01-26-76 agenda
^ ~T
:~~ -
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
"
Council Letter No . 3 7
\ Agenda January 26, 1976
Thee Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
Gity of Richfield
gentlemen: \,
Subject:, Policy Regarding` Use of School IDistrict Swimming. Pools
On November 20;, 1975 the school board and city council- met in joint session
for the ,purpose of discussing the arrangements for municipal use-of the< new
school pools. At that meeting the school s~iperintendent distributed the attached
statement as a suggested policy-,and procedure -for municipal use of chool pools:.
School district ~epre entatves indicated general support for the superintend-
ent sproposal. The city council requested the opportunity to turfy it further and
• indicated that. the city would take a position on it early in 1976. .
There are .two changes zcvhich should be made to the attached November 20, ~
197~'statement., Under. the category of scheduling, paragraph 4, it should
indicate that the pools. are available after 7:00 p:m, on school days and at
all other times except for-scheduled swimming meets. Paragraph' S should delete;
-any. reference to instructors since it is my understanding that we have reached an
'agreement at the s~aff level that he city- would be .able to provide instructors for -
any programs whic ; it offers .
The attached prgposa has been reviewed by the park and recreation advisory
commission. The commission did not take formal action on the proposal,. but did
generally`indicate support for the concept. Once.the .concept ha been approved"
by the city council~it would be appropriate. for the commission to participate in the
,process of developing programs and establishing usage fees.
The school district has not yet determined 'the fee structure which will be used
to charge-..the city nor the use of the .school: pools . However, in a meeting with the
superintendent~this~ week we did agree o meet further to discuss the_ subjectand
-_ ~ it is my understanding .that the district will develop a fee. structure in: the very ;
~ near future. Once ithat'information is :available to the city it will be possible-to
develop a detailed: program-for municipal.use of-the pools and. to develop: usage
fees which will cower related expenses. Recommendations on these details_wi11
be submitted to the, city council within: the next. few ,months . We have been
advised-that the school :pools will be available for city use this. summer. `_' .
. ,
-;
~.
i•
community purposes.
2. It is an understanding of both governmental bodies that the out-of-
pocket operating expense will be born by the-body using the facility -
or facilities on an hourly basis.
3. The .City of Richfield shall have first priority for .use after the school
use has been accommodated.
11J20/75
RICHFIELll PUBLIC SCHOOLS SWIM~fID1G POOLS
General Concepts
1. It is a commitment of both. the School Board and .the City Council to
support the concept of maximum pool usage for both educational and
Operation and Management-
1. The School will assume -full res~sarsibility for the operation and manage-
ment of the pools.
2. Usage of the pools will :,e governed as any other school`facili*_y
Scheduling .
1. During the regular school day both the East and the West Pools will be
used in the Junior High School Physical Education Program. The school
will use our present physical education instructors.
2. Senior High Boys'. and Girls' Swiu, teams.- ballet, etc. will be scheduled-
into the pools.
3. The school has a strong desire to work closely with the Richfield Swim
Ciub both as to time schedule and cost.
4. After seven o'clock on school days and at all other times the pools will
be available for public usage with first priority going to the City.
5. The school will be responsible for all personnel connected with the
pools - guards, attendants, instructors, etc. The hourly pay for person-
nel except custodians and maintenance will be coordinated with that paid
by the City.
6. T.he school will attempt tro 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.
f / ~_ /~
'CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No 35
i
Agenda January. 26, 19.76
The Honorable Mayor ,
and
Members of the City Council.
City of Richfield
i
Gentlemen• -
I
' ~ ommission A ointments
• S e t C
ub c .
7 ~ pp
The following appointments should be made to fill vacancies in various
commissions which either exist at the present-time or will occur through the
~ expiration of terms in early February.
~~
~.... Senior Citizens Advis orv Commission
i
There are three .full three-year terms to .fill .positions which. expire
February 1, 1976: The three incumbents are Sister Weller, Mrs . Mildred Stake
and Mr. Felton Je~ikns. It is our understanding that Mrs. Stake and Mr. Jenkins
.are. interested in eing reappointed. Sister Weller has requested that she not
be considered for~reappointment to this commission. Council members were
~ previously sent copies of an application from Lois Bendickson for this position.
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
..One vacant position exists for an unexpired term with a termination date
of February 1 , 1978. _ One application has been received from} Dean Covering
which has been previously sent to council members .
Advisor Youth C ~mmission
One vacent, dult position exists for an unexpired term with a termination
date of June 1, 1 78. No applications have been received. for this' position.
Metro olitan Air rt Sound Abatement Council MASAC
Annual calendar year appointments, must be made for two repreS~ntatives
andtwo alternates for MASAC. Incumbents are Stan Olson and Vern Luettinger
as representatives and Mr. Christensen and Wayne Burggraaff a~ alternate
representatives . ,
Respectfully submitted',
Wayne S . Burggraaff
City Manager
~,
~~ ~ .. ~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager -
Council Letter No. 34
- 1
Agenda,January 26, 1976
M..
,.. ..
The Honorable 1Vlayor
and.:
Members of the' City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen• ,
Subject: " Tabulation of Bids and Award of Ccntract for the
Removal of Lime Sludge at. the Water Treatment Plant
On January';15, 1976 bids were .opened by the city manager:in accordance
:with previous city. council authorization for the removal, of lime sludge from
- the water treatment plant. The public works director, planning director and
city clerk. also represented the city at thebid opening. The bid minutes. and
tabuiation are attached -for. city council review.
Five bids Iere received for the removal of lime sludge.' The; lowest
• bid was submitted by Phoenix Trucking and Contracting, Inc. at a unit price
of, $4.70 per cu is yard or a total estimated cost of $42,300. The cost for
this work is wi in the amount estimated in the .1976 operat~.ng budget-for the ~I
water utility.
Therefore, it is recommended that the city. council take the following
action:
1 . Approv ~ the; bid minutes .
2. Accept he low bid of Phoenix Trucking and .Contracting, ;Inc. and
direct e city. manager to execute a contract with that firm.
Respectfully submitted,
~:6
~~
Wayne S . Burggraaff
City Manager -
W'SB/bab
cc: Administrat ve Assistant
Public Works Director
Finance Direector-
',
i
CITY OF RICHFIELD
-Bid-Opening.
• January 15, 1976
LIME SLUDGE REMOVAL AND.
DISPOSAL -WATER TREATMENT PLANT
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
on Lime Sludge Removal and Disposal for the Water Treatment Plant as advertised
in the official newspaper on December 31, 1975.
Present:. Wayne S. Burggraaff, City Manager
Peter Eberz, Public Works Director
Richard Krier, Planning Director
Kenneth Conway, Water Dept. Director
Thomas. J. Moran, City Clerk
The following bids were submitted and read aloudt
BIDDER AND PRICE PER
CUBIC YARD
TOTAL COST
BID SECURITY
.Carl Bolander & Sons. Co.
00
$8
$72,
000
• B.B. 5% .
M, G. Astleford Co., Inc.
$6.25
$56,
250
B.B. 5%
Metro Engineering, Inc.
$5.00
$45
,000
B.B. 5%
Phoenix Trucking & Contracting Co. 7U
4 42 300
Cert. Check $2,115.00 .
