Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-07-06 PC Packet AGENDA MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, July 6, 2010 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. June 15, 2010 5. Public Hearings a. 7:00 pm or Later: Conditional Use Permit Revision for Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park 1" and 2,d Additions, 1316 Pearson Drive b. 7:00 pm or Later: 2011-2015 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 6. New Business 7. Unfinished Business a. 2010 Tour Route Recap/Discussion (no report) 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. Commissioner Report: City Council Meeting of June 28, 2010: Commissioner Fischer was scheduled to attend. The item for review was the Goodwill Store relocation to 2580 White Bear Avenue. Issues included wetland buffer variances, a parking waiver and a lot combination. b. Upcoming City Council Meeting of July 12, 2010: Commissioner Martin is scheduled to attend. The anticipated items for review are The Shores Senior Housing PUD, planned unit development, on Frost Avenue. 10. Staff Presentations 11.Adjournment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JUNE 15,2010 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairperson Desai called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner AI Bierbaum Commissioner Joseph Boeser Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Robert Martin Commissioner Tanya Nuss Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood City Staff Present: Present Present Present Absent Present Absent Present Present Present Tom Ekstrand, City Planner Michael Martin, Planner Shann Finwall. Environmental Planner Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator Michael Thompson, City Enqineer Steve Kummer. Staff Enqineer III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Planner Ekstrand welcomed the environmental and natural resource commission, who was present at the meeting for both of the public hearing items. Planner Ekstrand explained that the request by Mogren Landscaping to relocate to a temporary site has been stricken as part of the Goodwill proposal, Item S.b. of this agenda. Mr. Ekstrand explained that Mogren Landscaping will submit a separate request at a later date for a temporary landscape storage site. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Trippler seconded Ayes - all The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. May 18, 2010 Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the minutes of May 18, 2010 as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded The motion passed. Ayes - Bierbaum, Boeser, Desai, Martin, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -2- b. June 1, 2010 Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the minutes of June 1,2010 as submitted. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes - Bierbaum, Boeser, Desai, Martin, Pearson, Trippler Abstention - Yarwood The motion passed. v. PUBLIC HEARING a. Wetland Buffer Variance and Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development Request, The Shores at Lake Phalen Senior Housing Proposal by Kaas Wilson Architects, 940 Frost Avenue Planner Martin presented the staff report for this request by Jack Rajchenbach and Albert Miller of Maplewood Senior Living, LLC, to redevelop the 7.02-acre former St. Paul Tourist Cabin site located at 940 Frost Avenue with a senior housing development. Planner Martin said the project, to be called The Shores at Lake Phalen, will consist of 1 OS units of senior housing in a three-story building with underground parking. Ron Leaf, a consultant for the city, gave a presentation on the storm water maintenance requirements and wetland improvements for this proposal. Link Wilson, of Kaas Wilson Architects, was present representing the owners and developers. Mr. Wilson gave a presentation explaining the request for variances is needed to preserve many of the existing trees on the property. Mr. Wilson said they will be providing 30 cubic feet of storage with shelves per resident in individual storage rooms in the building. Mr. Wilson said they are requesting a 2S-foot setback variance from the wetland and they will be improving the water quality of the wetland tremendously. Commissioner Boeser asked where the loading and unloading will occur for this development. Mr. Wilson said the loading and unloading for the kitchen will occur through the garage. Mr. Boeser said the commission in the past has discussed requiring 10-foot parking spaces for senior developments and asked Mr. Wilson his thoughts on the 1 O-foot spaces and what would be their ability to move on the 1 O-foot spaces. Mr. Wilson responded that this facility would not have independent seniors, but will serve only memory care and assisted living seniors. Mr. Wilson said the parking spaces would generally be used by guests and staff. Mr. Wilson suggested that 1 O-foot-wide spaces be designated for residents, staff parking be underground and visitors use the 9 %-foot-wide parking spaces. Commissioner Trippler said they are proposing to employ 120 people, but will have only S2 parking spaces. Mr. Wilson responded that there will be five shifts for the 120 employees. Mr. Wilson said that at any given time there would be 18-20 staff parked and approximately 10 residents who drive. Mr. Wilson said that even if a granddaughter came with 20 visitors to see her grandmother, he feels there will be adequate parking. In response to a question from Mr. Trippler on staffing numbers, Mr. Wilson showed an overhead diagram and explained how the building would be staffed. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -3- Commissioner Pearson said he feels the above ground parking spaces need to be 10 feet wide. Mr. Pearson said he feels the two designated handicapped spaces near the entrance is not enough handicapped parking. Commissioner Pearson asked if soil borings were done on the property previously. Engineer Michael Thompson responded that soil borings were done and the applicant will be submitting a copy to the city. Commissioner Pearson asked for a copy of the soil borings report when it is received. Commissioner Trippler questioned whether a wetland can really be rejuvenated by man and asked if the city has had any experience with this. Engineer Thompson responded affirmatively and sited the Highway 61 and County Road B wetland that the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District improved with dredging and sediment removal. Ron Leaf, of Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District and consultant for the city, presented information detailing improvements that have been made to wetlands in the area and said that soil borings were then done on these wetlands to show they are improved. Commissioner Boeser suggested that since this is a senior facility and for safety reasons, a railing should be erected on the entire retaining wall. The public hearing was opened to the public for comments. The following people spoke: Mindy Mac Runnel questioned whether there will be enough parking for family celebrations held at the facility. Virginia Davis, of Frost Avenue and East Shore Drive, asked ifthere would be any walking paths with this facility. Planner Martin responded that there is a trail planned for the west side of the building from the sidewalk to Frost Avenue. Engineer Thompson explained that this trail was proposed to be five feet, but the fire marshal has requested that it be a ten-foot drivable surface. Mr. Thompson said there is a sidewalk running on the south side of the driveway entrance on East Shore Drive that would be connected to a trail that is part of a public improvement project. David Hesley, 2607 White Bear Avenue, said he owns a 60-unit senior facility on Gervais Avenue and a 70-unit facility with underground parking in Mahtomedi. Mr. Hesley said he wanted to give feedback regarding parking concerns. Mr. Hesley said he has been an owner of these facilities for 1S years and they have not had any issues at his facilities with the number of parking spaces provided. Mr. Hesley said the majority of seniors at the facility do not drive, so there is plenty of existing parking. There were no further comments from the public; the hearing was closed. Commissioner Yarwood moved approval of the conditional use permit resolution. This resolution approves the conditional use permit for a 10S senior-housing planned unit development with the Shoreland Overlay District of Phalen Lake. Approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The engineering department shall review and determine approval of all final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall comply with all requirements as specified in the city engineering department's June 7, 2010 review. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -4- b. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped May 24, 2010 and with revisions as noted in this approval. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the plans. c. The project is approved with 28 underground and 24 surface parking spaces. This is a parking reduction of 1S8 parking spaces (210 parking spaces are required per city code.) d. The project is approved with a 147-square-foot floor area reduction in the required unit floor area for the memory care and assisted living studio units (S80 square-foot units are required per city code; 433 to S78 square-foot units are proposed.) e. The project is approved with a 20-foot front-yard setback along Frost Avenue for the one- story dining room and kitchen portion of the building (30-foot front-yard setback required per city code.) f. The project is approved with storage space of not less than 30 cubic feet for the memory care and transitional care units (120 cubic feet of storage area per unit required per city code.) g. All signs on the property must be approved by the community design review board. h. Approval is conditioned on the owner constructing or funding a Gladstone neighborhood entry monument sign at the intersection of Frost Avenue and East Shore Drive. i. Approval is conditioned on the applicant implementing interior or exterior signage which reflects the previous use of the property as the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site. j. The approved landscape plan and tree preservation requirements shall be subject to monitoring by city staff to assure compliance. Minor modifications to these plans shall be subject to review by staff while major modifications shall require city council approval. k. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council approval or the permit shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. I. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Commissioner Trippler seconded Commissioner Pearson suggested a friendly amendment to modify Item c. adding "1 O-foot" to the 24 surface parking spaces requirement. Commissioner Yarwood said he did not want to require all 24 spaces to be 1 O-foot-wide spaces and thereby increase the impervious surface. Mr. Yarwood suggested language be added to Item c. recommending but not requiring, that "the applicant seek to develop on average, 1 O-foot-wide surface parking spaces." Commissioner Pearson agreed with Commissioner Yarwood's suggested language for the friendly amendment. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -5- The commission voted: Ayes - all The motion passed. Commissioner Pearson moved adoption of the resolution approving wetland buffer variances from the Manage C wetland on the east side of the site. Approval is based on the following reasons: a. Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause the applicant undue hardship because complying with all of the wetland buffer requirements stipulated by the ordinance would deplete the site area, substantially diminishing the development potential of this lot. b. Approval of the requested wetland buffer variance would benefit the adjacent wetland because the wetland is currently in poor condition and development of this site will allow for rehabilitation of the wetland and buffer areas. c. Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since the proposed restoration and mitigation of the wetland buffers will greatly improve the quality of the wetland. Approval of this wetland buffer variance is subject to the following conditions: a. All permits and approvals by the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District will need to be secured. b. Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by Mr. Thompson, dated June 7,2010. c. Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by Ms. Finwall and Ms. Gaynor, dated May 28, 2010. Commissioner Yarwood seconded Ayes - Bierbaum, Boeser, Desai, Martin, Pearson, Yarwood Nay - Trippler The motion passed. Commissioner Boeser moved approval of the lot division request to subdivide the 7.02-acre parcel located at 940 Frost Avenue. This lot division approval is subject to the following conditions: a. Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by Mr. Thompson, dated June 7,2010. b. Satisfy the requirements set forth in the staff report authored by Ms. Finwall and Ms. Gaynor, dated May 28, 2010. c. Submit to the city a revised plat showing the southern lot labeled as Lot 2, Block 1, and showing the boundary line shifted to the south to meet residential density requirements as determined by the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Subject to staff approval. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -6- d. The applicant shall pay cash connection charges for the new multi-family lots for connection to the water main and sanitary sewer main. e. Deeds describing the two new legal descriptions, including the required trail, drainage and utility easement descriptions must be drafted and stamped by the city. Ramsey County requires this acknowledgment of approval to record the deeds. These must be recorded with Ramsey County within one year of the date of the lot division approval or the lot split will become null and void (city code requirement). f. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit for the new development on the new lots, the following must be submitted to staff for approval: 1) Proof the Ramsey County has recorded the lot division. 2) A signed certificate of survey showing the location of all property lines. 3) Grading and drainage plan. 4) All necessary permits for sanitary sewer and water must be obtained. Commissioner Trippler seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all b. Wetland Buffer Variance, Goodwill Store Proposal by Kelco Services LLC, 2S80 White Bear Avenue Planner Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report for this request by Jim Kellison of Kelco Services to demolish the two existing buildings at 2S80 and 2S82 White Bear Avenue and replace them with a new Goodwill store. Planner Ekstrand again explained that the part of this request by Mogren Landscaping to relocate to a temporary landscape storage site has been removed from this item and will be considered separately at a later date. Planner Shann Finwall presented information on the wetland buffer variances proposed. Commissioner Trippler had a question regarding the parking required for this proposal and city code requirements. Jim Kellison of Kelco Services responded saying they have revised the required parking spaces, based on a recommendation by the community design review board for 1 O-foot spaces, and they are now proposing 76 10-foot parking spaces with proof of parking at 79 spaces. Mr. Kellison gave a presentation explaining details on the wetland buffer variances requested and the proposed drainage on the site. Commissioner Boeser asked the applicant to explain the traffic flow in and out of the site. Mr. Kellison noted the plan for entry and exit flow of traffic and said it may be possible for the semi trucks to make deliveries at an off-peak time to help with traffic congestion. The public hearing was opened for comments from the public. The following people spoke: Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -7- David Hesley, 2607 White Bear Avenue, said he is part of the business and economic commission. Mr. Hesley said Mogren Landscaping's temporary storage site was proposed to be relocated behind his building and he suggested a forum to discuss the ramifications of this redevelopment. Commissioner Yarwood asked if the vision for Mogrens is to remain in this area or ultimately to move somewhere else in Maplewood. Staff responded that Mogrens' temporary storage site was initially proposed for the property south of the car wash. Mayor Will Rossbach, 1386 County Road C East, spoke cautioning the commission not to have discussion about something that is not on the agenda and to stick to discussing the Goodwill request. Mayor Rossbach said the commission could be accused of using information that is not relevant for making their decision and could cast aspersions on the commission's decision making process. Commissioner Martin suggested that since buildings are being demolished and businesses are being displaced, the business and economic commission should review this request. Commissioner Boeser disagreed with Mayor Rossbach saying that this agenda item will cause a displacement of one of the current occupants and to take into consideration the domino effect of what's going to happen with the current property and how it affects the