Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1989 09-25 & 09-28 City Council Packet
AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7-000 P.M., Monda September 25, 1989 Council Chambers, Municipal Buildin and 799100 P.M., Thursda September 28, 1989 Carver School Meetin No. 89-21 A. CALL TO ORDER Bo ROLL CALL C. APPROTIAL OF MINUTES D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of C1.a-ims 2. Conditional Use Pe-.m-*l*-'L- Renewal-, 2239 Hazelwood Avenue (01son) 3. Re Land Surve 2990 Hi 61 (Mo 4 4. Conditional Use Permit Te lm-1-nation 2675 Stillwater Road 5. F-inal Plat: C. Little Add- iLtion 6. Donation Acceptance - Emer Preparedness F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1, 7:00 PeM., Street Vacation: Sherren Avenue 2, 7-015 P.M., Count Road C: ToHo 61 to Hazelwood, Project 89-04 - Public Hearin 3* 8100 P,M,, Larpenteur: 35E to Ed Pro 86-27 - Publ.-J'-c Hearin 4* 8:45 P.M., Code Amendment: Environmental Protection Ordinance (2nd Readin - 4 N Votes Go AWARD OF BIDS H* UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Address Chan Maplewood Care Center 2. Development Moratorium 3. Reconsideration of Hillwood Oaks No. 2 I. NEW BUSINESS 19 T.H. 36: Atlantic to T.H. 120 Reconstruction - Approve Plans 2. Roselawn: T.H. 49 to Jackson - Schedule Public Hearin 3. Final Approval of Bonds: VOA Care Center 4. Information on Multiple Dwellin 5. Pipkorn Buildin Screenin 2055 White Bear Avenue J. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS K COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. 2 0 30 40 5* 60 70 8 . 9* 100 L* ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS .0- 1* 7:00 ' P.M,, District No. 8 Water Tower: Assessment Hearin -- Carver School, September 28, 1989 G« 3. 4. 5. ADJOURNMENT OF SEPTE14BER 25, 1989 MEETING Agenda Number E -1 Action. by Cowncil',#1 AGENDA REPORT Endorse Modified Rejected- wow TO: City Manager Date FROM: Finance Director / RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: September 15, 1989 It is recommended that the Council approve payment of the following claims. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 435,434.74 Checks #4781 - #4826 Dated 09 -01 -89 thru 09 -13 -89 $ 140,341.78 Checks #2053 - #2165 Dated 09 -25 -89 $ 575,776.52 Total per attached voucher /check register PAYROLL: $ 168,817.27 $ 33,323.13 $ 202,140.40 $ 777,916.92 Payroll Checks Payroll Deductions Total Payroll GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. DFF: kaz _ . I _ . r'i r= 1 s .t s E i } `; ,' i i _ ,- _ J .. ; # -• _} C`t - r- . i u t i a_ •: _� ..r T i i i L . . . . _ t. - . . _-, ___- .. . ,__. --.-_----.-_—._.__M .. . _ - _ ' --- -- - - ■ _ r;�{} ! r-, , —, .. ti ;, LL�JCN;�EG r, :�� .1 � �'� # - i {i r : �`' t; :' ! IS 8 � '=_ t +-IT'S' L►F tT1AFaLEi}•1 _ . _ ___ _ _ _ ...., ., F A 6t` _ �/6� •.' �� / � 'T l ��'� _ t JT 1 ►� -..- t . iES 1 - e.4 . ;,J •- s; r•, - / r r - �, _ _ - _ - t pf . . # , _. .. - . . :. . _ .. , .....,. -. ..._ -..: _ . . . ... . _ - .:.: r ,. >- . - ►-} _� �L+n F�rtT U;� ' r • s_: :•, _ - i.� ai i i } ,i i = _ _ • { r T~ ..t. .- - a .. ..; �, r. ... .-.. .: �`t y f'ai _ .. { F•. �a i t . , _ :' . # ..i, � 4 r • rJ 1 J T E .' E 7+. ,_ >J i� t � . . .. -, .. .: :.� t-... L .. .. ri ULHE.EI! - ..., _ _ .. ... .. . .. .. .. _ _— __ —_ ---- - - — .-. .. ,. - _� i !. ,, - _ Ci;EC�: - VENDOR .- ChtCK VENDOR I T El{ I T Ety"t C!=EC.'r.: f`' �:.;. ;�,: N1U�;LER r NUItBER r DA # E I'AlA *�E t �tEi �iFT il�� At7i<<_��T At�i+_U��T 6i ) , 61 I. ..:. . .. . . ....,.". . .. . ..... . ^ r i ' (, J - - i-' ,e; i •» r l i 'f" �r _ "- -1 - ,, . E � , 3 2 : S N 1 T }�••. tom"• _ r. : ._:._ C . i-! L' -1 ,a-= t' i : : .;,. . . r ,....-. .,. ...: .. . .. .•.. X71 ..: .... , ..'.;:... _:_. �L�7_Sc.U, .... .fad' . '- .: ..: !C# l _ _ �a _ ?: ..� ... LJE r > �- �. , .. . ... .. t.. ri EAt. TH LIFE ,�E iv . I ht " :. �:.. a a ,. - c: t .. 91 < g _ c .: ... .. . .. . . .:. . . - - _ . _ _ _. .. . . . :... ,. , ..... ._ : .:.:. ., . .. ;_ .. , ,, .: _ . r�,r h t �y h 4 Ifi DE� 7 ]t : .....:. N . �p1 .( t3 :. .. .. ,. . .. _ . . _ C. i� 1�t:I l tis .. j' .Lr� . +5.+ 1i 2{ f 1141 } '= j 0 � _ 1 / ' •_ # O �; L E -r E N � �' � N CS• E�'irt_. j , f s r�1, ,J h �' � _ _ ti; - � _' '.. 5t f�t . 3 . .. 3# (I i}'' _ = r 4 i 8 _ - -ti ; L' �+ C`? t3 - �'=1 I i 1 J' =' :' _ _ t 11 1'11 ; Z"' i �t T � G . i �• i p1 13 E n� C-' : �' - - 1 = is . 1:� Jj s .. 1;41 j351 . 1171 , f - r ,. Vv1 yi ;461 1 = 1471 1 A_L .J�•Jl__E_ _ •-• ' 1 _ f_}' -J % 0 1 / 8� '. J j �'� __ f T r � r; �' C t I i i t L, L I t• E E ;� _ _ - i � `% r_ X11 .. �__ r :; , +_ _; f ' � ■ ■. tc � ;c,11 IF ... L � • 'T l { t - ..., .. .. .:. .. .... .. ....:. .. ... -". .. . _: .. ,. 4 t •� . .... ... .. :. ... .. _ _ . a ,r . L i3� ti, �1 . .. .. .... ... .. . _ . . . . _ ::.: ...." : .... ,.. , :. .. .. .: ... .',, H C M.A��E _,:.. : -; 1i6, HEA.LTH LIF£ DEN INtS .� � _,�: , �t� t`'+ ;'� tgI I i :: tv T 4. ��� � . � r L. , T } _� ..r gni #ag' , i 4 . - 9 L i 'fid ,+ ... . . , �3 3 _ . > _ . i� A .. U , N .#SAT I.0 NAL L a-£ r f -a., .., ., .:.:, :. ., . _ ..;. _. s � ._.,., A+ �� .: . .a t .. . _ . ... ..:._.... ... .. . . . ,. .. . . .. .. .-:: r tiT a 7j 1 i t� 5_. _ t3 . . - '. • _ . 11J _.. _ J .. , , a r+ a r t , # �_tr`Fi_IA.. ----____-_.-____.a�._.:_.__���..�E� � ,� ><�:. _���+i�...� t.,,:_�_F.�.��.3.�fi �".�_A��_ _ - ;' �_t3�:�.. �3 �z _i ._•I Va �a k •.1 i. l `3; HEALTH LIFE �tEN( INS ra='2 ,i_4 ala ,C41 I- 1 _._--- - ya 1 i•t r T - N_!1_ f - .-1 v�Ct . �5 . .... ,. „ .. ... ... .. .. .. .: .; .-: .. `` . , :,. , �. 1 , . .__. . .. _ _ J .: —' _ - _ -------------- ._-- _ _ __ _ .- .. _ .. _ t . _ .. , t . . , # c a a_ s. 1 j .I i E i . _: .. . .. . ----_.---.-- L, ;'.. ..... .. _: :. . .. :. . . . . ., _ - _ _.� .' t -T _ ' s i f,. a _ ��J s.� i �,S• . . �g '?.7 =; { r'i r= 1 s .t s E i } `; ,' i i _ ,- _ J 'a1 i 1 v = ± ' ' °- r- �_ -a #:° -- - i _ i 4 f" . t ,_ tri i :. >_ = e -d C it ; # -• _} C`t - r- . i u t i a_ •: _� ..r T i i i L r. i -} �, 7 �oi �, , • W ?g i .. . .. . _ - _ ' UT3L Ira}� hi`LE ■ _ r;�{} : _ t _ :j t�Q :�� .1 � �'� # - i {i r : �`' t; :' ! IS 8 � '=_ t . _ ___ _ _ _ ...., _ _ ' _ _�3� _ t . iES 1 ,r = , , . == e_. 7 �`I - ,r.F; ., -. _ _ - __ -'. - _ # E ; *i Ems- � —. I ;_ r a.�_� - - - — - - - — - - :.. i_ �:-. ; .: �- �, . t t t .,; - - - S ;: 5: . ; • -I t...- .. .:.. , . JZ _, e- ._S �} 1 µ �,}� ' r • s_: :•, _ - i.� ai i i } ,i i = _ _ • { r T~ ..t. .- - a .. ..; �, r. ... .-.. .: �`t y f'ai _ .. { F•. �a i t . , _ :' . # ..i, � 4 r • rJ 1 J T E .' E 7+. ,_ >J i� t � . . .. -, .. .: ,.... �_ a J :,. .. ri it , _:, t , r _ _ ra. .. , - .. .. ,. ,. .. .-. .. ,. - _� '.�. . .�J_L_�..!_=_LL_E.,.=_: s..t_r_tom: S`1__ !. ,, - _ t<I # - . n inti, I i • _ t U] .T#. L 9 'r; L A tR F7 r _ k y ' w Sl r, - a _i f •_ r a _ Lf' i -t)i -r _ _ s... / fes. , _ = �- r - r - .{ _ 4 -._ _ , . ^ r i ' (, J - - i-' ,e; i •» r l i 'f" �r _ "- -1 - ,, . E � , 3 2 : S N 1 T }�••. tom"• _ r. : ._:._ C . i-! L' -1 ,a-= t' i : : .;,. 14� . i I, .. - , ci .; ) . . 9 N SAL►Es LL.alaJtui, .: .. . . .,:,.. . .... .. . .. L ' 1. . ►}i c: t .. 91 . _. _ : ... .. . .. : .. '. . .. .. .. _. . . . . , .: . ;5 . 2� a, .( t3 .,�t�,,�t, }. {, ,.. :+it.rL E��s#tD t-�rt =.Es_�L hc'' ;d ;, -�- ;HE�, {;� ► I ;� �__, ,- :} }• C `�' I••=4 1 , ,, . -:.... �q •'F # 9 1 _ _} is 4 b ' ,:: :t } '= j 0 � _ 1 / ' •_ # O �; L E -r E N � �' � N CS• E�'irt_. j , f s r�1, ,J h �' � _ _ ti; - � _' '.. 5t f�t . 3 . .. . .. _ :. . _ _ , .._: 45, i .: .. s .. . J } J .. . . -. c f. ,. a >r iA ... .:-:. . ..: ; . _ .. ,1 T ;i 1 .� i j- ._ ►i . . . _.. ... : :, - r ,. Vv1 yi ;461 1 = 1471 1 4 # .� _% 5 `{' ,t `=; !_} Z_} _ f_}' -J % 0 1 / 8� '. J _ Mi 1, i'i N • S # A T .''. i R E .=t'•t S U R . t`l __ f T r � r; �' C t I i i t L, L I t• E E ;� _ _ - i � `% r_ X11 .. �__ r :; , +_ _; f ' � ■ ■. tc � ;c,11 IF ... i �9. , .. : :. ... .. .: , . .. ,..:... . .. ..... ,: .. .... .. .. - --- �-- - ... .. , .. ': .. . — - . . ED illi,_. -,t Air rAY .: _; - _ -- t 7 �oi �, , • . . .. .. . .. . _ - _ ' - Ji ! : _ t _ :j � } . ,,, _� � t, . # , f v :� -; N ; L_ ,_ = ' I # .E t r ia'J � �'� # - i {i r : �`' t; :' ! IS 8 � '=_ t ,r = , , . == e_. 7 �`I - ,r.F; ., -. _ _ - __ -'. - _ # E ; *i Ems- � —. I ;_ r a.�_� - - - — - - - — - - :.. i_ �:-. ; .: �- �, . t t t .,; - - - S ;: 5: . ; • -I t...- n. '+ �} 'i it i 7 e- ._S �} 1 µ �,}� ' r • s_: :•, _ - i.� ai i i } ,i i = _ _ • { r T~ ..t. .- - a .. ..; �, r. ... .-.. .: �`t y f'ai _ .. { F•. �a i t . , _ :' . # ..i, � 4 r • rJ 1 J T E .' E 7+. ,_ >J i� t � . . .. -, .. .. - ". . - ... -.. r. '.,,_: - - �. (�a '{, a t . ' t :. •� t!,. r, : ,!= T .. r i 'r .. L a .1,• �' 1- C E >J ' : , ." . , . r 5, �. _...',.-a r 5 ::+ . 5 0 :� �; . �� . ► � t`•} � - 7 r = . .. .. - .. I : . tis i i1 C E . ! C .T `i !.t 1` ifi ;% 3-' L ►� t»'.f .: f -! ! 1 '1' f i 'i •'! • � �• �,i � � f �..{ �[ t.- rJ S L.. € f ;_. �� i.., r. v OU .1 i y..• H E C V, T{ '_ 1 I u { ('t v i { t . • v CD Ll 1 5 T .�. t • k.. € z� � i f� i' f L, s'•� L :: ? ••. r v HPI is 1✓ !~'. IN tJ '112-- t= i': UA r E INI A111 DUES !: R,I IP i 3. _'• I'! t_t €.s # ! A : : U N i • ... 3 ... f - r a : - ... r _ .4T9'---f s k -. 7.. F € : f lc t, . s _ .... J .I / --} r :+a �' r r e :z •,.+.. t t '_. .c. f.. ryry 14 € p REN h �. f F`t =_ IN E 1 . 4 !....i �t l: .="1. ,_ � 4 -f^ 1 S €'€ +. C3. F ,.J•L L+�'C. t•: i,. }1.. € i� • i-• _ (" ! - - .. F i i r .. 5 - y ' .9 � 541::0 t - l f;Y ,� -rt • }c'1. +1 ' i' '`i•_ 't_" `' , i : - f•f M I NN t��_•-f___-_.�.__.-�---_� � � - , t .. � _ __.:____ , _ � •s• - t.t r r �- � '•• _t.. z :. _------_t_ t �+__ . _c i�___ L �. _j_ . __ �... � >J_.__._-__._ _ — _� __._r�. '-tom , 3�• {-• i � ��a�'? C .. '?;4; � ;... _41+ 0ft »9 :_ : St{t!E _T t.1.7tC: -.._ -i j _ -4=`»1 i 8 14•.r'`} r =_r .-. .t �w L ir »1 ✓1_i1• • -�»•�! {ti11 i��Ii �4 ,. ` : 5:.0 10 1 a' 1 Y 6._•ti..`T..�ce_. 0. %.--'9---_-:_--'39 4'-_'_.-: _.�i_. _t`:.--'. (.4•._ -_,.i.._;�..__f.-n -4 .___E _-��..s. �._--.. .. -r ti.-.t.. if•-S,tt'__-4- _i •__'__.--_.._^._ Et ..^__:_..{i..- .tk: s== if,.,. l-1,_.-.lt lf ... E... _ —111 -i _ i1 4A #1 .. .... i -.---.4 - »f -I ;_ 5 `J• •� r_j � 1,t ". r i-� '• f •_ +•3 s ° N - T z• T N T f'•' i 't: � LIR E R �. i}t , i R :.,J r•. w i €�. ' r w.f r w i.i i.. f ` t ' .y L . r' i- '1' _• r-, .� '1 • i : �. #3 1 v.: i i t. li'! i i _ _ -- 511 _t r 6 , # l i - _ r .' i � ' • fes, ■ t, j 0 - _• f . i . _ `S• i ,..t .. � F . i;. » . i e _ r-� _ .4 i'L ;- a„•.: r :� r t 1 .r F •t i `i �.7 :'4 a... a -.. A v U 1 . ar ! , }? t 'j C. � 1 .. D € i. -E 1 a1' - L 1 a. E 14 .: �` .. l ._ {:^ f 1 z i : - r .� , .. y . _ - .. ! t ! r r - . _ 1 _ r i t t •”, 1 f'L 1 € *'- i- - " Fr�..E' t _, iVA [ l.r,,_,_4�:, �� .� . - •- ii.t� - ' �� `: } i % i R t�+t 'i ', i •- r• j - f - � 1� : t! i t V i :~. % t-t h t i`L €..` ._. CO}�. 1'� € ` ._ .: ,•i I { f- =i: � f_ � r . 1 L �• •� .�. ,.l G il', _ A t f ] � !}i r =r i � 4.i � .- .! •€ � - f s .: • A =e -r •€ � ' • . ' • , r � . !.t.tf 7 1}'...:__iI L J1'.E :� it�F i��=.. .-...:. :._•...,. _ �' R OGr`M ? .. ,1»rf»ti.�f}': <'_ j-_t• •'i - r :.: ,:_+ - „• 1 ', »,_ : 1 p 0 =i_r a L " _� .. _ .:r' f'• - � � _ _ _ L .. 0 Cf r89 S H= r t= t i v S L t 0 G RA • t ;:, 2 t+ i'; i t —4—Z 5 r» i 'Y' :.J 10 Ll 10 -100 -. '0-8. } M L .w E ' OFF I C ALS A S S i tPai - FEES - :'UMPIRE ` '^t 0 - ', .. .... U € t` 1 i, .L. �! • �,.( - ice+ • � _; ):0.8 4,00 - A.- ..i - .i. 4�• i+ w f 5 { i 9! 0s f 8i E �"1 i:f t.j t t..t i 't`F 1 -NN � �� l_i 1 � t ti' Tl •1 .L.. 1 T r f.E i it€ t_• 5 i `___.__.•_--_--.-____.__....-_-._-_ 00, � _ _ _ t. . _ ")l, a ._+ •�• •___ '-f .M T �_� •J 541400 �, ':� 108/8 '_I _. fT� 1 ,l i}� V } Jam. T E f i�a_i�. A :. E R' -- MOTOR 71!- `»•t *.r a__,_-,___ - y.-Q-1,t .. - _y�,..._L L �} .•''. `7'+�' i _. - ,. L ».. 1f r / .. i.= f L r (i 1 i= R i� t �` t rE i _ { !-`.:.. EAS LIP, � {"� T � i �'? { _. .� Iii � VERS L .t. �• - :; 13. 5 0 i - y �t 4 r: 4-_,f 4 71iy2`0it ; i 11f; `i/ �'•_i'�:. g DE�`a!`��'�—.. W A G CE DE1)i1, 'i 10jN _ _;0, "—:,1 7 6,._;0,3 74 `:?' ,, C= i-r ' ? 9%= t} l i `-4/1 t t i '-• € -__ _ r- !1 G + { REPAIR v: i' i ?�. ;�i i f r L G f . . •� . 0 k- /E _ A JR,rR IT { REPA i IIIli}'= e l )= 1;= R�f� _ . 6: REPAIR . • Y : r R Y,{ N T E�- _ "AIR { } 16 1- - !a'� :.-. ems' ��[ � _ �. �� `) S � _ ., � � { _..� f j '1 1••1 t� .� . • , 1 i � _ f !lr -t 1 t � f•1 • r € • i- t••• _ �.,. _•.'f 1•_:: r»= t r � - � , , � � �'� .� i � 3 " � i_. tz t t � .� .� �y i� , r :� �,.� f - _' �. r.i .} ,•J iR _A ! � 11 i-5 .5 At �' {}' 1 1 1 !� r =1 f h »` T NIL L teat : i lit { E TREASURER _. -� i.. 1 i• EEL •moi i'► i R. '� r' t L i ?- r:..:.. a , 1 f - i. F c; � -�•A .. j -f _ j �. i» _ • . '-- -. i �r€ •'S i .moi " t •_,1 ' .. ! j •€ f-it ; _ `P 1 4 •_ _ L: ! 9 { .�, ,a 0 . ! 1 1 � V . T R1; _ '(' t_ /"', REE STATE ! •1 ,S - t I F 4 • �: e � � !.. � �i � {� J f� � '« �"s (� .rt-..- •� ... � 4r. ? LIC S t � D t : I �>� L 1 ',.• 4-' E �. V _ LF ♦` . i.._.�i' �t �»1 - T � r • � �_' t-. • -_- _ 481•-t f 417 2_i -_f.'t/.i�l_�'�` Ri'ii'iSv-i (_1_�tiN-4 Y FEE" FOR ;:iER4;r10E -?. i '; L„ S" T'A 0' F it l ii' L i i'ti t s_' ."' 1'3 - ., _' • ' � I 'i 1 }i._I-' r tr T L.f.[L_ •_. L_.s_i L:L...-. _._ _.. -___. - .. _ _ ._. .._ .._ ..-__ _._.. _ _ _ _ ._ _• r. r i_t t, PE RI Ci D 09 4 VOUCHER/ — CHEl.:ir' VENDOR C:H:_(.i•: t}E,ai1 -iR i i E(°y I TE ii �:L�• t t� G 1 �:, c rif t ►i �, rL'ER i; t N �t ER r `' T h E r: i• :�« 13L , T 7 Cl; L t':a�.!= 1 a C, r." i_1' � S A1, .s A M i f i i? -i- _ Lr� 3 4 8 Z 0 661750 , 09 1 2i :_ 9 NORTHERN STA TES P0;WER FEtL FOR SERV I * E t, 1 >, 095.. 4 1 a 095. .}4• ` " L - I 8 4 : . 5 09/12/89 STATE _ F M I N K ` .y! T.1- frL'L� _,- -_.___...r .,.:_sa.} J ._-•__. __.__.,_....__.-._.._-.. _, r-''-s_b,J_.Suf_ FF •i •_� :_ ` 1 �.; r = ' 1�� MINN. :r nf TE T t JrURER MTR VEPil L I rL P i Y�3 + -F '+l.,�+ 0C t. - _ '�8:::3 g +' - •;41-1}%0 .•':ice = r• r'_',.; +�+. i 12'_:3. _, i ,_ .`._,.r, �, 7r. .. Ml:a,�;. ..3TAT� sa��,r1�rt Etna' _ �-r �— �.—.... .. j'.� L S3 is , 's. f: � ,. _ %.'_j- '3i �„i� ,} _7 I'• � � s . • ' 1 � S F_LF 51_I65t i:F1 _i N _iE iOL � - - _ • _ . �H 1Y v i ♦ V STATE .{ J- i � ! �/ , �r . �_ I t �_ t t. TR i �# C a�It' -FEE' ,.• =5 _ , _2_: f ,E 9 s .. -: 5 3= �_'89 'er-_. _�1 ^_ ti-��--� -_--_ �' T r vAi' �- �L _ ._..-... .-. ;'} =+ 4 :... t_) i .^} �� '^- �+ .! f {� ,_t ^, � ,_t i• >_ .. 1� � , 44,,)� yS '-. E a r. r- HARDWARE }'t L. 1 �'� t1 � }i+} Y"♦ i-1 tr A I '4 i t,i ;� 7 C � Tic+ + S . ( . r•a i r L �;, �;, • G '_t Ri it �'C• kt _ Vii. t`; T MAT, I. ; t'4 1stL c - � �- • �. I. uUr'P L I E.SA!i: , }_,r•,' ll - • - [ E N L �. i i• � 3 MAIi T MATERIAL '.: 4_' L I, I • L Z 1r 1J. l.r Q L i I-' { [ ._. t� T. 10.59 '4 �l',•' ii :..:.� at i ... �. i; I.k ._i, -•'M i`'- i L° R 0 R A i`i >: f i. i• -'.F L - L 'S 6 t. ^ T . i R A F sJN -3�f r '.._ fir; ;y .. _ i'i} .. -._ E %.' ':. _ T 1'i A I .. t i 1 :u - _ Lr .. ? • = Cr q 7 +'-! _ ` -' ..J_s (•;_:t._ .3 0 1 :,: :, / ' .i i «4-;i i +_j �', i -i: 1. 1, _ i tl:^:t sly `t;j-}J4-;:? ri S�. PIP LI EL 1 16r C,0 1.'''it • 0Ct - •s_i�!1=�' fi •1,5 }(! '_• _ '�'-i%'`~'_!`� '`' 1_ �!t'ER1j ('''''• f` i 1•('-'t` � , 1 i L• 7 ii i.t .- , L ♦c?..____..____-..__.._�-._ �' 31 i s, p''�i 5i• } _.-_..-..___-�_{+'t.,,__._t. �__ +�! i r+oit -' �_r�r� '?r, .i.�...'w' - _ .. .. - _ ) a} i• i L t a. >• L ♦ � s._ r i.• �. .. ''i' _ C. .r ti. ti _•_---_. f ! i `—.._._-_. '4 40 _ _ + _..' t .- r _... ,-1 .. t.•_3i ='. i` : i i +_.i t AR.DEN `3Fil .f=:E� _E1, 3i�iSp T ?:L � 3- ' �- M. =}`.,s t � •s FEES 3 ._ES r ��a �'� �-.E �t�,��z � •`-� ; ,:0.5:! } , is. ". ;.•.� ' • i : ' r r 1 r i-' ,` 5. ,.! i r-' 0,; - !-•+ - - 1 1 '- •_i 1 { i_ CH T?• i _ ._ _- , 1:�- :•` .� _. ^; t_, -r' r=^'.-, .. .. < AM -r; C. BAHT -TE,t S R 'S•.+'.)i j' - - - - -'•� - 5 4 T -.' - _5477.2 ,:.. k..l �' ! '+.I 1 .i _ .. }_S ' . ,:.. r /• _ '.' jT' LE f•a i -' i 3 •� .Z hl A 1 5 _ t •. i.- L �.. i �• • L . � t. _ O R r ,r- 1 i f • � -J � 7 �,..• _ ,. 2 .. - _ ..�. i... YI: '..♦. I '.t L lr 4-:� Y i-} Cl, 2 ti.' t, '_•' !� L f, i r"'I _ i_1 U rw 1 i Z. t� �J _ i {_ i ri 1'. i.. L..,' i:_ _ 'y i r3 E 4 • ' ; •j '-' � � ,�. �; � _ : - Ste. a i F �...�.__.._.-_....-_.___. _.._____ � l` 1 r t..t �. _ r P* i_ ,•..I ' -i• � _.__._.-____•.__-_.__...-....-__:......._.._.___._..._._--_...-.__._._._....._�....._... .._._. �..r i..w. a.._.._..-_L�.a..i. �--1• L_4:___ - _ .. - � F01 , L. L�fl} ;., !• v{!UCL-r-' .N Li i'i ::+ i. ^. i 4 i 111 i:' , = C. L' .` ._ N! K. i r i t -i N A: `s_ i ' l .i i'. T • i - :. _t„jrt_ c _ 11 ti -•' r +v fj• .., 09/25/89 . " •"', � .r. � _ � . s F = , - . s _ - i t.. i••• + ._ i , _ r .'h 1 > _.l,f T r•. WAR�r-I`OU= .+t f: a r s a + s -'t t+ ' '+ - •.. r •_ E ._ , . v •, • E :rcA: rf, �s..� ��1t's�Li_ � 6 - :. .. :. ... .. ' _ .:.i U, P . .L w E . Y i_ i. t 1..'..r L '. s ' ,_ '_j �� :moi .F ?• t y { } 0 `:r I �.. �1 f 'S • L B L.. � • r••• 1 S g R • Z � :`'. i.. 4r' �� 1- ._t {'� 1 •.'i _t. CLOTH i., b •_iii - f .: _j r�. °t f. i '1,/25/89,i } ( _r i j .,l 0 . BIR }?s C I , E L .i U 7 - i ria FOR =, - Y+ t - , _ _ s ' -. .. z__.... •� .'} i r i•1 i+1 ra + r• r i, w_s ,-�. _�.-.__�•_.�i _..'1__..•=_...=2J�_.:..._!.�..�_._.,t..=J� i•• j •. r. .. i« r. �"•, : . r - _.�i�3.e-6----__.___ ._.___-_.-_ _--'---'- --..;,__._ _-_..._. __ .-. . ___.1....i._. � :•�.:��.L.T:? i'.{-......-__-._._�'_-':'-- _ _ _ _s i-.. •, ,_i t 1 0 [•; ';i _ •^ i= ',f : U i _ f t r r -+ r 1 :.: .. r _ i .�. i 3.J v •it t..i :'� i ;a ". -- i-': _ .'i '? : `i +.-.+.U,0' 1 _ _ _• _ i_ a �+ +._• r G A cl '- .... •_ i t T j_ _ f _ 'iw_ r A : 1- t _• s�, S T 1. . S s•� r1 : !t..F, i+- :. .' - 1 .i. ' ;_ " ... _ +, - _ .' - __ tr •» _ _ 1 �. » _ �l i } '- , r .. . =. + .•• v.l i '- titi ' { 6 'ti t_ w �'•1 ;_ s_t '_r : s .•_ _ `L �.. .�. Ir! i� w , 1 j:.. 1 t 1 `_.` `':' i.y s _ 3. 1 �� ''i' {_y 3 1 - 1 .. » _. TES .1 Z �� t i.• t i i•1 I ANN, Iiso sr , r r i 4 �. i I=i A e N! L+ i� C. f.: a :.•' =1 •- j ('y `-t .. , .10 _---.-__-.�. , •_.-.,1._. Vii_..__.. .,._, _ - _..__..._ .. ._..._ '. ___._._..... .t�••.V_._L _i..:i`_�._... �l.�l�-.:� t�E.-. ._ _. . Rir SERVICE 38 01:1 t4 f ' e- s 1 ,f a,t 4=5 =.j9�21__tr._9 C`sr103)E, NANf'Y PRS RAM REG FEES 1_Ib0 0 15 ! j _1 7 rr 0 `. j / _ } ,_+ `•' - Q�j_.• L S_ .i IN f t..• '�+. L. -L' S-.1 ,'.- �L , IS (tl_- 1_ .. _ - EPA t.s ��A_<.1�1•_•, i. �.__C_ ._ ^_ _.- ._.1..... _•r•.._.r_..J�_i _•���..i :.RE AI =v MAIN !� -T a tyr , -' REPA IR CE EQU __ __ _ 99 207 4 1 _iii ' (-) -j i) 9 f : , , t.. O l-. L Z "133 j . �. E,-,iE Y H U 1 F 11..� tt iT:::, 1 t_• C' .97 �.. i _ 9 f .4 (( LJ , � ._ .. �s - �'t��.. �.s�? i»j - t_ rl - � + � j ;� �F ':� �„� F �� �. ` - - -_. -- t.• ice` +1 D [U `-� 4• A 1 .1�1 V � � ^f :.� ._.� -.. _.-_.... _.__..i�I__>� iy.�i•.•�«��w• '�.li!_.,a �'± ;�.�_- a.' iw` ._. -- rs f^'- y i i i-�»-_.'•i_. t { 1 i +:�. -_ _ -_ +.-i' •f i� T �e1 a'i, }••. I � 't.S:�-,t.._`j:.� �j t_ n 15.2400 t i �' COPYL EQUIPMENT, !Up_� ,f 151; 13, 1 r .711 L-) f' ! i 100 i j ' : w j 2 "_tJ. - € : t R !=; C i� T G : ; ; !tet «`' U ! i - � i e �: �r i:, r U. i C '1 ; 0-1 f Z ! I _ . t j (j o 8 ) _i^j }t:_�8 te DH CU '�:) E i �yj l t LR � _ 107 _ -_— 2{!7`•t 180900;00 tz'-�__9 I25 DALEY �`�T EEL_S FOR SERVICE 9'� _. t-. i_� i_' { - �. •. _ 1 ,:. .i»' ..• ! � i �, ," ', i f ,� ._i ! t_ � i 4 '-' •i iyj S ry )J tt !! , 1 i.• !t'{ i� {' S }'t i� 1 D U1 i'i ` i i_i -r , r• - .1 '• -, - i- -C' r F'? -Z t ii� 1. I -f - r 1.,' i;( '1 t ._ ,� i -'i r -t R t ,., 3 3t 1 i T i i_ `� . ; - 0 t i i_ i 1 :: _ ..... .+ 2 0: 1 ' j � _ 09 2 5 8 9 EA Si M A N C f.i iA t COMPANY iU ' L T . !T� 4 i1 r O .:t T ;:r 111.91 DUPLICATING C 21' S r- r D OF La C' TING 0 '%b6• 't� Hi't _l + _ OF IAFLE�'!:J}�;") PAGE 5f i s --:�..._.__._._..____.__.._-.-.....-_- _L. -•-•---..._._...._____.._.._•-_•'__.•_`--_.__.._-.__--_-__..--._ [ 4 t -E -.R �_+ .at .. -..S.Ir �-� _• _•__-._ _ - r - Rau D 09 VOUCHER/ VENDOR 1--T E in C• t E t t:: KiUtaiL1ER N u m B E R D TE N. 11. DE.'= C:R Ii'' j• ION >" 0 U N T A. M. 0 U N Tt" t 71 t DUPL IC.•AT ING C0S i .� 67 86 r., 1.V ` _ U.UPL.Lc-ATN%.�tS; � �- �.T. 2. 1 -- ' +- �_•_ _ ,:... ; "` 0,: L s_L-•- ---•.., _ --••--- �t L! J f i.T_ L ; '7t'.: e 1 �•� _yam_______ � .�.._.-._ .- .. _....13J.-1�,..�_i S.._._...J J.IL.. �.t�� 3�..__. _ - r •i •• - { 1 i.. i� ,�--/ _ _ - _ _ sE,t.. - .. ,.-. ' .. ... :. ..-- _V.11 . REPAIR. : v VIA a NT J E -. { -. 1 a._ • 5 i.} ; 1,• : .:� .: .. .- ., .. Jy . M q _�_ ��—._____._.. _��:4_E_Y �_S�A.44—. �i�..�_�•�__i_�_E____ ..ri-,.,.. ���J �C RLPAIR MAINT,'E .._i:` 51 is Lat i 1 ILI EP MAINT/E 1 700.00 f a_ {: __ • _ L _ 0 •. 5 � J ? > E1 -- _ :i '.---"Ll.V 1 C__ __-1_J �-1 '3,J: w_.a!A -, •� -� a_ ;*t t: 't Z"50050 f_) t_� j , i ,_. , f� _ . i�; n '. E_' I - I i Lt i J. _J L• ;_ LAND < i t' i 1'' f 1 . j V C tYi tom. N i " t-' ^F a -t1 - =1 '24iL'7 ?_ ..°3C-1-•.i_i T - - - L ii:'`=i0VEM EN -.: .. :. 1 ` ; �• s '1 f ' 3f - LAN�? It'a'iiI_�iL�ji=i�T ` _ �. L a� �' ■ -T L ,1 ~i :' 7 � 7 .,., �3 0 {_S '.• i L F"yL.•-: 1< y,� *� _ - �� 1`_ _ _ . h Ci i � F !+Ei'fi IR __'; MA iNT . RE_..1 - r - _., s ,� _dam ti - � •. LL f} 300500 i ,,� .. i ': .% 1- ,••: r: -- r r-� ± - . # - r-- •-• ? i j. � t� i .. 14 35 _ 1 N = I • t I F`: iii v .. L• L i! • i i { .. ... t • _ `:' i.3 : L S ! i ! EYi >.' i.:i i_- L =..{ ! i ! - 3 a _ - Q. a J .FF 18.54 j _CLOTH _1 8F't ✓... -. - - i~ :�i i �'•' is aYJ ti. L- , i _ _ ---_ —_ .. _t. ?_I _. .._-i.._ ... ._.. _ _..._3 -'_- ate•! • U 7 >t ! F ..� RT 1 {{ .J =_'•. C L 0"r, LI' i �; - - - •r _ OTH UNI FOR1 ice;.. CLOTH H� - Z T { Uikli-Ji ;; �Li_)Tf .. �4 •r" 1 - - JTH _. ... ._.�__...�..;__ .:.____._-..,,._.^_.�____________.__ •1.. , _ __._.._ __ter . _. ____ _.._ .__.____-- . : .. ..I UNIFOR I.. 46 I 4Cz .. ,r•, • .. ,.'•- I _ .. �l t i S -I it�t S S l : C, .1 ' S' L '...� . _ Fr C J '. • t }•f i t �' •S N' a` �•' .�';� •' i {"• �= 4• ... _- 1 L •.. r L: L _. 'L.' 1_ 1 { •• ^ }.' 1'f' i' ) i •.T-.- tJ �.: t-1 Fes. L : ( t. a� i L} '.i: �.. _• t^ -1 _ j LF E 0 I� {„� 1 t } a : ) : 3 0 17, S t-) { i ry ' 5 GENERAL r` E ' is 9' R -, — PS _ 1}i ✓s l -� ~ � j ` a ti!w tt� a. i !'l TNT ifi !'� -i E- is ? A L ' . ' . _ � � 1 L.. �� a i 1 _ _ �-� •S -� „� ;rt 1 .� ,- Sa Q�ji_ :• :. . ,.. _F t 0, f t � �,. H L_ t • !'•. SJ EN Y !� }-.f i•i t i • C. K Sri E -i D C-1 r,--------.._ __. . _._ _____ .. _...__._..-____. _.__-_.-._.--..-._.._ _._.___-._.._ .-_-..�._-__ ._ .___ ...- -_. .__`_-._ --.- -- _.•-.� - �-_ -� { f � = r ; ; : T :� l � '+. � E L E �' f,: R T P'' i i. +_ !' { �.uEF,:�:_. A ;+ +: U ; i i f 0I ; T - _ ,� ,} ,_a `• .. •..'' E :~ - „v { _t! ,.. tite- .. . zt� B ' j JE 7 EL if i j�r'M RF, FE _ _ M1 • ,' - _ ". v !f L 0 9_ _ r s � _f i �. f i { e .ti <'j r �f ' T ra p -:A _ -M 1- , 1 Ml }'� { C. i 1 .t A - 1 . r` f f„'i _ s i _' i f 3 ; , f a 1 2 t-•• 0 ; 09 t r l=: r{ t }' �- '- f - G L,IR L _ . t c .i isi.. • ' rid : i .. ' Ur1'i I f J -. .-. - ,� !' ti • !17 L _ :f = 2 ? r_. �E € F t i '' /' _ �= r D. ': j f� `,► � ' : c �: 17 I :� r` � S-A L _ _ F _f ^, C., � �a ., j - rY_ �-"-5'--' }- L _ v 1 [ t W L ; _ - -j ; __ -- -- --- -------------' , i . J '. — t�t: _i '-j , i_, } �'_jr -;�iti=+'t _ _.-1 �iCii-=i[=i >��trr�+:'f'''••= r - V {-- : f- `�' f 7 _-!`, • '1' `_ a - �.a y - 4 s,{1 ._ , h`f" f `i -f t ':t ;3 ,'•? S-• �+i »'t •`� f is 'r;,: M1} - •tom ! 7 -• : - 1.. .. - =3 - . -+ !_ .. ti -i: 5i- .� .+.. r il,! - i - L 1 ? 'F ^ f _ _i - ;22:. _ et 0 rt i .�; 5 ['� �, 0 - . • { � ': f . i r:. t'f f. =; ,�j � �•t f�. �. la � _ w . _ HI With >L�D.t _ . � ice", to rs _ _ , _ _ .,� i.i f C ;:F t L_ C1i�iiPN,E iti ^r, - --. ,._ f - - - - _ L •_ 1_ . +:1 . f '} t3 J t . L Cl i I N C s � ,-• 't N r -i t - i;,, a~ ,•,a Lrti�i`•�.t��•� ��i +:11TH �.-____-• .v+.� = `'• ,-i : - i f 0 t ? i E- S? - S : 9 i •..t I •�� t i :'i• . ! S Z E_i ' ! _..r- � w A, _ r' r a E- - - .. + 1 t•l s:rl :.Ff ��ai ' i ,r j T ,�1i-Es f rYii' t i� �, {t -r• C_ _ �: 1 tf- _ _ i 4. j tyi i ; 1;.. 4'.2 -Lo {_3`:t i :::fr'±��.# KELLER ELS'•_ T h:' C. t f?!°:. a r, �:: - -r&MA #• 13 t • • i _ . 2 0 � 4 •_ 0 6 { � ---- Est ;t `s "i _ I 4 _ I •..= Jj - - � �, 3_ — -- - i'•. }r} f'•. i_ S 1 t ! : T 1.1 L �E � T C• ri �r .Y � .. •' 3« f P � , .r � .,. �.y -- - - - -S: r { 1 :3 G1 '.j �[ S U PP t '7[ +J - 6 a404 s". #S': 4 1� rr ;� l r _ 8 . y-_.___.-..__.__.._-�._•_ rn,.LrSEETEr _.._._-__ � _-�--.-_=.. cLE_ . �r._.. �RE = ._..._.._ _......._._..-.__ ,__ -•_._. I •t;i11-5* i _a �0 '•( i .:. J. f+.% "S' j , r 1 t � E„ } i i 'f' it t , ,."•2 i - L i-+ i \ ! L f,.• L 1?'4 } },_} �•[ i +•{ :� ._ •� /' t i "sy „�_ r � : :-i _ f � 1 14 J I'i J .--+ .�'•�_.l {Z 1 � �! �f "'i.-.-._-.-� �_� {-a ��+ �._i_�. �•1 i f~ � ' t _�.l _ �a, _ i 105 "T F O �f 0 rtiJ _ • t.!` Lt � �. �i , r� a;t•. LIGHTNING {�i �t T �i I .'(' r EAG ELECTR 1 � y � r a - E; �E EL" •' Fctt F F ,'0 r _ - }1 t{ ._ 1 .: ! • T j 't ( 1.� � �� {1 i}�.t � �. � F aj `` Jam` i' � L� ii�'•.�-�": �:� i� i��[ t4 �. F� � i'f rs� � .� `� LILL1E t NEW�'L-'J y �y� ; MEMBERS .-)) �- SUBS ry MEMBERS Y 16 , 00 107-5/89 47137 n , LE 2 10 81 49C-)200 1 / Ll�::_�: LUM'i>cs:: c.:L'i. :IITMATE R IAL r•. .I 2 ( . ii+moi a 0 -�2 ter A Ir N T l"I A IF EF' A L 90:k. .01 - x;03 a 0 ,t 5 E^} C" 5, 0-9 j j - _ f ._ ,,i `=`i _ ;S 1 5N � - Q ., i : 1 • T r S1 Ci 1'� S N D, J 1 21,11 { '._ 0 = 0 w � J T Tf7 ; .,. i �-y M A S N T MATER A T E L+:/ " R 3' + 1.90 - r 5�- 1 ,• V I;fit:H;/;E} C:IT�' OF t-1 PLL �%i I} F A�E , i 09/1. / -i r- �• i. • i? _ t^i a i!�•• r h` (. r.l. F: .r; .,>;,: JH ': " - r-1,iR PESz0D 0 VOUCHER/ C:H. E. !�: r:: E 1\11i i f; �: H E: C. K V E ; � D t: i R I T ? t -i I T E C>rt; L: H.E IC K NUME;EF NILA!;E;ER � ;<; T E 1•,; M 1 , +� i i E DDE O. r'T 1 DDE __ •, .• �: 1 , 1. i tai i it fi: yY� a«' 1-= N T A IMI t=► � � N T 71 1 1012i�F r/ 5� . .-..--_. .._....._._.. ._... yQUE� I,M� _. _. s_L2111 �PT�.. nt _. 631. r "9 2.49 '• ` • - - r f 1 .>= }�, ,y C?) { i ' ft I �� I y -t ��� C 1 3—,, '�• �•y • t �, {, f i/ r, .»^, t t (•. •- .. �. r-, . t '� r= f=• E -� __ ,.t_. t—__ .. r f� t� .�� - - _ .. i 1 .. w 1 } 3 5 1 ':'r iJ i. ~ ! ' ': 1' } A J it S C - 1 V Cr P ="+ i i T i 'i' •' REPAIR hE� I _. 1; r f E «� �. r p 00 r• 2. �1 .1 .520500 ''= tr � a'7 �� r >r•.�I - � ~ 1 it '.-t Cit: � RE MICHAEL t . t { : 3E sit:LE ,�LLU�t,� GE. - _� s-005,0 iti,r_„ -. _�_i-__-�.ic k-V► ..._..__._.1I '� 1 %6 402 1?'- ;I;'=' MIDWESTANIMAL S:EV It:E t -EE:, FL'•F; Ehi'I!i.-ov •! _ nit -t 10 i_ S • y'• •1L_ isj��1 L} �lC7 COMM Ll .. ;;IE�E,EQUIP,# rU•11T 141 _ q- 211 G Sy yA�• 540900 o J i �i I r�t'x � � F t^t T F;. r, 5 t^i J - 1 � 9 1"} '= '=1 I _ ' t= ! r-' 1 N ' ` F 1 ' , ,� .!_ }i lit _ L., T w. i r _ _�_.t � JJ :_ ti : a L � -1 i ,. -y F , L.C,1# T} OF, = - .�I L l T E� _ 6 60 - 1 >_ i :' _= I. i� 5 f 3' { 5 r ,_, '-J N t_ R T 1-E C- T A r, y URF .-, r 1 r , ! •.! i� ' i' =. i- y c _ c >� ! 4} % f� n i A L i' I � t, N t M A i .. - •1 (i. f'• ,.t -• � ? - � ._ MA I N T. MAT ER 1LAL 19EJo iv ,- L a �• i t �i f r: _} 1 c, + �•. ;� - !'. f r f'= T � t-' ` i • : N O T � E R N _. 1 � T +- ..' i=' _ > � E F � ! . U I � r: , :�_ C, T E RL i N Gr, _ _ r,. + UTT '7 L' ,TILE•?i RV T: fit• y} �t #IT ,�!} 09 r:=00. 091Z--5/89 NtiRW?E•`:3T I Nto:E _'T ;1,r r.i- _ -`ER'V I !_- E; r'IR,IN "'I FA.L FA-,.-t,,1E.INJ % _}•6. • ,. _ .:.' s_.i. �.. �'i' 5 Y yf 7l�J .�,t .•3. 670500 • f • 5 a� ,� t il.: Y"...�fl �a .t .. C. :. - ria •Jji JE..i ti�i ! L��) #�j�. N S., .- # � ,� L A Y E R i 5i �- :. � �. -- r, c r - t7 :, 'a.�j j _ -- I i �: "f1 Y �. L -_� � i R .. 1: I i' '.. , ._ _1S ��w. �- fLwE j E r3 i - # ! a � 1. • .. 7 — ,_—_— u� ,.. j ^ a �. f_ r i 0 0 i ' ` j' ; 5 /89 ' E f= :FLEE: E L E C: T R I C' REF - - - ; ; r R E 1� L :': -1 M tt ;'� I Ea i Lf 0.00 l? f .010 L. 2 7 " � � 1 i t � '..a t � lV O .. -. :. i , '1 " : .: � s_ _ .I � 1- i- - _' CONNECT '1 t` i y� T .{.. O r f- T � � 1 j: a b L.. i.- , i. •«' ! li .. f y - . , .__ r;- ' �` 1 i �f � #� q �" til � � �' � L I �'. ri ._' - . ,. ,-, •7 3,5 �•j':J / '�• + ��� `:} . r T' L , j', ; - o r ^r Y - r .••, t•- -y. .a �. +. �a ; J. .. 24. .. ` ... ._ - -:. C i i' ! t:.'• « i j'.j ( +' i=•, ! <� - . - ` , . ? J �. J _ ra r, - i I E S _.. _ •"'f h T. j } s - ti ts_ E # # �•, , i- .'.i i 1-i t. 1 i•l i •.; ri ' 1 �. 1 ; T ' -.s y i j i•- { 1 t� v . �'. N 1.t .,. �T� P t'l t 1 i v 1 i r � � T � �� �.. n _' � { _ L, . .� �t � �e -' � - S .. -,Ij G4LE. 8 (JE '-. f i "l' i i9 I ii s 7-F ' "� E I~ f'} 1 . F OR i -E S. 13� 3 S iii UC �-ER! ' 1 . ,r-. �,••� !!�' 6` 1: i'ti %• j.T F i ��i, E , i.+ t . {,, •" { • i:. • H ! - L• i'-. ..- ii[£ ttp `..! _. 1: E .: i ..• i �rtf [ !� 4 . f - T �- ` {`t'I L r_ (•• {�{{ i ' M - (. trj 1 ._i t._ 's i, ; j �y ' �i ;' S }st - i L i 1 .� '» , , i C} �:� ( i u C • 1 t t 0 N �t 1': ,1 T :tet I `i 1 }_ N 1 } 1 {' }'``s tsj ;-( t.i �••t t S • ...' .. .. .. :. .: ;••_. ;�, �- t .-. 1 " 1 - -' .Z r: -_ : ! i 7 F J .. , ..._; .s. ';. �c i •.� 1 -S. :. i,. : . r_ L [ -•. s f+t. ._ f� s s Ts..y 3 f ( i \j ty�' f F t!' ,�. �r s~ Y• M °- R 4 i.• 1 +moi' 1 =.3' � i .. E- i.-- 3 1 { i r_ 'S 1 , i [. •moi t r_... i v .. _ ...,._. - G �. � (� I s - } e : e-•,:�'OF ,.t � I t... � L.:J � � { t � i v i. .. �a) -. � . s L� 4138 r.- .., - 7 ' JL _ . 7 'l 5,�',Q t _ � �•J, tS ' i - t �' ic"T �r� _�'` + _ -� o 0 i' i l i f_� ,- - �' .� '_� `.1 } L4 ; - _. {�; � { =' i': i E FOR V - 1 t_1 ; 1 i � � 0� CIO Jai 1. •' L. •.._ --: - v Jof F _ ihDIrJO�.:�U_r - ITT - . T Tr ii � L = i _ J s ���. .� - .,i} • iI •"- .. _ •� _` ,_C :_s . r. '. t G,r„ft :.E.: r + J i L4 +: f''� 1k -.-J =T�••' T'i i! 4�, ri'i • ... _ [ H ° _. _ ...._-__._._...__..-___.___.•-__•____..._._--_--__�... _-_____.__- ii.'-- _.__i_?t - ' iir�.._ .', 'i'=ti -`••' !1.L,9..`. - ••' _i -t \_i_]._.4L'L_�_ ._-_._ ..._.a•_ •,"t - -__..--__ __ _______.__�}_�._-._......1_.tJ (( -u_. .._. _.._ _..._ •�} _L-�--y}.,moi-tyl_;_`�:f� V' -• 1 7 3 2 9 i-• i--,; f °'I' i •.!.•.. (^ -1 -• �, r -: i,l _1 •:_ 1 _ R C - = 1 - : i � !-s �, ,� i"-. t ? 1' }..i 't L ?J _- ,.J `J - r lam: C' �' � f F H � � S r f �L• L ._ q ! i 1 :, y 0 C '- E2 LAA=FL1A_ .;. l ' . 1 --it t-. 4 - !" :1 4f1 _ �. s •.. 1 1 j •�• � i S i. -� . ! ! _: : :' t �. _ .. - `+ -� i, - f. L' `tib � f=', :=t t 1 ' ' 1 ^'. _ "} N. :: 3. _ > i r . 1 7 :1* .. { ,.._ ,..F �� !-`t' i.• w - 4� YJ ' T. -- �.{ �. _ .. F'-1 i-'� -'t �- c 4 i }� 1 H �.. R �: C. :.i i'E ,.i . � .... v. 0 .: L •�f " .. J '.-•, :_+ 'i }- : 't. ;. • ._ �l {.r a ti_a �„7 _ ..: - r••t s1 • _, r.i ; 1:. " 'r• . 'i =_4 t .. : _I Ni N `•'t' F ' E f' F0.;:;' S r !'` �� .i r � F 60 } . r' ff_- f i i s-7 .07 ' •1 .__ 3. _ . _ i._._..k _ -_ _ •J ,� =4 ' - '...= L.' V ! RG •l f i. tui i; 1 :3. 4. A 0; - •, G•''. ,.,, r .:' fir < . ,, �. . - t' .. 'r " u U F= � L 136 F + i.i i = ; M F' i ;� • _; i,� - - 70 .. � ` 1. T OFF F � j (� ` � t'i i � �� - a � . - E _ _Tc Iii• � {" `� iY� 6' ! {" : J1 -� = I� - -{ ,-? 14 w f : _ t_8� S ER L L AM C . .'0i.I E Q 'U I YM _ N -.1 r . 9' c 1 ! C,t= �i Sty_ _Fr, _ t 1.,. - --- -- ------._- supp IES -1`'- .3 !.ii i i i L I E .:r OF ` 1 CE { C - 2'14 't _r� _9 _ _ -T i�� t!, All li .._tf•. E i� Fn _1 ' SERVICE - `! i .. <-. FSUPPLIES «4.3- F -_1 Z rt8 I�!ERS GUNS � LR_LIEL,�;�,� t_.;, = a }.- t yry 4 _.:; 7 (•t 0 _— 0'? �- � E �_ '. � 'S i 3..1TS M .rk il t_;.i� P, 10'13 4 i? iY4 1'? c;.. t`-' F, :_' 15t Y - _" '' 1 F '15 i t_1 _ F >_ _ 1 J , ! ! i•., E ORT ni L1 �.. - 1. _.•.. �._ Fi } �. a.-�. _. 1. ^Ii .� �_--_.---. }' ' f Y EEL T C f i G � 7 t� • i s 14 _ 8�t0__3 09I:F? -+ rUN CONTROL �F INhCL- DC,S (A�V�_h} S150.00 {5tF UJ �1 , i 1 T '.1 1 r :_-� ! I / .S 8} } �I-•may-;•- .:! '� _ ' M_ i� (.' _ L T ..- j ` f { C: U j-' 'L L .=s i t` t F 24.4o _ •-, .. T ::J U PP i�:-f• L �'.7 � L I4-. 1 J' V_. � _ LJ { 1. � ■ { j'r�;. r`I • C j._0 SJUPPL I ES OFFICE �. U P P L I E 3 OFFss.F 23 40 j ,y::.. i .:t"{ LEt=;�, � 'AG,E J• ._._-_ t 1 //_.ITS f 9 I _ 1 4 '' � r' _ -_.-•F_i'�' �_. �r� �-.._ _- ._ .___ ._ - i � Y I r, �. ; •t' s . T -T• r J 1-� � ; t � - _ _ � .. 1 VOUCHER/ OUC, fl- :HEr' VENL ih C H E _:1; VENDL" =:; Ell ITEi I TEL .:HEr::: - Ni>_1`{: B,ER NU1-iD R DATE N i '{;E DE.;;C_R IIT l0I Atil 0 UNT Ai{i1.UN T i , SUPPLIES 0FF I C E :, 90 SUE'?=LIE0 iFF. I,.•CE: I5.90 SUPPLIES OF'FiC-E ,,,, SUP'P'LIES t�Fl= i'r 12-1.14 34"1 .04 - 2150 860I00 09/2-:5/89 T Jo AUTO .j..� _ . LIEE VEHICLE _ 6SUP 2' i _t 1 c-:'6 f } 12 _: 0 >> 1 Z i / .. T.A. ,..' C }'1 1 i' %-t K Y %: �.:/ O N .:>' i N C _ M f+. 1 N ! MATERIAL i 9f9'75 , 'HINT MATERIAL s979.75 17100.00 31019.7 ;"' 5.. i ... f_f 0 31 0 F _} 9'/ Ta.E♦ s1 . CONT-RAtr.. .- i 1, 6. I - , .. _ :. ... ... CONTRACT P i if, s :.. ''y. 48■ %J 1� P 84 00 . _ .,. -.. ..- .. '.. y. 0iii i Fl >.T t M.- -;'M`� 00' _ _E r�! !TRACT ._ L. 4 a t _ _ ! 15 �- J = l 5- t T D..iE s OUTSIDE w _ S W ! f..' v 0 4 9 ! 2� 5 i 9 TARGET + ,_'t L' ... l•' t IJ f J 1 :.- a.: C "- r. i I FE. w. !- �' t_ Y i +.7 �; L' 1 _ !, i._ i• i - 47. 1-18 -� _r: 1'-' i�l � ? L i�1 !-a i `: � t i r' , •' L....t ,- �J s �i - ... �. - r _ - I IR 1. laJ i l l v: ! t �.. iL -rl ... 44, `' V- - I +' . 5'5. {i .•.( -.. 155 .•'.115. 5 i,8085 '- .:i'' 12 5! 89 �-; t r! ►�` lx..' }'�:�. i �.'r• f �^ ...�. r..+f..- .ry. r .r. ... " - - :c;' Aim; L 8 1 4764 .,_}0- 1 0 e 7 { ? - ,- 1 't f', -- - �_ �_!1 '• f) r ! 3 '=' t '=1 ri - : c.1, *: ��i .,��____ -._ _. __ - _ - j^ ~f - _._._..,.. =a - �-.. E � _ _.� _.�, �� ►rte_._ _ - - I _,��,i�;c� . _ a >,' Z. i _ :�: - U E ;�?EE 9 r:ELLULAF' : NC' — _i a" _ -� 13, _ .. T E L E F' I-: 0 N E -•w3 43.83 7 #-y , � ,= ti �! -.-�=- 9 010? 1010" TE--------------_ _.__.w_ ViidF►• - -, L.. r / S CLOTH i r l f= f . 1. 5 `. 9 C5 ; i 1 -, _i ` _ ':� !r _ _ � jj . T 1`j J_ y{ •_ T r � � r C. { � j � r i,f 7 3 -r Ell) L= 4 t 1 h i... a..= '_: i 1 i R i -'r 1- 1� -ry - ;. -- j � } 3 t �. I A i '. L}. } i i i- i... 0 V - { - 1 '.' i.t • _' 0 - --' -�.---_. _ a;'• -- ---. _- --. -. - i-_. {-3; _- `,,` ---- _ . -_._ J _!�__ r _'r_.._�..-__ ij[ t�::r ,. r•7 �.? 1_� I -',t;_ E .- SLA L--;,� i. �r� L_!' _ _!.. _... a.: • !" ` i'' t ,- - :.- .. - 1 _ _. •_ _ '-{ t ' � I °-; °-J _ f 2 •_ , � � ( �j r =I� • .- , i 1-�'f �- �, `-r�r - i r >} ; V A _' r'•. L.� F U L'. 2 123 i r R 1'r Vi cl 11 A I_, �• - j�' *J�'', ^ _; r _ � r �, � E. Lis i" +_' R tir. i. } �. 4 1 �• L .^; j _ .., i'4- t..= s f •i € �� .. { _ . .. � � fes, �:} i•! [ { '� iw •. I..w '' . _ i .. .. i _ ; { t 2 i• V. ' i _ { I , w.: �� r r i r - � :_� i" ... j'•. ... 5'i !�� •_' �': CH .: F t K ,r _ tl t -..1, i. I� - - _ L• v �_ .r t `� `_+! .:� i� i •i ,_ r'`. l ,' i } �• 7 �3 y i_; ,+ _ i iY•'1— s r.:"; `= U�'f ; A;f t i %i : i - 6 : i v :�..= i .,�1 '-� li ! . . f i.i i.. - l t �� i +', ! 4. ! i '+ tib +_' � ' . t... .f. E �= 1 i t is r l . - .. • r i t t 1 .. } �, c -5`4 _...� �... •• ; rI <_� __ 3 i i 3 t_ i { : T i < ' . _ i c�. `i ;w .._� .. T ' ` 1 ! i'. ' ' T Ni -._ - - .. __ _.._ _ _ _ i s .:i — L. L .- ... { r: 1 1.4 .. . .. ..... ... ... ... .. ._ _ _.._..__--' y ._._ __.. ._..--.-_..__..__ ... _._._. -..._ . '•_ ! ' ' - J ,. L= _ — w r' 1• '•. • i-. n % s:� •� r .r '!? t . u i i �..• +.r a - .. D U i—` L. v :'! i f 1'4 :.+. .. J ! ui 5 .r 21 c . .'Y •_ _... ___._ ..__ - .- - _. ,.i lwi 1; - i_ -^. iR i { 4 �_: i i y t r __ _ - .. _ .i ,. L' V ice= S,. �.• :i '1 .L i'i iZ _ i� 0 _.-.._. __ _ _.. _ . _. -. - 4 A c _.. ..._ .... .... _.... ._ -- - --_....- - - _• __ ..._..-.___.�_ ._. - _�- . V r 40 5 DU t i.. �. { f':.. .i. i •i eN Rte• { f ! ' +.' _ r e ww . - i• -i e t �• inj .� : fin' S -� _ s—. ° .� �,_ i •'•� `.j'i i i L I [ - L- M 'G._�_._.. IL•i r. ;..• 1 i it L I••. - .. 4Y _ _ s _ _—_—__.___.�_..---------___—• ---.__ _...._.-... __ _- _ _ _ _- - _ - - __ - .._ _. -Via;;-. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PAYROLL CHECKS ISSUED FOR PAY PERIOD ENDING 09/08/89 CHECK #11462 - CHECK #11615 EMPLOYEE NAME MCGUIRE, MICHAEL A. BLACKSTONE, GAIL WEILAND, ELIZABETH ZAWACKI , KATHRYN BEHM, LOIS N. JAHN, DAVID J. SWANSON, LYLE CODE, LARRY J. OSTER, ANDREA J. MIKISKA, WILLIAM FAUST, DANIEL F. TAYLOR, LINDA MATHEYS, ALANA K. VIGNALO, DELORES A. ANDERSON, CAROLE J. LA MOTTE, MARLENE AURELIUS, LUCILLE E. SELVOG, BETTY D. SCHADT, JEANNE L. KELSEY, CONNIE L. VIETOR, LORRAINE S. HENSLEY,-PATRICIA A. JAGOE, CAROL CARLE, JEANETTE E. OLSON, SANDRA RONGSTAD, CAROLEE COLLINS, KENNETH V. RICHIE, CAROLE L. SVENDSEN, JOANNE M. NELSON, ROBERT D. FULLER, ELAINE OMATH, JOY MARTINSON, CAROL F. STILL, VERNON T. SKALMAN, DONALD W. FRASER, JOHN NELSON, CAROL M. MORELLI, RAYMOND J. STEFFEN, SCOTT L. ARNOLD, DAVID L. BANICK, JOHN J. BOHL, JOHN C. CAHANES, ANTHONY G. CLAUSON, DALE K. MOESCHTER, RICHARD M. ATCHISON, JOHN H. YOUNGREN, JOHN GROSS PAY 2,782.34 1,510.90 1,181.30 1,034.10 1,034.10 819.28 1,027.00 276.80 534.12 172.80 2,033.30 1,050.28 1,083.88 1,083.88 1,308.69 210.00 1,878.90 189.13 1,029.48 681.92 972.68 572.57 732.68 918.35 624.35 280.00 2,084.50 1,189.99 1,205.01 1,800.50 641.31 301.58 1,245.02 1,378.28 1,455.66 909.48 1,706.52 1,435.83 1,638.82 1,617.48 1,450.44 1,556.15 1,800.50- 1,403.88 1,615.49 1,403.88 1,847.01 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PAYROLL CHECKS ISSUED FOR PAY PERIOD ENDING 09/08/89 CHECK #11462 - CHECK #11615 EMPLOYEE NAME GROSS PAY PELTIER, WILLIAM F. 11774.53 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS J. 1,327.08 WELCHLIN, CABOT V. 11382.17 LANG, RICHARD J. 11403.88 RAZSKAZOFF;, DALE 12454.28 HERBERT, MICHAEL J. 11534.79 DREGER, RICHARD C. 11647.57 STAFNE, GREGORY L. 11583.04 BECKER, RONALD D. 11454.28 HALWEG, KEVIN R. 11737.06 STOCKTON, DERRELL T. 11497.03 PAULOS, JR., PAUL G. 11173.77 BOWMAN, RICK A. 11465.79 KARIS, FLINT D. 11390.28 HEINZ, STEPHEN J. 11525.21 GRAF, DAVID M. 11467.08 THOMALLA, DAVID J. 11561.35 PALMA, STEVEN T. 11241.47 VORWERK, ROBERT E. 11467.08 BERGERON, JOSEPH A. 11497.26 MEEHAN, JAMES 11570.02 MELANDER, JON A. 11553.36 SAUNDERS, SARAH 790.33 EMBERTSON, JAMES M. 11538.10 WILLIAMS, DUANE J. 11354.90 RABINE, JANET L. 11237.05 BOYER, SCOTT K. 11170.82 WALDT, CYNTHIA 882.84 RYAN, MICHAEL P. 11617.48 FEHR, JOSEPH 11310.28 NELSON, KAREN A. 11160.86 FLAUGHER, JAYME L. 11182.16 WEGWERTH, JUDITH A. 543.47 HAIDER, KENNETH G. 21084.50 CHLEBECK, JUDY M. 11087.89 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 889.24 MEYER, GERALD W. 11217.64 KANE, MICHAEL R. 1,342.28 NAGEL, BRYAN 904.36 LUTZ, DAVID P. 11174.29 KLAUSING, HENRY F. 11210.08 SCHMOOCK, JOHN 992.68 HELEY, RONALD J. 11196.70 OSWALD, ERICK D. 12107.40 COLLINS, STEPHEN 396.75 FREBERG, RONALD L. 464.00 CASS, WILLIAM C. 11704.68 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PAYROLL CHECKS ISSUED FOR PAY PERIOD ENDING 09/08/89 CHECK #11462 - CHECK #11615 EMPLOYEE NAME GROSS PAY ZACK, TODD 378.00 LINDBLOM, RANDY 995.09 ELIAS, JAMES G. 11555.55 PECK, DENNIS L. 11334.28 PRIEBE, WILLIAM 11331.99 IRISH, BRUCE A. 1,635.08, GEISSLER, WALTER M. 11503.36 METZ, TERRY 995.08 LOFGREN, JOHN R. 959.32 ODEGARD, ROBERT D. 11878.90 BRENNER, LOIS J. 11067.88 KRUMMEL, BARBARA A. 486.34 STAPLES, PAULINE 11642.28 JONES, LUTHER 72.00 COKLEY, T. 200.00 TRAVERS, DANIEL 81.00 ANDERSON, ROBERT S. 11132.68 LINDORFF, DENNIS P. 11153.49 GARRY, WILLIAM 11010.86 HELEY, ROLAND B. 11175.88 MARUSKA, MARK A. 11465.96 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 818.28 AURELIUS, ERIC 352.00 LECOUNT, TERRY 160.00 SCHNEIDER, GREGORY 187.20 BURKE, MYLES R. 11197.48 BRENNER, JAY 470.36 BURKHARDT, DANIEL 200.00 BESETH-J R, RONALD 130.00 WARD, ROY G. 406.40 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS J. 11372.68 GREW-HAYMAN, JANET M. .11157.48 NELSON, JEAN 390.73 HORSNELL, JUDITH A. .567.94 HUTCHINSON, ANN E. 691.94 FISHER, LYNE 84.00 DOHERTY, KATHLEEN M. 11029.48 BARTA, MARIE L. 954.28 OLSON, GEOFFREY W. 11878.90 SUNDGAARD, L. 225.00 MISKELL, NANCY 328.59 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE L. 517.22 ROBERTS, KENNETH 11121.34 EKSTRAND, THOMAS G. 1144.2.94 BERNIER, SHAWN 300.00 OSTROM, MARJORIE 11563.08 CARVER, NICHOLAS N. 11187.88 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PAYROLL CHECKS ISSUED FOR PAY PERIOD ENDING 09/08/89 CHECK #11462 - CHECK #11615 EMPLOYEE NAME GROSS PAY LOFGREN, ROSANNE 31.50 WENGER, ROBERT J. 11499.45 LA CASSE, TELLY 105.00 LA CASSE, CASEY 136.50 NADEAU, EDWARD A. 11246.48 MULWEE, GEORGE W. 11152.68 NUTESON, LAVERNE S. 11536.68 BREHEIM, ROGER W. 11262.56 EDSON, DAVID B. 11181.00 MARTINSON, ERIC 368.00 GERMAIN, DAVE 11174.28 MULVANEY, DENNIS M. 11288.68 SPREIGL, GEORGE C. 11064.92 ------------ $168,817.27 PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST -457 $ 71019.42 CITY & COUNTY EMP CR UNION 24,953.00 AFSCME 2725 476.30 MN MUTUAL LIFE INS 19-3988 160.00 METRO SUPERVISORY ASSOC - 18.00 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 191.00 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 505.41 $ 33,323.13 GRAND TOTAL $202,140.40 f MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Shawn Bernier, Planning Intern SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Renewal LOCATION: 2239 Hazelwood Street APPLICANT: Ray -Olson DATE: September 5, 1989 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION E -a - i -, Aot3on by G©un��,i� Endorsed M,odifie Rej acted..... . Date The applicant is requesting renewal of the conditional use permit for a cleaning business home occupation. The business has been sold to Ray Olson and is operated from the Smith's home, who are now employees. BACKGROUND On June 14, 1982, Council approved this home occupation for one year. On June 27, 1983, Council renewed the.permit for five years and on September 12, 1988, renewed it for one year. All renewals were subject to the original condition of approval. ORDINANCE PROVISIONS Subsection 36-442 (3). All conditional use permits shall be reviewed by the Council within one year of the date of initial approval, unless such review is waived by Council decision or ordinance. At the one-year review, the Council may specify an indefinite term or specific term, . not to exceed five (5) years , for subsequent reviews. DISCUSSION No parking problems have been noted at this building. Staff will continue to monitor the site to determine if a parking shortage arises. Betty Smith, the former owner and original applicant, stated that her and her husband may be retiring in two years, thus they requested a two-year renewal of the CUP. At such time, Ray Olson would need to relocate the business from the Smith's home. RECOMMENDATION Renewal of the conditional use permit for the home occupation at 2239 Hazelwood Street through December 1991.4 Attachment: 1. Location Map. 2. Property Line/ zoning Map SBREPORT2 J� ,1. CT a /doh /g7on Lake. W M a V NTY x 61 t RA AT Z �a O JA wQ>W4 mKOHLMAN W ~ tz / -i x KOHLMAN AVE a o M- 4J 2 Roao �' ..0„ � � 23 M N Z J // J N W f }• O J W i N Q z 3 uj E DGEHIU_ RD. 2 � ac w wuj z3 Cr V t a N J z DEMONT u r AVEW F- W �f ji BROOAvE.�E ~ O =wK m :n 3t a a BROOKS It to AVE m SE X T T A GERVAIS AVE. GERVAIS AVE. % G6NDV1EW AVE. VIKING OR. F S E R R E N er LLARK =AV^1 25 �' ke ou TYC� O a LEL AND a �� 141 / o JUNCTION AVE A. BU O tip SAN AV SK ~ _AVE SNR AVE J w o RYAN m i 27 L FROST V N � � m a w FE NTON AVE 62 JJ (nw Q W a 113 $ GO 3 i a FRISBIE AVE. �.'� /ipR V a 3 F FRTPLEY AVE Q Lo a O� SO PH IA ST. r u = Pho/en Q J a 62 W a IL A I JjPjE NTEU 3Q' ;F]nF] Attachment One COPE�V0 E %nLAR AVE LAU E RD. LR p4 aa 2 S = 0 AN MUR ST z RKE cx =VE IT a o P-:ELDRIDG E AVE o J BELMON ' AVE w � Q a OPE AY E. t f o LARK p AVE. U' H CL l r. cc LAURIE Q RD,/ aI'� - . r Cr z AVE _ ,� ��5 1%4u 2 Bu AvE w `• 64 >t u SKILL MA N m AVE HAR RIS 500 ROSEWOOD AVE f V E ST R Y LA N Q� P VAP H t~ t~ p 2 AVE vi cn a H cn 5 a a Cr J w t� 1 r” SU MM ER AVEu m w Q _ Cr o CD u 15U JR IP .Y AV a w Wakefield Cr w _- _� V O Co �' a z v r- 2 9 �.: K 114 5 T N Air y Lok a Cr = SOP MIA ST d, o z Z 3 z J [PRICE z AVE PRI CE AV GJv wt c P > ^' �� a � Em. Z T. AVE..*~ I IPF -Inn 0 �._.. (6�) 65[IFIn ST. PA U L LOCATION MAP �vI_ \ 110 A4 20 t • K;� g�,�t SSS �5j3s L -, '• OP �e►c lt�ri I. r, .ter ► _ = j ' i a ♦ . , C'y V • • • — •� 16, � b Iti I -f- r -- 2255 LARK AVENUE jidn ,23E] 'I 5L§ Th. .y- I s 2 240 f. } S 14 + .. 2219 i 1 {:l I r� a+ f•1 •� �� �•'I t t�I Q 1 y 44 Ca ---m 4� It QnA Irk y , , 7� r .�rtA Attachment Two "1 f PROPERTY LINE MAP N r�� y »- Attachment Two "1 f PROPERTY LINE MAP N MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Registered Land Survey LOCATION: 2990 Highway 61 APPLICANT: Gerald and Bruce Mogren OWNER: Keith Venburg DATE: September 18, 1989 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION E-3 C .," - Aotion by Council Endorsed......, Modified Re j ecterl_ " Dat e The applicant is requesting approval of a Registered Land Survey (RLS) to change the location of the property lines near the Venburg Tire building.. The existing property lines run through the tire building whlle the proposed property lines will maintain a minimum of a thirty-foot setback from the tire building. (See the proposed plan on page 4.) Registered Land Surveys require the approval of the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Approve the Registered Land Survey as submitted. kenmemol8 Attachments: 1 Hazelwood Land Use Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Site Plan and proposed Registered Land Survey m M C i C W nr1n^1..,ftt . W. Ca W HAZELWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN Interchange towner collector tzs 00 t �sf 1 mfft.or--a erlal Jf LSC Am ., .Z C 0S. CA i t ;J + -.-- 0S R H �,j • �. la�t3ti� 1� �- 14 V . RL r- °o c LSC ha g e �+ �.k�, 4L• 2 Attachment I REVISED, 3-.25-85 ; 9-29-87 j 4-08-85 ' 9-21-�8 ' 8-26-85 10-27-88 1=4-89 10-09-854 -17-89 11-06-85 7-21-89 . �= 7-07-86 10-10-86 •Interchange } 12-30-86 Vadnats Heights +..t mayor collectorte _ y Co.3 -SC .,:.., _.LSM1B Ed & WC 1 tn a,•Q; :0 Ma)or colle ' / manna em � B W m M C i C W nr1n^1..,ftt . W. Ca W HAZELWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN Interchange towner collector tzs 00 t �sf 1 mfft.or--a erlal Jf LSC Am ., .Z C 0S. CA i t ;J + -.-- 0S R H �,j • �. la�t3ti� 1� �- 14 V . RL r- °o c LSC ha g e �+ �.k�, 4L• 2 Attachment I C �v 1TI 1 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 3 Attachment 2 4 Attachment 3 0 .Yv r. or 1•• a. -r Slf. it. we t n 1 T rC f••. �. T.� if, R. %-L j �•. 1..• .! owt N tt r. of s. VL ♦ rr w � !.•• 1, +. its. • u .N tr 1 t... .� at. u s w a.•s 202644 •W 202310 Ar- s - n•to -.- ..� ... tae oc _ .. _ . _ ry s• ... Dr TRACT A- t • -�, -• � - 6i ss s s,; c• ; TRACT' is/ =" �:� ,? G / 2 - I 49� �«r � t hi •. _ _ ��-O i � TRACT Ire.-TO-f $t wa X r v CD taousL Z t F • a Ilk" J - ..1 / � : ''� j " • �� _mom 1 w. r j ' 'scALE-,i.,,. no weer PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR 1 / REGISTERED LAND SURVEY *wow* 0 DEVCLO•[R' twrwt - 29.2 N••tt.oM tt,•. iM Cw/•t, 1•e whole 1•• tt• 99 OflCRMfgM. t.rr.r.r.r,wrr�rrr�•.� tM/t1�R M Team: ! • a.....+..t,.. w.rr...w a.r.d �: 'r ^r.�+ i r'•r"..n� ��..� �� •moo•� •, •� jra J w. TOTAL •Lft'.M[' �� Dr.+•w. •.•.....w.. tw. TOTAL. `1J• '��j -. - • W �r M1t MLwMLt eA ; MM rr+'►.:. :_ r�..� :..� ��.