The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1985 11-06 City Council PacketIeRJ a L 117-11 Maplewood City Council 7:00 P.M., Wednesday, November 6, 1985 Municipal Administration Building Meeting 85 -24 A. CALLTOORDER B. ROLLCALL C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. CONSENTAGENDA 1. Accounts Payable 2. Investment Authorization F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:10 — PUD and Variances: Harmony School Site G. AWARD OF BIDS H. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Edward Street 2. Southlawn Drive I. NEW BUSINESS 1. Cope Ave. Feasibility Study 2. Canvas of Election J. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS K. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS L. ADMINISTRATIVE PRSENTATIONS M. ADJOURNMENT f New MANUAL CHECKS FOR OCTOBER 31,19.85 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 201M69 10/31/85 313.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 201M69 10/31/85 313.00 - MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL .00 s 280T10 10/31/85 11,136.47 T&S EXCAVATING CONTRACT PYM 11036.47 • t 287M69 10/31/85 6,169.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 287M69 10/31/65 401.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 6,570.00 287N80 10/31/85 9.11 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 2.40 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 2.40, NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 31.73 NSP UTILITIES _ 287N80 10/31/85 100.09 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 19.76 NSP _ UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 : 5.97 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 41.17 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 214.42 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 161.22 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 4.93 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 233.68 NSP UTILITIES 287N80 10/31/85 88.58 NSP UTILITIES 915.46 # 287U85 10/31/85 65.00 UNIV OF M INN TRAVEL TRAINING . 65.00 288K20 10/31/85 145.00 KANE ROSEMARY P/R DEDUCT 145.00 s 289C25 10/31/85 1,434.54 CANADA LIFE INSURANCE 1,434.54 s 289K75 10/31/85 98 KNUTSON CONSTR CONTRACT PYM 98,383.71 289M69 10/31/85 4,824.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL - s f 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 289M69 10/31/85 330.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL - 5,154.00 289NSO 10/31/85 2.40 NSP UTILITIES 289N80 10/31/85 2.40 NSP UTILITIES 289NSO 10/31/85 4.25 NSP UTILITIES 289NSO 10/31/85 146.66 NSP UTILITIES 155.71 * * * * ** 290040 10/31/85 125.00 CLERK OF COURT FILING FEE 125.00 290J80 10/31/85 11.00 JUVENILE WORKSHOPS TRAVEL TRAINING 11.00 * ' 29OM52 10/31/85 14,683.22 MN FED SAVINGS FWT PBL 14,683.22 * * * * ** 290"69 10/31/85 6034.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 290"69 10/31/85 206.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 6,340.00 29OM76 10/31/85 6,930.57 MN TREAS PERA PERA PBL 29OM76 10/31/85 9,265.58 MN TREAS PERA PERA PBL 16, 196.15 290N80 10/31/85 324.01 NSP UTILITIES 29ONSO 10/31/85 184.00 NSP UTILITIES 290N80 10/31/85 168.90 NSP UTILITIES 676.91 • 291"20 10/31/85 77,265.00 METRO WASTE CONTR SAC PBL 291"20 10/31/85 772.65- METRO WASTE CONTR SAC PBL 76,492.35 291M69 10/31/85 5,047.75 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 291M69 10/31/85 451.'00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL j ti ^' 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER - CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 5,498.75 291M71 10/31/85 5 400.26 , MN ST TREAS SURTAX SURTAX PBL - _ 291M71 10/31/85 108.01— MN ST TREAS SURTAX SURTAX PBL 291085 10/31/85 65.00 UNIV OF MINN TRAVEL TRAINING 65.00 291088 10/31/85 200.00 UNIV OF WISC PROGRAMS 200.00 294AOS 10/31/85 361.55 AFSCME UNION DUES �y 294AO5 10/31/85 5.74 AFSCME UNION DUES _ 367.29 �r 294C35 10/31/85 18,840.50 CITY CREDIT UNION CREDIT UNION M , 18,840.50 294115 10/31/85 2 ICMA DEFERRED COMP 294115 10/31/85 664.58 ICMA DEFERRED COMP _ R 3,255.81 294M35 10/31/85 413.55 MN BENEFIT ASSOC P/R DEDUCT 413.55 294M52 10/31/85 237.50 MN FED SAVINGS SAVINGS BONDS 237.50 294M61 10/31/85 310.00 MN MUTUAL INS INSURANCE 310.00 294M65 10/31/85 6,247.40 MN ST COMM /REV SWT PBL 6,247.40 i' 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 294M68 .10/31/85 25.54 MN ST RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMP 294M68 10/31/85 18.46 MN ST RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMP 44.00 294M69 10/31/85 5,374.50 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 294M69 10/31/85 456.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 5,830.50 294M70 10/31/85 4,205.61 MN ST TREAS S/S 8/8 PBL 294M70 10/31/85 4,205.61 MN ST TREAS S/S S/S PBL 8,411 .22 • 294N80 10/31/85 3.53 NSP UTILITIES 294NSO 10/31/65 2.40 NSP UTILITIES 294NSO 10/31/85 50.83 NSP UTILITIES 294NSO 10/31/85 322.98 NSP UTILITIES 379.74 294572 10/31/85 44.98 STILL VERNON TRAVEL TRAINING 44.98 _ w 294W25 10/31/85 123.12 WISC REVENUE SWT PBL 123.12 V 295E60 10/31/85 160.00 EMBERTSON JAMES TRAVEL TRAINING 160.00 295L15 10/31/85 73,530.00 LAIS BANNIGAN CONTRACT PYM 73,530.00 +' 29SM69 10/31/85 6,248.70 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 29SM69 10/31/85 4,415.50 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 29SM69 10/31/85 250.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 295M69 10/31/85 304.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 11,218.20 � • 29SNSO 10 /31/85 2.40 NSP UTILITIES 29SNSO 10/31/85 439.76 NSP UTILITIES 29SN80 10/31/85 6.01 NSP UTILITIES 448.17 4 . i' I 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION N 295W74 10/31/85 160.00. WILLIAMS DUANE TRAVEL TRAINING 160.00 « 297C40 10/31/85 117.00 CLERK OF COURT FILING FEE 117.00 297M69 10/31/85 b,526.60 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 297M69 10/31/85 315.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 297M69 10/31/85 204.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 7,045.60 297NTO 10/31/85 2,666.0 0 NE SOCCER ASSOC PROGRAMS 2,666.00 • 298409 10/31/85 100.00 TRANSFIGURATION LEASE 100.00 29SM69 10/31/85 6,316.50 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 6,316.50 • 301124 10/31/85 32.00 CARLSON ORVILLE REFUND 32.00 301202 10/31/85 65.64 JOHNSON MARY WAGES PART TIME c 65.64 301305 10/31/85 72.00 MN NATURALISTS TRAVEL TRAINING 72.00 * ` e s C 301307 10/31/85 60.90 BERGLUND BETTY WAGES PART TIME 60.90 +� 301A62 10/31/85 32.00 AMUNDSON HELMER REFUND 32.00 + 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 301M69 10/31/85 5,477.75 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 301M69 10/31/85 7.435.03 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 301M69 10/31/85 313.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 301M69 10/31/85 363600 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 13,588.78 301NSO 10/31/85 33.71 NSP UTILITIES 301NSO 10/31/85 72.64 NSP UTILITIES 106.35 301054 10/31/85 58.80 OLSON MAXINE WAGES PARTIME • 58.80 # 303M69 10/31/85 6,230.25 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 303M69 10/31/85 348.00 MINN STATE TREAS LICENSE PBL 6,578.25 304C40 10/31/85 111.00 CLERK OF COURT LICENSE 111.00 « - 304M69 10/31/85 7,817.00 MINN STATE TREASURER LICENSE 304M69 10/31/85 195.00 MINN STATE TREASURER LICENSE - 8,012.00 �2 * * * * ** 224,480.00 FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL 537.40 FUND 03 TOTAL HYDRANT CHARGE 73,530.00 FUND 11 TOTAL PARK DEVELOPMENT 98,383071 FUND 13 TOTAL C.I.P. 11,136.47 FUND 56 TOTAL 85 -4 RIPLEY AVE 868.97 FUND 90 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER F 15,588.77 FUND 92 TOTAL PAYROLL BENEFIT *3' 424 TOTAL e NOVEMBER 06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PAGE: l 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 310001 10/29/85 12.00 12.00 310002 10/29/85 10.00 10.00 310003 10/29/85 13.00 13.00 310089 10/29/85 10.50 10.50 310125 10/29/85 175.00 175.00 310133 10/29/85 35.81 35.81 310172 10/29/85 466.01 466.01 31 0019 10/29/85 191.20 191.20 310314 10/29/85 1,027.33 310314 10/29/65 513.67 i,S41.00 310345 10/29/85 17.97 17.97 310380 10/29/85 2.79 310380 10/29/$5 36.52 39.31 * 310574 10/28/35 83.85 83.85 * CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIO1 L.E.MICKELSON REFUND MINN MECHANICAL REFUND SNYDER SHARON PROG SUPPLIES ROADRUNNER CORPORATE RISK MANG BYERLYS AQUATROL INC DELIVERY SERV CONTRACT PYM SUPPLIES REPAIR MAINT NORTH CENTRAL CONSTR SUPPLIES EKSLAD PARDEE CONTRACT PYM EKBLAD PARDEE CONTRACT PYM NATURE SHOP PROD SUPPLIES KAY INC SUPPLIES KAY INC SUPPLIES NO ST PAUL PLBG HTG SUPPLIES 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER _ CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIO 310590 10/29/85 1 . 5 00 AMER HEART ASSN REGISTRATION 15.00 - 310631 10/29/85 202.01 PAPER CALMENSON SUPPLIES 310631 10/29,/85 25.92 PAPER CALMENSON SUPPLIES 310631 10/29/85 1,617.10 PAPER CALMENSON SUPPLIES 1,845.03 . 310755 10/2$/85 6.25 SOUTHERN ILL PRESS SUPPLIES 6.25 310897 10/29/85 35.00 BANICK JOHN CANINE ALLOWANCE 35.00 310ASS 10/28/85 11.71 AURELIUS LUCILLE TRAVEL TRAINING 310ABS 10/2$/85 8.32 AURELIUS LUCILLE MILEAGE 20.03 31OBlS 10/28/85 164.85 BATTERY TIRE WHSE REPAIR MAINT 31OB15 10/29/85 32.89 BATTERY TIRE WHSE SUPPLIES 31OB15 10/28/85 59.40 BATTERY TIRE WHSE SUPPLIES _ P 310B15 10/29/85 67.92 BATTERY TIRE WHSE SUPPLIES ,X 325.06 310890 10/28/85 31.86 BUREAU OF BUSINESS SUBSCRIPTION - 31.86 r, 31OC38 10/2$/85 49.30 CLEAN STEP RUGS RUGS CLEANED 31OC38 10/28/85 50.30 CLEAN STEP RUGS RUGS CLEANED 99.60 310CS5 10/28/$5 207.62 COPY DUPLICATING DUPLICATING COST 207.62 31OC94 10/28/as 600.00 CUSTOM FIRE REPAIR P4� e *-, 3 AMOUNT 600.00 * 8.32 8.32 * 1,847.67 150.00 1,997..67 * 1,540.00 1 540.00 * 160.52 160.52 * 117.42 8.58 16.50 142.50 * 72.00 72.00 111.22 108.72 148.90 5.00 108.72 476.56 40.76 33.35 11 . 3.9S 14.04 103.80 40.00 40.00 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIOt DALCO SUPPLIES DEPT OF PUBLIC SFTY MAINT DEPT OF PUBLIC SFTY MAINT DICTAPHONE REPAIR MAINT ENRICA FISH MED SUPPLIES FAUST DANIEL TRAVEL TRAINING FAUST DANIEL MILEAGE FAUST DANIEL FUEL OIL FORMAN FORD.PAINT SUPPLIES GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEh CHECK NO. DATE CO REPAIR MAINT VEH GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT 31OD30 10/28/85 �e CO REPAIR MAINT VEH GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE 31OD40 10/28/85 SUPPLIES 31OD40 10/28/85 PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE PARTS 31OD44 10/28/85 GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES 310E70 10/28/85 31 0FOS 10/29/es 310FOS 10/29/85 31OF05 10/29/85 31OF45 10/28/85 31OG45 10/29/85 31OC45 10/29/85 - 31 OG45 10/29/85 31OG45 10/29/85 F 310GAS 10/29/85 31OG46 10/29/85 31OG46 10/29/85 31OG46 10/28/85 31OG46 10/28/85 i 31OG46 10/28/85 310G56 10/28/85 AMOUNT 600.00 * 8.32 8.32 * 1,847.67 150.00 1,997..67 * 1,540.00 1 540.00 * 160.52 160.52 * 117.42 8.58 16.50 142.50 * 72.00 72.00 111.22 108.72 148.90 5.00 108.72 476.56 40.76 33.35 11 . 3.9S 14.04 103.80 40.00 40.00 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIOt DALCO SUPPLIES DEPT OF PUBLIC SFTY MAINT DEPT OF PUBLIC SFTY MAINT DICTAPHONE REPAIR MAINT ENRICA FISH MED SUPPLIES FAUST DANIEL TRAVEL TRAINING FAUST DANIEL MILEAGE FAUST DANIEL FUEL OIL FORMAN FORD.PAINT SUPPLIES GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEh GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEh GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEH GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEH GOODYEAR TIRE CO REPAIR MAINT VEH GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GENUINE PARTS SUPPLIES GOVT TRAINING SERV TRAVEL TRAINING A A ce: � 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIO 310660 10/29/85 7.00 GRUBERS HDW HANK SUPPLIES 31OG60 10/29/x5 17.50 GRUBERS HDW HANK SUPPLIES 24.50 f 31OG62 10/28/85 1 GOPHER ST FENCE SIGNS 1,100.00 31OH40 10/29/85 82.90 HILLCREST GLASS SUPPLIES 82.90 31OH70 10/29/85 84.40 HORSNELL JUDITH MILEAGE 84.40 310145 10/28/85 54.65 INSTY-PRINTS SUPPLIES 54.65 31OJ45 10/28/85 6.63 JOLLY SUPPLIES 6.63 310JSO 10/28/85 42.95 J THOMAS ATHLECTICS SUPPLIES PROG 310JSO 10/28/85 1,210.95 J THOMAS ATHLECTICS SUPPLIES 1,253.90 31OL28 10/28/85 35.00 LANG RICHARD CANINE ALLOWANC 35.00 31OL45 10/28/85 16.70 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 7.20 LESLIE RAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 26.20 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 206.70 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL4S 10/28/85 216.20 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 144.65 LESLIE PAPER COPY PAPER 31OL45 10/28/85 26.20 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 311.20 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS 31OL45 10/28/85 120.60 LESLIE PAPER DUPLICATING COS _ 31OL45 10/28/85 144.65 LESLIE PAPER COPY PAPER i y P1 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTIO' - 1,220.30 31OM44 10!28/85 117.50 MINNIE MUFFLERS REPAIR MAINT 1 17.50 # 31OM48 10/28/85 3,752.40 METRO INSP SERVICE CONTRACT PYM 3,752.40 31OM79 10/28185 10.16 MN UC FUND CONTRACT PYM . 10.16 31ON20 10/28/ss 24.50 NEEDELS CO SUPPLIES 31ON20 10/28/85 8.51 NEEDELS CO SUPPLIES 33.01 31ON30 10/28/85 106.20 NORTH ST PAUL CITY UTILITIES 31ON30 10/28/85 2,813.22 NORTH ST PAUL CITY UTILITIES 2,919.42 31ONSO 10/29/85 9.74 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/28/85 324.91 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/28/$5 974.41 N.S.P. UTILITIES .+x 31ON80 10/2$/85 2.53 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/BS 3.68 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/29/$5 2.56 N.S.P. UTILITIES _ 31ONSO 10/29/85. 2.56 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/2$/85 3.71 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/29/85 2.55 N.S.P. UTILITIES - 31ONSO 10/28/$5 215.64 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31 ONS.O 10/28/85 998.16 N.S.P. UTILITIES 310N$O 10/29/35 33.25 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/28/85 95.88 N.S.P. UTILITIES . 31ON80 10/28/85 68.27 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/29/85 115.32 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/85 37.26 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/8s 67.49 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/85 156.42 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/29/85 68.33 N.S.P. UTILITIES 310N80 10/2$/$5 74.17 N.S.P. UTILITIES _ 31ONSO 10/28/85 99.22 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/85 123.23 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ONSO 10/2$/$5 110.73 N.S.P. UTILITIES 31ON80 10/28/85 94.85 N.S.P. UTILITIES z 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 31ON80 10/28/$5 68.53 31ONSO 1 0/28/85 100.53 31ONSO 10/29/85 24.34 31ONSO 10/28/85 46.91 31ONSO 10/28/85 15.35 31ON80 10/29/85 162.89 31ON80 10/28/85 4.48 31ONSO 10/28/85 55.92 31ONSO 10/29/85 33.34 31ONSO 10/29/$5 6.42 31ONSO 10/28/85 4.51 31ONSO 10/29/88 6.39 31ONSO 10/29/85 20.81 31ON80 10/28/8s 182-10 31ONSO 10/28/es 25."34 31ONSO 10/28/LS 4.49 31ONSO 10/29/85 62.87 31ONSO 10/28/85 4.51 31ONSO 10/28/8s 82.28 31ONSO 10/29/85 374.46 31ONSO 10/29/85 15.38 31ONSO 1 0/29/$5 126.51 31ONSO 10/29/$8 97.63 31ONSO 10/29/8s 3S7.06 31ONSO 10/29/85 8.30 31ON80 10/29/85 232.11 31ONSO 10/29/85 84.48 31ONSO 10/29/85 5.15 31ONSO 10/29/$5 13.96 31ONSO 10/29/85 115.75 31ONSO 10/29/25 89.56 31ONSO 10/29/25 22.35 31ONSO 10/29/85 178.80 31ONSO 10/29/85 243.36 31ON80 30/29/$5 43.07 6,604.81 * 31ON95 10/28/85 12.00 12.00 * 310POS 10/28/85 152.75 152.75 31OP40 10/28/85 10.65 31OP40 10/29/85 15.57 .26.22 31OPS2 10128/$5 39.22 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTI01 N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P UTILITIES N.S.R.. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P: UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.R. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.P. UTILITIES N.S.R. UTILITIES NUTESON LAVERNE TRAVEL TRAINING PALEN KIMBALL CO SUPPLIES MAINT PHOTOS TO GO SUPPLIES PHOTOS TO GO SUPPLIES POLAR CHEV SUPPLIES 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK NO. DATE 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/8s 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/8s 10/28/es 10/28/85 10 /28/$s AMOUNT 39.22 76.50 76 .50 206.00 206.00 * 8.48 8.48 * 5.00 5.00 100.00 10.00 5.00 125.00 * 57.00 57.00 * 33.16 33.16 * 50.00- 6.48 23.28 .17.14 17.54 17.14- 53.24 13.83 476.00 540.37 99.97 2.00 38.41 61.92 98.37 14.05 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION PROFESSIONAL PROCESS AMB BILLINGS RAMSEY CLINIC ASSOC EXAMINATIONS RENT ALL MN SUPPLIES RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT 31 OP67 RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT 31 OR OS RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT 31.OR29 RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT 31 OR40 RICE 31 0840 CAR 31 OR40 MAINT 31 OR40 SPS 310840 PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS OFFICE 31OR49 OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS 31 OR50 PROD OFFICE CHAIR 310803 31 OSO3 310503 31 OS03 31OS03 31 0503 310SO3 31 OSO3 310503 310505 310SOS 31 0505 310SOS 310505 310SOS 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/8s 10/28/85 10/28/85 10/28/8s 10/28/es 10/28/85 10 /28/$s AMOUNT 39.22 76.50 76 .50 206.00 206.00 * 8.48 8.48 * 5.00 5.00 100.00 10.00 5.00 125.00 * 57.00 57.00 * 33.16 33.16 * 50.00- 6.48 23.28 .17.14 17.54 17.14- 53.24 13.83 476.00 540.37 99.97 2.00 38.41 61.92 98.37 14.05 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION PROFESSIONAL PROCESS AMB BILLINGS RAMSEY CLINIC ASSOC EXAMINATIONS RENT ALL MN SUPPLIES RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT VEH RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT VEH RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT VEH RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT VEH RICE STREET CAR WASH MAINT VEH ROAD RESCUE SUPPLIES RONS PRINTING PRINIING BPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE CHAIR BPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES BPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES BPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS OFFICE.PROD OFFICE OFFICE gUPPLIES SPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES SPS OFFICE PROD OFFICE CHAIR S d T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES S d T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES S d T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES S d T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES S T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES S d T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 11.28 S & T . 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 194.47 S & T OFFICE CHECK NO. DATE 114.57 310805 10/28/85 OFFICE 310SOS 10/28/85. 3.81 310SOS 10/28/85 454.60 310SOS 1 0/28/85 1.22 310SOS 10/28/85 OFFICE .310SOS 10/28/85 2.35 310SOS 10/28/85 OFFICE 310SOS 10/28/85 12.80 310SOS 10/28/85 OFFICE 310SOS 10/28/85 12.80- 310505 10/28/$5 35.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 10.06 S & T OFFICE 31 0530 1 0/28/85 7.96 31 OS30 1 0/28/85 OFFICE 31OS30 10/29/85 15.74 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES TARGET 31OSSS 1 0/28/85 31OSSS 10/28/85 TARGET 31 0558 1 0/28/85 31OSSS 10/28/85 31OSSS 10/28/85 31OSSS 10/28/85 31 057 0 10/28/85 AS 310570 10/28/85 310S84 10/28/85 31OT29 10/28/85 31OT30 10/28/85 31OT30 10/29/85 31OT30 10/29/85 31OT30 10/29/85 31OT35 " 10/29/85 CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 11.28 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 194.47 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES$ 114.57 S 6 T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 3.81 S & T'OFFICE 454.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1.22 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 2.35 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 12.80 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 12.80- S 6 T'OFFICE 35.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 10.06 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 7.96 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 15.74 S & T OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES 676. 18 23.42 SEARS 18412 136.41 SEARS #8412 2,685.00 SEARS #8412 2,844.83 201.00 ST PAUL CITY OF 103.00 ST PAUL CITY OF 454.60 ST PAUL CITY OF 32.00 ST PAUL CITY.OF 889.75 ST PAUL CITY OF 98.00 ST PAUL CITY OF 1,778.35 * 34.95 STANDARD SPG ALIGN 255.61 STANDARD SPG ALIGN 290.56 * 35.00 STEFFEN SCOTT 35.00 578.10 T.A.SCHIFSKY SONS 578.10 28.94 TARGET 36.12 TARGET 36.69 TARGET 23.04 TARGET 124.79 23.28 TARGET OFFICE CHA-I R OFFICE CHAIR CONTRACT PYM REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT REPAIR MAINT VEH REPAIR MAINT VEH CANINE ALLOWANCE CONTRACT PYM SUPPLIES PROG SUPPLIES PROG SUPPLIES PROG SUPPLIES PROG SUPPLIES 1985 C I T Y OF MAPLEWOOD - CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 31 OT35 10/29/85 18.24 TARGET PROD SUPPLIES 41.52 310T60 10/29/85 30.87 TOLL COMPANY SUPPLIES 30.87 _ 31OTSO 10/28/85 30.36 TRUCK UTILITIES MFG TRUCK UTILITIES MFG SUPPLIES SUPPLIE 310TSO 10/28/85 11.36 rA 41.72 31OT93 10/28/85 47.50 TWIN CITY FILTER FILTERS CLEANED 47.50 310050 10!28/85 46.80 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNIFORMS j 310US0 10/28/85 10/28/85 89.10 98.95 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 31OUSO 31OUSO 10/28/85 99.46 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 31OUSO 10/28/85 17.95 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNIFORMS 310U50 10/28/85 10/28/85 22.45 109.65 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED. UNIFORMS 310050 310U50 10/28!85 320.08 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED - UNIFORMS 310US0 10/28/85 98.85 UNIFORMS. UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNIFOR 'Y 310050 10/28/85 10/28/85 315.4 193.66 .UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFOR 31OUSO 310050 10/28/85 93.22 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS --- �;. 31OUSO 10J28/g5 19.7b UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNIFORMS - - 310050 10/28/85 10/28/85 18.90 88.95 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS -� 310U50 310US 10/28/85 54.80 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 310US0 10/28/85 76.63 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 1,764.68 310V36 10/28!85 31.70 UNIVERSAL MEDICAL OXYGEN SUPPLIES OXYGEN SUPPLIES 310USS 10/28/85 52.80 UNIVERSAL MEDICAL 84.50 310W21 10!28/$5 9.96 WARNERS TRUE VALU SUPPLIES 9.96 31 OWS O 10/28/$5 1$5,52 WEBER- TROSETH INC SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 310W50 10/28/85 160.92 WELDER- TROSETH INC Ac v e. { i - r 1985 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CHECK NO. DATE 31OZ70 10/28/85 AMOUNT 346.44 18.50 18.50 29,780.64 1,066.36 2,685.00 2,005.25 10.16 2,064.84 37,612.25 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ZUERCHER JOHN FUND 01 TOTAL FUND 03 TOTAL FUND 11 TOTAL FUND 90 TOTAL FUND 92 TOTAL FUND 96 TOTAL TOTAL UNIFORMS GENERAL HYDRANT CHARGE PARK DEVELOPMENT SANITARY SEWER F PAYROLL BENEFIT VEHICLE 6 EQUIP DATE 10/29/85 21 -1078 C I T Y O F M A P L E W 0 t _ PROGRAM P R 10 FINANCE ADMINISTRATION PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REPO I ' CHECK GROSS 03436 NUM EMPLOYEE NUMBER NAME AR J PAY == - _ 22 -4432 MOELLER MARGARET A 422. 4O 03438 03425 08 -9671 BEHM ' Lois N 729m60 ;- _ DIVISION 02 CITY MANAGER DELORES A 723, 60 S DIVISIO 2` 2 03430 10-44 JAHN DAVID J 104w58 03431 10 - 6523 SWANSON, JR. LYLE E 709.36 03440 31 -2158 AU REL I US LUC I LLE E 2991.24 0. ;441 31 --4816 DIVISION 10 CITY HALL MAINT D 104a72 813.94 0344 31 03432 1 DOHE RTY KATHLEEN HLEEN M 2' 657. �0 =1 03433 12 -0166 ..._.._ _ CU LARRY J 2 42.40 0 34 34 12-0508 Z UE RCHE R JOHN! L 1 57. 60 DIVISIO 31 CITY CLERK ADMINISTRATION 3566.52 - DIVISION 12 EMERGENCY SERVICES j 1057.20 0 1 0 3435 21 -1078 FAUST DANIEL F 1686w 40 _ DIVISION 21 FINANCE ADMINISTRATION 1686. 40 r 03436 2 2- 0614 HAGE AR J 1071. == 03437 22 -4432 MOELLER MARGARET A 422. 4O 03438 22-4446 MATHEYS ALANA K 784w80 ;- 034 3 5 22 - 7550 VIGNALO DELORES A 770.40 S DIVISIO 2` 2 ACCOUNTING � X 045. 2 3 .r ` 1 03440 31 -2158 AU REL I US LUC I LLE E 2991.24 0. ;441 31 --4816 SELVOG BETTY D 104a72 0344 31 SCHADT JEANNE L 470s96 � J a DIVISIO 31 CITY CLERK ADMINISTRATION 3566.52 j 1 DATE 10/29/85 'PROGRAM PR10 40 4v DIVISION 41 PUBLIC SAFETY ADMIN 5986m47 I d o . .11 03454 42-0130 ZAPPA GROSS ROSS NUM EMPLOYEE NUMBER NAME 41-2934 03455 PAY 03443 33 -0547 KELSEY CONNIE L 479w26 03444 33-4435 �VIETOR LORRAINE S 712w25 03445 33-4994 HENSLEY PATRICIA A 471.53 4m 03446 33-6105 CARLE JEANETTE E 318.00 03447 33-8389 GREEN PHYLLIS C 843u20 03459 42-1364 ARNOLD low L 1401 14 03460 DIVISION 33 DEPUTY REGISTRAR ROGER W 2.824u24 03461 42-1577 BANICK 40 4v DIVISION 41 PUBLIC SAFETY ADMIN 5986m47 I d o . .11 03448 03454 42-0130 ZAPPA JOSEPH A 1401 14 41-2934 03455 42-0251 STILL VERNON T 1207s26 OMATH, 034,56 42-0457 SKALMAN DONALD W 1225 03457 42-0990 MORELLI RAYMOND J 12.07. 26 03458 42-1204 STEFFEN SCOTT L 1125m 64 03459 42-1364 ARNOLD DAVID L 1401 14 03460 42-1388 LEE ROGER W 1252a 06 03461 42-1577 BANICK JOHN J 1057s74 03.46.12 42 —1660 BOHL JOHN C 1 045. 75 03463 42-1930 CLAUSON DALE K 1252m06 03464 42-2063 MOESCHTER RICHARD M 1388a 63 03465 42-2115 ATCHISON JOHN H 1291m2E 0 3466 42-2231 KORTUS DONALD V 1218m18 �` 03467 42-2884 PELTIER WILLIAM F 1378u74 03468 42-2899 SZCZEPANSKI THOMAS J 754. 46 03469 42-3591 LANG RICHARD J 1347a01 03470 42-4801 RYAN MICHAEL P 1558m19 .03471 42 -4916 HERBERT MICHAEL J 1268o86 03472 42-6119 DREGER RICHARD C 1401. 14 -7! 03473 42-7418 BERGERON JOSEPH A 986s32 .03474 42-7686 MEEHAN R JAMES E 1478u46 03475 42-7887 GREEN NORMAN L 1401w14 03448 41-1717 COLLINS 03449 41-2356 RICHIE 03450 41-2934 SVENDSEN— 03451 41 —3183 NELSON 03452 41 —7636 OMATH, 0 41-9263 MARTINSON C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0 PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REPO KENNETH V 1751.20 CA ROLE L 634w68 JOANNE M 869w41 ROBERT D 1528aOO JOY E 647.26 CAROL— F 555u92 Ar DATE ,10/29/85 PROGRAM PR10 C I T Y 0 F M A P L E W 0 PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REPO f, CHECK GROSS NUM EMPLOYEE NUMBER NAME PAY i►' = ' 03476 42-8226 STAFNE GREGORY L 1'2290 66 03477 42-854�6 HALWEG KEN I N R 1378n74 03478 42 —13204 STOCKTON DERRELL T 1266e7O ► 03479 42-9867 BOWMAN RICK A 1150.46 DIVISION 42 POLICE SERVICES 32677s66 03480 4 —0009 KARIS FLINT D 1085u66 03481 43-0466 HEINZ STEPHEN i 32v86 ♦ 03482 43-0918 NELSON CAROL M 1452,97 03483 43-1789 GRAF DAVID M 1278a46 03484 43-2052 THOMALLA DAVID J 1262m16 03485 43 -2201 YOUNG REN JAMES G 1596w40 03486 43-4316 RAZSKAZOFF DALE E 1467. 46 03487 43 —6071 VORWERK ROBERT E 1372m96 03488 43-7791 MELANDER JON A 1321.77 03489 48-8434 BECKER RONALD D 1589u52 DIVISION 43 PARAMEDIC SERVICES 13660w22 03490 45 —1878 EMBERTSON JAMES M 1302w40 03491 45-3333 WILLIAMS DUANE J 1233s60 DIVISION 45 FIRE PREVENTION 2536sOO 271 03492 46-0183 RABINE JANET L 888m25 03493 46 —0322 STAHNKE JULIE A 773a72 ==j 03494 46-1899 CAHANES ANTHONY 6 1492n34 03495 46-5919 NELSON KAREN A 885m96 03496 46-7030 MARTIN SHAWN M 867w92 03497 46-7236 FLAUGHER JAYME L 863, 2`9 DIVISION 46 DISPATCHING SERV 5771,48 03498 51-0267 BARTA MARIE L 618.41 G DATE 10/29/85 C I T Y O F M A P L E W 0 PROGRAM P R 10 . PAYROLL CHECK. REGISTER RE K GROSS CHECK ` NUM EMPLOYEE NUMBER NAME PAY _ 03499 51 -3174 WEGWE RTH JUDITH A 620m72 0 350 0 51- -6872 HA I DE R KENNETH G 3791m24 DIV 51 PUB WOR ADMI 5030.37 -' 996u1 03501 52 -0547 MEYER GERALD W 03502 52 -1`41 KANE MICHAEL R 972.00 0 3503 52 -14 3 1 LUT Z DA V I D P 925._60 - y 03504 52 1484 _ RE I NE RT EDWARD A 350m80 03505 52 -3473 KLAUSING HENRY F 1021.46 = 03506 52 - 403 7 HE R O N ALD J 953. 03 507 52 -4847 THU RN PAUL F 194w25 . 03508 52 -6224 TEVL I N, J R. HARRY J 332. 4O = 0 3509 5'2 -62'64 F REBERG RONAL L 975.2 0 52-67 PRETTNER� JOSEPH D 1309w - = 03511 52 -8 313 L I BHA RDT THOMAS D 194m25 0 3512 5 2- 8 31 4 CAS WILLIAM C 13 5 1 .63 , DIVISION 52 STREET MAINTENANC 957 1105m60 03513 53 -1010 ELIAS JAMES G = 03514 5.3 -1688 PECK DENNIS L 1105.60 0 3515 5. -2 5'`2 P R I ESE_ WILLIA 9 30. 4 03 51 53-3970 AHL -J R. RAY C 1369023 03517 53 -4671 GESSELE JAMES T 1073.98 . 0351 53 -6109 GEISSLER WALTER M 108 _ DIVIS 53 ENGINEERING 6669.61 677.60 513 54 -3775 LOFGREN JOHN R 677.60 DIVISION 54 PUBLIC WORKS BLDG MAINT i, ' 03520 58 -1014 NADEAU EDWARD A 979. 09 ' 03521 58 -1720 NUTESON LAVERNE S 1309. 23 i__4 DIVISION 58 5Hw 5L-Wt. K U t. KH 1 1 Ut�l Z11 .7 r. o`t s DATE 10/29/85 C I T Y O F M A P L E W 0 PROGRAM P R 1 0 035'88 55- -1000 PAYROLL CHECK. REGISTER REP[ DE N N IS CHECK 105 8O 03527 59 -5760 GROSS MACDONALD NUM Elf PLOYEE . NUMDE R NAME PAY 03522 58-2563 B REHE I M ROGER W 970. 40 i,_ 23— EDSON DA VID B '970 - .0 58-3790 ANDERSON ROBERT S 694w40 03528 03525 58 -5993 OWEN GERALD C 1014.32 0 3 5'29 61 -1066 D R ENNE R DIVISION 58 5Hw 5L-Wt. K U t. KH 1 1 Ut�l Z11 .7 r. o`t s 035'88 55- -1000 M ULVANEY DE N N IS M 105 8O 03527 59 -5760 MACDONALD JOHN E 1045. 40 -= DIVISION 59 VEH & EQUIP MAINT 295.20 r - 03528 61 -0389 ODEGA RD ROBERT D 1571.20 0 3 5'29 61 -1066 D R ENNE R L0 I S J 8 28 s9 5 - 0353 0 61 -199 3 K.RUMMEL BARBARA A 315w20 03531 61-2618 STAPLES PAUL I NE 1233o23 DIVISION 61 COMM SERVICES ADMIN 3548.58 -- 03532 G_US I_N_DA MELV I N J 1 a 2 - _ 03533 _62—_34 6',� -39 15 L I t\fDORFF DENNIS P 925.61 _ V b3534 E2-4097 YUKE R WALTER A 54w00 03535 62-4121 H ELE Y ROLA D 994n32 -- ' 03536 62--4577 . . DEGNAN GERALD J 400. OO 03537 62 -4549 SARRACK GUST D 400.00 - : 03538_ 62 -5506 M ARUS KA M ARK A 97 03539 - 62 - 7215 .. — DU RKE MYLES R 330s-14 03540 62 -8182 GERMAIN DAVID A 372.00 s 0354 6'2 -9784 HUN TER TONY 87m0 _ — DIVI 62 PARK. MAINT 6402s62 T 03542 63-4246 WARD ROY G 375w20 r . 03543 63 -5547 ORTH KIMBERLY A 57w50 03544 63 -64 TAUE�MAN DOUGLAS J 96 8m43 • S r i DATE 10/29/85 P P R 1 O C I T Y O F M A P L E W 0 PAYROLL CHECK REGISTER REP[ —0776 WENGE R ROBERT J 1064. 00 03 554 74 _ . —9223 G I RA RD LAWRENCE M 1 00 03555 7 -- -- DIVI 74 HEALTH INSPECTI 1219m00 FUN NOT ON FILE 1`4547. 17 i ' GRAND TOT ALS 1 `4547. 17 4 r � _- DIVISION 71 CHECK. 2352. GROSS = MUM EMPLOYEE NUMBER NAME _ 03552 7 PAY L 928w00 03545 63 -5324 MAC DONALD ELAINE E 80m75 DIVISION 63 RECREATION PROGRAMS 1944o52 1481.88 ' = 03546 E4-- �+6 G_RE_W J M 808081 - 03547 64 -2163 SOUTTER CHRISTINE 1281.60 404.40 03 548 64- 4624 HO RSNELL JUDITH A 35 3. DIVISION 64 NATURE CENTER 1566.41 = . 0 3549 OL GEOFFREY W 1 592. OO_ - 03550 _71-0551 _ 71 -8993 . — CHLEBECK JUDY M 800800 —0776 WENGE R ROBERT J 1064. 00 03 554 74 _ . —9223 G I RA RD LAWRENCE M 1 00 03555 7 -- -- DIVI 74 HEALTH INSPECTI 1219m00 FUN NOT ON FILE 1`4547. 17 i ' GRAND TOT ALS 1 `4547. 17 4 r � _- DIVISION 71 COMM DEVELOPMENT ADMI 2352. 0355 72 -7178 E! ;ST RAND THOMAS G 1018. 52 _ 03552 7 JOHNS RANDALL L 928w00 DIVISI 72 P LANNIN G 1944o52 03553 73 -0677 OSTROM MARJORIE 1281.60 D I V I'S I ON 7 1281.60 BU I LD I NG INSPECTIONS —0776 WENGE R ROBERT J 1064. 00 03 554 74 _ . —9223 G I RA RD LAWRENCE M 1 00 03555 7 -- -- DIVI 74 HEALTH INSPECTI 1219m00 FUN NOT ON FILE 1`4547. 