Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 07-22 City Council Packet(A) CALL TO ORDER AGENDA MaDlewood City Council 7:00 P.M., Monday, July 22, 1985 Municipal Administration Building Meeting 85 -15 (g) _ROLL CALL (C) APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes 85 -14, Meet ng July 8 , 1985 (D) APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4} (E) C AGENDA All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion in the form 1 i sted below. There wi 11 be no separate discussion on these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separtely. 10 Accounts Payable i 2. Budget Transfer - Beam Avenue 30 Century Center - Accident Report 4. Final Plat - Westwinds of Maplewood (F) PUBLIC HEARINGS 10 7:00 - Plan Amendment: Harmony School (.Continuation) 20 7:00 - Code Amendment: M-1 & M -2 Di stricts (2nd Reading) Tax- Exempt Financing: Mapleridge Estates Tax - Exempt Financing: Century Ridge Apartments Variance: White Bear Avenue (Edina Realty) ` ff (H) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Plan Amendment & Rezoning: Hwy. 36 -Cope Ave, (.Hillcrest) 2. Preliminary Plat & Rezoning: Broshears' Addi ti'on 39 Code Amendment - Parking (Reconsideration) (I) NEW BUSINESS 1. Plan Review: Mapl Ridge Square 2. Older Adult Home - Share Program 3, Tax - Exempt Financing Fee Revision 4, Maplewood Community Education Advisory Committee 5. Muni cipal Legislative Commission 6. Civil Service Commission 70 Department of Parks & Recreation (J) VISITOR PRESENTATIONS (K) COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. 2. 3. 4* , 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. (L) ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS ( ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M., Monday, July 8, 1985 Council Chambers, Municipal Building Meeting No. 85 -14 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 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Greavu. B. ROLL CALL John C. Greavu, Mayor Present Norman G. Anderson, Councilmember Present Gary W. Bastian, Councilmember Present MaryLee Maida, Councilmember Absent Charlotte Wasiluk, Councilmember Present C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes No. 85 -13 (June 24, 1985) Councilmember Anderson moved to approve the Minutes of Meeting No. 85 -13 (June 24, 1985) as submitted. D Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Greavu moved to approve the agenda as amended 1. Farm Use Designation 2. Fourth of July 3. Castle Avenue 4. Commissions 5. High Voltage Study 6. C..D.R.B. 7. Transit Board Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. E. CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Bastian moved, Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk, Ayes - all, to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1 through 5, as recommended; 1. Accounts Payable Approved the accounts (Part I - Fees, Services, Expenses Check Register dated June 26, 1985 through June 28, 1985 - $375,296.58; Part II - Payroll dated June 25, 1985, Gross amount - $126,615.38) in the amount of $491,801.96. 7/8 2. Budget Changes - Insurance Approved the following budget transfer to cover the cost of insurance contracts: Contingency Unreserved Account Fund Equity $27,770 General Fund 4,080 $24,020 Hydrant Charge Fund 5,940 10,490 V.E.M. Fund $37,790 $34,510 Total 3. Time Extension - Crestview Forest Approved a four year time extension for the planned unit development and for the portion of the preliminary plat designated as Phases 3, 4 and 5 of the Crestview Forest Addition. 4. Time Extension - St. Paul Business Center East Approved the renewal of the Planned Unit Development for the St. Paul Business Center East for one year. 5. Acceptance of Coin Club Donation Accepted a donation of $50.00 from the Maplewood Coin Club towards the purchase of cardtable chairs to be used at the Heritage Center. A letter of appreciation will be sent to the Maplewood Coin Club. F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 P.M. IDR Western State Bank a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the request of WAV, Inc., 1740 Rice Street, for a $2,300,000 Industrial Revenue Note to con- struct an office building. b. Manager Evans presented the staff report. c. Mr. Dennis Prchal, representing WAV, Inc. spoke on behalf of the request. d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. The following were heard: Mr. George Rossbach, 1405 E. County Road D Mr. Don Bachmeier, St. Paul Business Center e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard. f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Anderson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption , - 2 - 7/8 85 - 7 - 99 RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT UTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT TO THE ENERGY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT WHEREAS, (a) The purpose of Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes, known as the Minnesota Industrial Development Act (the "Act ") as found and determined by the legislature is to promote the welfare of the state by the active attraction and encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce to prevent so far as possible the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic un- employment; (b) Factors necessitating the active promotion and development of economically sound industry and commerce are the increasing concentration of population in the metropolitan areas and the rapidly rising increase in the amount and cost of govern- mental services required to meet the needs of the increased population and the need for development of land use which will provide an adequate tax base to finance these increased costs and access to employment opportunities for such population. (c) The City Council of the City of Maplewood (the "City ") has received from WAV Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the "Company ") .a proposal that the City assist in financing a Project hereinafter described, through the issuance of a Revenue Bond or Bonds or a Revenue Note or Notes hereinafter referred to in this resolution as "Revenue Bonds" pursuant to the Act; (d) The City desires to facilitate the selective development of the community, retain and improve the tax base and help to provide the range of services and em- ployment opportunities required by the population; and the Project will assist the City in achieving those objectives. The Project will help to increase assessed valuation of the City and help maintain a positive relationship between assessed valuation and debt and enhance the image and reputation of the community; (e) The Company is currently engaged in the business of ownership, improvement and operation of real estate used by Western State Bank of St. Paul and others. The Project to be financed by -.the Revenue Bonds is an approximately 24,700 square foot three -story commercial bank and office building located at 1740 Rice Street in Maplewood and leased to Western State Bank of St. Paul and consists of the con- struction of buildings and improvements thereon and the installation of equipment therein to be initially owned and operated by the Company, and will result in the employment of additional persons to work within the new facilities; - 3 - 7(8 (f) The City has been advised by representatives of Company that conventional, commercial financing to pay the capital cost of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility - of operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but Company has also advised this Council that the Project would not be undertaken but for the availability of industrial bond financing; (g) Pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted on June 24, 1985, a. public hearing on the Project was held on July 8, 1985, after notice was published and materials made available for public inspection at the City Hall, all as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b at which public hearing all those appearing who so desired to speak were heard; (h) No public official of the City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The Council hereby gives preliminary approval to the proposal of Company that the City undertake the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act ( Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes), consisting of the construction and equipping of an approximately 24,700 square foot three -story commercial bank and office building located at 1740 Rice Street within the City pursuant to Com- pany's specifications suitable for the operations described above to be initially owned and operated by the Company and pursuant to a revenue agreement between the City and Company upon such terms and conditions with provisions for revision from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the principal of and interest on the Revenue Bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $2,300,000 to be issued pursuant to the _Act to finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project; and said agreement may also provide for the entire interest. of Company therein to be mort- gaged to the purchaser of the Revenue Bonds; and the City hereby undertakes pre- liminarily to issue its Revenue Bonds in accordance with such terms and conditions; 2. On the basis of information available to this Council it appears, and the Council hereby finds, that the Project constitutes properties, real and personal, used or useful in connection with one or more revenue producing enterprises engaged in any business within the meaning of Subdivision la of purposes stated in Section 474.02 of the Act; that the Project furthers the purposes stated in Section 474.01, Minnesota Statutes;. that the Project would not be undertaken but for the availability of industrial bond financing; that the availability of the financing under the Act and willingness of the City to furnish such financing . will be a substantial inducement to Company to undertake the Project, and that the effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the development of economically sound industry and commerce, to assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and marginal land, to help prevent chronic unemployment, to help the City retain and improve the tax base and to provide the range of service and employment opportunities required by the population, to help prevent the movement of talented and educated persons out of the state and to areas within the State where their services may not be as effectively used, to promote more intensive development and use of land within the City and eventually to increase the tax base of the community; - 4 - 7/8 3. The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by the City subject to the approval of the Project by the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority or such other state officer having authority to grant approval (the - "Authority "), and subject to final approval by this Council, Company, and the purchaser of the Revenue Bonds as to the ultimate details of the financing of the Project; 4. In accordance with Subdivision 72 of Section 474.01 Minnesota Statutes, the Mayor of the City is hereby authorized and directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the Authority requesting its approval, and other officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to provide the Authority with such preliminary information as it may require; 5. Company has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the financing of the Project whether or not the Project is carried to completion and whether or not approved by the Author- ity will be paid by Company; 6. Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, acting as bond counsel, is authorized to assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents relating to the Project, to consult with the City Attorney, Company and the purchaser of the Revenue Bonds as to the maturities, interest rates and other terms and pro- visions of the Revenue Bonds and as to the covenants and other provisions of the necessary documents and to submit such documents to the Council for final approval; 7. Nothing in this resolution or in the documents prepared pursuant hereto shall authorize the expenditure of any municipal funds on the Project other than the revenues derived from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this purpose. The Revenue Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property or funds of the City except the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. The holder of the Revenue Bonds shall never have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the outstanding principal on the Revenue Bonds or the interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City. The Revenue Bonds shall recite in substance that the Revenue Bonds, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Revenue Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; 8. In anticipation of the approval by the Authority the issuance of the Revenue Bonds to finance all or a portion of the Project, and in order that com- pletion of the Project will not be unduly delayed when approved, Company is hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward payment of that portion of the costs of the Project to be financed from the proceeds of the Revenue Bonds as Company considers necessary, including the use of interim, short -term financing, subject to reimbursement from the proceeds of the Revenue Bonds if and when del- ivered but otherwise without liability on the part of the City; 9. If construction of the Project is not started within one year from the date thereof, this resolution shall thereafter have no force and effect and the preliminary approval herein granted is withdrawn. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, this 8th 'day of July, 1985. - 5 7/8 Mayor Attest: Clerk Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. 2. 7:00 P.M. Variance - Maplewood Manor Ayes - all. a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the request of Maplewood Manor Health Care Center for approval of a 7.5 foot front setback variance to construct a 7.5 x 23 foot sunroom addition. b. Manager Evans presented the staff report. C. Mr. Leon Rotering,.Administrator of Maplewood Maple Manor Health Care Center, spoke on behalf of the proposal. d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard. e. Player Greavu called for opponents. None were heard. f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Bastian introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption 85 - 7 - 100 WHEREAS, Leon Rotering of Maplewood Maple Manor Health Care Center applied for a variance for the following- described property: Unplatted lands, the north 330 feet, of the East 300 feet of the West 475 feet of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4, subject to the avenue, Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, City of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota. This . property is also known as 550 E. Roselawn Avenue, Maplewood; WHEREAS, Section 36- 122(f) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires a thirty -foot front setback; WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to reduce the front setback to 22.5 feet, requiring a variance of seven and one -half feet; WHEREAS, the procedural history of this variance is as follows: 1. This variance was applied for on May 22, 1985. 2. This variance was reviewed by the Maplewood Community Design Review Board on June 25, 1985. The Board recommended to the City Council that said variance be approved. - 6 - 7/8 3. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing on July 8, 1985 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 recommend- . ations of the City Staff and Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the above - described variance be approved on the basis of the following findings of fact: 1. Strict enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship, since the building is already at the thirty -foot minimum setback line and there is no other feasible place to construct the addition. 2. The spirit and intent of the ordinance would be met since the addition would not obstruct any sight lines, due to the mature trees on this and adjacent lots. 3. The addition is relatively small compared to the overall building. 4. The canopy already extends into the setback. Seconded by Councilmember Anderson. Ayes - all. 3. 7:10 P.M. Preliminary Plat - Broshears' Addition a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding approval of the Broshears' preliminary plat and approval to rezone the property at the northeast corner of Highwood and McKnight Road from F Farm - residence to R -1, single dwelling. b. Manager Evans presented the staff report. C. The Planning Commission report was presented. d. Mr. George Broshears, the owner of the property, spoke on behalf of his requests. e. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard. f. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. The following were heard: Mr. Roger Richer, 2272 Phyllis Court q. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. h. Mayor Greavu moved to table this item until such time as the applicant and his associates further investigate the proposal. Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. 4. 7:20 P.M., Code Amendment : Parking (1st Reading) a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding a code amendment of the general parking requirements for commercial multiple dwelling. b. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. - 7 - 7/8 C. Boardmember George Rossbach presented the following Community Design Review Board recommendation: Board Member Rossbach moved the board recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the parking requirements as amended by the board as follows: 1. Section 36 -22 (a) (8) add after "One space for each two (2) Employees" "or 1 space for each 400 square feet of manufacturing use and 1 space for each 1000 square feet of warehousing space, whichever is greater." 2. Eliminate from Section 36 -22 (b) "Parking spaces designated for 'employees only' may be reduced to a minimum width of 8 1/2 feet." 3. Eliminate from Section 36 -22 (d) "Parks and." 4. Section 36 -140 "(i)" should be changed to "(h)" Board Member Peterson seconded Ayes - Board Members Peterson, Rossbach, Deans Nays - Board Member Juker d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. The following were heard: Mr. Tom Zacharias, 305 E. 47th St., New York, New York (Officer of the firm that owns Maplewood Mall) Mr. Henry Nichols, Ramon -Keeys Associates, Consulting engineering for the Maplewood Mall) e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. None were heard. f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Bastian moved first reading of an ordinance to amend the code regarding general parking requirements for commercial and multiple dwelling Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Mayor Greavu moved an amendment to require two (2) parking spaces per apart- ment unit Seconded by Councilmember Anderson. Ayes - Mayor Greavu, Councilmembers Anderson and Bastian. Nay - Councilmember Wasiluk Voting on original motion including the amendment. Ayes - Mayor Greavu, Councilmember Bastian. Nay - Councilmembers Anderson and Wasiluk. - 8 - 7/8 5. 7:30 P.M., Assessment Hearing : McClelland Watermain a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the adoption of the assessment roll for the McClelland Street watermain Project 84 -14. b.. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. C. Assistant Engineer Churck Ahl presented the specifics of the improvement. d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard. e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. The following were heard: Mr. Edward Dohua, 206 McClelland Mr. Dennis Johnson, 204 McClelland Mrs. Diane Johnson, 204 McClelland A written objection from David Arnold, 2579 Brookview Drive f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Mayor Greavu moved to reduce the cost per front foot by $5.00 ($39.96 per front foot) and to reduce the footage on Parcel No. 1 to 122.42 feet Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. h. Mayor Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption 85 - 7 - 101 RESOLUTION ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the construction of the McClelland Street Water Main as de- scribed in the files of the City Clerk as Project Number 84 -04, and has amended such proposed assessment as it deems just, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNE- SOTA: 1. Such ,proposed assessment, as amended, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall con- stitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be bene- fited by the proposed "improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments ex- tending over a period of 20 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or after the first Monday in January, 1986, and shall bear interest at the rate of ten (10) percent per annum from - 9 - 7/8 the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1985. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council to re- imburse itself in the future for the portion of the cost of this improvement paid for from municipal funds by levying additional assessments, on notice and hearing as provided for the assess- ments herein made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not made, upon any properties abutting on the improvement but not herein assessed for the improvement, when changed conditions relating to such properties make such assessment feasible. 4. To the extent that this improvement benefits non - abutting proper- ties which may be served by the improvement when one or more later extensions or improvements are made, but which are not herein as- sessed, therefore, it is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council, as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 429.051, to reimburse the City by adding any portion of the cost so paid to the assessments levied for any of such later extension or improve- ments. 5. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. 6. 7:40 P.M., Plan Amendment and Rezoning - Highway 61 between County Road C and Highway 36. a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding the proposed plan amendment and rezoning of the property on the west side of Highway 61 between County Road C and Highway 36. b. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. C. The Planning Commission recommendation was presented. d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard. e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. The following were heard: Mr. William J. Dunn, Attorney representing owners of property on Highway 61 Mr. Dennis Wheller, 967 Connor Mr. Stan Stenson, 2508 Forest Mr. Stanton Allen, 2620 Forest Street Mr. John Wyerman, 955 Brooks Court - 10 - 7/8 f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Anderson moved to table this item for further study Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. 7. 7:50 P.M., Plan Amendment and Rezoning : Castle Avenue (Hillcrest) a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding a plan amendment from RL, residential low density to BW business Warehouse and RM residential medium density and a rezoning from R -1, single family resi- dential and BC business commercial to M -1, light manufacturing and R -2 double dwelling, the property located on the south side of Highway 36 west of Ariel Street. b. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. C. The Planning Commission recommendation was presented. d. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. The following were heard: Mr. Geoff Jorpe, Attorney representing Hillcrest Development James Pamush, 7 West Golden Lake Road, Circle Pines e. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. The following were heard: Mrs. Marcia Haldren, 1927 E. Cope, read a letter from the area residents opposing the rezoning. (The letter became a permanent part of the record) Mr. Charles Themmes, 1928 Castle Avenue The resident at 1922 Castle Ave. Mr. Pat Haldren, 1927 E. Cope Avenue Mr. Fred Kreitz, 2242 Craig Place Mr. Tom Klaes, 2256 German St. Mrs. Helga Gehrke, 1917 E. Cope Avenue Mrs. Xelma Pitzl, 2060 Highway 36 Mr. Ken Niezgocki, 2271 Hazel St. f. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing. g. Councilmember Anderson moved to table this item until the meeting of July 22, 1985, to allow for the matter to be brought before a full Council. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. Mayor Greavu moved to waive the Rules of Procedures and discuss Item I -2 at a this time. Seconded by Councilmember Bastian. Ayes - all. I. NEW BUSINESS 2. Community Design Review Board Appointment. a. Mr. James Kochsiek introduced himself to the Council. b. Councilmember Bastian moved to appoint Mr . Ja Kochsiek to the Community - 11 - 7/8 Design Review Board Seconded by Councilmember Anderson. Ayes - all. G. AWARD OF BIDS None. H. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Ripley Avenue Water Main a. .Manager Evans presented the Staff report. b. Councilmember Anderson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption 85 - 7 - 102 WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on May 13, 1985, plans and specifications for Ripley Avenue Water Main, Project No. 85 -04, have been prepared by 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 MAPLE - WOOD, 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 2nd day of August, 1985, 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 50 of the amount of such bid. 3. The City Clerk and City Engineer are hereby authorized and instruc- ted to receive, ppen, 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 award of a contract, at the regular City Council meeting of August 12, 1985. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. I. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) - 1. 'Plan Amendment . Harmony'School a. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. - 12 - 7/8 b. Mr. Tony Danna, Attorney representing the developer, Smith Investment Properties, spoke on behalf of the proposal. c. Mr. Robert F. Ackerman, architect for the development, also spoke on behalf of the proposal. d. Mayor Greavu asked if anyone wished to be heard. The following expressed their opinions: Mrs. Delores Ethier, 2205 E. County Road C, presented a letter she had written opposing the development and also a petition from residents of North St. Paul opposing the development. e. Mayor Greavu moved to approve the plan amendment Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. f. Mayor Greavu withdrew his motion. g. Councilmember Bastian moved to table this item until the meeting of 22, 1985, for a full Council to be present Seconded by Councilmember Anderson. Ayes - all. 3. Tax - Forfieted Properties a. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. b. Councilmember Bastian introduced the following ten resolutions and moved their adoption 85 - 7 - 103 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following- described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 7, King's Addition to the City of St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota, Code Nos. 57- 41500 - 010 -07; 57- 41500- 020 -07, and 57- 41500- 030 -07, WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is, authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day,of July, 1985. - 13 - 7/8 85 - 7 - 104 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: Lot 4, Block 7, King's Addition to the City of St. Paul. Code No. 57- 41500- 040 -57. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. 85 - 7 - 105 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for street and utility purposes: Outlot A, King's Addition to the City of St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Code No. 57- 41500 - 010 -09. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City Officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for street and utility purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. a f. 85 - 7 - 106 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: Lot 25, Block 3, Maplecrest. Code No. 57- 48900 - 250 -03. - 14 - 7/8 WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City Officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax -. forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said -tax- forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. 85 - 7 - 107 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: Vacated street south of the adjoining and following: Part lying Northeasterly of the extended Northeasterly line of Lot 13 and Southwesterly of the extended Northeasterly line of Lot 12 of Lot 10, Block 3, Maplecrest Code No. 57- 48900 - 103 -03. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City Officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. 85 - 7 - 108 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for street and utility purposes: North 30 feet of Block One, Dearborn Park. Code No. 57- 22000 - 010 -01. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City Officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for street and utility purposes. - 15 - 7/8 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. 85 - 7 - 109 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following - described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: Subject to pipeline easement, Lot Seven, Block One, Wakefield Manor, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Code No. 57- 80800 - 070 -01. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. 85 - 7 - 110 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following- described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes: The North 160 feet of the South 450 feet of the East 300 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 29, Range 22. Code No. 57- 01810 - 010 -86. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the City's Comprehensive Plan. _ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the proper City Of£icials and hereby are authorized to make an application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax - forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the balance of the property may be sold. Adopted this 8th day of July, 1985. - 16 - 7/8 85 - 7 - 111 WHEREAS', the Board of County Commissioners of Ramsey County by resolu- tion dated October 15, 1984, classified as nonconservation land, certain land lying within the limits of the City of Maplewood; and WHEREAS,, acopy of the classification resolution together with a list of the land classified has been submitted for approval of the classification in accordance With Minnesota Statutes Annotated, Section 282.01, sub. 1; and WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that the following- - described tax - forfeited land is required for drainage purposes; Outlet A,. Maple Greens let Addition, Code. No. 57 =04. WHEREAS, the above acquisition would be consistent within the Cityls Comprehensive Plan, NOWT THEREIFORE�, -BE. IT RESOLVED, that said classification of the above- described land as. nonconservation land is hereby approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proper City Officials be and hereby Are authorized to make an application for conveyance of Outlot A, Maple Greens 1st Addition for drainage purposes; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized to file a certified - -copy of this resolution and application for conveyance of said tax- forfeited land in the Office of the Land Commissioner. Adopted this. 8th day of July, 1985, 85- 7 -112 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Ramsey County by Resolu- ti;on dated October 15, 1984, classified as nonconservation land, certain land lying within the limits of the City of MaplewoodF and WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has determined that retention of Outlet C Maple Greens 1st Addition (Code No. 57- 48950- 016 -06) would not serve a public purpose, it does not comply with the requirements for development and should be combined with adjoining developed properties for side and rear yard usage, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said classification of the above� described land as nonconservation land is hereby approvedF and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the above described parcel be withheld from sale by auctionfor - one year, during which time the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority will pursue the enactment of a tax - -forfeit land transfer program to dispose of substandard parcels to adjoining property owners. ,Seconded by CouncilmemberAnderson.. Ayes all, - 17 - 7/8 4. Code Amendment ; M =1 &M -2 District (15t Reading)_ a. Manager Evans presented the Staff_ report, b. Councilmember- Bastian moved first reading ofan - ordinanceamending the code to increase the distance from a - residential - district that a conditional use permit is - requiredfor - buildinginan M- 1, light manufacturing or M-2 heavy manufacturing district Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all, 5. Cable T,V, - Joint Powers Agreement, a. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. b. Councilmember Anderson introduced the following resolution and moved, its adoption 85 - 7 - 113 BE IT RESOLVED, that Article VI, Section 4 of the JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT OF THE RAMSEY/WASHINGTON COUNTIES SUBURBAN CABLE - COMMISSION be amended as follows: Section 4. Treasurer The Treasurer ` shall have custody of the Commis- sion's funds, shall pay its bills, shall keep its financial records and generally conduct the financial affairs of the Commission and for such other matters shall be delegated to him by the Commission. In conducting the Commission's financial affairs, the Treasurer shall, at all times, act in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Treasurer'are- ports, including any bills or claims to be acted upon by the Commission, shall be distributed to all directors not less than five (5) days prior to the meeting.. The Treasurer shall post a fidelity bond or other insurance in an amount approved by the Commission, The Commission shall bear the cost of the bond or insurance. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all, 6 M.H,F.A. - Resolution a, Manager Evans presented the Staff report,; b.- Councilmember Bastian introduced 'the °following resolution and moved its adoption: a .. 85 7 114 REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL HRA TO APPLY FOR AND IMPLEMENT A REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood desires to assist low income homeowners in making repairs to their homes for the purpose of correcting defects af- fecting directly the - safety, habitability, energy conservation, or accessi- bility of the - property; and, - 18 - 7/8 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency has funds to be used for such purposes, and will accept applications from housing and redevelopment authorities desiring to administer these Rehabilitation Loan Program funds; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has been duly organized pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1976, Section 473.123 and has all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1976, 473..193 under the provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes 1976, Sections 462.411 to 462.711; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Metropolitan Council is hereby requested to include the City of Maplewood in an application for state Re- habilitation Loan Program funds, and that the City Manager, Barry Evans, is hereby authorized to enter into any necessary agreement with the Metropolitan Council for operating the Program within the City. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. 7. Countryview Golf Course - Agreement. a, Manager Evans presented the Staff report. b. Councilmember Anderson authorized entering into an agreement with Coun- tryViewGolf- Courseinvolving - payingone -half the bill for placement of the nets on the golf course subject - tothe - City receiving a release from any further liability for the construction of Beam Aven and the City obtainin an agreement for full settlement as to - any - costsof Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all, 8,. Wesson Estate a. Manager Evans stated the attorneys handling the Wesson Estate have re- questeda compromise regarding the delinquent taxes and assessments levied against the property onthe - northwest corner of White Bear and Grevais'Avenues,. b. No action taken at this time, 9. Greenbrier Home, Inc, a• Manager Evans stated he had received letter from the Greenbrier Home, Inc „ requesting to speak before the Council regarding their proposal to open a group home for autistic adults in Maplewood.. b. No action taken,at this time. S. VISITOR PRESENTATION 1, Mike Mulroni, Broshear's Addition - 19 - 7/8 a. Mr. Mulroni stated he missed the public hearing regarding Broshear's Addition and wishes Council to consider his request for two lots on McKnight - Road. b. No action taken. K. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Farm Use Designation a. Councilmember Anderson requested a change from the zoning term F -Farm to F -Farm Residential so it isn't so confusing. b. No action taken. 2. 4th of July a. Councilmember Anderson requested Staff to send a letter of appreciation to everyone responsible for the fireworks. b. Staff to handle. 3. Castle Avenue a. Councilmember Anderson questioned if Castle Avenue could be renamed. b. No action taken. -- 4. Commissions a. Councilmember Anderson stated Council should continue to donate $10.00 per member per month for a commission appreciation dinner. b. No action taken. 5. High Voltage Study a. Councilmember Bastian stated we have a high voltage line that cuts through downtown Maplewood. There is a problem with this and wishes to have a study to see what surrounding communities are doing about this. L. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. Community Block Grant a. Manager Evans presented the Staff report. He further stated there will be another meeting Wednesday night if anyone wishes to attend. b. Councilmember Bastian moved to approve the agreement as presented for the Community Black Grant Program. Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. 2. -Transit Board a... Councilmember. Anderson - moved - . tosupport the candidate recommended by N ew Brighton for the Transit Board. - 20 - 7/8 Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all. M. ADJOURNMENT 11:20 P.M. City Clerk - 21 - 7/8 rr► MANUAL CHECKS JULY 31,19 8 5 Page: 1 190 C7 1 Y U F M1, FL : `CC^ CMc'CK RrGj ST' R CH "C K n T _ ITEM 3��C�Ir1.„ 1r'1 N _T /25 /E.5 A.25 ySp 1F1�,``� �T/c5/ @5 0 1 i • 4 11 S F UT; L.TI�0- 19.14 • - L7 I l I �. C '77/29/85 11b• °76.11 FC � AST_ C_� �� �Y.• N C - - 116 • °7b .1 1 • y r, IV ,o 15►._ C /T� / 5 • .. M;!. ST-AT- TR`4SVF R ..7 _ 6450 STA T.: TR_ 5 , - R U�- - - -E L_Ct.. 9.73•'5 : -_ 19 5 D 2A� .. 0 1ti1��y 191VAr. _7 /71 > ♦Q5 - -- _ .. .,7/25/ S k '0 _ • • �r -r 2. _ M� STAT= TR"AS � _ l.