landscape of the area. Commissioner Yarwood agreed with Commissioner Boeser saying that it is within the purview of the planning commission to take a broader approach and look at what is happening in the entire area when evaluating the proposals. Commissioner Boeser said the piecemealing of the series of events that are going to come down the pipe are being piecemealed and proposed from a single source. Commissioner Trippler asked for clarification on the approval of waivers regarding the wetland buffer variances. Mr. Trippler said the lot has not changed since they looked at it and he does not understand why it is an undue hardship for the applicant to comply with city ordinances. Staff explained that it is always difficult to estimate what a "hardship" is, but in this instance there will be improvements made to the buffer where there are none existing and secondly, it drastically reduces the original buildable area. Natural resource coordinator Ginny Gaynor said the wetland ordinance allows for averaging for the hardship reason and asked if the wetlands have been calculated to see if they meet the requirements under the wetland ordinance. Ms. Gaynor said that part of the goal of the wetland ordinance pertaining to redevelopment is to make the wetland better and the wetland buffer proposed for this project is a huge improvement. Commissioner Trippler said he is in agreement with most of this project, but he will not support variances when they exceed SO percent of the setback. Jim Kellison spoke again saying that if averaging calculations were done on the entire wetland setback from the property line, he is certain the setback would be well over SO feet. There were no further public comments; the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -8- Commission Yarwood said it is a nice proposal and a creative use of a challenging property and he is comfortable with what he sees and he is supportive of it. Commissioner Trippler moved approval of the parking waiver allowing the applicant to provide six fewer parking spaces than city code requires. Commissioner Boeser seconded Ayes - all The motion passed. Commissioner Boeser moved to strike the prior motion and second approved by the commission and replace it with the following "approval of the parking waiver allowing the applicant to provide fewer parking spaces than city code requires per the recommendation provided by the community design review board. Commissioner Trippler seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all Commissioner Bierbaum moved adoption of the resolution approving wetland buffer variances from the creek on the north side of the site and the Manage C wetland on the east side of the site. Approval is based on the following reasons: 1. Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause the applicant undue hardship because complying with all of the wetland buffer requirements stipulated by the ordinance would deplete the site area by approximately one half of its original size, substantially diminishing the development potential of this lot. 2. Approval of the requested wetland buffer variances would benefit the adjacent wetland and creek because the site is presently developed up to the wetland and creek edges. 3. Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since the proposed restoration and mitigation of the wetland and creek buffers will greatly improve the quality of the creek to the north and the wetland to the east. 4. The Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District has approved the applicant's plans. S. Approval of the wetland buffer variances shall be subject to complying with all of the conditions of approval in the Environmental Review report by Shann Finwall, Maplewood Environmental Planner and Ginny Gaynor, Maplewood Natural Resources Coordinator, dated May 14, 2010. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes - Bierbaum, Boeser, Desai, Martin, Pearson, Yarwood Nay - Trippler The motion passed. Commissioner Trippler moved to combine the two lots currently addressed as 2S80 and 2S82 White Bear Avenue into one legally described property. The applicant shall provide evidence that these lots have been combined as one before getting a building permit. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-15-10 -9- Commissioner Pearson seconded The motion passed. Ayes - all VI. NEW BUSINESS None VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. 2010 Tour Route Planner Ekstrand explained the route for the upcoming summer tour and noted the Spoon Lake neighborhood preserve and infiltration basin and Kohlman Park improvements have been added. The commission suggested that the Gladstone redevelopment area be dropped from the tour and the dinner break moved up to follow the second stop. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Mayor Will Rossbach said he is very much in favor of discussion of all of the ideas that the planning commission has about various planning and development things in the city. Mayor Rossbach said when he advises the commission to use caution, as he did tonight, it is because he has sat as a planning commissioner for 14 years, has sat as a council member for six years, and has received training experience on how to not get sued. Mayor Rossbach said the commission cannot introduce evidence into the discussion and findings that have to do with things not before the commission. Mayor Rossbach encouraged the commission to be on solid ground with solid findings. Mayor Rossbach said he would discuss with the city manager getting input from other commissions submitted before the planning commission schedules public hearings. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. June 14, 2010 City Council Meeting: Commissioner Bierbaum reported. b. Upcoming City Council Meeting of June 28, 2010: Commissioner Fischer will attend. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: James Antonen, City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park 1st and 2nd Addition-Conditional Use Permit Revision 1316 Pearson Drive Simple Majority Required for Approval of a Conditional Use Permit June 30, 2010 SUBJECT: LOCATION: VOTE REQUIRED: DATE: INTRODUCTION Thomas F. DeVincke, representing Mesa Dunes MHC Investors, LLC, the owners of Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park, is requesting city council approval of a revision to the conditional use permit (CUP) requirements for Rolling Hills 1" and 2nd Additions. The CUP for both additions require that all homes brought into the park must be new homes. The applicant is requesting that the park owner be allowed to move in used homes. BACKGROUND On October 25, 1982, the city council approved the CUP for the Rolling Hills 1 s, Addition. The CUP for the 1 sl Addition was reconsidered on August 13, 1984 due to compliance issues during the early stages of site development. On May 11 1987, the city council approved the CUP for the Rolling Hills 2nd Addition. There were many annual or subsequent reviews that followed to monitor CUP compliance during the development years. (Refer to the attached current conditions of approval in the Recommendation. The current conditions for both phases are included.) Please note that Condition 12 of the 1984 minutes and Condition 6 of the 1987 minutes require that all homes must be "new." DISCUSSION The applicant's reasons for this amendment as stated in his letter (attached) are: . Requiring only new homes is not consistent with the current use of the property. Permitting used homes is more consistent with the properties present use. . The city's building code officials retain the ability to inspect any homes to be moved into Rolling Hills. . Rolling Hills has a track record showing that it takes great care to ensure the aesthetic quality of the community. . Federal law provides that state or local requirements or standards must not affect the uniformity and comprehensiveness of the standards promulgated under this section. . State law and court determinations provide that zoning controls enacted by any legislative body must apply equally to manufactured and site-built homes. In this case, the city has singled out manufactured homes for disparate treatment because both the special and conditional use permits require that the manufactured homes in Rolling Hills be "new" but places no similar requirement on other types of housing. Accordingly, both these permits may arguably violate Minn. Stat. 394.25. . It is safe to assume that the city's goal in restricting homes in Rolling Hills to "new" homes was to ensure that the community did not become an eyesore for the city. Maplewood is not home to many manufactured home communities, and there was likely some trepidation on the city's part in dealing with this type of land use. Now I am confident that the city has a very different perspective on manufactured home communities. (Staff reply: There were four manufactured home parks in Maplewood at the time Rolling Hills 1s' and 2nd Additions were developed. These were the St. Paul Tourist Cabins and Manufactured Home Park, Town and Country, English Street south of Frost Avenue and Beaver Lake Manufactured Home Park.) . Rolling Hills is an expertly maintained community that, while overwhelmingly filled with used homes, remains aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Design, Aesthetics and Building Code When Rolling Hills was developing, it made sense to require that all homes placed in the development be new homes. Used homes placed in the park at that time would have set the tone for a diminished aesthetic right from the start. Now after nearly 30 years in operation, it makes sense to revise the CUP requirement that all homes to be placed in Rolling Hills must be new ones. The applicant did not specify, though, if there should be an age limit on homes to be moved into the development. Would 10-year-old homes be acceptable? Should 20-year-old homes be allowed or even older ones? The city's goal was initially to ensure good building aesthetics by requiring that all homes moved in are new ones. However, currently the homes at Rolling Hills range from new ones to 28 years of age. To pick a "home age" and say that replacement homes may not be any older than that would be somewhat arbitrary. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that a new home would be compatible with existing older ones. Perhaps a better way to determine home placement isto simply require that the home meet all applicable building code requirements. Requiring code compliance is defensible if challenged and not based on a guess of "how old is too old." The requirement for code upgrades will also eliminate the older used homes since there could be substantial, costly improvements needed to bring an old home up to code making it financially unfeasible. 2 Building Code The building code requires that all manufactured homes placed in the city must comply with Minnesota Rules Chapter 1350 for Manufactured Homes. These rules simply require that the structure be fully in compliance with code requirements. Rolling Hills Resident's Association Comments Paul Ruby, the president of the Rolling Hills Resident's Association, stated that they would like homes that are moved into Rolling Hills be no more than 12 years old. He feels that homes built before 1998 used plumbing material made from polybutylene. Mr. Ruby stated that this is an inferior product and that homes built after 1998 were installed with PEX, a better water-piping material. He would like to try to eliminate polybutylene plumbing. Conclusion Staff supports the applicant's request to amend the CUP for Rolling Hills 1 sl and 2nd Additions to allow used homes to be placed in the park. The homes must, of course, comply with all applicable building code requirements as would any site-built house. RECOMMENDATION The following motion deletes unnecessary or already-met requirements and combines the motions of the Rolling Hills 1 sl and 2nd Additions. Adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit revision for Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park 1s' and 2nd Additions. Approval is subject to the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (deletions are crossed out and additions are underlined): Rolling Hills 1s1 Addition CUP Conditions from August 13,1984 1. Prior to the gpring thaw and until July 1, 1981, iml3roved (gravel or gimilar material) eff street l3arking padc chall be provided for each vehicle accociated 'Nith an eccul3ied unit. Unrectricted emergency vehicle accecc muct be available at all times. 2. A mobile home chall not be moved ento a let after .'\l3ril 2J, 1981 until a ctreot ic fla'/ed in front of the lot. J. Thero chall be no e)(terier of equipment, suchac bikec, heces, lawnmo'l/orc, rakec, etc. 1. Each lot chall be allowod an exterior storage ched of no mere than 120 cquar-e feet. Such chod muct be kopt in workmanlike rel3air and l3ainted. 6. No accecs chall be allowed to Conturj /\venue. 3 6. No construction or grading shall be allowed to disturb the tamarack grove. 7. The private sanitary cower, water mains and ctreetc chall be constructeel to be cencictent '....ith the Mal3lewood anel St. Paul Water Utility ctandar-dc to encure a reaconable le'/el of service. 8. M utility inatallationa shall be undergrounel. 9. The flrivate ctroetc must be at least 28 feet in width, with flarking on one ciele only. ~Jo parking shall be flermitteel in the vicinity of interccctionc. The Director of Public Safety shall specify the no parking eliatancoc for each intercection. Signc chall bo flocteel by tho l3ark o'/>'ner when available. 10. Water linea muct be flushed at least once each year or ac roquired by the environmental health official. 11. All storm water elischarge must be elirecleel to the wetlanel to the woct. No cennection to the city storm ce'JI'er chall be alloweel. 12. .'\11 mebile homec muct be nmv, ckirteel anel tieel down. Skirting chall elGenel from the frame ef the chacsic to the greund. Skirting must be flainteel to comfllement the mobile fIem&.. 13. All tio dmvnc and fGundationg muct meet tho gtate building code. 11. (a) Conctruction en the below grade storm chelter chall begin May 11, 1981 and chall be completed by June 22, 1981, unless the Director ef Public Safety Clctendc the deadline due te circumstancec beyond the control of the de'lelol3er. (b) The decign of the below graelo ctructure must be approveel by the Director of Emer~oncy Servicec, including emergenc-y lighting, ventilation and canitary focilitiec. (c) The above grade 130rtion of the building muct receive apwoval from the design review bcard before construction. (d) The storm chelter must remain free of storage and be kel3t available for uce. (e) No further flermits for additienal mobile homes chall be icsued until the shelter ic completed. 15. The sign regulationc for the Rd district chall aflflly. 16. The following minimum setbacks chall aPl3ly: (1) Twenty feet to a flrivote stroet. (2) Thirty feet to a flublic right of 'Nay, e)(ceflt for cterage cheds. (3) Five f-cot side yarel setbael( on the siele eflflocite the entry. (1) T'Nenty f-cot siele yard cetback on the entry side. 17. No ctruclures chall be allowed in a required cetback, except for an acceccory building, in the twenty feot ciele yard setback and the thirt-y foot cetbacl( from a flublic right of way. J\n accecsorJ buileling must havo 0 ciele yarel setbacl( of at leact five feet. 18. Salos of mobile homec shall be Iimiteel to thocc o'JIneel by park residentc anel thoce cold by the flarl( owner for fllacement in the parl<. 4 19. The elevelol3er shall flroviele traffic control signc as requir-od by the Dir-octor of Public Safety. 20. Comflliance 'A'ith all pertinent state statutes and regulationc. 21. No variation shall be permitted from the site fllan dated d 21 8d without community elecign revic>.v board al3flroval. 22. The number of mebile homes shall not m(cood 216. 23. Thic sonditional UgO 1germit ohall bo rcviowes in one year to eletormine oompliance with conditionc and whether a change in conditionc is necessary to recolve flroblems that may have eleveloped. 21. (a) After 1.l3riI23, 1981, tho following imflrovements muct be installed within cb(ty days after a mobile home is fllaced on a lot: (1) 1\ flaved drivoway and off ctreet flarking pad at leact siJdeen foot wide and twenty feet deefl. (2) I. thirty inch wiele cidewalk from the mobile home entranco tc the parking pad cubject to placement of entranoe decks. (d) All requireellandccaping on the lot. If the Iandccafling cannot be comflletod within cbdy days, a letter of crodit of cash oscrow chall be depositeel with the Director of Community Development to ensuro installation. (1) Skirting. (13) Improvements required in item 21 chall net apply to model homes. 25. If any of the abovo conditiens arc not met, no additional mobile homes shall be mO'/ed into the flark. Rolling Hills 2nd Addition CUP Conditions from May 11,1987 1. Comflliance with state requirements. 2. There shall be no m(tericr ctorage ef equipment such as bikes, hoces, lawnmowem, rakes, etc. 3. Each lot chall be alloweel an mderior ctorage shed of no more than 120 cquare feet. Such sheel must be kel3t in workmanlike reflair and painted. 1. Each lot shall be alloweG to have children'c play equiflmont unlecs the de'Jeleflor flrovides a tot let adjacent to the community buileling. 