�. `moi �� ....r... •rte . �= i ....w ftw.r w.w writs •www T. PA ! a••••t tart NT toot. itlt tN•y, tt.w .r..•w •It.. N f•Mtl Yt •MN/t� tlo./ M or _ 0.0 a• ••NIf N ft••t••►t#"+So•••�t •.. $UN ARM rr 4 Attachment 3 TO FROM SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DATE INTRODUCTION MEMORANDUM ,��7 .- �/ r% ~ 10tion by Council -1 I Endorsed City Manager Modified ..... Shawn Bernier, Planning Intern Re j ecce Conditional Use Permit Termination--Home,;Dat 4 occupat i.on .4" M 2675 Stillwater Road Daniel Ader September 18, 1989 SUMMARY The applicant is no longer living at this address and the home is no longer used for patio furniture construction and sales. The conditional use permit, therefore, is no longer needed. BACKGROUND The applicant receivedinitial approval for this home occupation in September 1987, subject to six conditions. The permit received a one-year renewal in September 1988, subject to continued compliance with the original conditions of approval, ORDINANCE PROVISIONS Subsection 36-446 (a) ."The City Council may terminate the permit if the use is no longer in effect." RECOMMENDATION Termination of the conditional use permit for a patio furniture construction and sales home occupation at 2675 Stillwater Road, since the home is no longer used as a patio furniture construction and sales business. kd/Ader.cup Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map Larpenteur Conway Beaver Lake LAND USE PLAN 2 Attachment 1 6 Maryland Ave, to Stillwater ROd Sc Harvester O 0 • SG Minnehaha Conway Beaver Lake LAND USE PLAN 2 Attachment 1 6 �f • 1 • " ' _ ` • ' -16S L"� (its) . l.f4•�w. i �r t G t � 1 • 3 15 + • t •� --- !lT.46 slAblpei � •n ra •. (30) W 011 l''`� C� . •'• O 1 ,.✓ .00000dO 00 • Z � OIL N 1 jk ` ; O : is • . �. f. t�Jtj r. •. ...........: ,o r _75 ,yt • h ,/• =1: ...� � � ' X01 �� • ' 4"( > 2 r 1 r Z. �s �3) `OA) r Cb Z4. 1 ` � N l Ccs(JE 7) 400 a � %0000" %00001 r 9 • .t 1 • = . a 0! MOEN 4 ark~ .a ••mum PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 3 Attachment 2 'yKr.r4ell M Action by Council.. MEMORANDUM Endorsed Modif i ed TO:- City Manager Re j ected FROM Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Final Plat Approval Date .� LOCATION: County Road B, East of Payne Avenue APPLICANT/OWNER: Pare Associates, Inc. (Dennis Peck) PROJECT TITLE: C. Little Addition DATE: September 15, 1989 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting approval of the C. Little Addition final plat. This plat contains 25 single -dwelling lots. (Refer to the map on page 4 and the seperate attachment.) DISCUSSION The applicant has not completed all of the requirements of the approval of the preliminary plat This includes finalizing the 1 developers agreement and acquiring the necessary off-site easements. The City attorney has stated that the applicant must supply the legal descriptions of the property for the easements to him to begin the condemnation process prior to the City Council approving the final plat. Dennis Peck, representative for the applicant, has indicated that these matters will be finished. by the time this item is before the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Approve the C. Little Addition final plat to create 25 single - dwelling lots. REFERENCE Past Actions June 12, 1989: The City Council approved the C. Little Addition preliminary plat (page 3 ) subject to several conditions., July 10, 1989: The City Council approved the renaming of the street to Kenwood Court (from Greenbrier Court). Attachments .1. Property Line/Zoning Map 2. Co Little Addition preliminary plat 3. C. Little Addition final plat (8 1/2 x 11) 4. Co little Addition final plat (separate attachment) kenrmemo5 40 p30 Z. .� '3Z(33)0N ��+5) 85 (4') Ivo 1►tea16 4 H V CAL 4man 3v Tr 1 1� TMJ .7It wToll., raa 57.f �C . - - ... _ • 97.9AC. (`) � � 3) C � '�� ✓ 4 3A rj - vim • z8 ` � '' `, �. ts�h L t. J1 . s .. e� o• � o g.o 2 W 412.5 r �. 't .50 ac �. l �('►NCI� �. 4 •.. !,3L } c12 4 C a 1 . Rl /f N m - - - ,1 2 31 tll 11 11 11 f 13 c9 ( 1 1 _ _ � � 1�2 '�+ � X12•°5 233`• ; PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 2 Attachment I w w HVAU •, C 14 r �Pis PL. E Co Ft E c% AND USE DATA Comp. Plan Designation S. F. Residential Proposed Land Use Single Family Residential Contiguous Land Use North Vacant East S. F. Residential West S. F. Residential South S. F. Residential ..ZONING DATA Current Zoning Fm Farm Residential Proposed Zoning R-1 S. F. Residential SITE DATA Gross Site Area 9.82 AC Proposed Dwelling Units 25 DU Proposed Density 255 DU/ AC Road Length 905 LF Width 34 • FT Area t 1.34 AC CuWe-Sacs: Max. Length 4.67 LF Radius 60 FT Net Site Area 8.48 AC Proposed Ponding Easement 23 AC Average Lot Area 14,776 SF Minimum Lot Area: Allowed 10,000 SF Proposed 10,000 SF Lot Width @ Setback Line Proposed 75 FT Mir*n 75 FT Comer Lot Width Proposed • 100 FT • Minimum J 00 FT SETBACKS & EASEMENTS G�o0 mom�. %NorEs 1 I � �++. •.w r �++.• w•w•.rf 1n�► M AL M 1 • � iM7 • Ar��r• y„••s��•••• . aj i 1 f •...� 0% APO M►w•�.• A- 41061004 WWI*. M r.r.+� 1 •� � 1 4vw * � •.•tea. v.e•. tM� doom" 11� &4"= s wsaAPbW66- M� w~A I ��Aw waa •f'�as. Y '. M�"!. !w,"InloIrA M.A� N wa�"1• wA►�v � j_ OF i 46 A • 0 w s+ w 40001b Nw of SMwrr L %0~ #. ww• R 00% is MO .o• M ON "M •mound• '•UP.• of •••• •••{"w r Mme•• •w.A OWO fi�.r•.•"•• Mas wd "It 1•d t ww•w •. w •uY" N"w� arm • W •.ft ir••d opo••• M •r to •Y O.•iJ "r M YY M•%nft a• 40060 W. a vo am" 4 4 M+ w w► �.rwr w . r•+•a w. O: �% 1 w M =tw •. oftwo !1. 4nr• AI. • 1I1 inr Win•" •r r �r+r••M , •r V yp"r ♦ wa�... •�••• •rw s+•+.•„ "••D M M• •..r of ...Y r•w."M ` 0 wow ••.w •r• � N M rw• ..w/ M •a"• " •r as.w 1 W'M ..•• ••w•� Y .r.� ra N a"r •.w* w bw..r.."M w OWN" w w ..wr• �... «.... �....q w.... +— w:..* ►++ 1.w .� w &.0 um" s- d V. Ow w sm .tr■M wiw.w �lwr r �� �• �Ar► I. ��• �, •" • �:. «.sews n w.w . ,� Ir ALAN A. KAMAN "08ftA SLANSKAM AMNan PRELMNARY PLAT OF C. LITTLE ADDITION COUNTY ROAD 8 MAPLEWOOD. twN 55117 DIEvELOPEa GEMSTONE DEVELOPMENT, INC. 617 mAwTHORNE AVENUE EAST SANT PAUL. MN 55101 pwdEA PARE - ASSOCIATES, INC. 2172 FAYNE AVENUE MAPLEWOOD. MN 55117 Sulbdivisim Development Plan wwwdM vo NN 1 0- owl Mwo w•• fywr•sw Y/1r•s•• "saw Nr N.M M M".wr �MwM. i•tMr ��.W � 3i►.1�• M�� •/• �••1�1ww O�•s�nN�w � s+. A. I�Tirs/• �lJM Ili t��•`( P�,r� OF C +"w tv•P plot •r •..• •••• r••• .•• (�,VPLA rT'ED 404 JV.O iv69'2o i� "E 573.56 fot nrl �.vscs o/n✓�3 �wcwr, 7• l f-��v ..YL wi sccnow e • rr•.v. ,etr w .s .issv-ro sa..xe:+�t sen tov�'w p .71fv01[S iCPV orr*4.wvr SC1 ! irl 2 � L � � 3 " .,=�+�>o' [r .•'''�• Sd9 ��%/ WI /9S•02 � • .+t.,o�tS iia.,• �rwwvcw� �.ro ..r cirs f.•strtv�s +►f s.�•wr �wS: SCwc! .w"C iw.�cV . SiFrtr f't A:- . � 17 ._ _ _. L ._ o i0 .w Iso too 1 QC/4•4; S flit iw• n,.��r A10 i . � V� 1 / AAl �) ;� AlL.••,'w-a L1/l„mss lNi1li . ~ h �' O p.!rfl'w�SC' 1+•G9,+�' ra• o.;A! rso .... _.. Of d[i/I4•Ivi s� 00 ,ry o0 � 1 ^.' •Y' � - - -- •i %1 "W 37B SS t'$ .� _SW9'20 C O v w T ROAD — '�—�--� 11.1 So✓rte s,wC s►,* sEt�s+..•� (i s s �coecfo> �.tf uviftt wE el csrrwsr worm a st coP•c•r SLCfity B, ,rvi'ffr e~,r irn.s:a[rT rrs.v. ,rs.•,v ,C,"5,C Y cov vrr Fovvsa nMvv�'t yr .v�rciii f TO** City Manager Michael FROM: Emergency Management DATE: August 31, 1989 RE: Donation Acceptance MEMORANDUM McGuire Director Larry J. Cude F- 6 A0t10n VY Coun ail.oj 19ndorsed Modified R e j e c t e d _......,.....,�..�.....,�. Dat e TO: odifiedRejected----- Date- We have received a check for $1r600,00 from the Maplewood Moose Lodge #963, to be applied to the upgrading of equipment in our mobile communications command post. We request you put the acceptance of this gift on the city council agenda for September 11. If accepted, the money shall be put 'into appropriate emergency management account, LJC *Opl Action by council Endorsed...,.. . MEMORANDUM Modified...... .Rej este TO: Cit- Manager Dat e - Y g FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Street Vacation LOCATION: Sherren.Avenue, between White Bear Avenue and the former right-of-way of Hazel Street (in front of the Maplewood Care Center building) APPLICANT: City Staff DATE: September 12, 1989 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION ' staff is recommending that Sherren Avenue east of White Bear City g Avenue in front of the Maplewood Care Center be vacated* The vac vacation is proposed since the City has no interest in the street and the property on both sides is owned by the VOA Care Centers, the owners of the Maplewood Care Center. .CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Chapter 412.851 of state law states that "Council may, by r, an resolution, vacate street if it appears in the Y ,public interest to do so..." DISCUSSION The Maplewood Care Center has been using this area as a driveway. The.City attorney has p staff that since there is a private ._-. drive on the public riadvised ght-of-way, there is. the, potential of the Cit being liable if there is a damage claim filed against this Y ro ert . This could be aparticular concern if the drive area p p Y was not well maintained. Since the VOA owns the property on both sides of this street, they will become the owner of the property if it is vacated. This vacation appears to be appropriate since they have been using this property for the private driveway. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution on page 5 to vacate Sherren Avenue pp right-of-way between White Bear Avenue and the former right-of-way of Hazel Street (in front of the Maplewood Care. Center) Approval is in the public interest because: 1. The adjoining properties have adequate street access. 2. This street segment is not needed for area traffic circulation or emergency vehicle access. 3. There is a private drive on the right-of-way that may expose the City to liability. Attachments. 1. Location Map 2, Property Line/Zoning Mai 3. Street vacation resolution kenmemol9 AV : I le N i N N = y Y W LA RIE RD v Z � R 0 � sip Z 1 tRAII. i I i NORTH 9 I I C68 13 LOCATION MAP - 3 Attachment 1 r Z RIPL z Y 13 LOCATION MAP - 3 Attachment 1 r 44V 14 (4) 10 290 (7) L 4t z S 01 br Ar 0-- 50 too xx 0 1, 0 1',N G. Sanaaila a a im S , � t 4 3 021 E -K ff Tlist H 4001 L Maplewood Care N ' n law III Center Building #Zo *MEN ; e 19 21 22 2P 2425 o a 9 A L04 V'A jj-r E do 4# 41# 8 7 6 5 4 12 1.1 10 9 At dlor- T. k4 F alp 41b no do 00 20 21 1t- ,® op 19 2 25 2 7 6 7 :9 2021 2ti 24 Y5 C 17 11 23- 7 .. I (, A- to 41D 40D MID 401b 40 -1� II BIN I I I ii 1T1it a0 I1 11111 MIM M COPE 0• •xg 7-.q :5 5 :9 91 147-333 150 7 1,33.35 15 3.3 1b 3 3o ro 13 (z+) 1) (1 S) A(z �It %k2.3) �ZZ 14 • 0 ( 2-6 + 3 03 ft ri t oft -No to. I 2A of Ooh 5 (1 0 2 j 1.1 !jis 00 2 Im - - ........ WNW 04 t�'�� 10 (4), 3 W-3 LARK 23 4 77 as S. 0 '4 Undeveloped land owned by Maplewood Care Center Volunteers of America Property PROPERTY LINE ZONING MAP Proposed Street Vacation 4 Attachment 2 VACATION RE S O OUT I ON WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood initiated proceedings to vacate the public interest in the following -described property: Sherren Avenue, between White Bear Avenue and the former .right-of-way of Hazel Street (in front of the Maplewood Care Center). WHEREAS, the following adjacent properties are affected: Lots 5-10, Block 8, and Lots 1-8, Block 9, Dearborn Park Addition WHEREAS, the procedural history of this vacation is as follows: 1. A majority of the owners of property abutting said- street aidstreet have signed a petition for this vacation 2. This vacation was reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 18, 1989. The Planning Commission, recommended to the City Council that this vacation be approved. 3. The City Council held a public hearing on September 25, '1989 to consider this vacation. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law. All persons present at this hearing were given an opportunity to be heard and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations of the City staff and Planning Commission. WHEREAS, upon vacation of the above-described street, public interest in the property will accrue to the f611owing-described abutting properties: Lots 5-10, Block 8 and Lots 1-8, Block 9, Dearborn Park Addition 5 Attachment 3 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Maplewood City Council that it is in the public interest to grant the above-described vacation on the basis of the following findings of fact: 1. The adjoining properties have adequate street access. 20 This street segment is not needed for area traffic circulation or emergency vehicle access. 3 There is a private drive on the right-of-way that may expose the City to liability. Adopted this day of , 1989. AGENDA ITEM .lotion by Council.:.} AGENDA REPORT � 1Jnd ors a d..,�,....--- To. city ManagerModifie FROM Assistant City Engineer Rej ected. Date SUBJECT: County Road C, Trunk Highway 61 to Hazelwood Street Project 89-04, , Pub1ic Hearing. DATE: September 19, 1989 Introduction The public hearing mailing list is hereby transmitted. Attached is a resolution to order the project. ac g_roun d A copy o+ the August 22,-1989, agenda report is attached + or re+er�ence . Since the preparation of that report, the estimated costs o+ the project have increased. Further investigation a+ .necessary storm water, f ac i 1 i t i es to provide sediment removal/pretreatment prior to discharge to Koh 1 man Lake identi+ ied additional costs. The revised city share casts and inanc ing are given in the -dol 1 owing table. The total casts include. 18 percent engineering and administration casts pay able to Ramsey County as well- as seven percent engineering and administrative costs directly incurred by. city sta++ . The assessment recovery. i s based on standard rates, which is unchanged f ram the August 22, 1989, agenda report. Utility extensions +or +uture service connections are proposed to be directly assessed to the respective property. Project 89-04 2 September 19, 1989 MA � EWOOD COST AND FINANCING ' Construction Total Assessment Other ` CostCost ' Street, Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk $150,500 $188'100 $ 90,000 $ 98,100* - -- - -' Extensions �storm Sewer, Sediment Removal Pond Total $352,600 ^ ` *Municipal State Aid off system transfer ' ` **Municipal State Aid off system transfer as eligible. General obligation financing for costs associated with drainage of area not within County Road C right-of-wayal ` The financing for the frontage road relocation is entirely from MN/DOT funds. Clarification is being sought from MN/DOT staff on h^ limits fmaintenance that MW/DOT expects the city to take ' the' m s o ''' as well as available funds from MN/DOT to extend the `.over�-` distance of reconstruction north of the frontage road. from from the ' ~°-~�^dC�wn point." A recommendation on possible extension of the ` reconstruction of the frontage road from the limits shown in the feasibility report w�ll be made at the public hearing~ If the ' f�~~~-g*� road isreconstructed beyond the proposed limits, then ` it -is proposed to assess frontage road properties at $15/front foot, ' Recommendation ' It is recommended that the council adopt the attached resolution |' that orders the projects BAI jc Attachments * $440,750 $181,025 $259,725 ` *Municipal State Aid off system transfer ' ` **Municipal State Aid off system transfer as eligible. General obligation financing for costs associated with drainage of area not within County Road C right-of-wayal ` The financing for the frontage road relocation is entirely from MN/DOT funds. Clarification is being sought from MN/DOT staff on h^ limits fmaintenance that MW/DOT expects the city to take ' the' m s o ''' as well as available funds from MN/DOT to extend the `.over�-` distance of reconstruction north of the frontage road. from from the ' ~°-~�^dC�wn point." A recommendation on possible extension of the ` reconstruction of the frontage road from the limits shown in the feasibility report w�ll be made at the public hearing~ If the ' f�~~~-g*� road isreconstructed beyond the proposed limits, then ` it -is proposed to assess frontage road properties at $15/front foot, ' Recommendation ' It is recommended that the council adopt the attached resolution |' that orders the projects BAI jc Attachments RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, after due notice of public h e ar i n'g on. t h e construction of bridge, roadway with concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, sidewalk, utilities, and appurtenances on County Road C from T.H. 61 to Hazelwood, City Project 89-04, a h e ar i n cg on said improvement in accordance with the notice duly given was duly held on September 25, 1989 , and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard can the matter, and has fully considered t h e same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPL.EWOOD , MINNESOTA, a5 follows: 1N. That it is advisable, expedient and necessary that the City, of Maplewood construct bridge, roadway with concrete curb arid. gutter, storm sewer, sidewalk, utilities, and appurtenances on County Road C from. T.H. 6 1 to Hazelwood, City Project 89-041 as described in the notice of hearing thereof, and orders the same to be made. This improvement is to be constructed by Ramsey County under a cooperative agreement with the City of Maplewood . Z"...AGENDA ITEM -�- Actlmo.by Council:. ' AGENDA REPORT ' Endorood_______. TO: ' City Manager ' Modi.ed______~ Rejected _______ ! FROM: Assistant City Engineer - . Dat SUBJECT: County Road C --Trunk Highway 61 to Hazelwood Street, Project 89 -04 --Schedule public Hearing ' DATE: August 22, 1989 ' Ramsey County has had a consultant engineer prepare a feasibility re/ort evaluating the recommended improvements and costs of the report subject improvements This report presents the city's financing .h� �of its costs based upon the estimates contained in the draft feasibility' report. The final feasibility report will be transmitted separately. ` he recommended width of the reconstructed County Road C roadway �s 40 feet measured from the face of concrete curb and gutter across to the opposite face. This is proposed to be with no king a ll owe d on either side based upon sstandardized Ramsey par ' 'County design and practice. It is possible that the roadway `uld have parking on one side or a �educed width which would foto State Aid standards. The Highway 611 frontage roadcon r�m ^ would be relocated to the east at a width of 36 feet. Other aspects of the proposed project are a new bridge across the DNR trail (Burlington Northern tracks). The new bridge would be significantly lower than the existing bridge. This would improve deficient e�istinq sight distance. A sidewalk on one side is proposed. A storm sewer with outlet to � K hlmanLake is included in the proposal , The storm sewer would be routed through a proposed pond to enhance water quality prior todischarge to Kohlman Lake. ' The city share o roadway costs is estimated f d t i t� ted to be approximately 26 200 f d width over ��4 Feet and sidewalk $1 , or excess roadway , This includes 18 percent engineering and administration payable to Ramsey County and 7 percent for city engineering and - ad/inistration. The estimated total cost to be paid by the city together with curb and gut�er, is similarly forstorm sewer, oge er , U estimated to be $147,500. _ aik tl ap 1 ewood Project 89--04 -?--- August 2.2"1 1989 A review has been made of the amount recoverable from assessments under the standardized rates of $500 per RL or FSM 1 of for storm sewer,, $O .10 per square foot on all other uses for storm sewer, and 1 1 ^C for unit street costs . The amounts recoverab 1 e are $9C , 000 and $53,625 for street and storm sewer costs, respectively. The e.;cess cost above assessment recovery is proposed osed t o be through an o++ -system expenditure of Mu.n i c i p a l . State Aid funds. General- Obligation funding is also proposed to Supplement the MSA o++ -system transfer. for storm sewer expenses, 1+ the sidewalk* is deleted or if the street width is reduced, b a then the .assessments, do not change. The Costs to be covered Y proposed MSA o++ -system transfer would be reduced. Recommendation It is recommended that a pub l i c hearing be scheduled for this. .project. 8AI jw Attachment PROJECT NO. 89-84 CO RD C-TH61 TO HZLWD ST s D/P ND. tillANfITY Ofp{ LIST PA[k 1 [f 2 08-22-1989 ' COL. 1) = STREET - EMIT HZE 2 OF 2 PROJECT NIL 89-04 CO RD C-TH61 TO HZLUD ST {-- = COL 2) s SSTTORMMy S��E�� RR - UNIT 3 COL. -3) �_STORpM SEWIE 1 .-t. S.F. _ . D/P NO. 4) = SEWER SERVICE �•- s COL. 5) = WATER SERVICE = T REET- - .UNIT_ COL. _ 1)_ S t... 7 PIN NO. COL 1 COL 2 COL 3 COI. 4 CIX. 5 COL 6 0372'9722.33-0043 1.00 1.00_. 0.00 _ --- 8.60 _ -- . .. 0. Q0 _ . _ _ 0.00 ' _.._C(L. 4)__ SEWER SERVICE 03-29-22-33-0044 1.00 1.00 0.03 0. ea 8.00 0.00 t•.. 03-29-22-33-0045 1. e0 1.00 0.00 @. t'► 0.00 0.00 W::29-227M--OZ46 1.00 1.00 Q. Q+0 r - _ _ 0.00 _ 33 --.0.06 . _ _ . 0.00- COL 6 0. QO +, W-29-.22-33-0047 1.00 1.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 _ 10-29-22-22-0018 ._ _ _ 1.00. ___- -._-•--- _ 1.00. B-29-22-334,048 1.60 1.00 0.00 0.00 0. ea 0. eo . 8.00 s 03-23-22-33-0049 1.00 ._: ._,1.08 ,_ 0.00 _ 8.03 0.00 +� 83-29-22-33-0050 1.00 1.00 - 0.00 1..00 0.00 8.00 t� 10-29-22-22-0022 1.00 0 18-29-�2-3333-003 1.00 03-..'9-22-33-0051 1.00 1.00 0.013 0.00 8.0 0. e0 +^ 83-29-22-3s'-fl0 ;2 1.00 _ i. 00 _ 0.08 _ .___._ �.. __ . 8.08 0.00 0. Co 03-23-22-33-0054 1.00 1.06 0.08 8.80 0.00 0.00 .� 83.29-2.233-N55 1.00 1.00 0.09 0.08 e. �o 03-29-22-33-OUZ. 2.00 2.00 0.00 .__ _ 1.03 1.80 0.03 03-29-22-34-0Q09 1.00 1.00 8.0�► 8.08 Q. 00 0.0fl t » 83-29-22-34-0018 1.00 em 0.00 . t _Z�_�_3p_0013 2.08 2.00 0.00 0.08 . -- - - 0. Q0 Q►. ?0 03-29-22-34-0014 2.00 2.00 8.00 i. i�0 8.00 0. ea 03-29-22-34-0315 4.08 4.00 0. m 3. w 2.00 0.03 .. _ . _... 03-29-22-34-0022 ____ ___._ - _.._ 2.00. _ M 2.00 --------- 8.00 _ 8.3 0.00 0.00 84-29-22-43-00`'2 !. 00 0.00 32234.00 0. C0 Q. Q0 e4 -29-22-43-CK-*3 1.00 1.00 0.02 8. w 8.00 -t µ 'r p►4-25-c2-43-00�:4 1.08 1.00 _._.______ 8.00 - _ t, 04_29_22-43-0025 1.00 1.00 0. 08 8. ?0 0.00 0.00 414-29-22-43-0&% 1.00 1.00 8.00 @. 4►0 0. .. 04-29-22-43-0027 1.00 1.04 8.03 0.00 0.00 04-29-22-43-0028 1.00 1.00 0.0Q 04-29_22-43-00,'9 1.00 1.00 8. m 8. ( 0. U, 0.00 84-29-22-43-003@ _ 1.00 _ . __ .__ 1.00 0. 8.03 Q+. e0 0• Qfl _ . 04_29_22_43-0031 __ 1.08 1.00 0.0'3 8.03 0.03 0. ell, 94..29_22_43-043,0 2.00 2.00 0.05 0. i - 09-29-22-11-0001 -_. i. ee 1.00 _ _. - e. efl @. e.3 e. e3 �►. t�0 0. Qfl i 09-2i-22-11-0009 0.00 1.00 1.00 8.08 4+. ea 0. e0 ee e. Oki e ..� �____--_ z`+ 89-29-22-11-001 i . _ i. Q►0 _ ... 1. 1.00 0.00 0. N O.Ofl 0.00 f '' 09 -29 -?2-11--0012 09-29-22-11-0013 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.08 .8. ea 8.0fl 0.0 .. - 09-23-22-114014 � 1.00 1.00 - - _ _ 8.05 ._ . _ _ _ . _ . , 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 8.03 83-29-22-1 i-0018 1.00 0.00 l738b. 00 0.00 0.03 09-29-22-11-0035 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 8.08 D. fl0 0. N. 8. eo ___ _ _ _ _ 0.00 . 0. Do-, _ .._ _. 0.00 `� fd3-2J-22-11-0050 2.00 -.�.14 0.00 24134.00 9.w 0.00 0.00 ' 09-29-22-11-0063 1.00 0.00 1204+0.08 9. N 0.021 0.00 . 00 a• ea 0. eo 0.00 10-19-22-21-0002 15.00 15.00 0.08 14.0$ 4.00 0.03 0.00 � � 10-2'3-22-21-0006 0.00 0.00 - 548M. 00 6.m 0.03 2.00. ---2.00 __ 0. Q+0 _ _ _ _ 1.0$ 8. w - - - - = 10-29-22-22-0002 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.0x3 0. (d 0.03 0.00 l' 18-29-22-G2-0003 10 -X23 -2z-22-4604_ ._ 1.00 .. __ . _ . _ 1. @0__ _________ -0. _ 0.0a 0.08 0.8fl � ___ �_ HZE 2 OF 2 PROJECT NIL 89-04 CO RD C-TH61 TO HZLUD ST 08-22-1989 D/P NO. tX1W I TY I3iECK LIST = T REET- - .UNIT_ COL. _ 1)_ S _ COL. 2) = STORM SEWER - UNIT COL. 3) = STORM SEWER - S. F. ' _.._C(L. 4)__ SEWER SERVICE �+ COL. 5) = WATER SERVICE 40- COL. 6) = --pIN N0. COL i COL 2 COL 3 COL , COL 5 COL 6 0. QO ' 10-29-22-22-©017 1.00 1.00 8.00 0. e0 8. E�3 0.00 _ 10-29-22-22-0018 ._ _ _ 1.00. ___- -._-•--- _ 1.00. 8.08 8.00 8.00 10-29-22-22-3019 1.00 1.00 , 1.00 8.00 8. Ba " i 8-29-22-22-00'0 1.00 1.00. 8. i.00 0.00 8.00 @. ea ". � 10-29-22-22-0022 1.00 0 18-29-�2-3333-003 1.00 1.80 8.80 8.00 0.08 8. U 0.80 e. e0 8.00 0.Oa - - - „ ,.^ a► o►a a 6 a N W Q 'Q60Cr Q 'Q 2 U � fewois . L Dim w. L W J PALI W Y CO) i ZA C/R . C� 'FRA O O DR LCREST OR UV/LLE DR l/DIAN DR 60 VtK l fl 9R 25 RD N 8" • 9URKE dN W ELD R I OO E AV a U h NT q a SKILLMAN KFNWrSrbn MARK M POND �J t V'f ; L D f MONT AV Ay z a ►- gn SEXTAN T AV v a GE AV z W DR Y GENERAL ASSESSMENT AREA ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04. COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST CN ALE/A Knuckle Head Loi ;, 'f'CCR HARRic Q -Q 1 0-29-22-21 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 7 ° = 400' i� �w Lam •o fn 725• - ' '-104' -i %. i 3 8c .23ac: 80' �33c, 80/ a7 c• 80' .s/tc. •Stat. .79 Ac. -?S-- •' � � 3 37 .,. I2S' •' v+`v 0 - 116.76.. .5074c. 1{ .505ac. -- 00' -• C2 _ O o so3 0 Q-' �e l � (2.0 3 A 37 3 ° 6-1) , low- • .... 't .t 8 art. h � t ,f nr ��9� .2rio`'� .Z.�i O•C . ' - 3' -t t t ' p 15l 046 3 O co _2 6 . o 37 Y .42 �o io a'to zoo IfA ac. 32i 3�o -Z:t •�6 r arc. opo (G) 273 12�! Sao• • 3 3• -309 w- 530 •' u SL ie .5O ac. �o� -' f33) !::s! r (3.3) Opp (�) . .. SZ� .s8 pec. In 430 34) ( o o C8� �-.. 3? c. 6 cv • .84 3� (29) �p �35)36 -447 .tp3 ac . 1 096 N wl 8 (30)b) .37AC. 31 - CD C SE4)-00) - .84ac, • 4 -' Z.37J 1. S7 ac.I 1 0° 83 0� • 600 ' E I {� .O vD 0,�31 oma. 1.2.14•G . 692-* 5 5 o �38} � C- b 8a) CE O (I I L � •94a r-. � 1.2"1 o..G . C54-0 39 (-7a7.5) en o (12-) 0 180' i. 8 8 arc. 545' C-�s {) (e��) o l (4-0) co •9 z c - .- --- oto 3? - 38 m .92 -ac. • �14� 030 _IQIj6 • O ora.\ �� �..Ip{�1 J L'4�i - o .92 a�.c. (15) RsMIr, % Q Doc* 40 96 1 ., Z-45 M4. • _ 3 �-It � --• ._ 193' - -' 40 • •33 ac. Zbo .36 Ac 12.6 919-- • - _ P70 QQ 1 0-29-22-22 ASSESSMENT AREA. MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" = 400' 1� -T 4 V Q -Q 3-29-22-33 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" _ 400' ommmmm= NNW !o - 07 lb 11 0% rA A -% - I I r...- -, Q -Q 3-29-22-34 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61-- TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" = 400' Mr. LT I F r • 1•IJ3a� � / N .. Ifo;- r .r - IC • 1 `�� 1 � Q • o v o 60) I ! O v� oioej is ! L7?j • T10Pv r 1 � . •i ;� ; 3 : S2 . v7 v Z p �• I LA 41 I r ! / i3�) TU .l Q . Z p l l -•O I • i P 4` I LIP IIZ-tv do 60 .49ac (5� i ` Owe 12% 1003 ff , Q E3.0 . 94 a 4' •� PZ . ILA t —s� �• 2 • w LC'9ac ted. s I I i Ql OIV � � � . i •-6�. �.b ' •fib �4.• �+ t0 � ( a -KOH OMAN AVE. - O0 0 Gt, co w N to: vd ' �? j.4 9�p.�o 132 13-a 103.2 6s) o O C ` ) / 30 �•0 a°' • ��� � ` �: `. ; �• 1.31 ac l I, 4 1 5 6 r. (oil ANZ. -7 DZ E:��fAZ��:l�t tt�.{ �3.t• :. . � � I JJt 10 4 '1 �21 ` 7 4 9 3'5 t 42 ' 9 o i ,�• v �' , X08 �' 1.5 ••- � c$ j.OoaL • ,7�1Qa 50 C� 5J • ^ h ' 3 2 ''' /� 'ri � ^ d r r QJ v { 1 7(e � oil O (D • �, p. ! ./ • . •. �o 1 A-2 10A ,9 , 100 �.. �� t �n is c.� 6 4 *0 R7ISO .,a log oil 3 fr1 j 1+1 ,67— Q -.Q 4-29-22-44 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" = 400' In I c.v r r MArLtv1tnr� AVV. �1 So Rj M In BT-5735- �i o 54 %• A 7.L 7 17'� •''� iYl Oi t c t Z ,o f- 3 e:� o f o, fl13 N01f.30 5 8 0� o� F 10 5 r •, ¢i c o , o �, � `�Iq (� ,11 + 090 N s p 4 It � �9 10 Q,3f .3+ 34A1.0 o Q !!e - o I Q N , �4 93 �8 C- 17z) ri -(210) . •� a 10) • Cil } Q- t4 j E�3� 14K v� ['�o s a cD — .._. 47 .� h 3 Ln I 7 t5 �� ,,39•�� y.aJ (4)2 .100 AV ' ) 7 7 60 -g Iva1 , 4t .30 i l( t %a 6 -JIB � •� ED s Jas, 5 .4w(0tIs }�' rX06 PONDI NG ' 2 2A yo), �� - ^ �8�! I ^ I z 9 Q, I &3)750 1? 1 s. 7 >, b *, ccF� 7 0� a < (109) of% 0 r 1.4 7 ac. s G E ,D 12 -� Ln (90) 6 LA u• (74) r1i -n . (100 '� x,3 s' 14 13' .99I'll"N cu` g `p DRAINAG I3R D. DD, s ,►�.�.4 I AREA est a3 �j, PONDING � � U T LO T A � � - �••- al�" r AREA � Dvc. ^/0 WET LAND - 7:S. 7230(O5 • .3 C-) s 179.72,. • Ib q r&r• (7Z) to z. .9 6 CL to, 00 l .01 vp ' .01 •/-r r - y T'o, A L 8.09a Q -Q % 9-29-22- 11 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" = 400' M i u1 or �NO/�ccssf�� j � 30 .yam -. r D 1 ►n �. n► :. • ; �r WAD I • 134.5 ss • r 00. ZoA IS. a � ` gic(49) C) V 12 1 J cc 7 33 _ .36 �� ao V rs .i3 (70) , �� w�' +$4D- z ce 71, W X m ° 6 rj T!7r. �D 7 �_ 3 ,w ,. D - ?NN • X63 - ,3; � Vag. ZZB8G55-• R__ ---AVE-'° •: q X a - 4c 9 o "Is G 64 90 11 -1 -85 -ems 71.44' • 33 , I r'1An c.v r r MArLtv1tnr� AVV. �1 So Rj M In BT-5735- �i o 54 %• A 7.L 7 17'� •''� iYl Oi t c t Z ,o f- 3 e:� o f o, fl13 N01f.30 5 8 0� o� F 10 5 r •, ¢i c o , o �, � `�Iq (� ,11 + 090 N s p 4 It � �9 10 Q,3f .3+ 34A1.0 o Q !!e - o I Q N , �4 93 �8 C- 17z) ri -(210) . •� a 10) • Cil } Q- t4 j E�3� 14K v� ['�o s a cD — .._. 47 .� h 3 Ln I 7 t5 �� ,,39•�� y.aJ (4)2 .100 AV ' ) 7 7 60 -g Iva1 , 4t .30 i l( t %a 6 -JIB � •� ED s Jas, 5 .4w(0tIs }�' rX06 PONDI NG ' 2 2A yo), �� - ^ �8�! I ^ I z 9 Q, I &3)750 1? 1 s. 7 >, b *, ccF� 7 0� a < (109) of% 0 r 1.4 7 ac. s G E ,D 12 -� Ln (90) 6 LA u• (74) r1i -n . (100 '� x,3 s' 14 13' .99I'll"N cu` g `p DRAINAG I3R D. DD, s ,►�.�.4 I AREA est a3 �j, PONDING � � U T LO T A � � - �••- al�" r AREA � Dvc. ^/0 WET LAND - 7:S. 7230(O5 • .3 C-) s 179.72,. • Ib q r&r• (7Z) to z. .9 6 CL to, 00 l .01 vp ' .01 •/-r r - y T'o, A L 8.09a Q -Q % 9-29-22- 11 ASSESSMENT AREA MAP PROJECT 89-04 COUNTY ROAD C TH 61 TO HAZELWOOD ST SCALE 1" = 400' 3 AGENDA ITEM AGENDA REPORT .Action by: CounoiVpn TO: City Manager Endorsed Modif i ecL. ,.....�;. FROM: Assistant City Engineer Re j ectea. M e Avenue, Interstate erst at a 35E t o Edgerton Date SUBJECT: L.arp n t eur Aven , n Project 86-27, Public Hearing DATE: September 18 , 1989 Introduction The pub] is hearing mailing list for this project is herewith transmitted. A resolution to order the project is attached.. Since Ramsey County has had final plans prepared, a resolution is also attached approving the roadway, bridge, and right --of -way P l ans » The p l ans .will be presented at the council meeting for review., ....'Background A copy of the August 22, 1989, agenda report is attached for r~ef: erence « If the council orders the project and approves the plans, then Ramsey County will finalize state' and federal funding, obtain right-of-way and bid the project. Then a f ina I cooperative agreement, between Ramsey County and Maplewood, based pan the draft cooperative agreement included with the August 22, 1989, agenda report and the actual costs from the bidding w i l 1 be presented to the council for approval . Recommendation It. is recommended that the project be ordered and that the roadway, bridge, and right -o+ -way plarms be approved. BAI jc Attachments i RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT. AFTER PUBLIC HEAR I SIG C WHEREAS , of ter due notice of pub) i c hearing on the construction o+ roadway, bridge, storm sewer,, utilities, sidewalk, and appurtenances on L.arpenteur Avenue, Interstate OCE to -Edgerton, City Project 86-27, a hearing on said improvement in accordance with the notice duly given was duly held. on Septembers 25', 1989, and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD , MINNESOTA , as -Fol 1 ows : in That it is advisable, expedient and necessary that the City o+ Maplewood construct roadway, bridge, storm sewer, utilities, sidewalk, and appurtenances on Larpent eur Avenue, Interstate 35E to Edgerton, City Project 86-27, as described in the notice of hearing thereof , and orders the same to be made. 2a This improvement is to be made under a cooperative agreement with Ramsey County I RESOLUTION WHEREAS, plans for Project No. S . P . , 62 -630- 21 Bridge No .62554 showing proposed alignment, profiles, grades, and cross- sections ross-sections for the construction reconstruct i on , or improvement of County State Aid Highway No. 30 within the l imits of the city as a federal aid project and have been prepared and presented to the city NOW, THEREFORE , BE I T RESOLVED: that. sa i d p l an s be i n al l things approved RESOLUTION WHEREAS, plans +car^ Project No. S . A . P 62-630-36 shy ow i n g proposed alignment, pro+ i l es , grades,- and cross-sections for the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of County. State A i d Highway No. 30 within the limits o+ the city as a state aid project and have been prepared and presented to the city NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that said plans b e in all things approved. -� 7- AGENDA ITEM' - u� Action by Council., AGENDA REPORT Eodorood~_____~-~ 11odified____-�� TO: City Manager . . Rejected__�-���� � t ' FROM: Assistant City Engineer Da ` ' t Avenue Interstate 35-E to Edgerton, F1~oject SUBJECT: Larpen eur , 86 -27 --Schedule* Public Hearing . DATE: August 22, 1989 ` ' t which is ed a project development repor , Ramsey County.has pr�p�*r tru�tion ��� La�rp�nteur Avenue from ' appended hereto, for the recon� b Idge.nd� � D t iled roadw�y r , �I ' rstate 35-E to E�dgerton, � a , °�=_ t d to ' ^n�*� plans have been prepared" These are presen � right-of-waY p bli hearings ' - ��t �o schedule a pu c . . �h�* ��uncil with a request - - , ------nd m nt �r� shown inthe j� features of the proposed impro`�e e hplans- attached 1 The m� or f the typical cross section ��v�n in t e p ans" a*ttached copy Of _ Would b e ith concrete curb and gutter Four wide lanes w. -foot wide concrete sidewal k constructed The plans show a fiveon the north side of the street only. ` �z ed �hat'will discharge to a A storm sewer system is proposed r proposed pond within St. Paul n earthe Wheelock. parkway_ c rossin g of the Burlington Northern tracks (DNR trail). A new four - lane c� the existing two -land bridge bridge is to be provided to repl� just eastc) f DeSoto over the DNR trail. - f the draft cooper a ~ti'/e agreement prepared b, y Attached is a coPy ocooperative agreementwill be presented Ramsey Coun�y~ A final of award of.bids along with concurrence ' t f storm sewer able to Ramsey County or ` The estimated amounts pay co�-*� �s $128v3B5^06, and related ponding 'eeasement acquisition� f� roadway -related � bl to Ramsey County or roa ' The estimated amount p��/�d e��d�walk) is $40v~77� .64" When the items (curb and gutter e^n s rk done by the city is d administrative wo o ,cost�t of engineering an a '- - ' d $43,f.12-00 coss s - -- $136 000 an � ~' engineering - t costs become � s in the total project, cos ~��~,`�- -' r"^� and roadway, respectively*' for storm sewer , ' i d financing recoverable from , �� review of the amount of the required table gives the 's�essments has been m»ade" The attached ts recoverable =m t units by p ��,N~ The amoun �� appropriate assessment ^ foot' approp � -'--- 'M lot and $0 10 per square based upon $500 per ��L or. o ~ it for RL V are a with $1125 per un � ^for all other property for storm sewer-- i Maplewood Project 86--27 -?-- Aug Ust 22 , 1909 and RM and $15 per f .ront foot for all other uses for street" The .total recoverable costs are $59,,',:219 and V.212 , 875 for storm sewer and street, respect i vel y . The balance of costs of $97,10C) is proposed to be paid under an of f --system transfer of the city's Mun i c i pal State Aid account f ands ender Number 138-020--07 41 If the s i dewal [: were to be deleted from the project, -the proposed assessments would not change . In this case, the amount of MSA off --system transfer wou 1 d decrease. to $74,470a Recommendation It is recommended that a public hearing be scheduled for this project BAI jw Attachments AW State of Minnesota Department of Transportation. and County of Ramsey Department of Public Works Project Development Report and Location/Design Study Report for Larpenteur Avenue (CSAR 30) from I -35E to Edgerton Street in Maplewood and Saint Paul Proposed Improvement -Replace Bridge 7231 over abandoned Soo Line Railroad tracks -near Desoto Streetwith an .arch structure; reconstruct Larpenteur Avenue between I -35E and Edgerton Street State Project: S.P. 62-630-21 Minnesota Project: BRM -M, 5103 (1 Recommended: 41eoloozo-o 12v 14C R4 County Engineer Date Reviewed and Recommended: j District fate"Aid Engineer Approved: _.so ... Director, Office of State Aid �- 0,000 Date Date Project Development Report Introduction . Project Location and Description Objectives of Proposal Public and Agency Involvement Environmental Study Determination Statement Project Path Selection Project Manager= Location St dyReport Location of Proposed Improvement Location Alternatives "Do Nothing" Alternative Future Improvements Design Study Report Design Standards Design Elements Bridge Railroad Crossings Traffic Volumes Traffic Signals Lighting Design Speed Alternate Construction Options - Road Alternate Construction Options - Bridge Approximate Costs. Detours and Disruptions Right of Way Project Manager ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 Project Location Map 2 Typical Section- - Existing Road and Bridge 3 Recommended Alternative - Arch Structure - Elevation and Plan 4 Proposed Road Typical Section APPENDIX Page 1 1 2 4 5 7 7 8 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 12 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 ti ' PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REPORT INTRODUCTION This Project Development Report and Location/Design Study Report for Larpenteur Avenue from I -35E to Edgerton Street has. been prepared in accordance with the State of Minnesota Action Plan guidelines by Ramsey County Public Works Department. TheJ ro ro osed project, 0.6 miles in length, will reconstruct Larpenteur Avenue and P P P � replace the bridge over the former Soo Line tracks with an arch structure. Sidewalks will be constructed for the entire project length. • PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Location Thero osed action is located along Larpenteur Avenue (CSAR 30) from I -35E to P P Edgerton Street. Larpenteur Avenue is the border. between Saint Paul and Maplewood. The length of the project is 0.6 miles. Its location is illustrated in Figure 1, Project Location Map. -Descri tion of Existing Facilit Larpenteur Avenue has a functional classification of minor arterial and is a federal aid urban route. It connects subregions and activity centers within subregions. Medium - to -short trips at moderate -to. -lower speeds are the. characteristics of minor arterials. The speed limit on this portion of Larpenteur Avenue is 35 miles per hour. Traffic signals are located at its intersections with I -35E and at Edgerton Street. Other intersecting streets stop for Larpenteur Avenue traffic. The 1986 average daily traffic (ADT) count on Larpenteur Avenue from I -35E to Desoto Street was 7200. The projected ADT for year 2000 is 9900. East of the bridge at Desoto Street to Edgerton Street 1986 ADT was 7000. The projected ADT for year 2000 is 9900. Traf f is counts were conducted by Ramsey County Public Works Department and traffic projections were made by Ramsey County Public Works Department. Right-of-way width varies from 79.5 to over 100 feet. The existing road is 44 feet wide (see Figure 2, Typical Section) except at the badge east of Desoto Street where it is 30 feet wide. The road is operated as four lanes, undivided, narrowing to two lanes at..the bridge. Parking is not allowed on the road west . of the bridge or on the bridge; however, it is not prohibited east of the bridge. The surface of the road is bituminous. It was last surfaced in 1961. Bituminous curbs have been constructed along the road. The bridge east of Desoto Street (No. 7231) carries traffic on Larpenteur Avenue over } the former location of the Soo Line Railroad tracks. These tracks were abandoned by the railroad and the rails have been removed. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will use the former Soo Line right of way as a nonmotorized trail. The bridge was constructed in 1959. It is a steel beam span with a deck width (out -to - out) of 38 feet and total length of 158 feet. A minimal sidewalk provision is made on the south side. The vertical clearance was 23 feet above the railroad rails. Description of Pra sed FacilitY Street will be removed and replaced bride on Larpenteur Avenue east of . Desoto St d trail The g rP • to provide rade separation between the nonmotorize with an . arch structure p g renteur Avenue. See Figure 3, der Larpenteur Avenue and the vehicular traffic on Lap will u n P The rade of the road at the bridge location Arch Structure Elevation and Plan*g to intersect improve sight distances. * Desoto Street will be realigned • be -lowered to 1 p g •. location. Larpenteur Avenue will be Larpenteur Avenue slightly east of its existing • P d Edgerton Street with .four through reconstructed between the east 1-35E ramps an g Typical Section*.A 'd standards*- See Figure 4, Proposed Road lanes to meet state ai s • . f Larpenteur Avenue for the entire project sidewalk is proposed on at least one side o rP sidewalks* structure will be sufficiently long to accommodate two length. The arch strut walks along Larpenteur Avenue, f the ex ressed interest of the cities in side g • Because o p • of this project. .Additional right of way would a bicycle path �s not proposed as part P�' l !e the on Larpenteur Avenue. be 'needed to construct bicyc pa Adjacent Area • is primarily residential, both single-family.. and - Land use adjacent to Larpenteur Avenue , p y have direct • Driveways of residences along Larpenteur Avenue. :multiple -family units. Y access to the road. T. u r Avenue was purchased by the The former Soo Line right of way beneath Larpenteur a • esaurces. This right of way w Minnesota Department of Natural ill be used for R ter Plan of the • ail as indicated in the Gateway Segment Naas nonmotorized vehicle trail has occurred about the to De rtment of Natural Resources. Discussion Minneso Pa h of way as 4�f) at crossings with roads. The desi nation of the proposed trail right • Y would not apply to g ation has determined that Sect:on 4(f) PP Federal Highway Administration the use of trail right of way for transportation purposes. OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSAL Existing Def iciencies • road the brid e, the bridge approaches The .areas of deficiency on the project are the , g and the intersection of Larpenteur Avenue and Desoto Street* Ederton Street has higher than average Larpenteur Avenue between I-3SE � anal E g avement is m poor condition and requires frequent patching* main ten ance costs. The p ' provisions contributes to the deterioration of the The absence of adequate drainage pr than concrete curbs; The existing bituminous curbs are less stable - pavement surface. T g width of the road is 44 feet except are damaged by snowplows and traffic. The with they g t meet standards for county state aid highways* at the bridge. The width does no • Larpenteur Avenue the road should consist of four 12 -foot the volume of traffic on Larpente , wide travel lanes, rather than 11 -foot wide lanes. ' width. The 30 -foot width allows only The bride on Larpenteur AVenue is deficient in _ oachi g • two-lane road width on the bridge, with four lanes aper �; two Lanes of traffic. The condition. The amount of tes a bottleneck bride from both east and west, crea tfie g arses yet the bridge width cannot accommodate ' exceeds the capacity of two lanes, y � .traffic P e bridge requires drivers to maneuver into a single more lanes. The constraint of th g q lanes in each lane and presents a less safe condition than would continuing two through direction. 2 ■ I r • ' The concrete bridge deck is deteriorating. The top of the deck has been overlaid with bituminous and patched. Steel reinforcing bars are exposed on the underside of the deck due to concrete deterioration. Transverse cracks show efflorescence. These, s conditions weaken the structural capacity of the bridge. The federal standards for evaluating bridges are based on a sufficiency rating. A . suff iciency rating of 100 indicates a bridge ,of new . condition with a safe load capacity compatible with legal vehicle weights. A rating of 50 or less indicates that replacement considerations should be made. Factors considered in the sufficiency rating are structural adequacy, safety, serviceability, functional obsolescence and, essentiality for public use. The sufficiency rating of the bridge on Larpenteur Avenue over the Soo Line right of way is 38.4. The approaches to the bridge are cracked and have settled. Vehicles driving over the bridge consequently experience a bump at either end of the bridge. Desoto Street enters Larpenteur Avenue from the north, five feet west of the bridge.' The intersection angle of Desoto Street with Larpenteur Avenue is skewed. Turning movements at a skewed intersection are difficult for drivers, to negotiate and require greater distance for drivers entering the intersection than do 90 degree angle, intersections. Drivers of vehicles desiring to turn onto Larpenteur Avenue from Desoto Street have sight lines restricted further by the crest of the bridge deck and by the. bridge railings which obstruct their view of westbound traffic. The grade of the bridge was determined by the vertical clearance necessary to accommodate rail traffic under the bridge. The restricted sight distance from Desoto Street to Larpenteur Avenue has, according to accident reports received by Ramsey County Public Works Department, contributed to accidents- at this location. Shifting the alignment of Desoto Street to the east is prevented by the. bridge. Shifting it to the west would be costly because of existing development located there and would impact several adjacent properties. Cost Estimate The work proposed is estimated .to cost $902,400,. The costs are divided as follows: .. Storm Sewer 88,400 62,000 81800 81800 81800 Sidewalk (two sides) 46 000 _231000 23,000 Total $9021400' $144,800 $36,200 $420,000 $229,800 $35,8.00 $35,800 This estimate is based on federal bridge replacement funds, federal aid urban funds, state transportation funds .and Ramsey County policy for cost participation. 3 Federal State Fede ra 1 County Bridge Transpor- Aid State Aid Maple. St. Total Re 1. tation Urban Highway wood Paul Bridge Removal $ 25,000 $ 252000 Construct Arch 181,000 144,800 $36,200 Construct Roadway 562,000 $358,000 1969000 $ 41000 $ 4,000 .. Storm Sewer 88,400 62,000 81800 81800 81800 Sidewalk (two sides) 46 000 _231000 23,000 Total $9021400' $144,800 $36,200 $420,000 $229,800 $35,8.00 $35,800 This estimate is based on federal bridge replacement funds, federal aid urban funds, state transportation funds .and Ramsey County policy for cost participation. 