•` -. c _ . .. r..��� STA TR_AS L1Crt.: P •Q56. ♦ . 3. r-3 c- UT;L .TI�� s 1 �1 r, ► r 7 125 1 << 3 .S 3 Act L# T .1 ' t 1 T: Z. 5 /25/ @5 ? 76. 3 c �'� I,TII:TI:S N:. :%TIIiTI:t q5. 32 UTI L: TI i /25/F5 B''. @0 CLAR ?F COURT 'F- .. _ .. •L •G F EE - iy2�r,y • �2"�� �7/75 /P5 /25 /A5 9.274.79 MINN STAT_ TRZAS •0c t.A�ti�� ,,T _ 3 � %S• = W:tiN ST4T= TRrA 13153 - n 15- • S 7C=. 1 4 0w VA RI STT PF:OGP a fp; 15. 0 . 1y3c Sr7 L7/291@5 - - - -_ __ �S•;- r- QE AI: K J14%4 C A . . 1gs5 CITY OF PAF rHrCK A TO D:, T MouVr C , CHECK R tV STCQ V =N TTEp 0rSCpjrT•C 193C5o 7129 /e:) �r. 6 "VT TRAI o?NC T';tiEL TFO- ''•:1.:y_ c r TAB * _t �:.0 r'L PLC PqL Li p is .3L CP`- v I'.=. ALLOT L'iC �F UtiC U C'V S EL U'1 ,CU S = E L C n L^'JN F EL P ,_l. CC. _Fb CCwr t i �5. '^ t 1 y3..? - 7/29/P5 4.431. y8 J.E. c�iICLY 4.431. 1y3L7-" l /Z9 /eS 35 .:.0 LaNG M10411 D 35... 1 7 /Zy 5 1- •625.: a P'TR) WAST C"I 1y342 29 1J6.?5 "TRH wASTC C "NTR' 1 • 51 E. 75 i 1y?��9 7.4e ?2 MI NN STATE T -c%:AS 1 9 . '/25/ 5 4 7 P, NN STA T_ TRr�S 7•r-71.22 IY3 SC, 4 7/79 /r5 35. STE:F=.N SCOTT 35,. C lyotl� ,7 /2y /e5 15..�� FITL FL'IYD 15 ".:� t f. ♦ * t 357.'!5 AFSCMC 196 ..5 _7 /25 5 5 .'4 A 'ZC4 3 62. 9 : 196.' .,1 i5 i3: 17, 1 2 ^.5 7! CTY '- U� "C!N 17 0 2Q. 19a:" 112>1 3 iCWA *P63 .95 4.103.29 ,. ''•:1.:y_ c r TAB * _t �:.0 r'L PLC PqL Li p is .3L CP`- v I'.=. ALLOT L'iC �F UtiC U C'V S EL U'1 ,CU S = E L C n L^'JN F EL P ,_l. CC. _Fb CCwr t i P,4 e ' 19F5 C'.T I OF MA =L-kLDD CHECK RE -TST_ R [MACK �r �. �.,TL : MCU''' V N Dn TE w j ; ' , S C T ��iv 196.3_ .. 7/c5 26 3� 2 ZJ • I bK2 ;'7/25/55 145. KANE nDSr, ApY ° /? Q.D?!tT 14 - a t 190W.)2 ': 7/25/x`_ 15.1 79#n2 vN FEDEDAL SPA V:NGS rWT °GL 159179.2 31_0 ON M UTUAL IN.. � L ,► ,rttr♦ , 19 5 '712:/E5 6. o54 MA ST CCMM /?7V SrT r-?L v .d, 461.54 146•�F- _7 /L5 jF5 25.54 MN' ST ?ET: RE'"_ CAF= RREZI' CCU= 7/25/Q-5 13046 w'„ ST R_TtRE WE% D= f R tv CC� 44 • 1yo 10 _ 7/25fa5 6 19 7fkN ST0T_ TR"%•S L:Cc ;tiS� 1So"'t G �_7 /25/55 5,595.5 M:NN STAT= THE *S L:C�� c Tl25�F: 36. P7NN STATE TR .:.S L�L V 1Y6 ca ..r /25��5 27�. A M tiN STAT= THE S LiC _1ZE A- 7 5 /E= 4 11 •,,D N STA T S L: 7E 1vb�F'y `.7125/ xE 331. ' w_NN STAT TR_ 4S LTC =h`'= 13054. 1voF7: l /2> / 4 Ms ST TR7S S S!S °BL 1 star 7 ; .. l 125 1 5 4.32'.' 3 vN ST Ttar_ S %b c 54,Z7 • rrti ♦♦ Ivo'•75 L7 /'r5 /S5 716 `6 �•� T`�riS C= u'r:Cn rE 716.'6 ' •r• ♦•♦ 1106V ! /29/R5 550..3 T��tip! � A:�,:•,� 55. ' • f r 146N'45 ;; , / / ?9/p5 1 o PA 'ct� vo!- M ® b / f ;'HICK o EGI STEP V ITCM uCQCPIF7"C% Nc� „r N IS NBC NSP NSF N' p F � ^r� 4k SP 14SF ;y c Asp N A 0 N� N ei hSF N� OL ct L#l):TE� :J id I Y U'l L,I*iG C' CISPATClW .I.E. SHIFLY Ayr Ica UTIL:TI_�. LTILI TI_ c U TI L: T I Z S L'TI L TI S UTILITI_C UTI L1 TIC , UTiLITI - S UTi L TIL S �TILiTI_S UTILITI�'%c- UTILITIES LT: L:TI - c vT.L17 1 S UTIEIT:_= L71LITIEI LTIL:1IE L TIL.TI_S UTI L' T T. UT1L: TI Z S LTiLIII_: UT. L : T T _'S L,TIL ITI_= U T4 L T I -� L?IL TI Eft :. r�? 370.CS CA r�13K 3 L5 L CT YN .• -TI-c L i� . �T: t: TIC LT:LiT:_c 19F 5 CITY vF ?OA' "LE6 : "'l ^. CH_CK h_ ^�T� .. """ OUNT -7125 185 64 1y6 " ;K'_ rT /c5 /Lk5 2,4� 1S6hp r7/25/F5 94.79 1S6 7/25 '5044 1 90 k °:. :7 /25 / E 5 76 01 1 1 96lk _ r7le5 /� 5 10..0'5 1go� :7/25 /E5 740' 196k '7/25/E ` 3�.1 1 196 7 /2511 121 .05 196•��, �l /?5 /F� .202.27 196'! = 2 " 7 /25 / 5 5 4 196 - T / 31 4 *14 196 "�`'.' - 1/25/85 26. 196" .:l /?S�s` 4.25 150 7/25/ ?5 4 196 z: _ '7 /c5/8`. 64029 1y 6 ".�_ �l /2*) !�5 399. 196.% :7/25/F`_ 33.�R 1 f71251�5 15943 196 7/25X5 2390Q5 239. �5- 1y6.=s_ "T/25/*_'S 234.5 3 •1 3 4 • 1yb�J _ 1 /25it5 ��3 t 3 *3.'S • l ybta .1 l / ?9 5 • •' 0 f•' 5.756.2" 19/ .7 "' _7/29/ 5 1::.'0 19T X 32 : 7 /29 �a c 954o69 954 1�9 2.4� 2.41 19f N 349.43 f ;'HICK o EGI STEP V ITCM uCQCPIF7"C% Nc� „r N IS NBC NSP NSF N' p F � ^r� 4k SP 14SF ;y c Asp N A 0 N� N ei hSF N� OL ct L#l):TE� :J id I Y U'l L,I*iG C' CISPATClW .I.E. SHIFLY Ayr Ica UTIL:TI_�. LTILI TI_ c U TI L: T I Z S L'TI L TI S UTILITI_C UTI L1 TIC , UTiLITI - S UTi L TIL S �TILiTI_S UTILITI�'%c- UTILITIES LT: L:TI - c vT.L17 1 S UTIEIT:_= L71LITIEI LTIL:1IE L TIL.TI_S UTI L' T T. UT1L: TI Z S LTiLIII_: UT. L : T T _'S L,TIL ITI_= U T4 L T I -� L?IL TI Eft :. r�? 370.CS CA r�13K 3 L5 L CT YN .• -TI-c L i� . �T: t: TIC LT:LiT:_c A P 19F 5 C: TY )F fl, AFL- 6 CHECK REGIS CN='� K ��. C: Tc "VDU % -v V'��*� ^' �� �' ^�SCRTr'TT C ..1/29/F: 121.26 NAP UT :L.TI:.� IY7(„" r 7/2y/E5 1 1F . 7 8 hS- LTILITI:S 191 h = - 7 /2 0 37.4v NSr UT1 LITT_� 1y1��='" :7/29/5 6 .� �::° UTILTTI�' IYl R' _ _ l /l9 / R: 47 26 +NSF VTI L. c TI C 19T• :�^ = 7/29/ 5 4.25 ��� LT IL!7'ES 7/25/t `_ 6 115 UT:L:TI_t C 7/29 t5 14 *Sp L 1y7 7/29/90 5 1v7 4 ;Sr LT:I:TI 1 7 /29 /R 5 1 Sh.'r NSA U i L TI c 197 r 7129/85 171 0 �7 /2S /F5 217. L I LTTI S 1 X456. = 2 �► 19877-3 " .7/2"5 8 15�. =�? P" Tr'_NS = *u� SUFFL?-: -r 1 56.. IQP 11 5 "7/29/F5 4, .:Q 1 4NS4N NC r�.LFI'rL 1 5 HHH MTTP09 E _' -,,j sr�.•.(KC 1y� cos _T/2 5 y 645.26 e_ r�: ST!TE TR -::, L:�. =NZZ 1 Y l► - 7/c5 342.: M* STtT : 7 K =.,_ 6 . - 3 7. 6 19,5 r-1 l /25 /N5 24. RGwc_ Y C ^JDT 4 RUNS 2 4. - � 19914. l /25/ _ , .50 23 CL=RK OF �'�UMT L i�:� FM=S 123.50 199 «� �T /25/�`. 135.:"_' w "NN S.F.l.b TRAti'L T, .., 135. • 1V9 6 0 /251F5 4.'41 .::0 M;NN STAT TR"AS L:C�= N 19900. ;,7 /25 /p5 224.0 pTNti STaT_ TR_AS ! ;C z 49265.'0 CHSCK REG!ST:R V.N iPT_C r. V � V NSF k,' S ASS NCB *S� NcP NSP N S UTILITI:r UTI LI T: UTILITIE. UTIL:TI::c UTILITI UT1 L1 T:r— S UTILI TIES LTILiT%% UTI L:'I E 'c UTIL1TI =� LTILI TIEL UTI L 171 r UTI LITI`; UTILI l UTILITIES t��t�A JJS =�N flR* D AV ID rMP Q-N =c':T M: %% STAT- TR. %S MiNN STAT_ TRrAS M lk N, ST A TL- T R',. lc - w NN SZ ''AT7 TR - a; COLLL K "NArTm C^UNTOV ti: =W G-LF TRAY- - L T "A I :',; SLPPL:E : _:NTZL CLAIM" LICE ?' LL L aftft.Z ` L L.0 OE . �� L.C� �LPFL:ES Q=FUAC lQP5 CITY OF MAcL_6%0.01 CH - C T AwOUNIT i iy9% - ^ l /15 /fly 9 ' 1 IY 9A ► 2 • r 117 1y9%P ,.1/25/8: 2.43 199`, _712 `. 5 • 76. 4 1y9 �-7125fF5 13v 199 = l /Z5 /RS 5. 1V 9 1/25/R5 4.25 1 7/25/�. 5A•37 199N _ ''7 / 25 /'R- 5 0 , 1 =. 1 991k L l/? 5 /fly 4.2 5 199 % - 1f2 > /$y 51.55 199 217.x? - 199'," _7/25 5 •fi3 1 Y = 101 3 1 y9 164 .97 `- 69"45.21 2- 2' _TICS 185 1` • .. w ?7/25/5 1 . _.0 1 3 2 -- 1T/25/F 6,315.19 2' 3v(Q - 112> /fl5 443.:0 6 . r,'7 "1 /29 /fl5 32 .?1 r 32.31 • 72 49243.[5 CHSCK REG!ST:R V.N iPT_C r. V � V NSF k,' S ASS NCB *S� NcP NSP N S UTILITI:r UTI LI T: UTILITIE. UTIL:TI::c UTILITI UT1 L1 T:r— S UTILI TIES LTILiT%% UTI L:'I E 'c UTIL1TI =� LTILI TIEL UTI L 171 r UTI LITI`; UTILI l UTILITIES t��t�A JJS =�N flR* D AV ID rMP Q-N =c':T M: %% STAT- TR. %S MiNN STAT_ TRrAS M lk N, ST A TL- T R',. lc - w NN SZ ''AT7 TR - a; COLLL K "NArTm C^UNTOV ti: =W G-LF TRAY- - L T "A I :',; SLPPL:E : _:NTZL CLAIM" LICE ?' LL L aftft.Z ` L L.0 OE . �� L.C� �LPFL:ES Q=FUAC �J ■ v 19F5 CITY OP MAFLT6j0J C K N T :•! 2+:4 2r4 ;45 :.7I2SI�= [l_4m0r «'4 40 2.d'4 aA 2" , 4 066Y 2 ",4 2 4M71 2C4 - 111 „7 /25 /F5 .;7/25/55 �'/25 _7/15/b5 �,7 /c5 / 5 5 - 7/29/1--5 7/29155 MOU ^T 4 .r- 43.25 1 J 2 • 75 - ?"5.02 695 2f.:C 232 . 36.E J 434.j 7,22°.45 • 1 x ' 1 47,77 22. 1,124, • :r J� P CHECK RE67STER Vr- %DOD 7T:. P L'ESCPIPT G ^J Ap ; UT� G )D -A p A UT C SLAPL MT!► "•! STZ 7_ T0r STA T:- Tn &.. c m'_ t STAT_ TP M:KNI STAT_ TK'AS MIN STA T= T W A S ST ?P E; S SURTAX M'. S - TPEaS SU RTAx IL L ;C E' :E L :. L Sv;�TAV PPL . UR TL t► P LL 2 -5C4 - l /?'� / `. 1 25.::G CLERK JF C^UKT F'L T`.G F s - 125 .'r "7/3'" /F WI'v *3 STdT TP_AS LIC'N�E 2''5 u5" .. l /3 V - . ` 9.5 6.'6 M N STAT= TR L.0 =N3 2" 5r.. y STAT_ TK'AS LICL .:2 E 2 5 6 :7/3 ^/45 125._c- M: AN STAT- TR 3S L:CE ZE 2.5 7/3 /x`_ 125 00"NM SIT AT TR_4S L:C' "�S� 9 .�72 . 26 +► 2 "6MF� �7 /=r /F: 4 c ,25 M:N%i "TAT - 7R SUR_R LTC 1/:'' /F 27 . !�� �+.`J ?oT� J r �` • T "SU'".R L S , F'7, 5 • 1/37' 6.991 ST 'rR_S S ornA P' R :. = FL 2 oy l0 .. 7 / ?^ /'�� y .j4 ?,�5 M'. ST TK='4S =F_ A F_�= �6l 16 • 34_, 53 2 1' 3:: _ T /?� = /�: L r= �Lr - L'ar 3F =�. 9%# Z 9 %# t C w.,w- ��+�r+..�. .�....�•r• .. ., ,. .�...c -+s ��r.a..�w+'..y. ...q�r- .+••.r'.... w. -,v -nM tt +v'M' ' ^.•"fu-•'^"a►t!�l�R*7i+'�./R+�. ' � � \ 1 'Y��k � � -Yr Tom i �� ��1. tiY • -1s-y r � � �+ � ' � ' ♦ � � y ea - �. . . ..� X1..1 r ��f 4 , L�.T �•\�►} �� '` z. .-. ` Ars ~ • N . . •., V• ,1 ,• *•.* • -r . L It f�Y - t i.T3 S �r,w � • j ar � ' . ij:J'�I• - � " i ,r . '..� \�' 1 � 1 .. i r 1• � i. di . �� , . +M ., ! .V .. .. .. r .. � • . .. - . _ /�• -t = ���� SOH ' �' `• \� '/., ..•' z... . • «.� � �f , ,,��!{�� �y 1t \A/.`7i� - GrF.�.i•�R ig CITY j ?v.At-4L!_'6.J-ln 17Hr.CK E LT _ 2,if 2 = 3 i 7 7 r 3 :. 7/3 15 2 7 L 1 C E 21::x._ 1 Y_ 5 21 6 7 C' F 44 2 1 C' 7/ !7 15 5 2 q -1 5 4 fto I 7 5 v r --1 39 '01 rCo 21 35 7 / 3 b 5 A U Vt `4 D U -c P E 0 2 li F S M . 2 C 7 3 7 u 7 37 1 Q 5 21 �' c l / 3' / Q 5 2i " m 6 10 - I / tr P 4 ri CHECK Rr'GTST-R Ou T V ND 014 6 2 it 9 4 4 1, V h N S T A'T:- T 0 EA SU F.. R L 1 C E 4 f .* )10 P 1544 60TA T:-' TR ASURER L :C 6EN 6 7 C' F 44 49" J %eZmTiT7_ OF "%J TPEAT L IrC E%LE FEE 39 TR--Az-1 ST )F MIN911' FA N 39 '01 rCo 357*1 5 A U Vt `4 D U -c P E 0 59 li F S M . I N; DJ U% P E L CTY CNTV CWREO!T UN' C- _707T U% P3L 179232.5 3 94 F7* A4 I r-WA F --R R -- t) CC Iv r L 7 6x •95 1 C IPA C E F E R D CC 492 51.5Q 417 m a=%-= ASS CC SO L;,,k K r r 41 7.'5 15911 ° 5 P►4 I"% F :_* D C R A L S I V : N S, F *T P.-iL 237*50 V%' F7_0_7RAL SAV '.�IYGS p 159352*35 31:t. _n MUTUAL LIFE I%S N-L;!Nc-- 9 3 7 2 N S CC. 0 M *-, f R r V - h U L S0 ci7L k! 9 l7v t ff2 25*54 Pl,. ST R- T-0717.4'r G _F'R1EE C C r e46 P") ST Rt:TrlREfJr*,iT 44. -ill • 197J5. M:NN STAT_: TR'_7ASURFR c --;4 s P4 e 1gR5 (TTY JF MAPLL�L_ CH:.CK. RrvIST_R E CHICK to:. C =Tt. —' Nn U ►;T V = N D C!" T TE M CrJCRlPT73 21GP6Y 43 -.50 M h STAT, TRLASUR R LICE' 'i x• 21 C"71' _ l /3^ / 5 4 , 9 12 00 ST T = S S S L 21 C 17r 7/3,1- 4 9 4')1 2 MN' ST TR::�S 4 S /S F L 8 •=02.4'4 ` 21� - T /3� /E5 2?R. °2 MUTE 13 L Ati�L T C 23%x. y 2 • 21E ir.25 _7/3� /F5 16�.�6 U:SC ^_�'T REV�NU; ooT FQL 164. "6 ! 211 ;,4 F. � 7/31 /p5 /i �!� n� L _ s�.., 4 ^ 211 °4= _'� /S1 /e` 7sk M�DL'��OC AT Pr?J_;K�MS 21 1 c4c 7/'1 /45 291 . NADL -400C ATHL I- palliKAMS 1 9 627. �� • 211 J32 '.l /?1 /55 175.29 UL SN•LLY C041RACT FYI 175.29 ! 211!69 M'n'V STA'= TR� tS L:C: Z&E. 21 1 NCB ;,7/31 /t5 337. - W IN N STAT_ TREAS L:C:.Of SE 9, 319.59 • 2 1 ►:e' .:7/?1 gas 2 fa T L:PH 211 ° x7/31 /F? T L 21 1 9.'44 � ,c .., .�r T =L�R .,NC 2 1 1 of �� LT =L _ ,:= c Ct ? 17 1 /r5 51.42 Ncc UTU:TT_c /31 /L5 1 0 50 N3 TrL= r Z1 1 ►. _ ". T /31 / t = 120 7.1 N UT: i :'. T. c 449 o6 • KT 89. • 212 69 ,.7 /31 / F 5 2 MikJN STAT TRr4SURrR L "it C L 19P 5 CITY JF MAFLE. k � ^:) CHECK ": ^. C.,TE mou 2 e5. 2 64' 0 42 2 451.4 3.43 I *io 12 39 324.1 19,j641.69 412.84..20 J CHECK AEGIST: R FUNO TOTAL FUV 0 03 TOTAL FUND 10 TOTAL FUN ^ A2 T O T A L FU4D 9 TOTAL. FU`J n 92 TOT AL FUNl7 94 TG* AL ,7 AL `AT R AVAILAHLI' X33 -;.1 FR CST AV a: ;A'4 cE F! 4Y��LL E:N � A. F C:NT SEL I Su= T rTe L t t E'S QA EXPENDITURES SINCE LAST COLjI`JCIL 1EETII' ZC t t - t t t t t rf ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AUGUST 12,1985 PAGE: 1 1985 CITY OF MAPLEW030 CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMDUNT VEN001 ITEM DE-SCR P I TI0 N { 224313 /92/85 11.1^ ANNIS PAYLE M REFUND 224L13 J9; /02/85 159 *10 ANNIE RAYLE M REFUND 224 98!02/85 159 9 10• AN-AIS 6AYLE M REFUND f 224::25 08/C2/85 1 8.? MIDWEST AN _S D E R 224,,25 CB/02/85 ob 15. „J MIME TEAT DANE R= 3 D • 224J33 E 102! 8 S 400x' 0 ASSOC PUBLIC SFTY MEMBERSHIP 4000 224125 C8/02/E5 175.30 CORPORATE RISK MANG CONTRACT FYM 175oOD + 224129 03 /C2 /85 17.'?J KWIATKOWSKI JUDY REFUND 17.00 + 224135 « Cd /C2/85 12.57 MILLFRE F4 MEAT SUPPLIES PROD 12.67 + 224138 u3/ "2/85 16. NO ST PAU_ WELDING SUPPLIES 16.70 224193 08/02/85 243930 SCmN= ITTE2 FIREWORKS 4TH OF JULY 243.80 224221 cd /o2 /85 4e0 *30 CANT_RB'URY DOWNS PROGRAMS 48^.? D • 216212 L'd /C2/85 11.50 GJNN JACLYNN REFUND 11.50 + 224232 ,;5/2/85 3503 FLEXIBLE 31 1PE &TOOL 35.93 SUPPLIES r •••s•s A M OU NT 39.10 39. * 5.23 5.23 * 46.77 ►6.07 * 3.0 10.54 13.54 * 76.70 76 *TO * 3.51 3. 53 18. ^m- 15 15. ?1 195.00 195.30 62.53 48.24 110077 * 191.21 91 .2 0 * CHECK REGISTER V' NDO: ITEM DESCRIPT:O SPAN48A,UER SUSAN MILEAGE JERRY S FOODS SUPPLIES JOHNS 3 TER ES A MILEAGE NORT4WEST F ABRICS SUPPLIES NORTi WEST FABRICS SUPPLIES SDANYBWUEQ KATHL =EN MILEAGE CAPITOL RJBBER STAMP SUPPLIES KAT�i SUPPLIES LAY L ORD= R NAG MEMBERSH TP MIDWEST F_NCE & MFG SUPPLIES B:G A AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES BIG % 4 UTO PARTS SUPPLIES DIVIES WATER EQUIP SUPPLIES 1985 CITY OF MAPLEW003 t CHECK NO* DATE 21 4Z 42 « 06102f$! 22415- alto 08 /021 15 224265 vr� j8/ 1 ,7 1 1 /e5 224Z71 224271 j is 1C2 / P 5 .t, 224275" C O /P1 /e5 Ir 22 43J 9 Ca /E1 /85 22431 03 /_ 1 /85 224321 08 /c 1/85 22434.1 c8 /c2/85 224353 08/02/85 < Z14353 06/02/85 214366 i ° /%.2/85 A M OU NT 39.10 39. * 5.23 5.23 * 46.77 ►6.07 * 3.0 10.54 13.54 * 76.70 76 *TO * 3.51 3. 53 18. ^m- 15 15. ?1 195.00 195.30 62.53 48.24 110077 * 191.21 91 .2 0 * CHECK REGISTER V' NDO: ITEM DESCRIPT:O SPAN48A,UER SUSAN MILEAGE JERRY S FOODS SUPPLIES JOHNS 3 TER ES A MILEAGE NORT4WEST F ABRICS SUPPLIES NORTi WEST FABRICS SUPPLIES SDANYBWUEQ KATHL =EN MILEAGE CAPITOL RJBBER STAMP SUPPLIES KAT�i SUPPLIES LAY L ORD= R NAG MEMBERSH TP MIDWEST F_NCE & MFG SUPPLIES B:G A AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES BIG % 4 UTO PARTS SUPPLIES DIVIES WATER EQUIP SUPPLIES p� . 3 1925 CITY OF MAPLE-WOOD CHECK REGISTER 1 - CHECK Noe DATE AMJUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 224318 :w3102/95 390" INTLLIAMSO4 PATRICI TR TRAINING 224378 _b/02185 39•' ^ M?LLI AMSO4 PATRICIA MILEAGE 690D • 214 42 7 08/02/25 v-# INC 224446 " 18/02/25 12.22 MARY MCGA MILEAGE 12.22 y 224471 3s /02/85 16.0i) DICK30N HELEN JEAN REFUND 16.00 � � 21449) 8 0'3/.,2/ 5 � }d � : 0 y DREG:. '-CRT , UNIFORMS V 2 • 3 �lv • 214513 :: 08/2/85 319.'!6 FLEUIY PATRICK REFUND 319 •' 6 224550 is j8/02/85 16.96 SO- AN3AUER EVA PROGRAMS 16.96 + 224555 Cab 1^2 / 2 5 ` R3 0 Vr IS _ N KE NT C ON TR A C T — PYM R .- n 224616 " / ^2/ e5 5.50 PERGEN LYNDA REF UN0 5.50 • E 224618 OE/01/85 390•'0 LEES TAXIJERMY SUPPLIES. 39r.1,10 • 2247LO " 0 / 2 /85 16•')9 MElER 3AV= REFUND A M OU NT 16.10 239905.31 23 9 90 5. 2 1 • 21 . 8,4 21 .84 16.95 16.95 16.64 16.64 * 455.94 455.94 * 35.l O 3500 * 17.50 22R *1c 245.50 * 17910 17,'0 • 11.70 11, * 67.24 141 7D 981. � tl 1 65. � 0 1 �4 HECK REGI VEND0? ;T =r DESCRIP TT- G! ARCS+! T- CTJR AL ALL SETTLES GERALD FIRE ENGI NEERING WILCDX PETER STAV)ARD QEGISTER BAWICK J3,1 SANIT AI Y -"R flDUCTS S A14 ITA RY DRODUCTS GIEL SHARDti ADVAN :- STAMP AMfRI -D4TA Sr STEM AMERI.04TA SYSTEM Am 'RI -)4T% SV STE4 AMERI- DATA SYSTEM CONTRACT PYM MiLEA GE MEMBERSHIP MILEAGE SUPPLIES CANINE ALLOWA+'CF SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REFUND SUPPLIES SUP PL IE S CONTRACT PYM COMPUTER MA: NT C?NTRACT PYM! 19F5 CITY OF MAPLEIdOOD CHECK N). DATE 224725 06/02/8 224757 " Oa/02185 224815 ^8 /^2 /P5 224 842 „ 08/0-2/e5 } 224872 )Is/02/85 224K97 �8/r2/85 2149%w ^6/C2/85 22492 C8/C2/85 22491 5 8 /O2 /85 •t t. t 224 AC4 C8/01/85 214A55 08/01/85 214A55 08/ ^1/85 224A55 jblf' /85 12 C6 t el /85 A M OU NT 16.10 239905.31 23 9 90 5. 2 1 • 21 . 8,4 21 .84 16.95 16.95 16.64 16.64 * 455.94 455.94 * 35.l O 3500 * 17.50 22R *1c 245.50 * 17910 17,'0 • 11.70 11, * 67.24 141 7D 981. � tl 1 65. � 0 1 �4 HECK REGI VEND0? ;T =r DESCRIP TT- G! ARCS+! T- CTJR AL ALL SETTLES GERALD FIRE ENGI NEERING WILCDX PETER STAV)ARD QEGISTER BAWICK J3,1 SANIT AI Y -"R flDUCTS S A14 ITA RY DRODUCTS GIEL SHARDti ADVAN :- STAMP AMfRI -D4TA Sr STEM AMERI.04TA SYSTEM Am 'RI -)4T% SV STE4 AMERI- DATA SYSTEM CONTRACT PYM MiLEA GE MEMBERSHIP MILEAGE SUPPLIES CANINE ALLOWA+'CF SUPPLIES SUPPLIES REFUND SUPPLIES SUP PL IE S CONTRACT PYM COMPUTER MA: NT C?NTRACT PYM! 1 9 642* g8 FAHT JAMES C SUPPLIES 19642.x6 • t 19F5 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD AMOUNT VEND CHECK N0. DATE ARNAL S AUTO SERV REPAIR MA INT VEi 350.70 224A69 fr IkRTCA AFT 22 4A71 '3 /t'1 185 224A71 -id /r /85 224A 71 C-!5 /C1 /8 5 224A71 t 8 /r /F5 224A 71 i�d /C1 /85 224AT1 B /C.1 /85 224A71 Ots/C1 /85 224A71 S /C1 /85 224A75 OFFICE SUPPLIES 224A75 13/ ^1/85 224A75 6 /01/85 224A75 C8 / ^1 /85 224A75 - :: 6 /01 /8 224A75 G8lE'1 /85 224 A 75 28/01185 224175 Ca /C1 /85 224 A 75 d /01 /85 224A75 0 / 1 J25 224A75 26/C%/85 22 4A 7 5 08/Cl/85 224A75 s /r1 /85 224675 G8 / ^t /8s 224A75 �8/C1/85 224A75 AT A T 224A75 C1d /01 185 224A75 38/ ^1/85 224A75 8 /01 /PS 224A75 b /--� 118 5 22 C8101/F: 224x75 is /t'1 / 9s 224A75 :, 8 /01 / 8 5 224A 75 d /C 1 /85 r 224675 "8/01/85 224A75 C6 /CI 185 224A75 : 8/ 1 171 /85 *•••** A T A T 2240 3 TELEPHONE 1 9 642* g8 FAHT JAMES C SUPPLIES 19642.x6 • t CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VEND ITEM DESCRIPTION 350.l O ARNAL S AUTO SERV REPAIR MA INT VEi 350.70 16105 IkRTCA AFT DoRESS OFFTCE SUPPLIES 99.66 ARTCRAFT PiR E S S OFFICE SUFPLIES 157.79 • RTCR AFT RRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 119.f ARTCRAFT PRESS OFF ICE SUPPLIES 419,56 ARTCRAFT PoRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 119. T-4 ARTCR a= T CRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 1190040 ARTC ?AFT aRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 522.55 ARTCRAFT PRESS OFF IC_ SUPPLIES 1 f 4 79.65 22067 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 6.40 IT 9 T TELEPHONE 2965 AT A T TEL 71684 AT A T TELEPHONE 3. ?.0 AT A T TELEPHONE 9.64 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 6.40 AT A T TELEPHONE 14.84 AT i T TELEP' 137. ? AT A T TELEPHONE 7R. 32 A T A T TELEPHONE 3.20 AT A T TELEPHONE 9.60 AT L T TELEPHONE 21.50 AT t T TELEPHCNE 26.58 AT A T TELEPHONE 33.93 AT A T TELEPHONE 23.74 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 3.20 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 19020 AT A T TELEPHONE 29037 AT L T TELEPHONE 3020 AT L T TELEPHONE 35.4 6 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 6.4 O AT A T TELEPHONE 3020 AT t T TELEPHONE 3.20 AT A T TELEPHONE 3. ?O AT 9 T TE LEPHON E 3020 AT 9 T TELEPHONE 806 AT A TELEPHONE 58906 * 1 9 642* g8 FAHT JAMES C SUPPLIES 19642.x6 • t i 19E5 CITY OF MA FLE Y COD CHICK REGISTER AMOUNT CHECK N0• D++TE 81 041 RA TTER TIRE WHSE 22015 Lb /CI 185 224815 Ud /01 /85 . 22405 06/01 /85 SUPPLIES 137.96 • 224B22 u!S /C1/85 76.56 B.F.000DRICN SUPPLIES 7606 • 224845 L8 /01 /85 224P45 Cb I ^1 fE5 224B45 Cb /C1 /85 224F45 �ti /�'1 /8; 214P45 "8 /'`1/85 224945 Cg /C1 /85 224945 LB/ UTILITIES 21.52 B OAR ^ OF WAT_R COMM UTILITIES 224690 08 /C1 /85 UTILITIES 161 . F 4 2c4C33 08 /C'1 /85 31.'56 BUREAU 0ir BUSINESS UTILITIES 31.R6 224C36 J F /31 /85 a1.?6 CAFITOL SUPPLY 224C3F 08 /C1 /85 224C3P Lb / 5 224C 3E eg /C1/ 8 5 _ 22 4 C 3 6 Lb /r 1/ 85 224 C4 5 G8 /n1 / 85 RUG CLEANING 49.30 CLEA4 STEP RUGS RUG CLEANING 214054 O / ^1 /85 RUG CLEA KT %G 49030 224055 is/01/85 c� CHICK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION' 81 041 RA TTER TIRE WHSE SUPPLIES 17040 BATTERV TIRE YHSE SUPPLIES 3905 BA TTERr TIRE YHSE SUPPLIES 137.96 • 76.56 B.F.000DRICN SUPPLIES 7606 • 53.32 8C ORD OF iATER COMM UTILITIES 22964 BOARD OF JAT =R COMM UTILITIES 25.28 BOAR) DF J4T_R COMM UTILITIES 120 BOW) OF WATER C1MM UTILITIES 1306 80 ARO OF 4AT::R COMM UTILITIES 21.52 B OAR ^ OF WAT_R COMM UTILITIES 13.90 BOARD OF dATER COMM UTILITIES 161 . F 4 31.'56 BUREAU 0ir BUSINESS UTILITIES 31.R6 a1.?6 CAFITOL SUPPLY SUPPLIES 81.26 14.03 C AVE ANI MIL CONTROL ANIMAL CCNTR CL 14. + 49.30 CL EA4 STE RUGS RUG CLEANING 49.30 CLEA4 STEP RUGS RUG CLEANING 49.30 CLFA4 STE RUGS RUG CLEA KT %G 49030 CLE44 STEP RUGS RU6 CLEANING 19 * 47.95 CH1 WA SPRI NHS QATER CO CLEQ 47.95 * 135.CC CRIME CONTR DIGST MEMBERS 13501, + 18906 COPY DUPLICATING DUPLICATING COST AMDUNT 189.l 6 * 41.35 41 .35 * 65.22 11.92 15.27 95.41 • 97.62 97.62 + 2.95 2.95 • 56.99 13).35 187.34 + 1 * 788 .0 53.53 14.31 14.31 53e53 30. , 50 59.2 7 254.26 160.34 13R 13706 13.38 14.31 401.50 192.92 ?94.46 131970 2054.26 • P,4j CHECK REGISTER VEND01 ITEM DESCRIPTTC COPY rQUI INC SUPPL IES COUNTRV CLUB COUWTRr CHUB COUNTRY Ci,.UB CUSTOM FIB: DEPT OF NAIL R.SORC DALCO D.A LC 0 DALEY PAT EA STMAN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO EA ST44 N KODAK 4 EASTMAN KODAK CO EAST "AN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK C EA ST41 N K))AK CO EAST44 M KODAK CO SASTMI N KODAK CO E A STy� N KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO FA STy� N KODAK CO FASTMIN KODAK CO EA ST41 N KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO SUPPLIES SUPPLIES StPPLIES REPAIR MA INT BOO SUPPLIES SUPPLIES P BLG INsr� DUPLICATING COS' OUPLICATII�G CCS' 191R 5 CITY OF MAPLE 1i COD DUPLICATING COS* OUOLICATIK CCS? CHECK N0. DATE DUPLICATING COST DUPLI CAT IKG COS' DUPLICATING C.CS' DUPLICATING COS" DUB LI CA ;ING COST 214C58 0 8 /C1 /85 DUPLICAT rKG coo OUPLI "'AT ING CCS' DU'LICATIN'G COST DUPLICATING 22 4 C90 .: 08 / 21 / P 5 22 4 C 9. C8 /01 /85 224C9C �8/C1 /85 t 224194 C8 /;;1 /85 214 C2 5 U /01 /85 22403C C6 /Cl1 /85 224D30 Db /01 /8 5 224035 L58/31 /85 22 4 E0 7 08 / !� 1 / F5 224EO7 ob /'?1 /85 22 4 E? 7 08 /01 /85 224E ^7 v8 /C1/85 224EI7 C8/^1/85 224EO7 08/01/85 224EC7 0b /0I /85 224 Er, 7 U8/ ^1/85 224En7 ^b /t'1 /B 5 224EO7 Gb %01 /85 224E07 08 /x1 /85 224EO7 (is /01/85 224E07 0 8/ ^1185 22 4 EJ 7 Lb /01 /a 5 224EO7 io 8/:'.1 /6 5 224E07 UE /' 1/85 AMDUNT 189.l 6 * 41.35 41 .35 * 65.22 11.92 15.27 95.41 • 97.62 97.62 + 2.95 2.95 • 56.99 13).35 187.34 + 1 * 788 .0 53.53 14.31 14.31 53e53 30. , 50 59.2 7 254.26 160.34 13R 13706 13.38 14.31 401.50 192.92 ?94.46 131970 2054.26 • P,4j CHECK REGISTER VEND01 ITEM DESCRIPTTC COPY rQUI INC SUPPL IES COUNTRV CLUB COUWTRr CHUB COUNTRY Ci,.UB CUSTOM FIB: DEPT OF NAIL R.SORC DALCO D.A LC 0 DALEY PAT EA STMAN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO EA ST44 N KODAK 4 EASTMAN KODAK CO EAST "AN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK C EA ST41 N K))AK CO EAST44 M KODAK CO SASTMI N KODAK CO E A STy� N KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO FA STy� N KODAK CO FASTMIN KODAK CO EA ST41 N KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO EASTMAN KODAK CO SUPPLIES SUPPLIES StPPLIES REPAIR MA INT BOO SUPPLIES SUPPLIES P BLG INsr� DUPLICATING COS' OUPLICATII�G CCS' DUPLICAT INQ COS' DUPLICATING COS* OUOLICATIK CCS? DUPL I CAT I AG COS' DUPLICATING COST DUPLI CAT IKG COS' DUPLICATING C.CS' DUPLICATING COS" DUB LI CA ;ING COST DUP L I C AT,I N G COS'! DUPLICAT rKG coo OUPLI "'AT ING CCS' DU'LICATIN'G COST DUPLICATING CAST 1995 CITY OF MAPLEWOW CHECK REGISTER CHECK ND. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 224E25 U8 /T1 /85 117010 E K DUENL SUPPLIES 224E63 Ud /01 /85 3900 E TOEV MAR TRA TRAINING 224E90 OS/1 /85 225900 EVANS BAQRr Y�H ALLOWANCE 225 *30 224E97 08/ 282030 EZ RIDING RV CENTER REPAIR MAINT 282.0 t 224FC5 08/01/85 17.' 0 Ft UST DANIEL REFUND TANTA 224E ^5 C8/ ^1 /85 R.DO FAUST D AN *EL TRAVEL TRAINING 224FJ5 OS /Cl/85 9.42 FAUST DANIEL MILEAGE 34 t 2Z4F37 ^8/01./85 72.20 FLEET SUP SUPPLIES 72o20 a 224 G2 2 C g / "1 185 924.50 GAVE TIME SUPPLIES 224G22 :8/'11/85 13.Q4w GAVE TIME SU 224G22 08/C1 /85 13.94- GA PE TIME SUPPLIES 224G22 X8/01/85 929.50 GAME TIME SUPPLIES 1,831.12 224 G23 08/Cl/85 1 0 GOOD Yi LU HOMES REFUND 224G23 W8/ 2,v 3D0."' GOOD V4LU: RIMES REFUND 3, 5DC.10 224G24 " 'J8 /J1 /85 8. ^6 GQAF MIKE MILEAGE 8.n6 $ 224G45 08/01f85 24.50 GOODYEAR TIRE CO SUPPLIES VEH 24.50 • ' 4214G49 . ib/01/85 g.�0 GOPHER BEARING CO SUPPLIES VEH d AMOUNT 7D OD 355..1) 425.00 • 628.52 628.52 1 56.70 1 56. 7 0 • 375. ?7 375.:0 • 161.41 163.41 • 2G 0 2 0 Mir i3 22 .e.3C 2.93 IM. On J 13.68 6.81 33.42 12.98 12.98 t 15 ..0 15 eOC : 255.0 255 *90 • 1 :2 q V C "EC REGISTER V" NDOI ITEM DESCRIPT! 0' G.F•O.A. G. F.).A'. 8 OOKS SUPPL I ES GRACE DUAVE C CONSULTING• INSP Hr•LO ADW RTTSTNG CO FROG SUPPLIES "AI TR: E SERVICE REM CVA L TREE HAPMOV GLASS REPAIR MAIAT V € HEJNY RENTALS INC PROGRA MS MO RENTALS INC SUFPL:ES MO RSI EL L JUDITH SUPPLIES "nRSNELL JUDITH UNIFORMS HORSVELL JJDITH MILEAGE +40RSy_LL JUDITH FUEL OIL I NDJ �T:tIAL SUPPLY SUPPLIES INTL &SSN OF MEM8::RSHIP JB,J YROPHIES TROPHIES 1985 CITY OF MAPLE6000 CH =CK N ^. DATE sst *♦f 22 4 G) S 18 /01 f 85 224G57 Ott /01 185 22 44r U8/31 /8 5 22 4 H1 1 C 8 /01 / 8 5 f 224H16 G8/01/85 224H24 8 /;;1 /85 2[4HI 4 ^8 /'' /85 224H70 L8/CIf85 224H77 Dg/11/85 224H7U " 8 /U1 /85 114H7'' J 8 /131 /8 5 . 22417 8 /hot /85 22 4 195 /C1 / P5 224.131; ` Cd /^1 125 AMOUNT 7D OD 355..1) 425.00 • 628.52 628.52 1 56.70 1 56. 7 0 • 375. ?7 375.:0 • 161.41 163.41 • 2G 0 2 0 Mir i3 22 .e.3C 2.93 IM. On J 13.68 6.81 33.42 12.98 12.98 t 15 ..0 15 eOC : 255.0 255 *90 • 1 :2 q V C "EC REGISTER V" NDOI ITEM DESCRIPT! 0' G.F•O.A. G. F.).A'. 8 OOKS SUPPL I ES GRACE DUAVE C CONSULTING• INSP Hr•LO ADW RTTSTNG CO FROG SUPPLIES "AI TR: E SERVICE REM CVA L TREE HAPMOV GLASS REPAIR MAIAT V € HEJNY RENTALS INC PROGRA MS MO RENTALS INC SUFPL:ES MO RSI EL L JUDITH SUPPLIES "nRSNELL JUDITH UNIFORMS HORSVELL JJDITH MILEAGE +40RSy_LL JUDITH FUEL OIL I NDJ �T:tIAL SUPPLY SUPPLIES INTL &SSN OF MEM8::RSHIP JB,J YROPHIES TROPHIES 1993 C;TY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK. REGIST_R CHECK 10o 04TE AMOUNT V� NJOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ( 224J45 06/01/85 6955 J^LLY SUPPLIES 6.55 224K1 t " U5 /r'1 /85 13.94 K PART SUPPL ?ES t ( 22401 cd / ^1 / 8 5 3.2*4 K - HART SUPPLIES 124K55 C /L 1./85 10. KNOK LJMB =R SUPPLIES 224K55 t'Fs/)1 /A5 123.30 KNOX LUMBER SUPPLIES 133.3 6 224LC2 b /!'1 /85 44.98 LARS =N MA? IA TPA Vcl TRAihihS ( 22 4LJ 2 olb /�1 / F5 4o37 LARSEN MARIA MILEAGE 49.35 224Lr5 38 /r1 /85 61.50 L&A 2 RODUCTS OF MINN SUPPLIES 61.50 ( 224L1 9 -, n .��/..1 /85 59.53 LAKE SANITATION RU33 SH aEMOYAL 224L1 9 0a /''1 /85 173o53 LAKE SANITATION RJ88ISH REMOVAL r 233.00 224L21 C8 /C1 /85 252967 LAKE_AND = 4RD SUPPLIES VEN 252.67 . 214L2 a 08 /01f85 3503 LANG RICHA CANINE ALLOW 35.00 * 22402 08/01/85 501.__ "0 LAY :NFORCEMENT EQUP SUPPLIES 501.0 * r 224L45 :, b /01 /85 10060 L =SLI = PA ' DUCILICATIRG PAPE 224L45 Cc /C1 /85 19060 LESLIE PA"-=R DU? LT CAT ING PAPE 224L45 La/01/85 ?8.40 LESLIE PACER DUPLICATING PAPE AM)UNT 235.22 176..61 49. R4 9. R4 274.42 166.61 4904 1 S C79.78 * 73.1 5 73.1 5 * 1 * 553.62 1 9072.21 2 • 625.93 * 132.59 132.69 * 15o25 261 s; a 276.75 * 25.7 J 193913 74C .2 2 94 8, 3 2 * 99. 10 99010 + 3, 1#0 39 302.4 9 + 73.1 5 73.1 5- .O2 t CHECK REGISTER VENDOI ITEM DESCRIPT70P LESLIE PARER DUPLICATINE PAP= 1985 CITY OF 14APLEw00D DUPLICATING PAPE LtSLTE PAIR CHUCK h0• DATE L=SLIT 224145 oe /c1 /e5 PAPI 224L45 C8/U1/85 DUP 224L45' 0df n1 / 8 5 ( 224L45 08 /i 1/85 LESLIE 224L45 Ob /C1 / 85 224145 Cb /O1 /85 224L45 08 /01/85 224L5C�l01 /F5 tit ! t t 22400 i6 22400 8/71/85 Or 1 22 '' S '`8 /C1 /85 22 4M1 1 C8 /Q1 / F5 224VII Ld /'l /RS titttt t 224y14 -8/ ^1 /R5 224 MZ4 C8 /L1lP5 224M14 u3 /'.�1 /85 c: w tr t : tt ii 224"l 7 OF/Cl /35 224 00 R L b /r1 /E5 224 N5- 06 / ^1 /85 224M50 ?a /C'1 /85 iltttt AM)UNT 235.22 176..61 49. R4 9. R4 274.42 166.61 4904 1 S C79.78 * 73.1 5 73.1 5 * 1 * 553.62 1 9072.21 2 • 625.93 * 132.59 132.69 * 15o25 261 s; a 276.75 * 25.7 J 193913 74C .2 2 94 8, 3 2 * 99. 10 99010 + 3, 1#0 39 302.4 9 + 73.1 5 73.1 5- .O2 t CHECK REGISTER VENDOI ITEM DESCRIPT70P LESLIE PARER DUPLICATINE PAP= LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING PAPE LtSLTE PAIR SUPPLIES L=SLIT PVER DUPLICATING PAPI LESLIE PA DUP PAPE LESLTE PAPER DUPLICAT PAPE LESLIE WADER SUPPLIES MERIT C4EVROLET SUPPLIES LOGI S CONTRACT PYM LOGI S CONTRACT PYM MB SUPPLY SUPPLIES MAC QU :EN = QUIPMENT SUPPLIES M!aC AUEN ZGUIPMIENT SUPPLIES M APLE WOOD REVIEW PUBLISHING MAPLE'JOOD REVI EW PUBLISHINC MAPLEwO.OD REVIE PU3LI Stii NG MANDI PHOTO SUPPLIES METRO INSP SERVICE EIf INSF MV D' Rr-'ISTRAR SUPPLIES NN D' Tr A= GISTRAR SUPPLIES A MOU NT 187 1t'7 * 44.83 44.83 * 129.30 128.10 * 1 9384.44 1 084.4 4 * 4900000 4 * 235.25 38.90 38.9 C 38.90 39 . C 359.1 38 .90 19.5^ 50.1 6 16.70 113.98 67.95 81 . RO 84.0 5 1 •224.50 44.54 .54- 44.�a 33. 33.90 5002 CHECK REGISTER V= N00R ITEM DESCRIPTION MINN MI!NIVG CO SUPPLIES MT1 OISTRI M36R =N EPOS At1RTH ST o4UL CITY SUPPLIES SUPPLIES UTILITIES NORTHEPN A SQNALT N ORT4 WE ST:. R N BELL N1RT4WEST :R A BELL NORTIW =STERN BELL NI N BELL hORTHWESTERh Br LL N0RT-4 WEST:R A BELL N''RTHWEST =Rh SELL NIRTI d =R N BELL NORTHWESTER h HELL N0QTIWEST --- Z N BELL NORT14WEST :R N BELL NORT i Y: STER N BELL h^RTHWESTER h BELL N ^RTI WE ST =RN BELL NORTHERN OC CO NOOTHERN DOOR CO NOPELCO SEOVICE N.S. *. SUPPLIES TELEPti TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHCNE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TE LEPHONE TELE.PHO%E T ELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEP HON E TELEPHONE TELEPHONE REP A!R REP AIR REPAIR UTILITIES 1 r 19F5 CITY OF MAPLE WOOD CHECK NO• DATE 224 r5 5 08 /n1 / 8 124M64 Ob /01/85 22 Ud /C1 /P: 224N3C 185 224 N4. cd f0i 185 2Z400 . ^8 /"1 /R5 224 k5^ v6 /171 a 5 224%5 CSP1 /85 12 4N'5j C8 /::1 /85 2241;50 68 / "1_/85 22 4N50 ?e /01 / 5 224k C8 /Z1 /85 22 015C / ^1 /85 224%5u / P5 . 22050 OF / ^1 /85 22400 'As V1 /85 22400 Cb /C1 /85 224N5CC C8/ ^1 / E5 224N5C 8!'. 1 185 2241;55 ^8/ ^1 X85 224N55 C6 /C•1/85 1Z4N5 Q ^a /A 185 *! *••* 224 16 /01 /85 A MOU NT 187 1t'7 * 44.83 44.83 * 129.30 128.10 * 1 9384.44 1 084.4 4 * 4900000 4 * 235.25 38.90 38.9 C 38.90 39 . C 359.1 38 .90 19.5^ 50.1 6 16.70 113.98 67.95 81 . RO 84.0 5 1 •224.50 44.54 .54- 44.�a 33. 33.90 5002 CHECK REGISTER V= N00R ITEM DESCRIPTION MINN MI!NIVG CO SUPPLIES MT1 OISTRI M36R =N EPOS At1RTH ST o4UL CITY SUPPLIES SUPPLIES UTILITIES NORTHEPN A SQNALT N ORT4 WE ST:. R N BELL N1RT4WEST :R A BELL NORTIW =STERN BELL NI N BELL hORTHWESTERh Br LL N0RT-4 WEST:R A BELL N''RTHWEST =Rh SELL NIRTI d =R N BELL NORTHWESTER h HELL N0QTIWEST --- Z N BELL NORT14WEST :R N BELL NORT i Y: STER N BELL h^RTHWESTER h BELL N ^RTI WE ST =RN BELL NORTHERN OC CO NOOTHERN DOOR CO NOPELCO SEOVICE N.S. *. SUPPLIES TELEPti TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHCNE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TE LEPHONE TELE.PHO%E T ELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEP HON E TELEPHONE TELEPHONE REP A!R REP AIR REPAIR UTILITIES 1 4 o c e 13 ti w i y 1955 CITY OF MAPLE bCO3 CHECK REGISTER CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT ITEM DESCRIPTION; 224W -8 CR /CWF 5 1 • 186, 9 5 N.S.D. UTILITIES 224N80 G8 /01 /85 3.53 11.5.'. UTILITIES 2e 4Ng0 Cis /C.1 /8 5 2.40 N. S. UTI LI TIE S 224NFC CE / ^1 /85 2.40 N.S. UTILITIES 224NR0 �b / n1 /8` 3.53 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224AQJ 08 /01/85 61o63 14.S. UTILITIES 224Na0 08/''1/8 67040 N.S.p. UTILITIES 224NBG Oa /0185 125.50 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224NFZi 1 '8 /C ►1/85 61.45 N. S. p. UTILITIES 224N F0 08 /!'-) 1 /85 5997106 N.S. ?. -UTILITIES 224WV 08/' 1 /85 73957 N.S.'. UTILITIES 224NFC 11 F.62 N.S.a. UTILITIES 224%'90 67 t►.S.p. UTILITIES 224N3C 06/''1/85 37.29 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224+V8: C8/7l/85 9;.71 N.S.'. UTILITIES 224NRr tj6 /C1185 34.50 N.S.D. UTILITIES 224N8w 06PCI /85 4.25 h.S.p. UTILITIES 224AFJ nos/ ^1/85 4.17 N.S.D. UTILITIES 22 4 NF5 08 / ^1 /85 62079 N. S.' . UTILITIES Z24N8G Cla /C1 /85 4.25 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224N8� ^8/C1185 25'.'2 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224!�8r ja /ri /85 14.94 N.S.P. UTILITIES 2e 40) 08 /r`1 /85 4.25 NOW 0 UTILITIES 224N85 u 8 /r1. /St5 39 N.S. UTILITIES 224NFD ^b / /P5 25.37 N.S.P UTILITIES 224N8G 78/01/85 5,04 N.S.a. UTILITIES 22 WC, 3b /C'1 1 85 28.89 N.S.R. UTILITIES 224N00 .,, .8 /P1 185 192.64 N.S.'. UTILITIES 22 4 h8C: '. /01 / E 5 4. 5 N .S.P. UTI l I T IE S 224NFC 0 b/ ^1/85 52.24 N*S.'. UTILITIES 224NFG CS /01,/85 17.26 N.S.P. UTILITIES 224N8J 19.82 N.S.'. UTILITIES 22WO C 6/0-1 18 5 3.52 N.S.T. UTILI TIE S 224 N 8C 0 $ /01 / 8 5 96 ." 4 N.S.' • UTI LITIES 224NFC G8 f/ 1/85 7 .28 %*S.'. UTILITIES 224N C3 /C1 185 10.43 N.S.'. UTILITIES 224Ng 68/01/85 15906 k.S.o. UTILITIES 22 4 N 80 08 /G1 / P 5 11005 N. S. UTI LI T IE S 224NR0 L'8 /"1 /85 76.66 N.S.'• UTILITIES 224N85 C8 /P1 /85 163.73 N.S. UTILITIES 224N8j ^6/01 /85 44,11 N.S.p. UTI L ITIES 9 * 404.55 • 224N95 0 /2/85 100 NUTS 'SON L• VERNE TRAVEL TRA 10.33 • 21409:. Obf "1 /85 17.x'0 OVERSON MAlY R UNJ 17.00 + 224RJ 5 GK /01 /85 397.74 PALEN KIMBALL CO SU2PLIES 19F5 CITY 3F MAPLE WOOD CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT CHECK NC* DATE E 224P35 Ots /r1 /85 SUPPLIES 569.49 224Po7 OF /Cl/85 17.4^ PAPP STEPHANTE *flit . 10. f 224 F30 38 /01 1 85 y 2z4P31 08!C1 /8 5 224P31 ^8/'1/85 224P40 03/ ^1/85 22 4 P4 5 by /C1 /85 224P46 L8 /C1 /85 224 Oh /31 185 6,54 224Q66 :.b/(!1♦85 224RL US /:ji1 /8 5 22 4 RO 9 Ob /01 /85 224 R2 7 U5101/85 .ffl.. 224R39 ob /J1/85 2[4 R39 Uri /U1 /85 CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT V'NDOR ITEM DESCRIPT'ON 171.75 PAL.EN KIM3%LL CO SUPPLIES 569.49 17.4^ PAPP STEPHANTE NTLEAGE 10. 107053 PETERSON SELL CONY CONTRACT PYM 107.53 • 1.50 P ECK DENNIS TRAVEL TRAINI 13978 PECK DENNIS MILEAGE 15.26 • 6,54 PHOTOS TO GO PHOTO PR 3C 6.54 + 74 PI TC Y 904 E S LEA EQUIP 74 o � * 35.03 POLAR SEW 9 VAC SUPPLIES 35.0 * 15. 0 PikETTNER JOSEPH TRAVEL TRAI%ING 1 5 0 '! +► 75.CI0 PROTECT•A SUPPLIES 75.0 3 RAMS =Y COUNTY CONTRACT PYM 145 .n0 RAMS = Y COUNTY CONTRACT PY4 155.x`0 + 27.130 REEDS SALES SERVICE SUPPLIES 2049 RIC♦ %R)S PR7 G SUPPLIES 3.2 R IC H %R DS FROG SUPPLIES 1985 CITY OF MAPL EWOOD CH_CK REGISTER CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT V:VDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 224R39 08/01/85 10937 RICHARDS P RID 6 SUPPLIES 224839 X8/31185 1.20?3 RICHARDS FROG SUPPLIES 224R39 09/01/85 1C.PT RICHARDS PROG SUPPLIES �. 224R39 Gts /01 /85 4.49 RICHARDS PR ®G SUPPLIES 224R39 Ud /01 / 85 3 RI CHARDS PRO G SUPPLIES- 224A39 08/01/85 13.1.2 RIC44RDS PRDG SUPPLIES 224R39 ub /01 /85 23.4 3 RICHk R ?S FROG SUPPLIES d. c4R39 -0 8/.3/85 4 RI CHARDS PPDG SUPPLIES. 224R39 Of 0 1 /85 6.87 RICHARDS PROG SUPPLIEc 224839 08/01 /85 9.77 RICHARDS PROG SUPPLIES 224R39 L /::1 /85 17068 R I%V RDS SUcl FLIE S 224R39 ublbI185 8091 RICHARDS PPDG SUPPLIES 131.30 t 214R52 O8/Cl/85 17."0 RUSS GAIL REFUND 17.70 E 224a6C 08/01/85 6.32 R'1SEDALE :HEV SUPPLIES 224 R6C Ljd /r 1 /85 80 ROSE) ALE CHEV SUPPLIES 15.n1 224R9C 23.25 RYCO SUPPLY CO SU 23o25 224SL;2 *'8 1 31 le 5 1 55.25 S 9 D LOCK SAFE SUPPLIES 155.25 224SU3 O8 /C1 /85 28.25 SPS 0CFICE PROD SUPPLIES 214SU 3 08/01M T.?^ SPS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 224 SL3 U8/31 /85 95.43 SE'S OFF IC= PROD SUPPLIES 224SJ 3 06/ 73.36 SPS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 1i4S.,3 C8/C'1/85 12.54 SPS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 224S ^3 08/01/85 53.88 SOS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 224 S -a 3 06/01/85 53oPS SPS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 224SJ3 08/;:1/85 3.63 SPS OFFICE PROD SUPPLIES 327.91 224SO5 08/01/85 22.37 S 9 T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224Sd5 06/^1/85 11081- S 6 T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224SJ 5 C6/01 /85 14.69 S 6 T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224SO5 C3/i71/85 176.95 S A T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224SJ 5 C8/C1/85 2 *188 S 9 T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224S35 D8 /r1 /85 12956- S b T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224SJ 5 �b / ^1 IS 12956 S 9 T OFFICE SUPPLIES r r 22453 5 C8 /''1 /85 12.56 S 9 T OFFICE SUPPLIES P, c a * / � 1985 CITY OF KAPLE UM CHECK REGISTER CHECK N0. DATE A40JNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION t 224SC5 08/01/85 105.60 S t T OFFTME SUPPLIES 224SJ 5 08 /v.1 /85 23..00• S t T OFFICE SUPPLIES t 224505 U8/01/85 210 0 %0 s a r OFFICE SUPPLIES 22 4 SC1 5 C8 /''1 / 8 5 20e:3 S t T OF SUPPLIES 224 SO 08/01/85 36.06 S t T OFFICE SUPPLIES 224SJ 5 08/01/85 .63 S 9 T OFFICE SUPPLIES 372.57 224509 Chi /01 /P 5 2600.10 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES CH: PICAL TOTLETS 263 * nD 224 S41 �8/ ^1 /85 1t.�L SCHLJfMDER CYNTHIA REFUND 17.70 214543 8/01/85 18 ID SASS GENE REFUND ...... t 214545 cb/01/85 2942T. SOLIDIFICATION INC CONTRACT PYM 224S45 C6/71 /85 4401O SOLIDIFICATION INC FREIGHT 224545 Cdo /01/85 19562o22 SOLIDIFICATION INC CONTRACT FYM 4 9 33.39 114558 1505 ST PAUL CITY OF RADIO MAI%T 224 .18/ 1/85 37 ^00 ST PAUL C*TV OF RADIO MAIKT 224S58 08f "ll 85 221.x5 ST PAUL CITY OF RA3 MAINT 224558 224 Ohs /1/85 7200 ST PAUL CITY OF RADIO REPAIR ci 8 CW1 /85 16R.0D ST PAUL CITY OF RADIO MA IhT 224S58 08/C1 /85 734950 ST PAUL CITY OF ANALYSIS 1 •581.60 224S65 08 25.10 ST PAUL RAMSEY MED TRAVEL TRAIN 25.00 224 Sze 4 �.8 /CI /85 35 .OD STEF= CN S::OTT CANINE ALLOW ANCE 35* 10 214S9G Jtx /' 1 /8S 1 • SUPEI AM ICA SUPPL IES 224590 �.dSPl /P5 37.27 SUPER AMERICA FUEL OIL 2Z4S9r) U8 /41!85 18.40 SUPEIAM =RICA FUEL OIL 1985 CITY OF MAPLE WOOD CHECK NOs Di.TE AMOU NT 224S9r 081-1 /8 5 143 • 74 224S90 ub /C 1/85 ., SUPERAMERICA FUEL OIL 325.38 { PYM T.A. SCHIFSKY SONS CONTRACT PYM T. A. SCHIF SKY SCNS 224T29 u8 /?1 /85 1 ^0 224T29 ua /01 /85 96400 2c4T29 08/01/85 2.373.:'0 224T29 u8 /01 /85 29481950 224T?9 iK /C1 /85 931.x* SUPPLIES FROG 7 22473C L8 /C1 /85 15 .47 224T 3G 08/0-1185 85.92 22 4 TK- 08 / / 85 49 .I 2 224T30 U3/C1/85 2.3C 224T3L 08/01/85 T•72 160.43 224 T4? 4 t. 08 /01 /85 21e99 224 T4U Cb /C 1 / 8 5 40.35 62.34 224T43 Cots /01/85 1T6.R0 1T6.�Q 224 T6.1 Oo /11 /85 T4.'' 9 74.09 • 224T65 05 /!1 /85 3T2.19 372.19 • 224T75 35/C•1 /85 7,944.3D 224T75 0'6 /C1 /85 7 1598$8.6' f 224T93 05/Cl/85 47.53 47.50 224056 08/01/a5 2504 TESSMAN S:ED SUPPLIES TOLL CDMQANY SUPPLIES TKD4 SUPPLIES TRACEY OIL FUEL OIL TRACET OI L FUEL OIL TWIN CITY FILTER FILT CLEANED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS p1ld e. 17 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION SUPFRAMERICA FUEL OIL ., SUPERAMERICA FUEL OIL T. A. SCH IF SKY SONS CONTRACT PYM T.A. SCHIFSKY SONS CONTRACT PYM T. A. SCHIF SKY SCNS CONTRACT FYM T.A.SC41FSKY SONS CCNTRACT FYM T. A. S� HI FS(T SONS CONTRACT FYN TARGET SUPPLIES FROG TARGET SUP PL : ES PR OG TAR67T SUPPLIES FROG TARG =T SUPPLIES PROG TARGET SU FROG TAU94AN DOUGLAS SUPPLIES PROD TAUBMAN DOUGLAS MILEAGE TESSMAN S:ED SUPPLIES TOLL CDMQANY SUPPLIES TKD4 SUPPLIES TRACEY OIL FUEL OIL TRACET OI L FUEL OIL TWIN CITY FILTER FILT CLEANED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS e ' V 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCPIFT:Gt 224U50 08/01/85 31.50 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 224050 06/01/85 17303 . UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 224050 C6/�1/85 26. ^5 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 256949 : 224V5L 08/01/85 13.10 VIRTUE PRINTING StP'PLIES ti 13.`0 224W� 5 08/01/85 155.23 WAGERS TNC SUPPLIES 155.28 224W21 '' G8 /C1 /85 2904 WA PN'RS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES _ 224W21 ub/01/85 22.67 WARN -:'RS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 224W21 CS /C1. /85 5 *34- WARNERS TRJE VALU SUPPLIES 224W21 uR /C1fd5 11098 WARKRS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 224W21 Lb / ^1 !g5 24.63 WARNERS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 224 WZ 1 LAS /Ol /8 5 29 W ARy: RS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 224Y21 2.8/01/ 95 7*7 6 WARNERS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES ?24 W21 Lid /01 /P5 25 *78 WARN :RS TRJE VALU SUPPLIES 224W21 08/01f85 239]4 WARNERS TIUE VALU SUPPLIES 224W21 Lb/0/85 32.68 WARN: RS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 199.65 224W51 / 1 /85 1 WEIN4ANDL LINDA REFUND 224W70 8 121 185 10C.iC' WI NFI E LD 4ITCHELL COI TRACT PYM ! 