5. Each lot shall be alloweel a eleck and carflort, flrovided that either structure shall not be clocer than ten feet to any adjacent dwelling. Carflorts shall not be e10cer than six feet to a I3rivate ctreet anel shall not have walls. On lots along Century Avenue. chods chall not be closer than forty ceven feet to the right of way. 6. All mobile homos be new, skirted and tied dO'.vn. Skirting chall oxtend from the frame of the chaccis to the ground. Skirting must be flainteel to comfllement the mobile home. 7. I,ll tic dO'llnc anel foundations muct moot the ctate building code. 5 8. The sign regulationc for tho R3 elistrict shall apply. 9. The following minimum setbacks shall apply for dwellings: a. Twenty feet to a flrivate street. b. Forty cevon feet to the Century Avenue right of way. c. Five foot siele yard setbaok on the cide oppocite the entrj side. el. Twenty foot side yarel setback on the entry €lido. e. Seventy feet to a railroad traok. 10. Sale8 of moaile homes shall be limited to these owned by flarl< recidents anel thoce sold by the parI< o...:ner for placement in the l3arlc 11. The storm shelter shall be I<eflt free of ctorage. The shelter shall be keflt open at all timec or keys chall be maele available to all rocidents in a manner te be apl3roved by the Director of Emergenoy Servioec. 12. The city shall not be res~ensiblo for maintaining any of the internal imflrovements. 13. '.^iater linoc shall be flushed at least onoe a year. 11. Parking shall only be permitteel on one cide of each streot. No l3arl<ing chall be permitteE! c1080r than thirty f-cet to any intersection. 15. J'.dherenoe to the apflroved site fllan and rolated oonditiens. .^.ny cignifioant change must be al3flroved by the community design review aoard. Minor changes may be appreveel by staff. Revised/Combined Motion for both the Rolling Hills 1st and 2nd Addition$ 1. Compliance with all building code requirements. 2. There shall be no exterior storage of equipment such as bikes, hoses, lawnmowers, rakes, etc. 3. Each let shall be allowed an exterior storage shed of no more than 120 square feet. Sheds must be kept in good repair. 4. Each lot shall be alloweel to have children's play equipment unless the developer provides a tot lot adjacent to the community building. 5. All mobile homes shall be skirteel and tied down. Skirting shall extend from the frame of the chassis to the grounel. Skirting must match the mobile home. 6. Manufactured homes to be placed in the park are no longer required to be new. All homes to be moveel in must meet all current buileling coele and fire code requirements. 7. The sign regulations for the R3 district shall apply. 6 8. The following minimum setbacks shall apply for dwellings: . Twenty feet to a I3rivate street. . Thirty feet to any public right-ef-way for homes in the 1st Addition. . Forty-seven feet to the Century Avenue right-of-way for homes in the 2nd Addition. . Five foot side yarel setback on the side opposite the entry side. . Twenty foot side yard setback on the entry side. . Seventy feet to a railroad track. . Ten feet to any adjacent dwelling for a deck or car port. o Six feet to a private street for a carport (carports shall not have walls). . Forty-seven feet to the Century Avenue right-of-way for a shed in the 2nd Addition. 9. Sales of mobile homes shall be limited to those owned by park residents and those sold by the park owner for placement in the park. 10. The storm shelter shall be kept free of storage. The shelter shall be kept open at all times or keys shall be made available to all residents in a manner to be approved by the Director of Public Safety. 11. The property ewner shall be responsible for maintaining all internal improvements. 12. Water lines shall be flushed at least once a year. 13. Parking shall only be permitted on one side of each street. No parking shall be permitteel closer than thirty feet to any intersection. These requirements are subject to the review and approval of the police chief. 14. There shall be no driveway access to Century Avenue or Ivy Avenue from the individual manufactured home sites. 15. Internal traffic signs shall be installed subject to the approval of the police chief. 16. Adherence to the approved site plan and relateel conditions. Any significant change must be approved by the community design review board. Minor changes may be approved by staff. The number of home sites shall not be increased without the revision of this conditional use permit. 7 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 55.56 acres Existing Use: Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Union Pacific Railroad tracks South: Ivy Avenue and single dwellings East: Century Avenue and single dwellings in the City of Oakdale West: Pond View Apartments PLANNING Land Use Plan: MDR (medium density residential) Zoning: R3 (multiple dwelling residential) Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval Section 44-1 097(a) states that the city council shall determine that the nine standards for approval are met in order to approve a CUP. See findings 1-9 in the resolution. APPLlCA TIONIDECISION DEADLINE We received the complete applications for this proposal on April 23, 2010. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete apl3lications, however, the city staff may extend this review period an additional 60 days. Staff has done so and the deaelline now for a city council decision is August 21, 2010. p:sec24-29\Rolling Hills CUP Revision Review #27 10 te Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Land Use Plan Map 4. Applicant's letter of request date-stamped April 23, 2010 5. CUP Revision Resolution 8 IV! o Pres-erve PriOr! Neighborhood -.,P' Attachment 1 .;"..^.": '-"-~^t"'.'"" =:J :\ '-,\ -,~" ~'" 1 -""-, " .,~ "-, I ':c:J 1555 Do ic=J . o,o.'~~ .' <\0\1"~~~ \551''-'' ~ ~o ~~~\~W.~ D U,(~O~~! ~iO ,~~Q;> " mrl"O'O"O"Q"O'O"O ~E'::f ~~W <l4~a a:::~I!l!lmWml\i ~" '>~;;:I~cr: aCJllll:lJo MICHAEL DR " , ~" 0 o?mili~u~ul1\~m :f o a~rn- ~ ~pml~~~QdjQg~no~rro c~ ~ , : ~~~ ~.~ ~dl!Jqj ~nn~ EJ" ;0 ~ a. o:::l RYAN DR ~))!'6~"~U ill U\ltUU U.u.~,U U,\!:J lliJ Ii! n'U1jrOO~ ~r~'n'n'~o~~onrnID t?" w BENLANA CT c:: j:J ~ ~ ~ ~U.U~~,[!]o ~o~ .::~ ~~~~ ~ \IDn'ji1"n~'~~ ~~ ~; ~~~~. ffi [jili] '" ~ amn;u~ U OAK HILL CT ~ ,,''\319 ~., '\381 ~ ~ ~ 1!J,~~.&!,~U~c -:1~ .",o~ ~~ ~ 'f!l i'O'r;;]. 'i'~ "~l =' ""'" 0 "51= ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~"~ ~:..",.", ~ [;l ~.@ ~~ ~~ 0 ~ ;;;;1 ~ ~ I!!!!l o @j] ~ 2EI g ffi!J " !Jill ffirl ANGELA CT ~~t~" ~.UJJ~. -';; __ 0=1 ~ ~ ~ ) E'J ~,O;;;J ~~. "~~ 0.... "ill,"@;J = ..b ~ ~ ~ @t!I " ~ md~ ~oo m.t:J~ ~ 1m:::J"~ uaD ~gi ~~ I i:l ,.; 0.;:;;1"'r;:;:;;1 Cl.'Ilml<f)S'''~ / ,pml1..L.. ~ \.E!!!Ja::: ~c .....l~r-- ~ O~Cl.'l:l:lJO ",I:ill]=~~ __ . t:E@l.U " ICJ:IJCJ. ~ :r: I:l ~~~!iY ~.~~ ~ ~ClI!32::J ~ " "'S """"S i;;;:; =.;;- 'ow o;;;J 1]' on '1l'D'D'Q,[),~ """ ~'" $;z? ~::J ~,.,.", m Ii1 w a ~ Ell f(Lt 'iii:J /Jiis!i eJll C::J ~ ~ , MICKEY LN OJ ,I!J,lmJ~U]JI,~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1M @,~ OO,loo'U! 0 m @9 \32h1 ~lii1lAI"""""'" SITE I LOCATION MAP 1487 ~1I;PJ jJ;JIs Attachment 2 1 ZONING MAP Attachment 3 ~~ ~ ~'-J ~ ~~~ ~~i;:l s'-J ~ E "II ~ i;j.'1 >.J c.. m :2 CD 0 ~ OJ :;:) (!) ~ <Do ~ LLO 0 (!) <t: ~ ~ co 0 (!) cO "C ~ <t: ~ (!) ~ 0 (!) ~ <t: c: 0.. ~ (!) en 0 0.. ~ m "" <t: en (!) c ~ "" 0.. -J :::J (!) c en 0.. :::J "" If) en c ! ~ "" ~ :::J , c 0 0 ~ :::J ~ (!) 0 If) If) ~ :::1 ~ 0 0 0 N <t: O"l ~ <0 ~ N +'" ~ ::J ro , ~ ~ (!) +' <q 0 0.. C u.. (!) N ro ~ ~ ~ +' ~ -0 C C 'w ro (!) ro :::J I (!) +' -0 +' 0:: c 'w c 0 ~ Cll (!) (!) ~ ~ -0 0:: :2 C') 'w en en >- (!) c (!) m Cll 0:: "" 0:: 0 en a 0 >- c ~ <0 - -J ~ (!) 3: - (!) ro c ro 0 'w 0 en (!) '(3 (!) 0 c c en ~ E c ro L.., --' (!) E (!) :::J (!) ro 0 0.. lJ) 0 E 'c C +' (fJ ~'" CD :::, 0 ::J -0 - ~ ::J ro .J:: (!) E en (!) - -'" c (!) 0 > ~ g -0 .1:5 ::J > +' ~ (!) _ 0 ::J (!) .!2' 0 -0 0 en ro 0.. rn.!':~ 0:: --' ~ I ~ U c l') c 0 S ~ 0 m 0.. ON .0", D III II .o:N CD OJ<=- Z-< ._ ro 00 " E Z-"l BONNER & BORHART LLP Attachment 4 SUITE 1950 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612.313.0711 rACSIMILE 612.455.2055 ~~@~D\V~~ UU APR 23 2010 ~ Thomas F. DeVincke, Esq. Direct Dial No. 612-313-0735 By Thomas Ekstrand Senior PlaJmer City of Maplewoed 1830 County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Tom.Ekstrand@ci.maplewood.mn.us Re: Follett Investment Propeliy / Rolling Hills of Maple wood MHC Our File No. 9417.001 Dear Mr. Ekstrand: I am writing in support of Follett Investment Management, Inc. 's request for an amendment to the Special Use Permit issued by the City of Maplewood on or about October 25, 1983 with respect to the Relling Hills First Addition (Exhibit A) and the Conditional Use Pem1it issued by the City efMapleweod on er about May 11, 1987 with respect to the Rolling Hills Second Addition (Exhibit B). Among other things, these pennits both required that "all mobile homes must be new, skirted and lied down." Follett Investment Properties, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 9462.35.95 and the Maplewood Code of Ordinances, hereby applies for an amendment to the Special Use Permit and Conditional Use Pennit allowing used manufactured homes to be moved into the Rolling Hills of Maplewood maJ1Ufactured home community. I believe my client's application should be granted because the 152229.WPD Page 1 ef 7 relevant considerations all weigh in favor of permitting used manufactured housing in the Rolling Hills of Maplewood manufactured heme community. Factual and Lel!:al Backl!:round Rolling Hills of Maple wood is a manufactured home community consisting of approximately 325 home sites. Rolling Hills of Maple wood's first addition was originally developed in the 1982- 1983 time frame by the Pearson family. In or around 1987, it appears, based on the public record, that Rolling Hills expanded and developed a second addition. During its almost 28 years in operation, Rolling Hills of Maplewoed has been one efthe premiere manufactured home community in the Twin Cities metrepolitan area. It boasts wide, paved private streets, attractive signage, an improved stonn shelter, fully equipped common area playgrounds and exemplary tree plantings tlrroughout the property. Rolling Hills of Maplewood enforces strict home maintenance standards as well as home site mles designed to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the community. A copy of the "Rolling Hills Community Lot Appearance Standards" is attached hereto as Exhibit C. It is against this backdrop that the City should assess the propriety ofthe present applications for an amendment to the Special and Conditional Use Pelmits. A Milmesota city's comprehensive plan contains objectives, policies, standards, and programs to guide public and private land use. Minn. Stat. S 473.859, Subd. 1. Cities adopt zoning ormnances to execute the policies and geals of their land use plan. MiIm. Stat. S 462.357, Subd. 1. While expressly authorized by a zoning ordinance, "conditional uses" require the zoning authority's consent because of inherent hazards or location problems. Zylka v. City of Crystal, 167 N.W.2d 45, 28-9 (Minn. 1969). Despite this discretion, a city council may deny a conditionalllse pem1it on ly for 152229.WPD Page 2 of 7 reasons relating to the public health, safety, and general welfare or for incompatibility with a city's land use plan. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. City of Afton, 323 N.W.2d 757, 763 (Minn. 1982); C.R. Investments, Inc. v. Village of Shore view, 304 N.W.2d 320, 234-35 (Minn. 1981). I. The Proposed Conditional Use Permit Is Consistent With The Present Use Of The Property. Presently, Rolling Hills of Maplewood is a manufactured home community occupied by approximately 320 manufactured homes. These hemes range in date of manufacture from 1983 through 2008. The majority of the homes in the community were manufactured in the 1980s. A list of all homes, and their year of manufacture, is attached hereto as Exhibit D. At the time of the 1983 Special Use Penllit, the City appears to have been concerned about the character of the community and, as a result, the original Special Use Pel1nit required that any homes in the cemmunity be "new". This requirement was alse included in the Conditional Use permit issued a few years later. Presently, however, requiring all homes moved into the community to be "new" is not consistent with the current use ofthe Property. In fact, permitting used homes into the community is more consistent with the Property's present use. Moreover, the City's building code officials retain the ability to inspect any homes to be moved into Rolling Hills of Maplewood. Finally, Rolling Hills of Maplewood's track record has established that it takes great care te ensure the aesthetic quality of the community. 152229.wPD Page 3 of 7 II. The Existing Restrictions On The Use Of The Property May Violate Federal And State Law.l Presently, the Special and Conditional Use Permits require that all manufactured homes in the Rolling Hills community be "new". 42 U.S.C. S 5403 (d) provides: whenever a Federal manufactured home constructien and safety slamlard established under tlus chapter is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authOlity either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any manufactured home cevered, any standard regarding construction or safety applicable to the same aspect of performance of such manufactured home which is not identical to the Federal manufactured home construction and safety standard. Federal preemption under this subsection shall be broadly and liberally construed to ensure that disparate State or local requirements or standards do not affect the uniformity and comprehensiveness ofthe standards premulgated under this section nor the Federal superintendence of the mannfactured heusing industry as established by this chapter. In this case, the Special and Conditional Use Permits appear to conflict with Federal law by requiring exclusively "new" homes in Rolling Hills. Minnesota Statutes S 394.25, subd. 3 provides in pertinent part: "No provision may prohibit . . . manufactured homes built in conformance with SS 327.31 to 327.35 that comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section." Further, an erdinance is invalid if it contains expressed or implies terms that are irreconcilable with a Mimlesota statute. Mangold Midwest Co., v. Village a/Richfield, 143 N.W.2d 813,816-17 (Minn. 1966). 1 Follett Investment Properties, Inc., does not seek any remedy other than amendments to the existing nse permits and it raises the argument regarding validity ofthe permits merely to preserve those arguments for the record. 152229.WPD Page 4 of 7 Accordingly, under the Court ef Appeals of Minnesota ruling in County of Wright v. Kennedy, 415 N.W.2d 728 (Minn.App. 1987), tins section of both the Special Use and Cenditional Use Permits may be deemed invalid. In Kennedy, the challenged county ordinance required manufactured homes, but not other dwellings, to comply with certain roof pitch and minimum width requirements. The Court held that the challenged ordinance was invalid because it applied only to manufactured homes and not to site-built homcs and was, therefore, in conflict with Miml. Stat. ;) 394.25, the same statue invoke here by Prime Ventures. As the Kennedy Court stated, "the statute required that site-constructed hemes and manufactured homes be treated identically. Zoning controls enacted by any legislative body must apply equally to manufactured 8l1d site-built homes." 415 N.W.2d at 731. In this case, the City has singled out manufactured hemes for disparate treatment because both the Special and Conditional Use Permits require that the manufactured homes in Rolling Hills be "new" but places no similar requirement on other types of housing. Accordingly, both these permits may arguably violate Minn. Stat. ;) 394.25. III. The Special and Conditional Use Permits' Restdctions On Used Homes No Longer Serve Any Legitimate Governmental Purpose. It is safe to assume that the City's goal in restricting homes in the Rolling Hills of Maplewood commU1nty to "new" homes was to ensure that the community did not beceme an eyesore for the City. I note also that Maplewood is not home to many manufactured home communities, and there was likely some trepidation on the City's part in dealing with this type of land use. 152229.WPD Page 5 of 7 Now, as the thirtieth anniversary of Rolling Hills of Maple wood approaches, I am confident the City has a very different perspective on manufactured home communities. Rolling Hills of Maplewood is an expertly maintained community that, while overwhelmingly filled with used homes, remains aesthetically pleasing to the eye. IV. The Proposed Amendment Satisfied The City Of Maple wood's Criteria For Approval. Of the ten enumerated criteria for approval relative to conditienal use permits, the instant request either satisfies the criteria or the critelia is inapplicable. I will address the ten (10) criteria in the order presented in the application materials. 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be m confonnity with the City's comprehensive plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing, or cause a nuisance te any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollutien, drainage water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would not generate any additional vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use is already served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 152229.WPD Page 6 of 7 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would have no impact on the preservation of the site's natural and scenic features. 