HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 02-09 City Council PacketAGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M., Monday, February 9,1987
Municipal Administration Building
Meeting 87 -3
(A) CALL TO ORDER
(B) ROLL CALL
(C) APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Meeting No. 87 -1 ( January 12, 1987 )
(D) APPROVAL OF AGENDA
(E) CONSENT AGENDA
1. Accounts Payable
2. Donation - Nature Center
3. Final Plat - Highwood Addition
4. Time Extension Gervais Overlook
5. 1986 Budget Changes - Internal Rental . Charges
6. Financial Transfer to Close Debt Service Fund
7. Financial Transfers to Close Project 83 -4
8. Financial Transfers to Close Projects 85 -27 and 85 -35
9. Financial Transfers to Close Project 80 -10
10. 1986 Street Construction State Aid Transfers
11. Financial Transfer to Close Project 85 -34
12. 1986 Tax Increment Transfers
13. Easement Agreement - Southlawn Drive
(E -A) APPOINTMENTS
(F)
1. Human Relations Commission
2. Community Design Review Board
PUBLIC H EARINGS
1. 7 :00 P.M., 1078 Frost - Silberbauer : Street Vacation and Lot Divisions
(G) AWARD OF BIDS
(H) UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Conditional Use Permit 2242 Ripley (Grinnell)
2. Community Design Review Board Procedure ( 2nd Reading)
3. Archer Heights Parking
NEW BUSINESS
1. Soo Line Trail Plan
2. Zoning and Land Use Plan Consistency
3. Agreement - Board of Water Commissioners Project 86 -03B
4.
5.
6.
Chan Order Project 86-03A (District 6 Water Tower)
A - Hi'llcrest Countr Club Project 86-03A
Orderin Assessment Roll - Project 86-04 (Count Road C water Main)
.7. Orderin Assessment Roll Project 86-12 ( -StJ
8. Orderin Assessment Roll. Project 86-05'(Hillwood Drive)
9. Buildin Maintenance
10. Parks and Recreation Foreman
11. Appointments - Captain and ser
12. Resident Re - 2015 Radatz
(J) VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
(K) COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
.(L) ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
(M) ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES OF MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M., Monday, January 12, 1987
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 87 -1
A. CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, was held in the Council
Chambers, Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:02 P.M. by Mayor Greavu.
B. ROLL CALL
John C. Greavu, Mayor Present
Norman G. Anderson, Councilmember Absent
Gary W. Bastian, Councilmember Present
Frances L. Juker, Councilmember Present
Charlotte Wasiluk, Councilmember Present
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Meeting No. 86 -32 (November 24, 1986)
Councilmember,Wasiluk moved to approve the Minutes of Meeting No. 86 -32 (November
24, 1986) as corrected
Page 4, Item E -A -2 "Diessner"
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all.
2. Meeting No. 86 -33 (December 8, 1986)
Mayor Greavu moved to approve the Minutes of Meeting No. 86 -33 (December 8, 1986)
as submitted.
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Greavu moved to approve the Agenda as amended
1. Notice of Meetings
2. Maplewood Auto and Appliance
3. Item H -1 moved to E -A
4. Meeting Reminder
E. CONSENT AGENDA
Council removed Items E -3 and 4 to become Items I -8 and 9.
Mayor Greavu moved, seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk, Ayes - all, to approve the
Consent Agenda, Items 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 as recommended
1/12
KI
2
Accounts Payable
Approved the accounts (Part I - Fees, Services, Expenses check register dated
December 30, 1986, through January 02, 1987, $760,937.90 : Part II - Payroll
dated December 24, 1986 in gross amount $139,144.55) in the amount of $900,082.45.
Acceptance of Developer's Projects
Resolution No. 87 - 1 - 1
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, has heretofore entered
into contracts for public improvements for the following projects, described
as:
City Project No
83
- 02
83 --
03
85 -01
85 -
05
85 -
13
85 -23
Description
Beaver Creek Condos
Cave's Century 3rd Addition
Tilsen's 12th Addition
Cave's Lakewood Addition
Frattalone Addition
Maple Ridge Mall
WHEREAS, said projects have been certified as completed.
3
F,
5
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA,
that the said projects are completed and the utilities are hereby accepted as
part of the distribution systems.
Park Acquisition Charge (Neighborhood)
Discussed under I -8 -
Park Acquisition Charge (Commercial)
Discussed under I -9
Non -Union Employees' Settlement
Approved that the non -union employees' salaries be increased by 3.5% for a
six month period and add Martin Luther King, Jr., Day as an additional paid
holiday.
6. Temporary Employees' Pay Plan
Resolution No. 87 - 1 - 2
WHEREAS, according to the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act,
part -time employees who do not work more than 14 hours per week and temporary
employees who do not work in excess of 67 days in a calendar year are not
covered by union contract wage rates.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the following pay rate maximums are
hereby established for temporary and part -time employees retroactive to January
1, 1987:
- 2 - 1/12
Recreation worker
Recreation official
- Puppeteers
Accountant
Administrative Assistant
Secretary
Accounting Clerk
Clerk- Typist
Election judge
Election precinct chairman
Laborer
Engineering aide
Janitor
$10.85 per hour
16.30 per game
27.15 per-show
13.65 per hour
7.60 per hour
8.14 per hour
8.14 per hour
6.73 per hour
5.25 per hour
5.50 per hour
5.75 per hour
6.35 per hour
4.70 per hour
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the recreation workers who drag ballfields
may be paid up to $4.25 per field in lieu of an hourly payrate.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the minimum pay rates for each of the above
be (1) the amount specified by State law for those positions covered and (2)
$2.50 per hour for those positions not covered by State law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager shall have the authority to
set the pay rate within the above ranges.
7. Approved the purchase of a typewriter for the City Clerk's Department.
A Insurance for Early Retirees
a. Acting City Manager Ken Haider presented the Staff report.
b. Councilmember Juker moved to table this item and refer it to Staff for further
investigation
Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - Mayor Greavu, Councilmembers Juker,
and wasiluk
Nay - Councilmember Bastian
F. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 7:00 P.M., Conditional Use Permit - 2251 E. Larpenteur Avenue (Ribs Plus)
a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the
request of Mark La5cotte, E. J. Kavonius and Greg Kavonius, Ribs Plus, for
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a restaurant in a NC neighborhood
Commercial District.
b. Associate Planner Randy Johnson presented the Staff report.
c. Commissioner George Rossbach presented the Planning Commission recommenda-
tion.
d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard.
e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard.
- 3 - 1/12
f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing.
g. Mayor Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption
87- 1- 3
WHEREAS, Mark LaScotte, E. J. Kavonius and Greg Kavonius initiated a
conditonal use permit to operate a restaurant in the NC, neighborhood com-
mercial district at:
The south 176 feet of the east 247.5 feet of the SE 1/4 of Section 14,
Township 29, Range 22.
This property is also known as 2251 East Larpenteur Avenue, Maplewood;
WHEREAS, the procedural history of this conditional use permit is as
follows:
1. This conditional use permit was initiated pursuant to the
Maplewood Code of Ordinances.
2. This conditonal use permit was reviewed by the Maplewood Planning
Commission on December 15, 1986. The Planning Commission recommen-
ded to the City Council that said permit be approveda.
3. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing on January 12,
1987. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law.
All persons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to
be heard and present written statements. The Council also con-
sidered reports and recommendations of the City Staff and Planning
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the
above- described conditional use permit be approved on the basis of the follow-
ing findings -of -fact:
1. The use is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and with
the purpose and standards of this chapter.
2. The establishment or maintenance of the use would not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or general welfare.
3. The use would be located, designed, maintained and operated to be
compatible with the character of that zoning district.
4. The use would not depreciate property values.
5. The use would not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to present
and potential surrounding land uses, due to the noises, glare, smoke,
dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, water run -off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
6. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets
and shall not create traffic congestion, unsafe access or parking
needs that will cause undue burden to the area properties.
- 4 - 1/12
7. The use would be serviced by essential public services, such as
streets, police, fire protection, utilities, schools and parks.
8. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at
public cost for public facilities and services; and would not be
detrimental to the welfare of the City.
9. The use would preserve and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
10. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Containment of the cooking odors generated by this restaurant
so as not to be noticeable on adjacent residential property.
2. City environmental health official approval of a strategy for
the required odor containment prior to issuance of an occupancy
permit.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Ayes - all.
2. 7:10 P.M., Conditional Use Permit and Variance : 2405 Carver (Grand)
a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a ,public hearing regarding the
request of Charlene Grand for approval of a conditional use permit to
operate a beauty shop as a home occupation and approval of a variance to
allow a free - standing sign for the home occupation, rather than a sign
attached to the dwelling.
b. Associate Planner Johnson presented the Staff report.
c. Commissioner George Rossbach presented the Planning Commission recommenda-
tion.
d. Ms. Charlene Grand, the applicant, spoke on behalf of her request.
e. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. The following were heard:
Mr. Frismanis, 2431 Carver
f. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard.
g. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing.
h. Councilmember Wasiluk introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87 - 1 - 4
WHEREAS, Charlene Grand initiated a conditional use permit to operate
a beauty shop as a home occupation at the following- described property:
West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest
1/4 of Section 24, Township 28, Range 22.
- 5 - 1/12
This property is also known as 2405 Carver Avenue, Maplewood;
WHEREAS, the procedural history of this: conditional use permit is as
follows: -
1. This conditional use permit was initiated pursuant to the Maplewood
Code of Ordinances.
2. This conditional use permit was reviewed by the Maplewood Planning
Commission on December 15, 1986. The Planning Commission recom-
mended to the City Council that said permit be approved.
3. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing on January 12,
1987. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law.
All persons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to
be heard and present written statements. The Council also con-
sidered reports and recommendations of the City Staff and Planning
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the
above- described conditional use permit be approved on the basis of the
following findings -of -fact:
1. The use is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and
with the purpose and standards of this chapter.
2. The establishment or maintenance of the use would not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or general welfare.
3. The use would be located, designed, maintained and operated to be
compatible with the character of that zoning district.
4. The use would not depreciate property values.
5. The use would not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to present
and potential surrounding land uses; due to the noises, glare, smoke,
dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, water run -off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
6. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets
and shall not create traffic congestion, unsafe access or parking needs
that will cause undue burden to the area properties.
7. The use would be serviced by essential public services, such as streets,
police, fire protection, utilities, schools and parks.
8. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public
cost for public facilities and services; and would not be detrimental
to the welfare of the City.
9. The use would preserve and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
10. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
- 6 - 1/12
1. At the end of one year, if there is no unresolved complaint or
nuisance, Council may renew this permit.
2. Compliance with the requirements in Section 36 -66 (4) (b) per-
taining to the operation of a home occupation, except for the
sign location requirement.
3. Obtaining a building permit for all improvements.
Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all.
i. Mayor Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption
87 - 1 - 5
` WHEREAS, Charlene Grand applied for a variance for the following-
described property:
West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest
1/4 of Section 24, Township 28, Range 22.
This property is also known as 2405 Carver Avenue, Maplewood;
WHEREAS, Section 36 -66 (4) (b) (3), 36 -316 (2) and 36 -230 of the
Maplewood Code of Ordinances require signs for home occupations to be
attached to the dwelling.
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing a free - standing sign.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of this variance is as follows:
1. This variance was applied for on October 7, 1986.
2. This variance was reviewed by the Maplewood Planning Commission on
December 15, 1986. The Planning Commission recommended to the City
Council that said variance be approved.
3. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing on January 12, 1987,
to consider this variance. Notice thereof was published and mailed
pursuant to law. All persons present at said 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that a variance
is approved to locate a two- square foot home- occupation sign at least 15 feet
north of the Carver Avenue right -of -way.
Approval is on the basis that:
1. Strict enforcement would cause an undue hardship because:
a. A two - square foot sign would be unreadable if attached to the
dwelling.
b. Other area property owners are using similar -sized signs to
- 7 - 1/12
identify their properties.
2. Approval would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the
Code, which is to provide unobtrusive identification for a
home occupation.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Ayes - Mayor Greavu, Councilmembers
Juker and Wasiluk
Councilmember Bastian abstained.
3. 7:20 P.M., Rezoning : 2444 North Maplewood Drive (Miggler) (4 Votes)
a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the
proposal to rezone the westerly one - fourth of the Miggler truck farm
property from M -1 Light Manufacturing to CO, Commercial Office.
b. Associate Planner Johnson presented the Staff report.
C. Commissioner George Rossbach presented the Planning Commission recom-
mendation.
d. Mr. Chapman, representing the Migglers, spoke against the proposed
rezoning.
e. Mr. Robert Miggler, owner of the property, also spoke against the
proposal.
f. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard.
g. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard.
Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing.
i. Councilmembe, Wasiluk moved that{ Lot 1, B lock 1, and L 1, Block 2
remain 14-1 and Mat thp portion,' ot 2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 2 zoned
M -1 be rezon tonnC��
Seconde iY
,$1�y C un� memb�n fstian�(/ �es - Councian, Juker and
4u/ N ay p i"
Nay - a or Greavu.
Motion fai l aA _ _. - - - - --
j. Councilmember Bastian moved to rescind and expunge the previous motion
and to table Item F -3 for further investigation
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - Councilmembers Bastian, Juker and
Wasiluk
Nay - Mayor Greavu
G. AWARD OF BIDS
None.
— S — 1/12
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Insurance for Early Retirees
Discussed as Item E -A
I. NEW BUSINESS
1. Archer Heights Parking
a. City Attorney Patrick Kelly presented the legal opinion regarding the
need for additional parking spaces at Archer Heights.
b. Mayor Greavu moved to refer the matter to Staff for further information
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all.
2. Mining Permit Renewal : Beam Avenue
a. Acting Manager Haider presented the Staff report.
b. Commissioner Rossbach presented the Planning Commission report.
C. Councilmember Bastian
to Mr. Vova Piletich for
Beam Avenue Mining Permit issued
ect to the ori,
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
3. Project 86 -34 : Lakewood Drive Street Light Feasibility Report
a. Acting City Engineer Chuck Ahl presented the Staff report.
b. The following residents expressed their needs for street lighting:
Mark Nelson, 1594 Lakewood
Janet Brown, 1617 Lakewood
Resident at 1609 Lakewood
C. Councilmember Bastian authorized Staff to commence a study regarding the
financing of future street lights
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
d. Councilmember Bastian introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87- 1 -6
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, has received a public
improvement petition for the installation of street lights along Lakewood
Drive between Mondana and Larpenteur Avenues, City Project 86 -34; and
WHEREAS, the Northern States Power Company installs, owns and maintains
the street lights in this area of the City at a cost of $12.70 per month per
light.
- 9 - 1/12
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD -as
follows:
1. The City Engineer is hereby directed to authorize the Northern States
Power Company to install four street lights along Lakewood Drive
between Montana and Larpenteur Avenues.
2. The monthly costs incurred for said street lights -shall be desig-
nated for payment from the signals and street lights division budget
of the Public Works Department.
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
4. Project 86 -05 : Hillwood Drive Plan Approval and Authorization for Bids
a. Acting City Manager Haider presented the Staff report.
b. Mayor Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption
87- 1- 7
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on September 8,
1986, plans and specifications for Hillwood Drive -East of Crestview Drive,
Project No. 86 -05, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the City
Engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for
approval,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which are attached hereto
and made a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon
the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifi-
cations. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten
days before date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be
done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened and considered by
the Council at 10:00 a.m. on the 6th day of February, 1987, at the City
Hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with
the Clerk and accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to
the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, for 5% of the amount of such bid.
3. The City Clerk and City Engineer are hereby authorized and instructed
to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place
herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The Council will
consider the bids, and the ordering of an assessment roll based upon
the bids, at the regular City Council meeting of February 9, 1987.
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
5. Project 86 -12 : Arkwright Street Plan Approval
a. Acting City Engineer Ahl presented the Staff report.
- 10 - 1/12
b. Councilmember Juker introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87 - 1 - 8
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on September
8, 1986, plans and specifications for Arkwright Street from Eldridge Avenue
to County Road B, Project 86 -12, have been prepared by (or under the direction
of) the City Engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the
Council for approval,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TEH CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which are attached hereto
and made a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
papertand the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon
the making of such improvement under such approved plans and speci-
fications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten
days before date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be
done, sahll state that bids will be publicly opened and considered
by the Council at 2:00 P.M., on the 5th day of February, 1987, at
the City Hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and
filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a certified check or bid
bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, for 5% of the
amount of such bid.
3. The City Clerk and City Engineer are hereby authorized and instructed
to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place
herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The Council will
consider the bids, and the ordering of an assessment roll based upon
the bids, at the regular City Council Meeting of February 9, 1987.
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all.
6. Project 85 -07 : Crestview Drive Water Retainage Reduction
a. Acting City Engineer Ahl presented the Staff report.
b. Councilmember Bastian introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87- 1 -9
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, has heretofore
ordered made Improvement Project No. 85 -07, Crestview Drive - Hudson Place
Water Main and has let a construction contract, therefore pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, said project has been essentially completed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA,
that the project is substantially complete and the retainage is hereby reduced
to 1 %.
- 11 - 1/12
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
7. Annual Designations and Appointments
a. Acting Mayor
Mayor Greavu moved to appoint Councilmember Charlotte Wasiluk as Acting
Mayor
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all.
b. City Attorney
Mayor Greavu moved to appoint the firm of Bannigan and Kelly, P.A., as
City Attorney
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
'c. Prosecuting Attorney
Councilmember Bastian moved to appoint Martin J. Costello as the City
Prosecutor
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
d. Commissions and Boards
1. Planning Commission
a. Councilmember Bastian
the following to the
3 year terms
Ralph Sletten
Lorraine Fischer
Marvin Sigmundik
Les Axdahl
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
b. Councilmember Bastian moved to reappoint Les Axdahl as Chairman
of the Planning Commission.
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
2. Community Design Review Board
Councilmember Bastian moved to reappoint Thomas Deans and James
Kochsiek to the Community Design Review Board to each serve two -
year terms
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
3. Parks and Recreation Commission
Mayor Greavu moved to reappoint the 'fo.11cming to` =three +gear terms on the
Park and Recreation Commission
- 12 - 1/12
Rita Brenner
Cecelia Schneider
John Chegwyn
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all
4. Civil Service Commission
a. Acting City Manager stated there is a vacancy on the Civil
Service Commission as Mr. Donald Weida has moved from Maplewood
and can no longer serve on the Commission.
b. Councilmember Bastian moved to authorize Staff to advertise for
persons who wish to serve on the Civil Service Commission
Seconded by Councilmember Juker. Ayes - all.
,e. Suburban Rate Authority
Councilmember Bastian introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87 -1 - -10
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA,
as follows:
Councilmember Fran Juker is hereby designated to serve as a director of
the Suburban Rate Authority, and Daniel Faust is hereby designated to serve
as alternate director of the Suburban Rate Authority for the Year 1987 and
until their successors are appointed.
Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all.
f. Official Newspaper
Councilmember Bastian introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption
87 1 - 11
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that the "Maplewood Review" be designated the offical
newspaper for 1987.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Ayes - Mayor Greavu, Councilmembers
Bastian and Wasiluk
Nay - Councilmember Juker.
g. Rules of Procedures
1, Councilmember Bastian moved to accept the Rules of Procedures
2. Councilmember Juker moved to table the Rules of Procedures
Seconded by Mayor Greavu.
- 13 - 1/12
Mayor Greavu withdrew his second.
Motion failed for lack of a second.
3. Councilmember Bastian moved to accent the Rules of Procedures
temporarily until they are brought back before the Council for
revisions
Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all.
S. Park Acquisition Charge (Neighborhood)
9. Park Acquisition Charge (Commercial)
a. Mayor Greavu moved to table both Items I -8 and 9 indefinitely
Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all.
J. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None.
K. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Notices
Councilmember Bastian stated he would not be able to attend the March 23,
1987, Meeting. He reminded Council of the following meetings:
East Community Family Services Planning Session - January 21, 1987
Budget Ad Hoc Committee - January 21, 1987 (to be rescheduled)
Municipal Legislative Commission Dinner - January 21, 1987
Arts Committee - January 15, 1987
2. Maplewood Auto Supply - Glass and Appliance Center
a. Councilmember Juker stated the Maplewood Auto Supply property is becoming
nothing but a junk yard.
b. Staff will investigate.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Meeting Reminders
a. Acting City Manager Haider reminded the Council of the January 15 and
January 22, 1987 Meetings.
M. ADJOURNMENT
- 14 -
City Clerk
1/12
_
Action by Council
'
Endorsed,
Modifie
MANUAL
CHECKS_ �THRU JAN
e - age : 1
Red ee 6d.
]date
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO..
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION -
016025
02/02/87
16.00.
BACHMAN EDWARD J
REFUND
16.00
•
016A77
02/02/87
175.45
A T E T COMM
TELEPHONE
175.45
»
016033
02/02/87
573.32
GERMA.IN DAVID A
VAC CHECK
573.32
016M69
02/02/87
2,827.14
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
016M69
02/02/87
449.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
3,276.14
* * * * **
020M69
02/02/87
4,378.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
02OM69
02/02/87
379.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
4, 757.00
02ONSO
02/02/87
102.05
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
38.90
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
020N50
02/02/87
38.90
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
38.90
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
19.50
NW SELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
39.00
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
0.2/02/87
379.99
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
0.20N50
02/02/87
38.90
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
17.34
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02187
50.07
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
110.80
NW BELL TELE _
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
58.47
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
89.05
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
020N50
02/02/87
67.95
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
02ONSO
02/02/87
81.80
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
1,171.62
020P50
02/02/87
298.20
POSTMASTER
POSTAGE
298.20
•
021026
02/02/87
40.00
BRADEN JOHN_
REFUND
40.00
Page 2
I
I
1987 CITY
.
OF MAPL.EWOOD
.
._.. n -. ..rZ•.. .'n.{f•''1 vr. f.;,.R: iiM'w: is ^fG;','lf...•`Swa. ^.2. . 'i f. ; -.
-
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ION
021028
OE/02/87
150.00
CHCO.NW TRANSPPRTN
CONTRACT PYM
150.00
021029
02/02/87
15.90
FREDRICK DAVID
SUPPLIES
15.90 M
- --
021031
02/02/87
788.00
SIMON 6 ASSOC
SUPPLIES
788.00 +
021M69
02/02/87
28987.75
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE -
021M69
02/02/87
408.50
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
3,396.25 +
021N23
02/02/87
78.00
N/E SO - CCER ASSOC -
CONTRACT PYM
78.00 +
022C40
02/02/87
90.50
CLERK OF COURT
FILING FEE
90.50 +
022M20
02/02/87
5,172.75
METRO WASTE CONTR
SAC PBL
022M69
02/02/87
2,716,75
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
022M69
OP/02/87
150.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
2, 866.75
022295
02/02/87
36.00 -
P.E.R.A -
PERA PBL
36.00 +
022R15
Oe/02/87
30.00
RAMSEY CNTY RECORDER_
RECORDING FEES
30.00 +
'022828
02/02/87
178.88
SHARE
P/R DE DUCT
022828
022828
02/02/87 --
02/02%87
...35.1 . f 0 - —
SHARE
P/R DEDUCT
P, 550.89
SHARE
P/R DEDUCT
3#074.e7 +
Page: 3
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
-
CHECK NO .
DATE _ -- _ _ —_ -_
AMOUN
EILQE$CRjPTION
_ .VENDOR
022W21
02/02/87
88.99
WARNER TRUE VALUE.
SUPPLIES
-
88.99
02304
02/02/87
2,500.00
CARROLL.ANN
CONTRACT PYM
2,500.00 •
* * * * **
023M13
02/02/87
860.00
MAPLE —LEAF OFFIC
PROGRAMS
860.00
sass *•
023M69
02/02/87
374.50
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
023M69
02/02/87
1,765.00
MINN STATE TREASURER _
LICENSE
2,139.50 •
023P9S
02/02/87
8,379.31
P.E.R.A
PERA PBL
023P95
02/02/87
11028.38
P.E.R.A
PERA PBL
19,507.69 #
026AOS
02/02/87
402.45
AFSCME
UNION DUES
026A05
02/02/87
- 6.17
AFSCME
UNION DUES
408-62 �
026C35
02/02/87
19,678.00
CTY CNTY CREDIT UN
CREDIT UNION
19,678.00 •
026G36
02/02/87
145.00
GOFF KAPLAN WOLF
P/R DEDUCT
145.00 *
s * * *ss
.026115
02/02/87
4,005.18
ICMA RETIREMENT
P/R DEDUCT
026115
02/02/87
1,698.23
ICMA RETIREMENT
P/R DEDUCT
_._._
5, 703.41
* *ss **
026M35
02/02/87
389.55
MN BENEFIT ASSOC
P/R DEDUCT
389.55 +
026M53 _ _ _
02/ 02/87. __ __
_ _- 150.00
MN ._.DEPT OF HEALTH ____ _ _
CONTRACT PYM
Page: 4
i
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
026M53
02/02/87
150.00
NN DEPT OF HEALTH
CONTRACT PYM
300.00
026M61
02/02/87
346.15
MN MUTUAL LIFE
INSURANCE
026M61
02/02/87
13.85
MN MUTUAL LIFE
INSURANCE
360.00 s
026M65
02/02/87
7,677.92
MN ST COMM REVENUU
INSURANCE
7,677.92 +
026M68
02/02/87
23.92
MN ST RETIREMENT
INSURANCE
026M68
02/02/87
23.08
_
MN ST RETIREMENT
INSURANCE
47.00 •
026M69
02/02/87
10.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
026M69
02/02/87
1,491.30
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
026M69
02/02/87
311.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
1,81.2.30
026NSO
02/02/87
455.11-
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
2.17
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
52.81
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
1,673.99
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
53.51
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026N50
02/02/87
1,071.60
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
272.41
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
. 026N50
02/02/87
51.31
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026N50
02/02/87
51.31
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026N50
02/02/87
51.31
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
51.31
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
026NSO
02/02/87
_
51.31
NW BELL TELE
TELEPHONE
2,927.93 •
026W25
_02/02/87
130.93
WISC DEPT REV
P/R DEDUCT
130.93
-
t
027022
02/02/87
206.59
COMM OF REVENUE
FUEL TAX
206.59 «
O27DE4 -
02/02/87
361.00 -
DEPT OF NATL RE8.._.______
DNR LICENSE
OE7D24
02/02/87
18.00
DEPT OF NATL RES
DNR LICENSE
Page • 5
1987. CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR _ _ _
_ ITEM DESCRIPTION
379.00
027D27
02/02/87
156.00
DEPT OF NATL RES
DNR LICENSE
156.00
027F33
02/02/87
5,404.12
FIRST MINNESOTA
P/R DEDUCT
027F33
02/02/87
15,559.06
FIRST MINNESOTA
P/R DEDUCT
027F33
02/02/87
5,404.12
FIRST MINNESOTA
P/R DEDUCT
26,367.30 +
027J90
02/02/87
24.80
JUNCMANN JERRY
PAPERS
24.80
027M69
02/02/87
1,376.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
027M69
02/02/87
260.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
1,636.00
028027
02/02/87
9.50
BOY SCOUTS OF AMER
_TRAVEL TRAINING
9.50
028E24
02/02/87
2
EMP BENEFIT CLMS
CONTRACT PYM
2,000.00 +
02$M69
02/02/87
3,064.75
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
028M69
02/02/87
277.00
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
3,341.75
029C40
02/02/87
94.50.
CLERK OF COURT __.
COURT FILING
94.50 •
029M69
02/02/87
2,524.75
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
029 M6 9. _
_ ___OS/ OS/87
195.00 _
_ _ MINN STATE TREASURER _ __ _
LICENSE
2,719.75
029M71
02/02/87
715.21
MN ST TREAS SURTAX
SURTAX P9L
Page: 6
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD_
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
715.21 «
030C22
02/02/87
213.84
COHN OF REVENUE
DIESEL TAX
213.84 •
030M69
.02/02/87
7,551.50
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
030M69
02/02/87
236.00 --
MINN STATE TREASURER
LICENSE
7#787.510
112,555.67
FUND 01 TOTAL
GENERAL
297.9'7
FUND 03 TOTAL
HYDRANT CHARGE
150.00
FUND 33 TOTAL
150.00
FUND 65 TOTAL
86 -14 CORNER CAR
150.00
FUND 70 TOTAL
81 -20 MCKNIGHT /H`
2,0Q0.00 _
FUND 94 TOTAL
DENTAL 8ELF- -INSUI
20,817.95
FUND 95 TOTAL
PAYROLL BENEFIT
213.84
FUND 96 TOTAL
VEHICLE 6 EQUIP I
136,334.73
TOTAL
NECESSARY EXPENDITURES SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE DATED - FEB, -09,1987 C 8 Expense) Pa 1
1986 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK
REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR—-
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040670
01/27/87
38-20
BUILDERS 80
SUPPLIES
36-20 •
040902
01/29/87
17.24
BFI WASTE SYSTEMS
CONTRACT
PYM
17.24 •
eta
040905
01/27/87
141.85
MAPLE HILLS GOLF
PROGRAMS
040905
01/87/87
2123-83
MAPLE HILLS GOLF
PROGRAMS
040905
01/27/87
13.72
.MAPLE HILLS GOLF
SUPPLIES
379.40
040950
01/27/87
150.00
BUREAU OF
REPAIR
150.00
040AI5
01/27/87
1,312.30
AEC ENGINEERS
ENG
10312.30
040805
01/27/87
6*967.45
BANNICAN&KELLY
P.A.
CONTRACT
PYM
040805
01/27/87
2s955.33
BANNIGAN&KELLY
P.A.