17 i ' GRAND TOT ALS 1 `4547. 17 4 r � .t f� r f � i J TO: FROM: RE: DATE: PROPOSAL. MEMORANDUM City Manager Finance Director Investment Authorization November 1., 1985 Action by Cou Endorsed.. odifie ej ecte Date ?#^...' It is proposed. that certain mutual funds be approved for investment of City mon i es . RACTUnnn Lt has been City policy to allow t Finance Director to invest in any legally authorized investment in amounts and for maturities as deemed appropriate. State law allows ci to invest i n mutual funds whose only i are in securities of the United States and its agencies. Thus, the proposed i i'n certain mutual funds within the Franklin Group of Funds does not need.s Council authorization. However., - the admi ni'strators of the Franklin Funds require adoption of the attached resol.uti The specific mutual funds for which investments are planned are the Franklin U.S. Government Securities Fund and the Frank.l i'n Federal Money Fund. These investments would be through Offerman & Company, I.nc.., a local securities dealer (.see attached for further information) . The U.S. Government - S ties Fund invests exclusively in Government National Mortgage Associ ation securi ( ca.l 1 ed "Ginnie Maes ") . These securi ti es consist of pools of F, H .A. and V.A. mortgages . The maturity dates on securities - are usually 30 years. yet they. tend to have an average life of 12 years. This is- are 16% of all Americans. move every year and pay off their mortgages . The current yield on th.e Frank.l i U.S. Government Securities Fund is - about .12..5% and ' i't has been consistently one of the top f government bond mutual funds 1.1 sted i n Money Magazine. Since this fund consists of long -term securities, the market value of the J nvestment i s subject to si gni f- i cant fluctuation. Consequently, this investment wil have to be careful monitored. If interest rates start.to sharply rise,. the investment would have to be liquidated to avoid corresponding sharp decreases i'n the market value. It should be noted interest rates are not forecast to rise sharply i'n the near future. The other mutual fund proposed for investment, - ( ' the Frankl in Federal Money Fund) , would be used only on a limited basis. Its primary purpose would be to receive shares transferred from the U.S. Government Securities Fund to enable quicker redemption procedures.. If redemptions were requested to be made di rectly to the City it would take seven days, How money can be transferred from the. U , S . Government Securities Fund to the Federal Money Fund and to the City within one day. The proposed initial investment in these funds would involve the sale of $3,300,000 of Federal National Mortgage Association securities maturing dune 12, 1989 that are currently yi el ding 9.28 %. The current market value is slightly less than the book value, which would cause.a loss on the sale of about $28,000. However, this loss would be offset by the higher y.i el d on the mutual fund, If the mutual fund yield averages. 12.58% during the next year and the market value does not decrease, the City would real i approximately $123,000 more in dividends on the mutual fund than interest on th.e F A M.A. security proposed for sale. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached resolution. DFF:1nb PROFILE - THOMAS'E. BRENNAN REGISTERED REPRESENTATIVE OFFERMAN & COMPANY, INC. Tom Brennan is a Divisional Manager with Offerman and Company Inc,, which is located in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. He presently devotes most of his time to acting as a financial consultant to municipalities and other political subdivisions. He is familiar with and abides by . Chapter 118.05 of the. Minnesota -Statutes regarding`Depositories of Public Funds. Tom is also an Associate member of both the Government Finance Officers Association and the Minnesota Clerk- Treasurers Association. He is a strong believer in continued education and regularly attends the monthly GFOA meetings and regularly attends their state conferences in addition to attending the League of Cities conference. At the present time one of the popular investments for Public Funds has been a U.S. Government Securities Investment Fund 'which invests exclusively in GNMA's which are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government and offers one of the highest yields available. Other investments which are offered include: Certificates of Deposit, (both fixed returns and adjustable rate returns), Bankers Acceptances, Commercial Paper and individual GNMA's. Some of the Municipalities that Tom is working with and have authorized. the use of their names for referral purposes are the Cities of BLAINE MR, RICHARD JOHNSON CHASKA MR. DAVID POKORNEY LAKE ELMO MS. MARILYN BANNISTER LITTLE CANADA MR. JOSEPH CHLEBECK MAHTOMEDI MS. DEE BOLDT MINNETONKA MR. DALE EGGENBERGER NEW HOPE MR. LARRY WATTS RICHFIELD MS. JEAN MITCHELL ST. ANTHONY MR. DAVID CHILDS ST. LOUIS PARK MR. DONALD RAMBOW WHITE BEAR LAKE MR. DAVID MCGILLIVRAY WOODBURY MR. THOMAS WRIGHT If there is a need for further information feel free to call. Respectfully submitted, Jon V. Buss Vice - President OFFERMAN AND COMPANY, INC. hereby requests your approval f or qualification as a depository according to State Statute. OFFERMAN AND COMPANY has correspondent relations with over 300 Investment Dealers throughout the country. We maintain many product sources to choose f rom in order to of f er. the most competitive rates available f or Government backed securities and other investments which meet your State's guidelines f or the' investment of Public Funds. OFFERMAN AND COMPANY has been registered as a Broker /Dealer with the SEC, NASD and the State of Minnesota since 1969. We are licensed to do business in 48 continental U.S. states. Our bank r,ef erence is the First National Bank of Minneapolis. Funds invested will usually be held by the designated Custodian Bank of each particular investment. In the case of a Certif icate of Deposit either the actual certificate or a safe - keeping certificate will be provided. Respectfully submitted, Thomas E. Brennan Registered Represenative on V. Buss Vice - President RESOLUTION BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the individuals named below are authorized to open an account in the name of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota with one or more of the Franklin Group of Funds ("Funds") and to deposit such funds in this account as they deem. necessary, that the persons .. authori zed below may endorse checks and other instruments for deposit in said account and that checks or drafts withdrawing said funds may be signed by any one of the persons authorized below. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that - the Funds, i.ts Custodian .Bank, Bank of America, Franklin Adm n i strati ve Services, Inc. and Fran k.l i n Distributors, Inc shall be held harmless and fully protected in relying from time to_ time upon any certifications by the City Council as to the names of i*nd.i vi duals occupyi n.g such offices and in acting in reliance upon the foregoing resolutions until actual receipt . by them of a certi f i' ed copy of a resolution of the City Council modi` or revoking any or all such resolutions, The undersigned further certi f i..es that the following i nd i vi duals occupy the offices designated. X Daniel F. Faust, Finance Director Si gnature X Arline J, Hagen, City Treasurer Signature t nti oune : r MEMORANDUM dose M odifie d ej eeeA. TO: City Manager - � FROM: Associate Planner -- Johnson r SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit --- Planned Unit' Development and Parking Space Variances LOCATION: White Bear Avenue and County Road C APPLICANT /OWNER: Smith Investment Properties PROJECT: Harmony School Site Redevelopment DATE: October 24, 1985 SUMMARY Request 1. Approval of a conditional use permit for a planned unit development (PUD) of commercial uses and multiple dwelling, older -adult housing. 2. Approval of variances for the total number of spaces required and waive the requirement for garages for the 52 -unit residence. Proposal 1. Refer to the enclosed site plan on page 11. 2, The site would be redeveloped in two phases: a. Phase I (1) The easterly portion of the former Harmony School building would be converted and added onto, to create a 52 -unit rental apartment building for senior citizens. Each of the 52 units would have one bedroom, and range from 624 to 840 square feet of area. (2) The. portion of the former school building that fronts on County Road C would be converted and added onto to create about 16,500 square feet of office and retail area. The older portion of the school, closest to White. Bear Avenue, would be torn down. (3) The auditorium would be rentained and used by the seniors in the attached building for assemblies and crafts. The auditorium would not be open to the public. (4) Variance One -- Section 36 -22 (a) (2) requires at least two parking spaces per unit or 104 spaces. These is no separate requirement for senior housing. Seventy -nine parking spaces would be provided, requiring a variance of 25 spaces. (5) Variance Two -- Section 36 -22 (a) (2) requires at least one - half of the required parking spaces to be enclosed. No enclosed spaces are proposed, requiring a variance of 52 enclosed spaces. b. PHASE II (1) 'A .three- story, 64 -unit rental apartment building with underground- parking would be constructed: - (2) The building would be restricted to older adults, (3) The structure 48, two- bedroom and 16, one- " bedroom units, containing 1100 and 820 square feet, .respectively. (4) Parking would meet code if the eight spaces on the site plan marked "future" would be paved, 0 n m m o r 4-- C The proposed is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The parking space variances are similar to requests approved by council .for each of the other seniors housing developments. The proposed number of spaces per unit are higher than approved for the other seniors projects. The parking code requirements are designed for family housing and do not consider the fewer number of cars per unit needed for seniors housing. If a parking problem were to develop, additional spaces could be added in the southeastern portion of the site. Recommendation Approve the enclosed resolution (page 14 ) approving a conditional use permit for the Harmony School site planned unit development of older adult housing and office and retail uses including the following variances: 1. Allow 79 parking spaces for the 52 -unit seniors residence, rather than the 104 required by code, 20, the development from the requirement to provide enclosed parking spaces. Approval of the conditional use permit and variances is. subject to: 1. If council determines there is insufficient on -site parking for the 52 -unit seniors residence, within one year of 95% occupancy, additional parking may be required. 2. Maplewood and North St. Paul shall have continued used of the athletic facilities in the northeast portion of the site until that part of the site develops provided the use of these facilities does not interfere with the applicant's use of the property. 3. The 52 -unit seniors residence shall not be converted to nonseniors housing without revision of the PUD. For purposes of this permit, seniors housing is defined as a residence occupied by persons in their retirement years with a significant number of one - person households. 2 4. The auditorium attached to the 52 -unit seniors residence shall only be used by the residents of that building. No other public assembly is allowed, without a.revision of this permit. 5. The commercial portion of the development shall. be limited to the uses allowed in the BC (M) , business commercial (modified) zoning district. 6. The eight parking spaces (marked "future ") located south of the driveway-to the garage for the 64 -unit structure shall be constructed. 7. The proposed 575 square -foot units in the 52 -unit residence (October 8, 1985 plans) shall be increased in area to at least 580 square feet of.habitabl.e floor area. 8 Move the 64-unit residence to the west to comply with the required minimum setback of fifty feet. 9. Adherence to the site plan dated October 8, 1985, except as required in these conditions, unless a change is approved by the community design review board. In addition to the general findings in the resolution on page 14 that are required by code, approval of the parking space variances is recommended on the basis of the following findings unique to this proposal: 1. The parking space requirements contained in the zoning code do not realistically apply to the proposed development because these requirements are designed for family housing and do not consider the fewer number of cars per unit needed for senior housing, 2. The variances would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter because they would not result in the need to park vehicles off -site and because they would be consistent with similar variances granted for the Hazel Ridge and Concordia Arms seniors residences. No parking problem .has occurred at Concordia Arms. Hazel Ridge is scheduled for construction in the fall of 1985. 3. 'The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter, 4. The variances would not consitute a threat of a substantive nature to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land, nor be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the people. 5. The variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely on the basis of-financial considerations.. 6. If' a parking problem were to occur, adequate room exists on the site to provide additional parking spaces. 3 BACKGROUND Site Description Area: Phase I Residential 3.0 Commerical .1.5 Phase II 400 8.5 Existing land use: the former Harmony School structure, two softball diamonds and a basketball court in the northeast portion of the site that are used by North St. Paul and Maplewood for recreation programs. Surrounding Land Uses North: Ramsey County open space East: a single dwelling on a 200 x 631 foot parcel. The south h is planned for RL, residential low density use and the north half is planned for OS, open space. South: County Road C. Across the street 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 store, with gas pumps. Past Actions This Site Council approved. a plan amendment for this proposal from OS, open space and S, school to LSC, limited service commercial, RH , residential high density and RM, residential medium density on the basis that: 1. This land has been declared as excess property and sold by the school district make the OS, open space and S. school designations obsolete. 2. The LSC and RH designations are compatible with the adjoining commercial and open space uses. The RM designation provides an orderly transition to nearby si.ngle- dwelling properties. 3. The s i t e fronts on White Bear Avenue and County Road C, each with the capability to provide safe and adequate access for the proposed uses. 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 - cost households. 4 Other Seniors Residence Proposals Early 1970 - Council approved two parking- space variances for the 69- unit Archer Heights seniors residence (1816 Beebe Road) Code required 138 parking spaces, 21 spaces were permitted. Council also waived the requirement to provide enclosed parking spaces. In a survey of Archer Heights residents that was conducted ' .,in May 1976, the HRA concluded that: "the types of garage and parking variances given for this project should .not be allowed again. Whole hours for the elderly might not need one garage and one parking place for each unit, they should include some garages and adequate parking spaces within a reasonable distance of the building. Adequate parking is defined as ample, not only for the needs of the tenants, but also for visitors." 