9. The use would not cause any adverse environmental effects. It is my understanding that my client's application will be reviewed first by the City of Maplewood Planning Cemmission prior to any consideration by the City Council. I will await word of that Planning Commission hearing date. As for the enclosed checks, I calculate the application fees and other charges as follows: 1. Application fee of$l,OOO.OO per application for a total of$2,000.00. 2. $46.00 per application to pay the County for recording a City resolution for a total of $92.00. Please let me know if any further fees are required. In the meantime, if you have any questions er concems please contact me. very./ tlz,~:'~' /.;7 {~,;-;~~ Thomas F. DeVincke TFD enclosures cc: client 152229.WPD Page 7 of 7 '. .:....,O,',..:..jf'.."'h."~..'.,.... ~~)l~~~ '.// ;~N~:~'::;] 't ~./' ~:.~~\~l ......<'ant to due call or:".';, ("1e:wood, Minnesota n.,! '" :~:8;1 ,A.L:St~ day of 9ctober, ';1/" The following members were present: .... ,~.,.,,,,,,,,','-',"""-"" ..... "--~,,,,','._.-., -" ..,... .-......,- . ,-.' ..........", lolLs;' ,91.. ~nd not-ice thereof, was duly called and 1982, at 7:00 P,M. a regular meeting of the City Council. of the City of held in the Council Chambers in said City on the v Mayor Greavu; Councilmembers Anders?n, Bastian, Maida. The following members were absent: Oouncilmember Juker. Councilmerober Anderson introduced the following resolution and moved it~ adoption: 82 - 10 - 149 WHEREAS, special use procedure has been initiated by Richard Pearson for a special use permit for a 245 lot mobile home park for the following described property.: The northeast quarter of the southease quarter of Section 24, Townsh~p 29, Range 22 WHEREAS, the procedural history of this psecial use permit procedure is as follows: .1. That a special use permit has been initiated by Richard Pearson," pursuant to the Maplewood Code; 2. That said procedure was referred to and reviewed by the Maplewood City Planning Commission on the 4th day of October, 1982, at which time said Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that said rezone procedure be approved; 3. That the Maplewood City Council held a public hearing to consider the special use perrnit~ notice thereof having been published and mailed pursuant to law; and 4. That all persons present at said hearing were given an opportun~ty to be heard and/or present written statements~ and the Council considered'reports and recom- mendations of the City StafE and Planning Commission NOW, THEREFORE, EE IT RESOLVED EY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MkPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that the above described special use permit be granted on the basis of the follow- ing findings of fact: 1. A mobile home park is consistent with the c~mprehensive plan. 2. The conditioJ}s o-f the special use permit will assure compatibility with adjacent land uses. Approval is subject to the following conditions: J 1. Approval of a grading permit within one year of special use pe~mit approval. 2. Complete the following before a grading :permit is issued~ a. 'Deeding of seventeen feet of right-oE-way adjacent to Highway 120 to the State Highway Department. b. Deeding of a. thrity foot wide street and utility easement for 'Ivy Avenue, from Century Avenue to Ferndale Street. c. Approval of a grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan by the City Engineer. A cash escrQ~ or letter of credit, 'the amount to be determined by the City Engineer~ s~al1 b~ provided to guarantee co~pliance with the erosion control plan. "', b :;; jl EXHIBIT A .. ........... ...._..~.."'... ......~..,...__.....,.,. . "-~,"-"rc.~...,.~,..,..<";",.,...~...,, ,,,",-,,..,,,..., I' d. Approval of AadH shall block 1lN'1. the.turning radii on the private streets by the be designed to allow for emergency vehicles and A bus trun-around shall be allowed around block fire marshal. bus loop around "Nil. 3. There shall be no exte~ior storage of equipment, such ~s bike$, hoses, lawnmowers, rakes, etc. 4. Each lot shall be allowed one exterior storage. shed for no more than 120 square feet. 'Sueh sh~d- must be kept in workmanlike repa~'r and painted. 5. No access shall be allowed to Century Avenue. 6. No construction or grading shall be allowed to disturb the tamarack grove. 7. The private sanitary sewer, waterrnains and streets shall be constructed to be consistent with the Maplewood and ~t~ Paul water utility standards to ensure a reasonable level of service. B. All utility installations shall be uuderground. 9. The private streets must be at least 28 feet in width, with parking on one side only. 10. Water lines must be flushed at least once each yeaL or as required by the enciron- mental health officer. B Approval of this special use permit does not constitute approval of the site pl'an. The site plan and landscaping plan must be reviewed by the Community Design R~view Board. The Board shall give special consideration to: a. Varying the placement of homes on the site where practical. b. Minimizing the affect of the noise Erom Century Avenue DY berming and land-. seaping. c. Landscaping shall be placed so a~ not to hamper the removal or placement of mobile homes on the site. 12. All stormwater discharge must be directed to the wetland to the west. No con- nection to the City storm sewer shall be allowed. 13. A mobile home may not be moved onto a lot until the following is completed: a. A street is paved in front oE the lot. b. Utilities are available. c. A foundation, sidewalk and driveway are completed. d. Required trees, shrubs or be'rming must be in place. 1/ i4. Sod for lots must be in place thirty days after a lot is occupied, or a letter of credit or cash escrow deposited with the Director of Community Development to ensure installation. 15. All mobile homes 'must be new, skirted aud tieu. down. Skirting shall extend from the frame of the chassis to the ground. Skirting must be .painted to match the mobile home. Attachment 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Thomas F. DeVincke, Esquire, Mesa Dunes MNC Investors, LLC, owners of Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park, applied for a conditional use permit revision to reviseel the conditions of the conditional use permit for Rolling Hills 1 st and 2nd Addition to be allowed to place used homes in the park rather than the original requirement that all homes placed in the park be new. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located on the west siele of Century Avenue between Ivy Avenue and the Railroad tracks, addressed as 1316 Pearson Drive. The legal description is: WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows: 1. On July 6, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff publisheel a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered the reports and recommendation of city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council this permit. 2. On ,2010, the city council considereel reports anel recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council conditional use permit revision, because: the above-elescribed 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would net involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be elangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or ether nuisances. 5. The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street. 6. The use would be served by aelequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 9 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural ancl scenic features into the clevelopment design. 9. The use weuld cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions (deletions are crossed out and additions are underlined): Rolling Hills 1st Addition CUP Conditions from August 13,1984 26. Prior to the cflring thaw and until July 1, 1981, improvecl (gravel or similar material) off street l3arl<ing pads shall be flrovided for each vehicle acsociated with an occuflied unit. Unrectricted emergency vehicle access must be available at all times. 27. II, mobile home shall not be movecl onto a lot after I\flril 23, 1981 until a str-eet is l3aved in front of the lot. 28. There shall be no m<terier of equiflment, such ac bikes, hosec, la':mmowers, rakes, etc. 29. Each lot shall be allo'....ed an e)(terior storage shed of no more than 120 cquare feet. Such shecl must be kel3t in workmanlil<e reflair and flaintccl. 30. No access shall be allowecl to Century A'/enue. 21. No con8truetion or grading shall be allowed to disturb the tamaraek grove. 32. The pri'Jate canilary sewer, water mains and streets chall be censtructed te be concictent with the Maplewood and SI. Paul Water Utility standards to ensure a reasonaele level of nervice. 33.1\11 utility inntallatiens shall be underground. 31. The private streets muct be at leact 28 feet in width, with flarking on ono sido only. No l3arl<ing shall be permitted in the vicinity of intersections. The Director of Public Safety shall sl3ecify the no flarking distances for each intersection. Signs shall be pocted by the pork owner when available. 35. '.'Vater lines must be fluched at leact once each year or as requirecl ey the emironmental health official. 36. 1\11 storm water diccharge must be directecl to the wetland to the west. No connection to the city storm cewer chall bo allowecl. 37./\11 mobilo homes muct be new, skirtecl and tiod dO'Nn. SI<irting shall elGend from the frame of tho chacsic to the ground. Skirting must be painted to complement the moeile fIem&.. 38. .^.I1 tic clowns ancl foundatiens must meet the ntate building code. 39. (a) Constructien on the below grade storm chelter chall bO!jin May 11, 1981 and chall be completed by June 22, 1981, unless the Director of Public Safety extencls the deadline 10 clue to circumstanoes beyond the control of the dovelopor. (b) The decign of the below grade ctructure muct be apprevecl by the Director of Emorgenc-y Servioos, including emergenoy lighting, ventilation and canitary rocilitiec. (c) The above grade portion of the building must recoive apl3ro'Jal from the decign review bearcl before construction. (d) The storm shelter must romain free of storage ancl be kept available for uce. (e) ~lo further permitc for additicnal mobile homes shall be icsuecl until tho shelter is comflleted. 10. The sign regulations for the R3 district shall aflflly. 11. Tho following minimum setbacks shall aflflly: (5) Twonty feet to a ~ri'Jate 8treot. (6) Thirty feot to a public right of way, Ol<oeflt for storage sheds. (7) Five foot side yard setbacl'. on the side opposite the entry. (8) Twenty foot cide yard cctback on the entry side. 12. ~lo structures shall be allo'Ned in a requirecl setback, exoeflt for an acoeccory builcling, in the twenty foot cide yarcl cotback and the thirty foot cetback frem a flublic right of way. An accessory building must have a cide yarcl setbacl'. of at least five feet. 13. Sales of mobile homec shall be limited to these ownecl by flark residentc and thoce cold by the parI< owner for fllacement in the flork. 11. Tho devoloflor shalll3rovido traffio centrel sign8 as rOCluirod by the Dirootor of Public Safety. 15. Compliance with all flertinent ctate statutes ancl regulationc. 16. No variation shall be permittocl from the cite I3lan dated 3 21 83 without community design review board aflflro'ial. 17. The number of mobilo homes chall not exceecl 218. 18. This conditional uso flermit shall be reviewecl in one year to detormine compliance with cenclitions ancl whether a change in conditionc is neoessary to recolve flroblemc that may have develol3ed. 19. (a) .'\tIer Aflril23, 1981, the following improvements must be installed within cbdy dayc after a mobilo homo is fllacecl on a lot: (1) t. fla'iecl clriveway and off street flarking pacl at least sixteen foet wido and twenty foet deefl. (2) A thirty inch '""ide sicle'Nalk from the mobile home ontrance to the parking flad subjoct to fllacement of entrance deoks. (3) All required landscaping on tho lot. If the landccafling oannot be comflleted within cbcty days, a letter of oreclit of cash eccrow shall bedeflocited with the Director of Community Develoflment to encurc installatien. (1) Skirting. (b) Improvementc required in item 21 shall not al3ply te moclel home€:. 50. If any of the above conclitions arc not met, no aclclitional mobile homes chall be movecl into the l3ark. Rolling Hills 2nd Addition CUP Conditions from May 11, 1987 11 15. Compliance '.\lith ctato requirements. 17. There shall be ne exterior storage of equiflment suoh as bikes, hoces, lawnmowers, rakes, etc. 18. Each lot shall be allowecl an elGerior storage ched of no more than 120 cquar-e feet. Suoh shed muct be kept in workmanlike reflair and flaintocl. 19. Each lot shall be allowed to have ohildren's fllay equiflment unlecc the develofler provicles a tot let ac:ljaoent to the community builcling. 20. Each lot shall be allowed a cleck ancl oarl3ort, flrovided that either ctructure shall not be closer than ten feet to any adjacent dwolling. Carl30rtc shall not be clocer than six feet to a flrivate ctreet and shall not have walls. On lots along Conturj .'\venue, sheclc chall net be closer than forty seven feet to the right of way. 21. .A.II mobile homec be now, skirtecl ancl tied down. SI(irting shall extencl from the frame of the chassis to the ground. Skirting must be flainted to comfllement the mobile home. 22. .'\11 tie clownc and founclationc muct meet the state building cocle. 23. The sign regulationc for the R3 clistrict shall aflply. 21. The following minimum setbackc shall al3l3ly for dwellings: f. Twenty feet to a private street. g. Forty seven feet to the Century -"venue right of way. h. Five foot side yorcl cetback on the sicle oflflosite the entry cide. i. Twenty foot cide yard cetback on the entry sicle. j. Sevonty feet to a railroacl traclc 25. Salec ef mobile homes shall be limited to those ownecl by parl( residentc and thoce cold by the l3ark owner for placement in the l3arlc 25. The cterm 8helter shall be kept free of 8torage. Tho 8helter shall be l(el3t open at all times or keys shall bo made available to all resiclentc in a manner te be aPl3ro'Jecl by the Diroctor of Emergenoy Services. 27. The oity chall not be resl30nsible for maintaining any ef the internal imflro'/ementc. 28. Water lines chall be flushed at loast once a year. 29. Parking shall only bo permitted on ono sicle of each ctreet. No flarkin!l chall be permitted closer than thirty foot to any interceotion. 30. J\dherence to the approved site I3lan ancl rolated ooncliticnc. Any cignificant change must be aflflrOvecl by the community design review board. Minor changes may be aflflroved by ctaff. 12 Revised/Combined Motion for both the Rolling Hills 1st and 2nd Additions 17. Compliance with all building code requirements. 18. There shall be no exterior storage of equipment such as bikes, hoses, lawn mowers, rakes, etc. 19. Each lot shall be allowed an exterior storage shed of no more than 120 square feet. Sheds must be kept in good repair. 20. Each lot shall be allowed to have children's play equipment unless the developer provicles a tot lot adjacent to the community building. 21. All mobile hemes shall be skirted and tied clown. Skirting shall extend from the frame of the chassis to the grouncl. Skirting must match the mobile home. 22. Manufactured homes to be placecl in the park are no longer required to be new. All homes to be moved into the park must meet all currrent building code and fire cocle requirements. 23. The sign regulations for the R3 district shall apply. 24. The following minimum setbacks shall apply for dwellings: . Twenty feet to a private street. . Thirty feet to any public right-of-way for homes in the 1 st Addition. . Forty-seven feet to the Century Avenue right-of-way for homes in the 2nd Addition. . Five foot side yarcl setback on the side opposite the entry side. . Twenty foot side yard setback on the entry side. . Seventy feet to a railroad track. . Ten feet to any adjacent dwelling for a deck or car port. . Six feet to a private street for a carport (carports shall not have walls). . Forty-seven feet to the Century Avenue right-of-way for a shed in the 2nd Addition. 25. Sales of mobile homes shall be limited te those owned by park residents and those sold by the park owner for placement in the park. 26. The storm shelter shall be kept free of storage. The shelter shall be kept open at all times or keys shall be made available to all residents in a manner to be approved by the Director of Public Safety. 27. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining all internal improvements. 28. Water lines shall be flushed at least once a year. 29. Parking shall only be permitted on one side of each street. No parking shall be permitted closer than thirty feet to any intersection. These requirements are subject to the review and approval of the police chief. 13 30. There shall be no driveway access to Century Avenue or Ivy Avenue from the individual manufactured home sites. 31. Internal traffic signs shall be installed subject to the approval of the police chief. 32. Adherence to the approved site plan and related conditions. Any significant change must be approved by the community design review boarcl. Minor changes may be approvecl by staff. The number of home sites shall not be increased without the revision of this conclitional use permit. The Maplewood City Council this resolution on ,2010. 