' To permit the location of .any of the following uses in a district from which *_hey are excluded by the provisions of this cede; airport, library,.com- munity center, church, hospital and institution of an educational, philanthrop- ic or charitable nature, cemetery,' crematory, mausoleum or any other place fore the disposal of human dead. (6) J?or any use covered by section 3.35. Subd. 2. Limitation on Issuance. A special permit may not be issued for the purpose :of granting an adjustment or appeal pursuant to section 3.40 nor for. any. use not authorized for the specific district for which the permit is sought,. nor for any use prohibited in all districts by the provisions of this part. Subd. 3. Application. Application for the issuance of a special use permit shall be made to the chief inspector. Any proceedings to classify 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 Hearin. The council may hold such hearings on the proposal to issue.a special use permit as it may consider necessary; but at least one public ~~;~. hearing shall be held by the council or by a committee or commission to be desig- nated by the council in any application for a use permit for ~ establishment of any use listed in subdivision 1, subsections S and 7, of this s~.~Ction. Subd. 5. Conditions Governin Issuance. The council shall not. grant a permit for any of the uses enumerated in subdivision l hereof unless it finds that the est- ablishment, maintenance or operation of the use for which a use permit is sought`... will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental, (1) to-the health, safety, morals, ccmfort, convenience or welfare of the. persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or (2) to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in- the neighborhood. ~ ~~~d Lr f~;. ~,~ ~ ~~=~-~' Subd. 6. Im osition of Conditions on Iss~an~e n The council.may impose conditions and require guarantees in the granting o uspe~Ymits. Any use permitted under the terms of any special use. permit ~hal.l be established and conducted in conform- ~_ ity to the .terms of such permit and of any'~onditions designated in connection therewith. Subd. 7. Special Use Permit Time Limitations. A special use permit expires one year after it has been issued unless the use for which the permit has been granted has commenced within such year or unless, upon written application of the owner cf the affected land, the council shall extend the expiration date of such permit for an additional period, not to exceed one year. x~~, ~ - 'i - . ,J ~ - r gg ~ f rt ~ ~ '~ - . ~ _ _ '~ 263.7 Law Ovhd. Clearance Sign - ~ ~x5 coat: tronsformor pod CanC.- I P N `: 121x121 /~r1c. °d ~ TFFG;fi <PPfYJd -rte-- ----~--pick-up, Lane Sign - F ' 1_ a N Sp°a!cEr Rl ~^U Siyn ~° r~uct;«~~~oaar~c ~vL ~. t 9_ z ~1~6r111JR - i [a.! C.! ,~ ~~~i, r:~ - - h f« p~~. ~ '~ K .., ~. S ~.r CITY.bF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ` Orfice of Cit-y Ma~}~ager _ ' ~ ,: Council Letter No . ~ 102 ~' I ~` Agenda'Apri112, 1976 ~'' ~, ~; ~ ~ ~The:Honorable- Mayor ~. _~ and h ~~~ ~~, T:Iembers' of the C'i y Council " .. City of :Richfield Gentlemen: ~,, Subject} Bids on Street`Lighting Improvgment'Construction for Areas.. Nos. 10 and 11 ,, ; On April 2, 19;76 bids were~opened.by the city -manager fore' construction of street, lighting improvements in District Nos. 10 and 11, City 'roject No. 674., in accordance with'~prevous city'couricil:authorizafi,~on. The c' y clerk, public works director, planning director and two members `Qf the consulting engineer's ~` ~:: office also represe'ritedthe city a,t. th'e~bid opening.. ~~~~ District No. 10 includes that area bounded on 'x~e north by 66th .Street,. the east by Penn`Avenue, the south by 78th Street-and-the west by Xerxes Avenue. District No. 1>l includes that area; bounded on-the north by 62n~~ Street,, the east by 35W,, the south~by 66th Street and the west by Xerxes Avenue. The attached bid tabulation indicates the bid su}~mitted by"each of the seven ~ , bidders, for the propo ed project. The three alternate bids were.: 1. Aluminum standards ~ 2 Stainless steel standards ~ 3 . Add for power/door lumin rie s _ Stainless stee~ standards:have been installed M other port~~.ons of the city where the street improvement program has been completed. Th power door ~~ luminaries were in~ ailed in 1:975 to provide easier access for maintenance and changing of ba lla s s. d The consulting engineer's cost, estimate for the construction of this project was: $452,000. The low bid was submitted ,by,Egan-McKay~Eiectricala Contractors,, Inc. in the amount~of $367,367 00.°`f~r''stain~le s steel stdndar s, plus Alternate '.Bid`II1;_ powerldoolumnaries, in t~h~'•,amourtof,$l';5,33,~`for'aotal bid of `e $3 e$ , 900.00. Thi~ low bid is 18^l~'be~lov~ the estimate. ~~ ~ ~ ~~ •` V ~'' QA~- ~, ,3 ~a TM~i~~ ~~ _ V`~ ,~°~ ~ ~ r ~°`~ ,; • ~ N -i • e ~ (D n 0 m N. O r ~- r ~~~ .'~ v td K. ~ p, m o ~ ~ O c~-F ~~ ~' ui N w~+-~ ~ ~ N ov ~• ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c+ u~pi U] ~ ~ rn ~ 1~-' c~+' f--' V T~^^ ' ~ Vj O 1^,, p~ . - J i" ~W~~ ¢~ m Vry~\ /~~~ W F" v U1 ~~~ O Or! O~ ~ N O UI ~ • n x ~~ N N cE' K ^~^--M i ~" W i V Irk H C] • fD '~ ~ ~ H c+ O Fi ~ ~ O Y K H ~ ~ O C) . O ~ O O K ~c ~~ o o x ~+ r~ o N ~ ~ you • C> c+ N F-+ n c+ ~ ~ f,, c+ c+ 1 td W i ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ll n (D ~ } l~ H n C K n N ~ ~ ~ + c N. ~• N• ~ ~ N• rn ° ° ~ u~ c~ ~ o c~ c~ +'• ° ° ~ o o • ~ N d- 0 0 trJ Gd ~1 td bd lTl tr1 trJ bi bd bc1 ~ W td ~ N ~ - - - iw w W w ~ .~ .~ ~ ~ Co N -~ Ol Oo ~ ~ H V V- V V ` 1 P O O ~ O O W '-J ~ ~ O O O O O O O Q~ O O O O O O O ¢ ~ Cf ~ ~ • ' -Efl- ~' -~' -~ W W W W TA ~ N ~ ~' O OD ~O W H V V V O -~ I-' ~' O Vl W C'F (D O O 1 Oo O W a\ [D ~ O O d\ W O W ~ O --' H F O O O O O O O H O O O O O O O ~ `.3 R+ R~ N + -f -F f -~- t f ~ ~ om t -' {f} K H V N y V7 W W ~ O R+ (D ~ W ~ ~ N ~O ~O O O\ W p~ hJ O O ~' -~" O W W ~ H r n H bd d- H O O O O O O O ~ d •~y ¢t ~i f.+. K ro C] bd O H O ~'• fi y ;p trJ '~• .o ~ ~ . ~ (D c~+ H n N ~' 'Z O ~ c~+ ~~~ bd • c+ d °o r ~ N• ;~ a ~ c~ ~ :~ .~ N V ~ `C v ~ N'd Y O cam. ~ ~, N O~ ~' [A C) t+ ~+- N N• ~ ~ •~ O -~zrn ~~ N N N CITY OF RICHFIELD Baal Opening • April 2, 1976. ~. STREET LIGHTITdG & APPURTENANT WORK CITY .PROJECT N0. 674 AREAS N0. 10 AND 11 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of .the-administrative staff_-was called to~order by Wayne S. Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for Street Lighting and Appurtenant Work, City Project No. 674, Areas No. 10 and 11 as advertised in the official newspaper on March 10 and 17, 1976. Present: Wayne S. Burggraaff, City Manager Peter Eberz, Public Works Director Richard Krier, Planning Director Thomas J. Moran, City Clerk LeRoy Nyhus, Orr-Schelen-Niayeron The following bids were submitted and read aloud:. • BIDDER AND BID SECURITY ~ ALTERNATE I ALTERNATE II ALTERNATE III Egan. i~leKay B. B. 5% $367 367 $367,367 $.1,533 Electric Service Co. 'B. B. S% 422,167 430,176 1,934_ Hoffmann Electric B. B. 5% 377 460 388 483 5 694 Batzli Electric B. B. 5% 428 900 434 700 1 590 Hilite Electric B. B. 5% 368 193 373 533 3 963 :Collins Electric B. B. 5% 376 000 379 000 3 500 Electric-Repair & Constr. Co. B. B. 5% 469 000 48I 000 1 320 The City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at tr.e regular council meeting of April 12, 1976. :.• ~ - Thomas J. Moran City Clerk ~, ~- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT TO EGAN-MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., 7100 MEDICIPIE LAKE ROAD, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA FOR ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING AND APPURTENANCES THERETO, AREAS NOS. 10 & 11 CITY PROJECT,. N0. 67~+ Clerk's File.No. f BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as -. follows : - . . 1. That it is hereby determined-that the bid of Egan-McKay Electrical Con- tractors, Inc."is the lowest bid by a responsible bidder for the construction of City Project No. 671+, Ornamental Street Lighting, Areas Nos. 10 and 11. 2. That the bid of Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors, Inc. for the construction of the above referen^ed project at the price contained in their proposal of April.... 2, 1976, with an estimated construction cost of $367,367.00, using stainless steel standards, and the addition of Alternate Bid III in the amount of $1,533.00 for power/door luminaires, is hereby accepted. 