1:3 -30: Council conditionally approved the following parking variances as part of the PUD for the Concordia Arms seniors residence (2031 Lydia Avenue) : 1. Code required 251 parking spaces - -103 spaces were permitted. 240 ' The requirement to provide enclosed parking spaces was waived, Approval was subject to conditions including the following: "If the city council determines in the future that there is inadequate parking, an additional row of parking may be required. by council along the south edge of the parking lot. In order to assure . that adequate funds are available for expanding the parking lot, a cash deposit or letter of credit shall be submitted to the directory of community development. The amount shall be determined by the city engineer's estimated construction cost-of the parking lot expansion." If there is adequate parking demonstrated one year after occupancy, the cash deposit or letter of credit shall be returned to the applicant. The building shall be moved ten feet to the south to allow space for future parking, Approval was granted on the basis of f ind ing that included: 1. The HUD representative for this project has stated that garages or increased floor areas cannot be included in project financing. 2. ._The enclosed.survey by Weber Investment Corporation shows that the proposed number of parking spaces are more than provided in other elderly projects in the Metropolitan area. 3. The city ordinances have. not considered the unique nature of parking and floor area requirements for elderly housing 5 4- 11 -83: Council conditionally approved two parking variances as part of a PUD for the. Hazel Ridge seniors residence (2696 Hazelwood Avenue) : 1. Code required 150 parking spaces--75- were permitted. - f 2* Code required 75 enclosed parking spaced - -5,5 were permitted . Approval was-subject to conditions that included: "if council determines there is inadequate on -site parking for the residence within one year of 95% occupancy, additional parking ' spaces. may be required." Approval was granted on the basis of findings that included 1. The zoning code does not .consider the unique nature of parking space for senior housing, as such strict enforcement of the code would constitute an undue hardship. 2. The variances are required for the reasonable - practical development of the proposed seniors residence and are not based solely on financial concerns. 3. The parking variance is less than that approved for Concordia Arms (50% versus 59%). No parking problem has occurred at Condord is Arms, 4. If a problem was to occur, adequate room exists on the site to provide additional on -site parking. 5. The variances will not constitute a threat of a substantive nature to the inhabitants or adjacent property-owners. Planning 1.' Land Use Plan designation: LSC, limited service commercial,`RH, residential high density and RM, residential medium density.. 2. Zoning: F, farm residence 3. Permitted density: a. 34 people /net acre for the building A and westerly part of building C sites. b* 22'people/net acre for the easterly part of the building C site. 4. Proposed density: a. 24.3 people /net acre for the building A and west part of building C sites. b. 21.2 people /net acre for the. easterly part of the building C site. C� 5'. Policy c r i t e r i a from the plan: a. The LSC, limited service commercial designation to commercial facilities on a neighborhood scale. Heavy industrial uses, department stores, motels, auto accessory stores, etc. would be prohibited, while .other land uses of a medium intensity nature would be permitted subject to meeting certain-performance standards. b. The , RH, residential high density class ificati is designated for such - hous i ng types as apartments, two - family homes, townhouses, nursing homes, dormatories, or elderly housing. C* The RM residential medium density classification is designated for such housing types as single- family houses on small lots, two- family homes,' town houses, and mobile homes. d. Page 18 -9: Locate multiple- dwelling housing in areas not inferior to those generally used for conventional single dwellings. 6. Compliance with land use laws: a. Section 36 -442 (b) requires ten findings for the approval of a conditional use permit. (Refer to the resolution on .page 14) . b. Section 36 -438 (b) s planned unit development by substantial variances (zoning) including uses, Variances may be granted that: tates that it is the intention of to provide a "means to allow f l e x i b i l i t y from the provisions of this chapter, setbacks, height and other regulations. for planned unit developments provided (1) Certain regulations contained in this chapter do not realistically apply to the proposed development because of the unique nature of the proposed development. (2) They would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter. (3) The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter (zoning) . (4) The variances would not constitute a threat of a substantive nature to the property values, safety, health or general . wel f are of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land, nor be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the people. (5) The variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely on the basis of financial considerations." Public Works 7 Public Works 1. Public water should be taken only-from the St. Paul system because of the complaints of low water pressure from people in the :vicinity . .who are hooked up to*the North St. Paul. water system. 2. According to the city engineer, 'the. traffic generated by this development would be adequately handled by the upgraded capacity of the intersection of White Bear Avenue and County Road C w i th street widening . and turn lanes, 3. White Bear Avenue is designated as a major arterial and roadway and County Road C is designated as a major collector street in this area. Parks l.. On May 20, 1985, the parks commission recommended to the developer that they should give consideration to keeping the ball diamonds in use until they have to be vacated. 2. The City of North St. Paul would also like to continue to use these facilities for as long as possible. l._ Community design review board recommendation 2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority recommendation 3. Planning commission recommendation 4. Council decision following public hearing mb Attachments 1. Location map 2. Property line /zoning map 30 Proposed site plan 4* BC (M) zoning district 5. Parking variance justification 6. Resolution O R 3 2 7 BC F BC I F MI R F MI 1 MI BC f BC BE A AVE ' n2 F PUD 4 'n • F F (L B N Cr KOHLMAN R �R� N z ►- D � Ln (n - � Z I R ►- W R W ROAD R2 2 ,•o,• FT P U D Tr ' R z F R C F Q • �a F MI w � EDGEHILL R / F w F f M I (R2) DEMONT _ w , a a R ( A �, LBC 9 C = _f R LB o ` J SEXTAN L LAVE Q I f R rL=6PRA 3 z R LBC A R vi ,c VE MI Ml MI DVIEW Av R I DR �J M TRUNK WAY 3E Ml A MI _ AV C• MI 'R R L RK R LBC) • ► R z R J +v TY l K 1 R f LEI. AND r ST ` C c ~ ax L 4 R (r cTl o � AVE ®U� R BURKE R'S AVE M 1) (R 2 A F `1 ELDRIDGE A s I a LANE F F F? - `"� a s M ( w F . I S�� • , Co ,►, ( ;cK�L MA. aVE r ,• -•''"` • � • M I 50 • �a�E a 1 • ` SEW o``y -• A R a � R2 �.., i F_� � RYAN .. ,� RYA N ROSEWOOD r F J c� l F , ! : B R;) P �- LOCATION MAP 9 Attachment One 4 N ■ IV T1 1 . 8 t- K t ...: K J 8D ,zr l 9 o C //) o t o A �2 l . SZ �o Go V 1. bra auC . _ • , Co 0 n 1.01 o�C . al `9 C�/ . 0 U4 : r i 1.32 ac . p 0 (/5 ) = � c oo z Affi 0. Uza) Woo a W ... U Irk loom 14.0 1� 4g N X64 —Unit , Maplewood Covenant p Multiple DwelIin g f Church � f ` f 2 0 .�- g . n ac p 2p PHASE II , 52 —Un.i t ultiple Dwell Seniors ; Les = =: Superette ti PHASE I 19 AM • � , . a' .:• :i.:a :.!i : : • .!.:.RJ.•.u.a a.a • -.:i s Jl -•:ai / 22 4 Former Harmon School buildings , .• 1 ,% . i� a .1Y•ii.S'ii .'r' iq .• : i • •' 200 ' • a � ' 2.0 am- 9% 2.6 33112 "' d7 AMP Y16,500+ square feet of office/retail � —' 1 PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 10 Attachment two 4 i PHASE II T ' tl � n � R! •IL rAT10N ARIA � I - ►1 CI Tull Mop Jas Sri I+T ?'1 cans - _ O I Z77 t = \ 6 's .. . *Ir PHASE I tp MCI .4 At: _. 66 c , >: Gam, n STsr D S d 4 _ Ol f OJL ITT LLJ eo IT M v >'aRK i G - cc s e 4 1 _ RELRI:�T l0 M ►RE1� 1 3 4 o't�G R ` 0 8 -X C MERCIAL T ARKI 4a. 1 AA - 1.1. *cost ►+. I z� _ ��•�• � Newt , icy % • ' G1 P/ N sobs. • G o U N T Y R o �. p C G�c� s (c ,. Proposed Site Plan (October 8, 1985 ) 11 Attachment Three Sec. 36 -155. BC(M) Commercial District (Modified). (a) Intend The BC(M), Business Commercial District (Modified) is intended to provide for the orderly .transition between, more intensive commercial uses and low or .medium density residential areas. Restrictions on, but not limited to, building height, set- backs, orientation, parking blot location, or location of building entrances may be required - to ensure compatibility with abutting residential uses. (b) Use regulations. A building may be erected or used, and a lot may be used or occupied, for any of the following purposes, and no other: (1) Retail store; professional administrative offices; bank or savings and loan; personal service, craftsmen's shop, mortuary. (2) Hotel or motel. (3) Walk -in theatre. (4) Job printing shop. (5) Bakery or candy shop producing goods for on- premises re- tail sales. (6) Any use of the same general character as any of the above permitted uses, as determined by the city council, provided that no use which is noxious or hazardous shall be permitted. (c) Special use permit The following uses when authorized by the city council by means of a special use permit: (1) All uses permitted in R -3 Multiple Dwelling Districts, ex- cept the construction of houses permitted in R -1 and R -2 Districts. (2) Laundromat or similar automatic self-service laundry. (3) Restaurant, where there are no drive -up order windows or serving of food to patrons in their automobiles. All cooking odors must be controlled so as not to be noticeable to adja- cent residences. (4) Place of amusement, recreation, or assembly, other than a theater, where there are no outdoor activities. (d) Prohibited uses: (1) Drive -in theaters or drive -in restaurants. (2) Commercial or fee parking lots where such use is the only use of a given parcel or where such use provides for gen- eral rather than specific use parking. (e) Definitions. "Drive -in restaurant" means a restaurant with a drive -up order window or serving of food to patrons in their automobiles. Attachment Four Gary E. Stout, President Public- Private ventures, Inc.. 6700 Limerick Lane Edina, Minna 55435 . (612)941:-4999. . Mr. Randy Johnson October 21 , 1985 Associate Planner City of Maplewood Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Mr. This confirms our conversation today regarding the subject of parking at the old Harmony School site. I recently had the opportunity to review the parking statistics of a large development firm that specializes in senior housing (I DM Corp.) in automob i le- oriented southern Cal iforn is Their experience is that the parking ratios required are about 1 car er unit et opening, which P P 9� decreases to .5 and then eventually .3 cars per unit when the project "matures ". in the average unit at project maturity.. generally only a widow remains In residence and she tends not to drive. The experience of local units such as Croixdale (with'41 units and arkin demand of 20 to 25 P 9 cars, and Sutton Place (with 20 units and parking demand for 8 to 10 cars) tend to bear out those statistics, It seems to me that the parking request on the site is rather conservative for a number of reasons: 1. The 64 unit adult -only building is providing parking at the rate of 2 spaces per 1 unit 9P 9 P P which is a conventional family -unit rate. Therefore, some surplus parking should be available on this portion of the site. 2. The 62 commercial spaces are available during on Christmas, New Year's and other Holi when one might expect family visits may place a demand on parking. This parking would be used in preference to on- street parking. (My experience is that many older. adults living in a conventional complex also tend to be gone on vacation or visiting their children on these Holi and their spaces would probably also be available). 3. The parking ratio proposed on the senior adult-only n9 is j ust builds over 1.5 to 1 which is Ponservatiyeinitself. In addition, the developer has been told that the City would require conventional parking requirements if the building were ever used for another purpose. 4. The City has the ability to require the developer to provide de m ore parking in the event that P P P 9 experience dictates the need. Therefore, it appears that the City has unique safeguards on the parking requirements in this project. Please contact me if any further information is required. Sincerely s tea✓' Oery E. Stout GSIm 13 Attachment Five 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, Smith Investment Properties initiated a conditional use permit for the Harmony School site planned unit development of older adult housing and commercial uses, including parking space variances, at the following - described property: Beginning at the intersection of White Bear Avenue and the south line of the SW 1/4; thence northerly on said centerline 420.55 feet; thence east parallel with said south line 311 feet; thence northerly parallel with said. centerline 140 feet, thence due north 107.07 feet, thence east 391.55 feet to a point 658.95 feet north from said south line, thence to said south line at a point 200 feet west of southwest 1/4 corner; thence west to beginning, subject to roads in Section 2, Township 29, Range 22. This property is also known as the former Harmony School site, Maplewood; WHEREAS, the procedural history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. This conditional use permit was initiated by Smith Investment Properties, pursuant to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances. 2. This conditional use permit was reviewed by the Maplewood Planning Commission on October 21, 1985. The planning commission recommended to the city council that said permit be 3. The: Maplewood City Council held a public hearing . on , 1985 . Notice thereof was published and mailed pursua to law. All persons present at said hearing were given an opportunity to be heard and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. WHEREAS, the variances requested in conjunction with this planned unit development are: 1. A parking space variance 25 spaces. Section 36 -22 (a) (2) requires at least two parking spaces per dwelling unit or 104 spa for the 52 - unit residence - -70 spaces are proposed. 14 0 + +nrhman+ '�i x 2. An enclosed parking space variance of 52 spaces. Section 36 -22 (a) (2) requires at least one half of. the required parking spaces for a multiple dwelling to be enclosed. No enclosed spaces are proposed for the 52 -unit residence. -. NOW, THEREFORE, BE .IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD'CITY COUNCIL that the above - described conditional use permit and variances be granted - for the Harmony School site planned unit development, subject to the following conditions: 1. If council determines there is insufficient on -site parking for the 52 -unit seniors residence, within one year of 950 occupancy, additional parking may be permitted. 20 Maplewood and North St. Pau 1 shall have continued use of the athletic facilities in the northeast portion- of the site until that part of the site develops, provided, the use of these facilities does not interfere with the applicant's use of the property. 3. The 52 -unit seniors residence shall not be converted 'to nonseniors housing without revision of this PUD. For purposes of this permit, seniors housing is defined a residnece occupied by persons in their retirement years with a significant number of obe person households. 4. The auditorium attached to the 52 -unit seniors residence shall only be used-by the residents of that building. No other public assembly is allowed, without a revision of this permit. 5. The commercial portion of the development shall be limited to the uses allowed, in the BC (M) , business commercial (modif ied) zoning district. 6. The eight parking space (marked "future ") located south of the driveway to the garage for the 64 -unit structure shall be constructed. 7. The propoed 575 square foot units in the 52 -unit residence (October 8, 1985 plans) shall be increased in area to at least 580 square feet of habitable floor area. 8. Move the 64 -unit residence to the west to comply with the required minimum setback of feet. 9. Adherence to the site plan dated October 8, 1985, except as required in these conditions, unless a change is approved by the community design review board. Approval of the planned unit development is recommended on the basis of the following findings of fact: 10 The use is in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and with the purpose and standards of this chapter. 2. The establishment or maintenance of the use would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general-welfare, 3 . The use would be located, designed, maintained. and operated to be compatible with the character of that zoning district. 4. The use would not depreciate property 50 The use would-not be hazardous, detrimental or disturbing to present and potential. surrounding land uses., due to the noises, glare, ..smoke,. dust, odor, fumes, water pollution, water run -off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 6. The use would not create traffic congestion, unsafe access or parking needs that will cause undue burden to the area properties. 7. The use would be serviced by essential public services, such as streets, police, fire protection, utilities, schools and parks. 8. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services; and would not be detrimental to the welfare of the city. 9* The use would preserve and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 100 The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects, Approval of the parking space variances is recommended on the basis of the following findings of fact: 10 The parking space requirements contained in the zoning code do not realistically apply to the proposed development because these requirements are designed for family housing and do not consider the fewer number of cars per unit needed for senior housing. 2. The variances would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter because they would not result in the need to park vehicles off-site and because they would be consistent with similar variances granted for the Hazel Ridge and Concordia Arms seniors residences. No parking problem has occurred at Concordia Arms. Hazel Ridge is scheduled for construction in the fall of 19850 3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter. 4. The variances would not constitute a threat of a substantive nature to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land, nor be detrimental to the health, safety, morals or .general welfare of the people, 5., The variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely on the basis of financial considerations. 6. If a parking problem were to occur, adequate room exists on the site to provide additional parking spaces. 16 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 a. conditional use permit. Witness my hand as such clerk and the corporate seal of the city this day of , 1985. City Clerk City of Maplewood, Minnesota 17 VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. Planned Unit Development and Variances -- Harmony School Site Secretary Olson said the applicant is requesting approva"l,of a conditi - onal, use permit for a planned unit development of commercial uses. and multiple dwelling older —adult housing. There is also a request for variances for the total number of parking spaces required and to waive the requirement for the garages for the 52—unit residence. Staff is 'recommending' recommend i ng' approval of the request. The commission indicated that the letter from the developer does not provide a justification for the variance for the garages, the staff report does not provide a justification for the variance of garages, the total elimination of garages from a seniors' building is contrary to the recommendation the HRA had. The justification for the lack of garages at Concordia.Arms was due to the fact that it was a Section 8 202, which was coming in at the allowable cost per unit and does not allow for cost of garaging. This. i s not a subsidized housing, it is in the private market. They also questioned who would determine if there was not sufficient parking for the seniors' building. Secretary Olson said if additional parking would be requested by the developer, owner or tenants, a revised site plan would have to be approved by the city. If there is a problem with people parking on the street, the c i t y could also ask for a revision. Chairman Axdahl asked if there was anyone present who wished to comment on the proposal. Tony Dana, attorney representing Smith Investment Properties, also present is Robert Ackerman, architect, said they were not going to try to add to the memo but would be willing to answer questions. They have considered keeping the ball diamonds available for North St. Paul and Maplewood, they are concerned with the liability-and it was suggested a hold harmless agreement be established. They are agreeable to a condition which would prohibit use of the auditorium for other than residents' activities because of the parking situation, Mr. Ackerman said they have appeared before the review board. They are trying for continuity between the 'residential and the commercial areas. As far as parking for Building A ( seniors' building) he used projects he has been involved with that are similar, to determine the number of parking spaces. About half of the residents normally have cars. They feel what is proposed at this site, ,exceeds the parking provided at the other projects. Mr. Dana said they have reviewed the conditions of the conditional use permit, all of which are acceptable to the developer. V The commission questioned if there was any data on garages for the seniors as to whether they would use them. Mr. Ackerman said of the two other projects reviewed, there may be only one where the garages .wou 1 d have been provided if appropriate. The commission indicated* that as it is a requirement to provide half the parking in garages, it is-up to an applicant to justify why these garages should not be provided in this instance.. Bret Smith, developer, said i n i t i a l l y they wished to develop this. with apartments, one of the reasons they changed to senior's building is to please the City of Maplewood,'with the understanding that there would be no need for garages. Garages wou l d increase the cost of the project. If it turns out there is a need for garages they will have to build them. The questioned if there was sufficient room on the site for the construction of garages. They suggested 25 or 26 garages. Mr. Dana said they could work them into the site. . The commission questioned if the differences with the neighbors had been resolved. Mr. Dana said they did have several meetings with them, and differences seem to be solved. The commission asked if the developer would be able to provide the 26 garage spaces. The applicant indicated that he would provide one larger —type building with ingress at one end and egress at the other, rather than single garage type structures. Commissioner Whitcomb moved the planning commission recommend the city council approve the resolution approving a conditional use permit for the Harmony School site planned unit development of older adult housing and office and retail uses including the following variances: 1. Allow 79 parking spaces for the 52 —unit seniors' residence, rather than the 104 required by code. 2. Allow 26 enclosed parking spaces rather than the 52 enclosed spaces required by the code. Approval of the conditional use permit and variances is subject 1. If council determines that there is i n.suffi ci e.nt on—s parking for the 52—unit seniors' residence, within one year of 95% occupancy, additional parking may be-required, 2. Maplewood and North 'St. Paul shall have continued use of the athletic facilities in the northeast portion of the site until that part of the site develops provided the use of these f a c i l i t i e s does not i nterf.ere with the applicant's use of the property. 3. The 52 —unit seniors' residence shall not be converted to nonseniors' housing without revision of the planned unit development. For purposes of this permit, seniors' housing is defined as a residence occupied by persons in their retirement years with a significant number of one — person households. 4, The auditorium attached to the 52 —unit seniors' residence shall only be used by the residents of that building. Public assembly unrelated to senior use would be prohibited wi thout- a revision of t h i s permit. 5. The commercial portion of the development shall be 1 i*mi ted to the* uses allowed in the BC (M), business commercial (modified) zoning distri -ct. 6. The eight parking spaces (marked "future ") located south of the driveway to the garage for the 64 —unit structure shall'be constructed. 70 The proposed 575 square foot units in the 52 —unit residence (October 8, 1985 plans) shall be.:ncreased in area to at least 580 square feet of habitable .floor area. 8. Move the 64 —unit residence to the west to comply with the required minimum setback of 50 feet. 9. Adherence to the site plan dated October 8, 1985, except as required in these conditions, unless a change is approved by the community.design review board. In addition to the general findings in the resolution that are required by code, approval of the parking space variances is recommended on the basis of the following findings unique to this proposal: 1. The parking space requirements contained in the zoning code do not realistically apply to the proposed development because these requirements are designed for family housing and do not consider the fewer number of cars per unit needed for senior housing. 2. The variances would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter because they would not result in the need to park vehicles off —site and because they would be consistent with similar variances granted for the Hazel Ridge and Concordia Arms seniors' residences. No parking problem has occurred at Concordia Arms. Hazel Ridge is scheduled for construction in the fall of 1985. 3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter. 4. The variances would not constitute a threat of a substantive nature to the property values, safety, health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land, nor be detrimental to . the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the people. 5. The variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are not required solely on the basis of .financial considerations. 68 If a parking problem were to occur, adequate room exists on the site to provide additional parking spaces. Commissioner Sletten seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Ell of son, Fischer, Larson, Si gmundi k, S1 etten, Whitcomb Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward St reet to slow traffic at the bend in the road. 7 Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes N = o — No nion 2. should be removed? Yes No No Qp nion Why T" Name �� __ Address I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Y No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yep No No opinion Why? Name � Address NNy ,_ 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street t o slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Why? Name ddress 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traff at the bend in the road. 7 . Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? No No opinion Why? Name � Address I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes Djo,- No opinion 2. should be removed? No No opinion X Why? .r y � / ddress Name �'- - - - - -- t. fi I 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. -. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes ..No� No opinion 2. should be removed? Y s. No No opinion Why? Name Address I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road.. 7. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No. No opinion 2. should be removed? Why Yes No No opinion P " --4-- 41 Name Address 1_22t - � ,,�.. a- . t,'a v.� .c�pr,.r `YZ'i4.- � 4�u�+++ -xK 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffio at the bend in. the road . - - Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No o inion Whys- -- — - -- --- - - ---- -- --- - -- Name _ Address C/ LA - 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. .. 7_ Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Ye No No opinion Whys — -- - - - - -- - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - -- — Name 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Y Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Wh y • _ -- Name r J J a Addres I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street.t o slow traffio at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of oars in that area? Yes No No opinion X_ 2. should be removed? Ye r No No opinion Why? 67 Name ___ Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Whys -------- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- -- - - -- - - - - - -- �..� Name _ Address - I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffio at the bend in the road. - .. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in signifi.oantly reduoing the speed of oars in that area? Yes No, No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Why? - - - -- - - - -- - �? - - - - -- - - ---- - - - - -- - E + f 0 Name Address 1 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. _ Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion � 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Why? Address eo 0 elk 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to.slow traffic at the bend in the road. 7 Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Why? Yes No No opinion Nam Address I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. - 7 Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yep No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes Nq No opinion Why? Name �.�LLa Address �7a� `� "'"' �"�2- "'.�.• 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traff at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes � No opinion 2. should be removed? X9 No No opinion Whys - -- - -- --- --------- - - - - -- - - -- -- — Name �� _ Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes , V/ No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Whys �c�1�� . ��L __1 Aoo ,� C oe �/.10 aOeAe- oee 47000� Address Name Z I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road . - 7 Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes �To, No opinion 2. should be removed? No No opinion Why? _ FV1 - S# 0- 6 , r S /-I'q�� _ "�"�U�2 _ d idn�jq --have. o..., ro 4,L a MDf we 're," (TIS: 4-a 14,R Name � ��- .s�✓ Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes N No opinion 2. should be removed? t Name /--q ��'" �. Sc'' "''l/ Address J I No No opinion Why? Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: I. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Ye No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes � No opinion ` r Why? —� Nam Address 0 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed.on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. V Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Whv? Name ��. -�?�� r Address 1 Edward Street Bumps The speed . bumps were 'installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. 7 � - Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No Winion 2. should be removed? Yes No. No opinion Why? Name Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend ' in the road . Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? No No opinion Name -- Address r 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1'. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? 5 e No No opinion 2. should be removed? Ye No No opinion Why- -- --- -- - - - - -- - -- ---------------- ---- -- Name J� ��' �_� Address 1 E • 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No, No opinion � 2. should be removed? 5�es No No opinion Why? f - - - - -- - Address or 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic .at the bend in the road. - Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes N� No opinion 2. should be removed? Xe No No opinion Wh C y 'r Name Address - -__ -- —_ _ -- ' F I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffio at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Name __ Address ! z 1 Yes No No opinion Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road . Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No, No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Wh- y `� _ __ _ _-- - - - - -- -- — — t V\ A AA Ah' tt d !� Oix Name �0�1 (� y°�vtCi.JS4'�.(gd_t_� Address - ��_A— I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion -XI 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Nam Why? dC Address-7/_ I ell ! I 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes o No opinion 2. should be removed? YRs No No opinion Why? Name Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic p p at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of oars in that a rea? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Why? Name -Address _.��f__ P&LQ-¢"'J PL - -- 1 Edward Street Speed. Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes No No opinion X- 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion - - - -- - - - - - - -- - Na Address 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffio at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No opinion Why? _ _ _ - ---- - --- -- ----------------- --- - - - - -- - --- -------------------------- - - _ __ Address ZZi Name _N _ --- 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps.: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yg� No No opinion Why? __ __.� - -- - - - - - -- — -- - - -- v" Name f��r � Address - - -- - - _ _--- r P. d 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of oars in that area? Yes No No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes No No nion n. Name v ____ _ Address — —� 1 Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. 7: Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes Nq No opinion 2. should be removed? Name _ Address � ? 7 a � `� 1 Y No No opinion Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road -I Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of ears in that area? Yes � No opinion 2. should be removed? S No No opinion )OL" Wh .9 Oki_ Name __ Address wG 00**? L J I Edward Street Speed Bumps The speed bumps were installed on Edward Street to slow traffic at the bend in the road. Do you think the speed bumps: 1. are effective in significantly reducing the speed of cars in that area? Yes Rio,, No opinion 2. should be removed? Yes .0 No opinion Why? Name Address � r�Z L.�.�Lt1C.( r2 1 T0: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICAIJT: DATE: new Aotion by, Council u E ndor sed,....- ..,...�... MEMORANDUM M odifie d.. City Manag er Associate Planner -- Johnson Date .. Plan Amendment and Project Review -- Southlawn Drive City of Maplewood October .17, 1985 SUMMARY Request 1. Amend the land use plan to designate the Southlawn Drive corridor as a major collector street. 20 Find the construction of Southlawn Drive to be consistent with the revised land use plan, 1. Refer to the enclosed Southlawn Drive feasibility study. 2. The roadway is proposed to be constructed in two phases (page 7 ) a. Phase I would .begin next spring and consist of: (1) Acquisition and resurfacing of the Maplewood Mall entrance between Beam Avenue and the west entrance to the ring road. (2) Reconstruction of the west driveway entrance to the ring road to permit north bound right -hand turns. (The location of this entrance could be moved north if the adjoining property owners agree on the location.) (3) Acquisition of right -of -way ' and construction of a four -lane roadway between the west entrance to the mall and the north property line of the proposed Southlawn Plaza development. b. Phase II would consist of: (1) Construction of a four -lane, 52 -foot wide roadway north from the Southlawn Plaza property to County Road D. (2) The right -of -way would not be obtained or construction begun until the property to the west is proposed for development. (3) The entire right -of -way would be located on Robert Haj icek's property to provide an adequate setback. to the Holiday. Inn and to avoid as much poor s o i l conditions as possible near the pond by County Road D. 340 Additional sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main would be constructed to complete the existing system. Comments , According to the recommendations of two traffic consultants, (see background-section) the construction of a major collector street along the Southlawn Drive corridor ' is necessary to provide an adequate level of traffic sery ice to the area, once it is. fully .developed. The design is consistent with major collector street standards. The land use plan must be amended to show a major collector street along this corridor before council can order, the- improvement. State law requires that once a comprehensive plan has been adopted, no capital improvement shall be authorized until the planning agency finds it in compliance with the comprehensive Recommendation 1. Approve the enclosed resolution (page 5 ) amending the land use plan to show a major collector street designation along the Southlawn Drive corridor, between County Road D and Beam Avenue. Approval is on the basis that traffic studies have documented the need for Southlawn Drive as a collector between Beam Avenue and County Road D. 2. Find the proposed Southlawn Drive Improvement (Project 85 -17) in compliance with the comprehensive plan, as amended. BACKGROUND Past Actions 2 : The community design review board conditionally approved a site plan for .proposed Southlawn Plaza (page 8 ) . The site plan is cons istent w ith the proposed alignment of , Southlawn Drive and al lots more space for this future right -of -way than is needed. 5- 30 -85: Council ordered a feasibility study for the construction of Southlawn Drive. The request was initiated by the Joseph Company for the proposed Southlawn Plaza development (page 8 ) . State law requires that the planning commission review all public . capital improvement projects within the city. Section 462.356 of state law states: "After a comprehensive municipal plan or section thereof has been recommended by the planning agency and a copy filed with the governing body, no publicly owned interest in real property within the municipality shall be acquired or disposed of, nor shall any capital improvement be authorized by the municipality or special district or agency thereof or any other political subdivision having jurisdiction within the municipality until after the planning agency has reviewed the proposed acquisition, disposal, or capital improvement and reported in writing to the governing body or other special district or agency or political subdivision concerned, *its findings are to compliance of the proposed acquisition, disposal or improvement with the comprehensive municipal plan." T , , L. l : T.T A L 1, 10 Two traffic studies that were recently completed for this area concluded that the proposed project is necessary. These studies were: a. Benshoof and Associates, March, 1985, page 3: "Several �d`l stimt t advantages could be gained by establishing a collector route along an extension of Southlawn Drive between Beam Avenue and County Road D. Usage of Southlawn Drive as the collector route would enable Beam Avenue to provide an adequate level of traffic service, would enable the properties north of Beam Avenue to be more effectively integrated, would provide an alternative route to relieve usage of white Bear Avenue, and would enhance identity and accessibility for nearby properties." b. Strgar- Roscoe, Inc., September 1984, page 3: "Establishing a major collector route along an extension of Southlawn Boulevard between Beam Avenue and County Road D would 3 enable Beam Avenue to provide an adequate level of traffic service, would enable the properties north of Beam Avenue to be more effectively integrated with the Maplewood West Area, and would relieve traffic on White Bear Avenue." 2. A 30 -foot wide private access easement abuts the east side of the proposed street alignment, south of County Road D. This easement was granted to the owners of the Holiday Inn property from William Korstad. The sanitary sewer for the Holiday Inn is located within the easement. 1. Plan Amendment: a. Planning commission recommendation following a public hearing b. City council decision c. Metropolitan council review 2. Southlawn Drive Improvement: a. Planning commission recommendation b. City council decision jc Attachments 10 Hazelwood Neighborhood Land use Plan Map (existing) 2. Hazelwood Neighborhood Land Use Plan Map (proposed) 3. Property Line Map 4. Southlawn Plaza site plan. 59 Resolution 60 Southlawn Drive Feasibility Study (separate attachment) 4 w a men BW .- Niel ��Iw 11 111 70 t— )or colle;i Mill �� l �A r A - I MR. / `,.,��r�..� C '♦ r . •�... r �� ' M MIR a pr 1 . t su mom M41 same • r ILE • -T w 4.6 saw, 1 - 4 �7` 411-1101�11 IMF"— low " W-M �� Ali . ` � "'s. 111 v ��r�1� ,' i ow "da . 4 -IMMORM—�0 r. .ev%;,Na1 arte JKMMAJV 6 RS major -� ar Collector I V A Mig mini loll X13 ' it l �. _ '01 mill fig fisAp M �f • I �111� 11 • • s � ; I Ir..u: � � all 1W 4,111fis r M . -� • •� rr Cox F11-r-4, R 4 C 0 7. 7 M HAZELWOOD /� NEIGHBORHOOD L AND USE PLAN L!' (PROPOSED) -Attachment two 1 9_�� rM O C i .a ) a 1' 'M n Aij PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 4 _ 7 Attachment three Proposed Southlawn Plaza /.`"` 4: -- ---------- • ID Oz I .. , I � r , i , ,. • r fi � � ' • • • ' r � ,' •� j' '. ,�' •� ',till ' � , � j! � � 001 0 b : �`; ; �• ' . 7 : r, 40 mp Ww ag ' i qp �. r Yr .\.� ..� Imo• � _. SITE PLAN SOUTHLAWN PLAZA (Conditional approval 2= 12 -85) 8 Attachment four 4 N PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood initiated an amendment to the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan to designate the Southlawn Drive corridor, between Beam Avenue and County Road D, as a major collector street. WHEREAS, the procedural history of this plan amendment is as follows 1. The Maplewood Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 21, 1985 to consider this plan amendment. 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 planning commission recommended to the city council that said plan amendment. be 20 The Maplewood City council considered said plan 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 basis that traffic studies have documented the need for Southlawn Drive as a collector between Beam Avenue and County Road D. Adopted this day of , 19 8 5 . Seconded by Ayes - -. a Attachment five MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1985 7:30 P.M. 1380 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman . Axdahl called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Lester Axdahl Present-.(Chairman) Commissioner Richard Barrett Present Commissioner Robert Cardinal Present Commissioner Gary Ditch Present Commissioner Paul Ellefson Absent Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Present Commissioner Dorothy Hejny Absent Commissioenr Dennis Larson Commissioner Marvin Sigmundik Present .Commissioner Ralph Sletten Present Commissioner David Whitcomb Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 7, 1985 Correct: page 4, "c" should be "3 ", "d" should be "4 11 ; Page 4, condition 4, insert "benefiting" between "The" and "abutting." Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the minutes of October 7, 1985 as corrected. Commissioner Sigmundik seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett, Fischer, Abstained -- Commissioners Cardinal and Ditch IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Fischer moved approval of the agenda as submitted,' Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Fischer V. PUBLIC HEARING A. Plan Amendment /Project Review: Southlawn Drive Secretary Olson read the notice of public hearing. The proposal is to amend the land use plan to designate the Southlawn Drive corridor as a major I ollector street and to find the construction of Southlawn Drive to be consistent with the revised land use plan. ;f • The commission reviewed the definition of a "collector" street. They al so asked if this would be the only collector between Highway 61 and White Bear Avenue. Director of Public Works Haider said the guidelines .by the'-council indi calved that Kennard Street should also be constructed that woul d be a Simi l a facility.. to Southlawn. Hazelwood also goes north /south and would also be a similar facility. The commission questioned. if Southlawn could be straightened at the point of access to the Maplewood Mall property.. Director Haider indicated that it would then cut off .a corner of the Holiday. Inn. The street has to be jogged to the west at some point. The commission discussed with Director Haider the traffic pattern that w i l l result around the mall once the-streets are completed. Chairman Axdahl asked if there was anyone present who wished to comment with regard to the proposal.. Gene Wilson, 3954 Portland Avenue, representing Robert Hajicek, said they felt Southlawn must have the capabilities to act as a major utility carrying avenue. They believe growth and development will proceed west from Southlawn. Storm sewer, water and sanitary sewer must be adequate to provide for future developments to the west. To balance traffic in the area, three north /south roadways are desirable, Southlawn, Hazelwood and Kennard. They also suggest one or more east /west streets to permit even distribution of traffic flow. They have worked out a plan for the Hajicek property that would conform with the stated criteria. He does not understand why the property on the south half of Southlawn, one cannot be assessed on the improvement, and then the owner w i l l be paid for the property for right —of —way, while the portion to the north w i l l be assessed and receive less tax — increment f i n ng. Mr. Hajicek would be an active cooperating land owner as far as developing the roadway system. Steve Korstad, 35 East Pleasant, they have a private easement that goes east /west that Southlawn would go across. Gary Jackson, CPI Investors owners of Maplewood Mal 1, sai d he is concerned about the 30 foot easement, if Southlawn would go through will there be one or two i ngress /egress into the mal 1 'parki ng lot. Director Haider said they would reconnect the existing entrance to the ring road. a Mr. Jackson said at this time they would be only interested in maintaining the present drive and not accommodate two. They have future plans of expanding the parking lot and another roadway would not be conducive to what they have planned. The commission questioned what the original purpose of the east /west easement was. Mr. Kors tad said it goes back to when they were owners of the ma.l l , it -was sold to Homart, Sears wished to put up a home store . next ' to. the mall . The` home store concept was abandoned. In consideration 'of sel 1 i ng 1 ots* i and 8 an easement was obtained connecting what was left of the property to the mall. Mr. Jackson said they to go on record at this time that they - support the-one access to their property at this time. George Rossbach, 1406 E. County Road C, said the reason for putting the offset in Southlawn is to make land to the east of the road a little more usable between the two roads. He thought it was in the best interest to construct the f i rst portion of it and recommends approval of the plans. Clyde Fish, 7 Pi nehurst Drive, said he represents Mr. Ha j i cek, said they felt this was a good opportunity to extend Southlawn in its entirety. He requirested the commission also consider extending Lydia through. This would h e l p balance the traffic.. Mr. Hajicek, 1700 E. County Road D, said it is very important to their development plans that Southlawn go through now. If necessary, he will dedicate his share of the property towards. the work. When the mall was constructed, they had to have looped utilities for which he is paying the assessments. Utilities will have to be provided for the to develop. They would like to see all of the streets go in at this time. Ken Bouser, Southlawn and County Road D, said he presented statement for the residents on the north side of County Road D, said they are not opposed to Southlawn provided they do not get a heavy assessment for the construction. Albert Gowens, his mother is a property owner, he did not think it would be appropriate to have their property assessed, but would seem logical to extend Southlawn all of the way.to County Road D. He gets 3 to 5 people daily coming into their driveway, turning around and going back towards White Bear Avenue. He feels that hti s is a hazard to his family with the people using the drive as a turnaround. This is also an indication that .a north /south egress is required, The commission discussed with Director Haider the design of the storm sewer system for the area. Mr. Korstad said the 60 inch l i n e that was installed i n Beam Avenue, for which they were assessed, was to serve their property. Mr. Ha j i cek' s property was to be serviced from County Road D for the storm sewer. Chairman Axdahl closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fi sche'r moved the planning ,commission recommend the city council approve the resolution amending the land use plan to show a major collector street designation along the Southlawn Drive corridor, between: County Road D and Beam Avenue. Approval is on the basis that traffic studies-have documented th.e need for Southlawn Drive..as a collector between .Beam Avenue and County`. Road D. Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Ayes --- Commissioners Axdahl, B.arrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Fischer, . Larson, Si gmundi k, Sl etten, Whitcomb. Commissioner Fischer moved the planning commission recommend the city council find the proposed Southlawn Drive Improvement (Project 85 -1.7) in .compliance with the comprehensive plan, as amended. Commissioner Larson seconded Ayes -- Commissioners Axdahl, Barrett, Cardinal, Ditch, Fischer, Larson, Si gmundi k, Sl etten, Whitcomb VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS VII. COMMUNICATIONS VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. Tax — Increment Financin Secretary Olson said the request is to determine if the tax — increment financing plan and development program is acceptable, Commissioner Cardinal left the meeting The commission questioned why the Hazelwood Park development is included with this proposal. Secretary Olson said it was originally proposed to use PAC funds, but with the availability of the tax increment funds, it was felt to save the PAC funds for future. Al tough the council approved the use . of PAC funds in their motion, alternative funding can be used. The bond counsel was present at the meeting and commented on the financing methods for tax — increment financing. The commission indicated concern with including three park projects in this, financing method. They questioned using this type of financing when there .are PAC funds available for the acquisition. Also, there are other parks around that are not developed, and to'use $100,000 for the development of one park is not completely correct. The commission discussed with Director Haider the order of the improvement item p s to be .done. Mary I ppel said prior to 1983 if tax- - increment dollars, the had to be used with r y respect to each tax — increment district. The law has now been broadened, ..as long as the tax — increment dollars within your larger development area *the legal intent of the law is met. MEMORANDUM TO: Acting City Manager FROM: Assistant, Ci ty, Engi neer ..SUBJECT: Cope Avenue Feasibility Study City Project 85 -26 DATE: October 31, 1985 Aotion by Council: Endorsed .,. . . odifiee -... ej eotec . Date , Attached is the feasibility study for Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Ariel Street that addresses horizontal and vertical alignment of Cope Avenue from Craig Street to White Bear Avenue. This study was initiated by the property owners on the south side of Cope Avenue on the east and west side of the proposed German Street. The report addresses the following: 1. Extending the existing sanitary sewer from German Street to Ariel Street and on German Street from Cope to Lark Avenue. 2. Extending the water main from the water tower to the east to Ariel Street and adjusting the water main depth in locations where street grades conflict. 3. Storm sewer for the new street section plus a new trunk storm sewer to serve the entire area, including the flooded backyards on Castle Drive behind the.nursing home, which is proposed to be placed in Cope Avenue the entire distance from Ariel Street to vanDyke Street a -nd then south to the existing system at Lark Avenue, 4. Placement of a new street section with curb and gutter from Craig Street to the east to a temporary cul —de —sac at Ariel which will connect to a future North St. Paul street, plus a section of street on the German Street alignment from Lark Avenue to Cope Avenue, and also since the section of Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Hazel Street.'is to be removed for storm sewer, this section is proposed for curb and gutter and a new street section. 5. A proposed alignment for the White Bear Avenue and Cope Avenue East intersection, including vanDyke Street and Castle Drive, which identifies right —of —way required on certain parcels owned by the city. 6. A financing proposal that outlines assessing portions of the P P r_o osed improvements and also identifies city participation requirements. The report concludes that the improvements are feasible but financing alter— natives for city participation should be considered. It is recommended that the council pass the attached resolution ordering a public hearing for November 25, 1985 at 7 p.m. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT AND - CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING - .. . WHEREAS, the city en.gi neer • for the Ci t.y of Maplewood-has-been authorized and directed to prepare a report with reference to the improvement of Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Ariel Street (City ' Project $5 -26) by construction of sanitary sewer, water main, street and sewer improvements, and WHEREAS, the said city engineer has prepared the aforesaid report for the improvement herein described: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. The report of the city engineer, advising this Council that the proposed improvement on Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Ariel Street by construction of sanitary sewer, water main, street and storm sewer improvements is feasible and should best be made as proposed, is hereby received. 2. The Council will consider the aforesaid improvement in accord- ance with the reports and the assessment of benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement according to M.S.A. Chapter 429 at . an estimated total cost of the improvement of $420,775.00. 3. A public hearing will be held in the council chambers of the city hall at 1380 Frost Avenue on Monday, the 25th day of November, 1985 at 7 p.m, to consider said improvement. The city clerk shall give mailed and published notice of said hearing and improvement as required by law, COPE AVENUE IMPROVEMENT HAZEL STREET TO ARI EL STREET PROJECT 85 -26 MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that. this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. R. Charles Ahl, P.E. Registration No. October 31, 1985 City of Maplewood Department of Public Works 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 CITY 0 k . . . . . . . . 01D) M.APLE , A , s 1902 EAST COUNTY ROAD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55109 _J 1-) v DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 770 -4550 October 31, 19.85 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Maplewood 1380 Frost Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 COPE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS FROM HAZEL STREET TO ARIEL STREET CITY PROJECT 85- 26-- MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA Enclosed herewith is the feasibility report on the above -named project which has been prepared at your request. This report addresses the concern of. determining the engineering feasibility, estimated project costs and methods of financing for the construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, and F. J street improvements for Cope Avenue from Hazel Street to Ariel Street and German Street from Cope Avenue to Lark Avenue. LJ The study concludes in a recommendation to extend sanitary sewer and water main and to construct a storm sewer system to connect to the existing storm sewer at VanDyke Street and Lark Avenue plus a street system Cope Avenue and on German Street. If you have any questions about the contents of this report, pleas contact me. R. CHARLES AHL, P.E. ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER jw Enclosure cc: Ken Haider, Acting City Manager COPE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS ' FROM HAZEL STREET TO ARI EL STREET PROJECT 85 -26 MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA INDEX Title Page and Certification i Transmittal Letter Index Summary and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Introduction 0 . . . . . . 0 . . . . 2 Project Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 2 1. Sanitary Sewer Extension . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Water Main Extension . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . 2 3. Storm Sewer Improvements . . . . 0 . 3 4. Street System Improvements 3 Estimates of Cost 4 Proposed Financing . . . . . . . . 4 Proposed Financing Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ATTACHMENTS 1. Estimates of Cost -- Sanitary Sewer Water Main Storm Sewer Street 2. Utility and Assessment Maps -- #1 - Sanitary Sewer #2 - Water Main #3 - Storm Sewer #4 - Street '1 i i j { SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary -- 1. The sanitary sewer, water main,..storm sewer, and street J improvements considered hereinafter are cost effective and. are , feasible -. J 2. The total project cost is $420,:775 for all, improvements recommended in this report. Of this total, $370,150 is proposed to be assessed against , benef ited properties, 30 A revision in the Maplewood Drainage Plan ` is ` proposed so that a drainage problem east of the :nursing home can be solved by construction of a storm sewer segment. , Recommendations 1, If the improvements are . auth'or i zed , the facilities should . be constructed as proposed herein. 20 A storm sewer system should be constructed prior to any street construction to alleviate an erosion problem on the Cope Avenue right - of -way west of Hazel Street, 3. With the construction of a storm sewer system, a segment should be constructed to drain the low area north of Cope Avenue., east of the nursing home. The Maplewood Drainage Plan should be amended to reflect this change. 4.. The street system with concrete curb. and gutter proposed for Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Ariel Street should include a segment on Cope Avenue from Hazel Street to Craig Street because the'.-existing pavement will be removed for storm sewer construction.and a segment on German Street from Cope Avenue to J Lark Avenue to alleviate traffic problems on Hazel Street and - Craig Street and to reduce the length of the cul-de-sac. 5 City participation is recommended in the amount of $50,625 from a combination of hydrant fund monies, tax - increment fund monies, and state -aid maintenance fund monies. COPE AVENUE (Craig. Street to Ariel Street) INTRODUCTION The Maplewood City Council has authorized the preparation.of this, report to study the feasibility of street and utility improvements on Cope Avenue from Craig Street to Ariel Street and to determine an alignment of Cope Avenue from White Bear Avenue to Ariel Street. The original impetus for this study was in a petition from several property owners with frontage along Cope Avenue between Craig Street and Ariel Street. PROJECT SCOPE 1. Sanitary Sewer Extension The current system extends to the intersection of Cope and Craig and a separate segment extends to Lark and German. The Lark and German easement is at an elevation that would not serve this pro j ect area , therefore, an extension from Craig Street to Ariel Street along Cope Avenue will allow sanitary sewer service to be provided to all properties along Cope. It is projected that property along German Street between Cope Avenue and Lark Street will also develop so an extension has been provided in the German Street alignment. The elevation of this line is such that future service to the properties fronting on Castle Drive (Highway 36 frontage road) cannot be served with sanitary sewer.. This area was studied and projected to be served L by a future system to be constructed along Castle Drive, Map 1 at the end of this report shows the proposed sanitary sewer extensions and the future sanitary sewer improvements. 2.. Water Main Extension t A majority of this area is currently served by water main constructed as a part of the water tower project. An extension of the water main from the water tower to the east along Cope Avenue to Ariel Street is required to provide service to all properties on this project. Water services are proposed to be extended to all properties along this project. Due to proposed street grades certain segments of the existing water main will require replacement to proper depth. This is - required to provide proper street grades less than the maximum allowed by ordinance and to provide a proper alignment and grade for the future extension and intersection of Cope Avenue and White Bear Avenue. The proposed extension of water main and the segments of water main to be adjusted to proper depth as part of this project and as part of a future project are shown on Map 2 at the end of this report. 2 3 Storm Sewer Improvements r Drainage from this area currently flows 'from a ridge , .line at— approximately the location of the city's water ' tower to the west . collecting on the existing segment - of Cope Avenue and continuing west overland along the Cope Avenue alignment west of Hazel Street where serious erosion problems are occurrin g The drainage continues down the slope across the lot on the southeast corner of-Cope Avenue and VanDyke Street where it is collected as part of the' County I -Ditch 17 . system at Lark and VanDyke. Another portion of this drainage area flows* to a low area prior to outletting through a six -inch field culvert system into the nursing home's drainage system. This pondin g r : of water in this low area has caused serious problems for residents along Castle Drive who have septic system drain f ields in this, area and to residents along Cope Avenue who have lost use of their rear - yards during wet weather periods. This six -inch outlet from this area has been prone to clogging and blockages causing the local residents very, serious problems and the downstream storm sewer system is not .adequately developed or sized to handle this area's flow, therefore, it has been proposed, as part of this report, . to replace this six-inch t_ outlet with a properly sized outlet to a Cope Avenue storm sewer system. This area was originally planned to be drained to the MN DOT Highway 36 system in the Maplewood Drainage Plan, however, b requiring the developer's of Y _ g p the medium residential (RM} and business warehouse (BW) property to the east of this area to limit their run-- off to the undeveloped rate of 9.0 CFS would not change the downstream . storm sewer system constructed as part of County Ditch 170 The proposed storm sewer system for Co e Avenue would provide f P p or collection of all run-off during a 10 -year design storm from Ariel Street along Cope Avenue to the intersection of Cope and VanDyke, then ._ Y southerly along VanDyke to Lark Avenue where it connects to the existing County Ditch 17 system. The first segment of the County Ditch 17 system (approximately 200 feet) is not properly sized and J would require replacement. All other downstream segments of the County Ditch 17 system should be adequately sized for this proposed system. Map 3, shows the proposed storm sewer system. 4. Street Improvements The proposed street system includes extending the street, a nine -ton design with D -412 concrete curb and gutter, from Craig Street to Ariel Street and replacing a temporary cul -de -sac at Ariel Street. Neither the Maplewood Community Development Department nor the North St. Paul street plan is projecting the construction of Ariel Street south of Highway 36 to Cope Avenue in the current right -of -way. North St. Paul does project a street connecting to Cope Avenue in the future at which time the temporay cul -de -sac would be removed. Constructing this section would create a 975 foot, one access section of street system which is strongly discouraged by city standards. Therefore, it is proposed to construct a street section from the existing street at German and Lark to German and Cope. This would reduce the length of 3 r i L_ J i the temporary cul -de -sac to approximately 600 feet and would. also _ F provide additional access to this area other than Craig Street acid Hazel Street which are the only routes at this ti y me. It. is also proposed to construct a street section with concrete curb and gutter on Cope Avenue between Hazel Street and Craig Street because the existing street will be removed to place the storm sewer piping. The proposed street system is shown on Map 4 at the end of this report as well as a proposed alignment and. intersection detail` of the white Bear Avenue -- VanDyke Street - -Cope Avenue -- Castle Drive intersection. The proposed alignment and intersection - detail identifies right -of -way needs. for this area and will allow for proceedings to begin to sell a portion of the lot on the southeast corner of VanDyke Street and Cope Avenue which is currently owned by the City of Maplewood. ESTIMATES OF COST The estimated project costs include construction costs, 10% for construction contingencies and 32% for indirect costs for , engineerin .g legal, administrative and easement acquisition costs. The total estimated project cost for the improvements proposed is $420,775.00. A portion of the storm sewer cost . has been added to the street construction cost because the streets cannot be recommended for construction without a storm sewer system. In the,design of the storm sewer system 41.8% of the system's capacity is used. for direct street drainage which amounts to $63,9OO.00 of the $152, estimated construction cost, of this amount, 66.2% or $42,300.0.0 is used for direct street drainage on the proposed streets between Hazel and Ariel and on German Street between Cope and Lark. A detailed itemization of costs based on the proposed improvement plan for construction is r included in the appendix of this report. PROPOSED FINANCING The financing for the planned improvements is proposed to be by a combination of assessments and city participation. The sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer services and water services are proposed to be assessed against benefited properties with no city participation. The rates are estimated to- be $20.20 per front. foot for sanitary sewer, $650.00 per four -inch sanitary sewer service and $875.00 per one -inch water service. Map 1 shows the properties proposed to be assessed for sanitary sewer, The assessment for water main is proposed to be against all benefited L properties on Cope Avenue between German Street and Ariel Street which were not assessed as part of the water tower project. A $25.00 P er front foot rate would result in a city participation amount of $10,055.00 which is justifiable because a portion of the water main cost ($16 ,000.00) is for replacement of existing water main 'due to changes in street grade and also because a portion of the Cope Avenue .frontage is the water-tower property. It is proposed that the city r � L ' J Participation amount be paid from the hydrant fund. If_city participation is not used an assessment rate of . $35.45 per front foot would be used. Map. 2, shows the properties to .be assessed for water main f` The assessment for storm sewer is proposed to bea against all benefited properties draining to the planned improvement which were not assessed C- J as part of the County Ditch 17 improvement. Approximately 65% of the assessment area as shown on Map 3 drains to the proposed improvement north of Cope Avenue and east of the nursing home where the six -inch field tile out is proposed to be replaced as discussed in the project scope section of this report. By using an assessment rate of $.10 per square foot of residential low (RL) property and $.20 per square foot of residential medium (RM) , residential high (RH) , water property (W) and business warehouse (BW) property results in a city participation of $22.,070,,00,. This amount of city participation appears justified because $21,600.00 of storm sewer construction cost can be attributed to direct street drainage downstream of the proposed improvements and also because costs ($15, 200.00), have been added to the estimated project cost to replace approximately 200 feet of the existing storm sewer placed as a part of County Ditch 17 project. It is proposed to use funds from the tax - increment fund or the state -aid r maintenance monies for the city participation. If city participation is not used, assessment rates-of $ .125 per square foot of RL and $.25 per square foot of RM, RH , W and BW would be required, The assessment for street improvements is proposed to be against all benefited properties along Cope Avenue from, Hazel Street to Ariel Street and along German Street from Cope Avenue to Lark Avenue as shown on Map 4. City participation is recommended in the amount of $18,500.00 to cover the cost of street replacement in VanDyke Street from south of Lark Avenue to Cope Avenue where storm sewer is proposed to be constructed. The city participation is proposed to be paid by funds from either tax - increment funds or state -aid maintenance fund monies. If city participation is not used, an assessment rate of $81.65 per front foot would be required. The following table summarizes the financing proposal: PROPOSED FINANCING SUMMARY Cost City Description Est.Cost Asmt.Units Asmt.Rate Recovery Participation Street $216.300 2,649 FF $ 74967/FF $197,8001 $18,500 Storm Sewer 110:500 276,925 (Resi ) . l0/sq.ft. 88 ,430 22, 070 303,683 (RM,RH, W, BW) . 20 /sq . f t . Water Main 34,100 96198 LF 25.00/FF 24,045 10,055 Water Services 13,125 15 EA 875.00/EA 13,125 0 Sanitary Sewer 37,000 1,832.4 LF 20.20/FF 37,000 0 Sewer Services 9 15 EA 650.00 9,750 0 TOTAL $420,775 -- -- $370,150 $5,625 S ESTIMATE FOR - CONSTRUCTION _ OF SANITARY SEWER ON COPE AVENUE AND GERMAN STREET (COPE TO LARK) FROM GERMAN STREET TO ARI EL STREET 1 8" PVC @ 0' - 101' Depth 645 LF @ $ 12.00 $ 7, 740 * 001 2 8" PVC @ 10 - 12' Depth 285 LF @ 14900 31990900 3 8" PVC @ 12' - 14' Depth 1101 LF @ 16.00 1 4 8" PVC @ 14' - 16' Depth 200 LF @ 18.00 3,6OOeO1 5 8 DIP @ 0' - 10' Depth 40 LF @ 20.00 800.00 J .6 4' Dia. Manhole 01' - 8' Depth 3 EA @ 1 3 , 000 * 00 r 7 4' Dia . Manhole Extra Depth 6.5 LF @ 80.00 520.00 8 Reconstruct Existing Manhole 1 EA @ 5010.00 500000 - - 9 Adjust Exist, Manhole Casting 2 EA @ 200 e 0 0 400 *00 - 10 Connect to Exist. Manhole 2 EA @ 20101900 4000010 11 8" Outside Drop 6 LF @ 200.00 1,2010.00 12 Rock for Trench Stab, 314 CY @ 5.00 1,570.00 r Subtotal 25,480.00 Contingencies @ 10% 2,550900 Subtotal 28,030.00 Indirect Costs @ 32% 8 1 970..010 Grand Total 37 , 01OO.00 Services r - t 4" Services, Complete 15 EA . @ 650.010 9,75O.00 L. r :l _j l; r� ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION. OF WATER MAIN AND ' WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT - ON COPE AVENUE FROM HAZEL TO ARIEL ON GERMAN STREET FROM COPE TO LARK ` 1 6 DIP Water Pipe 320 LF @ $ 16.00 $ 5,120900 r 2 6" Fire Hydrant 3 EA @ 1,200e00 3 , 600 a 00 3 6 Gate Valve and Box 5 EA @ 400.00 2,000.00 4 Connect to Existing-W.M. 1 EA @ 500900 500.00 , 5 MJCIP Fittings 824 LBS @ 1925 1,030.00 6 ` 2 Rigid Insulation 120 SF @ 2000 241.00 -1 Subtotal 12,490.00 Contingencies @ 10% 1,250eOO Indirect Costs @ 320 4,360.00 r Grand Total 18,100.00 Replacement of Water Main Due to Grade Change 550 LF @ 20.00 11 ,000000 Contingencies @ 10% 1,1 100 00 Indirect Costs @ 320 3,9OO.00 Grand Total 16,000.00 r Services Trenching 455 LF @ 10000 4,550.00 ,- Tap and Materials by L- J Water Utility 15 EA @ 30000 4,550.00 Subtotal 9,150900 Contingencies @ 10% 900 0 00 Indirect Costs @ 32% 3,175900 4 Grand Total 13,125.00 591.00 400.00 13,680.00 22,932.00 12,360.00 . 20 , 98 8 * 00 8,060.00 5,148.00 20,800.00 270.00 105,230.041 10,520.00 115,750.00 37,050.00 152,800.00 63,900.00 88,900.00 21,600.00 110,500.00 L J y .. ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM SEWER COPE AVENUE AND VAN DYKE STREET (COPE TO LARK) FROM VAN DYKE STREET TO ARIEL STREET 1 Remove 24" RCP Storm Sewer Pipe 197 LF @ $ 3.00 2 Remove manhole or Catch Basin 2 EA @ 200.00 3 36" RCP 342 LF @ 40 4 24" RCP 819 LF @ 28e00 5 21" RCP 515 LF @ 24900 _ - 6 18" RCP 954 LF @ 22.10 .. 7 15" RCP 403 LF @ 20.00 8 12" RCP 286 LF @ 18.00 9 Catch Basin and /or Manhole 26 EA @ 800.00 l� Rock for Trench Stab, 54 CY @ 5.00 Subtotal Contingencies @ 10% Subtotal Indirect Costs @ 320 Grand Total Less Street Drainage (41.80) Storm Sewer Cost Street Drainage Below Hazel Street Total Cost 591.00 400.00 13,680.00 22,932.00 12,360.00 . 20 , 98 8 * 00 8,060.00 5,148.00 20,800.00 270.00 105,230.041 10,520.00 115,750.00 37,050.00 152,800.00 63,900.00 88,900.00 21,600.00 110,500.00 L ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STREET CONSTRUCTION AND RESTORATION _ ON COPE AVENUE (Restoration includes storm sewer only-- VanDyke to Hazel) � HAZEL STREET TO ARI EL STREET 1 Common Excavation 3,200 CY @ $ 2.00 $ 6,400.00 2 Common Borrow 500 CY @ 5.00 2,500900 ` 3 Bituminous Removal 1,500 SY @ 2.00 3,000.00 4 Class 5, 100% Crushed 3,250 TON @ 8.00 26,000.00 5 2331 Base @ 5% 730 TON @ 20.00 14, 600900 - 6 2341 Wear @ 6% 730 TON @ 22.00 16,060 7 AC Bituminous Material 84 TON @ 225.00 18, 9000 00 8 Tack Coat 390 GAL @ 2.00 780.00 9 D -412 Concrete Curb and Cutter 3,500 LF @ 6.00 21, 000 * 00 10 B -6 Bituminous Curb 320 LF @ 4.00 1,280900 11 Restoration -- Includes Seed, • Mulch, Topsoil & Fert . 1.2 AC @ 3 , 000 * 00 3 , 6OO a OO 12 Sod 2 SY @ 2.50 5, 250900 - 13 Hay Bales for Erosion Control 100 EA @ 4.30 430900 Subtotal ll9,800e00 Contingencies @ 10% 12,000.00 Subtotal 131,800.00 Indirect Costs @ 32%. 42, 200 * 00 - Grand Total 174,000900 Street Drainage at 66.2% of $63,900.00 42,300.00 - (33.8 % is City Participation in Trunk = $21, 600.00) ` J Total Street Cost 216,300.00 FRONTAGE TO BE ASSESSED SANITARY SEWER 8 -0 ��D- EXISTING SAN. SEWER 8" NEW SAN. SEWER 8 FUTURE SAN. SEWER D C TOWER -.NU E�- 16 6 M CITE OF MAPL FRONTAGE TO BE ASSESSED MINNESO _ EXISTING WATER MAIN TO BE PROJECT NO. 85 .RAISED THIS PROJECT COPE AVENUrE FEASIBILITY STUDY E X I-S T i N G WATER MAIN TO BE _ 1 WATER MAIN RAISED IN FUTURE PROJECT EXISTING WATER MAIN ��I ■��• PROPOSED WATER MAIN 6 . v .,. • . 4h�t f,: :•�ti• :'i : :tiff, .�: •: �.,,�:,: •. ; • a 1a: F. "i: • ? %.`.•:'v:..•+ � :'.:'. :•: � :•.•.tip •.�r:.:;rr :. • •.1 S�: i : ;.�..;.: i�.;::.•:.,. Jti'. 1 1. ii :•:;:l:•:;.i }:ti•;, :� ;:'•• • �� ' � `:• ; }� : :;f ;:; ::••i•:ti : {r Vii`., - - • sYs a� ..'sS 1'.t1 a • = '•�'�''. ,y�i.�. as • �' •y • • w �1a a1 ar i'JY• R a. 's� r ' •••a • •. j� s: S + r' ti �•.•:'..•'.V :•.: • :•a a' a ala�f �� :: ' s� ✓� � +l <a� 1.} :•.it ::' Y i • '.� a 1 r Y.• fir_•' t '.•J+aX .'.x.• ~ice s ♦ i S Y; 7 rt t � '.r'a•a a .. %a' y. ; .:•:; �ti �� •'• ::.•::eye; v - •. � • ;::•:.:.:zi��:• LARK a o �.Ms• •• :' �'~•' }1 ,� : t: ti t �:' J{ �: �•� ft l �. �.�� a .., , 4 }. . .,�� ti ....r.,�.i ' ' > J a `.;V; f : :. .� -. ,.� :! • :�i : f ::� ;: �:�; J• }i� i'i � 5 r :•a }tift�a.' • ": } ;i. ;••t:. !S i ;• S !:'t: �'at .• i'•• t .ati;.ia� �:.r :;, : } ••,� 1 :� •: �:i.i • `~�` a �ii `••a f � ' Jr ,.1i. ✓a t:': i :•� Y f :!S� �✓ :Z.':' ': i.y:'::i` �i •,.�41ia�iei41:•a .•'.' �•;: f'� :.':' >' � :••t.;J %ti:.`.�. •:�' :ti':''': }': e .•:'•titi;r :: • �'a .' :.tin S" � {y � : e S.':: ;:� ii .�'i;. i ,• : i••': •�.;: Jl~. +••:' % l w :�i::�., S+`' r :�� :: ";`:;:::;i :+, :'••~:�' :ii' •�':; :••::4•: `•: + ;;:;� rya +; _ .. . • LAURIE MAP N0. 3 CI OF MAPLEWOOD MINNESO • PROJECT NO. 55--25 COPE AVENUE - FEASIBILITY STUDY STORM SEWER ASSESSABLE AREA ............. ,. 24 . t 2" �� r-- EXISTING PIPE : --: - EX. CULVERT ` '_ 13 AM, Ii Z4 PROPOSED PIPE i2 - FUTURE PIPE ago= HIGHWAY I I �J!• O ' O . MAP NO, 4 C ITY OF MAPLEWOOD M INNESOTA i!MrrT lYlT T!`T.�! Ti :'�.- - TEMPORARY RIGHT -OF -WAY PROJECT NO. 85 _ 2�3 s ASSESSABLE FRONTAGE COPE AVENUE FEASIBILITY STUDY •F STREET ..CONSTRUCTION FUTURE STREET PROPOSED STREET