Park Construction
$8.25
$74
,250
B.B. 5%
The City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at
the regular council meeting of January 26, 1976.
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk
_i
H
a
N
H
a
H
W rn
Q,' ~
~ ..
L(~
rn
~ti
~
~ ~
a
• il) ~ ~
H
~ N
Z
A
^~
~ ~
~
~
Cf~ C
O
,
A o cn
~ ~ Z
~
O
~ W A H
O ~ ~ ~
O
~
fI~
H
,..a o
~~~~
E-i
O O
S O O O
~
O O O ~
[--i fYl O N O N
O n n n e
-~ -cam ~ -~ ~
U
H
~- O N O N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
w - -
w
c.~
H
a
O
u~ u~ ~ u,
i
•
o v ~ as ai rya a
~
N
A U -~} fYl G4 f~ P4
U
H
n
~i
.r.,
+~
U
F~
, U
U U ~'.,
H
~'d H m O
U ~
40 ~ O
~ ~ ~ ~ '
A ~ -
A O N ~ ~
~ C
,' t
-i
. d ~
H ~ ~
W 4 U
~
O
N ,~
i C3 ri .`~"
O i ~ Si ~+
~ a
a ~ ~
O
O"
O
O
M
N
i
zi
U
O
ti
~#'
t~
aU
U
~i .
H
~.' '
U
O
c.~
,~
x
v
?S
.,-~
N
O
a
1
.~
fil
0 -
a
O
•rl
~'
O
U
N
a
N
tap
cd
a
c
d
~-.
CITY'OF RICHFIELD, .MINNESOTA //
Office of City IVianager
Council Letter No. 33
Agenda January 26, 1976
,The Honorable Mayor -
\ and
Members of the C{ty Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:...
.,
Subject: Purchase in Excess of $1, Ot~O
Chapter 6, Section 6.05 of the City Charter stipulates that he .city
council` must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction when! the 'amount exceeds $1, 000. This couecil letter contains
three -such items .
Snow and::Leaf Boxes
The. approved''1976 budget provides funds for the purchase of two leaf and
snow boxes to be used on city trucks.' These boxes will provide additional.
capacity for hauling snow, leaves and" chipped wood using.. existing city trucks
• It is recommended; that the council approve this purchase in excess of $1,000 in
the amount of $3, 794.00.
Ground Master Lawnmower
The approved 1976 budget also provides funds for the purchase of one
rotary lawnmower... It is recommended that the city council approve this purchase
in excess of $1; 0100. in the amount of `$4, 595.00.
News etter Postage Charges
One. January Q0, 1:976 the. Richfield Newsletter was mailed to ,Richfield.:
residents.. Due tb the recent increase in postage rates, mailing costs exceeded
$1,000. It is, t erefore, technically necessary for the city; council to approve.
this purchase in e: amount of $1;171:00.
Respectfully submitted.,
~~
~'~~u,L
• Wayne: S. Burggraaff
City. Manager
WSB/bab ; .
cc Administrative Assistant
Park' & Recreation bisector
Public Works Director
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 32
Agenda January 26, 1`976
,_
The-Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of-Richfield
Gentlemen: .
Subject:- Design Agreement and Authorization to Take Bids
for Backstop at Donaldson ;Park
Last year the city- council approved the purchase of trees to be planted
adjacent to the tot lot and park shelter at Donaldson Park. The purpose of
the trees was to help provide protection for- the tot lot on a long range basis.
However, it was indicated that it would be necessary to increase the height
• of the backstop of the nearby baseball field.
Subsequent investigation of the existing backstop has indicated that .the
structure is unsafe due to severe cracks and splits in -thee supports . Any
additional weighf; on this- structure could not' be recommended..:
It has been determined that the best possible way to proceed would be to
design' and installa new backstop. Inasmuch as this structure would cost' in
e~ces_s of $5,000;`it is necessary that the city go through the preparation of
plans :and formal ~idding process . It is recommended that the city council
authorize the city manager to obtain the necessary design service from Brauer
and Associates for a maximum,of $975 and to advertise for bids for this back-
stop. It is desirable to .move quickly on this project so that we can benefit
from good, prices ~in the .early spring and make sure that the facility is .completed
before the baseba l season starts. - \^
.,
A resolution required. for. the gurpose'of accomplishing the recommendations
contained in this ~ otter has been prepared and is attached horeto.
Respectfully submitted,
- ;-
~'``
Wayne S. Burggraaff
City Manager
f ~ _
~. -
_. _ -
RESOLUTION N0.
`APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL AGREEMENT, FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE DONALDSON PARK BASEBALL FIELD
:BACKSTOP
CITY PROJECT NOo 654
Clerk's File No. _
WHEREAS, the city council has ordered City Project No. 654 for Donaldson-
. Park, with a project fund including monies for improvements to the baseball,'
field backstop,-and
WHEREAS, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission has reviewed the
existing situation and directed staff. seek methods of providing safety to
users of the baseball field and the tot lot at Donaldson Park,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
T. That the agreement between the City of Richfield-and Brauer and
• Associates for design and architectural services relating to the backstop
at the Donaldson Park baseball field shall not exceed $975.00 and is hereby
approved by the city council,
2. That the plans and specifications for said backstop are hereby
approved, Clerk's File No.'
3. That the city clerk is hereby. authroized and directed to advertise
for bids on said improvement as required by law..
~acecr~ by +ha ~;+v rnilnril of the city of Richfield this 26th day of January..
,~
.CITY OF RTCHFIELD, MINNESOTA
~- ~ Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 31
Agenda January 26, 1976
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject: Off-Street Parking Layout and Contract for Motel
at 7636 Cedar Avenue South
` At the council meetirig of January 12 , 1976 the city council approved a
special use permit to convert .two. existing apartment buildings at 7636 - 7644
Cedar Avenue to a budget motel establishment with the stipulation that a new
off-streetparking contract be submitted and approved.
The owner of this property, Mr john Prest, `18028 Priory Lane, Minnetonka,
has submitted an application for off-street parking and requests approval of an
off-street parking contract.
As indicated on the attached `.sketch, the applicant proposes t;o provide 81
off-street parking spaces using existing stalls and the additional stalls provided
by the new off-s reef parking space at the south end of'the site.
The city staf I has, reviewed and evaluated this off-stree parking contract
request and reco~mends it be approved subject to the following stipulations:
1. Final bu~ldiri ,landscaping and lighting plans be approved by the
g
department of .public works .
2. Secure t~11e necessary permits:
i - _ '
Respectfully submitted,
~.
G~~,
Wayne S.. Burggraaff
.City Manager
WSB/bll
cc: Public Works Director
Plannin Director
g
-i _-
~ -
_-20_-~-
i
:xIT- No ~
Right Tum Si 0
Ha
LANDSCAPED I
Prkg.
Ramp up
+~ 20 ~ S.W. S.W. ~
4600 ~ 1240 01 6000 ~
~ Plantings
Canopy
G
i
~ j' S.C
S.C. Pool
~_ n' ~~~ ~ ~ SCGreni
~v
SCOIe~ 1~~=40~ Sign
Landsc
gN~sc4p ` ` `
FO
hs,rr. i er Curb ~~
-~-
OFF-STREET I'1'~.RfIIdG NO. 76-1
UW1~LR AND ADllfiESS: Mr. John Prest
18028 Priory Lane, Minnetonka
:i~Lut~L DESCRIPTIOIu : TYza.t Dart of SL 4 of SEA lying E of Sly ext . of I. line of 13th
Ave. ~~. as laid out in plat of harson's mouth View Garden:: ?_nd
Addn. ?? or F;. ;7th St. axzd S of %,f 10 acres thereof exc. ,;pry .