CONTRACT
PYM
04080*5
01/27/87
225.00
BANNIGANSKELLY
P.A.
CONTRACT
PYM
10,147.76
040945
01/28/87
53.28
BOARD OF WATER
COMM-
CONTRACT
PYM
040945
01/e8/87
199-68
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040945
01/28/87
127.95
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONT
PYM
040945
01/28/87
470.68
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040B4S
01/28/87
96-06
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
0-40945
01/28/87
207.87
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040945
01/28/87
21.39
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040845
01/28/87
192-51
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040845
01/28/87
48.03
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
C
PYM
040945
01/e7/87
10295.00
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040845
01/28/87
53.28
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
040B45
01/28/87
26.64
BOARD OF WATER
COMM
CONTRACT
PYM
2,792.31
040D30
DALCO
SUPPLIES
183.96 •
040H29
01 /29/87
35._00
HEALTH RESOURCES - --
CONTRACT
-_ PYM
Page 2
1986 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040H29
01/29/87
79.00
HEALTH RESOURCES
CONTRACT PYM
114.00 •
--
040I70
01/29/87
3.47
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
040170
01/29/87
99.80
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
103.27 •
s * +MMi�i
040KSS
01/27/87
39.56
KNOX LUMBER -
SUPPLIES
39.56 +
040L21
01/27/97
144.03
LAKELAND FORD
SUPPLIES '
144.03 •
040L30
01/27/87
9,050.00—
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
AUDIT PREM
040L30
01/27/87
9,050.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
AUDIT PREM �
040L30
01/87/87
9,050.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
AUDIT PREM
9.050.00 +
040L70
01/27/87
1,801.64
LOCIS
-CONTRACT PYM
040LTO
01/27/87
5.78
LOCI$
CONTRACT PYM
1 ,807.36 �
040M14
01 /27/87
152.70
MAPLEWOOD REVIEW
PUBLISHING
158.70 •
040MSS
01/28/67
383.13
MPLS STAR 6 TRUBUNE
PUBLISHING
383.13 +
040M79
_ 01/28/87
692.08 -
MN UC FUND
CONTRACT PYM
692.08 •
040N30
01/27/87
_ I 061.44
M NORTH ST PAUL_ CITY_ _ _
UTILITIES_ . -
1,061.44 •
040R09
01/28/87
94.37
RAMSEY COUNTY
CONTRACT PYM
1986 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Page: 3
CHECK REGISTER -
ITEM DE8CRIPTION
_CHECK NO
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR _.._.
94.37 •
* *• *ss
040R24
01/29/87
5,202.30
REMINGTON ELEC
CONTRACT PYM
5,202.30 •
040502
0:1/29/87
29.00
S 6 D LOCK SAFE
SUPPLIES
29.00 «
040S09
01/27/87
33.89
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
`CHEMICAL TOILETS
S
CHEMICAL TOILET
040509
01/27/87
01/27/87
33.89
33.89
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
CHEMICAL TOILE
440509
101.67 «
040S39
01/27/87
271.14
SHORT ELLIOT HENDR
CONTRACT PYM
CONTRACT PYM
040S39
01/27/87
335.29
SHORT ELLIOT HENDR
606.43
ssss *s
040545
01/28/87
3,627.33
SOLIDIFICATION INC
CONTRACT PYM
3,627.33
0445.55
01/29/87
- 968.00
SPECIALTY RADIO
EQUIP
868.00 •
ss *sus
040558
01/27/87
58.50
ST PAUL CITY OF
ST PAUL CITY OF
REPAIR MAINT
REPAIR MAINT
040558
040558
01/27/87
01/27/87
338.45
368.78
ST PAUL CITY OF
REPAIR MAINT
040858
01/27/87
24.75
ST PAUL CITY OF
ST PAUL CITY OF
REPAIR MAINT
PHOTO PROCESS
040SSS
01/27/87
28.95
816.43 •
*s *s **
040S66
01/28/87
255.97
ST PAUL DISPATCH
_ PUBLISHING
255.97 •
040888
01/27/87
3,851.86
STATE OF MN DOT
CONTRACT PYM
3,851 .86 •
* *ss�•
Page: 4
1986 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040TIS
01/28/87
57.76
TELEXECON
CONTRACT PYM
040T29
01/27/87
47.84
T.A.SCHIFSKY SONS
REPAIR MAINT
47.84 *
-
040T94
01/27/87
1,037.92
TWIN CITY TESTING
CONTRACT PYM
1,037.92 •
040050
01/27/87
194.35
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040050
01/27/87
15.75
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040050
01/27/87
46.7E
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01/27/87
152.95
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01/27/87
�,. 78.35
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED -
UNIFORMS
040050
01/27/87
34.15
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01 /ET /8T
144.55
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01 /ET /87
83.55
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01/27/87
181!.S4
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040U50
01/27/87
218.40
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
040USO
01/ET/87
49.50
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
1
040X30
01/27/87
5.24
XEROX CORP _
DUPLICATING COST
040X30
01/27/87
8.74
XEROX CORP
DUPLICATING COST
040X30
01/27/87
36.68
XEROX CORP
DUPLICATING COST
040X30
01/27/87
43.67
XEROX CORP
DUPLICATING COST
040X30
01/27/87
36.68
XEROX CORP
DUPLICATING COST
040X30
01/27/87
43.67
XEROX CORP
DUPLICATING COST
174.68
ss�ss*
23,936.13
FUND 01 TOTAL
GENERAL
53.28
FUND 03 TOTAL
HYDRANT CHARGE
2,956.65
FUND 34 TOTAL
86 -03 CENTURY AVM
53.28
FUND 4t TOTAL
86 -10 JEFFERSONS
199.62
FUND 43 TOTAL
86 -13 CAVES $TER;
2.955.33
FUND 50 TOTAL
T8 -24 BEAM AV /W.1
598.63
FUND 55 TOTAL
86-11 HICHWOOD A'
96.06
FUND 57 TOTAL
85 -5 CAVES LAKEW
207.87
FUND 60 TOTAL
85 -07 CRESTVW DR
21.39
FUND 65 TOTAL
86 -14 CORNER CAR
-- __
- - - -- FUND 70 TOTAL
81-20 MCKNI CHT /H
1,343.03
FUND 73 TOTAL
85 -21 HIGHLAND T
53.28
FUND 80 TOTAL
86 -83 CAVES OAR C.
^ 251.64 �^
_
FUND 82 TOTAL
83 -01 FROST AV A:
3,633.05
-
FUND 90 TOTAL
_ N _. _�• :. Mk't ••.• N ,.y� 1M! \N.M}.�� 11'F���' �,•�r.!f' J +Mt- • ..
SANITARY SEWER Fl
y_ ._ - .
i
K
S
1966 CITY OF
CHECK NO. DATE
Page: 5
CHECK REGISTER
AMOUNT VENDOR_ _: _ _ ITEM DESCRIPTION
9,742.08 FUND 95 TOTAL PAYROLL BENEFIT
847.30 FUND 96 TOTAL _ ._ _ _ VEHICLE E EQUIP M
46,541.13 TOTAL
- .. _ _ •_ � s .." j. �'".' �;-^! �• fi. AVi ['y!"!'�.t"!M�6loCNl�7�t'�"�' tam`. _;�•! "��.r'�� r=--; r}.�i`-¢"ra -.� u ,
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE DATED FEBRUARY 09,1987 C 87 Expense) Page: l
040A03 . Q 1 /L9/8T _ _ _ - _ _. _ ._ 9. _ _
_ __ ADVANCE LIGHTING SUPPLIES
9.84 •
ARNALS AUTO 8ERV REPAIR MAINT VEH
040A69 01/89/87 168.01 _ _ -.
CHECK REGISTER
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
AMOUNT
VENDOR _ ... _ - _ __ _
ITEM DESCRIPTION
CHECK NO.
DATE
__
040009
01/29/87
55.8-0
ALMAC- PLASTICS
SUPPLIES
_
55.20 M
040010
01/29/87
13.49
AMER HEART ASSOC
SUPPLIES
13.49 +
040011
01/29/87
97.99
BARBER ELECTRIC
SUPPLIES
V. 99 •
_. _ _
01/29/87
39.90
BRUDZINSKI PAUL
CONTRACT PYM
040012
39.90 +
01 /29/87
16.00
DURLAND.KIMBERLY
REFUND
.040013
16.04 *
040014
01./29/87
745.00
ELECTRIC EQUIP
REPAIR
745.00 + _
- _ -
- - -- - - - -'
040015
01/29/87
16.00
ENGSTROM SUSAN
REFUND
04001*6
01 ♦29/87
1 566.92
•
INNOVATIVE
SUPPLIES
1,566.98 +
040017
01/29'/87
182.00
JOHN D SELLS 6 ASSOC
SUPPLIES
182.00 +
040018
01/29/8 7
10.00
JOKER FRAN
TRAVEL TRAINING
MILEAGE
040018
.01/29/87
10.19
JOKER FRAN
20.19 +
01/2 9/87
15.00
MCFOA A L CHESLEY
SUBSCRIPTION
040019
15.00 +
040020
01/29/87
8.00
SWINEHART CHERYL
REFUND
8.00 +
040021
01/30/87
16.00
SABO ANGIE
REFUND
16.00 •
04
01/29/87
3.10
MEEHAN JAMES
JAMES
TRAVEL TRAINING
TRAVEL TRAINING
040022
01/29/87
3.10
MEEHAN
6.20 +
040023
.. 1/29/87
0
589.75
MOUNDS PARK ACADEMY
PROGRAMS
589.75 •
040A03 . Q 1 /L9/8T _ _ _ - _ _. _ ._ 9. _ _
_ __ ADVANCE LIGHTING SUPPLIES
9.84 •
ARNALS AUTO 8ERV REPAIR MAINT VEH
040A69 01/89/87 168.01 _ _ -.
'
.. .l.F..
r.• ta�i %j....7.q.i.hrcl:ilVit7{':.r: �►r.Ar -.'+, w:. .✓. w. .. .. . '."
Page: 2
.. -
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040A69
*1/29/87
588.15
ANNALS AUTO SERV
REPAIR MAINT VEH
040A69
01/89/67
35.90
ARNALS AUTO SERV
REPAIR MAINT. VEH
040A69
01/29/87
65.91
ARNALS AUTO SERV
REPAIR MAINT VEH
798.08 •
040889
01/30/87
800.00
8I0 008 REPAIR
SUPPLIES
800.00 •
040892
01/29/87
36.44
BUERKLE BUICK
REPAIR MAINT VEH
36.44 + --
040C45
01/29/87
30.35
CHIPPEWA SPRINGS
WATER COOLER
30.35
* * * * **
040055
01/29/87
56.50
COPY DUPLICATING
SUPPLIES
56.50 •
040CSS
01/29/87
41.48
COPY EQUIPMENT INC
SUPPLIES
040CSS
01/29/87
43.04
COPY EQUIPMENT INC
SUPPLIES
040058
01/29/87
40.09
COPY EQUIPMENT INC
SUPPLIES
040CSO
01/29/87
199.38
COPY EQUIPMENT INC
SUPPLIES
040CSS
01/29/87
IPE.00
COPY EQUIPMENT INC
SUPPLIES
446.79 •
040059
01/29/87
180.00
CORPORATE RISK MGM
CONSULTING SERV
180.00 *
040061
01/29/87
111.50
CONNELLY IND ELECT
SUPPLIES
111.50 *
040067
01/29/87
134.16
CHAPIN PUBLISHING
PUBLISHING
134.16
040C90
01/89/87
5.47 _
COUNTRY CLUB _
SUPPLIES
5.47 •
040D30
01/29/87
d
8.00—
DALCO
SUPPLIES
Page: 3
1987 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO. DATE
AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION
_
/89 162.65 DALCO SUPPLIES
040D30
01
154.65 w
040F26
01/30/87
75.00
FIRE SAFETY
TRAVEL TRAINING
75.00
040F27
01/30/87
1,502.37
FIREARM TRAINING
RANGE EQUIP
1,502.37 •
* * * * **
040F34
01/29/87
20.00
FIRE MARSHALL$
SUBSCRIPTION
SUBSCRIPTION
040F34
01/29/87
.20.00
FIRE MARSHALLS
40.00 •
040F36
01/29/87
365.00
FISHER SCIENTIFIC
SUPPLIES
365.00 0
040044
01/29/67
15.95
GENERAL TIRE SERV
SUPPLIES
15.95 •
04.OG45
01/29/87
122.42
GOODYEAR TIRE CO
REPAIR MAINT VEH
REPAIR MAINT
040G45
01/29/87
5.00
5.00
GOODYEAR TIRE CO
GOODYEAR TIRE CO
REPAIR MAINT YEN
040645
01/29/87
132.42
040651
01/29/87
7.89
GLADSTONE LUMBER
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
040651
01/29/87
21.18
GLADSTONE LUMBER
29.01
+s *s * **
040H29
01/29/87
35.00
HEALTH RESOURCES
CONTRACT PYM
CONTRACT PYM
040H29
01/29/87
1
128.33
HEALTH RESOURCES
HEALTH RESOURCES
CONTRACT PY
040N29
01/29/87
1,283.33 •
040170
01/29/87
58.85
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
040170
01/29/67
.E5—
E6.7E
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY.
.
_ SUPPLIES
040170
040I70
01/29/87
01/29/87
.57—
INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
84.75
040J53
01/29/87
10.40
JOHNSON RANDY
MILEAGE
1987 CITY
..
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK NO.
DATE
- 040J53
01/29/87
AMOUNT
VENDOR
040K55
01/29/87
040KS5
01/29/87
040KSS
01/29/87
040K56
01/29/87
KNOX LUMBER
SUPPLIES
040L31
01/29/87
SUPPLIES
28.01
040L38
01/29/87
s *s + *+
040MOS
01/29/87
040MO6
01/29/87
6.19 •
040M1 1
01/29/67
s + * + *s
SUBSCRIPTION
040M14
01/29/87
15.00
040M19
01/29/87
040M19
01/29/87
040M19
01/29/87
MB SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
040MSS
01/29/87
* ** * **
215.00
040M59
01/29/87
Page: 4
CHECK REGISTER
-
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
9.36
JOHNSON RANDY
MILEAGE
29.23
KNOX LUMBER
SUPPLIES
42.4P
KNOX LUMBER
SUPPLIES
28.01
KNOX LUMBER
SUPPLIES
99.66 +
6.19
KNOWLANDS
SUPPLIES
6.19 •
15.00
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
SUBSCRIPTION
15.00 +
15.00
LAKE CNTY CHP ICBO
SUBSCRIPTION
15.00 +
10.28
MB SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
10.28 +
215.00
MASYS CORP
COMPUTER MAINT
215.00 +
' 41.00
MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT
SUPPLIES
41.00 +
87.75
MAPLEWOOD REVIEW
PUBLISHING
87.75 +
158.25
MERIT CHEVROLET
SUPPLIES
43.80
MERIT CHEVROLET
SUPPLIES
21.06
MERIT CHEVROLET
SUPPLIES
223-11 +
205.00
MINN MINING CO
SUPPLIES
205.00 +
23.30
. ... : _ wbARlilwlsy.;
MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT _
�f..tiu��• /'��. .. ���4t •� Ah� Y'IF wry • !!° 7 .` M
SUPPL I19B
< __
9
x
Page: 5
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR __
I TEM DESCR IPTION
040M59
01/E9/87
85.40
MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT
SUPPLIES
1 08. 7 0 «
040MSS
01/29/87
3:64-
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
SUPPLIES
040MOS
01/29/87
66.83
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
SUPPLIES
63.19
040M90
01/29/87
873.90
MOTOROLA INC
CONTRACT PYM
873.90 «
040M94
01/29/87
85.48
M.R.SIGN
SUPPLIES
040M94
01/29/87
1,143.10
M.R.SIGN
SUPPLIES
1,228.58
040M95
01/29/87
85.00
MRPA
SUBSCRIPTION
85.00 •
040N13
01/30/87
175.00
NATL SOC PROFL ENG
MEMBERSHIP
175.00 •
040N18
01/30/87
15.00
NATL REC PK ASSOC
PUBLICATION
040N18
01/30/87
15.00
NATL REC PK ASSOC
PUBLICATION
`30.00 •
040N20
01/30/87
29.20
NEEDELS CO
SUPPLIES
04ON20
01/30/87
136.90
NEEDELS CO
SUPPLIES
040N20
01/30/87
199.80
NEEDELS CO
SUPPLIES
365.90 •
040N30
01/30/87
6.6.00
NORTH ST PAUL CITY
SUPPLIES
66.00 •
s * *s **
0 40N95
01/30/87
9.75
NUTESON LAVERNE
TRAVEL TRAINING
040029
01/30/87
11.00
OCTOPUS CAR WASH
MAINT VEH
040029
01/30/87
5.00
- ._
OCTOPUS CAR WASH
.•- F'• -w ...w.r.pw..�..prr.+es +M� - a , .a„r:^. : n.,rww..y. _ ,..
MAINT VEH
- ..
Page: 6
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
.- VENDOR _
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040029
01/30/87
215.00
OCTOPUS CAR WASH
MAINT VEH
040029
01/30/87
71.00
OCTOPUS CAR WASH
MAINT VEH
040029
01/30/87
30.00
OCTOPUS .CAR WASH
MAINT VEH
333.00 •
040P33
01/30/87
508.48
PODANYS OFFICE EQUIP
EQUIP
040P33
01/30/87
28.78-
PODANYS OFFICE EQUIP
EQUIP
040P33
01/30/87
20.00
PODANYS OFFICE EQUIP
EQUIP
499.70 •
040P45
01/30/87
66.00
PITNEY BOWES
LEASE EQUIP
66.00 •
040P64
01/30/87
. 11.00
PRETTNER JOSEPH
TRAVEL TRAINING
11.00 •
040R04
01/30/87
3.48
RADIO SHACK
SUPPLIES
04OR04
01/30/87
2.29
RADIO SHACK
SUPPLIES
5.77 •
040R09
01/30/87
144.00
RAMSEY COUNTY
SUPPLIES
040809
01/30/87
287.60
RAMSEY COUNTY
CONTRACT PYM
431.60 •
040RSO
01/30/87
44.35
RON8 PRINTING
SUPPLIES
44.35 •
040502
01/30/87
59.00
8 6 D LOCK SAFE
SUPPLIES
59.00 •
040SO3
01/30/87
36.36
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040803
01/30/87
25.02
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040SO3
01/30/87
62.60
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040503
01/30/87
35.20
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040SO3
01/30/87
6.80
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040803
01/30/87
27.60 _____.SP8
OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES -
040503
01/30/87
141.66
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040803
01/30/87
109.80
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040503
01 /30/87
140.92
- SPS OFFICE PROD _ _ _
SUPPLIES_ . -
040803
01/30/87
35.E0
SPS OFFICE PROD
SUPPLIES
040803
01/30/87
154.00
SPS OFFICE PROD -
SUPPLIES
- T• ^ M' .' ,f„•.. q►+l r?... 4oa{ Y"!. ... r. 1c. 4laV�l• M!! "r'•ll+�'K�.iI+1.R^M1ty - ?� Ptt[ -.-.
..
'i
i,
Page: 7
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT _
- VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
TT5.16 •
-
040SOS
01/30/87
185.60
S i T OFFICE
SUPPLIES
185.60 •
040509
01/30/87
73.00
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
CHEMICAL TOILETf
040SO9
01/30/87
73.00
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
CHEM ICAL TOiLET:-
040SO9
01/30/87
73.00
SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
CHEMICAL TOILET:
219.00 •
040S11 4,
01/30/87
129.47
8 i 8 CRAFTS
SUPPLIES
129.47 •
040589
01/30/87
185.00
SIGN CENTER
SUPPLIES
185.00
040S36
01/30/87
49.93
SIMPLEX TIME REC
SUPPLIES
49.93 +
040537
01/30/87
8.11
SEVEN CRNERS ACE HDW
CHEMICAL TOILET
8.11 +
040S57
01/30/87
169.50
STAC
SUPPLIES
169.50 +
040SSS
01/30/87
3,300.00
SUNRISE BLOCS
SUPPLIES
040T30
01/30/87
55.98
TARGET
SUPPLIES
55.98 +
# # # # ##
040T50
01/30/87
_ _ . 9.10 ._ _ _ _
_..._ .T 1 AUTO PARTS .
SUPPLIES
040TSO
01/30/87
80.38
T J AUTO PARTS
SUPPLIES
040TSO
01/30/87
9.42
T J AUTO PARTS
SUPPLIES
040TSO
01/30/87
259.94 _
T J AUTO PARTS
REPAIR
040TSO
01/30/87
20.98
T J AUTO PARTS
SUPPLIES
379.82 •
- ..'f
. .r.♦ •..rs. r, '1•' •+v!b.er- �.3i!'i`ra„'�'•`'. i-�..-+*tilt .. ...v orrw+r.v
•-+►
1987 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Page: 8
1987 CITY
OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK.NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
040T60
01/30/87
41.44
TOLL COMPANY
SUPPLIES
41.44 •
040T63
01/30/87
35.00
TRI- COUNTY LAW
SUBSCRIPTION
35.00 •
040TOO
01/30/87
5.88
TRUCK UTILITIES MFG
SUPPLIES
040TOO
01/30/87
8.96
TRUCK UTILITIES MFG
SUPPLIES
14.84 +
040T93
01/30/87
111.57
TWIN CITY FILTER
REPAIR MAINT
040T93
01/30/87
111.57
TWIN CITY FILTER
REPAIR MAINT
040T93
01/30/87
111.57
TWIN CITY FILTER
REPAIR MAINT
111.57 •
040077
01/30/87
64.40
UNITED BUSINESS MACH
SUPPLIES
64.40 •
* *ss **
04OV15
01/30/87
1,817.98
VAL$ BODY SHOP
REPAIR MAINT VEH
1,5/7.98 •
040VSO
.01/30/87
86.05
VIRTUE PRINTING
SUPPLIES
26.05 +
040W15
01/30/87
146.59
WALDOR PUMP CO
SUPPLIES
146.59
040WSO
01/30/87
20.00
WEBER- TROSETH INC
REPAIR MAINT
20.00 +
040W90
01/30/87
9.70-
W W GRAINGER
SUPPLIES
040W90
01/30/87
174.40
- W W ORAINGER.
SUPPLIES
164.70 •
r . .- ti./S .gi'on.�Il.�wryi.
.. 1 �1R !I l...1. •.wJ y
... .. • .
Page: 9
1987 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
CHECK NO. DATE
INDICATE ITEMS FINAI BY RECREATIONAL FEES
CHECK
REGISTER
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION
19,374.09
FUND
01
TOTAL
GENERAL
754.84
FUND
03
TOTAL
_. HYDRANT CHARGE
134.16
FUND
64
TOTAL
895.85
FUND
90
TOTAL
- SANITARY SEWER FL
1,744.58
FUND
96
TOTAL
VEHICLE E EQUIP P
88,308.98
TOTAL
INDICATE ITEMS FINAI BY RECREATIONAL FEES
DATE 01/21/87
PROGRAM 'PRI52.1
PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REPO
CHELK GROSS 0 L
NUM EMPLOYEE NUtilBER- NAME PAY
13
C I T Y 0 F -M A P L E W 0
4
080G4 01-0109
GREAVU
JOHN
C
400a 00
00065 -01-0480
WAG ILUK
CHARLOTTE
P
325, 00
7
0 8 0 E. G Q —1318
DAB IIAN'...
GARY :.:
W
b
3. L 0
0 81,--16 7
JUKER
FRANCES
L
325.00
9
.01-7538
080GS 01-8088
ANDERSON
NURMAN
G
325,00
Oil
10
1 2
DIVISIUN
01
LEGISLATIVE
1700. 0.0
3
.. . ....... . ....... ...
16
Q) 3 0 6 9 !4*)2-1812
LAID
DUNALD
2239u '2O
1
i 17
080 02 71
BEW-1
LOIS
N
858o97
DIVISIUN
02-
CITY MANAGER
:31398* 17
21
22
—3
Z41
B!'Z) 7 1 10-4474
JAHN
DAVID
1
68,98
25
1 01 8 Ot' 7 2 1 —6523
SWANSON, JRw
LYLE.
E
966,42
27
Za
S
DWI I UN
10
CITY HALL MAINT
1035u40
Z9
30
31
32
08013 12-0124
DOHERTY
KATHLEEN
m
751,61
33
e, 8 CA* 7 4 12-0166
CUDE*
LARRY
J
242. 4et
----- -------
3m
080' 12-0908
4UERCHER
JUHN
L
1,57. G0
��
3.5
36
37
D I V I UN
12
EMEI-k'GLNILY SEHVICES
1151,61
38
39
40
11.1
Y 21 1 078
FAUST
DANIEL
F
1858m 60
4Z
43
44
DIVT? --"t I U N
21
F I INANCE ADMINISTRATION
1858MG0
- ---------- --- - -------
------
47
08077 22-06.14
HAGEN
ARLINE
J
1175. 91
4 9
0 8 Q, 78 22:"-443�2
MUELLER
MARGARE'l
A:
1. 095m 281
50
08079,�.-, 22 ---4446
MATHEYS ..... ...... ...
ALANA .....
51
C 180 22 5
—75 Q
IGr
V LO
DELORES
n�
.1858 97
- ----------
a3
54
DIVISIUN
22
ACCUUNTING
4101. 25
55
L 56
57 "6
57
ii
�
i
C I T Y 0 F -M A P L E W 0
BATE 01/2
PROGRAM P R I O
I is
C I T Y 0 E M A P L E. W 0
PAYROLL CHECK REG I G'l ER REPO
CHECK
_
GROG - 9
NUM
3
EMPLOYEE
NUMBER NAME
PAY
4
5 !)8!, -l81
,' i--•' :1 8
AURELIUS
LUCIL.L.E
E
1993,48
6 03 082
31 -481
�L.LUOG _
E�ETTY
D
1��. ' �e
7 ;�08
8
9
31 -9315
SCHADT
JEANNE
L
751.61
10 D IVISION
12
,. CITY CLERK ADM I N I G !
3055w
13
14 0 8084
33
�ELB�.Y
�������
�.
��.�4 go
15 �8!�85
33--44 ,�.t
V I ETOR
LORRA I � E
.733837
16 00006
33-•'4994
HENSL.EY
PA'TR I C I A
A
694,24
17 08087
33--•6 105
CA RLE
JEANETTE
E
613
18 001
3.1
GREEN
PHYLLIS
C
93G. 09
19
20
21 D
33 DEPUTY REGISTRAR
,�2,02, 98
2z
3
Z4
25 ' 0 8 -9
41
ULLINS
KEINNETH
v
1 9 %io. 28
2 6 0 05.4
41-2356
RICHIE
CAROLE
L
713021
27 0 -D91
41 --2934
SVEND,EN
JOANNE
M
987,11
28 0 % 0 :.e2
41-- 18
NELSO
ROUE RT
D
1687. 0 8
29 08093
41- _•76,36
OMATH
%fUY
E
727,13
30 0 8 09 4
41-9263 63
MA R t I N bON
CAROL
F
625,37 ii
31
32
33 B -I V I G I U N
41. ` PUBLIC SAFETY: ADM I N
8870. 1 8
34
35
36
37 ms s..#
4 2-012-30
E PH
1 4 55 ,2 6
'•s 0S0 9t:j
42 1
G'l I iLl....
V ERNON
T
1 2644 68
39 )8 97
. 42- -•0457
€�UNA�..D
€�
1287a 88
40 0aO'J8
42
U E L
RAY - MUND
J
128 / • 88
41 08099
4�.::-1 4
STEFFEN
SCOTT
L
1336,30
42 031
4
ARNULD
DAVID
L
145
43 1418. 1
42-1577
BAN I CK.L
J0HN
J
1457.
44 # 23 1 0 2'
4
BOHL
JOHN
C
11 55a 0 4
45 081
4 2 -- 1930
�.L.AUGON
DALE
�'t
�.3i �. v 88 '
.+ 0 4
4 i.:.: -- is 0i �
i #..� �
D
t:..
' 87u88
4 081 05
42
ATLHISON
JOHN
H
1351a08
081 C
42:-- 'x:884
PELT I E R
W I LL I A1
F
1455426
•
50 0 8 108'
42
W E L. C H L. I N
QABOIL
V
Mf ► .�
10 3 8. 0 2
51 .
52
Z
53
54
f
i
i
55
56
57
DATE 01/21/87
PROGF-ZAIN PIR10
PAYROLL CHEUK REGIS IER REPO
C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0
GROSS
2
3
NUM
EMPLOYEE
NUN DER, NAME
..
....
PAY
•
4
5
08109
42-3t5g1
LAMB
RICHARD
J
13 38
6
0'3 10
42-4801
RYAN
MICHAEL
P
1431.26
7
2181
42 -4916
HERBERT
M I CHAEL
J
1327a 081
0 3
03112
42-6119
DREGER
RICHARD
C
1455,26
9
1.13
42-7686
MEEHAN, J
'JAMES
E
1276o,32
10
11 4
4"2-7887
GREEN
NURMAN
L
1 4%-5 5.
O il
08115
42-8226
STAFNE
GREGORY
L
1287: 88
12
03116
42"'-
HALWEG
KEVIN
R
1522 61
13
42-9E04-
S f ( LXTUN
DERREI L
T
la641 68
14
L 118
42-9867
BOWMAN
.:R I CK
--A
1241w48
is
16
17
DIVISION
42 POLICE SERVICES
319090 07
19
21
81 1 S
43-0009
KARIS
FLINT
D
1265,82
u
016 1 i�:O
4135-0466
HEINL
S I EPHEN
il
1289
23
1-27.18 1 1
43-09 I'S
NELSON
CAROL
M
1313. 48
24
e =81
43--1789
GRAF
DAVID
M
1336w68
Z5
08123
43-2052
THUMALLA
DAVID
J
1289m 48
43-2201
YUUNURLN
G
1313a 48
127
08 125
43-4316.