3 Users Who would Benefit from the Pro sed Action Those wh o drive or ride vehicles alongthis portion of Larpenteur Avenue would benefit from the proposed project.. The current average daily traffic count is 7000 to 7200. Traffic is anticipated to increase, and therefore even more vehicular users would be benefitted in the future. Pedestrians will benefit if a sidewalk is constructed along Larpenteur Avenue* Objectives of Proposal of Larpenteur Avenue will provide a safer, smoother roadway. The Reconstruction P removal of the bridge and its replacement with an arch will also enhance safety at this location by providing a surface sufficiently wide for vehicles to travel on safely. tion will eliminate potential vehicle conflicts with bicycle and pedestrian The grade separation trail traffic sunder Larpenteur Avenue. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT Public Meetings A meeting has been held with Saint Paul District S Community Council on the project. Maplewood may schedule a public hearing on the project. In accordance with Ramsey P County policy, at least one public hearing will be held. Governmental Involvement g The followingagencies have been or will be contacted about this project: Board of Ramsey County Commissioners City of Saint Paul 'Saint Paul water Utility City of Maplewood Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Minnesota Historical Society Regional Transit Board Metropolitan Council Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation District I Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Correspondence and summaries of meetings held with some of these agencies are contained In the appendix of this report. Permits Required No permits will be required for this project. Negotiations will occur with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources about right of way required. Prioritization The Board of Ramse County Commissioners has approved a capital improvement Ps' ogram and deficient -bridge program which include this proposed project. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 4(f) Involvement • There will be no use of any 4(f) land for this project. .Section 404 and Wetlands Finding This project will not involve filling in any waterway, lake or wetlands. No 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers will be required. Executive Order 11990 regarding protection of wetlands will not apply and no wetlands finding will be necessary. Coast. Guard Permit Requirements This project is exempt from Coast Guard permit requirements. Right of Way Right of way needed to construct an arch structure would be 0.3 acres. This right of way would be acquired from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. No additional permanent right of way is anticipated to be needed for other proposed work on L.arpenteur Avenue. Air Quality The air quality of the proposed improvement has been analyzed. The proposed improvement is not anticipated to have significant air quality impacts and is considered to be consistent with the approved State Implementation Plan. Prior consultation with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, as required by FHPM 7-7-9, Air Quality Guidelines, and the detail of the air quality analysis, is considered to have been accomplished and is documented in and by the Memorandum of Understanding, between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Noise A noise analysis for this project was done using the Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model adapted for the. TI -59 calculator. Calculations were made assuming a peak -hour volume of 10% of the ADT with 5% trucks, evenly divided between heavy and medium trucks. Federal design noise levels for the receiver in a residential area are less than 70 dbA (Lip). Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards are less than 65.dbA (L10). This project will not have a significant effect on noise in the area. The roadway is now four lanes wide in front of all residential receptors and the amount of lane widening proposed will have a minimal effect'on noise. The results of the noise analysis showed the present L10 noise levels ranged from 65 to 68 dbA for houses adjacent to Larpenteur Avenue. The projected year 2006 noise levels for the same houses ranged from 66 to 69 &A, due mainly to the projected increase in traffic volume. No house would experience an increase of more than 1 dbA. Since the human ear cannot distinguish difference of less than 3 dbA, the effect of this project on noise levels is insignificant. In considering construction noise, Minnesota Standard Specifications for Highway Construction will apply. Section 7, Subsection 1701, states in part that the contractor 5 shall comply 1 with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees in the performance of the construction. This would include any local noise control laws. No unique noise receptors have been identified in the area that would be severely impacted q P by the proposed construction and the construction activity is not expected to generate Unusual or excessive noise. Water Pollution ' Potential for water pollution will come primarily from erosion of soil exposed during construction activities. Because of the nature of the soils and the steep slopes in the area of the bridge, erosion control is an important consideration. ThisP roject cannot be accomplished without some disruption to the existing vegetation during the required shaping of structure berms to stable slopes and the reconstruction of the approaches. There may be some minor soil erosion during the early construction stages of this project. However, construction specifications and special provisions will provide for temporary and permanent means to minimize soil erosion. These means .shall include but not be restricted to the use of silt fences, sodding and seeding. No body of water is in direct contact with the construction site, so proper erosion control measures should be effective In preventing adverse water quality impacts. Minnesota Environmental __Quality Board Requirements An Environmental Assessment Worksheet is not required for a project of this scope. National Historic Preservation Act The State Historic Preservation Officer has been contacted regarding this project. .Correspondence regarding this matter is contained in the appendix of this report. No sites of historical significance are affected by this project. �nntrnvprci a 1 lcct tPc The disposition of the bridge over the former Soo Line tracks has been a controversial issue. Ramsey Y originally i inally proposed to remove the bridge and eliminate the grade g separation between Larpenteur. . Avenue and the nonmotorized trail to be constructed. Discussions with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources have resulted in the alternative recommended in this report. AP revious draft Project Development Report for this project was prepared in 1984 which recommended bridge removal and filling in of the gap where the bridge was located. That report was not forwarded to the Federal Highway Administration because -federal funds were not involved in bridge removal and because the bridge replacement issue between Ramsey County and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources had not been resolved.. The issue has now been resolved. Aesthetic Values The proposed action is not anticipated to have a significant aesthetic impact on the area near the project. N Other Effects Traffic disruption will occur during the period of bridge removal and road construction at the bridge location. A detour will be necessary. F1, plain This project is not within the limits* of the 100 -year floodplain, therefore, the requirements of Executive Order 11988 do not apply. This determination. is based on Department of Housing and Urban Development flood hazard boundary maps for the Cities of Saint Paul and Maplewood. , Endangered Species The proposed project is located within the ranges given in the U.S. Fish and wildlife Service Red Book for the Arctic and American Peregrine Falcons. The proposed project would not affect the species or their habitats because it is not near any bluff areas that have been identified as potential nesting sites.. Farmland Protection Policy Act Compliance On July 8, 1986, County staff visited the Ramsey County field office of the Soil Conservation Service. A review of the 1982 National Resource Inventory (NRI) map indicated the project is entirely within a delineated urban area, and therefore contains no prime farmland. The site contains no unique farmland nor other farmland. DETERMINATION STATEMENT Based on . the Environmental Study and in accordance with the guidelines in 23CFR, Part 771, Environmental Impact and Related Procedures, it is determined that the proposed action is unlikely to precipitate foreseeable changes on the quality of the human environment and is appropriately classified as a categorical exclusion. PROJECT PATH SELECTION In accordance with the State of Minnesota Action Plan guidelines, it is proposed that the development of . this project will follow a minimal level path as shown: - combined project development report and location/design study report January, 1987 -- plans, specifications, estimate October, 1987 - advertise for bids April, 19-88 Because the minimal amount of right of way necessary for the implementation of this project is owned by Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, a single owner, it is believed that a minimal level path will adequately address the concerns related to the proposed project. ki PROJECT MANAGER The project manager is Paul Kirkwold, Deputy Director, Ramsey County Public Works ` Department, 167 Courthouse, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102, telephone 298-4127. 8 LOCATIONIDESIGN STUDY REPORT LOCATION STUDY REPORT Location of Pro osed Improvement Ramsey County Public Works Departmerit 'proposes the reconstruction of Larpenteur Avenue (CSAH 30) from I -35E to Edgerton Street. The bridge over the former Soo Line tracks will be replaced with an arch structure. Location Alternatives This is a minimal level project, therefore, no location alternatives will be discussed. T P�' 7 � 'Do Nothing" Alternative The "do nothing" alternative was rejected because the existing road is narrower than g standards specify and has deteriorated. The bridge is deficient. in width and is also deteriorating. Future Improvements of Larpenteur Avenue from Edgerton Street to Parkway Drive is scheduled An overlay pe g in 1987 or 1988. From Rice Street to I -35E, Larpenteur Avenue is to be reconstructed, although- a specific date has not been determined for that work. DESIGN STUDY REPORT Design Standards Design standards for this project are: urban state aid streets -- 1984 A. A. S. H. T O. Green Book A.A.S.KT.O. - specifications for highway bridges. Design Elements ro sed roadway width is 52 feet between curbs which consists of four 12 -foot The p po y travel lanes and two foot gutters on each side. Roadway g surf acin will be bituminous of nine -ton design strength. There will be a minimum distance of five feet between the street and the sidewalk except over the arch structure. The. boulevard width shall be reduced at the bridge crossing to minimize structure length and resulting costs. The maximum inslopes and g _ backslopes for the road will be three to one. A minimum of two feet will be provided between the face of the curb and fixed obstructions such as utility poles, road signs or f ire hydrants. . 9 ed will be 40 miles r hour based on stopping sight distance for 3. S feet Design speed per " height of eye and 0.5 f eet height of object. • S idewalk width will be five feet. Concrete sidewalks are proposed on the north and south sides of Larpenteur Avenue for the entire project length. The provision of sidewalks will, however, be negotiated with the Cines of Saint Paul and Maplewood. Storm sewers shall be designed for 10 -year, return period rainfall. There are no stream crossings along the subject segment. As the existing � Pe alignment of Larpenteur Avenue involves only slight deflection angles, there will be no horizontal curves which limit or govern design speed considerations. The po he abrupt vertical dro f f at the structure location will require the placement of a traffic barrier toP rotect the drivers of errant vehicles and to minimize structure barrel length. B rimae ' will be replaced with either a recast concrete arch . �Bebo) or a multi -plate The bridge P P steel arch structure. Competitive bids shall be sought on each structure type with the award beingmade to the bidder providing the least cost alternative. Either structure P . will meet Minnesota Department of Natural Resources requirements f or a 24-f oot horizontal and 12 -foot vertical opening for the nonmotorized trail below Larpenteur Avenue. Railroad Crossin s There are longer any Y no lon railroad crossings within the highway section termini. The bridge east of Desoto Street previously crossed over Soo Line Railroad tracks which have . been abandoned. Traf f is Volumes Existing g y average daily traf f is ranges f rom 7000 to 7200 on this section of Larpenteur Avenue. Projected traffic volumes are 9900 per day. Traffic Signals Existing traffic signals nals at the intersection of Larpenteur Avenue with 1--35E and with Edgerton Street will be retained. No additional signal systems are proposed. No modifications will be needed as a result of this project. Lighting No new lighting is proposed. Existing lighting will not be modified. N g g pr Po g Design Speed The design speed is proposed to be 40 miles per hour. Alternate Construction Options - Road An alternate construction option considered for the road is its repair. The subgrade of 10 ' • adequate, there are drainage problems and the width of the road is j the road is not adeq , g • narrower than county state aid standards specify. Repair of the road with an overlay would be only a short-term measure 'to improve the pavement surface* I That overlay would not correct drainage or width deficiencies of this section of Larpenteur Avenue. For these reasons, an overlay has been rejected. Options considered of constructing a road narrower than the four lanes proposed would notP rovide sufficient width for existing *or future traffic. Constructing a road wider than four lanes would be disruptive to adjacent property owners. The recommended alternative of reconstructingLarpenteur Avenue to four lanes, 52- , foot width, with concrete curbs and gutters and a sidewalk will provide adequate lane width, surface g condition and drainage provisions for the road; wW provide sufficient road capacity to meet existing and projected transportation needs; and will provide for P� y pedestrian needs. Alternate Construction Options - Bridle at the location of the existing bridge carrying vehicular traffic . The option proposed g over the former Soo Line tracks is to replace the bridge with a precast concrete arch or a multi -plate steel arch. other options considered were: 1. Removal of bridge; fill gap with granular material. With the abandonment of the Soo Line railway under the bridge, the bridge is no longer needed to separate vehicles from trains. The gap left by the bridge • removal would be filled and a new four -lane road would be constructed where the existing bridge was located. Users of the proposed nonmotorized trail would cross Larpenteur Avenue at grade to continue along the trail. • This option was rejected by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. P b That agency believes that an at crossing of Larpenteur Avenue y potential trail users would be unacceptable because of the volume of traffic on Larpenteur Avenue. 2. Replace bridge with a new . bridge.. Replacing the existingbridge over the former Soo Line tracks with a wider structure to accommodate four lanes of traffic, pedestrians and bicyclists was considered. Desoto Street would retain its skewed intersection with Larpenteur Avenue if a new bridge was constructed because of the constraint of the bridge 1 ocati on. This alternate was rejected because it would be more costly than using an arch to separate trail users from Larpenteur Avenue. The bridge replacement would not allow realignment of the Desoto Street intersection with Larpenteur Avenue without acquisition of additional right of way. 3. Repair existing bridge. Since this would not correct major deficiencies of roadway width and sight obstructions from Desoto Street, this option was rejected. 11 • 4. Widen existing structure. This option would correct the roadway width deficiency but would not correct sight obstructions caused by the grade of the bri&.e. The. low sufficiency. g • federal cost participation, in its rating of the bridge would preclude pa P . rehabilitation. This option has, therefore, been rejected* The recommended alternative of an arch- would remove the bottleneck condition at the bri e b wideningthe road to four lanes; remove a deteriorating bridge that is costly � � y • a ro osed to maintain; allow a grade suitable for access from Larpenteur Avenue to p p it below Lar enteur Avenue- improve safety, on Larpesnteur Avenue by realigning trail P '' with Lar enteur Avenue and Desoto Street to the east of its. existing intersection wi p werin the rade of Lar enteur Avenue at the bridge location; provide space for Iog g P pedestrians along Larpenteur Avenue. Approximate Costs proposed The ro work osed is estimated to cost $902,400. The costs are divided as follows: Federal State Federal County Bridge Transpor- Aid State Aid Maple- St. Total Re 1. tation Urban Highway wood Paul Bridge Removal $.25,000 $ 25,000 Construct Arch 181,000 1442800 $36,200 Construct Roadway 562,000 $358,000 196,000 $ 41000 $ 41000 Storm Sewer 88,400 629000 89800 81800 8,800 Sidewalk (two sides) 46 000 23,000 _ 232000 Total $902,400 $144,800$36,200 $420 000 $229,800 $35,800 $35,800 bridge lacernent funds, federal aid urban funds, This estimate •s based on federal i dgere P state transportation funds and Ramsey County policy for cost participation. Detours and Disr tions c q The contractor will be required to maintain a suitable driving surface for local traffic throug hout the duration of the project. 'The badge removal and construction phase wIII require' the detouring of through traffic onto adjacent county roads. To minimize the time of the detour to the full extent possible, as much of the new structure as Practicable shall be completed prior to the removal of the existing bridge. The available t : vertical and horizontal clearances under the existing bridge indicate that a substantial o•tion of the completion is feasible. A traffic control plan shall be included. in the P P ment of traffic in accordance Construction plan to provide for the safe and orderly mov e with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and sound engineering judgment. Upon the completion of construction, permanent signing in accordance with - the MU TCL will be placed. ' 12 t Right of Way Ri ht of needed to construct an arch structure would be 0.3 acres. This right of g Y wa waywould be acquired from the Minnesota Department of Natu ral Resources. No b needed for other ro osed . work additional permanent right of way is anticipated to e p p on Larpenteur Avenue. Project Manager project manager is Paul Kirkwold Deputy Director, Ramsey County Public Works Thep l a�g , P . tY Department, 167 Courthouse, Saint Paul, Minnepota 55102, telephone 298-4127. pa ! _ 13 4"CONC. WALK 6" COMPACTED SUBGRADE VARIES SEE PLANS 14' .IES2' 3' S 8' i 8624 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER - 1 BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MN/DOT 2361 1 1/2'*- BITUMINOUS BINDER COURSE MN/DOT 2341 4 1/2'*- BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE MN/DOT 2331 6" - AGGREGATE BASE CL -5 MN/DOT 2211 (100% CRUSHED) SELECT GRANULAR BORROW - 2'- UNIFORM COMPACTION TYPICAL SECTION LARPENTEUR AVENUE STA. 48+95- TO STA. 76+2.5 12' VARIES �01/FT .015'/FT, - -- - -- - - RAMSEY COUNTY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH MAPLEWOOD Agreement between the County of Ramsey City of Maplewood Re: Larpenteur Avenue I -35E to Edgerton Street Reconstruction and Bridge Replacement at DNR Trail Corridor Attachments: Right of Way Estimate Bridge Estimate Road Estiinate/Breakdown Agreement No. 89005 D 31qlyll Bridge MINN. PROJ. NO. BRM-M5103(1)and the S.P. 62-630-21 Bridge 62554 Right of Way S.A.P. 62-630-3.5 S.A.P. 138-020-10 Road 30. S.A.P. 62-630-36 S.A.P. 138-020-07 Account No. 47392 Estimated Amount Receivable from Ma2 lewood: ■■��rrr.rrr�■■.rrrrrr ■ w�r�r Bridge 0 Right of Way $ 22,186.00 Concrete Walk 21,360.95 Storm Sewer 106,199.06 Curb Gutter 19,414.69 Total $147,799.75 THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, a municipal corporation, hereinafter ref erred to as the "City," and Ramsey County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "County"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, The County and the City desire to construct and rebuild Larpenteur .Avenue between I -35E and Edgerton Street from a point 545 feet west of the west line of Section 17, T29N, R22 W to a point 2587 feet east of the west line of Section 17, T29N, R22W along the north" line of said Section 17 a distance of 2042 feet; and WHEREAS, Larpenteur Avenue from I -35E to Edgerton Street is partially in the City of St. Paul; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Paul and the County have a separate Cooperative Agreement No. 89006; and WHEREAS, the work contemplated under this agreement has been divided into three. separate plans which provide for the bridge replacement, right of way acquisition and road reconstruction; and WHEREAS, the replacement of Bridge No. 7231 with Bridge No. 62554 has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the Federal Bridge Replacement funds and identified as MINN. PROD, No. BRM -M5103(1); and 89005 Page 1 of 5 t WHEREAS, this bridge replacement project has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the County State Aid Highway funds and identified as S.P. 62--630-21 Bridge No. 62554; and WHEREAS, the right of way acquisition project has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the County State Aid Highway funds and identified as S.A.P. 62- 630-35; and WHEREAS, the right of way acquisition project has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the- Municipal State Aid Highway funds and identified as S.A.P. 138-020-10; and WHEREAS, this road project has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the County State Aid Highway funds and identified as S.A.P. 62-630-36; and WHEREAS, this road project has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Transportation as eligible for certain construction costs reimbursement from the Municipal State Aid Highway funds and identified as S.A.P. 138-020-07• and WHEREAS, plans for this project MINN. PROJ. NO. BRM -M5103(1), S.P. 62-630- 21, Bridge No. 62554, S.A.P. 62-630-35, S.A.P. 1.38-020-10, S.A.P. 62-630-36, and S.A.P. 138-0.20-07 showing proposed alignment, profiles, grades and crass sections ons -for the improvement of County State Aid Highway 30 within the limits of the City as a county state aid highway project has been presented to the City; and WHEREAS, the projects include, in addition to other things, right of way acquisition, grading, concrete curb and gutters, storm sewer, storm water holding ponds, 4 bridge replacement, sidewalks, and City utility adjustments and/or improvements; and j WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has determined allowable P P credit for storm sewer outfall lines previously constructed prior to the project, and the resultina portion of this storm sewers stem eligible for Count State Aid y g y i and Municipal State Aid Highway funds as present in D.V. Halvorson, MN/DOT Hydraulics Engineer, office memorandum dated July 27, 1988. Ea . Ky NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: E P. 1. The County shall prepare the necessary plans, specifications and proposals, f' take bids, and with concurrence of the City and the City of St. Paul, recommend award of a contract for the construction of Bridge No. 62554 to be awarded by the Minnesota Department of Transportation; the County shall perform the construction inspection. 2. Upon completion of Bridge No. 62554 the County shall own and maintain ' the bridge; however, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources shall be responsible 4 for usage and operation of .the trail opening and shall provide normal maintenance and f' access for that usage. Sj � 3. The County shall prepare the necessary plans, descriptions and esti mates and with the approval of the City, the City of St. Paul and the Minnesota Department of Transportation acquire the necessary right of ways in accordance with procedures for reimbursement from State Aid funds. 89005 Page 2 of 5 4. Right of way required for the roadway construction is estimated to be 100% eligible, for CSAR funds reimbursement and this portion shall be paid by the County. 5. Right of way required for the storm sewer and storm water holding ponds beyond the road right of way shall be paid for at the same ratio as the storm sewer cost participation. 6. All road project right of way- and temporary easements will be in the name of the County, and parking and other regulations will be controlled by the County.. AU highway rights of way on the project which are owned or acquired by the City shall be assigned by the City to the County. All storm sewer and storm water holding pond right of way in the City of St. Paul beyond the road right of way shall be assigned by the County to the City of St. Paul. .70 The County shall prepare the necessary plans, specifications and proposals, take. bids, and with concurrence of the City and the City of St. Paul, award a contract for the roadway, construction; the County shall perform the construction inspection. 8. The City shall assist the County in the inspection of the sanitary sewer and watermain adjustments. The City shall lead discussions with the City of St. Paul Board of water Commissioners on interpretation and administration of the plans and specifications relating to the watermain modification within the City. 9. The storm sewer system as shown in the plans and specifications is eligible for construction cost reimbursement of 60.9096 by County State Aid funds based on the hydraulics inemorandum and this portion shall be paid by the County. 100 The City shall pay for 30.65% of the construction cost of the storm sewer _system which portion is attributable to contributing area from the City outside the road right of way and not eligible for reimbursement from County State Aid Highway funds. The remaining 8.45% shall be paid by the City of St. Paul. 11. Upon completion of the project the County shall own and. maintain the storm sewer catchbasins ,and leads and the City shall own and maintain the storm sewer trunk lines within the City. Laterals and drains servicing property within the City outside the road right of way and storm water holding ponds shall also be owned and maintained by the City. 12. The City shall pay to the County 75% of the cost of concrete curb and gutters constructed wthin the City except for replacement of existing concrete curb and gutters. 13. The City shall pay. to the County 100% of the cost of the new sidewalk constructed within the City which does not replace existing sidewalk. 14. Upon completion of the project the City shall own and maintain the sidewalks within the City. 15. The City shall pay to the County 100% of the cost of City utility extensions or improvements provided in the plan within the City. 16. Any City utilities or facilities modified or added to those provisions presently made in the plans and specifications may be incorporated in the construction contract by supplemental agreement and shall be paid for as specified, in the supplemental agreement. 89005 Page 3 of 5 17. Upon completion of the work on the sanitary sewer and water main systems within the City, the City shall own and maintain the systems. 18. All liquidated damages assessed the contractor in connection with the work performed on the project shall result in a credit shared by the City of St. Paul, the City and the County in the same proportion as their respective total share of construction work is to the total construction cost without any deduction for liquidated damages. 19. The City shall pay its share of the right of way acquisition cost, as determined by the amounts actually paid to property owners plus appraisal and court 'costs to the County. This cost .participation shall be due upon notification by the County of the amounts actually expended by the County on behalf of the City. 20. The City shall pay 10% of its share of the construction cost, as determined by the contract proposed to be awarded, to the County as a preliminary engineering fee. This fee shall be due after receipt of bids and prior to award of a construction .contract. 21. In addition to the preliminary engineering fee the City shall pay 8% of its share of the construction cost, as determined by the final estimated contract amounts, to the Countytas a construction engineering fee. This fee shall be due upon notification to the City of the estimated final amounts due to the contractor. 22. All charges for services such as inspection and supervision within the City by the City of St. Paul Board of Water Commissioners shall be paid for by the Ctiy. 23. The City shall 'not assess or otherwise recover any portion of its costs for this project through levy on County -owned property. 24. The County shall, when a construction contract is proposed to be awarded, prepare a revised estimate and cost participation breakdown based on construction contract unit prices and submit a copy to the City. The City agrees to advance to the Treasurer of Rainsey County an amount equal to the City total construction cost 41 share plus preliminary engineering costs. The contractor shall then be paid by the County. 25. Upon completion of the work, the County shall prepare a revised estimate of cost and cost participation breakdown based upon the contract unit prices and the actual units of work estimated to have been performed and submit a copy to the City. The construction engineering costs to be paid the County by the City shall be based on this estimated final construction costa The County shall add to the City estimated final construction costs the preliminary engineering based on the contract as awarded- and wardedand -construction engineering -costs, make necessary adjustments for liquidated damages, if any, and deduct City funds previously advanced for the project by the City. The City agrees to pay to the County any amount due, be it more or less than the estimated sum* of the first revised estimate. In the event the calculations show that the City has advanced funds in greater amount than is due the County, the County shall refund the amount to the City without interest. 26. Preliminary plans reviewed at the public hearing and final plans and specifications are hereby in all things approved. 89005 Page 4 of 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed. CITY OF MAPLWOOD, MINNESOTA THE COUNTY OF RAMSEY By By: Chairperson Its Board of County Commissioners B , Attest: Its Chief Clerk --County, Board Date Date Approved as to Form: Assistant County Attorney Recommended for approval: Kenneth E. Weltzin, P.E. Director Ramsey County Public Works Department 89005 Page 5 of 5 Estimate of Right of way Cost Larpenteur Avenue from 1-35W to .Edgerton Street Ramsey County S.A.P. 62-630-35 Maplewood S.A.P. 138-020-10. Premised on no cost to Ramsey County for use of DNR property at Bridge or City of St. Paul property. ' Parcel 11E/TSE DE Total 1 $5,400 $5,400 2 1,680 $200 11880 3 11920 11920 4 678 678 5 r 630 630 6 622.80 622.80 7 234 234 8 360 360 9 750 750 10 11050 50 11100 11 960 960 12 71068 52000 12,068 13 240 240 14 480 480 15 2,400 800 31000 16 41596 49896 17 47,584 47,584 18 __.,..�_. 61000 51000 11 t 0 0, 0 $35,368.80 $58,634 $94,002..80 Appraisals 18 x 500 = 91000.00 $103,002.80 t Rounded to $103,000.00 Ramsey County CSAR Funds $ 74,698 Maplewood MSA Funds 22,186 St.. Paul Local Funds 61_116 Total $103,OUO HE - Highway Easement • TE - Temporary Slope Easement DE - Drainage Easement LARP ROW COST • Right of Way Estimate for Drainage PARCEL TSE DE SUB TOTAL APPRAISAL TOTAL 12 $6,000 $5,000 $1120,0.0 $500 $11, 500 15 800 800 500 11300 17 47,584 41,584 500 48,084 18 61000 51000 ...111000 500 112500 Total a $12,000 $58,384 $70,384 $2,000. $72,384. $72,384, x .609* = $44,:082 Ramsey County 72,384 x 03065 = 22,186 Maplewood 72,384 x .0845 = 61116 St. Paul $72,384 Right of Way Cast of Sewer Construction * Based on Hydraulics Memo 7/27/88 WRL m 1/11/89 N. ENGIMEER'S ESTIMATE - RAMSEY COUIfTY — SEH FILE N0: 88019 of BRM -M75103 ( 1 ) 10/3/88 EST. KNIT TOTAL . . ITEM Soso UNITQUAN. . PRICE EST. PRICE Mr���►r�w����w��rf��gofft,fft,wmo,wwe 01.6 01 soft m4m,w••wwr4mm'm4wr40ft* STRUCTURAL EXCAVATION 4m so L . S . am r� 1 15A . 00 rmorr•r� w�ft, w•� w 15000000 01.602 REV. BATTEN SURFACE S.F. 3198 2.00 6398.00 01.604 BUSH F ER SURFACE S. F. 708 2. SO 1710.000 01.605 DAMP PROFIN$ S.F. 541 1.75 946.75 02.603 _ DRAIMAGE SYSTEM L.S. 1 18000 18000.00 18.501 AGGREGATE SURFACING 9 CL, 2 TON 131 7.50 982.50 01.501 STRUCTURE CONCRETE 1A43 C . Y. 323 210.00 67830900- 010501 STRUCTURE. CONCRETE 3Y43 C.Y. 576 .250.00 144000 .00 01.513 CONCRETE PARAPET RAIL. 3X46 L. F, 290 35.00 10150.00 1019541 REINFORCEMENT BARS LB. 127780 0.40 51112.00 01.541 REINFORCEMENT BARS EPDXY COATED LB. 14570 0.55 8013.50 01.583 ORNAMENTAL METAL RAILING TYPE S-1 . L. S. 290 25.00 7250.00 45.509 CONDUIT SYSTEMLIGHTING C L. s . 1 1200, o0 1200.00 51,505 AGGREGATE BACKFILL.V. C C ) C.Y. 418 12.00 5016.00 81.501 THREE—PLY JOINT WATERPROOFING L . F , .519 . 5.00 2895000 '030511 30" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE SEWER L F . 200 40.00 8040.00 TOTAL •.wwss=.www ww w w w w $348, 563.75 of DATE 41 -hr -I1 RAKSEY COUNTY DEPAITMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PAGE i EM6IMEERS ESTIMATE S.A.P. 12-645-01 • _ M.S.A.P. 11J•Q10-1Q -_.. LARPENIEUR AVEMOE • IISE TO EDGEITON ST. PAUL IDADYAY COST%BIEAIDOVM COST 1 DATE: 01 MARCH, 1111 { ! { 1 S.A.P. 12.630.21 { S.A.P. 131.020-01 # STORM SETTER { j UNIT j ESTIMATED i ESTIMATED I ITEM NO. ==______:_______________________________==:::zz::z==zz=::::__:_::==:1=== CONTRACT ITEM 9XIT { PRICE saga 1 QUANTITIES { AMOUNT j QUANTITY AMOUNT # QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 QUANTITY AMOUNT { _ { 2021.501 MOBILIZATION L.S. { = gags I=====__ 50000.00 j gas := 1 # 1509000.00 I I 158,000.00 # I I # 2101.501 _ _ CLEA1116 ACIE 1 1504.00- _ { 2101.502 CLEA111i TREE j SO # 50 I ;2,500.00 # -- SO 121500.00 { 1 2101.106 GIUB1iNs ACIE j 1500.00 I i 14,sao.0o I I { ;4,s0o.e1 1- . - i 210I.S4.1 _ GIUBAIMG _ TREE I so i Sd 1 12,100.00 1 so 121500.00 j { 2114 -SOI REMOVE GoAIDIAIL L.F. # 2.25 # 43.1 1 2101 -SOI 11MOVE C01B AND GUTTER L.F. j 2.sO j TS { •t 1fI1.5o 1 1S 1113.50 { 2104.S11 REMOVE STORM SEVER PIPE I.F. i 1.00 # if i 1S21.61 1 if 1521.00 j j # •� j 2101 -SOS REMOVE CONCRETE VALI _ S.T. . 1 2.00 I _ fl # .1134.01 1 11 1131.00 # { # .. ......._. 2104 -SCS REMOVE CONCIETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S.Y. 1 S.00 I is 1 1315.00 1 1S 1315.00 { 2114.S01 REMOVE CATCH AASIMS EACH 1 200.00 { 14 j 129100.01 j 14 121100.06 { { # 2104 -SCS REMOVE MANHOLE EACH { 250.04 . { 2104.523. SALYAEE CASTIMG ASSEMALIESEACH # 10.00 { 1S j 11,350.40 # 1S 11,350.00 # # 1 _ { 21CS.SOI , _ COMMON EICAVATI011 (P) C.Y. J 3.25 { sill { 1111st6.15 # 5311 1111511.15 ...'.._....--_-•. 1 21CS.SIS INCLASSIFIED EICAVATION (P) C.Y. 1 3.2S { 1101 # 11S,121.2S 1 { i 4101 1tS,i21.25 I # 210S.S11 SUBGIADE EICAVATIOM (P) C.T. # 3.25 1 11631 { ;60,5.11.15 1 11631 161,S111.1S 1 { # j 216S.S22 SELECT 61ANULAI 10RIOV (C.Y.) C.Y. i S.00 1 1161 { 13f,130.00 I 1161 111,131.00 # 1 { 1 210,MIS SALYACE.101SOiL (L.Y.) C.Y. i 1.10 J 2100 1 121,100.00 { 2601 120,100.00 { j { �• i 2131.501 VATE11 DIST CONTROL (M)GAL.1 Ism # 100 { 11,504.01 # 100 111500.00 I I i # 221I.S11 AG;. LASE CLASS S, 1001 CIOSHED ' TON 1 1.00 I 5300 i 1311100.00 # 5300 011100.00 # 2232.S61 PAYWIT PIOFILINj S.Y. # 2.00 7331.101 1119111095 MATERIAL 101 111111E ROM { 160.00 1 315 1 1511400.01 1 311 3S1,400.00 1 I i '• , { 2331.511 SIXO[I color NItTOIE TOM { 11.01 { 1111 I 311,621,11 # 1664 121,124.00 J 2131.511 RASE C011SE 111TVIE TOM I 15.00 1 4216 i 114,1!1.60 1 4216 1149290.00 # 2I11 -S31 TENP01A11 LANE NAIIIN6 ICAO STI 21.00 1 3S 1 1100.00 1 3S :701.00 1 1 2114.S13 SAVCIT IITVXINOdS PAVENEMT 1' DEPTH L.F. I• 2.00 1 1210 I 12,421.11 1 1210 121120.00 I 1 # { 2311.SO4 6ITIMINDIS 1ATERIA► FOR 111111EE TON # 160.00 it 1 111,011.01 1 if 1119040.00 1 J I 1 2361.501 VEA1116 COHSE 1IITVIE TOM # 11.00 { 1111 J 111,111.01 1 1110 11!,!10.00 { J 1 f 1341.105 SIT011109S DIIYEVAY RESTORATION S.T. 1 .2s. go J 450 # 11.192SO.00 1 450 111,250.00 J 23SJ.S02 BITUNINOIS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL. # 2.00 I 2114 1 351161.00 I 2111 15,161.00 J 1411.103- CONC. ALOCI RETAINING VAI►.- S.F. { 10.00 1 1915 I 31t.,150.01 J 1115 111,1Se.08 1 # I •= { 2112.501 MOVE Oto BRIDGE L.S. 1 21000.00 j 1 I 125,000.06 I 1 125,100.00 1 1151.511 COARSE FILTER AGGREGATE C.T. j 6.00 I 2se j 319500.40 1 i I 250 111500.00 1 # 2S11.S11 3f' CM PIPE CVLVE1T L.F. t 40.00 1 91 1 1316%0.01 it 13,641.00 1 I 2511.515 12' 1C PIPE APRON EACH I 2SQ.00 J 3 i 1150,00 1 i I 1 5150.00 I { .2511.SIS 1S' 1C PIPE APRON EACH I 350.00 1 1 1 1350.00 1 I I 1 1351.01 j J 2511•S1S 11' IC PIPE APRON EACH I 300.00 I 2 j 1100.00 I I I 2 1i00.00 j 1 2501.S1S 36' IC PIPE APRON EACH # 4So.do 1 j 1150.00 1 I i 1 1450.00 { J 2561.S1S 41' It PT►E APRON EACH I 1009-00 # 1 { 1100.00 j I I 1 1180.01 J 2502.541 4' PERF. P.E. PIPE DIAIIt ►.F. J 4.00 J 3601 { ;11,100.00 j 3100 111,400.00 ( # I J 2503.541 12' IC PIPE SEVEI, DES. uef, C1 II ►.F. 1 20.00 I 210 1 ;51500.00 1 { 1 210 ;S1600.01 I 1 2S03 -S41 1S' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 31069 Cl. 11 L.F. { IS.00 1 1513 1 1311125.00 I I i 1513. 131,125.00 I I 2SOI.S41 11' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 31.06, C►. II E.F. J 30.00 1 Sat I 111,020.01 J I # 531 1111020,10 1 { 2SOI.541 11' IC PIPE SEVE1, DES. 3106, CL. I II L.F. i 32°.00 1 115 1 ;3,510:00 { { # its 13,110.00 # i 2503.541 21' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 3106, C►. II ►.F. # 34.00 { 25o3.s11 24' Ic PIPE SEVE11 DES. 3106, CL. ii L.F. 1 35.00 toS 1 114,111.00 1 I j 105 114,115.00 1 2503.54{ . 24' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 3001, Cl. III ►.F. { 31.00 { 341 1 112,611.00 { 1 { 1 311 112,111,01 1 DATE 01 -Mir -11 RAMSEY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERS ESTIMATE S.A.P. 62-645-41 M.S.�.P. 14l•O2O.1b LARPENTEUI AVEMIE • IISE TO EDSERT01 ST. PAUL ROADWAY COST/BREAKDOWN COST I I DATE: 01 MARCH, 1911 { J { 1 S.A.P. 62.630.21 i S.A.P. 131-020.01 1 STORM SEWER I J UNIT 1 ESTIMATED I ESTIMATED J ( ( J ITEM NO. saas* aIsaacs CONTRACT ITEM asssasssssassssssssssasssssszssass sssssssssaesssasas 1XIT III: 1 PRICE Is: sss:ssa ass I QUANTITIES I AMOUNT I QUANTITY AMOUNT I QOAXTITI AMOUNT ( QUANTITY ANOUNT i 1 2503.541 30' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 3146, CL. ii L.Fe I to.10 (sssszss:sss:{z:zz:::zzsszzzJ::ss::::::s:::z:::s::z:z:J:zz:sszz::::::sz::::zz::I:::z:z::::::::s::z::z:s:.l I 131 1 #5,210.00 I 1 I 131 #5,210.!! 1 �- 2503.St1. 36' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. )fill CL. III - L.Fe. i --- $5.00 ( - 266 ( 111,630.00 { 1 - I 266 #11,630.00 I- i MIM I 42' IC PIPE SEVER, DES. 3006, CL. IV L.F. 1 IS.00 j 651 1 #11,350.01 I � I { - tS! 111,350.10 1-- I 2SO3.S41 41' RC PIPE SEWER, DES. 3101, CL. V L.F. i 15.00 J 111 1 114,626.00 J I I 112 114,620.00 I I 2501.501 COMSIIICT NAMHOLE, DESIGN A L.F. 1 200.00 ( 16.1 I 1159310.01 1 J I 11.1 #15,310.11 i ( 2541.506 - CONSTRICT MANHOLE, DESIGN C L.F. { 225.01 i 1.1 i 12,115.01 1 1 ( 1.4 #2,115.11 1 1 2SO1.S00 CONSTIOCI MANHOLE, DESI61 0 L.F. i 250.10 I !I 1 #24,250.!! I I I 11 121,251.11 1 1 2506.501 SPECIAL DRAINAGE SIIUCTVIE EACH i 2000.04 i 1 I #t,000.00 ( i I 1 12,004.11 1 I 2506.511 CONSTRICT CATCH BASIN, DESIGN LP1 L.F. I 200.10.1 140.2 j 111,010.0! 1 i 1 110.2 121,411.11 I I ZSOI.S11 CONS119CT CATCH BASIN, DESIGN IN L.F. I 200.11 1 II.S 1 12,100.01 i ( I IO.S 12,110.11 I 1 2SOI.SO1 CONSTRICT CATCH BASIN, DESIGN N Lore i 200.01 1 16.4 ( 11,210.01 1 1 I 16.4 139211.11 1 I 2S11.S16 CASTING ASSEMBLY TYPE 1.113) EACH ( 254.11 ( is 1 13,150.11 i I I IS 13,150.41 1 2501.511 CASTING ASSEMBLY TYPE R•31II-L EACH i 251.10 1 2 I #SO0.00 i I 1 2 1SO4.10 j i 2S IMI CASTING ASSEMBLY TYPE R•2S12.1 EACH j 2S1.11 i S 1 111251.41 1 - • I I S 111250.11 i 2506.S22 ADJUST FIANE AND RING CASTI16 EACH I 200.01 I if I 13,201.11 I it #3,200.40 - i ISO6.101 RECOMSTVCT MANHOLE EACH I 1101.10 1 1 I ;1,001.01 1 1 111101.00 I I I I 2SII.S01 RANDOK RIPIAP CLASS III C.Y. 1 40.11 I 1S I 1100.11 1 I I 1S 1100.11 1 i 2521.501 4' CO*CIETE VALI S.F. i 1.31 I 1452! 1 111,116.41 1 103 1113.10 1 1312S 111,102.50 1 j j 2S IM I CONCRETE CORA 1 GUTTER, DES. 112A L.F. i $.So I 6611 I 1131400.51 1 1141 126,111.00 1 2531 11l,ast.51 I I j 2S31 -S41 I' CCNCIETE DRIVEWAY PAY11111 S.I. I 25.10 i $11 I 112,115.11 1 511 112011S.Co 1 1 I j IS}1.642 PEOESTIIAN CURB RAMP EACH 1 301.00 1 14 I 11,200.01 1 it 14,210.41 I I I i ISS4.91 TIAFFIC 1AIIIER DES 1 1111 L.F. 1 13.11 1 22S 1 121125.01 1 22S #2,12s.o0 I I 1 I IS54.521 TWISTED ENO TREATMENT EACH i 500.00 I 1 i 12,101.11 1 4 12,f0f.o1 I i I ISSI.603 CEDAR SPLIT RAIL FENCING tore i 5.10 ill I 11,140.00 I 141 13,200.00 IS63.641 TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 1 isloo.11 I 11 1151000.41 1 1 1iS,If1.04 1 1 1 j I50.102 LOOP DETECTOR 1' I i' EACH j 300.11 I 1 I 11,201.11 i 4 #1,210.00 1 1 I i. ISIS -902 LOOP DETECTOR 1' 121' EACH 1 101.01 1 1 I 1104.11 1 1 =611.00 1 1 i ISIS -102 RELOCATE HANDHOLI (ACV 1 15.11 1 1 I 115.01 I 1 115.00 I I I j 2S1S.501 ROADSIDE SEEDING ACRE j 200.01 j'- 3 1 1100.01 I 3 #104.00 I i j 2S1S.92 SEED OiiTURE S FOUND j 1.01 1 I5I 11so.0I j j ISI #430.01 1 j ISIS.sos SODDING S.Y. i 1.25 I 1223 1 1111521.7s 1 1211 1111521.15 1 { j J IS1S.S11 HOICK MATERIAL, TYPE I Tel i 200.00 j 3 I 1;00.01 1 I j I 1600.00 i Is1s.511 DISC ANCHORING ACRE i 51.01 I 3 1 #150.4! I i j #154.10 j { 2S1S.S31 FERTILIZER TON I 404.00 I O.ls I 1300.11 I i I o.IS 1100.11 1 1 ISo1.102 RELOCATE HYDRANT EACH i 100.00 i 1( =61400.00 I 1 #6,100.04 1 i I j IS04.102 CONNECT TO EIISTINi WATER MAIN EACH I 251.00 I 1 ( 1500.01 1 2 ss0o.00 { i 1514.612 ADJUST VALUE bot EACH I 12S.06 I 1 1 1115.01 1 1 11IS.00 I I I I ISO4.IO) LOWER 1' WATER MAIN L.F. 1 25.01 i Soo I 112,500.00 1 Soo 112,501.00 I 4504.602 1' WATER GATE VALVE EACH j 1SO.00 I i 1 #150.01 1 1 115@.00 1 1 I j 4;04.603 OVER I6' VAIEINAIN L.F. i 15.50 j 560 I 11,180.04 1 560 31,tO0.00 1 I I { ISQ1.1105 2' 11610 INSULATION S.Y. I 11.00 I 233 I 111191.01 1 233 111131.00 sss:sIts Its aa:sszsszzss=:=s: ass = Is: ::szs:ssIM; ssszsssszss::::z:z::i:::ssss::2:s:z:szsss:aszss:zz III: :ssszzz::sass:ssz:s:szsssssIstz:szs:2za:ssszz:zz1:s: aa::s::as2ass Is: zz:ssssssisas 1 SUBTOTAL a I 19431111.40 1 1614,121.15 I 134,554.00 1 1293,635.25 1 1 MOM•PAITICIPATIMG 1 0504.603 TRENCH 1 BACIFILL, II' WATERIAIN 11T Lore 1 11.00 j 211 1 12,100.10 I I 1 j 'Its =====szssasasass::=:::sss=:sss as: ss=sss:s:zssss::::x5::5:5:::=szsssszss;ssz:sssas gas sz=sl::zsss::=_===:I:zss::szssss:::zz:ss: :Is Jz:a:sz:ss:s=ssssasssszzz{s:sassssss=:;===sszsass:l TOTALS = j 19iS,4lI.11 ` 1631,121.15 j 13t,SSt,01 j 1113,635.25 j i LARPENTEUR AVENUE • I35E TO El-GERTON PROJECT TOTAL = $945,418.40 ST. PAUL/XAPLEVOOD ROADWAY COST/BREAKDOWN COST STORM SEWER SPLIT TOTAL = $193,635.25 S.A.P. 62-630-21 60.95 $1]8,813.81 S.A.P. 138-020-01 30.65% $89,999.20 ST. PAUL 8.455 $24,812.18 $293,635.25 . 10% 8S ST. PAUL COST BREAKDOWN PRXE z QUANTITY = COST ENGINEERING }CONSTRUCTION TOTAL CURB I GUTTER a 75% OF $6.50 z 3302 = $16,091.25 $1,609.13 #1,281,18 $18,9.94.16 STORK SEWER 8.45% r r r r r .. r r w r w r r r r r r r r r r r w w w $14,812.18 $2,481.22 r r r w r w w r w r r w r r w r w w r r- r r r w r r r r w r r w r r r r r r w r r r w w r r w $1,984.9] r r r .. •- r,w r r w w r $19,218.31 w r r r r-- • r.r w r r r r r r w r r w r r r w r r w w r r w r w w w r w r r r w w w w w r w r w• w w r r w r w r r- r r r• r w r r r• r r r r r r w r w r r r r rw r r- w r w r ESTIXATED CONSTRUCTION COST .�.. w r r r r r w w r w r w w w r r $48,,113.13 = STORM SEWER RIGHT OF WAY $6,116.00 r- w• r r w r r r w- $54,389.13 10% 8% MAPLEWOOD COST BREAKDOWN PRICE x QUANTITY = COST + ENGINEERING fCONSTRUCTION« TOTAL CURB i GUTTER 15% = $16,451.50 f $1,645.15 f $1,316.11 = $19,411.11 SIDEVALK = $18,102.50 f $1,810.15 f $1,448.10 = $21,360.95 _ STORK SEWER 30.65% = $89,999.20 f $8,999.91 f $1,199.94 =$1061199.06 ' ESTIKATED CONSTRUCTION COST $115,611.83 = STORM SEAR RIGHT OF WAY $22,186.00 $141,191.83 t FROM PAGE 1 OF RIGHT-OF-VAY ESTIKATE PROJECT NO. 86-27 LARPENTEUR AV -35E TO EDG PAGE I OF 2 08-22-1989 D/P NO. QUANTITY CHECK LIST ,all, __ lilt _= Z31r(t_k__1==j= ,l,ij-_IV i - 1 kiLl__uN 1 1 '-6%- COL. 2) = STORM SEWER -RESIDENTIAL - UNITS COL. 33 = STREETS -COMMERCIAL - F. E. r-nL- * .4) = -C;Tnpm czr=wr=p_rnmmi=pr_Tnt - = 9= PIN NO. COL I COL 2 COL 3 COL 4 ,R' PROJECT NO. 86-27 LARPENTEUR AV -35E TO EDG PAGE 2 OF 2 08-22-1989 D/P NO. QUANTITY CHECK LIST rn, I_ STIREEIS-BESIDEUIIAL UNIIS COL. 2) STORM SEWER -RESIDENTIAL - UNITS COL. 3) STREETS -COMMERCIAL - F. F. r-nl Ak I _c;TnjRM SEWER-COMMERCIAl • S- F- PIN NOw COL I 1 COL 2 COL 3 COL 4 18-29-22-44-0008 0.00 1.00 0. 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2 0 1-00 0.00 1018-a':9-22-44-001 1 0.00 0.00 .325.00 139392. 00 12 GRAND TOIGLS 17, IZZ 4 4. QQ 00 17-29-ap- _.3a__o_o 115 -AL -0 0 IC 17-29-22-33-0017 0.00 1.00 17-29-22-33-0018 0. O(Q�+ 1.00 0. �►nc 0. Q�0 17 - 21 9=:a -0-19 17-29-22-33-0020 • 17-29-22-33-0021 0.00 1.00 3 =0 0 �.� __:_. .., 0 R 00 ___._ 1.� 0 ¢� _ _ Q� . 0 0 _ 0 . Q10 .. _ . __... _ _ 17-29-22-33-0023 0.00 3 17-2 9-22' 33-0024 0.00 1. R+(0y 0. Q�¢+ Q�. Q�Ac 4 1 "15 1 • 1L0 1 • �KJ 0.--�0 O.-oo 17-29-22-33-0026 1.00 1.00 0. 00 0.00 17-29-22-33-0027 0.00 1.00 0.00 O.V Ao 0 0 0. oo__ 0. 00 17-29-22-33-0029 0.00 1.00 0.00 0. v ')o 17-29-22-33-0030 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 ______._17-2 9=2 a=3 3=0 0 31 0 ql 0.00. .0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17729.-22-33-0034 0.00 1.00 0.00 0. oo 17-29-22-33-00355 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17-29-22-333-00,36 1. 0 0 1.00 0.00 0.00 37 1.00 0.00 0. 00 17-29-22-33-0038 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17-29-22-33-0039 1.00 1.00 0.00 0. 00 17-29-22-34-0038 0. 00 1.00 0.00 0.00 17-29-22-34-0039 1.00. 1. 00 0.00 0.00 17=2.1 0.00 1.00 0. 00 0. 0 0 3 17-29-22.-34-0041 0.00 1.00 0.00 .0.00 17-29-222-34-0045 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 a a 3 0046 1, 00 1100 0.00 0.00 .17-29-22-34-0047 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17-29-22-34-0056 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Le 1 1.00 0.00 0.00 0._00 17-29-22-34-0064 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17-29-22-34-0065 1.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 18-29-22-44-0►001 0.00 0.00 0. OLA 87120. 0 0 32 18-29-22-44-0002 0.00 0. 00 0.00 43560. 00 .18-29-22-44-0003 0.00 0.00 0.00 435560.00 18-a2-22-44-0004 0.00 0. 00 0.00 43560.00 18-29-22-44--0005 0.00' 1.00 0. oet 0.00 18-29-22-44-0006 0.00 1.00 0. 00 0.00 ia-29-22-44-OOZZ- 1-000- 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,R' PROJECT NO. 86-27 LARPENTEUR AV -35E TO EDG PAGE 2 OF 2 08-22-1989 D/P NO. QUANTITY CHECK LIST rn, I_ STIREEIS-BESIDEUIIAL UNIIS COL. 2) STORM SEWER -RESIDENTIAL - UNITS COL. 3) STREETS -COMMERCIAL - F. F. r-nl Ak I _c;TnjRM SEWER-COMMERCIAl • S- F- PIN NOw COL I 1 COL 2 COL 3 COL 4 18-29-22-44-0008 0.00 1.00 0. 00 0.00 0.0 22 18--2 9-22-44-0009 0 1.00 0.00 0. 00 0 0.00 0.00 1018-a':9-22-44-001 1 0.00 0.00 .325.00 139392. 00 12 GRAND TOIGLS 17, IZZ 4 4. QQ 00 I��•�' � 6� s� 4A D D. 03. - - 6 77-50 77-50 77.50 77-50 4.45.9 .�► bo .7 7 n►c 01 0417 ��S so 6? t46 1,O • v � � C•4) oto � ' f 4- 4-10 d �4 • v 1 J.64 •c (44) •'c .� • Doc 11503.0 j .('43) lu • r WT X05 c� (4 7 �. (' ? _ oaf o T., 4r 157 LA ` o �' � T.S. ��•t37 - � in co A • (.0. S r- 15'j _ $.d 9.71 ._ ' "'".. izZ.14 1040.7 !O. 2. . c ;t �.1 c, S6� ov z or -41 19tH -- - b -c 75 �a 1 p o 4a 114•17Z - 10 ... O t rI o �t1► 3 `vx foO(Z s H ! o 1 �0 � 30�S 31 0 ac j-130 10 Q t .' ' g , f KINGSTON A 0 lot "t IL a - 4.� ► z� s ss 7 10 13 - O Z.1 iS 18 Z 171 tir, .f S 3 Q 2 S %c. � • 3' O """� CLQ A v / 5y BJ 1 : 3 _`� • - o< • 9 3 �17 L3 t� e V~� Il 20 n p-7 12 n 1 Q 11 I �► Ji i i 0 �j Q� T . ago � , i 2B ftJ- r ._._ �-_.. --. •^ ^► �. )) _ - 1 6 r • C O 05 a 70 6 ' 2Ba� w..._. L- 0 LC1I 5 CJ t- O tic 10 33 w\ v+ 89* 33 04 0 Q -Q 17-29-22-33 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA LARPENTEUR AVENUE PROJECT 86-27 INTERSTATE 35E TO EDGERTON STREET SCALE 1' _ 400' o X201 ........_ .....-. _._ - 1/3 a p ' a •...•+ ��,• .. - • N It c 'o 61.t o - ., p tob o IZ3.5 1 0.7 0 66 l20. IZo.T 143 33 SL.-- 9� Lz q •� 3 I ! 27 �G•i• 2 I W 1i .9 S' 2 � 5 ! O1O 2a 3 t2� 3 20 `(9127 " 4 25 .a�7): C, 4 w� ...-. ►. i .: 26 °,,y 24 5 (e) . Com, ! 8 6-)� � -- — – -- -- — 7 y to It ti . _ -- ..._ 1 (�) ' `0 1T •� 6 _ � _ \9 — .._. — _ (8 94f 2 '1 9) V) 4 0 ► / 1 9 0 61•Z IA0 - 40 •v 1�2O g t•L) 1-1 o r4 17 CV )19 12 A4_ --- __. 0 . 1 7�6 (71) IT IRT Y 3 11 D, o -7 1.3 112s, - — -- 5 3� :0 N 17 to Q j _ _ _ 1 - -- - - 142 0 PA is oo —VI 1 '�^ _ 11,t _ _ _109._ �,t, �i j •t° .to 3, o� o �zo.b 12 \KINGSTON -- ,—' �� - AVE:- o ,3 Lott A' 3� 59 • \� �� fid. �� � ;•�44 LTO 22 e...f' �`� . 3 Z QC • a r. — - r /� `� �O, 37) 1� "�° p 2 p �.46re }-- ` �•� I ,sem. -- T oe a �� .�44 15 7F7 � 2 4 5) eo) _- -74- 41-0123070 *A F �• 2a -r 4 ti� 3a list 2 23 35 -7 ZI 13 1111 22 Lo 08O • cj, LLj ~.,{ tri (f S) I f1 • � 2 O o ...� .._ _ w -- —� -- ._ 13 7 t Z -- - — -- -�— Q d4 40 40 s 17 ,� 1 i •�4 • 3_ _ —� —�_ W _ 45 y ^�• a �u 6p .,.�� 45 w - C 16 ° t7 14 (�)�Q " 0 �t to 16 42 ` •i ..v O n I ,1 cri o� 1)(-_ .. �'�. - — wipnrr►c+a. rt.�► .o .. ` r .,. ' - - /1 ti Q -Q 17-29-22-34 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA LA . RPENTEUR AVENUE PROJECT 86-27 INTERSTATE 35E TO EDGERTON STREET SCALE 1" _ 4 0 0 ' Q -Q 1 8-29-22-44 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA LARPENTEUR AVENUE PROJECT 86-27 INTERSTATE 35E TO EDGERTON STREET SCALE 1" : 400' r Jr J 1 tatost 1 2.00 MINN. OZO a l.29ac- .. (® ;- ALA _ . 1 IJw.I C �;y►nt tt e-t33si 1.00 5TATTn OR MtNN Q p 19 6 ) •, • 1�3t�o 1. 00 o.L. - t c�TAr OF. MINK. ► ? �.o��. 0Mpno (t.5(nac) Jrnre. o� MIW4. Ln 13 mommm M== I CIO '' - S 7 r I o ,A - : N1.0 , 8.a4--. aio AO - ., ' " 4.21" Y dL/ 7e 2 7 JJ 1' ,t1 ". •1 I "'ll • . t' t t� (D I Bona t 5 b' �O Z e ° _ . - 60, s - - _ ---- - _ Iia s r 010 O .G9aa. 00 .. i 1 . r. ... ..r._ _•• ' V O • ci 01 l� kn t 1 3.20ac. 3 I t o 0,50 • U 1 y Q 00 ne ri 1 in -� ' Ir Doc- 14.510.1.50 3.31_8 t '• t 'fl 3� •' 1 r' �za�♦ 3 ZG . �� ..• t� 1 T�• L/ /T7 �' 1�'S % r o. AVE. , '' , — ,z,4 gr I x'4o 2O 1 m7t- - 3 o r.,t DA,-W5.ON Iw #IVT' • % i 7 7 !� n Q -Q 1 8-29-22-44 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA LARPENTEUR AVENUE PROJECT 86-27 INTERSTATE 35E TO EDGERTON STREET SCALE 1" : 400' CAIVADA :. sandy L oke: 4Co%ium Bed, :- LLMAN AV MT VERNON AV z •� 4 J DOWNS AV v' ROSELAWN A 13 BELL.WOOD AV c~i> SUMMER AV AV � 4J 4 � SPS Z N Jbti s 0 0 �- V o p v w Q ►— � Q = ca GSTON C\� O O GENERAL ASSE sA iN r 61 SSMENT AREA PROPOSED 'ASSESSMENT AREA LARPENTEUR AVENUE'.PROJECT 86-2-7 INTERSTATE 35E TO EDGERTON STREET SCALE t� N/A by Couwi[l , d.�rsed MEMORANDUM Modif i e .TO: city:Manager er ReJ ected FROM: Director of Community Development Date SUBJECT: Code Amendment --Environmental Protection Ordinance DATE: September 1, 1989 INTRODUCTION The City Council directed staff to revise,the.environmental protection ordinance to provide more protection for significant trees. Council also wanted a survey of other cities' tree preservation ordinances. DISCUSSION The proposed ordinance gives the City more authority to preserve .significant natural features, especially large trees and .wood.lots . The following is a summary of major changes: 1. Section 9-187: The ordinance would apply to anyone altering a significant natural feature. The current ordinance only applies to developments subject to Council or Community .Design Review Board approval. 2. Section 9-188 (definitions): Several definitions of significant types of natural features have been added. The size of significant or large trees is increased from 4 to 8 inches in diameter. 3. Section 9-189: The density guarantee would be revised to allow the City to reduce the maximum allowed density in the land use plan by 33% or increase the minimum lot area to 15,000 square feet to preserve a significant natural feature. The current ordinance does not allow the City to protect some significant natural features, particularly clusters of large trees, where their preservation would .result in the loss of a developer's density. Most of the controversy surrounding the environmental protection ordinance has centered around lot sizes and densities. The following are a sample of average lot sizes for several plats in the "leg": Beth Heights 22,942 Huntington Hills South 25,636 Maplewood Highlands 191446 Maidment Terrace 14,282 Highwood 1st phase 15,560 Highwood 2nd phase 17,424 Gonyea's 1st and 2nd phases 16,800 Pleasantview Park 191781 4. Section 9-190: A tree plan is required showing which large trees and woodlots will be preserved. The City may hire a `tree expert, at the developer's expense, to evaluate this plan if needed. 5. Section 9-191 would require a woodlot alteration permit to alter a woodlot. Currently, removal of a woodlot is legal and requires no permit 6,0 Sect ion 9-193 C New standards for tree cutting and replacement have been added, as well as a fencing and signage. reeuire-lent during construction. In addition to the proposed ordinance, a tree preservation survey .is included on page 10, the Eden Prairie tree replacement policy on :page 11 and an article from "Zoning News" on suburban tree _ ordinances on page 17 Staff is also handing out the attachment on page 19 from "Lasting Woodlands" with each building permit involving tree removal. Several meetings were held with developers last spring on a preliminary draft of this ordinance. Copies of this report will be sent to them preceding the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION Adoptth.e attached ordinance. denvir . ord Attachments: 1. ordinance 20 Free Preservation Survey 3 Eden Prairie Tree Replacement Policy 4. Zoning News 5. "Lasting Woodlands" handout 2 ORDINANCE NO: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ORDINANCE THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS the following revisions to Chapter 9, Article IX of the City code-,_ Environmental Protection Ordinance (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out). Section 1. Sections 9-187 through 9-193 (1) are amended as follows: Section 9-157, Applicability. This art1cle shall apply to any person or use that would alter a sicMificant natural feature., new „h.d ; A,; 6:19n :. "%7G'tibn` t7'�JQ 'G v.l+ l.. . j • • cv v�rc�—rs a • M • •tq pe j ay or • • t -r i t h ou t R i t arr �rlerg' r_ CIr+ (b).. Public and semi-public projects, such as streets, utilities and parks, whether built by_a public agency or private developer, shall be subiect to this article; except that, the City Council may waive these requirements where there would be a greater public need for the project than to meet the requirements of this article. A public hearing shall be held before declaring such a waiver. The property owner v-1 least 350 feet of the site shall be notified. at least 10 days before the hearing. Section 9-188. Definitions. Bluffline: A line delineating a top of a slope with direct drainage to a protected water, connecting the points at which the slope becomes less than eighteen (18) percent. (More than one bluffline may be encountered proceeding landward from a . protected water*) Critical area: The Mississippi River Corridor Area bounded by Carver Avenue, I-494 and the city limits. a;aoj3=t of 3 and - shaded by as-a--�ae Direct drainage: Drainage into a protected water without an intervening pond or wetland. -p line The farthest distance around and away from the trunk of a tree that rain or dew will fall directly to the Attachment 1 ground from the leaves or branches of that tree. 'Erosion. The general process by which soils are removed by flowing surface or subsurface water or wind. Gross soil loss: The average annual total amount of soil material carried from one acre of land by erosion. Large tree. Any healthy tree that has a trunk diameter, four feet ^ above the ground of at least 8 inches. .Pipeline: An underground line of pipe including associated pumps, Valves, control devices and other structures utilized for conveying liquids, gases, sewage or other finely divided sol ids .from one point to another. Protected water: Formerly referred to as public waters, means any water defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section. 105.37, Subdivision 14. Retaining wall: A structure utilized to hold a slope in a position which it would not naturally remain in. Sediment: Suspended matter carried by water, sewage or other liquids Significant natural feature : . a significant water body _large tree, a woodlof _, a significant slope or a site of historical or archeological significance that has been .recorded with the State. Significant slope: A natural slope of 25 percent or more grade over an area at least 20.feet in length top to .bottom) and 500 feet in width (side to side Significant water body: A water body shown on the City .Drainage Plan or a water body over one acre in area. -Slope: The inclination of the natural surface of the land from the horizontal; commonly described as a ratio of the .length to the height. Structure: Anything manufactured, constructed or erected which is normally attached to or positioned on land, including portable structures. Substation: Any utility structure, other than lines, pipelines poles hn3 or towers. Terrace: A relatively level area bordered on one or more .sides by a retaining wall. % I& It �- 4 Utlltys �rri l �-�• Phu=i rrnl farri 10. %Oft Iftw..M. � i t e�M. Ift-.6. ftw �w of Electric, telephone, telegraph, cable television, water, sanitary and storm sewer, solid waste, gas or similar service operations. Vegetation: All plant growth, especially trees, shrubs, mosses or .grasses , Water body: Any lake, stream, pond, wetland or river. Wetland: Any land which is seasonably wet or flooded, including all marshes, bogs, swamps or floodplains. woodlot: A treed area of at least one-half acre of which at least 25% of the area includes large trees. Sec. 9-189. PensJ *-3x qume Effect on density. pre -vent the de-ve-3on-m of ==QnA_=t_3x to t1: a33azaad in the Ma:03auxand rye -e -d 123_ The city may reduce the maximum allowed density where such reduction would save all or part of a significant natural feature. However, regardless of the rec,ruirements in this article,.the maximum allowed density shall not be reduced below .67% of the allowed density in the city's land use plan for multiple dwellings. The minimum lot size shall not be increased above 15,000 cure feet for single dwellings. The City Council may require the clustering of dwellings in the form of town- houses, quads, er- apartments or similar uses, where it is necessary to preserve significant natural , features . C` &A eIftw DIVISION 2. ADMINISTRATION Section 9-190 Tree plan required A tree plan shall be required with any City application which would result in the loss of large trees or all or part of a woodlot. This plan shall show the existing woodlot, ,identify the sizes and species of any large trees and indicate which trees are to be removed. The applicant shall show on the tree plan.and on the site, the limits of g_posed grading activity near a large tree or woodlot to be preserved. These grading limits shall not encroach upon the dr%p-lines of the trees to be preserved in the woodlot. City staff may submit the plan to a tree expert for a recommendation. Any costs shall be paid for by the developer. 5 Sec. 9-191. Woodlot alteration_permit. .(a) A woodlot alteration application shall be submitted to the Director of . Community Development for any alteration of a woodlot that is not reviewed in another application. The applicant shall submit a t_plan and any other information needed to determine compliance with this article. Specific requirements shall be stated on an application .form in the office of the Director of Community Development. An application fee shall be established bye 'CityCouncil by resolution from time -to -time. , (b) The Director of Community Development may approve a woodlot alteration permit which complies with this article. The Director's decision may be appealed to the City.Council in writing by , any effected party within ten days of the Director's written decision. Sec. 9-192. Conditions of Approval. The City may _re_quire conditions of approval to insure compliance with this article. DIVISION 3. APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 9-19-1 193,v Approval c + '^' nnreya-1 standards. Anv request=, alter a significant natural feature must meet the following standards: (1) General standards. a. All plans and the The conduct of all grading, landscaping,,structure placement, and street routing shall be consistent with And to th '�� li ��ta=t i " tha- f„r+-ha-=2n r� r•f the City's comprehensive plan, and fto d&db ���_ for development in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, the Maplewood Critical Area. Plan. b. The proposed development shall not lessen existing public access to and along a protected water. c. The proposed development shall be designed, constructed and maintained to avoid causing: 1. Erosion. 2. Pollution, contamination water bodies or storm sewers. 3, Flooding. 0 or siltation of 4. Ground water contamination. 5. Alteration of significant natural features. d. IDevelopment shall. not substantially diminish the scientific, historical, educational, recreational or aesthetic value of unique natural areas, and plants and animals, snania=,- which are registered with the state as such, and shall not substantially alter their reproductive cycles ' e. Views of protected waters from buildings or public streets shall not be impaired by the placement of advertising signs. Section 2. The current Subsection 191 (5), now 193 (5), is amended as follows: (5) Trees. a. Development shall be designed to preserve lame trees and woodlots, where such ureservation would not effect the public health, safety or welfare.���ZXY The City may prohibit removal of all or part of a woodlot or large tree. This decision shall be based on, but not limited to the following criteria: 1. Size 2. Sredies, health and attractiveness of the trees including: (a) sensitivity.to disease. (b) life span. _(c) nuisance characteristics (d) sensitivity to site grading. 3. Potential for transplanting. 4. Need for thinning a woodlot. 5. Effect on the functioning of a development. 6. The public health, safety and welfare. b. If large trees are cut, the density of trees shall be restored to that which existed before development, but in Ino case shall the applicant be required to raise the density above ten (10) trees per acre, unless part N of a required planting screen. „�� }r��c re�irc �` d *=^ 3 i = .. . , . . a- 3 a =t ad gzha 3 3 ha x - rna-= 3 ta-= rgha-3 3 %% t 121 ftwwwluw 1 G rpv e r-- cob, If any large tree in a woodlot is cut, damaged or the area within the tree's dripline has been encroached upon by gradinaecfuipment without City authorization the City may re ireplanting-of a new tree and a fine. The fine shall be set by Citv resolution from time -to - time. In addition, if the City determines that a d -gid tree will probably not survive, it shall be removed by the develop_ d.cr-w- Any trees required to be planted shall be varied in species, shall maximize the use of species native to the area, shall not include any species under disease elidemic and shall be hardy under local conditions. Trees shall be at least 2 1/2 inches in diameter for deciduous trees and eight feet tall for coniferous trees. e.4- Any trees required to be planted shall be replaced if they die or appear to be dying within one year of planting. f. Before any construction or grading takes place,. snowfencing or erosion control fencing shall.be placed around the borders of woodlots or the driplines of large trees to be preserved. Signs shall be placed along this fence line prohibiting orad ing bevond the fence line. Section 3. DIVISION 3. UTILITIES AND STREETS is hereby renumbered to DIVISION 4. Secs. 9-192 utilities and 9-193 streets are hereby renumbered to Secs. 9-194 and 9-195. There are no other revisions to these sections. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on , 198 Attest: City Clerk 9 Ayes - Nays -- mayor TREE PRESERVATION SURVEY Staff surveyed 26 Suburban cities. Circle Pines was al so included at the City Council 's. request. Each city was asked for their tree preservation requirements. Only two cities, Burnsville and Eden Prairie, have city-wide tree preservation ordinances* The o1lowing cities have ho tree preservation ordinamces: Coon - pidsv Plymouth, Brooklyn Center, Fridley, Blaine, Crystal , New Brighton, New Hope., Apple Valley, South St Paul, Maple Grove, Columbia Heights, West St, Paul, Shoreview, North St. Paul, /akdalev Woodbury, Newport, Little Canada, and Circle Pines. The following cities have a limited tree preservation ordinance: iconditional` it t Roseville requires ax ���� perm out trees with at c last `�a 6 -inch diameter in shore1aand areas. Cottage Grove |has a similar ordinance to Maplewood, but it only applies to designated critical area land along the Mississippi River. The -following cities have a city-wide tree preservation ordinance: Burnsville has a similar ordinance to Maplewoodv except that any t-ree ^with a diameter of at least 2-1/2 inches that is cut must be - laced, up to a maximum of 15 trees per acre. -Va.dnais. Heights requires tree preservation, but has no specific requirements or required replanting. lEden Prairie has the most detailed tree replacement policy of any of the cities surveyed. A copy is attached. It appears to be d'fficult and time-consuming to administer because of its White Bear Lake is considering an ordinance to regulate cutting trees 6 inches or more in diameter. lO ' Attachment � � TREE REPLACEMENT POLICY (--fJCvq. A* PUR PO SE It is the intent and desire of the City to protect, preserve, and enhance the naturals environment and beauty of Eden Prairie by encouraging the resourceful and prudent development of our existing woodland areas. To create an incentive for good planning, design, and development, the Tree Replacement Policy shall serve as a basis for project review in the promotion mson of tree preservation and/or determining the required replacement of significant trees. When reviewing new development projects, either commercial or residential, City Staff attempts through design to preserve and protect natural site characteristics such as wooded areas,: hills, and ponds. However, it is not always possible and/or feasible to save 100% of any existing significant natural site characteristic. Because of this, a tree replacement policy has been developed. BeBACKGROUND In developing the Tree Replacement Policy, Staff had to determine the following items: 1, Define significant tree. A significant tree is defined as a tree of 12 inches in diameter or greater whose mature height will be greater than 30 feet (examples: oak, maple, basswood, etc.) or a tree of 8 inches in diameter or more whose mature • height is usually less than 30 feet (examples: ironwood, cedar/juniper, etc.). 2. Which species of trees shall be replaced? Deciduous hardwood trees which shall be replaced includes cak, maple, basswood, ash, ironwood, etc.. In addition, coniferous trees shall also be replaced if they meet the specific size requirement. Diseased trees shall not be subject to tree replacement. It is the responsibl ity of the developer to submit ' a certified tree inventory depicting: a. The size, species, and condition of all trees greater than 12 inches in diameter whose mature height will be greater than 30 feet (examples: oak, maple, basswood, ash, Colorado Spruce, etc. ). b. The size, species, and condition of all trees greater than 8 inches in diameter whose mature height is usually less than 30 feet (examples: ironwood, cedar/juniper, etc.). 11 Attachment 3 Based on this tree inventory, the actual tree loss will be c a l cu 1 at ed and the amount of replacement determined. To reduce the amount of tree replacement required, the proponent may opt to relocate those trees which are suitable. It will be the responsibility of the City Forester to make. the final determination as to the number and types of trees which shall be replaced and/or relocated. 3. At what point (percentage) i s a significant wooded area substantially altered by tree removal. For a wooded site, short of acquisition by the City, some tree removal is probably unavoidable and reasonable to expect as a part of development of the land. By only replacing significant trees, a substantial amount of vegetation under this size could be removed without replacement. This fact alone allows considerable latitude ,in the reasonable development of property. Generally, the. smaller the percentage of the overall wooded portion of the site that is removed, the less the change in the character of this site; and therefore, the less the percentage of replacement necessary to preserve the character of the site. The larger the percentage of removal of trees of the total wooded area the greater the change in the character of the site and the larger the percentage of tree replacement required to help mitigate the change f in site character. Staff, therefore, suggests that for any removal of the significant trees on a site, a proportion of the trees shall be replaced on a diameter (caliper) inch for diameter inch basis. Cl*TREE RE PL AC EM ENT The first 100 caliper inches of tree removal from a site shall be replaced 1009' with the remaining caliper inches replaced on a proportionate basis. The proportion of tree replacement shall diminish, from 100% replacement at 60% loss down at a constant rate to the 100 caliper inch mark. Trees removed outside of an approved construction plan would continue to be replaced at 100% on an area inch per area inch basis. 1. Tree Replacement Calculations The amount of tree replacement is based upon the total amount of caliper inches of significant trees removed from the site divided by the total amount of caliper inches of significant trees on -site. General provisions of this policy include: a. The first 100 caliper inches removed from any site shall be replaced 100 percent. b. If the percent of caliper inches removed is greater than or equal to 60 percent, the caliper inch replacement shall be 100 percent. 12 2. Tree Replacement Formula Total Caliper Inches Removed = Percent Caliper Inches Removed Total Ca] iper Inches Percent Caliper Inches Removed x Tree Replacement Factor -(1-6-6) = Percent Tree Replacement Total Caliper Inches Removed - 100 = Total Caliper Inches Replaced by Percentage Tontal Caliper Inches Replaced by Percentage x Percent Tree Replacement) + 100 = Total Caliper Inch Replacement Faples a. 95 Caliper Inches Removed 400 Total Caliper Inches 95 = 23.75% Regardless of percentage, because the total amount of tree removal is less than or equal to 100, tree replacement shall be 100% or 95 caliper inches. :b. 367 Caliper Inches Removed 743 Total Caliper Inches '367 49.39% 49.39% x 1.66 = 81.98% 367 - 100 = 267 , (267 x 81.98%) + 100 = 318.88 or 319 Caliper Inches Replaced 811 Caliper Inces Removed 923 Total Cal iper Inches 811 = 87.8 6% Because the percentage of trees removed is greater than or equal to 60%, the amount of tree replacement shall be 100% or 811 caliper inches. :3. Rep l aceme nt Locations Once the amount of tree replacement has been determined, the proponent will be required to submit a landscape plan detailing the location, type, and size of trees to be replaced. This plan will be required prior to first reading by the City Council. 13 ar Locations in which tree replacement shall occur are as follows: a. Site restoration areas including steep slopes. be Lot yard areas. C* Outlots or common areas. d. Buffering between different land use and/or activities. e. Entrance monuments. f. Adjacent park or community open space (shall be coordinated by the Planning Staff and the Community Services Staff) . 4. Sizes and Types The minimum size of trees which shall be9 i ven credit for tree replacement are a 3" deciduous tree or an 8' coniferous tree, except that in steep slope restoration, using 2 1/211 size trees, credit will be given. No replacement credit will be given for shrubs or ornamental trees. The attached list describes the types of trees suitable to be planted in Eden Prairie. Trees designated for replacement shall be of . a similar variety of the trees which were prem ov ed .when applicable and/or available. .00 ENFORCEMENT In Multi -family, Office, Commercial or Industrial developments, the developer will be required to follow normal landscape bonding procedures as described in the City of Eden Prairie.'s Landscape/Screening Procedures and Requirements. ' In Single Family Residential subdivisions, the procedure shall be as follows: 1. To determine the cost of the trees to be replaced, the developer should either provide the City with a contract for the replacement of the trees or two nursery estimates. If a developer fails to give nursery estimates or provide the City with a copy of an actual contract for installation of the trees, then the City will estimate based on its knowledge of the approximate price per caliper inch to determine the total cost. 2. Proponent will be required to submit surety at 1 1/2 times the cost of the tree replacement. Surety shall either be a bond, letter of credit, cash, or an assurance of an escrow with a title company. 3. The City will provide one landscape inspection each year (usually in the fall) for each individual -project. At that time, the amount of landscaping installed will be determined. One complete growing season after the 1st inspection a subsequent bond amount will be released if in compliance with the developer's agreement and City ICO cdc. The balance of the surety will be retained by the City as a guarantee for tree replacement and/or completion. 14 Should any of the landscaping I material not be installed, the City will retain the associated bond amount which shall be placed into a Natural Resources Fund. The purpose of the Natural Resources Fund shall include but not limited to the purchase of landscaping to be placed within the adjacent neighborhood or community park. In addition to the number of trees being removed as part of construction, the proponent will also be liable for the replacement of those* trees directly at or near the construction limits which may die as a direct result of this construction activity. In order to protect the City and future homeowner against additional tree loss, the proponent will be required to bond fpr those trees which have been designated as being saved but due to their proximity to any construction activity, may not survive. The number of caliper inches of "questionable" trees shall be calculated and a subsequent bond amount included as part of the tree replacement bond. At the time of final inspection for the replacement trees, these "questionable" trees will also be inspected. After this inspection, the proponent will be contacted regarding any additional tree replacement and/or timing for the bond release. 15 r � ' SHADE TREES - l a r e trees 30+ feet mature he i �ht Norway Maple - Acer platanoides cultivars - 'Cleveland' Red Maple - Acer rubrum cultivars - ' Northwood' , ' Fi redance' Silver Queen Silver Maple (seedless)Acer sacchar� num'Silver Queen Sugar Maple - Acer saccharum cul i tvar 'Green Mountain' River Birch - Betula nigra Hackberry - Cel ti s occidentalis Black Ash - Fraximus nigra .Green Ash - Fraxi nus pennsyl vani ca cultivars - "Newport' 'Bergeson' 'Marshall 's See • dl ess Patmore , 'Summit' Ginkgo Ginkgo bi 1 oba (male only) Honeyl ocust - . G1 end i is i a tri canthos i nermi s Kentucky Coffeetree - Gymnocladus dioicus Ironwood - Ostrya vi rginiara White Oak - Quercus a l ba Swamp White Oak - Quercus bicolor Pin Oak - Quereus palustris Northern Red Oak - Quercus rubra American Linden - Ti 1 i a americana Li ttl el ea f Linden - Ti l i a cordata cultivars - ' G1 enl even' ,GreensP ire' Redmond Linden - Ti 1 i a americana Redmond' Conifer Trees Balsam Fir - Abies balsamea White Fir an Abi es concol or European Larch - Larix decidua Black Hills Spruce Picea l auca ' Densa ' . - 9 to Austro an Pine - Pinus nigra Ponderosa Pine - Pinus ponderosa Norway Pine - Pinus resinosa Scotch Pine - Pinus sylvestris White Pine - Pinus strobes Douglas Fir - Pseudotsuga menti es i i Canadian Hemlock - Tsuga canadensis 16 .ti}l• -,y�; .eliy��'Y�•:� +�i7�t�""C` _ iL i �.�.-•.��x$,. ��i4 j`. }'" r t• R; T kers. / i jf`• b is• rr t. �� � r,'ia : •"psi ►�':�+'� ;%d �, t�++�R' REM ,fy A Tree Grows in Suburbia in Pinellas County, Florida, before the county adopted a tree preservation code, builders would market new homes by showing off a model with extensive landscaping and large trees. Later, after all the home sites were sold off, builders would clear the remaining tracts, put up homes and tell stunned homebuyers that landscaping was their responsibility. Such clear -cutting practices are not unique to Florida. A recent study by Tree Atlanta, a conservation group, shows that he metropolitan area loses the equivalent of up to 50 acres of woodlands .per day during the prime building season. And the U.S. Departnient of Agriculture estimates that niany of the Washington, D.C., suburbs have lost up to half of their woodlands over the last 30 years. (See graph.) The continued loss of woodlands has forced many cities to adopt ordinances to protect trees from indiscriminate clearing for land development. A large number of tree protection ordinances were enacted during the 1970s. However, many of these codes did not work out. Many cities did not have adequate staff to police the protection of trees. They required developers to identify large trees on site plans but were unable .to determine whether trees were actually saved. Some cities also found that grading activities and utility excavations later killed those trees that were supposed to be saved. Many cities also discovered that it was politically infeasible to adopt strong ordinances that might stop development or require modifications of plans in order to protect trees. The second generation of tree protection ordinances .simplifies the process of tree preservation and goes further than the 1970s codes. The cities featured below all have good tree preservation programs. They all conduct inspections, many have staff or consulting arborists, and all have experience in the administration of tree protection codes. Lake Forest, Illinois This affluent suburb on Chicago's North Shore has taken tree preservation seriously for a long time. For the last nine years, it ias been designated a "Tree City" by the National Arbor Day Foundation. In 1987, the city's tree protection.program gained national attention following a fight between Mr. T, the television actor, and the city council. Immediately after moving to Lake Forest, Mr. T chopped down over 100 oak trees on his estate, reportedly to relieve allergies. The city council condemned the action as "outrageous destruction." At the time., Lake Forest's tree preservation code applied only to .new developments and, therefore, did not apply to Mr. T's property. The city's code now prohibits the mass removal of trees from all new building sites and controls the removal of existing trees from front yards within 35 feet of the road right- of-way. The controls on clearing of construction sites apply to all of the city's buildable lots and to the protection of all trees at least 12 inches in diameter at breast height. Trees may be removed in a "construction area" that includes the building 17 JANUARY 1989 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION envelope, driveways, and utility lines. Builders must stake out a building envelope plus 20 feet, accessways, and areas for utility trenches. All large trees outside of this area must be preserved. To protect existing trees, the city's code establishes a "preservation area" extending 35 feet in depth along any lot line facing a public street. Permits are required for the removal of any trees 12 inches in diameter or larger within this area. Pcrnnits may be granted if the tree is diseased, dead, or dying, or if tree preservation would create an economic hardship on the property owner. Even if such permits are granted, the owner nlay be required, at the discretion of the diretlor cif Parks, forestry, and public works, to replace those trees removed with others no less than four inches in diameter. Fulton County, Georgia The county board of commissioners adopted a tree preservation ordinance in 1985. The code applies to all clew development except for single-family home construction. According to Edward Macie, Fulton County Arborist, the ordinance has been highly effective in protecting thousands of existing trees and requiring the planting of tens of thousands of new trees. According to Macie, flexibility has been the key ingredient to the county's protection program. As code administrator, lie Acres of Trees in Selected Areas of Suburban NVashington 200 150 100 so Anne Prince Arundel Georges -airlitx County County County c o 0 0 00 � W) CN CN T CN o% Q• o• o> Source: U.S. Forest Smice Attachment 4 has. been `given discretion in ncgotiating which trees must be proicctcd and which niay be removed. The cotle docs not rcquire that all trccs be prescrvcd, but, when trees are removed, they must be replaced. The tree protection criteria apply to any land -clearing, grading, or construction activities. Tree protection and landscape plans .must be submitted with other construction plans and must show which trees will be preserved. Inethods of guarding trees during construction, proposed utility trendies, and areas to be graded or landscaped. The protection of trees does not end .with the submission of plans in Fulton County. Construction with must be altered to Iimit the amount of grading or clearing within the vicinity of protected trees. These trees must be fcnccd off to keep licavy equipment from inadvertently damaging a tree's root systcnl. The protected area includes all the area beneath the tree's canopy drip line. The drip line is a vertical line extending from the outer surface of a tree's branch tips down to the ground. Hilton dead Island, South Carolina Hilton Head's ordinance is geared not only to preserving trees but also to maintaining the diversity of tree species on the island. Developers are rccluircd to do a conlplctc count of all trees on a site and document their size and species. The results of the count are used to calculate the number of trees that must be preserved, based on a minimum standard of 900 adjusted caliper inches of trees per acre of pervious surface arca. The ordinance also establislics the mix of spccics that must be retained on thesite. The island's goal is to maintain the approximate composition of tree species that existed on the undisturbed site. For exainple, a developer cannot destroy a stand of oak trees unless there are enough retraining hardwoods to provide the appropriate balance of hardwood trees to the other types of trees on the site. The town's code also addresses the problem of lots that were cleared of trees years ago but never developed. Developers of these sites are required to plant trees to meet a minimum number of tree caliper inches per acre. - Finally, the ordinance requires individual honieowncrs to maintain the trees on tlicir lot. Sally Krcbs, the town's natural resource coordinator, spends two days a week doing inspections of sites. "If a tree dies or is hit by a car, it's got to be replaced --period.„ , Agoura Hills, California In response to the removal of vast numbers of oak trees in Los Angeles County, the city of Agoura Hills passed strict oak preservation guidelines that prevent even the pruning of oak tree limbs larger than two inches in diameter without an oak tree permit. The ordinance also requires a permit for the removal of any oak tree. Susan Kelsey, Agoura Hills' oak tree consultant, notes that the planning commission will approve removal only when reasonable use of the site would be completely inhibited by preservation of the trees. Four new oaks ;rust be planted for each oak that is removed. During construction, all oak trees must be surrounded by a five -foot -High chain link fence placed at least 15 feet beyond the trunk. If a proposed building or sidewalk encroaches into this protection zone, the city's oak tree consultant must be on the site at all tunes that work in the protected zone is being c1olle. Iii some cases. builklin s have lied icy 1v wdesigned during. construction in order to save oaks. Kelsey points out that -over the last 100 years, there's been incredible, intentional devastation of the oaks. Now, we've recognized the ,l $ importance of saving our natural resources." 11 West Bloomfield Townsliip :incl NON -i. Miciflg n In Michigan. coinil11rnitiesalc taking :Mops It) plesci ve woodland areas. West Bloomfield '1'mviiship .incl N(wi have designated woodland areas on official woodland niaps. Dc%-elopment that takes place in these areas I»ust comply faith the woodlands protection ordinance. In Wcst Bioonificld, the cxtcn( to which dc:velopiiic:nt ina}, encroach into the woodland arca dcpends on the ecolt)gic;il seilsitivitN- of'(hc• arca. For each pr(g)osed devc•h)p1►it:i►i. 1110 township's woodland rc\•icc\, board deterinincs a "tolcrailce point" ---the number of trees that can be removed Witlhout destroying the woodland character of the site:. In areas that have excellent soils grid are 1)op hated I)y rast- growing spccics of trees, the board may pc i -mit clic remov;►I ()1' up to 50 percent of the trees on tilt site. I lowever, iii delicate ecological areas, the board may restrict this removal to nilly 10 percent of the total number of trees. Novi's ordinance protects woodland areas by reclucirtg required lot sizes and allowing cluster deveioprnciit whc it tilt majority of the property is within a bona fide woodland arca. For exaniplc, in the town's residential estate district, tilt rcquired lot sires can be rceluccd froin one• acres to oiic•-this d acre where wooded arras will be prescr\,cd. Both the west Bloonlficld and Novi ordinnccs ii»pose monetary penalties on property owilcrs found to have violatcd the woodland protection rcgulations. `Fest Bloomfield also rcquires that dc\-clopers post a bond equal to 60 per it -cc on clic site as a condition of site plan approval. If the devcl()l)c;r destroys trees in excess of the number allowed, the borlcl moncyis dcvoted to supplemcntal landscaping of the site. Toric Bird, planning director for NVcst Bloonff acid, says that this step is taken as a last resort. "Thr best enforcement iitcchanisr» is to maintain a vigilance on the property throughout the dcvclopinent process." In recent years, coniniunities have developcd sophisticatcd approaches to protecting trees from both the bulldozer anti 111e ovcrly exuberant residential tree pruner. Recent coc)rs denlonstratC innovation and nexiblity in land do:velopincrit regulations in the interest of preserving trees. The tree ordinance in Bellevue. Washington, perini(s up to a l U pc i-cciit reduction in the nutnber of required parking spaces for the retention of over 15 percent of the signif icartt trees oil site. Irt Orlando, Florida, the city council niay require a pro poscd subdivision to cluster homes in order to protect the trccs on site. Finally, Pleasant Ilill, California, has found that public relation techniques, such as the awarding of tree preservation plaques, greatly enhance public support for tree protcction. Lake Cowity, Ill., Adol)ts Perfortiltlttce Lt)Ilijig Last month, Lake County adopted a new perforr»ance zolli lg ordinance for the 200 square miles of unincorporated ialld ill the county. In a 20 to 3 vote, the county board endorsed the controversial ordinance that has bccn over five years irl the making. The performance zoning concept was introduced iii Lake Count' by Lana Kendi . tilt,• cotrn(y*s f0riner director of 11.111i1iriL. The 111%\]CI ordinJnce that apivars iii 1 enJig*s 100 hcx)l-. Performance e Z ming. was originally prepared for adoption in Lake County. Howcvcr, the county delayed approval of the ne\c• Toning code bM'ILJCe of the 0bjec•1i()r1s ()f ,-1 number of municipalities. LASTING WOODLANDS I��?ESENTS: A Dozen Very Basic Things Which Developers. and Builders Should Know in Order to Avoid Killing Trees (and to avoid the lawsuits that would result from such killings) 1. The roots are the most important part of a tree. 2. Tree roots must have oxygen(!) in order to function. Covering roots with dirt or water can deprive roots of vital oxygen supplies, especially roots of oak trees. 3. The key feeder roots of most trees (especially of oak trees) are in the top 6-12 in. of .soil. ' The myth of "deep rooted trees" is just that: a myth. Even side roots from the short "tap. root" of an oak slant upward to get to oxygen and rain water. 4. The feeder roots of trees are mostly in a large, shallow disc that is 2-4 times the area covered by the crown. In other words, the roots usually extend far beyond the branches! S. .Grading dirt over the feeder roots of trees anywhere under their branches (and often beyond) suffocates the feeder roots and kills all or most of the crown in 1-3 years. 6. - Grading dirt away from the root zone of trees removes their feeder roots and does .:great injury to the crown within 1-3 years. It kills the nearly invisible hair roots. 7. If you can see roots of a tree which you have cut, you have already done considerable damage to the :tree: it is like seeing a pulsing artery in a flesh cut on a human. 8. Compaction of soil under trees (especially by bulldozers working an area, and by repeated .parking of cars, pickups and trucks by construction people) is almost as deadly to frees as covering their roots with soil. The compaction deprives the hair roots of oxygen. 9. Building a protecting "tree well" (e.g. a stone wall) around the trunk of a tree while covering the surrounding area with dirt is a fool's project. It does no good at all. 10. Trenching to install utilities cuts a tree's roots. Multiple trenches can sever most of a tree's roots. Remember, it is the roots of a tree, not its top, which are most important. 1140 Changing grades so that temporary or permanent ponding of water occurs usually results, in suffocation of all roots in the pond due to lack of oxygen, and the trees die. 12. Wounding oak trunks and branches any time from early spring to late summer usually results in oak wilt infecting the tree in areas where oak wilt disease exists. The infection will usually spread through grafted root systems to the whole clump of oak trees surrounding the infected tree. Bulldozers and "Bobcats" easily create wounds in oaks. Prepared by Donald C. Willtkt, Attorney at Law, Willtke do Daniels, 201 Ridgewood Avenue, Minneapolis, MN. Mr. Willeke is Chairman of the Minnesota Satz Shade Tree Advisory Committee. He is a Director of the American Forestry Association and of Lusting Woodlands, Inc. Lasting Woodlands, Inc. is a non-profit corporation. Call Chris Siems, President, a/ 612-439-3356. 19 Attachment 5 _ fonstruction Damage :Prevention: On -Site Strategies On this page we lay out a series of steps that are essential to construction site tree preservation. These steps should become an integral part of the building process. Unfortunately(fonunatety for usforest-lovers!), each woods is different and generates its own questions pertaining to individual tree tolerances. For example: Which tree blocks should be saved? How should traffic be directed on the site? These questions are best answered by a qualified professional consultant. The help of a consultant often pays for uself by saving a builder's valuable time and by increasing property values. ?'tee preservation can be viewed as a four step process. Each step should be integrated into every building project. 1. 'Develop a lot plan that pinpoints tree blocks to be preserved. ss'Y -The builder who says Ill try to save as many trees as I can " will inevitably see y ,one tee after another damaged or destroyed due to "accidents or miscommunications." Know what you are trying to accomplish and which tree blocks you want to preserve before construction proj an ect begins. The expertise of a consultant is YPortion of the c especially valuable during this phase. ttiticn offoffdesignated areas with snow fencing, flagging, and signs. �' ar Block off the areas you wish to preserve with snow fencing and flagging. Post signs ns that state that there is to be no filling, scraping, or trenching of the soil , and no 'vin- or parking in these designated areas. This may seem somewhat severe but it is the driving P g g only y sure way to let contractors and buyers know that you are serious about preserving • positive image it will ro • ec t; it says that those trees. A side benefit of your efforts is the positwe im g p Y YOu 'are taking every precaution to preserve trees. Ex licitl communicate instructions to every contractor on the site. 3 P Y � it's impossible Nearly every builder we've spoken to voices one common problem. t y• contractor to miss the signals and to be on the site every second, and it only takes one c g damage designated tree blocks. There are two ways to combat this problem. Conspicuous fencing and signage make acceptable traffic flow and ons P ?y g � on-site radices very clear to every actor entering the site. Second, if possible, tree preservation practices should be a .cants g ten component in the contract with each contractor. Once again this seems somewhat .writ p harsh but it goes a long way toward getting the desired results. y 4. Monitorvigor the health and vi or of trees during and after construction. Even the most woodland -sensitive construction can place trees under .some stress, effects of this stress sometimes aren't apparent immediately. Check the health of and. . the a PP . served trees periodicallyto make sure they have maintained their vigor. Wilting leaves is expert immediately* the first sign of construction damage. If this occurs, contact a tree -care p c a ain this is a eat wa to make it clear to everyone that you are serious about �n e g great Y Savin trees. It is also one step you can take to avoid construction damage liability.. g f extra work but when you integrate These .steps may seem ince they entad a lot o � Y your g into our re ular building process, they will become a routine part of each building • , project. That'g s what we're striving for, A network of builders for whom tree preservation comes as naturally as g or sheathing. ]Vote: c ure issue o willcontain an anic e that more t roughly develops the steps and ideas expressed in this piece. If you have any questions about construction damage, please call Christian Siems at 439-3356. We can link you up with professionals that can help you .That's what our network is for! is 20 . Construction Damage Liability: Stralkht Talk by Donald C. willeke, Attorney and Counselor at Law and a Director of the American Forestry Association Developers and contractors face a potentially expensive problem if they disregard the -dam age which can occur when homes are built on wooded lots. Often nonsuspecting homebuyers- purchase a newly constructed home on a lot containing what appear to be large, healthy tr s. "hen, to their dismay, m a year or two some of the trees start to show signs of discs: branches die, and sometimes whole trees collapse m mid-season. The ) homeowners first impulse is to talk to their city forester or to call some tree care company. From such gree experts the et the bad news: "Your tree roots were buried with new fill, y g and the trees are "goners."' The standard reaction of these homeowners is first to get very angry at the builder who sold diem the.home or did the construction, and then to go out, get a.lawyer and sue. liability of builders to homeowners for tee loss is based upon several theories. (1) That the builder knew or should have known that damage would result to the activities bl�gut acted ne i ently. It is no defense that the builders did fact know. General Motors was supposed to know that Cory not in a* could blow up. $uilding cars is its business, and it is supposed to know how to do the job right. (2) That the builder knew of the damage or potential damage and did not tell the nonsus g buyers. This is, to use the unpleasant legal term, simply "fraud." pectznn (3) That the builder breached the contract he or she had with the homeowners, either to build the homePmPe Y rl , or to sell them an already constructed home with what app=oed to be healthy trees on the property. (4) That the builder violated consumer protection laws in selling the homeowners a defectiveP roduct, or "hoodwinked" the homeowners by neglecting to tell them that the product had a latent defect that would only show up at a later date. Liability of the builder (on any of the above counts) can be quite expensive. Several builders have had to pay sums equal to the price of the lot on which the home stood.. Some of the builders have been able to bring in excavating contractors and. make them share some of the liability, but it is still the builder's primary responsibility to know how to "do it right" and then to follow through and actually see that it is done right. Failure to observe that simple rule can be very, very expensive. One lawsuit (and the legal fees a builder has to pay for defense) can wipe out the profit on many homes. 21 III, IAT J Sh It e. e "'I 1 .0 lot, Minneapolis St ' Saturday June 7/1986 � ` •L� •�` ...�� ��.;;���. ..rill ,.�,;�•x=. Ob >k �,. ' •� �, �` ,lam j�h��..• ` VI - :: ►;tom•; :�:��..�•- l�{r; r L•.•:1.w►r Staff .photo by Donna Terek Of the 14 Ire esthat once shaded Andrea and Gordon Weber's lot, all that remains is the woodpile on which their children are playing. Oilold ,i i trees, t ir-Fa 1 -.-dg *t c' a n ` t S , if• r 'aye. home b ers learn ,dais the wide canopies of 14 oak and ash "We were heartsick," he said. "It , ; x • , By Ingrid Sundstrom ' nks 18 to 30 inches In was almost like a loss of a family •- t " �'" Staff Writer. • trees with 'tru member when the trees came f � t �, ..�- •• • - • -- diameter. � down. We lost their shade and we 1 -Gordon and Andrea Weber had • for their dream When tfieleaves came out that lost our privacy. The trees went •.,,�.�._. ,�� :. ��,;�, •, •,, ;.• +.� saved:a long-time'l"' r ► house. They shopped carefully fora spring, their lot looked Just as the across the back of our lot at the z ' builder had said It would — like a bottom of a hill. Now when we sit tot that would give their three ` ��• Wit' children room to play. with trees park, Gordon Weber said. But by on our deck, everyone behind us on de the house and the next spring, the beautiful Veer the blit is looking down right at us. .9AM. ^ w„ A. _• ., = big enough to shade '' were dead, kilted by a land. t • A c r''� 'r ,yard.- What happened to the Webers is not, .,�... t "�•+'�:•� 'i -;, �. , f M • development contractor who, PP r • ,.-r+4.-��" t �. :. .�r �.+.�., a ;�• 4 ...:~A, " When the Webers' house was under construction, the backyarc They sound just the right spot ln• �t' .: experts later determined, ttht ' uncommon in the Twin Cities area, all later killed by till dirt. *!,# Maple Grove and, in the winter of dirt four to six feet deep l Trees continued on page 2S had a row of large trees �' 1981,:their house was bunt underr,. !{+,.trees, suftocattng their roots: , j , • •- tt)uyers�ef�nancer` woutdbe rhome.�e _ The narrowing rate gap added to her about misleading advertising �C y lenders or builders),"said Ne el the rats h1a the thepled lowesllow in l early fe ' doubts, since she already had a loan at 12}' percent — "not bad." she Elkins, chief of the consumer law years. ' ••'=-:';;=" ,i-:: nold. Bu, it's the cost of refinancing section of thestate b 1 atm hearing a lot of "They were happy with the and financing that is discouraging al's office, disappointment." rates," he said, "but points and c • some homeowners and surprising fees added so substantially to .a. ' : , ,t� i � •., �A�•,•vim :�f yam, i. 1R"� -�'�l+e "1 haven't run across any complaints IV urAffordable'Luxiv �� + '." �•< ,'.{�,�. �' i �f6yy�.�.-�r M"Y`���.��'+,'S5 l�•yj V^��. V � 'y+�+ Niel � • '' Y{t Vt.�' �� d. ..h' 'f �•�f� �'i i"%'. ..-i'•.:r. ♦..i':-N:a��y'Y�tirr..i4��i�a�i.i1i. .!r 1. _' � a _ .r. � i. .t _:i�,�L•iw��. ` 'l AIWA t1 �'t2'►�9 _Y _ +� Minneapolis St ' Saturday June 7/1986 � ` •L� •�` ...�� ��.;;���. ..rill ,.�,;�•x=. Ob >k �,. ' •� �, �` ,lam j�h��..• ` VI - :: ►;tom•; :�:��..�•- l�{r; r L•.•:1.w►r Staff .photo by Donna Terek Of the 14 Ire esthat once shaded Andrea and Gordon Weber's lot, all that remains is the woodpile on which their children are playing. Oilold ,i i trees, t ir-Fa 1 -.-dg *t c' a n ` t S , if• r 'aye. home b ers learn ,dais the wide canopies of 14 oak and ash "We were heartsick," he said. "It , ; x • , By Ingrid Sundstrom ' nks 18 to 30 inches In was almost like a loss of a family •- t " �'" Staff Writer. • trees with 'tru member when the trees came f � t �, ..�- •• • - • -- diameter. � down. We lost their shade and we 1 -Gordon and Andrea Weber had • for their dream When tfieleaves came out that lost our privacy. The trees went •.,,�.�._. ,�� :. ��,;�, •, •,, ;.• +.� saved:a long-time'l"' r ► house. They shopped carefully fora spring, their lot looked Just as the across the back of our lot at the z ' builder had said It would — like a bottom of a hill. Now when we sit tot that would give their three ` ��• Wit' children room to play. with trees park, Gordon Weber said. But by on our deck, everyone behind us on de the house and the next spring, the beautiful Veer the blit is looking down right at us. .9AM. ^ w„ A. _• ., = big enough to shade '' were dead, kilted by a land. t • A c r''� 'r ,yard.- What happened to the Webers is not, .,�... t "�•+'�:•� 'i -;, �. , f M • development contractor who, PP r • ,.-r+4.-��" t �. :. .�r �.+.�., a ;�• 4 ...:~A, " When the Webers' house was under construction, the backyarc They sound just the right spot ln• �t' .: experts later determined, ttht ' uncommon in the Twin Cities area, all later killed by till dirt. *!,# Maple Grove and, in the winter of dirt four to six feet deep l Trees continued on page 2S had a row of large trees �' 1981,:their house was bunt underr,. !{+,.trees, suftocattng their roots: , j , • •- tt)uyers�ef�nancer` woutdbe rhome.�e _ The narrowing rate gap added to her about misleading advertising �C y lenders or builders),"said Ne el the rats h1a the thepled lowesllow in l early fe ' doubts, since she already had a loan at 12}' percent — "not bad." she Elkins, chief of the consumer law years. ' ••'=-:';;=" ,i-:: nold. Bu, it's the cost of refinancing section of thestate b 1 atm hearing a lot of "They were happy with the and financing that is discouraging al's office, disappointment." rates," he said, "but points and c • some homeowners and surprising fees added so substantially to ethers. He has heard from people who bought or refinanced homes when Fees continued on page 3S "1 haven't run across any complaints urAffordable'Luxiv �� Stan Photo by Donald Black recommend building a house very can cut off the oxygen supply to the To -save oak treoa around this house In Bloomington, the developer made sure that old root systems were not suffocated by new fill dirt. can store a lot of energy, It can take "Preserving trees becomes a very Trucks and other equipment TreesContinued from page is expensive proposition," Graham shouldn't be parked under trees s Cutting roots for a foundation or said. "To save the trees. you're using because exhaust and hot gases can ,said Don Willeke. a lawyer and Inches of soil over a tree's root more land, and then If you have to harm the trees, and the equipment chairman of the state Shade Tree system, which spreads beyond the fence the trees, you're getting to a can compact the ground. Wounds or Advisory Committee. leaf line. usually will cause most point where people (with moderate scratches in oaks should be mature trees to die within two years. Incomes) can't afford the houses on Immediately treated with a sealing, I would say it's * very major 'Contractors often spread dirt to level them." compound. -problem." he said. "I think it's done .-all the time around the area, and I'd • say we're losing millions of dollars worth of trees." Armed with testimony from prominent tree specialists and nursery and forestry experts, the Webers sued. the land developer. Their case was resolved out of court ,and they received a cash settlement a sloped lot, but the compacted soil recommend building a house very can cut off the oxygen supply to the Graham said his firm puts snow tree's fine hair roots, Because trees fences around trees to protect them can store a lot of energy, It can take from harm and to keep vehicles two to three years for them to die. from driving across the roots. If the lot, "but we try to minimize loss," ground has to be graded near a s Cutting roots for a foundation or mature tree, his company builds a for sewer or utility lines may kill the ' well around the base of the tree to part of the tree fed by those roots. If allow the roots to get the air they the roots are heavily disrupted, the need. whole tree may die. "I don't house around a tree, or a deck French and Shirley suggest catling in landscape architects or tree specialists to help determine which trees are valuable and worth saving. Most communities in the area have tlty foresters who can recommend appropriate consultants, Shirley said. "People get professional advice when they're making plans for their to of about $20,000. recommend building a house very Some trees do have to come down homes for any number of things, • • close to a tree, because without the because they are in the middle of a French said. "It costs a lot of money That paid for removing the dead root system, some or all of the tree lot, "but we try to minimize loss," - to take a tree down, and It only takes trees and planting a few will die," French said. "Sometimes Graham said. "Still. it gives me an a professional a few minutes to give replacement ones — two ash trees. a people have actually built their eerie feeling to have to cut down a advice about saving one." . Norway maple. a clump birch and house around a tree, or a deck 200 -year-old tree. •, Home buyers should ask the an American linden --trees � by the 'Webers' lawyer as 1►round a tree. That's a poor Investment." Willeke and French, by alring the consultants for references and check .described "buggywhips" with -diameters of 2 to I• problem of const ruction•kilied trees,, the references. "Minnesota lacks 3 Inches. But because of Maple ■ In the case fol asks. which often "are holding up a rightful flag," said.,,, some sort of monitoring or minimum. Grove's heavy clay soil, three of the. are considtim4 the most desirable Glen Shirley, who has been 14. • standards for this trade,"•French ..: trees died. Sothey keep punting trees on wooded lots, any kind of cut Bloomington's city forester for ; said. , •,; , flew ones. or nick In a tree can Invite the ; ..'i years. "There should be more . Insects that carry oak wilt disease, s awareness on the public's account";,.. ,, '.,.. . •...•; , If ell else falls, there are legal , Dead trees often are passed off by particularly in May and .June, "Bark feed Shirley, who was hired Just as Dutch .L remedies, builders .or developers as unavoidable, caused by oak wilt or French said. beetles can on even the healthiest elm trees, elm disease was moving Into .. "Minnesota courts have been other disease. said John Daniels, causing Dutch elm disease," he said. Bloomington. has since seen trees in conscious of the difference between Willeke's law partner, who represented the Webers in their . "But a healthy oak can't be damaged by oak wilt unless there Is a wound his city killed by what he calls "cut and fill" land -development work for a shade tree and mere timber," :a Daniels said. "There are cases going lawsuit. But In many cases the in the tree — even the smallest houses. But the good word back to the I970s that recognize that deaths are preventable, experts say. wound or broken branch." apparently is spreading, he said, and lately he's seeing more developers a tree on a residential or commercial lot Is shade and has a "I think the way building practices A home site dotted with mature trees :pending time and money to save value that Is different from a certain have been In Minnesota, a lot of usually is more expensive than a trees. .'x' number of board feet." t trees have been lost due to construction that didn't have to be cleared lot. but unless the trees are avoided and protected, "You may Before buying a wooded lot, Why would anyone want ?o save a ' ' lost," said David French, head of the just be buying a lot of very green • potential buyers should talk to the tree anyway? Plant Pathology Department at the University of Minnesota, who was firewood," Willeke said. "It's sad • because you cannot replace a 100- land developer as well as the builder to determine which trees are going "Trees soften the landscape and ' among those called In to confirm the year-old or 200 -year-old tree. If it to be saved and protected. French make it more attractive. They wind shading and diagnosis on the Webers' trees. dies, you'll never see Its like again, unless you live a lot longer than I said. If the base of a tree trunk on the lot is not enlarged, or If no provide protection, - cooling in summer.",. French said. "There are a lot of builders who do hope to." buttress roots can be seen, suspect a . "In the fall, they drop their leaves take care. and with knowledge and •: land fill. and we have to rake them and soy . they glue us exercise." care. this doesn't have to happen." French said. 4 Thomas Graham, of Graham Development Co., Is one of several .' The trees that are to be saved should be fenced And I don't mean ;. ' The deaths of otherwise healthy focal land developers who consciously work to preserve trees — putting a little piece of wire around , • ; , `.' trees can be attributed to several - on home sites, said French, who has the stem of the tree," French said. .. •.,. ; ., construction -related causes: advised Graham on tree "You could still bang Into that with a 'preservation for several years. bulldozer." N Putting more than three or four paths. Features 28R's. 2►i baths, walkout f garage. near Downtown on bus line. Priced fro Directions: Cty. ltd. 18 to Medicine Lk. Rd., Hours: Open Sat. thru Thi Other times by appoint ' • Pei EASAi`iT • -� \ - 2426 /M Gi GLEN Realtor Quality of 9 Bu Ef f tiff•--- A% Now ,you too can enjoy, the relaxing atmospher Lakeside Court home built by Mary Anderson. Mary Anderson homes are for discriminating buye to using only quality materials. And when it comes Rheem Is.the worlds largest maker of gas water hea and quality team up for dependable, energy effic Models in Lakeside Courts, Plymouth, are open 1:1 Monday through Friday. There are a few lake I. available, FROM $100,000. c Call Mert Jacobson 553-1101 ' LAKESIDE COURTS: Dir. 494 to Co. 9 East 1 mi, to Zachary lane, 1 mi. N. to Schmitt Lake Rd., left S blocks to Forest View Lane and tell 4 blocks to t akrside Court model. Mary Anderson Homes .8901 Tyndale Ave. S., Bloomington, Pho s is w . (,an, ► t' Cut Kej .. off' •�`�iA+111Wi� .'.:��iii;�� And at Kenwood Isles Condominium Seniors, our home owners rejoice in 'freedom. Finding time, now for shot and Calhoun Square, walks around I welincss classes at.thc adjacent YWt i A move to Kenwood Isles is well de: you think. Just ask anyone .who lives I And be sureto .visit our six models ` KENW( Planning Commission Minutes 8-2I-89 VII . NEW BUSINESS A. Code Amendment: 'Environmental Protection Ordinance Secretary Olson presented the staff .report regarding the revision of the Environmental Protection Ordinance to provide more protection for significant trees. A commissioner asked staff if a developer cuts a number of the original mature trees, could the developer replace these trees with a small number of conifers and still fulfill the requirements of the ordinance. Staff said the density could be reduced by 20%, as opposed to .the current ordinance which does not allow the City to save any trees. A commissioner asked how long a period of time a developer was responsible for replacing existing trees which may be damaged by grading equipment. Staff said they must determine at the time the grading inspection is done what trees must be replaced. The chairman asked if anyone from the audience wished to speak. There were no comments. Commissioner Cardinal moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the revised Environmental Protection Ordinance. Commissioner Ayers seconded Ayes --Ayers, Barrett, Cardinal, 4 Fiola, Sigmundik, Sletten Action by Council,:, Ex�dors�d MEMORANDUM Modifie' TO:.City Manager Rejected........... . .FROM: Director of Community Development Dat SUBJECT: Address Change DATE September 14, 1989 INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting that the address for the Maplewood Care Center be changed to 2320 White Bear Avenue. The address assigned by the City is 1905 Cope Avenue. The Care.Center uses 1900 Sherren Avenue. The City Clerk states that this causes problems with City mailings. Assuming that the Council vacates Sherren Avenue, the address should be changed to White Bear Avenue, RECOMMENDATION Change the address for the Maplewood Care Center to 2320 White Bear Avenue. MEM05 t/,Z wr "Act On Enaoreed.,. . MEMORANDUM Modified-, Re J ected- TO ; City Manager Date FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Development Moratorium DATE September 1, 1989 INTRODUCTION The Cit Council, on August 31, adopted a moratorium on new • •y The purpose preliminary plat applications through September 25. p p would be allow time for adoption of a revised environmental protection ordinance designed to give the City more control over the preservation of trees and other significant natural features. .BACKGROUND The City considered a similar proposal to this in 1982. (Refer to the attached newspaper article on page 3 and the typical response from developers in the letter from Marlin Grant on page 4.) Subsequently, an environmental protection ordinance was proposed by staff that would have allowed the City to reduce densities to one dwel l inch for each acre of land. After lobbying by developers, th9 provision was changed to guarantee developers the maximum density allowed in the land use plan. DISCUSSION in some cases, increasing the minimum lot size may help to save trees. In other cases, the grading required to develop a site may .have to be done regardless of the lot size. Streets and utilities still need to be installed and the site may still need extensive grading for dra ina a purposes or to . get the proper. elevation for sanitary sewer drainage. A significant increase in lot sizes would also unnecessarily raise housing costs for lots where there are no significant natural features. The environmental protection ordinance is the best way to save significant natural features. The problem with the current ordinance is that the density guarantee section severely restricts the City's ability to preserve trees and other natural features. The proposed revision to this ordinance would allow the City to reduce densities by 33% to save significant natural features. This means that the City could increase the minimum lot size to .15,000 square feet in. specific areas where significant natural features could be preserved. The last concern with a moratorium is the legal issues. Refer to the attached memo from the City Attorney on page 6. RECOMMENDATION Take no action on extending the moratorium. MEM0.8 Attachments: 1. Newspaper article 2 Letter: Marlin Grant 3. Memo: City Attorney 2 2 Sections - 34 Pages s • leWo • WED., JUNE Ib, 19E in le Copy. 3 x4a)" Maplewood, Minnesota IL Y) t � r •.r . Counc •' ' .. `.� 11,..-, /fie L _ •i J , r .. -. -.,Py 4 - , �'. - h •r - •. •" _/fit i '^,'a` • i• :. `.i. . _ _ ord • f 4 .- •� deecendin t- - uthern lakes in the chain rotection with the list s filen. vironmental p to ke P o builders, according _ it came to addressing the cit JONATHON CLYDE GLASS financial effectn i to evaluate en Oak Wilt proble. - _ - B It ens the city ch E and 0 y Staff Writer _ Haider. enables on an in- D a cited a velo ment proposal - the council each de P , apply the en ho ever, .deals in defeating Council took and pP Y i The Maplewood City dividual basis he dis riminatorY o �`{ a 14 meeting to • onmental guidelines accordingly, la to finance Maplewood' disea �•� = several steps at its Jun 1 vir P B 3.2 votes, with MG explained. some.. tr p g Bastian in erne the cit 's unique environments ro ram. Y on the terrain, ending and Councilman Gars' Pres as thumbs down on a tea�lires but turned Depending uare- _•~:; city's diseased tree developments ments could have 10,400-s9 min city, the council rejecte s, ` al to extend w �•�:< w propos the tY _ d P le others could be required to endations to provide a Iota 1 ` y amt' moval program- f feet lots, whi minimums, added Te�O forms of resider 1.• ' P til ordered city -square in variuos ro ran ip._ _. 4,1_1 By a 5-0 ental a L,ee Maida, �1�' is to support the p g w vote the coon have 60, a strong i -e r Councilwoman M ry assess�men r s �` s r•i r� : , rmers tG prepare an environm tett -environmental policy. ' �w.�3 pverla ordinance designed to Pro of the 1g82 and 1983. a�s overlay steep proponent- to two statements • lder explained that the city s e� � � : ��. -, .. � tree tog �`F wetlands, fl. woodlands, f xj � natural Maida took exception ended Hai eased tr program has t • `T' ..f~-� �`. and other specified rt which recomm year of r. � peak hill slopes to keep housing as ' highly successful. From a in im roper development. in the staff repo 4 features from P -z - set important that the council trees cut and removed - y ordinance may. ble as possible and refrain from than q,5©0 -. The just to declined to e future development of affords . w. th imum lot sizes j -the mm�l?er has steadily guidelines for r rtion of the lands increasing min . e neighborhoods• than 500'}in 19811 he said, •dP ayir F since a majo P° theoitY construction have create higher in t se ment of the chart with a steeply declining curve Teitiaining open for rtan g the sanitation prod which can afford to « nmental characteristics. There is an imb c Once ybu drop 'ease sp tial env for council house -buying Pu . .. should be ready costs for the amenities f the cutting and removal o ordinance sh earl fall. pa higher home en s e dead ees curve will jump up ,M. r �Y _p?i- Tit, tember or y a Y g rustic environm t, h said. trees)'t c .. review by September environmental of pan opens to see Maplewood •m a the next year,• he said. ends` - s Y •wx. Action -. on originate • in I would hate _ One of ,aider s recomm dev�loprnent policy orig oration .type situation, ` assess indiv council requested that reverse discrimination � tha t the city February when the cou proposed - e possibility of she said• t a city survey of homeowners Ior 100 percent of the V y�:,.:x --,city staff �dy to zoning Maida also noted tha �' n Road cos on their property. • removal s . J establishing residential-esta • :� a _� =, - lot sizes from - residents south of Lower rt for larger other suggested that the council ap districts, wvitb .inuumurn read support oth on all homeo� re feet, for the dilly indicated wi �pents there. Of 120 peoplea special levy sl . 2A 000 to 40,U( ton Road. The lot size requu'em ire 92 ex- a in household, to -�.: d .1 bower Afton a questionnaire, aver g g � . A: Ni ,.-- - .. ,open lan south in and responding th 1 -estate am. �Plannirig Commlesion and �°� - g royal of the residentia the program.. thori : both recom- pressed approval a ,000- uestione� .:-._.�.velo ent -. Au �' Forty-two favored John G�eavu q Rede P'm ; residential- zoning. that. -the study t minimums, while 25 favored Mayor ` mended the square -fee such a levy sliould?nly apply t0 el x a - - expanded to cover s9 24 ref erred 20,000. DeSpite the s °~ estate zoniri� - _ 30 000 and P residential oak diseases. trees?„ he r - A for r or ,all .- ort notdo'it f whole city viewed the matter, they public suppf ley s or Anderson ad - in 1 S As city staff re es tun , Maida l� the council 'ons besid zo g overla or- Councilman N . • :., `. tiT b-; ;, identified �. - other Opti • tlae environmental Y e can't discriminate against tre es�.ate zoning, including the vocating lit tool. `w } 4* td tial as a more workable po Y - that government pr resider and special durance A said, no . v L env'ironmeIItg °Tdinan tions �.:��'�ke should apply' 0. ll trees• - Develop ment regulations Kohl a the levy F s f la pmt ,Dev p housing develop- TURNING 'I'O E approved Bari tried to mak ; endin Of ' h g nimous y PFrO Ras recomm . n limiting � densitY it sensitive areas• area, council �` plans, to begin .;note .attractive Y to ._ R ': ; _ �mentsinenvironments Y roposal R.amse County s Pl ba •with ' be `rediA ��f ;° n ti • - - ' den zoning p . i r easement ° . Via.y Zrhe rest uisit , te the largest cost increases' acq s wetland _ ould landown to set up ' "I - �� t -particularly re AY, - builders while failing to >2 bete the. lake slid q '; roa ot for pT°sP�Ve despite filtration syste installation special levy aPP environmental fes es f of the ...� •r _� a �?-og;-aMI.- the it hwa 61 P -�is�a w 'thwbil p p e lot size requirements, Hig y forma o �of •land bens the city f Mal t . 11 the .. ' T y�' ;� of a pump, f other plants"to to deep trees something ci canhlude&,.,..-._ ti _ . : - ” �• us a .._. • to do s • p�Ianting of rata - nd chemicals _`w!� need argument whit ..- - the silt n rt NE the land to 40,000 absorb or ff . Funding - be added in a •IF YOi�g to carried in undwater or five years.. t4bat doeSD't say any ect, which will cov 31 acres, futile. the N a new borne # square fee trees he for the pr43 t�meS - W th the „-2 votes, on St,ration j has amt how many completed this = admin i the develop' •ter j{eII and could be comp ov eat.. - tree program was, w t e Reagan veto. bill,• w�h i't must save," �ubrlc Works Dom• from the f $ : ' :� ys ' victim of a peculiar app entirely 3tened to g, �-'� - - the water q'w�', federal s� _ coiuicil ' � rwirig � :�. - ���ry f erv�r a iders unnecessary , . .Haider told the 'ordinance Besides Imp- enha� pa - • go 11-14 ° : '` The environmental overlay y °� it is expeC 4 • �^ y _ ' X # V ;. A. W, r iimt 1 0 n resw Lo said. ed somewhat the most offective eti•• R ento's district has clang roved makes possible - ,4t a1 - , �. gym# -recently apPro o .. �-.. a ult of the to . The �- t res for Minnesota. - 2�.�._ _ _� :. r ;.. Stricting plan all ,� - ,.. ... - - - �:.....:,,+ still includes ^.h.4nderson SETTER HOMES FOR SETTER LIVING MARVIN H. ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ;TLily 198 2 8501 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLISS MINNESOTA 56420 t Mr.. John Creavu, Mayor .Maplewood City Hall 13`80 frost Avenue :aplewood, Minnesota 55109 Regarding; Land Preservation Ordinance r Dear Yi.�% Cxeavu: r• few— TELEPHONE 6e1-2661 l 1977 251h From: City gr. Referred To: ilrlayor & CouncilCl . E �. j r •. Cher l read with interest the article in the June 16, 1982 Maplewood Review., entitled 'Council Plans Land Preservation Ordinance' . I would like to re-emphasize to you the difficulty that home buyers are experiencing in attempting to buy homes with interest rates .where they have been for the past 12 month period . 1 do not f eel that we are going to see any sizable decrease in interest rates in the future and that current market rates are going to be something that we will have to live with from this }point on. With this in mind, the .difficulty in: .purchasing a home, I fear, will continue from this day forward. with that, 1 feel we all -must do everything that we possibly can to help create a situation where new people can buy a home in every community including Maplewood and not be priced out of a given area. Unfortunately, any time that you begin to :consider increasing mimimum lot sizes, it goes without saying, that the cost of the lot will increase dramatically as will the house. Therefore, I would heartily urge you to consider this subject closely and to ' not create a situation which is going to increase the requirement of lot sizes therefore increasing the cost of housing. We have not personally found a segment of the market which can or. will of ford to pay higher home costs for the amenities of open rustic environment. Obviously, there is an exception to every rule and there certainly are some very well to do people who perhaps can afford this. However, I would hope that we are more concerned about that average person rather than that person who can afford whatever they want. . 4 Attachment 2 Page 2 July 7, 1982 E Whenever a survey, is made for residents who already a y h ve thei. r housing, , the results always come out that the would refer large lots Y P g and . larger houses placed upon the undeveloped land around them or within their community. Such residents look at possible increased property values for their subject property which In many cases are not large lots. However, unfortunately, they do not concern themselves with other struggling homebuyers attempting to buy housing at today's P, g Y g y s .costs nor do they take the time to remember the struggle that they may have had to purchase the home they -presently live in. Many times such existing property owners. do not ' . g P p y realize the difference. in monthly housing expense from the time that they May ha `Te purch.a s ed their home. As an example: they may have purchased a very nice custom home 10 years ago at- a monthly cost of $200 to $300 per month. Wherein now the same exact home can easily cost $1,000 to $1,200 per month. In either situation the person already living in a home versus the person attempting to P g buy a home many times has the same income, however, as this example shows, it is then very difficult if not impossible for the ::person who did not buy that same home 10 years ago o to ualif Y for it today, q 1 would hope that we, as the residential industry, you, as public officials, and existing Maplewood residentwould a 11 share concern as to how people today can purchase new homes within our communities. I heartily ask your sincere consideration of this item. I will 11 greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak with you regarding this item at the appropriate time, Sincerely, `MARVIN H. ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Marlin D. Grant President JOG mg . 5 1 11 MEMO To Geoff Olson, City Planner Michael McGuire, City Manager From: Patrick J. Kelly, Co -City Attorney Date: August 21, 1989 - Re: monitorfimu Minnesota Statute §46235,5,. Subd. 4 allows and authorizes interim ordinances. If a city is conducting stndles, has authorized a study, or is in the process of adoptingor amendinga :comprehensive plan, the city council may adopt an interim ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction. The interim ordinance may regulate, restrict, or prohibit any use, development, or subdivision for a period not to exceed one year from the date it takes effect. The city may extend it for additioiJ'a,l pciloU's a; the council may deem appropriate, not exceeding a total additional period. of .18 months. No interim ordinance may , haltdelay, or impede a subdivision which Y P has had preliminary approval prior to the effective date of the interim ordinance. It should be noted that interim ordinances are not subject to the procedural or extraordinary vote J P rY requirements applicable to other zoning ordinances. Cities may find it desirable during the preparation of a zoning ordinance to adopt an "interim or stop gap ordinance to preserve the status quo of the city pending the adoption of the comprehensive zoning ordinance. Because zoning studies are time consuming, the interim ordinance can maintain some land use planning while the city is in the process of adopting P g the ordinance. To support the validity of an interim land use control ordinance, a city should consider the following suggestions when drafting the ordinance: .1) The closer the procedure complies with requirements for a permanent zoning ordinance, the more likely a court will validate an interim ordinance. This means the city should use available land use information, use the planning commission, follow notice and hearing procedures, and adopt the ordinance by 2/3 of all council members. 2) In a preamble or elsewhere, the ordinance should set out the circumstances requiring the interim procedure and show that it is part of a continuing planning effort that will result as soon as possible in the permanent ordinance. 3) The more provisions of th includes, the more likely ordinance should establish provide the regulations tha te permanent ordinance that the interim ordinance the courts will sustain it. This means that the at least a minimum number of use districts and are applied to each. 6 Attachment 3 MEMO Page Two August 21, 1.989 Courts have held a valid moratorium based on the following: 1) Enacted good faith without discrimination; 2) Limited duration; 3) Study. proceeds properly; 4) Ordinance expeditiously adopted. The courts will balance and weigh consideration as to whether or not the landowner has substantially changed his position in reliance on the existing ordinance and to whether or not. the municipality has acted in good faith or has discriminated against a particular property owner. CONCLUSION Again, the courts will look at the following: 1) The closer the procedure complies with requirements for a permanent zoning ordinance, the more likely a court will validate an interim ordinance. 2) To proceed correctly the city should use available land use information, use the planning commission, follow notice and hearing procedures, adopt the ordinance by 2/3 vote of all council members. SUGGESTION Questions of Planning: 1) Does estate zoning accomplish the preservation of trees? 2) Is the enforcement of tree preservation feasible? 3) Is the preservation of trees a problem in other areas and zones in the city? 4) Will an environmental ordinance be easier to enforce and regulate tree preservation throughout the city? 7 AGENDA ITEM H-3 H-3. Reconsideration of Hillwood Oaks No. 2 An oral presentation will be presented at the meeting by Community Development Director Geoff Olson. AGENDA ITEM -7 7 / MEMORANDUM Action by Council:; Endorsed TO: City Manager Mod.ifie8 ReJ ected FROM:, Assistant City Engineer Date ft SUBJECT: T . H . 36, Atlantic to T.H. 120 Reconstruct ion --Approve Plans DATE . September 1B, 19B9 Introduction Plans and spec i f i cat i ons for this project have been received from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Approval of the .plans is requested by MnDOT . A resolution of approval, drafted by MnDOT , is attached . Background The pl ans will be presented at the. counc i 1 meeting for review., The major el ements are mil 1 i ng and overl ay of the surf acing and complete reconstruction and widening of the White Bear AvenUe bridge. During reconstruction of the bridge, traff is on T .H. 36 I it l be restricted to a single lane in each direction. The east bound exit and entrance ramps for White Bear Avenue -will be o l ' osed with a detour on Hazelwood to Cope to White Bear and .-Eleventh Avenue to McKnight Roads A number of unauthorized entrances/ex its will be permanently closed. The entrance/exit at Ariel Street will also be- closed Reconstruction of ramps and construction of storm sewer and curb and gutter on the north side of the Castle frontage road is also proposed. pec omme n d at i on It is recommended that the plans be approved. BAI jw Attachment RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation for the St ate o -f Minnesota has prepared: plans., special pr,ov i s i ons , and spec i f i cat i ons f or the improvement of Trunk Highway No . 1118 , renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 36, within the corporate .l i m i t s of the City of Maplewood and North St. P'au l , from Atlantic Street to east corporate limits; and seeks the approval thereof NOW, THEN, BE IT RESOLVED that said plans and special provisions for the improvement of said trunk highway, within said corporate limits of the. c Ity, be and hereby are Iapproved, :Including the elevations and grades as shown, and consent is hereby given to any and all changes in grade occasioned by said construction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city does hereby agree to require the parking of all veh.icl es , if such parking is permitted within the corporate limits of said city on said trunk highway, to be parallel With the curb adjacent to the highway, and at least 20 feet from any crosswalks on all public street s intersecting said trunk highway. TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM_��__��^ AGENDA REPORT City Manager Assistant City Engineer Rosel awn' Avenue, T.H. 49 to Jackson Street Project 87-01, Schedule Public Hearing Action by Counoll*oj Endormed��.�~~�~�. ` Rei emtet��.�__�� Date ' ' .DATE: September 19, 1989 IntrodLtction A -r' feasibility . �f the report (design memorandum) prepared by tn- --'sultantengineer retained by ��amsey County for this sa ac e Thisprprojecti tt h d This agenda report represents proposed 'fi'�ncin��F-±h� city's share ths�estimated project costs. Aresolution to schedule a public hearing i h' consultant engineer was given authorizationby Ramsey County ' The quite detailed set of preliminary plans, which are to prepare a qu ' --- -- d date of the � currently' ' available for review. By the propose _ u�hearin- a final set of plans should be available for public y, '' ' approvals ` ` 'Tha proposed improvements include a 40 -foot wide bituminous n t" No roadway with concrete curb and gutter and bridge replaceme �h proposed bridge ' sidewalk is proposed at this time. However, e prop ' �at 44-fo�twide street plus a 'would be built to accommodate a , ' sidewalk- on the north side-. The boulevard would be graded to accommodate a � d t future five-foot wide concrete �idewalk, It is dt~ sand n� stripe the roadway as no parking on either `p`"�"=�th 2 foot 1 -ane in each direction and an eight -foot wide =^~=-~� '�� l- — r each side. The provision of a striped no parking �''~�- �ll ll for reasonable bbicycle and pedestrian use o+ the roadway at this ti �hould��r wz aow It is proposed ex d t extend a 12 inch water line from the Little Canada feeder main just easto e f the Soo Line tracks to Rice Street. Services would be provided as requested, or as ' apparently needed for future development" Atthis time, the issues that are not satisfactorily resolved involve the slope easement on the water utility property necessary to widen the road and raise the grade on the road (for the Soo Line tracks) A section of modular 'clearance over . -- - d t maintain the ' precast concrete block retaining wall is propose o ' spent lime sludge lagoon entrance drive and allow a screening tree planting area" An agreement with the water utility has not Project 87�01 2 September 19, 1989 been reached concerning acquisition of right-of-way and/or slope easements and replacement of trees that must be removed for the slope easement and retaining wall., The cost estimates do not � include costs for tree planting or a significant amount for right -o+ -way onoquisition. If the water utility refuses to provide trees in the planting area on top of the proposed retaining wall or replacement trees in the slope fill areas, then a significant addition in project costs would be necessary. Staff members of the water utility have indicated that they perceive the existing trees on Roselawn as an adequate screen for the spent lime sludge lagoons. In the event that tree planting costs are added to the project,, Maplewood would pay75 percent of these costs according to Ramsey ' County cost participation policy. If it is necessary to purchase or condemn right-of-way then Maplewood incurs all costs according _ to Ramsey County cost participation policy. %f the issue is circumvented by the construction of additional retaining wall with vehicle and pedestrian barriers, then Maplewood would also pay 75 percent of the additional costs. The potential for increasing the project cost due to these issues does not affect proposed assessments. A summary of proposed 'assessments is attached. Proposed assessments are based on standard policy. Residential properties would be assessed $1125 and $500 each lot for street and storm sewer, respectively. _ Commercial and other non -RL or RM properties would be assessed at .$15/front foot and $0.10/square foot for street and storm sewer, ' re/specwe ti ly. Water Wat main assessment is proposed at $30 per front foot. The proposed water main assessment would recover the projected costs of extensionn of trunk water main to Rice Street. .The costs of water and sewer service stubs would be fully ' recovered through assessments to the benefited property. A summary of current estimated -costs and local share financing is given in the following table: ESTIMATED CITY COSTS AND PROPOSED FINANCING Project Assessment MSA Off System Gen.Oblig. Street $300,700 $ 65,000 $235,700 - Storm Sewer 15,000 5,000 - $10,000 Water Main 49»000 49,000 Service Stubs 22, 000 ������� _-- Total $386,700 $141,000 $235,700 :r.10,000 *Project cost is estimated construction cost with 25 percent for engineering and administration (18 percent Ramsey County and seven percent Maplewood). Project 7-01 3 September 19 , .1989 Recommendation It is recommended that the council adopt the . attached reso*1 ut i on that sets a pubs is hearing for this project. BAI jc Attachments RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, the c i ty engineer for the City of Maplewood has been authorized and directed to prepare a report with reference to the improvement of Rose l awn Avenue from Rice Street ( T . H . 49 ) to Jackson Street, City Project 87-01., by construction of roadway with concrete curb and gutter, bridge, storm sewer, water main, and appurtenances, and WHEREAS, the said city engineer has prepared the aforesaid report for the improvement herein described: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD , MINNESOTA, as follows 1. The report of the city engineer advising this council that the proposed improvement on Rosel awn Avenue from Rice Street (T.H. 49) to Jackson Street, City Project 87-01, by construction of roadway .with concrete curb and gutter., bridge, storm sewer, water main, and appurtenances, is feasible and should best be made as proposed, is hereby received. 2a The council will consider the aforesaid improvement in accordance with the reports and the assessment of benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement according to MSA Chapter 429 , at an estimated. total cost of the improvement of $970,00040 3. A public hearing will be held in the council chambers of the city hall at 1830 East County Road 8 on Monday, the 23rd day of October, 1989, at 7 p.m. to consider said improvement. The city clerk shall give mailed and published notice of said hearing and improvement as required by 1 aw . DM21802 - STATE OF MINNESOTA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COUNTY DE RAMSEY i DEP.&RTHENT of PUBLIC WORKS . Y DESIGN, MEMORANDUM for Roselawn Avenue (CSAM 26) from Rice Street to .45 mile east of Rice Street in Maplewood Proposed Improvement - Replace Bridge 6629 over Soo Line Railroad Track; F reconstruct Roselawn Avenue between . Rice Street and .45 mile east of Rice Street State Project: S.P. 62-626-03, M.S.A.P. 138-020-06 Minnesota Project: BROS 9062 ) I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly s t Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. F i i Marvin L. Sorva la Yi r � - 2-A - � Reg. No. Date; _ - 13380 DM21802 F t f TABLE OF CONTENTS } INTRODUCTION PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITY F DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS i PROJECT STAGING ESTIMATED COSTS & FUNDING SOURCES ALTERN.A.TE CONSTRUCTION OPTIONS - ROAD ALTERNATE CONSTRUCTION OPTIONS BRIDGE ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, RECOMMENDATIONS # ILLUSTRATIONS 3 r Figure 1 - Project Plan and Profile Map • _ Typical Section - Road Figure 2 Proposed Figure 3 - Proposed Typical Section - Bridge R sY r Page 1 . DM21802 Page No. 1. 2. 2. 2. 4 8. 8. 10. 10. 11. 11. 1 1 4 i S f DESIGN MEMORANDUM ROSELAWN AVENUE FROM RICE STREET TO .45 MILE EAST OF RICE STREET f s COUNTY OF RAMSEY { INTRODUCTION This Design Memorandum for Roselawn Avenue from Rice Street (T.H. 49) to .45 mUe� east of Rise Street has been prepared and submitted in accordance with the approved Highway Project Development Process by Ramsey County Public Works Department, PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The proposed project is Roselawn Avenue (CSAR 26) from Rice Street (T.H. u 49). to .45 mile east of Rice Street. The project is located in the City of Maplewood and Is .45 smile in length. The location is illustrated in Figure 1, k! �I r Project Plan & Profile Map* DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITY Roselawn Avenue is currentlya two lane, 30 foot wide, undivided road. S s� i Parking is not prohibited on the road, although the width does not provide sufficient space for parking on the paved surface. The surface of the road is bituminous. There are no pedestrian or bicycle facilities along the road. Right-of-way width varies from 63 to 120 feet. The 1987 average daily d s traffic (ADT) count on Roselawn Avenue from Rice Street to Jackson Street was I � . 3300The projected.ADT for 2007 is 5300. Heavy commercial vehicles are P ro Page 2 DM21802 seven percent of the current ADT. Traffic counts were conducted by Ramsey County Pub-lic Works Department. Bridge No. 662.9-, located 0,2 mile east of Rice Street, -was reconstructed in 1950 and carries traffic on. Roselawn Avenue over a Soo Line Railroad Company track. It consists of seven steel beam spans supported on a timber structure on a 20 degree skew. Deck width (out to out) is 31.2 feet and length is 123.5 feet. There are no sidewalk provisions on the bridge. The vertical clearance between the track and the underside of the bridge is 23 feet. S ial.s have indicated this track will continue to be used. Due to the poor condition of the steel beams of the bridge, a maximum five ton gross load restriction is currontly in effect. Truck and bus traffic must use alternate routes between Rice Street and I -35E. The posted speed limit on Roselawn Avenue is 30 miles per hour. The terrain is rolling. Land use adjacent to Roselawn Avenue is St. Paul Water Utility, Soo Line Railroad Company, commercial areas at the intersection of Roselawn. Avenue at Rice Street and single family residences east of the bridge. The principal land owner along the segment, St. Paul Water Utility, has a treatment plant on the south side of Roselawn Avenue. Lime sludge from the water treatment operation is pumped to an area north of Roselawn Avenue to stilling basins. A service road used by trucks and equipment extracting lime from the stilling basins is adjacent to and parallel with Roselawn Avenue. (Figure 1). On the south side of Roselawn Avenue, a massive earth reinforced concrete water reservoir is, located adjacent to Roselawn Avenue Two major water supply lines (90 inch conduits) pass beneath Roselawn Avenue at approximate right angles just east of the existing bridge* DM21802 Page 3 . DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT The existing bridge (No. 6629) on Roselawn Avenue east of Rice Street will be replaced. with a new, three span structure (No. 62559 ) to continue the grade separation between the railroad track and Roselawn Avenue. The length of the bridge is approximately 160 feet and the roadway width is 44 feet. A 6 foot wide sidewalk will be constructed on the north side. A type J concrete railing and a two rail pipe railing will be constructed on the south side A concrete parapet and pipe railing will be constructed on the north side of the bridge. (Figure 3 ) The superstructureof the bridge will consist of 36 inch prestressed con- crete beams and a 9 inch thick reinforced concrete deck. The structural ca - P Y acit will be HS25. Vertical clearance under the bridge will be 23 feet minimum and horizontal clearance from the centerline of track will be 25 feet to eliminate the need for crash walls on the piers Due to the close proximity of the two 90 inch St. Paul water conduits, au ered piles will be used to minimize disturbance to these conduits. The g piles will be 14 inch diameter, concrete filled piles approximately 60 feet deep designed for 60 ton capacity. The road east and west of the bridge will be 40 feet wide, with a 12 foot wide travel el lane a six foot wide reaction lane and B624 concrete curb and .gutter. The boulevard on the north side will be 13 feet wide. This provides for a 6.5 foot grassy area behind the curb, a future 5 foot concrete sidewalk and 1.5 feet at the top for rounding. The south boulevard will be grass and 6.5 feet wide. (Figure 2)* Side slopes vary from 3 horizontal to 1 vertical in most areas, to 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical in areas of large fills. Boulevard slopes are at 2 Page 4 . DM21802 I t t ' percent towards the new curb and gutter. The pavement section will be parabolic in shape with the centerline elevation being 0.48 feet higher than the gutter elevation on each side . A minimum of two feet will be provided between the face of curb and fixed obstructions such as utility poles, road signs,. or fire hydrants* ;= z Avenue approaches Rice Street, it will be widened to accom- As Roselawn pp right. At the Rice Street intersection, Roselawn modate vehicles turning g i Avenue will be 46 feet wide, consisting of two 12 foot wide. travel lanes, one P 32 foot wide right turn lane on the north side of Roselawn Avenue, a six foot g: wide reaction space on the south side of Roselawn Avenue and two foot wide s s gutters on each side of the road. The taper will be at 15 to 1 and run from .Station Thirty-five foot radii will tie into existing curb on Z+10 to 3+00. y Street. An existing chain link fence, located on the the east side of Rice g • Roselawn at Rice Street, will be removed south side from the public right - de o f Ro s of -way and placed on private property. The eastern terminus of the project is Jackson Street. Permanent con- • between Rice Street and 300 feet east of Beaumont struction will occur s Street. From this point, Roselawn will taper from 40 feet wide to the exist- s ing 34 foot width at the west side of Jackson Street* Bituminous curb will be z 's tem section to better convey surface runoff. Utilized in thi temporary desi n rade for Roselawn Avenue is an average of 2 feet higher than The g g E and 3.5 feet higher at the bridge. This raise will help flatten out existing g F� driveway grades at the east end of the project and is necessary at the bridge s insure proper clearance. Grades match existing pavements over the railroad to p p � at both Rice Street and Jackson Street. Page 5 . DM21802 z i Xu u Parking will be prohibited on the south side of Roselawn Avenue between Rice Street and Beaumont Street. On the north side of Roselawn Avenue parking will beP rohibited from Rice Street to approximately 300 feet east of Beaumont Street, the eastern terminus of the project. To avoid costly mitigation of damages, assure the structural integrity of the earth reinforced concrete water reservoir, and provide adequate boulevard widths, the road centerline will be shifted six feet to the north between sta- tions, 7+00 to 11+00 and 16+00 to 20+00. This will result in the need to con- st y YP con- struct a keystone type retaining wall along the south side of the sludge basin service road. The wall will be approximately 270 feet long and average 10 feet in height. Placement will be at 45 feet north of the street centerline, or 6 feet south of the service road. This will result in a 12 foot wide flat north of the property line where trees are proposed to be planted. The area P P Y new tree line will re lace the trees lost due to construction and act as a screen for the line sludge basins. Discussions with St. Paul Water Utility arencessay e to work out funding of these improvements. The proposed center- line of construction will thatch the existing centerline at the Rice Street intersection and in the temporary construction portion at the project's east- erly terminus. Because of the road shift -at the middle of the project, six feet of addi- tional right-ofy -wa will need to be acquired along the north side of Roselawn Avenue. The property, located between Soo Line Railroad and Beaumont Street, is owned by St. Paul Water Utility. Page 6 DM21802 The design section for Roselawn Avenue will consist of 1.5 inches of 2341 modified b g bituminous wearing course, 2 inches of 2331 bituminous binder course, 3.5 inches of 2331 bituminous base course, 7 inches of Class 5 aggregate base, and a e depth of select ranular borrow. Granular borrow varies from 6 variabT p 8 inches at Rice Street to 4.5 feet at the Soo Line bridge. Design speed will.,be 40 miles per hour based on stopping sight distance g for 3.5 feet height of eye and 0.5 feet height of object. The subgrade d to be 17 and the ten ton design sigma N20 is 3469000. R -value was determine Based on these numbers the required granular equivalent is 21 inches for .Q Roselawn Avenue. The design section detailed in the previous paragraph has a ual to 21.375 inches which exceeds the required. granular equivalent aq No -new lighting is proposed an Roselawn Avenue. Existing lighting located on wooden poles will be retained. Some poles will require relocation due to widening of the street. Rice Street is proposed by. Mn/DOT in 1990, the same time Improvement to Ri P P d. Mn laps to construct new concrete curb and Roselawn Avenue is schedule DOT plans gutter with 35 foot • radii at Roselawn and then overlay the entire roadway. Storm sewer will be constructed on the west side of Rice Street with new catch basinsbuilt and a pipe stubbed to the east to pick up Roselawn storm drain - culvert under Roselawn at Rice Street will be re - age. The existing 15 inch moved by Mn/DOT and di along filled aloe the east side. A traffic signal will also be installed at the intersection. Page 7 . DM21802 PROPOSED UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS Storm sewer is proposed as part of the Roselawn Avenue Improvements. Storm water flows east and we s t of the high point at Beaumont Street* Catch • therefore necessary at Jackson Street, on the east side basins and piping are Y the Soo Line Railroad at Rice Street. Pipe. sizes vary from 15 inch of' diameter for catch basin leads to 18 inch for the outlet on the east side of thetracks. Also, a 24 inch and 36 inch culvert under Roselawn will. need to . be extended due to widening of the road. _ Existing water main in Roselawn Avenue consists of 12 inch pipe f rom east of the Soo Line Railroad to Jackson Street. To facilitate future development west of she y P tracks,the Cit of Maplewood proposes to extend 12 inch water main along the north side of Roselawn to Rice Street. The pipe will be stubbed north and south at Rice to allow future connection without disruption .to Roselawn Avenue. Water services will be provided to businesses. PROJECT STAGING The r upgrading of Roselawn Avenue will involve several stages of construc- • e street will receive new water main, storm tion. Since th sewer, pavement, and a bridge at the Soo Line Railroad, complete closure of the street to thru traffic will be necessary* The first step will be to remove the existing bituminous pavement from the roadway. - Water main and storm sewer construction can then begin on either end of the project, depending on depths. Some filling may be necessary to con- struct storm sewer near id a since design grades are the bridge g as much as 3.5 feet higher than existing* Page 8 . DM21802 y Access must be maintained at: all. times to individuals living at the east endof the project and to the Water Utility Purification Plant located just . '� east of the bridge. Trucks extracting lime from the sludge basins must be allowed access at all times* Once all utilities have been installed, including necessary gas, tele- phone and cable TV reP lacement, final street grading can take place. i in and stockpiling of existing topsoil from the boulevards is required. Str p g P g grubbing Clearing and rubbin of trees and brush within the slope limits can be accomplished at the same time. Because the street is beingwidened and raised, substantial quantities of necessary. Select ranular borrow material will be utilized in fill will be n . granular the areas directly beneath the driven roadway. In the boulevards and side slopes, common borrow material (i.e., silty sands, clayey sands) will be used. After proper and complete compacting of the subgrade, aggregate base mate - P P p real can be laced. This would be followed by concrete curb and gutter, final grading aggregate adin of the a re ate base, and placement of the three bituminous layers. Sodding of disturbed residential boulevards and seeding all other areas p P would take lace. Repairing driveways and stripping the new roadway pavement . would be necessary along lon with placement of signs along the route. Existing chain link fencing and vehicular gates would be replaced in their original locations. DM21802 Page 9 . ESTIMATED_ COSTS` AND FUNDING SOURCES The work proposed is estimated to cost $970,000. The costs are divided as follows State Federal Transpor- Bridge tation County Replace- Bridge State Aid Total went Bonding _Highway Maplewood Bridge removal. $ 209000 $ 209000 Construct Bridge with Sidewalk on one side 3809000 $3049000 $769000 Construct Roadway 498,000 214,100 $2839900 Storm Sewer 72 000 � � - 58,000 14:000 TOTAL ...... ... $ 974 000 $3049000 $76,000 $2929100 $2979900 This estimate is based on federal bridge replacement funds, county state • highway funds, state transportation funds aid p and Ramsey County's. policy for cost participation. Estimated year of construction is 1990. 4 i ALTERNATE CONSTRUCTION OPTIONS - ROAD 1 An alternate construction option for the road is its repair. The subgrade z1 of the road is not adequate, there are drainage problems and the width of the ji .I i road would be narrower than county state -aid standards specify. Repair of the 1 Y ' overlay would be only ashort -term measure to improve the pave - road with an y � meet surface. The overlay would not correct drainage or width deficiencies on L this section of Roselaw. Avenue. For these reasons, repair of the road has been rejected from further consideration. Page 10. DM21802 r i s L Y it would be possible to reconstruct Roselawn Avenue to a width other than 40 feet. A wider road, of four travel lanes, is not required to accommodate the anticipated volume of traffic on Roselawn Avenue. A wider road to accom- modatearkin on both sides was -considered unnecessary. A road 36 feet wide �' g with two 12 foot wide travel lanes, an eight foot wide parking lane on one side and two foot wide gutters on each side could be constructed. This option would not, however, accommodate two directional bicycle travel as would the 40 foot alternative. Construction of a detached bicycle path would require in addition to that proposed. ALTERNATE CONSTRUCTION OPTIONS BRIDGE Theg rade separation of vehicle users and trains is desirable to be main- tained at this location. The option of rehabilitating the existing bridge is notP ractical. Therefore, replacing it is the best alternative. ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Advantages of this improvement project are many. The most important will be a wider, safer roadway for the traveling public. The 6 foot reaction lane on either side will act as bike paths and allow cars to pull over in an emer- gency enc situation. The added boulevard width on the north will accommodate a future concrete sidewalk for pedestrian traffic. The grade raise will flatten out steep driveway slopes at the east end of the project. At Rice Street, the new cur pavement, avement, g and right turn lane will match the improvements proposed b DOT. The new bridge over the Soo Line Railroad will be wider and cap- . y Mn/DOT, Page 11. DM21802 V able of supporting truck and bus traffic. New concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer will handle storm water runoff more efficiently,, thereby elim- mating ditches and swales. The extension of water main to Rice Street will .provide for future needs as development in the area increases* of the proposed project are the costs of all the improve - Disadvantage ments . Estunateci costs are included in this report. Also, a substantial number of trees will be cleared due to raising and widening the road. The two g driveway entrances to the lime sludge basins will become steeper due to the improvement. Some routine maintenance of the proposed keystone retaining wall along the sludge basin service road will be necessary. Because the advantagesof the project far outweigh the disadvantages, it is .recommended the 'improvements be done as detailed in this report. The main .reason being replacement of. the deficient bridge with a structurally sound • carrying truck, bus, and firefighting vehicles. Also, the bridge capable of c y g pavement of Roselawn is in poor condition and in need of adequate drainage ,. provisions* DM21802 Page 12. ... �.. �. •.,- - ,.ti-�w•ane sr::+�^. "� -+a. •r-,�ar.�"y �tyrr+..�cw`!'^.'C• +r'•'.N,1�%7C"?'�i; '..—T t*1 R' *y yR�,,'.7".tte,.b�z,"•_'..^�w!:Y.Y'T�^ ;'^.'.7a•r-r ;tc.'?';'^,• :s•gm^; •L,e•"'s,°.QL"^a a..•.•a1-.J �•ti^fie; � ."9�.C'• :""c"i":i �•...•.. •9!%TM,�"'•p'^.-,y!�,_•tir'. ..aw r.w_ .a - aea: ?!, ,,. �n.t.,. *+T•.s,r.• ,.r ..r..�w"�'gs!C+eti.,.^..•:R!'w'!7!i•. r•t t'`� _ .. ...lt�7R,<. ;:. �,,:1�., ^19' 9 � r *• moi• - , -r - ;...+�`'��..c.,-.�..s:7rR•"°7�'v'r�'?r-y_:�,x;•.R.s:T+:' -„ :.. _ _.., . c S . r, r-.•.._ ..•� . +:t° :.,.,, �-..� :sem _. ••• _ _ N NEW PRESTRESSED Q� CONCRETE BRWE �• Sto 8+63 to Sto. 9+95 p PROPOSED KEMONE RETAIN M b Z 1MATERi tAiN UYE SLUDGE %ALL . 4w v 6wo Ape PC ' ai. is Qom' Is �a zj BI s s nt s a s / t i 1/ : • t� � ..a.. J '_' 1` I i' f• r ~ w a ounlrv�t4oat`=/ PROPOSED O + + • Z }}...... 0 O .10 cod STORY SEWER O U v� STRSSE:2 END CONSTR UCTM BECIN CONSTRUCTIN 118624 CONCRETE PROPOSED Q Sta. 23+75 U S Ste. O+S CURB k (ATTER VAT ( s0' f — F) 0 to m (� Enptn•Ka i Arcntl•cta Boneatroo Roaene Anderltk b Aeaoclatea SL Pau[ Minnesota Date: Jan. 1989 Comm. 21802 Fig . N O . z pa gc /�v'�.r�n o. v}. v p,• �o�'''y�s•111 oN,� OV Of.i Oci 8.Z 4i� �o'}�r� 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (� Enptn•Ka i Arcntl•cta Boneatroo Roaene Anderltk b Aeaoclatea SL Pau[ Minnesota Date: Jan. 1989 Comm. 21802 Fig . N O . PIPE RAILING CONCRETE PkRAPE7. 36" P RLES7 R E SS, E D CONCREINE BE -AMS 2'-4„ 52'-8" 4 SPACES ® 10'-2 1/2 40'-10" END SPANS SECTION OF FINISHED. BRIDGE FLOOR SCALE 0 51 ROSELAWN AVENUE Rice St. to Jackson St. Street Improvements PIPE RAILING CONCRETE RAILING TYPE J 29 Sonestroo Enginows & Architects Rosene Anderlik d Associates SL PlsA Minn000ta Date: JAN. 1989 Fig. No. 3 Comm. 2'81.'2 LITTLE CANADA BELMON SKILLMI GENERAL ASSESSMENT AREA ASSESSMENT AREA ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJo87-01 RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. SCALE N/A MT: V aoo M A 31 • 7 Z • 't .*'moi ASSESSMENT AREA S ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJ,87-01 = 400' RICE ST. (T -H 49) TO JACKSON ST. v IV Z4i B. of W. C. � r Q 0 r ♦ f `�� / /4) 1 V • / oy FN 72 14o 1 r � � i Cp 8 r / (9) 17 40) S I - j a 44 2' �ea.2oa.c.. .• •�M Ido / - Oz)12-3) (70) - ofs 0 dop do, ` to � ,r I -/V • 33 3 r G-71.DO bo •Q�Q 18=_29r22-24 ASSESSMENT AREA ROSELAWN AVENUE. PROJ. 87-01 RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. SCALE 1" = 400' D -�► -� .�L 33 �33 42 ' ,. s�93. ..._ •. ee i. a�`_ r 'n,ir was ASSESSMENT AREA SCALE ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJ. 87 -01 Cit - 4 0 0' RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. , 1 6 G f,%� �4A O 12Z»o70 4 -24 --So c . . 61 ZZ c so (3S) to . S .19 a c PuM p�NG VJ 401 -r (10. 50 city of st .Paul 1 ru � (33) - - 233' _.' If? 4 • 1210 t (Z 6) ���• Y i 4- Z • l J - -•-_ 551.88. .... � Cosa. 63 6 18�29...�.22......31 -2 (3 0) = W oa, . _._... CD • i 9 `V � 1 of � N - tOr{ AL 3.`JZ ' 0 (34) Q � • 1 �+ p 6 Q. was ASSESSMENT AREA SCALE ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJ. 87 -01 Cit - 4 0 0' RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. , FEN70N AV F, f,%� �4A O 12Z»o70 4 -24 --So c . . 61 ZZ c so (3S) to . S .19 a c PuM p�NG -r (10. 50 city of st .Paul 1 ru � (33) - - 233' _.' If? 4 • 1210 ���• Y i 4- • l J - � 1 r ul 54 ac • 13 (00 /8f 18�29...�.22......31 was ASSESSMENT AREA SCALE ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJ. 87 -01 Cit - 4 0 0' RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. , 57 0 IT 1 r J16 104 °t. -jG-E R�%.: 0 ' ! pA- 34 -4— (11) 4fe 7 ' •t'' ,' 1 t 1 ` I Z,4 .1 1 = • Z..�`-'--t—tt i► �.._.-.! vac. v 49 Z30 -L7 'A or 0 j _ • 1401 Z. Alf t ! •• "1 � q i , _� Q • I , -' r Q. Lj , ,0 14 13 0 ;�+g �l )C i ' •� 1 ° N e 1O 1 I 12 13 14 1r .. ,- ; f _ I . 7 I-* 1.1 de 1 4o v. J _ Ar y . J • it r 9 , "_L7_ __t ..: . ; - s - i �e f �},,.►c ,- c -,. • 's - 7 1 0�8 ,Z 4.1-5 '� 0 11 • 4«7 �o ac ••�'1 i�Va7L s+► •.{ • S � 43 01t(a ;�'O 3 � ! t � L �' f ,► 41. 17 Q 51 J ' " tIf f 14 '- 9 7 = Z P • S ' •' �3 I' Z o ; t ' R t •t 2 LZ N 21 �' '. z /3 i � • � Z �.m Ls 14 71 = 30. _ �z 3) - .J /f 31 - Qt�ttrQ 18tett•29� 2 t ASSESSMENT AREA ROSELAWN AVENUE PROJ. 87-01 RICE ST. (TH 49) TO JACKSON ST. SCALE 1" = 400' PAGE I OF 2 D/P NO. $1,125.000 `� � 09-19-1989 PROJECT NO. 87-01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON EA. = **$141010.00 PROJECT SUMMARY UNIT AT **$500.000 SEC -1 4 PARCELS ASSESSED *******796.000 AT ***$30.000 ITEM ' QUANTITY' PER EACH RATE , $19400.000 ASSESSMENT ` STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********0" 000 UNIT AT $19125,000 EA" ' ' *******$0100 STREET -COMMERCIAL *******848.000 Fe Fe AT ***$15.000 EA. = **$121720.00 STORM SEWER *********0.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = *******$0.00 WATER MAIN *******848.000 F.F. AT ***$'0.000 EA. = **$25,440.00 WATER SERVICE -6" EACH AT $11400.000 EA. = ***$11400.00 WATER GERVICE-211 EACH AT $19500.000 EA. = ***$1,500.00 .SEWER SERVICE -611 *********00000 EACH AT $21500"000 EA" SEC~ 5 PARCELS ASSESSED ` ITEM ` QUANTITY PER RATE ` ASSESSMENT ' ST` RESIDENTIAL *********3"000 UNIT A $1,125,000 EA" ***$3v375.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *****11159"000 ` F"F" AT ***$15"000 EA" **$1716-85"OO STORM SEWER ~000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = ***$1,500~OO WATER MAIN *********0.000 FR Fe AT ***$30.600 EA. = *******$0.00 WATER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $11400.000 EA. = *******$0.00 WATER SERVICE -2" EACH AT $19500.000 EA. = **,*****$@00 SEWER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $2,500.000 EA. .SEC -18 -T -29-R-22-00-31 8 PARCELS ASSESSED ' QUANTITY .PER RATE ASSESSMENT STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********7.000 UNIT AT $11125,600 EA. = ***$7,875.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *******650.NOO Fe Fe AT ***$15.000 EA. ***$99750.00 STORM SEWER *********7.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = ***$31,500.00 WATER MAIN *********0.000 FF, AT ***$30.000 EA. = *******$0.00 WATER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $19400.000 EA. = *******$0.00 WATER SERVICE -2" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,500.000 EA. = *******$0.N0 SEWER SERVICE -611 *********00000 EACH AT $21500"000 EA" STREET -RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -6" WATER SERVICE -2" SEWER SERVICE -6" 5 PARCELS ASSESSED QUANTITY ASSESSMENT *********0.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA.=**��*$0.� *******934.O00 F.F. AT ***$15.000 EA. = **$141010.00 *********0.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = *******$0.00 *******796.000 F.F. AT ***$30.000 EA. = **$231880.00 *********4.000 EACH AT $19400.000 EA. = ***$5,600.00 *********4.000 EACH AT $1,500.000 EA. = ***$61000.00 *********3.000 EACH AT $2,500.000 EA, .= ***$71500.00 PAGE 2 OF 2 D/P No. 09--19--1989 PROJECT NO. 87-01 ROSELAWN—RICE TO JACKSON PROJECT SUMMARY GRAND TOTALS 22 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT .STREET—RESIDENTIAL 10.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. _**$1,11250.00 STREET --COMMERCIAL *****31591 a 000. F. F. AT ***$15.000 EA. _ **$539 865.00 .STORM SEWER ********10.0x0 UNIT_ AT **$500.000 EA. _ ***$59000m00 WATER . MAIN ***** 1, 644.000 F. F. AT ***$30.000 EA. = **$49,320,00 WATER SERVICE -611 EACH AT $1, 400.000 EA. =- ***$7, 000.00 WATER SERVICE -211 � �*****5.000 EACH AT $17500,000 EA. _ ***$7,500, 00. SEWER SERVICE -611 3.000 EACH AT $2, 500.000 EA.. = ***$7,500,00 TOTAL AMOUNT. ASSESSED FOR THIS PROJECT = **$141,1435,00 PROJECT NOO, 87-01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON D/P N0. COI. 5 COL 6 ITITY CHECK LIST 0.00 300.00 COL. 1) = STREET -RESIDENTIAL -UNIT 0.00 COL. 2) = STRET-COMMERCIAL - Fa F. 0.00 COL. 3) = STORM SEVER - UNIT ION 1.00 COL. 4) = NATER MAIN - F. F. 0.00 120.00 COL. 5) = WATER -SERVICE -6M .0.00 0.00 COL. 6) = WATER SERVICE -2" 328.00 0.00 COL. 7) = SEWER SERVICE -6' 0.00 8.00 PIN NO. CO. 1 COL 2 18-29-22-23-0004 0.00 300.00 18-29-22-23-0005 0.00 100.00 18-29-22-23-0006 0.00 120.00 18-29-22-23-00107 0.00 328.00 18-29-22-24-0001 0.00 122.00 18-29-22-24-0002 0.00 1037.00 18-29-22-244017 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-24-0018 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-24-0019 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0001 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0002. 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0003 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0004 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0005 1.00 8.00 18-29-22-31-0024 1.00 0.00 18-29--22-31-0025 1.00 0.00 18-29-22-31-0042 0.00 650.00 18-29-22-32-0001 0.00 126.00 18 -29 -22 -32 -►4 0.00 12.00 18-29-22-32-0008 0.00 168.00 18-29-22-32-0021 0.00 118.00 18-29-22-32-0025 0.00 510.00 GRAND TOTALS 10,00 3591.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAGE 1 OF 1 09-19-1989 COL 3 COL 4 COI. 5 COL 6 COL 7 0.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 ION 1.00 0.00 0.00 120.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.00 328.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0. 08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0100, 1.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1. oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1000 0.00 0. e0 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0, 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 168.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0. N 118.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 510.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 100 1644.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 D/P NOW ITEM STREET -RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE -211 SEWER SERVICE -6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT STREET -RESIDENTIAL STREET --COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE --6" WATER SERVICE -211 SEWER SERVICE -6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = STREET -RESIDENTIAL ST REET--COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE-211 SEWER SERVICE -611 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = STREET -RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL .STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE -2" SEDER SERVICE -611 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = PROJECT N0. 87--01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON ASSESSMENT ROLL QUANTITY PER wwwrM�O ��Ai�w UNIT AT F. F. AT UNIT AT F, F. AT EACH AT EACH AT EACH AT UNIT AT F. F. AT UNIT AT F. F. AT EACH AT EACH AT EACH AT UNIT AT F. F. AT UNIT AT F. F. AT EACH AT EACH AT EACH AT UNIT AT F. F. AT UNIT AT F. F. AT EACH AT EACH AT EACH AT RATE $15125,000 EA. ***$15,1000 EA. **$500.000 EA. ***$30.000 EA. $11400.000 EA. $19500,000 EA. = $25500,000 EA. $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15m000 EA. = **$500,000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = .$11400.000 EA. = $1,500.000 EA. - $2,500.000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA. ***$15. 000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. $1,500.000 EA. - $2,500.000 .000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15,000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. ***$30.000 EA. = $19400.000 EA. = $1,500.000 EA. = $2,500.000 EA. = PAGE 1 OF 6 09-19--1989 ASSESSMENT 18-29-22--23-0004 ********$0.00 ****$4, 500.00 ********$0.00 *.***$91000.00 ********$0.00 ********$0400 ********$0. 00 ***$131500.00 18-29-22-23-0005 ********$0.00 ****$11500,00 ****$3,000.00 ****$19400.00 ****$11500.00 ********$0.00 ****$7,400.00 18-29-22-23--0006 ********$0.00 ****$39 600. 00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ****$5,400.00 18-29-22-23-0007 ********$0. 00 ****$4,920.00 ********$0.00 ****$9,840.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ***$141760.00 PROJECT NO. 87-01 ROSELAWN—RICETB JACKSON ASSESSMENTROLL QUANTITY PER REET—RES I DENT IAL STREET—COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE -2" GEWERSERVICE-6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = *********14000 UNlT UNIT AT ` STREET—COMMERCIAL *******122.000 F.F. AT STORM SEWER ********»0~000 UNIT AT WATER MAIN *********0.000 F.F. AT WATER SERVICE -6" EACH AT ' WATERSERVICE-2" EACH AT SEWER SERVICE -611 EACH AT TOTAL ASSESSMENT = ' STREET—RESIDENTIAL *********0.000 UNIT AT ' STREET—COMMERCIAL *****11037.000 F.F. AT STORM SEWER *********0.000 UNIT AT WATER MAIN ********«0.000 F.F. AT `WATER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EAC. AT WATER SERVICE -211 *********0^000 EACH AT SEWER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT TOTAL ASSESSMENT = ' ' STREET—RESIDENTIAL *********1.000 UNIT AT STREET -COMMERCIAL *********0.000 F.F. AT STORM SEWER *********1.000 UNIT AT WATER MAIN *********0.0o0 F.F. AT WATER SERVICE—G" **'*******00000 EACH AT WATER SERVICE -2" *********0.000 EACH AT SEWER SERVICE -611 *********0.000 EACH AT TOTAL ASSESSMENT = REET—RES I DENT IAL STREET—COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE -2" GEWERSERVICE-6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = *********14000 UNlT AT *********0.000 F, Fa AT UNIT AT *********0.000 F.F. AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.000 EACH AT $1�125~000 EA. = ***$15.000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. = $1,500~000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15,000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. = $1,500,000 EA. = $2,500.000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15.000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. = $1,500.000 EA. = $2v500.000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA, = ***$15,000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. = $1,500.000 EA. = PAGE 2 OF 6 09-19-1989 ASSESSMENT ---------- 1 1 STREET—RESIDENTIAL *********0.000 18-29-22-24-0002 1B.-29-22-24-0017 18-29-22-24-0018 I}7P N0. ITEM STREET --RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -6" WATER SERVICE --2" SEWER SERVICE -611 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = STREET --RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE-211 SEWER SERVICE -6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = STREET --RESIDENTIAL STREET --COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -6" WATER SERVICE --2" SEWER SERVICE -6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = STREET --RESIDENTIAL STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE -611 WATER SERVICE -2'' SEWER SERVICE -6" TOTAL ASSESSMENT = PROJECT NO, 87--01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON ASSESSMENT ROLL QUANTITY PER RATE 1.000 UNIT AT ******* 0,000 F. F. AT *********1.000 UNIT AT 000 F. F. AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.0000 EACH AT *********1,000 UNIT AT ******* 0,000 F. F. AT *********1.000 UNIT AT 000 F. F. AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.0000 EACH AT *********1,000 UNIT AT ******* 0,000 F. F. AT *********1.000 UNIT AT 000 F. F. AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.000 EACH AT *********0.0000 EACH AT *********1,000 UNIT AT *********0.000 F. F. AT *********1.000 UNIT AT *********0.000 F. F. AT ****`*****0.000 EACH AT *********0.000 EACH AT EACH AT $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15.000 EA. *$500.000 EA. ***$30.000 EA. $17400..000 EA. = $1,500.000 EA. = $2,500.000 EA. = $17125.000 EA. ***$15.000 EA. = **$500.000 EA. = ***$30,000 EA. $17400.000 EA. = $1, 500. 000 EA. = $2,500.000 EA. $1,125.000 EA. = ***$15.000 EA.. **$ 500.0000 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. = $1,400.000 EA. = $19500.000 EA. = $27500.000 EA. = $1,125.000 EA. = ***$ 15. 000 EA. = **$500.0001 EA. = ***$30.000 EA. $11400..000 EA. = $19500.000 EA. = $27500.000 EA. = PAGE 3 OF 6 09--19-1969 ASSESSMENT ---------- 18--29-22-24--0019 18-29-22-31-0001 ****$11125..00 ********$0.00 ******$500.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ****$116250 00 18-29-22--31-0002 ****$1, 125.'00 ********$O.00 ******$500.00 ********$0.00 ********$0.00 ********$0. 00 ****$1, 625. 00 18-29-22-31-+0003 ****$1.1125.00 ********$0.00 ******$500.00 ********$0..0020 PROJECT NO, 87-01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON ' ASSESSMENT ROLL ' QUANTITY PER RATE ` PAGE 4 OF G 09-19-1989 ASSESSMENT 18-29-22-31-0025 ST��(�ID�I� *���1.(� �lT � $1,1�.�� �.= ���1,1�.� 18-29-22-31-0004 STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********1.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. = =**$11125.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *********0.000 F, F, AT ***$15.000 EA. = ********$0.0N STORM SEWER *********1.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = ******$500.00 WATER MAIN *********0.000 F, F, AT ***$30.000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,400.000 BA~ = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -2" *********�.000 EACH AT $1,500.000 EA. = ********$0.00 .SEWER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $2,5,00.000 EA. = ********$0~00 TOTAL ` ASSESSMENT = ' ****$11625.00 ` ' 28-29-22-31-0005 STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********1.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. = ****$11125.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *********0.000 F, F, AT ***$15~000 EA. = ********$0.00 STORM SEWER *********1.000 UNIT AT *a$500.000 EA. = ******$500.00 WATER' MAIN *********0"000**0.000 F. Fe AT ***$30.000 EA. = ********$0100 WATER SERVICE -611 *********0.000 EACH AT $1,400.000 EA. = ********$0,m0 WATER SERVICE -2" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA. = ********$0.00 SEWER, SERVICE -611 *********0.000 EACH AT $21500.000 EA. = ********$0.00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = ****$11625.00 ' ' 18-29-22-31-0024 ST *********1.000 ' UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. = ****$1112E%J:.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *********0.000 F. F, AT ****$15.000 EA. = ********$0.00 STORM SEWER ***.******1.000 UNIT AT **$500~000 EA. = ******$500.00 'WATERMAIN, .000 F, F, AT ***$30.000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -6" .000 EACH AT $1,400.000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -2" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,500.000 EA. 00 SEWER SERVICE -6" EACH AT $2,500.000 EA. = ********$000 TOTAL ASSESSMENT ****$1, 62 18-29-22-31-0025 ST��(�ID�I� *���1.(� �lT � $1,1�.�� �.= ���1,1�.� STREET -COMMERCIAL *********0~000 F, F, AT ***$15.000 EA. = ********$0.00 STORM SEWER *********1.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = ******$500.00 WATER MAIN *********0.000 F. F. AT ***$30.000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -6" ********0.000 EACH AT $1v400.000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -2" *w*******0.000 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA. = ********$0.00 SEWER SERVICE -6" *********0.000 EACH AT $2,500.000 EA. = ********$0.0N TOTAL ASSESSMENT = ` ****$1,625.00 DIP NO. PROJECT NO, 87--01 ROSELAWN--RICE TO JACKSON ASSESSMENT ROLL RAGE 5 OF 6 09--19-1989 ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT 18--29--22-31-0042 STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********0.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. STREET --COMMERCIAL *******650.000 F. F. AT ***$15.000 EA. _ ****$9, 750. 00 STORM SEWER *********0,000 UNIT AT **$500,000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER MAIN *********0. 000 F. F. AT ***$30. 000 EA. = ********$0800 WATER SERVICE -611 *********0,000 EACH AT $1,400.000 EA. _ ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -211 *********0w000 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA. = ********$0. 00 SEWER SERVICE -G" *********O.000 EACH AT $2, 500.000 EA. = ********$0'00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = ****$91750.00 18-29-22-32-0001 STREETS -RES I DENT I AL *********O.000 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. = ******-**$0.00 STREET -COMMERCIAL *******126v000 F. F. AT ***$15.000 EA. = ****$11890.00 STORM SEWER *********0.000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA: = ********$0.00 WATER MAIN *********0.000 F. F. AT ***$30.000 EA. _ ********$01-00 WATER SERVICE --6" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,400,000 EA. = ********$0. .00 WATER SERVICE -2" *********0.000 EACH AT $1,500.000 EA. = ********$0.00 SEWER SERVICE -611 *******'**0.000 EACH AT $21-500,000 EA. = ********$0.00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT 18-29--22-32-0004 STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********0.. 000 UNIT AT $1,125,000 EA. = ********$0.00 STREET --COMMERCIAL ********12,000 F. F. AT ***$15,000 EA. = ******$180. 00 STORM SEWER *********0,000 000 UNIT AT **$500.000 EA. = ****-****$0.00 WATER MAIN *********0"000 F. F. AT ***$30,000 EA. = ********$0.00 WATER SERVICE -611 *********0,000 EACH AT $1,400,000 EA: = ********$0,00 WATER SERVICE -211 *********00000 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA.. _ ********$0.00 SEWER SERVICE -611 *********O.000 EACH AT $2,500,000 EA. = ********$0.'00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT 18--29-22-32--0008 STREET -RESIDENTIAL *********0.000 UNIT AT $11125.000 EA. = ********$0.00 STREET- COMMERCIAL ******* 168.000 F. F. AT ***$15.000 EA. _ ****$2,520.00 STORM SEWER *********0.000 UNIT AT **`500.000 EA. = ****-*-*-**$0.00 WATER MAIN *******168.000 F. F. AT ***$30.000 EA. = ****$59040-00 WATER SERVICE-6111.OQ O EACH AT $1, 400.000 EA. = ****$11400.00 WATER SERVICE -211 *********1,000 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA. = ****$11500.00 SEWER SERVICE -611 ********* 1.000 EACH AT $27500.000 EA. _ ****$2,500.00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT -= ***$121960.00 PROJECT NO. 87-01 ROSELAWN-RICE TO JACKSON DIP Na. ASSESSMENT ROLL ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE STREET -RESIDENTIAL r�00 .STREET -COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER ***$15,000 WATER MAIN *******1113, 000 .WATER SERVICE -G" *********j'000 WATER SERVICE --2" AT SEWER SERVICE -611 ***.******0, 000 TOTAL ASSESSMENT = $11400.000 STREET. RES.I DENT I AL ****$11400.100 STREET COMMERCIAL *******510.000 STORM SEWER *********0.000 WATER MAIN ******510, Qt00 DATER SERVICE -611 *********2,,000 WATER SERVICE -211 *********2.000 SEWER SERVICE -611 *********2.000 TOTAL. ASSESSMENT 18--29-22-32-0025 22 PARCELS ASSESSED AT STREET -RESIDENTIAL ********10.000 .STREET. COMMERCIAL *****3, 591.000 STORM SEWER ********10.000 WATER MAIN .*****17644m000 .WATER SERVICE -611 ********s0. 00 WATER SERVICE -211 ***$30.000 SEWER SERVICE -611 SACH TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED FOR THIS PROJECT = RAGE 6 OF 6 09--19--1989 ASSESSMENT ---------- 18-29-22-32-0021 UNIT AT '$11125,000 EA. F. F. AT ***$15,000 EA. -= ****$19770.00 UNIT AT **$50.0.000 EA. _ ********so. 00 F. F. AT ***$30,000 EA. _ ****$31540-.00 EACH AT $11400.000 EA. _ ****$11400.100 EACH AT $1,500,000 EA. _ ****$1, 500, 00 EACH AT $2,5010,000 EA. _ ********$0.00 ****$8,210.00 18--29-22-32-0025 UNIT AT $1,125.000 EA. _ ********$0,.00 F. F. AT ***$15.000 EA. _ ****$7, 6=0. 00 UNIT AT **$500,000 EA. _ ********s0. 00 . F. AT ***$30.000 EA. _ ***$151300.00 SACH AT $1,400,000 EA. _ ****$27800.00 TACH AT $1,500.000 EA. = ****$31 000. 00 7-ACH AT $2,500.000 EA. _ ****$5,000.00 ***$6,j, 750. 00 GRAND TOTALS JN I T AT $1,125,000 EA. = ***$117 250.00 . F. AT ***$15.000 EA. _ ***$53,865.00 INIT AT **$500.000 EA. _ ****$57 000.00 . F. AT ***$30.000 EA. _ ***$49,320.00 :ACH AT $19400m000 EA. _ ****$7,000.00 :ACH AT $1,500,000 EA. -_ ****$7,500,00 =ACH AT $21500w@00 EA. = ****$77 500.00 **$1417 435.00 Briggs and Morgan M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota FROM: Mary L. Ippel Andrew R. Kintzinger DATE: September 18, 1989 Action by Council v Endorzed Modifi ed...-.........., Refected Date Attached is a draft of a Resolution giving final approval to the issuance of the $ 4 2 6 0 0 0 0 City of Maplewood, Minnesota Health Care Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1989 (VOA Care Centers Minnesota Project). The Resolution gives final approval to issuing the Bonds, subject to approval of the Project b the Stat � y e Department of Trade and Economic Development. The Resolution also approves the Indenture, Loan Agreement and Bond Purchase Agreement for the Bonds, subject to any further changes that the City Attorney approves before Bond closing. Section 7.14 of the Loan Agreement requires VOA Care Centers Minnesota to install curbing, a trash container enclosure a sprinkler system and additional parking spaces as conditions for obtaining the Bond financing. The Loan Agreement also requires finalization of a new address for the Project, Because at the time of this memorandum the Bonds have not yet been marketed by the Underwriter, Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Yost Incorporated, the attached Resolution may need minor revi- sions before the September 25, 1989 City Council meeting. If necessary, a final, revised co copy of the Resolution well be provided to you prior to Monday's meeting. ARK/drm 14:039 Attachment MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Information on Multiple Dwellings DATE: September 18, 1989 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION F - � Action by Counoil a Endorsed, Mod:Lfied . Rejected Dade At the August 10, 1989 joint meeting between the City Council and the commissions, a number of items of information were requested of staff. These included: 16 A survey of the number of units per acre that metropolitan cities use for low-density, medium -density and high-density residential land use categories. 2. A breakdown of the number of housing units by types and percentages in Maplewood. 30 A set of land use maps of Maplewood showing where medium and high density residential development has occurred and where such development is planned, but undeveloped. 4. .Samples of multiple -family architectural -design standards from area communities. 5. A survey of rental rates in multiple -family housing in the metropolitan area. DISCUSSION The following is documentation of the -information that staff found in its recent research. 1. Number of residential units per acre. Staff conducted a survey of 23 metropolitan cities to determine the maximum densities allowed for medium -density and high-density multiple dwellings. For medium -density residential, a wide range of units per acre was found to be in use. The lowest was 3-6 units per acre and the highest was up to 12 units per acre. For the low number ,in, this category, the average was 3.36 units per acre. On the high end, the average was 9.18 units per acre. For comparison, Maplewood's maximum allowed density in units per acre in the RM land use category will range from 8.1 for townhouses to 11.6 for apartments when the new sewer plan is approved by the Metropolitan Council, Thus Maplewood's permitted densities will be somewhat higher than those commonly in use in the metropolitan area. Regarding high-density residential development, our research found that area, cities use varying ranges of units per acre for this land use category. The lowest was 6-10 units per acre and the highest was 12-20 units per acre. The average of the low numbers for this type of development is 9.2 units per acre while the average of the highest permitted density is 18.4 units p►er acre. Maplewoodls allowed densities in the RH land use category will range .from 12.5 units per acre for townhomes and small. apartment buildings to 17.9 units per acre: for apartments buildings with five or more units Thus Maple ood*'s allowed densities for high-density residential start out higher (a largerminimum) but is quite similar to the average for the maximum number of units per acre. To summarize, the average range of units per acre for residential development of the surveyed cities and Maplewood is as follows: Surveyed Cities Maplewood Medium -density 3.36 - 9.18 8.1 - 11.6 High-density 9.2 - 18.4 12.5 - 17.9 If the City Council is interested in lowering the allowed densities in the two residential land use categories, it appears that this would not be unreasonable when compared to other similar sized metropolitan cities. Staff would suggest the following density ranges be used in this regard: Medium -density 4.0 - 9.0 units per acre High-density 9.0 - 16.0 units per acre These density ranges are quite comparable to what is used in other similar sized metropolitan area cities and they should nerve to lower the allowed densities in future residential developments in Maplewood. 2. Housing Unit Breakdown The following is a listing by percentage of the housing units in the City of Maplewood and the average of those cities that were surveyed. These figures include building permits issued through September, 1988. Sinale Familv Townhouse Multiple Familv Mobile Home Maplewood - 63.8% 6.0% 24.4% 5.8% Survey Ave.- 65.0% 6.0% 25.0% 4.0% 2 For comparison purposes, staff analyzed the housing unit breakdown of 32 suburban metropolitan cities (including Maplewood*) This included building permits issued through September 1988 as tabulated by the Metropolitan Council* The following is a sumnary of the findings of this study: a. For single-family homesr the percentage of a city"s: total housing units ranged from a high of 90 .. 6 percent in Cottage Grove to a low of 41.1 percent in Little Canada. Single-family homes averaged 65 percent of the total number of housing units in those cities that were surveyed. This is slightly higher than the 63.8 percent that single- family homes comprise of the housing stock in Maplewood. b. Townhouses ranged from a high 16.5 percent of the housing units in Eagan to a low of 0.1 percent in three cities. This type of unit averaged 6 percent of the total number of housingunits in the 32 cities that were studied. • � �• a percentage of This percentage Is identical to th p g townhouses found in Maplewood. CIO Multiple -family units ranged from a high 44.5 percent of the housing units in Little Canada to a low of 4 percent of the housing units in Cottage Grove. Of the cities that were studied, apartment units averaged 25 percent of the total number of housing units. Maplewood's apartment units comprise 24.4 percent of the total housing units in the City. This percentage is very similar to the.overall average that was found in the 32 metropolitan cities. d. The last type of housing unit that was analyzed in this study was mobile homes. it was found that Lakeville had the hi hest percentage ercenta a of its housing stock in mobile homes with eight 13.4 percent. The low was found in g cities which haveno mobile homes and the average percentage of the cities in the study was 4 percent. The percentage of Maplewood's housing stock that is mobile homes is 5.8, slightly higher than the 4 percent found in the 32 cities that were studied. To summarize the analysis of the breakdown of housing units, it appears that ,Maplewood is very close to the average of the cities that were studied. That is, in the four types of housing units that have data readily available, Maplewood's fourercenta es of each type of unit as a portion of the p g � total number of housing units is very similar to the overall average for cities with similar populations in the metropolitan area. In other words, the composition of the housing stock in Maplewood could be considered typical. 3 3. Land Use Maps The attached maps have been prepared showing where medium and high density re:s identia.l. development has occurred and where such deve.l opmentit. s. planned.,, but. unidevelopedle .....: The existing areas are shown with = :::::• : .: • •::::.•... . The planned but undeveloped areas are shown with. 4. Architectural design standards for multiple -family development. of the cities that were contacted, four had specific archJ,.tectural design standards for multiple -family development in their zoning ordinances. The cities with such standards are Apple Valley, Coon Rapids, North St. Paul and Woodbury. The pertinent sections of those ordinances are attached for reference. The following is a summary of what each city requires for multIple-family developments in regards to architectural design.. a. Apple Valley Apple Valley has four standards which apply to the exterior of multiple -family structures. These are: (1) All exterior surfaces (including accessory buildings) shall be treated as a front and shall have an equally attractive or same .fascia. Accessor buildin s and garages shall have a design an (2) y g and appearance that will not detract from the main building (s) or adjacent buildings* (3) All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened or otherwise handled in such a manner such that they are not visually obvious and are compatible with the surrounding development. This section then continues on with standards for the treatment of exterior eg:pment . (4) Materials on multiple residential buildings adjacent to residential zoning districts shall have a vertical exposed exterior finish consisting of at least fifty (50) percent non-combustible, non -degradable and maintenance -free construction materials (such as face brick or natural stone but excluding construction materials as sheet aluminum, iron, or concrete block of any kind or similar), with the balance being a non- manufactured natural construction material such as plank cedar or redwood. 4 b. Coon Rapids Coon Rapids has the following requirements for building design, building variety, and recreation areas: (1) Building Design. All residential structures shall be designed to be compatible with their surrounding land uses:.: Special care shall be taken to blend such structures with adjacent dwelling units. All exterior wall surfaces of the residential structures, including garages, shall be of the same or compatible facing material as that used on the front of the building. Such surfaces- shall be of wood siding, face brick, stone, or a compatible material. (2) Building Variety. All residential units shall be designed with as much variety as possible through the use of different exterior materials, colors, landscaping, mixtures of building types, staggered setbacks, and broken roof lines. No more than two (2) adjacent townhouse units in a townhouse group shall have the same setback. The Planning Commission may valve this requirement when there is a significant variation in the setback within a townhouse unit. (3) Play Area. Children's play areas are required for most multiple -family developments. In addition, all multiple -family developments are required to include an adult recreation area subject. The play and recreation areas are all subject to City approval. c . North t. Paul Multiple -family ordinance requirements in North St. Paul: (1) All buildings within an apartment development shall be so planned that it has the equivalent of a front appearance on the exterior vertical surface. (2) Open storage of laundry drying or garden equipment shall. not be permitted . (3.) Garages shall have the same construction appearance as the principal building(s). (4) No dwelling unit within a multiple -family dwelling ,shall be so constructed as to have more than forty percent (40 percent) of the horizontal lineal distances of a dwelling unit's exterior wall below ground level. Continuous window wells or other selective excavation shall not be used to circumvent this restriction. Areas which do not qualify as dwelling units because of non compliance with this section may be used for amusement, recreation, storage or as "tility areas. 5 (5) Security Construction standards for the following: (a) Exterior doors (b) Garage doors (c) Swinging doors (d) Sliding doors (e) Window protection d. Woodblury Woodbury has the following ordinance provisions for appearance and general building standards: I (1) Appearance: All buildings within an apartment development shall be so planned that each exterior vertical surface is subject to the same standards and requirements for the front of the building. (2) General building requirements: (a) Requirements for exterior wall surfacing and covering. All multiple family dwelling buildings shall be designed and constructed to have the equivalent of a front appearance on each exterior surface. Multi -family units of three ( 3 ) or more stories shall be constructed of brick exterior. (b) Open air drying of clothes shall not be permitted on the grounds of multiple -family dwellings except when the following conditions are met: 1) The areas for open air drying of clothes are specifically drawn on the original site plans. 2) A durable and dustless surface and adequate screening is provided for the entire area to be used for the drying of clothes. (c) The design shall make use of all land contained in the site and shall be related to the multiple family use, either parking, circulation, recreation, landscaping, screening, building, storage, etc., so that no portion remains undeveloped. (d) Except with townhouse and multiple family dwellings of four (4) units or less, no exterior trash or garbage disposal or storage shall be permitted. In the case of row housing and multiple -family dwellings of four (4) units or less, there shall be no exterior incineration and all storage shall be completely enclosed by walls and roof. (e) Refuse, either combustible or noncombustible, shall be contained in a rodent proof, screen structure near the principal building. The design of the space or room in which refuse is deposited shall meet the approval of the City Fire Marshal, and the City health officer. Access doors large enough to allow bin -type refuse containers to be removed for loading in refuse trucks shall be a. part of the design of the refuse storage space. Refuse must be. removed from the premises at least once per week. Refuse shall be removed from the premises by a licensed trash pickup service. (f) No air conditioning unit shall protrude from any exterior wall except to the extent required for proper functioning. A grill designed to appear as an integral part of the wall shall be placed to screen the protruding portion _of the air conditioner. (g) No multiple -residence dwelling unit shall be so constructed as to have more than forty (40) percent of the horizontal lineal distance of a unit's exterior wall below ground. Continuous window wells or other selective excavation shall not be used to circumvent this restriction. Areas which do not qualify as dwelling units because of this restriction may be used for recreation, amusement, storage, or as utility areas. Staff recommends that the examples of design standards for multiple -family development be sent with direction from the City Council to the Community Design Review Board for their consideration. The Review Board should then form recommendations as to what design standards or requirements should be used in Maplewood. Their ideas would then be sent back to the City Council in the form of an ordinance amendment for adoption and implementation. 7 5. Rent survey. I have attached acopy of a portion of the July 17, 1989 Real Estate Journal which has their most recent Apartment Guide survey. This survey includes information by community on rent and. vac:ahoy rates for May 1989,. February 1989 and May" 1988 for stud3*Lo1 r one -bedroom, two --bedroom and -three bedroom apartments'S Th i.s tu.dy showed an average of 8.5% of the 6i un ,xs surveyed in Maplewood as being vacant in May 1989. This compares to an average vacancy rate of 6.59% for all of the units surveyed in 50 area cities. Maplewood& vacancy rate is especially high for two-bedroom units (13.36% versus 8.2%) but is much lower than the average for studio (2.94% versus 6.74%) and one -bedroom (2.76% versus 6.4%) apartments. RECOMMENDATION This memorandum has a .broad range of information regarding multiple -family development in Maplewood and other area cities. The recommendat%ons contained herein are as follows: 1. If the City Council would prefer to lower the permitted densities in residential developments, the*Comprehensive Plan should be amended to change the permitted densities in the residential land use categories. This matter should first be sent to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendations prior to the City Council taking final action. 2. Refer the examples of design standards for multiple -family development that have been attached to -the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) for a recommendation on what might be used in Maplewood. The City Council -should provide direction and additional. ideas for what they would like to see put into use in Maplewood. 3. Take no action on reducing the amount of land planned for multiple dwellings, unless there are specific sites that the City -Council feels may conflict with surrounding land uses. Attachments 1. Land Use Plan Maps 2. Zoning Ordinance Excerpts: a. Apple Valley b. Coon Rapids C. North St. Paul d. Woodbury 3. July 17, 1989 Real Estate Journal Apartment Guide Survey kenrhsgmem rl n -Rd- R I Lm iv 0 0" Roselawn amm wy. 36 LIttle Ca 0/, m Rffl -SAP�dm� rm - a H HILI 30RHOOD LAND -2-a") mn Lim.� Q W ESTERN HILI 30RHOOD LAND U EVA a /I •lei 2interchange w tnterchanEge a ia / d ( f �. t n�t.e`rc i an'ge - T7 _ j A�. S11 / ._.Z-1 uffOS aIor, c c�or - — - + R T � o s..._ _ LS . . .11 If JL norhisf I - -•r-: o ! � 1 I 1 i I• �-� n LSC CL) IS :,• _ y • • _ • �/••/ S4 Ro I i n J. T� ' intercharl a mayor coiiectorm -- don OS.__ Jw ul "Mai Rl V. tii� ..� __ ..� �. -•1.11 J- - - : RI • • r• •! ..� . - � ' � t •car.• '•� ...., � . s ••�•. �' L L. J11 a CID rw _ �... e•. a •••tea •• t 1 '••.•• .. ...•• • y,a v f Sc interchange �.j major arteria Tr--- ---1 g... , . a enteue A M• • 1le wi i 1 LSC `l7 _ W . Parkside Revised: NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 8_138II4 11-25-86 G -13-f34 2-11-85 10 3-11-85 . 19-7 Vadnais Height 4 . �•. interchange inti at arteria{ , mmx� r P _. MRiwowt� •BWCJV 1 R1. LITTLE CAWADA minor arteria�� - �loti 1 R1, • 1 } 1 �. ssMssa. f 0 1 Aft R1 1 i ma'or ' Coltecot�.,_'r-- _ mi or arteriat - Loa ;:,:,::� o v «t Cy ;; ;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;,,,v • arterial interchange '�- Revised: 12-16-83 n Koh1man Lake "'00a NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 19-9 REVISED 3-25-85.. 9-29-87 4--08-85 9-21-88 - 8-26--85 10"2 7"8 1-4-89. 10-09-85 4-17-89 11-06-85 7-21-89 7-07-86 10-10-86 interchangeinterchange 12-3t-.5 principal arterial 694 _ ajor i Fes"--• - - y �u kp ,s ,c [ =N.., •. r.R, collector 11i' _ �J11;{,p +r, ia; f M1' •i'• . •'• •":bhvytlh�';..e•. o •;. J i.is•..•n1?,?3 aa73.. ifr' .;. s'i �r 1v �e`j ,•, a•J ea.e • r,y � �� _.- - .........w` .'.,� �. y�•••'r` •iyiyR .^.,'ir+ 1. e o s ••r ";n,i .�s4J� _ -- 1 BW one _02 .. cc) maJor .: 'rgo 0 MP1E w000 e MauiC0lifor ,_.-•---------- - - r , ci J044 IMEMM.::::::::.::.: �::.:.:;.;..;:.;..:.: •. v• c .1J najor collector � ...Ex:� � ,.-- _, »� +► eam a m o rLSIlerial 10C Co 0 -0s R,L —C o. ' ' i o rterlQ T _ - coy ,t r ,--- . n C*� ± —, I •— t� --} _ OS -------- - - -- - —t :Ong - i SC. R H BW m 1 n ox c 0.11 * o P �. L. LSC �su R m ' } Mai ol'ie Trv2t RL �'� -� - l. T un M=C� I I i,0 W ., 1 RL ILSC _ - mmm"7 - ' M41 r al s' H^gh a 3 in a hae 9 O m t _ LMC � U > 0M u) +• m Q +• C — i C O cc o m Co o m E Y HAZELWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD UE 19-11 12 11 low :2 rf i 'Awl I OL 111 a I f *41 m IV was' Ida IF •' �✓ _ - moi lim Iwo 0 ccr E 9 # K f^ Y- i A i. cc C W REVISED 8--24-85 7-23•-85 . 5-12-88 I 3 SHERWOOD GLEN NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 14 19-15 t; L +w U cd p O U 3 c� L .— '0 N O E _ E REVISED 4-08-85 f - Saint Pau! ■�• M) V • %.^v % V ■ •Ml ^^`` � a CL o a m Frost Ave. AM GLADSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 15 19-17 N j> i i. i is S. CL/ j _ O 81ppleo C, • v J lellope aofew h El Ron.i f• c° CIO::•r.%= TH ci V. z NMI nTm Ij rum Good AN so 1 =, - .i � ��. � � App-- - ppdr •�1- �.•;;;;:;i;Ih;M�}�: :'•'.' �.�.�:': •' t• .. � _.�� • - - i I Mc Kn ' h t' Ro •111, •�IJill �r 4T ITT, —11 -�� �� f I ••••'•'' ��Mjpljaj IL , eny Ainiva3 / 77SauntPau. j - • i AV was; CAI Ocz Own /// • • [• • am cc i• ► �........:::...... ;tt, •,frry 0 �... 04 •r - o - y -Q 0000 t • ... i 1 ■■... C M n1 ' - M d - Ln 1 (A�.Or CD j 1 t •R.400 •.,..a W . sZ ' S i • 0 aofew �.►M. White Bear !. Larpenteur • W t IC • r W u !p . c�' Maryland Ave. in Stillwater Road SC Harvester o 0 S c Minnehaha Conway • Revised: interchange •r: 1 c 3-3-83 qko —15-83 interchange. 1-94 —27-83 } 62783 t r-� 1-23-84 _ 4-8-85 10-10-86 Beaver Lake 8-05-88 ma 1e wood NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN • :y • 17 19-21 .'� arw,wnG,ai�C. - YSaflrf .. �-i.'i�m.�..�Y'v'9.-6x•1� ... ... .. _ 4•«'-'."r.. V%rII1t%—Cr% rN�I BATTLE CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 18 19-23 REVISED 12-09-85 7-07--86 cc m 0 own% to E major arterial Lower Ott on - ! RAM SEY CO. � � ':.• ';;,,;�•. W O R K HODS may, ♦.. glary t/ � . a h � •� Jb. •s.: � +��+wM•� .� i� i��i'i ��' aaR ✓�j.'k!.��ar�a•'�. •t Y �a .a"�. L � •aq�'•�."..: •Ji•�.�••�ij.•i i • :..:i �`• • �:ii:�i:�:ti�. 3 •: ��i� •i i iVi• iii ii .� •.•�'•':: i .•.•.a�•: is is �•.::'• :•: .'. :': .'. • •�• • ••• � �• :•'::•a•'•••••••' - ':•i.•.•.•}.•::i, is �•••� • • • • • •::•'. Londin_ Lane _.- vs�... .,.•.�{.. o DAY RL .. . ..:.;.:..:;:::::::::: •�•'•'•'• O'DAY �'~ • -i••• inor collector Malland Y w ' ' Cr c .� �Q O .RL, v POAK c QS ' 40 > k low co Q +- minor Collector Cu m 1° RL W W 0ti >.nc off 1 O c �v E 10 ' C I Linwood major collector v VE G 1 r. c # 1 i i � � VISTA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 19 19-25 Linwood Highwood-- E Carver llectc r ` r cc REVISED c 5-27-87 0.� 1 10-X28.87 t 3--04.-88 - 5-25-89 S School Search Area i m 1/2 Mile Radius O V Lm CbC 0S J 1 T �' 7 HIGII rev D NEIGHBORHOOD LAND tJE PLAN 20 19-27 Y - as a. too' Highwood-- E Carver llectc r ` r cc REVISED c 5-27-87 0.� 1 10-X28.87 t 3--04.-88 - 5-25-89 S School Search Area i m 1/2 Mile Radius O V Lm CbC 0S J 1 T �' 7 HIGII rev D NEIGHBORHOOD LAND tJE PLAN 20 19-27 Y s; REVISED Carver A% Q E1,41, Newport CARVbR RIDGE ' NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN � I z, ,s-za Of i N n C+ J a C+ N N) V APPENDIX A—ZONING I ►1.53 r, Sec'4 A1-53. wilding and site design. w n w The design of all building site and landscape plans shalt be :.M prepared by a professional skilled and trained to perform these • W � �In ;w services. Buildings shall be designed to fit the particular site and shall be harmonious with adjacent buildings, topography and :. natux-al surroundings and shall otherwise meet the provisions of . r• this (.rdinances In carder to assure that new construction, is compatible «� th exist. ng structures and neighborhood environments, it is neces- nary to estab-ish minimum design and building material stand- . ands. These standards will serve to prevent new developnment from destabilizing adjacent neighbor by mitigating the in- trins c negative impacts associated with structures .of greater bulk and densitythe 1'Qlowng standards are established to •, y -= a omplish these ends • r a) E � � Exterior vertical suraiesi n: All exterior vertical sur- . face faces of residential, multiple residential, commercial, in- �-� dustrial and institutional structures of any type shall be treated as a front and have an equally attractive or same =� fascia. . w ..w (b) Design of garag. !garages and other accessory buildings M shall have a design and -appearance that will not detract .a from the main building(s) or adjacent buildings. �? (c) Mechanical protrusions. All necessary mechanical protru- sions visible to the exterior shall be screened or handled in a manner such that they are not visually obvious and are w v compatible with the su�oundin development. Satisfaction . of this requirement shall be demonstrated by the screen ing of the equipment such that it is not visible from a point six (6) feet above any common property line or street right- of -way. Rooftop equipment shall be set back from the edge of the roof a minimum of twenty (20) feet. Screening shall consist of either a parapet wall along the roofs edge or by r an opaque ue screen constructed of the same material as the ..- P building's primary vertical exposed exterior finish. Equip- ment shall be painted a neutral earth -tone color. All me- chanical protrusions shall be pointed out on plan the site ` V r� and elevations. ` V `w • y I1 . v r ., Supp. No. 7 1341 • w • r •My 3 w C+ C+ .C+ 1.53 (d) APPLE VALLEY COUL Materials. Materials shall be those normally utilized in this part of the country for permanent type construction, which are found in what is generally accepted as good architectural design and which are found to be compatible with nearby existing buildings. Required building materi- als shall depend upon the use of the building as follows: (1) Commercial buildings shall have a vertical exposed exterior finish of . one hundred (100) per cent non- combustible, non -degradable and maintenance -free con- struction materials (such as face brick or natural stone but excluding such construction materials as sheet or corrugated aluminum, iron, or concrete block of any kind or similar). Exterior roof -top finishes shall pre- clude the use of exposed or plated metal; any metal surface shall be coated or anodized with a non -reflective, glare -free finish. (2) Industrial buildings shall have a vertical exposed ex- terior finish of one hundred (100) per cent non-com- bustible, non -degradable and maintenance -free construc- tion materials (such as face brick, natural stone or decorative concrete block but excluding such construc- tion materials as sheet or corrugated aluminum, iron, plain or painted plain concrete block or similar). Any decorative concrete block shall be colored only by means of a pigment impregnated throughout the entire block. Exterior roof -top finishes shall preclude the use of ex - P or plated lated metal any metal surface shall be coated or anodized with a non -reflective, glare -free finish. () Multiple residential buildings adjacent to "R" zones or occupied "M" zones shall have a vertical exposed exterior finish consisting of at least fifty (50) per cent non-combustible, non -degradable and maintenance -free construction materials (such as face brick or natural stone but excluding such construction materials as sheet aluminum, iron, or concrete block of any kind or similar), with the balance being a non -manufactured natural construction material such as plank cedar or redwood. (Orel. No. 2(91 § 2, 4-21.8.1; Ord. No. 4.36, § 19, 2-23-89) Supp. No. 7 1342 See. A1-54. Natural features. Site planning and development shall show due regard f oi- all natural terrain features, such as trees or vegetation, watercou:•Ses, historic areas, slopes, soil conditions, ponding areas and wetlands and similar existing physical features in order that development of any type e will not have an adverse or detrimental effect upon the ecology or natural character of an area. (Ord. No. 291, § 2, 4-21-83) Sec. Al -5R Screening. (a) Screening in residential districts; A (18) Parking and Drives. ; (a) Minimum Number of Required Off-street Parking Spaces. is Two-family and quad --A minimum of two (2) spaces r uni ., At least one (1) space per unit shall consist of ani enclosed garage. T'wrbous --A mini;mulr of three (3) spaces per ' unit. At leasx ague, (1.) s ⁣e per, unix shall consist of an enclosed garage., At leant: two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be on the. s�=e lot, as. the townhouseW, At least one-half (1) sp3;�e pe unit shad be in a common parking area. Lux , Mu-4-triple—In accordance with Chapter 11-1000. (b) Except for a tandem parking space, no parking shall be permitted or drives constructed within five (5) feet of any . prop- erty line or within 20 feet of any right-of-way line. There shall be no parking permitted within the sight triangle described in lection 11401825(1). Setback areas shall be landscaped in grass, shrubbery, and trees. At least one (1) tree, with a mini- mum caliper of two (2) inches shah be planted per each 50 -foot section of street frontage. (c) Driveways for two-family dwellings shall have a minimum Width within the street right-of-way of ten (10) f eet per dwelling unit and a maximum width of 24 feet per dwelling unit, excluding: the entrance radii. (d) driveways leading from a street to a garage for quads, townhouses, and multiple dwellings with attached garages shall have a minimum width of ten (10) feet per garage and a maximum width of 48 feet per driveway, excluding the entrance radii. (e) Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsections 11-905(18)(b) and (d) a minimum 14 foot wide driveway may serve units of adja- cent quad structures and may be located along the common property line. Cross easements for the joint use of all shared driveways within a. quad development shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder. (f) Individual driveway access to arterial streets shall be prohibired,, unless approved by the City Council. Where a drive- way access is permitted to an arterial street, a driveway turn- around shall be provided in order to eliminate the need for vehicles to back onto the street when exiting. (g) To the extent not in conf lict with this section, parking and drives shall be constructed to the standards of Section 11-1802 through 11-1811. (19) P.lay+„_ A multiple dwelling, townhouse or option' B quad development containing more than eight (8) dwelling units with two (2) or more -bedrooms shall include a children's play area. All multiple 1 dwelling developments shall include an adult recreation area. The 1 location, size, and equipment in such areas shall be approved by the Planning Commission as to adequacy and ability to meet the needs of the development's residents. The Planning Commission, after a public �- hearing, may approve another amenity in lieu of a children's play area in a condominium development, upon the following findings: (a) The children's *play area would not be useful to the residents of the condominium development. Rev, 11/-10/87 11-42D .. 25 Attachment 2b Coop./ ,�iiP/DS (4) .State licensed Residential Facilities or Day `,are Facilities serving seventeen (17) or more persons. - 55 f ee t .11-905 District Standards. The District Standards s.nzll 'oe as follows& - 70 f eet (1 B>uildin, , Desi. X11 residential structures shall be 20 feet tr.arr�m ■■ w �,o� be c;:os pa.t�ble wlt� Lheir surrounding land uses. special vidual dwelling unit. rdsigne� re shall be; tae to, blend: such structures with adjacent dwelling 100 square its.Ali exteriotr wall, s ;r- a�c.¢°s of: the residential structures, includ inn! garages, s,; ,ail oe o." �,he s�:Ve or� co�rnpatt"bie i acing m :ter! a l (c) Open space asthat use; o the: ro,nr of t' e b il.d'.ina.. Su�c surf aces shall be of back areas, shall be wood s1. infix: fa, ::e brick s M-n.e�,. or a co pa�.ible ma�t:eriai. than 50 feet in any di;-tiensi-3t) (except for access points) ( Bu�ildi.narlell residential units shall be designed with as much variety as possible through the use of different exterior materials, colors, landscaping, mixtures of build in types, s*agoered i setbacks, and broken roof lines. :`o more than t uo (2) adjacent tavv 4 house unit in a townhouse group shall have the same setback. The Planning Commission may waive this requirement %;-hen there is a s�oni- ' f icant variation in the s� t5ack within a townhouse unit. (3) Buildin Height. The maxitnum 5ijilding height shall 5e: T wo- f ami 1v w> -W 40 fee t quad; - 55 f ee t Townhouse 55 f ee t Multiple - 70 f eet %ccessory Building - 20 feet (4) Building Width. The minimum building width sha!1 be 20 fe-e-t over a minimum of 50 percent of building length. (5) Bulk of 'Townhouse Group. There shall. be no more than eioh t (8) townhouse units- in anv townhouse group, and in no event shall env townhouse group be more than 2'-0 Leet in lengt:n. (6) Common Open 5P ace-\_rea. (a) Common open space are shall be orJvided for ;uad (Option B), townhouse, and multiply develoom`nts, and shall con- sist of the following minimurn syliare f oota;e: Quad (Option B) - 500 square f �Q t per unit Townhouse - 700 square feet per unit ;tilultiple - See Chapter 11-1000 (b) For multiple dwelling developm. Ants, common io0en soa��p areas may be reduced by one ( 1) square- foot for ea,:h square foo: of private open space provided for the private use of each indi- vidual dwelling unit. in no case sha!1 this e.xce�d 100 square feet per dwelling unit. (c) Open space areas s1hall be cantivuous, may, include se"- back areas, shall be no less than 50 feet in any di;-tiensi-3t) (except for access points) an,. shall be .snos�.aped in a�,.oraa,��_J with specifications on file in the office of the Director of Rev. 10/08/85 11-42 24 Attachment 2b Rev. 09/08/87 11-42E 26 Attachment 2b (b) The proposed amenity will provide a substantially better living environmentfor the residents than if the amenity is not provided. (c) At least 506 of the condominium project has been sold and control of the association has been assumed by the residents. (d) The proposed amenity is requested by a majority vote of the members of the condominium association. (e) The developer is in agreement with, the request or has defaulted .on. the security agreement given to guarantee the installation of the play area. (20) Private open Space. In addition to common open space, the followinginimucm square footage per residential unit shall be pro- vided for the private vise of each individual dwelling unit. Private open space shall be so located and designed to maximize its utility to F the dwelling unit it serves and maximize its privacy, especially in a relation to adjacent dwelling units, In townhouse developments, pri- vate open space shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from exterior boundaries and a minimum ' l imum of ten (10) feet from private open space areas accessory to another townhouse group. For purposes -of this Section, balcony areas shall be included in computing private open space area. Quad - 400 square feet Townhouse - 400 square feet (21) Setbacks. The minimum setbacks shall be as follows: (a) Two-family and Quad Units. .a Principal Use Building r Front Yard 35 feet Two-family 4 j 35 feet Quad �1 Rear Yard 35 feet Two-family, 65 feet if i abutting an office, commercial, or industrial district or tj railroad right-of-way z{ 35 feet Quad, 65 feet if abutting a an office, commercial, or industrial district or railroad right-of-way Side Yard 10 feet Two-family (house side), �i 40 feet if abutting an office, commercial or industrial district or railroad right-of-way S feet Two-family (garage side), s " 3 5 feet if abutting g an e office, commercial or industrial district or railroad right-of-way Rev. 09/08/87 11-42E 26 Attachment 2b I VV %Y 61 .060 Z W I N G AND IA ND USE 6. Recreation and open Area Regulations: a. In addition to front and sideyard requirements. and in addition to required parking spaces and associated access driveways, there shall be 200 square feet of land acrea per apartment unit, or ten percent (10 percent) of the gross project area, whichever is greatest, . sP ecif i.cal ly designed and developed for recreational uses such as the following: 1. Children s Play Apparatus. 20 swimi ng and Wading Pools. 3. Game Areas (Tenniss Horse Shoe, etc.) 4. Picnicking, Outdoor Cooking and Lounging. b. At least twenty percent (20 percent) of the gross project area shall be landscaped Open Space. This requirement shall consist of the P P P required setback spaces and other areas planted with grass, trees, and shrubs.' Such areas shall not be covered with structures or in- clude parking areas or access driveways. This requirement is in addition to the recre:at onal area requirement. 70 Lot Width Regulations A lot on which there is erected a multi 1 e dwelling shall have a minimum width of not less than one hundred and ten (11Q)v-feet at the building setback line, and a minimum depth of not less than one hundred and twenty-five (125) feet. 8. Garage Regulations: Garage shall p .1 be rovided for at least one-third (1/3) of the apartment units. The l ans trust show garages, one garage for each and every apartment unit in the para enure po3ect. �t one-third (1/3) of the es need be constructed as the. garages pro ' eCt iprogresses*Garage constitutes one parking space. This garage space is 0� included n the 2.5 spaces peT- dwelling unit required by this ordinance. .9. Minimum Floor Area: The tn. n�m floor'area of an efficiency dwelling unit shall be not less than � � mum 400 netsquare feet, that of a one bedroom dwelling shall not be less than 100 net square feet, and that of a two-bedroom dwelling unit shall be not less than 9q 00 net square feet. Units containing three or more bedrooms shall have an addi ti oni 150 net square feet of floor area for each bedroom in excess of two bedrooms. For purposes of measurements the net floor area of a dwelling unit shall. mean th at area within a building used as a single dwelling unit, and shall be measured from the inside walls to the center of partitions bounding the dwelling unit being measured but shall not include public sta i rviays , public entries, public foyers, public bal conies s or unenclosed public porches, separate utility rooms, furnace areas or room, storage areas not within the apartment, or garages. 10. Parking Regulations: In addition to the 2.5 parking spaces per apartment unit these spaces shall not be 4 within thin the re qui red front or side ards. These spaces shall be a minimum of 9 feet b 20 feet 'in dimension and steal be a minimum of 10 feet from an interior lot line. .7 61:060. Design and Construction Requirements. 1. Design Review: permit for a multiple dwelling must be approved by the City Council A bu�ld�ng pe P a fuer review of the plans set forth in 60.060 in the manner set forth in Chapter 69, Special Use Permits, and the Planning Commission may recommend and the Council 27 Attachment 2C S -?-77 Tv _Ln 1%0 . ZONING AND I.AhT USE bl. VbV conditions varantees in connection. therewith as will secure es i gnate coed or 9 anti al ly the provisions of this District. 2 8u ildin9 9 Desi n and Construction: . l l i n building 1 d i n containing three (3) or A bu i 1dAng perms t fora nul t� pl a dwelling 9 • - • ,i' ; shall PGt, be is�,sued unless the applicants building plans, more dwelling nig un is red � ra the State of ,; r certified f iced by an architect registered .including �h�e. �s �� to ��l ani, are � e� design l ng and site has been prepared under stating, thef the • ra: h shad 'n no way prohibit the preparation • , o of th. i s 9 p, his direct su e'ry * s, o.ns pa -a of .the site to l a. �� by a. p • profonal s i to planner. Such pians shall include the following: i 1 s of the proposed site development including a. Complete d e to p P , drivewa s, parking spaces, dimensions of location of buildings, driveways, the lot, lot. area and yard dimensions. indicate species number and site of b, Complete landscaping plans � n P trees an Pro d shrubs osed and i t shal 1 also indicate existing P trees which can be saved after construction and a plan for maintenance of the landscaping must be prove ded . c proposed sidewalks to service parking, , Compl? ete ,plans: for crp tins and service areas within the proposed development* d . Complete plans for storm water drainage 9 systems sufficient to dram and dispose of all surface water accumulations within the area. e. Complete structural electrical and mechanical plans for the proposed buildings designed by registered engineers. an and specifications for exterior wall finishes {, Complete plans � p B d for, all principal and accessory buildings. propose p p All buildings within n an apartment ar tment development shall be so 9 planned that it hast he equivalent of a front appearance on each exterior vertical surface. l Open storage of laundry drying or garden equipment . shall not be permitted. 9 2. Garages shall have the same construction appearance as theP ri nci pal building (s)o nit within a multiple family ly dwel 1 i ng shall be h. No dwelling u ercent v more than forty percent (40 p ) so constructed as to have ori zontal lineal neal d i stances of a dwelling unit s of the h - wells r wall below round level* . Conti nuous window extern o 9 0 r other selective excavation shall not be used to circumvent this restr� cti on. Areas which do not qualify as dwelling may be used cause of non-compliance with this ecti on y units be fora amusement, recreation, storage or as utility areas* i . Security construction standards: 1. Exterior Doors: a. Exterior doors and doors .1 eadi ng from garage areas into multiple dwelling buildings and d ; rs leading into stairwells below the sixth a c h 1 shall have selflocking (Dead latch) floor leve devices allowing egress to the exterior of the 28 - -» Attachment 2C IV* -41 IV. 61.060 ZONING AND LAhT USE buildin9 or into the garage area, or stairwell , but requiring a key be used to gain access to the interior of the building from the outside or garage area or into the hallways from the stairwell* . b. Exterior doors and doors 1 eadi ng from the garage areas . into multiple dwelling buildings and doors leading into stairwells shall be equipped with sel f cl os i ng devices, if not already required by other regulations, ordinance, or code. 2, Garage Doors Whenever parkingfacilities are providedo either under or `thin the con -fines of the perimeter walls of any multiple w� dwelling,such facility shall be fully enclosed and provided with a locking device. 3. All swinging doors to individual motel , hotel and multi - family d a. All wood doors shall be of solid core with a minimum thickness of 1-3/4 inches. b. Swinging entrance doors to i ndi vi dual units shall have deadbol is with one inch minimum throw and hardened steel inserts in addition to deadl a tches with half- inch alf- inch minimum throw. The locks shall be so constructed that both deadbol t and deadl atch can be retracted by a single action of the inside door knob. Al ternate devices to equally resist illegal entry may be substituted subject to prior approval of the Police Department . An ante or peephole hole shall be provided in each c. P individual entrance door* d* Door closers will be provided on each individual entrance door. e. Do 9 Doors swinging i n9 out shall have non -removable hinge pins. f. In -swinging exterior doors shall have rabbi ted jambs. Jambs for all doors shall be so constructed or protected 9 so as to prevent violation of the function of the strike. 9 Type �. Sliding Patio T e Doors opening onto patios or balconies which are r less than one story above grade or are otherwise accessible from the outside: a. All single sliding patio doors shall have the moveable section of the door slide on the inside of the fixed portion of the door. b. Dead locks shall be provided on all single sliding patio doors. The lock shall be operable from the outside by a keyutilizing i z i ng a bored lock cylinder of pin tumbler con- struction. hall be struction. !Mounting screws for the lock case s inaccessible from the outside. Lock bolts shall be of hardened material or have hardened steel inserts and shall be capable of withstanding a force of 800 pounds applied P in .any direction. The lock bolt shall engage the strike sufficiently to prevent its being disengaged by any possible movement of the door with the space or clearances provided 29 Att one h meriit 2C •. • w ra 6. Iv. ZOff:ING AhM LAND USE 61.060 for installation and operation. The strike area shall be reinforced to maintain effectiveness of bola strenth. Double sliding patio doors acus t be locked a t the meeting rail and meet the locking requirements of "B" above. low Protection: Windows shall be so constructed that when the window is locked it cannot be lifted from the frame. Window locking devices shall be capable of withstanding a force of 300 pounds applied in any direction.- Louvered irection. Louvered windows shall not be used within eight feet of ground level, adjacent structures or fire escapes. Exceptions No portion of this Code shall supersede any local, state or Federal laws, regulations, or codes dealing with the life -safety factors. Enforcement of .this ordinance should be developed with the cooperation of the local fire authority to avoid possible conflict with fire laws. 3, Efficiency Dwelling Units: No more than 20 P ercent of the dwelling units in any one building shall . be efficiency dwelling units* 4. Closets and Bulk Storage: The following minimum amounts of closet and bulk storage shall be provided for each dwelling unit: a. One bedro.om unit 4M10 lineal feet of closet space and 96 cubic feet of bulk storage. Only finished space having a minimum of 2 feet in . depth shall be considered in determining the lineal feet of closet provided. b. Two bedroom unit - 24 lineal feet of closet space and 116 cubic feet of bulk storage. only space having a minimum of 2 feet in depth shall be considered in determining the lineal feet of closet provided. c. Three or more bedrooms - For each bedroom in excess of two in any one dwelling unit, an additional 10 lineal feet of closet space and 50 cubic feet of bulk storage volume shall be required. Only space havi nt a minimum of 2 feet in depth shall be considered in determining the lineal feet of closet provided. 5 Sound I n all multiple family dwellings, the following requirements relating to accousti cal controls shall apply: a. All plumbing serving each dwelling unit shall be separated from other dwelling units by a room, closet, corridor or sound barrier. b . r partitions ons and floor oor s s tens shall be at least Sound Transmi ss i of Party p y Class 50. Corridor partitions shall be at least Sound Transmission Class 45. Sound Transmission Class (STC) shall be d-etermi ned in accordance with International Accousti cal Standards. 30 -Attachment 2C • § 24-9 WOODBURY CITY CODE (2) The ,landscaping standards and requirements shall be consistent with article V division 2 of this chapter. V. (g) Screening. (1) Screening to a height of at least five (5) feet shall be required when: a.. Any oiif s;tre,et parking area conta-ins more than six6 Oparking spaces and is within thirty (3 0) feet of an adjoining residential zone; and be, Where_ the driveway to a, parking area of more than six(6) parking spaces is within thirty (30) feet of an adjoining residential zone, (2) All exterior storage shall be screened. The exterior storage screening required • � b y d shall consist of a solid fence or wall not less than five (5) feet. high, but shall not extend within fifteen (15) feet of any street, driveway, or lot line. (3) Sidewalks shall be provided from parking areas, loading zones and recreation areas to the entrances of the building. (4) Outdoor Swimming pools or other intensive recreation shall observe setbacks re- quired, for the principal structure. .(h) Appearance. All buildings within an apartment development shall be so planned that • each exterior vertical surface is subject to the same standards and requirements for the front of the building. (i) General building or structural requirements. e(1) Ile(tuirements for exterior wall surfacing and covering. All multiple t;,t»il llli y (%v(w�ilt, buildings shall be designed and constructed to have the ont appear- ance e uiviilent of • • y ti ppc,ar ance on each exterior surface. Multi -family units of three (3) or more stories shall be constructed of brick exterior. (2) Open air drying of clothes shall not be permitted on the grounds of multiple family dwellings except when the following conditions are met: a. The areas for open air drying of clothes are specifically drawn on the original site plans. be A durable and dustless surface and adequate screening is provided for the entire •-? area to be used for the drying of clothes. i (3) Each multiple family dwelling development containing more than four (4) dwelling units shall include a play area with a minimum size of two -hundred (200) square feet ' per unit. 4) 1.(, Any blighting or deteriorating aspects of the multiple family dwelling development ` shall be placed or absorbed by the site itself, rather than by neighboring; residential uses. This provision particularly applies to the location of parking areas. (5) The design shall make use of all land contained in the site and shall be related to the multiple family use, either parking, circulation, recreation, landscaping,screening, building, storage, etc., so that no portion remains undeveloped. . 1488. Attachment ent �2D 31 .r, 4• 'ZONING § 24-9 cle V, {6) Except with townhouses and multiple family dwellings of four (4) or less units, no y exterior trash or gat•inuge: disposal or storage shall be permitted. In the case of row .: housing and multiple family dwellings of four (4) units or less, there shall be no :• exterlor ine4ner•ation and all storage shall be completely enclosed by walls and roof. (7) R fuse, either combust'ble or noncombustible' shall be contained in a rodent proof, 111d is . screen structure near the principal building. The design of the space or room in which refuse is deposited shall meet the approval of the city fire marshal, and city health ges is officer. ,Access doors large enough to allow bin type refuse containers to be removed for loading in refuse trucks shall be a part of the design of the refuse storage space. Refuse efusse must. he removed fromthe premises at least once per week. Refuse shall be ;tend .remiav�ed from the Premises h licensed ti•a,sh pickup service. (6) Disposal of organic food waste normally, encountered during the preparation of food areas and left over food shall be disposed of by a grinding unit installed in one sink. in each dwelling unit. (9) Open f incineration is prohibited. Gas, fuel rail, or electric tided incinerators located in the principal structure or in an accessory structure shall be prohibited. (10) All corridors in.truetu� .hat -es housing three (3) or more dwelling units shall he at least five (h) feet in ti��idth. • (11) All multiple residence dwelling units shall provide a minimum of ninety-six (96) cubic feet of miscellaneous storage space for each dwelling unit within the structure. Such space shall be in addition to normal storage space provided in wardrobes, cabinets, closets and linen closets. IQ12) No airconditioning unit shall protrude from any exterior wall except to the extent re mired for proper functioning. A grrill designed to appear as an integral part of the wall shall be placed to screen the protruding portion of the air conditioner. 113' (13) To insure proper footings, soil borings shall be taken. The boring locations shall be submitted and approved by the city engineer and shall be noted in a boring log to be to presented to the city building inspector at the time application is made for a building permit. The boring locations and map shall become a part of the building permit file. 7C (14 No multiple residence dwelling unit shall be so constructed as to have more than forty (40) percent of the horizontal lineal distance of a unit's exterior wall below ground. Continuous window wells or other selective excavation shall not he used to t circumvent this restriction. Areas which (3o not qualify as dwelling units because of the restriction may be used for recreation, amusement, storage, or as utility areas. t Q) Additional densities. I (1) For projects proposed in areas designated high density up to ten (10) dwelling units per gross acre on the comprehensive land use plan, it shall be possible for the development to earn greater densities through an amendment to the comprehensive land use plan for development up to fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre and strict adherence to minimum lot size and maximum height as defined in subsection (c) may be waived at the city council's discretion. 1499 32 Attachment 2C w c+ 0 E3 fD C+ W D LOOKING FOR $ CONSERVATION? Look To The Minneapolis Energy Office The Minneapolis Enerqv Office has been heloino orotprty nwnprc imnrn"c thn•• 1..,0..+... July III iyay Minnesota Real Estate Journal page APARTMENTGUIDE 6 V4accmc-111iiies d St. Antho 3.0 rcent. percent-, an ny, pe . Un' type u ft 05/89 � M Rem &no % cna ngs Rent 05M % cue r0. were The highest. overall vacancy les AP.E vAu:EY reoted in Minnetonka with 19.7 percent, iQbury, rcent; Eden Prairie 12.6 Studio i Bedroom 2 ged�, 110 266 2" 3,16$0 431.95 517.00 0.00 4.69 4.51 .So 432.95 $17.75 0:29 0.23- 0.14» $86.00 � 430.9$ $18.00 4.14 O.Z 0.19-14.7 . pe ri n percent, Fridley, 11.4 perce t, a d 3 Bedroom 108 2 7 s 623.75 In 1 coma lexe!.57` 1 p 1.85 MOO 0.60 61e.75 0.81 AP'AF"t'1'li! ENT VACANCY Chanhassen, 11.4 perwrit. According to the W4 ei CENTER 41,40 1s 334.42 -- _ 0Z .ftftft 33:30 0.34 . `T+0. survey, new construction in some of these I "M ,i99 428.94 5.14 4,6.34 289 X23.30 09.55 8.44 207 7s2 PERCENTCities resulted in the high rates. - Z BedrooM- 1283 518.14 1 . .63 502.63 3.09 496.19 4.42 The second quay r survey revealed that 3 ftdrooth 22 2443 619.75 In 26 complexes 4, 612.25 1.22 5%.00 4.16 � 530 studio apartment buildings containing �,1. l�l.Y , t acancy. rates dropped slightly in Vthe 6,842 units had a vacancy rate of 6.7 percent, S1Aic i 6 2911 M.00 410.17 000+ �E3�s/� $354.25 406.81 106% 0.83 $344,50 405.60 1.13 Twin Cities metropolitan area 1 311 facilities contatttin 54,678 one - 2 fa", 3 22% 31 498.23 664.38 410 3,23 499.79 0.31` 493.30 i.00 during the second quarter of 1989 over first bedroom units had a vacancy rate of 6.4 per- 5244 In27 complexot ' 658.75 0.85 645.25 296 r figures, while rents incri:ased slightly, q� g y' cent; 1 202 buildings with 50,709 two- g �6 according to the quarterly Apartment FACTS bedroom units were at 8.2 percent; 268 1 Bedrool" 2 Bed(oorh 176 244 $428.00 499.83 a,1 + ► 4045.00 $425.00 0.71% 0.99 $392.50 465;00 9.04% 7.49 Re rt. facilities with 4,396 three-bedroom units Bedroom a 426 670.00 h 3 complexes 0:06 650.00 3.08 0.00 0.00 The Apartment Guide an Edina -based p� uildin s with were at 6.5 percent, and seven b g ��IFair - firm, surveys nearly 1,300 properties 23 four-bedroom units had a vacancy rate of studio , BedrooM 9 3U2 $392.90 �.35% 08 $396.85 1.00-0.e $394.36 oss�.% representing more than 110,000 rental units to 21.7 rcent. 2 Bedroom X272 472.52 68103 410 470.10 580.29 0.51- 0.30 4(4.95 $69.84 1.41 141 determine actual rent and occupancy levels of P cY Average overall rents increased a little 3 Bedroom ?4011in 112308 71complexes 34 &74% 71803 °•04 621.78 1s.s4 apartments in the metro area. more than 2 percent during the second &jRNSviLLE - The report shows an overall vacancy rate of quarter, according to the survey. The average Studio 132 2288 3378.16 449.33 3,03% $378.83 4,52.76 0.34% 0.76- &%7.32 454 2.93% 7.2 percent for the second quarter of 1989, rent duringthe quarter was $490 u from q ' P iroom Bedroom 2982 539.65 4;90 2S d 542.88 059- 52 54383 1.14- 077- from 7.7 percent for the first quarter of pe q r $480 during the last quarter.- 3 3 Bedroom S 67 In 43 complexes 8 ss6.7s o.ss 642.93 2.•9 the year. The second quarter rate, however, is The average rent for one-, two- and three- CHAN"�E _ higher than the 6 percent rate reported in the bedroom units rose while rents for studio and ' I `uBedroom 224 s' 033 5000 13.54 M:M 1.30 � 50 238 - second quarter oast year. second q y • four-bedroom units dropped from last PP 2 Bedroom tie 50483 In 763 11.M% 491.83 2.6304 505 8833 020- During the second quarter of 1989, Min- quarter's figures. The average vent fora studio CHASKA 392 3 complexes neo lis had a vacancy rate of 7 percent; St. Po Pe was $347.58, down nearly 1.2 percent from y ' Bedroom 149 $423.44 2.68% 5423.93 0.12-% $433.00 2.21-% Paul, 8 percent; the northwest suburbs, 7.2 last quarter. One -bedroom apartments 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 346 22 48938 572.50 7.80 000 487.86 565.00 0.31 1.33 49400 60500 0.94 - 5.37- percent; the northeast suburbs, 5.1 percent; averaged $437.64, up 0.84 percent from the 517 to d complexes 6.00% the south%tst suburbs, 9.1 percent; and the previous quarter. Two-bedroom units averag- COON RAPIOS Studio 9 1382.50 11.11% $367.50 4.08% S36750 4 08% southeast. 5.8 percent: ed $536.51, u 0.87 percent from the first p pc ' BedrOom 2 Bedroom 790ot. 790 412.62 6 57 2.68 413.19 2.13 428 5.74 • Among individual cities, the lowest vacan-quarter. q Three-bedroom units averaged 3 Bedroom 89 5112'9 59688 449 51064 590 00 0.91 .1.17 48896 % 573.13 536 3.24 cy rates reported in the survey were found in $648.51, up 0.83 percent from last quarter. 4 Bedroom 5 1426 67500 N 1s con plexes 20.00 4.35% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Forest Lake. 1.25 percent; Wayzata, 2.5 per- Four-bedroom apartments averaged 5925.50, CRYSTAL cent; Oakdale, 2.75 Trent; Shoreview, 2.9 Pe a 6.3 p q _ I percent drop from last quarter. --Uz l)/ Studio 1 Bedroom 3 771 53+15.50 429.73 33.33% 3.89 $337.50 429.04 2.37 % 0.16 s 0.00 000% 2 Bedroom 567 51900 13.05 515.83 0.61 425.19 51354 1.07 1.06 No. % Vacant 3 Bedroom 24 692.50 14583 684.17 1.22 660-63 4.79 Unit TOM Units Rent 05189 05/89 Rent 02/89 % Change Rent 05/88 % Change 1365 in 13 complexes IM26% ANOKA '-" EDEN PRAIRIE Studio 4 i 5322.14 21.9546 Stud 1 Bedroom 476 415.38 12.39 5 283.93 13.4b% $287 .50 12.05% 414.44 0.23 362.50 14 59 Studio 1 Bedroom 69 1283 $431.00 530.61 5.80% 12.47 $430.00 528.86 0.23% 0.33 $432.00 524.23 0.23-% 1.22 1 2 Bedroom 504 50130 6.75 3 BeGroom 20 532 50 10.00 498.63 0.54 436 00 1498 545.63 2.41- 52600 124 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 1967 222 644 33 760.59 13.98 2.70 64190 748.82 0.09- 1.57 644 50 722.94 0.03- 5.21 1041 In 16 complexes 9.99% 3541 In 20 complexes 12-57% LOOKING FOR $ CONSERVATION? Look To The Minneapolis Energy Office The Minneapolis Enerqv Office has been heloino orotprty nwnprc imnrn"c thn•• 1..,0..+... -P D C+ C7 (D C+ W ca r Pae 8 Page Minnesota Real Estate. journal July 17, 1989 APARTMENT GUIDE CONT. .. HOPKINS No. V*_ -ant - Studio Unit 1Y" Units Rent 0918.4 OS/89 (tent 02189 Change Rent 05188 % Change EAST ST. PAUL 1354 .... 5.54 44092 0.81 43630 1.88 Studio 24S $313.80 6.94% $313.00 0.26% $309.07 1.53% 1 Bedroom 2600 380.01 6.04 378.57 0.38 378.76 0.33 2 Bedroom 2412 457.94 9.29 457.82 0.03 454.43 ' 0.77 3 Bedroom 194 586.67 1.03 585.08 0.27 591.95 0.89- 5366.88 5451 to 77 complexes 7.34% $36813 0.34-% 1 Bedroom 523 E CAN S'udio 109 5361.80 0.92% _ $365.60 1.04-% $361.10 0.19% 1 Bedroom 1850 478.75 3.24 476.04 0.57 474.41 0.91 2 Bedroom 2326 572.82 4.30 566.11 1.19 566.41 1235 3 Bedroom 508 632.83 2.95 636.25 0.54- 625.75 .1.13 1.13 $33950 4793 In 32 complexes 3.67% 5334.00 1.65% 1 Bedroom 651 EINNA 2.76 422.54 2.15 423.73 1.86 2 Bedroom 861 St.,dio 65 $414.17 13.85% $461.25 10.21-% $448.75 7.71-% 1 Bedroom 1218 54290 8.62 539.83 0.57 533.59 1.74 2 Bedroom 1313 668:08 10.21 667.50 0.09 657.98 1.54 3 Bedroom 199 837.33 11.06 847.00 1.14- 13.96 1.62 2534 2795 In 33 complexes 9.66% 2.61% $314.75 111% 1 Bedroom EXCELSIOR 409.13 7.40 33W1 277 408.31 0.20 2 8edr+ rf1 Stjd* 11 5346.25 0.00% $346.25 0.00% 'x.25 0.00% I Bedroom 140 410.00 7.86 410.00 0.00 409.38 0.15 2 Bedroom 133 480.00 10.53 478.00 0.42 473.75 1.32 ( 11 Of LSM Street) 234 In 5 complexes &W% Studio 1 Bedroom ow 2696 FOREST LAKE Studio 2 $165.00 0.00% S 0.00 0.0046 $340:0.4 51.47-% 1 Bedroom 154 427.50 2.60 425.00 0.59 417.50 2.40 2 Bedroom 149 51125 0.00 490.00. 4.34 476.67 7.25 3 Bedroom 16 480.00- 0.00 525.00 8.57- 495.00 3.03- 321 In 4 com;Aues 1.25% Sttdr0 1 Troon 284 1335 $360.00 FTt10lEY studio Is 5293.75 6.25% 5293.75 0.00% 5286.67 2.47% 1 Bedroom 8e9 416.94 13.72 417.47 0.13- 421.14 1.00- 2 Bedroom 735 49968 11.70 502.05 0.47- 502.90 0.65- 3 Bedroom 223 519800 1.79 597.50 0.06 56375 6.08 1663 In 21 compW" 11A3% Stud* 1 Bedroom 69 411 5315.00 426.75 2.90% 9.83 HOPKINS No. 4ti Vacant - Studio Studoo 190 SM" 1.58% 5353.00 0.69% 5341 44 4.10% 1 Bedroom 1354 44450 5.54 44092 0.81 43630 1.88 2 Bedroom 1166 54630 12.88 545.79 0.09 54500 0.24 3 Bedroom 116 69650 1.72 696.50 0.00 68490 1.69 20?6 2323 In 27 Complexes &14% 718.70 0.57 680.80 LITTLE CANADA INVER GROVE tE)GKM No. 4ti Vacant Studio 25 $332.00 4.0046 5342.00 2.92-% $312.50 6.24% 1 Bedroom 772 440 57 4.92 446.29 1.28- 438.93 0.37 2 Bedroom 1014 52169 7.40 516.38 1.03 505.63 3.18 3 Bedroom 215 577 92 3.25 581.67 0.84- 580.00 0.36- 3.18 20?6 M 11 com pkmes 5.97% 20.02 718.70 0.57 680.80 LITTLE CANADA 3 Bedroom 229 912.44 18.34 907.56 0.54 Stud* 92 5366.88 1.09% 5368.13 0.34-% $36813 0.34-% 1 Bedroom 523 46656 0.96 465.00 0.34 465.94 0.34 2 Bedroom 582 56969 5.50 56686 0.50 560.94 1.56 3 Bedroom 38 669.38 000 697.50 4.03- 685.00 2.28-- 479.17 627.58 1235 In a M. 4200 3.08% 560.00 0.00 560.00 0..00 MAPLEWOOD Stud* 34 $33950 2.94% 5339.50 0.00% 5334.00 1.65% 1 Bedroom 651 43161 2.76 422.54 2.15 423.73 1.86 2 Bedroom 861 51724 1336 509.88 1.44 506.72 2.08 3 Bedroom 30 66680 am 639.75 4.23 625.38 6.62 605.00 1576 in 17 completes 50 In 10 complexes 45541 NORTH ST. PAUL, No. 4ti Vacant Studio Unk Type Units Rent OSM 05189 Rent 07189 % Change Rent 05/88 % Change MINNETONKA 377.50 4.06 379.29 0.47- 374.29 0.86 2 Bedroom .Studio 70 $499.80 10.00% &501.€10 0.40-% $444.17 1252% 1 Bedroom 1552 562.95 19.91 558.24, 0.84 545.62 3.18 2 Bedroom 1913 722.79 20.02 718.70 0.57 680.80 6.17 3 Bedroom 229 912.44 18.34 907.56 0.54 946.60 3.61- 70 339 3764 In 21 complexes 19.69% 0.7996 0.11 5300.00 6.83% 2- Bedroom MOUND 463.33 4.18 461.25 0.45 366.00 437.40 5.99 5.93 3 Bedroom Studio 1 BedroOM 597.50 $390.00 472.58 0.00% 5.36 $390.00 471.42 0.0 0.25 $366.25 6.48% 2 Bedroom 196 643.33 9.69 641.67 0-26 479.17 627.58 1.38- 2.51 3 Bedroet" 1 449 560.00 0.00 560.00 0..00 560.00 0.00 . • MOUN vllr� Y_1 - In 6 complexes 621% Studio 1 Bedroom 1 5320.00 425.35 0.00% 5.06 $320.00 420.45 0.00% 1117 $ 0.00 0.00% 2 Bedroom 5£5 506.28 4.07 503.22 O.C1 420.45 496.00 1.17 2.07 3 Bedroom 2 605.00 0.00 605.00 0100 605.00 0.00 1121 In 10 complexes 45541 MINNE.IIP(; (north o1 lake Street) Studio 2534 5320.76 9.69% 331242 2.61% $314.75 111% 1 Bedroom 6296 409.13 7.40 33W1 277 408.31 0.20 2 8edr+ rf1 4403 548.41 8.49 -- i. 1.93 565.91 3.09- 3 Bedroom- 55 543.83 9.09 W.550 9.22 669.17 3.79- 4 Bedrocw% 1 11203 1000.00 in 243 compk=9 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINNEA .13 ( 11 Of LSM Street) Studio 1 Bedroom ow 2696 $340.60 420.81 6.47% 3.80 M.t 419102 1.95% 0.43 $344.57 1.15-4b 2 Bedroom 1258 533.05 6.76 X9.03 0.76 424.48 546.02 0.86- 238- 3 Sedroorn 194 665.43 4.12 W, .36 2.95 721.83 7.81- 4951 In 147 compkxse 4.89% i MIKI NEAPOL.tS (U of W)` _ Sttdr0 1 Troon 284 1335 $360.00 5.83% 1" 0.28% $349.38 304% 2 Doormen 01 Q 434.21 580.18 5.69 6.42 431.69 '581.3A 0.58 0.20- 417.47 558.03 401 397 3 BOOM &, 4 Wro" 83 6 750.13 912.50 13.25 12.50 712.00 912.60 5.36 0.00 716.31 472 2520 M 42 compkwe 6.19% 912.50 000 Stud* 1 Bedroom 69 411 5315.00 426.75 2.90% 9.83 $314418 424.H6 0.20% 0.44 $318.33 1.05-% 2 Bedroom ®10 488.90 3.70 487,40; 0.31 422.89 495.72 0.98 1.38- 3 Bedroom 6 572.50 0.00 5",00 1.33 565.00 1.33 1302 In 10 complesss 5.61% NEW MOPE Stud* 1 Bedroorrl 11 1105 537133 435.50 9.09% 3.26 $387,00 4M.63 4.05-41 0.03- 5374.00 0.71-% 2 Bedroom 1169 530.11 4.02 526.00 0.78 434.48 524.57 0:23 1,06 3 9edi m. 39 2'324 606.38 In 27 complexes 0.00 3.61 % W0113 0.21 604.67 0.28 NORTH ST. PAUL, Studio 23 5292.50 4.35% SM -00 0.86% $311.67 6.15-% 1 Bed#001rl 211 377.50 4.06 379.29 0.47- 374.29 0.86 2 Bedroom 307 466.67 2.93 465.00 0.36 458.44 1.80 3 Bedroot. 39 545.00 2.56 545.00 0.00 545.00 0.00 640 In 9 compkmes 3.44% OAKDALE Studio 1 Bedroom 70 339 $320.50 387.92 1.43% 2.36 $318.00 387.50 0.7996 0.11 5300.00 6.83% 2- Bedroom 239 463.33 4.18 461.25 0.45 366.00 437.40 5.99 5.93 3 Bedroom 80 597.50 1.25 $97.50 0.00 660.00 9.47- 778 in 8 complexes 2.75% First Interstate CompanyMort ageg ,., Philip Allen ••;' From high-tech medical to light manufacturing, the Cityof Arranged Construction Miniperm.Financing - g• __ .. _ _ .._ ... ... _... _,1111.... .. .._._......�... _ __ _ W CT1 Minnesota Rea l Rstate journal age My 1'7 1989 . . • No. 4i Vacant .. `• Unit type Units • pant 05/89 05!89 Rent 02189 4i Change pent 0518$ % Change OSSEO0.00% Studio 6 $300.00 5378.79 E300.00 O.00�ib $300.00 .0.00% 1.35 1 Bedroom ., 118 394.38 ,. 3.3'9 3.70 394.38 468.75 0:00 0.00 389.13 462.50 1.35 2 Bedroom 135 259 468.75 In 4 complexes 3.47% ' 700.86 0.06 4 Bedroom PLYMOUTH Studio 90 $385.25 7.78% 5380.00 1.38'4+I► 5396.67 2.88-% 1 Bedroan 1727 501.05 594.88 7.76 11.51 502.40 593.83 0.27-• 0.18 494.77 588.15 1.27 1.14 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 2719 745,83 14.16 757.95 1.6G- 755.36 1.26- 399.41• 47219 55 M 33 complexes 10.20% 39243 471.x8 1.78 3.37 2. Bedroom 3 Bedroom 1699 43 RICHFIELD Studio S 16 $345.1}0 6.25% $345.80 0.00% $313.50 10.30% 1 Bedroom 1215 434.34 5.19 5.46 428.69 522.29 1.32 1.10 429.42 522.38 1.15 1.08 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 1135 49 528.04 604.38 0.00 603.75 0.10 599.38 0.83 • 2415 in 44 complexes 5.22% 0.81 067 2 Sedroono 3 Bedroom. 1669 1t Q 602.93 891.14 ROSSINS50ALE 1 Bedroom 202 $432,60 6.44% $384.00 12.63% 9.68 $416.88 514.67 3.75% 3.74 2 Bedroom 259 53' 13 3,86 0.00 486.79 595.00 4.20 595.00 4.20 3 Bedroom 463 �+t+>tes In 8 com 4.9711 studio 1 $325.00 . Stu"ROSEL.E Studio 82 $361.00 4.88% $360.89 419.78 - 0.03% 1.61 5358: 425:11 1.27% 0.34 1 Bedroom 1963 1334 426.54 530.22 3.67 3.30 527.57 0.50 " 0.24 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 37 729.00 0.00 719.00 1.39 7,1110, 1.60 33#% 3416 In 52 complexes 3.51 % Stdd+ i8 $363,86 SAVAGE Studio 6 $345.00 0.00% 5345.00 0.00% $345 00 . 425.33 0.00% 3.10 I Bedroom 175 203 438.50 546.71 9.14 8.87 426.71 530.88 2.76 2.98 MP 205 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom St 717.17 3.92 707.17 1.41 695 83 3.07 3.270A 43S In 8 completes 8.28% WAYZl1TA Studio ® $379.00 SHAKOPEF Studio 12 5321.00 O.00ab 1.58 moo 398.67 5.25% 1.38 S333 7'S 39300 382-% 284 1 Bedroom190 2 Bodroom 266 404.17 500:67 15.79 496.92 0.75 474 SO w 40 552 0.43- 3 Bedica, 5-41;30 720 V 0.12 1.85 12.50 582.50 0.00 4 787.00 25.00 476 In 7 c8omplexes 9.66% 1406 361 In 8 complexes SHOREVIEW Studio 55 5390.00 3.64% 538 7:50 0.65% S39500 1.27-Mi 1 Bedroom 530 463.13 1.13 5,22 460.63 571.25 0.54 1.53 460 63 56000 0.54 3.57 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 383 580.00 0.00 620.00 2.42 62000 2.42 5.39 909 97Z In 4 complexes 57667 2.02- 1307 In 19 complexes SOUTH ST. PAUL 28 5299.17 10.714b 5325.00 7.95-a►b 5390 00 23.29-% 1studioBed Bedroom 120 407.50 4.17 40458 528.75 0.72 087 42000 51550 2.98- 3.46 2 Bedroom+ 2 149 11 533.33 647.50 11.41 0.00 645.00 0.39 60750 6.58 3 Bedroom 308 in 7 complexes 8.12% 630.50 967 1157 ST. ANTHONY 3 5310.00 0.00% 5310.00 0.00% 5345.00 1.64% Studio 1 Bedroom 337 406.25 2.08 406 402.06 458.94 1.04 098 39688 456 13 2.36 1.60 2 Bedroom 345 11 463.44 516.25 0.00 511.25 0.98 503 75 2.48 3 Bedroom 696 in 8 complexes 3.02% 6.4000 8.2000 43764 536.51 "Wes 0.8743 Our World. a _w' rl17 No. 4 Vacsnt Unit type Units Rent 05189 05189 pent 02189 % Change Want 05188 41, Change ST LOUIS PARK Studio 285 $381.19 4:2196 5378.79 0.63% 5390:84 .2.x7=9b 1 Bedroom 2106 .: 473.01 5:75 7.18 471.29 581.29 . 0.36 042 474.30 576.09 027- 0.97 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 2062 97 581.40 - 701.25 4:12 688.54 : 700.86 0.06 4 Bedroom 1 698.00 obo 698.00 0100 698.00 0.00 4551 In 59 complexes !!.2046 5f. PAUL (Nortn) . 2a 5326.52 5.04% 5325 1 8.4 $.`326:31 6.06%Studio 1 Bedroom 2073 399.41• 8.37 5A W.0i 479.=7 1;40 1171 39243 471.x8 1.78 3.37 2. Bedroom 3 Bedroom 1699 43 487.35 575.13 0:00 0:11 567.00. 1.43 4053 In 64 complexes SAM ' ST; PAUL i'! StYdio 046 $347.45 WW2 3:20-% $348.16 020-% 1 Sedroom 2592 443.80 10.46 13.08 :10. 5:14 1.19 2.34 440.23 598.90 0.81 067 2 Sedroono 3 Bedroom. 1669 1t Q 602.93 891.14 10.53 :1 4.01:,854.73 426 4 r00rn 4 1129.50 50.00 1304,56 13.42- 1575.00 2829- .5129'1 In 85 complexes 103'!" studio 1 $325.00 0.00% :i ' 000% 5325.00 0.00% 1 Bftroom 164 410.50 2.44 4.4 3 40710 0.74 :1!175 397.50 462.50 327 157 2 l slroo+'R 3 t, 225 469.75 575:00 0.0O .20, x,77 555.00 360 414 In 5 complexes 33#% Stdd+ i8 $363,86 5.5846 X71.00 1.92-% 5362.83 028% 1 Bedroom 13-42 434.83 3.73 4X 05 MAW 0.74- 1,16- 439.40 536.00 1.04- 0.54- 2 Broom 3 Bert! .room I= 41 533.09 635.50 2.84 0.00 1.47- 624.00 1.84 2750 In 35 complexes 3.270A WAYZl1TA Studio ® $379.00 0.00% 9 Or 0.00% $37000 2.43% 1 Bedroom 150 442;33 2.00 449 06 0.74 42783 3.39 2 Bedroom 151 48 542.00 734.17 2.65 2.08 5-41;30 720 V 0.12 1.85 534 29 70333 1.44 438 3 Be0r00m 4 Bedrtl 4 787.00 25.00 767:00 0.00 69000 1406 361 In 8 complexes 2.49% ' WHITSWARLAii Stuft . 9 5360.00 0.00% ;00 5.26-% $395 00 8 86-4b 1 Bedroom 359 450.93 2.51 448,10 1 0.63 0.60 442.81 52197 183 259 2 Beft" 3 BedroOm 909 33 535.50 565.00 5.39 909 : 0.27 57667 2.02- 1307 In 19 complexes 4.67% WOOM-19 Studio _ 8 S33900 25.00% VIM 00 0.00% 5339 00 0.00% 1 Bedroom+ 340 451.40 12.35 4-52.00 630 21 0.13- 0.26- 447 08 602.75 0.97 5 61 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 767 42 636.57 691.50 16.04 7.14 684 00 1.10 630.50 967 1157 In 9 complexes 14.69% SUMMARY T`(3TALS FOR ALL MUNICIPAUTiES Average Unit Type No. Units % Vacant Awerege 05189 Rent 05189 Bent 02189 % Change Rent 05188 % Change Studio 6842 6.7378% $347.58 $ 351=73 ACV, 00 1.1799-% 0.8387 $350.19 43121 f 0.7453-% 1.4912 I. Bedroom 2 Bedroom 54678 50709 6.4000 8.2000 43764 536.51 "Wes 0.8743 525.31 21321 3 Bedroom 4396 6.4800 648.51 643.1.6 925.50 0.8318 6.3209- 638.64 968 88 1.5455 10.5152- 4 Bedroom 23 21.7400 867.00 11664.8 in 1484 complexes LENDER REPOSSESSIONS AGENDA ITEM I-5 Action by Council o - Enldorsed PIPKORN BUILDING SCREENING: 2055 white Bear Avenue Modified _ Dejected Dat e There will be an oral presentation of this Item at the meeting by Community Development Director Geoff Olson . AGENDA XTEM Action by Council AGENDA REPORT Endorsed... Modified TO: City Manager ReJ ectec*L,,,- Date ERCP M Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT; Water District 8 Improvements, Project 86715- Assessment Hearing DATE September 19, 1989 Introduction A resolution to adopt the assessment roll is attached. �.�n d A copy of the August 8, 1989 agenda report is attached for reference. Due to the large number of parcels involved, a copy of the assessment record book, will be available at the assessment hearing instead of being transmitted with this agenda report. Recommendation I t . i s recommended that the assessment roll be adopted., BAI jw Attachment lip AGENDA ITEM Action by Council: AGENDA REPORT Endorsed Modified TO: City Manager Re j ected FRUM : Assistant City Engineer Date SUBJECT Water District 8, Project 86-15--Schedul e Assessment Hearing .DATE: August 8, 1989 Introduction Attached is a summary of the proposed assessment rol I for the subject project. It is requested that an assessment hearing be scheduled& Evac kgrosin d The same assessment rates are sit I ized as was presented at the pub.1.ic hearing. That is, $100/Unit for parcels that had p,reviously been assessed f or the original construction of the Mail and Road booster station and $250 for all other parcels in the service area boundary. The proposed assessment roll utilizes the density factors in the comprehensive sanitary sewer plan to determine future units in currently undeveloped land. The assessment roll recovers $551,850. The projected recovery through assessment given at the time of the public hearing was $532,250n -Re,commendat i on Due to the I arge number of parcels involved (1439 parcels), it is recommended that a special hearing date be set. It is recommended that the hearing shout d be hel d in John GI enn Middl e School cafeteria during the week- of September 11-15, 19890 jW Attachments BAI RESOLUTION ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, ' the city council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to-th d assessment th construction fWt Diti�t8 e propose �assessmen or e��ons ruc on o � a er s r improvements, as described in the files of the city clerk as � Project 86-15, and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems. just, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, 'MINNESOTA: IN Such proposed assessment, as amended, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute th0» special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement int he amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of twenty years, the first of the installments to be payable on or after the first Monday in January 1991, and shall bear interest at the rate of nine (9.0) percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. T' the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1990. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one yearon all unpaid installments. 3, It is hereby declared to be the intention of the council to reimburse itself in the future for the portion of the cost of this improvement paid for from municipal funds by levying additional assessment,s on notice and hearing as provided for the assessments ' herein made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not herein assessed for the improvement, when changed conditions relating to such properties make such assessment feasible. ' 4. To the extent that this improvement benefits nonabutting properties which may be served by the improvement when one or more later extensions or improvements are made, but which are not herein assessed, therefore, it is hereby declared to be the intention of thecouncil , as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 420.051, to'`reimburse the city by adding any portion of the cost so paid to �the~�assessments levied for any of such later extension or improvements. 5. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended don the property tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. UlN j o ' " 3 .. 2 �13 L{{r � s . 1 e• 1 .DISTRICT 8 WATER IMP. ASSESSMP'PIT AREA ASSESSMENT MAP PROJECT-* 86-15 District 8 Water Improvement SCALE N N/A ' ��•��{# ASS? �� :,� �}'�� 7,r�:���.�.:•:.::.•:... WAN 400" .•., ..:.:.•::,:;:...• ..• �: .:•. :� yam;.•:•- . a: Z• .. 0 .... ... ..... ... :............. .. . v :: : ' >:. Aj O o . o <: o ... >. - i+ . "" 4> UlN j o ' " 3 .. 2 �13 L{{r � s . 1 e• 1 .DISTRICT 8 WATER IMP. ASSESSMP'PIT AREA ASSESSMENT MAP PROJECT-* 86-15 District 8 Water Improvement SCALE N N/A Tr TA, = 143 _ It of ,� t PA 0 o � • CITY OF MAPLEYVOOO \ w Q/Q 12-28-22-12 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. scale :N//� Date:$ -1—g 0 QAll LLj I; Q ' `''•+ k 71 V -p 13 04 A of 00 430) sl�. , ,�..,1.. ! f; 0 .3 LANE Al :r Lj 1 7. LLj z, 3 -7 14 14 v* 4981 vs. I --- % -:h p 0 A �`(0 N io # j A) -# rte04 `/ `� l S 1, �a 9-) Nw -Coe Oki Z. A 4 A 6r) a 4 (0 or %of 100, Lu t or) ? Ito! ell) to 3 C2 itol It V--1 I or Ion 00) 45 T 1 7 Az--dd pq 4 d) s fZ0lip. 0 11 b In CO 1(0 o t0 -*V AY CIRCLE tD 4j cr— 40i 95 I , sip 10 q) • r Ito t, j q 1013. L Is Q/Q 12-28-22-13 Notification Area Map PROJECT. 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale:N/A 'Date :8— 1 —8 bow- 0 -s Jq 40 Q/Q 12-28-22-21 Notification Area Map PROJECT.86-7 5 scole:N/A DISTRICT 8 WATER.TANK IMP. Dole :e - i -8� r a; E ?:I r • • �•..,..'' RESERVED FOR zlo, a� IL it2. o o 40) y lop Q/Q 12-2.8-22-22 Notification Area Map PROJECT: 86-15 " DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP.. Scale:N/A Date:g—1—gam 1---� r Scale:N/A Date:g—1—gam 1---� 0 to 4 !1% AL 2 0 to Q/Q 12-28-22-23 Notification Area' Map PROJECT. -1 5 � •nic-rGrir-r -86 R WATER TANK IMP. scale:NIIA 1_8 Dote :8-1-8 2 04 Oft F 0 Z -v 4 446 .44.17 1. Sj dW PL To Z 2.3) X/6' j IS zi ZI Z 3 )ION 3 —„s-:.. —...r—j .�3 C2j/� Z32 . %, 4s- \4 Z433 .2j9 so C Oj o” *TOJ --Q'r4s4j0 1 A No R 0.4 Q/Q 12-28-22-23 Notification Area' Map PROJECT. -1 5 � •nic-rGrir-r -86 R WATER TANK IMP. scale:NIIA 1_8 Dote :8-1-8 • s �:;. �. +x-95.90 • D IL09 >� -44 C 40, +► t , . O UT LST A roti F3 r r ?,%. /*A ` or' rip PO 7 V ' " (6 7) • titin (48� .� �1 1 O� o �� 10CA R • ;� in ��} "7�, Y� 6�ri r�i �� •r�S.Sr 8 •' • 26 • ` '� . r.� �� �j, .00 5 t�� ''L� Q • •� 59, ,•y s�" , % tr. ,, •, �. ',j.' .l� Ij (4 f 14 p d �� �1 (00) q. ,� 3 ���4� �a��.• AVE. S5; IZ 15. (4-5) 13 UL 10 W. la 172 c �, POND �, IY . .aj till 3 35, oy Cr. cri lie (7(0) (75) 7 A D r , !off co 13� lz3•to4 a,) •} ,'k•%.�. 2 / Ir. ,5�; I,•��. .t •t _ y, �, cc AL 3 13 i�16 KING (77) 4z 0) 1) r. •i r • Q/Q 12-28-22-24 49 Notification Area Map PROJECT; 86--.15 too. " DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/7%� Dote:g-1-8 Q/Q 72-28-22-31 Notification Area Map PROJECT -86-15 •• nic-rr�irT R WATER TANK IMP. v 4 st scale:N]/A 1_ Dale:8-1-8 t .4 1. lei - to 4 04) ju 12.r W ILI zk U 00 # Z) Cr_ N :Z Q 1 254.30 7e•87 5 3 3 ILE 125 a 3 2 3 ale 3 1%3 7Y J lz 4 Z 7.30 LLJ 5• 05) F- a 0 2 90 I24. zi .40 uj �3 3, U 6 7 J %VA' K WA Y 1 10 o 0 9-9-77 KWOOD D R I V E 'J. -H I L L S ., 14 7 1 A (5s 4a) (+7) 90 /00. 3 O (50) t f N1719 D r V% 4 0 10 Z 8 A. A P.0 A? 7 (24,)4 a s.� o o 2- Cl IL � , p Q_ Ll IDR. 6 5' 0 f qk.� 3 u J _ Z 0 5.3 32 N d pl� (.O 70 139.50 Z b 1004 OZ (31) �, 7 �% % 2� 4 > rr 5 95% Q/Q 72-28-22-31 Notification Area Map PROJECT -86-15 •• nic-rr�irT R WATER TANK IMP. v 4 st scale:N]/A 1_ Dale:8-1-8 €I LI fi k e,1 rt t .t. )f a R1. LOOP or �) .t� Lw 0 6*1 • jj Q�f • 1 - Ct�� t 07) N O (5 0� CO(- 2G 5.0 1 O 59 i ► l Oa,� 010 1 c �; 40 ' 2.9 Y. 0 FIN 1 ' •+ Z0.07 _ ' g3 +� 148 0� • ' CY+) Ira 22 w 't •^ V t0•i•�.••5 12.E Z�7.•)7 1_1 � '• DC '� �� 60) 103.07 3 IQ 0�l O I :; e � �3 1 2�� ,' ou � 3 • o^ti C� .. ,,, s.; � .••� of . •fir f-, N ���7 "1 ti � o, ',, ' • 1 •� 000 7. 34- KJ/TEAK WOOD COURT L+5.04N { P. ti Ctr �� s ► �- . ;- . R� 1 � � i 1 , � • � � X8.7 •��,,'' .�r.• 1� ,1t ��(.A_ .50 56 qD _ _ 1 2 J TO A D . _ • L ��'' OAKRiUV E 2ND D v Z 0 t �� ; ^ l4 Ary .13 l V, 3�• .!s +! �•' Fos H I LLWOOD ti �h' ►� �� •� yip ,� � f c .� ^ • N `, oto + t O' � � ' ? r• ( O .' r .A 4F F2 n, • ' � � Cts) �(+�'� C 3 "� , �� , , 00 - •` Q/Q -12-28-22-32 Notification Area Map PROJECT,86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale: N l A Dofe:8-1--8 • 00) , , [] o Com) 1 N- C 4-.4-8 (N�r 3 3 < 0 000 IN, 4 W-0 q LINWOOO -0' , OUT LOT c __j1001, soL u 3 6 (re t3oarj ofwxtcrOnI er � >HEIG �, 40 .41 1�z -004 C) Ire 11010" 0� C3 LLJ O -f OUTLOI B ,I Iwo z (93) (76) ry (go (77).• 90 0 l� 4 9 Cl Q/Q 12-28-22-33 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-15 '' DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. scale:NJI/A _8 D at e:8— 1 —8%-, • Q/Q 12-28-22-34 Notification Area Map PROJECT,86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP* Scale:N/A Dato:8-1-8 a 8 V Oj 013 .?04,70 X65.62 s �d) �� 2J -/ie t+.� N10 ^' ('V'� , 3S ao T JB •.fo1 N tS� _ o 14) ff' Q 1 r' �,,� jy `�s el Sj ' - . :;:• r i30 of 2 4 1' 2 3 4^ � 'f� � as _ � o�� ' ROA R EST IEIV • —«U, �. 43 2 IN N43 .•�,► 2 i is �J h� ti • 3 S 2 z' .p N tt • w LiJ . jS J5 zo Js �� A u OUTLOT B � • 1 23rq 4 1 23 4 Q.• 0 OUTL O T B r•) } (89) �• o ' ' 2� N T 04 4 3 2 1 Nq 3 � t OUTLOT C Jnr jr,3S is 35 :3s'6 � •' a �1 ' PON p OV V' ,��, tie •• L �—_ Z CRESTVIE 3 � , , 4 4I. INS lb C E TV I E W F O R E ST, . 3 R D. A D 73 tss F O R -E5 T Lai} , o.0 T L o -r.,J14 2 ' LAI r cs� °CL� 1 O 2 e ►- 2 z PART OF CC•N"MON j• AREA PON so PON o h 3 N ( H C/1 (J , s,, SEE PLAT COPY • FOR DETAILS Q/Q 12-28-22-42 Notification Area Map PROJECT.86-715 °• nic-rFtir:T R WATER TANK IMP. Scale: N / A Daie:8-1-8.. Q/Q 12-208-22-43 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-15 n��'rRIc;T fi WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/lA 1 8." Date :8— 1-8" t>1 •lb 100% IA • 1 BO 400 390 • ,• I �,,� ��) • T v, •- g) in �) J , r In b 1'%oil -- N • .7 3 •w- • s Alf (3) it► Scl •1 `�`Jctr f�Inr 000.1 1 �. 1 (1.15 J • (45p) �. •J �) I I Q, l 4 Lx,L - •SNI-' '� '�'�• 1 �1LA 1 so 40r 41 , it 58.33'. TIM fZ�c t 7•S : r AV V L. Alps Q/Q 13-28-22-11 Notification Area Map PROJECT, 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale:N/A Date:8-1-8., Q/Q .13-28-22-12 Notification Area Map PROJECT .86-415 " DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scala : N l A I • Q/Q .13-28-22-12 Notification Area Map PROJECT .86-415 " DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scala : N l A I • • t N ,'Sc ►a, 1.9'7 `�' 1 t. •• �� . (34) ' 10 A , i . 2 , ,d •�+' ,,,, �, ,,s • • ;,�. s .. . _ ,ate �. .. G W OD (4-6) 1 .: 6 tY O j 7 1 c9�� \ N C? IV01 A. ECON A /D'b 52 (of • io > To � ., �., 14 _( )C C) C C C i. do VALLEY VIEW AVE.. C22- 7) ' 5 3 6 7 /73..3? ' 4' '•'' "' 1 �`' _.. -f 1.�. ) ,. ! . ' • W I •' •�• a.4-0 I;i+� to �s Ito. .. • 4- F% 1.0Z Or • .. •f 1` It �•i J � • .� .r' 1 � �• •� � � � • ' � n • ' '� � , l t • 1 • �.� ~• i, l . • S �0 1, C291 W Cgs C h • t -� ` - u• • 176 P ? • • , . . • Q/Q 13-2 8-2 2- 13 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-75 nISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP., scoia:N/A Date:g—1—g Q/Q 13=28.-22-14 • Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-15 nlqTRlr.T 8 WATER TANK IMP. scoio :N/A Dote:8-1-8., 10, q/q 13-28-22-21 • Notification Area Map PROJECT86-75 • nl-qTPlrvT 2 WATER TANK IMP. scale :NIIIA Date:8-1-8 .• �, '.�.:'• i s 7 A 1 S 0 -. �. 9 �r i 1.9 10 5 r� 148. t31 - b 0 'I 10081 V1 .341tc o 0 n` !S) iii• i (i3 ► ;; !'�`�.� W �8� V n �►s.t �• .'^••-• CHw )TEN ERS •, r ��0 , ( • ) 8 ,•� rl 0 ( ( M, `IACD rll .4G Q�i V 'n • • . �^ • '.' ! �• ••� � .�.. 147. ' ' ;V) • } ,• •' ~ 1• Jr '•• -as iI (!� • • i 1• Fill L4 49 16 (43) rb B D 16� It _ .... Or J) r , \k!t 6,0 HU 141: 14 U/D .� AVE.Nof 46 O �i3) S�o �>r �/� •�l! � ! 9 I'� 1 os� .,.- y w •�• il,S' r. +-4j� • �•�9t,1 1g 1ls �) v C�h p -• may ' y �• 7 • ,�, ,� r ,3s' o G Y o • � �1 •�,, v -4 D 0 (5 Z) to (4-9 V, (50 co z 7)' 6\ ;0 o J . o ap o. 01 3 K G L rw lei. s (29�CO 7 o 8 I T,Z g0tt4 ,, Ct3) ! s _ 4-b 3 e-ll.a vt" 3 o s • Z (57) .l►o !s ,os 8t l t7.�l o ••r !l. 74 l 04. 3 8 *► iy`� ----- _. - - A P (47� 2ND c53' A D C)`' 4 6 4 (48 'o b �n � • 01 ,� acs• �Alp 5 ,na.� ,�.3..;, 05• u ' 09, \6, �' DRA1 N1v E 6 + F. M a'.NKD\ •� A D _. �3 I� i So `� � • � 7 ° 1 •_� / OUT LOT A v ' r Pe INETLANA j 13Z Z 3 0 tSt.79 100 _ 0 Ao 32} 3 v� 9 X37 ti G ,' 07.) o ��� c� J •" DOD ; �5 O .H T Jf. o N O U T L O T B 10. L '110.2336 .4 ^1 10 7 . L ` 12r 7 �l' = G� .46-13-28-22-22%, Q/Q Notification Area'Map PROJECT 86-15 ' DISTRICT 8 WATER..TANK IMP. I . -9 cv ip w Scale :N f A Date:8-1-8 '0 13 Z)4 0 1 4ot loo .00 ��J CS�� Ir 39 TIMBER TRAIL 0 13-54 100 /IsN j A. 01 All. ft 2 14 3 1 bo P ns 0 0 (z+) 3 too 130 ZZo so J$I C) Qw. V1 0 6 6-07 110 Lj 42J) ro or% 'COURT:O3 P HYLIS .. I 41 (�,- . cc k, le . 0 4 1 ko 7 3 k0N V A E -5 _ ,, n I Lo 5 5)6 (8 7) N, - 5 CA 3 Ieo VC A *'c" T L I R I D E 51 4 6 A 101 02 (67)3 q) ( )4 (3 E < %J (403) CD 7 (93) cD #100 55 0 N4EWAVE .0 3 0 li 14 0 VALLEY V I 7.j 76. 78 11 -'ci (9 430) J 4 X 2 N D/ A Ds TOM COX: 7,:5 2(3cl R A 1f4 V Pon, _� 7 7 47 ;77 1>1 T , I I D L.E 5 MIDGE u 13%0 6 (4 .0% (���6 44 1 1: a Sb IA %I -b or ow� 14% CFO (53) 2 .13 f: ' ; s(41 •10 12 A( 2) 1� D Do 1ST.�-, C4) c. .69) IUD dh Q/Q 13-28-22-23' A Notification Area Map PROJECT 86,15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A D a I e :8-10-8%-0 Q/Q 13-28-22-24 Notification Area Map PROJECT $.6-15 ni�TRic;T 2 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A Date:8-1-8.: 1---1 eon • • 1'� S • • - __ ito • -�—� 4 . % t o J � � 110' r \ G' 1 � �� • � r -c-_ 0 70 114) • ' :=.: � S_3 gds � �,,c •�; n 1• . + • !, l Tonrc, o+•3 �a �' , �• IK ,",' .jam , 22 13,.;5.. �' ?. Q � _ � ;, ,��,�- � � � � �� Z �r1 • • y .�, ; co Q� .•.. *'V • • Y _ •O (fv2� , X64• r� �. .� 69) _ a ON av (w 4lop to. ob d00lQsdo44 .11 • ,• .° �`'• . AMIE�`— oE.r* nN000e0o r 4,;N. -Q' 4 •� •r.; t j '• 7 -� • -t : � Wpm co ' •� ' O J � .. •a ' ,Y c'1 • , , • '.' • t -71 - .r- JoA 0 teo (27) _ �s AlTut.4 cC,rb cJ s o �, $ .Q o,` o O ti.. ogro - C � (3 1) Q 1 �----M I T Z �o �' _ • - o• AVE E .r Crn !•J 12t.'StA10o to -T l� 2010. 39; (3 cf 0 Cl Ij r r � • o '+ 1t C 'p.-- O ( + `j O f3 10 0 r 't Cii) - - J, .: 11 61 o c t- 3 9 (,N) (42) (43) (4 �-� 0 c vtoo — . I J 1 9. ► (tzo o•}OUTHCREST�1o,oAVE S ) on 0 1 0.101 I .Oj. +•�. •• o 14 r Q/Q 13-28-22-31 Notification Area Map PROJECT 8.6- 15 " DISTRICT 8 WATER.TANK IMP. scare :N/A Date:8-1—g,. Mdvar•+G ��• f? Z� yj (10) 2_ 3 •.., ., =' 3 , o let Otto .,� Pis • _• � so W � J � . , ;.adOp dop J '+ IV* .� 2 AJ '.� 6Z) Lj V? • V' J , ~� 7J N�•� • l� • f ,�: ' LL. 0 1• 2 • 1, • • .J de i n � • •� . V, • ,• • �. • •• • • 41 t 9 � •• 0. V6 f • T ` V IW% 13-28-22-32 Notification Area Map �. PROJECT -86-15 • • n��-rn��-r 0 Nnl n TSR 7rANIV 1N1itD Scale :N/A rr Dote :g -1—g,, 1( 414 ?(o _, i 41 85o.4a 4b • . •i GONYE A S (4 ) 2 A �d �S} 3 10 OAK f a f too 0 yo 70 o (4(0) 8 1.9p 0 U T L 0 7 A/f 11 loot( OR(f,5 -SaELAND Lit Z 1 cry Cz v) IL 13 )0048 77019 19 H GT�- 1S.T,.%oo lr� ()7lc, %1 17 14 19 �) 11-- -t 1 6 15 loft 20 L ...................... 2 7 2.1 Z) (Z 3 2Z Z 3 24 Z. 26 (2-5 (Z 40) (27) IV �)o 10 r) ANN* --Mft �< • O 00f 17 '3,9 IS 5NOW5HOE (31) A ts> (3 Z) (3) 9 % (3 3) '4' (33 C3 10 Z �3 7) 000 00 4A'D5D"% :2 u 1 10 0 6 (01 �5 0 (-44N 45 %A in 141 ADDJ 4 I :C aND S 5 A� 1 49 �v CONY AS 1. C) , R r) Y W r) r) n eA*'(rO P t. N L V D « H, , Q/Q 13-28-22-33 Notification Area Map PROJECT.86-75 0 .[DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. jZi. 9 7 Scole:NIIA 1_8 Dole:8-1-8 f I i t14Z 1413 t'. / 1 Urs • - '' i • , 'i r�� 1 � l . •I C3Ci Q `to A M 13 fit. V J s 1 � � • � 12 �,� 0it• c� E 0 0 J IA (13J . 5N � S 3 h � I ' s• � rr 8 , • � i . i i ?� IL 19 2 10 • X11 �6 ((p} h !O 1. 47)4Af -1 (27) C J • as oil _ _iia) 14 (3) • to o ` I P 15 C) 1 (41)•131 M 1• ,�, 53 G L A N V, 6w) . 10 12 .. . • 13 7� 13-22-34-2 f8 _ : • Notific.ation Area Map PROJECT. 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A Date:8-1--8 4*% A V • �+ /.,4 AA - • - . _ VIC CV n'J•i.7 n ! Irl (19) • N 1 1 ? 4 4 .v P N I 1 •� 1 AS �',• co S 1 • 1'1 (22) • 4 _ 1 .� �O o o 1 �J`r.iYt� co 4tZo Fs t r �• 44V `11 4e Ln cc 40' • „' •i . -AlO 1 j ' •• 0 A, f) 1 oft 0 14 O. • t.ICA "t al ... •• / ��. l Q/Q -13-.28-22-4 1 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86--n15 ntqTRlCT- 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A Date:8-1—g i' • ' _,• '' ia,:►•� 7- 19,9 1f4P do .2 C�• 9 .. •.;:,, , r ; IG .o p ^1 2 (u) :. 1, ,zm z w z . Its Zoo • `' � tet' --�.. .�. (37)�► �z /10 •• : 3 Cts) �2v� 1 �► 3('/Z) (� (03 . ,,^^ 4 10 i rr LO t 9 �- . r . 4• •n C7! 4 •� CID 170..9.9 LL Irt es -4 AT E S �) A s, , VA. >0 (2f3) XP a •x� , 6 t'( -S52-1) h l .• orm ^• 1-i 1 3o 3.1 r —1 i- ,� 0 7 (29) Q On - t 1 tt • t ! .'�. 1' •1 ` R • f � V , • to tv /r f a OUT LOT A 1 • Q- LIT:. Now �1►) — ' Q/Q '1.�-28-22-42 Notification Area Map PROJECT 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. scale :N/A Date:g-1—g i 1 � �• .. , R. 01u�. -1E�15' 40' i • • ti O Y i.i : . 41t 4v or ILI of Tow 40' t /��~,.• If ` ` a '• Q/Q_ " .:1 3-28-22-43 Notification Area Map PROJECT. 86-15 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A N Daie:$-1—g 1 -" wo !TAV L 01 74v_�'. 4 f .7 9> xr ^� Lto Itiv+ � i • is r! i `Jv) 101 71 lit `, - - - * �`• ��-� X33 �c (�1042 r311 13 3`-- mm qr t r . 7z ♦ �ot30) • (vs -T)301 8 H czG N tri• -------.— UX14 Z • l !' QZ( 4p 41 •!Cr Ott Q •� 1'7' �Z 11 CL z .n fqu1 0. LL zo:j g f ac. o )907 1.2t3sc.. flo 1,9 t `�c,hc (Z�� h ♦ Z.+ o Lbs co N 7p t1b�► 3 05.30 rl x24,.1 ;J� k 2z 1 . f t 1 U ;►, 30 — i .40 .. �2 7) r cc ,► AA • • • • • QiQ 24-28-22-22 Notification Area Map PROJECT, 86-4115 DISTRICT 8 WATER TANK IMP. Scale :N/A Dote:8-1—s PAGE 1 ,OF 5 D/ P N0. ? ? :' ? 07-31-1989 PROJECT N0. 86-15 D I ST. 8 WATER PROJECT SUMMARY SEC -12 -T -28-R-22-90-12 1 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER(l) 000 UN ITS AT **$250,000 EH. _ 00 WATER TOWER(2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 -SEC-12-T-28-R-22-QQ713 90 PARCELS.ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (1) *******.**0. 000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = *******$0,00 WATER TOWER ( 2) ********89.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = ***$a, 900. 00 SEC -12 -T -28-R-22-00-21 195 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT ------------ ------_----WATER WATER TOWER (1) *******388.000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$97, 000.00 WATER TOWER(2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -12 -T -28-R-22-90-22 6 PARCELS ASSESSED .ITEM QUANTITY PER WATER TOWER(l) *******175.000 UNITS AT WATER TOWER(2) *********0.000 UNITS AT SEC -12 -T -28-R-22-00-23 243 PARCELS ASSESSED ----------------------- ITEM QUANTITY PER ----------------------------- ----- WATER , TOWER (1) *********0'000 UNITS AT MATER TOWER(2) *******291.000 UNITS AT SEC -12 -T -28-R-22-00-24 75 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER WATER TOWER (1) *********0'000 UNITS AT WATER TOWER(2) ********94.000 UNITS AT RATE ASSESSMENT **$250.000 EA. = **$43,750,00 **$100,000 EA. = *******$0. 00 RATE ASSESSMENT ----------- ** 250.000 EA. _ *******$0.00 **$100.000 EA.. = **$291 100.00 RATE ASSESSMENT **$250.000 EA. = *******$0.00 **$100,000 EA. = ***$9,400.00 J PAGE 2 OF 5 D /P NO. ? ? ? ? 07-31-1989 PROJECT N0. 86-15 DIST.8 WATER _ PROJECT SUMMARY SEC -12—T -28-R-22_00-31 58 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER(l) UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. 00 :WATER TOWER(2) ********57.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. _ ***$51 700.00 SEC-12--T--28—R-22—QQ-32 56 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER WATER TOWER(l) *********0.000 UNITS AT WATER TOWER(2) ********89.000 UNITS AT SEC -12—T -28—R--22-00-33 94 PARCELS ASSESSED --www-- �wNw---N---►-- w-w-ww _ ITEM QUANTITY PER s Wd TER TOWER(l) *******124,000 UNITS AT .WATER TOWER(2) *********0.000 UNITS AT RATE ASSESSMENT **$250.000 EA. = *******$0.00 **$100.000 EA. = ***$81900.00 RATE ASSESSMENT -------- -- ------------- **$250.000 ----------mow **$250.1 00 EA. = **$31,000.00 **$100,000 EA. = *******$0. 00 SEC -12—T -28—R-22-00-34 14 PARCELS ASSESSED -�ww-wwwwwww--wwww--�w- ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER(l) ********54,000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$131 500. 00 WATER TOWER(2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100s000 EA. = *******$0. 00 SEC -12 -T --28-R-22-00-42 88 PARCELS ASSESSED M-N-w---w-w-Nw-r-N .ITEM QUANTITY PER WATER TOWER(l) *********0.000 UNITS AT WATER TOWER(2) *******141.000 UNITS AT SEC -12—T -28-.R-22-00-43 1 PARCELS ASSESSED w-�ww-N--MwwNrw-www ITEM QUANTITY PER WATER TOWER(l) ********52,000 UNITS AT WATER TOWER(2) *********0.0+0 —UNITS AT RATE ASSESSMENT ----- ------ **$250, ----- **$250. 000 EA. = *******$0. 0tr **$100.000 EA. = **$149 100. 00 RATE ASSESSMENT **$250.000 EA. = **$ 139 000. �c)0 **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 PAGE 3 OF 5 D/P N0. ???? 07-31-1989 PROJECT Nd. 86-15 DIST.8 WATER _. PROJECT SUMMARY SEC -13—T -28—R-22-00-11 18 PARCEL$ ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ---------- ASSESSMENT _----_------ WATER TOWER(l) ********77.000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = **$191250, 00 WATER TOWER(2) *****-****0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -13 -T -28-R--22-00-12 5 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER(l) ******* 168n OOO UNITS AT **$250s000 EA. = **$42, 100, 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100,000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -13—T -28—R-22-00-13 49 PARCELS ----------------------- ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ---------- ASSESSMENT _____________ WATER TOWER (1) ********821000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = **$201500a00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100,000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -13—T -28—R-22-00-14 16 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER(l) ********31.000 UNITS AT **$250-000 EA. = ***$7,750. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000. EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -13 -T -28—R—.22-09-21 18 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT ----- _____ _ _ WATER TOWER(l) ********75.000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$181750, 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -13 -•T -28—R-22-00--22 72 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT ----------- -__-----_-WATER WATERTOWER ( 1) ********73.000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = **$181250. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100,000 0 EA. = *******$0.00 PAGE 4 OF 5 D / P N0. ? ? ? ? 07--31-1989 PROJECT N0. 86-15 DIST.B WATER PROJECT SUMMARY SEC -13—T -28-R--22-00-23 86 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT ------------- WATER TOWER(l) **84. X00 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = **$21, 000. 00 WATER TOWER (2) UNITS AT **$100,000 EA. = *******$.0.00 SEC -13-T-28-R-.22-QQ-24 8 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (1) ******** 16.000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = ***$4, 000.00 WATER TOWER (2) UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$fit. oll-) SEC -13 -T -28-R-22-00-31 64 PARCELS ASSESSED __------------------- ITEM ----------___-- QUANTITY -------------- PER. ----- RATE ---------- ASSESSMENT -------------- WATER TOWER (1) ** *****83. 000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = '**$20,750. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. _ SEC-13-T-28-R--22-QQ-32 35 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT -- r! --------- --------WATER WATER TOWER(l) ********74,000 UNITS AT **$250. 000 EA. = **$181500. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.,000 EA. = *******$0. 00 SEC -13 -T -28-R-22--00-33 ------------------------ 48 PARCELS ASSESSED .ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT ----------- ----------WATERTOWER WATER TOWER(1) ********79.000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$191750. 00 MATER ' TOWER ( 2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0. tc 0 SEC -13 -T -28—R-22-00--34 ---___------------------ 50 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT NN--_-i-_-- WATER TOWER ( 1) ********48,000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$121000. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100,000 EA. = *******$0.00 PAGE 5 OF 5 D/P N0. ???? 07-31-1989 PROJECT NO. 86-15 D I ST. 8 WATER PROJECT SUMMARY SEC -'13 -T -28-R-22-00-41 7 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (1) **46. 00 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$111500. 00 WATER TOWER (2) * *0.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0, 00 SEC -13 -T -28-R-22-00-42 38 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (1) ******* 124. 000 UNITS AT **$250. 000 EA. = **$311000. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0.000 UNITS AT **$100,000 EA. = *******$0, 00 SEC -13 -T -28-R-22.00-43 1 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM ---- QUANTITY --------------- PER ----- RATE ---------- ASSESSMENT ------------- WATER TOWER (1) ********44,000 UNITS AT **$250,000 EA. = **$11, 000. 00 WATER TOWER (2) *********0,000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = *******$0.00 SEC -24 -T -28-R-22-00-22 3 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (i) *********6.000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = ***$11500, 00 .WATER TOWER (2) *********08000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = ****.***$0, 00 GRAND TOTALS 1439 PARCELS ASSESSED ITEM QUANTITY PER RATE ASSESSMENT WATER TOWER (1) *****119035.000 UNITS AT **$250.000 EA. = *$4759 750.00 NATER TOWER (2) *******761.000 UNITS AT **$100.000 EA. = **$761 100.00 TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED FOR THIS PROJECT = **$551,850.00 RESOLUTION ORDERING ASSESSMENT ROLL HEARING WHEREAS , the clerk and the enc i neer have, at the direction o -F the do�.�nc i 1 , prepared an assessment rol 1 f or the construct i on of Water District S Improvements, City Project 86--15, and the said assessment is on file in the office of the city clerk NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD 9 MINNESOTA in A hearing shall be held on the day of 19 , at the city hal .1 at m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place al 1 persons owning property affected by such improvement will b'e given an opportunity . to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2S The city clerk i s hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published in the official newspaper, at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and to mail notices to the owners of all property affected by said assessment. 3 » The notice of hearing shat 1 state the date , time and ,.place of hearing, the general nature of the improvement the area to be assessed, that the proposed assessment roll is on file with the clerk and that written or oral objections w i l 1 be considered. RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, the city clerk and city engineer have received final. .costs for the improvement of Water District 8 Improvements, City Project 86-15. NOW , THEREFORE, BE I T . RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD MINNESOTA that the city cl erk and c ity engineer shal l forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law,. and they shall file a copy i of such proposed assessment in the city off ice for inspection.