14 AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Planning Commission Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager Public Hearing: 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan June 30, 2010 INTRODUCTION As part of the budget process, the City annually prepares a Capital Improvement Plan to help estimate the major capital expenses and projects that will have an impact on the debt levels and levy expenditures in the next 5-year period. The Capital Improvement Plan, or CIP, is a planning tool and does not authorize projects or purchases, but allows the City Council to review these expenditures and provide direction on the overall capital goals for the City. The staff has been working on various requests and plans since March 2010. After establishment of goals by the City Council, the plan is prepared and projects recommended, along with a list of the projects that, based upon the staff recommendations, are deferred or listed as declined, which is also called unfunded needs. The CIP is presented to the Planning Commission to conduct a Public Hearing on conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council will consider adopting the Final CIP on July 26'h SUMMARY *NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS*: The full version of the draft Capital Improvement Plan is available to view on the City's webpage. For Commission members, who wish a full version of the CIP, please contact City staff and a document will be printed for you. We are attempting to reduce the printing and paper costs and making the document available electronically for review is part of the City sustainability efforts. We have attached significant pages to this report for discussion. The proposed expenditures are grouped by category of project. For example, equipment, parks, redevelopment, etc. As shown on the attached chart, the total proposed CIP for 2011 - 2015 is $65,735,385. The final chart lists the projects that were proposed by the staff, but due to funding limitations are recommended to be deferred / declined. A total of $54,223,410 of projects deemed necessary by the staff are recommended to be declined in the next 5 years. Included later in this report is a list of the major revisions proposed by staff to meet the financial needs of a 0% capital project funding increase. The number of projects along with the dollar volume of projects in the declined list has more than doubled from $21,409,872 in the 2010 - 2014 CIP to the current proposal. Over 40% of the staff requests for projects are recommended to be deferred due to lack of funding. The overall level of City debt is projected to decrease as part of this plan, from a proposed debt level of $76,157,297 in 2011 [which is slightly increased from the 2010 level of 74,922,297] to a project debt level of $65,974,630. The reason for the high number of projects being declined / deferred is that the Council will need to give direction on the level of tax increase or increased funding to the debt service fund. The plan presented to the Council previously based upon a 5% levy increase did not provide for new funding dedicated to new capital expenditures for either public improvement projects, capital expenditures at City Hall, the MCC or other City buildings, or for new equipment. As the Council proceeds to debate the requested expenditures during July along with giving direction on the allocation of any new funding for 2011 and beyond, additional projects and/or expenditures at the MCC and City Hall will be programmed into the final CIP document. Page 1 of 36 2011 - 2015 Capital I mprovement Plan Page Two Summarv of 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan The following documents are attached to provide information for Commissioners to review the Capital Improvement Plan and provide a recommendation to the City Council: 1. Transmittal Letter: this letter provides a summary of the document along with thoughts on the debt and a recommendation from the Assistant City Manager, who was responsible for preparation of the plan, and the City Manager, who directs the overall operations of the City. 2. Highlights of the Capital Improvement Plan: this summary page identifies the trends of the past plans. This year's version is a 15.5% decrease in proposed expenditures from last year's version and is essentially equal to the proposed total expenditures from two years ago. 3. Projects for 2011: this summary shows the $17,212,230 of projects proposed for 2011. 4. General Community Development Information: this summary provides the basis for the review by the Planning Commission. The role of the Commission is to consider whether this CIP is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This section has been prepared by the Planning staff and indicates the likely development and City growth in the next five years. 5. Debt Transactions: this summary indicates past and future debt for the proposed projects. 6. Debt per capita: this summary projects city debt based upon the number of people in the City. 7. Debt per market value: this summary projects city debt based on market value. 8. Summary of projects: these four charts provide a summary of all projects listed within the next five year period by Department; by Funding Source; by Project Category and by Neighborhood. 9. Declined Projects: the $54,223,410 that has not been identified for funding over the next five years is listed. The projects are further defined later in this report. Deferred - Declined Proiects The following revisions from the original staff requests/recommendations for projects and expenditures have been implemented to meet the 0% growth on Capital project expenditures plan: Ambulance Service Fund . An ambulance proposed for replacement in 2013 was moved to 2014 . An ambulance proposed for replacement in 2015 was moved to unfunded. Bonds - GO Funding . Expansion of the Police Department in 2015 was moved to unfunded. . Replacement/repair of a Fire Station in 2015 was moved to unfunded. . Improvement of streets in East Shore Drive area in 2014-15 was moved to unfunded. . Improvement of Lakewood - Sterling Streets in 2011 was delayed to 2012. . Improvement of Pond - Dorland Streets in 2012 delayed to 2014. . Annual City-wide sidewalk improvements were moved to unfunded. . Improvement of County Road D Ct, E of TH 61 in 2014 was moved to 2015. . Improvement of Beebe Road in 2014 was moved to 2015. . Edgerton - Roselawn area storm sewer improvements in 2014 was moved to unfunded. . County Road C area street improvements in 2014 were moved to unfunded. . Signal proposed at County Road D and Hazelwood in 2014 was moved to unfunded. . Improvement of Crestview - Highland area streets in 2012 was moved to 2013. . Improvement of Bartlemy-Meyer area streets in 2013 was moved to 2014. . Improvement of Farrell-Ferndale area streets in 2014 was moved to 2015. . Improvement of Ferndale-Ivy area streets in 2013-14 was moved to unfunded. . Improvement of Dennis-McClelland area streets in 2014-15 was moved to unfunded. . Improvement of Montana-Nebraska area streets in 2015 was moved to unfunded. Page 2 of 36 2011 - 2015 Capital I mprovement Plan Page Three Deferred - Declined Proiects (continued) CIP Fund . City Hall security system improvements in 2011-15 were moved to unfunded. . Replacement of Carpet in Police and Public Works in 2014-15 was moved to unfunded. . Funding for Community Field Upgrades and Park Equipment was reduced by 50%. IT Fund . Replacement of the Phone System in 2011-12 was delayed to 2013 . Installation of Fiber Optic Network for City use in 2012-13 was delayed to 2014 MCC Fund . Exterior Painting in 2011 was delayed to 2013/14 . Replacement of the Gym Roof in 2015 was moved to unfunded . Repairs in the lap-leisure pool in 2011-12 was moved to unfunded . Replacement of 3 boilers in 2013 was moved to unfunded . Replacement of carpet in 2013/15 was moved to unfunded . Replacement of exercise equipment in 2012 was moved to 2014 . Replacement of the sand filter in 2014-15 was moved to unfunded . Installation of a UVTS Treatment System in 2011-12 was moved to unfunded. Park Development Fund . Gethsemane Park Purchase and Improvements in 2012 was moved to unfunded. . Improvements to Goodrich Park in 2011-13 were reduced by 50%. . Improvements to Joy Park in 2013-14 were reduced by 50%. . Annual Trail Improvements in 2011-15 was moved to unfunded. . Annual I mprovements to Open Space areas in 2011-15 was moved to unfunded. Sanitary Sewer Fund . Pipe Lining and Sump Pump Programs in 2011-13 were moved to unfunded. Redevelopment Fund . Annual Housing Replacement Program in 2011-15 was moved to unfunded. . Annual Commercial Property Redevelopment Program in 2011-15 was moved to unfunded. . Hillcrest Area Redevelopment Improvements in 2013-15 was moved to unfunded. Environmental Utility Fund . Proposed annual undesignated projects for Non-degradation were moved to unfunded. . Proposed Improvements to City Campus in 2011-12 were moved to unfunded. Fire Truck Replacement Fund . Replacement of one truck in 2010 was moved to 2011. . Replacement of one truck in 2014 was moved to 2015. Fleet Management Fund . Various equipment purchases were delayed to reduce expenditures by $150,000 per year. . Various equipment purchases totaling in excess of $500,000 were moved to unfunded list. Page 3 of 36 2011 - 2015 Capital I mprovement Plan Page Three Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan has numerous sections that can be reviewed to be consistent with this Capital Improvement Plan. The following comments are provided for consideration: Sustainability/Environmental: This plan provides for a future investment in environmental projects. 1. Fire Training Facility: this project proposes to implement many of the provisions of the Marshlands concept for the vacant MnDOT property at TH 5 and TH120. A grant from Ramsey County will be dedicated to $750,000 worth of environmental cleanup of this site, along with the introductions of wetland enhancement and trail improvements. A vision of an environmental classroom that is part of the final fire facility is planned. 2. Wetland Enhancement Program: This program is proposed to continue, albeit at a much reduced level from previous years. The numbers of wetlands to be improved will not likely decrease due to the reductions in this program, as the focus for wetland enhancement has been combined with the street improvement projects. 3. Fish Creek Open Space: this project provides for the protection of over 20 acres of the most critical open space property on the former CoPar property by implementing a development of the northern 25 acres to pay debt on the purchase of the open space property. 4. Gladstone Savanna Improvements: as part of Phase I of the Gladstone redevelopment initiative at the Tourist Cabin Property, funds will be identified for the redevelopment and cleanup of the Gladstone Savanna. 5. Street Improvement projects: as noted previously, these projects are the focus for the City's effort to meet the storm water requirements of the City's NPDES permit. The projects will implement an infiltration requirement and as neighborhoods approach an improvement and reconstruction of their infrastructure, the environmental footprint of that neighborhood is transformed into a more environmentally friendly impact. Redevelopment: 1. Gladstone Phases I, II and III: the redevelopment initiative continues with three projects planned in the next five years within the Gladstone area. 2. TH 36 - English Interchange: this major project will remove the signal on TH 36 at English and replace it with an interchange with English Street above TH 36. This will provide an opportunity to consider a redevelopment of the area beginning in 2014. 3. Hillcrest Redevelopment: this important project has not been funded. 4. Commercial Property Redevelopment: this important project has not been funded. 5. Housing Replacement Program: this important project has not been funded. Recommendation The Planning Commission should conduct a Public Hearing on the Capital Improvement Plan proposed for 2011 - 2015. Upon completion of the Public Hearing, it is recommended the 2011 - 2015 Capital I mprovement Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Planning Commission should recommend adoption of the CIP by the City Council. Attachments: 1. Transmittal Letter 2. Highlights of Capital Improvement Plan 3. Projects for 2011 4. Community Development Information 5. Debt Transactions; Debt per Capita; Debt per Market Value 6. 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Declined Projects by Department 7. 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Projects Grouped by Funding Source 8. 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Projects Grouped by Project Category 9. 2011 - 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Projects Grouped by Neighborhood 10. 2011- 2015 Capital Improvement Plan Declined Projects Page 4 of 36 Attachment 1 Mayer and City Council Henorable Mayer and Council Members: The 2011 - 2015 Proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the City of Maplewood is submitted herewith. The intent of this decument is to coordinate the planning, financing and timing of major equipment purchases and censtructien projects. The document Is divided Inte four sectiens: Introductien, Debt Capacity and Financing Strategy, Project Details, and Appendix. The focus of this CIP is on the maintenance and protection of the City's existing assets, Its buildings and streetslinfrastructure. The staff has spent numerous hours of analysis in an attempt te provide the most cost-effective and prioritized prejects fer 2011 - 2015 te meet that focus. Highlights of the 2010 - 2014 CIP are: 1. In 2007 and 2008, the City Council was presented with plans to advance roadway recenstructien projects to take advantage of competitive pricing and te address a deteriorating roadway system. The plan called for an annual expenditure of $10,000,000 through 2012 for neighberhood street upgrades. This advanced plan has resulted in very faverable bids In 2007,2008,2009 and again in 2010 that have provided savings in the program approaching 25-30% ef the estimated cests. This expanded program has resulted in a majer increase in debt service payments in the current and future years. Due to the Ceuncll's desire te reduce the ameunt ef City debt and stabilize the tax levy for debt service, the CIP no longer reflects that expanded effert and a number of projects have been deferred te minimize debt levy increases. The cost savings of advancing projects is continuing in 2010. The City debt service levels are projected to begin a reduction but not until 2014 er 2015, se this CIP reflects a slowing down of the investment in infrastructure. If the City Ceuncil wishes te censider advancing addltlenal projects, an allecatlen of the debt levy will be needed fer this program. The projections for expenses to this program begins to diminish in 2011 and continues at a lower level through 2014 as planned expenditures are reduced to the $5-6 million ameunt which is down from the projected level ef $10-12 million in 2007 - 2010. Expenditures thereafter should be lewer as Maplewood streets are upgraded to more of a maintenance level rather than a reconstruction need. 2. The Gladstene redevelopment initiative is reflected in this plan. Major improvements totaling $5,300,000 are planned for Phase 1 in 2010 and 2011, plus an additional $1,200,000 fer the Gladstene Savana in 2011. The second phase ef the redevelopment is estimated te be delayed from the original plan in 2012 to 2013-14 at $3,500,000 and the third phase has been delayed in this plan at $5,750,000 from 2014 to 2015. The staff reviewed redevelopment plans fer ether areas of the Community and reviewed eptlons fer beginning the Hillcrest Area Redevelopment during this timeframe. Unfertunately, funding limitations required that the Hillcrest Area Redevelopment initiative net be started until Gladstone is completed, which delays that important project to pest-2015. Page 5 of 36 2 Attachment 1 3. Develepment of a Master Trail Plan was a prierity for the City in 2008 and 2009. This Plan prieritizes the use of PAC fees for the acquisitien and censtructien in existing parks and requires the delay of trail corridors and trail extensiens. Censtruction of the transpertation and recreational components to meet citizen needs and desires for trail cennections and corridors throughout the community will remain within street projects as part of the reconstructien program and as a part of ceordinated projects with Ramsey County and MnDOT. Some trail projects in 2011 continue with expenditures for trail develepment as well as trails at and near Jey Park and Lions Park. 4. Additional improvements were propesed te centinue building maintenance of City facilities at City Hall and Mapleweod Community Center. The Maplewoed Cemmunity Center is unable te support eperatienal costs due to nearly 45% of these costs for large increases in replacement ef mechanical and building features. These requests have been delayed for a number ef years due to the need for financial adjustments to the MCC Fund. Additional improvements at City Hall have alse been delayed due to the lack of a dedicated funding source. As the Council debates the levy fer 2011, censideration needs te be given to dedicate funds to these needs. The improvements have been removed from the CIP reflecting this lack ef funding and are shown in the deferred/declined list. 5. Replacement of vehicles and equipment in the Fleet Management Fund reflects a need te delay the replacement ef equipment. An annual expenditure ef $300,000 to $350,000 is proposed for the planning period for replacements. This has meant a significant deferral of needed replacements that will add to maintenance costs. 