;sec. 35, T. 2.8, .i. 2~+.
7636 rznd. 76~~4 Cedar Avenue
U5L; : hiot el
1?ATE OF API'LICATIOI~: January 20, 19'Tb
I1CIL ACTIUIS: January 26, 1976
PA.IZKI~r'U ~PACLS : t31
F ,,
~~. ~
CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA
Office of -City Manager
Council Letter No. 30-
Agenda. January 26, 1976
The Honorable Mayor
and ~,
.Members of the Gity Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen: 1
I
,Subject: Report on Loca ion of Minnesota Highway Department
Right-of-Way. Fences in the Area of" 64th S! reet and
- ~ Emerson Avenue
On October 14~, i 1975 the city council passed a resolution requesting the
1nnesota Highway Department to construct .noise barriers adjacent o .the
residential prope~ty between 6400 and: 6500. Emerson Avenue:. the city
council's action,l~~ that time was based on a petition received from residents ,
of that block requ sting a barrier. In November, the city council received
another petition ~e~questing that they rescind their previous action and elimin-
ate the noise barriler between 6400 and 6500 Emerson Avenue.
At the request of the city" council the attached letter was:-sent- to residents
livfng,in the 640 ::block on Emerson Avenue. You will note that the letter asks
that anyone wish ng to withdraw their name from any of the previous petitions `
.should 'advise. th ~ city during the week of January 5, :1976. 'None of the residents
have indicateal a desire to withdraw their..names.
~Tliis is being ubmitted to the city council for information purposes and no
further action is ~equired.
Respectfully submitted,
~J .
Wayne S. Burggraaff
f City :Manager
WSB/eja
• cc: Administrati a Assistant-
Public .Work ,Director
~.~ .
•
December 29 , 1975
RE: Noise Barriers
On October 14, 1975, the city :council passed a resolution requesting
the. Minnesota Highway Department to construct noise barriers adjacent
to the residential property between, 6400 and 6500 Emerson Avenue South.
.The city council's action at that time was based on a petition received
from residents of that block requesting a barrier.. In November, the
city council received another petition requesting .that they rescind their
previous action and eliminate the noise barrier between 6430 and 6400
Emerson Avenue South.
It was indicated that some residents supported the barrier on the premise
that the chain link fence now bordering the highway right-of-way would
be removed and they would gain additional yard space . The Highway
Department has indicated a willingness to ,remove the chain link fence
once the barrier is constructed. It is not likely, however, that they
will move the link fence unless it is done as part of the barrier project.
The city council .has requested the .city staff to convey this information
to .the residents to determine whether anyone wishes to withdraw their
name from either of the previous petitions. Should you :wish to have
your name withdrawn, please contact Joyce Wilde at the Richfield City
Ha11, 869-7521, during the week of January 5, 1976. If we do not
receive notice to the contrary, we will assume you wish to retain your
name on-.one of the existing petitions.
Sincerely,..
•
Joyce L. Wilde
Administrative Assistant.
JLW/bll -
~• TRAFFIC CONTROL COMMITTEE MINUTES
` January 19, 1976 ~. i
The Traffic .Control Committee convened at 9:00 a.m., January 19, 1976. Members I
present were: Pete Eberz, Public Works.Director, Marshall Raaen, Assistant City II
Engineer, Lieutenant Ron Richardson, Public Safety Officer, and Joyce Wilde,
Administrative Assistant. Members absent:.. Tom. Morgan, Director. of Public Safety.. ~
The Committee considered four requests for stop signs.. The following action was !,
taken by the Committee:
`?5th and Bloomington - The Committee recommends that a two-way stop sign
. stopping traffic on 75th Street at Bloomington. Avenue should be installed.
68th and Bloomington - The Committee heard testimony at their December i5, 1975,
Meeting .from the individual requesting this stop sign. The Committee delayed
a decision pending the results of traffic counts at the intersection. The
Committee has completed their. evaluation of this intersection and recommends.
that the request for a four-way stop sign be denied.
7fith and Colfax and 76th and Morgan - The Committee reviewed the request for
.four-way stop signs at both of these intersections. It is the Committee's
recommendation that no stop signs be installed at these intersections. The
Committee requested the Public Safety Department to continue it's "concentrated
. ~~ 1 e a
It is ho ed that this action wil b
enforcement alon 76th Street.
• g p
satisfactory means of addressing thespeed problem. ~I
The residents- requesting the above stop signs have been notified of the Committee's ',i
recommendation. ~I
i
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce L. Wilde, Chairman I
JLW/bll
~.
QUESTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES
. AND HUMAN SERVICE COUNCILS REGARDING
THE COUNTY DECENTRALIZATIOiy PROPOSAL I'~
1. What is your reaction to the general .concept of amulti-service center?
a. Ts there a potential grouping of complementary services that
.could be colocated in your area? If so, what services?
b. Can a single location in the area be identified that could -
provide at least acceptable client access for pote-~tia1 service
agencies?
2. Regarding the proposed list of County-provided core services -- .
a. Are these services needed?
b. Are they acceptable? If not, how can they be made so?
3. Regarding supplementary services --
a. -What types of services and specific agencies (either that are
. presently or potentially located within the community) would be
appropriate for colocation?
b. Of ~xistig services in your community, which would 'be particu-
larly _inappropriate for colocation because of a community identity,
nature of .service provided, etc.?
4. It .has. been suggested that multi-service centers should be located
adjacent to regional libraries at the "Dales". If a single center were
to be developed in your community,. would the regional library represent
the best location? If not, what site selection criteria ought to be
used in the-evaluation of alternative locations?
i
5. If the multi-service center concept does not seem appropriate for. your.
community, what might be some alternative strategies for decentraliza-
tion of services that should be investigated? .
6. ``Other comments/concerns?
ajh
11/2b/75
~: -
::.,.~
~~ SUMMARY OF THE STATUS AND CONTENT OF
NENNEPIN COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE DECENTRALIZATION.PROPOSAL
A County proposal for the decentralization of services has been developed
by the Office of Planning and Development and approved, in concept, by the
Board of Commissioners. The proposal is ,now-serving as the basis for dis-
cussion with municipalities, service providers and interested citizens in
affected areas of the County. The recommendations and concerns expressed.
during these discussions will be considered in developing detailed plans
i for decentra lization to be presented for County Board apRroval.
In summary, the proposal provides ,for the following:
1. The establishment of multi-service centers in each of the-three
suburban planning areas of Hennepin County and the Central,-North,
and Northeast areas of Minneapolis by 1980.
2. The first priority for the development of these centers should,'be
given to the three suburban areas and Northeast Minneapolis.
