The URL can be used to link to this page

1985 Council Reports - - ---'-~-'--~'_.~.~.~-""""'-'~~~ - . ! I I i HOPKINS I "I I CITY COUNCIL MEETING . July 16,1985 . . ,____ ~;1fll 1 -_J. -- -.-.-. ~~~---.-...---~------~' -'"---_.------._''''--------~--- .~~~~~--._.--- -- . /' ~.,." VI-c ,------ -' ~- .. "1;-":', \ ,,~'--'ll' T', . CITY OF HOPKINS '"=-=. .. ... ~~~.~~ '-- 10" "RST srREET SOllfH ,,- ..... ..... ,.1-.- , HOPKiNS, MINNESOTA S5-3<C3 ...f--, . . 612/re!;"e.c!1(. Resolution endorsing Paul Joyce r' - - for appointment:. t.o Regionct1 ~,,~ - Tr:wsit Board ! PURPOSE: The purpose of this report 1s to recommend action on a Resolution ~ndo!'sing Paul Joyce as a candida te for trle Regional Transi t Board. BACKGROUND: Attached to this report is a letter from the Metropolitan Council indicating th&t the Regional Transit Board (RTB) will be reduced fl'om l'~ members to 8 members, A s a res ul t t the "Ie tr'opol i tan Council will be appointing an entirely new Board. Paul Jcyce, a Hopkins resident 'las represented tilis area Of'! the . RIB since August 1985. Obviously, Mr. Joyce l.inderstands the '. needs of Hopkins and'r1ould be an effective voice for Ol)f' corJcerns at the RTB. It wOuld seem to be in the City's best interest to endorse his candidacy for the new Board. A Resolution endorsing ~1r. Joy..:e as a c.andld~te for the RTB is enclosed with this report ALTERNATIVES: Co u n c i 1 has tll e fa 110 win gal 1: ern a t i v e s wit 11 f' e gar d tot his i s sue: 1. Do nothing. Should you decide not t,) take any action I the I Metropolitan Council may still appoint Mr. Joyce to the RTB. On the other hand, this may be taken as an indication of no confidence by the local government and someone else may be appointed. 2. Adopt the Resol1ltion. By following this course of action, Y0U will help to assure that a Hopkins resident is appointee to the RTB, 3. Open up the pt'ocess to other applicants. By following this course of action, the City Council could actively develop or pursue other apDlicants for this position. The disadvantage here is t~lat the time frame is :short and a Hopkins resident already has, what would seem to be, a Detter oppcrtGnlty for appointment --Council Rept " C'_ - - I ~ '.; . ". than so;:neone unfar.1iliar to the Metropolitan Council. RECot1MENDI~TION : . Adoption of a Resolut.ion is a Council perogative. Howeverf staff believes that it is in the best .interest of the Clty to recommend Paul Joyce for candidacy to the RTB, in order' to insure Hopk.ins input on transpcrtat,ion issues in the future, ~- C r a(g~ '>Jl Ci ty Mana.ger' /i. . ~~II_,~ . _,.........,,~iIl -.-1" III ~_- · D1i_-'" ~_ ----<U:. "- ~_BlII'S--~"'-~~~~~~!iiIlIJ{~ --__mao.._] '*" CI/,( OF HOPKINS Hennepin Count~., Minnt'5ot,8 ~ .' .... RESOLUTION ~O, 85-:1204 AeSOLUTI0N ENDORSING ?AUL JOYCe "'01\ AFPOINTMENT TO THE HEGIONA~ TR4NSIT BOARD III'HERZAS, P!1Ld Joyce has liel"1/ed on the negicnal TI"~n3it Bo & 1"11 (fl'j'B) alnc~ Aug\ut, 1984 1"9pl"e3er.tlng Distl"1ct M, which lnelut:t!s the City or Hnpkln~. and WHF.NEAS, Paul Joyce h~s prov1de~ ~x~~11ent rep~egentat!on tor Dl~tr1ct M and has de~on$trated le&de~5tip on many k~y 13SU~S, and ~HEREAS, the Mineaota ~~g151ature has rn8nd~ted a redUction in the eembershlp or th~ HrB r~om 1~ member~ t.:l a members, and .. WHEREAS, the GeograptJlcal. Bou~darles of p~oposed RTB Dlstrt,t G 8~e ve~y similar to tnose of Dlatrlct M, served by Paul Joyce, thel'l c. NOW, THEREFORE BF. IT R~SOtVED, by the City Counctl of th. City or Hopkins, t\'lll t Paul Joyce b~ endorsed a~ the be:;t candidate to repr~aent Di~trlct G on the a~B1on81 Transit Board, ba~ed on h!~ expe~1enee ~ith the flTB nd hl~ kno~ledge of the District, or-d, SE IT fVRTHER R.':SOl..VEi:I . tha~ Dirk DeVries, as HopkIns' r-epl""'sent- atl....~ t:> the Metropolitan Council be reQue::ited to present this end~ "seL'le~ t to the full Metropolitan CQuncil fopr consideration. I'allsed and adopted by the City Council of' the City of Hopklros at a regular meeting hel d the 16th day of July, 1985, J. SCOTT ReNNE E;"LEN LAVIN City Clerk Mayor JERRE A. MILLER City Attorney . '. j . ~ 'f I " , --------- ..... - -~ ----... ~---.--.-'" ___~r~___________.... '"""""""""~---~....~~~_ll:.I-~T~~~ ~~ > JUl 0 8 198~ o\ital.l ~.., f--' ", (\ ~/letropoIi1an Council . '.' ,I" ~ ='" \ '.' .1 , 4'" <',~\ ~ i./ ",> ~ 300 f;letro Sqd3,e Building '!l..> ", '~- ]. .'.-, ~ ~' -" '..... Sevenlh and Rober~ Svp.ets . '--.. ~ '. ,~~ C \" 'i. "-,"". St. Paul, rv1inrlesota 55101 11 _/T . . ~,....,'J..... ./ ~ ". " \: , 0' ).. .'/,:' .(_/!~.J \~V'~"... Telephone (6121291,6359 July 3~ 1985 v. , ,,' TO: Metropolitan A~ea Local Elected Officials This yeart the Minnesota Legislature pass~d a bill redu~ing the mGmbership of the TIegional Transit Board (RrS} from 14 members to 8 members. The Of;lW Board will corl:;.\i3t of eight ID€mbel"s from the metropolitan area appointed by the Metropolitan Council, plus a chair appointed by the Governor. Th~ Metropolitan Council will hold a public hearing to accept statements from people woo are interested in being appointsd and to hear recommendations on appointments. We wo~ld appreciate your input into tbe appointmen~ prooess. If you wish to recommend or endorse a candidate, please contact the Metropolitan CQ~~cil member from your district. The public heai"irlg for RTB Chair- will be held Tuesday, July 23, at 4:30 p.l!1. in Metropolitan Council Chambers, 300 Metro Square Buildings Seventh & Robert Street8, St. PaUl, Minnesota 55101 . The ;;oullcil will then provide the . Governo'r ..,ith a Hst of nominees (or this po~ition9 h public t~aring will be held for interested parties and applia4nts for RTB District A on Monday, July 22, at 7:00 p.m. in Metropolitan Council Chamb~r3. The deadli~e for applications i~ Monday, JUly 22, 1985, Applications should :.j be submitt~d to the Seoretary of state, 180 State Office 8uilding, St. Faul, i M.."l. 551 S5. Application fo.r!tlS are available through th.e Sf3oretar'Y of' State's I office and Gan be obtained by calling 296-2805^ Public hearings fo~ all eight districts will be held oetween July 22 and July 25, with th~ Council making j appointments at a special Council meeting on Thursday, AU~J8t 1, 1985. , If you have any qlJestion8~ please contact Bill Lester at 291-6630. Sincerely, . Sandra S, Gardebring Chair cc: Clerks, City & Ccur.ty Administrators, Town Board Chairs WJL132-CHADM1 .\" t: , " J" ;.' _:.:. ~: ; i. ~ : ; , r'. I ~~ - - - -~----._._--._. ---~ ---- - - ~.---~-------~- ~,- ~.~...~-: . . ... SCHEDULE Of REG!ONAl iRANSIT BOARD HEARINGS ---'_.""'"-.:.--_----------~----...--..- ~ . Monday, July 22: RTB District A (Cauncil Districts 1 & 2) 7:00 p.m. Metropo1ftan Council Chambers 300 Metro Square Building 7th and Robert Str~ets St. Pau 1, Mn. 55101 Monday, July 22: RTB District H (Co\iilcil Districts 15 & 16) 7:00 p.m. Woodbu~y City l,d 11 2100 Radio DrivE Woodbury, Mn. TuesdaYt July 23: RTB Dist~;ct B (Council Districts 3 & 1) 7:00 p.m. Rcseville City Hall Lexington & County Road C Roseville, Mn" 55113 Tuesday~ July 23: RTB District G (Council Districts 13 ~ 14) 7:00 p.m. Eden Prairie Schools Administration Building 8100 School Road Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Tuesday, July 23: Public Hearing of Applicants for the RTB Chair 4.: 30 p.m. Metf'opo H tan Count il Chdmbers 300 Metro Square Building St. P au 1 't Mn. 55101 Wed., July 24: RTB Dfstrict C (Council Districts 4 & 5) 7:00 p.m. Regina High Scho~l 4225 Third Avenue South Minneapo i 1$, Mn. Wed.. Ju ly 24: RTB District F (Council Districts 11 & 12) 7:00 p.m. Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Mfl. Thurs., July 25: RTB District 0 (Council District 6 & 10) 7:00 p.m. Crystal City Hall 4141 Douglas Drive Crystal, Mo. Thurs., July 25: RTB District E (Council Distri:ts 8 & 9) 7:00 p.m. Fridley City ~al1 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, Mn. REG! Of\l-Cli,'\DMl . I -__~.jl~Ill!..~l III ~_I,..,'~"II;'.\'.,,-'.,:,:J, ,'~".':,!,';.'_Il _ _..---.:...~---------~~---- ~. -- .. . ..... RESPONSIBIL!TIES OF THE REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARO --- . ....------ ~ The Regional Transit Board cootdinates transit op~rat1ons with'" the metropolitan area and implemerlts the Couilcil#s long-term transit plan; Establishes a trar.sit information s~rvice; Adopts a transit service implementation plan; Contracts with trans it oj)erators in the metropolitan area to provide transit services; Coordintes special transportation services for the elderly, handicapped or others with special transportation needs; Admi n; ster's contracts for paratrans i t projects; and t Appoints the members of the Metropolitan Transit Commission. Members receive $50 per diem and expenses. For SPtcific infoNmation contact the Metropolitan Council~ Bil1 lester, 300 ~tro Square Building. St. Paul, Mn. 55101 (612)291-6630. REG!ON~-CHADMl I ".' ~..~.>. ;.'. (.l'~;':':~'.~~'''' .),}, t" "~:'~;:-"".t~ :._ ~ Z!~~.f,-":::<'..:,::~~.~."..:">,:..:, ';'t..,' ;. .,.....1:,J..~~ '''''\~J: ;. ~~-:';~_i:":.~':""'1'>:.~.~'~.: ...(:.~~., .f.~ .:,~ ~.-, J, ~.,""'ll_-~~~ll_rllilT!lif~':llii".!IIilIIlO1JI!Ii~~~~"""'ili---- -~ilIll~.l!.lJS.._n"-~ 171& 1--~ . ~ . .. t" -- _.- -.. -- I . ... ... In ''''L ~ t l.a lIIIf..'''l i. '(;il......"'. 'lttl. . "ilt1~i:C11 ,,_ '.- Z e...-.4 ~., !'6,.~;:a"j.~."" ~ ____r J "j..r~IS"I' Ct~..:.. 1. ~"'I.t ._lIIt q.... ,. '11'1(....." .2 I " ;,-e. .....:-:: . (.)"1\,....,1 '.:' 'q.1-\\.~" ~~~f -III'~"h .. ~.fi:lll.t)M ;. ':~\.,J..'. l1'(:&'-;-'S, t. G...., .i~ ....." t ........1..1- \~ H' ..r_..., , .. :9"5t4i."l",U.. '. .....~\)o..u~~ -<__ ~_ r' L&h I!il,!l,Ilt';;. ~, :.;:;: .~..~ '>>~"Q It ~il{h.10e . ...I'a."..ut .p ......-( .(... _":7' to ).-!, ':~.:...j lQ ....Q-".' .. ~. :i ;:~~=:~~ ~ ;~~i.~::~r "'I",,~~ 4~C;i..\ C:~ ..__ ~,., II .-,.! 'l-lt'I~'i'\ )~ .,l;i1.....tll~ nlUuU ""~~4' "';/,...~Cl , lOt"'err. ".....,. ..11. ~'.- 01. r. "~IIIl'R"'" J.l .f .;.'~' \ l'l~.' L .;. . \.- '-." ,.q 4 A.'!~~'l.- t" ""4('{ a~,,~r~i" 'I;l &\-. ....-V...l~ '-.... ....1.:' ! .~...:....~ ~- i.t;-! __ \;h..r"'::c.-oal 9v\.i~carl :"11 ..,q~; ~ ..;,'.:;$.';.v_ -7'ilNt'.nF" =!C'I'1~~~f ~m ............'~<i.'.....,,: ~ .~ oc-..., W ""CO' r. '"Adill( ~.~. ~ ' ......- ,~::-~ ... 1 ....., U ~ _! "t,,:'~ ~ -- I ..~II_..-rQ~.. '*c:..f: r~"i' \ WA3l-f!;tIlliG~CS CO "i.~'h'(-;-=---b. --------- :~....c:'u... ..__\[ ~;rlI"~ i:I~1;C"..,,- ~... '-.. - : ,. lit. ~ '.-,,-:0:0",.... . r. .iJ :_~~ i $r.l.,.......-lor~~ I,)~t.a)) '1 0... -~~..t'.... . ;J~;;..'-i";,~~ ....eN:'iE " C';) ~--~~'',;A,~::;:: ~..~, ..' 4, ,-/ ) (. UO-..'v. ~~t!l}' ..~ ..........; ......- ..tl~...:"J:.c"'" ;.~_. ':>r:-::;:":) <; :......, M~~.' :.J. :.... p '.-,. ~~~_ =~,. '.--. -; f .-- ~. (4.. , :--).. _.,.",.0(11<::( '; "(Q~~I "~-"':H.j!'. "". ~:.../ :-Il...,~ _ ./ ..- 'Y ...,....~c.,'f" :'~"'."t.l .'l.I.,... ___..-,_ ....I..t ro:.....'~ .. J ~ ....(~r -......... , j ~~..t..t'~';I~; I ;t.t."-..cco ...r!.I"~.......! I i in I L I . . I j K! i , . . ~ i ....';'-O~.."l~.11 ~ ; e.t.IIVE~ ce.!: ....~... ! -------...--;- - -------:=a t , . ~ 1';"'..C i :)oI...s-~C; l Jl4.J(O~;:\ C"J . ~".IISC"'. '''''-'W'lii:l , 0Cla--C:...". ~ ::~"a'?i~ ;j.:"t..:i..H_... t ,.."...".. 'tI"'I$"I\,:'~ / G ~"I",'''''..a. j(~r-~ . ~---~ I I ....., --~ ! :t:t141"';t:f~ i I U'~\.' ~...",(P tCU__61J..-T ..:... 'S~I,-...! I - UAI . \1'<; I I -aw. --.. -.---------' ---~J ~-.-----.l.r---~ I oJJIIi' _ .-! ~~.:..' ~; - "-~~. .._-.-.. I ' ...-...'-....-.... ~ ' .~"..." .....'" ___ .. .......'.... ;.....,......,1. --.. ;!,l.....O :-:;~E<\ ~".,,,,G. :,Uf. :~!:::,r r 1...1.(: ('YH.J.r ~...a..~ -- ..&"'5....."1- il\l(. j ~ N' 1(.v~lo'''.IIj. I'~ ,..~.."...~. - SCO~~ CO. : ........~...:t .Q-I~U,,. 1- ------- - --- --- -- ----- -...... - ~-- --- -- - - - ......--~ -- --.. Ul..~1 iII..4lill( I - --- - t 't~"" ....a. " <<.. . ...-z71"'1IJI ;:'"1(. -.." ~ 1!..... ~\.',...! -i,~r... ...'l'..... '.. I .; .JI["~ .,'. = ~--"" - .., ....... .~ \: -4" li'>'O.l(T .- . .. . ).. -. ...1.l1i'I,.\o,1 --=~ ..~.....::.... :j':.J~~I' -, .. ,~...( -1LCO ----~------------- ~"".:C _~.. ~ 11_,j.,e:,''''' ,I ? _..A....-U -: _ ~ !!~f ...\ ...~S , .., I -.... " J. '." .;,.; J: t. ~ - .."'J :.J . ~'.. .~ ~ ~ 'l.: ::'1 nEGiC\jAL i?,.l:'-JS',7 2CARD \:E.V1:;E.~S ;>',"JO DIS7:'<:C':; C~aH.: ::'! C~~ ?e:":)f".'::. ~I~tr CO:: ;. 7~G::;;"~'lco F G~d'~arl<.i...~~,'. '~:.,~:"';':!C~g 3~,"oe'l ':'.':os:a G J<lmllS ~e',';',jra _.::. ~ ~r" ;:'ar,.."n C 3errarc S~;e,=,es H ;\-lart;ar~t Sr~,r ~d ., ;13<>' _:!{::~ I 'J ::;,;.;" :i CJr3"~CaS ! AIJ-SOfl ;:.....(1, '~:::';-'o'\'dc.:: <~;:-l ~ ,;'arrf. S,... .';'..f,:~r: >J. ..i\.;3r,~3. (\)I;;,~S "-"'''e ~! ....., . "'-4'" -~ I...... ~..~ ..~ .... " .....::1.', Ir;Zl ....-j./;~,.-1. ....... -"p .;:. ..,........I::r, ..,"" - .. -T - ot-' r..l .:.. ,../".... 1":., ......''';...,..,..1'"1: -,.-" '-,.,., ....,- I -"t__~ c I _... ,t...... _ ...,,J _ , 1 ..L.I," ....Q._.~ _. ._ ~ ... ~.'C. _ _' ....~.. _, ....". ~.. '-' ..- .. ." "'~-" _ _.... . """'o.I"'-lj ,J __..... ,-,; :::::;:~.C:l ~n .. ..........1 .: -3 :. C," :~.\ _-: ..J.'-':: : 'i::" ::: :-2. ::.:. ::;"-4 ... _ .'J..o,'-.J" '2' (,i~. _,7 ~ ~73 ::,,,t' c-: ...~ ~___~~~{;!~ =~>~:__~_~~~: ~~~~~,_,~; :J:~' _~~~'~_::'1:'~~~~~ ~~~ : ~,c: ..~_~~~~~~~,: :,~:~~~____ j '~;~"-_r- Ii !l'! iiI ;RUW ...~ it~nr Irl.Cl.~ W"-...~ >-l'- wi -II '> '.' , -......1(111:.1" \'l.:'$:'a.c', _ ; t9~I'i. U,,, . .~R4' 1 t-K<M t~ .....fiI4t,u.-A ~ --.......- : ~=.t::~~ Itll....q ~1 :.~":.~~.t ..". . .l....r.. 1 11..,..ut.ll ~! ~P""" ol:81' "'.4~ . ....,.'.~ i~ c;aNP"c. lfII.a...ft ..' ....... .J' .. " ; -."." ,] -.' .. r..... , L . rUMtHl:l U". ~. I,.,U;"'t..,\.. ~ _ _ _ __ .... ,~...--.:..:.. "'l...~ ~ '" ."..Cl,.W ..;......U 31. .... :,..... -.,a I ie ::.:I~f+ ~ .."-....~ -------____~~......,.,.., I,.'t \~,..,. :r ""'.11'( .141 I' -. ~ ' . Ct-9Cr- -:.~'J" :t c..".....t (' 1 I l'~ "'<'IJ:;~U" 2t .1\.L'~4Jtf .....Cy... CO !...... I U t1f'-'I.GlH-. #t e,u II.. ...,.....-. &JII -.q t-.-.....U 1\ ~...iH..... \~Il'(~ 'I..9\!' IIll..H" .."....u. i ..~ ~ ... .J;l!i:'.-'C'D1 .fa If ...r t POI.r I i~ E : ., ", ~ __ ._~ 1 I ~!5~f' -~ ., - - ....<;:.ll1ty 6aul'ld.llry ''''''') ,.." coun ' I ....... D;Hl"'u M\inlC;lp~! 60ut'ldllry >..,~. ~' ~ ! . ~",J'j"~'" C;I).c.. ""1'''' C"llIil"'fH\.1l ..'~'a~-_ Town$hip a;:)un~aN ~ n.'.,' I I . -- ~ I." ----- ..... ~ _.... i ",I'!. 0 ( d.II.q.~I$~ -... II;;::\,( "-11 Wr.s.>t1~G""~ --- c!"',na.... tiI..l'$ ~.;r.t "+ (tu...o.~::i"~_.....,. ~ ",\". _on", I ~ lZ -a.1lI1 ......."f nu' _ ~" -J ~ - ..4 I III ~ ~f""f N eel .... "',. .-....~~~1 .' ;..~' . L].Y).~ oI~~lolI~a&. lI-IU.."rL,;l . ". ._ .~.?., .' 1 ie-,m ; I'll ~ ~ ;::....."9 ~....., .. '1U' t=> ':::9 ',Uj -, _ . ",ll.,51 ~ &:-.............. ... ~ - - .",z;Ll- \. f '0..:..;:),. ..0(.1:..'''''-.4 ~,. .'t.lI"~ ~,......ur,. . )- -'".IM"tI_ - ... -'.' ~ '., 01' -. ~."L.' ..en.. . -"cI"~ "'t-.. '~ ... ~ .ct"I"'~I,L.(' It ,. i _<-;""" .....,....-~... ,-"-...",-. """lll ,---y l '~~--~w -- ~ ...,.[~'.D :,:i~~i~ I ~"""SIY =Q.' .C;. .'~~;'-'~';':" I~' - ~~ I ",'''WUfDn i i\::i5f~; _..-eo:o I ....r~..~...... I ~ :'.:~~{ : } rI ~" . -{ .-..." '.L&~~ ! tlll"'..l'IlCt~, - ~ -:".':-/',~i __..,..__~-...-__--+o:-....____ - .,.:r'::-;./:::f: !'!O -'"~"U ~ ' , ':.;:""-~ ~..a'" ~ It, - :;.o.-.:}~-::-~~ . I . . 0;'_"''' :3...t~-!3Jic :.....<It:.. i ....:$.... ....rl'?"~-4~~ I ........~. :.:;~~~.:;~~~.- , ...,- ~G~'=: '" ; >~ I ,. J'~ I CAIISC en I -. ~ . UGU .~.;. , ~t;'':;;N, . . I ~ ~.-:-_~;.,;,:~';;'7:~L;~ --~--,J...._....._---'~-----:J ~. I --. " ~.~.~~:;"~t,."..' , f ' L -, ,,"..~;-~,:~ :...5OLIo /. !:lAKOTA CO, . ~ ,,'.::.~."~J :CA~::" ~ I i~rfii" .~ ~ .-...~; 1oU_","<< JI 1 :/; _..;:-::.;.,;:;:~~ ~.~ J c~J ~."'\p~.(~ ~ ~! ~ ~ s......, ~ ',,<G~,.~:~;"~ ~IJ....a .I._e:lflC. t 'l...t~~ j : :...,.-~ rlll:.~~ i ~ ..aL-l.l" t ltOtC".4.' H [ ..,......-G,t. \,-J -.- , .:'i~':...:'~'.'~.~.;~:._'" , ....n. , I ..n,,"" I ' " ';oc~ _ I i r- ,~" i..'~t I' ( '..-, ~ :.'.";'.::;.'." .......".. , ..J' - ~.~---r ",'...' ----,---- I ~~ ~~ I <:'f4.~ : l ~..~ , . I . .~./;;1 -_"-C~<i! I ~ I ..(~..,1.1..'0"'" .. I~"'''' ..- .'.~.' l I I . ".~:I 1 I l,A......\4I. ~ r ...;1'1.&1:1: I ;:,."'''>''-',:.~ S-I\hQ ~ltl(. , S...l..... u~.. I :1C!(o.r I 1 [",~a-I r 1...-.: ~ ; "::::':~:~~ , _ I .."U I oIL ......L..'.. i , , I 'W .'.itMCTOII ~i scan co. '. ' I I I ..........p...c( I t1U'IlQ",' I I '--; I ! ------.----- ---r"'-- - ....-_-' ~--- --.--------'-- 1 'I .' .--. ' I ; I "'r." ...........:;- : ~ 1 C"". '!'r-It:t ,- r \...... j.."'iJT'oc; ! ~ ~ I !U:..L.1 ",...-11;' -U.l"~ ~[Q.&it ...f... ' !'Jo"t:u :qf:-( iI'':lr;. j .....LL I 1 i ....~ ."_~.ICT' I _,t".":'N J:.c'..:'~.1 , I . ----., , I ~ ..""I I 1...f:.. -------~--~---~~~- ~ ~~~ I;,VI ;:-\.(5 'I ~4 ~S ~c ;Zt .,.(t"'~.....( .b.q.'":~:,, uU ~ \: ;:. ~ . ,\tote~ ~iW' .igh~ ~!S1rlct1;,)n ~,'"'!it~;-: "re o.ss.ltd on ~-rtl.l ~6 ,\ii!!'U""'JooI1:4in D~r~(.l~ -jlmlc~. ~C,""J :O~r'!":!'::!=!": ~::-!::'C--:::" .:..cmOflted 0; t"h-n CoUI'l.:1l 01='''''', U 'OIIOWI. ::iS1"~ )" :::'-r:r:<;,:! !.2: 3, 3,;'. r: . .!. 5: :l. ~.1 O. ;;, 3,9, F. 11,' 2; ~. 13.;~: Pi, 15-16. J'JI~i ~9~ ;'-".J~I~i.-vFiN-c..C3.,~:-~15 _______.___.__~~........_._......w__.....~~~_eo;.o:_..........a'1f.l!! .ll!illli..z....~~.:::iR;1ti.~~ ~~""'" , :,,--,. ,,K VI-f ~~:.~>rmr~l~ll~~~ CITY OF ~ II HOPKiNS ~~_._~~~- -- ---..:~ . , ..... ~ ------- '.~~"- RICHARD I S LIQUORS "...--_---._---..---~._---------..,-- 22-10th AVENUE NORTH ~ ",-'-..... '\ ON SALE 3.2% BEER LICENSE I I PURPOSE TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR - 2 DAY LICENSE FOR ON SALE 3.2% BEER .> TEMPORARY ", .. I BACKGROUND API'JJICANT TIIO~~S LY~~N HAMILTON,OWNER - I LOCATION 22-10th A\~NUE NORTH DATE JULY 19 & 20, 1985 REASON SIDEWALK SALES IN CONNECTION WITH RASPBERRY;FESTIVITIES RECORD CHECK CLEAR TO DATE 1 RECOMMENDATION Based on information provided ~nd reccrds check, I I Poli~e Departm~nt does not anticipate any problems. , and sees no reason to withhold approval. ~ / \ / i (' /, ..,/ " /' -' ._~,.., ~ ~/. - ( , ~/u_L.1 '__ J I JAC C. l:'kATT COttiAANDER POLICE DEPARTMENT I / I t,~ 1. O.k.--.J I I j ---.....- JOhnSonO - I Earl L. Chief I I I I i i I i { ~-._-- ... . .-.-..-.--.-.---.---- C U LJ fl (I i [~ (;.Dr If ~C~i_~~j - .,---~----~ r ... t ~..--- ._~-~--~~......- 14 --:-- .J-.....I' , ., . . '" . ':. _' t "" ' :--:"::';.-: ,.':', . ;.." ,._ · .. ..:~..:.. "_ - ~.1 . ~....:..: ~. - APPLICATION FOR I..ICDZSE City of lkpkins, Minnesota _ ..... .,... '_ ~=. Erint oc~ a!Linfonnation. - UCE>.'SE OO'_~ -c--~~._~..:_... ...UO..... ___0<. .... .-.'. o. _....... _ _ _~_ ~___ ._ The urrle:r-signed hereby l'Mkes arplicatia'! fur the licer..se{s) iIrlicated 'belOW' for the period enlir19 December 31 of t.he year pri.nted at left alxNe. _ . ~ r! (-"'] /) _,. t1l;J Lic>:m.se Type ?.c:... 1~'l:___--~-_._~----_.__Fee.__4i!}, __ ~ ,_ Licefl.se Type Fee ..-- - ---.... --------- - License 'I'yfe Fee - ..- ---.. - d>. (Uca.1SE FOR VENDI~ WLHlNES M./ST Flu.. cur ov ENCLosED Vt-.J..'DING MACHINE FOa-t) Total$.2tt.-- ~ ~--..... T.:-'Pe of License (circle one) Individual (Mner ;artnerl;:, 'p , ~d"ti~) ---.- .0 . I. Licensee Name I h(7d/;::;r-2 I:- ,-//"/9"., J+ri..-..n II ~. ~ I First Middte Last ~te of. j' ri.vers License & ~te ".7"'1 '" ~ /' _"".." _ c:T __ f- ----. ~ Prone ?!"'Fi/~ Work P~:J)- 6r' Birt:l:tjf~A('-='O t. 7"i.f .:J-:7-"?_$G -7~ Pa"""...ner or 0 ~cer . Rept"esent..L"lg Applicant_ ~___. .~ _ ". ,first fuddle Last ~te of ad vers License & State .. ..H:::me Prone Work Phone Birth ..co-".see ~in..,;. ~es. - ~e No. - . . ..... -- ......... --- tl_ License'! Operation Address. .{h J! . / ~ g: ././ .// (~f different l:t'OCl1 alxy.u~),.:;'7 tIJ_=~_tit.:r~ ~iYQ Prone No.---.:::l2 -:tJbb~ Lice.~ee or Per:son Re~n"~i...F19' /' ~ / . . Lica.~ee Fiome Addres~ . 'C) (~h:~ 1'i:;;{.l CJ4~~.~7~~ p~ . ~7 Bane Phone ~k.lrl<: Phone T..-. _--. If licensee is a paru'1ership or a corporation. list name, tL:le, han9 address, and h-:ne teleFhone number of ead, partner, officer arrl direc+...or. Na!re Title! First - Mi.ddle ~3st ---- Date of Drivers License & State A::n-e Phone Work Phone BirtJ1 . --------- -,--- ---d. NaTe Ti~le First Middle Last_ Da te of Dri vers Lice,.''1se & State RarE Prone WOt'k Phon~ Bl.:-..:h -------. -.--~--- -~--~ Name Tltle - Fir~-t - l-uddl~ Last -- A ~te of Dnvers Lic~nse & State ~ Ph::lne Wot"k Phone 81 r-_~ Ofo/:~ ip""-,ion otB;!sin~ss (be spec~tic): / --.- -- I ..J.JE -.,0.;L., C. r'j :7 -:t {)2 "f ~ V,; 6.d:2 -, ,- ~LJ::.._ iT...... . 0/ /': J t..J . .5H' .t'I r- c c;>f-.f~_ 3'"'7 d C::;",..., l ",.l-'f25-!-:-!- :',;? ~ &...., ;t;,~?'~:i r2i'O;<?_b .,[, ",.~"7' v h~f-h · ".. .___. Ple.~se Ccn;pl:::-te Rever-se S~de (/ I I ~:::"':..~.~:~,":,.' - ~ ...." . -- ---,._---~~~~......"""~ . '~~. CITY OF HOPKINS Date: . "'-.... BPOE HOPKINS ELK ---- I_~ CLUB #2221 ON SALE 3.2% BEER LICENSE I I PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to recommend Council action -_. on a request for a 2 day temporary on-sale 3.2% Beer I License. I BACKGROUND: Applicant: Leon R. Stagg, see Hopkins Elk Club I Date Requested: July 20 & 21, 1985 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. ,!...ocation: North side of Elk Club in parking lot. Reason: In concert with Raspber~y Festival Family Day and Parade. Tent to be set up in parking lot as in past years. Record Check clear on ap~licant and organization. I . RECOMMENDATION: Based on information ~rovided and records check, --------.,., -- Police Department does not anticipate any problems and sees no reason to withhold approval. I " 'tta...t J. O,.l-~ f Earl L-: Johnson I Chief of Police Hopkins Police Depart~ent j ,- ,~ Council Rept # d5- ,>J I ~___L~ ~ MMHh..-..--- -,1 - - _.....__w___, ._,. .~ - --~~-~~~-~--- -..--___......-I"V"..____ ~ lr ... --~ C:"f___ ... VI-h . "- ., CITY OF HOPKINS Date: July 11. 1985 F'armers Market Approval -' City Parking Lot - -, PURPO~3E : The pur'pose of this report is to recornmehd Council action on a request by Lindberg-Pierce, Ine tn use city parki.r.g lot if 300 for a farm e r I s rn ark e t . I BACKGROUND~ I As part of the Specialty Block development, a Farmer's Market has been proposed for the City parking lot dJrectly behinl1 the shops. Eventually this will be a full-scale operation, operuting during the week and on Saturday morning, to accommodate anticipated demand. Inttially, however, a request by Lindberg- Pierce has been submitted (letter attached) requesting the use of thE: parkjng lot on Saturday mornings between 7 a.m. and noon in order to allow the farmers to set up and "phase in" their Farmer's Market de'/elopment over a 3-year period. This arrangement will not interfere with parking demand, because initially it \>/111 be limited to Saturday mornings. The City Attorn!:y has reviewed this and :i.ndica tes that a Council illotion approving an agreement between the parties will Le suffi.cient to ge t this under way. An agreement betHeen the parties will specify the far-merts responsibility for cleaning up and maintaining their area in an ol'Cerly fashion. This has been discussed prel imina,ily a 11 d a p par e n t1 y is agreeable. In o r' d e r to complete en e ;::..ppropr'iate paper ,'lork, we have suggested that they begin on July 27thr ass'Jming that the City Council grant:') appt'oval. The r' e w i 11 howe",Ter, be signs advertising the Farmer's Market On July 20th in or'der to capture the intepest of people ~...ho are attending the Raspberry Fevtival. R'::COMMENDP.TION: I !' e c omm end that t h,:.' City Councjl grant approval to Lindberg-Pierce 2nd the East C>:ntr'al Vegetable Producer's Cooperative to set up a Farmer's ;'1a.rket on City Lot # 300, subject to City Attorney appr'oval on rl 3 a tis r a ~: \., 0 r :'1 ag!"'eel~lcP t fD'- OParki"r1:tJ use. . Craig -,lfCitY~ C " Rept # 85-21 --,,----- OUnCl1 .em..a.lh.....-.~~.....", -~--,..._..- -- ---,------ ._---~~.~--------~~---~ ....:O-~~~ - - 'f . . . llndb.rg Pielce,lnc. Arc hi!ec Is SU:t1O 710 60C Firsl Ave, North Minneapolis, M:nncsola 55:103 Jc1mes H. Undberg (612) 332.3339 Robert L P!~rce . ~~W_ ....,-- - - - r,~ - , July 8. 1985 City of Hopkins 1010 SO'-lth F;-rst Str'eet Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 To~ ~~yor and CouncilmP.mbers Members of the Napkins Housing & Redevelopment Authority Re; Speci a 1 ty Block Fanners Market Segment .., Integr?~ tD the concept for this project has bee!'! the incorporation of a " ~ major Farmers Ma.rket elemerlt n a canopied! 8~9 month/year operation with )- ~ . .~ approximately 65 rental truck stalls and some additional cart and free- i .; ~' . standing space. Prelimnnary findings of the Economic Research Associates' I study confirm,that this ingredient is highly attractive with 96% of the ' -'1 household respendents expressing enthusi asm for this feature . . . . We have been pursuing tenants . . , growers/producers for the Market with Frank Skaff~ ~resident of the East Central Minnesota Vegetable Producers Cooperati ve. Mr. Skaff has recommended that the Fanners Market activity be initiated on a phased basis, keying to the 1987 opening of the project. This approach is directed to: 'Demonstrating to potential growers the strength/vitality of this new out~et and development of the approrriate mix of suppliers. . The opportunity to buil d publ ic awareness of the Farmers Market Operation. . The opportunity for Developer, City and the Cooperative to fine-tune the logistics of this operation. On a broader seal e, the presence of th'] s acti vity shoul d underscore the actual progress of this project and build shopper traff1c to Downtown Hopkins. The objective of this ;nfot1national memo is to introduce the concept of a phased intro~uction of this activity-;20-25 growers in mid-summer/fall of 1985; 30.1~ ~rowers in 1986 and full-scale operation in spring af 1987 with approximatelY 80-90 growers under contract for a nine-month 5ed~on . . . . bedding plants through Christmas trees. It is projected by the Growers that in 1987 the market will operate on a three dayiweek basis. . , Tuesday and Thursday afternoons 3:00 to 7:00 in ~ddition to Saturday morning. ~~_"",~~",","",_~~~_~l ~_.._~.._- ----~-. - .~""-"-'-:sIII" ....,. ~ ~ ___....~~ ", r A '" " , SE-ec1a1t~ B~c~ _ _. L in.9Qerg Pierce.. Inc. Fclrmers arKet Segment ArCh1 tects \. July 8, 1985 Page 2 of 2 The scope and operating fomlat of the market will $hare many characteristics with the St. Paul model . . . . i.e. offering only goods grown or pr'oduced within the area, requiring growers to be a part of a market association with fees production and operating rules and with coordination and administration .: hand]ed by a market mast~r, ~ po~ition p~ojected to be ful1..;time eight months ..................~.f..l: of tne year and a part..t1nle Job 1n the wlnter months. ):~ The structur~ng of ~he detai 1 of these various ?per~t;n9 relati?nship~ and .:".~}l agreeme.,ts wlll evolve over the next year and w.ill lncorporate t:he c!"lter1a of th~ City as they come to be define!1. . In concept, the r'elationsMp of ,_ ...1 the Growers Association to the developers wil1 parallel that of any other ~:;;;1 tenant. +1' We have ~been examining. other. operating markets, hav~ been in contact ~.,ith the ..:....J State OT Minnesota Agncultllre Department and the Mlnnesota Gro\'m program. in developing an ope~ati~g framework for this activity. . We have been working with Kevin lccke and membBrs of City staff to identify and examine issues related to this activity; location~ space required, traffic, "parkln93 deaning-up1 costs., hours, etc. ." - . At this point, we ar'e requesting a permit to operate a market of 20 t growers \ ; / to operate Saturday morning from 7;00 to noon and to commence operations . 1 July 20th or 27th and going throU9hJD~tober. \ I ~- .-', : l Prel1~inary details of this operation have been outlined with mainstreet '.i and Clty staff (see attached). We assume this to be a conditional permit subject to on-going review and modification as the logistics and issue~ related to this activi~y emerge. Sincerely, ~ v Ri chard Gi lyard . I , ~1f:.~~-....r._~~~~~',Bi'..-....~~i'L:amIN~ ~~~~~_..-=-_______,..___.._._______.,'____ _.._._..1' _., llI'lnIMv....-.-..---;::: ~~_liJ1l~iIII!IIN _.. ~.~~~ ---._~.... ...T]I&.___~....._-~ _ ......, A.. .~ VI-i "'~;.,. CITY OF HOPKINS -' Hno FIRST SY~EH SOUTH ' j-iOPl(INS. MINNESOTA 5SS4~ 1:312}935-8474 Resolution # 85-3203 r PURPOSE: - - l This Resolution is required by State law as one of the steps in the process of any constru~tjon project installed under 8tlapter 429 relating to special assessments. BACKGROUND: This type cf Resolution is adopted by the Council to covel' assessment projects which have heen completed in order to be able tQ ce~tify to the County for collection with the property taxes for the following year. ANALYSlS~ . The projects listed under Exhibit A have bewen substantially complete_ ~..... and fina.l payments hacle b~en made tCJ the contr'actors from t.he PoI~R. ,- .- Fund. A.LTERNATIVES: ;-. 1, Delay this step inthe assessment process. 2. Adopt the Resolution' 85-3203 and prepare the assessment lists for each project. I RECOMMENDATION: We would recommend that tile Cour.cil adopt Re301ution ~ 85-3203 to proceed with the assessment process. While this process can be held at any time, the process must be completed by early October to be collected with the 1986 ~ropepty taxes. \, I~ \ M~,~CV"v-- I e;r,. ( , Ii --~- ~ -:.J - r uorJn Stroj2r. I City Engineer I I ~ - Council Rept #' 85-22 ~ e'*,! ......~ .~~ ~ . -----~-.-.~-,.--...-..-.--..---~-~----~~~.~- J~"""""'~ -"- \ ' .). , . ~ ,~. CITY OF HOPKINS . i~f!rtf!ph, County. Hirmesota ~ESOLUTION N~, 35-3203 RESOlUTl~~ DECLARING COSTS TO B~ AS5ESStO AND ORDERING PR[PARATrON OF PRO~OSEO ASStSSMEHTS Wl-lEREAS, c~rt.!in irnp\"Ov~nt5, all as ft'l.'lN funy de~l;rjbf:d in Exhibit A. h~~tQ att~ched and hereby made! part hereof h<<ve been previously Qrdert'o and cO&'1p 1eted: MOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKIUS, MIHNESOTA, <is fellOW!: L That tM cost of each such illprovement to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be the cost or tne ~mount to be assessed, whichever is greater, which appears fn said Exhibit A. 2. That the City Clerk. wtth tt~ ~$sistance of City Engineer, s~11 forthwltl'. ..:alcuiate the proper UIOunt t" ~. s~hny assf:~sed for e~ch such i~ro~~nt ~~irtst ever~ ~~sess~d p1ec~ or ~rcel of land within the various ~. rliSt7itt~ ~r io(aticn~ ~ffected w1t~ut regard to caih v~lu!tion, 55 provided by l~w, and toe sh~jl file . c~py of such pror~5ed Isse$sments in his Gfflce :... for public ~n'PiCtion. 3. ~ Clerk shall. upcn th~ eOEpl~tlG~ of $UC~ proposed a~~es$me~ts notify the tovncll thereof. Passed anQ !dopted by the Co~nctl of the City of Hopk1ns. Minnesota. this 16th ~y ~f July. 1985. ~;-./':. J. SCOTT REHHE, ELLEM LAVIN, City Clerk Mi!yor JERnE A. MILLER, City Attorney . W~__,"~)JII ~___~_J --~'--'-'------'"~'N~~.' r~- -~IIlIiI_';V-- nr.-~""~~--"WliI.I~lIi!I.:Jm \ . ,'h" . , . ~~~!~!I A '. l. Ptoj~ct 82-07. Curb ~nri Qut.ter On l~"th Stre~t and Feltl Court from Eltv~nttl Avenue to Elev~nth Stre~t South, ~$tf~~ted cost befng $12.559.00. 2. Projfct 82-08 and S2-0BA. Road. strfet 11ghttng and Ibndscap,ng on Tenth Street ,nd ~eltl CU~~~ fro~ Eleventh Avenue to El~vent~ Street South. e$t1~tfd cost being $77.197.00. 3. FFOject 82-09. StoriQ ~ewer on Tenth Stre~t and Ftltl Court from l1eventh Aven~e t~ Elev~nth Street South, est1~ted cost being $60.256.00 4. Project 33-02. ConCTtte &11ey east of lOth A~enu~ South between 6th Street ~uth arid 7th St,'eet Souto. e1;timated cost being $11.126.00. 5. Pftljec:t 84=01. ConcNt~ Cl.irb lind sutter and. ~r1v..'W4Ys on the !\orth ~~rvice TMtl of State Highway He. 'I fro!!! RoMn~OiS lilne to County RNd #13. i!tstiNUd cost being $15.041.00., 6. Project 84~Q2. Concrete alley betftee~ 16th Av~nue North and 17th Avenu~ ebl"th frmn 4th St:re~t North to 16th Avenue Nrwth. estimated cost being $1l.51~.OO. 7. Project 84-05. wate~in extensi9n on the east and north side of Chape1 View, tsti~ted cost being $43.952.00 S. Project 85~Q2. Retaining wall north side of 146 15th Awenue North. e~tlmated c~st being $4.lSi.OO. L:~.~. ,':;.. . -;:':..,;:-, '_.i--.'. . . I ~.'~~,_._---_.,- . ~.~ oOe VI-m ., CITY OF HOPKINS Date: ~1 u 1 y 11, 1985 - ---..- .. ~- Appt. to HRA Board I PURPOSE~ Appointment cf Chuck Redepenning to H. R . A. Board I BACKGROUND: Minnesota Statute requires that all new member to a HRA Beard of Commissioners be appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Cou~cil ALTERNATIVES: None I RECOMMENDATION: Approval to Board I I 1 '" . . / / I . >-- 1k"4'/t~V'---"'" .>. J 1iii-Ke rrigan 'e Asst. Director HRA I I I . L___ ----Council Rept # .S ,) '.. 2 '3 - .. -- ---...---- - -- _ .____.... __ __._ __ ___~. ,_________~ ,_____~~~._.__.,_.___._.__.......T__-.~.._~.,~.~...._._-...___~~.__._....__~~____d __._ __.____~__..._._.,__.__~,_______... _._. ,_ _ 1 --. ~_.._..___r._'_ __~_____~_,____ ___~r_~'."__~,.._',<_C_____~T~ _ _____ ~ ..._ ''lit VI-n ., CITY OF HOPKINS .. -- Date: July 12, 1985 Addt'ess Painting On - --1 r::-- St.reet Curbs ~ PURPOSE I I The pur-pose ot' this re pOi' t- is to recommend Council actinn on I a request by Residential Si3n Painting Service to paint house numbe rs O!1 the str~et cu rb. I BACKGROUND On Thursday July 11, the Ci ty was informed that distribution of flyers (copy attached) t whicll advertised the painting of addr"esses on the st.reet curb, was taking pla.ce in Hopkins. I The individual was told to request city approval prior to any .~ work being conducted. Unfol~tunately, the pet'son performing the service had already corrpleted a number of "jobsrl, based Of'! an understanding that there was no city ordinance that proi'li bi ted such activities. On Friday~ staff met with Ms. Carol Carhar't, of Residential Sign Painting Service and told !1er that she must cease further activity until the City Council could consider approval of this activity. She was told thCit she could appeal for consideration . on TIJE:sdayts agenda. ANALYSIS Previol..:sly, t 11e City Council has tur'ned down this ty pe of proposal. Further. this work is being done in the public eight-of-way, ::[1 the public 3treet. If performed at all . it should be under the direction and control of the City 0 f Hopkins. The liability exposuf'e cannot and should n ,) t be overlooked. RECOMNENDATION I recommend denial of t fl i s request based on the fact that the I C it'.' should have tot,_31 con~r""Gl O'/er' ~ight-of-W3Y maintenance and improvements, and b~se~~ O~ t\'H: liability exposure that exists. I ("y . f(t'{~l ~ I ~,-~; 2 Tg T'~~}iap P .- c1 ?f-i>: 2. :': .:; g e r -- .. j J i , I 'L .----- C ounci I Reot # .3 ~) - ? i. , - --- -~- ~-- V"'~,". c:,~,,;'_"II1. ~. ,...., -"'f .~.' ,,,;,, -,~-- J . --- I . ~. i '0 ATTENT'- RESIDEN~ .' ; Home address nYmbers wiJl b~pa!nted 00 your curbs along your street tomorrow. Your number will be painted only with your permission, We strongly recommend that you take advantage of this opportunity to have your curb address numbers professionally painted in la,r'ge black 4-inch eas'j-to-see numbers on a reflective whjte backgrO\6ld. These numbers are used by fire, police and ambulance ~J. as welt as delivery people and friends who can find yotr home more easHy. Uniform addresses along your street not only can save I ives, they give a more organized, secure appet'JI"anCe to your rtelghborhoOG, . The cost for this service is only $5.00 and you pay when the work '5 finished, and }.ou are completely saUsfled. If you would '. "';~. ;... J' ... '..-_ '......1' Uke your home included, please 1111 in the form below and 'eave ... ,. . It taped to your front door. Piease do this before 9:00 N1 tomorrow, AH notices will be ptcked-up# rain or shiile, and the addresses wi I J be painted on the Curbs. Again, We strongly recommend you take zxjyantage of this opportunity. Fill in the notice beiow and leave It taped to your front dCiJr. Please don't be left ~Y;t. RES:DGIT}\l slcr~ PA.r!r.Nu .) RVleE Ttlank you., 9.01 Wesim:.;reland L;.nc If you prp-fer 600r step 51. Louis Park. MN ~5426 (612) 545.4861 I nstead of curn PlEASE SPECIFY' Name:__ - - , Address: - -'-- I ResideotirsY Sign Peinting Service . ~ ~!C.~_:.mf-"]r .~.-&iIE'U1!D,n;~"WR.f-'BJI-fi.:SI..iIOI;~...-.-___._. _.,.. , - .UuH~'_~__ _.JRJII!!Il!lI~' ~"~"~nl J . '~,; . ~"""(' ,~:.'" ... ~ - '..~ CITY OF HOPKINS IOH; fIRST STAEET SOUTH HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 5~1 6121935-8474 C 0 U N elL M E M 0 A .~~_~--.!!_~ ----..._-----...--._----~---- To: Mayor & City Council From: Re: Reuter Rp.cycling Project Date: July 11, 1985 --~--------------------------------------------------------------------------- At a meetj.ng this date, 1 met with the Reutem to discuss theIr proposal for locating a recycling facility in Hopkins. __ They indicated a r!eed t.o obtain a IIconcept approval" from the City Council prior' to the end of July in order to continue to . pursue sites within Hopkins. According to the Reuter. s , they are obI 19a ted to demons tra te E\ n e xecu ted p UT'C !lase a.greemen t for a site by July 31. I explained that the City was not in a position to approve their deVelopll1ent~ and that they needed to follow normal channels for development of proper-ty. They aCknowledged this, however, they have requested an appearance before the Counci.l Tuesday night, to get a "sense of the Council\! regarding their development. Specifically, they have identified the following sites as Pbtential 1 ations, and they would like your reaction. 1. White Motor Site 2. Old Landfill site 3. Minneapolis Floral Site 4. N. W. Hopkins site (N. of Hwy 5, West of Hwy 73) It is the Reuters' contention that support for theIr facility by the City may help in the fight 3gainst the Transfer Station. COM t"i S !II T : Obviously, the Reuter's proposal is complex. To make any d fO; (; i s. ion a t t h j s poi n t may n c L b e ::i rj V j s a b ] e . H 'J ...1 eve r, S h 0 U 1 d you be in favor, Or' at lea.'H, not Opposed to thf:ir' project, an acknowledgement of the Council's feel ing about the "concept" W 0 u 1 d not 11 n d u 1 y res t t. i c t rut U r't2 .q c t ion f 0 I' 0 rag a ins tap pro ',J a l . 4n Equal ()rp()r!ur~!ly EfT"'D!oyar .~.....--.~_.._- - -~-- -----~-----~--. -'--~~-'--~.~---'-____~--on ~~r~____----w- IP'"""""'l ...," ~ _-'F'"'"f'l ~~... 6 -'? .,.!..,.~~+~,~ '~" ~t~_:,-r.. ....., -~. .., __;...'~'tI:- '''i\. CITY OF HOPKINS =~-~~~~_...'," .- 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS, MINNf'10T A 5S'J.43 61219$5--841. C 0 ij N C I L r4 E H 0 R AND !j M _____...,.._______c To: Mayor & Ci ty Council From: Cra,ig R. Rapp, City Manager ~ Re: Special Council Meeting - P~f)lly Tar law suit Da te: July 11, 1985 ~--------~--~~--~---~-----------------------~----~--~-~~--------------~~------ Attached is a letter that we received from Gary Hansen, the attorney who has been following t.he Reilly Tar law suit for the City of Hopkins. Apparently a settlement agreement has been reached 1-11 tll all of the parties, except for Hopkins. Jerre Miller and r have discussed this and we both feel tbat we have . r-eached a point where it will.. be ne.::essary for the Ci ty to meet wi t.h Mr' . Hansen and determine what ou;~ options ar.e and ,..hat r~K!ommendations you would make as to further pursuit of claims r~lating to t {1 is la sui t. By Tuesdayfs me8tingr I will have discusee1 times and "~s wi th Hr. Hansen and 1 will h"" prepared .....~ to share them with y (~ If YOll have any questions prior to that time, however! please (,;..1 not hesitate to give either Jerre Miller or me a call. . .A.r~ E~'..!~.::J Oppcr~L;ilH)' E.n-lp-ioy:etr ~~~.~~, ~~--,~..... -- - ' ---=rJI:ftM_-~~.uJ!lllliiW'.r-.IPiIIJ_~~V . - V I \JL..r C,) I,I-"\LJ, .....,., .'.. 1..'" <".,,,, ~,_",~~1 ~-"'V':fiJ -:: Kc'9 ! :71_Ji" ;1:_~',J \~r';-c '~-",,:o,_~ ;"I.,f,o'~.." -', '1.,1-...,,-, t ~~Il..1t~ BROWN 8( COil j. 5w..:.....,,,..,,-, I h~l: I '~.~ .1&t;. . ~';;.t i. . "'.10-"')t'I,h; I ,-l" ~ ':;' ,~>~.,..'}.~-, J , '.(. ,,_~,/\.-", ,.... A.'. . ~",~~Id~ ",)l I SI\/1 rr~1 .,'i > i.( r"'__-"~':' .....y.~J' ; -;{:~-r.. .Ju~ l . ....1..\ ',,-f.._ '. : I, ~.. 0 r.' '\'\'.\~..-,,~.)' 1 r-f.!~."f ~ ::>J . '~', ~/" .-.:: .',., ~ \" . '~.';'T- .;-'.... "_ -Be I ~., '-'.", 'dq--'l ~'",:)I' l~ I !<~"j '," .:\ l ;, ,- .\'.. "'-~! ".j( "-,", ~ ..... '. :, r "'."'1: n....".~,.- June 25, 1985 ". tl.- ,I'J'.....;.,.' ,. . I 'r ,. ~.H-._ '", .'; Mr. Jehu J. Strojahn City Engineer & D:irecl;or of Puhlic Works City of Hopkins 1010 South First Street Hopkins, M...t.l 5534} Fill: Hopkins/Reilly Tar Dear John: I have enclosed copies of a draft settlement agreement on vlhich Reilly Tar, the Uni.ted St.ateS-;-and the lo1innesota Pollution Control Agency have reached near final agreement. Apparently Reilly and St. Louis Park are negotiating separately and are a.lao noar agreement. . The settlement calls for a remedial action plan involving the construction of a. granular activated carbon (GAC) drinking water treatment system at St. Louis Park wells numbers 10 and 15 and for a system of pumping wells designed to remove or con- trol the f low of PAR (~on tarninan ts . Unde r the plan f Hopkins! well number 3 may be returned to service at anytime after the GAC system I the Prairie du Chien source control well, and the Prairie du Chien gradient control well have been in operation for five years: provided that PAH levels do not exceed 5.6 ng/l of Benzo(a)pyrene plus Diebenz- (a,h)anthracene, 28 ng/l of carginogenic PAR, or 280 ng/l or other PAR. Hopkins' well number 3 is to be monitored semi- annually for five yea~~ and annually thereafter. Hopkins' well number 6 is to be mGnitored annually. This mon~toring is to continue f0r at least 30 years. The proposed agreement calls for payment by Reilly to the United States Government of $1,680,000.00 and to the State of Minnesota of $1,000,000.00. It does not anticipate any payment to the City of Hopkins. I have not h.~ard '..",heth.:r it is anticipated that Reilly will make a payment to st. Louis Park, but 1 r. l!.ght of the "hold harmless" c.greemcIlt, I doubt. j t. That subaqrcement is more likely to invoke an ,t 9 r f~ C~rrl(~ n t by St. LciLl i s P,'i!-k to undertt.ly.e primary responsibility for: sorne or kl? i 11. Y I ~ c'b.1 iqa t ions u nde r the . remedial action pla!L . , ~. ~..z~~~_~-...-....~,,__.__._._.__,_. ~WJI..:;.,..tjl,Ji!UIli~~r.!;W'~'~l'~~....~IIU\t_- ~_----"-:-._"" . ,. V I """../ L_! Lv 'r-\L~ BRCJv\/N & , . S~!1iTH ;l x-~H:::;)" )'j/': f~~\~(t;~(_.,~~ i\~ (,- t -,1 Mr. John J. Strojahn June 25, 1985 Page Two Hopkins will have to decide whether to execute this settlement agreement. If it does! Reilly is obligated to take steps at its expense which should result, in the eventuill reopening of Hopkins ~ well number 3. On the other hand; Hopkins will recoup none of its response costs or its attorneys I fees. If Hopkins refuses to execute the agreement, however, it will likely be the lone remaining plaintiff. 'rhe economi.c burd en of continuing the lawsuit alone is not likely one that Hopkins wishes to assume. When you have had an opportunity to study the enclosed documents~ we should discuss how the City wishes to proceed. your s , ry '-,--~ 1 '16 J - 0 0 2 I cc: r~r . Jerre Miller Ene losu:::e s I I I I 1 I ! i 1 I I , ! .t . t I . , ' . . c. . .. -. - -~~.~---------~--~~ . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING . August 6,1985 -- , ...: ~;\~ wh.~ ".~ ; ;r: "'. .~ ~.,. ~ ~. :. ("':~~:J.~~!:.n ;'1( ',t ,J. .~' A:" '., f~~" &:.':- ~~.,........ ......: '" ~ ....;".. . :~I;' .~ I: .~ .....:~~:~l . ~;, 1-- -- - - - ~~-, '~..---.._..~-~--.-.. y ...- ~"'~~~liI.--- "J~t:;JJ ~1:IW.~~~. c................... r.~~ I ./ .- P- ...~: CITY OF HOPKINS 10tO FIRST STREEY saUTt-! HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 61 V9;, 5-ft.4141 August l 1985 " , r- '\ Rudy Luther Agreement 1 PURPOSE: The pllrpose of this report is to recommend City Council action on an cgreement between Rudy Luther's Hopk:Lns Notors, Inc. and the City of Hopkins. BACKGROUND: As par>t of the approval for the development of Hopkins Honda on the Hopkins Theater site, the e i t.y directed that an agreement be drafted to addr-ess three issues, (1) the ,,18.1 vel" of a II partial takinglt. ( 2 ) that the Luther site would be acquired by the Ci ty under a negotiated sale and ( 3 ) that Luther and Honda would waive any r-elocation benefits accorded under the acquisition. The City A ttorrJey has wo~'ked with attorneys representing Rudy Lucher t.o prepare the attached agreemen t. In his view, this I agre~ment is acceptable and it specifically addresses the three concerns outlined above. It wil.l be necessary for the City Council to take action on the agreement prior to taking action on thB rezoning of the Hopkins Theater site. RECOMMENDATION: j Based on the City Attorney1s l'ecommendation for approval, I authorize that the Council author'ize execution of the attached agreement bet...eer; the City of Hopkins and Rudy Lutherls Hopkins I iic~.ja. Inc. ~, I I ~ '1 "lfL :- Cr'2iig R. Rapp~ C i t Y r.~ a~ a;g e r V I I I I I i , I I ~...J '-- Council Rept "It' .. ~, c.J":/ a ~illm.__~~ .~~oI.I."""'~_.,.____ __. ~~ ---F""V'I'llIIi r..-'","W'" 1II!eIi::~tl:t4~ -~ ~_ __~~Ml~~~-'~""-' , .. v ,~' tY__ r-~F'~\ll'lI;r.'Q~~'~" ..~ CIT't' OF HOPKlr\JS - (""1.1., , ,,. - . ';1 '" .. 'r ~. _::~~~..~~Ji~ ~~ ~..----r -~ . ."... '. ~- -~--- .- -:-~~---' , ... P,ugust 1, 1985 STAFF REPORT I_~__.u..__~.__~ STORM WA TER PROBLE~ ,~ I 305 21st AVENUE NORTH (Steven Roberts - Mrs. Andrenj I PURPOSE: To report on the storm water retention and ponding at #305 21st Avenue I North and the suggested alternatives and costs to alleviate the prob- lem. BA~KGROUND: Continued item referred to the City Engineer for review and report after appearances by M~. Roberts and Mrs. Andren at the July 16! 1985 meeting. I ANALYSIS: The low area south of the garage at 305 21st Avenue North is the col- lection point fOt' a large area of stonn water runoff fl'om Hilltop Park yards to the south, Third Str'eet North as well as some from {1305. Without a drainage pipe~ water will pond to a depth of over three feet before 'it wi 11 r'un out overland to the Dark. The oresent inlet structure (55 gallon bal'rel) is filled with debris. and rock and does not act as an inlet. The drain tile that ran from this structure was damaged when a swimming pool was constructed at #305. (see inspectors I report attached). The drain tile ran into a hole that is filled with rock and covered with sod. No easements for the tile installation are on file. I I A storm sewer drain is needed to alleviate the flooding and drain the street and property at #305. I AL TER~ttl,TIVES: The present catch basin and tile are all on private property~ I I although they drain to the park. A determination could be wade that I this is a private installation and should be repaired by them. i I The City Council has a policy of draining public streets and paying fer the construction w'ith general budget !UII"';~. ~~:~i.struction costs I I of surface damage are uscally charged to the benefitted area. An j I inlet str'uctut'e could be bui i t on Third Street North with the outfall I across #305 along approximately the present alignment. with outfall I into the City park. ~1 easement would be needed for this construction i I i I Ano ther a Herna te wou 1 d be to cons truct a pprox i ma te ly 400 feet of stOll sewer en 21st Avenue. connectiilg to ex'isting storm sevier. This would + be a costly instal1at~on as it would require the reconstruction of asphalt street that is in good condition. j ! , -,---~~---~ "---~~-----~---- r ;', Un (- I I Pp~1 tt ::- ~ .___ ~.n.,__~__'~ m J '," " , ... ~- ....-...... ~ . STOR}1 WATER PROBLEM PAGE 2 RECOMMENDATION: Install a catch basin close to the existing catch basin in I Third Street North. An outfall line would be constructed from there through the pt'opert.y at #305 21st Avenue N.orth outfalling into the i park. Drainage would be into the present rock drainage area with an overflow into the park. Construction would be by smail machinery with care to damaga as little landscaping as possible. Costs of pipe and catch bas into be pa i d from ge nera 1 fund (stann se'fJer). If sur- face restoration is to be assessed t an assessment project should be initiated by Council resolution. Estimated cost of construction and restoration is $3)800. An easement is needed for installation of the pipe. .,...'.' ~ Engineer .. "'.;'. ::.'. -.;-.',.. '. . .,j.e. ".-. "., '.., .-.,." ',""_'. '.,.,......, ,.....'.,\ ,;.. ..~,.",. ':~'" ,,!, i: :';',:-.__,,_'" ....',,"...... ~'.<_.'., __- ____ -'- , .,_J ..,~."",t....-:-... ....':\..:;,......\ :..,.....,_ .,,"'...~'- ...... . ".'., .'....~ ...~~~1...... .,..... _ ,~'..!- J-' -1 '.. '_'" ill "S' - '"' ~w- 1_ --... -~ _~~ll'~h~...r[J;-~ _...~~ 11 _.mi~_..JI!W iii -'_ . , .~' ~'~I' -. ,', ~ I I ~"'O"'" ":.)(,",-AU'~'(""O "::;~...j.~~~:<,,:.:..:.::;.t.'~.~.-'..\:~M.'. ~ · ~ .... ~ ~ \. c..... - . '~., "\. ,"r' . .v,,' . .,.. ~~ Ii f i '.., ',.~ ~...., :';-'_ ,,~_"t.~ _~...., :,.~~,,:'UL" ~. >, Ho@t>(,I.N.5.. Mt"....,.,N. .sS"3~3 .-;.: . ...... >," .' c"";;",:;': . -;.: "~~ : 'J~~'~ " <.,~~,~~\~:~~~1tJ' I ,,< \' ':'" ,:~ .. " '. :,' ,';>~ ,>, ~~.''':.l;'~~ .. . . .,.- ::Jr'..tllV~~'t..). ," . ~ "., ,-\i..~ ~ ~"~;4'"-'~:i!~. , ...;;. ..I>#~' ~ ~.!:~. . ...t~~ f.. ~ ri;-:, ~~ ;...;1~,,_ . - . .. . :"'{k~ .~...-;... ~ r / < '~'.~.: '.~~,;~::;;~~<:~~~ 1....:1, 'v .. '. ",_.,.. '.. : ,:-{ r----.-.~- - -, .~~~-~I. .(~..:' .~:'~. '~.'~ ~~.~-;:":.~;<:,:.':~?i 11 ,'. ."..,... J'" ,~ .' ,---_1....<,.;'~L.. ;<,}.?t.:-i'!ot',i.> ~~ '...; '0- I ,...~ . .'. 'f,:'it- :.~..~: >>>Y~'/:~:T,:::!t; I '.' .....,. '.. . .. . '~i,. Ii..: ;. ;'rt. I "r~" -.,--'.,,- -.--.,] -.J..t7;. ! l' .' : ' /:' ",:. "")~t I l .. ..' ...- ,t... .' - ....-- "-',:"r-': i - - .'" ,.;"'t~~'~ I ~ 1 "'~' -: -....,.'d~'l:t \ , '.. < ;!"",;' .:f;~ ' .-/.. ~.. ,L." " i /' \ ! -:c' ," -'. ,.:'-;...;,....~~,. ,:,,;:::;'1' j . ''\? '\ . ,-<', _ ,'__ -tIJ~c........~t:~,~. i ""(" v ' ,~ . ~', :';:-,." ;~'~~::-.,~~~~'..:"<: 1 '" ~, 'Ii> ' . ,.,...>:I;i-i'~ij}1\;. ~ . ~.. '"' 0 .'.. .,' .: . "-"~'~:f ":r~':;:' ........ ~ . 0 '. . ~_. , .. " _. ~ '.' ;>;~ ~"" ~.. ~.\A\':'" ....,N.,._..,.,..~.,::...'..'.;;~I~ . "" . ~', ..I. rl ...,,,. _. ~~~ - P",,~g''''S::H~ ...--.: If"\,.., . . 1""~" .........,~.,t,> .i;.~,.?'~ ,~ ., , " ", ">J.....-.:...,.-..~.i:-,:~~j~~P. . " j. l . .' ,~. , . :i(::-~ l;' ::r1~> -:: ' ,. Jef ", ...,......-'.'~ ""'.\-7.-~..~".. I. : \ ,I' l> ~...;-': ., .;- :' ~~'~.'{-'i 'j '.' , ..... . '..' ~"','.~. ",-, .'. 1 .' - c '4... "., ;':'.. ,.;.,-,:-.&. " ! " . .' > :;+ F:. '~,,"4:.i.t .r_ . ".-. ..\. . ."'!'!".... .... 'C'>i-if1.ff,.. ," '" . ;<~' ."-:t....":~~~:,,. . ..' ',. ~6 ,..f...~",... . . 1. ~==-' /' . . ":... -r.~._~:?1[~~~ } 1(; c J ~'_ ~t~.._.... "-:-:":',....'.5:.:.'1':'g I ! ..)'1'1:>'7 fl I --~...~." ':':,\:'~""i'ft,t~~ i "-- /'.' J '. .:. ,(f.q....~_.l;,.~.~~ --..,;,../ J'" . ,.: r-.' .' .c.,'. '?:~~';'W I .... ' ~". q) " ..L.......~;; '. .. l ~I /..:'.' ,. ~ .','" ..:~~~;'~,~Y1~~" - .-: ,// "V '_ '. . I. ,\ e (1+-1 (...;t~.;;':[.: ; , /"" I !-.. :', ( ':,'. c'......,\~o "" .,', ~ t-, '-"'-- ...-.-<. ~-_ _, - ~.. r. . n, k. ' .'\:.~.:..~. /// 0 --------------. I 't..,.v;o.~:;~.-7(i::t.!i ' .. 1:-- ,>t-t ,I.".. ~ ,- /P. .;;'''~~~~~e I\....... "1- q>. . 6.~\"".",-~ ,,1I:.'r,' '. , '\ - '.; ~. .~A",~'::', ;~f.-(9~ ~=tf'rJ,;,., ~ 0 S'-{-o ....~ Sc V_ooL-'-.. Or,. ,"'" _" "'- ,;~~;:~.:~~~, r , " '. ..~:..~ t. r ~l"<' I,., . '.; .~~ .. . - t'~ -. . ..,- /~"-' ~. ;~~".~,:: .~:~i~~~ . .. t.. '... "... -.. - ., -';,-' , ~,' ~J '..- . '': " l :i~.' f t ' ,.., .. , - t<A '-t KCttK~ ~.o~..~ G.\..~~ .t.~~I?&i~'IDI:1.. "...' ~ 3 -- p-(,.-- 00 \.{ S ~ 3 '5 ~ i!L.l?l-i c:~ "t- -Sot ~ ~_:.~~ '" L' Ln.,... , ,'" ,~., ,.~ .:'..~,., ..~ . .,~_..-:.....--_::~ .,.. .'~ ._ '-.-., _ __.- ':~'~';--_"".-:"";'; _ ""J.~_"'_;';,~~ (-" ~ 'T ..-'''1,:-.. ,.... ..... ~', ,:"i' ....."r~ ...:__~ ;" .~.. - . /,' .:..: '\i; ~>,:j ..:~~ ~J; .~~ ~'. ~ . .,,;r:,;'~':'~~'~ ~.; ;~;'J -.... (~.. :.'. ~.'r;j<-"'i..-;'..:.~~~-".~:};I:!>...""..::~' -..~~ ,'~tr.'.'" .r~'";,"'" ,.,.. -t~.. .,.;,~ -. . - ~.. . ...------- .. J.~Cl",,)l;~III'I'il~. " - . --.............. , , I I I. I t I I I - ""'~.-"n.- .........-- -...- ~".._- - - .. . ,'l! . () u.I Q ':i.. -~ ~ 3 - II ~. . -- ;-:0 ~-~ ~ ;- ~' ~ g J \ ~ - \ ex. - 'i, -< 9 u.. \ -1--~ ~ I CY - D-- ~ \ u rY "I '(' ;::.'). ~. \ .. .) \ - - W. - ..... - r--- \ - \ i - , - - : " \ \ \ ~ i \ '-It-. :/ \ - \ \ I \ \ \ c !'y' :>''''tl' _ 1'2 -.s 0 'i. \ -.l~~~;;--~ ~, ..,<; /:r- --.;., <" - - ,/ -'--;: - '<r - - - -, ~ , 1:'" 17' I .-:.: c' '-"'v S I ' . . ~ - ......_~~-, ~ .......",. -- ~-~'--flll ~ . . J~"""""'~_~ ' ~ ~ - ~~ ;-- --- ~ - . . ... v' - J . h . ._', . ," ( ~' '" ~... .. . n , .. -_ . '-i :1-. _, ,~., . I'" '" . .M:W"/ f,.;ln~i~~ CIT'f OF HOPKINS - !.,... "f.. ~BJ . '-" I. ....-'~ ," I ~ I' _' _ ~~ ~ '-". '.---=~.~~ .~ .-:' .--. August 1. 1985 - -~.:;;.... ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF STUDY (-----.- ------.------.-- MEADOWBROOK ROAD --. "'"' Cnl ZEN REQUEST FOR STOP SIGN I I PURPOSE: io respond to the request for stop signs on Meadowbrook Road. BACKGROUND: A I~equest presented to the City Council for stop signs on Meadow- I brook Road was referred to the Engineer for study and recommer.dation. The entrance to the Meadowbrook GOlf Course is located about 1350 feet I south of Excelsior Avenue (County Road 3). The entrance is at Good- I rich Street to the west. Boyce Str~et enters Meadowbrook ROftd about 700 feet south of Excelsior' Avenue. There are no entrances from the east into Meadowbrook Road north of Goodrich. The traffic to and from the golf course win be heavy during the sum- mer golf season. The rest of the year finds very little traffic on , the road except for locai residents. The period of heavy t~affic coincides with school vacation when there are chiidren playing in the area. The concern of the residents is for the safety of the children and to other local tr4ffic. . ANALYSIS: Meadowbrook Road is a residential street with th~ ex~epticn of the golf course. T~affic on the street is not excessive. The pOlice report indicates that speed is not excessive. Sight lines are good I except for the intersection at Goodrich and Meadowbrook. Traffic entering from the side streets is minimal. The Manual for Unifonm Traffic control devises states that "Stop signs -o;lould not be used , for speed control. II (see attat..:hed copy). r Al.TERNATES: Install stop signs at Goodrich Street only. This would control I those cars turning into the golf course without regard to southbound I traffic. Southbound would a1so be stopped at that intersection. I RECOMMENDATION: Deny installation of stop signs on Meadowbrook Road as proposed~ ! The Police Report on this concurrs. , I I I //) I I I ! ! / / ,/ .' l/"/' ; / ~./../II ;: l . ~ - </~~~' I ~? n AndersoYl. Assistant Engineer I I '- .. {- ("1 U n C i ! ~~' (: r) r ,.". j _._---.~ ~,----._.---- .. ____ ~ ____,__._" _____-----'__~ _-0__ - ~- ~ - 'lo- r - ~....~-~ .- _,____c____.____________=.. ------~~~- ~'-"'-"'.....-.I ~~ lXI'._ - ~ ~ , _-._Ji!ft'I'I_rl....,.. ~~V--, ! ! I . I I I ! I . ~B.,.j Warrants for ~t(lp :-;j~ll B('GII'"'' 1ft.. :-;'1'0[' :-'lgll ,,':1 !lS(I'.. " :illh:;(:\flll:l1 In{'nu\"f.nii?H;~Pc to motorist;:;. it "hOlll(f Iw lI~('d only WhNH 1\';'I'l'allted, ;\ STOP sib'"!J mn)' be warranted rlt fill iTltl'rsN~tion \\'hen~ one or1liOrf' of the fol. !0.wing- wndi: iOl\:; eXIst: L liltei'sc~tioll of :', jp"" !lIll'o,'I'11l1 l';l:ld with It /'rulin road when' Bpplication of the 1l'l!'111,'1 i n:..:hr '<If,\\':'1)' nde is lii'l<luly hilzard'JIIl;'. :l, ,-:,t:'\'('1 fllll'ring:t 1111"11::11 hlf-,l~\\':!:.. or .~In'rt. ;), l'n:-:Ign:dizpd inll'rsPc',tinlllll a ,.;i~nalized alva. -4. Or h,.t, ini pr,.;('nions 1I'lll'!'!' a '.'oll1b:nalioll of high spet:d, re- I st.rirtl'd \'iew, rlad serious :l",'idt>;l{ l'p,'ord indir-;llt'" a Ili'ed fill' c0ntl';;j hy tlll' ::-:TOI' "i~r;. ! STOP Sig-!l' :-:hould lU'\'H be used on till' iimilil!h roa.dways of J expressways, Properly designed eXlll'I!$\\'a)" interch:mges prol-ide r for the ccnlinuol!s f.o\r of tmtiir, making- STOP signs unneeesaary ewn (111 the 1'1Itcrill':: roadw:lY", l,Vl1en' Ilt-grad{O intersections are lel1lpOl'<\t!ly j!i~lii;,'d fnr lo,:,t1 t I':dlir ill sparSt'Jy populated areas, STOP ,si;;n,s ~Lollld he 1lO't'd O!l t he entering !'oudways to protect the t,h(ough trJilic, STOP sig-ns may nlS{1 he I'eqliired at the end of dil'erging roadways at the intersection with other highw:lJs not designed as expressways, In most of these cases, the speeds \viH not wa.rrant. any great incl'{,>:lsC in th~ sign sizes, I STOP !';jgnf.. shllll not t~ el'edl"Ai o.t in(f,rsections where traffic i ! ; . control signa!:> nro operating'. T!I(' conflicting' I.'OffiIl1UIHis of two I ~ t'Yl'es of control devices are con fnsing, If tl'1lllic is r€quired to stop \\'hen t.he operution of the sl;(:p-aud-go signals is not warranted, the .:....-~~'I\, ...... " .. signals should be put on flashing operation \o;ith the red flashing ..: .~""... n~ht facing the traffic that must stop. I Where two main h:ghways intersect! the STOP sign or signs should normally he posted on the minor stre6t. to :;t.op the lesser flow i I <:If traffic. Tmffic engineering studies, how€:\-er, may justify a. ded. I ! sion to instal! l\, STOP sign 01' signs on the major street, as at It ! dll'ee-W:l~' intersection Whl:fe ;::1 f...ty ('ollc,iderntiolls may justify stop- pi!;!; [he grealer th)\\, of tral1i,~ to IK'l'll1it ,l lpft-turning mo\'emenL For other than emergency lHlrpos(':' pon:lblc' or p,lrt.-tir:w STOP signs shali not be used, STOP signs siiOHlr! nut bE" Iist'd fr,r"pped "<1!ltrol. --- - . I 101m .. :-r- - ~~....,- ...~ -.. ----.r.r.- ~......~.__..........,. .~.~,---- _~_,""R1 1i:lBi' ~.~--~~ . . .. -d -" ~. '< -- - "{. '!-.;"Ifi'ci'i'.I'~' -' ill~~ CITY HOPKINS · i"~'tjl\'1 f<lllli~~ OF I."~'J-l' '11, ! . .-- "'1 ' .. .. ~-- ~,~~ ':'..:,,' . ~ --......"..c.- ________ 'c. ----, -_--.~ .- Police Department Staff Study Meadowbrook Road 1"----.-.--.--.--------- Citizen Request for Stop Sign --"--- I !'urpose: To assist Hopkins Engineering Department by monitoring ~raffic speeds and I vehicle frequency between Excelsior Ave. and Interlachen Golf Course on I Meadowbrook Road. I Back9roun<! : In response to a request from residents who live on Meadowbrook Road that a stop sign be erect.ed on Boyce and Goodrich Streets to curtail I , speeding on Meadowb~ook Road. ! Hopkins City Engineer requested staff study by police depa:rtment to I assess the police perspective. I I The problem according to information Vie received from the engineering ! department was speeding during the aaytime hours. Day shift officers along with the afte:t:nocn shift moni tared t.rafflc from .July 17 to July 22 on a paciodic basis. Officers observed the traffic was extremely heavy due to p~rsons going to and from the golf course. Offic€rs reported that, although traffic was heavy, there were v~ry few vehicles above the speed lim~t of 30 mph. On one day shift, officers monitorsd traffic on Meadowbrook Rd. for I approximatel:t 48 minuteS using radar. During this time, 43 vehicles were observed driving to and from the Headowbrook Golf Course, and four vehicles were observed driving at speeds consid~red too fast for a i residential area. 'I'h~ highest. speed clocked was 40 mph. 'l'here I appears to be more t:han an average amount of traffic along Meadowbrook , Rd. betwE'cn the hours of 8: 30 a. m. a'1d 5:30 p.m. This however ...,ould obviously be only during the summer months. 'rhe wir\ ter acti.'.1. ties at: Meadowbrook Galf Course are limited to cross-coantry 8kiirv, at that location, I It has 3.1so been observed over the years that a number of vehicles avoid! i the traffic sErr~phores at the intersection of Blak. and Excelsior by j I cutting through Interlacher. Park and going south on Blake Rd. or: east I I on Excelsior Ave. Over the years we have h,d some concern hy Interlache Park residents in regard to this traffic pattern tactic, but there is i virtually nothing the police depart.ment can do to ~urtail this action. I The second,J.ry cO!1sidel"ation of placing stop signs on Meacowbrook Rd. at 1 I Goodrich and Boyce l5 tr',at there \>.'i 11 be an increased volurrill of noise j levels due to the starting and stopping of vebicles at the stop signs. j l'hi5 mayor way not outweigh f" . 11 I I the urgency o. erectIng stop SIgns at t ,08e I tn t,\'VG 10cGt iens. Anot.her considera.tion is the Natioll<ll Traffic lI.dvisory I sUmdards for placement of traffic regulation devlces in the form of 11' ,. I ~'f.'J {~ r) i 11 . ._~~. _~l'iext p!==...g,e) ~__~ ~_~'____~_,.___c~__~'__ ._ , ". -- . u. ---- - -~......_,.""'"-~, "'~:4'i!~~m"~~ .. . .I!~ '~'~"_~, CITY OF HOPKINS ~ ....,-...~../ .,'~. ".,- . ...~ ~- : " +. - ..~ ...:, ,..~--------. "';"..." ~, --~_.--.---- Police Department Staff Study ~ ----- Meadowbrook Road (page 2 yi~ld and stop signs has never been for the sole purpose of tri'l.ffic speed control. ~~!,dation' o,,',y tnstanation of stop signs on MeadOwbrook Rd. as proposed. I ('\ I I ~J."-~ I I Earl L. JOruison . ~~ief of Police U by: Jack Pratt i Commander j I I I I I r ! I i I i ~ I , j \ (r-\',n-I'! Rent # ____' '--- , ---- ./ ,.'U. JI.,: \ fJ _.,.r-'-- ~!!m!I~~~~_.."",-_...............__.,_... " ... . .. TRAFFIC S'JRVEY ------ . Location -- Meadm.;br?_ok Road & B~yce. Meadowbrook Road & Goodrich. - - TIME SPEED .MPH. 1. 8:57 l. 37- ") 8:58 2. 34 "". 3. 8:58 3. 30 4. 8:58 4. 30 5. 8:59 5. 26 6, 8:59 6 . 27 7. 9:01 7. 27 8. 9:01 8. 27 9. 9:01 9 . 34 10. 9:02 10. 28 ~ .. 9:03 11. 31 .!..J.... 12. 9~O6 12. 28 13. 9:08 13. 33 14. 9:09 14. 40- 15. 9: 16 15. 36 16. 9:18 16. 30 . 17. 9:18 17< 32 "/1 18. 9:18 18. 32 ::) 19. 9:21 19. 21 . 20. 9:22 20. 30 I ,c-.i: 9:22 2l. 28 9:23 22. 27 'J .. 23" 9:24 23. 31 '-~ ."'~:'~'o 24. 9:24 24. 27 Cj 25. 9:25 25. 35 , . .'" << , ',0"'1 26. 9:27 26. 39- - '-:"~"" 27. 9:29 27. 26 :i~~ 28. 9:29 28. 29 - . I ": "::-,,,~ 29. 9~29 29. 25 30. 9:32 30. 29 31. 9: 32 :::Sl. 31 32. 9:33 32. 35 33. 9:34 33. 25 34. 9:35 34. 25 35. 9:35 35. 29 36. 9:35 36. 29 37. 9:35 37. 29 38. 9:36 38. 35 39. 9 ;36 39. 35 40. 9:41 40. 30 41. 9:41 4l. 30 42. 9:44 42. 35 43. 9:45 43. 38- - .Total Vehicles 43 Approxi~ately 48 min. ......{.{......1.~~h. '.. ~ ~':~t" ".~. ..-. .'~: ~~'I..~' ;~~.'.! "": :...:}'..,~'4"':..,..~..t,...;:,::.<...........;:r..... '~..; .. ,'~ ;.. "-1~;:': . ./;., .,:~.: >.:. '.~. " ;., < < r.--;; : 1. :: ~ _' '~'.: .: .' f~,,' - .:..... -:.- ;, _.' \~ :, . ~ . .. '. ":,..,~. .., ,-.'" , .J . . . + ~. . ~.~W\1i1'tE~-Y~1H:t:t~_.,...,..~____~~_ __.__~~~~__. _~~~ ~~ _ ~<'1', V .~ ft.- . Jlt"(X~f~1!!IWI CiTY OF HOPKINS . ~. _ .r'~ ':~- --..." "'~\, .,."~ '.-' August 1 ~ 1985 5TAFF REPORT PARr.ING RFSTRICTION REQUEST ~ ~~ r--- .-..-..---.-. .-.- MARVY ADVERTISiNG 1 I' PURPOSE: Addeedum to Eng1 "".r, Report regardie9 a request made by Mar.)' Mver- I I tising, 41 - 12th Avenue North. to ch~nge parking resttictions on 12th Avenue North. I BACKGROUND: Marvy Advertising request and Council appearance July 16. Letters r~ve been sent to the affected properties on 12th Avenue No~th. Replie have been received from two residents and from the apartment owner on on the west side. One property owner had no comment, the othar (N33) was concerned that ove~night pf.rking prohibition wou1d hinder out of I town visitors he might have. The apartment owner had cn1y one additional request~ that of a No- Parking zone north of the driveway entrance to the garage. RECOMMENDATION: Remcval of 1imits only on portio/1 adjacent to pt~operty o\ftned I by Marvy Advertising as recommended in John Strojan report 6/27/85. . Also recommended is a No Parking Anytin~ en the west side of 12th Avenue North, north of the apartment garage drive. I I Ii _~ 1 / / .~, 1 ~. '~~~ I I on Anderson. Assistant Engineer I . ! I I 1 I I I i I I '~_m ______________ _ ( "u r', ( j I f'i p r, ' " , -. _ -- ---- -- j ..' -' u . " ~_ L-_~=~~>.~_............. ~_~ - .,........--__, __~~~~_______.___._.__.~_] May 3D, 1985 \, Hopkins City Council c/o Mr. John Strojan, Engineering Cepartment Hopkins City Hall iOl0 First Street South Hopki ns, 1li nnesata 55343 Dear John and Council Members: After considering further alternatives, we feel it necessary to request a parking ordinance change on the north haif of Twelfth Avenue betwaen Excelsior Avenue and First Street North. We would like the parking on the north half of the block changed frem a two-hour zone to only an over- e night restriction. We are H;questing this change due to the fact that the majority of our clients ale at the studio for a four to eight-hour period of time. With the acquisition of additional property this past year, we do have off- street parking for sevent~en to eiqh.tp.pn cars which is more than adequate for our staff. However, several of us park on the street to leave off- street spaces for clients who have concerns with parking in the two-hour zone. We have ever; experienced clients attempting to park on Twelfth Avenue in the block between First and Second Streets North who have re- ceived complaints from the property owners. As far as making this change is concerned, it really would not change the e existing parking pattern on the street; it would only save everyone from , ...., . ~;- - . ..- - .~.- ~>~~:::-,..c,]C'~;" . _____~.JrIC.;-~'....- ; Page Two Hopkins City Council c/o M~. John Strojan May 30~ i 985 going out and driving their cars around the block every time the meter monitor marks the tires. At the same tiwl€) we \'i'ould also like to request painting a yellow uNo Park.ing Zone" in front of our building entrance. This is to keep the walk across the boulevard open for people coming and going from the studio. . Please give me a call if there are an.y questions or concerns regarding the above requests. I thank you for your help in considering our situa- tion. Sincerely, .........~ I ~~~/ _______ ~~.:L'? ~/L:---- Thomas A. Bach MARVYl ADVERTrS1NG PHOTOGRAPHY, INC. TAB/l k It . ~:',-: ~;-:' -:;,.~: .,' ~L.. _....-.....w L__.,_"" 'iI' ~b .,....:. CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STf~EE'r SOUTH HOPKINS, MlNNESOT,is. 553-(3 IH ~9.35-8.4? 4 Changes in the Compensation of r- ~ - the Hopkins Fire Department ( Purpose - The purpose of th~s report is to explaIn the changes that are proposed in the Hopk f os Fire Oeparl:ment due to the Fair labor Standards Act (FLSA) . Backqround - On February 19, 1985 the U.S. Suoreme Court overturned a prevfous decision and removed the exemption that cities had ~njoyed rrom the FLSA. One of the errects or this action was to change the derioition or what constituted a volunteer rir~ department. VOlunteer fire departments are exempt From the overtime and minImum wage provisions of the FLSA IF the campensation For the volunteers is not more ~han $2.50;call. Since our volunteers rsceive $5,OO/cal' plus an hourly rete For any ca 1 1 9 fn ~xcess of' 120 minutes, they are considered . amployees. Anal~ - There are several results iF our volunteers most be treated as employees. Hfnfmum wage must be paid Tor all . l times when they are working, at drills, in trstnfng or at the stat i on pr'epared to answer med' ca 1 emergencfes" City ~ i oyees who are a 1 so "01 unteer S ,;.,IOU J d ha lie to be pa i d t r me and one-ha 1 r For any ca 1 1 s -they answer at n f ght or on weekends. Extensive record keeping procedures wou'd also I have to be Followed. f I ) The Hopi<lilS Fire department has decided 1..0 reduce its p€'r ! f call compensation to $2.50. This ensures that the department wi 1 I be consio~,~d ~ volunteer Ffre department. The result of this action will be to al low the department to I continue to operate essential ty unChanged. The department would like the cfty to place an additIonal $2.50 per' call into the ReI ier Association Pension Fund. Recommendat!on - [ recommend that the City Counci I agree to Fire Department's p~oposal. The cost wi 11 be the same and i the department wi! i be able to continue to operate in its I present manner. I ;:: // /~. ~r~".... ' . . -l ~- 11"'-- ~ ~-.: -1....../ ...r:( Administrative Assistant Coune; I Rept # -- i --. - ~.. ii'I:l1'\,K.,.- __ 1 _ ~!~r:!l~ il'i4 .. -~ if ___ __ T - - ....,.~ . . . .. EMERGENCY 901.1 HOPKIIIS FIRE DEPARTmBtT NON.EM!AGENCV - (612) 938..tlS85 '1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH, HOPKINS. MN 55343 I I . Date: .J u 1 'j 12, 1965 I I ..l To: Crai.g R ar,p, City Manager I c:.. I From: Hugh Strat.m, Fire Chief~.J '] 1 Re: HFD cespon~-;e to Garcia decision 'j ---------------------------~-----------_._~-------~-------~------- i At the J u1 y business meetin3 of the HFD the members voted to J reduce Que pay to $2.50 pe r' hour. This decision is retroactive .I to July 1, 1985, and is to be carried forward in our 1986 budge t. I I Wi th this vote, the membership madE: a strong philosophical 1 statement that we are a volunteer fire depat'tment. To .join the J Hopkins fire Department is to dO:late your' tyime t.o the community in retucn fo r- expenses and a pensior.. To join the Hopkins fire 'I Department is net to 8eek a pert-time job. - OJ ~ As you are aware, the U . S. Supreme Court decision regarding the "1 Fair Labor Standards Act (F'LSA} created sev eI~e consequences fot' I the HFD. I had to restrict 3 members who are city employees, to I responding only during their regulaX work hours. If they come in I : over their 'fO-hour' work 'JJeek, I was r' e q u j, l' e d to pay them nearly $24.00 per hour. I was also forced to terminate one s te.", ard who was suddenly receiving $24.00 per hour fDr maintaining the apparatus. If the HFD had maintBined its hOUI'ly pay schedule, aUf' payroll request for' 1986 ',lou1d have been $198,000. Our members would have been severly res t r i '2 t e d in hours they could be at the fire st.ation, plus we would (laVe nad to maintain comprehensive hou r 1 y wor'k 3 u m In a r j_ e s 'I We also realized this 'dO u 1 d P r' 0 b a b 1 Y be at the expense vi. :,~~1ning ,::)~ ~-~ {j (~.(1pita} improvements. Fcll~)wing two lengthy meetings and a ':.hor'uugh 2,iring ot' t r-1 e member's concerns, 3:", ..., e 11 as ans'rlering their questio!ls a'" best I co cOtdd, they voted tCl reduce p\ e j r cornpensa~. ~on to $2.50 per call. This mo",'e exempts the HFD from cor:p1ying 'vol i ~ h the FLSA because we are no T.,} c1:lBsif'ied as vclUn.t€~ers as pe I' t.he Feclecal Statutes. The RE'li.ef ';ssociation ~r'ustee:3 u re meeting to prepare a budget. proposal to significantly jr.c:^eCise thp pension. T ~ is t I) e .L '-' feelio2; 0; U)e membel'ship ;,11 a t in r't':'C()f;:ni tion ~. <- the HFD's action vI the follc't>ling actlr)ns :~ h I,J iJ 1 d be: taker' "'y C i. ty manE,gement: co P12c~ ':.he $ ~ . S C: per call no t usr:d in r. ~1 e 1985 budget .into ttl e REli~r Asscciati0n' P e f1 S ion Fund. " "" . -.. "'!'J I . ....IIIJ . ~ .,. . .' $5.00 budgeted per CHll - .~. 5 0 per call a s () f "i / 1 I 8 5 'j $ 2 . 5 0 P I) t 1. n top ens ion peT' c a U. fro m 7 11 I thru 12/31/85 i (l Significantly increase the retirment/pension plan beginning with 1986 budget. Our specific request is t') be determined bv the Trustees and submitted as soon as possible. "r have requested a long-term growth 1 proje:::t1on from the Trustees to ease budget p.lannine. I was surprised at their decision. I h&d expected the membership to stay with the hourly pay. I am proud of the action taken by t his d e par t men t. The i r f L- s t con c ern was for the t h r e e- c i t Y employees I had restricted. Next they wanted to be able to come ~ and go as they pleased without all sorts of btH'caucratic record ".j. keeping. I think they decided to go volunteer when I told them .; the FLSA wouldn't allow them to forfeit their wage protection to i donate time for departmental prOjectS''':l' The members want the addresses of our congressional delegation..;;;.'.'.'..'.:. The Garcia decision is a classic textbook example of big ~~ government mucking about trying to solve one problem and creating a million others. I suspect some of our members are going to I ,~it€ the delegation outlining their frustration with this unnecessary interference in our operations. I have been directed ....<........... tow r i tea 1 e t t e r tot h e del e gat ion 0 n b e h a J. for the en t ire.' dep<Ht::r:entf outlining our official outrage.? < .: .. ~ ..;. If you have any questions or comments, call my office - 926-6479;.~ . "."." - 0 r my h 0 m e - 9 3 3 - 3 6 7 :3 .:;;V~ '-,. ~..- . ~_~:ag~--~~ --- ~-I- - . rr - c..- '......; CITY OF HOPKINS -' 10'0 F!RST STREET SOUTH HOPKiNS. MINNESOTA 55:U3 612/93S.~7" August 1 , 1985 - --tilake School l;i..1.S routing t'equest - - 1 PURPOSE: Recommend action on a request by Blake School to have a bus , exit from the southwest corner of their' prope%~ty Using a section , of the old street t:ar right.-of-way. I BACKGROUND: f See ler,ters from Eberhardt Commercial Real Estate and Police Report fr'o[!l D. c. Sikorski. Marlys Canter of Eberhardt Company and .john Stander, Head Master of Blake <:::C.:-:G~l re'lieTtl€d the problem of traffic congestion and student :>afety wi th the studens and employees leaving at the same time. They felt that this plan I would have the least impact On the residential area. B 1 ak e school wou.ld monitor the exit and maIntain the road. f Residents from the ar'ea . p rese,') ted a petition asking that the , walkway not be de0troyed. Residents also explained that the I buse$ would be loud and hence the adj acen t homes would have to close their windows. 'They did not want this type of tratfic in a residential area. I RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning and Plannj,ng Commission denied the request of Blake Schools unanimously. Reasons cited W8re: (1) preservation of the bike path, ( 2 ) Blake can route their internal t r a f f j, C . ( 3 ) Preservation of neighborhoodt ( 4 ) Problelm can be solved by improving the traffic flow on to Blake Road. I Analys I I ~ , J ~-- -- Counci I Rept # J C, ~-_.,~~~~----- --~W_ 'lI!:tif _ fi-- -~ '11II" ,..', ,; '.- ,_,'" . . ,'~""'" ......... .:: - ~ _.'......_~'w_..-;o--,................- I' I I , , I I . OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO: E. LQ Johcson FROM: D.C. Sikorski DATE: 7/28/85 SUB.TEeT: Blake School Traff~c Report On 7/26/8Sg I found a memo from Commander Pratt requesting that r lco~ over the attached five pagesl make some observationsl and submit my recornmer:.dati(.,ns to you before the next zoning and planning commission meeting. The letter from Eberhardt Commercial Real Estate dated July 15, 185 mentions: several options for school bus e%it routes from Blake . School property. However, none of the attached materials describe those options. Therefore, I have selected three of my own options in addition to the one under consideration (see attachment t1: enlarged map). The second paragraph of the Eberhardt letter suggests that the two cities. the school, and the neighbors have agreed that option #3 on my map is the best option. This is not the indication I received from everyone I talked t.o as I drove up and down the pedestrian/bicycle path and spoke with several people, young and old, who live in the nei.ghborhood and who were using the path. The majority of them described what I have indicated as option #2 on my map as the best option. The letter from City Engineer John Strojan dated July 16, J.985, was undoubtedly delivered to all affected residents of Hopkins in the area of the proposed project. I assume the Edina City Engineer sent a similar letter to Edina residents iD the same area. I am sure a more aCCu~ate represe~tation of neighborhood opinion will be expressed at those meetings tha~ by that which was held by Eberhardt and hosted by Blake School. I In ~lr. Strejar;'s letter to Chief Earl Johnso~ dated July 25, 1985, he states that, "the request is being made to allevi~te a student safety problem in the parking area r.ear the school, ar~d to lessen the traffic congestion for cars and buses attempting to get on to Blake Rd. during the rush hours. " . I iaJI'IiaIDt-.. _a.. l' ir1liE!'~~,.- ,--,- ALLEVIATE A STUDENT SAFETY PROBLEM: No specific student safety problem is mentioned in any of the materials provided to me. As Hopkins Police traffic sergeant, I have not been made aware of a . student safety problem in the parking area or an~"'.Ilhere else on the Blake School property from any source. The only possible student safety problem I can think of in the parking area is buses might be eff-loading and on-loading in areas where the private vehicles of teachers, parents, and students would mingle with pedestrian traffic. Proper loc~tion of off-loading and on-loading areas 15, in my cpinion, indspendent of any of the possible options for ingress and egress of school buses to and from the prope~ty. LESSEN THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION FOR CARS AND BUSES ATTEMPTING TO GET ONTO BLAKE RD. DURING RUSH HOURS: This is what I believe to be the real problem generating this request for another exit. As traffic sergeant, I have received no previous informati~n indicating concern over the traffic congestion on the Blake School drive'..,ay because there are buses mixed in with the automobile traffic. Ha#ever, this arg~~ent has merit. It requires a lot more space between vehicles using Blake Rd. before a school bus driver can safely pull a large bus out into the traffic. This is especially tru4? if the bus driver desires to mak.~ a left turn cnd go north on Blake Rd. He then bas to coordinate the space between two lines of traffic going in opposite directions during the rush hours. Automobile drivers who know they cculd have made it in less time with less spac~ become frustrated waiting behind bllses. THE FOUR OPTIONS: ~ Option t1: Assemble the students and the buses north of the school and exit directly onto Co. Rd. 3. I believe this option to be the least desirable for the following reasons: 1.) 'The parking lot at the end of the road is too small to accommodate both buses and students, t.md .there is no room for a turn-around. 2.) The steep hill from th~ 5chool northbound towards Co. Rd. 3 would be prohibitively dangerous for buses or. students to negotiate in the winter when it is icy. 3.) There is limited access to Co Rd. 3 at this time because both eastbound lanes are usually filled with rush hour traffic, leavi~g a situation similar to that at the main gate on Blake Rd. Also, no left turn is permitted from that driveway further restrictiD9 options for direction of travel. opti.on 1f2: The access road to the track. Most of the people 1 spoke With while I w<:s on the pedestriar../bicycle path i:!uggested this as ar. alterr.ative to option #3. Buses could be dl,verted off tne front driveway ar.d o~~o the access road tow~rds the track where they would tller.. be ramped up :0 an ir..tersectior.. at Blake Rd. ar.d Goodrich St. A semaphore with a pressure plate would then cor.trol access to this ir.~ersec~ior.. There are thre~ positive reasons for this arrar.gement. 1.) The resider.ts stated that Blake and Goodrich needs a semaphore to slow the traffic and allow access to Blake Rd. from Goodrich St. 2.) There ~re three directions 0f travel for the buses o~ce they exit school property onto Blake Rd.: Northbound to Co. Rd. 3, eastbound or. Goodrich, ~r..d southbour.d or.. Blake Rd. . tuw~rd Edina. 3.)The access road from the qate toward the track is suffi~ip~tly lor.~ to accommodate the div~rted buse~ wheLE they car. w~.it t.o get cr:to 3t21;~e Rd. without ir.terferir:g with automobile traffic. '1',"" . .' ~ ~', " --~-~--~--~~ ------.p-----;p--<(" ~~Il_""""~'-~~-- There are three negative reasons agai~stthis optio~. 1.)There would would b€ increased traffic into the Interlachen Pa~k neighborhood . on Goo~~ich St: fr,;:>m buses ar.d other t.raffi~ desi.rir"g to avoid the congestion at Co. R1. 3 and Blake Rd. by us.tng other ex its from I Interlachen Park. This, of course, would be exactly what would happen with option #3 at Harrison Ave. S. 2.) A ramp frcn! the access road up toward the i~tersectior. of Blake and Goodrich would require the removal of ornamental shrubbery, privacy trees. and would ruir: thl'! la.ndscaping or: the west side of Blake Rd. 3. ) This would be, by far, the most expensive option. opt}on #3: via the pedestria~/bicycle path onto Harrison Ave. S. Ail of the people I spoke with \tlhile I was on the path and in the neighborhood were opposed to this option. There were no positive conunents, and I could find no posit.lve reasons for i.mplementJ.ng this option. The negative factors are as follows: 1.) It would reduce the degree of safety afforded ped~atrians and bicyclists by compromising the use int:ent of the path. Persons using the path for which it was intended would. during beth the morning and the even1ng r'.lsh hours, be confronted with various confusing configurations of chains, gates, monitcrs~ and vehicular traffic. Human nature being What it iSl I do not believe the path would be strictly limited to "buses oD.ly" in actual practice, once the route would be widened and improved. Even with the most stringent safeguards, r believe this a.crangemect would be dangerous because the two most statigtically vulnerable groups: children and the elderly (retired), are the predominar.,t users of the pat.h during '1 . rush hours. Once on Harrison Ave. S., the buses would have three diractions of travel similar to option #2. However. there would still be limited access to Co. Rd. 3 during rush hour at its intersections with Harrison, Van Buren. Jackson, and Monroe. All three directions lead the bu~es through neighborhoods that are even mor~ densely con~tructed and densely populated, with a much higher probabili"ty of young couples with small children thac the Interlachen Park neighborhood. 3.) Blake school buses leaving the " southwest corner of the property and not attempting to use Co. Rd. I 3 would be competing with the rusn hour traffic of Harley Hopy-ins School and the Super Valu warehouse. 4.) The project as proposed requires a gate which would limit access to the path and would have to be monitored by a school employee. This will be tough Or! the school employee during bad weather. The gate would have to remain closed when the path ~s not being used for vehicular traffic. I This would create a navigation hazard for pedestrian--and especially bicycle--traffic, particularly at night with no artificial lighting. 5.) option #3 requires complicated inter-city cooperation. G.} I spoke WiLh Superintendant Mike Lauseng of the water dep~rtment because the location is so near a primary city water. source. Hr. LauseDg ir.fonrs me "chat there is a 16 ir:ch water main which runs south from the tower and then directly down the center of the pedestrian/bicycle path. He told me that the driving of school buses on that path durir:g the winter can drive the frost line down onto the pipe, ar.d possibly crack it. Preparation of the earth under the prcpospd roa~way would have to be similar to _ a city street with water mains underr..eath it. Tbat type of _ improvemer:t r.ould ()8 more exper..s~ve thnn i~ plar.r.ed by ~oerhardt. ~~t'P~~~.ti'~~~Ji -!t"'h'Mif'I~--""..r.F"'r:~ ..'"8: . QEtionJ4: A traffic co~trol device oc Blake Rd. at its i.ntersection with the Blake School main gate. I believe the least . expensive. least controversie.l solution to the Blake School tr..,ffic , problem would be to install ele~tLic traffic 8ign~ls at the BlaKe . School main gate. These could take the form of :standard semaphoreG; or a red!flaeh-:,ng yellow school-typ~ se<<.aphore. 1 believe the school-type semapbore. placed on a timer to operate 1 only during school hours and controlled by a pressure plate at the achool gate or by a timed-access computer, would be preferable. The positive aapects of this arrangement are: 1.) It is the least expensive of the options requiring property modification. 2.) It dooe not compromiae th~ inte~t of the north parking lot and drive'way. the access road to the track, landscapin~ I the.. int.er66ct>io~ of Blake and Goodrich, the pedestri.~n/bicycle path, or the seclusion of the neighborhood around Harrison Ave. S. 3.) It will solvl!; the problem that_ buses have wai.ting for large enough gaps in traffic. 4.) Onc~ having left the Blake School property in either direction from the gate, all approaches to, and turns made within, major intersecti.ons--especially left turns--can be made at intersections controlled by traffic signals. Negative aspects: The only negative effect I foresee is that southbound traffic on Blake Rd. from Co Rd~ 3 would back up into the intersection if the proposed sernaphor~ is not synchronized with a red light for southbound t~affic at Co. Rd. 3 and Blake. Blake Rd. is Co. Rd. 20. and suitable arrangements would have to be d. made with Hennepin County for the implementation of this option. CONCLUSION: Paragraph #5 of the Eberhardt letter sta'ces, I<The Blake Schools want to solve tbis traffi~ and safety problem with a minimum of disruption to the r.eighborhood.R If that is their intent, and considering the information I have been able to gather within the time frame given maf I believe an option other than the modif~on of the pedestrian/bicycle path should be implement~. ._ ~c jW" David C. S~korskl Tr.affic Sergeant Hopki~a Police Department DCS/caj . ,~ ~_ ~.'k\/. t , (!60 ~ _ .J .r I .' .."t.~ I . ~~ 1 11 . d~~~ lmrA~I{M{,fJ"r 1 . ~/ ft/' ~y I 1 : . ~ I . ;~~.' i . . ...-c~ ~ I . . ~. ~~) :>-:_.~~ j . r I I . t~1 I -' - I ~f. '~ I r I TJ~r ,_I rJ. . . . r; J I tr(r::r~ 1:\ 10-..1 J L -- -- . I ~I[}] · . ~I\ IL1- - ~ I . I LL _ 0'" \ - t I, I r. . .. _ '--' ..I1 'r! "ITn I. ,*". ~ I - _ .. .{ p \5 II (i) e.. - I - . - _ __ _ / J ". ~ . _.:-J " I · _ Q'I/ltu J .. :J. :;; '.. !!"CC-~ _ Lot' ~ ~ ~.. 1 f - 1- L.. -- - .. o:-..~ ~... _ ~ <>. ... r ~ . ~.. ' . _ ^' 1- ~ . ~ ~ - _ ,,0 I - _ 'l( 1- - ~ ' . --< ~ ... .....' ~ "-.... ,... I' / e. ,..' _ . .'-" (> -, - r r c _ I l( ?" -. _ _'~ I SC If 0 0 '0 (----"'---J .I .J oj . I I !~- 8000 ..' \ I \ - " I ~ ,,' I I \ _ I I T - ; ~ I ,_.,-,t,,.,,.. I Ii. . ' 0 ~, .. I' <r .--.' , ! - .- " I . .~-.. ' , ,'- . ----. I ' \ '1-iIE .... ,I r. ,',Ac I I , __ ~ _, . G) 1/ '~~"'5 i [' >-1 I :tt-. - - - ., ~ { cc-,":/,!' ) I ..., - - - __ ' '- I \ \. ,,_c ~ _ _.-, J '. ----' . '--' I ' . . .' /ltl ' "_ . ~_.., '. ". / :. . I'<' ..., . ::> '- -./.. .... I -c::l ~ .. - , 0 ;;., . . -' .- ... .' .... ..... . - - - - r t=::iB ' c u If ,,~. 1 . .. ... ...---,... Ul I - .,,'((' ,.,.- - . _ ~ . l" ., -;'j c; - .,...-c'- - . I I l _ LIP r In ,- .' .' .t. .",{ rl! -i _~I. J , ..\ ,.~ . r -I ,~.- ..- , . -~ .,,' i 'I _ _' J r .., - - - .. ; , ~ I 1 '- L' . - -~ I _ 1_ ~ ..J _ _ - i I II! I _! Ii-<~ I' . L.I .,! 1 _ - L I ... ' I ; --i ;-< ! -II-- _ I - - i ,0 I I - ( I .! _ _ Ii - . . . ..' 1 -1' - .Ji I I 1 -- .i I . ~_--+--- 1 , ~ -,~Q"'- : " . Ii ~__: I - __~~~~__.___'_ - -----'-___'____~,~_~~~~r~~~__~.~'~___.___~_~~~-~~__'_~-----', ---~~ ~~~_____.~_~__ f" , .. CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH I _,..;J*f:--:r ~iOPKINS. MiNNESOTA 55343 612193..0;..8474 DATE: C..;~y 25, 1985 I TO: Earl Johnson FROM: John Strujan RE; Blake School Traffic B1ake 5r.hoo1 is requEsting permission from the City cf Hopkins and Edina to use a portion of the o1d streetcar right-of-way for d bus exit du~ing the morning and after'noon rush hours. The request is being made to alleviate a student safety problem in the parking area near the school and to lessen the traffic congestion for cars and ~uses attempting to get onto Blake Road during the rush hours. The Council and Planning Co~nission reviewed this pending request while . on a bus tour Wednesday evening. Mayor Lavin a.sked if the Police Department had been requested to make any comments or gi'ie opinions as to the severity of the problem or the merit of the proposed solution. Enclosed is some bdckground infor-mation which has been sent to residents and the Planning COlTiTlission prior to the meeting on Tuesday~ JUlY 30. We would appreciate any comments or observations you and your staff can give us prior to the meeting. Thank you for your help in this request_ '\::1 '. ~~"--. I '\ ."' '...., --- \ I \ I '-J Johr. J. Strojan City Engineer I I . I I I i I An Equal Op;:>ortLiniiy Employer I [ , ~~!l!lfil~~~~1I!Hi ~__'I5IlIIint/L..... -- --"-'~lNl<B( ",~":r &U.1I~W1HK.;:D'fi'7t ~JII- I JI""""~'~ ~-,------- . . . CITY OF HOPKINS - 1010 FIRST STr,EET SOUTH.. HOPKiNS, MINNESOTA 55343 II 612/935-8474 July 15, 1985 Dear Resident, Blake School has requested permission to have a bus exit from the southwest corner of their property (see attached sketch and letter) using a section of the ~1d streetcar- right-of-way (p'resently used as a waHing-bi ke path) to Harrl:on Aven~e. The Zoning and Planning Commission will take up this matt~r a~ 1 ~ meeting of July 30, 1985. This meeting starts at 7:30 P,ffi" and 1 S held in the Council Chambers of the City HalL 1010 Fi rst Street South. Blake SchOOl will have to get penn;ss;on fr~~ the City of Edina also because the s~ree!~ar r1ght~of-way and the access point to Harrison AV;:iiue is within the c~ty ~'mits of Edina. The streets that the bus~s might use when they '. meet arrlson Avenue will be discussed as part of the request, If you.are interested in this matter, we invite you to attend to express your vle~s. If you are unable to attend, you may submit written c~wents to me pr~or to the meeting date. I will transmit them to the Commission at the meet. 1 "9. . Thank you for your interest in this matter. Sincerely, " ; i\ ~.- . '~~ \, './;.', -,- ~.~ ~' u.......'- :': ' -'. \^-~ .j '\. ;. John J. Strojan City Engineer Encl. i i . I ~- .~. ~,- '.. .' '-" .., , . ,- . .'~' . '~"_._."'..---"'-,._--,-""'~,-*'_.-. '..~._- ~ ~--,~,--~------- -- -- ---,.,- ---~'~--'~~--'''-' ,~ - .....--'-'- ,__ -i:'--- ~_'MIi 111 5'i~ ,. .~ JUt 1 5 198$ July 11 i 1985 Mr ~ Crai.g Rapp City Manager 1010 So. First Street iklpkins, ~ 55343 He: The Blake ScOCols Dear Mr. Rapp: toe have been arployed. by the Bla}r.e Schools to pursue several options for school bus exit routes in an attaIpt to alleviate traffic rongestio., and ensure student sa fety. .. Af+-...er discussions '.vi th the cities of Edi.."1a <md Hopkins, Blake hosted a !meting for concerned neighbors at the Hopkins canpus July 10, 1985. lk have determined. that t.he oost option for oot..~ Blake and tb2! neighbof.ilood would be to ratte scl'xlol bus traffic out the scut:hwest o::>rr.er of t.l)e parlting lot, roto the vacated streetcar right-of-way 1 €Xi ting onto Seoond Street So\...~ (see nap) . Edina and Hopkins each own a r~rtion of the streetcar ri.ght-of-....ay. ~ l'.!i.:;ta..ll"\Ce fr-Jn t.he parking lot to the st:ceet is approxirna.tely one terd:h of a mile . Cut-rently, it is bei."1g used as a bike path. The Blake Sch::Jols respL'>Ctfully request permission to widen that portion of the streetC'-ar right-of-way mentioned above to accrnm:x:1ate one-way bus traffic leaving the Hopkins campus at 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 2.m. ~nday through Friday. ~ Blake Schools would rronitor the use of this exit by putting a gate at the street exit" and locking the gate at all times other than 8: 30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Further, Blake is willing to irrprove the path at its own expense, rraintain it throughout '(he ~'.;hcol year and after one year hold another rreeting wi th the neigi'.1:x:lr3. If, after one year, the neighbors are opposed to continuation of B1.ak..:=' s use of this path, Blake wi 11 honor their wishes. I . 32!10 Whl Lt:Ul :;lft'!'! P:J. B<..'x 1:{i~S M~nnt:"il-."I:I.'i, ~hflnl''''j,,~tl~ :<'~.~.111 ~~1:; ~,~til~..:;.,,() .lIlll'II[- - --~lIi...~ _~~_.._ I -- -- ----- v.,. - ;>;1[1 ----- ---------.-..--- .... , , . . The Blake Schools want to t',;.Olve this traffic and &-lfety problem with a ll'inirrum of diSt:uption to tJ-e ~i9h.borhoo:.i. If the City Councils awrove this request, BlMe t\'Q1ld like to CQipl~te the path-widenblg before ~ 1985 school year begir.s, $eptaroer 3, 1985. We ur.derstand that the next. 1?lanrJ.ng Cc:nrra.ssion I!'t2eting is 'fue&lay ~ ..1uly 30 t fol~ by a City Council rreeti,''lg on T-.Jesday I J\ugust 6. m= would like to be on the agenda for tOOse rneatings. Please contact roo at your earliest COnveniel.iCe to let me know if this is possible. Tha.'lk you wry nuch for ya.lr consideration of tillS r-equest. '. S~ly, / /) IJ (3" ~ / 1{jL ~ tl /]/ _~C; 'L..'-~) v ~.arlys J. Cat ' --, dSOCiate Consulting Se':fvices fee cc: Joh,.. Starrier '.7, .,'. .,-"..,' I . JJB~-"'~.. _;rn."'~_._~_____,.... ___-.o____~_~_~_~~' ~___~_.___,._.~_-,......__..___.~_~~__,_~_________~ ___~~._'_~~__~___~~_~__'_~._,~.~~~ .'. . , UCI~y '"'~ JUl 2 9 1985 ~IN~ .'--'__ _ .......v. 4801 WEST 50Hl S IALF.T. EDiW\. 'c;'NN~:SliTt, 5:,J2~ 6.2-927-886! NOTICE --. Several weeks ago, you may have received a letter from Blake School concerning their interest in ct.nstruc::ting a school bus access to their property. One of the alternatives under conzideration was a driveway which would extend from the southwest corner of the school prop~rty, across the old streetcar right-ai-way. ~o Harrison Avenue. (As you know. the streetcar right-of-way is presently improved with a walking/bike path which was com.tt"ucted by the City of Hopkins.) Blake School ha.s elected to pursue this alternative and is requesting permission from the Cities of Hopkins and Edina to construct the driveway. Pe!'Tilis*,ion from Ediu~ is required as the Gi,ty owns one or the parc~ls of p'l"operty . that the driveway will cross. You are invited to attend 8. public hearing concerning this request on August 5 ~ 1985~ at 7:00 P. M., at the Edina City Hal: Council Chambers, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina. You may express your views at this hearing or submit written comments prior to the hearing. Please cc.,1.1 m~ prior to this hearing if you have any C{uestions. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL -, ~!anager GLH / 8\01 ,j I I I I . ~~~~-----6...---.:c"E.ll!W.'I'!UJ. ~~}- BUEll. !lI!Hdi. __.~A. J~- -.W! ~~.iaite;g~~~~~ . , "'11: J -'i.J:::.,.o , CITY OF HOPKINS .... '.. ~ ---,- ~-- ..~;- . August J, 2985 VARIANCE FOR (.._-----------~,._._-~- LESTER V. ~1AP.SCH _r__-----....~..__._> 354 A 1 tnea Lane I Purpose: RecOIrrnend action on an appl ication by Lester V. Maasch of 354 Althea Lane for a 5 foot sideyard variance for con~ struction of an addition to the existing garage. I BacKground: See attached staff report to Planning and Zoning Commission. I I K. Maxfield Otto~ representing the applicant, explained that I the app~icant has more than one car and with the addition the applicant will be able to park two cars in the garage. He alsD expressed a concern that there are too many ca~s parked on the street which makes it a hazard because it reduces the street to one lane. He further stated that similar variances have been granted previously in this area. ,oJ ~coomendati on: The Commission denied the variance on a 5 to 1 vote. The ;~i'~ variance was denied because of lack of hardhfp and fire danger. ~~I\Di'f\ I Nancy (p.r,ljerson Community Development An31yst I I I ! ! ; - i f I I I I I , I _J "---_~__ C''','___ _._.c____. ...... \ j r' ~, ! ~-~-I.j~'\t I! '; , . ---". '-',- ~---~----- \.1 . _ I ,-. . L ,- ~':'\< ---.' - . . . July 17, 19B5 Case No: 85~35 Ap P 1 i can t : Lester Maasch Location: 354 Althea Lane Request: Sideyard Variance STAFF FINDINGS & COMMENTS: Anderson 1. The applicant is requesting a sideyard variance to enlarge an existing garage at 354 Althea lane. The subject site is zoned R-I-C. 2. The applicant is proposing to build a 5'x23'6" addition to the existiny 13'6"x 20 I ga t'age. 427.08 (3) states accessory buildings to a residential structure shall not exceed an aggregate area of 528 square feet, The ga~age with the addition will have 387.50 square feet. 3. The zoning ordinance requires that attached accessory structures comply with the s~tback requirements of the district. Ordinance 427.31 requires a 10 foot sideyard setback in an R-1-C district. The sideyard with the proposed addition ~ ; 5 two feet. 4. The existing sideyara is 7 feet which makes the house a nan-conforming use. Ordinance 427.06(9) states non-conforming uses shall not be expanded beyond th~ building in which said use is located at the time this ordinance beco~5 effective. 5. The di sta.lCe between the app 1 i cant 's exi st iog garage and the adjacent property owners house is approximate 1y 14 feeL At a :--ecent Caunci 1 meeting a question was asked as to the rational~ bphind having ~ greater setback requirement for attached garages than for detached. The basic reason has to do with fire safety. Two detached garages can be located wi thin four feet of each other (2 f2et to each property 1 i ne). Should one burn. the adjacent structure because of its' proximity has a good chance of catching fire. 8y having a minimum of 15 feet separation between attached garages I the chances of a fire ,>preadi/1-g from one house to another are reduced. 6. The applicant has contacted the surrounding neighbOrs, The neighbor whose pt'0pe,"ty is arljacrnt to till" pr8Dosed addition has no objection to the granting r;~' the variance. I I I J. Ordinance 427.04(108) states that a variance shall be granted to a specific parcel of property because of undue hardship due to circumstances peculiar' and unlque upon such parcel, The applicant has stated that the lots in the area do not have sufficient frontage to permit an expansion without grantlng of the requested . var'iar.ce. ______.__.~_._................._........_......._'..~,,_r'lZ''!!lL_I'I"~ ~':I!lJ';l:iiIIIo ~~Ilmill!,a. :.I~~~~"!~~~ . , ~ fOK VARTANCf APPLlCArrON ONLY , NOTE: 1"he purpose of ! varhnce is to provide relief to a property owner when the strict enforecment of the Zoning Ordinance would cause an undue hard.>> ~hip to the property owner or deny reasonable use of the prop~rty. ---- Hargs~i~ to the applicant is t~e crucial test. Variances will be granted on,y 1n unusual s ituatinns which were not foreseen wt:en the Zoning Ordin- ance was adopted. Economic situations are seld~n unique and are rarely considered a valid hardship. Hardship A. Explain ~~y st~ict e~forc~ent of the Zoning Ordinance would cause undue hardship: Th~2~titioryer has only a one-car ~ara~e} as do his neighbors and practic&.lly all the residents of Althea Lane;he has a passer<ger vehicle aQd a van for hiswor-k~and. as is th~ase ~ith all his neighbors, he must park one of those vehicles on the street. This s.r~.ates bgth _L!r~ffic and a fire hazzard 0[1 Altheai--ane. /. Coodi tiol1s 8. \ Yhat are the special conditions (shape of lot. exceptionai topogrcphic conditions. etc.) of this request that are unique to to;:; proper'ty and do not apply generally to other properties in the district? Lots .:hrL.Q,12.s~.sLdCl, Dot have suffi.ci.ent frontag.e ~_perUl.i t q,n expaneion ~ ~r"antin2 of the: reQ.ues-red variancp. I I list of Homeowners Contacted by Applicant C. Submit a list of names and ,?lddresses of neighbors contacted. ! E 1 ton J. J a cob s c n - 3 5 0 A It he d Lan e, Hop kin s ( h i. s P 1"0 per t y I 15 the only one whi.ch could be adversly affected) 1 James Ault -353 Althea Lane, Hopkins(across the street from I pptitioners property I Robert r~illcr- ]/1,) Althcd Lane, HGpkin", ' . I i i i I I ~ I ~ -"'i'1'j'i!T~z~~~~~i1M".mi_grd.{" -. ' DATE -----'=:-'--.:::..~_..:...s:_ ~_.._____ JO~ __~ t;. ..:::. //;"'/~y.~ .-.~-- r - --~ - ~--- 20 0 -~- -- - -,~~ ' . ~ ~, k .;. " n) "\ - ~ ~ ~ 1. :~ '" -''-':4 ... V:' , . a" -~_._,-_._- , '---'---'-'---'-~--. ~-.. ,,' :l!" r-- ==--------,,' ~ l,;~ A.I) J:\ / 7' r;) .4,..) . '.> .- 0, ... ,r r "', .. I I ,- J . - , I I ~ 7 . _ tJ \ ! G' h, J Q X, - ~;..; I I . -\. &J !;~ I . t:Y <., D _. l.-. I -- :" G' "f , fI\ ,0 'M. " ~ ~" " <. ~ 12 p ':~- ~ . ~ t J I .-I..!i I ' () Do , .",-' "Jlr . .~ ~ L_ . ,'~ c--: ~ .'",-.~ ~ .-- + --. -- ~ ~ l..: ~ VI ~- ~ a~ r" ry-.. b r:. >~ x >< ~ ,'.') }J h'} l "), ' I) \J" I I :"~-:I ( !l . I i - ,.~ ,,- I ~ I ,-.. t; "'- I .' f::: :'-, l) I '. ""~ I:: X ."":.. ' .' I ~ I '''!' ,. .. i ~ - I .... t;.- h; c~ .~. t- !.:: .... tJ~ !:' (; ..." I ..: I If ' '. j !r. , ::, ~ I --. "'- -.1 ~..., ,,~ n , ...... ! "'" , v "1" t>. ;~ i 'J I i I,) ::. - -1 , .... . ... I ... I C 1 ,.. ~ , ! ( 'J '....... I " -, ---="', I, i 1- '" ... ... i f'" ') -' .""S ..... ';> c-- - ~ - ..... I -1 t:;- ' - - . ,- I I . -, /', ~ j-, ...~ ',- ~ I. i -...:.. ' ,~ \ I G' ~--- .._--. -- _....~__.'n.__ ' 'V' --'.-..- ~ - I z:. .. - - ~ ,...,. ; - I - - ' . _~NDf;RSE~@ PERM":~EL9~' WINDOWS t.. GLIDING _~OORS fOR COMMERCIAL ~ INSTITUTIONAL USE i . . , -g -.l1m - _ _,_ .. - k.1 __ __J J -- ._~ .-- --,- --...~~ ..,j] - .------ -._'...-."--.,.~---------....., ,. _~._w~._, __ ._..,., ._____,~ '~_ JO II ______.._._.__.. ~.._.... ______, __._ ..__._______. _..._, ---....,...-q-.. .... ~--.-...- .b. _____~~__.........~..._._ ______., --.-------------1... ~ ...."1'. :,(, , , t--. 0 ", .., / ....., / (- ~ ./ ~ - :t: .. ... -.- '- AI\ n', t--~------~,--\'/ f. ~ ~ I'. I ') -.---1:\ . \~ - ~ \. ~ ?;" --l.j \'i~: .f\J . ~.' 1 \ ~, 1- I l \ ~ ? \ \\ ".... ''1 C oJ "- ..:> ,(< IT!' ~ .. '" ';: ft. ~ >< -. ~ t-.._-,._,-~, ~-1 . \', \'U I"f, ~, .. '.... '" Ie ~,. ..' i '4 ~ ~) V) 'i (; l ()) o ~ I I ......:c-' \ t.... "--in "t: x r- -'----~---. f i ~ '-. t-. '" .... \ .>.: -.....J 'l ,'..... ~ (") ....) j I ; , i ' 1) "h ') .... ---r~ '-" ;, ....1 ~_' ...._ ~ ~ "i ,.., -',' I I \ -:- ~ r-- r- ~- '"'. _ f' {- I) (' " " r- ,... ..... 10 ~ 7 i I \ 'J .....-~ l'h', (". j..... ....j .....01- (:,-' T,: -..J \ II ~ ' r /\ ~f. ' i~" L' r -.'...... i,.. l ...., , ~ rr-- ~J Go' ,\ I rJ ':).. -.", '-J ~ . j' I f ~~." -..... '\ )( . (}- o.~ '-..~ It: f-. . ~ -" \ I ~.' I <. c '.. I r , (.., .. I> ,. 't {^ ~ C' : r., ,;- : I } . '1);'~" 'Y. ."' if''; ~. ; J...;..: , ' . '. 0 ' fT1 ~ r. , . ,:J: I~-- ---..., , / I . '\ II - - ",..." '.~-:' ' , '\ ~. ,.') .. n,. D .::t >. ("\ ~__) .... ~ r II I ! ~ "- ,1 ...." ' PI :: " t <1 i ( (..) t "-.i~ '-,I (1'- ~ :,. I ! I ..../ ", "i C~ (" .:i ::> '-- it; f) . I " l.-) '{ .... '- . -./ ,.! ~---, V I .... -... (~ ..... - & .. "",. ~ .'! C\ :) ~ .; T, ~_ . ~ C, I -; r- ..; - I }; i ! ! . ~, ~ I" r: ',.. , ",~,:.':::':~~ L -- __ . _ ,j I I f::- ',.' ........ _ , .,!~" L-..._ "'/ I .0. v'''' ), , " ( ., ":- '':'C,~'r:{ " ~ " '..). ~" :',:"'~' I r. ~'" .... - (]'" ,C . .,.:'t; j '"'t) .J I..---"" '"'-...... .. ", .~(.~ I ~ ;) r ~ ,', '.~, / ~i, .');~i; .' '.... 'I "'. ''l'~ ., ~, _ A ;. 'i" ''-, \' 1::.. I ;...- .' ;<~c i ~ ~~ ~ ~ '-- t' i.. ~,' _; ,j;{~~ ~ f!. ~ ., '"X '., c... . .H" -:~ f t tj;;' " ~,: ___ ~. ..,,(;~ .- r' ,,"t &."p",- R' c' ......- ~~ ., ~ ~ (" '.,.' ...... .;,tM1 ~ - ,.. ..' . ..... r' ~ .. J -- .:t t' """'i.'i/: ," ~ -. !'>,- ........ - , " ~ J ',':'f:'i'1'i -. -. ~ ~ ,'\ ~- - ~., " ! n ::,"i';: '. ,.., -, - . '-.! 'r'-. ,'.)'J~ ~ ~ ~, ("7 ',. _I ...... -. ~~ ,}" !~"r '-. ..... --.. "'. - -.j r... - r- ./ ~ c: ~ , .'.:.~ ..... ~ :~.) ,-. I I ','. \:..... "'1"" 1"- . ' ~, I '~ ;~' - ~ ~. ;:. ~ ...._~ '.... . . f ' :'........... 1, ",., '{:.. r... ~, T- i , , ..... I -. " .' , . I.> ?.... /' ~ ,)J I I.....,. '7 '-. 1';. " \.. ,. . . I . " "', .- ~ ;- r... :. ;;:. '.J _ .j' n, ~ ~' I (, - , ",. " '. , . ...... ~ :- I ........, ""--- t.. I. -, - -...:,-- -1 ,. ~ J \'- '- i "- ...... ~ ....., c:- ' \) '1:-.. '\ T. , (':;. I II . ~- ,,':'. .I ~ I ' , ~ r: ~ -i I t> ,Y , fJ I I ANDERSFN~ Pf.HMA.SHiELD@ W1NDOWS '" GLi[HNG DOORS fOR COMMEI~CIAL ltt INSTITUTIONAL USE . -- ----..:,. ---:::._- - j -: I -I 1 .. . - - """'-- .--,---..- b.Al .......~JB.'.utillJa:i- . , STATE Of MINNESOTA) ) .::. c. '_ ...1 COUNTY or HENNEPIN) AffIDAV!T ELTON J. JACOSSON,being firs t duly sworn upon oa th , deposes and says: That I am ~he owner of a res idence located at; 350- Althea Lane, Hopkins, !1innesota, the legal deSCTiption of I;lh iCh 1 <" . '" . Lot 7 , Block 3 , Campbell addition That my neiGhbOr' to the Noeth, LESTER J. r-'lMSCh , his discussed ;. with me hi" petition whereby he "J.S l'equeSY:J.ng Co v'-; r.l ,3;1 ce In the side ya.rd limit between our houses, t!"~ ;::::::~;nit a fiveCS) foot addicion to his ga l'~~r;!', . rr!' . L, ~~; "r i n f 0 r~r.' 0-- .-. .. '~ n c. (~to j .~~ r t 1. r) I . t :: 10' ,1, r'~ n ~ i it g 0 f 1 n 1 ~~ \......' .1',: "'L V'" L S \J.::h a \/a,r",: 'ince 10 ,/ () /<: ,/+ -1'""- /" ~ ','.,I~- I', /, ~: . ".., .., {-' [j:f':' ..' ' I -r~ . . , ,." . .__ok: _ ~'J.'=::'-A,! /4 CC >L~ "\- . ,. ! 1 j./' -' / ~. , / . .. ..' " '';'' ,'1. , . 7'-~' ~ ,~, . / -' / ,'. .' ", / ",' , .. . ' .. _,' ,; /// /' ..,. / . /~,,/1'./ .. , ..' "po, ,....~:.: '-,:r:./ ,;0" , .~ ' .." ~., : ~ ,. , . .... . I ~ , .., :,: ,." , ;'.1\' I ',[:t"" J " '.... ':; ~., :.;; ,~ ,J u...( , : . ~ 1 ... . ~~~..J.JIi l______.".-.,.m.. :lfll':--l'El",'IliI,,~' " ,1II'l. .JI'.'~>~,.';""!Ii'..'.';-I':": _'..ll',_::- .~, "I"';'" ''';'1'~1_!l.4'' .. '.'.. '.' " . ,..".,. . ..... ','.....- "',." '-- ", ."",'IB"" _"'11"'.".-,..,- .,,' ,.,'. '11I-" -'" ,." - . '. ~ . ,,,..po"" ~:" - -~---_. ~'~-'--'------""'-------"-'--Q:J<~~~""'_~T _~--.___, VESELY & MILLER PRIJF"f.!>SlQNAJ... ....BSUCI...T;C:. ATTURNj;;YS AT .,;oW SUiH:: 2D3 Nl.:JRTHW;:::SH'::RN SANK SUlLDlW3 HOPKINS, MiNNESOTA 55343 Jn9EI"H C. VEBf:I..) (.. z! 93a.7~3:1 Jf.:~FlI:: A. M!l.L~R .JERI:MY '3, \<lTEINER July 31 , I ClR~ .,!........w'-' 0.. COUNI\C!.. 1<, ~AX.'iLl..O Cl,,"ro To: Honorable ~la j!O l' .; COu.ncil City of Hopkins He: Petition of Lester j1aasch for side-yard variance 85-35 This ~s to apply to your' body to appeal and override the . action taken by the Zoni.ng and Planning C0l111niss ion at its meeting held July 30th~ 1985. Because the Fire MarshaJl. lS on va':ation this week and it le doubtfull that 'we would be abJ.e to ma.ke some other inquiries deemed necessary, be fore your next re gular I':;1~E:t- ing(Au3ust 6th) l we would r'2quest that this matter be cont~ inu'2d until Y0ur' :::ee:.ing August 20 tJl , ! ,.- ;'. '. -.Jes peet f'.llly, \ t, . - , . :-:dx::(:ld ',jt tc-/\ ttc crtey 1'\ . f o-~~' ~ e 5 1: ,,:::r >1 a a s c h 2 1 D F'ar.r~l:i,q 1 (.~ ".j , :..OdG, ::')Fl'-~ '1 ll::;., ',~~, n~'l'~~ ":~,',) ta . . ---r IlIII11. t:a 1 ..i.~- -~. ~ _!BI\IBII --- .JC ....... _ L ----- .. ---v --~-"IiIm~~~______~._- ~ F1li V-1 I' r rJ1:.e- I i i ~l" CITY OF HOPKINS --- 1010 Fl"ST $l'REET SOU Irl HOPKINS. M:NNESOiA S~ 812/93$.-6474 Resolutiun to provide funding by the Stat~ ~ for Hop-A-" Ride ""'-- r-"""_....~ ~ Purpoille: O~tai.ning approval of a resolution to snter into a contract with the Stat~ of MiancBota to provide a public transportation service in the City of H~jpkins 3nd that the City .;,)f Hopkins agrees to provide 40% of i::he total cost '> of the traJ;~~it project [nun lOcal funds. B.;Acksround: The purpose of the Hopkins Hop-A-Ride para transit system ia to provide as advance-rescLvation~ Ghared-~ide taxi service to all who n~ed such t~a~sportation within the limits of the City of Hopkins. The City of Hopkins will contract on the basis of bids submitted with a local taxi company for one yearil with a six moIith review cl&~.!se. commencing January 1. 1986. Service will be provided 12 hours a day. between th~ hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. The system ope~at~s Mocday through Saturday. The projected ridership for 1986 ia 32.000 pasae:age{'s. This l:e~wlution ?:t"ovides the sanie fundi.ng as the curt'ent resoluticm. Jecommendation: I recommend approval of the resolution enter into a contract with the State of Minnesota. to provide a public transportation service in the City of Hopkinu. .- Analyst ~ . .. j -~--Councj' Rept # '"'- -.' ... ~~~~,.lll!;sr!;l;fili\llfil'---===_~~_________. -y[ h "'=' }j.,-~r~~~r'i...~ CITY OF HOPKINS -~_ '. - r..iic~. ._' _..-~-~' .- _~.j-__ -', ....;""r""L"":':"..-:-"~_ . - 1 -._ ~,-, August 1, 1985 STAFF REPORT REMOVAL OF NO PARKING SIGNS I--~------~._- OAK GLEN DRIVE " PURPOSE: r~e purpose of this report is to request Council approval to remove ])arkiY19 signs on Oak Glen Drive. BACKGROU1~!): Sever'a"' years ago, the Hopkins Theatre expanded to fOur theatres. r~ey also \\'f:re promoting first run pictures and Tuesday flight specials. I ?~rkin9 of patrons became intolerable to residents north of the I t~eatre. They i~quested and were granted relief by the Council. ~i9ns \'Iere placed prohibit'ing parking from 7 to 10 p.m. and indicating t~is was a tow away zone. I ANALYSIS: file ti1eatre is now dused and demolition scheduledforth1smonth. r~e new occupant, Hopkins Honda,has adequate parking scheduled for t t~eir use. RECOMME~DAr[O~: Remove the No Parking signs on Oak Glen Drive from ~irst Street ~Drt~ to Second Street North. ! I /~~~/J. I I~~ ~~~~;---- I I ~( Ofi p, ~nd€rsun. Assistant Eng. I ! , . i I I I ' , ' I i 1 I I .. ir r R' - ~ I ____.-.--____~________~_~__ \1 :": U "-1 j re.". II t p ~"J 11, 1'1 .j .:~ --~. -'.~_.-- ----,.---~-- I "' "'.:' 1'-'. , ,,-. r"-/ ! I I 1 I I ~~'.&~.IIJJllL~..&...~ flIC:Il'Je!IiM~~:!:W_,.......~____~-------'-- .. \0. , ..--:- "u.-. .' J >J:.- -a:tk- , ~ M~~-!-fU~ ~ ,"~.v.1 . ,~... ,I :'~~t. .,- ... '" t ~.~~ ;~>~~~1.~ CITY OF HOPKINS ~~~~~~~. August 1. 1985 ENGINEER STAFF REPORT r--"-~- __,_._ 5 YEAR ST!\TE AI D CONSTRUCTION - PROGRAM I I PURPOSE: To fulfill the cequirerents of the State Aid Office to hi\ve a cur- rent five year const~uction program. BACKGROUND: Cities of over 5000 each year get a return on gasoline taxes ac- I I cording to rules as set upDy the Minnesota Depa~tment of Transpor- i tation. Hopld ns received $238.140 fo'r 1985. One of the requirements to receiving this money is that an approved five year construction progTam be submitted. This is to be updated at 3 year intervals. I ANALYSIS: We have review€d the 5 year construction program submitted in 1982 I and the 5 year Capital Budget Workplan as submitted by William Craig~ City Manager, to the Zoning and Planning Commission in February '85. I We have also studied the present conditions of current1y designated State Aid Streets. The attached reflects the anticipated construction on those streets for the next 5 years. RECO~ENDATION: Adopt the 5 year State Aid Construction program as submitted and forward to tr~ Mn DOT for thier approval. //~/~~ I I G~n Anderson. Asslstant Engineer I I I I I , I I I I j I I ~ J '-- .. I I r, .-.!! ~.~). J r'-., ! i1 ];. -~--~---~-~~- ~ , ~ ' - r- ., __, __. '.'~_____T_~~__~___-'_ I .---.:o",r-.- -- - -=~-' >~~ -I ...~.:ar-- H~ ~.aIWI__- --- ...... ......!li " 'PI'l'J'C~~-'----- " SF-OOOOO-GO STATE OF MINNESOTA OE:.?ARTMl:NT TRANS~R~~TION - R00m 420 Office Memorandum Of Hee 01: State Ai.d TO, Hunicipa! Engineers DATE: July 15. 1985 , . , ",Y FADM, Gordon .p~t.I."tor PHONE. 612-296-9872 .., " , . SUBJECT: Contim.lalt ion of the 5-Ye2.!' Construction Program Reporting Tbllil Muuicip51 Screening Committee at its October 1981 meeting passed the diTe~th'e folhid 3tates that; By Janus rr 1. 1.983. each municipalit)' shall submit a revised 5-year c~~ttruction program Which has been approved by their city COlOl\'~Lt. This prcgl."sm shall include sufficient proja.cta ::~ l:t:iliz;e all exieting ~nd anticipated fund s ar.cruid.% ~~i.ing the life of th~ program. The progr.am will be updated. a.t 3-year iute~als and a revie~ made at that tlJ:le to asc:ertain progr&.m implementation. The r~quit~~~Gtm ~ere reviewed and it was determined that this inf~rmation h . ?aluable to tbe L~er.~umbered Construction Fund S~bcommittee, as well &8, usefal to the City Ensineers in making the city councils more aware of Statp. Aili fund in3 . To comply witb this directive, each city is requested to submit & council-appro~Ed) itemized 5-year program of propo3ed construction by priodty. sho~:ii1g the termini.. length, e8timate~ cost, and type of anti~ip&ted projects on tb~ enclosed forms. Include on1 v State Aid expend itl1res in this -"'- report. This submittl!l1 should be return~~ to the District State Aid Engineer by Aug. 15. 1985. We .are retU1"'Il i ng a copy of your previous 5-year construction program to thosp. dtiea whicb submitted a ceport in 1982. These ~eports could be helpful in preparing tbis year's submittal. Enclosu.re: 19'1!.2 5-Year Construction Program . 'liJIlIl:ttlli;:LX!IlII!rJll..n_~lBQ~~_~..MOlI__~~ ]L~~~~ ~-.--~1~-~~~~- 1 "'" ~ "- I. '(]lNl CI rAL $ 1'Xl:-:.-\ 1'1 srr~:> r ';'t";T~'>l . ~:-':','ar '::"-,nsr.ruclion PrCi;.~r.J~ Fot' .. ~ip.e_J.(1 "!~~_ . (StJt~ Aid Sx~end(tures O"lv) REVE~lJS -- Present St2te Aid Construction BalancQ June JO, l~ >> ~. $_77':0, J So":.? ':st ir:lat.ed Annun 1 ::-al1stcIJC:: ion Allotrn-cnt $_.,~~~..J.. Il.).o X 4 - $-_9nJ 5~o :~"t imated Total SU::0 Ai'~ AllctMQnt for PrG~',r.]mmin.-; Purp~ses ) ~, <J~ 9'1.1 'I ESTI~fATED EXP~NJln'R'::S ~ -- I~imated Year . of I State Aid Z"<'lend i ture .,.. ., projeet Jescription E:xpenditure LCr.:11rtl -- ~ 1985-1988 Or. I Constl'uct R.R. overpass I rror.< 5th St So MS I Construct s idewa 1 ks To 400 I south Reconstruct roadw~y I ; LLongth :;di~- C & G & surfacing 1 S...L.J.Qo..ooo - , Li ght i fig - 1986 On 7th St.So.(t~SAH 347) Reconstruct Roadway cromJuth Av~ So{~S8HJf6) C & G & Surfacing To 9th Ave ~o Stol~m Se~'{:;r $ 50 ~ 000 I ,- -~ .. ~--.. Length .125 I - .. - . I 1986 ! '.In ~~l.th Ave. ( MSAH 349) Reconstruction I Fr0r.l Stat~ Hiqhwa.y #7 _ To CSAH #3 d ~ 35,000 r.enzth~833 - 1987 On 11th Ave So MSAH 3~6) Traffic Lights From At 5th St So MSAH354j To ~ 40 ..000 '" -- Len~,th -0- I + ~- f 1986 ,:n 11th Ave So(MSA~346) Reconstruction Fro~.6th St So(MSAH354) C & G To 3001 South $ 40,000 Lcn~: 1, .057 I " 1990 er. 17th Ave (MSAH 34~ I Asphalt overl~~ I cro~ st. Hwy #7 140,000 I To _C&..Ed #3 I 1> I L ! -. j I 1'"- I Len;:::, .833 -- --_.,_-1-.,___.~_" I . ! _~~._,~.-~_-.-v.&P'':'''...,.._..~______~...-...-,.~~.....~,.h..--'_''-''''--''-.'_.'..'_''.__,__... 17-----------------~..~T-'-.---,..---.----,,-<.---r------------..............------.----o.u~"r~~,~------- ~_ 1- _~~._--....~~---'~'-'--~" , :0.. I ~.,...., MUNICIPAL STATE..AtiJ STREF.:T SYSl'E~ . 5-Year Construction ,program Fur R_ H~P-i(f NL (State Aia Expenditures Only) H.EVENU e -~ - Present State Aid Constructlol'1 Balance June 30, 19-1.f =: $ 7f1.a ...lR'J j Zstina::ed Annual Construction Allotment S 23tt...i!f-R X 4 = $~..fJ 3stimateri Total State Aid Allotment for Prograrrl'ning Purposes $ ~" 'I? _ 9'1':' , ESTIMATED E..'{p~r:)In:R!S _ r...... .... ysarf I. Estimated of State Aid Zxpen~itur~ Termini ~oject Description cxpenditu~e ' - - 1986 On Smetana &gad Completion of Smetana Frcm~..lJ:th. Ave .5.2........ ~_ Ori ve To West C i tv ~ imit~ -- $ 100 000 Length 375 · ." . I On I From : , To_ _-- ~ I TOTAL $lJO~C!OO Length_ _ On Fr~ ~ --... ~ $ Lennth -- a l I f On _ From ~ ~ S ~n~th I . -- I On -- From To .$ ...__ -4 _ Le:1gtr: j - . I - I ~n L I trOD ..... ""'--- ~ $ I Len~''''::h v- ~ I b - .---- -- L,-- - _ _~-J r<<i~~' ~~~~~_~~3Yo.'l_"""""""--"""""---~~,~<,,_,,~.""" ______.... 4",-. ...\ ,,.,,."'..' 2,.,0"",: --- --w:::wlT.7 -. ~-"'lMW_r~-.m.._' _ . ":'-:,..,~_ ,':..;.,..,.'..,'.'.., ; u TI - K' Cr-r'y OF HOPKINS August. 1, 1985 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT r---.-..-.--------.-- --~ CONSTRUCT 6' FENCE ~ ") 29-39 & 101-107 20th Ave. So. I I Purpose: Recommend action on an application for- a Conditional Use Pennit I by Hopkins HRA to construct a 6 foot high fence on the south I property line at 29-39 & 101~,1O7 20th Avenue South. I I I 1 (. BaCkground: See attached Staff Report to Zoning and Planning Commission. I Jim Kerrigan spoke for the Hopkins HRA and explained that debris blowing on the adjacent property has been a problem and also . that children have been climbing in the pine trses. The owner I of the property di~ctly to the South expressed his support for .~ such an improvement. RecO!1mendation: The Commission recommended approval unanimously with the folt~- 'i~ i rig condi t ions: 1. The fence is to have screening material ~"" " addedj 2. The fence is to be knuckled both top and bottom" J 1 - . -",',' l I I I I i I I Community Development Analyst I I l I r ! I I j I I I I 1 j ---.~------~~-----,--- c: :)tj r) (~II ~'r~r\i 11 rl "-- - -..., .. --'-~---~._~---....-/ . J I ~ i'aIII__ ~.--..........- .---- -. ~~1&__: -all&lIIliii_---,- bB-'Uw-Y...... '~,~,~19i1 _ ... ,,-- -~--- I '.... . . July ii, 19155 Ca se No: 85- 36 App) icant: HRA Location: 29-19 & 101-107 20th Avenue SOiJth Reques t : Conditional Use Permit to construct a 6 foot fence. STAFF FINDiNGS & COMMENTS: Anderson 1. The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Pe~lit to construct a 6 foot fence. The property is located at 29-39 & 101-187 20th Avenue South. The subject site is zoned R-2. 2. Ordinance 427.11(8) requires fences for special purposes and fences differing in construction. height or length may be pennitted in any district in the City of Hopkins by the issuancE of a Conditional Use Permit approved by the Zoning and Planning Commission and by the City Council upon proof and reasons submitted by the applicant and upon the signlng by said bodies that such special purpose is necessary to protect. buffer or improve the prerni ses for which such fence i sir:- tended. Such special fence permit, if issuedt may stipulate and provide for the ..,. height, lQcation. construction arid type of SpeC"i4l fence thereby permitted. 3. The proposed fence is to be put on the south 51 de of the prQper.ty and made of ~.''''' chain link. 4. The proposed fence has been requested by the adjacent pr'operty owners to prevent trespassing and to keep debris from blowing on the-ir property. . ~ ,,-,- .,_. ~ ~ ...&.iI._~Ift.IIM!Il!.~_~~ "_~."'PM~_.. _~~-~w--~ _ __ .__.rr..~ ,_ ~~~~..------- t . .1J -.. .. J I '-" ~ ~ ] 1 . (" (''I --.:- - ~ - -~ I C,.., -, --- ~ I !'I ',J, - n ,-- --. !'. -- ~~1.1(05fr: 1 ;l:: ;L J \ I I . - - ---, (92) ':) I -... 7. , I;) , , ,10" '<I r--- 3 I.L....--I fu--- t-.:~J I ~ !~ -- ~ ,.,~ 6_ 31 I ~ .. 2"'~! ~~~<l.!'.._~ -.' . 'I;~~ ((S). ': ! (' -- 25 -< i(I07) '7 C\ 0) ~ -', . " :b . , '" '1~4).e~;,:t: :-;i> uo<i,[i,' ~-~ ......I~ '. \ I" - . - .9 Ii--:: ;~.. -,,;-- '0(9)1] .. 1- ,,\7) :.>L /. ..--,- \\I I.~,' - - - -,-' .- I1'J \ ~ \ ,1--. .--- 1195) 10 1<J f- """, f- 10 ~'O- \<tll'l~ H(8):ft96l'Ii-21c\; ~--~1416>i1 -"';l J I~- --.-- --J I ..::.l .':S-. ~ ffillr - - \ C) ~ J~~: E-~: ~~) ...1Jifi2~~1 L_. . ~2~!M, ( ,12 ~ , i PII'). 'I AOII/l~ r41! 11l~1l~ (lIll' I'~ r . - ~.\ .,I9,IBI IF'16i" 1413, I911BI17{6 ", 14! 13 i9 " . ~ I I r I 1 I . . I I I 1 . I It!''l: ' 'c' . L j_,.J . UlW. wL...~ ~> ,_.-'~ ---. EXCEL5TO,Y- ~ --"l j ~I 1--' - 20/2 ~\: ,~i ,1'0 f (II' I I ,...,.- I I .~~ , " ,,', . ,...... I I .' .':"; j 1---:-.... i i I ~j '1 ~' ' " -.;;;.: I r;:-;- .~ I "I~l:~ I ~BI:~~~~J I ~~,~ (1.1 4 I Sr'l!;' i. _ __ "t f\i ....'. - -,--' .' (.,. 1- -- "-- -I r- (10) /(96) f ~ -., ~ I 120/ 6 I - E- .. .. ' .'. 1- -- -- - h (8.1 , .. ... : .', () <) ". J " ..,.. I 1 I'..) .... '5':;," J ,'- - 8- ~~ i [(54) 0 ~ ~ c- ~J , ~l_, . 'u_, --I! ~.', c ~ I~ I~, j L'<Z;i_. 9 .~ >.. i ,. .", . 1- - -. - ! (W.. '''''1 C:l ' i~ 2 (.411 (5) ~ I~ 13..' ;~_,.._,,,.IO ~'~I (IE) ~I- ..../ "'" (l.,~ -- - I '..---, I --', Ie) -\ ---, L' (23) II I ~ .::: l't J" A (79' (6J "1 ::r-., I., '. _~" ~ 12m . ~ I~ '" -....: ' ~ lr) '-. "1 Iii; _"in) (.7)-'- .. O)I~ I (79) A ~ r: C _ _ ::::......... r ~ 11(72' J~;;- ;;. I ~ D (7BI (7)--~ r:-- _ ~I ." lit) . f---=-.a:=: ~:::t: !..... ----.- ~ IO{11} " , ; _~_ C --I" !~ ~ (8) ~/ j~ -~, Ll liB) fr. II ~=;;:I C) !:; (!2) I (.) - - -0;1 ~ · (70)/ '- " ~IC\J'-"': .3:J ~-_....:.~ .~-- -...: j. J : ~ (II}O) ~I I~ 8169'1 ,..-_--'-- _ __ _.J I__ I COUNTY ROAD t.....-..-~~~~. w .II - ! . ! I @ ./"--.... ( 44) I I I .... / ......--....."" i ..___._. .._,_._.,. _"__,w..~~__.-.......-.._..~,__._..-.....,."""~"""",,,,._~~ -~~l~~--'-__"-__,,,~ ~-oIl .._~""""":ZI ilM"'~ ...II~I ~~- v- r .....T- _ _.....-..- _ ~ .,~.~ - -- ~ -( ..~ . .. VESELY & MaLLER . PROF'CZlsro,....... ',_ ,4l.o;!~ oel....TlON ATTiJRt'.'E'rS AT LAW !3UITE 203 NO~THWESTEHN SANK 8IJILi:lINO HCJPKIN5. MINNESOTA 553"13 ~O.I;"I-i C. vlttili:LY (611Z1 9~B.76:1!i ..!lUI Flit A. ~ 1I..1.;: ~ j'uly 31, 1985 .ll'RItM'f A, "1'EI"'1I: III 01" aOU,".~L K, MAXF'I r:I..C O-rTO To: Honorable Hayor Ii: Council City of Hopkins Re: Pe"tition of Lester Maasch for side-yard variance b5-35 Trli G is to apply to your body to appeal and override the action ta.ken by the Zoning and Planning Corrunission at: its . meeting held J'uly 30th, 1985. Because the Fire Marshall is on vacation this week and it is doubtfull that we would be able to make some othex' inquil"'ies deemed necessary) before your next regular rneet- ing(Ausust 6th), we would request that this matter be cont- inued until your meeting August 20th. - I ,/-----, , / " /./ -- >-.;.. ,,,Re~pectful1Y, , 1/ ." ~ .- i /'.,'" ./' '~/ /::'" . .'. -: :"1 I ' . I, \,', r . . ., ; . . ,/~,. f ~/ /' y/ ;' . ," .'tI"!/... I -f' ".' ." _, L: '~~ri.~ld Otta~A-t~~r~ey for Lester Haas ch 210 Farmdale Road, Hopkins, Minnesota . --"._.,-,_.._-- ....---..:II---...__...._.~-~------_. .__,_ .. J MJP_ -". ,., "',-".' . -11-' -~-'.~ .....IS'j 'F!f_JlfPJ~/~-::,;:....;,' .'_'" .' ..~: I CITY OF HOPKINS Io~"..;- ".. .. 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS" MINNESOTA SS:W3 612/935-B47"1 .--- ,- -- Well #l Repair PURPOSE: To recommend City Council action on an expenditure in excess of $10 r 000 on Well #l. BACKGHOUND: Attached t.o this report is a memo from the Public Works Depart- ment regarding the breakdown of thf' pump at Well Ill. After calling emeI~gency service to pull and inspe.:t the p urn p , j t-.. was I determined that significant repairs were necessary. Typically, with an expenditure of this size, the stafr would , Secure three Quotes and i"ECOmmend approval to the lowest bidder. In this case~ we required emergency service which dictated the selection of a vendor to effect a repair. Staff cid request est.imates fa.. V8r'ious types of repair/replacement. The Public Works Operations Director and Water/Sewer Superintendent r'ecommend alternate #1 (attached), 1n the amount Of $11s198.00. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend t ha t the Ci ty Council approve the expenditure of $17,198.00 for pep a i l' Of the pump at Well #1. The expenditure is for repairs identified as Proposal # J , present.ed by Layne Minne~ota ~nY. 0 apP~nager I I -! I I I I c " Rept # 38 .-.-l ..--.---------..-.. - OUnCI, --. I ~_._. ~~ ~~~M ~- ----. -- -~'.. 1"-"'" ~ "., ..........'. - ,...J ".1rI'. '''40 -_ CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FiRln .""l(i!:'t o.;OUTW "nON&; P~:l'4 I ',- HOPI<IMS. MIN,..,f;SOTA l'.Jea.t3 INTER-OFFICE MEMO To_.~ra1g Rf1ppJCi~ Manager _ DATE_~8us_t 2, -19~ F'ROM Ev Beecher/Public ~orks OperatJons Director - Mike Lauseng/Water &,'""Sewer S-upt. SUBJECT 'oJEI.L llO. 1 ~BREAK~.l!."N ~ "--- -- ~- One July 12, 1985~ we found No 1 Well running but not pumping. We were unable to detel~ine the cause. Layne Mimleaota Well Co. Emergency Service was called to pull and inspact to d~termine the cause of the malfmlction. We found that the Static Level in the Well was at'143 feet. The criginal Static Level was 58 feet. The setting on the Well is 140 feet. Thia dxop in Static Level caused the pump to break auction. Layne took the pump to the ahop ~nd tore down and inspected . and reported its conditvu r:-o us. Mr. LSllaeng and myself have also inapected the equipme~t and concur that the ~epa1ra are neces2Jary. The attached aheets ahow the different possible routea to go. for its repair. It i9 the raccmmend9t1on of the Public Works Operations J)epartment" that we go with the proposal marked No. 1 for ,'17.198.00. Included in all three proposalB is the coat of labor and material to lewer Well setting CO ISO feet to com~en8ate for the drop in Static Water Level in tbe Well. This work should be started aa BOon a$ possible in case that the dry spell returns or their are other breakdowns. A pmint of interest~ we pumped 91 million gallons of water for the month of July. Thank you for your consideration ~f this matter. .~~et!Cher j . ~ j PC @-e.e."1tL.,/ Hike LauB~ ./I~~I=:r v -I I I -- '.~j ~~L~l ~~.~Iili'BIi~..__.___.__ ~. __It!- 11 - ...,' ~,... ~.-., _.,; ,,....,,....,,. ~ .,--. '-,ID.,.I!i.:..~' I~.'," , - ~------ _l'U'TilII\li-6V~~ "'U '''" ~ 1~'. .,... '. .;._ ." "'..., Co " . ~.' . .. ,,,~,,,,,-,....,,-,'.. ! I .~ I I - . I I . PTopo..l , 1 Por. the Repair oi well , 1 .' Cl~an ~t~r. bake & revarnish. replace bearings & test. Clean & Paint Well Bead, replace Stuffing !ox Bushing, gYGa8~ ~ pscking. $ l:1lU.OO 2 8" ~ 5' ColUllrt Pipe T.C..322 Wall $ 490.00 1 Sta1nle.e S:eel MOtar Shaft 7.55.00 1 Adjusting Rut 74.00 11 S.xlOi Int~raed1ate Column Pipe T.C~ .322 ~all 4,760eOO 1 8wxlO' Suet1Mt ripe T"C. .322 Wall 218;00 'I Cut'bm! StHl 1.5"xlO' Shaftl! 76.5.00 ... 1 Carbon StMl 1.SnxS' Shaft 158.00 18 Rubber Line Shaft Bearings . 360.00 4 8ltxl.Sit Sp:tdfJrJa :U2.00 1 Rroru:C!! Stra1i1er Ccme 611.00 . 4 Carbma. StMI 1 e S!i CmzpJi egg f IV. CO $ ~ 9.831.00 Three Stage L4Yne PumPi 900 Qpm 8t 219' Total Head, 83.5% !ff1ci~t 60 BP. $ 3!1 4()" . 00 rul1~ iu~ct, repair and reinstall pump, motol', and check operation, $' 3,960.00 Grand Total 17.188.00 . . . I ;,) i I ~~_J!/~~~~_"_"""- -.... ----...---~~..,-,-_._.. ,- "I.\lBI I1J1iM,_, -"""~ ~....~W- !.m.~Co1il......,- t..._~~..._ ~ ~ .: " I I I . I ~ropo..l , 2 For the Rep.ir of Well , L .. Cl~ .otor, beu & rev.rahh, replacit bearingM & teet. Clean' paint Well .ad, n1'1&C8 Stuffing :Boz Bush1.nS, grea.e & pacldt1g. .. $ 1,211..00 2 au x S' Coluam. Pipe T.C. 277 Wall $ 424.00 1 Stainless Steel Motor Shaft 753,,00 1 Mjusting Nut 74..00 " 11 Intermediate Column Pipe T.C. 277 Wall 4tU4~OO 1 8" x le' Suction Pipe T.e. 277 lisll 189.00 3 Carboo Stell. l.S'txlO' Shafts 765.00 1 CarbGn St~l 1.S"x 5' Shaft 188~OO 18 Rubber Lin. Shaft Bearings . 360.00 " 8" X 1.5" Spider. 252.00 1 G21vtni~ed StrAiner Cone 328.00 . 4 C4rbcm StHl 1.3" Couplift'8 80,00 , E, 7it4h 00 Three Stage Layne Puap !f00 gpIl at 219t Total Head, 83.5% Efficient 60 ... $ 3,407.00 P,,,,\11, ins~~t, repair .and rein8tall pump, motor, and chQck operaltiouil . $ 3,960.00 Grand Total $ 16,107'.eo .2.n.!:1,^!!~:!. p~. ':-stagep 900 gpm at 204' Total Head 79% Efficient 58 B?, .!M.; . $ 389.00 . I I I . I ; j I I I i -~~,' j I __~___~~__T~~_~__ . , ~ - I I I i . I . P~opoaal I 3 ler the Repair of Wall I 1 CllUD IlWJt01", ~k. II revarniah, t'flpl4lc:e burifAga & tut. CluA & p41nt Well HMd~ replace Stutfius Box Bushing, greaae , packing. $ 1,211.00 T.C. 277 T..C. 322 "$ 424700 ~- 2 8't X 5' Cahan Pipe T.C. 277 Wall $ 490.00 1 St~1nle8B Steel ~~tor Shaft 755.00 755.00 1 Adjusting Nut 74.00 74.00 17 8ft x 10' Intermedillte Column Pipe 4,114.00 4,760.00 1 8.11 :lit 10. Su~tion Pipe 189.00 218.00 $ 5,556~OO $ 6,297.00 11 1~5" x 10' Stainless 5tH! Shafe. $ 7.429.00 $ 7,429..00 · 1 1.5" x 5'! Staf.nleu Steel Shaft: 266.00 266.00 19 1.5u Stamleu Steel ClJu~lin&8 855 . 00 6S5cOO . US 8.ubb.e.:r Line Shaft lSea.dcgs J~ 0.00 360.00 4 8" ;x 1..5" Spiders 252.00 252.00 ;, 1 G&lviniaed Strainer COM 326.00 328~OO OR 1 B~onze Stratn2r Cone '78,,00 678.00 _.0...- $ ~ SUR TOTAl. GALVINr.z:ro: $ l6,,257.00 1(;,998.. 00 SUB TOTAL BRONZE: $ 16.607-.00 $ 17 . 346.. 00 - Threa Stage 'Layne Pump 900 gpm at 219: Total Head, 83.5% Ef.hcient 60 UP. $ 3i'+07.00 $ 3.407.00 ~t1onal Pum~ 4~8t~ge, 900 gp~ at 204' Total He&d 79% Efficient 58 HP. $ 3,796.00 $ 3,796.00 I Pull, tnspect, repair and reinstall pump, motor, and check operation. . . ~ 3.960.00 $ 3. 96C?e.O.Q TOTAL GALVINIZED. 3-STAGE $ 23,974.00 $ 24,115.00 TOTAL BRONZE, 4-STAGE $ 24,713.00 $ 25.454.00 . i I I i .~"~~"""""-~-~-"-"",.,""~,,-~ ---~~. ---. --- -.,..- r----- -~__m__ JIlL'" -;:r . ..... 10 , ~,. . ... .... ---",",' ~~ .....' CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 fiRST STREET SOUTH HOPI<INS. I..lINNESOT A S53<1J 61 ~/9J5-847<i C 0 U N elL M g M 0 RAN u U ~ -------------------~-~~,---~~~~---~,.- ,.._~ --,-- ---. r 0 : ~'1 Cl V 0 r & C i t Y Co lln C i 1 . / F'rC'tm: cr"aig fL Rapp, City Manager rYf'4- , " Re: Hopkins Theater Tower request Date: August 3, 1985 -------~-------------~..-------_._---------~~~-~--------------------------~------ Attached for you information is a request from Dick Stanley re~resenting a group that has been organized to save the Hopkins Theate~ tower. Mr. Stanley's letter requests a variance from the . he 1 g 11 t 1 i m ita ti. 0 n S 0 f the Z 0 n in g cod e in 0 I'd e r top 1 ace the tower> on the NOW Sports building located at the southeast corner- of Main Street and 5th Avenue North. In additiorJ, he is also requesting that the City provide e storage area for the tower once it is removed from the theater on or about August 14th. In addition, he makes reference to public fu.nding to be involved with the project although he does not specify an amount. Staff has informed Mr. Stanley that, in order for a variance to be processed, the request would first have to be referred to the Planning Commission1 with subsequent action by the City Counci.l. He understands this and i3 requesting to be placei on August 27th Zoning and Planning Cornmi~sion agenda. Should the City Council decjde to ass.i.st the If Save the Tower" effort by providing storage space for the tJ\>1er, some type of hold harmless arrangement shouJ d be negotiCited to protect the City from liability resulting from damale to Hie tower while stored on City property. The most logi,al location to store the tower, should that be the Council deci.sIon, is the old landfill site. Pinally the City Council should attempt to determine what level of financial support, if any; is heing requested in order to put I the public part.icipation request into prospect.ive. As of t!'1is ',:r'i tin g , ~11' . S tan 1 e y i sun a b 1 e top r 0 v ide mew i ttl a S oe c if i c . request. However, he may be able to do that by TuesdE.Y ev~ning'l Until additIonal information is prpsent~d and the Planning Commission has revie\-ied r,he proposal, no recommendZltioil (In the variar!c.e can, ob'/iousl'i. be given. With respect to storage of t. h e tow '" t~ , s t a f f r e corn men d s t hat t. h e C 0 u n c i 1 r e qui. r- e a h old harmless rHtt"e9"ient tc:; pr0t~~ci. t:](? City's interest during the . 11,', Fquar (JPP~J!1\ ",,'( f'::P)(~!()rfP L~i:'~~_;;;;;~~~~~T""'..._'__~_. ...~.=..-::.::'..::'~~-~~..,. ~:tl.:.nl.lI~_!A;W't_...~"".......,_'__m______ :.}i _0 -_~___________'---"--"-""'A."","""'-_",_,_~ ..~ ..... . p€I'iod of storage. Finally, shcuJd you consider' a request for' financing assistance, you should he cognizant of the fae t that any SU C 1'1 gesture will be pAid via 1..0 i; e City' e contln;?:ency fund, as rW)!1ey has no t been set aside fo r' an e x: pen d i t I.! !' E' of this type. . . ~All.J.ttjl"~nnlY!fi.~JiSt~~l JIIl~~ .M ~ '. . .... . -. August 1, 1985 CITY COUNCII~ Hopkins City Ball Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Dear Council Members: We are requesting a height variance in order to place the Hopkins Theatre Tower upon the Now Sports building located at the Southeast corner of Mainstreet and 5th AVe. South. - . We are also requesting a storage area for the tower once it is removed from the existing structure on or about August 14, 1985. The luration of the storage is yet undetermined as it hinges upon public funding and structural conditions of the property owned by Now Sports. Thank you for any consideration you may render. Most Since-2fY r \,~ o -L6, (f)~~,c'7 :-;::',:J DICK STANLEY P.O. Box 203 Hopkinsf MN 55343 935-4238 . iJd~~~JI11fll.Wd*mlCitH~ . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING . August 20, 1985 ~..~~..r' '~::~'-~~":';~; ~~~i!:~:J~;; .....:;....~.:~f.t~..i~. '.1",~ :.1';~ ,Jf ~"!:,-,;:.~:". i;;~"r.:;~. ')....7;: ~;;~. :;.<~'l~~;...~.,_.~.\....,.... ~.z ':;';A'.t _." r - ~~ anaJ ~__.llJlililllllm\_~ _ _fiBlG""";,, ""_ __ - ~ -. "'.,- .1'...111_"...... .__....' ," ,'. ""'1' :.;, ~-'_. .."-:."._'~II":f::-..., 'f'.j' _:'.'_: . "'- . :.... .i..rc, - , '''"~: ' CITY OF HOPKINS ~ -~& 1010 ~'N$T STREET OOUTH HOPKINS, MIN~"ESOT'" 55343 ti 12/93s..a4 7" August 14, J 985 VARIANCE FOR r ~- LESTER V. MAASCH ----" l I ]~,4 Al then Lane PURPOSE --....-..0.-...-- I To provide additional infor'mation on an application by Lester V. Maasch of 354 Althea Lane for a 5-foot sldeyard variance for construction of an addition to the existing ga~ag€. BACKGROUND I See attached staff report to Planning and Zoning Commission. K. M.axfield Otto~ ~epresenting thE: applicant, explained that the applicant has more than C'!,;.;; one car and with the addition, the applicant will be able to park two cars in the gar-age. He also expressed a concern that there are too many cars p~rked en the street.r which makes it a hazard because it reduces the street to one li'lne. Mr. Otto further. stated that similar v,'lriances have been g:t'::mted previously in this area and prqvided three n@nes of individuals he believed have received variances. In resear(;hlng this matter, I found the follows!n: 349 Herman Terrace - has no record of a variance granted and no record of a building permit issued. A picture of the house in the file, taken in 1958, shows a two stall garage. 341 Heman Te~'r'ace - A variance '....as granted to extend the garage four feet ~th~-5I'opet'ty line at the shortest distance. The setback did increase at I the back of the garage to 7 feet. The adjacent house was 9' 6" at the shortest distance from the lot line. Both lots are not square, so the setbacks did increase at the back of the buildings. The adjacent house had living space next to the addition. A third name was given with no address. The records do not indi~ate that this person applied for a variance. With no address, it is impossible to determine what lot was being refer~ed to. It Dhoulc be noted that at 353 Althea Lane, a variance was denied to build an addition to the existing garage. The additio~ was to be setback 1 foot from the rear of the garage addition and t1,./O feet at the fr'ont of the addition. The adjacent property garage is located six feet from the property line. RECOM!-1END p.:r ION I The Commission de~ied the variance on a ~'i to 1 ;,,'ot.e. The variance was denied because of lack of hardship and fire danger. I i11'~kOO)) Council Rept # "18 ~) ~-. - , " .: ~..;rr::---- \~: .-' ",: _ P::~ =.,i.:.:.:; ~_ - 'M.I'IE ___,- - --11III al1alVr,~~ . . .. __"" ~"""...~_" 1JII1H .~ --- --- r If _ .~_'T'~ .Y . BRUCE C. DOUGLAS AnORN.V AT UlW . 120 EDINA BUBINE8S C~''ER 6OO'J LINCOLN DRIVE ED!NA. MIN:r-.'ESO'i'A 6UUI OF COUN~.I..: n:U!fOHONa Gt..NN P. ."UOIR August 7, 1985 (0 1 ~ iJ3e__"'" THO..AlII 1", 1.0WE: Mr. Jim Kerrigan Director of Community Development Hopkins City Uall 1010 First Street South Hopkins, MN 55343 .] 350 Althea Lane '-'J Re: Hopkins, Minnesota Block 7, Block 3 "Campbell Addition to Hopkins" Dear Mr. Kerrigan: '. .- I am writing this letter to confirm the content of my August 6, 1985 telephone conversation with Nancy Anderson of the . Community Development staff. At that time :r informed Ms. Ander- son that 1 represent John and Debora Cappola. On July 2, 1985 Mr. and Mrs.. Cappola entered into an agreement with Elton J. and Betty L. Jacobson to purchase from Mr. and Mrs. Jacobson property located at 350 Althea Lane, Hopkins, Minnesota. It appears that either immediately prior thereto or subsequent to the date of the purchase agreement Mr.. Elton J. Jacobson signed an affidavit indicating that he had no obj6ction 'j to a requested variance which would permit an adjoining property owner, r.es Maasch, to construct a two car garage on Mra Maasch's :1 adjoining property. If this two car garage were constructed, it I is my underst,anding that tLe garage wall would be but two feet from the property line and within seven feet of the bedroom of the home purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Capp0la. At no time were Mr. and Mrs. Cappola advised of the existence of such an agreement by Mr. Jacobson. Indeed, Mr.. Cappola first became aware of th~ pendency of such a variance request during the evening of August 5, 1~85.. Please be advised that Mr. Cappola in no way endorses or consents to such a variance. Mr. Cappola in fact believes that the construction of a such a structure on the Maasch property would substantially diminish the value of the property located at 350 Althea Lane, Hopkins, Minnesota, Bnd that the pendency of such . construction substantially diminishes the equitable interest in .: . . , , ...,-, ; . - -:.~, ";,.' ,...~ ~.:~ - . '". .-- - '"'- ,-. -::-' ~ -~.- -- ~ .LJ_--" J ..----.....u.llt~~..,. Mr~ Jim Kerrigan AUQust. 7 I 1985 Page 2 that property created by the July 2, 1985 purcha.se aq~eement. It is my understanding that th~ Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission has anticipated these concerns and on July 30~ 198.5 denied Mr. Maasch1e request for a variance. It is also my understandin(,. that Mr. Maaach disputes that denial and, with the assistance of his legal counsel, Max Otto, has chosen to appeal that denial. I was advised by Ms. Anderson on August 6, 1985 that this matter had been initially been scheduled for hearing on that same date, but at the request of Mr. Otto has been continued. When a new hearing date is set please advise me so that I may have an opportunity to appear on behalf of Mr. an~ Mrs. Cappola at that meeting. As an alternative solution, it might be preferable to simply continue that hearing pending resolution of th~ unfortunate situation created by Mr. Jacobson's actions. Mr. and Mrs. Cappola at this time desire nothing more than recision of the July 2, 1985 purchase agreement and return of their earnest money. If Mr. and Mrs. Jacobson are amenable to such a solution and if Mr. and Mrs. Jacobson are willing to continue to reside at the premises or are willing to assume the risks of reselling this . property after Mr. Maasch has completed his structure, then the Zoning and Planning Commission may wish to reconsider their previous decision. In any event, my clients are unwilling to acquiesce to this proposed construct. Thank yc~ for your attention and courtesy in this matter. ~~ ~- / _... _ II __ Glenn P. Bruder GPB/ch cc: Mr. and Mrs. J'ohn Cappo1a Mr. Max Otto Caldwell Banker Realty ERA M. B. Hagen Realty . ..,---....'.- I . --~~..---~-- - -~ . . . EMERGENCY 9-1-1 HOPKins FIRE DEPARTMEnT NON-EMERGENCY . (612) 938 -SS85 1010 FmST STHEET SOUTH. HOPKINS. MN 55343 Augu~t 13 , 1985 Les J. Maasch 354 Althea Lane Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Dear Mr. Maasch, Per your conversation wi th your' neighbor, Fire Chief Hugh Strawn, I have reviewed your proposed garage addition. Speaking st.r'ict.ly from a fire safety standpoint, the Fire Prevention Bureau woul.j ::o!J$ider a garage wall l~ss t.hall three feet f f'om the adjoining property line, other than a street 01' aUey. to be in violation of the Minnesota Uniform 3uildirJg Coder . unless that wall was protected. The minimum fi.re pro tee tion r.equil"'ed for a residential garage wall, less than three feet from the property line, is one hour f i r'e resistant construction without any openi(lgs, such as, windows~ or doors, on that side of the building. Plcc::.:e keep in mind tha t these are minimum distance r~;qui remen ts, pert.i'lining strictly to f i t~e separation. I have enclosed a copy of table 5a of the Minnesota Uniform Building Code. The r. i gill i g h t e d area pertain to you (' particUlar situation. If there ::ire ar.y questions or there is anything else I carl help you ~~ i t h , please feel free to c a 11 . Sincerely, ~/1l?~ CeClrge ,J , 1-j 8. ~ d a l F'i : ,', ~'1il r t; ~'I ~11 ;, l~ .: "I' . Crti i g fl ,I [) P '. , . . " .. '"., <, /':. , ~ } .--~ , , ~'" 1.",' !. -~ ~ ~ - ~~~- IoI";'li . . \ l , \ TA811~ HO. 5-A-WAll AND OPENING PROttCTlON O~ OCCUPANCIES vAea'l ON LOCAnoH ON PROPERTY - I rvPES II ONE.HOUR, II.N ANO " CONSTRUCll0t4: For exterior wall and ()~r.I~tO~.t!on of "'1:,8 II OM-hour.1l4~ and V h'l bulllt!ng8. ~ tabfit bltlow. ElIc.pil-:m, to l!mltet~r. for 1\tpeCl II Onff-hCl'r, Ii, .nd .,. V construet ,as provl~ In ~k,"" rn '. 1t!9, '903I1nd 2203 .pply. For 1Y~.I. II.F.R., Illlllnd IV conlltructlon. see Se,:tll);'!1 1803. 1903, 200..1.nd 2t03, ~ [~I'QU~- __~==-~_. ~NP~_oroct!J!lf<~'--"-=-~=_~, AV; ~St'5~OF T' ~IH ~l 0 EXlEllIOft 'M\lJ.S EXlll!l!Ol'1 ~ ]I!: -4 I II ~A"t:'~"'IY .""", w,.. · ",,- ,,' ""=1""' I.." "r I roo ~ m"" :1 I in i . b\l,lliir.g NO! <lpVlt;;.b!c(~ ~:oo. 602 .ud 6(3) , t-AIl} buih,hr.g ,w portion (If a building na"ln,!: an aS~~lbly room ;;"ilh an --- I --- I lX'<.:upanl iuad ,.f lcs, Ih"n lOon and a \la~C ! NO! pt'r.nincd i~s\ I I l.t-Any bu,ldi"g ur poniun "I' it bulldl~g h~vin!1 a~ as'>Cmbl)' lU\,m with an 2 hou['j ks\ !II..., 10 Ihan 5 feel I I ~euilznlload urJOO Of more wilhout i M;lge, ",dudmg ~ut;h bUIIJmf' I feel. 1 hour elsewhere I ProIe<:leU!cs;. Ihan I ":>.cd for ed1Kalian~! pllrpe~~ .t!'d not d.tssed a~ a Group E 10 ftel i ^ (of Group B. DiVISIon 2 Q,;CUp;lrn:~ ~I~= J.-Any i>uiiQing Of roorrioa of a buikJiog hal'ing an asscm~l}' room ...ilh an 12 l!,'ur~ Ic~~ lhall 5 fe~l. No( permitted less lh~';- . 602 occupant (Qad of le~s thall 300 WilhlJUI a \lage, Including suell buiidin&. u!oed: i hOl.'r less than 40 feet :) f~t I I I f:l\' etlolcational ~s ltnd nox classed ;;s a GI1l\!P F. or Group 9, Di vision Prol:~cled less than 10 fCl:I I ~ 2 Occup"""y - -- t ~ 4--S!adiums. reviewing slarnh an6 am;!5o{~!lt park s(J'Uelures not inch;ikd I h'Jur les~ than 10 feei I'rlJtccted ~ss than 10 feet ---t will.in other Group A Occupam:ics !"::-CasoJi~ 5e;"'o'icc s!31ioos, gll.ffiges wile..., IlO repair won is done except -r--- I I exch.mge of ?'I.ns ,and I!IJIIDleoancl: reqLmi!lg no open flame, welC:mg. or use I i I B I of t1~mm.,bk hq;,;;<h [ I I ^ >-."".JJc. .... dip,", ......"'""'.., "',,". " oc'"P~"'" .fI," ,'" ". ! N~ ,,~,..'"~ ,.... j ::.ec: aL-o I\'h?!"'U~.md teU!1 st<'l'CS, office buildings, prioling planls. ,m'Jnlclpal I I hour less than 20 fe~ feet I Section I ?Ohc~ and fin: Sliill!<ms, factvn~s and worksh<l\Y.i usIl'~ malenal not h!ghly I PrOCecleQ less llta:l 10 feel 702 l11!ml\~hte cr: .:ombusti\7lc, stonlge and sales rlX>nts tor comhusllblc good:;. j I . p:Ur-.! ~~ wirWut bulk h;;ooling I I Duiklil!gs or J'Crtion. of t.otlH'.l.ir.gs havi"g rooms u:;cd fOr c(!iJeatio..al J .,. pu;poses, bcyood lhe 12th grade, with les; than 50 lXCUp....g in any roo~ 1 J 'r 10 . ~ ICt)n(/nu~d) . ~: : ...", ~, 0.; '.-:." . . ',_",t ,~< ,~ . ~"." '<" ' '\~ . - ..i ." ..-.-. - o. ~ ..'-..... ..... 0 ~~...... ......- ....; ....~. ',. ':' 01 ~. .-.". .,,"., ....... .,,?-: ..,:,..... .... .""'. , ??;0o, . ~,...........~~Il'liM:I!IiUIIIf..~ )R~LIlEJ.I~~_~.~.-a._w........,~,s ~-------~-~~ ~~- \' g TABLE NO, $-A-ConlinlJl'td '{' . TYPES \1 ONt:.HOUf\, II,N AND Ii ONLY )10 ,~__.__._._.m__.............."......_._ ....- -.-.-.-, -,. -..........-. ...,-- - -, ...---.-..-.-..-....--... . ... . ---.,..... .. "1 : mu; RII:$I1lT","CE Of 1'- , . (IIi~l'fl...aii~' --, . l OflOlJP !x;8CIlIPf'lGll ~ OCC\I""NCY , I[~TI[RiOH WALLS U rEJllOfl WA.Ll!l i H ,\-Alfmft h~;;~.tr\ ....h".r-;~:.;I~a-;;w";~-;~d~;.:-;~~;:l;~'~;;:;,:;;,-.;.:.,;!f'dt~;,~;-1" : r...ur ~,:::-~o-;.;.(iI~~,d.~~I~ f'.:-;;;;~~,~jk~~~11 Ie " mainl~nanc:e ,,'qcirin~ na .'p..'!l (!al11l', w~ldlng, III Ih', uV' 1'1 highly I I ~ i~C'1 j ,on, I flJmm.l'>le Iiqui.;h i I !'r\>ll'llC',II,~" !11;tn 20 Icel Ol"'n rar~Hlg ~ar'IJle"I\'\ll "'<julll'Il1Cn''', See S'-dlnl> IlYJ l ! I: I ~ rl_~IPO~~n___'__------ _~_._,_____'u___~___, +..... - --,. . . +-- .-....."- --..~J ~lcc planl", p<,wcr plum" pur:'I'In~ planl', cold 'Illrage .md l rl'.IIllClIe, ,llhHlI IC" !Iun.\ k.'l I :-':lil 1,<-m~IIIc'J Ic\~ tn;.1I i I F-<lCIOnf'~ <lr.d w'a~~hllr' \J~lng r;(1l\cllmt>mllble ar.<ll\(.mc\pl,)"w n',ltcrlo1l, I' feel i Slorare End ~dla n~'m~ III ",l!l<:(>mbu~tI;,ic ~lOd OU!1c'plmlvc 1Il~.cno1b ' ~rll-^nYbUlldlllg UM:.d for ctlu,ailllllal p\ltp<~~:-;-lm~Jgh Ihe 12lh g-;;k-b;:-5I:-,;-f-~-h<;U-~'k"-;h4-;:~fC~I'1-'~;; Pcrm;lIedk~~h;;;-i Is I I ,nore pcr.."ns (;;r m''fl: I!:l:r. l2 h"ur~ i"" wcd. or foUl !Iou" III .any U'le ja~ i 1 hour \c~' Ihal' Hl leel' ~ kr.1 I ~t~'J~ 2-AOlY ty"ildmg \l~d for cducall<m~1 r'.JrT'n~\ !hrnugh ,h.:: ! 2lh grade by lc~, i ' Pr;"cclc~ le~s than! 0 r:;.07 than SO pcrwns fm more Ihan 12 hnuf!; per ~cek or four nOllrs 111 anyone Ja;.' I I lcell _ ~Ar.y buildi~g used for day,earc purp<>>oCs for more Ih~~~hildlen _ j __ -L- .--J H I-Slong!:, hlir.d!ing, us.: ;>r sa" of hazardous and highly tlam:'labit ,.r 1- I r " l~rl(lSiVe mal('rial~ other than flarnmable liquids ISee alw SeWun 9() I (a" I See Cnapl~r9 o'nd .he Fire Code I :.ce ~,50 D" , \ l Secliops !VI~IQn \, _' I: 902 a:,1.l 12 SlOr.lge. ,handling, U~ Qr sale of Clas>cs I: II and 11I--:' liquids: dry r.1eal\ial.' 4 hours Ic~, :han 5 fect:T No! permined !ess :h;>rt ~ %3 I p,lants uSillg CI<l5-~ L 11 or llI,A hqu~d~; pilm' stores w'lh bulk h:mdlmg: palni :'. h.)u!S le~s th~~ I~" I 5 fcel . a soups and spmy-palnttrlf rooms and shops [See :;bo Sectlon 901 (a), II fr.et, I hum k5S Ihaft ,0 I Ploce,ted k~s than 20 !eel I ::D Di~'is;ulI 2 j . .reCI J I: I : >--WoOih~l'rkir.g =~:ahldllnelltS. PI:o.nin.g mills. box faCI"ries. Dufling: rooms I I ~ I \ for lire-rebUIlding planls <lnd pick ing r00m,; sl':<Y,ls, faclOries r.r wareh<;u~s . \ r wnert loo~ corr,blj,lible tiben or dusl are mal\!.lfa.:tufed, proces~d, \ 0 I L I generated Of stored; and pi~'I.efjnishJl!g ml>m~ i z: _ ! 4-R(f'alr garag::..~. d:mified as a G:uup B, Division! <kcupancy _--1-.-.] ~ 'Gf'JlJp E.. lJivi,iuns ~ and j Occupa!lcies havir.~ an oo;cul'linl k.ad (>f nO! 11\Ql'e than 20 may halle ~)(lerior wall am! opening proleclinn as requj~ed f(Jr :2 GroIip R, I)ivisioll 3 Occupancies, M i (I ( ~ . I '. ~.' .... .;.. ..... 4-. . '...... .... " .-,;,;.~'.'. " ..' ." .'., _ ~.., "~',_.. ~. _' '.' ,_~. '.".." .. i I. .... ~ - = H i :S-Aircraft re ail ha.o = --:-------;- ,'. III IC~I.) I .' ,P ~ '. .____ -Cour Ie,s 1.hafl ffi kel I Pro:(:cl~d I,,,~ man 60 feCI ~ ! I 11-- ~.llrsenes for, Ihe fulHI01e care of cOIIJr;~t1 ur;de" tn, "<~C "f ~i ~ lcach I 2 hour> Ic" than 5 f~ g I $"e .ho j "'coll'lmodalmg n,lOl': Ihan ft\.c pc n<1 0 , I . I I hour ,.bc"-Il,,,,- I Z I ;:;",.iorl ~ospllab,. sa:Ulanums, nur;in;g home; ....llh tlVrlambulalury p~Hcnu al"J ! I , If1O.:' I ,mlllar build.ngs {ca;;h accoll1m,-"j~ling more lhail ii,'e !,<,ll>Ilnsl I ' Not pcmllned less lhan 5 I , ~ ,~ leel [ j ~_ ,. . ' _, .'. -'~~-T--'-'-'-----~---- . Pr"""e.! ks' linn lO feel I_Nursing h.lme, to, ambu!<llory pallen's, hl'mes k,r c!oddren ,,1.\ years nl ;;~c I ! h.,u! ! ~r llVt:r (each :K'cumm(.xI~t~~g iildlC l~~.:n f! \,'l" pt"r;.;ons j " , ! i "---~kl~,ai ~o~~llals, .menlal ~alli1J.n.um.., J,III~. rmlln~, rc. fonllal,>ne,md ' = :lOU" Ie" lh,!n 5 kel, : ,'-:"1 rcrm.'I.[~Cd Ie" than 5 III ~ I LUI Hlgs "here pcr,onall'~rtJes ollnlnal!'s arc qmrlarly rc,tramed I hour cI,ev.o<:re I feel. pn~ecl~d les., [h:>.!\ ' --L- I' 10 feel M~ ! 1-'7iva1e gardj.:<:s, carp<>rls, she,1,; and a~ri,ul:ural hUlldlnf' ----.!. :h(~'J! !-::5, than ,; ft:e.~~P;;~itlcd I;~s '9n' I (S~e ~Iso Sec""n r 101 . Djv~\ion I I i illl may he prOleclca ,;r.1 r feel 1<1 > I I I Int. e)(teno; ,,'i!h : f ! ' rn,u;:-rEaJ:. ,approved fl~; i I i ,c l-hr.Hlr f~f(.rr;...I~tlyC : . ! r--~-~--~~--~~---._----'--_.__.. _.." _. _" ,i,:'l"'I1::-'[('U(II,-ln): l J I ~ ---Fr:n.,:~s '.l\cr h ft'('( hl~h, lanL.. .Ind ((11,\\..'1,\ -- H -~._- -~ - _._~~~ ,"Of 1(.""UI II",' l~"-r l'lr-:~r-:-"-\I'-:r~--.--i , '_________~_~~~_~, " l .. I,..J ':. \,.,. _1-1.'1.: I Ii S<.}.I~!Sll II--~~'>ICI~ JnJ oIl'"n"\l'OI \wuws ---.----.-, '.. .. - ,- ... -'- ..----I-;~!;;-I:~::;;;;.;~e~I-! -S;;;r;::;:;;~~I~<! k" ihan l , , '._ _.! _~~\JnJ~:._~_~_~~'_~~~_~~~_!.I_f1lII~il(1.J!ln~IIl':lrc:lhJ!lIiJI...._.r'HIIl\, .. ~ 5f~l.t I 1 I Sc<l,..n ~. I .-. ---'. ,,,,,,,_u~___"n_'n'_ - ....... '''10'' i -D."1.'llrh~'" ..tr,d lod~lnl! rhl~j\,."" I ~ ---~I --..,---.-;-.---,--.----~---.~:J '\ . ' .... u::-' - 1"'- T~ '- - '1"-..,..,..----- -~ _'_ _ --- ,,,u, t'" ~11JI1 1 ,n'l I~ :,,,, Il<'mll!leJ Io:~\ ihJn L ...u..~1 (.'-1.-' ,,~,., I ("'......'11' (.-Y.:ll( I . "!:" l::;'.'!!~;_;;I-;-ul',;:~~-::~~-'~;:r~I-;(-~:~I:.~I-;9-- "~.:..- - ____......_._u______.~_..~__..____~___ :\{)TES: I ~~ ~l.t: S',......llt1n ,i;i:'l-i r\H ~:-!........ ,11 ~dH... ,(;k'l.h"~ .lfhl rt.."luffl.'!1H.'nh ~li'.~'rH\~ t"'~~c.:r:Lj,I.'\' ,)1 \1[\t'1\J11~\ r~'rlllHll'u H1I,:-.;h..r:'jr """J.il, :~I r~\,lt .~,h:!ljoI11~~,r~'~(ri.~.;,Il~Ii,"" '~'.... .h.:f'{...'.=. ',:r.,lll-: (l..'~tll~,~il~'. ',l'l,l rl,t\t.''''\~l (,'n"lrlh.!;"I~ , ll"r ~,.I h 1.1.....,'~: '1111.,-,10. .-.,11,J" ,I'ILj i~d..;':" ..~,I~' 'I."; P.I~! 1\ ~ i":'f i Jf.......ri!~l~.... ...h.dl~' ~':l\'t", l!.',.r h., .i t~t\. ,!"'l'~~jj'-ll\ h,I\'J1~ ,I ~hrl'~' t\!ur~h...-h"',~f ~IIl' pr\lh.:l.tI11n l,tlHH' '{J . > "or H' '~~~-~ --~ ... . V-~~~- It!l.._ -_."1l.~rd" -!!!ilIlN T ~ ..... '>l,: CITY OF HOPKINS t010 fIRST STREE,. SOUTH HOPI\INS. MINNESOTA 5$343 61219a~7" ~'Ck9rOUn:- HOPKINS RAILROAD DEPOT On Murch 28~ 1985, Bill Graham, Hennepin County Regional Railway Authority called regarding the railroad depot located on County Road #3. He stated that Hennepin County had told Hopkins that the County would fix up the building cur~ rentiy owned by the Railway Authority and used by the Chicago and Northwestern railrnad to house their resident agent. Mr. Graham said that the building is in extr~c;nc1y poor condition. There is essentially no foundation, the bricks are falling off the walls and the chimney, all windows and doors need replacement, etc. The C & NW Railr'oad has petitionerl the State of Minnesota Transportation Regulation Board to remove their resident J agent from the building. If they vacate the building, Mr. Graham said that the .1 County, having no use for the building~ woulrl have to board ~? the windows anti dcor5 to prevent vandalism. The Council's response was that they wanted the building to remain in active use for the present with the possibi'lity of fl.Jture use for Light Rail Transit. They felt that if the Co(mty was going to withdraw from 'its original position to rehab and maintain the building, a local group may take it on as a project. This position was relayed to the County on April 24, 1985, On May 6, 1985, the Hopkins Jaycees sent a letter expressing their desire to rehab the building 'if they could use it as a meeting place. Bill Graham no longer works for Hennepin County. On August 12, 1985s I spOke with Ken Stevens, {phone #348-4182L an assistant to the Hennepin County Administrator, regarding their position on the Jaycees or a similar group to rehab the building. He stated that a representative from the County would be I present at the August 20, 1935 Council meeting. He stated that the County would not fix up the building nor participate in the costs of rehabil itatioll. He said that he felt the condition of the structure would preclude a group of non-professionals from proper rehabilitatio~. The County would not accept the possible liability problems which might be associated with the Jaycees doing the wO'r'k. Ana 1 )IS i 5_ I After one week of ca11ing the Chicago Northwestern Railroad, attempts to I get a supervisor to provide entry for an interior inspection have been unsuccess-r ful. As soon as an ;n~~~~~~:P:~:~ '~ C::,Pleted . fir..1 ,nspection reporJ I I ~_"____."""~"""',"~---""-__.'~r""_"""""~._~,___.,,__. ,.- .. . Council Report #40 Hopkins Railroad Depot Page two will be provided to the Council. An inspection based on the exterior inspection h: Hopkins Railroad Depot There appears to be very heavy shingles on south, east and west sides. The significance of this being possible overload on roof. The north side of roof has rolled roofing. Roof bows on east end. ihree feet up from ground level, the brick veneer is very loose, mortar has severely disintegr.ated and could very possibly cause a structural problem. There are large cracks in various places~ especially around some headers. This could be caused from ground settlement and could be a serious structural p~oblem. (CanSt teli unless walls are opened up.) The chimney is in bad condition and should be replaced. There is no cross ventilation between ground and floor joists which could mean deteriorated joists. The size of the structure is 24' x 771 or 1648 square feet. Inspection was made on August 13. 1985 by Firmus Opitz. . Alternatives It is difficult to present alternatives u~til the interior inspection is completed and some cost to repair estimates are made. The Hennepin County representative will provide further information at the Council meeting. From the limited information now available, it would appedr that a rehab would be a major undertaking and probably beyond the ability of a community organi- la ti-on sllch as the Jaycees. Recommendation I bel 'j eve that the Coune i1 shou 1 d 'tIii it 011 a dec is i on until furtht'!r i nfor~ mation is pt'ovided by Hennepin County and an interior inspection made and repair' -~ cost estimates provided by Firmus Opitz. When the information is complete~ a ~pecific listing of alternatives and staff recommendation will be provided. Respectfully submitted, /~ / / r / if- ~_/ \/ ,-- ~_$;'- c ~ , j, ~cott Renne . I i , I 1l..._..,.,.___~~~....,"\I~~~~:~~......:J:::...~~>-......'--<l.~~~~~~- " ' . ~ -- . '- --~~~~~ 7 j~""""- -~.__.fiA':llm !.- .. v'17!1l---- - --')- - --- _ -- __.8 ! I~ .... ~ j U' ' r. 1 r~ :) R j~ I L ;< tJ i\,:: J ~ ;"; () T , I 0,-...1 I --, i , c~ .. ~ ....-'~.... ,~ '\ .,.,'.'l , .. : ~ ,/1 'c'j ! "..J .,1. r ~ h . ,~: _,..,;.>'61.~Jiil;..: VIEW FROM NORTHEAST VIEW FROM NORTHWEST 1 ~---- _I i I I I I - I I I ...<, i 1 , I /-.: -'" r, i I ..- J. ~ _ ;., Ff~:ut~ (, i - ~.~ t.I~~ Ie . ;. I'~ ;-;? )~.~ :t,H'J[S r ~.. .' ,...-... ~ .... " . .~~r~;~~~~.g~.-l<!~~ I · v~ I ih ......" . ~.. .... '---~ ------. .. H . . jI _ ..',..,",. . -- _..~-- T~. C'TY OF HOPKINS -~ :-_-c::::~:: ~-;;;= . .-::~. ,.,0 FtR8, srREer SOU,,, --"". . ,.' ... HOPKINS, MINNESOTA !=534~ . S~ti9:;5-6474 r Recycling -", - 1 pW~pOse: The purpose of th f s report I s to summar I ze the results of" the Hopkins Pf lot Recycl.flg Program and make e recommendat i on as 1;",0 what, I t= anyth I ng, the city shou j d do .... about recycling in the future. Ba~round: During the last rew years it has become apparent that the cost or garbage dfsposal wrll be f ncreas f n9 every year. At one time Hopk ins had 1 and'f' f II s within the ctty i imfts. Now garbage must be transported many miles. The existing landfills are becoming Full and the sf t i ng of' new 1 andF f , ! s j s along and d i ff feu. t p,'ocess. LandFills are also not as environmentally sound as they were once thought to be. LandFIlls can and do poliute groundwater. in order to avo i d us, og l andF 1 j 1 s Hennep f n . County has recent) y agread to Fund a garbage burn! og . ,I -Feci 1 ity. All of these 'factors wi \1 make the cost of disposing of garbage more and more expensive. I During the last legislative ses5ion the Minnesota J Leg.slature passed a bill concerning solid waste management. Thfs bill will aFFect Hopkins in severa' ways. , i ) Tht':, b 1 1 l all 01<45 Hennep in County to adopt an I ordinance requiring separation of mixed municipal waste. I 2) Provides that aFter January I, 1990 waste disposal I fac i lit i es in the metropo 1 i tan ar-ea may not accept mixed muniCipal solid waste. One method to reduce the cost of garbage d i sposa 1 is to reduce the amount Or garbage through reCYCling. With this in mind the City of Hopk i ns undertook a one year pi I at recye I f ng proj ect dur; ng the summer or 1984. Three f"lundred homes in the Park Va I ley ne i ghborhood part; c i pated in the reeyel ing project. These homes were given contain!':i;:; for paper. glass and met~l. The materials were pjcked up twice a month by U.S. Recyco. I -l -Council Rept # '1 _ ) ~--~---,- r:- -- ~~~lRU.lr.. ~!f~ ___ ...._..,.. .. ---~~~......_JI!I~~ _rr__.- _..-- -~---.--l ~'", t r I i . The participation rate for the pilot project area averaged 341.. This compares favorably with the participation rates of other cit~es In the metropolitan area. (See page 4) . Our~ng the pi lot period ., tons of glass. 3 tons of meta I , and 26 tons of newspaper were :-ecyc 1 ed . The total cost of the proJect was $7.350.00. The bulk or thl!:l tots I , $5.000.00. was a one time cost for containers. The program official !y ended July 31 . 1985. w~ have extended the pilot program untl I October 1 to allow time ror a decision on the future or recycling in Hopkins to be made. The cost wi i 1 be $300.00. AnaIYsf~: What would be the C05t of' implementing this system city wide7 The cost of containers wou1d again be the 1 ar'gest expense - approximately $44.000 it= we gave 3 containers to each of the households served by Waste TechnOlogy. The cost of' pick....p would be approximately $1,,500-$3,000 per f!";Onth. . Where would the money come 'from? Hennepin County w! 11 provIde 'funding of' up to 50", of dfrect cast. outlays or $.25 per household. whichever ~s greater, to mun i c t pa \ f tIes Tor recyc 1 t ng programs such as drop-ot=t= centers and curbside recycling. The Metropo 1 f tan Counc i I wi 11 pay $.50 per household for local programs, plus $4.00 per ton of recyclable material co 1 1 acted. There ~s also a gnmt program which might provide some funds. Alternatives: Do nothing: To be rlonest this is going to be the response of' a number of cities. We could wait unt i i the County either takes care of the problem or forces us ~o address ft. City wfde curbside recyclfng ,4. ) With containers: This is the most expensive option. It would also make the largest impact.. B) Without containers: This Is what M i nneapo 1 f 5 and Richfield do. The advantage is lower cost. The possible disadvantage is lower participation rat.es. EstablIsh a drop-oFf" center: This is the lowest cost option. Cities with drop-orr centers report that they tend to be self supporting. The cost or operation is covered by the sa 1 e of the materials. The disadvantage of a drop-off . center is that it would have the lowest participation rate. ..., L Iift--.~. 1t;l~~~ ---.-.:1- .....- ----..-_-~------~- - ----- -- ----,~~'~'. -,-~ ----.---:- --..- . - -- - ~.~...--- .... .. . Re~~ndat ions: [ do m.lt be I i eve that the City should do nothIng. Th~ Metropol i ten Counc I 1 wanted the legislature to instItute mandatory recycling. C!tles were able to postpone this step by aSking 'for t I me to allow voluntary progrSffiS to work. It is up to the cities tn the metropol ftan ar~a to act. [ recommend that we institute recyc 1 i ng on a cft}' wIde basis. I be 1 i eve that we should purchase conta'ners~ but only for glass and meta\ . Newspaper can be easily bagged or bundied. Buying only two containers per hou$ehold would reduce the capitol cost to approximately $30,000, half' of which would be paid for by Hennepin County. Half' of the annual operating cost wi 11 be pa i d by Hennepin County. A port Ion 0+ the remaining cost wi 11 be paId by a yearly subsidy of $~50 per household by the Met r-opo 1 I tan COI.,mc i I . The remaining annual cost of $6,ODO - $15~OOO could be paid From the general 'fund or by adding $025 to $.50 per household per month to the present garbage bill. . We should also examIne the possibf! fty of having Waste Technology bitt the cIty by weight rather than by households served. We would thereFore be In a pcs(tion to reduce our cost or garbage d i spOsa 1 through a successful recyc 1 I ng pr(..")gram. Should the Counc 1 ! agree to this reconvnendation we wouid prepare RFPs 'for purchasing the containers arld picking up the materials. rhe Cnunc f , w f 1 I have an opportunity to approve or disapprove the entlre program after we have receIved the bfds. r 4v/& _ LI i m Gene 1 liE! I Adl'ni n i strat I ve Ass i stant 3 . -.----- I ~~~""---"'-I'"~ ~<~~ . , .---.. OTHER RECYCLING PROGRAMS MinneapolIs HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: 170,000 TYPE Of PROGRAM: Curbs'de/Alley FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION: Once a month PARTICIPATION RATEl 201- FINANCING: General f"und Champ 1 In HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: Unknown TYPE OF PROGRAM: Dropof'f' FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION: 6 days a week PARTICIPAT10N RATE: FINANCING: General fund Columbia Hetght.~ HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: Unknowl"\ TYPE OF PROGRAM: Dropoff" FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION: Saturdays PARTICIPATION RATE: F I "~ANC JNG ~ General 'fund :. Ed t na HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: Unknown TYPE OF PROGRAM: Dropoff' FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION: Wednesdays & SaturdaYs PARTICIPATION RATE: fINANCING: Recycl'ng receipts, donations RichField HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: 11,000 TYPE OF PROGRAM: Curbside FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION~ Second Saturdays PARTICIPATION RATE: 15~ FINANCING: CitY9 Hennepln CtY'J COBG St. Lout 5 Pa:rl,( HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: 12.000 TYPE OF PROGRAM: CurbstdeiAlley FREQUENCY Or:- COLLEC1ION: -twice a IllUflti'-1 PARTICIPATION RATE: bU7. FINANCtNG: $5.00 per refuse bill Shakcpee HOUSEHOLDS SERVED: 3,000 TYPE OF PROGRAM: Curbslde . FREQUENCY OF COLLECTiON: Second Saturdays PARTICIPATION RATE: Unknown FINANCING: City, DEED gr'ant ...- --...------.-.....- , ~ _____.aIIIW .Il ~----- - ~~-"---~' '-------~ '----- ~~------ I ,. , ., I I I' . " CITY OF HOPKINS Date: ,qugust 15 j 19(j5 HOPK.1.NS JAYCEE I S '.-... Clli~ PARK I-rrKEY R1NK -,;:... ON SALE 3. 2~ BEER LICENSE I Ft.t'fUJ("SE: The purpose of this report is to recarrrend Council a{"uon on -a. -~.....-- reqtl€st for a 1 day t.erlp:)rar.l on-sale 3.2% Beer Licel'1Se. BACKG...~: 4Plicant: Ga:r:y Roger Knox, Ibpkins Jaycee's Date Iequested~ Septerrber 6, 1985 I.c:.caticn : two locatiOP.s betvieefl 9th & lOth on Mai.nstteet:: I P.Easrn : Ftl.lld raiser for "Save the ToNer" ccr.mi. t~ and also Mainstreet dedication. Sale to .ana , at midnight. , P.ecord check clear on a,..t:plicant. and. organizaticn. ~ ~IDA1'IOO : Based on infonnation. provided Cind records check, Polioe... . - tepart:ment sees no reas.')n to with.;old ~'1prova1 except that I cnly one site be approved. f I I ~ -;e~ Wat'ren R. Neff I Sergewl.t Hopkins Police I:ep.:Lrtrnent , I I -. ~ C ounci I Rept # 42 _J - ~~. . . " - -- ~~~~--~=~--------- - ~ Ml""''''I'~ ..........,.. CITY OF HOPKINS -,-;~ . August 14, 1985 REPORT ON RESOLUTION NO. 85-3209 1-~--"'~--'-----~-ARtSOLUTION ORDERING AN ENGINEER'S-'-- I ~[PORT ON STORM DRAINAGE AT 305 - 21ST AVE NUt NORTH PURPOSE: The purpose of t~is report is to suggest the necessary legal steps foauthor'lze the instatllati Oil and assessment of a portion of the cost of the above project. i Bil.CKGROUND: The petitio~er, Steven Roberts~ 305 - 21st Avenue North requested I City action to correct a st~rm water drainage situation on his property. r ANALYSIS: The Council, a fter several meetings and 1'epOt~ts by the City Engineer~ J [ office 'and the City Att;Jr'ne)' agreed to reconstruct the eXisting stonn dra'ln. I This action was taken at the August 6, 1985 meeting. Irr order to be able to as~ess a portion or the cost of the project. a resolution ordering an engineers r2p~rt is necessary. Although thB project was discussed in detaii this step was Fi~t taken as it was not determined until the last meet- ing that the City woul~ be involved in the project or that any portion would be assessed. ALTERNATIVES~ (I) Not adopt the resolution. The City has made a committment to~participate.(2) Adopt tIle resolution. This action wou1d be consistent with th~ action taken at thi! All/gust 6th meet; ng. I RECOMMENDATION: Adopt i{~s~l)lLJtion No. 85-3209, "A RESOLUTION ORDERING AN 1 ENGINEER'S REPORT ON S1lllUli DRflINAGE AT 305 - 21ST AVENUE NORTH. I J I }ot_} .~~. I ! John J. Strojan, ity Engineer r I i I I r I f I I I I I I l I I L___.._~.______...._~ _ ( , ~ ) !.J f~:~,i i P f-\ f) i f1 4/~ . ..._.._J .-' r '="""!'"--....,__ ".O'._m._._.'. :.. IIII!l . _ --- 1I111Ql1 'K r-- I'I~,-- E_~__'lfIl'l!/llNi"ltl~~ . . CITY OF ~OPKINS . Hennepill County. Minnesota RESOUJTION NO. 85 - 3209 A I~ESOlUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF ENGINEf.RfS REPOqT ON IMPQOVEMENTS l~HEREAS a v~tit i Of! has been recei ved requE:sti ng the improvement of Third Street North by the installation of stann sewer thereon and the assess- ment of benefitting property for an or a pOi'tioli of the eost of the improve- ment pursuant to M.S.A.. Sees. 429.011 to Sees. 429.111. as amended. NOW, THEREFORE. BE it RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS 1/ MINNESOTA, that the py'oposed improvement be referred to .John Strojan, City Engineer, for study and h~ is instructed to report with all convenient speed - advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improve- ments are feasible and as to whether they should best be made as proposed or ':. in connection with some other imp~ovement, ~nd the estimated cost of the improvements as reco~nded. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota, this 20th day of August, 1985. J. SCOTT RENNE, ELLEN LAVIN, City Clerk Mayo r JERRE A. MILLER, . City Attorney ~ . I ! - .. . .. ~'~--Pl' --r.I.'.....' "III""." "'.>-.".",,"" '~~ __JD - - --i "'lI1!_ ....~;..~..-I_)-.....,~._I..~i,:,..'.lj,.'.-'l'.. :.'~;"~r-'i"\"\'''''H''''''';,",-.,.,,",,'I.~--;;;./;- '~,t,. . -~"-,,-._,~._,,........,----.._~ ---- - -~ ~ ~~_l=_~- --all -, ,,,ft.~~r~~lf_~ CITY OF HOPKINS ',":"~:..._! -,~ ~ . , .'~.. ---.;;...-~ ___J~,<~ . _ , ' ~ --. "-- -~, ~':. .... - '~. ~~ ---.::., . Augus t J,4, 1985 REPORT ON (--~--,._~ ---- RESOLUTION NO. 85-3210 ------ , ORDERING I~ STORM DRAINAGE AT 305 - 21ST AV~NUE NORTH ! PURPOSE: Ihe purpose of this report is to provide the second legal step in the legal process necessary to order in a public improven~nt project and to J enable the City to assess a portion of the cost to benefitted property. BACKGROUND: The adoption of Resolution No. 85-3209 authorizes the prepara- I t'lon of an Engineers Feasi bil ity Report. I ANALYSIS: The Engineering Department has studied the drainage problem at I I the abOVe l<<ation. We have determined that the best solution is to replace I the cxistin~ stonm sewer tile with a new inlet and larger line in approxi- 1 mately the same location. The estimated cost of the construction is $3800. 1 The portion of the cost for restoration of the ground surface is $400. If the City is to install and maintain a public storm sewer as proposed, the property ow~er would have to grant the City an easement for construction and Inaintenance. Al TERNATIVES-: (1) Not reconstruct the storm dr'ain line. The City has made a tentative committment to reconstruct the 1 ioe at the August 6 meeting. / (2) Reconstr~ct the stonm sewer line and improve the drainage from the lOW spot. This cction is consistant with the action taken on August 6. 1985. J I I RECOMMENDATI()fl : We recom~nd for Council consideration that the Ci~y recon- ! struct t.he storm sewer and pay for this cost from the Ci ty stonn sewer fund I and assess the cost of the surface restoration to the prcperty owne~ at 305 - 21st Awenue North. The above recommendation is consistent with past City policy rcgard~n9 installation of stonn sewer lines. It would be neces- sary to adopt Reso1:.ltion No. 85-3210 "A RESOLUTION ORDERING IN THE STORM ORA! NAGE AT 305 - 21st AVENUE NORTH". I I I ~}'~r I J I John J. Stro:ln, City Engineer I I I I I i I I I "'-- ..~__o. --- ~4 (-.. , :: tJ r '! ".'~ i i h' e ;) T :t: 45 J .'-.... '__.__.~,h....---~._~_ ~-~"'~~:.:~T~~lt;:':r"rif~tr/'i~~~', ~.. - ~~~_~_n._ ~O__ t I :,. ctrY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County. Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 85-3210 RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS WHEREAS, pursuant to Resoiution No. 3209 of the Council adopted August 20, 1985. with referencE to the improvement on Th;\"d Street North by the installation of storm sewer thereon, and this report was received by the Council on August 20, 1985, showing a total cost of $3800. NOW. THEREFORE} BE IT RES.OLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the report prepared by John Strojan, City Engineer. .. 2. That John Strojan, City Engineer, 'is hereby designated as the Engineer "~_'I for this improvement and he shall prepare plans and specifications for the. making of such ir~rovement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins~ Minnesota, this 20th day of August, 1985. J. SCOTT RENNE, ELLEN LAVIN. I City Clerk r.!ayor 1 1 JERRE A. MILLER, .i City Attorney I . . ---"--.-,--.--.-. - -- __ ~ .At:!w:B5IRI - -- j - ---'IWIE:ftIl!I --, ....- --~-- - - ~~- ~"---- .... '\ - .~ ... CITY OF HOPKINS BRUSH/TREE REMOVAL '~ -, EOUIPMENT PURCHASE PURPOSE The purpose of this report. is to recommend Council action on a req\JF.!st by the Public Wo rks De par tmen t to purchase a non-, budg~ ted I piece of equipment for use in tree and brush removal. f BACKGROUND ApprOXimately one month ago, the Public Woeks Department besan a serious evalua tion of the mar;power and eGuipinent devoted to tree and brush removal operations. Based on a concern by the City Council earlier this year that diseased tree removal was so expensive, the Public Works Department undertook a pr'ogram of hauli ng away diseased trees from private property once they had I bt'!en taken clown. Although this program has reduced some of the -I costs of tree removal to the residents, it has severely impacted our abil i. ty to do other important street maintenance activities. After discussirl8 this with the Operations Director, I indicated that .i t was admirable tObNtempt to assist residents by hauling away their diseased treesr hat street repair and maintenance had a higher prior'ity and should not suff~r as a r'esult of this new pr~ogram . At this point, .I requested information relating to the cost of tree all d brush removal operations. After doing some preliminary investigation, the Operations Director infor'med me that the C i t:y c 0 u 1. d purchase a used Pre n tj, c e loader ( a combination truck and loader unit) that ,IOU 1. d sienificantly reduce the manpower' and equipme!1t required for tree and brush removal. The cost of the unit is $14,000. Both the Oper",tions Director and tile Sbop Superintendent inspected the vehicle and feel that it is in good working condition. They estimate a I I wo T'kirlg life Df approximately six years. Purchased new, a J 1 Prentice loader would cost approximately $80.000. I I [l..NALYSIS I l I I I ~_ttached to this report is a memo f r-('iil :::'? Public W01~~j I D epal'tmen t rega r'd ing the comparative costs of tree ~~rt D:-'ILSb I alJu I removal under OlJr' current system v;;rsus removal operations with a I Prentice loader. Currently ; t- t3kes 1 loader, 2 dump trucks, a I -'- ~ brush chipper, and five people t.o effectively pick up and hA,ul l:r'ush t h r 0 U g [1 0 U t. the year. During the SprIng and summer mon~ C 'I Rept # 46 - OUnCi _ ro_____. -- "-.-,~ ~ ~~- ,~~--~-- -~-~~ - -1 .~" "t Page 2 "Heport #85-'.6" . When brush roemoval is heavy, j t takes more than one day to clean the entire city. Over the wintel~ months, obviously, . t takes 1 _' less time, howevei' conditions 2ren't as ravor'able for removal. The crew spends approximately seven hours per week over' the course of one year' removing the b r' u s II . In addition, the crew spends approximately eight hours pe !' week over a 5 month perjod hauling away diseased trees from City c',.jned prope,ty. Again, this takes approximately a 5 man crew, using the same kinds of equipment minus the br'ush chipper. Using a Prentice loader, we will be able to I'educe the numbep of people from 5 to 2 and significantly cut our manpower costs. At.tached fat" your infol'alation is a summary of the salary savings, based on conversion to this type of operation. As the attached inforrr.at.ion indicates, the S 91 ary savings alone (not including benefits) are prcjected to be over $17,700 in the first year. Adding in benefits and wear and tear on other equipment, could signific8.nl..ly increase that to tal. In SUIl!mal'Y~ the Public Works Dl2partment is requesting a $14,000 non-budgeted expenditure for a piece of equipment t.hat will have an estimated life of 6 years with a pay back rate of less than 1 year, based on labor and equipment cost savings. ALTERNATIVES . The Ci ty C 0 U I} C i 1 has the following alternatives with respect to thls request~ , Do nothing. Should the Council follow this course .... . of action, the city crews will conti.nue to r'un tree and b ru s h rernova.l oper'ations as they have tn the pas t. 2. Eliminate b ru s h hauling as a service and contract for the hauljng and removal of diseased trees on city property. By cnoosing this option, the C 0 U n c i.l would be able to allocate the brush and tree removal manpower and equipment back to the street department in order to insure that street maintenance proj ec ts are corr,pl eted. 3 . Purchase the used prentlce loader as propo.sed~ This alternative enables the city to continue the brush removal program and turns back manpower and equipment to the street department to help meet the 1!'" needs. ~~rOMMENDATION I recommend alter'oative # 3 . Although, normally, 1 am opposed to . non-budgeted put'chases of equipment, i t is apparent that the savings in both manpower> and equipment lt10uld be s i g n ,i. fie ant by ma\-:ir\g ~his purchase ;ind changing o u r~ opcratio!l. AlLhough the Council could redirect man po ',0/ e r' and equipment. by discontlnuing the b !'U s h removal r;rngram and contra.::ting for public tree hauling, the result is a reductio:: in servJ.ce and the ~ ~~- . "''lJIIlSIIIII:- ... ~~ tIJ- 1 ~ - 1 ~ _\.",:, '~''''. .,' _0', ,. -..-- . . " ..! - - ~ " ,./.~ <;\ '.. '4 .-. ", . elimination of a popular and !.lseful program. FinallYt the pUI~ch;sse of this equipmenL will r€st.:lt in the elimination of a budget i."ec;'les t in 1986 far a Cour ' .... one loader that would have 01, I ~ been used to upgrade the treE' removal operat.ions in the Public Wo rks De pa r' tm e n t . Although 1 t may :1ot have been approved, that piece of equiplYlent would not have r'educed the manpower and equipment commitment l.Je currently have. Funding for this purchase, if approved~ should come from the Gene r-al Fund contingency. 0-( craig R. City Man . .~ . .. - - CURRENT OPERATION --------.............'------- Bru~_~_auling 5 persons e 7 hr-s/day ( aved x 52 wks ::: $20,140.72 Tree Haul ing (city ownedl 5 person @ 8hrs/da x 20 wks ::;; 9,116.80 Labor Cost (benefits not incl) :: $29t857.52 PROPOSED OPERATION ~l"ush Hauling 2 person @ 7 hrs!da (Aver.! x 52 wks :: $ 8,401.12 :r r.e~ Hau li n& 2 pe~5on @ 8 hrs/da x 20 wks :: 3.692.8(; _________-.--r - Labor Cost (benefits not incl) :: 12~O93.92 . 29,857.52 CUl.ren t Cost. -12,093.92 ProposE'ld Cost $17,763.60 S A V I1l0S - 1st . '.~iIIII'1~.~l'IMl!Jr.~ ,..:''''*f'i ' ~" .:., .. - "'..r'~ ,. ~;--...-I, I ~- , - '. r-:"""--._ ~ . ~r - ~. ,'~ ' :, , _,! I ,-n~~. "it. CITY OF HOPKINS ~ .!.,--'-li i~-,-o.. ...., aT.O" oou", ..ONO._.. ~ _..~__~-:: ~ , . HOPltIN5. MINNESOTA BOMa - _ ~ -=- ' '".. INTER-OFFICE MEMO TO." Craig Rapp/Clty Manager DATE_ August 1S _19~ - ~ Ev Beecher/Pa~lic Works ~rations Dir. Cliff Robinson7Street Superintendent . SUBJECT - ~ Proposed change in equipment and method of handling brush -- Some thought should be given to other methods of hauling and hand1ing.~ logs and brush.At this time Landeo Equipment in Lakeville has a used truck &ud loader Unit which could be bought for $14,000 or less. The Loader and chassis are both in good mechanical condition. A Unit like this would be a big plus for our tree operation.. A Unit like this would free up our loaders trucks and personnel for our Dther work. One person would be able to take care of the log pick-up instead of the present 4 or 5 person crew we now uoe. This would be true even if we stop hauling private trees. This Unit would ~lso be used for our weekly b~18h pick-up. Making it ~ much . more efficient: operatj,t,)n. Following are some cost comparisons of our present operation: PRESENT PROPOSED 3 persons 455 .84 2 persons 184.64 1 Loader @ $35.00/hr 280.00 1 Truck 2 Trucice $S6.00/hr 44B.00 Loader Unit $ 50.00 / h r 400.00 1 Chipper $25.00/hr 200.00 584.64 1 Truck $16.00/hr 12O.~O $1,511.84 The sbove reflects costs for one 8 hour day and does not include benefit~. Oth~r coots that are hard to pinpoint is damage to our dump trucks & bent dump bodies, tailgates and tires. Each time we go back to hauling street materials the dump bodies have to be straightened, 80 they will hold. We have discussed the use of this type of equipment with Mr. W. Dungmore I Park Supt. for the City of Eden Prairie., They haul private and public trees and do it all with one man and one piece of equipment. He states . their average load is 5 trees. Our system WOI'!.tS out to be about 1 tre~ per load aveLage. I Our brush pick-up averages roughly 8 hours per week. Hauli~ City trees on 1 y , ( No private trees), averages roughly one day a ..reek for ?. mOB. a J'_e~~!:".. I This machine can also be used to handle pi.pe for sewer and water use. In . the opinion of the operating staff that with this macrin€ there would be no prohlem with keeping up with the City trees and brush pickup with this equipment. A good look at hauling private trees would have to be taken. i ~.\--~~."""" Ib ~~-ii"~liia_iiii}mli'iilil~ ~ ~~~ """""17""-'~ rJl~~_~,:,'!"'-' -r I" ~ " ~ ~--~ ~,.. .. j . -~ Ws are sure that there would be amplti time with this Unit to keep our Streat PatchingJ 8ealcoat1ng~ cra~k sealing snd sto~ sawe~ work. If we go ~ like W~ are now a safer log handling Unit will be requGsted in 1986 Budget $6,500. If Unit is approved this ~ount will not he needed in the 1986 Budget. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. tf~ Everett :Beecher Public Works Operations Director ~ Cliff Robiuson Street Superintendent . .......~j . ,,:,~ ".~ .J ....~ .'...1..... ..... ,] 1 ~ I I I 8 ~ ~~~ --~ 'I!!"II ..... ___~~______,__. - --,- --'--'-'--~ -",",~"'El Wp<JT"" I "'It. , CITY OF HOPKINS ,-' ~. 1010 FIRS! STREET SOurH HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 553,4:) 612l33~T" August. 15, 1985 REQUEST BY N. W. BELL . " TO PLACE BURIED CABLE ON LAKE ST. N. E. PURPOSE To request Council action on a permit request from Northwesterr. Bell. BACKGROUND - The City Council requires all installations of utilities on public streets to be reviewed and approved. ANALYSIS ~- Northwestern Bell 1s propcsing to place all of" the present aer'ial telephone line between Blake Road and Louisiana Avenue underground. The cable ~ould be . placed 2' north of the north curb line in the boulevard area, All surfaces would be replaced and driveways and str'eets would be tunnelled. This cable would be placed in October - November', 1985. However the overhead woul~ not be removed until all the changeovers of service are completed. ALTERNATIVES L Not approve - In this case the existing overhead would remain. . . t 2. Approve REC()MMENDATION ,-------------..--...---.-.-.-- We reconunend for Council consideration that the request be approved. The overhead cable would be removed in 1986 as Changeover to the under-ground connections takE place. " ~. t r ' " -' , ',' 'r Jl. '7"'''>-~--- ~ ) John Stro,jun Engilleer "- Council Rept # 47 -, ~_~.n!li1S~ - Jll, -- 1M'IiIiJ.~,___. ---Alalll.lIlIl:i~. ..:!f~~ ,_ "___ ~ '1 --.~ WJ~rVBiA~.?!I!iIm~rl:K -~-- ..... CITY OF HOPKINS - - _....,.....~ AGREEMENT - ( ~--.. Steve Roberts PURPOSE - The purpose of this report is to pr-esent to the Co~ncil a praposed easement and agreement between the City and Steven Roberts BACKGROUND The sterm drainage petitioned for by Steven Roberts to l.mprove the drainage from a low spot on property at 305 - 21st Avenue North has been considered under other agenda items. ANALYSIS Assuming that the C,i ty Council takes action by ResoluUo!i 85-3210 to order ~:'.' the storm drainage. it is necessar-y that the pro;:>erty owner agree to furnish the City with the necessary construction and permanent easement to permit the city to enter private propet'ty to construct and maintain the storm sewer. In addition the prope~ty owner would agree to pay the portion of the cost of the project which would repalr the surface of the ya('o. ALTERNATIVES 1. riot approve the easement and agl'eemerlt. TlJe City has made a tentative co~~itment to install the sewer line. I 2.. Approve the easement and agreement. This 3ction is consistent with the action taken on August 6, 1985. RECOMNENDATION I We recommend fOt' Council consideration that the proposed agreement and easemen t I I be accepted by the City to enable construction to take place and a portion of the project be assessed to the property owner. I I The City Attorr~y will produc~ the necessary agreement and easement document before the meeting. ~~1Jt~~ J hn Str~jan City Engineer --Council Rept # ~1 ~ - ------. -, 1"W ~"J ~il .. - --~.._'~""'--~. V~ " , . '. ~ J:I t:JI . I ."...' I I i CITY HOPKI NS OF ~. r, ...---- 1985 IR8 fund - J Allocation PURPOSE I 1985 Industrial Redevelopment Bond (IRB) Fund Allocation I BACKGROUND As an Entitlement City, Hopkins received 1.9 million dollars in IRB funding I capacity for 1985. The deadline fer co~~itment of these dollars is August 30. However, if we wish to retain all or a portion of an allocation through October 31, a letter of interest can be submitted to the St.ate along with a 1% application deposit. ANALYSIS ~ At the present time the following actions can be considered. l. The City of Savage is in need of additional IRB financing. They contacted us as to whether we would be willing to transfer all or a portion of our allocation to them through a joint powers agreement. 2. W. Pitt Rolfe has pt~eviously approached the Council about an $850,000 f IRB Bond to finance construction of ar: office bUilding ~t 635 _ 2nd Avenue Sou th . In talking with him, (see enclosed letter) he has stated that he is still very interested in such financing and would provide us with a firm commitment by Tuesday, August 20. 3. Lindberg/Pierce have expressed an inter-est as relates to the Specialty Block Development. In discussing this matter with them, they have stated tl1ey are interested, but cannot make any com:nitrnent at this time. I 4. The final option available is to turn the allucation back to State. Because of new legislation, this would in no way affect any future potential of the City to secure IRB bonding capacity. ! RECOMMENDATION Based on the fact that Lindberg/Pierce is not able to commit to Industrial Bond financing at this time, we would suggest spli.tting the allocation between Pitt Rolfe in the amount of $850,000 with the balance to be transferred Council Rept It 49 ...J __~Ijl,~~:AIa::a ..~v:"'....,.,..____-,_~_~~_ ,._., ___ -,.".- - 1 n n- J --,~. . , . to the City of Savage. Although there is no entitlement progra~ sGheduled for next year, establishing a ~th Savage would at least keep our optIons open. $i~~w _. _ Cow~unity D elopment Director :i. .". , ~'Jf_ -,-~---- ~'.F"" 'l"~.IWIiIiF!:"--~~______.~_~~ _- illl..mIIIIiIin.._____ilI ~~I'" _~ __~ ~~- ~~~~m -". -JII~""i . "j . \\1'. PIT T l~ 0 L F F C 0 ~I PAX Y . ACCOUNTANTS AND AUDITORS 712 W::"SL.E"Y TEMPt,.~ eU.LOIN(:; MINN E:....POLIS MI NNESOTA 55-103 - a7EH~ TELEPHONE (1312) 870-4448 W. ",.TT F<OLF"E August 15, 19 S 5 "'OR[) A RO.......e: (I-Q30 -I~el')) JAMEe H. WURO!:LMAN. G, P. A. Mr. Craig Rapp I City Manager, City of Hopkins 1010 First Street South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 SUBJECT: City of Hopkins Industrial Revenue Bonds, I Year 1985 Dear Mr. Rapp: In the past few days I have had contact with Mr. Jim Kerrigan, Hopkins Director:' of Community Development, and it is my under- standing from this conversation that there are Hopkins Industrial Revenue Bonds available for use for the calendar year 1985. In July of 1985, I made an application to the City of Hopkins to be I assigned i:.i. total of $850,000.00 of Revenue Bonds fox the financing .' of my building project to be located at 635 - 2nd A"lenue South, . in Hopkins. I am still very inter~sted in this means of financing my building project. Since my call from Jim Kerriganr I have contacted Mr. Bruce Watson of the First Bank Hopkins, notifying him of this opportunity to use Industrial Revenue Bonds in financing. He presently is on vacation, to return Mond~y August 19th. I have an appointment with Mr. Watson on Monday, at which time we will firm up once again our financial plan. While we have net started construction of the building, we are presently attempting to lease space, and hopefully will be in a position for Fall construc- tion. At this time I would like to assure you of our interest in financ- ing via lndustrial Revt::!nue Bonds, and :r'espectfully request that you would consider an application from us. Knowing the Council meets Tuesday August 20th, I feel it would be very difficult to firm plans by that dace, but fcel confident w0 c~~ give you assurance of our plans by that date. I Yours very truly, - .~ j I /' r / /' I!/~~ ( (//<-_- w~ Pitt Rolfe (7-- n~ WPR:mo . ~~~~~~;~:",,:'~.d.~ ~~ ~~1 ( .f:;"~\' c -: ~ :.-.~..~ :-,,'~-'-:"<' ~ ~~.I\ o.~ t ~h "::':~:~;1::' ,r'~.. ~. :.~ .~.. . :""Ii.: :~;.. . .~'.' ,..' ~ . ~(...~.';;:.;': ,<," ii. . + ~~ ;. t.. ..:. ~ -... ~~l~: ..,::t:..'i'{t..~ ~14 "'W\N ~'V'!Ir ~-R ~- f'f -- -. - ,- _ -~--1!II1I1l 1 -~, " . . l!'TY ~f SAVA6E~ 12305 QUENTiN AVE. SO. SAVAGE, MINNESOTA 55378 CITY HALL 612/1190.1045 ..1 i Hom. "f Don Pc.eh August 14, 1985 Jim Kerrigan 1010 South First Street Hopkins, 11innesota 55343 Dear Jim: Attached please fin.d copies of the joint powers agreement for consideration by your city councila This fOI~ has been drafted by John Kirby of the Dorsey- Wni tney lavl firma If yom' attorney has any questions, . please have him contact ei t,.her myself or Mr. Kirby a We will be able to make commitments for the one percent deposit after Monday, August 19. I will be in contact with you shortly after that time to determine the best method of relaying that deposit to the state, assuming your city council takes favorable action. If you have any questionsr please contact me. We very much appreciate your help in this n.atter. Sincerely, if, . // , ,'~ i i; I( , . ;......-, (l.i,,..- _ t -'.... (..--{ I' , . .' . - ~--. '.,. ',- Mark HcNeill City Administrator . I . .k ~.--. ~- --~ . . ~ . . AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, entered ,into as of this day of - A.ugust, 1985, by and between the City of Savage, a municipal corporation in Scott County, Minnesota (Savage) and the City of Hopkins, a municipal corpo:t'ation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (Hopkins) : wITNESSE'l'H: In consideration of the mutual undertakings set forth herein, Savage and Hopkins agree as follows: I. This Agreement ~s entered into pursuant to the authority granted to Savage and Hopkins by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471. 59 and 474018 (collectively, Act) . The purpose . of this Agreement 15 to enable Savage to issue its industrial development revenue bonds (Bonds; for an approved project or projects pursuant to an allocation made by the Act to Hopkins as an entitlement issuer under the Act. II~ 2.01. Hopkins has recelved a final certified allocation as an entitlement lssuer 1n the amount of $1,962,780. Savage 15 a local i~suer which expects to use its full enti~lement 1n 1985. 2.02" Savage .~-jishes to issue its Bonds for a project or F:LO]ects In the amount of at least $6,284,630. . ,;~'.., ~ .;-~:.~..'I ': :.~.~,t,~;4.....~jf;~~'~~,<<~;~,:;~ w. .... ~ \, -<1>'... ~_L__ ___. -,,~ - -----..!!I!!I. r."II~jr-l..... ~-"""'JW"""'II" -v ~~ -~ -~ . , . . . . 2.03. Hopkins finds it 1S desirable to make available to Savage from Hopkins' dllocation the sum of $1,962,780. 111. 3.01. Tn order to induce Hopkins to enter into this Agreement, Savage represents and agrees as follows: (a) Savage has or reasonably expects to have proposals for projects requiring Bonds in an amount of at least $6,284,630. (b) Savage intends to issue Bor..ds for said projects prior to December 31, 1985; (c) Savage shall reimburse, indemnify, hold harmless and defend Hopk.ins, its officials, employees and agents for all costs, expenses, claims, damages and losses which they may incur or for which they may be held liable as a result of . the transactions contemplated herein and hereby releases Hopkins, its officials, employees and J agents from any claim Savage may have arising out 1 of the transactions contemplated herein. (d) Savage will timely and promptly notify Hopkins of all proceedings relating to the approval of the projects and the issuance of Bonds therefore. In the event Savage has not adopted preliminary resolutions covering projects ~n an amount not less than $6,284,630 by October 1, 1985, Savage will consult with Hopkins regarding the appropriate use or disposition of any unused portion of the allocation hereby transferred by Hopkins. (e) Savage 'tli 11, on or before September 3, 1985, file a copy of this Agreement with the Authority, together with the appropriate letter of i~te!1t -......"..::;J 1% re5c>)~vaticn fee cover1ng the Clll '--:. d.l:\~~:~,' j on ~""rI-""-:lh~r transferred by f;c~~:i. t~ c; .. I 1.1.,_.. _^"~ i . ~1iI~ "'-- J .~..._~----- --.,.. ~~_.,.-Uf"~~...2sbd ~ ~~-~ y- .vT--- ,_~ ;& ~r :r!lil" -III I ~; I . · I . ! - ! 3.02. In recognition of its und9rtakings under this . Agreement, Hopkins represent s and. agrees as f0110\o\'5: (a) Hopkins represents that it has the necessary amounts of uncommitted allocation to enable it to enter into this Agreement, (b) Hopkins ',.;il1 use its best efforts to inform Savage of any modification of its alloca- tion or of any other facts coming to its attention which may materially affect its abili ty to carry out and give effect to the transaction contem- plated. IV. 4.01. As used in this Agreement the terms (a) entitlement issuer, (b) local issuer, (c) allocation, (d) bonds, and (e) project . have the meanings given them by the Act and by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474. The term "Authority" means the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development. IN WITNESS WHEREBY I Savage and Hopkins have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers as of the date first written above. CITY OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA CI~~AVA '~ (! ( By By I <,.}..1.,.. '- / Mayor Mayor By ATTEST~ Ci ty. Manager ...-i ", . , 1", f.I-t,,~ /., . . r1/~ By ~ ,. /~_ . " , Iy . City Clerk-Administrator , I I i I .....:IR"R _ur~Jrri:I.~lsI ~ h.dl&~_ _ _'~~,u~'~- "'_._,~.___________,__._.. 14 '~. . ' '" --.... '......'. ..",.. ~-_. ...-.1 . - CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 553-43 6'V93s..~474 C 0 U N C _1__~_~~_~-.-2_~__!:__~ u_I!__U ~~ ------._-- To: Mayor & City Council From: Craig R. Rapp, City Manager Cf~ Re: Club license request - Medalist Sports Club Date~ August 16, 1985 ----~-----~--~-_.~-------~---------~-~----------~~----------~------------------ Jim Simon of the Medalist Sports Club has requested the opportunity ~o appear before t.he City Council on Tuesday to discuss his request for a club license application. Mr. Simon will be requesting Council consideration not only fot" license '. approval. bu t to add ress t~le (j i screpancy be tween Ci ty Ord inance . and State law relative to the existence of a private club. Specirically~ the Hopkjns City Ordinance requires that. a club must be in existence for twent.y years befor-e they are eligible for a cluo license. State law, on the other hand requires only a 5 ye~r existence. For your information, I have attached an opin:l.on from Jerre Mill~r regarding the club license issue. The City Council does have a great deal of discretion in regard to this requeE;t including the power to attach conditions on approval. You may wish to make a decision on Tuesday night. However, it would seem more uppropriate to refer this back to staff for additi0nal information gathering and a report back by the next Council IlJ~eting. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact either Jerre or me. . .."\ ~ .~~q~ ;':~"lC:: ir~'.!I'Hl'7' F""~~ .':_>~,p., . ~">4~7~" ; '~..J<:"o~\~-'7~ :;:~:~j}\:"'~".2::~::.. ': ~:.?Y'~~S'.::".- . '.~.~~:~ ;'...1. ~~/~'~;:~ r:;,.~'^l.:<I,:.r;~;.;~':'~ ~"'., ~.,: :,:~'~::'i~;"::~{~'~ f:~";.~':'~~~~'~~''t-''~~~r~.:~.~~;rrtE~\~!~;' ~_~''...~~~);~~'''''':.''' ' 0 ~"f.:::?:~P:':~..r; ~~~~:. -.-------.-...-,.,.-~----~ ~~~- -------. Jt1I B ."~.'1,"" CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH I-lOPKINS. MINNESOTA ~S343 6 ~ 2/935-8474 MEMO Date: August 15p 1985 To: Craig Rapp From: Jerre Miller Re ~ Medalist Sports Club You have aSKed me to review and comment on an application for a pr i vate club o(l.-sale liquor license submitted to the Council by the Medalist Sports Club. The authority for the City to issue such a license is contained in Minnesota Statute S340.1l, subd. 11, a copy of which I nave attached to this memo.. . Specifically, on-sale licenses r/lay be issued to clubs subject to approval by the Commissioner of Public Safety which have been in existence for at least three years, has been incorporated and pertains to service for the benef it of its members and their guests exculsively. The authority to issue such a license by the City under this statute is lil1lited to "hotels, clubs, restaurants and establishments9. Chapter 340 defines a club- (Minnesota Statutes S340.07, subd. 15 ) as: "Clubll means any corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of c i vie, fraternal, social, or business purposes or Eor intellectual improvement, or tOl:' the promotion of sports, or a congressionally chartered veterans' organization, which shall have mor:e than 50 members, and which shall, for more than a year, have owned, hired, or leased a building or space In a building of such extent and character as m ~ ~t h~ suitable _~..;l ...-w. :! '-'= QltU aaequate tor the reasonable and comfortable accoIDodation I of its members, and whose afEairs and management are conducted by a board of directors, executive committee, or other sl.milar body chosen by the members at a meeting held for th",t purpose, none ot whose members, officers, agents . or employees 3re paid directly or indirectly any compensation by way uf prufit trom the distribution or sale of beverages to the members of the club, or to its guests, beyond the amount of such reasonable salary or \..,ages as may be fixed and voted each year by the directors or other governing bod'l..n Equal Opportunity Employer I --~""""""""" ~ V--T- ~ - - f_ ~I ..JII~~.IIII -g- - . In 1969, the legislature reduced the "existence" requirement of clubs from 20 years to 15 years. In the 1983 legislature further amended downward the "existence" requirement vf private clubs from 15 years to 3 years. Section 810.20 of the Hopkins Ordinance (1977) requires bona fide clubs to be in existence for at least 20 years (copy attached). I am unable tv locate any findings upon which a city relied in deviating from the private club existence. It may be presumed as the legislature reduced the existence peeiod from 20 years down to 3 years that applicable amendmen~s in conformance with the statute were never addressed by the City. Minnesota Statutes S340.l1, subd. 17 allows the local authority to impose further restrtctions and reg\llations upon thoa sale and possession of intoxicating liquor within its limits. It may be safely presumed this section of the statute allows a city to further restrict by ordinance the statutes pertaining to license issuances on condition it is not done arbitrarily. capriciously or in a discriminatory manner. Two issues confront you. l. May a municipality require a longer exist€:nce period than allowed by the Minnesota Statute. . 2. May the City Council exercise total discretion to deny ox grant a club license. T can find no Minnesota cases pertaining precisely to either of ... th e se two issues. However, an attorney general ruling in 1955 stated it was not mandatory for a municipality to issue a club liquor license. Op. Atty. Gen. , 218-G-15 March 23, 1955. Earlier attorney general opinions also stated it was optional with the governing body of a city whether a license should be issued and a village council could not be forced to issue such a license. ~, Atty. G e Il. , 218-G-15 January 20, 1958 and Op. A~ty. Gen., 218-G-15 May 13, 1946. I Furthermore, S ubd . 17 of Minnesota Statutes ~340.1l grants to the local authority power to impose restrictions and regulations l1PQn sale and possession of intoKicatin(J 1, i quo r . It seems to me the issues may be answered in the following manner: , The City has the discretion to determine in the fHst Instance .J. . whether or not it shall ct..,ns idee an applic<:!tion for a private club license. 2. If ttle City 1S to act favorably on such an application, it ffiU3t . have reasonable grounds upon which to insist on a 20-year existence period so as not to be arbitrary, coiJr iCllJUS or discrimInatory in the denial of a club license un thIS gr0und. j'olman_vs. ~.ity o~ Ro.:::alton, 1977 311 M1.nnesotd 555, 249 NW 2d 466 in which case the I Supreme Court in affirming the 1 () we r courts dental of a mandamus -~~j" I':'-_...~.._,"~.""""",~,,-,~ ~ ...----------.,. "N rL -. n "1 -w- -. ..--. . i action held the city's denial of a license on the ground that three existing establishments fulfilled community needs and would overtax ita limited traffic and law enforcement facilities was reasunable. The court said the city had the power to refuse a license where tbe welfare of the city suggested such action, JAM . . I I l ,-----&.LJR.IBUllBl'l U. _..........1,,: ...;",;::...'><"-;,:: ;".t...-- -, ---- ___N" ~_- , - - .1 -- ~"fiI[- - 1 ~ ~ . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING " . September 3, 1985 I I ,---, --. I -- ~. j~~nL_.__"~_ - -....~"""_"__ .ail. i __ -11'-- IJiV ~. . . -f . .. ... CITY OF HOPKINS Hopkins Railroad Depot - Inspection Report Augus t 27, 1985 Purpose Tt.e purpose of this report is to provide the results of an interior inspection as additional information to Council Report #40. Bac.t.9.round Council Report #40 provided information about the depot building along with an exterio." inspection report made by Firmus Opitz on August 13. 1985. On August 22. 1985t Ray Kohnen made an interior inspection of the proper.ty,. Ken Stevens, Administrative Assistant for Hennepin County a(ld I representatives for the Hopkins Jaycees appeared at the August 20. 1985 Council meeting to present their respecti~e positions on use of the prop- erty. . ~.!!a 115 i ~ Hopkins Railroad Depot Visual Interior Inspection 1 Basement I .L. 15' x 20'room under ticket agent office ,A. . B. Original used as a furnace room C. Full of t'ubbi sh I O. Cement floor E. Brick interior wall finish F. Needs new stairway and walls repaired 2. wdit~ilg R~c~ A. Windows are old. lift sash with storms and screens. not weather- I stripped B. Has two baths which are very small with water closets and 1 ava tori es I I C. Floor is covered with worn tile D. Ceiling is covered with one foot tile J:" Now used as a locker room/lunch room for working cr!ws Lo. J: Room now has a dividing wall, making it two rooms i G. Old wood paneling on the walls -~j "-- Council Rept #50 --'-------~_-.--- ..~- ~ IERW'I~"~ ~_n ~ .-:. " -1 .... . Page t~.;o Council Report # Hopkins RailrOdd Depot Inspection Report 3. Ticket Agent Office A. Size 121 x 14' g, Wood paneling on walls C. Ceiling tile is 1 foot size D. Floor is covered with worn tile E. Oil furnace in one corner F. Room has window air conditioner 4. Baggage Room A. Size 241 x 241 B. Has 3 sliding shed doors C. Open Wi! 11 S O. Open ceiling to roof ,. No heat 1:.. ". F. Cement floor >..... G. 101 X 10J store room 5. To use the building, the follwoing th'jngs should be repaired or replaced: , A, Ceil i ng B. Floors ,.. Windows 1,.,. O. Exte"ri or walls E. Interior wa 1 'Is F. Insulation G. Roof H. Li ghts 1. Paint throughout J. Baths K. Heating system To give a cost on repairing a building of this type, you have to know what is wanted. Repair;~g and decor~ting can run anywhere from $30.00 pet' square foot to mOT'!? th~rl $100.00 per square foot. T0 mrlke ~ this building useable, a rough estimate of cost to repair would be in the $40,00 to $50.00 per square foot range, This would Le the cost to dean up arId paint with a minimum of repait. . --- III. '_.w.I.J:1:h. -- _.._~--- iii! ~ .o......-.....~.. --~~ ,--.---- f-..oll!l"" i . . ~ '- I I I I I I . Page three Council Report # Hopkins Railroad Depot Inspect'ion Report Alternatives 1. Do nothing. Hennepin County has an obligation to not let the property deteriorate into an eyesore, but would not rehab the property S~ it would serve a use other than a storage building. 2. Make an assessment of the need for the property. If City involvement is deemed appropri ate, then a speci fi c use should be detel~mi ned. From this proposed use, the amount of necessary rehab could be determined by the inspections department from which contractors could subnit bids. The Council could then decide if the rehab costs, which will probably be substantial, are justified by the need for the property. Reconmendation The costs of rehabbing this building would appear to be as much as that of new construction. A rehab is beyond tn~ scope of a civic group ... due to heating, plumbing, mortar repair, foundation r"epairj etc., which are specialized trades. It is assumed that Hennepin County will keep their committment to maintaining a presentable exterior appearance. Therefore! Alternative #1 is recommended. Respectfully submitted, .-or- ~\e-~ ~. J:Scott Renne . II,",.: I..... :.".'.'" ",', _I...... -...~I!::t'~. II!I ...~"~~ _-..,.:..r~r.: ~ ~---- -~--- "" - _"'-.r?'""' -'-.'--- - _ nil ~ """"I' -Jf.~"llIiIl!JU__sr--."',! '''''''fBlI! 241 f - ~ l-~liii~; ~oo~ ~ ~~ 1 . I VI 1""" VI ,..... I r 0 I ~ ~I Q c o o tXl 0, o )::0;0 o G'} ;0 ~ Ci> I'T1 t J w <P I 111 I . i C 1:; .'.". . ^ ':'., ,-,> 'J ~" .,H;; 'J -1 )::0 . .'>,\y: - 0- .........,., Cl ;s:. -i :::c""" ",,~ ~E~ ~ - p}1i~ m ~. ~ , Ii ~ . l I'T1 ~ ;:rJ -< ~ U1 ! I ~ ~ I I - = I 1~ , ~ ~ ,.., VI !:1> n )::> n i! ~ I n::1 {\!, V1 :1> '-j ~c::I'- ?3 ~ 11 __~ ~ m i (;) 'fi ~ j m ,~ ~ i 0 ~ I 0 ~ ~! I ~ I ^' ~ ~ . ~ - -0 "U ~ ~ I j ..... I ~ I )::0 , --4 L --'-:-:---~;;;::::r , ::::::L... , r'r1 24 I '_. ~ . -- .- __IliR!l _~~~&. .L! .- ... efT'{ OF HOPKINS DATE: August 28, 1985 Request for Vacation of pOI' t ion of the N - S Alley ') Bleck 3 , West Minneapolis Center PURPOSE: - Recommend action on an application by Honeywell, Inc. to vacate a portion of the North-South alley i 11 Block 3 , West t4i nneapol i s Center. BACKGROUND: See staff report to Zoning & Planning Commission, James Williams, a corporate attorney appeared before the Commission and explained thdt in August of 1970, Ordinance 325 vacated this area, except this sma 11 part of this alley_ He further stated . that a survey had located no utilities under the alley. RECOMMENDATION: The Commission approved the vacation unani~ously. o~_ Nanc [lnder-son Community ~evelopment Analyst I I Councir Rept # f;. 1 j ~ r, j.-l. _ . -~~ ", ~'.. .~. , .. "I:o~ ":t.' 1:"'./ ~:'"' ~ ~ .....:::~'... . ...... .,. . -\0 :~""",. ,.': , __ r ,~,' :", .! - ~~ :...:~. o. .<ll ~':. . .....rt; .,.':'".. , . ' . _''''-'-'-_~ ~.~'-- ~~~-~~~~__~~~____~__~~__.~_~~__~~_'_~~___,____'_~_,~__~_'_'~~~__~~_R._.._'-,'____~___~'-~-'- ~ ,," -. - .... CITY OF HOPKINS DATE: August 28. 1985 r---"~---- Variance to constr'uct -- ........ I a garage with entrance 14 feet from property line - 22 - 7th Ave. N. PURPOSE: Recommend action on an application by Michael Peterson of 22 - I 7th Avenue North for a variance to constrllct a garage with the vehicle en:t~ance 14 feet fr'om the l~ear property line. BACKGROUND: See sta.ff report to Zoning and Planning Commission. A concern !Na.s raised that 14 feet for a vehicle entrance would not be f enough room to e n t e r / e ~: i t the garage. However, the current garag~ has only 1 Ll feet for' a vehicle entrance a.nd the applicant -. stated he has no problem now. RECOMMENDATION: J:'he Commission appr-oved unanimously. It was fel t the applicant had a har.dship for the following cetisons: 1. The current garage has 14 feet for a vehicle entrance. 2. A 20 foot. vehicle entrance \1ould restrict the back yard. A variance had ;:,revio!jsly r1een granted t.o construct a home on this c~ 3 . lot due to its narrow width (34 feet). I ~jTI~ I I Nanc- Anderson r CommL ity Development Analyst. I f ! . C ounci I Rept '* ')2 = .... -...' - GII~- ~111 -wi .I - ........" ! . ... CITY OF HOPKiNS DATE: August 28. 1985 Conditional Use Perm i t to construct 3n addition to eXisting building at. 1007-1021 E Excelsior Ave. PURPOSE: To recommend action on an applicaticn by the Hopkins Commerce Center for a Conditional Use Pe rmi t to construct an addition to the existing building at 1001 - 1021 East Excelsior Avenue. BACKGROUND: See staff report to Zoning &: PlanningCommission. Mr. Newman and Mr. Youngdahl appeared before i. ;1 e Com m is s ion representing Hopkins Commerce Center. A redesign of the parking area was submitted to comply with thE parking ('equireme!'1ts~ Lack of ,... landscaping was a major concern, since this is a developed site, complying with the landscape ordinance would be almost impossible. Mr. Kerrigan stated thati in the pa~t. parking spaces have been used for landscaping and if acid i;;' .. h,al parking were requiz'ed in the future~ the landscaping would be recoved. I RECOMMENDATION: Th e Comm i 55 ion approved unanimously under the following conditions: 1. Subject to approval by the Fire Marshal 2 . The curb cut to be approved by the County I J. A revised plan with q parking layout that may 11ave up to 6 less spaces t hat \'10 u 1 d be used fOI' landscaping. These spaces would be restored to parking spaces if it was needed I in the future. -~-'.... 4. If :::;igns in the parking lot were located in the parking spaces, they are to be relocated. 5. No parking on the south side of the easternmost building. I~\ Andersor. ity Development Ar.alyst C 1"\1 u."\ ""i I Rept # ~, 3 VUII\., ------------.,.-,.- . ----~ ______c"_ '-., . 'J. ........' , CITY OF HOPKINS ,." Augus t 28, 19S5 r Variance to Construct an ".._ --.r-, Addition at 65 ~'7th Ave. So. PURPOSE: Recommend action on an application by Henry Pokorny of 65 - 'I th Avenue South for a sideyard variance, a front yard variancet a variance to exueed the floor area ratio, a parking variance and a variance to expand a non-conforming use. BACKGROUND: See staff report to Zoning and Planning Commission. Mr. Kerrigan stated that similar vari.ances were granted to the property east I of the subject site. A concern about lack of parking was I expressed. r-lr. Pokorny stated there was no parking problem. . RECOMMENDATION: The Commission approved unanimously with the following I conditions: I l. The proposed addition will be used for sto~age. 2. The Fire Marshal's approval of the proposed plan. ~\, I Clm-J N~ Afld~ Community Development Analyst C ounci I Rept # 54 j ~-----'""-'. _.._,-------~~._--~----, --_.-~"'--~-~~ ---'--~ ............- II - ~- ------ . '" CITY OF HOPKINS ,..- .- , ,. - DATE: A.ugust 28, 1985 -~ Conditional Use Permit for 240 unit re::;idential facility at 1001-1011 Feltl Court PURPOSE: Recommend action on an application by St. Therese Home, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 240 unit elderly residential facility and a 200 bed nursing home at 1001 - 1011 Feltl Court. BACKGROUND: Richard Ludwig of St. Therese and Dan Swedberg of Hammel Green and Abrahamson appeared before the Commission. Mr. Swedberg pres::;nted the development plans and stated that the two staff .. conc.erns dealing with setbacks will be corrected. Ms. Bourne expressed a concern that t.here are enough people in this small area already. I RECOMMENDATION: The Commission approved the Conditional Use Permi t on a 6-1 , va te toJi th the fOllowing conditions: 1 . The setback problems be cor-reeted. 2. Approval of the Nine-MJle Creek watershed district. i 3. The berm and )<lndse:aping be completed with the first phase. I j \~ I f.f.m ~ Nan~~~rson C Ullllil Ll nit y De vel 0 pm e n t. Analyst Council Repi *' c: f ~ ) , '.. CITY OF HOPKINS ~~~~::' ,--: ~'f"" DATE: Au gu s t 28. 1985 - Request for a revision "'\ of a Conditional Use Permit I Amhurst project - Hwy 7 & Edgemoor Drive , PURPOSE: Recommend action on a request by Centur'ion Company for revision of their Condit.ional Use Perm it for a ponding area on property which is part of the Aml1urst Project abutting State Highway 7 and Edgemoor Drive. BACKGROUND: I See staff report to Zoning and Planning Commisston. Mr. Len I , Thielt representing Centurion Company appeared before the Commission and stated that the re was no need for' the ponding area . because different drainage had been workBd out. The plans for I this ar'ea would be for a one or two single family dl'lelling and acceS3 to these homes would be through Knol 1\.:ooa. Knollwood residents express a concern that they did not wish an access from the Amhurst development in to Knollwood and also the emergency exit road would not be r'edirec ted on to Edgemoor. RECOMMENDATION: The Commission ap{:'roved on a 6-1 vote with the follO'.dng conditions: 1. The plan jJlat be approved by the Zoning and i or I Planning Commi~~ion. . i 2, The Emergency exit not exit/enter' cn to Edgemoor I Drive. bA~~~ i Communit..y Development Analyst Council Rept # 5 ' 0 J iiIiiii__ -~ -- -- _a-. - -~~ OJ 11I_ - ~ _'L~.il.Ili.Jl ~.lJliIiII!I -- --'--- -~------~- . -". CITY OF HOPKINS DATE; Revision of the Sign Or'd jnance I PURPOSE: Recommend action on amending the sign section of the Zoning Ordinance regarding signs in residential districts and overhanging signs. BACKGROUND: See sta.ff report to Zoning and Planning Commission. Hr, Rirscht addressed the issue of whether overhanging signs were to be measured from the top or the bottom of the sign to meet the required 10 feet from the sidewalk. The wording 'Was changed to cl &ri fy this. .. RECOMMENDATION: The Commission approved unanimousl y , and recommended that the Council hold a first r'eacting on the attached or'dinance. I j I Gf I nderson ity Development Analyst I J I ~ C ounci I Rept # 57 j = .' ----~-~--,...-- 'V_~~ -- ~- 'I/-1l'l ----w-~ ~F~--~~~Y~ -,..... ___,<.-.r , 'I . ",' ... .. CITY OF HOPKINS LICENSE FEE ORDINANCE 85-554 r---- SECOND REPORT Purppse The purpose of this report is to give the City Council further infor- mation on Ordinance 85-554 (license fee ordinance). Background On August 6, 1985, the Clty Council had the first reading en Ordinance f 85-554. At that time there were questions raised with respect to two of the fees proposed in the new ordinance. A Club license is proposed to I increase from $550.00 to $1000.00, 3.2 Beer Off Sale is proposed to increase from $50.00 to $150.00. Analysis . - The attached survey of liquor fee~ in Hennepin County (note that liquor off sale fees are regulated by the State) reveals a relatively wide range. The proposed fee schedule would make Hopkins one of the higher cities for 3.2 Off, 3.2 On~ and Club, one of the lower fees for Wine and in the high midrange for Liquor On Sale. I By State 1 aw, fees charged must be t'e 1 at i ve to the expenses incurred I '1 for administration and control of the !>ervice, business or activity being I licensed. The attached excerpt from League information packet "Legal I Aspects of Municipal LicensingH provides more detai' on this issue. I Therefore, 1iquor 'fees with the costs of police, D.W.l. prosecution, etc. i have always been the highest fees charged by municipalities. The exact ratio of police calls resulting from liquor abuse between Clubs/public bars/3.2 off sale/off sale liquor is very difficult to deter- r mine. An approximate ratio is that clubs have about 25% of the police calls that a public on sale facility has. Some est~biishments have had I I I essentially no calls in the past year, while some have had over one hundred. Most of the police calls are car lockouts, accidents, theft, etc.. and not 1 1 i quor re 1 a ted . Some calls which are liquor oriented are not able to be allocated to any establishment. For examplet if the police discover a ma11 I cruiser with an open bottle, the source of the liquor can not be determined. ! ! It is the pOlicy of the Hopkins Police Department to encourage a r I bartender or manager of a liquor establishment to cali the police as soon as possible when any problems arise (e.g. if a custDmer becomes belligerent I ,-- Council Rept II ;=q ~ ~ ~-,~--.-- ~ Page two . Council Report # i license Fee Ordinance 85-554 Second Repor't I I j after be; ng "cut off'! a bartender is encouraged to ca 11 the police, I who would come and explain the importance of the responsible use of ! alcohol). The Police Department does not want to inhibit liquor estab- lishments fr'J!11 calling in with their problems. Currently. the fee for a Club license is 7.33% of the fee for an On Sale license. The proposed change would make a Club license 13.33% of an On Sale iicense. The 3.2 Off Sale fee increase could be considered as helping to offset costs of mall liquor problems. Alternatives #1} Adopt the proposed fee schedule in Qrdinance 85-554 by passing the second reading and ordering publication. Although this has large increases in the fees charged for Club and 3.2 Off Sale licenses, it closes the differential that has existed in various 1 i qUOt~ fees. #2) Modify the two fees reported upon in this memo or any other fees for the second reading of Ordinance 85-554. The Council i. may wi s h to pha se i ncrea s es in Over two Gr IflOt'e ye a rs 'if a large increase in a single year seems unreasonable. #3) Do nothing. License fees would remain at the same level as they have for the past two years. Recomnendatioi'\ I recommend alternative #1. The staff recommended fee schedule 1S the result of input from the Clerk, Finance. and Police dEpartments. The propo<;ed fee ~ch8dule is not excessive considering it represents a change over a two year period and corrects some fee$ that appear to have been teo low ir. the past. Respectfully submitted, J. ~'tt l<:~-~ - J. Scott Renne I City Clerk/Assessor . ~:-~...,)--:. h)_ ......,.'&.;7::...-::.~':. I -;..~~';::' .'~~ -:.~_ ;', r' ;_~~. ..~". ~.":',. M~'~ . '''.:'. ." ".. --0,. ."."~' n --- -r'l!ll ---'IIfII WliJ!tBn- '. _DljIWl___IIF-", '-,m ~~~~~'~~nNa~~~~~= ~~~"~ ~~O~ "~~~~O ~'<O".C Dt'........ OCOlO",=, ~t"i':3' l:2~%'f.1.~'lllOOOUl~Pf" lllt-4glJ:$b."fO/tllll"t""''''''BVlOt-4 ~M 0 N~C ~~~~~~~ . ,., "J' 'U O. ~ .....'< '< P ~;, l:i.I o.~~ tlO< titj~ 0- ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ,., ~ ~~~ ~no ~n 1-'0 11I'l;l <<>~.. llImc ~C m ~ ~ ~ = ~ 11 '<l ~l"t "i lit' I'D 0 to I"l '1 tI t'.l,N . '-" ~ ""' N ~ l'.ol ~NNVl~NON~O~~~VlVl ~ . OVlVlOOVlOVlOONOOOO 0 N o "- HI ....... o o I N ~ ..... VI N 0\ VJ P. N VI w \,;l 0-. -...J VI 'W VI VI 0 Vl 0 0 v... \.it 0 N 0 0 8 Ul VI I' o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 1.." 0 0 0 0 N o . o Ul 10 o Ie - >rJ /l'l i1 > ~ . ~~',:~ ..... t" .< VI '< ~':; IJr .0 ", ." ... VI ....<::::,...,;'1 ;. N I-' N N N N N 'I-' N I-' ,~..o 0 '. ":"~ -... ...."" w...... '-'''' ." ~ fo"- (;0 ~ .;~-;,~<;i(>~ o 0 ....... 0 0 v' 0 0 0 0 0 {):J 0 ...... 00 0\ tI IJl " ".' ;'.,: o 0 \Jl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI 0 0 111ft <.'..' o 0 0 0 0 coo 0 0 0 :::> 0 0 0 ~'::'. l"t . ", ! fr./;j ~ o 0 ~ ~ ....1' v' 0-. <; 00 ...... In N.. .. OJ w~ .. r-- ..... Vl VI '.0 0 1-' I-' \.,.J ~ '''' i-' N.. V1 0 V1 ~ .......... oOOJOOOOI-'-O.....oooo \.J1 cr 00000000 III 000000 0 (Il 0 t-' 1-'" C o >i V> . < ~ ill o >i .....J -J J;:-. 0 Vl ~-... '--l 00\..,.... Vl (j\ 1--'_ 00 '"-J"""; I ~ . .. ~.... ~ .. rb... r: V'1lnl..n I OOV'1WN V'10if; vlV, v' . 000 oooov. 00 00 0 C oOO-.JOOOOQ 00 100 0 0 . 11 00 ..... o 0 9 o . :J Vl o . 0 ._1 _11"- _____ ----.:L - ._-~~-,~-'-- .... 1'\!-" ~ . , - · 'I~: .-: = .:. .. CITY OF HOPKINS :.i:;'-=.---=-.. -. '-tlo. ~= _~.' _~~ . _..- 1010 FIRST srREn SOur>< '. ' '~_ ''''', . .~ . HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 . , e12/935-,~T4 Selection of Auditors for - 1985 Audit ~\ August 27, 1985 Purpose Design~te Auditors for the year 1985 Background A Change in Auditing firms was made for the year 1983 to Peat. Marwick~ Mitchell & Co. Peat Marwick has completed the audits for 1983 and 1984 as well as the Tri-annual Revenue Sharing Audit (1982-1984), '. , I AnalysIs The working relationship with Peat Marwick baa . been very good. For the two audits they have , completed, besides the normal basic verifications, they shifted emphasis to different areas in the two audit y~ars. Their fee for 1983 was $l~~'OO and for 1984 $11,000. The fee estimate for 1985 is "will not exceed $11,750." I i Recommendation I recommend Peat Ma~wick be designated as City i AuJitors for the year 1985. I crt />I~/ I . John E. Schedler. Finance Director J '- Counci' Rept # 59 I L_ I_~_ .........--.__ ___--.J - .-1 ___ __Ji- .~ -- ~ CrTY OF HOPKINS DATE: August 29t 1985 ~ .- REQUEST BY NSP TO PLACE BURIED CABLE ON A.SHLEY ROAD --- AND BOYCE STREET PURPOSE . I To request Council action on a permit request from NSP. BACKGROUnD I The City Council requires all installations of utilities on public streets to be reviewed and approve. ANALYSIS - --<l~ ,-.' ':~j>- NSP is proposing to replace all of' the present undergound line on "::.g,~l .1 Ashley Road and Boyce Road. The cable would be placed 1n the J boulevard area. All surfaces would be replaced and driveways and .;~~'?;') "'F,~ streets would be tunnelled. This cable would be placed in S~ October-November, 1985. However the overhead would not be removed until all the changeovers of service are completed. ,] I ~, .-'t ALTBRNArrVES '::':;,~ - l. Not a pp rove - In this case the exist.ing underground would I >1 remain and be a continued maintenance problem for NSP. ! I , I .... Approve Co. I - RECOMM.ENDATION I We r'ecornmend for Council constderation that the request be I approved. )c-k\~. k~___ John .s tf'oj an City Engineer . J t c ouncit ",-, Rept ;, -' 60 --~ ~--":..4 - -".. - ~ ~~.---- - - --- ,------ ,-- '----------~~~------ .... ~ CITY OF HOPKINS Date: August 29, 1985 ___ ST. JOSEPH CHURCH OF HOPKI 3.2% BEER LICENSE PURPOSE; The purpose of this report is to reco~~end Council acti~n on a request ,for a one day temporary on-sale 3.2% Beer License. BACKGROUND: Applicant: l-1ichael EJ.mer pyzdrowski Dat~ Requested: September 22, 1985 11:00 am - 10:00 pm Location: St. Joseph Church of Hopkins 1310 Mainstreet Reason: Annual Fall Festival Record check clear on applic~nt and organization. j RECOMMENDATION: Based on information provided and records check, . Police Department sees no reason t.o withhold approval I Thi,s is ~n. arrrmal event without incident in the past. i J \ ~-~~-r -oK Warren R. Neff, Sergeant Hopkins Police Department Counei I Rept # 61 ---' -- ..... H It&i ~--- ~~ -~'. -~--... -r !II~:POI~....".. - .~... - CITY OF HOPKINS ..--- Date: August 29, 1985 Hopkins House Inc. 1501 Highway #7 ... \ Liquor License Purpose: The purpose of this report is to recommend action on a rt:quest for liquor license. ,Background: Applicants: l. Donald Floyd Hagen DOB 1-18-24 2 . Jo~eph William Knoblauch DOB 11-21-26 3. Herbert Ambrose Mason DOB 8-5-22 4. David Dean Gravdahl DOE 8-8-38 Other persons named in the application are: l. Carol Hagen DOB 12-27-24 2. Margery Knoblauch DOB 8-7-24 3. Marian Mason DOB 1-4-26 4. Jan Gravdahl DOB 8-19-41 Reconunendation: The following agencies were contacted and their records searched for any criminal activity involving the above eight persons: The Hopkins Police Department, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, I .State of Minnesota Liquor Control Bureau, Hennepin County Sheriff's Offics, Crow Wing County Sheriff's Office, MINerS, NCIC, state of ,- Minnesota Driver's License Bureau. I None of these agencies had any records to speak of involving these peopJ_e, The records that were obtained and consist or minor driving violations for three or the principles lnvol',red and I the Hopkins Police records for Mr. Hagen and Mr. Mason 'o'lh;i.ch consist of mostly police matters where they were the complainants, or other minor violations such as dog at large. I I ~?? , ~r...... ~- arren R. Neff, S . Hopkins Police Departm~IlL .caj j C ouneil Rept ~ 62 I I I ~--_.. -____~ l!I>.-_ --<lb. ----------. ~---i~:'II~'-' ;~"". ':~ ',-..'.,., ,...... .. ..:~~" ,j "'.II!I'..<IIIIIIIi__r._....-..I-." I.l/illf ~ ~"- Wl!'!V-~--~--- : '? ..~, . ~... . ,. T ," ........., . ,. CITY OF HOPKINS DATI:::: August 29, 1985 PBT RESOLUTION a.... --, PURPOSE --- The pllrpose of this report is to recommend Council action on adopting a resolution approving a loan of two breath test instruments to the Ci y of Hopkins from the State of Minnesota. BACKGROUND - Attached to this report is a loan agreement from the Bu reau of' I Criminal Apprehension indicating that they will loan to the City of Hopkins, two breath test instruments to he used by the Police De par'tmen t. Additional information is attached explaining the ty pe of ur.lt and the State program. This has been done in the past a[ld is an extremely useful tool for the Police Department. RECOMMENDATION 1 r-ecommend that the City Council adopt a resolution entering into an agreement wi th the State of Minnesota for the purpose of receiving I two breath testing instruments on a loan basis for use by the Folice Department. I I r'I/ m ./ I \ , l- .{1l~ y<'Y'-- f r81.g p . __,. - ~ I I \.;.1 LY f'll.:Yr' f I ~ [ "--- Council Rpn+ # ./ , \ ...... r-' r 63 --~- l W-"~ _liS _- - - ......... .~-:~''''-='+U:... " -,~, '." ", .. ,-.,' . .,' ".' " '" " ',." ,", 'lU'IIf..... ~.~. '4,. ~ : f. 0 ~-'.. ~ '.,..1., '.,,0.0.. \,' ~ :" i ,l,.'~-'. ,- --- ....- -,.---'--- . ., ~ "1...... CITY OF HOPKINS to> ~~-.;........ ,....-;. h EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD NAl'-IE CHANGE PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to recommend Council action on ! the request by the City of Hinnetonka to consider changing the name of certain streets in Hopkins to Excelsior Boulevard. BACKGROUND Attached to this report is a 1 et tel" from the Minnetonka Ci ty Manager asking the Ci ty of Hopkins to consider renaming County Road , 3 to Excelsior Boulevard. As you are aware, County Road 3 through Hopkins is identified as either Excelsior Avenue East or 2nd street south, depending on its location. The Minneto!1ka staff is interested in Hopkins opinion of this so that they migbt formulate :. resolution requiring certain businesses within Minnetonka to conform with Minnetonka's numbering system. r asked the engineering, pUblic works, and police departments to comment on this request and I have attached their responses for your information. Basically, they all agree that the name change would be a good idea, however they point out that the retention of a Hopkins numbering system ~ould be desireable. ANALYSIS Because of the common useage of the term "Excelsior Boul evardt., and to avoid confusion, Lhe name change request seems like a good idea. In add5.tion, l~equiring the current businesses along County Road 3 to change their addl'esses to the St Louis Park/Minnetonka numbering system also -'3 ppears to be reasonable. However, the practical aspects of requiring this are difficult to overcome. r am ::;ure that many of the older well-established businesses along County Road 3 would find it difficult at this point in time to change their address. In addition, there is precedent f' 0 r' the fact that Hopkins h3S never" conformed wit. h the surrounding communities n~!mbering system, thet1efor'e, maintaining its own independence would be consistent with past practices. ALTERNATIVES -l Council has the Callo'lii!'1g alternat.ives with t'egard to this request.: C ounci I Rept # 64 ./ I I ~,~~~iIJ~~~..- -:II 0l0I..._ oOIlIl._ ~ -.-.-. I ~-----~ , J I 1 . Do nothing. Following this course of action will not result '1 in any adverse impacts to ttlO City of Hopkins and will met' e 1 y inconvenience the City of Minnetonka. 2. Indicate to t-1innetonl<a that you favor a name change and initiate proceedings to do so, Should you follow this course of action, a decision on whether or not to change the numbering SY3tem should also be made. RECOMNENDATION I r~coromend alternatlve 2 . In addition, I would recommend retaining the Hopkins numbering system unless a 5 urvey of businesses indicat~s an overwhelming acceptance of changing to conform with St. Louis Park and Minn~tonka. Craig R. R Cl ty Mana . . -- - -----_._~...-..-:~~- ~... ....~~A ~~_JIi:I . J1>1iIili'llih~1II. ~ 1 . JUL 31 1985 A /! · [[J[rl[Jll~Jt~x]8[}Io~-1 L J L,J _.-J '---___ _ _J ~,-J July 26, 1985 Mr. Craig Rapp, City Manager City of Hopklns 1010 First Street South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Dear Craig: I understand the Hopkins City Council recently renamed the portion of Excelsior Avenue between Sha~y Oak Road and C.S. A.H. #18 to Main Street. I also understand that at the time the Councll took this action, there was some discussion about renaming the remainder of Excelsior Avenue that lies east of' 0-,- C.S.A.H. #18 and the segment of Second Street South that lies west of C.G.A.H. #18 to Excelsior Boulevard. There are sever- al reasons why we would encourage the City or Hopkins to make this name change. . C.S.A.H. #3 is currently called Excelsior Boulevard through the cities of Minnetonka and St. Louis Park. It would be much more convenient and less confusing for the motoring public '-I" 1. there was one continuous name for this street throughout the aree. Also, ther-e are a number of businesses the southeast .. 1n COrnel" ., of the intersection of C.S.A.H.#3 and Shady Oak Road, _ _...: ,L t... .: _ W.L LU.L:l the Minnetanka city l;""t-<:: that use Second Street. South and - -- ........ "-..... , four-digit numbers for their addresses. This is . . ~ L. lDconS1S d~n<. with our numbering system and does cause some confusion with the Police and Fire Departments. We have discussed this problem with the property owners in- volved. rviany of them state that they are reluctant to make the change to five digits and the Excelsior Boulevard address, which \'lOuld then be consistent with the Minnetonka system, because they would have to change their stationery, etc. . the city offices are located at 14600 minnetonka boulevard minnetonka, minnesota ~ 933~2511 Please notice our new zipcode is .55345 I ii'I: -.. ~H~- - ~-- ~...-..-- .--- -,~~--'-_----~----- I ~--'~~~-~~~ ------ -----~-- - . Mr. Craig Happ. e it Y Manager Page 2 . .Ju 1 y 26, 1985 If Hopkins took the action to change the name of Second Street South to Excelsior Boulevard, the Post Offlce would require that their addresses be changed and at that time, we feel that we would be able to have them changed to the five-digit numbering system. For these reasons, our staff would very much appreciate your support- ing the renaming of C.S.A.H. #3 through Hopkins to Excelsior Boule- vard. If you support this idea, please let me know fSO that I can review the concept more thoroughly with the Minnetonka City Council and affected business owners. After that review, I would ask the Minnetonka City Council to adopt a resolution formally requesting the name change. If it is unlikely that this proposal will be favorably considered by the Hopkins city Council, I would ctlso ap- preciate being so advised; we would probably not pursue it if that is the case. Thank you for your considerat.ion. ~SincerelY' . ;;:::: F. Mille< il .. I City Manager ':'1 ~ JFro1: d :~ '1 'J I .j I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I . I I I , I -.-~ ~ !:!!MIIV.M:"~II!.BiIl\!l_ . _._Iir ..... _ ."ill!'''- ~ -~ .'--.... . - ~. -- ~ - -- ~ . ,~ .-r~. ,,~~ ~~ ..,..,~~,., ... . " , , C'TY OF HOPKINS 1010 ..I...... .T"an eOUTH "NONIE, ".....,. HOPKINS. r.UNNI:SOTA IJSM8 . . INTER-OFF8CE MEMO TO, Crai9. Rapp I City Manager DATE August 26 1921... FROM... Ev Beecher I Public Works Operations Director . SUBJECT Street Name Chan~e8 I see ~o major problems with changing 2nd Street South to Excelsior Blvd. I believe that we should keep our own numbering system if the name is changed. We get many inquiries at City Garage from truckers and motorists looking for Excelsior Blvd addre88e8~ it would seeM to me that the name change would clear up some of the confusion. :.. Thank you for the Oin~ortunity to comment on this item.. Ev Beecher ~. . . --- --,---_. <-~.~' ,~:m.~ ' "t, _. C ~,,,,t~~ ,; , '.~~~~ifi"'~"'<' ~~, -';,~ CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIAST STREET SOUTH · HOPK!NS. MiNNESOTA 55343 . 612/935-8474 . M E f-1 0 August 26, 1985 To: Craig Rapp, Manage~ From: Earl Johnson ~~. Re: Name Change/Excelsior Blvd - - -.. - - - - - -- - -- -- -. - - - -- - - - - - - -- -- - . I have had an opportunity to review the request proposed to you by Jim Miller. As I indicated in our staff meeting the police department would not be opposed to renaming this section of roadway to Excelsior Blvd. If you require anything more than our opinion at this time please let me know. . __~",","-k_____~_.______________, ._____,_.. _ _,_.__ I August 27, 1985 To; City Manager Craig Rapp From: City Eng'ineer John Strojan Re: Renaming Por~ion of Excelsior Avenue & Second Street South Prior to the construction of County Road 3 from Shady Oak Road to County Road 18 on its present alignment, County Road 3 was routed through Hopkins on what is now Mainstreet. Washington Avenue (County Road 18) was the east-west division between Excelsior Avenue East and Excelsior Avenue West. With the flame change of a portion of Excelsior Avenue we are still left with an Excelsior ".,. - Avenue East which meets Excelsior Boulevard, at Interlachen Road. ThB street numbering system is also different from t~ street numbering in St. Louis Park and Minnetonka which are the continuation of the Minneapol'ls numbering system. Continuity in street names and numbering is desirabi~ when possible. Blake Road north is an example of a recent change made to eliminate a confusing change to Monk Avenu~ at County Road 3, Prior to the construction of County Road 18 freeway, the section of County Road 3 from Co~nty Road 18 to Shady Oak Road was designated as Second Street South. With the present location of County Road 3, consideration can De given to changing :. the na~ of Excelsior Avenue East and the po~tion of Cour.ty Road 3 between County Read 18 and Shady Oak Road to Excelsior Boul~vard. This wo~ld give the ~ontinu1ty to the name Excelsior Boulevard from Minneapolis to Minnetonka. It probably would not be practical to change the street numbering system since the remainder of Hopkins with one exception on County Road 5~ uses the Hopkins numbering system. A portion of the originally platted Second Street South between 5th Avenue South and 13th Avenue South would remain as Second Street South. The change would not be drastic as over the years the use of Excelsior Avenue and Boulevard have been used interchangeably ~ven though not technically correct. I wouid recomrrend for your consider'ation the change of name as outlined. The process of hearings etc. would have to be followed to make the proposal subject to I til~ '...ide~t possib1e review by affected properties. I!l Respectfu~ tted. I ~~ - ' I a L' ~~ John J. Strojan Ci ty Enl.ri fleer . - -~ - ---,.--WllII111 - 1 ~-'- ;u.... .1'>1...- ~~..m. ~ - J 11II_ _ ---,- 'Tl't"" ."'Uln-....- ~ r ~ _____ I 1'- IIIlIIi :,-"'1 . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING . St:.\nfornher 18 -- ...." t' .." j i I ..., I I , I 1Qa~ .,,0" - . .J ..,;'__ _-.r "_'_~"'"",,____,____. __ ---~-~--- VJ. (L, ".~; '. CITY OF HOPKiNS ;--0:- 1010 FIRST STREET SOUn1 .."'::.--.,.,.. ' .. - HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 5530&:' Septe:nber 12, 1985 6~2iS35.Ml~ IRB BACKGROUND PITT ROLFE PROJECT At a recent meeting, the Ci ty Council took action to reserve $850,000 of the" City's 1985 IRE Entit-Iement Fund for financing the construction of an office building at 635-n37 Second Avenue South by Rolfe Properties, Inc. The Preliminary Resolution is part of the IRB process. A final resolution of approval is required at a later date. ANALYSIS The applicant has submitted all required documents in conjunction with this I process except for the following; _ letter from bond attorney that he is p~epared to grant a favorable preliminary opinion releting to the qualification of the project under the , t.;inll. Municipal Indust.rial Development Act. I . _ A nonrefundable deposit, payable toward the City's fees (a $750 application fee is requi~ed). The applicant has stated tl1,at oot.h of the above items would be pi'ovlded 'Prior tothe September 18 Public Hearing. The application and related documents have been submitted to the City Attorney, Howevert he has been on vacation for the last two weeks and therefor'e, I have been unable to talk to him to determine if the documents are 1 ! a.cceptable from 3 legal standpoint. I aSSUlne he wi llcevj_ew these documents I I when he returns prier to the meeting, ALTERNATIVES - Approve the preliminar"-Y cesolutiorJ, _ Do nct approve the resolution, in which case, the City would lose this amount of its allocation _ Approve preliminary resolution, provided =311 required material has been submittcd and toe City Attorney has had sufficient time to review the .. . . .1 appllcat lon. I R ECOt-IMEND AT I ON Approve prel iminar'y tt".''Jhltion, provided all required materia.l has beer. I n. 3ubrr.itt.::,d and the City .t\ttol'oey has had sufficient time to review the -~~li/-~t' C1\-'P)',",'_<'/ l~,)n. J ~ / 1/ " , .,2ommunC68Hci~iF<et~1 # b5 -- - -.n.J1.L MIlI1 ~,~~_ ~ 1 I I _ . _n--- _~_ 1~.Jc:I _1111I--- Ub '... CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTI1 HOPKINS, M1NNfSOl A 5S:!-~3 612/935-S~ 7" ~ Bealle Sports Foundation re: gambling PURPOSE: To inform the Council of issues that may be raised during an appearance by John Ross, Director of the Braille Sports Foundation, regarding charitable gambling. BACKGROUND: On February 19, 1985, the City Council passed a ninety day morator~um on new gambling licenses in the City due to some unresolved questions which developed due to state control of gambling licenses. This moratorium wa5 extended on April 16, 1985 until the City Attorney could draft a new gambling ordinance. The general feel iflg of the Council at that time was that they did not want to expand gambling in Hopkins beyond its current levei of private ,. clubs. The National MS Society M;nnesot~ North Star Chapter made two appear- ances to Council explaining what their operation does and encouraging Council consideration of charitable gambling in public bars. John Ross, Director of the Braille Sports Foundation (phone #935-0423), was informed of the past Council actions on charitable gambling in public bars and the current mora- torium and forthcoming ordinance. This information did not dissuade him from requesti~g a Council appearance to explain their operation. They ha ve not made a formal lir.ense application nor have a tentative location at thi~ time. They currently have two locations in St. Lcuis Park selling pull tabs; Al's Liquors and Timothy O'Tooles, both on Excelsior Blvd. . I ANALYSIS: Jerre Miller has not yet completed the new gambling ordinance. The l ~:~~:~~ :t~~~ ~:: :~~ d~scretion to allow or disallow an expansion of c~ar- itable gambling within Hopkins, AL TERNATIVES: I 1) Do nothing. Jerre Miller will presumably draft the new ordinance f to reflect the Council's position last spring of limiting gambling licenses ! , I to establishments t:-'.:;.t h~d them lli 1934 (Legion, Elks. K.C.. and V.f:'.W.) ! 2) Do further research on Braille Sports FDu~dation's operations I such uS ,-o~tucting St. Louis Park Police Department to find out if any I I I \ Rept # J '- --- C ounci I 66 - ~_~o_.__ ~.~ Xf.- ....,,- ~~ ...... __..... 1_ -- _---r- v"j:iIR~fln- ,.,-- IIIlI!I' . probleJ11S have beer created, etc. The entire issue of charitable gambling could be exarnined now that some of the new establishments have been in operation f0r a while. 3) Advise the City Attorney to revise the new gambling ordinance to , allow charitable gambling in public bars. RECOMMENDATiON: Staff recommends Alternative #1. The Council felt very strongly last spring tnat there were enough gambling licenses in Hopkins. Once a prece... dent is established with one operation in a public bar~ the rest of the bars will almost surely follow, requesting charitable gambl ing in their estab- lishments. Respectfully submitted, ;:r: ~ ~~ J. Scott Renne _c. City Clerk/Assessor ..' ~I I J i I I I I I ! I I I ....... I I I I i I 1 I -- - ---'~- -------- lZ:Le- ... CITY OF HOPKINS "- ...-----:''"'' DATE: September 12, 198'j ..-- ~ PUBLIC HEARING ST. THERESE PROJECT I PURPOSE - Set public hearing date - St Therese Project BACKGROUND St. Therese recently r-eceived approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct an elderly housing/nursery home project 1n the southwest corner of the City. They are now look.ing at the possibility of financing part of this Project wi th HOllsing Revenue Bonds. To date, the Ci ty has financed Auburn North (Centurian) and the new Chapel View Project with this type bond. ANALYSIS No formal application has yet been rec( " ved by St. Therese concerning this matter. All necessary documentation would have to be submitted to the City Attor-ney at 1 eas t two weeks prior' to t,he hearing date. The use, as proposed, is similar to that of Chape~_ View and therefore, appears to conform to the type of' projects the Council has wished to finance. ALTERNATIVES No action or set heal'ing dAte. RECOMMENDATION meeting in October to provide ~ -~-- r\" ....,,.........~.........._ 1./ _.... l 1::. \..- 1..-. V I l c '" , r,,- i I Repr # 0', J V IJ I I '-J ~ , U, ~'._~~,~-,-- ./ _ _'__..'_'_______ '__0 o______.____~_~__~_ ~ - ~ -~JII'; :w~... . -J________ TIe CITY OF HOPKINS ....-.' :.. ---~., ...- September 11~ 1985 PROCEDURAL GUIDES - -~ FOR THE HOPKINS REHABILITATION PROGRAM PURPOSE To adopt procedura1 guides for the Hopkins Rehabilitation Program. 8ACKG~OUND Hopkins has been involved with rehabing homes since 1974. The original rehabili- tation money was obtained through the HUD CCtmlunity Development Block Grant Program (CBOG). At the start of the Housing Rehabilitation Program tha maximum grant/loan that was available was $15,000, and was later increased to $25,000. This money could be used for almost any permanent improvement for a home. As less money became available the maximum amount of a grantlloan was reduced to $6.000 which could on')y be used for improving code items and energy related items. Eligibility was based . on the Q pp l'j cants income. As of July 1~ 1985~ the City of Hopkins was allocated $107,633 to use on housing rehabilitation th,'ough the Hennepin County CBrxi Program. Because this program is no longer being financed by HUn it is necessary that the City adopt Rehab guide- lines which meet the r~qu;rements of the County. The propcsed guidelines do not really change the present program significantly. Both grant and loans will still I be availableo Eligibility is based on an applicants inc~~ and will b~ distributed i on a first COOlet first serve basis. The maximum amount of a grantlloan will in..: crease $6~OOO to $10~OOO and the ceiling on the amount of assets an ~pplicant can have of $25,000. BECOMMEN~ T ION I recommend that these procedural guides be adopted for the Housing Rehabilitation Program. I I I 1 I ~-~~-- C ounell F-~ept IT 58 ~'~ ..~,--~ I I I I ,...~li --_..--- -.IiIliIIlLa.. ...~ -- ------,_.,- .j - . ~ -----<:ill""'llt'~ ...,- ~~.J"l" F""""'~"- - . ve- CITY OF HOPKINS September 12t 1985 ORDINANCE NO. 85~556 VACATING A PART OF THE NORTH~SOUTH --------------------, ALLEY IN BLOCK 3t WEST MPLS CENTER PURPOSE To approve the ordinance vacating a part of the North~South a11ey in Block 3, West Minneapol is Center. BACKGROUND I At the last Council meeting the Council approved the vacation of this ailey. , I This alley is located if I a Honeywell p.ilrking lot and is fully developed. I All vacations require an ordinance passed by the Council. Ordinance No.85-556 has been prepared for your approval. RECa4MENDATION Approve fo&" first re ad i ng. I , f I j I .--1 I I Council Rept 11, q --, ~ b _ -~ ~ -------- __---ili . , l!Lh CITY OF HOPKINS I ! REQUEST BY N.W. BELL TO PLACE BURfED CABLE OFF l -, LAKE ST. N.E, ONTO BLAKE ROAD NORTH AND ONTO MURPHY AVENUE PURPOSE To request Council action on a permit request from Northwestern Bell. BACKGROUND The City Council requires all installations of utilities on public streets to be reviewed and approved. The Council on August 20, 1985, approved the installation of buried cable on Lake Street N.E. at the above location but the extension onto the two streets were not requested at that time. ANALYSIS Northwester'n Bell 1s proposing to place all of the present aerial t~lephone line on lake Str~et N.E. between Blake Road and Louisiana Avenue underground. The cable wuuld be placed 21 north of the north curb line in the boulevard area. The re- quested lines connect into proposed manholes on this lake Street N.r. project and connect to existing overhead on Blake and Murphy. This overhead wili fioi be i~- I r placed at this time, All surfaces would be replaced. This cable would be placed I in Qctobe~ - November, 1985. However the overhead wouid not b~ f=ffiOved unti1 a11 t~ ch~n~cYG'~ of service are compl~ted. ALTERNATIVES I There is no real altel'native as construction und(>'(' prior August 20 approval will I i ~emove the present connection to existing overhead lines. RECOMMENDATION I : We recommend for Council consideration that the request be approved. The overhead I cable woul<l be remov~d in 1986 as changeover to the underground connections take place. /-/ I / /? ! ' ~ /) / -J I ~.tf,-~%~- i I 1 , I j ___/ con Anderson, Asst. Engineer t_ L- I ~Councii Repr ;r 1'D .~~----~--~-""_..- !.~ ~':'.'.'.~ ',.t~f""':"~.....:.~,~,.~..j .':';":' .,- ..~'..'r . ~)"......~\"". __ ....l~. " ".-:~ "':.'~~-Io,..s-.;; r -. or. '. ~.L,:, 1,-; .:...:' .: --"-'-'. -'" ~..... .:-~....... ~~ '~------- . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING . October 1, 1985 . . CITY OF HOPKINS August 14. 1985 REPORT ON 1.........------- SPECI~6R'~SimMENTS m . PURPOSE: The pur~ose of this report is to inform the Council of the Special Assessments to be ievied in 1985. the me~hods used to spread the assessments and the recommended assessments. I BACKGROUND: After hearings and Council action. the following projects have been constructed and completed. 82:07-09 Curb and gutter. streets, lighting and landscaping and stann .' sewer on Felt1 Court & 10th Street South 83:02 Concrete alley east of lOth Avenue South. between 6th & 7th Street South 84:01 Curb. Qutter and drives. north side HiQhwav 7. east of County Road 73 84:02 Concrete alley west of 16th Avenue North. between 3rd and 4th Street North 84:05 Watermain Extension~ Minnetonka Mills Road to Gethsemane Lutheran I ~unh I 85~02 RetaininQ wali. Second Street North at 146 15th Avenue North - ,'j~ Costs of the above p,o.iects have been arr; ,ed at and a djyisio. of these costs I..; are recolllT!ended. These d i vis; ons ha ve been made based on benefit to the oarce 1 s I .- I of land and the increase of value to that land and accordinq to cast Dractices I and oolicies of the Council I ANAlYSIS: project 82:07-09 Feltl Court - The costs of the improvements on Feltl Court have been divided evenly between the two parcels adjacent to the project by request of the property owner, Opus Corporatio~ Project 83:02 lOth Avenue Alley - This alley was constructed in two sections with a portion in the center of the block left out. The alley is fronted on the east by a Westbrooke Condominium development and on the west by single and double family homes. The total cost of the concrete con- struction was reduced by 20% as per Council policy. One half of the remaining I cost has been divided equ~lly among the 88 condominiums O~ the east side of I the alley. One half of the remaining costs of the west side has been divided i as follows: each lot received an area assessrrent of an amount equal to the I : units on the east side. The remainder has been divided according to the amount I i that each parcel had frontage on the alley. i I 1- Pr2Ject 84:01 Curb and Gutter and drives, North side Highway 7 - r ~ The North Service Drive was improved by MnDOT from Robinwood Lane to County L___Road-'73~~_:~ree""~t ',t:~~~; t~i :~;, rto :a: for mtaincosts,~urb and gutter; - -__ J _ __ __ _ _ _~'~~ro~c____~ I .. ;'~'""~'~," "":. . ,Jo'.( i ,"0:. i i~}', I .~ . t ~. .~. '~!, . C lTY OF 1l0PK 1 liS j';' f ...~, . i Hennepin County, Minn~scta , (0..', NOTICE OF ~EARINr. ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS P ".~~ ;j.. , ";,' TO WHOM IT ~4Y CONCERN: . ..,"':~ I ' .~.~ './ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City ~ " of Hcp~;os will n~et in the Council Chambe~s of .~e Ci~ Hall ~ . ~; , at Hopkins, Minnesota, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., on September 18, 1985, '; !! to pass upon the proposed special assessments for the improvements " of certain streets, avenues, highways, lllty~ and thoroughfares ~<. :"J.;.~i: ,. i....'. i .., .'.,.,. ..' ,'."," and for tne costs of removing trees and stumps, all more particularly ~i> ~';'.':[~i .' ....,... ;.,.. described in Exhibit A. hereto attached and here~y made a part nereof. :~::'.~~. '\,i:) The proposed assessments are on file for p!lbHc inspl!ction 111 1 111(j ~ the office of the City Clerk at said City Hal,. Written or oral objections will be cons~d!red &ftd hta~d 4t s.~d .,~l .'__.."~'%';:.r~ 'i ..~L::~~<l}i::$ , ti hearii1g. ~';:}i"~~~ An owner may appeal an assessment tu district cou~t Dursua~t to \~r-"~,~~~~t Minnesota St~tutes Section 42;,v~i OJ ~~(Ti~g noti~~ OT LOC ap~eal upo~ '; the mayor or clerk of the city within 20 days after the ado~t1~n of th~ aS$tss~nt and filing such notice with the distr~ct court with1n ten , . . d~ys after service upon tha ~yor or clerk, The total cost of each of said improvements are set forth l" said Exhibit A. and unless otherwise ~tuted herein, the City will pay no ~...,':~ part of any of such a~sessments. " ..,. .;..... '... J. SCOTT RENNE. JERRE A, MILLER, ,: City Cieri<. Ci ty Attorne~ , ..~ %:' 'Ii, .' Published in the HOPKINS SAILOR on September 2, 1985 and September 9, 1985, '", '. , .. . ' .. , ,: 1,~ . ;1 ;J ", io~, , '}!';.; .. ~.. , . iii' ~' -, ~. 'F .,. '; " . Council Report # Page 2 driveways, wa1ks, moving of hydrants, adjusting valves, etc. State Aid was available and has been received. The only costs to be assessed 'i s the curb and gutter and drives. All costs have been divided according to an average width uS per past policy. Project 84:02 Alley - 16th Avenue North - This alley consists of two portions; the north-south portion as platted, dividing the blocks and an angle portion, connecting the south end of the N-S portion to 16th Avenue parallel with the abandoned R.R. This second portion has no direct frontage which increases the cost of the alley. The total cost of the concrete con- struction was reduced by 20% as per Council policy. The remaining costs of the alley have been divided on an average width as per past policy. All asphalt patches were allocated to property adjacent. Pr:~ect 84:05 Watermain Extension, Minnetonka Mills Road to Gethsemane Lut eran Church. Gethsemane Lutheran Chvrch petitioned for a fire hydrant to give the builaing fire protection. To sati~fy that need and to give added fire protection to other buildings in the area a line was constructed from Minnetonka Mills Road to Gethsemane with a hydrant also placed at the southwest corner of Milpah Congregational Church. Chapel View apartme~ts for the elderly was being bid at that time. Instead of them' building a separate line to the building to connect to the sprinklers, a service connect.ion was . installed at their desired locatio~. Benefits to the properties were studied and the following recQffimendations are to divide the costs, benefits being divided on a square footage or special bene- fit basis: Gethsemane - total square foot area used. Rosewood West Apartments - total square footage l~ss area served and rr~viously assessed on 5th Avenue North. A reduction in area of 40% was also used I because the building is partially sprinkled. Mizpah Congregational Church - total square footage less drea served and previously assessed on 5th Avenue North Chapel View Apartments and Nursing Home - total square footage less ~rea served and previously assessed on Minnetonka Mills Road. A reduction was also made of 20% of the area involved with the Nursing Home because of partial sprinkling in the basement area. A 40% reduction was made in the ar'ea of the apartments because the building is to be sprinkled. A s pee i a 1 benefit was subtracted from the total project and added to the Chapel View apa~tments. This benefit was for the special costs involved with the sprinkler connection. A,O. Bursch - total square footage used less area served and previously . assessed on Minnetonka Mills Ro~j ?roject 85 :02 Retaining Wall - 146 15th Avenue North - Total costs of the retaining wall has been placed on the above parcel as per agreement, Tree and Stu~ Remova 1 - Some tree and stump removals have not been paid for. The total costs for these removals have been allocated to the parcels i nvo 1 ved . .. ,_ JI!All m ~- ,,=- __-"T" .. '"iI' .tI__ III PII "~ <~;,1: -"",i,., ';~IiI"M':'"'~':, ~, . ":.::';' ,,':'~--^.'~.F:'i' ,,", '." - , , ., - , ~.:' " '... ., . Council Report # Page 3 .. Outside Readers or Water M~ter - Readers are placed on meters in private home by the City but are charged for for Cipdttrnents. etc. The reader at 129-135 13th Avenue South was installed but not paid for. Total costs have been ailocated to that parcel. RECQt.iMENDA TI ON: We recommend the adoption of the proposed assessments and that Resolution No. 85-3208 be adopted cal'fing for a Public Hear'ing to be held September 17. 1985. ..____1 .-- / /" // -~- Engineer ,. . : ~ ' . ..: i,'.-:, .. ~..~ ~ :~,.~ .... . ~...~.r .po. .~~~. ,j ;"J . ~.>'!~ t \...: ;;'~.- .".::;.~:.,.\....~.:'~ . "~.e't~, = " G, . i I . CITY OF HOPKINS HENNFPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-3208 RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 85-3203 pass€d and adopted by the Council on Ju1y 16th. 1985, the City Clerk and Engineer were directed to prepare proposed assessments of the costs of improving various streets, avenues. and thoroughfares and miscel1aneous improvements in the City of Hopkins, all as more fullY described in Exhibit A. hereto attached and attached to Resolution No. 85-3203 and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, the said Cleric: has notified the Council that such proposed . assessments have been completed and filed in his office for public inipection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF HOPKINS. M!NNESOTA, as fo11ows: 1. A hearing shall be held on September Qth, 1985. to pass upon such proposed assessments, and at such time and place, all persons owing property affected by such improveIT~nts and assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessments. ? The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a Notice of the Hearing .. . on the proposed dssessments to be published at least two weeks prior to the hearingt and he shall state in the Notice the total cost of each of such improvements, Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, this 20th day of August, 1985. . J. SCOTT RENNE, ELLEN LAVIN, Ci ty C1 erk Mayo r .JERRE A. MILLER, 1 City Attorney _._--,-------_.,..,.~--_.~.._-----,.._._------------- .". r~------' ~---, - -~--~ - .. . - . EXHIBIT A ------- - 1. Project 82-Qi. Curb and yuttet' on Tenth Street and Feltl Court from Eleventh Avenue to Eleventh Street South, estimated cost being S12,559.00 2. Project 82-08 and 82-0BA. Road, street lighting and landscaping on Tenth Street and Feltl Court from Eleventh Avenue to Eleventh Street South, estimated cost being $77,197,00, 3, Project 82-09. Storm sewer on Tenth Street and Feltl Court from Eleventh Avenue to Eleventh Street South, estimated cost being $60,256,00 4. Project 83-02. Concrete alley east of 10th Avenue South between 6th St~eet South and 7th Street South, estimated cost being $11,126.00, S. Project 84-01. Concrete curb and gutter and driveways on the north service road of State Highway No.7 from Robinwood Lanr: to County Road #73, estimated cost Deiog $15.041.00. 6. Project 84-02. Concr"ete a l1ey between 16th Avenve rlorth and 17th Avenue North from 4th Street North to 16th Avenue North, estimated cost being $11 t 513 . 00 . . ., Project 84-05. Watermain extension on the East and north side of Chapel ' . View, estimated cost being $43,~52.00 8. Project 85-02. Retaining wall north side of 146 15th Avenue North, estimated cost being $4,197.00. 9. Tree and stump removal at the following locations; 1. 301-10th Avenue North, Lot 13, 8lock 99 West Minneapolis Second Division, total cost being $286.00. 2. 22-6th Avenue North, Lot 5, Block 65 West Minneapolis Second Division, total cost being $155.00. 3. 630 West Park Valley Drive, Lot 9, B10ck 3 Park Valley Second Addition, total cost being $329.00. 4. 10I-12th Avenue North, Lot II, Block 77 West Minneapolis Second Division, total cost being $339.00. 5. 142 Harrison Avenue South, Lot 11 and 12, Block 36 West Minneapolis Center, total cost being $ 190.00. 6. 203 Wilshire Walk, lot 2, Block 2 Kncllwood. total cost being $223.00. I 10. Instal1at1on outside reader on meter at 129-135 13th Avenue South, Lot la, 11 & 12, Block 9 West Minneapolis, tot.al cost being S59.00. . I 1 I I i.. l - ._-,- HIL- ~- _,JH I --!III' I... :,;" . I --~--------.------_.__...__.--_.._.- N I .' \ ,f i , ..< ,L " ' ) \' r. \ ~ .... "- ~'_' lJ , r, i'J ' C i ~Q \}). -(\ ; \ ( t r ~ , ~~rl' ..... ~ \ \' t ~ I '.... "}J /~ '"[:H .:5""~ I /' ~ . . / / ~ -- r (( ~ I t \) o' ~ ~ r: ,t t~ I t'-\ i ~ \ \ ~! .- ' \ I 1 I ' I ' \ \_------ -- .... - . ------~ . '----_..~------_..._~-- :5' ,/t?/::i :r t< /' /,( /; 0 _ __ - ......-..-_'...- -'-,~~--......-....,,-_._--,~ '-'~--'-----"'-_._'-~~------~---"""""""'--~'- ~ /-~,.) g;;: ~"J 7' _'I ::;,,'8 ;'/:;v/l'~-< /" v .. o,.R ~ f'6.1fC) .(('..-; "'.. '''/f ....... ~ 8 .'7./ ~ II. "./" .<"....// "'" ./ r./,f .., ~:; 5';"0,.,&...... ,<::'.6 .'v'--,? '7 /~ r. ~/ ;i._;: ~. / STo 150. G'Di - 1 .lj!Jp. 3/ jP61f: tJ# If . ;f" 5 /. 0 - J1 d Jftf~7. J,o ~f(/ if) ,;if If1 '(." t' .;t ;.n '17 . 00 . - (t;~ WI W ~5l51 i J I -., ,.{ ..1:2'2.3 ~ I I , (<; II? ~L '! ./;,117,1,1) Y . ~ 1J ~1I97-&.() o J~'?7.c,o - Jf97-6O 50. l- iD. ST. I 1 9 r 1 \1") I . W ~ ci ~(j I r~ 7" ~ Il ' -,- ~"'-/./' . ,- -;!"' :; ,) -' /1: J ('0 5' ~ tJ " - /" ." 8:~ -0;(, ',f (.1 J . ~......r_ _"'.." ___'_ ....-~~~~ _J~T ~rli" V T1 - _Ill-. .-1. .rx:r~ - 1IIl!J.~,~ _~. " I II J l~_~] 4TJi . 6.,..." __", . - r/~p~~ I ;i"rof.A-' I h 11'57,(7.1 I I '" L, 4~ lofi!17. ~ l"- I --- .... /l ' . '7 .0:, A '" -'<" f') '1 $ ~ :1,.."., ,..., ("If !J'" 0 .. r- (J~t)J 8"1-0.1,., ~ ~ o!', . ..-' '_ ' ... ""'~~""".""~"'."~'.;~/t"... ...... _0 _& ",."~. ;" .0.;,.."." L. ,...,:-;: ~.. >to .. ..... _'" IJW. ..- -u-.-a _ -. - :. r,r-r-ilT ~ --'-----..... v~~Ift'P- - ~ ~ n -. 'TL . . N 110. / / I~ / I, f I ~ I o '0 L_ 00 l{> ^~ .~ ~ I r ~ ~ I V ~ I ,~ , I ~ ~ S ~ ~f . I~ ~ \ I - ~J' ",Jj IS_, ,""v~ 'I{ ~ ~ '. ~\ '" "- } ~I I ~ . ~ '{ \/ r ~ ~, '- . ~ ~, ~. ' , - ~ ~ '1._ '\.i · K; : '" If- . ''----.. '<It ~ .i J ~ 1 1 ~ V'\~' I ~--...., , -9.p",~ ' .~, 1"1 l... I r , .. ......""-- .................. I t ~.~ v -< $ ~ - ~. k' -.............l~.~ '~>.. , - <.- ~~.... ~>" '. -~'~- '. <, / \'),f I a~t/4~ --? 1\ I ~~ I I --....<~ ~., ''----.. · ,. W' ' ,a "'. , " I I r.........'......... u~w~ . - - '" rt'A""'.J -^ , / p, . r' '_ y ~" ;, r ~ t II., ,., :;55 S'S .:f/ C; i./r', _ "'( c r , L . O"O!'o..> . ~,,!'" '~,I'J '10 fr. r_r~ Ie'""..., roE''''. I,. 010 5 . " .~ ,,~-'" .,a '''{' .. .o$'~ 0 f.n<.6~ . n'1 r" ' -, - I. r;) -'", . -' y bA ,'f' .' _ .. i.'< /'0'.<-0" --'1'01 · '. . ii' !.:-. a..' 'f 'r ' ~r.t 1.,,"'.'. .' , .:..... I , " ,.., -~- t;.. . ~' -' c. --.., ~- '7/'71.: .- ~/ I' ./ ........... I ...... ..- , ~- ~.. .~ . CITY OF HOPKINS ..-: ... 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTl1 HOPKINS. MINNESOT^ 5534:) ~11/935-8H" IIp.te: September 26, 1985 - __ U m b r ell a L i a b i 1 i t Y ~ - ~ Insurance Purchase PURPOSE :~ The purpose of this report.is.t~ re~ommend City Council action on { the purchase of umbrella 1~C!blllty ~nsurance. BACKGROUND For a number of years, the City of Hopkins has carried umbrella, or "excess;' liability insurance, to guard against extraordinary claims and damage awards, Specifically the Ci ty has cat' r i e d a policy with a $5,000,000 limit. This, coupled with a $600,000 underlying pOlicy, provided $5,600,000 worth of insurance J protection. J I .1 On September 1 , 1985, the $5,000,000 u n b t' e 11 a coverage expired. As the attached memos from tri.:: Finance Director indicate, repeated attempts to secure continued coverage at the $5,000,000 I level ha.ve failed. Currently, t h<~ Ci ty has a binder for excess covE=rage in the amount of .$1,000,000, however the cost is extremely high ($31,500). Securing liability and excess liability insurance coverages has I become a national d.llernma. Increases of 100 to 1000 perr:ent over last year!s premiums are common for those cities lucky enough to find a company that will p:'"'ovide coverage. Excludin~ t 11 e excess liabUity premium, the City of Hopkins has experienced a 101% increase in premiums over those pa Ld in 1984-85. ThL'3 occurred even though (.1aims experience remained the same. Excess (umbrella) fJremiums will increase from $5t500 fat' $5,000,000 cover'age, to $3J.,5CO for $1,000,000 coverage. This I'epresents an astronomical 2763% increase for diminished co\erage. I ANALYSIS I -- ( As the at.tached memos 3!"ld articles point out, liability insurance l~ both scarce and expen::, lVt:.. C) " conCE'!"f) to the City of Hopkins I ''-. .l. is the need for excess Jiabil"ltv coverage. A reduced level of C 0 vet' age 13 available, but ~ \. 3 SIgnificant c: os t. J -- CI _ l -~-,---Councir Rept # 7 " , ., ~~.. ",';"," , .n~ I'!"__JII~ JL - -J _"i'~-~i'!IlIF~_~__. " , '_,,' '. "". '. \;:- ,~" '.l ,r.. . - --------~-~~~~--- A factor to consider in weighing the pUr'chase of excess liability insurance is the governmental lrnmunity provision "f State law. Currently. cities are immune f r'O m paying liability damages in - excess ot' $600,OQO. The 0 re t.i c all y , at 1 eas t , i t would seem unnecesaary for cities to carry excess liability coverage. Unfortunately~ COUt'ts t h rougllou t the United States have been awarding damages in excess of statutory limits, calling into question th'-" validity of governmental immunity. The City Attorney was questioned regarding the advisability of dropping and/or reducing the City's excess coverage. His opinion was that the City should attempt to retain the $5,000,000 policy. but failing that, t.o at least secure some adtH tional coverage -- beyond the basic $600,000. Based on recent case law, the Ci ty appears to be well advised to obtain the $1,000,000 excess liability policy currently available. ALTERNATIVES The City Council has the following alternativp.s available for dealing with this issue: (1) Dc not purchase e}.Ccess liability coverage. This would '["or c e ""t'h'e-c i t Y to ... --, - .. fer awards above seJ...i:-1.nSUi"'ance any $600,000. The City's reserves could fund up to $1.5 million without borrowing. ., ( 2 ) Purchase excess liabil_i ty covera e currently available. - This means purchasing a $l,OOO~OOO policy for 31,500. This provides total protection of $1,600,000. RECOMMENDATION St.aff recommends altel'l1ative 112. ThE' volatility of the marketplace coupled with the uncertainty of the City's eJr~posure , makes this the more pruaent choice. .1 ~ II Craig R -E.E..- C i t Y t-l a nag e r - - .. -: ~ e Memorandum City of Hopkins TO: Craig R, Rapp ,~ FROM: John E. Schedler' \ SUBJECT: \) Insurance Premiums DATE: September- 17, J985 - I have uew received the insurance quotes for the liability/property policies 9-1-85 to 9-1-86. Most of the ~ates doubled except for umbrella excess liability which is a disaster. . The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust ~uote is as follows: 1984/85 1985/86 Increase Premium Quote Amount i. Property 5 ~ 924 15,800 9,876 167% Automobile 22,95J. 27,134 4,183 18 General Liability 18,701 44,265 25,564 137 A -0- 8.385 8,385 Reserve Assessment - --, 47,576 95,584 48.008 101 Umbrella Excess Liability 31,500 $1,000,000 Limit A. In addition to the reinsurance, each city pays along with its premium a tlreserve assessment" equal to 10% of its premium. This provides UteIT \Vith an additional reserve against the possibility or unexpectedly high losses. LMCIT expects to be able to discontinue (11i5 reserve assessment after one year. This is a new "change". The relatively smaller increase in the auto policy results partly from II increasing the deductibilfties on the heavier city vehicles and fire trucks. I -"'''',-::;;,."",-_. ,". ",". .:....,.."....--.-- ~ ----- ~-~ IA""--- I .J .~.~''', ,,. _.~, '.. _, , < . . .... r.... ,... 1111~ - - r"""'llV""" rf - Ii . -- _........'- .. - tit In order to even obtl!in a quote on umbrella excess 1 iab,iJ ity. Cityside Insur-ance agency informed the city that their companies would require a minimum of 51,000,000 underlying insurance in the League program. The League'R maximum basie liabilf.ty is $600,000 and rhus we requested a quote on il $1,000,000 umbrella excess from the League to satisfy the basic underlying minimum, When we put in place the quotes in this manner the excess umbrella companies said they would not even quote unless a cut through endorsement was received from the League's reinsurers. A cut through endorsement is a guarantee from the reinsurer that no matter what happens to the League program, the reinsurer will cover the first $1,000,000 of liability. This endorsement was not possible to secure. Therefor at this time we cannot obtain a quote for umbrella above what the League would provide at the outlandish premium of $31,500. For comparison. last year the city carried $5,000,000 umbrella, above the basic $600.000 liability. for a premium of $5,500 (2,763% increase) The agent for the League program, First Insurance Valley Vi.ew is continuing to search the market and indicated there could be a reversal of this premium fiasco within a y~ar. I recommend the League quotes for property, automobile and general liability (including reserve) be accepted. The option for a $1,000.000 umbrella is ther~ and the city should probably acc~pt the $31.500 quote for this next year ",. and monitor the market. For any excess umbrella above $1.000,000 the city is forced into self-insurance. The 1986 budget will cover the basic policies, but not the $31,500 umbrella. AddHionally I would recommend that the city levy the allowable limit to provide for risks that raaybe incurred in the future. This could provide $500.000 toward self insurance. 1 I It I i ., 1 ___:__,_._"U:_;, t~~:"?"_~'.:" -:-j ;,:.' " _"":~;'>""~,":':;:.'""'. :,..; ~_ ...._ l '&JIi.....II111 j ---- - Rl8I .-JoI..1IiIdlftiI!l - -- ~- ~~~~---------'~-,-~-~-- .,~<~~:\, "t, . ~" CITY OF HOPkiNS ,~I 0 ""'HI'l' 8T1"I:T COUl"H PHONE, ~38-$4"" HOPKINS, MINNESOTA OSU:S ....~ ';;...~ .' "...: ~"'. :':" ",',1'. ."~ - INTER-OFFiCE MEMO TO Craig Rapp Ji!: DATE September J, 19~ FROM_--.:! 0 h n E. Schedler SUBJECT. ~ City Insurance Cov~rage 1985-1986 . ~ A couple of months ago I requested the Cityts insurance agents to obtain quotes And search for new insurance carriers where possible. With the upheaval in the insuranclC industry at this time it has been an arduous task requiring much more information with fewer companies interested in City coverage. Workmens Compensation The agent could not find a.uother company so the ren~wal was 'with '. the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) with a deposit premium of $ 81,229 (subject to change upon audit of actual payroll) whic.h is a 70% increase from the prior yea,. . General Liability and Auto Package~ Again a different company could not be located to even compare rates which are anticipated to substantial increase. There was a change in the administrator of the LMCIT casualty program froTI: l'.!:lerican Business Insurance to North Star Casualty June 1 . 1985. With this change and No):'ch Star moving their offices, cur agent has been unable to obtain a quote or:: the rates to date. The City has received a binder for these coverages. Umbrella ----------- The company who provided this coverage last year no longer will cover. cities. Cityside Insuranc.e Agency has located a company to provide uIIibrella, but under certatn new conditions. They would require the underlying LHCIT policy carry a minimum lj_abl.i~t:y of $ I,OOO.OOO.LMCIT will only write up to $ 600,000, but will in addition provide a maximum ;! of $ 1,000,000 in umbrella coverage. This combination would be satisfactory to the new excess umbrella company to provide $ 5,000,000 additional umbrella. However they \<'i11 not quote a rate until they know the premiums LMCIT will charge for the basic poliCies and in order to bir:.d the coverage September 1 , 1985 they wou Id require the City pay 50% of the ultimate $ 5,000,000 premium if the City chooses not to accept their coverage. Our agent is giving a ballpark estimate that the premium for the $ 5,000,000 umbrella C 0 vet' age will be $ !l 5 . 0 0 0 per year. Last year the City's premium was S 5,500. The actual pr(~mium should be kr:own by early next week. ---- .- ___U"___~~,~__.~____~__~'_ . The alternatives are l. Bind coverage with an unknoW'il cost - both -- for the binding (one: h~lf) lind/or ultimate total cost :t$ 15.000. 2. Wait the week until actual pr.emiums .3l:'e known Bnd do wtthout the excess umbrella f 0 l' a short period of time. 'I .I 3. Do not carry any excess umbrella and rely on the $ 1.600.000 I covel'age jn the basic policy from LMCIT. In t:he meiUGt"y of our agent and since I have been with the City, no claim has ever been filed against the excess umbrella policy. In light of recent Court/Jury decisions, which tend to "give the City Bwsyll I would recommend alternative one. The City would then hope for a turn around in the insurance world and could find another company for coverage or the premium balloon would become mere reasonable in the f'..l.ture. ,- near . ........- -PI' - - ~~-'''liIlilIII-~_ __ m - r - .'f '. CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 f'lRST STREET SOUTl1 HOPIC,INS, MINNESOT A SS:U,) 612/935.8.7. Family Plust Inc. ~ re: gambling application PURPOSE: To recommend to the Council action on a Class B gambling license which Family Plus has applied for at the Hopkins Bowl. BACKGROUND: . .'1 On September 13~ 1985t Joy Harris, Administrativ~ Director for Family Plus, i Inc., applied for a Class B gambling license (raffles. paddlewheels. tipboards; ,I j and pull tabs). Family Plus, Inc. is a charitable organization which operates I the West Suburban Juvenile Defense Prograln (Hopkins has referred almost 800 juveniles to this program since its inception in 1980), parenting skills classei~ .j and counseling to individuals who can't afford the CO$t of counseling (both I ..1 on a one-to-one and gr'oup basi s) , Furth~r background is provided in Council :":J Report #66 ~hich dealt with a gambling appearance by John Ross of the Braille "l I ..~'1 Sports Foundation at the September 18 ~eti~g, ::,~ ANALYSIS: I ,cJ I ' .,.~ Je~re Miller is formulating a formal policy rather than an ordinance to "i~ .:'~ .- deal with gambling applications. He will explain why a policy is the preferred ~ m~thod rather than pass an ord'inance. ;1 ALTERNATIVES: 1 ) Approve the license application and allow charitable gambling at the I Hopkins Bowl. I 2) Pass a resolution specifically denying this applicatlon which will be I I sent to the Minnesota Charitable Gambliny Contral Board. I RECOMMENDATION: I Staff reccmnends Alternative #2. The Council felt very strongly last spring that there were enough gambling licenses in Hopkins. Once a prece- dent is established with one operation in a public bar, the rest of the bars will almost surely follow, requesting charitable gambling in their estab- ! llshment.s. Respectfully submitted, , f'_.... \' it'-P 1 ,,) G, <...~~ ~\.A-Q__ ----- . i J.- ScotCRenne \ '-- Cnlln"il Rept It City ClprktAsse5$or or ---.- ,,,_. L ." '", .. . ~1 ~~ .. ~~ ;',:. '1 ~,(.. ~ '~';'~.'~' ~L~-4. .:I~' >-c't~ "t." '~~,,' ;.'{~; ,~:\:?::....-....~..." ,;~...~~ :..',:~.~~: 0 :."\:40,: ':...~~..~..-> r ~ ".,>: .~; ~ ," ;::'~;" -:. : ~r~'~<',: ~:"-"" .'.~' ~ '1. 0;' . .r.... ~ ';i.~ .' ~ \.. /:. ",~'\'. ~~"" ~,'~ .,;.., '\ ~':.~";;'i- ~'..''.Y .. ::'.. -t:, " . ''''..' ,!q..h ' CITY OF HOPKINS 10'0 FIRST STREt:T SOUTH HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 5s..~3 612/935-&474 MEMO Oa t.e : September 25~ 1985 To: Craig Rapp From: Jerre Miller Re: Proposed Gambling Ordinance You have aSKed me whether an ordinance should be drafted pertaining to gambling. I have read t.he gambling statute several times and spoken with the gambl ing board representative and the attorney general representing it concerning the interpretation of t.he statute. . r have been told the board's jurisdictional concerns pert.i.:lin only to the operation of bingo, raftles, paddlewheels1 tipboards and p~ll-t~bs as defined in M. S. S 349.121 subd. 2. All applicants must submit a request for licensing to that board. The statute allows a city to set mQre stcingent regula.t ionl; of any gambling forms within its boundaries including its prohibition. It: may also require those organizations who infrequently use bingo or I:affles to be licensed even thoug h the statute exempts them from licensing. More importantlYe however, the statute 3110..5 the City to adopt a resolution disapproving t.he license granted by the state so long as this action is given to the state within 30 days after the City receives r.otice that the st,ate has issued a license to someone who wishes to engage in gambling in Hopkins. For that reasonr I .4~..... n ' ... think. an ordinance is necessary in that UV"i.:a. ...... the Clty by resolut,ion may sim?ly affirm or deny the use of a license in HopKins that W3S issLled by the State. It would seem more ,:qJprVpr iate for tile City to ad0pt a policy uFon which its resolutions would be bdsed. . An Equal Opp?rtunity Employer - -- ---------~ --- .J5iRII!!! -- --~~ ~. '. ~ -r-o . . M. s. S 349.30 defines gambling devices are defined as .slot. machines, roulette, punchboards and pinball machines... These devices are outside the jurisdiction or concern af the State Board and although the statute seems to pro~ide the issuing author ity of a lj,cense for the use of these devices in the city other lang uage convinces me their use is illegal. I am not pleased with this language of the statute because it does not tell me clearly whether the use of these devices, if licensed by the City~ is legally permissible undeL the staLute. Tbe only definition of legal gambling is in M. S. S 349.13 which is a miser:able definition. I t says: -Lawful gambling is not a lottery or gll.mbling within the meaning of S 609.75 to 609.76 if it is conducted under this chapterw I 9 u-e ss that means if the City or .''; t.he board has licensed someone to use the devices, it does not constitute the crime of gambling defined in S 609.75. :.>:~~ ....;) I would recommend the Council formulate a policy include the basis ...:.~ upon. which it would affirm or deny the use of gambling equipment .::~1 .: '..:-~' when llcense<i by the State. JAM . . . . , .,,':; - -: ",..:".~' , ..~" ',:::.,;,~ . :'~':~~~ .1 ..<~ '] ....1 "I 5] "j~ ....~~ .-:.~ 'I .' J.~ I I j ~I . I - - r~ · - .' , ~ " ". ~#.-I ~ "~-'i ~ "~.",~. ~ ~l.. '''_ l..'i~..~ ~.': .1!l!iIIiiii.:!....;.~.iliIiili'-il!!.. ~:.",. . .....-;,.: ' CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343 61OYS-.35-847O( Sept.ember 24 ~ 1985 Resolution Approving 1- Compost Agreement purpose: The purpose of" this report is to recommend action on a Reso ll....... i cn authorizing the signing of' an agreement between the City of' Hopkins and Hennepin County f'or the composting of' yard wastes. Bac.!.<ground: Compost f'rom leaves and grass is avai lable as a pub 1 i c service From Hennepin County ap.d a number of' the mun , c I pa 1 It 1 es within the county. Compostfng reduces the need For i andf' ill I ng yard wastes whi le providing an excel I ent 5011 condftioner. The CIty has be~n Involved in this program Fer several . years. We make leaf bags avaf lable for city residents" pickup the bags and haul It to the compOsting site. I Hennepin County personnel handle the actual compostlng. Analysis: Composting helps reduce the amount of wastes that the Cfty I must send to !andfllls. Compostfng leaves is considerably I cheaper than taking them to a 1 andF ill . It also ffts in i wi"th the proposed recyc ling p'~ogram. 80th programs will I I help the rity meet the goal of reducing our 50 lid waste. I ! .A. 1 ternat i ves : 1- Do nothing: The City wi 11 5t ill have to deal with I leaves. Without composting 1 eaves wi j 1 have t:o be sent to a I , I andf i ! I . 2~ Sign the Agreement with Hennepin County. J I I Re~Qrr!n~Q~~t i_on: . AcJopt the Re50 I ut ion Ei"d ..- : ,..~,...." I-ho ~'; r ~.) prnr...n. t w i '~. h "~onn,;,:u..... t ...... ~. ~..-. ~- .- - . .--.. .-r-' .. COllnty. 1/ it JI' .' ,-' .,..-'.... .-' ,...,' . ~ . ~':r;~!":'- -_.----LJf:-~::.Lp ..:.-L.._~.~.. / J l m C,pne lIe Arlm III i strat! VP Ass I stant Counei I Rept #/3 -'I i _''';; ""J.;";"",,,~,<:!,,'~<\_'J":;"::"'-,! ".".~ _~~~ ~ - __J " .. ~,~.. ,ro, ~~~~-C-~"'~""'" j.., : .. . ~ ''--'': ~ . CITY Of HOPE\I ~.JS Hennepin County, Minnesot.a Resolut.ion If 85-]214 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SIGNING AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR COMPOSTING OF YARD WASTES WHEREAS, Yard wastes make up 9% of all municipal solid wast in the County; and WHEREAS~ Yard was t e s can be c.onverted into compost, useful as soil conditioner and bedding material; and WHEREAS, ... '- - County 0.""'-3""" has adopted R~sol \1 tinn No. illl:' LlV-t.A.a. _ 80-1l-930t a policy to proce~s leaves and grass into compost at municipalities which establish a cornposting site; and WHE RE,~S, The City has established a compost site and desires to participate with Hennepin County in composting operations~ NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Coune11 of the City . of Hopkins that it hereby approves participation of the Ci ty In the Joint Compost Program and authorizes the Mayor and Manager to sign the Cooperative Agreement. Pa.ssed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota; on this 1st day of October 1985. J . SCOTT RENNE, ELLE:N LAVIN City ClerK r.1 a y 0 r JERRE A. MILLER C i t Y Attorney . _ i~. ~.. l:IIliL..d1l IYITII _,_.1_.....,111;]__ Ll ~ _~_J'~_______1IBI:l -- -~- .~-- 111- ~ . 1-"', :,,, .:',;;'..IlI.;..,..,...,...,.,.J,. ~,~ -'11 ~;a. / CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUni ...--: . HOPKINS MINNESOTA 553t3 .....~'.---... - - 612/9J~8~7. September 24, 1985 PHYSICAL FITNESS COURSE ON GEN1'RAL PARK =-i PURPOSE The purpose of this action is to secure permission for School District 270 to install physical fitlless equipment on Central Park. BACKGRQQlID The Hopkins School District has obtained the physical fitness equipment and instruction signs ideal for a phyBicalfi~~eBs court or oourse. The equipment and signs are manufactured by GAMEFIELD. The School District's initial intent was to install equipment in a relatively small area (court) at Katherine CUl'ren Elementary, or perhaps overlap upon Central Park. An onsite meeting was held September 12, Elrue Dunsmore, Richard Wilson and several staff members of the school district discussed use of this equipment and the best location to accommodate that use. The outcome was a decision to recommend that most of the physical fitness equipment (stations) be installed on Central . Park 7 spread out and pl~ced adjacent to the asphalt valkway that circles the park. Assuming that t.he public will desire mling this equipment, including during the normal school day, it was agreed that this arrangement vas better thB..Tl if the equipm.ent were to be in a confined area near the schoo1. Safety, accessibility, maintenance and aesthetics were considered in determining the location for each station. I ALTERN'ATIV \f'_q !n alternative to the proposal pre56llted here is to deny the School I District's offer. It appears that they would install the equipment on school j property, and probably ill a "court" configuration, 32' x 32'. t The Hopkins Park Board discussed this proposal at its September 16, 1986 meetirig and submit the following recommendatiolls: 1. That the offer of School District #270 to furnish and install a fitness course on Central Park b8 accepted and that the School District be allowed the opportunity to use the course in the same manner as the genel'sl public. I 2. That fu~ a~'eement be made that School District #270 will install the proposed fitness course I1t Katherine Curren/Central Park and be responsible for maintenace and liability. I At the City AttorneY8 nirection I have comm~~icated to {.tr. Robert Johnston that a letter should be sent to the i~i ty, stating theil' intentions to insta.ll and maintain the 0:::'c;l:r:,,'!;:t and. held the City harmless for injuries. I I . L contd -Council Rept # , i.; -' --.-./ ~ - - -- // . Physical Fitness Course on Central Park Page 2 . RECO~ATION It is recommended that at the October 1, 1985 meeting or the City Council the following illotion be approved: "That School District #270 be allowed +;0 install physical fitness equipment on Central Park, subject to receipts of written documents approved by the City Attorney". By Richa.rd 'Wilson Recreation and Park Director .' . ______.____~_____~.~t , -, CITY OF HOPKINS '--:' 1010 FIRST STREET soun~ ..; -. HOPK,NS. MINNESOTA 55::\4:'1 612/935-6H4 September 25, 1985 Recommendation for the KSTP Billboard PURPOSE ' - Recommendation by the Zoning & Planning Commission for signage for the KSTP billboard. BACKGROUND The Mayot' asked the Zoning and Planning Commission for its recommendation for signage for the KSTP billboard. This billboard was granted a variance toexceed the maximum allowable height on June 18, 1985. One of the conditions of the variance wat that the Hubbard Broadcasting provide a directional arrow and the City name (HOPKINS) attached, in an aesthetically pleasing manner, to its sign structure at t.he propsed s.i.te. Arthur Dean had submitted a sketch of possible signage. RECOMMENDATION The Commission recommended the sketch that was submitted by Arthur.' Dean with a few exception., 1 . the red str5.ps would remain without the arrow. 2 . special event banne t'S be placed on the r-ed stips. The colors and lettering were r'ecommended to i remain the same as th~; sketch. l r ')1 ~I 'I/~~_~ J Nan c y .; ii e r son <)1<- Community Development Analyst '- - ---Council Rept # 75 ~_.------. J ...... ,-.r ,", .~. ., ~.-"" ,",.." I" , ....! : .~/";:., .: .'. ~ .,.. t~. . o~ '..;.. _ ' . ,./', ~. '.~ . . . . ' -' ~-... "-.. ~ :;. . of:' '.. ...: ;.... ; -, - 'w I. 1- v I II (a I ~ ... . .a~~- - -- .. ~ ,~'~_~~::_~:.~ ~. "~ _ .' ~" N CITY OF HOPKINS ~ ~~ ._ _. -,.. IOlOflnsrsmEHsourH , ...-;::..s.~,_. -"= HOPXINS, MiNNESOTA 5S3~~ 61 ?I935-847... Date: September 27, 1985 ----------- VARIANCE REQUEST PUR POSE St. Therese To recommend action on an application by St. Therese Home, Inc. for a variance to allow parking within the 30 foot front yard setback at 1001 - 1011 Feltl Court. BACKGROUND On 9/3/85 the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for construction of a 240 unit elderly residential facility and a 200 bed nursing home at 1001 - 1011 Feltl Court in the southwest corner of the City, contingent upon the applicant, St. Therese, meeting the following conditions: - Approval by Nine Mile Cr'eek Watershed District I-berm and landscaping to be completed with the first phase ~ (construction of the residential facility). I The plan~ as approved, detailed 34 visitor parking spaces along Feltl Court set back 30' from the property line, as this is t.he I front yard set back requirement and the Zoning Ordinance aoes not allow parking to be provided in this area. The representatives of St. Therese, on reviewing the approved plant now feel that 34 visitor spaces will be inadequate. As a resultt they are requesting a 15f va.riance to allow additional parking in the front yard set back area. This will provide them an additional 11 spaces. They have stated they are requesting the variance because they are not able to move the development to I the east to facilitate the additional parking and still maintain I the 30 foot set back for the following reasons: - poor soil c0nditions to the east of the proposed building. - Westbrook residents have stated they want the facility to be as far west on the site 33 possible. Hr::' :<~.1 ~-.\: j\ , ~T ----_.,--~- -~--- ~---'-- I IT he? 0 n i n p; F. P] ann i n f7, C:., m fTl i ~, " 1 0 [J .:J P P r (, '/ e ci t h I'." V a ria nee r e que s ton S e p tern II e r 2 I, ~,i t rl t f1 e i' ( ] j () ''': i n g c () t; (j i t j n n ,; : .- l - COUflCI I Rept # I', j .... ~- ~~~- ~ '- -- ... .,--JIIa . , , . - Fifleen feet variance go no further south than the closest po i n t of the building to Feltl Court. - Landscape screening being opaquE' in nature be p.lanted in proximity to the parking lot curb and be mainLained to t.he height of 4 f€'et mtnimum and t.o work out a landscape that It/ould not "dead end II terminate at the south. ( / 'hJ ~~~~~ . Jim Kerrigan -J"'" C OffilllUn i ty Development Director . . lo M1.i1rf_~,",~~J..h17 --~ ~111 11i1BUMiiT'--- _'II-- -, ..ill __u -.llI1i - n ~ F~ , . , . September 10, 1985 r;ase No: 85-49 . i Applicant: St. Therese Home, Inc. Location: 1001-1011 Feltl Court Request: Variance to allow parking with~n front yard setback. STAFF FINDINGS & COMMENTS: Anderson 1. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow parking within the front yard setback. The subject site is zoned R-4 PUD. 2. The applicant was granted a Conditional Use Permit on September 3~ 1985~ to construct a residential/nursing home facility. The applicants approved plan has 34 visitor parking spaces, with the variance at least 11 more additional spaces will be provided for visitor parking. 3. Ordinance 427.07 states no front yard required by this Ordinance shall contain any building or other structure except fencing, ornamental outdoor furniture. penmitted signs and landscaping. The front yard setback for an R-4 District is 30 feet. The proposed plan shows a setback of 10 feet. .. 4. The subject plan without the variance has the required parking spaces. 5. Ordinance 427.23 states that variances shall be approved only by circumstances unique to the property under consideration would cause undue hardship to owner. The appl icant has stated that soil conditions would not per'mit IOOv'ing the build- ing to the east. . iIPJII -- . -~------,. .At -.... '....'~~ ----A ---''I'''''"" . ' . ..' Z3 I. tt. r M''', '-~ . ~, . '....... ., ". ~ ~ ~ \ , J C,'. :' .. ~~. t4 ~ . , l !~' ,,~ / I' .f , / ./ J J , .."':.~ -0. P AIIJlN:; LEVU a. eae.c ~ ' ~~ ,,,. 1-;;- . ~.. I ~/ . /.' ~J 'U V , .-. . I . _,' .,;. J . '. . '.' }'-l- ". ,.1 : I . I I /.,- . I I Ii I I"""" t I I "l , , :J. I I ~"; 4- I " I I to I' : I I ' , ,'. .~ l I ",' J,._ _y '. -t..... N I · . ',~ 1I~: ,I '..'nl , . .~ r- I .. l' " .,.. Ll ; , If i 'l'TI .' . . _ .. 1 .i I li_L~ I L-CC"-I,,,,., 0 r i.Jor;aJ(fc..e , , . r {. C:1 (J ~.=. +- .' . ,,_.'< 1- I . -- .' . ,0 -- ----."'- -.,. ----~--- ------ --- , .---~~ - ~.-...-.-_~ . " -- 1 R0~FE PROPERTIES, I Ne. . 7( } Wesl ey TempI e Bu; I di ng I 2 J Ens t Grant Street Mi nneapol i 5 J "'# nnesot a 55403 September 13, 1985 Hopkins City Council City of Hopkins; Minnesota 55343 SUBJECT: Renewal of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 84 - 27 Madam Mayor Ellen Lavin, On September 18, 19841 Rolfe Properties, Inc., was granted a Conditional Use Permit to build an office building in the City of Hopkins. The location is at 635 - 637 Second Avenue South. A legal description of the real estate is on file with the original application. Due to conditions beyond cur control, we will be unable . to start construction on the office bui.lding before the present Conditional Use Permit expires. Most all hurdles have been overcome, and I believe construction will start within the next thirty to ninety days. I respectfully request that the present Conditional Use Permit Case ~lo. 84 - 27 be extended for one year from the expiration date, September 18, 1985. Yours very truly, i ~ /) A I / /14- . I / ..--< /1 (, ~--;t //'.. '/1 _. '" 'j r~ '--_ _ ~g W. Pitt Rolfe, ~resident . .. '.', '.'-" . ,", . ' . ~ '. -: ;.'!. I: \.:.....:.. :. .::..".,.. ....t...,...~ '.', - .-~ -- - -- aIL J~~----:d ----,.----- . ,. 0; ., VIII C '.. CITY OF HOPKINS ""~,.-;..._". - --:. Date: Septenber 17, 1985 . HOPKINS JAYCEE IS - MAINS'I'REET - I - ON &:ilJ:.E 3. 2 % BEER LICENSE PfJRPOSE: The purr:ose of this report :is to reccmnend Council action on a request f'"or a 2 day tarporary en-sale 3.2% Beer License. BACKG..'UJND : Applicant: Michael Gerard Pakenham, ~s Jayceefs Date Requeste::l: Friday, O::rt:ober. 4, 1985, 4: 00 pn - 1: 00 am Saturday, October 5, 1985, 8:00 am - 6::00 pn Location; Downtown Mainst.reetbetwaal 9th and 10+-.l1 AV-cnue3 Peasan: In ccncert with Booya Fest Fecord Che:::k clear en awlicant and organizaticn. REXD.I>1E1IDATICN : ~ed on irtformatif'J} provided. and records check, Police Depart:rnent sees no reason to withhold approval. .' ~--r~' Warren R. Neff, Sergeant: fIopkin~ Police De:part:InEnt \ i I I I Council Repi # IS J I - - ...~.--- ". _c~J .-~ APPLICATION FUR LICENSE ci ty of Hopkins I Mi nn'~S0td CIONS' Print or 'l'fI><C all info<motion LICENSE 1<). Ile uo'Jersigned hereof IM'kes ,l.pplic("\ti.oo for the licenf;e(p.) irrHcated belON for the pm:"icxi 0Jj.H~y~ r""",...::ernbcr 31 of the Yt:~'.Ic Pllntyrf ,It 1 eft ab..-"n:, Lic'~n8': Type /~",.;;>" __, ;f,.~ r;;J /t~~~ ~~) s:.~ ~ Fee v ...... . ~ ... ,,- License 1'yr;e f'ee --, ~-........--- - L.icense 'TYl::e Fee j -.....-.-.--~-- 0_.... _ _ _ -...-..--_.. (LICENSE FOR VF.:NDIN:; MtC...UNES MJST FIlL cur ~5ED V1..:NDli'lJ MA.QUt--l'E FDR'1) 'ibta 1$ ~(). (.} () Type of License (circle Oll'e) I ndi vidu,31 ONner Partnership Corporation 11.- ,?,.,,'/"), . Jc, 'i '::' t" ....' " Licensee Name ~r('"-".-! ,.- First Middle ------ Last Date of Drivers License & State Hane Ph:me~7 Work Phone ;+I-p/-p,,' Birth i,(-1Z:..:.i01 Partner or Officer , Representing l\H:.:>licant /V!.C 1'"1<7<::. / f-q,hy-.J IQ,.4r'/'2LX/:t. First Middle Last Date Ot Drivers License & State Hale Prone '1 ;: -'7 ');)" 7 h'ork Phone 9;./ -/ fi?:.. Sirth II. (; Z ' ,c / L2!i.J-- r; {;)) - <..7 ~. J /0 eensee BUsinl~:;S Mdress PO, 6:..,...-<: 3/ ~jicp;l!/I') 5 Phone No. ""'-- """-- , Licensee Operation Ad~'ess (if d2fferent fran above) Prone No. "'......... '" Licensee or Person R~presenting ---~ Licens>:':0 !-Jane Address ) 7 I S- 0= /v' I?I 1/// /;~~~ ,__ _ _ L-: 1-,- ~ II ..., J'./ ./ I .'/ - Ha7e Phone c; ;: ,; - :: ') <,; '7 C' 7/ It' '0--7 .././_ _' J . WOrk. Phone /') - / 'I I If licensee is a partnership or a o.:>rporation, list name, title. home address, and h<::rre tele~ne nurrber of each p3rtner, officer ani dir-ector. Narre Title -~ First, Middle Last Date of Drivers License & State Hone Phone ','lark Phone Bi rtll. - -- - ----"- --- NaJIo2 'ri He - - First Middle wst Oat.1::! of Drivers Licic'.ns'~ & State HOTlt.~ F'h::me ',vork Phone Birth - ---,. ~- N(1n..__~ '1'1 tie -.- .----~-._------... --....... - _.-.----.-..---.--.-'-.--..-_-,- ---- b:-st 1'h d{H e L.l.st [),\ce of l)rlv'~rs Llcense & Stat.': . Ph::me \'.lork Phone Rirth ,1-illti()t\-6TnGSIness (be specific): --~ -------- ----- -~~:, '~~/ ~,",<,+ -(:'/:f~-; '-~'!:"'C';>---,---Q~~ ; - /Ir- ">-f";' ~,--~-:':'/,"~ -'!f.'-"'/ .' ',"- ' '.' " " r"' '.' C'_/'" I~<c).::/...". ".>'~-~ v_~/.':1',""," c:; v Iv' b,' =-=----~,~~__:...L~_~_ ------ ~__ ,._ ;' -~ ~-- _,_ -------.--- _______ Please Ccmp1t.'te R("'.r..'r-'5j,~ side - ~ ....----.--.-.. - ~--~- ~ . ... · - ~ll~~';;.}~ ,. ". .~..'. CITY OF HOPKINS ~....- ~~~.:; _. _.---- . J 1010 "Rsr STREET sourH . "'~"-'-" .:=: HOPKINS. MINNESOTA !>53.3 6\2/935-841" 1986 BUDGET _ I 1985/86 Property Tax Levy, I ~R POSE The purpose of this report is to recommend City Council action on the proposed 1986 Budget and property tax levy. BACKGROUND The City Council has completed two budget review worksessions. At the most recent meeting, held September 26, the 1986 Budget as proposed by the City Manager was approved in concept with the following additions: (1) $3,100 added to the City Manager budget for additional City Newsletter publishing :.'. (2) $2,360 added to Pub 1 ie Works f or purchase of an underbody plow. (3) $1,250 added to General fund departments for safety related expenses. (4) $1~200 added to General Fund departments for addtional license plate fees. The total additions approved on September 26, equal $7,910. It was pointed out at the worksession that the insurance expenditure projections were low, based on recent renewal rates. St.aff recommended that a decision on the insurance budget be withheld until the October 1 Counc.il meeting, due to a pending decision On the purchase of umbrella liability insurance. Based on staff projections, howev~r, and the apparent consensus of the City Council, we feel that a recommendation to increase the 1986 insurance budget by 1.15,950, (generalliabiJity and umbrella) is necessary. ^ ' h ~ . , C ' - '. ' ... .' I I't S sum 1 r: g t, e C, 1 t:; <) U n ell con C 'J r' S '".' 1 t h t 1,11 S r e <: 0 m men \J a L. l 0) n . I additions to the General fund Budget: as originally proposed now total $Ld,860. ~ Council Rept It 79 ./' <,...~~~ .... ~,.....- - This result in a need for a property tax levy of $2,450,000. It is projected that the City!s mill rate will increase 1.544 ~ills . to 18.314. Attached to this report is an arlalysis of the tax levy impact on various properties within the City. ANALYSIS The Council generally agreed with the level of expf~nditur'f."s proposed for the 1986 budget, ioncluding all additions except insurance. The iiisurance projecti.ons have 2,dded approximately .25 mills, but unfortunately, tnis is a largely unavoidable expense. The proposed budget, as originally presented, did not comternplate the approved changes. The significant additional change, liability insurance, is not something the City can modify by changing procedures or reducing service. Therefore, reductions in other areas is the only alternative to increasing revenue via the property tax. Fortunately, the proposed mill rate increase of 1.544 mills does not create a large burden on property tax payers. Assuming no change from other jurisdictions, must residential property owners will receive a reduction in their tax bill, with the owner of a $55,000 home (as an example) receiving about a $10.00 increase. ALTERNATIVES ~- . The City Council has the following alternatives available for dealing with this issue: (l) Adopt the proper.ty tax levy necessary to fund the budget with all proposed additions for a total levy of $2,450,000. (2) Reduce expenditures to a level adequate to address property tax levy concerns. If a reduction is proposed, it will be necessary to specifically identify the amount of the levy or mill rate desired. (3) Increase expenditures and property tax levy beyond identified additions to address service needs no~ included in proposed budget. Again, specificity is required. RECOMMENDATION I recommend Al ternative #1. Al though the original pr'oposed budget did not contemplate a levy quite this high, circumstances beyond our control have increased tlJt LV;:;\., Vi r'unrring t!:e City. Therefore, to maintain services, we must increase revenue. ~~L" ---6 ,~ . I \ _ <-:--_ ( .... / l ~ i, ,\ /':.~'-- ,-..... _- .... .;: f"'"io . , " '" of, 1 '_ ,_, ...... . l~r c..g R ~P,. \...1 l..1 1,,<tna-gCi . ) '. -" ~I._ .I:l. _ ~.-1 -- ---~--~_....... - -- ~ , r . CITY Ol~ HOPKINS Hennepin Counry, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 85 - 3215 A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1985 TAX L~VY COLLECTIBLE IN 1986 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COL~:IL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA. that the following sums of money be levied for the current year collectible in i986 upon the taxable property in said City of Hopkins, for the following purposes; General Fund 2,450,000 Provision has been made for the payment of the City's contrib\ttory share to the Public Employees Retirement Association. Provision has also been made for the payment of principal a.nd interest on the follo~ing bond issues: ;. P.I.R. Fund Issue of 7-1-72 ';, Water Revenue Bonds of 6-1-67 Sanitary Sewer Revenue Bonds of 7-1-.-70 Redevelopment Bonds of 11-1-77 Water Revenue (E.D.A.) of 12-2-0-77 Redevelopment Bonds of 11-1-78 Redevelopment Bonds of 3-1-84 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota, at a regular meeting of the Council held the 1st day of October, 1985. J. Scott Renne Ellen Lavin City Clerk Mayor JetTe A. ~lill€r City Attorney . ---.--- --~ --~ ~- --..--... . l'::"'~~ ~,.,.--~~r.". . . ~<~--- -~ - - . ~ ""'\T >'~",:~~.i: "'};J 9/27/85 . FINAL CHANGES TO 1986 BUDGET ADD NEW TOtAL - Hgr. 40240-203 1,500 3,9:10 Postage Mgr. 1I0420-301 1,600 4tOOO Printing License P.W. 42120-409 800 sao Taxes 8: License P.W. 42120-580 2~360 19,310 Under P.W. 42120-202 1,250 2,300 Park 43550-409 400 400 Taxes & Ins. 43930-412 25,950 43,150 General Ins. 43930-415 10,000 25,000 Unbrella Total General Fund 43,860 4,355,300 .>':" .. ---- . ~--~---_._-,- --.,.,. -- - ~.~ . -",,',?:~!.J . '~'C'" . . . Memorandum City or Hopkins TO: Craig Rapp FROM: Scott Renne SLlBJECT : 1986 Property Tax Estimates DATE: September 27, 1985 As an addition to the memo of August 29, I have calculated the property taxes based upon the estimated pay 86 mill rate of 97.264 (18.314 city mill rate with school, county and miscellaneous mill . rates the same as pay 85). The reduction in taxes with an increased mill rate is due to legislated changes in computation of assessed value and an increase in the st~te paid homestead credit. Residential Co~nercialjlndustrial Mill Rate $55,000 $70~ 75~ j80,OOO $1l5,Q.QQ $100,000 $lt(}OO~OOQ 95.720('85} $432.82 $669.55 $935.12 $1940.18 $3254.48 $40,298.12 . : ~ estimated (pay 186) 97.264 $442.94 .$644.95 $905.80 $1893.03 $3306.98 $40,948.14 Difference $ 10. 12 ($24.60) rf29.32) (f 47,15) $'5T:"5'O $ 650.02 ~::.... - -_._,,- . _. '_.IiII:iI ~ -- ~~~......-:I"I . - - -Uti_ , .. 9-27-85 198/1 liudi~e[ Final Compared to . [.>c'VV 1.imits :md Sp('('in1 Ll~Vit~S Gerll'raJ Fund: Propo~ed Expenditures: $ 4,355,300 Funding Proposed: Local Government Aid 1,072,900 ~ Other Income 778,400 Transfer In - 45,000 General Fund Surplus -~- 9,000 1,905,300 Tax Levy for General Fund $ 2,450,000 Maximum Levy Allc~able: u.. Final Levy Limits 2.753.728 Special Levies General Fund 180,875 Total Levy Allowable 2,934,603 Under Levy Limit $ 484,603 Hills 18.314 Estimated Valuiltion 133,776,400 ;; Iii -- u - ~- --~ ---- - ...- - - 'WIA<bd>.... -- -...--..--........... v n:I (hI . .. CITY OF HOPKINS September 26~ 1985 REQUEST BY N.S.P. CO. TO PLACE OVERHEAD CABLE ON 1--'----u---~~-~--'-u---.rtH ST. NO. AND ALLEY WEST OF 19TH AVE. PURPOSE -- To request Council action on a permit request from Northern States Power. BACKGROUND I 1he City Council requires ail installations of utilities on public streets to be reviewed and approved. ANALYSIS I Northern States Power is proposing to re-rcute all of the present aerial I electric lines located on the Homestead property to permit future deve1oprr~~t of a housing project in Minnetonka. One new pole will be set in alley west I of 19th. I ALTERNATIVES I Deny the request. ! RECOMMENDATION I We recommend fo~ Council consideration that the request be approved. I /'; ,-- I \~~~~ I I John J. Strojan I C; ty Engi nee r I I l I I I I I I i 1 i , I I i i I I , r':)r)rl~ It 80 J _~'.~~_.~__ ,'____~~_~'..~-------." ,.-1 ~oJI r : ..~ i ~ - ,-.-- ~._----- .~,--- I \ .~ ~-' I -1 -- - - - - ..... .... -----~ VIII (i) ~ &"i-: " . ~r'lFr . dJ- , ';- - ( f'w" '. ~'~.. '('r.;' - CITY HOPI(INS "~~!:~ ~~}I~~~' . .~. . OF ~,~..~~'-.., ~ September 26, 1985 - ,~, . --- REQUEST BY MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS SOUTHWEST . . -, -~--- TO PLACE BURIED TV CABLE ON 1 VAN BUREN AVENUE NDRTH PURPOSE To request Council action on a permit request from Minnesota Cablesystems Southwest. BACKGROUND . The City Council requires all installations of utilities on public sb^eets to be reviewed and approved. I ANALYSIS Minnesota Cablesystems Southwest is proposing to place underground TV cable on Van Buren Avenue North. All slJrfaces would be repiaced. This cah'le WGuld be placed in October ~ November~ 1985. AlTERNAlIVES Deny the request. RECOMMENDATION We recommend for Council consideration that the request be approved. ~,.~+ Jchn J. Strojan City Engineer I I I i I I I i I I ! j i i j I I -- I ------ --. - -----~-~ "'----~---,-- -------.--~---~--.;, () U () C I i C?or)t ff I v~, I 81 - -. ~~-- --.:::....... -....-'-- ..,.-..-,""" , . ~. v If ~ ' ,:l~ .. --; :.' , ,~;. tfj ,'I~Hm)ra4' CITY OF HOPKINS ~. '''..~\- , . '~-i.:-; .,__ ~\,,:'.. .. - -.::;..:;.'~ September 26, 1985 REPORT ON r---w - - ---.- PROPOSED ASSESSMENT I r WATERMAIN EXTENSION, MINNETONKA MILLS ROAD TO GETHSEMANE CHURCH PROJECT 84-05 I PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to respond to the Council request I for further investigation regarding the sprinkler credit proposal. I BACKGROUND: Hearing notices were sent to all property owners listing the I amounts proposed to be assessed. These proposed assessment amounts were calculated by the City Assessor and the City Engineer based on a judgment I as to relative benefit to the properties for the additiona1 fire protection, I future water service availability and increase in the value of the property. The Council cor.tinued the hearing to October 1, 1985. I ANALYSIS: The main reason for the watermain extension was to provide additional Tire prot~ction. The location of the existing buildings including the two t churches, Rosewood Apartments~ Chapel View Nursing Home and thp. proposed Chapel View Apartments led to the decision as to the final locat'ion of the wa ta rma in. This location would best serve the present needs and also be available for future connection of sprinkling systems in existing buildings and provide water service for future bui1dings. A research of the existing fire protection facilities available to each property was made. It was apparent that all of the properties involved have , service and limited fire protection from the waterma.'ins and hydrants previously I installed in frontage streets such as 5th Avenue North and Minnetonka Mills Road. These facilities provide for the normal water use needs but are of I limited value for fire coverage because of the distance limitation of flow thru hoses (approximately 300 feet, according to Fire Marshall figures). I Additiondl protection can be provided by the installation of special s~parate connections to watermains which are run into buildings and feed a system of I fire activated sprinklers in all or a portion of a building or a standpipe with fire connections in a stairway exit system which can be f~d by the I Fire Department at connections outside the building. Both of these systems I can be used and are desireable in multi-story buildings. These types of I additiona1 protection are recommended in buildings hav'ing high human occupancy I I such as the churches, nursing home and apartments adjacent to this improve:o.-ent, I I I I In studying the available additional fire protection installed at owners I I I expense, the following was noted: -t_____ I ! COUnC! I F~ept # 82 ,-.-) '":.'.~'.I.......~r...<';.,:I'.:....~_ ........'.. . ::;,.,..~~...:.~.~..:t~~.~.t~~~';:-~' ~"..~:;.. '''. ,~.,,; :~~.l-o,.... J~ ~i:.."'_ .',- ""~, ~ " ... Council Report # Page 2 . Rosewood Apartments: ( I ) The garage on the luwest level is fully sprinklered. (2 ) The building has ~ standpipe with fire connections at each floor, Chapel View Apartments and Nursing Home: (1) The nursing home has partial sprinkling in the basement area. (2) The apartments (presently under construction) are to be fully sprinklered. Gethsema~e Church, Mizpah Church and A.a. Bursch: (1) These properties have no special protection Precise figures are not available but it is estimated it would cost $10,000 each for the additiQilal fire protection installed by Rosewood Apartments and Chapel Vie'..... This type of add'itlona1 rrotection can pr'event a fire from spread- ing and is a benefit to the s~fety of occupants and fire fighters. The new mains as instalied are avanable to all pl~\')perties for connection of sprinkling systems. The cost \.o!ould be lower due to the fact that the main is close to an non-sprinklered b'Jilding~ and does not involve a dig-up and restoratior of a public street. The bas i s on wh i ch asses Slrtents rnU5 t b~ ca 1 cuI r1 ted is benefit to the prop€:rty. ~.. When adequacy of existing fire ?rotectionwas taken into account, tne conclusion was that the properties provided varying degrees of existing protection. There is additional protection pt"ovided by the new ntdins and hydtants to an buildings, but those with more built in protection have a lesser need for ddditional protection. That is the rationale for the credits proposed. The following table will list three assessment totals based upon (1) as proposed in the hearing notices (2) 20% maximum credit for self installed fire protection (3) no credit for self installed fire protection: Propet" tl As Proposed 20% Max. Credit No Credit --,- Gethsemane $18,448.44 $17,001. 56 $15,457.07 Rosewood 7,552.70 9,526.22 10,826.03 Mizpdh 7 , 417 .40 6.835.66 6,214 .69 Cha.pe'l View 11,522,59 11 ,892.10 12,797,16 Bursch 948.69 874,28 7Y4.86 ?ince the City is assessing d fixed amount for the project the tables s~,m'l that 1 If the+~red~t is decreased or eliminated, the assessment for the non~$prinkered I ~roper~les IS decreosed and the assessment for the sprinklered properties is lncreased. RECOMMENDATION: I would recollll1€nd for Council consic!et'ation in assessil,,' the I project that the original spread as proposed reflects relative benefits ~Q-the I affected properties. Attached is a copy of the first report. ~ cr-L 1 .~.- ". ~~ .~' 1 " . Js t -,---- ----------..-- L 0 . ~ ro J a n Cit] Engineer SIiiIl\.- lI_c ----.;;:r -- - I T T . .' ~,\ " . ~4~:~'~.~W~'~~ CITY OF HOPKINS ~ u"-',-r~,~ ~" '----- --, .- ----- ,.~....,;- -" ., .-' , ,. . T-,_' August 14, 1985 REPORT ON __ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS --... FOR 1985 l PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the Special Assessments to be levied in 1985. the methods used to spread the assessments I and the recommended assessments. BACKGROUND: After hearings and Council action, the following projects have been constructed and compieted. 82:07-09 Cu~b and gutter, streets. lighting and landscaping and storm sewer on Feltl Court & lOth Street South 83:02 Concrete alley east of 10th Avenue South, between 5th & 7th StreE',t South 84:01 Curb. Clutter and drives. north s1de Hiahwav 7. east af COuntv Road 73 . 84:02 Concrete alley west of 16th Avenue North. between 3rd and 4th Street North 84:05 Watermain Extension. Minnetonka Mills RQad to Gethsemaop. Lutheran Church 85:02 Retainina wall. Second Street North at 146 15th Avenue North Costs of the above orojects have been arrived at and a division of these costs are reconmended. These divisions have been made based on benefit to the Darcels I of iand and the increase of value to that land and accordinQ to oast oractices and oolicies of the Council ANALYSIS: Project 82:07-09 feltl Court_-The costs of the improvements on Feltl I Court have been divided evenly between the two parcels adjacent to the project by request of the property owner. Opus Corporati on I Project 83:02 10th Avenue Alley - This alley was constructed in I I two sections with a portion in the center of the block left out. The alley i is fronted on the east by a Westbrooke Condominium development and on the I I' west by single and double family homes. The total cost of the concrete con- struction ....as r~d~ced by ?O% as per Council pol,ic.~., One half of the ~ema'ining I J cost has been dlVld:d equally am~n$ the 88 conoom1nlums on the ea~t sjd~ ~f ! i the alley, One hal t of the n.'malnlrlg costs of the VJest sIde has Deen divlded : as follows: each lot received an area asseSSfT!e'lt of an amount equal to the f i units on the east side. The reInainder has been divided according to the amount! i that each parcel had frontage on the alley. I Pr<.!.,j,gct 84:01 Cu.,rb_.and Gutter and cir'ives~_North.3idE'~iway 7 _- j l The North Service Drive was improved by MnDOT from RObinwoQd Lane to County Road ;;73. By agreement, the City \vas to pay for certdin costs, curb and gutter. ,___ _~ ...___,~,_._ ,.. _,. ______,_.____ --_ (~~, '; l.J r) .~ i i ~~~' r:; ;.' ~ If .-. -. ~ -~~._--.----,-~~ '1 ........ &..-":.1 II ~ _~- --- ~_....... 1D1JUa&.:IiDI""';___ __~T"L..b,LL~J :~ -.-.. ----~ -- n ~. ..........- IT ..".. .-,'.' . .. ... , . . Council Report ;: Page 2 driveways, walks. moving of hydrants, adjusting valves, etc. State Aid was available and h~s been received. The only costs to be assessed is the curb and gutter and drives, A11 costs have been divided according to an average width as per past pJlicy. Project 84:02 A)ley - 16th Avenue North - This alley consists of two portions; the north-south portion as platted, dividing the block, and an angle portion. connecting the south end of the N-S portion to 16th Avenue parallel with the abandoned R.R. This second portion has no direct frontage which inCrea5€S the cost of the alley. The total cost of the concrete con- struction was reduced by 20% as per Council policy. The remaining costs of the alley have been divided on an average width as per past pOlicy. All asphalt patches were allocated to property adjacent. Project 84:05 Watermain Extension, Minnetonka Mills Road to Geths~mane Lutheran Church. Gethsen2ne Lutheran Church petitioned for a fire hydrant to gi ve the bui 101n9 fit'e protecti on. To satisfy that need and to give added fire protection to ether buildings in the area a line was constructed from Minnetonka Mills Road to Gethsemane with a hydrant aiso placed at the southwest corner of Mizpah Congregational Church. Chapel View apartments for the elderly was being bid at that time. Instead of them' bun ding a separate . 1 ine to the bui Iding to connect to the sprinklers I a service connection was installed at their desired location. Benefits to the properties were studied and the following recommendat'ions 3re to divide the costs, benefits being divided on a square footage or sped>'}l bene- fit basi $; Gethsem~ne - total square foot area used. Rosewood West Apartments - total square footage less area served and previously assessed on 5th Avenue North. A reduction in area of 40% was also used because the b,1i ldi ng is parti a liy sprinkled. Mizpah Congregational Church - total square footage less area served and previously assessed on 5th Avenue North Chapel View Apar'tments and Nursing Home - total square footage less area serv€d and previously assessed on Minn€t0nka Mills Read. A reduction was also made Df 20t of the area ir.volved with the Nursing Home because of partial sprinkling in the basement area. A 40% reduction WaS made in the area af the cpartments because the bui1ding is to be sprinkled. A spec i a 1 benefi t was subtracted fl'om the total project and added to the Chapel View a;Jartments. This benefit was for the special costs involved with the sprinkler connection. A,a, 8ursch - total sqi1:1re f.J0td']€ U-:;,E,'(1 1GSS oi-~rl served and previously assessed on Minnetonkd Mills Road Project 85:02 Ret~~ning Wail - 146 15th Avenue North - Total costs of the retai,1ing wall has been placed on the above parce1 as per agreement. Tr.ee and Stump Rernove: 1. - Some tr'ee and stump r'emova 1 s have !lot been piJid for, The total costs for these remuvals have been allocated to the parcels involved. ~ ~ ~ ~~...~~~.---------..------' ~~~------ I . .., . . . . . Council Report # Page 3 Outside Readers or \~ater Met~ - Readers are placed on meters in private home by the City but are charged for for apartments, etc. The reader at 129-135 13th Avenue South was installed but not paid for. Total costs have been allocated to that parcel. RECOMMENDATI ON: We recommend the adoption of the proposed assessments and that Resolution No. 85-3208 be adopted calling fer a Public Hearing to be held September 17, 1985. ," .--..... / / .I . Engineer ~'. .. L-.... _........-M ~rr-- tI!I- -- - IIli ....._-........; .' ,..., . l' '1.:,1 ..' "'" ' . 'v' ~.. ," ..'. :', .>' I' '.' .. 'lJfI"l!'l'JlI - .' .~ .' . . . t .. , 0.." .. ,,~_'. 0' .. ~ " . :. o,~ .,or. 4' .' . . .'.', ...s.. ,'" ,/. ........ - .,~.,.c ~. -. ~ I -- . HOPKINS CITY COUNCIL MEETING -, . ., October 15, -"9R!i II I ~~ ___~--'_r~~_~..._ .---.-.........-.___.r __'M' __ ~~__.____ ~~M~_~'______ ~ . . ......' . . ~ CITY OF HOPKI NS 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH '., '"'~~...~..."' HCPKI~JS, MINNr:SOTA 553<&3 612193$-e.141 . Clayton Miller Appearance PURPOSE: This report will serve to inform the Council about an appearance by Clayton Miller regarding a continuation of his ccntract for deed on the unsold lots on the west side of Shady Oak Lake. BACKGROUND: The City sold 6.4 acres of land located on the west side of Shady Oak Lake in September 1983 for $285.000. The sale was on a contract for deed with $30,000 down to Clayton Miiler. Bruce Kociemba, Phil Sandin et. ai. The contract ballooned one year ago and Clayton Miller requested and received an extension of one year from the Council with 12% interest. The property was platted into eight lots. Two lots have been paid off and I Clayton Miller has said he expects to payoff three lots this week. He wi 11 request another one year extension on the balance of his debt to the City ($80,146 principal + $17,033 interest for the past year) which covers the three . remaining unsold lots. Mr. Miller will undoubtedly ask the Council to take into consideration some of the bad luck that they have had in platting and marketing the lots. These experiences have included: 1) An expense of $29,000 for soil correction on one lot. Mr. Mi 11 er I s request for City participation in this expense was denied by the Council. ') . Conversion of the property from abstract to torrens title took one -J year due to complications. Mr. Miller claims that several sales were lost due to the additional time required for this process. 0,"' 3) The special assessments on the property were originally estimated to I be $70,000 for the eight lots. The final assessment was $127~OOO. ANALYSIS: The City's interests are secured by the three remaining lots. The I asking orice for the lots are $78,500 including $15JOOO - $17,000 of special assessments. Mr. Miller is going to request a one year extension at a 10% interest rate with a continuation of the lot by lot release. All accrued interest would be paid at the time of each lot releas~. The interest rate requested of lO'~ is lower than the 12% set by the Council at last year's extension. Although interest rates have declined in the past year, contracts for deed are typically in the ll~ - 12% range, '- ~--Council Rept #2~)-21 _---.J ----..--~i.llJ9Oci - ---.;r - .-..-, . , - '/~ l , ,. ":)~ /~~ .",;; t , '~ .o"d -j i ;~ '~J . Clayton Miller Appearance " Page 2 '. ., '-~:! The 12% interest accruing for the past year on the balance due the City .' exceeds our current investment return of 8.0% to 8.5%. The City does not have an immediate need fur the cash and would reinvest the balloon at our current rate AL TERNATIVES: 1) Deny the extension. The matter would be turned over to the City Attorney for foreclosure on the contract for deed. 2) Grant an extension of one year at the same interest rate as the past extension of 12% with the provision that as each lot is released~ all accrued interest on the entire remaining balance is paid off. 3) Accept Mr. Miller's proposal of one year extension at 10% interest with the same provision as #2 for lot release/interest payoff. 4) Alter the extension terms as the Council deems appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends aiternate #2. The City's interests aie col1aterized by the land and the return of 12% exceeds our current investment return. Although the developer's problems are not the fault of the City they . do serve to reinforce a decision to allow an ~xtension of the contract for deed. Respectfully submitted, .::r: ,~tr K~ - J. Scott Renne City Clerk/Assessor I ! ~ 'I:UAI..J_:.Jo<_______;_ .__ 'IT..... - -n__ ,....;.. ~ .... ~,., CITY OF HOPKINS - 1010 FIRST STREET SOUTH HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 553<'3 612/935-84 74 NEW CITY LOGO Purpose: The purpose of this report is to examine the costs associated with the introduction of a new city logo. Back9round: The current city logo is adapted from the Minnesota State Sea} . The City Counc i I has authorized staff' to pursue development of a new logo. Staff has asked Mr. Tod WSi-ner to make an appearance in Front of the Council for the purpose of exchanging l ties~. on the design or a new logo. Hr. War~ner created the Ha i nst. reet logo. . Analysis: There would a variety of' costs associated with the creation of a new logo. Mr. Warner wi 11 charge $500.00. This fee ., lncl:.Jdes rough draf'ts. Cind 'finished art work. Mr. Wat-ner has guaranteed to work with the Council unti I they receive a i design which they approve. Other costs include replacing the current 1090 on city equipment. unlForms. etc. This cost is estimated to be at least $1,500.00. This cost would increase if it i s decjd~}d to use the new logo on ci ty stationary ....hich currently features a drawing of city hal I. The current city logo has identified the City of Hopkins For - ! many years. It i s a fami liar and recognizable syrnbo I . It would also cost seve,al thousand dollars to t'ep I ace it. The current logo. however, use~~ the M i nne~,ota ~jtate sea 1. There \5 nothing about it that is speciFic to HopkIns except the words "e i t y uf Hopkins". A new seal could enhance the I identity of t~e City. rt is a \ ,=,0 fairly common for cities to charlge t.he it' logo'':' ever time. Counei I Rept # ~ ~", J ~'J--::"-1 -.. .-..----.-.- --~. ---- -_._-_._._-~,---- ----,-'.----.-.-..-..--.-,..-- -. - ----~..______~r -"~- -( "- . . A 1 ternq:tlY_es : 1- Authorize Hr. Warner to proceed with the creat;on of' a new logo. ., Oecide to retaIn the currellt city logo. ""0 d~ /.." ,r, /'" -~. . .... /~ell;e L.-/ Admin;stn9tive Assistant c. ----- - . IIlllJlII1II/&lU -... - _1 ,..~t_ ~ ~- ~'!ItII!I!IlIf~ _.._--...,~:.L- ~I'r --lII~ -~ ~..: ' CITY OF HOPKINS 1010 fiRST STREET SOUTH ~. HOPKINS. MINNESOTA S53<C3 ;"~;.r.,'" 512193$-&0\7. Gambling license Applications by Braille Sports Foundation ~--"'--- - - PURPOSE~ To recommend to the Council action on two Class B gambling license .. app1ications for location at Archies and Opera Hall by the Braille Sports Foundation. BACKGROUND: John Ross, Executive Director of the Braille Sports Foundation1 appeared before the Council on September 18 to provide general information about his non profit charitable organization. At that time he did not have a formal application. On October 1, 1985 formal application for a 'license was made for Archies and Opera Hall. ANALYSIS: The application would not comply with the proposed gambling pOlicy for the City. This situation parallels the application by Family .1 Plus, Inc. at the October 1, 1985 Council meeting. AL TERNATIVES: ( 1 Approve the application which would contradict with the gambling policy. (2 Pass a resol~tion specifically denying this application which will be sent to the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Conb'ol Board. RECOMMENO.~TION: Staff recow~nds Alternative #2< The gambling poli~y should be fo 11 owed. Respectfully submitted~ J. 2) tiLtt '-l7 ^ ~ ... lJ ['-., '<./ ,"-'~- I J. Scott Renne City Clerk/Assessor i I I I I 11 ) C III Inri! Rept 85-85 --- ../Vv' r'-""' . ~~~1L- ---.r--- --- -~----- -- --bdl~ . - - .."~ ':";~. "I I - I I .... . CITY OF HOPKINS ~' -. I ( Suburban Community Services Gambling License Application PURPOS E : To recomnend to the Council action on a Class B gambling license for a raffle only by Suburban Comnunity Services. The individual making the application is Jo Ann Kvern. 933-9311. BACKGROUND: A copy of Suburban Community Services annual report is enclosed in the packet. They have been in existence for thirty years and are located at 1001 Highway 7, Hopkins. They work alroost exclusively with Senior Citizen groups. They operate the Senior Outreach program at the Hopkins f.Qrnmunity Center. Funding is from the United l~ay, corrmurdties where they perform services (Hopkins will provide $8400 in 1986), grants and foundations. ./ The activity requested is a "52" raffle. This is a common fund raising raffle where 250 tickets are sold at $26,00 pe~ ticket. j From the $6500.00 in proceeds, $3400.00 is given away in prizes on a weekly basis in differing amounts. The tickets are sold by their staff, board members, etc. According to Jo Ann Kvern, there would not be any solicitation within Hopkins on a door to door basis for either businesses or residences. ANALYSIS: The application complies with the proposed gambling policy for I the City. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Pass a resolution specifically denying the application which would be forwarded to the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control I Board. I 2) Take no action. The application would then be considered by j I f the Minnesota Gambling Control Board and if the applicant receives their approval. the raffle would be held. RECOMMEND.A.TION: Staff recommends A lter'na t i ve #2. This operation complies I with the criteria identified in the Cityis gambling policy. Respectfully submitted, r ("""0 ,..~\ >\..-.>.' V (' . - ,~_- '-C: \ '\' T---'-. (r\.....t~__. ~cotfRef1n-e--'-~~ City Clerk/Assessor I I I "- C ounci I Rept #8')-86 .j -----.. ~-- .... -- --- - ..----_.~._-~~~--'-'---"