4 t • t t 224W9Q to /'''1 /e5 89915 W W GRAItiIER SU *PL;ES 224W90 %6 /E-1 /85 @2952 W 6 GRA'TNvER SUPPLIES 224W90 ub /''1 /8: 143.52 W W ;RAINfmER SUPPLIES 315 * 224230 08/01/85 187920 ZEQ MFG CO SUPPLIES 187920 * 48 * C76.1 2 FUND nj TOTAL GENERAL 262 9 . 1 4 FUND 03 TOTAL Hy) RA `:T CHAQ GE 11 0883.62 'FU4 D 11 TOTAL PARK DEVELOPMENT e P40 e: 0 t 1985 CITY OF MAPLEyp0O CHECK REGISTER CHECK NC. DATE A POOL) NT VZ I DOR ITEM DESCRIPTI01 239905. ^ 1 372.19 FUND 13 TOTAL Col p i 2 427.1 7 FU'VD - FU'VJ 39 7C TOTAL TOTAL R1.4 K CCLELLa�D 4 495. ?g VUVO 97 TOT 2 3 M..KAIGHTIt 16 ,t989.1 1 FUV) 96 TOTAL SANITARY SEW � E E F VEHICLE t EQUIP 108 9 4C7.54 TOTAL • � i �.. � Lr' .► . i : ' , l ` i / ..J .. ..— .a. .— .�.. • v � ♦ � 1 � � � . r � 1J ... J; ~ � i loop m4w� ANWAM '�f �!' ANWWWM�V� -w,.41r"mw~ 7— C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0 TER rr`.—EP�k AM ^R l 0 PAYROLL CHECK'. REGIcSiL- 7 G R 0 M E t"ll P- L 0`f 'a -- 4S '-,4UrDER N A rlr E PAY OL PoLl "N 17, 1 1: i� E U i c H tA c 4 0 LD . �,� t CHnRLOTTE P --r T W 3 62) 3 �-'a .{ -F Dr �c` N NOR!"lPiN G L m FIT' T -4 R Y R iL C- CITY 7.. 071 y �11 1 6 r-li 1% d6 F I NG Ir N -T- T N r i j i to T HE YS K L 7 F I NG .� _..wywr- •- r+w�r.+'�� �ar�!••�rw�.raM� �►•■I ++ww�r��.n/ir. w/w�r rYMllw.�.tra ?�.:..•u•,�LeM�■rl�w�/w 4bdW• 4MM- -NEVINWOMM -MWI r . T Y 0 F M A P L E W W PAYROLL f7: C HEry RE T K A IT 7- 17 .9 ;r o p L Z AURELIUS LUr" I LLE E ETTY IL r. H R I 71 E H V A. i + 14 .; P E; 'r 'I R W T I L I PM r F_ T TE E P H Y L 16- 1 y % L 7' T4 T C. y I - -- �- — - --•- — y- - --- —� j - -- _ � � — - — — — — - — ~� • —� -- -- 1 -i -� -^ ? - -- - - -- --- -- -` � i�L.; i.... _�- -..—.— - --- � -- - -- 'mot .► i. ^ w �� "� 7 A c - ,57 W IT 7- S C 0 T 'T o L Z L I "D 1 IL H R I 71 r7i L,! H D C ll L 1) i + 14 .; P E; 'r 'I R W T I L I PM A 7 14 c - ,57 11 C7 77 7 , C7 C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W vr 9— 5 T1 A I r-1 4 P t' L CHE K RED I S' E R R P' - - --- ----- 7 -yi D 'r T 17� m W-j , C- - N L2 M 1 A p ._ , ...... __ -.. .... L N �5 R I H D 1 L-=—'7'L=—' 77 Ry m I P 1 E DE FR T M I Chor G- "st D 5 41 14 1401 4 L E T - "t 277 H E T �-7 U-W m j G -4- E CDs 0 tj E k '-'Y -7 D 7 11 C7 77 7 , C7 • T1 A T - - --- ----- 7 -yi D 'r T 17� m W-j , C- • r P C I T Y 0 F`' L E L M 'tY ROL D T L T w N PHY J jAYME L 7 1 #3� t- r L j L J I 4 -- T + L l rn 4 M T I r Z o M T 7h Z- -7 AU 4 ...... Ir 4 Id F T 7- L • 77 L 'F' E N R 6 T '85 C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0 0 PAYROLL CHECK RE,-~Ir"TER GRO=m I PAY E. "-O"(ELE NUMBER NAI L q RS GREGORY w 4 p i E C! L-JP R D A 10 0 t :74 1 RC L -'D E -1 iE i m ROGER w 970. 4 T f -7 Dq.v ID Z 0 q Flu, T S 4 y C"S R ri L_ T - 1 c D lb 2" N PDA V 1 21 A CI-7 -:11 0 1 "* 77 T H f, *4 ON L r a I R �Ti y A 4L Z, OL 7 4 TONY '7 JL N 4 T 4 p i :74 y RC L -'D r". t , r :7- T f r F n I j - ) y C"S R D lb 2" N PDA V 1 21 A CI-7 -:11 0 1 "* 77 T H f, *4 ON L r a I R �Ti y A 4L Z, OL 7 4 TONY wr .w.r+►'•rsr�� a+�.r>ar•i•+Ar•r.wsrw•tl•. '.. -.x¢, •Ir/"�'•1� •�r••11•Iwaa�t�..r��. �Mr. • ;:; i� : r�, tJ C I T Y 0 E m A P L E W 0 F' R'_ PAY ROLL CHECK . RE I ATE R P' -; 141L.! •0X PETER K 182 00 - I . :T _, rt _w• 7 0 S ' P ; U 0 I AURA ,1 3104 ,! 1 ... J - - - �:. - - -- — - - - : — C R ST J � .�. ._ •. ...! .: ... :i r i '4 L.� f .' ..J : V 1' 1 1 SETTLE C •. � C � t }� t {"— 1 _.. i t r.... L L � {/ t ! I l ! 1 in i - ` �a T Y L I : r: R om, 0 i-i : tii L,_ C 0�' � � • !� ��. , 1 . i ..• �.. i �� L -- �r �... �` r iw_ aw. 1 . j �...' a,_. i? ' � L ,r. :"� l 4 ^ ... T . — _.. '`._ �'t' • ,,'f. -- cc / c ~ IA I t L r ' - r� • 'r � � ~rte+ i " t = ,r .. -_ -� _. I.•. « i f �.. ..._ a+ �. ..�. wr t ,,� i'r •. r- , a f � 1 `_ • - � = t !• • a... ' —� _• .� _ ... ._ -_ ,..r. • - •^ t • y /' �' , �'� ( rl t L j�� • ��• / . w _ + : t • L ~ I i... r74 ' -I ..:. . Vi T .: �, i, W. it '_.. .r i._. • .ri �� 1 M.•t E . _ r74 r% ti, � } � _ .' � 1 1 � !•.! t �. !•, �' •� �� Iasi :- / T _ - .y 7 — .� sw ...I � �. L... ... __ , t i ... _.. . 1 i •� 1 r,._ wr s 1 � �J � � � L —' • , L. `.' 3 - - •- l = �: l , r rr l 3 �L 4 T tr' i r t • � r �..J • 1.� •- M Ar 1 _ |-' �-^ ---7 4----�EALTH - ' -------------- - ` - ------ -----' / CHECK REG.&STER REP | . GROSS -.W "I BUILDING INSPECTIONE..-j so LD 1 25 _ |-' �-^ ---7 4----�EALTH - ' -------------- - ` - ------ -----' / �' | . MEMORANDUM fiction by Council.. TO: City Manager se FROM: - � _ Endor Finance Di rector �,� ---- Modif ie . RE: Budget Transfer - Beam Avenue r-3- -LATE: July 9, 1985 Rejtcte Date On July 8, 1985 the City Council approved payment of $4,843.25 to Country .View Golf Course for the installation of screens to Drotect Beam Avenue from flying golf b a l l s . A budget transfer from the General Fund Contingenc y Account is needed to finance this payment as it was not anticipated in the 1985 Budget. DFF :1 nb k. `M r • Action by Council: f� MEMORANDUM doxse Modif ie Rej ecte d Date - - -- T0: City Manager .FROM: ,, Thomas Ekstrand-- Associate Planner -SUBJECT: Accident Report _.LOCATION: 705 North Century Avenue OWNER: Geneva Investment Co. (Richard II) PROJECT: Century Center DATE: July 9, 1985 SUMMARY On November 26, 1984, council omitted condition number 18 from the approval for Century Center. This condition required that the driveway on Century Avenue be limited to right —turn exits only. An island was to be constructed to force a right —out movement. Council deleted this requirement provided that after six months, staff report back with a list of any accidents. Comments Chief Collins has reported that there have not been any accidents because of this access. Since council has already deleted the right —turn only requirement, no further action is necessary. mb Attachment: Site Plan a y i _- • _ � • _ � •ice •..i � � • f i ` w -- _-� 0 0.0 �- • .c. n s • • MINNEHAHA AVENUE SITE PLAN 4 N "wool .Aotion by C oulsi l: MEMORANDUM End ors a rl...�,,,,,�, -- Modified- TO: City Manager Date FROM: Associate Planner --- Johnson SUBJECT: Final Plat LOCATION: Beebe Road, North of Larpenteur Avenue APPLICANT /OWNER: Donald Palme PROJECT: Westwinds of Maplewood DATE: July 15, 1985 Reg nest rrrrr�� Approval of a final plat to create four multiple- dwelling lots, Recommendation Approve the Westwinds of Maplewood final plat. BACKGROUND Past Actions 11- 27 --84: The community design review board conditionall approved the site and bui=lding plans. Y pp 12-40-84: Council approved the preliminary plat for one ear. There were other conditions. Y no Procedure City council decision jw Attachments 1. Location Map 20 Zoning and Property Line Map 1 3. Preliminary Plat (8 1/2 x 11) 4. Preliminary Plat (separate enclosure) 2 1 IKI 0R. C SHERREN AVE C S R EN AVE. AVE OP A VE. LARK AVE] F: LARK AVE. in +n = =1 LAURIE RD. a Z LAURIE RO r _ C� fi5 N CA _ 2160 N. AVE . 8U KE Z:4YE,� t� cl J AVE . b =J))� ~• PUBLIC 4A �.E w O 00 (1) STANICH CT. V .� W WDF*G T oc AVE. N 64 > BLDG. < 'a 1 m AVE. _ HA / 4� ROS WOOD AVE. RY AN h :.1 NORTH 29 W��-- fig 28 a n �— HOLLOW AY 5 Li < rs I R a OE .: -, W 4 W 4 ' W awe r � m 5 Wakefield 7 RI PLEY AVE Y W 1.: F ... Lake s 3r Q 49 = 29 j o = = 3 z J PRICE Z AV • > N AV RP T A EN E 6 65 ST. PAUL T29NRZZW •A f. • �- LOCATION MAP I � 3 Attachment 1 4 N - CPU ��9. U. — ARCHER HEIGHTS f APARTMENTS , anw = r 1 • 1 `+1 + f w ♦r / -11.x• .- ... R3 Irv', N .r . Bec- �, _ Dprc%lDrics . �hL. ,,. �'sOl �00 d v . F or • s Q • MOUNDS ,PARK;:�::�:= ., • ACADEMY °: ° :.::• • .:. -.1.: .•' ..•; .. • • : :: ••: :• : ::. 040 _ • 75 -4 LAr 213 5 ••' o t t eSµtod • • t;; - y C i ty of MaE p l,ew W umping Stati n 4 low - _ 095 _ 1 �- 214 7 , • 1 w • _ • j f NI El • PROPERTY LINE /ZONING'MAP 4 Attachment 2 4 N SITE, GRADING 8 DRAINAGE PLAN SITE DATA Total Acres 2.7 Acres with- Landscaping WESTWINDS OF MAPLEWOOD Total " 59 twts,A"e, ftfts q R mew 16 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD — COUNTY OF RAMSEY ftit m 1 s • : Total Parting 32 (2 ow unit) r Ars! Got *;$I' Ai elf SW 4& of - Sf tai . �� - • - - S�r N 7'.!* AK /MOMS ROMP .fettAN4 , ift ----' ' . -s B L 0 C. K 1 - - -• - -- 2 3 �4 f o mow' j •/�Iw•� - AM�rwE A./rWs /lou•rr•./ 6a/.sfr /sw.wa/ :.rwsr S nk 10 - - r - - . _ - mot— - -•- � •: . I � J e�yerral.eil�sr/ eer•/1•� • i� f"Roved .I•eliy� `•�±s � s _ _ /iwrfaret/ � !!we• / //I i 0W1VER 8 DEVELOPER TOWNHOME INVESTMENT CO 1306 West County Rood F Arden Hills, MN 55112 Telephone 484 -3244 Av- V Mfrof Ihrw IS AU /lw•"sw Arr+faw irs.wr - -• 2/ A is I A-ew "s ' f, reu JJ Awnwor lot Sze eV eve e' 4,2 rsar> cabr► "."r-re � Tip9e•s� rip �iM/ /1.1!?•ci V U!. /••► iw/sr-esw•ess IS r:ls• ss Am >4 "raww.Sip~ L A/ & aarw Lit n•aa► os mi ler+ ovow •/ is, V AWAosees Z se .s .o 4W A'Q V A I(•f -A a of Ql.I. rI/ JV het nlbiwmw w .wq..,s/ S-3w swr~ovi A2/ 41 AreAm Y ~~ l+w r 13 _ - " _ - erns:.••, ear•. - .•� ray. -n• PROPERTY DESCRIPTION "0 West belf of the seastassst ewsetsr - -E tae som"mmet oww -•--- of the Smtbmst emsster• scoot tae Saws 2*i. :erec twwe -: at aise eseeot the Lost 33 feet.taetmc_ -- - .• - � — - Rarest 22. lessee coawaty. !baesr:a. i7Ci 23 1 JEWS _ N — Z - -- --� --: " ` =�r. —, - — —�• — — + .rr -� � -- --. SCALE: / —20 • ..... mo t, � n+ ose < -- . �,,,� � :�1`Attt -�— •� '.�.•.•� ..�.- - - -•' -- • � - �i•7r•�� M. �� .• •� , 3 t .•. • .�. 1 Il►1• �� �I�� •�i � •�• j �• .er' • BE . �f G. • i .. . -. •�ll.fl II �l - . - - � ►- -� ,...- •� E.G. RUD & 'SONS. III �'•. LAND SURVEYI0-- 956G Ljnv%ow LANDSCAPING DENNIS E BROWN. P i wee. ra..w .an •.w OM a= s.sse•ss w r. Or N OW -9 e••ee• o •w..o.oe w aw t ea a ra e.., ... CIVIL ENGINEER Mfswes asearswaw ammo •aasr asaa•we• C,09 000.1 A•e •. 5rs:4 r•srok. IM SW! n_ , e+. ,.� .• + earr. TsISMSM si0.4Y4 met. as ors" of smose••f. i7Ci 23 1 0 '® Y T0: FROM: SUBJECT: .LOCATION: APPLICANT /OWNER: DATE: Action by C ouncil * MEMORANDUM dowse City Managere3ecte Associate Planner --- Johnson Bate Plan Amendment (OS and S to LSC, RH and RM White Bear Avenue and County Road C Smith Investment Properties June 27, 1985 SUMMARY Request Amendment of the land use plan from OS, open space and S s p p , .chool to LSC, limited service commercial, RH, residential high density residential medium density Reason for the Request Harmony School has been closed and sold to the applicant* i cant . The nations are PP OS and S land use designations obsolete and must be changed before redevelopment can occur. Proposal 1. Refer to the concept development lan on page 9 P P g 2. Refer to the applicant's letter on page 11. 3. The site would be redeveloped in three . P phases. Phase I: a. The LSC land use designation is proposed for the portion of the Harmony School building that fronts on County Road C. to convert it to an office and retail mall. The older portion of the school, closest to White Bear Avenue would be torn down. b. The RH land use designation is proposed to add on to the remainder of the school building to create a 52-unit rental building for senior.citizens. The stage and auditorium would be retained for an activity and recreation area. Phase II: The RH land use plan designation is proposed for a three - story, 52 -unit rental building with underground parking. The monthly rents would range between $500 and $700. The unit swould not necessarily be restricted to the elderly. Phase III: The RM land use plan designation is ro osed to P P construct up to thirteen, two and three bedroom patio homes. 4 once the land use plan is amended the a ' and site � applicant will .request , zoning ite plan approval. Comments Thi development concept is consistent with land 'use 1 ' pan policies for es or amending land use districts. These 01 i c i ' p es include compatibility with the site and the surrounding uses* (See page 9 , ) Phase III was reduced f rom RH to RM density o be' more ' y e compatible with the adjoining single dwellings. Phase I density as reduced from m 56 .to 52 units to allow enough parking. The plan originally ro osed proposed 30 to 40 patio homes. Up to 13 units would be constructed under the present plan. The resulting senior and family housing would also help he city P y mov e closer to achieving its housing plan goals. Recommendation (at least four votes are required for approval) PP ) Approve the enclosed resolution (page 13) to amend the land use lan for the former Harmon School property P Y P p y ,from S , school and OS , open space to LSC, limited service commercial, RH, residential high density and RM, residential medium density on the bas that: g Y 1. This land has been declared as excess property nd sold b the Y y school district making the OS, open space and S, school designations obsolete. 2. The LSC and RH designations are compatible with the adjoining g commercial and open space uses. The RM designation provides an orderly transition to nearby single dwelling properties. 3. The site fronts on White Bear Avenue and County Road C, each with the capability to provide safe and adequate access for the ro osed uses. P P 4. The proposed senior and family housing is needed to achieve the city's 1980 to 1990 housing plan goals for low -to- moderate and modest - income households. 2 :S D esc rip tion :A r -ea 8.52 acres BACKGROUND Existing land use: the former Harmony School structure and two softball diamonds and basketball court in • the northeast portion of the ' si te that are used by North St, Pau 1 a • programs. and Maplewood for recreation Surrounding Land Uses North: Ramsey County open space East: a single dwelling on a 200 x 630 foot is planned for RL r parcel. The south half residential low density use and the nor .planned for OS, open space, north half i s .:South.: County Road C. Across the street eet is Ramsey County open space, a single dwelling that is planned for SC, service commercial use and commercial uses on the corner of White Bear Avenue. West: a convenience mini- -mall, with as um • 9 pumps fronting on White Bear Avenue Past Actions 12. - 7 . Council amended the designation of the for • rmer Hazelwood School s ite to RB, residential business for a combination o • ffic� building and senior citizen housing development. The RB ' designation allows high densit :housing. Single dwellings and ark land Y P surround the site, Planning 1. Land use plan designation: resen -- school; o ose -- P t OS, open space and S, r P • P d LSC, limited service commercial RH residential .high density, RM, residential m ► , esidential medium density. 2.. .Zoning: present --F, farm residence 3(. Polcies from the plan: a. Page 12 -11: High density residential areas should be located adjacent to or close to collector or arterial roadways, b.. Page 18 -10: Locate multiple-family ' P y housing In areas not inferior to those generally used for cony ' housing. conventional single- family c. Page 18 -31: The LSC, limited commercial cent ' ation refers to commercial center classl f ic- facilitles on a neighborhood scale. 3 Heavy industrial uses de par � pr tment stores, motels, auto accessor stores, etc, would be prohibited while y med ium intensity nat ' other land uses of a re would be permitted subject to meet i certain performance standards, ng d* Page 18-30: The RH r esidential na hous � high density classificatio g ted for such t n is designat types as apartments, two-family homes, town houses, nursing homes, dormatories or elderl housing. The maximum population density is 34 people per net y .acre. e. Page 18-30: The RM, residential medium density classific- ation is designated for such housing g types as single-family ngle- family houses on small lots, two - family homes, town houses an and mobile homes. The maximum Population density is 22 people per net acre, f- Page 18 -5: Transitions b differing t between distinctly differi of land uses shall be accomplished. types p hed in an orderly fashion which does not create a negative impact on adjoining developments, lopments. 4. Housing: a Page C-3: Senior citizen housing should • be located. 1) In a residential district but with good access to commercial facil ities and services, such as rocer drugstores, medical clinics and passive recreational areas 2) So that there would be uick response ponse of emergency services ' (i . e. medical, ambulance police • p ice and fire) 3 ) Near 'public transportation b. 1980 to 1990 goals from the Ma • Maplewood housing plan: 1 ) Page C -31: 785 new modest -cos • t housing units are to be provided. As of December 31 1984 1 ' � 54 of the 785 units had been achieved Modest -cost monthly rent are-defined as between $575 to $600 (1984) . 2) Page C - 32: 620 new low -to- moderate • Provided. Income housing units are to be p ed . As of December 13, 1984, 394. of the 620 units had been provided. Low-to-moderate moderate income monthly rent is defined as not exceeding $575 (1984) . 3) The applicant is proposing monthly $500 and 7(�0, g y rents of between �. The city assessors of Coon Rap ids p s and Brooklyn Center have done periodic studies that show that multiple dwellings g do not devalue adjacent single dwellings. A study by the Bosclair Corporation in Bloomington from 1960 -70 found that homes ad • acent slightly hi � to apartments appreciated at a sli g y gher rate than homes that were not adjacent to apartments. A stud done b • Thompson y_ y North Star Appraisal in 1980 for Orin Thom p Homes found that quads had no effect on ad ' a single- dwelling home values or the time � cent i t took to sell these homes, 4 4 This sales study was based on • lle two quad projects in Savage an . y A 1984 study by Lafayette and p' `� d Apple Valley. found that the proposed Sterling fierce, Inc, for Castle Design ng Glen apartments in Maplewood would marketability or value of adjacent not affect the � t homes. 60 Permitted density: no residential site. If ch dential uses are planned for this anged to RH, residential high d his If changed to RM, residential g de nsity--34 people /net acre. medium density__22 peopl net acre, cre. 7• :Proposed density: Phases I and II: 27 .8 people/net ogle /net acre - Phase III: The density o uld not exceed 22 people/net houses net a ses or patio homes a / acre, re Proposed. :Between four and eight permitted, depending on whether g t units would be bedrooms were built. r one, two or three Public. Works 1. Publ water sho be taken only from the St ..because of the complaints of 1 Paul system ow water pressure from people in the vicinity who are hooked u to _ P the North St. Paul water s st y em. 29 According to the city engineer, the traffic generated by development would ngl ' d be adequately handled b t c this Y he upgraded capacity of the intersection of White Bear Avenue and County Road C wi widening and turn lanes. th street 30 White Bear Avenue is des' • designated as a mayor arterial and roadway dway and County Road C is designated g as a mayor collector street in this .Parks On May 20, 1985, the parks comm ' ' that the should issi Y ld give consideration use until they have to be vacated, go on record as recommending e , to the have more open n and recreation space Citizen Comments 4 on recommended to the developer to keeping the ball diamonds i The commission would also li ke n to city council that this ro'ect for its resid P Twenty -four property owners within asked their o in' 350 feet of this proposal were p ion of the May 6, 1985 site lan a responses were received -- -two own P (page �� � • Fourteen owne are In favor, two had no comment . and nine are opposed for the following reasons: 1. Apartment buildings are incompatible with a location near sin 1 g dwellings because of increased e nose, traffic, invasion of privac (trespass problems) . y 2. The proposed density i s too high. 3. The traffic would a revate Count Road gg the already dangerous intersec ' Y C and White Bear Avenue, tion of 5 4* If the gym and stage are to remain available s additional ilable for larger gatherings g parking should be provided. 5. There is need to rovide additional ditional outdoor amenities for seniors, including garden plots, grass, • parking g , trees, picnic tables and to site the P g lots away from the views from these units, ts, as much as In response to these concerns • , th� e applicant changed Phase III from R to RM an d reduce the density in Phase I from 5 H concerns will be addressed 6 to 52 units. Other when the site plan is reviewed as ar the planned unit process. rocess. P t of Procedure 1. Planning commission recommendation • co ion following a public hearing 2. City council decision 30 Metropolitan Council review for impact on metropolitan systems jC Attachments 1. Hazelwood Neighborhood Land Use Plan • 2. � Hazelwood Nei h MaP (existing) g P borhhod Land use Plan Map (proposed 3. Property Line Ma P 4. Site plan sent out for public comment 5. Proposed site plan 60 Letter of justification 7. Resolution • Interchange Interchange principal arterial ' • ee4 • vadnai i f . • • Height � _ � •� pit '�tt�tir n j . , Co. Ad. ,D mayor coils or - ► If -;- BW N R13 -- TTM MaJor co 119clor �--, Ilk mayor coltectory - • ' /• � / , . - LJ - E1W. O b� O ' • _rte .0s All e. _ If Cow p 4 rileffill I0Ot ' I � + r t SC R . 1 [ - 7 7 r S'' Jo. _ _ P ;os , . 8 C BW 'R • r 1 = • N •• P ' • s '' MR Major coiie = i EMIR 'BW B W SC � mzj o al Mart : "�" / _ . -- • ' o .a,.. H Dh 8y 3 Cx n r " n �• � ° o O W 0 .. G C ` -- O O an m 0 — o E HAZE NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN Existing .Land Use w , � - Attachment one '� Interchange rots principal arterial _ rchang0 . - .. a 94 Vadnals Heights - - ;__• SC a:� ��i —.,.. ��t-sitwt tray: Co. Rd. major coils or ___ „ RB . Ma )or ` collector " �Cj •. 1 . nnalor collector E"rla A t�sc_j B W f _'J . - --zL 11.-J Ito RM ' 4 - J 1J LS t•._._ i ��• ! i R6 1. of rte . Rai _. L4 I d, r - U� R I _ . �.� a L_ f - _ r --- _� 17 S 7= • r7 BW _ LsC'' Major code = t[ �t 0 i IN yv c B W • — - B -- : -_, S C : / f 1--- H g a y3 h - - - - , � • o .. , ..:.... In r ha g t !. . • _ . o V O. • O W M 30 4" < • C C daft V O 0 o o t HAZELWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE PLAN 0 PROPOSED LAND USE IN I Mal 8 Attachment two 4 N (z2) '7 � . ire 3 j3 12 56 8 12 8 i , • R LA A, A ' o + �.� �2 56 a 0 C P 9 !� ►. t t '0 O • • w 1. b5 owc o 00 O (3) ♦ Z C 1 o ( /,�� 04.0 - � • �e • N g• , • c ( j 9 ' ... 1.32 arc a � n ► - � ""J + co ' AM s• z . a G J (4 • I *� i4aplewood C o v e n a n t AD ' 2 — u n i t m u l t i p l e dwe 11 n Church ' (high density) t:�a.►.. 4. 8 3 6) (7 gB� 3 As PHASE II � COS r l�St 4.2 _ - . 52 senior housing units ^- { � ti (high densi Les 's 2 �4 •r. Superette L 0,9) . 3 PHASE I . 13 patio homes U (medium density) 22 Former Ha_ rmon School bui ldi n?- � y g� 3 PHASE III 2633,12 - ' �, J l b 500+ office/retail '- 6, _ square feet of PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP .- - (Proposed development concept) 9 N Attachment three WI.1 •T- y .. .t __ CA • J. 1 tee- _ '• •. V ee ' r • 1 i 14b die I ft A _ •. v s E i �, M 4fV t o, ..; tip; . •+ c 4: �. '40 to NO `r V 'Z it r :. -►+ • t Z / s v. of .6 1 1 •• Pot Vb ValosiT000 V/ sycrays d o W. 1`1r u••w••N,u••••NM•M k; 4 Z ` +'i TO L _o re r' "00, i s h 6 Iii p O� .•�o J .•� __ lb .m a ? �: 0 — .. 1 Mr• .. 10 61G • . ►• so 1 5 -6 -85 site plan E . Sent out for public comment QI ,i y � Pa 10 Attachment four_ 1 0 / T. + 52 ESIDENCES PHASE 1 er ' C�? cari Y • �O M HXSE sue , , _, • O E Q- B COMMERCIAL ' . T• N . ♦Ttt iVM M•►LL.,.l.eao ri • •. A T � V ■ c0 v & 0 f 1 PHASE 3 Fv To MME _ yo•r To LXCtto , Q O.. LLJ D O CL CL •r 4- E V Q ­SMIT 0 INVESTMENT— P- ROPERTIES .__HARMONY._SCHO.O1S[Z -- - Q PRELUAINARY SITE PLAN STUDY -- S cam► L r_v c • ACKERMANN & ASSOCIATES INC. ARCHITECTS A.I.A. \ ST. PALP.- MI 55107 35 WEST "TER SiaErr TELEPW-WE ZM -r.M was dwow ms w w ::. 5SI '.1 L ANTHONY A. DANNA S?v ATTORNEY AT LAW ' NORTHERN .FEDERAL BUILDING WABASHA AT SIXTH STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 66102 612.224 -6768 May 6, 1985 City of Maplewood 1902 Es County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Development of Harmony School Site Gentlemen: Submitted herewith for your consideration • please fend the followin • . g. Conditional Use or PUB A • pplicatlon Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application List Property pP n • p ty Owners Preliminary Site Plan .Filing Fees. The applicant herein is Smith Investment • Partnership Properties, a Minnesota p consisting of Bret M. Smith, N. Russell Smi P. Smith. th and Norman The firm has retained the undersigned gned as Attorney, and the firm of Ackerman n and Associates of St. Paul as Architects of aiding it in the dev for the purpose elopment of the abandoned Harmon School • at White Bear Avenue and County Roa d C. y o01 Sete Market Studies performed by the firm Multi-family 1 lndi sate a need • in the area for y , and 2 bedroom apartments. The developers ' use the existing structures b o - intend to into the a Portion of the existin y converting the existing classrooms Partments. , A porti structure • parallel to County Road C is o g ucture which runs • not suitablQ for apartment conversion and since Its felt that the complex will support oriented commercials a e Pp t Certain service thusly. P c , the developers have designated such space p ce The developers are extremely sensi i of the nei h o y t ve to the concept of preservation g b rhood and to working with the corms • unity as a whole in a positive and constructive manna r. They wi 11 be open to suggestions 11 . Attachment six from neighbors, staff, council development of the property to forward to becoming a part of AAD : as Encl. and its said Ve , Nr Ati I community with respect to the highest and best use and look community. truly ours, 7 C Y DANNA orney at Law 12 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Smith Investment Properties initia i a ted an amendment to the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan from OS en space ' o P P e anal S, .school to LSC, limited service commercial, RH, residential high density and RM residential medium density for the followin -- describ . g ed property. Unplatted land beginning at intersectio on of White Bear Avenue and South line of SW 1/4 thence northerly n said centerline thence east parallel y terline 42.55 feet, p with said South line 311 feet, thence northerly parallel with said centerline 140 feet thence du e north 1f�7.�7 feet, thence east 391.55 feet to point 658.95 feet north ' from said South Tine thence to said South line at point 200 feet P west of said 1/4 corner, thence west to beginning, subject to roads in S Township 29, Range 22 Section 2, This property is more commonly described as the former Harmony Elementary School. WHEREAS, the procedural history of this lan amendment follows: P is as 1. The Maplewood Planning Commission held a ubli ' ,Tune 17, 1985 to consider c hearing on er this plan amendment. Notice thereof was publishged and mailed pursuant to law. All ersons • given an o P present at said hearing were g opportunity to be heard and present written statements. The planning commission recommended to the city that said plan amendment be ty council 2. The Maplewood City Council considered said lan p amendment on 1985. The council considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the above- described plan amendment be approved on the b findings PP basis of the following gs of fact: 1. This land has been declared as excess ro ert P p y and sold by the school district making the OS, open , space and S sch ool designations obsolete. P 2. The LSC and RH designations are compatible with P the adjoining commercial and open space uses. The RM desig gnation provides an orderly transition to nearby single- dwellin g properties, 3o The site fronts on White Bear Avenue and Count Road C to provide y , each with the capability p e safe and adequate access for the proposed uses. 4. The proposed senior and family housing s needed to 's 198 to 199f� g achieve the city's housing plan goals for low -to- moderate and modest -cost households. Adopted this day of , 1985. Seconded by Ayes-- 13 Attachment seven Ma 15, 1985 Mr. Geoff 01snn Director of .Communit Development Cit of Map'lewood 1902 East Count Road 8 Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Dear Mr. Olson: The followk is response to the Harmon School Development Projef,-A: I am defintel opposed to the proposal because of the hi population densit which is not in keepin with famil homes located nearb The environmental impact, the lack of privac the intrusion into established !shad life st the elimination of much needed recreational area the effect on wild life space, the water shed factors are all threatened b this development. The protection of wild life habitat, ducks end birds nestin etc*, and the open space zonin which will markedl be overrun with people will de the q ualit y of life in the area. E with current fencin the incr in people mainl from Lake Rid Park has caused fires, invasions of privac tresspassin hazard to wild life and garba problems. If you lived here Y ou would understand and appreciate this and realize how g reatl y these problems will be increased with more multiple dwullin units in the areas Plans'have been to maintain space, trees, wildlife in a low densit population environment. Maintenonce of fencin on school and open space propert has had some deterrent to invasion of privac and propert but increased/ chan status can onl cause more problem"31, Please refer also to 1ptter of Linda La Pitz who lives at this a ress 6:,* Sincerel �i ,��,v-z��' ill„ . Dolores Ethier 2187 Floral Drive White Bear Lake, Mn. 55110 Ma 15, 1985 Mr. Geoff Olson Director of Communit Development Cit of Maplewood 1902 East Count Road 8 Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 . Dear Mr. Olson: The followin is m response to the proposed- Harmon School Development. This has been a sin famil home area for y ears and the influx of this man people is in excess to reasonable land use. The proposal will have a devastatin effect on m mother who has lived here all her life, paid tame3i on the land, and kept the area neat and in shape for sin fa it use. Her hopes for her famil and her father's before her are poi endan b these proposals. It will cause undue hardship on our famil which has lived in this area for three generations. This does not take into consideration the rights of current residents, the impact on life st of residents to the east and south of the area which is mainl all sin famil units, or the environmental conse on open space or private props owners. The densit of population created will markedl reduce benefits of sin famil homas in the area. It will disturb the normal peace andtran of'' the neighborhood. I do not believe there will be adequate space, adequate parkin ads ade protection to private propert and wildlife for this mass of people. The environmental impact should be checked. Effect on wild life, recreatinn, sanitation, traffic, police and fire protection requirement will be tremendous. The 'quiet nei now becomes an activit hub with all the associated problems. If ade water control is not provided, it could possible cause problems on current locations. There has been-some serious questions on maintenance of proper water levels. Famil residents near this area do deserve some consideration and current land owners, tenants and those who use the Qr-hool* recreational facilities are definitel "out" on this proposal. The present tenant at this duplex (2045 E 17th Ave.) left an apart dwellir McKni Rdo specificall to g et some peace and q uiet and a bit of privac without people essentiall "on top of them." There are definite objections to this increased densit and chan a famil residence/school area to multipl dwellin units, Sincerel L Dolores Ethier Note: This- response also g iven for 'Alice Olson-, m ninet y ear old mother who has lived in this area all her life. Dolores Ethier. 2045 E 17th Ave, No. St. ,Paul, Mn. 55109 May 14, 1985 Mr. Geoff Olson Director of Community Development Ci of Maplewood 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Dear Mr • Olson; I have several comments to make about the ro osed H Development project . P P Harmony School According to the maps and tentative plans made available your opinion serve there area through Y few points which need careful consideration, 1. Dens ity W 4 The City of Maplewood has iven t • rats o 8 his project its highest density Y ng f RB which allows up to 34 people per acre. This site has approximately 8.52 acres available for development. • That would allow up to 290 residents in this complex, excluding the proposed commercial development space. That is far too man eo le for t Y P P his area. Immediately east of this area is largely undeveloped • Y p single family residen- t ial space. This space has been occupied b m famil h four generations, Y y y, including myself, through g ons, so I am accutely aware of the land situation surrounding this particular site, My family's land extends f ,school fence east to Case P from the Harmony Casey Lake Park in North St. Paul aul and north to the open space in Maplewood. It is my grandmother's wish that her -land t will be 91 this fall) remain in the family. I amp the oldest of seven children and I can assure you that we have every intention of maintai i property within this family ng the family y as single family residential space. We have no desire to live immediately next door to an overcrowded c the a omplex, particularly. when we are making efforts of maintaining space and trees and wildlife in a low - density environment. I:mo�ediately to the north of Harmony School is a large Ramsey msey County Open Space area of close to 10.37 acres. This space was sold by my grandmother for the purpose of open space environment. A small cre ek flows through it which is fed by o from Casey Lake. This space is a wildlife refuge for geese, ducks, pheasants, egrets woodchucks mu of others ' � muskrats, and a large variety mall animals. During the last few years the r stead stream of adventuresome youth has increased to include e y regular dire: -bike elaborate treehouses, p actice in the summer and snowmobiles in the winter. The highly intense Lake Ridge Park Condominium development - --which completely occu ied - -onl which still is not Y P y increases the threat to this important wildlife space. while some people may maintain that some of the animals, , particularly the muskrats, are not an esp ecially ially desirable creature, the environment that they create allows egrets to come back each ear and nest, ease w Y t, or occasional blue herons, and Canadian geese, which took up residence in the park this spring. These animals are beautiful, and important ' and hel values and the * p to increase the property quality of life in this neighborhood . - 2 - Overcrowding from the south only increases • open space area. the dangers to this important 2. Curbing and Sidewalks -- It does Road Co not appear that the proposed development of County with upgradin to include curbs and sidewa during the next three ,years has been included lks, should be included as it will affect the proposed ed in this plan. That planni ro space along County Road C. P P parking for commercial 3. Commercial Develoement -- I have no ob jection to small counner cial enterprises on this s - ite, especially if support services for com are included. A the elderly and surrounding co art icu deli,. dry - cleaning services, etc, would be Particularly welcome. It does appear that the • ark parking has not been well planned. If commercial nor be allowed. to enter parking is primarily on the north of the sit y no r t h-bound traffic will r e ' onl Possible a the lot, and north -bound will be the Only P e direction for exiting the lot. Commercial ial parking to the south will be limited, especially ears to with the sidewalks. East parki PP be ideal for residents and visitors will b which a any commercial development will at � e limited. Sinoce tract business from the large residential neighborhood to the north and east th ive to those resident ' e east parking lot will be most attract s • If the gym and stage are made available fo • arts and activities and events, the demand for a r co�annunit very heavy. parking to the east will be 4 . Parking -- For the yeas ores us t me j ntioned, and others connecter with the Phase 2 and Phase 3 development projects, I am concerned parking space be allocated to this de that enough dev elopment * . Seniors, if they are on a bus -line, have a tendency to consolidated • own t o one vehicle per family or eliminate it altogether if possible. White Bear Avenue offers Route 15 which goes north to Maplewood Mall or south to downtown S as this is sure to encour�a e t • Paul. Such a location area has g 8Q� seniors to eliminate their cars* But this traditionally been a challenge for bus-riders, , and many residents will resist givin up cars for. personal transportation. In addition to the resident vehicles, you must consider the fan�il su cars of visitors . Friends, y, pport services including home health care workers etc. tc• will, in most cases, drive in rather than take the bus. Please be sure that adequate parking is planned for in this complex to avoid mP street overflow. 5.... Senior Complex Des f gnat ion dw= In the Dis School Board renounce t at �� tract 622 News, the Har�aony Elementary School has been sold to Smith Investment Properties under the terms of ur $750,000. a purchase agreement approve by the School Board. The purchase price is The purchaser intends to develop the property for senior citizen housing. ing . I have no objection to the creation of a senior housing complex on this site. In fact, I think it is an ideal location and would serve the community needs very well, particularly with an eye to long-rang � -ran g planning. I would like to make sure that the ENTIRE project retain the "Senior Citizen" desi nati especially Phase 3. Unless the developer makes a'c 8 on -_ entire site to seniors se o�mnitment to dedicate the serious problems will develop. Phase 3 with two and three bedroom patio homes, may appea to single ' young child P g e parent families or parents with Y S ren, and there simply is not enough space in this d evelopment evelopment for children. As the mother of three I can't stress that .strongly enough. 