3. Each center will-offer the same .group of core services to area
residents and will include the following:
• Financial Assistance Service
~ • Applicationsand Eligibility for Medical Assistance
• Applications and certification for food stamps
o Information, referra land outreach services
• Social casework and groupwork services
• Probation services
SUMMARY -DECENTRALIZATION PROPOSAL'
Page t
4. Each center will also offer a number of supp ementary services
that are appropriate for meeting other uniqu needs.. of the comm~-
nity. They might include one or more of the following, as well as
other types. of services that night be sugges ed by local comm~-
nities. It is important to note that any su elementary services
that are not presently the responsibility of Hennepin County would
not be provided by Hennepin County. Rather, the intent is to .
extend the availability of shared space to t ose currently deliver-
ing these services. in order. to, encourage gre ter coordination of
effort.
• selected primary physical health serv ces
o detoxification or other chemical depe dency services.
• .other public services that complement core services
(state employment services, vocationa rehabilitation, •
special education, etc.) .
• other private services (individual/fa ily counseling,
.group therapy, recreational services, legal services,
community organization and planning s rvices, volunteer-
serv-ices, etc.)
• others
ajh
11/19/75
_: ,~
R
NOTES ON STATUS OF DECENTRALIZATION PLANNING PROCESS
Prepared for HASS Management Committee
I. Activity to Date
A. Staff prepared concept paper: Comprehensive Decentralization
Plan.
B. County Board passed resolution September 16, 1975 endorsing
concept and directing staff to begin discussions-with municipal
officials to assess acceptability of the plan...
C. Office of. Planning and Development conducted meetings with city
managers and elected officials in all suburban. areas of Hennepin
County and with the human services councils in each suburban
area for purposes of presenting concept and initiating joint
planning process."(September 16-November 30, 1975). '
D. Informal planning committees consisting of municipal managers
were established fcr each suburban area. Office of Planning and
Development sent questions to individual municipalities, city
- manager committees, and suburban human services planning councils
requesting feed-back on specific concerns (see attachment).
E. City of Minneapolis Council resolution passed October 31, 1975,
requesting joint planning for decentralization within Minneapolis.
Companion resolution passed by County Board on November 25, 1975.,
establishing membership and also identifying N. E. Minneapolis
as highest priority.
F. Office of Planning and Development held meeting with N. E. Human
Services Committee to present concept .and begin feed-back process..
G. .City Planning and Development Office has been requested to specify
staff liaison. for City-County decentralization effort and to
identify representation from City Community Development Revenue
Sharing (CDRS) Committee. -
H. Letters sent to major State agencies conveying decentralization
report and requesting feed-back regarding possibility of co-
location of services.
I. Architects for Ridgedale and Brookdale Kegional Libraries were
directed to include Health and Social Services decentralization
concept within feasibility plan for libraries.
I + . Page 2
II. Future Efforts
A. Feed-back from individual municipali ies and suburban planning
committees due Jauuary',15, 1976.
B. Joint City-County committee will be onvened as soon as City
responds designating membership and. taff liaison.
•
C. Feed-back from municipalities will b assessed to determine
viability of decentralization concep and municipal reactions
regarding services needed and site s lection.
D. County departments andlprivate agenc'es will be contacted to
begin implementation planning to res and to needs identified
by municipalities.
E. Capital requirements for decentraliz d sites will be determined
and requests will be submitted to Ca ital Budgeting Task Force.
Where appropriate, capital requests ill be integrated with
Library plans.
III.. General Comment
The decentralization planning process has been designed to allow
maximum participation from municipalities while at the same time
timing the process in such a way as to re ain the option of potential
• co-location with the libraries in Ridgeda e and Brookdale. We antici-
pate that, by June.l976, we',will have a g od understanding of the kinds
of services and number of staff which wou d be projected for each service
site, assuming a January 1978 opening for new facilities in the sub-
urban areas.
In the. event that CDRS monies from the City of Minneapolis can be used
to capitalize remodelling or reconstructi n costs in N. E. Minneapolis,
it may be possible to anticipate an earli r opening date for N. E.
.Minneapolis.
' Attachment
fm
12/18/75
._ ~
:.~a
.CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
a Office bf City Manager
Council Letter No. 2":6
~ ~ Agenda' January 26, 1976
~ - ~ - -
The Honorable Ma,;yor
and j
Members of the City: Council"
City of Richfield
i
Gentlemen• °
Subjecf: Proposed Amendment to the Municipal Code
Concerning the Regulation of Saunas grid
` ! Massage Parlors
The purpose of l this council letter is to propose for city :council consideration
two changes in the existing ordinance relating to the-regulation of saunas and
mas-sage parlors.
The.city has had. experience withsauna operations for a period of several
• years.. A recent s udy has beenconducted to determine the average costs in-
volved` in making ~nitial investigations and' processing license- applications. for
~ saunas and also to determine the municipal costs that are unique to the annual
regulation of sauna licenses. The basis -for this study wae,the annual cost
that we have incurred-for these. operations for the period of time: that saunas
..have been permitted and regula ed in the .city..
u ' ha ~ di at hat au a o eratio s do re uire continual and in-
Our s t dy s n c ed t s n p n q
tensive efforts by the. city to insure. appropriate. regulation ;and compliance with
the. municipal code. Due to this fact and because` there are already four saunas
licensed to operate in the city, the. first proposed change in the sauna regulation
ordinance is to h it the number of saunas and massage parlor licenses which
I may be in force at :any one time to four licenses:
a o
The `second pro posed change relates'to_the establishment of initial application
and annual license fees which are determined ,to be adequate to cover city costs .
~ unique to the.. processing of ..applications and the regulation of these establishments.
At the present time there is no separate application fee and the°annual license
fee is $150.00, - I is recommended that the ordinance be amended !to require an
initial application and investigation fee of $700 and an annual :license fee of $..600-.
•
i
1.
}
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER V
PART II SECTION 5.25
OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
' OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Chapter V, Part II, Section 5.25 of the Ordinance Code
of the City of Richfield relating to the regulation of saunas
and massage parlors is hereby amended by amending Subdivisions.
and 4 to read as follows:
"Subd. 2 License Required.
(1) It is .found and determined that the-type of business
activity subject to licensure under this section is partic-
ularly subject to abuse which may take a number of forms
contrary to the morals, health, safety and General welfare of
the community. Further, it is~ found that control of these
abuses requires intensive efforts of the public safety
department as well as other departments of the ci y. These.
efforts exceed those required. to control and rea_ulate other..
business activities licensed by the city. This concentrated
use of city services tends to detract from and reduce the
level' of service available to the rest of the community
and thereby diminishes the ability of the city to promote
the general. health, welfare, morals and safety of the community..
" The number of .sauna and massage parlor licenses which may be
in force at any one time shall be four.
2) No person shall engage in the business of operating a
sauna or massage parlor either exclusively or in connection
with any other business enterprise without being licensed as
provided in this section.. "
Subd. 4 License Fees and License Year. The annual license
fee is $1~9-8~ $600.00. The license fee shall be paid when
the application is filed.. In the event that the application
is denied or in the event that the license once issued is revoked,
cancelled, suspended or surrendered, no part of -the annual fee'
shall be returned to the applicantunlessby council action.
In addition to the annual license fee required by this
su division, any applicant making an initial application shall
also pay a non-refundable a licaiton and investi ation fee of
700.00 at the time of making such application. A separate
li-`cause shall be obtained. for each palce of business. .The .
licensee shall display the license on a prominent place in
the licensed business at all times. A license, unless revoked
or surrendered, is for the calendar year -or part. thereof, for
w is it as een issued."