RAZSKAZOFF
DALE
E
1*35 1008
:8
0 L31 1 2 6
4 -j
VURWERK
R 0 U E wi
E
13601a 68
40
z 9
0-8127
43-7418
BE RGE RON
JOSEPH
A
1221 a %J4
30
0 1 "23
4 Z3-- 7 7 9 1
MELANDEH
JON
A
1348,99
31
08129
43-8434
BECKER:
RUNALD
D
1336.68
32
33
34
T f--
D I Vl Z:s
1 0 In
43 PARAMEDIC SERVICES
14427a39
35
36
37
38
45-1878
EMBERTSON
JAM
-,"ES
M
1441a 48
39
!Z18131
45-3333
WILL I A L MS L
DUANE
JL
1256IM68
40
41
42
DIVISION
45 FIRE PREVENTION
2698a 16
43
45
46
el 18132
46--0,183
RA ... El w -
JAINET
L
865,69
47
08133
46-0322
STAHNKE
JULIE
A
837m 05
08134
46-0389
BOYER
SCOIT
K
748u33
49
08-13S
CAHANES.
ANTHUNY
G:...
14 5,5L:. 26...
50
46-591 S
..... . - NELSGN:...',..-..—...
KAREN �
G 3:3
51
52
53
54
55
56
37
C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0
DATE 01/21/87
C I
T Y
0 F M A P L E W 0
PRZOGRAN
PR10
PAYROLL CHECK REGISIER REP(
GROSS-
t,'.HECK
3
NUt-1
EMPLOYEE
NUMBER'
NAME
PAY
4
81 7
4 6 7 0 3 ii'Ll
MARTIN
SHAWN
M'
878w05
6
ci 3138
46-7236
FLAUGHER
JAYME
L
881.69
7
9
DIVISION
46
DISPATCHING tERV
6528a4O •
10
12
13
X 81. 9
51-0267
BARTA:
MARIE
L.
709a 05,:
14
02 w% 1 4 0
51-3174
�WEGWERIH
JUDITH
415.8
15 l /
0- 8 l 4 1
51-6872
HA
KENNETH
G
2176a 68
16
17
-
D I V I I
51
PUBLIC WURKS ADMIN
3301 a 5G
19
20
22
V", b 4 .7
ML y L K
ULHHLD
W,
1 Ofli a b%S
081.43
52•1241
KANE
M I Ull IAEL
R
1Q)89, 61
24
0 Os 1 44
52-1431
LUTZ
DAVID
P
1 Q'I'l 9, 4
25
ZZ 145
52-1484
RE.INERT
EDWARD
A
1 1 G9. 58
Z
2 6
01" 146
52-347ZS
KLAUb. I.Nb'
HENRY
F
.
-Pt9a
11 Q 53
V
08147
5 1`x. - -- 4.3 37
HELEY
RUNALD
J:
10.69s, 21
0 S � 1 48
52—.6224
TE,VLIN, JR.
HARRY
J
1089o37
46
29
018 1 4 9
52•6254
F REEVE RG
RUNALD
L
1 049. 05
30
08150
52-6755
PRETTNEK
JOSEPH
B
1434,46
31
8 15 1
52-8314
CASS.
W I LL I AM-.
C.
1480m22
33
34
D I V I I
o r% , ,
52
S I REET M I N I Et-,J'ONCE - --
...
11559o97
36
37
t 38
15 2
53-1010
ELIAS
JAMES., -
G
1221w33
39
081b3.
53-1688-
..PECK
DENN: IS
L
121 k 17
40
05 1 n4
-- --- ---- -
WILLIRM
I _168, 87
0141
08155
53-3'J70
AHL—JR.
RAY
C
1684u38
42
08156
5�
GEES LE
JAMES
T
1867,63
i
43
0 57
5 —6 1, '9
GE I SSLER�.
M
1188s73
45
......
DIVISION
53
ENUINLERINU
-----------------
--
89411$11
47
48
42
50
08158
54-3'175
JOHN
R
942.0 50:
..........
53
DIVISIUN
54
PUBLIC- WORKS BLDG MAINT
9422 5O
54
55
57
DATE 01/21/87
PROGRAM PR 1 O
C I. T Y - 0 F A P L_ E W C
PAYROLL CHECK REGI SI ER REP(
•
z
NUM
EMPLOYEE
NUri1L:L,R
NAMIE
PA y
4
5
0 81 9 -
58- -1014
NADEAU -
EDWARD
A
1109,45
6
021160
58-1590
MUL t4EE
GEORGE
W
1 087, 81
7
81 .
58�-1
NUTESON -
LAVER NE
S
1434u46
08
081 6
58-2563
BREHE I M
ROGER
W
1 067.61
9
218183
58- --2582
ED Uri
DAVID
B
1 073, O8
o ff
to
1t
DIVISIO
5 8
SAN SL WE R OPERATIO
57 52.21
3
1 4
16
�;: +�a164
59-- 1Ci00
MU_V N Y
DENN I S
M,
11, 5,13
17
18
081 65
59-9760
MAGDONAL D
JUHN
E
1146,81
19
-
z8
D I V I G
I ON
59
VEH : EQUIP IAA I NT
�:��{ 1� 94
y
z1
u
'
za
~mot 188
8 . -� 8
OUEGARD
ROBERT
D
1734.60
60
25
081
61-1 066 66
D RENNE fit
LG 18
J
874, 97
:6
0L 63
81-1 993
K RUMMEL.
BARBARA
A
,. 6 � w 18
2 7 ¢
08169
61-
G rAPLEG .
PAUL.INE
1378, 22
'3N
30
DI
81
COMM SERVICES ADM I W
4348 w95
31
- -
32
33
81 0
62--0
WILLIAMS
CU I G
1
167 , 25
;5
08171
82 -3411
UU8INDA
MELVIN
1
1382,94
94
36
0817
62-3790
ANDERSON
ROUE R T
E
1 , 48, 74
37
.. 08
6 2 - 39 1 5
L I kitDORFF. ..
DENNIS
p
1 43 1 w 6i:
38
�4; x.174
62 -4121
HELE I
RGLANLF
.t 89w 'i:. i �
39
0817
82- -
MA RUI S A
MA RK
A
7 � j
11 t �, 8�
40
0817 6
62-7219
BURKE
MYL S
R
131
61
41
08177
62 --8182
UE RMA I N
DAVID
A
1219,63
42
81
62-9784
HUNTER
TONY
1 18, `5
43
i
45
DIVISIUN
82
PA R- MA I NTENANCE
923 #, ,, �. 8
47
48
-
49
`A81 l9
w
6 3 -003 5
�
STARK ,
#��CHA RD"
E;
1 74 00
s
50
818
3 -017
RAU b'
LAURA
.,
i
51'„'sa
RUBERi
PAUL
,]'.
,. j
185. 30
53
54
55
56
'
57
•
D A Tt 01 21 81? 0 I T Y 0 E fit- A P L E W 0
PROGRAM P R i O PAY RULL CHE REGISTER REP(
1 40, - -
GROSS.
NUM
3
EMPLOYEE
NUMBER NAME
PAY
4
5 08182
63-130 1
THURIK
SCOTT
141n38
6
08183
63-1518
SHELDON
LEO
8
1 14 s 75
7
��C 184
63-1808
L I NDORFF
TODD
M
1 0G 25
1
63-3203
WALLACE
JUN
T
216s20
-- O, 4-0 188
63-3346
BOLVE H
RAYMOND
L
84-88
10
;:.``#8187
63
JUHANEK
TODD
120
W it
0%S 188
63-- 4248
WARD
ROY
G
4 80
12
63-5547
ORTH
KIMBERLY
A
12m 75
13
81 � t
83--5776
MEYs,.. EMBOURG
' - M A R I I N
W
83. 7�i
08191
�
81--84.`,2
TAUB��AN
I�UUUL.AG
J
1 j
1.�64..�G
Ss
- 7 1 3 1 q2
8, -71
POS l IE
g
I:E1-4
R
1�. 9, 88
16
08193
63 -8118
WHEATON
MARK
A
199,m
ro
17
t :,1 4
1 63 -8158
PADGETT
MA RG I E
D
3 a 50
18
08195 5
8 '- -9't. -x_.19
DIESEL.
GERALD
D
24. IZI
19
Qi 1 G8
63-9252
E R I CKSOH
JAGO��
E
27�`�. 79
20
08197
63 --9700
FIRM
RACHEL
A
251M OO
23
24
D . ' I G I Ot
83
REU RL.AT I ON P ROG RA,`l�
34
Z5
27
0 198
64- -0508
GREW
,JANET
M
898, 81
F
28
081 .�
8 �-" � 8'
FLI CK
BARBARA
L.
334.72
'
L
^ g
�' 8- C,
64-- 4624
HURSNEL.L.
JUDITH
A
433.34
3
30
31
32
33
DIVISION
G4
-
NATURE CENTER
'
189 8 x 85
34
35
36
08201
71 --0551
UL SUN
GEOFFREY
W
171
37
f 1 8 ,.;,;elm'
71 �8 ,� �4
L I 1 N S i ON
JOY
L
232 s 84
38
08203
71- --8993
CHLEDECK
JUDY
K
891a 13
39
_
{
40
at
D I V I S
I ON
71
COMM DEVELOPMENT
ADM I N
w
42
43
i
45
. 4
72--7178
&,G 'l RAND
THOMAS
G
1094,85 z
08205 5
72- -8505
JUHNSUN
RANDALL
L
1143,92
4 7
-
48
43
DIVISION'
72
PLANN I WU
�.�..,�8. 77
50
52
-
53
54
55
.
57
i
1 40, - -
DATE 0 1/2 1 /87
P P R 10
C 0 M . A PLEw0
PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REPO
1
'
L..•
-
a
NUM EM 1�1...OYEE
-
�#UMBE R h�AM8 -
.
• 3
4
iwi
6 73.
QS t ROM MARJORIE
1393w37
6
s
DIVISION
BUILDING I NS PELT I UN
1.�`��.., .
9
10
it
12
Zl82!Z1 7 74- -0776
WENGE�R ROBERT
,J 1166,17
13
14
1S
DIVISION C
7 1Ei LT1 IN' P ECTION
1 i . i
16
17
FUND NOT CAN FILE
14 59'1. 04
18
19
_ � i 20
v
GRAND T€�TALS
1 40,..397. O4
2 1
.
d
u
�.
2A
s
}i5
- i
�g
i
30
31
32
33
.
34,
35
36
}
37
38
39
40
41
az
43 .
as
45
46
47
49
50
:.
:;
52
53
54
56
57
L�
t � Ij el
MEMORANDUM be��°
` � n ' 6,J � w . o ra::: s• r: mcm ...rw- :_ , m :isx:a � cesr- ram.
To: Ken Haider, Acting Ci Manager
From: Robert D. Odegard, Director of Parks and Recreatio•
Subj: Donation - Nature Center
Date: January 20, 1987
Mr. and Mrs. Jon Belisle have donated $100.00 to Maplewood Nature Center
for the second consecutive year. They have also given a wildlife print
as well as magazine subscriptions. A letter acknowledging the. gift has
been sent.
Please request that the City Council accept the contribution and direct
the Finance Director to assign the $100.00 to the Nature Center (Ac-
count #01- 4480 -64).
A ct i on by Co uncil o .
MEMORANDUM Endorse
Mod.if i od,...,�...m�„�
TO City Mana. er 1Re� ecte
g
FROM: - Associate Planner - - Johnson D
SUBJECT: Final Plat
LOCATION: Sterling Street and Highwood g Avenue •
APPLICANT /OWNER: Good Value Homes, I
PROJECT: Highwood
DATE: January 30, 1987
3
Reques t
Final plat approval.
Comments
Each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval Y P pp val has been
satisfied, except the transfer of Outlot A to the adjoining property
7 g P P tY
owner . This will occur after the plat is recorded,
P A n n myn in A n 4- ; .,
Approve the Highwood final plat.
' BACKGROUND
Past Action
7 -14 -86
1. Counc i 1 approved the H i hwood r � ' •
g p eliminary plat, subject to:
a. Submittal of a developer's agreement, '
g , with required surety,
to _the city engineer for . proposed public im roveme
p nts..
b. Submittal of a recordable uit- claim de '
q deed to the city
engineer to convey a public right-of-way asement to the '
feet .y e city for
the west thirty of proposed Sterling Street from Highwood
Avenue to the north line of Phase One.
c. Designate the southerly 33 x 207 -foot portion of Lot One
Block Two as an outlot. This property will be combined with
the
property adjacent to the west.
d. Show a twenty - foot wide sanitary ewer easement
the north y ent centered on
and along line of Lot Twelve, Block Three. Sanitary
sewer shall be constructed to the west line
ne of 2585 Highwood
Avenue.
e. Submission to the City engineer of a •
Y g n easement (s ) for public
storm water ponding areas over portions of ro osed Lots
p p Three
through Eight, Block Three and Lots Three through Seven, and Nine
through Fourteen, Block Two, all in Phase Two. The legal
descriptions for these easement 1
ent areas shall be approved by the
city engineer. The applicant may submit a recordab
plat Phase ble quit - claim
deed (s) or
P se Two as an outlot and show the easements on
the plat. (Comment: There is no need to require these
as a condition of this lat .q a easements
p The final drainage and grading
plans indicate that runoff from this site
e will not increase above
predevelopment levels as a result of this lat.
P )
f. Approval a of the final grading, utility and. drainag plans
the city engineer, g p by
g. Evidence shall be submitted showing that Williams Brothers'
Pipeline has approved. the width of the proposed p p i el ine
containment easement and that the proposed crossing of the
pipeline at Valley View Avenue has been approved.
h. Evidence shall be submitted to the director"of community
development that the private north p over the
easterly part of the plat ha' /south access easement ov
s been eliminated.
2. Council also rezoned this site from F, farm residence to R -1
single dwelling. '
j 1
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Final Plat (8 1/2 x 11)
4. Final Plat (separate enclosure)
2
H)UHWOOD
Final Plat Proposcd '
5
Attachment 3
•
-= �Nssl�e
ill/
t
Ir/N/� ` ae�ewM► - � s���
A Ire� d Me 5 SAID ow
1NI. Ott A►q�'K�•
'r
do Ilia
A!
1. .
W
•
28
MOO
am
^MLOI AV~-qeE
WLLEYVIEW
r MACE
t
.,�
v
^ma
tArmw
i
4,
IMAM
so
rl'3lbi
a
! s
�,e
2
70
�• ;
3
-.. ' /
- ssa� - ' �. Awl'�!!X•!'
o
law
,reran
j
�►`
L
1l Mr d A4 5.1MG[0A�s .0 ale
; Klil
SH/N, A(EHS J�ec L!.
.,.
A4p
MCI
�.�Zc�,�,
'Ali7 3is'XIl7L/
Maw r
S!m Z
,
so r "_�
M� eM~r ..
M 4 I A* SarDA�I
SW /.RAEN,itl�
K Ire d lit AM
�
3
Air F .
Ai �
�
p
A► d * -W&W
rcr� ;•«s
a � •. �TJgiY
i �' � ;
f E
.'
..............
w� i
83 �,
90 �, xif !d' w d f f'� "&0 New, S ea
� ~ � �'~
mat
Moo JMW
—�
.� h A OOH
AW ^
OWN
ANPO O6D
�IYE
-,
^ "
- a
p A
AM!•�7'S'7'11' A /I!'•S!'di',E ^
"�—�
'
Sw car/aer d 7lMe f v low of tint F /?, 3E'/i. till/ /s, .SM /1
J300'
1 Aw Of h* SW 1A, AX lac 3 e�c.13, TZN.R.ZL
3�f ta�xr r✓ n'lt S�E/i
•
+ Caary Cdw /I
H)UHWOOD
Final Plat Proposcd '
5
Attachment 3
•
1
•
f
I
I
.• a
a
t6 Z4,7 21,700•
li, 1 t 700 0 '
17 WO ; 2 3 4 g ` 7
VALLEYVIEW go
SMIt� •twt� AVENUE ••
w-
� ' "tea' - � 13,5D5•�
4
I S " ---.
•
bWP 11,7000 17,500• 0 9
s i l7 #so fps , b
` 11700• G 7 11,XO* 11,570 IG,�OD� $ 1 woo
» 20 ID
_ ,9e3 , 700 14,900 Q
_ c it o 9
.y 19,559•
VCR �--- .. 4� ern
Mf r S+w. SM . 0 3% V�
i
_ t
` t
• Preliminary Plat 1
(Approved 7- 14 -86 •
4 - Attachment 2
Q w
I w
major collector
R1 L
V
_ 0
ti
Lm
0
c
Cim
�
ca .:
C**�
C
•_
u�
1
�••
"Linwood Ave,
J `
r0
O
f'O
W
Q
c
Q
1� sc
•
1 W
w
r
r Hi ghwood Ave.
4mm
C D
c�
�- - •,
F -
WIN r111 918!1
OR
r
= .. ♦� i
IN rtiwirili Tiinor ec or r
_colt rrr t , ' . , ��uererrr'
J w I
w
i w
•
� I
� ' 1
,
•
• 1
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT /OWNER:
PROJECT:
DATE:
City Manager
Associate Planner -- Johnson
Time Extension -- Preliminary Plat
2830 Keller Parkway
Richard Andersen
Gervais Overlook
January 30, 1987
SUMMARY
MEMORANDUM
Action by Council e
odic f c
Rejected
Date
Request
Approve a one -year time extension for the easterly fifteen lots of the
twenty -lot preliminary plat.
Comments
Mr. Andersen expects to request final plat approval for the remainder
of the site thi s spring. See the attached letter,
Recommendation
Approve a one -year time extension for Block One and Lots One through
Eleven, Block Two of the Gervais Overlook preliminary plat.
BACKGROUND
Past Actions
2- 13 -84:
Council approved the 20 -lot single - dwelling preliminary plat, subject
to:
1. The City of Little Canada ordering city water to the site. The
plans shall be approved by the Maplewood City Engineer,
2. Final grading, utility and drainage plans shall be submitted for
approval by the city engineer . These plans shall provide for:
a. The lowest floor level ( including basements) of all
permanent structures shall be no lower than 864.6 feet.
b. Compliance with grading, filling and water quality
management plan requirements of Sections 36 -566 ( f ) and 36 -567
(b) of the shoreland ordinance.
These plans shall consider the recommendations of the Soil
Conservation Service in their January 9, 1984 report.
3. A signed developer's agreement, with required surety shall be
submitted to the director of public works for all public improvements,
including a temporary cul -de -sac at the east end of proposed Beam
Avenue,
4. Payment of a deferred water assessment.
5. Removal or relocation of the garage to comply with setback
requirements.
6. Proof by land survey that the existing dwelling (and accessory
structure, if retained) would be located consistent with setback
requirements.
7. Submission of an opinion from a registered soils engineer that
the lots as proposed are buildable. This report shall include a
statement of the remedial procedures necessary to remove any soils
material that is questionable as a foundation for building,
89 The name "Block Two" shall be placed on the lots south of Beam
Avenue,
90 Lots Twelve through Sixteen may be realigned to front on Arcade
Street,
2- 11 -85:
Council approved a one -year time extension for this preliminary plat.
2
9- 23 -85:
Council conditionally approved the Frattalone final P lat for the five
westerly lots (Twelve through Sixteen) of the development.
2-10-86:
Council approved a one -year time for this preliminary plat
Y P ,
except the part that had been final platted as the Frattalone
Addition, (Page 5.)
Planning -
Sec tion 30 - 5. (e) states "For one year followin prelimin a
r V flat
app roval and for two (2) years.following final approval, unless the
subdivider and the city agree otherwise, no amendment to a
comprehens ive - plan or official control shall apply to or of fect the
use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or
platting required or permitted by the approved application.
Thereafter, pursuant to its reg ulations the city ma extend the period
• i�
by agreement_ w th the subdivider and subject to all applicable
performance conditions and requirements, or it ma require submission
of a new a 1 ication unless activity �
._. _PP , s s phy s i c a l and
investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the approved
application and the subdivider will suffer substantial
teal financial
damage as a consequence of a requirement to submit a new application
PP n
j 1
Atta chments:
1. Location Map
2. Gervais Overlook Twenty Lot Preliminary Plat
3. Letter of Request
3
ac
Z
o W
*
o
H
AY
—
s o - ..��...._ .:
22
VE.
Ge�Yoia
L oke
`�- - 23 :
Z .
Q J
V
- 22
}
60 j
+�l
DVI
h p7 i � ROAD MAN
s
J H I F 7 e W
61
,S;: GERVAi
V
C
AVE.
a �Al
t: VtK
VIKING
O s
25 � -
e uRKE A
AV.
urLMOWT
_ �sKILLMAN �•
4i bW 'AD LA.
��► � t�
X 0
Fil
E
H . c *'79 SHE R �RE
C OPE
EL RK
Q
[LAURIE
[ 7LELANO�® 25
Julg AVE.
h
u RKE
or AVE _
♦; T h ELDRIDG
h
AN ELMON P ®r
t
x : P VE SKILL MA
o AYpN
- AY
R� R
tdi A '� jI �I
< Il . I
LOCATION MAP
4 Attachment Ond
Ko ller
Lo,t e
i
i
T _
4
N
3 -. 1
7�
As N a s �••ib0 t ;
H- S' 3 2 1
-- m B 0cK m 1 o 0
lb T
• \ O
as 6
.• " ~
U P /
��� so 06, • ....
90 Co
�, •• y 1
f `
10 C
J.
.` ti . `: w:.. 0 • # O
•., '; vim=_ ; . •.
:� . ; :tiff: • 8 O so t
oe
SOO
�• • :;..: •.•: • • :off t Q 8 • � /
7:
J w
PREL I MI NARY PLAT' FOR 20 LOTS
Final platted as t attal
`• :�� e- Fr one
•Addition on 923 -88 .
attachment two.
_J
4
N
2830 Keller Parkway St Paul, MN 55109
January 26, 1987
City of Maplewood
1830 fast County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
Gervais Overlock Addition
Attn: Geoffrey 01son Director of Community Development
Dear Sirs:
With deepest regrets- we are asking for a tine extension in preparing
the final plat for the Gerva is Overlook addition. We hope this would
allow us to accomplish the final stages for the preparation pertaining
to the final plat presented some time ago to you.
On the last request for a time extension., we indicated that the legal
right--of-way had been transferred from us to Frank Frattalone as per
plans. This permitted him to record and begin building on the 5 lots
on Arcade Street as per preliminary plat plan. However, we do not as
yet have in our possession the filed paper work transferring the deed
to our property right -of -way. Only then would we be able to proceed
with work of staking and preparing the site for the improvements.
Metro Title has in the past two and a half months been trying to
locate the paper work, which was already signed and delivered to them
but has not been given to us to record. We feel frustrated at this
stage. It also delays us from being able to give directions to
prepare for final plat*-
Attached is a copy of a letter from Jacobsen Excavating indicating
that they have come to a cost and estimate and are ready to proceed
as soon as we can be notified of the recording papers of the right -m
of -•way. They feel that the earlist they can begin is early April,
1987, or according to weather conditions.
We sincerely beg your indulgence. You have been considerate in the
past. It has been difficult working .between the two cities of Little
Canada and.,Xplewood to accomplish our goals.
Sincerely
r
Mr. an Mrs. Ric r 4Andersen
Enclosure
6 Attachment 3 126. "87
Mr. and Mrs. Richard Andersen
2830 Keller Parkway
St. Paul NiN 55109
Dear Dick: .
.Sometime ago you gave me information and all facts concerning your
property. I was asked to prepare a feasibility cost in putting in
improvments for the final plot in Gervais Overlook.
For the benefit of the City of Maplewood, I am sending you an
acknowledept that the costs we have gone over would be possible.
We would very much like to work with you and see your project to
completion. We feel that early April, 1987 would be a realistic
time to begin., or according to weather conditions. We are prepared
to work with the staff and engineers to accomplish this.
Sin rely --
Jeff Jacobsen
Jacobsen Excavation
- 0
' L 26. 'a7
r___ .5100"o,
Aotzon by Coun
MEMORANDUM
Aloe. f off.
TO: Acting City Manager R ejooto
FROM:. Finance Directoro
RE -0 1986 Budget Changes - I-nterna -1 Rental Charges
DATE: January 27, 1987
PRnPn_'U1
It is proposed that budget transfers totaling $18,410 be approved to
finance the 1986 V.E.M. Fund rental charges.
RACKGRNINn
The Vehicle.and Equipment Maintenance V . E . M .) Fund accounts for the operating
expenses of al. l City vehicles and .major pieces of equipment except for public-
.safety vehicles These.operating expenses are used as a to establish
rental rates that are charged t-o ' the departments using the vehicles. During
the year, each department is al'.l pcated internal rental charges based on the
amount of miles driven for each vehicle.
In 1986, General Fund .actual. internal. rental charges were greater than the
budgeted amount due. to revisions i.n the rental rates and higher usage than
anticipated. Therefore, the following budget transfers are needed
These are routine year -end budget transfers. which should be approved as
Department Heads.do not have any control over the rental rates charged for
the vehicles and that they use.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve the above listed transfers to
finance the:1986 V.E.M. Fund charges.
DFF:inb
Transfer .(From)- To
Division Unappropriated
Fund Balance
21
Finance Administration
$, 2001.
31
City Clerk Administration
200
42
Police Services
( 360)
51
Public Works Administration
( 280)
52
Street Maintenance
(20,330)
53
Engineering
( 1
54
Public Works Building Maintenance
( 30)
61
Parks &Recreation Administration
190.
62
Park Maintenance
1
63
Recreation Programs
2
64
Nature Center
740
71
Community Development Administration
( 210)
72
Planning
( 210).
73
Building Inspections
( 540)
74
Health Inspections
( 410)
Net Amount From Unappropriated
Fund' Balance $ 1
These are routine year -end budget transfers. which should be approved as
Department Heads.do not have any control over the rental rates charged for
the vehicles and that they use.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve the above listed transfers to
finance the:1986 V.E.M. Fund charges.
DFF:inb
MEMORANDUM
T0. Acting City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
RE: Financi.a.l Transfer 'to Close '
Debt. Service Fund
DATE: January 28, 1987
PROPOSAL
o A 1-
011 by c0U11.
1 f:l 0
e pct
�o
I t is proposed .that Debt Service Account #19 wi thi
_ n the Special
Assessment Fund
be closed by a transfer of the remaining alance to
Proj the Capital Improvement Pro g
� . Fund effective December 31, 1986..
BACKGROUND
, I . n 1986 the final payment was made on the 1 ast un aid --
in Debt Service bond i ssue
vice Acco.u.nt #19 i -n the Special Assessment - Fund. Accordin
to state law (M.S Subd. 4 y sur pl rema � n� ng i n a Debt an
Service Fund, after the bonds and interest have been ai d
to any p � may be
appropriated y other general purpose.
When the 1986 Budget was prepared, it was l anned that the remaining
p ema � n � ng
balance i -n this
account be transferred to the Capital Improvement
Projects Fund. at the end of 1986 to partially finance the '
y e construction
of the new City y Hall.. The 1986 Budget a nticipated a surplus of $925,000.
The actual cash surplus i s $94-1,000 based on rel i mi nar y ea r - end
accounting reports.
p y y
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Debt Service Account #19 within the
.Special
Assessment Fund be closed by a transfer of the remaining balance to the
he
Capital Improvement Projects Fund effective 12-31-86.
31 86.
DFF : l nb
MEMORANDUM
TO: Acting City Manager
FROM: Fi nance Department
RE: Financial .Transfer to Close Project 83 -4
DATE: . .January 28, 1987
PROPOSAL
A ction by Council
D e Li n� �,
- L, ,l� d a . � .."t
e e t e
Date
It is proposed that transfers of $38,618.46 and $37 ,430.28 be made
from Project .86 -3 (Century Avenue Water) a*nd Project 81 -20 . 1g ht
Road - Hwy. 36 to Conway) respectively, to Project 83 -4 (McKnight
Road Water) ,
Ur Kr Rni iN n
Based upon past .Council acti ons, the improvements planned as part of
Project 83 -4 will now constructed as part of Projects 86 -3 and
81 --20. Therefore, it is necessary to transfer money from the Projects
86 -3 and 81 -20 , to finance the. pro -rata. shares of costs incurred by
Project 83-4. -These transfers ^wi 'l l el' i mi nate the deficit in Project
83 -4 and allow the fund to be closed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that transfers of $38,618.46 and. $, made
from Project 86 -3 (Century Avenue Water) and Project 81 -20 (McKnight
Road - Highway 36 to Conway), respectively, to Project 83 -4 (McKnight
Road Water).
DFF :1 nb
MEMORANDUM
Act- a
T0: Acti ng Ci ty Manager o d ' f J.ed
FROM: Finance Director Rejected
RE: Fi.nanci al Transfers to Close Projects 85 -27 and 85 -35 Date
DATE: January 29, 1987
PROPOSAL
It is prop-sed that two 12 -31 -86 transfers be made from the General Fund
to the following projects to finance the cost of engineering f e a s i b i l i t y
studies:
Transfer Pr.e j ect..
Amount NO. Ti tl e
$23,361.23 85 -27 Hazelwood -Beam to C
4 85 -35 Cope /English Storm Sewer
R Ar Vr DOI ini n
The deficits in the above projects represent the cost of engineering
feasibility studies. Both of these projects were rejected by the Council
in 1986. Therefore it is necessary, to eliminate these deficits by transfers
of money -from -the General Fund.. The 1986. Budget has .$30,.000 appropriated-- - -- - --
for transfers of this type and none have been done in 1986.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended. that two 12 -31 -86 transfe -rs be made from the General Fund
to the. fol l"owi ng projects to finance the cost of engineering feasibility.
studies.