6. Recreational Facilities -- I have lived school fence immediate next door to the Harmony nce for over seven years. This project articular) Phase 2 and Phase 3 are ' particularly going to eliminate valuable park and recreational space from our community. As a resident, I know that the he space is used three to five evenings of every we ek between April and October, with weekends also very popular. Many of these are informal games or ract c sched P i es that. I'm sure have not been formally led through the Parks and Recreation Department, - 3 so The loss of these fields for baseball, softball T -ball and practice, is ' � basketball, both games and P , going to be severe to many Maplewood residents and put additional strains on other facilities or eliminate e sport availabili 7. Phase Three -- This phase of the project aspect of the P � bothers me more than any other as P e entire proposal. The prospect of living iamediatel next door to thirty or forty, two and three bedroom two-story Y the proposed site within the allocated or Y patio homes in ated space scares me. I am not anxious to have all that humanity crowded into tin little le s aces Y p next door -- towering over this little house, and within fingertip reach of the fence, For one thing, the architectural drawing shows wee For another, Y ty seven units, not thirty or forty er, the floorspace is much smaller than the typim ca 1 one bedroom unit shown in the tipper right corner, story unit will not provide 8 � and even a two story p e much area for movement, especially if the intend to Y area . squeeze three bedrooms into the tin Y Another consideration, again, is the lack of arks . A es a fam w P � three - bedroom unit encourages y ith more than one car. Again -where do the visitors of There is no space for outdoor recreation. Does that S over into back and �$n they will spill Y y ard, or will the residents be encouraged to peel back the fence for access to the open apace .and wild near the lake? ? 8. Overall Quality ape* My final concern is with the ua Smith — is Q lity of thi project. Obviously, Y, expecting a profitable return on the investment. If this is a quality project, using good materials and adequate q ate planning to provide a quality environment for the residents, then a stable environment will produce the low maintenance and profitable return the investor hopes fo If cheap materials and a desire to pack as man people in as • u Y P P possible ©verri e the consideration fora quality environment, there will be problems affectin the entire project and all the surrounding areas, Quality of rife demands space for outdoor recreational activities. vities, Most seniors feel a need for time and space outdoors* Picnic tables a rasa and trees � small garden area 8 ees are very important to area residents. They should be important to the developer of this ro •ect also N P J of all seniors will be able to walk up to Casey Lake Park, and to look out ou y r window into a parking lot can be very discouraging. The quality f this development supervised. Y pment should be closely In sum, the development of this project will have a tremendous impact on my family and me through its impact on the d tnp e a joining property. I hope you take nay comments into consideration. S'i erely ILI nda Olson LaPitz 005 East County Road C Maplewood, MN 55109 I May 17, 1985 Mr. Geoff Olson Director of Community Development City y of Maplewood 1902 E. Co. Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 With regard to the Smith Investment Properties Harmon School apmen t $ I submit the following y Site Qevel- wi ng commen is and in ormat i on . 148 living units plus a commercial development are p roposed o sed a of land. 1 to 3 bedrooms i p p n$• 5 � acres n each 1 i v i n9 unit means somewhere around 400 people or mare, I. don't have privacy on my property now with 0 ea le on the Harmony a ba p p Must because I have a large back yard i t apparently belongs to everybody - -a place far the kids to p 1 ay , a place t o walk the dog, o cut Christmas 9 i i stmas trees and snowmobile in the winter time, and even a place to launch their boats in the water from my l i t t l e private dock on the lake. Can ou imagine y Sine what it is going to be l i k e with 400+ people right on .top of us, but then you can't stop 'progress. My main purpose in writing is to serve notice on the city of Ma ers of t " p y Maplewood and the developers his property that a people proof barrier must be maintained by the develo between the development and m f am i l ' ht ra privacy haul y y s property. We have a rig ht R y ng awned this property for four generations and I don't expect the developers and the city to come back later and say "i not our problem, . you will have to deal with the eo le who live You are creati the ablem no p p ve there. " r R, and must see that the necessary provisions are incorporated in the approved plans to insure our pri vac . This means installing and maintaining whatever y er barriers are necessary to pr event access to our property, including that from the open space which will certainly be used by the residents, This letter is notarized and becomes a legal document which we i n t e n d to use in any litigation which may become necessary in the future regarding this matter, Si ncerely , Delbert L. Olson 2027 E. 17th Ave. North St. Paul, MN 55109 w �o4n c arden6z 00 y NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA RAMSEY COUNTY My commission expires June 27, 1989 19 Day oT -� e,y 9dS C. Plan Amendment -- County Road C and hit W e gear Avenue (Harmony School Secretary Olson read the notice of ubl �� ' P hearing. The proposal is to amend the la nd use plan from OS, open space and S, school • commerc i a i RH r to LSC, limited service ce residential high density and RM, residential. medi ' Staf is recommending ap um density. : .Tony Danna, attorney representing mith Inv is contingent g Investment, said the purchase agreement n g . t • upon the approval to allow the use of a p ortion as senior citizen residential P of the property tial faci 1 ity and another portion proposed a just P s a senior area, but not restricted to that. Phase III is a proposa for a bu ffer in the form of pa tio homes. The recommendation mendation for density as recommended by the planning department, has been approved pp oved by the developer. He introduced the architect, Robert Ackerman, Bob Ackerman said they have had numerous m ' meetings with staff. They do intend to tear down the earlier two—story ddition y and then add on. The classrooms are ideal for one — bedroom apartments. Hesaid has P a three is to serve as 'a buffer. This w i l l be at med.i um dens The wish to get approval for phase one at this t' y Mme so they can begin construction. The commi ssion uestioned o f the width of the cu 1 —de —sac was sufficient, Director of Public Works Haider said that when private roadways are proposed he generally meets with the fire marshal t ' o veri that the turning radius is appropriate for the emergency ' . g y veh� cl es. Chairman Axdahl asked if there was anyone • the proposal, y ne present who wished to comment on P P Li nda Lapi tz, 2005 E. Co unty Road C said she will be within six f of .Phase III, said she is lad the feet . , g senior density has been reduced. She questioned if the sight lines to the open space • Count Road C P P wil t be elim inated mi Hated from County . The applicant indicated that a three—story ree —story bu i 1 d i ng � s permitted by code. Ms. Lapi tz indicated that the view of • the open space and the lake will also be cut off for the senior residents a l s o b the • ht y three —story building, d� ng. She thought the building was also quite large. There • . g will be very little space around the building. ldi ng. She is concerned about the availabili ace for of recreational space picnic tables, etc. She also questioned how intend to promote the use of these hey ese units for the elderly. The applicant indicated that the very y nature of the apartment itself. The two — bedroom units will not be excluding parents • P eats with one child. There will be no playground equi pment on this site. Ms. Lapitz again questioned if the a fac ' ti es PPl i cant wi 11 be providing recreational l i . The applicant indicated the are Hex reside y t to an space area, the resints are proposed to be seniors, they will be using the open pen space for walks etc. 4, 6 1 * -� - k f L Mrs. Lapitz said the property is more for wildlife open space rather than for use. This prov.i des a nice view. The have a r ' q •. y problem now with motorized vehicles using ng the open space problem. The applicant i can PP t does have to take into account the recreation needs of this community that is being g The applicant said they are now working n the site 1 g pan only. He thought construction of the first phase would begin next spring. Ms. Lapitz said their family has been on the ' 1 and for five, generators. They intend to maintain their property to the ace open s and lake • P P a e as single family property. They are thinking of building another house on the adding onto the existing home. Property and A res ident of the neig • questioned putting high density next to open space and maintain the w i l d l i f e on the site. This ro ose P hase developme P P d three P m pent is much different than what they were originall told about. She did not receive a notice of this change. They had mul tiple dwel in the neighborhood alread ' g dy. The neighbors prefer single—family development for the neighborhood. There • i s no buffering between the high density and the opens ace. She f • P feels s that the zoning w i l l detract from the adjacent residential ro ert P P y A resident from the neighborhood said he moved to the area about 7 years. ago. He commented as the distance his child has to 0 g to school, He fel that the sch ool will.be needed in a few number of y ears. Gene Group, Chairman of the Maplewood Covenant t Church, said they received the e plan with the higher density, it'was a consensus of the board the proposal was too dense. They would support the lower ' PP density. Albert Olson, 2027 17th Avenue sa d there is open space around the site and th should be protected. He asked if a barrie al ong h is property, er would be maintained Secretary Olson said the request at this meet' use plan. Ong is to look at the land Mrs, Carmen, 2818 17th Avenue, said she was 1 gad the patio homes were reduced in number to 13. She would l i k e to see some recreational faci provid p ded on the site. A .res i dent from the area said the ball field • used now, s at the school are heavily The commission questioned if the arks commission • P ss ion had reviewed need for recreation facilities in the area. Secretary Olson said the parks commission did d revi ew the proposal and stated the developer should give consideration to keeping h Ping the ball diamond in use until they h ave to be vacated. Chairman Axdahl closed the public hearing r • g i p ton of the meeting. The commission reviewed with Director Haider the maintenance of the drainage ditch in the open space area. Commissioner Fischer indicated t h e - s i t e is located on major carriers of traffic, this proposal does meet the criteria that has been P ut into the housing section of the.-plan, moved the planning commission recommend the city council approve the resolution to amend the land use lan for the former Harmon School property P Harmony p p ty from S, school and OS, open space t to LSC, limited service commercial, RH, residential high density an g y d RM, residential medium density on the basis that: 1. This land has been declared as excess property and sold P P y d bythe school district making the OS, open space and S, school designations obsolete. 2. The LSC and RH designations are compatible with the ad 'oi ni n re— J g co m— and open spaces uses. The RM designation provides an orderly single e dwel 1 ' y transition to nearby g dwelling properties. 36 The site fronts on White Bear Avenue and Count. Road ad C, each with the capability to provide safe and adequate access for the ro osed . uses. P P 4. The proposed senior and family housing is neede dto achieve the city's ys 1980 to 1990 hossing plan goals for low —to— moderate and modest — income households. Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Commissioner Sletten questioned if there could be a recommendation. included in the motion, regarding the switch in properties. Commissioner Fischer requested that be a separate motion and made clear . that it would be looked upon favorably if such a transaction would occur. u. It should not be made a condition of the approval. Voting on the motion: Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett Ditch Fischer, Larson, Sletten, Whitcomb; Nays -- Commissioner Cardinal Motion carries 7:1 Commissioner Sletten moved the commission recommend an attempt be ma p de to effect a land swap. of northwesterly area with Ramsey ount Open S y y p pace to the northeast segment. . . Commissioner Fischer seconded Ayes--Commissioners Axdah y 1, Barrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Fischer, Larson, Sletten, Whitcomb VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VI. COMMUNICATIONS MEMORANDUM 1►0tion b Council: TO: Cit Manager Endorsed....... FROM: Director of Communit Development 'Nod1fied., SUBJECT: Code Amendment - -M -1 and M-2 Districts DATE: June .11, 1985 Rejecte Date Request Amend the code to increase the distance from a residential district that a conditional use permit is re for buildin in an M-1, Ti manufacturin or M-2, heav manufacturin district. Reasons for the Request Code re a conditional use permit for a buildin or use in an M-1 district,, within 200 feet of a residential district or within 250 feet in an M-2 district. The proposed amendment would chan both to 350 feet. The existin distances ma not alwa be ade to protect residential areas. The state le reco a similar problem several y ears a when the amended the plannin act to increase the re distance for hearin notices on rezonin from 200 to 350 feet, Recommendation Approve the enclosed ordinance, j w Enclosure ORDINANCE N0, AN ORDINANCE INCREASING THE DISTANCE FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN AN M -1 OR M -2 DISTRICT Section 1. Section 36- 187(b) of the M -1 district is amended as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (b) No building or exterior use, except parking, sha-11 be erected, altered or conducted within 350 twe- htttidred feet of a residential distri without a conditional use permit. Section 2. Section 36 -202 of the M -2 district is amended as follows: (additions underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 36 -202. Minimum distances for building and use from a residential rea4deeee district. No b u i l d i n g or exterior use, except parking, 4n- ati- M- 2- 14eayy- MantifaEtttr4 -eg D4atr4et -4e- the -e4ty may be erected, altered or conducted ttaedr- aed -ee- pert-4ee e� - a - het e� p�em�ae� � � ae - P4 - �- Heavy- �4a�e�aettt��- �g- O�et��e -��- tie- duty -ray be-used, within 3 50 twe- huftdred -f 4f ty- f 2504 feet of a residential res+defiee dist rict without a conditional use permit w4th4e- the- e4ty - -e *ee p t- as- attther4eed by- perm4t-4aetted- the- e4ty- eeeee +4. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, t h i s day of , 1985. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Ayes-- Nays-- a r B. Code Amendment: M -1 and M -2 District Secretary Olson said the proposal is, to amend the code to increase the distance from a residential district that a conditional use perm in p its required for building an M -1 or M -2 area ,Commissioner Fischer moved the 1 panning commission recommend the city council adopt the ordinance amending the code for building i n an M- zoning. 1 and M-2 . ing. Commissioner Barrett seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Fischer, Larson, Sl etten Whitcomb .lotion by Council: Awo MEMORANDUM Endorse y Modifie EeJ este TO: City Manager Dat - - - FROM: Associate Planner -- Johnson .. SUBJECT: Tax - exempt Financing--Multiple Dwelling and Housing P g using Bond Plan Amendment APPLICANT: Lexington Investment Company LOCATION: Century Avenue, South of Brookview Court PROJECT: Century Ridge Apartments DATE: June 27, 1985 SUMMARY Request 1. Preliminary approval of a $3.75 million e tax-exempt mortgage P 9 g revenue bond program to construct a 81 -unit rental housing complex. 2. Amend the c i ty' s ' ho us i ng bond plan to include this financing program. Proposal 1. Refer to the site plan on page 8. 240 The unit mix and proposed monthly rents would be: a. 3 efficiency units: $400 b. 39 one - bedroom' units: $500 c. 39 two - bedroom units: $600 39 Construction is proposed to begin in October 1985 and be completed in September, 1986, 4. Community design review board approval of the site and building plans has been requested. 5. The city's full faith and credit would not back these bonds. Comments This proposal is consistent with the requirements for approval of tax- exempt financing ( page 3). Recommendation Approval of the resolution on page 12 to: 1. Grant preliminary approval of $3.75 million in - • tax exempt mortgage, revenue financing for the 81 -unit Century Ridge apartment development, subject to construction beginning within one y ear. Approval is on the basis that: a. The development will not have - a negative effect on the vacancy rates of existing Maplewood apartment complexes. b. There is reasonable assurance that twenty percent of the units will be occupied by low -to- moderate income persons until the bonds are retired, 2. Amend the housing bond plan to include a $3.75 million dollar tax - exempt financing program for the Century Ridge apartment project. 2 BACKGROUND Site Description Gross acreage: 4.2 acres Existing land use: undeveloped Past Actions City Wide 10 -8 -84: Council granted preliminary approval of $3.8 million in tax- exempt financing for the 100 -unit Maple Ridge apartment complex proposed by the Podawi ltz Corporation. to Hazelwood Street and County Road D. The bond closing is expected to take place in July, 1985. 1- 14 -85: Council granted preliminary approval of $5.8 million tax - exempt financing for up to 100 units, for the Hazel Ridge elderly housing development proposed by Health Resources, Inc. at 2696 Hazelwood street. Final approval has been requested. 2- 11 -85: Council granted preliminary approval of $10 million in tax - exempt financing for a 180 -unit Beaver Creek apartment complex proposed by Castle Design and Development at Ivy Avenue and Ferndale Street, Planning 1. Land use plan designation: RH, residential high density 2. Permitted density: 34 people net acre 3. Proposed density: 33.2 4. Zoning: R -3 multiple dwelling 5. Housing: a . The following requirements have been adopted by council for approval of tax- exempt mortgage revenue financing for multiple d w e l l i n g s : 1) The development shall be consistent with the comprehen- sive plan. 2) The development will not have a negative impact on the vacancy rates of existing multiple dwellings in the city. 3) There is reasonable assurance that the development will be able to comply with the 20 percent low -to- moderate income requirement over the l i f e of the bond issue, 3 4) The bond indenture agreement shall require: (a) The developer to annually certify to the city, on the anniversary date of the bonds, compliance with the federal low -to- moderate income requirements. (b) The program trustee, as approved by the city council, shall inform the city of any noncompliance trends. 5) Payment of a program participation fee. b. Federal law regarding the issuance of e tax-exempt mortgage P J g revenue bonds for multiple - family housing requires at least 20 percent of the units to be occupied by low -to- moderate income persons until the bonds are retired, once a person or family is income-qualified, their unit counts toward the twenty percent requirement as long as they reside in the unit even though their income may rise above the ceiling. c. Low -to- moderate income is defined as an annual adjusted household income of 80 percent or less of the average annual income in the twin city area. The 80 percent ceiling is $26,240. (Gross income is reduced by $750 per adult and $500 P er child to calculate adjusted annual income.) In 1984, the Metropolitan Council's suggested rent ceiling for low -to- moderate income households was $575 per month, excluding the cost of utilities for housing, d. Housing bond plan amendment: Council's adoption of the housing bond plan in October 1982 authorized the use of tax - exempt financing for multiple dwellings. This plan, however, did not include specific development programs. As a result, each time a development is approved for this financin g, council must amend the housing bond plan. The amendment must be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council before the developer's request for the tax- exempt financing can be submitted to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for approval. e. According to a marketing opinion (page ), prepared b Gar g 9 p p Y Y Stout of Public Private Ventures, Maplewood could absorb 363 new rental units in 1985 and 256 new rental units in each of the next five years, without causing a vacancy problem for existing developments. Two family-housing projects for a total of 286 units have been granted preliminary approval (past action), Neither has begun construction, and it is unlikely that any of the units will be available for occupancy in 1985. A third request is pending for a 186 -unit project at Stillwater Road and Stillwater Avenue. Occupancy is proposed for 1986. Up to 619 units (363 for 1985 plus 256 for 1986) could be approved for 1986 occupancy without 0 n causing a vacancy problem. This proposal, if approved, in addition to each of the other projects for which this funding has been requested, would create a total of 553 new noneld erly units or 66 less units than is projected to meet the city's need. Procedure 1. HRA recommendation 20 City council decision, following a public hearing 30 Submission of the housing bond plan amendment to Metropolitan Council to review for consistency with the Metropolitan Housing Guide. 4. Submission of the bond program to the MHFA for approval. mb Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line Map 3. Site Pl a n 4. Market Opinion 5. Resolution 5 =- LOCATION MAP 6 Attachment 1 N 77.4E1 1 t•• : L.. o► Is 4w! P' t\ I ( � to L ._ I .•• agog up 7 g °' to v, 193 j � R �� p '' 5 94 7 5 - � Duo 7 • � N , ( 3l 1 N ' ( * (34) (33 (3Z� l 3 1 l / o �) • 19 zo t zs') i8 O° J4o ♦ ` s 21 ZZ ll (L 4 (Z3) j T U(0 � •� t-� f . 3.9 ISO o , ti • ?_4 t l 0 1 Q. f "� n l �► 27 _ 1 1 l 35 c L Z I `^ - {, t � 0 Cc CID An \ ► O6 . 1 v I r I �o Lod 1 , of • - 4 1 f. 4 - C 1 _ 4 a ` ; Ib /AJ 1 I 1 % 129.50 96.d� 3 % 65 76.9 7 95 7Cay5 75 '7rs.9b , ^ r 74 76.5 - 6.9 2 174- ........ ................. � �' �1 1 i D ........ . ........ . .......... .. . � / (t i ) � � .IOC► Sum 164.98 154 g4 - q ���h • .... 34A(0' 134.88 30 30 13419a 134.98 30 30 10() sg 9� ♦�. �; ` 6 c0 r p (aa o m (3z) _ � 0 0 1 �' ( :r � 135 _ 13 6 1 10 °.�� • 1 �. cap) (6. � 45 c� Z �-� o� 3 (-V) 4 ra�4: 1 1 (es �) C37� O 1 41) ti .�• •�� zs t � _ _ ._... 135 _ ' �(22� '�•. C.38) � 1 , � 13 2 76 � i ZP ca3 c s9 3 .......... .... ........... ......... .... V. 7 ( ) 4v 7 ", 34=66 ......... ............ -4 (gs) 7 + r (Ti ass _� -- as) • ':':' _ cn too • 92 aL ti+) 6 za I 9 z 0 9 = = s3 2z t f 13Al 5 7 + 440 1 C ?'�� / sty 1 , 7 10 10 - 19 10 tZ 7e) �S') (n 18 11 in ul Z 13 Ln j t- r` dk 1 co cD t 14 Al 0 9 a _ _ = � I• ao m Y 72) !` 9 4 5 �` 3 4.45 :.i'1. r 3 - C '�9 . 18 15 40 ao 13 r I( PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP Attachment 2 Q N M � 1 / OM N aca 1" a 40' 1-4-1- 4J (D E s to u ■ w M Al t+ u O r a t O 0 J • S I `f f D A TA I be M V J 0 M J w / -/ fib u1 L t� 1 N� h tii.! A • - " { / V. v T OTM• I o t 43 L s. F. Ar TM P- NT UOITS a E / T1uJ a Go & 040#4 192, S.F: 1 d N O TOTAL LWIT t •! '4O PA94;; I OCR ( TC rA L SrA GE.S. -- -.. 4J (D E s to • CENrUR' AVENUE u ■ w M Al t+ u O r a t O 0 J U ,. I be M V J 0 M J w jq ■ u V � V � 4-- a E L N ( _ -0 .m t •r C � J Wm a W i- .� _ U m «0 1284 u+�csas .c..s 1 "t 4 0' • CENrUR' AVENUE Gary E. Stout, President Public Private Ventures, Inc. Mr. Gary Bailey Bailey Enterprises 2233 University Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota Suite 332, 4 Pine Tree Drive Arden Hills, Minn. 55112 (612) 483 -2989 June 7, 1985 1 Dear Mr. Bailey I have independently evaluated your proposal to construct an apartment project, ranging in size from approximately 72 to 78 units in Maplewood, Minnesota. I have reviewed data and information available to Public Private Ventures from: the Census, the Apartment Guide, the apartment owners and operators in and around Maplewood, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, the Minnesota Multi - Family Association, mortgage bankers, other developers,, etc. Based upon the review and analysis of this data performed by my firm, it is my professional opinion that the specific proposed project would not adversely affect the average annual vacancy rates to a point above 59 in existing sound Maplewood rental complexes. Since existing complexes constructed during the 1970's have an ability to rent housing for a rate tower than that you must charge (due to increases in construction, land interest and other costs since that time) most existing owners would have the ability to attract tenants to their units at rents that you would find uneconomic. Therefore, should an unexpected problem develop, you should anticipate that your project would experience the vacancy rates above 5Fo rather the existing projects in Maplewood due to this rent differential. in addition, your proposed project amenities are not found in all existing Maplewood units (such as heated underground parking, larger than normal units, elevators, etc.) which will require both your cost and rent structure to be above that of competing units. Due to the increased costs that your project will absorb, it is likely that your units wi ll not only avoi competition in the same rental market with existing Maplew units, bu t will also avoid competition with other new Maplewood units_ If a project with the amenities that you propose is not available in Maplewood,, past experience indicates that potential Maplewood residents will locate in adjacent areas. The major competition that this project may face is the proposed Brutger project in St. Paul, which proposes similar amenities, but is located and primarily competes in the St. Paul market. 0 A4.j.__L__._I A Given the current demand for rental housing in the area, you could anticipate that the units that you construct will rent at an acceptable rate. You may be able to shorten the 1 to 2 year period normally required for full rent -up and stabilization in a project of this size, if you can move the project rapidly toward construction this calendar year. The financial feasibility of this project appears to depend upon tax exempt financing, an early construction start, and project initiation under existing Federal tax legislation., This conclusion is based upon a number of factors, as summarized in a more extensive report. Basically, Maplewood has a projected average annual rental housing demand in the range of approximately 256 units per year, for the next five years. After five years, the total demand should decrease, based upon current Metropolitan Council projections. Due to low vacancy rates, the current year's demand for 256 rental housing should be increased by at least 107 units (as previously estimated by another consultant) in order to account for the amount of construction necessary to increase vacancy to sound rental units up to approximately the 5S rate that 1s considered normal and optimal. You will be competing in the upper one third of the estimated current market of 363 units. Due to the relative lack of construction of rental units in the Maplewood over the past few years, the above projection should be considered conservative in that there is most likely some "latent" demand for units that normally would have been built In former years had the opportunity been available. This latent demand has not been fully accounted for and therefore is not added to the above first year market projection. The above projections consider: the location of job centers in and near Maplewood, the proximity of the City to nearby population centers, the urban amenities that Maplewood offers, the City's relative lackof problems experienced inmost urban areas, the constrained housing growth In the past, the relatively high job growth in the past, the future projections of fob growth, the impact of job transfers on housing demand close to places of work, the relatively high ratio of housing unit growth to population growth experienced in Maplewood in the past, relatively low local and regional vacancies, declines in turnover rates for rental housing in Maplewood to a point below regional averages in recent years,, increases in apartment rents in the City over the past few years, regional and local fluctuations in multi family construction, the effect of the proposed changes in federal taxation on current and future rental unit development., projections of population and household increase for Maplewood and IN surrounding municipalities, the high past and projected future ratio between job growth and household growth within Maplewood boundaries, greater consumer desire for location in inner ring suburbs due to increased concern about commutation times, the potential impact of future increases of mortgage interest rates on future multifamily housing construction, the potential impact of increased construction costs on multi- family construction, the potential competitive financial impact of constructing new multifamily construction at existing tax exempt rates on units built during the past decade, and other relevant factors. It is also my professi opinion that adequate housing need and demand,_ exists in the municipality for moderate income residents, at or under the maximum current moderate income limit of X26,240, to fill 20% of the units with the required low or moderate income residents. Given the following facts: that these income limits are annually re- evaluated and increased in proportion with increases in average family income in the region; that you have the option to skew rents charged in 20R of the units to ensure that these units will be affordable in the event that an unexpected problem did develop at some point in the future; and that you have had experience meeting this obligation in other projects in which you have an ownership or management interest, in my opinion t fr o J ect should be able to com�ly_with th fe deral low-to-moderate income requirements over the life of the bond issue. Data and other information documenting these conclusions is available if required. Please do not hesitate to contact me at any time if questions arise in your review of these conclusions. Sincerely yours 00� 4 �� Gary E. Stout GS /m 11 5650 RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A FINANCING P ROG RAM FOR A MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT AND THE P ROG RAM , AND THE AMENDMENT OF THE HOUSING REVENUE BOND PROGRAMS PORTION OF THE CITY'S 462C HOUSING PLAN TO INCLUDE THE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD TO ISSUE HOUSING REVENUE BONDS AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE FINANCING PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT FOR APPROVAL TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE SAID PROJECT AND PROGRAM (LEXINGTON INVESTMENT CO. PROJECT) WHEREAS, (a) Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act) confers upon cities the power to issue revenue bonds to finance a program for the purposes of planning, administering, making or purchasing loans with respect to one or more multi - family housing developments within the boundaries of the city; Y (b) The City has received from Lexington Investment Co., a Minnesota general partnership to be formed with Sherman Rutzick, James Rutzick, Gary Bailey, William McCaw, David Kluender and Ken Ellenberg as general partners (the "Developer "), a proposal that the City undertake a program to finance a Project hereinafter described, through the issuance of revenue bonds or obligations (in one or more series or which may be in the form of a single debt instrument) (the "Bonds ") pursuant to the Act; (c) The City desires to: facilitate the development of rental housing within the community; encourage the development of affordable housing opportunities for residents of the City; encourage the development of housing facilities designed for occupancy by persons of low or moderate income; and encourage the development.of blighted or underutilized land and structures within the boundaries of the City; and the Project will assist the City in achieving these objectives; (d) The City desires to expand the "Housing Revenue Bond Programs" portion of its 462C Housing Plan to incorporate the program for the Project; (e) The Developer is currently engaged in the business of providing rental housing. The Project to be financed by the Bonds is the construction and equipping of a building containing approximately 81 rental units, anticipated to consist of three efficiency units, 39 one - bedroom units and 39 two - bedroom units, located immediately southwest of the crossing of Battle Creek and Century Avenue in the City, which will result in the provision of additional rental housing opportunities to persons within the community; (f) The City has been advised by the Developer that conventional, commercial financing to pay the capital costs of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but . the Developer has also advised the City that with the aid of municipal financing, and resulting low borrowing costs, the Project is economically more feasible; (g) A public hearing on the Project, the financing program and the amendment of the "Housing Revenue Bond Programs" portion of the City's 462C Housing Plan therefor was held on July 22, 19 8 5 by the Maplewood City Council, after notice was published, all as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.05, subd. 5, at which public hearing all those appearing at said hearing who desired to speak were heard; (h) No public of ficial of the City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project; (i) The City has received a r4port from a qualified real estate marketing analyst showing (i) that the Project will not have a negative.impact on vacancy rates of existing multiple dwellings in the City and (ii) the development will be able to comply with the federal law.and moderate income requirements over the life of the bond issue. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City hereby gives preliminary approval to the proposal of the Developer that the City undertake the Project, described above, and the program of financing therefor, '• pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, consisting of the construction and equipping of multi - family rental housing facilities within the City pursuant to the Developer's specifications and to a revenue agreement between the City and the Developer on such terms and conditions with provisions for revision from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the principal and interest on the Bonds in a total principal amount of approx- imately $3,750,000 to be issued pursuant to the Act to finance the construction and equipping of the Project; and said agreement may also provide for the entire interest of the Developer therein to be mortgaged to the purchaser or purchasers of the Bonds, or a trustee for the holder(s) of the Bonds; and the City hereby undertakes preliminarily to issue its bonds in accordance with such terms and conditions; 2. The "Housing Revenue Bond Programs" portion of the City's 462C Housing Plan as herein proposed to be amended is hereby approved and adopted and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to submit the amended 462C Housing Plan to the Metropolitan Council for its review and comment. The comments .of the Metropolitan Council, if any, shall be submitted to the City Council for its consideration; 3. At the option of the Developer, the financing may be structured so as to take advantage of whatever means are available and are permitted by law to enhance the security or or marketability y eta i.li.ty of , the Bonds; provided that any such financing structure must be approved by the City; 4. On the basis of information available to the City, it appears, and the City hereby finds, that the Project constitutes a multifamily housing development within the meaning of subdivision 5 of Section 462C.02 of the Act; that the Project will be primarily occupied, in part, by persons of low or moderate income; that the availability of the financing under the Act and the willingness of the City to provide such financing will be a substantial inducement to the Developer to undertake the Project, and that the effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the provision of additional multi - family rental housing opportunities to residents of the City, to assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and marginal land and to promote more intensive development and use of land within the City; 5e The Project, and the proram to finance the Project by the issuance of revenue bond is hereby given preliminary approval by the City subject to the approval of the financing program by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (the "MHFA") and subject to final approval by the City, the Developer and the purchasers of the Bonds as to ultimate details of the financing of the Project; 6. In accordance with subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05, Minnesota Statutes, the Mayor of the City is hereby authorized and directed to submit the program for financing the Project to the MHFA, requesting its approval, and other officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to provide the MHFA with preliminary information as it may require; 7. The Developer has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the financing of the Project whether or not the Project is carried to completion and whether or not approved by MHFA will be paid by the Developer; 8. Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, acting as bond counsel, is authorized to assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents relating to, the Project and the financing program therefor, to consult with the City Attorney, the City's fiscal consultant, Developer and purchasers of the Bonds (or trustee for the purchasers of the Bonds) as to the maturities, interest rates and other terms and provisions of the Bonds and as to the covenants and other provisions of the necessary documents and submit such documents to the City for final approval; 9. Nothing in . this Resolution or the documents prepared pursuant hereto shall authorize the expenditure of any municipal funds on the Project other than the revenues derived from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this purpose, The Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property or funds of the City except the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. The holder or holders of the Bonds shall never have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the outstanding principal on the Bonds or the interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereon against any property of the City . The Bonds shall recite in substance that the Bonds, including the interest thereon, are payable solely from the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; 10. In anticipation of the approval by the MHFA and the issuance of the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the Project, and in order that completion of the project will not be unduly delayed when approved, the Developer is hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward payment of that portion of the costs of the Project to be financed from the proceeds of the Bonds, as the Developer considers necessary, including the use of interim', short -term financing, subject to reimbursement from the roceeds of the Bonds if n w p any when delivered but otherwise without liability on the part of the City; 11. If construction of the Project is not started within one year fran the date hereof, this resolution shall thereafter have no force and effect and the preliminary approval herein granted is withdrawn; 12 . The actions of the City Clerk in causing public notice of the public hearing and in describing the general nature of . the Project and estimating the principal amount of the Bonds to be issued to finance the Project is in all respects ratified and confirmed; Adopted by the City Council of the. City of Maplewood, Minnesota this 22nd day of July, 1985. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF MAPLEWOOD I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to a resolution giving preliminary approval to a multi-family rental housing development project. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 22nd day of July, 1985. City Clerk (SEAL) MINUTES MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY July 9, 1985 B. Preliminary Tax — exempt Financing roval 9 pp Century Ridge Apartments Staff recommended approval is outlined in the staff report. Gar y 6ai ley o f Lexington Investments stated that if the requested financing s approved, the intend to b g Y e under construction later this summer. Commissioner Schmit moved and Commissioner Connell seconded Connelly to recommend tha co uncil approve the proposed resolution to grant: (1) p reliminar y y approval of X3. 75 mi llion i n tax— exempt financing for the 81 —unit Century Ridge development near Creek on Century venue subject sect to construction beginning within one year,and (2) authorize the city's 4 � 6ond y 62e Hous i n g Plan to be amended to include this program, ram. Motion carried. Ayes - -all 3 F MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager. � FROM: Associate Planner -- Johnson r• SUBJECT: Variance (Width of Land Area •' P � J�otion by Co LOCATION: White Bear Avenue, South of Lydia Avenue W1 APPLICANT: Edina Realty, Inc. Zn(j4rr3@ OWNER: First Trust Company of St. Paul PROJECT: Ed Realty Of �. E odifie DATE. June 20, 1985 SUMMARY Request Approval of a variance to reduce the width of the required r q ed landscaped area. Proposal 1. The applicant wants to place the parkin lot for the ro 0 g p p sed office building eleven feet from the side and ten feet from the rear property lines. 2. Code requires a landscaped area of ' at least twenty eet i ' y n width when a nonresidential use is located adjacent to resident � zoned property, 3 . The variance would apply to the easte'rl 140 feet of the south y property line and all of the north and east property lines, P Y 4. The office building would meet all required setbacks 5. See the applicant's letter of request. 6. This review is for consideration of the variance only. Detailed plans will be submitted later for the board's review. Comments The city is presently proposing a parkin ordinance amendment. mendment. This amendment proposes that parking stalls next to a curb be nine by eighteen feet in size and those inside a arkin ' i P g lot be nine by nineteen feet, If this ordinance is approved, there would be no need for a rear yard setback variance and the ro osed nine-foot - ' P P e foot side yard setback variances could be reduced to six -foot variances ' The side yard setbacks could, therefore, be increased to fourteen feet. This request is consistent with the requirements for q approval of a variance, If the code amendment is approved, however, ' s Pp � � the parking plan should be adjust ted to provide a twenty -foot rear yard setback and six -foot side yard setbacks. To maintain a uniform appearance as viewed from the ark along the east P � the berm and screening g t property line of the Maplewood East Shopping adjacent to the common Center should be continued ad � n property line of this property and the park on the applicant's property, P P p y. Recommendation Approve the enclosed resolution (page 11) , approving a nine-foot parking lot setback variance from the northerly property ine and the easterly y er y 140 feet of the south property line, and a ten foot parking lot setback variance from the east property line of the proposed Edina Realty office building site on the basis that: 1. Strict enforcement of the zoning code would cause an undue hardship unique to this property because: a. The is to the north and east, although zoned for F, farm residence use, s planned for SC, service commercial use. b. There are no dwellings located near these property lines. c. The planned commercial development to the north and the existing development to the south can have parking lots within five feet of this property. 20 The spirit and intent of the zoning code would be met because the proposed eleven foot setback to the south property line is wide enough g to accommodate an adequate buffer to the adjacent park property. Approval is subject to: 1. Increasing the amount of setback along the side and rear property lines, i f council amends the proposed parking code amendment, 2. The applicant providing a berm and landscaped screening along the common property line with the city park to the south. This berm and screening shall be similar to the berm behind the Maplewood East Shopping Center, and shall meet Section 36 -27 of the city code. 3. Any additional landscaping elsewhere on the site shall be subject to the requirements of the community design review board. 2 t BACKGROUND Site Description Size: 150 x 430 feet Existing land use: undeveloped Surrounding Land Uses North and east: A farm house and barn on about 6.4 acres of land planned for SC, service commercial use South: The Maplewood East Shopping Center and Maplewood Heights park P ghts city West: White Bear Avenue. Across the street are three banking facilities Past Action 9- 10 -84: Council approved a zone change from F farm residence ce to LBC, limited business commercial for the proposed Edina Realty office building, Planning 1. Lund use plan designation: SC service commercial a 20 Zoning: LBC, limited business commercial 3. Compliance with land use laws: - a. State law: 1) Section 462.357, Subd. 6 requires that the following findings be made before a zoning variance can be g ranted: a) Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration.. Undue hardship as used in connection with the granting of a .variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. b) The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. 3 b. City code: 1. Section 36-27(a) requires a landscaped area of not feet P less than twenty et in width where a nonresidential use would be within-two hundred feet of a residentially-zoned property. 2. Section 27 (b) (2) states that screenin g shall be required where there would be exterior storage of goods or materials which could g g unreasonably annoy or endanger surrounding property owners. 3. Section 27(c) states that screening ening shall be satisfied by the use of a screening fence, berm, lant screening Wing or a combination thereof. If the topography, na to natural growth of vegetation, permanent buildings, or other barriers meet the standards of subsections (1) and (2) below, they may be substituted for all Y y or part of the screening fence or planting screen: (a) A planting screen shall consist of evergreen Plantings. Trees shall be a minimum of two and one- half (2 1 /2) inches in trunk diameter, two (2) feet above grade.. Shrubs may be used is combination with a berm and shall be a minimum of two (2) feet in height. Spacing of trees and shrubs shall be so as to create an eighty (80) percent oPl.aque screening at least six (6) feet in height. (b) Berms shall have moveable side slopes. Slopes greater than two and one -half (2 1/2) to one may be used if the slopes are stepped with retaining walls. Plant materials resistant to erosion may be substituted for sod when approved by the community design review board. (c) Screening,, fences shall be painted or stained whenever necessary, so as not to fade, chip or discolor. Broken or knocked down fences shall be repaired. Planting screens shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Plantings that have died shall be promptly replaced. Screening may be satisfied with a screening fence. e. A screening fence shall be attractive, compatible with the rinic al building P P p lding and surrounding land uses, at least six (6) feet in height, and P rovide a minimum opaqueness of eighty (80) percent. 40 Site, landscape and building plans are sub to community design review board and approval. 4 Procedure 10 Community design review board 24D City council decision, following public g p lic hearing mb Attachments 1. Location Map .2. Property Line and Zoning Map 30 Site Plan 4. Applicant's Letter of Request 510 Resolution 4 �I WHITE BEA LAKE (3) N. C HIP"" c S8 ' (6) N. 8AA7EWY 1 (7) N. MARY CT. COUNTY ROAD 65 ` G AI L Avff- T30NRZZW (4) 34 wo o YNN a) u) FURNESS t (2) (6) /4 CT. S) TTlN R2 21M A -- "L Y D IA _A EAM r� u _i�ANV� Iil K3) i Y M MAPLE LANE ,. II MAPLEVI EW :: : :••:: (I.) MAPLE LANE • 68 (2 .) CHIPPE WA CIRCLE -01 (3.) CHIPPEWA AVE. =�'� =� • 0•� PRIVATE STREET (MESSASI AV E) NORTH ST. PAUL AVE. A 2s 3 �� 40 N EDGENU. RD. J 65 s DEMONT AVE a W AVE II to AVE. XIA NMI AV m •.. 2400 N `� YA 1 RVA Ay YO :. COURT ,� ��• 36 A TLE EN AvE. 0PE AVE. *: LARK AVE. }. h M C _ a LAURIE RD � a s A v E . 65 � � W a I �- --~� , 25 21 s0 N. RU KE // AVE. �1 It �� ���`•. LOCATION MAP 0 6 Attachment 1 ti . /9• •!' ?.'►`E'. '• • : fit. r ` - Ara j iaoa t h R h r w z o ' in �N ti h • cb � a h ti h 12.ot' w 40 .o4' ti 'c �, N o rwe s t s 6i Z �Z.o h � M ry Red Lob: S PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 7 Attachment 2 Q N t 430' r.r �� �.r r� �r� �r� r. rr �n �� rr r �r� r ��r 7r� �� ��r rr �r as a. s err i� r �■� �� � 0 1 o i l ITT /� f ; 49 ti:; :•. i'�!�iiC.•: ;v: ;: • :•: f , ;.. •tom .I Goan 5 PROP0SEDi�`f f o f ED I N A �:.; •. X ���•� f: REALTY tiff Ln YXI. ILA- q , A 5 1 t • �r � r � r�r rr is rr r.�. � r�� �r� .r �■� ..�. r. -_ - r - _� _ = rr .r. '�� r. SITE PLAN s Attachment 3 Edin aReal Maplewood Office INC. 2025 Woodlynn Avenue, Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 • (612) 770 -1775 October 31, 1984 City of Maplewood 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Attention: Planning Commission To Whom it May Concern: Explanation of proposed variance The property is zoned LBC with setbacks of 30 feet front, 20 feet side and rear and 20 feet parking areas. Parking requirements are one space for every 200 square feet of ground floor and one space for every 300 square feet of upper floor area in excess of 1,000 square feet. Based on the proposed building size of 14,400 square feet (7,200 square feet per floor) total parking stalls (10 feet x 20 feet) required are 57. We are asking for a variance on the parking setback requirement from 20 feet to 11 feet at the north, east and southerly lot lines. We are proposing to design 94 parking stalls to provide ample parking of staff and clientele. To provide this number of stalls within the 150 feet property dimension, the 2 row drive and er endicular P P park is the most efficient and productive design. As noted, it is important to Edina Realty to provide this number of stalls for their business within their own property limits. The setback of 20 feet would eliminate 24 stalls from this configuration. Diagonal parking within the setback limits does not leave adequate drive lanes and eliminates 10 parking stalls. This project site has been rezoned from F to LBC , as is projected for the property to the East and North of this parcel. The property to the south, back to within 150 feet of the east property is zoned BC, the remaining length is adjacent to park land. rC E Re l a REALTORS ®, MLS 9 Attachment 4 4 City of Maplewood Planning Commission October 31, 1984 Page 2 The landscaping requirements have been reviewed and will be complied with on all boundaries,, It is felt this variance will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the parking setback requirements. We are very concerned about the Asethetic quality and image of our business and do not intend to detract from the intent of the code. Thank you for considerin g this matter. Si a y, R ber Sne Sales Manager - Maplewood Office Edina Realty, Inc. 10 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 1985 at 7 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: WHEREAS, Edina Realty, Inc. applied for a variance for the following-described property: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 2, Township 29, Range 22: Commencin g at a point on the Easterly right of way line of White Bear Avenue 731.5 feet Northerly of the Southerly line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence Easterly and parallel with said Southerly line for a distance of 430 feet; thence Northerly at right angles to said Southerly line a distance of 150 feet; thence Westerly on a line drawn parallel to said Southerly line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, to its point of intersection with the Easterly line of White Bear Avenue; thence southerly along said Easterly right of way line to point of beginning. 9 WHEREAS, Section 36 -27 of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires a landscaped area of no less than twenty feet in width where a nonresidential use abuts residentially -zoned property; WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing side yard parking lot setbacks of eleven feet, requiring a variance of nine feet, and a rear yard parking lot setback of ten feet, requiring a variance of ten feet; WHEREAS, the procedural history of this variance is as follows: 1. This variance was applied for on November 2, 1984. 2. This variance was reviewed by the Maplewood Community Design Review Board on May 28, 1985. The board recommended to the city council that said variance be 3. The Maplewood 1985 to consider this mailed pursuant to law. given an opportunity to council also considered and review board, City Council held a public, hearing on variance. Notice thereof was ' publ ished and All persons present at said hearing were be heard and present written statements. The reports and recommendations of the city staff NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MA PLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the above - described variance be approved on the basis of the following findings of fact: 11 Attachment 5 1. Strict enforcement of the zoning code would cause an undue hardship unique to this property because, a. The property to the north and east, although zoned for F, farm residence use, is planned for SC, service commercial use, , b. There are no located near these ro ert lines, P P Y c. The planned commercial development to the north and the existing development to the south can have parking lots within five feet of this property. 2. The spirit and intent of the zoning code would be met because the proposed eleven foot setback to the south property line is wide enough to accommodate an adequate buffer to the adjacent P ark property, Approval is subject to a. Increasing the amount of setback along the side and rear property lines if council amends the proposed parkin g code amendment, b. The applicant providing a berm and landscaped screening along the common property line with the city park to the south. This berm and screening shall be similar to the berm behind the Maplewood East Shopping Center, and shall meet Section 36 -27 of the city code, CIO Any= additional landscaping elsewhere on the site shall be subject to the requirements of the community design i n review board, in consideration of the planned commercial land to the north and east. Adopted this Seconded by STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) CITY OF MAPLEWOOD day of ,1985. Ayes ---- SS, 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 da 1985, with the original y o f iginal on file in my office, and the same is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to this variance Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city this day of 19850 Y City Clerk -t .._- % - - - - - 4 w M TO: FROM - SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: OWNERS: DATE Request Action by Council: MEMORANDUM End o rse d.....,.._.�,.,_ Modif l e sate "Now City Manager date Director of Community Development Plan Amendments and Rezonings Highway 36, City Limits and Cope Avenue Hillcrest Development and City.of Maplewood Hillcrest Development, Charles Humphrey and James and Gudrun Pomush June 13, 1985 1. Amend the city's land use plan from RL, residential low density to BW, business warehouse and RM, residential medium density as shown on page 7. 2. Amend the zoning map from R -1, single family residential and BC business commercial to M -1, light manufacturing and R -2, double dwelling as shown on page 9. Comments .The court has ordered the city to approve this plan amendment and a consistent rezoning. The council's revious action to rezone a P part of this site from BC, business commercial to R -1 and denial of a p etition by H illcrest Development for a plan amendment have been voided by the court after Hillcrest Development brought a suit against the city. Recommendation ( at least four votes are required f o*r approval) 10 Approve the enclosed resolution amending the land use plan from RL, residential low density to BW, business warehouse and RM, residential medium density as shown on page 7, based on the district court's order. 2. Amend the zoning map from R -1, single family residential and BC business commercial to M -1, light manufacturin g and R -2 double dwelling as shown on page 9. In addition to the required findings in code, these rezonings are approved on the basis that: " a. The previous rezoning to R -1 was voided by district court. b. Rezonings, compatible with the plan amendments, are required by the court and state law. • c. The proposed zonings are the most compatible with the court ordered plan amendments. BACKGROUND Site Description Acreage: 9.5 Existing land use: a city water tower and undeveloped land Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Castle Drive and Highway 36 Easterly: single dwellings and undeveloped land in North St. Paul planned and zoned for single dwellings Southerly: single dwellings and undeveloped land, planned and Zoned for single dwellings Westerly: Maplewood Care Center and single dwellings Past Actions 11 -4 -65: Council approved the BC zone on the Hillcrest Development site for the construction of a small shopping complex. 3- 21 -83: The planning commission tabled a proposed rezoning of the BC zone to R -1 to give Hillcrest Development time to apply for a plan amendment. 5- 16 -83: The planning commission set a hearing date for the plan amendment requested by Hillcrest Development and expanded the area west to the Maplewood Care Center. 5- 23 -83: The city council held a public hearing and tabled the rezoning .until the planning commission considered the plan amendment requested by Hillcrest Development. 6-20-83: The planning commission recommended approval of the plan amendment as shown on page 7. 7- 11 -83: Council did not approve any amendments to the plan. 8 -1 -83: The planning commission tabled a request to rezone the BC zone to R -1, as they had addressed this issue previously and felt the s i t e should remain BC. . 2 r 9- 12 -83: Council rezoned the BC zone to R -1. 5- 14 -85: After a court hearing, district court voided the council actions and ordered the city to amend the plan as recommended by the staff and planning commission and rezone accordingly. Planning 10 Land use plan designation: RL, residential low density and W, water tower 29 The RL designation is primarily designated for a variety of single dwellings. An occasional double dwelling may be allowed. 39 The BW, business warehouse designation includes governmental and public utility buildings and structures, storage and warehousing facilities, wholesale business and office establishments, cartage and express facilities, radio television stations and other industrial uses of a lower- intensity nature. 4. The RM, residential medium density designation provides for such housing types as single dwellings on smaller lots, double. dwellings and town houses. 5. One of the general development design objectives in the comprehensive plan (p. 18 -5) states, "Whenever possible, changes in the land g • use shall occur at center mid -block points,,so that similar uses front on the same street, or at borders of areas separated by major man -made or natural barriers." Taxes Mr. Gerald Augst, of the Ramsey County Assessor's Office, states that rezoning this area for commercial use would not affect the valuation or taxes of surrounding homes or even a home rezoned for commercial use. If the home was sold for a commercial use, it would then be taxed as such. Public Works 'Sewer and water are available Parks The city's park plan proposes a neighborhood park in the area of County Road B and the North St. Paul border. The director of community services stated that the park and recreation commission is not interested in the Hillcrest site. 3 Citizen Comments Surveys were sent to the property owners within 350 feet, of the 22 replies, eight were in' favor, four had no opinion and ten objected. Procedure 10 Planning commission holds a public hearing and makes a recommendation to the city council. 2. City council makes the final decision ]c Attachments 10 Location Map 20 Sherwood Glen Plan -- existing 3. Proposed Plan Map 4. Existing Zoning 50 Proposed Zoning 6. M -1 district 7. Resolution- -plan amendment 80 Resolution -- rezoning 90 Applicant's letter of justification 10. Court order 4 . . — U U ' U U x o. I t| . � _ IGHTS C 0-0 KOHL LN-JL.AVLr. ROAD -j DEMONT AV ST 10- A AVE. SE N AV AV L Atf 7 7AVM SHERREN AV AV Lj rAOV"C. LARK AVIE. Lum" AVE : 25 xAjj AV NA ir - 0 A V 111. CS 1w : 0� : O - D� _ LOC'ATI'ON MAP" Attachment one O' 1 A O _ n AL J. T ._ .inter ang rm a r� RhM A S s 7 ' r L 1 • Sherwood Glen � � RL y residential low density Existing land use -PLAN NEIGIIBOn'IOGD LAND USE w. water tower 6 Attachment two a �d • n _ o lo ----------------- J ---- J..�� —L ' a � �'��� � '���''�� ^"�'�.�"�• ���w '�-._� mow.. -� • �...�. +. •�.��• -nr+ �r - ._.w�.� .� ......��_r.....w • • � � ��� 1 � • i� T y� � w �..� � _ _ � _ w � - -. _ i � � _. i � � _. � i .� i -T ..� F • i r P t t _ ! 1 I ' 11 , i��� y I _ I ! ! ! ! :. i i , t! i ; _ • : ; 1 1 •�•� T t I t f �� s 1 i r 1 •. 1 :} a N T1 i 1 1 •, 1. •. t, 't i w t" ! .� 1 1 ! !! _ 1 I 1 i i i � 1 ! 1 � ! i I 1 3 , 61 . I ! 1 , ! 1 1 f 1 i I I 1 ! i f 1 • . tv c. •r , cl :� t 1 22 .1928.1930 I �� JOOD CARE -- - ' • , AV U T _ ti N • l 917 19271 t , 2272 Jr Lq JD CC U �. �... 1!4 .� W _ r 4 tY a c. p o C.! 9 5 a• 8 _____ -- 1 1-24-77 -24 - T T Ilk ROAD • .—� • it BW, business warehousing PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT RL, residential low density RM, residential medium density W, water tower Attachment three 4 N 10 ro (7) C8� 1ZS 15 G� r .o F J 34�- !C / O p �• • i i — �. — -. • w .. .N M • -- am 4W - 1 f� G 7 8 9 f 11 1+ ft RREN 4 • Code - Avenue . DO3 15a . C 24� c z oo _ _4 � � ; "-• � � � a� � , t om '• e--- � ( � i '*- �' N` d� 19 3f SM& MW 4W 7 i► � o a � 7 00 boo � t 4 R _.1 • b7 . _ -� 40 .1- t oo V E - �- R f B C :...:: ...' .: o Xx F,.• : •r.:.•. Al , � y � ':.. ;t •:,�:.::.:: ::,�� ..:. Water T ow e r �. : i� : :�•:• :� �:.: •�.,.:•_::::.• �•..�.;.�. � = �' -:� .-'- t•: --r' - :;n;,;.wr.w: {ter; '..a.s;�::} : ��;.s�`:;.}. . is :w:• .''►: 4-J in •N : :•.'. :•• ''� � y � o tt t s 1 r � • N 14J _ N CD _ PAU El 554.74 eli E t � _ AV E Z.97.37 CD Q , L _ h I r — - - — - — — poC�. 1p 1 2 1.78 o.c , t�°•� ?_°a7.34' -5 Z97 ' ROAD .b7 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP (existing) R -1, single dwell . ..... Area to be rezoned BC, business commercial 8 Attachment t f o u r f s C 13 i 0 4 _� 4 F W am ISM, 14 (A) r 10 9 lot; W 15 11 (to) ,� I t'? Pa • V L ► 0 6-N MI 100 -� r I N G AA H WM ............ .......... L L 40- 19 22 193 92419281 0. 17 92 1 325 7 8 40 A ................. AY T 3 Z REN A M aplewood Care Centerj- :. V3 rA 0 .... .......... I. ...... 4 2 1 1 1 14 2 11 10 L - L v � f oo- or .... .... .... ..... I 25 71 '16 17 1 2 2 924 4 2 2 7 fe I 01 144 t u Cope Avenue 5 4 3 1 ■ (13) 1 ' 7; 0 0 ) ro -50 30) 4p 1 4 00 . r in C� s) ............. 47 too I S 40 go a 4W dF W dW 4b 4W 4b dw R V- E 7 __ :X. 1 rn -------- ft — L e"M Water Tower ........... ... ........ 594.1-9 L& ILI o CL 0 V1 r- 03 - V 4 76 03 4J 4J V) V), Z E CD i Ot4 eCS �- ! 1. � V • � ! 77 ?1 (3 t) a 46 A. 4 dr OS 0 2 594.74 AV o =� �s�, A U L V) O 6 sauna ro WANT Q DO t Lim Csb) 2 1.7a oc. ° I� r 0 ROAD 44(o.01 -944,-.ja 1 : b7 - 1 0 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING - MAP Area to be rezoned. (Proposed) M li manufacturin P-2, double dwellin R-1, sin dwellin Attachment five �'''�''� �`'� N oil y 1 5W ■ rn -------- ft — L e"M Water Tower ........... ... ........ 594.1-9 L& ILI o CL 0 V1 r- 03 - V 4 76 03 4J 4J V) V), Z E CD i Ot4 eCS �- ! 1. � V • � ! 77 ?1 (3 t) a 46 A. 4 dr OS 0 2 594.74 AV o =� �s�, A U L V) O 6 sauna ro WANT Q DO t Lim Csb) 2 1.7a oc. ° I� r 0 ROAD 44(o.01 -944,-.ja 1 : b7 - 1 0 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING - MAP Area to be rezoned. (Proposed) M li manufacturin P-2, double dwellin R-1, sin dwellin Attachment five �'''�''� �`'� N DMSI0N 9. U-•1 LIGHT LAHMACnWX DISTRICT r Sec. 36 -266. Permitted uses. • Zbe following uses are permitted in the hi-1 District prow ded that, ao use which !s noxious or hazardous shall be permitted. + (a) AxW use listed as a permitted use in a BC Business and Commercial District, if the property is not designated for LSC Limited Service Coa- mercial orP Residential Medium density use on the city's comprehensive plan. (b ) Rbolesa]e business establiaboents. t (c) Custca shop for ma articles or products sold cc the premises. ' (d) Plumbing, heating, air conditions -` banging, . root �, glazing, Painting, paper- ' roofing ventilating and electrical contractors, blacksmith abop, earientry, soldering or welding shop. i (e) Printer's shop. - (f) Place of ammsement, recreation or assembly. (g) Bottling establishment. . (b) lknufacturing, assembly or processing of: (I) Canvas and canvas products. • (II) Clothing and otber textile products. ( III) II ectri cal equipment, appli cances and supplies, except heavy electrical machinery. (IV) Food products, except meat, poultry or fish. (Y) Jewelry, clocks or watches. (VI) Leatber products. f ( VII) Wds cal, dental or drafting equipment, ti cal op goods. (VIII) Masi cal instruments. - (IX) Perfumes, pharmaceutical producta, rubber products and synthetic treated fabrics. (X) Sma11 products from the following previously pre a Cory, feathers, felt, ter pared materials: shells. ,glass. hair, born, paper, plastics or (XI) Sporting goods. (XII) Tool, dye and pattern making or similar small machine shops. (XI II.) Wood products. (i) Carpet and rug cleaning. U Laundry, dry cleaning or dyeing plant. (k) Laboratory, research, experimental or test ' fag • _ (1) offices ( m ) School • :f ( a ) Warebouse (o) Accessory use : on the same lot with and customarily nciden of the above permitted uses, inclvd y tai to an � ing an apartment for security purposes. Code 1965, 1 909.010; ord. Ho. 395, j 1, 5•- 13-76; ors. Ho. 556, f 1, 12- 12 -83) Sec. 36 -167. Canditienal uses. (a) 7be following uses are pernedtted in an M-1 DlBtrict subsequent - approval of a conditional use permit: q eat to (1) Used car lot. (Z) Yard for the storage, sale or distribution of ice, coal, ftiel oil • building materials or similar materials. Junk le ' yards shall not be allowed. , sa - age or wrecking (3) Any use listed as a permitted use in a BC Business Commercial District, if the property is designated for 1SC Limited Service Commercial or RV Residential medium density use on the eity's comprehensive plan. (4) Any use of the same character as a permitted use in Section 36 -186. (S) Trucking yard or terminal. (b) No building or exterior use, except parking, sha11 be erected, altered or conducted within two hundred feet of a residential district without a conditional use permit. ft mob Attachment six j Plan Amendment Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is considering an amendment to the Mapiewood.comprehensive plan from RL, residential low density to BW, business warehouse and RM, residential medium density or the property Y P P y bounder] by Highway 36, North St. Paul and Cope Avenue. WHEREAS, the procedural history of this plan amendment is as follows: 110 This plan amendment was initiated by Hillcrest Development and the City of Maplewood. 2. The Maplewood Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 20, 1983 and June 17, 1985 to consider this plan amendment. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law. All P ersons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to be heard and present written statements. The planning commission recommended to the city council that said plan amendment be approved, 3. The Maplewood City Council did not approve said plan amendment on July 11, 1983. 4. District court, on May 14, 1985, voided the council action and ordered the city to amend the plan as proposed, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the plan designations for the following areas be changed as follows: 1. The area bounded by Highway 36, North St Paul, the south line of block 11, lots 1 through 15 and block 10, lots 1 through 5 and the west line of the east half of block 7, lot 26 and block 10, lot 5 shall be changed from RL to BW, business warehousing. 2. Block 10, lots 28 through 30 and block 11, lots 16 through 22 and 27 through 30 shall be changed from RL to RM, residential medium density. Approval is based on the district court's order. Adopted this day of , 1985. Seconded by Ayes -- 11 Attachment seven Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting g of the city council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly called Y and held in the council chambers in said city on the day f P 1985 at 7 .m. Y The following members were present: The following members were absent: WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood initiated the following ezonin g s: g 1. From R -1 single dwelling residential and, BC, business commercial to M -1, light manufacturing: Block 6; Lot 1 - 15, Block 11; Lot 1 - 4 and the East half of Lot 5, Block 10; . and Lots 27 - 30 and the East half of Lot 26, all in Dearborn Park, Section 11, Townshi 29, Range 22, 2. From R -1 and BC to R -2 double dwelling: Lots 16 - 30 Block 11 and Lots 27 - 30 and the East half of Lot 26, Dearborn Park, Section 11, Township 29, Range 22. WHEREAS, the procedural history of this rezoning is as follows: 1. This rezoning- was initiated by the City of Maplewood, pursuant to Chapter 36 Article VI Ordinances, P ' P t I of the Maplewood Code of 2. This rezoning was reviewed by the Maplewood Plannin Commission on dune 17 1985. The planning commission recommended to the city council that said rezoning be approved, 3. The Maplewood City Council held a public hearing 1985 to consider this rezoning, on ' g. Notice thereof was published and mailed pursuant to law. All persons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to be heard and resent written statements. tements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the ci ty staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL that the above - described rezoning be approved on the basis of the following ' findings of fact: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, p , purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. The proposed change will not substantial) injure ure or detract property y � act from the use of neighboring p perty or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the ro ert adjacent acent P P Y � to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded, q y feguarded . 17 A11__E___t _!_L 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable and the P ublic welfare, .4 The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient and economical nomical extension of public services and .facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire P rotection and schools. 5. The previous rezoning to R -1 was voided by district court. 60 Rezonings, compatible with the plan amendments are required by the court and state law. 7. The proposed zonings are the most compatible with the court ordered plan amendments Adopted this day of , 1985. 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 hat I have carefully compared r ed th y p e attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City of Maplewood held on the day f , 1985 with the original on y file in my office, and the same is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to a rezoning. Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city y this day of , 1985. City Clerk City of Maplewood, 13 STATEMENT OF WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION V f1U nVTAT�IM TAT T 711►Tr% TTn nT % nr4 - r"'r�%�"r�%T Applicant Hillcrest Development, the owner of numerous lots previously described, which are located along Minnesota Trunk Highway 36, north of Cope Avenue and west of Ariel Street, submits this Statement of Written Justification for Changing the Land Use Classification under the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan for that property. We believe that a change from the existing low- density residential classifi- cation to a commercial classification is warranted for the following reasons: 1. The property in question is situated in an area of high ground on the frontage road immediately bordering Highway 36. A portion of the property was acquired in eminent domain proceedings by the City a few years ago for construction of a large water tower. 2. It is fair to say that the trend of development along Highway 36 over the past few years supports the pro- posed change. Virtually no residential development has occurred; rather, the uses are commercial and institutional in character. In fact, a portion of the subject property is currently zoned commercial, and has been since late 1965. Thus, the proposed land use classification will not have any adverse effects on, and will be more desirable to, the surround neighborhood, the City of Maplewood, and the comprehensive plan itself. 14 Attachment nine Attachment 7 - continued f 3. Most of the land use classifications along Highway 36 between Highway 61 and North St. Paul are commercial The subject property is the only R -1 classification along _the highway. It is unclear why this property should have received the R -1 designation, other than the fact that at some time in the past it was platted. 40 There is no realistic possibility that this pro- perty could ever be developed into single - family residential housing. This is so because of its roximit to a major, P Y � , high - volume highway, as well as the large Maplewood water tower. Given a choice between this location and some other location which had no such incompatible uses present, no one would build or buy a home in this area. 5. From a rational planning standpoint, it makes no sense to designate this property as residential. Rather, a more intensive commercial use should be permitted on this property, so that it can blend with the residential areas which exist farther to the south. 6. If the proposed change to a more rational and compatible land use classification is not approved, Hillcrest Development would, as a practical matter, be deprived of all beneficial use of the property in question. In Hillcrest's judgment, this would amount to a taking without just en- com comp en- 19 LAIS, BANNIGAN &KELLY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 409 MIDWEST FEDERAL BUILDING 5TH AND CEDAR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 i 1 DONALD L LAIS JOHN F. BANNIGAN, JR. PATRICK J. KELLY Mr. Barry Evans Maplewood City Manager 1380 Frost Avenue Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Mr. Evans: May 20, 1985 RE: Hillcrest Development vs City of Maplewood Enclosed find the following documents: 1) Copy of Judgment entered May 14, 1985 received May 15, 1985; and AREA CODE 612 224 -3781 2) Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment dated, filed and entered May 6, 19850 The Judgment was entered consistent with the authority vested in me by the Council to effect a settlement without further legal proceedings. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment reflect a stipulation entered into with the Plaintiff. That Stipulation is consistent with a conference held with the trial court after the submission of evidence wherein the Court indicated in general terms the direction he thought the evidence lead him. I confirmed this after submitting the Stipulation and proposed Findings to him. Lastly, the Judge has indicated a willingness to meet with me and councilperson Bastian for a conference to further explain the Court's position. The effect of the judgment is as follows: The rezone is vacated and consideration of Plaintiffs application to amend the land use plan must be reconsidered and action taken consistent with the recommendation of the planning commission and the director of community development. Once the comprehensive land use plan is amended, the zoning must be amended to reflect the plan. Ic Attarhmont ton Mr. Barry Evans Page 2 May 20, 198 5 The Court will retain jurisdiction to insure that these steps are taken. I will be happy to meet with the Council at its pleasure to discuss in detail the ramification of this Court action. Sincerely yours, LAIS, BMNIGAN & KELLY, P.A. Ian TB:cg Enclosures C: Geoff Olson - STATE OF MINNESOTA �" VA , f�r 1."� 1 5 �q , DISTRICT 'SS. _ COURT COUNTY OF RAMSEY r j SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE NO. 464367 Hillcrest Development, a Minnesota • P , nnesota limited partnership, • P aintif f VS PURSUAN T City of Maplewood, Ramsey Count Minnesota, JUDGMENT y, nnesota, a municipal corporation, ROLL Defendant Pursuant to the Findings of g Fact Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment, Shumaker, J., dated and filed 5--6-85: IT IS ORDERED 1) The - - -- actions c•f the Maplewood C • � 1tY Council denying Hi£.cr t Development's application f0 • r a municipal lard use plan. amendment and amending Its zoning crdinance with re spect to the property involved herei are without rational basis and therefore void. Z) The ap lfcation • of Hillcrest Developrr. ent to amend the lard use play. Is remanded to the Ma le w p ocd Ci Council for furth er considerat • aPprcpria to action consistent with the planning n m ti o ion and ng coission ae n taken June 24, 1983 CExh. 6) ar. d as rec °rnrrended by its Director of Corr�n • unity Development In that Staff Report dated Tune 16, I983 (Exh. 5) ar. d . as graphically depicted in Exhibits 19, 21 and 22. ' 3) This Court shall retain • '� Jurisdiction hereof for the ur P PO..e cf insuring that lVaplewoad City Council shall act upon Hillcrest Development' s application consistent with the Findings and Conclusions herein and that the z oning crdinance be zPPrcpria tely amended Pr th eaf ter consistent herewith and Minn. Stats., §473.865, Subd. 3 thereof. LET JUDGMENT BE ENT ER ED ACCORDINGLY without costs or disbur serr_ en is awarded t • o either sloe. John F. Hannigan, Jr. atty. for : Ci t y �......