3. That the proposed contract between Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors, Inc. "~ and the City of Richfield be given Clerk's File No. and be placed on file. :. That said proposed contract for the construction of said city project is hereby approved and adopted and the Mayor and Manager .are hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for or in behalf of the City of Richfield and the Clerk is authorized and directed to affix. the city seal thereto. • 1+. That payments to be made tinder the terms.of said contract shall be charged against the Construction Fund. 5. That the Corporate Surety-Bond in the sum of the estimated contract price which accompanies said proposed contract is hereby accepted and approved. 6. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to return the security documents to the unsuccessful bidders upon the execution of said proposed contract. Adopted by the City Council this 12th day of April, 1976.. -Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk .~~-~ r 3 iT CITY OF MCHFIELD, I~IINNESGTA _ s. °O.ffice of City Manager ~? { Council Letter No. 101 '; ;~ Agenda April 12, 1976 ~_. '~" ~ ~ s~ ~ -v, , The I~or~orable I~I~yor ~_.F ~ and'- , ~ _ ~ ~ r n ' ~ I~;Iembers of the City Council ~ ~ , ~ ,~, L City. of .Richfield , ~ -: . ~ Gentlemen: I,~ _ Sub;ject:', Special U e Permit., Oak drove Lutheran CYiurch M ~~ ~ ~~7001; Lynd~~ale Aven-ue ~'~i i . Mr. -Myron O1s~n, Mr. Earl Youngren and_ Mr. Richard Jolson of the- Oak.'. P Y Drove Lutheran Church have requested the° issuance of a; specal~use permitto ~~~ ,~ a11ov~.- operation of a Day Activity Center in a,re'sidential zone The..,center ~ , . would beyoperated ~b.y Day Ac•tvity Centers of Minneapolis, Inc. ~ whowould rent the space`fro m.ahe church ""A.special "use permit is requ~ed for this use ~ ,Y is as a school use.in :a residential district per :Chapter III, Part 1~V, Section 3.30, `~' ~ IA ~s Subd. 2 ; paragrap ~ \1 of the muncipa`.1 code. ~~ - }~-; The follow.ing ~items are attached to his-letter and will b~ referred to ~~, . ~ throughout this rep ort; ~ i ~. l . Exhibit A ~ shows the current zoning of the proposed Iay , Activity C enter and the immediate surrounding area. i ; 2 .< Exhibit B; 1 I which shows the current.-land use in the area . " ~~- ~~~ 3. Exhib"it C . y _ i which is a copy: of the zoning ordinance regulations, Section 3 x '30, Subd. 2, Paragraph 1. 4. Exhibit D a site plan of the church. ` - 5. :.Exhibit E, , Hennepin County Health and Social Services Advisory Board Review . ~~ ~ Background Inform tion ~•.~: ~ ; Day Activity i Centers of Minneapolis, Inc. began its first program about l6 a years ago at Our t time it was aviour's Lutheran Church in IVlinneapolis..At th "~' a parent organize program operating on a parttime~ basis. Since the State of ~ Minnesota adopted a policy of de-institutionalization for me tally~xetarded people, s°~? ~ ~ this t e _of -ro rani has ex anded in its scope.and in the riuber cif people. served. Y1? p g P .;~~ rv ~ aj ~:~~. ~~p _ _ r - - x .~ .s .. . -.. ~. .:~ F . L., Council Letter No, r1~01 2-" April 12 , 1976 • 'x #{ Day Activity Centers of IVlinneapolis, 1nc. operates under a coporate board comprised of individuals -from parti"cipa'ti~7g churches, the Lutheran Social ~~ Service and the Hennepin County Hea"Lth and Social Services A~vis:ory Board: Day Activity Cente S of Minneapolis, Inc. is supported totally through federal, ' state and Hennepin~County funding. ''" 'The day,"activi~y center program is organized to". include up~to" 40 mentally. " } ~ retard ed persons. The program would be-;in operation Monday_ hrough Friday ~~~ " ~ from 9:00 'a , m.` to 3:00 p, m. Trarisp~rtaton for the program participant will :+ be handled by small~hand"icabs orvans. There will-be eight to ten'staff members working ~t the" center.. The program to be offered at Oak -Grove Lutheran Church ~ ca ~~ be compared to ~that offered at -the Fraser"School , but will be for adult men- to 11 retarded-. Thef ~ p g p Y program emphasis is laced bn small rou activities, geared to participants ability;.for learning "basic living skills..., The Day Activity"Center proposed at yak Grove-Lutheran hurch would be the first of its type4in the' south suburban area., Federal regulations limit the ~~& ~~," center"to a "contra_ct~ ;lease of one year which would run from Jul~• 1,:'.197.6 to July 1 ; 1977 if the special use permit is=granted," Day Activity Cer~ters are licensed by the Minnesota State Department of. Public" Welfare.; and the Hennepin County and Social` Services, Advisory. Board with""its Mental Retardation~Subcommittee acting in a review capacity."- This subcommittee reviews all propo als for funding _ as well as loca'tiori; `,programs to be.offered, and service area eed. •`Information " ".E on .the Hennepin County Health and, Social Services Advisory Board review fore " , ,this ",spe.cific activity center is atta ched (Exhibit E) . The servie area for this Day Activity CenterE is Richfield, Bloomington, Edina and Eden-Prairie.. There .are currently 12 Day Activity Centers"with various programs operating in Hennepin County. - . xY ~ ~,. ;:. ~s Zoning Ordinance Requirements 4 The zonin ord na i i c .~ g: nce requ res ssuan e of a special use permit for operation of a school in an "R" district as follows:.: ~ ~ Section 3..41 , ubdivision 5 ~ Conditions ;Go erning Issuance . The council shall not ra ' t 'a ermit for g p ahy of the uses ; enumerated in .subdivision 1 "hereof unless it finds that the e`stablshment, 'and maintenance.' of the use for which a us ~ perm't is sought I will not be det " imen'tal (1) to the health, safety,''morals, comfort, conven- iences or welfa re of the persons residing: or working in the~neiglborhood of "such use, or (2 ); o the. public"welfare or injurious to property or !improvement a in the neighbor ood . ;,.r F"findings ~. ~..; ,. , The s aff has r~ ,Vewed this request in a"ccordance with Se tion 3,.41; sub- ~ ~. division 5. ' y ~~ ~~- ,~- I - - - ~ ~ ~ . Council Letter No. .101 -3- April 12, 1976 - ~'? I ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1` Will he u' se of its• o~ ration b~ de"trmental to the h' alth of persons ~ . s ~resid~ing or.working in tlie~n~ei~hborhood ? The physical and mental health. of persons will not be "affected. as the use`- will not create additional noise, air pollution, dust 'or disruptions of social life: ~~ s ~s 2. Will the use be detrimental to the safety of other people.? I, ~''" Program participants will:,be .bused to and from the c urch. Safety V~ from acci~l'ents and ~.ieath (traffic, and other types) "canot bs guaranteed -~ in any circumstance. ~ I r:~,' '~' 3. Wi11 the use be detrimental to the comfort., convenience~or welfare ~~, -of peop"1e~ working or residing in the neighborhood ? ~ , _ ~ - ,Although the meaning of comfort, convenience and welfare is a difficult °'~, question, ,convenience and 'comfort can be directly slated to volume of '~ H ' traffic. As stated previously;' this use will not create a' detrimental 1 ` traffic pr blem . ~ ~~~~ ~ I 1~ 4!: Will the proposed use be detrimental to-the public welfare I~ ~ . • It is doubtful that a public detrimenf could occur. Areas of effect on the publi~ :welfare include crime rate.: and curtailmentx~of `public services . • _ ~: It is'doub~tful-that the day activity center would cause any increase in " , the crime ~ rate or curtail public services : `~ F j ~~ 5 Will'the use be injurious ,to property or improvements in the nei hborhood ? g I•. No building or. ite configuration changes will .occur ecause of the. day activity.: center. ` it is doubtful that a day activity center for ~ ~-• . mentally retarded adults will have any effect on nei ?hborhood ro ert g~. p p Y ~~ I or improvements. I • Staff 'Recommendatiol A beneficial community service. would be derived from this t . ype o";f operation . I It is expected ;that the majority of program participants will be from Richfield, and the remainder from tie other communities in the :service area previously described. The location of the church makes available numerous resources for learning through, experience , such as: -Wood Lake Na use Center, Bartholemew. Douse ;and the library. ~~= The Oak Grove Luth bran Church facility meets all applicable departrre~;nt of public ~n~elfare rules and regulations. The facility is in compliance with Richfield environ- mental health codes ~ . ~ ' r: It is the conclusion of the city s taff that the applicant has met'the requirements set forth in Section 2..41 of the city zoning ordinance for this s •ecial use permit. .. - s~ _ ~ '¢ Y wy ~' t a ~. (x`G.'""t .AYE ._ . II L'l~~ »..Z'_.r' : , in+3C 45 ~ 4t,t0 ~ bj eta 6< L~ x' 3p S -~ ~: ~ ~ y pia! ~ s,i ~ {.'~ ~ ~ ~~ C f_.. . 4.} ~ 4s ~ a4. ~ _. _ ~3._ ~, ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ •~B, ~`~~ ~~~ _? X21 '~ +7 \! ~~3 7 ...` ..`e.: ^,N ' ~ ~ STS °'> Q` y,1'/n,~1S _ zap • ~ -~ ~ o ,, ~ ~ _ j ~+ ~~ .,, 5 ~P 2 ~ . ,, i51,~ _ __ _~. ~ ~ ~ 2E ~2~~b .. _ a~ _ .s ~_ --~ ec J ~ " ~ ~1.:, ~i ~ ~ (~ ._.,.~ J Q ' La...4 U C.~ , _ e '-yam ' ~ ~c.SS '"!--° ~-±~~3.5. _ ~t ~ `~ _ g ~ ` ~°u23.2_ ~ . ~+....~ _. tl O _ 'L ~ _ -~- ~ ---- _ ~ pp ~~: i~J 4~ ° .._~., n. r5 ~_J (hoc p, ~ ~__--t'~..._-- ~ 5E 4~ 7 ~ O ~ ~ , ~ 1S.,d z 2 .t~6.t$ ___ - \~ " .chi ;'; t5 ?°'°,.$.'.7:_IO.. , a 4 { .,,1 .2d 6 _. ~.3 Ik i ~~~~ .- ~ -Yf 3....-S Ty~i ~11 w .e• `~ V 1 -^. Q ''J`~ i ,.. et~_. `~ ~ t h ii~.,~~_ ~ __~L~ 25 . O 1l~ y ~ t ~ ti~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' _ - ~ P. ~ _ 1Z . ~,.`~° 3 . ~if.132 ~0~~_3~: 0 ~~° 40 . .~j5o 5 , ~2~ 7 2_ /`?5oi9 i/'~E 22.._ b4u0 . ; ~ 'e 7 _ aS '2g_2 ~_ ~ v v v4v!~ ~qo ` (,y~lS~ ~' ~r 43 ~~y- b Y ,ZS,. ~~~ .L1. ~'.-.. ° ~ 1~ i~ ' - ~~ - .I.A ~ ~ i i C O U f.. J1 ~ I ~ ' i 6c 71 s t S T. s 2 I [] ° 12 k (.,~ -- ._ .~ 2 Q° ° Q 2 2 Q° 2 3 n o o~ 2.2 3 ~8 f N ~ ~ Q N ~ Q ,$ ^ N ~ - ~ } N. L-.-l. ~ ( p V C~ N N Q ~ ~ p V Q~~ 9 ~~ Ma ~~ 9:^M r ~t Q ~ °' ~~ ~~ ~-- [[3 t2 L:1 ~ a ~ 13 t2 C~ ~~~ ~~.,,.: r.:~.. ' _ ~~.. .. .,....~ U~ E ,.L~UI•..T1C!~~ ~ ~ :a;~-DL'c?~ _Da ~ l_.~ST (~,} _ _ a~i:},C~!'!ti=.^~iOli 1. '_'rn1L•':t?!1 il~~e.^,. Tn 'i:'t1C~. :: ~:~ D'! StrLCt, UnZeSS Ot17C"fF7iSe prOVid4d a- _ ._ _._ _.. ~I.~ i this r?lante:_ :~o building o?- 1at~d sh~.l_1 be u;,~cl and no building _~hall herecfter be nseet?d O~' :itiLCLU?'~^lif c1LG-''•_'@d C'<iC.^-•.pf. fOt' OI2C Ot fi'Orn Oi f•1'.C fOllOilil?V L2GG'~: ~'•.) :in~i^ ~C.l;2ilV C~STell~-g~ c~.2?d tl?elr 2C:°.~COY•y buildiitbC. ~ ..I - i.7 ~ C?~e~.'.CC'• , -s ? _7/:•. f Iii lI >.?73-~ i - ''~ _ -- ). 3 Horne occu»~tions. { ) 4 It i s `our_d and deL-erminad filet ti? c u . n~ ~ ~ - ~ { ) e o c anc of a sin__` _amil .c_s'den i c_ I' Y ~ Y .. ?i? & ^?2_gle ra.mily residence neigl?boriiood. by ~y number o{ unrslcted.ps_aons_te2ids to disru:::: and disturb the charac~.er o~ auch neigl2bo_hood; that ouch occupancy- tends to adversa?y affaot prc;~e2-ty valuationa of the other single family residences: in such n~ighbcrhood;-that such occupancy to:ids to involve :patterns or Iivi:~g and-conduct BJhiCI? are dif~`a_arLt {_om and offensive aiZd a_~noying to the .residents of other single f4mily ~esid~2?ce structures i r_he reighbo~l?ood; that• such occupancy tends to create spacial ,olive p~'Gblem:, for the city.; .than such occupancy is ,::ors in the nature of_ a mult_~ e residential use of p;:operty ar_d Shouldmore apn-ropriately' be is the ,multiple rQsidenee arias c-_ is?e city; and that ~uclz oc~unancy of a residei?tial unit in a multiple -ras?_d~.1CG' .one of the city is Iess 1_ilc~Iy to result in such adverse influences . or such adv~_sa ilfluence;, T:~il1 be ~-o~:ally absent in such multiple -residence zones. ~.. ~'~ ~iu u:?ls,~iul f0~ 2 siP_~le family residence EtrlfCtUre Ln the 'LC'3~.dCntial areas t0 be occupied,by a croup of individuals, `xceedng three in number, ~~ho are not related by blood, r.arriaga or adoption. Subd. 2 Us~c b;~ Snec_al iJse Permit. The olloT~~ing uses a-o pe?'mi tted only upon the Brocu_emn•r<t of special use permits as o-rGVidad`?n Section 3.4.1 of this chapter; {1) ~:?u_-c'?es, liLra-ries, museums; schools, memoria'_ buildings (including name 4 "'~ pietas and l:u~l°`ti".7 b0%a."=ds meeti.?b ti?e ~et'u=_em.`3nt3 Of this COdC). '~ _ {2) ~lul;~, golf couises; lodges, ~~ rernity or sorority houses, ~~ithout sez~- , 7i C2S ~C t11C 7L!:.i1..C customarily Carr i°_d Gn ~.s a bUuln~,~.S3. , {3) I3osnitGls, clinics and other buildings used for the treatment of-human ail- • meet: . " {•'s) P}?~1_aTth_opic and cha~_itavle ?ns~t~.tuticns other -thin those heretofore mentionee,a ;5) Th? ..car ci ??g of more .than tT:o L-o~.rder~ by. a residence a.mi ly. . (~) Public utility ir~sL-allations. ~ . ,^~ubri, 3. Hainht :e~ula.tions. T}o building shall hereafter ua erected or structurally altered i~~ the ~e~iderce di~rrict to e._ceed 35 feet or 2 l/2 ~to-ries in height subject t^- mcdificz~_ion~ and .exceptions provided in Section 3.39 of this chapter. Subd. !-. L_ct i:_ea, Frontage and Ya;-d Requirements. The foliGC9i27g renuirements shall 'be vbservn_d L-y all bui ldi ngs in the `~ ~" district hereafter erected o-r st-ructu-rally alte-rsd, ;:zbact to the modifications provided in .Section 3.3>' of-this chapter: . %'.) Lot ~~~a, Every bui ld3ng desig2?ed `or the hou~in~ .of one iami_ly, together 5:~i th i t.~ acceaao•ry buildings, shall be located on a lot in one o:-nership having an are=.: of not less than g0~,~ s.~ua-re feet irECluding the adjacent one-half of the abutting a' 1 ey • {2; F'co2?t- Yard. Each building eh~:ll have .a front yard o~ not less than 30 feet subject ~~o modified re~uiremnnLs contained ir_ Section 3.3 of this chapter. {3) S`de Ward. Each building shall h~:ve t~ao side yards, one on each side of th` building. she side yards in_the case of 1 l./2 story or smaller buildings • shall .have ~ T~7idL'h of not less than ~xive feet and in file case of larger .buildings . shall h«ve a ,•ridth of not less than 10 fees., subject to modifications and specifi- I~d,~~~~ cations provided' fo"t i.r erection 3.3 of .this chapter. Each d~~elling lo- i _ _ - • • 54 2-11-7~s .. , . . ,. gu, .. ..... .. ~ , • ~t ~ r-~ // 1 1 { , t ~ W it ~c • .J `'C ~ ~ `„ ~~ (~ h i . Q..: o ~ t •• t .. ~. - . ~~ C U ~ L~. E 7 f • ---5 1-t- . ~ i j t _ s '« ~- z I L' ~} [• 0 ~ I` t 1 ~ ~~ . ,,;4y` : .. ~ _ ~ }' F--- ~ ~ [ 111 1(~ o t,~. ~, `_ Y •. ~-- }f~~`~ ^^ n > Gc~ q , ~~, r~ i ~ ._ ~;; IRCS` (~ C - . ~ ~ ~ i l ~ ~~ Y c ,. ~ ~ . ~ ~ fit, t • < ~ - 9 1. (~ ' ^~ } . A~ • • t ,. • =.::~ • .. ~ .~ , ~ i K. tj~ ,' 4.A ~+ «~ ~~~ i ~I,, -~.f~..~ ISTi~ ~A~ ~ ~~ '~;; t??C~~ '•~•i ~ ~ Duu.,e` Year "• Health ern. YLtF: •ic~ii. ,a'1, . '. : . 14 t t~_._...__ ~•- !" Mental Retardation t p~ _~ ,';` .. • -_--_- -' _ " ' - ~ Grp Cede •` '• ment Activit !` •cf~a-^"~,r'~,-;`t. Treat / y .::.~ , r._.a, Day ~~ J ''' - ' t~tiH/1~R/CD ~ ~ o ~.4J . t`.~:, s I i' I i't DACs (Expansion) ~ ~ --- ,~ • ,. ~ •„~~ ~~,.~~,•ti at.;.,_ ~ c i us to subj ec~cs i through V I as given i n t~~e budget: c ~:. _ , t. ~~iJ 4ustifica~.~cn r:: / dui ti or[ai pages as n 2 ~ecossary.) . . ~,s ~ rs~Lr;:cti ens : { f The Z1}~/i1R/CD Area Program Office is proposing five ne.•r I cori:~unity programs t riority of d to serve the hese programs needs of the retarded persons and their. n fanilies. , p er or are' as fol 1 oti~rs 1. Development of-an adult day activity center in•the South hennepin Area to serve 40 moderately to profoundly retarded multiply handicappzd adults. - 2. Development°of an infant stimulation program to serve 20 developmentally delayed . infants ages 0-2 and their fart~ilies. - - 3. Full funding for Reuben Lindh infant stimulation program to serve 25 developmen~a- de ayed.infants, ages 0-2 and their fannies. - 4.. Expansio~l of community involvement:-programs to serve an additional 50 multiply,- handicapped ;i~ adults such as those who are blind, deaf and/or er~ationally dis- turbed. Currently CIP serves 50 nodera~ely to profoundly retarded adults. 5. -Develop~en ~of a day activity center ~•rithin Outreach Cor.~unity Center to serve 25 roderately to .severely .retarded adults. - ~on the purpose of ne~•r program justification, each proposed program will be addressed ~: dividually ~•rithin the guidelines of the budget package. - 1. The problem that tirarrants this program is threefold: (.a) placer~ent of former state hospital residents in the community. .~-- . ,. I. The Problem '~~ (b) development of residential facilities in the suburban area. 1 ~ 2. . ; _ ~. (c) lack of day programs to acco~:nodate the population being served by residential facilities in the South suburban area. - The cause of the problem is increased emphasis on cor•~munity placement with the "normalization" concept being a preva~l~ng philosophy in prograt,;r~ing and the difference in funding patterns for co~.~munity day programs and resi- denti al services . ~•,hil ~ she fort,.er i s rat}per c1 osed ended, the 1 after i s open.- enaeu: `hus a situation arises ~•rhere residential facilities develop Wore easi~;. hence- faster tE~an day_pro4rar~s. ___._._.______T -- 19?B ----~ iriuJOit I~CCOL}iT CCC~S = 0~~ Yoai^ F?:!dg~t. t ewr sc,.N.`~ __-- - S~~d~ ~. --r---- ~f~.~n ~r•t_t/1 CCU ~_.__.~ - ~)~J [•~)~l~ iL tC; `~i}~. 1.1 »~,~ 7C1 ~.! -- ---- s - ~'`'~.~~ + The ..target population will be 40 moderately to profoundly retarded adults, "'~ `'~- some with physically handicaps who are, or will be 1j:v:~ng in the South Henne- pin (8loomington} area. Currently there is one s~;~all'group home sponsored by Outreach Community Center, serving 5 persons ~•rho would fit into-this func- tinning level. By Septer,~ber 1, 1975, Lutheran Soci-al Services will have de- veloped two facilities to serve a total .of 24 moderately to profoundly re- tarded adults. i3y Duly 1, 1975, Fraser School will have developed three small group homes to serve i0"persons each ti•rithiri the moderately to severely retarded categories. • Only cons-iderirg known near facility development we have a potential of 5C persons needing-day prograr~~-ning within this community. Hennepi n County !•!el fare survey of adult P, needs i ndi.cate that there are a total. of 429 moderately to severely retarded. adults on current caseloads. 0f this 429, I12 needed "sdme type" of co~~~manity day program that c•rould emphasize social skill development, academic develop~;:ent and vocational skill development. While it is inconceivable that all adult t•1R population of the moderately to severely functioning level will move to the South Hennepin area, there is expectation that sore ti•rill, should there be residential and day programs available. As residential programs are developing; it is necessary that day • programs develop proportionately. •. Significant expansion in .this program and all community programs could take place if the funding source is available to meot`the demands. Legislative and governr~ental trends are definitiely swinging to~•rard'provision of con~~munity based services for the retarded. ~~ i ~:. O lj •l '~' 1 ` 7 ~ c` 1'1 ."{ ~ 1l i f ~l ~. it N i ~' (~ N ~ {~.: ~ ~ ~ _ A 1. Th i s netir program i s directed tourard the fol 1 o~•ri ng public .objectives ' (a) to plan, in a systematic way, for the phasing out of state hospitals through the provision of community-based services for t;i2 persons. (b) to increase access to human services in these areas of Hennepin County trhere services are not available. ~~ (c) to develop a more integrated system of social services that ensures thae oval labi 1 i ty of corpl e,aentary and supporti va services. Estimates of pregres~ tc~.•rard these objectives can be made indirectly by various methods, which include, but are not limited to, the following; (a} utilization rate studies of community-based facilities. (b) attitudinal surveys regarding location of program in a specific com- . munity, e.g., survey on a "before" and "after "basis of opinion about retarded adults living, working and .socializing in the same com.;runity as "normal" people. (c) within individual community-based programs, measuring holy well a .program is aci;ieviny sta-te program goals. . 3~5 • P y (d} analysis of the relationship between co,.unity placement and return to state hospitals after ,orr ~ uni ty placement. : (e) development of evaluation systems which-ensure the quality of program- ming is equal to or better than institutionalization programs~ing. ~(f) developing checks and balances to ensure that one, type of community .pro- o rim n i t ch a de ree that.-other typ..s of co u y ' d e not ex and to su g 0 ram as sucn S F 9 y other. m lemen,, each not avail-able to co ro rams are P P 9 I~' ` 'III. Other ra~ncies Involved in Developr~en-c of Cormun. t-y__based Proc~r~ms _ ___ 1. Other agencies of government involved in levelopment of co:~~munity-based programs include the Hennepin County .elfare Department;-the Office of Planning and Develc:: meet; E•Setropol i tan Council ; the- State Depart,.. nt of P~:bl i c ~•el fare and the.. State .Developmental Disabilities Task Force. From norn-governr,:ental agencies,`develop- ment is fostered through-the ~~inneapoiis Association for Retarded Citizens, the Rssociation of Residents for the Retarded in ~•ainnesota; a~innesota Day Activity Center Association and the Day Activity Center Association of Hennepin County. The level of coordination bet~rreen the County and other agencies varies; ho~;rever,. it is gradually becoming-accepted.-that the-Area Program Gffice has primary respon_ bi7ity in justifying and leveloping and coordinationg new programs. 2. During the 1975 calendar year Hennepin County is sponsoring jointly tivith the State and Federal Government, 12 community-based day activity centers serving 213 adults and 267 children (total- of 480) persons. The cost of Federal and County tax support was $967,175 Y 1l, Pal i cy and-Community Effects Invoi ved I. Impaction-.County policy will depend on the degree. to 4vhich a firm commitment is made to the establishr,ent of com^unity-based facilities. 2.> Postponing implementation of this program may incur additional expenditure of ~,I persons in this geographical area Uho have to travel a long distance to receive day programs. Also, there may be less cost benefit in using existing inner-city DAC's (presupposing there were openings available)-than developing a day program erithin proximity of pi ace of residence. Alternatives r ~ his is the alternatives considered ,or this opalat~on. T l.. There were no other p only solution ~ if institutionalization is not considered. ~ ~, 2. P.egarding reasons, please seerSection I, Farts 1,2,3 above. ~~ _ ~, 3O6 .k y n n • RESOLUTION.NO. : RESOLUTION RELATING TO RELEASE OF-BOND ON OFF STREET PARKING Brian Realty Company 2520 Inglewood South - Location: .3001-3005.West 66th Street Use: Goodyear Auto Service Company WHEREAS, Brian Realty Company, :2520 Inglewood South, Minneapolis, Minnesota, had an off-street parking agreement with the City of Richfield, relating to the Goodyear Auto Service Company, 3001-3005 West 66th Street, which contract bears the designation of Contract No. 21~+2.and which contract was guaranteed by a bond of the American Empire Insurance Company, Watertown,-New York, in the amount of $10,500.00, and WHEREAS, Brian Realty Company has complied with the provisions of said agreement and the American Empire. Insurance Company now seeks to be relieved of any fLtrther obligation under said bond, and WHEREAS, there appears to be no justification for requiring Brian Realty Company to continue to provide a bond for security on the performance of said agreement. NOW THEREFORE,. BE IT RESOLVED by the City .Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: That the city manager is hereby authorized and directed to release the American Empire Insurance Company, Watertown, New York, for any and all acts of Brian Realty Company, committed or incurred in violation of Contract No. 21+2 on and after the 12th day of April, 1976.. Adopted by•the -City Council. of the City of Richfield this 12th day of April, 1976. ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk Loren L. Law Mayor . ~-. p~ Q ~I ~~ ~ i I{~'if ~"' W ~! ~ ii; ~ ,I,. ... i i /. 1 ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~` W e ' f 4 ~ ~,(,.f ~ nil , ~ -y , Z t~ W I M ~'r. ~ ~ u ., o.p _ ~~~! ~ f ll, .I m III y, , ~dl~l ~' pG •a %+ '~ ~,I I yl tl '~ • ;~~ r ~ Q:r'~j 4 w~~ ",., ' II ,1111 ~, II a ~, ", i, W m ICI L. (~ LL s . ,~ I;;.,:, . ~ , ~ .,,oJ ~ s°•:+=. _ h°l ayo, p ` y,3,~ai I .. V > ` >° s ~ ~ a/ t i~~ ~ ~ O ` \\\ ? J r~ ~ 1 , ~ r I ~ _"~'~, ' - ~ D,±F ,~' ~/, Ems" r;%; f / ~~ ` 4 `~ ~• ` ' .'~ i 1-~-#j i ~iA .'fir-~ / ~ r~__-~c.:L '~i ¢t ! fill tt I:_ ~ J 111 // j ~~ ~ ,I ~ r sy _'~ ~ ~ ~ I~ 7 .~; u -' t _ '~ ~~tt i i~ II i i ty. d: 1_ 1 `` °/ r~°a°y ~f •., ~t•..i:~ ? ' i\. ~~ alt' ~~i t, \~ \ 9~ $ it E Vlfl~ Il rid j .(I~ - "~ • ~ r •• ~ ~ ~. 'M f. ~ ~ __ i il~ I I ~~ I ~ \~ w' j t III1~ j l ~~] '~ J~_ ~1c \ snl~ ' i ~, Ilil ~ I • ~ ` {~~~, _ ! ~~` ~ \`~II ~ '' ~~ 1 t ._ CITY--0F RICHFIELD ` Bid Opening. ,y; April. 2, .1976 STREET PAVING & APPURTENANT WORK • PROJECT. NO. 674 AREAS N0. i0 & 11 pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015,- a meeting of the administrative staff was called to order by Wayne S. Burggraaff, City Manager, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was. to receive, open and-read aloud, sealed bids for Street Paving-and. Appurtenant Work, City Project No. 674, Areas No, 10 and 11 as advertised in the official newspaper on March l0 and 17, 1976. Present: Wayne S, Burggraaff, City.Manager Peter Eberz, Public Works Director Richard Krier,.:Planning Director Thomas J.. Moran, City Clerk LaRoy Nyhus, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron The following bids were submitted and read aloud: BIDDER AND BID SECURITY TOTAL BID Hardrives.~ .Inc. B. B. 5% $2,659,417.10 • Northwest Bituminous B. B. 5% 2,683,885.55 Progressive Contractors, Inc. B. B.` 5'/° 2,536,708.00 C.. S. McCrossan B. B. 5% 2,590,995.50 Arcon Construction Co. B. B, 5% 2,644,763.80 Minnesota Valley Surfacing Co. B. B. 5% 2,559,116.30 McNamara Vivant Contracting Co. B. B. 5% 2,727,631.60 Fischer Sand & Aggregate B. B. 5% 2,660,639.25 The 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 .. RESOLUTION N0. . AWARDING CONTRACT TO.PROGRESSIVE TING BID AND RESOLUTION ACCEP CONTRACTORS,-INC., 8736 ZACHARY LANE, OSSEO, MINNESOTA, FOR `PERMANENT STREET SURFACING, AREAS NOS. 10 AND 11 CITY PROJECT N0. 67~+ Clerk's File No. BE IT RESOLVED by-the. City Council of the City. of Richfield, Minnesota as follows.. 1. That it is hereby determined that the bid of Progressive~Contractors, Inc., 8736 Zachary Lane, Osseo, Minnesota is the lowest bid by a responsible bidder for the construction of City Project Noy 674, Areas Nos. 10 and 11, permanent street. surfacing. 2. That the bid of Progressive Contractors, Inc. for the construction of the above referenced project on a unit price basis, at the price contained in .their proposal of April 2, 1976, with an estimated construction cost of $2,536,708 is hereby accepted. '. 3. That the proposed contract between Progressive Contractors, Inc. and the. City of .Richfield be given Clerk's File No. and be placed on file. That said proposed contract for the construction of said .city project is hereby approved and adopted and the Mayor and Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for or on behalf of the City of. Richfield and the Clerk is authorized and directed to affix the city seal thereto. ~+. That payments to be made under the terms of said contract shall be charged against the Construction Fund. ~_ 5. That the Corporate Surety Bond in the sum of the estimated contract price which accompanies said proposed contract is hereby accepted and approved. . 6. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to return. the security docments to the unsuccessful bidders upon execution of said proposed contract. Adopted by the City Council this 12th day of April, 1976. ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk i:. J st ~~,.~9s. ,/ At R 519~~ ~~~~~ ~G4. ~~ ~~ r ~~ ~f ~~ ~~.~ ~ ~ _ /~. 7 ~' .- . ~. ~ is , r~ ;~ (/ ~ f, r C r,/ / ~}'~~. + ,n"L{.Q/ ~~-(.t)U/LG~ _ `~ ~~~,~.6~?i ~ `{P f G~YYi,ld, ~ G~,l~v~-~Z r -; C` ~J ~ L .~ .aw~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~~~'' i Q CITE"-:OF RICI-IFIELD, MINNESOTA ' g •~~ Office .of City Manager ~, ~ Coun ' l Letter No . 9'6 `' <~ Agend• April 12, 197..6 The Honorable Mayor ~-. and C Members of the ity Council City of Richfield ~ < - ~., .1 I - .~ j f4 Gentlemen: ,,. { ,~ ~ x~, :Sub~e ~t~: ~Street Easernent for 77th Street ,E ~ The"purpose 'of this' letter is 'to recommend execution of an easement dedi- . eating land for street right-of-way purposes on 77th Street frm Sheridan Avenue h a A e , to T v om s nue . ~~ F - ~~ - ~d ~ ThiB section~~of 77th Street is :.included in the 1976 stree construction program. :, The normal right-~of-way width .for a residential street is 60 feet, although there are • a' number of instances where-width's .range from 5,0 to 60 feet. At thepresent time x only the; 30 feet o'f right-of-way on thenorth' side of this ..section of 77th Street , ` t _ , has been dedicated for treet.purposes.' In anticipation of 's greet`construction the city has..:contacte d Northwest Unit Investment Company, ownr of the ,property on `~, thesouth side of 77th Street„to-investigate dedication of land for street purposes: i '~ i Northwest U t.Investment Company has indicated a willingness to dedicatee ' 20'feet of street r ~ght-of-way which would be sufficient to construct a regular ~~ width residential street on 77th Street...:. The company is wiling to dedicate the ~, land for street pur poses at no cost. to the city, but with the understanding that the.;~company wouli d not be assessed for 'street construction along his 358 feet section of 77th St reet. The estimated side` street assessment for this section 'of 77th Street wouldf riot exceed $ 3 , 0.00.00. The 7', 000 square feet of land being dedicated for rigli t;-of-way purpose has an assessor's value; of 90~ per square foot.. Therefore; it is the conclusion of the city staff that the dedication of ate. this land under t , e conditions negotiated with Northwest Unit Investment Company is advantageous o both the company and the city. 1 It is the reco mmendation. of the public works director, ink which I concur, that the city cou cif f the attached easement dedication ~t i ~ ~ r ~~ ~ ~ i . '> ~~ ~-~ .~~ -~ _ ~- ,.- . ~, , ,... - ~ . __ - ~>, .. .............:.........day of.................................................. ~~~~ ;.13~~~~turei ~1ade this..:......... ....... . March ..., 19.6....:, between ........~IQ~i.'f~.VdFS.'P.....II~J.1.'.~....Z~tV.ES.TMENT....C.Q...:,.....a...par.arlership ...................................................._....._ cz~orporativtcund~er-the-lucoa-of flee Sluts-of ................................................................................, pw•ty of the first part, and ..................C:I.~X....Qk'...RI.CAF.IE.I,A.......................................................:......:.:..............................................:..................................:_......._....__ a ~}•~~zt~r~~~ZZder the laws of the State of...... Mi17Y~.fd.~A:ks'~ ............:..............................................................................._......._.., partyof .the second part, ~Itltf~~ft)j, That the said party of the fcrat part, in consideration of the sum of ,.,.One...Do,liar:....(.~.1.,..9.0.).....and....Q.ther..::~}oQd...and...ualuab.l.e...cons.ide~:a.~t,i.on:. Z~~ to it in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby aeknozvledged, does hereby Crant, Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said party of the second part, its successors and assigns, Forever, all the tract............or parcel...:..... of land lying and beingtn the Courtly of.:.:.__._._..._..: Hennepin „.,..„...._Q~ State of Alinnesota, described as follows, to-wits A perpetual easement for. street purposes over, under and. across the following described tract of land, to-wit: That part of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 32, Township 28, Range 24, described as follows: Commencing ,at the Southwest .corner of Jacobson and Quist 2nd Addition, thence Easterly along said South line a distance of 358.65 feet to its intersection with the East line of Sheridan Avenue extended, thence South along said East. line a distance of 20 feet, thence Westerly .and parallel to the South line of Jacobson and Quist 2nd Addition a distance of 358.65-feet to a point 20 feet South of the West line of Jacobson and Quist 2nd Addition, .thence North a distance of 20 feet to the point of beginning. ~o babe anb to ~jolD tije ~attte, Together with all the hereditanrents and appurterta.nces there- unto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the said party of the second part, its successors and ossi•~ns, Forever. ~fn @Ce~timonp ` ~jetfof, The Said first party has caused these presents to be ea;eeuted~•~¢~~e by its..pa,.r.•tn~er••sh3p ~X4d~~S+~~R~c~4 ..................................._................. xx~P3sF~li~~~4c ~i~azxacnda~c~¢s~~€~t:~$4~c , as of day and year first above written. ., NORTHWEST.,.UNIT,.,INVESTMEPIT,,,,~Q,,__,,.,,,;,,__ By ............. ..:......:................_..._...._.:.._........_..._.._...._..._ An thorized p ~~ ..............................:.....~~~~~t ~,. ~ - _ . RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION .WAIVING STREET ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to construct a full width street on 77th Street between Sheridan Avenue and Thomas Avenue,. and. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield current~.y.has only 30 feet of right-of-way' available for street purposes, and WHEREAS, Northwest. Unit Investment Co. has agreed to dedicate additional land for street construction purposes. - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of .. Richfield agrees to waive any; permanent. street construction assessment to ~~ ..~ Northwest Unit Investment Co. for the construction of 77th Street between Sheridan Avenue and Thomas Avenue. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 12th day of i April , .1976. ~ ~-~~ >i _ Loren L. Law Mayor i ATTEST: ~ ~:I ' Thomas J. Moran City Clerk ~ 'vim ~ " ~~~ _ ,~., ~' ~ f ~ - _ a ~' " i~ ~I ~, TY OF RICHFIELD, M"INNESOTA ~ " Office of City Manager ~" ~ Counc+'1 Letter. No. 95 .. . :. ,` ~ A d gen - April l2, 1976 f' " The Honorable Mayor ~ and ~ ~x e - M mbers of the; City Council ~ City "of "Richfield ~ ~: ~ "- - ,~ Gentl"emen: ;Subject: Change Order Penn Avenue Liquor "Store- `~I ~ O the n Aril 12 197 6' city .council" agenda there: is a change .order re - lating to th Pen A e ` uo or e v n nue Liq r St e Project. The change order is com- ..:prised of two i~ems for a total increase of $2,006.00 in the project. - ~" ~ ~ ; ~~ ~• ~ The first item of the change order is for erection"of anadditional sign on the east bui°lding wall south of the main entrance. ThisF sign ;is necessary ' ' to "complete the outdoor advertising .for the Penn-Avenue Liquor Store. "" (~ .2 ~" The second part of this change order,.invo ves installationof'three additional exterior lights to improve the visibility of the building and pedes- trian safety in the area around he building. ~. It is recommended that the 'cit :council a y pprove this change order in the amount. of $ 2, 006.00, f (~~" " Respectful y submitted, . ~, ' Wayne S. Burggraaff City .Manager i WSB/eja ~" ~, " cc: Public Wor s" Director ;~ Liquor Store Manager t .Finance Dir ector ~ ~ ~m,l ' , F . .. ,. i ~~ s. l _ ~/ , _~ rt CITY'OF RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA ~ ~` ~ Office of City Manager- Council Letter No. 94 Agenda April 12 , 1976 The Honorable Mayor and .::Members 'of theCity'Council City of Richfield "~ ':Gentlemen.: ;' Subject: Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Certain ,; Public Records '~ Attached to this council letter is a resolution providing for authorization to de troy certain public records in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. In ` .general, a municipality must retain .non-permanent records fora period of l seven years with the exception °of debt service records whch .must be retained 10 years and voter registration-which must be kept one year after election. ~, The records described in the attached resolution have been reviewed``by~ the Director of~,Finance in that capacity and in his capacit~. as City Clerk, and also ,by th ~ City.Attorney. In has been determined tha~ there is no need to keep these r .cords and; that they may be destroyed in a corda!nce with state statetes.~, Copies of I he-resolution must be sent to the State" De artment of Admin- stration, Minnesota Historical Society, the Attorney General-arid the State Auditor for fina~.;approval to des roy or transfer records. ' It shoufld be noted Ghat the resole on provides for:transfer to the Richfield Hi~storc1al Society permanently bo nd copies of the Richfie ld Sun for the years 1967 and 1968. I It is ,re co mended that the city council adopt the attached resolution. Respectfully` submitted, ~~ ~' Wayne S. B~rggraaff City IVlanager :~ ' WSB/eja ;~ L k cc: Finance Director City Attorney _ RESOLUTION N0. • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TfIE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC RECORDS WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 138, and Minnesota Statutes 4.65.63 authorize the destruction of .certain-city records; and WIH•;REAS, the City Clerk is required to keep the following records: (1) A minute. book noting therein all proceedings of the council; (2) An ordinance book in which he shall .record at length all ordinances passed by the council; (3)' A finance book in which he shall enter all the money transactions of the city, including the dates and amounts of all receipts and the person from whom the money was received, and of all orders drawn upon the treasurer with their payees and objects; and WHEREAS, the city attorney has given written approval authorizing the following list of records for destruction; and WHEREAS, this list of records is hereby presented to the council with a request that the destruction be approved; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the City of Richfield,. I • Minnesota, that: a. The Director. of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to destroy the following classes of records: All purchase orders, .claims and vouchers, and disbursement checks paid prior to January l; 1969; _ b. All daily cash summaries and validated ,cash receipts prior to Januar-,~ 1, 19 69 ; c. .All payroll authorization and payroll checks prior to January 1, 1969; d. All non-permanent accounting reports, miscellaneous papers, and correspondence dated prior to January 1, 1969; e. All utility billing registers, duplicate bills, and validated payment stubs prior to January 1,.1969; f. Bound copy of the Richfield News - 1967 and 1968; (to be given to the Richfield Historical Society);. g. All formal bids, bid specifications, supporting documents, and completed contracts prior to January I, 1969; h. Bonds, bond coupons, and other evidence of indebtedness which have been . paid and cancelled, or otherwise .retired more than ten years (January. I, 1956) as follows: _._ ,_, ., y _., _ _ j. i ~ . . 6... _. s Resolution No. Page 2 . s Date of Date of Denomi- Bond Issue _ Issue' Maturity nation Bond Numbers Improv. Bonds of 1950 8/1%50. 2/1/64 $1,000 219-231 Improv. Bonds. of 1950 B i 8/1/50 9/1/50 2./1/65 2/1/65 1,000 1-,000 232-249 124-133 es Improv. Bonds of 1950; Ser v. Bonds of 1951; Series:F m 8/1/51 .. 2/1/65 1,000 34-36~ pro I ~Sewer Improv. Bands of 1953, 3/1/53 3/1/65 1,000 , 601-660 Series A Improv: Bonds-of 1953, Series B 11/1%53 11/1/65 1,000 554-603 Improv. Bonds of 1953, Series.C A S ' 11/1/53 2/1/54 11/1/65 2/1/65 1,000 000 1 103-112 451-485 eries Improv,-Bonds of 1954, .. , 490-500 : Improv. Bo~d~ of 1954, Series B .8/1/54 8/1/65 1,000 451-500 Improv. Bonds of 1955 6/1/55. .6/1/65 1,000 571-G40 Sewer Improv, Bonds of 1956, 2/I/56 2/1/65 000 1, 176-200 Series A Park 3mprov. Bonds of 1957. 9/1./57 3/1/:65 1,000 97 113-i15 Improv. Bonds of 1959 6/1/59 12/1/65 1;000 151-180 Isnprov, Bonds of 1960 11/1/60 2/1/65 1,000 126-175 ,~ G. 0. Water Bonds of 1961 11/1/61 II/1/61 2/1/65 2/1/65 1,000 1,000. 6-IO 66-130 Irnprov. Bonds of 1961 Water Bonds of 1.962 0 G 11/T/62 11/1/65 1,000 1-25 . . Improv. Bonds of 1962 5/1/62 2/1/65 1,000 1-125 ~"Erap, Improv. Bonds of 1963 8/1/63 8f1/65 5,000 1-315. i. Non-permanent Public Safety Department reports and correspond ence dated prior to January 1, 1969. _ _ - Daily operations records, m iscellaneous traffic records, citations, surveys and summons, dictab elt tapes (radio transmissions ), radio logs, radar records, miscel laneous investigation records. Fire and medical alarm records,. fire daily operation .records. j. Non-permanent city clerk department license applica tions (1968 and 1969); Voter registration file updates and changes (1974). Before such records are destroyed copies of this resolut ion and an application for authority to dispose of records shall be sent to the Minne sota Historical Society, ed destro t b l no the Attorney General, and the State Auditor, and such records shal rical Society if the application Hist t e y e requesting... o a so but will be sent to the Minn the city within thirty (30) .days d b i e from the date this application y ve ce them is r is filed, Passed by the City Council of the City of Rich field this 12th day of .April, 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor. ,~ ATTEST: Thomas `J. Moran City G er a _Y CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening April 1,1976 WATER METERS Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No..1015, a meeting of the. administrative 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 The following bids-were submitted and read aloud; WATER METERS COMPLETE WITH REMOTE BIDDER AND REMOTE REG & EXTRA REG KIT REGISTRATION KITS BID SECURITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST- UNIT COST TOTAL COST • Power Process Equipment Co. B. B, 5% $66.01 $13,202 $21.00 $6,300 Neptune . Water Meter Co. B. B. 5% + 20.00 + 4,000 4I.69 8,338 20.00 6,000 Badger Meter Inc. ' Cert. Check $1,000. 60.50 12,100 22,55 6,765 ' Badger Meter Inc. .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• i v m H x ~ O ~~i N H w ~~~~ ~- E-+ a ~- U2HO~ • H Q-, ~-I . Aa~~N-1-i ~H~~7 w~~a Al~co~ H Pq s ~ o O ~ .. },{ Z W A U . off E-+ ~ ~. O H ~ ~ ~ 'z0, ~~~~ o 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 H N a0 ~ ~ A ° M ~ ~ ~ w c n ~ w w .: ~"~ ~ ~ ~"~ '~} '(~' •Ff} {f} ~ H U ] O O O O O ~ O O ~ ~ M w O w N w P-- w E~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ O N .~} ~} ~ ~ H H C7 W a W H H ~ p o o ire ~ U O O U1 ~ P', H ~ ~ N N H N N. N N O O O O O O U N ~ O O a N M r-I ri M w N . N w r-i Wx H a~ W a . o .. c~ c ' a W ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~q ~ H H ~ ~ - ~ ~ o ~ u~. W , ~ ~ ~s> -~ tf} U H' O ~~ ~ O W U ~ A ~• ~ ~. • W ~. ~' ~ ~ W ~ H. H ~. O O o : o ~ ~ /y! ~ L o ~ w w W A o ~ ~ ~• a~i~ ~~ N ~ ~ Pq 3 P4 40 W b ~ PU ;d ° t~ ~ a as z ai w '~ ~ 0 0 .. ap w r {A 4-1 O ~ _ O _ . g g of N ~,. _,, .~ .~ _ - fs .~ U ~+ H ~ w m m _ 1 .,i O~ a i fTa O H A U (~ ti - W l i ... ~~ ~~ r' ,, 1 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA f 'c O fi e of Cit an M a y er g ~~ - CounciLZetter No. 92 Agenda April 12 1976 ' The Honorable Ma~~yor -.and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Gentlemen: Subject: `,, Ordinance: Amendment Defining Mein Thoroughfares for Liquor License Purposes At the last citycouncil meeting" the city attorney rev}ewed the need to amend .Section 3.33. of the city ordinance code for the purpose of better '~ • defining main thoroughfares for the purpose of the on-sale liquor license ordinance. An ord nance amendment has been prepared end a copy is a tta Chad . ~ The .purpose of he amendment is'to make .it clean tha th ' i el t ce nsi o n f g on-sale establish ent ' s rs o n t limited to locatio s w ' n hic re loca h to d do n the. major streets liste~ in the pla tin ordinance g Respectfully,submitted, ~~, ~ ~ t ~ t Wayne S. Burggraaff ~ City Manager WSB/eja _cc• City Attorney Planning Direc or i ...:..:....:. • AMENDMENT TO .SECTION 3.33, SUBDIVISXON 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 tYie 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 'j vehicular stacking space allowing for an efficient and orderly flow of traffic from the site onto adjacent [main streets] main thoroughfares of the city. 'Main thoroughfares ;••~.• of the city', as used in this paragraph, means a street desig- nated as a state trunk highway or a service drive adjacent to the state trunk highway, a state aid highway, a county aid highway, a county highway, an urban expressway, an arterial street of the city, 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 i• '~~~y4 ., .cif- .~`.iT~ f ~~, ~ ,. j } ~S: ;~'. Ater. No.° 91 '' •il 12.; 1976 :~ =; tingency .,. f a salary l ~ er,, and -~ fer ha's cy appro- resolution . .i i __ ~ ..~ «. RESQLUTION N0. . ~ 'RESOLUTION AUTfi0R1:ZING TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION FROM THE 1976 CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WHEREAS,: Resolution No. .5420 appropriated funds for each department of the City for the year 1976; and WHEREAS, a contingency appropriation was made in the General Fund for various purposes, including the 1976 salary adjustments and related .fringe benefit contributions; and.. WHEREAS, the City Council established guide lines for .salary adjust- merits of the General Services Management Personnel and the City Manager has made adjustments for 1976 providing for a pay plan and certain sup- elemental wage benefits; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5505, establish the 1976 salary for the City Manager and certain supplemental wage benefits; and WHEREAS, it is hereby determined necessary to adjust the 1976 budget appropriation $21,975 to reflect adjustments required-by the above actions. L NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City. Council of the City of Richfield that the sum of $21,975 be transferred from the 1976 contingency appropriation of the General Fund to the following departments: • 4 Mayor & Council $ 1,727 . ~ ~ Planning 1,533 Park & Recreation 2,518 ' Finance 3,107 Public Works 6,032 Public Safety 3,469 Executive 2,034 Health 1,555 Total Contingency 21 975 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 12th day of April, 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor L ~ ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran .City Clerk ANALYSIS OF CHANGES IN 1976 CONTINGENCY 10/10/75 Resolution 5420 Adopted Budget ,5225,000 12/8175 Resolution 5450 Tree Disease ~ -15.,000 12/22/75 Resolution 5467 Animal Humane Society - 500 1/22/76 Resolution 5478 General Services ~ -55,931 2/10/76 Resolution 5485 Police Federation -42,820 . 2/23/76 Resolution 5492 Labor & Trades -29,510 _ 3/08/76- Resolution 5504 Police Supervisory -13,266 4/12/76 Resolution Management -21,975 • . 1976 Revised Balance 45 998 w~ / ~ / ~ - ~ ~ \ ~ ) ': _ I /j CITY OF RICHFIELD,. MINNESOTA - ~_ Office of City Manager C ' ~ Council Letter No. 90 ~~ Agenda-April 12, 1976 ` , _ ~ The, Honorable Mayor ,and Members 'of the City Council ; ~Gity of Richfie d Gentlemen: ~ ~ Subject:, Transitory Ordinance Providing for the Expenditure of ~ - j > Funds for Certain. 1976 Projects At the March~22, 1976. city council meeting the city council gave first reading consideration to a_ transitory ordinance appropriating '$172 , 500 for park acquisition and betterment and for general public buildings.. After the action was taken by he city council it was determined that it -would be. possible to reduce the funds appropriated for community center furnishings from the original $12, 000 figure to $9, 000. Therefore, the figure ` in the attached try nsitory ordinance for park development should be reduced ~ b'Y $3, 000 to $85, 000. ; .The funds being appropriated for. park acquisition and be terment would " be allocated to th~ following projects: Augsburg Park Site Study $ 3 , 000 Dr~naldson Park ~ 25, 000 Tennis Court Resurfacing 18 , 000 ` Park Land Acquisition Reserve 20, 000' Airport Golf Course ,Feasibility Study 10, 000 Community Center Furnishings 9 , 000 Total $85,000 ~ , ' The funds being a propriated for general public buildings would be allocated to the following p ojects: - , , City Garage 50, 000 City Hall 29,500 Liquor Stores 5, 000 I ` Total $84,500 ~, Bill No. 1976 - 8 Appendix A Transitory Ordinance No. 16.37 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR PARK ACQUISITION AND BETTERMENT AND CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The City of Richfield Does Ordain: Section 1. It is found and determined necessary and expedient for the city to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capita 1 improvements listed in section 2 hereof, for which the city would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2. The capital improvements and the amount of expenditures for such improvements, which are hereby authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2, of the City Charter, are as follows: Park Development 000 ~~ ~_ . General Public Improvements 84, 500 Section 3. The expenditure herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are hereafter authorized from time to time by council resolution _ Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1976. Loren L . Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas J. Moran City Clerk • Y ,~ , i M~ - l- - ~ l ' ; CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager- ; . Council Letter No. 89 ` ~ Agenda April 12 , 1976 ~, The Honorable lYlayor, ~ ` f ' and Members of the City Council City of Richfield. ~ Gentlemen•' ' ~ Subject: O~`dinance Amendment Concerning Regulation of On-Sale Li uo r Lic q ense I Atthe March 22, 1976 city councilmeeting the city council received a report from the ion-sale liquor study committee recommending a number of changes in the on-sale regulatory ordinance. First reading consideration was given to the proposed changes at that. time. i A copy of `the proposed. ordinance amendment incorpprating all of ' I'' the recommended changes is attached. It is before the city council at the April 12 , 1976 city cot}ncil meeting for second reading consideration and adoption . , ~ i ~; Respectfully submitted, I ~ - ' ~~~~ ~ - ~ Wayne S . Burggraa ff City Manager i WSB/eja cc: City Attorney City Clerk ~ ~ ~ ~ Public, Safe y Director ' ~ _ ~, I~ AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER XI SECTION 11.06 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN; Chapter XI, Section 11.06 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield relating to the sale of "on-sale" of intoxicating liquor is hereby amended as follows: 1. By amending Subdivision 1, Paragraph (3), Subdivision 4, Paragraph (2) (g), Subdivision 8, Paragraph (5), Subdivision 9, Paragraph (2), Subdivision 10, Paragraph (8), Subdivision 12, Paragraph (13), Subdivision 13, Paragraph (1), Subdivision 14, Paragraph (1), Subdivision 19 and adding Subdivision 23 to read as follows: • "Subdivision 1 (3). The term 'restaurant' means any establishment under the control of a single proprietor or manager, having appropriate facilities to serve meals in one or more dining rooms having a total area of at least [ 10, 000 ] 7, 500 square feet, and where in consideration of payment therefor, meals are regularly served at tables to the general public, and which employs_ an adequate staff for the usual and suitable service to its guests and the principal part of the business of which is the serving of foods . The area to be used in computing such [ 10, 000] 7, 500 square foot minimum shall be the gross floor area of the restaurant including liquor. Basement areas, however, shall not be counted for the purpose of meeting such [ 10, 000] 7, 500 square foot minimum requirement. " "Subdivision 2. License Required. No person, except wholesalers or manufacturers, to the extent authorized under state license, shall directly or indirectly deal in, sell, or keep for sale any intoxicating liquor for "on- sale" sale without first having received a license to do so as provided in this section. "On-sale" licenses shall be issued only to hotels and restaurants. No more than [five] seven "on-sale" licenses may be issued to .hotels and restaurants . " "Subdivision 4 (2) (g) . Whether the applicant in the case of a natural person, or his spouse, or the manager and all persons holding or possessing an interest in the business to be licensed have [has] ever been convicted [ of any ordinance, other than traffic] for violation of any law of the United States, State of Minnesota, or any other state or territory or any municipal ordinance. " _2_ "Subd. 8 (5). At any time that an additional investigation is • required because of a change in the ownership, interest or control of of a partnership or a corporation [ or because of an enlargement, alteration or extension of the premises previously licensed] the licensee shall pay an additional investigative fee in the amount of [ $75.00 J $100.00 per each individual involved in the change who was not listed on the original or renewal application. " Subd . 9 (2) . Upon completion [ receipt] of the manager' s preliminary [written] report [and recommendations by the chief of police] and within 20 days thereafter, the manager may recommend to the council that a public hearing be held upon the application. The council shall then instruct the city clerk to cause to be published in the official newspaper 10 days in advance, a notice of the hearing to be held by the city council,. setting forth the day, time and place when the hearing will beheld, the name of the applicant, the premises where the business is to be conducted, and such other information as the council may direct.. At the hearing opportunity shall be given to any person to be heard for or against the granting of .the license. After the hearing the council may either grant or deny the license . If the license is granted, the council may withhold its issuance until the applicant has qualified in all respects for the license. If the premises to be licensed are not complete at the time that the hearing • is conducted the council may grant the license but shall withhold its issuance until the premises have been completed in accordance with the representations made by the applicant. If a license has been granted but its issuance has been withheld pending completion of the premises to be licensed, and if the licensee does not proceed with reasonable dispatch to ready the premises, the council may rescind the action granting the license. Such action shall not be taken, however, without giving the licensee at least eight days notice of the time and-place of a hearing on the proposed rescission. " "Subd. 10 (8). Who, if a corporation does not have a manager who is eligible pursuant to the provisions of this section or whose corporate stock is owned or subject to the beneficial interest of any person or the spouse of any person ineligible for licensure under paragraphs (2) , (3) , (4) , (5) , and (6) of this subdivision. " "Subd. 12(13). Changes in the corporate or association officers, corporate charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws or partnership agreement,.as the cases may be, shall be submitted to the city clerk [within] not less than 30 days [after ] before such changes are to be made. In the case of a corporation, the licensee shall notify the city clerk when a person not listed in the original application acquires an interest which, together with that of his spouse, parent, brother, • sister or child, exceeds 5% (and shall give all information about said person as is required of a person pursuant to the provisions of Sub- division 4 of this section. ] Such notice shall be given not less than 30 days from the date of the proposed transfer. " -3- "Subd. 13 (1). At the time of filing an application for an 'on- . sale' license, the applicant shall file a bond with corporate surety with the city clerk. Such bond shall be in the amount of $10, 000.00. The license shall keep such bond or any substituted bond in the- same amount and with the same terms in full force and effect throughout the license period. " "Subd. 14 (1) . Prior to the issuance of an 'on-sale' liquor license, the applicant shall file with the city clerk (a) a public liability insurance policy providing coverage of at least $250, 000 and $500, 000 and (b) a liquor liability policy covering. liabilities under the. provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 340.96. [Each of such policies shall ] and providin covera ge of at least $100, 000 and $300, 000. The city shall be named as an additional party insured on each of such policies . " "Subd. 19. Revocation or Suspension Procedure. The licensee shall be [ granted a hearing upon at least ten days notice before revocation or suspension is ordered by the city council in cases where mandatory revocation is not provided by law. Such notice shall state the nature of the charges against the licensee . The notice may be served upon the licensee personally or by leaving the same at the licensed premises with the person in charge thereof. ] afforded an • opportunity for a hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Sections 15 0418 to 15 0426 before the city council may vote whether to revoke or to suspend its license . No suspension shall exceed 60 days . " "Subd. 23. Transfer of License. No transfer of any license required under this section shall be permitted until all of the provisions of this section have been met including the filing of an original application, the payment of all fees and the approval of the city council. A license transfer shall be deemed to have. occurred when any of the following conditions exist: (1) Any expansion, alteration, extension of the licensed premises intended to be used for the sale or consumption of intoxicating liquor, on-sale. (2) Any transfer of the license from person to person or from place to place. (3) Any change in the business structure or organization of the licensee including, but not limited to, changes in the corporate or association officers, charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws or partnership agreement. (4) Any change in the legal or beneficial ownership of corporate stock which, together with the interest of a spouse, parent, brother, sister or child, involves 5% or more of the corporate stock. Y -4- (5) The grant of any power of attorney, voting proxy, pledge or other assignment of the voting rights of corporate stock which will effect alone or in conjunction with any other assignment to the same assignee, his spouse, parent, brother, sister or child, 5% or more of the voting shares of stock. (6) The creation of any new pecuniary interest in the ownership operation management, or profits of the licensed business. (7) The existence of any other situation whereby individuals other than those listed in the original license application acquire a role in the management, operation or profit of the license. " 2. By repealing Subdivision 12, Paragraph (17) and renumbering the remaining paragraphs of Subdivision 12 accordingly. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 1976. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Thomas j. Moran, City Clerk