DFF:I nb
4E�
r - L_ : 4: `r�,. C oianc
MEMORANDUM
mcsad,
E
C". I
-FO: Actin Cit Mana I f e,
FROM: Finance Director Rela ected�,.-
RE: Financial Transfer, to Close Project 80-10 Dat
DATE: Januar 29, 1987
P ROPOSAL
IA is proposed. that effective 12--31-86 the remainin balance I . n the f und
for Project 80-10. (Hi 61 'Fronta Road) be -transferred to the Debt
Service Fund for the 1983 Improvement Bonds which -f-inanced this project.
R Ar k/r-. Pni iN n
Project 80-10 was f inanced: b MN/-DOT Cooperative A Funds and the
1.983 Improvement Bonds. In 1986, - the final installment of state aid was
received on this project. Construction has 'been completed on the pro
and there are no outstandin special assessment 'app-eal:s..' Therefore, it
is approp-riate atthis,time to transfer the remainin balance of appro'xi-
matel in this project to the Debt Service Fund for the 1983
Improvement Bonds
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that effective 12-31.86. the remainin balance in the
fund for Project 80-10 (Hi 61 Fronta Road) be'.transf'erred to the
Debt Service Fund for the 1983 Improvement Bonds which financed this.
project.
DFF: I.nb
, L _t-, /D
MEMORANDUM
T4: Acting City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
RE: 1986 Street Construction State Aid Transfers
DATE: February 3, 1987
PRnPngAl
A cti on by CoUnC11 :1
Uodifie
� ;0te
It is proposed that transfers of $43,,375.62, $ $46,,.689.42
be made to Project 81 -21 ( Bear.Avenue'- Highway 36 to'694, Project
84 -5 (Highway 61 Acces and Project 84 -10 (Connor Avenue) respectively,
from the '' Street Construction State Aid Fund..
RArVnPnllN
Construction of Projects 81 -21 and 84-5 been completed. When these
pro ec is were originally p res- e- nt -ed- -- t -o - -= th -e - - -Co -u n -c i- -1 - -- -t- -was- -- 1= n- d-i�a- , n- - -- th -a-t
no special , as.sessments would be levied and the projects would be .financed
by state aid. - it i now necessary to make the transfers from the Street
Construction State Aid Fund to finance these projects.
Con on of Project 84 -10 has also been completed. tWhen .this project
was presented to the Council, it wa.s i ndicated that 50/ of the project
costs would be financed by state aid. The balance will be paid for by
benefited property owners.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that transfers of $43,375.62, $10,708.24 and $46,689.42
be made to Project 81 -21 (White Bear Avenue - `Highway 36 to 694) , Project
84 -5 (Highway 61 Access..)*, and Project 84 -10 (Connor.Avenue), respectively ,
from the Street Construction State Aid Fund.
DFF:Inb
MEMO RA«.DUM Action b Council:,
Endor ed
r /'M A
� 'do fl ff e
TO: Actin Ci t Manager e j ec`� e ,,..
g Y er g
FROM: Finance Di rector Date ..
RE: Fi nanc i a.l Transfer to Close Project 85 -34
DATE: February 2, 1987
PROPOSAL
It is proposed that $1,661.12 be transferred from the Hydrant Charge Fund
to close the fund for Project 85 -34 (Water Booster - Maple Ridge
Estates),
RACKGRO[IND
Preliminary engineering costs were incurred for this project i n .1985 and
1986. Pressure problems in City's water distribution required a
revi of the Maple Ridge Estates internal and building distribution.
systems to determine the adequacy of fire flows. A consultant was retained
,t r - P_ uiP.�tho fire fl �:? rP ry rr�ct ran an i 1 ine watPT_ ''a W
pressure system. The consultant recommended revi to the
Maple- Ridge Estates system, wh ch were accompli shed, and determined that
with the construction of the elevated tank at Stillwater Road and Ferndale
Street a booster system would not be required and would be
adequate until the elevated tank was constructed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended. that $1,661.1.2 be transferred from the Hydrant Charge
Fund to close the fund for Project 85 -34 (Water Booster Station -Maple
Ridge Estates).
DFF:inb
MEMORANDUM Action by Council
TO:) Acting City Manager �g
FROM: Finance Director
RE: 1986 Tax Increment Transfers
DATE: January 30, 1987
In 1986 tax increment bonds were sold to finance several projects as
designated in the Development. Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Several of these projects incurred expendi ,during 19860 It is
necessary to these projects for expendi i
ncurred by
transfers of money from the Tax Increment Fund to the Park Development
Fund and the Special Assessment Fund.
Therefore it is recommended that the Counci authorize the following
1986 transfers from the Tax Increment Fund:
To the Special
Assessment Fund:
$126 - ,000
for Project 86 -03
(Water Tower)
167
for Project 85 -07
(Hudson Place)
18
for Project 85 -17
(Southlawn Ave.)
81,000
for Project 81 -20
(McKnight Road)
$ 392 5 000
Total
To the Park Development Fund
$ for Hazel wood Park - land acquisition
108,500 for Harvest Park.- land acquisition
181, 500
To
DFF:Inb
~
MEMORANDUM
�zudor Se--_
11"T 0 d���e�_�_____
Ile eot c
TD: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Acting City Manager
SUBJECT: Easement Agreement--Southlawn Drive
DATE: February 3, 1987
ad to Joseph Compan proposed development. The a has
been reviewed and is recommended for approval,
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made as of the day f
y 1986
by and between MAPLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, •.
a Minnesota limited partnership ("Partnership"). and the CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, a municipal corporation In the County of Ramsey, State
of Minnesota ("Maplewood"),
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Maplewood desires a nonexclusive public
.. usve p ermanent p
- -�
-- - - r-
Basemen # -- - r- oad�nras -- - and - -- atitrtre -- purposes - over - under; - - -- Through - --
and across that certain parcel of real property legally described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein b this reference
"Ease �� p Y nce
("Easement Parcel"); , and
WHEREAS, the Partnership s prepared to rant such p p p g c easement
subject to the terms. and conditions set forth in this Easement
Agreement,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency f which
is hereby th Y
Y e parties hereby agree as follows
1 The Partnership hereby grants to Maplewood a
Y g p
nonexclusive permanent public easement for roadways and
utilities purposes over, under, through, . and across ss the
Easement Parcel,
2. Maplewood's right to ave and improve the
p p
Easement Parcel is subject to the following terms and
conditions
(1) Maplewood, in the exercise of the rights
granted to it, will use its best efforts to avoid
any unreasonable interference with the business
and activities of the Partnership, its tenants,
subtenants, and their respective invitees,
licensees, or damage or interfere with any
utilities or other facilities presently installed
within the Easement Parcel or hereinafter installed
by the , Partnership, its tenants, or subtenants.
Maplewood will complete (or cause to be
completed) the paving and /or other improvements
to the Easement Parcel with reasonable
promptness.
(ii) Maplewood will repair an damage to th
p y g e
Easement Parcel or. adjacent land resulting from
its activities in connection with or
paving
otherwise improvin the Easement Parcel,, and will
promptl restore the Easement Parcel and such
adjacent - land to a condition e to or . better
than that which existed prior to Maplewood's
activities, or those of its a emplo or
contractors in pavi or otherwise improvin the
Easement Parcel
3* If an ter or provision of this A shall
to an extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the
remainin terms and provisions hereof shall not be affected
thereb and shall remain -valid and. enforceable to the fullest
extent permitted b law,
40 This A ma be executed in multiple
ori or counterparts,, each of which will be an' ori
and when all of the parties to this A have si
at least one (1) cop such copies. to will constitute a
full and bindin a
.so. This A shall be construed and enforced
in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this A
as of the da and y ear first above written,
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, a municipal
corporation,
B
Its
Its
MAPLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
B Joseph Compan of
Maplewood, Inc., a Minnesota
i
f
d ;
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF 'RAMSEY
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day f
1986 b Y
• y and
the - -- _.._
and
respectively, of City of Maptewood, a
municipal corporation.
7111A491--5,
STATE OF 4AWAX-1-NI NE30TA
COUNTY OF
i
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this da
� Y of
D6>e,eWfk , 1986, by David S. Joseph, the President of Joseph
C ompany of Maplewood, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, the general
partner of Maplewood Development Limited Partnership, a limited
partn P
ership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation
and limited partnership.
THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY:
MOSS 6 BARN ETT, P.A. (JJO)
1200 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 339 -8551
1380 FROST AVENUE MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55109
MAPLEWOOD HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION
Action b Council:.
Endorsed.---
Mo dif 1" e
Rejected.-.
Date-
January 7. 1987
To: City Mana Office
From Scott Rostron, Chair
Human Relations. Commission
I am forwardin an application form from Karla V. Sand
for Cit Council review,
Mrs. Sand has attended two meetin of the Human Relations
Commission and has expressed her interest in becomin a
member.
At its re meetin on Januar 6, 1987, the Commission
endorsed her application and feels s/he wil-I be an effective
participant.
Please inform us when her application will be on the
Council a Thank you.
enc.
MAPLEWOOD BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
I,ICATION FORM
NAME �
Date
ADDRESS 3 � 3 /r Phone: Home
Work
AGE HOMEOWMs YES _ Number of Yeas as a Homeowner
N --- Number of Years as a Resident
Mould regales attendance at meetings be difficult: Yee No
On which board or commission are you interested in serving on? List 6, number 1 being
first choice.
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION
ROUSING & LOPMENT AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RELATION COMMISSION POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
;f _thus is a Renewal Application, total number of meetings held on your board or
commission this past year? How many have you missed?
Education � di
Present Occupation and Employer
Number of Years 1
New g plc t only: Pre ioua fob experience employers. at last three).
, � .V /( f � 1 1A .R � i��':R- v�'L�'J . � �n.A `1f .. 11A A./4 oi ca �fi /I� Ilk
�t►� .-
Ki 4 ( WAIEW11 I
List Organizations o'Y Clubs in the Community in which you have been, or are an active
uarticilDant. w
� & -7 V ---PC 1
M
Background experience in of a Boards or Commiasions If
%6.d
_
Why would you like to serve on any of these boards o r comet scone? �
aXQ a
Additional Comments*
U
l
�
col .. . • �
,
Act by Co
1 End orsed
Ylo dif
oj octet, •
TO :
Dato
C i t Manage
y g
-FROM:
Thomas Ekstrand -- Associate Planner
..SUBJECT:
Community Design Review Board Appointment
PP
DATE:
Ja nuary 14., 1987 t
There is one vacancy on
the community design review board. This
s
position was vacated when
George Rossbach was appointed to the
planning commission. This
position is for a two-year term '
y ending
January 1, 19899
The. board interviewed three
applicants resumes attached) ( c ed) on
January 13, 19870 The
board found that all three individuals
were acceptable candidates.
The following is the board's
.recommendation in order
of preference:
.1..Marvin Erickson, Jr.
20 Michael B. Ayers
.3. Don Shiek
Rec ommendation
i
Make an appointment of
one of the above persons to ' gn
the design
review board.
mb
Attachments:
Three applications
1APLEwow. BOARDS & CO MISSIONS
ApriacAnon mm
IMMM n),4 �.t OOP V . I
Liz r 4/po -.7 e -Date
ADDRESS I 5/ z " Pin Y uO'a x A ,�r
Phones Nome 77
• Work�� -
1GE �OMEOwHER t M � .
Number of Years se a RomeownerL '
NO .
Number of Ye ars as a Resident
Would *- regvlar attendance 'at mee t
Inge be ditf ieul is Yee no }e
on Whirh board or ooauais Sion
are your interested in serving on? List 6 numbe 1 being
first ohoioe.
corjjvNl .
TY DESIGN REV BOARD
PARK & RECREATION CofOU S SI Ot1
RoVSIING do REDMLOF'ME -
NT AUT}�ORITY
PLANNING COMM.I S
SION
�• BUMAN RELATION COMMISSION POLICE CIVIL SERVICE cE COMT•1 i S SI oN
if athib is a Renewal Application tot
al number of the a tings held on our bo
and or
cos esion this pent year? How
marry have you missed?
Education ..�; •.�.:,�>> . ..-• , .
Present Occupation and Employer .
��. . /v
ber of Y ears G�
NeM Applicants only: Previous
0. job experience and employers. list l ast thre
/CIO Ale
// A r i
P.
hie t .Organizations or Clubs in the
Communi in which you have bee
participant. Elie �/F_ or axe an active
Mackground experience in of th a Boards or Comanieeions, 1f
,0Vir oveFY
�Y would you like to serve
on aW of these boards or ooauniesiona?
0 uo$ r/V WE cs a rh w, ,Jv
Y
Additional. Comments. pftl Y �r'R�:.S�. -" /, , .
r; C .V e ,�,_, ' � C : /y�1!S �'.. /. f V i (' � c • pis+ •�� =� , • ,
/04 i o f . �.�•
•
. MAI'LEWOOD BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
• y
APPLICATION FORM
NAB Date
ADDRESS L !' Phone Home �1
o rk ___as l Je56 ,.ia
JI G E J HOMEOW[ERs YES •� / Number '
of Years as a Homeowner
NO
• Number of Years. as a Resident •� .
Would regular attendance at meetings be difficults Yee No -�
{
;t
9n w i'ch board or commission are you interested in eery on List serving Y i t 6 number 1 being ,
1
first choice.
COMMUNITY DESIGN REYIEW BOARD .. PARK & RECREATION COMMISSiOII
•HOUSING do LOPMENT AUTHORITY PLANKING
coMMisstoN
HUMAN RELATION. ION COMMISSION POLICE CIVIL SERVICE CMUSSIO
r� N
If .this is a Renewal Application, total number of meetings held on
n8 your board or
j commission this past year? How have you r , many y missed?
Education n , , (} a , o•:., , ,
Present Oocupation and Employer '.�cAkc -\ ���� -.•�v �,�,c �� �,�� r� � ,v ��► 07 y k
AQ oMim Ce, Mum
L 0
le �... Number of Yeexa
rr "r" +rr.iru
New Applican onl
Pp ys Previous Job experience and employers. list last t hree.
ULU% C. M+,r, �'.j �7)�, \ALI Y
1A , T , Lt k
Li. U A Ak(� 1%1
�j
List Organizations or - Clubs in the Communi in which you have been, or are an active
Participant. I'v%C A0 l -
• �Q.VI Q u i 11 %V1 � .2 t
W tJl n o Y 1 2— y y COLov
CIL
�r tiQS
P kavi n I Q11c\ .
CIT 1v V>v %C•Nv ksr [c` Ac_ �4
Background experience in of the �asds Commissions,
F � or I t arty t Q %A c, u r � e r V A
Z- Cj * V)% * r% y
P(QV)n„ aVIc� �� tC�11 c �2C
C n tt .�u uaA as CA �, ol wrr
1t CO�l�1C 1�
'�'lrurtn� c m( A� A QC1 " rn �� .� - 1v ¢ T'no n Wou� l �.
Wh d you like to serve on of these
�y see arde or co mmissions? i' � ` �na •� � � � ��
F, v Yl Lar... r1 h n �M�fY1r �c► �'r `
J
f
Additional Comments.
Vctm���� , .
Gt �►�, L�rc�FV.., «lam
kim t C (im nII Axer)A ktrak w,k1 �.ic.. t v 0 «\YGA INU. �lc• flaV , `
L f C`1►1 1►l ��n�1 ►llti
1rAN c
tj
1 •
NAME D nv - Date
moo
�►��
ADDRESS
Phones Home - •--
Work : t
AGE t5 HOMEOWNER t YES - Number of Years eye a Homeowne ,
.....
No
Number of Years as a Resident
would regular attendance .at meetings be difficulty L Yee K
o
On which board or oommiSsion are you interested in se n
ing ? List 6, number 1 being
first choioe.
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PARK do RECREATION COMMISSION
HOUSING do REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 9,000' p NN�I
LANG COMMISSION
HUMAN RELATION COMMIS
SION 06 POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
If this is a Renewal Application, total number of meet
i.ngs held on your board or
commission this past year? How have you ---
�iy y missed?
Fd11Cati011 SCIleez Gf 1/7v
C '�`� ► .
Present Oocupation and Employer Poe a/t"7ax;�' � o /4,/ 6
Number of Years , r
} New Applicants only: Previous job experience and employers
P list ,last thr .
6
3 "7� , G
List Organizations or Clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an � , active
participant.
r
7 7
Background experience in any of the Boards or Commissions, If an
f�c., -c
Why would you -like to serve on any of these boards or oommieeione? 0 . _
1�E�L I E1 � S�'iv L� '��'�' i9it✓ ,S7 /r✓
Po H46—,L P
Additional Comments.
XAPilEWOOD BOARDS COMMISSIONS
APPLICATION FORM
f -/
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Street Vacation and Lot Division
LOCATION: 1078 Frost Avenue
APPLICANT: Frank Silberbauer
DATE: January 9, 1987
SUMMARY
Requests
Action by Council v
Endorseq
odifie
eJ ected
Date
141 . Vacate 151 feet of the Fenton Avenue right -of -way, west of Walter
Street, ( See page 11.)
2. Approve the division of Lot 4 Block 4, with 22 feet on the south
part and 18 feet on the north.
Reasons for Requests
Street vacation: The street vacation would give the Silberbauers
frontage on the Walter Street and Fenton Avenue pavement. This would
allow them to divide their house from the parcel to the north and meet
the code requ i r i ng ' that a building be located adjacent to a maintained
street.
Lot division: The owners of 1078 Frost Avenue (the Silberbauers) sold
Parcel One (page 11) to Michial Mularoni in 1982. The city has not
approved the split and, therefore, the county has not divided the
taxes. The county is now seeking to sell the entire propert y for
nonpayment of real estate taxes. Approving the split would allow the
Silberbauers and Mr. Mularoni to record their deeds and have the taxes
divided and paid,
r n mm n r% i- t--
The lot division should not be approved unless the street vacation is
approved. If the lot division is approved without the street
vacation, Parcel Two would violate the section of code requiring all
lots to abut on a publicly dedicated and maintained street.
Recommendation
10 Approve the resolution on page 12 to vacate Fenton Avenue, south
of 1078 Frost Avenue, subject to:
a. Retaining a utility easement over-the south ten feet of the
right -of -way for the existing power line.
b. Readdressing 1082 Fenton Avenue to a Walter Street address,
Approval is on the basis that vacation of that right -of -way is in the
public interest because:
a. The right -of -way is . not needed for a street,
b. A through street could not be constructed because the Fenton
Avenue right -of -way abutting to the west has been vacated.
c. The north half of this right -of -way is needed for access to
1078 Frost Avenue if the house is divided from its Frost Avenue
frontage.
d. This vacation would add additional frontage and a potential
building site that would make it easier to assess a future Walter
Street.
2. Approve the division of Lot 4, Block 4, with 22 feet' on the south
part and 18 feet on the north, subject to.
a. Readdressing 1078 Frost Avenue to a Walter - Street address,
b. The new address being posted next to the driveway on Fenton
Avenue. The fire marshal shall approve the size,, type and
location of the address numerals.
c. The driveway shall be upgraded, as necessary, to comply with
Section 10.207 of the uniform fire code or the dwelling shall be
sprinklered. If any upgrading is necessary, all work shall be
confined to the west half of the right -of -way in the event Walter
Street is vacated.
d. A cash escrow for the drive improvements may be provided to
the city. The work must then be done by May 1, 19 8 7 .
e. The north portion of Lot 4 shall be combined with the
property abutting to the north,
f . The south portion of Lot 4 shall be combined with the
property abutting to the south.
90 The deeds associated with that lot division shall be
recorded within six months of council approval. The director of
community development may grant a time extension for just cause.
2
BACKGROUND
Description of the proper t
S i z : 150 by 393 feet consisting of ten substandard. width, platted
lots Gone 33 -foot, and nine 40 -foot wide)
Existing land use: A single dwelling. Frost Avenue is the only
improved street frontage for the property. Hence, the Frost Avenue
address for the applicant's home, which is 265 feet south of Frost
Avenue. Primary access is from Fenton Avenue over unimproved Walter
Street.
Description of Fenton Avenue right -of -way
1. The subject right -of -way is unimproved, 60 feet in width and 150
feet in length.
2. Northern States Power maintains a street light on the south line
of the right -of -way, adjacent to Walter Street. The power line to the
pole comes from another pole about 150. feet to the west,
3o The property owner to the south (10 82 Fenton Avenue) maintains
the south 35 to 40 feet of the right -of -way as side -yard area, He
also maintains a gravel parking area on the south 30 feet or so next
to Walter Street. (This person also has. a double garage on the south
side of the property adjacent to the house.)
Surrounding Land Uses
1. Property to be divided:
North: Frost Avenue
East: Unimproved Walter Street right -of -way
South: Unimproved Fenton Avenue right -of -way
West: An undeveloped lot and two single dwellings fronting on
Adele Street
2. Fenton Avenue:
North: The applicant property
East: Improved Walter Street
South: A single dwelling (1082 Fenton Avenue) that also fronts
on improved Walter Street
West: Vacated Fenton Avenue right -of -way
C
Past Actions
5- 31 -78:
A building permit was issued for the applicant's dwelling with Frost
Avenue as the legal frontage. The present driveway access over
unimproved Walter Street was part of the building permit approval
5- .1 -80:
Council approved the construction of Walter Street. Construction of
Walter Street did not occur because of a d sagreement with Mr.
Silberbauer over assessments and required easements. If a project
does not proceed within one year, it must be ordered by council.
Reordering was not requested.
7- 29 -82:
A lot division was approved for Michial Mularoni for the same lot
division presently requested, subject to.
1. City clerk approval of the readdressing of the Silberbauer
residence from 1178 Frost Avenue to a Fenton Avenue address,
29 Vacation of Walter Street and Fenton Avenue to provide at least
50 feet of improved frontage for the south lot (Silberbauer
residence).
3. All deeds must be recorded within six months or approval will be
null and void.
8- 23 -82:
1. Council vacated Fenton Avenue, west of the applicant's property,
to 40 feet east of Adele Street. The part of Fenton Avenue presently
requested for vacation was also considered but was not approved. The
planning commission had recommended approval. There are no reasons
given in the council minutes for the denial. The property owner to
the south, however, did state he opposed using any portion of Fenton
Avenue for another homesite.
2. Council also denied a petition by Michial Mularoni to vacate
Walter Street between Fenton and Frost Avenues and to rezone part of
vacated Walter Street and the abutting property to the west from R -1,
single dwelling, to R -3, multiple dwelling.
5-19-83:
Council's 8 -23 -82 denial of the R -1 to R -3 rezoning and associated
street vacations was upheld in district court.
4
1- 28 -85:
Council denied the vacation of Walter Street, south of Frost Avenue,
to the lot-split 1 i ne requested at that time ( page 11) and the
associated lot - frontage variance for 1096 Frost Avenue, on the basis
that:
10 There is .a public need for development of Walter Street, _
2.. 1 Frost Avenue is currently under plans for upgrading and a study
should be made with respect to the . impact of - increased traffic that
would result in a need for development of Walter Street. (Scheduled
for summer 1987.)
Ie The public interest will not be advanced by vacation of Walter
Street,,
40 Future access from Walter Street to 1096 Frost Avenue (page 10)
would be completely eliminated if Walter Street was vacated. The only
ingress and egress for 1096 Frost Avenue would be ' through an existing
alley. Evidence revealed problems with limited al ley access as
follows:
a. The alley may not be sufficient for emergency access,
b. City of Maplewood does not maintain plowing for alleys,
C* A determination from Ramsey County must be made concerning
protection of the access of the existing alley in the development
of Frost Avenue, (Curb cut provided.)
Council also denied a rezoning from R -1 to R -3 for the north part of
the applicant's property, proposed Parcel One, and the adjoining part
of Walter Street to have been vacated,
Planning
1. Land use plan: RM, residential medium density for Parcel One and
RL, residential low density, for Parcel Tw6.
2. Zoning: R -1, single dwelling
3* Compliance with land use laws:
a. State law:
Section 412.851. of State Statutes allows a city to vacate any
interest= in property when the council makes a finding that "it
appears to be in the public interest to do so."
5
b. City code:
Section 30-8(f) (4) requires all lots to "abut on a publicly
dedicated and maintained street. "-
Legal
In 1984 the applicant initiated a lawsuit to order Maplewood to
approve the proposed lot division. This action was in response to
Ramsey County initiating foreclosure proceedings for nonpayment of
real estate taxes. The applicant had sold_ proposed Parcel One to
Michial Mularoni in 1982. However, Ramsey County would not record the
deed without Maplewood' s approval. The applicant contends that he and
Mr . Mularoni cannot pay their respective taxes until Maplewood
approves the deed for recording.
In September, 1986, the city attorney persuaded the applicant's
attorney to withhold further legal action until the lot division had
been considered by Maplewood. Ramsey County agreed to put the
foreclosure proceedings on hold as long as the applicant is seeking
approval of the lot division.
Public Works
10 On January 28, 1985, council directed the city engineer to study
the before and after traffic volume on Phalen Place following
reconstruction of Frost Avenue. This study would be a basis for
considering the need to construct Walter Street.
2. Reconstruction of Frost Avenue has recently been completed. The
traffic study will begin next spring and should be completed by fall
19870
3e If council determines that Val ter Street should be constructed 'r
the earliest the project could be completed would be the summer of
19880
4. There are no city utilities in or planned within the part of
Fenton Avenue right -of -way requested for vacation.
Fire Marshal
Section 10.207 of the uniform fire code requires an all-weather access
within 150 feet of single dwellings, which have at least a five -ton
bearing capacity and are at least 12 -feet wide, unless the dwelling is
sprinklered.
Citizen Comments
Twenty persons who own property within 350 feet of the applicant's
property were surveyed. Of the eight respondents, four were opposed,
one had no comment, and three were in favor of the proposal.
C
Those opposed raised the following concerns:
10 Property owner to the south of Fenton Avenue (1082 Fenton
Avenue)-.-If Walter Street is constructed, then another dwelling could
be constructed between my house and the applicant's house. My house
faces and is addressed off of Fenton Avenue. I bought this property
because I wanted a corner lot with at least 120 feet of separation to
a house to the north. 'Vacate or improve Walter Street, north of
Fenton Avenue, to give Mr. S i lberbauer - the room he needs.
2e If Fenton Avenue is vacated , the applicant will try to create
another homesite south of his home. If that home is built, both it
and the present home would have driveways in violation of city code,
Let Walter Street be. put through and let the houses, be built on Walter
Street with Waiter addresses.
(Staff comments : A house could not be constructed south of the
S ilberbauer's home without dividing at least five feet from Lot Two or
acquiring five feet from the part of the Fenton Avenue right-of-way
that would accrue to 1082 Fenton Avenue. A lot division would violate
the code since - it would leave the S i lberbauer I s home without f rontage
on a .maintained street. - A variance would be required to build a
house. If Walter Street were constructed, the split could be
approved. There would still be at least 55 feet of separation between
the new house and 1082 Fenton Avenue.)
30 The house at 1078 Frost (applicant's home) was built without lot
frontage of 30 feet_ . The owner has never used Frost Avenue as an
access road. What will change by the lot division?
(Staff comment: 1078 Frost Avenue has legal frontage on Frost Avenue.
Code does not require that this frontage be used, only that it is
available.)
4. Not enough information to make a decision. What is going to
happen with the north part of the property?
(Staff comment: The city has not received any current plans for
development of the north parcel.)
5. We are concerned that the north part of the property will be
allowed to develop with a use that will depreciate residential
property values .
(Staff comment: Parcel One is zoned R -1, single dwelling, but planned
for medium density residential use . )
60 "In newer areas there is an effort to enforce existing laws
concerning parking and health and safety hazards. In that
neighborhoods our property values decline because other laws are not
enforced. We cannot risk additional commercial building or multiple
units for housing."
7
(Staff comment: We are not aware of any laws that have not been
enforced in this area.)
One of the respondents in favor said that "the corner looks
unfinished. This will bring up the value of the propert involved."
Y
Procedure
1. Planning Commission recommendation
29 City Council decision following a public hearing
ji
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Property Line /Zoning Map
30 Detailed Property Line Map
4. Resolution (vacation)
f
I
F 4 "'�
R P U 0 R s
U '734
fin i R CO UNTY R
• _ W ROAD R2 --•
• _
- F - -
�. R R
/ F
` L.� W • R • • PU o R
� 2 � R F
Q F R2 a
W EDGE i .