�..�,...�...�, ..., �_. , of Maplewood, Form CDC 8158 STATE OF MINNESOTA F I y^ COUNTY OF RAMSEY MAY 6 19$5 J. E. GQCK 'SKI, Check Deputy HILLCREST DEVELOPMENT, a Minnesota limited partnership, Plaintiff .. vs CITY OF MAPLE W ppD MINNESOTA.- COUNTY, ESOTA, a municipal cor • poratl Defendant. DISTRICT COURT SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FILE 969367 FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT The above -er. titled matter came on far trial Wit bout a fury bef amse ore the District undersigned Judge of . ct Court at the R � ^ y County Courthouse, . St. Raul, Minnesota on F ebruary 11, 12 and 13, 1935 - j arpe, - G ea.. � red P. Es uir the Esquire, of firm of M aun, Greene, Hayes, Simon Johanr esor, ar: d Srehl 332 Z Hamm Building, St. Paul • MN 55102, appeared f • or H !crest Develcpmemt Plaintiff, Torn F. Bar..n' alntiff. lgan, Jr., Esquire, of the fir • m of Lais, Bamn ig3n & Kelly, � . .A., 909 Midwest Federal Building, St. p • MN 55101 oppeaTed for t1: Defendant, ;. e C" . of Maplewood, Based upon the file s, records, rrert: ►orand Ord ro 1 • �' cEE c� n g STIPULATION of counsel . r�erein, the dated the � d ay of � o .�. Y �� a 1� 5 S . } ,the Ceu.rt now being fully adviSed, makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1 1 That Plaintiff • (hereinafter "Hillcrest" ) is a family owned li • meted partnership duly organized and existing under and pursuant to the laws of State of Minnesota, he sota anal has been engag 9 In the purchase, sale, owners h' ip and 18 davelopment of commercial, merclal, Industrial and multi real es 'win .tare in the Cities Met Metropolitan Area. 2) That Defendant endant (hereinafter "Maplewood") is a munici !duly pal corporation Minnesota d e xisting under . . organized an and pursuant to the laws of the State and is currently f y engaged in a p rogram of zoning crdinanCe a use plan amendments. and ?and . 3) T hat Hjll crest has been the fee owner of record for ove 2 of an unimproved tract of l 0 Years and situat on the southside of State moo- 36 (hereinafter runk High - way ter "Hwy, 36 „ ) east • of its Intersection w' hate Bear Avenue and described th w ed as follows Lots 16 and 17• Block 6; i..ots 2, Lots 2 8 1 . 2. 3, 28, 29 , 29 and 30, Bloc and 30, Blo 10. �. Block 11, all in D ,and Lots 1Q, 15, 16 Dearborn Park (including ar.0 17, ar. d streets). g the vacated alle Q That Ma p by its Re 1 • so�ut�on No, E�- 1 ; -3?? *o cdo ' �. p�..n November 19 65, arrended its Zoning Ordinance as it pertained tG the a bc R esident i a1 (P -1 ti e tra from to Business and Commercial (BC). S) That Hill crest has likewise been the fee owner of rec Years of unimprove ord for many d lands situated in tho .. � �foreSald location adjccer t and near the aforesaid t ract described as fo11o s. Lots 23 . 2 4, 25 26 one- an . 27, Zs, Zg half of Lot 26 and 3 0. Block 6 t he e and Lot 27, Block 7• east 3, g, S, 6, �� 8 2 ; and Lot 7, 28, 29 and 30 Block 1, 2, Park (including the � lock 11 all in I) -- g e vacated alleys and ecrborn streets) 5) That Tames and Gudrun Po mush, husband and wife ' reside in Circle Pines Min w nc presently Minnesota, have since 1952 been the fee ow Of an Unimproved Hers of record Of the Hill crest tracts of land situate d in the foresail to • cat2on between two acts, described as foll . -2- Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 B • . g lock 6; and Lots 9, 10, v, 12 13, 18 • 1 2 0 . • Zl, and 22 Block 11, all in Dearborn Park (including the vacated alleys and streets). 7) That Maplewood - - , pursuant to Minn. Stats. §462.351, et se . q , adopted a Comprehensive Municipal p 1 Plan as defined in Minn. St . ats. §962.352, Subd. S, in -1 identifying the above tracts therein for low density residential teal uses. _ 8) That said tracts are- bounded on the south b C Y p Atienve, platted but otherwise unimproved, P d, and on the north by Castle • Avenue which is improved, although substandard in co • nstruction, and serves as a frc.nta e road oad to Hwy. 36 connecting the controlled intersection tion of Cape Avenue and White Bear Avenue and the Ariel Street access to said Hwy. 36 at the Maple T P d � crth St. Paul city boundary. 9) That Hwy, 36 is a heavily traveled urban trunk hiar 1 hwaY averaging 25.,670 vehicu s lar trips e P per day in 1982 and 26,130 vehicular trips per day in 1983. 10} That White Bear A • Avenue is a high volume County State Aid H • IghwaY which is connected to Hwy. 3 6 by a controlled access interchange, Il) That Maplewood acquired frcm HWcrest in 1977 through • g proceedings in eminent domain the site for the construction of a 1.3 • ' water gallon elevated tower on the following 9 des cn be d tract; rn J Lots 23, 24, 25 and 26 Block lt, Dearborn Pork; Said water tower was thereafter constructed and has been •� �n exi., ten ce for the past several yeF-rs. 12) That since Hillcrest purchased the tract in question ex • , extensive l,ght industrial, commercial, office and similar non - residential develo m p ent has occurred along Hwy. 36 from its intersection with State Trunk Highway o. 6 Y 1 to the vest and Century Avenve (the east county line) to the east. Mar. of Y these land uses are in close proximity to single family amlly residential developments . 13) That in March of 1983 the Ma 1 • • p ewocd Council duly initiated proceedingc. R pursuant to Chapter 36, Article VII of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances and Minn.. Stats. §462.357, Subd. 9 thereof . and §973.865, Subd. 3 thereof to amend Its zoning ordinance to compl w ith p y ith the Maplewocd land use plan. 14) That on the 21st day y of March, 1983 the Maplewood Planning Commission tabled consideration of the • council initiated zoning amendment • for a period of six months • to allow Hi.11crest to make an alternative proposal for the property, - 15) That Hillcrest ap A _ PP A pril 26, 1983 to Maplewocd for on amendment to the municipality's lard use plan from low densit r esidential (RL) to limited service commercial (LSO) for the tracts is described in Findings 3), Sj, and 6) above. 1 That the Maplewocd council on May � y 23, ..983 tabled further consideration of its initated zoning amendment from B _ r n rn C # c: R 3 �cl �. • ng Planning Commission consideration and recommendation � ♦� � • dotlon on Y111Lres� s a pp li cat i on for land use plan amendment frcm RL to LSC. 17) That the Maplewood Director of Communit ♦ v • u��� � � Dev�Iopmen t by his MEMORANDUM dated June 16, 1983 (Exh. 5 and rec ommended • � 19 P.eTE'ln) re CO�.� r:�encEd amend2 said .land- use plan from RL to R � • •- � - � .� M (Residential hiea.u.rn Der1sI-: ty) on the strip fronting Cope Avenue and BW - � (Business Warehouse) on the balance cf the tracts subject to Metro Council ap proval. PF al. 18) That the Maplewood Planning oln • ' g m2s.lon considered Hlllcrest s application at a public hearing thereon une 2 J 6, 1983 and recommended to the council approval of a resolution amendin the land d use plan. frc m RL to RM and BW as set forth in Finding 17 (Exh. 6 19) That on July 11, 198.3 Hillcrest's a lication for or land use plan amendment as amended by the Planning Commission came before the C' • Cit Council at a public hearing thereon. Upon the close cf the public hearing, the council took no action on the application thereby in practical effect denying • y g the same without giving any reason therefor or making ary fact finding the eon (Exh. 7). 20) That on A ugust 1, 1983 the Council initiated zoning amendment from BC to R -1 for that ortion of � • P the Hill crest property described in Finding 3 came on for *consideration before the Planning ommission. A ' g motion to recommend approval of said amendment failed. The Planning Co g m ion tabled further consideration thereof stating they had previously addressed the issue and the site should remain BC (Exh. 9). 21) That on September 12, 1983, a ublic hearing v�• P g as held before the Council to consider amending he ion � • 9 e on the subject tract from BC to R-1. Upon closing the public hearing, the Council ap pp ed amending the zone based on the following: "1) The proposed change is consistent with the spirit,, purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. 2) The proposed change will not substantially njure y j or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the ro osed change or p lan is adeq P P P quat safeguarded. 3) The proposed change will serve the best interes an a n d conveniences of . the community, where apjlicable, and the public welfare. 4) The current zoning was done previous „ P to adoption of the comprehensive plan. (Exh. 10) 22) That Gary L. Tankenoff testified as one • of two general partners In Hillcrest. The property described in Finding v g a bo v e was purchased In 1967 vacant and unimproved for commercial develop pment purpo..es. It is situated on one of the highest elevations in Maplewood contig t • g o Hw 36 with excellent 1 •' visibility therefrom. With the siting f an elevated • g ated water tower_ on contlgLOUs property previously owned by Hillcrest the high volume of traffic, ar. d the level of highway noise cn said Hwy. 36 Y Mr. Tankenoff opened that the subject tract had no reasonable or robable value alue for single- family residential purposes. He was of the further opinion that commercial A office and/or light industrial uses � were the highest and best as well as the most reasonable and probable uses within the forseEable future for the subject t tract. James Pomush, an owner of the land adjacent to the Hillcrest tracts and the water tower, testified by deposition onthe same matters in a manner consistent with Mr. Tankenoff, 23) That Alfonzo E. Perez a registered professional engineer, specializing in acoustics and noise con • 1, doing business as Northern Sound, scientific auY monitored and measured Hwy. 35 generated traffic • f c noise at the site in question. He concluded that the noise - from Hwy. 35 exceeded State noise standards for single- family residential uses. 24) That H il] crest calle d as an adverse witness, Geoffrey Wo Olson Maplewood Director of Community • y eveloprnent, who testified that Hwy. 36 is the principal alterial highway through the e City with the highest traffic volumes and speeds. He testified that the Maplewood land use plan attributes the maj source cf air pollution to vehicular traffic; that noise generated by traffic has been a prcb]em; that Maplewocd is bisected cted by several major highways and noise levels along these corridors are apt t ' p o be high; and that low - density residential development adjacent to such highwa • . g ays is g enerally discouraged. Mr. Olson testified that in his prcfessional judgment l 9 the best expression of land uses compatible with the objectives of the Ma lewocd land and use plan and the existing circumstances surrounding the subject tract are reflected in his prcpo�ed plan amendment (Exh. 6 ar.d 19). 25) That Hit:•:: est presented t %e testimon • y of Robert M. LaFond, of E.F. i aFond Co., Inc., who qualified to testify s • Y an expert in real property valuation. He concluded that with the high volume of traffic and noise cn Hwy. 36 and the proximity of the elevated water tower, the site in question was not conducive to quality single - family residences compatible patible with the residences to the south. He determined that the highest and be • st use cf the site would be for commercial and light .industrial uses. In his op inion, the site had a fair market value of $1.95 per square foot for commercial and light industrial ial uses and a fair market value cf $0.37 per square foct for single • gle family residential uses. 26) That Hillcrest presented - the testimon ny of Kenneth G. Briggs, presently the director of lard dev elopment for Northeast Realty, a subsidiar ry f Harstad -Todd Construction Co. Inc and .formerly director of community development for the City f B laine, Y Minnesota. He had extensive exp as a planner and developer of single �• g family re.,Identlal subdivisions. He was of the opinion that the subject site was not . marketable for any type cf single-family residential uses without public subsidy. He w as as further of the opinion as a professional planner that the lard use lan p amendment propoSed by the IViaplewocod Staff and reflected in E h f =- Ex h. 19 was the best and most reasonable and robab p 1Y/ use to which the site could be put consistent with ' existing highways,, the water tower, land uses, patterns of development in the e area and the expressed objectives of the present Maplewoc•d land use plan. 27) That Hill crest .presented the testimony of Howard N. Darilgren, who qualified to testify as a professional • c2ty planning expert. He presently serves the City of Roseville, among others as planner. He concluded that single family residential use of the entire site was unreasonable in fight of its physical -7- setting and location `and inconsistent with the stated .policies of Maplewocd's ` land use plan. He found that the uses proposed by the Ma lewocd staff f f ar. d - approved by its planning commission . . on as reflected in Exh. 19 best ut the site, consistent with its sumo undingE and the land use plan. Exhibits 21 an 22 best reflect this. Bu sin � nes., - warehouse uses along the frontage road would adequately screen out the sight, sc•und and dust of Hwy. 36. The medium d ensity residential proposed north of Cope Avenue e and south of the business- warehouse use would provide an adequate transition from - mthe non re.c. �dential to residential uses south of Cope Avenue consistent with the re P sent lard use p1ar.. 28) That Maplewood sub . Foened as witnesses the following nElghbors from the area: a1 Charles E. Them mes, Jr., who resided at 1128 Castle Avenue lust west of the subject site on the lrcntave road. d. He constructed a deck at the rear of his home. Road noise and dust from Hwy. 36 had no adverse effect • upon his enjoyment of his home, deck and - yard. He was able to slQEp nig!b=s in the summer with the windows open while convalescing from back surgery. b1 Dana L. Toll who resided at 1922 Castle IL venue, on the frcnta e g road.. She purchased her home a ear a r • Y a nd a hall before the puohc hearings on zoning changes. She shopped around and w - • walked the area with her dogs prior to purchasing. She found the area to be guiEt, seciudEd and desroble for residential purposes. C) Nick F. Weller, resided at -- � 2236 Germon Street, Maplewood, south Of Cope Avenue. He built a new home just before the construction of the elevated water tower was begLn. Since then, he has constructed a pool and patio in his backyard. Hwy. 36 noise and flu ' • Po tlan has no adverse impact on his enjoy of the yard, patio End P ocl. -8- 29) That Maplewood called on one of its council persons, Mr. Gary Bastian, to testify as to the basis for the council's action. Mr. Bastian stated that the present BC zone was not consistent with the municipal land use lar.; that the P P uses permitted under the BC zone are potential nuisance uses to the surrounding residential uses, that BC zone* was inadequately buffered from the low density residential districts to the south and west, that Castle Avenue might be inadequate to handle a mix of residential and business - commercial traffic; that the access- from Castle Avenue to Hwy. 36 by Ariel Street was subject to closure b MnDOT � Y and that because cf Casale Avenue being substandard in cons ruction and the po,ssible lots of alternate access- to the area from clo sure at nriel, police and fire protection might not have adequate access to the si Based upon the above FINDINGS OF FACT, the Court mak the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1� ThE Maplewocd Council finding in supi,ort of the zoning amendment which reads: "The prc posed change is consistent with the spirit, purpo :�e and intent of the zoning crdinarce and ccmprFrensive plan." is vagLe and does not have factual support in t1:e record, in particular the recommendations of the planning commission, the staff reports, the testimony of Mr. Geoffrey Olson, the Maplewood City Planner, Mr. Ke^neth G. Briggs, expert lard planning, ar. d Mr. Howard Dahlgrer., expert City Land Planning Consultant, 2) That Maplewood Council Finding in support of the zoning amendment which reads: "ThE prepoSed change will not substantially injure cr detract from the use cf neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use c f the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan. is adequately . safe uarde " 9 d Is factually supported in the record before the Council and this Court but is not legally sufficient because it lacks substantial relation to public health safety . ar. d welfare, 3� That the Maplewood • P •d Council finding In support of the zonin amendment that states: "The prc-po; ed change will s • 9 se rve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable the public v�el and ' fare. o is vague and not legally su • 9 y fficiert having no factual basis in the record and no substantial relation to public health safety ety and welfare. 4) That the Ma lew • p ocd Council finding i n su ort of the zoning amendment that states: "The current zoning was done - comprehensive previous -to adoption of the com P ive plar.." has factual basis in the record but - legally .r � t was not sulflclert having no substantial relation to public health, safet and welfare. 5) That the failure to act upon ., p the Hillcrest a. for a lard use Plan amendment from RL to BVII constitutes in practical Effect a denial without findings snaking it in�porsible Court _ fOr this t0 find a raiiOT?c�l b asis therE'fOr. 6) That the actions of the City Council denying HiUcrest's a -licat'o p� �t n to amend the Maplewood land use Ian p and amending the zoning ordinance as it relates to the tract in ves ' q tin were and are arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious and void as a matter of law. from the above CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the Court makes the following: . r I ORDER 1) The actions of the Maplewood City Council denying Hillcrest Development's application for a municipal lard use play. amendment and amendin Its zoning ordinance with respect to the property involved herein are without rational basis and therefore void. 2) The aprlication of Hillcrest Development to amend the lard use plan. Is remanded to the Maplewood City Council for further consideration and ap�TCpriate action consistent with the planning commission action , taken June 20, 1983 (£xh. 6) ar.d as recommended by its Director of Comrr unity Development, in that Staff Report dated Junf 16, 1953 (Exh. 5) ar. d as graphically depicted in Exhibits 19, 21 and 22. 3) This Court shall retain jurisdiction hereof for the purpose cf insuring that Maplewood City Council shall act upon Hil]crest Developmnent's application consistent with the Findingc. and Conclusions herein and tha± the zoning ordinance be appropriately amended thereafter consistent herewith ana Minn. Stats., §473.8E5, Subd. 3 thereof. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY, without costs or G disburserr.-ents awarded to either side. Dated at St. Paul, Minnesota, this day of ih1 ar. 1985. 1 V T RT" v crdon W. Shuman r Judge of District Court -ll- 6 _ , 7 , S B. Plan Amendment and Rezoning -- Highway 36, Cope and Ariel Hillcrest Secretary Olson read the notice of public heari The proposal is ' g P P to amend the city s land use plan from RL, residential dente a 1 1 ow density to BW, business warehouse and RM, residential medium density and also amend the zoning a le family to M -1 Li. h m dwelling. g P from R -1, sin g Y g t manufacturing and R -2 double The two proposals are as a result of the court . orderi n the city to g y approve the plan amendment and a consistent rezoning. The commission questioned how the property owners adjacent to this site � to would be protected from the additional run —off from a commercial deve e opment on the property proposed for zone change. Director of Public Works Haider said an development would ' Y P d be reviewed by the review board. They address the question of drainage impact g on surrounding properties. That questions would be addressed durin g this review process. Chairman Axdahl asked if there was anyone resent who wished on the proposal. Y P d to comment Norm Anderson, Maplewood counci lmember, uestioned if the r — q p roposed M 1 It area had been enlarged. Attorney Bannigan explained the court action and the ro r p pe ty involved, G eoff Jarpe, attorney for Hill crest Development, said he has a before the city • appeared pre or to this with regard to the Hill crest property. He said his c l i e n t supports the decision of the court in the same way he supported the decision of the planning commission. He requested the commission approve the court action. W i l l Art, 2236 German, said they do-not want the comm r ' commercial � a 1 zoning, the council listened to the neighbors when the approve the residential ' Y PP dential zoning. Vada said she purchased her r q uestion P operty two years ago when this q on first came up. She questioned when the survey citizens for comment, was sent to Secretary Olson said the surv was • Y y taken when the original action occurred 1 9830 The property owner said she has talk • talked to property owners, they indicated Gated they had not received the Sh survey. e said that u y her proeprty . i s part of a valley Y use to include the nusing home property, When • y the nursing home was constructed the property was raised, which causes the water to now back up onto her property. She does • y not need additional t i ona 1 water problems-as this w i l l cause a problem with her well and se system. If Castle is to be septic used by trucks she wil i have noise and dust pollution. The road is not constructed to handle truck traffic. The residents of the nursing home will n • of be able to walk safely �n the area if the property develops with manufa P actur�ng use. 4 , / �7 - S*r 9' * - Joan Cabot, 1928 Castle, said she thought the proposed zone would not be compatible with the neighborhood, therefore, would not meet the section of the code that requires compatibility with the neighborhood. When they purchased their house .in 1963 the property was all zoned R -1 and Farm. This was checked by their attorney at the time. Chai rman Axdahl asked if the court had considered the 'standing water on drai of i el ds and wells and what affect that has on the health and welfare of the neighborhood. Attorney Bannigan said they did supeone four people that had appeared before the commission and council to give first —hand information in court When the nursing home was constructed the natural drainage g was blocked off to the south and west. There has been flooding on the property even when it was open and not developed. Also, Castle is a substandard road and not in good repair, James Pomish,said he owns the Hill crest property, He purch, Highway 36 with the intention After construction of Highway to single family development. use of the property, it wou property just to the west of the ased the property prior to construction of of constructing a home on the property. 36 the property was not conducive to If there is going to be any reasonable have to be on a commercial basis. Gerald Cabot. , 1928 Castle Avenue, questioned why n some areas of Y Maplewood homes can be constructed next to a freeway ut not in this are He did , testify fy i n court. The run — off from black top will of l ute th well He thought the city P s' g ty should have checked out the situation more before going to court much like Hillcrest did, He said if the cit does not appea this decision there against y • wi ll l be a law suit the c He did not have a chance to say in court what he wanted just , answered questions, Thelma Ge rke, 1917 E. Cope, they would l i k e the cit decis to appeal this court The Hillcrest property was rezoned in 1965 to BC. It was residential prior to that, We were not notified of this change i ge n zoning. When the nursing home was proposed, it was proposed as a — - P P one—story structure, All of thene ighbors signed for the proposal, A three—story building are ask Y g was constructed. They ng Maplewood to fight for them now in-court, Attorney Banni gan said this is a nona eal abl a findi PP d ng, conc 1 us i ons and order by the judge in this particular instance. The only y chop ce there was was to try and sustain the R-1 which was very unlikely i kel i n the f y Y ace of the evidence or having the BC. John Gl asow, 2271 Craig Place, if development occur • an P son the H i 11 crest p roperty additional traffic light-wills have to be installed t Ari Highway 36. Ent � el and Hi g Y ances onto Highway 36 would have to be constructed, Richard oei, 2263 Craig Place, said he just purchased P d the house in February Said he had three inches of water in the basement at the time of purchase. He just installed a drain t i l e system in the house He understood the property to be R -1 which would rovi p de a sheltered area without a lot of traffic for children to play. If the street constructed it will y t �s cause additional traffic i n the neighborhood, there wi be more water run —off and more water sitting i n the e back yard. He feels it would decrease the value of his property, Pat Mogren, 1927 Cope, said she got copies of the roceedi n s from ' P g district court. She was informed that the city had 90 days in which to appeal this decision. She questioned if the clerk was incorrect. Attorney Bannigan said this was a consent decree and the city cannot appeal nor can Hillcrest appeal. Ms. Mogren questioned if traffic studies were done for the area to compare what little traffic they have now and what will result from a commercial development Attorney Bannigan said there were two traffic counts done, both on Highwa g y 36, and there was assumption made that traffic on the residential streets was lows Ms. Mogren said there is a big difference between the traffic on 36 and that going through their neighborhood. They have been told that Castle is a county road, which would require approval from the count to upgrade, Y Pg She asked if there was any alternative than the RM. Some of the neighbors are concerned with low income housing in the area. Secretary Olson said the land use plan designation is RM which would . g permit R-2 zoning which allows single and two =f ami 1 homes. Whether i t would ould be subsidized housing, the city cannot control. He commented on the size lots permitted for construction of one and two—family homes. Mary Anderson, 2049. Craig Place, they have a nice neighborhood and d does not wish to have a - warehouse constructed in the neighborhood. Dana Toll, said there was an article in the a er that the city P P y shoul d concentrate on the residential development. (St. Paul paper, February 13 1 y 985) There was a question from the audience a ' s to developing the property for parks Secretary Olson said . at the time of the original hearings s ' g the parks director indicated the city was no longer interested in the ro ert for P P Y a park site. There is a search area proposed somewhere within a 2 mile radius for a park. The parks commission is meeting to determine i f the search g ea ch area should be deleted, Chairman Axdahl closed the public hearing portion of ' g P the meeting. The commission questioned if Hill crest intends to develop e op the property with single dwelling or do they have an plan at all, Y P . Geoff Jarpe, attorney for Hillcrest, said not single • g e dwellings that is why they were in court. They submitted schematics to the court ' ou t which showed an office warehouse type use. The city taff wishes provide Y to have the RM to p e a natural buffer between the warehouse and the single family property to the south. They ointed out that m P some kind of landscaping in the RM area could perhaps be utilized a ' P s effectively vely as a buffer. f There are no specific plans at this time. G,17 -i` The commission asked Public Works Director Haider what he would see as far as the roadway and the drainage situation. Director Haider said he thought MnDOT constructed the roadway and he said the county is involved with the roadway also. He reviewed the. existing utilities within .the neighborhood. Water is available to the site in question, .the sanitary sewer is in Cope Avenue and would have to be extended to the s i te. The storm sewer is nonexistent as far as the site is concerned. A system would have to be designed. The commission asked if there could be some interim relief to the storm water situation in the neighborhood until more development occurs. Director Haider said there is a limited amount that can be done using maintenance forces of the city to affect some relief in the area. The city council would have to authorized expenditures for some type of relief, The commission questioned of Ari el will be closed at Highway 36, Director Haider said the median would be closed. Commissioner Fischer moved the that we are under a consent decree if the council feels they have more room to maneuver in this do so, as a lannin P g commission. we do not have that prerogative, therefore moved the planning commission recommend that the city council approve the resolution amending PP a ding the land plan from RL, residential low density to BW,business warehouse an RM, residential medium density based on the district court's order. Also, the commission recommends the zoning map be amended from R -1, single family residential denti a 1 and 8C, business commercial a 1 to M -1, light ght manufacturing and R -2, double dwelling. In addition to the required findings in code these rezonings are approved on the basis that: 1. The previous rezoning to R -1 was voided by district court. 2. Rezonings, compatible with the plan amendments,are y required b the court and state law. q 30 The proposed zonings are the most compatible with the court ordered plan amendments. Further, the planning commission recommends the council direct staff to pursue immediately and present to the council as soon as possible, a method of addressing the water drainage problems that presently xist in the area, . Commissioner S1 etten seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Cardinal Ditch, tc , Fischer, Larson, S1 etten, Whitcomb. Nays -- Commissioners Axdahl and Barrett Request 1. Approve a preliminary plat for eighteen single - dwellin g lots. 2. Approve a rezoning from F, farm residence to R -1, single dwelling (city staff) , Proposal 1. Refer to the enclosed preliminary plat for the street and lot configurations, 2. Valley View Drive and the adjoining ten lots would be developed a s a second addition. p Recommendation 10 Approve the Broshears preliminary plat, subject to: a. Entering into a development agreement with required surety y for the public improvements and driveway turn - around for lots 1 and 2 of the 1st Addition prior to final plat approval. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements: (1) Granting of an easement and construction of a temporary P Y cul -de -sac at the east end of Valley View Drive if the construction of this street has not been secured in the Leonard's oak Hills No. 5 Addition. (2) Removal of the silo, barbed wire fencing and other miscellaneous equipment from the former farmstead, prior to release of the surety. b. Approval of a final grading, utility and drainage na a lans g P The grade and location of Valley View Drive shall be consistent with that proposed for Valley View Drive in Leonard's Oak Hills No. 5 Addition. co The portion of the site to be platted as the second addition shall be designated as Outlot A in the first addition P lat or the Valley View Drive right -of -way must be dedicated as art of the first addition plat, P &otion by Council: Endorse - MEMORANDUM Modifie - ReJ ecte TO: City Manager Date- FROM: Associate Planner -- Johnson SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat and Rezoning to R -1 g ( ) LOCATION: Highwood Avenue and McKnight Road OWNER: George Broshears APPLICANT: Michial Mularoni and Associates and George Broshears DATE: July- 15, 1985 SUMMARY Request 1. Approve a preliminary plat for eighteen single - dwellin g lots. 2. Approve a rezoning from F, farm residence to R -1, single dwelling (city staff) , Proposal 1. Refer to the enclosed preliminary plat for the street and lot configurations, 2. Valley View Drive and the adjoining ten lots would be developed a s a second addition. p Recommendation 10 Approve the Broshears preliminary plat, subject to: a. Entering into a development agreement with required surety y for the public improvements and driveway turn - around for lots 1 and 2 of the 1st Addition prior to final plat approval. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements: (1) Granting of an easement and construction of a temporary P Y cul -de -sac at the east end of Valley View Drive if the construction of this street has not been secured in the Leonard's oak Hills No. 5 Addition. (2) Removal of the silo, barbed wire fencing and other miscellaneous equipment from the former farmstead, prior to release of the surety. b. Approval of a final grading, utility and drainage na a lans g P The grade and location of Valley View Drive shall be consistent with that proposed for Valley View Drive in Leonard's Oak Hills No. 5 Addition. co The portion of the site to be platted as the second addition shall be designated as Outlot A in the first addition P lat or the Valley View Drive right -of -way must be dedicated as art of the first addition plat, P 2. Adopt the enclosed resol (page 9 r • from F farm g ) • rezoning the entire site residence to R -1, residence district (sing dwell At least four votes in favor are n g lung). necessary ry for approval, This rezoning is proposed to eliminate the ossib' ' la' p ility of any future nuisance complaints i.nts associated with the uses permitted in a farm zone, such as the raising of livestock. �4 0 BACKGROUND Site Description Gross area: 5.6 acres Net area: 4.7 acres Existing land use: undeveloped, except for a s i l o and miscellaneous remnants of the former farmstead, including barbed wire fencing. Surrounding Land Uses North: 'five single - dwelling homes that front on Phylis Court East: undeveloped property, proposed for the Leonard's Oak Hills No. 5 Addition (page 7) . South: Highwood Avenue. Across the street are two double and two single dwellings. West: McKnight Road and single - dwelling properties. Past Actions 1- 30 -81: An administrative lot division was approved to create the property labeled as the "exception ".shown on the proposed plot drawing, subject to conditions that have been met.. 4- 15 -82: Council approved the Leonard's Oak Hills planned unit development and preliminary plat for 26 single and four double dwellings for the s i t e abutting to the south, subject to conditions, The PUD approval for double dwellings has expired. Four time extensions have been approved for the preliminary plat. Planning 1. Land use plan designation: RL, residential low density 2. Zoning: F, farm residence 3. The proposed meets or exceeds all zoning and subdivision requirements Public Works City sewer and water are available. K Drnr.e.�7» re 1. Planning commission recommendation 2 0 - C ity council mb Attachments 1. Location Map 2, Property Line /Zoning Map 30 Leonard's oak Hills 5th Addition 4. Preliminary Plat 5. Resolution (rezoning) 6. Preliminary Plat (separate attachment) 4 h V . VlLL 4GE Of • J J • •a - a sf � • c� NE WFORr .j LOCATION MAP Attachment 1 61 4 N Ln :•�: '.� is , :': i :: •:,: ::::. Lr A >'. A �� we rrbeetv . ;,:::.ti• (S) ( ( ) '4 43 2275 r: :: g i9 9 7 so 9 9 0 t , �— 1 - --� Ito, 7Y 0 40 ,�• t r i „ t Sac ❑ t°'. ilk t 0. 2.' 2092 ��•~ 3� c 1 I o�? FO 4 o�� i 228 8 _ 964 -66 2270 ooh `��� . J � •. !W s ( ` viol I J1 41 Ifu 1 PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 101 Attachment 2 Q N TIMBER T `' � � •�.�� S 10.9 O ac . 13.54 loo • � � . 0 (L >> 0 T 0 1 2 4 3 4 ro C24) C2`) G3 3 4 / oo O ZZO •S �► pp bir 60 ^ v 4a N ( N ! ��� V 2 � OT 3 j 4p . / Poi A •��9 sa9 , 1G � . K ds t (Z2 eo (21) pc C . �a so t 5 c 4 R s 4,2.� N ■ 0. PHYLIS COURT "�; ` ;AS w o ! J • ?0 2288 ' , � �J 6(00 e �oc^C 1,0 2264 ?272 2280 ', C �q/ 0 2304 �, o k wr _ t •►•. of ( ..;•. .�. .. .. .. - y•, •:•r ::•: ':ti :tiff•:;. :' ti'' ti .;t:ti `' :. J %::.� •:.. f• i . • .ti'': • :: • : '•• ^ ' '��� ' ��� �'�� �' ''•� �' °; Pro o s e d L e o n a r d s Oak H i l l s #5 Addition Z 5 ' Ln :•�: '.� is , :': i :: •:,: ::::. Lr A >'. A �� we rrbeetv . ;,:::.ti• (S) ( ( ) '4 43 2275 r: :: g i9 9 7 so 9 9 0 t , �— 1 - --� Ito, 7Y 0 40 ,�• t r i „ t Sac ❑ t°'. ilk t 0. 2.' 2092 ��•~ 3� c 1 I o�? FO 4 o�� i 228 8 _ 964 -66 2270 ooh `��� . J � •. !W s ( ` viol I J1 41 Ifu 1 PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 101 Attachment 2 Q N v 1+ sD a� ci o —J. '0 0 O (D Q_ N fD 3 ■w •N- _ {� �: 11..E C - 1� •..-- ` 'r I� I 1 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT LEOt4ARD'S 0Ak% HILLS N0. 5 � t,llvwfeltw w+•1 �.sII K wf tee. A. ON1.L. • r rot Bill LEONARD 2867 FOREST DALE ROAD NEW BRIGHTON MN 56112 1 i -900 fill r -fin, Lillis Mss wn KMS w waw t11! 1 2 M tell wv tat r sisal rivatt • 11 tort 1 wttt toll 11 tvn - ---- PImu up tail met "us M wife • 41 son lust.. tv %m X1111 (rya1t1 Ml KN l �• • - ��-� w MIMCe tilt 11 romm •11•1.11 11 \` 11/t[1 11 f 4.1 m a t 1 I •• !tilt"• t$Kmgt tlel ••••• «.�. 111"111 town" %m ` pilots at 1m • I.M l /r'tlfl IIt11l" •m / J t � • shells K011 r Us rtt KA1 11.1141 • M /tvt1 ttol tM ` .�.�_....r s1u.+n w11 an \ UI /tIM 11s1M tAr'ttsfttt 1 •r ' PNMlw Iit" to imin p 1s1un1• � ` Mrltlrlfl Attit�tt "m tri to - .f• N• to L 11. \�" �" • �� t t • 1. s~ **"Wow I" to" of me bwb.w• "wr I It 1141 of as a.N..w �. offal w Its 1/fl W as ..•...1 too to IM 1141 r utu.. 1obsor" t 1 VOMH6$0 w•.ft. 40% fill. s.r....40-00 u►1..rt.n .. 00 0111 .f w "Iso Is •I/r....•. • ` ` r� "� 1. 1M fr•fA "I to" N as ad" sf►Ir11 11 1/11 • IM tmmadom 1 f1mbw 11. 1/41 d we a.v...1 PwN 1. 1141 at tU.Ht 9b/f1..f fill. wr. aft WAMWMfM .r... INWI. w" w.w. -«...s ftvt. 0". 1. all 1M1 tort M w w" .nrwu to I'll d as shm"no .1 wf.1w I« Ins •00 ' \ •�• of u. rei.....r.w 4w 1 /4111 w owes" wf.ww $1 ti.wlt 11�ff1. .Ir• - /•.1)1. 1 311w e O.m• t•.••I� -- •eet ftm f1wmM1Yt Y /•I/w- " 40 w M w t••w••. w.. a..4* w.. fr.r 1.1.11 w• t I 1r • t•.. fir•. Visa* $44.11 m .1l 1." 1r .1� rf• • f�1 6 6. 01 9".4 1 1 fOA br1y. M /Y Orel t 1.>♦ d /r" f1Y�Mt ONW*W /. 1 /.1. 040M rA ` /M .M 1..1 M qbI V 0. Mr I W d MN tf►It 1 � w0r I. 1141 ' • 1 949.11 M f.11 f.N so" of Wr t1�• d 6"tmfag. Mme• Ors $49.10 to" r v /w0 b"IMA". w/rU r posse •OMO. •ter ,s...