.., .-
.Passed by the City Counc i1 of the City of Richfield this
day of 1.976.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
~; ~~ i
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
~
`` ~`~ Office of City Manager
~.~~
Council Letter No. 25
~i
Agenda January< 26, 1976
Th
H
Ma
bl
e
ongra
e
yor
and
j
Members of the~;City Council
City of Richfield
Gentlemen•
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Establishing .Park Curfew
mber 22, 1975 .city council meeting, the city council gave
At the Dece'
~ ~
first reading consideration to an ordinance amendment establishing a curfew
in city parks . The ordinance amendment provides that the parks be closed
from 11:00 p.m.'~, to 5:00 a.m., and that allowances be made for authorized
city or county personnel who must be in the park during the hours the parks
are closed.
• A copy of the- ordinance amendment is attached and-it is recommended
tYiat it be given second reading consideration at the January-. 26, 1976 city
.council meeting:
Respectfully submi ed,
_ -Wayne S . Burggraaff
City Manager
WSB/bab
cc: .City Attorne y. ;
.Park & Recr ation Director
Public Safe y Director
'
I
~ ~
..
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER IV OF THE
ORDINANCE CODE. OF THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD ADDING SECTION 4.14
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES -0RDAIN:
`Chapter IV of the ordinance code of the. City of Richfield is amended by
adding Section 4.14 relating to closing of public parks and providing penalties
for being in public parks after closing which. reads as follows:
"4.14 REGULATING CLOSING OF PUBLIC PARKS
Subdivision 1. Parks to be Closed. All public parks will close
at 11:00 o`clock p.m. each day and shall remain closed to the public.
until 5.00 a.m. on the next day Except as provided in Subd._2, no
1 be in remain in or enter an ublic .ark between the hours
shal
erson
P
of 11.00 o'clock p.m. and 5.00 o'clock a.m. and no person shall drive
into or remain in a public parking area within or immediately adjacent to
a public park during the hours when such park 1s closed.. For the purposes
of this section that area of Augsburg Park belong~.ng to and occupied by
the Hennepin County branch library is included as a public park. _
Subd. 2. Activities Permitted After Closing.
The following activities may continue in the public parks after the parks
• have closed pursuant to subdivision 1 of thin section:
Use of the indoor ice. arena.
City sponsored and supervised activities, which because of
- the nature of the activity, cannot be held during the t~.mes
when the, parks are open.
Activities sponsored by any other group, association or
organization which has applied for and received a permit
for such activity pursuant to Subd..3 of this section.
Custodial or maintenance city and Hennepin County authorized
personnel who must perform their services during the times
when the parks-are closed.
Subd. 3. Permits. A group, association or organization wishing to`
s onsor an activit which will use cit arks between the hours of 11:00
o clock p.m. and 5.00 o'clock a.m. shall apply to the city manager not
~. .
t'.
. foi a permi_~ conduct that. actVlmanyager_
such planned activity _______-- repared Y ~ - , eterniTines
The aPP m nager ~ ::.
lication sea_h. uee ounle_ s~ e city - _~--
No permi~h~S~
tha~ hhe proposed activ~.tY.~. ark
_ be conducted during hou s when the p
(].} -Could not ubl ~.c .
'' 1 pnto~P -
i~sidents of
Will notes,likely to .disturb th
(2~ surrounding the park....
proper Y -
to cause or c eate crowd control
. ~.(~;Will not be likely`
or-' tra fic or parkinai~ nan~ P oblems. s
-Will not interfere wit Y` e activitle .
-~- scheduled for the par
re-' v o sly
the area in the
a e limits-time o~ the t• vity, ~av
r may -----and may impose-= er con~a~sos
a er
The .man ---- ;The.. rn~naq --
park `where t` a=rvthe nropose~acti~tY errtit an ind_enn tY
~n the conductd2 o~ai issuance o~ t p
_._.-"_- ------ damage o r
~------• city' harmless srom l3.abi ity °ert---y -"'in_---_ E
re ui s e a s--------'-- .. r op
bond holding the the•city for an P
. character aid reir:bursing
• cleanup cos _ anager The city manager ,,
city • ---__._.,_,--
4., Closing of Pares= and any pa='~ira d ~a_ ~
Subd. ------close any public Pa K - ----r eriod as
-_----. '_ for such P
maY ~ u on his order - acent to sucn? rk , ______--- -.'_.-" r
within or im~nediatel~aa7_ ----_-- rot ct_o_r restore or
0
-' -" Such
h~ 1 deem necessary in order ~_ activit1eS
e ro pie- vent. breaches °°uthe` Cep eonn~o ad~`~i -o such
terminat____ ---- 1 with - een informea ____
order to close shams a~P~Iyo -Gerson-having -.---
. onducted in the park'•--h area shall- re•~ Gin n~the-- area"'_nger -
c anY_su. ~---
an der cloy ~ -necessary to leave.
th~_is reasonably ity of Richffield, .
• passed .by the City.. Council of ..the ~ 1975.:
day of
Minnesota this '.
Mayor.
_ ~ en L. Law
ATTEST: ,
.Moran City C erk
Tomas J-
. _2..
_ /
Y .{ , -
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
..~ Council Letter No. 24
' Agenda January 26, 1:976
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of 'Richfield
Gentlemen:
Subject:. Hearing on Community Development Block Grant Program
The city council has scheduled two'publc hewrings- on the city's application
for the Community. Block Grant Program. The first hearing is January 26, 1976
andthe second hearing is scheduled for February 9, 1976. Inasmuch as the
city is a part of the Hennepin County Urban County application, ,the hearings
are technically being held as joint hearings with Hennepin ,County.
The purpose of the :.public hearings is to consider the amended; housing assist-
ance p-tan and the..amended community development plan. Both of these plans
`were adopted by the. city council. last year .and the arnerided plans .generally.
follow the original plans adopted last year,.-
In ,the case of-the community development plan, of:which a;copy is attached,
there are the folltying.-changes: -
1. Commdnity development funds for the L/H/N commercial improvement
project have been changed from $20, OOO to ,$60, 000 in 1976 and reduced:.
from $180, 000 to $140, 000 in 1977. While there is a shift in the years
in which. it is planned to spend. these funds, the total amount`of $20q, 000
remains f}}~ie same. The change is being made to cover front end costs
for: the _L/ H/N project .
2. .Arterial street lighting costs estimated at $126, 000 has been. deleted
and park ~ evelopment projects substituted in the same amount.. This
will perm~t $35,-500 for park development in 1976 and $9O, S00 for park
l
v~ 1 - i
de elopment in 977. It has been-determined fihwt the-street light ng
originally propo ed would be very unlikely to .qualify as an eligible.
~ activity. ~ .
3 . An additional amount.of $1, 741: which was received` during the: current
year has been added to the Memoriwl Park project.
L ! ~ ..
Council Letter No'. 24 -2- January 26, 1976
The amended housin assistance plan is also attached. The changes in
g
that plan are as fgllows:
~ 1 . The first year program goal for leased housing was reduced from
95 units to 52 units to reflect the actualallocation of units. The
split between elderly and non-elderly units is-changed accordingly
based on t~;he 52 units actually ;allocated.
2. Rehabilitation of ,50 units was added in 1976 and 1.977 to reflect`an
anticipated $2,00,.000 loan:from: the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
which wi1L be carried out by local lending institutions under ,the'
supervision of .the HRA.
In the first year of community development block grant funding, the city
received approximately $99, 000 as its share of the Urban-Hennepin County Entt-
i lement. It is-estimated that the~city will receive approximately $182;800'`for . ' '
.federal fiscal year 1977 and $268,000 for federal fisca .year 1978.
~ In preparation for the public hearings, on this subject, adequate legal notices
have been published in the newspaper and a special story has been included in
the quarterly report mailed;to all res dents of Richfield. Letters have been sent ,
~ ~ , to all citizen advisory commissions offering an opportunity, for suggestions from.
those groups. It is the opinion of the 'staff that these and other efforts made by J
the city meet the `requirements of the federal regulations for participation in the
` development of the community development block grant application.
'It is redommended that the city council hear testimony at both the January 26
and February 9 hearings. Final action on approving- and adopting the community
development plan should be taken at the February 9, 1976 hearing:
Respectfully submitted,
J
j." Wayne S. Burggraaff
City .Manager
WSB/eja
cc: Finance Dire~tor
- Park and Recreation Director
Planning Dire. for
Public Works Director
COMNHJNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY
.Both the long term and .short term objectives address. the statement of need.
Long Term Development Objectives
- To conserve the residential aspects of Richfield.
- To improve the residential environment of the comRnmity.
- To eliminate deterioration and blighting.influences to residential and commercial
areas.
- To improve the service delivery system of cixy government.
' -'To provide a greater range of housing choices. '
Short Term Development Objectives
- Improve and eliminate deterioration in residential neighborhoods surroundir_g the
Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Commercial area and provide planning and relocation assist-
ance.
- Provide for renewal of approximately 10 deteriorated .homes.
- Provide for the rehabilitation of approximately 53 homes.-
- Provide minor park development and improvements to existing parks.
- Eliminate backwash water discharge into Legion Lake Park.
- Reconstruct a facility for senior citizens in the old library.
-Provide rehabilitation funds for 76 Richfield homeowners.
'I
CONY~4[JNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
STATEMENT OF NEED
-Senior Citizen Center: Reconstruction of the vacated library building for
seniro citizens. The facility's reconstruction will make the `physical improve-
ments necessary to delivery integrated housing and other social as well as
recreational services.
.Estimated Cost and Source of Funds
1975
. Comm~mity Development Funds $.50,000.00
Special Revenue Funds 66,000.00
Total Cost $116;000.00
Data Source: 19.75-1980 Capital Program
- Water Backwash System: This project consists of the installation of a water
system to recycle backwash water at the city's water treatment plant. The system
is required by the Minnesota Po.ilution Control Agency to prevent the discharge of
untreated backwash water into Legion Lake Park.
Estimated Cost and Source of Funding..
1975
Community Development Funds $ 30,000.00
Water User Fees 50,531.00
...Total-Cost $ 80,531.00
Data Source: 1975-1980 Capital Program .
- Housing Rehabilitation:-This project in to provide a interest right down and
grant program for the rehabilitation of both renter and owner occupied single fam-
.iay housing.. An estimated total of 53 units will be rehabilitated.
Estimated Cost and Source of Funds
1975 19.76 1977
Community Development Funds $ 10,000.00 $ 37,5Q0.00 $ 37,500.00
HRA .... _0_ . .....: -:0= ' ~ ~ ~ I5;000: 00 `
'~ Total-Cost $ 10,000.00 $ 37,500,00 $ 52,500..00
~,
-Housing Rehabilitation: This project is to provide a interest right down
and grant program for the rehabilitation of both renter and owner occupied
single-family .housing.. An estimated total of 53 units will be rehabilitated.
Estimate Cost and Source of Funds -
1975 1976 1977
Community Development. Funds $10,000. $37,500 $37,500
NRA -0- -0- 15,000
Total Cost $10,000 $37,500 $52,500
-New Home Pro ram: The purpose of this program is to assist in the
spot renewal .
- elimination of residential deterioration. The program consists of the
purchase on the open market of existing vacant homes and lots which are
in a dilapidated condition. The method of financing will be to establish
a revolving fund. through funds gained in selling city owned: lots in New
Ford Town and through Community Development funding. The revolving fund
will be repaid from the resale of land.
Estimated Cost and Source of Funds
(to start revolving fund) 1976 1977
Community Development Funds $50,000
Sale of Lots 50,000
Total Cost - $100,000
-~
-Park Development:. Development. of Memorial and Fremont Parks, improvement to the
Community Center and. Taft Parkin 1976. ;Improvements to Augsburg Park and
minor park development at Nicollet Park and another minor park in 1977-1978.
Estimated Cost and Source of Funds
1975: 1976 1977
Community Development Funds $ 8,855 $35,500 $90,500
Special Revenue Funds 19,741 35,000 86,000
Total Cost $19,741 $70.500 $176,500
• --Commercial Im rovement: Although the LHN Commercial Improvement Program
is not yet completed, a.need for public funding will be necessary to carry
out the program. The 1977 estimated costs. in this case are very sketchy..
and only include community development funds.
Estimated Cost and Source of Funds
1976 1977
.Community Development Funds $60,000 $140,000
• DRAFT
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
A Housing Assistance Plan, as outlined in Title I of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974, consists of four maing parts:
- I. Survey of Housing Conditions (Table I)
II. Housing Assistance Needs of Lower Income.
Households (Table II)
III. Annual Goal for Housing Assistance (Table LII)
IV. General Locations of Proposed Housing-for
Lower Income Households (Table IV)
-The purpose of the Housing Assistance Plan is to provide an assessment of
housing conditions and needs, and to-set realistic annual goals for meeting
a portion of those needs in conjunction with community development activities
to be undertaken in Richfield.
The various parts of the Plan, along with an explanation of how each part was
developed follows.
2
.PART L. SURVEY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS.
This part is to "accurately survey the condition of the housing stock in the
communi ty'•.
Two aources of data were used as the most accurate information :available at
thi's time on conditions of housing in Richfield... They. are:
1. 1970 Census - 4th Count and. 6th Count (Special Run)
2. Report. on Survey of Housing Conditions,. Metropolitan
Council, prepared by Economic Research Corporation,
January,- 1975
The limitations on the accuracy of the.Censusdata are that it is now five-years
old, and that the housing "conditions" being measured are the age of the structure
and the lack of Some or all :plumbing facilities. Nonethe less, it is possible~to
gain information form this data, and it is possible to separate rental housing
conditions from owner occupiedhousng conditions...
1970 Densus 6th Count data was used to determine the number of substandard
units in Richfield, as well as the total occupied and vacant units by tenure as
shown on Table I. Substandard units here -are chose: units which have incomplete
plumbing facilities.
Suitable for Rehabilitation units were determined from T970 Census Fourth Count.
These estimates were made taking all occupied units built prior to 1939., and
within the !^an9e of vG7ues and rents affordable by low and moderate income persons
($199/month rent, $19,999 value) -but excludin those units of ver low value
and rent (below $10,000 value and below 100/month as being not capable of
rehabilitaion. Very few units were excluded in this process as being note capable
of rehabilitation. (Owner-occupied 39, renter-occupied lI)
The total thus achieved as shown_on Table I was compared to the most recent survey
information, Report on Survey of Housing Conditions, prepared for the Metropolitan
Council by Economic Research Corporation. This survey was conducted throughout
the seven-county metropolitan area, including the City of Richfield,:during°the
spring and summer of 1974. All structures weregiven. a visual exterior inspection
and rated according to uniform criteria which awarded "points" to structures depend-
ing on the number and severity of structural defects which were visible on the
exterior.
i `The purpose of the original survey was to determine the number of substandard
-structures in the metropolitan area.. In this survey, Richfield had 0 substandard
structures.
Estimates on .the. number of housing units whi:ch could be rehabilitated were then
prepared using the orginal survey information. These estimates show that 333
.structures .need some or possibly major rehabilitation in Richfield, which compares
favorably to the 1970 Census figure of 401 structurPS, t~~wn orr Table I.
,.,
~ - ,
%"
,,.~
-.
~,
I•
-3-
Form Approved
OMR Ho. 63-R1471
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN OEvcLOPMENT
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
TABLE I -SURVEY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS
1. NAME OF APPLICANT 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. ^ ORIGINAL
• ^ AMENDMENT
City of Richfield., Minnesota 4. PROGRAM YEAR
From:. To:
OCCUPANCY STATUS AND
A NUMBERS OF YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITS
.
CONDITION OF HOUSING UNITS TOTAL OWNER -TYPE RENTAL -TYPE
t. a. OCCUPIED UNITS: TOTAL 14,806 1 10,1401 4°6661
671 461 211
b. SUBSTANDARD
ALL oTHER 7392
14 10,0942 4,6452
G ,
TOTAL
S 1801(1.22%) 341 1221
:
2. a VACANT UNIT
11 O1 O1
b. SUBSTANDARD
1792 ` 342 122?
c. ALL OTHER •
.
3. TOTAL OCCUPIED AND VACANT 14,9862 10,174 4,7882
UNITS
B. SUITABLE FOR REHABILITATION .
S 3963 3433 533
~. occuPtED uNIT
V 53 33 23
ACANT UNITS
Z.
3.•TOTAL SUITABLE FOR REHABIL- 4013 34,6 553
ITATION
C. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
1Vo1. VI Census. Data, 1970, Special run supplied by HUD.
2Figure computed from above data.. •
3Metropolitan Council computation from Fourth Count Housing Data, 1970.
Estimates number of occupi ed units built prior to 1939 within ra nge of value or
rent available to low and moderate income persons, excludes very low values as
not rehabable. Will test against Metropolitan Council Special R ehab Survey
available 2-1-75, and Rich field's own data.
.: ~
NUD7015.8 ~it.S.6AYCRNMCN7 PRINTING ~FF(CE;197~I-ti50-1113/712
(11-74) I
-4-
PART II HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS OF LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
• The purpose of this Part is to determine the n umber of households currently resid-
ing in Richfield°as well as those expected to reside in Richfield that will require
housing assistance.
For the purposes of this Part, the households "in need" are those (1) whose
incomes are within the limits of the Section * Housing Assistance Payments
Program, and (2) are likely to apply for-such a Program because 'of .current
"inadequate living conditions".
Income limits for the Section 8 Housing Assist ance Payments Program are as
follows:
.(Moderate) (Low)
Lower Income Very Low Income
Fami1Y Size 80% of Median 50% of Median
1 $ 7,800 $ 4,700
2 10,000 6.,250
. 3 11,250 - 7,050
4 12,500 7,800
5 13,250 8,450
6 14,050 9,050
7 ~ 14,850 9,700
8 or more 15,600 10,300
Both families and the elderly are eligible for assistance.
Section 8 Housing Assist ance Payments Program is a new rental. assistance
program authorized by th e Housing and Community Development Act of-1974.
An eligible recipient of rental assistance would pay 15 to 25% of income for
rent,. and HUD would pay the difference between this amount and the fair market
rent the. property owner would normally receive for the unit.
• -
.. - 5 -
"Inadequate living .conditions" include:
- Lacking plumbing facilities
- Overcrowed
-• Paying more'than 25% of income -for rent
- Owners in housing over 30 years old and valued at less than
$10 ,-000
All of these factors were combined in a special computer tabulation of 1970
Census data, with a breakdown by size of household as shown in Table IIa.
The total households needing assistance in Richfield are shown-om Table II. It
includes-all renter households (1,103) within income limits and living in "inadequate
conditions" except for non-elderly vne-person households, who would not be
eligible. It also includes 20 elderly owner households having low or very low
income and living in inadequate living conditions.
Larger families (families with 4 or more minor children) are separated out to
determine the number of units needed with 3 or more bedrooms. This number was
reached by counting half of all income-eligible/inadequately housed 5-person
households, and all 6 or more person households in the same"category. This totally
I 31.1arge families.
Elderly households needing ssistance were drawn from the same special tab of
~ 1970 Census. data. 299 is the number of olderly renters and owners with low or
very low incomes and in "inadequate living conditions".
The number of handicapped (person disabled more than 6 months and unable to
I ~ worlc~).•n Richfield was 392 in 1970 Census. Four. per cent of all households in
Richfield were found to be income eligible and inadequately housed.- This four
per cent need factor applied to 392 gives us an estimated 16 handicapped eligible
~ for Sect ion 8 housing subsidies and in need of assistance. Thus, the total
elderly and handicapped is 315 (29916).
In Migration
According to Metropolitan Council estimates, lOl new households are expected to
reside in Richfield 1975--1980. We estimate four .per cent of these will be
"in need" or 4 households of which 20%, of about 1, may be expected to be
handicapped or elderly.
•
Q
~ a
0 1
> ~,.~ m
t
o
,o
aao r O
Q Z Z
E m ~ Q ~ `
~ O
m
Z O '~ ~
ff ~ ~ m~ .r
a o N J LL .~
NM ~ ~ ~ .
-
N
v
N O
r--
m
b
O r- +-~ N
i S- •r
C m U O Z3 ~
F- p 'Cf N ~
. ~ ~
H ~ ~ ~.
N~ O O
Z
W j
Z ff ~ •r
N
N Q
` N O 4J
O Z W o m O Q. •r U_ _
O > ~ Y ~ SZ +-~ ~
F
Z _ F ~ D O ~
w a Q i O U O +
_
a ~ J ~ O -p N Tf O •r
O ~ _ ~ +> S= i N
O a O
O
ff W ~ •r ~ Q N
W Z Q O
. LL ~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~
' ~
W
c~
of
2
U N
mrnm
,r
~ ~"
~
o N
w u ~ ~ E a~ N N
aZ 3 ,
o m ,~ o~ rn~
m Q 0 y c
> ~r ~ a~
J •J ~ ..
~
] d ~
w O ~ .r. ~
/rte tCf i
_ w
O
O m
~ ~-- ~ s=
V 00 p~.r
Q Q t7 Z C C N 4r- 'C
~~w
H
O N N
? N Z +> O O RS
I Z Z t r- N N
p, y. Q m N tD C Q~ N •n O
0 0 ~ ~ p l •~ r6 ~ 41
1.. O N O ~ +~ ~ ~ L1 i
~ Q O •t3 r-" 'd N
~ ~ Q
~
O.Q N
Q Z • N 1--1 •r S= p
W O.
O Q m m ri e- i C •'r 'O N Cp
O F a. M 1 M L •r • ~ 1"' N
~
-- N S ~ J Q - ~ O
_ a
W E
j 0=00 O~ n
.... i N
E O ~ 4-
f O
a
W it +-
O O O O C
..) 11 Ln Z7 i •r ~
M r i N >= U lU p
~ ca c N M ~ ~
o
N E
. .
-, ~ •r-
ct3
t
~ C M- ~~ w N •h ~ U ~
~•--1 ~J ~•r L ~p
N ..~ O 1[f O O CO e
s= •
Ol
+1 ~ O
•r
O O N
o
W ~` W ~ X~ ~ Q ,O~~•~~~ 111 •
w W MM
Z'j d y y d Q
V d d O ~ !t3 •r •r ~
~
(~ ~ r_ r C
r ~ Q Q Q Q y
O Q Q F
0 6
t ~ V U ~ V U
y...
G ~
2~
O ~
~
O V
p J
O
Z
O w .. N N Q~
~ N E E Or-
O
=
L
4 2
W
Z
Z Z
.
Z
O N O i fl..
- f U O W ~~ = Q ~ S Q y I Q Z N C U +~ II. nN
.r
Q lY
W~
~
}
~
} W
~
y Q U ~ C. ~ ~
Z V •r
~ N- O O
V O G H O _ 'ol C.
V~
J V
2 Z W ><
2 ~ Z J
2 Z
Q J 2W Z
Q J
ff rA ~~
W ...E
.~
O
d Q ff ff ~ (~ .-~ r•.
CC r1 N m
`
Q A. N O JU J O
J QO.-.
` J O
"
1 Q0 -
ZF- J J O O ~ ~ L-0
C E.
LL r 2 F'Z J
ZQ Q ff
W W W
W J
U
U Q ff
W ~0 ff W ~
~
y 0
V
" Z .: F O Z . 0
~ O
N W Z ,,
~y
O W ,Z .. Q
~ W Z Q
.
; 1gH . V .. Y O
! Z V a .= r ci .
G Q r c i Q a .= r ci G ~~
•
f
r
Q ~ - ~ Q R •
' - -
... _ a,.. .. :,,,..
C
7f
~.:
r
D'
n
n
TABLE IIa
RICHFLELD HOUSING ASSISTANCE .NEEDS
Renter. ~ Moderate .Income
Occupied Low income eligible Eligible
Households (in "inadeq uate" housing-) (in °`inadequate" housing? Total
I person (elderly) 116 80 196
2. 158 298 456
3 & 4 1~1 252 403
5 12 21 33
6+ 4 11 15
441 b62: ~ 1,103
Count of elderlyinadequately housed/income eligible
Owners 20
Renters i96 - 1 person
77 - 2 person
6-- 3 person
299 -elderly + 16 handicapped = 315
',
'i
.., - - 8
PART IIh A~tNUAL GOALS FOR HOUSING ASSISTANCE
This portion of the Housing Assistance Plan is to establish realistic annual
• goals in order to meet some of the housing needs identified in Part II. ~,
The constraints on setting realistic goals are.: ',
1. Lack. of information on funding, availability-from HUD.
2. HUD allocation and distribution funds to Richfiield and the
~ rest of the metropolitan area.
3. Capability and capacity of Richfield i n undertake ng a housing
- assistance ro ram.
9
P
Given these constraints, and the identified need for assisting 1,129 households
as shown in Part II, the following goals are proposed (and shown on Table III):
First Year Goals
I. Utilize the existing housing stock through the Section $
Existing Housing Program on a scattered basis.
2. .Serve elderly as well as non-elderly in approximate proportion
to need.
3. Begun rehabilitation program to improvesubstandard housing
through the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds.
4. Construct new building of 150 units fore elderly..
Three Year Goals
b. Construct 5 homes for larger families on sites scattered
throughout Richfield.
~,
6. Complete rehabilitation of 76 homes throughout Richfield
through the .use of Community Development Block Grant funds
and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rehabilitation loans.
7. Complete rehabilitation of 50 rental housing units. through.
Section 8 Substantial Rehabilitation Program.
_ I
l -9-
-• i'BFIn APOroved : ~
OMB No. 63-R1471
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ,
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
TAi3LE Iti - A{>!iUUAL GOAL FOR HOUSiPJG ASSISTANCE-
OF APPLICANT
NAME 2. APPLICATION NUMBER !. ^ ORIGINAL
. X~AMENOMENT
OF RICHFIELD
•~CITY a. PROGRAM YEAR
_ From: To:
NUMBERS OF UNITS (except as noiedl
FIRST YEAR GOAL THREE YEAR GOAL•
A. CATEGORY
• TYPES OF UNITS TYPES OF UNITS
TOTAL
New
Exist
Rahab. TOTAL
New
Exist
Rehab.
1. TOTAL 205 150 52 3 42
2 ELDERLY 166 150 16 2 8
3. NON-ELDERLY LARGE 2 2
S.R.
a.oTHER 37 34 3 129 96 33
8. SOURCES OF ASSISTANCE
1. HUD
.. sec I N ..
~s~antial 50 50
AMOUNT $ ~ S S S S S S
3 . 22 22
b.cD BLOCK .GRANTS $1~~000 $10,000 $85,000 85 000
e. 'OTHER
Z. STATE AGENCIES'
IDENTIFY PROGRAM: a.
50 50
MHFA LOAN PROGRAM ~ $200,00 200 00
3. OTHER
a. FARMERS HOME AD.
4
b. LOCAL PROGRAMS $15,000 15 000
C. OTHER (specify/
C. EXPLANATION. OF PRIORITIES
' OPtlonal
"Explain -any State agency amounts Included
HU0,7015.10: t!r U.S.GOVF.RNITNT F'RlN1lNG OFFICEs1974-G50-103/717
f11.7a)
•_,~
lI
~~
~~
r ~.
< ~~
r
C' ~_
r--
I:-:
- 10 -
RESOLUTION N0. b31~
- RESOLUTION ADOPTING
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND PROGRAM AND
THE HOUSING RSSISTANCE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Cc,uncil of the-City of Richfield has reviewed
the Community Development Plan and Program and the Housing
Assistance Plan in accord with the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974, and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds a need to provide community
for the assistance of low and moderate income. people
development
,
and the eliminate blighting conditions, and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds a need to provide subsidized
housing for low and moderate income people including elderly, and
WHEREAS, .the City Council will .review the Community Development
Plan and Program and .the Housing Assistance Plarr on an annual
- basis, and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Plan and Program and the
Housing Assistance Plan will vw made part of Hennepin County "Urban
• County" Entitlement Grant application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESQLVED that the City Council of the
City of Richfield does hereby adopt the Community Development Plan and
Program and the Housing Assistance Plan and authorize the City
Manager. to submit a Community Development Block Grant application
and prepare plans to implement the Housing Assistance Plan.
Passes by the.City Council of the city of Richfield this 9th day of
February, 1976.
Loren L. Law .Mayor
ATTEST:.
Thomas J. Moran City Clerk