6. The Park Develepment Fund is shewing a centinued slew down of revenues as the housing market and building of cemmercial industrial facilities slows due to the slewing ecenomy. A number of projects have been delayed or deferred from the requests ef the Park Commission. 7. A new additien te the 2011-2015 CIP is the planned Fire Training Facility. The East Metro area is lacking in a quality fire training facility. This facility will allew firefighters to enhance their skills in a safe environment. Much ef the cest ef this facility will be financed with grants including the grant of the land from MnDOT. The facility will utilize wind, solar and geethermal technelegies. A joint pewers agreement will enable costs to be berne by the many metropelitan area fire departments that will benefit from it. 8. TH 36 and English Street will be under pressure to be revised te an interchange due to the project that removed signals from TH 36 in Nerth St. Paul. Funding is proposed for a major interchange project in 2014-2015. Mest funding, $12,000,000 ef the $14,800,000 tetal will come need to come from grants and MnDOT seurces. The total 2011 - 2015 CIP reflects a reduced investment in capital program. This CIP, which differs dramatically from past years, shows an 13.1 % decrease from the previous year's program. Significant re-prioritizing ef funds shows that investment is propesed te decrease fer buildings, equipment and Public Works, while Parks and redevelepment improvements are identified fer substantial increases. The 2010 - 2014 CIP was a $77.76 Million plan, while the 2011 - 2015 CIP is a $65.73 Million plan. Much of this decreased cost is directly attributable to the delay and deferral ef projects due to limited funding optiens. The 2010-2014 CIP included grants of $13,900,000 while the 2011-2015 CIP includes grants in the ameunt ef $16,300,000. Page 6 of 36 3 Attachment 1 As with the previous year, a sectien of this CIP is listed within the Appendix ef Deferred Prejects. These are projects that were recemmended by staff and Commissions and are significant needs within the City. An analysis of the impacts of these projects identified that funding is not available under current programs tetallng $54,233,410. in the 2010 - 2014 CIP the Deferred Projects liste was for $21 ,409,672 worth of projects, which is a 253% increase in deferred-delayed projects and directly attributable to the lack ef funding dedicated to capital replacement. If other funds become available, these projects may be recensidered in future years. The property tax impact of projects included in this CIP was evaluated. Estimates were prepared of the new tax levies that will be required te support these projects assuming that new bonds will be issued to finance CIP projects. For 2009, the city's total tax levy was $16,670,046 and ef that ameunt, $3,624,702 was for debt service on bend issues. The tetal Debt outstanding for Maplewoed is propesed to reach $76,157,297 in 2011 based upon the current plan within this CIP. 2010 total debt is $79,047,297. The City's tetal debt is limited by statute to net mere than 3% of market value of taxable preperty of the City. Very little of the debt ef the City, approximately $2,000,000 is actually subject te the legal debt margin. Staff continues to moniter tetal city debt as a percent ef market value with the intention of keeping total debt within 2%. With the new debt projected by this CIP, the City will remain at or below that objective at 2.0 declining to 1.6% by 2015. It is recemmended that the CIP be formally adepted by the City Ceuncil fellowing a Public Hearing that is required to be held by the Planning Commission. As part of this adoption process, a strong commitment is needed to follow the construction and financing schedule for the public improvement projects planned for 2011. This allews the City's engineering staff to be fully utilized and will minimize the need for censultant engineers. Also, it will facilitate the planning fer the year 2011 bend issue by the Finance Department. The CIP, by design, is a planning teol for City staff and elected officials. The CIP gives the City Council the flexibility to proceed with the proposed projects based en the political, economic, and financial realities ef each year. After the CIP has been fermally adepted by the City Ceuncil, the projects scheduled for 2011 will be included in the Proposed 2011 Budget decument. This will provide the City Council anether opportunity te review the preposed year 2011 prejects. The 2011 - 2015 CIP presents an excellent combinatien of maintenance and redevelopment projects. By proceeding with these scheduled improvements, the City Council can be assured the City's infrastructure, facility and equipment needs meet these of its citizens. R. Charles Ahl Assistant City Manager James W. Antenen City Manager Page 7 of 36 4 Attachment 2 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The five-year total expenditures within the 2011-2015 C.I.P. are $65,735,385. Changes by project category over the last C.LP. are as follows: 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 C.I.P C.I.P C.I.P Buildings $1,311,000 $4,365,599 $3,849,000 Redevelopment 12,250.000 10.625.000 14,550.000 Equipment 3,285,098 3,731,659 3,089,185 Parks 2,165,000 6,300,000 6,900,000 Public Works 46,748,000 52,741,499 37.347.200 TOTALS 565,759,098 $77,763,757 $65,735,385 Increase (Decrease) Amount Percent (516,599) -11.8% 3,925.000 36.9% (642,474) -17.2% 600,000 9.5% (15,394,299) -29.20/0 (12,028,372) -15.5% The five largest projects within the C.I.P. are as follows: 1. TH 36 - En!jlish Intersection Improvements - $14,800,000 Contruction of this project is planned for 2014. With the recent improvements along TH36, this is the only remaining signaled intersection. $2.5 million of City funding is anticipated with the rest coming from grants and other state funding. 2. Western HillslLarpenteur Area Streets - $5,980,000 Contruction of this project is planned for 2011. The majority of the streets will require full reconstruction. 3. Gladstone Phase III - $5.750.000 Phase III includes improvements along Frost Avenue from English Street through Hazelwood. Improvements include burial of power lines, streetscape, new roadways, new storm water initiatives and utility extensions. Phases I and II will precede this project with a total anticipated cost of $7,715,000. 4. Gladstone Area Streetscape Phase 1-$5.300.000 Construction of this project is planned for 2011. The majority afthe project will include improvements that are coordinated with the redevelopment of the Tourist Cabin property. 5. CrestviewlHiqhwood Area Streets - $4.779.700 Contruction of this project is planned for 2013. The majority of the streets will require partial reconstruction while others will require full reconstruction due to utilities improvements. Details regarding the projects included within the C.LP. are in the third section of this document. The projects are grouped by neighborhoods and there is a separate page for each project. There are 51 projects in the current C.I.P. The 2010-2014 C.I.P. had 71 projects. Page 8 of 36 5 Attachment 3 PROJECTS SCHEDULED FOR 2011 PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CATEGORY COST F009.030 Fire Training Facility Buildings 5570.000 $570.000 F003.020 Replacement of Fire Truck Equipment $449.730 F008.010 Ambulance Replacement Equipment 117.500 PW09.010 JetIVac Truck Equipment 325.000 5892.230 PM10.010 Wetland Enhancement Program Parks $25.000 PM11.010 Fish Creek Open Space Parks 2,250.000 PM11.02 Goodrich Park Improvements Parks 100.000 PM03.010 Joy Park Improvements Parks 50.000 PM03.060 Joy Park Improvements Parks 100.000 PM07.010 Community Field Upgrades Parks 25.000 PM08.040 Park Equipment, Fence and Court Replacement Parks 20.000 PM08.050 Gladstone Savanna Improvements Parks 1.200.000 53.770.000 PW07.060 Western Hills!Larpenteur Area Streets Public Works 5.780.000 PW07.100 TH 36-English Intersection Improvements Public Works 800.000 PW08.100 Sterling Street, Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr. Public Works 100.000 56,680.000 CD04.010 Gladstone Area Streetscape - Phase 1 Redevelopment 55.300.000 55.300.000 Grand Total 517.212.230 Page 9 of 36 13 Attachment 4 GENERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION Community Growth The population of Maplewood has been increasing steadily. The following table shows the recent and projected population and housing trends: Population. Households and Household Size 1990 2000 2008' 2010 2020 2030 Occupied Housing Units 11,496 13,758 14,890 15,600 16,650 18,150 Household Size (people per household) 2.69 2.56 2.47 2.40 2.31 2.25 Population 30,954 35,258 36,717 37,500 38,500 40,900 Sources: Metropolitan Council and City Staff . Metropolitan Council Estimate from April 1, 2008 Undeveloped Land Included on the next page is a map showing the location of the undeveloped land in the city. Most of the undeveloped residential land is in the south ';Ieg" of the city. Nearly all of the undeveloped commercial land is in the north end of the city, near Maplewood Mall. In addition to retail and office development in this area, the city expects construction to continue at the 3M campus in south Maplewood. Proiected Population City staff made the population estimates through the year 2015 based in part on the 2000 Census, Metropolitan Council data and from staff research. For the purposes of this document, staff assumed that population in Maplewood will increase at a rate of 100 people per year in 2010 through 2015, based on Metropolitan Council forecasts and projections. Page 10 of 36 18 ent 4 II. . IiJg./tI,er 11> Livj .. Maplewood's Undeveloped land Streets ~ Commercial Residential Water & D r'- -~. fi(:;~' ;. 0 . .,.. ~ .', 19 Table 1. Attachment 4 MAPLEWOOD POPULA TION STA TIS TICS ESTlMA TED POPULA TlON NEW OCCUPIED YEAR POPULA TlON GAIN DWELLING UNITS HOUSEHOLD UNITS 1995 32,935 515 284 12,826 1996 33,295 360 137 12,963 1997 33,943 648 372 13,335 1998 34,412 469 182 13,517 1999 34,723 311 139 13,656 2000 35,258 535 102 13,758 2001 35,403 145 129 13,899 2002 35,592 189 284 14,040 2003 35,762 170 92 14,181 2004 35,957 195 102 14,322 2005 36,107 150 71 14,463 2006 36,397 290 207 14,604 2007 36,530 133 108 14,745 2008 36,717 187 121 14,890 2009 37,109 392 121 15,240 2010 37,500 391 70 15,600 2011 37,600 100 70 15,687 2012 37,700 100 70 15,774 2013 37,800 100 50 15,861 2014 37,900 100 50 15,948 2015 38,000 100 50 16,125 Sources: Estimated Population 2000 - U.S. CENSUS 1995-2015 - Met Council Estimates 2008-2015 - City of Maplewood Staff Estimates New Dwelling Units City of Maplewood Permit Applications Occupied Household Units 2000 - U.S. CENSUS 1995-2008 - Met Council Estimates 2008-2015 - City of Maplewood Staff Estimates Page 12 of 36 20 Chart 1 e 30000 o ~ ~ 35000 o 11. 34000 Chart 2 e .2 1ii :; c. o 11. 300 Attachment 4 40000 I Estimated Population 1995 to 2015 - - - - - c- - - - - - c- - - - - c- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - c- - - - - c- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - - - I-- - - ~ - ~ I-- ~ ~ - ~ I-- ~ ~ - ~ I-- - ~ - ~ I-- - '-i 39000 38000 37000 33000 32000 31000 30000 #$~~~#########~#~~~~~ Year 700 Maplewood Population 1995 to 2015 estimated annual gains (persons per year) r- ~ r- 000 500 400 200 100 o en m m "' m '" c- m m OJ m '" m m '" o o o N o o '" o o 3 o en "' o 0 """. 0 c- o o OJ o o '" o o o o N o '" o ;! o en o o o o Page 13 of 36 21 2.500 2.000 1.500 "" j e o 1.000 0.500 1.564 Attachment 4 Maplewood Population 1995 . 2015 ANNUAL ESTIMATED RATES OF GROWTH (percentage population increase each year) 1.909 1.517 1.05f 1.043 0.265 O. 0.263 0.266 0.265 0.000 co '"' '"' '"' '" 0 0; N co "" '" '"' '"' '"' '" 0 N co "" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Year Page 14 of 36 22 Beaver lake Parkside Hillside Hazelwood Sherwood Glen Gladstone Highwood Maplewood Heights Vista Hills Kohlman lake Western Hills Battle Creek Carver Ridge Attachment 4 City of Maplewood Population by Neighborhood o 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 III Fully Developed c:J2000 Census 2000 Census Fullv Developed Beaver Lake 4,888 5,646 Parkside 4,658 5,028 Hillside 3,520 4,934 Hazelwood 3,290 3,895 Sherwood Glen 3,599 3,767 Gladstone 3,235 3,586 Highwood 2,706 3,106 Maplewood Heights 2,298 2,929 Vista Hills 2,519 2,845 Kohlman Lake 1,588 2,490 Western Hills 1,363 1,471 Ballle Creek 1,138 1,470 Carver Ridge 145 724 Total 34,947 41,891 Page 15 of 36 ':\CIP\2011-2015\Page 22 Population by Neighborhood.xls 23 Attachment 5 DEBT CAPACITY During the preparation of this Capital Improvement Plan, the City's present and future debt capacity was evaluated. This was done to determine the amow1t of additional bonds that could bc issued to finance the projects that were requested by departments for the Capital Improvement Plan. The primary emphasis ofthe debt capacity analysis was to determine the amount of debt that could be issued without causing a dmvngrading ofthe City's bond rating. Also, the analysis included a projection of the City's legal debt margin which is the difference between the maximum debt allowed under state law and the amount of debt outstanding. Bond ratings are based on economic, debt, administrative, and tiscal factors. Consequently, ratings are subjective and there is not a formula that can be f()Uowed to calculate a bond rating. However, there are two quantitative measures for comparing relative debt burdens: debt per capita and the ratio of debt to tax base. Unfortunately there are not any absolute benchmarks as to what these ratios should be. Until ] 998 Moody's Investors Service annually published medians that indicated averages based upon population categories of cities. At this writing, the City's rating from Moody's is Aa2. The analysis of Maple wood's debt capacity included a review of data for the past five years on debt ratios and bond ratings. Also, the analysis included a projection of future debt transactions, population changes, tax base growth, and debt ratios. The amount of debt anticipated to be issued in 2011-2015 is $29,255,000. Most of the bonds planned to be issued between 2011 and 2015 will be J()r public works improvements. Debt transactions and outstanding debt for 2006-2015 are shown on the next two pages. Page 16 of 36 25 Attachment 5 DEBT TRANSACTIONS PAST FIVE YEARS AND NEXT FIVE YEARS New Less Debt Debt Debt Escrow Net Debt Year Issued Paid Outstanding Funds Outstanding 2006 Balance Forward 58,842,297 (2,560,000) 56,282,297 2007 15,150,000 (4,220,000) 69,772,297 (2,560,000) 67,212,297 2008 11,040,000 (5,460,000) 75,352,297 (2,560,000) 72,792,297 2009 7,370,000 (l 0,1 05,000) 72,6] 7,297 (2,560,000) 70,057,297 20]0 15,915,000 (9,485,000) 79,047,297 (4,125,000) 74,922,297 20ll 8,065,000 (l0,955,000) 76,157,297 0 76,]57,297 2012 4,710,000 (7,340,000) 73,527,297 0 73,527,297 2013 4,305,000 (7,877,458) 69,954,839 0 69,954,839 2014 5,850,000 (8,004,672) 67,800,167 0 67,800,167 20]5 6,325,000 (8,150,537) 65,974,630 0 65,974,630 Page 17 of 36 26 Attachment 5 C.I.P IMPACT ON CITY DEBT 2006 TO 2015 - CURRENT AND PROJECTED $80,000,000 $75,000,000 $/0,000,000 $65,000,000 $60,000,000 $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $4:),000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5.000,000 $0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 d PROJECTED L CURRENT Page 18 of 36 27 Attachment 5 Population projections jflr the next five years were made in order to project the debt per capita. (Debt per capita is calculated by dividing the outstanding debt by the population.) These projections are explained at the end of Section] under the heading General Community Development Information. The J()lIowing table is a compilation of the preceding projections: PROJECTED DEBT PER CAPITA Debt Outstanding Debt Per Capita Without With Without With New New Projected New New Year Debt Debt Population Debt Debt 2011 68,092,297 76,157,297 37,600 1,811 2,025 2012 6] ,242,297 73,527,297 37,700 ],624 1,950 2013 54,234,839 69,954,839 37,800 1,435 ],85] 2014 47,3 70,16 7 67,800,]67 37,900 1,250 U89 2015 40,849,630 65,974,630 38,000 1,075 ],736 The data in the above table is displayed in the graph on the next page. Page 19 of 36 28 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 o DEBT PER CAPITA 2006 TO 2015 . CURRENT AND PROJECTED 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Attachment 5 2014 2015 ___ MAPLEWOOD-CURRENT MAPLEWOOD-PROJECTED 29 Page 20 of 36 Attachment 5 The ratio of debt to tax base was also analyzed. This ratio is calculated by dividing the debt outstanding by the estimated full market value of Maplewood's tax base. The estimated full markct value of the City's tax base was projected for 2011-2015 based upon the assumption that it would decrease by 2'% in 2011, not change in2012 and increase by 2% in 2013, 2% in 2014 and 3%, in 2015. The following table is a compilation ofthc preceding projections: PROJECTED DEBT TO MARKET VALUE Debt Outstanding Debt To Market Valne Without With Projected Without With New New Tax Base New New Year Debt Debt Market Value Debt Debt 2011 68,092,297 76,157,297 3,823,787,520 1.8%) 2.0'% 2012 61,242,297 73,527,297 3,823,787,520 1.6IJtQ 1.9% 2013 54,234,839 69,954,839 3,900,263,270 1.4%) 1.8% 2014 47,370,167 67,800,167 3,978,268,536 1. 270 1.7% 2015 40,849,630 65,974,630 4,097,616,592 1.0%) 1.6% The data in the above table is graphically displayed on the next page. Page 21 of 36 30 Attachment 5 RATIO OF DEBT TO MARKET VALUE 2006 TO 2015 - Current and Projected 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 -II>- MAPLEWOOD-CURRENT ....+... MAPLEVVOOD-PROJEC1ED Page 22 of 36 31 Attachment 5 City bonds have an "Aa+" rating from Standard and Poor's Investor Rating Serviee aeeording to their report dated April 8, 2010. The previous rating was "Aa2" by Moody's Investors Serviee aeeording to their report dated Mareh 6, 2009. The switch in rating services results in a conversion to compare ratings. A rating of "Aa+" Ii-om Standard and Poor's is comparable to an "Aal" rating by Moody's which means an increased f(Jr the City. The last rating increase lrom "A-]" to "Aa" in ] 989 was due to "continued growth and diversification of the City's economy, strength and long-term stability of its dominant taxpayer and well maintained finances add to margins of protection for debt which poses a moderate burden." The increase in the rating was partially due to a globalization by the rating industry to make ratings of government general obligation debt comparable to the ratings of cOllxJrate debt of equal risk. In addition, Standard and Poor's noted continual strength and stability of Maplewood's dominant tax payers and well maintained tlnances and investment in infrast111cture as overall strength. Only about 8%, of Standard and Poor's ratings nationwide are "Aa+" or better. The projected debt ratios indicate that Maplewood will probably be able to maintain its present bond ratings through 2015. Another important factor related to the City's debt capacity is the State legal debt limit. This limit is 3.0%, of the assessor's market value of the City's tax base. Bond issues covered by this limit are those that are financed by property taxes unless at least 20% of the annual debt service costs are financed by special assessments or tax increments. Maplewood has three debt issues that are subject to the debt limit in 20] ] -20] 5. The difference between the statutory debt limit and the bonds outstanding that are covered by the debt limit is referred to as the legal debt margin. The table below shows Maplewood's legal debt margin for the years 2011-20]5. It indicates that the City is currently and will be significantly under tlle legal debt limit for the entire period. Projection of Legal Debt Margin December 31 2011 2012 2013 20,4 2015 :',,1arket value of taxable properly $3,9,9,846,000 S3,916,1l9,000 $4,014,405,000 $4,215,269,000 S4,355,435,000 Statutory debt limit 3.0% of market value 11l,595,380 1,9,303,310 122,232,150 ,26,458,010 130,663,050 Amount of debt aoolicable to debt limit: Open Space Refunding Bonds 20020 1,400,000 1,070,000 725,000 365,000 0 Capital Improvement Plan Bonds 20040 545,000 515,000 485,000 455,000 420,000 Equipment Certificates 2006B 65,000 0 0 0 0 Total debt applicable to debt limit 2,010,000 1,585,000 1,210,000 820,000 420,000 Legal debt margin 1,5,585,380 117,/18,310 ,21,022,150 125,638,070 130,243,050 Page 23 of 36 32 Attachment 6 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY DEPARTMENT Status: Accepted Pf?OJECT NUMBEF? C004,O:O C009,020 C009,030 F003,020 F006,020 F008,01O F009,020 F009,030 :T0901O iT09020 MT10,030 MT08,040 PM:001O PM'1101O PM:: ,020 PM03,01O PM03,060 PM07,01O PM08,040 PM08,050 PW:'I,O:O PW:'1,020 PW::,030 PW1:,040 PW03,2:0 PW04,:1O PW05,080 PW06,010 PW06,060 PW06,O/O PW07,030 PW07,060 PW07,:00 PW08,050 PW08,060 PW08,TfO PW08,080 PW08100 PW09,01O PW09,020 PW09,030 PW09080 GlaiJstmle f\rea Streelscape Pt'ase Gladstone-Phase :1 Gladstone Ptmse:1i ALLOCAT:ON OF COSTS BY YE.AR TOTAL PRiOR COST 5,300,000 0 5,300,000 0 0 l! 0 3,500,000 0 0 0 400000 3,100,000 0 5,750,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,750,000 14.550.000 0 5.300.000 0 400.000 3.100.000 3.750.000 449,730 0 449,730 0 0 0 0 48:,280 0 0 0 0 r; 481,280 ::7,500 0 :17,500 0 l! 0 0 12'1,025 0 0 0 0 :21,025 0 3,/00,000 30,000 570,000 3,100,000 0 0 0 4.869.535 30.000 1.137.230 3.100.000 0 121.025 481.280 :20.000 0 0 0 :20,000 0 0 300,800 0 0 0 0 300,800 0 420.800 0 0 0 120.000 300.800 0 59,000 0 0 0 r; 59,000 0 :20,000 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 0 179.000 0 0 C 60.000 119.000 0 :25,000 50,000 25,000 0 0 50,000 0 4,250,000 0 2,2S0,000 0 2,000,000 0 0 500,000 0 100,000 0 400,000 0 0 3S0,000 300,000 SO,OOO 0 0 r; 0 300,000 200,000 :00,000 0 l! 0 0 160,000 3S,000 2S,000 2S,000 2S,000 2S000 2S,000 12S,000 2S,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 :,/00,000 0 :,200,000 0 2S0,000 0 250,000 7.510.000 610.000 3.770.000 45.000 2.695.000 95.000 295.000 18,000 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 :85,000 0 0 185,000 r; 0 0 ::4,320 0 0 0 0 :14,320 0 18S,130 0 0 0 0 0 '8S,730 200,000 0 0 2S,000 25,000 :SO,OOO 0 1,001,SOO 0 0 0 0 r; 1,001,SOO 870,000 30,000 0 0 0 840,000 0 86,200 0 0 0 86,200 0 0 82,SOO 0 0 0 82,500 0 0 :71.000 0 0 0 0 17:,000 0 71,200 0 0 0 7:.200 l! 0 S,980,000 200,000 S,-f80,000 0 0 0 0 14,800,000 0 800,000 :,000,000 SOO,OOO :2,500,000 0 2,430,000 200,000 0 2,230,000 0 r; 0 4,779,700 0 0 200,000 4,S79,700 0 0 :,440,000 0 0 0 100,000 1,340000 0 :,170,000 0 0 0 :SO,OOO :,020,000 0 7'10,000 0 100,000 6-10.000 r; 0 0 32S,OOO 0 325,000 0 0 l! 0 98,300 0 0 0 0 0 98,300 :6:,600 0 0 100,800 60,800 0 0 4,330,000 0 0 0 0 r; 4,200,100 39.276.050 430.000 7.005.000 4.428.800 5.655.400 16.135.320 5.491.630 66.805.385 1.070.000 17.212.230 7.573.800 8..930.400 19.871.145 10.017.910 Repl<\cernentofFireTruck Replacement of Fire Truck ArnbulanceReplacernent .AmbulanceReplacement Fire Training Facility PtlOneSystem Fiber Optics MCC Exercise Equipment MCC Exterior Mete;! Painting Wel1and Enhmlcmr:ent Pmgrmr: Fish Creek Open Space GOOiJricti Park improvements Lions Park Improvements .JoyParkimprovements Community Fieid Upgrades Park Equipment, Fence and Court Repiacement Gladstone Sav<\nn<\ Improvements Cab for Jacobsen Mower JetlerTruck ParallelogramUft Single Axle PIm'!Truck Lift Station UpgradePrograrn CountyRd 0 Court, EastofTH 6'1 to Hazelwood PoniJAvef1ueiOorl<\rliJ Road Two Toro Lawn Mowers and T\NO Trailers One Tractor Loader and TtireeWheel Trucksler One Snm'! Plow Truck : Ton Tn;ck Western Hills/LarpenteurAreaStreets TH 36 - Englisti Intersection impmvmr:ents LakewoodiSterling.AreaStreets Crestvim'liiHighwoOiJ Ama Streets Barteimy Meyer Area Streets Bartelmy Street. Minnetmh<\ !we to SliI~Nater Rd Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr JeUVacTn,:ck Two Tom Mowers and One 4-Wheel Truckster One 1 ton One 11i2ton and One 1i2 ton Trucks FarrelliFerndale.AreaStreet Improvements Page 24 of 36 113 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Pf?OJECT Status: Accepted FOOS.a1U FD09.020 PM'i1.01O PW04110 PW05,OSO PW07,[)60 PWOS,050 PW08,060 PW08,TfO PW09,080 CD09.020 PWOI,'100 PW08,080 PW08,100 CD04.01O CD09.020 CD09.030 PM11,010 PMOS,USO PWQ4,11O PW05,080 PW07,060 PWOI,'iOO PW08,050 PWOS,060 PW08,O/O PWOS,080 PW08,WO PW09,080 C004.0W CD09.030 FD09.030 PM07,010 PMOS 040 MT10,030 MT08.040 CD04.Q10 CD09.Q20 FD09,030 PM10010 PM03,OlO PMOS,USO PW05,080 PWOI,060 PW07,100 J\rrbulanwReplacernent .AmbulanceReplacement Fish Creek Open Space CountyRd D Court Easl ofTH 61 to Hazelwood Pond.AvenueiCorland Road Western HillslLarpenteurf\reastreels LakewoodiSterllng.AreaStreets Creslview/Higtiwood J\re" Streets Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets Farrell/FerniJale A.f(-m Sln;et Improvemenls Gladslone Pt:ase:1 TH 36 - English Intersection improvements Bartelmy Slmet MinnehatH Ave, to SliIl\",ater Rd Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Or GladstoneAreaStreetscape- Phase GlmJslmle Phaseil Gladstone-Phase ili Fist: Cmek Open Space Gladstone Savanna Improvements CountyRiJ 0 Court. East ofTH 6: 1D Hazelwomj Pond Avenue/Dorland Road Western Hill~;fLarpenteurf\rea Streets TH 36 - English Intersection improvements Lak(-)WOOd/SterlingA.renStmets Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Bartelmy Meyer .Area Streets Bartelmy Street. Minnet:ah" A.ve to Stillwater Rd Sterling Street, Lon din Lane to Crestview Forest Or FarrelVFerniJnlef\ma Street Improvements Gladslone f\rea Slmetsc"pe- Phase Gladstone-Ph"se ili Fire Training F"ciiity Comrnunity FieliJ Upgrmjes Park Equipment, Fence and Court Repl"cement MCC Exercise Equipment MCC Exterior Melal Painting GlaiJstone/\rea Streels, ape. pt:ase Gladstone-Phase il Fire Training Facility Wetland Enh"ncementProgram UonsPm1<; Improvements GladstoneSav"nn" Improvements PondA.venue/Oorland Ro,,(j Western Hills/Larpenteur.Are" Streets TH 36 English Inlersection impmvemenls AmtJulance Service Fumj .AmtJulance Service Fund Bonds-G,O impmvement Bomjs.G,O impmvemenl Bonds-(~,O improvement Boneis-GD impmvement Bonds-G,O impmvement BOniJs.G,O irrprovmrenl Bonds-G,O improvement BondsG,O impmvemenl Bomjs.M,S.f\ Bonds-MS,A Bonds-M,S,/\ Bonds-MS,A Bonds-Speciai.Assessment Bonds-Speci,;IA.ssessment Bonds-Special.Assessment BOniJs.Special Assm;sment Bonds-Special Assessment Boneis-SpeciaIA.ssessmenl Bonds-Special.Assessment BOniJs.SpecialAssessment Bonds-Speci"IAssessment BondsSpecialA.ssessment Bonds-Special.Assessment Bonds-Special.Assessment BOniJs.SpecialAssessment Bonds-Special.Assessment Bonds-SpeciaIA.ssessment Bomjs.Tax increment Bonds-Tax increment C.IP,Fund C,I,P, Fund C,IPFund Community Center Operations Corrmunity Center Operations Erwironmenlal Ulilily Fund Environmental Utility Fund Environmenlal Utility Fumj Environmental Utility Fund Envimnrnent,;1 Utilily Fund Environmental Utility Fund Environmenlal Utility Fumj Environment,,1 Utility Fund Erwimnment<,l Ulilily Fund TOTAL 117,500 PN/OF? o 117,500 o Attachment 7 ALLOGATiON OF COSTS BY YEAR o o o o o o o o 238.525 o 117.500 o o 121.025 350,000 317,400 426,300 2,383,000 1,2'70,:10 2,32:,200 102,600 9.451.810 r; 350,000 0 0 o 0 0 0 30,000 0 0 0 200,000 2,:8JOOO l! 0 200,000 01,0-'0,:10 0 o 0 200,0002,:2:,200 o 0 0 '00,000 l! 0 0 0 430.000 2.533.000 1.210.110 2.221.200 396,300 o o o 602,600 o o o o 317,400 o o o o o 998.900 1.998.600 o 350,000 250,0001,000,000 150,000 539,800 o 400.000 1.889.800 o 0 01,500,000 o o o o o 304,500 350,000 2,250,000 689,800 461,000 3.750.800 o o o o o 0 o ,000,000 100,000 361000 o 0 o 100.000 1.361.000 o o o o o 800,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 750,000 400,000 228,:00 304,500 2,096,000 400,000 854-,000 1,680,000 505,000 35:.000 270,000 13.656.600 o 800,000 o o o o o o o o o l! r; o 0 o 0 854-,000 0 0:,680,000 o Q o 0 270,000 0 o 0 300,000 505,000 35:,000 o o r; 2,000,000 o o o 22.8,:00 o o o o o o l! r; o 750,000 o o o l! r; o o o 400,000 (; 4.146.000 1.124.000 1.680.000 2.960.500 3.146.100 l! o 700,000 o o o 02,096,000 o :00,000 o 0 o Q o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 700,000 o o o o o o o o 2.700.000 o o o o 125,000 o 160,000 125,000 15,000 35,000 25000 60,000 25,000 20,000 50,000 25,000 20,000 25,000 20,000 o o 25,000 20,000 25,000 20,000 45.000 410.000 75.000 105.000 95.000 45.000 45.000 59,000 179.000 r; o o o o u o o o 59,000 u 60.000 119.000 o o G 300,000 150,000 125,000 125,000 25,000 200,000 43,500 900000 700,000 114 o o 300,000 :5,000 50,000 25,000 r; 200,000 o o o 900,000 o 700,000 60,000 25,000 o 50,000 o o o :50,000 o o o o o o o l! o o o o 50,000 o o o o 43,500 o Page 25 of 36 l! o o o o o o o o o o FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Pf?OJECT Status: Accepted PW08.050 PW08060 PW08,070 PW09G8D FD03.020 FC06.020 PW11,010 PW11 ,020 PW11 ,030 PW1'].040 PW06,010 PW06,060 PW06,070 PW07,030 PW09,010 PW09,020 PW09,030 C0Q4.0W CD09.020 CD09,030 FD09.030 PM11,010 PMI1,OW PW07,100 :T09,010 :T09,020 CD04.Q'1O PW07100 PM11,01Q PM'i1.02D PM03,010 PM03,060 PM08,050 FD09.030 PMI1,OW C0Q4.01U C009.02D CD09.030 PM11 010 PW03.210 PWOS,OSO PW07,060 LakewooejiSterling jI..ma Streets Crestview/Highwood .Area Streets Bartelrny Meyerf\ma Streels FarrellfFerndale.AreaStreetlmprovements Replacement of Fire Truck Replacement of Fire Truck Cab for Jacobsen Mmver JetterTruck ParallelogmmLift Single Axle Plow Truck TwoToro Lawn Mowers and T\NO Tmilers One Tractor Loader and Three Wheel Truckster One SrHNI Plow Truck '-Ton Truck Jel/Vw;TnJCk Two Toro Mowers and One 4-Wheel Truckster One: ton One ::/2ton and One :J2tonTrucks Gladstone f\rea Stmetscape- Phase Gladstone-Phase il Gla:Jstone- Phase ili Fire Tmining Facility Fist: Creek Open Space Fish Creek Open Space TH 36 English IntHrsection improvements PtlOneSystem Fiber Optics GladstoneAreaStreetscape- Phase TH 36 - Englist: Intersection !mprovml1ents Fish Creek Open Space Goodrich Pari< improvements Lions Park Improvements JoyP<\ri< improvements Gla:JstoneSnvanr:a Improvements Fire Training Faciiity Fish Creek Open Space Gla:Jstone f\rea Streets, ape- pt:ase Gladstone pt:ase!1 Gladstone pt:ase!ii Fish Creek Open Space Lift Station Upgrwje ProgmrT' Pond Avenue!Dorland Rond Western Hill~;fLarpenteur Area Streets Environmental Utility Fumj Environmental Utility Fund Environrnent,:IUlilityFund Environmental Utility Fund Fire Truck RepiacementFund Fire Truck Replncement Fun:J Fleet Management Fumj FieetManngementFund Fleet Marmgement Fund Fleet Management Fund Fleet M,magement Fumj FieetManagementFund Fleet Manngermmt Fund Fleet MnnagementFund Fleet M,magement Fumj FieetManngementFund Fleet Marmgement Fund Grants Grants Gmnts Grants Grants Grants Griwls Infnrmalion Tect:nology Fund Infom1ation Technology Fund Mn/DOT Mn!DOT Park Development Fund Park Development Fund Park Development Fund Park Development Fund Park Development Fumj RnmseyCounty Ramsey County Sanit<:rf Sewor Fund Sanitary Sewer Fun:J Sanitary Sewer Fun:J SanitarjSewerFund Sanitnry Sewer Fun:J Sanitary Sewer Fund Sanitary Sewer Fun:J TOTAL :25,000 246,000 73,000 652,000 3.664.500 Attachment 7 o ALLOGATiON OF COSTS BY YEAR PN/OF? o l! r; 90.000 2.185.000 o o :25mO o o 246,000 o o o 73,000 o o o o 652,000 652.000 o 449,730 931.010 o 449,130 o o 175.000 o o o 396.000 o l! o o 166.500 o o o o o 481.280 o o 449.730 :8,000 185,000 :14,320 185,130 86,200 82,500 17:,000 71,200 325,000 98,300 :6:,600 o o l! r; o o o o 325,000 o o o :8,000 185,000 o o o 86,200 82,500 o o o o ::4,320 o o o r; 185,130 o o o o o o o o :00,800 o o o /:,200 o o 60,800 o o o 17:,000 o o o o o o o 98,300 o o o o o o o l! 0:,200,000 o 0 o o o o o l! o :50,000 03,000000 0 o o o 02,000,000 l! o o o 0 01,250,000 o o 07,200,000 o o 0:,500,000 o 0 o 0 o 0 o o 7,200,000 16.300.000 o o o 0:,600,000 o 0 o l! 50,000 1.498.850 :,200,000 ,250,000 :,500,000 3,000,000 :50,000 2,000,000 :20,000 300,800 o o o o :20,000 o o 300,800 o o o o o 1,600,000 4,250,000 o o o 250.000 250,000 4,000,000 o 0 o o o l! o o o o 250,000 50,000 500,000 325,000 300,000 :,:00,000 r; 100,000 50,000 :00,000 600,000 o o 400,000 o o 250,000 275,000 200,000 o o o l! o o o o o 250.000 450,000 250,000 r; 450,000 250,000 o o o u o o o o o o o G o :00,000 250,000 250,000 100,000 200,000 43,500 302,000 115 o :00,000 o o o o o -fOO,OOO o l! r; o 302,000 o 25,000 o o o 250,000 o o 25,000 o o o o o :50,000 43,500 o Page 26 of 36 o o o o 250,000 o o o o o Attachment 7 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY FUNDING SOURCE Pf?OJECT Status: Accepted PW08.050 PW080fjO PW08,070 PW08.080 PW08:00 PW09,080 PW05.080 PW07.0fjO PW08,050 PW08,OfjO PW08.0iO PW08080 PW09,080 PW04.:10 PW05080 PWOIOfjO PW08,050 PW080fjO PW08070 PW08,080 PW09,080 C004,0'1O PW04,:10 Lakewoo(iiSterling JI..ma streets Crestview/Highwood _Area Streets Bartelmy Meyerf\ma Streels Bartelmy Street Minnehaha Ave. to Stillwater Rd Slerling Streel,Londin Lane 10 Crestview Forest Dr Farreil/Ferndale Area Street Improvements Pond Avenue!Oorland Road Western Hill~;fLarpenteurJl..reaStreets Lakewood/Sterling Area Streels Crestview/Highwooe) Area Slreets BartelmyMeyerAreaStreets Bartelmy Street Minnetmha !we to Stilhrmter Rd Farreil/Ferndale Area Street Improvements COllntyRd 0 Court. EastofTH 6'1 to Hazelwood Pondj\venueiOorland Romi Western Hills/LarpenteurAreaStreets LakewoodiSterling j\re,\ Slreets Crestview/Highwood Area Streets Bartelmy Meyer f\ma Streets Barteirny Street, Minnehaha _Ave, to Stiii1J'mter Rd Farrell/Ferne)alej\renSlmet Improvemenls GladstoneAreaStreetscape- Phase CountyRd 0 Court. East ofTH 6110 H,;zelwood Sanilary Sewer Fune) Sanitari Sewer FlInd Sanilnry Sewer Fune) Sanilary Sewer FlInd Sanilary Sewer Fune) SanitariSewerFund S( Pall I WAC Fund St P,\uIWAC Fune) St PaulWAC Fund SI PauIW,A..C Fund St Pall I WAC Fund 51 PaulWAC Fune) St PaulWAC Fund SI. Pall I Water St P,\uIWaler St Paul Water SI. Paul Water St Pall I Water St PauIW,;ler St. Paul Water SI. Paul Water Street Light Utility FlInd Vae)naisHeigtlts TOTAL PF'?!OF? ALLOGATiON OF COSTS BY YEAR :25,000 0 0 125mO 0 0 0 24fj,000 0 0 0 246,000 0 0 73,000 l! 0 0 0 73,000 0 59,000 r; 0 0 0 59,000 0 39,000 0 0 39,000 0 0 0 2'19,000 0 0 0 0 0 219,000 2.606.500 0 1.102.000 189.000 521.000 325.500 469.000 26,100 179,400 0 0 r; 0 26,10U 0 0 179.400 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1,290 0 0 l! 0 0 :43,100 0 0 r; 0 0 0 43,20U 0 0 0 0 0 35,100 0 0 0 0 0 '29,900 0 179.400 7.290 143.100 104.400 129.900 0 0 0 0 0 262,000 0 0 0 0 2fj,100 0 0 119,600 0 0 0 0 l! 0 48,fjOO 0 0 0 r; 0 0 143,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 43,200 0 0 0 0 0 35,100 0 0 0 l! 0 0 :2_9,900 0 104.400 391.900 r; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 l! 0 0 0 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 145 -1,29U 143,100 43,200 35,100 129,900 564.090 262,000 2fj,100 1'19,600 48,fjOO 143,400 43,200 35,100 129,900 fJ07.900 200,000 200.000 Page 27 of 36 116 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY PROJECT CA TEGORY PROJECT Status: Accepted PROJECT TiTLE PROJECT CA TEGORY TOTAL COST PRiO,,,? YEARS 2011 Attachment 8 3,'100,000 ALLOCAT iON OF COSTS BY YEA.R 2012 2013 2014 o 2015 FD09.030 MTlO,030 I\1T08.040 FD03.020 FOD6.02D FOOS,OiD mOg.02D 'T09.0'10 'T09.020 PW11,010 PW11,020 PW11,030 PW11 ,040 PW06.Q'iO PW06,060 PW06,OIO PWOI,030 PW09010 PW09,020 PW09,030 PM10010 PM11010 PM11 ,020 PM03010 PM03,060 PM070iO PM08.040 PMOS,050 Fire Training Facility MCC Exercise Equipment MCC Exterior Melal Painting ReplacernenlofFireTn.:ck ReplacernenlofFireTn:ck j''.fTlbulanmReplacernenl .ArnbulanceReplacement Phone System FiberCptics Cab for Jacobsen Mower JelterTruck Parallelogram un Singlef\>:lePlowTn:ck Two Toro Lawn Mowers and Two Trailers One Tractor Loader and Three Wheel Truckster One Snow Plm'! Truck '-Ton Truck JetNw:Truck Two Tom Mowers an:) One4-Whoel Truckster One 1 ton One 11!2 ton and One 1!2 ton Trucks Wetland Enhancement Program Fish Creek Open Space Goodtich Park improvements LlonsParl<:mprovements JoyParl<!mpmvmrents Corrmunity Field Upgmdm; Park EDuiprrent, Fence ami Court Replacement GladstoneSavanna:mprovements Building Building Building Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equiprmnt Equipment Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks 3,700,000 59,000 120,000 30,000 5-fO.OOO o o o l! o o 60,000 o 59,000 o o 60,000 o o o 3879000 449,730 481,280 117,500 121,025 120,000 300,800 18,000 185,000 114,320 185,730 86,200 82,500 171,000 7'1,200 325,000 98,300 161,600 30000 570 000 o 449,730 3100 000 l! o o o o 18,000 60 000 o o o o o 120,000 119 000 o o o o 121,025 o o o o 117.500 o 185,000 o o o o 86,200 o 300,800 o 481,280 r; o r; o o o o o o o o l! 325,000 o o o o o o o o 100,800 o 82,500 o o o 114,320 o o o l! o o -11,200 o o 171,000 o o o o o 60,800 o o o o o o o 185.730 o o o o o o o o o o 98,300 o 7ii5110 10RQ185 125,000 4,250,000 500,000 350,000 300,000 160,000 125,000 1,100,000 50,000 300,000 200,000 35,000 25,000 o RQ7nO 1(11800 25,000 20,000 410700 o o 2,000,000 7(17145 o 50,000 o o 25000 o 2,250,000 o 400,000 o o 25,000 20,000 o o o 100000 o o 25,000 20,000 o 250,000 o o 50,000 100,000 25,000 20,000 o 1,200,000 o o 25,000 20,000 o 250,000 7<l50oo 7510000 l)1(1oo0 177(1000 45000 1 fill5 000 Q5000 118 Page 29 of 36 Attachment 8 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY PROJECT CA TEGORY Status: Accepted PRO./ECT PROJECT TITLE PROJECT CATEGOFiY TOTAL PRiO,1.;! ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEA.R COST YEARS 2011 2012 2013 2014 200,000 0 0 25,000 25,000 150,000 1,007,500 0 0 0 0 0 870,000 30,000 0 0 0 840,000 5,980,000 200,000 5,780,000 0 0 0 14,800,000 0 800,000 1,000,000 500,000 12,500,000 2,430,000 200,000 0 2,230,000 0 0 4,779,700 0 0 200,000 4,579,700 0 1,440,000 l! 0 0 100,000 1,340,000 1,170,000 0 0 0 150,000 1,020,000 /l0,oo0 0 100,000 670,000 0 0 4,330,000 0 r; 0 0 0 37.777 200 430 000 6 680 000 4125.000 5354700 15850000 2015 PW03,210 Lift Station Upgraeie Program Public Works o PW04,110 Count.; Rei C Court, EastofTH 6110 HazehrlOOd Public Works 1,007,500 PW05,080 Pond Avenlle!Dorland Road PlIblicWorks o PW07,060 Western HillslLarpentellrAreaStreets PlIblicWorks PW07,100 TH 36-English intersection Improvements PlIblicWorks PWOS,050 I akewooQISlerlef f\ff.d Streets Public Works o PWOS,060 Crcslview/HigtwlDod J\rea Slmets Public Works o PWOS,070 Bartelmy Meyer I\ma Streets Public Works o PWOS,OSO Bartelmy Street. Minnetmha rwe, to Stillwater Ri) Public Works PWOS,100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Dr PlIblicWorks o PW09,oeo Farrell/Ferndale Area Street improvements PlIblicWor1<s 4,330,000 5337500 CD04,01O Gladstone.AreaStreetscape- Phase Redevelopment 5,300,000 0 5,300,000 0 0 0 0 CC09,020 Glai)stone- Phase Redevelopment 3,500,000 0 0 400,000 3,100,000 CC09,030 GI",)stone- Phase i Redevelopment 5,750,000 0 0 0 0 0 5,750,000 u:,;,>nfIfJII n '> ~()() fIfJII n ,jOOfIfJII 1100fIfJII '>7'>()fIfJII 66805385 1070000 17212230 7573800 8 930 400 19871145 12147810 Page 30 of 36 119 Attachment 9 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY NEIGHBORHOOD Status: Accepted P,r.;:OJECT NUMBE.r.;: PWOI,060 PW04,;lO PM03,060 PWOI,'100 Western HillsfLarpenteurAreaStreets CountyR:j D Courl, EaslofTH 6: tn Hazelwo()(j JoyPark:mpmvements TH 36 - English Intersection improvements TOTAL ALLOC.ATiON OF COSTS BY YEAR PRiOR NE!G!-iBO,r.;:!-iOOD COST 0: -WestemHills 59S0000 200,000 5,7S0,000 o o o 04 Hazelwood :,007,500 o 05 -Maplewoo:)H 300,000 200,000 ;00,000 o o o 06-SherwoodGie 14,SOO,000 o SOO,OOO 1,000000 500,000 '2500,000 o CD04,0'1O GladstoneAreaStreetscape- Phase 07 -Gladstone 5,300,000 0 5,300,000 0 0 0 CD09,020 Gladstnne Ptiase !I 07 GI,,:)slDne 3,500,000 0 0 0 400,000 3,:00,000 CD09,030 Gladstone-Ph"se ili O-{ -GI"dstone 5,l50,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,l50,000 PMOS 050 Gla:)stone Sm,:anna Improvements 07 -Gla:)stone :,700,000 0 :,200,000 0 250,000 0 250,000 FD09,030 Fire Tmining Facility OS -Hillsi:je 3,700,000 30,000 510,000 3,100,000 0 0 PM;1,020 Goodlich Park improvements OS -Hillside 500,000 0 '00,000 0 400,000 0 0 0 PM03,OW Lions Park Improvements 09- Bem,:erLake 350,000 300,000 50,Q00 0 0 0 0 PWOS07O Bartelmy Meyer Area Streets 09- Beaver Lake :,440,000 0 0 0 100,000 1,340,000 0 pwoa,oao Bartelmy Street, Minnehatla Ave, to StillI.vater R:j 09 Beaver Lnke :,170,000 0 0 0 :50,000 :,020,000 0 PW09,OSO Farrell/Ferndale Area Street Improvements 09 -BeaverL"ke 4,330,000 0 0 0 0 0 4,200,100 7.290.000 50.000 0 250.000 2.360.000 4.200.100 PW05,OSO Pond.Avenue/Dorland Road ;: -Vista Hills SIO,OOO 30,000 0 0 0 840,000 PWOa,060 Crestview!Higtiwood J\re" Streets 1: Vista Hills 4,779,700 0 0 200,000 4,579,700 0 PWOa,100 Sterling Street,Londin Lane to Crestview Forest Or 11 -Vista Hills no 000 0 ;00,000 610,000 0 0 PM11010 Pwoa,050 FD03,020 FD06,020 FOOS,OW FD09,020 iT09,01O :T09020 MT10,030 MToa,040 PM;OO1Q PM01,OW PMoa,040 PW11,01O PW1'i,020 PW:1,030 PW:'1,040 PW03,2'!O Fish Creek Open Space Lakewood!Sterling Are" Streets Replacement of Fire Truck Repl"cement of Fire Truck Ambulance Replacement Ambulance Replacement Phone System Fiber Optics MCC Exercise Equipment MCC Exterior Meli\! Painting Wetland Enhancement Progmm Comrrunity Fiel:) Upgrmjes Park Equipment Fence and Court Replacement CnbforJm;obsenMm/ilOf Jetter Truck PamllelogramLift Single Axie Plow Truck Lift Station Upgrade Progmm :7 High'u'/Oo:) ;2 -High'u'/Ood 4.250,000 2,430,000 o 200,000 2,250,000 o o 2,000,000 2.230,000 0 o o Not Designated 449,I30 0 449J30 0 0 0 Not Designated 4a1,2aO 0 0 0 0 0 4a:,7aO Not Designated 117,500 0 11,500 0 0 0 Not Designate:) :2:,025 0 0 0 0 ;2:,025 0 Not Designated 120,000 0 0 0 120,000 0 0 Not Designated 300,aOO 0 0 0 0 300,aOO l! Not Designatea 59,000 0 0 0 0 59,000 0 Not Designate:) :20,000 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 0 Not Designated :25,000 50,Q00 25,000 0 0 50,000 r; Not Designated :60,000 35,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Not Designated 125,000 25,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Not Designate:) :a,ooo 0 0 :a,ooo 0 0 0 Not Designated 1S5,000 0 0 'S5,000 0 0 0 Not Designated ::4,320 0 0 0 0 114,320 0 Not Designatea 1S5130 0 0 0 0 0 ;a5.730 Not Designatea 200,000 0 0 25,000 25,000 150,000 0 Page 31 0136 120 Attachment 9 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY NEIGHBORHOOD Status: Accepted P,r.;:OJECT NUMBE.r.;: PW06,010 PW06,060 PW06,0-10 PW07,030 PW09,010 PW09,020 PW09,030 rwo Taro Lawn Mowers and T,,/o Trailers Ono Tmcbr Lo~J:jer anti Throe Wt;eel Trucksler One Snow Plow Truck 1-TonTn;ck Jettv'acTruck Two Toro Mry,'/rHs ami One 4-Wheel Trucksler One 1 ton One 11/2ton and One 1/2 ton Trucks TOTAL PRiOR ALLOGATiON OF COSTS BY YEAR NE!G!-iBO,r.;:!-iOOD COST Not Designated 86,200 0 0 0 86,200 0 Not Designate() 82,500 0 0 0 82,500 0 Not Designated 1'1'1000 0 0 0 0 1'11,000 Not Designated 71,200 0 0 0 71,200 0 Not Designated 325,000 0 325,000 0 0 0 0 Not Designate() 98,300 0 0 0 0 0 98,300 Not Designated 161,600 0 0 100,800 60,800 0 0 3.8711185 962.230 373.800 550.700 1.071.145 810.310 17.212.230 Page 32 of 36 121 Attachment 10 FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECTS GROUPED BY DEPARTMENT Status: Declined Pf?OJECT NUMBEF? CD02,0:0 CD04,030 CD04,040 CD04,050 CD09,0:0 m:o,o:o FD09,0'1O MTW,O:O MT:o.020 MTOS,0'10 MTOS,090 MTOS,1'iO MTOS,:20 MTOS,:30 MTOS,:40 MTOS,:50 MTOS,160 MT09,O:O PM'1O,020 PM'1O,030 PM:0,040 PM07,100 PM08,060 PM09,010 PW:O,O:o PW::,050 PW1'i,O-ro PW::,080 PW:'1,090 PW02,:20 PW03,'130 PW03,:60 PW03,:80 PW03,:90 PW06,'100 PW06,:30 PW06,:50 PW08,020 PWOS,030 PW08,::0 PW09,040 PW09,060 PW09,T10 PW09,:00 1-1Dusing ReplacementPrograrT' Hillcrest.Area RDadway Improvements HillcrestJ\reaRedevelopment HillcrestAreaStreetscape Commercinl Property Redevelopment ALLOCATiON OF COSTS BY YE.AR TOTAL PRiOR COST 825,000 0 75,000 :50,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 0 UOO,OOO 0 100,000 0 :,000,000 0 UOO,OOO 0 0 0 0 1,100,000 0 :,000,000 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 6.125.000 (; 275.000 450.000 400.000 4.600.000 400.000 3,300,000 0 0 0 l! 0 3,300,000 124,660 0 0 0 0 0 124,660 3,424.660 0 0 0 0 0 3.424.660 90,000 0 45,000 45,000 0 0 0 42,600 0 0 0 0 0 42,600 :80,000 60,000 0 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 2:5,350 0 0 0 0 l! 2:5,350 195,000 0 108,000 0 0 0 87,000 73.400 0 0 0 0 0 73,400 6:,000 0 0 0 0 r; 61,000 :63,400 0 0 63,000 40,000 60,400 :0,400,000 0 0 0 0 0 :0.400,000 53.'100 0 0 0 0 53.700 0 141.100 0 0 0 0 82,400 58,700 11.615.550 60.000 153.000 45.000 103.000 216.100 11.038.450 630,000 280,000 50,000 -15,000 75,000 75,000 i5,000 365,000 40,000 70.000 :65,000 35,000 35,000 20,000 :,260,000 0 0 :,260,000 0 l! 0 180,000 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 60,000 200,000 50,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 :00,000 100,000 0 0 0 r; 0 2.735.000 470.000 150.000 1.530.000 200.000 200.000 185.000 3,340,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 3,140,000 70,000 0 0 0 l! 0 70,000 4,000,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 3,800,000 250,000 0 0 250,000 0 0 0 4.780,000 0 0 200,000 4,580000 0 0 325,000 0 325,000 0 0 l! 0 850,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 741,000 2:0,000 0 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 500,000 0 :00,000 :00,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 0 :00,000 :00,000 :00,000 0 0 2,f300,000 0 0 2,600,000 0 0 0 :,240,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,240,000 3.8'10,000 80,000 0 0 320000 3,410,000 0 61,200 0 0 0 0 l! 6:,200 58,000 0 0 0 0 0 58,000 280,000 0 0 0 0 280,000 0 239,000 0 0 0 0 239000 0 800,000 0 0 :00,000 700,000 0 0 2,120,000 0 0 0 0 0 :,948,400 4,440,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 4,:06,800 30.333.200 80.000 567.000 3.392.000 5.842.000 4.831.000 15.301.100 54.233.410 610.000 1.145.000 5.417.000 6.545.000 9.847.100 30.355.510 Replacement of Fire Station .AmbulanceReplacement MCC ETS Ultm Violet Trentment System (UVTS) Maplewooii Corrmunity Center Aquatic Lighting Cit)! Fncilities Security Systems Enhancement MCC Gym Roof MCC LapiLeisure Pool Finish MCC Boilers (3) PublicWorksCnrpeting MCC Carpet Police Departmenl Expansion City Hali Carpet MCC Pool Sand Filter Implementation of Non-Degradation Cit)! Campus Improvements GethsmmmePnrk Parks-Trail Development Open Space Improvements NelghbortlOod Parks Montana ! Nebraska Area Streets Emergenc.yGenemtor East Shore Drive Area Streets Signal System at Soutl1lawniM ,II Entrance Ark'NlightJSunrise Area Streets City Landfill Closure Beebe Road, Hollo'/IRY- Larpenteur City.wide Siiiew"lk Improvements Sanitarj Sewer Pipe LiningiSealing Program S"nitary Sewer Sump Pump Removnl PrograrT' Carver Crossings Area improvements E(jgmtoniRoselawn Drainage !mprovmrents County Rd C Area Streets, TH 61 to White Bear Ave One.Jacobsen Lawn Mower Two H2 Ton Pickup Trucks Signal System at County Road D afiii Halelwood One Tandem.Axle Snow Plm'ITruck Gerten Ponii Dminage Improvemer:ls Ferndaleii\;-^j.AreaStreet Improvements DennisiMcClelland J\re" Street improvements Page 34 of 36 123 Attachment 10 PROJECTS DEFERRED/DECLINED In the course of preparation of this Capital Improvement Plan, several noteworthy projects were proposed but deemed by staff to not be appropriate for inclusion at this time. These projects are discussed below and included f(Jr your review. . Hillcrest Area Redevelopment - Staff recommends that this project be deferred until the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment is further along so as to avoid competing with each other. . Housing Replacement Program - This is a worthwhile project and the current economic conditions would call for some investment in this project. City finances are not currently available to provide sufficient benefit. . Commercial Property Redevelopment - While this is a worthy project, staff does not believe that the costs are a priority use of tax levies. Staff will continue to look for opportunities in this area. . Various Requests for Trucks, Lawn Mowers, etc. m This equipment will continue to need periodic replacement and other similar requests are included in the CIP. These projects are indicative ofa need to keep replacements down to an only-as-needed basis. . Police Department Expansion - This is an expensive proposition and its need has not been adequately demonstrated. Space needs at City Hall continue to be evaluated. This project may require a referendum to identify a source of funds. . Replacement/repair ofHre Station - This item will need to be addressed in the coming years, as a couple of stations need to be bronght up to code and major repairs to roof areas and internal areas need attention. This item was deferred due to the high cost and a lack offlUlding identified. The Fire Chief will be conducting a station feasibility study to determine warrants for replacement. . Police Department and Public Works Carpeting - The carpet in these areas are showing wear. Staff believes this need needs to be deferred for a few more years due to the lack of funding. . Community Center Gym Roof, Pool Area Sand Filter, Aquatic Lighting, Lap/Leisure Pool, Boilers, Carpet and Ultra-voilet Treatment System - Numerous maintenance initiatives are recommended for the Community Center. Staff believes the Enancing ItJr replacement items at MCC need to be discussed as a new method of fimds are identified, as the current MCC operational revenue does not sustain these larger maintenance costs. . Ambulance Replacement - the replacement rates for the ambulance fleet has been delayed by one year at the recommendation ofthe Fire Chief based upon current department needs. . City Landfill Closure - Staff continues to monitor the landfill and work with authorities. When closure is mandated, this will be added to the next CIP. . Signal System at County Rd. D and Hazelwood - 3 way stop signs are installed and are effective. Signal lights are not yet warranted. Page 35 of 36 124 Attachment 10 . Park Projects - The source of fWlding for expansion of the parks system has been diminishing and with the economic slow-dm\11, has become minimal. A new source of funding for parks and park amenities needs to he identified. The following projects were deferred due to fi.mding limitations: o Gethsemane Park m this proposal for improvements will not proceed until a development proposal is brought forward. An altemative plan for purchasing the property may be explored. o Trail Development - this program is being deferred due to lack of funding. The trail plan will be implemented with street improvement projects. o Neighborhood Parks this program is being deferred due to lack of funding and funding priorities directed to major park improvements. o Goodrich Park the proposed expansion and improvements to Goodrich Park needed to be reduced by approximately 50% due to limited available funding and priorities in existing projects. o Joy Park - the proposed continuation of improvements to Joy Park were reduced by 50'% due to limited funding and priorities in existing projects. . Various Street Improvements - The JiJllowing street improvement projects are deferred to 20J 6 or beyond and will be considered in the normal street improvement plan due to limited limding and a desire to reduce the level of City debt: o East Shore Drive Area Streets o Montana/Nebraska Area Streets o Carver Crossings Area Improvements o County Rd C Area Streets, TH 61 to White Bear A venue o Beebe Road, Holloway to Larpenteur o City-wide sidewalk improvements o Femdale/lvy Area Street Improvements o Dennis/McClelland Area Street Improvements . Edgerton - Roselawn Storm Sewer - Due to fimding limitations f()r this large and expensive project, along with the controversial nature of the improvements, this project has been deferred out of the next 5-year period. Page 36 of 36 125