�,,, .. i 1 •� •� ss LICAT111 NIP 11 1 i t r1jr #4 1111 MI u a. Q �J fl Op ,, mouon �ounow ! | | | ! / | . . ~— / ' ~_ Iv � so ip we ° y / . ' 0 r "-'*~ ' - u == PRELIMINARY PLAT BROSHEARS ADDITION Attachment Four / | |U| | | | | / / | � | ' | ' | U/ ' U / momw' l""50! | | ` | ' � . | x . �} . ' | � ' |. y ,, mouon �ounow ! | | | ! / | . . ~— / ' ~_ Iv � so ip we ° y / . ' 0 r "-'*~ ' - u == PRELIMINARY PLAT BROSHEARS ADDITION Attachment Four Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the city council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly held in the council chamber cabled and s in said city on the day of , 1985 at 7 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood initiated a rezoning rom g F, farm residence to R -1, residence district (single dwelling) for the following- described property: The Southwest quarter of the Southwest uarter, of q the Northwet quarter of Section 13, Township 28, Range 22, except the east 197.00 feet thereof, also except the South 168.00 feet of the West 175.00 feet thereof. WHEREAS, the procedural history of this rezoning g s as follows 1. This rezoning was initiated by the City f Maplewood, Chapter 36 Article y P d, pursuant to Cha P . le VII of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances . 2. This rezoning was reviewed by the Maplewood Planning Commission on June 17 1 P ing 985. The planning commission recommended to the city council that said rezoning be 3. The Maplewood City Council held a ublic hearing ing on 1985 to consider this rezoning. Notice thereof ` was published and mailed pursuant to law. All persons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to be heard and resent ' P written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city and planning commission. Y staff NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD CITY the above - described rezoning COUNCIL that • i ng be approved on the basis of the following findings of fact: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the ' and intent of the zoning code, spirit, purpose 2. The proposed change will not substantial) ' hbor in r y injure or detract from the use of neighboring g p operty or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the ro er t ' r P P y adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded, The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable and ' welfare, P the public IN 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools, Adopted this day of , 19 8 5 . 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 carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City of Maplewood held on the day of 1985 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 this rezoning, Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city this day of , 1985. City Clerk City of Maplewood. 10 c• MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Thomas Ekstrand -- Associate Planner SUBJECT* • Code Amendment -- Park i ng APPLICANT: City of Maplewood DATE: June 25, 1985 SUMMARY Request 113 .cti.on by C ounc ! 1 kc;3if Amendment of the general parking requirements for commercial and multiple dwelling. Reasons for the Request 1. The parking requirements in the CO, commercial office district require 25% more parking than any other commercial district. 2. Council asked staff to determine if the number of parking spaces for retail uses may be inadequate, because o f P roblems w i t h . Sound of Music on Beam Avenue, 3. Our parking stall size requirements are overly restrictive. 4. Curbing requirements are required by policy, but not included in ordinance. Comments 10 Office Parking: The study on office parking came about from a request for a zone change from CO to LBC, limited business commercial for the proposed office site between NCR and Mr. Steak on Sloan Place. This proposed two -story office building could not P g provide enough parking under CO regulations, but could under LBC requirements. Based on the survey results on page 10, the most widely used parking formula for offices is one space square required for each 200 s q q re feet of floor area. Planners in these surveyed cities find that this formula works well, The 1:200 square -foot formula is the same as requirement except that Maplewood has a less (one space for each 300 square-feet) for upp no reason why upper floor floor office space parking than office space on the main floor. floor area requirement should be eliminated, Maplewood Is current restrictive formula er floors. There is should need less This separate upper 0 2. Retail Parking: e{ The.retail parking requirements are being reviewed because of the Sound of Music store's need for additional parking space. Sound of Music is.exceeding Maplewood's parking requirements by two spaces, but their parking is inadequate. The examples below are to help evaluate if other stores in Maplewood are experiencing the same problem. Comments based on Store Spaces Spac Provided Observation Sound of Music 31 33 (1 :188 sq. ft. ) insufficient parking Birshf ields 117 140 (1:167 sq. ft. ) always excess parking Maplewood Square 228 235 (1:193 sq. f t. ) enough parking Other than the Sound of Music, there has not been any problem with Maplewood's current retail parking requirement. The code should not be changed. Requiring increased parking for all, retail uses would create an excess of parking for future stores and shopping centers and be an unnecessary cost of development. 3. Parking Stall Dimensions: Maplewood has no uniform parking stall size requirments. Staff is proposing that parking stalls be permitted to be nine feet wide, which is the most accepted standard today, based on the survey results on page - . Sixty -five percent of these cities permitted this width space. The only problem with reducing the parking space width to nine feet is that door nicks could potentially increase. Although this is a disadvantage, nine -foot spaces are still very adequate and safe. Eighteen -foot deep spaces, when abutting a curb, sidewalk or landscaped area, would suffice, since cars typically overhang beyond the space one to two feet. Even the larger vehicles, like the 18.5 -foot long Chevrolet Kingswood Estate Wagon (see page 4 ), would only need a parking space 16.5 to 17.5 feet deep, The aisle widths staff has proposed for the various angles of parking space arrangement were derived from a parking study prepared by the engineering f i r m of Bar ton- Aschman . A letter of support from the Joseph Company is enclosed on page 150 4. Curbing: Staff is also proposing to formalize in ordinance, our current policy of requiring continuous concrete curbing around parking lots. This requirement is important because: 2 a. Concrete curbin holds up longer. Bituminous and timber curbs are susceptible to 3amage by snowplows and are generally much shorter lived, therefore, there is much less of a maintenance problem with concrete. I b. Continuous curbing is important to contain and direct storm water run - off and also serves as a wheel stop to protect landscaping. The park and recreation commission recommends that city parks be exempt from the curbing requirement (see enclosed minutes and memo from the director of community services, pages 17. and 18 The community design review board recommended against exempting parks because it would allow a double standard. The staff recommends a compromise -- requiring curbing only in parks with parking lots that are used in the winter. Curbing gets most of its abuse in winter from snow plows, Recommendation Approval of the attached code amendment regarding minimum parking requirements. (Recommendations of the community design review board are included, except for the curbing requirement for parks.) 3 BACKGROUND Past Action 11- 28 -83: Council amended the off- street parking regulations in a multiple- dwelling district (Section 36 -109) to read: "Minimum parking stall size shall be ten (10) feet by twenty (20) feet, except that parking stalls for owner- occupied units may be reduced to nine ( 9) by eighteen (18Y feet." Sample of Car Dimensions Make Dimensions (width /length in feet) VW Bug 5 x 13.5 Mercury Linx 5.5 x 14 VW Rabbit pickup 5 x 14.5 Dodge Aries 5.5 x 14.5 Oldsmobile Omega 5.5 x 14 .5 Ford F 100 (full size pickup) 6.5 x 1695 Ford van 695 x 17 Chevrolet Caprice 695 x 17.5 Ford Torino 6.5 x 17.5 Chevrolet Kingswood Estate Wagon 6.5 x 18.5 Surveys Four surveys are attached and their results are summarized as. follows: 1. Office parking requirements - -the most frequently applied parking requirement is one space for each 200 square feet of floor area. 2. Retail parking rquirements- -the most commonly applied formulas are one space for each 150 square feet and one space for each 200 square feet. 3. Parking space dimensions- -the most often required parking stall dimension is a nine by twenty -foot space. 4.. Of the 28 cities surveyed, fourteen cities required concrete curbing in their park parking lots; ten do not; three do not require, but encourage it; and one city installs concrete curbing only along the portion of parking lot that fronts on the right -of -way. 1. Recommendation by the community . des i g n review board 2 . First r ead i ng by the c i t y council 3. Second reading and hearing by the city council mb Attachments: 1. Ordinance amendment 2. Office parking survey 3. Retail parking survey 4. Parking space dimension survey 5. Curbing Survey (park parking lots) 6. Survey - manufacturing and warehouse parking 7. Letter: Joseph Co. 8. Memo: Curbing 9. Parks Commission minutes 10. CDRB minutes A ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 36 -22 is amended as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out) : Section 36 -22. Off- street parking. (a. 'r�s —tom ee ' % �Z Tj g--�f The following types of uses shall provide additional off - street parking space, as indicated, unless otherwise authorized by the city council. All 1"Phai parking spaces shall have proper access from a street or alley and shall be located on or near the lot on which such use. is situated: (1) Single - family dwelling: Two (2) spaces. as provided above. ( 2 ) Multiple d w e l l i n g : Two (2) spaces for each housekeeping unit. One of these spaces must be enclosed. (3) Hotel or tourist cabin court: One space for each rental room or suite, (4) Restaurant, cafe or tea room: One space for each fifty (50) square feet of floor space devoted to patron use, (5) Theater, auditorium, church or other place of public assemblage: A minimum of one space for every four (4) seats. Schools must have a minimum of one space for every twenty (20 ) auditorium seats. (6) Commercial office or recreational building use, other than those specified above f Aw .16 �ee4 One space for each two hundred ( 200) square feet, or portion thereof , of - floor area -p_ Dlys nn ) squa t . (7) Shopping centers having enclosed, nonleasable common areas: - one space for each two hundred ( 200) square feet, _ or portion the—r—.6—of, of leasable floor area. (. ) Manufacturing and warehouse establishments: One space for each two (2) employees - , or one space for each 400 square feet of manufacturi space and on _space for eac 1,000 - square f eet of wa rehouse spac _ h ichever i s g reste Of f - street parking facilities existing at the effective date of this paragraph (June 22, 1972) shall not subsequently be reduced to an amount less than that required under this paragraph for a similar new building or use. Off street parking facilities provided to comply with the provi s of this paragraph shall not subsequently be Attachment 1 reduced below the requirements of this paragraph • -UO &I 0 W , R CI Any na � — Q - v z. z-1 L L ice., " • I I • • I (9) Motor Fuel Stations Four (4) spaces , plus three (3 ) additional spaces for each service stall. If there is a convenience store or restaurant associated with the fuel station, additional arkin shall be rovided in accordance with this section. (b) _Each _parking space shall be not less than nine feet wide and nineteen feet in length (measured p6rallel. with the striping lines exclusive of access aisles • If a parking space abuts a curb, sidewalk or landsca ed area, the l.en th of the space may_ be reduced to eighteen feet • (c) _ .All _spaces_ shall be served b'y access aisles of the followin widths, based on the angle of the arkin stalls: P g Parking Angle Aisle Width 90 degree, 24 feet (two-way traf f is 60 degree 19 feet (one-way traf f is _4 degree 16 feet (one-way tra f f i c (d) All arkin lots shall have continuous concrete curbin surrounding the exterior perimeter of the lot and drives. Park parking - lots, that are not used in the winter, and parking lots avin twelve s aces or less are exempt from this requirement unless required by the city engineer for drainage control. (e) ,All parking lots shall be continual) and ro erl maintained- Section 2 • Section 36 -140 (g -j) of the CO, commercial office district, regulations are amended as follows (deletions are crossed out) : • • • • • _ • - • • . • - UP anci one j n . ,. � e� a � e— fee -�-- -e € € � eon a r��- �- e�� -�e%-A ., r , ., a �,,,a ; ,. --e -ale n t a � 1-i ' .....es • • • • - 1 •• - - + 1 r r r =111 • r • , I • - • - • • • + _ • - • R W.2 TINN r I IF 2�:_ � -0 V 6 WWAbWAbW • Wr r r • r ( ---} Lighting: All lighting shall be designed and located so as to confine direct rays to the premises_ . Lighting standards - shall not.exceed a height of fifteen (15) feet. Lighting standards and fixtures shall be of a design and of materials that are compatible with the architecture and the landscape architecture of the site. • 1 + • • • - • _ • • - jab 1 • • - M Rob • • • • - - • - - It 1 1 r • - e - - • Aft • + • • • • •• • • - nib ELM P a l m: • + • r + • - r •• • - . • . • + 1 • r + r • r • •• - • •• r r r - • • • • r • •• + • • I� • • • • •• + • - MULOP - - - - - mKip (h) -4- -}- Uses confined to structure: All uses shall, unless otherwise specified, be contained entirely within a completely enclosed structure. Parking facilities are exempted from this requirement... (Ord. No. 380, s 104, 1- 16 -75; Ord. No. 529, s 4, 11- 22 -82) Section 3. Section 36 -172 (7) , (8) and (9) of the SC, shopping.. center district regulations are amended as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out) : -- _ - -- - -•• -- - - -- • • W I - MV, + • r • • • • • • - r - Parking, loading or service areas used by motor vehicles shall be located entirely within the lot lines of the shopping center, shall be physically separated from public streets and shall have no more than two (2) accessways to any one public street. All accessways shall be located at least one hundred (100) feet from the intersection of any street lines. The city council may prescribe more restrictive conditions or any further reasonable conditions deemed appropriate with respect to the suitability of the shopping center in the neighborhood. (Code 1965, s 908.020; Ord, No. 529, s 8, 11- 22 - 82) Section 4. Sections 36 -156 and 36 -157 of the fuel station ordinance shall be amended as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out) : 7 Section 36 -156. Motor fuel stations -- Generally. All automobile garages, motor fuel stations and other businesses providing fuel or service for motor vehicles shall be classified according to the classes set forth in Section 367 -151 of this division and shall be placed upon a site having the area and treatment as provided in Section 36 -151 and Sections 36 -15:�- 8 through 36 -161 of this division. (Ord. No. 232, 4 ( §907.,030), 10- 19 -67) 8 eev 9 ••- -- - -- - - -. - ma - - f ar e am b ene - - - • • - • • • • .. - - • -. . • w • . - • r • • - - - . • GG Q mrn G 4 Q t i G nS IAI • • • • .. • • s pace a - • • 1 - • - a - _ - • 13 0 ,i - - - .0 e • • • - • • • - - • - • - �_ �­ ft - - o - - • - r - cq %. % .6. .F g ZaIP R - - - - - %. %.f a a V *W e W__'%_� N.&A Section 5. Section 36 -109 of the multiple - dwelling district parking regulations shall be amended as follows (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out) : Section 36 -109. Same- -Off- street parking. Each multiple - dwelling unit in the city shall have off - street parking space. Parking spaces shall be in addition to, and not part of, the driveways or maneuvering space necessary to the parking areas serving such multiple dwelling. All parking spaces, driveways and other parts of the parking facilities shall be dust free and shall be surfaced with concrete or blacktop. Regui -: -tea- -- r - _ ^i 3 i :kie B parking requirements shall be as follows: s ta , , = _ for - ;a ---- e - 8 (1)- An open parking stall shall be a minimum distance of fifteen feet from a dwelling unit window and five (5) feet from any side or rear a . # property l i n e . S J c a nr rte- r , (2) - f Parking stalls may not ' Be located within f feet of a d zai= 3 3 -x- _ 3 ^ t --s e t k-e-- f- e - street righter -of -way, unless Section 36 -27 applies. ( �1 ?A 1 1 p a r lr ; v • or rfnae run-off ..� g-- n i t c mn nar ter axaay-from thAz 11 - .1 � 10 'Wool Wl- a 11 1-1 %1`* VV %11 -It {-{-} Where a garage or carport opens to a public street, the width of the driveway onto that public street shall not exceed twenty -four (24) feet in width, and in no event shall a series of garages open directly to that street. Where a series of garages face each other on a private road, the, minimum width separating garages shall be thirty (30) feet in order to provide v i s i b i l i t y in backing out or turning around. (Code 1965, 6 906.070; Ord, No. 231, § 1 10 -5 -67; Ord. No. 245, 4 ( §906.030) , 10 -3 -68; Ord, No. 555, § 2 11- 28 -83) (4) Parking shall also be in accordance with section 36 -220 Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the Maplewood City Council this day of , 1985. Mayor Attest: Ayes- - City Clerk Nays -- SURVEY OFFICE PARKING REQUIREMENTS N ( Spaces Per Square Foot) Maplewood--1:200 ( first floor) plus 1:300 ( upper floors)--in most districts. 1 :150 in CO districts Coon Rapids - -1 :300 Roseville- -1:200 Burnsville - - 1 :150 for buildings under 6,000 square feet 1:200 for buildings over 6,000 square feet Plymouth- -1:200 Brooklyn Center- -1:200 Fridley- -1:250 Blaine - -1:200 Crystal - -3 spaces plus 1:200 New Brighton- -1:200 New Hope - -3 spaces plus 1:200 Golden Valley - -1 :250 White Bear Lake - -3 spaces plus 1 :200 Apple Valley - -1:150 for the first 6,000 square feet 1:200 if over 6,000 square feet South St. Paul - -1:300 Eagan - -1:150 Maple Grove - -1 :250 Columbia Heights- -1:200 for the first 6 square feet 1:250 if over 6,000 square feet Cottage Grove - -1:200 West St. Paul - -1:150 for the first 6,000 square feet 1:200 if over 6,000 square feet North St. Paul 1:150 Oakdale--6:1000 (1:167) for the first 20 , 000 square feet Newport - -1:200 Vadnais Heights -- 6:1000 (1:167) for the first 20,000 square feet 1:200 if over 20,000 square feet St. Paul- -1:200 Attachment Two SURVEY RETAIL PARKING REQUIREMENTS (Spaces . Per Square Foot) Maplewood- -1:200 (first floor) and 1:300 (additional floors) Burnsville- -1:150 Roseville- -1:200 Coon Rapids - -1:200 Plymouth- -1:200 Brooklyn Center- -1:125 Fridley- -1:150 Crystal- -1:140 New Brighton - -1:200 New Hope - -1:150 Golden Valley- -1:150 White Bear Lake - -1:200 Apple Valley- -1:150 South. St. Paul- -1:100 Eagan- -1:150 .Maple Grove - -1:200 Columbia Heights - -1:200 Cottage Grove - -1:150 Shoreview - -5.5 :1000 (1:182) Oakdale- -1:200 Woodbury- -1:185 Newport- -1:150 (plus one for each employee) Vadnais Heights - -1:200 St. Paul- -1:150 Blaine- 11 Attachment Three PARKING SPACE DIMENSION SURVEY. 8 -30 -83 City Coon Rapids Eagan Brooklyn Center Vadnais Heights St. Paul Burnsville Plymouth Fridley Blaine Crystal New Brighton New Hope Golden Valley White Bear Lake Apple Valley South St. Paul Roseville Columbia Heights Cottage Grove Shoreview No. St. Paul Oakdale Woodbury Newport Stall Dimensions when Parking Stall abutting curb, sidewalk Dimensions or landscaped area Aisle Width 9 x 18 9 x 16 24 10 x 20 10 x 18 24 8'8 "x 19.5 8' 8 "x 18 24 9 x 18 9 x 16 24 9 x 18 9 x 16 20 ( 8 x 16 compact) 9 x 18 no change 24 9 x 18.5 of 26 10 x 20 it 25 9 x 20 it 24 9.5 x 20 to 24 9 x 20 " 22 10 x 20 " 24 9 x 20 " No specified requirement 895 x 20 " 24 10 x 20 " 24 9 x 20 " 20 9 x 18 " 24 9 x 20 " 22 9 x 20 " No spec i f i ed requirement 9 x 20 " 24 9 x 20 " No spec i f i ed requirement 9 x 20 " It 9 x 20 " 24 10 x 20 " No specif ied requirement Attachment Four 12 CONCRETE CURBING IN PARK PARKING LOTS �, Attachment 5 'No Concrete Requires Concrete Curbing Requi rement Curb 1. Maplewood x 2. Coon Rapids (only curb along portion that fronts on r.o.w) 3. Roseville x 4. Burnsville x (does encourgage it) 5. Plymouth x . 6. Brooklyn Center x 7. Fridley x 8. Blaine x (does encourage it) 9. Crystal x 10. New Brighton x 11. New Hope x 12. Golden Valley x 13. White Bear Lake x 14. Apple Valley x 15. South St. Paul x 16 , Eagan x 170 Maple Grove x 18. Columbia Heights x 19. Cottage Grove x (asphalt optional) 20. West St. Paul x 21. Shoreview x 22. North St. Paul x 23. Oakdale x 24. Woodbury x 25. Newport x 26. Little Canada x 27. Vadnais Heights x 28. St. Paul x (concrete preferred, but not . required) 29. Ramsey County x ( does encourage it) �, Attachment 5 SURVEY . MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE PARKING 5 -30 -85 Manufacturing Warehousing 1. Maplewood *1/2 employees 1/2 employees ..2. Coon Rapids 1 /each employee on the 1 /each employee on largest shift the largest shift 3. Roseville 2/3 employees or 1/1,000 .1/2,000 sq. ft. sq. ft. whichever is greater 4. Burnsville 1 /each employee on largest .1 /each employee on shift plus one for each largest shift plus company one for each company 5. Plymouth 1/300 sq, ft. 1/2,000 sq. ft. 6. Fridley 1/400 sq, ft. 1/2,000 sq, ft. 7. Blaine 1/2 employees or 1/200 sq. 1/2,000 sq, ft, or ft., whichever is greater 1/2 employees, 8. Golden Valley 1/500 sq. ft. 9. White Bear Lake 1/350 sq, ft. plus 1 /each company vehicle 10. Apple Valley 4 spaces plus 1/800 sq. ft. 11. So. St. Paul 12. Eagan 13. Maple Grove 14. Columbia Heights 1/400 sq, ft. or 1/4 employees, whichever is greater 1/800 sq. ft. 1/350 sq. ft, plus one for each company vehicle 4 plus 1/400 sq. ft. 15. Cottage Grove 4 plus 1/400 sq. ft. 16. Shoreview 1/2,000 sq. ft. *Spaces per number of employees whichever is greater 1/2,000 sq. ft. 1./1,000 sq. ft, plus one for each employ- ee on the largest shift. 1/400 sq, ft, (under 6,000 sq. ft.) 1/800 sq. ft. (over 6,000 sq. ft.) 1/800 sq. ft. or 1/4 employees, whichever is greater 1/800 sq. ft. 1/2,000 sq, ft, plus one for each company vehicle. 1/400 sq. ft. (under 6,000 sq, ft.) l/ 1,000 sq. ft. (over 6,000 sq, ft. 1/400 sq. ft. (.under 6,000 sq. ft.) l/ 2,000 sq, ft. (over 6,000 sq. ft. 1,2000 sq. ft. JOSEPH COMPANY I'EAOOf iVDEVELOPER$�DE715 5001 NORTH UNIVERSITY STREET / PEORIA, ILLINOIS 61614 / TELEPHONE 3091692 -1135 June 18, 1985 Mr. Geoff Olsen Planning Director City of Maplewood 1902 E. County Road "B" Maplewood MN 55109 Re: Parking Stall Size Dear Mr. Olsen: Discussions with Tom Ekstrand of your office has prompted us to write you. Our development of well over one million square feet of commercial properties across the Midwest has taught us valuable guidelines with respect to parking requirements . A. recent study by the U.S, Dept . of Transportation indicates that, by 1990, the percent of automobiles in the U.S. that are compact will be between 70 and 80 percent, When more than one out of two vehicles parked in a shopping center or other development is a compact, it is appropriate, to consider special accommodation of these vehicles. Our experience has f ound most stall width requirements to be 8.5 to 9 ft., recognizing that with the growing proportion of small vehicles, it is increasingly less likely that two large vehicles will park adjacent to one another; thus space for opening doors (which governs the required distance between adjacently parked vehicles) and stall width can be reduced. Rearrangement of surface parking area to accommodate the advent of today's car sizes also allows more landscape areas, The tra- ditional "sea of asphalt" can be made more attractive with the use of landscape islands. The islands are made available by downsizing the area required by the cars. UNIVERSITY SOUARE FONDULAC PLAZA BARTONVILLE SOUARE PEORIA EAST PEORIA BARTONVILLE 1 f • . •. Mr. Geoff Olsen - June 18, 1985 Page two We have attempted to illustrate our experiences which have offered the best solutions to parking development for every- one concerned. If we can assist any further, please call, Best regards, OF I/ . - I Monte J. Brannan AIA Corporate Architect MJB : Hkb 16 OmFmnPANni im To: Park and Recreation Commission From: Robert D. Odegard, Director of Community Services • y Subs: Cement Parking Curbs Required Around All Parking.Lots Date: June 12, 1985 An amendment to the minimum parking requirements of the City's Ordinance includes the following: "(d ) All parking lots shall have continuous concrete curbing surrounding the exterior perimeter of the lot and drive. Parks and parking lots having twelve spaces or less are exempt from this requirement unless required by the City Engineer for drainage control." In the previous sentence, the words "Parks and" were struck out by the Design Review Board. It was their feeling that parks should be treated as any other business, etc. in the City and have to construct concrete curbing. Part of their reason- i.ng for going to concrete curbing was due to the abuse that asphalt curb has taken during the winter when plows have chipped out the asphalt and it has. not been repaired in the Spring. I do not have any real objection to the installation of concrete curbing around parking lots in the parks, however I do feel that the Park and Recrea- tion Commission and myself should have the right to decide what type of curb- ing would be most attractive in each park. Attractiveness is always in the "eye of the beholder". While we do have some parking f a c i l i t i e s that are cleaned in the winter at skating rink locations, there are man parking lots YP 9 that are not cleaned in the winter and therefore the excuse about hitting with snowplows does not apply. I would submit that there are other means of control besides cement curbs for our parks: 1) Timbers laid flat on the parking surface or used for a timber wall. 2) Curb wheel blocks. 3) Timbers or metal posts inserted similar to fence posts and where needed planking attached to the timbers. 4) Fencing such as chainlink, woven wire, wood, decorative fence, metal plate guardrails. 5) Simple chain or cable. 6) Berms which can be either dirt or rock with attractive landscaping planted in them. 7) A slight swale. 8) Plantings such as shrubs, trees, hedges, vines. 9) Proper striping where the lot is basically used in the summer. 10) Large stones or boulders. 11) Brick walls or brick flower planters. Parks are like people - each one is an individual and should be planned and developed to its greatest potential. It is my recommendation that the Plan - n ng Commission be advised that the parking f a c i l i t i e s in the Maplewood parks not be limited to concrete curbs around parking facilities. 17 Attachment 8 MEMORANDUM To: Geoff Olson, Director of Community Development 1 From: Robert D. Odegard, Director of Community Servi ces �'N,: Subj: Cement Curbs Around Parking Lots Date: June 24, 1985 The following motion was made after considerable discussion at the regular on June 17, 1985: _Park and Recreation Commission meeting g Commissioner Christianson MOVED to recommend to the City Council to reinstate the words "Parks and" in the proposed amendment to the City Ordinance struck out by the Community Design Review Board and leave the matter of drainag e con- trol and aesthetics to the Cit y E En in and Park Board; SECOND by Commissioner Schneider; AYES: Commissioners Brenner, Chegwyn, Qualley, Christianson Piietich and Schneider; ' NAYES: Commissioner Zappa; Motion Passed. Attachment 9 • n' If construction has not begun within two ea: of r oard review g y a pproval sha be repeated. shall be p g p ded a ha 11 be d � rec ted 8.. Site secu 1 i ghti n or so not to cause an ndue glare onto adja properties or roadways. 9. The landscape plan sha be r i sed for . staff approval providing for. a. Evergreen shrubbe shall rov i de i • d n tfie areas indicated � Gated on the buildi 1 d i ng elevation sheets. b. Sod sha be provided in all rass area ea north and northwest of the propose ui ldi ng. and also around the perime of the entire bui.ldi n . All er disturbed areas shall be sod or see g d. 6 es- - Y . d Member Peterson seconded A all B. Parkin Ordinance Amendment ent Secretary Ekstrand said that Gar Jack • Gary son from Maplewood Mall is present at the meeting to listen to discussion regardin the parking ordinance S P g and amendment. Board Member Juker said she is opp • pp to the proposed 9 —foot wide stalls. The board discussed the number of parkin spaces required r g P q ed for school auditoriums and suggested staff survey ther communities r • Y r their requirements. The board agreed that any parkin lot either in a g park or by a commercial buildi should be required red to have ' q e the continuous concrete curbing. They eliminated reducing the p arking stall ' g P g size for employees to 8 11 feet.They suggested addin to the manufa cturing • g u actur�ng and warehouse parking requi rements to include 1 space for 400 square feet of manufacturi n g use and 1 space for each 1,000 square feet of-warehousin to space or one space of each two em p gees is greater. , Also section (i) shou ;.be ( h ) . Board Member Rossbach moved the board recommend a r pp ova 1 of the proposed amendment to the parking requirements as amended b the b oard • y oa d as follows. 1. Section 36 -22 (a) (8) add after " (2) �� „ or One space for each two Em l o Empl 1 space for each 400 square feet of manufact 1 square ng use and 1 space for each feet of warehousing space, whichever i s g reater "" 2. Eliminate f rom Section 36 -22 b "Parkin 'employees C ) g spaces designated for only may be reduced to la minimum wid dth of 8 1 /2 feet. " 3. Eliminate from Section 36 -22 d ''Park ( ) sand. " 4. Section 36 -140 11 (1)" should be changed to " " g Ch) Board Member Peterson seconded Ayes--Board Members Peterson, Rossbach Deans Nays - -Board Member Juke r In S TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: OWNER.: PROJECT: DATE: .�ctian by Council: f MEMORANDUM � O Re�eate City Manager Date Thomas Ekstrand -- Associate Planner Plan Review Northwest Corner of White Bear Avenue and Gervais Avenue Maplewood Associates Limited Partnership H. Standley Wessin Estate _ Mapleridge Square July 5, 1985 SUMMARY Request Approval of plans for a 108,706 square foot retail shopping center and Rainbow Foods grocery store. The northerly 280 feet will be developed at a later date. Proposal The two buildings are to have exteriors of eight -inch square pattern q burnished concrete block and rock -face concrete block. The colors used will be beige and brown. Comments The proposed parking code would allow 9 by 18 foot arkin spaces when P g P the spaces abut a curb or sidewalk and 9 by 19 f oot spaces when cars would be parking bumper to bumper. All of the sp aces proposed, P P p , except for handicap parking, are 9 by 18 foot stalls. The site P lan should be revised to meet the proposed ordinance as a minimum. There should be considerable planting of evergreen trees to screen the westerly elevation of Rainbow Foods and the northerly elevation of the retail center., since both of these views are highly visible from roadways. 9 Y Recommendation Approval of plans date- stamped 6 -25 -85 for the q Maplerid 9 e Square shopping center, subject to: 1. Approval of plans by the community design review y g eview board does not constitute approval of a building permit. 2. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screenin g enclosures with a 100% opaque wooden gate according to ordinance. 3. Any exterior building or roof -top equipment shall be decoratively screened and hidden from view. The screening material is subject to staff approval. 40 An erosion control plan, acceptable to the city engineer, shall be-submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for erosion control during construction, 5. Parking areas shall be striped and all bituminous areas shall have continuous concrete curbing. Parking lots shall be kept in a continual state of repair, 60 The site plan shall be revised to provide: .a. Parking stalls that measure 9 by 19 feet, unless they abut a curb or sidewalk, in which case they may be 9 by 18 feet. b. Narrowing of the easterly driveway on Gervais Avenue from 50 feet to 32 feet. 7. If construction has not begun within two years of approval, board review shall be repeated. PA , 8. Site security lighting shall be provided and shall be directed or shielded so not to cause any undue glare onto adjacent properties ' acent or roadways. 910 If any adjacent property is disturbed or property irons removed P Y due to construction of the site, that property shall be restored and irons replaced by the applicant 10. Grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. � 11. The applicant shall sign a hold-harmless rmless agreement with the city because of the driveway constructed over the sanitary ewer ease roval of the i Y eas subject to the ap c it y attorney. 12.' The applicant shall dedicate a drainage easement over ver the triangular area at the westerly side of the site. 13. All required landscape areas shall be continually nd properly maintained, y p perly 14. All required plant materials that die shall be replaced b y the owner within one year. P 15. The landscaping plan shall be revised for staff approval • pp to . a. Eliminate the berms within 50 feet of the White Bear Avenue access. b. Provide evergreen trees of a pine or spruce variety et P y of the retail building instead of the deciduous trees ro osed. Six additional trees shall also P o be added for extra screening of the back side of the building. c. This same evergreen planting scheme shall be followed on the ' west side of Rainbow Foods, in the same quantity. 2 r. r d. All evergreen trees shall y proposed in be at least two inches B and B the planting schedule as . 16. Stop signs sh al l be provided at all ex i is 17. "No Parkin Fir �� signs and fire h g e Lane si hydrants in areas subj' marshal's shall be provided subject to the fire marshal s approval. 18. The applicant • shall provide a detached sidewalk ewalk or .trail alon the Gervais Avenue right-of-way, way, according to the specifications f ' f the director of communit - P lcations of y services. 19• A comprehensive si gnage plan shall be submitted the board. for approval by 20. An access permit mu - st be obtained from Ramse y White Bear Avenue access. Y ounty for the 21. The applicant shall ' provide a monetary guarantee in � a form acceptable to staff, in the amount improvements of 150% of the estimated cost P ents that are not completed b of any site im P y occupancy. 3 BACKGROUND Site Description 10 Site size: 11.7 acres 2. Existing land use: undeveloped p d Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: business offices and undeveloped commercial land Southerly: Gervais Avenue and the Montgomery Wards office Easterly: White Bear Avenue a s' • single 1 e dwel 11 ng and a dental office Westerly: undeveloped Ramsey Count commercial property Y open space land and undeveloped p perty p Past Action 2- 16 --82• The board conditionally approved Y PP d the layout for this development ( see page g . DEPARTMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 110 Land use plan designation: • g SC. service commercial 2. Zoning: BC, business commercial Public Works 1• The applicant should d dedicate a drainage easement o triangular area at the westerly ver the y s ide of the site. 2. The applicant should a sign drivewa g hold- harmless agreement for the y They propose to build over the city's ' easement on the. west side Y s sanitary sewer e of the site. Parks The city's bicycle Gervais Avenue and suggested that the property or on the development. route /trail plan proposes an • P on - street trail along an off-street trail along White Bear Avenue. Gervais Avenue trail be It is provided on the applicant's boulevard, but that it be built a • s part of this Public Safety 1. Stop signs should be rovi • . „ o p Bed at all exits. 2 N Parking Fire Lane signs shall be ins 3. Fire hydrants should talled. be provided. Ramsev Count 10 The applicant should set back the development a sufficient distance to accommodate an extra five foot taking for right-of-way. r-wa g g y. The applicant has provided for this. 2. The access to White Bear Avenue is OK, but ma y have to be widened slightly, pending final. review by the county. 3. The berms adjacent to the White Bear Avenue entrance should be eliminated. 4. Future access to the northerly 280 feet will be considered when that lot is proposed for development. The "access easement" should be u t i l i z e d , however, for the cross flow of traffic between the properties. jc Attachments 1. Location 2. Property 3. Original 4. Previous 5. Plans da Map Line /Zoning Map site plan of 2 -16 -82 conditions of approval dated 2 -16 -82 te- stamped 6 -25 -85 r y , - WH/ TE BEAR 1r W Z W Q � v ob 1 COPE a� WOODLYNN "W M& (21 PRIVATE S v A &SSABI wJ NORTH N 1 W � Q Y W Q RD sk W u r W Z W Q � v ob 1 COPE a� WOODLYNN "W M& (21 PRIVATE S v A &SSABI wJ NORTH N 1 W � Q Y W Q RD sk a 1 2 ISO 15 ��) /j� 0 j two (V5 0 1 � ;1 3 , 144.5 t'JO' 7S� .i .• w� s 1 OD 1`q , 1 1 !11 � 4o 1• o h AI dop 0 1 �� D-f 3 •• 1 (3) o� a ' ► t 10 20 ° 1 1Q U� . 33 . _ ( (/0) . 1 sv t t 1'' • Jv Ls . s. �9,t a ..• w ` !l 201 t- s �O — i � � c� 1 ' l!e) `� f- s!�•) L.l�.� tir+ � z to Office 6 r e o r AMal ►� o�� (8) 01r AV W, vr RI ' ;:ti•.:; .r. � "•:• � •fir•: :'�:� ..; = ' -:•::• '.:•.::: :. � .:::•: '. � '.�:::. t O/ ' 1 � c os,• � ::�: '� �'�'� •.•:;: :. �:; ':'::::�::�: % -. � _ y r ' , • '�� •;• : ice: .. �:�•:�:•� ;•;•: L:; ;:�. .�r • :;.: ;:•:.•. •,'•••• _ r4•4�En 00or C O Ab Cr ��: . .::::.:::.:.:.:.:::.. .����,,., ■ �C� 7- :.: V e ... ...... X13' 1 : % % : •. • X : . •.:.• : ••' :• :..�.'•;.;.f?�.? j• « 1 1 L ;; +: 3z its IkL- -imp s . �•` •:<�:: ;:;:• t 1 1 s• 2500 Z i 1 M r o 1. j B 0 . ............ �'� In r - • :•;•;• .. ;t C�p Ll OFF D A irE •:.•. '� ; % •j '' • ; • ' j0 j 4 I h l � 1 In :� « ELEVENTH IT 3 0 MONTGOMERY WARDS � j �. �� ' ` — ► � s V � 1 • 79 a �. so 35 M t I 0-0! �s • 1 1 1 .I� /•I\ PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 7 Attachment two 4 N rr J I a t. III ORIGINAL SITE PLAN APPROVED 2-16-82 8 Attachment three �. DESIGN REVIEW A. JSB, Inc. - Maple Rid P Ridge Mall Z Bill Henneman of Benson -Orth Associates was present at the meeting. He indicated they. had read the staff Is recommendations. He commented that they 4i not wish to use. the textured concrete.biock on the exterior rear elevation: The board, _applicant. and Direct � • � or of Public Works Haider dis cussed e proposed bicycle trail and sidewal The board discussed with the applicant the access to the site . the. access trucks w e I11 use and th general a and 9 traffic pattern for the site Board Member Hedlund m oved t Board recommend royal of P the bu g and si to 1 ans for J ' P SB , INC* I NC subject to the fo 1 ] a . wing conditions. 