� R / F z F S' DEMON
' • W T
Cr
M1 W j
L
• o R R � � LW R ` 9C � R "
LL
jj
� _..._._.1 a
`• F Q SEXTAN AVE Q
R MI R i R W R
•
M l Ml a GHAtuDViE,N AV
F MI
RVICER M
TRtJNi(
WAY
Ml p A
Q F • --r _. • R R
COUNTY z R- 3C • _ _ •
Q R v ® PUD a
.R� R• _
F F L.EI 4 ND n t
R A � (R 2) ® ST A
v F r TI AV u R
° RE D
RKE AV E �V � f BURKE R3 (- AVE
R
R D
R F t �:L
AV
ti c
T / �a R- WOO
BE
A D ;.ANE Q� M I W
R F ER x M A. avE • �� m
W a F LE R 2 , y � R
m vE 0 RYAN ~ ! O
w z . .rte • 2) ROSEWOOD
W � ``' (R2
AVE R ; *•T-~ _ r . C • R
9E L' OD
�AV / I cn . f S
• F L C AVE
FEN
�� 1 W
a 4 R C
F ( W.
z F a a R e...R3 R
' 'I a • / � o REseI R v
L IN£ w
F R J Cr
R
Ft SOP HA AV + ., ac W =
ONGSTON AVE F E l , Y i ;
9 C (�A) /� C Z aKE ayq Q i R _ R z
� AVE �_� LEN N �2 o F
F e LAKE F ( AvE R J ol
z t
F R
N C
C/ TY OF ST. PAUL
r
LOCATION MAP
Attachment 1
D
4
N
�S0
SS OF
LEASED TO V 1 LL A6G O F ^P
E P'1 �,.E WO t
N o r
L -W I A-. I . t A %001 *40 1
GO
65 0; ♦ � 0 1068 --
1
1.'T � ar.ic. M • 7 i 3 �-- - •1 a. t a
e o� a . 1096 If- s S
L 7 14
6 a (,` ._
PROP SPLIT.,ow
4SED !,
14 ,Of *R Doc W&SO
1078 6
2 0 r ?9� 2 -O 1101 L 20
. g
i ■�
• lit 47SZ 1 s 1
T =
is
V
5
�c7c3 + 18 3' 1 1 1 � 1
slim
3 W 1
Ir .4o. t 0 2
1 0 40614 130
4 40
44V - < j7 Z
3
r f ca 49 GO
D
it Q • ( a 31
Fl%kT eF E S 4 ' 3 ? �4, *' !4� ♦s1 c-.o • � T 1 to
c
`
9 2 L OO KOUT v R I PLEY
•. i0!
w► s.� _ A �. MfkK 00
I
,n)_ -- i 1 1 i LZ(n
PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP
Vacation approved 8 -23 -82 N PROPOSED VACATtQN
Attachment 2
| —
/
'|
/
/ .
lot split line
' .
.....
(
_
Vacated
Fenton Street
55'
'--------
Frost Avenue..
-
NRCEL 1
t7� N
�078 Frost
iCEL 2
#I
FENTON
kw
CL
Detailed Propert Line Map
Ri requested for vacation
Attachment 3
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly called and held
in the council chambers in said city on the day of ,
1987, at 7 p.m.
The following members were present:
The following members were absent:
WHEREAS, Frank S i lberbauer initiated proceedings to vacate the
public, interest in the Fenton Avenue right -of -way lying between the
west right-of-way line of Walter Street and the southerly extension of
the center line of the vacated alley in Block Four, Kavanaugh and
Dawson' s Addition to Gladstone, Ramsey. County.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of this vacation is as follows:
10 A majority of the owners of property abutting said street
right -of -way have signed a petition for this vacation;,
2. This vacation was reviewed by the planning commission on
February 2, 1987. The planning commission recommended to the city
council that this vacation be
3. The city council held a public hearing on February 9, 1987,
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 right -
of -way, public interest in the property will accrue to the following
described abutting properties:
Lot One, Block Four, together with accruing vacated alley, and
Lot Ten, Block Five, Kavanagh and Dawson's Addition to Gladstone.
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:
10 The right -of -way is not needed for a street.
2. A through street could not be constructed because the Fenton
Avenue right -= -of-way abutting to the west has been vacated,
12 Attachment 4
3. The north half of this right -of -way is needed for access to
1078 Frost Avenue if the house is divided from its Frost Avenue
frontage.
4. This vacation would add additional frontage and a potential
g P teal
building site that would make it ea_ s i er to assess a future Walter
Street.
This vacation is subject to the retention of:
i. A utility easement over the south ten feet of the ri ht-
for the existing g of
way ng power line.
2e Readdressing 1082 Fenton _Avenue to a Walter Street address,
Adopted this day of , 19870
Seconded by
Ayes --
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) SS.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed Clerk
of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I' have
Y Y
carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a
regular meeting of the City of Maplewood, held on the day of
1987, with the original on file in my office and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same
relates to vacation of this street right -of -way.
Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city
this day of , 1987.
City Clerk
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
13
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Associate Planner -- Johnson
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit (Home Occupation)
LOCATION: 2242 Ripley Avenue
APPLICANT /OWNER: Roland and Jean Grinnell
DATE: December 30, 1986
SUMMARY
Action by Council
Endorsed
Rejected
Request _
Approval of a conditional use permit to operate a lawn mowing, snow
plowing and landscaping business as a home occupation.
Code Related Facts
1. This is the applicant's primary occupation. The business has
been in existence for ten years. A complaint brought to attention the
need for this permit.
2. There are seven business - related vehicles parking at this site:
a. Two Ford pick -ups for the summer work
• b. Three Chevrolet pick -ups for snowplowing (one is a back -up
vehicle)
C* An older Chevrolet pick -up that is to be removed
d. An employee's car during working days.
3. There are also two personal vehicles and a boat parked on the
site. The business trucks are occasionally used for personal use.
4. There is one nonresident employee.
5. The city issued a permit to add onto the garage in 1982, with the
condition that the addition be used for storage only. The proposed
addition would have exceeded the maximum allowed area. A service door
was required to the addition to prevent its being used as a garage.
There is no service door now. The entire area is being used as a
garage. Staff has notified the applicant that a partition and service
door must be installed to limit the garage area to 1,000-square feet
as required by code. The garage could then accommodate the boat and
four vehicles. The applicant is now parking six business vehicles in
the drive
Seven vehicles associated with this business is excessive. The
business is otherwise an acceptable home occupation.
The intent of the code is to insure that the operation of a home
occupation is not noticeable by. neighboring property owners, except
p
for an inconspicuous sign, I n this regard, the code limits off - street
parking for business use to three spaces. The applicant has seven
business - related vehicles (six trucks and their employee's car).
Another problem is that parking more than one truck with a plow
attached in the public view is inconsi with the intent of code - to
conceal the existence of a home occupation.
Parking several vehicles on a site close to or on the street obstructs
traffic v i s i b i l i t y and creates a traffic safety problem.
Recommendation
Approve the resolution on page 9 to conditionally approve the
operation of a landscaping, lawn mowing and snowplowing business as a
home occupation for one year at-22 Ripley Avenue, subject to:
1. Council may renew this permit if all of the conditions of
approval have been complied with.
2. The garage area available for parking motor vehicles shall be
reduced to 1,000 square feet within 30 days of the approval of this
home occupation permit. A building permit shall be applied for.
3. A list of all of the applicant's vehicles by type, year and
license number shall be submitted to the director of community
development within five working days of permit approval. Those
vehicles to be used- strictly for private use shall be declared. Any
change to the status of a vehicle on this list shall be reported to
the city within ten days of the change. In the event of a dispute as
to the business /nonbusiness status of a vehicle, the director -of
community development may request any appropriate form of proof,
including but not limited to tax records.
40 There shall be no more than three business - related vehicles
parked and garaged on the site. If the nonresident employee parks on
the premises, it shall be counted as one of the three permitted
business- related vehicles. A description of this vehicle shall be
included with the list of the applicant's vehicles as required in
Condition Three,
5. There shall be no on- street parking of any vehicles associated
with the business, including the employee's car.
6. No business vehicle shall be parking within 14 feet of the
street.
7. Only one truck with a snowplow attached shall be permitted to be
parked in the driveway at a time.
8. There shall be no outside storage on the premises of any
business - related equipment or landscape materials, other than the
permissible number of vehicles.
- a
2
9. A home occupation license shall be obtained from the city clerk
for 1987 and each year thereaf ter. in January while the conditional use
permit is in effect. -
10. � The requirements of Section 36 -66 (b) of city code shall be
complied with. (See planning section on page 4.)
11. The business vehicles shall be limited to automobiles, pickups
and vans. -
3
BACKGROUND
Existing Land Use
A single dwelling with. a 11256.square attached garage. The
applicant needs to reduce the area used for motor vehicles to 1,000
square feet or less to comply with code. A 528- square foot addition
was - added to the existing 728- square f oot garage in, 1982 . The
addition was to have been restricted to nonmotor vehicle storage,
g .
accessed only by a service door from the garage. There is no wall
between the two areas as required in the building permit issued in
1982.
Surrounding Land Uses
North: Across Ripley Avenue is a vacant single- dwellig lot.
East and west: single dwellings
South: the rear yard of a single- dwelling lot that fronts on McKnight
Road,
Planning
1. Zoning: R -1 single dwelling.
2. Compliance with land use laws:
a. Section -36 -66 (b) requires the following findings for
approval of a conditional .use permit for a home occupation
(language underlined is at issue with this request):
(1) Not more than one person, other than members of the
family residing on the premises, shall be allowed to engage
in such occupation.
(2) An area equivalent to no more than twenty (.20) percent
of each level of the dwelling unit floor area shall be used
in the conduct of a home occupation,
( There shall be no change in the outside appearance of
the building or premises, that would indicate the conduct of
ho e occupation, other one sign meeti th
requirements of the city code .
(4 ) Limited reta i 1 sales of products produced off -site may
be permitted, but only when subordinate to the principal
activity(ies) of the home occupation.
(5) No traffic shall be generated by a home occupation in
greater volumes than would normally be expected in a
residential neighborhood. The need for off- street parking
shall not exceed more than FF ee ff treet parkin spaces
for home occupation at any iven time, in addition to the
parking s aces required 12y the resident occupants,
a
(6) No equipment or process shall be used in such home
occupation which creates noise, vibration, glare, fumes, .
odors or electrical interference detectable to the normal
senses off the lot. In the case of electrical interference,
no equipment or process shall be used which creates visual
or audible interference in .any radio or television receivers
off - the premises, or causes fluctuations in line voltage off
the premises. _
(7) No fire,, safe t or health hazard shall exist.
(8) A home occupation shall not include the repair of
internal combustion engines, body shops, machine shops,
welding, ammunition manufacturing or other objectionable
uses as determined by the city. Machine shops are defined
as places where raw metal is fabricated, using machines that
operate on more than one hundred twenty (120) volts of
current.
(9) Any violation of these requirements shall result in the
denial or revocation of the home occupation.
b. Section 36 -442 (b) requires ten findings for the approval of
a conditional use permit, Refer to the resolution on page 9 for
these conditions.
c. Section 36 -6 limits a private garage to 1,100- .square feet of
area designed for the storage or shelter of motor vehicles,
Public Works
Section 29 -100 C states "no part of a driveway in the right -'of -way of
a street may be used for the servicing of vehicles or the conduct of
private business."
City Clerk
Section 17 -22 states "a license shall be secured from the city clerk
annually in the month of January, to continue operation of a home
occupation, once original approval is granted including approvals
granted prior to the enactment of this article."
Citizen Comments
Thirty -two persons owning property within 350 feet of the applicant's
property were surveyed. of the 14 respondents, four had no comment,
two were in favor, four would not be opposed if the on- street parking
is eliminated and four are opposed. Those opposed raised the
following concerns:
10 Vehicles are being parked on the street which obstructs the
ability of m=otorists to see children at play and could hamper the
ability of emergency vehicles to get through.
5
20 The business use of the property detracts from the quiet
residential character of _the area.
3. If one business is allowed, how do you stop the next?
n,. r% Oft ...a.%
1. Planning_commisson recommendation.
29 City council decision following a public hearing.
jc
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Property Line /Zoning Map
3. Resolution
6
J WAY R
A C
MI
_'. M I R' ,
ABC) CR 2
T .
®
R
ST
�--- -� Cr
CO �� R
R3 AV IK
F �.
6C R
R- - F v
j M1 a
11 W
- . -,.,,� • m M 1 soo,r" F
r +
ROSE O
� S ROSEWOOD r F
(R2
�• R �
F
I, AVE
I i f R
R (UO
� 5 P F )N R �,
11 N
Cal t I- RIPL AVE 0
1 i R ~� � ., R 3 LL_
RIpIEY
R2
o
F R R Q
c , ( 8C
R o R ; R L
ARPF R IR
T. P,441L
Z
Q
LOCATION MAP
�
:3
Z Cr R2) F
R F
►- ; R
N W
F
F R3
(PUS)
F R3 R3
PUD AVE
(R O L4 - F (. F R3
ID AHO AVE
R � R R F
-R2) .._.J
t Pua)
M I
Attachment 1
4
N
0
t
►l
PROPERTY /ZONING MAP Q
8 attachment - 2 '• �
WwLm:lF U� V4
•
��.s . moo..
�o -•�• . • 4op
-?TV
i.
got
_TS
` + N V
234 1785
2242
3.1sarc,
• . c•hl .. - - - -•
. is v
doom
'! 3• : T.�r►1
OSO s•� L
o =
Oat 31)
in
r
- tio p
�
.h,K. �,��
in
4
• 4:..
�t r
h
f 7S � 1►t
��t .
Tire &t
A �
0
colt
� �
�
2.00 aC
f f
�
(jr)
1n
•
ScHe of sT G t2
� Q
�3G)
as
0
-
Z35.32-
.X03
to ,
': ►Z S apt.
1
PROPERTY /ZONING MAP Q
8 attachment - 2 '• �
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the
city council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly called and
held in the council chambers in said city on the day of
1987 at 7 p.m. -
The following members were.present:
The following members were absent:
WHEREAS, Roland and Jean Grinnell initiated a conditional use
permit to approve the operation of a landscaping and snowplowing
business as a home occupation at the following- described property:
The East 75 feet of the West 150 feet of Lot 1, Block 2,
Hillcrest Addition.
This property is also known as 2242 Ripley Avenue, Maplewood;
WHEREAS, the procedural history of this conditional use permit is
as follows:
10 This conditional use permit was reviewed by the Maplewood
Planning Commission on January 5, 1987. The planning commission
recommended to the city council that said permit be .
2. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing on
1987. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law. All
persons present at said 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that
the above - described conditional use permit be approved on the basis of
the following findings-of-fact:
1. The use is in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan
and with the purpose and standards of this chapter.
2. The establishment or maintenance of the use would not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare,
3. The use would be located, designed, maintained and operated
to be compatible with the character of that zoning district.
4. The use would not depreciate property values.
5. The use would not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to
present and potential surrounding land uses, due to the noises, glare,
smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, water run-off, vibration,
general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
9 Attachment 3
6. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on
local streets and shall not create traffic congestion, unsafe access
or parking needs that will cause undue burden to the area properties.
7. The use would be serviced by essential public services, such
as streets, police, fire protection, utilities, schools and parks.
8. The use would not create excessive additional requirements
at public cost for public facilities and services; and would not be.
detrimental to the welfare of the city.
9. The use would preserve and incorporate the site's natural
and scenic features into the development design.
100 The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions.
1. Council may renew this permit if all of the conditions of
approval have been complied with.
2. The garage area available for parking motor vehicles shall
be reduced to 1,000 square feet or less within 60 PP
days of approval of
this home occupation permit. A building permit shall be applied for.
3 . A list of all of the applicant's vehicles by type, year and
license number shall be submitted to the director of community
development within five working days of permit approval. Those
vehicles to be used strictly for private use shall be declared. Any
change to the status of a vehicle on this list shall be reported to
the city wi th i n ten days of the change. In the event of a dispute as
to the business /nonbusiness status of a vehicle, the director of
community development may request any appropriate form of P roof
including but not limited to- tax records.
40 There shall be no more than three business - related vehicles
parked or garaged on the site. If the nonresident employee parks on
the premises, it shall be counted as one of three ermitted business-
mess -
related vehicles. A description of this vehicle shall be included
with the list of the applicant's vehicles as required in Condition
on
Three,
518 There shall be no on- street parking of any vehicles
associated with the business, including the employee's car.
69 No business vehicle shall be parked within 14 feet of the
street.
7. Only one truck with a snowplow attached shall be permitted
to be parked in the driveway at a time.
8. There shall be no outside storage on the remises of any
y
business- related equipment or landscape materials, other than the
permissible number of vehicles.
10
910 A home occupation license shall be obtained from the city
clerk for 1987 and each year thereaf ter in January while the
conditional use permit is in effect.
.10. The requirements of Section 36 -66 (b) shall be. complied with.
11. The business vehicles shall be limited to automobiles,
pickups and vans.
Adopted this day of , 1987.
Seconded by Ayes --
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) SS.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed clerk
of the City of Maplewood, Mi nneso , do hereby certify that I have
carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a
regular meeting of the City of Maplewood, held on the day of
, 1987, with the original on file in my office, and the same is a
full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same
relates to a conditional use permit.
Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city
this day of , 1987.
City Clerk
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
11
� -4
a♦
1
The co fission questioned if there were many flammable sol nts.used in the -
business.
The appli ndicated not much
, the l i t t l e - h e ha are stored in an enclosure.
He does have a nti l ati ng system- the area w re ee he will be working.
Commissioner Ros sbac moved Ahe - l a
p nning c fission recommend the city council
approve the resolution o approve a cond ional use ermi t for n
operate a, home occu ation inv p o n e year to
P , olving. t repair, tuning and sale of refurbished
pianos, subject to: d
1. - Comp liance with c ity re u i r nt
q s for the operation of a home occupation.
in particular, no more than 5 s re feet of h
r q th detached garage- .shall be
used for business purposes.
2. This permit may be enewed after oneXar, provided there is no unresolved
n uisance,
3. Afire exti wisher shall be installed in \thorkshop area as prescribed
by the fire m shal.
4. OnlyXanos repaired on —site may be sold.
Commi sioner Cardinal seconded A •
yes- -Commi loners Axdahl, Barrett,
Ca i na 1, Fischer, F i of a, Hanson, Larson, Ros sbach •
SletteR, S�gmund�k
0-
B. Conditional Use Permit - -2242 Rip ley P y
Secretary Olson said the applicant is
requesting •
Permit • approval of a conditional onal use
p to operate a l mowing., snow ng and 1 andsca i n business p g as a
home occupation. Staff is recommending approval as outlined in their report.
The commission questioned how the ara a addition •
8 8 was constructed without the .
separating wall being installed as was required on the buildin permit.
Secretary Olson said it was possible the owner n •
ever called for a final
nal
inspection on the garage addition, therefore the re
checked, qu i rement was not
The commission questioned if the applicant had i •
PP d nd � Gated on the bu � l.d � ng
permit application if the addition was to be used for the business storage.
Secretary Olson said it was shown for a res •
dent � a 1 garage addition t � on for
residential use. The applicant has applied i ed fora building '
� p bu d� ng perms t to
instal) the s eparatin g wall to make the garage meet
The commission discussed how this proposed home occupation ccupati on wow 1 d be policed.
Commissioner Sletten moved the 1
p anning comission recommend the city counci
approve the resolution to conditionally approve the operation and snowp of a landscaping,
l awn mowing g p owing business as a home occupation for one ear
at 2242 Ripley Avenue subject to: y
MIk
- •...- ..- :......a.. .v.\ ".� �'• l ♦.yam .... �. ..r•.Y.._ ._ .. .. ... ... ..
Nk
r �
1. Council may renew this permit i f. all of the conditions of ap h ave
been complied with.
PP
2. The garage area avai 1 able for parki motor vehicles shall g be reduced
to 19000 square .. f eet within 30 days of the approval of this home occupation
permit. A building permit shall be ..applied for. -
30 A list of al 1 of the appl i c ant's vehicles b •t a y ear and licen cen
y yp y se number
shall be ;submitted to the: director of community development -wi thin five work
days of permit approva Those vehicles to be used strictly for private use
shall be declared. Any change to the status of. a vehicle on this l i s t shall
be reported to the city wi ten days of the change. In the event of a di .s P ute
as to the bus i ness /nonbus i ness status of a vehicle, the director of communit
development may request an appropriate form of proof, including but not limited
_
to tax records. I r
4. There shall be no more than three business-related vehicles parked or
garaged on the site. If the nonresident employee parks on the premises, it shall
be counted as one of the three permitted business - related vehicles. A description
of this vehicle shall be included with the list-of the applicat's - vehicles as
required in Cond i t.i on Three.
5. There shall be no on- street parking of any vehicles associated with the
business, including the empl oyee' s car.
6. No business vehicle shall be parking within 14 feet of the street.
7. Only one truck-with a snowplow attached shall be permi tted to be parked in
the driveway at a time.
8. There shall be no outside storage on the premises of any business - related
equipment or landscape maters al s, other than the permissible number of vehicles.
9. A home occupation license shall be obtained from the city clerk for 1987
and each year thereafter in January while the conditional use permit is in
effect.
10. The requirements of section 36 -66 (b) of city code shall be complied with.
Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes -- Commissioners. Axdahl ,
Barrett, Fischer, F i of a, Larson, Rossbach, Sl etten
Nays -- Commissioners Cardinal,
Hanson and Sigmundik
i
t cry by Council
a
MEMORANDUM
Endorsed
od1 f 1e
Re* ecte
TO City Manager Date
FROM: Thomas Ekstrand-- Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Code Amendment - -CDRB Procedure
DATE: December 29, 1986
SUMMARY
Request
Amend the ordinance requiring annual city council approval of the design review
board's rules of procedure,
g
Comments
The community design review board is the only board thatis required to submit
its rules of procedure to the council on an annual basis. Other boards are
only required to submit their rules of procedure when a change is made. The
proposed amendment would save time for staff, the board and the city council,
since it is rare that a change in the "rules" is needed.
Recommendation
Adoption of the ordinance amendment on page 2.
mb
Attachments:
Ordinance Amendment
Rules of Procedure
I
ORDINANCE NO.,
AN ORDINANCE REVISING SEVERAL PROCEDURE OF
THE COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS. (additions are
,.underlined and deletions are crossed .out):
Section 1. Sec, 25 -640 �4eet�- eaea }eea� -gee- �--ade �- -
�
Or a n i z a t i o n a 1 me et n
(a) . At every first- second meeting i n Januar e
y, the community design
review board: shall elect a chairman and vi chairman,
X14--Af
eeuee41 -f er -aPP e a ,
(b) At least three (3) members of the board must be present at the
meeting to constitute a quorum.
( c) _ Any changes to the rules of rocedure shall be submitted to the
city - counci l for approval,
Section 2, This ordinance shall take effect upon its p assage ' _ P P g and pubic -
cati
on,
Passed by the Maplewood
City Council this day
of , 1987.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Ayes--
Nays--
2 Attachment 1
C. Code Amendment - -Rules of Procedure
Board Member Marlow moved the b •
board approve the ordinance amendment to
eliminate the annual approval of the rules of r
p ocedure.
Board Member Deans seconded
Ayes—all,
r
y
MEMORANDUM
A.c`tican, by Coun.cii -i
Endorsed - -
Modiff ed
Rej ected.
Date
TO: City Manager
FROM: Director of Community Development
. SUBJECT: Soo Line Trail Plan .
DATE: January 27, 1987
The city has received a draft copy of the Department of Natural
Resources' P •
{DNR) plan for developing the Soo Line corridor. The Soo _
Line corridor was purchased by the. DNR as an extension of their
Minnesota - Wisconsin Boundary State trail. This trail goes from Oakdale
to Duluth. The Soo Line acquisition extends this trail into St. Paul.
The trail will include a 12 -foot wide asphalt path and
P p waysides every
few miles. The trail is restricted to nonmotorized uses.
Selected pages from the DNR plan that pertain to Maplewood p are
attached. The entire plan is 100 pages long. A copy is in my office
if you wish to borrow it.
Recommendation
Inform the DNR that:
1. The BN corridor is proposed to be abandoned and acquired for public
q p llc
use. This may resolve the problem of a trail crossin g there.
2. If the Maplewood library is relocated, a trail connection would not
be needed.
3. A trail to city hall should be constructed.
jw
Enclosure
s�o G /Ne TtZAIL f-
5 uMMgR y'
DOT, the Saint Paul Water Commission, and the Kresge Corporation*
g The
Water Commission has granted two crossings over its water i eline t
PP o
the ' f4eo�r of J -35E of -wa right -of
g y south of the tra i 1, and this
owner has indicated no objections to the DNB's use of h
t ese cross i nqs
for trail access. The DNR should move rom tl t r •
p p y o each agreement with
these parties in order to rovide access to h
P the trail from Maryland
Avenue.
At the time of sale of the ra i 1 road rade to h •
g t DNR, the Soo L ine
ne
Railroad Company retained a arcel of land west f
P o I -35E for a billboard
site .Figure 5c),, The Arlington access connector and trai 1 realignment
must be so sited as to avoid this arcel . Further, ac '
P acc to this s s i g n
parcel by. the sign company was guaranteed by the DNR at the time of
purchase. Trail development should take this int account
r The Ramsey County Public Works Department has indicated an interest
in replacing its road bridge over the trail at Lar enteur A '
p Avenue, While
1 e
the DNR does not dispute the need to replace the bridge, discussions
have centered around the DNR' s pe rceived need to maintain rad
g e
separatio between what will be a high -use trail and the wel 1- travelled
o�
� street. Recent •
�, e t Average Daly Traffic (ADT) counts show that this street
is a 35 -mph .minor arterial carrying between 8- 10,000 vehicles p er da
. P y
The DNR has recommended the use of a concrete arch st t cture (Figure 7)
to carry the street over the trail, but costs, availability of fu n ding,
ding,
and the ability of the structure to meet Federal Aid '
� d requ � rements have
introduced uncertainty. Subsequent investigations b the DNR and t
e
county indicate that the protect is feasible, al thou h some questions
9
still need to be resolved. Discussions will continue and a resolution
is expected shortly.
(3i]
:9
FE 58 ! 36 6 t
�_ X
A >
_. x
kO 1
th
MAP
LEWOOD
I el
IL
r � r
�� �� ti -�� .. ; c fir•,` �' N `� V� \ •f„ G 3 6 \`
lb 00 ole'D 0000" 60
. ` �jJ =� � •! • ••••• � � G ` L ..i• ••Ten d �`� { C am. � �V �'.
• \ 'r ! �• ?• �, ••�• . ,••.� �. ^.
X
' • .�% ,ayf e lam �• a✓c • ••• •• °� �: '� `\
J - R 1
\ 1� • \ \'.� c \ �� �/ L.;� ' _ _ •��•�• f-4 Oi • ; o • �/
r•r ST r. �� O c �rav 'emu ✓_'`` '\ - .er_
•• •• ` ^• � \ / fir • f n. .. � �t } <•" •� � f' �"�
�� • `� � Gff �!% y in • �ti�I / t. • _ ` ' S
K•IIIIIt M a 6 ' E h! • .14 +! �! '' ' t v T a v ,• • • • ew er Slamint •III •I • ••! -44
4 /' • 1 • III • • / ! •!`
cr
W1•L01 sin `: t •• El l
IT ''� :•" �� � •� ��� - �� 'mot • • O �� .�'� ' 5 4�1� � .4
VL
ale
I
lo
.• . •r �'
\'•._ ,'�\�,• a �, �:�•; �► r \ �'` y ' , �. `� f % I'-�
f ` .• ,• / ` �� / '•i \��! Pr.aien ,•`\. Qa, NIAPLEWOOQ
:Cis! �•. i I .\\\ - / c /`e \\ /, �� �` ! X.
V.
`\ • � �.r `t. `, , / ! � „� � � C4 � +,�. / `� ! '� N ! � .7- T • , " SAINT PAUL ` � • •• • f / 1 ; +� •'J -� .' \
58 61 65
32
A wayside rest area should be constructed on a small 1
( . 6 acre)
parcel of tax forfeit property just east of Edgerton Str eet in . _ 9 M aplewood
A- '- " ocket ark" •
p p style development, consisting merel
of severa benches and landscaping, would be well-situated •
on this
parcel to serve as a rest stop or trail users sers as well as a green space
enhancement for the surrounding rea which is •
9 � primarily res�dent�al.
Since this parcel is tax forfeit title res n •
p e tly rests �n the
state. However, the statutes provide that the counties have management
authority over tax forfeit arcel s within •
P their boundaries. . Use of this
s
parcel for trail purposes will require re that th e DNR obtain management
authority over it from Ramsey County. The procedure Y p e ure i ' s as follows
1 . The Regional T r a i l s a nd Waterway '
ys Coordinator contacts the DNR bureau
of Land and i nforms them that the T r a i l s and Waterways Unit w'
h ashes to
obtain
the necessary management authorit
2. The Bureau of Land assigns a negotiator who contacts h
t e coun for
its approval and secures an abstract of title
3. If the County Land office approves the transaction the Bur
D � eau of
Land ask the NR Bureau of Legal to draw up a resol
transferring the management authority to the state.
4. The drafted resolution is then approved b the count b oard Y y o rd of
commissioners. The approved resolution must be .recorded.
The_ DNR is then free to proceed with develop Since thi
P �s
process can be relatively time consuming, t
g, should be started as soon
as possible.
The Gateway Segment passes through the Pha len- Keller Park om 1 '
c p ex in
Maplewood. This is a heavily used recreational faci l i t '
_ y, c ontain ing ni ng two
golf courses, restroom facilities, an archer range, a swimming _ Y 9 > g beach ,
picnic areas, and a system of hiking, bicycl in and cross-country '
9 y sk�ing ,
trails. A - connection between the Gateway Segment and the Pha 1 en
9 Ke l l e r
[33]
00•
"Waft%
•
T o
00
fA
• OP
@who
4w
0
di
0 FY24li/ TAeLSMP
odro *
9 40
op a
dop 00 0
4 dp
• 00, -OOP
ell-
dop
loop so* dpdp
1 000 +00%4p-' ql, mop - top 40P
40
% Lor=L� CFF 6rM AHa
P te.ONS AZ r*IA�JY
WWI-
Ap A64=S� (160'f K 70
CA*ffO 96 AT 2 FM T
PAfZK
mi
HVKTH
e4AZ 11 lo
O •
I
m
•
.
Trail system, which would make the above faci directly available
to trail users, would be highly desirable. The kamsey Count y Parks and
Recr' e' .a �rftDepartment supports this move and' indicates willingness to
make land available for the connector if necessary The connector
should be placed on the north side of the trail . and 'construc to a
grade of ten percent or less (Fi gure 9) . A wall or berm along the
northerly edge may be necessary to avoid safety hazards from the
adjacent archery range.
The City of Maplewood has submitted P cans to the DNR for
install of storm drain pipe in the ri ght - of - way between Larpenteur
Avenue and Prosperity Road (Figure 10a) . The City has obtained a
license to do that portion of the work between Lake Phalen and F1 icek
Park (Figure 10b) . The rest of the project is deferred to a later date. `
Maplewood w i l l need to seek new licenses for the add i ti ona 1 J
ro 'ects .
P
The City has also secured a government lease in order to all ow
expansion of the Flicek Park ball diamonds into the Gateway Segment
right - of - way (Pigur 10c) . This work w i l l be done concurrently with the
storm drain work,
A safe crossing will be needed where the Gateway Segment crosses the
Burlington. Northern tracks at Gloster Junction in just Ma lewood, east of
P
English Street. Although there are numerous street crossings as
g the
trail passes -through the eastern suburbs, this is the only railroad
crossing. 'In the past, railroads have often been reluctant to grant
at- grade crossings due to perceived l i a b i l i t y problems,
Discus sions should be opened with the ra which would be a imed
at resolving this issue. The DNR personnel involved in these discussions
should keep several things in mind:
[35]
i :*:*'* Keller .....•...
....
...Lake
........:.
.. ... .....
..................
':GA r :....: • .
I..........
•
l
Q •
r•� j , as •`•��
� ,� J JCR • � •
. • P AW
Lake
:• :•:.•:
:.. }'t �.•...... ..... • • 4 S Q'i , 1
....... ...
•� • • • • • • • • •• •• • . , • ,�
.t� .•. . :. . . .. 4
• h l L: J t
.......
114; 10
. • . , , ,
fo
f It
I f •
J J
.....
....
.• :•.•.• •.. • ... J
PhaIen •.•.. 1
be
• • •. • • • • • • • 1 • •
o
be
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • A - . .••• • / v ••
i j6qp`HiO! UH LEW+TH apt PUMsEP
2 41 EVE TO p•P�
k44 M16 r•"
e
NTH P"J"
r-l g;:O#T ^417 ilif - I UT. OF
p.N.R .
4H P0114ur
00 smo dies
„ PtWiH4 HILA 16 PL.
AW
er_JW4PqY,._
LW d
I'�
�' �• Alm
. �� ,i
,�•• •••• :.. :: C `` ;, v {,• .r -c
090 . • `•s4 • • • • • • ......... 2
•• ice'\ `., : w ' J .t�f 41 ••
s: F� • •
F T 52 ('J •
nr
fs�!b) . . I--,' " I *,,, ,
IC s000
'o LaKe
••••'` 'SS .~ \� IX ;
, ;- �� f =�..� I ��"' - �::. •'•
• • ^ x �\ = • 1 2► r o
S
Sw
swot -F
SEE WrAj 1w
�T
s _
_ N
S -16
= F
It
MNHHX�
-- — -- -- -
44T��/�►`f' 5w*p-"T TVAJ L
Olow ONEW dowo amm mom mm mom Q� amm Gomm 4� mom. m. amm. mom. Ana Gss., GOING, dimmo
view vl^"r *.
CIE Lt�S
- { t'1� •
we
..._ ._. h ..[ ..
_._. _ -... :.'__�.. _._, _._'.� ._ _L ?:�'"" .-_. ._ t ____ ___'...L.. + �'_.,_�..`_'� r � __� ___'!_r _ '", Y"v ._"„�•.- �.�.r , �..,•.•a•xnn•r4 . {a��!tl
• �J
i
.)C ve W. �
..'•
io
s .:.
' : y.. ::ti. •:•: •Y is f
{ .H
1
,L�-, -..
�
}
Ll
4 pt7 vPK .aNn u..a v nY L;IrT
rvRTF{
1. The Gateway Segment enabling n act
. g granted condemnation authority on
this trail. .
2. _The former rights of the Soo Line to cross the Burlington url i ngton Northern
at^th-Ts point may not have _ extingui shed at the time of sale,
3 . The DNR .may wish to consider building an overpass at this point to
separate the grades (Figure 11b)
4. At the time of sale the DNR took '
an option on the former wye track
parcel connecting the Soo Line and Burlington Northern •
q uadrant of tracks �n the
southeast
g the ,function. If no crossing is a ossible
Gloster, and the DNR must reroute t
e the tra � 1 so as to cross the
Burlington Northern tracks at an existing street 'n ( 9 t i tersect� on
Frost Avenu
e ) , this former wye wou ld be the rou (Ficure of choke lla
The Maplewood Department of Community Serv ces has requested
coordination with the DNR regarding develop of '
P the right -of -way where
it passes between Robin Hood Park and the -
grounds of the former Gladstone _-
School. Their desire is to s landscape and vegetate the right-of-way i n
this vicinity as to create visual and physical continu� •
ty across the
right -of -way between the two arks.. •
P A plan view of such a project is
given in Figure 12. The City of Maplewood ewood h
p as agreed to keep the area
mowed if the DNR will level the area and e •
establish grass �n the
corridor. This is well- advised s1nce the r' •
right-of-way t -o f -way � n this area
presently is weedy and overgrown.
In this same vicinity the tra •
Y l passes immediately to the south of
the Maplewood Branch of the Ramsey ount Lib
Y y Li b rary System, However, a
large berm forms a visual and h s i ca 1 barrie P Y _ between it and the tra
It is desirable to breach this obstacle i n •
_ order to encourage library
brary
users to travel to the library on the trail, on -site •
i nspection w ill
probably reveal the best location for this work
An example is given in
Figure 13.
[39]
Af
•
•
' 0000��
I dWAW
TKA&
!OT
f "Nib •
mod
/-.0
Or o
91
lw
C*
•ft
Now 0
•
zdr
J
o ct,
It f
' Ad t 4
•
000 0
-4
t46 40t
f 0
-i
dV • 0
40
0
lb
4p
• �., �` ,�
—r —� � r • t
Uw
1957v
,, • -� ; �.��.� . � �1�—�� � �` � rte. Illp � -
! �� � tea.' ••_- i' � + ice �'-'_ ��,�
i, ~� fm
'�• j � f r✓ V �s !is %� �` ��� [;4 • .I• '���wti y v' fS� t
0 �lr,J./ L ��� -.� • I.'j� t ., l / C ♦• 4 9 '►!' l�l s I�E •!' �kJn.Jrt�. a / i� F "�� •��1
r t + � •
g
ZA
Cal
irA �� 11 . •e�•.4�rd. s��l�YlI .� "�I..� _t. 1 1 L '� ��:_f7/• ��1
1
OW
lF
.�
- •
K I
•- � '� . , T . ' ! � `. s `mss � � �F ='.��C • y
i L1 •' f .
V
or a
j .
35E
..........
........ dc
ArOb
dot
low
61
sift 42
mom
—we am& di6m 40M
� Trr 5 I K0 N 14 op p PARK �t
I?os ..�-- .�.
\y, 4
ol
•�' / J .i
• • �.r .. i � � A l Y, y eti► `• �
f i
- -r'�. ,,��,, tt
1!►TFt►YAY' #J4 SE4M n���,� l� A� `�\ , •` R Y A '
'
., .. .. �T' .'' � ! z � •��• fay ,� •�
at r f '
' •� rte �= ,� _.,-• �t ..+�••w•.::..:.. ..... `� 1
ar
Aq
a �`Ae
• . - ` i [ RYAN AVE ' �,, y sr ,�� O :; •.-
Nous1N4 ti
COMMUHITY
I LEH
\� •� �y �' , ••• �1
�s ! •• Oo h. ol
1 � Y
• •• •�
o•
. i � F .• '�• a ,�, ���• ••
• ' '
4 1` � ' e . � • do
�,; of tom; � J ••
:n . ••
zo
� ;
mom
�. _ �.
oo
AV
♦�� I
1 / WNH HOOP p4zK
1 �
i
1 *06
HL4H AS Ft�5ci & , w
. APP ME 'w TAE P �TiMG„s,
low
t
i
dOo ` 1
' Nor
i
♦�� ,�� Iwo
f
1
1
Jr
,
i
f
i
ago- .
.. -� -_ ' � ��
.40 ' �' top
dop
-'f
AFTM THE A•Pp X;.-
AMD - TWE Mt . p.H,, L
i le
,/ i / 1 ` I I CM M U N ITY Gs ��
PIQ It apap
1
1
i
1
1
i
1
l uerz�r
f
� 1
r
1
I
1
� t~
S
1
i
1
i
i
C�i.AdsTo�lE I�AYSlPE ��
o u so
ReH
L otJT��W �0;_
I
t
l
•'- -
.• '•
...
.;.
...........
z
..
r. 4�
v j
t ••
.•
ag o
..�,.• . .
t
`w
,,a a
7 •
•, ��
g w '
�.��.� � i ��
J
Gur T4"U4H �Rt1'fb M�•TUj
u�R�RT �HTR`f Goss
P-:NTibf M1/E AT 90 °MD STRdpE:. �
aS NECesSAxy.
W .
_.._..� r''S P�'I�KIHCi.
��e
/rte
rfoICrH
LILY cot, IyFMOWcTloh
42
r
According to recent traffic counts White Bear Avenue carries
es
approximately 20,000 000 cars per day i n the area where i t i s crossed _ ossed by the
tra if --'h.• street, which is a count •
y h ighway,
is presently four lanes
wide with an 80 foot right 9 y R amsey County plans, at .some future
point, to improve it, ultima widening -
Y ng the. r ight-of-way of way to 120 feet.
At the present time, the trai 1 •
crosses White Bear Avenue at grade.
Wh Bear Avenue i s, at this o
R t, a four lane street with a 35 mile
per hour speed 1 imi t, creating an in c o nvenient •
g onven�ent and potential hazardous
situation for trail users. Further
the latest ADT counts at th i s p oi n t
show 17,500 cars per day se the s •
Y s at this point. It �s
recommended that the DNR separate the rad •
g es at this crossing, ether by
means of a tunnel_ underneath or an overpass erpass 14). To leave the
crossing at grade is to expose trail users to undue hazards, and, at
l to undue inconvenience in the form of long waiting periods for a
safe crossing.
Whether a tunnel or an overpass is selected
it must be so
constructed that necessary footings and entrance ram •
ramps lie e outside Ramsey
County's planned 120 foot street right-of-way •
9 y, wh � ch � s documented � n
the county's major street plan. This w i l l a] •
low the road to be widened
without r_equi r i ng reconstruction or rep lacemen t acemen
p t of the bypass structure .
The DNR should work with the City of North Saint Paul stablish
a trai wayside , bn.,,. a vacant city - owned
arce] f
P o
near the Seventh_
Street - County
Road 6 -.- n r ( Fi
� section
, •
w� th a modicum of
development,
to i nclude sever ~ nches
tree
e and
shrub plantings, anti ngs , and
landscaping,
the ONR •
considerably a
nce the
trail environment in
this area, n
my for trail "users but
also
0 or
'
� dents of the area,
[431
•
NORTH ST PAU
4
AM
• eii�
.,.•...
r IPA WIN
too
oft
Of
OPP pow.
•'' -
..
e
I I � t � � f� � • r ,
I � � � � � I � .craw • � t • � � � � /, �
:mow * �• .. -'��� t �� �, `
1
1 w. MEMO@ _
jam v r X ,
r _ , _ n I Will[ own" • ���� �►/ ,. •rs� of �a� /a1i• doW
lift!
dw ?1 1 1" 1 A rzix
f ,o w • .. • !ref 1 r f , •�� f +.. dm
�Ir, �� a ... . *. , a► rat_ .� �' 40MM '. • + - MONNO •�-� • +�� • ,��
fjj T %Z .711 �. t "'= • !far �.#tlf ��lls/I %/6�� � � . � — ---- �r►
FAMM
. f
Unauthorized access to the trail should be d i scoura ed b a
9 Y number
f
o means.. The elimination - of uses can b
_ - illegal e pursued by means of
signing, barricades, and ticketing of off
enders (see LAW ENFORCEMENT)
The use by otherwise legitimate tra i 1 users of ri vate
p or restricted
property to access the trail can be handled in much c the same way.
Barricades across the trail should be emplo p yed only where absolutel
necessary to control a serious problem, and should
not unduly hamper the
passage of official vehicles.
2. Invasion of Privacy
Under the best of circumstances and with the best of '
intenti
trails are capable of disturbing the •
e pri vacy of adjoining ng i andowners,
This can occur when a trail user approaches a h ouse •
i n order to get a
drink of water, use the phone or borrow tools. The DNR has found
through surveys that this happens often along trai 1
sand that a small,
but significant, number of adjoining landowners are n '
a noyed by ,t.
Invasion of privacy can also result from close '
proximity of the
trail to a house or yard. People can •
p feel inhibited, bi ted, even threatened,
in such circumstances, even if trail users keep heir '
p distance and do
not make direct contact.
Finally, trail- related noise can disturb those ro er
p p ty owners
located closely adjacent to the trail, es' ecial l at n'
especially n
Three separate potential problems exist here the fir '
firs being the
trail user who actively seeks out and approaches a house ouse for some
reason. 'To alleviate this problem the DNR should •
_ supply � n the trail
1
right -of -way those services and amenities for which the •
_ e tray 1 user m
otherwise approach a house. This can be done b •
. y providing or directing
users to existing drinking water and toilet fa cil i ties ,
shady areas,
[66]
public telephones, and food and lodging e '
s tabl � shments . If these are
easy to get at, the need to seek them from adjoining andowners wi ll l l be
reduced. Signage can also be used to encourage trail
g users to stay on
the trail,
The second. potential invasion of ri vac '
p y problem �s .represented by
the trail user who unwittingly or inadvertently ann ys property owners
because the trail lies in close proximity o a and or '
Y y d well i ng, 1� ng . I f the
landowners so request, the DNR should seek
to a 11 ev a to the problem by
means of vegetative or man -made visua and •
phys i ca 1 barriers, depending
ng
upon what is judged to be necessary. A number of d ' '
a �o�ning homeowners
have already requested such barriers and the DNR should follow through
by consulting with these homeowners to determine
e � f the barriers are
warranted. Such barriers have the added virtue of in some cases,
alleviating the direct approach problem
pp by discouraging users from
leaving the trail,
Finally, trail - related noise can be a n •
u�sance, particularly at
night. Since the trail is non-motorized b la a s i g nificant •
Y � gnif� cant potential
for noise will be eliminated jus by proper trail management. Regarding
other noise sources, it is w e l l to remember that the more or less urban
setting of this trai means that its environs will er.era •
y 11y be noisier
than would be the case out in the country. Oft •
y to the no heard
emanating from the trail w i l l be no worse than that coming v '
_ gat any given
time from the average city street. If re •
repeated noise disturbances
turbances , from
whatever trail source, cause problems for adjoining i ng homeowners or tra � •
1
users, the DNR should take appropriate action. This m i
ay
signage, user education efforts, enforcement acti
ons, barriers, a
curfew, or other action as appropriate.
C677
motel in Maplewood) is the Pine Point Park camping •
pi g area �n Washington
County, about 12 trail miles away.
Detailed design and construction specifications for
such thi as
treadway paving, drainage, sign and •
9 9� support facili are -
. addressed in the DNR Trail s Manual. T • -
The cons truction, maintenance and
operation of the ' Gateway Segment t will be •
. 9 i n conformance with this
5
manual. .
5. Vegetation Management
The vegetation i the Ga teway Se •
y gment right -of -way w� l 1 need to be
managed on a cont asi in r
9 o to provide the best possible
recreational experience for users and resent t •
. P he most favorable image
possible to the public.
The trail will be mowed to a distance
of fi feet on each side
de
from the edge of the treadwa a s a m atter '
Y ter of r outine . Al encroaching .
and overhanging brushy growth w i l l be kept trimme •
p ed as per specifications
in the Tra Manual But i n addition
to t h i s an affirmative p rag ram of
vegetative management should be implemented '
which takes note of growth
characteristics, weed problems, and outstanding
.. Ong scenic and
combines this knowledge with specific management •
g t techn � ques � n order to
provide and maintain scenic views, shade wi ldl if
e food and cover, and
other desirable features on the trail,
Vegetation may require mechanical ical manipulation in order to best
serve the interests of the trail user. Where the growth of
natural ly - occurring vegetation will r s •
eve the need at hand, this should
be encouraged. .Native fruit- and nu - •
nut -bearing species will attract
wildlife and enhance trail user a
. s tisfactlon. These can and should be
planted where appropriate, possibly n an •
Y area where vegetat
[73]
screening is needed. For example, natural l - occurrin native
Y g grape
vines will rapidly cover a chain link fence and attract w i l d l i f e
besides. A creative approach to the oss ibil ities in '
P inherent �n
vegetative management is to be encouraged among operational personnel.
This plan recommends the establishment of rass at various
s
locations i n the corridor. This may be acco m pl ished i shed b
Y p y a number of
means, among them periodic mowing, di rect seeding, and sodding, n
g. The
means to be chosen will depend upon site conditions. Areas to be
planted to grass should be seeded with a mix substantiall
teal ly s�m� lar to
DOT Formula #1, or other suitable mixture which consists entirel f
y o
native species or whose growth will evolve over time to result in
a
nearly pure native stand.
Nuisance vegetation must a l s o be dealt with on the Gateway S
There are several ways to accomplish this, includin chemicals,
,
mechanical cutting or removal, and manipulation and encouragement of
desirable vegetation in order to allow it to out-compete the
undesirables.
Under the provisions of DNR Operational Order #59, it is the DNB's
Poli that non methods be used whenever o '
p ss�ble, and that
safety rather than cost be the primary consideration in selection
of
materials and methods when chemicals are to be used. It is anticipated
that chemicals would need to be employed only in those instances where
persistent or severe nuisance vegetation problems exist.
The manner of control within the context of this plan
biological; in other words, the establishment of a stabl native
vegetational community will essentially eliminate undesirable species in
many areas. Where this end can be achieved by mere encouragement of the
[74]
natural ly- occ.urring .desirable vegetational components. i t '
P � �s the
preferred route to follow.' However, this is not always possible. There
may be instances in which vegetative species must be lanted arid
p a
cultivated, or removed mechanically or chemically, n order
Y � to ach i eve
the tra i 1 's objectives. Where undes vegetation on mu
g st be removed,
replacement, if indicated, should be with native species whose q ual ities
include as many as possible of the following, as ap (in n
o
particular order) : self - establishment of suitable height and densi
9 slty
for view framing or barrier creation, seasonal color, flowers, wildlife
food and cover, competitiveness against undesirable re i nva i
s on,
non - invasiveness where appropriate, and a suckering growth habit g g a t where
spreading is desirable,
In general, the overall management direction should be n
o e of
encouragement of the growth of existing desirable vegetation and mechanical management of it to frame views, provide shade and a 1 eas i n
P 9
appearance, promote the w i l d l i f e resource, and control undesirable
species. Where these objectives can be better attained via the
artificial establishment of native vegetation, this should be done. The
introduction of exotic speci and the use of pesticides should be
avoided except where their use is clearly indicated and reasonable
alternatives do not exist.
6. Surface Water
Water
problems are relatively
few on
the Gateway Se 9 ment. For the
most part,
the railroad grade on
which
it w i l l be constructed is
relatively
flat and drainage has
been
rovided for b railroad
P y
maintenance.
[75]
IMPLEMENTATION
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
The implementation of this plan has been programed as a series
of
priorities. Priorities were set based upon professional n '
P p o al perceptions of
how bes to provide for orderly development Y p t of the Gateway Segment,
dealing with critical problem areas such as washouts first and then
proceeding with those improvements which will make the trail useable ie as
soon as possible. Because the Gateway S and Wash ington
Y g county ..
Segment make up a continuous trail experience, '
p � t � s desirable that they
be developed . s imu l taneous l i f fund i n p ermits,
Y� g p its.
It must be recognized that, while the DNR has committed itself to
development and operation of the Boundary Trail and its Gateway S egment,
egment,
funding for development can not be rec i se 1 red
P y p redicted on an annual
basis since it comes from legislative appropriations. For this reason
o,
no attempt was made to devise annual spending p lans for the P G ateway
Segment. Instead, development tasks were prioritized in a
two - dimensional matrix (Table 1) (inside back cover so that the
� y can be
taken on in a coherent order as money becomes a v a i l a b l e . Since the
purpose of the prioritization scheme is to correct r bl
p o ems and make the
trail useable as soon as ossible i t' will •
p ] i be important for maximum
convenience to the public that projects be completed as much as P ossible
in the order specified,
[911
PHASING SCHEDULE
The expenditure schedule for the Gateway Segment is tied to a
phasing schedule (Table 2 ) . The 1 a.tter provides for an orderly and
d
steady increase in the level of resource mana ement$ orientation,
,
interpretation, and marketing efforts expended by the DNR as
construction of the trail proceeds. A close coordination between the
two schedules assures that user traffic is well provided for as early as
feasible. Of particular importance, the phasing schedule provides . P 9 p a
framework for steadily intensifying marketing efforts for the trail as
each phase of construction is completed. It is - important that the
public understand that funding and manpower limitations require that
trails often take years to go from initial conception to final
completion; the expectation often is that a year or two after
acquisition w i l l see the completion and grand opening of the trail. The
phasing schedule, by providing for a steady i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of
management and marketing efforts appropriate to the current level of
development, allows convenient and enjoyable use and keeps th
Y p the public's
expectations to a level which can be met.
This implementation plan for the Gateway Segment has been developed
Y 9
with the above in mind, with due regard for the fact that the P resent
legislative emphasis on tax and spending reductions w i l l mean a
protracted development schedule for the Gateway Segment. Table 1
summarizes the timing of development phase `completion for each trail
use. Completion of each development phase triggers the marketing and
other management ,procedures shown in Table 2.
I
C921
DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
As can be seen from the expenditure schedule the •
highest priori
development actions invol rep air of hazards an '
P d erosion problems, as
well as bridge decking and railing i n to g ma the grade useable for foot
traffic.
The eroded areas and washouts will be ermanentl re
P y pared in the .
course of routine bl ading and shaping n operations '
P g p Mons which are the
preparation for paving. It wi be imp ortant •
p taut to affir matively p
for proper drainage in the course of this work in order t '
0 obviate
long -term problems,
Next in priority generally are those developments which require
equire
vegetation plantings. Doing these earl g ives the '
Y 9 plantings time to
grow to functional size by the time overall development is completed p a nd
significant use exists on the trail,
Most hardened projects, such as the parki no 1 ots are p
„ . �
relatively low both because they are relatively e
and because
they will not be needed much before the r
t ail is completely developed.
The phasing schedule (Table 2) recognizes the f •
9 act that the trail's
s
clientele is largely made up of local eo le during '
p p g the in
development phases. Once the Westminster Street bridge is decked ecked and
railed and the washouts are repaired, i red deve l o pment •
p opment phase A can be said to
be completed. The-management activities called for at that
at stage �n
the phasing schedule should then be initiated. The hasin
p g schedule
should-continue to be followed as development P roceeds,
[93]
•
INTERIM USE PATTERNS
Use, of the trail prior, to completion will undoubtedl
P y take p] ace,
. a l though it will ..not be on a large scale and will i nvo 1 ve few
if any,
people from outside the local area. The - DNR's wisest course is to P l an
for this interim use so as to rovi de those services •
P ces �n�t� ally desired
by the public and so as to encourage orderly o ression and
Y P 9 development
of those use patterns which will exist after the is completel
P Y
developed,
Another consideration is that motorized uses have become
established on the trail, though these are largely prohibited b law
9 Y P y .
To a certain extent, the onset of development activiti ' '
� ti es wi th attendant
presence of DNR personnel in the right -of -way will discourage such
traffic. However, enforcement activities should be an ongoing art of
9 g P
the picture as development proceeds. The aim should be to eliminate
illegitimate uses from the corridor b the time of development
evelopment
completion. Probably the single most effective rocedur '
p e � n this regard
will be for DNR vehicles and personnel to be visible on the trail as
much as possible. Signing will be very important ortant also.
Also effective in reducing illicit uses is the P resence of
legitimate users on the trail, Bridge decking and railing and washout
repair will encourage such use.
MARKETING STRATEGY
.It is important to remember
that the
Gateway Segment is an
integral
part of the Minnesota- Wisconsin
Boundary
State Trail, and to a
certain
[94;
extent its marketing strategy should be tied to that of the Boundary
• Trai 1 as a whole. At the same time the Segment's 1
g oca t i on will serve to
maintain its individual identity s a recreations •
Y recreatio and commuti
f a c i l i t y in. its own right. Promotional efforts as •
per the phasing
schedule should recognize the inherent reiationshi •
p while highlighting
the potential of the Gateway S e g ment itself. M •
Y 9 Ma t ng th � s trail 1 w� 11
be a complex job and will require more or less continuous attention,
The p u b l i c should be kept informed of ro res s as p 9 proceeds,
as provided in the phasing schedule.
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS
The cost per mile of maintaining the Gateway Segment wi b
Y 9 e
somewhat higher than is the case on other state trails primarily
p mar�ly
because its urban location w i l l result in high levels s f '
g o use, which will
lead in turn to somewhat higher 1 levels s than - - •
normal of facili
deterioration, grooming frequency, and li ttering. The Regional ona l Tr
g ails
and Waterways Coordinator is ultimately responsible for on the r
goun t+
management of facilities. However, since management r •
espons�b� 1 � ties
for t r a i l s and waterways f a c i l i t i e s in the Metro Pe ion have steadi
9
increased in recent years, a full time trail 1
� manager for the Metro Area
position of the Boundary Trail will be necessary n order to assur ea
proper level of management.
In order to arr'i ve at an estimated annual cost for maintenan on
the Gateway and Washington County segments of the Boundary Tra 1, the
cost of maintaining a Natural Resources Specialist 1 p osition was used
for calculation purposes. This cost is about $25,000.00 annua lly,
[95]
1
Further, the DNR's experience is that labor costs u ab
• p out 70
percent of the per-mile cost of maintenance on an annual basis. This
s
means that with a Natural Resources Specialist 1 trail manager, annual
maintenance on the entire Soo line rail road rade would d cost the D
9 NR
about $36,000.00 per year. It must be emphasized, however, p e er, that these
numbers are for discussion purposes only, to give some idea of what
annual maintenance costs will be,
X961
�r
f
7.
ASPHALT TREADWAY (7.87 miles, 12 feet wide):
Blade and shape ( @.$1,000 /mile)
$ 7,870.00
'Steri 1 ize subgrade (@ $1,000 /mile) 79870e00
Gravel sub- base (3" @ $7 /cubic yard, $5,134.50/mil 40
52
Surface (2 12 feet wide) 194 9 19
. 2.c5
$2250,340.77
SIGNAGE
Regulatory signs R $144 /mile) $ 19133.28
Interpretive signs _ 1
$ 12
c.
PARKING LOTS
WEST END
Phase 1: picnic tables, trees and shrubs, 2: t avement
Phase p
toilets and kiosk $ 30
EAST END
picnic tables, benches, trees and shrubs, kiosk, 30 000.00
pavement '
$ 60
BRIDGES
Decking and railing (@ $100 /foot)
new: Gloster (@ $1,500 /foot, 10 foot clearspan)
new: White Bear Avenue
• new: Anchor Block /McKnight Road
WAYSIDES
MAPLEWOOD
cat work (@ $50/hour)
picnic table
kiosk
three trees (2 #" DBH, B &B, planted)
- five shrubs (planted, B &B)
grass seeding (*16 DOT formula 1
X0.12 /square foot)
two benches
$ 59
150,000.00
150,000000
150,000.00
$509,800.00
S 150.00
150.00
2,500.00
360.00
150.00
836.35
$ 4,046.35
y
[98]
WAYSIDES (continued)
GLADSTONE.
cat- work (@ $50 /hour)
two benches '
kiosk -
ten trees (21. DBH; & , , . planted
ten shrubs (B&B planted)
grass seeding (65,000 feet DOT formula 1
@ $0.12 square foot)
COUNTY ROAD B
cat work (@ $
two benches
five trees (21" DBH, B&B, planted)
ted
P )
five shrubs (B &B, planted)
grass seedin (.2 acres DOT formula 1
@ $0.12 square foot)
NORTH SAINT PAUL -- FRANKLIN PARK
cat work (@ $50/hour)
two.. picnic tables
three benches
five trees (21" DBH, B &B, planted
five shrubs (B &B, planted)
restroom building
NORTH SAINT . AUL- MARGARET STREET
cat work. . (@ $50 /hour)
three benches
five trees (2j" DB11 , B &B , 1 an ted
P )
ten shrubs (B &B, planted)
kiosk
RIGHT -OF -WAY BEAUTIFICATION AND SCREENING
500 trees (21 DBH, B &B, planted)
500 shrubs (B &B, planted)
GRAND TOTAL
$ 150.00
2,500.00
1,200.00
200.00
7,800.00
$ 11
$ 150.00
600.00
150.00
1,045.44
$ 1,845.44
$ 150.00
300.,00
600, o0
150.00
$ 1,150.00
$ 150.00'..
600.00
200.00
_ 2,500.00
$ 3 , 350.00
609000000
10
$ 70
$
ti
[99]
C. Soo Line Trail Plan
Sec retary Olson said the proposal is the , develo m n -
p e t plan the trail.
He reviewed the portion of the plan that affects Ma 1 ewood.
P F
Commissioner Fischer moved the lannin •
p g commission s � on recorn�nend the ci ty counc i 1
inform the DNR that:
1. The BN corridor is proposed to be a* •
doned and acquired for public
use. This may resolve the problem of a trail crossi n there,
e.
2. If the Maplewood library is relocated a trai 1 •
be .needed.
connection might not
39 There should be a trail connection to the city '
y all site.
- Commissioner Rossbach seconded
Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl , Barrett,
Cardinal, Fischer, Fiola, Hanson, Larson, Rossbach S
letten,Sigmundik
MEMORANDUM
TO :. Acting City Manager
FROM: D irector of Community Endor
SUBJECT: Zoning and Land Use Plan Consistent Mo f
DATE : Y � ��"'°
December 17 , 19 8 6 Rej ecte
Date
The results of a Metropolitan Council survey are attached regarding
g 9
consistency between comprehensive plans and zoning rdinances. One ne of
the survey's findings is that many cities, including Maplewood, do not
have consistent zoning and comprehensive plans. As the cover letter
points out, the Metropolitan Council's Land Use Advisory Committee is
concerned about this and is encouraging cities to make the two
consistent. The Metropolitan Council staff is also trying to make
y g an
issue of this. This issue will probably lead to a proposal in the
state legislature.
Several years ago, Maplewood eliminated inconsistencies where the
zoning allowed a more intensive land use than the comprehensive plan
P P
did. The opposite situation, where the plan allows a more intensive
use than the zoning, still exists. This is the "holding one" concept
g p
discussed on page 8 of the survey. Other cities, such as Oakdale use
the opposite strategy of eliminating "holding zones" to P romote
economic development. However, some city control of development may
be lost as a result. Y
The planning commisson, on January 6, 1986, took the following
position on this issue while reviewing the Metropolitan Development
and Investment Framework Guide:
"We agree that the Metropolitan Council should be concerned about
inconsistencies between zoning and the' land use plan, where land is
zoned for a higher intensity of use than shown on the p lan. A
significant acreage of this kind of land could have an adverse effect
on planning for regional systems. The Land Use Planning Act should be
amended to require that the zoning and land use plan be consistent in
these cases.
"We question the timeliness of rezoning, when the present zonin g is
less intensive than the \ land use plan. Man cities delay this Y y s type of
rezoning until it is requested by a developer and a specific p lan is
proposed. This allows the city and neighborhood to see what they are
getting and negotiate for improvement if needed. This strategy is
especially important when rezoning around single- dwelling neighbor-
hoods. Most neighborhoods will o specific g
g oppose rezoning s without
proposals, because they fear the unknown and assume the worst.
Whether a city chooses to use this strategy or not should be a local
zoning decision. The Metropolitan Council should not be involved
•
since there is no adverse effect on regional systems."
Recommendation
Endorse the planning commission's position on this issue.
mb
Attachment
- October 17, 1986
o litao
�o 0
i
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
Seventh and Robert Streets
St. Paul.. Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 291 -6359
TO: CITIES, TOWNSHIPS AND COUNTIES IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA
The Metropolitan Council conducted a survey of all cities, counties and
townships in the Metropolitan Area in April 1986 regarding consistency between
comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances. The report summarizing the results
of the survey is attached for your information and use. Four strategies are
proposed for the Metropolitan Council:
1. To encourage and /or assist Metropolitan Area communites in updating or
amending their comprehensive plans so that they are. a useful functional
guide to day - today land use decisions.
2. To impress upon communities the importance of complying with the
Metropolitan Land Planning Act in adopting official controls not in
conflict with the comprehensive plan,
3. To assist communities in understanding "what in conflict with" means and in
preparing consistent plans and ordinances.
4. To remind communities that the Metropolitan Council commits to providing
regional services only to serve the level of development indicated in a
comprehensive plan, even if the zoning ordinance allows higher density
development or would require a higher service level.
The Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) , a citizen committee appointed by the
Metropolitan Council to monitor local land use issues, has expressed concern
that a community may not be using its comprehensive plan as a broader, long -
range guide to individual zoning decisions. Where the comprehensive plan has
become outdated or has been amended frequently as a result of zoning changes,
it is no longer useful. When this occurs, zoning may take precedence over
planning and, in the extreme, may even substitute for planning. To avoid this,
the Land Use Advisory Committee encourages local communities to do a broad -
based review of their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances, both to update
them and to make the two consistent. LUAC also encourages communities to
monitor their plans and ordinances to keep them consistent, By doing so,
comprehensive plans will be more useful as an overall guide to planning and
development decisions .
If you have any questions concerning the survey and report, please contact Lucy
Thompson, Community Assistance Planner, at 291 - 6381.
Sincerely,
Sandra S. C
Chair
SSG / ms
An Equal Opportunity Employer
CONSISTENCY BETWEEN COMPREHENSIVE PLANS
AND
ZONING ORDINANCES
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Roberts Streets
St* Paul , Minnesota 55101
Tel, ( 612) 291-6359
October 1986
Publication No. 640 -86 -090
0
INTRODUCTION
In the 1985 legislative session, an amendment to Minnesota's planning enabling
legislation was adopted stating that "If the comprehensive municipal plan is in
conflict with the zoning ordinance., the zoning ordinance supersedes the plan."
The change was made to the state -wide municipal planning law, Minnesota
Statute, Section 462.357, Subd . 2 and to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act,
Minnesota Statute, Section 473.858, subd.l. The new provision took effect July
1, 1985.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact the new legislation may have
in the Metropolitan Area on the use of comprehensive plans and the
implementation of those plans through official controls, specifically the
zoning ordinance* The impact of the zoning ordinance superseding the
comprehensive plan where the two conflict is of special concern to the
Metropolitan Council for two reasons. First, the Council reviews only
comprehensive plans for their consistency with regional goals and policies,
Official controls in conflict with a comprehensive .plan may cause plan
implementation 'to conflict with regional policies, limiting the Council
ability to guide development and change in the seven - county region to achieve
regional goals. Second, the Land Planning Act prohibits local governmental
units from adopting official controls which permit activity in conflict with
metropolitan system plans, Since the Council does not review official
controls, it must rely on a local government adopting. official controls
consistent with its comprehensive plan. Only the comprehensive plan is
reviewed by the Council for consistency with the metropolitan system plans,
The adoption of legislation giving zoning ordinance precedence over the
comprehensive plan where the two conflict prompted Metropolitan Council concern
about the comprehensive planning process in the Metropolitan Area. After a
Planner's Forum indicated a great deal of interest in the consistency issue and
the impact of the new law on comprehensive planning, the Council conducted a
survey of each city, township and county in the seven - county area. The results
of the survey comprise the bulk of this report; the report also offers an
assessment of what the results mean for the Council's ability to encourage
coordinated and orderly development in the Metropolitan Area,
BACKGROUND ON THE CONSISTENCY ISSUE
The Concept of C ons i s tene
In essence, consistency means that local land use regulations bear some direct
relationship to local comprehensive plans* Consistency is typically defined as
compatibility between zoning and planning objectives and policies: In this
interpretation, a zoning ordinance is considered to be consistent with a
comprehensive plan when the allowable uses and standards contained in the text
of the ordinance further _ the. policies of the plan and do not inhibit or
obstruct the attainment of those policies* Conversely, a zoning ordinance
would be in conflict with a comprehensive plan where its regulations do inhibit
or obstruct the attainment of the plan's policies,
Consistency Requirements in the Metropolitan Area
In the Metropolitan Area, consistency means "not in conflict with." The
Metropolitan Land Planning Act's prohibition of official controls in conflict
with a comprehensive plan is a weaker mandate than a requirement of consistency,
Y
Within the Metropolitan Area, the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA)
.requires every local governmental unit to . prepare a comprehensive plan.
Further:
1) Each local governmental unit must adopt official controls as described
in its comprehensive plan.
2) A local governmental. unit may not adopt official controls in conflict
with its comprehensive plan or permit activity in conflict with
metropolitan system plans,
3) Where an official control conflicts with a comprehensive plan as the
result of an amendment to the plan, the official control must be
amended within nine months so as not to conflict with the amended
plan,
The MLPA contains both a local and regional perspective. The local goal
reflected in the act is planned, orderly and staged development,* The regional
goal is the creation of local comprehensive plans and official controls
consistent with metropolitan system plans, and the development of a coordinated
approach towards planning among interdependent local governmental units,
Although the MLPA clearly requires that prospective official controls not be in
conflict with local comprehensive plans, the 1985 amendment raises a number of
issues regarding-the consistency requirement ,. most notably:
1) Will local governmental units have less incentive to make their
zoning ordinances (and other official controls) and comprehensive
plans consistent,when they can defer to the zoning ordinance as the
prevailing document?
2) What are the implications for planning for regional systems
(transportation, airports, sewers, and parks and open space) where the
Council bases local need for such systems on a comprehensive plan that
may allow a lesser scale or density of development than the official
controls?
LOCAL EXPERIENCE WITH INCONSISTENCY IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA
Planning/ Zoning Consistency Survey
In an attempt to address these issues precipitated by the 1985 amendment, a
mail -back survey was sent in April 1986 to each city_ , township and county_ in
the seven- county Metropolitan Area. The survey was directed to the person_
responsible for implementing each community's zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan. For cities and counties, this person was most often the
planner or director of planning; for towns, this person was usually the town
clerk,
The purpose of the survey was twofold: - 1) to determine the extent and nature
of inconsistency between zoning ordinances and comprehensive plans in the
Metropolitan Area; and 2) to determine what, if anything, communities have done
or anticipate doing to reconcile inconsistencies* Communities were asked 11
2
questions and were requested ' to enclose any issues papers, legal opinions, or
other pertinent materials dealing with the consistency issue. The survey is
attached (See Appendix A.)
Of 196 surveys sent out, 123 (63 percent) were returned by the deadline. Four
of the 123 surveys were not usable due to incomplete information. Of the
respondents, 81 percent were cities, 14 percent were townships, and 5 percent
were counties,
Survey Finding
Knowledge of the 1985 amendment to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA.) is
fairly widespread among local communities--74 percent of the respondents were
aware of the legislation prior to the survey. Those respondents not familiar
with the legislation were usually from smaller towns in the rural areas of the
region.
Almost all communities have officially adopted a comprehensive plan and zoning
ordinance (98 percent and 97 percent, respectively.) Most of the communities
who do not have an officially adopted zoning ordinance use another
Jurisdiction's zoning ordinance. In all cases in this survey, this means a
township using county zoning. Also, one county (Hennepin) does not have its
own zoning ordinance, but does have a comprehensive plan,
Communities were asked to indicate when their comprehensive plans and zoning
ordinances were adopted, with the intent of getting an idea of which came
first. Knowing which came first is important for the consistency issue, since
the MLPA implies- that the comprehensive plan should be prepared and adopted
first* According to the survey responses , 73 percent of the communities
adopted their zoning ordinance before their comprehensive plan. This is to be
expected, since there was no comprehensive plan requirement in the Metropolitan
Area until the MLPA was adopted in 1976s, The following table illustrates the
percentage of communities adopting plans and ordinances within specified
timef rames .
Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance
Before 1970 0% 19%
1970 -1975 4 24
1.976 -1980 24 15
1981 -1986 72 42
The next question dealt with whether the zoning ordinance was consistent (i.e.
not in conflict) with the comprehensive plan at the time either the zoning
ordinance or comprehensive plan was first adopted s. Fifty -three percent of the
respondents indicated yes; 47 percent indicated no. For those communities
answering no, 68 percent did not correct the inconsistencies at that time
This is an interesting situation against which to gauge further inconsistency- -
close to 50 percent of the communities that responded began their planning and
zoning efforts with a conflict between the two. One problem with the MLPA is
that although it prohibits official controls which are in conflict with a
community comprehensive plan, it requires a community to amend a conflicting
official control only where the conflict occurs as a result of an amendment to
the comprehensive plan. Reconciliation of a conflict with a zoning ordinance
existing long before the city adopted a comprehensive plan is only implied in
the MLPA. This is probably the situation for many of the communities that
indicated there was an initial conflict between their zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan.,
3
Question 5 attempted to understand the status of a community's comprehensive
plan -- whether it has been amended since its adoption, what types of changes
were made, what prompted them, and whether they created an inconsistency with
the zoning ordinance . Sixty -two percent of the respondents indicated that
their comprehensive plans had been amended, The most common types of changes
were minor revisions to the text and changes in the land use plan map, with a
slightly greater frequency of map changes (including MUSA line adjustments) .
Other types of changes included the preparation of new plan chapters; update
of existing plan chapters; new street alignments; updated population, housing
and employment forecasts; and total rewrites,
The reasons for comprehensive plan amendments can be grouped into four major
categories:
o development pressure 63%
o update , city initiative 22%
o Metropolitan Council requirements 8%
(e.g. urban service area , sewer capacity)
o reconcile inconsistency with zoning ordinance 7%
Fifty - eight percent of the respondents felt that changes in the comprehensive
plan created an inconsistency with their zoning ordinance . Of these
respondents , sixty percent then amended the zoning ordinance so that the two
were consistent; 40 percent did not .
Question 6 attempted to understand the status of a community's zoning
ordinance, asking for the same information as Question 5. It appears that
more local zoning ordinances have been amended than local comprehensive plans;
?9 percent of the respondents said that their zoning ordinances had been
amended* Responses regarding the types of changes made to the zoning ordinance
were fairly evenly divided between text and map changes, with text changes
being cited a bit more frequently. Responses as to what prompted amendments to
the zoning ordinance fell into five general categories:
o development pressure /property owner requests 51%
0 outdated language, uses /clarification of language 23%
o city initiative (e .g . enforcement problems, 16%
reflection of new city goals)
o maintain consistency with comprehensive plan 6%
o response to legislative requirements, 4%
Metropolitan Council
A slight majority (53%) of the respondents felt that changes in the zoning
ordinance never created an inconsistency with their comprehensive plans, Of
the 47 . percent who felt that zoning ordinance amendments did create an
inconsistency, 29 percent said that it "rarely" happened, 17 percent said that
it "sometimes" happened, and one percent said t hat it "frequently" happened .
These statistics suggest - that either the types of changes being made in the
zoning ordinance do not necessitate changes in local comprehensive plans or the
communities amend their zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan at the same
time where the amended zoning ordinance would be in conflict with the
comprehensive plan .
4
For those communities where changes in the zoning ordinance did create an
inconsistency, 66 percent did not then amend the comprehensive plan to remove
the inconsistency. This is in line with t ve plan created an
he responses regarding amending he
zoning ordinance where changes in the comp rehensi 6
i
neonsistency with its Where changes in the comprehensive plan created an
inconsistency, a majority of communities amended their zoning ordinances to
remove the inconsistency. This would seem to indicate that A majority of
communities use the comprehensive plan as the gauge against which officials
controls are to be judged. Similarly, a majority of the communities where
changes in the zoning ordinance created an inconsistency did not amend their
comprehensive plans to remove the inconsistency. This would seem to indicate
that a majority of communities hold the comprehensive plan as a "Controlling"
8
document which will be amended less frequently and which will provide a long-
term framework for individual zoning decisions,
For an overwhelming majority of the respondents , inconsistency between the
zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan is not a problem. Eighty -nine percent
of the respondents indicated no problem in their community. Of those who
indicated that inconsistency is a problem, too few respondents gave examples
to discern any pattern in the way inconsistency is manifested at the local
level.
Survey respondents gave a variety of definitions of "consistency" as it is
interpreted by their own community. Although worded in various ways, the
definitions can be grouped into four categories:
o zoning implements the comprehensive plan 38%
o the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan are
"comparable", "identical", "similar", "compatible" 37%
o the zoning map and land use plan map have identical 20%
designations
o the comprehensive plan reflects zoning 5%
Individual communities made some interesting remarks regarding consistency:
Y
o "Consistency defines the usefulness of the zoning ordinance as a tool
to implement the land use goals and objectives of the comprehensive
Plane Without consistency, the usefulness of the zoning ordinance as
an implementation tool diminishes."
o "Zoning should not get into areas of regulation that are not mentioned
and authorized as desirable by the Plan."
o "At the time of development, the official use and regulation of land
through zoning is consistent with long -range planning." (definition of
consistency)
o "The zoning ordinance effectuates the goals and values of the
comprehensive plan."
Questions 9 and 10 attempted to establish which document (the zoning ordinance
or comprehensive plan) takes precedence in actual experience and which should
take precedence when the two conflict The range of responses given for -a
community's actual experience with inconsistency indicates no clear pattern of
either document taking precedence. In some cases the zoning ordinance
prevailed, and a comprehensive plan amendment was adopted to make the plan
consistent with the ordinance; in other cases , the comprehensive plan was left
intact , and the zoning amendment was denied. Most of the inconsistencies were
raised by a particular development request. A few communities did note that
there were special cases where inconsistencies were allowed to remain.
5
In terms of which should take precedence - the zoning ordinance or
comprehensive plan - when the two conflict, regardless of what the new
legislation dictates, the response was firmly in support of the zoning
ordinance* Seventy -two percent of the respondents indicated that the zoning
ordinance should take precedences Their reasons can be grouped into five
general categories:
o the zoning ordinance is a legal, enforceable instrument with the power
of law
o zoning is more detailed, specific and basic
o zoning retains local control since zoning decisions are made by a
locally- elected body
o zoning is more current than the comprehensive plan
o zoning is more easily understood, more practical and more upfront
For the 28 percent of the communities that indicated . that the comprehensive
plan should take precedence, the primary reason noted was that the
comprehensive plan establishes the long -term direction, goals and values for a
community and provides a framework for individual zoning decisions. In this
way,. the zoning ordinance is meant to effectuate the comprehensive plan, not
direct or control its' A few respondents were quite strong in their support of
the comprehensive plan, with one community asking, "Why do we have a
comprehensive plan if it doesn't serve as a guide for the development and
redevelopment of services in a community ?"
Finally, respondents were asked whether the new legislation will create a
problem in their community in implementing either the comprehensive plan or the
zoning ordinances Ninety -one percent answered no. Again, their answers can be
categorized into five areas:
o Zoning has always been the controlling documents
o Inconsistencies are being resolved,
o Both documents are taken seriously enough that inconsistency is not a
problems
o Inconsistency is of less importance in fully - developed communities
than in developing suburbs.
o The comprehensive plan is not a working document; it merely collects
dust.
For those few communities that indicated that the new legislation would present
a problem, explanations fell into three general categories:
o The comprehensive plan establishes a city's goals, values and
direction for the future. The zoning ordinance is meant to
effectuate the comprehensive plan, not direct or control it,
o Where a community has its own comprehensive plan but is under another
jurisdiction's zoning ordinance, giving precedence to the zoning -
=ordinance removes local control.
o The new legislation is contrary to the concept of comprehensive
planning,
It was interesting that a few communities who noted that the comprehensive plan
should take precedence still anticipated no problem with the new legislation,
Logically enough, those communities were usually communities that did not
consider inconsistency a problem.
6
Survey Conclusions
Based on the survey sample, the following conclusions can be made:
1. Knowledge of the 1985 amendment to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act is
fairly widespread among Metropolitan Area communi ties .
2. Almost all communities have officially adopted a comprehensive plan and
zoning ordinance, with the zoning ordinance being adopted first in the
majority of those communities,
3. Only a slim majority of communities originally adopted a zoning ordinance
consistent with their comprehensive plan.
4. For a majority of communities, amendments to the comprehensive plan created
an inconsistency with the zoning ordinance*, Most of these communities then
amended the zoning ordinance so the two were consistent,
5e More local zoning ordinances have been amended than comprehensive
plans,
with a majority of respondents feeling that changes in the zoning
ordinance did not create an inconsistency with their comprehensive plans .
6. For those communities where changes in the zoning ordinance did create an
inconsistency, a majority did not amend their comprehensive plans to remove
the inconsistency.
7. It appears that a majority of communities use the comprehensive plan as a
"controlling" document which will be amended less frequently and which will
provide A long-term framework for individual zoning decisions,
8. Inconsistency between local zoning ordinances and comprehensive. plans does
exist in Metropolitan Area communties, but local communities do not
consider it a problem.
9. In terms of actual experience with inconsistency, there is no clear pattern
of either the zoning ordinance or comprehensive plan taking precedence when
the two conflict,
10. There are conflicting messages in terms of which document should take
precedence when the two conflict. In response to questions about whether
either the zoning ordinance or comprehensive plan was amended to reconcile
an inconsistency between the two, most communities either amended the
zoning ordinance or let the inconsistency stand. This may indicate a
preference for the comprehensive plan, but it may also indicate that
communities pay little attention to the plan. However, in response to a
direct question on which should take precedence, response was firmly in
support of the Zoning ordinance,
119 In the view of local communities, the 1985 amendment to the Metropolitan
Land Planning Act will not create a problem for comprehensive plan
implementation. The new legislation appears to validate and strengthen the
local interpretation of precedence.
Local Approaches to C ons i s tenet'
rA
The survey revealed several strategies local governments in the Metropolitan
Area use to deal with inconsistency between a community's zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan. A few examples are highlighted below,
The communities of Maple Grove, Rosemount, Eden Prairie and Apple Valley use
the "holding zone" concept. In Maple Grove, all vacant land is zoned
"Agriculture" until development is proposed for a particular parcel. At the
time of development, either the parcel is zoned consistent with the
comprehensive plan or the comprehensive plan is amended where the rezoning
...would be inconsistent with the plan. According to the city's community
development director, the use of an agricultural . zone as a holding zone has
not caused any problems and is accepted by the development community.
Rosemount also uses the Agricultural zoning classification as a holding zone.
Doing so creates a certain amount of inconsistency with the comprehensive plan,
but this is not considered a problem. In Rosemount, the majority of -
undeveloped land is agricultural; zoning all land according to the
comprehensive plan would create many nonconforming uses* Rosemount's
perspective is that in a community where agricultural land use is predominant,
an Agricultural holding zone is logical. In the city's eyes , there will always
be an inconsistency between planning and zoning, but the city will not risk
down-zoning for plan consistency,
Eden Prairie zones virtually all vacant parcels "Rural" until there is a
request for change in zoning consistent with the comprehensive plan. If the
new zoning district being proposed is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide
Plan, a Guide Plan amendment must either be justified or the zoning is denied,
In Apple Valley, undeveloped areas retain Agricultural zoning until a
development proposal is made consistent with the comprehensive plan and the
utilities extension schedule. In this way, the comprehensive plan is used to
justify the "highest and best use" of land.
Three communities responding to the survey (Mounds View, Corcoran and Apple
Valley) utilize a more direct approach towards consistency. Mounds View has a
consistency policy stated directly in its zoning ordinance. While it is not a
mandate or requirement for consistency, it is significant that linking the
zoning ordinance with the comprehensive plan is stated outright as a policy in
the zoning ordinance. Chapter 40.01 (C) states:
"Subd. C Relation to Comprehensive Municipal Plan. It is the policy of the
City of Mounds View that the enactment, amendment and administration of
this Code be accomplished with due consideration for the recommendations
contained in the Comprehensive Municipal Plan as developed and amended from
time to time by the Planning Commission of the City. The Council
recognizes the Comprehensive Municipal Plan as the Planning Commission's
recommendations for responsibility to regulate land use and development in
accordance .with the policies and purpose herein set forth."
Corcoran has a similar statement in its zoning ordinance. Again, the City
Council recognizes the comprehensive plan as the guiding policy for the
regulation of land use and development.
At the time its comprehensive plan was prepared, the city of Apple Valley
identified five specific cases of inconsistency between zoning and land use
8
plan designations . For most of thew, the plan notes how the inconsistency will
be eliminated. From the city's response to the survey, it can be assumed that
potential inconsistencies occurring after plan adoption are dealt with on a
ease -by -case basis, amending either ' the comprehensive plan or the zoning
ordinance to keep the two consistent and to assure that development occurs
consistent with both documents
Bloomington discusses the consistency issue at length in its comprehensive
plan. The plan states the' importance of having zoning and subdivision
controls that are "in conformity with" the plan. With the observation that
there is a trend toward increased reliance on consistency between the
comprehensive plan and zoning. ordinance, the plan notes that a "prudent
community" must closely evaluate ordinances and judicial /legislative decisions
with regard to the concept of consistency.
The Bloomington comprehensive plan contains a table showing which land use plan
categories correspond to existing zoning classifications, a valuable guide to
working towards consistency between the two. The plan does note a concern
about the timing of zoning, concluding that whether rezoning occurs at the time
of development, or in advance of development, depends on the specifics of a
particular parcel and proposal.
Finally, the Bloomington plan states as one of its goals "to evaluate the
relationship between the Comprehensive Plan and regulatory controls and to
increase consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning and
subdivision ordinances o" The objective tied to this goal is to "amend the
subdivision and zoning ordinances within nine months of the adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan as needed to assure comprehensive plan and zoning
consistency."
Several communities have undertaken substantial efforts to make their zoning
ordinances and comprehensive plans consistent. The communities of Eden
Prairie, Coon Rapids, Plymouth and Minnetonka highlighted these efforts in
their survey responses,
The process used in Eden. Prairie seems to reinforce use of the comprehensive
plan as the framework against which all rezoning proposals are decided. In
Eden Prairie, a person (s) requesting a Comprehensive Guide Plan change must
provide substantial evidence to support the change, including answers to the
following:
1. What impact does the requested Comprehensive Guide Plan change have on
In cases where a proposed zoning change from "Rural" (holding zone) to a
classification which permits development is inconsistent with the Guide Plan,
a Guide Plan change must be justified or the rezoning is denied. This suggests
that inconsistencies between the zoning ordinance and Guide Plan are never
created.
9
the balance of land uses in
the city?
2.
What impact does
the plan change have on surrounding land uses?
3.
What impact does
the change
have on the site?
4,s
What impact does
the change
have on city services, such as s ewer ,
water, stormwater runoff and roads?
5•
Is the requested
Guide Plan
change a better use of the land?
In cases where a proposed zoning change from "Rural" (holding zone) to a
classification which permits development is inconsistent with the Guide Plan,
a Guide Plan change must be justified or the rezoning is denied. This suggests
that inconsistencies between the zoning ordinance and Guide Plan are never
created.
9
The Coon Rapids approach is to first create zoning districts directly
consistent with comprehensive plan land use designations*, -According to the
city's planning director, this has been accomplished. The city then defined
and initiated a process to rezone to achieve consistency with the plan. Since
the local interpretation in Coon Rapids, prior to the new legislation, had been
-that the comprehensive plan supersedes zoning where the two conflict, the city
will now accelerate the process of proposing zoning changes consistent with the.
plan. This process will involve either a reaffirmation of the comprehensive
.Plan through the decision to rezone consistent with the plan, or a rejection
of the comprehensive plan and adoption of plan amendments consistent with
either existing zoning or other appropriate plan and rezoning actions,
Plymouth approached the consistency issue by promptly reconciling the city's
zoning ordinance and Land Use Guide Plan after the adoption of an updated
comprehensive plan in 1980. The city "methodically" identified every case of
inconsistency between the Guide Plan and the zoning ordinance and, over a six -
month period, initiated approximately 24 public hearings to reconcile
identified inconsistencies .
Minnetonka recently revised the entire zoning ordinance text to conform to its
comprehensive plane. In the future, zoning map changes will be made as
development occurs, but they will be made in accordance with the comprehensive
plan .
IMPLICATIONS OF RECENT LEGISLATION AND SURV FINDINGS FOR COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING IN .THE METRO AREA
Very soon after adoption of the 1985 amendment to the MLPA giving the zoning
ordinance precedence over the comprehensive plan where the two conflict, there
seemed to be a fear that the need for comprehensive planning would . be
diminished. Early interpretations of the amendment seemed to require local
communities to look no further than their zoning ordinances to accomplish local
planning. By taking comprehensive planning out of a more policy, goals and
objectives context and putting it into a context which seemed to encourage only
politically- expedient land use decisions, the practice of truly comprehensive
planning and the effective use of a comprehensive plan to guide individual
land use decisions would seemingly disappear. After studying the issue,
potential consequences of the amendment and the approaches Metropolitan Area
communities appear to be taking towards planning and zoning, there seems to be
much less need for alarm than originally supposed. The reasons are four-fold.
First, the 1985 legislation giving precedence to the zoning ordinance appears
merely to validate and confirm local perception of- the zoning ordinance. For
most survey respondents, the zoning ordinance has usually been given precedence
where the ordinance and comprehensive plan conflict because it is a legally
enforceable document,
Second, despite their giving precedence to the zoning ordinance, most -
Metropolitan Area corarnunities still to use the comprehensive plan to
provide a longer -range framework and context for day - today zoning decisions,
Reading through the lines of survey responses reveals an underlying dependence
on the comprehensive plan as a community's statement of the overall direction
it should take in terms of land use and development.
10
Third , following f rom the f irst two reasons , it appears that many -communities
comply with the MLPA requirement prohibiting adoption of official controls
which are in conflict with a comprehensive plan. There seems to be fairly
.serious attention in the Metropolitan Area to maintaining some degree of
consistency between the two documents , or to beginning a major effort to
reconcile them at some point, in. the future and then to continue to keep them
consistent.
Finally, the prohibition of adoption of offical controls in conflict with a
comprehensive plan remains in. the ML Technically, at least, municipalities
in . the Metropolitan Area should not be creating situations where the two
conflict and, thus, where the 1985 amendment would apply.
Despite these reassurances that the threat of zoning ordinance precedence is
not as prominent as originally feared, some patterns emerged from the survey
(and from further analysis of the entire consistency issue) which indicate that
comprehensive planning and zoning may not function as "neatly" as they should,
First of all, inconsistency between local comprehensive plans and zoning
ordinances comes out in some surveys, yet those communit .es do not consider it
a problem. Because the design of the survey does not allow a very specific
look at the type or extent of the inconsistency (it may range from undeveloped
land being zoned Agricultural but designated as High Density Residential in
the Land Use Plan, to residential land being designated as Low Density
Residential in the Land Use Plan yet zoned for High Density Residential) , it is
difficult to tell whether it really is a problem. It is likely, however, that
there are cases where the differences between the comprehensive plan and zoning
ordinance are significant enough to warrant concern. Not only might the
attainment of the city's goals and policies be jeopardized, but the protection
of regional systems could be threatened* Further, local development could be
impacted if regional system allocations (based on the level of development
permitted in the comprehensive plan) are not sufficient to service the level of
development allowed in the zoning ordinance.
Second, there are a few communities that support the new legislation because
it gives them an "out" to ignore the comprehensive plan when making land
use decisions and allows the plan to become, out -of -date and useless. For these
communi ties , the fears mentioned above still exist. Rather than reconcile
inconsistencies between the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance, the
communities will simply plan by zoning. Obviously, the effect on community
development, infrastructure investments, quality of life and a variety of other
factors can be disastrous- -these communities will not have the essential longer -
range perspective which the comprehensive plan provides. Further, they will
not base their official controls on a document which represents the community's
vision for the future or which ties the components of a community (housing,
transportation, parks and open space, agricultural preservation, land use,
etc.) into a coordinated whole.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
Based on the observations noted above, it appears that the focus of action on
the consistency issue should be in four areas:
19 Encoura n and /or assisting Metropolitan Area communities to*update or
amend their comprehensive plans so that they are a useful functional iulde
to day - today land use decisions
11
Several communities in the Metropolitan Area are planning for the future
with a comprehensive plan that is at least five years old. For these
communities, zoning regulations, which are more frequently amended to keep
up with changes in developer interest and to reflect changes in community
goals, become more important and useful than broader land use policies.
Inconsistencies increase, and the comprehensive plan becomes more out-of-
date*- To address this problem, communities are encouraged to periodically
undertake a broad -scale review of their comprehensive plans and to amend
them to reflect current city goals and policies* In the course of such a
review, a community may discover that the zoning ordinance also needs
updating.
While a comprehensive plan update may be necessary to reflect current
community goals and policies, it may also be required in response to
changes in Metropolitan Council policy plans or system statements (e.g. the -
Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework, the transportation
policy plan or the sewers system statement), The MLPA requires local
governmental units., after receiving an amendment to a metropolitan system
plan, to review their comprehensive plans. The purpose of the review is to
determine if an amendment to the comprehensive plan is necessary to ensure
continued conformity with metropolitan system plans, This may be an
opportunity for the Council to require local units to either attest to the
consistency between their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances or to
justify an increase in system demand created by a zoning ordinance which is
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.
20 Impressing upon communities the importance of complying with the MLPA in
OMMONONNUMMONN" adopting official controls not in conflict with the comprehensive plan.
A community should comply with the MLPA not simply because it is law, but
because the Council determines regional service allocations based on the
community's plan and on the assumption that zoning is consistent with the
plan. If a community allows, through its zoning ordinance, development at
a higher density than indicated in the comprehensive plan, it may be
allowing development that cannot be serviced by the regional systems, or
that conflicts with regional policies. If and when a project comes to the
Council for review, a delay may occur in project approval where this is the
case. Such a delay may cause the project itself to be delayed or even
abandoned.
3. Assisting communities in understanding what "in conflict with" means and in
preparing consistent plans and ordinances,
This is an ongoing process The Council can play an educational role in
bringing to communities legal interpretations of "in conflict with" and
consistency as .they have been used in other . states * The Council most
likely will not have a direct role in preparing . consistent plans and
ordinances; only where achieving consistency impacts regional decisions
will there be a need for Council involvement.
4. Reminding communities that the Metropolitan Council commits to providing
regional services only to serve the level of development indicated in a
comprehensive plan, even if the zoning ordinance allows higher density
development or would require a higher service level.
12
Inconsistency is both a local and regional issue. While inconsistency may
result in, among other things, inefficient development patterns, it may
also result in municipalities committing to development which cannot be
serviced by regional systems
SUMMARY
The purpose of this paper has been-to examine the impact the 1985 amendment to
the MLPA may have in the Metropolitan Area on the use of comprehensive plans
. the implementation of those plans through official controls, specifically
the zoning ordinance. In general, it appears that the amendment giving
precedence to the zoning ordinance where the zoning ordinance conflicts with
the comprehensive plan merely validates local interpretation and experience.
Further, according to survey respondents, either there is very little
inconsistency in the Metropolitan Area, or the inconsistency that exists is
inconsequential. Most communities seem to comply with the MLPA requirements
that official controls not conflict with comprehensive plans, so the
opportunity to give the . zoning ordinance precedence is infrequent,
However, the impression that local comprehensive planning will persist in spite
of the new legislation must not give metropolitan communities or the
Metropolitan Council a false confidence . Keeping the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan consistent is an ongoing process requiring regular
monitoring. Perhaps a followup survey should be conducted in a year to see
whether communities have tended to defer planning to the zoning ordinance and
whether the legislation is still working or has become a detriment to planning.
In the meantime, metropolitan communities need to strengthen their
comprehensive plans so that they continue to provide a useful framework for
land use and zoning decisions, An ongoing effort should also be made to
eliminate inconsistencies as they arise, making sure to retain the . validity of
the comprehensive plan as the 1 onge r- range planning guide,
MS4266
13
CONTACT PERSON
Name
Position
Phone Number
PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY
1. Before this survey, were you aware of the 1985 am to the
Metropolitan Land Planning Act stating, that the zoning ordinance takes
precedence over the comprehensive plan where the two conflict?
Yes No
20 Has your community officially adopted a comprehensive plan?
Yes ____ Date Adopted No
3 a. Has your community officially adopted a zoning ordinance
( including text and map) ? Yes Date Adopted No
b. Do you use another jurisdiction's zoning ordinance (e.g. a township
under the county's zoning ordinance) ? Yes . Whose _..__ No
4.a. Was the Zoning ordinance consistent with the comprehensive plan at the
time either the zoning ordinance or comprehensive plan were first
adopted? -Yee No _
b. If not, did you correct the inconsistencies at that time?
Yes Within what period of time No
5 a. Since adoption of your comprehensive plan, has the plan been amended in
any way? Yes No
b. If yes, please note the types of changes (e.go minor text revision, Land
Use Plan change, total rewrite) and assign a percentage per type:
e. What normally prompted the amendments?
do In ' your opinion, did changes in the comprehensive plan create an
inconsistency with your Zoning ordinance?
Frequently Sometimes _„_ Rarely Never
e. If yes, did you then ascend the zoning ordinance to remove the
inconsistency (in the majority of cases) ? Yes „� No
6 .a.. Since adoption of the zoning ordinance, has the ordinance (text or map)
been amended? Yes No
b . If yes, please note the types of changes ( e . g. text or map) and assign a
percentage per type:
c. What normally prompted the am ndments?
d. In your opinion, did changes in the zoning ordinance create an
inconsistency with your comprehensive plan?
Frequently Sometimes Rarely Never
e. If yes, did you then amend the comprehensive plan to remove the
inconsistency C ino the majority of cases) ? Yes No
f . If no , are you in the process of doing so? Yes No
7 . a . In general, is inconsistency between the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan a problem in. your community? Yes No
b. If yes, please give two examples:
8. How does your community define "consistency" between the zoning ordinance
- and comprehensive plan?
9. In your community's experience, where there has been an inconsistency
between the comprehensive plan and a zoning ordinance, how was the issue
raised and how was it resolved?
1019 Now legislation aside, which should take precedence?
Comprehensive plan Zoning ordinance
Why?
11. As you see it, will the new legislation create a problem in your
community in implementing either the comprehensive plan or the zoning
ordinance? Yes. No
n
Explain
PLEASE ENCLOSE ANY ISSUES PAPERS, LEGAL OPINIONS, ETC. DEALING WITH THE
CONSISTENCY ISSUE. THANK YOU.
MS4102
D. Zon i n& and Land Use Plan Consistency
Secretary Olson the survey gives the results regarding consistenc Y between
the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances. Metropolitan Council prepared
this survey. It is suggested that the council adopt the planning
commission's
position on this issue.
The planning commission reviewed the results of the survey,
Commissioner Fischer moved the planning commission recommend- the city ty council
endorse the following position on the zoning and land use 1 an consistency:
P
We agree that the metropolitan council should be concerned where land is zoned f or
a higher intensity of use than shown on the 1 an. A significant n i f i cane
P g t acreage of
this kind of land could have an adverse effect on planning for regional onal s
The land use planning act should 8 ystems.
p g ould be amended to require that the zoning and
land use plan be consistent in thse cases.
We question the timeliness of rezoning when the zoning i s less s i n ten i
intensive than
the land use plan.. Many cities delay this type of rezoning until i t i s requested
equested
by a developer and a specific plan is proposed. This allows the - city
neighborhood to se and
nei
8 e what they are getting and negotiate for improvements if
needed. This strategy is especially important when rezoning round single— hborhoods. Most n 8 —
dwelling nei 8 e
8 t eighborhoods will oppose rezonings without
specific proposals, because they fear the unknown and assume the r
wo s t .
Whether a city chooses to use this strategy or.not should be a local ca zoning
• decision. The metropolitan council should not be involved i f there i
. e s no
adverse effect on regional systems unless it becomes apparent that h '
rand ignoring i pp the city is
flagrantly Y 8 g is approved comprehensive plan.
Commissioner Sigmundik seconded A es- -Commission r A
Cardinal Fi sch r y e s xdahl, Garrett.
e, F i of a, Hanson. Larson, Rossbach, S l etten, S i 8 mund i k
xncil
MEMORANDUM
Re `2 ected.,
J.
TOO Actin Cit Mana Da"U'e
FROM: Actin Cit En
SUBJECT: Water Service District 6 Improvements
Cit Project 86-03B
A With Water Utilit on Furness Parkwa
DATE, Februar 2, 1987
Attached is a cop of an a between the Board of Water
Commissioners and the Cit of Maplewood for construction of a water
main alon Furness Parkwa to provide additional water suppl to
Maplewood's Beebe Road pumpin station. The a states that in
return for the easements and ri of connection that Maplewood would
provide the follo
10 Pa for easements of $9,879.00,
2* An easement across the Hillcrest Countr Club drivin ran
3* Construction of the water main to board standards.
4* Pa to the board for inspection costs.
5* Transfer of title to the board for the water main one y ear after
acceptance of the main.
6. Indemnification to the board and the Cit of St. Paul,
7* Insurance to Cit of St. Paul specifications.
Finall the a states that dependin upon the ne water
service a the board would reimburse Maplewood for all costs of
the project. If the future a provides for retail arran
then the board would reimburse Maplewood for all costs, however, if
the a is for a wholesale s then no reimbursement would
occur. This a is consistent with the board's polic with
other "retail" and "wholesale" municipalities,
It is recommended that the council approve this a and
authorize the $9,879.00 easement pa b passin the attached
resolution.
3C
r!�
S
C
J
}
v
. a.
.. .. 1. .. .. .. ... ,. ::: .�.. C
VAT R,
. -.
9
K
tt. .. -
AGREEIlEHT
.d .•'ti3w �X L > •Y
f
4
X
f . y
A,- .. wr'3 L.. , � �?r .rY. rh,. ,u .i,-. J ✓F .k. s. «:;,j:1
'' .t i ,c :tip C.1 -..;• .... i'�: - ` . {.a3 .iF <.' 7 }. ° �' .. ....,'::. r_,. . >�... l r .. `. t..'. ... � i ::�1 K y�S. { .t o ,� ;..
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered this day of
1987, by and between the Board of Comm' issi oners of the
City of Saint Paul, . hereinafter "BOARD", and the City of
Maplewood, hereinafter *MAPLEWOOD
WHEREAS, There exists an agreement between Board and
Maplewood providing for the sale and supply of rater to the
inhabitants and businesses of the City of Maplewood by Board, -
and which agreement sets forth the duties and obligations
pertaining thereto on behalf of Board and Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, Maplewood desires to have an additional watermai
connection from the Board's watersupply to Maplewood's Beebe
pump station, and the'Board is willing to comply with this
request=
NOW THEREFOR, In order to accomplish the above purpose, the
parties hereto do hereby agree as follows
1) BOARD'S OBLIGATIONS. Bosrd.shall acquire watermain
easements in property along Furness Parkway between Larpenteur
Avenue and Idaho Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota, sufficient to
allow - the construction and maintenance of a watermain in said
easement.. The property is currently owned by the City of Saint
Paul and is under the jurisdiction of the City's Department of
• Community Services. The cost of these easements is estimated to
be $9, 879.00, shall be paid for by Maplewood and shall be
considered to be part of the cost of the project.
2) MAPLEWOOD'S OBLIGATIONS.
a) Maplewood shall acquire a.30-foot wide easement for
public watermain purposes over private property from Idaho
Avenue to the Board's Hillcrest Reservoir property, said
easement to be held in the name of the Board and its location
shall be subject to approval of the Board's General Manager.
The cost of this easement, as paid for by Maplewood, shall be
part of the cost of. the project. Maplewood shall record the.
easement document and provide the Board with a certified
recorded copy thereof.
b) Maplewood shall construct the new watermain within the
easements and public rights -of -way according to the plans and
specifications approved by the Board's General Manager, and
shall pay all costs associated with said construction. Board
shall connect the watermain to the Board's existing 24 -inch main
near the Hillcrest Reservoir and shall be reimbursed for costs
incurred therefor by Maplewood. All costs of construction and
connection shall be part of the cost of the project.
c) Maplewood shall provide Board's engineering staff with
a minimum of three days advance notice prior to commencing
construction of the watermain and shall permit the Board's
engineering staff with opportunities to view and inspect-the
construction of the watermain. Maplewood shall reimbruse Board
f f or. th project,, inspection costs,
o which costs Shall be part of the cost
d? Upon completion of'construction and one year after
acceptance of the main by Maplewood from its contractor
Maplewood shall transfer title to the watermain to the Board.
Thereafter Board shall be responsible for the maintenance and
repair of said watermain.
3) PERMISSI0N TO ENTER BOARD'S PROPERTY. Permission and
authority are hereby granted to Maplewood and to its contractor
to enter upon Board's easements and right-of-way or the purpose
ose p p
of constructing the watermain, subject to the following
covenants:
INDEMNITY. Maplewood shall protect, hold harmless and
defend Board and the City of Saint Paul, its officers and
employees, against all liability, claims, demands and
actions or causes of action whatsoever, and shall promptly
pay and satisfy any and all valid claims and judgments,
costs and expenses, including costs of defense, arising out
of loss of or damage to property or injury to or death of
person, or persons by rea=son of or alleged to have been
caused by, resulting from or growing out of, directly or
indirectly, wholly or in part, or because of, design,
construction, maintenance, alteration or other operations in
respect to the construction of the subject watermain by
Maplewood and /or its contractor.
INSURANCE. Maplewood shall require that its contractor take
out and maintain during the performance of any work within
the Board's easements and rights -of -way contemplated by this
agreement liability insurance insuring the contractor,
Maplewood, Board and the City of Saint Paul as point
insureds, the minimum amounts of such liability insurance
shall be as follows:
Bodily injury insurance (including death) in an amount
of not less than $300,000 for all damages arising out
of bodily injuries to or death of one person, and
subject to the same limits for each person in a total
of not less than $600,000 on account of any one
occurrence.
Property damage insurance in an amount of not less
thanb *300,p000 for all damages to or destruction of
property in any one occurrence, and subject to that
limit per occurrence= further subject to a total of not
less than $600, OOO for all damages to or destruction of
property during the policy period.
.. �✓'tw. r,. 2r`.4r.7G 92:4T,y+,[T ;+F' " [ ... .. .. t .. . ..... ,.. _ .. ...
Said insurance shall include the provision that it
cannot 'be altered or cancelled except upon thirty as
written notice to the y Y Y
Board, and such insurance shall
meet with the .approval of the City Attorney of the City
._ Y Y
Of Saint Paul.
4) FUTURE REIMBURSEMENT. Board and Maplewood are
e
currently negotiating a renewal of the existing water service
agreement. In the event that this future agreement shall
provide a "full service retail - type" arrangement, then and in
that event Board shall reimburse Maplewood for the entire
cost
of the project as provided for in this a reementa The cost st of
the project includes costs associated with the acquisition
q of
easements, inspection services of the Board, construction of the
watermain from and including the connection to the Board's
existing 24 -inch watermain northerly -to the city imits of
Ma
u _ levood t Lar enteu - Y _
P p r Avenue),, and:- costs of connection to * the
existing Board's 24- -inch main. However if the future agreement
� nt
provides for a "wholesale- type arrangement, then and in that
event Board shall not be obligated to reimburse Maplewood for
project,
the costs of the P
This agreement is made and executed pursuant to and under
the authority of a resolution adopted by the Board the d a y
of 1987 and of a resolution ado ted b
Council t p y
the Maplewood City he day of ,
1987, a certified copy of said resolutions being nnexed hereto
o
and by this reference incorporated in and made part hereof the
same as If set forth herein verbatim.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed these
presents on the days and year first above written.
APPROVED:
General Manager
FORM APPROVED:
Assistant City Attorney
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL
By
President
By
Finance Dept. Director
9
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
By
Mayor
By
Secretary
By
City Clerk
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the council has ordered made City Project 86 -03B, Water
Service District 6 Improvements, and
WHEREAS, the approved project plans call for construction of
water main from the Beebe Road pumping station to the Board of Water
Commissioners' of the City of St. Paul Hillcrest Reservior through
property along Furness Parkway which is owned by the City of St. Paul,
and
WHEREAS, an agreement exists between the Board of Water
Commissioners and the City of Maplewood providing for the supply of
water to the inhabitants and businesses of the City of Maplewood by
the Board of Water Commissioners;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, as follows:
1. The agreement allowing for the easements and rights of
connection for the water main located on property along Furness
Parkway for City Project 86 -03B, Water Service District 6
Improvements is hereby approved and the mayor and city clerk are
authorized and directed to execute said agreement.
29 The payment of $9,879.00 to the Board of Water
Commissioners for the Furness Parkway easements as described in
said agreement is hereby approved.
�
.7 '
MEMORANDUM
TO: Acting City Manager
FROM: Acting City Engineer
SUBJECT: Water Service District 6 Improvements
City Project 86 -03A
Stillwater Road Elevated Tank Change Order 1
DATE: February 2, 1987
t b
tr
Attached is a change order on the elevated tank portion of the above -
named project. The work covered by this change order is for a
connection from the tower directly to the distribution system in
Stillwater Road and will serve as a redundant supply line. This
connection was contemplated as a future main in the preliminary
design, however, with the tank location moved closer to Stillwater.
Road this short connection (65 feet) is recommended for installation
with this contract to avoid disturbance with future construction to
the easement site, the school district or Stillwater Road.
It is recommended that the council approve this change order by
passing the attached resolution.
jC
SHOftT- ELLIOTT- HENDftICKSON INC*
CHANGE ORDER
DATE: January 9, 1987 LOCATION • l MG Tank /Service Dist. 6
CHANGE 0RDE8 N0. 1 City of Maplewood
OWNER
PROJECT NO. 86 -03 FILE NO.: 86151
Nature of Change
Description and Cost:
For the additional connection to
the inplace 8" watermain in Stillwater
Road, add the
following:
Estimated
Unit
Total
Item
Unit
Quantity
Price
Price
16" DIP Watermain (CL. 52)
LF
65
* 48.00
$3,120.00
M.J. DI. Fittings
LB
595
* 2.00
1,190.00
16" Butterfly valve & Box
EA
2
1450
6 , 9 0 0.0 0
Agg. Base. C15 (100% Crushed)
TON
18.7
* 30000
561.00
Bituminous Base, 2331 (Patch)
TON
8 o 7
*300..00
2
Bituminous Wearing, 2341 (Patch)
TOOT
6.5
*300000
1, 950.00
Sodding
SY
200
* 2.00
400.00
Traffic Control
LS
1
275.00
275.00
Remove & Replace Fence
LS
1
300.00
300.00
*Bid Price
Total Add
$17,306.00
Is Cost Actual or Estimated? Estimated
This authorizes Contractor to perform this work as part of Base Contract when signed by all parties.
Recommended for Approval: Short- Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
B3'- • �y�" Approved for Owner: %
Agreed to Contract YDR ORAGE, INC. By .X
B Title CO NTRACTING ENGINEER By
Contractor 2
Owner 1
Distribution
Resident En
1 St. Paul Office
I
Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc.
222 East Little Canada Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55117
RESOLUTION
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONTRUCTION CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the Cit Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore
order made Improvement Project 86-03A, Water Service District 6
Improvements (Elevated Tank) and has let a construction contract to
H Inc. therefor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,, Chapter-l-'
429, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessar and expedient that said contract be
modified and desi as Improvement Project 86-03A, Chan Order 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the ma and cit clerk are hereb authorized and
directed to modif the existin contract b executin said Chan
Order 10
MEMORANDUM
TO: Actin Cit Mana
FROM: Actin Cit En
SUBJECT: Water Service District 6 Improvements
Cit Project 86-03B
Water Main Easement Approval
DATE: Februar 2, 1987
A has been reached with the Hillcrest Countr Club for a water
main easement across the drivin ran near Furness Parkwa The
easement is to be ac in the name of the Board of Water
Commissioners at Maplewood's expense. The offer made to the countr
club was $14,680.00 or approximatel $1.00 per s foot for the 50-
f oot wide easement. The feasibilit report estimated that Maplewood
would need to expend an additional $39,000.00 if the easement could
not be obtained from the countr club (Maplewood does not have
condemnation power outside of the cit and a new main location were
re
It is recommended that the council approve this easement pa b
passin the attached resolution,
jc
RESOLUTION -- APPROVING EASEMENT PAYMENT
WHEREAS, the council has ordered City Project 86 -03, Water
Service District 6 Improvements, and
WHEREAS, the council intends to levy assessments against
benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, water main easements are required for the project
through property owned by the Hillcrest Country Club located within
the City of St. Paul;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that payment in the amount of $14,680.00 to the Hillcrest
Country Club for water main easements is hereby approved.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Acting City Manager
FROM: Acting City Engineer
SUBJECT: County Road C water Main
City Project 86 -04
Ordering Assessment Roll
DATE: February 2, 1987
Ac -b on by Councilfl
Date
Bids were received and opened for the above -named project on January
28, 1987 at 10 a.m. This is the second bid opening for this project.
In August 1986 the council, upon staff recommendation, rejected the
two bids received because it was believed a more competititve market
would exist in an earlier season bid. This second bid attracted ten
bidders with the low bidder, F. M. Frattalone Excavating, Inc.,
submitting a bid of $137,193.00 which is $8,400 below the engineer's
estimate and $23,000 below the August'1986 low bid. Nine of the ten
bids received were below the August 1986 low bid.
It is recommended that the council accept the bids and order the
preparation of an assessment roll based upon the lowest responsible
bid from F. M. Frattalone Excavating, Inc, by passing the attached
resolution.
j c
TABULATION OF BIDS
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the
officials designated for a bid opening by the City Council of
Maplewood was convened at 10 a.m., at the Maplewood City Hall on
January 28, 1987. The purpose of this meeting was receive, open
and publicly read aloud bids for construction of City Project 86 -04,
County Road C Water Main.
Present were: R. Charles Ahl of Maplewood and Larry Bohrer of TKDA,
Inc.
Following the reading of the notice of advertisement for bids, the
following bids were opened and read:
BIDDER
BID AMOUNT
BID BOND
F . M. Frattalone
$137 ,193 . X10
5%
M. Danner Trucking
139,603.75
50
B & D Underground
139,878.46
5%
Albrecht Excavating
141,824.50
5%
Lake Area Utility
142,857oOO
50
Co W. Houle, Inc.
146,277950
50
Lametti & Sons
148
50
Arcon Construction
155,138.90
5%
Civil Structures
157,492.00
50
H. B. H. Construction
205 , 553.5 1
5%
Pursuant to prior instruction of the council, the city clerk referred
the bids received to the city engineer instructing him to tabulate
same and report with his recommendation at the regular city council
meeting of February 9, 1987.
Meeting adjourned at 10:15 a.m.
RESOLUTION
ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, the cit clerk and cit en have presented the
final bid fi for the improvement titled Cit Project 86-04,
Count Road C Water Main,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the cit clerk and cit en shall forthwith
calculate the proper amount to be speciall assessed for such
improvement a ever assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
abuttin on the streets affected, without re to cash valuation, as
provided b law, and the shall file a cop of such proposed
assessment in the cit office for inspection.
FURTHER, the clerk shall, upon completion of such proposed
assessment notif the council thereof,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Actin Cit Mana
FROM: Actin Cit En
SUBJECT: Arkwri Street--Eldrid Avenue to Count Road C
Cit Project 86-12
Orderin Assessment Roll
DATE: Februar 2, 1987
on b C ounc 11 3L
SrIE,
------ '=Wu�
o z1 d�
e C t e
D
to
Bids are to be received and opened for the construction of Arkwri
Street on Februar 5, 1987 at 2 p.m. A tabulation of the bids and a
report on the low bidder will be supplied to the council at the
Februar 9 meetin If the bids are considered reasonable, the staff
report will recommend that the council accept the bids and order the
prepar of an assessment roll based upon the lowest responsible
bid*
MEMORANDUM
TO: Acting City Manager
FROM: Acting City Engineer
SUBJECT: Hillwood Drive -- Crestview Drive to Marnie Street
City Project 86 -05
Ordering Assessment Roll
DATE: February 2, 1987
f' A� 1� - � : � - "L �:.,!' � 2.1' ' x . m
6 O "1
D ate
Bids are to be received and opened for the above -named project on
February 6, 1987 at 10 a.m. A tabulation of the bids and a report on
the low bidder will be supplied to the council at the February 9
meeting. If the bids appear reasonable, the staff report will
recommend that the council accept the bids and order the preparation
of an assessment roll based upon the lowest responsible bid.
_7" - 9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ma and Cit Council
FROM: Actin Cit Mana
SUBJECT: Buildin Maintenance
DATE: Februar 3, 1987
ActJ on b Coun
L _ Oil
0i
Endors
Irlodif I
Dat
At the last meetin a proposal to increase the buildin maintenance
staff was presented to the council. The proposal was not approved.
Normall the item would not be presented a until bud time. I
do believe, however, that the proposal did not suppl sufficient
detail or information for the council,
Current staffin is two .full -time and one part-time emplo in
buildin maintenance. The proposal is to add a full-time position and
eliminate the part-time position.
Present
2 full-time
1 part-time
Proposed
3 full-time
0 part-time
Another item concerns the bud transfer. Assumin the position
would not be filled until mid-March the bud transfer would be
$17,100 or $4,500 less than reported earlier,
jc
a
MEMORANDUM Action by Council :,
Endorse
TO: Mayor & City Counci 1 Y ied.-.
,
FROM: Acting City Manager Fe�ecte
i
.SUBJECT: Building Maintenance Date
DATE: January 20, 1987
During the 1987 Budget preparation it was im p anticipate impossible to
the personnel needs for building maintenance. It was agreed to wait
until January 1,1987 to assess the situation.
The New City Hall, one floor of the Ol d City Ha and the Public Works
Building require. servi at this time. It i s anti thi situati
w i l l continue for some time. It has become obvious that the two full
and one part -time janitors cannot be expected to adequatel y maintain this
much space. Even the most routine items, like trashing and light floor
care, are not always satisfactory. There is virtually no time available
for extended or special maintenance like stripping and waxing floors. In
addition, snow removal and grounds maintenance has not yet required much
attention due to the mild weather.
It is recommended that a budget transfer from the Contingency Account be
authorized in the amount of $21,580. This would fund an additional
full -time Building Maintenance Person. In addition, it is requested that
the City Council authorize hiring an individual to fill the proposed new
position. _
KGH :1 n b
,L —/D
U17Mr)D AKIM IM
Ac til on b Co unc - 1:
Endorsed
To: Ken Haider, Actin Cit Mana Modified
From: Robert D. Ode Director of Parks and Recreatio
io6p Rejected..
Subj: Replacement of Park Foreman
Date: Februar 2, 1987
It is re that the Cit authorize the hirin of a new Park
Foreman,
✓ cc: Cit Clerk
Action on by Council :�
February 4, 1987
Bndorse
MEMORANDUM Mode f e
"R e eete m .�te
To: Acting City Manager Kenneth Haider
From: Director of Publ Safety Kenneth V. Col 1 i ns �
Subject: Request Approval For Promotions
There currently exists a vacancy in the Maplewood Police Department for
the position of Captain. This vacancy is in the budget and was at the time
the budget was approved by the City Council,
The Civil Service Commi on tested for this posi tion in the l atter P art
of 1986 and has recently established an eligibility list,
As we have previously discussed, it is my intention to streamline the
structure of the Maplewood Police Department. Part of this streamli.nin
9
and reorganization called for the reduction or chang of certain ranks:.
The reorganization as I.have laid it out to you and previous City Managers
calls for one Department Head and two Captains. One Captain would be
responsible for the services portion of the Police Department (administration),
and the other Captain's position would be responsible for operations (patrol
and investigation).
It is my request at,this time to appoint the second Captain to carry out
this part of the reorganization.
The appointment of a new Captain would leave a vacancy in the Sergeants'
rank, and I would request that an individual be appoi to fill thi s
vacancy from the current eligibility list.
Your earliest review and approval of this matter would be greatly appreciated.
KVC: j s
A-Opf--1
Ac r ouncil:
Endorsed
� Modified
Re,{ ectedr�_
Date
00.0
tow-, ft.
l �� c Gi _ , / �`. B,