1. Approval of laps b • P, y the board does not constitute building per. i t, approval of a 2. All rooftop and exterior building equipment shall be screened from view in a decorative manner. Screening is subject to Staff approval. 3. Site security lighting shall be provided and shall be directed so not to cause any undue glare onto adjacent properties or roadways. 4. Intermittent berms shall be provided along both street frontages as shown on the landscapingoplan. All, grass areas shall be sodded. 5. If landscaping is not provided by occupancy the applicant shall provi an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150% of the estimated cost of the landscaping as a guarantee. 6. All required plantings that die shall be replaced by the applicant or owner. 7. The rear elevation of the building shall, as a minimum, have an exterior of concrete block painted to match the color of the brick plus the same fascia material shall be used around the entire building. 8. Permits from Ramsey County shall be obtained for access onto White Bear Avenue and for drainage. 9. The applicant shall o r - ° P . vide an eight foo� wide concrete • White Bear Avenue. Thi rete s� dewal k along sidewalk shall be located on ro the right -of -way one foot from the Property l ne. The appl i cant shat 1 a • detached sidewalk -or trail al provide a i l along the Ge rva i s Avenue right-of-way, specifications ons of the Di rector of Comm • Community Services. 10. The applicant shall dedicate the easterly 22 feet • for of the subject property to Ramsey County street widening. 9 9 Attachment four 11. The truck access on White Bear .Avenue shall be posted for "delivery truck . use only" 12. The proposed median opening on Gervai s Avenue shall • be prohibited.-- f Any revisions to the site plan regarding this ingress- egress are - subject to. staff. approval.. 13. There .shal 1 be not future curb cuts permitted from the Whi Bear .Avenue truck access, to the proposed lot to the 14. Two fire hydrants shall be provided according to the specifications of the Fire Marshal, 75. A comprehensive signage plan shall be submitted for approval by the Board. 16. The parking lot and driveways as well as all interior parking lot landscape areas shall be curbed with the continuous concrete curbing, the parking lot shall be striped. 17: Traffic control signs shall be provided, subject to the of the Director of Public Safety, 18. The building shall be totally sprinklered. 79. Emergency exit lighting and fire extinguishers shall be provided accord- ng to the fire Marshal's specifications. 20. Trash enclosures shall be constructed of a masonry material and shall be a color to match the building. These enclosures shall have closable � gates. 21. All outstanding assessments are to be paid prior to the "issuance of a building permit. 22. The final drainage plan shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. . 23. If left turning movements at the White Bear Avenue driveways prove to be accident causing by the determination of the Director of Public Safety, these driveways shall be reconstructed at the developer's expense to limit future vehicular movement to right -in and right -out only. Any redesigning of driveways shall be subject to the City Engineer's approval. 24. At all times during construction the developer shall maintain a driveway to the building for access by Public Safety personnel. 25. The owner and applicant shall agree to the above conditions in writing. Board Member Moe seconded Ayes - all. 10 roMpeNiFS _-Z .JUN 25 v% Size Buildin 'A' 501,906 sefe 'L' shape retail Buildin V 57,800 s.f. g rocer y MAPLERIDGE MAPLEWOOD MINNESOTA Descr of the Improvements T 108,706 s.f. Retail Center A New Construction Buildin Description T1 4lA4 410 Tenants 19 lease spaces f. fits .21i; P arkin g 592 parkin spaces -X-. Land Area 5089000 J* 11.7 acres Construction Details Foundations Reinforced concrete Basement None Exterior Walls Concrete masonr units, painted, ri insulation, and gy psum board backup Interior Demisin Walls 6" metal stud to roof deck with 5/8" F.C. gy psum board each side and sound insulation • Windows/ rt Doors Bronze aluminum thermal -break frames with I" insulated g lass Roof Sin pl ballasted membrane Structural' Support Steel frame with bar joist and metal deck . . . . . . . . Ceilin Acoustic tile suspended ceilin system turn -Key Finished Lease Spaces 1) Rainbow Foods - 2) Walgreens 3) St. Paul Book and Stationery Elevators None Stairs Roof access only Description of the Improvements (Con't. Lighting 2x4 f lourescent recessed lights Insulation R -25 roof insulation, 1h" rigid insulation at walls Heating Cooling Individual tenant HVAC . forced air gas roof top units Electric Individual tenant metering Fire Protection Entire building is sprinklered Bathrooms Based on tenant lease arrangements with accommodations in each tenant space Tenant Finished in Other Space 0685 1) Walls - Gypsum board taped and sanded 2) Ceiling - 2x4 acoustic tale and 2x4 lay is flourescent light fixtures (70, ft. candles) 3) Floor - concrete 4) Toilet room D' TO: .FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: DATE: Request Aatl by Council* r MEMORANDUM E n ftre a d..r.._............. lto�i�le City Manager Pei eote Associate Planner Johnson Date Older Adult Home- Sharing Program Older g Adult Home- Share Task Force July 10, 1985 Approve. a resolution of intent to participate in the Older Adult H ome - Share pilot program. Comments Eleven communities, including Maplewood, have been requested to ad opt ' opt a resolution of intent to participate in the financing ' P racing of the proposed Older Adult Home - Share pilot program. Ma lewood's contribution button would be $2656 for the year beginning January 1, 1986. The enclosed memorandum was sent to each of the study area communities. Two informational meetings were held on May 29 and y 30 to explain the proposal. The contribution requested from each community mmunity is listed on page 13 of the memorandum. As of July 10, Hugo, Little Canada, North St. Paul Oakdale, Heights had � e, Roseville and Vadnais Hei g d authorized participation. Assuming Maplewood chooses to participate, P P p , $9,206 of the $12,646 program budget will have .been pledged. Decisions from White Bear lake and White • ite Bear Township are pending. Lauderdale and Falcon Heights robabl will P y 1 not participate. Pauline Staples has begun co • g contacting foundations, area businesses, bankers, etc. to cover the funding hort g fall. The next meeting of the task force will be in earl Au u Y g st• At that time, a decision will be made whether adequate support exists to proceed. Recommendation Adopt the resolution on page 14. Procedure 10 HRA recommendation 2. Council decision jC Attachments 10 Report sent to study area communities 2. Resolution P MEMORANDUM TO: Governing Bodies of Stu � • Study Area Commun FROM: Older Adult Home Share Task Fo SUBJECT: Financing for a Pilot Home-Share DATE: re Housing Pro ram May 13, 1985 g feguest y community to .� o i n with several of communities to finance a pilot home- her area begin January 986 share housing program that wou Y The contribution that is r ld community is listed on page 13, equested from each A commitment from our • • Reasons for the Req uest 10 A needs assessment conducted about 2580 0 . th• is past January, revealed o lder adults in a three school that includes your communit district study area, that alternative , would choose to share their home e to having to move. s as an (Refer to the background sectio information about the home-sharing c s for further assessment.) 9 oncept and the needs 20 The existing Lutheran S • Social Services (LSS) Share - A -Home is the only program offering this service to program Study .area. It is not suff ici Persons residing in the demand, ently funded to service the ro ' P ected 3. The waiting lists for t he seniors residences within area are often very long, The home- the study short or ion term sharing concept could rovide g option to those seniors who P a their homes whsle waiting for would rather remain in they want to 1i g r an apartment to become availab le live but, 9- for whatever reason where their present dwellin . can no longer maintain 4. This program could also ' o provide older adults who do not d relocate, but who can no io esire to a r option to remain close maintain to friends 9 and their family in dwelling, with a n familiar environment. In some alternative to Navin g instances, ces this service a could provide a viable sable costs and Y unfamiliar Prematurely environment of relocate an older ' adult into the a nursing home. 50 The home -share conce t • p can be easily and cost-effectively tested Proposed Program Concept r 1 • A three year pilot expansion of the existing Luthera Services LS P (LSS Share -A -Home Program. Social reviewed annuals g Funding commitments would be the Y• Three years was chosen because concept, a of the newness of 2. Expansion of the LSS r but provide an o P ogram would keep the costs to a mi ' op portunit y to accurately assess t nlong term program, he need for a long 3 . For 1986, $11, 397 would fund the • pilot program. A part -time social worker would be hired to adm this ram ro . This would be of f iced with the director p g his person of the present program at Bethesda Hospital, If interest in the ro ram ' w • p g • arrants, with the opening of an office in the study area would be considered wi the • that the space must be provided ' e stipulation r .located- as �' free of charge and be as centrally Y 49 The expanded program would be available to persons residing within the jurisdictions of the White Bear Lake, Roseville and North St. Paul Maplewood - Oakdale school districts. 5• Each community within the ro ram • ' , p g area is being asked to contribute on a fa i r -share bas s to the cost of expanding in program. The initial basis for the allocation of P 9 the - LSS costs would-be based upon a community's population of older adults adult _population for the en , relative to the older tare area. (See page 13.) In succe ' years, the number of requests received f eding from each community would also be used to determine the cost allocation, cation. 6• Supplemental funds would be so • sight from foundations, corpora- tions, area banks, area school districts and Ramsey County. An funds received would reduce the contributio on requested of each community. 7• Any fees received from the matching service would be credited toward a community's 1987 and 1988 contributions* per The present fee is $200 p $100 from the homeowner and 100 • matching $ from the live -in, successfully ng live -ins with homeowners requires • a q an extensive interview process conducted by trained, neutral third party. The fee to be charged during the pilot program will be a greed on at a later date. 8. A "board of directors" would be established to monitor the effectiveness of the pilot ro ram a . p g and to address the financial questions. The members would include a representativ area- communities, school districts. (s) of the study cts LSS, live -ins, home- sharers area educational institutions, other financial nancial sponsors, etc. 915 At the end of the ilot • p program, consideration would be given the program should be a rivate versus •c to whether .p rsus a public service. Recommendation That each of the eleven communities ' within the study area adopt the enclosed "Resolution of Intent to Participate" ticipate (page 14) and return it to the Older Adult t Home -Share Task Force on or before re July 26, 1985. 2 BACKGROUND Task Force Formation In October 1984, the Maplewood City Council asked the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to study the need for an older adult home- sharing program. The need for a multi - jurisdictional study was recognized. As a result, the Older Adult Home -Share Task Force was organized as a subcommittee of the Maplewood HRA in November 1984. The membership is listed on page 6. Definition of Home Sharing The concensus of the task force is that for the purposes of studying y 9 .the need for a home -share program that the concept should be defined as follows: 1. Older adult homeowners (at least sixty years of age) sharing their homes with a younger person or family. 2. Older adults ( at least sixty years of age) who would move into the home of a younger person or family. This group of individuals could include persons who can no longer live alone in an apartment setting. The task force also recognizes a third group of potential home - sharers --_- single parents wanting to share the homes of other single parents- -but did not include it in the study because of the lack of data and because of the.emphasis on need to resolve the housing problems of older adults, Demand Analysis w 1. In January 1985, the Maplewood City Council appropriated $1297 to conduct the needs assessment survey. The survey cost $1249. 20 The geographic boundaries of the study area included the areas within the jurisdictions of the White Bear Lake, Roseville and North 8t. Paul- Maplewood - Oakdale school districts. These boundaries were chosen because each district maintains a mailing list of older adults and because the districts were initially thought to be a potential candidate to administer a home -share program, due to their on -going senior citizen program expertise, including transportation, ortation meals -on- wheels, counseling and education. 3. A systematic random sample of the 5915. persons from the three ' mailing lists resulted in 1691 older adults chosen to receive a questionnaire. 4. The questionnaire was pretested at a meeting of the Golden Aires Club to insure that the intent of the survey and the questions would be clearly understood. The pretest resulted in some minor language and format changes. A copy of the final questionnaire is presented on page 8. 3 50 To maximize the rate of return envelope was , a stam ed ad dressed return included with each ,p � were also published the questionnaire. Newspaper ar ' week that the questionnaires p ticles nnaires were mailed out. 6. the question Eighty of the 478 r �� espondents, or 16.7 percen As an alternative to ha t, answered to home, would y ou shar havi ng to move from A Y re Your home w ith an . your present er 41 persons stated that individual or .family ?�� concept, t they might consider the home - sharing 7 • Projecting the 16 '7 percent in-favor res ponse mailing opulation of 591 g l ist ponse rate to the Iota expected to be interested persons, 988 of then 1 terested in home-sharing. Persons would be g . 8• The 16.7 erc ent response rate i ac 2.4 e P • percent 95 percent of the curate w�.thin plus or minus were administered time. In other word • 100 times, 95 of the i _ s , if this survey range between 14 , 3 and 19 in -favor response rates •1 percent. would According to the 198 0 census, 15 9 * g , , 22 o lder reside within the s � 3 persons 60 years of Population i study area (page 13). Assuming and s representative of this en suming the sample . ,g •n the population of Y 2500 persons withi older adults, approximately e study area could be expected to be interested i e the persons in sharing their homes P s respond ing� to the A summary profile page 11, survey in favor of home-sharing aring is on Existing Home - Share Pro Lutheran Social Serv ices vices (LSS ) operates the onl home-share win City area. Le an their program of Significance in the Twin b .and, until January 14 g heir pro ram Y , 1985, concentrated the' i in 1980 and its suburbs, On Ja l. Debra Paulsr their efforts i • Bethesda Ho nuary 14, a Ste Paul of Minneapolis spita f was opened at staff person at this ud is presently the onl office. Her Y full -time 1985. Two founda program has a bud et Lions and a bank have g of $38, 000 for budget Fifty ma tche Provided ab 2 • match s Per year is the $ 5,0,00 of this h costs between $400 capacity at this time and $600, Each The critical element of a successful home-shar hare progr to maintain a large s • g pool of persons who want the ability pool, according to Ms p to be is . aulsrud of LSS, is limi This completely separate pro limited. It is her belief that if a c P gram from the LSS program same or overlappin s P 9 were to be started up with the would likely experience g ervice areas, both problems. programs Pilot Expansion of th LSS Share Prog m The task force conclu that a pilot existing ro r g LSS program would be p g am expansion of the w the most .efficient and Nether the demand identi cost- effective ay to evaluate w materialize, The task f nt f led in the sury ' th orce based this conclusio eY will n on the f 1 • The LSS program has a successful fi ve - year track record 4 2e LSS is experienced with the start -up of other successful home - u sharing programs. 30 It is critical that an task force coo any program format that is proposed b th cooperate with and not duplicate the I y e their roster of live -in candidates,, LSS s services or es, if the pilot program. is to accurately assess the need for a long term service. jW Attachments 1. Task Force Membership p Questionnaire and Cover Letter 3. Survey Results 40 Summary Profile of Respond 5 • Re nested ents In Favor of Home-Sharing q Community Contributions g 69 Resolution of Intent to Pa • rticlpate OLDER ADULT HOME -SHARE TASK FOR • CE 10 Lorraine Fischer, CI aizman .Maplewood HRA (Housing and Re development Authority) 18.12 North Furness Street Maplewood, Minnesota 55189 • • z 2. Dale Carlson, Commissioner Maplewood HRA 1898 Barclay Street Maplewood, Minnesota 55109.._...- _ (777 -6440) -- ; . 3. Betty Motz, Director Senior ' i Services District 622 (North St. Paul -Ma -Map lewood - .. P d Oakdale) Gladstone Co . mmun�ty Education Center Frost Avenue and Manton Street Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 . (770-4743) 4 0 Janet Guthrie, Director Seni • �r Services - District 623 (Roseville area) 1910 West County Road B _ Roseville, Minnesota 55113 (633- 8150 ext. 316) �. Joanne Hutchinson, Director Senior Services District .624 (White Bear Lake . � 239 area - - 9 Cedar Avenue White Bear Lake, Minnesota 5 • • .5110 (429 -0543) • 6. Dave Nordenson • Outreach Worker -- Wilder Foundation Concordia Arms 2030 East Lydia Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55189 . ( 7. Steve Roe, Director of Community ' • of No y Serv City North St. Paul 2526 Seventh Avenue East North St. Paul, Minnesota 55109 (770 -4471) 80 Mark Sather, City er City Manager ty of White Bear Lake 4828 Cook Avenue + White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55118 (429 -8526) - 90 John Hurl Health Resources Incorporated 2696 Hazelwood Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 (770 -9133) . 10. Jo Christenson, Manager Franklyn Park Seniors Residence 2485 E. Seppala Boulevard North St. Paul, Minnesota 55109 47 11. Mike Van Guilder, Manager Archer Heights Seniors Residence 1816 Beebe Road Maplewood, Minnesota 5 . (770-399.6) 12. Bill Young Human Services, Inc. 706.6 Stillwater Blvd. North Oakdale, Minnesota 55119 Staff Persons: Randall' Johnson; Associate Planner Department of Community Development 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 (770 -4560) •�, Pauline Staples, Assistant Director Department-of Community Services .1380 Frost Avenue -Maplewood, Minnesota _55109 .(770 -4570) i CITY OF M.API.EWOOD 1902 EAST COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55109 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - 7704560 January 25, 1985 Good Morning: As more persons in the suburban areas on the north side of St. Paul reach retirement age, the waiting lists for area seniors apartment buildings continue to g row. Recognizing the need to address this growing concern, several St. Paul suburban communities and their school districts are looking at the possibilit y of starting a home-share program as a partial solution to the lack of available seniors' apartment units. Home - sharing is general defined as. a homeowner agreeing to share their home with an individual or fami for reasons involving security, companionship, i onsh i p p� assistance with household or yard tasks or transportation needs. A young person may share an older person's home or an older person may share a younqer person's home. • It would be very much appreciated if you would take a few minutes to complete the enclosed � p questionnaire. re. Your input will 1 help us decide whether there--is a need to continue 1 ooki ng into the idea of -starting a home-sharing program . A am g 9 p g stamped, self-addressed return - envelope is enclosed to return your completed -questionnaire. If you want more information about the home - sharing idea, please call Pauline. Staples -- (770-4574) or Randall Johnson -- (770 - 4560). - Thank you very much for your time and assistance. Very truly yours, Lorraine Fischer, Chairman Older Adult Home -Share Task Force NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY OLDER ADULTS NOME- SNARL' s the reasons what would. apply to you. ( eck all of I need -help - with =yard -work-----.:.- � Need ^cOmpaniooshi p I need held with-house work for security nt _____ _Health reasons N `_Ott r {pleise-specify) . eed for better transportation tf nanblal seasons 6. 1- voidd=.a a#V:a �o�oe - •sha��r iac�r �.t��-a va3 l+s�l.•t— = 1 -3 ears -� =� _ _ . • ? 3 S_yea�rs- �.- _Onsure�— I would-:not participat • , a 1 re adf--pa.z -t �n- L't_ -i.a-� dome -�sha =� -lrrvg zam�. -- :fi co►n perso, n -�rn+d t ephone••numbet art: tam - � 7. It you NC.LD-nm=, cons i drs• _.=ha r � -amour .hnm e ; •- •. minutes .to tell us why you are o _ _ t (Your -, reasons �r easons - tae important `tv �elp- h - t�--•v derstari� idea. nd ---any. • na jor problems that the public nay have tiritb - this jdta;j Reasonst - �':•• (oier) •, •• f Thank you for your assistance in helping us determine • 7 • are housi it there is a .need to establish a home -share ' '� .• 0 9 Program. • I! TES, why would'you consider sharing rout .homer . • P ROC RAM Instructions - - LEASE PLACE AN • X • NEXT TO EACH RESPONSE T HAT APPLI TO YOtO • (Put . addl t3onal- comments on -back aide _of_ toss- gu*stionnalre}_ _ Please fhdicate the community is which you lives Zip Code _ Little Canada - ' ltoserille .Other M aplewood • _„__Vadna i s !i sight= Other s . North St. Paul ( specify) its Bear Lake • "Oakdale ...... its Bear Township Your Present Situation 1. Marital Status: _single married widoi+ ed or divorced • Now long? t Age:. i-.� to _S2- - ______6o to_ 69_ 7o to 79 Ses: _ _: !lale__. ]renal*._ •'--_ _. . In what_ t ype_ of dwelling_ do you presently live? ' Own boose Rent apartment __ Live wltb friends o f Other (pie sa a specify) Y S. now long bave you lived at your current address? _less than 2 years 6 -10 ears 2 S ears Y _ 21 or more years y 11 -26 - years _tour Housing Preferences ' 6- If you RAD TO move - Your present home, would ou - - 1sove soz (check all the options that you would consider) = es to • A rental apartment limited to older adults? •� • 11 condoeinium , ,ttownhous* or cooperative residence' limited to older adults? . rental apartment 'with no age restrictions? A Condominium,— -townhouse -or- -cooperative residence, with -no age restrictions? A residence specifically designed for less 'thaa - ten - older adults? The single- family house of *a younger family or lndivi'dual not necessarily your family wembersj? T he single - family home of a - person (s) of . a similar - a e is a sel OOther; - (please specify) 9 a► fT__ _ S. As an alternative to HA VIUC to _.move _.l.�tOM : out . • you share. - youz.%boae - with.- tan •br --fami y2.::Y� -home, • n SURVEY RESULTS Final Tabulation — 3/22/85 School Di stricts Mailing List fo 2u l ation Fi nal . ,.. Sam l e /Rev i sl i on /Total (' of Mal List (o of Res onses Sam 1 � � ) Yes/Maybe/N o White Bear Lake (pink) Roseville (gold) 2565 2420 795 - 11 = C ) 640 (— 3) = 784 637 (31) 211 27 � ) 35 20 156 Maplewood (yellow) 930 273 (_ 3) = 270 (26 2g ( ) 183 (29) 84 (31) 38 15 130 20 11 53 5915 1708 ( -17) 1691 (29) 4 78 26 ( ) 8 0 41 326 . Seniors' Residences Mailing List 9 • Final Oei2e Population Revision Total Sam le Lesponses C') Yes/Maybe/No Franklyn Park Washington Square 117 80 ( -1) = 116 100% 28 (24) 3 0 25 Roseville Seniors House 126 _ ( -1) = 80 125 100% 100% 12 (15) 15 (12) 1 0 11 2 1 12 323. 321 5 17 C ) 6 1 48 Seniors Residences Mailing List Final a'itin2 Lists (Blue) Population --- Revision Total Sam 1 e R p es (') Yes /Maybe /No Roseville Seniors House 215 100% Washington Square 104 No Distinction 100% 66 1) 12 5 49 A c er Heights 28 100' 347 ( -30) w 317 • Note: Revisions to mailing list totals: Total Response • 'Beige: —2 (30 year old caretaker /a woman received 2 questionnaires ) '- Blue: —30 Mailing Pink: —11 Gold: —3 Returned, undeliverable questionnaires 2329 599 (26 %) Yellow: — Source: Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority Janua 1985 y y Survey 10 AttArhmont I SUMMARY PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS IN FAVOR OF THE HOME — SHARING CONCEPT Survey Categories School Districts Ma iling Lists Senior Residence s i dence. Waiting Lists Maplewood — North St. Paul— Oakdale Roseville White Bear Lake TOTA 1. Present Yes Maybe Yes Maybe Yes Maybe Yes Maybe y Yes Maybe y Residence Type: a.' Single Dwelling 15 5 33 11 31 15 7 86 31 b.-Other 3 1 1 1 1 3 -4 3 . 9 8 2. When a Home —Share SFD other SFD Other SFD Other SFD Other 4 SFD Other Program i s Wanted: a. Next Year 4 3 4' 2 3 1 10 3 b. 1 to 3 Years 2 1 2 1 1 4 3 c. 3 to 5 Years 1 0 1 d. Unsure 19 5 37 3 34 4 3 2 93 14 3. Reasons for Wanting a Home —Share Program (see legend in notes �. below): Rank Rank. .a. # 12 27 24 8 71 #1. b• #4 10 19 13 7 49 #4 c• 5 15 9 3 32 d. 2 7 7 7 23 e. #3 9 16 20 6 51 #3 f. #2 15 23 20 6 64 #2 9• 6 17 18 7 48 Other 4 3 2 9 SUMMARY PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS IN FAVOR OF THE HOME— SHARING CONCEPT 4. Marital Status: a. Single, Divorced or Widowed 46 28 25 11 110 b. Married 26 28 ; 26 3 83 5. Median Age 70 -79 60 -69 60 -69 _ 70 79 N/A 6. Median Number of Years at Present Residence: 21+ 21+ . 21+ 21+ N/A Source: 1985 Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Survey Notes: Yes -- person would participate in a home —share program Maybe --- person might participate in a home — share program SFD - -sing 1 e family detached dwelling 1 .0. Other -- housing unit other than a single family detached dwelling Legend Question 3: a. need help with. yard w q rk e. financial reasons b. need help with housework f. need companionship c, health reasons g. need for security d. need for better transportation 12 REQUESTED COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTIONS 1986 PILOT HOME -HARE PROGRAM Requested Fair -Share Contri bution $ 670 215 202 632 2,656 1,037 632 4 253 367 1,733 $12,6a6 ( ) Percent of owner - occupied households resided in by persons 60+ years of age # Average for total study area Source: 1980 Census Percent of Study Area Number of Persons Study Area Communities 60+ Years of Age 60+ Population Falcon Heights (25.4) 809 5e3% Hugo' (13.9) 260 1.7 Lauderdale (18.0) 246 1,6 Little Canada (15.2) 751 5.0 Maplewood (16.7) 3 21.0 North St. Paul (14.4) 1,243 8,2 Oakdale (10.6) 759 5.0 Roseville (17.2) 5,127 33,6 Vadnais Heights (10.2) 298 2,0 White Bear Township (15.7) 446 2,9 White Bear Lake (14.0) 2,089 13.7 Total (15.0)# 15 100 7 Requested Fair -Share Contri bution $ 670 215 202 632 2,656 1,037 632 4 253 367 1,733 $12,6a6 ( ) Percent of owner - occupied households resided in by persons 60+ years of age # Average for total study area Source: 1980 Census RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE HOME SHARE PILOT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Older Adult Home -Share Task Force was established in October 1984 to study the need for a home -share housing program; WHEREAS, the study area included the jurisdictions of the White Bear Lake, Roseville and North St. Paul - Maplewood - Oakdale school districts; WHEREAS, the task force membership is multijurisdictional, including but not limited to representatives of city government, school districts, managers of seniors residences, senior health care providers and senior counseling services from within the study area; . WHEREAS, in January, 1985, the Maplewood City Council authorized $1297 for a needs assessment of which $1249 was expended WHEREAS, the results of the needs assessment indicate that approximately 2500 older adults in the study area would be expected to participate in a home -share program as an alternative to having to move from their homes; WHEREAS, no program currently exists that can serve the estimated demand in the study area; WHEREAS, a three -year pilot expansion of Lutheran Social Services' Share -A -Home program would be the most cost - effective means of assessing the need for a long -term program; WHEREAS, the cost of administering a program for the study area from January 1, 1986 to December 31, 1986 would be $11,397.00; WHEREAS, the task force is hereby requesting that each of the eleven study area communities contribute to the financing of a pilot home —share program for 1986, on the basis of their 1980 older adult population, as follows: Community Falcon Heights Hugo Lauderdale Little Canada Maplewood North St. Paul Oakdale Roseville Vadnais Heights White Bear Township White Bear Lake % of Study Area's Requested Older Adult Population Contribution 5.3 $ 670 1.7 215 1.6 202 5.0 632 21.0 2,656 8.2 1,037 5.0 632 33.6 4,249 2.0 253 2.9 367 13.7 1,733 100% $ 12,646 WHEREAS, funding for the second and third years of the pilot program will be requested of the affected communities in ,Tune of 1986 and in June of 1987; 14 a I WHEREAS, supplemental funding will be sought to reduce the costs to be borne by the participating communities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Maplewood intends to participate in the Older Adult Home — Share Program from January 1, 1986 to December 31, 1986, for a cost not to exceed $2656. Said expenditure will be included i n the city's budget for 1986. 15 , MINUTES MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY July 9, 1985 E. Older Adult Home Share Program Staff is recommending a $2656 contribution community by Maplewood to the eleven o munity effort for the reasons stated in'the staff report. P Assuming council authorizes-this expenditure, $9206 of the $12,646 program P 9 m budget for 1986 w i l l have been pledged. Decisions from White Bear Lake White - Bear Township and p re pending. Lauderdale and Falcon Heights will r _ g probabl y not participate. The task force is seeking funding from foundations, and area businesses to make up the funding shortfall, 1. Commissioner Carlson moved an • d Commissioner Connelly seconddd to recommend that council authorize the requested $2656 • q contribution to the ram. Older—Adult 1 t Home Share Program, motion by Council: 3 z MEMORANDUM Endorsed.„ f N o difi ad FROM .,�,,.,_.�.... T0: City Manager Pe ea to : Associated Planner -- Johnson Date SUBJECT: Tax - Exempt Financi DATE; ng Fee -- Multiple Dwellings July 1, 1985 Request Amend the formula for setting the city's ' t financing ZtY s fee to approve the use of tax -exem P cing for multiple-dwelling projects 9 P � ects Comments In August 1984, council adopted ' T P guidelines for approving this t g These guidelines require a fee .YAe of financing. lump sum at the beginnin to be pall to the city as a 9 ng of a mortgage or annuall over ' a mortgage. Y. the life of The existing lump sum option s • P should be revised to equal the r the annual fee option. The annual p present value of more re fee generates substantially venue than the existing lump p sum fee. If the ,annual fee was to be required qu i red for all five of the end i n projects, approximatel P 9 th y $370,000 in revenue would be e existing lump sum option were to be .generated. If the ..revenue from the p used, only about $72,000 lus odawi 1 tz annual fee of about P generated. $56.800 would be This change would not only • y enefit the city, but also be more 41 developers - -all would be paying fair to P Y ng an equivalent fee. Recommendation Amend the city's tax-exempt financing na • to . • P ncing fee guidelines as follows (language be deleted is crossed out and underl ined) ; language to be added is As a condition of approving his financing, a lump sum fee at b closing r g g an annual fee over the l i f e of and reserves the bond issued will be required. The city erves the right to choose the fee option wi ption that ill be the most beneficial to the city. This choice will when the final resolution is ad be made opted Factors to be taken into account will include, but not be limited to: a. The size of requested issue b• Unbudgeted city funding needs • eds at the time of the request c. The number of requests q d. Federal arbitrage considerations bons The formula for each fee op tion P n is as follows: a, Annual fee: An annual fee payable on each anniversary of the bond issued of not less than one- eighth of one percent of the unpaid balance and one - quarter of once percent of the bond issue shall be paid at bond closing, subject to federal arbitrage restrictions. -ate b. Lump sum fee: At bond closing, a lump -sum fee shall be paid that is equivalent to the resent value of. the annual fee o tion. The present value must be determined by a qualified expert, acce table t o the city. :EEQ amount of Ono O'preent rock:ri a 2 a1• to r MINUTES MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Ju 1 y 9, 1985 7. New 6usinesss c •ntinued} . C. Amendment of Tax— exempt Fi nancing nancing Fee Staff is recommending th t the present lump sum fee option .revised to equal. the p resent P should be P t va 1 ue of the annual fee o t i on f . stated in the staff report. P or the reasons Staff al cl that the present l ump sum formula was to be use if th e annual fee would not e ener d only g enerate enough money to be useful on annual basis. With approximate) an y $28,000 of annual income r e five projects being . p rocessed, P o�ected for the d, the lump sum fee option on ha obsolete. P s become Commissioner Connelly moved and Commissioner s i one r - Schmit seconded to recommend that council amend the lump sum fee formula as recommended by staff. Motion carried. A e5 __ a l y 1 � "OMMUN/T Y EDUCA TION NO. ST, PAUL MAPLEWOOD- OAKDALE SCHOOLS 2055 E. Larpenteur Avenue MAPLEWOOD, MN 55 109 Action by Council: _ DATE: July 11 1985 Endorse Phone: (612 ) 7 70-4607 Modifie TO: Barry Evans, Manag Rejected City of Maplewood Date FROM: George VonDrashek Community Educatio Director RE: Maplewood Community d � • y ucation Advisory Committee Representative Mr. Joe Fox, who has served on the District • #622 Community Education Adv isory Committee for the past 12 years as a member representing the City of Maplewood, has resigned from ' The committee and I 9 m the committee. are going to miss Joe and the advice and assistance he has given us during his. term. We are anxious to have the city appoint nt anot resent them PP her person to represent on the committee as soon as possible. The only criteria for all committee members ' f �s that they cannot be an employee o the school district or city. The committee m of them meets every second Wednesday month at 7:30 p.m. at the Gladstone Community Education Center. Thank you for your assistance in finding s a 9 replacement. As soon as someone i • appointed, I would appreciate a call. I do a short i nservi ce with them prior to their first meeting, 'If you information, 1 ease call _ Y need more P me at 770 4607. GVD:tr "COMMUN%TY AND SCHOOL WORKING TOGETHER' by counc Endor�e� MEMORANDUM kodifie Rej ected..._.. Dade - ___. TO:. Mayor & City Council FROM: Barr R. Evan ,City Manager SUBJECT: Muni ci Qal Legi s 1 ati ve Comrni ss i DATE: July 15, 1985 At the present time we are without an elected person on the Board of Directors of the above Commi'ss i on . one of you needs to volu and /or be selected to the position formerly held by Mik Wasp l uk. Inasmuch as this is an important commission, I would like that a selection be made at the July 22 meeting BRE :1nb July 16, 1985 Action by"Council: .41 - MEMORANDUM Endorse Modif i e d,_.,�,._____. Rej ecte d..,..... To City Manager Barry Evans - Date From: Chief of Police Kenneth V, Colli `.r.. Subject: Appointment to C i v i l Service Commission Vacancy - Appl i c ant Steven Gunn The Maplewood Police Civil Service Commission was left with a vacancy with the death of' Joseph Gri emann. Mr. Gunn was a candidate at the time of our last appointment. He is still very interested in serving in this position. I would recommend that he be appointed to fill th existing vacancy. The vacant term runs from January 1985 to January 1988. I submit this for your review and handling, KVC :js cc Civil Service F i l e pAPilEwOOD BOARDS & COMKISSIONS APPLICATION Foy AA GO* rv oe Al - Date ADDRESS 12 DG E • S��! -��'►� a n� l'►�� � ��GVao o M �J Phone Home X83 3y 7 York 46 -65g A G EA 10 kOMEOWMM: YES Number of Years as a Homeowner //os NO Number of Years as s Resident Mould regular attendance at seetings be difficult: Yes No = On which board or oomaiission are you interested in serving on? List 6, number 1 being first choioe. , COmmUNI TY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Z�PARK & RECREATION COIrDriISSION HOUSING do LOP NT AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMISSION HUM AN RELATION COMMISSION POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION =f this is a Renewal Application, total number of meetings held on your board or saion this peat year? _ How many have you missed ?! Eauoation 3;. (4 .Poi14- sactrj ttot'V- of 1 JrD- /97v &Ov Present Occupation and employer L R �✓ E/Z %N/!�'G�O ��6 � �� �'�e" 64 the A RoteA) 1� 21 of Years � • � New Applicants only: Previous Sob experience and employers. A-Wn Iry petit e'e R-LS 0-r-+(- ce- -- � D List Organizations or Clubs in the Community in which you have 'been, or are an active participant. Ff�J�oc��oN� ark /ham Background experience in any of the Boards or Commissions, If arty. --�fien> s j ve - e�,� --�- %-�•� c.e_ vj-c._ � b o ,� `t t�f.� -tea Why would you like to serve on any of these boards or commissions? �iL ✓ '' � ��Q�� �CLK,w.�11 -��7.� aL liL �C�/t•� fG�r�� 0/ Additional Coment'd. VlL �i'k vLc �tc.- 1ZC +��f�:.crlZ9z9� �► F � (list last three) . �- 7 MEMORANDUM Notion by C ounO tl: J . Zr�dors e f Modif ie R,e� ecte .._.. TO: Mayor & City Council I)ate : FROM: Barry R. Evans, Ci Manager SUBJECT: Community Services- Parks and Recreation DATE: July 16, 1985 The attached resolution changes the name of the Department of Community Services to Department of Parks and Recreation. The present name is ver confusing to the public, and doesn't really identify what the department does. This would also be an appropriate time, before we move into a new building, so that appropriate signage can be developed. I recommend adoption of the a ched. BRE:1nb a RESOLUTION NO. 85- - CITY OF MAPLEWOOD COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA � BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Ci ty of Maplewood that the name of the Department of Community Services be changed to the De ar Parks and Recreation. P tment of Passed this day of July, 1985, Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Ayes: Nays: